Why does the Quran say Alexander was a Muslim?


Warning: Attempt to read property "comment_date" on null in /var/www/wptbox/wp-includes/comment-template.php on line 1043

Warning: Attempt to read property "comment_date" on null in /var/www/wptbox/wp-includes/comment-template.php on line 1043

Warning: Attempt to read property "comment_date" on null in /var/www/wptbox/wp-includes/comment-template.php on line 1043

He was a pagan, even minted coins with Zeus and other gods on them
>But Dhu'l Qarnayn wasn't Alexander
The parallels between Dhu'l Qarnayn and Alexander legends are very clear, plus many classical commentators said it was him (such as in Tafsir al-Jalalayn)
>No, it was Cyrus
Very recent idea. But even then the Cyrus cylinder shows that Cyrus worshipped the Babylonian god Marduk

  1. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    The man with answers to all your questions:

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >"marvelous quran"
      Cringe.

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      ... in a video, i.e. targeting illiterates.

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        He has written shit too. Would you like to buy his books, my swarthy friend?

        • 2 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          you are very confused about who is who in this thread.

          • 2 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Watch the video, my swarthy friend. He answers your question in great detail. If you are satisfied with his answers, you may proceed to purchase some of his wares.

  2. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    we wuz Macedonians and shit

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      *Greek. Fyromians are Slavs.

  3. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    It doesn't. Stop listening to Shias

    Alexander was not a Muslim neither was Cyrus, Zoroaster, Guru Nana or the Dalai Lama. They were all filthy mushriks and it is obligatory on the Muslim to make a stand against them and their false beliefs.

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Ya Madkhali bootlicker, will you first make a stand against MBS and his false beliefs? Seething against the Dalai Lama while his own house burns, lol.

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Rather a Madkhali than a Shia kek, you are following a cult created by a israelite - Abdullah Ibn Saba and have the audacity label the likes of Bin Salman as israelites. Bin Salman is a Muslim, a Muslim with mistakes but still a Muslim. You are an idol worshipper and make dua to Ali so you are not a Muslim. That's why we prefer MBS and the House of Saud to Shias. Clear?

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Ya Madkhali bootlicker, will you first make a stand against MBS and his false beliefs? Seething against the Dalai Lama while his own house burns, lol.

      Rather a Madkhali than a Shia kek, you are following a cult created by a israelite - Abdullah Ibn Saba and have the audacity label the likes of Bin Salman as israelites. Bin Salman is a Muslim, a Muslim with mistakes but still a Muslim. You are an idol worshipper and make dua to Ali so you are not a Muslim. That's why we prefer MBS and the House of Saud to Shias. Clear?

      Both these brown teenagers live in birmingham

  4. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    It's obviously not some historical figure we know about. To me, he is a Türkish ruler who scattered the descendants of Ham and Japheth to the East and West, the original Germanics and the original Han.

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >It's obviously not some historical figure we know about. To me, he is a Türkish ruler who scattered the descendants of Ham and Japheth to the East and West, the original Germanics and the original Han.

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        I saw it in a dream. Who are you to dispute me?

        • 2 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          I was there.
          Reincarnation.

          • 2 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            If you were there, you would know he is Türkish. Thank you for confirming me, brother.

            • 2 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              I was there, you're wrong
              He was a proud Kurd

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Kürdish are bastards, but they are Türkish bastards.

  5. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Same reason Nordfag/Medshit claim he is part of their people(You all descend from the slaves).

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Technically basically every white person descends from multiple European kings.
      Though, it needs to be said that most African Americans can also trace their line back to Charlemagne.

  6. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    it has more mistakes
    >women have yellow sperm, and whoever cums first is who the kid will resemble
    - https://sunnah.com/urn/1002010 (Sahih)
    >the israelites are responsible for meat decaying
    - bukhari 60:72
    >that man is created from:
    >nothing
    - quran 19:67
    >cloth of blood
    - quran 96:2
    >water
    - quran 21:30
    >seed
    - quran 16:4
    >clay
    - quran 15:26
    >earth
    - quran 11:61
    >dust
    - quran 3:59

    >allah sends hail from mountains that are in heaven
    - quran 24:43
    >the sun sets in murky water (this was discovered by alexander the great, who was also a prophet of islam)
    - quran 18:86

    allah says he created earth first, then heaven
    - quran 41:9-12
    no wait actually heaven first, then the earth
    - quran 79:27-32

    muhammad recited satanic verses, cannot know what is from allah and what is from satan
    - quran 22:52

    allah will make muhammad forget verses
    - quran 2:106

    muhammad thinks mary (mother of jesus) is the sister of the brother of moses (even tho they lived many years from each other)
    - quran 19:28
    - Sahih Muslim 28:13
    - Tafsir Ibn Kathir (non-abridged) 19:28

    muhammad thinks mary is part of the christian trinity
    - quran 5:73-75
    - quran 5:116

    allah decieves whoever he wants
    - quran 4:88
    allah is the best of the decievers
    - quran 3:54
    allah made it appear that christ died on the cross
    - quran 4:157
    >Muhammad says a Muslim baby could go to hell
    https://sunnah.com/urn/1250820
    >Muhammad fondled Aisha while fasting
    https://sunnah.com/tirmidhi/8/47
    >Aisha scraping semen off Muhammad's clothes
    https://sunnah.com/bukhari/4/96
    >Aisha made her relatives give their tits to strangers
    https://sunnah.com/urn/413040
    https://sunnah.com/urn/413020
    https://sunnah.com/muslim/17/33
    >Breastfeeding adults was in the Quran, but a sheep ate the verse
    https://sunnah.com/urn/1262630
    >Aisha (a mature young lady! that Arabian heat made em' grow back then!) still played with dolls while married to Muhammad
    https://sunnah.com/bukhari/78/157
    https://sunnah.com/nasai/26/183
    https://sunnah.com/adab/55/18

  7. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    no, Alexander isn’t him, when did Alexander build wall to keep 2 tribes that destroyed everything in their way ?, also if you actually gave shit instead of baitposting you would know that Dhu Qarnayn travelled west, not east, also you proved yourself wrong, Dhu Qarnyan worshipped allah, you said that Alexander was pagan, so Alexander can’t be him

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Alexander legends (going back at least to Josephus) say he was a monotheist who build a great wall against Gog and Magog.
      So Dhu'l Qarnayn is a legendary version of Alexander, not the historical Alexander

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >monotheist
        yeah right, he worshipped Zeus and believed in other gods and saw himself as son of Ra and son of Zeus, where did Josephus say that he was monotheist ?

        • 2 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          My bad, I should have been more precise. Josephus mentions the building of the wall but not that he was a monotheist. Though later Alexander legends do.
          >he worshipped Zeus
          Agreed, but then again later Christians did think he believed in God

          • 2 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            That's because the Bible prophecizes Alexander as the goat who will take over the two horns that are Persia/Medes.

            Theres no reason why he wouldnt convert after hearing this from the israelites.

            • 2 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              Point is (1) Josephus is our only source he ever heard this (2) even Josephus doesn't mention Alexander converted and (3) all the evidence says he remained a pagan. After conquering Israel, Alexander moved on to Egypt, where he was proclaimed to be the son of Zeus-Ammon (the name Dhu'l Qarnayn probably comes from propaganda which depicted Alexander with the horns of Ammon). Pic related a coin minted in the final years of his reign, with one the one side Alexander dressed up as the hero Hercules and on the other side the god Zeus with his eagle. There are literally hundreds of these coins

            • 2 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              WTF are you talking about? Nope, wrong. Why can't you do a simple search, and look at more than the first two pages of results you get?

              The US Pharmaceutical Industry is the single largest political donor in the world, PERIOD. Believe it or not, European governments made it illegal a long time ago for drug or medical companies to donate to a political campaign because of the conflict of interests, all except for New Zealand. Also the US is the only country in the world aside from New Zealand that allow the Pharmaceutical companies to advertise in public and on television. I bet you didn't know that either.

              Gates doesn't come close, Soros doesn't come close. Saudi oil tycoons don't even scratch the surface in comparison to what the Pharmaceutical Industry gives to the politicians, the FDA, the CDC, and the WHO or the WEF.

              Ever wonder who is behind on the good supplements and vitamins getting banned? The Pharmaceutical industry. Since 2003 about 839 drugs, supplements and medications have been banned by the FDA, I'll just give you 3

              Ephedrine - aided in weight loss, reduced water retention which leads to about 60,000 people getting misdiagnosed with a disease or illness they don't have, improved concentration and focus reducing the need for Ritalin
              >Pfizer and Johnson and Johnson lobbied Congress to pressure the FDA to ban it, it's now banned

              Kratom - Reduced pain and helped people get off opioids which hurt Pfizers sales
              >Pfizer lobbied Congress to pressure the FDA to ban it because it was hurting sales

              Ivermectin - Has been shown to reduce inflammation for a period of 3 months, reduce cellular replication in negative-sense RNA viruses, get rid of parasites which are a leading cause of illnesses in the US, reverse Lyme Disease and other Auto Immune "diseases" which are nothing more than inflammation
              >Pfizer, Moderna, Johnson & Johnson, AAVIS, Acadia, Patheon, Merck & Co lobbied congress to pressure Twitter, the CDC, the FDA, facebook, Instagram,

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Dhu-l Qarnayn is a completely fictional character concocted from legends about Alexander the Great. Why do you think that Islamic scholars have such a hard time pinning him down in history and identifying him with any historical figure in particular? the candidates proponed by Islamic scholars are wildly inconsistent, because none of them remotely fit the mold.

        The alexander manuscript is from the 18th century.

        • 2 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          >https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gates_of_Alexander

          >Josephus, a israeli historian in the 1st century, gives the first extant reference to gates constructed by Alexander, designed to be a barrier against the Scythians
          >1st century

          • 2 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            You mentioned the alexander romance. The alexander romance manuscript with that story is from the 18th century
            As for gates built to stoo the scythians thats irrelevant

            • 2 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              I mentioned the Gates of Alexander, fuckface.
              >As for gates built to stoo the scythians thats irrelevant
              Read the thread, I ain't going over this bullshit again.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                You mentioned the alexander romance.

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Dhu-l Qarnayn is a completely fictional character concocted from legends about Alexander the Great. Why do you think that Islamic scholars have such a hard time pinning him down in history and identifying him with any historical figure in particular? the candidates proponed by Islamic scholars are wildly inconsistent, because none of them remotely fit the mold.

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        He obviously is a prehistoric figure. Gog and Magog aren't exactly recorded in history either. They are recorded only in Biblical genealogies.

        • 2 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          Where's the bigass wall that he supposedly built? That should absolutely be able to be found, even in prehistoric times.

          >Gog and Magog aren't exactly recorded in history either. They are recorded only in Biblical genealogies.
          No? Gog and Magog come from a prophetic dream in the book of Ezekiel, Magog is a particular country and Gog is its ruler whom will war and surround Israel but ultimately lose because of God.

          Even here we find no record of a great general fighting them and building a big brass wall to keep them at bay.

          Yet another thing the Quran gets wrong.

          • 2 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            It doesn't even say a wall. Simply a barrier. What I understand from this is that he expelled certain problematic tribes beyond the mountains. This is generally taken to be the mountains of the Caucasus, but it can be other mountains as well.

            • 2 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              Ok, so where's the barrier? Where's any of this in the historical record?
              >This is generally taken to be the mountains of the Caucasus
              Are you telling me that this motherfucker built mountains now?

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                He didn't build mountains. He banished them beyond the mountains, thus establishing a barrier. That's what it says. أجعل بينكم وبينهم ردما.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                So where are they now? Do we have any archaeological or historical record of warrior tribes being driven behind the mountains of the Caucasus? Where are their descendants? Did they leave some DNA footprint? Are there archaeological findings pointing out to their stay behind the Causasus? Are there records celebrating his victory of these tribes.

                Mind you, all of this is your own very tortured personal interpretation. Muslim scholars absolutely believed fo centuries that Alexander the Great was Dhu-l Qarnayn and it's only now in the modern age that they've backtracked like crazy because they know this issue debunks their entire religion. Also they did understand the text to mean that Qarnayn actually built walls to keep them out.

                https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gates_of_Alexander
                https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theories_about_Alexander_the_Great_in_the_Quran
                https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dhul-Qarnayn

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Because they're scholars and their job is to speculate. Is every historical paper we read 100% accurate? Not really.
                As for evidence, you're missing the entire point of Surat al-Kahf, where this is from. It's about the faithful being tested in various ways. That we are tested first in terms of faith in defending our religion, by our wealth in maintaining our virtue, by our knowledge in receding from arrogance, and finally in our power by recognizing the source of all is Allah, سبحانه وتعالى.
                Archaeological evidence and this sort of thing has very little relevance to the lesson of the surah. Perhaps we will find some helment with two horns and we will gradually identify who this person is. You should know who is this person wearing a two-horned helmet. Figure out who it is rather than dismissing it offhandedly.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >YOU JUST HAVE TO BELIEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEVE
                So Muslims are no better than fundamentalist Christians....
                Sad.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                I didn't say you just have to believe. I said that this is not something you are easily going to find evidence for. If you want to look, then you are free to look. But unless and until you build a time machine, concrete evidence of most Abrahamic figures might never be found. That has nothing to do with the religion itself.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Or I could, you know, draw conclusions from the avaliable evidence so farand reach the completely reasonable conclusion that Dhu-l Qarnayn never existed, the never built any wall or barrier, Ya'juj and Ma'juj never existed, and Islam as a whole is a big fat lie.

                And if Allah has any issue with that, then he's not nobody but himself to blame for not providing evidence of any kind.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                There is zero evidence for any other prophet either. Again, take the lesson rather than looking for historical figures you might never find.
                The lesson is that we should be humble in our power and remember that ما شاء الله, or that nothing happens except for the Will of Allah.
                In the verses preceding, there is also talk of a rich man and a poor man. Are you going to say that this story is fake because the rich man and the poor man haven't been identified and we don't have archaeological evidence for them? This would be a very strange thing to do.
                Again, you are still free to speculate on who this is. Who is some historical figure with two horns who drove some warring tribes beyond the mountains. As a LULZ afficianado, you should have some idea of who it might be referring to.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >There is zero evidence for any other prophet either.
                Excellent. Glad you can admit the truth.
                In time, you will realize that the same is truth about Allah.

                Good day.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                This is not really relevant. The truth is Islam is valuable to me in itself. Even if every single prophet were completely fictional, I'd still follow Islam as it is by far the best way to align one's heart with God. I've tried out other religions, and have my own atheistic phase, but truly Islam properly followed makes our hearts shine with the light of God.
                You'll obviously disagree since you are surrounded by Muslims that don't follow the teachings of Islam. If I were in your position, I would disagree as well.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Nta but in short you were born into it and can't overcome your programming, nice

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >Even if every single prophet were completely fictional
                If every prophet was fictional, then there is no truth in your religion period, you're just following it because it makes you feel good, (i.e. narcissim), which is fine, that's what everyone does, but keep your religion to yourself and stop trying to shove it everybody's throat.
                >You'll obviously disagree since you are surrounded by Muslims that don't follow the teachings of Islam.
                I'm sorry, what? Where did this assumption about me come from?

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                I said if EVERY prophet were fictional. It's a hypothetical. What I mean is that the practices of Islam stand by themselves.
                Of course, I have zero evidence of anything contradicting Islam. I've seen the worst atheists and the rest can throw at me. All of it has only strengthened my iman.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >What I mean is that the practices of Islam stand by themselves.
                They don't. They stand by the truthfulness of its supposed prophets. Just like Christianity doesn't stant by itself without the resurrection, if you disprove that, the whole thing falls apart immediately. Paul himself admits to this:

                1 Corinthians 15:12-19
                >Now if Christ is proclaimed as raised from the dead, how can some of you say that there is no resurrection of the dead? But if there is no resurrection of the dead, then not even Christ has been raised. And if Christ has not been raised, then our preaching is in vain and your faith is in vain. We are even found to be misrepresenting God, because we testified about God that he raised Christ, whom he did not raise if it is true that the dead are not raised. For if the dead are not raised, not even Christ has been raised. And if Christ has not been raised, your faith is futile and you are still in your sins. Then those also who have fallen asleep in Christ have perished. If in Christ we have hope in this life only, we are of all people most to be pitied.

                If Muhammad was not visited by an angel, indeed if angels don't exist to begin with, or even Allah. Then nothing of what he says matters, whatever accomplishments he or his followers did are their own, not thanks to a God. And the Quran, no matter how beautiful you think it is, it's just a book, written fully by human beings.

                >Of course, I have zero evidence of anything contradicting Islam.
                Dhu-l Qarnayin
                >I've seen the worst atheists and the rest can throw at me. All of it has only strengthened my iman.
                Right, I've heard the same from Christians, you're no different. Indeed no argument can refute simple blind faith.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                You're picking at the letter of what I said rather than the spirit. What I mean is that Islam is so valuable in itself that evidence is not something I'd even look for. Of course, if something truly contradicted Islam, I'd leave Islam, but I'm yet to find such a thing.
                Dhul Qarnayn is not at all something that contradicts Islam. How does an unknown figure somehow contradict Islam? The identification with Alexander was mere speculation. There are many more speculations that scholars have made. This is only relevant as a person interested in history. As a Muslim, Dhul Qarnayn is simply Dhul Qarnayn.
                Who knows? Perhaps his name actually is Dhul Qarnayn (or the equivalent in his language) and we're making meaningless speculations here. Perhaps this is someone completely separate and trying to identify him with a historical figure is taking the wrong track altogether.
                Maybe Two Horns is exactly the name we're looking for. If you find anyone with such a name, be sure to inform us.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >What I mean is that Islam is so valuable in itself that evidence is not something I'd even look for.
                And I'm telling you that it is not you dumb motherfucker. It makes zero sense to seek God if God doesn't exist to begin with you retard.
                >if something truly contradicted Islam, I'd leave Islam, but I'm yet to find such a thing.
                You're contradicting yourself in real time now. You've just admitted that even if every prophet was fictional, something that would explicitly contradict Islam since it affirms the existence and truthfulness of these prophets, and it relies on their message being true, even if they were fictional that would still not make you leave Islam.

                So no, you're dishonest, even if something contradicted Islam, you wouldn't leave.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                It's sort of like this: if a device is working, do you look into how it's working? Not really unless you had special interest in engineering.
                Similarly, as a Muslim, I wouldn't look for evidence confirming Islam as there is nothing in Islam that would make me doubt it.
                Now, as someone interested in history, science, philosophy, I would gladly take whatever evidence is presented before me and see if it contradicts Islam.
                So, the two are separate. I'd accept Islam as a secular construct in addition to being a religious construct. In short, even if I were an atheist, I'd still prefer Islamic law to any other law.

                >Islam isn't based around worshipping prophets.
                I never said that it was? I said that Islam is based around its prophets being real and truthful. Which you're very openly admitting that it doesn't matter to you anyways.
                >it wouldn't make a fuck of difference since the religion is based around a connection to god and the holy text are stories and philosophies to grow that connection.
                Oh I see, you're one of those "it's all just metaphors maaaaaaaaaaaaaan" types.

                That's not me.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >So, the two are separate. I'd accept Islam as a secular construct in addition to being a religious construct. In short, even if I were an atheist, I'd still prefer Islamic law to any other law.
                Excellent, now we're getting to something worth discussing.
                Why then is Islamic law superior to all other law, if no country currently implements it completely and the ones who try to do so are absolute hellholes like Afghanistan or ISIS back when they still held land? Why are the most secular countries the most safe, prosperous and advanced if Islamic law is better? Why should, say, Norway, implement Islamic law? How would it benefit from it? How do you justify Islamic law from a secular perspective? What is so valuable about it that even as an atheist (that is, God does not exist in your view) you would prefer it over other laws?

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Depends on what you mean by Islamic laws. Not drinking, not taking drugs, not fornicating, not committing adultery - these are all things that would be beneficial to any country.
                Afghanistan has been at war for 40 years and ISIS are ISIS. Islamic law works out just fine in the Gulf. It would work out even better in Western countries, and solve most of the remaining problems that the West currently has.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >Islamic law works out just fine in the Gulf.
                I think you mean the assloads of oil that were found in the region. Prior to that nobody have a shit about the Arab peninsula, Mecca and Medina were the only sites of any importance (and the coast,) for religious reason, before that the Ottoman Empire and Persia were the big power in the region and they were both making progress towards secularisation, the Ottman Empire even legalized gay marriage in the 19th century. Clearly not a fully fledged Islamic empire.
                >It would work out even better in Western countries
                What makes you say this?

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >gulf
                I know they were irrelevant. I mean that their countries aren't getting messed up because of Islamic law. That isn't really a problem for them.
                >ottomans
                Did the Ottoman empire legalize gay marriage or simply decriminalize homosexuality?
                >west
                Why not? How would discouraging usage of intoxicants and encouraging family values harm the West exactly?

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >I know they were irrelevant. I mean that their countries aren't getting messed up because of Islamic law.
                Because they're filthy rich.
                >Did the Ottoman empire legalize gay marriage or simply decriminalize homosexuality?
                Why would an Islamic empire do either?
                >Why not? How would discouraging usage of intoxicants
                We do that in the West just fine, we all know that shooting your veins with heroin or snorting cocain is not good for you. We don't need your magic book to tell us that drugs are bad mmmkay?
                >and encouraging family values harm the West exactly?
                Would you accept fully your son to come out as gay, or atheist, or convert to another religion? Are those your family values?

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >gulf
                What does money have to do with this? I'm saying that there are no social problems that arise due to them following Islamic law. Are you saying Islamic law hurts a country economically? How can family law and criminal law hurt anyone economically?
                >west
                Sure, if you think the West doesn't have an issue with drugs or adultery that's needs addressing, then I have no issue. There are many issues within the Ummah that I'd rather focus on before lecturing you on how to run your country.
                >son
                The unacceptability of atheism comes from the old generation of Muslim parents not really understanding why their children become atheists. The truth is that most of us aren't born Muslim - most of us are born liberal and raised with liberal values and only convert into Islam at an older age. At some point, the more studious among us see a contradiction between liberal values and Islam and have to make a choice.
                So, an atheist is simply someone who is consistent with the liberal values he grew up with. A religious person is someone who goes against these liberal values. It's natural to be an atheist. It's very unnatural to be a Muslim. Thus, it's the parents job to convince his child. If he fails to do so, then he cannot judge the child for following exactly the values most of the world follows, and that he'd be raised to follow as well.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >What does money have to do with this? I'm saying that there are no social problems that arise due to them following Islamic law.
                Saudi executes people for practicing witchcraft. That sounds like a problem to me.
                >Are you saying Islamic law hurts a country economically?
                Yeah.
                >How can family law and criminal law hurt anyone economically?
                Depends on your definition of "family" and "crime", which I think you know us filthy Westerners would not agree with.
                >Sure, if you think the West doesn't have an issue with drugs or adultery that's needs addressing, then I have no issue.
                You suffer from the exact same problems, not a single one (no, not even fertility rates, yours are also dropping) is exclusive to the West. And infidelity is just a general problem of the human condition, not something that only happens in the west.
                >There are many issues within the Ummah that I'd rather focus on before lecturing you on how to run your country.
                I agree, religion is the main one of your issues.
                >The unacceptability of atheism comes from the old generation of Muslim parents not really understanding why their children become atheists. The truth is that most of us aren't born Muslim - most of us are born liberal and raised with liberal values and only convert into Islam at an older age. At some point, the more studious among us see a contradiction between liberal values and Islam and have to make a choice.
                >So, an atheist is simply someone who is consistent with the liberal values he grew up with. A religious person is someone who goes against these liberal values. It's natural to be an atheist. It's very unnatural to be a Muslim. Thus, it's the parents job to convince his child. If he fails to do so, then he cannot judge the child for following exactly the values most of the world follows, and that he'd be raised to follow as well.
                I thought according to Islam we are all born Muslims and deviate later in life. Aren't you contradicting your own religion?

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Being born Muslim means being born with an innate understanding of the oneness of God. We are all raised liberal. Most Islamic countries follow liberal laws and liberal constitutions, which inherently go against most Islamic values. Even Iran's odd situation comes from having Islamism merged with popular democracy.
                I personally think the biggest political problem facing us is that we still haven't figured out what a centralized Islamic state actually looks like. Islamic states in the past were extremely decentralized, with the judges coming from the local community and the law being applied locally according to local circumstances and culture. However, this fell apart once European states started centralizing and fielding much larger armies fed by a much more organized workforce. They did this at the cost of Christianity, but it still worked in a material sense. For us, it's been a constant push-pull. The secular states get pushed towards Islamism, and the Islamic states get pulled towards secularism. In both cases, neither party knows what they are even arguing for.
                As for Islamic values, I don't think you'll agree with anything I say until I fix the issues within the Ummah itself. Only if the Ummah sets a better example does lecturing other even become a thing. Most of the preaching that goes on in the West falls flat for this reason. They also oddly focus excessively on law and politics rather than philosophy and mysticism, which turns people off further. I can see you've been the victim of such evangelizing as well. Islam will fix everything, etc. It might, but they have to first provide proof, which they don't bother doing.

                >t was a private party
                It was set an promoted by the Saudi Government itself. People were encouraged to come in for free as long as they came in custom. Young people were encouraged to assist.
                >It's "next to Mecca" in the same sense Tel Aviv is next to Jerusalem.
                Yeah? Tel Aviv is also very close to Jerusalem?
                >There was also an international uproar over it, which is why you know about this at all
                I wonder how many fucks did Saudi give about that "uproar", which was basically just Muslim apologists crying in social media. Meanwhile actual Saudi citizens telling them to fuck off and don't ruin the party for them.

                I was going back two years ago. Seems they did this last October from the 27th to the 29th.
                Anyway, I don't know what their justification for this was. So, I can't comment on this.
                Maybe the Saudi government is apostasizing. I won't know until I investigate further.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Ok, this sounds like a good place to end.

                Good day to you. I'm off to eat spaghetti.

                Anyway here are some videos to get you started in the Saudi Halloween party thing:

                https://www.youtube.com/shorts/-BOuSXxoNOo

                https://www.youtube.com/shorts/pTSkwaBigfs

                https://www.youtube.com/shorts/GbHc6Ft8NpM

                https://www.youtube.com/shorts/v3ttz0rKF80

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Selam aleyküm kardeşim. Enjoy your meal.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >How would discouraging usage of intoxicants and encouraging family values harm the West exactly?
                Just because Islam gets these things right doesn't mean it's true. If you really care about religions, which include what they say about eternal salvation or damnation, the most important thing is whether or not they are true.
                Mormons are wellknown for their abstaining from intoxicants and their family values, but I would still argue that Joseph Smith did not in fact translate a record of israelites living in pre-Columbian America by looking into a hat.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Also, it's not just proscriptions. I'm also talking about prescriptions. Going to the mosque every day keeps me in touch with the community. Fasting keeps me fit and conscious of my diet and also encourages exercise. Charity is more or less self-explanatory. There are also fairly ordinary practices that are enhanced in Islam - I have to visit family, visit friends, stay away from vulgar media, keep physically fit, focus on family and children, and many other such things. That's more what I was talking about than simply law.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Curious, plenty of people around me do those exact same things without the need of any religion telling them to do so.

                Anon it seems to me like you're simply a person with a lot of personal problems and Islam was just your way to put your life in order, which is fine. But most of us are not you, nor do we need to subscribe to the religion that you subscribe to, and we would most definitely not appreciate implementing a religious law that controls our lives for us.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                I did these things as well. What I said is Islam ensures that I don't lapse from doing these things. Practicing Muslims can't lapse from these duties. Many atheists unfortunately do.
                Islam is not really controlling. Some states misuse Islamic law to crackdown on dissidents, but this is not encouraged within Islam itself. That's more about using Islamic law selectively.
                Surveillance is forbidden and any evidence gathered using surveillance is not admissible in Islamic courts.
                So, you'll see many states use the argument against rebelling to punish dissidents, but you'll never hear the same people say spying is haram.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Also, Saudi Arabia is definiety not Islamic, last year they allowed Halloween to be celebrated in the country for the first time in a city right next to Mecca.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                It was a private party and it was in Jeddah. It's "next to Mecca" in the same sense Tel Aviv is next to Jerusalem. There was also an international uproar over it, which is why you know about this at all.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >t was a private party
                It was set an promoted by the Saudi Government itself. People were encouraged to come in for free as long as they came in custom. Young people were encouraged to assist.
                >It's "next to Mecca" in the same sense Tel Aviv is next to Jerusalem.
                Yeah? Tel Aviv is also very close to Jerusalem?
                >There was also an international uproar over it, which is why you know about this at all
                I wonder how many fucks did Saudi give about that "uproar", which was basically just Muslim apologists crying in social media. Meanwhile actual Saudi citizens telling them to fuck off and don't ruin the party for them.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >I've seen the worst atheists and the rest can throw at me.
                Ok, let me ask you a simple question: what is then the worst that atheists have thrown at you? Of all things, what is the one that has caused you the most doubts and was hardest to overcome?

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Nothing. My main issue was with violence. I was very pacifist in my youth. I was vegan. I tried out Jainism (and no, I'm not Indian), and so didn't even eat root vegetables. I was even considering becoming a Jain monk and eventually approaching sallekhana.
                However, my pacifism came from a desire to protect others, and this eventually made me realize that peace cannot be achieved with some degree of violence, so I gradually accepted that justice requires violence, and true pacifism is not possible and is even harmful.
                Other than this, it was merely one ridiculous argument after another. Even a simple google search is enough to refute most arguments. I'm over that sort of thing now. My main goal now is to keep going deeper into Islamic philosophy and its conjunction with the modern physical sciences.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >then there is no truth in your religion period
                Islam isn't based around worshipping prophets. If all of them were removed (same goes for all abrahamic religions) it wouldn't make a fuck of difference since the religion is based around a connection to god and the holy text are stories and philosophies to grow that connection.
                Athiests get so frustrated because they have no idea what religion is about and thus argue against shit no one takes all that seriously to begin with.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >Islam isn't based around worshipping prophets.
                I never said that it was? I said that Islam is based around its prophets being real and truthful. Which you're very openly admitting that it doesn't matter to you anyways.
                >it wouldn't make a fuck of difference since the religion is based around a connection to god and the holy text are stories and philosophies to grow that connection.
                Oh I see, you're one of those "it's all just metaphors maaaaaaaaaaaaaan" types.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >That has nothing to do with the religion itself.
                What the fuck do you mean? The historicity of these figures and events has everything to do with the religion.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Only if the history is wrong does it become relevant. Until evidence is found either for or against the story, it is not relevant to Islam.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Also, it's not as if we have extensive archaeological evidence of other Qur'anic prophets either. Who do we really have physical evidence for in the first place? If you want to dismiss him to be a myth, you're just going down the route of dismissing Jesus, Moses, Abraham, (as) and the rest of the prophets as well.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Fine by me.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                it was channeled to Mohamed just like the teachings were channeled to Moses and Jesus and mediums and psychics today, the problem is people are told to take these teaches and make books and then people take that and twist it and contort it and misinterpret it, take it out of context, add things and take away things that they like and don't like. So it's about 15% genuine just like christianity. The rest is stuff we humans inserted into it to fulfill their own personal agendas. The point is, you aren't supposed to worship gods and they weren't meant to be religions, just learn the teachings and use them to make you better, but your lost if you go around thinking that we get 72 versions when we die or judged or go to hell or that you're any different than someone that believes something completely different

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Worshipping is something we do for ourselves. It obviously doesn't benefit God in any way. It merely acts as a reminder of our teachings. The same way if you listen to a song over and over again, you begin to internalize the lessons contained within that song.

          • 2 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            do you also believe that the earth is flat ?

  8. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    all of our religions were channeled, jesus, moses, mohamad, you could channel a being that would tell you all the same stuff and every single one of us could made our own religion if we really wanted

  9. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    because Kooran is a joke. Supposed absolute truth from alah is mostly random contradictory ramblings from muhamad. Poison curing dates, alcohol being Great for wisdom,all water being clean muhamad needing to fuck other poeples wifes etc. To be Muslim you have to be either stupid or just evil.

  10. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous
  11. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Same reason modern Christians claim that Plato was really a Christian. People like to claim possession of great men, great warriors, or great thinkers. I imagine Alexander was specifically chosen for his conquest of the Persian Empire likening him to defeating one of the great empires lording over the pre-Caliphate Arabs, and being Greek suggesting that Greeks should naturally be Muslims.

  12. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Really? You really believe that?
    >An independently study found that the Pharmaceutical Industry, which is behind one of the US's most powerful and wealthy lobbies in D.C., make more money off US sales than all other countries combined

    Do an internet about a drug, or a weird symptom you or a friend might be having, almost every answer or search result that pops up on whatever search engine you use will be all or in part sponsored by BigPharm

    MSM and all televised Media including but not limited to FOX, CNN, MSNBC, ABC etc
    >Funded by BigPharm
    Publishing Companies, the companies that print your books
    >BigPharm is a major stake holder in every single one
    News Papers and Magazines
    >BigPharm is the largest financial contributor
    Capital Hill, your Congressional and Senate representatives
    >BigPharm is the single largest contributor to all of them
    The studies that you find after doing a search on a new drug
    >Financed by BigPharm

    I cannot describe how long or large the tentacles of BigPharm reach, it's unfathomable how much influence they have politically and socially. It would shock most people if they found out.

    Of all the companies that operate in America, by far the companies with the worst track record of all time are the Pharmaceutical companies. I'll just use Pfizer as an example to illustrate just what I mean

    Pfizer
    >Sued over 66 times
    >Directly responsible for roughly 43,000 deaths
    >Has paid out over 3.2 billion in damages in the past 15 years

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      The second leading cause of all deaths, I'll repeat (ALL DEATHS) in America are Med and Pharm related.

      Number 1 leading cause of death in America
      >Heart Disease & Cancer
      This is because of the shit people eat and drink, and the medications they take, but don't expect them to admit that medications do it

      Number 2 leading cause of death in America
      >Pharmaceutical Drugs & Medical Mal Practice
      This essentially means that the drugs people take, kill them. And if that doesn't kill you, then a doctor fucking up and making a mistake will

      Do you have any idea what that means? Statistically and mathematically that would mean that the moment you go to a doctors office and leave with a prescription for (whatever) you have increased your odds of dying from the medication or Mal Practice by 18%.

      In other words, you have just increased your chances of dying by 18%, at the hands of a doctor or by a drug.

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *