>Romans pretty much allow freedom of religion in their empire.

Are you saying that it isn't true and Mongols were deeply zealous people or what?

>>1753985
Because they fear terrorists.

File: kuffir.jpg (22KB, 250x201px) Image search: [Google]

22KB, 250x201px

>romans
>tolerant ovf other religions
So thats why they razed the Second Temple of David Khan and the local Christians turned it into a garbage zone before the righteous Muslims came and restored it to glory?

And don't get me started when they created the meme of christianity and started to persecute any pagan not following it by destroying their temples or just out killing them.

Because Muslims are hypocrite butthurt people who like portraying themselves as peaceful, if you say they are violent they will kill you so don't do that

>Romans pretty much allow freedom of religion in their empire.
Except Christians.

>>1754032
The Roman Empire loses a lot of it's fun after it becomes Christian.

>>1753985
romans are pagans, they're not exactly tolerant, just that they believe other god aside from their deities exist too, but assigned to another nation

because the mongols kills indiscriminately

muslims are tolerant at that age compared to christian europe and pretty much most of the world at the time

>>1754027

>Romans attack jews after they rise up in Rebellion to their Roman masters

>judaism isnt made illegal or anything after this conflict either

go murder a 9 year old girl because she learned how to read

>>1754035
Yes, but it persecuted Christians, mostly starting with Nero.

File: balkan pol kul.jpg (137KB, 800x820px) Image search: [Google]

137KB, 800x820px

>>1754030

>>1754027
>So thats why they razed the Second Temple of David

The Romans were perfectly content to let the Jews follow their own religion: it's the fault of the Jews. They're the ones that rebelled three times.

>>1753985
>DUDE MUSLIMS WERE GREAT!
They're being compared to bloodthirsty Mesopotamians, not actually tolerant people.

>>1754037
>muslims are tolerant at that age compared to christian europe

lol no

File: image.png (102KB, 609x497px) Image search: [Google]

102KB, 609x497px

>>1754032
Well duh. Any logical person would've banned Christianity at the time considering the threat it posed.

>>1754032
There was a legal reason for that i.e. their crimes.

File: koffir.jpg (25KB, 250x201px) Image search: [Google]

25KB, 250x201px

>>1754038
>judaism isnt made illegal or anything after this conflict either
As long as you don't practice it inside Rome, since Tiberius banned it completely and pay the fiscus judaicus in the newly renamed land of Syria-Palestina that was do distance themselves from their heirtage.

>>1754032
Romans generally didn't give a fuck about other cults. The problem with Christian is that they openly refused to worship emperors as living gods, dominus et deus. This was an absolute must for all subjects of Rome regardless of their spiritual beliefs. If you refused you were immediately accused of treason against the emperor, so the prosecution of Christians was pretty much more of political nature, and less of religious.

To be fair the Romans did ban and persecute the Druids in their empire. Then again they did deserve it.

>>1753985
butthurt muslim revisionists

>>1754047
except from small cases like some few trading cities around spain and italy, like palermo, venice, etc. europe is pretty much less intolerant and diverse compared to muslim citites

Mongolians were cool guys. They raped your woman and NOT burn your monastery. They also killed 10 percent of the world population, but I mean you guys should have surrendered when you had the chance, like what the fuck it's their fault. If they fight back, than mongolians had to kill those petty shit posters. And about Roman and Muslims? They are a bunch of petty ass losers compared to my waifu Genghis Khan.

>>1754027

>bin Blatta

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turkestan_cockroach

Well memed my friend, well memed.

>>1754068
I think slavs are generally much more intolerant than Southern Europe.

>They dont force their subjects to worship Jupiter or whatever
>implying the Romans wouldn't kill you if you didn't pray for the good of the emperor

no

File: keffir.jpg (26KB, 250x201px) Image search: [Google]

26KB, 250x201px

>>1754123
>intolerant
*inferior

>>1754142
That's a real small ask senpai.

Hebrews and Mosleums have a lying clause built in for shit like that. Christcvcks should've gotten theirs.

>>1753985
>Romans pretty much allow freedom of religion in their empire. They dont force their subjects to worship Jupiter or whatever

About that... the state did not do that but it was very common for the trade guilds of the era to force the subject. If you did not go along with that they would not let you join and make it very hard for you to work in that profession. They were also de facto parts of the cults of Minerva, Jupiter, or more rarely other Roman gods. Also the state granted rights to the collegia opificum so... the Roman state just took a round about and passive aggressive means of making you worship Jupiter.

Just saying.

>>1754419
Huh. Neat. Better than two taxes, getting humiliated, and then getting cucked.

>>1753985
>made them crawl on their hands and knees and humiliate and beat them while they paid this tax! They were so tolerant!"

Really going to need a source senpai. You're welcome for correcting the record.

>>1753985
>measuring civilizations by how nice they were

The more people you can tolerate the more you can exploit; I wasn't under the impression anybody thought this was "nice".

>>1754491
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jizya

The humiliation part really changed from area to area.

I don't think anyone claims that Muslims were great purveyors of religious freedom or anything, but they were certainly better than the Christians of their time and have historically been much more tolerant than their current reputation would have people believe, which I'm pretty sure are the only two points really being made when this is brought up.

>>1754513
Would rather live in Cordoba than Paris in 1000 as a Jew desu

>>1754518
Even as certain sects of Christianity it would have been better under Muslim rule. They didn't see protestant or catholic or anabaptist etc. they saw christian only.

>>1753985
It is well know that the Mongols and pre-Christian Romans were religiously tolerant. The Muslim empires are seen as having been generally more tolerant than their neighbors.

>>1754063
They went after the Druids because the Druids were extremely influential political and religious class who refused more-or-less point-blank to play ball. If they'd kissed the ring instead of telling the Romans to go fuck themselves they might still be around.

>>1753985
>Romans pretty much allow freedom of religion in their empire. They dont force their subjects to worship Jupiter or whatever
Topkek.

The word "martyr" literally arose from the thousands of Christians burned, quartered, crucified, dismembered and beheaded by the Romans for refusing to worship their Gods. It is also the origin of the word "Atheist" (someone who rejected the Roman Gods).

>>1754513

Too bad you "pretty sure" that "nobody is doing thaaat!" because I've seen people claim that Muslim tolerance was almost on par with the modern West, both on major publications and on 4chan. People don't really put much thought into what they're saying if what's being said agrees with their comfier thoughts.

>>1754762
thats, what you see. the problem is some people looking at medieval muslims the same way muslims act today, say whatever you want but they're vastly different back then, although to be fair they maybe exaggerated it a bit so people like you could tell the difference

>>1754058
The persecution of Christians was also populist in nature, namely on perceiving that Christianity is a blood cult or something sinister like that, because they liked to congregate in random hidden places and spouted strange Eastern sermons with "blood" and "flesh".