I like Islam but struggle to understand how the early fitnas aren't a huge mark against it. Why couldn't this religion bring peace to the most immediate companions of the prophet Muhammad? Why were 3 of the 4 rightly guided caliphs killed by Muslims? Why couldn't Muhammad declare a successor, and if he really did and it was Ali, how could Allah allow that part of the message of Islam to be corrupted?
>I like IslamSorry about your brain death, get well soon!
>>18457043They lived through very unstable and hard times, it was common for emperors in the past to be killed
>>18457052But you don't see anything like this among the apostles and first generations of Christians, even if there is disagreement about dogma.
>>18457057Because they didn’t hold any positions of power
>>18457063I don't think that answers it. Early Christians were killed by non-Christians. Early Muslims were killed by Muslims. There is nothing comparable to the animosity between Ali and Aisha among the apostles.
>>18457079Early Christians had no political power, its an irrelevant comparison. Its more accurate to compare with how coups and assassinations were common throughout the byzantine empire’s history or some other entity, they were power struggles that had little to do with religion itself.
>>18457043>Why couldn't this religion bring peace to the most immediate companions of the prophet Muhammad?Mohammed was a warlord, he didnt come to bring peace.
>>18457043You know Mo raped a 9 year old little girl, right?
>>18457043it's an arab religion for arabs. arabs are a savage desert race.
>>18457085>That while he was with a delegation from Quraish to Muawiya, the latter heard the news that `Abdullah bin `Amr bin Al-`As said that there would be a king from the tribe of Qahtan. On that Muawiya became angry, got up and then praised Allah as He deserved, and said, "Nowthen, I have heard that some men amongst you narrate things which are neither in the Holy Book, nor have been told by Allah's Messenger (صلى الله عليه وسلم(. Those men are the ignorant amongst you. Beware of such hopes as make the people go astray, for I heard Allah's Messenger (صلى الله عليه وسلم(saying, 'Authority of ruling will remain with Quraish, and whoever bears hostility to them, Allah will destroy him as long as they abide by the laws of the religion.' " Sahih al-Bukhari 3500Kek. How is Roman emperors becoming popes and continuing their power killings the same as Islamist bandits being told literally the Quraish should be rulers as long as the keep Sharia and they decide to assassinate them because they were applying the Sharia the best and were literally called Rashidun or the Rightly Guided but they decide against the prophet's order to kill them and create the 1400 years old Sunni/Shia war.
>>18457047Shia are the True muslims but does their tradition allow Ass Bombers?
>>18457679what
>>18457043>I like IslamWhy?It's a much worse version of christianity in my opinion mixed with a lot more talmudic nonsense.
>>18457857>The Quran instructs believers to obey Allah, the Messenger, and those in authority among them, and to refer disputes to Allah and His Messenger.The verse addressing this principle is Surah An-Nisa (4:59): "O you who have believed, obey Allah and obey the Messenger and those in authority among you. And if you disagree over anything, refer it to Allah and the Messenger, if you should believe in Allah and the Last Day. That is the best [way] and best in result" (Quran.com, 4:59)Why did the islamists kill their Rightly Guided rulers when they were told by Allah & Muhammad to obey them?
>>18457901I don't know. Does this prove Shi'ism?
>>18457043>why did the followers of a schizophrenic highway man end up shanking each other?gee, thats a hard one. I couldn't think of a reason
>>18458141No it doesn't it just proves islamist themselves don't even follow their retarded cult commandments they preach.
>>18457043Not a mujo but if the early Christians had state power they'd definitely sought to curtail the activities of the gnostics. I don't think they'd get to killing though
>>18457043there is nothing to do in this life but rape muhammad and feel the complete satisfaction from it. This is a lifestyle.
>>18458180Even when Christians became Kangz of the Roman Empire they weren't ruling based on bloodline unlike the islamists where it's is the Quraish bloodline that is chosen to rule yeah they got family squabbles between the House of the prophet and the tribe but it's their Quraish supremacist cult.>But but the TurksIt's called Ottomans not Ozguls
>>18457043>Why couldn't Muhammad declare a successor, and if he really did and it was Ali, how could Allah allow that part of the message of Islam to be corrupted?This isn't really a solid argument, because the existence of Shias today shows that the message was transmitted. What you could rather question is why God would allow the "true" message to be followed only by the minority. But this also assumes that the "true" message can't be followed only by a minority. Actually basically every religion believes that a select few follow the true religion with the rest going astray, and this is no different in Islam. Muslims believe that most of Moses' followers ignored his true message and worshipped the calf, Christ's followers started worshipping Christ alongside God, and there are plenty of hadiths that the Sunnah will be corrupted and only the few will follow it. So the fact that Shias are a minority group isn't the strongest basis of critique against them.
>>18457043>Why couldn't this religion bring peace to the most immediate companions of the prophet Muhammad? This isn't unique to Islam though. Christ was betrayed by one of his closest companions. Similarly not all of Muhammad's companions had pure intentions, which is why you see that Ali and his faction (aka the Shia) split off from the majority when he received little support against Abu Bakr. >Why were 3 of the 4 rightly guided caliphs killed by Muslims?Sunnis don't consider the killers of Umar and Uthman to be Muslims. Both Sunnis and Shias agree that the killer of Ali was not a Muslim (he was a kharijite). Curiously though, Sunnis do consider those who killed Muhammad's entire family at the Battle of Karbala to be Muslims. (Shias do not and this is one of the big areas of disagreement between Sunnis and Shias)
>>18457043Yeah it's hard to believe an illiterate schizo pedo warlord didn't bring peace, crazy that.
>I like IslamWhat is there to like about Islam? It takes Christianity, demystifies it, and adds the worst aspects of Mosaic law such as child circumcision and pork prohibition
>>18457085Why do Muslims always retreat to this position of saying Islam was entirely shaped by the culture of the time so you can't criticise it for anything, but also it's this eternal truth that never changes so you need to follow it.
>>18457043Embrace Judaism
>>18457043>killed by MuslimsBecause people acted on their free will to murder the caliphs. If people didn't have free will, then there would be no reason for the prophet (PBUH) to recite the quran. If converting to islam somehow took people's free will we wouldn't need police or jails>Why couldn't Muhammad declare a successorBecause he didn't need one. Only Mohamed (PBUH) could have truly succeeded as a political and religious leader, as evidenced by his successor's failures
>>18457043By what I recall at least one of the early caliphs was murdered for reasons that had nothing to do with faith and were entirely related on his tax policies.
>>18458795It wasn't tax policies, you're probably thinking of Uthman. He showed a lot of favoritism to his own clansmen and made them governors officials, etc and used to give them gifts from the public treasury, He himself lived in a palace. He was killed by a public mob, he was very unpopular
>>18458795>nothing to do with faith and were entirely related on his tax policiesWell, that's the crux of the matter, if the political ruler is also the religious ruler, then these matters are related,especially when they're supposed to be God's representative on earth.Seeing the Best Generation of Muslims factionalise and fight one another like regular empires,required very strong harmonization efforts by the promoters of orthodoxy.
>>18458808>Seeing the Best Generation of Muslims factionalise and fight one another like regular empires,>required very strong harmonization efforts by the promoters of orthodoxy.To be fair Shias don't believe in the Best Generation stuff. They believe in their faction and that's it. It's Sunnis that try to harmonize and erase the apparent divisions between those people
>>18457043Why would a handsome blonde and blue-eyed white guy dress like a sandnigger?
>>18458337> This isn't unique to Islam though. Christ was betrayed by one of his closest companions.Yes but the betrayals lead to the ultimate revelation of Christianity. Afterward Christ's death and resurrection there were no feuds or violence among the apostles or among Christians. You have to look hundreds of years into the future for that.> Sunnis don't consider the killers of Umar and Uthman to be Muslims. Both Sunnis and Shias agree that the killer of Ali was not a Muslim (he was a kharijite). Curiously though, Sunnis do consider those who killed Muhammad's entire family at the Battle of Karbala to be Muslims. (Shias do not and this is one of the big areas of disagreement between Sunnis and Shias)This is a good point. It still seems weird that there was so much animosity between the companions of Muhammad, like between Ali and Aisha etc. People often say that Paul made up Christianity, yet you never see any accounts of the other apostles trying to fight him.
>>18458820Yes, I thought it implied by the OP that he meant Sunnis, like most people do when they say "Muslims."What you're saying is actually related to that. Sunni cast a broad net and then define the heresies,that's why they're broadly considered the orthodox group.Shia tend to a small group of legitimate authorities and then split apart over disagreements over legitimate successors,and are generally seen as a sect.
>>18458853>You have to look hundreds of years into the future for that.Exactly. It's apples and oranges. On the one hand Muhammad had more followers during his lifetime than Christ did, which logically means more of weak faith. It's the opposite of a tight-knit group. Secondly and more importantly, Muhammad achieved political power in his lifetime which draws even more people of questionable faith. When Muhammad bloodlessly conquered Mecca, he granted amnesty to all his enemies still there, and you'd have to have beeen very radically opposed to Muhammad to have still been against him at that point. So Muslim historians agree that after that point there were large numbers of fake converts to Islam of dubious loyalty. As you recognize, this wasn't even possible for Christians until much later. >It still seems weird that there was so much animosity between the companions of Muhammad, like between Ali and Aisha etc.I don't think it's weird at all. There was en empire at stake, unlike in early Christianity. Even if the apostles disagreed with eachother, it's not like they could raise armies to fight. But Islam was politcally developed and Aisha could raise an army against Ali because if her faction won they'd be kings. You can't compare that to a small, persecuted sect that's on the run for their lives.
>>18458856>hat's why they're broadly considered the orthodox group.That's not really why, it's because they won. Ali and his faction lost, and they were relegated to trying to survive as a persecuted minority group opposed to the political leadership, and occasionally leading revolts. Sunnism was the religion of the majority and the religion of the government, which obviously is going to enforce and teach it's own side, which further reinforces the majority. If Shias won then they'd be perceived as the orthodox group, that's really all it comes down to.
>>18458337>Both Sunnis and Shias agree that the killer of Ali was not a Muslim (he was a kharijite).Were Kharijites literally just Muslims and supporters of Ali though? Then they decided he wasn't hardcore enough and killed him?
>>18458867>But Islam was politcally developed and Aisha could raise an army against Ali because if her faction won they'd be kings. You can't compare that to a small, persecuted sect that's on the run for their lives.But shouldn't Aisha not raise an army against Ali for political gain because they're all companions of Muhammad ? Aren't these people supposed to be the best Muslims of all time?
>>18458856>Sunni cast a broad net and then define the heresiesThat's true, the problem is that it's such an artificial exercise. Those divisions were real, they existed. Even take the "4 Rightly Guided Caliphs" concept for example. That concept was invented much later. In his own time, Ali wasn't grouped with his predecessors. He faced mass revolts as soon as he took power, including by Uthman's clansmen. And after the Umayyads (Uthman's clan) took power, they instituted the practice of publicly cursing Ali as part of the Islamic prayer. So this idea of casting a broad net happened much later, and in a manner that tries to erase the real divisions that existed. It's divorced from reality.
>>18458873>Were Kharijites literally just Muslims and supporters of Ali though? Then they decided he wasn't hardcore enough and killed him?They excommunicated him and basically every all other Muslims, and vice versa. So neither Sunnis nor Shias consider them Muslims.>But shouldn't Aisha not raise an army against Ali for political gain because they're all companions of Muhammad ? Aren't these people supposed to be the best Muslims of all time?This is a totally valid critique of Sunnism, because they're the ones that believe in that doctrine. Shias don't believe that literally every single person Muhammad met makes up the greatest generation. They believe a small group of Muhammad's most loyal followers led by Ali stayed true to his message. So that critique wouldn't apply to them.
>>18458885also replying to this >>18458874
>>18458885> Shias don't believe that literally every single person Muhammad met makes up the greatest generation. They believe a small group of Muhammad's most loyal followers led by Ali stayed true to his message. So that critique wouldn't apply to them.Does this not lead to the implication that Aisha was a bitch?
>>18458895>Does this not lead to the implication that Aisha was a bitch?Not just an implication, Shias actively dislike her for starting that rebellion. And Sunnis hate Shias for that.
>>18458853>Yes but the betrayals lead to the ultimate revelation of Christianity.Funnily enough, from the Shia perspective the exact same thing is happening. The betrayals that led to Ali's killing, Husayn's beheading, etc were the ultimate revelation of their righteousness against Sunnism
>>18458870I actually phrased it badly. Of course a weaker sect doesn't have the power define the "correct" religion.It just seems to me that Sunni has in some notable cases, such asincorporating Ali, trustworthiness of the Sahabah and validity of the 4 Sunni madhab,to have opted for (artificially) paving over the differences to create a sense of unity.The different Shia groups seem very focused on the differences,being strongly divided by their acceptence or rejection of the legitimate successor of Ali.>>18458876I don't disagree. Traditionists tend to project ideas back to the original authorities,and in doing so engage in creative historiography.Going back to the OP; if you don't have any faith commitments, then you will be less than amazed by the behaviour of the early Muslims.
>>18458924>Going back to the OP; if you don't have any faith commitments, then you will be less than amazed by the behaviour of the early Muslims.Definitely I agree, those civil wars were brutish and nasty. But I do think some of the early Muslims definitely displayed exemplary behaviour. It's hard to read the story of the Battle of Karbala without being awed at the stand of 70 men against 1000. So I think you could be impressed by some of the behaviour and still hold a coherent position, but not if you try to hold on to the idea that "they were all good, they were the greatest generation". That concept is just fundamentally untenable.
>>18458903>And Sunnis hate Shias for that.Only midwits think stuff like this explains people hating each other and not other more tangible factors.
>>18459123then why do sunnis chimp out and go on headchopping rampages even against other sunnis let alone christians, shias, etc?
>>18459123Perhaps you don't realize that this is a significant doctrinal issue between the sects, with Sunnis considering the Shia negative stance on Aisha as tantamount to blasphemy
>>18458873>>18458895>Does this not lead to the implication that Aisha was a bitch?The Kharijites got angry with Ali for pardoning his aunty Aisha for her crimes in the revolt which killed 1000s of islamists in 656 and then for getting fooled into accepting arbitration talks to settle the conflict with Muawiya when Ali forces were winning in 657. All they wanted him to do was act like a strong ruler who followed the Quran and the Hadiths which gave him full Authority under Sharia but instead he betrayed and killed his own men. To this day islamists call Kharijite anyone who follows the Quran and Hadiths and believes in Jihad.
>>18459291It really makes it seem like Islam is not the best religion since it can't even control its own members from killing each other immediately after the death of their prophet.
>>18457047/thread
>>18457079>There is nothing comparable to the animosity between Ali and AishaIt's awe-inspiring. To this day shia dogs call into egyptian cooking shows to hurl insults at Aisha.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WlKPK6HDnjQ
>>18459767They have been fighting and overthrowing each others for 1400 years this Ummah brotherhood is a meme if they aren't fighting an outside power or empire to conquer and rob land and resources from they will fight and steal from each others. Islamists were fighting each others in the Sahel unti West Africans sent home the Europeans who were protesting them then the islamists turn on them.
>>18457043>I like Islam but struggle to understand how the early fitnas aren't a huge mark against it.What are you talking about. Everyone knows even muslims. The main sect sunni islam is copium the religion about the first century of islam. The main tenets are to not talk about this time period. Had they managed to destroy the shiites then it would have been buried
>>18457043>I like Islamgo fuck the goats achmed
