Is the Quran a good book?

youtu.be/gCvMMSTOl4Q

Ideological considerations aside, it's a gigantic mess.

much civilization such culture wow

>It is told that Omar Ibn Al-Khattab had an anal disease, which could only be cured by semen

Damn, the Qu'ran says THAT?!

It was recited orally one verse at a time in the span of 23 years by Muhammad, and then written down 19 years after his death. By that time, most of the ones that had memorized the quran had died in battle, so there were lots of versions with countless differences. The third caliph, Uthman, destroyed basically all the deviant versions and declared his version the only correct one, so that's the one we have now.

It should be obvious from its origin that the book is going to be a complete fucking mess. Muhammad took things from every religion, pagan ones, zoroastrism, christianity, judaism. It mixed everything, added some peculiar rules (4 wives each, except the prophet, who could have an unlimited number) and called it islam.

The style of the book is trite, repetitive, annoyingly bad. The stories often feel truncated or started in the middle with no context and no reference to what the hell it's talking about. Muhammad didn't even know christianity very well, so he often makes stupid mistakes (like when he says the Holy Trinity is made of God, Jesus and Mary).

The suras (chapters) are not in chronological order, which makes it very difficult to understand what exactly are the rules of islam, since the practice of naskh (abrogation) invalidates the older rules in favor of the most recent ones, when there are conflicts between 2 verses.
(Btw: all the peaceful verses muslims always quote to prove that Islam is a religion of peace come from the meccan period, the oldest one. They've all been abrogated by the medinese suras, much more recent.)

Overall, it's a terrible book.
If you want to know what Islam says, read sharia manuals or fatwa websites like IslamQA.com

No, that's an hadith. Basically, an anecdote of stuff Muhammad said/did. The Sunna has a few millions of those, and some are considered as valid as the Quran.

I don't know what you're getting at

Pretty accurate in my experience. For a book that is accorded the highest literary value among Muslims, it's mostly incoherent trash.

I'm telling you that that story about Omar Ibn Al-Khattab having an anal disease which could only be cured by semen was NOT in the quran but in a hadith.

And hadiths (which are anecdotes of stuff Muhammad did or said) are contained in the Sunna, a different book from the Quran.

Is that clear now?

But you also said that some are considered as valid as the Quran, and I find it hard to imagine that not even the most flamboyant gay would go on arabic television to defend ass diseases cured by semen unless he was really fucking sure about what he was saying theologically. Seeing as you seem to know what you're talking about, how risque is this belief exactly in the muslim community?

How do you know this, because as a straight white male I find it hard to believe that the largest religion in the world would have these wildly inconsistent claims and beliefs.

>how risque is this belief exactly in the muslim community?
That caliph Omar was a power bottom faggot? Very fucking risky. Losing-your-head risky.

I think that the guy in that video is a shia muslim mocking Omar because he's a caliph that shias don't recognize as valid. Shias are assholes, they love to slander and mock personalities that sunni muslims worship.

He probably lives in a shia majority country, so in his case saying that Omar took it up the ass is not risky unless a sunni decides to kill him for it. Business as usual for shias.

(As for how can sunni muslims condemn homosexuality while admiring a faggot like Omar, you can't really understand muslims' ability to doublethink unless you've studied them and their culture. They can say that A is non-A without finding any logical flaw. They just DON'T KNOW HOW TO THINK.)

All of this is only from a view-point in time. To truly understand any scripture, one must have the capacity to comprehend That which the words are pointing to.

All scriptures point towards Truth, the source, god (or whatever name is suits your preferences).

The Quran in its essence has NOTHING to do with Islam.

Okay, but the distinction was originally due to Muhammad being unclear about who would be his successor, the first Caliph, so how could such a distinction lead to these radical differences in ideology and view of other muslims? It's ultimately the same book, right? So you'd think they would be able to kind-of get along.

>How do you know this
I've studied Islam for years. I've read the quran, the most famous tafsirs (commentaries on the quran), lots of ahadiths, the sirat, lots of fatwas, 4 sharia legal codes. Also talked to muslims on their forums.

>I find it hard to believe that the largest religion in the world would have these wildly inconsistent claims and beliefs.
This is really basic knowledge that everyone that studies the quran possesses. None of the things I said are even slightly controversial (of course I mean among non-muslims. Muslims will deny even the evidence and proclaim that the quran is perfect and undisputable).

Islam was a political system that Muhammad invented for the sole purpose of accumulating power. Political and military power. In the quran, the supposed "Word of Allah" perfect and immutable, Muhammad constantly "reveals" verses that give him special privileges and even refer to the particular political circumstances of that time. A timeless book that can't be understood unless you know the context in which every verse was "revealed". Hm.
Among the perks of prophethood that the quran gives to Muhammad:

>He can have all the wives and female slaves he wants.

>His followers were ordered to always obey him, even when he's not "revealing" the quran.
That's because Allah protects his prophets from committing sins or saying wrong things (doctrine known as ismah) and so Muhammad is always right. Even against evidence. No backtalk.

>Allah forbade poetry, songs and drawings of people because poets, singers and painters were mocking Muhammad.
They're still forbidden to this day.

>The quran orders Muhammad's followers not to marry his wives if he were to die, because it would annoy him.
Really.

>Once, Allah gave Muhammad permission to break the law and marry the ex-wife of his adoptive son because she was hot as hell.
The ex-wife was named Zaynab, if I remember correctly.

>Another time, 3 people were saying that Aisha (the wife he married at 6 and fucked at 9) had cheated on him, but Allah sent a revelation that said that you need 4 witnesses to prove cheating, so Muhammad wasn't a cuck.
Thanks to this, even today it's still pretty much impossible for muslim women to prove they've been raped, since they need to bring 4 (male) witnesses (women's testimony is not accepted).

>The Quran even orders Muhammad's followers not to stay and talk with him too much when they visit him because that would annoy him, but the Prophet is too embarassed to tell them, so Allah does it for him (what an autist!).
He used his book of divine revelation to escape social anxiety and small talk.

None of this is a joke. I am NOT making shit up.

But how did it become such a widespread religion? Clearly there must be something about these texts that people find comforting or inspiring. Why do people say Muhammad is a peaceful and kind man if he did all this crazy and awful shit?

>how could such a distinction lead to these radical differences in ideology and view of other muslims?
Thing is, Ali (the leader of shias) had slightly different views about some matters from Abu Bakr (the leader of sunnis).
(Btw Abu Bakr means "father of the foal" because he used to fuck camels and goats. Not joking.)

Also, because of the "insult" perceived by shias against Ali from Abu Bakr and his followers, some opinions and hadiths that were transmitted by them are not considered valid by shias. The sunnis by contrast consider other hadiths not valid because they were transmitted by filthy shias.
For example, the temporary marriages (mut'a), marriages that only last a few hours so you can fuck hoes without sinning, are something the shias consider allowed but the sunnis consider abrogated by hadiths that the shias don't recognize as valid.
And since the hadiths are MILLIONS, while the quran is a pretty short book, lots of islamic rules are found in the hadiths and not in the quran.

>you'd think they'd get along
You're underestimating the sheer amount of conflict that following to the letter 2 slightly different set of rules can bring. Islam is intolerant of any other faith and even any other slightly-different-interpretation.
According to sharia, if you deny even the smallest islamic rule or any attribute of the Prophet or of Allah, you're an apostate and must be killed. No ulema (scholar) doubts this.

>Another time, 3 people were saying that Aisha (the wife he married at 6 and fucked at 9) had cheated on him, but Allah sent a revelation that said that you need 4 witnesses to prove cheating, so Muhammad wasn't a cuck.

A quick search of Wikipedia tells me Abu Bakr was called that because he enjoyed playing with goats as a child, which is a totally different thing. That honestly sounds like some sunni-shia animosity, like napeoleon being portrayed as really short while he was pretty much average for his time. It sounds really complicated, though, like, the scale you're talking about is massive. How do people make sense of it?

>how did it become such a widespread religion?
Good question. Here's how it happened.

During the first 10 years as a "prophet", Muhammad preached peace and tolerance because he had no military or political power. In those 10 years of hard work, he converted 100 people. Only ten people a year.

After he started provoking the pagans by telling them that their gods were false and ordering them to convert to Islam, the pagans kicked him out of Mecca (that's the "persecution" muslims always whine about).

Muhammad declared himself a poor refugee and went to Medina, a jewish city. Then, realizing that preaching peace and tolerance wasn't very effective, he became a highway man. A bandit.

He and his followers started to attack meccan caravans, killing the merchants and stealing all their money (the quran legitimized the practice by saying that "persecution is worse than murder", so the muslims could kill and steal to "defend" themselves from the meccan persecution. Muslims still use this logic to this day.)

The more money he got from these attacks, the more people wanted to join his religion, for 3 reasons:
1) so they could get a share;
2) so Muhammad wouldn't attack them;
3) for their war-like mentality, the winner was right. If Muhammad was winning battles, it meant Islam was the true religion.

After 5 years in Medina, Muhammed had killed/enslaved all the jews there and accumulated tens of thousands of followers.
After 10 years, he had accumulated an army and he returned to Mecca, conquered it and forced everyone to choose between converting to islam or dying.
Then he did the same thing to all other towns and tribes in the entire Arabia, unifying all of them under Islam with the sword.

When Muhammad died, his successor continue to pursue the command to "fight the idolaters until the religion will be only for Allah", and attacked Iran, India, North Africa, Spain, Italy, Eastern Europe, etc. Usually winning battles thanks to their superior number and their ferocity and surprise attacks (but getting buttblasted pretty much everytime they attacked westerners, starting from Charles Martel).

Meanwhile, they kept impregnating 2, 3 or 4 wives each, plus lots of female slaves, and shitting out millions and millions of kids that then became soldiers to conquer more infidel lands.

THAT'S how islam spread so much. With wombs and swords. Because of pure, simple, earthly greed.

>Why do people say Muhammad is a peaceful and kind man
Because the quran is full of verses that preach peace. But they are ALL from the earliest period of Muhammad's career, when he was a powerless prophet in Mecca. Which means they've all been abrogated by more recent verses "revealed" while Muhammad was in Medina, fighting the infidels.

Verse 9:5 alone is estimated to have abrogated at least 120 earlier peaceful verses.

insane birthrates, also you're fed these stories from childhood all the way through to graduation, friday sermons blasted through speakers at noon, obligatory quran classes where you have to memorize scripture even if arabic is a foreign language to you also a death penalty for leaving.
t. former muslim

>A quick search of Wikipedia tells me Abu Bakr was called that because he enjoyed playing with goats as a child
That's the sunni version of events. And it doesn't explain why he was called "Abu", which means "father".

Muslims are extremely active on wikipedia, quora and similar websites. They delete everything they don't like and try really hard to make it look like islam is a peaceful religion.

When and where did you grow up? And did they really give the death penalty to children? That's insane.

>did they really give the death penalty to children?
Not him but no, islam says that children can't be killed.

If a child apostatizes it's considered real apostasy. He doesn't get killed until he comes of age, then he has 3 days to recant his apostasy, or they kill him.

And coming of age is at like, what, 12 in Islam? Seems pretty harsh. I really remember my atheist, fuck-the-world mentality then, so do people just radicalize?

Born in 96, grew up in the UAE, government isn't really transparent so they don't release death row inmates info, but it states clearly that atheists (specifically former muslims) get the death penalty in their anti blasphemy law.

>do people just radicalize?
"Radicalizing" is one of those politically correct words that have no real meaning, like "islamism". Muslims don't radicalize, they grow up with beliefs incompatible with liberal societies all their life, and one day they simply act on them.

Saying that they "radicalize" shifts the blame onto the asshole doing the radicalizing, corrupting innocent muslims and all that bullshit. The reality is that if you follow islam, you are NOT compatible with any western country.

Also, islam and islamism are the same thing.

I'm not sure if that's true. My driving instructor, for instance, is a muslim, but we often talk about the level of homophobia within the muslim community. He's told me Islam literally means peace, but at the same time he's also a firm supporter of Erdogan, and I can imagine him taking, let's call it 'extreme action' if he had to decide between Turkey and my country of origin. Wouldn't you at that point say that he had been radicalized, because he seemed perfectly fine with living in western society, but was politically motivated to act in his own county's best interests, that country being one wherein there is a muslim majority.

Interesting stuff any comments on groups like the Sufis?

>Islam literally means peace
It actually means submission, as in to allah and his prophet.

the Shia/Sunna hassle of today is mostly a political thing (read: Iranian Revolution) and only a cover up for a much greater conflict, which is between the Arabs and the Persians (the majority of the latter being Shiites) from ancient times.
Which explains why do they hate Omar the most because he's the one who ended their empire.

Right, yeah, but that point he's so worked up I don't really want to risk mentioning that hahaha

>My driving instructor, for instance, is a muslim
He's either one of those people that call themselves muslims without even knowing what islam orders, or a liar using Taqiyya (sacred deceit) on a gullible infidel.

>He's told me Islam literally means peace
Aaand he's a liar using Taqiyya. Islam means submission. Literally.

>I can imagine him taking, let's call it 'extreme action' if he had to decide between Turkey and my country of origin. Wouldn't you at that point say that he had been radicalized
No. I would say he always was a savage piece of shit. He only recently demonstrated it with actions, but he didn't become one recently.

>Islam literally means peace
Islam literally means "submission [to God]"

>groups like the Sufis
Sufis are a mystical sect of islam that is considered heretical by pretty much every other muslim denomination. They are by far the most moderate brand of muslims, for the simple reason that they IGNORE all of islam's most violent commands and interpret islam allegorically, in a philosophical way instead of in a literal one.

Problem is, Islam is very clear that ignoring the literal meaning of the texts makes you an apostate. Sufis call themselves muslims, but they're not really.

Did you just call me a gullible infidel? How dare you. I can laugh with him, though, he's a funny guy. Tends to whistle to women passing by, plus he could easily not talk about the homophobia in his community, so there's clearly a part of him that sees the value in western society.

cant blame you
>Taqiyya
funny thing, iv'e never heard of this practice until after i left islam, not from anyone ever.

>Tends to whistle to women passing by
Inbred animals will be inbred animals, I guess.

>there's clearly a part of him that sees the value in western society
Yeah. That's why he supports a radical muslim like Erdogan and would be ready to take "extreme action" if he thought his medieval death cult demanded it.

Do something fun: actually study islam and what it REALLY says, then argue with him about it.

>iv'e never heard of this practice until after i left islam
Because they never mentioned it or because they never USED it?

I mean, did you even have contacts with infidels in the UAE? A chance to use Taqiyya?

These are very interesting user. I appreciate you taking the time to type the good words out

You're welcome. The more I learn about this medieval faith, the more pissed I get. It's fun to let off steam every once in a while.

I am angry. Angry about islam.

Word up man. Do you know anything about Saladin? I always hear he was an honorable historic figure but I don't know if that's bullshit or truth

never tried to convert anyone because i was never really invested in it, beyond the occasional sleepless night spent fearing eternal hell.

Thanks, what are the best scholarly biographies of Muhammad and exegesis of the Koran?

Do other religions run into simmilar historical issues like Islam does?

I really think I'm just going to get my driving license to be honest, but it sounds like you two would have a lot talk about. Do you meet any muslims where you live?

>Saladin? I always hear he was an honorable historic figure but I don't know if that's bullshit or truth
As a rule of thumb, if you hear that a muslim leader was honorable by western standards, that's bullshit by pro-islam orientalists. Saladin was as bloodthirsty as any other muslim leader, he was just a better military commander.

>the best scholarly biographies of Muhammad and exegesis of the Koran?
"The Life of Muhammad", which is the sirat translated by Alfred Guillaume. I'm sure you can find a copy for free on the internet.
The best tafsirs are that of At-Tabari and Ibn Kathir. Also on the internet. They're the most respected ones, their interpretation is the one still accepted by mainstream islam to this day (thanks to the anti-scientific belief that past generations were wiser than current ones and understood the world better).

>Do other religions run into simmilar historical issues like Islam does?
Meaning, being created by a murderous autistic (and probably epilectic) cunt by mixing other religions and then used as a weapon to submit entire continents?
I think buddists did that.

>Do you meet any muslims where you live?
Yes. They're arrogant, ignorant cunts. As expected from a religion that teaches them that western science is flawed bullshit made up by infidels and muslims are the only ones that know the TRUTH.
Also, they are ALL convinced that western women are worthless whores. Even the ones that don't beat them and rape them support these practices.
And muslim women are even fiercer than the men in calling western women whores.

>"The Life of Muhammad", which is the sirat translated by Alfred Guillaume.

Thanks

>Meaning, being created by a murderous autistic

I mean in their holy texts having simmilar indications of not being divinely inspired. From some of the study ive done what you are saying sounds a bit simmilar to Mormonism in some ways.

>their holy texts having simmilar indications of not being divinely inspired
Well, I haven't really studied any other religion, but since they're all bullshit (especially the abramitic ones) I would assume they all have a few indicators of their bullshit nature.

Mormonism is wacky, but in a harmless way. Joseph Smith was a complete fucking hack, of course. All that story about the golden tablets was ludicrous. And the rest of their doctrine is too.

Video related:

youtube.com/watch?v=0a3eJC3qAFU

Is acts17appologetics/ david wood a good source of info on Islam?

Solid post thanks

I've read some articles by David Wood and they seemed solid. But if you want to really know what it says, a quick and easy way is to download some sharia legal code and read the laws about the matters that interest you. Muslim legislators always justify every law by quoting the relevant quranic suras and hadiths.
I suggest these 2:

>'Umdat al-Salik (The Reliance of the Traveller).

>A Summary of Islamic Jurisprudence.

You can find both on the internet.
The first is from the 13th century. The second was written in 2001. They're pretty much IDENTICAL. No progress in eight centuries.
Really drives the point home that islam is anti-science, anti-progress, anti-innovations, anti-freethinking.

Muhammad had scribes write it down, so it wasn't just recited orally.
>The third caliph, Uthman, destroyed basically all the deviant versions and declared his version the only correct one
Wrong, he destroyed the ones that went against Muhammads original Quran that the scribes wrote down, and he compiled the Quran. He burnt the wrong ones because he didn't want people in Syria to be reciting something different from people in Egypt, it would cause corruption.
>It should be obvious from its origin that the book is going to be a complete fucking mes
If you translate a 1400 year old language it won't make sense. In original Arabic it's a miracle, that's how Muhammad (PBUH) got so many followers in such a short amount of time.
>since the practice of naskh (abrogation) invalidates the older rules in favor of the most recent ones, when there are conflicts between 2 verses
There are only historical abrogations in the Quran, there are none relating to the tenants of Islam, so they don't matter. For example 9:5 is a historical verse, and by reading the verses that come before it you can see that the Muslims made a treaty with the polytheists, who broke the treaty and killed Muslims. So Allah allowed the Muslims to attack them.
If you read the verse after it clearly explains that if they seek protection and don't fight, then grant them protection and deliver them to their place of safety.
>Overall, it's a terrible book
That would be the opinion of anyone who picked out verses without reading the whole thing
>If you want to know what Islam says, read sharia manuals or fatwa websites like IslamQA.com
Fatwa websites? Anyone can post a fatwa, for all you know it could be a non-Muslim pretending to give wrong advice. And there are no such things as Sharia manuals.
If you want to know what islam says you don't go to random blogs on the internet from anonymous people.
>Is acts17appologetics/ david wood a good source of info on Islam
Why would you go to someone who's specialty is in philosophy for info on Islam? You go to a Muslim who's studied Islam. If you want to learn about Christianity you go to a Christian who's studied Christianity.

Well said my fellow 'pede

No, his understanding of Islam isn't what I would call great.

The Islamic narrative regarding the building of the Kabbah by Abraham and Ishmael is fucking retarded, to start.

>Memri TV couldn't handle Momo's banter

>there are only historical abrogations in Islam
islamic defense force is here

Considering that there's so many easily refutable lies in this thread, I don't see why not. The reality is Islam is divine, Muhammad was clearly mentioned in previous religious texts (Torah and Bible). There's a reason why it's the fastest growing religion by converts in the west.

>There's a reason why it's the fastest growing religion by converts

Source on this? I thought it was immigration.

Pretty much your entire post is bullshit, as expected from a muslim. Greatest hits:

>Muhammad had scribes write it down
While some verses were written on scraps of paper, fabric, wood and even animal bones, the majority of it was memorized. Zayd had to gather all the ones that knew it by memory to write it all down.

>he destroyed the ones that went against Muhammads original Quran
Uthman destroyed any quran except his version and then declared that the other versions were "corrupted". There is no proof whatsoever that his version was the most faithful to Muhammad's original teachings.

>In original Arabic it's a miracle
And here we have the most retarded argument muslims always use: the quran is itself a miracle... but only in the original arabic. Christ...

>there are none relating to the tenants of Islam
Complete fucking bullshit debunked by every islamic scholar on the planet. Even the goddamn prohibition to drink alcohol is nothing but a later addition that abrogated a previous verse that instead allowed alcohol.
And Ibn Kathir and at-Tabari and EVERY OTHER MUSLIM SCHOLAR agrees that veerse 9:5 (the Verse of the Sword) made it forever impossible to coexist peacefully with infidels except for short truces (who cannot be longer than 10 years). This is not my opinion, it's mainstream doctrine. Study your own religion.

>the verse after it clearly explains that if they seek protection and don't fight, then grant them protection
Who the fuck do you think you're fooling? That verse talks about dhimmitude. If the infidels submit and "seek protection" (meaning = they become dhimmis) then they must not be killed, because the dhimmis have to pay "infidelity taxes" (jizya and kharaj) so they're an immense source of income for muslims.
That's what the quran means by "protection". The same thing mobsters mean.

>Anyone can post a fatwa
IslamWeb.net and IslamQA are run by respected sheyks, not by "anyone".
And each fatwa is supported by lots of quotations from the quran, the sirat, the hadiths and the tafsirs. They're doctrinally solid.

>That would be the opinion of anyone who picked out verses without reading the whole thing
I read the whole thing. It was a piece of shit.

>there are no such things as Sharia manuals
Are you high on donkey semen?? Umdat al-Salik (Reliance of the Traveller) is still recognized as a sharia manual to this day. It's given out in american mosques to new converts to teach them what sharia says. It was even recognized by the university of Al-Azhar (the most prestigious of the sunni world) as a valid source of doctrine!
And "A Summary of Islamic Jurisprudence" was written as recently as 2001. Tell me this doesn't exist:
>amazon.com/Summary-Islamic-Jurisprudence-VOL-Set/dp/B004E4AHWE
I guess Amazon is a lying infidel too.

What a lying piece of shit. Go practice your taqyyia somewhere else.

>easily refutable lies
>doesn't refute a single one
That inbreeding really got to your head.

complete bullshit.

>The reality is Islam is divine,
May Allah kill me right now if he exists and if islam is really divine.
...
See? Nothing.

>Muhammad was clearly mentioned in previous religious texts (Torah and Bible).
No, he wasn't. You muslims just twist the meaning of a few passages to make it look like they refer to Muhammad. Bullshit.

>There's a reason why it's the fastest growing religion by converts in the west.
It's the fastest growing religion because of 2 dynamics:
1) FUCKING IMMIGRANTS.
2) YOUR WHORE WOMEN SHITTING OUT 7 LITTLE ROACHES EACH.
And that's it. The converts are an insignificant part of the equation (and the ex-muslims are probably more numerous).

Your religion is fake. Your prophet was a pedophile and a piece of shit. You're a piece of shit too. And your so called god can't even stop me from speaking.

Fuck you and fuck allah.

ncregister.com/daily-news/why-are-millions-of-muslims-becoming-christian/
economist.com/blogs/economist-explains/2013/09/economist-explains-17
nytimes.com/2013/02/04/world/europe/rise-of-islamic-converts-challenges-france.html

People aren't really that different, tribalism accounts for most conflict between cultures

Is it actually powerful in its own language? Is it by virtue of its tongue or quality?

youtube.com/watch?v=k3MzZgPBL3Q

>Among the numerous situations that may arise during this season are the Christmas lights. Little Omar –with awe and delight, one evening as you’re passing by lit up houses on the way to the Masjid –may exclaim: “Look, the lights are so pretty!” you look at him frowning, “No, no, no! Omar, those are ugly!” you reply scolding him.

>Omar may never tell you he thinks the lights are pretty again, because he doesn’t want to disappoint you. However, that doesn’t mean that this is what he thinks. He may still believe that the lights are pretty; and in addition, he may feel that this is untrue!

>It may even be hard for you to tell someone the lights are ugly – possibly because you don’t even believe that yourself. Why? Because the lights are delightful to most, young and old alike, that’s why they are used for all sorts of festive occasions. The fact is, although they may be nice to look at, the underlying reason is that they are used at this time of the year, and this is what is ugly… not the lights themselves.

islamic autism, everyone

>People aren't really that different
Muslims are born and raised in a culture that did not have the Enlightment. A culture that is utterly dominated by a warring faith from the 7th century that cannot change and adapt to modern times because one of its basic tenets is its immutability. They're fucking aliens. Their worldview, their morals, their way of intending logic... everything is drastically different from ours, and in ways a westerner wouldn't even dream of.

It's uncanny to read and hear how they think. Aliens.

this is really beautiful, thanks user

>Also, they are ALL convinced that western women are worthless whores

They are sort of right but this really activates a tribal defense reflex in me, because I can tell when I meet them IRL(lot's of Arab exchange students at my college) they have no respect for our culture or people. Prior to meeting and studying Islam I thought I would sympathize because I'm right wing as well. But Islam seems to just be an Arab expansionist ideology packaged as Abrahamic religion. The fact progressives are so ignorant makes me rage and has caused a couple power level slip ups.

>They are sort of right but this really activates a tribal defense reflex in me
I completely understand you. Fuck our retarded women but fuck muslims even more.

Islam is not even right-wing. It's obtusity, ignorance, arrogance, arab suprematism. In one word, shit.

>Taqiyya

End this /pol/ meme, taqiyya is only a concept in Shia Islam

they are right about our women, but the facts are that their women would be just as bad if they weren't severely repressed, which is what makes them such insufferable cunts in the first place.

You want islamic autism? How about this quranic verse:

>(33:53) O you who believe! Enter not the Prophet's houses, except when leave is given to you for a meal, (and then) not (so early as) to wait for its preparation. But when you are invited, enter, and when you have taken your meal, DISPERSE WITHOUT SITTING FOR A TALK. Verily, such (behaviour) annoys the Prophet, and HE IS SHY of (asking) you (to go), but Allah is not shy of (telling you) the truth. And when you ask (his wives) for anything you want, ask them FROM BEHIND A SCREEN, that is purer for your hearts and for their hearts. And it is not (right) for you that you should annoy Allah's Messenger, nor that you should ever MARRY HIS WIVES AFTER HIM (his death). Verily! With Allah that shall be an enormity.

In this single verse, Muhammad uses the quran to:
1) Tell his friends not to come in his house unless he invites them,
2) Not to stay in his house indefinitely but fuck off quickly because he's shy and too awkward for small talk,
3) He tells women to not show themselves directly, but from behind a screen (hijab),
4) He warns his comrades that no one should fuck his wives after he dies because the idea pisses him off.

This is islam's perfect man. This is islam's sacred, perfect, timeless divine revelation.

Rekt. Keep fighting the good fight user.

Is the constitution a good book to read?
If you are a Law-maker the quran the only incorruptible constitution on earth.

Can you save some of your posts on a pastebin/do an faq your stuff is great

I think I might spend some time to make a sourced chart comparing Jesus and the NT to Muhamed and the Quran. And then try and get /pol/ to run with it and spread onto twitter/fb. Because the facts speak for themselves

>taqiyya is only a concept in Shia Islam
Complete fucking bullshit.
In 'Umdat al-Salik, which is a SUNNI sharia manual (shafi school) there is a blatant taqyyia attempt in the paragraph about infibulation. Pic related.

While the english translation says only to cut the prepuce of the clitoris and not the clitoris itself, the arab texts says clearly to cut the clitoris.

The misleading translation was confirmed in a courtroom during a trial (case n° A392/2002) by professor of linguistic Mark John Durie. Here's his very interesting testimony (page 50):

>saltshakers.org.au/images/stories/attachments/284_313278_VCAT_-_DOCUMENTS_RELATIN.pdf

Sunnis use taqyyia just like shia. Claiming they don't is just part of taqyyia.

Excellent idea. Pictures and infographics are the way to go nowadays.

This constutution (the Coran) is such hermetic and solid that there Is a Law whithin it to read every lettre.

Look up "Qur'an Code."

The Qur'an is the exact opposite of a mess. It's ordered mathematically in ways which would've been impossible, especially when it was transmitted orally.

>While some verses were written on scraps of paper, fabric, wood and even animal bones, the majority of it was memorized. Zayd had to gather all the ones that knew it by memory to write it all down.
>Uthman destroyed any quran except his version and then declared that the other versions were "corrupted". There is no proof whatsoever that his version was the most faithful to Muhammad's original teachings.
I'm not sure you understand how the compilation worked.

Muhammad taught ONE Quran, with seven different ahruf (ways of reading in some cases).

This provision from Allah was given to help facilitate the easy recitation and memorisation of the Quran by the contemporary Arab speakers from all Arab tribes with their subtle linguistic nuances, especially focusing on the young, old, women, and those who could not read or write.

The written text of this quran has been standardized by the Caliph Uthman in agreement of the Companions of Prophet Muhammad so as to accomadate these readings. Where the text could not accomodate a particular instance of reading, often an addition/ommision of letter/word was required.

The fact remains that only ONE text of the Quran is preserved and read today in 10 authentic Qirat, (readings), each transmitted by two rwayats (narrations). Each of these readings are authentically transmitted by the prophet Muhammad and all of these are acceptable readings of the Quran. The meaning stays the same, grammatical rules and annotations are added to preserve the recitation and meaning of the Quran.
>Even the goddamn prohibition to drink alcohol is nothing but a later addition that abrogated a previous verse that instead allowed alcohol.
This is exactly what I mean. Only historical abrogations have taken place, the abrogation of the alcohol verses were historical.
First Allah sent down a verse stopping people from coming to prayer drunk, then he stopped strong drinks and eventually banned alcohol as a whole. You can't just
>And Ibn Kathir and at-Tabari and EVERY OTHER MUSLIM SCHOLAR agrees that veerse 9:5 (the Verse of the Sword) made it forever impossible to coexist peacefully with infidels except for short truces (who cannot be longer than 10 years). This is not my opinion, it's mainstream doctrine. Study your own religion.
Which mainstream doctrine are you talking about? All the shuyookh I've heard from say the exact opposite. And cite your source, don't just throw names of tafsir authors.
>That verse talks about dhimmitude. If the infidels submit and "seek protection" (meaning = they become dhimmis)
It doesn't say this though, if it talked about infidels I'd see your point. But the fact is the word "Infidel" isn't even mentioned in the Quran once. Clearly shows you haven't read the quran and are only copying from websites.
>Umdat al-Salik (Reliance of the Traveller)
Umdat al Salik is a manual for FIQH, not sharia. Sharia is used in an islamic state, fiqh is used everywhere.

Always. Destroying lying mudshits is a moral imperative.

I'm actually writing a book about islam's teachings and the many ways it's incompatible with western civilization. 445 pages of evidence from islamic texts that islam has no place in the West.
It's a scholarly work, because I'm a researcher by formation, so every statement is carefully sourced. I want to make it ironclad, so no muslim can claim I'm lying.
If I can find a publisher that isn't too much of a pussy I'm gonna publish it. And then probably get killed by some inbred goatfucker.

Remember me after my death and keep up the good fight.

>is such hermetic and solid that there Is a Law whithin it to read every lettre.
Just buy a chromosome already.

its worth reading.

i personally preferred it to the bible from an academic point of view

>I'm actually writing a book about islam's teachings and the many ways it's incompatible with western civilization.

Should it get published will you let us know how to get it?

i'd fucking read that book. this thread has been very enlightening. im a liberalfag and am now even more disgusted by islam.

tell us more.

>I'm actually writing a book about islam's teachings and the many ways it's incompatible with western civilization.
HAHAHHAHAHHAHAHHHAHAHAAHHAAHAHAHAHHHAHAHHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAH

be sure to let us know when its getting published/ self-published

The fact is the Quran is a divine book, it (and the hadith) contains many strikingly accurate prediction.
The fact that it claims to have been perfectly preserved should automatically tell you about its divine nature.
The Quran's eloutqent nature of recitation and rhyming of verses is thought to be the best Arabic book (by linguistic scholars).
The fact that the Quran is in accuracy with modern science also shows its divine nature. It explained embryology 1400 years ago.
The Bible and torah clearly predicted Muhammad, they said he would be 1.In the lands of Kedar. 2. The people of Selah will sing or rejoice. 3. He will be a mighty warrior. 4. He will turn back the idol worshippers and implement justice ( in the region of Kedar and Selah )
Kedar is the son of Ishmael, whom Muhammad is the descendant of.