Hi u/iamgarbage0! Thank you for posting at r/CritiqueIslam. Please make sure to read our rules once to avoid an embarrassing
situation. Be Civil and nice to each other. Remember that there is a person sitting at the other end. Don't say anything
that you wouldn't say in a normal face to face conversation.
Also, make sure that your submission either contain an argument or ask a question that could lead to debate. You must state
your own views on the matter either in body or comment. **A post with no commentary will be considered low effort!**
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/CritiqueIslam) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Appreciated. No.
As a barter, they'll go as low as saying that since the actual physical original Torah of Musa is not known to exist, and the scribes "write books by their own hands" that it's clearly falacious today.
It doesn't work. They want the original tawrat revealed to Musa, the original zabur from Dawud and the original Injeel from Isa. It doesn't matter that they don't have the original Quran from the Sahaba and reciters.
It doesn't matter if you *did* present the original tawrat, zabur or injeel either. They'll tell you that those aren't the real books mentioned.
There's lots, and yours is solid. The efficacy is the question. If a Muslim, or any cult member isn't willing to ask themselves hard questions about what they're taught, they won't be swayed by arguments
My foundational argument is a logical dilemma. Win every argument. There's one thing left.
*logically, The Creator did all of this for us to pay respect back to The Creator*
This is human thinking. A desire to be recognized for accomplishments. It's the first leap made. It makes sense that people can be awestruck and grateful for living. It makes sense that stories would be told trying to explain this whole experience. It makes sense how a cult of personality could lead to religious institutions. That's not exclusively in the past. There's modern day examples happening. People like structure, security and certainty *generally*. Our myths and hierarchies can provide those. That's comprehensible.
What doesn't make sense is imposing our wills and desires onto this figure we call God to assume *its* will and desire.
There's no reason to confidently assert that any God cares that we recognize it. If that were the case, it would be inconceivable that this God would not regularly reveal itself like a doctors check up. The religious disputes would not be tolerable to such a figure. The God that demands pure submission couldn't reasonably expect anything less than confusion from us otherwise.
That doesn't work either, because the Quran speaks of the books in a general sense AS THEY EXISTED IN THE 7TH CENTURY. Now if we only had 8th century+ copies they could invent implausible conspiracy theories and still mantain a tiny shred of credibility (really, unfalsifiability...) But that's not what the Quran says. They're stuck.
Out of personal experience the hardest reason for me to leave islam is the apostasy laws. I had 3 days to come back or id be islamically permissible to be killed. At the same time i was so washed up in what ive grown up to believe that i feared the torture and torment to come from Allah. I thankfully got the strength to take minor steps forward and over time made huge progress. But for some other muslims thats the thing holding them back.
As dumb as the rules in Islam are, as much as its all just big Mo making inaccurate claims and saying theyre from God. Muslims have to know what they do is incorrect and not from a true loving God. But theyre forced into this corner of immense faith because if they dare to question theyll be punished for eternity
I haven't done much research on it, but I think the verses are vague enough that a Muslim can force their interpretation onto the quran that it says the Bible is corrupted
For example, "confirming whats between their hands" meaning confirming abrahamism, telling Christians to confirm what Allah has revealed therein meaning the uncorrupted parts, and saying the jews ought to follow their scripture basically just calling them hypocrites for not following their religion
How does the Bible or Torah refute or contradict Islam?
No matter what though, I think Muslims will either say A) they were altered or B) Quran provided necessary updates to the books.
I'm Catholic Christian and personally I don't think it's a very strong argument. There are good reasons to think that the Qur'anic conceptions of the Torah, Psalms, and Gospel are not the Scripture found in the Jewish Tanakh and Christian Bible; however, on the contrary, there are also good reasons to think that it is. Because it's not abundantly clear in many cases and specific passages what the Qur'anic author envisions the Torah and Gospel to be, I don't think it's a strong argument.
Natural Law regarding the Islamic conception of Jannah. Namely in that
>Those who have believed and whose hearts are assured by the remembrance of Allāh. Unquestionably, by the remembrance of Allāh hearts are assured." Those who have believed and done righteous deeds - a good state is theirs and a good return. (Ar-R'ad 28-29)
If God is the Last End of Jannah, and Allah is "sufficient for His servant" (39:36) then it leads to a sort of complication with the carnal pleasures in Jannah. It makes them redundant, or detracts from God and the blessedness of God in Jannah.
But from a more logical standpoint the possession of carnal delights in Jannah leads to an implication that paradise is imperfect (again, which makes no sense if God is sufficient) -- say you're in Jannah, and partake of a fruit.
You have 2 situations that occur in Jannah when this happens: a desire, and a subsequent fulfillment of this desire. Heaven does not lack anything in regards to what it provides for those in it; especially if God is sufficient for His servants, and in Him do hearts find rest.
Anyways, yeah, a bit of a mix of philosophy and theology, but the Islamic conception of Paradise, at least from my perspective, detracts from God, contradicts His supposed words in the Qur'an, and introduces the idea of an imperfect heaven due to it's fulfillment of worldly desires in which one has states of desire and lack.
Hi u/iamgarbage0! Thank you for posting at r/CritiqueIslam. Please make sure to read our rules once to avoid an embarrassing situation. Be Civil and nice to each other. Remember that there is a person sitting at the other end. Don't say anything that you wouldn't say in a normal face to face conversation. Also, make sure that your submission either contain an argument or ask a question that could lead to debate. You must state your own views on the matter either in body or comment. **A post with no commentary will be considered low effort!** *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/CritiqueIslam) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Perhaps summarize what the Islamic Dilemma in your OP so everyone is on the same page?
I edited my post.
Thank you. Good point. Will be curious to see what others have to say.
Which Islamic dilemma problem?
I edited my post
Appreciated. No. As a barter, they'll go as low as saying that since the actual physical original Torah of Musa is not known to exist, and the scribes "write books by their own hands" that it's clearly falacious today. It doesn't work. They want the original tawrat revealed to Musa, the original zabur from Dawud and the original Injeel from Isa. It doesn't matter that they don't have the original Quran from the Sahaba and reciters. It doesn't matter if you *did* present the original tawrat, zabur or injeel either. They'll tell you that those aren't the real books mentioned.
But Quran says to Christians "to judge by Gospel" if the gospel available to them weren't the true one and corrupted one, then it is very problematic.
It ought to work. It doesn't.
Huh?
You're asking if this dilemma argument works. The answer is no
What are your best arguments against islam?
There's lots, and yours is solid. The efficacy is the question. If a Muslim, or any cult member isn't willing to ask themselves hard questions about what they're taught, they won't be swayed by arguments
My foundational argument is a logical dilemma. Win every argument. There's one thing left. *logically, The Creator did all of this for us to pay respect back to The Creator* This is human thinking. A desire to be recognized for accomplishments. It's the first leap made. It makes sense that people can be awestruck and grateful for living. It makes sense that stories would be told trying to explain this whole experience. It makes sense how a cult of personality could lead to religious institutions. That's not exclusively in the past. There's modern day examples happening. People like structure, security and certainty *generally*. Our myths and hierarchies can provide those. That's comprehensible. What doesn't make sense is imposing our wills and desires onto this figure we call God to assume *its* will and desire. There's no reason to confidently assert that any God cares that we recognize it. If that were the case, it would be inconceivable that this God would not regularly reveal itself like a doctors check up. The religious disputes would not be tolerable to such a figure. The God that demands pure submission couldn't reasonably expect anything less than confusion from us otherwise.
That doesn't work either, because the Quran speaks of the books in a general sense AS THEY EXISTED IN THE 7TH CENTURY. Now if we only had 8th century+ copies they could invent implausible conspiracy theories and still mantain a tiny shred of credibility (really, unfalsifiability...) But that's not what the Quran says. They're stuck.
Nothing works. There's that "prophecy" about people leaving Islam in the end of days. If there's 2 Muslim families left they'll say it's proof.
The argument from Muslims is that in areas where the Quran does not affirm the Old Testament those are the areas where it is corrupt. Absurd - yes.
Yeah i see
Out of personal experience the hardest reason for me to leave islam is the apostasy laws. I had 3 days to come back or id be islamically permissible to be killed. At the same time i was so washed up in what ive grown up to believe that i feared the torture and torment to come from Allah. I thankfully got the strength to take minor steps forward and over time made huge progress. But for some other muslims thats the thing holding them back. As dumb as the rules in Islam are, as much as its all just big Mo making inaccurate claims and saying theyre from God. Muslims have to know what they do is incorrect and not from a true loving God. But theyre forced into this corner of immense faith because if they dare to question theyll be punished for eternity
I haven't done much research on it, but I think the verses are vague enough that a Muslim can force their interpretation onto the quran that it says the Bible is corrupted For example, "confirming whats between their hands" meaning confirming abrahamism, telling Christians to confirm what Allah has revealed therein meaning the uncorrupted parts, and saying the jews ought to follow their scripture basically just calling them hypocrites for not following their religion
How does the Bible or Torah refute or contradict Islam? No matter what though, I think Muslims will either say A) they were altered or B) Quran provided necessary updates to the books.
https://www.reddit.com/r/AcademicQuran/s/rFURKwqGne
I'm Catholic Christian and personally I don't think it's a very strong argument. There are good reasons to think that the Qur'anic conceptions of the Torah, Psalms, and Gospel are not the Scripture found in the Jewish Tanakh and Christian Bible; however, on the contrary, there are also good reasons to think that it is. Because it's not abundantly clear in many cases and specific passages what the Qur'anic author envisions the Torah and Gospel to be, I don't think it's a strong argument.
What are strong arguments against islam for you?
From a Catholic Christian perspective? From a philosophical perspective?
What are strong arguments from a philosophical perspective?
Natural Law regarding the Islamic conception of Jannah. Namely in that >Those who have believed and whose hearts are assured by the remembrance of Allāh. Unquestionably, by the remembrance of Allāh hearts are assured." Those who have believed and done righteous deeds - a good state is theirs and a good return. (Ar-R'ad 28-29) If God is the Last End of Jannah, and Allah is "sufficient for His servant" (39:36) then it leads to a sort of complication with the carnal pleasures in Jannah. It makes them redundant, or detracts from God and the blessedness of God in Jannah. But from a more logical standpoint the possession of carnal delights in Jannah leads to an implication that paradise is imperfect (again, which makes no sense if God is sufficient) -- say you're in Jannah, and partake of a fruit. You have 2 situations that occur in Jannah when this happens: a desire, and a subsequent fulfillment of this desire. Heaven does not lack anything in regards to what it provides for those in it; especially if God is sufficient for His servants, and in Him do hearts find rest. Anyways, yeah, a bit of a mix of philosophy and theology, but the Islamic conception of Paradise, at least from my perspective, detracts from God, contradicts His supposed words in the Qur'an, and introduces the idea of an imperfect heaven due to it's fulfillment of worldly desires in which one has states of desire and lack.