[VIDEOS] Religion or Atheism?

[Third_Umpire]

I have naive question
how do you exercise your spirituality?

How do I personally do it, or how do people do it? I personally feel spiritual when I think about our world and it's place in this vast universe. Our universe is amazing, of which we are a tiny part of. It fills me with wonder at how life came about to be on our planet, and where else in our universe life may be, and in what shape or form. This helps me put into perspective how fortunate I am and we all are, and it helps me also put my day to day problems in perspective, and make me thankful for being alive.

 

[shaykh]

I generally try and stay away from textual convos these days but felt an intervention was necessary here...

“Verily, those who disbelieve (in the religion of Islam, the Qur’aan and Prophet Muhammad) from among the people of the Scripture (Jews and Christians) and Al-Mushrikoon will abide in the fire of Hell. They are the worst of creatures” (Al Bayinnah 98:6)

Ibn Kathirs Tafsir on the verse:

Allah informs of what will happen to the wicked disbelievers among the People of the Scripture and the idolators who oppose the Allah's divinely revealed Books and the Prophets whom He sent. He says that they will be in the fire of Hell on the Day of Judgement and they will abide therein forever. This means that they will remain in it and they will have no way out of it and they will not cease being in it.

Further evidence in the hadith:

The Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: “By the One in Whose hand is my soul, no one of this nation, Jew or Christian, hears of me then dies without having believed in that with which I was sent, but he will be one of the people of the Fire.” Narrated by Muslim, 153.

Morality and good deeds are linked to intention...and if the intention isn't to worship Allah then it isn't a good deed...

There really is nothing to suggest that non-Muslims are going to heaven because by virtue of rejecting Islam they have committed the most grievous of sins in Islam...

 

[Third_Umpire]

I generally try and stay away from textual convos these days but felt an intervention was necessary here...



Ibn Kathirs Tafsir on the verse:



Further evidence in the hadith:



Morality and good deeds are linked to intention...and if the intention isn't to worship Allah then it isn't a good deed...

There really is nothing to suggest that non-Muslims are going to heaven because by virtue of rejecting Islam they have committed the most grievous of sins in Islam...

These three quotes (from thousands of such quotes, I presume) are a great example of why any reasonable, compassionate human being should disavow themself from religion, particularly the one referenced here. Thank you for posting this!

"They are the worst of creatures" <-- charming, indeed.

 

[Square Drive]

[MENTION=131701]Mamoon[/MENTION] with some solid posts.

Don't agree with your opinion on evolution. Also, saying God has been 'unjust' is very harsh.

Apart from that some great points made.

 

[TalentSpotterPk]

I generally try and stay away from textual convos these days but felt an intervention was necessary here...



Ibn Kathirs Tafsir on the verse:



Further evidence in the hadith:



Morality and good deeds are linked to intention...and if the intention isn't to worship Allah then it isn't a good deed...

There really is nothing to suggest that non-Muslims are going to heaven because by virtue of rejecting Islam they have committed the most grievous of sins in Islam...

You need not be offended. If you want to throw all non believers in hell (if it exists) than you are most welcome.


I am not comimg from hibernation. I know very well what Modoodi has said and what Zakir Naik has said and what Ibn e Kathir has said. Everybody knows that it is the belief of majority muslims. You also know it very well. But it doesn't mean that Ghamdi or people who think like him should be dumped. They can give their perspective.


If I don't believe in God than I wouldn't be bothered about any religious scripture and what it says. When there is no God than why care about verses Tafsir's ?


You normally don't care about textual conversation but what prompted you to care about it ? A point of view that All non believers won't be dumped in hell ?

 

[speed]

These three quotes (from thousands of such quotes, I presume) are a great example of why any reasonable, compassionate human being should disavow themself from religion, particularly the one referenced here. Thank you for posting this!

"They are the worst of creatures" <-- charming, indeed.

Someone who doesn't believe in hell is troubled by these verses? What is wrong With Allah doing with his creation what he wills.

Again all together ignoring the fact that Injustice is impossible for Allah.

 

[TalentSpotterPk]

Were God to reveal himself in the manner which atheists demand, it would be contrary to his purpose. His purpose in creating us is not simply that we know he exists, but that we choose to know Him and thereby become deserving of a relationship. Were God’s existence as manifestly obvious as the sun or the moon, there would be no merit whatsoever in believing. Belief would become necessary for everyone, and we would have no chance to demonstrate our good trust in others, insight, and perseverance.The demonstration of these qualities earns God’s reward, and are only possible if the seeker of truth must work through a veil to reach the True Beloved



“Are they waiting for anything but that Allah should come to them in the coverings of the clouds with angels, and the matter be decided? And to Allah do all things return.” (2:211)


Atheists would believe on any Hypothesis but God Unfortunately, pointing out the wisdom of God is something that many atheists will close their ears to. The reality is that too many have set their heart on not believing, and would brush away any further evidence for God as easily as they have brushed away the current evidence. Take an example given above: God announcing his existence through a voice reverberating around the heavens. One would imagine that atheists would surely not be able to doubt that, right? Wrong. Just read Dawkins’ own admission regarding it:


Interviewer: What would it take for you to believe in God?

Dawkins: I used to say it would be very simple. It would be the Second Coming of Jesus or a great, big, deep, booming, bass voice saying “I am God.” But I was persuaded… that even if there was this booming voice in the Second Coming with clouds of glory, the probable explanation is that it is a hallucination or a conjuring trick by David Copperfield…

Interviewer: So what would persuade you?

Dawkins: Well, I’m starting to think nothing would, which, in a way, goes against the grain, because I’ve always paid lip service to the view that a scientist should change his mind when evidence is forthcoming.
Dawkins, in this stunning moment of intellectual shamelessness has typified the New Atheist mindset—they will not believe in God, because to them God cannot exist. Their emotional rejection of God blinds them to any consideration of the evidence. We see this already with the absurd denials of evident divine design in the fine-tuning of the universe, and the origin of life. The atheist scientific establishment have run away from the idea of conscious design towards absurd and unfalsifiable multiverse theories because, in the words of Saint, they are “atheists first, and scientists after.” They have an undying faith in ungrounded materialistic explanations while ignoring the obvious interpretation of the facts in front of them. The Qur’an refers to this mindset when it says:

“And even if We opened to them a door from heaven, and they began ascending through it, They would surely say, ‘Only our eyes are dazed; rather we are a bewitched people.’” (15:16)


Dawkins admits Intelligent design by say " Aliens " but never by God.

[UTUBE]BoncJBrrdQ8[/UTUBE]

 

[shaykh]

You need not be offended. If you want to throw all non believers in hell (if it exists) than you are most welcome.


I am not comimg from hibernation. I know very well what Modoodi has said and what Zakir Naik has said and what Ibn e Kathir has said. Everybody knows that it is the belief of majority muslims. You also know it very well. But it doesn't mean that Ghamdi or people who think like him should be dumped. They can give their perspective.


If I don't believe in God than I wouldn't be bothered about any religious scripture and what it says. When there is no God than why care about verses Tafsir's ?


You normally don't care about textual conversation but what prompted you to care about it ? A point of view that All non believers won't be dumped in hell ?

Not offended at all...just I feel your response on the issue of hell for disbelievers was far from mainstream...so just presented the mainstream view...

For those who do good deeds, there shall be the best reward and yet more blessings.
(Ch.10: V.27)

Good deeds can only come from Muslims...this is the predominant view...because if a deed is not done for the sake of worshipping Allah then it is not a good deed...

The same idea can be applied to your mention of acting righteously...if one doesn't believe in Allah then how can anything he does be deemed righteous?...

The verse I mentioned explains clearly what the fate is for those who reject Allahs message...and that is the verse commonly used to determine what the fate is for non-Muslims...

You can mention Ghamdi if you like but i'm sure you will agree that his views are far from mainstream...this isn't to say that it's wrong but it's certainly not a predominant view...

I've just presented the other side to bring balance to the conversation...

 

[tonmoy]

I do not deny any word or verse of quran. Not even the pointing/Arabic Case system.


Some translators have translated the word " Mushrikeen " in verse 6 of Surah e Baiyinah as Polythiests while others have translated as Polythiests while others have translated it as Idolaters.

I shall go with the latter.


Now the thing is that those who Intensionally rejected the message because of their worldly seats, worldly objectives, personal ego they are the ones who are talked about in this verse.


The verses I have provided in post 148 look vague to you not to me. Allah could have named only believers in those verses.


Now on Youtube type " will non muslims go to jannah ghamdi " or " hell for non muslims ghamdi " and watch both videos.


Since you are an Atheist so you won't be bothered about Quran since you do not believe it is a book of Allah as you do not believe Allah exists. So No verse is good or bad for you, they are all irrelevent for you and man made.


Since you are born in a Muslim family so it was duty of your parents to bring you up as a Muslim ie offer prayers, recite Quran, fast, tell you about Islamic beliefs and monitor you until a certain age whether you are completing your religious onligations or not.

If they did. Fine. If not than it's their mistake and they are responsible for it.


If they did and you did not strive than its your mistake.


If you strive as per Allah's instructions in His way from the age of 3-4 to the age of say 20 than after the hardwork you eventually experience him. When you strive harder than the next level of righteousness and piety leads you to the level where you see true dreams which fulfil infront of your eyes. Than the next level is of " Kashaf " and than " Roya "


If you have not strived and you want God to show up and prove you his existence than it is not going to happen unfortunately unless God shows up in a way which you me or no one wants which would be disaster. I wish and pray it doesn't ever happen.


God is not a physical entity which can be proved to you or me by a video.


If my parents and religious teachers did not care about my prayers and all religious obligations, if I wasn’t held accountable daily until my teenage wrt duties than it would not have become part of my routine and I wouldn't have developed Love for God and than in the next fortunate step I wouldn't have felt HIS existence eventually. For more than a decade it was all like a duty for which I was questioned and held accountable. It was all striving for someone I never saw heard or felt and was only told about or someone about him I read and had no conviction.

First it was Iman ul Taqleed than it was Iman ul Ikhtayaar, than it is Iman ul Yaqeen. I have only achieved first step of Imam ul Yaqeen and I am striving to achieve other 3 steps in my lifetime.


God forbid if after striving more than a decade I could not attain ie failed to attain first level of Imam bil Yaqeen than I would have become an Aethiest and would have ended doing all those things I was told are obligatory and would have considered them waste of time, energy and money.


My advice for you would be to strive in Allah's way. You will eventually InshaAllah experience his existence. It won't affect your worldly life. It is harmless to your body. If you experience Allah accept him. If not than don't bother. Simple.


Just criticising a book of Allah when you do not believe in him will get you nothing personally. But if you want more people to become Agnostic or Aethiest than it might help your cause with many who are borderline.


I have seen tons of Videos of World's renounced Aethiesm leaders and scholars including Scientists. I myself am a Masters student of Bio Medical sciences who will InshAllah be a Scientist soon (life permiting) but when I have experienced Allah than nothing can detract me to believe there is no God. Now the only thing which could happen is that I become a Sinner of higher order and stop fulfilling my religious duties and than Lie to people that there is No God when I have experienced Him. Than surely Allah has all the power to implement verse 6 of Chapter 98 on the day of Judgement. Yes a believer can become disbeliever. I wish and pray it never happens to me and InshaAllah it will never happen. I hope I die as a believer and my virtues weight more than my sins.


This is all I have to say. I wish and pray you lead a happy successful life and you are blessed with Iman in this Lifetime.

I expected the discussion to be civil and educational, and not about negative remarks about me and my family. I was wrong again to expect that.

Anyways, since you are a scientist (soon to be), so I would ask you again to read the verses that you provided and tell me where it says explicitly that "non muslims" would be rewarded?
And on the verse 98:6, even if according to you "Mushrikeen" means idolaters, than someone like Kailash Satyarthi (nobel laureate in Peace) is actually worst of creatures? I am not criticizing but ask the scientist in you, is that how you would describe him?

Anyways, I do not preach religion or atheism. I have no objective other than to engage in thoughtful and logical discussion. I only feel strongly about it because I am impacted by the actions of people who commit atrocities beyond belief in the name of religion. I lived and suffered in a muslim majority country because of Mullahs and Maolanas.

 

[yasir]

Were God to reveal himself in the manner which atheists demand, it would be contrary to his purpose. His purpose in creating us is not simply that we know he exists, but that we choose to know Him and thereby become deserving of a relationship. Were God’s existence as manifestly obvious as the sun or the moon, there would be no merit whatsoever in believing. Belief would become necessary for everyone, and we would have no chance to demonstrate our good trust in others, insight, and perseverance.The demonstration of these qualities earns God’s reward, and are only possible if the seeker of truth must work through a veil to reach the True Beloved



“Are they waiting for anything but that Allah should come to them in the coverings of the clouds with angels, and the matter be decided? And to Allah do all things return.” (2:211)


Atheists would believe on any Hypothesis but God Unfortunately, pointing out the wisdom of God is something that many atheists will close their ears to. The reality is that too many have set their heart on not believing, and would brush away any further evidence for God as easily as they have brushed away the current evidence. Take an example given above: God announcing his existence through a voice reverberating around the heavens. One would imagine that atheists would surely not be able to doubt that, right? Wrong. Just read Dawkins’ own admission regarding it:


Interviewer: What would it take for you to believe in God?

Dawkins: I used to say it would be very simple. It would be the Second Coming of Jesus or a great, big, deep, booming, bass voice saying “I am God.” But I was persuaded… that even if there was this booming voice in the Second Coming with clouds of glory, the probable explanation is that it is a hallucination or a conjuring trick by David Copperfield…

Interviewer: So what would persuade you?

Dawkins: Well, I’m starting to think nothing would, which, in a way, goes against the grain, because I’ve always paid lip service to the view that a scientist should change his mind when evidence is forthcoming.
Dawkins, in this stunning moment of intellectual shamelessness has typified the New Atheist mindset—they will not believe in God, because to them God cannot exist. Their emotional rejection of God blinds them to any consideration of the evidence. We see this already with the absurd denials of evident divine design in the fine-tuning of the universe, and the origin of life. The atheist scientific establishment have run away from the idea of conscious design towards absurd and unfalsifiable multiverse theories because, in the words of Saint, they are “atheists first, and scientists after.” They have an undying faith in ungrounded materialistic explanations while ignoring the obvious interpretation of the facts in front of them. The Qur’an refers to this mindset when it says:

“And even if We opened to them a door from heaven, and they began ascending through it, They would surely say, ‘Only our eyes are dazed; rather we are a bewitched people.’” (15:16)


Dawkins admits Intelligent design by say " Aliens " but never by God.

[UTUBE]BoncJBrrdQ8[/UTUBE]

Oh Come on, you are mis-quoted Dawkins here....

What Atheist in general reject is kind of God that exists in Theology all over the world... The God that was not created by anything else, who that happened???

What we see in natural or real world is that things evolve from simple to complex forms...For examples, in the beginning there were Quarks and electron, then Proton and Neutrons were formed, then Hydrogen and Helium, Hydrogen and Gravity made possible Stars, which forged all other elements and so on...Again, very simple particles evolved into more complex entities in the universe that has Galaxies, Stars, planets, blackholes init...

Same can be said about evolution of life, self replicating molecule, started the evolution process... In both case their was no intelligence behind them, self replicating molecule nor Quarks were self aware or had any intelligent abilities as we associate with us or God...

Where as in Theology, God is created from 0 to God(the most complex entity that ever could be in entire Cosmos) instantaneously and does not have any beginning or End. What he is made of?? - Like we are made of atoms, who made that stuff?? - This does not make any logical sense nor their is any evidence behind any such thing in the world we live in...There is no thing that starts backward, means go from most complex to simple

 

[Third_Umpire]

Someone who doesn't believe in hell is troubled by these verses? What is wrong With Allah doing with his creation what he wills.

Again all together ignoring the fact that Injustice is impossible for Allah.

How can one not be troubled by the harsh, abusive and intolerant tone and message in those verses? I personally may not believe in it, but I know millions upon millions of poor souls subscribe to this, and it's not hard to see why many of them may do so out of fear.

 

[Yossarian]

Not offended at all...just I feel your response on the issue of hell for disbelievers was far from mainstream...so just presented the mainstream view...



Good deeds can only come from Muslims...this is the predominant view...because if a deed is not done for the sake of worshipping Allah then it is not a good deed...

The same idea can be applied to your mention of acting righteously...if one doesn't believe in Allah then how can anything he does be deemed righteous?...

The verse I mentioned explains clearly what the fate is for those who reject Allahs message...and that is the verse commonly used to determine what the fate is for non-Muslims...

You can mention Ghamdi if you like but i'm sure you will agree that his views are far from mainstream...this isn't to say that it's wrong but it's certainly not a predominant view...

I've just presented the other side to bring balance to the conversation...

Just to balance it more evenly, the fact is that every religion claims to be the 'correct' religion and claims that the only route to Heaven is to follow it's teachings. This, by definition, therefore means that all other religions and beliefs must be 'wrong' and incorrect, and one cannot get to Heaven by following their path.

So in effect, every religion is saying that if you don't follow it's teachings, you will end up in Hell.

Now some will try and sugar-coat this religion versus that religion, by selectively quoting passages from other beliefs religious texts whilst trying to explain away similar passages from their own religious texts, so to pick out one religion above all others is a bit nonsensical.

 

[Yossarian]

How can one not be troubled by the harsh, abusive and intolerant tone and message in those verses? I personally may not believe in it, but I know millions upon millions of poor souls subscribe to this, and it's not hard to see why many of them may do so out of fear.

You saying that those not believing in Hell are also in fear of the contents of these verses?

 

[TalentSpotterPk]

Oh Come on, you are mis-quoted Dawkins here....

What Atheist in general reject is kind of God that exists in Theology all over the world... The God that was not created by anything else, who that happened???

What we see in natural or real world is that things evolve from simple to complex forms...For examples, in the beginning there were Quarks and electron, then Proton and Neutrons were formed, then Hydrogen and Helium, Hydrogen and Gravity made possible Stars, which forged all other elements and so on...Again, very simple particles evolved into more complex entities in the universe that has Galaxies, Stars, planets, blackholes init...

Same can be said about evolution of life, self replicating molecule, started the evolution process... In both case their was no intelligence behind them, self replicating molecule nor Quarks were self aware or had any intelligent abilities as we associate with us or God...

Where as in Theology, God is created from 0 to God(the most complex entity that ever could be in entire Cosmos) instantaneously and does not have any beginning or End. What he is made of?? - Like we are made of atoms, who made that stuff?? - This does not make any logical sense nor their is any evidence behind any such thing in the world we live in...There is no thing that starts backward, means go from most complex to simple

I would like to move forward after you tell me where I have misquoted Dawkins ?

 

[yasir]

I would like to move forward after you tell me where I have misquoted Dawkins ?

"Dawkins admits Intelligent design"

He did not admit to any intelligent design hypothesis...

 

[Robert]

Dawkins admits Intelligent design by say " Aliens " but never by God

Since there is no evidence for aliens either, I doubt he did that.

 

[super hitter]

What do you think.


Is One of the reason to worship Allah and obey his commandments is to get near him ? Experience his existence ? Make a living relation with him where he communicates with you ?


Or Allah just seazed his characteristic of communicating with his loved ones ? He used to talk with previous ones but he doesn't bother doing it now with this generation ?

In case you say No ie Yes he has stopped communicating than isn't it injustice ? Than we aren't as blessed and lucky as previous ones ? Than we are born in wrong era ?


Pehli Qomoun se humkalaam hota tha ab naheen hota ?

if you worship ALLAH and obey his commandments, you'll definitely feel his existence and the true reality which isn't beyond our imagination at all!

 

[TalentSpotterPk]

"Dawkins admits Intelligent design"

He did not admit to any intelligent design hypothesis...

He did admit intelligent design. But for him there isn't God behind that design rather there is a force and behind that force is another force and so on. I did not misquote Dawkins.

Since there is no evidence for aliens either, I doubt he did that.

I did not say that he said there are aliens behind this design, i said (say Aliens) ie something behind it except God.

 

[TalentSpotterPk]

if you worship ALLAH and obey his commandments, you'll definitely feel his existence and the true reality which isn't beyond our imagination at all!

This is not the answer to my questions.

 

[TalentSpotterPk]

I expected the discussion to be civil and educational, and not about negative remarks about me and my family. I was wrong again to expect that.

Anyways, since you are a scientist (soon to be), so I would ask you again to read the verses that you provided and tell me where it says explicitly that "non muslims" would be rewarded?
And on the verse 98:6, even if according to you "Mushrikeen" means idolaters, than someone like Kailash Satyarthi (nobel laureate in Peace) is actually worst of creatures? I am not criticizing but ask the scientist in you, is that how you would describe him?

Anyways, I do not preach religion or atheism. I have no objective other than to engage in thoughtful and logical discussion. I only feel strongly about it because I am impacted by the actions of people who commit atrocities beyond belief in the name of religion. I lived and suffered in a muslim majority country because of Mullahs and Maolanas.

I do not spread and endorse what Ulema e Soo say. You lived and suffered in a Muslim majority country due to Mullah-ism which Mullah feels and says is Islam. I don't endorse those doctrines and I have already rejected them. For me those doctrines are not part of Islam.


I just gave an observation that from where Aethiesm grows in a Muslim family. My observations can be totally wrong. I mentioned " or " " or " in my post. So you don't need to believe on something which doesn't fit on you. You can chose the other options where " or " can assist you.

I condemn those attrocities on the name of religion and I frequently challenge the ideologies behind them and call them concoctions and adulterations.

 

[miandadrules]

He did admit intelligent design. But for him there isn't God behind that design rather there is a force and behind that force is another force and so on. I did not misquote Dawkins.



I did not say that he said there are aliens behind this design, i said (say Aliens) ie something behind it except God.

No he didn't at all.

This is a clear cognitive bias. You are simply hearing what you want to hear.

 

[TalentSpotterPk]

Oh Come on, you are mis-quoted Dawkins here....

What Atheist in general reject is kind of God that exists in Theology all over the world... The God that was not created by anything else, who that happened???

What we see in natural or real world is that things evolve from simple to complex forms...For examples, in the beginning there were Quarks and electron, then Proton and Neutrons were formed, then Hydrogen and Helium, Hydrogen and Gravity made possible Stars, which forged all other elements and so on...Again, very simple particles evolved into more complex entities in the universe that has Galaxies, Stars, planets, blackholes init...

Same can be said about evolution of life, self replicating molecule, started the evolution process... In both case their was no intelligence behind them, self replicating molecule nor Quarks were self aware or had any intelligent abilities as we associate with us or God...

Where as in Theology, God is created from 0 to God(the most complex entity that ever could be in entire Cosmos) instantaneously and does not have any beginning or End. What he is made of?? - Like we are made of atoms, who made that stuff?? - This does not make any logical sense nor their is any evidence behind any such thing in the world we live in...There is no thing that starts backward, means go from most complex to simple

Oh Come on, you are mis-quoted Dawkins here....

What Atheist in general reject is kind of God that exists in Theology all over the world... The God that was not created by anything else, who that happened???

Yes I know it.

What we see in natural or real world is that things evolve from simple to complex forms...For examples, in the beginning[/B] there were Quarks and electron, then Proton and Neutrons were formed, then Hydrogen and Helium, Hydrogen and Gravity made possible Stars, which forged all other elements and so on...Again, very simple particles evolved into more complex entities in the universe that has Galaxies, Stars, planets, blackholes init...


When everything starts from zero and nothing than from where quarks and electrons came into being ?

Same can be said about evolution of life, self replicating molecule, started the evolution process... In both case their was no intelligence behind them, self replicating molecule nor Quarks were self aware or had any intelligent abilities as we associate with us or God...

So even self replication there has to be a molecule. Replication fork cannot work in vacuum. It needs a cell. Replication in Amoeba needs existence of Amoeba. For first cell which undervent replication, from where did that cell come from ? Out of nothing ?

Where as in Theology, God is created from 0 to God(the most complex entity that ever could be in entire Cosmos) instantaneously and does not have any beginning or End. What he is made of??

We never claimed GOD to be a physical entity as perceived by Aethiests.

- Like we are made of atoms, who made that stuff?? - This does not make any logical sense nor their is any evidence behind any such thing in the world we live in...There is no thing that starts backward, means go from most complex to simple

We never said God is a physical entity. If God was a physical entity than more than theologians Scientists would have proved this physical entity.

When we never said God is a physical entity than we do not need to say that he started from zero and came into being. HE is not a material

 

[tonmoy]

I do not spread and endorse what Ulema e Soo say. You lived and suffered in a Muslim majority country due to Mullah-ism which Mullah feels and says is Islam. I don't endorse those doctrines and I have already rejected them. For me those doctrines are not part of Islam.


I just gave an observation that from where Aethiesm grows in a Muslim family. My observations can be totally wrong. I mentioned " or " " or " in my post. So you don't need to believe on something which doesn't fit on you. You can chose the other options where " or " can assist you.

I condemn those attrocities on the name of religion and I frequently challenge the ideologies behind them and call them concoctions and adulterations.

You did not answer my very simple question.
Do you think Kailash Satyarthi (nobel laureate in Peace) is actually worst of creatures because he is an idol worshipper? ( remember you agreed that Mushrikeen means idol worshippers and you have no problem with that)

 

[Dead Ball]

Religion makes extra-ordinary claims, but fails to provide even a shred of evidence.

I am with Atheism on this one.

 

[Black Zero]

Religion makes extra-ordinary claims, but fails to provide even a shred of evidence.

I am with Atheism on this one.

If you do not mind sharing, are you a believer otherwise?

 

[Dead Ball]

If you do not mind sharing, are you a believer otherwise?

Nope.

My father is irreligious but believes in the existence of a superpower.

I used to be the same as my dad until around a decade ago. The more i started noticing how things work in the world, how the most corrupt people are usually the most powerful/richest, and how millions of children in the world are dying because they lack access to proper drinking water etc. etc., i concluded there is nobody up there, and its left to us to look after each other.

 

[TalentSpotterPk]

You did not answer my very simple question.
Do you think Kailash Satyarthi (nobel laureate in Peace) is actually worst of creatures because he is an idol worshipper? ( remember you agreed that Mushrikeen means idol worshippers and you have no problem with that)

1. Did I say all Idolators are going to hell ? No I did not say that.

I think I need to repeat what I said.

Now the thing is that those who Intensionally rejected the message because of their worldly seats, worldly objectives, personal ego they are the ones who are talked about in this verse.(refer to post 160)


2. (a) I am no God and I do not know whether Kailash Satyarthi is an Idolator intensionally or unintensionally.

I believe if its unintensional than if his good deeds weigh more than bad ones than Allah will grant him Paradise as per this,

(b). If a person rejects Islam after knowing Islam and fully understanding its truth he will be asked about it by God. Otherwise he will be judged according to his own religion or his understanding of right and wrong.

I have no idea at all that in which category Kailash Satyarthi falls in. He knows it and Allah knows it. What is in his head/heart I do not know. So he will be judged accordingly by Allah.



For those who do good deeds, there shall be the best reward and yet more blessings. (Ch.10: V.27)

It leaves it open to God as to who will be judged worthy of entering paradise.


Allah will be the judge and I am nobody to grant him certificate of Paradise or hell.




What Kailash Satyarth has done for opressed children is highly commendable. In terms of Haqooq ul Ibad rights of Human beings he has done a huge service in my view. Rightly granted noble prize. From whatever I know about him I don't consider him a bad person rather I consider him a good person.

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

Nope.

My father is irreligious but believes in the existence of a superpower.

I used to be the same as my dad until around a decade ago. The more i started noticing how things work in the world, how the most corrupt people are usually the most powerful/richest, and how millions of children in the world are dying because they lack access to proper drinking water etc. etc., i concluded there is nobody up there, and its left to us to look after each other.

Given that no one up there is going to help out, we could probably get clean drinking water to those dying kids if we really wanted to.

 

[TalentSpotterPk]

For the Atheist, strictly logically speaking, there should be no problem to be resolved. There should be no question to be answered. They do not owe their existence to any creator, and no creator is accountable before them if they find any distortion in the random unrolling of creation. For every suffering, every misery, every unequal distribution of happiness, nothing but chance is to be blamed and that realization ends the age-old debate. Chance being the creator, or nature, as we may call it, being unconscious, deaf and dumb, blind and chaotic cannot be blamed for any flaw in what is born out of chaos. The outcome of chance, without a creator, has to be blind and disorderly, without reason, without design, without direction.

 

[shaykh]

Nope.

My father is irreligious but believes in the existence of a superpower.

I used to be the same as my dad until around a decade ago. The more i started noticing how things work in the world, how the most corrupt people are usually the most powerful/richest, and how millions of children in the world are dying because they lack access to proper drinking water etc. etc., i concluded there is nobody up there, and its left to us to look after each other.

Theodicy has actually been studied in depth...does God allowing evil mean God is evil?...

As a precursor though...does God need to be perfect or even just?...pagan deities were often imperfect...if God is evil does that mean he doesn't exist?...

Even if you do decide that God or Gods has/have to be perfect then the other argument put forth is the one of free will...God allows evil to exist because if he intervenes then essentially he is impacting humans ability to enact their free will...

 

[Black Zero]

Nope.

My father is irreligious but believes in the existence of a superpower.

I used to be the same as my dad until around a decade ago. The more i started noticing how things work in the world, how the most corrupt people are usually the most powerful/richest, and how millions of children in the world are dying because they lack access to proper drinking water etc. etc., i concluded there is nobody up there, and its left to us to look after each other.

Thanks for replying!

Different religions have addressed the question of existing misery/injustice different ways (i.e. the reward for victims in after life etc), so I will take that you are not satisfied with this line of justification.

 

[hadi123]

Religion makes extra-ordinary claims, but fails to provide even a shred of evidence.

I am with Atheism on this one.

exactly, no science can prove God. It can't disprove it though so many people still believe in God but you can't disprove Leprechauns don't exist either

 

[TalentSpotterPk]

exactly, no science can prove God. It can't disprove it though so many people still believe in God but you can't disprove Leprechauns don't exist either

RationalReligion or End of Atheism websites are the medicines I prescribe you.

Do watch two Doctors qualified from top British medical colleges doing fellowships in Uk discussing it. They are in their early twenties. They have just passed yours age few years ago and are of my age. Watch short videos. If you have time do read the articles aswell.

 

[ataullah]

You are living a good life , by the definition of good life that you made yourself. For different people good life can imply different things.

God is the creator , he is the one who will make rules and regulations. Disbelieving him is equivalent to treason in a kingdom. rejecting his sovereignty.

Firstly , you got to believe in a creator , that is first step . All this while I am not talking about Islam only. That is why firstly you need to recognize the existence of creator for all created things . After that only one can look into different religions.

In Islam ordained fate as you called , is called lawh E mahfuz , its a tablet in which everything is written down. This indicates and shows the Perfect knowledge of God about past , present and future. It does not mean that since it is written down , we are forced to act like that.

It was written down because God knew we will make those choices in those situations.

[MENTION=60967]Justcrazy[/MENTION] MashAllah kia zabardast baat ki. Allah aap ko doosron k liyay hidayat ka zareea banay,

 

[Robert]

exactly, no science can prove God. It can't disprove it though so many people still believe in God but you can't disprove Leprechauns don't exist either

Correct. This is why I say separate God and science in your mind, if you want to keep God.

 

[ataullah]

Quran is word of Allah and is unique. It has never been changed as Allah took it on himself to protect it. Let alone a word, even every dot has been preserved. Its a book which is read even though not understood by many non Arabs. I alhamdulillah am Hafiz e Quran and know it like surah fatiha or like surah ikhlas. This is enough for me to know there's Allah. Just this even though there are many more evidences to prove its word of Allah. No book like it

 

[JaDed]

Quran is word of Allah and is unique. It has never been changed as Allah took it on himself to protect it. Let alone a word, even every dot has been preserved. Its a book which is read even though not understood by many non Arabs. I alhamdulillah am Hafiz e Quran and know it like surah fatiha or like surah ikhlas. This is enough for me to know there's Allah. Just this even though there are many more evidences to prove its word of Allah. No book like it

Please stop already,stop judging your fellow human beings just because they don't follow the same religion as urs,for all u know they might have the same core beliefs of being a good compassion human.
So many compassionate people might be athetist agnostic unbeliever and not believe in religion but do good in this world.

 

[yasir]

Oh Come on, you are mis-quoted Dawkins here....

What Atheist in general reject is kind of God that exists in Theology all over the world... The God that was not created by anything else, who that happened???

Yes I know it.

What we see in natural or real world is that things evolve from simple to complex forms...For examples, in the beginning[/B] there were Quarks and electron, then Proton and Neutrons were formed, then Hydrogen and Helium, Hydrogen and Gravity made possible Stars, which forged all other elements and so on...Again, very simple particles evolved into more complex entities in the universe that has Galaxies, Stars, planets, blackholes init...


When everything starts from zero and nothing than from where quarks and electrons came into being ?

Same can be said about evolution of life, self replicating molecule, started the evolution process... In both case their was no intelligence behind them, self replicating molecule nor Quarks were self aware or had any intelligent abilities as we associate with us or God...

So even self replication there has to be a molecule. Replication fork cannot work in vacuum. It needs a cell. Replication in Amoeba needs existence of Amoeba. For first cell which undervent replication, from where did that cell come from ? Out of nothing ?

Where as in Theology, God is created from 0 to God(the most complex entity that ever could be in entire Cosmos) instantaneously and does not have any beginning or End. What he is made of??

We never claimed GOD to be a physical entity as perceived by Aethiests.

- Like we are made of atoms, who made that stuff?? - This does not make any logical sense nor their is any evidence behind any such thing in the world we live in...There is no thing that starts backward, means go from most complex to simple

We never said God is a physical entity. If God was a physical entity than more than theologians Scientists would have proved this physical entity.

When we never said God is a physical entity than we do not need to say that he started from zero and came into being. HE is not a material

Weather God is physical or Spiritual or whatever you want to call it, how that Spiritual thing got created?? - First of all what is that Spiritual thing, we are talking about?? - How can we sweep fundamentals of God under the rug and go after Science about Origin problem??

This spiritual thing you are coming up with is a big cop out, when you don't have burden of proof, then anybody can come up with anything, how we can get to the bottom of truth with this approach??

If that Spiritual thing was so easy to get created, that we don't have to even talk about it, how come there are not more than one of them??

 

[ataullah]

Please stop already,stop judging your fellow human beings just because they don't follow the same religion as urs,for all u know they might have the same core beliefs of being a good compassion human.
So many compassionate people might be athetist agnostic unbeliever and not believe in religion but do good in this world.

I'm not judging anyone dear. Sorry.

 

[Pakpak]

Quran is word of Allah and is unique. It has never been changed as Allah took it on himself to protect it. Let alone a word, even every dot has been preserved. Its a book which is read even though not understood by many non Arabs. I alhamdulillah am Hafiz e Quran and know it like surah fatiha or like surah ikhlas. This is enough for me to know there's Allah. Just this even though there are many more evidences to prove its word of Allah. No book like it

If a book remains unchanged how does that prove its legitimacy? There are many books of literature that have remained unchanged, and even if they weren't this doesn't mean legitimacy. All it means is that the book has some dedicated followers. You already have some in Ahmediyya sect and other sects changing words (apparently) so the book and message has already been changed.

There are a lot of reasons to believe in God, but this one has always been very weak.

 

[TalentSpotterPk]

Weather God is physical or Spiritual or whatever you want to call it, how that Spiritual thing got created?? - First of all what is that Spiritual thing, we are talking about?? - How can we sweep fundamentals of God under the rug and go after Science about Origin problem??

This spiritual thing you are coming up with is a big cop out, when you don't have burden of proof, then anybody can come up with anything, how we can get to the bottom of truth with this approach??

If that Spiritual thing was so easy to get created, that we don't have to even talk about it, how come there are not more than one of them??

I don't mind if its a cop out for you.

Since I did not say that God is a physical entity so I don't need to give any evidence for how he came into being. I never said that he was a physical entity who came into being so I do not need to give any evidence of God's creation. I never said that God got created.


I have mentioned it in several posts how one can reach out God and his Iman can than convert into Iman bil yaqeen. One had to strive hard and follow Allah's commandments. For details read other posts. But for you its all myth, all lies, all fradulent stuff, unrealistic etc etc so I don't mind your opinion. When a man after striving for years achieves higher levels of spirituality than its all for himself only. It is not a telephone call or a videocall for which you can be given evidence.


Anybody who hasn't strived enough or gets tired too early can jump the ship and say Hey there is no God.
" Believe You Me "

If there is a GOD, GOD come down finish me. See He did not come, did not finish me off so " He doesn't exist "

 

[Muhammad10]

Please post respectfully on this topic. No need to use words like "BS" in reference to people's beliefs, etc.

 

[TalentSpotterPk]

If a book remains unchanged how does that prove its legitimacy? There are many books of literature that have remained unchanged, and even if they weren't this doesn't mean legitimacy. All it means is that the book has some dedicated followers. You already have some in Ahmediyya sect and other sects changing words (apparently) so the book and message has already been changed.

There are a lot of reasons to believe in God, but this one has always been very weak.

kindly present an evidence for your claim. For someone who doesn't believe in God how many times have you held a Quran publised by Ahmadiyya Muslim Community in your hand ? and how many times have you read it ?

Not even an " aeraab " arabic case system is different.



Having different interpretations on some matters doesn't mean Naoozbillah Quran is corrupted. Shia Sunni Ahmadi's etc etc have disagreements amongst them on interpretations but that does not mean Quran is corrupted.


If there is a God which there is, than no worldly faith, sect etc has the power to corrupt Quran, because it is Allah's promise that He will keep it in original state till last day of Earth. And another thing is the institution of Hafiz e Quran from 1500 odd years, which ensures it remains in original form. There are many Ahmadi's aswell who are Hafiz e Quran.


This is a religion vs atheism debate, don't make it controversial needlessly. If one extrapolates different meaning it does't mean Quran is corrupted. Shia muslims quote soe verses and say these are about 12 Shia Imam's, Sunni muslims or ahmadi's do not degree, there are other disagreements aswell but it does not mean than Quran has got corrupted.

 

[Pakpak]

kindly present an evidence for your claim. For someone who doesn't believe in God how many times have you held a Quran publised by Ahmadiyya Muslim Community in your hand ? and how many times have you read it ?

Not even an " aeraab " arabic case system is different.



Having different interpretations on some matters doesn't mean Naoozbillah Quran is corrupted. Shia Sunni Ahmadi's etc etc have disagreements amongst them on interpretations but that does not mean Quran is corrupted.


If there is a God which there is, than no worldly faith, sect etc has the power to corrupt Quran, because it is Allah's promise that He will keep it in original state till last day of Earth. And another thing is the institution of Hafiz e Quran from 1500 odd years, which ensures it remains in original form. There are many Ahmadi's aswell who are Hafiz e Quran.


This is a religion vs atheism debate, don't make it controversial needlessly. If one extrapolates different meaning it does't mean Quran is corrupted. Shia muslims quote soe verses and say these are about 12 Shia Imam's, Sunni muslims or ahmadi's do not degree, there are other disagreements aswell but it does not mean than Quran has got corrupted.

My point was, there are dozens of sects hence Quran being changed or unchanged or having some sort of uniform message is of little consequence and subsequently hardly a validity of a religion.

 

[speed]

How can one not be troubled by the harsh, abusive and intolerant tone and message in those verses? I personally may not believe in it, but I know millions upon millions of poor souls subscribe to this, and it's not hard to see why many of them may do so out of fear.

disbelievers object to these verses because they think God must confirm to their views, which is certainly not the case.

 

[TalentSpotterPk]

disbelievers object to these verses because they think God must confirm to their views, which is certainly not the case.

There might be other reasons aswell,

In the words of Mohammad Pbuh " Kya Tum ne Uska Dil Cheer k dekha hai " ?


Or God has appointed you as his Qazi on Earth to exercise God's powers ?

 

[ataullah]

Ibn Abu Al-‘Izz reported: It is said that Abu Hanifa, may Allah have mercy on him, was approached by some speculative theologians who intended to discuss with him the oneness of Allah’s Lordship. He said, “Before we discuss this question, tell me what you think about a boat in the Euphrates which goes to shore, loads itself with food and other things, then returns, anchors and unloads all by itself, without anyone sailing or controlling it?” They said, “This is impossible.” Abu Hanifa said:

إِذَا كَانَ هَذَا مُحَالًا فِي سَفِينَةٍ فَكَيْفَ فِي هَذَا الْعَالَمِ كُلِّهِ عُلْوِهِ وَسُفْلِهِ

If it is impossible with a boat, then how is it possible for the world, in all its vastness, to move by itself?

Source: Sharh Aqidah At-Tahawi 35

 

[Justcrazy]

[MENTION=60967]Justcrazy[/MENTION] MashAllah kia zabardast baat ki. Allah aap ko doosron k liyay hidayat ka zareea banay,

Thanks , I have seen many people even Muslims having confusion about this issue of free will and fate.
That is because most scholars have not explaine dit properly.

 

[ataullah]

Thanks , I have seen many people even Muslims having confusion about this issue of free will and fate.
That is because most scholars have not explaine dit properly.

Yes its a very common question asked many times. Its necessary to explain these issues especially in makaatib to our children

 

[hadi123]

Find it funny how the way God could prove himself by ending suffering etc and he doesn't. Some people may believe that he gives free will but I have to believe the other alternative to that reason ie that God can't end suffering etc because he doesn't exist. Think of all the conflict in this world from religion

 

[Pakpak]

Ibn Abu Al-‘Izz reported: It is said that Abu Hanifa, may Allah have mercy on him, was approached by some speculative theologians who intended to discuss with him the oneness of Allah’s Lordship. He said, “Before we discuss this question, tell me what you think about a boat in the Euphrates which goes to shore, loads itself with food and other things, then returns, anchors and unloads all by itself, without anyone sailing or controlling it?” They said, “This is impossible.” Abu Hanifa said:

إِذَا كَانَ هَذَا مُحَالًا فِي سَفِينَةٍ فَكَيْفَ فِي هَذَا الْعَالَمِ كُلِّهِ عُلْوِهِ وَسُفْلِهِ

If it is impossible with a boat, then how is it possible for the world, in all its vastness, to move by itself?

Source: Sharh Aqidah At-Tahawi 35

Using Quranic verses from itself to verify the Quran? That doesn't even work. Otherwise every religion can use verses from its own book to say its the truth.

 

[ataullah]

Find it funny how the way God could prove himself by ending suffering etc and he doesn't. Some people may believe that he gives free will but I have to believe the other alternative to that reason ie that God can't end suffering etc because he doesn't exist. Think of all the conflict in this world from religion

He doesn't need to prove anything otherwise it isn't a test. This life's a test. This world proves theres Allah.

 

[ataullah]

Using Quranic verses from itself to verify the Quran? That doesn't even work. Otherwise every religion can use verses from its own book to say its the truth.

That's not a Quran verse.

 

[Pakpak]

That's not a Quran verse.

Its not, still proves nothing. His statement is backed up by nothing. And neither does it validate your claim.

 

[ataullah]

Its not, still proves nothing. His statement is backed up by nothing. And neither does it validate your claim.

I don't need to validate or claim anything. Alhamdulillah I've 100% belief in Islam. Ur entitled to ur opinion. Plz take matter seriously is my sincere advice.

 

[Pakpak]

I don't need to validate or claim anything. Alhamdulillah I've 100% belief in Islam. Ur entitled to ur opinion. Plz take matter seriously is my sincere advice.

I'll advise you the same.

 

[speed]

Find it funny how the way God could prove himself by ending suffering etc and he doesn't. Some people may believe that he gives free will but I have to believe the other alternative to that reason ie that God can't end suffering etc because he doesn't exist. Think of all the conflict in this world from religion

There are more obese people in the world than starving people....

 

[dhump]

Were God to reveal himself in the manner which atheists demand, it would be contrary to his purpose. His purpose in creating us is not simply that we know he exists, but that we choose to know Him and thereby become deserving of a relationship. Were God’s existence as manifestly obvious as the sun or the moon, there would be no merit whatsoever in believing. Belief would become necessary for everyone, and we would have no chance to demonstrate our good trust in others, insight, and perseverance.The demonstration of these qualities earns God’s reward, and are only possible if the seeker of truth must work through a veil to reach the True Beloved



“Are they waiting for anything but that Allah should come to them in the coverings of the clouds with angels, and the matter be decided? And to Allah do all things return.” (2:211)


Atheists would believe on any Hypothesis but God Unfortunately, pointing out the wisdom of God is something that many atheists will close their ears to. The reality is that too many have set their heart on not believing, and would brush away any further evidence for God as easily as they have brushed away the current evidence. Take an example given above: God announcing his existence through a voice reverberating around the heavens. One would imagine that atheists would surely not be able to doubt that, right? Wrong. Just read Dawkins’ own admission regarding it:


Interviewer: What would it take for you to believe in God?

Dawkins: I used to say it would be very simple. It would be the Second Coming of Jesus or a great, big, deep, booming, bass voice saying “I am God.” But I was persuaded… that even if there was this booming voice in the Second Coming with clouds of glory, the probable explanation is that it is a hallucination or a conjuring trick by David Copperfield…

Interviewer: So what would persuade you?

Dawkins: Well, I’m starting to think nothing would, which, in a way, goes against the grain, because I’ve always paid lip service to the view that a scientist should change his mind when evidence is forthcoming.
Dawkins, in this stunning moment of intellectual shamelessness has typified the New Atheist mindset—they will not believe in God, because to them God cannot exist. Their emotional rejection of God blinds them to any consideration of the evidence. We see this already with the absurd denials of evident divine design in the fine-tuning of the universe, and the origin of life. The atheist scientific establishment have run away from the idea of conscious design towards absurd and unfalsifiable multiverse theories because, in the words of Saint, they are “atheists first, and scientists after.” They have an undying faith in ungrounded materialistic explanations while ignoring the obvious interpretation of the facts in front of them. The Qur’an refers to this mindset when it says:

“And even if We opened to them a door from heaven, and they began ascending through it, They would surely say, ‘Only our eyes are dazed; rather we are a bewitched people.’” (15:16)


Dawkins admits Intelligent design by say " Aliens " but never by God.

[UTUBE]BoncJBrrdQ8[/UTUBE]

You have to study Dawkins properly don't just stick to web content and internet clippings of Interviews.

 

[TalentSpotterPk]

You have to study Dawkins properly don't just stick to web content and internet clippings of Interviews.

I have. Do you find him rational ? Convincing ?

 

[TalentSpotterPk]

Thanks , I have seen many people even Muslims having confusion about this issue of free will and fate.
That is because most scholars have not explaine dit properly.

Scholars are not appointed by God so every scholar can have his own understanding of free will or fate.
Is there a universal consensus amongst Islamic Scholars of 73 sects ?
Anybody who will disagree with the other scholar through his own thinking will say thay the scholar has not explained this properly.

 

[Pollack]

Atheism looks cool and unharmful only in the presence of theism. In absence of any religion atheism would cause absolute chaos since there will be no greater accountability and responsibility the fear of which religions manage to create on human beings for proper conduct in society. One might argue strict enforcement of societal laws which are same for all will act as deterrent but that will not be the case in absence of religion.Even now we have laws not influenced by religion and yet there are those who break it.

 

[Pakpak]

Atheism looks cool and unharmful only in the presence of theism. In absence of any religion atheism would cause absolute chaos since there will be no greater accountability and responsibility the fear of which religions manage to create on human beings for proper conduct in society. One might argue strict enforcement of societal laws which are same for all will act as deterrent but that will not be the case in absence of religion.

So atheism would mean people would resort to crime, rape and murder? What an absurd post. The most peaceful countries right now with proper laws and regulations and accountability are all majority atheists.

Even now we have laws not influenced by religion and yet there are those who break it.

And....? They are punished and held accountable.

What does breaking laws have to do with being religious or not? Or do you live in a universe where religious people don't break laws?

 

[Pollack]

So atheism would mean people would resort to crime, rape and murder? What an absurd post. The most peaceful countries right now with proper laws and regulations and accountability are all majority atheists.



And....? They are punished and held accountable.

What does breaking laws have to do with being religious or not? Or do you live in a universe where religious people don't break laws?

1.Let me explain what I meant. Mostly atheists start of reading religious books or understanding religion in general if not reading anything by keen observation of people who follow religion. Now religions do help in understanding what is right and what is wrong in general. Atheist learn all such things unaware of it while making carefully observation of it.Now they usually don't agree with some of the rights and wrongs set forward but they unknowingly do acquire some guidance as to how to live a life ,conduct which sound reasonable to them. If there is no religion there is just this law of land. So atheism would work only in the presence of theism since there is still a basic framework which even atheist would follow from religious teaching and teachings which they find not logical would not be included in their laws of the land.

If slowly number of atheists increase then this framework would be loosing.When entire world turns atheist this religious teachings of right and wrong would still remain but its just a matter of time before a mad atheist corrupts it all and devise laws according to his logic and all you have to do is follow it.

I don't know if it makes sense. I am bad at explaining things

 

[Pakpak]

1.Let me explain what I meant. Mostly atheists start of reading religious books or understanding religion in general if not reading anything by keen observation of people who follow religion. Now religions do help in understanding what is right and what is wrong in general. Atheist learn all such things unaware of it while making carefully observation of it.Now they usually don't agree with some of the rights and wrongs set forward but they unknowingly do acquire some guidance as to how to live a life ,conduct which sound reasonable to them. If there is no religion there is just this law of land. So atheism would work only in the presence of theism since there is still a basic framework which even atheist would follow from religious teaching and teachings which they find not logical would not be included in their laws of the land.

If slowly number of atheists increase then this framework would be loosing.When entire world turns atheist this religious teachings of right and wrong would still remain but its just a matter of time before a mad atheist corrupts it all and devise laws according to his logic and all you have to do is follow it.

I don't know if it makes sense. I am bad at explaining things

You explain things well, unfortunately all your points are simply terrible and illogical.

The atheists in the West grow up with atheist parents, and lo and behold turn out to be perfect citizens. All the laws in the Western countries are exactly the opposite of what religions would advise. And Western nations are the ideal example of everyone getting justice, accountability and equality. Infact the less religious the Western states got the more developed they've become.

Only religions teach right and wrong? You don't have to be religious to know not to rape, or murder or cheat others. Its basic common sense regardless of someone being religious or not.

Your points, as illogical as they are, would make sense if you could name ONE religious state (Muslim or otherwise) that runs a perfect society with justice, accountability and equality for all. I can name you atleast 10 atheist ones.

 

[Pollack]

You explain things well, unfortunately all your points are simply terrible and illogical.

The atheists in the West grow up with atheist parents, and lo and behold turn out to be perfect citizens. All the laws in the Western countries are exactly the opposite of what religions would advise. And Western nations are the ideal example of everyone getting justice, accountability and equality. Infact the less religious the Western states got the more developed they've become.

Only religions teach right and wrong? You don't have to be religious to know not to rape, or murder or cheat others. Its basic common sense regardless of someone being religious or not.

Your points, as illogical as they are, would make sense if you could name ONE religious state (Muslim or otherwise) that runs a perfect society with justice, accountability and equality for all. I can name you atleast 10 atheist ones.

When you say atheists all over the world are doing fine it is perfectly in line with what I said.There is no contradiction here. Religion has not been completely wiped out from humanity.If you read I have been emphasising on when entire world(almost) is atheist. So far number of atheist compared to theist is still miniscule.

Regarding common sense: Common sense is only common when you have uncommon to differentiate with. For atheist what theist do has no common sense and for theist what atheist believe. See you need to have contrast to make you believe what you believe is right. Under one law of land much of the common sense would be vested with law making authority(should I call them common sense making authority).If there are people with skewed logic and they are charismatic and able to sell there skewed logic to people common sense would not sound common at all. There are religious people who have skewed logic of religion.They twist it and sell it and sizeable people buy it but still not all? Because there are people to contrast it some from other religions, some from same, some are atheist like you(sorry for assumption).These people are there for restoring sanity.With entire world turning atheist there is just one law and that can be corrupted and then kept for sale and people would buy it.There would be no checks and barrier.

 

[Pollack]

With religion there is always an unsaid barrier.This will remain as it is because people would keep believing in god (an unknown) and god will never come down even if he is actually present.He would not take one mighty press conference addressing the entire world and clarify it.He hadn't till now and no reason to believe he will if he is actually there.And inspite this in the name of god people fear to do wrong(of course not all).This when even his existence is not concretely provable.In case of atheistic world this is not possible.You can either believe law making authority even if he propounds nonsense or you may ignore it completely and do your own things which are actually not logical and face consequence of course but what if there is mass disobedience.Law making authority would be actual entity unlike god.

 

[miandadrules]

The argument that there would be anarchy without religion is absurd and devoid of any true understanding of history, anthropology or science.

The reason the majority of humans ascribe to a variant of the golden rule is because it is a trait that is selected for, from the start of our development. For a social species to flourish they need to develop trust and cohesion in order to survive.

Now, when these bonds develop in pockets you get the formation of tribes, which then codify these rules in the form of doctrine which leads to the inception of religion. Not the other way round.

If you believe that the only reason you're not raping and pillaging is because of religion, then one has to question the type of people religion nurtures.

 

[Pakpak]

I don't even know where to start with your posts.

When you say atheists all over the world are doing fine it is perfectly in line with what I said.There is no contradiction here. Religion has not been completely wiped out from humanity.If you read I have been emphasising on when entire world(almost) is atheist''

No, it is not in line what you said. You said:

''Mostly atheists start of reading religious books or understanding religion in general if not reading anything by keen observation of people who follow religion.''

To which I pointed out, that numerous people do NOT starts as atheist by reading religious books or ''keenly observing religious people''. They start off as atheists as they are born with atheist parents, and therefore have zero exposure to religion, turn out to be perfectly sound human beings. Exposure to religion is not really a pre-requisite to being a sane individual and I gave the example of several established atheist countries who turned AWAY from religion especially when it came to state matters and look where they are now. I can infact point out many examples where when there WAS exposure to religion you had people turning out to be complete maniacs.


''Common sense is only common when you have uncommon to differentiate with''

Not really. This is just gibberish word salad, and I have heard this nonsensical logic from Christian evangelicals before. I do not murder, maim or harm my fellow man because I would not wish harm upon anyone else. Religion has not ingrained that in me, I know it because I have a brain in my head.

You do not need to be an atheist to be moral and you do not need to religious to be moral. Some core values like, no inbreeding, no cannabalism etc are ingrained in our species and without such values we'd go extinct as a race. If you're saying we need religion to prevent us from doing that then this is precisely the condescending, patronising nonsense that once led me away from faith. When you people descend to such remarks you turn people away from the flock.

 

[Pakpak]

The argument that there would be anarchy without religion is absurd and devoid of any true understanding of history, anthropology or science.

The reason the majority of humans ascribe to a variant of the golden rule is because it is a trait that is selected for, from the start of our development. For a social species to flourish they need to develop trust and cohesion in order to survive.

Now, when these bonds develop in pockets you get the formation of tribes, which then codify these rules in the form of doctrine which leads to the inception of religion. Not the other way round.

If you believe that the only reason you're not raping and pillaging is because of religion, then one has to question the type of people religion nurtures.

Thank you, what I meant to say and you said it better than I managed to above. Ofcourse his reply will be that the 'traits' are given by God, which again is a philosophical dead-end.

 

[miandadrules]

1.Let me explain what I meant. Mostly atheists start of reading religious books or understanding religion in general if not reading anything by keen observation of people who follow religion. Now religions do help in understanding what is right and what is wrong in general. Atheist learn all such things unaware of it while making carefully observation of it.Now they usually don't agree with some of the rights and wrongs set forward but they unknowingly do acquire some guidance as to how to live a life ,conduct which sound reasonable to them. If there is no religion there is just this law of land. So atheism would work only in the presence of theism since there is still a basic framework which even atheist would follow from religious teaching and teachings which they find not logical would not be included in their laws of the land.

If slowly number of atheists increase then this framework would be loosing.When entire world turns atheist this religious teachings of right and wrong would still remain but its just a matter of time before a mad atheist corrupts it all and devise laws according to his logic and all you have to do is follow it.

I don't know if it makes sense. I am bad at explaining things

It's called parenting.

 

[miandadrules]

I have. Do you find him rational ? Convincing ?

Very rational.

Very convincing.

Though he has became a caricature in his old age.

 

[TalentSpotterPk]

Very rational.

Very convincing.

Though he has became a caricature in his old age.

Good for you. No Problem at all.

 

[miandadrules]

Good for you. No Problem at all.

Why would there be a problem?

 

[TalentSpotterPk]

The argument that there would be anarchy without religion is absurd and devoid of any true understanding of history, anthropology or science.

The reason the majority of humans ascribe to a variant of the golden rule is because it is a trait that is selected for, from the start of our development. For a social species to flourish they need to develop trust and cohesion in order to survive.

Now, when these bonds develop in pockets you get the formation of tribes, which then codify these rules in the form of doctrine which leads to the inception of religion. Not the other way round.

If you believe that the only reason you're not raping and pillaging is because of religion, then one has to question the type of people religion nurtures.

In Chemistry we are taught about Ideal Gas but in reality Ideal Gas does not exist.


No religion can nurture Angels (if Angels exist for Aetheists, which don't exist for them), I mean Ideal people. A man is created in a way that He may be inclined towards both Good & Bad.


If an Atheist rapes someone while he thinks that He will get away with it, the person he is raping is of a nature that won't report this offence or he has got hold of corrupt police officers or he feels there will be no evidence than he would go for it.

While in case of a religious person if he knows there is a God, if he has felt his existence ever, if he has a belief that his actions would be held accountable by Allah in this life or life after death than he has a chance of backing off at the very last moment. It may not necessarily be only because of fear of a higher power but if he feels that Allah has ever bestowed his special love on him or he has blessed him immensely when he prayed or Allah is his best friend than He will think I won't disappoint my Lord, I won't make him sad or unhappy, I won't break HIS trust and affection for me so I should back off and not commit this offence.

If for this you want a video evidence or documentary proof or scientific proof than sorry I am helpless. Than just take it as my opinion and call it illogical or irrational since there is no scientific evidence to back it.

Since there is no scientific evidence to prove that a stimulus in his brain switched him Off by making him realise something.


As far as religions or religious communities are concerned than Yes this is a Barrometer to judge them grossly. If every religion and amongst them every sect claims that they are true believers, their moral code is ths best one than their actions should prove it aswell. There Apparents morals & ethics as a community do represent them on the whole. Because what is the benefit of a religion or God if it cannot shape morally ethically sound role models for the entire society and the world ?


So Yes religious communities should be judged by their actions. If their actions are anti humanity than either they nomore follow their religion, or their religion is lacking or it got adulterated hence their actions have become anti-life. This is a reason religious people jump the ships or totally leave a religion altogether.

 

[miandadrules]

[/B]


In Chemistry we are taught about Ideal Gas but in reality Ideal Gas does not exist.


No religion can nurture Angels (if Angels exist for Aetheists, which don't exist for them), I mean Ideal people. A man is created in a way that He may be inclined towards both Good & Bad.


If an Atheist rapes someone while he thinks that He will get away with it, the person he is raping is of a nature that won't report this offence or he has got hold of corrupt police officers or he feels there will be no evidence than he would go for it.

While in case of a religious person if he knows there is a God, if he has felt his existence ever, if he has a belief that his actions would be held accountable by Allah in this life or life after death than he has a chance of backing off at the very last moment. It may not necessarily be only because of fear of a higher power but if he feels that Allah has ever bestowed his special love on him or he has blessed him immensely when he prayed or Allah is his best friend than He will think I won't disappoint my Lord, I won't make him sad or unhappy, I won't break HIS trust and affection for me so I should back off and not commit this offence.

If for this you want a video evidence or documentary proof or scientific proof than sorry I am helpless. Than just take it as my opinion and call it illogical or irrational since there is no scientific evidence to back it.

Since there is no scientific evidence to prove that a stimulus in his brain switched him Off by making him realise something.


As far as religions or religious communities are concerned than Yes this is a Barrometer to judge them grossly. If every religion and amongst them every sect claims that they are true believers, their moral code is ths best one than their actions should prove it aswell. There Apparents morals & ethics as a community do represent them on the whole. Because what is the benefit of a religion or God if it cannot shape morally ethically sound role models for the entire society and the world ?


So Yes religious communities should be judged by their actions. If their actions are anti humanity than either they nomore follow their religion, or their religion is lacking or it got adulterated hence their actions have become anti-life. This is a reason religious people jump the ships or totally leave a religion altogether.

There so much wrong it is hard to know where to start.

Please provide some statistics that show crime rates amongst Theists and Atheists, so at least we have some reference point.

How much research have you done in criminal psychology for you to express these insights in to the rapists mindset and how they meticulously plan their crimes. Please share them with us.

You've basically resorted to emotive language because you can't provide a substantive response. You're making wild assumptions with regards to the motivations of criminals without showing any grasp of the concept, using almost child-like analogies.

Also, very few, almost a minuscule number of people every change their faith, so I'm not sure how you can justify what you are saying.

The rest of your post has no correlation to what I posted.

 

[Pollack]

It's called parenting.

Are parent immune to illogical thinking.Are you suggesting all terrorist family members are also similar and they did not do parenting well.I am sure inspite of good parenting young people do get brainwashed and then would possibly pass that to their children as well aka parenting gone haywire.

 

[miandadrules]

Are parent immune to illogical thinking.Are you suggesting all terrorist family members are also similar and they did not do parenting well.I am sure inspite of good parenting young people do get brainwashed and then would possibly pass that to their children as well aka parenting gone haywire.

Your point was that religion provided the essential framework and atheism wouldn't work without it, which is totally untrue. Parenting is what lays the framework.

99.9% of the Islamists terrorists had their faith introduced to them by their parents, which laid the ground work for radicalisation. If you teach them to obey scripture without question you are susceptible to be taken advantage off.

I'm not sure what you are even suggesting with parenting gone haywire and illogical thinking, in this context. Are you suggesting that religion is logical thinking to begin with and any deviation is illogical?

 

[Pollack]

I don't even know where to start with your posts.



No, it is not in line what you said. You said:



To which I pointed out, that numerous people do NOT starts as atheist by reading religious books or ''keenly observing religious people''. They start off as atheists as they are born with atheist parents, and therefore have zero exposure to religion, turn out to be perfectly sound human beings. Exposure to religion is not really a pre-requisite to being a sane individual and I gave the example of several established atheist countries who turned AWAY from religion especially when it came to state matters and look where they are now. I can infact point out many examples where when there WAS exposure to religion you had people turning out to be complete maniacs.


''Common sense is only common when you have uncommon to differentiate with''

Not really. This is just gibberish word salad, and I have heard this nonsensical logic from Christian evangelicals before. I do not murder, maim or harm my fellow man because I would not wish harm upon anyone else. Religion has not ingrained that in me, I know it because I have a brain in my head.

You do not need to be an atheist to be moral and you do not need to religious to be moral. Some core values like, no inbreeding, no cannabalism etc are ingrained in our species and without such values we'd go extinct as a race. If you're saying we need religion to prevent us from doing that then this is precisely the condescending, patronising nonsense that once led me away from faith. When you people descend to such remarks you turn people away from the flock.

Forget about that reading and observing thing I said that keeping desi atheists in mind also I was meaning it in a subtle way.

Atheist have zero exposure to religion? If I ask an atheist in a completely atheistic society what is religion he would have no idea? He wouldnt know there is something called religion and some people follow it . That there is a god whom they pray to get wishes fulfilled or protect them or stop them from doing anything wrong.They don't freaking have any idea of god or religion? If your answer is they would know but not the details of different religions,rituals etc then congratulations religion has still already influenced there thoughts unconsciously.



About last paragraph I haven't made any condescending remarks on either atheists in general or you.Instead illogical,absurd adjectives been used by you.I think you are assuming me to be intolerant religious person who looks down upon atheist.Rest assured I am just putting forward my opinions here and that's it.

 

[Pollack]

Your point was that religion provided the essential framework and atheism wouldn't work without it, which is totally untrue. Parenting is what lays the framework.

99.9% of the Islamists terrorists had their faith introduced to them by their parents, which laid the ground work for radicalisation. If you teach them to obey scripture without question you are susceptible to be taken advantage off.

I'm not sure what you are even suggesting with parenting gone haywire and illogical thinking, in this context. Are you suggesting that religion is logical thinking to begin with and any deviation is illogical?

Oh dear ! I request you to ignore my initial two posts of this thread.I haven't explained them well.Just flush them out.Later posts are only my opaque views.

 

[miandadrules]

Oh dear ! I request you to ignore my initial two posts of this thread.I haven't explained them well.Just flush them out.Later posts are only my opaque views.

Your later posts are equally devoid of a logical narrative.

If your point is that religion is essential to provide a counter-narrative, then you certainly haven't substantiated it. You also seem to be under the mistaken notion that morality and a sense of what is right and wrong is based on ones belief in God. Otherwise you wouldn't assume that all theists would think the same.

The flaw in your argument is that an Atheists point of view is up for discussion and can be challenged and hence less likely to be corrupted, whereas religious doctrine is absolute therefore sanctifies the corruption.