Islam; a religion in crisis

[Captain Scarlet]

1) Its pious and humourless - a defence mechanism from ridicule, to stop people calling it names and offending it.

2) Self styled righteousness - the follower can't wait to say "you will see" as if someday we will find out all along they were right and there is no room for doubt. Scary!

3) It hates itself - for being a self evident plagarism of previous works, meaning if its true god was incompetent for not getting it right in the first place but more likely its of course false and re-heated from previous judeo-christian an arabic pagan cults centred on moon worship.

To hide its innate sense of inferiority, it has to erect a supeficial facade of superiority. Is the stench of intolerance from Islam (embedded within its own texts), a sign of its own weakness and has it no cure but to become ever more intolerant until it implodes?

[Minimalist]

The only crisis those shitheads would have is if there was a shortage of rocks to throw.


They are proud of the rest of their nonsense. In that, they are indistinguishable from xtians.

[theVOID]

They're only indistinguishable until you draw a certain figure..

[DeistPaladin]

3) It hates itself - for being a self evident plagarism of previous works, meaning if its true god was incompetent for not getting it right in the first place but more likely its of course false and re-heated from previous judeo-christian an arabic pagan cults centred on moon worship.

Give the devil his due, Christianity presents a pretty slick package that might fool the uneducated. They present a variety of supposed "eye-witness accounts" and a few doctored pieces of evidence like the TF. Sure, we see through it but you have to read the Bible with a critical eye and do some digging into the questionable history to really see the sham for what it is. Since most Christians never even read the Bible, never mind with a critical eye, it's not hard to see how some can be taken in by the fraud.

Islam is a bit more crude. I can sum it up in seven words: "Some guy claimed God spoke to him".

That's it. Not only is there no evidence, there's not even any faux evidence as with Christianity. No made-up "eye-witnesses". No holes in the ground said to be an "empty tomb". No fabricated artifacts. No forged historical documents. No OT scripture passages wrenched out of context to justify the pagan influences. No folklore about persecuted early believers. Even Lee Strobel couldn't work with this story.

But it gets shakier than that, as your last point underscores. Islam is the Johnny-come-lately to the dance. It turns out the Jews and Christians had gotten it all wrong for thousands of years and God does nothing to correct them. Instead, he talks to some guy in another land while he's alone in a cave. As if that would solve the problem better than sending Jesus back to Rome to set the wayward Christians straight.

Why would anyone not brainwashed from childhood ever convert to this religion?

[Anomalocaris]

Islam is a bit more crude. I can sum it up in seven words: "Some guy claimed God spoke to him".

........

Islam is the Johnny-come-lately to the dance.

.......

Why would anyone not brainwashed from childhood ever convert to this religion?

You mean Islam is a lot like Mormonism.

[Rayaan]

This is a book for those of you who claim that the Quran was plagiarized:

"The History of the Quranic Text, from Revelation to Compilation: A Comparative Study with the Old and New Testaments," by Muhammad Mustafa Al-Azami

http://www.amazon.co.uk/History-Quranic-...1872531652

You can also download it from here: http://www.megaupload.com/?d=8MF5SKDE

[Tiberius]

Written by a Muslim. No chance of bias there at all.

This is the problem with such claims; people will believe the evidence that supports their pre-conceived ideas and reject any that oppose them.

[DeistPaladin]

You mean Islam is a lot like Mormonism.

Exactly like Mormonism.

One prophet spoke to God in a cave, the other in a forest.

Both prophets were told that the previous religions had gotten it all wrong.

Both prophets were given a new book by an angel.

Both prophets were told to lead people back to the light.

[Rayaan]

Written by a Muslim. No chance of bias there at all.

This is the problem with such claims; people will believe the evidence that supports their pre-conceived ideas and reject any that oppose them.

It's also a bias to think that a book is going to be biased just because it was written by a Muslim.

You should first know about the author's intellectual history, his level of scholarship, what other books he has written, what the readers have said about him, and the soundness of his arguments, before making an assumption that the author is biased in his approach to the Quran. And more importantly, it is more appropriate to determine if there is any bias in the book by examining the work itself as opposed to looking at the author's background only.

[downbeatplumb]

Its hard to take seriously any of the religious texts.

They all claim to be inspired by something we don't believe in.

Mohammed (if he existed) was illiterate so would not have read the new and old testaments. He would have known the 'meat' of the religions. It would be like living in Iran and not knowing anything about Islam if he didn't.

So any religion he founded as a copy would be similar but not exact, now what do we see when we look at Islam.......