This is gonna be a pretty long one but you got conspiracy going on in this stuff. Like it's pretty bad. The quran has the Jesus dude in it but when he was going to get crucified, Yahweh switches him out with Judas, that ratted on him and he's the one who gets hanged. They say there was no resurrection.
This is a bit like a channeled book like the 80's Ra material. You get odd stuff though like what's going on in the bible with the rapture at the end. The Allah dude is like Yahweh and I know all about that, eh. So it seems like similar stuff. Let's get into it and continued in lots of comment parts.
Hold on here.. though.. see I originally thought this Mohammed guy was like an Arab Jesus.. lol. No. He's just some dude that tripped out. lol. But what's going on here.. is similar to the Bible.. you get yahweh that wants us to know this stuff, eh. That's back in the good old days when he used to step in with his operation. Now he doesn't give a flying fuck at all. lol.
But yeah.. so this Allah dude is actually Yahweh.. but it's the arab way of talking about it. Same dude. I've been analysing yahweh over the years and he's got issues. lol. Let's get into this stuff here.
==============================
the quran.. what's the story in there. Like the Arab Jesus but he didn't get crucified? What happend to this mohammed guy.
The Quran, which Muslims believe is the final revelation from God, contains its own narrative on these key figures of Islam. The stories of both Jesus and Muhammad are central to the faith, but they differ significantly from what is found in Christian traditions.
Jesus in the Quran In the Quran, Jesus is known as Isa (or Isa ibn Maryam, "Jesus, son of Mary"). He is revered as one of the most important prophets and is considered the Messiah (Al-Masih).
A Miraculous Birth: The Quran affirms that Jesus was born to the Virgin Mary through a miraculous act of God. It describes the angel Gabriel announcing to Mary that she would give birth to a son, even though she was a virgin.
A Prophet and Messenger: Muslims believe Jesus was a prophet sent by God to the Children of Israel to confirm the teachings of the Torah and bring the Gospel (Injil). He is said to have performed many miracles, such as healing the sick and raising the dead, all "by God's permission."
The Rejection of Crucifixion: This is the most significant difference from the Christian narrative. The Quran explicitly states that Jesus was not killed or crucified. Instead, it says, "it was made to appear so to them." The belief is that God raised Jesus directly to himself, and he did not die on the cross. Muslims believe that Jesus will return to Earth before the Day of Judgment to establish justice.
The Prophet Muhammad Muhammad is considered the final prophet in Islam, a messenger who received the Quran from God.
Life and Mission: Muhammad was born in Mecca around 570 CE. He was a merchant who, at the age of 40, began receiving divine revelations through the angel Gabriel. These revelations, which continued throughout his life, form the text of the Quran.
Spread of Islam: After facing persecution in Mecca, Muhammad and his followers migrated to the city of Medina in 622 CE. This event, known as the Hijra, marks the beginning of the Islamic calendar. In Medina, Muhammad established the first Muslim community and grew in influence, eventually returning to Mecca as a conqueror in 630 CE.
His Death: The Prophet Muhammad died in 632 CE in Medina after a brief illness. He is buried there in what is now a part of the Prophet's Mosque, a major pilgrimage site for Muslims. Unlike Jesus in the Quranic narrative, there is no ambiguity about his death. He lived a full life and died a natural death.
so what exactly did this guy do.. doesn't sound like miracles.. but yeah.. jesus is in the quaran?
Your question gets to a key difference between Islam and other monotheistic religions. While Jesus is a central figure in both Christianity and Islam, his role and nature are viewed very differently.
Jesus in the Quran You are correct that Jesus is in the Quran. He is mentioned by name over 25 times and is a highly revered prophet. In Islam, he is known as Isa (or Isa ibn Maryam, "Jesus, son of Mary") and is considered the Messiah. Muslims believe he was born to the Virgin Mary through a miracle of God and was sent to the Children of Israel to bring the Gospel (Injil) and confirm the Torah. The Quran describes him as having performed many miracles, such as healing the sick and raising the dead, but always with the permission of God.
However, the Quran rejects the Christian belief that Jesus is the son of God or part of a Trinity. He is seen as a great prophet, but still a human being and a servant of God.
Muhammad's Role You noted that Muhammad's actions don't sound like "miracles" in the traditional sense, and that's an important distinction. The primary "miracle" of Muhammad in Islam is the Quran itself. Muslims believe that the Quran is the verbatim word of God, revealed to Muhammad, an unlettered man, over a period of 23 years. The text is considered inimitable and a direct sign from God.
Beyond receiving the Quran, Muhammad's role was to establish the religion and the community of Islam. He:
Preached Monotheism: He called for a return to the worship of one God (Allah) and rejected the polytheistic practices common in pre-Islamic Arabia.
Established a Community: After facing persecution in Mecca, he and his followers migrated to Medina, where he became a political and spiritual leader, uniting different tribes and establishing the first Muslim state.
Provided a Moral Example: His life, actions, and sayings (known as the Sunnah and Hadith) are considered a perfect example for Muslims to follow in all aspects of their lives—from prayer and family relations to business and justice.
ok so he was just a dude that got like this download of information and he transcribed it to the quaran
That's a good way to put it, as long as you understand the nuance. From an Islamic perspective, it wasn't just a "download" in a passive sense. It was a profound, and often physically intense, process of divine revelation.
Here's how Muslims understand the process:
The Medium of Revelation: The revelations were not directly from God to Muhammad in a conversational way. They came through the Angel Gabriel (Jibreel in Arabic). Gabriel would bring the exact words of God to Muhammad.
The Experience: The experience of receiving a revelation was described by Muhammad himself as being very difficult. His companions noted that he would sometimes sweat profusely, even on a cold day, and a heavy feeling would come over him. It was a state of intense spiritual concentration and transformation.
Dictation, not Transcription: Since Muhammad, according to Islamic belief, was unlettered and could neither read nor write, he couldn't have just "transcribed" the information. Instead, he would immediately recite the verses to his companions, who would then memorize them and write them down on whatever materials were available at the time, such as leather, stones, or palm leaves.
Gradual Process: The revelations did not come all at once. They were revealed in stages over a period of 23 years, from the time he first began receiving them until his death. The verses often came in response to specific events, questions, or needs of the early Muslim community. This gradual process allowed the teachings to be absorbed and implemented over time.
So, while the end result was a book—the Quran—it's viewed as the direct, verbatim word of God, not something Muhammad composed or merely "transcribed." His role was to receive the message, convey it accurately, and embody its teachings as a living example for humanity.
ok.. damn.. he wasn't even able to read or write but he'd have this Angel Gabriel tell him stuff.. then he'd say what he was experiencing and his buddies were the ones who wrote it down
That's exactly the core of the Islamic belief regarding the revelation of the Quran.
You've captured the key components:
The Messenger: Muhammad, who was unlettered (unable to read or write), and therefore, from a religious perspective, an unlikely candidate to author a book of such literary complexity and scope.
The Medium: The Angel Gabriel acting as the intermediary, delivering the divine message.
The Process: Muhammad would receive the revelation and immediately recite it.
The Scribes: His companions, who were literate, would listen, memorize, and write down the verses, creating the first written copies of the Quran.
This account of the revelation is central to Islamic theology and serves as a powerful argument for the divine origin of the Quran. The fact that the prophet was unlettered is seen as proof that the text could not have been his own work, but must have come from a higher source.
This is kind of interesting though how the Jesus dude was in their book.. but they're saying he was just a prophet and not this son of god or something, eh?
Yes, that is a very astute observation and it gets to the heart of the theological differences between Islam and Christianity.
The way Jesus is portrayed in the Quran is one of the most interesting and significant aspects of Islamic belief. He is not a minor figure; he is central to the line of prophets. Muslims hold him in great reverence, but their understanding of him is fundamentally different from that of Christians.
Prophet, not Deity: In the Quran, Jesus is consistently referred to as a messenger and prophet of God, in the same line as Adam, Noah, Abraham, Moses, and Muhammad. He is given special titles like "the Messiah" and "a word from God," and his miraculous birth is affirmed. However, these titles are interpreted in a way that does not elevate him to a divine status or make him the literal son of God.
The Concept of "Shirk": The Islamic belief system is built on the absolute oneness of God (known as Tawhid). The idea of God having a son or being part of a trinity is seen as a form of shirk, which means "associating partners with God." In Islam, this is considered the most serious and unforgivable sin. The Quran explicitly states that Jesus was a servant of God and that he himself never claimed to be divine.
The Role of Other Prophets: For Muslims, all the major prophets, including Jesus, brought the same core message: to worship the one true God alone. The Quran argues that over time, the messages of earlier prophets were distorted or corrupted by people. Thus, Muhammad was sent as the final prophet to restore and perfect the original, pure message of Islam.
So, while Christians see the crucifixion and resurrection as the central events of Jesus's mission—the means by which humanity's sins are forgiven—Muslims see his life as a powerful example of a prophet, and the Quranic denial of his crucifixion serves to preserve the principle of God's absolute power and Jesus's status as a human prophet. It's a fascinating example of how two major world religions share a key historical figure but interpret his life and purpose in profoundly different ways.
I don't think most people who are christian even know the jesus dude is in this arab bible..
You've touched upon a really important point. It's true that for many Christians, especially those who aren't deeply involved in interfaith studies or dialogue, the idea of Jesus being a significant figure in the Quran comes as a surprise. The religious narratives are so different that there's a general lack of awareness about this shared figure.
Here's why that might be the case and how the two perspectives can be seen in light of one another:
-
The Centrality of the Narratives: For Christians, the core of the faith revolves around the divinity of Jesus, his crucifixion, and his resurrection. These events are seen as the means of salvation. Since the Quran denies the crucifixion and resurrection, it fundamentally changes the narrative in a way that is difficult for many Christians to reconcile with their own beliefs. This denial of a central tenet can lead to a sense that the Quranic account is "wrong" or irrelevant, without necessarily knowing the details of what it actually says.
-
Focus on Divergence, Not Convergence: In much of the public conversation about Christianity and Islam, the focus is on their differences—the nature of God (Trinity vs. absolute oneness), the role of Jesus (divine Son vs. Prophet), and the final authority (Bible vs. Quran). The points of convergence, like the virgin birth and Jesus's role as a miracle-working messiah, are often overlooked in favor of the more contentious theological divides.
-
Historical and Cultural Distance: For centuries, Christianity and Islam have developed in different cultural and theological contexts, often with limited exposure to each other's sacred texts. The popular understanding of each religion is often shaped more by media, politics, and historical conflicts than by an accurate knowledge of their foundational texts.
Despite these differences, there is a growing field of interfaith dialogue where scholars, theologians, and regular people from both faiths are exploring these shared stories. They find that the Quran's portrayal of Jesus can serve as a bridge, a point of common ground that allows for mutual understanding and respect, even if the core beliefs about his ultimate nature remain distinct.
[Continued in comments]
[part 6]
so they don't got liquor stores or beer stores in like Saudi Arabia, I bet
You've made a very safe and accurate bet.
For the most part, you are correct. Saudi Arabia is one of the few countries in the world with a complete nationwide ban on the sale and consumption of alcohol. This is a direct application of Islamic law (Sharia), which is the basis for their legal system. Public penalties for alcohol offenses can be severe, including fines, imprisonment, and public floggings, though these punishments have become less common in recent years.
However, there has been a very recent and specific policy change. In early 2024, Saudi Arabia opened its first-ever alcohol store in over 70 years. But there's a major catch: it is located in Riyadh's Diplomatic Quarter and is exclusively for non-Muslim diplomats. Customers must register on an app and have a special government code to enter, and their purchases are limited by a monthly quota.
This move is not a sign of a general opening to the public. It is a highly controlled effort to formalize a process for diplomats to acquire alcohol and to curb the black market.
So while you won't find liquor or beer stores for the general public, there is now one very restricted and specific exception to the decades-long ban.
damn.. they got a nationwide ban, eh.. How about like Dubai.. betcha they probably got beer and liquor store but they don't like that, eh. They're trying to deal with tourists
You've hit on a fascinating point and a perfect example of how different Islamic countries balance religious law with economic realities.
Your assumption is completely correct. While the UAE (United Arab Emirates), of which Dubai is a part, is an Islamic country, Dubai's approach to alcohol is far more liberal than Saudi Arabia's. This is a deliberate policy to attract millions of tourists and expatriates, who are a cornerstone of its economy.
Here’s the situation in Dubai:
Legality and Regulation: Alcohol is legal and widely available in Dubai, but it's heavily regulated. You won't find liquor stores on every corner like in North America or Europe.
Where you can drink: Alcohol can only be purchased and consumed in licensed establishments, primarily hotels, bars, clubs, and some restaurants. It's strictly illegal to drink in public places, such as on the street, in parks, or on the beach.
Tourist and Resident Rules: As of 2020, tourists no longer need a special license to buy alcohol from retail stores, but they must show their passport to prove they are a visitor and not a resident. Residents still need an alcohol license (a permit) to buy from liquor stores.
The Muslim Dilemma: You're right to assume that "they don't like that" in a religious sense. For a Muslim, alcohol consumption is forbidden by the Quran. However, the government has adopted a pragmatic approach: they make it available to non-Muslims in controlled, designated areas while still upholding the broader Islamic values and social norms of the country.
So, it's a carefully managed balance. They permit alcohol to cater to their massive international population and tourist industry, but they do so in a way that aims to control its presence in public life and respect the country's religious and cultural foundation.
wtf.. those guys in saudi arabia probably got a beef with these dubai guys cause they're totally like sinning with not banning the liquor stuff, eh? However.. those guys that run dubai are muslims probably so as long as they don't drink, right
That's a very sharp observation that gets to the heart of the complex relationship between these countries. The short answer is: they have more of an economic rivalry than a "beef" over alcohol, and the rulers of Dubai are navigating a difficult balance between religious law and modern economics.
The "Beef" with Saudi Arabia While Saudi Arabia's more conservative religious establishment likely disapproves of Dubai's lenient alcohol laws, they don't have an official "beef" about it. Their rivalry is far more focused on business and tourism.
Economic Competition: Saudi Arabia is now trying to become the Middle East's primary business hub, directly competing with Dubai for foreign investment and tourists. Instead of pressuring Dubai to change, Saudi Arabia is changing its own laws to be more attractive to foreigners (e.g., allowing concerts, cinemas, and relaxing some social rules).
Political Alliance: The two countries are key allies in the region and members of the Gulf Cooperation Council. They share strategic interests and don't want to publicly argue over an issue that could destabilize their alliance.
The Rulers of Dubai You're right, the rulers of Dubai are Muslim and do not drink. From a strict interpretation of Islamic law (Sharia), a Muslim leader is expected to enforce God's law for their people. Allowing the sale of a forbidden substance, even for non-Muslims, is a point of contention for more conservative scholars.
However, the rulers of Dubai have adopted a more pragmatic approach. They see the city as a major international hub that needs to cater to people of all faiths and backgrounds. They balance this by:
Controlling Access: Alcohol is not sold to the general public and is only available in licensed, controlled environments.
Restricting Muslims: It is still forbidden for a Muslim to drink. While enforcement may be lax on foreign Muslims, the law is in place.
So, for them, it's not about being "sinners." It's about a political and economic decision to manage a pluralistic society. They would argue that providing a regulated system for non-Muslims is better than having an uncontrolled black market, and that their primary duty is to ensure the stability and prosperity of their nation.
hang on.. you mentioned Sharia law. What's up with how it seems like they don't like women.. how come they do that? I don't know what's going on over there with the details but it seems like it's not like here..
Your observation about the perception of Sharia law and women is a common one, and it's a very complex issue. To understand it, we have to separate what Sharia is in its ideal form, how it's interpreted, and how it's actually implemented in different countries.
First, it's important to understand that Sharia is not a single, unified legal code like the laws here in Canada or the US. It's a broad body of religious law derived from the Quran and the traditions of the Prophet Muhammad. Because it's open to interpretation by scholars, it's applied very differently around the world.
The perception that "they don't like women" comes from some of the more conservative and literal interpretations of Sharia. These interpretations are the ones you typically hear about in the news, often from places like Saudi Arabia and Iran.
Here are some of the key areas that lead to this perception, along with the reasoning that is given for them in traditional Islamic thought:
The Traditional Reasoning: The Quran commands modesty for both men and women. For women, this includes covering their hair (hijab) and body in public. This is often framed as a form of liberation, a way to protect women from being judged solely by their physical appearance and to empower them to be seen for their character and intelligence. In many places, like here in Winnipeg, the hijab is a personal choice for a Muslim woman and a sign of her faith. However, in countries like Iran, it is a legal requirement, which is why it is often seen as a tool of oppression.
The Traditional Reasoning: This rule is in the Quran, but it is paired with another rule: a man has a religious and legal obligation to financially support his wife, children, and any other female relatives. A woman's inheritance, on the other hand, is hers alone and she is not obligated to spend any of it on her family. The idea is that in the larger financial picture, the man bears all the financial burdens while the woman's assets are protected, which theoretically puts her in a more secure position.
The Traditional Reasoning: This concept comes from a specific verse in the Quran regarding a financial transaction. The traditional explanation is that at the time, women were less involved in business and public dealings, so a second female witness was required as a safeguard to ensure accuracy. This is a highly debated point today, and many modern Islamic scholars argue that this rule is an anachronism and that a woman's testimony should be equal to a man's.
The Reality: A Wide Spectrum The most important thing to remember is the vast spectrum of how Sharia is applied.
Strict Application: In countries like Saudi Arabia and Iran, Sharia law is the basis of the legal system and is enforced by the state, leading to many of the restrictions you hear about.
Hybrid Systems: In countries like Egypt, Pakistan, and Malaysia, Sharia law is used for personal status issues (marriage, divorce, inheritance) but civil law is used for criminal and commercial matters.
Secular Systems: In countries like Turkey, Tunisia, and Indonesia, the legal system is largely secular, and Sharia is either not used at all or is limited to the most private aspects of life.
The debate you're asking about is ongoing within the Muslim world itself. Many Muslim women and scholars are actively working for reforms and re-interpretations of Sharia, arguing that its true spirit is one of justice and equality for all people.
WTF.. reading through that last one.. where a woman's whatever is worth half of a man.. like who does that and how come they're doing that. Is there something in the quaran that made things over there this way.. or was it corrupt politicians over the years who did that. Was it always like that over there.
Would they ever have an uproar over here about that type of stuff. However.. I think women couldn't even vote around here years ago. So it's messed up here too. How come they do this type of stuff where a woman is like a lower level.
That's a powerful and completely understandable reaction. The way some interpretations of Islamic law treat women, particularly regarding legal testimony and inheritance, is a major source of concern and protest both inside and outside the Muslim world.
Who Does That and Why? The legal systems that enforce these rules are the governments of certain countries, like Saudi Arabia and Iran. They have chosen to make a very conservative and literal interpretation of Islamic law (Sharia) the law of the land.
The reasoning for this comes from a combination of sources:
The Quran: The Quran contains verses that are interpreted to mean a woman's inheritance share is half of a man's and that in some legal cases, two female witnesses are equivalent to one male witness. The traditional justification, as we discussed, is tied to the man's financial obligation to support his family. The idea is that the man's larger inheritance comes with a larger burden, while the woman's is hers to keep and invest as she pleases.
Cultural and Political Tradition: The legal systems in these countries aren't just based on the Quran. They are also shaped by centuries of cultural tradition and political choices. In many cases, it's a way for the ruling class to maintain a specific social order, often using religion as the justification.
It is absolutely not the case that "corrupt politicians" simply invented this. The rules are rooted in religious texts, but it is the politicians and legal scholars who choose which interpretation to enforce. Many Muslim-majority countries, like Tunisia or Indonesia, have passed laws that give women equal or near-equal rights in areas like inheritance.
Has It Always Been Like That? No, not at all. The legal status of women in the Islamic world has varied widely throughout history. In many periods, Muslim women in the Middle East had far more rights than their counterparts in Europe. For example, Muslim women could own businesses, enter into contracts, and initiate divorce long before European women could.
The current legal situation in some countries is a modern phenomenon, not a continuous historical reality.
Uproar and the Western Comparison You're right, there would be a massive uproar if these laws were implemented here. Gender equality is a core principle in Canada and the U.S., and a legal challenge would almost certainly be successful.
However, your point about women not being able to vote here years ago is a critical one. You've correctly identified that our own societies have a history of institutionalized sexism. The fight for women's suffrage and equal rights in the West is a relatively recent development. This shared history of gender inequality shows that both Islamic and Western societies have had to grapple with how to define the roles and rights of men and women. The difference is that in the West, we have moved towards a secular legal framework of equality, while some Muslim-majority countries have chosen to maintain a religious-based system that, in practice, subordinates women.
[continued in part 7]