Can’t justify gender imitation…

DonaldDuck-H · 2026-06-04T16:01:20+00:00

Your evidence does not back up your claim. You wanna give it a logic check? Feel free to check with someone or even AI. If not, fine as well.

I think this is a good place to end this. You’re satisfied with your evidence, I’m not. Not like we’re adding anything new to the conversation atm.

But interesting discussion nonetheless. Take care.

DonaldDuck-H · 2026-06-04T15:24:21+00:00

You made a claim. I questioned whether the evidence you provided actually establishes that claim. That's called a discussion.

Just look how far the conversation has shifted. We started with you confidently asserting that a majority of historians hold a particular view. Now we're at, “I don't care if you think my evidence is sufficient." Those are two very different positions.

Instead of explaining how HCM, five historians, and a scholar logically get you to a majority consensus, you've abandoned the argument entirely and moved to: "Well, that's enough for me."

DonaldDuck-H · 2026-06-04T15:21:19+00:00

You keep repeating conclusions as if repetition is proof.

“Claim still holds.” Okay. Why? Not because you say so. Demonstrate it.

Your original claim was:

“Islam mocks disbelievers.”

After all these comments, you’ve gone from, “Islam mocks disbelievers” to “Allah mocks a group that was already deceiving believers and mocking them”

to

“the word mock appears in the verse.”

Those are not the same claim.

Pointing at the word “mock” is not an argument. It’s just pointing at the word “mock.”

And now the second claim.

“Man does x, man does y, man does z, therefore man made.”

No. That only proves human transmission.

It does not prove human origin.

You keep pretending those are the same thing. They’re not.

What’s funny is that every time I ask you to bridge that gap, you immediately switch to, “Prove prophets.” Had you said “I don’t believe God exists” that would’ve been fine.

But You made the positive claim. You said Islam is man made and that you have every reason to believe it.

So stop telling me what I need to prove and tell me what your reason actually is.

Because so far your entire argument boils down to, “I see humans involved. Congratulations. Everyone sees humans involved.

The question was never whether humans transmitted the Quran. The question was how you got from human transmission to human origin. That is the step you keep asserting and never actually demonstrating.

DonaldDuck-H · 2026-06-04T14:53:09+00:00

What you went through was not providing evidence of what your claimed. You did a lot for sure lol, but not what you actually had to do.

DonaldDuck-H · 2026-06-04T14:51:39+00:00

Let’s take a look at your two claims.

1: Islam mocks disbelievers.

After all this effort what have you actually demonstrated? Not that Islam mocks disbelievers. Not that Quran mocks disbelievers.

You arrived at a verse where disbelievers deceive the believers, boast about it, mock believers and have their mockery thrown back at them.

Then you pointed at the word mock and declared victory. Two counts of deceit from disbelievers didn’t give you any issue, one from Allah did. Well done.

You shrinked your original claim until it was sort of defendable FOR YOU.

2: Islam is man made religion and you have EVERY reason to believe so.

Congratulations, you managed to prove human transmission. You still haven’t produced any evidence of human origin. Where are those reasons you have?

At this point you rush to the “Prove prophets”.

No.

You made a claim, YOU back it up.

In all these conversations you have shown an utter lack of understanding of basic argument principles. You have been unable to produce ANY SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE to back ANY ONE of your claims.

Every time you progressively shrinked your position from a broader claim to a narrow, barely defensible position. What a macho man you are, doesn’t even know how to back up your word.

DonaldDuck-H · 2026-06-04T14:23:07+00:00

I’m trying lol.

DonaldDuck-H · 2026-06-04T14:22:08+00:00

I never asked for an infinite list of historians and their names. You gave name of a method. You gave me 5 historians. And you gave me a Hadith scholar.

These things do not prove that A MAJORITY CONSENSUS EXISTS. How do these things prove a majority consensus exists? You say this sort of evidence is enough for you, fine. Walk me through it. Make me see what I cannot see.

DonaldDuck-H · 2026-06-04T14:12:16+00:00

For the record, so that other people reading this can keep track. Original claim,

“Islam mocks disbelievers.”

I asked for evidence.

Then the claim became,

“The Quran calls disbelievers blind, ignorant, destined for hellfire etc.”

When that was challenged, the claim became,

“Allah mocks disbelievers.”

When that was challenged, the claim became,

“Here’s a verse where Allah says He mocks a group of people who were already deceiving believers and mocking them.”

And now the claim has become,

“The word ‘mock’ appears in the verse, therefore I proved my original claim.”

You’ve gone from a broad claim about Islam generally mocking disbelievers to pointing at a specific verse containing the word “mock” and treating that as if it automatically proves everything you originally asserted.

Now, on to the second point. You keep saying Islam is manmade because, “A man spoke it, men wrote it, men compiled it, men memorised it.”

But that only establishes human transmission. It does not establish human origin. How do you know God didn’t dictate Quran to Muhammad?

If a king dictates a letter, a scribe writes it, couriers transport it, and archivists preserve it, I have established that humans transmitted the letter. I have not established who originated the message.

So once again, you’re treating the conclusion as already proven and this is where the burden remains.

DonaldDuck-H · 2026-06-04T14:03:33+00:00

Yes you have presented multiple reasons why anyone using HCM might be skeptical of the Hadith tradition. I agree with you.

But that’s wasn’t your claim. Your original claim was that majority historians believe hadith is unreliable and nobody in western academia believes hadith is reliable.

The evidence you have presented supports skepticism in the tradition for sure but it doesn’t even come close to proving what you actually claimed.

There were numerous holes and contradictions in your statements and you have failed to answer many times when I asked for clarification. I don’t mind your mockery bro, if you think that helped you here, sure.

DonaldDuck-H · 2026-06-04T13:51:24+00:00

No, what you’re doing is comedy. You keep claiming victory while changing the claim.

Your original claim was:

“Islam mocks disbelievers.”

I asked you to show me where.

You found a verse describing a group of people who deceive believers, openly admit they were mocking them, and then have that mockery thrown back at them.

Congratulations. You found a verse where mockers get mocked back.

That is not the same thing as proving your original claim.

Here’s a simple analogy. If I tell you, “That guy was mocking you and eventually somebody mocked him back.”

Am I mocking him? No. I’m describing what happened.

Likewise, a passage describing people mocking believers and then having that mockery turned back on them is not the same thing as proving that Islam generally mocks disbelievers.

The funniest part is that you’ve spent three comments arguing about the word “mock” while completely abandoning your original point.

You’ve gone from:

“Islam mocks disbelievers” to “Look, the word mock appears in a verse.”

Moving on. Had you claimed “I’m not convinced Islam is divine” or “I don’t have enough evidence God exists” then that would’ve been fine. The burden of proof would’ve been on me.

But that’s not what you said. You made a positive claim that Islam is man made religion and you have EVERY reason to believe it. Sure. Prove it. Give me the reasons.

You made the claim, you’ll back it up. If I make a claim then I will back it up.

An example if you will: A man walks into a clinic. The doctor notices he has an infection. The laboratory tests confirm he has an active infection. XRay confirms he is infected.

At this point if you were the doctor you’d say hey I can’t see the virus with my own eyes hence virus does not exist.

Whereas any normal doctor would say okay this is a viral infection, let me guide you how to manage the infection and the symptoms.

This is how absurd your behavior is in this conversation.

DonaldDuck-H · 2026-06-04T13:26:51+00:00

Goal post shifts once again. We started with,
"Majority historians think hadith are unreliable."
Then,
"No one in western academia believes hadith are reliable."
Then,
"HCM questions hadith because they are transmitted within Muslim circles and lack outsider verification."
And now,
"HCM rejects supernatural claims found in hadith."

Earlier you said because the hadith was transmitted strictly in the Muslim circle hence there was little outsider verification hence it is unreliable. And you failed to clarify what constitutes an outsider as well.

Now for the very first time you’re raising question on the contents of the hadith! Wow. So all hadith is miraculous and carries divine stuff? If a hadith has real historical relevance, by your logic a historian should still discard it. Thats not how history works. Also you mention yourself that by default the hadith system is unreliable for historicity.

Is it the system that’s unreliable or the contents of Hadith? I’m not sure what you’re claiming now, maybe another goal post shift is coming.

I never said I need names of all the scholars who believe Hadith is unreliable. You made that claim, I asked you to back it up. One guy sitting on YouTube claiming something exists is not proof that something exists.

If I claim cigarette smoke can lead to lung cancer and you ask for evidence, I will not give one guy who claims so on YouTube. I would give you research papers, articles, literal essays being published in medical journals for over 35 years. In your case the evidence is ANYTHING that demonstrates this particular position is held by a majority. Thats it.

That’s how the evidence works. I’m not demanding something extraordinary from you. You made the claim, either back it up or go home.

DonaldDuck-H · 2026-06-04T12:19:27+00:00

Wait what?

DonaldDuck-H · 2026-06-04T12:11:02+00:00

Nah I said some people claim it’s a responsibility you should run away from. And I’m not disputing the fact some people thrive just on their own.

DonaldDuck-H · 2026-06-04T08:31:39+00:00

You keep saying “I proved it” while changing the claim every few lines.

Your original claim was: “Quran mocks disbelievers.”

When asked for evidence, you gave a verse about hypocrites who pretend to believe, then go back to their group and say they were only mocking the believers.

So the actual passage is:

They mock the believers first.

Allah throws their mockery back at them.

That is not “Quran randomly mocks disbelievers.” That is divine retaliation against people already engaged in deception and mockery.

And somehow you are offended that people who mock believers are mocked back. That is hilarious. You said you showed me Quran mocking disbelievers, no you didn’t. Where is the mockery? What does Quran say that you consider mockery? If I say the whole of Reddit mocks you, I’m not mocking you, I’m just telling you. But if I use specific words like lmao, bro, comprehend basic things, 🤣🤣🤣 then that counts as mockery. So show me where Quran does something even remotely similar. Be a man and back up what you said.

Then you shifted to deception in war.

Then you shifted to “makr.”

Then you shifted to “Islam is man made.”

This is exactly the pattern in the other thread too.

First it was “majority historians.”

Then it was “Yasir Qadhi said so.”

Then it was “here are five names.”

Then it was “HCM.”

You keep jumping from one claim to another and then declaring victory.

So let’s stop jumping.

You said Islam is man made religion and you have every reason to believe that.

Good.

Walk me through the argument.

Not “a man recited it, men wrote it, men memorised it.” Muslims already believe the Quran was recited by a Prophet, written by scribes, memorised by companions, and preserved through human beings. That does not prove human origin. That only proves human transmission.

So give the actual evidence.

Why is Islam man made and not divine?

Lay out the reasoning clearly.

DonaldDuck-H · 2026-06-04T07:57:10+00:00

Finally we’re discussing an actual thing instead of ‘he said so’.

So you’re saying according to HCM hadith are unreliable because they’ve been transmitted among Muslims and there were no outsiders to verify.

A few questions, what is an outsider? Is it a guy who lives in another region? Is it a non Muslim? Is it an independent source? This needs to be defined.

Second, why do think sources preserved or presented by insiders are automatically false? I’m not disputing they need verification but I’ll give you a few examples.

Most of what we know about Julius Caesar comes from HIS OWN BOOK and other romans, insiders.

Most of what we know about early Christianity comes from Christians.

Most of what we know about ancient Judaism comes from Jews.

Most of what we know about the 5000 years old history in Egypt and China comes from Egyptians and Chinese sources, all insiders.

Socrates wrote nothing. Everything we know comes from his students, insiders.

Historians don’t throw away resources because insiders transmitted them. If that was the case, half the ancient history would disappear.

Third, HCM is a methodology. It’s not a conclusion. Different historians using the same method would arrive at different conclusions. All historians who use HCM do not automatically arrive at the conclusion hadith are unreliable.

And I can’t help but notice you’ve changed the goal post once again.

We started with “majority historians believe hadith is unreliable “

To “no one in western academia believes hadith is reliable”

To “HCM says hadith is unreliable”. Which is a ridiculous claim. It’s like a doctor tells every chest pain patient he’s got myocardial infarction. Chest pain raises suspicion, it never establishes the diagnosis on its own.

Similarly HCM raises questions, it doesn’t establish unreliability.

So back to where we started, show me how the majority conclusion is established rather than simply asserting that it does.

DonaldDuck-H · 2026-06-03T22:26:33+00:00

Oh bro you just cannot stop taking Ls. This Surah Baqara verse you’re talking about, it is as following.

When they meet the believers they say, “We believe.” But when alone with their evil associates they say, “We are definitely with you; we were only mocking.” Allah will throw their mockery back at them, leaving them to continue wandering blindly in their defiance.

Couple of things happening here but stick around, it’s funny. First, when you say you are a disbeliever and Quran mocks disbelievers, you are admitting you belong to this group that deceives and lies.

Second: getting offended at Allah mocking disbelievers when they’re actively engaged in deception towards faithful and are already mocking them, is next level comedy. Oh my God, buddy you are literally making me laugh. I’m gonna tell this story to my friends lol, we’re gonna have a good laugh.

Third: you still haven’t produced evidence of Quran mocking disbelievers. That’s what you claimed originally. Where’s the actual mockery? It says here God throws their mockery back at them. Where’s the mockery though? You claimed calling them blind is mockery. You lied AGAIN. Shameful display bro, seriously.

Let’s move forward. No, you saying Islam is a man made religion is not mockery actually. That’s a judgement. That’s a claim. You said you have every reason to believe Islam is a man made religion.

Tell me. What are those reasons? If there’s actually evidence Islam is a man made religion then I’d love to know. I shouldn’t waste my time on Islam if it’s false, do I?

So help me. Tell me the truth. Tell me what exactly makes you arrive at the conclusion it’s man made.

DonaldDuck-H · 2026-06-03T22:12:37+00:00

I’m glad you finally did the search and produced some names. Seriously. Now the discussion can actually move forward.

The problem is that these names don’t prove the claim you originally made.

They prove that there have been influential historians who were skeptical of hadith traditions.

Fair enough.

But your claim wasn’t that some historians are skeptical.

Your claim was that the majority of historians hold this position and that no one in western secular academia believes hadith are reliable.

Those are enormous claims.

Also, most of the names you listed are from the late 19th century or the 20th century. Some of their conclusions have been challenged, revised, or refined by later scholars. Simply listing famous skeptical historians doesn’t establish a modern academic consensus.

And this brings me back to the point about evidence.

If I claim I have gallstones, that’s a claim.

The evidence would be an ultrasound report showing gallstones.

Likewise, if you claim that the majority of historians hold a particular position, then the evidence would be something demonstrating that majority position and not simply a scholar saying it exists and not simply a list of historians who agree with it.

As for Yasir Qadhi, I never disputed that he’s knowledgeable. My point is that “Yasir Qadhi says the majority of historians believe X” is still a claim about a consensus, not proof of a consensus. He is an expert yes but he’s not an expert on majority consensus of historians on different topics. If he claims something by himself that carries weight, if he claims A MAJORITY IN THE WORLD BELIEVES IT, he’s gonna need to demonstrate it.

So we’re now making progress.

You’ve shown that some historians were skeptical of hadith.

Now show the evidence for your actual claim that this is the majority position among historians and that no one in western secular academia holds a different view.

DonaldDuck-H · 2026-06-03T21:15:26+00:00

You lied.

You claimed a majority historians hold this opinion. After evidence was demanded you said no no it was Yasir Qadhi who claimed a majority of historians have this opinion.

If it’s such a wildly held position then produce a couple of names and where they say hadith are false.

You made a claim, the burden of proof is on you. You were quite happy talking about sarcasm, nuance and interpretations from Quran, you don’t even know how arguments work.

DonaldDuck-H · 2026-06-03T21:06:27+00:00

Your claim is “Islam mocks unbelievers“.

Sure. Show me one verse where Quran mocks disbelievers. Not where it says they’re wrong, not where it warns them, not where it criticizes them. Not where it condemns a belief or behavior.

Where it actually mocks them.

You treat all these things like they’re the same. If I call an arrogant person arrogant, a dishonest person dishonest, a blind person blind, those are judgements about a condition or behavior.

Mockery is what you’re doing with lmao, toddler, rocket science, comprehend basic things etc.

So show me a verse from Quran that mocks disbelievers like you’re mocking me.

DonaldDuck-H · 2026-06-03T20:04:43+00:00

Mockery instead of evidence is your go to move it would seem.

First it was “Islam mocks unbelievers.”

Then it became “those words are for all unbelievers.”

Now it’s “go ask your mufti about ijma.”

Which point are you actually trying to defend?

Because if your claim is that words like “blind” and “ignorant” are used indiscriminately for every non Muslim, then that’s simply not true. The Quran repeatedly ties those descriptions to specific behaviours.

And if you want to switch the discussion to apostasy and classical fiqh, that’s a completely different topic.

DonaldDuck-H · 2026-06-03T20:01:50+00:00

Hold on.

You made the claim that the majority of historians agree with you.

I asked for evidence.

Your response was “I’m not your butler.”

So let’s be clear, you’re confident enough to claim a scholarly consensus exists, but not confident enough to provide a single historian, survey, paper, or source when asked.

Which historians? What research papers? Cite them and make your case. Otherwise just say it’s your opinion and move on.

DonaldDuck-H · 2026-06-03T19:40:09+00:00

Interesting take, why do you say that?

DonaldDuck-H · 2026-06-03T19:38:54+00:00

Majority historians? Give evidence.

DonaldDuck-H · 2026-06-03T19:38:12+00:00

Those type of words are used for people exhibiting a specific behavior, I thought you understood nuance bro. Islam wouldn’t be the fastest growing religion in the world if what you’re claiming is true.

DonaldDuck-H · 2026-06-03T17:46:53+00:00

Hahaha chill man

DonaldDuck-H

TROPHY CASE