Should I convert (revert) to Islam?
>>18474671sure
>>18474671While Islam is right about the unity and transcendence of God, of objective morality, and of the importance of being right with the divine order, it still falls short of being free from idolatry.From a strictly scriptural perspective, the prohibition in Leviticus against setting up a figured stone or a standing pillar for the purpose of bowing down to it creates a direct theological conflict with the rites of the Hajj. When pilgrims circle the Kaaba and attempt to kiss, touch, or salute the Black Stone, they are engaging in a physical veneration of an object that has been assigned supernatural significance, such as the tradition that it absorbs sins or descended from heaven. Even though Islamic theology insists the stone is merely a marker and that all worship is directed toward Allah alone, the physical act of prostration in the direction of a lithic object and the ritualized reverence given to it mirror the exact behaviors the Torah defines as idolatrous. Therefore, if one applies the biblical standard that any physical object serving as an intermediary or a focal point of sacred touch is an idol, the veneration of the Black Stone becomes a clear continuation of the very stone-cult practices that the Hebrew prophets sought to abolish.
>>18474671Do you believe semen literally originates from between the backbone and the ribs? If so you're good to go. If not, SHIRK!
>>18474671Yes, goy. Worship the cube. Worship the rock. Worship the pedo. Fuck your cousin. Islam is calling.
>>18474671Just become an Haredi Orthodox Jew if you want a strict conservative and legalistic religion. It has its BS rules like Islam but nothing compared to the batshit insane ridiculous drivel you'll find in hadith.
>>18474671Don't do it. If you admire the history of Islam or whatever, appreciate from a distance. But don't get too close to it.Qu'ran might seem fine and you might make no big deal of the weird, unsettling parts. But unlike the Bible, the Qu'ran is the UNCREATED word of God, the most perfect and accurate book ever, without a single drop of falsehood.So yeah, what dude is telling here >>18474762is a big deal. If you say "yeah, this is silly, maybe Muhammad got it wrong", you are then committing the worst sin imaginable, which is shirk (in this case, denying that the word of Allah is perfect and therefore acknowledging that there is knowledge superior to what Allah has revealed.)So, go ahead and convert if you believe that there isn't a single small inaccuracy in the Qu'ranSecondly, the Sahih Hadith are CRAZY and even the craziest things that Muhammad said are supposed to be taken literally. I believe the largest bullshit is how Muhammad describes heaven in multiple hadith, and whatever he saw or was told by Gabriel sounds like the greatest bullshit childish fiction ever. Especially his descriptions of how sex will be in Jannah, like how a man will have the sexual stamina of 70 men, how his penis will never tire down and how will be able to fuck a hundred virgins in a single morning. Yeah, coomer bullshit. So go ahead if you are looking forward to cooooom eternally.It's clear that Muhammad was making shit up. If he wasn't making shit up, then someone made shit up for him and modern muslims consider it holy.Whenever you come to a fucked up contradiction in the Qu'ran or Hadith, they will come with a fucked up explanation and end up with "but what do we know? Allah knows best! Allahu Alam". What they mean is "yeah, I shit is absurd but I trust it because I don't wanna go to hell".Good luck, buddy.
>>18474671Just pray to god; if you earnestly pray to God I think you will be fine.
>>18474853I mean, the hadith is so full of shit that I don't even know where to begin. Dude was literally inventing a bunch of stories to convince gullible people.>when rooster crow, it saw an angel>when donkey bray, he saw sheitan>gabriel is so big that one of its wings covered the whole sky>if a wife deny having sex with a husband, an angel will curse her throughout the night>trees in jannah are so big that a ride would take 100 days to cross its shade>cryptids like al jassasah, whatever that was>fly to heaven on a donkey>moses and the rock fleeing with his clothes>moses slapping the angel of death>the bizarre description of Yajuj and Majuj trying to cross the wall, whatever place that is
>>18474671No, Muhammad didn't even exist. "Muḥammad" is a title that means praiseworthy that Arab Christians used for Jesus. The references to "Muḥammad" in the Quran are to Jesus. The Mythical "Muḥammad" that Muslims believe in was created by the Abbasids who also created the hadiths to gain legitimacy after the creation of the Quran. Btw the Quran was written in Arabic influenced Syriac and was a bible commentary by Unitarian Christians. Which later on had Arabic vowel dots added to it which lead to misreading's of it and confusion. Because, the Arabic language changed in a few generations (due to the decline of Aramaic speakers) which led people to interpret the Quran differently based on their lack of familiarity of Aramaic. As dynasties changed so did religious beliefs and the center of mass of the religion. Spain had religious tension and they sided against the Catholics there. It was more of a civil war and not a Muslim invasion. You had non trinitarian Christians in Persia and Arabia who hated the Orthodox Church. Rebellion in Persia put them in power. Byzantines gave them administration of the Levant. The early “Muslims” coined Christian coins and Christianity thrived there. The al-Aqsa Mosque and the grand mosque of Cordoba were originally churches.see this playlist: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jXq4AK562L0&list=PL1zJ2LUq92EkBQpJlVHK2vb7YigCcmzP7&index=1
>>18474671Only if you wanna do you hell. Jesus is the only way.
>>18474671Sure
>>18474948>The Mythical "Muḥammad" that Muslims believe in was created by the Abbasids who also created the hadiths to gain legitimacy after the creation of the Quran.So the Abbasids invented Muhammad to give themselves legitimacy, but chose not to make themselves the descendants of Muhammad, and so opened themselves up to periodic revolts by leaders claiming descent from Muhammad? Nonsensical theory
Have you guys noticed that of the three Abrahamic religions, the holy figures act in ways incompatible with the implied modern morality we all agree on?Jesus sperged out and cursed a fig tree, Mohammed was a pedophile(and also he was apparently raped which for some reason you all view as like a defect on his part), and Jews, like - yeah I mean those arguments get pretty dang nutty.Don't really know where I'm going with this but like - c'mon guys. Cut each other a little slack I doubt any of these holy figures are gonna give us props for simping so strongly for them.
>>18475120>Jesus sperged out and cursed a fig treeOne, it was a tree. Two, the fig tree is a symbol for Israel, which was not bearing fruit for God, and it's manifest in him going to the Temple and having a meltdown.I think a better example is when Jesus calls the Lebanese woman a bitch.
>>18474948>Muhammad didn't even exist.Muhammad's immediate family, descendants, and early followers are so well documented and had so many witnesses to the point where it's utterly ridiculous and intellectually dishonest to doubt Muhammad's existence at all.>"Muḥammad" is a title that means praiseworthy that Arab Christians used for Jesus.Now I remember hearing about some early Islamic or pre-Islamic name also being a title at the same time as being a name (this is common apparently) from a scholar so I don't doubt the odds, but never have I ever seen anyone actually mention any source of this "Jesus with Muhammad as a title" claim. What's the source of this?>Spain had religious tension and they sided against the Catholics there.I don't think there was a presence of much if any relevant religious tension in Visigoth Spain besides from the Jewish population there by the time of the Muslim conquest. Some Visigoth nobles did side with the Muslims but not to the point where it can be described as a civil war as most of the conquering army were Berbers. Jews are often said to have supported the Muslims conquer Al-Andalus in later Andalusi sources though.
>>18475126He is ignorant, my slave. Ignore him, he is certainly among the disbelievers! Check them.
>>18474671lets all be honest it was just a excuse for a warlord to kick the sassanids and byzantines down after 20+ years of constant war
