Does Quran prove God?

[downbeatplumb]

I don’t believe in it, I just said so. It makes no sense to me. Unless you wish to just tell me what I believe, then you’re mistaken.

You can say it all you want love that seeks to recognize value as is, is part of you. So again, I am 100% sure you believe in objective worth and value, whether you are aware of it or not, is a different matter.

Stop with the value shit. It means less than nothing and you've been banging on about it for AGES.

[Mystic]

Love is nothing but recognition of value, and the most valued value, is love itself.

Love recognizes everything including itself.

The more we love, the more we increase in vision of value and judgement of value, and it asses in truth, because it's not trying to make up reality, but know it.

Love thus is a seeker of vision of truth.

It seeks to know God and know others.

Love has a divine language and all things valued, are in that language.

The Absolute loving God thus is the only thing that can truly see us as we are because it's perfect love and judgment, and love seeks to recognize things closer to their truth and this why God's connecting signs and names are needed, to love God and love creation, because they are the balancing witnessing eye that sees things closest to the absolute vision of God and point to God.



Do you disbelieve in the one who upholds every soul by what it has earned?

[downbeatplumb]

Love is nothing but recognition of value, and the most valued value, is love itself.

Love recognizes everything including itself.

The more we love, the more we increase in vision of value and judgement of value, and it asses in truth, because it's not trying to make up reality, but know it.

Love thus is a seeker of vision of truth.

It seeks to know God and know others.

Love has a divine language and all things valued, are in that language.

The Absolute loving God thus is the only thing that can truly see us as we are because it's perfect love and judgment, and love seeks to recognize things closer to their truth and this why God's connecting signs and names are needed, to love God and love creation, because they are the balancing witnessing eye that sees things closest to the absolute vision of God and point to God.



Do you disbelieve in the one who upholds every soul by what it has earned?

At this point I think you're just doing it to annoy me!

[FatAndFaithless]

It's like a muslim version of jordan peterson word games.

[Alan V]

1) Love is nothing but recognition of value, and the most valued value, is love itself.

2) Love recognizes everything including itself.

3) The more we love, the more we increase in vision of value and judgement of value, and it asses in truth, because it's not trying to make up reality, but know it.

4) Love thus is a seeker of vision of truth.

5) It seeks to know God and know others.

6) Love has a divine language and all things valued, are in that language.

7) The Absolute loving God thus is the only thing that can truly see us as we are because it's perfect love and judgment, and love seeks to recognize things closer to their truth and this why God's connecting signs and names are needed, to love God and love creation, because they are the balancing witnessing eye that sees things closest to the absolute vision of God and point to God.



8) Do you disbelieve in the one who upholds every soul by what it has earned?

1) We love what is valuable to us. I get that. We don't love what is not valuable to us, or whatever we consider neutral or even hateful. Love is not a value in itself, but an emotion felt about a value. You are effectively equivocating with loaded terminology.

2) As far as I can figure out, you are saying that whatever something is loved for is its essential attribute. I don't see why this follows, since what I value is relative to my perspectives. I don't claim any absolute perspectives, and you can't demonstrate any. All you can do is make assertions.

3) Again, you are reiterating that love somehow establishes reality. I disagree.

4) And again. No, the seeker of truth is someone who can find it anywhere, not just in love. That's why you are crippled in such discussions. Atheists don't love what we consider harmful to people.

5) Here you jump off the rails, unless you are defining God as the human emotion of love. That's an equivocation.

6) Since number 5 didn't follow, neither does this.

7) You are conflating love with truth with God. Can you honestly say you love all of creation, including, for instance, tsunamis which randomly kill hundreds?

8) If you are asking whether I disbelieve in God, the answer is still yes. Your argument, such as it was, doesn't make sense.

Summary: Until you can talk without loaded terminology, you will convey nothing to us and will learn nothing from us either. We can't accept your assumptions as a first step in conversation.

[LastPoet]

It's like a muslim version of jordan peterson word games.

He has Schizophrenia, he is being convinced that it is demons by probably his religion folks, it is caused by demons/atheists/his previous apostasy.

It is a sad tale.

[Abaddon_ire]

It's like a muslim version of jordan peterson word games.

I was thinking more of an auto-chopra.

[Astreja]

It's like a muslim version of jordan peterson word games.

He has Schizophrenia, he is being convinced that it is demons by probably his religion folks, it is caused by demons/atheists/his previous apostasy.

It is a sad tale.

It's a very sad tale.  I also wonder if there's an element of scrupulosity at play here.

[Ravenshire]

Anyways, the purpose of this thread is to show arguments in Quran.

No, the purpose of this thread, like all your other "proof" threads, is to spam your bullshit all over AF. You're not convincing anyone but yourself MK.

---

Does the Quran prove god?

No. Absolutely not. It's a claim that is completely unsupported by external evidence -- in other words, mere fiction.

God has brought a proof to humanity, so whoever holds on to God, will be guided to his path.

But, at the foot of the path is a sign saying "Abandon reason, all ye who enter here."

---

It has been established, many times, in many threads, and through out the years.

By who? You?

Yep. He's quite good at convincing himself that he's "proven" something. Not so good at convincing others though.

---

Rob, I think you're torturing yourself.  You've seen more than anyone how intractable MK is to logic and argument.

If you can explain how anything he said in the last post has any relevance to my argument, it would be appreciated.

I read it 3 times... and I think some people here their defense mechanism is to say anything no matter how irrational or irrelevant, as if it will refute the argument.

Since you're incapable of making a coherent argument, anything we say will refute them.

[robvalue]

The word "objective" gets thrown around in apologetics in general as if it’s some kind of spell. You can’t just say something is objective, you have to explain in what way that is the case. It needs to be a conclusion theoretically reachable by anyone, following a certain method, to get some sort of result which actually means something. I think it often just means "relating to god" or "external to our reality", as actually used.

Obvious examples are things like mass, physical dimensions, electrical current, and so on. A method is agreed by which they are measured, and everyone should get the same result if it’s done properly. This result is also then apparent and important when the object interacts with other objects. It makes a difference. I don’t know what difference the "value" of something is supposed to make, outside of personal decisions.

It could of course be determined indirectly that something appears to be objective, as far as we can tell; but again, the data leading to that conclusion should be obtainable by anyone running the experiment.