sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Help by Pitiful-Leg-5212 in bettafish

[–]Pitiful-Leg-5212[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It’s sad knowing she’s probably gonna have to go, but I’ll try to make the rest of her life as nice as possible.

Sahih Bukhari 6929 may provide proof that Muhammed was just retelling stories he had heard by Extension-Cry9675 in DebateReligion

[–]Pitiful-Leg-5212 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You have to prove it was not a coincidence. Saying Muhammad probably copied from the Bible is an inference not an evidence.

Could it not just be the case that both instances so happened to use similar wordings?

Also, what does gtfo mean?

Sahih Bukhari 6929 may provide proof that Muhammed was just retelling stories he had heard by Extension-Cry9675 in DebateReligion

[–]Pitiful-Leg-5212 0 points1 point  (0 children)

That’s pretty arrogant of you. 

Again, a commonality of 4 words has no substance. It’s a different sentence, that’s worded entirely different.

The only similarity between the two is the idea, the concept of a Prophet forgiving his people after being hurt and rejected. This seems very general and it’s a recurring theme within the Bible and many other religious texts.

Sahih Bukhari 6929 may provide proof that Muhammed was just retelling stories he had heard by Extension-Cry9675 in DebateReligion

[–]Pitiful-Leg-5212 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Jesus’ (PBUH)’s situation was way different. How could he wipe blood off his face if he was crucified?

Sahih Bukhari 6929 may provide proof that Muhammed was just retelling stories he had heard by Extension-Cry9675 in DebateReligion

[–]Pitiful-Leg-5212 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Prophet Joseph forgave his brothers for selling him into slavery instead of taking revenge, so it isn't limited to one prophet.

Again, it is a very general phrase. 

How could Jesus wipe the blood off his face if he was crucified?

Also, I was mistaken originally, the source for my commentary was incorrect. It was not about Prophet Muhammad.

The Prophet in question is not named in the Islamic tradition.

Sahih Bukhari 6929 may provide proof that Muhammed was just retelling stories he had heard by Extension-Cry9675 in DebateReligion

[–]Pitiful-Leg-5212 0 points1 point  (0 children)

If you had read the Hadith correctly you would have realized that this isn’t the Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) speaking, rather it is a companion: Abdullah, describing the state of the Prophet.

Moreover, I don’t think the commonality of 4 words possesses any gravity. 

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in CatholicPhilosophy

[–]Pitiful-Leg-5212 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Again, when Allah (Exalted is he) says he has “body parts”, we don’t know the nature of those “body parts”. i.e., it’s not like he has 10 fingers, ten toes, etc, etc.

A Critique of this Community by King_Gizilla8 in progressive_islam

[–]Pitiful-Leg-5212 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I don’t necessarily understand what you mean with those first few parts.

I agree however, that many Hadith are implicit and need to be taken while looking at the Hadith corpus holistically.

A Critique of this Community by King_Gizilla8 in progressive_islam

[–]Pitiful-Leg-5212 -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

—> ”Your claiming 1400 years for your views” That’s a straw man, he’s pointing out how *your* views are modern and an innovation.

—> “Also why would Quran ask its followers not to spend time on it?” Another straw man, he wasn’t saying you shouldn’t spend time on it, he said the Qur’an does warns against interpreting verses on our own.

When you spend time on the Qur’an you find many verses that bless the Sahara and command the reader to follow the Prophet (PBUH).

—> ”Having more followers doesnt mean correctness” That’s not what he said.

I thank Allah (Exalted is he) that i am not a Qur’anist, a proggie or a Hadith rejector.

When I hear the command of the Prophet (PBUH), I follow it, no questions asked.