OPEN FORUM

Do you have something on your mind?  Do you need answers to lingering questions?  Or do you just need a place to engage with other people?  The new “Forum” page will serve as a place for visitors to make comments, start new discussions not related to any of the blog posts, make suggestions or just hang out.  If you want to participate, please abide by the following rules:   

  1. Respect the sacred.  No offensive comments about God, His prophets or His religion.
  2. No spam. All automated messages and advertisements will be deleted.
  3. Respect other users. No abusing of fellow forum members. While comments will not be moderated, continued abusive behavior will result in the deletion of comments or the commenter being banned from the blog.
  4. No threats or harassment of other users will be tolerated. Any instance of threatening or harassing behavior will result in being banned.
  5. No profanity or pornography is allowed. Posts containing such material will be deleted.
  6. Do not post copyrighted material.

5,098 thoughts on “OPEN FORUM”

  1. Ahmed mushrif

    سلام عليكم is there any refutation to this?
    <a
    about a boiling water flooding the world? Or a oven flowing from water?

    Like

    Reply
      2. Ahmed mushrif

        It’s about water flooding from a oven which means that the water was boiling and that means that it allegedly palagrized from the talmud which says when the flood happened the water was boiling. My questions is was the water boiling in the quranic version of the story and does تنور mean oven or something else.

        jazakalla

        Like

      3. Ahmed mushrif

        It’s about water flooding from a oven which means that the water was boiling and that means that it allegedly palagrized from the talmud which says when the flood happened the water was boiling. My questions is was the water boiling in the quranic version of the story and does تنور mean oven or something else.

        jazakalla

        Like

      4. Ibn Kathir explains that it means the face of the earth: http://m.qtafsir.com/Surah-Hud/The-beginning-of-the-Flood-and—
        Lane’s Lexicon also gives one of the definitions as the “surface of the ground”:
        https://ejtaal.net/aa/#hw4=131,ll=356,ls=5,la=450,sg=209,ha=81,br=162,pr=32,aan=95,mgf=139,vi=90,kz=218,mr=104,mn=140,uqw=208,umr=168,ums=123,umj=98,ulq=443,uqa=68,uqq=45,bdw=h156,amr=h97,asb=h97,auh=h266,dhq=h78,mht=h79,msb=h37,tla=h33,amj=h87,ens=h1,mis=h1

        Like

  2. Ed

    @stewjo004

    Thanks for the response.

    “Its not real (you’re just quoting WikiIslam) and that’s why no cares.”
    I have not used a book or article called “wikiIslam.” I have provided citations for the sources I have cited.

    “Since you insist today to swallow Teisi (despite the fact I’m like 85% sure he hasn’t even been peer reviewed yet and you’re going to end up looking like a jack@$$ like the people who were quoting Dan Gibson prior to peer review but I digress)“
    Teisi’s book is published by Oxford University Press, who peer review all of their scholarly publications. Teisi lists peer reviewers including Stefan Vranka, Christopher Bonura, Domenico Agostini, Guillaume Dye, Aaron Hughes, George Kiraz, Sergey Minov, Khodadad Rezakhani, Mario Casari, Andrea Piras, Lutz Greisiger, Yuri Stoyanov, Hasan Ansari, Marilyn Booth, Glen Bowersock, Martino Diez, Alejandro Garcia-Sanjuan, Christian Mauder, Matthew Melvin-Koushki, Johannes Pahlitzsch, Michele Salzman, and Nukhet Varlik.

    “DING! DING! DING! There ya go! Now we go back to my magical question I’ve asked you a million times, as a local to Arabs IS idntified by early Muslims let’s read from QB’s article from years ago: “It is actually more likely that Dhul Qarnayn was an Arab king. The scholar al-Tabbakh (d. 1951) noted that the prefix “Dhu” was used by the Arabs to refer to Arab kings (for example, Dhu Nuwas).“
    Dhu’l Qurnain being portrayed as an arabian king is not inconsistent with my theory. Each story of Alexander has their own version of him, in which he is from different locations and of different religions. For example, the Alexander of The Alexander Romance is Egyptian, not Macedonian. In the Syriac Alexander Legend, Alexander is a monotheistic Christian, not a polytheist. In Persian legends of Alexander, he is the son of Persian king Darius II, not of Macedonian king Phillip II. Thus, Alexander being portrayed as an arabian – and a muslim – is what we would expect to see from the quran.

    “In fact, there is a hadith related by al-Maghribi (d. 1286) which stated that Dhul Qarnayn was from Himyar (Yemen).[5] But regardless of the true identity of Dhul Qarnayn, the bottom-line is that there is no evidence that he was directly associated with Alexander the Great in the Quran. The only associations made were by external sources.”
    I could not find the exact hadith being referenced, but I assume it is refrencing the fictional Himyarite king Sa’b Dhu-Marathid who is often cited as being a candidate for Dhu’l Qurnain. Sa’b is a fictional king (reigned somewhere between the 11th to 13th century BC by my estimation) who is first referenced in The Book of Crowns on the Kings of Himyar in the 8th century AD. Minoo Southgate observes that “Most of the deeds attributed to Sa’b, however, are found in Hebrew and Ethiopic Alexander material dating at least a century before Islam. A l-Ti-jan’s legends, therefore, must have belonged to Alexander originally. Later, they were attributed to Sa’b perhaps by Moslems who, disturbed by the glory showered upon the pagan Alexander in the Koran, invented the believer Sa*b as a suitable original for him.” (Southgate 1977: 283) In short, Al-Maghribi’s identification of Dhu’l Qurnain with this king is in fact an indirect identification of Dhu’l Qurnain with Alexander.

    “And this does not even take into account early Muslims such as Ali(ra) believed Dhul Qarnain to be an African king, so yes ALL speculative as I said the first time while you keep trying to deal in absolutes.“

    With the evidence I have presented, it is far from speculation. While it is true that some early muslims associated Dhu’l Qurnain with other figures, this does not change the true identity of Dhu’l Qurnain. To add to this, as I presented above, Muslims either indirectly associated Dhu’l Qurnain with Alexander, or directly associated him with Alexander, like in the case of Tafsir Al-Jalalayn (1459-1505 AD), “And they the Jews question you concerning Dhū’l-Qarnayn whose name was Alexander; he was not a prophet. Say ‘I shall recite relate to you a mention an account of him’ of his affair.”

    ““(this kind of “two seas” language could be similar to Surah 25:53”

    Gotta pause here. So using your own “evidence” there is a mention of TWO seas not one so you’re off to a good start. Now let’s pull up the second ayah to show that reading comprehension:

    “As it’s He who released the two bodies of flowing water, one sweet and fresh along with the other that’s salty and disgusting, and placed an impassable barrier between them.”

    As you can see the second ayah you used doesn’t even mention a “bright sea” its referring to fresh and salt water bodies (and a metaphor for faith and disbelief as water is a common metaphor for revelation in the Quran) So yes this point is just complte and utter nonsense”
    I will admit that this was not the strongest connection (hence why I said that it “could be similar”), but I thought it was an interesting enough connection to at least mention. This is not a hill that I would die on though.

    ““similar to Surah 36:38”

    Uhhh…again no its not (even ignoring the sun moving is common in description in literature) these two texts are nothing alike so idk why this was even brought up”
    The similarities in both statements in that the sun travels by the command of God.

    1. “He found it rising on a people whom We had provided no shelter from it””

    Where does “the spot is a barren land” (simialr to something ala a desert further strengthening the Arab motiff) morph into “the sun burns all it touches” in your mind out of curiosity? Instead of just looking for words like “sun rise” and “sunset” and claiming dependency actually show the stories matching“
    What exactly are you quoting from? Where does it say “the spot is a barren land?” Where does it say “the sun burns all it touches?” The stories match with our traveler finding a people group who do not have shelter from the sun (hence why in The Syriac Alexander Legend, the people are seen running and hiding in the ocean to escape the heat).

    ““This passage closely mirrors Sahih al-Bukhari 3199”

    Lmao what???? How the heck did they mirror one another? There’s no mention of prostrating anywhere in the passage you’ve quoted”
    Yes, there is. “And when the sun enters the window of heaven, he straightway bows down and makes obeisance before God his Creator.”

    “6. Manuscripts

    Pay attention here. Let’s go with Alexander is all compiled at different dates, quoting Josephus does NOT help you as the manuscripts for it are dated post Islam so we can’t use it to determine an earlier tradition (barring you can find another ancient author whose manuscripts are earlier quoting said tradition) Jospehus itself has many edits from Christians so it doesn’t strengthen your case is what everyone is attempting to explain to you”
    Let me reiterate myself again. This is not how textual criticism works. This is a form of the slippery slope fallacy, where if one part of the text has been edited, then that means the text as a whole is unreliable. To add to this, dating something based on the oldest extant manuscripts is beyond ridiculous. Scholars date things based on many other factors, and the parts I highlighted about Gog and Magog are agreed to be authentic Josephus. This is all not to mention that this is clearly an older tradition. Pliny the elder (1st century) mentions it. Jerome (4th century) mentions it. Josephus (1st century) mentions it. Pseudo-Hegesippus (translation of Josephus, 4th century) mentions it. Jordanes (6th century) mentions it. Procopius (6th century) mentions it. The Syriac Alexander Legend (6th century) mentions it. The list goes on and on. Are you seriously suggesting that all of these works were edited to include an element from the quran? And that all of our manuscripts were edited to include this element?

    To finish, I would like to leave a quote from Kevin Van Bladel’s 2008 paper on the subject, regarding the incompleteness of Wheeler’s study. “Wheeler does not address directly Noldeke’s hypothesis of the relationship of the Alexander Legend to Q ,18:83-102, which is the subject of the present paper, though he does refer in his notes to Noldeke’s work (“Moses or Alexander?” 201, n. 52; Moses, 138, n. 55 to chapter 1). This strikes me as an unfortunate oversight. While this is not the place to redraw Wheeler’s charts showing the supposed interrelationships of these texts, a few critical remarks are in order to guide the reader. In discussing the Qur’an, its commentaries, three different texts about Alexander (the Legend, the Song, and different recensions of the Romance), and then also the Talmudie story of Alexander, Wheeler has overlooked a good deal of relevant published research (e.g. see later in this note) but has almost completely avoided getting into the details of the texts that could be used to establish their real interrelationships. To take just one of the prob¬ lematic conclusions as an example, his charts of affiliations (Wheeler, “Moses or Alexander?” 202-3; Moses, 17, 19) argue that the Babylonian Talmud is a source of the Christian Song of Alexander, which is extremely unlikely. He argues, without foun¬ dation, that when Qur’an commentators refer to extra-Qur’anic traditions, it becomes impossible for the Qur’an to refer to the same extra-Qur’5nic traditions; the Qur’an itself is cleared of relying on the same ancient traditions (Moses, 28-9). This and other problematic schemata aside, Wheeler has not included the Legend of Alexander in his chart of affiliations, but only the Song of Alexander, which has been shown not actually to be by Jacob of Serugh, as Wheeler seems to think; “Moses or Alexander?’’ 201; Moses, 17; following Noldeke, actually, but missing much of the subsequent scholarship; for example, A. Baumstark, Gesdnchte der Syrischen Lileralur, Bonn: A. Markus’und E. Weber, 1922, 191; K.. Czegledy, “Monographs on Syriac and Muhammadan sources in the literary remains of M. Kmosko,” Acia Orienlalia Acadeiniae Scienliaruni Hungaricae 4, 1955,(19-90)35-6; G.J. Reinink, “Ps.-Methodius: A concept of history in response to Islam,” in A. Cameron and L.l. Conrad (eds) The Byzantine and Early Islamic Near East I: Problems in the Literary Source Material, Studies in Late Antiquity and Early Islam 1, Princeton, NJ; Darwin, 1992, (149-87) 167 n. 73; S. Gcro, ‘The legend of Alexander the Great in the Christian orient,” Bulletin of the John Rylands Library 75, 1993, 3-9, 7; and above all the introduction accompanying the standard edition of the Song of Alexander itself: Das syrische Alexanderlied. Die Drei Rezensionen, CSCO 454 (edition)-455 (translation), Scriptores Syri l95-6,Trans. G.J. Reinink (ed.), Louvain: Peelers, 1983. Compare Wheeler’s reference to “the brief so-called Legend of Alexander, which is often said to be a prose version of Jacob of Serugh’s (Song).. .” (Wheeler, Moses, 17, no references given) with Reinink’s statement: “No scholar has seriously considered the possibility that the legend is dependent on the (Song)” (Reinink, “Alexander the Great,” 153). Not even Budge, who first edited the Legend, thought that it was a prose version of the Song ; rather he supposed that they shared a common source (Budge, History of Alexander, Ixxvii). As Reinink has shown, the Song of A lexander is to some degree a reaction to the Alexander Legend composed not many years- after the latter, probably between 630 and 640 CE (Reinink, “Alexander the Great,” 152-5 and 165-8).”

    Thanks.

    Like

    Reply
    1. stewjo004

      @Ed

      “I have not used a book or article called “wikiIslam.””

      Had to look for your quote and so I had to copy and paste it and lo ehold wikiIslam was the result starting from the same point. I have no idea why you keep trying to piss on people and tell them its raining

      As for the rest…K

      Liked by 1 person

      Reply
      2. Ed

        Thanks for the response. What quote? And what do you mean by starting from the same point? Furthermore, what significance does “wikiIslam” have? Like I said, I gave you all of my sources, if “wikiIslam” used the same sources as me, thats not my problem. Thanks.

        Like

    1. ramboreturns2025

      roach,

      “have prior knowledge of”

      no c-roach, it does not neccessary follow, for instance, if they did, they wouldn’t have asked, since it was told orally from place to place according to c-roach like you. if they had either very little knowledge of lack of knowledge they would have asked, but when the quran addresses the jews when it comes to the laws of Allah, the quran says “why do they ask you WHEN they know what the law of Allah is ” (paraphrase) but when the quraysh are asking , they seem ignorant.

      Like

      Reply
      1. Ed

        Thanks for the response. It seems to me (from the examples given) that these are all things that do not require Muhammad to tell them beforehand, but rather questions that you could come up with on your own. Thanks.

        Like

  4. Ed

    @quranandbibleblog

    Thanks for the response. Could you explain what “deception” I have used? I’ve cited my sources for you to look at, provided an argument based on the consensus of scholarship (see commentaries by Tesei, Shoemaker, Van Bladel, Reynolds, Noldeke, Stewart, Durmaz, Hughes etc etc). Do you have anything of value to add to the conversation outside of insults and appeals to ridicule? thanks.

    Like

    Reply
      1. ed

        Thanks for the response. In what way am I playing stupid? And what did I get caught doing? Using scholarship? respectfully, I would appreciate it if you would remove yourself from the conversation if you have nothing of any value to add. Thanks.

        Like

  5. Ed

    @quranandbibleblog

    Thanks for the response. I dont think there is any need for that. I assumed this was a place for scholarly discussion, and I haven’t violated any of the rules. If you have an issue with anything that I have said please tell me. I would like to know what warrants this. Thanks.

    Like

    Reply
    1. stewjo004

      @Ed

      What warrants it is the passive aggressiveness. I will simplify the discussion so we can all move on with our lives. Kuffar are retarded. Not a few, not a portion, ALL of you. You make assumptions and then proceed to say “Aha!!! THIS right here is what islam is talking about it!!!” No Muslim is going to agree with your premise because everyone here is a vet. Every couple of years one dumb@$$ orientalist whom you all jokingly refer to as “scholars” (like whatever kaffir you quoted) comes with some “groundbreaking theory” that turns out to be utterly wrong in a few years. Examples off the top of my head include Dan Gibson’s “Petra is the real Mecca” and Patricia Crone’s “Islamic revisionism” We’ve seen it all at this point but you morons are going to keep trudging along because…you’re all retarded. Does this help explain things for you or do I need to breakout the finger puppets?

      Liked by 1 person

      Reply
      1. Ed

        Thanks for the response.

        “What warrants it is the passive aggressiveness”
        What are you talking about? I’m going to be honest here, I think this isn’t a problem with anything that I’ve said, but rather an issue with your opinion that “all kuffar are retarted.” I haven’t written anything here with malice towards anyone else.

        “Every couple of years one dumb@$$ orientalist whom you all jokingly refer to as “scholars” (like whatever kaffir you quoted) comes with some “groundbreaking theory” that turns out to be utterly wrong in a few years. Examples off the top of my head include Dan Gibson’s “Petra is the real Mecca” and Patricia Crone’s “Islamic revisionism””
        quoting a self published book by Dan Gibson, or some random 1970’s theory, then saying this applies to all scholars is ridiculous. If I were to grab some random muslim scholar who says the earth is flat, or that evolution isn’t true, would that mean all muslim scholars are liars? This isn’t just some random theory, this is a consensus that has been recognized for decades. Hell, I even gave you the quotes from the texts I was referencing, not just quotes from scholars.

        I say this with the utmost respect, but I think you ought to rethink your methodology because “everyone else but me and my people are stupid and can therefore be dismissed” aint it. Thanks.

        Like

      2. stewjo004

        @Ed

        You can take issue all day. Doesn’t change reality. Water is wet, the sky is blue and kuffar are retarded (otherwise they”d be Muslim) Its just life Edward

        (Sigh) God, its like teaching kids Santa isn’t real🤦 Orientalist started as Christian missionaries to attempt to intellectually attack Islam because the sword failed. That is the foundation for the study and it hasn’t changed other than the fact that they’re more secular now. So no their names don’t mean sh!t around here and its literally just a bunch of intellectual larping. Maybe if you live for a few more years and you watch all his stupid sh!t get wrecked (as it will inevetibaly will) you can remember this conversation

        And no I’m pretty comfortable dismissing you all. You literally just built off our sh!t and have always been considered savages. Thank you

        Liked by 1 person

      3. Ed

        Thanks for the response.

        “You can take issue all day. Doesn’t change reality. Water is wet, the sky is blue and kuffar are retarded (otherwise they”d be Muslim) Its just life Edward”

        My name isn’t Edward. Again, “everyone who disagrees with me is dumb” isn’t an argument.

        “(Sigh) God, its like teaching kids Santa isn’t real Orientalist started as Christian missionaries to attempt to intellectually attack Islam because the sword failed. That is the foundation for the study and it hasn’t changed other than the fact that they’re more secular now.”

        Dismissing an entire field of research based on how they supposedly started (I’m not inclined to believe your theory on how they started because you have done almost nothing but lie this whole time, then lash out) is ridiculous.

        “So no their names don’t mean sh!t around here and its literally just a bunch of intellectual larping. Maybe if you live for a few more years and you watch all his stupid sh!t get wrecked (as it will inevetibaly will) you can remember this conversation”

        “Trust me guys, they’re gonna disprove him (don’t know who “him” is, I’m citing the scholarly consensus after all) one of these days, just keep waiting.” Very convincing.

        “And no I’m pretty comfortable dismissing you all. You literally just built off our sh!t and have always been considered savages. Thank you”

        And were back to name calling and the classic “he disagrees with me, therefore hes wrong.” Very nice.

        Get some help man. If you always felt this way, why did you even bother trying to quote a scholar in the first place? You should have just gone with the ole “everyone who disagrees with me is stupid” argument in the first place.

        Thanks.

        Like

      4. stewjo004

        @ED

        1. Edward if you couldn’t tell none of us are engaging to begin with. Could we refute the nonsense? Yes as we all have track records of doing so. Just because we don’t feel like going through the work for no gain on something we already know is wrong doesn’t mean we lack the abilty to argue more effectively
        2. It’s not my fault you don’t know history Edward. You have this thing called “Google” on your computer or mobile device which you can type ANY question into and get an answer. I would personally recommend because you’re clearly ignorant on the subject (some may say retarded) type in the forefathers of the field “William Tisdall” and “Abraham Geiger” (both refuted btw) so you can catch up with the rest of the class. i know this must be exciting and all that for you seeing as its new but this is just a rerun to everyone else. Also I find it curious you have called me a liar or “lashed out” could you quote that for me? Technically speaking you are the one who got caught in misinformation )one could say a lie) by your erroneous attempt to equate an ayah and hadith that had NOTHING to do with your thesis statement but…I digress
        3. There is no “scholarly consensus” on your claim, please see why I refer to you all as “retards”
        4. I have never engaged i simply pointed out it a perusing of your nonsense flaws in the argumetn with no indepth research. We ALWAYS refute you retards but again you’re new to this I understand. As I said sometimes you just need to mature and grow up hence why i recommend you remember this conversation, Edward

        Like

  6. Assalamu alaikum,

    Sheikh Saleh al Fawzan and others have said and confirmed that anyone decides to miss the prayer ’cause he doesn’t feel like he therefore committed apostasy.

    1. Is it correct how I understood from their message?
    2. Today by mistake have awaken after Sunrise and Dhuhr, but not at the end of Dhuhr. However, I have slept a liittle bit “cause I had pain in my head like if someone punched my head so hard and when I got up, I felt it healed. But, I did not thought of missing the prayer ’cause I did not felt like or else it’ll be apostasy, so therefore I have controlled myself. Does that mean I have not committed apostasy if I have missed while not wanting to abandon?
    3. Is this correct understanding from what I deduced?

    Like

    Reply
    2. stewjo004

      @Alex

      1. To begin there is a difference of opinion on the one who purposely misses the prayer Sheikh Fawzan holds the opinion it is a nullifier but there are other ulema who hold the position its like the rest of the pillars where the person is sinful but still a Muslim as long as he doesn’t deny that he has to pray
      2. Missing a salah through for example sleeping or forgetting is not what the people who hold the postion of apostasy are referring to and this wouldn’t be a nullifier. It would apply to a person who knows Salah is in and then refuses
      3. With that said you are inshaAllah fine, just make up the dhur prayer you missed and continue on as normal

      Liked by 2 people

      Reply

  7. Secularism and liberalism is rampant in Muslim countries especially via colleges and western cultural influence, we can’t call it a “growing problem” at this point it would quite preposterous as it is already an established/popular political and ideological power on Muslim lands.

    Dawah organizations getting millions in donations ought to better focus on our countries first instead of non muslim countries, many don’t agree with that view of mine nor do they offer any pragmatic solutions.

    I’m happy with the success they’re having in Africa, but still I find it ridiculous to concentrate our efforts there when our strongholds are crumbling. It’s like throwing water off the boat to keep it afloat using a bucket without patching the hole.

    Liked by 1 person

    Reply
  8. Sunniahlions930

    Salam, I had a conversation with a muslim on a article from islamic awarness on the topic of haman, he said that they changed the article multiple times because the kuffar refuted them (I think he means answering islam but I am not sure) how can I respond to him.

    Like

    Reply
    2. stewjo004

      @Sunnialions

      We need more info on the topic etc. Also Islamic Awareness changing their position is actually admirable, ask how many times those kuffar did so

      Liked by 1 person

      Reply
    1. stewjo004

      @Sunniahlions

      1. This Jason brother’s adab is atrocious and I can tell he has never gotten into a fight before. But anyways he also doesn’t know what he’s talking about regarding ulema (the ijazah system possibly inspired the doctorate system) If you get a bachelor’s degree in most scholarly circles they will acknowledge you’ve had some formal training. Also, ulema will takee info even ahlul bidah like Shia and Mutazilah in things like Arabic grammar if their work is benefical so as I said this person REALLY doesn’t know what they’re talking about
      2. Also his whole premise is dumb, okay they updated their article when they learned some stuff does this person think ulema never make any mistakes
      3. As for you, you did nothing wrong and my advice is to simply ignore this person as they are arrogant and not worth speaking with as they are “idealogically driven” and you can quote even people he would classify as a scholar and it wouldn’t matter.

      Liked by 2 people

      Reply
      1. Sunniahlions930

        Did manners in speaking is definitely not appropriate, but you’d be surprised to know that he is very knowledgeable especially in christianity and islam.
        So I wouldn’t go as far as saying he’s not knowledgeable but he definitely was in the wrong here.
        Also how did you know this was Jason’s server?

        Like

      2. Sunniahlions930

        His knowledge on Christianity and refuting salafis, shias etc are good, but he does this to basically anyone.

        Like

  10. Assalamu alaikum,

    Someone from Twitter whom I have chatted about Tajikistan’s President that the reason for his ban of some of the Islamic practices(but has let Quran, Mosque, Church and Bible) is only to protect the language and culture, which I find it very ridiculous, because if the President is a Muslim then he should not have banned any part of Shariah but instead, he could have kept the official language without religious interference, but banning parts of Shariah for this sounds like secularism.

    And about Mustafa Kemal, the guy has explained to me that it’s purpose was to form a national territory by returning the conquered lands outside of Anatolia(the place where Turks originated from which is annexed with Greece and Israel).

    The majority of scholars have said that one who prefers secularism over Shariah who thinks it’s better than it then he has committed apostasy.

    My questins are:

    1. Should we excuse Mustafa Kemal from takfir? Or, he is indeed an apostate when the Twitter user has explained?
    2. Is the reason he made a valid excuse for kufr?
    3. Did Mustafa Kemal really believed that secularism is better than Shariah?
    4. is Emomali Rahmon’s reason for banning some Shariah practices is valid excuse for kufr or he really committed an act of apostasy?
    5. Why nobody protested to resign the Tajikistan politicians and the President in replacement with someone who establishes Shariah fully(not partially)?
    6. Is protest halal in case of wanting to take it down the Islamic Government that have removed some Islamic practices?
    7. Are all Turkish politicians really Salafi Muslims based on the fact that the Turkish Government have issued a warrant for arresting Apostate Prophet for his blasphemy?

    Like

    Reply
    1. stewjo004

      @Alex

      Lot to unpack:

      1. I don’t recommend you make takfir or curse anyone even when obvious as there’s nothing to gain
      2. Regarding Kemal and Rahmon the “technicality” saving them at the moment is potential ignorance and let’s leave it at that. Judge by their actions in your heart accordingly
      3. The reason no one protested is due to potentially being killed combined with ignorance due to government crackdowns on madrassa etc
      4. Protest are halal in general
      5. Türkiye has a range of Islamic sects

      Like

      Reply
  11. Sarwar Rasul

    assalam alaikum
    how should we respond to those who claim abrahamic religions (also monotheism) was evolved from babylonian and sumerian mythologies
    Has anyone have any link to a detailed refutation?
    also is micah 5:2 talking about jesus? Being born in Bethlehem and existing from old,ancient days?

    Like

    Reply
  12. stewjo004

    @Edd

    Why you getting all catty with me for giving you real talk? 💀

    That isn’t scholarly consensus dumb@$$. You’ve simply listed other retards who hold the position
    There was no mention of prostartion in what you quoted (nor relevent)
    I didn’t make a manuscript argument (even though all the manuscripts are post Islam)

    Like

    Reply

  14. I’ve noticed a growing trend among daees especially on X promoting socialism.
    Often they don’t outright say it but their criticisms are only restricted to “Capitalism”, while at the same time they will say things like “well you know I don’t agree with socialism entirely BUT….look at the similarities with Islam”
    Maybe you guys can correct me but the matter of private property is sacred it is not? Which kinda makes it a serious matter.
    For example they will say things like the early caliphates were socialists in regards to their economic approach. I really don’t see how tbh from my own personal research, they seem pretty capitalist to me except that it was a welfare state with some degree of interventionism a la Nordic countries.
    Am i missing something because it’s been years since i’ve been seeing the same fallacious anti capitalist rhetoric ad infinitum, they say stuff about Islam which in my opinion is either from ignorance or they’re outright lying.

    Like

    Reply
  16. Orthodox Razi

    Hello everyone am new to this blog (Although I enjoy it very much may Allah bless your work ) I was wondering about brother Paul form blogging theology and that is if he is still a racist I have read your post about Paul’s racism and was heart broken (Especially since am black myself and enjoyed his content)
    I was wondering if Paul changed his mind or if he has apologized I also want to know more about Paul as well since he was a apostate for time if I know my information correctly anyway may Allah bless you and hope to hear a response.

    Like

    Reply

    1. As-salaam alaikum.

      He is a Muslim again and is actively promoting Islam. So, I would say he has retracted those comments. I think he said them when he was in a state of frustration and confusion. Allah knows best.

      Like

      Reply
      1. Orthodox Razi

        thanks for letting me know if I remember he had interview were during it he said he was struggling in his life with something during the time I believe Allan knows best anyway hope to see more form this blog and jazakallah khair

        Like

    2. Razi, salam

      You sound like a good hearted guy.

      I would advise you to take what’s good and leave what’s bad.

      It takes a narcissist to know a narcissist, this Paul guy is full or surprises and I’m almost certain more is to come, if ever it happens make sure to not give him the attention he craves for.
      @Faiz pleej don’t ban me saar

      Like

      Reply

  17. guys, was doing some reading about the oral transmissions of the vedas
    Just a little fun fact, there are different schools claiming to inherit the authentic vedas notably the Rig since the time of rishi vyas who’s the so called compiler of the veda.
    Obviously there’s some degree of myth to it but those schools definitely can be traced back only to medieval times.
    The point is that every versions differ from each other.
    While the shaakha (school tradition) is a weak argument for authenticity (duh), if you wanna annoy the dumb@$$ ask him which version is authentic

    Like

    Reply

Leave a comment