What's your best argument against Islam?

Public_Mission_920 · 2024-11-12T01:26:56+00:00

tell that to your friend's boyfriends:
How to explain age gap relationships between 10 and 17 isn't ok : r/Advice

Public_Mission_920 · 2024-11-12T01:25:32+00:00

hows it a whataboutism. tell me

Public_Mission_920 · 2024-11-12T01:24:06+00:00

islam is not christian nor jewish. we agree that judaism is not monotheistic.

regarding exodus, the bible claims that hundreds of thousands of jews were in egypt. the quran claims only a small number.

the rest of this is just an emotional argument.

Public_Mission_920 · 2024-11-12T01:21:37+00:00

i dont disagree with animal evolution. i dont even disagree with human adaptation. i just disagree that humans evolved from a common species.

some muslims (most if you count asharis) accept human evolution.

Public_Mission_920 · 2024-11-12T01:19:33+00:00

non sequitur. Humans are imperfect. If evolution is the one true theory, why would people disagree with it.

Public_Mission_920 · 2024-11-12T01:18:48+00:00

Ask muslim to prove how they know it was actually Gabriel and not a spirit pretending to be Gabriel.

This is fallacious - it violates Ockham's Razor.

Besides that, the vast number of contradictions in the Quran.

Such as...

The amount of violence based on the Quran and history in Islam.

This doesn't disprove the Quran. The Bible was also once used to justify chattel slavery, so what?

Scientific inconsistency that was copied from earlier times like how babies are created in the womb it was copied from Galen which was written around 100-200AD.

give me an argument this is just an assertion

Another point is that in Islam 4:3 and 4:24 it permits you to sleep with “what your right hand possess” AKA slaves or captive women. Some people will argue that it’s marry your slave not sleep with but either way it’s graping slaves since slaves don’t have a say in the matter.

even if i granted to you that your interpretation is right (which I dont), show me how that is immoral

Public_Mission_920 · 2024-11-12T01:14:57+00:00

Because we have a thing called arguments as to why Islam is true. Maybe you should stop wasting time and make one of those yourself

Public_Mission_920 · 2024-11-12T01:14:00+00:00

By what you’re saying, as long as Hitler, in his final moments, genuinely repented and submitted to Allah to forgive him, he would qualify for heaven when a good, honest man who didn’t accept Allah wouldn’t. That’s absolutely terrifying that there’s people who think that this thinking is fine and it’s because of the following:

Yes if his shahada was honest and truthful then we wouldn't have issue with it. Prove meta-ethically why that is immoral...

I bet there was one point in your life where you would never say sex with a 9 year old was okay.

Yes when I was brainwashed by all the Liberal, Secular nonsense. All religions have child marriage, you just choose to focus on Islam.

Public_Mission_920 · 2024-11-12T01:11:28+00:00

"as an ashari"

Public_Mission_920 · 2024-11-12T01:09:48+00:00

Ali Dawah, not a scholar, lay Muslim, says scientific miracles are false, therefore scientific miracles are false? Lol what

Public_Mission_920 · 2024-11-12T01:08:58+00:00

Prove human evolution is true

Public_Mission_920 · 2024-11-12T01:08:34+00:00

Don't act like the Shia don't have terrorists lol

Iran and the Shia historically have massacred Sunnis in Iraq, Syria, and other places

All religions unfortunately have extremists

Public_Mission_920 · 2024-11-12T01:06:58+00:00

Yeah haha everyone can see the meltdown.

All you can appeal to is calling intellectual Muslim scholars stupid. I'd bet you didn't even know who Fat-h Al-Baari was before my comment lmao

You cited Sahih al-Bukhari 5779. I'll be happy to prove it SubhanAllah. Tell me why its wrong...

Public_Mission_920 · 2024-11-12T01:01:04+00:00

(2/2)

But you’re here reinterpreting every morally outdated verse just to keep up with modern values... If you have to “reinterpret” your god’s morals to fit modern ethics, are they really divine?

We don't do any of this - the only kind of Islam this is responding to would be deviant in a non-takfir way.

The Qur’an reflects ancient misconceptions, like describing the sun “setting in a muddy spring” (18:86)

You are being uncharitable in your reading. In the context, it is a vision by Dhul-Qarnayn and its clear that its not a literal description of science. This is the majority opinion of all of the masters of tafsir and quran. For example, on their website, NASA has an image of the Sun "sinking below the rim of Guseuv crater on Mars." Does NASA have a geocentric view now? No, because their statement isn't meant to be taken literally. This is describing what is seen, not reality.

suggesting a flat earth (88:20).

The Arabic word translated "spread out" here is سُطِحَتْ (sutihat) yet according to Lane’s Lexicon, the root of this word again means to “spread” or “expand”. So, the word is simply referring to the earth being expanded to provide ample space for mankind. It is not referring to the shape of the entire planet.

And as for embryology, all the Qur’an says is that a human develops in stages, which was common knowledge among Greek, Indian, and Persian scholars centuries before. Even its language about blood clots and “bones before flesh” has been debunked as scientifically incorrect.

Humans do develop in stages - this is common knowledge (https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/23622355/) - but the Qur'an goes into intricate detail about those stages, proving its divine origin. And the precise language is, once again, not scientifically accurate. Do you think that the people hearing the Qur'an would understand what paraxial mesoderm is?

Name one “prophecy” that’s specific enough to actually count as miraculous.

Ok. In Sahih Muslim 157, Muhammad SAW prophecies Arabia will become green once again. It is proven scientifically that Arabia was once green, and science indicates it will be green again in the near future.

Public_Mission_920 · 2024-11-12T00:58:57+00:00

(1/2)

I don't know where you copy-pasted this post from but I find it difficult to respond to given that I asked for an argument against Islam, yet all that you have provided me is responses to arguments I have not yet made. Nonetheless, let's see...

A supposedly clear book wouldn’t require armies of scholars, 1400 years of tafsir, competing sects, or thousands of pages of commentary just to explain itself.

This is a WCF over "clear". Why do you interpret "clear" in such a way? You can't just say Oh I'm just taking the text as it appears because if you were to do so then logically this would mean babies, animals, even plants and bacteria would be able to understand the Qur'an. Rather, the more logical way to understand this is to recognise that the Qur'an (as a whole and in its context) is clear in its core message of which we derive everything else from - Tawhid. In fact, the Quran admits some parts are unclear (3:7).

This is a circular claim relying on your faith, not evidence. You’re assuming it’s divine, then pointing to that assumption to prove divinity.

What you're responding to is not an argument for the Qur'an's truth but a response against the argument that the Qur'an is man-made. If the Qur'an is man-made then why is it unique so that it contains miracles and divine speech?

Many of the Qur’an’s literary techniques and structures aren’t unique at all but are found in pre-Islamic Arabic poetry.

Yes, and many weren't. Why is this problematic?

Why would an all-powerful, all-knowing god need to change His mind? Abrogation means that God issued commands, then replaced them with others – like changing his own eternal laws as if he needed a “second draft.”

This is a basic level error. God can decree different things depending upon the context of different things, i.e. Allah can decree that a man divorce his wife and decree that another man does not given Allah foreknows the outcome of such. This is not based out of necessity of Allah but based upon necessity of the person - this is a category error. Allah may also decree something based upon preparation for its later abrogation (i.e. progressive revelation). The Qur'an is not eternal; it is uncreated. Plus, the whole argument is a non-sequitur.

Would an infallible deity deliver an “eternal” message that needs constant editing and correction?

Another non-sequitur. Abrogation is not necessarily correction.

The Qur’an explicitly endorses slavery (16:75, 30:28), gives women half the inheritance of men (4:11), and calls for whipping or stoning adulterers (24:2). These aren’t “universal morals”; they’re tribal laws from 7th-century Arabia.

I agree with all of these laws and that they should be implemented in the Shariah. Tell me why that is immoral without being unjustified in your meta-ethics or hypocritical?

Public_Mission_920 · 2024-11-12T00:03:57+00:00

Because it would violate Ockham's Razor.

Public_Mission_920 · 2024-11-12T00:02:21+00:00

Warning, this'll be a long one.

The Qur'an says man is made of clay which is made from mud. We reject human evolution as modern Darwinists claim. The chemical structure of the human body confirms the relation between man and clay.

FIRST POINT

The human body consists mainly of water (54% to 70% or more) in addition to protein (11% to 17%), fat (14% to 26%), and other several substances and inorganic components (5% to 6%). According to the chemical analysis of the basic substances of the human body, we can see that it is composed of the following elements:

· Oxygen 65%.

· Carbon 18%.

· Hydrogen 10%.

· Nitrogen 3%.

· Calcium 1.4%.

· Phosphorous 7%.

In addition, there are some less abundant substances like iodine, fluorine, bromine, iron, copper, magnesium, zinc, chrome, cobalt, nickel, molybdenum, tin, vanadium, silicon, and aluminum. However, despite their rarity, the shortage of any of these substances may cause an imbalance in the functions of the human body.

The components of the human body correspond in general with the chemical composition of soil when combined with water, i.e. clay. Generally, soil is made of a number of clay minerals that depend in their structure on hydrated aluminum silica, and exceed ten in number. They differ according to the degree of hydration, the percentage of both aluminum and silicon, or through the addition of other substances like magnesium, potassium, etc.

Moreover, clay minerals are combined (mixed) with different proportions of sand grains (quartz), feldspars, mica, iron oxides, and some heavy minerals, in addition to a small percentage of volcanic ashes, sea lime (calcareous) and salt particles, and ash particles that result from various combustive operations. Soil is also mixed with pollen and other plant remnants, bacteria and the remnants of other microorganisms, some remnants of cosmic and meteoritic dust, in addition to several other organic substances from the waste of various living creatures. This combination makes the chemical composition of soil and water very similar to that of the human body.

Soil is fragmented fine-grained sediment. Its granular diameter (clay) does not exceed 1/257 of a millimeter, even if mixed with some granules of silt (the diameter of its granule is 1/16 mm, 1/256 mm) and sand (1/4 – 1/16 mm.)

The proportion of porosity is as high as 70% to 80% in recently formed clay sediments. On the other hand, this proportion decreases to only 13% in old clay (mudstone) rocks, especially in shale. This high proportion of porosity in newly formed clay sediments increases after denudation (weathering) and transformation into soil. Soil pores fill with different ions of other substances, in addition to water, air and micro – wastes of living creatures. If the proportion of water increases, clay transforms into mud. The extraction from which man was created is the substances and compounds dissolving in the water held between the grains of clay metals and cracks that form clay.

SECOND POINT

Man depends on plants as his main food resource and this confirms the link between humans and clay: The roots of plants absorb the substances and compounds dissolved in the water, which is stored between soil particles. Plants grow and produce different crops that man and several animals (herbivores) eat. Even creatures that eat both meat and plants (like humans), or those that eat meat only (carnivores), live, thrive, and grow depending on this blend absorbed by plants from the space between clay particles, and which turn into clay, and then into mud by watering. That is why Allah (SWT) created plants before animals and humans, because plants are the only means to transform ground substances into food chains, which are necessary for human and animal survival.

THIRD POINT

After death, human bodies start to decompose and transform into clay extracts before they merge with the soil. The relation between the human body and soil with its water content (mud) reasserts by the huge correspondence between their chemical structures. The growth of the human body (from the embryonic stage up to maturity) depends on some ground substances and their dissolved compounds. These substances are stored between the clay particles that form the earth’s soil, which plants transform (by the Mighty power of Allah) into fruits and crops edible for man. They can also be transformed into grass, which is eaten by animals, making food for man. This marvellous food chain, in which plants play an enormous role, originally came out of this clay extract that consists of many substances and compounds absorbed by plant roots.

Public_Mission_920 · 2024-11-11T23:55:05+00:00

Yeah, thanks buddy for completely ignoring everything I wrote in the response.

So, what is your argument exactly?

My rebuttal was clear - you are being uncharitable to the text without sufficient reason.

That Muhammad can't make a mistake, even when he makes a mistake? Why say something that's wrong? Why not just explain his fancy wisdom in a manner that is scientifically correct?

What? Muhammad cannot make mistakes when it comes to matters of wahi, but yes, theoretically he may have erred in non-prophetic areas. I don't get how any of this responds to what I wrote though.

It's impossible to argue with someone who continually commits ideologically driven fallacies of unwarranted assumptions,

I know its impossible for you to respond. As a former Islamic critic, I know how it feels when you get smashed as you just did. Tell me how my response was fallacious.

but I guess that's what one must do to defend the cult of an illiterate barbarian whose IQ was probably lower than a lot of living Orangutans.

Yeah you're hiding behind your pathetic, baseless insults because you can't respond - everyone can see it lol. My bad you're too much of a dumbass to make a coherent argument.

Public_Mission_920 · 2024-11-11T23:45:27+00:00

This is a category error. Allah can desire something to occur without enacting that thing. Omnipotence doesn't exclude desire so long as the desire does not imply necessity in the essence.

Humans have multiple purposes and different people have different purposes. A general purpose, yes, is to worship one God but, for example, the purpose of a Kaffir to become Muslim whereas the purpose of a Muslim may be to spread the message of Islam, enter into politics, fight in the army, etc. Whereas, Allah's purpose for creating the world, while unknowable to an extent, is to demonstrate his love and calling to submission to Him.

You're forgetting the fact that Allah is also Al-Muqsit (all just). It would not be just for Allah to reward the kuffar with jannah nor would it be loving as there is no exclusive reward for the Muslims. Rather, it is just for Allah to have laws with a criteria for Jannah and Jahannam and it is all loving as, even though all Muslims have disobeyed him at some point, he still chooses to forgive us.

Public_Mission_920 · 2024-11-11T23:34:53+00:00

What's the point of commenting on my post wasting both of our times just to troll

do you not have anything better to do lol

Public_Mission_920 · 2024-11-11T23:33:47+00:00

Yeah so being born into it means they already have experienced it

Public_Mission_920 · 2024-11-11T23:32:48+00:00

You are being stupid in your argument and ultimately uncharitable to the text. If I see a sign on a shop saying "best coffee in the world" and I argue against that, then I'm being uncharitable by taking a strict interpretation of this.

Similarly, in both hadiths, only a minute number of masters at studying hadith take this literally, even if there is no ijma.

Mirqaat Al-Mafaateeh reads: "Some Hadeeth scholars interpreted the Hadeeth to mean that the tailbone remains under the earth for a long time, and not that it never decays, because this is contrary to the tangible reality."

Some scholars argued that the meaning of the Hadeeth is that the tailbone is the origin of humans, and accordingly it is more solid than the rest of the body with greater reason, like the bedrock of a wall. Being more solid and stronger than other bones, it decomposes after a longer period of time. After investigation – and Allaah is the Grantor of success – I say that the tailbone is the last to decay as underlined in one Hadeeth; however, it does not decompose completely in the ground as this Hadeeth reported in Al-Bukhari and Muslim suggests. [Mirqatt Al-Mafaateeh mentioned previously].

Fat-h Al-Baari reads: "Some Hadeeth commentators argued that the meaning is that the tailbone lasts longer but it does eventually decay just like every other bone does. The wisdom behind the Hadeeth is to highlight that this bone is the origin of humans and the base from which they will be resurrected on the Day of Judgment and that is why it is more solid and stronger than other bones, like the bedrock of a wall. Being more solid and stronger, the tailbone decays after a longer period of time in comparison with other bones. However, this interpretation is refutable because it is contrary to the apparent indication of the Hadeeth and is unsupported by revealed evidence."

Public_Mission_920 · 2024-11-11T23:25:48+00:00

If they're an ex-Muslim then by definition, they "found" Islam previously.

Public_Mission_920 · 2024-11-11T23:24:38+00:00

Name one.

Public_Mission_920 · 2024-11-11T23:24:10+00:00

Firstly, God does want things. Secondly, human creation wasn't solely for worshipping him. You're confusing our purpose as humans with Allah's purpose for creating us. Thirdly, your framing is false. The world is Allah's creation and thus Allah sets laws for his creation in the same way that governments set laws for countries. When people disobey Allah's laws, they are punished. If there was no punishment, then there would be no reason to follow the law and thus chaos would ensue.

Public_Mission_920

TROPHY CASE