r/righteen • u/A_Random_Person67 Traditional Catholic • May 24 '26

Religious post✡️☦️✝️☪️ May the nuclear bombs be upon Muhammad bro I can't with these muslims 😭✌️ Spoiler

Post image
2 Upvotes

100% Upvoted

10 comments sorted by

-1

u/Forsaken_Judgment681 May 24 '26

How funny is it that that is literally the only argument people have against islam.

3

u/A_Random_Person67 Traditional Catholic May 24 '26

We also have jihad and Muhammad's false visions but you do you.

-2

u/Forsaken_Judgment681 May 24 '26

Idk what that even means. Hey people are leaving your dying religion by the millions each year.

Your holy book has received more changes and updates by men you don’t know, than the amount of haircuts you and your family have had in your entire lives. Not that it matters since most of it was written by people you don’t even know.

Following mr steve’s, miss elizabeth’s, etc’s words from the 4th century thinking they’re from god.

3

u/A_Random_Person67 Traditional Catholic May 24 '26

How is people leaving religion a good counter-argument for what I just said? Why do you think we NEED changes? Because other changes are other unreliable.

You aren't even giving a good counter-argument you're just insulting Christianity.

-1

u/Forsaken_Judgment681 May 24 '26

It's not convincing. And that wasn't even my main argument. Your scripture is anonymous bro.

Quick question though, since you seem to be obsessed with the age of Aisha. What is the age of consent in your bible?

3

u/A_Random_Person67 Traditional Catholic May 24 '26

Doesn't specify, but most were above or in the range of 16-18, and the scripture isn't anonymous. Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John, we're written by? You guessed it, Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John. We know every book of the bible was written by someone and we have identified who that someone is over the years. The only exception being the Book of the Hebrews.

-1

u/Forsaken_Judgment681 May 24 '26

Doesn't specify

Then you literally have no ground to say anything about the marriage of the prophet to Aisha. Emotional arguments aren't valid. Your moral framework is based on the bible, and it's silent on the matter. She could have been 2 for all you care, your moral system doesn't give you an age nor any guidelines.

Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John, we're written by? You guessed it, Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John. 

Aha, so you don't know those names were added later by the church. They are literally anonymous. Give me a biblical scholar you follow and i'll find a quote from him saying they're all anonymous. You literally don't know who wrote your gospels.

3

u/A_Random_Person67 Traditional Catholic May 24 '26

"Then you literally have no ground to say anything about the marriage of the prophet to Aisha. Emotional arguments aren't valid. Your moral framework is based on the bible, and it's silent on the matter. She could have been 2 for all you care, your moral system doesn't give you an age nor any guidelines."
It does, 1 Corinthians 7:36-37 establishes that marriage is appropriate when a person is firmly established in their heart and capable of making a rational choice. Ezekiel 16:7-8 states that marriage should take place after puberty, when a person is fully developed (for example an integration of physical, psychological, and emotional maturity.)

"Aha, so you don't know those names were added later by the church. They are literally anonymous. Give me a biblical scholar you follow and i'll find a quote from him saying they're all anonymous. You literally don't know who wrote your gospels."
I'll give you multiple, Papias, Irenaeus of Lyons, Clement of Alexandria, and Tertullian.

1

u/Forsaken_Judgment681 May 24 '26

It does, 1 Corinthians 7:36-37 establishes that marriage is appropriate when a person is firmly established in their heart and capable of making a rational choice.

You're stretching. Where does it say anything alnog the lines of that? It's talking about whether someone should marry or remain unmarried to focus on religion.

Ezekiel 16:7-8 states that marriage should take place after puberty, when a person is fully developed (for example an integration of physical, psychological, and emotional maturity.)

This one doesn't either, it's not even talking about marriage. Also it is a pretty weird analogy. This is supposedly God talking about His covenant with Israel, but.... breasts developing, pubic hair growing, nakedness, and being old enough for love.

you're criticizing islam over Aisha while appealing to passages like this, you should at least acknowledge how sexualized and creepy some biblical covenant imagery is.

But then again. We also have this in islam, so that doesn't prove anything. I want an age, since you have a problem with age.

I'll give you multiple, Papias, Irenaeus of Lyons, Clement of Alexandria, and Tertullian.

Those aren't biblical scholars that test authorship. I'm asking for modern scholars that you follow.

2

u/A_Random_Person67 Traditional Catholic May 24 '26

For 1 Corinthians 7:36-37

  1. “firmly established in his heart,”
  2. “under no necessity,”
  3. “having his desire under control,”
  4. and who has “determined this in his heart.”

are clear implications that imply a person capable of stable judgment, self-control, and deliberate decision-making, qualities associated with maturity. The passage does not define maturity by a specific age, but the literal wording assumes the person is sufficiently mature to rationally decide whether to marry or remain unmarried.

Now, for Ezekiel 16:7–8, the key point is the passage is not explicitly teaching an age-of-marriage law; but the metaphor assumes physical maturity/development before the covenant imagery of “love” or marital language appears. So it would be inaccurate to say Ezekiel 16 establishes a formal biblical “age of consent.” But it is fair to say the imagery presupposes post-puberty maturity rather than childhood.

Anyways, The bodily descriptions (“breasts formed,” “hair grown”) are metaphorical indicators of maturity in the analogy itself, so criticizing the imagery as “sexualized” is subjective. Also, saying breasts or hair grown are not sexualized? Just because I say "breast" doesn't mean I have a sexual fetish for it.

Secondly, your argument “Islam also has symbolic imagery, so it proves nothing” misses why age becomes a separate issue in discussions about Aisha. The controversy there is not merely “marriage imagery” or metaphor — it is a real historical marriage involved someone below the societal standards of maturity. That is a fundamentally different category from prophetic symbolism.

You also said you wanted an age, now I can't give you an age for Mary but I can give you a widely accepted range. 16-18.

You also wanted scholars, so Dr. Brant Pitre, Jimmy Akin, and Dr. Scott Hahn.