Why is Islam so much easier and more logical to follow? >There is Only one god and Muhammad was his last prophet

Why is Islam so much easier and more logical to follow?

>There is Only one god and Muhammad was his last prophet
>you can find what rules to follow and what is a sin in Quran and Hadiths
>Only two denominations, Shia and Sunni where 90% is Sunni

Meanwhile Christianity

> lmao God is three persons in one
>Jesus died for your sins. Why? He just did.
>Cherrypicks what is a sin or not from OT and NT. Christian still nevet have a good answer what is sinful or not
>30billion denominations

Shopping Cart Returner Shirt $21.68

Black Rifle Cuck Company, Conservative Humor Shirt $21.68

Shopping Cart Returner Shirt $21.68

  1. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Islam is a political ideology to rule every aspect of your life while Christianity is more philosophical.
    Also arabs need these draconian rules in order to function. Wasn't in medieval sicily that Moors become drunk ans that's how Normans broke a seige?
    We can see jn europe now how dangerous arabs are when they do drugs or drink and how casually they steal, Mohammed saw this and that's why he came up with all the extremist rules.
    Real people (white) don't need this to function wich is why Islam won't be accepted.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >christianity is just le philosophical shit haha!
      >ignore our wealth, our pedophilia, our power, that's just philosophy bro!
      I laughed...

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Protestantism might have made it more philosophical than it really was but Christianity started purely as a political tool, too. Why do you think the biggest schisms are about who is the christian authority?
      Protestants try to philosophize based on lies made to rule more easily, they'll never go anywhere. Real philosophers started on nothing and built the foundations with logic.
      >also that one event where people were drunk totally explains everything and proves they need stricter rules
      Yeah as if white people never got drunk

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Before christianity vikings pillaged and raped like no other

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Yea pretty much, subhumans need a tight leash like the chimps they are, you give them the slightest bit of freedom and they act worse than American blacks (who at least have the excuse of having fatherless homes and the CIA cracking their community up).

      Muslims are just too inbred to function as people at this point. It genuinely seems that whites and east Asians are the only humans capable of self governance.

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        You are Lost at Sea. I hope you find Land soon, your tired soul needs rest.

  2. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Muhammad is a false prophet who is burning in hell like Joseph Smith though

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      From a Christian perspective yeah. According to muslims you Christians are polytheists who worship Jesus when he was only a prophet according tp them

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Muslim sources prove that he was a false prophet
        >praised pagan goddesses and included them in worship
        >broke his own made up islamic laws
        >his own followers suspected him of being a thief
        etc.

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          >Muslim sources
          *historically unreliable hadiths

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >everything that disagrees with my religion is unreliable
            Welcome to the sixteenth century

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >everything that disagrees with my religion is unreliable
            Yes.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Every hadith exists in a Schrödinger's state of being valid and not valid, if they're arguing with non-moronic westerners they say it's invalid, as soon as they have Sharia law and can kill anyone who raises an eyebrow at these stupid hadiths then suddenly it's valid and they can execute them for blasphemy, what an amazingly evil system.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >as soon as they have Sharia law and can kill anyone who raises an eyebrow at these stupid hadiths
            You do realize this is exactly what Quranists oppose right?

            Are you one of those that are Koran onlyist?

            Not strictly, but I believe hadiths can only be trusted if they don't contradict the Quran, and even then they're not necessary.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            See

            https://i.imgur.com/gWuaEte.png

            Every hadith exists in a Schrödinger's state of being valid and not valid, if they're arguing with non-moronic westerners they say it's invalid, as soon as they have Sharia law and can kill anyone who raises an eyebrow at these stupid hadiths then suddenly it's valid and they can execute them for blasphemy, what an amazingly evil system.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            I already reply to that post.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            That's a hadith, not from the Quran. Islam has a second coming of Jesus along with Imam Mahdi in the hadiths. Even in that hadith it says Jesus will be a witness on Judgment day. God is the final judge.

            >as soon as they have Sharia law and can kill anyone who raises an eyebrow at these stupid hadiths
            You do realize this is exactly what Quranists oppose right?

            [...]
            Not strictly, but I believe hadiths can only be trusted if they don't contradict the Quran, and even then they're not necessary.

            I already reply to that post.

            The Koran is a Arian Christian lectionary.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            It's not Arian, it's more Socinian.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      In dante's divine comedy the worst Salahaddin got was the purgatory, and i'd say he knows about christian theology more than you do

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Nta
        Dante did put Muhammad in Hell, but this is still a good point which more people should know. Saladin conducted warfare with far more respect for human life than the Crusaders, and the irony was not lost on Dante. But Dante did not know the Quran or Islam, he merely repeated the European claim that Islam was a heresy, which originates in the 8th century.

  3. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    All religions are from same doppleganger of Time (that is like a number in group of numbers) that is related to dark 2D realm that is related to - tears through its kind of memory, speech and actions.

  4. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >islam
    >more logical
    Only if you stay at the most superficial analysis.
    When you start to dig deeper, you discover cans of worms upon cans of worms that muslims are desperate to hide.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      That's why Descartes, the pioneer of rationalism in the western canon, was inspired by Al ghazali, and his scholastic ancestors, By Ibn Rushd

  5. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >more logical
    Riddle me this: If the Quran was directly taught to Muhammad by an angel, then why does it have inaccuracies about basic anatomy, like semen being produced between the backbone and ribs?

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      So let man observe from what he was created

      He was created from a fluid, ejected

      Emerging from between the backbone and ribs

      The seminal vesicle is between the backbone and ribs, assuming the liquid is semen. It can also be the woman's eggs, maybe the last verse is talking about the human that comes out of the womb, i don't know arabic and not an islamic scholar so i wouldn't tell you. But neither are you

  6. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >>Only two denominations, Shia and Sunni
    I think you might need to do a little bit of research on this one.

  7. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Muhammad was a fat midget:
    >Narrated AbuBarzah: AbdusSalam ibn AbuHazim AbuTalut said: I saw AbuBarzah who came to visit Ubaydullah ibn Ziyad. Then a man named Muslim who was there in the company mentioned it to me.
    >When Ubaydullah saw him, he said: This Muhammad of yours is a dwarf and fat. The old man (i.e. AbuBarzah) understood it. So he said: I did not think that I should remain among people who would make me feel ashamed of the company of Muhammad (peace be upon him).

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Rabi'ah ibn Abi 'Abd al-Rahman said: "I heard Anas ibn Malik (may Allah be pleased with him) describing the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him). He said:

      "He was of average height, not too tall and not too short, with a pinkish colour, not very white and not dark, and his hair was neither very curly nor very straight.
      The Revelation came to him when he was forty years old, and he stayed in Makkah for ten years after the Revelation came, then in Madinah for ten years. When he died, there were no more than twenty white hairs on his head and in his beard."

      It is mentioned in a reliable tradition that Amirul Momineen (a.s.) said: “I have not seen anyone having such broad shoulders as the Messenger of Allah (S)."

      These sources say he was white too: https://wikiislam.net/wiki/Qur%27an,_Hadith_and_Scholars:Muhammad%27s_White_Complexion

  8. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Islam and Buddhism are intellectually satisfying religions in which one has no need to make "leaps of faith." Actually no religion really requires this except Christianity.

    The reason is that Christian theology (the Trinity and man-God Christology) were formed by consensus of human beings over the first four centuries AD.

    It had to be enforced with violence to gain traction and become the ossifed institution of the RomanChurch.

    This problem of Dogmatism is less present in the Eastern Church.

    There is a reason Catholic Europe spawned the Enlightenment and the worldview which doubts God altogether.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >Islam and Buddhism are intellectually satisfying religions in which one has no need to make "leaps of faith."
      You have zero knowledge about islam.

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        No my friend, I have much more knowledge than you. Islam is the most misunderstood and poorly grasped phenomenon in the entire Western Mind.

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          least arrogant muslim

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          Infidelity increases when drunks drink taquilla. Don't be afraid to tell the bar-tender that his service is no longer required. Jesus came for the sinners, not the righteous, so be courageous brother, and bring the lamp out from under the bowl and the bed, and put it on its stand stand. That is how you increase fidelity.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      How is the idea that prophets came with one book every single time throughout history without there being evidence for it and much evidence against it and the evidence once proposed by Mohammad being refuted "intellectually satisfying"? Yeah, I get it's a simple idea. But that doesn't mean it's "intellectually satisfying", unless you're stupid.

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        "To every people, We have sent a messenger.

        Revelation is sometimes but not always written down as sacred text. There are many religions that are transmitted orally. Some of them down to the present.

        I have been watching this Youtube channel about Navajo spirituality with an emphasis on traditional practice. It is really neat how the broad structure of all religions is the same.

        ?si=48lNQFzauSUudGsY

        Some of these revealed traditions are corrupted to an extent. The idea is that Islam represents the ultimate revelation for man, but no people was without guidance to the truth.

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          >Some of these revealed traditions are corrupted to an extent.
          Yeah, but just like the Bible being corrupted meme, that's just confirmation bias.
          >Compatible practice? The perennial religion!
          >Stuff contradicts this proto-Islamism? Corruption!

          Also, once again, and this question makes islamists melt down, why was Jesus sent again?
          The israelites were going hard into monotheism and religious rules to spite the romans, even going Al-Qaida at times, with the zealots.

          Makes no sense to send the second most important human in existence, with an entirely new book, for guys there were fulfilling the pillars just fine.

          Especially since Jesus's presence ended up spawning, from an Islamic POV, the biggest heresy in history.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            How is it a confirmation bias to suggest that traditions are in general subject to corruption? Islam is not free from this, but the Quran is (because nobody ever messed with the text. The oldest Quran dates to the 7th century and is almost exactly the same as we now have it).

            No confirmation bias at all. There is no other sacted text I am aware of that has been proven to be so well-preserved, and the Quran was written in one lifetime, wheras the OT and NT each took centuries of editing and compiling to reach their present form.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >How is it a confirmation bias to suggest that traditions are in general subject to corruption?

            No, you can't prove a text is true by taking past unrelated texts, finding commonalities, and saying whatever doesn't fit your text is corrupted.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            I have not made any claims whatsoever about which chapters/verses are corrupted. I stated it is true that such corruption exists in general, and have not advanced an argument about how to tell corruption from truth.

            To be crystal clear: traditions in general (their practices, beliefs, leaders and texts) are subject to corruption.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >To be crystal clear: traditions in general (their practices, beliefs, leaders and texts) are subject to corruption.

            I'm saying you are bundling unrelated traditions, and saying whatever doesn't fit yours is corruption.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            I have not said enough for you to conclude that in any fairness. This is pointless to continue bickering over, you seem to have made up your mind how I thinkm

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >I have not said enough for you to conclude that in any fairness.
            You said other traditions are corrupted.
            That assumes you know their original form.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Look this is very tiring, are you upset because I said Islam is the ultimate revelation? Why is it contradictory or reprehensible to say "I believe the tradition I adhere to is the last one revealed by God to mankind."

            Is it any different than saying "I believe science and rationality, which I adhere to, are the ultimate stage of human thought." ?

            If it is no different, then what are we truly arguing over? Nothing about corruption or tradition I don't think. Quit playing games and state the nature of your disagreement plainly.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >Is it any different than saying "I believe science and rationality, which I adhere to, are the ultimate stage of human thought." ?
            Yes, because there is not a single rational thing about Islam whatsoever. Why the frick has this thread gotten to over 100 replies? Anyone with a moderate handle on Islam can utterly BTFO it.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Okay I thought so. Have a good day anon.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >Why is it contradictory or reprehensible to say "I believe the tradition I adhere to is the last one revealed by God to mankind."

            Because you cant prove anything about the supposed previous revelations.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >wahhhh religion is not compatible with science wahhh
            This needs to be said why? You suppose you are the first to tell me this?

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Now science, basic logic.
            This entire thing runs on a logical fallacy:

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

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            I have studied some classical logic and mathematical logic. This "affirming the consequent" idea can be easily summarized as: [if A then B] does not imply [if B then A). That is a simple statement, I cannot understand why it has been expanded into this long article.

            Anyways please point out where I incorrectly assumed a converse given a conditional.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >Anyways please point out where I incorrectly assumed a converse given a conditional.
            You assume the other revelations are corrupted proto-Islam, without any shred of evidence, outside Islam stating it's the last revelation, and muslims trying to crowbar the other religions into it's own image.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            You are baffled my friend. You have lost track of the line of argument entirely, and now repeat yourself, like a bumbling idiot.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Yeah, i repeat myself, because you still havent proved the original form of those religions, outside islamic dogma(which another guy showed you failed, as well, by retreating into "maybe they taught us to respect our parents, or something" thing).

            Stop getting into these arguments that you dont know about, and cant prove.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Our disagreements clearly stem from a disagreement about metaphysics, namely I believe God and the Soul are real, and you do not. Everyrhing else is pointless noise sourced from this singular disagreement. I have tried to explain how knowledge and intellect are not confined to empirical truths, and this description seems to not have registered. I don't know that any good can come from our communicating. Please have a wonderful day.

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          There's zero evidence or even indication that "faiths" such as Roman or Greek polytheism ever originated from monotheism. Zero. For all we know, polytheism arose from animism and ancestor worship, not the very abstract idea of the monotheistic Abrahamic God. Furthermore, core tenants of monotheism are no where to be found outside of the Semitic cultural sphere. We know that even the israeli faith started out as a monolateral religion and not a monotheistic one. You have to bend over backwards to make the Islamic narrative fit with all of this evidence.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >There's zero evidence or even indication that "faiths" such as Roman or Greek polytheism ever originated from monotheism. Zero.

            Completely agree anon. I did not mean to suggest that all religions share a common theological or historical foundation. Rather, I meant to suggest that all tribes and nations are sent guides and prophets who help them understand basic aspects of human life, so that the people can come to know truth. Not All the Truth (capital T!), but truths that help them live righteously and meaningfully.

            So, perhaps these teachers sent by God did not come saying "Hey! There is only one God, his name is X, he has given me Y book!"

            Rather these prophets and teachers say things like "We must honor our older and wiser members. We must not be selfish and fight within our families. We should seek to live in balance and modesty. We should pray in song or writing."

            These are the kind of ideas common to all traditional socieites. Their universality is owed to the common source of the teachings: God. Karl Jung is one of many who attempt to find another source in the collective unconscious (a nonexistent phantom of his mind). Others attribute it to Darwin and "human nature." (What is the human if not the thing outside of nature?)

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Depends on what you define as a "guide". I don't see the inventor of the wheel as a "prophet" in the Biblical sense. In any case, it's not the narrative of the Qur'an. In the Qur'an, you'll find
            >we sent messengers with the same [!] message and some people accepted the message and some did not. Those who didn't, we destroyed.
            I don't see how people would reject the message of the wheel, but that's besides the point. It paints a very clear picture of the world, which you'd expect from an Arab in the 7th century. Again, you have to bend over backwards to make this fit with the modern historical and archeological evidence.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            The Aztecs seem to have gone completely insane and forgotten their teachings, for example.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            And you think that's a potential placeholder for one of Yahwe's guys?

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            I am not sure I follow? Placeholder?

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Confused you with someone else, nevermind.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            I agree we would have to bend over backwards to make Islam compatible with the secular west. It is not compatible. One will triumph over the other or both will be erased in nuclear war, time shall tell.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Out of arguments and you have to resort to good-old threats of violence. This is why you guys are never going to "triumph". Most people are not going to let them ne coerced into compliance. Especially, if it's compliance with something that's so ludicrously idiotic as Islam is.

            You have a closed mind, that's all. Best of luck to you. Remember: a person can study science and also religion, as I have done.

            You Semites are all the same apostles. Out of steam and you retort to passive-aggressive snark before self-righteously venturing off.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            No threat anon, I abhor warfare. I can see why you would have read that as a threat and I apologize for the ambiguous language. It is my hope that atheism will gradually die out as humanity becomes more aware of the destruction it has unleashed, mostly through industrial production and modern warfare (I consider atheism a necessary condition for both).

            I hope nobody is hurt or killed and humanity abandons war soon.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            No offense taken, then. What I care for is the truth, as far as we can grasp it. Not Atheism. If it was proven to me that religion is true, I'd accept it. I don't even demand a proof of mathematical rigor but the case should be able to withstand a trial in the context of courtroom. However, as things stand, I don't see religion being able to do this. I simply don't see the evidence that'd support it.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            I appreciate your skepticism of hard atheism. One thing I invite you to consider is the idea of gnosis or intellectus, of instantaneous insight or knowledge given by God directly to the individual mind. Schuon ("Knowledge and the Sacred") writes about this "vertical" knowledge and contrasts it with the "horizontal" knowledve of empiricism and science. Both are valid, and one without the other leads to great confusion.

            Modern science struggles greatly with consciousness and the physics of cosmological origination. It is my opinion that this is no coincidence-- these are explicable only with vertical knowledge. The self/soul/atman is not of this world. Neither is this world. They come from the Divine, who made creation and who made the human being so that it could think, feel, dream and pray (hope).

            This life is a test, to see if we will remember God and acknowledge him, or if we will instead enjoy the illusion of freedom and do as we please. Everyone has a conscience that sheds light on the nature of right and wromg (vertical knowledge) and, as Hume taught us, morality is not derivable from descriptions of reality.

  9. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >Why is Islam so much easier and more logical to follow?

    ?si=V478_iuAyuPF2f3b

  10. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    israeli is a tldr condensed version of an ancient dead religion.
    Christianity is a tldr condensed version of Judaism.
    Islam is a tldr condensed version of Christianity.

    Jews can only be made with a female israelite birthing one. Christians can be made via baptism. Muslims can be made with a guy saying "yeah you good, allahu akbar welcome."

    Each iteration makes getting new blood easier. Thus more profit.

    t. Dropped out before reaching seminary school
    They're all sand people mythos. Over the years people changed stuff and added stuff for money, hoes, and hoe.. All homie knows.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      You are thoroughly confused and have an apeish comprehension of these things. Presumably if you had staid in school you would be less ignorant and more useful.

      Was it drugs or gay sex?

  11. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Why did he suddenly change his name to Allah from YHWH?

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      No one called God YHWH except for a temple priest once a year. The common name for God was Elah in Aramaic, and that's what Jesus called God when he didn't just say "the father". Elah in Arabic is Allah.

      https://i.imgur.com/7HXuTtt.jpeg

      Why is Islam so much easier and more logical to follow?

      >There is Only one god and Muhammad was his last prophet
      >you can find what rules to follow and what is a sin in Quran and Hadiths
      >Only two denominations, Shia and Sunni where 90% is Sunni

      Meanwhile Christianity

      > lmao God is three persons in one
      >Jesus died for your sins. Why? He just did.
      >Cherrypicks what is a sin or not from OT and NT. Christian still nevet have a good answer what is sinful or not
      >30billion denominations

      The Quran defines God in a literal sense as the creator of existence while the new testament refers to God as a metaphorical father. They are different ways of looking at God's relationship with mankind, but both are true. Reminder that Christianity is unitarian in nature, and the trinity doctrine was developed later on. The Church fathers misinterpreted Jesus, the apostles and Paul, who were writing about prophetic pre-existence, and a new creation. They instead interpreted this as the literal pre-existence of Christ in the beginning of time at the Genesis creation. The trinitarian doctrine is a counterfeit of the true gospel. The Bible states God is not a man, and that we were created in the image of God while trinitarians created God in the image of man.

  12. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Reality itself is complex and often escapes man's understanding. A religion without such features could truly be said to me man-made. I take it for one of many of the proofs of Christianity that its persepective is essentially that of God. Just contrast the Islamic idea of Paradise with the Christian idea for one very clear example.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >Just contrast the Islamic idea of Paradise with the Christian idea for one very clear example.
      There is no Christian idea of paradise, because Jesus preached about the coming kingdom of God on earth, not in heaven. In this kingdom people would have resurrected bodies, and live in a messianic age. The Islamic idea is an actual paradise in the heavens, that's the main difference.

      >But men have wives and sex in heaven
      There are plenty of ways to interpret those verses. Yes, a man will have a wife (soulmate) in heaven, that's how I interpret those Quran verses. I don't believe you will have more than one wife in heaven either. One man will have one wife who will become a virgin again, like Adam and Eve. If you died on earth without marrying you will be given a heavenly wife (hoor al Ayn). No one will have sex slaves, all of these developments came later on in the fan fiction hadiths.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      What do you mean? Islam doesn't believe that reality is simple and humans understand it: God is said to be infinitely above all comprehension (even prophets cannot see him) and there's plenty of coranic verses that denounce the ignorance of men in their daily life (like not truly knowing how plants grow for example). It doesn't give you full knowledge of reality but a simple way of living through it.

  13. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Muhammad was a pedo, a slave owner and a warmonger. How can people believe he is a prophet?

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >How can people believe he is a prophet?
      We don't all believe in contradictory hadiths written 150 years after the Quran.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      All Christians believe this peaceful gentleman was a prophet:

      Numbers 31:13-18
      13 And Moses, and Eleazar the priest, and all the princes of the congregation, went forth to meet them without the camp.

      14 And Moses was wroth with the officers of the host, with the captains over thousands, and captains over hundreds, which came from the battle.

      15 And Moses said unto them, Have ye saved all the women alive?

      16 Behold, these caused the children of Israel, through the counsel of Balaam, to commit trespass against the Lord in the matter of Peor, and there was a plague among the congregation of the Lord.

      17 Now therefore kill every male among the little ones, and kill every woman that hath known man by lying with him.

      18 But all the women children, that have not known a man by lying with him, keep alive for yourselves.

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        After the Israelite victory over the Midianites six chapters later, Moses is said to have made the following connection: "[The Midianite women] were the ones who followed Balaam's advice and enticed the Israelites to be unfaithful to Yahweh in the Peor incident, so that a plague struck Yahweh's people”. Yahweh himself claimed that the plague did not hit the Israelite camp until the Midianite princess Kozbi entered it (without reference to sex or foreign gods worship), leading Yahweh to instruct Moses to kill the Midianites who are also Moabites.

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          So you're saying Moses fought a war in the name of God (in this case had women and children slaughtered), but you when Muhammad does it he's a warmonger? The Quran makes no mention of needing to genocide women and children, war was fought between men.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Yahweh commanded holy war against Midian "in retaliation for the latter's seduction of Israel into acts of harlotry and idolatry". The inclusion of the women of Midian in enticing the Israelites into the worship of an alien god became the reason that justified the later assault against Midian in Numbers 31.

            The Midianites were corrupted by the love of money, idolatry, and fornication; therefore, everything taken from them had to be purified either by fire or water. Fire speaks of the Holy Spirit, and the water of purification foreshadows the waters of baptism. For in the baptismal waters, the Holy Spirit cleanses us with His fire, and we are born anew in union with Christ in His death, burial, and Resurrection. The old man of covetousness, idolatry, and fornication is crucified with Christ, and the new man is renewed to live in virtue and holiness (Rom 6:3-5; Jn 3:3-5; Mt 3:11).

            TLTR; DON’T HAVE SEX WITH IDOLATERS.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Why do søyjack christcuck trannies think any of this was a bad thing? That's why your children are being raped by arabs, hello moron cuckold subhuman.

  14. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    both are equally delusional and moronic

  15. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >When the Most High divided the nations, When He scattered the sons of Adam, He set the boundaries of the nations By the number of God's angels. For the Lord's portion became the people of Jacob; The allotment of His inheritance is Israel. (Deuteronomy 32:8-9)
    There are many gods. The Most High, Angels, and Saints. Christianity is Henotheism, where they worship One God who is Three Persons, because that is described in BOTH the Old Testament and the New Testament. That being said:

    >Jesus died for your sins. Why? He just did.
    God incarnated as Man, so that we as Man can be Elevated and Sanctified as like Him. #Theoisis

    >Cherrypicks what is a sin or not from OT and NT.
    Don’t you Muslims have the same thing? A later commandment supersedes and older one? The term I’m referring to is “Naskh” in Islamic jurisprudence. It’s the concept where an earlier revelation or commandment is abrogated or superseded by a later one.

    >30billion denominations
    And two of them are Shiism and Sunnism

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      The trinity is nowhere to be found in the OT, and in the NT the idea of prophetic pre-existence was lost on the former pagan Church fathers.

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        There are many, many verses. I’ll show you some:
        >Exodus 23:20–21. The LORD says he will send an Angel before the Israelites, and warns them to obey the Angel's voice, and that the Angel "will not pardon transgressions" because the LORD's "name is in him".
        >Genesis 16:7–14. The angel of the Lord appears to Hagar. The angel speaks as God himself in the first person, and in verse 13 Hagar identifies "the LORD that spoke to her" as "The God Who sees".
        >Genesis 22:11–15. The angel of the Lord appears to Abraham and refers to himself as God in the first person.

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          An angel is literally a messenger. That's what angel means. The angel speaks for YHWH in the name of YHWH. Since you believe Jesus is the angel of the Lord though, are you aware that the angel of the Lord is sometimes depicted with a sword making allusions to the warrior arch-angel Michael. You are a Jehova's Witness, and you didn't even know it.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >Angel "will not pardon transgressions" because the LORD's "name is in him".
            That is God.

            That reminds me, according to Islam, does Isa judges the world?

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            That has NOTHING to do with Islam, be warned!

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Every scholar of the Quran perceives that "the Hour" is a reference to the hour of judgment. Jesus is also recognized as the one who knows "the Hour," and therefore will be present at the final judgment. In other words, He will be coming again.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            That's a hadith, not from the Quran. Islam has a second coming of Jesus along with Imam Mahdi in the hadiths. Even in that hadith it says Jesus will be a witness on Judgment day. God is the final judge.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Are you one of those that are Koran onlyist?

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >Sahih Muslim, where it’s narrated that Jesus will descend and rule with justice, breaking the cross, killing the swine, and abolishing the jizya (tax on non-Muslims living in Muslim lands), signifying the end of disbelief. While not directly stating Jesus will judge the world, this Hadith is often interpreted to imply his role in the final events leading up to the Day of Judgment.
            Isn’t that also the 2nd most important Hadith in all of Sunnism? Should every single Islam all convert to Shiism now?

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Most Muslims believe in a second coming, they just believe trinitarian worship will end and that monotheism will win. Shia just believe the Mahdi is more important than Sunnies believe, equating him with the messiah ben David of Judaism. Everyone believes the prophet Jesus will return from heaven and pray with the Mahdi, they even give his physical description in the hadiths.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            That doesn’t answer my question. The Shia as their own collection of Hadith.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Yes, like I said. The Shia have their own hadiths where the Mahdi is very important while the Sunnis view him as just someone who unites the Muslims. The Shia view the Mahdi more like a new Christ who will perform miracles like healing the sick, he's more of a Christ-like messiah while Sunnis view him more like a israeli warrior messiah.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Sooooo, should all Sunnis all convert to Shiism?

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Mainstream Sunni hadiths are more moronic so be default Shiism is superior.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            We don't know who the angel is, because he's not named, but based on the imagery of him wielding a sword it can be assumed it's Michael.

            Read what I already wrote:
            >An angel is literally a messenger. That's what angel means. The angel speaks for YHWH in the name of YHWH

            >That reminds me, according to Islam, does Isa judges the world?
            I know more about the Bible than the Quran, so provide the Quran verse. I know about the Son of Man sitting on his throne judging, but God is judging through him.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            The Son of Man is YHWH, the Ancient of Days is El Elyon.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            YHWH is El Elyon, there aren't two gods. Are you a gnostic?

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            No, the earliest texts, with more evidence provided from the DSS, affirm YHWH as the son of Elyon, which is also why He's the "Holy One" of Israel, and there are many "Holy Ones". That's why most Canaanite hymns that are appropriated for Him are to Ba'al and not El.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            YHWH means "to be" in Hebrew, it's not even a name, just a state. El Elyon means the most high, these are titles for the same God. The eternal one, the highest God above all other gods (idols).

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            That's the folk etymology for it, sure. El Elyon does not just mean "The Most High," it was a title applied only to El, which is why, for example, in Genesis 14:22 scribes had to later add in YHWH to ensure that Abram was not swearing an oath to a "mere" Canaanite deity. It's also why there's discrepancies in the Genesis account on when the name YHWH begins to be used.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            I would recommend the following books:
            >The Bodies of God and the World of Ancient Israel, by Benjamin Sommer
            >Two Gods in Heaven:israeli Concepts of God in Antiquity, by Peter Schäfer
            >Religion of the Apostles:Orthodox Christianity in the First Century, by Father Stephen De Young

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        The Son of Man figure, the title Jesus gave to Himself, is worshipped alongside God by all the earth in Daniel 7.
        >In my vision at night I looked, and there before me was one like a son of man, coming with the clouds of heaven. He approached the Ancient of Days and was led into his presence. He was given authority, glory and sovereign power; all nations and peoples of every language worshiped him. His dominion is an everlasting dominion that will not pass away, and his kingdom is one that will never be destroyed.
        Daniel 7, which prophesizes that this will first occur during Rome's rule on earth is one of the most powerful proofs for Jesus and the Church.

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          David was worshiped with God as the king, and representative of God. The messiah is a king who is worshiped in the same way.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            That does not contradict the example I just provided, of a man being worshipped alongside God, showing that God does share His divinity with an apparently unlike Being, in this case a human, what the idea of the Trinity amounts to, which could be shown with the OT, disproving your initial statement. Also, note the added weight of this passage accurately predicting the future, which only God could do. Thus, the significance of this passage is from God Himself, which even Daniel mentions.
            >The great God has shown the king what will take place in the future. The dream is true and its interpretation is trustworthy.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Yeah, my exact point is that a man (David) can be worshiped as a king with God. Thus the king messiah will be worshiped with God, but not as God.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Since the prophecy shows at face a man sharing God's divinity, since it also confirms Jesus Christ's own ministry, and since Jesus Himself claimed to be God, that is quite a prooftext against any idea of strict monotheism.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            The Biblical unitarian position is this, God the father is the only true God. Jesus is not God, but he is the Lord of the Christians (like a king). The Lord of the universe is God, and the intermediary between God and man is Jesus Christ. It's a religion of intercession, not idolatry.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Jesus asserts the exact opposite position:
            >My Father, which gave them me, is greater than all; and no man is able to pluck them out of my Father's hand.
            >I and my Father are one.
            >Then the israelites took up stones again to stone him. Jesus answered them, Many good works have I shewed you from my Father; for which of those works do ye stone me? The israelites answered him, saying, For a good work we stone thee not; but for blasphemy; and because that thou, being a man, makest thyself God. Jesus answered them, Is it not written in your law, I said, Ye are gods?

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            You just posted a unitarian verse. Jesus is in union with God, not literally God. Then the israelites of the time who believe claimed to literally be God want to kill him, and he denies that he claimed to be God by quoting Psalms: "You are all Elohim, sons of the most high". (addressing Israelites)

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            It was one of many possible verses, also if He was simply asserting unity then He wouldn't have been accused of blasphemy, which He also doesn't deny or attempt to clarify. Any interested can do the research, I'm done posting since I've got things to do. God bless all the world, and you too reader!

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >He wouldn't have been accused of blasphemy
            Yes, he would since he was addressing simpletons who misinterpreted what he said.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >Jesus Himself claimed to be God
            *prophetic pre-existence not literal

  16. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Islam is the most shallow world religion there is. I prefer the mysticism and profound theology of Christianity any day over the dulling bluntness of Islam.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >I prefer the mysticism
      Islam has Sufis.

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >morons in turbans huffing and puffing like spastics
        >ZOMG LE HECKIN MYSTICISM

  17. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    ur brown

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Jesus was brown lmao

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Yeshua was more brown than Muhammad.

  18. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Op is just trying to distract other Muslims from record high and INCREASING apostasy rates! Can't wait for the day this undeniably false religion is dead and buried forever!

  19. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >Koran says that Christians should judge by the Gospels.
    >The Gospels proves that Mohammed and his cult is false.
    I’m just following the Koran, that instructs me to worship Jesus.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >The Gospels proves that Mohammed and his cult is false
      No, it doesn't.

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        > For false messiahs and false prophets will appear and perform great signs and wonders to deceive, if possible, even the elect. (Matthew 24:24)

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          The true gospel is the fact that God is one person, not three people. The Quran does not contradict the gospels. It only contradicts false teachers like the Church fathers who taught trinitarianism.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Where is it? Because we have Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John when Muhammad was alive. So where are those other TRUE Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John?

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >TRUE Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John
            That's what I'm saying, the gospels you have all confirm unitarianism, not trinitarianism. Trinitarians misinterpreted the scripture.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >Jesus: "You Will See the Son of Man Seated at the Right Hand of Power and Coming on the Clouds of Heaven.”
            >Jews: OY VEY!!! He said he is G-d!!

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >Jesus: "You Will See the Son of Man Seated at the Right Hand of Power and Coming on the Clouds of Heaven.”
            >Jews: OY VEY!!! He said he is Moshiach!!

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            It’s not a death penalty to say you are the Messiah, but it is if you say you are God. That is why the israelites were all offended that he said that.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            They killed him because he spent three years revolting against their traditions, and literally cost them money on several occasions. The Pharisees were worldly people who used their power for personal gain. Claiming to be the son of God (the messiah) was just the final pretext to kill him, but there was a lot of build up beforehand. They wanted him gone for a while.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Jews (pharisees) don’t believe that Messiah is the Son of Man. Don’t you know all the collection of false messiahs?
            Everyone can be the messiah, if they tried.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >false messiahs
            Other messiah claimants did exactly what the israelites of the time wanted like Bar Kokhba who lead a revolt against Rome. Jesus revolted against his own religious authorities, and that's why they killed him.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Jews (pharisees) don’t believe that Messiah is the Son of Man. Don’t you know all the collection of false messiahs?
            Everyone can be the messiah, if they tried.

            >The Pharisees

            What about the Saducees?

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >What about the Saducees?
            Jesus messed with them too.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Imagine seeing Yahweh face-to-face and still failing to grasp that He is the Son of Man. There's a reason why He said "Father, forgive them, for they know not what they do." Men have slandered God for long enough.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >Yahweh is the Son of Man

            It says right here that The Name is the Son of Man. How can they deny it?

            Genesis 2:19
            "whatsoever Adam called every living being, that was the name"

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Genesis 2:19
            Out of the ground the Lord God formed every beast of the field and every bird of the air, and brought them to Adam to see what he would call them. And whatever Adam called each living creature, that was its name.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Why say Lord and God? Why not just say Lord, or God? What's the significance of combining them?

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >Out of adama, the semantics of Good judgement formed every creation of the blank slate, and every floating creation of heaven, and brought them to mankind to see what mankind would call "them". And whatever mankind called each living definition, that was its semantic signature.

            Semantics are the Son of Man.

            A verse about the imperfection of pi:

            Exodus 3:14
            God says to moses:
            אֶֽהְיֶ֖ה שְׁלָחַ֥נִי אֲלֵיכֶֽם

            So why is his name not
            " אֶֽהְיֶ֖ה "

            Why do some refuse to even say the name? Why do others call him the Lord, or Adoni, or Allah, or Jehovah?

            The Name is the Son of Man.
            Jesus Christ.
            That which is saved and annointed by good judgement.
            Do not assign worth to the semantics of God with vanity. Connotations are from men. Meaning and purpose is from God.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Where is it? Because we have Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John when Muhammad was alive. So where are those other TRUE Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John?

            1 John 5:7
            >7 For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            1 John 5:7 is a known interpolation that was not found in the oldest Greek manuscripts. It's only in the King James version as far as I know.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Some translations in other languages have it

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            28 Thomas said to him, “My Lord and my God!”

            29 Then Jesus told him, “Because you have seen me, you have believed; blessed are those who have not seen and yet have believed.”
            How does this prove unitarianism?

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Reality: Thomas witnesses a real miracle, and praises the God that resurrected a man from crucifixion.

            What trinitarians believe Thomas meant: Wow, Jesus, you are literally my Lord and my God!

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            OT god in Isaiah 44:6
            >“I am the first and I am the last,
            and apart from me there is no God.
            Jesus in revelation 22:13
            >I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end, the first and the last
            If you want more Genesis 18, the three visitors
            18 The Lord appeared to Abraham near the great trees of Mamre while he was sitting at the entrance to his tent in the heat of the day. 2 Abraham looked up and saw three men standing nearby. When he saw them, he hurried from the entrance of his tent to meet them and bowed low to the ground.

            3 He said, “If I have found favor in your eyes, my lord,do not pass your servant by.

            Check exodus 3 the angel of the lord appears and in verse 7 it is referred to the angel as “The Lord”

            And yes unitarians stop coping Thomas was telling Jesus he was his god

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Isaiah 9
            6 For to us a child is born, to us a son is given, and the government will be on his shoulders. And he will be called Wonderful Counselor, *Mighty God*, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            John 8:58
            How can someone who is not god be there before Abraham

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Psalm 102:25-27
            25 In the beginning you laid the foundations of the earth,
            and the heavens are the work of your hands.
            26 They will perish, but you remain;
            they will all wear out like a garment.
            Like clothing you will change them
            and they will be discarded.
            27 But you remain the same,
            and your years will never end.

            Hebrews 1
            10 He also says,

            “In the beginning, Lord, you laid the foundations of the earth,
            and the heavens are the work of your hands.
            11 They will perish, but you remain;
            they will all wear out like a garment.
            12 You will roll them up like a robe;
            like a garment they will be changed.
            But you remain the same,
            and your years will never end.”

            The father in hebrews 1 talks about the son the same way the prayer in psalm 102 talks about Jehovah

            More proof that Unitarianism is wrong

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            The Godhead, or Elohim, was always interpreted as plural.

            "Son of God" is an honorific, applied ex to David.

            More to the point, Hebrews is deliberately playing on / referencing the Psalms. It is not like they independently composed the same piece. The older influenced the newer, as throughout the NT (which is almost entitely built out of references to the OT)

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Elohim probably originally referred to the deities of the ancient Canaanite pantheon, but at the time the bible was written down that meaning had been forgotten.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Yes I am aware of the secular scholarly consensus on that. I am aware of all the so-called Caananite practices in especially II Kings, associated with sacred poles, particular altars, the two-deer motif, Asherah and the rest of it.

            I disagree that the Israelites came from the Caananites, or that Caananite religion evolved into Hebrew religion.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >I disagree
            On what grounds?

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            The same reason I dissent from Mr. Freud's wacky theory that Moses was an Egyptian priest of Akhenaten.

            There is no reason to invent theories when the religion has had its own self-understanding for thousands of years. I am by no means a literalist but I see no reason why a man called Moses could not have been a prophet of God, or the founder of the religion of the Hebrews.

            If Moses founded a new religion then Hebrew religion is not made out of fragments of the existing religious culture of the levant.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            There's a difference between Freud's theory and the modern one in that the latter has evidence to back it up. In any case, there's no evidence for the traditional narrative, either. So why do you put your faith in this one? Only because it's the "traditional one" does immediately imply it's true.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >Only because it's the "traditional one" does immediately imply it's true

            In my worldview, I believe this to be entirely true: the more traditional the source, the more true it is.

            This is not an accepted view in the secular world, I understand.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >the more traditional the source, the more true it is
            Why? Or do go by this dogmatically?

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            It would take me several hours to explain in conversation, there is no way to get into it here. I believe God is actively guiding mankind's destiny and that prophets are often his voice in the human world. I believe Moses was one of them. I am not averse to the use of reason and apply it often, but also use another category of knowledge that percieves or remembers divine truths directly and without evidence or argument. The first instance of this I learned of, speaking personally, was the inherent value of human life, a truth that cannot be derived from scientific descriptions of reality or the application of logic.

  20. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    both are as autistic as each other

  21. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    why isn’t there a single israeli/Christian group who considers the Kaaba a holy site if it was built by Ishmael and Abraham?
    why did God change his proper name to be the Arabic phrase for “The God?”
    why do the Ten Commandments never get mentioned in the new scripture?
    What’s up with the pagan influences in the hajj?

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >why isn’t there a single israeli/Christian group who considers the Kaaba a holy site if it was built by Ishmael and Abraham?
      Because they don't believe in Islam's claims.

      >why did God change his proper name to be the Arabic phrase for “The God?”
      Allah (Arabic) is Elah (Aramaic)

      >why do the Ten Commandments never get mentioned in the new scripture?
      https://submission.org/The_ten_commandments_in_the_Quran.html

      >What’s up with the pagan influences in the hajj?
      Entirely traditions from the hadiths about Adam falling from heaven with a white stone that turned black from the sins of mankind.

  22. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >Islam being logical

    Islam is a the most trustmebro.kek religion out there.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Probably know something before you post

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        It is though.
        It's based on word of mouth, and trusting what some "expert" says in a "telephone game" of hadiths.
        It implies that everyone is incapable of understanding the reality that Allah created with reason, and so we must instead submit ourselves to some "expert" who has the title of "trusted bro".

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          but dude nasa confirmed that the moon was split takbir eid mubarak habibi hamud

  23. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    about Christianity:
    > The Holy Trinity does not equal three people, you just don't understand that due to a lack of intelligence
    >He died for our sins because he loves us, and wants to forgive people because He knows there is good in everyone
    > of course there isn't a complete list of sins in the Bible, it doesn't go like "sins: can't lie, can't steal, can't kill, etc" that way it can be hard to understand everything after all we are all just humans, not robots that know everything
    > Unless you're talking about a twisted denomination it all comes to the same point: following the teachings of Jesus, there's just differences between the church, way of praying, etc, which isn't specified in the Bible

    I don't think Islam is "easier" to follow
    > In both there is 1 God, you're just twisting / misunderstanding words
    > Just like in the Bible you can find what to do and not do, the average religious person can't name every single sin/rule in their Holy book, you probably can't either
    > Just because there are 2 denominations doesn't make it easier to follow, nor does it make it more logical

    Islam also has a lot of harder rules like women wear a hijab (by choice), but will get judged if they don't, in more severe cases even insulted or beaten (same goes with showing skin), also can't listen to a lot of music and will get judged if they do

    this is no hate or anything in that direction, I am just saying this because I disagree
    I was raised an atheist myself, and learned (basics) about both Islam and Christianity
    (sorry if there are misspellings)

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >The Holy Trinity does not equal three people
      This is the part where everyone pretends like people and persons are different words with different meanings, and not synonyms of each other.

      >He died for our sins because he loves us, and wants to forgive people because He knows there is good in everyone
      I believe in the vicarious atonement, but also God can just forgive sins because he's all powerful. The sacrifice is necessary for making a new covenant, not forgiveness.

      >Islam also has a lot of harder rules like women wear a hijab (by choice), but will get judged if they don't, in more severe cases even insulted or beaten (same goes with showing skin), also can't listen to a lot of music and will get judged if they do

      I agree that this is moronic. Islam is in desperate need of reform. There are plenty of messed up punishments in the Torah, but even israelites don't practice those anymore.

  24. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >30billion denominations

    Thank God.
    Smaller the communes the better.

  25. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >I cannot explain reality/universe, so it must be the creator from islam, judaism,christianity,... Cuculcan,...

  26. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >Why is Islam so much easier and more logical to follow?
    It's a younger religion and the creators learned from the mistakes of Judaism and early Christianity.
    It was actually manufactured by 2-3 people and did not grow organically like Christianity did. Even Islam suffers from this problem though when it comes to the Haddiths and which ones you should follow.

  27. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    I'm not a religious man, so I have no chips in this game, but I will say that from a literary and historical standpoint, the Bible is a superior piece of literature than the Quran. The Quran is the Bible but with all of its substance removed for just Islamic doctrine, with the expectation that the reader is already familiar with the Bible.

  28. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    don't ask this type of questions in IQfy
    if you want to be muslim just ask god to guide you.
    And Mohammed (pbh) did not make this rules himself he cannot decide what is halal and haram its an angel kalled Djebril who was sent from god to our prophet (pbuh) , with the quran. It's called (wahey). Look honestly bro i wish you guidance from Allah (swt) to the truth,
    and please don't judge islam by arabs because sadly they don't represent islam nobody can do that except Mohammed (pbuh) you can read about him and you will se the beauty of islam.
    It's my first time talking with someone who is a nonbeliever, i wish i helped you with somthing.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Have you ever read the Gospel? I advise you to read the Gospel, as well as this book, if you want to learn about Christianity.

      http://library.lol/main/924ABA132117960DB2C1B65A1DC5B3E1

  29. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >Only two denominations
    Ibadi? Quranism? Sufism?

  30. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Because Islam is simple minded and tedious and Christianity is rich and endlessly unfolding. You can have Buzzfeed listicle answers to the deepest questions or you can have the truth.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Absurd. Please at least read a few books within the Islamic tradition before you spout off. There is every bit of intellectual sophistication one finds in Christianity, Buddhism or secular philosophy.

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >a few books within the Islamic tradition

        Hadiths are so weird. How can Islam be a true religion?

        https://web.archive.org/web/20200606133250/https://pastebin.com/2CJrErSe

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        I read the Koran, it's actually _terrible_. I assume the commentary must be better because it's so stupid it's hard to take seriously, and Muslims are quite cool and pious people (obvious exceptions, but every religion has them), and it can't be from the Koran. And the Islamic tradition helped preserve classical tradition and produced Averroes and in a sense began the Renaissance, so there was real intelligence and learning there.

        But the fact is that the Koran is a bad book for the reason everyone says it's good (it's easy to understand! Like my animes!), and the Bible is good for the reason everyone says it's bad (it's confusing! Why can't the transcendent mystery be simple and easy?)

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          A westerner reading an English translation of the Quran is likely to fight the text from the first to last verse, and most likely will not finish even half of it because they will come to their own conclusion firmly (the same conclusion the held prior to touching the book).

          If you do not have an open mind to the idea of God and prophecy you will simply ransack the text like a barbarian, grabbing at whatever catches your eye, slashing away at every vague threat, and pillaging whatever gemstones you stumble upon.

          If you do have an open mind about God and prophecy, then a close study of the text with explications and notes will be very much worthwhile. "The Study Quran" is one such version, which compiles huge amounts of expository and referential notes with extended quotes from elsewhere in the Islamic tradition. It also has a series of essays in the back on particular subjects, such as death, which are very readable and attempt to illucidate Quranic ideas to modern readers perhaps unacuainted with the study of Islam or sacred texts. I cannot recommend it highly enough.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >The Study Quran
            This book was made by CIA agent Seyyed Hossein Nasr

            Check wikileaks.org

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Nasr is not a CIA agent that is absurd.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Check wikileaks.org, bwoy

            Nasr fled to London after the Islamic Revolution and has lived in the United States since 1984

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Sir he was a close friend of the Shah's wife, and his life was uprooted along with many Iranians when the Ayatollah came to power. Like many Iranians it became unsafe for him to remain there and he was forced to exile. Please stop being so uncriticallly conspiratorial.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >Check wikileaks.org
            Naw I don't think I will
            >CIA agent
            even if that were true (it's not) that has nothing to actually do with the books substance. You're allowed to work for the CIA and do other shit too

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          Before becoming acquainted with Greek philosophy and science, Muslims only had stories about Mahomet.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      That was really well said. I think I'm familiar with your posting style enough to say that I find yours pleasant to read. I always do. I wish my conviction and faith was strong enough that i could speak for Christianity with confidence and without judgment of others, like you do.

  31. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Hadiths are so weird. How can Islam be a true religion?

    https://web.archive.org/web/20200606133250/https://pastebin.com/2CJrErSe

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      The non canon gospels are weird, how can Christianity be a true religion?

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        There are only hadiths from Sahih Al-Bukhari and Sahih Muslim, this is what all Sunnis on the planet recognize as reliable evidence about Muhammad.

        If you are Shiite or Quranite, then you're in the minority in Islam and you're not considered a Muslim by others.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      If you open up page 347 of an advanced textbook on organic chemistry, you will see things that make no sense to you, and you may try your best to interpret what you see, but you will be entirely wrong for the most part.

      Why do you think you can read random hadith from an intellectual tradition with which you have no familiarity? Do you understand Arabic and how it operates? Do you know how Arabic metaphors and common sayings work? Do you have a general understanding of hadith, the various strands and sources, the different schools of Islam and which hadith they rely on and which they do not and why? Do you know how ancient metaphorical language works, in the case of law, as for example in Deuteronomy and Leviticus, where many of the laws are metaphorical and not literal, or even poetical as in Dante?

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Yeah, links to an Sunni website with different obscene 'metaphors and common sayings' about Mohammed.

        Show the interpretation of these hadiths as metaphors in the books of traditional Islamic scholars. Until this happens, your arguments have no basis.

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          I am not doing your homework for you. If you want to learn I will assist you, if you want to win internet debates and reinforce your existing beliefs there is no point in our interacting. Certainly there is zero chance of you convincing me to come over to your view. I know too much.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            If you knew the metaphorical interpretation of at least two or three hadiths from this list, you would immediately give it, citing the original source. Instead, you appeal to an abstract tradition, which you yourself cannot name and quote its representatives.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            You are talking to yourself henceforth. Good day.

            Are you Indian?

            A white American raised in a secular liberal home, upper middle class.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            So you have not given a single example of a metaphorical reading of the nonsense contained in collections of reliable hadiths about Muhammad

            Hadiths are so weird. How can Islam be a true religion?

            https://web.archive.org/web/20200606133250/https://pastebin.com/2CJrErSe

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Do you really think that the practice of this teaching was different from that described in these hadiths?

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          Please understand how enormously complex it is to enter into the thoughts, ideas and practices of another civilization with comparable age to yours.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Are you Indian?

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Islam is the youngest of the world's religions. Your sect ('tradition'), which you are embarrassed to name, is even younger and most likely arose in the 19th-20th century.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Check wikileaks.org, bwoy

            Nasr works for the American state

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Spamming the same lines just makes you look like a schizo, but you probably are, unless you actually want to elaborate instead of sending people to fricking wikileaks. Schizos I swear....

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            This was addressed to Muslims, but since you don't belong to Islam, it is understandable why the connection between Nasr and the American government doesn't matter to you.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            I was born with a lot of native curiosity about religion, and have spent many years formally and informally studying Buddhism, Hinduism, Christianity and to a lesser extent Islam (my current interest).

            In perhaps 10 or 15 thousand pages of reading I have only found, again and again, that everything about religion is so much more complicated, intricate and subtle than we first realize when we begin our study. Many times I have experienced a kind of ecstasy just dwelling on hiw enormous these things are, how there are tens of thousands of books and poems and prophecies which remain untranslated into English, how the English study of world religions is so recent and so undeveloped, how difficult and majestic and beautiful these cultures are seen from within.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            I hope your ecstasy doesn't look like this

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            I am not watching a random link from someone who is being assinine on IQfy, I am not into disgusting content.

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >God made the religion for all mankind so opaque you have to spend years of studying to even hope to comprehend it
        Theology is not organic chemistry, where you actually need some skill.

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          Sign of the times. Bowing to quantitative sciences and placing them beyond literature or religion, which are assumed to be silly and stupid.

          Did Oppenheimer feel this way? Niels Bohr? Albert Einstein? Kurt Godel?

          Nope nope nope and nope. All took theology extremely seriously.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Albert Einstein wasn't a proponent of any organized religion, he was a Deist. Niels Bohr was an Atheist during his younger years, as far as I know. Make of that, what you will. I grant you Kurt Gödel. Oppenheimer is a meme. Also, I can come up with many, many intelligent men that were Atheists.

            >Bowing to quantitative sciences and placing them beyond literature or religion, which are assumed to be silly and stupid.
            I never talked of literature. Literature is not making a claim to truth. Religion does. My scorn is well-placed here, because religion is mostly lies, hearsay and superstition among short-sighted dogmatism, threats and coercion. Almost always at the cost of well-meaning people.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            You have a closed mind, that's all. Best of luck to you. Remember: a person can study science and also religion, as I have done.

  32. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >easier and more logical to follow
    Picrel is easier and more logical to follow than Christianity?

  33. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Islam looks very strange

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      *Traditional Islam

  34. 4 weeks ago
    Timmy

    Quran is for smooth brains

  35. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Less authors trying to keep the story straight.

  36. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Are there any Christian denominations which approve of prayers to Mary but reject prayers to every other saint?

  37. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    [...]

    >If you believe jesus was an angel
    Angle in hebrew “Mlak” didn’t mean and angel (winged species) as in jehovah’s witnesses it meant representative of god

    >Jesus is allowed to use god’s titles
    Why? Doesn’t it mean he is god if the father says about him what was said to jehovah

    >prophetic preexisting
    That’s god

    >that’s all about god
    In hebrews 1 the father tells this to the son referencing what was told about jehovah in psalm 102

    >trinitarians cannot comprehend it
    Here were are not debating on wether he is the son of god or not we are debating if he is god

  38. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >white robes, not red or yellow
    >don't kill insects
    >shave your heads
    Muslimbros...
    why is our pilgrimage basically a buddhist trip?

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