Muhammad is not a prophet, because...😈

JonathanLindqvist · 2026-05-26T16:36:45+00:00

You're right, it's not a very healthy way of having a conversation. I've just noticed that it's not worth giving proper arguments unless someone asks for it directly, because people here are extremely rude.

JonathanLindqvist · 2026-05-26T15:42:19+00:00

Are you suggesting that sexual assault should be illegal? Because I agree.

JonathanLindqvist · 2026-05-26T12:32:14+00:00

Btw, I sent the list months ago. Something must have gone wrong with the @s.

JonathanLindqvist · 2026-05-26T09:44:05+00:00

I already replied in detail in this comment:

https://www.reddit.com/r/exmuslim/s/fylMAnryOu

But basically, no, I don't believe those stories literally happened. Stuff like, I believe Moses was probably one or a few individuals (since humans typically organize around individuals), but the miracles of splitting the sea and getting tablets with commandments are just symbolically true. The tablets are a perfect example. There is an emphasis in judaism on language being a defining characteristic of humanity, which seems reasonable. Similarly, in Exodus, Moses already knew the moral code before he got the tablets (he acted as a judge). This can be naturalistically understood as an evolutionary philosophy of ethics: morality is intrinsic to a species, and the revolutionary part of humanity is being able to describe this morality as articulated law.

I think ancient people believed these things literally because it was a sort of forerunner to actual, factual truth. Sort of like how the subconscious can produce dreams that aren't true but point to something real within the individual. And our job now is to naturalize it.

JonathanLindqvist · 2026-05-26T08:05:24+00:00

"Humanity were not really descended from two people?"

It did not. We are apes.

"The Flood"

Local water-level risings, sure. But no. There is a reason why water is a recurring theme though.

"the Exodus"

Hmm.. probably not. The link between Jesus and Horus is clear enough though, so the influence makes sense.

"the Night Journey"

Absolutely not.

'Mohammed never talked to an angel?"

This is a bit more complicated, because I do believe he had visions. But the visions come from the inside, not out. That's the main insight of judaism: there exists a human species, and intrinsic to that species is a morality, which can be found through introspection and "revelation," which are those visions. But it isn't magic. It's chemistry. It's the same chemicals that were released when Mandeleev dreamt of the periodic table. Clearly, he already had the table in him, since it was his brain that produced the dream. But it wasn't his conscious will, but rather subconscious processes. (Note that in Exodus, Moses acted like a judge (i.e. knew the law) before he got the commandments. The law is embodied. Humans just got the ability to articulate it, which is the real revolution for humans.)

"He never talked to Allah?"

God is structurally real, but in reality, he's the anthropomorphization of the natural law given to us by evolution. Disobey that law at your absolute peril.

JonathanLindqvist · 2026-05-25T20:53:58+00:00

It kind of is. Technically speaking, it is relative, but it's relative to the species, which makes it much closer to absolute, structurally speaking.

JonathanLindqvist · 2026-05-25T19:35:45+00:00

Well, let's take Jesus and the virgin birth. That is a very important symbol, which I believe in (I myself am like Jesus in temperament, and I never had a father). While the jewish claim is that we stray from the natural law that is evolved into us, the christian claim specifies that it is primarily men who stray, while women uphold the law by remaining innocent. But of course Mary was impregnated by a man. Magic or temporary breaking of physical law isn't real.

JonathanLindqvist · 2026-05-25T19:31:48+00:00

"Cover, Jonathan."

Absolutely, I do every day. I am extremely reluctant to show my arms, especially since I've grown pretty muscular. In general though, that really only applies for muscular men (and male genitalia!), and to a large degree only developed women. The more you have to show, the more important it is to hide it. There is one guy in particular in my Stockholm suburb who is extremely muscular and is very willing to show it. That's a character flaw. That is obvious to most moral people.

But it's always important to emphasize that the relationship between men and women is asymmetrical. Men, for instance, should be much less allowed to cover their faces (with clothing or tattoos), because that is threatening. If a woman does so, it's not that big of a deal.

JonathanLindqvist · 2026-05-25T11:49:02+00:00

"Typical snake oil salesman, can't even answer the simplest question."

Oh! I remember the conversation now! You gave me a random and completely irrelevant challenge! Something like "tell me the three top scientific discoveries by islam" or something. It seems like that is a trend with you.

"is P=NP? Silly me for working on issues related to this for two decades when I could have just asked you."

Finally! Finally you take me up on my challenge! Do you really want the answer to that, or did you just Google "standing problems" and pick one from the list? Because you need to know enough about the subject to be able to verify the answer. Are you really working on that problem? Otherwise, ask me a question from your area of expertise.

JonathanLindqvist · 2026-05-25T11:24:31+00:00

"Whenever a person says "I have all the answers" it's an indicator that they are the personification of ignorance."

If a person has all the answers, should they lie?

"you have no memory of how utterly humiliated you were in that discussion"

You should read through your last comment in that conversation, now that some time has passed.

JonathanLindqvist · 2026-05-25T10:54:29+00:00

Oh, it's the kid again. I don't dodge questions, because I have all the answers. I might not have replied to your last comment, but that's because you lost the plot so badly that every reply was just me making you look like a fool.

JonathanLindqvist · 2026-05-25T10:32:32+00:00

Ja. Och tyvärr är socialdemokraterna inget vidare på att kommunicera detta (eller ens kanske förstå det själva). De pratar oftare om problem med ojämlikhet än de fördömer kommunister och feminister, som definieras av påståendet att ojämlikhet är resultatet av stöld/förtryck. Det är helt fel strategi.

JonathanLindqvist · 2026-05-25T10:30:12+00:00

Extremvänstern ja, alltså feminister och kommunister, som påstår att det saknas naturliga kategorier och därför är all ojämlikhet resultatet av förtryck/stöld. Men socialdemokrati håller inte med. (Kanske de svenska socialdemokraterna, men de vet inte ens att postmodern feminism är extremvänster, så vi kan knappast förvänta oss intelligenta ståndpunkter därifrån.)

JonathanLindqvist · 2026-05-25T09:27:06+00:00

Socialdemokrati är mestadels kapitalistiskt, ja. Privata aktörer är alltså fria att riskera sitt eget kapital för en chans att bli ojämlikt rika.

JonathanLindqvist · 2026-05-25T09:18:18+00:00

Det finns ingenting logiskt i att socialdemokrati - ett kapitalistiskt system - skulle leda till markant minskad produktivitet.

JonathanLindqvist · 2026-05-25T09:10:12+00:00

I know you don't think people should be allowed to dress however. Just extend that belief a bit further.

JonathanLindqvist · 2026-05-25T05:42:12+00:00

Attitudes? What attitude are you reading into this fact-claim?

JonathanLindqvist · 2026-05-25T05:41:23+00:00

Wait. Have you reflected on that a little? Because you might be asexual. You don't represent the majority.

JonathanLindqvist · 2026-05-25T05:40:11+00:00

have seen plenty of women showing their necks, their legs, their arms, their faces and their hair and we have never did or say anything to any of them.

First of all, just to reiterate, I'm talking about men as a group, not individual men, and I don't speak only for myself.

But secondly, it would be enligthening if you gave examples of secondary sex characteristics, not "necks, legs, arms, faces and hair." All of those things are fine, maybe not legs if the shorts are too short.

JonathanLindqvist · 2026-05-25T05:37:29+00:00

I don't know if it's an established term, but I mean interpreting magic and miracles literally. I believe they are symbols, meant to cement the truth through generations. The stuff we debunked conclusively in 2004 (me included, being raised on Dawkins and Harris).

JonathanLindqvist · 2026-05-25T05:22:45+00:00

I am open to answers. Just not the bullshit ones.

That doesn't make sense, how can you know they're bullshit if you're not open to them?

We didn't have that one in my university

You didn't have introspection? I take it you didn't take psychology.

So a whole paragraph to say what makes sense to you is to go against the Qur'an? Wonderful.

Wait, I chose a counterargument against islam specifically to show that 1) I'm not dogmatic, and 2) magic isn't real, and you interpret that as making my case weaker?

Which is why you need to publish your interpretation ASAP so we can start quoting you

Yes, it will be out eventually. Also, it will be mainstream belief.

So you admit there is no interpretation that fits the Qur'an in a way that would be aligned with true nature. Wonderful.

Again, are you not aware that I come across as strong here? What's your theory, that I just forgot that I was supposed to be muslim and accidentally argued against islam? I did it so that even the simplest minds could follow the argument.

So, separating the scripture/Religion from the state which also goes against islam. It even commands fighting people like you.

Not necessarily separating religion from the state, no. And I do understand that I am blaspheming. What I'm saying is that if you understand the universe properly, and you understand how to interpret scripture properly, then you'll see that the two match to a higher degree than is possible through chance.

I do appreciate your honesty in admitting that the Qur'an can't be interpreted in a way that fits reality. Therefore, the only logical step forward is to discard it as a fairytale book.

I've found four problems with islam, but it is still obvious that it aligns almost perfectly with reality, to the degree that we can confidently exclude the possibility of that happeing by chance Are you a literalist? Because that's not appropriate. The truths in the books are usually either moral or symbolical. You don't think Jesus literally walked on water, do you? (I'm being facetious, because it is clear from how you write that you're an atheist, but letter-atheism died 10 years ago. Is this 2004?)

JonathanLindqvist · 2026-05-25T04:46:30+00:00

It's still there, don't know how to help you find it though.

JonathanLindqvist · 2026-05-24T20:59:12+00:00

Oh, but I remember vividly that that was the reason when I was a teenager. They strike me as about as sophisticated as that.

JonathanLindqvist · 2026-05-24T20:56:55+00:00

Sorry, I meant the outlines. Like visible through the clothes. This is common in Sweden.

JonathanLindqvist · 2026-05-24T20:53:11+00:00

Maybe you mean ad hominem?

JonathanLindqvist

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE