Muslims use an endless list of fallacious and silly arguments in their defence of indefensible Islam. Here is a list of those:
‘Out of Context’ Argument
When one raises questions about verses of the Quran or Muhammad’s actions from the hadith, all Muslims—be it mullahs or educated moderate ones—parrot only one thing in defence: ‘You are talking out of context’, ‘please find out under what circumstances Muhammad did so’, ‘there must be some reason for that’ and so on. But they themselves will never try to find out those contexts or circumstances under which Muhammad did so many malicious things, or nonsensical or violence-inciting verses were revealed. And when you show them the context of verses from the tafsirs, which often make Islam appear even more evil and atrocious, they immediately change tune to claim that ‘this verse is allegorical’ and on the worst scenario, they would say ‘this verse is sarcastic’. Just imagine that the creator of the universe is talking in allegorical or sarcastic terms for guiding humanity through His divine scripture.
‘Circular Logic’ Argument
Whenever one asks Muslims to prove their religion and prophet to be true, all of them answer in a similar and very absurd and illogical way. They explain:
Muslim: Muhammad is a true prophet because the Quran says so.
Inquirer: What is the evidence that the Quran is true and divine?
Muslim: The Quran is true because Allah says so.
Inquirer: How do you to be certain that Allah is the true God and the Quran is His divine words?
Muslim: Allah is the true God because Muhammad said so.
Inquirer: And how do you know what Muhammad was true?
Muslim: Muhammad is true because the Quran says so.
This is called circular logic, proving something from its own source. It is like saying: I am the God, and the evidence for this is that I am saying so. Remember, no one trust something that the claimer himself says. He has to prove himself either with evidences or with reason. The source of the Quran and Allah is only one and that source is Muhammad. Muhammad himself is claiming everything, and there is no evidence whatsoever that those claims are true and credible. Any thug and imposter can claim something in these ways. That doesn’t make that claim true. Not only that, whenever Muslims try to validate or justify any instruction or law of the Quran or of Islam—like the benefit of veil or growing beard or anything else—they give Quranic evidence in support of their claims, even to non-believers of the Quran. How foolish these behaviours are!
‘This is Not Islam’ Argument
Whenever pointed to evil acts committed by a Muslim, Islamic group or Islamic nation in the name of Islam, another excuse Muslims offer in Islam’s defence is: ‘This is not Islam’, ‘This has nothing to do with Islam’, ‘Nowhere does Islam command one to do so’. Be it 9/11 or 26/11 terror attacks or a condemnable act like the shooting of young girl Malala Yousufzai by Pakistani Taleban, their answer is always the same: “This is not Islam” to which is routinely added another excuse, “This must a ploy of the Jews and the West to defame Islam”.
Whenever something bad is done by Muslims, Muslims countries—immediately Muslims will blindly say the following:
- Iran, Afghanistan, Saudi Arabia’s political and social fallacies has nothing to do with real Islamic country.
- The Taliban's destruction of Buddhist antiquities has nothing to do with real Islam.
- The Taliban shot fourteen years old Malala Yousufzai for promoting girls’ education in Pakistan and killing six polio vaccinators of Pakistan from UN have nothing to do with real Islam.
- The forcible conversion of helpless Christians in Indonesia has nothing to do with real Islam.
- The genocide being perpetrated in Sudan by the Islamists in Khartoum has nothing to do with real Islam.
- Bomb-blasts in Mosques of Pakistan, Iran and Iraq; has nothing to do with Islam.
- The unwillingness of the Saudi authorities to allow women to drive has nothing to do with real Islam.
- The sectarian violence in Pakistan between Sunni and Shiite has nothing to do with real Islam.
- The practice of female genital mutilation by Muslims all over North Africa, Middle East, Pakistan, Indonesia etc. have nothing to do with real Islam.
- Having sex with slave girls in Saudi Arabia has nothing to do with real Islam
- Women oppression and inequality with men has nothing to do with real Islam.
- The decapitations of the inhabitants of entire villages by jihadists in Algeria have nothing to do with real Islam.
- Acts of terror committed frequently around the world in the name of Islam have nothing to do with real Islam.
- The Hadiths depicting Muhammad (pbuh) as a pedophilic, murderous, thief have nothing to do with real Islam.
- The verses in the Quran and Hadiths justifying the slaughter of the Banu Qurayza by Allah's Apostle (pbuh) have nothing to do with real Islam.
They will keep adding such excuse after excuse such that it would appear: Islam itself has nothing to do with “real” Islam.
If this is not Islam, then what is Islam, where is it followed, and who are following it?
‘Everyone cannot understand the Quran’ Argument
Whenever one criticizes or asks questions about errors and contradictions in the Quran, Muslims repeat the reply like parrots that not everyone can understand the depth and wisdom of the Quran, many people get misled by reading the Quran itself. If ask back: What other meanings can one derive from verses of Quran, which misleads the readers also? Or who will decide who is actually misled by reading the Quran, who is not? Is it the non-believers of the Quran or the Muslims themselves? Questions such as these would lead Muslims to a point, when they will have no further answers to offer. And at such point, they will say: “This kind of questions will only weaken your faith and eventually would lead you to great loss”.
‘Islam is also a socio-political Religion’ Argument
Muslims claims that Islam teaches everything in life, from sex acts to politics. When they are pointed to any unconscionable or violent command in the Quran and Hadiths, for example, some Islamic teachings that deprive individuals of his/her rights or teachings that are perilous to certain person or gender, then immediately they try to show some social benefit of that law or teaching, while completely ignoring its detrimental aspects. This argument is a shameless trick used by Muslims to hide the Islamic blunder, which Muslims often make—some of them consciously, others plagiarizing subconsciously. This argument is a significant camouflage against the truth that Islam is a political cult.
‘Scientific laws may change but not the Quran’ Argument
On one hand, Muslims claim that science is not comparable to Islam, which is absolute and eternal divine truth, while science keeps changing. On the other hand, they try hard to show that Islam is compatible with science, and they keep trying to prove that there are all kinds of sciences in the Quran and Hadiths. At the other end, science never tries to claim compatibility with the Quran; science works on its own way. Therefore, Muslims by trying hard to show compatibility of the Quran with science unwittingly puts science above, Islam below, because nobody will try to show compatibility of something with another which is inferior. Similarly, they claim that the teachings of the Quran are above everything else, yet they send their children to school to learn science, which they consider backward and inferior to Islam, to knowledge of the Quran and Hadith. Who could be greater fools than Muslims, who knowingly send their children to learn a false, inferior and momentary thing? They claim all other scriptures like the Bible, Torah, Gita and others are either corrupted or not at all divine, and simultaneously they claim that Muhammad is predicted in those scriptures. None can bigger idiots than those, who make such self-contradictory claims?
‘Allah knows best & It’s Allah wish’ Argument
In a debate or discussion with Muslims or mullahs, when one asks a critical question about Islam for which they have no answers, they will immediately end the discussion with words like: “It is Allah’s wish”, “Allah knows best”. This means that they come to engage in debate with certitude when they know little in their own admission. If one comes to engage in a discussion or a debate and says, he doesn’t know, it is Allah who knows, then what is the point of discussion with him? I have debated with hundreds of such Muslims. Their answers were all the same and ended with same sentence: “It is Allah wish”. For example, when I ask them: Why did Allah take six days to create the heaven and earth in spite of the power of ‘Kun Fayakun’ and being omnipotent, they answered, “It is Allah’s wish”. Whenever I ask Muslims, why Allah asked Muhammad to marry a six-year-old girl and what Allah proved thus, their only answer is: “It is Allah’s wish”. When I asked, how a child would be treated on Judgment Day, who was born in an infidel family and died within 2-3 years of his/her birth, they answered: “Allah knows best”. When I asked them, how the population after Adam and Eve grew when they only had two sons, Abel and Cain, no sister, they answered: “Allah’s know. We are not supposed to know everything and cannot question him and his wisdom.” If Islam don’t have the answer for ‘wherefrom and how we have come to existence’, isn’t it foolish to believe Islam’s saying about where we heading to.
They win debates by saying only, ‘Allah knows”, and “Allah has every answer”. Thus, they are saved from answering crucial question leaving the critics unable to debate further, because Muslims can’t contact Allah for the answer and Allah will not answer before the Judgment Day.
‘Even hearing such things is sin’ Argument
Another very cunning and dishonest ploy Muslims employ in defense of Islam is that they leave a discussion or a debate by saying: “Oh God! We can’t even hear this sort of denigration about a great person like our beloved Prophet Muhammad” or “it is a sin to hear such defamation of our prophet”. This is a very great misdemeanor to defend Islam and Muhammad. If one is defaming my father, I am not supposed to leave the place saying, “I cannot even hear such things against a great personality like my father”. If I have confidence in the integrity of father, I will clear the doubts of the person raising such criticisms against my father’s character with refutation of the accusation with substantive evidence. Only if I have no confidence in my father’s character, I may leave the place with lame excuse like Muslims do regarding the weakness of Muhammad’s character, although it will be wiser for me to ask for evidence from the person so that I may enlighten myself about some unknown weakness that my father might have had. After all, we are only humans prone to erring.
On the existence of Allah and the sanctity of Islam, Muslims are always afraid of losing their faith and try to avoid such discussions at any cost, while atheists or agnostics are never afraid of such things. This is because, whatever beliefs Muslims cherish are not based on concrete reason or evidence but on superstition or blind faith. Faith is nothing but hope, and hope is the only lie that never loses its credibility. Atheists and agnostics live on evidence and reason while believers live on faith and superstition. That’s why the former don’t have controversies and contradictions among them and are open to discussion and doubt anything, even their cherished thoughts about the world. Edifice based on faith and superstition can’t be defended by reasoned argument, but only threats and violence, which followers of blind-faith religions have employed copious throughout history. So says Bertrand Russell: “Persecution is used in theology, but not in arithmetic, because in arithmetic there is knowledge, but in theology there are only opinions.”
‘This life is just a Test’ Argument
Whenever faced with questions like – why there is so much suffering and diseases in the world, why there are earthquakes, floods, cyclones and other natural disasters, from which even the followers of the Quran and Hadiths are not spared – Muslims readily claim that ‘This life is only a test’. For them, earthly life is temporal, does not deserve any serious attention and the earth is only an examination hall. Yet, they pay so much importance to their unimportant life on earth that they carry out the most horrendous acts like the 9/11 massacre in USA, 26/11 massacre in Mumbia, Madrid bombings, Boston blasts, shooting the little girl Malala, and such. In the examination hall only, their prophet had more than a dozen of wives and married a six-year-old girl (Aisha) when he was aged 50.
‘Islam is the fastest-growing religion’ Argument
In the defence of Islam, another frequent made vacuous claim of Muslims is: ‘Islam is the fastest growing religion’ in the world. So, it must be the truest religion on earth. First, this argument is completely fallacious. Islam is the fastest-growing religion does not mean that is the true or truest religion, because truth has nothing to do with majority, nor should it be judged on the basis of numbers. If this is so, then idolatry was truest religion 2000 years ago, because the world’s 99% people were polytheistic at that time. Believers of Hinduism were larger than Muslims over the greater part of Islam’s 1400-year history (until the last century), so Hinduism was true religion, Islam was false until then. Today, Christianity is believed by more people than Islam; so Christianity must be true, Islam is false. Or once, Christianity was the fastest-growing religion in earth; so Christianity was the true religion during those times.
Muslims are polyphiloprogenitive, i.e. they breed faster than others peoples. But that is the characteristic of all poor and uneducated people in any nations. Prior to Copernicus and Galileo, almost everyone agreed that the Earth was flat and the universe was geocentric. This consensus of virtually every member of human race did not make this belief true. As Bertrand Russell said: The fact that an opinion has been widely held is no evidence whatever that it is not utterly absurd; indeed in view of the silliness of the majority of mankind, a widespread belief is more likely to be foolish than sensible.”
It is totally fallacious on the part of Muslims when they claim Islam to be true because it is most popular, like saying “thousands of people convert to Islam; so it must be true”. Hitler said, if a lie is repeated often enough and long enough, it would come to be perceived as truth.
Other similar Muslim claims are:
- Muhammad is most influential person in history as per Michael Hart’s “The 100”.
- The Quran is the most widely read book.
- Muhammad is the most common name.
Almost all people can make bricks. Far lesser number can make pots. There are far more patients than Doctors. Even among the Doctors skilled surgeons and experts are only a fraction. Very few people on earth understand Astrophysics. In all times, knowledge and skill have been rare commodities possessed by only a few. Ignorance has always been the part of majority. Ignorance of Muslims is not only amazing, but positively harmful to them as well as to the rest of humanity. Hitler was influential too. The Harry Potter series have been most sold books in recent history. The housefly is the fastest breeding insect and the fish is the largest breeding in number. If proliferation is the point to establish truth and majority is the sign of divinity, then houseflies are most truthful creature and fishes are most divine.
‘This was the custom of that time’ Argument
When one points out the evil practices and violence of Muhammad, Muslims come up with another excuse that ‘This was the custom of the time’. No matter you tell them, ‘Muhammad had slaves’, ‘Muhammad had concubines’, ‘He married a six-year-old girls, ‘He killed people’ or ‘He waged wars’, their answer would always be similar and simple, ‘This was the custom of the time’ or ‘War was sometime necessary to establish peace’. But when you ask them to produce example of another saints or prophets who did so, you will find them mum. Remember, morality is not a time-dependent, place-dependent, or person-dependent variable. Whatever is wrong for one person, it is wrong for another; whatever is wrong in on time, it is wrong for any time; whatever is wrong is one place, it is wrong in another place. Another question is that: Did Muhammad come to reform the social evils of his or to be a part of it? If he could not reform the evils of the contemporary society, instead practiced those evils, then why should one follow him?
‘It is our fault, not Islam’s’ Argument
Today, very few Muslims follow certain laws of Islam, like, keeping beard, say prayers five times a day, reproduce prolifically, and learning from Islamic teachers or mullahs. When one asks them: why don’t you follow Islam properly if it is a simple and beneficial religion, then you will definitely hear this answer: ‘This is our fault.” “If we cannot follow Islam, it is our fall, not of Allah; Allah has given us guidance, now it is up to us whether or not we follow it’. If such a vast majority of Muslims fails to comply with the Islamic laws, then we are obliged to say that Islam has failed as a religion.
‘The Error is in the translation’ Argument
When the contradictions, absurdities, or the violent verses of the Quran are pointed out, Muslims will ask aggressively: “Do you know Arabic?” When the non-Muslim replies, “No”, they triumphantly say, “You have to read it in original Arabic to understand it fully”, or “These verses/words are not there in the original Arabic Quran”, or, “The exact meaning of the verses of the Quran is lost in the translation”, or “There are many fake translations of the Qur’an to malign Islam” etc. With this, Western critics generally become silent. If critics ask them to name a translation that they read to understand the Quran properly, they would hesitate to tell any name, but if you press them, they would name those same translations which they were denying to inaccurate. So, the conclusion is that they can use any translations for their understanding of the Quran properly, but if the critics discover errors and contradictions in the same translation, it becomes inaccurate.
Now the essentiality of reading the Quran in Arabic to understand it accurately, the question is: How many Muslims have read the Qur’an in original Arabic? Since the majority of the Muslims are not Arabs, they also rely on translations. When they have not read it in Arabic or they even don’t know anything about Arabic, how could they claim that it needs to be read in Arabic to understand correctly? Therefore, the language argument is a dishonest Muslim tactic to defend the many problems inherent in the Quran. Language is no barrier for find truth, as those who translated must have done so with extreme care and analysis and consultation from various sources. Furthermore, if they think those translations are wrong then why there is no protest against those fake translations, like the way Muslims generally do for any criticism and denigration against Islam and Muhammad. And how many Muslims scholars and Muslims read the Bible in Greek or Aramaic, the Torah in Hebrew or the Gita in Sanskrit before they criticize those scriptures, which they are most active at.
If the translations of the Quran by greatest scholars of Arabic language and Islam are full of errors, then who in this world has understood the Quran accurately? Why God has created the Quran in such a language and expressions that is difficult to grasp and interpret by the most proficient in Arabic? Though the purpose is to guide the entire population of the world, while Arabic is the language of humankind’s most treasured sacred book that is understood by small population in the world. Did Allah want to spend half of our lives in learning a language and then understanding His divine instruction?
‘Islam is a misunderstood religion’ Argument
Another excuse used by Muslim apologists that aims to sanitize Islam from the practices of its followers when they are pointed to the evil, atrocities and outrageous activities of Muslims all the globe, like bomb blasts in the mosques in Pakistan, Iraq or any other, shooting by Taliban to a young girl (Malala), attacking and bombing schools of young children by the Taleban in Afghanistan and other shameful terrorist activities all over the world, and very old men, often clerics, marrying underage girls, they reply: ‘Islam is a misunderstood religion’, ‘those Muslims misunderstand Islam’. Such claims are made against by those devout members of Islamic organizations, who spend their entire lives learning about Islam. The irony is that the people who make the claims have very little knowledge of or even know nothing about Islam. For them, Islam comprises of only those soft outer layer such as shahada, prayers, fasting, zakat, hajj, and avoiding sins like adultery, alcohol and pork consumption. There are tens of millions of Muslims, whose understanding of Islam is limited to that polished image. They are the Muslims, who truly misunderstand Islam. They never read the Quran and Hadith to understand that their Islam is only a miniscule part of the whole gamut of Islam, which is purely a political game, set up by Muhammad to rule the world and bring the world under Islamic imperialism.
A religion that can be so extensively misunderstood for fourteen hundred years by its own followers is certainly not worth following, nor respect.
Almost every Muslim will make the outrageous claim that they are not true Muslims, they are not following Islam. Muslims of one sect claims the Muslim of another Islamic sect that ‘they are not Muslims’; ‘they are not following Islam truly’. Who truly follow Islam is a completely dark concept. Even if there some people who correctly follow Islam, their number must be miniscule or nearly non-existent.
It takes more exploration and learning to discover the inherent harder core of Islam, where the importance of jihad and rejection of the others become more highlighted. Unfortunately, by the time Muslims reach that level of knowledge, they have already committed themselves to the service of Allah and their brain damage is complete. They become the violent and outrageous Muslims. A few others desert Islam.
There was never a time when Islam had a one distinct picture that Muslims could see with clarity and agree on. From the beginning, Islam was destined to have multiple interpretations. The Quran addresses issues in a vague, not concise style that sets the ground for multiple interpretations. Muslims are told that they can find in the Quran all the information they need; but when they open the book, they find nothing but repeated vagueness. Instead of coming to the obvious conclusion that the Quran is nonsense, they try to extract any interpretation to support whatever imagination they have in mind. Seeking refuge in Hadith does not help, because different Hadiths give different pictures of Islam depending on which ones you want to believe.
Let us not forget that Islam, from its inception, has been used as a political tool to subjugate the masses. Today’s Muslims have the same problem in understanding Islam as their ancestors did over the past fourteen centuries. Muslims, who are biased to their own political views, can usually manage to find some kind of support in the Quran or Sunna.
Only 24 years after Mohammed’s death, a group of Muslims broke into Uthman’s house; the third rightly-guided Caliph and the Prophet dearest companion and son-in-law, and murdered him while he was reading the Quran. Those Muslims did not think for a second they were committing a murder, but were utterly convinced they were practicing jihad for the sake of Allah. Their judgment was based on their understanding of the Quran and Sunna. On the other hand, Uthman’s supporters, who also based their judgment on the Quran and Sunna, believed those men were murderers and deserved to be killed.
Caliph Ali, the fourth rightly-guided Caliph and also the Prophet dearest companion and son-in-law, and his supporters of Sahaba (Mohammed’s companions) were engaged for five years defending the Islamic state against their adversaries, who were also Sahaba. Both sides fought the war while holding the Quran and shouting “Allahu Akbar”, as they slaughtered each other for the sake of Allah. More recently, when the Muslim nations were divided over Iraq’s invasion of Kuwait, both sides produced mountains of evidence, all based on sharia sources to prove that they were right and the other side was wrong or even committed kufr and deserves the death penalty!
A religion that can be so misunderstood for fourteen hundred years is certainly not worth following.
‘Red Herring’ Argument
This is one of the most common fallacies Muslims often make. It means whenever you point out an evil or an error of Islam, they would highlight the evil of other religions, instead of clarifying the criticism raised against Islam or the Quran. They present this fallacy as if you are an apologist of that religion, which they use as red herring. They don’t understand that highlighting evils committed by others does not dissipate theirs. When I raised the issue of polygamy of Muhammad, every Muslim shot back: ‘so what, even Krishna had several thousand wives’. What is interesting is that they often assert and believe that Ramayana and Mahabharata are only myths, yet they won’t refrain from highlighting those mythical stories to defend Muhammad, a real person, just to hide their own disgrace. If I point out that how can defend the Prophet by citing mythical stories from the Ramayana and Mahabharata, they often call me an apologist of Hinduism. Once I asked a Muslim why Muhammad fought so many wars, the person immediately retorted: “so what about the war of Mahabharata was also fought; Kanishka, a Buddhist, also waged wars and killed so many people. Then I asked him two questions: Is Mahabharata a real story and Was Kanishka a prophet of God? Then the person became quiet. In the first place, they are ignorant of the fact that highlighting evils of others does not justify the evils of their own. While debating, they rationalize as if Islam and other faiths are to have the same standard; they are not supposed to stand and fall together.
‘This Hadith is not authentic’ Argument
This argument is perhaps the last defence Muslims employ to save Islam. There are thousands of moral, scientific, and logical errors in the book of Hadiths, which itself is more than sufficient evidence to prove that Islam is a evil cult and Muhammad was a cruel imposter. But when questions raised on the integrity of Islam and Muhammad due to those numerous indefensible Hadiths, the sustainers of Islam come up with another explanation that those Hadiths (sayings and deeds of Muhammad as mentions in the books of Hadiths) are Da’eef (not authentic). On what basis they declare those Hadiths to be unauthentic is completely unexplained and cagey. If those Hadiths were not correct, then why the Muhadiths wrote those outrageous and incorrect things, still a nightmare for Islamic apologists? The acme of misdemeanor is that if those Hadiths are going to remain there even it is not authentic, so that they can bring them into play when needed.
‘Conspiracy of the West and Jews’ Argument
Whatever atrocities Muslims do all over the world, Muslims generally blame the conspiracy of the West and the Jews for those acts. Be it the 9/11 terrorists attacks, or the Madrid bombings or the 26/11 Mumbai massacre, Muslims tend to accuse anyone but Muslims for those evil acts. Even after the confession of Osama Bin Laden, Muslims still claimed that the 9/11 attacks were an inside job of the US government or committed by the Jews. Those, who commit those atrocities, Muslims believe, are actually agents of the West or Israel, who had taken proper training in Islam. All these they do are aimed at defaming Islam. This sort of lies released by renowned Muslim clerics or leaders eventually reaches the mouth of every Muslim, who learns it by heart, and like a parrot, speaks without any reasoning whatsoever. Why would the West and Israel try to defame Islam? Why they don’t carry out the same campaign against other religions, such as Hinduism or Buddhism? What they would achieve from these efforts? Would a person burn his own house in order to blame his neighbour? And if they undergo proper training in Islamic scripture just to malign Islam, why don’t they get inspiration from their learning the Quran, Hadiths and Sira, and become devout Muslim? Why Allah leaves them uninspired even after their reading the Quran? These are questions Muslims are afraid to ask. From the last question in this list arise Muslims’ fallacious argument discussed next.
‘Allah’s gives Hidayah as He wishes’ Argument
When one asks a Muslim: Why do so many Muslims leave Islam, especially after gaining good knowledge of Islam and the Quran? Or, why there are so many non-Muslim scholars of Arabic and Islamic literature who, despite having very deep knowledge of Islam, never embrace Islam? They would retort that Allah gives Hidayah, whomever He wills. They argue that Allah did not bestow Hidayah even upon Muhammad’s loving uncle and protector. Such arguments are nothing but fallacious defence to hide the evil and treachery of Muhammad. The reason why Muhammad’s uncle did not accept him as a prophet can be another. His uncle Abu Taleb did not only deeply love him, but also swore to protect him when the Meccan expressed their desire to harm Muhammad for his insulting their religion and customs. Yet, Muslims will never reflect on why such a loving uncle would refuse to believe Muhammad’s prophetic claim, or why Allah will not give guidance to such a devoted and loving protector of His beloved apostle? Logically, if there was only one person Allah decided to give guidance, it should have been his uncle Abu Taleb. It seems Allah provide guidance to only those, who blindly trust Muhammad’s words.
Muslims use more tricks in the defence of Islam. Whenever they are face with some Islamic duty, which are weird or difficult to follow for moral or practical reasons, they make all kinds of groundless classifications to justify their inability to follow them. Suppose, they are face with modern-day reality, where they must embrace Bid’dah (innovation), they classify it into two types—namely Bid’dah-e-Husna and Bid’dah-e-Zalala. When faced with their duty of engaging in Jihad, they classify it as Jihad-e-Nafs and Jihad Amr. But, there are such descriptions in the Quran and Hadith.
When one criticizes Islam, they demand for his/her qualification, when for such one issues, one require no specific qualification is required other than their own logic and conscience to be able to judge right and wrong, to tell sinner and saint apart, to separate good from evil. Yet, Muslims themselves can go on criticizing every other religion as per their wish.
When an ex-Muslim is able to show a Muslim the unsavory truth of Islam and convince him to leave Islam, Muslims accuse that new apostate must be an idiot and ignorant of true Islam or must have been forced to leave Islam. Actually those accusations apply to themselves most perfectly as they are the real ignorants of Islam and the victim of the greatest lie of the universe. Moreover, force and persecution is the weapon of Islam, of Muslims, not of the liberals because Islam legally mandates the killing of apostate.
With advancement of knowledge and technology with time, Muslims innovate new justifications to defend their weird and irrational beliefs. Most recently, they innovated the excuse that Islam mandate debate in open forum with physical presence, not in writing on websites, blogs or emails. This they claim because they know well that no sensible critic would debate with Muslims on Islamic issues in front of a Muslim audience, who are ever ready to kill anybody on the slightest of criticism of Islam. So, this is nothing but a cowardly way to defend their indefensible ideology. If anything, debating on internet can be far more feasible, comfortable, cheap, authentic and intellectual than any debate with physical appearance. Debating face to face can be threatening; people can use shriek, sophism, chicanery or demagogy to win the debate.
Muslims always react with shriek and insolence when one says something critical of Islam. It is well known that Muslims almost nothing substantive to support their claim that Islam is a true religion and Muhammad was a true prophet of God. Muslims only can hurl abuses and threats to silence the critics of Islam. Shrieking and stridency is their weapon to support their illogical and evil cult. If their religion is founded to truth, they would defend it with reason and logical arguments, not with threats and persecution. It seems their Allah did not provide brains or their religion didn’t provide them grounds to defend their claims. Else, they need not behave like wild beasts when people criticize Islam; they can shut the critics with logical arguments and refutations.
If a people in a society do evil things, like sacrificing young children and engage in killing and plundering of opponent sects, and assume that those evil deeds are worship of God, without any inclination to listen to anything about their rituals and beliefs, and are ready to kill anyone who say anything against their (evil) beliefs, just like Muslims do, then can you tell me any method to guide them to right path. Remember, open scrutiny is the only way to separate the right from the wrong. No criticism no rectification.
Bertrand Russell asserts: “Thoughts are not ‘free’ when legal penalties are incurred by the holding or not holding of certain opinions, or by giving expression to one’s belief or lack of belief on certain matters.” And when there is no freedom of thought, criticism is not tolerated, and then no reformation or purification is expected. Those who use threats, not logical arguments, are not only pauper of evidence but also intellectually impotent and ethically wimp, who depend on the means of others. Muslims fit that bill perfectly, as they use threats to suppress the critics of Islam and voices of truth. If they were on the right path, they would defeat them with the weapon of reason and ample rational substantiation in support of their claims. Just because they have no rational grounds to defend their superstitious, illogical and weird claims, they are so intolerant and ready to persecute one at the slightest of criticism against Islam and Muhammad.
As far as Muslims’ fanatical attitude regarding Islam is concerned, the Great Philanthropist, Philosopher, Mathematician, Logician and Educationist Sir Bertrand Russell’s following words most fitting:
The opinions that are held with passion are always those for which no good ground exists; indeed the passion is the measure of holder’s lack of rational conviction. Opinions in politics and religion are almost always held passionately.”
‘…the problem with the world today is ignorant are cocksure and intelligent are full of doubts.’
Muslims keeps blabbering about truth, greatness and miracles of their faith, but when questioned about basis of their rock-solid confidence in Islam, about what miracles they have seen in Islam, they can comes up with nothing convincing. I have asked this question to thousands of Muslims. Most of them failed to tell me anything and when some of them come up with answers, those appear silly or ridiculous.
I concur with Ali Sina’s statement that “Muslims put off their brains with their shoes and sandals and stand blindly behind an illiterate Imam who barks the Quranic verses without understanding even a single letter of it.” The Islamic ills affecting Muslims is chronic, which will take a long, long time to be cured. It can only be accelerated by their study of Islam patiently and with an open mind. There are a lot to know about Islam, judge everything by listening to both sides of arguments—all with a rational mind, and only then can Muslims realize what is true about their faith.
“He, who decides a case without hearing the other side, even if he decides justly, cannot be considered just.”
God will not punish anyone of us for using our brain to ask logical questions about anything we believe or even for questioning God’s existence, at least until His existence has been founded on concrete evidence. But Muhammad and his Islam intimidate Muslims against using your brains concerning his claims. Muslims are turned so morally down, dejected, downhearted and depressed that they have no moral courage to question anything about Islam than blinding believing each and everything Muhammad, the 7th-century pedophile, looter, liar, lustful misogynist and narcissist said and base their moral founds on the same. He turned Muslims into zombies, who have lost God’s biggest gifts them—their brain and rationality—thanks to Muhammad lure for them of big-bosom houris in Islamic heaven and the fear of roasting and toasting in hell. No matter how qualified they are academically, how many certificates and diplomas they may have, they are prone to utter nothing but rubbish in the matter of religious beliefs. There are honored professionals among Muslims, such chartered accountants, doctors, and engineers, but end result is all the same—they generally remain devoid of reason, when it comes to their faith. Just as Bertrand Russell has written (Sceptical Essays): “When a man adds up an account, he is much more likely to make a mistake in his favour than to his detriment; and when a man reasons, he is more apt to incur fallacies which favours his wishes than such as thwart them.”
Read part 1: How Muslims Defend Islam: Understanding Muslims