I hope that he's suffering, Small not his uncle, seriously....gut wrenching, red hot poker up the arse, heart breaking sort of pain....you know, the sort of emotional pain that he's inflicted on others.
I think its obvious our friend doesn't understand the word doctrine, hence why he has to keep copying a pasting the same sentence so that the context remains the same. Additionally to claim that other religions haven't followed a similar path thanks to extreme beliefs and interpretation of so called sacred texts hundreds of years after their original relevance is incredibly ignorant of the topic. ....and for that reason, I'm out.
You made an argument. I responded to it. You haven't replied to that. Here is what you said: (a) The Muslim world isn't in a position today to wage conventional war against unbeliever nations. (b) Individual Muslims were never required to just kill people they happened to meet. And we could also add: (c) The fact that offensive war is a part of traditional Islam, doesn't mean that all mosques today are preaching it. It doesn't mean that all Muslims today are interested in it. So for various reasons, your argument just isn't very good. When it comes to the word "doctrine", the point I'm making is that it's part of the traditional teaching of the religion. i.e. when Muslims went out to kill and subjugate unbelievers historically, they were following the mainstream teaching of their religion. The bad things they did, they were told to do much of it by their religion.
I really must say we're all quite privileged on ESB Britain to have so many scholars of the muslim faith.
Have Christians done bad things historically speaking? Yes of course they have. That's not the issue at all. Does traditional Christianity have anything equivalent to "offensive jihad" in traditional Islam? No it doesn't.
I'm no scholar. But what I'm saying about Islam involving offensive war... I could quote people regarded as scholars and/or apologists for the religion in agreement with that.