I believe in God: So Debate me

[Rabb Allah]

Except that there is no debate. He claims he seen something we don't and there is no way to verify it. People who take drugs can say the same thing.

That is the issue. This is why I am entirely against proselitization.

As it is necessary to affix right ideas to words, I will, before I
proceed further into the subject, offer some other observations on the
word revelation. Revelation, when applied to religion, means
something communicated immediately from God to man.

No one will deny or dispute the power of the Almighty to make such
a communication, if he pleases. But admitting, for the sake of a case,
that something has been revealed to a certain person, and not
revealed to any other person, it is revelation to that person only. When
he tells it to a second person, a second to a third, a third to a fourth,
and so on, it ceases to be a revelation to all those persons. It is
revelation to the first person only, and hearsay to every other, and
consequently they are not obliged to believe it.

It is a contradiction in terms and ideas, to call anything a
revelation that comes to us at second-hand, either verbally or in
writing. Revelation is necessarily limited to the first
communication- after this, it is only an account of something which
that person says was a revelation made to him; and though he may
find himself obliged to believe it, it cannot be incumbent on me to
believe it in the same manner; for it was not a revelation made to me,
and I have only his word for it that it was made to him.

This sums up things rather nicely since I reject the idea that the existence of god should even be debate and merely be studied and researched. It is entirely subjective and not worth debating. I was the one that warned you that this would not be a satisfying debate

---

I'll settle the debate. There is no personal god, one that actually gives a shit about individuals or their plight in life. That's obvious.

Okay, so that issue is resolved, now let's move on.

I agree, the conception of a person god is ludicrous which is something I have stated before. I doubt we can move on though since you are blowing wind as of now. Nobody is debating the existence of a personal god

---

I just tend to side with the underdog who's getting gang raped. If I were anticatholics I'd favor the Catholic who's outnumbered and treated like shit, if the Jew is getting gang raped I favor the Jew, if it is the atheist standing up against a crowd of theists I favor the atheist, or the heretic being burned for heresy, or the Christians in Communist Russia going off to the gulags, or the Christians in pagan Rome getting fed to lions and raped by donkeys, Or an educated evolutionist presenting their case to a Christian forum...

You get the point. I favor the underdog even if I disagree with them. I admire those who dare to be their own person and not compromise to be accepted.

In this case I admire Mr. Barak Hussein Muhammad Osama Obdulla shayikaya Abdulrab! Praise Allah!

You are such a genuinely good person. It astonishes me sometimes because usually I favor atheist in theistic forums. I only came here to see if I could make a switch for once and actually battle an atheist with pure intellect although it is not successful which I knew from the state it wouldn't be because I do not handle atheistic assertions.

I am actually very pro Jew for this very reason since they are such an oppressed people. Borderline Zionist you may say .

Preach it brother

[Brakeman]

..

So "Shaykh," have you ever actually communicated with god?

If so, can you describe the form and substance of his reply?

[Senshi]

Except that there is no debate. He claims he seen something we don't and there is no way to verify it. People who take drugs can say the same thing.

That is the issue. This is why I am entirely against proselitization.

As it is necessary to affix right ideas to words, I will, before I
proceed further into the subject, offer some other observations on the
word revelation. Revelation, when applied to religion, means
something communicated immediately from God to man.

No one will deny or dispute the power of the Almighty to make such
a communication, if he pleases. But admitting, for the sake of a case,
that something has been revealed to a certain person, and not
revealed to any other person, it is revelation to that person only. When
he tells it to a second person, a second to a third, a third to a fourth,
and so on, it ceases to be a revelation to all those persons. It is
revelation to the first person only, and hearsay to every other, and
consequently they are not obliged to believe it.

It is a contradiction in terms and ideas, to call anything a
revelation that comes to us at second-hand, either verbally or in
writing. Revelation is necessarily limited to the first
communication- after this, it is only an account of something which
that person says was a revelation made to him; and though he may
find himself obliged to believe it, it cannot be incumbent on me to
believe it in the same manner; for it was not a revelation made to me,
and I have only his word for it that it was made to him.

This sums up things rather nicely since I reject the idea that the existence of god should even be debate and merely be studied and researched. It is entirely subjective and not worth debating. I was the one that warned you that this would not be a satisfying debate

---

I'll settle the debate. There is no personal god, one that actually gives a shit about individuals or their plight in life. That's obvious.

Okay, so that issue is resolved, now let's move on.

I agree, the conception of a person god is ludicrous which is something I have stated before. I doubt we can move on though since you are blowing wind as of now. Nobody is debating the existence of a personal god

---

I just tend to side with the underdog who's getting gang raped. If I were anticatholics I'd favor the Catholic who's outnumbered and treated like shit, if the Jew is getting gang raped I favor the Jew, if it is the atheist standing up against a crowd of theists I favor the atheist, or the heretic being burned for heresy, or the Christians in Communist Russia going off to the gulags, or the Christians in pagan Rome getting fed to lions and raped by donkeys, Or an educated evolutionist presenting their case to a Christian forum...

You get the point. I favor the underdog even if I disagree with them. I admire those who dare to be their own person and not compromise to be accepted.

In this case I admire Mr. Barak Hussein Muhammad Osama Obdulla shayikaya Abdulrab! Praise Allah!

You are such a genuinely good person. It astonishes me sometimes because usually I favor atheist in theistic forums. I only came here to see if I could make a switch for once and actually battle an atheist with pure intellect although it is not successful which I knew from the state it wouldn't be because I do not handle atheistic assertions.

I am actually very pro Jew for this very reason since they are such an oppressed people. Borderline Zionist you may say .

Preach it brother

I like to debate it with Muslims. The internet offers a debate platform that is safe from the risk of decapitation. However the topic should be debated again and again until dangerous religious practices are diminished.

[Rabb Allah]

I don't know if this has already been asked, but in your profile under religious views, it says "The Slave who worships his Master is Master of the Free".

What does that mean?

Well Mr. Silverman it is actually a misquote of a misquote of a loose quote that finds itself in Dharmic and Sufi traditions. Dharmic religions despise individuality and so do I but not in the normative sense. Individuality is relevant to the self the same way that emotions are relative tot he self, they are not external issues but subjective experiences.
Dharmic and Sufi traditions condense the loss of self to enslavement called "dasa" in Dharmic traditions and "abd" in Sufi/Nabataean traditions. The assertion is that enslavement to god and the loss of will power is the highest form of life because if the loss of self occurs in relation to god(the most powerful mind conceivable) you become the most power mind conceivable. If you assert that God is Panentheistic like 99% of all mystics do then you asset that all possible actions are not free since all actions are the product of 1 mind(God) so if your actions are not free then you must seek freedom which is usually define as self absorption into God.

If God is omniscient then you of course know that any action you do is foretold by God. God knows past and future so there is no true freedom considering that God is essentially "Big Brother" on a divine level. So having the thought of freedom is considered a delusion since by default you are a slave. Not because god wants slaves but because you cannot be anything else int he face of a mind which is the product of ALL possible, known or conceivable outcomes. So acknowledging enslavement is freedom in the same sense that finding out whether your girlfriend has AIDS is freedom of relief(weird analogy I know)

---

..

So "Shaykh," have you ever actually communicated with god?

If so, can you describe the form and substance of his reply?

God does not speak, I have found no reason to think so.

---

I like to debate it with Muslims. The internet offers a debate platform that is safe from the risk of decapitation. However the topic should be debated again and again until dangerous religious practices are diminished.

In general Muslims are cowards and the fear of decapitation only comes from foreign threats. It is rather simple to dump Muslims on idiotic claims due to the fact they have very moronic beliefs that are based upon the most fucked up version of legalese. They are ignorant of their own religion and just like Christians love twisting something already twisted into something that conforms to their wants and needs

[Brakeman]

So "Shaykh," have you ever actually communicated with god?

If so, can you describe the form and substance of his reply?

God does not speak, I have found no reason to think so.

So I take it that you do not accept any claims from people living or dead that claim to have conversed with god and have preached god's directives from their supposed conversation?

[Rabb Allah]

God does not speak, I have found no reason to think so.

So I take it that you do not accept any claims from people living or dead that claim to have conversed with god and have preached god's directives from their supposed conversation?

I find it not only absurd but ludicrous

[Jiggerj]

As the title says so whip out your guns and start the atheist vs theist fuck fest. Ask questions about my beliefs or anything you wanna know.

It is human nature to be discontent. So, this god of yours sent you here to learn how to be a better human. To test you. To throw obstacles and challenges in your way.

If you pass, you get to go to heaven. But, again, it is in our nature to be discontent. So, in order to be welcomed into heaven this god must strip you of all the things that make you human.

So, what's the point of learning how to be a good human if it's only going to be stripped away from you?

[Brakeman]

So I take it that you do not accept any claims from people living or dead that claim to have conversed with god and have preached god's directives from their supposed conversation?

I find it not only absurd but ludicrous

OK now I'm a bit confused.. I thought you to be a muslim.

[Rabb Allah]

I find it not only absurd but ludicrous

OK now I'm a bit confused.. I thought you to be a muslim.

I have specifically stated multiple times that I am not a Muslim and if anything anti-Muslim. My user title "عدو من محمد" says enemy of Muhammad.

---

It is human nature to be discontent. So, this god of yours sent you here to learn how to be a better human. To test you. To throw obstacles and challenges in your way.

Hahaha. Are you stupid? You are acting as if God is a person of some sort and that humans are the most important beings int he universe. We live on a cosmic speck of dust for crying out loud.

If you pass, you get to go to heaven. But, again, it is in our nature to be discontent. So, in order to be welcomed into heaven this god must strip you of all the things that make you human.

Why are you so fixated on heaven? Heaven sounds overrated and absurd

So, what's the point of learning how to be a good human if it's only going to be stripped away from you?

What is human? Last I recall we were one of the many animals on this semi-spherical floating orb which is a couple million years away from a solar catastrophe

[Brian37]

..

So "Shaykh," have you ever actually communicated with god?

If so, can you describe the form and substance of his reply?

Debating believers of all religions is like working at the DMV, all of them think they can drive, and they all think their different cars make them special, but you still end up telling them all to get in line and take a number. When you finally inspect their claims that they deserve a license you realize they have never studied the drivers manual(how logic works), and every time you give them the eye exam they always see letters that spell out their pet god claim. Then they all get pissed when you give them a failing grade.