4 Mistakes You Make When You Talk About Islam (And Religion in General)

[feelosofer]

Islam is extremist Arab worshipping filth. Everyone it has a stronghold in Africa, there is conflict and Arab masters. It needs to be eradicated along with the people who practice it if need be.

Support religicide brehs

 

[lini...]

 

[Jesus Shuttlesworth]

All "religion" aside, how do you guys think the universe came into existence? It's not logical to reject God. A universe appearing from nothing goes against every scientific principle we have. So what are you basing your rejection of God on? You can't hide behind science and totally disregard all it's teachings at the same time.

Fact is, you guys are lost with no answers to any questions, no guidance and no destination. A sad, sad state.

One could easily make these same dumb arguments about sports. Sports are terrible for society. They cause injury and encourage alcohol consumption which leads to alcoholism and death. The different teams divide society and have even caused deaths in some cases. The sheeple are manipulated and swindled out of their hard earned money, billions of dollars a year. And anyone interested in grown men playing a game is insane.

But anyone who watches sports knows this isn't an accurate depiction and there is much more to it though. Keep looking like idiots though, brehs.

 

[mbewane]

Islam is extremist Arab worshipping filth. Everyone it has a stronghold in Africa, there is conflict and Arab masters. It needs to be eradicated along with the people who practice it if need be.

I hope you actually know that there are millions of Africans practicing Islam that aren't on this extremist bs, you want to kill them too? I didn't see any "Arab masters" () in Senegal, did you ?

 

[The Real]

Actually, it isn't. For instance, religion is directly responsible for 'natural/human rights'........


​

Hmm, this seems like a very biased history. No doubt the individuals he mentions are milestones in one, particular Western conception of rights (I think this assertion is validated both by his initial definition of rights,) but I think this tends towards the two points I made earlier rather than direct proof. There are treatises of statecraft that precede those examples, though, and which are secular, too. This isn't to say that secular thinkers were responsible for the idea, only that the ideas recede into that historical abyss where we can't follow. There are Chinese sources, Greek sources, etc.

And do you have any sources for the argument that religion is directly responsible for education and science?

 

[acri1]

All "religion" aside, how do you guys think the universe came into existence? It's not logical to reject God. A universe appearing from nothing goes against every scientific principle we have. So what are you basing your rejection of God on? You can't hide behind science and totally disregard all it's teachings at the same time.

So where did god come from then? Did an omnipotent being just pop out of nowhere one day and decide to create the universe?

If you're arguing that the universe had to come from somewhere, then god also had to have come from somewhere so you need to explain how he came into existence. If you say this doesn't apply to god then that's special pleading and you already lost.

 

[Fervid]

All "religion" aside, how do you guys think the universe came into existence?

I don't know. That's the only logical position.

 

[Jesus Shuttlesworth]

So where did god come from then? Did an omnipotent being just pop out of nowhere one day and decide to create the universe?

If you're arguing that the universe had to come from somewhere, then god also had to have come from somewhere so you need to explain how he came into existence. If you say this doesn't apply to god then that's special pleading and you already lost.

Your question is equivalent to asking "if we evolved from monkeys then why are there still monkeys?"

It's clear you don't understand the concept of God at it's most basic principle.

The creator is not a part of the creation, and thus not created.

Who painted the painter? Who wrote the author? Who cooked the chef? All of these questions are on par with yours.

 

[Jesus Shuttlesworth]

I don't know. That's the only logical position.

I you don't know then you've removed yourself from the discussion. At least the talking part.

 

[mbewane]

Your question is equivalent to asking "if we evolved from monkeys then why are there still monkeys?"

It's clear you don't understand the concept of God at it's most basic principle.

The creator is not a part of the creation, and thus not created.

Who painted the painter? Who wrote the author? Who cooked the chef? All of these questions are on par with yours.

 

[Propaganda]

Your question is equivalent to asking "if we evolved from monkeys then why are there still monkeys?"

It's clear you don't understand the concept of God at it's most basic principle.

The creator is not a part of the creation, and thus not created.

Who painted the painter? Who wrote the author? Who cooked the chef? All of these questions are on par with yours.

nice save, breh.

 

[the cac mamba]

One could easily make these same dumb arguments about sports. Sports are terrible for society. They cause injury and encourage alcohol consumption which leads to alcoholism and death. The different teams divide society and have even caused deaths in some cases. The sheeple are manipulated and swindled out of their hard earned money, billions of dollars a year. And anyone interested in grown men playing a game is insane.

But anyone who watches sports knows this isn't an accurate depiction and there is much more to it though.

nah, you're pretty much correct

 

[the cac mamba]

Without religion, you'd have no 'rights', science or education.
​

 

[NoMayo15]

Your question is equivalent to asking "if we evolved from monkeys then why are there still monkeys?"

It's clear you don't understand the concept of God at it's most basic principle.

The creator is not a part of the creation, and thus not created.

Who painted the painter? Who wrote the author? Who cooked the chef? All of these questions are on par with yours.

No, it isn't.

The problem we're running into is that you're already presupposing a god. Assuming the universe was "created" itself implies a conscious "creator". Defining a god into existence, and calling that evidence is not intellectually honest.

Atheists generally agree with the science, and the science doesn't say the "universe appearing from nothing", as you put it. What atheists reject is the notion that the universe must have been created by some sort of intelligent entity. It didn't. There are several scientific ideas about how it did come about, and none of those contain a supernatural being. In science, we explain things by referring to what we already know or understand, and by invoking God, you're attempting to answer a question with another mystery. It's a complete non-answer, because there is no objective way to see whether or not the claim is true.

Besides, for every single natural occurrence mankind attributed to a God, there turned out to be a completely rational, non-supernatural answer. What makes you think this question is any different?

 

[cheek100]

i will say this.. as a muslim reading that article; if i were white id be blushing a lil bit
we use those "defense mechanisms" quite often and we believe them wholeheartedly
for the most part we are not mentally ill either.. some crazies but most of us rspect
life and other living things..
its nearly impossible to explain why you believe in God to a non-believer and visa versa
the arguement loses its intrgrity and soon insults are thrown..
peace brehs