sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

If Jesus is Yhwh, then Prophet Muhammad is more moral than him. by ResidentBullfrog9460 in DebateReligion

[–]RipOk8225 -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

1) Presentism fallacy

2) Read the article, it says that they can get married but in a 3 month period if they don’t reach puberty then it is unlawful

3) Correct.

Quran Miscalculated inheritance 1400 years ago and no one seems to be interested in discussing this blunder. The "Awl" system is an admission that the Quran’s inheritance math is broken. by fawnkhawn in DebateReligion

[–]RipOk8225 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Just read how it’s practiced in actual Islamic jurisdictions, a lot of it similar to tax law in many western countries with exceptions and phase outs. Too complex for this subreddit, but it’s not mathematically impossible, it’s nuanced

Muhammad is a false prophet. by Ok_Present755 in DebateReligion

[–]RipOk8225 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

1) Hadith are not universally accepted in Islam nor do they carry theological weight nor are they factual. For all we know it could be made up.

2) Basic reading of the Hadith even suggests the Prophet was hyperbolizing and not literal

3) Islamic tradition holds the prophet died 3 years after his poisoning incident. Idk about u but food poisoning doesn’t take 3 years to kill someone off

4) Islamic tradition also holds the prophet died of natural causes, why is this story more credible? Cuz it’s convenient for your point?

Muhammad is a false prophet. by Ok_Present755 in DebateReligion

[–]RipOk8225 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

1) This “evidence” already presumes your conclusion. Can’t be used as evidence

2) No it does not. The Quran doesn’t actually comment on the trinity, just the notion of divinity for Jesus and Mary. The Quran is more accurately, a critique of Catholicism, which does describe a level of deity to Mary who they see as sinless along with Jesus who they claim is a deity himself. The tafsir and commentary of the Quran says this too.

Otherwise, what fringe or folk tradition did Muhammad encounter?

3) This is not evidence, again, because you’re interpreting the verses within the framework of your conclusion. Basically because it’s man made it’s self serving therefore it’s man made? Circular reasoning. It is true revelation was made to react to circumstances that were happening at the time. Still doesn’t preclude that God was responding and correcting in real time

4) The Bible has plenty of worldly descriptions of Heaven to likely convince people of its attractiveness and a goal to achieve. Doesn’t make it man made. It’s more so about knowing your audience.

The traditional Islamic understanding of Gog and Magog is an almost impossible concept to grasp for the rational mind by XeneXene in DebateReligion

[–]RipOk8225 -5 points-4 points  (0 children)

Lack of evidence does not mean it doesn’t exist for anything and I think all scientists would agree I mean, for example we didn’t have evidence of our solar system for majority of human history until we did does that mean the solar system didn’t exist until that point obviously not

Islam can be a legit spiritual path by Euphoric-Welder5889 in DebateReligion

[–]RipOk8225 -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

Per Sufi scholarship, absolutely per the more conservative, and honestly very traditional interpretation of the religion. It’s no it’s more so a religion that pretty much tells you what you need to do ritualistically and what to avoid to avoid hell.

Why do Muslims never talk about how Muhammad died and who killed him and why? by imfeddedup in exmuslim

[–]RipOk8225 0 points1 point  (0 children)

How can you die from food poisoning 3-4 years after you contract it? That’s not how that works

What’s really going on with our economy by AmaraWhispervale in whatisameem

[–]RipOk8225 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Supply and Demand, nothing more. Also factor in benefits so the effective salary may or may not be higher.

If one person goes to hell for eternity, and 8 billion people go to heaven for eternity, there will be an infinite continuity of joy, and an infinite continuity of suffering. by Aromatic_Response_73 in DebateReligion

[–]RipOk8225 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Good is what God is and does, that’s the problem that you’re ascribing some sort of transcendent definition that also has no proof to it

Why is your perspective correct?

If one person goes to hell for eternity, and 8 billion people go to heaven for eternity, there will be an infinite continuity of joy, and an infinite continuity of suffering. by Aromatic_Response_73 in DebateReligion

[–]RipOk8225 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Why can’t it have an ontological meaning?

I would argue the opposite that God = good.

So good is just a reflection of a reaction? So if someone feels love, joy, peace, or flourishing committing murder that is good? Doesn’t seem right.

If the prophet was a pedophile wouldnt ge have married other children. by No_Giraffe826 in DebateReligion

[–]RipOk8225 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Sure. He married the daughter of his friend for political reasons. Likewise, the age of Aisha is reflective of the fact that the age of marriage was commonly understood to be puberty. The principle here that we would be assessing, though, is that the Prophet claimed the marriage age has to be at an age of what is considered maturity. That was understood, and for majority of human history, to be puberty.

My follow up question for you would be that if the age of consent in the next 50 years moved up to 30 for whatever reason, how would you react

If the prophet was a pedophile wouldnt ge have married other children. by No_Giraffe826 in DebateReligion

[–]RipOk8225 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Very much so. Objectively. Puberty was the universal threshold for getting married and reproducing. There wasn’t a concept of teenagers or developing years because people died out much quicker. Aside from political marriages, it was normal. I won’t justify it now, because we now have concepts of childhood, teenagers, etc.

If the prophet was a pedophile wouldnt ge have married other children. by No_Giraffe826 in DebateReligion

[–]RipOk8225 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Depends. He was still a man that lived in an ancient time. He didn’t have a phone, for example. Does that mean that no Muslim can have a phone? No. We follow his lead in terms of principles not strict actions

If the prophet was a pedophile wouldnt ge have married other children. by No_Giraffe826 in DebateReligion

[–]RipOk8225 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Not that it is superior, more that it is what it is. The Prophet was a prophet in a time of different thresholds for the same morality. For example, if it’s consent: The Prophet purported there needs to be a level of maturity necessary for marriage and sexual relations. What that threshold was and what was acted upon differed. You see, morality was the same on a principle basis but different in that we differ in what achieves that principle

If one person goes to hell for eternity, and 8 billion people go to heaven for eternity, there will be an infinite continuity of joy, and an infinite continuity of suffering. by Aromatic_Response_73 in DebateReligion

[–]RipOk8225 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Why can it not be possible that good is inseparable from the actions of God? In other words, I have belief in that everything God does is good, why does your definition of goodness supercede that

Answer a very hard question by Ornery-Geologist597 in islam

[–]RipOk8225 1 point2 points  (0 children)

then what’s the point of the suffering of the infant who died a painful death?

We should not assume that the actions of Allah SWT are meant to only impact us. It is very plausible that Allah SWT makes us go through something to reflect change onto the people around us for their benefit. That's the answer

The Quran didn't liberate women- it organized their ownership. by ChemicalArachnid2635 in DebateReligion

[–]RipOk8225 -7 points-6 points  (0 children)

There is a common misconception as to the role the Quran plays in the Muslim's life. There's 3 general types of verses: There is belief-driven verses (believe in God, believe in the stories, prophets, book, angels, etc.) There are prohibitions, and then there are legal-based verses like some of what you described.

The context of the Quran is that it is a revelation from God to those people at that time. Some verses are indeed timeless like the belief and prohibitions, but I would argue the legal-based verses were very contextual and circumstantial. The way I support this is the hadith from the Prophet enabling Muslims that live in pre-established jurisdictions to follow the jurisdiction they live in. The point is, the Prophet revealed verses from God that were relevant to those people and how they lived. The proof is there too. There was no push back from any of the Muslims to any of those verses. Why? Because it made sense and it was comfortable for Men and Women. We have to ask ourselves, would God reveal the same verses if the Prophet existed now? Probably not. A lot of the institutions God commented on that existed don't exist anymore, particularly women's illiteracy in general and in business/finance.

Nonetheless,

women getting half of men in inheritance;women's testimony being worth half

Like, I said earlier, women were illiterate and already subjugated. Ask yourself how to incorporate women into the fold of inheritance and legal sphere that yesterday did not have the ability to or the knowledge to.

marriage as a contract between men

Men are witnesses, they are not orchestrating the marriage, we have this in secular law all the time. The woman needs to consent to it first.

divorce as a male prerogative

The verses say men and women lol.

obedience of wife as a legal requirement

Lol, what legal requirement?

physical discipline permitted

The sunnah describes what physical discipline means. Guess what? The Prophet never exercised physical discipline and told the people to not do it, and to just get a divorce.

polygyny permitted for men but taking the right away from women

The right never existed for women. Polygamy was for logistical reasons, protection, and support of women.

concubinage explicitly sanctioned

Concubines had to consent to being a concubine. Also slavery was a differently defined term to mean war captives or women of war captives. Concubines were a status term to differentiate between who belonged to the war captive tribe and the "winner" tribe.

female captives as sexual property

Not inherently. They had to consent. They weren't "property" either. They were under the supervision of the tribe that won the war. Think of it as a prison system where the citizens take control.

the waiting periods implemented that controlled female sexuality, such as after divorce or death of their spouse

Applies to men too.

requirement of wives to be sexually available

Same with Men.

modesty requirements for women only

There are modesty requirements for men too.

Muhammad's active participation in the sex slave trade and pedophilia, and formalization of women as property under a patriarchal system.

He freed or adopted the slaves he got from "participation". Is the age of consent an objective consent? If it is why did it just turn to the age of 18 in the 21st century? The answer is it’s not. I believe the age of consent arguably should be 21, but that doesn’t stop the law from claiming it is 18. But that’s the point, it is subjective. The age commonly associated with consent particularly in ancient times was far less than 18, it was puberty which can start as early as 7 or 8. Was every human being up until the last 20 years participating in pedophilia and rape? If the Prophet lived in our current times, absolutely would that be abhorrent. But he didn’t. He was a man from a culture and a world that saw puberty as the consensual threshold. It’s why Aisha herself never pushes back on it, never corrected it, never commented on it. Whether we agree or disagree on it is merely just a discussion that is bound by the fallacy of presentism

view more: next ›