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

Islam the master of religions and the most complete

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 2 votes the winner is...
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 12/23/2013 Category: Religion
Updated: 6 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 961 times Debate No: 42827
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (8)
Votes (2)




This is a re-debate of another debate that wateva232 requested i debate it with him, my views are still the same so i am waiting on him now.


I would like to thank my opponent for accepting my request and reposting the debate and inviting me.

Since there were no rules posted I will proceed with this round as an acceptance round and let my opponent post his arguments first. I will be debating that Islam is not the master of religions and it is not complete. Pro will be debating the opposite.

I will await my opponents arguments and wish him good luck.

Debate Round No. 1


Alright then, i first want to say that i challenge you to bring me any mistake in the Qur'an or Suna, just 1 mistake.

Second, Islam is pretty clear One book to follow and nothing else pretty simple, while other religions have lots (and i mean LOTS) of books and complicated stuff to follow.

Third, The prophecy's and the knowledge in the Qur'an all proven true.


What my opponent done here is simply tried to shift the Bop on me completely. My opponent made the claim that Islam is the master of all religions and he is the one who should be giving arguments for it. Not me giving arguments against it. Also, this arguments completely fails logically. Me not bringing one mistake in the Qur'an or Sunna does not make Islam a master of all religions. This same argument could be used for Buddhism or Hinduism. I could simply say well bring me one mistake in Buddhism or Hinduism and if you don't, your religion is not the master of all religions. However as I hate backing out from a debate, I will give an example I used before of a mistake in the Sunna. This is what my opponent asked for, despite being a failed argument.

My opponent then contradicts himself completely and uses another logical fallacy by saying " Islam is pretty clear, one book to follow and nothing else, pretty simple. While other religions have lots of books and complicated stuff to follow."

This is a logical fallacy, an argument from ignorance. You not understanding certain religions does not make them complicated or non sensical. The same way these religions are complicated and makes no sense, the same way you are to them. If you disbelieve in the story of Buddha and that was he divinely conceived [1] and consider it a fairytale. The same way Buddhists would see the story of Muhammad riding a legendary horse called Boraq and travelling through the seven skies.

The second mistake my opponent committed in the previous passage, is claiming that Islam is following one book only. While in fact the people who only follow this one book (ie :- Qur'an) are Quranists and are considered heretics by the mainstream Sunni and Shia majority sects. Muslims, depending on the sect, each follow their own sayings of Muhammad. Sunni and Shia Hadith collections differ because scholars from the two traditions differ as to the reliability of the narrators and transmitters. Narrators who took the side of Abu Bakr and Umar rather than Ali, in the disputes over leadership that followed the death of Muhammad, are seen as unreliable by the Shia; narrations sourced to Ali and the family of Muhammad, and to their supporters, are preferred. Sunni scholars put trust in narrators, such as Aisha, whom Shia reject. Differences in Hadith collections have contributed to differences in worship practices and shari'a law and have hardened the dividing line between the two traditions.

What my opponent finally claimed is that the prophet and knowledge in the Qur'an are all proven true. This is an unsubstantiated claim with no backing evidence. I could simply say the same thing regarding any religion and claim it is the master of all religions.

My opponent has failed completely to provide any arguments for Islam and committed multiple logical fallacies and wild claims with absolutely no backing evidence or any convincing arguments. I was hoping for more of this debate but unfortunately my opponent did not even try.

However, I will provide my arguments against Islam and show why it is not the master of all religions.


First I will copy a previous mistake in the Sunna I've submitted here on DB and copy paste it:

" N.B:- This Hadith is a bit long, so I underlined the part in contention as the rest is not really related to my argument.

Sahih Bukhari Volume 04, Book 55, Hadith Number 546 : "Narrated By Anas : When 'Abdullah bin Salam heard the arrival of the Prophet at Medina, he came to him and said, "I am going to ask you about three things which nobody knows except a prophet: What is the first portent of the Hour? What will be the first meal taken by the people of Paradise? Why does a child resemble its father, and why does it resemble its maternal uncle"

Allah's Apostle said, "Gabriel has just now told me of their answers." 'Abdullah said, "He (i.e. Gabriel), from amongst all the angels, is the enemy of the Jews." Allah's Apostle said, "The first portent of the Hour will be a fire that will bring together the people from the east to the west; the first meal of the people of Paradise will be Extra-lobe (caudate lobe) of fish-liver. As for the resemblance of the child to its parents: If a man has sexual intercourse with his wife and gets discharge first, the child will resemble the father, and if the woman gets discharge first, the child will resemble her." On that 'Abdullah bin Salam said, "I testify that you are the Apostle of Allah." 'Abdullah bin Salam further said, "O Allah's Apostle! The Jews are liars, and if they should come to know about my conversion to Islam before you ask them (about me), they would tell a lie about me."

The Jews came to Allah's Apostle and 'Abdullah went inside the house. Allah's Apostle asked (the Jews), "What kind of man is 'Abdullah bin Salam amongst you?" They replied, "He is the most learned person amongst us, and the best amongst us, and the son of the best amongst us." Allah's Apostle said, "What do you think if he embraces Islam (will you do as he does)?" The Jews said, "May Allah save him from it." Then 'Abdullah bin Salam came out in front of them saying, "I testify that None has the right to be worshipped but Allah and that Muhammad is the Apostle of Allah." Thereupon they said, "He is the evilest among us, and the son of the evilest amongst us," and continued talking badly of him."

This is the second Hadith in contention. Muhammad answered the question of why a child resembles one of the parents more than the other and the answer was absurd. Muhammad claimed that Gabriel (The angel that revealed the Qur'an upon him) answer was, if a women discharges first then the resemblance will be to the maternal uncle or if the man discharges first the resemblance will be for the father.

Anyone who studied biology would know that the vaginal discharge or fluid has no genetic material at all. The genetic material is contained within the egg. Either way, who discharges first has no impact on who the child resembles. The resemblance is based solely on dominant/recessive traits that are contained within the DNA of the sperm and egg. Mendelian inheritance explain this phenomenon quite efficiently [2]. For extra information here is a website that explains child resemblance"

My next criticisms of Islam will rest on the following arguments briefly due to character limit:

1. Muhammad Marriages: Muhammad had set a limit of 4 women per man. Yet he himself has failed to comply to his own rules. Muhammad married from 11-13 wives with an unknown number of concubines. Some of the disputed marriages are:

A. Aisha: She was 6 years old when Muhammad engaged her and 9 years old when Muhammad consummated his marriage with her. There was absolutely on reason for this marriage except that Muhammad wanted to. There was no alliance to be made with her father Abu Bakr as he was his best friend or was she a war slave like others he had married.
B. Rihanna: She was enslaved in the invasion of Banu Quraiza. Most scholars actually agree that she was only a concubine and not one of his wives.
C. Zainab: She was the husband of an ex-slave Muhammad owned named Zaid ibn Harith. He was considered his son until adoption was abandoned. Muslims claim that Muhammad did this to prove to people that your adopted son is not your real son and his wife is not unlawful to you. Even if we take the case for it, this is absolutely in humane to raise someone and then marrying his ex-wife however they hated each other.

Muhammad had many other marriages that were also completely unnecessary and shows only that Muhammad thought of his own sexual benefit.

2. Slavery: Islam does not condemn slavery but in fact condones it. Ma Malakat Aymanukum or what your hand posses or literally meaning concubines is repeated 14 times in the Qur'an. Female captives from war are regarded as concubines and are allowed to have sex with just the same as you would with your wife in the Qur'an (Chapter 4:24). There is not once said in the Qur'an to free "Ma Malakat Aymanukum" or regarded as anything else but sex objects. So tell me, how does this make Islam the master of all religions? Lastly, there is no obligation in Islam for the freeing of slaves. Some Muslims say that Muhammad freed slaves but it was not a necessary act and there is no hereafter punishment for owning slaves. Simply, slavery is permitted in Islam.

3. Apostasy: This is simple, you leave Islam then you either have 3 days to repent or be killed. If you publicly declare that you left Islam in a Shari'a law based country you will be killed. Christian missionaries are persecuted in Islamic countries and are not allowed to preach their faith to Muslims. Yet in western countries, Muslims enjoy the complete freedom of preaching their religion and claiming how peaceful it is.


I could have brought more arguments against Islam but I think that those are enough for now and also complying with character limit. If we compare Islam to Buddhism we will find that Buddhism contains no violence, no slavery, no polygamy and certainly no pedophilia. If we make the same claim as Pro then Buddhism is the master of all religions. However, I will await my opponent reply and wait to see his convincing arguments "for" Islam.

Thank you.
Debate Round No. 2


1- When i say Islam is peaceful i don't mean Islam don't allow killing at all or steal or any other thing just give complete freedom, Islam has laws, Islam is peaceful in its own ways, if someone follow it completely he well be peaceful.

2- I should made myself more clear when i said that, i have read a lot about Christianity and Judaism, and i understand both, there are a lot of contradictions in both[1], you read something here and you find the complete opposite somewhere else.

3- I am not talking about Shia, Sunna is the only way in Islam, Shia is just something created when Ali had problems, Shia is not Islam. Therefore the only truth is Quran then Suna

4- Check the evidence at the end [2]

5- Now for the so called mistake about (Sahih Bukhari Volume 04, Book 55, Hadith Number 546):

Sperm undergoes certain changes only after it's inside female tracts.

So these changes might include strengthening of sperm DNA to overwhelm/dominate ovum genes.

So basically i got no answer for this so far, but a lot of things were said about Islam that were proven wrong after science has been advancing. and you didn't provide the source where it says that discharge doesn't effect the gender.

6- Simple, Muhammad (pbuh) did marry 4, but 4 at once, the 11 he married was after one of his wife's dies or he divorced her, he never married more then 4 at the same time just like Islam says. (i am not gonna answer about Zainab marriage or Aisha cause that's another subject.)

7- Ma Malakat Aymanukum does not mean slavery all, it only means the people who you capture after a war, and it have certain rules when you capture, you can't capture a free women that is married. you can't capture a women that has nothing to do with the war. and most important, it's in these days are done because in older days it was done because non Muslims and those who where fighting Muslims were doing it and raping Muslim women, so it was done to revenge Muslims and their women, now its gone unless they do it again.

8- That's what it is, and i see nothing wrong with it, Islam is no game, you don't enter Islam and leave whenever you like to, there are rules, and it does to prevent spies too cause spies in older days where doing this and they might do this even now.
and for missionaries, there is not a single country now doing full Islam, not even Saudi Arabia, so just to remind you i am debating Islam and not Islam countries, when the Prophet (pbuh) was alive there was a Jew living near him, he used to throw spikes in the Prophet (pbuh) way everyday and preach Judaism, the Prophet (pbuh) didn't do anything to him, in fact when he was on his deathbed, the Prophet (pbuh) visited him and told him to become a Muslim, he became one.[3]


[2]: (this is a whole site that have over 50 proofs of Islam)


Now i just want to say one thing, leave everything in Islam behind and just keep the proofs, +50 proof of anything (not just Islam but anything) isn't enough to make you believe? if i see +50 proofs of anything i well believe in it immediately no questions asked.

Thank you.


I am absolutely sorry about the references in the last post, I completely forgotten about them. My mistake, very sorry. I will add them in the comments section, so not to confuse with sources in this post.

Nonetheless, I will rebut my opponent claims he posted in round 3 with the same numbering, so that I won't have to copy each of his argument.


1- It's quite contradictory to claim that it is peaceful yet allows killing. Muhammad lead 27-29 wars in the last ten years of his life. While the number of expeditions Muhammad commanded were around 100 [1,2]. How is that peaceful in anyway? A so called prophet commands so many wars yet we never see Buddha or Jesus personally commanding any wars. So in regards to the peacefullness of the prophet. Buddha was definitely more peaceful than Muhammad. Thus the conclusion would be the Buddhism in regards to peace, is more peaceful than Islam.

The second claim is that if someone follows Islam he will find peace of mind is what I think my opponent is trying to say, this can again be debunked with Buddhist philosophy. Most Buddhists find peace of mind through Nirvana and make the same claim as you are. Yet Buddhists when they follow their religion completely you don't find wars, while Muslims you always find conquests.

2. Completely irrelevant point. I have not debated for or against Christianity or Judaism. But I have to agree though that both religions contain contradictions. But if we look it from another side, Islam also has many contradictions. I'll give one really simple contradiction in Islam. Muhammad claimed that he travelled through the 7 heavens until he reached the final heaven and he met Allah. This is known as Esraa and Miraj [3]. However, we find in another Hadith that Muhammad claims that when the sun sets, it goes under Allah's throne and awaits his permission to rise again [4]. Let alone the scientific mistake presented here, this is a contradiction about the throne of Allah which Muhammad claims he met. Is he in the last heaven (edge of the universe) or is he here in the solar system next to the sun?

3. My opponent looked at this point very subjectively and from his point of view only. According to each sect of Islam, each is the correct way to follow Islam, let it be Sunni, Shia, Ahmaddiya, Quranism, Sufism, etc... Just because you are born in a Sunni branch does not discredit the other sects and their arguments for their respective beliefs.

4. Due to character limit, I will let my opponent choose only one of the supposed miracle claims in the Qur'an. Just for your info, I have read most of them and they are nothing but wishful thinking. But, choose only ONE miracle claim that you think is the strongest and I will happily debunk it.

5. My opponent made a weird claim that since sperm undergoes changes in the female tract it might strenghting the sperm DNA to dominate ovum genes. However, this is completely untrue. The changes occuring to the sperm are morphological and has nothing to do with the genetic makeup. There is no such thing as strenghting of the sperm DNA to dominate ovum genes. It is when both fuse together, is when dominant/recessive traits start to appear [5].

I did not say that the discharge affect the gender, I said it does not affect resemblance in any way. Whoever ejaculates first does not cause the offspring to resemble the maternal uncle or his father. So basically my opponent admitted that this is a mistake that science is yet to discover which i completely doubt. Thus, his first claim is to find a mistake in the Sunna has been fulfilled.

6. This is blatant lie, Muhammad was married to 9 women at a single time [6]. Completely ignoring the commands of his own religion. I am not sure why my opponent did not reply to the arguments about Aisha and Zainab and also completely ignoring Rihanna.

7. A religion that promotes revenge does not make it a master of all religions. If we compare it to Buddhism again, there is no revenge in Buddhism. So if we compare Islam in regards to Buddhism about revenge, Buddhism wins again.

However my opponent is trying to justify this act, he still admitted that Islam allows concubines. Actually my opponent made another mistake claiming that you cannot capture a women that has nothing to do with the war, since women did not fight in Arabia. Concubines were the wives of the dead soliders. So simply you kill a man and take his wife as a sex slave for the rest of her life. If Ma Malakat Aymanukum does not mean slavery then what does it mean? War booty? Still slave, just different terminology.

8. My opponent accepts the killing of human beings just because they left the faith. My opponent accepts that Muslims do not have freedom of choosing their religion or coming to a different view about Islam. If you were unluckily born a Muslim and thought it was not the true religion you better shut up for the rest of your life and live as a hypocrite or you will be killed. So speaking of spies, would you rather have a pretending Muslim or a real Muslim? This makes no sense actually. If any religion promoted the same concept you would be calling this religion immoral and inhumane. For example if Christians who converts to Islam are killed you would definitely stand against it, yet if it is Muslims who converts to Christianity you allow them to be killed. I will say it again, if you compare Islam to Buddhism. Buddhism does not punish apostasy. Thus Buddhism is more peaceful than Islam and is the master of all religions.

Even Islamic countries who are considered secular, punish missionaries. It's from the simple fact that you cannot leave Islam. Whether it's Saudia Arabia or Iran. If you leave Islam you will be killed. Thus, how can the missionaries of various other religions operate if any convert is immediately killed?


I have read these supposed miracles and I really see them as just wishful thinking. As I said before, give me the strongest miracle claim you have. But choose only ONE. The one miracle claim that you believe that cannot be refuted and is a clear miracle.

Thank you.






4. Sahih Bukhari Volume 4, Book 54, Number 421


Debate Round No. 3


1- When Muhammad (pbuh) did wars it was for 2 reasons only, either its for 1- defending Islam like if enemy's came and invaded a city he defended it. or 2- rebelling bad things like if enemy's attacked a route followed by Muslims or killed a messenger etc... he fought wars upon them, so i don't see anything bad about it, are we supposed to let them invade us? and Jesus did not kill?[1] according to the Bible he killed really a lot of people.

2- That's the point, the throne of Allah is bigger then everything ever was and ever well. its bigger then the whole universe and there are 7 skies (heavens) the normal sky which is the whole universe we know and other 6 skies which are whole other universes we don't know. now about the sun, you didn't say the whole saying, the prophet (pbuh) says that the sun bow's (sjood) and there are 2 meanings for that, 1- the normal bow which we know. 2- the bow for everything else which doesn't mean literally bowing, it means just surrendering to Allah and having your will, which in Quran says that everything does it. and another thing, you didn't really point out for me what's the relate between the 2 hadithes? so this is completely off topic.

3- No i didn't, this is plain simple. Quran and every Muslim know that you must not worship and ask help from anyone but Allah, Shia say (Oh Ali) which is a human being, so they are not Muslims, and they curse the Prophet (pbuh) wife and his friends too, and they hit theirselfs, which is forbidden in Quran, that's 3 reasons and there is plenty more.

4- The prophet said[2] there are 360 joints in the Human body, explain that 1400 years ago.

Note: i did not say miracles, i said prophecies and advanced knowledge.

5- i am gonna skip this since i feel this has been done.

6- I am completely sorry for saying he didn't marry more then 4, yes he did marry 9 at once, because of the following: first -he was not looking for sexual pleasure he was a king, he could married 20 year old, or virgins, but notice almost all of his marriages AFTER the command not to marry more then 4 was old women more then 40 year old, and not virgins,

-the other goal is to share his suna, since he said a lot of stuff only between his wifes, they were used as scholars, notice how many hadiths his wifes shared,

-And everyone was marrying more then 4 btw before the command not to came, then everyone divorced but he (pbuh) cause he was a prophet was told not to, but it also came with something, he was told as well not to divorce OR marry, that's it, so it wasn't just pleasure made by him,

-and it also had great benefits for his wifes, they were wifes of a prophet, it was mercy from Allah not to let them go, they had great responsibility, they had double the good deeds but also double the sins,

-it was also done to make people come together, there was a lot of discrimination between people and tribes and he did it to prevent that, and if he really wanted pleasure why didn't he do all this in his good years? why now?

and your reference number [6] doesn't work.

(and i said why i did not reply to Aaisha or Zainab, cause that's whole another subject)

7- So let's say someone raped your wife, or stole you, you don't want anything? and btw Islam does promote forgiveness whenever someone did something bad to you, you get the option either to take from him what he did to you or forgive and those who forgive get a lot of goodness in heaven.

8- You know that he gets 3 days before getting killed, during these days he is debated and viewed, whatever he thinks is wrong about Islam gets corrected, a lot of people left Islam and returned after realizing its correct, and the 3 days period can get longer if he was still not done, and he must be seen by people with knowledge to determine if he really left Islam, and you must be not under threat, if you leave Islam under threat then its not leaving.

Apostasy is done to prevent infidels from getting on Muslims places a lot, so if one leave Islam so well another and another...

And like i said, debate me what the Prophet did not what Countries are doing.




Since this is my last post i would like to say thanks for this debate and i hope we could debate more, Peace.


This is the last round of the debate and I would like to thank my opponent for this interesting debate. Despite lacking completely any justification for why Islam is the master of all religions and ignoring completely every argument that stand for Buddhism against Islam. I feel that I have done more than enough to prove that Islam is not the master of all religions as I provided alot of arguments against Islam that practically went unchallenged. So after I finish refuting my opponent claims, I will give a short conclusion.


1. Again my opponent is seemingly ignorant about the history of Islam. He forgot to mention that there were lots of battles Muhammad intiated without any plausible self defense. He attacked many tribes with an excuse saying that he gathered intelligence and launched multiple pre-emptive strikes on several tribes. They were not for self-defense but they were on the offense and these tribes did not fight Muhammad at all. Even if they conspired to attack Muhammad, he shouldn't be attacking them and killing them as cruel as he did. Some examples of such offensive expeditions are; Banu Salim tribe, Banu Sulaym tribe, Banu Nadir and Banu Quriaza.

Banu Quriaza was a Jewish tribe that supposedly allied with the Meccans by aiding them and not fighting directly against the Muslims. However, he invaded Banu Quraiza and killed all the males in the tribe and took the women and children as slaves [1]. One can also find that Muhammad intiated many wars only on suspiscion, such as the Banu Mustaliq. Muhammad fought wars to unite Arabia and become king of Arabia. He successfully done so, no doubt. But that doesn't make him a prophet with all his ruthelessness. So if we compare him to Buddha again, Buddha was more peaceful.

Lastly, my opponent has used a false premise of Jesus being God, thus he killed lots of people. However, I have no reason to accept Jesus as a God, all I said is Jesus "Personally" never killed anyone or lead a war and this is true.

2. The point is the contradiction between the two hadith. Is there a place where Allah's throne resides, ie the seventh heaven, or is he everywhere thus the sun bows down for him? If you claim the second, then the Esra and Miraj was incorrect because Muhammad went through a physical place to meet him and this place as Gabriel said he could not go forward so not to get burned by the light of Allah. Thus the two hadith are contradicting each other. This was not off-topic, you brought the argument that Christianity and Judaism contains contradictions for absolutely no reason, so I brought a contradiction within Islam.

3. This is another misunderstanding from my opponent regarding the different sects in Islam. Every Sunni Muslim will claim that his sect is the correct way of Islam. Shia will claim the same. On the contrary, anyone foreign to Islam, wouldn't know which is the correct way to follow Islam and will consider both as just sects of the same religion. Second, Shia don't pray to Ali, this is another argument from ignorance. They pray to Allah just as you do, except that they believe the rightful heir to the khilafa was Ali not Abu Bakr. They also hate Aisha and curse her for one simple reason you seem to be not aware of, is that Aisha lead a war against Ali and she lost. There were political tensions between both and it was quite clear.

4. is not a scientific website to be accepted as a source. It is an Islamic biased website. However, as I said I hate to back out from a debate, I will refute this claim. First, there are many different opinions about how many joints are there in the human body. Some sources say from 100 to 400 joints, the most credible source I have found says 150 joints [2]. Second, it is not that hard for people at the time to perform an autopsy and count out the number of joints in the human body. Thirdly and most importantly, this knowledge was already known since 239 BCE in Chinese science [3]. Lü-shih Ch'un-ch'iu claimed the 360 joints almost 800 years before Muhammad even existed. An advanced knowledge or prophecy must not be something that was known at the time. Thus this claim that you provided as the most powerful proof of Islam is just a plagiarism of an old Chinese science book. If there is anything to it, this Chinese book would constitute the miracle and not Islam.

5. A mistake in the Sunna has been fulfilled making my opponent first propsition in Round 2 "Find a mistake in the Quran or Sunna" to be accomplished. A mistake that went unchallenged.

6. First, he married a 9 year old virgin. So this is another argument from ignorance. He married her after the ruling of 4 women has been well established. Second, whether they were virgins or not does not even matter to the fact that he did not abide to his own rulings. He made rules and he deliberately broke them for his own benefit. Marrying a 9 year old was only for his pleasure, since there were no ties to strengthen since she was the daughter of his best friend Abu Bakr. Third, it is very hypocritical for his people to abide by his rules while he broke them completely. Lastly, if we compare Buddha to Muhammad, Buddha did not marry 11 women or a 9 year old child or not abiding by the rules that he made. Thus making Buddha better than Muhammad and Buddhism is the master of all religions.

7. I don't see how your argument relates to anything about owning concubines. Muhammad and his followers owned concubines. They killed their husbands in the wars and took them as sex slaves for the rest of their lives. This is not peaceful and this is not Godly and this definitely does not make Islam the master of all religions. If we to compare Islam with Buddhism again, Buddhism does not allow slavery or concubines or war booty. Thus Buddhism wins again.

Even if these people were the transgressors, their wives and children had nothing to do with anything and definitely not complete villages like Banu Quraiza. An entire tribe was killed and children and women were taken as slaves and concubines. This doesn't look like a peaceful religion. Definitely not the master of all religions.

8. Why kill him at all? You are justifying killing of a human being just cause he disagrees with you on matters of faith. Two people read the same book, person A believed this book to be true, person B denied it. Person B will get killed for simply denying that this book is the truth. So what kind of truth is this? You either say it is the truth or be killed? The truth does not fear criticism or abandoning, cause even if the entire earth abandoned the truth it will still be true no matter what. For example if the entire humanity believed that the earth is flat, this would not make the earth flat. So if people left Islam and it is the truth, it is their loss. You kill them, it forces them to become hypocrites. You make someone who disbelieves in your faith live amongst you as a hypocrite cause it is either believe or be killed.

If Christians were killed because they converted to Islam, you would revolt against this action. But now, you are justifiying the killing of Ex-Muslims just because they left Islam. All in all, Buddhism does not punish apostasy, Thus making Buddhism the master of all religions.


I've come to the end of this debate and I would like to thank my opponent for this debate. I believe I have done my best to prove that Islam is not the master of all religions and Buddhism is better than Islam in many aspects that were discussed. I've shown and my opponent did not disagree that Islam allows slavery, concubines, wars, pedophilia and death penalty for apostasy. My arguments that Buddhism is better than Islam because they do not contain such acts and mainly they went unchallenged. Thus if we use the same concept as my opponent did, then surely Buddhism is the master of all religions.

My opponent has given me three tasks, which were; 1. Find a mistake in the Quran or Sunna: Which I've done round 2 and completley went unchallenged, thus making the first premise of why Islam is the master of all religions is incorrect, because Islam do contain mistakes.

2. Islam is pretty clear, only one book to follow: I've shown why this is a logical fallacy to begin with and is a very subjective and ignorant way of looking at other people religions.

3. Prophecies and Advanced knowledge in Quran or Sunna: My opponent provided one argument that I have completley debunked. It was ancient knowledge and something that is not scientifically proven today and there is quite a disagreement in the number of joints.

Thus the three main concepts my opponent proposed had all been resolved and debunked and also compared Islam with Buddhism and showed why in every aspect debated Buddhism is better than Islam.

I have said it all ladies and gentlement. Thank you for your time and I would like to thank my opponent for this debate.



1. Tabari volume 8


3. Geoffrey Lloyd & Nathan Sivin, The Way and The Word: Science and Medicine in Early China and Greece, (Yale University Press, 2002), pp. 223-224

Debate Round No. 4
8 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 8 records.
Posted by NiqashMotawadi3 6 years ago

Sources go to Con since Pro used non-trusted websites such and AnsweringChristianity (which is a Muslim website that tries to attack AnsweingIslam, a Christian-biased website). Moreover, Pro used the Jewish neighbor Hadeeth which is "fabricated" according to Al Banee's ruling. There are usually four levels for reviewed hadeeths: authentic, good, bad, fabricated. Pro's was fabricated.

Con managed to win this debate right from the beginning when Pro started with a red herring and a sleazy attempt to shift the burden of proof. The resolution itself in untenable and so Pro used many "arguments from ignorance" about other religions to establish Islam as the master of the religions, which doesn't make sense to me as Pro does not know Sikhism and thousands of other religions. Pro also claimed that Shiah are not Islam which is his opinion, and not a fact to be said like that. The Shiah consider themselves true Muslims much like Pro considers his Sunnah sect to be true Islam. Moreover, Con pointed out a scientific mistake in the Hadeeths that Pro couldn't refute but tried to refute through back-flipping apologetic and that clearly failed. Pro also said that following Islam was not complicated, forgetting the ambiguity of the Qur'anic verses and their different interpretations, and the bulk of Hadeeths as Con pointed out. Pro did not satisfy his self-acclaimed burden of proof, so arguments go to Con. I also found Pro's support of punishment for apostasy and claims that "you can't just leave Islam" to be revolting.

Con had better grammar than Pro who did not even capitalize his "I"s or use commas correctly.
Posted by Thelord444 6 years ago
I didnt leave it, i responded to it, if you want me to directly say Buddhism is wrong something wouldn't change anything.
Posted by wateva232 6 years ago
It is an Islamic website and it is not a scientific website. The sources presented are not scientific resources, but more or less an advertising websites for products for joint and bone pain. This is not a credible source.

Dude, I am not saying the Shia are correct. I am simply claiming they base their belief on some facts. Like I said, you are a sunni because you are born so. If you were born a Shia you wouldn't be saying they are the incorrect sect.
The second part is that not all Shia's call for Ali. This is a specific sect called Alawites that do what you are saying. The rest don't. And where in the Qur'an does it say do not curse Muhammad's friends? I haven't seem to come across such verse. I have to agree that youm 3ashoora is against the Qur'an no doubt. But my argument is still as is, Shia believe they are the true way of Islam so does the Sunnis, Sufis, Quranists, Ahmaddiyas, etc.... You seem to be only picking on the Shia's.

Lastly, your argument that jesus did not kill anyone is a false premise as I explained. I think you have not read the source you have given me by saying such. You have not given me anything, you claim that jesus killed because jesus is the god of the old testament and thus jesus killed many people. This is not evidence at all since I reject the idea of Jesus being god in the first place. I don't believe in his divinity so I have no reason to believe that he is the God of the old testament. I said also that Jesus personally. If we look at the story of Jesus the human being in the Bible, there is no violence or wars in his story. Thus, Jesus was not violent.

Again, I have debated mostly for Buddhism, why did you completely leave out every single part I speak of Buddhism and Buddha?
Posted by Thelord444 6 years ago
how is Answering Christianity Islamic biased website while it shows evidence and sources? and how are Shia correct since in the Quran it says dont curse Mohammad friends? (and btw they do call for Ali, you are not very informed) and they hit themselfs, which in Quran is banned (you seem to forgot this one), and how you still say Jesus didnt kill anyone while i proved it?,
Posted by TheSquirrel 6 years ago
"Sperm undergoes certain changes only after it's inside female tracts.

So these changes might include strengthening of sperm DNA to overwhelm/dominate ovum genes."

That's not how you biology!
Posted by Thelord444 6 years ago
do what you want to do really i dont care much about who goes first.
Posted by wateva232 6 years ago
Should I consider your first debate round in the previous debate as the same in this one? Should I make an acceptance round or start debating immediately?
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by Artur 6 years ago
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:06 
Reasons for voting decision: Con was better. 1stly, in the first round, since Pro asserted, he needed to present his reasons, he didnt, CON noticed it and presented good arguements with examples from buddism. 2. No matter u agree or not with con, he answerd every point but sometimes Pro skipped points for example: Zainab and Rihanna. or when Pro was refuted by Con he changed his own mind, such as: Con asserted that Muhammad broke his own rule and Pro replied: he didnot marry more than f at once, then Con refuted it and showed us that Muhammad owned 9 wives at once and e.t.c
Vote Placed by NiqashMotawadi3 6 years ago
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:06 
Reasons for voting decision: RFD in comments. Good job, Con.

By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use.