Best products from r/exmuslim

We found 164 comments on r/exmuslim discussing the most recommended products. We ran sentiment analysis on each of these comments to determine how redditors feel about different products. We found 270 products and ranked them based on the amount of positive reactions they received. Here are the top 20.

1. What the Modern Martyr Should Know: 72 Grapes and not a single virgin.

    Features:
  • EDiMAX EW-7611ULB is a true 2-in-1 combo adapter offering both Wi-Fi 4 802.11n (N150) wifi connectivity with Bluetooth 4.0 all in one nano USB adapter
  • Enjoy widely compatible Wi-Fi N150 for data rate of up to 150Mbps. It is also backwards compatible with 802.11b/g standards.
  • Smart Bluetooth technology enables advanced dual-mode Bluetooth 4.0 LE & BR/EDR. Backwards compatible with BT 2.1+EDR & 3.0+HS. Connect to phones, tablets, mice, keyboards, and more with ease. *Search for EW-7611ULB V2 for BT 4.2 for up to 2.6X transfer speeds
  • PLUG-AND-PLAY SUPPORT with Windows 11. Supports Windows 7/8/8.1/10, MAC OS 10.7~10.15, and Linux 2.6.32~5.2 (Fedora & Ubuntu). ** BT support on Windows only, Mac OS not supported at the moment. Visit EDiMAX website for the latest support information and driver download.
  • EASY WIRELESS CONNECTION via software WPS (Wi-Fi Protected Setup). This 2-in-1 adapter is also equipped with the latest Wi-Fi WPA3 security standards and is backwards compatible with WPA and WPA2 encryption methods.
  • EXTEND YOUR POWER with EW-7611ULB's QoS-WMM, WMM-Power Save mode, and Bluetooth Low Energy (LE) green technology.
  • NANO DESIGN ENABLES ULTRA PORTABILITY. The nano form factor and the combination design lets you keep the USB adapter plugged in while you take your laptop or device on the go.
  • TRUSTED BRAND: With decades of experience in developing and manufacturing networking products, EDiMAX is committed to providing the latest networking technologies at affordable prices.
  • TRUSTED BRAND: With decades of experience in developing and manufacturing networking products, EDiMAX is committed to providing the latest networking technologies at affordable prices.
What the Modern Martyr Should Know: 72 Grapes and not a single virgin.
▼ Read Reddit mentions

5. The Origins of Biblical Monotheism: Israel's Polytheistic Background and the Ugaritic Texts

    Features:
  • Zendure: Originated from one of the most successful external battery projects on Kickstarter. Trusted by hundreds of thousands of fans worldwide. Join the Zendure experience today.
  • ZEN+: Ultimate compatibility. Each port automatically detects your device and fine tunes the output to charge it at maximum speed (up to 2.1A). Enjoy top charging speed with a "Zen" peace of mind. In addition, it's one of the very few external batteries in the market with 4 USB outputs, a total of 3.1A max output, and an LED digital display.
  • Durability & Style: Crush proof composite material, dual-injection molding and a shock-absorbing central belt make it one of the most durable and yet stylish external batteries available.
  • 1) Charge-Through - Charge Zendure while charging your devices with a single wall charger, a feature rarely seen in other power banks. (2A power source required). 2) Auto-On - Turns itself on automatically when connected to compatible devices so you don't need to push the power button on the external battery. 3) Long-Term Standby - Maintains up to 95% of charge after six months in standby (when USB disconnected). A great feature for emergency backup.
  • What You Get: Zendure A8 Portable Charger External Battery Power Bank, Micro USB cable, travel pouch, thank you card, product guide, 18-month warranty and friendly customer service.
The Origins of Biblical Monotheism: Israel's Polytheistic Background and the Ugaritic Texts
▼ Read Reddit mentions

Top comments mentioning products on r/exmuslim:

u/exmindchen · 1 pointr/exmuslim

This would be a better option...

Try these short videos (around 10 minutes) about earliest qur'anic Arabic

Origin- part 1
https://youtu.be/6C3DuLnUh7w

Part 2
https://youtu.be/U_sv5tPlnng

Informative e-book on early islam and Arab history
https://www.amazon.com/dp/B00903HTIE/ref=cm_sw_r_wa_awdb_06TrzbNDSAW50

Passages copy pasted from a book. A peep hole into the real historicity of "islam"

*

Professor Johannes Thomas of the University of Paderborn pointed out that our sources for the conquest of Spain by Muslims are quite late and unreliable. There are no Arabic inscriptions dating back to the Eighth Century and only six dating back to the Ninth. The earliest description of the conquest of North Africa and Spain written in Arabic was written by Ibn Abd al-Hakam, an Egyptian who had never been in Spain and who is said to have written the text in the middle of the 9th Century. As the Dutch Arabist Rienhard Dozy said this account has no more historical value than the fairy tales in "The Book of the Thousand Nights"

Professor Helmut Waldmann of TŸbingen gave a brief history of Zurvanism -a branch of Zoroastrianism that had the divinity Zurvan as its First Principle (primordial creator deity). In the second part of his talk, Waldmann gave a sketch of the influence of Zurvanism on Islam.

****


Christoph Heger, convinced of the validity of Christoph Luxenberg and Volker Popp's thesis that early documents, inscriptions and coins that contain the terms "muhammad" and " 'ali" should not be understood as proper names of the putatively historical figures of Islamic historiography but as honorific titles of Jesus Christ, argued that confirmation of the said thesis could be found in the old text of an inscription of a talisman in the possession of Tewfik Canaan. The text of the talisman should be read as:

"O healer, O God! Help from God and near victory and good tiding of the believers! O praised one [muhammad], O merciful one, O benefactor. There is no young man like the high one [ 'ali] and no sword like the two-edged sword of the high one. O God, O living one, O eternal one, O Lord of majesty and honour, O merciful one, O compassionate one".

This text should be understood as an invocation of Jesus Christ- the healer, the good tiding, the praised, merciful and high one, the young hero, "out of the mouth [of whom] went a sharp two-edged sword" [Apoc. 1:16], namely “the word of God,” which is “sharper than any two-edged sword” [Hebrews 4:12].

*


Where Dr. Markus Gross discussed the Buddhist influence on Islam, Professor Kropp explained the Ethiopian elements in the Koran. Independent scholar, traveller, and numismatist Volker Popp argued that Islamic history as recounted by Islamic historians has a Biblical structure –the first four caliphs are clearly modelled on Adam, Noah, Abraham, and Moses. The Muslim historians transformed historical facts to fit a Biblical pattern. Popp also developed a fascinating thesis that Islamic historians had a propensity to turn nomen (gentile) (name of the gens or clan) into patronyms; a patronym being a component of a personal name based on the name of one's father. Thus Islamic historians had a tendency to take, for instance, Iranian names on inscriptions and turn them into Arabic-sounding names. Having turned Iranians into Arabs, the next step was to turn historical events connected with the original Iranians which had nothing to do with Islamic history into Islamic history. For example, Islamic history knows various so called Civil Wars. One of them was between Abd-al-Malik, his governor al-Hajjaj and the rival caliph inMecca by the name of Abdallah Zubair. The evidence of inscriptions tells us that the name Zubayr is a misreading. The correct reading is ZNBYL. This was made into ZUBYL by the Arab historians. From ZUBYL they derived the name Zubair, which has no Semitic root. The real story is a fight between Abd al-Malik at Merv and the King of Kabulistan, who held the title ZNBYL. This took place between 60 and 75 Arab era in the East of the former Sassanian domains. The historians transferred this feud to Mecca andJerusalem and then embedded the whole into the structure of a well known story from the Old Testament, the secession of Omri and his building the Temple of Samaria.

**

The paper delivered by Rainer Nabielek of Berlin provided evidence of a successful application of Luxenberg’s method not only to the Koran but to non-religious texts as well. This was convincingly shown by means of a hitherto unsolved medical term. This medical term can be traced back to Syriac in the same way as many Koranic expressions as demonstrated by Luxenberg. In addition to this Nabielek pointed in his paper to the hitherto overlooked phenomenon of the existence of loan syntax in classical Arabic. His contribution confirms the validity of Luxenberg’s method in general.



Keith Small compared the textual variants in the New Testament manuscripts and Koranic manuscripts. Dr. Elisabeth Puin gave a lucid, and highly original analysis of an early Koran manuscript from Sana, Yemen, [DAM 01-27.1] in part written over a palimpsest Koranic text. Dr. Elisabeth Puin summarized her findings and their implications,


“As for the scriptio superior, the comparison with the Standard text [Cairo 1924/25 Koran] shows that it still contains many differences in orthography and verse counting; there are even minor textual variants, like, for example, singular instead of plural, wa- instead of fa-, and so on. Some - but by far not all - of those differences were at a later stage corrected by erasure and /or amendments. We cannot suppose that all the differences are only due to the calligrapher's inattention, being simply spelling mistakes; there are too many of them on every page, and some of them are found repeatedly, not only in this manuscript but in others too. So we must conclude that at the stage when and in the region where the manuscript was written those variants were not felt to be mistakes but conformed to a specific writing tradition.”    

------------
Professor Van Reeth, already much impressed by Luxenberg's thesis and methodology, gave two talks at the conference. The shorter one compared the image of the pearl in four passages in the Koran that refer to a eucharistic prayer, and a parallel image found in the Eucharist of the Manichaeans. The longer talk discussed the similarities of the Islamic vision of the union of Muhammad with his God, and the commentary of Ephrem the Syrian on the union of the believer with God.

****

Dr Reynolds of the University of Notre Dame (U.S.A.) examined the meaning of the difficult term hanif, found in the Koran but clearly a non-Arabic word. It probably comes from the Syriac word hanpa, meaning pagan, but in the Koran it has a secondary Syriac meaning, of a clan (gens); ethnicity. In the Koran the term is almost always used in connection with Abraham, but in the sense of his ethnicity and never his religion.

*****
Finally, Christoph Luxenberg himself gave an impressive talk that seemed to untie some difficult knots that several centuries of both Islamic and Western scholarship had been unable to undo. He gave an original explanation of the so-called mysterious letters with which some Surahs commence. At the beginning of twenty nine suras following the bismillah stands a letter, or a group of letters which are simply read as separate letters of the alphabet. Luxenberg suggested that they all had something to do with Syriac liturgical traditions. For instance, the letter êŒd at the beginning of Surah 38 indicates the number 90, referring to Psalm 90, while the letters A L R to be found at the beginning of Surahs 10, 11, 12, 14, 15 are a Syriac abbreviation meaning “The Lord said to me.”

u/TooManyInLitter · 65 pointsr/exmuslim

> thus the onus of proof to prove this falls upon you [to show that monotheistic Yahwehism/Allahism is a fallacy].

Accepted.

Against your claim of monotheistic Yahwehism/Allahism, the essential and absolute foundation of Islam, I presented an argument that Monotheistic Allahism/monotheistic Yahwehism, using the very precedents utilized by Muhammad, is a fallacious position as the physical archeological and linguistic anthropological evidence of revealed and holy scripture of cultures/societies/religions that preceded and became that of the early Israelites shows the worship of Yahweh originated initial in a highly polytheistic pantheon with an evolution/progression from a polytheism to a henotheism to, finally after thousands of years, to a full monotheism. This evaluation can be can be traced and correlated, to a high degree of reliability and confidence, with the changing man-made military and political position of Yahweh's adherents attempting to gain influence and control over their enemies. To show (via the burden of proof) that "There is no God but Allah," you will have to present evidence/an argument that refutes this argument.

Argument against monotheistic Yahwehism/Allahism

The most foundational and essential belief in Islam, and in all the Abrahamic religions (Judaism, Christianity, Islam), is that Yahweh/YHWH/YHVH, God, or Allah, is that "God/Allah" exists and there is the only one true revealed God (monotheism) - or monotheistic Yahwehism. As this is also the core of the Tanakh (Judaism), Bible (Christianity), and Qur'an/Koran (Islam); questions concerning the source of, and the validity of, this monotheistic Deity belief would raise significant doubt as to the Holy Book's validity as the word of God/Yahweh/Allah and to the very foundation of these belief systems. These core scriptural documents also establish the precept and precedent accepting predecessor society/culture holy scripture and documentation of revealed Yahwehism and integrating and propagating core attributes and beliefs (though with some variation and conflict with peripherals). Yet, within the Holy Scriptures of predecessor Babylonian, Ugarit and Canaanite, and early Israelite religions/societies/cultures, the evidence points to the evolution and growth in the belief of the monothesitic Yahweh Deity from a polytheistic foundation of the El [El Elyon] (the Father God/God Most High) God pantheon. Yahweh (one of many sons of El) was a subordinate fertility/rain/warrior local desert God whom, through a process of convergence, differentiation and displacement (synthesis and syncretism), was elevated from polytheism to henotheism (a monolatry for Yahweh; Yahweh is in charge, there are other Gods to worship) to an aggressive monolatrist polytheistic belief (Yahweh is the most important God, there exists other Gods but worship of these other Gods is to be actively rejected) to, finally, a monotheistic belief system (there is and, somehow, always has been, only Yahweh) as documented in the revealed holy scriptures of these religions and cultures that directly influenced and/or became the Biblical Israelites.

For ones edification, here are some physical archeological and linguistic anthropological evidential sources documenting the development and growth of monotheistic Yahwehism/Allahism from a historical polytheistic foundation of revealed holy scripture to the monotheism of early Biblical Israelites:

  • [The Early History of God: Yahweh and the Other Deities in Ancient Israel](http://www.amazon.com/The-Early-History-God-Biblical/dp/080283972X) by Mark Smith<br />
  • The Origins of Biblical Monotheism: Israel's Polytheistic Background and the Ugaritic Texts by Mark S. Smith
  • A History of God: The 4,000-Year Quest of Judaism, Christianity and Islam by Karen Armstrong
  • The Religion of Ancient Israel (Library of Ancient Israel) by Patrick D. Miller
  • Religions of Ancient Israel: A Synthesis of Parallactic Approaches by Ziony Zevit

    Traces of the foundational polytheistic (many many gods, El is in charge) belief, and it's evolution into a man-driven politically and militarily motivated monolatry for Yahweh (Yahweh is in charge, acknowledgement of other gods) to monotheistic Yahwehism (where Yahweh is and, somehow, always been the one and only god “There is no god but Allah”/“You shall have no other gods before Me"), litter the Torah and Old Testament of the Bible which survived editing and redaction. To a lesser extent (as it is based upon already redacted material and with better editing/explicit rationalizations already included) the New Testament and Qur'an also show linkages to this foundational polytheistic belief. Given that the tradition of monotheistic Yahwehism is the essential foundation of the Abrahamic Religions, this falsehood propagates to any/all doctrine/dogma/claims based upon this foundation - rendering these religions, at best, demonstratively invalid; and nominally, morally and culturally reprehensible.

    With the dubious claim of monotheistic Yahwehism that the Abrahamic God is based upon, and that serves as the most essential foundation of the Tanakh/Bible/Qur'an narrative, then any claim that the Tanakh/Bible/Qur'an is valid as a source for any "truth" or "knowledge" concerning Yahweh/Allah, and, Jesus the Christ, is at best, highly questionable and suspect, and nominally, completely "non-truthful."

    To continue, what evidence is there that the Prophet Muḥammad () was even aware of the origin story of worship Yahweh/Allah that predates the information available to the local contemporary Jews and Christians? What sayings (direct Qur'an or first person strong Hadith) are directly attributable to the Prophet Muhammad that demonstrate that the Prophet was even aware of the Holy Scriptures of predecessor Babylonian, Ugarit and Canaanite, and/or early Israelite religions/societies/cultures depicting Yahweh in a polytheistic pantheon as a subordinate deity? From my investigations, the Prophet Muhammad was ignorant of the politically and militarily motivated synthesis and syncretism of the El Elyon polytheistic pantheon into a henotheism (a monolatry for Yahweh; Yahweh is in charge, there are other Gods to worship) to an aggressive monolatrist polytheistic belief (Yahweh is the most important God, there exists other Gods but worship of these other Gods is to be actively rejected) to, finally, a monotheistic belief system (there is and, somehow, always has been, only Yahweh), where the later (the monotheistic Yahwehism of Judaism as presented within the Pentateuch/Old Testament) appears to be foundation upon which was revealed to Muhammad via the intermediary Angel Gabriel/Jibra'il. The argument that the essential monotheistic Yahwehism was somehow corrupted by adherents to The Majestic, The Supreme, The Creator Allah/Yahweh, and then somehow corrected at a later date, seems to better fit an apologetic stance formulated post-Prophet to attempt to explain the discovery of knowledge concerning the origin story of Yahwehism adherence rather than any knowledge the Prophet Muhammad had/received/documented.

    Finally, Islamic presuppositional apologetics, as based upon the revelations of Gabriel/Jibra'il via the Prophet (), and having the position of monotheistic Yahwehism as the source/author of knowledge and the absolute standard for facts/logic/reason/science/morality/etc., is shown to also be invalid as a result of the fully dependent, essential, and foundational tenet of monotheistic Yahwehism having been shown to be fallacious, fundamentally flawed and refuted. To argue against, or refute, the position of the fallacy of monotheistic Yahwehism, and to support of presuppositional apologetics, the burden of proof is upon the adherent to yahweh/Allah to provide credible evidence or proof of the existence of monotheistic Yahweh Deity against the presuppositional position of the null hypothesis {that supernatural deities do not exist} as exemplified by the agnostic atheist baseline position, and against the argument against monotheistic Yahwehism via Yahweh's Allah's polytheistic origin narratives as exemplified by the gnostic atheist held position that was presented above against monotheistic Yahwehism.

    [character limit reached - to be continued]
u/ReasonOnFaith · 2 pointsr/exmuslim

A great resource that has taught me tons, is "The Atheist Debates Project" run by and featuring Matt Dillahunty. Watch the episodes for free on YouTube. I'm a patron to support the excellent work that Matt does.

Further, you can see these ideas in action, by listening/watching the podcast/YouTube/live stream of the Internet TV show, "The Atheist Experience". Some callers aren't interesting, but some exchanges are just gold.

I myself have written a primer on beliefs and labels to help introduce one to the landscape. Read that to understand the concepts. View the links in the green resource boxes to dive deeper into any subject. Watch the debates linked to, to see how others argue the material.

Just be a sponge for this. Prop up you iPhone in the bathroom and play debates while you brush your teeth or in the kitchen as you scramble your eggs. You'll get in an extra 30+ minutes a day of absorbing this content.

To learn about how best to get people to think without ever really arguing, but instead, using the socratic method to get them to think about their own positions, read the book (or listen to the excellent audiobook), A Manual for Creating Atheists. Based on these techniques, you can watch Anthony Magnabosco as he approaches people and politely asks them questions to get them to think. This technique is called Street Epistemology.

Finally, go through the Philosophy playlist on YouTube, from the channel Crash Course. They do an excellent job of introducing a lot of the concepts and terminology involved in philosophical argumentation--which is what all of this comes down to.

We need more people who educate themselves and can speak intelligently to the issues. So thank you for taking an interest. This is an awesome journey. Welcome.

u/therigdenking · 2 pointsr/exmuslim

&gt; why u say hadith and sirah? I thought the sirah is just the lifestory of muhammad and this is found in the ahadith. Also the tafsirs use hadith. And i think there r many different sirahs, all leaving out stuff xD by modern authors etc.

When I say hadith, I generally mean sahih bukhari, sahih muslim etc. When I say sirah I mean biography of Muhammad by ibn ishaq/ibn hisham, one of the earliest biographies of Muhammad.

https://www.wikiwand.com/en/Prophetic_biography

https://www.wikiwand.com/en/Ibn_Ishaq#/Biography_of_Muhammad

https://www.wikiwand.com/en/Ibn_Hisham

&gt; I dont want to correct u, but i want to understand xD

No you have pretty good knowledge actually. Feel free to correct me whenever I make a mistake. I want to learn the Islam as objective as possible, as I have no intention to practice taqiyya lol

&gt; Such fascinating ideas on how islam came to be xD gonna get that book

https://www.amazon.com/Shadow-Sword-Birth-Global-Empire/dp/0307473651

This is the book. You may find it a pdf online maybe, or order it online. But definitely read it.

About last part, yeah I agree. Even though the cult leader Muhammad we encounter in hadith and other sources seem so real, the fact that there's so little written evidence about Islam's origins is a something to think about. When Umar(supposedly) conquered Jerusalem in 640, why didn't he wrote down a Quran? Why didn't they write a biography of Muhammad, or their history in general? Holland again says that for example even when barbarian tribes invaded Roman Empire, like the Germanic tribes in Britain, even their king stopped and wrote down books. But these people, whose motivation is built upon a "holy book", don't write down shit for at least 100 years. The name Muhammad start to appear in 690-710. The first manuscripts of Quran came from 8th century, why? And even then they are incomplete. And they were distributed in Umayyad era, while traditional muslim belief is that Uthman distributed those copies. Where is Uthman's Quran, the first Quran? Again, the belief is that a Umayyad ruler burned it. WTF lol! There's no original Quran. How are we going to be sure that Umayyads didn't sit down, observed Judaism, Christianity and wrote down a book according to that, while putting info from various other sources?(embryology in the Quran and other stuff)

u/rjmaway · 4 pointsr/exmuslim

Copied from previous thread

My story:

I became a Muslim over a decade ago because I thought the Qur'an was the word of God. I was under the impression it contained scientific miracles and I was ready to remake my life to what God wanted from me. After deciding to be a Muslim, I got married a few years later and continued to study the faith to become a better Muslim. I studied as much as my free time allowed. I didn't question the foundations of the faith for many years.

After ~8 years, I decided to increase my faith by studying what initially brought me into the religion. I noticed that a lot of the initial things that attracted me to Islam were extreme stretches of wording (I had learned more Arabic over the years) and I began to question more. I noticed that as I was gaining ijazah's in various works, each scholar would have radically different interpretations and I wondered how so many well-intentioned scholars could come to so many different conclusions from a supposedly clear book. I also got frustrated that many of my teachers would give me "honest" answers because my faith was "stronger" than other Muslims.

After Omar Suleiman's slavery followup video, my questions grew in intensity. He used one quote to prove his point that was not in it's proper context and I realized that the best "evidence" for his claims was incredibly weak. I knew I had to find the truth of the matter. Jonathan Brown's comments on slavery confirmed what I knew had to be true given how terrible the evidence was that a slave/master sexual relationship required consent.

This lead me down a path of questioning for years. Over time, I began to realize that the Qur'an spoke with the "scientific" knowledge of a basic, late antiquity person. The issue of abrogation always troubled me, as did the difference in tone throughout the Qur'an. I read as many different books of seerah in English as I could and I couldn't get it out of my head how the Qur'an's changes fit his life circumstances so frequently for a supposed message to mankind. I also found the arguments of the Qur'an sorely lacking. In addition, the various stories of the Qur'an like Dhul Qarnayn and Suleiman were retelling of fictional tales that grew over time. I began to realize the Qur'an perfectly fit into late antiquity and that it couldn't really transcend it. I also discovered the true history of the Muslim/Arab conquests was far more brutal than the whitewashed version my teachers gave me. I found that Muhammad could have been troubled and still been a charismatic person like St. Hildergard, Joan of Arc, or Joseph Smith. He wasn't as remarkable and unique as I thought. I also learned more about cognitive dissonance and how people will dig in further when evidence is presented that would refute their belief in a person. The hadith tradition, which only accepts known and good Muslims, was not historical enough to really examine Muhammad even if there is information to gather from it (see works by Motzki and Schoeler). When I read books about the i'jaz of the Qur'an, I found them very unconvincing as many more works are also quite remarkable (like the Illiad). I also found the belief in the miraculous preservation of the Qur'an was unfounded as well as its claims of divine origin (A,B, C) . Basically, everything about Islam is what I would expect from man, not an Omnipotent and Omniscient Being.

u/not_stoned · 5 pointsr/exmuslim

&gt;How did Islam spread so wide so quickly?

It didn't. This is a huge myth. I'll elaborate on this further down.

&gt;There must be a significant number of early adopters of Islam that genuinely believe in Mo's message.
How did Mo convince them? If it was coercion, I doubt it will last. I am surprised that after his death, only a handful of apostate tribes rebelled. I would expect the whole of arabia would return to their pre-Islamic days, if indeed most of the conversions were half-hearted. But as you can see, that motley crew in medina grew to become 1.7 billion.

Muhammad preached Islam for 13 years in Mecca. Do you know how many followers he got? 150. This is supposedly the best version of Islam too, the most tolerant as much of it wasn't abrogated by later actions in Medina.

Muhammad conquered Arabia by force, and he converted tribes by force. You say only a handful of tribes rebelled, but that's false: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ridda_wars

Majority rebelled, except those around Mecca &amp; Medina. We can see Islam was not as popular with Arabs as the PR claims.

&gt;It's the youngest abrahamic religion and yet had the fastest growth. No other major religions come close.

&gt;We could probably dismiss the whole of sirah as a fabrication, but they are substantiated by hadiths, and as u know, hadiths are kinda hard to fake, unless a grand conspiracy is going on, but that would take the entire first and second generation muslims to agree to it. FYI, I'm more inclined towards this explanation, even though it's highly unlikely. It's still possible.

You've answered the question yourself. Much of Islamic history we know was written hundreds of years after Muhammad. Nothing is verifiable, Hadith are faked all the time. Even a few Muslims believe the Hadith compilations like Bukhari, Muslim etc were canonized for political reasons.

You can read Fred M. Donner's Muhammad and the Believers if you want to get an idea of how the actual Muhammad might have been (Donner is one of the most foremost Western scholars of Islam). https://www.amazon.com/Muhammad-Believers-At-Origins-Islam/dp/0674064143

It posits that Islam wasn't even defined as a religion until much later than originally thought. Many similar theories exist too, some saying Islam was only formalized by the early empire for legitimacy reasons (as neighbor empires like Persians and Romans had their own state religions). There is heaps of evidence for this.

He even says the early Muslim armies were multiethnic and mutlireligious, with Christians and Jews among them.

&gt;So what is Islam's secret? There must be some proper explanation other than "divine intervention". Something far sinister perhaps?

It's way more mundane than you think. It boils down to Islam coming along in the right place at the right time. Let me list some factors and facts:

  1. Arabian kingdoms were nothing new, Muhammad was the first to unite Arabia proper though. Similar happened to the Mongols under Genghis Khan - there's actually a lot of parallels with Genghis Khan and Muhammad but that's another topic. The point is that it was inevitable that someone would come along and do this. Both Mongolia and Arabia were ripe for this to happen when it did.

  2. Persia and Rome had fought each other for 1000 years constantly and were exhausted. This made them easy pickings for the newly united, fanatical Muslim Arabs. Conquering Persia is what truly set Islamdom on the map to being relevant.


  3. Muslims allowed conquered peoples to mostly do their own thing, but gave them second class status which made converting to Islam a huge incentive. That's not to say they didn't oppress anyone though, because they did. Zoroastrians for instance were treated horribly. But MANY people, maybe even the majority, converted for economic reasons.

  4. Islam spread quickly because the Muslim armies spread quickly, mostly thanks to the above mentioned reason #2. However, that doesn't mean everyone converted to Islam. Look at Turkey for example, it very, very slowly converted to Islam. It took hundreds of years. This is the case everywhere - in the "Golden Age of Islam" I would say in many areas Muslims were 50/50 with local Christians &amp; Jews &amp; others rather than at the 90% population numbers you see today. It's controversial, but you can directly correlate the rise of the Muslim population through conversions and birth to the stagnation of the region as a whole - take that with a grain of salt though.

  5. Christianity spread pretty slowly until Rome adopted it when it kicked into overdrive. So you can see how influential an empire with a state religion is in converting people. Muslims just happened to have a state religion for their empire from almost the very beginning, unlike Rome who fought against Christianity &amp; tried to suppress it for a long time.

    There's nothing really miraculous about this stuff.

    Now, you want to see an example of a religion that really was impressive in how it spread? Look at Manichaeism. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manichaeism

    This faith started in Iran and ended up spreading as far away as China and Britain - all without military conquest but purely through trade.

    Now that's a fucking miracle! It even rivaled Christianity at one point, and in an alternate history could have easily replaced it had some things gone differently.

    Shame it was persecuted heavily by pretty much everyone, from Zoroastrians to Muslims.

u/hl_lost · 1 pointr/exmuslim

I think you are on the right track. There is no need to be nervous but its always best to be as sincere and open as you can when investigating something of this nature.

When I was at a similar point in my life, I was looking at all sorts of Islamophobic materials and it was a complete waste of time. I would go back and forth between the Islamic sites and the phobic ones and invariably there would be a perfectly logical argument against the scientific basis for the factoid in question which could not rule out the 'miraculous' part. The mention of fingerprint in Quran comes to mind.

Ultimately what will decide it for you is your own experience with the source material, i.e. the Quran. 100% of all the material bashing down the Quran is based on less than 0.001% of the book. Forget scholars, forget the hadith, forget anything else and just try and go through the book for yourself. If at the end of it, you dont feel anything and have no use for Islam, I am pretty sure you will be A-Okay. Whats the point of believing in a Just God if He will call you to task in spite of your best efforts?

For me, while I still have doubts over the classical interpretation of some parts, I am convinced of its divine nature.

Read https://www.amazon.com/Losing-My-Religion-Call-Help/dp/1590080270/ for one guy's journey which started and continues with the Quran. He also answers all the common objections.

Also the following two will give good insight in to the nature of early islam and why you should take all the traditional islamic narrative with a grain of salt.

https://www.amazon.com/Misquoting-Muhammad-Challenge-Interpreting-Prophets/dp/1780747829
https://www.amazon.com/Destiny-Disrupted-History-Through-Islamic/dp/1586488139/

In any case, be brave and feel confident that whichever way it turns for you, your sincerity guarantees your well being.

u/massimosclaw · 5 pointsr/exmuslim

I know how you must feel. I went through the same thing. I was threatened by my mother, grabbed by the chest, and threatened to be kicked out of my house. I refused because I had no place to go, as my dad tried to calm her down, luckily they had to leave. I've learned a lot since then, and went back into the closet (though you seem to have a job, and security, so I'd say you don't have to do that) I think there's one effective persuasion technique that you may have not been exposed to - but maybe now it's too late because you're out of the closet. You might even be going through what many people call "an angry atheist phase", this can cause you to become more tribal which can send you into a downward spiral of anger and pain, and suck time like hell.

Here's the effective strategy I came across - this must be approached after you are both cool and preferably the other person doesn't know you are an atheist (but again, to me, it just seems too late):

It's called Street Epistemology. It's most concisely put in this book "A Manual for Creating Atheists", and you can see a good example of it on video here.

If you were an American Indian and you were dancing around the fire with feathers in your head gear, and I walked up to you and said "What are you dancing around the fire for?" You don't take your hat and throw it on the ground and say "You know I never thought of it that way!" We can't do that, we look at the world with our background, we have no other way of doing it.

Why is it that a Nazi gets a lump in his throat when he sees a swastika, and an American feels anger? The difference is the environment they've been brought up in. And if you're brought up in an environment with misinformation, you will behave that way.

No Chinese baby was ever born speaking Chinese, no matter how many generations of Chinese.

A child never writes his own alphabet

I believe, all behavior and actions that all people take are perfectly lawful to their environment and background. How your wife reacted, while it is very harmful to you, and I certainly empathize all the pain that my family has caused me specifically, is perfectly appropriate to her background and upbringing. Not saying what she did to you was beneficial. I'm saying that that is perfectly appropriate to the way she was brought up, and because of her indoctrination, it requires a different approach if you would like to change her beliefs and behaviors.

Over the years I've discovered a better way to convince believers. It's not hard either. It just takes some reading, and understanding on how human behavior works and how people are brainwashed. And how they are victims of that, not acting with their own free will and their own ideas.

A few books that helped me with convincing believers were: Nonviolent communication by Marshall Rosenberg, and semantics to clear language, the easiest book: Language in Thought and Action by Hayakawa. To understand psychological biases check out You Are Not So Smart by David McRaney

But perhaps the most helpful person was being exposed to Jacque Fresco - I shared some of his thoughts above. I highly recommend him - his ideas have changed my life.

I shared this snippet from Jacque Fresco on another post in this subreddit, but it bears repeating:

Conflict occurs when a person doesn’t seek your advice but you advise them.
So the way to get along with people is to let them be what they are unless they say I don’t seem to get along with pollocks whats my problem? Very few people say “What do you think of my value system?” If they do that and it’s sincere, not an ego thing...
If they ask a question, thats where you can get in and suggest but if they don’t, don’t s superimpose your values even if they’re better

If you suggest, 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5

and they say I don’t like 4 and 5,

don’t argue.

Your question is: How different is the persons background than yours? And does the person seek information? And if they did, don’t feel like you’re instructing them.
If you come home and you brother is using a shovel in the lawn, and he's struggling with it and you come up to him and say "That's no way to use a shovel!"

That's not going to change him. If, however, you say nothing - and he comes up to you, and says "I can't seem to use this shovel efficiently, can you help me?" then you can instruct them but don't feel like you're instructing them so you say "I used to do it that way, then another person taught me to push it down with my foot, and that was easier"

Sometimes people don’t want advice. They feel they’re being put down. So stop giving one another advice, that produces antagonism, unless they ask for it.
You can’t point out “The trouble with you is you don’t listen to anybody” That doesn’t cause em to now listen. They’ll go on with their same pattern.

Unless they say to you “Am I inattentive? Or Do I appear inattentive?” Very few people talk like that. That’s what sane means. Sane means when a person comes over “I’m not familiar with that jigsaw. How do you use it?” Then you instruct them. If they come over everyday and ask you - watch them and guide them through it.
Making a comment “Your’e dimwitted or slow. The trouble with you is you have no imagination.” That doesn’t alter behavior, it only increases conflict.

In order to avoid conflict don’t generate it. You generate it when you offer something to somebody that they didn’t ask for. Let them be. Whatever they say. Unless they turn to you.

If someone says “I’m a catholic” Say “Do you fully accept everything in the catholic doctrine?” “yes!”

The door is shut. It’s welded.

But if he says “Im not sure” thats an opening.

That goes for any subject. Check for openings before you talk. If you’ve had conflict all your life cause you believe that what you say enters their head the way you want to - thats projection. When you tell something to somebody for their own good. “If you keep drinking the way you are - you may become addicted” But if you come at a person and he says “fuck you” then shut up.

If I’m talking to religious people I would say “The bible says thou shalt not kill” How do you handle war?

I would say “The bible says love thine enemy - if a man strikes you turn the other cheek” How do you deal with that?

u/ohamid234 · 1 pointr/exmuslim

I linked a paper that debunked the argument that human beings and chimps share a common ancestor because of genetic similarity. I have not engaged in any fallacy whatsoever, you, however, engaged in two in your comment. The first is a straw man because you misrepresented what I said, I specifically said that it debunks genetic similarity. Your second fallacy committed here is called the vested interest fallacy which is as follow:

&gt;The Vested Interest Fallacy occurs when a person argues that someone’s claim or recommended action is incorrect because the person is motivated by their interest in gaining something by it, with the implication that were it not for this vested interest then the person wouldn’t make the claim or recommend the action. Because this reasoning attacks the reasoner rather than the reasoning itself, it is a kind of Ad Hominem fallacy.

http://www.iep.utm.edu/fallacy/#VestedInterest

By saying that the paper is on an Islamic website in no way whatsoever degrades the quality of the research or the arguments presented. Indeed, to say that homo sapiens and chimps share a common ancestor due to genetic similarity has, in fact, been debunked. As for evolution in general see my previous comment. I won't repeat myself.

&gt;How do you know that Islam is true? What is the reason you believe Islam is true?

There are plenty of reasons, I recommend checking out Hamza Tzortzis book, The Divine Reality.

&gt;And your claim that Islam is true is unsubstantiated.

Your claim that the 7 year old who memorized the Quran is being abused and indoctrinated is unsubstantiated. Moreover, your substantiation requires scientism and naturalism which cannot be substantiated itself, because, they are, of course, self refuting and conflicting with one another.

Edit: Fixed an error.

u/captaindisguise · 4 pointsr/exmuslim

LOL!

To u/ACaulfield910, it is pretty clear you don't really understand what you are touting.

Just to point out a single example,

  • I think you are an unintelligent ignoramus &lt;-- This is not an ad hominem; this is an insult.

  • I think you are an unitelligent ignoramus, therefore your belief X is false &lt;-- This is an ad hominem

    For another example, when u/wazzym provided you with some links here; your glorious response was to say that they are by "a reddit keyboard warrior with no credibility".

    Now that is an ad hominem worthy of its name. To top that, you followed your ad hominem with an argumentum ad verecundiam.

    Please, get your thoughts straight before trying to teach others logic.

    Apart from that, you aren't doing yourself any favors on this forum if you think you can uncritically accept and merely regurgitate traditional Islamic narratives.

    From your romanticist views of early Islam, it is also clear that you are clueless as to what contemporary critical non-religious scholarship has to say about Islamic origins. I really recommend that you read this book by Stephen Shoemaker

    Good Luck
u/humzak03 · 2 pointsr/exmuslim

For your case I recommend a great book. It’s called “the divine reality” by Hamza Tzortis. It selves into the philosophy of existence, purpose, and god, not only from an Islamic POV but from an atheist POV as well. It’s a very good read as well. Highly recommend reading it.
https://www.amazon.com/Divine-Reality-Islam-Mirage-Atheism/dp/0996545387

u/noflippingidea · 14 pointsr/exmuslim

Definitely. Ironically, /r/Islam is what started me on my journey, because half the content on that sub was stuff I totally disagreed with on a fundamental level. The questions that were being asked were silly (in my opinion), and the answers were even sillier. I didn't realise people actually thought that way. I was a pretty liberal Muslim at the time and thought that you didn't have to follow the Qur'an by the book to be a good Muslim, all you had to do was have good intentions. Seems I was the only one who thought that way.

So I went out looking for a sub that countered that one, which is when I found /r/exmuslim. The more I lurked around this sub the more I started to question organised religion, but still somewhat believed that god existed. Then I read The God Delusion, and that, I think, was the final blow.

But yes, /r/exmuslim played a huge part.

u/str8baller · 1 pointr/exmuslim

General principle and approach to understanding existence:

Anekantavada

Historical Materialism
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Books I'd recommend to every former believer:

The Birth and Death of Meaning

To Have or To Be

Language in Thought and Action

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Also Ayn Rand and Sam Harris have been good examples that show to me that losing religious belief doesn't necessitate that someone becomes "good". This has driven me to relentlessly continue to search for, and facilitate the experience of Truth, Justice, Beauty, Love. In that sense I've retained the concept in Islam of jihad (to relentlessly strive and struggle for Truth Justice Beauty Love).

In this stage of our material history, I believe this can only be accomplished through abolishing private property.

3 minute intro to Marxism

10 minute intro to Karl Marx --- (Reminder for newcomers that private property refers exclusively to the means of production, not your home and other possessions which are considered personal property)

Introduction to Marxism by Professor Richard D. Wolff

Against Capitalism by Jerry Cohen

Introduction to Anarchism by Noam Chomsky

Chomsky on capitalism #1

Chomsky on capitalism #2

Here is a list of some more Chomsky videos

'Anarchy Works' - A simple Q&amp;A style book

Albert Einstein - Why Socialism?

The Conquest of Bread by Kroptokin - Anarcho-Communism, audiobook

Socialism: Utopian and Scientific by Engels

What is Property? by Proudhon

Reform or Revolution by Rosa Luxemborg

Anarchism and Other Essays by Emma Goldman

A Peoples History of the United States by Howard Zinn ...Universally acclaimed by those on the left, and a definite classic/must-read ... can also be found in audiobook form on kickass torrents or the pirate bay

Capital Volume 1 by Karl Marx - Explained by David Harvey

The Principles of Communism

Mutual Aid: A Factor of Evolution

The Zapatista movement: A modern day libertarian socialist society

Rojava: Another modern day socialist society

Marx's concept of false consciousness; similar to what we call 'the matrix' in the 21st century

Marx on 'alienation' of workers

Liberationschool.org

http://ouleft.org/


/r/Socialism

/r/Socialism101

/r/Anarchy101 &lt;--- the best of all the '101' subreddits IMO as it has the most content (use the search bar as well)

/r/Communism101

/r/DebateACommunist

/r/DebateAnarchism

https://youtu.be/-w12bkm9g8o?t=3m18s &lt;--- Capitalist exploitation explained


Leftist movies and documentaries:

'Americas Unofficial Religion - The War on an Idea' - Short documentary about the history of socialism and the left in America ... This one is absolutely essential


'Matewan' - A labor union organizer comes to an embattled mining community brutally and violently dominated and harassed by the mining company - 7.9/10 on IMDB

['Land and Freedom' - an unemployed communist that comes to Spain in 1937 during the civil war to enroll the republicans and defend the democracy against the fascists. 7.6/10 on IMDB](http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0114671/?ref
=fn_al_tt_1)


'The Take' - tells the story of workers in Buenos Aires, Argentina who reclaim control of a closed Forja auto plant where they once worked and turn it into a worker cooperative.

'Inside Job' - documentary featuring Matt Damon about the 2008 financial crisis

'Manufacturing Consent: Noam Chomsky and the Media' - documentary about the noted American linguist/political dissident and his warning about corporate media's role in modern propaganda.


'Che: Part One' - In 1956, Ernesto 'Che' Guevara and a band of Castro-led Cuban exiles mobilize an army to topple the regime of dictator Fulgencio Batista.

'The Black Power Mixtape 1967-1975' - about the Black Panther movement, featuring Angela Davis, MLK jr, Malcom X

'The Perverts Guide to Ideology' - In this clip from the film, Slavoj Zizek explains ideology

Socialism is an economic and social system defined by social ownership of the means of production. (Workers democratically own and operate the places in which they work, as opposed to private power aka capitalism)

The means of production are non-human inputs the create economic value, such as factories, workplaces, industrial machinery, etc. Socialists refer to the means of production as capital, or private property. Private property in the socialist context shouldn't be confused with personal property, such as your home, car, computer, and other possessions.

In a capitalist society the means of production are owned and controlled privately, by those that can afford them (the capitalist aka those with capital). Production is carried out to benefit the capitalist (production for profit). Workers are paid a wage, and receive that amount regardless of how much value they produce.

Communism is the highest developed stage of socialism wherein there is no state, no money, no class system. The means of production are owned by all and provide for everyone's needs.


Past and present socialist/anarchist societies include - Revolutionary Catalonia, Anarchist Aragon, Shinmin Province in Korea/Manchuria, Free Territory of Ukraine, The Bavarian Soviet Republic, The Paris Commune, The Zapatista controlled areas of Chiapas (current day), Magonista Baja California, Shanghai People's Commune, Rojava (current day), etc

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The only other drive available to me is to be a careerist, which I am not interested in. I just need the money to make a living but I don't plan on going above and beyond even though the opportunities do present themselves to me.

u/Byzantium · 5 pointsr/exmuslim

&gt;Muslims have been debunking atheist arguments for over a millennium. I would recommend reading Hamza Tzortzis's "The Divine Reality: God, Islam &amp; The Mirage Of Atheism". The first chapter is available for free on Amazon. https://www.amazon.com/Divine-Reality-Islam-Mirage-Atheism/dp/0996545387/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&amp;amp;qid=1491918002&amp;amp;sr=8-1&amp;amp;keywords=hamza+tzortzis

&gt;There is also plenty of material that is available online for free as well by Muslim authors, they use the standard arguments (i.e. Teleological, Kalam, Contingency). https://asadullahali.com/2015/08/16/the-rationality-of-believing-in-god-without-evidence-part-1/

&gt;Tzortzis's book takes you from atheism to Islam, succinctly.

u/ferengiprophet · 1 pointr/exmuslim

According to the book I'm reading, What the Modern Martyr Should Know: 72 Grapes and Not a Single Virgin, the phrase "b-ismi-llāhi r-raḥmāni r-raḥīmi" means "in the name of the loving and beloved God" in Syro-Aramaic, one of the languages used by Christians in the Middle East. This is important to note because it is theorized that Islam is an offshoot of Syrian-Christianity. Here's a screenshot of the page with Christoph Luxenberg's translation of the phrase.

u/squeezebuttmagic · 3 pointsr/exmuslim

&gt; I’m really sorry that this is long. I know that the responses I’ll get on this, if any, will be biased most likely but if any of you could give me advice on what I should read

I've read many books, but the one that has changed my life the most, and has changed the lives of almost anyone I have recommended it to, is this one.

Everyone here probably hates me cause I recommend it all the time, but seriously it's hard to put down. Expect to have your life and perception of life changed forever. People usually recommend his other book, but this book does the best job in explaining the way the human ego/mind works, this is the most important part.

u/REDPlLL · 1 pointr/exmuslim

Well i gave you a dictionary definition of lying. If you define "lie" to mean something else, then go ahead. But Islam does not permit lying according to the definition i gave ("saying something incorrect"). So if someone were to ask me if i was a Muslim and i don't respond, then that's not a lie using the definition i gave.

The problem with your definition is that it leads to interpretive problems (which i think you hate). If i assume your a Christian this whole time, and you are an atheist, then i can claim that you lied to me. You deceived me by not being open to me about your lack of faith. You could claim that you weren't trying to act Christian, but i could claim the opposite and there is no objective measure that we both could agree on to always determine who in fact is right here.

&gt; Can you recommend some? From what I've seen, most of Islamic history is an expansion of conquest and subjugation that makes the British Empire look like the Salvation Army.

More like the opposite. Here's a highly recommended biography:
http://www.amazon.com/Muhammad-Life-Based-Earliest-Sources/dp/1594771537

u/heybells2004 · 1 pointr/exmuslim

Read The God Delusion by Richard Dawkins...you will be more at peace

https://www.amazon.com/God-Delusion-Richard-Dawkins/dp/0618918248

u/leviathanawakes · 0 pointsr/exmuslim

So basically, you accept Quran, but anything more than that such as certain hadith, have to be taken with a pinch of salt and seen if it is really authentic. The way I go about it is,

  1. If a hadith talks about the world and clearly contradicts empirical evidence, such as ones against evolution, I don't accept it.
  2. If a hadith talks about actions etc , I'll look at if it has multiple reliable chains of transmission. (Mutawattir). If it doesn't, then you cant really enforce it.

    Most of the controversial issues regarding Islam stems from hadiths that are single-chain narration. That means only ONE person reported hearing it from the prophet pbuh, and ONE student from him, and so on. Sahih Muslim and Bukhari unfortunately do accept a lot of single-chain narrations.

    &amp;#x200B;

    I personally am wary of accepting a single-chain narration.

    &amp;#x200B;

    There's this good book that talks about all of these issues with hadiths etc by Jonathan Brown. Misquoting Muhammed
u/Saxobeat321 · 1 pointr/exmuslim

If it's of any interest. Just a few links concerning why individuals have left Islam...

&gt; https://www.reddit.com/r/exmuslim/comments/4l4v9f/previously_casual_muslim_here_seeking_your/

&gt;
https://www.reddit.com/r/exmuslim/comments/4ai9gv/why_i_left_islam/

&gt; https://www.reddit.com/r/exmuslim/comments/4if6fg/someone_asked_me_what_were_the_reasons_that/

&gt;
https://www.reddit.com/r/exmuslim/comments/4o7tx1/what_made_you_leave_islambecome_an_atheist/d4amofx

&gt; https://www.reddit.com/r/exmuslim/comments/g9jy3/so_why_is_it_that_you_left_islam/

&gt;
https://www.reddit.com/r/exmuslim/comments/mh66e/so_why_is_it_that_you_left_islam_part_2/

&gt; https://www.reddit.com/r/exmuslim/comments/4jh3j9/why_did_you_leave_islam/

&gt;

https://www.reddit.com/r/exmuslim/comments/4m970a/seriousat_what_point_you_stop_believing/

&gt; https://www.reddit.com/r/exmuslim/comments/4nu9rk/why_did_you_leave_islam/

&gt;
https://www.reddit.com/r/exmuslim/comments/1jvnyo/why_i_as_a_muslim_sold_myself_and_left_islam/

&gt; https://www.reddit.com/r/exmuslim/comments/3sn113/discussion_why_are_you_an_exmuslim/

&gt;
https://www.reddit.com/r/exmuslim/comments/3ncax0/ex_muslims_whats_your_main_reason_for_leaving/

&gt; https://www.reddit.com/r/exmuslim/comments/3qn2zl/why_did_you_leave_islam_question_from_a_muslim/

&gt;
https://www.reddit.com/r/exmuslim/comments/4jwyjm/what_exact_questionevent_made_you_leave_islam/

&gt; https://www.reddit.com/r/exmuslim/comments/43yrr4/why_did_you_all_leave_islam/

&gt;
https://www.reddit.com/r/exmuslim/comments/4acim7/what_made_you_leave_islam_was_it_a_gradual/

&gt; https://www.reddit.com/r/exmuslim/comments/4k93qm/whats_your_story_exmuslim_help_needed/d3ekq99

&gt;
http://www.theexmuslim.com/2016/02/28/why-i-left-islam-and-chose-not-to-return/

&gt; https://www.quora.com/How-did-it-feel-to-leave-Islam

&gt;
Why I left Islam?" - (By Ishina)

&gt; "Why I left Islam &amp; goodbye"
&gt;https://youtu.be/ra9QQ58b7JY

&gt;
"7 reasons why I left Islam"
&gt;https://youtu.be/ZZ6c66G99A4

&gt; 'The Apostates: When Muslims Leave Islam' [1] - by Simon Cottee.
"The Apostates is the first major study of apostasy from Islam in the western secular context. Drawing on life-history interviews with ex-Muslims from the UK and Canada, Simon Cottee explores how and with what consequences Muslims leave Islam and become irreligious..."
http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/24284240-the-apostates

&gt;
'Arabs Without God: Atheism and freedom of belief in the Middle East' [1] - by Brian Whitaker.
"...In this ground-breaking book, journalist Brian Whitaker looks at the factors that lead them to abandon religion and the challenges they pose for governments and societies that claim to be organised according to the will of God..."
http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/23206783-arabs-without-god

&gt; Recent Survey (of 738 individuals) on the topic of their apostasy...*
https://www.reddit.com/r/exmuslim/comments/4ccgjd/new_exmuslimnevermoose_surveys_please_participate/

u/remembertosmilebot · 1 pointr/exmuslim

Did you know Amazon will donate a portion of every purchase if you shop by going to smile.amazon.com instead? Over $50,000,000 has been raised for charity - all you need to do is change the URL!

Here are your smile-ified links:

https://smile.amazon.com/dp/B00903HTIE/ref=cm_sw_r_wa_awdb_06TrzbNDSAW50

---

^^i'm ^^a ^^friendly&amp;nbsp;bot

u/Awkward_Arab · 3 pointsr/exmuslim

Just noted this part of your reply.

&gt;it's his claim that compared with Jesus, the amount of genuine scholarship on the historicity of Mohammed is woefully lacking.

What are you talking about? There are scholars for the revisionist theory, albeit outdated. John Wansbrough, Patricia Crone, Joseph Schacht, Michael Cook. The ones that I'm fond of and they all have impeccable credentials (the number of degrees, and where you obtained them from actually do matter) Fred Donner, Harald Motzki, Jonathon Brown, and Andreas Goerke.

I usually recommend these two books to anyone that's interested in the history of Muhammad and Islam, they're critical of the traditional narrative among others.

Muhammad And The believers: At The Origins of Islam by Fred Donner

Muhammad: A Very Short Introduction by Jonathon Brown

u/AnAnachronism · 6 pointsr/exmuslim

You may be interested in Stephen Shoemaker's The Death of a Prophet.

http://www.amazon.com/The-Death-Prophet-Beginnings-Divinations/dp/0812243560/

It is pricey, so you may want to find it at an academic library. The research and writing is top notch, and everything is superbly cited and referenced.

u/jeffsthename · 1 pointr/exmuslim

I agree with the above. Most ex-moose figure it out on their own. The more you try to show them that their beliefs are wrong the more defensive they get. I suggest you read this https://www.amazon.com/Manual-Creating-Atheists-Peter-Boghossian/dp/1939578094

u/DetectiveInspectorMF · 1 pointr/exmuslim

"the most common reasons for disaffiliating from Islam among the respondents turned out to be the lack of logic in Islam, the fact that it contravenes science and its inhumane nature"


http://archiv.ub.uni-marburg.de/ep/0004/article/download/4572/5002/


"Many respondents said their doubts centred on misgivings related to the intellectual architecture of Islam: that is, they suspected that Islam’s cognitive claims about how the world is or came to be are not true."

https://www.amazon.co.uk/Apostates-When-Muslims-Leave-Islam/dp/1849044694