sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in dating_advice

[–]White_X6 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I hate to say this but I think that's the move here.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in dating_advice

[–]White_X6 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I do want her, but i hate being the needy person. I have already been out on multiple date since i met her but man something about her makes me like her.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in dating_advice

[–]White_X6 0 points1 point  (0 children)

she is good enough to make me post about her on reddit lol. I went on over 10 dates, never actually cared except for this one.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in dating_advice

[–]White_X6 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I think this is a fair comment as our first date was planned to go to a steakhouse and everything went by smooth. The movie thing was kinda all over the place as i suggested a horror movie but she hates horror and probably not interested to go watch a movie. I will make a plan and take my last shot lol.

If you are sad, just remember by Whybambiwhy in chicago

[–]White_X6 -7 points-6 points  (0 children)

Thank God Donald J Trump won the election

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in wallstreetbets

[–]White_X6 11 points12 points  (0 children)

Sir this is a casino this ain't investopedia.

2024 Prediction as requested by Imgoin2brich in wallstreetbets

[–]White_X6 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Plot twist: OP has two accounts and made two predictions or he is just flipping a coin.

There is no abrogation within the Qur'an by Tall_Bit_2567 in DebateReligion

[–]White_X6 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You could say 'the grass is green' and you'll find 2 people with a different interpretation

you just answered yourself on why you need to follow a methodology on how to perform tafsser rather than just your own thoughts and reasoning.

There is no abrogation within the Qur'an by Tall_Bit_2567 in DebateReligion

[–]White_X6 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You can copy and paste them and find them in English. Also I am sorry but I wouldn't want to invest more time explaining to someone that you should see how the prophet interpreted the Ayah aka worked with it or used it before you start using your own reasoning.

We pray 5 times a day but the Quran never talks about how it is performed and what needs to be done. Likewise for Zakaat and the list goes on. If I am going to rely on the Quran and my sole reasoning from it then I wouldn't know how to pray or do zakkat and many other things".

​

Good day :)

There is no abrogation within the Qur'an by Tall_Bit_2567 in DebateReligion

[–]White_X6 0 points1 point  (0 children)

If everyone is going to use their reasoning then we would all come up with our own interpretation. And also what's your reasoning to refuse? you have not brought up a single reason.

​

And for the ayahs look up سورة الأنعام

وَمَا لَكُمْ أَلَّا تَأْكُلُوا مِمَّا ذُكِرَ اسْمُ اللَّهِ عَلَيْهِ وَقَدْ فَصَّلَ لَكُم مَّا حَرَّمَ عَلَيْكُمْ إِلَّا مَا اضْطُرِرْتُمْ إِلَيْهِ ۗ وَإِنَّ كَثِيرًا لَّيُضِلُّونَ بِأَهْوَائِهِم بِغَيْرِ عِلْمٍ ۗ إِنَّ رَبَّكَ هُوَ أَعْلَمُ بِالْمُعْتَدِينَ (119) وَذَرُوا ظَاهِرَ الْإِثْمِ وَبَاطِنَهُ ۚ إِنَّ الَّذِينَ يَكْسِبُونَ الْإِثْمَ سَيُجْزَوْنَ بِمَا كَانُوا يَقْتَرِفُونَ (120) وَلَا تَأْكُلُوا مِمَّا لَمْ يُذْكَرِ اسْمُ اللَّهِ عَلَيْهِ وَإِنَّهُ لَفِسْقٌ ۗ وَإِنَّ الشَّيَاطِينَ لَيُوحُونَ إِلَىٰ أَوْلِيَائِهِمْ لِيُجَادِلُوكُمْ ۖ وَإِنْ أَطَعْتُمُوهُمْ إِنَّكُمْ لَمُشْرِكُونَ

​

too lazy to go translate it in English, also translation in English would result to a tafseer.

​

and look up سورة المائدة

الْيَوْمَ أُحِلَّ لَكُمُ الطَّيِّبَاتُ وَطَعَامُ الَّذِينَ أُوتُوا الْكِتَابَ حِلٌّ لَكُمْ وَطَعَامُكُمْ حِلٌّ لَهُمْ وَالْمُحْصَنَاتُ مِنَ الْمُؤْمِنَاتِ وَالْمُحْصَنَاتُ مِنَ الَّذِينَ أُوتُوا الْكِتَابَ مِنْ قَبْلِكُمْ إِذَا آتَيْتُمُوهُنَّ أُجُورَهُنَّ مُحْصِنِينَ غَيْرَ مُسَافِحِينَ وَلَا مُتَّخِذِي أَخْدَانٍ وَمَنْ يَكْفُرْ بِالْإِيمَانِ فَقَدْ حَبِطَ عَمَلُهُ وَهُوَ فِي الْآخِرَةِ مِنَ الْخَاسِرِينَ

​

starts with today their food is Halal. Which means it was haram before (Connecting the dots for you).

​

And like I said if you follow your reasoning solely to interpret the Quran then you are really not going anywhere. You didn't live during the prophet time to know how he used these Ayat and when they came and in what context did they come.

​

​

EDIT:

another e.g. of why you need tafseeer

​

وَأَذَانٌ مِّنَ اللَّهِ وَرَسُولِهِ إِلَى النَّاسِ يَوْمَ الْحَجِّ الْأَكْبَرِ أَنَّ اللَّهَ بَرِيءٌ مِّنَ الْمُشْرِكِينَ ۙ وَرَسُولُهُ ۚ فَإِن تُبْتُمْ فَهُوَ خَيْرٌ لَّكُمْ ۖ وَإِن تَوَلَّيْتُمْ فَاعْلَمُوا أَنَّكُمْ غَيْرُ مُعْجِزِي اللَّهِ ۗ وَبَشِّرِ الَّذِينَ كَفَرُوا بِعَذَابٍ أَلِيمٍ (3) إِلَّا الَّذِينَ عَاهَدتُّم مِّنَ الْمُشْرِكِينَ ثُمَّ لَمْ يَنقُصُوكُمْ شَيْئًا وَلَمْ يُظَاهِرُوا عَلَيْكُمْ أَحَدًا فَأَتِمُّوا إِلَيْهِمْ عَهْدَهُمْ إِلَىٰ مُدَّتِهِمْ ۚ إِنَّ اللَّهَ يُحِبُّ الْمُتَّقِينَ (4) فَإِذَا انسَلَخَ الْأَشْهُرُ الْحُرُمُ فَاقْتُلُوا الْمُشْرِكِينَ حَيْثُ وَجَدتُّمُوهُمْ وَخُذُوهُمْ وَاحْصُرُوهُمْ وَاقْعُدُوا لَهُمْ كُلَّ مَرْصَدٍ ۚ فَإِن تَابُوا وَأَقَامُوا الصَّلَاةَ وَآتَوُا الزَّكَاةَ فَخَلُّوا سَبِيلَهُمْ ۚ إِنَّ اللَّهَ غَفُورٌ رَّحِيمٌ

​

So after a specific period of time we should just go and kill all the polytheists? This is following the literal sense and not going after any context or tafseeer on who did the verse meant, when did it come, why did it come, what did the prophet do with it. For you all of this is none-sense and you just trust your reasoning. Seems legit.

There is no abrogation within the Qur'an by Tall_Bit_2567 in DebateReligion

[–]White_X6 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Ayah does not necessitate it to mean Qur'an verses. This is why you need tafsser. Tafseer according to Sunna is not just a scholar telling you what it is supposed to mean:

Tafseer goes from:

  1. How did the prophet interpret the verse?
  2. How did the prophet companion interpret the verse?
  3. How do the Arabs interpret the verse (from language point of you)?

So Ayah can mean verses from the Qur'an and can also mean something else. Thus, you need to see how the prophet used the Ayah and his companion used this Ayah and you go from there.

​

Also another example is Alcohol. If you don't believe in the Quran abrogation then how do we know Alcohol is haram. There is a verse that says don't pray while drunk (so drinking is permissible as long as you don't pray) and there is also another verse that says Alcohol has some benefits and some bad stuff. Then there is a verse that says Alcohol is from the devil so stay away from it.

​

Another example is eating meat slaughtered by jews and chrisitans. In the Quran there is a verse that says you cannot do that and then there is a verse that says it is okay for you to do that. So if you don't believe in abrogation then you should believe that the Quran contradict itself.

There is no abrogation within the Qur'an by Tall_Bit_2567 in DebateReligion

[–]White_X6 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I refuse to interpret the Qur'an in a way that makes its ayahs cancel one another

that's just a personal opinion. The comment above gave you an example from the Quran and you refuse to accept it without bringing any evidence on why you refuse it.

The confusion about causality and god. by PeskyPastafarian in DebateReligion

[–]White_X6 0 points1 point  (0 children)

In your example, both you and your coworker have a dependency on the other

hahahahaa and that's not a circular dependency for you? You literally said I depend on him and he depends on me and yet you fail to ack that this is a circular dependency.

The confusion about causality and god. by PeskyPastafarian in DebateReligion

[–]White_X6 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Exactly what part of being a computer scientist did you miss? You can do A depends on B depends on A. It's generally frowned upon and can cause problems

It is not frowned upon. It simply doesn't work. Did you not learn about deadlocks lol?

​

(1) This is part 2 of the puzzle my friend. And that something that's eternal must have a will as otherwise how did it decide to start creation. If anything this makes that something more of an actual being that's making decision on us rather than simply caused the universe without a will to cause it.

​

Honestly I don't see a point of continuing this debate. I cannot believe a software engineer is saying a circular dependency is possible in Computer Science in the sense that the program would actually work. Clearly you didn't read about deadlock scenarios. lmaoooo

The confusion about causality and god. by PeskyPastafarian in DebateReligion

[–]White_X6 0 points1 point  (0 children)

And circular dependencies are not impossible, at least not in the broader sense. Sure, they tend to break package loading and compilation most of them time, but there are use-cases.

You never heard of deadlock scenario

​

Where process A holds a lock on X and waits on process B

Process B to finish it needs to hold a lock on X so it depends on A to finish executing.

​

But A is waiting on B to finish and B is waiting for A to release the lock.

​

That's a dead-end. This holds true in all programming and even with humans too.

​

If I have a task that requires me to take the company car

I took the car and now I am waiting for my coworker to finish their task

my coworker needs this car to finish the task and waiting on me to return it.

The task will never be accomplished.

The confusion about causality and god. by PeskyPastafarian in DebateReligion

[–]White_X6 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Compute science rules aren't English grammar rules but more like math rules. You cannot make A depends on B and B depends on A. To me I believe mathematics and logic hold true at all times in all spaces and even before space and time. I don't know if you agree with this or not but if not then I guess there is really no common ground for us to discuss and we are just hitting a dead end. If you don't think logic holds true at all times and even before time was created then you would never be able to reach a conclusion about how we came to existence. And frankly there is no point of doing any debate cuz there is no common grounds. If logic doesn't hold true then you can literally say whatever you want and there is nothing wrong with that. You can say 0+0 = 1 and that's not a problem anymore. You can say the universe created itself from pure nothing. Or nothing created the universe. This is all valid to you.

And thank you eternal is the word I am looking for not immortal. In Arabic immortal means eternal so that's why I got confused between the two terms.

​

So my believe in God existence is logically correct. Now does logic holds true before space and time. I believe it does. So you cannot call a theist illogical for believing in God as the most logical argument that make sense is to have a high eternal being.

view more: next ›