[Serious] Time to embrace Islam!

[BrianSoddingBoru4]

Islam appeals to the supernatural and I don't think that the supernatural is a real thing.

Until you prove the existence of any god, arguing about which one is the right one is like arguing which fairy has the shiniest wings.

I have a personal take on proofs of the existence of God. Since any logical proof of existence relies on a set of axioms that everybody agrees on to be correct, there cannot be one. We cannot prove by pure reason that anything exist, we either resort to evidence left by that thing as showing its existence or, in the case of God, we evaluate weither any prophet who claims to come from him has valid claims, and the truth of the prophet's claims is evidence of God's existence.

Let's suppose the Kalam argument is true, and is the only proof out there. Then how do you explain the details of the proof to the layman? And is it fair of God to make the only way to get to him a logical maze vey few people can get out of?

Any proof of God - not necessarily logical - has to be accessible even to the ordinary layman who cannot follow a logical train of thought. And prophetic claims are the best candidates for that.

Could you list some of these prophetic claims?

Boru

[R00tKiT]

Where is the Ad hominem you're refering to? These guys ignore a great deal about the religion, and it disgusts me that you would rather back them up than acknowledge how wrong they were in spreading lies in public settings.

Christianity was secularized some centuries ago and most christians are ok with their religion being a bunch of mutually exclusive denominations. I don't think it's fair to compare that with Islam, which remained uncompromising since it began to exist.

If Islam has remained uncompromising, how do you explain the various sects and schools within Islam?

Boru

By uncompromising I mean the religion remained true to its principles even if they oppose the state or any political institution.

Sects within islam are not as various as you think, virtually all Muslims regardless of their sects agree on the crucial issues. Schools are simply academic differences about secondary subjects of theology and have no bearing on how Muslims live their lives.

[BrianSoddingBoru4]

If Islam has remained uncompromising, how do you explain the various sects and schools within Islam?

Boru

By uncompromising I mean the religion remained true to its principles even if they oppose the state or any political institution.

Sects within islam are not as various as you think, virtually all Muslims regardless of their sects agree on the crucial issues. Schools are simply academic differences about secondary subjects of theology and have no bearing on how Muslims live their lives.

Which is pretty much the same as Christianity.

Boru

[WinterHold]

---

The source of Islam -which is the Quran- is clear and have no problem. The problem is many Shiite/Sunni Muslims who bring Arabic text like the Hadith books and mix it with the Quran, then the result is a perfect religion for Dawkins to pick up on.

Dawkins didn't read the Qur'an nor the hadiths, and he reportedly says he can't quote any of the Islamic sources as well as he does with the Bible. Also, some quranic verses simply don't make sense once you omit all the hadith books.

Even the number of prayers per day isn't mentioned in the Qur'an! Can you pray the correct Islamic way according to what's on the Qur'an alone? Good luck.

Muslims are scattered between sects; the majority are Sunni Muslims; and every single sect (including Sunnies and the other sects).
Each sect has its own scholars; and its followers do not obey and give blind trust but to scholars from their own sects.
Prayers are mentioned in the Quran; but you follow a sect that says "prayers are not mentioned in the Quran".

But the bible said:



In other verses "donkey" means cock.

I am aware that the bible and especially the Old Testament contains horrible stories of genocides etc. But for christians that still doesn't disprove the omnibenevolence of God. So they try to reconcile these two impossibilities.

No you are not familiar with the bible. You are a liar calling "genocide" verses recieted in a Roman porn book to be "the words of a loving God".

Are the crusades your love? so between all sects on earth, you chose Christian Evangelical gory texts to be your belief...

aren't you a treat?

[Pat Mustard]

I've been aware of these points you made by many other Muslims I've encountered in the past, including Muslim relatives. It's just as sketchy as almost any other religion. Arguing for a non-Trinitarian God, or telling me that you believe the texts have been well preserved, doesn't prove that Islam is true. It's just a couple of statements that Muslims hold to.

And I'm not interested in numerology or perverse reinterpretations of Qur'anic verse to reflect modern scientific findings. So hopefully you're not one of those apologists who harp on about any of that.

I don't claim Islam being better at certain aspects makes it true, I merely say that most atheists in the West left their faith for reasons that are specific to their former religion, and they should thus think hard about the remaining major religions. And no, numerology and reinterpretations are not interesting to me either since they tend to force the texts to say things that aren't there.

One historical proof of the truth of our religion is usually presented like this : Muhammad challenged his contemporaries - who were highly proficient in the arabic language in all its aspects - to come up with sayings just as eloquent as the Qur'an's. This kind of literary challenge was common at his time. Why is this valid evidence ? Because the challenge is appropriate to the cultural context in which Muhammad found himself in, and since his contemporaries objectively failed to address the challenge, and prefered to prosecute him and his followers rather than respond intellectually, this makes his claim more credible.

Jesus's contemporaries were well versed - relatively to their time - in medical science, so his "prophetic challenge" had something to do with resurrecting the dead, which the very impossible thing to cure.

I know this is extremely oversimplified, I'm just trying to clarify how the reasoning goes.

say some dude I don’t know from Adam tries to sell me some unicorn poop. I look at it and say looks like a rock. He responds but it’s the best most special and prettiest unicorn poop ever. I’ll still want proof unicorns actually exist before I consider buying some unicorn poop. He points to the poop and says there is the proof right there! How could there be unicorn poop if there are no unicorns? Now give me 11 drakspas and take the unicorn poop! See where I am going with this? I don’t need to touch the guys rock and feel it and study it cause no matter how intimately I get to know it I ain’t buying it till I see a flippin unicorn and no amount of rocks you show me insisting they are unicorn poop is going to change my mind. Want me to buy your unicorn poop? First you gotta show me a unicorn then we can discuss the merits of its poop...

I get what you're saying, just because Islam might be better doesn't prove it's true. I am arguing here that Islam deserves to be looked into much more than any other religion - Abrahamic or not - since its core beliefs are sensible.

---

Nope. You pay a bit more attention to what you worship.

I don't worship Muhammad. You pay a bit more attention to your religious education, if you took any.

There is absolutely no evidence presented for your religion in that post. You've presented plenty of assertions unsupported by anything inside or outside your religion as a post-hoc retrofit of what has solidified into two religions, islam & christianity, but none of it even rises to anecdote, much less evidence.

[R00tKiT]

Muslims are scattered between sects; the majority are Sunni Muslims; and every single sect (including Sunnies and the other sects).

Yeah, how scattered they must be when approximately 90% belong to the same sect, and the remainder disagrees on which Caliph should've been followed after Muhammad. Did you ever take a statistics class ? Because, you know, "scattered" should be backed up by actual numbers.

Each sect has its own scholars; and its followers do not obey and give blind trust but to scholars from their own sects.

Nonsense. Anything any scholar ever wrote -provided you read any - is backed up by scholarly justification from the sacred texts, one you can understand and check yourself. There's no blind trust involved.

Prayers are mentioned in the Quran; but you follow a sect that says "prayers are not mentioned in the Quran".

I asked about the number of prayers, not prayer per se. You can't even read my replies correctly, surely you must've missed the important(missing) details in the Qur'an.

No you are not familiar with the bible. You are a liar calling "genocide" verses recieted in a Roman porn book to be "the words of a loving God".

Are the crusades your love? so between all sects on earth, you chose Christian Evangelical gory texts to be your belief...

aren't you a treat?

I am a Muslim. Whatever you say, just don't shoot me.

[WinterHold]

Muslims are scattered between sects; the majority are Sunni Muslims; and every single sect (including Sunnies and the other sects).

Yeah, how scattered they must be when approximately 90% belong to the same sect, and the remainder disagrees on which Caliph should've been followed after Muhammad. Did you ever take a statistics class ? Because, you know, "scattered" should be backed up by actual numbers.

They are scattered.
Evidence is the huge amount of body count resulting from Muslim civil wars like the one in Syria and Yemen. Nothing is easier to detect than a Syrian Shiite Alawi air raid; or a Saudi Sunni airstrike.
They are so scattered. Wait for the next Sunni/Shiite war: Saudi Arabia vs Iran.
So scattered.

AtlasS33 Wrote:
Each sect has its own scholars; and its followers do not obey and give blind trust but to scholars from their own sects.

Nonsense. Anything any scholar ever wrote -provided you read any - is backed up by scholarly justification from the sacred texts, one you can understand and check yourself. There's no blind trust involved.

Why lie?

When a Sunni does anything different in religion; the common sentence in my land: "قلبت شيعي يابو؟؟
It means "did you convert to Shiitism ??"

So please don't lie. If you speak about numbers, speak about the number of Sunnies butchered in Syria, and speak about the numbers of Shiites butchered in Yemen

---

Prayers are mentioned in the Quran; but you follow a sect that says "prayers are not mentioned in the Quran".

I asked about the number of prayers, not prayer per se. You can't even read my replies correctly, surely you must've missed the important(missing) details in the Qur'an.

You're serious; right?

No you are not familiar with the bible. You are a liar calling "genocide" verses recieted in a Roman porn book to be "the words of a loving God".

Are the crusades your love? so between all sects on earth, you chose Christian Evangelical gory texts to be your belief...

aren't you a treat?

I am a Muslim. Whatever you say, just don't shoot me.

okay,,,

[R00tKiT]

They are scattered.
Evidence is the huge amount of body count resulting from Muslim civil wars like the one in Syria and Yemen. Nothing is easier to detect than a Syrian Shiite Alawi air raid; or a Saudi Sunni airstrike.
They are so scattered. Wait for the next Sunni/Shiite war: Saudi Arabia vs Iran.
So scattered.

Please, stop the nonsense. Ongoing wars in the Middle East are very complicated poltical matters and have nothing to do with what each sect believes. If you think this is worth discussing the open a new thread, you're wasting your breath here.

Why lie?

When a Sunni does anything different in religion; the common sentence in my land: "قلبت شيعي يابو؟؟
It means "did you convert to Shiitism ??

Nobody cares about what people randomly say in your land, if you have solid evidence from scripture or reliable religious references you can post them in a new thread.

---

I asked about the number of prayers, not prayer per se. You can't even read my replies correctly, surely you must've missed the important(missing) details in the Qur'an.

You're serious; right?

I am. And you're cowardly trying to dodge my question. Where is the numbers of prayers per day in the Qur'an ? direct answer please.

---

There is absolutely no evidence presented for your religion in that post. You've presented plenty of assertions unsupported by anything inside or outside your religion as a post-hoc retrofit of what has solidified into two religions, islam & christianity, but none of it even rises to anecdote, much less evidence.

So, that highly regarded intellectuals in your side prove to be ignorant about the basics of a religion they confidently and consistently insult, isn't evidence for you people that you should look up harder?

[Nay_Sayer]

Time to embrace Pastafarianism.  There is still time.

RAmen

---

Whataboutism. Still makes moohamed a pedo.

FSM weaps.

In the immortal words of the mightiest giant who ever puned poorly, I don’t think that word means what you think it means. See I was not minimizing rape of a child ( even if it wasn’t technically rape you know age of consent married her first and all that. Statutory rape being just that statutory so if you comply with the statutes as they were, which he apparently did, it couldn’t be rape. Try not to confuse legality with morality and while you’re at it try not to impose one eras moral judgements on another era. And no I do not suggest in any way that anyone should be screwing 9 year olds, married or not, I was just pointing out the comment seemed more racist based than logical argument based, you know, the tone Of the language the characature the details just jumped out. But go ahead smug away it’s a good look on you.

Whataboutisms indeed FSM truly weeps you got that part right...

That was sad.

1: My comment was directed at Klorophyll, So did you just admit, accidentally, this is a sock account?

2: Really quick with the "I was criticized, Racist!" card aren't we?

Extra prayers for you. RAmen

[Pat Mustard]

So, that highly regarded intellectuals in your side prove to be ignorant about the basics of a religion they confidently and consistently insult, isn't evidence for you people that you should look up harder?

You're trying to prove islam to be true. Show me evidence and stop with the baseless ad hominems.