[Serious] Time to embrace Islam!

[BrianSoddingBoru4]

This thread has become a microcosm of world religions:  No one agrees on even the simplest terminology, which leads to disagreements on the larger questions, which quickly degenerates into invective, talking over one another and shouting.  If AF were a real-world lecture hall, the place would be littered with broken chairs and injured people by now.

It kind of warms my heart to know I've been right about religion all along. 

Boru

[The Architect Of Fate]

@Abaddon_ire

Sincerely, you have responded better than I could have to the user in question. Still... my response... Thanks!

The whole problem with you people is that you overcomplicate matters, when things are and should be simple.  A coherent definition of god would be like this : the unique immortal, omnipotent and omniscient being.

In all honesty, I don't mean to "overcomplicate" matters, to the contrary, I mean to clarify what you're asking. So what physical properties does "god" have, if any?

Why did I define God like that? Because it's the only interesting definition. Any mortal being will cease to exist and won't interfere in any way with any creature nor will meet us in an eventual afterlife.

Interesting, according to who? And how have you come to define the "afterlife" in this way?

And you seem, like everyone here, to be overly repugnant of theology, which is your former religion's fault, and not any other religion.

While you and I may have different opinions of theology, I find the "subject" to be interesting, as well as the study of religion.

Saying no is never an answer to anything buddy. Not assuming (just as not knowing) something exists doesn't mean you're certain you won't change your mind later. Again, you're arbitrarily objecting to any clarification I try to make.

What do you mean that I'm "saying no"...? And no, I never said "not assuming... something exists" was the same as "you're certain you won't change your mind later"...

Did you spend some time looking up what the Isnad is all about, or just cannot help the urge of accusing us of circularity?

No, I didn't. Are you claiming that this is a source for your claim?

Spoilers  Isnad is  circular itself

[R00tKiT]

"Fuck" is a word. Are you a child that you are scared of words?

If so, explain why certain words scare you.

Apparently, you need to upgrade your moral system before feeling remorse after uttering a "fuck off" to people who disagree with your outdated lies.

An apologist for allah,

At least try to save face by making a case for ONE verse really mentioning apostasy. Next time don't try and mindllessly copy garbage unfounded stereotype here, it will be dismantled, badly.

That's a strange question in the manner that it was framed and in the contents.  Yes, a dictionary can be trusted to define words.  Apostasy isn't a concept belonging to any particularly tradition - every religious authority, of every religion, has had to deal with the problem of dissenters and free riders.  No matter what language is being spoken, and no matter what religion the people speaking it belong to, they've all been discussing the subject of apostasy, what to do with apostates, and the justifications for whatever course of action they may take. 

Apostasy doesn't belong to people speaking about it casually, it's an extremely serious court order that only comes from a state, not individuals or insurgent groups. And consensus has been reached centuries ago that almost impossible conditions should be met before thinking of applying such penalty. I already mentioned that no order was issued by major Islamic caliphates before the 11th century, which means 4 centuries went by after Muhammad without a single case of execution because of apostasy.

As to the other matter, I would be surprised if there's any significant difference between our moral systems, Kloro.  It would be a fun experiment to try and come up with any moral declarations that you think can only be made by, for example..a muslim (and the right kind of muslim, whichever kind that is).  I'd contend..sight unseen, that I could strip all of the god from the statement while retaining the moral content, for which every culture and every person, religious or otherwise, has an analog - just like apostasy and treason.

Actually there are many declarations I can make that make us stand out as Muslims, such as:

- Never say fuck off to people who disagee with you when you run out of answers and/or found out that what you copied was garbage but are too cowardly to acknowledge it.

- Don't be afraid as a moderator to remove the "fuck off" comments even if the member in question shares your (non)religious belief.

- Never copy the numbers of verses of the Qur'an without reading the actual verses, because it usually turns out they don't contain the claim for which you brought them into the discussion in the first place.

- Never say "Disgusting" about a marriage that happened 14 centuries ago because presentism is a deadly sin for historians.

And many more to come.

---

In all honesty, I don't mean to "overcomplicate" matters, to the contrary, I mean to clarify what you're asking. So what physical properties does "god" have, if any?

Apparently you don't want to presuppose anything about God, which is already a mistake. Let me ask you this : If I claim that my cat is a divine entity, is my claim worth investigating ?

No, I didn't. Are you claiming that this is a source for your claim?

Actually it is. It is the way we establish that something reported about Muhammad (such as producing a miracle) is accurate, so naturally it does serve our claims.

[Duty]

I choose to embrace Islam in the style of a hungry boa constrictor embracing a paraplegic, inoperable, insane plump rabbit. Watch me roll in 2020. 

---

hmmm...that might conceivably be interpreted as an intention to do violence, so just to clarify, I'm writing an atheistic book - that is "all."

[LadyForCamus]

I’m still waiting for a @Klorophyll to address his circular argument. 😏

[LastPoet]

Oh look, a holier than thou islam apologist.

[BrianSoddingBoru4]

I’m still waiting for a @Klorophyll to address his circular argument. 😏

Good luck with that.

Boru

[Duty]

[Deesse23]

Someone saying "fuck off" needs an upgrade of his moral system.
Someone excusing pre-teen marriage (and possibly rape) does not.

[R00tKiT]

I’m still waiting for a @Klorophyll to address his circular argument. 😏

There is no circularity involved, you mistakenly think the holy book of Islam is just a claim, ignoring the fact that there was an unanswered challenge made by Muhammad to his followers. The book is the finest work in his language, the most prominent translation of the book [ The Koran interpreted, John Arberry] acknowledges our orthodox view that the book cannot be translated but only interpreted, hence the choice of the title.  Quote from Mr.Arberry : "It may be affirmed that within the literature of the Arabs, wide and fecund as it is both in poetry and in elevated prose, there is nothing to compare with it".

Our claim that the Qur'an is incomparable comes then from expert judgment, accurate tradition [cf. authentic hadiths according to the rules of Isnad] tells us Muhammad actually improvised the whole Qur'an. The verses came according to the particular situation Muhammad found himself in. No one can improvise a masterful piece of art no matter how good. All that aside , how can the prophet threaten all the Meccan cultural heritage with his new book *of claims*, namely by insulting their gods, knowing these guys are highly proficient with their native language, and yet receive no answer at all?

It is well known that Arab tribes were meeting at the famous Souq Okadh to announce treatises and hold poetry competitions. The latter were instrumental, together with the Qur'an, in formalizing Arabic grammar and syntax. What's expected of them is to turn his literary challenge into a joke, as was the case with anyone who dares to present himself as the brightest orator of his tribe. Pre-islamic poetry was already very sophisticated, and a fully developed system of thematic sequence.
This didn't happen with any other "holy book", the Bible we have is a collection of dubious translations where the sayings of Jesus are no longer distinguishable of what Paul might have added to them.

So the key thing here is to delve deeper into what the pre-Islamic arabia was like, in order to understand why the Qur'an is indeed miraculous in its own right, instead of lazily suspending judgement, or worse, misinformedly insulting the book, as is often the case in these forums. So there is some homework to do for the serious researcher, there are no arguments ready to be spoon-fed to people who are unwilling to rethink the stereotypes.