Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi all, we have some important news to share. Please follow the link here to find out more!

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058419143/important-news/p1?new=1

Off topic discussion about God/Islam/Questions...

2456789

Comments

  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 33 iBumblebeetuna


    ADGOBE wrote: »
    If God were anything physical it would also mean God would be vulnerable which is just not what God is.

    WRONG! Judges 1:19 - And the LORD was with Judah; and he drave out the inhabitants of the mountain; but could not drive out the inhabitants of the valley, because they had chariots of iron


  • Posts: 81,310 CMod ✭✭✭✭ Terrence Wrong Wristband


    Why does god need to test our faith?

    How else could an omnipotent deity get its kicks and its ego stroked


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 13,686 ✭✭✭✭PDN


    WRONG! Judges 1:19 - And the LORD was with Judah; and he drave out the inhabitants of the mountain; but could not drive out the inhabitants of the valley, because they had chariots of iron

    "PDN voted for Fergus O'Dowd; and he was elected as TD."

    Does this mean that I was elected as a TD, or that Fergus O'Dowd was?

    If you were really interested in what Judges 1:19 says (rather than cutting and pasting from a theologically illiterate atheist website) then you would have read this:

    And Judah went with Simeon his brother, and they slew the Canaanites that inhabited Zephath, and utterly destroyed it. And the name of the city was called Hormah. Also Judah took Gaza with the coast thereof, and Askelon with the coast thereof, and Ekron with the coast thereof. And the LORD was with Judah; and he drave out the inhabitants of the mountain; but could not drive out the inhabitants of the valley, because they had chariots of iron. (Judges 1:17-19).

    The natural sense of the meaning is that the 'he' in verse 19 is the 'him' in verse 17. So the Lord was with Judah and Judah drove out the inhabitants of the mountain, but could not drive out the inhabitants of the valley. That is reflected in modern translations.

    I love the way some people will ignore 4 centuries years of scholarship by linguists and quote from a 400 year old archaic translation because it can be better twisted to their agenda. :)


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,840 ✭✭✭Mark Hamill


    PDN wrote: »
    "PDN voted for Fergus O'Dowd; and he was elected as TD."

    Does this mean that I was elected as a TD, or that Fergus O'Dowd was?

    If you were really interested in what Judges 1:19 says (rather than cutting and pasting from a theologically illiterate atheist website) then you would have read this:

    And Judah went with Simeon his brother, and they slew the Canaanites that inhabited Zephath, and utterly destroyed it. And the name of the city was called Hormah. Also Judah took Gaza with the coast thereof, and Askelon with the coast thereof, and Ekron with the coast thereof. And the LORD was with Judah; and he drave out the inhabitants of the mountain; but could not drive out the inhabitants of the valley, because they had chariots of iron. (Judges 1:17-19).

    The natural sense of the meaning is that the 'he' in verse 19 is the 'him' in verse 17. So the Lord was with Judah and Judah drove out the inhabitants of the mountain, but could not drive out the inhabitants of the valley. That is reflected in modern translations.

    I love the way some people will ignore 4 centuries years of scholarship by linguists and quote from a 400 year old archaic translation because it can be better twisted to their agenda. :)

    I think its funny the smugness you show when all you have pointed out is that the answer to fighting someone with god on their side is to have iron chariots.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 33 iBumblebeetuna


    PDN wrote: »
    "PDN voted for Fergus O'Dowd; and he was elected as TD."

    Does this mean that I was elected as a TD, or that Fergus O'Dowd was?

    If you were really interested in what Judges 1:19 says (rather than cutting and pasting from a theologically illiterate atheist website) then you would have read this:

    And Judah went with Simeon his brother, and they slew the Canaanites that inhabited Zephath, and utterly destroyed it. And the name of the city was called Hormah. Also Judah took Gaza with the coast thereof, and Askelon with the coast thereof, and Ekron with the coast thereof. And the LORD was with Judah; and he drave out the inhabitants of the mountain; but could not drive out the inhabitants of the valley, because they had chariots of iron. (Judges 1:17-19).

    The natural sense of the meaning is that the 'he' in verse 19 is the 'him' in verse 17. So the Lord was with Judah and Judah drove out the inhabitants of the mountain, but could not drive out the inhabitants of the valley. That is reflected in modern translations.

    I love the way some people will ignore 4 centuries years of scholarship by linguists and quote from a 400 year old archaic translation because it can be better twisted to their agenda. :)

    I've learned something new today, many thanks PDN :).


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 13,686 ✭✭✭✭PDN


    I think its funny the smugness you show when all you have pointed out is that the answer to fighting someone with god on their side is to have iron chariots.

    Sorry, the smugness in here is infectious at times. I will try harder to be self-loathing. ;)

    But I will remember that in atheist -speak "pointing out an error" = "smugness"


  • Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 25,610 Mod ✭✭✭✭Dades


    PDN wrote: »
    I love the way some people will ignore 4 centuries years of scholarship by linguists and quote from a 400 year old archaic translation because it can be better twisted to their agenda. :)
    I just ignore 4 centuries years of scholarship by linguists because no matter what way it's read it still comes across as a nonsense way to explain our existence.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,840 ✭✭✭Mark Hamill


    PDN wrote: »
    Sorry, the smugness in here is infectious at times. I will try harder to be self-loathing. ;)

    But I will remember that in atheist -speak "pointing out an error" = "smugness"

    None of this responds to my point. Your smugness seems to be all gone now that it seems your knee jerk defense of anything biblical from anything critical has come not just lacking, but actually reinforcing the original attack.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 13,686 ✭✭✭✭PDN


    None of this responds to my point. Your smugness seems to be all gone now that it seems your knee jerk defense of anything biblical from anything critical has come not just lacking, but actually reinforcing the original attack.

    No, I am quite happy for you guys to criticise the Bible all you like. Receiving confirmation from other group members is important for any small minority group.

    I certainly don't think, that by pointing out an error, I reinforced any attack. But then again, I don't claim to understand how you view things through your own rather unique ideological prism.

    You might find that I understand you better if you addressed actual issues than indulging in snide little personal comments about smugness. It's hard to break old habits, but I'm sure you can do it if you try.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,840 ✭✭✭Mark Hamill


    PDN wrote: »
    No, I am quite happy for you guys to criticise the Bible all you like. Receiving confirmation from other group members is important for any small minority group.

    I certainly don't think, that by pointing out an error, I reinforced any attack. But then again, I don't claim to understand how you view things through your own rather unique ideological prism.

    You might find that I understand you better if you addressed actual issues than indulging in snide little personal comments about smugness. It's hard to break old habits, but I'm sure you can do it if you try.

    Still not dealing with the point clearly raised in post 35, but then again I'm sure hiding insults in double talk makes you feel much better than accepting being wrong, so why should you care?


  • Advertisement
  • Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 24,466 Mod ✭✭✭✭robindch


    PDN wrote: »
    Receiving confirmation from other group members is important for any small minority group.

    Quote true. To wit:

    150029.gif


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 13,686 ✭✭✭✭PDN


    Still not dealing with the point clearly raised in post 35, but then again I'm sure hiding insults in double talk makes you feel much better than accepting being wrong, so why should you care?

    Look, I pointed out an error. It's no big deal.

    Even though I'm a Christian in the A&A forum that is still permissable. Learn to deal with it.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,811 ✭✭✭CerebralCortex


    PDN wrote: »
    Look, I pointed out an error. It's no big deal.

    Post #35 dude.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 13,686 ✭✭✭✭PDN


    Post #35 dude.


    Post 35 doesn't alter the error that I pointed out, dude. It refers to some argument that is nothing to do with me.

    If you want to argue with some Muslim guy then that's nice for you, but I learned long ago that when two idiots are arguing then a wise man doesn't try to separate them. Therefore, while it is my Christian duty to point out lamentable errors people make about the Bible, I'll happily let a Muslim and an atheist continue unhindered while they point out the weaknesses in each of their positions. ;)


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,007 ✭✭✭stevoslice


    PDN wrote: »
    I learned long ago that when two idiots are arguing then a wise man doesn't try to separate them. Therefore, while it is my Christian duty to point out lamentable errors people make about the Bible, I'll happily let a Muslim and an atheist continue unhindered while they point out the weaknesses in each of their positions. ;)

    Your opinion towards 'atheists' and 'muslims' is a bit scary, you liken both to idiots and also have a few derisory quotes in your sig.

    FYI there is no such thing as atheist speak. When it comes to religion, atheists can speak their feelings openly and do not have to find some mention of a similar situation in a dusty old 'mistranslated' book, if you can't accept that someone has a free mind, or won't on account of your religion then i fear you may have to widen your definition of the word idiot.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 13,686 ✭✭✭✭PDN


    thebhoy wrote: »
    Your opinion towards 'atheists' and 'muslims' is a bit scary, you liken both to idiots and also have a few derisory quotes in your sig.

    Derisory quotes? I'm sorry you don't appreciate Voltaire and Thomas Paine.


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 5,172 ✭✭✭Ghost Buster


    PDN wrote: »
    Post 35 doesn't alter the error that I pointed out, dude. It refers to some argument that is nothing to do with me.

    If you want to argue with some Muslim guy then that's nice for you, but I learned long ago that when two idiots are arguing then a wise man doesn't try to separate them. Therefore, while it is my Christian duty to point out lamentable errors people make about the Bible, I'll happily let a Muslim and an atheist continue unhindered while they point out the weaknesses in each of their positions. ;)

    Now ya see... heres the funny auld thing. I got banned from another area of 'Religion and spirituality' for simply pointing out a fact. I ignored the moderators instruction to stop as I considered the statement of fact to be perfectly within the charter. But in the usual spirit of "get away from our bubble with that pin" employed by certain Mods for I got banned.
    Here perhaps i can state this fact without impunity.

    You say that you are pointing out errors made by people about the bible.. yeah?
    So your interpretation of the bible is the correct one.. yeah?
    And heres what got me banned else where.... ready your self now....
    THATS WHAT THEY ALL SAY.
    Shocking isnt it?
    Every single sub sect of Christianity interpret the Bible differently
    Every different religion have their own holy books all off which are the one true book and the one true word of God..

    So what give you the arrogance to call anybody who differs to you and idiot and appoint yourself as 'a wise man'?


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 5,172 ✭✭✭Ghost Buster


    PDN wrote: »
    Derisory quotes? I'm sorry you don't appreciate Voltaire and Thomas Paine.

    EDIT:
    Self moderation... Dont want to stoop to some peoples level


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,007 ✭✭✭stevoslice


    PDN wrote: »
    Derisory quotes? I'm sorry you don't appreciate Voltaire and Thomas Paine.
    Voltaire wrote:
    "Prejudices are what fools use for reason"

    “For seventeen hundred years the Christian sect has done nothing but harm”

    "Of all religions, Christianity is without a doubt the one that should inspire tolerance most, although, up to now, the Christians have been the most intolerant of all men"

    “Christianity is the most ridiculous, the most absurd, and bloody religion that has ever infected the world”

    “If Christians want us to believe in a Redeemer, let them act redeemed”
    "Take away from Genesis the belief that Moses was the author, on which only the strange believe that it is the word of God has stood, and there remains nothing of Genesis but an anonymous book of stories, fables, and traditionary or invented absurdities, or of downright lies"

    "The declaration which says that God visits the sins of the fathers upon the children is contrary to every principle of moral justice"

    "..but the Bible is such a book of lies and contradictions there is no knowing which part to believe or whether any..."

    "Of all the systems of religion that ever were invented, there is no more derogatory to the Almighty, more unedifiying to man, more repugnant to reason, and more contradictory to itself than this thing called Christianity. Too absurd for belief, too impossible to convince, and too inconsistent for practice, t renders the heart torpid or produces only atheists or fanatics. As an engine of power, it serves the purpose of despotism, and as ameans of wealth, the avarice of priests, but so far as respects the good of man in general it leads to nothing here or hereafter."
    Don't I now, or should I just take the above as metaphors.. or maybe I have taken these quotes out of context?



  • Closed Accounts Posts: 13,686 ✭✭✭✭PDN


    thebhoy wrote: »
    Don't I now, or should I just take the above as metaphors.. or maybe I have taken these quotes out of context?

    No, those quotes are perfectly proper.

    Congratulations on your mastery of google!


  • Advertisement
  • Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 25,610 Mod ✭✭✭✭Dades


    PDN wrote: »
    If you want to argue with some Muslim guy then that's nice for you, but I learned long ago that when two idiots are arguing then a wise man doesn't try to separate them...

    I'll happily let a Muslim and an atheist continue unhindered while they point out the weaknesses in each of their positions. ;)
    PDN, you're not being smart or clever you're just breaking the charter. Don't.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 13,686 ✭✭✭✭PDN


    Dades wrote: »
    PDN, you're not being smart or clever you're just breaking the charter. Don't.

    My apologies, it's a common expression in Belfast.

    It's like saying that someone is "the fly in the ointment", you're not saying that they are actually a fly.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 560 ✭✭✭virmilitaris


    And this ladies and gentlemen is why its completely pointless to have discussions with religious people. They know something we don't know and yet they can't explain it. We yave to see it for ourselves and to see it for ourselves we have to believe it first.

    Around and around we go.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,640 ✭✭✭Pushtrak


    And this ladies and gentlemen is why its completely pointless to have discussions with religious people. They know something we don't know and yet they can't explain it. We yave to see it for ourselves and to see it for ourselves we have to believe it first.

    Around and around we go.
    Guess our cardiovascular vision isn't up to the task.


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 1,320 ✭✭✭dead one


    All you have here is declarations, without evidence, which hold about as much weight as me declaring that i am god and I created everything but I cant explain it to you because you wouldn't be able to understand it. You talk about proofs, but offer none. What proof is there that the universe couldn't have arose from chance?

    What you have, What is evidence that you have soul, How you prove me if i wish to see your soul, What evidence you will provide me to stop my mouth. Evidence speaks my friend. You or billion of million of you can't create a book like quran. Is it not enough for the evidence u are seeking my kind friend?. What is evidence if i wish to see that you have intelligent brain. Will you cut your head with axe and show me that Look! you have larger brain than other human. Sound silly exactly. Suppose i say to you prove me how intelligent you are. My question is directly related to your brain. As per rule and requirement of evidence is that you should show me your brain not the theory which your brain utters. That's what is logic of evidence my friend.Look i give you the evidence which speaks, Let see

    evidence no 1 (if it is wrong than bring another book like quran)

    chap1

    Say: If the whole of mankind and jinns were to gather together to produce the like of this Qur`an, they could not produce the like thereof, even if they backed up each other with help and support.

    evidence no 2

    It is not enough for them that we have sent down to thee (O Muhammad) the book(al-Qur`an) which is rehearsed to them? Verily, in it (this perspicuous book) is a mercy and reminder to those who believe. (Qur`an 29:51).

    Two Proofs:
    As a proof of the divine authorship and the miraculous nature of the Qur`an, two arguments are advanced by the almighty Himself:
    1. 'that we' (God Almighty) have revealed to you (O muhammed!) 'the book to you' who art absolutely an unlearned person. An 'ummi' prophet. One who cannot read or write. One who cannot sign his own name. Let thomas carlyle testify regarding the educational qualifications of Muhammad -'one other circumstance we must not forget: that he had no school learnin; of the thing we call school-learning none at all.'Moreoever the divine author(God Almighty) himself testifies to the veracity of Muhammed's(pbuh) claim that he could never have composed the contents of the holy Qur`an; he could not have been its author:

    And thou (O Muhammad) was not (able) to recite a book before this (book came), nor art thou (able) to transcribe it with thy right hand:In that case, indeed, would the talkers of vanities have doubted

    (Qur`an 29:48).


    The author of the Qur`an is reasoning with us, that had Muhammad(pbuh) been a learned man, and had he been able to read or write, then in that case the babblers in the market places might have had some justification to doubt his claim that the holy qur`an is God's word. In the event of Muhammed(pbuh) being a literate person, the accusation of his enemies that he had probably copied his book (Qur`an) from the writings of the jews and christians, or that perhaps he had been studying aristotle and plato, or that he must have browsed through the 'Torat,' the 'Zabur' and the 'Injeel' and had rehashed it all in a beautiful language, might have carried some weight. Then, 'the talkers of vanities' might have had a poiint. But even this flimsy pretence has been denied to the unbeliever and the cynic: a point hardly big enough to hang a fly upon!

    2. 'The book'? Yes, the 'book' itself, carries its own evidence proving its divine authorship. Study the book from any angel. Scrutinize it. Why not take up the author's challenge if your doubts are genuine? Do they not consider the qur`an(with care) had it been from other than Allah, they would surely have found therein much discrepancy.
    You cant use the quran (supposedly evidence for allah) as evidence for a purpose and then use that purpose as evidence for allah. You have a circular argument, so it is null and void.

    I have cleared it thousand of times, That you r quite mixed because of the corruption of christianity and Judasim, Infact Abraham, Moses, Jesus and Muhammad Preached the message of Same God i.e Islam. There is only one God but it's people who changed their teaching and made Jesus as their God. It is quite clear in Quran if u read it, That's why i am asking all you don't believe other people, why you don't search it with your own brain and heart than it is sure you will find the truth. If you believe in Jesus, Moses, Muhammad as messenger of God than you are believing the lord of Universe but Muhammad is last messenger.

    In the Noble Quran, verses 3:2-6 says: Allah! There is no God save Him, He has revealed unto you O Muhammad the Book, the Quran, as He revealed the Torah unto Moses and the Gospel unto Jesus for guidance to mankind. Lo! Those who disbelieve the revelations of Allah, Muhammad and the Quran, for them await a terrible chastisement in the afterlife.
    That doesn't actually answer my point at all. All it says is that people will question the chosen language no matter what, so why not arabic? Well why not have it in a magic language, that is automatically and easily translatable (with no loss of meaning) into any other? Why not have multiple prophets, each covering the major languages (or every language, its not like it would be any extra work for allah)? Why does there need to be a book at all? Why dont we aren't we just born knowing it, like instinct?

    Magic langauge is myth, I am sure you will not believe in myth . So suppose if it in magic language why you consider that you will believe it, rather in reality you are not going believe in it. What an irony in your words and thoughts.
    You dont seem to appreciate that your god has given three different, contradictory religious books, in three different times and three different languages and that each claim to be the infallible word of god and applicable to humanity for all time. They dont even cross translate properly (translate the original hebrew torah into aramaic or arabic and you dont end up with even the same rules as what's in the original aramaic bible or arabic quran)
    Yes, the other books are for those people, The other books had been changed by people but Quran is unchangeable, There is only one version of Quran in the whole world. The reason why other books are contradicting because they are corrupted by high priests. The original books which reavled on Moses and Jesus had no Contradiction with Quran.But i am sorry you will not find those original books unless you stop the time and go in the times of Jesus or Moses Because There message was Same i.e Worhship one God. That is the reason why Allah sent his last messenger to guide people.
    Clockmakers make clocks, builders make houses. Electrical charges in clouds make lightning. Abiogenesis makes life. Evolution makes diversity. Its all natural.Of course if you argue for allah as clockmaker, because of the complexity in the clock being too much for chance, then you must explain who made the most complex thing of all, god?
    Well, I can't answer this question but i have reason and evidence which support my claim, Please have look contradiction in your thoughts. You said u believe in complex system of clock, even you also believe clock has creator, it is one point and second point is that If you take your body as complex clock than you don't believe in its creator. There is clear contradiction of evidence which seek. TO answer your question here is my proof who made the most complex thing of all in the words of God.

    057.003 He is the First and the Last, the Evident and the Immanent: and He has full knowledge of all things.

    When there was nothing, Allah T'ala was, and when there will be nothing, He will be. He is the most Manifest of all the manifest, for whatever manifests itself in the world, does only by His attributes and His works and His light. And He is the Most Hidden of all the hidden, for not only do the senses fail to percieve Him but the intellect and thought and imagination also cannot attain to His essence and reality.

    In the Noble Quran, verses 3:2-6 briefly say:

    Allah! There is no God save Him, the Alive. He does not die and He is not evanescent; He is the Eternal, the Self-subsistent who has no beginning. He has revealed unto you O Muhammad the Book, the Quran, as He revealed the Torah unto Moses and the Gospel unto Jesus for guidance to mankind. Lo! those who disbelieve the revelations of Allah, Muhammad and the Quran, for them awaits a terrible chastisement in this world and in the afterlife.

    Now please explain to me, everything you use has creator, But you are not created. What is that point which allow you to think that you have no creator?.
    That doesn't answer my question. You said we shouldn't question god, I said we should because 1) we are presented with many different interpretations of god, so we need to question these in order to determine which is accurate and 2) questioning, even a real living god, offers no dangers or difficulty to him, so why shouldn't we?
    Yes that's what i am telling why you don't take all books i.e Bible,Talmud,Vedas, Quran etc and study it yourself. By reading other thoughts as many christian,muslims,jews, ahtiest, agnostic are doing You can't find the truth. That is the point i am clearing since the begining. I am sure majority of atheist haven't study Quran. Suppose i say doctrines which are present in Bible are cruel as the hunger of hyena, why you should believe in me, why you don't search it by reading the bible

    Why would god need proof? God is the judge and seeing as he is infallible and already knows if we passed the test or not, then he doesn't need the test at all, he just knows.
    God needs no proof, The proof is for people, Suppose i gave you 10000$ and i have no proof that i had given you 10000$ and when i demand that you should return dollars, You say to me that you did't received dollars. All your actions are your proofs for the place which you deserved. I hope you understand it. Suppose you robb someone, Your action is your proof for the punishment which you deserved so in the end you don't deny that i didn't commit that action. Even Allah has given you full right that you can spare the
    victim.
    Pretty sure most who start off poor, stay that way. I'm thinking of the millions of starving poor in Africa and the slums in South America.

    That is injustice in the world because Allah sent his book to guide people but people are not following command of Allah. You can't make world rich unless you follow what is truth. Like i said if all the world truely believe in message of Quran, than everyone in this world will be rich and equal.

    Qur'an 49:13
    O mankind! We created you from a single (pair) of a male and a female and made you into nations and tribes that ye may know each other (not that ye may despise each other). Verily the most honored of you in the sight of Allah is (he who is) the most righteous of you. And Allah has full knowledge and is well acquainted (with all things).

    Now what is righteous, it is quite cleared he who is best in the eyes of Allah and in the eyes of people.
    You create other problems with this statement:1)We have humans doing that, and we call them tyrants and dictators. Objective morality would therefore imply that god is a tyrant and dictator

    Suppose i gave you example two societies "A" and "B". The society "A" is free society where people believe no God or message of God. (Don't mix it with christianity or Judasim) and Society "B" who follow one true religion. As "A" is free society, it means they are free in every aspect of life, like drugs, wines, sometime freedom refers means more crimes. It's nature of human. On the other hand society "B" will be more moral. Can you please explain why you have traffic signals on the roads to stop what?. Is it tyranny. Why you don't break those signal even if you in hurry. So the message of God is like traffic signals, if you broke those signals than it is sure you can't create a pieceful society as the world isn't peaceful today. Look at the injustice in the world.
    .2) Why should we fear god? What purpose does fear serve for god that understanding wouldn't better achieve?3)Why is that the only way to achieve peace on earth? This is a god we are talking about, I'm sure there are a great many things he could do to ensure peace on earth.

    Suppose if you are going to robb the house of some poor person and

    you also don't have fear in God. You will robb the poor, even you will kill some of his family members. You won't robb it only if you have fear. If all the people truely fear God than there will be no injustices in the society that is purpose of fear. If you truly fear Allah than i am sure you are an honest, sincere man because some times, such situations arise when people are free to act and in those action they perfome injustices
    Kind of begs the question why there are still rich and poor people in islamic countries then, doesn't it?

    First of All there is no practical islamic society on the face of earth. Today Many muslims countries consist of vast majority of hypocrites and tyrants who follow no message of God. That is simplest answer which i can give, If you are interested in Islam, please don't look at people, please read the scripture. That is what majority of christian, jews, athiest are doing as you said


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 1,320 ✭✭✭dead one


    bluewolf wrote: »
    What :confused::confused:

    why thou are confused, Kind sister!, Who puts limit of confusion in your thoughts. You give me link that "Behavior animal kills their young ones" The behavior doesn't imply on majority of animal, Majority of animals love their kids, even a cat will attack on bear saving its kids. Isn't it true?. The evidence demand that cats can't stand against bears but why cats believe in theory of love. Who puts that theory in the heart of those animal who kill their young ones.

    lioness is no match for bear. This is demand of evidence but love needs no evidence. Please watch below theory against the the evidence.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h7MuFDVEUro&feature=related
    Isn't that thing Called God.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 560 ✭✭✭virmilitaris


    dead one wrote: »

    evidence no 1 (if it is wrong than bring another book like quran)

    chapn, for them await a terrible chastisement in the afterlife.[/COLOR]


    I've read the quran. Its exactly what I expected from a rip off of the bible. Its the same as any other religious text I have ever read. There is nothing special about it whatsoever.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,753 ✭✭✭fitz0


    dead one wrote: »

    So can you Answer my these question?

    1. What is Soul?
    2. What is death?
    3. Who sent us on the world?
    4. Where are the souls of those people who lived once on earth etc.

    In answer to your questions, some more.



    But, really, your questions are posed from a theological point of view and our answers will all be from an atheist/agnostic pov. What do you really expect to gain from this other than answers that have been given many, many times before?

    And this just because I like it



  • Posts: 81,310 CMod ✭✭✭✭ Terrence Wrong Wristband


    dead one wrote: »
    why thou are confused, Kind sister!, Who puts limit of confusion in your thoughts.
    Your posts are rambling and confusing
    Isn't that thing Called God.
    No, it's called protecting the young for survival of the species. We could throw in compassion as well, though I suspect it's more functional than that

    And if they don't protect their young, do you ascribe that to god too? Both the good and the bad?


  • Advertisement
  • Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 25,610 Mod ✭✭✭✭Dades


    Courtesy of the FSoR thread.

    if-you-could-reason-wth-religious-people-there-would-be-no-religious-people-house-500x375.jpg


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement