More. Mehn, this section has become a joke. A shadow of it's former self.

Johnchrix:
They've been chased by redpillers.

You don't mean it.

Jeon:
As they say "no Women on NL. Every pink monikers you see are operated by Men"

Did not know about that, honestly. In the past, around the early 2010s when I was more active here, there used to be a lot of women. Everything seem to have changed.

Why will Women want to be on romance section when family /food /health e.t.c are presented with the way Men on romance section behave like wild animals ^{sorry wild animals, I know this is an insult to you.} But please accept my apologies.

Yea, I kind of notice the threads are a lot more sexual than they used to be. Seem like threads more appropriate for sexuality section is making it here. Plus, there seem to be an uptick in threads devaluing women.

Why are you looking for the Women?

Not looking. Just curious. That's all. I thought Romance section will have a balance since romance is a thing shared between men and women.

Really? What happened to the women? I actually thought they'd be more.

Asalam alaykum

I think it must be near two years since I posted here. I paused posting because I got more preoccupied with life. I planned on returning to complete some unfinished threads here but not this soon. Anyway, I was forced out because the Muslim community is making headline again, and as before, it is for a bad reason.

I just want to share my thoughts on the recent incident at Sokoto state, but rather than spill it directly, I'll do so by responding to one of the current post from this section on the front page.

https://www.nairaland.com/7128270/these-red-lines-must-not

1. Insulting Allāh سبحانه وتعالى: An attack on Allāh whom Muslims worship is an attempt to ridicule the basis of their existence and faith. Passing derogatory remarks, making mockery of His names and Attributes, denying His Names and Attributes, comparing Him to His creatures, reducing Him to a mere entity, etc, are some of the things to avoid when describing Him. He is NOT an idol. He's not the Ka'abah that Muslims circumambulate during Tawāf. He is Allāh, to be described ONLY by the attributes that He has given Himself.

OK, so can we insult God? As in G O D, the creator of the universe in monotheistic religions? Pay attention to his language. He makes it sound like Allah is a sort of local or tribal god among Muslims, like Zeus was to the ancient Greeks and Shango is to Yoruba pagans. So, it's like if you insult the creator of the universe, Luk.gaf & his group of like minded Muslims don't care. It is only when you use the Arabic word, Allah, that he cares.

This is a very silly thing, since most Muslims will tell you that Allah is God, the creator of the universe. Allah is the Arabic word for God. In the Bible which Muslims recognize as previous revelations by Allah, there is no mention of "Allah," and what you will find there are non-Arabic terms for God like Yahweh or Elloi.

2. Desecrating the Qur'ān: The Qur'ān is NOT a creature of Allāh like us humans. It is the eternal word of Allāh, revealed to the Prophet ﷺ through Angel Jibrīl and preserved in its original form since its revelation till date by divine protection. It has not and CANNOT be corrupted in the least. Twisting its meaning, tearing it, burning it, stepping on it, denying its authenticity, etc as we have witnessed bigots do in the past is ridiculous and provocative.

This is bluffing. Empty bluffing. Nobody can tell whether the Qur'an has been corrupted or not. To do that, you'd have to have on one hand the original copy written by Muhammad or written or by his scribe under his dictation, and then have on the other hand today's copy to compare verse by verse.

As we don't have any extant copy from Muhammad for comparison, we can only make speculations, we can't certify or confirm. Hence when he states that "It has not & CANNOT be corrupted." This demonstrate profound ignorance and borderline stupidity at best.

Till date, there has been no copy of the complete Qur'an traceable to Muhammad. And among the parchments of Qur'an fragments we've uncovered from the late 7th, 8th & 9th century, some of them like the undertext of the Sanaa palimpsest presents significant variation from today's Qur'an.

3. Insulting the Messenger of Allāh ﷺ: In recent times, no personality: political or religious has been attacked unjustly and without provocation as Muhammad ﷺ.

OK, what is this -

"The Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) as saying: Allah's curse to be on the Jews, they made the graves of their Prophets mosques."

How do you think Christians and Jews will take this? You expect them to respect a man that addresses them this way? Is the Prophet's statement not provocative here?

There are many provocative things that Muhammad did according to your traditional Muslim sources. So, I'm sorry but I don't think anyone should be forced to respect Muhammad. Respect is something that is earned, not demanded.

Prophet Muhammad ﷺ is the symbol of Islām and its most revered figure.

OK.

He's NOT the originator or founder of Islām as wrongly asserted by some prominent Orientalists. In fact, there's NOTHING like Mohammedanism in the Islamic literature. Prophet Muhammad ﷺ was sent to continue the propagation of messages of the previous prophets before him.

Alright, how does anyone manage to contradict themselves so much in the same paragraph. There is nothing like Mohammedanism but Muhammad(not Allah, apparently) is the symbol and most revered figure of Islam. You will not kill if anyone insult Jesus or Abraham but you will kill for Mohammed.

This is Mohammedanism and the orientalists were spot on.

4. Ridiculing the Companions of the Prophet ﷺ: These were men and women who shed tears, blood and sweat to protect the nascent faith in its advent, learn its principles and practices, preserve and pass it to posterity. The Sahābah represent the best generation of people after the Prophet ﷺ. They recorded and reported the Qur'ān as well as the Prophet's Traditions which form the basis of the Sharī'ah. Thus, doubting their credibility and ridiculing them in whatever form is tantamount to uprooting Islām from its very foundation.

The sahabas didn't think of themselves this way. The sahabas fought and disputed among themselves after Muhammad. Just read Muslim history from the Battle of Camel till the Massacre of Karbala. If you want to call for respect for the sahabas, I get it. But by dubbing them the best generation after Muhammad, you're setting a low bar for Muslims.

The sahabas invaded Persia and other empires they had no business with, cementing Islam's image as a militarily aggressive religion. Even on an individual level, the sahabas were often entitled(like Abu Bakr), aggressive(like Umar), cunning & deceitful(like Abu Huraira) individuals.

So, this entire post which makes front page is abysmal. It seem catered to kindergartens children or low IQ Muslims who would rather learn Islam from quaternary sources like the Luk.gaf instead of delving into the primary sources for themselves. And what makes it worse is the timing.

A young woman was lynched to death for insulting Islam earlier this week. And today, Luk.gaf springs to the frontpage with one post were he tries to damage control for the Muslim community and another post where he exposes his apathy for the victim by speaking about "Red Lines" that musn't be crossed.

Traditionally, in Islam, red lines are things like Idol worshiping, homicide, adultery. Luk.gaf never mention any, he just jumps to respect, respect and respect. Again, respect is something that is earned, not demanded. If you have to demand it, you don't deserve it.

Notice in the entirety of this post, he never once expressed horror or remorse that a young woman was killed. This is unfortunately the attitude of loads of Muslims. They condemned the manner Deborah was killed but they conclude she or anyone who insult the prophet deserves death.

To them the homicide itself is nothing. If you force these Muslims to do one; either kill an innocent man or insult the prophet. They'll kill the man. That's the level of mental derangement & religion induced psychopathy we're dealing with here.

I had this discussion with my own family. And not even one of them could bring themselves to say that it is too extreme to kill someone for insulting Muhammad whether the killing was by a street mob or authorized by a legal sharia court. They couldn't. It was a bitter pill for me.

So, in 2022, this many Muslims still think it is OK to kill someone for insulting their religion, even when they can neither prove the Qur'an is from God or unchanged. It is a terrible thing. And I think it is time to adopt a more drastic approach towards this problem.

You know, I look at Palestine, you have Arab Muslims bemoaning Israeli/Jewish occupation & oppression. I looked at Sweden last month, and you have Muslim immigrants protesting Islamophobia, racism and discrimination. And I'm starting to ask myself, "I'm suppose to empathize with these Muslims?"

I'm suppose to feel bad for and advocate on behalf of a group of people of whom 50 to 75 percent think it is OK to kill someone for insulting their religion?

Asalam alaykum

I think it must be near two years since I posted here. I paused posting because I got more preoccupied with life. I planned on returning to complete some unfinished threads here but not this soon. Anyway, I was forced out because the Muslim community is making headline again, and as before, it is for a bad reason.

I just want to share my thoughts on the recent incident at Sokoto state, but rather than spill it directly, I'll do so by responding to one of the current post from this section on the front page.

https://www.nairaland.com/7128270/these-red-lines-must-not

1. Insulting Allāh سبحانه وتعالى: An attack on Allāh whom Muslims worship is an attempt to ridicule the basis of their existence and faith. Passing derogatory remarks, making mockery of His names and Attributes, denying His Names and Attributes, comparing Him to His creatures, reducing Him to a mere entity, etc, are some of the things to avoid when describing Him. He is NOT an idol. He's not the Ka'abah that Muslims circumambulate during Tawāf. He is Allāh, to be described ONLY by the attributes that He has given Himself.

OK, so can we insult God? As in G O D, the creator of the universe in monotheistic religions? Pay attention to his language. He makes it sound like Allah is a sort of local or tribal god among Muslims, like Zeus was to the ancient Greeks and Shango is to Yoruba pagans. So, it's like if you insult the creator of the universe, Luk.gaf & his group of like minded Muslims don't care. It is only when you use the Arabic word, Allah, that he cares.

This is a very silly thing, since most Muslims will tell you that Allah is God, the creator of the universe. Allah is the Arabic word for God. In the Bible which Muslims recognize as previous revelations by Allah, there is no mention of "Allah," and what you will find there are non-Arabic terms for God like Yahweh or Elloi.

2. Desecrating the Qur'ān: The Qur'ān is NOT a creature of Allāh like us humans. It is the eternal word of Allāh, revealed to the Prophet ﷺ through Angel Jibrīl and preserved in its original form since its revelation till date by divine protection. It has not and CANNOT be corrupted in the least. Twisting its meaning, tearing it, burning it, stepping on it, denying its authenticity, etc as we have witnessed bigots do in the past is ridiculous and provocative.

This is bluffing. Empty bluffing. Nobody can tell whether the Qur'an has been corrupted or not. To do that, you'd have to have on one hand the original copy written by Muhammad or written or by his scribe under his dictation, and then have on the other hand today's copy to compare verse by verse.

As we don't have any extant copy from Muhammad for comparison, we can only make speculations, we can't certify or confirm. Hence when he states that "It has not & CANNOT be corrupted." This demonstrate profound ignorance and borderline stupidity at best.

Till date, there has been no copy of the complete Qur'an traceable to Muhammad. And among the parchments of Qur'an fragments we've uncovered from the late 7th, 8th & 9th century, some of them like the undertext of the Sanaa palimpsest presents significant variation from today's Qur'an.

3. Insulting the Messenger of Allāh ﷺ: In recent times, no personality: political or religious has been attacked unjustly and without provocation as Muhammad ﷺ.

OK, what is this -

"The Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) as saying: Allah's curse to be on the Jews, they made the graves of their Prophets mosques."

How do you think Christians and Jews will take this? You expect them to respect a man that addresses them this way? Is the Prophet's statement not provocative here?

There are many provocative things that Muhammad did according to your traditional Muslim sources. So, I'm sorry but I don't think anyone should be forced to respect Muhammad. Respect is something that is earned, not demanded.

Prophet Muhammad ﷺ is the symbol of Islām and its most revered figure.

OK.

He's NOT the originator or founder of Islām as wrongly asserted by some prominent Orientalists. In fact, there's NOTHING like Mohammedanism in the Islamic literature. Prophet Muhammad ﷺ was sent to continue the propagation of messages of the previous prophets before him.

Alright, how does anyone manage to contradict themselves so much in the same paragraph. There is nothing like Mohammedanism but Muhammad(not Allah, apparently) is the symbol and most revered figure of Islam. You will not kill if anyone insult Jesus or Abraham but you will kill for Mohammed.

This is Mohammedanism and the orientalists were spot on.

4. Ridiculing the Companions of the Prophet ﷺ: These were men and women who shed tears, blood and sweat to protect the nascent faith in its advent, learn its principles and practices, preserve and pass it to posterity. The Sahābah represent the best generation of people after the Prophet ﷺ. They recorded and reported the Qur'ān as well as the Prophet's Traditions which form the basis of the Sharī'ah. Thus, doubting their credibility and ridiculing them in whatever form is tantamount to uprooting Islām from its very foundation.

The sahabas didn't think of themselves this way. The sahabas fought and disputed among themselves after Muhammad. Just read Muslim history from the Battle of Camel till the Massacre of Karbala. If you want to call for respect for the sahabas, I get it. But by dubbing them the best generation after Muhammad, you're setting a low bar for Muslims.

The sahabas invaded Persia and other empires they had no business with, cementing Islam's image as a militarily aggressive religion. Even on an individual level, the sahabas were often entitled(like Abu Bakr), aggressive(like Umar), cunning & deceitful(like Abu Huraira) individuals.

So, this entire post which makes front page is abysmal. It seem catered to kindergartens children or low IQ Muslims who would rather learn Islam from quaternary sources like the Luk.gaf instead of delving into the primary sources for themselves. And what makes it worse is the timing.

A young woman was lynched to death for insulting Islam earlier this week. And today, Luk.gaf springs to the frontpage with one post were he tries to damage control for the Muslim community and another post where he exposes his apathy for the victim by speaking about "Red Lines" that musn't be crossed.

Traditionally, in Islam, red lines are things like Idol worshiping, homicide, adultery. Luk.gaf never mention any, he just jumps to respect, respect and respect. Again, respect is something that is earned, not demanded. If you have to demand it, you don't deserve it.

Notice in the entirety of this post, he never once expressed horror or remorse that a young woman was killed. This is unfortunately the attitude of loads of Muslims. They condemned the manner Deborah was killed but they conclude she or anyone who insult the prophet deserves death.

To them the homicide itself is nothing. If you force these Muslims to do one; either kill an innocent man or insult the prophet. They'll kill the man. That's the level of mental derangement & religion induced psychopathy we're dealing with here.

I had this discussion with my own family. And not even one of them could bring themselves to say that it is too extreme to kill someone for insulting Muhammad whether the killing was by a street mob or authorized by a legal sharia court. They couldn't. It was a bitter pill for me.

So, in 2022, this many Muslims still think it is OK to kill someone for insulting their religion, even when they can neither prove the Qur'an is from God or unchanged. It is a terrible thing. And I think it is time to adopt a more drastic approach towards this problem.

You know, I look at Palestine, you have Arab Muslims bemoaning Israeli/Jewish occupation & oppression. I looked at Sweden last month, and you have Muslim immigrants protesting Islamophobia, racism and discrimination. And I'm starting to ask myself, "I'm suppose to empathize with these Muslims?"

I'm suppose to feel bad for and advocate on behalf of a group of people of whom 50 to 75 percent think it is OK to kill someone for insulting their religion?

The Red Pill only works for above average looking guys or guys who are gifted with physical traits that women desire.

vickydevoka:

I been do galfriend matter that year after uni. As de gals don de give me sign Wella. Omo after 6 month i run. That thing na hell.

#. True true person way no get galfriend or wife de always get piece of mind

Absolutely. Even if they no be your girlfriend or wife, even if they just be your friend or colleague, na wahala. That is why I don't give up & wan dissociate from them entirely. A lot of them are narcissists. I no wan deal with their drama, mind games, & passive aggressive behaviours like ignoring text, keeping malice, jealousy, and assuming you want sex because you ask for their number or text them.

WAPuss: [/quote]you mean the real eye or the swollen eye?? Which of them??

The swollen eyes. A lot of girls like this have a habit of pursuing guys that won't hesitate to hurt them. At the same time they're demeaning and bitter towards guys that tolerate or respect their well-being.

Topmaike007:
Before Una insult the Boyfriend, make Una first ask wetin she do to get such beating.

Women can be so toxic in a relationship and when this type of treatment happens they play the victim card...we need the boy to come give us his own story before we judge the case.

You never hit anyone. Never. Except in self defense which is highly unlikely in this case.

So, there's been a lot of noise lately about Afghanistan falling under the hands of Taliban again, since the evacuation of American army troops from the country. A lot of people, including the so called moderate Muslims are bemoaning and crying on how this is a bad thing, playing the blame game and suggesting what should be done to help the Afghans, especially women & children.

Now, the Talibans are Afghani version of Wahhabis who ruled Afghanistan with iron fist between 1996 & 2001, and during that period they literally enforced antiquated and outdated Sharia laws like amputating thieves, killing adulterers or apostates or blasphemers, secluding women from public, enforcing burkha on them, and beards on men, banning music, videos & pictures of human beings or animals(hence they forbid TV, video games, and social media).

After 9/11, US deployed troops to take out the Taliban & this forced many of them to flee and go under ground where they've remained ever since, kept at bay by the stationed US troops. But now, with the withdrawal of the US troops from Afghanistan, the Taliban have resurfaced at last.

Today, the Afghani military is fallen, their president have escaped in private aircraft stashed with cash, and a lot of Afghani have stormed Kabul airport in previous days seeking to flee Taliban tyranny.

Here are 3 reasons why Taliban rule in Afghanistan may be a good thing

1. It'll force Muslims to have a honest dialogue for Islamic reform.

Islam needs a reformation. Period. You can blame Taliban on western imperialism all you want but at the end of the day, the west didn't teach Talibans all the hideous religious practices that they enforce. I can show you numerous binding hadith & even Quranic passages supporting Taliban backward laws & practices. And in 2021, for people to just pretend that Islam is a religion of peace & the Talibans are just radicals who misunderstand Islam, is plain dishonest.

The Taliban at least between '96 & 2001 were practising Islam as was literally spelt in traditional Islamic text, it was the so called moderate or liberal Muslims who went rogue & deviated from the script without an official sort of reform.

If there was a formal reform to explain away these outdated and backward teachings in Islam like the Protestant reformation did with Christianity, we wouldn't be having the Talibans. But because Muslims insist against reform, they have to chose between dishonestly cherry picking between traditional teachings in order to stay moderate or embracing all of the teachings & thus imbibing the hideous teaching that breeds fanaticism. The only other alternative is apostasy.

2. It should compel Muslims to take responsibility for themselves & stop depending on the west

Some western Muslims are begining to blame the return of Taliban on US, saying that the US should've prepared Afghani military for this before withdrawal, or that US should've never meddled with Afghanistan. But all these are just lame excuses. It'll be like blaming immigration for the rise of 'far right groups' in the west. It's a fairly decent claim, but it doesn't explain everything.

What we need to consider is why for 20 years, the Afghani Muslims failed to debunk Taliban ideology & convince the masses against it? Did they think just ignoring it or suppressing it will make it disappear?

Taliban is Afghani Muslim religio-cultural problem, not American or British problem, the Afghani Muslims need to take responsibility & fix their problem. But as long as western troops remain in Afghanistan to ward off the Talibans, Afghani Muslims won't acknowledge or deal with the problem.

3. It serves as a timely reminder that the western elites cares only for money & power, not democracy or freedom for anyone.

I think it is important to mention this because a lot of people including Muslims still get it twisted. Yes, at some point in the past, it looked as if freedom of speech, democracy & other human right values mattered in the west. But you can't say the same for the modern west wether it is the conservative right or liberal left in power.

And you only need to look how poorly the west treat her own citizens in order to get it. Look at America in the summer of 2020, and see the leaders encouraging or excusing protesters burning and looting business centers, stores & properties of innocent owners. Plain, open broad daylight crimes & terrorism were justified by American leaders & media as 'peaceful protests.'

If you think these same western leaders care about terrorists taking over Afghanistan & restricting individual Afghani freedoms etc, I don't know what else to tell you.

The western elite don't care for democracy or freedom, in fact they don't want it any where in the world. They're content with the status quo and realize that true freedom & democracies in non-western countries will enable these countries become independent of the west & begin competing with the west. And the west don't want this, they want to remain unchallenged at the top, so of course they prefer stupid, dumbass religious nutjobs at the helm in Muslim countries.

Now, what about the common Afghani people? And the women, we should worry what the Talibans will do with them like last time, right?

We shouldn't. You'd be shocked to find a lot of Afghanis prefer Taliban rule. And you'll find endless count of women admit they don't feel oppressed but empowered by the Taliban law. So, don't shed a tear for these people. This is their fate. If they wanted, they could've rejected the Talibans a long time ago.

Plumptre was born in England and could even be mistaken to be a caucasian

Mistaken to be Caucasian? Then what is she? Negro? Say what you want. But a person who is 1/4 black & with these phenotype is way closer to English Caucasian than Nigerian Negroes or Black. Basic Genetics.

By sheer Will, Discipline, Hard work, Sacrifice & Talent. But it's redundant posing this question to Muslims because if Muslims knew the real answer, we won't even have to ask.

And it is difficult enough conversation to have with Muslims since half the time, they're apparently still basking in the glories of the so called Islamic golden age.

And the remaining time that is left, they spend lamenting the death of the "True Islam" that birth the Islamic golden age, & the need for Muslims to return to it to reclaim their former glories.

Conservative & Liberal Attempt To Revive Muslim Civilization

The result of this of course are disasters in epic proportion like the bloody Wahhabi sect that slaughtered hundred of thousands of Muslims between the 18th & 20th century to reclaim the holy cities & enforce True Islam. Thinking they'd done their job, the Wahhabis hung their swords & waited for manna from heaven, but manna did not fall.

By the 1950s-60s, more Muslims were starting to move on, figuring from the failure of Wahhabism or Muslim Brotherhood(MB) that the era of Islam was over. Hence the popularity of secular dictators & nationalist regimes in the Muslim world, like Gamal Abdel Nasser of Egypt.

Yet, other Muslims reached a different conclusion, which is that the True Islam is a lot less prescriptive & restrictive than the Wahhabis or MB credit it for. And that it wasn't this True Islam that the Wahhabis & MB tried.

Muhammad Taha suggested only the Meccan passages of Qur'an be eternally binding. Ahmed Subhy Mansur recommended vetting hadith before ultimately resolving to thrash everything. Rashad Khalifa called against hadith & even announced himself a messenger.

The Root of Liberal Islam & Why It Still Won't Save The Day

You can say that modern Qur'anism is an offspring of these more liberal yet vain attempts to re-invigorate Islam, while at the same time, shift things away from the old, antiquated ways of the Wahhabis & MB, the ways that no longer worked.

The problem with these liberal attempts to correct course & fix things is that, just like their conservative counterpart, they failed to appreciate the generations of talent, sacrifice, hard work & discipline behind modern western civilization.

And they say, "If only we could just practice the True Islam, everything will fall into place." And they take this rhetoric entirely on faith alone. Never does the Qur'an guarantee it. Nevertheless, pure empty faith that by turning to True Islam, we can recreate the Islamic golden age.

The Term 'Islamic Golden Age' Is Misleading

An Islamic golden age that didn't even emerge untill nearly 200 years after Muhammad. And even when it did emerge, it benefitted from immense contribution from Zoroastrians & Christians. In fact, here is what the Abbasid Caliph Al Mamun said;

The Persians(Zoroastrians) ruled for a thousand years and did not need us Arabs even for a day. We(Muslim Arabs) have been ruling them for one or two centuries and cannot do without them for an hour.

Learn The True Lessons of The Islamic Golden Age & The Rise of Western Civilization.

And thus, just as those who learnt the wrong lessons from modern western civilization credit it's existence to slavery or colonialism; those who learnt the wrong lesson from Islamic golden age credit its existence to some True Islam.

Then like the modern state of Israel, the Muslims' state will be accused of invasion & occupation of non-Muslim land & will be condemned by non-Muslims as a terrorist state.

Muslims' Conquest & Occupation Of Mecca

Before Islam, Mecca was the religious hub of Arab polytheists who practiced a religion that mixed bits of Abrahamic theology with Arab mythology. And like today's Muslims, the polytheists venerated the site of the sacred mosque & kaaba. When Muhammad began proselytism, of course, he and his followers began to clash with the local authorities, eventually forcing them to migrate to Yathrib - modern Medina - where they established their community.

We know that Muslims grew larger & stronger in Medinah, so much that they came to be perceived as a threat by their original hosts - the local Jews. And this is where the eternal feud between Muslims & Jews sprung from. With increasing power, the Medinan Muslims soon began to resist & engage in frequent warfare against the Meccan polytheists until the famous treaty of Hudaibiya brokered peace between them.

But the polytheists' violation of this treaty became the pretext for the Muslims to invade Mecca & seize power & dominion over the city. Whether this invasion or occupation was sanctioned by their treaty is unclear. At any rate, all of history on this matter originate from Muslims' sources & you know what they say of "History Is Written By The Victors." It seem unlikely that the polytheists would agree on a treaty to surrender their land or shrine to their worst foes.

A lot has been discussed of all the Arab polytheists subsequently embracing Islam, and the Muslim conquest of Mecca deserving praise because it managed to avoid bloodshed. Yet, history has proven that much of these polytheists were deprived access to the holy site & forced to choose between Islam & death. Hence, they apostatized as soon as the prophet died, & this compounded by a chain of tragic events prompted the infamous Apostasy wars.

Parallels Between Muslim Conquest of Mecca & Zionist Conquest of Palestine

All these happened in the 7th century, and Muslims have remained at the helm of Mecca ever since. When you come to the 20th century, then you look at the occupation of Palestine by Zionists, it literally seem like history repeating itself with Muslims in place of the Arab polytheists & Zionists in place of the Medinan Muslims.

Muslim Conquest of Jerusalem

But if my analogy between Muslim conquest of Mecca & Zionist conquest of Jerusalem seem rather forced or far-fetched, then consider that Jerusalem was under Christian rule for centuries with it's holy site venerated by Jews. Then after conquering Mecca, some early the early Muslims thought it ideal to invade Jerusalem; and to compound the misery & humiliation of their Judeo-Christian subjects, build a mosque on the very holiest site of Judaism!

Why I Remain Neutral On Israeli-Palestinian Conflict

All this is why I find mind boggling the popular Muslim outcry of Zionist occupation of Jerusalem & Al Aqsa mosque. And this outcry now translate into outrage that becomes the green light for Hamas to initiate rocket fire against Israel from within the vicinity of civilian Palestinians.

It is true that there are a number of details separating Muslim conquest of Mecca or Jerusalem to Zionist conquest & occupation of Jerusalem. But at the core they're the same, albeit with varying outcomes. One group invading another's territory & taking the reins. So while the Muslims could get away with Mecca & Jerusalem in the 7th century, it is unlikely to happen in the 20th century as we've seen with the Zionists.

Peace.

#10. What Is Mazaje Missing?

Citation here - https://www.nairaland.com/1893782/what-mazaje-missing

At this point, I've been already banned from Islam for Muslim section. So, I hung around Religion section creating Islamic posts of relevance to non-Muslims. Back in 2014, staunch critics of Muslims frequented Religion section. Notably atheists, they'd go into great details on how Muslims generally suck and how Christians are more cultured and reasonable folks than Muslims.

These critics fail to account for historical contextual differences that turned the Christian West into the first world & the Muslim East into an economic & social backwater. The result of this is the harmful conclusion that "Islam & Muslims are hostile & not amendable." Which often lead to non-Muslims constantly nitpicking or witch-hunting Muslims or constantly bending over back ward to placate Muslims.

I spelled out in this post that we should cut Muslims some slack. And I go into specifics about the historical realities that have abandoned Muslims in the middle age while their Christian counterpart paved the way forward into the new age.

#9. Refuting The Hadith Defenders' Book

Yet again, this is another Topic that the moderators deleted. It was an attempt to refute Bassam Zawadi's post; Questions That Quranites Have No Good Logical Responses To. Because of Mclotunji's overbearance & high-handedness, I resolved to start a blog & post the topic there. I had already taken so much pain to respond to Bassam Zawadi, and wasn't going to give up for a few Muslims who cannot stand my view.

This is the link to the topic - https://flamesoftruth./2014/10/06/refuting-the-hadith-defender-book/

I cover issues like the myth on absence of Qur'anists in the early years of Islam, how can we perform salat & zakat, follow the messenger with the Qur'an alone? etc. All these issues traditionalists raise stems from poor reading of history, subjective interpretation of Islam, and of course a level of dishonesty.

GracieX3:
Empiree,

It seems like many of your muslim brethren are quiet nowadays.

Is it because Islam is getting blasted in the media so much, nowadays?

I mean, from extremist muslim bandits to punishments for blasphemy and killing apostates, the news hasnt been good for islam!


Where are udatso, lanrexlan, sino, stalwert, rashduct4luv, antichristian and co? They have been awfully quiet.


cc imaliyu, usermane, tintingz

Islam getting blasted by the media? Quite to the contrary, no one hears about Islam nowadays. The headlines are no longer about Islamists or Islamophobes, they've been largely about Trump, his followers & the so called far right. In fact, until the recent rocket exchange between Palestine & Israel, everyone already forgotten about the Muslim world, at least in the English speaking world.

It is a very interesting thing. It shows how much the media is able to shift the masses' attention from one obsession to another.

GracieX3:



What the fvck?

Hate speech and blasphemy are not the same thing.

Calling for death and injury of someone is different from criticising works written in a book.

Oh, did Muhammad Hijab call for violence? Calling for violence is where I draw the line. But insult constitute free speech.

GracieX3:



Is it that you cannot see the difference between people and religion?

I kind of agree with Albaqir on that part. Apostate Prophet need to accept insult to him & his wife from Muhammad Hijab in this case. Hate speech & blasphemy are the same thing.

GracieX3:


I know, I just wanted you to be aware of the refutation.


However, have you seen Mohammed Hijabs videos before?

Yes, he is a Sunni Muslim pseudo-intellectual.

GracieX3:
Come and see your hero!

What? I have no affiliation with this clown. Spare me of him.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4ADXV__xqqE

This podcast exposes the folly of anti-reformism among Muslims and explains why Muslims adamant against reform are actually playing into hands of the western powers. The summary is that western elites don't want to see a Muslim reform in the middle east or north Africa, they want Muslims to keep the status quo or in fact, regress back to the Islam of the middle age or 7th century, just as the Muslim Islamist groups have been calling for.

#8. Why the Zionist Enemies of the Prophet Muhammad LOVE HADITH even More than Sunnis and Shiites?

Citation here - https://19.org/blog/zionists-love-hadiths

This is another thread that was deleted by the mods. As you might've noticed from the URL in the citation, the article in the thread was not mine. I was reposting an article from another Qur'anist's website.

One talking point of my Sunni & Shiites adversaries in previous years was this; "Oh, look! The Christians really appreciate your brand of Islam, you must be on the wrong then." I call them adversary because they're not merely critics of my Islamic views, they're nasty, vindictive, and manipulative keyboard jihadists that loomed over Islam For Muslim section.

And I prove them wrong in this thread. There are non-Muslims that don't appreciate the Qur'anist view because they consider it to be 'white washing' Islam and Muhammad. Think of it, if you reject hadith books you won't have to deal with Muhammad's alleged child marriage, the command to kill all black dogs, or the command to fight people until they make shahada.

In the article, Edip Yuksel, the writer points out that just as Sunnis and Shiites love and depend on hadith books, so do vile enemies of Muslims that want wars against Muslims. Here's an excerpt of what Edip writes;

I have exposed Kasem and other ardent enemies of Islam and Muhammed who are used by a rabid warmonger, David Horowitz, the founder of a Zionist propaganda machine, FrontPage Magazine. I have published my debates with Robert Spencer, Bill Warner, Abu Kasem, and Ali Sina in a book titled: Peacemaker’s Guide to War Mongers.

These enemies of Islam who have been promoting wars, torture, and genocide against Muslims around the world for more than a decade, are all in love with hadith. When I debated with them, they all insisted on hadiths, which were fabricated centuries after Muhammed. Over and over, they repeated the need for hadith to understand the Quran.

And then Edip proceeds to present an excerpt from FrontPage Magazine web post listing some of the foulest hadith reports on Muhammad, women, non-Muslims, etc. Now, for me as a Qur'anist, I don't have any problem with Robert Spencer, etc. I've listened to them, contrary to Edip they're not warmongers, and I consider their bashing of "Islam" to be part of a civil discourse that is needed on Islam.

Love for money. You can go weeks and months without sex.

#7. The Puzzled's Guide To Jizya

Citation here - https://www.nairaland.com/1880974/puzzled-guide-jizya

In this thread, I cover the clear distinction between Jizya in the Qur'an and Jizya in the traditional Muslim religion. I refute the oft-repeated claims that jizya in the traditional Muslim religion or Qur'an is equivalent to modern tax, or that jizya is to Christian as zakat is to Muslim under Qur'anic law.

These claims are portrayal of the deteriorated state of Islamic and General education among Muslim, plus they also explain the 'moderate' Muslim's rational struggle with his faith. My decision to create this thread was borne out of hostile responses I received a former thread - Penned Response To The Uyghur(Muslim's) Cries.

I wrote on that thread that I have barely sympathy for "oppressed" Muslims who ironically support sharia laws that oppress non-Muslims. Of course, you had all these Muslims who challenged me to prove sharia oppresses anyone. Thus, I raised the issue of jizya.

But as it happened, I must've been dealing with very dumb or dishonest Muslims. They had all these ridiculous analogies between jizya and zakat or modern taxes to deny jizya does oppresses non-Muslims under sharia rule. These necessitated me to address the issue on a different thread.

#6. Qur'an: The Iron(57)

Citation here; https://www.nairaland.com/1863386/quran-iron-57

This is an attempt of Qur'anic exegesis on my part. Here I cover the 29 verses of Qur'an chapter 57, presenting my interpretation. It serves to remind Muslim readers that we don't need hadith or classical tafsir to understand the Qur'an. I'm an advocate for individual interpretation of Qur'an and oppose the monopoly of traditonalist exegetes from the middle age on interpretation of Qur'an. We should be able to challenge and divert from orthodox interpretations of verses.

The highlight of the thread is the 25th verse, where I observe a scientific miracle pertaining to Iron - the fact that 57, the chapter number is the mass number of the element, that 26, the atomic number of Iron is the count of the word "God" up till this verse, and is in fact the verse number of this verse if you count basmallah as the first verse in the chapter.

But if the Qur'an is embedded with so much of these scientific hints that were only discovered today, why would anyone doubt it?

Well, I addressed this in one of my penultimate threads on contradictions between Qur'an and Science. The presence of any numerical or scientific code in the Qur'an does not detract from the fact that there are verses that could and have been interpreted to yield factually inaccurate views.

The oft-repeated claim is that there is no error in the Qur'an. Yet this is disputable. It stems from confirmation bias on the part of Muslim readers, who are determined to derive interpretation that fits with the already established facts.

But the earlier scholars who did not have access to the vast array of scientific facts we've uncovered today could not afford confirmation bias as modern scholars. They read the Qur'an and resolved it imply that the atmosphere is a solid dome, that the sun runs to a resting place and that an embryo starts out as a blood clot.

Another issue with the numerical and scientific miracles of the Qur'an is just how there is no consistent methodology to derive them. And how it is up to the reader to make and break the rules to deduce these miracles. Sometimes basmallah may be added to the count of verses, other times it isn't. Sometimes gematric values of the Arabic words are considered, other times it is the number of words in the verses that are counted.

Empiree:
Guy, I'm not gonna mention your moniker to avoid issues. But why did you have to report my post?. My post did not violate NL rules. Does it mean you are intolerant?.

I hope you didn't report me?. This is not fair now, brother.

I had nothing to do with it. It might've been antispam bot.

#5. Penned Response the Uyghuir(Muslims) Cries

Citation here: https://www.nairaland.com/1850854/pened-response-uyghurs-muslims-cries

We live in an age where everyone claims to be oppressed. Nigerians are oppressed by SARS, blacks are oppressed by whites, whites are oppressed by Jews, Jews are oppressed by Christians/Muslims, and of course, Muslims are oppressed by Jews/Christians. It's the world we live in.

In my study on oppression narratives, I find that more often, the people who claim to be oppressed are themselves not innocent victims. And thus, the basic premise of the thread was to pose this simple question;

Why is it fine for Muslim countries to enforce pro-Islamic policies even upon non-Muslims, but somehow for the Chinese Communist Party(CCP) to enforce pro-communist principles upon Muslims is crime?

The same way Iran, Saudi Arabia, or Pakistan criminalizes any idea it considers a threat to Islam, so does the CCP criminalizes Islam as a threat to communism. Muslims consider homosexuality or fornication as cardinal threats. The CCP & her partisan considers the mosques and open practice of Islam, as threats.

An objection you might raise is; 'What kind of threat are people who are just going to the mosque or fasting? And how do they compare with 'fornicators and homosexuals' who ruin communities with infections and decadence?

Well, as the name states, the ruling ideology in China is communism. And the ultimate goal of communism is to unite the working class against the middle class in order to eliminate all class and social inequalities. Communists consider religions like Islam to be divisive of the working class and an obstacle to achieving this goal.

Ifeann:

Username. How are you, its been years. Gald to see a post from you. Are ur brothers still attacking you for criticizing the hadiths. By the way are you still a muslim. Hope uare doing fine

Peace.

I'm fine. I'm over hadith criticism at this point. And you may say that I am no longer a theoretical in the traditional sense, since I have my doubts and skepticism in authenticity of Qur'an. Personally though, I just practice Islam to my taste at this point. I can't leave religion or spirituality, for complicated reasons.

#4. Passive Terrorism: Peaceful Violence

Citation here - https://www.nairaland.com/1828224/passive-terrorism-peaceful-violence

This is not my article. I found it on International Qur'anic Center, an English/Arabic/French Muslim reform and Qur'anist website. I found the article deeply enlightening and published it with a more catchy title here on NairaLand. Unfortunately, I never left the url to the original and thus cannot find the article today.

In this article, the writer explores the role of so called moderate Muslims in festering Muslim terrorists, whether intentionally or unintentionally. In the light of the recent attack in France, where a school teacher was beheaded by an Islamist for displaying Charlie Hebdo cartoon to his students, this article would be a good read. Especially seeing as Muslims in the middle east are protesting Macron's support for Charlie Hebdo & his remarks such as on Islam being "in crisis all over the world" after condemning the incident.

At this point, they'll say European colonialists exploited African resources to build their civilization. And this is false again because blacks had these resources at their disposal before the Europeans appeared, but they neither discovered nor tapped into them adequately. Moreover, the resources remain in abundance among blacks today and they have done little to exploit them.

And then at this point, they'll probably accuse you of hating black people and lose all civility in addressing you. And so, when you look at the reality of most black people today, they have really terrible views on about just everything, and they do not truly care about any black civilization or community.

So, compared to Europeans, Arabs or East Asians, blacks don't have a civilization. I could stop here. But then you have these people who agree with this conclusion, but blame the lack of black civilization on external factors, rather than internal factors within the black community.

One common argument is that Europeans only developed their civilization through slavery. But then you tell these people that blacks had slaves too. If slavery built western civilization, why didn't it build black civilization?