I think this is the strongest argument against classical theism but let's apply it to islam.

If God is omnipotent and omniscient, he can lie to us and change our reality. So how can we know if everything said in islam (Charia, Paradise for believers) is true?

Let's say, for the sake of argyment, that Islam is true in the sense that a well-defined Allah sent a revelation and laws to Muhammad. What guarantee do I have that I will go to Paradise after following Islam?

Allah could send atheists to Paradise and Muslims to Hell,
Christians to Paradise and others to Hell,
500 pagans to Paradise, 200 Zoroastrians to Hell, and billions into infinite reincarnation. (Why not?)

Or perhaps he created Hell but has never actually sent anyone there. There are infinitely many logical possibilities that contradict your creed like this.

You cannot refute this by saying,

"If everything in our religion is true, then everything will happen as written in our text."

Because your God could modify every aspect of reality, our minds, or even your texts without us ever noticing it. Your creed would have no power against a God capable of doing such things.

So we don't have any rational reason to believe in islam even if islam is true !

Once you realize this, it becomes absurd to submit your life to a God who can do whatever he wants, regardless of what you believe or do.

If the abstract ideas as "State, God, Nature etc." are only spooks that we use to live together, he could not be able to say that pleasure and pain are spooks because they are not ideas but pure experiences.

Finally, maybe hedonism and egoism are very close ; what do you think about that ?

When i was thinking about argument for and against moral objectivity or subjectivity ; i asked myself if someone had a probabilist approach of moral actions.

For example,let's take a hedonist and empirist point a view of ethics

If we know that a action (like rape or murder) cause at 99,99% more suffering than pleasure for all concerned persons, i could qualify it at 99,99% evil and not 100% to avoid absolutism fallacy.

I don't know if i'm enough clear, but i want to know if "probabilist ethics" exist and who have already done it ?

I personnally leaved islam in studying the story of a sahaba (Ibn Abi Sarh if you want to check) and the story of islam.

So after i debated with many muslims online, i even created a youtube channel and i think now that these debates are really useless...

I don't know how some ex-muslims dedicate all their free time to study this absurd cult, making videos while years, debating and support the offense of angry muslims etc.

After introspection, i don't want to talk about islam all my life, i want to really live, have fun, knowing peace, feel pleasure...

I have a dillemma, either continue to share my experiences and knowing of islam despite the mental pain that it causes
Either to remove entirely this religion of my life and ignoring it...

What do you think ?

>4:157-158 and for boasting, “We killed the Messiah, Jesus, son of Mary, the messenger of Allah.” But they neither killed nor crucified him—it was only made to appear so. Even those who argue for this ˹crucifixion˺ are in doubt. They have no knowledge whatsoever—only making assumptions. They certainly did not kill him. Rather, Allah raised him up to Himself. And Allah is Almighty, All-Wis (Trad by Dr. Mustapha Al Khattab

In Islam, it is important to understand that the narrative regarding the Messiah is roughly as follows:

Jesus arrives with the Gospel and miracles to preach monotheism -> He is condemned to crucifixion -> But at the moment of his sentence, he ascends to heaven ->

-> Finally, Allah deceives the entire world, forcing it to witness a "fake crucified Jesus" mistaken for the real Jesus, who remains unharmed.

This illusion supposedly worked so well early Christians like Paul of Tarsus (in 50) and Ignatius of Antioch, Jews like Flavius ​​Josephus, and even Romans historians like Tacitus all together reported the crucifixion of Jesus Christ

This would imply that for six centuries from 33 to 622 AD the direct experience of the inhabitants of Judea and the shared historical knowledge of Jewish, Christian, and pagan peoples do not constitute proof...

... But a 7th-century Bedouin leader of a state, claiming that God deceived humanity for 600 years, suddenly becomes credible ?

In more Quran claims that Jews and Christians have doubts about the Christ Death but in fact in 7th century no one jew and no one christian ever doubt and it became a axiom for christian theology either for roman church (Nicee 321 Constantinople 385) or for Arians or Nestorians, crucifixion is the basis a christian creed.

And above all, this raises two crucial questions :

1. Why did Allah a so-claimed truthfullness God lied to humanity for 600 years in making humans believe in a fake Jesus crucified ?

2. Why does the Quran reproach us for believing in the historical fact of the crucifixion without "proof," while commanding us to believe Muhammad without any proof regarding this matter?

A neutral observer (an atheist like myself) has a thousand times more reason to favor the corroborating and independents accounts of Paul of Tarsus, Tacitus, and Flavius ​​Josephus over those of a Bedouin born 500 years later...

>4:157-158 and for boasting, “We killed the Messiah, Jesus, son of Mary, the messenger of Allah.” But they neither killed nor crucified him—it was only made to appear so. Even those who argue for this ˹crucifixion˺ are in doubt. They have no knowledge whatsoever—only making assumptions. They certainly did not kill him. Rather, Allah raised him up to Himself. And Allah is Almighty, All-Wis (Trad by Dr. Mustapha Al Khattab

In Islam, it is important to understand that the narrative regarding the Messiah is roughly as follows:

Jesus arrives with the Gospel and miracles to preach monotheism -> He is condemned to crucifixion -> But at the moment of his sentence, he ascends to heaven ->

-> Finally, Allah deceives the entire world, forcing it to witness a "fake crucified Jesus" mistaken for the real Jesus, who remains unharmed.

This illusion supposedly worked so well early Christians like Paul of Tarsus (in 50) and Ignatius of Antioch, Jews like Flavius ​​Josephus, and even Romans historians like Tacitus all together reported the crucifixion of Jesus Christ

This would imply that for six centuries from 33 to 622 AD the direct experience of the inhabitants of Judea and the shared historical knowledge of Jewish, Christian, and pagan peoples do not constitute proof...

... But a 7th-century Bedouin leader of a state, claiming that God deceived humanity for 600 years, suddenly becomes credible ?

And above all, this raises two crucial questions :

1. Why did Allah a so-claimed truthfullness God lied to humanity for 600 years in making humans believe in a fake Jesus crucified ?

2. Why does the Quran reproach us for believing in the historical fact of the crucifixion without "proof," while commanding us to believe Muhammad without any proof regarding this matter?

A neutral observer (an atheist like myself) has a thousand times more reason to favor the corroborating and independents accounts of Paul of Tarsus, Tacitus, and Flavius ​​Josephus over those of a Bedouin born 500 years later...

1. Context

In 616, while Persian Sassanid Empire won the major battle against Byzantin Empire in Antioch (613) taken Jerusalem, and launched 2 compaigns to take Anatolia (615) and Egypt (616). Arabs are supporting the two empires. According to tafsirs, polytheists arabs supported persians, and monotheist arabs supported the "ahl al kitab" byzantin empire.

This context was extremely unfortunate for Byzance, they are going to lose Egypt with Anatolia and Persians are at the doors of Constantinople.

So Muhammad obviously supporter of Byzance will make a... "prophecy"

2. The prophecy of Muhammad

>(Trad. by Mokrane Gezzou translator of Tafsir Al Jalalayn)
30:2 - The byzantines have been vanquished
3 - in the nearer part of land. But they after the vainquishing shall be the victors
4 - in a few years (bid i sin means three to nine years) To God belongs the command before and after And on that day the believers shall rejoice
5 - in God's help He helps whomever He will; and He is the Mighty, the merciful

3. Meaning of the prophecy

So we need to define the terms to define the prophecy.

In 616 Romans losed, but they will win enter 619 and 625. So this is what we call a a priori prediction.

And when Romans will win Muslims will be happy about God's help, so a God's help while or close before Roman victory. (We can't rejoice about a thing that never yet happened...)

In 619 Sassanid Empire finished to conquer Anatolia (617-618) Egypt with Alexandria siege (619), and there are no major battles enter 619 and 622.

So the only battle with miraculous God's help according to tafsirs is Battle of Badr on March 624. And the decisive battle where Byzantine won against Sassanids is the Battle of Ganzak in June 624 won the 2 July 624 according to the byzantinist Illka Syvanne. A battle where byzantines destroyed on of the main temple of fire of zoroastrism Takht-e-Suleiman.

But this battle was only the second major battle of counter-offensive of Heraclius, Heraclius needed to win another major battle in Anatolia to invade Sassanid territories -> The Battle of Ophlimus in 622.

So the probabilty of Muhammad prophecy is the probabilities combined of the victories of these 3 battles... the formula is :
P(Badr) x P(Ganzak) x P(Ophlimus)

4. How calculate ? The Lineal Lanchester Law

A formula called Lineal Lanchester law permit to calculte the a priori probability of a battle with the effectives of two armies.

Inspired by it I will use a very simple null model : the a priori probability of victory is approximated by each army's share of the total forces engaged.

5. The calculation

Let's start for Badr where the numbers are the more precise

>Sahih Muslim 1673
When it was the day on which the Battle of Badr was fought, the Messenger of Allah cast a glance at the infidels, and they were one thousand while his own Companions were three hundred and nineteen >!(PS : i know there are other estimations at 313 or 317 but anyway it will not give much changes to probabilities...)!<

So : 319 Muslim against 1 000 Meccans = 1319 Total soldiers

P(Badr) = 319 / 1319 x 100 = 24,18% (less than 1/4)

For Ganzak according to the byzantinist James Howard Johnston byzantine campaigns's army are usually enter 15 000 and 20 000 soldiers since Maurice emperor, and Kaegi estimated it enter 20 000 and 24 000 soldiers

For Persians according to Kaegi and Syvanne the soldiers of Khosro II are numbered at 40,000.

So i will take the numbers 20 000 for Heraclius and 40 000 for Khosro

P(Ganzak) = 20 000 / 60 000 x 100 = 33,33% (1/3)

We need now the numbers of Ophlimus battle, but we have a problem... there are no numbers for this battle and we can only speculate...

>!We only know that byzantines were in number inferiority, that Heraclius leaded them personnaly since Constantinople, more moveable than persians not leaded by Khosro but their best general Sharnaraz and that Byzantines defeated them due to their mobility in ennemy's territory.!<

So Personnally with all my reading i can estimate byzantine army at 15 000 soldiers and Sassanid army at 20 000 soldiers. I think that this is the more plausible number, but keep in mind that this is only my personal notice.

P(Ophlimus) = 15 000 / 35 000 x 100 = 42,86% (3/7)

So let's have or final result !

24,18% x 1/3 x 3/7 = 3,45%
-> 1 chance on 29 !

6. Impressive but really surnatural ?

As we can see Muhammad had litterally 96,55% of chances to fail his prophecy and he suceed. This is impressive but really not surnatural...

There are predictions who are so much difficult and in all cases, a 1 of 29 event is not probable but very respectfull of laws of nature...

7. Comparisons

In 2016, bookmakers estimated that Leicester City FC have 1 chance of 5000 to win Premier League... one of most unprobable events in sport history...

Imagine the no-sense to say that when Abu Bakr bet against Quraysh on 29/1 he is listening to a Prophet a God, but when a women bet 10 pounds on 5000/1 odds, she is a simple human.

Political predictions have also nothing surnatural Piotr Dunorvo a Russian Politician said in a famous memorandum to the Tsar of Russia on 1914 that if he declares war to Germany, he'll make his army weak and lose his power towards a bolchevik revolution.

6 months later Nicolai II don't listen him declares war to Germany and in 1917 Vladimir Lenine takes Moscou and make this Bolchevik revolution...

8. Conclusion

As we can see there are nothing miraculous with roman's so called miracle, this is maybe a brilliant geo-political reading of the 7th century context ; but nothing exceptionnal or make ourselves think that this is a "divine revelation out of nowhere"

1. Context

In 616, while Persian Sassanid Empire won the major battle against Byzantin Empire in Antioch (613) taken Jerusalem, and launched 2 compaigns to take Anatolia (615) and Egypt (616). Arabs are supporting the two empires. According to tafsirs, polytheists arabs supported persians, and monotheist arabs supported the "ahl al kitab" byzantin empire.

This context was extremely unfortunate for Byzance, they are going to lose Egypt with Anatolia and Persians are at the doors of Constantinople.

So Muhammad obviously supporter of Byzance will make a... "prophecy"

2. The prophecy of Muhammad

>(Trad. by Mokrane Gezzou translator of Tafsir Al Jalalayn)
30:2 - The byzantines have been vanquished
3 - in the nearer part of land. But they after the vainquishing shall be the victors
4 - in a few years (bid i sin means three to nine years) To God belongs the command before and after And on that day the believers shall rejoice
5 - in God's help He helps whomever He will; and He is the Mighty, the merciful

3. Meaning of the prophecy

So we need to define the terms to define the prophecy.

In 616 Romans losed, but they will win enter 619 and 625. So this is what we call a a priori prediction.

And when Romans will win Muslims will be happy about God's help, so a God's help while or close before Roman victory. (We can't rejoice about a thing that never yet happened...)

In 619 Sassanid Empire finished to conquer Anatolia (617-618) Egypt with Alexandria siege (619), and there are no major battles enter 619 and 622.

So the only battle with miraculous God's help according to tafsirs is Battle of Badr on March 624. And the decisive battle where Byzantine won against Sassanids is the Battle of Ganzak in June 624 won the 2 July 624 according to the byzantinist Illka Syvanne. A battle where byzantines destroyed on of the main temple of fire of zoroastrism Takht-e-Suleiman.

But this battle was only the second major battle of counter-offensive of Heraclius, Heraclius needed to win another major battle in Anatolia to invade Sassanid territories -> The Battle of Ophlimus in 622.

So the probabilty of Muhammad prophecy is the probabilities combined of the victories of these 3 battles... the formula is :
P(Badr) x P(Ganzak) x P(Ophlimus)

4. How calculate ? The Lineal Lanchester Law

A formula called Lineal Lanchester law permit to calculte the a priori probability of a battle with the effectives of two armies.

Inspired by it I will use a very simple null model : the a priori probability of victory is approximated by each army's share of the total forces engaged.

5. The calculation

Let's start for Badr where the numbers are the more precise

>Sahih Muslim 1673
When it was the day on which the Battle of Badr was fought, the Messenger of Allah cast a glance at the infidels, and they were one thousand while his own Companions were three hundred and nineteen >!(PS : i know there are other estimations at 313 or 317 but anyway it will not give much changes to probabilities...)!<

So : 319 Muslim against 1 000 Meccans = 1319 Total soldiers

P(Badr) = 319 / 1319 x 100 = 24,18% (less than 1/4)

For Ganzak according to the byzantinist James Howard Johnston byzantine campaigns's army are usually enter 15 000 and 20 000 soldiers since Maurice emperor, and Kaegi estimated it enter 20 000 and 24 000 soldiers

For Persians according to Kaegi and Syvanne the soldiers of Khosro II are numbered at 40,000.

So i will take the numbers 20 000 for Heraclius and 40 000 for Khosro

P(Ganzak) = 20 000 / 60 000 x 100 = 33,33% (1/3)

We need now the numbers of Ophlimus battle, but we have a problem... there are no numbers for this battle and we can only speculate...

>!We only know that byzantines were in number inferiority, that Heraclius leaded them personnaly since Constantinople, more moveable than persians not leaded by Khosro but their best general Sharnaraz and that Byzantines defeated them due to their mobility in ennemy's territory.!<

So Personnally with all my reading i can estimate byzantine army at 15 000 soldiers and Sassanid army at 20 000 soldiers. I think that this is the more plausible number, but keep in mind that this is only my personal notice.

P(Ophlimus) = 15 000 / 35 000 x 100 = 42,86% (3/7)

So let's have or final result !

24,18% x 1/3 x 3/7 = 3,45%
-> 1 chance on 29 !

6. Impressive but really surnatural ?

As we can see Muhammad had litterally 96,55% of chances to fail his prophecy and he suceed. This is impressive but really not surnatural...

There are predictions who are so much difficult and in all cases, a 1 of 29 event is not probable but very respectfull of laws of nature...

7. Comparisons

In 2016, bookmakers estimated that Leicester City FC have 1 chance of 5000 to win Premier League... one of most unprobable events in sport history...

Imagine the no-sense to say that when Abu Bakr bet against Quraysh on 29/1 he is listening to a Prophet a God, but when a women bet 10 pounds on 5000/1 odds, she is a simple human.

Political predictions have also nothing surnatural Piotr Dunorvo a Russian Politician said in a famous memorandum to the Tsar of Russia on 1914 that if he declares war to Germany, he'll make his army weak and lose his power towards a bolchevik revolution.

6 months later Nicolai II don't listen him declares war to Germany and in 1917 Vladimir Lenine takes Moscou and make this Bolchevik revolution...

8. Conclusion

As we can see there are nothing miraculous with roman's so called miracle, this is maybe a brilliant geo-political reading of the 7th century context ; but nothing exceptionnal or make ourselves think that this is a "divine revelation out of nowhere"

Hi, i'm H20 living in France, i'm a arab from morocco and either in France where dating is so hard and Morocco where is very conservative i struggle.

I search a destination where arab mens are seen as cool or just a destination where dating is easier. I even ask myself are there any countries that like maghrebis mens ?

I have thinked at countries like Ivory Coast, Nigeria, Togo or Bénin, because i like curvy womens and i would like to date them.

So what do you think where i can go for it ?

Question : Did Umar give 4/6 to the sisters and 3/6 to the husband in accordance with the law of Allah?

Before answering et us consider the famous case of *awl* (proportional reduction of shares) found in the hadith of Umar discussed in fiqh texts :

A deceased woman with a husband and two sisters.

The Quran states: 4:12 – "And for you is half of what your wives leave, if they have no children."
4:176 – "Regarding the deceased who has neither father, mother, nor child*... if there are* two sisters (or more), then they receive two-thirds of what he leaves."

Look at the wording of the verse: "what he/they leaves" what does they leave ? -> 6/6, or 100% of their heritage. So We deduce :

>P1: "What he leaves" = 100% of his inheritance = 6/6.

Let us look at the inheritance rules :

>Husband = 1/2 = 3/6
Sisters = 2/3 = 4/6
Thus, 3/6 + 4/6 = 7/6 -> resulting in an excess of 1/6.

We therefore deduce P2

>P2 : Allah commands us to distribute 7/6, starting from an inheritance base of 6/6 ; specifically, 3/6 to the husband and 4/6 to the sisters.

But there is no need to panic, for we have awl a tool that allows us to modify the rule in the event of an excess. We change the common denominator of the shares :

7/6 becomes 7/7.
Husband receives 3/7 instead of 3/6.
Sisters receive 4/7 instead of 4/6.

We deduce P3:

>P3: Using awl, Umar distributed 7/7 starting from an inheritance of 6/6 ; specifically, 4/7 to the husband and 3/7 to the sisters.

From P1, P2, and P3, we draw the logical conclusion -

>-> C: Omar did not carry out Allah's command ; 7/7 ≠ 7/6 ; awl constitutes disobedience to Allah.

And here, Sunni Muslims, to defend Omar and the fuqahas (jurists), you have only 3 options : refute P1, P2, or P3.

Either refute that the inheritance equals 100% of the inheritance -> Absurd.
Or refute that Allah commanded 7/6 from 6/6 -> Good luck for altering the scripture.
Or refute that 7/6 ≠ 7/7, 3/6 ≠ 3/7, and 4/6 ≠ 4/7 -> Refute mathematics itself.

If you are unable to do so (and you will be unable), and you admit that Omar disobeyed Allah, then you must answer this question : Could Omar logically obey Allah ?

And to answer, you must demonstrate how "giving 7/6 from 6/6" is a logical possibility.

If you don't so, then you must admit that Allah's command was illogical and, therefore... contradictory. So can you answer my question.

>Question : Did Umar give 4/6 to the sisters and 3/6 to the husband in accordance with the law of Allah?

Question : Did Umar give 4/6 to the sisters and 3/6 to the husband in accordance with the law of Allah?

Before answering et us consider the famous case of *awl* (proportional reduction of shares) found in the hadith of Umar discussed in fiqh texts :

A deceased woman with a husband and two sisters.

The Quran states: 4:12 – "And for you is half of what your wives leave, if they have no children."
4:176 – "Regarding the deceased who has neither father, mother, nor child*... if there are* two sisters (or more), then they receive two-thirds of what he leaves."

Look at the wording of the verse: "what he/they leaves" what does they leave ? -> 6/6, or 100% of their heritage. So We deduce :

>P1: "What he leaves" = 100% of his inheritance = 6/6.

Let us look at the inheritance rules :

>Husband = 1/2 = 3/6
Sisters = 2/3 = 4/6
Thus, 3/6 + 4/6 = 7/6 -> resulting in an excess of 1/6.

We therefore deduce P2

>P2 : Allah commands us to distribute 7/6, starting from an inheritance base of 6/6 ; specifically, 3/6 to the husband and 4/6 to the sisters.

But there is no need to panic, for we have awl a tool that allows us to modify the rule in the event of an excess. We change the common denominator of the shares :

7/6 becomes 7/7.
Husband receives 3/7 instead of 3/6.
Sisters receive 4/7 instead of 4/6.

We deduce P3:

>P3: Using awl, Umar distributed 7/7 starting from an inheritance of 6/6 ; specifically, 4/7 to the husband and 3/7 to the sisters.

From P1, P2, and P3, we draw the logical conclusion -

>-> C: Omar did not carry out Allah's command ; 7/7 ≠ 7/6 ; awl constitutes disobedience to Allah.

And here, Sunni Muslims, to defend Omar and the fuqahas (jurists), you have only 3 options : refute P1, P2, or P3.

Either refute that the inheritance equals 100% of the inheritance -> Absurd.
Or refute that Allah commanded 7/6 from 6/6 -> Good luck for altering the scripture.
Or refute that 7/6 ≠ 7/7, 3/6 ≠ 3/7, and 4/6 ≠ 4/7 -> Refute mathematics itself.

If you are unable to do so (and you will be unable), and you admit that Omar disobeyed Allah, then you must answer this question : Could Omar logically obey Allah ?

And to answer, you must demonstrate how "giving 7/6 from 6/6" is a logical possibility.

If you don't so, then you must admit that Allah's command was illogical and, therefore... contradictory. So can you answer my question.

>Question : Did Umar give 4/6 to the sisters and 3/6 to the husband in accordance with the law of Allah?

C’est pas cher c’est très pratique dans les grandes villes avec des transports dysfonctionnels (comme Marseille ou Nice) ou juste pour se balader dans des quartiers très éloignés de chez soi…

Par contre tu vas à un date avec ; pas mal de femmes vont te regarder très mal ; tu vas au travail avec on te regarde mal aussi ; tu dis que t’en as une à ton pote, on te traite même d’homosexuel… (oui on m’a déjà dit « t’es un PD si tu achètes ça » )
Complètement lunaire !

Je peux comprendre pour les trots en libre service type Lime, ça peut être associé à la mauvaise circulation, au danger sur la route…, Mais les trots perso ça devrait passer… ah bah non juste en parlant tu te fais juger

Perso j’aurais préféré me payer une trotinette 300-400€ que de claquer 3700€ en auto école pour rater le permis voiture 3 fois…


In a Nietzschean perspective "Modesty" is merely a value invented by weak men to stifle the morale of strong women through resentment.

We can take the example of mens who says :

"Waaah, they use their beauty without modesty on OnlyFans and earning thousands of euros"

"Waaah, they're prostitutes on Instagram"

You see this kind of powerless talk? Well, that's what I'm criticizing

This morality of strong women consists of expressing their will to power through the force of their seductive beauty, and impotent men hate it.

We can also take the example of radical sunni islam who hate women who shows their beauty to give the control to mens

>Sahih Sunan Tirmidhi According to Abu Huraira, the Prophet said: "If I had ordered anyone to prostrate to someone else, I would have ordered the wife to prostrate to her husband"

Anyway strong womens use their beauty and weak mens create "modesty" value to criticize women who use their power