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

Dafunkdoc_Unlimited

Theological Noncognitivist Since Birth
Joined
Jul 25, 2012
Messages
45,062
Reputation
8,154
Daps
122,292
Reppin
The Wrong Side of the Tracks
GetInTheTruck said:
You believe what you do because you put faith in the scientists whom you receive your information from.

No. I believe what I do because it makes sense and I do not believe that we cannot know everything. This is my problem with many theists' stance. It is as if many of you give up on knowing anything more than what you've been told/believe. When I ask, 'Exactly what is this 'Creator' you believe in?', they rattle-off a list of secondary/tertiary attributes that don't answer the question. This is why I've looked into things for myself. If you can't be bothered to know everything about what it is you worship, then I can't rely on you to tell me what I want to know about it. I'll find the answers on my own.


 

GetInTheTruck

Member
Joined
May 1, 2012
Messages
15,661
Reputation
-741
Daps
27,704
Reppin
Queens
No. I believe what I do because it makes sense and I do not believe that we cannot know everything. This is my problem with many theists' stance. It is as if many of you give up on knowing anything more than what you've been told/believe. When I ask, 'Exactly what is this 'Creator' you believe in?', they rattle-off a list of secondary/tertiary attributes that don't answer the question. This is why I've looked into things for myself. If you can't be bothered to know everything about what it is you worship, then I can't rely on you to tell me what I want to know about it. I'll find the answers on my own.



What scientific research have you personally done to conclude that the universe came into existence on it's own? Why is an atheists "stance" anymore valid than a theists "stance?"

You can ask me "exactly what is this creator that you believe in," and I can ask you "so if the universe arose out of nothingness, then where did that nothingness come from?" what's your point?

I don't really care what you believe/don't believe, I just laugh at you atheists who claim to be on a higher intellectual level than anybody who happens to believe in a higher power/Supreme intelligence. Not every theist is a brain-dead Christian who believes the universe is only 6,000 years old.
 

Dafunkdoc_Unlimited

Theological Noncognitivist Since Birth
Joined
Jul 25, 2012
Messages
45,062
Reputation
8,154
Daps
122,292
Reppin
The Wrong Side of the Tracks
GetInTheTruck said:
What scientific research have you personally done to conclude that the universe came into existence on it's own? Why is an atheists "stance" anymore valid than a theists "stance?"

1. I'm not an atheist.

2. I believe what this guy figured out about the creation of the Universe and have witnessed the 'red shift' myself by visiting an observatory......

410px-Lemaitre.jpg


3. As far as the Universe coming into existence on it's own, that is an illogical supposition. Everything that begins to exist has a cause.

4. I don't find atheists' stance any more logical or correct than theists'.
 
Last edited:

Jesus Shuttlesworth

I Got Game
Joined
May 2, 2012
Messages
11,987
Reputation
1,835
Daps
20,228
Reppin
Sovereignty
:heh: Call it what you want. I was just sharing dialogue until it began taking up half my day. But please feel free to continue defending your position. Personally, I see no need for me to do the same. :manny:
 

cheek100

Truuu
Supporter
Joined
May 1, 2012
Messages
19,855
Reputation
5,038
Daps
74,233
But to get back to tru's main point, which was this: Do you at least understand why someone would seriously doubt that the events in the Old/New Testament & Qu'ran actually happened as reported? You understand why one wouldn't accept the Bible/Qu'ran to be truth, right?
yes i do understand.. if u look at these books with a critical eye its very weird and often disturbing
i cant say that i believe the bible throughout However as a muslim these stories are key to
fully understanding the quran.. so yes i get confused, even sometimes discouraged knowing
especially the new testament has been rewritten countless times..
the old man once told me "everythings not meant to have a suitable explanation and the
best thing a Good muslim can say is I DONT KNOW"
:wow:
 

Exiled Martian

Was young I couldn't do good, now I can't do Bad
Joined
Sep 13, 2013
Messages
1,199
Reputation
190
Daps
1,810
Reppin
Swag-hili Shores
:heh: Call it what you want. I was just sharing dialogue until it began taking up half my day. But please feel free to continue defending your position. Personally, I see no need for me to do the same. :manny:


Your back & forth was much appreciated breh... you had me churning out alphabets in an onslaught fashion via this keyboard....:shaq: Don't know if you marked the recurring theme I was portraying... i.e. my main case in point was that TIME PLAYED/ PLAYS/ WILL PLAY an integral role in moulding & mainfesting belief systems.....You see my my problem with creationism is it's no more or less valid than any other culture's creation myth. It all made sense at the time they were thought up to the people who imagined them. Christians believe the earth is 6000 years old. This literal account came from Martin Luther. IIRC, medieval monks had come to this conclusion by counting back the ages of characters in the bible to determine the rough age. The Bible doesn't explicitly give a number. This was only a best guess. Both Augustine of Hippo and Thomas Aquinas asserted that the creation story was an allegory not to be taken literally. :wow:


So you see how for most people living in the early 16th century, it made sense. Writing didn't really evolve until the 4th millennium. Any history prior to that would have been oral. Which of course gets corrupted over time. Modern archaeology, biology, geology, and astronomy had yet to be invented. So there was no way to prove the 6000 year figure wasn't true. It was the best answer European society had at the time. Then as science evolved, holes began to appear in the creation myth. Human fossils and artifacts were found that were much older than 6000 years. Then they began finding animal and plant fossils that were millions of years old. Then Darwin came up with his theory of evolution studying the changes in these animals. Then we began finding stars that were more than 6000 light years away from us. Then we discovered the cosmic background radiation and came to the conclusion that the universe is 13.8 billion years. That's the best information we have now. Heck We're still not sure what caused the Big Bang :yeshrug:. Maybe it was divine intervention. We lack the tools to know for sure. However, any Christian who continues to view the Bible creation story as being literal with SO MUCH EVIDENCE (see list below extracted from various Bible excerpts) against it is I guess seriously closet brained & illogical. Even the founders of their own church said it wasn't. For most of Christian history it wasn't. This is only a recent invention friend...:blessed:

Please tell me or rather explain (if you can that is ) How does one take the below & accept it whole heartedly without batting an eyelid or forming an imaginary question mark over their heads:dwillhuh:......especially now in modern times... Just realise that more time passes, these dated holy books will be less & less credible....with the se- saw clearly tipping in sciences favour as it gets more & more prominent at giving us various answers to our life & faith questions

A bush that burned yet wasn't consumed that also talked.
A virgin birth.
Angels killing the first born of an entire city.
Demons possessing pigs.
Talking donkeys and snakes.
Returning from the dead.
Angels guarding the corners of a flat world.
Dude being swallowed by a whale and surviving.
Floating hands inscribing stuff on a wall
Parting a sea with a stick
Shouting at a wall to make it fall
Glowing Jesus (transfiguration)
Bears killing kids for making fun of male pattern baldness.


Anyways to conclude (this is the believer in me by the way or whatever remains of him that is):

Believing in a god is a leap of faith. Who's to say that the universe wasn't sparked into existence by some unfathomable being that was interested in creating a sand box for life. Cosmic rocks carry the building blocks throughout the universe and the fundamental laws of our universe create the option for our consciousness to have evolved. Someone that takes that leap of faith I can respect :manny:. However The bible is just words written by people used to control other people. Considering it the word of an omnipotent being is a leap of stupidity, not a leap of faith brehs :lupe:
 
Last edited:

The Real

Anti-Ignorance
Joined
May 8, 2012
Messages
6,353
Reputation
725
Daps
10,726
Reppin
NYC
k7501.gif





Have not read this one, but was suggested by a rabbi.......

Harrison%20The%20Fall%20of%20Man.jpg

Thanks for the links. I haven't read the 2nd book, so I can't comment there, but I have read the first one before. My problem with the book was that it was deeply Eurocentric and read like thinly-veiled apologetics for Christianity in particular. None of the great scientific advancements of "pagan" Asia (China, India, etc) or even the Islamic world were given proper weight. So first, I disagreed strongly with the assumption that Christian beliefs in particular determined the existence of science as a specifically European development. But second, I didn't find convincing evidence that these specific beliefs, though they did certainly influence scientific development (and I agree with the thesis that science didn't explode out of nowhere, nor did it emerge in direct contrast to religion,) were direct causal necessities in scientific understanding, either.
 

The Real

Anti-Ignorance
Joined
May 8, 2012
Messages
6,353
Reputation
725
Daps
10,726
Reppin
NYC
Why is "this all came about on its own, out of nowhere" a more logical position than "all of this must have been designed by some type of superior intelligence?"

Why do you need to know who designed the designer? What makes you feel that you are entitled to know the answer to that question?

I think the issue here is if we're entitled to decide what we can't know before we try to know it. No doubt there will always be limits to human understanding- we're physical beings limited by time, space, and our own biology. But to declare that we can't know something (or are not entitled to knowing it) a priori seems unjustified to me. We always discover limits by our efforts to transcend them, not by assuming they exist beforehand. This is one of my major issues with some forms of organized religion. I don't think anyone has the right, on any authority (barring God directly appearing before us and telling us) where we can't go, because they themselves don't actually know the answer to that question, and can't without trying to go there.
 
Last edited:
Top