I heard pretty much every possible argument against Islam and the only one that I can’t sufficiently rebuttal is the 9 year old wife thing, but I wanna hear something I haven’t heard before and rebuttled, and people overlook all the reasons islam is right, I’ll give one reason why Islam is right and start there.
First, the Quran was orally transmitted and the prophet was illiterate, whether you Believe angel jibreel revealed it or not doesn’t change the fact that it was completely oral. Now if you look at how it was revealed overtime, you can see the literary impossibilities with it being completely oral and revealed at specific times over the span of the illiterate prophets life time. It’s literally logically impossible to have ring composition in a orally transmitted chapter with each of its parts being revealed overtime pertaining to varying completely random unplanned situations unless the author could tell the future. If you don’t wanna rebuttal this then just give me a reasons why Islam is totally wrong.
Why did God find it more important to teach his prophet a Lesson about not saying Inshallah then convincing the Jews about the true word?
You need to watch dr. Adnan ibrahim. He prove that islam is right.
As a Muslim why do you believe God allows evil to exist?
The main reason why Islam is wrong is that there isn’t any god.
My argument is the one shouldn’t follow any religion, neither the Bible nor quran, because u end up giving authority to those things and they in return make u biased and blind, and the one who’s concerned about truth won’t follow or blindly agree with anything they see or hear. See if u can live a religion Esoterically, don’t let any religion, any dogma any fear limit your free and full potential.
It seems awfully convenient that the only real arguments for the Quran are based around intricacies in a language mostly spoken by people who believe it.
Here’s my attempt:
If the Quran is a perfect text completely dictated by a God, why are there people who disagree over what it means? How can there be groups of people that understand the text so differently that some will use violence against each other for how differently they interpret it? Since people can disagree about what it says, there is a theoretically better version of the text that is able to be understood by more people. This in itself disproves it being a perfect text.
Now, I purely have respect for other people’s beliefs. I’m just using an argument that I have to use when talking to my fellow Christians, some of whom think that the Bible is perfect.
>you can see the literary impossibilities with it being completely oral and revealed at specific times over the span of the illiterate prophets life time. It’s literally logically impossible to have ring composition in a orally transmitted chapter with each of its parts being revealed overtime pertaining to varying completely random unplanned situations unless the author could tell the future.
The linguistic miracle argument for the supposed divinity of the Quran is easy to rebut.
There are multiple instances of Sanskrit literature praising Hindu deities that are mindbogglingly amazing. Here is one: A palindromic sentence that praises Lord Rama when read in one direction and praises Lord Krishna when read in the other direction — simultaneously being rhythmic and musical
https://fb.watch/e_1qXQZiwt/
Can Quran/Arabic match this?
There is a song praising Surya — the sun God which when sun in the right Sanskrit metre takes exactly 8:19 seconds to complete which is also the time it takes for the light from the Sun to reach earth.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6oIrgLehqKA
Why are the above Hindu linguistic miracles not worth your while, while Arabic Quranic miracles should be worth our while?
The ring, or chiastic, structure is not unique to the Quran. The Iliad and Odyssey both have a chiastic structure, but we don’t use that as evidence that Homer was divinely inspired. The flood myth in Genesis has a chiastic structure of A-B-C…X…C’-B’-A’. A story using a literary technique isn’t strong evidence of anything.
> It’s literally logically impossible to have ring composition in a orally transmitted chapter with each of its parts being revealed overtime pertaining to varying completely random unplanned situations unless the author could tell the future
Or alternative, there is nothing strange about it if is either a literary composition from the beginning, or was literarily embellished later.
>Now if you look at how it was revealed overtime, you can see the literary impossibilities with it being completely oral and revealed at specific times over the span of the illiterate prophets life time. It’s literally logically impossible to have ring composition in a orally transmitted chapter with each of its parts being revealed overtime pertaining to varying completely random unplanned situations unless the author could tell the future.
I think you need to justify this claim with specifics. To me it is simply a poorly written bunch of preaching which doesn’t “ring true” to me at either a rational or emotional level. I have no problem at all believing the person who composed it was illiterate.
But at any rate, Islam is “wrong” for the same reason other Abrahamic religions are wrong: the God described in that religion does not exist.
Why couldn’t an illiterate person speak passages out loud at different times of his or her life and then have those passages written down?
You have no proof that it was oral, that if it was oral it stayed as the same story (which would be a extremely haed thing to prove) nor that the written book is a faithful, undoctored transcription of said oral tale. In that sense ring composition is fairly feeble as a proof for divinity (not to mention that its not impossible under the conditions you mention, just very, very difficult)
More interestingly you can look into old judaic pre christian assyrian and persian myths and find the historical roots of the islam as a mutation and adoption of pre existing beliefs. You can follow the whole process way before its inception by following the religions that inspired islam, which pretty much proves it not as a novel, divinely inspired fairh but a derivative work.
>just give me a reasons why Islam is totally wrong.
I wouldn’t go that far with my reasoning, just that you can’t prove Islam is right. So here’s my rebuttal. Prove to me that Satan couldn’t have written the Qur’an. Satan could be more capable of literary prowess than humans albeit less capable than God if both exist and all you assert is that people couldn’t make it. Your contention that it must come from God requires you to demonstrate that other beings lesser than God but more capable than humans couldn’t fabricate the Qur’an.
Since you believe in a being that’s capable of more than we understand, your argument falls apart when confronted with the possibility that someone else like Satan might be able to construct a book better than humans. As to why Satan would write the Qur’an, you can ask me but I’ll only be able to guess the mind of someone islamists have yet to prove exists. I’m only using Satan as a rebuttal since you assert some cosmic unknown entity came up with your holy book.
So my reply is to OP, to avoid replying on 100 different people will only reply back to OP.
So regarding the marriage thing.
First, religion aside, this argument would be similar to saying in 100 years when all people turn vegans, some of the new vegan would come up with the argument that 100 years ago Muslims were murderer cause they were eating meat. Judging a community based on a different socio-political argument is either delusional or malicious, which is very evident by fact that this comes mostly from nation who belive that Mary the mother of Jesus got pregnant with Jesus when she was 12 years old, and make stories about Romeo and juliet who was 13 years old, then make big fuzz about Prophet mohammed.
Second during that era of time, it was accepted and agreed upon that anyone reached the age of puberity can get married. And that is shown in so many history of western kings and queens, and even in the life story of the Prophet him self. Aysha was actually engaged before marriage to Prophet muhammed to someone else, and another wife to the Prophet safeyah, who was an ex-jew and married to the Prophet at age 12, was already married and divorced TWICE before the Prophet married her at age 12. And this is also evident from the fact that this argument never came till this recent era, no western nation or even the non believers during Prophet era have said anything about that marriage.
Add to that, the average age for people during that time reached 20 something during certain times, so marrying at age of 18 to die while you are 20 something, or to have fewer number of fertility years to have kids when majority of kids at that era are dieing is just plain stupid, and would result in extinction. In Islam there is no age for marriage, once the person reached puberty if he/she are suitable mentally and financially they can get married. Doesn’t matter if the person is 30 or 10.
Finally, how that affected Aysha her self. What Aysha said and did after the prophets Death, and what is documented is that Aysha wanted to be burried beside the Prophet Muhammed and he died with his head in her lap and last thing Aysha her self said, was that the (Sewak, similar to tooth brush) was in her mouth first to make it soft for Prophet muhammed and that was the most precious thing to her heart. Not a single mention of anything said or done by aysha that would suggest she was married against her own will, or that this marriage resulted in any trauma for her.
>It’s literally logically impossible to have ring composition in a orally transmitted chapter with each of its parts being revealed overtime pertaining to varying completely random unplanned situations unless the author could tell the future.
Or unless the author could, idk, read or remember the already-told parts to make the new ones fit?
Saying it has ring composition in it is probably the dumbest thing I have ever heard.
It’s like saying the ancient Greeks knew Maxwell’s equations because Zeus threw lightning bolts, which are explained the laws of electromagnetic equations.
>literary impossibilities
If I told you there is a greek epic poem that is written in dactylic hexameter while technically due to it’s age and location we would expect it to be written in trochaic tetrameter catalectic, *and then* I told you that clearly the greek gods imbued the poet with the power of time travel, would you accept that?
Let’s say you have no explanation for that literary weirdness. Would you instantly accept my wild explanation or would you go “huh, there must be some things we don’t fully understand about greek poetry, cool”?
Can you give a specific example of a ring composition in the Quran which you have strong evidence was revealed by Mohammed over a period of time with some of those parts being revealed before the events took place?
>First, the Quran was orally transmitted and the prophet was illiterate
Yes, that would be the only way for illiterate people to transmit it.
>Now if you look at how it was revealed overtime,
I can’t, all I have is what someone wrote down after the oral tradition.
>you can see the literary impossibilities with it being completely oral and revealed at specific times over the span of the illiterate prophets life time.
Muslim apologists say this all the time but whenever they present an example it’s always possible.
>It’s literally logically impossible to have ring composition in a orally transmitted chapter with each of its parts being revealed overtime pertaining to varying completely random unplanned situations unless the author could tell the future.
It’s not. Hafiz memorize the Qu’ran. They could say it to someone who can write it down. There’s nothing impossible about this.
What I expect you mean is that it’s not possible for someone to compose or improvise the text and someone write it down. Maybe, I dunno. But I don’t know that anyone did compose or improvise the text or anything about its composition. All we have is the text and stories people tell about its origin.
>If you don’t wanna rebuttal this then just give me a reasons why Islam is totally wrong.
I don’t know if it’s totally wrong. I don’t believe an angel dictated it or its divine or particularly interesting, no more than the other sacred texts people insist are divine.
It seems the only argument is that it’s too hard to image be any humans could have composed it, I don’t see why not, if humans can understand it’s structure, I don’t see why they couldn’t compose it.
Non Sequitur: miraculous origins of a holy book do not necessarily imply an all-powerful creator god. Your god could be powerful enough to inspire a holy book in miraculous circumstances yet still be relatively not powerful. Your god could simply be mistaken about their nature or, worst case scenario, lying in exchange for greater power over mortals.
To me it’s not that *just* *Islam is wrong*, it’s that they’re all wrong.
A guy in the middle east has a book orally described to him by an angel and you take that as fact.
A guy in the US gets visited by an angel called Moroni who tells him about some gold plates and a magic translation stone and he gets the book of Mormon.
Yet, you call bullshit on the book of Mormon?
Even though it’s just as preposterous as your divine claims.
Plenty of actors have memorized the complete works of Shakespeare.
The reason so many old books rhyme is so that they are easy to memorize.
23 years is plenty of time to create a book the size of the Quran.
And the sun doesn’t set in a muddy pond (18:86).
What if the prophet lied about being illiterate? Or what if that story is completely made up? Why did God convey his message through the prophet then chose to be silent ever since?
There’s a lot as to why Islam is wrong like every religion.
> First, the Quran was orally transmitted and the prophet was illiterate
Was he? There’s a fair amount of evidence that suggests Mohammad wasn’t illiterate but that this was, instead, a myth created long after his death. Eg https://www.jstor.org/stable/25728052
Even if he was, what do you mean by “each of its parts being revealed overtime pertaining to varying completely random unplanned situations unless the author could tell the future.” What parts of the Quran do you see as predictions of the future?
Islam denies the crucifixion happened. That’s damning enough.
But any religion that tells you not to listen to music, have certain kinds of consensual sex with your spouse, draw/paint people, or demand you learn arabic in your free time or be punished isn’t exactly a great religion to follow.
But what can you expect from a religion founded from an epileptic warlord.
>I heard pretty much every possible argument against Islam and the only one that I can’t sufficiently rebuttal is the 9 year old wife thing
Then you’re ignoring the burden of proof. You’re claiming it’s right, you have the burden to show that it is in fact right. We don’t have the burden to show it’s wrong.
The Quran was written in the 7th century. Was it written by a man (or men) who lived in that time, or was it written by the Creator of the Universe?
Asking people to believe it has supernatural origins is a tough sell. Especially since everything in the book reflects what 7th century people believed about Nature.
Imagine what a book written by the creator of the universe COULD have contained.
– germ theory of disease
– earth and the planets orbit the sun. And the math to prove it (Newtonian physics)
– cosmological knowledge (space and time are the same thing, relativity)
– economic blueprint to prevent all war (sanctions instead of swords)
– medical knowledge, like the existence of anesthesia to make surgery possible
– slavery is immoral
You’ve heard apologists argue that this verse here and this verse there can be interpreted to show that the Quran hints at some now-understood scientific truth.
But it would have been irrefutable proof of divine origin if, say, it had shroëdinger’s equation and Allah said “when you understand this you will better understand the complexities of my creation”
Anyway, I don’t see anything in the Quran that couldn’t have been written by 7th century human poets.
>It’s literally logically impossible to have ring composition in a orally transmitted chapter with each of its parts being revealed overtime pertaining to varying completely random unplanned situations unless the author could tell the future.
…every work is written “over time”. You don’t need to be able to tell the future, you just need to be aware of what you already wrote.
at the end of the day it comes down to faith.
an alternate version of history where people live for hundreds of years, where spacetime is subject to change, where sorcerers are a norm, where magical beings exist and other Outlandish things are seen as normal.
if you believe in Allah then None of those things seem an impossibility.
if you don’t believe then those things seem impossible or one could even ascribe them to other factors.
Well a lot of the Koran is cribbed from other myths so there is that. The fact that the prophet has sex with a 9 yr old doesn’t seem to be very godly.
I’m sorry to tell you, but there are rebuttals to your “rebuttals”. You can’t just find an apologetic answer and consider the problem solved. You have to win debates with critics of Islam. What is your rebuttal to evolution? Are you ignorantly denying established science or heretically re-interpreting Islam?
And your argument is totally wrong. Firstly, there are hadiths about Muhammad’s scribes and also there are hadiths where Muhammad himself writes stuff. Also Waraqa ibn Nawfal was writing before Islam. And hadiths are from the 9th century, so I wouldn’t even use them talking about historical Muhammad. There’s no ring composition – the “ring composition” is just an interpretation by later Muslims. And Muhammad supposedly had the whole Quran in memory and was pondering the verses every day and he could make any composition he wanted. And I don’t know how can you believe that the Quran is eternal word of god, when Muhammad was “revealing” verses in response to random events happening in his life.
That seems a very odd argument to say that you can’t rebut. It makes me wonder if you are actually a Muslim.
I would say that the biggest way that Islam is wrong is that it claims there is a God and there is no evidence for such God. All the other stuff is secondary at best.
How can you rebut that? Hint: providing objective, verifiable, strong evidence for your God would be the best way to go about it.
If ring composition is impossible in a work that is orally transmitted over time, why would that make Islam more likely to be true? It rather makes it seem that the Quran was not orally transmitted. Of course Muhammad surely did say many profound and inspiring things that he claimed had come from God, but the ring composition seems to show that the words of Muhammad did not survive unaltered through the oral transmission, but instead they were improved and organized by later Muslims into a ring composition. It seems that the Quran is largely the work of literate and educated later Muslims, and not just a transcription of Muhammad’s words.
> Now if you look at how it was revealed overtime, you can see the literary impossibilities with it being completely oral and revealed at specific times over the span of the illiterate prophets life time.
Why is that impossible? Are you saying it’s impossible to hold a complex story line in your head? What is the impossibility?
> It’s literally logically impossible…
This is just complete bullshit. Unless you mean ‘literally’ to be figuratively, or ‘logically impossible’ to mean really hard.
Chapters were assembled after, the authors collected quotes and stories that frequently got details wrong and outright contradicted one another (various hadiths). Muhammad wasn’t listing off verse by verse so what does its structure matter.
I think several practices show it’s not divine. The prior pagan practices of the Hajj, stone idolatry, stories that are not original but cultural stories (Jesus as a child bringing clay birds to life from the Infancy Gospel of Thomas, the Cave of the Seven Sleepers, etc), and the inclusion of people mocking him for being a gullible rube (9.61) makes it quite clear to me.