Freethought & Rationalism Archive

brighid · 06-26-2003, 07:58 AM

Quote:

Not at all.... it is an OPEN invitation to anyone here or in the world to simply note my address and phone number and report to any authority in the world that I am doing something wrong here. Instead of reporting, I would invite you to come to my home, have a cup of tea with me, handcuff me, and take me to the nearest police station for the crime of FREEDOM.

Well, good then ... that doesn't mean we won't worry about your safety

I might take you up on the cup of tea, but the handcuffs might be taking things too far

Brighid

River · 06-26-2003, 08:16 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by EstherRose
Hi River,

Would you please explain this science in the koran to me?

Until, when he reached the setting place of the sun, he found it setting in a spring of black muddy (or hot) water. And he found near it a people. We (All�h) said (by inspiration): "O Dhul-Qarnain! Either you punish them, or treat them with kindness." (Al-Kahf 18:86)

"
He [Dhu�l-Qarnayn] followed, until he reached the setting of the sun. He found it set in a spring of murky water. (18:85-6)

Does it not imply that the earth is flat and be considered a scientific mistake?

Answer: The problem seems to have arisen due to an erroneous translation of the said verses. A correct translation is:

He [Dhu�l-Qarnayn] made ready his resources, until he reached the place where the sun sets. He found it as if it was setting in a spring of murky water. (18:85-6)

The setting of the sun in murky waters is a figurative portrayal. When one is standing on the shores where the sun sets, the scene is very much like what the verse says. It seems as if the sun is setting in murky waters. The style adopted by the Qur�an indicates that Dhu�l-Qarnayn had conquered all the known parts of the West at that time. He had reached the end of the known land territory and now only the expanse of water remained beyond it. It must be appreciated that the language of the Qur�an is highly literary and it often employs figurative styles and constructions to convey its meanings. If one does not have a literary taste, he fails to grasp the delicacy and elegance of such
styles. "http://www.renaissance.com.pk/novquer2y1.html

Qu'ran definitely has some sort of metaphorical component or spin-off groups such as Bahaii and Sikh beliefs couldnt have formed , since they were derived mainly of the metaphorical side of Islam. Well anyways....

This should have been pretty obvious from the other Quranic verse that said that the Day merged into the night.... ( without taking exceptions to consideration, since everything has exceptions). There is no talk about the sun merging into a body of water. We tend to forget that the arabs of 1400 years ago were not primitive . They were not cavemen. They had navigation systems and ways of following the stars. Islam relies heavily on mathematics. We have 5 appointed prayers a day . We utilise the lunar calendar . And have compasses to map out the Qibla ( direction) of Mecca. The arabs were never that dumb that they would think the sun would melt into the water. uhmmm. And if the Prophet said something that dumb...Islam would have been rejected point blank. Well to show you how sophisticated
the Quran is take a look at the following verse:

[THE SUN WILL EXTINGUISH AFTER A CERTAIN PERIOD]

"And the Sun Runs its course For a period determined For it;
that is The decree of (Him) The exalted in Might, The All-Knowing."
[AI-Qur'an 36:38]*

aatayyab · 06-26-2003, 08:17 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by River
O' Ali ,Amir ....Perhaps you do have some qualities of Ali ( the Son in law of the Prophet). Ali would continue his namaz/salat ( prayer) despite the fact that his opponents were shooting arrows at him. A brave soldier/philosopher , indeed.

-River

P.S.... it is said that people pick up some of the traits of the person whom they were labelled after.....

Thanks for the compliments of being BRAVE enough, unless proven otherwise by the local POLICE really knocking my door

This is what makes all the difference whenever I think of God. For example, I would be fearing Police right now on my doorstep, if I had no belief in my God. But, since, I have belief in my God, whether I am living in a Jewish land, makes no difference to me. Yes, it is the belief of God that makes you NOT coward, but brave. The examples are in front of YOUR very own eyes on TV. See those weapon-less Muslims blowing themselves up in response to Planes, Tanks, Machine Guns....? Such a martyr feeling can only come inside you when you believe God and that HE is taking care of each and everything. You just want to prove right, right and wrong a wrong. Nothing special about it.

Now, while praising those suicide bombers, I am not praising their strategy to defend their own religion and land. If I would be in their place, I would simply NUKE the TelAviv and keep the forces ready for a FULL assault and bring the words of Quran into reality that "No jew will be left alive, even if a jew is hiding behind a wall, that wall will speak up, here is the jew, kill him".

Again, I don't agree with killing every jew since it includes women, childern, elderly and those young men who don't want to fight. It includes only those who are fighting.

About my name, and the traits of name in one's personality, here is my story. The land I belong was once land of Hindus only. No muslim here. A few muslim preachers came here and they converted hindus in numbers of 1,000 or so on a daily basis. Since, Hinduism teaches caste system and Islam teaches equality. One of those preachers was "Data Ali Hajveri Ganj Baksh" who preached in my own city about 400 years ago. His shrine is very popular here. Before my birth, when my mother was pregnant, my mother met this Holy Guy in dream. He informed her that there would be a son and you should name him "Amir Ali". Tayyab was my mother's favourite, hence, my name Amir Ali Tayyab, which if you translate in easy english becomes like this;

"Chief, Lion, Clean".

Oh man... What did I tell here... It is Atheists forum, and now I will have to FACE all those jokes out of this HOLY story of me....

Amir Ali Tayyab
http://aatayyab.com

River · 06-26-2003, 08:23 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by aatayyab
Thanks for the compliments of being BRAVE enough, unless proven otherwise by the local POLICE really knocking my door

Oh man... What did I tell here... It is Atheists forum, and now I will have to FACE all those jokes out of this HOLY story of me....

Amir Ali Tayyab
http://aatayyab.com

uhmm...that statement is not in the Quran. And there are jews that are Muslims....see...

www.jews-for-allah.org

River · 06-26-2003, 08:45 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by haverbob
Sorry just one more thing, (since you don't feel like private messaging me) and

........

..........By the way, EstherRose asked you 2 questions in her post and you decided to answer only one question as far as I could tell(fetus,blood clot...question). This is most curious. Now I am fascinated. I don't want to bother with whether you were justified in your selective response. Not my concern. What I would really be fascinated to know is EXACTLY what you were thinking when you saw her "sun in the pond" question.

I don't care about why you didn't respond, I care about how you reconciled your decision to not respond. I could never fully grasp this type of thinking when I've seen it from other Muslims as well. Maybe you may just teach me something very valuable in your answer and I could walk away with a little better understanding of this type of thinking. That would be fascinating to hear, if you would be gracious enough to share this with me.

Why do you think I hesitated when one poster , also previously asked for clarification of this particular verse?

Was it because I am deceitful? Honestly , it has to do with a problem ( a couple of problems) that commentators have been wrestling with for centuries.

The problem is that the series of verses in question exhibit three variables. As a Muslim, I am taught to believe in both reasoning and faith. Not one over the other. Thus when I go about trying to solve a problem , I must know the context . I can not analyze isolated verses ( verses in a vacuum).

These are the 3 variables:

X: The Identity of Prophet Dhul-Qurnain

Y: The Identity of Yajuj and Majuj

Z: " The sun sets in muddy pond or springs".

Lets begin with Variable X. Who is Prophet Dhul-Qurnain? He is meantioned as a powerful Prophet who made Iron gates ( merged with Alloy) to seal the Tribes of Yajuj and Majuj ( since they were causing a mess). Lets see what commentators have suggested as the Identity of this Prophet. Dhul- Qurnain's name literally translates to "2 horned one". Thus it reverberates with the Biblical concept of " 2 horned one" in Revelations. This name has also been a suffix for many Yemeni Kings. However, there has been a huge debate concerning whether Prophet Dhul-Qurnain is in actuality Alexander the Great. Alexander ( also Iskander ) has been related to the building of a huge gate in Persian folklore, and there are several documents appearing to confirm Alexander the Great as the Prophet Dhul-Qurnain. Now the problem is ? Wasnt' Alexander an idolater? Some have debated that there is a difference between the fictional Alexander the Great and the Historical Alexander the Great and that the historical Alexander the Great was a submitter and all his victories was due to his asking of G-d's will. Others have said that it was Cyrus the great king of Iran, and regarded as savior by some Jews at the time. Cyrus is known as Darius of the Bible. Still others continue to believe that he was a Yemenite king. This topic might still be debated further. Some say that this " Alexander" or Ishkander ( i.e Kandahar of Afghanistan is named after Alexander the Great) is really a Prophet by the name of Alexander roughly around the same time as Prophet Abraham ( Ibrahim) pbuh. How can we trace his identity ? Perhaps we can find clues to his identity from his aquaintances. Based on Extra-Quranic texts , Prophet Khidr was the cook of Dhul-Qurnain. Other sources say that he was a soldier in Dhul-Qurnain's army and unintentionally founded the "water of life" which Dhul-Qurnain was trying to find all his life. Now, there exists another problem . Who is Prophet Khidr? He is mentioned once in the Quran as the Servant of Allah that guided Moses . He is also believed to be the initiator, " murshid " of saints. Other sources connect him with Prophet Enoch ( Idrees), who was one of the only Prophets to ascend to G-d. Biblical sources state that Khidr is St.George or perhaps the ArchAngel Metatron. And if you want to go even further Prophet Khidr is usually mentioned as the character " Hermes" in mythology and the Green man of Europe as well as "the wandering Jew".

Variable Y: Who are the Yajuj and Majuj? Who are the lost tribes of Gog and Magog? They have been tied to Scythians an advanced tribe of people skilled with metallurgy and some how mysteriously vanished from the archaelogical record. Other say they were a group of primitive neandertals that escaped extinction ( for more on this study the field cryptozoology). They have also been called the Tartars and Sclavonians. This Caucasias theory is advanced because the word Caucasius literally means "Fort of Gog" after the story of Alexander the Great and the Wall. Others have theories that they might be the chinese based on some enigmatic verse that says "shaded with their eyes" and also related to Great Wall of China. There's one theory that advances that the Gog and Magog are the Hashemite Kingdom. Weak support from Genesis cites Gog and Magog as the sons of Japheth and the Origininators of the European race. The Gog and Magog have also been used as an Identification for the Mongolians by some and the word Magog has been tied to the Mughal of India. The Yajuj and Majuj have also been connected to the Biblical Nephilim and Amalakites as well as america and EU..hmmmm...your guess is as good as mine.-River

Now lets look at Variable Z:

"
He [Dhu�l-Qarnayn] followed, until he reached the setting of the sun. He found it set in a spring of murky water. (18:85-6)

Does it not imply that the earth is flat and be considered a scientific mistake?

Answer: The problem seems to have arisen due to an erroneous translation of the said verses. A correct translation is:
He [Dhu�l-Qarnayn] made ready his resources, until he reached the place where the sun sets. He found it as if it was setting in a spring of murky water. (18:85-6)

The setting of the sun in murky waters is a figurative portrayal. When one is standing on the shores where the sun sets, the scene is very much like what the verse says. It seems as if the sun is setting in murky waters. The style adopted by the Qur�an indicates that Dhu�l-Qarnayn had conquered all the known parts of the West at that time. He had reached the end of the known land territory and now only the expanse of water remained beyond it. It must be appreciated that the language of the Qur�an is highly literary and it often employs figurative styles and constructions to convey its meanings. If one does not have a literary taste, he fails to grasp the delicacy and elegance of such
styles. "http://www.renaissance.com.pk/novquer2y1.html

Qu'ran definitely has some sort of metaphorical component or spin-off groups such as Bahaii and Sikh beliefs couldnt have formed , since they were derived mainly of the metaphorical side of Islam. Well anyways....

This should have been pretty obvious from the other Quranic verse that said that the Day merged into the night.... ( without taking exceptions to consideration, since everything has exceptions). There is no talk about the sun merging into a body of water. We tend to forget that the arabs of 1400 years ago were not primitive . They were not cavemen. They had navigation systems and ways of following the stars. Islam relies heavily on mathematics. We have 5 appointed prayers a day . We utilise the lunar calendar . And have compasses to map out the Qibla ( direction) of Mecca. The arabs were never that dumb that they would think the sun would melt into the water. uhmmm. And if the Prophet said something that dumb...Islam would have been rejected point blank. Well to show you how sophisticated
the Quran is take a look at the following verse:

[THE SUN WILL EXTINGUISH AFTER A CERTAIN PERIOD]

"And the Sun Runs its course For a period determined For it;
that is The decree of (Him) The exalted in Might, The All-Knowing."
[AI-Qur'an 36:38]*

Insha'Allah , you found my response suffient. Perhaps not?-River

brighid · 06-26-2003, 08:49 AM

Quote:

This is what makes all the difference whenever I think of God. For example, I would be fearing Police right now on my doorstep, if I had no belief in my God. But, since, I have belief in my God, whether I am living in a Jewish land, makes no difference to me. Yes, it is the belief of God that makes you NOT coward, but brave. The examples are in front of YOUR very own eyes on TV. See those weapon-less Muslims blowing themselves up in response to Planes, Tanks, Machine Guns....? Such a martyr feeling can only come inside you when you believe God and that HE is taking care of each and everything. You just want to prove right, right and wrong a wrong. Nothing special about it.

I would argue that "belief" in this God does not actually make God real. Believing God is protecting you doesn't mean a God is actually protecting you. So all these people blowing themselves and other people up over a belief in a God is terribly wrong.

Amir, let me ask you ... if a man or army determined to kill you (and not knowing whether you are actually an enemy) came into your home land, or into your home armed and violent would you fight him? Does fighting against armed intruders, or armies make one less innocent of the crimes of his government or leaders? Do you think defending ones self and family makes one guilty of a crime? Would those intruders be justified in killing you, your wife and children because you faught against their aggression?

Violence is rarely the answer and blowing up Tel Aviv will not quicken your freedom in Pakistan. Although I do not agree with the Israeli government and its current course of action I do not believe killing all the innocent people who happen to live in Tel Aviv to be the solution to any problem, even if any of the tyrannts are justifiably killed.

Making such a claim is really no different then what the American administration has done and condoned in Iraq. Morally upright people do not casually dismiss the murder of innocents in justifying their acts of vengence.

Brighid

Inconnu · 06-26-2003, 09:23 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by aatayyab
What is reason behind your objection to my website link?

Quote:

Amir,
I can't speak for the other poster but I also recommended you remove your link for no other purpose then fear of the reprisals and potential butchering you speak of if any one found out you were having these discussions. Anonymity seesm prudent in your case because one could very easily discover exactly who you are and any lurking infidel reporters could easily "out" you and have you suffer the consequences.

Brighid

exactly! Ah, you dont mind, ok.

River · 06-26-2003, 09:39 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by diana
On haitus, huh? Hmk. Should you return to this thread, I thought I'd toss in another post for you to ignore. What the hell.

I agree he can be a bit abrasive, but that's part of his charm. It grows on you.

I daresay you've done your best to accomodate all comers to the extent that the Koran will allow. When the Koran still doesn't make sense or uphold what science has shown to be an accurate depiction of reality, you run and hide behind the old "we can't fully understand" arguments.

Your basic assumptions appear to be: (1) there is a god, (2) he not only made us, but has a continuing interest in our activities, (3) he gave us scriptures to guide our behaviors, (4) those scriptures are still in existence today (on earth), and (5) we have ready access to them.

You've read dozens of scriptures, you say. Assuming you read them all before you chose one as "best" (as opposed to growing up in the Muslim faith, accepting it as the true faith, and reading other "scriptures" along the way that you assumed were false before you read them), I admire your honesty and drive. But while you were doing this, how seriously did you consider the possibility that no god exists at all?

I see you've remarked that emotional needs to be more rational in his approach to scripture, and you've hinted that haverbob is also allowing his feelings to cloud his judgment. But how seriously have you considered the possibility that there is no god and no afterlife, that this is all we've got, without allowing your own judgment to be influenced by your fear of death and desire to believe there's someone watching out for you?

It sounds like when you say "everything is in there," you don't really mean anything at all by "everything." It's more of a poetic device, not meant to be understood literally, isn't it?

Christians are fond of doing the same thing. Everything is in the Bible, they say. Really? I should be able to find instructions on building a house, then. Useful, timeless information, that. But other than "build your house on a rock" and "don't divide it against itself" (that one's a stretch, I know), there's no information at all. This is where Christians say, "Not everything everything. You know what I mean." No, I don't. You say "everything" but you don't really mean everything.

All this says to me is that you don't know what you mean, but you're using a phrase that sounds good, impressive, and best of all, comforting.

Would you mind if I reword that sentence? I think you misplaced a phrase. Here: It is true many Muslims believe that the Quran is the Uncreated word of God and that it is not open to interpretation. I think this is what you meant, because when it comes down to it, you are (have thus far shown yourself to be) unable to demonstrate that the Koran is the Uncreated word of God. The best you've been able to "prove" is that you believe it is.

Your belief is not to be confused with fact.

I agree. I do hate it when believers read anti-atheist websites/books/rhetoric and think they understand atheism, so I can identify with you here. How better to understand something than to go to the source? Go to those who subscribe to that viewpoint and ask them questions. Read their literature and think (critically) for yourself. Do you agree?

However, I'll add that it's equally important, if one is to make an informed judgment, to also critically read the literature/rhetoric against that viewpoint. Are the detractors misunderstanding or misrepresenting the opposing viewpoint? Or are those who subscribe to that viewpoint ignoring or glossing over its inherent contradictions?

The most important thing is to think for yourself. I don't think it's possible to do this fairly unless you consider all sides of the equasion.

For this reason, I read the Koran. To be fair, I didn't read it in Arabic. However, the "Koran in Arabic is the only true Koran" position presents some problems. Yes--all translations will fail at some point. But all living languages change meanings over time, so even the Koran doesn't mean the same thing to those living today that it did when Mohammed dictated it. Even were I to learn Arabic in order to best understand the Koran, I--as a native speaker of English--would never be fluent in the language and, at best, would only understand it in light of the concepts I've absorbed from my own native tongue. IOWs, my understanding would still be English-based. So please forgive me for drawing my conclusions based upon an English translation.

It is far and away the most boring book I've ever read. The repetition is mind-numbing. Mohammed appears to have frequently forgotten that he already had certain thoughts on paper--which I suppose is simple to do when you're illiterate--and kept repeating them, often verbatim. There is no rhyme or reason to the order of the book--something scholars admit up front. There is contradiction, and Mohammed admits as much (or Allah, if you prefer, as I'm sure you do), using the old "I said that to test you" rhetoric that Christians are also fond of.

I've asked questions of Muslims concerning their faith (as many have questioned you here) and pointed out verses in the Koran that contradict what science has discovered, and so far, they respond with stuff like

...which is just another way of saying, "You've stumped me, but I'm still convinced the Koran is the Uncreated word of God." In other words, it isn't an answer at all.

I'm very sensitive to "answers" that don't in fact answer anything. Right now, my bullshit detector is clicking like mad.

"Somewhat ambiguous"? Hm.

What you mean is, there's this one verse in a book that supposedly God-breathed that clearly contradicts something science has proven to be true beyond a reasonable doubt. Apologists for that book jump through hoops to explain how it was meant metaphorically or...or...um...poetically (yeah...that's it...that's the ticket), or...oh...this one's my favorite: It was put there to test our faith! There are also the twin "God's wisdom is greater than ours" and the "We just don't have the wisdom to comprehend what he means" trapdoors.

This is not "ambiguity." It is apologetics. It is the desperation of the trapped.

The Christian bible uses the same argument in defense of itself, as I'm sure you know.

When I catch a person lying, they know it, and they tell me, "I don't lie," I don't believe them--I believe what I've seen them do. By the same token, when a text in which I've found contradictions tells me it doesn't have them, I believe my own observations in lieu of accepting as truth its claim about itself.

You may see my approach as argumentative and antagonistic. I see it as common sense.

d

BUGGY EDIT MODE: ON

I AM CURRENTLY WRITING YOU A RESPONSE. HOWEVER DUE TO SERVER PROBLEMS AND A CRASH-INCLINED PC , YOU SHOULD NOT READ THIS POST TILL I REMOVE THE WORDS BUGGY EDIT.

-Diana

I do not find your approach argumentative or antagonistic. It is however augmentative and agnostic. In short, I believe you are far more open-minded than most people but there are certain things that I must point out. Just for a moment , place your b.s meter aside for I do not want to set it off.

I must say that you are 100% right on my basic assumptions. You nailed it . Though, you compared me to Christian missionaries and apologetics.....Which I would have to disagree because I am clearly speaking at another level. Christians who defend their scripture are often compelled to employ semantic acrobatics as a way of expressing themselves. Their methodology is often different, and there certainly isn't a whole lot they could say about science from their scripture.

Roughly ten years ago, I felt a similar viewpoint of the Holy Quran. When I first picked it up ...I was confused......Why are chapters named after things that it is not related to ? Why is there no beginning or end to the book? Why are things belabored upon? Why is there no geneology charts? Why are the shortest Suras in the back? Things didnt make sense at first, and I stopped reading the book for some time......

However, over the years I have taken and indepth look into the Quran. You say it has no rhythm and order. It might appear that way because translaters of the Quran have generally had it such that it would imitate the feel of "Kings James Version". This is a difficult task indeed . The Quran is by far the most meticulously chiseled book in human history. Allow me to explain....

Biff the unclean · 06-26-2003, 10:58 AM

1. i appreciate your TECHNICAL advice to River presumably a non_IT literate guy/gal.
Oh he is literate, he just has a bit of a problem with personal honesty. You find that in his Darwin quotes which he was literate enough to take out of context knowing full well that by doing so they would appear to mean the opposite of what the author intended. Such lack of personal integrity is a common problem amongst the religious as they are only concerned that they be believed, and have not concern about if the are correct.

2. In my 33 years of Islam, I always used to pray a God which I never saw, never heard, never spoke.
Of course he didn't. He's just a character in a book.

It is just that when I was born, my parents told me, so I used to do it.
Same was true for many of us here. I know it was for me.

This is my first time, that I am questioning for the EXISTANCE of such thing called "GOD" in the presence of such miseries as we all witness around us.
The problems around us only show that the personality of the character God that is in all the books that he is the hero of. It doesn't necessarily prove that there are no Gods. It does prove that there is not a God that is anything like the God who is the hero of these "holy" books.

As per my little knowledge of Islam, our God "Allah" should NEVER be discussed since, it is beyond our mental capacity to try to "understand" HIM. For example, think of a robot that I created. Whatever I program it, it will think like that. Nothing beyond.
When people tell you that it is a sure sign that they are trying to trick you.
First--their mental capacity isn't any greater than yours. So how come they can understand him and you can't?
Second--your mental capacity is just fine. You aren't an idiot and you can understand what is going on. There isn't any God. There is just a bunch of people telling a story about a God. It's only a story. They are using it to gain control over the people they are telling it to.

3. "fake" is something that we keep on calling until the day it becomes "truth". Right now, i may say that USA has been nuked by Iran. That is "fake" until the day it is REALLY nuked
You have to think this out a bit further.
Iran isn't a fake. Such a place exists.
The United States isn't a fake, I'm sitting in it as we speak.
There really are such things as atomic bombs.
There really are such things as wars

So you are talking about REAL places, Real technology and Real potential situations.

When you talk about God you are talking about a fictional character. A fictional character who lives in a fictional land and does fictional magic. There are no REAL components to the God story while your Iran/US story was made up almost entirely of real components.

River · 06-26-2003, 11:14 AM

[QUOTE]Originally posted by River
[B]BUGGY EDIT MODE: ON

I AM CURRENTLY WRITING YOU A RESPONSE. HOWEVER DUE TO SERVER PROBLEMS AND A CRASH-INCLINED PC , YOU SHOULD NOT READ THIS POST TILL I REMOVE THE WORDS BUGGY EDIT.

-Diana

I do not find your approach argumentative or antagonistic. It is however augmentative and agnostic. In short, I believe you are far more open-minded than most people but there are certain things that I must point out. Just for a moment , place your b.s meter aside for I do not want to set it off.

I must say that you are 100% right on my basic assumptions. You nailed it . Though, you compared me to Christian missionaries and apologetics.....Which I would have to disagree because I am clearly speaking at another level. Christians who defend their scripture are often compelled to employ semantic acrobatics as a way of expressing themselves. Their methodology is often different, and there certainly isn't a whole lot they could say about science from their scripture.

Roughly ten years ago, I felt a similar viewpoint of the Holy Quran. When I first picked it up ...I was confused......Why are chapters named after things that it is not related to ? Why is there no beginning or end to the book? Why are things belabored upon? Why is there no geneology charts? Why are the shortest Suras in the back? Things didnt make sense at first, and I stopped reading the book for some time......

However, over the years I have taken and indepth look into the Quran. You say it has no rhythm and order. It might appear that way because translaters of the Quran have generally had it such that it would imitate the feel of "Kings James Version". This is a difficult task indeed . The Quran is by far the most meticulously chiseled book in human history. Allow me to explain....

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

06-26-2003, 10:58 AM	#209
Biff the unclean Banned Join Date: Oct 2002 Location: an inaccessible island fortress Posts: 10,638	1. i appreciate your TECHNICAL advice to River presumably a non_IT literate guy/gal. Oh he is literate, he just has a bit of a problem with personal honesty. You find that in his Darwin quotes which he was literate enough to take out of context knowing full well that by doing so they would appear to mean the opposite of what the author intended. Such lack of personal integrity is a common problem amongst the religious as they are only concerned that they be believed, and have not concern about if the are correct. 2. In my 33 years of Islam, I always used to pray a God which I never saw, never heard, never spoke. Of course he didn't. He's just a character in a book. It is just that when I was born, my parents told me, so I used to do it. Same was true for many of us here. I know it was for me. This is my first time, that I am questioning for the EXISTANCE of such thing called "GOD" in the presence of such miseries as we all witness around us. The problems around us only show that the personality of the character God that is in all the books that he is the hero of. It doesn't necessarily prove that there are no Gods. It does prove that there is not a God that is anything like the God who is the hero of these "holy" books. As per my little knowledge of Islam, our God "Allah" should NEVER be discussed since, it is beyond our mental capacity to try to "understand" HIM. For example, think of a robot that I created. Whatever I program it, it will think like that. Nothing beyond. When people tell you that it is a sure sign that they are trying to trick you. First--their mental capacity isn't any greater than yours. So how come they can understand him and you can't? Second--your mental capacity is just fine. You aren't an idiot and you can understand what is going on. There isn't any God. There is just a bunch of people telling a story about a God. It's only a story. They are using it to gain control over the people they are telling it to. 3. "fake" is something that we keep on calling until the day it becomes "truth". Right now, i may say that USA has been nuked by Iran. That is "fake" until the day it is REALLY nuked You have to think this out a bit further. Iran isn't a fake. Such a place exists. The United States isn't a fake, I'm sitting in it as we speak. There really are such things as atomic bombs. There really are such things as wars So you are talking about REAL places, Real technology and Real potential situations. When you talk about God you are talking about a fictional character. A fictional character who lives in a fictional land and does fictional magic. There are no REAL components to the God story while your Iran/US story was made up almost entirely of real components.

06-26-2003, 11:14 AM	#210
River Banned Join Date: Feb 2003 Location: NY Posts: 3,680	[QUOTE]Originally posted by River [B]BUGGY EDIT MODE: ON I AM CURRENTLY WRITING YOU A RESPONSE. HOWEVER DUE TO SERVER PROBLEMS AND A CRASH-INCLINED PC , YOU SHOULD NOT READ THIS POST TILL I REMOVE THE WORDS BUGGY EDIT. -Diana I do not find your approach argumentative or antagonistic. It is however augmentative and agnostic. In short, I believe you are far more open-minded than most people but there are certain things that I must point out. Just for a moment , place your b.s meter aside for I do not want to set it off. I must say that you are 100% right on my basic assumptions. You nailed it . Though, you compared me to Christian missionaries and apologetics.....Which I would have to disagree because I am clearly speaking at another level. Christians who defend their scripture are often compelled to employ semantic acrobatics as a way of expressing themselves. Their methodology is often different, and there certainly isn't a whole lot they could say about science from their scripture. Roughly ten years ago, I felt a similar viewpoint of the Holy Quran. When I first picked it up ...I was confused......Why are chapters named after things that it is not related to ? Why is there no beginning or end to the book? Why are things belabored upon? Why is there no geneology charts? Why are the shortest Suras in the back? Things didnt make sense at first, and I stopped reading the book for some time...... However, over the years I have taken and indepth look into the Quran. You say it has no rhythm and order. It might appear that way because translaters of the Quran have generally had it such that it would imitate the feel of "Kings James Version". This is a difficult task indeed . The Quran is by far the most meticulously chiseled book in human history. Allow me to explain....

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.