The Instigator
Pro (for)
0 Points
The Contender
Con (against)
0 Points

Christianity(pro) vs Islam(con).

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 0 votes the winner is...
It's a Tie!
Voting Style: Open Point System: Select Winner
Started: 6/17/2015 Category: Religion
Updated: 1 year ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 536 times Debate No: 76646
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (7)
Votes (0)




I hope someone will join me for what will hopefully be an interesting and thought provoking debate.

This debate will not focus so much on theology rather than the real life implications and practices of each religion and their compatibility with modern and progressive society. I believe that the real world implications of Christianity have had a far better impact in modern society than Islam in the areas of:

Missionary work
Living opportunities
Women's Rights
Basic human interaction

There is a significant BOP on both sides as we must both provide evidence for our claims. Sources are not necessary and no penalty will be given for omitting them. However, should you decide to use a source, that is perfectly fine.


Please be polite and respectful. I feel that debates are much more enjoyable when there is a mutual respect between the two parties

If you do include a source, please cite it

and most importantly, have an open mind! :)


Regarding peacefulness the Quran states that Islam is Peace when it says "O Men enter all in Peace" In Arabic the word used to describe Islam in thies verse was Al Silm meaning peace and also theres a verse in the quran which says "allah doesnt forbid you to be friends with those disbelievers who never fought you in cause iof religion and never driven you out of your houses so you have to be good with them and deal justly withvthem" this is in Surat Al Mumtahina in the Quran and a Hadith in Bukhari says " A Muslim is a person who doesnt harm Muslims with his hands or toungue" however we find in the Bible stories in Deutrononmy where people are ordered to fight a city and kill all living things there and the book of joshua and especially Deutronomy 20 is against Islamic beliefs simce it says if you fought a city seek peace woth it and if it iopens its doors then all the people in it are yours and under slavery while we see in Quran "If they Incline to peace then incline for it" in Chapter of Al Anfal(spoils of War) and in Islam wars are only deffensive as in al Baqarah " Fight in the path of God those who fight you and dont transgess limits God doesnt love those who transgess limits" however in Bible we see Moses and other prophets attacking the Cannanites and Midians. Tolerance in the Quran ioutwighs that in Bible since the Quran says "Who wishes believes and who wishes disbelieve" and "no compulsion in religion" and in Chapter Al Maidah it says "Dont argye with the People of Book except with whats better except those who fight you and say Our God and Your God is One and we believe in what was revealed to us amd what was revealed to you and we submitt to Him" and we find a Hadith in Abu Dawood saying "I came to guide and not to curse, O Allah May you guide People of Daws for they
left Islam" this is for tolerance and peacefullness however in Bible in Deutronomy Chapter 13 a death oenalty for apostasy thank you
Debate Round No. 1


The passage in Deuteronomy that my opponent mentioned was taken grotesquely out of context. If we read the passage more carefully we will find that God authorized this attack because the Jewish faith was still in its infancy and this "village" was actually a nomadic tribe of savages that would have ransacked Jerusalem and destroyed God's nation. No where n the Bible will one find a passage that condones violence against all non believers and tells Jews/Christians to kill. The people who the Israelites killed were all fully mature male warriors who posed a very large threat to them. Another thing to consider is that all violence of the Bible takes place in the old testament, before the advent of Christ and the Christian message. Even the violence of the Old Testament isnt nearly Equivalent to the hundreds of verses in the Quran that condone violence against an y and all people who would dare question the "religion of peace." The old testament is not used as a tool for moral guidance but is rather utilized as a history of Israel and the prophecy for Jesus' coming. If you have a problem with the violence in the old testament or mosaic law, take that up with the Jews. In the New Testament, which Christians follow, we find verses such as these

"If one strikes you on your cheek, turn the other to him also"
(Luke 6:29)

"Blessed are the peacemakers for they shall be called sons of god"
(Matthew 5:9)

"love your enemies, and bless those who curse you"
(Luke 6:28)

"And let the peace that comes from Christ rule in your hearts. For as members of one body you are called to live in peace. And always be thankful."
(Colossians 3:15)

I challenge my opponent to fine ONE instance of violence or condoning of violence in the New Testament, which is the real Christian message. However, When we look at the Quran, we find a stark contrast to the Bible in terms of peace. When I read through the Quran, I found verses such as the following

Quran (3:151) - "Soon shall We cast terror into the hearts of the Unbelievers, for that they joined companions with Allah, for which He had sent no authority". This speaks directly of polytheists, yet it also includes Christians, since they believe in the Trinity (ie. what Muhammad incorrectly believed to be 'joining companions to Allah').

Quran (8:12) "I shall cast terror into the hearts of those who disbelieve. Cut off their heads and every fingertip of them." no reasonable person can argue that this means a spiritual struggle

Quran (8:67) "It is not for a Prophet that he should have prisoners of war until he had made a great slaughter in the land..."

Quran (9:123) - "O you who believe! fight those of the unbelievers who are near to you and let them find in you hardness."

Quran (25:52) - "Therefore listen not to the Unbelievers, but strive against them with the utmost strenuousness..." "Strive against" is Jihad - obviously not in the personal context. It's also significant to point out that this is a Meccan verse.

Now with all this in mind, my opponent can throw all the verses of peace that he wants but there is no rebuttal that can refute these facts. In addition, any "peaceful" verse he gives me will be in direct contradiction to the verses mentioned above which would pose a major problem for Islam as a religion. My opponent can also attempt to cherry pick violent Bible verses but this will not work either because all violence in the Bible is found in the Old Testament and is justified against certain tribes who wanted the total destruction of Israel.

Id also like to raise a few points about Muslims vs Christians

1. Most Muslim countries are failed states while primarily Christian nations are wealthy and prosperous

2. Islam currently has the most extremists of any religion with hundreds of Islamic terrorist groups killing innocent civilians every day in the name of Allah. While it is true that Christian terrorist groups exist, they are very small compared to their muslim counterparts and their acts of terror are much less severe and find little to no backing from the Bible.

3. Several hundred Christian charities exist for non Christians and they provide aid and relief for displaced muslims while Islam does not operate a single charity for international aid. Christian Aid workers are also often at risk for kidnapping from islamic terrorists for helping in those countries

4. When Christians live in Muslim countries, they are constantly persecuted and are denied churches and houses of worship. When Muslims come to Christian countries, they are accepted as useful members of society and are allowed to gather and build mosques freely.

5. Christians in Muslim countries are killed for peacefully expressing their desire for equality. Muslims in Christian countries violently protest and demand that the government and schools change to fit their needs, claiming racism whenever they are criticized for their behavior.

6. Sharia law is considered higher than constitutional law in almost all Muslim countries. Sharia law promotes oppression, veiling of women, mandatory beards, religious police and a tax for non muslims. Christianity has no concept of religious law and separates church and state. with the exception of canon law, which only applies to clergy and is much less restricting than sharia.

While we're at it, lets compare the Prophet of Islam (Muhammed) and Jesus Christ;

1. Muhammed was a bandit and a warrior while Jesus was a preacher and a carpenter

2. Muhammed preached violence and demanded bodyguards while Jesus preached peace and chastised anyone who attempted to defend him with force

3. Muhammed took 12 wives and claimed revelations from god to justify his sex harems and polygamy. Jesus was celibate and never looked upon a woman in a lustful way

4. Muhammed married a 9 year old girl, fondled her and BATHED with her. Jesus ... well... didn't do that.

5. Muhammed spread his message through hate and war, killing anyone who wouldn't convert and taxing non muslims. Jesus spread his message through peace and baptism, using the gospel to bring people to god.

6. Early Muslims persecuted and killed non Muslims. Early Christians lived in constant persecution from the Roman government.

7. Jesus was said to do many miracles, with several eye witnesses bearing testament to his divinity while Muhammed was never able to do one miraculous thing in his life.

8. Muhammed: Demanded others die for him
Jesus: Suffered one of the most agonizing death for the sake of Humanity.

9. Jesus = most praised spiritual leader. Muhammed = most criticized spiritual leader.

(Many Muslims consider Muhammed to be the utmost example of a good person.)

I anxiously await my opponents answers to my points and hope he will make some of his own


Well, I am really surprised by my oppononets knowledge of the Quran yet there are some points meed to be cleared here:1-Youre right when you said about Deutronomy and the danger of these nomadic tribes to Jewish since it is the same for Muslims at Prophet Muhammed time and these wars and verses you pickedvfrom the Quran are deffensive against certain disbelievers who attacked Muslims as I stated the vesre whoch says that Muslims are ORDERED to treat peaceful non-muslims kindly as in Surat Al mumtahina which I stated above. The point I am making is that Quran must be taken as a whole book since you can pick verses which talk about war and I pick verses preaching tolerance andmthis isnt any contradiction as the book is a complete book and when we take all verses incconsideration we find the following :1-Islam gives us permission to deffend ourselves 2-Other peaceful non-believers must be treated kindly and justly 3-of the attackingnnon-muslim stop we must stop(chapter al maidah).So all verses about war are talking about those ruthless Arab who driven Muslims out if thier homes and took their properties and wage a war pn them for no reason as in Al Baqarah:"Permission to fight is given to those who were driven out of thoer houses and killed just for saying Our Lord is God" anyway about chairty Muslims are ordered to give charity to All People who are Poor amd needy whatever thier religion and I a, not talking about what is happening but what Islam should be as in al Tauba:"Al Sadaqat(Charity) are to the Poor and Needy and the Strangers and Captives....etc" no where it specifies Muslims and we find Omar Ibn Al Khatab giving a charity to a Jew fromcthe Money of the State which proves my point.About Non-Muslims in Islamic countries i live in egypt next to a Church and I visit it currently with my Christian friends and I go to a Christian School and were all friends wothout any racism and even mr President vistited the Cathedral on Januray 7th the Coptic Christmas and we have a united Charity for rebuilding Churches and Mosques and Christians and Muslims live here in harmony and they participate in political life as much as Muslims and about New Testament verses here are some as in Mathew Jesus says"Dont think I came Earth to spread Peace but I came as a sword" and Luke im his parable he says" amd ,y enemies vring them and slay them infront of me" and sorryvdidnt he says " I didnt came to abolish the Law" and "I am the God of Moses" so he was the one who instructed Moses to kill the Cananites all except virgin women who were taken as captives and he was God of David whoraised s,ashing children on rocks in Psalms and the point that the Old Testament was deffensive wars then can tou deny that Joshua in the Book of Joshua atracked the city for "Not obeying the messanger he sent" and lets claim that they were deffensive why Moses ordered to kill all children and women execot the virgin ?? What did they do?! they could have only killed the men who posed a threat to Jewish oppostiely to Al Baqarah Quran which says"Fight in the path of God those who fight you" and it completes to say "Wla Taatadoo In Allah Lay Yuhib Al Mutadin" which means But dont offend or start attcking since God doesnt love offenders and about the 12 wives of the Prophet are even less than one quarter of the 200 concubines of David we see in the Bible and 9 yaer old Aisha is still under elaboration since this was reported by Hadith which isnt a Quran so it may be a fabricated one and studies using Ibn Ishaq the Story of Muhammed it says she was born before his mission bu 4 years and this makes her 19 years old when he married her anyway. You cant say that wars in Old Testament were deffensive as in Numbers 31 it says Vengence of God on Midianites and why in Deutronomy did it say " Of they open the doors then they are all yours and under slavery" and this was with peace amd who is better here Jesus who is God fro,cthe begining and he instructed these instructions in Old testament amd said in the new I didnt came to abolish the Law or Muhammed who in his quran there is "If they incline to peace then inclinento it and leave them" in Al Anfal and even when Muhammed reached Mecca his home town and had an upper hand on the people who persecuted his nation for 23 years and slayed him and he said" Go youre today free" "He who is in his house is Safe". You may be right when you say that Muslim countires sometimes treat non-Muslims unjustly but that has nothing to do with Islam which says in Al Maidah" Dont argue with the people of Book"
Debate Round No. 2


My opponent in his argument has brought up several good points but unfortunately, with a small amount of critical analysis, these assertions can be easily refuted.

My opponent has stated that both the Bible and the Koran should be taken as whole books rather than looking for individual verses of violence. Now this is true and I've never said the Bible is 100% flawless. I am only attempting to prove that Islam is more violent than Christianity, or in optimistic terms, Christianity is more peaceful than Islam. Unfortunately, as I said in my previous argument, when we read the Koran, we get an uneasy feeling of non-peacefulness. The Bible tends to focus on the rewards of living a good life for Jesus, inciting people with the rewards of heaven and being with God. The Koran, however tends to do the exact opposite. In the Koran, we find several verses scaring people into doing good deeds by threatening them with promises of hellfire and eternal suffering. By this comparison we can find that even the Koran is belligerent and prefers to bully people into doing the right thing rather than explain WHY to do the right thing. Another point to consider is that violence is littered throughout the Koran in almost every Sura. (Islamic version of a book) To reiterate, the only violence of the Bible is found in a few select chapters of the Old testament and is completely justified, unlike the rampant rape and pillage of Mohammed's armies.

My opponent also stated that Islamic wars were just as defensive as the wars Jews fought to defend Israel. Now unfortunately, the Koran he bases this off of begs to differ by its recollection of events. In order to give my opponent the proper reason for Mohammed's wars, lets go through a brief history of early Islam; Muhammad was born in Mecca to an Arabian pagan family. He grew up as a normal child. Historians argue whether he was a merchant or a bandit but historical evidence points to merchant as his likely occupation. In his 20s, Muhammad married a wealthy widow named Khadija, another Arabian pagan. After their marriage Muhammad began seeing "revelations from god" which were likely hallucinations brought on by heat stroke and dehydration. In these questionable revelations, the Archangel Gabriel revealed the Koran to Muhammad and told him to preach in the city of Mecca where he was born. He began to preach in the Kabba, which was a pagan worship center with the Arabian gods encircling it. City authorities expelled Muhammad from Mecca for teaching a heresy. Muhammad then emigrated to Medina where Islam received a much warmer welcome, There, he preached that fighting for God was the only way to win his favor and gathered an army to CAPTURE MECCA BY FORCE. (thats right, rather than preach and be persecuted, Mohammed took up the sword to advance his own agenda) only 5 years after its advent, Islamic warriors inspired by the "religion of peace" captured Mecca by force and ransacked the city. It is said that Mohammed beheaded up to 800 Jews in a single day. After his conquest had captured what is now Saudi Arabia, the religion of peace stormed across the borders into Turkey, Iraq and Egypt. The verses I stated in the previous argument were in reference to those wars. The simple fact is that no one can consider those wars to be defensive. Mohammed wasn't defending himself from persecution, he was killing innocent Jews Christians and Pagans who were defending THEMSELVES from persecution by Muslims. No matter how my opponent chooses to spin this information, the simple truth is that Mohammed's wars were conquest and not defensive.

Christianity, however never took up arms to spread but rather endured lasting persecution, using peace and love to bring people to the religion. The only Christian war that was ever fought was the Crusades, which were retaliatory strikes to Muslim aggression.

by these facts, we can soundly put the nail in the coffin for my opponents assertion that Islamic wars were defensive as Jewish ones were.

My opponent also mentioned that Muslims are loving and tolerant to Non Muslims. (or Kuffar in Arabic) This is also an utterly false concept as even a quick glimpse into the history and laws of Islamic Caliphates offer a very different view. In the Islamic caliphate, A christian man is 1 half of a Muslim man and a Christian woman is one quarter of a Muslim man. A pagan man is 1/4 of a Muslim male and a pagan woman is 1/8 of a Muslim male. This means that if a Muslim man killed a christian woman, there would have to be 2 christian male witnesses present to convict the man whereas if a christian killed a Muslim, one Muslim testimony is all it would take to send the defendant to the chopping block. Also, under Sharia, non Muslims must pay a tax called the Jizya, which among other things, funds Islamic warriors who conquer and to oppress other people. Essentially, non Muslims are forced into aiding their captors. It is also a well known fact that one must pay the Jizya on his or her knees and look at the ground. They also must beg the tax collector to take their money which is a very degrading and inhumane system. In the verses my opponent mentioned, Mohammed is telling his followers not to kill non Muslims who "we have an alliance with" alliance as in living under the caliphate. This doesnt mean a whole lot as Mohammed is basically saying not to bother killing people theyve already got under their control.

My opponent brought up two verses in the New testament that he believes condone violence. one of these verses was the most contravention saying of Jesus Christ "I came not to bring peace but a sword." now on the surface this appears to hint that Jesus came to kill. This is simply not true. Jesus' sword was never a literal one. In fact, when Peter takes up a sword to defend him he says "He who lives by the sword will die by the sword" implying that Jesus wants no armed defense or bodyguards. Jesus' "sword" was a spiritual one that he would use to destroy the power of the devil in mankind and join heaven and earth once more. The other verse was "take those who would not have me as king and slay them before my face" This verse is not an actual quote of Luke but rather part of a apocryphal parable he was telling in which an insane and power hungry king is made good by the power of the Holy spirit. Luke did not say this in reference to his real life enemies but rather towards the kings enemies in the parable. Thus, my opponent has still failed to come up with a violent verse in the New testament.

In reference to Solomon's 200 wives, God never approved of it and in fact told Solomon several times that this was not the way to live. Mohammed's wives and concubines, however, were approved of by Allah many times. Also, Solomon was a Jew, so his actions are not a burden on us Christians.

Im also glad my opponent brought up Aisha. Aisha was 6 years old when Mohammed married her and 9 when he had sex with her to consummate their marriage. By this fact, Aisha should not be used in any way to defend Islam as she is one of the largest reasons Islam is so heavily criticized and seen as a backwards religion.

I hope my opponent takes these arguments to heart


I am glad ro see my opponemts knowlege about "islamic History" yet the problem is I am not an ordinary Muslim I am a Quranist amd reject these inhumane actions of Caliphate which have no base in the Quran amd I will elaborate more now:
The verse in Chapter 9 of al Jizyah is talking about specific Jews and christians who atracked us and caused harm amd so they need to oay compensation of losses and this is still the system in modern day war and I dint approve conquers anyway and if you believe the wars are offensive I demmand your answer for this verse"God doesnt forgid you tocbefriends with disgelievers who didnt FIGHT youcfor religion......." and "If they incline to peace incline to it" Regarding Muhammed entrance to Mecca it wasnt a conquer, it was a forced RETURN to Mecca adter peesecution as the cerses says in Al fatih"Youcthought that the Prophet and the believers wont return backcto their families(Children and wives) " and Muslims didnt even killcone person that day as in ABukhari"Go you are free today and I forgive you" and the verses of al Tawbah hich demmand Muslims return to Mecca it says"amd if anycof the infidels seek your refuge then five it to them and tell them the words of God and take them to safe place" so this shows that day Muhammed was ordered to accept refuge of peaceful Infidels who didnt persecute Muslims and even those who persecuted and repented can seek refuge !! amd there werent anyother conquests at the time of Muhammed anymore as this was a return and he didnt HARM any of the infidels as the verses show anyway and the verses of Baqarah"Get them out From where they drobe you out" which means JUST fight until you return your properties and homes which they took after driving you out !! Regarding 1/4 amd 1/8 I demmand a verse in Quran justifying that! and I demmand also many things : if wars are offensive what is "Fight in cause of God those who fight you ..." and it seems you tend to brush off my question in he previous round "Wasnt Jesus the God of Moses ??" Didnt he say"imdidnt came to abolish the law" then HE approved the death of All the city in Joshua even females and children and Deutronomy and the Spoils of War and Number when Moses killed all the people excelt virgin womem ?? You say deffense then way was it in numbers Gods Vengence as stated ?? and about Allah using more threatining than convincing then I tell you true statistics and search them :the occurance of word Athab (paimin Hell) is EqUAL to Thawab (Rewards in Heavan) and Jannah (haeavns) is EQUAl to occurance of Al Nar (Hellfire) which shows the balanced-words of the Most Wise and violence in Old Tesa,ent is not defrenive as David praising dashing children into rocks and more and theres a long list amd notfew as you say !! what about Deut 2:25 "All nations should be terrorized by Nation of Yahwah(ieJesus) or Yahwah isnt jesus ?? and Deutornomy 7:2 when Yahwah instructs killing of all cities under CONQUER and 3:3-6 when they killed Mem amd Womem amd Children was that defrensive ?? killing women ?? and Joshua 6:21 he killed mem and womem am children under whose imstructions amd about 800 jews what bout the tweleve thousands of Joshua 8:25 men and womem ?! amd Isiah 13:15-18 when God whished to rape their wives and smash thoer children amd Eizeikal 9:10 prders to kill thowmwhole city and have no mercy and Sa,eul 2 when David burns cities and who was thier God who instructed them ?! about the 800jews theres no historical account if them In Quran amd they came through narrations which may not be true and may be fabricated and ket me cocmlide with this verse if Quran in Chapter Al Maidah of Cain and Habel which says"If you (O brother) rose your hand to kill me I would never rise my hand to kill you (for deffense) I fear God the Lord of Universe " and "adm whoever kills a soul without being in court for justice as if he killed all the nations and he who made it alive as if he made all nations live" and in Al Furqan " The Slaves of Allah are those who if disgelievers spoke harsh to them they reply with PEACE" and Al Baqarah" Those who are Muslims and Jews and Christians who believe in AGodamd the Last Day and do good deeds no fear on them on that Day and they wouldnt get doomed"
Debate Round No. 3


It appears that there is a major flaw with the logic of my opponents previous arguments. My opponent claimed that the is a "Quranist" and prefers to focus on the holy text of Islam and reject the crimes perpetrated by the caliphate and his fellow Muslims. Unfortunately, the personal values and behaviors of my opponent do not come into question here. We are debating about the real life implications of both Christianity and Islam to determine which is more peaceful. In doing this, we must not look at the actions of individuals alone, but the religion as a whole. In order to understand this topic, it is not only important but critical that we analyze the caliphate and questionable aspects of Sharia whether my opponent agrees with their actions or not. After all, The ISIS member in Iraq and my opponent took the exact same shahada (declaration of faith), pray the same 5 prayers a day, and most importantly, read from the same book. And yet one can peacefully debate his religion and the other kills anyone who speaks out against it. The simple fact is that my opponent's religion is filled with more extremism than liberalism. more bigotry than acceptance and more oppression than freedom. I commend him for rebuking these actions but unfortunately, they still happened and were still carried out by people who subscribe to the same belief system.

Regardless of this I will make a few short rebuttals followed by my closing statements.

My opponent stated that the Jizya was a war reparation payed by specific Christians jews and Pagans who terrorized the Islamic State. The simple fact is that the Jizya is a tax for ALL non Muslims regardless of age, income or previous crimes. Warping facts does little to construct an argument

My opponent also stated that the invasion of Mecca was not a conquest. This is a false and laughable concept as Muhammed surrounded the city with a massive army to force them into surrendering.

Before I close I want to thank con for a very interesting and entertaining debate

Throughout this debate I have provided substantial evidence that:

1. Islamic teaching is more violent teaching
2. Islamic history is far bloodier than christian history
3. and that the Muslim world generally sees more religious violence than the christian world

please vote on who presented a better argument and not only your personal opinion
thanls :)


My opponent I really thank you for this enjoyable debate but i dont know why you refused to answer the crimes of the old testament and how jesus justified them since Jesus was Yahwah from the begining and he did all the violence I stated. Regarding the caliohate, you say the jizyah was for all but I demmanded again your explanation for "Fight in cause of Hod those who fight you and dont offend" Al Baqaeah and "if they incline to peace incline to it" and "Allah doesnt forbid you to friend disbelievers who didnt fight you......" then how Islamic conquests are justified in the Quran if it stated War is deffensive? and you didnt answer this. The point is that conquests arent justifed so how come Jizyah if there were no conquests and about enterance in Mecca Inwould like to compare Joshua entering the city in the bible and Muhammed entering Mecca: Joshua after entering the city killed ALL LiVIING THINGS animals,women and men and children as I stated above and when Muhammed entered he harmed not an insect since he said to them in al Bukhari"Go youre today free". Reagrdong today implications we find dozens of charities in out country who advertise using verses from Quran and als Hadith such as "Give charity to heal the sick among you" and "A Muslim cant sleep and his NEIGHBOUR(not Muslim) hungry and he knows" and "If you give charity of a small piece of dateyou would be 70 years away from Hellfire on Last Day". These sayings of the Prophet and dozens are used ro advertise for Cancer Hospitals and rconstructing houses and giving acces to electricity and water for poor villages and they increase nowadays in Ramadan especially and for reconcstructing Churches and Mosques they quote the berse in Al Maidah "You would find the most lovimg toMusli,s are the Christians because they have Monks and Priests and rhey are humble" and in al amaidah "Dont argue with the people of book" and regarding women rights, we find that if we hold a comparison between Pre-Islamic time and now we find the following:
1-No more burrial of alive female babies out of shame as Quran stopped it(Al Shams)
2-Women in Islam can inherit their fathers and relatives properties unlike in Jahiliyah under orders of Quran (Al Nisaa)
3-Womem can divorce their husbands by Khulu as in al Talaq amd prohibitng the Thihar (Al Mojadila)
4-Women concubines must not be forced to intercourse but evem given a dowry and after the permission of parents and even Muslims are ordered to give them freedom if they demmand it as al Nisaa "And who cant marry free womem then from those whom are bonded to you by oath amd Ankaehum(have intercourse) with the permission of thier parents and give them thier Ajr(dowries) and if any of your slaves came demmanding you write them record of freedom write it to him and give them money from which Allah gave you"
5- Women cant be beaten although some mistranslate the verse of Al nisaa toeman beating while it means seperate them since Idribuhun has Also the eaning of seperate from them and the evidence is the berse in Surat al Nisaa "You cant inherit women by force and you cant harm them" My opponent ignored the verses of Quran which progibits fighting disbelievers who are peaceful and Couldnt answer the crimes of old testament but no problem. After all a nice debate!
Debate Round No. 4
7 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 7 records.
Posted by voxprojectus 1 year ago
I found this debate fascinating, had I the option to vote, my vote would go as follows:

Who I agreed with before the debate: Tie.
RFD: I do not think that one can truly measure how 'good' a whole religion is.

Who I agreed with After the debate: Tie.
RFD: While the debate created an overall context for contrasting these religions, and I certainly believe the instigator clearly argued along those lines far better than the challenger, it did not sway my overall opinion on these specific religions.

Spelling and Grammar: Pro.
RFD: This was easy to discern. While Con's language was perfectly respectful, it was rife with misspellings and grammatical curios.

Who made more Convincing Arguments: Pro.
RFD: All of his points were in line with the premise of the debate as he laid it out in round 1. He did a better job addressing the specifics of Con's arguments and backed up his own statements with rational points.

Who used more reliable sources: Tie
Pro and con both used religious text for their arguments, these cannot be evaluated for reliability in and of themselves.
Posted by Loubna 1 year ago
Seems that my opponent cant answer or he is too busy maybe
Posted by BurningCriticism 1 year ago
I am glad then---> I don't really care about political correctness I just saw what appeared to be a ... deadly debate so to say... being that you challanged ISLAM directly with Christainity and that seems to be an odd choice of words for not debating Muslims... *says "I want to debate you! *other screams and*slice... *head rolls...

Happy Debating!!!
(Hope you win)
Posted by shalal12 1 year ago
Very nice, continue this debate. I'm ALL ear.
As an audience I ask you to give sources and references.
Let me predict; pro is going to find verses from Quran which talks about violence.
Talking about ISIS also sucks but it has nothing to do with Islam.
I also suggest con to talk about "women right" which was mentioned by pro.
go0d luck for both
Posted by Loubna 1 year ago
Me too I dont want to offend anyone amyway and I just want to view the true Islam which most Muslims damage by their ruthless actions whichchave nothing to do i
with Islam
Posted by mikethedebater 1 year ago
BurningCriticism, i dont mean to offend anyone by this debate. I just want an interesting dialogue on the topic. I love Muslims just as much as anyone else, the problems lie with Islam, not Muslims. I think that maybe sometimes the fear of political incorrectness restrains us from discussing issues for fear of being labelled as bigoted or racist but this is an issue that has to be debated. I hope I haven't offended you
Posted by BurningCriticism 1 year ago
don't do this bro there is a fine line and you crossed it... just love people for who they are
No votes have been placed for this debate.