Convert me if you can

[dqualk]

I believe that Christianity is more convincing than Islam, for one thing because it spread, and continues to spread without the use of violence. I am not saying that violence has never been used to spread Christianity. I am saying that early Chritsianiy spread during persecution, without being violent at all. And Christianity from the 18th century on has for the most part not used violent measn to spread Christianity and Christianity still continues to grow.

Also, the Quran contradicts itself and then when posed with this problem you say, well we take whatever was said latest to be true. But such a book should not contradict itself. Also, the Quran says to do things that I believe are intrinsically evil, like one it is the will of Allah that people be allowed to rape women they have conqured. Also, Muhammad himself broke one of his own rules by having more than three wives, one of which was 9 if I remember correctly.

The religion of Islam was birthed and flourshes with impure motives. Christianity, under its historical curcumstances was able to flourish with pure motives. Now the motives were muddled up when Christianity aquired power. But our first communities had pure motives, and that being a true love for God, neighbor and self. A lot of Islam seems to be a shaping of Judiasm and Christianity to the will of Muhammad so that Muhammad could better enjoy life. This goes back to impure motives. When Peter was cruficied upside down while living a life of charity, that is he took a vow to poverty and lived ot serve others, he certainly was not loving and proclaiming the Gospel for any selfish benefit, indeed he lost any kind of material benefit. It is true that peopel fight and die for Islam, but they do it to acquire material things. Muhammad conquered to spread Islamic "truth" but he also just happened to acquire great material wealth and power, including the enslavement of many, and 9 wives, one of which was a mere child.


Islam does not speak to my deepest yearning like Christianity does. I feel like it only answers one of my metaphysical needs and that is a sense of purpose. And in Islam that purpose is less than aduqate as it calls for submission, as if man's ultimate destiny is to submit. In Christianity man's ultimate destiny is to participate in the Triune love of God. To be truly free, to be in Truth and to truly love.


I could probably think of more reasons why I think XP is more convincing. With that said I hope I did not disrespect anyone. I have respect for Muslims and their beliefs. And I do not mean to be blasphemous, if I speak disrespect toward Allah or Muhammad I do not do with the intent of disrespect, I do it with the intent of speaking my convictions, although I recognize that this may be disrepectful but it is an accidental quality, and not an intended quality.

In Christ

[Rayaan]

Christianity offers bullshit as evidence but Islam presents absolutely nothing.

Quran + Hadiths + the life of Muhammad (pbuh) ≠ "absolutely nothing" (although you could say that they are bullshit as well).

I'm just curious. What evidence of "non-existence" do you think you would like to see?

Something which supports that all the accounts of Jesus, aside from his divine-like attributes, were only being made up by the early Christians.

[Ashendant]

Christianity offers bullshit as evidence but Islam presents absolutely nothing.

Quran + Hadiths + the life of Muhammad (pbuh) ≠ "absolutely nothing" (although you could say that they are bullshit as well).

I'm just curious. What evidence of "non-existence" do you think you would like to see?

Something which supports that all the accounts of Jesus, aside from his divine-like attributes, were only being made up by the early Christians.

I say that Muhammad was delusional, spending years in solitude is not good for the mind

[annatar]

Quran + Hadiths + the life of Muhammad (pbuh) ≠ "absolutely nothing" (although you could say that they are bullshit as well).

Either quran or hadiths are not reliable sources. So yes they are absolutely nothing as an argument. You can't prove quran with quran. Even if you try, it'll get you nowhere cos it has so many contradictions, stupid rules, violence, sexism and even an arithmetic error.
Hadiths are "life of muhammed" so you dont need to count them twice.. As a result you have nothing..

@DeistPaladin, just one reason to you for not to believe in islam; According to quran 1 sometimes is equal to 1,125... if you can believe such thing welcome aboard!

[Regens Küchl]

Islam's Claim: God spoke to Muhammad

Evidence Offered:
1. "Look how beautiful the poetry of the Koran is." (appeal to art)
2. "Islam has grown and so it must be true." (appeal to popularity)
3. "There's scientific knowledge in the Koran that Muhammad couldn't have known."

I have to add at least one more point to your list. It is a very very common muslim claim.
For example a prominent muslim scholar who claims that in the foreword of his commented Quran-translation would be Muhammad Asad.
http://www.amazon.de/Die-Botschaft-Koran...3491725402

4. "If you read the Quran and do not get his divinity or the beautyful poetry, or if you try to criticice it it is because you did not read it in the original arabic and because you do not feel like an arab.
What ? You have learned arabic to perfection, lived for many years in arabic towns, studied the Quran in the original arabic and you still do not get his divinity or the beautyful poetry, or try to criticice it ?
You see : that is because you did not spend also years and years among the arabic desert tribes, for only they are really fit to understand the Quran.
I have to disqualify you as a discutant on the Quran and I have to disqualify your critic. you are not fit to criticice the Quran, for if you did not do all of the above you cannot have really understood the Quran.
(That is if you are a critic - If you become a devote muslim you did understand it after all.)

This way muslims can disqualify 98 percent of all Quran-critics

[Rayaan]

I believe that Christianity is more convincing then Islam, for one thing because it spread, and continues to spread without the use of violence. I am not saying that violence has never been used to spread Christianity. I am saying that early Chritsianiy spread during persecution, without being violent at all. And Christianity from the 18th century on has for the most part not used violent measn to spread Christianity and Christianity still continues to grow.

You basically see Christianity in a better light than Islam for the reason mentioned above. That's perfectly okay.

With that said I hope I did not disrespect anyone. I have respect for Muslims and their beliefs. And I do not mean to be blasphemous, if I speak disrespect toward Allah or Muhammad I do not do with the intent of disrespect, I do it with the intent of speaking my convictions, although I recognize that this may be disrepectful but it is an accidental quality, and not an intended quality.

Yes, I don't think that you had an intention to disrespect me or anyone else.

I say that Muhammad was delusional, spending years in solitude is not good for the mind.

You never know, because meditating alone in a cave might have opened his heart and mind to be able to experience something much more powerful in the universe.

Either quran or hadiths are not reliable sources. So yes they are absolutely nothing as an argument. You can't prove quran with quran. Even if you try, it'll get you nowhere cos it has so many contradictions, stupid rules, violence, sexism and even an arithmetic error.
Hadiths are "life of muhammed" so you dont need to count them twice.. As a result you have nothing..

There are different degrees of reliability. It's not a black and white thing. So, they can still be used as an argument for Islam if they have the slightest reliability.

According to quran 1 sometimes is equal to 1,125... if you can believe such thing welcome aboard!

I think you are referring to the verses about the division of inheritance (again).
But this is not a mathematical error if you really understand the principles behind the inheritance issue.

See this: Islamic Inheritance Law: General Rules and Shares
And this: Quranic Rules of Inheritance: Do They Involve Mathematical Errors?

The first one is a thorough and detailed explanation of the inheritance laws according to the Quran and Sharia which has many charts and examples as well.

[annatar]

I think you are referring to the verses about the division of inheritance (again).

Yes. I am. And the reason why I am doing it is because it is a crucial mistake and you cant fix it without changing the rates given in quran.

You're telling me that I dont understand the principles of inheritance but you are not able to tell who understands or doesn't Because you admitted that you dont know that issue.
You said once that you are not familiar with this inharitage issue. And even if you don't know a shit about it you are defending it with sending me some links which I know you didn't even read..(you would see that they are not fixing that error but just changing the original rates of quran had you read!) That is nothing but a blind faith... And, If you think you can't understand quran without your imams interpretations, look these veses really carefully,

Yusuf, 1: Alif, Lam, Ra. These are the verses of the clear Book.
Al-hijr, 1: Alif, Lam, Ra. These are the verses of the Book and a clear Qur'an.
al-haj, 16: And thus have We sent the Qur'an down as verses of clear evidence and because Allah guides whom He intends.
......
....(there are a lot more like them)

So quran giving us clear instructions about the herritage and this instructions are imposible to use. Therefor, according to quran 1=1.125

There are different degrees of reliability. It's not a black and white thing. So, they can still be used as an argument for Islam if they have the slightest reliability.

Apart form their reliability which is none, you cant use a book to confirm itself. it is not an argument it is jus a fallacy. Telling that quran is right because quran says its right is not a valid argument. You need real evidence to prove your book. So quran+hadiths are not arguments..

[Rayaan]

Yusuf, 1: Alif, Lam, Ra. These are the verses of the clear Book.
Al-hijr, 1: Alif, Lam, Ra. These are the verses of the Book and a clear Qur'an.
al-haj, 16: And thus have We sent the Qur'an down as verses of clear evidence and because Allah guides whom He intends.
......
....(there are a lot more like them)

Yes, but these verses don't necessarily mean that every single verse in the Quran is going to be crystal clear to you after reading them the first time. There are certain verse that require a greater analysis than others to be understood within the proper context. So, there are two category of verses in the Quran which are called "muhkam" and "muttashaabih." The muhkam verses are clear in and of themselves whereas the muttashaabih verses are those which need to be interpreted in relation to other verses in the Quran (which are the mukham verses).

There is a specific verse in the Quran about this, which says:

“It is He Who has sent down to you (O Muhammad) the Book. In it are verses that are entirely clear (mukham); they are the foundations of the Book; and others not entirely clear (muttashaabih). So as for those in whose hearts there is a deviation (from the truth) they follow that which is not entirely clear thereof, seeking confusion and chaos (Al-Fitnah) and seeking for its interpretation, but none knows its interpretation save Allaah. And those who are firmly grounded in knowledge say: 'We believe in it; the whole of it (clear and unclear verses) are from our Lord.' And none receive admonition except men of understanding." - (Surah 3:07)

The entirely clear verses are those which have been clearly explained to establish what things are permissible and what things are impermissible (halal and haraam), to state the punishments and rewards, to command or to prohibit, to inform or to give an example, to advise or to admonish, etc. Then, the Quran says that these entirely clear verses are the foundation of the Book, meaning that they are the basis of the Book that contains the pillars of the religion and what people need to know in matters of religion and their responsibilities in matters of this life and also the afterlife. These clear verses are called the "foundation of the Book" in Surah 3:07 because they are the majority of the Quran, and therefore, it is not incorrect to say that the Quran as a whole is a clear book also.

The point is that the majority of the verses in the Quran are plain and clear in their meanings. The others, however, are a little more vague. Some people will try to interpret those verses without having a sufficient knowledge of the Quran and then they will get the wrong meanings out of the verses. This can possibly lead them into misguidance or even disbelief, and then, they will try to confuse the other Muslims also and they will try to take them away from Islam.

[Oldandeasilyconfused]

for one thing because it spread, and continues to spread without the use of violence

Oh please!

Mind boggling,willful ignorance or barefaced lie?

Historically Christians have been murdering the opposition, critics and any who dared question its superstitions for at least 1500 years*. Some Christians still do if they can.Murdering gays and abortion doctors for example. I won't even start on the Crusades,the Inquisition,The Reformation or Counter Reformation,plus centuries of rabbid hatred towards and Pogroms of the Jews. The Holocaust simply would not have been possible without a thousand year tradition of Christian antisemitism.

As a matter of historical record,Islam has generally been less violent more tolerant,and more honourable in war than Christianity.

Christianity is indeed growing in some third world countries----- poverty,ignorance ,superstition/religion are siblings. It's no coincidence that religion is declines the more affluent and educated a society becomes.


Both Christianity and Islam are faith based systems ( belief without evidence). The Bible is the mythology of Christianity,the Qur'an the mythology of Islam. Arguing about their relative credibility on an atheist forum is pretty silly.

00000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000
*the earliest example I can think of is the murder by Christians of Hypatia of Alexandria in 415 CE.

Hypatia (play /haɪˈpeɪʃə/; Greek: Ὑπατία, Hypatía; born between AD 350 and 370; died March 415) was a Greek[1][2] scholar from Alexandria, Egypt, considered the first notable woman in mathematics,[3][4][5] who also taught philosophy and astronomy.[6] She lived in Roman Egypt, and was killed by a Christian mob who accused her of causing religious turmoil.[7] Some suggest that her murder marked the end of what is traditionally known as Classical antiquity,[8][9] although others such as Maria Dzielska and Christian Wildberg observe that Hellenistic philosophy continued to flourish in the 5th and 6th centuries, Wildberg suggests until the age of Justinian.[10][11

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hypatia_of_alexandria

[Rayaan]

Historically Christians have been murdering the opposition, critics and any who dared question its superstitions for at least 1500 years*. Some Christians still do if they can.Murdering gays and abortion doctors for example. I won't even start on the Crusades,the Inquisition,The Reformation or Counter Reformation,plus centuries of rabbid hatred towards and Pogroms of the Jews. The Holocaust simply would not have been possible without a thousand year tradition of Christian antisemitism.

As a matter of historical record,Islam has generally been less violent more tolerant,and more honourable in war than Christianity.

Interesting, I never thought of Christianity like that before ...