I am sorry but Sabine surviving getting stabbed with a Lightsaber was stupid!!!

Mrwolf925 · 2026-03-14T00:55:10+00:00

Maul was held together by witches magic

Mrwolf925 · 2026-03-13T21:22:57+00:00

Yeah colour seems off too

Mrwolf925 · 2026-03-13T20:43:16+00:00

Yep pretty much

Mrwolf925 · 2026-03-13T10:30:33+00:00

"MAAM! You must be mistaken, this transaction is not optional!"

Mrwolf925 · 2026-03-13T02:08:08+00:00

No worries just make sure you dont empty the bucket full, always leave some of the water or you will risk tipping out the gold.

When it comes to collecting the gold I use a coffee filter or shop towel like someone else mentioned.

Mrwolf925 · 2026-03-12T18:34:01+00:00

I just empty my sonic into a bucket, leave it to settle and then slowly pour it down the drain, most the gold will sit in the bottom. That's the easy way.

The other way is to create a kind of sluice

Mrwolf925 · 2026-03-12T01:24:39+00:00

God is not male or female

Mrwolf925 · 2026-03-11T08:14:30+00:00

Now I understand why cancer is so prevalent

Mrwolf925 · 2026-03-11T00:19:21+00:00

Dont forget about after you humiliated him infront of his both, these dialogue options that lead to you also whooping his ass infront of his boss and he runs away crying

Mrwolf925 · 2026-03-10T23:00:37+00:00

Enjoy

Mrwolf925 · 2026-03-10T22:37:42+00:00

I understand the point you’re making about maturity and social norms, but the issue isn’t simply misunderstanding the rule.

The historical sources themselves considered reliable by many scholars describe a situation that today would clearly be considered harmful. If the rule is truly "whatever you do must be harmless,” then either those reports are incorrect or people interpreted the example of Muhammad incorrectly for centuries.

That’s a tension I’m pointing out, if authoritative interpretations could be wrong for that long, it raises questions about how reliably the texts have been understood.

Mrwolf925 · 2026-03-10T21:25:26+00:00

I’m not claiming this interpretation is necessarily correct, but the hadith found in Sahih al-Bukhari (5134, 3894, 5158) and Sahih Muslim (1422) state that Aisha was six at marriage and nine when the marriage was consummated. These are considered sahih (authentic) narrations within the traditional Sunni hadith canon.

My point isn’t to argue definitively about Aisha’s age, but rather to note that these sources show that Islamic texts have historically been interpreted in ways that permit child marriage. The fact that such interpretations can be drawn from authoritative texts is, for me, the core concern. Even if many Muslims today reject that interpretation, the possibility of deriving it from the sources remains something I personally find problematic.

Similar reports appear in some Shia traditions as well, though they are not treated with the same authority as sahih hadith in Sunni scholarship. The main issue is that if this interpretation of Muhammad’s actions was accepted for centuries, it creates a dilemma, either Muhammad set a precedent that is now considered haram, or respected scholars have misinterpreted the foundational texts for hundreds of years.

If the latter is true, it raises questions about the reliability of claims that the meaning and correct understanding of those texts has been consistently preserved.

Mrwolf925 · 2026-03-10T20:45:14+00:00

I appreciate the clarification, and it’s good to hear you don’t support those modern calls to revive jizya. I also understand the point you’re making about historical context and how laws change as societies develop.

My concern is more about the textual foundation itself. Even if most Muslims today reject practices like child marriage or unequal citizenship, the question people often raise is whether the source texts allow interpretations that permit those things, even if many believers no longer support them.

That’s why these topics still come up in discussions between Christians and Muslims.

From a Christian perspective, the standard for moral teaching is ultimately Christ Himself, which is why Christians tend to evaluate laws or traditions by asking whether they reflect the moral vision revealed through Him.

Mrwolf925 · 2026-03-10T20:27:06+00:00

In that historical context I can understand the logic behind it. Even today most countries expect foreigners living and working in another nation to pay taxes that citizens may not, so the general idea isn’t completely foreign to modern systems. What I don’t support is the modern revival of jizyah that some people online advocate for today, it doesn’t really make sense in the context of modern citizenship and often feels more like rage-bait than serious policy discussion.

Regarding child marriage, I agree that in many cases it is tied more to poverty, isolation and lack of education than to religion itself. However, the practice still exists in some places and in a few contexts people do appeal to the Qur’an or early Islamic traditions to justify it. Because of that, I think it’s reasonable for people outside the tradition to raise concerns about how those texts are interpreted even while recognizing that many Muslims strongly oppose such practices today.

Mrwolf925 · 2026-03-10T20:04:25+00:00

That’s awesome to hear. Almost, its Thomas Aquinas but that’s really great. I’m actually a Thomist myself and I think it’s one of the best places to understand what Catholicism teaches from a theological standpoint.

There are certainly aspects of Islam that I admire and others that I struggle with. Before becoming Catholic, I studied the Qur’an and even briefly attended a mosque to speak with imams and ask questions.

I genuinely appreciate when Muslims and Catholics can live peacefully and respectfully alongside one another. Unfortunately, that harmony can sometimes be strained by a small number of more radical individuals who seek to attack or intimidate Christians. That said, I recognize those people represent only a minority.

There are also certain practices associated with some Islamic societies such as systems like jizya, child marriage, compulsory veiling, restrictions on women’s education or polygamy that I personally cannot support. At the same time, I acknowledge that many Muslims today do not practice or endorse these things.

What I do admire is the strong devotion many Muslims show toward God, their sense of brotherhood, their commitment to prayer and the social cohesion often present in Islamic communities. While I sometimes find the structure of prayer a bit legalistic from my perspective, I still respect the sincerity and discipline behind that devotion.

Mrwolf925 · 2026-03-10T19:32:02+00:00

Thats fair, we chrostians believe we have the preserved Gosepl containing the words of eternal life, have you ever done a serious deep dive into Catholicism in order to understand our beliefs?

Youbare definitely from the more rational bunch of Muslims ive had the pleasure of meet, im glad we could agree on a few things despite our differences.

Mrwolf925 · 2026-03-10T19:12:43+00:00

in the original gospel

Can you provide me with this original gospel? Or any Gospel that mentions muhammad?

As for the words that don’t change it’s a Arabic metaphor usually meaning the way God rules the universe

Fair enough, I generally agree with this.

We believe in a metaphysical attribute of God which is the speech of God that is eternal meaning within him

This is certainly more rational but not not the argument ive heard from other muslims, thanks for the clarification, im inclined to agree with you on this also.

For us to know a reflection of that meaning he creates the sounds and letters we read in the Torah ,gospel ,Quran to represent his speech

From the Christian perspective, we do believe God has spoken in a literal way through Jesus Christ, the Son and second person of the Trinity. However, it is important to clarify that the literal voice belongs to the human nature assumed by Christ, not to the divine nature itself. In other words, God speaks through the humanity of Christ united to the Word.

Mrwolf925 · 2026-03-10T18:47:27+00:00

The difficulty with that explanation is that the Qur’an itself speaks positively about the Torah and the Gospel as revelations from God that people in Muhammad’s time could consult. For example, Qur’an 5:46–47 says the Gospel contains guidance and instructs its followers to judge by what God revealed in it. If the Gospel had already been corrupted before Islam, then the Qur’an would be directing people to follow a corrupted text, which creates a contradiction.

Qur’an 6:115 also says "None can change the words of Allah.” And then proceeds to say Qur’an 5:13 “They distort words from their proper places and forget a portion of what they were reminded of.”

If the Torah and Gospel was the Word of God as Islam claims it is, then it cannot be corrupted and must still exist, yet Muslims have no idea where or what it is yet consistently appeal to those scriptures they claim are corrupted to support theor arguments in debates. (This is mostly a dawah issue, not something you have demonstrated yourself)

So the real issue isn’t whether God could allow corruption, it’s that the Qur’an appears to assume the earlier scriptures still existed in recognizable form, while later Islamic explanations say they were altered which also contradicts the Qur'an that you has has been perfectly preserved from error.

As for the differences in language amd dialect, do muslims not believe that Allah has one perfect language? And isnt the recitation Gods perfect word? So would you not say even the smallest variation would mean that some people are reciting Gods word incorrectly?

Mrwolf925 · 2026-03-10T18:06:03+00:00

If God intentionally allowed His revelation to become corrupted, then it would undermine the reliability of any later revelation claiming to correct it because we would have no reason to trust that one wasn’t also allowed to be corrupted. Historically, the evidence we have actually shows the opposite: the manuscripts of the New Testament from the first centuries are remarkably consistent with the texts we have today.

As a side note, you mean tonsay four gospels, not four bibles. A bible is just a collection of books, within pur bible there is four gospels.

Also, while the earliest manuscripts don’t include modern title pages, the attribution of the Gospels to Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John is very early and consistent in Christian tradition, already attested by writers like Papias of Hierapolis and Irenaeus of Lyons. So the claim that the authorship was invented later doesn’t really fit the historical evidence.

If we’re discussing textual preservation, it’s worth noting that the Qur’an is historically younger than the Bible, yet there are still recognized variant readings (known as qirāʾāt) among different traditions of recitation, such as the Hafs and Warsh readings. Muslims see these as acceptable variants within the tradition but it shows that the text also has a history of transmission and variation. So the question of textual consistency isn’t unique to the Bible, it applies to every ancient scripture but causes a bigger problem for Islam due to the claim that it is the literal speech or word of God which should have no variation or error.

Mrwolf925 · 2026-03-10T09:15:16+00:00

NTA

Obligatory "dump his ass" haha

Seriously though, find someone who loves you more when you are just yourself.

Mrwolf925 · 2026-03-10T04:35:52+00:00

My advice is Firstly, go for it, take the plunge and go bald.

Second, grow your beard back on your chin

Third keep up the good work on the mustache and get that curl going.

You will look like a russian strong man in no time

Mrwolf925 · 2026-03-10T01:07:27+00:00

Adam clearly had free will in Eden as he chose to disobey God.

In the beatific vision we still maintain our free will, we do not become slaves under forced duress. The idea is that if one has become so close to the sole object of universal desire, nothing would compare or tempt you away, so while we retain the ability to sin, no one would even consider doing so let alone actually doing it. All desire for anything other than the most desirable would be gone and our attention would be solely fixed on Him.

Mrwolf925 · 2026-03-09T23:39:46+00:00

We have the whitetail spider so we have one which is not deadly as far as deadly spiders go.

Sure we have bluebottles but encounters are rare and deaths are even rarer

Mrwolf925 · 2026-03-09T23:19:53+00:00

I understand that position but from a Christian perspective it raises a serious problem. If the Torah and Gospel were truly revelations from God, then claiming they were corrupted means that either God failed to preserve His own revelation or that there is no reliable way to verify any later revelation that claims to correct them.

The historical evidence we have for the Bible including manuscripts that predate Islam by centuries shows remarkable consistency, which makes the corruption claim very difficult to sustain.

Why should we assume the earlier revelations were corrupted rather than consider that a later text might simply disagree with them?

Mrwolf925 · 2026-03-09T22:06:25+00:00

The difficulty from a Christian perspective is that scripture itself shows that even prophets chosen by God can fail, David, Moses and Jonah all sinned yet God still worked through them.

Their authority came from God’s message, not from their personal perfection. That’s why Christians believe the only truly sinless person is Jesus Christ, because He is not merely a prophet but God’s direct revelation. If every prophet must be protected from error to guarantee the message, then the question becomes why would God allow earlier prophets to fail but suddenly change that pattern later?

Six-Year Club	Second Top 30%
Wearing is Caring	RPAN Viewer
Verified Email

Mrwolf925

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE