Consume Product

All other religions are more similar to each other than Christianity, because Christianity is a fundamentally different religion. Even nihilism is more similar to judaism than Christianity.

Its literally spanwed by the same "people"

Muhhamed was a bastard son of a jewish scribe, despite what sand niggers claim their religion is 1:1 copy of juadism just niggerier to appeal to the lower IQ rationality of most arabs (who [prior to Islam were even MORE barbaric](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=07OsSSt0ytc) than they are today)

u/steele2 on suicide watch

> Circumcision of boys

The New Testament mentions but does not mandate circumcision. The Quran simply does not mention circumcision whatsoever.

Furthermore, the many Christians and Muslims who believe that circumcision is mandated believe it for Old Testament reasons. The Quran's silence, for instance, is interpreted by such Muslims as that the Old Testament already settles the debate. Thus, they conclude that it is necessary. However, it is just as easy to interpret the Quran's silence as meaning that it is unnecessary, that if it were necessary, the Quran would contain a verse explicitly mandating it.

Thus Christianity and Islam are closer to each other on this issue. Tapewormism is the only one in which circumcision is effectively beyond debate.

> Dietary Laws

All three agree that there are dietary laws and only differ on what the content of those laws are, for instance, regarding dairy and wine. Christians who believe otherwise, that Jesus abolished the dietary laws, have simply fallen for a misinterpretion of Mark 7:1-23.

First, if Jesus abolished the Old Testament dietary laws, this renders parts of the New Testament that cover chronologically later events senseless. For instance:

> [Acts 10:14] But Peter said, “By no means, Lord, for I have never eaten anything unholy and unclean.” (NASB)

Why would Peter respond in this way if Jesus abolished the dietary laws years earlier?

Secondly, it contradicts the other Gospels. Matthew 15:20, covering the same event, reads:

> [Matthew 15:18-20] But what comes out of the mouth proceeds from the heart, and this defiles a person. For out of the heart come evil thoughts, murder, adultery, sexual immorality, theft, false witness, slander. These are what defile a person. But to eat with unwashed hands does not defile anyone.” (ESV)

What sense does Matthew 15:20 make if Jesus was actually talking about dietary laws in that time and place? Mark 7:1-23 is about ritual handwashing, not dietary laws.

> Prophets

Which of the Old Testament prophets accepted in both Islam and tapewormism do Christians reject? If Christians reject even a single one of them, and thus claim that the Old Testament contains definite falsehoods, why do they insist that the Old Testament still be part of the Bible?

Tapewormism rejects the New Testament prophets - John and Jesus - and Muhammad. Christianity and Islam both accept John and Jesus, leaving only the difference of one man, Muhammad, between them.

All three are the same on the Old Testament prophets. Christianity and Islam are much closer to each other than to tapewormism on the New Testament prophets.

> Torah's origins

All three agree that the Torah originally came from God.

Some tapeworms and some Christians believe that it is inerrant. However, all Muslims should reject Torah inerrancy, since the Quran clearly states that whatever Moses received - the original version of today's Torah or at least some part of it, in which case other prophets were given the other parts of it - has been corrupted and is thus errant.

> [Quran 6:91] They have no grasp of God’s true measure when they say, ‘God has sent nothing down to a mere mortal.’ Say, ‘Who was it who sent down the Scripture, which Moses brought as a light and a guide to people, which *you made into separate sheets, showing some but hiding many?* You were taught things that neither you nor your forefathers had known.’ Say, ‘God [sent it down],’ then leave them engrossed in their vain talk (tr. Abdel Haleem, emphasis mine)

Thus, tapewormism and Christianity can debate whether today's Torah is inerrant, putting them together on one side; but it is un-Quranic to have that debate, since the Quran clearly settles it, putting Islam alone on the other side. You can't believe that the Torah is inerrant while accepting a text, the Quran, that claims that men have split the Torah into pieces, many or most of which are unknown to most or all people today. From this perspective, we simply have, at best, an incomplete version of what Moses originally received from God.

Stop being deceived by AIs and obviously loaded questions. Instead of asking about the differences between tapewormism, Christianity, and Islam, the question posed was about the similarities between tapewormism and Islam, the provided answer of which you peddle as though it was an answer to the former.

Christianity and Islam are against tapewormism on circumcision. All three agree that there are dietary laws. All three agree on the Old Testament prophets, but disagree on John, Jesus, and Muhammad. Tapewormism rejects the last three. All three agree on the origin of the Torah. Christianity and tapewormism are against Islam on Torah inerrancy.

True.

Much of the quran is a poorly plagiarized version of the jwish laws of the torah.

Muhammad did this in an attempt to recruit kikes into his religion, but when he presented the quran to rabbis, they laughed at him.

Mo was so butt-hurt that he ran home and added new chapters to his "perfect" scripture about TKD which contradicted earlier passages, but Mo got around that problem by claiming the later passages were more perfect than the earlier passages.

The quran literally references how one of Mo's wives thought he was full of shit.