RE: Islam true religion?
February 1, 2012 at 11:43 am
(This post was last modified: February 1, 2012 at 12:35 pm by Mister Agenda.)
Zakir, one way in which the Christians have misled you is in the notion that links are a form of argumentation. They don't know any better, they think appeal to authority is an argument, but it's usually a fallacy. A good argument can stand on its own merits and doesn't require that theperson making it have credentials.
Here are the arguments we have heard from you so far:
The Quran is well-written, therefore it is true. This isn't an argument, it is a non-sequitur. It could be badly-written and true or perfectly-written and false.
Scientists are converting to Islam. Appeal to authority, and anyway there's no clear trend of scientists converting to Islam. Some do, sure. Some convert to Christianity or become atheists or Buddhists or whatever, too. You haven't provided any evidence of a significant trend. If there were a significant trend, it would not establish that it is for scientific reasons or emotional ones.
A very tiny percentage of scientists who happen to be Muslim think they have evidence that the moon was once split in two, while pretty much all other scientists in the word find the notion ludicrous. You support it with a story about a king, that we have no way of knowing wasn't made-up. In all the world, no one else noted the moon being split in two.
Mohammed was a trustworthy fellow, so what he said is true. How do you know he was a trustworthy fellow? Because the Qu'ran and Hadiths say so. Who were the Hadiths written by? Muslims, who must presuppose their prophet is trustworthy. Who was the Qu'ran written by? Who knows? Pieces of it were floating all over the region until it was finally compiled into one book. Maybe it was dictated by Mohammed, maybe a portion of it was and others are interpolations. When a trustworthy fellow says he split the moon in two, I don't believe him. When he makes such an incredible claim without strong evidence to back it up, at that point it is clear that I was mistaken about him being trustworthy. He is clearly lying or delusional. Hell, if I thought the moon split in two and others didn't agree with me and natural disasters weren't happening left and right, I'd conclude that I am delusional. The fact that Mohammed can say he split the moon and rode around on a flying donkey and you still think he's trustworthy says more about you than about Mohammed.
Now here is a pro tip: instead of replying with a bunch of links, make your own argument to refute my rebuttal to your claims. Speak for yourself.
Here are the arguments we have heard from you so far:
The Quran is well-written, therefore it is true. This isn't an argument, it is a non-sequitur. It could be badly-written and true or perfectly-written and false.
Scientists are converting to Islam. Appeal to authority, and anyway there's no clear trend of scientists converting to Islam. Some do, sure. Some convert to Christianity or become atheists or Buddhists or whatever, too. You haven't provided any evidence of a significant trend. If there were a significant trend, it would not establish that it is for scientific reasons or emotional ones.
A very tiny percentage of scientists who happen to be Muslim think they have evidence that the moon was once split in two, while pretty much all other scientists in the word find the notion ludicrous. You support it with a story about a king, that we have no way of knowing wasn't made-up. In all the world, no one else noted the moon being split in two.
Mohammed was a trustworthy fellow, so what he said is true. How do you know he was a trustworthy fellow? Because the Qu'ran and Hadiths say so. Who were the Hadiths written by? Muslims, who must presuppose their prophet is trustworthy. Who was the Qu'ran written by? Who knows? Pieces of it were floating all over the region until it was finally compiled into one book. Maybe it was dictated by Mohammed, maybe a portion of it was and others are interpolations. When a trustworthy fellow says he split the moon in two, I don't believe him. When he makes such an incredible claim without strong evidence to back it up, at that point it is clear that I was mistaken about him being trustworthy. He is clearly lying or delusional. Hell, if I thought the moon split in two and others didn't agree with me and natural disasters weren't happening left and right, I'd conclude that I am delusional. The fact that Mohammed can say he split the moon and rode around on a flying donkey and you still think he's trustworthy says more about you than about Mohammed.
Now here is a pro tip: instead of replying with a bunch of links, make your own argument to refute my rebuttal to your claims. Speak for yourself.