What is your best argument to refute islam

54yo muhammad put his pp inside 9yo aisha
also, the koran is a pile of shit
explain what is going on in chapter 66 without going to another source.
oh wait! you can't?
so, allah's perfect book needs a bunch of other imperfect books to be explained?
eat shit.

Abraham was a schizo freak who cut into his sons dick for magic brownie points. Being downstream from that is even more retarded, you're all semites to me.

>>17867638
Aisha was 19

Isaac creampied rebecca when she was 3

the judeochristian pile of shit know as the bible can't even define what exactly is a trinity without going schizo mode

Islam is the truth

>>17867649
Who gave you an opinion? half your country is inbred lmao

Don't care about refuting it, they can bomb themselves into the stone age down in the -stan's for all I care. Just get them out of my nation.

>>17867649
Rebecca wasn’t 3

>>17867649
Aisha was 6 when your pervert "prophet" started groping and fingering her.

>>17867653
If you mean Rebecca's age, it's from rabbinic debate where one rabbi said that Rebbeca was 3 because of assumption that no time had passed between passages. Even other rabbis knew he was wrong.
If our Paki friend had read the Bible, he would see that Rebecca:
>is described as 'young woman'
>draws multiple jars of water from the well
>speaks in correct sentences
>is asked for her informed consent
and overall is described as an adult, not a toddler.
However muslims look for any deflection they can find; for they cannot defend.

>>17867671
I actually don't give a rat's ass. I'm the guy that called abraham a schizo anyway.

The Old Testament prophecy points to Christ the church and prefigures the rites sacrifices Mass liturgy and practices of the church, that it would convert the 4th empire according to Daniel’s prophecy.

There is nothing about Muhammad. Except maybe a vague promise that ishmael would also be a big nation one day if we were to say Arabs are ishmaelites. But nothing about conning any religion or prophet from Arabia or that the church would change so it would need a prophet to fix things.

Islamic powers are prefigured by old etsmanet stories and paralleled with the philistines and Assyrians against Israel. Like with the battle of the horns of hattin paralleling battle of aphec, or Assyrian siege of Jerusalem paralleling ottoman siege of Vienna. They are the paralleled version of the enemies of the people of God the church in the New Testament period.

Muhammad changed his doctrines to fit his own lifestyle like banning adoption and make divorce legal to marry his cousin, he wanted to commit suicide, pedophilia, sex addict type of coomer, he said the Jewish law was still in effect and for everyone but he picked and chose from which Jewish laws to practice and its incomplete. And the Jewish laws weren’t mandatory morally for every ethnic group God only intended Jews to not eat pork, circumsize…etc not everyone, made heaven a sensual experience rather than spiritual,

>>17867635 (OP)
None. Islam is a state of mind, but most people, particularly atheists - even those claiming to be Muslims - don't get it.

>>17867671
>inb4 toddlers were built different back then

>>17867635 (OP)
muslims are brown and smelly and therefore retarded

>>17867635 (OP)
1. Muhammad was killed by being poisoned from a Jewness whom he enslaved, if he truly was a prophet, Allah would've let that happen
2. Muhammad lost battles before, almost dying in one of them in fact
3. The Quran contains nonsensical math when it comes to calculating inheritance percentages, it doesn't add up to 100 percent

>>17867635 (OP)

>>17867779
Many are saying this

David wood video “why Muslims pray to Muhammed”

>>17867635 (OP)
Upon close examination, literally every single aspect of islam reveals its falsehood. That in itself is the greatest argument.

>>17867846
>>17868015
>>17867779
>>17867638

>>17867635 (OP)
For real, it has no magical element, Mohammed was too much of a perfect candidate to start a religion.
For example Jesus is a bizarre figure to start a religion around which makes it less likely to be fraudulent. A warlord visionary who was often alone, thoughtful, and strategically minded just seems like someone who would start a religion.
There’s no magic to it, no mythology, it’s like if desert people tried to create a religion. Which is what happened.

>>17868290
>muslim thinks his impotent meme makes up for his lack of intellect

>>17867635 (OP)
Quran claims to be perfect yet has scientific errors (embryology, mountains as "pegs," sun setting in mud). Muhammad’s "perfect moral example" includes child marriage, slavery, and mass murder. Islam spread by conquest, not truth... Why would God need armies? Zero contemporary non-Muslim sources confirming early Islam’s claims.

>>17867635 (OP)
Muhammad's in the Bible read it for yourself:
2 Peter 2
>But false prophets also arose among the people, just as there will be false teachers among you, who will secretly bring in destructive opinions. They will even deny the Master who bought them—bringing swift destruction on themselves. 2 Even so, many will follow their licentious ways, and because of these teachers[a] the way of truth will be maligned. 3 And in their greed they will exploit you with deceptive words. Their condemnation, pronounced against them long ago, has not been idle, and their destruction is not asleep.
Galatians 1:8-9
>But even if we or an angel from heaven should preach to you a gospel contrary to the one we preached to you, let him be accursed. As we have said before, so now I say again: If anyone is preaching to you a gospel contrary to the one you received, let him be accursed.
And with that, Islam is done for.

>>17867635 (OP)
Those idiots aren't supposed to be worshiping a cube and slaughtering those people for whom Jesus is the messiah. Muhammad would personally kick the shit out of them if he was alive today and knew how far off the path those abominations have fallen.

Look up how Muhammad died.

>>17868315
Muhammad became a warlord after he started his prophethood, not before. The people he preached to were mainly Jews, Christians, and other monotheists so that is why Islam has many elements from Judaism, Christianity, and preexisting rituals from traditional Arab paganism. ("pagan" but they were for the most part monotheistic by the time of Muhammad)
Muhammad was described to be an illiterate merchant before his prophethood, so I honestly doubt that he's the perfect candidate for a cult leader. I'd argue that the reason why he was successful was due to his pandering to Jews, Christians, and monotheists in general.
Jesus is likewise similar in the way that he pandered to his Jewish environment. Later those Jewish followers transformed him into what he is now in Christianity, likely again to pander to a growing Jesus movement that could've died in its tracks if somebody didn't claim that he resurrected.

Nothing really magical about either of them.

>>17867638
The Quran explicitly said Aisha wasn't a virgin when she married the prophet, sadly most Muslims follow hadiths books more than the Quran

>>17867635 (OP)
Luv me bacon

>>17867635 (OP)
If Islam good then why Pakistan capital say Islambad?

>>17867635 (OP)
>What is your best argument to refute islam
Galatians 1:8-9

>But even if we or an angel from heaven should preach to you a gospel contrary to the one we preached to you, let him be accursed. As we have said before, so now I say again: If anyone is preaching to you a gospel contrary to the one you received, let him be accursed.

>>17868357
>The people he preached to were mainly Jews, Christians
BS, the final revelation was for how to deal with those not called to be saved in Christ. Death is their due but allowing their service to and worship of God was suggested as an alternative for those who would submit to the Lord.

God curses those who curse Israel. QED

>>17868420
You're saying this as if it's impossible for a Christian to give up on Christianity and convert to another religion. We do know there were Christians in pre-Islamic Arabia as they would pray to Jesus by writing on rocks in the same style their pagan ancestors would when praying to their gods, and the Quran borrows from Christian literature and talks much about Jesus and Mary. Muhammad wouldn't bring Jesus or Mary up or even take from their literature if he was not trying to preach to Christians as well.

>>17867635 (OP)
The fact that in every single aspect it matches a system produced by a posessed warlord rather than a divinely inspired prophet.

1/ It relies on a message from a spirit that is never confirmed to be from God. Like a posessed warlord would.
2/ In every one of its teachings it behaves as a dumbed down version of Christianity. Like a posessed warlord vaguely aware of Christianity would.
3/ Its role model is hardly a model at all beyond his own time. Like a posessed warlord.
4/ It proposes that Christians considered Mary to be a deity. Like a posessed warlord vaguely aware of Christianity would.

The only benefit over Christianity that Muslims can offer is that their variations of Quran are more consistent than variations of individual Biblical books. But when you realize Islam completely depends on the Quran whereas Christianity depends on Christ and the Spirit as their primary source, this benefit collapses.

>>17867635 (OP)
it's cringe

>>17867635 (OP)
>What is your best argument to refute islam
The problem of evil as portrayed by Epicurus destroys the Abrahamic and Hindu God. Who says otherwise is lying. The appeal to free will is the most dishonest and dumbest attempt at a rebuttal ever conceived.

>>17867635 (OP)
It goes against Holy Scripture that predates it. Nothing else needs to be said to show how false Islam is.

Mohammedans are in grave error and need to accept the Truth of Jesus Christ, or risk eternal damnation.

>>17868394
>The Quran explicitly said Aisha wasn't a virgin when she married the prophet
Chapter and verse (I know you will not give it because it's not there).

>>17868505
>It proposes that Christians considered Mary to be a deity. Like a posessed warlord vaguely aware of Christianity would.

Case in point.: >>17868553
An ignorant observer will see a statue, see reverence and leap to conclusions. God wouldn't.

>>17868555
If prayer isn't worship, then what is?

>>17868546
Arguably the same could be said for Christians who believe in the trinity, don't follow Jewish laws, and make images of God.

>>17868555
>>17868553
I can only assume those things they put on the statue's feet are offerings. what else would they be?

>>17868569
Wrong. Jesus, the Trinity, and other truths of Christianity can be found all over the old testament. Both the denial and consequences of their future spiritual blindness is laid out.

>>17867649
>Aisha was 19
Hadiths directly contradict this and are the superior source.

Islam is essentially a voluntaristic Christian heresy (i.e. God can make something evil, good) but without the Imago Dei, which is why they callously disregard human life (even fellow Muslims).

>>17868573
No not really. The trinity makes no presence and had to be argued into the Bible. The original writers of the OT and NT never considered a trinity. That is a new idea that occurred much later and has no mention among the original Christians.

>>17868564
Worship is serving. Prayer is a medium.

>>17868572
Gifts. We venerate saints like we would a living person. Would you think I'm being worshipped and brought an offering if people got around me, brought me a birthday cake and chanted a song that praises me?

>>17868584
>Get behind me, Satan! You are a hindrance to me; for you are not on the side of God, but of men.

It's clear you have no intention of arguing in good faith. To all else interested, look to the pre incarnate Christ in the Old Testament as a starting point. There are many resources for this online, even in video format on websites like YouTube.

>>17867635 (OP)
Uncreatedness of the Quran contradicts the oneness of Allah.
There, strongest argument against Sunnism. Shi'ism is another matter. But they also trend rather insane.
>>17868505
You are just begging the question here. All your arguments rely on arbitrary, unfalsifiable criteria resting on the assumption Christianity is true and Islam isn't, along with many other unjustified presumptions you probably have not even examined.
If this is your best argument I would not want to read your worst.

>>17867635 (OP)
Like most religions, Islam's core metaphysical and theological tenets exist so far outside the realm of verifiable truth that it does not need to be refuted.

You would have to prove the following to be incontrovertibly true, before Islam became deserving of refutation:
>A sentient deity exists
>That deity is the only deity
>That deity is omniscient
>That deity is omnipotent
>The Qur'an most perfectly reflects that deity's will (i.e. The texts of other traditions are, in some fundamental way, incorrect).
>That deity demands observance of, or subservience to, the laws delineated in the Qur'an.
>That deity transmitted messages to the men known as Abraham, Moses, Jesus and Mohammed, at the very least.
>Mohammed was chosen to receive the final and most correct series of transmissions.

>>17868487
>You're saying
Not what i said.

Enjoy jahannam, infidels.

>>17868613
>jahannam
Doesn't exist.

>>17868599
>All your arguments rely on arbitrary, unfalsifiable criteria resting on the assumption Christianity is true and Islam isn't,
Not really

>1/ It relies on a message from a spirit that is never confirmed to be from God. Like a posessed warlord would.
This is true even if Christianity is false.
>2/ In every one of its teachings it behaves as a dumbed down version of Christianity. Like a posessed warlord vaguely aware of Christianity would.
This is true even if Christianity is false.
>3/ Its role model is hardly a model at all beyond his own time. Like a posessed warlord.
This is true even if Christianity is false.
>4/ It proposes that Christians considered Mary to be a deity. Like a posessed warlord vaguely aware of Christianity would.
This is tenable if and only if we completely disregard Christian theology (regardless of whether it's right or wrong). Meaning .... this can be true even if Christianity is false.

>>17868620
>This is true even if Christianity is false.
Proof?
>This is true even if Christianity is false.
Proof?
>This is true even if Christianity is false.
Proof?

>>17868593
I only present to you the consensus of scholars who critically analyze the Bible and its history. You are presupposing things within the Bible that never even reached the ears of the writers of it.
>pre incarnate Christ
This is also something that is not agreed among all Christians in history, including some high ranking Roman priests.
>Get behind me, Satan!
I do hope you know that Jesus's understanding of the word "satan" is not a supreme devil, but you probably don't considering you're unfamiliar with what is meant in the Bible.

>>17868627
What more do you need?

>>17868578
>Hadiths

HAHAHAHAHAHA

Hadiths are all lies, I completely denounce them and their perversions are the only gotcha kike worshippers have against the true Faith

Meanwhile I can quote hundreds and thousands of vile and disgusting racist, murderous, pedo and rapet passages from the jewble, not only is morally corrupt but also completely inconsistent where one passage says rabbi yeshua is a different person and other says it's YHWH

The judeochristian holy book is an immoral compilation of schizophrenia and the delusions of a parasitic nepotistic tribe from the deserts of Iraq who later infested the Levant

>>17868610
Literally 0 reading comprehension.

>>17868631
>Le Quran
Does the sun sit on a muddy spring?

>>17867653
>half your country is inbred
The jews you worship as demi gods are the most edogamic race on earth

Rabbi Yeshua himself was probably extremely inbred

>>17867670
The jewble says yhwh impregnated himself only Mary's womb when she was 13

The jewble says it's a holy duty to take goyim little girls as sex slaves as seen in deuteronomy

The jewble says the "holy" pedo degenerate prophet Isaac kiddle fiddled poor Rebecca when she was 3

Aisha was 19 and Muhammad (PBUH) actually married women way older than him usually with Aisha being the exception

>>17868627
>1/ It relies on a message from a spirit that is never confirmed to be from God. Like a posessed warlord would.
Proved by absence of that confirmation. I'm not sure what other proof you imagine can exist for this.
>2/ In every one of its teachings it behaves as a dumbed down version of Christianity. Like a posessed warlord vaguely aware of Christianity would.
Proved by comparison of individual concepts. For example: Bodily afterlife. In Christianity this stems from Genesis 1 where matter itself is pronounced "good" (hence bodies are good) and consequently from God deciding to take human form, which sanctified it further. In Islam, matter is not treated in this systemic fashion and bodily resurrection is just sort of slapped on top of the theology without any deeper context.
>3/ Its role model is hardly a model at all beyond his own time. Like a posessed warlord.
Proved by him allowing himself exceptions from rules (such as wife count), marrying divorced wife of his adoptive son and according to many, many Muslims - fucking a child.

>>17868655
Ok holy shit I completely misread your reply. Sorry. I though you were making the opposite point.

>>17868636
Engage with what I said, don't misrepresent what I said in order to argue against something you yourself fabricated.

>>17868640
>you worship jews as demi gods
That is not christianity, never was and never will be.

>>17867635 (OP)
Saudi Arabia.

They say they're the best at Islam, yet they have destroyed Mecca. In fact, most of their early history is them getting slapped around by the Ottomans for trying to destroy Mecca once again.

>>17868662
Understandable, God bless.

It is widely believed today that the Qur'an was completed up to 300 years after Muhammad's death, not shortly after, like many traditional Islamists believe. Furthermore, the Qur'an constantly changes perspectives in a way that is convoluted and impossible to keep up with.

>>17868668
Say that again?? Every christian I came across with in my country basically called themselves subhumans (as well as all nonjoos) in comparison to the chosenite master race because YHWH elected them to enslave humanity and that to receive crumbles from YHWH we need to serve baby killing yids like good dogs

I kid you not, they unironically believe this

>>17868663
You're going to have to explain how the final revelation is in anyway indicative of the idea that Muhammad preached to Christians is BS, as you put it. I don't see how anyone is supposed to interpret your post in a way other than that you disagree with the idea that a Christian can somehow ignore the final revelation.

>>17868696
>Say that again??
That is not christianity, never was and never will be.

>>17868705
So you're saying the absolute majority of the people who call themselves christian in the world are not true christians?

>>17868739
>absolute majority
It isn't

>>17868620
Oh yeah? Ok.

>1/ It relies on a message from a spirit that is never confirmed to be from God.
First of all, while Jibril was the main messanger of Muhammad from Allah, the Quran recounts there were other forms of prophetic transmission. Including Allah speaking personally to Muhammad a few times. The Quran recounts this was Allah. If you question the validity of the Quran, you also indirectly raise doubt on the validity of all previous prophets and testimonies about them.
>2/ In every one of its teachings it behaves as a dumbed down version of Christianity.
This presumes Christianity is true because it unjustly deems many doctrines that stand by themselves to be "Dumbed down versions" of Christianity, this assigns Christianity a higher position than Islam in an undisclosed hierarchy, you are being, so to speak, Christo-centric. The same could very much be said in the reverse order. It's also a completely false statement.
>3/ Its role model is hardly a model at all beyond his own time.
Here you presume the following
>In the universe there is an objective immutable standard of what a good role model is.
>I hold knowledge of that standard.
>That standard fits all my personal and cultural mores, ethics, and values.
>I can accurately measure things against that standard.
Because you are a Christian, and where presumably raised within a Christian cultural environment. You are presuming the values of (modern) Christians are true.
>4/ It proposes that Christians considered Mary to be a deity.
Only if you read the passage in the most literal way possible. When it could be a rhetorical device to highlight the unusual treatment Mary got and still gets in Chirstianity.
>This is tenable if and only if we completely disregard Christian theology
This is largely irrelevant from a muslim standpoint. (Which I'm not, btw, though you should've been able to tell by the fact I don't use the retarded acronyms)

>>17868777
>Allah speaking personally to Muhammad a few times.
Not a single Muslim was able to produce those, so I will be glad if you break this pattern. From what I have seen, all instances of Allah speaking are mediated and it is "Allah speaking" only in the sense of it being Allah's message.
>If you question the validity of the Quran, you also indirectly raise doubt on the validity of all previous prophets and testimonies about them.
Correct. I question all testimonies that stem from a demon.
>>2/ In every one of its teachings it behaves as a dumbed down version of Christianity.
>This presumes Christianity is true
No. This is true even if Christianity is false. Complexity doesn't imply soundness.
>The same could very much be said in the reverse order.
Show me like I showed in >>17868655
>You are presuming the values of (modern) Christians are true.
My argument does not build on this premise. You didn't notice that atheists (who do not share this presupposition) tend to criticize Muhammad just as much?
>Only if you read the passage in the most literal way possible.
Correct. Are you arguing we should be reading the Quran metaphorically first and foremost?
>>This is tenable if and only if we completely disregard Christian theology
>This is largely irrelevant from a muslim standpoint.
It is not irrelevant to the objection that I'm addressing. Which is that Christianity is pre-supposed in my argument.

About one third of your responses are "but you believe in Christianity" despite me showing why the conviction of the speaker makes no difference.

>>17868548
https://quran.com/66/5
Virgin, she was not virgin when she married prophet Muhammad which demolishes the whole argument that she was underaged/minor

>>17868578
>hadiths which obviously are distorted and pushed by wahabis

You confirmed you're a dumbass