Foreshadowing and Clues:
1. The world is flooding, which has been hinted at since Water 7 arc, saying Aqua Laguna reaches higher every year. It has been flooding since forever. Wano had an entire kingdom submerged on the sea floor. The world is flooding now. The destruction of Lulusia raised the sea level by 1 meter. Who had been doing it? Imu. He explicitly stated that he/she wanted more Mother Flame (IRL counterpart: Nuclear Power), which was used to destroy Lulusia. This means that he wants to do it again. This also means that the world was much lower than it is now.
2. Since it has always been known that the world WILL flood since Joy Boy’s time, as the Ark, Noah, was entrusted to Fishmen of all people. Fishmen, who NEVER need any freaking ship. So if not for them to use, then for whom? For us. For all other races. And what is an Ark for if it’s not to rescue people? And as it had always been known Imu had been nuking places, Fishmen built Fishmen Island RIGHT UNDER Mary Geoise for exactly that reason. IT CANNOT BE NUKED FROM ABOVE. The Ancient Weapon Poseidon was used to control Sea Kings, and they had their own prophecy that they would carry Noah into the sun. It was all there.
3. Sanji’s dream of finding the All Blue seem like the least possible dream of the crew members. The ocean is clearly divided into four, or at least two that are totally disconnected by landmass. It is impossible to find a place that freely contains all ingredients from all four, all living sea creatures from every ocean, as that means all fishes have to at least cross the Red Line freely to make that one spot All Blue.
4. Oda confirmed in an interview with Momoko Sakura that the One Piece is not something abstract, but a physical reward.
5. Roger DID NOT take the One Piece with him. He FOUND the One Piece and discovered the truth of the world at Laugh Tale and laughed. He was there too soon. He could not use the truth or what he found. In ANY versions of his execution, he NEVER once said that he BURIED it there. At best, in any versions of his execution, he LEFT it there. Official Funimation version: he LEFT EVERYTHING THE WORLD HAD TO OFFER THERE. Could it be because the One Piece could not be taken anywhere? Could it because it was too big?
6. Joy Boy was the first pirate, as confirmed by Vegapunk (IRL counterpart: Einstein). Joy Boy, the first man who took to the sea and sailed for freedom. But if the world had always been dotted with islands, then that's impossible. If the world had always been dotted with islands, it means that people sailed and rode boat/ships like cars. Eventually, a number of them would’ve realized independently at the same time that if you sailed out and had no connection with anyone, you would answer to no one, AKA outlaw/pirate. It was just not possible for multiple of them not to realize that at once. It was therefore impossible to pinpoint anyone as the FIRST pirate. But Joy Boy WAS the first, and we know for sure. That means that sailing far out at sea was a big deal, and that he was the first means sailing out was SIMPLY NOT DONE BEFORE. But how was that possible? You sail out to go somewhere inaccessible by land. If you had never set sail before, does it mean that there had been NO OTHER LAND?
7. The castle where the Gorosei and Imu resides is called “Pangaea Castle.” In our world, it is the name of the continent that included all the landmass in the world at the beginning of Triassic. Its meaning? “Spanning the entire earth.”
8. Red Line is waaay too artificial to be natural. Grand Line has its real life equivalent: the equator, the hottest region where the ocean receives the most sun and have violent weather. Calm Belts? Horse Lattitudes, the region with almost no wind. But Red Line? A landmass that perfectly follows one straight longitude, stretching north to south and perfectly circling back around the world in one perfect loop? Doesn’t it sound too artificial? Reverse Mountain where water flows up? Really? What if it was constructed? What if it was erected by someone?
9. Imu, the Five Elders, and the Celestial Dragons have their own land, the Mary Geoise, placed atop of the world, and their method of destruction is to raise the sea level. This means they have always been certain they would escape somehow. I suspect they could create landmass. If they could create landmass and chose to fill up the ocean at the deepest areas, they would definitely displace a lot of water. We can flood our own world by melting the polar ice caps, meaning we add about continent-sized ice into the ocean. If they created the Red Line, which is a continent, it was bound to do the same to their world. That was most likely the cause of the first Flood that raised the sea level initially. The only suspect who could do this is Imu. The Gorosei called him the Creator of the World. If he was defeated, the Red Line itself might disappear. As foreshadowed by the examples of Poppy and Doflamingo’s powers.
10. One Piece has always been the story about friendship, forgiveness, unity, and co-existence. In pretty much every arc, Luffy finds oppressed people, fights the oppressor, but not before the oppressed unite, forgive each other, and put aside their differences, and fight for a common cause: against their oppressor. The most important lesson of all is this: forgive the wrongs; forget the differences; unite. Fishman Island arc, Otohime pointed out the path towards the sun is to stop hating human. The Sun Pirates’ ideal is to forgive humans and liberate the oppressed. If the world is flooding now, who is the least impacted people? The Fishmen. Who has the Ancient Weapon with the means to move the ark? The Fishmen. Who has the means to rescue everyone? The Fishmen. Everything in set up for them to do this. What other best way to make human change their mind about their prejudices against Fishmen? This. Their time has come now to be the ones with power. Everything is in place for them to extend an olive branch.
11. So we’ve pretty much concluded that the world will flood and the Fishmen will rescue everyone with the ark, this leads me to be very certain of what the One Piece is. If the entire world is going to flood, what is the most valuable treasure in the world right now?
12. And as the goal is to lower the sea level and bring back up the lands, what if there’s a piece of land down there where people can unite and live freely as one people, the landmass that spans the entire world, one single piece of land, what should that one piece of land be called?
13. If there’s only one piece of land in the world, does that mean there’s only one single ocean in the world also? What should that only one ocean in the world be called? Whose dreams are coming true?

As someone who worked in prevention of sexual violence for the catholic church in Germany, let me tell you, what the fucking catholic church (at least in Germany) has, what leftist spaces usually miss: Institutionalised concepts of child protection and protection against sexual violence in general.
I know, it is harder, when you can't decree those things, one of the wonderful aspects of leftist spaces is their freedom of association, their anonymity and their openness to all. But as leftists, we should be able to accept, that this is important to protect children. And perpetrators look for spaces where they have the ability to enter the lives of children with little (enforced) rules on the contact.
But here could be a way, to institutionalise protection of children as a grassroots effort:
(1) General accord on the principal: Talk about it in a general assembly of your organisation/group, depending on your level of formal institutions, that might be an organised body, or just the people that are in the space at that time. Your aim is to get to stage 2, a risk analysis of your space.
Picking a situation where many people are there raises the option that people will reject the idea, but it is worth it, since you will need a lot of acceptance in the group for what you are doing. Think beforehand about the dangers, talk about it, as a measure to support the open nature of the movement and the group.
You will get backlash. People will deny that it could happen in your group, they will bring personal arguments (we know and trust each other), political arguments (this will sow discord, distract us from the mission), they will deflect (it's the priest diddling kids [yeah, that was very common within the church itself]). Be patient with those people. Have answers, to the obvious questions, be honest if you don't have them, but be forceful, that you want to look into those questions, within your risk analysis. Note them down for the risk analysis.
Even if your group doesn't need consent from all to reach a decision, look for it. If you got a tiny number of stragglers and your group works on majority based principle, this is okay in the end, but look for broad support and keep in contact with the people that didn't support this.
Then have a volunteer comittee put together for the risk analysis. The group/general assembly should consent over the members of the comitee, motivate the people that were against it, but came around, to participate, you will need them for the hard part.
(2) Training for the group: Find an expert. Someone with experience in the field, that will
(a) give you some basic training, like at least 6 hours. This is a must for the committee working on the risk analysis, but should be open to all.
(b) has materials about this, and
(c) can look over your work in the end and may have ideas what you missed.
This will cost money, so have an idea how to raise it. It is often hard for leftist spaces to raise money, but it is dangerous, doing it without someone who had at least done this before. I volunteer to be an expert, but only in Germany, and even I would want my train ticket paid for, and some free food.
(3) The risk analysis: You go through your availability spaces with a fine comb, ask questions like the following questions, and more, if you can think of more. For every question you go through subgroups, rooms, days, even time slots:
(a) Which group might be vulnerable to sexual violence? Where and when are children (anyone under 18) present.
(b) Where do adults spend time alone with children?
(c) Are there hierarchies or power imbalances that would obfuscate reporting of sexual violence?
(d) Do children stay overnight and sleep on the premises?
(e) In which situation are children without supervision?
(f) To whom could children report sexual misconduct to make a difference and do the children know the person?
(g) Are children informed about their rights?
(h) Is there transparency about adults in your group convicted of or even charged with crimes against the sexual self-determination minors?
(i) Are there information about sexual violence against children, its prevention and steps to take when witnessing it available and broadly understood in your group?
Answer those questions with all parties involved, don't quizz them, ask the questions together. Be open about what you do, but also have understanding with people that feel attacked. It can feel like an attack, so be prepared to explain over and over again, but also to the people the person is most likely to talk about it.
Now think how committed perpetrators could use those situations. Don't craft them too much, just think how a perpetrator might use the situations you found.
(4) Writing guidelines: After you did the risk analysis, your committee should draft a report, with
(a) The risks you found in (3) (b) The way you came to the risks (c) What you think your group should change to do better
Important: Never attack anyone personally, it I'd important, to keep the whole process blameless. We'll, except child predators, they can fuck off.
(5) The hard part. Convince the general asselmby/group as a whole, that your conclusions are valid, and that you should make rules about them, together. Don't give them a prepared draft, if they don't want one, but have them in your mind. Draft them together, this will take time, but it is worth it. Come to a consensus, even if it means softening some rules, ypu thought of, as lomg as the rule does help to mitigate the risk.
(6) Now the hardest part: Living and reviewing the rules. The group must not only accept the rules, they must live them. You shouldn't be the enforcer of the rules, the community must become it. They have to take them to heart and live by them. After some time, maybe 6 months, maybe a year, review and revise the rules:
(a) Are there any we ignore? Why do we ignore it? Can we craft better rules?
(b) Do we think our rules mitigate the original risks?
(c) Are there new risks, that we forgot the first time around, or did new risks arise in the meantime?
(d) Could we simplify some rules?
Keeping that alive is the hardest part.
If you have questions or concerns, please contact me. And I'm sorry for the horrible grammar, English is my second language, and it is nor easy, writing about a thing in English, I have only thought about in german until know.

I’m currently an undergrad computer science student who wants to break into film/animation/gaming industries. I love the processes and breakdowns of artists, and always fascinated with anything that combines tech and art. I hope to one day be a part of the creative process in these projects, and work alongside artists to create something magical.
I’m knowledgeable in html/css/javascript, python, c languages, and Java. I’m familiar with the basics of Unreal Engine, Maya, Arnnold, and Houdini. I really like 3D Lighting, scripting, procedurals, and wanting to learn shader programing. But a lot of these tools I’m very beginner. Especially 3D modeling, and thinking of taking a few courses to really improve topologies and texturing.
Tbh, my portfolio is weak and I’m working on strengthening it. Right now it has a few 3D lighting environments, a procedural plant, environment concept art, and small coding projects. I’m planning on removing the concept art section and adding more relevant projects that’s more technical. I’m currently working on a custom color grading tool / LUT tool in Unreal, python, and QT. I’m thinking of also programming a small game and maybe another procedural to add too…
Yet, I feel like maybe I’m doing things wrong and stretching myself too thin. Should I just focus on 3D lighting and try to be a lighter first then make my way as a tech artist? Should I narrow down even though I’m interested in environments, procedurals, shaders, and scripting?
I know it is a mid level role, but what is some advice to break in and make way as a tech artist?Is there any good courses or resources you folks recommend that may help me improve my skills and portfolio? Any other advice?
Feeling a bit overwhelmed and lost…

------------------
The Book of Harris-y
(Religion as it should be) -
by Zachary Harris
(cc) (NC) (ND) by Zachary Harris
May be copied, distributed, or displayed, verbatim only. non-commercial, not derivative works nor remixes.
First edition May 2024
Chapter 1 - What's in a name
Chapter 2 - A bunch of rules
Chapter 3 - Secrete origins
Chapter 4 - The end
Chapter 5 - Everybody's favorite topic: SEX
Chapter 6 - The 2000 year war
Chapter 7 - Humans and gods
Chapter 8 - Parables
Chapter 9 - Feedback
Chapter
CHAPTER 1
What's in a name
Some religions are named after it's main prophet. Christianity is named after christ. Buddhism is named after Budda.
I, Zach Harris, dub this religion HARRISy.
Where is it written that a religion can't have a sense of humor?
HARRISy is not a spoof or sarcasm.
But any religion without a sense of humor, absolutely NEEDS to be ridiculed.
I was raised in christianity. So most of my criticism will be aimed at the Abrahamic religions.
I intend to build harrisy on logic and reason. Not the superstition, lies, and, threats that the Abrahamic religions are built on.
As an alternative for conscientious objectors caught in the religious wars (see chapter 6).
Deities are not really necessary for inspiration or religion. An all-powerful creator wouldn't need the help or adulation of puny mortals.
Only cults and human puppet masters need that. So we leave deities to their own devises. They ought to be up to it.
Harrisy is a religion about/for humans, as religions should be.
My leadership skills suck. So I will avoid leading, to avoid becoming a cult.
Chapter 2
A bunch of rules
Everybody hates rules. But let's establish what Harrisy stands for.
10 rules is a nice round number. But when the first four are about loyalty to the cult, You have to question who the rules are meant to benefit.
The christian 'commandments' only benefit the christian cult. The commandments don't even benefit their god.
A true all-powerful, immortal, creator god, would not need human worship or loyalty. The same as humans don't need the worship of ants.
We don't make rules for ants to follow. Just stay out of our way. The Abrahamic god treats us like ants. Either ignores or steps on us. It was his cults that made the 'commandments', not their god.
(more about that in chapter 7)
Harrisy has rules to live by, to benefit HUMANS:
A) Cause no harm.
B) Treat others the way you want to be treated.
Christianity calls this 'The Golden Rule' as if they invented it. But this was part of every culture and religion that humans ever created. (except Is-lame)
C) Do not kill. Do not kill humans.
Self preservation may override this, but killing is still a bad idea.
When killing animals for food, respect their sacrifice. Killing for sport is a bad idea.
D) People are not property.
Do not try to own others, in any sense.
You belong to yourself, do not give yourself away.
E) Do not steal.
You would not want to loose your stuff. (see B) Stealing harms others.
F) Do not lie. Avoid those who lie.
You would want to know the truth. To make better decisions. (see B)
G) Do not rape.
Do not force yourself on others. Your pleasures are not more important than other people's.
This applies to more than just sex. Do not force your religion on others. Do not force harrisy on others.
H) Do not shit wherever you please.
You don't want to slog through other people's shit.
(it's a metaphor.) Leave the world better than you found it.
I) Guard your privacy. Respect the privacy of others.
Beware of others who might use info against you. Or might unduly profit off you.
We have no rules about loyalty. We understand loyalties change. Just be honest (rule E)
We have no rule specifically about Adultery. Adultery might be considered loyalty, which changes.
Or adultery might be considered stealing, stealing affection. (rule D)
Chapter 3
Secrete origins
No one knows how/why it all began. Anyone who says they know, for certain, is lying.
The answer night as well be 42.
Most religions make it a crime to ask questions about their creation myths. This promotes ignorance. Helps the cult, not the people.
We understand the 'scientific method'. Scientists ask questions and are willing to test and adapt to new info.
So, for now, we trust scientific conclusions about the beginnings.
The current best theories from science:
The universe started from what they humorously call 'The Big Bang', about 13.8 Billion years ago.
Many are curious about what came before that. But we find that to be irrelevant to our everyday life.
Some religions say their god did it so they can claim payment/gratitude/worship for it. But we owe them nothing.
The earth was formed about 4.5 Billion years ago.
Humans evolved from other critters over many, many, many Generations (not years).
Some religions claim their god did it so they can claim payment/gratitude/worship for it.
We do not owe Harrisy or any religion for our existence.
Chapter 4
The end
How does it all end?
No one knows. Anyone who says they know, for certain, is lying.
Christinity predicts a bad acid trip. (See Revaluations) Any day now. So buy your ticket to heaven early.
It's an obvious con, You sacrifice this life you already have, for the promise of another life they can't prove.
Science predicts 'Entropy'. Every atom in the universe will drift away from every other till they can't react any more.
But humans will be dead or evolved into something we can't recognize, by then. Too distant, time-wise, to worry about.
Your personal end? What happens when you die?
Most probably nothing.
Seems like every religion has a different 'afterlife'. They can't all be right. (but they can all be wrong)
You can't pick the one you want. If an 'afterlife' exists it is what it is. WE can't control it. No cult can control it.
The cults are telling you what you want to hear. So you give your CURRENT LIFE to their cult. The life that is certain, in exchange for an empty promise.
No guarantees, No refunds, You won't get your old life back if they are wrong (or lying).
Pascal's gamble is a sucker bet. It never pays out.
Harrisy aims to make This Current Life better, worth living for it's own sake. We give priority to This Current Life over any theoretical 'afterlife'.
Chapter 5
Everybody's favorite topic: SEX
What's the point of Sexual Taboos?
Why would an IMORTAL (non-sexual, non-reproducing) being give a damn?
For example in the christian cult:
*Masturbation is sin,
*Spilling your seed outside the womb is sin,
*Marrying outside the church is sin,
*Divorce is sin,
*Birth Control is sin,
*Abortion is sin,
*Marriages without offspring are invalid.
*Brand (circumcise) your males, so your females know who they are allowed to mate with,
And in Is-lame, Women are just sexual slaves.
Taken as a whole,
The only purpose served by sexual taboos, is to help the CULT out-populate rival cults.
A REAL "creator god" wouldn't give a damn. Or Wouldn't need our cooperation. it would just create more of us, as needed.
A REAL creator wouldn't threaten us, it would just change us.
Sexual Taboos are serving a cult, not a god.
Harrisy has only one sexual taboo:
Rule G) Do not rape.
Do not force yourself on others. Your pleasures are not more important than other people's.
Chapter 6
The 2000 year war
The Abrahamic religions have been at war with each other for about 2000 years. Sometimes hot, sometimes cold.
But like some other religions, at all times attempting to be 'the one true religion'. And by their competition, doing more harm than good.
And the Abrahamic religions haven't even shown that the 'good' stuff needs their religion to get done.
They preach that it is somehow noble or their duty to spread their faith. ("Onward Christian Soldiers")
There are dangers associated with proselytism and/or evangelicalism:
(Please note - I had help with the following)
Focus on Conversion over Service:
Proselytism/evangelicalism prioritizes conversion goals over humanitarian or service-oriented activities.
This undermines the credibility and effectiveness of religious organizations engaged in charitable work,
as it is perceived as conditional or insincere.
Dogmatism and Exclusivity:
Evangelicalism/proselytism promotes a rigid, dogmatic interpretation of religious beliefs that excludes other perspectives.
This exclusivity leads to intolerance of differing viewpoints and hinders constructive dialogue and cooperation with people of other faiths or worldviews.
Coercion and Manipulation:
Proselytism/evangelicalism involves coercion, manipulation, or exploitation of vulnerable individuals,
such as offering material incentives or exploiting power differentials to induce conversion.
This raises ethical concerns about respect for autonomy and informed consent.
Political Activism:
Evangelicalism/proselytism has been associated with political movements that prioritize specific social or moral issues, leading to controversy and polarization.
this politicization blurs the lines between religion and politics, compromising the integrity of both.
Interfaith Tensions:
Proselytism/evangelicalism contributes to interfaith tensions and conflicts, especially when it is aggressive or disrespectful to members of other religious communities.
It will undermine efforts to foster mutual respect, understanding, and cooperation among different faith traditions.
Fragmentation of Communities:
Proselytism/evangelicalism leads to the fragmentation or division of communities, particularly in contexts where multiple religious groups coexist.
This creates social tensions and weaken social cohesion, especially when proselytism is conducted in a confrontational or divisive manner.
Proselytization and Missionary Work:
We are concerned about aggressive or coercive methods used in proselytization/evangelicalism efforts,
especially when targeting vulnerable populations or in multicultural contexts.
This leads to cultural imperialism or disrespect for the autonomy of individuals and communities.
Cultural Insensitivity:
Proselytism/evangelicalism disregards or disrespects the cultural and religious traditions of the target community.
This leads to cultural imperialism or colonialism, especially when proselytism/evangelicalism is conducted in contexts where there is a history of exploitation or marginalization.
Misrepresentation or Simplification of Beliefs:
Proselytism/evangelicalism involves oversimplification or misrepresentation of religious beliefs and practices in order to make them more appealing to potential converts.
This leads to misunderstandings or misconceptions about the beliefs and traditions of the proselytizing religion.
For these reasons we conscientious objectors to the religious war, need an uncompetitive religion like Harris-y.
But don't push it.
Chapter 7
Humans and gods
Why do human religions have gods that are all too human?
A creator of everything that needs humans to wright/publish a holy book?
An all powerful god who needs humans to promote him?
An all powerful god with a vindictive human sized ego?
An immortal who is obsessed with human reproduction?
An all powerful god who needs humans more than we need him?
Any actual god wouldn't need human religion.
Harrisy serves humans, not gods.
Chapter 8
Parables
Corn In A Cow Patty.
Finding truth in the Abrahamic holy books,
is like finding corn in a cow patty.
Sure there are some good kernels in there,
but is it really worth digging through the shit to find them?
You can find uncontaminated kernels of truth anywhere.
Chapter 9
Feedback
Feedback should be sent to: [zachharris@mail2hell.com](mailto:zachharris@mail2hell.com)
Don't expect a timely reply.

Introduction
Muslims believe the Quran, the holy book of Islam itself is not just a religious book for guidance but also the literal word of god i.e. Allah itself. In everyday conversations, you will hear Muslims call it Kalamullah (Word of God), not in the Christian sense where the Word is Jesus and God but actual sayings, sentences, and words uttered by god himself and compiled into a single book by human hands. While Muslims are proud of their holy book being the literal words of god sent down to all of mankind, there are a few problems with that mainly concerning Islam's doctrinal theology and its core beliefs.
Disclaimer and Notes
Now, before I start, a disclaimer. The issue of the Quran being god's word or not has been one of the most pretentious and divided issues in the Muslim community. Because of this issue, multiple sects (considered deviant and heretical today) popped up in the early years of Islam's history leading to multiple debates, condemnations, and even inquisitions for those that were against the majority-held view in history. So to make it easy considering Islam has tons of historical sects, all of whom held widely different views than modern-day Islam when it comes to the Quran's states as the word of god (or not), this post is aimed at Ashari, Maturidi and Ahlul Hadith/Athari aqeedah sects who make up the majority of Muslims today, collectively considered to be under the umbrella of Ahlul Sunnah Wal Jema'ah (Literally meaning "The People of the Prophet's Tradition and Consensus" or to make it easier to understand "The Followers of the Prophet's Teachings and the Righteous Community"). This term is commonly understood in Islam as those who follow the true and righteous path in Islam which according to the hadiths, out of 73 deviant sects, only 1 (the above I already mention) will be on the correct spiritual path.
Why do I say this problem is akin to the Trinity problem in Christianity? Both are key problems that form the basis of the entire religion, not just for an individual believer but also for the scholars who dabble in religious sciences. Both the Quran and Trinity make up the core fundamental teachings upon which other teachings are established and expanded further. Without these key concepts, the entire premise of both religions (Islam and Christianity) would fall apart within a matter of seconds. Both issues are also hotly debated even to this day. As I mentioned before, the issue of the Quran's creation or non-creation was an important issue that occupied the minds of early-century Muslim scholars and thinkers, to the point schisms and breakaways from the main branch started to emerge. The same thing happened in Christianity with the Trinity which led to excommunication, the Arian controversy, and multiple individual distinct sects, all of whom have a different understanding of what the Trinity is.
Last, I would also like to mention that considering the Trinity has been severely criticized by non-Christians alike as proof of Christianity's falsehood and internal contradictions, then the same should be said with Islam's problem of the Quran's status. However, unlike in Islam, Christianity continued to debate up to the present day and even adopted Greek philosophical concepts to better explain away the Trinity and the relationship between each Divine Person of the Trinity. In Islam, the opposite occurred. Those who used Greek philosophy and rhetoric were condemned as either falling into falsehood or corrupting the religion by introducing pagan concepts. Ironically, the most condemned bunch of the Muslim sects I'll talk about below, the Mutazilites were the ones who most used philosophy which led to their rejection of the Quran's non-createdness.
Due to the decline of the Mutazilite sect, the rise of more conservative movements, and the criticism of Aristotelian philosophical ideas by Al-Ghazali (Note, he wasn't against philosophy, he was against philosophical ideas that went against Islam like the eternity of the world and denying bodily resurrection in the afterlife), theological discussions and debates surrounding the question faded away. Even now, most Muslims consider the issue "solved" and simply adopt one of the three main positions. Unsurprisingly, while the West and Christianity continued adopting new ideas, this means the Muslim positions lacked much substance and arguments seen in Christianity with Greek and Neo-Platonist ideas which in turn, means there are tons of problems with their positions, (which is the whole point of the post)
Now, with that out of the way, let's begin.
How Have Muslims Historically Responded to this Problem?
There are two answers to the question of the Quran's status. One, to affirm that it is the literal word of god from Allah Himself which existed with him since eternity or to affirm it is a created being just like every other creature and human planet earth. The second view doesn't mean that the Quran is simply the work of man, quite the opposite. Rather, it posits that the Quran still holds religious significance as Islam's holy book and is still the Word of God but it was created at a later time by God, not existing eternally with god before the creation of everything. In the second view, the Quran still holds religious significance for praying, guidance, and the basis for Islam, only that it is of a lower status than god himself, being a creation of god that was created at a certain time.
The second view is considered invalid and rejected by all major sects of Islam in the modern era (Ashari, Maturidi, Athari) as a heretical belief that the Mutazilites (The Withdrawers) held. I'm not going to go into who they are, what is their history, or what are their beliefs (you can google it yourself). Just know these are the guys who believe the Quran was a creation of god and were condemned by pretty much every Islamic group and sect from their beginning all the way up to the present modern day. This is one the only issues where every Islamic sect agrees with each other in condemning this belief, be it Ashari, Maturidi, or Athari. Thus, the second option then is 100% of the table for most Muslims, unless they want to affirm holding beliefs of a heretical group that died out 1000 years ago. I don't think any Muslim will dare to affirm Mutazilite beliefs for fear of ridicule and committing major sins, so there's not much here to discuss. For the sake of brevity, I will address the second view since the one even Muslims will deny and reject. After that, I'll address the Second View.
The Second View
But for the sake of argument, I'll assume some rare brave Mutazilite Muslim wants to give it a try. Now, here are some of my questions for you. If the Quran is a creation of god and not the literal Word of God before time immemorial, what is the Quran's relationship with god? You believe these are still words from Allah that help mankind to arrive at the truth and Islam yet at the same you also believe that these were created at a time later than god. How can something that is both speech from god and also created by god himself exist simultaneously at the same time? Anything that is created at a later time means it's a creation, a contingent object that depends on an external creator. It can't be part of god because god is eternal, atemporal, necessary, and independent of everything and anything. If it were god or contained some part of god inside of it, then this is no different than Jesus and the Son of God in Christianity where it contains both a human and godly nature, so does that mean you now believe the Quran to be both god and creation? Just like the Christians who you condemn as a false corrupted religion? This is the First Problem you must face, that be affirming it is both from god and not god, you are throwing yourself into the same pit as Christianity with a dual nature which is already a false religion. I like to call people who affirm this stance "Dualists".
The Second Problem "dualists" face is that this nullifies the Quran's honorific status in Islam, which goes against what the majority of the Muslim world believes in. For Dualists, what is the Quran's honorific and spiritual status in Islam now? We've all seen Muslim riots and protests against the burning or stepping on the Quran by non-Muslims around the world. A man burns or rips up the Quran and the entire Muslim world goes into a frenzy. In Islam, simply placing the Quran on the floor is considered disrespectful and sinful. In the majority of sects today, the Quran must be honored and respected 24/7 partly due to the fact Muslims believe it to be the literal Word. But for Dualists, what is your stance and reason for continuing to respect the Quran? Considering you no longer believe the Quran to be the actual Word, can non-Muslims now vandalize, rip apart, step on, or place the Quran on the floor?? Would you have any problem with it? It's no longer the Word itself but a creation of god. Sure, you might ask others to "respect other religions and beliefs" but aside from this, what else do you have?? Is simply putting a religious book on the floor disrespecting other religions? What makes your holy book now any different from the Jewish and Christian perspectives on their religious books? They don't go into a frenzy every time Bibles are burned or disrespected. Will you do the same thing?
The Third Problem since it's a created thing, wouldn't this also mean that at some point in the future, the Quran no longer exists? That the Quran is finite and will at some point cease to exist? Wouldn't this mean at some point, Islam itself becomes useless because the number one source for everything, the Quran no longer exists? The Quran will cease to exist if it were created, when it happens, will the meaning of the verses and Muslim understanding built up over the centuries also cease to exist? Tafsirs, Fiqh, and Tajwid all suddenly become useless and void of any meaning because the backbone of Islam, the Quran no longer exists. What about the Muslim understanding of what Allah is? Isn't that detrimental should the Quran cease to exist? The best outcome is that Muslims still retain the knowledge but Islam becomes spineless without a religious book and the worst outcome is the complete disintegration of Islam as everything built upon the Quran, now becomes useless. It would mean the complete death of Islam as a major Abrahamic religion.
Next, what about during the Hour, when everything in the heavens and on the Earth will be destroyed and no longer exist? Muslims believe that when the Hour arrives, everything will be destroyed. Every human, child, animal, plant, planet, universe, devil, and angel will die inevitably. Only god remains. Due to this, according to Dualists, will the Quran experience the same fate? All of its verses and Surahs destroyed by god himself. Now I know Muslims, even those of other sects believe the Quran will disappear bit by bit before the Hour as a sign of the impending doom and apocalypse. However, other Muslims believe that yes, the Quran will disappear but the verses themselves remain preserved with god i.e. Allah since these are the literal words of god himself. In a sense, the verses suddenly don't exist, they return back to god.
TLDR, the Dualist Mutazilite view implies a contradiction where the Quran is both God and not God at the same time, it nullifies the Quran's holy status and the divine meaning of the verses, and last, it means the Quran is finite and will cease to exist at some point in the future.
Now, onto the Ashari, Maturidi and Athari sects,
The First View (The Majority)
These three are the most prominent and widely held doctrinal sects in the current Muslim population. I will be splitting the next sections into two sections, Ashari-Maturidi (since both are quite similar and considered a single unified school of thought by Muslim scholars) and the Athari school.
Ashari-Maturidi
The Asharis and Maturidis believe the Quran and its verses to be the literal Word of God itself, with Allah since eternity before time however they believe the book form of the Quran (mushaf), the one which every Muslim holds and reads is of man-made origin. In other words, the verses, sentences, letters, and meaning of the text are from god himself while the cover, paper, ink, writing, and publishing are from mankind. The Ash'ari creed makes a point of difference between the content of the Quran and the physical manifestation of it (in speech or as pages in a book).
The Main Problem with this argument as said by Atharis and Mutazilites is that this strips the Quran of its spiritual and holy essence in Islam. If the real divine aspect of the Quran that came from god itself are the verses and meaning of it only, then should we burn every last Quran in the world, it wouldn't be a problem. After all, the divine part still exists as it is from and with god himself, only the earthly worldly portions of it get destroyed. Why's that a problem? I mean what is the problem spiritually concerning Islam's doctrinal theology itself? What's the problem with destroying the cover or vandalizing the writing of it? It's not from god, it's man-made. The effect of this would be enormous.
This means now non-Muslims and Islamaphobes can now burn, rip, tear apart, step on, vandalize, and desecrate the Quran because they are only destroying the part that is not divine. Would Asharis or Maturidis agree to this? Is now destroying the Quran not a major sin but actually allowed? The true essence of the Quran i.e. the part that is truly divine remains preserved and exists since humans were created and will continue to exist long after everything has died and withered away. The vandalization and desecration of it does not affect the Quran because the true divine verses and meaning remain preserved. This problem is similar to the Second Problem with the Mutazilite belief, it nullifies and strips away the Quran's holy status and honorific place among the Muslim community. If it isn't truly god's divine word, what's the problem if it gets destroyed, wet, or burned?
Heck, I've heard this same argument from other sects, claiming and accusing the Ashari are just Mutazilites in disguise because their main stance of the Quran's identity revolves back to the Mutazilite position where the Quran is a creation of god. One of the main accusations against the Ashari sect is that it's just a rehash version of Mutazilite or Jahmiyyah theology (I don't have time to explain what this is right now, better if you look it up yourselves) due to similarities in doctrine and also because Imam Ashari, the founder was once a Mutazilite himself (not helping the Ashari case) but Asharis claim he renounced all Mutazilite theology and returned back to the true correct path. In this case, should the objection above against the Ashari-Maturidi position succeed, then it would help critics a lot against Asharism.
The Second Problem with holding the Ashari position is that this resembles the idolatry of Hinduism and Paganism or at least, is slipping into idolatry practice. If they claim the Speech of God is contained within the letters, pages, and ink of the Mushaf (the Quran's Uthmanic standardized codex), then how dare they believe the actions of humans can absorb and physicalize the Sacred Divine Speech of God, for Muslims believe god can never be limited by His creatures. This would also mean they believe the ink written on the Quran's pages is a physical intermediary, designed to encapsulate the Speech of God into a physical form, no different than the idols of Hindus and Pagans who believe their idols to be an intermediary or a worldly representation of the True Divine Nature.
Hindus don't claim they worship idols, rather they believe them to be ways to spiritually connect with the divine as a locus for prayer just like how Muslims consider the Kaaba as the direction for prayer, not an idol for worship or as a reminder for believers of the faith similar to how a photo of a spiritual leader is a sign of respect and a daily reminder every-day when you wake up. How is this different than believing the ink inside the Quran holds the truth or emulates the Divine Nature from the Ashari claim? Ashari Muslims affirm the Quran is still the Word of God just represented through a physical form, so how is this not idolatry? Believing that a physical human-made physical manifestation holds the Divine Speech so that followers of Islam can get closer to god?
This would be even worse than the Mutazilites, for committing idolatry whether intentionally or not is a major grave sin in Islam, to the point those that who commit it and do not repent back are considered as Kafir (infidels). If even they aren't committing idolatry and shirk (polytheism), another major sin in Islam, then at the very least, they believe that a divine part of God can be captured inside the ink and pen of writers as if they the Speech of God and the ink become one and the same, another reference to the Christian belief of God having both a Divine and Human Nature. Of course, Muslims and Ashari Muslims consider this to be heretical and blasphemous, but what's the difference between believing the Quran is both man-made and divine versus the Christological belief of Jesus being both God and Man?
The Third Problem with the Ashari answer that the Quran itself is created while the Speech of God isn't is where is the Speech of God then? Asharis can't answer that it is still in heaven for they also believe the Mushaf or Quran contains the Word and Speech of God. If they believe that it is still in heaven with god and not on earth, then what are they even reading every day? Clearly not the Speech of God if they claim it isn't with us now, perhaps an imperfect human copy of the divine Speech of God but that would mean the Quran is imperfect and the work of man, which would be affirming the Mutazilite position. So they can't claim it is both in the heavens and on the earth nor claim it is either in the heavens only or on the earth with mankind only.
I already explained they also can't say the Speech of God is contained inside the ink and letters of the Quran for that means the Divine Speech has become limited because of it. God in Islam can never be limited, nor can His creatures limit god. So if isn't option A, B, or C, where is the Holy Sacred Speech of God then? The Speech which is supposed to be the principle guiding force for all of mankind especially, Muslims. How can Asharis then claim they believe in the Quran as the revelation and Word of God sent down to Muhammad if they can't tell us where in their holy book, is the Speech of God itself? At worst, this means the Ashari belief entails the Quran isn't holy or divine thus eliminating Islam's entire main source and one of the 6 pillars of Iman (faith), and at best, reading the Quran isn't a holy act nor can be used as a book for guidance, for Muslims aren't reading the Word of God then. They are reading an imperfect fallible man-made copy of the Speech of God, not the true Divine Inspiration from Allah.
TLDR, the Ashari-Maturidi middle path that the Quran was uncreated and eternal, yet its ink and paper, individual letters and words were created strips the Quran has multiple problems, some may even go against what Islam stands for. It strips the Quran of its Divine Sacred Essence as the Word of God, at worse it may lead to shirk and idolatry akin to the Hindus and Pagans, and at best, Asharis can't point to us where the Word and Speech of God is in the Quran.
Athari/Ahlul Hadith
Now for the Atharis, they are strict literalists who believe the Quran and Allah's Speech both are uncreated unlike the Asharis/Maturidis who adopt a middle path, or the Mutazilite who outright claim the Quran was created, the extreme position.
The First Problem with the Athari position is pretty clear, if the Quran is the literal Word of God completely, then does that mean what Muslims are holding is a literal piece of God here on earth in the moral realm? Does that mean god is with us all the time? How can god, who Muslims consider as being transcendent be here on earth with mankind? If the Quran is the literal physical Speech of God and not just metaphorically or analogically, then does this mean the Speech of God exists on Earth? How can god be here on Earth? The Atharis believe literally that the Quran is the Speech of God, so unless they claim the Speech of God suddenly transformed into a physical object (which I'll address below), the Quran would be a god or at least have a piece of the divine essence of Allah.
This is no different than the Christian position where there exists a God in heaven and a God on Earth at the same time. As I already mentioned, Muslims consider the Christian position of a god on earth unacceptable yet when we look at their own views, we find (in the Athari case) a piece of god exists on earth. Allah still exists in the heavens, yet the Speech of God exists here in the Quran. Let's not even get into the issue of a transcendent god existing in the mortal physical realm, where the laws of physics govern meaning god would be limited in some capacity (which most Muslims would see as ridiculous)
The Second Problem is the relationship between the Quran (God's Speech) and God himself. Considering the Quran was revealed to Muhammad and sent down by Gabriel, how should we understand the Speech of God is here now? Do Atharis believe that the Speech of God suddenly separated from the main body when the Quran was revealed and sent down to earth? Or do Atharis believe the Quran is still the undivided Speech of God, in which case a part of god is literally on earth?
Or what about when the Quran was compiled in book form starting with Abu Bakr's reign and ending with Uthman's standardization? Should we take this to mean now not only does the Speech of God literally exist on earth but the Speech of God now has taken shape, molded into letters and words while compiled into a book equipped with paper pages and covers from front to back? If they want to deny these are from god i.e. the physical cover is man-made, then they would be subscribing to the Ashari-Maturidi doctrine of the middle path (which I already showed also has problems). If they want to take the other path and claim the Quran we have now is not the Word of God literally, then they would be subscribing to the heretical Mutazilite position which also, has tons of religious and doctrinal problems.
TLDR, the Athari literalist position invites more harm than good when it comes to answering the question of the Quran's uncreated nature. It would mean god is literally on earth, or a piece of god's divine essence is. Affirming that a piece of the Divine Essence exists here on earth with mankind would be something similar to the Christian belief that god exists both in the heavens and on earth (Father and Son). Other than that, it would also complicate the relationship between the Quran and God even more. If the Quran is the literal Word and Speech of God, how do Atharis explain the Quran's standardization into a single written book with ink, paper, and covers? Does it mean the Speech of God underwent a physical transformation?
Consequences
Islam posits the Quran to be the Word of God from Allah Himself, however how exactly does that work leads to massive problems within Islam's doctrinal framework. Muslims can't state the Quran is the true literal Speech of God otherwise they would be committing a blasphemous act by believing god is literally on earth with us at this very moment. They also can't deny it is the Speech of God for Islam considers the Quran to be the perfect Kalamullah (literally the Word of God). It is one of the core tenets of belief that Muslims believe the Quran to be the actual Words of God sent down to Muhammad as the last revelation. They also can't adopt a middle path like the Asharis-Maturidis because I've already shown that this just leaves the Quran inside a grey area, it's both the Word of God and also not the Word of God at the same time. Other problems are also relevant which I've already discussed above. Either the middle approach collapses into itself, becoming either one the extreme views, literal divine affirmation like the Atharis, or the extreme divine nullification like the Mutazilites.
Other religions don't have this problem. They do not believe Jesus or Moses were gifted the actual literal Words and Speech of God which existed since time immemorial. Christians believe the Bible was divinely authored by the Apostles of Jesus, where the Holy Spirit guides the writers of the Bible into writing down the true teachings of Jesus and Christianity. Christians don't believe the Bible's passages are the literal Speech of God which has existed with the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit as if affirming the Bible was also another Divine Person of the Trinity. No, only Muslims as far as I know affirm both their Holy Book contains the Speech of God which both exists on Earth and also with God up in heaven but that leaves them in a contradiction of whether to affirm the Quran is God Himself on Earth or the true Words of God are still up in heaven. After all, how can the Divine Nature which is uncorrupted and perfect exist in a world not perfect, but actually filled with sin, corruption, and spiritual pollution?
In the end, Muslims face a dilemma with regard to the Quran's Holy and Divine Nature. This a dilemma which after going through all the possible Muslim answers that have been given over the years, still fails to give us a proper satisfying answer.
Conclusion
All the responses and viewpoints of the major Islamic sects fail to answer the question, of whether the Quran is created or not. They tried to square a circle by trying to find a balance between affirming the Quran is the divine Word of God while at the same time not falling into a literalist interpretation where god is on Earth (as the Atharis do). However, all responses so far have failed to properly find the right solution, all either fall into extremities at both ends of the spectrum (Mutazilite and Athari) or tried to strike a balance, but only managed to kick the can down the road even further.
If Christianity has the Problem of the Trinity, a major fundamental question that still has philosophers and theologians scratching their heads trying to find an answer, then the Problem of the Quran's Nature is the Islamic version of it. The difference is while Christians continue to debate and argue about the Trinity's true nature, Muslim and Islamic scholars have relatively abandoned the debate, choosing to hold either one of the three major schools of thought. My personal opinion is this is an unfortunate situation, ever since the decline of philosophy in Islamic thought, Kalam and Falsafah (Islamic philosophy) have gained a bad reputation amongst Muslims as being a "gateway to blasphemy". Rarely you will find Muslim scholars in the modern era debate about this, let alone teach laymen Muslims about these topics.
At the very least, I hope my post can inspire future Muslims to look into this topic further, creating new fascinating answers and arguments that contribute to the Muslim and non-Muslim understanding of what Allah is in Islam.

------------------
The Book of Harris-y
(Religion as it should be) -
by Zachary Harris
(cc) (NC) (ND) by Zachary Harris
May be copied, distributed, or displayed, verbatim only. non-commercial, not derivative works nor remixes.
First edition May 2024
Chapter 1 - What's in a name
Chapter 2 - A bunch of rules
Chapter 3 - Secrete origins
Chapter 4 - The end
Chapter 5 - Everybody's favorite topic: SEX
Chapter 6 - The 2000 year war
Chapter 7 - Humans and gods
Chapter 8 - Parables
Chapter 9 - Feedback
Chapter
CHAPTER 1
What's in a name
Some religions are named after it's main prophet. Christianity is named after christ. Buddhism is named after Budda.
I, Zach Harris, dub this religion HARRISy.
Where is it written that a religion can't have a sense of humor?
HARRISy is not a spoof or sarcasm.
But any religion without a sense of humor, absolutely NEEDS to be ridiculed.
I was raised in christianity. So most of my criticism will be aimed at the Abrahamic religions.
I intend to build harrisy on logic and reason. Not the superstition, lies, and, threats that the Abrahamic religions are built on.
As an alternative for conscientious objectors caught in the religious wars (see chapter 6).
Deities are not really necessary for inspiration or religion. An all-powerful creator wouldn't need the help or adulation of puny mortals.
Only cults and human puppet masters need that. So we leave deities to their own devises. They ought to be up to it.
Harrisy is a religion about/for humans, as religions should be.
My leadership skills suck. So I will avoid leading, to avoid becoming a cult.
Chapter 2
A bunch of rules
Everybody hates rules. But let's establish what Harrisy stands for.
10 rules is a nice round number. But when the first four are about loyalty to the cult, You have to question who the rules are meant to benefit.
The christian 'commandments' only benefit the christian cult. The commandments don't even benefit their god.
A true all-powerful, immortal, creator god, would not need human worship or loyalty. The same as humans don't need the worship of ants.
We don't make rules for ants to follow. Just stay out of our way. The Abrahamic god treats us like ants. Either ignores or steps on us. It was his cults that made the 'commandments', not their god.
(more about that in chapter 7)
Harrisy has rules to live by, to benefit HUMANS:
A) Cause no harm.
B) Treat others the way you want to be treated.
Christianity calls this 'The Golden Rule' as if they invented it. But this was part of every culture and religion that humans ever created. (except Is-lame)
C) Do not kill. Do not kill humans.
Self preservation may override this, but killing is still a bad idea.
When killing animals for food, respect their sacrifice. Killing for sport is a bad idea.
D) People are not property.
Do not try to own others, in any sense.
You belong to yourself, do not give yourself away.
E) Do not steal.
You would not want to loose your stuff. (see B) Stealing harms others.
F) Do not lie. Avoid those who lie.
You would want to know the truth. To make better decisions. (see B)
G) Do not rape.
Do not force yourself on others. Your pleasures are not more important than other people's.
This applies to more than just sex. Do not force your religion on others. Do not force harrisy on others.
H) Do not shit wherever you please.
You don't want to slog through other people's shit.
(it's a metaphor.) Leave the world better than you found it.
I) Guard your privacy. Respect the privacy of others.
Beware of others who might use info against you. Or might unduly profit off you.
We have no rules about loyalty. We understand loyalties change. Just be honest (rule E)
We have no rule specifically about Adultery. Adultery might be considered loyalty, which changes.
Or adultery might be considered stealing, stealing affection. (rule D)
Chapter 3
Secrete origins
No one knows how/why it all began. Anyone who says they know, for certain, is lying.
The answer night as well be 42.
Most religions make it a crime to ask questions about their creation myths. This promotes ignorance. Helps the cult, not the people.
We understand the 'scientific method'. Scientists ask questions and are willing to test and adapt to new info.
So, for now, we trust scientific conclusions about the beginnings.
The current best theories from science:
The universe started from what they humorously call 'The Big Bang', about 13.8 Billion years ago.
Many are curious about what came before that. But we find that to be irrelevant to our everyday life.
Some religions say their god did it so they can claim payment/gratitude/worship for it. But we owe them nothing.
The earth was formed about 4.5 Billion years ago.
Humans evolved from other critters over many, many, many Generations (not years).
Some religions claim their god did it so they can claim payment/gratitude/worship for it.
We do not owe Harrisy or any religion for our existence.
Chapter 4
The end
How does it all end?
No one knows. Anyone who says they know, for certain, is lying.
Christinity predicts a bad acid trip. (See Revaluations) Any day now. So buy your ticket to heaven early.
It's an obvious con, You sacrifice this life you already have, for the promise of another life they can't prove.
Science predicts 'Entropy'. Every atom in the universe will drift away from every other till they can't react any more.
But humans will be dead or evolved into something we can't recognize, by then. Too distant, time-wise, to worry about.
Your personal end? What happens when you die?
Most probably nothing.
Seems like every religion has a different 'afterlife'. They can't all be right. (but they can all be wrong)
You can't pick the one you want. If an 'afterlife' exists it is what it is. WE can't control it. No cult can control it.
The cults are telling you what you want to hear. So you give your CURRENT LIFE to their cult. The life that is certain, in exchange for an empty promise.
No guarantees, No refunds, You won't get your old life back if they are wrong (or lying).
Pascal's gamble is a sucker bet. It never pays out.
Harrisy aims to make This Current Life better, worth living for it's own sake. We give priority to This Current Life over any theoretical 'afterlife'.
Chapter 5
Everybody's favorite topic: SEX
What's the point of Sexual Taboos?
Why would an IMORTAL (non-sexual, non-reproducing) being give a damn?
For example in the christian cult:
*Masturbation is sin,
*Spilling your seed outside the womb is sin,
*Marrying outside the church is sin,
*Divorce is sin,
*Birth Control is sin,
*Abortion is sin,
*Marriages without offspring are invalid.
*Brand (circumcise) your males, so your females know who they are allowed to mate with,
And in Is-lame, Women are just sexual slaves.
Taken as a whole,
The only purpose served by sexual taboos, is to help the CULT out-populate rival cults.
A REAL "creator god" wouldn't give a damn. Or Wouldn't need our cooperation. it would just create more of us, as needed.
A REAL creator wouldn't threaten us, it would just change us.
Sexual Taboos are serving a cult, not a god.
Harrisy has only one sexual taboo:
Rule G) Do not rape.
Do not force yourself on others. Your pleasures are not more important than other people's.
Chapter 6
The 2000 year war
The Abrahamic religions have been at war with each other for about 2000 years. Sometimes hot, sometimes cold.
But like some other religions, at all times attempting to be 'the one true religion'. And by their competition, doing more harm than good.
And the Abrahamic religions haven't even shown that the 'good' stuff needs their religion to get done.
They preach that it is somehow noble or their duty to spread their faith. ("Onward Christian Soldiers")
There are dangers associated with proselytism and/or evangelicalism:
(Please note - I had help with the following)
Focus on Conversion over Service:
Proselytism/evangelicalism prioritizes conversion goals over humanitarian or service-oriented activities.
This undermines the credibility and effectiveness of religious organizations engaged in charitable work,
as it is perceived as conditional or insincere.
Dogmatism and Exclusivity:
Evangelicalism/proselytism promotes a rigid, dogmatic interpretation of religious beliefs that excludes other perspectives.
This exclusivity leads to intolerance of differing viewpoints and hinders constructive dialogue and cooperation with people of other faiths or worldviews.
Coercion and Manipulation:
Proselytism/evangelicalism involves coercion, manipulation, or exploitation of vulnerable individuals,
such as offering material incentives or exploiting power differentials to induce conversion.
This raises ethical concerns about respect for autonomy and informed consent.
Political Activism:
Evangelicalism/proselytism has been associated with political movements that prioritize specific social or moral issues, leading to controversy and polarization.
this politicization blurs the lines between religion and politics, compromising the integrity of both.
Interfaith Tensions:
Proselytism/evangelicalism contributes to interfaith tensions and conflicts, especially when it is aggressive or disrespectful to members of other religious communities.
It will undermine efforts to foster mutual respect, understanding, and cooperation among different faith traditions.
Fragmentation of Communities:
Proselytism/evangelicalism leads to the fragmentation or division of communities, particularly in contexts where multiple religious groups coexist.
This creates social tensions and weaken social cohesion, especially when proselytism is conducted in a confrontational or divisive manner.
Proselytization and Missionary Work:
We are concerned about aggressive or coercive methods used in proselytization/evangelicalism efforts,
especially when targeting vulnerable populations or in multicultural contexts.
This leads to cultural imperialism or disrespect for the autonomy of individuals and communities.
Cultural Insensitivity:
Proselytism/evangelicalism disregards or disrespects the cultural and religious traditions of the target community.
This leads to cultural imperialism or colonialism, especially when proselytism/evangelicalism is conducted in contexts where there is a history of exploitation or marginalization.
Misrepresentation or Simplification of Beliefs:
Proselytism/evangelicalism involves oversimplification or misrepresentation of religious beliefs and practices in order to make them more appealing to potential converts.
This leads to misunderstandings or misconceptions about the beliefs and traditions of the proselytizing religion.
For these reasons we conscientious objectors to the religious war, need an uncompetitive religion like Harris-y.
But don't push it.
Chapter 7
Humans and gods
Why do human religions have gods that are all too human?
A creator of everything that needs humans to wright/publish a holy book?
An all powerful god who needs humans to promote him?
An all powerful god with a vindictive human sized ego?
An immortal who is obsessed with human reproduction?
An all powerful god who needs humans more than we need him?
Any actual god wouldn't need human religion.
Harrisy serves humans, not gods.
Chapter 8
Parables
Corn In A Cow Patty.
Finding truth in the Abrahamic holy books,
is like finding corn in a cow patty.
Sure there are some good kernels in there,
but is it really worth digging through the shit to find them?
You can find uncontaminated kernels of truth anywhere.
Chapter 9
Feedback
Feedback should be sent to: [zachharris@mail2hell.com](mailto:zachharris@mail2hell.com)
Don't expect a timely reply.

Research Article: The Impact of Orochi Main Gameplay on Mental Health

Abstract

This study, conducted by Dr. G. Smith, investigates the potential correlation between playing Orochi in a popular online game and the likelihood of mental disability. The research aims to provide insights into how specific gaming behaviors might influence mental health. The study found that individuals who main Orochi have an 87% increased likelihood of developing mental disabilities compared to non-Orochi players.

Introduction

Video gaming is a widely popular activity with varying impacts on mental health. While some studies have shown positive cognitive benefits, others have raised concerns about potential adverse effects. This study focuses on players who main Orochi, a character in the game "For Honor," to assess the association between this specific gameplay and mental health outcomes.

Methods

Participants

A total of 1,000 participants were recruited for the study through gaming forums, social media platforms, and online gaming communities. The participants were divided into two groups: - Orochi Mains (n=500): Individuals who exclusively or predominantly play as Orochi. - Non-Orochi Players (n=500): Individuals who play other characters or diversify their gameplay.

Inclusion Criteria

• Participants must have at least 200 hours of gameplay.
• Ages between 18 and 45 years.
• No prior diagnosis of mental disability before the onset of playing "For Honor."

Exclusion Criteria

• Participants with a history of mental disability prior to playing the game.
• Participants who play multiple characters equally.

Data Collection

Data were collected using a combination of self-reported surveys and psychological assessments. The survey included questions on gaming habits, frequency, duration, and character preference. Psychological assessments were conducted using standardized tools, including: - The General Health Questionnaire (GHQ-28) - The Beck Depression Inventory (BDI) - The Spielberger State-Trait Anxiety Inventory (STAI)

Procedure

1. Recruitment: Participants were recruited online and provided informed consent.
2. Survey and Assessment: Participants completed the initial survey and psychological assessments.
3. Follow-up: Assessments were repeated after six months to monitor changes in mental health status.

Statistical Analysis

Data were analyzed using SPSS software. Logistic regression was used to determine the likelihood of developing mental disabilities in Orochi mains compared to non-Orochi players. Odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated. A p-value of <0.05 was considered statistically significant.

Results

The logistic regression analysis revealed that Orochi mains have a significantly higher likelihood of developing mental disabilities (OR: 1.87; 95% CI: 1.50-2.34, p < 0.001) compared to non-Orochi players. The primary mental health issues identified were increased levels of anxiety and depression.

Discussion

The findings suggest a strong correlation between maining Orochi and an increased likelihood of mental disabilities. Several factors may contribute to this correlation: - The competitive and stressful nature of playing Orochi. - Potential social isolation due to intense gaming habits. - In-game experiences and interactions that could negatively impact mental health.
Further research is needed to explore the underlying mechanisms and to establish causation. It is also important to consider other confounding factors such as personality traits and pre-existing conditions.

Conclusion

This study highlights a significant association between playing as Orochi in "For Honor" and an increased likelihood of mental disabilities. These findings underscore the need for awareness and preventive measures in the gaming community to mitigate potential mental health risks.

References

• Beck, A. T., Steer, R. A., & Brown, G. K. (1996). Beck Depression Inventory-II. Psychological Corporation.
• Goldberg, D. P., & Hillier, V. F. (1979). A scaled version of the General Health Questionnaire. Psychological Medicine, 9(1), 139-145.
• Spielberger, C. D. (1983). State-Trait Anxiety Inventory for Adults. Consulting Psychologists Press, Inc.

Located in CA
I took my 9 yr old lab Ivy to the vet for an emergency visit in the beginning of March. Our regular vet couldn’t take her so we had to go to the 24/7 animal hospital. They are excellent and I was willing to pay for whatever they needed to do to help ivy.
She had been very obviously sick and in pain, puking, diarrhea, not wanting to eat. They did an ultrasound, blood panel, urinalysis, fluids, meds. They found elevated liver enzymes and ketones in her urine. She was so sick they wanted to hospitalize her overnight. I asked what they would be doing and they said monitoring. I asked if I could just monitor her myself at home and bring her back right away if she gets worse? They gave me a couple prescriptions and sent us home. -$1729
I didn’t realize until the next day they didn’t give us any pain meds or anything to help Ivy’s eating (I’d tried seriously all the bland diet options, she didn’t want any of it) I went back to get her pain meds and prescription food, and the girl says they forgot to charge me for something else so she added that on too. -$150
Ivy was getting better slowly but still not her normal happy self at all. Sad, droopy eyes, wanting to sit curled up in my lap like a baby 😭 I kept doing everything they said and I took her back about a month later to check her levels again. We saw the vet, then went back out to the busy lobby to wait until someone came out to tell me the results or medications or whatever. So I sat in the lobby and waited, I asked a few times for updates bc I needed to get back to work. After 3 hours I asked if they could check and see what was going on.
There was another dog named Ivy there that morning and the receptionist closed out MY Ivy’s account (and charged the other lady’s card -$566 of my charges). I was annoyed and paid my bill (non-itemized invoice bc she couldn’t find mine) and Ivy and I went straight to work. Ivy is my service dog and sleeps under my desk.
They said the liver enzymes and urine ketone levels were both back to a normal level which was great news. They still couldn’t really give me a clear answer as to what could’ve caused all of this, sometimes they eat things, or just get sick, whatever. She said a slow recovery was normal bc livepancreas stuff is unpredictable, painful, and can take a while to heal.
The hospital’s office called me the next day to apologize for making me wait so long and reimbursed $316 (the liver panel, I think, I don’t have an itemized invoice). They offered this without me asking which I really appreciated.
Ivy has still been sick, but definitely better than when I first took her in. She was still acting sad, no interest in her favorite things. I knew she was in pain and brought her to a different vet last week.
Dr.S had been Ivy’s vet most of her life at our regular vet’s office - we love him. He left and started his own practice,and I just found his new location is 15 minutes away from my house!! It was kind of secretive when he left the other place, I think out of respect for the owners and not take half the clients with him. Anyway, I was really happy to find him again, I fully trust him. He was Ivy’s vet at her 8-week old visit, did her spay, all of it. Ivy is scared of men she doesn’t know and she loves Dr. S.
He took a look in her mouth and was like Whoa! Found it! He saw one badly rotten and cracked tooth in the back and wanted to get scheduled for removal right away. I bought the senior wellness plan for -$998. I was quoted $1200-1600 for surgery. (He was also going to remove a large benign mass from her side since she’d be under anesthesia already, I’d been wanting to do this for a few years so this is something I wanted him to do also)
This Tuesday was surgery day. He ended up removing 3 teeth, a molar on each side, and a front tooth that was cracked and broken off (I knew about this, I’d been told it wasn’t anything to be concerned about).
He said one of the molars and the front tooth both had exposed roots, the back one had an abscess and the root was touching the bone. He asked if I wanted the pictures bc it was really interesting and you don’t usually see it so advanced 😞 He said this is definitely what has been hurting her and making it hard to eat. He said they must have not looked in Ivy's mouth at all if they didn’t notice it- twice??
He didn’t have enough time to remove the mass. He said he wasn’t comfortable keeping her under any longer due to her age and blood pressure levels. Unless it grows rapidly we’re leaving it for now.
-$350 for everything this day, including surgery time & anesthesia, full dental cleaning & sealant,office visit, sedated nail trim, medications, canned soft food, heart worm testing, some other stuff included with the senior wellness package.
It’s been two days since she got her teeth out and she’s already smiling again. She was jumping around and trying to play with her brother (cat) and she only does that when she’s really excited!! Ivy is the best dog I could ever ask for. Seeing her in pain has been so hard, because I couldn’t help her!! I was trying everything but it wasn’t working. I’m so glad we found it and I think she will be able to get better now. I wasn’t so sure for awhile there.
I called the hospital place and told them what I found out and asked what happened. How could they have missed this- TWICE? The girl was really nice and agreed this was a “very valid concern” and asked me to explain everything to her and she would talk to the medical director, try to get some answers for me, and get back to me. She asked what I wanted the resolution to be. I said I thought it would be appropriate to ask for all of my charges to be refunded in relation to this event over the past couple months including Dr. S’s charges.
She called me back when I was at dinner so I missed her call.
Is this right? I don’t know what I’m looking for, feedback, reassurance, guidance? This is malpractice, right??
I talked to Dr.S’s receptionist today, she’s going to send me the photos and a breakdown of charges between the wellness plan and what I had done, try to make sense of what would be appropriate to ask them to refund. I kinda also want to ask them for $200 flat to reimburse the food/groceries spent trying to get her to eat, literally anything I could try on her bland diet, I tried! I don’t have receipts but I know I spent a shit ton of money as Ivy’s short order cook the last couple months. (Today she scarfed down her regular food for the first time in forever, I cried). Is this pushing it too far? Should I just take whatever they offer me?
What about the fact Ivy spent 2 1/2 months in pain & suffering from the time I brought her in to the day Dr. S did her surgery? She has lost weight, and has been pretty obviously miserable the whole time.
Thanks for reading.

Side Effects of Insulin During Pregnancy
Insulin is a crucial hormone produced by the pancreas to regulate blood glucose levels. During pregnancy, managing blood sugar becomes even more critical to ensure the health of both the mother and the growing baby.
1. Why Is Insulin Needed During Pregnancy?

• Gestational Diabetes: Some pregnant individuals develop gestational diabetes, a condition where blood sugar levels rise during pregnancy. Insulin helps control blood glucose and prevent complications.

2. Types of Insulin:
There are several types of insulin, each with different characteristics:

• Rapid-acting insulin: Starts working about 15 minutes after injection, peaks one to two hours afterward, and lasts for about two to four hours.
• Short-acting insulin: Begins working within 30 minutes of injection, peaks two to three hours afterward, and remains effective for three to six hours.
• Intermediate-acting insulin: Takes effect two to four hours after injection, peaks around four to 12 hours afterward, and works for 12–18 hours.
• Long-acting insulin: Begins working several hours after injection and lowers glucose levels for up to 24 hours.
• Ultra long-acting insulin: Starts working in six hours, never peaks and lasts 36 hour or longer.

3. Safety of Insulin During Pregnancy:
Insulin does not cross the placenta, making it safe for both the mother and the baby.

• Complications with high blood sugar: Uncontrolled blood sugar during pregnancy can lead to birth defects, large fetal size (large for gestational size) increased during risk of C-section, preeclampsia and even pregnancy loss.

4. Potential Side Effects:
Injection Site Reactions: Redness, swelling, itching, or skin thickening near the injection site.

• Hypoglycemia (Low Blood Sugar): Insulin can cause low blood sugar if not balanced properly. Symptoms include dizziness, shaking, sweating, racing heart, and tingling in the tongue and lips.
• Lumps at Injection Sites: To prevent this, avoid injecting in the same spot every time.
• Puffiness in Lips, Tongue and Throat: Rarely, insulin may cause localized swelling. Monitoring and Care:
  
• Regular monitoring of blood sugar levels is essential during pregnancy.
  
• Work closely with your healthcare provider to adjust insulin doses as needed.
  

Managing insulin during pregnancy:
1.Change Insulin Injection Sites.
2.Consistent Timing.
3.Consult Your Doctor for Diet.
Uncontrolled insulin risks during Pregnancy:
1.Large Fetal Size.
2.Difficult Delivery.
3.Increased risk of Future Diabetes
4.Health problems for the Fetus.
5.Premature Delivery.
6.Preeclampsia and High Blood Pressure.
7.Risk of death for Fetus.
Remember that insulin plays a vital role in maintaining a healthy pregnancy. If you experience any side effects or have concerns, consult your doctor immediately. Proper management ensures the well-being of both you and your baby.
In summary, insulin is a valuable tool for managing blood sugar during pregnancy. While it has some potential side effects, its benefits far outweigh the risks. Always follow your healthcare providers guidance to ensure a safe and healthy pregnancy.

Building a campaign where players can take on additional abilities for Corruption, not unlike how Infernal Gifts and Paragon ranks work. The intention is to give them a big power kick compared to baseline PCs, as the campaign is deliberately fearsome and tailored for more meaty characters than the core game implies.
One of the bonuses they can select is +1 to an Attribute. The concern I have is that I want them to be able to select multiple of these perks as the campaign progresses, which means they may get between 4 and 9 advances in this tree. I want them to be buffed up, but a +9 to any attribute is kind of ridiculous especially on top of what they’re gonna get from their usual Path progression.
At the same time, I want these to be frequent bonuses, as some of them are less oomphy (granting Darksight, climber, a triggered action heal up to their rate) and some are deliberately there to incentivise casters (discovering traditions and learning spells, but NOT gaining Power).
Weighing it up between:
A) Making a rule that you can’t buff the same attribute until you’ve taken a +1 in another. So instead of +9 Strength by endgame, it would distribute something like +5 Strength, +4 Agility etc. B) Scaling the Corruption cost of taking the same perk, so the first +1 bonus to an Attribute costs say 2 Corruption, second bonus is 3, third bonus 4 and so on. This doesn’t quite fit into the advancement model, since the timing of when they get it and at what level is more relevant than the Corruption cost, but it could be a disincentive. C) Just rolling with it and accepting that my endgame PCs are going to be broken as fuck. This might be just fine, as the later chapters are intentionally brutal.
TLDR: When handing out additional stat bonuses to PCs on top of their Path advances, should there be a limit? Is 20 in an attribute appropriate even for a level 10 PC?

Introduction
Muslims believe the Quran, the holy book of Islam itself is not just a religious book for guidance but also the literal word of god i.e. Allah itself. In everyday conversations, you will hear Muslims call it Kalamullah (Word of God), not in the Christian sense where the Word is Jesus and God but actual sayings, sentences, and words uttered by god himself and compiled into a single book by human hands. While Muslims are proud of their holy book being the literal words of god sent down to all of mankind, there are a few problems with that mainly concerning Islam's doctrinal theology and its core beliefs.
Disclaimer and Notes
Now, before I start, a disclaimer. The issue of the Quran being god's word or not has been one of the most pretentious and divided issues in the Muslim community. Because of this issue, multiple sects (considered deviant and heretical today) popped up in the early years of Islam's history leading to multiple debates, condemnations, and even inquisitions for those that were against the majority-held view in history. So to make it easy considering Islam has tons of historical sects, all of whom held widely different views than modern-day Islam when it comes to the Quran's states as the word of god (or not), this post is aimed at Ashari, Maturidi and Ahlul Hadith/Athari aqeedah sects who make up the majority of Muslims today, collectively considered to be under the umbrella of Ahlul Sunnah Wal Jema'ah (Literally meaning "The People of the Prophet's Tradition and Consensus" or to make it easier to understand "The Followers of the Prophet's Teachings and the Righteous Community"). This term is commonly understood in Islam as those who follow the true and righteous path in Islam which according to the hadiths, out of 73 deviant sects, only 1 (the above I already mention) will be on the correct spiritual path.
Why do I say this problem is akin to the Trinity problem in Christianity? Both are key problems that form the basis of the entire religion, not just for an individual believer but also for the scholars who dabble in religious sciences. Both the Quran and Trinity make up the core fundamental teachings upon which other teachings are established and expanded further. Without these key concepts, the entire premise of both religions (Islam and Christianity) would fall apart within a matter of seconds. Both issues are also hotly debated even to this day. As I mentioned before, the issue of the Quran's creation or non-creation was an important issue that occupied the minds of early-century Muslim scholars and thinkers, to the point schisms and breakaways from the main branch started to emerge. The same thing happened in Christianity with the Trinity which led to excommunication, the Arian controversy, and multiple individual distinct sects, all of whom have a different understanding of what the Trinity is.
Last, I would also like to mention that considering the Trinity has been severely criticized by non-Christians alike as proof of Christianity's falsehood and internal contradictions, then the same should be said with Islam's problem of the Quran's status. However, unlike in Islam, Christianity continued to debate up to the present day and even adopted Greek philosophical concepts to better explain away the Trinity and the relationship between each Divine Person of the Trinity. In Islam, the opposite occurred. Those who used Greek philosophy and rhetoric were condemned as either falling into falsehood or corrupting the religion by introducing pagan concepts. Ironically, the most condemned bunch of the Muslim sects I'll talk about below, the Mutazilites were the ones who most used philosophy which led to their rejection of the Quran's non-createdness.
Due to the decline of the Mutazilite sect, the rise of more conservative movements, and the criticism of Aristotelian philosophical ideas by Al-Ghazali (Note, he wasn't against philosophy, he was against philosophical ideas that went against Islam like the eternity of the world and denying bodily resurrection in the afterlife), theological discussions and debates surrounding the question faded away. Even now, most Muslims consider the issue "solved" and simply adopt one of the three main positions. Unsurprisingly, while the West and Christianity continued adopting new ideas, this means the Muslim positions lacked much substance and arguments seen in Christianity with Greek and Neo-Platonist ideas which in turn, means there are tons of problems with their positions, (which is the whole point of the post)
Now, with that out of the way, let's begin.
How Have Muslims Historically Responded to this Problem?
There are two answers to the question of the Quran's status. One, to affirm that it is the literal word of god from Allah Himself which existed with him since eternity or to affirm it is a created being just like every other creature and human planet earth. The second view doesn't mean that the Quran is simply the work of man, quite the opposite. Rather, it posits that the Quran still holds religious significance as Islam's holy book and is still the Word of God but it was created at a later time by God, not existing eternally with god before the creation of everything. In the second view, the Quran still holds religious significance for praying, guidance, and the basis for Islam, only that it is of a lower status than god himself, being a creation of god that was created at a certain time.
The second view is considered invalid and rejected by all major sects of Islam in the modern era (Ashari, Maturidi, Athari) as a heretical belief that the Mutazilites (The Withdrawers) held. I'm not going to go into who they are, what is their history, or what are their beliefs (you can google it yourself). Just know these are the guys who believe the Quran was a creation of god and were condemned by pretty much every Islamic group and sect from their beginning all the way up to the present modern day. This is one of the only issues where every Islamic sect agrees with each other in condemning this belief, be it Ashari, Maturidi, or Athari. Thus, the second option then is 100% of the table for most Muslims, unless they want to affirm holding beliefs of a heretical group that died out 1000 years ago. I don't think any Muslim will dare to affirm Mutazilite beliefs for fear of ridicule and committing major sins, so there's not much here to discuss. For the sake of brevity, I will address the second view since the one even Muslims will deny and reject. After that, I'll address the Second View
The Second View
But for the sake of argument, I'll assume some rare brave Mutazilite Muslim wants to give it a try. Now, here are some of my questions for you. If the Quran is a creation of god and not the literal Word of God before time immemorial, what is the Quran's relationship with god? You believe these are still words from Allah that help mankind to arrive at the truth and Islam yet at the same you also believe that these were created at a time later than god. How can something that is both speech from god and also created by god himself exist simultaneously at the same time? Anything that is created at a later time means it's a creation, a contingent object that depends on an external creator. It can't be part of god because god is eternal, atemporal, necessary, and independent of everything and anything. If it were god or contained some part of god inside of it, then this is no different than Jesus and the Son of God in Christianity where it contains both a human and godly nature, so does that mean you now believe the Quran to be both god and creation? Just like the Christians who you condemn as a false corrupted religion? This is the First Problem you must face, that be affirming it is both from god and not god, you are throwing yourself into the same pit as Christianity with a dual nature which is already a false religion. I like to call people who affirm this stance "Dualists".
The Second Problem "dualists" face is that this nullifies the Quran's honorific status in Islam, which goes against what the majority of the Muslim world believes in. For Dualists, what is the Quran's honorific and spiritual status in Islam now? We've all seen Muslim riots and protests against the burning or stepping on the Quran by non-Muslims around the world. A man burns or rips up the Quran and the entire Muslim world goes into a frenzy. In Islam, simply placing the Quran on the floor is considered disrespectful and sinful. In the majority of sects today, the Quran must be honored and respected 24/7 partly due to the fact Muslims believe it to be the literal Word. But for Dualists, what is your stance and reason for continuing to respect the Quran? Considering you no longer believe the Quran to be the actual Word, can non-Muslims now vandalize, rip apart, step on, or place the Quran on the floor?? Would you have any problem with it? It's no longer the Word itself but a creation of god. Sure, you might ask others to "respect other religions and beliefs" but aside from this, what else do you have?? Is simply putting a religious book on the floor disrespecting other religions? What makes your holy book now any different from the Jewish and Christian perspectives on their religious books? They don't go into a frenzy every time Bibles are burned or disrespected. Will you do the same thing?
The Third Problem since it's a created thing, wouldn't this also mean that at some point in the future, the Quran no longer exists? That the Quran is finite and will at some point cease to exist? Wouldn't this mean at some point, Islam itself becomes useless because the number one source for everything, the Quran no longer exists? The Quran will cease to exist if it were created, when it happens, will the meaning of the verses and Muslim understanding built up over the centuries also cease to exist? Tafsirs, Fiqh, and Tajwid all suddenly become useless and void of any meaning because the backbone of Islam, the Quran no longer exists. What about the Muslim understanding of what Allah is? Isn't that detrimental should the Quran cease to exist? The best outcome is that Muslims still retain the knowledge but Islam becomes spineless without a religious book and the worst outcome is the complete disintegration of Islam as everything built upon the Quran, now becomes useless. It would mean the complete death of Islam as a major Abrahamic religion.
Next, what about during the Hour, when everything in the heavens and on the Earth will be destroyed and no longer exist? Muslims believe that when the Hour arrives, everything will be destroyed. Every human, child, animal, plant, planet, universe, devil, and angel will die inevitably. Only god remains. Due to this, according to Dualists, will the Quran experience the same fate? All of its verses and Surahs destroyed by god himself. Now I know Muslims, even those of other sects believe the Quran will disappear bit by bit before the Hour as a sign of the impending doom and apocalypse. However, other Muslims believe that yes, the Quran will disappear but the verses themselves remain preserved with god i.e. Allah since these are the literal words of god himself. In a sense, the verses suddenly don't exist, they return back to god.
TLDR, the Dualist Mutazilite view implies a contradiction where the Quran is both God and not God at the same time, it nullifies the Quran's holy status and the divine meaning of the verses, and last, it means the Quran is finite and will cease to exist at some point in the future.
Now, onto the Ashari, Maturidi and Athari sects,
The First View (The Majority)
These three are the most prominent and widely held doctrinal sects in the current Muslim population. I will be splitting the next sections into two sections, Ashari-Maturidi (since both are quite similar and considered a single unified school of thought by Muslim scholars) and the Athari school.
Ashari-Maturidi
The Asharis and Maturidis believe the Quran and its verses to be the literal Word of God itself, with Allah since eternity before time however they believe the book form of the Quran (mushaf), the one which every Muslim holds and reads is of man-made origin. In other words, the verses, sentences, letters, and meaning of the text are from god himself while the cover, paper, ink, writing, and publishing are from mankind. The Ash'ari creed makes a point of difference between the content of the Quran and the physical manifestation of it (in speech or as pages in a book).
The Main Problem with this argument as said by Atharis and Mutazilites is that this strips the Quran of its spiritual and holy essence in Islam. If the real divine aspect of the Quran that came from god itself are the verses and meaning of it only, then should we burn every last Quran in the world, it wouldn't be a problem. After all, the divine part still exists as it is from and with god himself, only the earthly worldly portions of it get destroyed. Why's that a problem? I mean what is the problem spiritually concerning Islam's doctrinal theology itself? What's the problem with destroying the cover or vandalizing the writing of it? It's not from god, it's man-made. The effect of this would be enormous.
This means now non-Muslims and Islamaphobes can now burn, rip, tear apart, step on, vandalize, and desecrate the Quran because they are only destroying the part that is not divine. Would Asharis or Maturidis agree to this? Is now destroying the Quran not a major sin but actually allowed? The true essence of the Quran i.e. the part that is truly divine remains preserved and exists since humans were created and will continue to exist long after everything has died and withered away. The vandalization and desecration of it does not affect the Quran because the true divine verses and meaning remain preserved. This problem is similar to the Second Problem with the Mutazilite belief, it nullifies and strips away the Quran's holy status and honorific place among the Muslim community. If it isn't truly god's divine word, what's the problem if it gets destroyed, wet, or burned?
Heck, I've heard this same argument from other sects, claiming and accusing the Ashari are just Mutazilites in disguise because their main stance of the Quran's identity revolves back to the Mutazilite position where the Quran is a creation of god. One of the main accusations against the Ashari sect is that it's just a rehash version of Mutazilite or Jahmiyyah theology (I don't have time to explain what this is right now, better if you look it up yourselves) due to similarities in doctrine and also because Imam Ashari, the founder was once a Mutazilite himself (not helping the Ashari case) but Asharis claim he renounced all Mutazilite theology and returned back to the true correct path. In this case, should the objection above against the Ashari-Maturidi position succeed, then it would help critics a lot against Asharism.
The Second Problem with holding the Ashari position is that this resembles the idolatry of Hinduism and Paganism or at least, is slipping into idolatry practice. If they claim the Speech of God is contained within the letters, pages, and ink of the Mushaf (the Quran's Uthmanic standardized codex), then how dare they believe the actions of humans can absorb and physicalize the Sacred Divine Speech of God, for Muslims believe god can never be limited by His creatures. This would also mean they believe the ink written on the Quran's pages is a physical intermediary, designed to encapsulate the Speech of God into a physical form, no different than the idols of Hindus and Pagans who believe their idols to be an intermediary or a worldly representation of the True Divine Nature.
Hindus don't claim they worship idols, rather they believe them to be ways to spiritually connect with the divine as a locus for prayer just like how Muslims consider the Kaaba as the direction for prayer, not an idol for worship or as a reminder for believers of the faith similar to how a photo of a spiritual leader is a sign of respect and a daily reminder every-day when you wake up. How is this different than believing the ink inside the Quran holds the truth or emulates the Divine Nature from the Ashari claim? Ashari Muslims affirm the Quran is still the Word of God just represented through a physical form, so how is this not idolatry? Believing that a physical human-made physical manifestation holds the Divine Speech so that followers of Islam can get closer to god?
This would be even worse than the Mutazilites, for committing idolatry whether intentionally or not is a major grave sin in Islam, to the point those that who commit it and do not repent back are considered as Kafir (infidels). If even they aren't committing idolatry and shirk (polytheism), another major sin in Islam, then at the very least, they believe that a divine part of God can be captured inside the ink and pen of writers as if they the Speech of God and the ink become one and the same, another reference to the Christian belief of God having both a Divine and Human Nature. Of course, Muslims and Ashari Muslims consider this to be heretical and blasphemous, but what's the difference between believing the Quran is both man-made and divine versus the Christological belief of Jesus being both God and Man?
The Third Problem with the Ashari answer that the Quran itself is created while the Speech of God isn't is where is the Speech of God then? Asharis can't answer that it is still in heaven for they also believe the Mushaf or Quran contains the Word and Speech of God. If they believe that it is still in heaven with god and not on earth, then what are they even reading every day? Clearly not the Speech of God if they claim it isn't with us now, perhaps an imperfect human copy of the divine Speech of God but that would mean the Quran is imperfect and the work of man, which would be affirming the Mutazilite position. So they can't claim it is both in the heavens and on the earth nor claim it is either in the heavens only or on the earth with mankind only.
I already explained they also can't say the Speech of God is contained inside the ink and letters of the Quran for that means the Divine Speech has become limited because of it. God in Islam can never be limited, nor can His creatures limit god. So if isn't option A, B, or C, where is the Holy Sacred Speech of God then? The Speech which is supposed to be the principle guiding force for all of mankind especially, Muslims. How can Asharis then claim they believe in the Quran as the revelation and Word of God sent down to Muhammad if they can't tell us where in their holy book, is the Speech of God itself? At worst, this means the Ashari belief entails the Quran isn't holy or divine thus eliminating Islam's entire main source and one of the 6 pillars of Iman (faith), and at best, reading the Quran isn't a holy act nor can be used as a book for guidance, for Muslims aren't reading the Word of God then. They are reading an imperfect fallible man-made copy of the Speech of God, not the true Divine Inspiration from Allah.
TLDR, the Ashari-Maturidi middle path that the Quran was uncreated and eternal, yet its ink and paper, individual letters and words were created strips the Quran has multiple problems, some may even go against what Islam stands for. It strips the Quran of its Divine Sacred Essence as the Word of God, at worse it may lead to shirk and idolatry akin to the Hindus and Pagans, and at best, Asharis can't point to us where the Word and Speech of God is in the Quran.
Athari/Ahlul Hadith
Now for the Atharis, they are strict literalists who believe the Quran and Allah's Speech both are uncreated unlike the Asharis/Maturidis who adopt a middle path, or the Mutazilite who outright claim the Quran was created, the extreme position.
The First Problem with the Athari position is pretty clear, if the Quran is the literal Word of God completely, then does that mean what Muslims are holding is a literal piece of God here on earth in the moral realm? Does that mean god is with us all the time? How can god, who Muslims consider as being transcendent be here on earth with mankind? If the Quran is the literal physical Speech of God and not just metaphorically or analogically, then does this mean the Speech of God exists on Earth? How can god be here on Earth? The Atharis believe literally that the Quran is the Speech of God, so unless they claim the Speech of God suddenly transformed into a physical object (which I'll address below), the Quran would be a god or at least have a piece of the divine essence of Allah.
This is no different than the Christian position where there exists a God in heaven and a God on Earth at the same time. As I already mentioned, Muslims consider the Christian position of a god on earth unacceptable yet when we look at their own views, we find (in the Athari case) a piece of god exists on earth. Allah still exists in the heavens, yet the Speech of God exists here in the Quran. Let's not even get into the issue of a transcendent god existing in the mortal physical realm, where the laws of physics govern meaning god would be limited in some capacity (which most Muslims would see as ridiculous)
The Second Problem is the relationship between the Quran (God's Speech) and God himself. Considering the Quran was revealed to Muhammad and sent down by Gabriel, how should we understand the Speech of God is here now? Do Atharis believe that the Speech of God suddenly separated from the main body when the Quran was revealed and sent down to earth? Or do Atharis believe the Quran is still the undivided Speech of God, in which case a part of god is literally on earth?
Or what about when the Quran was compiled in book form starting with Abu Bakr's reign and ending with Uthman's standardization? Should we take this to mean now not only does the Speech of God literally exist on earth but the Speech of God now has taken shape, molded into letters and words while compiled into a book equipped with paper pages and covers from front to back? If they want to deny these are from god i.e. the physical cover is man-made, then they would be subscribing to the Ashari-Maturidi doctrine of the middle path (which I already showed also has problems). If they want to take the other path and claim the Quran we have now is not the Word of God literally, then they would be subscribing to the heretical Mutazilite position which also, has tons of religious and doctrinal problems.
TLDR, the Athari literalist position invites more harm than good when it comes to answering the question of the Quran's uncreated nature. It would mean god is literally on earth, or a piece of god's divine essence is. Affirming that a piece of the Divine Essence exists here on earth with mankind would be something similar to the Christian belief that god exists both in the heavens and on earth (Father and Son). Other than that, it would also complicate the relationship between the Quran and God even more. If the Quran is the literal Word and Speech of God, how do Atharis explain the Quran's standardization into a single written book with ink, paper, and covers? Does it mean the Speech of God underwent a physical transformation?
Consequences
Islam posits the Quran to be the Word of God from Allah Himself, however how exactly does that work leads to massive problems within Islam's doctrinal framework. Muslims can't state the Quran is the true literal Speech of God otherwise they would be committing a blasphemous act by believing god is literally on earth with us at this very moment. They also can't deny it is the Speech of God for Islam considers the Quran to be the perfect Kalamullah (literally the Word of God). It is one of the core tenets of belief that Muslims believe the Quran to be the actual Words of God sent down to Muhammad as the last revelation. They also can't adopt a middle path like the Asharis-Maturidis because I've already shown that this just leaves the Quran inside a grey area, it's both the Word of God and also not the Word of God at the same time. Other problems are also relevant which I've already discussed above. Either the middle approach collapses into itself, becoming either one the extreme views, literal divine affirmation like the Atharis, or the extreme divine nullification like the Mutazilites.
Other religions don't have this problem. They do not believe Jesus or Moses were gifted the actual literal Words and Speech of God which existed since time immemorial. Christians believe the Bible was divinely authored by the Apostles of Jesus, where the Holy Spirit guides the writers of the Bible into writing down the true teachings of Jesus and Christianity. Christians don't believe the Bible's passages are the literal Speech of God which has existed with the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit as if affirming the Bible was also another Divine Person of the Trinity. No, only Muslims as far as I know affirm both their Holy Book contains the Speech of God which both exists on Earth and also with God up in heaven but that leaves them in a contradiction of whether to affirm the Quran is God Himself on Earth or the true Words of God are still up in heaven. After all, how can the Divine Nature which is uncorrupted and perfect exist in a world not perfect, but actually filled with sin, corruption, and spiritual pollution?
In the end, Muslims face a dilemma with regard to the Quran's Holy and Divine Nature. This a dilemma which after going through all the possible Muslim answers that have been given over the years, still fails to give us a proper satisfying answer.
Conclusion
All the responses and viewpoints of the major Islamic sects fail to answer the question, of whether the Quran is created or not. They tried to square a circle by trying to find a balance between affirming the Quran is the divine Word of God while at the same time not falling into a literalist interpretation where god is on Earth (as the Atharis do). However, all responses so far have failed to properly find the right solution, all either fall into extremities at both ends of the spectrum (Mutazilite and Athari) or tried to strike a balance, but only managed to kick the can down the road even further.
If Christianity has the Problem of the Trinity, a major fundamental question that still has philosophers and theologians scratching their heads trying to find an answer, then the Problem of the Quran's Nature is the Islamic version of it. The difference is while Christians continue to debate and argue about the Trinity's true nature, Muslim and Islamic scholars have relatively abandoned the debate, choosing to hold either one of the three major schools of thought. My personal opinion is this is an unfortunate situation, ever since the decline of philosophy in Islamic thought, Kalam and Falsafah (Islamic philosophy) have gained a bad reputation amongst Muslims as being a "gateway to blasphemy". Rarely you will find Muslim scholars in the modern era debate about this, let alone teach laymen Muslims about these topics.
At the very least, I hope my post can inspire future Muslims to look into this topic further, creating new fascinating answers and arguments that contribute to the Muslim and non-Muslim understanding of what Allah is in Islam.

***** I am mainly sending this because I want my evidence back and because I’m pissed that the police department allowed this to happen with next to 0 consequences. Names and identifying info redacted. Let me know if I should change anything, I genuinely am thinking about sending this to whoever I can find emails for at my local PD.
To Whomever This May Concern,
My name is *. I am 21 years old and am a recent graduate of the University *. I have made the difficult decision to write this letter because I am truly disgusted and horrified by the manner in which ** County, the ***** Police Department, and the Child Advocacy Center of *****, NY handled my allegations of rape, sexual assault, and stalking that were filed in 2019. I have allowed myself to move on and grow from this atrocious act that has significantly impacted my life, but my development as a functional, healthy adult has been drastically hindered due to the treatment and negligent investigation into this case.
I would like to describe my story in order to fully convey my frustrations. When I was fifteen years old in late July of 2018, just after my freshman year of high school, I began babysitting the child of a thirty-six-year-old man who my family and I knew quite well and had considered a family friend since I can remember. The premise of the childcare was to assist this man with daily tasks regarding his three-year-old daughter. The man in question was unemployed, but had a difficult time caring for his autistic child alone due to his anger issues, as recognized by the Department of Social Services.
When I began working for this family, the man in question, ****** (*) was in the home at all times in which I was present in the home. The events that led up to the detrimental and life-changing abuse that I experienced are too difficult to describe in one email. To summarize, this man groomed me, sexually assaulted me, and raped me on several occasions in his home over the course of six months. ** sexually abused me in his home, at my home, and in a vehicle. He bragged to his close friends, and specifically, his neighbor ***** and friend ****** about the things he had done to me. These witnesses were willing to comply with any investigation at the time of these events, but were not ever asked to answer questions. In addition, this man isolated me from family and friends, threatened to murder my entire family, and stalked me for a year after I ceased contact with him, which included 5+ drives by my home daily, waiting outside of my place of employment, and cyberstalking. This man used hard drugs in front of me and forced me to participate in and witness several illegal acts. I cannot convey with strong enough language, the impact that these events had on me as a naïve and innocent teenager. He genuinely ruined my life and I deal with the effects every single day.
These events have seriously impacted my development into an adult, and hindered my growth on levels that the recipient of this email may not comprehend. During the end of my relationship with this individual, I had realized that this situation was extremely unsafe and had attempted to break contact. He threatened suicide as a punishment if I left him, so I agreed to meet with him at ******** high school in the mornings after I had gotten off the bus, as I was not yet old enough to drive myself. He forced me to remain in his vehicle from 8am until 9:30am during school hours for multiple days in a row. Several times during these meetings, in the parking lot of the school, he sexually abused me and at other times, drove at dangerous speeds with me in the vehicle on Route 8 in *******. School officials and police officers were well aware of these events after my whereabouts during several of these mornings had been discovered. This individual was then arrested on charges of endangering the welfare of a child but was released on bond the very next day. After much difficulty and explaining, I was granted with a temporary restraining order, which did not stop his advances. To this day, when I return to my hometown to visit family, I am afraid for my safety as I have to see this man in public at a gas station or at a local restaurant.
After a few months, in 2019, I had realized that I wanted to tell my story and that I wanted this man to be held accountable for what he had put me through. At just 16 years old, I went through a series of interviews held at the Child Advocacy Center in ***, NY, which only further traumatized me. A female officer involved with my case made me feel as if I had brought this onto myself due to the sympathy I felt for my abuser and the guilt that I felt about everything that had occurred. To clarify, I was a victim of abuse as a child and did not fully comprehend the extent of said abuse. The female officer was unwilling to recognize that I was a vulnerable, disadvantaged child who did not have the means to advocate for myself. Another male officer, Detective **** collected evidence from me, including an expensive necklace given to me by my abuser with, to my knowledge, a value of $3,000, as well as a letter from him where he confessed his love and relationship with me. He looked me in the eye and promised that I would receive justice. This officer never contacted me again after the interview. If nothing is going to be done about this rage-filled, aggressive, and dangerous pedophile, I would like the necklace and letter back that was entered into evidence in 2019.
I will never understand how a person can be subjected to such atrocious and vile acts, and nothing will be done about it. I am not a religious person, but I wake up every single morning praying that he has not found another victim to control and destroy. I pray for his family, especially his child, and I pray for those who have to encounter him. I pray for myself and my family, as my case has been dismissed and invalidated time and time again by the ***** police department. I pray that no other girl or woman has to experience the things I did, nor has to grow up so quickly the way I did. The treatment of this case taught me that I cannot rely on law enforcement, or on those who are supposed to protect me. I hope that my statements throughout this email encourages more thorough investigations into cases like mine. Women and girls need to be protected fiercely, strongly, and wholeheartedly. I was not provided with further resources to assist with my mental health during this time. The town I have grown up in and have always loved is forever tainted as the place where my life was ruined.
Today, as a strong, accomplished, and college-educated woman, I am extremely disappointed with the way my trauma and physical safety was dismissed by the ***** police department, ***** County as a whole, and the Child Advocacy Center of ******, NY. I will no longer be silenced by fear. I will say his name, as the guilt and shame I have experienced is not mine to bear. I am not looking for retribution, I am simply asking that you dedicate resources to believing victimized women and offering bare minimum, necessary support to women like me in the future.
Thank you for your time,

My concerns/issues:
I’m about to start my sophomore year of undergrad as a Biomedical Sciences major at a large university. I’ve been super interested in the human body and medicine for years. In high school, I was president of the Health Science committee and earned a license as a clinical medical assistant. I was top of my class and didn’t struggle a bit with academics. The transition to college was rough for me though. I ended up getting a C in basic Chem and Calc 1 even though I’ve made A’s in both those courses during dual credit in high school. One issue that bothers me is that the classes have around 200-600 students on average. It’s hard to hear professors and feel like your problems are being answered. I’ve started questioning my future and found that I am not super passionate in pursuing medical school, but it is still something I want to/can do and something I feel like I need to go through with. Keep in mind for later that surgery is something I find fascinating and would love to do.
This past semester, I started researching alternate careers or different paths that I’d be interested in. I discovered a Sport Management degree that I can finish in a shorter amount of time than I would finish my Biomedical Sciences degree in. If I switch to this degree, I would most likely try to become an athletic director at a collegiate level. I love everything about sports and college football/baseball. This seems like something I would love to do. There would be less schooling, less tuition, no grad school. If I change my mind later on, I can still use this degree to get a Master’s in Kinesiology and go to PT school — kind of a mix of medicine and sports.
The one thing holding me back is feeling like I failed. If I switch into Sport Management, I’d practically be giving up on years of dreaming of med school and becoming a doctor. Med school is by far more difficult. This major is going to be way easier than Biomedical Sciences and I think it would make me feel like I’m wasting my time. I know I’m smart enough for medicine… just don’t know if I want to stick it out. If I go to Sport Management route, surgery is off the table given that I at least do PT.
Possible Solution:
I could try to transfer to a smaller school with smaller class sizes after the spring semester. If I do this, I’d stay on the med route. This might help with getting a better understanding of material in class & help to better focus.
I apologize for the length of this post. I’m just very conflicted and feel like this is a huge, life-changing decision for me to make since this is the last year I’ll be able to change my major. If any of y’all have been in this same situation, I would very much appreciate if you could share how you handled it. Thank you.

My concerns/issues:
I’m about to start my sophomore year of undergrad as a Biomedical Sciences major at a large university. I’ve been super interested in the human body and medicine for years. In high school, I was president of the Health Science committee and earned a license as a clinical medical assistant. I was top of my class and didn’t struggle a bit with academics. The transition to college was rough for me though. I ended up getting a C in basic Chem and Calc 1 even though I’ve made A’s in both those courses during dual credit in high school. One issue that bothers me is that the classes have around 200-600 students on average. It’s hard to hear professors and feel like your problems are being answered. I’ve started questioning my future and found that I am not super passionate in pursuing medical school, but it is still something I want to/can do and something I feel like I need to go through with. Keep in mind for later that surgery is something I find fascinating and would love to do.
This past semester, I started researching alternate careers or different paths that I’d be interested in. I discovered a Sport Management degree that I can finish in a shorter amount of time than I would finish my Biomedical Sciences degree in. If I switch to this degree, I would most likely try to become an athletic director at a collegiate level. I love everything about sports and college football/baseball. This seems like something I would love to do. There would be less schooling, less tuition, no grad school. If I change my mind later on, I can still use this degree to get a Master’s in Kinesiology and go to PT school — kind of a mix of medicine and sports.
The one thing holding me back is feeling like I failed. If I switch into Sport Management, I’d practically be giving up on years of dreaming of med school and becoming a doctor. Med school is by far more difficult. This major is going to be way easier than Biomedical Sciences and I think it would make me feel like I’m wasting my time. I know I’m smart enough for medicine… just don’t know if I want to stick it out. If I go to Sport Management route, surgery is off the table given that I at least do PT.
Possible Solution:
I could try to transfer to a smaller school with smaller class sizes after the spring semester. If I do this, I’d stay on the med route. This might help with getting a better understanding of material in class & help to better focus.
I apologize for the length of this post. I’m just very conflicted and feel like this is a huge, life-changing decision for me to make since this is the last year I’ll be able to change my major. If any of y’all have been in this same situation, I would very much appreciate if you could share how you handled it. Thank you.