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 7]
welll you do got some stuff in the old days.. growing up.. the guy had to bring home the bacon, eh.. while the wife stays home and raise the kids. This is when things started getting messed up around here, where.. the wife had to go work too. So I get how over there.. the guy had to bring home the bacon ok cause the wife is busy taking care of the kids and can't work. But why this "half" stuff with the women.. you know what I mean
Your question is very insightful because it correctly identifies the parallel between traditional gender roles in both societies and then homes in on the specific detail that seems to be an unfair exception to the rule.
You're absolutely right: in the old days here, the man was the breadwinner, and the wife was the homemaker. That model, while having its own issues, had a clear division of labor.
The "half" rule in Sharia law is directly connected to this model, but with a specific legal and religious framework behind it.
The Reasoning Behind the "Half" The core of your question is why it's specifically "half" if the principle is that the man has to provide. In traditional Islamic law, the rule is based on a concept of reciprocity and legal obligation.
The Man's Obligation: A man is legally and religiously obligated to financially support his wife, his children, and his parents, even if his wife is wealthy and a breadwinner herself. His income is not his alone; a significant portion is for the upkeep of his family. His inheritance, therefore, comes with this pre-existing burden.
The Woman's Freedom: A woman, on the other hand, is not obligated to spend her money on anyone, not even her husband or children. Whatever she earns or inherits is hers alone to keep, save, or spend as she wishes.
So, the "half" is seen as a way to balance the financial responsibilities. The man's share is double because his financial burden is far greater. The woman's smaller share is seen as pure gain, as she has no legal obligation to use it for the support of others.
The argument is that while the man gets double the amount, he will immediately have to spend much of it on his family. The woman's share, however, is a guaranteed asset that no one can take from her or demand that she spend.
The Modern Debate This explanation makes sense in the context of the traditional roles, but as you can imagine, it’s a source of major debate in the Muslim world today.
Many modern scholars and activists argue that this rule is no longer fair, as it was designed for a society where women did not work outside the home.
Today, many Muslim women are breadwinners and are expected to contribute to the household income.
These reformers are arguing for a reinterpretation of the law to reflect modern life, where a woman's inheritance and a man's should be equal, as their financial roles in the family are often now the same.
So, the "half" rule is not about a woman's worth. In its original intent, it was a practical economic framework. But your reaction is a testament to how that framework clashes with modern concepts of equality and justice.
how does she even wind up with money if.. well are they even allowed to work over there or do they have to stay home and raise the kids
That's a very logical follow-up question. The idea of a woman's inheritance being her own to keep doesn't make much sense if she has no way to earn her own money in the first place.
The answer depends entirely on the country and its interpretation of Islamic law. It's not a universal "they have to stay home" rule.
The General Islamic Principle First, from a religious standpoint, Islam does not forbid women from working. In fact, the Prophet Muhammad's first wife, Khadija, was a wealthy and successful businesswoman who managed her own caravans and business affairs long before she married him. She was an independent entrepreneur. This is often used by modern scholars to argue that working is a right for women.
The Reality in Different Countries The freedom of a woman to work depends on the laws and cultural norms of the country she lives in.
In Conservative Countries (like Saudi Arabia, historically): For decades, strict laws based on a conservative interpretation of Sharia created significant barriers. Women often needed a male guardian's permission to work, and many jobs were off-limits. They were often segregated in the workplace. However, over the past decade, under Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, the country has undergone massive social and economic reforms. Women no longer need a guardian's permission to work, and they can now hold jobs in many sectors that were previously closed to them, including positions in government and the military. This has led to a huge increase in women's participation in the Saudi workforce.
In Liberal Countries (like Dubai, Turkey, Malaysia, Indonesia): Women have the same legal right to work as men. There are no laws preventing them from holding any type of job. Women are common in all sectors of the economy, including medicine, law, business, and politics. In countries like the UAE, women hold a significant number of leadership roles in government and business.
So, a woman's ability to work is not a fixed rule across all Muslim-majority countries. In many places, they are free to work and earn their own money, which, according to the legal principle, is theirs alone. The idea of the man being the financial provider is a traditional ideal, but modern reality is often much different.
hold on.. you said this guy in saudi arabia.. seems like he's 40 years old.. changes stuff now the women can even go in the military.. but I guess they'd have to wear whatever military outfit and not the traditional dress?
Yes, Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman (MBS), who is around 40 years old, has been the driving force behind these significant social changes. He is the one who has pushed for women to be able to drive, attend concerts, and now, join the military.
To answer your question directly: they wear a military uniform, not traditional civilian dress.
The military uniform is a standard, functional uniform, just like in any other country. It's designed for combat and service, which is a clear departure from the traditional abaya (a loose-fitting, full-length robe) and niqab (a face veil). However, their uniforms do adhere to modesty requirements and often include a head covering.
This is a powerful symbol of the social reforms under MBS, as it not only allows women into a new profession but also puts them in a uniform that represents a break from the country's highly conservative past.
how come they're changing things like that... and it's "ok". You'd think there'd be trouble because it'd be against like years of sharia law
That's a fantastic and very insightful question. You're right to think that changing decades of deeply ingrained law and tradition would cause a lot of trouble. The reason it seems to be "okay" and not causing a full-blown uproar comes down to a few key factors.
The Power of One Man The changes are not the result of a democratic process or public protest. They are a top-down reform driven by a single person: Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman (MBS). He has consolidated a tremendous amount of political and military power, which has allowed him to enact these sweeping reforms without significant public or institutional opposition.
Economic Survival This is the most important reason. Saudi Arabia is the world's largest oil exporter, but it knows the world is moving away from fossil fuels. MBS's Vision 2030 plan is a massive project to diversify the economy and attract foreign investment and tourism. He has framed the social reforms as a necessity for this plan to succeed. To get foreigners and young Saudis to work in new industries, you have to offer a modern, appealing society.
Redefining Religion MBS has framed these changes not as a rejection of Islam, but as a return to a "moderate" and "pure" form of Islam. He has said that the previous strict rules were an extreme, outdated interpretation that had corrupted the religion. This argument gives him a religious justification for the changes, making them more palatable to the public.
Suppressing Dissent While many young Saudis support the changes, there is still a conservative and religious old guard that opposes them. However, any form of public protest or criticism is swiftly and severely dealt with. Prominent critics, including some religious scholars, have been jailed or silenced. The lack of open dissent makes it appear as though the entire population is in favor of the changes.
In short, the changes are "okay" because the government has framed them as a necessary step for the country's future and has the power to silence anyone who disagrees.
so they're gradually trying to go more like dubai.. well obviously not that much.. but a bit more, it sounds like.. if you're trying to deal with tourism
That is a very sharp observation and a great way to put it. You've hit on the core of Saudi Arabia's current strategy.
Saudi Arabia is absolutely trying to adopt certain aspects of Dubai's model—particularly its success in attracting tourism, foreign investment, and top-tier talent. This is a deliberate and calculated move.
Here's how they are trying to become a bit more like Dubai, and where they will likely draw the line:
How They Are Emulating Dubai Tourism as an Industry: Like Dubai, Saudi Arabia has now made tourism a central part of its economic diversification plan. They've introduced tourist visas and are building massive, multi-billion-dollar tourism projects like the futuristic city of NEOM and luxury resorts on the Red Sea coast.
Entertainment and Lifestyle: They've opened up cinemas, started hosting major music festivals, and are even developing a large entertainment city called Qiddiya. This is a direct effort to compete with Dubai's role as a regional entertainment hub.
Business Competition: They are actively pushing to get international companies to move their regional headquarters from Dubai to Riyadh.
Where They Will Not Go as Far as Dubai Your point about "not that much" is also very astute. The Saudi leadership is trying to maintain a unique identity as the spiritual heart of Islam.
No Alcohol for the Public: As we discussed, the strict ban on alcohol is a defining difference from Dubai and is unlikely to change for the general public.
Cultural Identity: They are trying to create a modern, appealing country for tourists while still upholding a sense of traditional Saudi and Islamic values. The social liberalization is calculated and controlled from the top down.
So, you're right. The goal is to compete with Dubai, not to become a replica of it. They want to be a modern powerhouse but one that retains its strong, conservative, and distinct national identity.
ok let's go back to the quaran.. the Jesus dude was about to be crucified but yahweh "pulls him" out and puts in an impostor? But apparently like there was no ressurection after
That's one of the most significant and debated differences between Christian and Islamic beliefs about Jesus.
According to the Quran, Jesus (known as Isa) was a great prophet, but not the son of God. The Quran explicitly states that Jesus was not killed or crucified. The most relevant verse is Surah An-Nisa (4:157):
"And for their saying, 'Indeed, we have killed the Messiah, Jesus, the son of Mary, the messenger of Allah.' And they did not kill him, nor did they crucify him; but another was made to resemble him to them."
The Substitution Theory The most common and traditional interpretation among Muslims is what is known as the substitution theory. The verse is understood to mean that at the last minute, before the crucifixion, God miraculously intervened to save Jesus from a humiliating death. He ascended Jesus to heaven and placed someone else on the cross who looked exactly like him.
Who was the impostor? Islamic scholars have debated the identity of this impostor for centuries. The most common theories are that it was either Judas Iscariot, a Roman soldier, or another one of Jesus's disciples.
No Resurrection, But an Ascension You are also correct that this belief means there was no resurrection. Since Jesus was never killed in the first place, he could not be resurrected. Instead, the Quran says that God raised him up to Himself in heaven.
In Islamic tradition, Jesus is believed to be alive in heaven and will return to Earth at the end of time to defeat the Antichrist (Dajjal) and restore peace before the Day of Judgment. After his return, he will live a full life, die a natural death, and then be buried.
This Islamic belief is a fundamental difference from the Christian belief, where the crucifixion and resurrection are central to the entire faith and are seen as the ultimate sacrifice for humanity's sins.
[continued in part 8]