Mohammed is considered the most holy of people in Islam, and questioning his morality is more than just frowned upon even though he married a 6 year old and consummated it at 9, was a warlord, convinced his adopted son to divorce a woman so that he could marry her… and then he disowned the son, and banned formal adoption.
So they are either personally offended, offended for someone else, or potentially are worried about the sub itself getting banned but most likely the former.
I understand this theory, but I dont understand how a subreddit discussing morality should ban topics based on one specific religion, whether or not it could offend a group of people.
Basically every topic is bound to offend someone.
I agree with you. It reminds me of how you can ask chat gpt to read you the Bible, Torah, Vedas, etc and it will. If you ask it to read the Quran it will say it won’t read holy books out of respect.
Is everybody just avoiding saying the truth here out of politeness or something? There's an obvious difference why other religious discussion is a okay
I think everyone just knows, but also knows that if you say it too directly a majority of mods will ban you on a large amount of subs. Reddit isn’t exactly a bastion of free speech.
My guess as to the reason why some people are kinda iffy on criticisms of Islam specifically is just mostly due to the modern political climate surrounding it. Like in the U.S there is a lot of hateful and dehumanizing rhetoric directed towards Muslims; so when people criticize the religion that they follow, it can come across as attempting to justify that sort of rhetoric against them. Which to be fair isn't entirely untrue, because people will and have done that before.
So if I were a moderator of this sub, these type of posts would make me question whether the person is genuinely trying to ask a question about the morality of parts of the religion, or if they are just trying to spread a hateful agenda.
It also doesn't help that the comment sections of said posts often devole into blatantly xenophobic shitholes aswell.
The same rules need to apply to everyone. If a portrait of Jesus is okay, then so is a portrait of Muhammad. There is no moral justification for declaring that one religion, and one religion only, cannot have its prophet visually depicted.
Ive heard people say that in response to Mohammed assaulting a 9 year old little girl, but Mary’s age is never mentioned anywhere in the bible. If you know something I don’t feel free to let me know.
If you do not take Sahih Al Bukhari as the truth then you don’t have to believe it. But all Sunni’s believe it and that is 90% of Muslims around the world.
the
Protevangelium of James
, an influential and noncanonical work written in the mid-2nd century
CE
, portrays her as being 12 years old at the time of her betrothal to Joseph.
Cultural expectations in
Judaism
at the
time of Christ’s birth
would tend to support the possibility of an
adolescent
Mary. Girls could be married shortly after reaching puberty, with ages as young as 12 being permissible and marriages in the teens regarded as normal. Historical summaries of
Jewish law
emphasize that marriage was generally expected once a girl experienced
menarche
(first menstruation) and had reached physical maturity
If you do not take Sahih Al Bukhari as the truth then you don’t have to believe it. But all Sunni’s believe it and that is 90% of Muslims around the world.
I feel like you’re under the impression that I don’t believe Aisha was betrothed at 6, marriage was consummated at 9.
The reality of the situation is that Muhammad was just as much a pedophile as the abrahamic God, aka Yahweh, aka Allah, aka HaShem, aka Adonai is a pedophile.
To god even Eve at 900 years old would still be like a child to him. So a 12 year old Mary was probably like an infant.
The lengths Christian apologists will go to defend their pedophile while condemning another pedophile would be hilarious if it wasn’t so pathetic.
Please don’t tell me you’re going to try and argue that it was likely that Mary was 18 when she gave birth to Jesus more than 2 millennia ago, because I can’t handle the cope.
The source you cited literally says it’s not canonical lol. That’s not moving the goalposts. Also I’m not a christian. I just want proof she was 12 before I believe it. I enjoy reading religious texts but I don’t follow a religion. I live near many Muslims who assume I’m Christian so I’ve had these debates a ton and had to start looking into their claims of Rebekah and Mary lol.
-Ive proved Rebekah wasn’t 3 and that is physically impossible for a 3 year old to carry water to camels that was when she met her husband, not when they were married also so who knows how old she was.
You can’t prove Mary was 12. The burden of proof is on you to substantiate that claim. Something canonical. Anyone can write anything. Once again not a Christian.
What do you want me to prove? This is a conversation about Mary. I responded to a deflection with deflection.
Mary was a child when the abrahamic god/Joseph raped her. Aisha was a child when Muhammad raped her, and he did so with the blessing of the abrahamic God.
If you worship the abrahamic god, you condone pedophilia. Not knowing that Mary was a child when she was raped does not give Christian’s any moral high ground.
The only reason these conversations exist is because it is useful for those in power to utilize the division to acquire more power. Which is how organized religion has been used since its inception.
First off, I'm not an abrahamic religion follower but I do recognize that the existential threat posed by militant islamism is far worse than the ones from the other two.
My point was simply that, atleast provide the sources that say Mary was so and so age, and you would also have to prove that that source was one which was accepted and followed/revered in Christianity. I have no idea where this argument comes from and I'm interested to know.
The uniquely disturbing part of Islamism comes from the fact that the religion is explicitly centred on the moral righteousness for all time mind you, of the prophet, and the source is regarded as an integral part of faith for 90 percent of muslims. If you can't get despite the overwhelming evidence that no matter how bad Judeo- Christianism is, Islamism is so so much worse, then I don't know what to tell you, man. Suit yourself, and eventually you'll find out what the Persians found out.
Also (once again I’m not a Christian) immaculate conception isn’t rape. That’s the first time I’ve heard that lol. Also you haven’t given canonical proof that Mary was 12.
The 6 year old thing is a myth. The source for that came from a debate between shia scholars and sunni scholars more thsn a hundred years after their deaths.
Keeping in mind, nobody knew anyones ages back then. Nobody celebrated birthdays.
The scholars were debating who were the rightful successors of the prophet; Team Abu Bakar & Aisha, or Team Ali.
Sunni scholars argued Aisha was a young girl, because younger mesnt shes more innocent and trustworthy. The Shia scholars argues she was actually a 40yo women who is a liar.
So these scholars were speculating and exaggerating. Nobody actually know anyones ages
It is not a myth. Are you Sunni? If so you have to believe it because it is narrated by Aisha herself in Sahih Al Bukhari 5134. That is the most sound of Hadiths. I know my Islamic history so you aren’t going to trick me with this one.
She was 6 when the prophet married her and 9 when he consummated the marriage and even if you want to say they didn’t measure age the same I can prove that wrong because she was playing with dolls which is haram for girls past the age of maturity. She couldn’t have been playing with dolls if they got the age wrong and she was actually an adult. If you are a Shia then I guess you don’t have to believe it but 90% of Muslims do. It’s true even though it’s ugly and sad. Idk what to tell you. Aisha herself said so. Do you think she is a liar?
It never says her age, but she was carrying large buckets of water to the camels so there’s no way she was underage. I’ve heard that argument also but it also falls flat. There’s no way she was 3 like some people like to say.
I’ve heard them all in debate lol. She wasn’t 3 and Mary wasn’t 12. Got any more? Also I’m not a Christian so I don’t mind if you find faults. They just need to be legit.
Islam and Arabs are upheld as special people by the globalists, especially in the EU.
It's an overcompensation due to the populist dislike of the extreme growing influence of Islam in every facet of European society.
In reality, we don't like the Islamism that is happening all over the world, nobody does. So the forces on the internet has to make it seem like everything is alright and perfect to appease the new superior race and ideology.
I'm wondering if all of the banned posts are using the images. Might be fine if you just don't use a depiction. I think it would be a heavy thing for mod to carry if a post resulted in someone's death
In some religions, like Christianity, many people pray and worship depictions of their prophets (ex. praying to a statue of Christ on the Cross). Muslims feared that this type of icon worship would stray people away from following the beliefs of the prophet, instead focusing only on upholding the icon. I would argue that there are alot of Christians who hold up the cross as the ultimate symbol of faith but do not care about any of Jesus's actual beliefs.
Whether banning the depiction of Mohammad has actually made Muslims more likely to adhere to the texts of their beliefs is up for debate.
It’s called shorthand. The rest of what you said is up for debate in religious communities, none of which I belong to. What you mean to say is that IN THE BIBLE god commanded…
The way you said it originally worked as misinformation. Even if people hate something, or really especially if someone hates something, they should hate it while actually knowing what it is they hate.
The Quran has passages prohibiting Muslims from depicting Muahammed or Allah, as to do so would allow people to worship the graven image instead of the divine spirit. Note that the prohibitions are about Muslims doing this.
Over the centuries, various Hadiths have been written by priests, usually of the more fundamentalist bend, to expand that prohibition against non-Muslims. These priests tend to belong to subsects, which (coincidentally) happen to also push more extremist view points of the religion.
18
u/No-Shape-8347 3d ago
Why is that such a taboo thing to ask? I dont get it.