No god but God is that the author’s personal religious beliefs never really compromises his retelling of the history. It’s almost as if he’s taking a non-Muslim perspective at times in order to prove or explain things, which I really liked because it shows that he’s rational and logical and doesn’t fall back on religious arguments that can’t be proven all the time. I loved is how he writes about the religion in the Arabian penninsula before Islam. He goes a lot more in depth than most authors do on the subject. He does a lot to put things into perspective and to show how truly tolerant and accepting the early Islamic community was. Which is one thing that Aslan keeps bringing up and trying to prove - that the ummah is meant to encompass Christians, Jews, and Muslims. Not just Muslims. Aslan is a rationalist and it definitely shows. Whenever he questions an Islamic concept it always seems to strengthen his faith instead of damaging it. I think it’s supposed to do that to the reader, too. It certainly worked for me. I’ve always been a firm believer in the idea that you cannot have true faith until you question it, and that questioning your religion or your faith is a good thing.
One of the things I loved about