@bicero__ "Fikir fukaralığının hakaret perdesiyle örtüldüğü yerlerde kelimeler sükûtu seçer; çünkü bazı zihniyetlerin seviyesine inmek, o çukurun konforuna ortak olmaktır."
@Ziusudras The person mentioned in the Qur’an and referred to by the title ‘Zul-Qarnayn’ is, both historically and textually, Solomon, peace be upon him.
@WoundedTiger__ Quoting a fake timeline to bash Islam while cheering for apostasy just exposes your echo chamber's agenda. You never read the Qur'an or understood its context; you only followed social media bias. True knowledge cures ignorance, but trolls prefer memes!
@ReasonBound@AmericanProud08@Phatymarh44 Bring documents and evidence that this is in the Quran, come with actual arguments instead of displaying your ignorance with cheap trash!
@RishiVasishta@CuteAaruhi4 Relying on centuries-old human speculation while rejecting the primary source is the real circular trap. Calling objective facts "stupidity" only proves a complete inability to engage with actual text and logic.
@Azarionaa@CuteAaruhi4 Ah, the classic "protest like the West" recipe! Because clearly, copy-pasting Western models is the only way to think, right? We critique both extremists and ignorant stereotypes. Irony is you preaching against herd mentality while literally parroting textbook clichés.
@Azarionaa@CuteAaruhi4 Ah, the classic "protest like the West" recipe! Because clearly, copy-pasting Western models is the only way to think, right? We critique both extremists and ignorant stereotypes. Irony is you preaching against herd mentality while literally parroting textbook clichés.
@Azarionaa@CuteAaruhi4 HERD PSYCHOLOGY: THEY DO NOT ASK, THEY DO NOT QUESTION, THEY DO NOT READ, THEY DO NOT RESEARCH; THEY SIMPLY OBEY.📘MOST PEOPLE DO NOT USE THEIR REASON; THEY BELIEVE BLINDLY. (Surah Al-Ma’idah, verse 103)
@RishiVasishta@CuteAaruhi4 Equating the preserved divine word of the Quran with centuries-later human records is baseless bias. Calling logical truth "jargon" doesn't change facts; it just shows an evasion of reality and a lack of sound arguments.
@RishiVasishta@CuteAaruhi4 Claiming the Quran is incomplete without human sources contradicts its own explicit verses stating it is fully detailed. Equating divine faith with human-made collections is a logical fallacy, not a valid critique.
@RishiVasishta@CuteAaruhi4 The Quran defines core principles and values, not a rigid rulebook of ritual steps. Traditional technical details come from later human narrations, not the Book itself. A Quran-centric view rejects treating sectarian rituals as divine law.
@RishiVasishta@CuteAaruhi4 Relying on sects or narrations misleads people. Islam cannot be properly understood through them. True understanding requires a Quran-centric approach, taking the Quran alone as your ultimate reference, not traditional dogmas.
@Azarionaa@CuteAaruhi4 Islam has no uniform code like mandatory turbans or hijabs. Also, Surah Nebe 33 doesn't mean sexual virgins; "kavaibe etraba" refers to equal, compatible, and noble peers/companions in heaven, not physical objects. Misinterpretations distort the Quran’s pure message.
@RishiVasishta@CuteAaruhi4 When they blended local traditions and customs with the Umayyad-Abbasid religion, this monstrosity of a religion emerged. You mistake this religion for Islam.
There is no Islamic government based on the Qur’an anywhere on earth.
@Azarionaa@CuteAaruhi4 Calling linguistic metaphors "Taqiyya" just proves you can't read root meanings. Equating sacred allegories with your hyper-sexualized obsessions is pure projection. You read the text with a biased, carnal lens and blame Islam for your own mental limits. Open a dictionary!