If the Quran was indeed written by Mohammed then how could a simple trader create such a masterpiece in literacy unmatched to this very day in arabic literature?
Checkmate atheists
>>1172733
The "Muhammad was illiterate" meme was invented to deny the fact that he clearly copied the bible.
>>1172733
Your pic is beautiful btw whats the style called ?
>>1172733
I rank Mohammad as a very charismatic cult leader and effective warlord. The fact he started off as a trader is neither here nor there.
>>1172733
Mohammed didn't write the Quran though. It was compiled and edited by later Caliphs
>>1172733
Because he was really fucking clever? The guy clearly knew all about Christianity and Judaism as well as politics, being a statesman, diplomacy or war. Love him or hate him, he was a great man of history who united a people and forged an empire.
The illiterate trader thing really is a meme to down play him to make it seem more miraculous.
>>1172744
So they say. I believe it to have been written by him.
>>1172744
Compiling and editing is not writing. Virtually every famous writer ever has had an editor and no one gives credit to the editor as being the author.
>>1172736
I didn't say he was illiterate, I said he was a simple trader unfamiliar with the art of literature and yet wrote such an amazing piece of literature
>>1172741
Its Sufi islamic art, Pic related is another nice one
>>1172743
That doesn't explain how he wrote the Quran
>>1172744
Proofs?
>>1172754
well that's not even the official story even Muslims accept
>>1172759
>That doesn't explain how he wrote the Quran
The only thing you asked that needed an explanation is how could a simple trader write it. My response suitably addressed that question.
>>1172768
The official story is that it was verbally transmitted by Mohammad and written down on various scrolls during his lifetime and the scrolls were compiled into one volume shortly after his death.
Compiling scrolls does not make the compilers the writers.
>>1172771
>how could a simple trader write a masterpiece of literature
>he was a warlord and charismatic
This is not an explanation
>>1172768
The official Islamic story isn't necessarily right, it's propaganda.
Do you really think a 20 year merchant, statesman and diplomat couldn't read? The guy spent lots of time in the Byzantine empire too.
>>1172776
so it was dictated by him rather than actually written
>>1172776
exactly, this is not the same as Muhammad writing the Quran. He told it to several people in shorter chunks. I don't see why it would be hard for him to give out these smaller chunks in a poetic format that makes it easier for his readers to remember
>>1172792
*listeners
>>1172759
>>1172780
> I said he was a simple trader unfamiliar with the art of literature and yet wrote such an amazing piece of literature
JK Rowling was a waitress and she became a billionaire after writing one of the most popular fiction series of all time.
Someone doesn't have to be formally educated in a craft to be good at it.
A chapter of the Quran is devoted to Muhammad's desire that he uncle die and his uncles wife be hung with a rope. The reason he hated his uncles wife was that she repeatedly threw rubbishy into his garden.
You call that great literature?
The reason the Quran is the greatest piece of Arabic writing is because the Arabs have written absolutely nothing of note in their entire history.
>>1172806
>Yes. he was illiterate.
No he wasn't and there's no evidence for this.
>>1172810
Harry Potter is simple language with no rythmes or use of stylistic devices. The Quran makes use of many stylistic devices, and can both be sung and read normally.
>>1172781
>Do you really think a 20 year merchant, statesman and diplomat couldn't read?
I made no such claim. I just don't think there is a reason to think he wrote the Quran. This isn't accepted by secular scholars or muslims. and why would it be propaganda that he didn't actually write it but told it in smaller parts to many people who then compiled it after his death? it immediately being compiled I could see being propaganda, but not that he didn't do the writing. I bet he was do busy preaching and fighting to write down the whole Quran anyways
>>1172817
>A chapter of the Quran is devoted to Muhammad's desire that he uncle die and his uncles wife be hung with a rope. The reason he hated his uncles wife was that she repeatedly threw rubbishy into his garden.
that doesn't exist, you made that up or read it from someone who made it up
>>1172818
The sources about him say he was illiterate. There is no evidence to the contrary.
>>1172817
>chapter
>>1172817
Source?
>>1172819
You do need to know that during Arabia at this time oral poetry was a big part of their culture and held in very high esteem. There were regular poetry competitions going on at the time, and it was the main method of recording history.
>>1172824
There are no sources that say he was illiterate other than some written centuries after his death
>>1172827
A chapter is an appropriate word for a formal subdivision of a text of the size of a surrah. Don't be a pedant.
>>1172821
I highly advise you to read the Quran before you make such claims. It's surah 111
>>1172736
That's not it. The Quran doesn't copy the Bible in style or content. Most likely it was an attempt at expressing the 'seal of the prophets' concept through metaphor, making Muhammad symbolize the turning point of Arabic as an oral tradition into a written one.
>>1172733
Muhammad likely had contact and training in North Arabian liturgical tradition of a still developing Abrahamic Arab movement.
>>1172817
Why would that make it a bad piece of literature?
There's simply no coherent argument in saying "the Quran has bad stories in it that I don't like" to the claim it is not good literature.
You can write great literature about incredibly petty or nasty things.
>>1172733
Muhammed didn't write it. He 'had siezures' then said it and his followers memorized it and wrote it down many years later.
>the quran isn't from God Mohammed wrote it
>Mohammed didn't write it it was his followers
>His followers didn't write it it was the caliphs
>actually Mohammed wrote it down but not all of it
?????????
>>1172925
Muhammad proclaimed it, his followers wrote it down, all the scraps were compiled just after he died or perhaps when he was dying.
This doesn't mean he was illiterate though, he wasn't.
Because the Quran isn't prose, it's poetry, and oral poetry predates writing in many, many societies.
It was a mistake to force people to forever live under the same moral compass. Otherwise,if you're of healthy mind the Qu'Ran is like a manlier standalone version of the Bible.
>>1172983
>It was a mistake to force people to forever live under the same moral compass.
This, for me, is the most solid criticism of Islam.
In truth the ethical code dictated by Islam is probably pretty good when you look at it for the relevant time period.
It taught a humane way of slaughtering animals.
It accepted and endorsed slavery but encouraged slaves to be freed in a place and time when slavery was a rampant pre-existing institution.
I could give other examples, but you get the point.
Fast forward several hundred years and it is endorsing slavery when slavery has long since been discarded by the civilised world. It is encouraging inhumane animal slaughter because we have tech that can make it much more humane.
That's what happens when you have a religious belief that a Medieval warlord was inspired by God and is the most perfect human that ever lived.
>a masterpiece in literacy
I think you mean a tour de force.
>>1173029
This. This is why i say that Muhammad was a liberal reformer and a good guy but it always gets laughed away. He proposed such things as the radical notion of women being allowed to divorce, or having rights, or not killing baby girls on birth.
If the same man was born today he'd grow up into some triggerfest tumblr homo.
>Implying a simple trader would be able to manage all of this math
http://submission.org/App1.html
>>1173029
This is a much more realistic western response to Islam than "they r the terries."
It does miss a fundamental point though: God's rule of man is not subjected to the petty and temporally conditioned opinions of man. Believing Muslims could not care less if you feel their religion isn't quite consonant enough with your liberal humanism. In the last analysis, their vision is grounded in the only ultimate entity, conveyed by prophecy, the only thing that can ever serve as some grounds of truth. Yours is tidewater.
>>1173097
I agree and acknowledge with what you are saying, but I think there are plenty of believing Muslims who are not fundamentalists who want their faith to move towards a more modern code of ethics, whether you want to term that 'liberal humanism' or not.
The key, I think, is to attack the idea that Muhammad is the most perfect example of a human being, or more subtly suggest he was the most perfect example of a human being for his time period but if he were alive today he might do things a tad differently, like not fuck a nine year old, for example.
>>1172733
Mohammed was illiterate. Some of his followers who were educated wrote down what he supposedly said after he died.
does it have anything to do with the talmud???
answer this!!
>>1173188
I'm not remotely making an argument you are wrong but If you are making comparisons with the Talmud you should be explaining specifically what you are talking about instead of making a vague statement and saying "answer this!!".
>>1173188
does it?
>>1173136
I think attacking Muhammad is mostly slanderous and not likely to lead to a situation characterized by tolerance, respect, dialogue etc.
It is one of many things that fans the flames. The equivalent tactic among Muslims is to attack the West's sacred cows (Freedom Go to Hell!).
>>1172810
>good at the craft
Harry Potter was popular, sure, but it's not well written. Plots are obvious as fuck, corny and cliché, liberal use of spelling shit backwards, a half-remembered knowledge of high-school Latin gives a lot of things away, and the ending really sucks.
Good for her and everything, but it's pretty terrible literature. That should give hope for the rest of us with a piece of shitty literature in our minds waiting to be written.
>>1173097
Dude? There's a problem here, and it's really very simple. The deity in question doesn't actually exist and the morals of muhammed while quite nice for their time are frankly outdated. Muslims can say all they like about how we're just tidewater or whatever, but if it comes right down to it the modern west is more then capable of destroying the entirety of islamic civilization if it so chooses.
I have my own issues with the values of the modern world, but I'm not going to pretend that my own problems are shared by some hypothetical omnipotent entity.
>>1173249
>It is not particularly good literature, even (granted) in its English translation.
I'd amend that to especially in translation. Literature, especially one written in poetic language, suffers in translation even in the best case.
>>1173221
I don't mean to simply post shitty drawings of him or something. I mean to make a coherent argument that believing in Mohammad as a prophet does not mean trying to live your life like a Medieval Arabian.
>>1173263
Not him but this line of thought goes under the assumption of western morals are superior to islamic ones for example,ofcourse it would seem so in your point of view but in theirs they also consider their morals superior,for example you might go ''western morals are superior because they gave women more sexual freedom and gave rights to homosexuals'' but their line of thought would be ''it's inferior because it enables degenracy and and moral decay'',another thing is they believe that their deity indeed exists.
>>1173136
>The key, I think, is to attack the idea that Muhammad is the most perfect example of a human being, or more subtly suggest he was the most perfect example of a human being for his time period but if he were alive today he might do things a tad differently, like not fuck a nine year old, for example.
This is easy, the Quran itself says Muhammad is not perfect, and had faults and sinned. Sunni Muslims are heretics who won't accept this, they put the word of men above the word of the Quran, the apparent word of God.
The reform for Islam is Quran alone, Quranism.
>>1173272
I think what Mohammed ultimately tried to achieve was to bring people to live their lives as good, peace-loving people united under one community. For his time, Mohammed was extremely peaceful, and I think today muslims should ultimately try to be peaceful and loving. They should put this as their number one priority, instead of the traditions they've been upholding from the times back then.
>>1173302
>>under the assumption of western morals are superior to islamic ones
That's because they are, largely. Modern western morals are also superior to the christian morals that we had in the past too.
As far as the islamic world is concerned, what they do is of little relevance, because global events over the next 50 to 100 years will likely lead to a dramatic reduction in the world's muslim population.
>>1172733
is it really unmatched or is that just a cliche people spout to sound pious?
imagine a christian world where the bible represented the acme of literature. that would blow.
>inb4 christians/godposters say it is to be contrarian or pious
>>1173320
Modern western morals are superiror because they fit better into our time. They are not superior because they're more humanist or give the human more rights, because there is no such thing as superior model. When the times change our modern day morals will be outdated and replaced by a moral better fitting to the current Zeitgeist
>>1172741
It's Arabic calligraphy.
>>1173320
>global events over the next 50 to 100 years will likely lead to a dramatic reduction in the world's muslim population.
the muslim population is projected to grow dramatically in the next 50 to 100 years, faster than any other religion
>>1173320
>As far as the islamic world is concerned, what they do is of little relevance, because global events over the next 50 to 100 years will likely lead to a dramatic reduction in the world's muslim population.
Predicting the future is always a silly business but this, based on demographics, seems unlikely, in fact pretty much the opposite is true.
>>1173311
Great point.
>>1173314
>They should put this as their number one priority, instead of the traditions they've been upholding from the times back then.
The thing is, it isn't even a case of the traditions they have always been holding, this extreme Wahhabism that is causing all the problems is primarily being funded by Saudi Arabians.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wahhabism
>>1173330
>imagine a christian world where the bible represented the acme of literature. that would blow.
You mean the USA.
>>1172741
The art of islamic caligraphy gets different names and forms depending on the culture/country. In this case it's ottoman and it represents a turkish sufi. It's kind of famous, as a tourist you'll see it everywhere if you travel to the country.
>>1173338
>The thing is, it isn't even a case of the traditions they have always been holding, this extreme Wahhabism that is causing all the problems is primarily being funded by Saudi Arabians.
Agreed,people keep saying islam needs to be reformed to solve it's main issues,what they don't realise is that it WAS already reformed (Wahabism) which caused all of it's current violent problems since wahabis have such big boner for hadiths which encourage a lot of awful shit,biggest crime offender is the bukhari.
>>1173359
You mean the global climate change that is likely to force mass migration to the West?
Yes, I am thoroughly aware of this thank you.
>>1173359
>he doesn't know about global climate change and it's likely effects on much of the muslim world
you think they are just going to sit there and drown?
>>1173356
We seem to agree on too much to even have a decent 4chan argument!!
The Islamic Reformation has already happened and it is Wahhabism, which has significant parallels with Calvinism in particular and Lutheranism to a lesser extent. It is that very 'reformation' that is causing all of these problems.
I don't know why people try to just copy/paste Western history onto other cultures.
>>1173356
The worst part is when people claim Wahabism is fundamental Islam, that it is original core Islam. It couldn't be further from it. Wahabism is like Catholicism with all its canons and rules and laws, it's all inane pointless bullshit traditions topped off with a hate
>>1173359
>The morals most muslims abide by fit with the middle ages, and it isn't the middle ages any longer.
Uh no, most muslims are normal people with jobs and families who watch tv in the evening.
>>1173390
>Oh great, muslim evangelicals. Just what we needed.
You obviously don't know anything about quranism
> arabic
> literature
I can't name even one other arabic book. Probably there are literally zero challengers.
>>1173425
Enlighten me, then.
How is Quran alone any different from Sola Scriptura?
>>1172733
Are these Arabic letters that make up these drawings? If so what do they spell? I find this ingenious on the part of the artists... "You said I could not draw, so I just formated the words in a very special way...". It's fascinating how incredibly beautiful art is able to arise under very strict rules, yet today artists have absolute freedom but all they do is trash.
>>1173438
It's not, but you implied it was evangelical, it isn't.
Check this out for the differences between quran only and sunni Islam.
It has to be an old version of the page, for some reason they stripped out the differences section in the latest page.
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Quranism&oldid=669609185
What does this tiger say?
>>1173442
> all they do is trash.
Maybe you shouldn't look only for trash artists.
>>1173450
moo?
>>1173070
Wait a minute, as a trader he would have to do math.
>>1173070
Lol kikes and christards do the same thing with the bible. You can play this game with the LOTR or an encyclopedia if you wanted.
>>1173482
>math
This isn't math it's numerology.
>>1173482
on the level of one fish, two fish, red fish, blue fish
>>1173449
ok, maybe not evangelist, but protestant.
Interesting.
What do quranists believe about predestination, btw?
>>1173383
No. But most other nations are not going to accept hundreds of millions of migrants from the third world either. Especially not Europe or the US. Combine that with all the infighting and starvation(the real killer with climate change, btw) and the world is going to be minus a large number of muslims.
>>1173370
And what makes you think that they are going to be allowed in? They aren't, they're going to get shot dead at any land border they arrive at and will either be allowed to drown crossing the seas or have their boats deliberately sunk at various ocean crossings.
>>1173548
Don't making comparisons to Christianity, you don't need to.
>What do quranists believe about predestination, btw?
There is no stance on it, humans do have control over their own actions though.
>>1173549
While the possibility is not completely impossible,although certainly not on the same scale,this is still a prediction and not a fact.
>>1173549
By the time climate change will impact the world to such an extent, Europe will already be part of Islamic civilization and the Arabs will be welcomed with open arms as part of the Ummah.
>inb4 muh pagan revival
>inb4 muh christian revival
>inb4 muh secular society
Civilization will always triumph, whether under the sign of the cross or of the crescent.
>>1173564
I know. Totally different history, so comparisons are retarded. But your calls for reform are exactly the same as sola scriptura, theologically speaking.
>>1173574
True, it is a prediction, but it is a prediction based on both current events, the german government coming to an arrangement with turkey to take some of the syrian refugees out of germany for example, plus the utter and complete unwillingness for most other european states to take in anything more then a trivial number of said refugees.
>>1173577
Keep dreaming abdul, Us vs Them is fundamental to all human thinking, and nobody is going to welcome obvious outsiders with open arms.
>>1173591
Same in practice but it has very different consequences for Islam.
>>1173549
>And what makes you think that they are going to be allowed in? They aren't, they're going to get shot dead at any land border they arrive at and will either be allowed to drown crossing the seas or have their boats deliberately sunk at various ocean crossings.
Pure fantasy.
>>1173604
Hardly. Hundreds of millions of muslims taking refuge in the europe would destroy european society and that will not be allowed.
>>1173598
How well is that working for you nowadays? Your society has no values and it imports Muslims that do not assimilate and have a higher birth rate. They will civilize you in due time, don't worry
>Us vs Them
The 'us' of secular western humanism will be replaced by the 'us' of sacral islamic humanism. Or do you think you're on the brink of a new 1848? The era of the nation state is no more.
>>1173618
Ahahah all this delusion, you have no idea how fucked the muslim world is long term. Not european either btw.
>>muh birthrates
Not enough I'm afraid. Too few of you guys in europe for this to matter by the time this goes down.
>>1173630
I'm Eastern European and nihilist, you fag; but I don't have delusions of grandeur of national revival.
Western civilization is dead and those '''few''' Muslims in Europe will plant the seed of Islamic civilization. The barbarism of today cannot perpetuate itself ad infinitum.
>>1173650
Nah, europe is more then civilized, this idea that people doing lots of weird sex stuff or whatever makes them barbaric is a stupid /pol/ meme.
>>those '''few''' Muslims in Europe will plant the seed of Islamic civilization
Ahahah, yeah right, a tiny number of muslims most of whom are hardly interested in being warriors of jihad aren't going to do shit.
>>1173609
You underestimate how weak we euros are at the moment.
We lack the necessary cruelty to keep us alife.
The east of europe will hold, the west might fall.
>>1173609
>that will not be allowed.
By some shitposter on the Interwebs?
>>1173688
If western europe was weak they would have all gone along with taking in syrian refugees right away. They didn't. Once this shit goes down nobody is going to be taking in refugees at all for any reason.
>>1173699
No. By governments.
>>1173688
> We lack the necessary cruelty
Don't worry cruelty would come up when it would be necessary. This is a part of human nature. So no need to fear mongering before such a moment.
>>1173671
>europe is more then civilized
And you're just as much of a meme, you sperg. There is no 'western' civilization anymore, all that is left of the West is their material wealth and their Roman-derived law. You are not 'civilized', but developed.
>warriors of jihad
No one is talking about jihad. They are outbreeding Europeans while maintaining their law within their closed communities. Not to mention the fact that they are gaining converts as well. They will either impose their law on the soft masses once they become large enough or will simply outbreed them in time and then the new law will be naturally transmitted by the majority.
>>1173711
Because the east is poor and thus hardened naturally against audacicious foreign requests going over their limits.
Half of the western demographic is around 50 goddamnit, you find here regions looking like a giant elder-care home.
I just hope something bad happens that forces us to retain a bit of old western barbarity in order to survive when shits gonna get really harsh in the coming 50s.
>>1173715
There is not one single government in the whole of history that has successfully stopped mass migration.
Are you seriously suggesting it is going to happen now, when the home population recognises we are at fault for said mass migration?
>>1173724
> impose their law on the soft masses once they become large enough
Do you really believe in democracy so much? All laws in history are enforced by powerful minorities.
>>1173730
> in order to survive
Even fucking Assyrian survived and they like out of the history for thousands years. You need the real fucked up shit to start question survival of peoples.
>>1173732
>>There is not one single government in the whole of history that has successfully stopped mass migration.
Most of those governments didn't have modern weapons technology.
>Are you seriously suggesting it is going to happen now, when the home population recognises we are at fault for said mass migration?
Yes, because most europeans do not want to live in islamic theocracies.
>>1173724
You really underestimate people's capacity for cruelty when the chips are down. I assure you that most of the people you think are soft and weak right now are only such due to living in a time of relative abundance.
>>1173737
Which is exactly what my comment stated. The average citizen will not defend his 'country', 'nation' or even way of life at the risk of death or worse. He will simply submit to the will of the new elite, Islamic or otherwise.
>>1173762
This. Put someone into a corner and results would not be nice for you. Weakness of civilization was a relatively thin one all things considered.
>>1173764
There is not now, nor will there ever be an islamic elite in europe. Euro muslims are in the main just as decadent as the rest of the euros are.
>>1173756
>Most of those governments didn't have modern weapons technology.
Again, just pure fantasy.
If you honestly think that modern liberal governments are going ti unleash modern militaries on poor people just or fleeing global warming we caused then you are hallucinating.
Simply not going to happen.
>>1173781
Wrong, you're the one that's engaged in a fantasy here. Nobody is going to give a shit about the poor third worlders when the possibility of a eurabia scenario is actually likely due to mass migration. The refugees will not be allowed in, and if they attempt to force the matter they will be slain until they cease those attempts.
I mean really, you honestly think europe will just blithely accept hundreds of millions of muslim immigrants when the total population of europe is only about 800 million or so?
lol no.
>>1173762
>>1173771
Both of you overestimate the average individual. Very few people will endanger themselves out of idealism.
Same shit happened when communism was imposed on several EE countries post-WW2. Except a few that took the path of armed struggle in the mountains or the occasional hysteria done by agitators such as in Hungary, nobody actively opposed the new regime.
>>1173777
>just as decadent
Just some of them that come from either rich decadent families or somewhat secularized countries such as Turkey. Yet many others, especially those coming from the Middle East, still follow Islamic tradition and enforce it in their own communities, communities which are growing.
>>1173798
Comparing this to communism isn't really all that valid, as most of eastern europe wasn't living under anything as crazy as an islamist regime would be. Also, these migrants are not going to have anything remotely like the red army to rely upon.
>>1173795
>The refugees will not be allowed in,
So you were back to providing a single precedent where governments have stopped mass migration.
I'm waiting.......
All you have to do is provide evidence for your fantasies.
>>1173795
> hundreds of millions of muslim immigrants
Because literally all fucking Iran is migration into European Union? What next? Muh gozzilions of muslims?
>>1173818
The current situation is unprecedented in multiple ways. The response will also be unprecedented.
>>1173813
>as crazy
Subjective and not really relevant. A communist regime with collectivization and nationalization had a greater impact on the life of the average citizen rather than Shaira law would. And that's also in a time where people still had values and there was still an intellectual elite(which ended up imprisoned, worked to death and executed) that the masses looked up to.
>>1173823
Why are you talking about iran right now? Iran right now isn't in a state of crisis brought about by climate change influenced starvation. Besides, the total muslim population is 1 billion. Hundreds of millions of muslims heading to europe once these events take place is hardly unreasonable.
>>1173798
Muslims was decadent even when Islam was kind of real deal in the past. It was very known even for other contemporary Muslim authors.
>>1173826
In other words you are making shit up.
All over the world, the South African border with Zimbabwe. The US border with Mexico / South America. The EU border with the Middle East. The EU sea between Europe and North Africa. The Indian border with Bangladesh.
Everywhere, in every single place across every continent and in every country governments have failed to stop mass migration.
And all you can say is "it'll be different this time due to something I pulled right out of my asshole".
>>1173835
>>Subjective and not really relevant. A communist regime with collectivization and nationalization had a greater impact on the life of the average citizen rather than Shaira law would.
I disagree but that isn't really relevant, as the other part of my post that you ignored is crucial. These refugees will not have the military force necessary to enforce their will upon europe.
>>1173856
None of those places have anything like mass migration on the order of hundreds of millions of people. The US in particular is doing practically nothing about it's southern border because the amount of mexicans who cross that border is a drop in the bucket compared to the total US population.
Once this really starts, nobody is going to be accepting of migrants.
>>1173839
Not to mention that by the time such an exodus occurs Muslims will form a sizable part of Europe, enough to influence politics and veto (both democratically and through threat of violence) the closing of borders.
>>1173858
That will only lead to civil war then. And again, worst case scenario for them, it's only a matter of time. You have to be delusional to believe that they aren't expanding demographically while the Europeans are regressing.
>>1173839
> Why are you talking about iran right now?
There are 70 millions Muslims in Iran, for your 100 millions you need both all Iran and Iraq Muslims to migrate into Europe. Which is absurd idea. How it even logistically possible?
>>1173871
In other words you still can't give me one precedent for the claims you are making.
>>1173882
>>Not to mention that by the time such an exodus occurs Muslims will form a sizable part of Europe, enough to influence politics and veto (both democratically and through threat of violence) the closing of borders.
Then those muslims will wind being violently repressed.
>>That will only lead to civil war then
Maybe, but the muslims aren't going to get their way. Most of them are likely going to die.
>>1173882
RIght now isn't the issue, the issue is decades down the road. And the muslim world is far more then just iran. I guess I should also say that there will be subtantial african migrants as well, but that's not really relevant to me. Neither group is going to get anywhere.
>>1173891
Of course I can't, because get this, the current situation is without precedent. But I can make some likely predictions based on how people tend to act when their survival as a people is at stake. The first world has the weapons and tech to make sure that they survive even if the third world dies.
>>1173905
Lol.
Someone though the Turner Diaries were a documentary.
You're 12 years old. Amirite?
>>1173914
>Of course I can't,
Thanks for agreeing you are making shit up.
>>1173917
I never read the turner diaries and I am a legal adult. I'm not talking about current events either, currently there is enough food and other resources to go around that people are reasonably civil to each other in spite of whatever ideological or ethnic differences that exist.
>>1173905
>Then those muslims will wind being violently repressed.
1. The military intervention by the government would be delayed since we are talking about neo-liberal humanist democracies, not early 20th century democracies.
2. It would end up in a guerilla war in which the Muslims will fight tooth and nail, while the professional armies will handicap themselves by military conventions of war conduct and human rights.
3. The conflict would take place in their own countries, in highly populated mixed areas, again proving a handicap for military intervention.
>muslims aren't going to get their way.
We'll have to live and see, eh?
>>1173918
You're the one who thinks that the first world will accept regression to barbarism because of guilt. I simply made some reasonable predictions of what will happen given the circumstances.
>>1173044
I agree, however, Jesus was a much better reformer for his time, and you can argue Islam contributed to Mesopotamia's decline. While Islam isn't neccesarily a religion of evil it is a religion of WARRIORS. The Arabs assembled and took over the rest of the middle east and north africa.
>>1173924
>>The military intervention by the government would be delayed since we are talking about neo-liberal humanist democracies, not early 20th century democracies.
Nah, martial law will be declared and any dissenters will be imprisoned or executed.
>>It would end up in a guerilla war in which the Muslims will fight tooth and nail, while the professional armies will handicap themselves by military conventions of war conduct and human rights.
Nobody is going to respect the human rights of a fifth column movement in a time of severe crisis.
>>We'll have to live and see, eh?
Most muslims won't live through what's coming.
>>1173905
> The issue is decades down the road.
How you come up with fucking hundreds? For this you need at least 20 times more potential migrant population than we got today. I don't even say that you need 20 times more migrants. I say people as people who at least have a reason to migrate. You need even more people and much more time to be true for your order of migration numbers.
>>1173934
>Nah, martial law will be declared and any dissenters will be imprisoned or executed.
Speculation. Both the regime and a considerable part of the population would oppose such measures even in the face of such a threat.
>Nobody is going to respect the human rights of a fifth column movement in a time of severe crisis.
They will, we are not talking about dictatorships or authoritarian republics, but about liberal democracies.
>>1173939
It's not hard to get a few hundred million migrants from the Middle East and Africa if the crops start failing, which they probably will.
>>1172733
>creating graven images with calligraphy
This seems like cheating
>>1173946
>Speculation. Both the regime and a considerable part of the population would oppose such measures even in the face of such a threat.
No they wouldn't, not when the alternative is living under a theocracy.
>>They will, we are not talking about dictatorships or authoritarian republics, but about liberal democracies.
>>being this naive.
Liberal democracies do not consider their ideals to be suicide pacts, and even if they did, the citizens who do not want to live in a theocratic third world shithole will vote for the first group of authoritarian assholes who promise to prevent such a thing.
>>1173905
I think you guys are blowing it out of proportion. Here in Toronto all the Muslims born and raised here are just as Muslim as Western Christians are Christian. They do have conservative ideas but once their immigrant parents die Islam will become a much more benign ideology. That being said Muslim immigration should be slowed down until Islam reaches the renaissance it needs.
>>1173966
>No they wouldn't, not when the alternative is living under a theocracy.
This is one big ol' >implying
>will vote for the first group of authoritarian assholes who promise to prevent such a thing.
There will be no authoritarian assholes to vote, such actions would go against things such as human rights and the Geneva convention and by law they'd be either disqualified as a political party or outright arrested.
>>1173435
Well you're in luck because Muslims claim that the Quran is not only the best literature in the arabic world but the entire world as well.
>>1173982
>This is one big ol' >implying
Hmm? Do you think that the muslim migrants in this scenario will just casually accept what they see as a decadent society?
>>There will be no authoritarian assholes to vote, such actions would go against things such as human rights and the Geneva convention and by law they'd be either disqualified as a political party or outright arrested.
This is hilariously naive. Nobody is going to care about the geneva conventions when national, cultural and ethnic survival is at stake.
>>1173954
> It's not hard to get a few hundred million migrants
Thus is literally 25 times harder to get than today migration rate. You can't just pull number like that and hand wave it on failed crops.
>>1172733
desu the 1001 nights is more interesting. the Qur'an is just a fanfic of the bible.
>>1173994
>the muslim migrants in this scenario will just casually accept what they see as a decadent society?
The Muslim migrants are idealists, the average citizen is no more than an animal seeking to have his basic needs met and maybe a little extra hedonism on the side.
>This is hilariously naive. Nobody is going to care about the geneva conventions when national, cultural and ethnic survival is at stake.
The state is governed by law, that is a matter of fact.
Also,
>national
Nation states are a remnant of the national era. Most people don't give a shit about nationality and most of the people that do are just pub patriots, not some nationalist fanatics ready to die for their countries.
>cultural
Culture today is defined by market trends, not nationality.
>ethnic
Racialism is discredited today both academically and by the average citizen and miscegenation is becoming the norm.
>>1173905
> the issue is decades down the road
You need to wait 500 years for problem to be that bad, assuming everything would be the same rate as it is now. I am very generous here.
>>1173330
Idk about the rest of the Bible, but for my money Ecclesiastes is one of the best literary works ever produced.
>>1173435
You should at least know of Al-Kwahrizmi's and Averroes' books.
Those guys were pretty important even in the west.
>>1173435
>what is 1001 nights
Nigger almost nobody read it but everyone has heard its name somewhere.
>>1174116
There's a bunch of great Persian sufist writers.
>>1174053
>implying muslims go to ALL of Europe
Try counting only western european countries. The results will be much different.
Look at this graph for example:
Take for instance Germany. It says ithas 4 muslims (incredibly underrated estimate) in 2010. Then it says that by 2030 there will be 5 million muslims there. Only 1 million muslims more in 20 years. And yet, they received one million muslims in 2016 alone. If you think Western Europe isn't being invaded and outbred you are delusional.
Considering the migrant pressure is not stopping, but increasing each year, and that by 2030 the african population will literally double, we are in deep trouble.
Go on, accuse me of being /pol/ or a stormfag, but it's the simple truth. Whoever underestimates this problem will make it explode, and afterwards it will be too late to fix.
>>1174218
It's already too late to fix. Mass politics don't work and I don't see revolutionaries starting a 'spring of nations' sort of continent wide tide of revolutions.
Even if a country elected a fascist party or what not, it's very likely that they'd get invaded by either Russia or NATO.
>>1174020
>>all this delusion
Ahahahah, boy are you in for a surprise. The peoples of europe are not going to accept becoming part of the third world, and they will fight to maintain their relatively comfortable existences, and because they have the better weapons, better trained militaries, and nuclear weapons, they will win.
>>1174248
>The peoples of europe
You mean the professional soldiers because today's pussified generations even if they'd get conscripted they'd sooner shoot themselves rather than Mehmet. ))
>>1173070
>implying god would tell his final prophet to condone sex slaves
>>1174177
Who wrote in Arabic.
>>1172733
A demon helped him write it as he originally thought
>>1173097
There's also the fact that Muhammad's case for divine inspiration is no stronger than Joseph Smith's for Mormonism.
Historically or metaphysically/transcendental
Imo if any of the current mainstream religions is true Islam is towards the bottom of the list
>>1172733
> yfw you notice Muhammad claimed Jesus was Muslim though Jesus moral teachings have little no compatibility with the explict political ideology expressed in the Koran.
At least that autistic Christian didnt show up to ruin this thread
>>1174254
Oh really? Is that why far right political parties are gaining strength in many parts of europe? Besides it doesn't matter if professional soldiers do it or conscripts, the waves of migrants are fucked either way.
Turko-Persian poetry set to Arabic pentameter is GOD tier
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QViNekeqkpk
>>1172733
Demonic automatic writing.
>>1173435
The Necronomicon
>>1173188
the question answers itself:
So much, indeed, was Muhammad indebted to the Jews for a great portion of his teaching on this and other subjects that the Qur'an has been described as a compendium of Talmudic Judaism. (Blair, The Sources of Islam, p. 55
http://www.answering-islam.org/Gilchrist/Vol1/5b.html
http://islamicencyclopedia.org/public/index/topicDetail/id/972#Talmud-and-Prophet-Muhammad
can some1 tl;dr this?
http://sufism.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/jewish-and-islamic-law.pdf
can any1 link to an archive post of anon detailing talmudism influence on islam?
Muhammad never existed. "Muhammad" was probably an honorific title that was used for Jesus, who the Arabs originally worshiped as a Prophet. If he did exist, he was likely just some warlord or cult leader at the start of the Arab Conquests. Arab coins and the Al-Aqsa Mosque, first mosque built during the conquest, heavily imply that the word "Mohammad" was an honorific title the Arabs use for Jesus as it means "Anointed One".
The Quran might have begun the compiling process under the Rashadun's, but the final version was written by Umayyad Caliph Abd Al-Malik, several decades later. It was compiled and adopted from various heretical Christian and Jewish scriptures that have now been lost. Most of the hadiths were based on local folklore that became attributed to Muhammad and were meant to give context to a bunch of random pages that have no connection. A few passages were written by Abd Al-Malik (especially those encouraging bloody conquest). They de-emphasized worship of Jesus, and began venerating their original leader or mythical figure called "Muhammad".
The Arabs wanted a religion and national polity that reflected their sense of cultural (and ethnic) superiority. Soon all the other rival Arab sects, such as the Shia, began doing the same thing.
They also wanted the religion the encourage all the conquests they had achieved to keep on going. And there you have in a nutshell why Islam is so inherently imperialistic and violent compared to just about every other faith.
Why is Mohammed being a warlord always brought up like it makes him a false prophet?
Christ was the exception, prophets before him were warlords, warmongers or warriors.
>>1175329
Jewish Prophets didn't order their followers to conquer the world, which they are still trying to do.
>>1175261
scholars have made extensive comparative studies and have shown commonality between Islamic teachings with what is in the Talmud and concluded that the Prophet took a major portion of his teachings, if not all, from this literature.
it is striking to find how heavily Muhammad relied on his Jewish contacts for the passages and teachings he ultimately set forth as part of the divine revelation.
So much, indeed, was Muhammad indebted to the Jews that the Qur'an has been described as a compendium of Talmudic Judaism. (Blair, The Sources of Islam, p. 55).
One finds many of the Old Testament stories of the prophets reproduced in the Qur'an, sometimes in a precis form where the Qur'anic record is a faithful, though often vague, summary of the original Biblical narrative (e.g. the story of Jonah in Surah 37.139-148). On other occasions the Qur'anic narratives contain elements of Biblical truths confounded with folklore and fables extracted from the Talmud and in some cases (such as the story of Abraham and the idols which we shall presently consider) the sources are entirely Midrashic/Haggadic and are accordingly purely fictitious.
This accounts for the seeming discrepancies between the stories of :he Bible and the Koranic version of the same narratives. However, in relating the Koranic version of the biblical story to the Haggadic source as indicated in our study, the discrepancies almost entirely disappear. For, astonishingly enough, the biblical narratives are reproduced in the Koran in true Haggadic cloak. (Katsh, Judaism in Islam, p. xvii).
>>1175261
>mohomed was adopted by a tribe of jews, and lived with them
>mohomed lived as an unconverted jew and learned from his jewish adopted family
>he prayed together with his adopted jewish family
>the jews had an empire in arabia known as himyar
>jews were a majority populace in arabia and were numerous
>most arabians can trace their ancestry to arabian jewish tribes/clans, much like the saudi royal family
in those days, the jews of arabia have been trying to fill the void of power between the romans and persians, for quite some time and have planned for a resurgent jewish empire. the talmudist community achieved that with neo-talmudism (islam)
muslims today will deny this, since it goes against the supremecy of neo-talmudism (islam)
tl;dr islam is neo-talmudism, talmudism is a religion that split from ancient hebrew religion, ancient hebrew religion only recognizes the 5 books of moses aka Karaites and not talmud
>>1175329
>prophets before him were warlords, warmongers or warriors.
No. Except Joshua, and to a lesser extent David and Solomon, they were just travelling preachers that were trying to tell Israel to get it's shit back together.
>>1172733
Hey guys almighty God here. So I sent you guys a bunch of prophets before, immediate apostasy. That whole Jesus thing, you took that all wrong, he didn't actually get crucified. So this time just to get things straight I'm speaking Arabic now m'kay? It makes total sense because I'm pretty sure it's a universal language. Don't mess this up because hell fire is totally real and this is your last messenger. Kisses.
>>1175312
>Tom Holland
Why does that guy get such recognition, he's such a bad historian
>>1173136
But he didn't fuck a 9 year old, when will this /pol/ meme die
Aisha was 19 at the time her marriage was consummated
>>1175658
Kek.
That's not a /pol/ meme.
http://www.usc.edu/org/cmje/religious-texts/hadith/bukhari/058-sbt.php#005.058.234
>>1175450
And even so, David was forbidden from erecting a temple because of his wars, so...
>>1175669
This is exactly why it's a meme,the Bukhari is a bunch of hadiths compiled hundreds of years after Muhammad's death so their historical validity is equal to nothing,the 9 year old thing was started by sunni preachers in order to counter shia's claims that Aisha was a whore,facts on the other hand obviously show she was not 9 specially since it is a matter of incontrovertible historical record that Aisha was involved in the Battles of Badr in 624 and Uhud in 625, in neither of which was anyone under the age of 15 allowed,I can put a few more examples if you want.
>>1175701
What rubbish. A young girl would not have acted as a combatant, or a women of any age for that matter.
>>1175715
That's not how it works,they did not engage as combatants,the female role in battles were to stay behind the armies for moral and medical support and to prevent the men from retreating.
>>1175746
And the 15 age limit did not apply to non-combatants.
>First, the prohibition applied to combatants. It applied neither to non-combatant boys nor to non-combatant girls and women. Second, `A'isha did not participate in Badr at all but bade farewell to the combatants as they were leaving Madina, as narrated by Muslim in his Sahih. On the day of Uhud (year 3), Anas, at the time only twelve or thirteen years old, reports seeing an eleven-year old `A'isha and his mother Umm Sulaym having tied up their dresses and carrying water skins back and forth to the combatants, as narrated by al-Bukhari and Muslim.
http://www.webcitation.org/67gTj2QC2
>>1173320
Not really
>>1175715
Arab women took part in battles, not as combatants but morale women at the rear, cheering and shouting.
Except for Hind who ate someones heart.
>>1174218
I like how if you conquer and annex Iraq and there is now +50 qurannions of muslims in your country it would be a glorious national victory, but if same +50 qurannions of muslim just migrated into your country and such it is being invaded and outbread.
>>1175761
Even though this site denies the age limit on non combatants it still comes to the conclusion of aisha not being 9 year old using other sources
>According to Ibn Hajar, Fatimah was five years older than Ayesha. Fatimah is reported to have been born when the Prophet was 35 years old. Thus, even if this information is taken to be correct, Ayesha could by no means be less than 14 years old at the time of hijrah, and 15 or 16 years old at the time of her marriage.
As i said before there are a lot of things that discredit the whole 9 year old thing not just the battle age limit.
>>1172863
Idk why it's so surprising. To Arabs family is huge; this surah confirmed that even the family of the prophet were condemned to hell if they didn't not come to Islam. Abu Lahab died a pagan.
No different than Christianity desu
>>1175824
I provided that citation to counter a specific point.
Ibn Hajar was born in 1372.
And you had the cheek to say my hadith, compiled in the 9th century and generally recognised as the most authoritative source on Mohammad's life after the Koran was historically worthless because it was too long after the event.
>>1175450
What about Abraham? Moses was pretty into mass murder too.
>>1175842
This is exactly my point you cannot prove that she is 9 year old using hadiths as they are historically non valid,yet if you try to do so you're enabling the other side of the arguement to do the same to also prove their point which ends in a stalemate,more or less the burden of proof lies on you but you do not have factual evidence to support your claim.
>>1175862
>This is exactly my point you cannot prove that she is 9 year old using hadiths as they are historically non valid,
More valid than any argument you have made to the contrary.
You were just casually citing someone writing in the 1400s when it fit your narrative, yet the earliest most historically valid sources are somehow invalid when they don't.
http://www.usc.edu/org/cmje/religious-texts/hadith/muslim/008-smt.php#008.3309
>>1175870
Hadiths are NOT valid,not only because it completely contradicts the quran which it claims to explain,yet it adds non sense religious rules and weird obligations that do not exist anywhere in the quran despite the quran HEAVILY mentioning that it is fully detailed and you should not use external sources nor prohibit things that you were not prohibited in the quran,but it also tries to narrate history that happened hundreds of years before it was composed making it invalid specially due to the existance of hundreds of thousands of hadiths so just because they picked a bunch of those and decided to claim it was correct it still isnt no matter how many imams you get to agree,if verse 24:58 so strongly advices to keep the innocence of prepubescent children yet your hadiths claim muhammad married a 9 year old,Your hadiths are historically a weak unreliable source,HEAVILY contradicts the quran which it claims to explain (not just this verse but i can give a lot more examples) yet you still defend it and try to claim it's valid.
>>1175906
9 years old is not necessarily prepubescent. You are simply being factually inaccurate here.
>Some girls start their first period at 8 or 9 years old, while others don't start it until they're 15 or 16. The average age is 12 or 13. The best way to figure out when you may start
http://www.beinggirl.com/article/signs-of-your-first-period/
>>1175840
>its simply coincidence
weak taqiyah m8
islam is literally talmudists extending the talmud to create a new empire
you are a talmudist in denial
>>1172733
Probably because mohammed didn't exist and the entire story was made up?
>>1175925
This still does not refute the fact that hadiths are unreliable,and this is also a weak point considering that you don't know whether or not she actually had her period at age of 8 or 9 specially since those are rare occurances,i can make claims about certain historical events yet until i bring proper evidence my claims are worth nothing,so unless you prove that hadiths are a reliable source it is on the same level of reliable as fanfiction about stalin wanking it to communist aliens fantasies.
>>1175954
I'm sorry I simply don't share your view on this. We are not talking about just any old hadith, all my citations have been from the ones that centuries of scholarship have gone into proving are the most reliable.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kutub_al-Sittah
>>1175963
Alright let's play this game i'm fine with that,keep these verses in mind by the way 2:2 6:114 and 6:115,
From Bukhari Vol. 3, #515
Narrated Abu Huraira: "Allah's Apostle said, "Whoever keeps a dog, one Qirat of the reward of his good deeds is deducted daily, unless the dog is used for guarding a farm or cattle." Abu Huraira (in another narration) said from the Prophet, "unless it is used for guarding sheep or farms, or for hunting." Narrated Abu Hazim from Abu Huraira: The Prophet said, "A dog for guarding cattle or for hunting.""
From Muslim Number 3815:
Ibn Umar reported Allah's Messenger as saying: He who keeps a dog other than that meant for watching the herd or for hunting loses every day out of his deeds equal to two qirat.
According to your most authentic hadiths,the ones that according to your own words,are from hadiths that centuries of scholarship have gone into proving are the most reliable,are claiming that owning a dog in your house causes you to lose one or two qirat DAILY,i do not think you're aware of how much that is but let me ask you this,something as important and massive as losing your good deeds on a DAILY basis for owning a dog somehow goes COMPLETELY unmentioned in the quran,yet your so called most reliable hadiths that were composed years later claim that this is true,and by the way bukhari is the most authentic hadith compilation and sahih muslim is the 2nd most authentic one according to your ''reliable'' scholars,you have no idea how many contradictions this thing has with the quran and common sense,i can bring a lot more contradictions like this all day for you if you want,one thing i need to know though,are you a sunni muslim?
>we can figure out how the universe came to be billions of years ago but we can't figure out who wrote a well known book less than 2000 years ago
>>1175986
So you are down to nitpicking other parts of a specific source and trying to use that as evidence the entire source is wrong.
This is a fallacious argument.
https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/composition-division
There are multiple citations from multiple of the most authoritative hadith of the age of Aisha at marriage.
Trying to say "well this collection seems dodgy on this tiny point" doesn't even refute the claim in that one hadith yet alone refute the cumulative evidence from multiple ones.
>>1175997
i am not nitpicking i picked an example to prove how there are faults and contradictions within these ''authentic'' hadith compilations and that they are NOT perfect you honestly don't expect me to try and contradict every single one of the thousands of hadiths in a single post do you,and it also goes beyond a tiny point,the bukhari and sahih muslim do nothing but make up shit that doesn't exist and full of contradictions,i can go on quoting a lot more made up stuff and rules and show how they're contradictory with the quran which they claim it is a part of,i have already proven that your hadiths are not reliable history source AND full of contradictions yet all you do is say how it is authentic because a bunch of people said so,your most authoritative hadith is still impossible to be 100% valid because at the time of the hadiths being compiled everyone who had direct contact with the events its trying to narrate were dead not to mention these hadiths were passed down orally and then thrown in the middle of another hundreds of thousands orally passed fake hadiths,The 9 year old story hadith was fabricated to counter shia belief of aisha being a whore,Unless you bring a proper evidence to back up the validity of your hadith's claims i'm no longer going to bother wasting my time.
>>1176040
I have made no claims that any source is 100% perfect. I have provided multiple sources from multiple scholars.
I've happily accepted upon my shoulders the burden of proof in every step of this conversation and proved you wrong every time.
http://www.usc.edu/org/cmje/religious-texts/hadith/abudawud/041-sat.php#041.4917
>>1176048
You keep quoting the hadiths but you do not give me a reason as to why they should be considered reliable,sunni scholars that are unrelated to the events of this compilation that approve of it equals to nothing as it's probably done because it serves their political agenda(to counter the shia view of aisha for this particular hadith for example),so i still fail to see why you so strongly attach yourself to it.
>>1173450
Islamic calligraphic art very often is like those typographic collages you see and English, and don't come together to say anything coherent, and are instead simply a way to get around the icon idolatry they despise in Christian art.
>>1175994
We figure out the first thing through precise measurements of the inherent properties of the universe's most fundamental building blocks, as well as the movements of large astronomical bodies (red shift, blue shift).
Those big and small phenomenon are simply easier to measure, with our current technology, than the chaotic, under-recorded movements of pre-scientific human culture. If the people living at the time did not reliably record the events without bias, then yes, we will have trouble figuring out what happened.
If scientific experiments divided into religious schisms and philosophical banter, and no one wrote anything down reliably, then I suppose we would have a hard time deciphering them, too.
>>1176062
I have given multiple reasons why they should be considered solid.
The last citation I posted was this....
http://www.usc.edu/org/cmje/religious-texts/hadith/abudawud/041-sat.php#041.4917
>Narrated Aisha, Ummul Mu'minin:
>When we came to Medina, the women came to me when I was playing on the swing, and my hair were up to my ears. They brought me, prepared me, and decorated me. Then they brought me to the Apostle of Allah (peace_be_upon_him) and he took up cohabitation with me, when I was nine.
I know Wikipedia is not perfect but this is what Wikipedia says about this collection.....
>Abu Dawud collected 500,000 hadith, but included only 4,800 in this collection. It took Abu Dawud 20 years to collect the hadiths. He made a series of journeys to meet most of the foremost traditionists of his time and acquired from them the most reliable hadiths, quoting sources through which it reached him. Since the author collected hadiths which no one had ever assembled together, his sunan has been accepted as a standard work by scholars from many parts of the Islamic world.
That seems as strong a secondary source as any you are going to get from the ancient world. I'm not saying any one source is perfect and I have provided multiple other sources.
> 'A'isha (Allah be pleased with her) reported that Allah's Apostle (may peace be upon him) married her when she was seven years old, and he was taken to his house as a bride when she was nine, and her dolls were with her; and when he (the Holy Prophet) died she was eighteen years old.
http://www.usc.edu/org/cmje/religious-texts/hadith/muslim/008-smt.php#008.3311
Since you are now throwing a huge hissy fit I appeal to the fair play of this thread and board.
Have I made unreasonable arguments or failed to back them with citations?
>>1176048
>>1175997
>>1175963
>>1175963
>>1175925
>>1175870
>>1175761
>>1175669
Does anyone here seriously think Mohammad didn't fuck a nine year old?
>>1176100
Now while i won't say anything as bold as that every single hadith is completely incorrect,we could certainly use them to get a vague idea of how things happened or worked However point still remains that these hadiths were compiled almost 300 years after muhammad's death which makes its validity far of that from a fact no matter how much effort abu dawud spent to collect them as they could have had very easily been changed through that time passage SPECIALLY since they were not,as your own quote says,been ever assembled together but instead passed orally as nothing but rumors and a word of mouth,had they been properly documented or passed down in a period of time remotely close to muhammad's era it would have a considerable amount of validity however this does not,I believe this arguement comes to an end here as you seem to consider a 300 year late orally passed historian record valid while i do not.
>>1175939
Good riddance tbqh
>>1176190
That has been answered in detail and you know it.
>>1176195
Your ''detail'' was saying that he is less credible because he wrote his conclusion in the 1400s which by the way,were based on the narration of al waqidi which was born in 748 AD making him more reliable than the bukhari (Which i will still stand that this is also not a fact),So not only does he use hadiths to counter bukhari's 9 year old hadith claims but hes also more credible in terms of time aswell,and standing by my own point i still declare both of these nothing but claims however if you decide to use hadiths as facts you still lose the arguement.
>>1176239
>al waqidi
Oh really?
al-Shafi’i (d. 204 A.H.) said "All the books of al-Waqidi are lies. In Madinah there were seven men who used to fabricator authorities, one of which was al-Waqidi."
Ahmad ibn Hanbal (d. 241 A.H.) said "He is a liar, makes alternations in the traditions"
Al-Nasa’i (d. 303 A.H.) said "The liars known for fabricating the Hadith of the Messenger of Allah are four. They are: Arba’ah b. Abi Yahya in Madinah, al-Waqidi in Baghdad, Muqatil b. Sulayman in Khurasan and Muhammad bin Sa’id in Syria."
al-Bukhari (d. 256 A.H.) said "al-Waqidi has been abandoned in Hadith. He fabricates Hadith"
Al-Dhahabi (d. 748 A.H.) said "Consensus has taken place on the weakness of al-Waqidi"
Yahya ibn Ma'in (d. 233 A.H.) said "He is weak. He is nothing. Not reliable!"
Ishaq Ibn Rahwayh (d. 238 A.H.) said "According to my view, he is one of those who fabricate Hadith"
Abu Dawood (d. 275 A.H.) said "I do not write his Hadith and I do not report (Hadith) on his authority. I have no doubt that he used to make up Hadith"
Abu Hatim Muhammad ibn Idris al-Razi (d. 277 A.H.) said "He fabricates Hadith. We have abandoned his Hadith"
Al-Daraqutni (d. 385 A.H.) said "There is weakness in him (in his reporting)"
Ali ibn al-Madini (d. 241 A.H.)said "He fabricates Hadith"
Ibn ‘Adi (d. 365 A.H.) said "His traditions are not safe and there is danger from him (in accepting his traditions)"
Hajar al-Asqalani (d. 852 A.H.)said "He has been abandoned in spite of vastness of his knowledge"
Abu Zur’a al-Razi (d. 264 A.H.) said "(Waqidi's writing) Abandoned, Weak"
Al-Nawawi (d. 676 A.H.): said "Their (muhaddithin scholars) consensus is that al-Waqidi is weak"
>>1176273
That's very easily because most of his works were free of the political shitfest that happened with the abbasid period where his works disagree with sunni and shia beliefs so obviously theyll have to criticize it otherwise they're in agreement with something that more or less says that they're lying which is why most of these dates are way after his death(and to nobody's surprise includes the bukhari himself),In the end you should be aware by now that hadiths are nothing but things people nitpick from to assert their political agenda,Just like you are doing right now and that most of them remain nothing more than a rumor and a claim including al waqidi's.
>>1176339
So in other words you are saying Al-Waqidi, who never said anything directly about Aisha's age and wrote in the 800s and is highly controversial is a rock solid source because of the way someone interpreted him in the 1400s even though he never said what the person in the 1400s claimed,
However you also think all the solid less contentious scholars that wrote in the 800s based on legitimate sources are completely invalid.
Tell me again when you were going to make a remotely coherent argument.
>>1176175
not an argument
>>1176423
How many times have i said that al waqidi's hadiths are also nothing but claims and rumors for you to understand that yet you put words into my mouth and say that i assume hes rock solid,Have you honestly not understood yet that every single hadith is far far away from being anything close to a fact? have you not noticed how not only as shown earlier by comparing it to the quranic verses that they have contradictions,have you not noticed how these compilations include many repeated hadiths that outright conflict with eachother,that's because they're no more than an ''I THINK that these hadiths MIGHT be legit'' the fact that they're uncertain which of these hadiths is the legit one if any at all shows their doubt on the validity of their sources yet you so illogically stubbornly attempt to use them as facts which is the main problem here.
>>1176423
>solid less contentious scholars that wrote in the 800s based on legitimate sources
The purpose of hadith was to validate Islamic law and doctrine, not to record history in the modern sense, and since they were transmitted orally, as very short statements, they easily drifted away from their original meaning or completely fabricated as conditions changed.
The age of Aisha at marriage was likely never truly recorded by anyone, but in the attempt to construct the timeline of early Islamic lore one or more of the storytellers of the 8th and 9th century began to piece together and concoct these kinds of details for whatever purpose. That her presumed age in one hadith apparently contradicts her presumed age in another is a consequence of this guesswork that entered Islamic mythology as oral tradition.
>>1175486
Because his work furthers the Jewish narrative
>>1176528
>>1176552
Sorry but at this stage the burden of proof is very firmly on you. I have shouldered it thoughout the entire discussion and provided multiple sources>>1176100 as to Aisha's age at the time Mohammad fucked her .
It is time you provided a serious argument because every slight claim to contrary has been shot down in flames.
>>1172733
>If the Quran was indeed written by Mohammed then how could a simple trader create such a masterpiece in literacy unmatched to this very day in arabic literature?
Because it was breathed out by Satan.
>>1176871
Not this meme again.
>>1176871
oh god, thread over
>>1176876
>>1176878
>>1176871
Allah is the same God of Abraham!
>>1176887
We are here to learn about history and not about your crazy conspiracy theories.
>>1176888
The abomination which you muslims call "Allah" is not what arab Christians call Allah, i.e. God.
>For when God made a promise to Abraham, since He had no one greater by whom to swear, He swore by Himself.
Hebrews 6:13
Pic related, we see that "Allah" does not swear by himself. Instead, "Allah" implies that the stars, the moon, the 'brilliance' of the sun, and a man-made city are greater than "Allah" - the very things he is supposed to have created. He even swears by such menial things as fruits which is not surprising since "Allah" is Satan and in the Holy Bible Satan is described as:
>"the god of this world" (2 Cor 4:4)
>"the whole world lies in the power of the evil one" (1 Jn 5:19)
>"the prince of the power of the air" (Eph 2:2)
>"the ruler of this world" (Jn 12:31)
>>1176893
>conspiracy theories
Nice buzzword but every single thing you see in this screenshot >>1176871 is supported by Scripture, ancient historians and islamic sources, it's not nonsense pulled out of Alex Jones' butt.
This is according to Ibn Ishaq's Sirat Rasul Allah, our earliest detailed biographical record on the life of Muhammad:
>[Muhammad said,] “So I read it, and he departed from me. And I awoke from my sleep, and it was as though these words were written on my heart. (T. Now none of God's creatures was more hateful to me than an (ecstatic) poet or a man possessed: I could not even look at them. I thought, Woe is me poet or possessed—Never shall Quraysh say this of me! I will go to the top of the mountain and throw myself down that I may kill myself and gain rest. So I went forth to do so and then) when I was midway on the mountain, I heard a voice from heaven saying, “O Muhammad! thou art the apostle of God and I am Gabriel.”
Ibn Ishaq, p. 106
>>1176901
lol oh great one Muslim source lol kill yourself Allah will make you burn in fucking hell ya Homaar piece of shit
>>1176904
Are you the frustrated muslim from two days ago?
As I told you before, that "one Muslim source" is from Ibn Ishaq's Sirat Rasul Allah, our earliest detailed biographical record on the life of Muhammad. What don't you understand?
Al-Tabari includes several narrations about Muhammad’s suicide attempts in his massive Ta’rikh al-Rusul wa’l-Muluk. In one version, Muhammad tries to kill himself before receiving his first Qur’anic revelation. During his yearly pagan religious retreat, a spirit appeared to him and said, “Muhammad, you are the Messenger of God.” Muhammad then fled to his wife Khadijah and begged her to cover him. After this, Muhammad considered killing himself:
>He (Muhammad) said: I had been thinking of hurling myself down from a mountain crag, but he appeared to me, as I was thinking about this, and said, “Muhammad, I am Gabriel and you are the Messenger of God.” Then he said, “Recite!” I said, “What shall I recite?” He took me and pressed me three times tightly until I was nearly stifled and was utterly exhausted; then he said: “Recite in the name of your Lord who created,” and I recited it. Then I went to Khadijah and said, “I have been in fear for my life.”
Al-Tabari, Volume VI, p. 68
"Allah" is a demon and everytime you pray towards his image in the prostitute Kaaba in Mecca, he rubs his hands.
>>1176914
>dat idolatry
>>1176930
>THE IDIOT
The idiot is the one who when presented with unsettling facts blocks his ears and refuses to listen while spouting buzzwords.
>>1176937
No, the idiot is someone who needs to cure his Æutism with a healthy dose of bleach
>>1176942
>Æutism
Oh you're that kid who thinks this name-calling is clever? Your post is literally "kill yourself!". How old are you? Are you also muslim?
>>1176871
>all those triggered muslims
kek
>>1176945
It's not clever, it's probably an accurate description of why you keep shitposting the same threads with the exact same posts using the exact same images. You also seem to be utterly incapable of any form of social interaction, demonstrated by your complete lack of response to any points anyone makes to your posts.
This leads me to believe that you have massive autism. The Æ in front of it is just a nickname in reference to your tripcode, which, again, is another sign that you're probably autistic, as all tripfags are
>>1176959
>Demons don't exist
>>1176960
>It's not clever
Indeed. It's just a childish insult like "faggot'', "nigger", "retard", "kike" and "cuck". Your entire post revolves around this word.
>your complete lack of response to any points anyone makes to your posts.
?
Also, I often use the same images because I...like them. That's it. Calm your autism instead of projecting.
>>1176966
That is correct.
>>1176983
He's not wrong though.
>>1176959
>Demons don't exist
>>1176997
>He
>>1176987
That is incorrect.
>>1176983
>Also, I often use the same images because I...like them. That's it.
Yes, and you're here 24/7 and monitor this board for literally every thread involving Islam or Christianity, just to make the same set of posts. If it's an Islam thread, it's "Islam is satanic" and if it's a thread about Christianity, it's self-congratulating verse from the Bible #76.098. Because repetitive behavior for such a long period of time is totally the sign of someone who knows how social interaction works.
Seriously though, follow your own advice:
>Calm your autism instead of projecting.
Also, stop your tripfaggotry
>>1176998
>demons exist
