VOTE! The REAL Thrembo....

[meijak]

Theology.

View attachment 172812

It is so ironic that you complain about me using "copy-paste arguments" while you keep making the same arguments and avoid contesting any of the arguments I made. Your entire argument relies on a Strawman Fallacy. You pretended that I was not giving you historical context when I literally cited people like Ibn Hamdan, Al-Nawawi, and Ibn Hajar who concluded that these hadith were condemning actual statues and image of idols, rather than mere drawings. You did Appeal to Ignorance as WELL LMAOO YOU JUST CANT STOP LOSING, just because you cannot find context in some of the sources does not mean that it does not exist, retard, and Al-Nawawi in Sharh Sahih Muslim literally said this was an issue that Salafi were debating with some said that the hadith was referring to statues and other to 2D images. And, bitch, just because Aisha """"""narrated"""""" this hadith, does not mean that there is only one interpretation, that is a complete disregard for how Islamic jurisprudence is set-up.

Nope also never said that son.


ALSO ABOVE ME IS A PEDO

I'm bored wit this but I will ask you a single question. Do you think this is wrong?

 

[Warrior-Z]

That's not what a strawman fallacy is, and rejecting a claim on basis of it being a fallacy is itself a fallacy. If you think that Islamic scholars apart of a subset of a subset who were born hundreds of years after Muhammad's death are more trustworthy than the first-hand account of the wife of Muhammed, then you're retarded.

No, by taking the position that I did not provide any historical context you misrepresented the argument, as plenty of scholarly material was cited in the form of scholars like Ibn Hamdan, Al-Nawawi, and Ibn Hajar, and all of them analyzed those hadiths and demonstrated that it primarily opposed statues and idol-like depictions of living creatures and not every last drawing of a living creature. Also you committed Appeal to Purity, you legit acting like only first-hand accounts matter while dismissing centuries of scholarship. Islamic jurisprudence doesn’t work that way.

 

[baqqrih]

you sound like a cereal or serial number or whatever chainsmoker your voice mogs bro

I know, my voice itself is pleasant, but I believe speaking over such an extended amount of time would bother my family that lives with me. I don't want to bother them, so I prefer to keep things text-based (this is why I only really post voice messages when I'm driving or when I'm alone at home).

 

[Warrior-Z]

Would text still work, then?

I don't really do formal debates in text.

 

[Warrior-Z]

I'm bored wit this but I will ask you a single question. Do you think this is wrong?

What are you referring to?

 

[baqqrih]

I don't really do formal debates in text.

Well, would it work for this particular instance?

 

[Gigafly]

No, by taking the position that I did not provide any historical context you misrepresented the argument, as plenty of scholarly material was cited in the form of scholars like Ibn Hamdan, Al-Nawawi, and Ibn Hajar, and all of them analyzed those hadiths and demonstrated that it primarily opposed statues and idol-like depictions of living creatures and not every last drawing of a living creature. Also you committed Appeal to Purity, you legit acting like only first-hand accounts matter while dismissing centuries of scholarship. Islamic jurisprudence doesn’t work that way.

The article you quoted did not mention anything relevant to that, so I'm just assuming you're pulling this out of your ass. You're again rejecting a claim based solely on you thinking it's a fallacy, which itself is a fallacy. You suck at debating, get a job nigger

 

[Mr. Thrembo 88]

 

[meijak]

What are you referring to?

Don't play qoi, just answer the question.

 

[Gigafly]

Don't play qoi, just answer the question.

>qoi

 

[Warrior-Z]

Well, would it work for this particular instance?

I'm afraid not.

The article you quoted did not mention anything relevant to that, so I'm just assuming you're pulling this out of your ass. You're again rejecting a claim based solely on you thinking it's a fallacy, which itself is a fallacy. You suck at debating,

Are you retarded? In Fath al-Bari, Ibn Hajar clearly states, "the prohibition is only on complete statues throwing shadow, not pictures" and then clarifying in Al-Nawawi's Sharh on Sahih Muslim that these hadiths concern idolatrous images, not every type of art???? Your argument that centuries of contextual scholarship are irrelevant is just cherry-picking and false equivalence, and you're ignoring rigorous analysis in favor of a single, first-hand account from Aisha. Unless you are willing to engage in scholarly argument rather than your simplistic interpretation, your point collapses under its own ignorance, and you really suck at debating.

 

[Warrior-Z]

1. Yes
2. It should be illegal unless it's dangerous to the mother
3. EMR?

Wasn't asking you, pedo.

Don't play qoi, just answer the question.

No, what are you referring to?

So... Your cord sisters

Prove that rq.

 

[meijak]

>qoi

I am an esl but I do want warrior-p to actually respond to this

 

[baqqrih]

I'm afraid not.

I'm sorry to disappoint.

 

[Warrior-Z]

rich from the guy who supports child marriage

Yeah I don't, you can go ahead and prove that.

 

[meijak]

Wasn't asking you, pedo.

No, what are you referring to?

Prove that rq.

I mean,if you're gonna be this obtuse, there is no reason to even talk

 

[Erblicken]

muhammad was an illiterate pedophile who raided caravans and married his adopted son's wife (this is why you cannot take legal custody of an adopted child if you're muslim). he was literally possessed by demons, why the fuck would you listen to anything he says?

 

[Warrior-Z]

I mean,if you're gonna be this obtuse, there is no reason to even talk

Then stfu and gtfo you fat obese mutt.

 

[Warrior-Z]

muhammad was an illiterate pedophile who raided caravans and married his adopted son's wife (this is why you cannot take legal custody of an adopted child if you're muslim). he was literally possessed by demons, why the fuck would you listen to anything he says?

Do you have the balls to debate this in VC soon?
This was all debunked.

 

[Erblicken]

Do you have the balls to debate this in VC soon?
This was all debunked.

how was it debunked, elaborate 4 me...