Crelisya

And The whole claim that “all prophets were Israelites except Muhammad” doesn’t really hold up when you actually look at the basic genealogy and timeline.

“Israelite” simply refers to the descendants of ""Jacob"" (Israel), and that comes generations after Abraham, so even Abraham himself can’t be classified as an Israelite despite being his ancestor. The name “Israel” is just tied to Jacob and has a historical/symbolic origin, not a universal category that applies to all prophets.

On top of that, you’ve got """Adam""" in the tradition as the first prophet, way before any ethnic divisions even exist, so the whole framework doesn’t even start there.

Then you have Noah preaching to his own pre-Abrahamic people, "Abraham" being sent to the people of Ur in Mesopotamia, "Loth" to Sodom and Gomorrah, "Hud" to the people of ‘Ad, Salih to the Thamud (an ancient Arabian tribe), and "Shu‘ayb" to the people of Midian (a region of ancient North-West Arabia / Levant with Arab or arabo-Semitic populations).

So the idea that everyone fits neatly into Israelite lineage except one exception just doesn’t match the actual narrative. At that point, insisting on that framing just keeps stretching the logic. That only makes you look even more foolish than you already are.

Okay, so once again you’re proving you didn’t even read the Qur’an. What you’re referring to is a "" hadith "", not the Qur’an two completely different things, which you’d know if you had even basic knowledge of the subject. But it’s fine, we’ll break it down and educate you since you clearly never took the time to actually study any of this.

Regarding your urine argument, the use of substances like urine in medical treatments was not something unique at all it was part of ancient medicine across multiple civilizations. In Ancient Greece, physicians like Hippocrates used urine both for diagnosis and sometimes treatment, and in the Roman Empire, Pliny the Elder documented its use for various medical and practical purposes.

In Ayurvedic medicine in India, practices like Shivambu therapy involved the use of urine for healing, while in Traditional Chinese Medicine, it was occasionally used in remedies and diagnostic practices. Even in medieval Europe, doctors practiced uroscopy, analyzing urine as a central medical tool.

So the use of substances like camel urine, often mentioned with milk, fits into a broader historical medical context based on the knowledge available at the time not something strange or exclusive to Islam.

And you also seem to deliberately ignore the fact that this was""" not a religious commandment """ or an "" obligation "", but simply a contextual practice related to the medical understanding of that time.

As for the claim that Aisha was 6 years old, it is based on specific narrations, but it is not the only interpretation. Some historians argue she was likely older around 18 or 19 by analyzing historical timelines and contextual evidence. For example, her sister Asma is reported to have been about 10 years older than her and is historically estimated to have been around 27–28 at the time of the Hijrah (622 CE), which would place Aisha in her late teens. Additionally, events Aisha is reported to have witnessed and participated in suggest a level of maturity inconsistent with a very young child. There is also the factor that different calendar systems were used at the time the Hijri calendar is lunar (shorter than the solar calendar), which can affect age calculations over time.

Moreover, it’s important to understand the broader historical context: in many societies across the world at that time, marrying at a young age was a common social norm, not something unique. Life expectancy, social structures, and definitions of adulthood were very different from today, and people were often considered adults much earlier based on physical maturity and social responsibilities. Judging historical practices by modern standards without context leads to distorted conclusions.

And once again, you’re not presenting ""facts"" you’re just recycling oversimplified claims with no context while ignoring anything that doesn’t fit your narrative. All you’ve been doing is jumping from topic to topic and throwing insults without a single solid argument. Your intellectual level is becoming very clear and the more you talk, the more you embarrass yourself.

I didn’t really like the drama that much, but I do agree on one thing the guy/girl just shared his/her opinion and how he/she felt about what he watched. If you don’t agree with him, that’s totally fine you can debate it. But he’s/she's right about one thing you guys were the ones who started insulting him/her for no real reason. He/she was clearly just expressing an opinion without any hostility, and you’re the ones jumping at his/her throat and attacking him/her.

That being said, I personally didn’t get any queerbaiting vibes from it. I’d actually be curious to know what made you think that was there a specific line or scene? Because to me, it mostly felt like the guy was clearly autistic.

And based on the legal definition of “genocide”, Israel’s actions toward Palestinians align with several of its core criteria. There is extensive evidence of large-scale killings, including women and children, as well as widespread physical and psychological harm inflicted on the civilian population. The systematic destruction of infrastructure including homes, hospitals, water systems, and electricity networks combined with prolonged restrictions on food and humanitarian aid has created living conditions that threaten the survival of the population.

These elements correspond directly to acts listed under the Genocide Convention, such as killing members of a group and deliberately inflicting conditions of life calculated to bring about its destruction.

+ widely circulated videos and reports showing israeli soldiers displaying disregard or mockery toward Palestinian victims have been cited by critics as further indication of dehumanization, which some argue supports the case for genocidal intent.

But yeah, keep going spreading misinformation no one here is going to believe you. Many people, even non religious ones, support Palestine because the facts and history are clear, and your propaganda doesn’t work since people are aware of what’s going on.

Moses, Jesus, and Ilyas were from the Children of Israel and part of that community, but they were prophets of God, not symbols of a modern political state. You’re confusing a religious community with a modern nation-state, which is simply not accurate

You also seem to ignore something fundamental in the Qur’an: every community was sent messengers.
“And for every nation is a messenger…” (Qur’an 10:47)

The issue has never been about identity, but about how people responded to those messages. The Qur’an repeatedly shows that many communities rejected, denied, or opposed their prophets despite receiving clear guidance. This is also clearly illustrated in the story of Moses, where his message and commands were resisted and not consistently followed.

At the same time, in Islam, belief is not selective. Muslims are required to believe in all prophets without rejecting any of them:

“We make no distinction between any of His messengers…” (Qur’an 2:285)

So again, the standard in the Qur’an is not based on lineage or identity, but on consistency in faith and obedience.

First, in the Qur’an, God doesn’t “abandon” people randomly. Favor and responsibility are tied to actions. For example:

“O Children of Israel, remember My favor which I have bestowed upon you and that I preferred you over the worlds.” (Qur’an 2:47)

But that favor was never unconditional:

“But they changed the words… so We sent down punishment upon them for their disobedience.” (Qur’an 2:59)

And even more clearly:

“Allah does not change the condition of a people until they change what is in themselves.” (Qur’an 13:11)

So no it’s not “God loved them then abandoned them.” It’s about """accountability """

The Qur’an also clearly shows that access to the land itself was conditional upon obedience. When they refused:

“Go, you and your Lord, and fight. We are sitting right here.” (Qur’an 5:24)

The result was immediate:

“Then it is forbidden to them for forty years…” (Qur’an 5:26)

So again entering and living in that land was """ conditional """, not some permanent or unconditional promise you can turn into a modern political claim.

Second, bringing up prophets like Moses, Jesus, or Ilyas doesn’t prove anything about modern politics. Islam never says that a modern state today has permanent ownership of land just because prophets once lived there.

Plus, the Qur’an talks about a “blessed land,” but you seem to deliberately ignore that access to it, from an Islamic perspective, is tied to faith in God and obedience to Him, not ethnicity or identity alone. The text doesn’t support the idea of an unconditional entitlement based purely on lineage.
And historically, this land has been inhabited continuously by populations " including Palestinians " for centuries. So again, you can’t ignore both the religious conditions and the historical reality to push a one-sided narrative.

And let’s be real you’re either misunderstanding this on purpose or you haven’t actually read the Qur’an properly, because it simply doesn’t say what you’re trying to make it say.
Instead of throwing insults, go educate urself as i said cuz Right now, you’re just making yourself look ridiculous.

And Palestine wasn’t some empty land. People had been living there for centuries mostly Arab Muslims and Christians with their own communities, culture, and identity, especially under the Ottoman Empire.

In the early 1900s, Jews in Europe were facing serious persecution, which led to more migration. At the same time, European powers were also pushing solutions to what they called the “Jewish question,” and one of those ideas was encouraging settlement outside Europe including in Palestine. This ties into the Balfour Declaration, where Britain supported a Jewish national home in Palestine… without really consulting the people already living there.

Then during the British Mandate for Palestine, immigration increased a lot, backed by international and colonial policies, while Palestinians didn’t really get political power or sovereignty.

And then in 1948, when Israel was created, you had the Nakba basically the mass displacement of hundreds of thousands of Palestinians. Whole villages were destroyed, and a huge number of people became refugees. That’s not really debated by historians, it’s a documented fact.

Honestly, a fair solution back then would’ve been something like two states, where both sides actually get self-determination. But Palestinians weren’t really given that instead, many lost their land while they were still living on it.

So yeah, this didn’t just start with one event or one date. It’s the result of a whole chain of things: European persecution, political decisions made by outside powers, mass migration, the long-term impact of the Nakba, and colonization.

Yup, unlike you, I’ve actually read it.and Moses (peace be upon him) basically spends a lot of time reminding the Children of Israel that God literally saved them, fed them, guided them and yet they still kept doubting, complaining, and disobeying. He tells them to worship one God, follow the rules, and appreciate what they’ve been given, but instead, they question everything, refuse clear instructions, and even fall into things like "idol worship" right after being rescued. At one point, he’s essentially telling them, “You were given every sign possible, what more do you want?”

Don’t talk about topics you’re not educated on. If you’re brainwashed, that’s your problem you’re honestly coming across as pretty dumb.

how's the romance pretty slow ?
the plot is good?

Sun Qian has a very strong filmography she consistently chooses interesting and compelling scripts.

After watching the first 4 episodes, I honestly think this is a really solid drama. The balance between comedy and serious moments is handled really well. The character interactions feel natural and engaging, and the pacing is smooth enough that it never gets boring. It all feels pretty light and well-paced overall, which makes it even more enjoyable.

As for the ML, I get why some people might feel frustrated watching him constantly give so much of himself, always pushing through even to the point of exhaustion. But to me, that actually fits the whole point of the drama, especially considering the title. In real life, the medical field often gets criticized for dehumanizing patients treating them like cases or objects (transplants, tests, etc.) and doctors are often seen as lacking empathy.

Here though, it kind of flips that dynamic. And while that portrayal might feel uncomfortable, it reflects a certain professional reality: at the end of the day, people are expected to do their job. His colleagues expect him to fulfill his duties, like we see with the little girl’s case. Despite his own struggles and trauma, the patient still comes first, and his emotions get pushed aside.

Also, it’s worth remembering that in a professional setting, relationships aren’t an obligation. Everyone is primarily responsible for their role. Getting along well with coworkers is definitely a plus, but it’s more of a bonus than a requirement.

the webtoon was a masterclass i hope the kdrama will be as good as the webtoon

Oh really, you're getting bored? I'm not that far in yet, I'm only on episode 4, but so far I'm loving it.

By the way, there's a new drama called See You at Work Tomorrow that just came out. I have no idea if it's any good yet, but I thought I'd mention it in case you're interested.

There's also Dream to You coming out in July, and that's one I'm really looking forward to.

I think we can all agree that after everything the ML goes through, the title couldn't be more fitting...

Sure, keep defending inappropriate behavior if you want.

The execution of both dramas is fairly similar, but story-wise they're quite different. Dr. Romantic is much more focused on the medical aspect, whereas here the medical setting mainly serves as a backdrop.

That said, you can still clearly spot some similarities between the two.

Exactly. The hate this drama gets is seriously overblown. It definitely has its flaws and it's far from perfect, but it's still entertaining and genuinely enjoyable to watch.

To everyone who's unsure whether to watch this drama or not. don’t let the comments and reviewers fool you. This drama is far from perfect, but it’s nowhere near as bad as some people make it out to be. The hate is honestly a bit exaggerated (the rating should be a 8.2). I wrote a pretty detailed review covering all the pros and cons, with ratings for the different aspects of the drama, so feel free to check it out if you want a more balanced opinion.

I get what you're saying, but I still think there are a lot of similarities in terms of the overall vibe: the visual style, the atmosphere, the balance between comedy and more serious moments, the dialogue, the directing, etc. That's mainly what I'm referring to.

I also think the writing is very strong. If you take away the love-triangle aspect, it's a really well-written drama with compelling characters and relationships.