Posts: 3628
Threads: 20
Joined: July 20, 2011
Reputation:
47
RE: The Argument for Islam is very Simple:
March 21, 2017 at 8:22 pm
(March 21, 2017 at 8:12 pm)AtlasS33 Wrote: Quote:I don't understand you guys. I don't.
Me too.
What's so hard to understand that we are not convinced that your, or any god, exists?
Why is it our fault that your god remains so hidden, as to look as if does not exist?
You'd believe if you just opened your heart" is a terrible argument for religion. It's basically saying, "If you bias yourself enough, you can convince yourself that this is true." If religion were true, people wouldn't need faith to believe it -- it would be supported by good evidence.
Posts: 7677
Threads: 635
Joined: January 19, 2013
Reputation:
30
RE: The Argument for Islam is very Simple:
March 21, 2017 at 8:44 pm
(March 21, 2017 at 8:22 pm)Simon Moon Wrote: (March 21, 2017 at 8:12 pm)AtlasS33 Wrote: Me too.
What's so hard to understand that we are not convinced that your, or any god, exists?
Why is it our fault that your god remains so hidden, as to look as if does not exist?
The universe has so many signs.
"Argument from Design" is what philosophy fans call it. Every civilization believed that this system can never be without a controller.
Designer; maker.
I wouldn't say "Apple" is invisible. I was just too lazy to read the brand.
Posts: 3628
Threads: 20
Joined: July 20, 2011
Reputation:
47
RE: The Argument for Islam is very Simple:
March 21, 2017 at 9:01 pm
(This post was last modified: March 21, 2017 at 9:05 pm by Simon Moon.)
(March 21, 2017 at 8:44 pm)AtlasS33 Wrote: (March 21, 2017 at 8:22 pm)Simon Moon Wrote: What's so hard to understand that we are not convinced that your, or any god, exists?
Why is it our fault that your god remains so hidden, as to look as if does not exist?
The universe has so many signs.
"Argument from Design" is what philosophy fans call it. Every civilization believed that this system can never be without a controller.
Designer; maker.
I wouldn't say "Apple" is invisible. I was just too lazy to read the brand.
Problem is, the 'argument from design' (actually, philosophy fans call it the teleological argument) fails on philosophical and evidential levels.
Quote:Every civilization believed that this system can never be without a controller.
This is a logical fallacy known as "argumentum ad antiquitatem".
The fact that every civilization believed that the universe needs a creator/operator, provides zero evidence that, it is in fact, true. Every civilization once believed the earth was flat. How did that work out?
You'd believe if you just opened your heart" is a terrible argument for religion. It's basically saying, "If you bias yourself enough, you can convince yourself that this is true." If religion were true, people wouldn't need faith to believe it -- it would be supported by good evidence.
Posts: 20476
Threads: 447
Joined: June 16, 2014
Reputation:
111
RE: The Argument for Islam is very Simple:
March 21, 2017 at 9:05 pm
(This post was last modified: March 21, 2017 at 9:06 pm by ignoramus.)
MK, tell us something real! What did you have for dinner last night?
Do you hold hands with the folks, close your eyes and pray before eating?
I did! You haven't tasted my wife's cooking! Lol!
No God, No fear.
Know God, Know fear.
Posts: 7677
Threads: 635
Joined: January 19, 2013
Reputation:
30
RE: The Argument for Islam is very Simple:
March 21, 2017 at 9:59 pm
(March 21, 2017 at 9:01 pm)Simon Moon Wrote: This is a logical fallacy known as "argumentum ad antiquitatem".
The fact that every civilization believed that the universe needs a creator/operator, provides zero evidence that, it is in fact, true. Every civilization once believed the earth was flat. How did that work out?
"There is no smoke without fire" can be edited to be
"There is no smoke without chemical reaction".
The point comes as different between words and fact.
Truth don't lie. Unlike the smoke/fire phrase, that can be rephrased depending on the quantity of knowledge we poses, truth is the ultimate form of... let's say condition? a condition can only be judged as true or false.
"There is no smoke without fire; false".
"There is no smoke without smoke; true".
"There is no planetary orbit without a system; true".
"There is no system without a creator; false".
If somebody believes that systems can exist without a creator, then that's a person who answered number 4 with a True.
What's the evidence on an answer with True?
Posts: 21824
Threads: 24
Joined: February 2, 2010
Reputation:
106
RE: The Argument for Islam is very Simple:
March 21, 2017 at 10:17 pm
That ain't simple -- that's a Wall o' Bullshit.
Here's a clue: if it's got more than twenty words or two paragraphs, it's not simple.
Rewrite (remember, 2nd draft = 1st draft minus at least 10%!) and resubmit.
Posts: 3541
Threads: 0
Joined: January 20, 2015
Reputation:
35
RE: The Argument for Islam is very Simple:
March 21, 2017 at 10:30 pm
(March 21, 2017 at 7:40 pm)MysticKnight Wrote: [...]
I don't understand you guys. I don't.
You don't understand, because you live in your own world of fantasy, where your incoherent, nonsensical statements and mealy-mouthed platitudes somehow constitute "arguments". We don't live in your head, we don't feel what you feel about the products of your imagination. And we haven't been brainwashed since childhood into blindly accepting mystical bullsh*t of your ancestors.
Everything you say sounds like an autistic stream of conscience, not unlike the passionate ramblings of people, who are high on drugs. The difference is - drugs wear off, at which point the users regain the clarity of mind. You're probably f*cked in the head for good...
"The fact that a believer is happier than a skeptic is no more to the point than the fact that a drunken man is happier than a sober one." - George Bernard Shaw
Posts: 23918
Threads: 300
Joined: June 25, 2011
Reputation:
151
RE: The Argument for Islam is very Simple:
March 21, 2017 at 10:36 pm
Let me guess, the simplest argument has got to be:
Believe in Allah = 40 virgins in paradise
-or maybe:
Want to keep that head attached to your head? Yes = live, No = bye bye.
Posts: 3133
Threads: 8
Joined: October 7, 2016
Reputation:
40
RE: The Argument for Islam is very Simple:
March 21, 2017 at 11:08 pm
(March 21, 2017 at 7:37 am)MysticKnight Wrote: 1. You can rely on the sufficient for guidance (God), or you can rely on people claiming that they should or can be followed.
Rejected. No evidence for your god, and I think it's dangerous to accept unsupported claims.
Quote:2. The problem with relying on other then God is that you cannot know who is guided unless God manifests them with clear proof, and hence, cannot know who should be followed.
Rejected. No evidence for your god; therefore, no one is actually "guided."
Quote:3. The leaders he wants us to follow and who makes representatives of his religion are his chosen ones.
Rejected. No evidence for your god; therefore, there are no chosen ones at all.
Quote:4. God gives clear guidance with respect to the affair of his chosen ones.
Rejected. As in point #3, no evidence for your god and no chosen ones.
Quote:5. The ones he associates together in a mission, also happen to be the closest one's to each other, and they are "family" in ways normal blood relatives or wives related to them are not.
Rejected. I choose my own family.
Quote:6. Holy Ladies like Sarah and Mariam although don't take on the position were they should be taken as ruler by all humanity, are examples and signs of God and are part of the holy family that God has chosen for guidance. They are to emphasize that the path is meant for both men and women equally, although, the man and woman are not alike though people want them to be very similar in this century.
Rejected. I see no point whatsoever in accepting rulership by mythological or long-dead women from an alien culture, and no one chooses a path for me.
Quote:7. God has sacred numbers for the spiritual way the universe operates...
Absolutely ridiculous. No number is "sacred"; that's just a tired old superstition. Rejected.
Quote:8. God is consistent with his sacred numbers and has wisdom in them.
Rejected. Numbers are just numbers.
Quote:9. God is very clean in providing proof consistently and demonstrates by his way of the past, to the present and future.
Rejected. I have never in all of my nearly 60 years seen even one piece of evidence for gods, let alone "proof."
Quote:10. The number of Salahs, the number of Rukus, and Sujoods, in both day and night, and in each Salah, and combined, all have sacred value in Quran...
Rejected. Put down the numerology book and back away slowly.
Quote:11. We can listen to all sorts of people babble about the Quran but at the end, it's the family of the reminder who God wants us to seek knowledge from and directed humanity to ask when we do not know as all those sent before Mohammad were men who he revealed revelation to, and made the means towards him, and who were explainer of the revelation revealed to their hearts.
Rejected. Meaningless word salad and blind assertion.
Quote:12. As God leaves a legacy of knowledge through the family of the reminder, we are to seek light from their words, and not rely on others to explain to us the Quran, though we may council one another about the ahadiths and Quran, we need to come thirsty to the family of the reminder like we come thirsty to Quran. Together, they will connect us to God and Salah cannot be established without this realization.
Rejected. Just cultish unsupported assertions (and still no evidence for your god).
Quote:13. Innovations are not to be followed but rather all practices relating to the sacred have to have proof from either a legacy of news from God or by knowledge. There has to be traces of knowledge to rely on, and not conjecture.
Rejected. A belief that is not allowed to adapt to reality is already dead in the water. Tradition is not the virtue you seem to think it is.
Quote:14. God is the True King and Master in all this, and sufficient is God as a Guide.
Rejected. You have no way of demonstrating this: Even if you somehow manage to prove that your god actually exists, how are you going to prove that it's the only god, the highest god, or the most powerful god? There could be quite a few gods above it, unknown to you because they didn't think it was important to dictate scriptures to mortals on planet Earth.
Congratulations, MK. You scored 0/14.
Posts: 8214
Threads: 394
Joined: November 2, 2011
Reputation:
44
RE: The Argument for Islam is very Simple:
March 22, 2017 at 12:30 am
(This post was last modified: March 22, 2017 at 12:33 am by Mystic.)
There are plenty of threads discussing proofs of God.
This about proof of Islam.
(March 21, 2017 at 10:17 pm)Thumpalumpacus Wrote: That ain't simple -- that's a Wall o' Bullshit.
Here's a clue: if it's got more than twenty words or two paragraphs, it's not simple.
Rewrite (remember, 2nd draft = 1st draft minus at least 10%!) and resubmit.
I wrote in a way, you can stop early and religion is already proven. For example, you can go 1-3, and that would be enough to prove Islam.
|
