Rape who out of where, be specific for me.
He only sustained some injuries, nothing life threatening.
yes.
this verse refers to the battle of tabuk. Its not a general order to kill christians or jooz. It was a specific order to defend against the Romans. (Unlike the bible,the Quran does not record the circumstances that leads to a verse being revealed. The people at the time of the revelation would know what the revelation means and later people would have to refer to hadith and history to understand what went on at that time)
« religion of peace » is something made up by some « muslims » trying to please the west.“muh religion of peace” really showing here tho
If not for my priest locally, I’d agree.
Another reason why islam is false. Your book just doesn't make sense. It's the greatest thing ever made, yet it requires other books (made by humans) to be understood and guess what... it's still unclear af
how about fuck both and give Jerusalem back to the Catholic Church
Fuck Jerusalem too. Lets focus on fixing our countries first.
The catholic church deserves to get wiped off the face of the Earth (I'm Christian)
those « other books » are just recollections of the sayings and doings of the prophet (pretty much the same as the gospels btw, difference being that we have the chain of narrations). our « bible » would be the Quran+ books of Hadith.
No. Assuming that someone on an island got airdropped the Quran without hadith, takfir etc… and he does his best to follow what is written, he will be judged based on his niyah (intentions), and most certainly will enter Jannah.
How is it a contradiction if you simultaneously affirm both that objective assertions are subjective
something objective cannot be subjective.
Yeah but how do you prove islam is more moral than anyone else
objectively more moral
im defending religion in general, not just islam. Im saying that religion gives us objective morals, unlike atheism which doesnt. If the true principles of atheism were applied, we would very much not be different from animals since atheism cannot give an objective reason to why killing, raping, incest, hypergamy etc is bad.
maybe atheism is more objectively moral because it is the foundation of everything like inventions, technology, and very religion itself which by itself gives nothing but cope.
It's unclear to all Muslims. It's literally impossible to just read the Quran, you gotta go and ask the sheikhs about pretty much everything.
No, The Gospels were written between AD 66 and 90, which means they appeared between 33 and 50 years after Jesus' death. Meanwhile, it wasn't until the 8th and 9th centuries, roughly 200 to 300 years after Muhammad's death, that scholars began compiling and writing down these traditions of sayings and actions.
Dnr all but As a ex muslim and now atheist first sentence is true that it's not fully clear and it plays with 2 possibilities at once while claiming to be otherwise.
inventions, technology ??? BS mate.
Read it nigga this shit bomb
christianity didnt help newton invent the math that i as an atheist probably know more about than you
Fuck very very accurate. Hence I left honestly it's just interpretation that's it.
Allah couldn't make a good book if his life depended on it. Gets mogged by human authors on a daily basis
BrahminBoss is EXTREMELY based. More news at 11
Agreed. But your going harsh on muslim cels here.there only kind people .org .like gengar and squirtle and forgot that other guy. Others just degrade like blackgymmax
No one (besides Quranists) claim that the Quran alone can answer all questions. There is a reason why we have Hadith too.
Copy-pasted BS
Yet there are no copies of the gospel from that date range so this is irrelevant. We also dont have any type of chain of narration or anything. this is a debate for another day tho.
when they were compiled doesnt change anything. (100-300AH btw)
Chain of narration is the most important thing when it comes to hadith authentification.
He is an idol-worshipping pagan, check his post history
I've not noticed that, most of they seem narcy imo (not all).
sandnigger classic, the west is doomed
siberian temperature IQ. Did atheism help anyone invent anything ?
Might be I guess I don't know i don't usually look into these debates also why gandy degen banner use something more non degen
In the past. Islam and Judaism are now the most violent religions.
Many Islamic Jihadist groups would disagree with you.
Because the U.S. and Russia have dropped a huge amount of Bombs on them to contain them to the middle east. ISIS wants to take over the entire world.
Muslims are 1.1% of the U.S. population. Such as small percentage of the population causing so much violence. Imagine if we let more of them in?
i know more maths cause i do it everyday as a job and go college and im ahead of everyone.
You know how to rep farm don't you? Future incelebrity in making also you didn't reply why men's virginity do not matter?
Surah 9:29, “ Fight against those who do not believe in Allah, nor in the last day, nor forbid that which has been forbidden by Allah and Allah's messenger, nor acknowledge the religion of truth (Islam) among the people who were given the scriptures, until they pay the security tax willingly, and feel themselves subdued.”
It's still true, I often argue with muzzies so I have some things stored in my arsenal
I guess you mean
We don't need a "chain" nigga. The guys who wrote the Gospels were literally there and heard Jesus say it first hand. A "narration" doesn't get more "sahih" than that
It does, it's way too late in your case. Not to mention that they were compiled very far away from where the supposed events happened. Jfl Muhammad al-Bukhari whote this shit from 4k kilometers away
214 years later and 4k kilometers away
that doesnt mean we should ignore the past.
thats fine, all reputable muslims scholars now and from before disagree with them. Same way most christians would disagree with extremist groups like the KKK that have a flawed interpretation of christian scriptures.
the bombing of middle eastern civilians and the stealing of $150 billions of oil money wasnt to « contain » ISIS.
Like the US did in the middle east ? Im not condoning terrorist attacks, im just pointing out the hypocrisy of the media.
I replied to 9:29 earlier and 47:4 is also talking about a specific battle.
Its not, nor do you have any way to say it is. This is most likely something copy pasted from some christian with some arabic knowledge.
Yep, mb
No, « those who wrote the gospels » were eyewitnesses of eye witnesses which is a chain.
Give me a reason why the location of the compilation changes the authenticity of a hadith
Atheism has nothing to do with that so its irrelevant to our debate
ik
It should be considered as there is no objective morality without it.
Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John wrote the Gospels, they were in the presence of Jesus. They didn't ask others what to write
Over such a long time, information can be easily distorted. Like a game of telephone, details may be added, removed, or made sound better in the retelling of the sayings across generations. Societies and their values change over centuries. The hadith nigga, living in a different cultural context 4000 kilometers away, can definitely misinterpret the meaning or intent behind Muhammad's sayings. Not to mention, he probably had his own agenda when collecting the sayings. He definitely filtered those (choose to include sayings that support his views and omit others... reminds me of this one book that got some of it's chapters burned and eaten by sheep so they may never see light ever again
). Being this far away, it's unlikely that Bukhari had access to reliable sources to verify the authenticity of the sayings he collected. And last but not least, there's a chance the author, or someone in the "transmission chain", fabricated sayings entirely to fit a certain narrative or for dramatic effect (the moon split for example)
you say this like it is a well-known fact when its source of many debates amongst christian scholars
This does not play in your favour, knowing that the oldest bible (incomplete btw) is from 300-305 AD
could have, however Bukhari and other hadtith books were all authenticated both at the time of the compilation and later by others.
« probably »
The bible ?He definitely filtered those (choose to include sayings that support his views and omit others... reminds me of this one book that got some of it's chapters burned so they may never see light ever again
Thats where the importance of the chain of narration comes in lol
again, this is why the field of islamic studies specialising in the authentification of hadith is so important to us
Bad example since the moon splitting is from Quran and not hadith(moon split for example
It's not a "source of many debates", maybe there are some retards who wanna make a career out of sayings controversial stuff, but real scholars just laugh at them.
Cope, The Bible is unchanged, It's a fact confirmed by some of the biggest critics of Christianity
« could »
It was narrated that Aishah said: "The Verse of stoning and of breastfeeding an adult ten
Secular historians laugh at y'all's "chains" and criteria. Muslims scholars said Islam was right
. How about you try and read some criticism from independent historians.Ok, my bad, here are some miracles of Muhammad that can only be found in the hadith:
