What's new

Çay Bahçesi

Wow, all Evangelist talking points... have you converted to Christianity, my friend?

Even Allah is a pre-islamic Arab mythology god, you can't seperate Islam from Arab culture.
It is arab culture + bible.


In fact, "Allah" is simply the Arabic equivalent of the English word "God." It's a contraction of two words, the Arabic definite article "al" (essentially equal to English "the") and the Arabic noun "ilah," meaning "god" with a lower case "g." Arabic script has no capital , so attaching the definite article to "ilah" serves the purpose. While "ilah" can refer to a pagan "god," "Allah" cannot. Instead, it designates "The God"— the one true God of Abrahamic monotheism.

In its turn, "ilah" is closely related to a much more familiar word from the Hebrew Bible: "Elohim." If the Hebrew masculine plural ending "-im" is removed from it, "Elohim" becomes "Eloh," which is plainly related to Arabic "ilah," much in the same way that German "Gott" and its synonym, English "God," are related. (Arabic and Hebrew are linguistic cousins, from the same family of Semitic languages.)

Moreover, "Allah" is the word routinely used by Arabic-speaking Christians and Jews to refer to their God. "In the beginning," reads the Arabic translation of the first verse of Genesis, "Allah created the heavens and the earth." "In the beginning was the Word," reads the Christian Arabic version of John 1:1, "and the Word was with Allah, and the Word was Allah."

Read a bit about pre-islamic arab mythology. You're going to find some striking resemblances with Islam.

Have you read about pre-Islamic Arab mythology yourself? Cause I doubt you have.

Hubal (Arabic: هُبَل‎) was a god worshipped in pre-Islamic Arabia, notably by Quraysh at the Kaaba in Mecca. His idol was a human figure, believed to control acts of divination, which was in the form of tossing arrows before the statue.

Which sounds nothing like anything Allah(swt) does.



Also no correlation with Islam.

it's remarkably similiar to the previously existing ones don't you think?

giphy.gif

No, not at all.



72 virgins, etc.

The idea of 72 virgins in Islam refers to an aspect of paradise.

In a collection by Abu `Isa Muhammad ibn `Isa at-Tirmidhi in his Jami` at-Tirmidhi and also quoted by Ibn Kathir in his Tafsir ibn Kathir of sura 55 it is stated:It was mentioned by Daraj Ibn Abi Hatim, that Abu al-Haytham 'Adullah Ibn Wahb narrated from Abu Sa'id al-Khudhri, who heard Muhammad saying, 'The smallest reward for the people of Heaven is an abode where there are eighty thousand servants and seventy-two houri, over which stands a dome decorated with pearls, aquamarine, and ruby, as wide as the distance from al-Jabiyyah to San'a.
However, regarding the above statement, Hafiz Salahuddin Yusuf has said: "The narration, which claims that everyone would have seventy-two wives has a weak chain of narrators and is not reliable to use as authentic hadith."

Importantly, some scholars argue that the promise of 72 virgins is a mistranslation from "72 angels" or even from "72 white raisins, of crystal clarity". According to Ibn Warraq referring to The Syro-Aramaic Reading of the Koran, "Luxenberg claims that the context makes it clear that it is food and drink that is being offered, and not unsullied maidens or houris".

The relevant verses in the Holy Quran are as follows:

Thus will it be. And We shall consort them with fair maidens, having wide, beautiful eyes. [3]

‘Reclining on couches arranged in rows.’ And We shall consort them with fair maidens having wide, beautiful eyes. [4]

These verses make no mention of Jihad, holy war, or any type of fighting as the precondition to attain paradise.

Next, both Prophet Muhammad and the Qur’an reject the concept of heavenly reward via, “sex with beautiful women for eternity.” Prophet Muhammad clarified that such an interpretation could not be an applicable interpretation of the aforementioned verses. He said:

Allah the Exalted and Glorious, said: ‘I have prepared for My pious servants which no eye has ever seen, and no ear has ever heard, and no human heart has ever perceived but it is testified by the Book of Allah.’ He then recited: ‘No soul knows what comfort has been concealed from them, as a reward for what they did’ (32:18).’ [5]

Therefore, to limit Divine reward to something as hedonistic as “eternal sex” is not only contrary to Islam, but an insult to God’s bounty for those who earn paradise. The rewards of paradise are far beyond what any human can conceive or perceive in this life.

In Arabic, like in many Semitic languages, nouns are either masculine or feminine. Appropriately enough, a masculine noun is used when referring to a male and when referring to a female, an additional ‘ta marbuta’ is added to the end of the masculine noun to make it feminine. [6] For example, the Qur’an states:

And thou, O soul at peace! Return to thy Lord well pleased with Him and He well pleased with thee. So enter thou among My chosen servants, And enter thou My Garden. [7]

These four short Qur’anic verses describe the soul in Paradise both to refer to females, 89:28-29, and also to refer to males, 89:30-31. According to Islamic theology, unlike the human being, the soul is neither male nor female. This background builds the platform to properly understand the verses.

The Arabic noun translated to “fair maidens” is derived from the three Arabic letters, ha, vau, and ra, or hur [hoor]. The Arabic word hur is applicable to both men and women. It is applicable to men in its plural form, ahwar, and applicable to women in the same context. This title, bestowed upon an individual, indicates a character of having beautiful eyes—a reward for those righteous souls. It also indicates an intense whiteness to the eye. Both of the descriptions refer to spiritual matters, having nothing to do with any sort of hedonistic physical gratification.

Moreover, hur has no gender, but Islam teaches that no soul can reach its full potential until it has a spouse. Thus, this verse demonstrates that one reward of paradise is that the soul of each person—whether male or female—will be given a companion with which to celebrate paradise.

To be sure, these are yet metaphorical explanations that will more effectively be understood in the afterlife. In the meantime, suffice it to say that the allegation that the reward of martyrdom is hedonistic pleasure is a belief that finds no support in Islam in any capacity. This is clear from a sincere study of the Qur’anic Arabic.

Source for Mohammad's pre-islamic trustworthiness is the same source that says he was married to Aisha when she was 6 years old.




Also history and research clearly shows that Aisha was never 6 or 9 during Marriage.

Aisha was thought to be 10 at the time of her betrothal and 15 at the time of her marraige. (Living Thoughts Of The Prophet Muhammad -pbuh, chapter 1)

However, later research showed that she was actually 15 at the time of her betrothal and 19 at the time of her marraige.

Research subsequent to the time of Maulana Muhammad Ali has shown that she was older than this. An excellent short work presenting such evidence is the Urdu pamphlet Rukhsati kai waqt Sayyida Aisha Siddiqa ki umar (‘The age of Lady Aisha at the time of the start of her married life’) by Abu Tahir Irfani. Points 1 to 3 below have been brought to light in this pamphlet.

The famous classical historian of Islam, Ibn Jarir Tabari, wrote in his ‘History’:

“In the time before Islam, Abu Bakr married two women. The first was Fatila daughter of Abdul Uzza, from whom Abdullah and Asma were born. Then he married Umm Ruman, from whom Abdur Rahman and Aisha were born. These four were born before Islam.”

Being born before Islam means being born before the Call.

The compiler of the famous Hadith collection Mishkat al-Masabih, Imam Wali-ud-Din Muhammad ibn Abdullah Al-Khatib, who died 700 years ago, has also written brief biographical notes on the narrators of Hadith reports. He writes under Asma, the older daughter of Abu Bakr:

“She was the sister of Aisha Siddiqa,wife of the Holy Prophet, and was ten years older than her. … In 73 A.H. … Asma died at the age of one hundred years"

This would make Asma 28 years of age in 1 A.H., the year of the Hijra, thus making Aisha 18 years old in 1 A.H. So Aisha would be 19 years old at the time of the consummation of her marriage, and 14 or 15 years old at the time of her nikah. It would place her year of birth at four or five years before the Call.

The same statement is made by the famous classical commentator of the Holy Quran, Ibn Kathir, in his book Al-bidayya wal-nihaya:

“Asma died in 73 A.H. at the age of one hundred years. She was ten years older than her sister Aisha."
 
Last edited:
There are rumours that prophet Muhammed married his daughter in law who was also the wife of his adopted child? .. Is this true, bro?

I believe you are referring to Zainab... correct?

this story of her marrying his adopted son has been vigorously rejected by most Muslim scholars mainly because of its lack of having any chain of narration and its complete absence from any authentic hadith. Also, mistranslation might have also had a part to play here.
 
Last edited:
I believe you are referring to Zainab... correct?

this story of her marrying his adopted son has been vigorously rejected by most Muslim scholars mainly because of its lack of having any chain of narration and its complete absence from any authentic hadith. Also, mistranslation might have also had a part to play here.

Yes.

So, Turkish directorate of religious affairs should find a better translator since they claim the same thing In the encylopedia of islam published by "Diyanet İşleri Başkanlığı".

“... Biz onu -Zeyneb’i- sana nikâhladık ki evlâtlıkları eşleriyle ilişkilerini kestiklerinde müminlere bir güçlük olmasın ...” (el-Ahzâb 33/37-38).
http://www.islamansiklopedisi.info/dia/pdf/c44/c440218.pdf



What is the correct translation of Al-Ahzab 37 ?
 
What makes you think Mohammad wasn't a man whose "with ambition and is educated in the matter enough that it can fool the people around them and/or play into their depravity." in other words, 72 virgins, etc.

Source for Mohammad's pre-islamic trustworthiness is the same source that says he was married to Aisha when she was 6 years old.

Why do you accept one as fact and not the other?

And more importantly do you think that buddha was the prophet sent to the chinese?
What about the more primitive dieties such as volcano gods, thunder gods, sea gods of various cultures.

I think the big mistake you're making is that you're envisioning a reality in which the religion started perfect and got devolved by human corruption. Whereas the evidence suggests that the religion started as primitive and got more and more sophisticated as human cognitive abilities developed.

Watch this when you have the time:

Because there is an entire logging system as from who the hadeeth has been recited from and how trustworthy that guy is and what the trustworthiness and likeliness of his chain(the link of people who passed the message till the source) to the source is.

And with that chain that shows the trustworthiness of the last prophet is way more solid, while the ones with the virgins and him marrying a 6 years old are weak(which means a high likelihood it was fabricated)

Now to Buddha, In the official list of known prophets who has been send to the earth, Buddha's name is not on it. So I wouldn't know, Maybe, Maybe not.

And when it comes back to my opinion, we don't know how deep the older religions were. That is also the reason why its only an opinion and not something established with which I can back it up.

The only things I have going for it is that.
- "Allah" announced that every tribe on earth has been send a messenger
- "Adam" already had skills, language and thought
- "Prophet Nuh" lived for 950 years
- Destruction of entire civilizations/tribes by "Allah" was a thing because reasons for example "Prophet Lut", iirc some of those civilization were advanced ones

Whether the religions which originated from that is a corruption from that or just an alternative presented after or during that prophets time is something I wouldn't know.

When it comes to the video with Celâl Şengör, He is talking from a different starting perspective.

That of "Islam" is that humans were created which only "Allah" knows how long.

Celâl Şengör is taking the point of Darwin, that all everything shares a common ancestor. And thus he fits with what he knows so far into that narrative. And the field of expertise of Celâl Şengör is Geology, I went trough a considerable amount of his abstracts of his research paper. Most if not all are in the Field of Geology and not Anthropology or Archaeology.

Why this matters. Ever since the theory of Darwin became the consensus, Later when a timetable was set do to a finding in Indonesia, findings which did not fit the timetable were written off as mistakes(allegedly) . And with the rise of Leftist/Socialist/Communist influence in the scientific and intellectual circles they are able to quell research or findings which does not fit that line of thought.

And this can be read from
- intellectuals and socialism by F.A Hayek

And from The Naked Communist
- About the infiltration of schools and editorial positions to shape the public's mind

And here a short video of what I am talking about

And with that I am currently more focused on tracking the activity which might lead to the next socialist revolution.
 
Last edited:
President Trump has ousted Secretary of State Rex Tillerson and plans to nominate CIA Director Mike Pompeo to replace him as the nation’s top diplomat.

And this is Pompeo's tweet after 15th July coup attempt, 16th of July :D
_94237997_tweet.jpg

Let's see if he can say the same thing to directly Erdoğan's face :D One things is for sure that Us-Turkey relations will not be so good anytime soon.
 
Because there is an entire logging system as from who the hadeeth has been recited from and how trustworthy that guy is and what the trustworthiness and likeliness of his chain(the link of people who passed the message till the source) to the source is.

And with that chain that shows the trustworthiness of the last prophet is way more solid, while the ones with the virgins and him marrying a 6 years old are weak(which means a high likelihood it was fabricated)

Now to Buddha, In the official list of known prophets who has been send to the earth, Buddha's name is not on it. So I wouldn't know, Maybe, Maybe not.

And when it comes back to my opinion, we don't know how deep the older religions were. That is also the reason why its only an opinion and not something established with which I can back it up.

The only things I have going for it is that.
- "Allah" announced that every tribe on earth has been send a messenger
- "Adam" already had skills, language and thought
- "Prophet Nuh" lived for 950 years
- Destruction of entire civilizations/tribes by "Allah" was a thing because reasons for example "Prophet Lut", iirc some of those civilization were advanced ones

Whether the religions which originated from that is a corruption from that or just an alternative presented after or during that prophets time is something I wouldn't know.

When it comes to the video with Celâl Şengör, He is talking from a different starting perspective.

That of "Islam" is that humans were created which only "Allah" knows how long.

Celâl Şengör is taking the point of Darwin, that all everything shares a common ancestor. And thus he fits with what he knows so far into that narrative. And the field of expertise of Celâl Şengör is Geology, I went trough a considerable amount of his abstracts of his research paper. Most if not all are in the Field of Geology and not Anthropology or Archaeology.

Why this matters. Ever since the theory of Darwin became the consensus, Later when a timetable was set do to a finding in Indonesia, findings which did not fit the timetable were written off as mistakes(allegedly) . And with the rise of Leftist/Socialist/Communist influence in the scientific and intellectual circles they are able to quell research or findings which does not fit that line of thought.

And this can be read from
- intellectuals and socialism by F.A Hayek

And from The Naked Communist
- About the infiltration of schools and editorial positions to shape the public's mind

And here a short video of what I am talking about

And with that I am currently more focused on tracking the activity which might lead to the next socialist revolution.

First of all, thank you for the level-headed response, this has been a pleasant exchange.

I like Hayek and I agree that there is indeed corruption in academia caused by socialism. But I don't think evolutionary biology is one of the branches that is affected to the extend that you're implying.

Richard Dawkins himself is very much hated by the socialists and feminists. I do believe that in near future race thing will blow up and biology will be the discipline that destroys socialism forever.

Evidence for Darwinian evolution is so overwhelming no one or two mistakes could eliminate it. Odds are the findings in Indonesia that you talk of that were written off as mistakes were exactly that, mistakes.

This is a fun little video that talks about a couple of instances like this.

@EgyptianAmerican I'll get back at you once I have the time to read your entire post. But I wanted to just say that the Allah-Hubal thing isn't the only resemblance between Islam and pre Islamic arab mythology. Djinn for example is an arab mythology creature that carried onto islamic mythology. Tawaf, hajj, animal sacrifice etc, all existed in arab culture before Islam.

such examples are so numerous it would take an amount of time to write them here which I don't have.
 
Last edited:
First of all, thank you for the level-headed response, this has been a pleasant exchange.

I like Hayek and I agree that there is indeed corruption in academia caused by socialism. But I don't think evolutionary biology is one of the branches that is affected to the extend that you're implying.

Richard Dawkins himself is very much hated by the socialists and feminists. I do believe that in near future race thing will blow up and biology will be the discipline that destroys socialism forever.

Evidence for Darwinian evolution is so overwhelming no one or two mistakes could eliminate it. Odds are the findings in Indonesia that you talk of that were written off as mistakes were exactly that, mistakes.

This is a fun little video that talks about a couple of instances like this.

Thank you too.

But, with regards to the Darwinian theory. Since this is not my field of study and not for the near future since life asks for different priorities to attend to. I look at the work from David Berlinski who presents strong arguments, if we were to go further into this with scientific findings and the scientific field about this subject I would not be able to, because to look at that subject with a scientific perspective I lack the necessary tools and knowledge to do so. I am working to overcome those limitation, but that again takes time.
 
Last edited:
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom