This research attempts to provide insights into the argumentation structures in the discussion of Islam on social media involving 14 Malaysian former Muslims. The social media accounts of the participants were observed for 12 months, from January to December 2019. A total of 368 postings put forth arguments related to Islamic authoritative discourse, the Quran and “Sunnah” of the Prophet Muhammad, to justify their renunciation of the Muslim religion. The analysis revealed that the Level 2 argument, which includes the claim, data to support the claim, and the warrant, was identified as the most common argument structure. Level 5, which has more than one rebuttal, was the least common argument structure. The analysis shows that most argument structures were at the lower levels (1–3) in that they offered no strong, clearly identifiable rebuttals. This study concludes that the arguments put forth by former Muslims, in the main, are loosely constructed rather than attempts to build a strong cumulative argumentation to support their reasons for abandoning the Muslim faith.

This study attempts to generate new insights into the wide spread online and offline conspiratorial discourse on COVID-19. Twofold analytical lens consisted of narrative interrelations framework and content analysis showed how the linguistic resources and conversational such as popular socio-religious discourses, hypothetical narratives, personal narratives, personal mental archives, and interpolated arguments are integrated in the interpretation of intertextual Bases such as Bill Gates’ TED talk 2015 (26%); Nematullah Wali’s predictions (32%); ‘End of Days’ book by Sylvia Browne (14.9%); and ‘The Eyes of Darkness’ novel by Dean Koontz (22%) by which the conspiracists in Pakistan construct an internally persuasive discourse promoting conspiracy theories on COVID-19. Several linguistic resources such as mood, modality, topicalization, insinuation, and intertextuality emerged as the main tools of making the conspiracy theories internally persuasive.