Mr. Sima

@meowbundi What's the source?

Al-Ghazali interprets the tradition, "the angels do not enter a house in which there is an image," as "a house" referring to the heart so if it is occupied with the image of others instead of being occupied with Allah alone, angels do not enter it.

@kelevitch Nothing you said disproved the Quranist claim. Allah says in the Quran that a verse isn't abrogated or caused to be forgotten except another which is better is brought. Some revelation could have been made to be forgotten and some abrogated.

Quranists make a claim that sounds incredibly pious on the surface: We only follow the Quran because it is the only revelation Allah sent to the Prophet ﷺ. We don't need the hadith. There is just one massive problem with this claim. The Quran itself completely destroys it. If you actually read the Quran closely, you will discover the Quran repeatedly references commands, knowledge, and permissions given by Allah to the Prophet ﷺ that do not exist anywhere in the Quran itself. This proves, without a shadow of a doubt, that the Prophet ﷺ was receiving Wahy revelation outside of the Quran. 1. The Command to Cut the Palm Trees During the siege of Banu Nadir, the Muslims cut down some of the enemy's palm trees. The hypocrites and Jewish tribes tried to claim the Prophet ﷺ was causing corruption on earth. Allah defends the Prophet ﷺ in Surah Al-Hashr (59:5):Whatever you have cut down of their palm trees or left standing on their trunks - it was by permission of Allah... Read the Quran from Al-Fatihah to An-Nas. Where is the verse saying, “O Prophet, cut down the palm trees of Banu Nadir”? It doesn't exist. Yet Allah explicitly says it was done by His permission. How did the Prophet ﷺ get this permission? Through revelation outside the Quran. 2. The First Qibla For over a year, the Prophet ﷺ and the companions prayed facing Jerusalem, until Allah commanded them to face Mecca. But look at how Allah phrases this in Surah Al-Baqarah (2:143): “And We did not make the qiblah which you used to face [Jerusalem] except that We might make evident who would follow the Messenger...” Allah says “WE” made the first Qibla. Allah takes credit for the command. But search the entire Quran. Is there a single verse commanding the Muslims to pray towards Jerusalem? No. That initial command was given to the Prophet ﷺ through extra-Quranic revelation. 3. The Leaked Secret In Surah At-Tahrim (66:3), the Prophet ﷺ confides a secret to one of his wives, who then leaks it to another. The Quran says: “Allah showed it to him... And when he informed her about it, she said, 'Who told you this?' He said, 'The All-Knowing, the Acquainted informed me.'” How did Allah inform him? Did a verse come down saying “O Prophet, your wife leaked the secret”? No. The Prophet ﷺ knew because Allah revealed it to him directly, in an entirely separate channel of revelation from the Quran. 4. The Promise of Angels at Badr In Surah Al-Anfal (8:9), Allah reminds the believers: “When you asked help of your Lord, and He answered you, 'Indeed, I will reinforce you with a thousand from the angels...'” Allah is referencing a conversation, a prayer, and a divine response of absolute guarantee that occurred before the battle. The Prophet ﷺ was given a promise by Allah. This, again, points to a constant stream of divine communication guiding the Prophet's ﷺ leadership. The Conclusion is Undeniable: If you truly believe in the Quran, you are forced by the Quran itself to admit that Allah gave the Prophet ﷺ commands, permissions, and knowledge that were never written in the Mushaf. Islamic scholars understood this 1,400 years ago. They categorized revelation into two types: Wahy Matlu (Recited Revelation) = The Quran. Wahy Ghayr Matlu (Unrecited Revelation) = The Sunnah. Allah gave us the Quran as the constitution, and He gave the Prophet ﷺ extra-Quranic revelation to show us how to live it. The companions preserved the first in the Mushaf, and they preserved the second through the Isnad (Hadith). You cannot claim to be a “Quran-only” Muslim. Because the Quran itself demands that you follow the other revelation given to the Messenger ﷺ. “Whoever obeys the Messenger has truly obeyed Allah.”Quran 4:80)

90% of Aqeedah issues that are debated upon aren't of any use for laymen and they shouldn't be bothered by it.

@refuting_kufar Wonderful work brother.

🧵 The claim that in Numbers 31:17-18, Yahweh does not endorse the murder and rape of Children but rather it was Moses “acting out of anger” is highly problematic and almost never works for various reasons. (Thread)

New article by @MohsenGT "The Qur'an Cultic Trinity: Marian Piety in Late Antiquity and the Qur'an" really enjoyed reading it and highly recommend it :) muse.jhu.edu/pub/1/article/…

@refuting_kufar Wonderful.

Thread🧵Matthew's account of Herod's alleged massacre of the innocent children is most probably not historical.

@KeluargaBuaya @ehzhiburger @great_j0rdan I only use polemics against Polemics. It's sad that a lot of people force Muslims to insult revered figures in other religions. The Prophet did not teach that. Peace be upon you, brother 🤝

@Mr_Sima_ @ehzhiburger @great_j0rdan Adding to avoid confusion: Jesus didn't make new law, therefore Jesus didn't condemn his own law. The law is already exist, it is the Torah. What Jesus did was fixing the practices. Jesus teachings is 100% identic with Muhammad teachings: The religion of peace.

If Christianity is the “Religion of Peace” then why does the bible consistently advocate for v10lence against non believers? Bible command Christians to Kill witches (Ex 22:18) Kill adulterers (Lev 20:10) Kill blasphemers (Lev 24:14) Kill false prophets (Zech 13:3) Kill fortune-tellers (Lev 20:27) Kill non-Hebrews (Dt 20:16-17) Kill sons of sinners (Isaiah 14:21) Kill nonbelievers (2 Chron 15:12-13) Kill anyone who curses God (Lev 24:16) Kill all males after winning battles (Dt 20:13) Kill disobedient children (Ex 21:17, Mk 7:10) Kill strangers close to a church (Num 1:48-51) Kill those who work on the Sabbath (Ex 31:15) Kill men who have sex with other men (Lev 20:13) Kill any bride discovered not a virgin (Dt 22:21) Kill those who curse father or mother (Lev 20:9) Kill those who worship the wrong god (Num 25:1-9) and: Kill anyone who kills anyone (Lev 24:17).

@refuting_kufar I see

@Mr_Sima_ It's very complex. Muatazillah were not a legel school and I don't think they had any anti-hadith propaganda. Some of the prominent Muatazillah were themselves Hadith transmitters. Ibn Qutaiba polemically accused them of such. It's more likely they disagreed on the conclusions.

During the mihna, the Caliph, despite having maximum coercive state power, theological motivation, and a corps of scholars, was unable to produce even a single hadith to support the Mu'tazilite position on the createdness of the Qur'an.

@KeluargaBuaya @ehzhiburger @great_j0rdan So Jesus condemns his own laws? Quite the passages please.

@ehzhiburger @Mr_Sima_ @great_j0rdan Mr. Sima, Jesus didn't. Instead he condemn the practice. Jesus emphasize that the Kingdom of God is not a political sovereign. Therefore, killing and subjugation are irrelevant. That is why I suggest the author of the post to read the bible thoroughly, not only the beginning.

@WISE_UPX @Rurouni_Phoenix Source for the sucking of tongues?

@Rurouni_Phoenix It’s not the only freaky thing we know about Muhammad. We also know that Aisha was cleaning semen off his clothes, and he was sucking on boys tongues, even talks about grown men being breastfed. If Al-zutt is your only concern then you’re in for a whole heap of shubuhat

I have become firmly convinced that Al Zutt The DaVinci Code of Islam. Grifters make claims about Al Zutt they purport to be true but once you actually dig into it it's full of BS and the people pushing it will never back down no matter what you tell them. I'm am almost so done

@EAdesawe73935 @YusufAsunmogejo I just did

@Mr_Sima_ @YusufAsunmogejo I want you to do it and not sound stupid. Please go ahead

I laugh in Chinese 😂 Should I burst your bubble? Let me burst it because I see that you don’t want to learn. You have been fed with lies and it has compounded your ignorance. You are confusing the first three hundred years of early Christianity with the last 1700 years of Christendom. Yes, the early followers of Jesus were persecuted. However, the moment the Roman Empire adopted Christianity under Constantine and later made it the only legal religion with the Edict of Thessalonica in 380 AD, the persecuted became the violent persecutors. Pagans were slaughtered and their temples destroyed. Have you read about Charlemagne? During the Saxon Wars in the 8th century, he issued a law called the “Capitulatio de partibus Saxoniae.” His official state policy was baptism or death. I know you don’t know this Barbie 😂. He beheaded thousands of Saxons in a single day at the Massacre of Verden for refusing to convert. When the Conquistadors arrived in the Americas, they read a document called the “Requerimiento” to the native populations. It demanded they submit to the Church and the Spanish Crown, or face war, enslavement, and death. Was that people repenting and turning to Jesus? State violence played a huge role in Christianizing Europe and the Americas. Now let me turn to Islam. I see that you are ignorant, and this has made you conflate political expansion with religious conversion. When Muslim armies defeated the Byzantine and Persian empires, they conquered land and established political authority. They did not put swords to the necks of civilians to change their faith. If they did, places like Egypt, Syria, and Persia would have become Muslim overnight. However, historical records show these regions remained majority Christian and Zoroastrian for almost 300 years after the initial Islamic conquest. They converted gradually over centuries under the Dhimmi system because they were protected and allowed to keep their faith. Take a look at the largest Muslim populations today. Indonesia, Malaysia, and massive regions of East and West Africa. No Muslim army ever marched there. Islam spread entirely through trade routes, scholars, and the moral character of Muslim merchants. Do not take my word for it. Sir Thomas Arnold, a non-Muslim historian in his book “The Preaching of Islam” thoroughly dismantled this sword myth. In fact, the famous British historian De Lacy O'Leary wrote in his book “Islam at the Crossroads” and stated expressly that: the myth of the legend of fanatical Muslims sweeping through the world and forcing Islam at the point of the sword is one of the most fantastically absurd myths that historians have ever repeated. Will I open your head and speak truth to it if you can’t be open minded to learn? This subject matter is well above your pay grade. Maybe your boss Dachomo will do better. And I promise, I will school him. Thank you for your attention.

@KeluargaBuaya @great_j0rdan This is a morality issue, why did Jesus and the father subject their followers under such a barbaric system for a 1000 years. On what grounds do you stand on insulting Islam when your God does these to people? How many people did the church execute because of these?

@great_j0rdan Those all you mentioned are from the Old Testament, which that means it is Jewish Torah. Bible consists of books in thousands year span, not only the Torah. You may read the beginning, you should read it to the end.

@EAdesawe73935 @YusufAsunmogejo We can flip this back at you and points at the horrible things Moses and Saul did. Perhaps they were following Moses example who Jesus Christ endorsed.

Again, you don't get it. Listing historical abuses by Christians doesn’t prove Christianity teaches violence. None of those actions listed like Charlemagne’s wars, the Conquistadors or forced conversions can be justified from the teachings of Jesus in the Gospel of Matthew or any part of the New Testament. In fact, they contradict them. So what does that tell you? Yes, they were Christians but the acted on their own accord. Now flip it. In the Qur’an, there are explicit commands about: fighting (e.g., Qur'an 9:29), subjugation (jizya under humiliation) and even taking captives, which is still prevalent today and Quran used as a reference. That's the difference you failed to see!

@EveKeneinan It all starts with the notion that a man 2000 years ago claimed to be God, if he did, why would you believe him? Because he was righteous? Any Man telling you to take him as his Lord and savior on accounts of giving good advice, is a Chalartan. Isa(AS) was not a charlatan

@EveKeneinan The Muslims are seeing it from a zoomed out perspective. I remember reading a passage of the Gospel were Jesus was getting stoned and he ran and hid, I was disturbed. This is who billions of people call the creator of the heavens and earth? This is a grave insult, a Blaphesmy.

Islam can never distance itself from slavery, because Master to slave is the fundamental relation between God and man, just as it is Father to children in true faith. Muslims find Christianity repugnant for this very reason, that God would adulterate and contaminate Himself if He were to mix His essence with ours. The Incarnation is for Muslims a terrible and unthinkable abasement of God, something that absolutely cannot be. But the revulsion is all first-order. Any Muslim who thinks longer on the matter, comes to understand that such a condescension on the part of God almighty is precisely the highest and most Godlike manifestation of God and His love for man. Christ crucified will always triumph over Saracen hordes.

@IAmGeezy_K Ohh so you believe in God but no organized religion. Well..... 💪

@Mr_Sima_ I have no religion, I worship God in the best way I can, not by any human principle.

Again the solat constitute reciting the words verbatim not paraphrased. Translating to your language and then reciting would not be verbatim now would it? By having one language, you're calling for unity. A similar concept would be the Qibla, the Muslims prayer facing the.

@BerkeKhan6 I don't know his views but someone claiming to be a maliki Quranist might simply just be a Quranist that follows the Living tradition. The first huge hadith book was muwatta of Imam Malik, it documents hadiths based on the living sunnah and is devoid of politically shaped hadiths

😂😂😂😂😂😂 Man said Maliki qur'anist. 😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂 Maliki Qur'anist 😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂 Man said 😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂 Man 😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂 Man said maliki 😂😂😂 Qur'anist 😭😭😭😭😭😭😭😭😭 OOOOOOOOO I AM DEDO! 💀💀💀💀💀

@IAmGeezy_K Wonderful. I won't assume it's Christianity but if it is then cool

@Mr_Sima_ Yes it is.

@IAmGeezy_K Okay Sir. I'm sure your religion is the opposite 🤝

@Mr_Sima_ Lol, no matter how hard you try to explain it, allah was meant to be the god of the Arabs only, a local and tribal god whose language of worship is Arabic, and there's no changing to that. That's why if you translate some Arabic prayers into English, you'll realize it's nonsense