the story of Our Lady "the Virgin Mary" in the muslims holly book (quran)

[Thorne]

Which is in and of itself a "presumption" of something's non-existance.

All right, then, maybe you can explain it to me. Just how is NOT presuming the existence of something the same as presuming its non-existence? I honestly cannot understand how the two are the same.

You are still making a presumtion/ assumption/ corolation/ guestimation etc etc etc eaither way regardless of what word you wish to use, becuase you cannot "KNOW" for sure with any real certitude any more than anyone else can one way or the other.

I have already admitted that I cannot know for certain that there are no gods. All I can know is that there is no viable evidence FOR gods, and therefore there is no rational reason for ME to assume that there are. I don't claim they do not exist, I don't presume they do not exist, I simply do not assume or presume that they do. You rationalize your beliefs with faith. That's fine. I choose not to rely on faith, but on evidence. Why is that so bad?

And Ive come to realize that no amount of logic will work with you on this topic becuase you choose to not let logic apply to your own arguments, you just keep on trying to mince words just so you can maintain your dogmatic agenda you are being an outright sophist and insist anyway that only your way is the right one, which my dear Thorne makes you no different than those very secular fundamentalists that you blame for all wrongs on the earth.

Again, I have never claimed that my way is the right one. I leave those claims to religion. All I claim is that my way is right for ME.

Do I ridicule religious dogma? Absolutely, when it makes ridiculous claims without evidence! Do I call people stupid? No, not usually. When they blindly accept the teachings of a religion without really understanding it then yes, I believe they are acting stupidly. Do I attack people because they have faith? No! I disagree with them.

The OP in this thread posted a little story from the Quran dealing with the mother of Jesus. Did I launch an attack against him? No, I derided the story! I did not compare him to evil Muslims, past or present. I did not ridicule his faith. I pointed out what I perceived to be fallacies in the story! If this had been a modern book and I had made these kinds of claims to the author no one would have cared. But because some people seem to think that this particular collection of stories is somehow holy, then I am not permitted to point out where I think they are wrong? Sorry, but I don't play by those rules. Everything is fair game.

[Thorne]

well you Say this over and over again
Trying to bring the differences, differentiating between religions

Well, every religion claims to represent the one true faith, the only path to God and Salvation. They can't all be right.

with Angry vindictive tone on religions

"Science flies you to the moon. Religion flies you into buildings." - Victor Stenger
(Not intended as an attack just against Islam, but against all dogmatic religions.)

I hope only you are not Satan worshiped

LOL! Have no fear. The reasons for not believing in gods applies just as readily to devils.

[denuseri]

All right, then, maybe you can explain it to me. Just how is NOT presuming the existence of something the same as presuming its non-existence? I honestly cannot understand how the two are the same.

Seriously? This is a prime example of the type of sophistry Im talking about.


I have already admitted that I cannot know for certain that there are no gods. Ergo your presuming there to be no god or gods...duh.

All I can know is that there is no viable evidence FOR gods,( in your opinion) and therefore there is no rational reason for ME to assume that there are. (again, thats your presumtion to make, other highly ratinonal people however apparently disagree with that assumption) I don't claim they do not exist, I don't presume they do not exist, I simply do not assume or presume that they do. (Same thing honey child)You rationalize your beliefs with faith. Just like you rationalize yours since by your own admission you dont know one way or the other. That's fine. (then why try to associate my belief and those of others in a derogatory manner every single time you make a post on religion?) I choose not to rely on faith, but on evidence. (what evidence?) Why is that so bad? Its not, using sophistry and acting like the fundamentalists you claim to oppose however imho is.


Again, I have never claimed that my way is the right one. Actually you do that bery thing with the way you present your arguments. I leave those claims to religion. Aethiests make just as many unfounded claims from what I can tell. All I claim is that my way is right for ME. And then in the same breath tell everyone else how they are a bunch of superstitiot idiots for believing what they believe. See the hipocracy at work there yet?

Do I ridicule religious dogma? Absolutely, when it makes ridiculous claims without evidence! Do I call people stupid? No, not usually. Actually you do several times in each and every thread on religion Ive seen you post in. In fact you implied it just now yet again. When they blindly accept the teachings of a religion without really understanding it then yes, (who are you to know weather or not someone is blindly doing anything? Are you in their minds? ) I believe they are acting stupidly. Do I attack people because they have faith? No! I disagree with them. All while calling what they believe in "ridiculous, superstition, stupid. fanciful etc etc the list goes on"...those are all forms of attack.

The OP in this thread posted a little story from the Quran dealing with the mother of Jesus. Did I launch an attack against him? No, I derided the story! I did not compare him to evil Muslims, past or present. I did not ridicule his faith. Um Im sory sugar, you actually did ridicule his faith and mine, and everyone else who wasnt an aetheist. I pointed out what I perceived to be fallacies in the story! In a rather belicose manner I might add. If this had been a modern book and I had made these kinds of claims to the author no one would have cared. But because some people seem to think that this particular collection of stories is somehow holy, (here you go again attacking all people of faith) then I am not permitted to point out where I think they are wrong? Pointing out where one doesnt share the same beliefs as anoyther isnt the issue, its calling them all stupid, ridiculous, fanciful, superstitious, blind, etc etc when you do it. Sorry, but I don't play by those rules. Everything is fair game.

Apparently...(thats the battle hymn of the sophists btw) ...which is why I get very tired of trying to discuss religion with you. You even make it where its inpossible for people of any different faiths outside of yours to try and seek any common ground between each other.

[Thorne]

All right, then, maybe you can explain it to me. Just how is NOT presuming the existence of something the same as presuming its non-existence? I honestly cannot understand how the two are the same.
Seriously? This is a prime example of the type of sophistry Im talking about.

I think this is a primary sticking point between us, and until we can resolve it I'd prefer to hold off discussion of the other points here.

So yes, I'm quite serious. I truly cannot understand your point here. I maintain that NOT believing in something is very different from believing that something is not. I see a large difference between saying, "I do not believe in God", and saying, "I believe there is no God." The first is a statement of disbelief while the second is a statement of belief. It is POSSIBLE to say both, but saying the first does not necessarily mean that the second is true. In my mind what you are seeming to imply is like saying, since I do not believe in RED, therefore I must believe in GREEN. Both MAY be true, but neither is dependent upon the other.

[denuseri]

Not at all:... when you say you do not have a belief in "red" becuase you think there is no evidence for its existance it is in fact exactly the same as saying you do not believe that Red exists.

Green has nothing to do with it.

[domaster]

you know what i Hate most ...

When people talk about God as if they're talking about humans or animals or anything else creature created by god
This is a big mistake
that God
Nothing like it
And we can not resemble a creature to creator
This is because of the limited human intellect

Does not apply to God No time or place
Because time and space creatures created by God
So God does not get old
And it does not apply to Starter Beginning and the End
he was Not created by creator and not born dos not have Family
Has always been and will be
And God does not die

And because of our thought that limited with the nature of the universe we live in.!!!
And who are still trying to understand ... (universe )

Find us whenever we think of God
Intentionally or unintentionally we resemble his creatures with hem God

With respect to all
This is a fact Thought limited
One so we had the meeting
And collect our thoughts and beliefs in a peaceful manner
For a deeper understanding of the universe that we are a part

Just a note I wanted to share with you

[Thorne]

Not at all:... when you say you do not have a belief in "red" becuase you think there is no evidence for its existance it is in fact exactly the same as saying you do not believe that Red exists.

Exactly my point! But saying that I do not believe that Red exists is NOT the same as saying I believe that red does NOT exist.

[Thorne]

domaster,

You claim that we mortals are unable to understand God, our intellect to limited too comprehend his true nature. And then you go on to explain his true nature: God does not get old; He was not created by a creator; He was not born and does not have a family; God does not die!

And I ask you, once again, How do you KNOW? What evidence is there to support your claims about God's nature? Yes, you have faith, that I understand. But the only thing you have which tells you about God is the Quran, or the Bible if you are Christian, or the Torah if you are Jewish. And all of these documents were written by men! Men who had no more idea of what God is than you or I can have.

Oh, certainly, they claim their statements came directly from God. Who would believe them if they didn't? But if God revealed the Torah to the Israelites, and if God revealed the New Testament to the Christians, and if God revealed the Quran to Muhammad, why do they disagree so blatantly on the very nature of God? Why do they disagree so widely on what God expects us to do?

And if God is so far beyond our intellects, why does he have so many human failings? We "know" that God gets angry. We "know" that God gets jealous. These are HUMAN emotions, implying that God is more like us than you claim. We "know" that God kills innocent children. We "know" that God destroys entire cities. These actions don't make God so hard to understand after all. Why, it's almost as if God were a reflection of our own minds!

[domaster]

well I thought you do not believe in god

Are you from thois who say anything just to appear

& Do not compare the Quran Gospel

Gospel was written after more of 100 years after the lifting of Jesus Christ
Quran Books written by Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah Companions Memorizers in charge of it

[Thorne]

well I thought you do not believe in god

I don't. That's the point of my post. You are someone who can believe without proof. I require proof.

& Do not compare the Quran Gospel

Gospel was written after more of 100 years after the lifting of Jesus Christ
Quran Books written by Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah Companions Memorizers in charge of it

Yes, the New Testament was written long after the death of Jesus. By people who did not know him, by people who were not there.

The Quran was dictated to Muhammad by an angel, which only he could see or hear, of course. It was memorized by his Companions and written down later. Yeah, not much chance of transcription errors there, right?

But both of these are third person accounts of events which none of the writers witnessed and for which no one can provide any evidence.

The Quran is no more believable in its descriptions of God and his commands than the Bible, the Torah or the Book of Mormon. They are all filled with speculation, conjecture and wishful thinking, all wrapped up in religious dogma.

[leo9]

[QUOTE=denuseri;922381]Addittonally, all of the faiths mentioned (other than aethism apparently) seem to in fact to preach tolerance of others.

I can't believe you are serious. As for Xianity, if you think that has always been tolerant of other religions you slept through History 101. As for Islam, the Hadith says "He that changes his religion, he must be slain," and that is still the law in many Middle Eastern states. In India the Hindus are persecuting Muslims as enthusiastically as the other way around. They used to say Buddhists were always tolerant, until the Sri Lankan Buddhists started slaughtering their Hindu neighbours.

With the arguable exception of Stalinist Russia, I can't think of an example of atheist persecutions.

[denuseri]

Thanks for taking a comment I made personally to Thorne to highlight how he as an aethiest appeared to not be as tollerant in his arguments as he purposed all aethiests to be completely out of context Leo and turning around and insulting me to boot.

[Thorne]

With the arguable exception of Stalinist Russia, I can't think of an example of atheist persecutions.

And even there, you cannot say those persecutions were in the cause of atheism. They were performed to satisfy the cause of Communism. And a flawed communism at that.

[domaster]

leo9
(((As for Islam, the Hadith says "He that changes his religion, he must be slain," and that is still the law in many Middle Eastern states)))
Are you serious leo9

I live in the Middle East
I have not seen and not heard in my life ever ever that someone be killd
For change religion
And very rarely hear about the Muslims who left Islam
maybe
Perhaps the poor and the needy have turned to Christianity for a living or Nationality

All the great efforts undertaken by the Church to eradicate Islam in the Middle East starting with Crusades
Trying to erase all traces of civilization and Islamic beliefs as they did with the Americas, North and South
do not forget Australia (in fact the whole world)

I do not blame and i do not urge or something
Islam forbids incitement and blaming the any one for his father, or grandfather mistac
Each individual is be judged for his actions

Other information, according to statistics lately erected
Islam is the religion most prevalent speed of all religions
People from all religions and beliefs and from different social positions convert to Islam every day

ps :
Please forgive me for my language its not so...
I have learned English from watching the movies & the chat rooms

[denuseri]

I would love a link explaining just what Xianity really is, all I could find was an obscure refernce on wikipedia to a fictious religion and some cross references that do not explain anything but say its some kind of new age slang for Chrisianity?

In any event I don't believe the topic of this thread is to discuss what aethism is or is not, nor to constantly refute what one believes about what someone's elses religion as being false for whatever reason or insult it's adhereants intelligence. People are going to believe what they wish anyways where as that is concerned.

I dont believe the main message of Hinduism, Judism, Buddism, Christianity, Islam, Bahai or Wicca is one of anything other than to love one another and help each other, to live together in peace and harmony. Yes its true that in the past and even today their are people who do bad things in the name of their religion and I am all for getting people to stop doing such things, to be tollerent of one another beliefs. Some like aethiests may feel like they don't need to have faith in an outside force to help them in that endeavor and thats perfectly fine. But they shouldn't be fundamentally insistant on that which they cannot prove eaither or going on some kind of rampage to see all religion abolished.

Since no one can prove themselves right on any of it, doesnt it make more sence to just let people believe what they wish and punnish actions instead of ideas?

All I am asking is why can't we all stop nitpicking about the specifics as we move into the future?

Focus on common ground as opposed to making things worse by fostering divisions?

[Thorne]

I have not seen and not heard in my life ever ever that someone be killd
For change religion
And very rarely hear about the Muslims who left Islam

Apostasy in Islam (Arabic: ارتداد, irtidād or ridda‎) is commonly defined in Islam as the rejection in word or deed of their former religion (apostasy) by a person who was previously a follower of Islam. Islamic scholarship differs on the earthly punishment for apostasy, ranging from death to no punishment at all.[1]
From a Wikipedia article:
"Many medieval Sunni schools of Islamic jurisprudence held that apostasy by a male Muslim is punishable by death, differing only on whether to execute the apostate immediately or grant the apostate an opportunity to repent and thus avoid penalty. They also differed on the punishment of a female apostate: death or imprisonment until repentance,[2] these judgements are still adopted by extremist Islamic Scholars today."

Those who face death or imprisonment for turning away from their religion are unlikely to do so.

[domaster]

Wikipedia ::::: Is not an Islamic reference

And I think when you want to inquire and understand something, ask specialists in this thing
Whatever...

Apostasy is not only limited or restricted or confined to islam
As long as the sanctions down on the piece of apostasy to how known its not come with islam its old as old as the humanbeing on earth

The prophets and their fellows and they do the apostasy punishment as policy deterrent

The prophets unto their fellows, and they do a policy deterrent

Otherwise, many people will followed their whims and whims of the devil
& that happen lots
And do not forget sanctions revealed by God to the apostates
And their stories are known in Valangel Altorat and Alzabor and the Koran

And if you want to Learn & be gauged from something ask the people of it.

[Thorne]

domaster, it sounds as though you are saying that we can only trust Islam to be truthful about Islam.

Very well, let's try these!
"We are ex-Muslims. Some of us were born and raised in Islam and some of us had converted to Islam at some moment in our lives. We were taught never to question the truth of Islam and to believe in Allah and his messenger with blind faith. We were told that Allah would forgive all sins but the sin of disbelief (Quran 4:48 and 4:116). But we committed the ultimate sin of thinking and questioned the belief that was imposed on us and we came to realize that far from being a religion of truth, Islam is a hoax, it is hallucination of a sick mind and nothing but lies and deceits."

Or we could look here:
"Dear Apostates, If you have left Islam and do not want your information listed here, please understand that its very important for apostates to form a group. Nothing agitates a Muslim, as much as seeing a group of people who have left Islam. This is why Mohammed ordered to kill us! He knew we know the truth about Islam, and we would be the ones who could make the lies he was selling to people fall down to the floor like an imaginary sand castle." [Emphasis mine.]

And these are former Muslims, remember. They have intimate knowledge of Islam.

I would point out that Islam is not alone in proscribing its followers from thinking for themselves. Many religions do the same. It seems to be one of the prime tenets of religion: belief trumps rational thought. This is the antithesis of science, which values rational thought above everything.

That does not mean one cannot have faith and be a scientist. Far from it. There have been, and are, many scientists who believe in one god or another. Faith is a personal journey. Religion, especially dogmatic religion, tries to force that journey along specific roads, mapping out the destination and way-points along the road, and anything which contradicts or negates that dogma is pushed to the edges of the map and marked, "Here there be Dragons!"

[domaster]

as i said
And I think when you want to inquire and understand something, ask specialists of this thing

& u keep reading & asking thos how hait religion
What you offering here is not a reference

& its not fair to do that for any...thing ...
if ur fair ask both sides

not evry one left Islam or any other religion its big mind or big Mind thinker there is how thay can not leave there old life even for god

well if ur fair see that 111111111 2222222

& u must read the 2sc link

one last thing stop talking about humanbeing as they are perfect & so smart


now let's talk about religion
religion

For as long as that religions was the law

The system of civilized communities
For as long as the brake to the whims of animal
And criminal instincts
And according to my vision of the subject -Islam built the one of the most beautiful civilization and more sophisticated
We're still reaping some of the fruit till to day
Civilization edited by contemporary science of the darkness of ignorance, witchcraft and sorcery

First words of God revealed in the Koran
"READ"
And as long as the Messenger of Allah, Mohammad urged us on science and learning share it with others

They want to extinguish the light of Allah with their mouths, but Allah refuses except to perfect His light, although the disbelievers dislike it.
(33) It is He who has sent His Messenger with guidance and the religion of truth to manifest it over all religion, although they who associate others with Allah dislike it.
(33-32 versses 9 chapter)
in this versses god talk about thos who belive in god but they keep Denying for a reason or nother

[Thorne]

as i said
And I think when you want to inquire and understand something, ask specialists of this thing

I agree. And who better to ask about Islam and apostasy, for example, then those who have left Islam?

& u keep reading & asking thos how hait religion
What you offering here is not a reference

Are you trying to say that those who hate religion cannot be experts in it? Even when most of them were raised in religious homes, and steeped in religion for years? So by your standards, the only one's I can ask about the evils of religion are those religious "experts" who don't believe that religion is evil. Strange restriction. It's like telling me I can't ask astronomers about the stars, but can only trust the astrologers.

if ur fair ask both sides

I have seen both sides. And I have chosen my side.

& u must read the 2sc link

The first link seems to say that Einstein did NOT believe in God, at least in the God of Christianity, Islam or Judaism. Not sure what you're trying to say about that.
The second link I've seen before, and it's a hoax. Read the Snopes expose written almost 4 years ago.

one last thing stop talking about humanbeing as they are perfect & so smart

LOL! I've never claimed that. Quite the opposite, in fact.

I'm not interested in trading quotes from the Quran, or the Bible, with you. I'll admit that your knowledge of the Quran is far greater than mine. That does nothing to prove that anything in the book is true, however. Show me evidence which does not originate in a religious book. Give me examples of the extensive testing which has been done to prove that the Quran, or the Bible, is the inerrant word of God. And, since there are many contradictions between them, show me evidence that your word of God is truer than their word of God.

[domaster]

I agree. And who better to ask about Islam and apostasy, for example, then those who have left Islam?

I have seen both sides. And I have chosen my side.

I'm not interested in trading quotes from the Quran, or the Bible, with you. I'll admit that your knowledge of the Quran is far greater than mine. That does nothing to prove that anything in the book is true, however. Show me evidence which does not originate in a religious book. Give me examples of the extensive testing which has been done to prove that the Quran, or the Bible, is the inerrant word of God. And, since there are many contradictions between them, show me evidence that your word of God is truer than their word of God.

I dare you to ask who spent his life in the service of Islam
if you're looking for evidence ask the Scientists Religion

there it is , you have said u take you (side)
This explains a lot of things
Why you are here not by chance
i think This is your job
I am not prepared to prove anything to those who came previously closed mind
And fight against the entire purpose of religion and not a discussion

The contradiction existing between the Books
Does not come from God, but from humans
All the prophets who were sent by God
Sent them to spread one message starting from Adam, to the last Prophets Muhammad peace be upon him

God did not send a prophet
Until the people distort and change the god words of and the provisions

That came to Muhammad peace be upon him
The last prophet sent to all people

The contradiction existing Books
Does not come from God, but we humans came from
All the prophets who were sent by God
Sent them to spread one message starting from Adam, but Seal of the Prophets Muhammad peace be upon him

And God has sent a provisions Special to evry Nation
Dedicated to them according to their ideology or their time
Until came Muhammad peace be upon him The last prophet he was sent to all people
with perfect book for evryone & evryage

[Thorne]

I dare you to ask who spent his life in the service of Islam
if you're looking for evidence ask the Scientists Religion

I have asked science for evidence. And science tells me there is no evidence, yet. Maybe there can be, though personally I doubt it. But in all the years that mankind has been worshiping gods, there has never been any evidence that those gods exist. Until there IS evidence, I can find no reason to believe that there are gods.

i think This is your job

No, it's more of a hobby.

I am not prepared to prove anything to those who came previously closed mind

My mind is not closed! If you can provide the evidence I am perfectly willing to look at it. And if it credible, and testable, then I would be willing to reconsider my position. All I ask for is the evidence.

And fight against the entire purpose of religion and not a discussion

Any discussion of religion, or politics, eventually seems to degrade into a fight. Probably because neither side is willing to give up their demands. The religious demand unquestioning faith. The scientist demands evidence and proof.

The contradiction existing between the Books
Does not come from God, but from humans

One big one I know of just off the top of my head! The Bible, and Christianity, recognizes Jesus as the Son of God. The Quran, and Islam, recognize him only as a prophet. A rather large contradiction, don't you think? Or are you saying that only Islam has it right?

All the prophets who were sent by God
Sent them to spread one message starting from Adam, but Seal of the Prophets Muhammad peace be upon him

As I scientist I can understand that you believe this, but how do you KNOW?

And God has sent a provisions Special to evry Nation

How do you KNOW?

Until came Muhammad peace be upon him The last prophet he was sent to all people
with perfect book for evryone & evryage

Ahh, I see. So you DO believe that your religion is the only true religion? And you say my mind is closed?

[leo9]

My word, I haven't seen a religious troll since the old newsgroup days, that takes me back. They used to be just Xians, but they still believe that telling you the Good News is bound to convert you.

[Thorne]

My word, I haven't seen a religious troll since the old newsgroup days, that takes me back. They used to be just Xians, but they still believe that telling you the Good News is bound to convert you.

Yeah, they think using quotes from a book I don't believe in, about a god I don't believe in, will change my mind. I've learned more from Heinlein, Asimov and Clarke than from Moses, Jesus or Mohammed.

But it can be fun when you can use their holy books against them. I'll need to familiarize myself more with the Quran, though, if I want to be more effective.

[denuseri]

It's not bad enough the thread has gotten totally derailed into yet another aethism bully pulpuit rant, thanks Thorne, (which is somehow ok cuase it was "fun" huh?)

...but we are resorting to name calling?



(I would love to know just who is being called a troll and what context your using the word Xian in leo? ) Cuase when I look through the rest of the thread the only troll like behavior I see seems to come from the side of the one claiming to believe in "not believing" in anything.


I see so long as the religion isnt pagan or aethism its fair game to use any amount of sophistry to attack it?

God forbid someone try to get together the Muslims and the Christians on any common ground, we cant have that now can we? Lets make sure we attack and belittle them every chance we get huh?

Is that aethisms way of paving a brighter future?

Making whatever divisions there are even deeper, trying to get people to focus on only the bad things, obfuscate, spin, and dogmatize everything.

You just cant stand to see people express their faith or seek common ground with others of different faiths?

Sounds to me like someone sure is saying its his way or the highway to me.

[Thorne]

It's not bad enough the thread has gotten totally derailed into yet another aethism bully pulpuit rant, thanks Thorne, (which is somehow ok cuase it was "fun" huh?)

Why is it OK for domaster to preach his beliefs, including quoting the Quran, but when I do the same it's ranting?

I see so long as the religion isnt pagan or aethism its fair game to use any amount of sophistry to attack it?

What sophistry?

God forbid someone try to get together the Muslims and the Christians on any common ground, we cant have that now can we? Lets make sure we attack and belittle them every chance we get huh?

I treat the Christians and Muslims equally! Isn't that common ground?

Is that aethisms way of paving a brighter future?

Yes. A world without religion. Looks pretty bright to me.

You just cant stand to see people express their faith or seek common ground with others of different faiths?

Express their faith, no problem. Proselytize? Fine, as long as I can respond in kind.

Sounds to me like someone sure is saying its his way or the highway to me.

Not saying that at all.

Domaster came in here and was espousing his beliefs. Great. I don't have a problem with that. But I have the same right to point out where I think his beliefs fail. Why do you have a problem with me doing that? Why is it all right for you to misrepresent my atheism ("one claiming to believe in "not believing" in anything"), but it's not okay for me to point out that what someone believes in is unlikely or unproven?

As for showing respect for religions, I can't think of even one good reason to do so. Why should I respect a religion whose leaders protect child molesters? Why should I respect a religion whose leaders treat rape victims as criminals? Why should I respect a religion whose believers think that a good time in heaven will be looking down on all those souls suffering in hell, and laughing at them? Go ahead! Give me a really good reason to respect religious beliefs.

And for the record, I didn't call anyone a troll, though I can understand why leo9 did. To be fair, though, domaster has not done the typical troll action of tossing a lot of BS into the arena and ducking out to watch the fur fly. He's defended his beliefs admirably. True, he's trying to convince me by using his holy book instead of reason, which is somewhat troll-like, but that doesn't make him a troll.

[denuseri]

Why is it OK for domaster to preach his beliefs, including quoting the Quran, but when I do the same it's ranting?

Oh you preached your own beliefs in abundance allready though havent you. All he did initially was try to point out that Christians and Muslims have some shared beliefs that could work to help make peace between them and then, as ussually, you tunred it into a "no your beielfs are wrong and your an idiot for having them rant".


What sophistry?

Points up to well over half of your posts in the thread where you associate all believers with rapists, murderers, child molesters, believers in fairy tales, flying purple unicons and what not becuase they must be since they are not aethiests like you.

I treat the Christians and Muslims equally! Isn't that common ground?

In trying to belittle their faith when your own beliefs have no more or less wieght than theirs becuase the base premise of all is the same is the hieght of hipocracy.

Yes. A world without religion. Looks pretty bright to me.

And a world where everyone could be free to practice or not their religion or belief system or life philosophy, or lack therof in mutual respect and tolerance without being called an idiot becuase those beliefs differ wouldnt be brighter?




Express their faith, no problem. Proselytize? Fine, as long as I can respond in kind.

The proselytizing Ive seen so far has come ironically enough from the one claiming to not belive in anything, even when you so clearly do believe in what you believe in with as much zealotry and fundamentalism as the most ardhent of the "faithful". How silly is that, sounds like the pot calling the proverbial kettle black.


Not saying that at all.

Then why not let others believe in what they wish too without trying to attack them for their beliefs for a change?

You make it impossible to have a reasoned discussion of theocracies when over and over you keep trying to draw sophic analogies to attck all faiths other than aethism as being wrong continiusly through any thread that even mentions the word religion.

Domaster came in here and was espousing his beliefs. Great. I don't have a problem with that. But I have the same right to point out where I think his beliefs fail. Why do you have a problem with me doing that? Why is it all right for you to misrepresent my atheism ("one claiming to believe in "not believing" in anything"), but it's not okay for me to point out that what someone believes in is unlikely or unproven?

Oh is that what youve been doing, Im sorry love I couldnt get around how youve been misrepresenting not only your stated ideals and those of all others who dont share your "way of thinking" (which btw is the exact same as saying "your beliefs").

No I dont have a problem with you expressing your beliefs, just the sophistic manner in which you choose to cloak it as an attack against anything that differs from your own, which is the hieght of hipocracy imho, especially when it comes from someone claiming to expouse the values of science and reason over baseless asumption.

It would be nice to have a discussion about religion just once without all the anti-religion dogma getting in the way.

Instead of allways attacking why not listen to what the other person is saying about their own beliefs just once and take them at face value?

As for showing respect for religions, I can't think of even one good reason to do so. No apparently you dont and yet you ask for that same respect be shown to you...how ironic and hypocritical. Why should I respect a religion whose leaders protect child molesters? Why should I respect a religion whose leaders treat rape victims as criminals? Why should I respect a religion whose believers think that a good time in heaven will be looking down on all those souls suffering in hell, and laughing at them? Go ahead! Give me a really good reason to respect religious beliefs.

Just as many bad things have ben done in the name of aethism so I dont see any difference there.

Respect doesnt require you to convert or anything, just "tolerance".

The Founding Father's believed that all people should be mutually respected when it came to one's own beliefs, that why we got the whole seperation of church and state thing to begin with. Or to quote the wiccans, "and it harm not others, do as thou will."

And for the record, I didn't call anyone a troll, though I can understand why leo9 did. To be fair, though, domaster has not done the typical troll action (so how is it fair to call him a troll or troll like then?) of tossing a lot of BS into the arena and ducking out to watch the fur fly. He's defended his beliefs admirably. True, he's trying to convince me by using his holy book instead of reason, which is somewhat troll-like, but that doesn't make him a troll.

Troll-like? Really? And you seriously wonder why I call you out on this kind of stuff?

In any event I don't believe the topic of this thread is to discuss what aethism is or is not, nor to constantly refute what one believes about what someone's elses religion or philosophy as being false for whatever reason or insult it's adhereants intelligence.

People are going to believe what they wish anyways where as that is concerned.

"For the believer no proof is nessesary and for the unbeliever, no proof is possible anyways."

I dont believe the main message of Hinduism, Judism, Buddism, Christianity, Islam, Bahai or Wicca is one of anything other than to love one another and help each other, to live together in peace and harmony. Yes its true that in the past and even today their are people who do bad things in the name of their religion and I am all for getting people to stop doing such things, to be tollerent of one another beliefs.

Some like aethiests may feel like they don't need to have faith in an outside force to help them in that endeavor and thats perfectly fine. But they shouldn't be fundamentally insistant on that which they cannot prove eaither or going on some kind of sophist filled rampage to see all religion abolished and become exactly like the very thing they espouse to be against.

You say the aethism practiced by the Communists wasnt behind all the atrocities committed against people of all faiths, fine, I say religions/belief systems in general all apply equally where as that is conserned. Evil men, using dogma to their own ends period. You wish to punnish the weapon used as opposed to the one wielding it I see. In that case we should abolish science too since it certiantly comes up with all manner of evil things to use against each other too.


Since no one can prove themselves right on any of it, doesnt it make more sence to just let people believe what they wish and punnish what society considers by law to be actions instead of ideas?

Seriously, isnt it ok for people to think what they wish to think so long as they are not hurting others?

All I am asking is why can't we all stop nitpicking about the specifics as we move into the future?

Focus on common ground as opposed to making things worse by fostering divisions?

Or will you do as you did earlier in the thread and all the others like it, and ignore reason and logic when it doesnt support the dogma of religion bashing?

Well, will you? I would love to see you actually answer ALL of my proposals with reason and logic and not skip them over like you ussually do and only pick at things to spin them?

<< gets in a philosophical socratic pose.

Come on lets see what you really got, no more hiding behind side issues Thorne.

Eaither you want to really practice what you preach or your not interessted in logic, reason, and science so much as dogma and rehtoric that suits the purpose of attacking all religions for that sake alone.

Which is it I wonder?

[Thorne]

[QUOTE=denuseri;923817]Well, will you? I would love to see you actually answer ALL of my proposals with reason and logic and not skip them over like you ussually do and only pick at things to spin them?
I'll give it a shot, then. And in all seriousness.

"For the believer no proof is nessesary and for the unbeliever, no proof is possible anyways."

Very right, for part 1. Very wrong for part 2. I've already stated that there are proofs of gods which could change my mind. I'm still waiting to see any of them.

I dont believe the main message of Hinduism, Judism, Buddism, Christianity, Islam, Bahai or Wicca is one of anything other than to love one another and help each other, to live together in peace and harmony. Yes its true that in the past and even today their are people who do bad things in the name of their religion and I am all for getting people to stop doing such things, to be tollerent of one another beliefs.

These may be the main messages of the religion, but it is NOT necessarily what is practiced by the hierarchies of those faiths. How many Christian religion, are willing to show tolerance for Gays, for example? Or Islam, or Judaism. I'm not familiar with the others you name, which is perhaps a failing of mine, but those religions are not trying to ram their beliefs down my throat through changing the laws.

Some like aethiests may feel like they don't need to have faith in an outside force to help them in that endeavor and thats perfectly fine. But they shouldn't be fundamentally insistant on that which they cannot prove eaither or going on some kind of sophist filled rampage to see all religion abolished and become exactly like the very thing they espouse to be against.

And once more I state that, as an atheist, I am not the one making the claim that gods exist. I am simply asking for proof, and in the absence of that proof I do not see any point in believing. And, while I think the world would be better off without religion, I am not trying to destroy religion, or faith. I am simply asking theists to actually think about what they believe in, and learn how those beliefs have changed over the years. See, for example, how their supposedly inerrant Bible was cobbled together from pieces of stories, which were based on even earlier stories. I do NOT say, "Do not believe!" I simply say, "Understand what you believe." Too many do not.

You say the aethism practiced by the Communists wasnt behind all the atrocities committed against people of all faiths, fine, I say religions/belief systems in general all apply equally where as that is conserned. Evil men, using dogma to their own ends period. You wish to punnish the weapon used as opposed to the one wielding it I see. In that case we should abolish science too since it certiantly comes up with all manner of evil things to use against each other too.

There is no atheism to "practice". Atheism is simply the lack of belief in gods. ANY gods. There's no dogma, no services, no sermons. And yes, I agree that most of the evils incurred by religions are performed by evil men (and women) who twist the true message to meet their own ends. But it is the fear of the common theists which allows them to do this. When the leaders' words are law, who will gainsay them? How many Roman Catholics have risen up in righteous anger to condemn the Churches lack of response to the pedophile scandals? Damned few, as far as I can tell! And why haven't they? Because their leaders have told them, "This is Church business. Just sit down, say your prayers, and keep putting money into those collection plates." The problems in Islam (as I see them, at least) are very similar. The people don't condemn their leaders for the atrocities they espouse, thereby giving tacit approval to them.

Since no one can prove themselves right on any of it, doesnt it make more sence to just let people believe what they wish and punnish what society considers by law to be actions instead of ideas?

Absolutely! But how can you do that when the churches, the religions, control the law? Where is the justice for a rape victim in Iran? Islam controls the law, and Islam hates women even more than Catholics do. Where is the justice for the children who die of simple, easily curable diseases because their parents decided that praying was better than medicine? By all means, believe what you wish, but when your beliefs impinge upon my life you've gone too far.

Seriously, isnt it ok for people to think what they wish to think so long as they are not hurting others?

Go here to see whether they are hurting others.

All I am asking is why can't we all stop nitpicking about the specifics as we move into the future?

If they were only nits we were picking I could agree. But there are people dying because of religious beliefs. Ask the wives and families of doctors and nurses who happen to work in abortion clinics if these are nits. Ask the gays being executed in Uganda if these are only minor differences or opinion. Whether these abominations are caused directly or indirectly by religious belief is irrelevant. Religion gives them their impetus, and in many cases protects the perpetrators.

Come on lets see what you really got, no more hiding behind side issues Thorne.

Well, that's what I've got. How did I do? And nothing I've said here is any different than what I've said in the past.

People can believe whatever they want. I've never said that this should change. What does need to change, though, is people allowing those who believe in the supernatural the same consideration as those who believe in facts and evidence. If someone stands before me, either literally or figuratively in an open forum, and claims that his god is the one true god, or that everyone should believe what he believes, I'm going to call him out on it. And when those beliefs are patently false, I'll say so. The man who claims the world is flat just because some holy book tells him so is no more deserving of respect than the man who believes that a crocodile can give birth to a duck. PROVE that the world is flat and I'll respect you.

[TantricSoul]

My friends and esteemed contributors to the forums,
So here we are, once again, the current subject isn’t even closely related to the thread title or what I believe the intention of the thread was . I agree with denu that this thread might have lead to a rather interesting conversation, yet instead has become the all too familiar cyclical and unchanging battle of words between faith and facts.
I also agree with Thorne that he has a right, like us all, to contribute his opinion or challenge others on their opinions. And having been on the opposing side of debates with him in the past, I know he has a “take no prisoners” approach.
So where to from here? Because I would like to see if we can make some space in these religious threads for some viewpoints and discussions other than the atheist/theist discussion. You both are heavy contributors here and I cut you both slack because of that fact, but cmon, thread after thread is ending up on the same topic.
I’m tempted to encourage you both to have it out, once and for all, in a single thread, in the hope that you can come to a place where you can respect each-others (and other contributors) viewpoints without feeling the need to turn every thread into this same discussion. Yet I am not confident that will work either. Denus’ faith is not likely to change Thornes’ mind, just as his facts won’t change her faith, so why? Why keep doing it over and over?
So I’ll ask you both nicely, please, if you must continue to rehash this, contain it to a thread or two, and leave some space for other topics and viewpoints.
Thank you,
Tantric

[denuseri]

Thank you for your wise moderation Tantric!