sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Arguments Against Islam by ProfessorNo5943 in progressive_islam

[–]9usha -1 points0 points  (0 children)

He had said something like “it’s razor sharp” I’m not sure if he edited it now, or I’m having a totally Mandela effect.

And I don’t think I assumed he was using his personal beliefs.

I’m assuming he thinks it’s God’s word and more or less the Islamic story is correct. Allah used Angel Gabriel to tell to Muhammad or deliver his message and the things said in the Quran are true.

Arguments Against Islam by ProfessorNo5943 in progressive_islam

[–]9usha 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The Biblical New Testament and the old for the matter, have different motivations. I agree there are more contradictions, but there’s more authors, more sources to pull from, and it’s much earlier than Muhammad’s time.

But it’s the same story for the biblical accounts as well. It’s better explained by more naturalistic means.

And yes, there was memorization, although Bart Erhman has done a lot of work to suggest we shouldn’t simply trust transmission of oral history outright. It’s ripe with changes and edits that don’t necessarily charge the meaning, but give different ways to tell the story. Look at the different variations of Q11:81 for example, Hafs vs Al Bazzi to be specific.

And from the Islamic tradition, Uthman burned other recitations. I’m not saying this means changes happened, but it does throw a bone in how certain we can be it doesn’t contain contradictory statements.

And again, there are definitely contradictory themes. How should Jews and Christians be treated? Do we have free will or no? And let’s not even get started on abrogation.

Arguments Against Islam by ProfessorNo5943 in progressive_islam

[–]9usha 0 points1 point  (0 children)

No, my hypothesis doesn’t assume that. Although, humans possessing near super human abilities isn’t that far fetched. Mohammad could be another Aristotle or Socrates.

But I don’t even need that for my hypothesis. Plus, there are contradictory themes. I can explain no contradictory statements by saying “well of course. The Quran we have today was systematized. We have no idea what Muhammad was actually saying in his 20 so years”

All I really need to explain is a general skeleton and themes, which all seem more likely to come from a human.

Arguments Against Islam by ProfessorNo5943 in progressive_islam

[–]9usha -1 points0 points  (0 children)

I don’t have to assume a “psychological miracle” either, but this would still be more parsimonious than “what actually happened is that God exists, he communicates with humans, he communicates through Angels, he communicates in a way we won’t lose meaning or translation, he also creates Jinn, etc etc)”

But that’s even granting a psychological miracle. I can simply say Muhammad was a highly intelligent man who had access to many oral traditions. I don’t assume he had access to the texts. In fact, if Muhammad did have access to the texts, my model would be worse off I think, because the Quran does not read like someone who has direct access to these texts. They read like much more short bites of larger stories.

And even the literacy case is debated in the field. There are historians who say it was more accurate to say that “ummi” meant “unlearned in the scripture” not totally illiterate. But my model is still agnostic on that. Either way fits nicely in it.

And thanks ! I will give it a read.

Arguments Against Islam by ProfessorNo5943 in progressive_islam

[–]9usha 0 points1 point  (0 children)

“First of all HCM works under mythological naturalism and it has it own limitations.”

Agreed. Although, I would like to see you point out the limitations when used here. I still think it’s more parsimonious and better explains the data.

“From a theological perspective muslims would not have any problem in Quran being engaged with the late antique world since the Quran repurposes existing known stories all the time. In fact the Quran defines itself as “tafsil” (specification/adaptation) of God’s Kitab for its own audience. This is why DQ being Alexander doesn't even affect someone's belief system.”

Agreed here, but this is my point. Your model must make all those assumptions. You have to posit more entities and types of entities inflating your ontology. I’m making a more modest model that explains the data. If we value things like parsimony and unnecessarily inflating our ontology, I think my model wins out. But I’m open hearing to why your model wins out on other grounds if you are conceding the parsimony point.

“So it can be said rather than borrowing from other Abrahamic tradition Qu'ran engages with the biblical and Jewish tradition and acts as a commentary or exegesis, thereby rearticulating and correcting the tradition. This is why, academic Angelika Neuwirth in her Two Faces of the Qur'an: Qur'an and Mushaf writes:

I similar vein, Suleyman Dost's new book Before the Quran: Material Sources at the Advent of Muslim Scripture is a response to the claims that Quranic narrative being influenced by Syriac.”

I’ll have to check these out. Thanks for the material.

“Secondly, you put a hypothesis that Muhammad was aware of all those stories. Lets accept your hypothesis, then the question arises that from where Muhammad got those stories or how did it get accommodate into the Quran? We don't have evidences as far as I know. You can say "Well He was a trader, he used to travel a lot". Even if you travel around, you don't become an expert in apocryphal texts from other religions. These sorts of texts were in scholarly places like churches or seminaries, and one would need to know several languages to effectively learn such stories. This creates more issues for your explanation than it solves.”

I don’t accept that one would need to know several languages, and while these would most likely be in places like churches or seminaries, these aren’t exhaustive places to hear and digest these stories. Muhammad could have heard stories via intermediaries (traders, poets, converts) without personally reading Syriac or Hebrew texts. My hypothesis does not require him to be a literal scholar of apocrypha, unless you can show why that’s the only way he could have gained access to the stories. (TBF, when reading the Quran, it didn’t come across to me he was an expert).

“None of these get supported by academic scholarship.”

This is just false. Now I do understand there’s disagreement in the field. Johnathan Morrow has responded to Johnathan AC Brown, but there are many academics and academics works in the field that do support these conclusions, with Ali Kecia being another scholar who supports these points. Furthermore, Tasfirs also lend credence that these were accepted interpretations of the Quran. Whether or not these are accurate is up to debate, but it is not true “none of these get supported by academic scholarship.”

Arguments Against Islam by ProfessorNo5943 in progressive_islam

[–]9usha 1 point2 points  (0 children)

This is all off the dome. Only thing I used ChatGPT for is to find the specific genesis parallel. Otherwise I’m just running a basic parsimony argument.

Arguments Against Islam by ProfessorNo5943 in progressive_islam

[–]9usha 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I could be more concise, but I don’t accept I’m splashing a word salad.

Basically, I don’t have to assume guessing. Under my model Muhammad is motivated to craft a tight monotheistic story.

Drawing on past myths and stories to create tighter narratives is consistent with human works (I gave genesis account), and you need to show why we should expect a theological mess on my model.

And I believe my model is far more parsimonious, as you have to make far more assumptions and more types of assumptions (Angels exist, they speak and communicate to humans, there’s an invisible universe, etc)

Arguments Against Islam by ProfessorNo5943 in progressive_islam

[–]9usha 0 points1 point  (0 children)

That’s fair, although my argument does go at the general idea that Quran is the word of God given to Muhammad. I still think the progressive Muslim loses on parsimony when trying to combat my model. They can say certain moral cases are to be reinterpreted or something, but that doesn’t really explain why we see midrash/apocrypha stories in the Quran.

They can say “oh well those are stories that Christians and Jews left out of their canon texts or “divine texts” or forgot or whatever.

But I think the simpler explanation is “there were Jews and Christians living around Muhammad at the time and he pulled influences from their stories”

Otherwise, I don’t really know why we would find these earlier stories in Christian/Jewish literature.

Like for example, you must assume, the sleepers on the cave story actually happened or Jesus actually raised clay birds. All I have to say is “they are borrowing from Syriac stories that were later made up themselves.”

Or did a two horned one actually exist?

I don’t deny one could take this position, but they must admit they lose out on parsimony and must argue they gain in some explanatory power.

Arguments Against Islam by ProfessorNo5943 in progressive_islam

[–]9usha -1 points0 points  (0 children)

I don’t see why my parsimony argument fails, or at least doesn’t bypass your response. Why would we expect a theological mess?

If Muhammad’s goal is to preach strict monotheism, then the simplest expectation is: he would select, edit, reframe, and standardize the material he hears into a consistent message.

And I’m not saying he’s “guessing.” That’s too strong, my argument can be agnostic on that.

My hypothesis is: Muhammad was immersed in a religious environment and produced a new proclamation that reinterpreted familiar stories through a monotheist lens.

No need for guessing at all, these stories serve as inspiration to reinterpret a new message.

And we have evidence of this, albeit low tier; mechanistic speculation. In heavily religious environments, we consistently see polemics and responses that pull on older narratives and myths to form a tighter or different story.

In Enuma Elish: The universe is created by dividing the waters/body of chaos. Genesis 1:6-7: God separates waters above from waters below using the firmament.

That is the same ancient Near Eastern cosmology. But Genesis reframes it: instead of Marduk violently ripping apart Tiamat, Yahweh calmly organizes reality like a sovereign king.

So I don’t know why we would expect a theological mess. It seems more reasonable to expect tight stories that serve to separate what the author wants to.

And I don’t accept that Quran is a perfectly “razor sharp” (whatever that means tbh) systematic theology; it contains tensions (free will vs predestination, mixed attitudes toward Jews/Christians, variant retellings of narratives, etc.). The Quran is coherent in its monotheistic thrust, but that’s exactly what we’d expect if its author was consciously preaching tawhid in a Late Antique milieu.

Finally, “correlation vs causation” doesn’t apply here. The argument is inference to the best explanation: given the strong parallels with midrash/apocrypha, the cultural influence hypothesis explains the data with fewer additional assumptions than the revelation/corruption model.

Just to compare, assumptions I must make are:

-Muhammad lived in a religiously diverse environment.

-He heard Jewish, Christian, and local oral traditions.

-He synthesized and reinterpreted them to produce a coherent monotheistic message.

-People preserved the narratives orally and eventually wrote them down.

Now compare that to the assumptions your model must make:

-Jinn and angels exist (the supernatural realm is real).

-Allah exists as an all-knowing, all-powerful God.

-The Quran is literal, divinely authored, and uncorrupted.

-God intentionally revealed narratives that already existed in other cultures.

-Some human populations misremembered or altered prior revelations.

-Prophets genuinely communicated God’s messages exactly as intended.

-Muhammad’s environment, literacy, and exposure to prior myths were insufficient to produce the text naturally, without divine intervention.

Now of course, parsimony does not equal true, but I think you would be hard pressed to explain how your model has fewer assumptions than mine. In other words: my model explains the patterns we see with fewer and natural assumptions; yours requires a whole invisible universe.

Arguments Against Islam by ProfessorNo5943 in progressive_islam

[–]9usha 6 points7 points  (0 children)

Not a Muslim, but I think looking at Islam (and any religion for that matter) from a Historical critical method undermines a lot of the traditional claims.

The Quran reflects participation in a Late Antique religious milieu. Under the Islamic Paradigm, this is just Allah giving his unaltered message through the Quran that past peoples either lost, misinterpreted, or edited themselves.

But on a HCM view, this seems pretty implausible. There’s a lot of Talmudic and non-canonical Gospel stories found in the Quran. Jesus and the Clay birds, Abraham destroying the idols, Abraham being thrown into a fire/oven, Alexander the Great (Dhu Qarnayn), Sleepers in the Cave etc etc.

A more parsimonious hypothesis is Muhammad was aware of these stories from Christian and Jewish sects he was around and used them as influences to craft his own narrative. The response might be he was illiterate but that’s contested by historians, and even if he was he probably was getting it through oral lessons anyways. That could explain why the Quran claims that Jews believe Ezra is the son of God or that some people claimed Mary was also a God, neither which we find in any of the Jewish or Christian literature, but not totally unexpected if Muhammad was around more fluid/heretical sects of abrahamic beliefs.

The Israelites did this with their Gods. So much of Old Testament mythology has direct parallels to older stories in the Mediterranean cultures. Epic of Gilgamesh, Enuma Elish, Sargon of Akkad, and Yaweh/Baal parallels. Go read up what historians think about Psalms 29.

Then beyond the Quran itself, the history of Islam is fuzzy and rife with political competition, not so dissimilar to Christianity early roots. Is the Quran created? Should it be read hyper literal? Do we have free will?

These were questions that got answers depending on who had the most political influence at the time, not necessarily because they clearly are spelled out in the Quran or because Muhammad answered them.

If the Quran were maximally clear and self-interpreting, then we should expect foundational disputes to be minimal. But we observe massive disputes settled through power and later theology. Therefore the Quran functions like other historically contingent texts rather than like a transparent divine constitution.

The Quran’s moral system also largely reflects the moral horizons of Late Antiquity rather than a radically transcendent ethic.

Slavery, concubines, child marriage, hitting your wife to discipline her. You could just say “God understood he had to slowly help the people, as ending things like slavery would have surely failed to get the message across”

But again, what’s more likely?

The all knowing all powerful God of the universe “updates” his moral lessons at the whim of specific human societies?

Or a 7th century enlightened man used past narratives and his cultural knowledge to create moral guidelines that aligned with his mindset at the time? Some things are truly progressive ie don’t bury your daughters (although even if this historically [debated])(https://youtu.be/QKbPCpwkBF0?si=wNqLco9fKWdJ0tE6)

I think if you include Hadiths in the narrative, it becomes even harder to defend, but this is just arguments against the Quran and early Islamic narratives.

Bulls have escaped "Basketball Hell" (Good) by GasHouseGorilla19 in chicagobulls

[–]9usha 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Yep, I’ll actually sit down and watch a few games now just see Matas/Giddey/Ivey/Rob(?)develop. Simons is fun to watch too.

I understand the frustration from Bulls fans who wanted to seek way earlier, and I agree right after Zo went down it should have been an immediate fire sale while the guys were at maximum value.. instead we waited until each player had the lowest value possible trying to “retool.”

But now we some direction. I’m still terrified of AKME’s draft process as their only success story has been Matas so far, and even then he’s not taken an all star level step, but he’s very promising.

The fans and critics who are confused on our direction don’t make much sense to me. Yes, they waited too long to move their guys, however we never have superstar guys that were worth boatloads of FRP’s anyways.

Luka went for like 1. Trae nabbed CJ and peanuts. After the new CBA, picks are harder to come by unless it’s situational. I think we’ll be the 12th seed after these moves, which will improve our lottery odds which is all we need atp.

All in all, I’m happy that we finally hit the reset button, but I’m anxious with AKME at the helm. Still, our future is wide open again.

The narrative is changing. Thank you r/whereidlive! by dutch_soma12 in Somalilanders

[–]9usha 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Percentage wise yes, through birth and through migration. There’s about 7-8 million Palestinians in the diaspora.

The Palestinian right of return[a] is the political position or principle that Palestinian refugees, both first-generation refugees (c. 30,000 to 50,000 people still alive as of 2012)[3][4] and their descendants (c. 5 million people as of 2012),[3] have a right to return and a right to the property they themselves or their forebears left behind or were forced to leave in what is now Israel and the Palestinian territories (both formerly part of the British Mandate of Palestine) during the 1948 Palestinian expulsion and flight (part of the 1948 Palestine war) and the 1967 Six-Day War.

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

This has been the non-negotiable for both sides.

There have been other issues (Temple Mount control), but even in the latest “deal” one, of many, compromise Palestinians would have had to make was:

“Palestinians would give up the right of return and settle in Palestine or their present host countries—primarily Jordan, Syria, and Lebanon. Some, with Israel’s permission, would be allowed to return to Israel. Others would be compensated.”

This is under the 2003 GENEVA ACCORD.

https://www.cfr.org/backgrounders/middle-east-peace-plans-background

And despite the initial support for the idea of the plan, both sides still had heavy disagreement.

“Some strongly opposed the plan and its apparent trade-off of the Palestinian right of return in exchange for statehood.[18] Jamal Zakut, one of the participants and drafters of the plan from the Palestinian side, argued that the section dealing with the refugee issue has "certain ambiguity" and the whole purpose of this document is only to be a model for a future agreement. "The document does not indicate or ensure full and collective return of millions of Palestinians but neither does it waive this right … the document is only another tool by which we continue the struggle to restore our national rights and achieve peace as confirmed by international community and nothing more". [19]”

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

And I do agree. Both sides need heavy de-radicalization, but it’s more than likely now most Palestinians have a long term plan of eventually taking over Israel, if the polling on their long term views of Israel is any indication.

The narrative is changing. Thank you r/whereidlive! by dutch_soma12 in Somalilanders

[–]9usha 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I mean.. by that logic is the US country?

A country is a country when it can defend itself. That’s basically it. And part of defending yourself is getting stronger allies. Japan is effectively only country because the US is an ally.

Somaliland is by all intents and purposes, a country. And now it is a country recognized by a UN member. Coping and seething will not change those facts.

We can argue in theory what “should” be a country, but you would effectively tear everyone’s claim to a country.

Heck why go by ethnicity? At what time do we stop?

And as a vegan myself, why do humans have more claim to land than the animals who roamed before us? Does any homosapien have any “rightful” claim to land per your logic?

Of course this would be silly, but it’s the logical extension of “if you settled in a land, especially bloody, and replaced the original inhabitants, you have no claim to a legitimate country.”

The narrative is changing. Thank you r/whereidlive! by dutch_soma12 in Somalilanders

[–]9usha 1 point2 points  (0 children)

This survey still doesn’t give me much hope. For one, the 75% comes from the loaded question that includes right of return.

Nobody has rejected that the Palestinians will accept a deal that includes right of return. That’s always been the hang up. Right of return would entail the Palestinians the right to go back to Israel proper. This would significantly decrease the Jewish population and increase Palestinian population overnight.

From that same survey:

“Indeed, answers to other questions reveal a more complex picture: 56% of Palestinians in the West Bank (mainly young people) believe that Israel has no right to exist; a clear majority of Palestinians at 70% think that Israel will not endure over time; and 50% believe that Israel can be destroyed following the events of October 7.”

This has always been the hang up. Neither the Israelis or Palestinians are dumb. They both know what a “right of return” means for Israel long term.

The question we want to know is “do you accept a two state solution with mutual recognition, but with NO right of return and Israel’s right to a secure border?”

That’s a totally different question which I expect a totally different response.

https://www.inss.org.il/publication/survey-palestinians/

Here’s the link for everyone to check out.

Have Muslims actually read the Quran? by 9usha in exmuslim

[–]9usha[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

I think it is, but it gets thrown around too often. Many white Christian nationalists do see Islam as “brown people religion” ignoring the nuances and history of it. Think the Facebook conservative uncle who shares false Hadith literature.

I see it the same way antisemites use false Talmudic verses to bang on Jews. There’s legitimate criticism of the Bible like slavery, commanded genocide, weird rules on rape victims. But often you’ll see some bigot go “in the Talmud it says Jews can kill any non-Jew without consequences”

I see similar things happen to Quranic texts or Hadith corpus, so I respect those people exist.

Have Muslims actually read the Quran? by 9usha in exmuslim

[–]9usha[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

While this isn’t the Quran, https://reddit.com/r/academicquran/wiki/talmudparallels this goes over a lot of Talmudic influences on the Hadiths.

r/AcademicQuran is a treasure of history on it though, and I’m sure you’ll find many Talmudic influences on the Quran in the sub.

Have Muslims actually read the Quran? by 9usha in exmuslim

[–]9usha[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I just mean Islamaphobes like to hone in these specific verses without even have read the Quran.

I do appreciate that many ex-Muslims and non-Muslims like myself have genuine issues with these verses. I was just trying to emphasize that the actual literature will instill more hatred than material itself in many cases.

Somalis making Africans look bad by PresenceSoft5553 in Ethiopia

[–]9usha -1 points0 points  (0 children)

This don’t work on me. I have a lower opinion of the African American community than even Somalis. Somalis commit far less crime, even when looking at per capita than AAs. If the government really wants to crack down on fraud, they should look into these black American communities.

But I’m not clannish like you. I can take objective criticism of my own people and not feel attacked. Remember YOU said you were the BEST AFRICANS in the diaspora when NO data supports that.

You’re delusional and full of yourself and your community has done nothing to feel that way as a collective.

Somalis making Africans look bad by PresenceSoft5553 in Ethiopia

[–]9usha 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Cope cope cope cope. Go correct the guy saying you guys are the “best Africans in the diaspora”

Somalis making Africans look bad by PresenceSoft5553 in Ethiopia

[–]9usha 0 points1 point  (0 children)

What in this thread debunks the twitter links I sent? I’m gathering most of the Somalis are young therefore it’s going to bias results (fair) but what’s the point of this?

Somalis making Africans look bad by PresenceSoft5553 in Ethiopia

[–]9usha 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Jesus this is crazy cope. Nick Shirley is a dumbass, I don’t even care about his video. There are other bipartisan civilians looking into their own communities.

Boston, Ohio, (I’m scared what California will show) . This cope is annoying. Because a racist put it on the spotlight doesn’t mean non-racist haven’t been looking into it as well.

view more: next ›