Islam true religion?

[The Grand Nudger]

As am I, do you deny that Joanie loves Chachi?

[Darwinian]

I'm still waiting on a response to that link.........

Just curious, but what exactly were your motives and what are you hoping to achieve by being here?

I'm not saying that you should leave but I was just wondering.

[The Grand Nudger]

To show kafir the light.

[Minimalist]

What? It's true. 90% of Biblical scholars agree Jesus (Peace be Upon him) existed. Bart Ehrman says so as well and he is very very respected and knowledgable.

100% of biblical "scholars" make their living assuring idiots that fairy tales are true. I suppose you expect them to cut off their own income?

The sad fact is, and even Ehrman has this problem, they have no evidence to show that any of their holy horseshit....or yours, for that matter....ever happened.

So, if "jesus" came along with ver. 2 of religious bullshit and then mohammed (FHUTA) came along with ver. 3 how come you aren't willing to accept Joseph Smith with ver 4? If you can buy one phony prophet you should be able to accept another. Why aren't you on your knees 5 times a day - with your incessant droning - facing Salt Lake City and worshiping mormon shit?

You are very inconsistent Fakir....not to mention as dumb as a fucking bag of cunt hair.

[genkaus]

http://islamic-replies.ucoz.com/2/Quran_...Light.html = Science supports Quran.

As far as I understood, this was the gist of the argument
Muslim says: Mohammad (and therefore quran) correctly predicts the reflective nature of moon which he could not have known unless told by god himself because that knowledge wasn't available to humanity.

Atheist says: The knowledge was available and here is the list of previous astronomers who have said the same thing.

Muslim refutes the argument by saying
1. No evidence that this knowledge reached Mohammad and 2. Certain incorrect concepts were not included.

Consider this:

Aryabhata: 476–550 CE: Indian Astronomer:

Aryabhata was the author of the Āryabhatīya and the Aryabhatasiddhanta, which, according to Hayashi (2008): 'circulated mainly in the northwest of India and, through the Sāsānian dynasty (224–651) of Iran, had a profound influence on the development of Islamic astronomy. Its contents are preserved to some extent in the works of Varahamihira (flourished c. 550), Bhaskara I (flourished c. 629), Brahmagupta (598–c. 665), and others. It is one of the earliest astronomical works to assign the start of each day to midnight.'[4] Aryabhata explicitly mentioned that the earth rotates about its axis, thereby causing what appears to be an apparent westward motion of the stars.[4] Aryabhata also mentioned that reflected sunlight is the cause behind the shining of the moon.[4] Ayrabhata's followers were particularly strong in South India, where his principles of the diurnal rotation of the earth, among others, were followed and a number of secondary works were based on them.[1]

Here we have an astronomer who lived before Mohammad, whose findings were scientific, who had a great following, which means his works well known and the knowledge of whose work is known to extend to the area where Islam developed. To the extent that development of Islamic astronomy relied on the influence.

This evidence supports the hypothesis that the knowledge of moon's reflected light was not only possible but even probable to Mohammad.

[Minimalist]

Which assumes that there WAS a mohammed (FHUTA) and not just some fictional character invented to carry the ball for a bunch of ignorant tribesmen on the Arabian peninsula.

[genkaus]

No offence but Agnostics have better manners than Atheists. Atleast they are willing to listen to argumetns unlike some here.

That Agnostic was a smart man.

Willingness to listen to someone's bullshit does not make one smart.

So you want me type all the arguments from the link on here? I don't get that. It's easier to just read it.

Actually, we'd prefer if you made your own arguments. Not link us to someone else's and not copy-pasted from somewhere else.

[Aegrus]

WTF??? Zakir, you still haven't answered me. This si the fourth time I've asked that you address my points. I'll bring them up yet again, for your benefit.

1. You have claimed that popularity of a religion equals its validity. I replied that Christianity, which we both agree is insane, has more followers than Islam. Xtianity has 2.2 billion, you previously posted that Islam has 1.8 billion.

Here is my source: http://www.pewforum.org/Christian/Global...-exec.aspx

2. I asked how you knew that Muhammed was completely honest, as obviously he has motivation to lie for prestige. I already explained why the Koran saying he's honest is not proof. (Circular logic)

You also say that eye-witnesses count as proof, but they do not- for Xtianity has many thousands of "eye-witnesses" for many things, as do aliens. Do you believe in both the Christian god and aliens? (The kind that appear to be little green men.)

I'll leave off the third one for now, as I'm lazy, and maybe three confuses you too much to reply.

---

WTF??? Zakir, you still haven't answered me. This si the fourth time I've asked that you address my points. I'll bring them up yet again, for your benefit.

1. You have claimed that popularity of a religion equals its validity. I replied that Christianity, which we both agree is insane, has more followers than Islam. Xtianity has 2.2 billion, you previously posted that Islam has 1.8 billion.

Here is my source: http://www.pewforum.org/Christian/Global...-exec.aspx

2. I asked how you knew that Muhammed was completely honest, as obviously he has motivation to lie for prestige. I already explained why the Koran saying he's honest is not proof. (Circular logic)

You also say that eye-witnesses count as proof, but they do not- for Xtianity has many thousands of "eye-witnesses" for many things, as do aliens. Do you believe in both the Christian god and aliens? (The kind that appear to be little green men.)

I'll leave off the third one for now, as I'm lazy, and maybe three confuses you too much to reply.

I'm not dropping this issue- I've had too many valid points ignored by fundies in the past. I will push this and push this until it is clear to everyone that you have no answer., because you are wrong.

[reverendjeremiah]

I'm still waiting on a response to that link.........

Please hold your breath while I read up on that link

---

WTF??? Zakir, you still haven't answered me. This si the fourth time I've asked that you address my points. I'll bring them up yet again, for your benefit.

You have been asked a question Zakir... please answer them.

Zakir, Rayaan has tried to warn you...now I am going to politely warn you: http://atheistforums.org/rules.php

#4 - No Preaching
To advocate, especially to urge acceptance of or compliance with your own theology, philosophy or point of view is not permitted. If you want to preach, get yourself a soapbox in hyde park and don't do it here. You are welcome to discuss your own beliefs, why you believe them, etc. Just don't expect or demand anyone to agree with them.

Play nice zakir...stop the preaching and either get with the community or go back to your mosque. This is OUR territory you walked onto Zakir, not yours.

[Doubting Thomas]

Yeah, copy & paste is usually the debate style of Christian YEC's.