praise allah

allah is great

يا هلا بالعرصات

@Domadru يهلا والله بك ياشيخ

القضيب

ازيكم؟

Allahu Akbar!

Allahu Akbar!

Allahu Akbar!

Allahu Akbar!

Allahu Akbar!

دحشو بطيزك يا جحبه

allahu akbar.

allahu akbar b tizak ya 3ars

w

allah akbar

@羅大哥toni @TheoryOfEurope#7975 @Deleted User https://youtu.be/4vxeC1-Przk?t=48

Allah rules in heaven
Hitler rules on earth

🍻

Allah rules in heaven

and

and

he also rules on earth

https://cdn.discordapp.com/emojis/319793188162240522.png

Who rules in Hell tho.

👀

@National Trotskyist According to Christians, Lucifer dishes out the torturing doesn't he? But according to Islam, Lucifer will be tortured, and angels will be doing the torturing to anyone in Hell

@Sn0w ❄ According to Christians, Hell is a place of eternal rivalisation, in that way no one really rules it, albeit some like Satan or Lucifer have been claimed as leaders. I've heard versions saying there are like 3 leaders.
Protestants, some for example don't believe Satan rules Hell, but he actually dwells on Earth and is tormented in Hell.
I don't think Lucifer or any of the devils exists in Islam, as no angel can fall in it.

The Jewish Sitra Akha is pretty close to the Christian conception of Hell, it is manifestation of the evil sephiroths, qlippoth.
There are 3 categories of evil beings in Judaism, The demons/shedim, close to Islamic djinni, the spawn of Lilith and the fallen angels/devils of Samael.

Meant Judaism, fug

Well Sitra Akha is the place for Samael buddies at least

And yeah it's claimed in Christianity that they torture the souls there.

Orthodoxes even got a different from Catholic version of Purgatory, the aerial toll houses/mytarstva, where they're tempted by them before deciding their fate of going to Heaven.

Lucifer does exists in Islam and so do the devils. But yeah you're right about the non-existence of fallen angels
In Islam, he's a demon. Demons (Jinn), like humans, have free will, whereas angels don't. That's why Muslims claim he wasn't an angel, as angels are basically God's practically-mindless pawns (still ultimately good though) who do his bidding. One of the biggest sins in Islam is to contact a demon (be it through magic or whatever) as well as it being a huge sin on a demon to possess a human
A devil is basically an evil demon.
I know that in Christianity, all demons are all evil, there isn't the idea of a "good" demon @National Trotskyist

From what I've heard, Lucifer is not Satan, and that assigning that name to Satan is something that arose from misinterpretation and mistranslation of old Hebrew and Christian texts

A misinterpretation that has become ingrained in mainstream theology

According to which beliefs? @Chalin

Well as far as I'm aware, the name Lucifer is used by Christians

It was the Latin word for morning star

Used in some passage in the book of Isaiah

The arabic name for Lucifer is iblees. The Arabic name for Satan is Sheytan. In Islam, they're the same being. I don't know if they are or aren't according to Christian/Judaic beliefs, but I always assumed they were

Lucifer original appeared within theological scripture as "morning star" in Isaiah 14:12

The word Lucifer comes from the Latin word for that phrase, apparently

The name Lucifer didn't really begin to become used interchangeably with Satan in Christianity until the King James Bible came into being

Or the publication of Dantes Inferno

I can't figure out which

I'm not well versed in the subject

I just now that the name "Lucifer" itself seems to be something widely misused to the point that the fact that it's misused has become meaningless

Yeah, the only mention of the name "Lucifer" in the Christian Bible was actually in reference to Nebuchadnezzar II, oddly enough

The Babylonian king who conquered the holy land

I don't know jack shit about Islamic scripture, other than that much of it parallels other Abrahamic scripture

Oh wait I think I remember something. Iblees was used before his pride took over him, before he became evil
I really don't know enough details about the Bible version of him aside from stuff I've heard here and there such as him being a fallen angel and so on. And I know the Bible has been changed/reworded but that's it

Yea, upon a but more reading, it seems that it was at some point in the European medieval age that the word "Lucifer" generally came to be used as the name as the devil prior to his fall from heaven

It parallels it cause in the Quran, God says he sent the Torah to the Israelis through Musa (Moses), then the Bible through Issa (Jesus), the son of the virgin Mariam, but every time he sent a book, the people changed it eventually. We believe they were all sent by God through an angel named Jibrael, they're just changed/editted

Really? So Christians also used Lucifer as his name before he fell?

By some

It's kinda used all over the place

Depends on the source, I can't get a clear picture

I've read some of the Bible but I ought to sit down and read it through

Unless you read the King James version, I doubt you'd find much use of the name "Lucifer"

Hmm

I was considering KJV

Since that's the most common one, or so I've heard

Also, it's not explicitly said that the serpent in the Garden of Eden was actually the devil

Not in the Bible, at least

Oh, we believe it was

The New International Version is also a common one

Though I'd have to recheck

It's basically assumed that the serpent is the devil

Who else would be leading God's creations astray

How could the devil have been in heaven

A preacher will tell you that it's pretty obvious that the serpent was the devil

You'd find that a lot of what is taught by Christian theologians is based upon assumptions and inferences made about the text, rather than litteral translation

Doesn't that increase inacurracy though?

That's a big issue, yes

It's one of the reasons why I do not believe in the Bible

Well

I agree with your standpoint in sticking to morals

Most modern Christians do not take the old testament as fact

Too much of it contradicts known science and history, and there's just too many contradictions

https://infidels.org/library/modern/donald_morgan/contradictions.html

The new testament is less inconsistent, and better follows the beliefs of modern Christianity

There's some stuff that breaks science, like Jesus turning water into wine, but it's easier to accept that Jesus can defy the laws of creation from time to time than it is to accept the Creationist belief of how the universe was created based upon the litteral interpretation of genesis

When modern science is far more consistent than the old testament

That's a lot of contradictions. You know if the bible was never changed from how it was originally revealed, there would have been no need for the Quran, by Muslim beliefs at least

I believe his ability to turn water into wine was *supposed* to contradict science, to prove him

Along with his other abilities

Yeah, as I said

If Jesus was God on Earth, or even a prophet who acted on behalf of God, of course he'd be able to violate natural law to prove his divine nature

I know a creationist who believes the Earth was formed 5000 years ago. But he also has a masters degree in environmental sciences and he's seen trees that are 6000 years old. I have no comment to that

Yeah

top kek

It sounds like you were going to add a "but"

A "but" to what?

Jesus:
"I'm gonna prove my divinity by doing impossible stuff"
*does impossible stuff*

I don't believe Jesus and the miracles, but it isn't remotely absurd for someone who does believe in Jesus's divinity to believe that he did those things

Oh, I get it

It's like believing in Zeus, and then believing that Zeus did actually kill people with lightning

Yeahhh