Is atheism self-contradictory ?

[downbeatplumb]

I talked to many atheists before joining this forum and I know exactly what you think of him, but here's the thing : you cannot condemn anything he did or anyone's wrongdoings since nothing is "immoral" outside belief systems. Even assuming that the Prophet commited immoral actions nothing says to me that they ARE indeed immoral. Homosexuality for example is gravely immoral in Islam, and was considered as such in the Western civilisations until modern times, so whose perspective should you adopt and why ?

Completely wrong.  As far as I can see Big Mo is no more real than jesus, or moses.  Just another mouthpiece for some god.  Thus, I do not condemn your boy for raping 9 year olds or slaughtering unbelievers because these things did not happen.  They were created as apparently examples of good behavior by the morons who invented Big Mo in the first place.  Now, stop being a fool and go try some bacon.  It will improve your life and then wash it down with a beer.  Muslims have to be the most, dour, unhappy, uptight people in the world!

You know what the actions of muslims could just be down to bacon deficiency.

Ok all together sing.

All we are saying.
Is give pigs a chance.

[Aoi Magi]

@OP
Atheism is simply a lack of belief in god, how one arrives to that point is irrelevant, and thus it cannot be self-contradictory.

A perfect being by definition would be capable of perfect creation, and a perfect creation should be capable of perfect functioning without guidance.

Regarding your claim to the quaran being a perfect book, I can claim that the call of cthulhu is a much better book, because here perfection is subjective and without definition.

Regarding muhammad, pedophilia aside, he was a warlord and having people follow you under the threat of death doesn't require divine wisdom.

[Parsim0ny]

Why do you conclude that there is no perfect being ?

You just told us that a perfect being couldn't leave his creation without guidance.  That's how.

I suggest you take a moment to think about what I'm saying and resist the urge to reply quickly with anything. I said that a perfect being can't leave his creation without guidance, because absolute fairness is one of his attributes. It follows that there HAS to be some kind of a connection between Him and his creatures. I don't see how this means that He doesn't exist.

Who cares, we're not talking about math teachers or geometry books...it was your comment, your argument - that a perfect being could not leave it's creation without guidance.  Be satisfied that it's accurate or rephrase it.

Then it is clear that you didn't understand my argument, so I'll repeat it again : an absolutely fair God must guide his creatures towards Him, this does NOT imply that he should prove himself to everyone of them independently, because only under that assumption we can say God doesn't exist because it didn't happen. But since you don't care about any of this, I won't waste anymore time repeating it to you either. 

I'm not sure what you think that means.......like, write a better book?  The Curious George series qualifies.  Maybe the Good Doctor Suess?  Hell, Where's Waldo counts and it only has two words.

Except no believer rejected the Qur'an or was convinced of his imitability because The Curious George series or Where's Waldo were more accurate.

Yeah, alot of people think that their uncles are going to hell.  I'm not sure what you think this proves..or even what it;s in response to?

You're right, a rational person wouldn't risk himself  to be exposed by inventing such verses (or at least wouldn;t risk his uncle, I guess?).  I guess that means that whomever ghostwrote for "Mohamed" wasn't a rational person.  Thanks for clearing that up, I'd been wondering.

Again, you didn't understand the argument, you're just replying. Saying that Muhammad wasn't rational is absolute nonsense, the man successfully convinced thousands of his contemporaries - and 1.6 billion people currently - that he was the Messenger of God, united the whole Arabian Peninsula under one flag, then defeated the Great Powers of his time : the Roman and Sasanian Empires. What do you need more from him to prove to you that he was rational ? Yes, Muhammad was a very rational person, and you don't need to be a Muslim to acknowledge that.
Now imagine this same rational person saying to someone that he's going to Hell because he rejects the message of Islam for non-rational reasons WHILE THIS PERSON IS STILL ALIVE. ALL he had to do is to claim that he's a muslim, all muslims will therefore know that Muhammad was mistaken in predicting that Abu Lahab will never become a Muslim, therfore Muhammad is lying to them. Is that rational to you ?

Well, the trinity is their problem, not ours. We simply believe that they were initially right. The verses you quoted simply stated some of the polytheists claims : that Muhammad was simply repeating tales of the ancients in his book. The verses didn't acknowledge that at all.

So........I got the context exactly right, then, is what you're saying?  Yeah, I know.  You knew that too......so?

In any case, it's good to see you eliminated the problem of the trinity.  One down....the entirety of your religion to go.

No, you got it all wrong. You claimed that the Qur'an recorded that Muhammad quoted specifically from Christian books. It turned out that this wasn't the exact meaning of the verses. 


And good luck with bringing the entirety of my religion down, I'll be glad.

Actually, it responds by stating that his words are in arabic.  The bar was obviously low at the time.  It then goes on to waffle, like all religions waffle, about how you won't see until you believe, and if you believed you would see.

No, buddy. After the verse 5. 25. here's how the Qur'an responds : 6. Say, “It was revealed by He who knows the Secret in the heavens and the earth. He is always Forgiving and Merciful.”.

---

Completely wrong.  As far as I can see Big Mo is no more real than jesus, or moses.  Just another mouthpiece for some god.  Thus, I do not condemn your boy for raping 9 year olds or slaughtering unbelievers because these things did not happen.  They were created as apparently examples of good behavior by the morons who invented Big Mo in the first place.  Now, stop being a fool and go try some bacon.  It will improve your life and then wash it down with a beer.  Muslims have to be the most, dour, unhappy, uptight people in the world!

Completely wrong. 

[The Grand Nudger]

I suggest you take a moment to think about what I'm saying and resist the urge to reply quickly with anything. I said that a perfect being can't leave his creation without guidance, because absolute fairness is one of his attributes. It follows that there HAS to be some kind of a connection between Him and his creatures. I don't see how this means that He doesn't exist.

Sorry, just not a slow witted person.  If a perfect being can't leave his creation without guidance, then there is no perfect being.  This, assuming, ofc, we're the creation of some being.  The notion that there just has to be some kind of a connection doesn't follow from that statement.  It;s a complete non-sequitur...and, conveniently, an article of your faith.

Then it is clear that you didn't understand my argument, so I'll repeat it again : an absolutely fair God must guide his creatures towards Him, this does NOT imply that he should prove himself to everyone of them independently, because only under that assumption we can say God doesn't exist because it didn't happen. But since you don't care about any of this, I won't waste anymore time repeating it to you either. 

Interesting sideline, but nothing to do with any of my comments.  

Except no believer rejected the Qur'an or was convinced of his imitability because The Curious George series or Where's Waldo were more accurate.

Do you expect a muslim to stop being a muslim for reading about a monkey?  I mean, what are you really saying here, other than that muslims are thick headed, honestly?

Again, you didn't understand the argument, you're just replying. Saying that Muhammad wasn't rational is absolute nonsense,

You're the one that said it, you just didn't want to follow through..just like the bit above.  Instead, you launched off into a non-sequitur....jjust like you did above.

If no rational person would do x, and a person does x...then that person is not rational.

the man successfully convinced thousands of his contemporaries -

Just like every disgraced televangelist.... ?

 and 1.6 billion people currently

"He" didn't do that, you're really not giving credit where credit is due.....and really, does it matter how many likes and subs he got?  This is an argument ad popolum.  An appeal to the masses.  Just because alot of people believe something..doesn't mean that it's true.  How many people believe in the trinity..in your estimation?  How does this establish rationality?

- that he was the Messenger of God,

Well, -a- messenger of god.  It;s good that there were others or he;d have been super short on material, amiright or amiright?

united the whole Arabian Peninsula under one flag, then defeated the Great Powers of his time : the Roman and Sasanian Empires.

You mean to say, here, that he was a warlord....and that this somehow establishes his credentials as gods pr secretary?  Speaking of the romans...they conquered the world...did that mean that they were the pagan gods pr secretaries?  Does this establish the veracity of -their- god beliefs...in your estiomation? How is any of this, for that matter, even supposed to show that he was rational?

What do you need more from him to prove to you that he was rational ?

-Anything to show that he was rational...and definitely not some argument from one of his believers that no rational person would do what he did.  Seems counter-productive.

Yes, Muhammad was a very rational person, and you don't need to be a Muslim to acknowledge that.

Okay?

Now imagine this same rational person saying to someone that he's going to Hell because he rejects the message of Islam for non-rational reasons WHILE THIS PERSON IS STILL ALIVE. ALL he had to do is to claim that he's a muslim, all muslims will therefore know that Muhammad was mistaken in predicting that Abu Lahab will never become a Muslim, therfore Muhammad is lying to them. Is that rational to you ?

You religious nitwits constantly bicker about how the other is going to go to hell and it -never- seems to hurt any of your credibility with your respective flocks.  No, Pars...nothing about literally anything you've said to me is rational.  That's the problem.

No, you got it all wrong. You claimed that the Qur'an recorded that Muhammad quoted specifically from Christian books. It turned out that this wasn't the exact meaning of the verses. 

Okay cupcake.  If you say so.  

And good luck with bringing the entirety of my religion down, I'll be glad.

I think that muslims are handling that nicely, they hardly need my help - as evidenced by your comments in thread.

No, buddy. After the verse 5. 25. here's how the Qur'an responds : 6. Say, “It was revealed by He who knows the Secret in the heavens and the earth. He is always Forgiving and Merciful.”.

Should I quote the verse again...so you can deny, again, that it says exactly what it does..again...like a very devout muslim?

[Cyberman]

Completely wrong.  As far as I can see Big Mo is no more real than jesus, or moses.  Just another mouthpiece for some god.  Thus, I do not condemn your boy for raping 9 year olds or slaughtering unbelievers because these things did not happen.  They were created as apparently examples of good behavior by the morons who invented Big Mo in the first place.  Now, stop being a fool and go try some bacon.  It will improve your life and then wash it down with a beer.  Muslims have to be the most, dour, unhappy, uptight people in the world!

Completely wrong. 

Nope; completely correct.

[Ben Davis]

TL;DR I don't understand epistemology and blame teh athiests.

Parsimony, it behoves the student to study at least some of the subject before asking questions.

[Parsim0ny]

Sorry, just not a slow witted person.  If a perfect being can't leave his creation without guidance, then there is no perfect being.  This, assuming, ofc, we're the creation of some being.  The notion that there just has to be some kind of a connection doesn't follow from that statement.  It;s a complete non-sequitur.  

Okay, I'll ask you for one last time, PLEASE prove to me the conclusion in bold. You're now simply repeating what you said earlier.

Do you expect a muslim to stop being a muslim for reading about a monkey?  I mean, what are you really saying here, other than that muslims are thick headed, honestly?

Now you're starting to understand the argument. Since a random story about a monkey isn't qualified to to bring down Qur'an as the best literary achievement in Arabic, you need to make a better one. So good luck with that.

Again, you didn't understand the argument, you're just replying. Saying that Muhammad wasn't rational is absolute nonsense,

You're the one that said it, you just didn't want to follow through..just like the bit above.  Instead, you launched off into a non-sequitur....jjust like you did above.

If no rational person would do x, and a person does x...then that person is not rational.

the man successfully convinced thousands of his contemporaries -

Just like every disgraced televangelist.... ?

 and 1.6 billion people currently

"He" didn't do that, you're really not giving credit where credit is due.....and really, does it matter how many likes and subs he got?  This is an argument ad popolum.  An appeal to the masses.  Just because alot of people believe something..doesn't mean that it's true.  How many people believe in the trinity..in your estimation?  

- that he was the Messenger of God,

Well, -a- messenger of god.  It;s good that there were others or he;d have been super short on material, amiright or amiright?

I'm not trying to prove to you that Muhammad is right, or that he is truly a messenger of God. I'm simply stating some of his achievements, regardless of the morality of his actions. 


You said "If no rational person would do x, and a person does x...then that person is not rational." This is true as far as you ASSUME that Muhammad wrote the Qur'an, you're simply begging the question.

You mean to say, here, that he was a warlord....and that this somehow establishes his credentials as gods pr secretary?  Speaking of the romans...they conquered the world...did that mean that they were the pagan gods pr secretaries?  Does this establish the veracity of -their- god beliefs...in your estiomation?

What do you need more from him to prove to you that he was rational ?

-Anything to show that he was rational...and definitely not some argument from one of his believers that no rational person would do what he did.  Seems counter-productive.

You are disregarding the argument and stating your personal perspective about him. I still didn't even claim that he was right or that he's a perfect person. I said his known achievements in history are sufficient to prove that he was rational.

[The Grand Nudger]

You are disregarding the argument and stating your personal perspective about him. I still didn't even claim that he was right or that he's a perfect person. I said his known achievements in history are sufficient to prove that he was irrational.

Fruedian slip?  

How could fallacious arguments possibly prove anything...rationality, accuracy, perfection..what have you, Pars?

(hint, they can't...that's why they're called fallacious arguments)

[Parsim0ny]

You are disregarding the argument and stating your personal perspective about him. I still didn't even claim that he was right or that he's a perfect person. I said his known achievements in history are sufficient to prove that he was irrational.

Fruedian slip?  

How could fallacious arguments possibly prove anything...rationality, accuracy, perfection..what have you, Pars?

I mean seriously. just type the word Muhammad in your search engine and ask yourself if his biography is that of a crazy man who talks nonsense.

[The Grand Nudger]

Yes, it's the biography of a crazy man who talks nonsense, or a story about a crazy character who talks nonsense.  Difficult to say, between the two, at times.