A

[A @castledoor17]

@Bambit_enforcer @Ahlulsunnah__ My point is that your linguistic distinction doesn’t change anything. سبّ is not limited to obscene language.

Al-Ālūsī, discussing سبّ الصحابة, explicitly states:

واللعن مثل السب بل هو أدهى وأمر، وقد يقال له سب أيضا

Laʿn may itself may be sabb. Other scholars say this also.

[A @castledoor17]

@Bambit_enforcer @Ahlulsunnah__ I didn’t ask whether they were equal in faith, character or merit. I asked whether Abū Bakr, ʿUmar and ʿUthmān RA are believers, just as ʿAlī RA is.

I ask because you implied they don’t meet the threshold of belief required for
“لَعْنُ الْمُؤْمِنِ كَقَتْلِهِ”to apply to them

[A @castledoor17]

@Bambit_enforcer @Ahlulsunnah__ Do Abū Bakr, ʿUmar and ʿUthmān رضي الله عنهم qualify as believers in the same way ʿAlī رضي الله عنه qualifies as a believer?

[A @castledoor17]

@Bambit_enforcer @Ahlulsunnah__ The Prophet ﷺ said: “لَعْنُ الْمُؤْمِنِ كَقَتْلِهِ”“Cursing a believer is like killing him.” (Bukhari & Muslim)

Your linguistic distinction does nothing. Sunni scholars have explicitly held that laʿn can be even more severe than sabb. It is not some milder alternative.

[A @castledoor17]

@doodooshiestyy @dontjudgemefive @KollegeKidd Ok, science doesn’t even make that claim and you want to make it your god. Science doesn’t create anything; it describes and tests how things happen. You’ve confused a method of inquiry with a causal agent, then used that confusion as an argument against God.

[A @castledoor17]

@Exegoddamn @ChillOffSha @JohnDyson123 @Tebron_james @KollegeKidd “When a system is already made to function” 😂

You just admitted it was made…. Made by whom?

I advise you read the final unaltered revelation from God, the Qur’an, accept it or don’t accept it is on you, least you can do for yourself is read some of it.

[A @castledoor17]

@Exegoddamn @ChillOffSha @JohnDyson123 @Tebron_james @KollegeKidd I’m going to stop engaging with you, either you are a child or are severely incapable.

I asked: “Can the chain of parents keep going backwards without a beginning?” You answered “Yes.” Now you agree Earth has a beginning. Then the chain of human parents cannot be beginningless.

[A @castledoor17]

@Exegoddamn @ChillOffSha @JohnDyson123 @Tebron_james @KollegeKidd 😂 I recall you called me retarded twice.

How can human parents regress infinitely into the past when the Earth on which every human has existed has only existed for a finite amount of time?

Come on man, you really think a perfectly designed system has no designer?

[A @castledoor17]

@bannedChristian @Exposing_apes @AN112003_ @akhi__ex Your heart is filled with hate. I can show you Christian’s practicing child marriage. That’s not even the discussion here.

You believe in what your heart desires, not the Bible. The definition of child is not even set in stone and has changed drastically throughout history.

[A @castledoor17]

@bannedChristian @kojeovo_ @AN112003_ @akhi__ex Are you OK with Catholic canon law treating 12 as marriageable for girls for centuries, into the early 20th century? If yes, you concede historical norms matter. If no, your moral test condemns historic Christianity too. That is exactly the presentism you deny.

[A @castledoor17]

@Exegoddamn @ChillOffSha @JohnDyson123 @Tebron_james @KollegeKidd Are you unable to answer the question? Yes, babies come from parents. Now keep going backwards. Their parents came from parents too. Can that chain keep going back without having a beginning?

[A @castledoor17]

@bannedChristian @Exposing_apes @AN112003_ @akhi__ex Your interpretation doesn’t even match historic Christian law. For centuries, Catholic canon law permitted valid marriage at 12 for girls and 14 for boys. Only in 1917 was it raised to 14 and 16. This is a prime example of what we call presentism. You are being dishonest.

[A @castledoor17]

@bannedChristian @AN112003_ @akhi__ex Do you hear yourself? Why would Mary need to be given to an elderly man in marriage/betrothal merely for him to be her guardian?

[A @castledoor17]

@bannedChristian @AN112003_ @akhi__ex 7–20 according to whom? The Catholic Encyclopedia says Mary may have given birth at “about thirteen or fourteen.” The History of Joseph the Carpenter explicitly places Jesus birth “in the fifteenth year of her age.” What source gives you 17–20?

[A @castledoor17]

@bannedChristian @Exposing_apes @AN112003_ @akhi__ex Since you claim to hold moral superiority here, tell us, how is marriageable age determined? Is it a fixed number, what is it?

[A @castledoor17]

@bannedChristian @Exposing_apes @AN112003_ @akhi__ex But you are ok with 12 year old Mary being married off to 90 year old Joseph right?

[A @castledoor17]

@bannedChristian @AN112003_ @akhi__ex So you are ok with a 16 year old giving birth?

And you are also ok with a 12 year old being married to a 90 year old?

[A @castledoor17]

@bannedChristian @AN112003_ @akhi__ex Mary was around 12 when she gave birth to Jesus. We are not your enemies man. A muslim is required to believe that Jesus Christ was a righteous prophet.
Jesus said to them, “A prophet is not without honor except in his own town, among his relatives and in his own home.” Mark 6:4

[A @castledoor17]

@ProFrogICB @akhi__ex Sinning or promoting sin does not make someone a kafir. It is a terrible thing, but it does not make someone a disbeliever. Do you get paid to speak nonsense?

[A @castledoor17]

@imogyouhahahaha @theafroaussie Colonialism…? Weapons of mass destruction? Sykes-Picot? How old are you? The amount of ignorance in this comment is astonishing.