Are you an atheist? (2 Viewers)

[aziz rasul]

15. “O mankind (nas), you are the ones who are in need of Allaah, while Allaah is the Self-Sufficient, Worthy of all Praise.

16. If He Wills, he could do away with you and bring forth a new creation.

17. And that is not hard for Allaah.”

Qur’an – Surah Fatir (The Creator) 35:15-17
See also 4:133, 14:19-20 and 79:27

Verse 16 suggests that if God can create a new mankind, maybe He did so in the past.

 

[Alc]

The book is true because the book says so.
Bible, Torah or Qu'ran, doesn't matter.

People of a more scientific or logical bent want to see evidence to back the books up.
People who are more willing to take something as truth as long as they're told it's true say that the books are proof in themselves.

We're not likely to make any new headway here.

 

[aziz rasul]

The book is true because the book says so.

Wrong. The book is true if there are no contradictions in it and verses relating to provable stuff e.g. science match i.e. there should be no conflict between Science and True Scripture as Monsignor George Henri Lemaitre said many decades ago.

People of a more scientific or logical bent want to see evidence to back the books up.

That’s what I was trying to do, but you have simply ignored that fact.

We're not likely to make any new headway here.

You probably won’t, I agree. A closed mind never does.

 

[Alc]

Wrong. The book is true if there are no contradictions in it and verses relating to provable stuff e.g. science match i.e. there should be no conflict between Science and True Scripture as Monsignor George Henri Lemaitre said many decades ago.


That’s what I was trying to do, but you have simply ignored that fact.

Ok, database process is taking time anyway so *sigh* here we go again:

15. “O mankind (nas), you are the ones who are in need of Allaah, while Allaah is the Self-Sufficient, Worthy of all Praise.
This verse, passage or whatever it's called proves nothing. Nothing at all. Zip, nada, nothing. It makes grammatical sense, up to a point, but that's it.

16. If He Wills, he could do away with you and bring forth a new creation.
See the above response. This PROVES nothing. You are saying a being that you cannot prove exists can do something. Okay, by the same token, Superman can fly and lift an aircraft carrier. I've written that, so now it's true. See the difference between PROOF and just having something written down?

17. And that is not hard for Allaah.”
If he, she or it is real, correct.
If he, she or it is fictional, also correct (hell, look at what Harry Potter can do!)
The tough bit is PROVING that Allaah is real.

Qur’an – Surah Fatir (The Creator) 35:15-17
See also 4:133, 14:19-20 and 79:27
Verse 16 suggests that if God can create a new mankind, maybe He did so in the past.
'Suggests' and 'maybe' are not proof words. When applied to a being whose existence is far from proven, they become even more doubtful.

You probably won’t, I agree. A closed mind never does.
A closed mind never agrees. I that a Muslim saying, then? I'd have thought any religion relies and depends on it, yours included. As soon as people start questioning things for themselves, that's when we get scientific progress, sexual equality, and the like, and story books have less impact on people's day-to-day lives. Far better for you that people remain close minded and only accept what's written in the book, surely?

 

[aziz rasul]

This verse, passage or whatever it's called proves nothing. Nothing at all. Zip, nada, nothing. It makes grammatical sense, up to a point, but that's it.

As a non-believer, that is predictable.

See the above response. This PROVES nothing. You are saying a being that you cannot prove exists can do something. Okay, by the same token, Superman can fly and lift an aircraft carrier. I've written that, so now it's true. See the difference between PROOF and just having something written down?

Who says that God’s existence cannot be proven? You may not be able to, it doesn’t mean that others can’t. The fact that verse suggests that God can do away with mankind and create a new one is to me interesting. The fossil evidence of previous mankind would fit with this concept of doing away with previous mankind and creating a new one. After all God is the Creator. See 59:24 below.

He is Allah, the Creator, the Evolver, the Fashioner. His are the most beautiful names; whatever is in the heavens and the earth declares His glory; and He is the Mighty, the Wise.

You can write whatever you want, but the main difference is that what you wrote is nonsense and everyone except young children know it. You can’t COMPARE God’s words with yours.

The tough bit is PROVING that Allaah is real.

Not really. If you are truly seeking the TRUTH and seeking whether God is real and exists, then you will find Him, otherwise it will always allude you because your stance is to ridicule.

'Suggests' and 'maybe' are not proof words. When applied to a being whose existence is far from proven, they become even more doubtful.

If God is the Creator then He must have created the earlier species of man.

A closed mind never agrees. I that a Muslim saying, then? I'd have thought any religion relies and depends on it, yours included. As soon as people start questioning things for themselves, that's when we get scientific progress, sexual equality, and the like, and story books have less impact on people's day-to-day lives. Far better for you that people remain close minded and only accept what's written in the book, surely?

OK remain close minded. God in the Qur’an asks us to reason, think, listen, reflect, etc. If you wish I can provide the verses but you will only ridicule them anyway. You, incorrectly assume that all adherents of faith blindly follow their faith. Well not all of us do. Many, unfortunately do, which is not in keeping with the Qur’an.

 

[jeremy.lankenau]

FINALLY! An Islamic poster.

Aziz, let me introduce you to Bladerunner, I think you two may be the only ones who actually understand each other, though you might hate each other. Know your enemy and all that.

So the Koran doesn't contradict itself and that's your proof? Oh wait, is this because of the concept of abrogation - aka the Koran so blatantly contradicted itself that Islam came up with a specific theology to address contradictions. Yeah, that makes sense...

 

[The_Doc_Man]

The book is true if there are no contradictions in it and verses relating to provable stuff e.g. science match

By this standard, the stories told in the Hobbit and the Lord of the Rings are true. Professor Tolkien was EXTREMELY meticulous in his writing. For that matter, the Harry Potter stories have no provable falsehoods because the wizards actively hide all evidence of the existence of ongoing magic and magical creatures. So the Harry Potter stories must also be true - by your stated standard.

Who says that God’s existence cannot be proven? You may not be able to, it doesn’t mean that others can’t.

By strict interpretation of the language, you are correct. However, it is significant that in more than 2000 years, nobody has successfully done so in a way that can be documented outside of the scriptures themselves. And a self-referential (i.e. circular) proof is no proof at all. It is worth the shape that it resembles - a big, fat zero.

Aziz, I fully and completely acknowledge your right to believe something. However, what constitutes proof for you does not constitute proof for me. Do you NOT acknowledge my right to believe other than you do - and thus disagree with you?

As to the "proof" point, I must admit that I don't know a certain specific thing about Islamic beliefs, but in Christian beliefs I know this for a fact: IF you can prove the existence of God, the god (little-g) you proved to exist isn't the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Joseph - because "only through faith" can we come to know God.

Does Islam have the equivalent of an "only through faith" disclaimer? If it does, that is a fatal flaw in ANY argument about proof of God's (or Allah's) existence.

 

[Alc]

Aziz, let me introduce you to Bladerunner, I think you two may be the only ones who actually understand each other, though you might hate each other. Know your enemy and all that.

Compare the posts. It wouldn't be the first time someone created another username for themselves on here, in order to post agreement with something they already said.

Not making accusations. It just seems coincidental that both can't argue a point without posting references to a book.

 

[Vassago]

Compare the posts. It wouldn't be the first time someone created another username for themselves on here, in order to post agreement with something they already said.

Not making accusations. It just seems coincidental that both can't argue a point without posting references to a book.

Not really much of a coincidence there. That's a very common tactic for any almost all religious fanatics. I can pretty much confirm they are not the same person. Aziz just hasn't been around in a long time.

 

[Alc]

Not really much of a coincidence there. That's a very common tactic for any almost all religious fanatics. I can pretty much confirm they are not the same person. Aziz just hasn't been around in a long time.

Like I say, no accusation intended.

I liken it to the old expression about how you know you've understood something if you can explain it clearly to somebody else. If all you can do is parrot text from a book, without being able to explain why the text is correct, then you don't have much credibility.

 

[Vassago]

Like I say, no accusation intended.

No worries. I knew what you meant, just wanted to clear it up for anyone else who may not have understood the tongue in cheek.

 

[Mike375]

I thought by now we would have had the whole atheist issues solved

 

[The_Doc_Man]

Yeah, but to borrow a Woody Allen line (from What's Up, Tiger Lily), some people are sadistic, sodomistic necrophiles - they like to beat dead horses.

 

[Frothingslosh]

Aziz has been gone for a year or so. He's basically the Muslim version, with the same approach to discussion, the same standards of proof, and the same refusal to accept anything other than his holy book as evidence. One big difference is that I haven't seen Aziz ranting that liberals and progressives are willing and knowing participants in a grand conspiracy to destroy the US and murder all Christians (or Muslims, in this case).

Aziz does, however, insist that all people are born Muslim, and that anyone who isn't one now was either brainwashed away from it or chose to embrace evil.

 

[Alc]

Aziz does, however, insist that all people are born Muslim, and that anyone who isn't one now was either brainwashed away from it or chose to embrace evil.

Thank you! NOW I remember him.

 

[jeremy.lankenau]

I read an article in the Washington Post this morning that I think relevant, especially those of us who espouse a more scientific approach to reasoning. The article is entitled "How to Change Someone's Mind According to Science."

Some key points:
- After five rounds of back-and-forth comments between the original poster and the challenger, the challenger has virtually no chance of receiving a delta (the mathematical sign of change) [from the original poster indicating they changed their mind], they write.
- Numbers are important: The more people that try to persuade the original poster, the greater the likelihood of changing their view.
- So is timing: Those who write back first to the post first are more likely to persuade the original poster than those who write later

There are many other good tips to remember to help someone win a debate.

Full article can be found here

 

[AccessBlaster]

Some key points:
- After five rounds of back-and-forth comments between the original poster and the challenger, the challenger has virtually no chance of receiving a delta (the mathematical sign of change) [from the original poster indicating they changed their mind], they write.
- Numbers are important: The more people that try to persuade the original poster, the greater the likelihood of changing their view.
- So is timing: Those who write back first to the post first are more likely to persuade the original poster than those who write later

There are many other good tips to remember to help someone win a debate.

Full article can be found here

Hmm is this a how to brain wash 101? And if they don't change their minds what happens scientific waterboarding? lol

 

[The_Doc_Man]

Jeremy, in a "free-floating" topic that article might be correct, but when religion is involved, neither logic nor statistics have much effect. A zealot is a zealot and won't open his/her mind to the idea that their original position might be wrong. It takes a life-altering, ego-shattering, mind-bending event that reaches into the very core of your psyche to change your religious beliefs. (Or at least it did for me and for the people I know who used to be Christian and now are atheist.)

Until your beliefs are challenged by LIFE - not by people - you are probably not going to give up beliefs instilled into to by your parents, and that is the most common origin of your religious beliefs.

 

[aziz rasul]

This is in answer to those claim I don't regard science as important even though there are numerous times when I have quoted science. See my signature.

Here is something to ponder on regarding human reproduction in order to show where God’s creation matches God’s word.

The seminal fluid is created by secretions from the male reproductive organs. The 100-500 million spermatozoa (sperm) will move through the ejaculatory ducts to mix with fluid from the prostate, seminal vesicles and bulbourethral glands, forming semen.

The contributions and components of semen are:-

Gland Approximate (%)
Testes 2-5
Seminal vesicle 65-75
Prostate 25-30
bulbourethral glands Less than 1

Verily, We created man from a drop of mingled sperm (nutfahtin amchaj) …
Qur’an – Insan (Man) 76:2

· The seminal fluid, comprising of a mixture of four different liquids, travels from the male urinary tract to the female reproductive system.
· Only one spermatozoa will fertilise an egg in the fallopian tube.
· Once the egg enters into the egg, the fertilised egg goes into ‘lock down’ i.e. the single spermatozoa inside the egg cannot escape and no new spermatozoa can enter.
· Over two weeks, the fertilised egg becomes a clot.
· Thereafter, the clot travels down the fallopian tube and implants itself to the wall of the uterus. This is referred to as ‘implantation’. The levels of a pregnancy hormone (Human Chorionic Gonadotropin - HCG) increases which indicates that ‘implantation’ has occurred through a urine or blood test.
· Both men and woman have 23 pairs of chromosomes in each cell.
· Twenty two of these chromosome pairs (autosomes) are identical in both men and women.
· The twenty third pair, the sex chromosome (gonosomes), is an XX for women and an XY for men, thus men decide the gender of the child.

12. And [We] created man from an extract of clay (tiyn).
13. Moreover We placed him as a drop (nutfah) in a safe lodging.
14. Then We created the drop (nutfah) into a clinging clot (alaqah), and created the clinging clot (alaqah) into a lump of chewed flesh (mudrat), and created the chewed flesh (mudrat) into bones ('idham) and clothed the bones ('idham) with intact flesh (lahm); then We developed him into another creation. So blessed is Allaah, the best of creators.
15. Then indeed, after that you are to die.
16. Then indeed you, on the Day of Resurrection, will be resurrected.
Qur’an 23:12-16 See also 16:4, 22:5, 32:7-11, 75:37-38, 77:20-23 and 96:2

45. That He did create in pairs, male and female,
46. From a sperm (nutfah) drop when it is emitted.
Qur’an 53:45-46

The number of times the words man and woman occurs in the Qur'an is 23.

man (rajul)
2:282, 4:12, 6:9, 7:63, 7:69, 10:2, 11:78, 17:47, 18:37, 23:25, 23:28, 25:8, 28:20, 33:4, 34:7, 34:43, 36:20, 39:29 (thrice), 40:28 (twice) and 43:21

woman (aimra'a)
3:35, 3:40, 4:12, 4:128, 7:83, 11:71, 11:81, 12:21, 12:51, 15:60, 19:5, 19:8, 27:23, 27:57, 28:9, 29:32, 29:33, 33:50, 51:29, 66:10 (twice), 66:11 and 111:4

 

[scott-atkinson]

And your point is?