u/ConsistentSquare5650

Imam Al-Nawawi, commenting on those who would impose a humiliation along with the paying of the Jizyah, said:

هذه** الهيئة المذكورة أولا لا نعلم لها على هذا الوجه أصلا معتمدا وإنما ذكرها طائفة من أصحابنا الخراسانيين وقال جمهور الأصحاب تؤخذ الجزية برفق كأخذ الديون فالصواب الجزم بأن هذه الهيئة باطلة مردودة على من اخترعها ولم ينقل أن النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم ولا أحد من الخلفاء الراشدين فعل شيئا منها مع أخذهم الجزية وقد قال الرافعي رحمه الله في أول كتاب الجزية الأصح عند الأصحاب تفسير الصغار بالتزام أحكام الإسلام وجريانها عليهم وقالوا أشد الصغار على المرء أن يحكم عليه بما لا يعتقده ويضطر إلى **احتماله

As for this aforementioned practice (hay’ah), I know of no sound support for it in this respect, and it is only mentioned by the scholars of Khurasan. The majority (jumhur) of scholars say that the Jizyah is to be taken with gentleness, as one would receive a debt (dayn). The reliably correct opinion is that this practice is invalid and those who devised it should be refuted. It is not related that the Prophet or any of the rightly-guided caliphs did any such thing when collecting the Jizyah.Al-Raafi’i may Allah have mercy on him said in the first part of his book on Jizyah that the more correct opinions amongst our companions is thatsighaar means to abide by the rulings of Islam and to have them imposed on you. They said that the most severe form of sighaar that could occur is having something that they don’t agree with imposed on them. * ***(Rawdat al-Talibin, Volume 10, p.315-16)**

the deception is unreal.

Firstly, keep in mind that Islam rejects common ancestry

Now see the absolute dishonesty of Muslim apologists below

most laypeople do not know the distinction between common ancestry and the mechanisms proposed to explain evolution.

because common ancestry is supported by overwhelming evidence, and is IMMOVABLE, some muslim apologists shift the discussion to criticisms of neo-darwinism. people like suboor ahmad and hamza tzortzis often focus on debates over the mechanisms of evolution because scientists continue to discuss and refine those mechanisms.

to someone unfamiliar with evolutionary biology, this can create the impression that common ancestry itself is in dispute. it is not.
not a single mainstream biologist rejects common ancestry. even michael behe, one of the most prominent critics of darwinian mechanisms, accepts common ancestry. criticizing aspects of neo-darwinism is not the same as rejecting the fact that humans and other organisms share common ancestry.

Seriously wtf

ibn Taymiyyah is frequently cited as supporting the consensus (ijma') that the Earth is spherical according to the scholars of islam but in reality the so-called "consensus" mentioned in Majmu al-Fatawa (25/195) refers not to the scholars of Islam, but rather to philosophers
Ibn Taymiyyah clarifies in his book" Bayan Talbees al- Jahmiyah" that the so-called ijma' mentioned regarding the shape of the Earth is not the consensus of authentic religious scholars, but rather
"the agreement of philosophers".

source

al-Mubarakfuri said:
"I said that if by that he meant that the earth is spherical, by consensus that all the imams of this religion, past and present, agree on its sphericity and affirm it, then that is undeniably false.
and if by this he meant the agreement of philosophers and astronomers, then we should not pay attention to it."
[Tuhfat al-Ahwadhi, p. 498]

Ibn Taymiyyah quoting Ibn al-Munadi as saying: « Similarly they were unanimously agreed that the Earth, with all its movements on land and sea is like a ball. He said: That is indicated by the fact that the sun, moon and stars do not rise and set over those who are in different parts of the earth at the same time; rather that occurs in the east before it occurs in the west. >>>
This statement is strikingly similar to what Ibn Rustah records in his book Al-A'laq al-Nafsiyyah (page 12).
We note here in Ibn Taymiyyah's book: "They also
agreed that the Earth, with all its MOVEMENTS "حركاتها"
"...on land and sea, is like a sphere

Amazing fine tuning by god where striking majority of past specie couldn’t adapt 😄
The entire fine tuning argument is garbage.
The universe only probably has earth where life can sustain.
Does this seem like a finely tuned model? Doesn’t seem so

The amount of mental gymnastics I’ve committed as an apologist in past to justify Prophet having sex with 9 year old.

Now I don’t get the same “shock and disgust” factor like I used to when I first heard this. Just because how many times I’ve tried to justify it in past

I still consider it immoral but I often forget how disgusting this act is.

NOT EVEN ANIMALS DO SUCH AN ACT

If God is truly All-Merciful and perfectly just, punishments must fit the crime. Yet, Islamic scripture outlines extreme torture for minor infractions.

Below are the things Allah will burn alive someone for in hell:
making pictures of living beings [Sahih al-Bukhari 5950]

plucking eyebrows [Sahih al-Bukhari 5931]

wearing clothes below ankles [Sahih al-Bukhari 5787]

making tattoos [Sahih al-Bukhari 5931]

women who introduce gap between teeth for beauty (wtf) [Sahih al-Bukhari 5931]

the women who lengthen hair for others [Sahih al-Bukhari 5934]

women who get it lengthen for themselves [Sahih al-Bukhari 5934]

women who don’t give their husband sex when asked [Sahih al-Bukhari 3237]

a thief who steals an egg (for what his hands are already to be cut) [Sahih al-Bukhari 6799]

If a human judge sentenced someone to burn alive for plucking eyebrows or drawing a picture, they would be deemed a cruel tyrant. Defending this as "perfect divine justice" is illogical. Burning people for finite, cosmetic choices completely voids the concept of perfect mercy.
(You can add more in comments lol)

Below are the things Allah will burn alive someone for in hell

* making pictures of living beings [Sahih al-Bukhari 5950]

* plucking eyebrows [Sahih al-Bukhari 5931]

* wearing clothes below ankles [Sahih al-Bukhari 5787]

* making tattoos [Sahih al-Bukhari 5931]

* women who introduce gap between teeth for beauty (wtf) [Sahih al-Bukhari 5931]

* the women who lengthen hair for others [Sahih al-Bukhari 5934]

* women who get it lengthen for themselves [Sahih al-Bukhari 5934]

* women who don’t give their husband sex when asked [Sahih al-Bukhari 3237]

* a thief who steals an egg (for what his hands are already to be cut) [Sahih al-Bukhari 6799]
(You can add more in comments lol)

Prophet said in Sahih Muslim 1923 that a group will keep fighting for Islam till the day of judgment. The hadith uses the word يُقَاتِلُونَ
which means this isn’t some “fighting with words” but bloodshed. What group is this? Because today we see no Muslim nation fighting any western nation in hostile manner, except groups like lSlS, other than that all are just fighting among themselves. Iran is already a rafidah state so you can’t claim that either.

Prophet said in Sahih Muslim 1923 that a group will keep fighting for Islam till the day of judgment. The hadith uses the word يُقَاتِلُونَ
which means this isn’t some “fighting with words” but bloodshed. What group is this? Because today we see no Muslim nation fighting any western nation in hostile manner, except groups like lSlS, other than that all are just fighting among themselves. Iran is already a rafidah state so you can’t claim that either.

FYI I’m a former Muslim and the below are the reasons even the finest of Muslim debaters will dodge or give completely stupid answers to, ALWAYS

1. Is why Islam is objectively false
2. Is why Islam doesn’t make sense
3. Is critique of its moral compass

1. Common Ancestry

Islam traditionally teaches a specially created Adam and Eve, yet genetics strongly supports common ancestry. Shared ERVs, pseudogenes, and other genetic markers appear exactly where we’d expect if humans and apes share ancestors. Why would a special creation look indistinguishable from common descent?
This makes Islam objectively false

2. Qadr and Free Will

If Allah wrote every event before creation and nothing can occur contrary to His decree, in what meaningful sense could anyone have acted differently? If the outcome is fixed, accountability appears difficult to justify. He is writing an entire script then holding the person accountable for going by it. LOL

3. Euthyphro Dilemma

Is something good because Allah commands it, or does Allah command it because it is good? If the former, morality seems arbitrary. If the latter, goodness exists independently of divine command. When severe punishments are prescribed for acts many regard as minor, the dilemma becomes especially pressing. Imagine a woman burning infront of you alive because she drew a monkey or plucked her eyebrows
And the reason why Islam permits child marriages, kiIIing apostates, not because there’s empirical goodness in them, but because Allah said so

Hello, so as the post says, I can’t reveal my identity tho

Since I have beyond measure huge following, I can’t just drop my account because I don’t believe in the faith lol so I just use it to see how people interact to topics which aren’t brought up in Muslim discourse, and since I’m Muslim in their eyes they can’t dismiss it by saying “huhhh kafir propaganda”

But I want to share a very weird instance with you all. A few years ago I started my page to talk about Islam , it is about Islam all along but

As time went on I looked into the truth, evolution, the incessant violence , misogyny , what not, and now I don’t believe in it, but as said, my account is huge so I can’t just risk anything outside lol

Here’s my take , majority “believers” just want to stay in avoidance.

I was in live stream on YouTube with other Muslim content creators obviously pretending to be Muslim myself and I made a statement “how can we as Muslims say humans don’t follow evolution when trillions of other species do and when we also accept micro evolution is true?”

To that their absolutely dumfuck response was “humans are exceptional, they have thinking skills, Allah has made them special”. “These scientists are just pushing these evolution models forcefully, just go and search how many people they’ve kicked out because they disagreed with evolution”

Me: “absolutely brother, it’s very apparent that it’s all just pure science propaganda”

They: “Alhamdulillah but we have Quran, Allah made Adam with clay in heaven so it’s clear that evolution is not true”

Me: “exactly”

It’s just mind boggling what stupidity is often justified because people just don’t have the courage to see the truth.

Apparently humans chimpanzees monkeys gorillas apes all have the exact same way of broken L gulo gene which makes us vulnerable of getting a deadly disease like scurvy.
How do you (if happen to be) as a theist explain creationism when the exact same gene is broken in exact same manner among all higher primates and no other mammal.

If a god designed every higher primate to have such patterns independently , he’s trying to intentionally deceive human beings to not believe in him

Same with Indic religions like Hinduism too since it believes in first man manu, and for christans and Muslims first man is Adam, but For people who are conservative to the core in religion, how do you strike a compatibility with common ancestry?

For me it’s

“It is such as he, as little con- scious of himself as the bee in a hive, who are the lucky in life, for they have the best chance of happiness: their activities are shared by all, and their pleasures are only pleasures because they are enjoyed in common; you will see them on Whit-Monday dancing on Hampstead Heath, shouting at a football match, or from club windows in Pall Mall cheering a royal procession. It is because of them that man has been called a social animal.”

From of human bondage by Somerset Maugham