10 arguments not to use against Islam
Depending on which world view you hold to, it is debatable which arguments to use or not use against Islam. One such debate between myself and some Christian Apologists erupted here.(Atheist arguments against Islam vs Christian arguments against Islam).
There are many convoluted, silly, nonsensical arguments used against Islam which ultimately cause Muslims to undermine the credibility of anyone with any sound argument against Islam. We need to learn to distinguish credible arguments, and fallacious arguments and stop mixing them all in one bag.
Knowing that Muslims would add alot more arguments to list, indeed possibly every argument against Islam to this list, this list is not intended to supplicate them. For example Muslims do not believe the Quran validates the Bible, nor do many Muslims believe the Quran and Sunnah teach an Islamic state is required to offensively spread itself through military conquest. Clearly we have no agreement here.
But as an agnostic-atheist I have never come across such a list of arguments not to use, and hence in the spirit of honesty, I intend to provide a list that neither, Jew, Hindu, nor Christian, nor Atheist alike should ever use to argue against Islam with.
The following arguments should be unanimously be rejected:
Definitive arguments not to use
1) Mohammed had sex with a watermelon
The only thing that comes close to this assertion is this:
"If a man makes a hole in a watermelon, or a piece of dough, or a leather skin, or a statue, and has sex with it, then this is the same as what we have said about other types of masturbation [i.e., that it is halaal in the same circumstances given before, such as being on a journey]. In fact, it is easier than masturbating with one's hand".
And:
"If a woman does not have a husband, and her lust becomes strong, then some of our scholars say: It is permissible for the woman to take an akranbij, which is a piece of leather worked until it becomes shaped like a penis, and insert it in herself. She may also use a cucumber."
Bada'i al-Fuwa'id of Ibn Qayyim (Islamic scholar), page 129"
Nothing attributes this practise to Mohammed himself. The claim appears to be the opinion of Ibn Qayyim, hence it's not ijma(consensus) nor even jumhur(majority) of scholars agreeing. The practice is prohibited unless Muslims men are on journey according to the opinion.
2) Islam allows sex with animals.
Nothing attributes this practise to Mohammed himself. The claim appears to be the opinion of Ibn Qayyim, hence it's not ijma(consensus) nor even jumhur(majority) of scholars agreeing. The practice is prohibited unless Muslims men are on journey according to the opinion.
2) Islam allows sex with animals.
One of the most stupid arguments out there and refuted here:
http://muslim-responses.com/Sex_with_animals/Sex_with_animals_
3) Show me one good thing in Islam! (since there is none you can't)
3) Show me one good thing in Islam! (since there is none you can't)
Questions and arguments like this are as irrational as asking: "Show me one good thing in communism or Nazism!"
False ideologies have many enticing factors about them. Nazism had national unity, employment, successful economy, purpose, destiny, music, plays, theater, fireworks.
Clearly the person hasn't thought the question out.
4) Anything good in Islam comes from Judiasm/Christianity
Sometimes after the original question (3) has been asked and something good is provided, the original questionnaire says "but that's not from Islam!".
Well you've already managed to falsify the original question, because the origin of the teaching is irrelevant, (this is known as a genetic fallacy) the question is: Is it part of Islam now, whether it was adopted or not? And they have shown you something good within Islam e.g. The Qur'an s condemnation of pagans burying infant children alive.
5) Mohammed was a necrophiliac (had sex with his dead aunt)
The narration is of dubious authorship, the content is ambigious.
The narration is of dubious authorship, the content is ambigious.
This post takes care of it in-depth:
http://thefactsaboutislam.blogspot.com/2010/07/false-allegation-of-muhammad-having-sx.html
6) Mohammed plagiarized from Imrau'l Qais
6) Mohammed plagiarized from Imrau'l Qais
The Christians show why this is false here:
http://www.answering-islam.org/Quran/Sources/qais.html
7) Islam says Jews are descendants of apes, monkeys and pigs.
This is not explictly in the Quran or Sunnah, but is the view of some prominent scholars, sheiks and imams and even commentators.
7) Islam says Jews are descendants of apes, monkeys and pigs.
This is not explictly in the Quran or Sunnah, but is the view of some prominent scholars, sheiks and imams and even commentators.
Ironically it is the Jewish Virtual Library that ends up debunking this argument, but rather at the conclusion of the article they argue they have substantiated the claim. The evidence actually shows however this claim is not presented in the authoritative sources of Islam.
"Did the Jews Who Were Transformed Have Offspring?
Another issue on which the Koran commentators and authors of the Adab prose literature focused was whether the Jews who were changed into animals had offspring.
Al-Qurtubi explains that two approaches developed among clerics on this matter. According to the first, all apes today are the offspring of the sons of Israel. This was also the view of Ibn Qutaiba,[48] the important ninth-century scholar and author of famous Adab works, who thought that apes who were originally Jews do reproduce.[49]
According to the second approach, the apes who used to be Jews left no offspring. Therefore, today's apes, pigs, and other animals are the offspring of animals in existence before the divine punishment. Ibn Abbas, for example, maintained that anyone whose form was changed lived for no more than three days and did not eat, drink, or propagate."
The closet thing possible is this:
"Those who believe that today's animals are the offspring of the sons of Israel base their belief on some reliable traditions from the Prophet Muhammad, in which he warned against eating particular animals out of fear that they were originally the sons of Israel. In the tradition in the reliable compilations of Muslim and Al-Bukhari, the following is attributed to the Prophet Muhammad: "A group of the sons of Israel, and it is not known what they did, was lost, and I fear that they are mice. Don't you see that when mice are given camel's milk they don't drink it, and when they are given sheep's milk they drink it?" As the 13th century Hadith commentator Al-Nawawi[50] explains, "The flesh and milk of camels are forbidden to the sons of Israel, while the flesh and milk of sheep are not. Therefore, the mice's refraining from drinking camel's milk and their not refraining from drinking sheep's milk proves that they are the sons of Israel in animal form.""
There are a few other examples, but ultimately here is the conclussion:
"The Prophet's fear, in various traditions, that mice, lizards and other animals are humans who were transformed, is explained by Al-Qurtubi: This was a hypothesis raised by the Prophet before he received the divine inspiration that made it clear to him that Allah did not give offspring to such humans in changed form. After he got this inspiration, he was no longer fearful, and stated: "Allah did not destroy people or torment them [and at the same time] give them offspring. The apes and the pigs [we see today] existed before." According to Al-Qurtubi, this tradition is most reliable, and it appears in Muslim's compilation of traditions. He adds that the tradition about eating lizards in the Prophet's presence and at his table without [the Prophet's] condemnation proves that they are not the offspring of the sons of Israel."
8) Islam allows sex with your daughter from adultery
Al-Qurtubi explains that two approaches developed among clerics on this matter. According to the first, all apes today are the offspring of the sons of Israel. This was also the view of Ibn Qutaiba,[48] the important ninth-century scholar and author of famous Adab works, who thought that apes who were originally Jews do reproduce.[49]
According to the second approach, the apes who used to be Jews left no offspring. Therefore, today's apes, pigs, and other animals are the offspring of animals in existence before the divine punishment. Ibn Abbas, for example, maintained that anyone whose form was changed lived for no more than three days and did not eat, drink, or propagate."
The closet thing possible is this:
"Those who believe that today's animals are the offspring of the sons of Israel base their belief on some reliable traditions from the Prophet Muhammad, in which he warned against eating particular animals out of fear that they were originally the sons of Israel. In the tradition in the reliable compilations of Muslim and Al-Bukhari, the following is attributed to the Prophet Muhammad: "A group of the sons of Israel, and it is not known what they did, was lost, and I fear that they are mice. Don't you see that when mice are given camel's milk they don't drink it, and when they are given sheep's milk they drink it?" As the 13th century Hadith commentator Al-Nawawi[50] explains, "The flesh and milk of camels are forbidden to the sons of Israel, while the flesh and milk of sheep are not. Therefore, the mice's refraining from drinking camel's milk and their not refraining from drinking sheep's milk proves that they are the sons of Israel in animal form.""
There are a few other examples, but ultimately here is the conclussion:
"The Prophet's fear, in various traditions, that mice, lizards and other animals are humans who were transformed, is explained by Al-Qurtubi: This was a hypothesis raised by the Prophet before he received the divine inspiration that made it clear to him that Allah did not give offspring to such humans in changed form. After he got this inspiration, he was no longer fearful, and stated: "Allah did not destroy people or torment them [and at the same time] give them offspring. The apes and the pigs [we see today] existed before." According to Al-Qurtubi, this tradition is most reliable, and it appears in Muslim's compilation of traditions. He adds that the tradition about eating lizards in the Prophet's presence and at his table without [the Prophet's] condemnation proves that they are not the offspring of the sons of Israel."
8) Islam allows sex with your daughter from adultery
Muhammad Salman
10-18-2008, 07:33 PM
Wa'alaykum As-Salam
We know in Islam sex outside of marriage is forbidden; so the question should be reworded "Does Islam allow a man to marry his illegitimate daughter". I'm sure this would help, insha'Allah:But the illegitimate father (the zaani) is still affected by the rulings forbidding marriage. According to the majority of scholars, the rulings forbidding marriage still apply between the illegitimate child and his father and his father’s relatives.
Ibn Qudaamah (may Allaah have mercy on him) said: It is haraam for a man to marry his illegitimate daughter, or his illegitimate sister, or his (illegitimate) son’s daughter, or his daughter’s daughter, or his brother’s daughter, or his sister who is illegitimate. This is the view of most of the fuqaha’. End quote. Al-Mughni (7/485).
Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyah (may Allaah have mercy on him) was asked about an illegitimate daughter –can she marry her father?
He replied: Praise be to Allaah. The view of the majority of scholars is that it is not permissible to marry her. This is definitely the correct view. End quote. Majmoo’ al-Fataawa (32/134).
It says in al-Mawsoo’ah al-Fiqhiyyah (36/210): It is haraam for a man to marry his illegitimate daughter, because of the clear meaning of the verse (interpretation of the meaning):
“Forbidden to you (for marriage) are: your mothers, your daughters…” [al-Nisa’ 4:23] because she is his daughter in a real sense and in linguistic terms and she was created from his water (i.e. sperm), so the illegitimate son is forbidden (in marriage) to his mother. This is the view of the Hanafis and of the Maalikis and Hanbalis. End quote.
Source: Attribution of an illegitimate child and rulings that result from that (http://www.islamqa.com/en/ref/85043%22)
Imam al-Qurtbi (rahimahullah) was a shafi'i so he may have quoted the wrongly attributed opinion to Imam Shafi'i (radiallahu anho); so, check this out: Imam Shafi'i on marrying one's illegitimate daughter (http://www.ahlalhdeeth.com/vbe/showthread.php?t=1999)
Wallahu A'lam
This answer is legitimate and taken from: http://www.ahlalhdeeth.com/vbe/archive/index.php/t-3159.html, http://www.ahlalhdeeth.com/vbe/showthread.php?t=3159
9) Islam says you are not allowed pets and teaches to kill all dogs
Like temporary marriage, this command was abrogated:
Like temporary marriage, this command was abrogated:
10) Allah is a moon God
Allah was perceived differently by various tribes of Arabia, and it's certainly possible one or some of those tribes viewed the moon God as the supreme God, Allah. However what matters is not how some tribes have defined Allah, but how Mohammed and the Quran itself defines Allah. If we were to define the Biblical term for God El, or Elohim by the surrounding canaanite cultures who believed in El, we would have a very different definition of El. The semantics do not matter, the coherent definition of Allah provided by the authoritative texts do matter. Allah is certainly not defined as the "moon" within the Islamic corpus.
11) Mohammed himself practiced thying and sodomizing of Aisha
This video is being promulgated around by several anti-Islam blogs and sites along with some Khomeini's quotes and some "Saudi Panel" Fatwa, the sites all seem to link to each other as a source.
I believe Yahya Snow supplies enough evidence, none of these sources are reliable. Until more information and authentic sources can be shown, as a matter of intellectual honesty I suggest abandoning this as an argument not to use against Islam.
Possible arguments not to use
1) Mohammed is a pedophile
Personally I don't use this argument much as I try to focus on firstly addressing the message before the messenger. Not only can this argument cause offense to Muslims and therefore cause all conversation to cease but you have a horde of Muslims who contest the age of Aisha, and you have Muslims who flat out reject Bukhari, Dawud and another narrations. Even some Sunni Muslims who do accept Bukhari still believe there are problems with these hadith and the conflictions that exist within the hadith corpus.
I think the best time to use a similar line of argument is to show that Muslims today in this age are still in nearly every country they migrate to and their own countries, approving and engaging child marriage.
Ultimately if the topic does come up (and it has several times) if the Muslims wish to defend such conceptions ought to be practised in the modern age based on the fixed example of Mohammed, then it is nessacery to be very serious in dismantling this to shreds, as child marriage is abohorrent.
1) Mohammed is a pedophile
Personally I don't use this argument much as I try to focus on firstly addressing the message before the messenger. Not only can this argument cause offense to Muslims and therefore cause all conversation to cease but you have a horde of Muslims who contest the age of Aisha, and you have Muslims who flat out reject Bukhari, Dawud and another narrations. Even some Sunni Muslims who do accept Bukhari still believe there are problems with these hadith and the conflictions that exist within the hadith corpus.
I think the best time to use a similar line of argument is to show that Muslims today in this age are still in nearly every country they migrate to and their own countries, approving and engaging child marriage.
Ultimately if the topic does come up (and it has several times) if the Muslims wish to defend such conceptions ought to be practised in the modern age based on the fixed example of Mohammed, then it is nessacery to be very serious in dismantling this to shreds, as child marriage is abohorrent.
In terms of dialogue this argument is best left alone.
Conclusion
This list by no means is a complete list of every argument not to use. But surely I will add to this list the more bizaare, outlandish arguments I come across.
Skeptics need to be rational, and not completely blinded by bigotry and hatred, no matter what beliefs you have, use your brain. If you want to convince Muslims of using true scholarship, then you must stop using debunk, pseudo nonsense.
