Interesting debate on existance of god, worth a read 2
- Thread starter RPGlover12
- Start date
- Status
OP
RPGlover12
New member
- Thread Starter
- #482
look mohamed i've tried with them toooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo much ask them for how many pages were me alone and all of them they were all against me and then i've just found out after askin many people they told me guidness only come from allah not u or me or anybody from the world just allah even after i heard that i didn't gave up upon them instead i still continued and continued and continued and continued and i still believed that allah will guide them and i do pray for them everyday and i do everything for them but the guidness still comes from allah u can't let them become muslims by just tellin some stuff like i gave them facts in the quran like never before and sunah and still and am still lookin for some stuff for them i will never give up upon them
sk8bloke22
roll for life
the difference is, at least mohammad yousif is actually explaining his evidence, or quotes he uses. u just listed, and listed, and listed and listed and listed quotes, extracts that were at many times, very random.
a little extract from talkorigins.org on how a fact is defined (although there are various ways one can define a fact):
" facts and theories are different things, not rungs in a hierarchy of increasing certainty. Facts are the world's data. Theories are structures of ideas that explain and interpret facts. Facts don't go away when scientists debate rival theories to explain them. Einstein's theory of gravitation replaced Newton's in this century, but apples didn't suspend themselves in midair, pending the outcome. And humans evolved from ape-like ancestors whether they did so by Darwin's proposed mechanism or by some other yet to be discovered.
Moreover "fact" doesn't mean "absolute certainty"; there ain't no such animal in an exciting and complex world. The final proofs of logic and mathematics flow deductively from stated premises and achieve certainty only because they are NOT about the empirical world"
basically a fact is something that is data or process (in the case of biology) such as the effect of gravity on apples dangling from a tree. the proposed mechanism that causes the process to occur is a theory. different stuff which seems to get constantly mixed up, particularly in this arguement. according to the definition about a fact isnt necessarily a truth, but rather a truth is something that is believed correct through observing the facts.
a little extract from talkorigins.org on how a fact is defined (although there are various ways one can define a fact):
" facts and theories are different things, not rungs in a hierarchy of increasing certainty. Facts are the world's data. Theories are structures of ideas that explain and interpret facts. Facts don't go away when scientists debate rival theories to explain them. Einstein's theory of gravitation replaced Newton's in this century, but apples didn't suspend themselves in midair, pending the outcome. And humans evolved from ape-like ancestors whether they did so by Darwin's proposed mechanism or by some other yet to be discovered.
Moreover "fact" doesn't mean "absolute certainty"; there ain't no such animal in an exciting and complex world. The final proofs of logic and mathematics flow deductively from stated premises and achieve certainty only because they are NOT about the empirical world"
basically a fact is something that is data or process (in the case of biology) such as the effect of gravity on apples dangling from a tree. the proposed mechanism that causes the process to occur is a theory. different stuff which seems to get constantly mixed up, particularly in this arguement. according to the definition about a fact isnt necessarily a truth, but rather a truth is something that is believed correct through observing the facts.
Last edited:
OP
RPGlover12
New member
- Thread Starter
- #486
we never forced ya to become a muslim we will not tell ya to become a muslim or be killed actually its a stupid we just leave ya find ur own truth on ur ownEddy said:
Mohammed Yousif
Banned
This is not for you.
Please ignore all my postings here.
You don't want to say "God exists" because you don't want to be limited , and so you this discussion has nothing to do with you , you are not seeking the truth , you are seeking someone to tell you "Oh man , you are right , there is no god and you can make everything you want to do even it's evil without limits" NO , I will not tell you that.
Please guys , if someone wants to reach the truth (God exists or not) , I encourage him to continue discussing this , if not please just ignore this thread.
Totally not true, if you heard something don't assume it's true unless you make sure of it first!
I don't need anyone to tell me I'm right , I have my own faith that I'm quite sure of it , I'm just trying to discuss that with other people. Actually , people like Eddy are who want someone to tell them they are right!
Toran ? what? a new book
Qur'an or Torah ?
anyway I already gave proofs that Qur'an is true, no one can knew all these facts more that 14 centuries ago! But since god is the PERFECTION , we can say that God knows EVERYTHING and no one but God can know all these facts 14 centuries ago!!
If the people in schools had had a faith that tells them to STOP VIOLENCE , there wouldn't have been such violence.
Mohammed Yousif
Banned
You can't say "These words are written in a book , so they are not facts".
Sorry , but this cannot be a good way to judge it , yes it's a book but you can make sure of every word in it and I already gave you some examples!!
If Mohammed (peace be upon him) can't read and can't write , how come he gave you words in Arabic? (and I mean REAL Arabic which even arabic native speakers have problems reading it!) and this itself is a miracle , Mohammed (peace be upon him) was known before Allah sent him to the whole nations in his home (Qoraish) by the honest , all people at that time were trusting every word he was saying, and after he gave them some verses , they believed that these words CAN'T be said by ANY HUMAN who can read and write , so what about this who can NOT read and can NOT write!!!
But they were like Eddy , they didn't want any limits by joining him , they wanted to do EVERYTHING they want to do including EVIL things.
AlphaWolf:
If you know someone who didn't lie a SINGLE TIME and he told you some FACTS that you are already sure of them and then he told you more facts that you don't know about , what will you do? you will believe him, and after you take these facts and verify them , you will trust him even more and more.
At that point , you will know that this one doesn't lie and you will believe anything he is telling you about.
Another approach is :
If he already told you some facts that was discovered 14 centuries later and were IMPOSSIBLE to discover at his time , what should you think of him?
a magicain ? no those people can't know about these things.
God is the knowledge , and God is who told Mohammed (peace be upon him) about these facts . and this is the ONLY ACCEPTABLE explanation of that.
so God trusted Mohammed (peace be upon him) , and so we -humans- should do as well!
Another approach is :
The one who can't read and can't write, can't write these words on his own , and even if he can do , every verse is VERY HARD to make (this may not be clear in English , but it's VERY clear in Arabic , Arabic is very HARD language , despite these dialects that were developped to make it easy) , maybe in English you can easily write a poem, but in Arabic it's far more HARDER and it's far BETTER than any english peom (I don't mean the meanings , I mean the formation of the sentence and 'Qafea' and 'Wazn' and 'Mohasenat Bade3ea' and a lot of things that don't exist in English).
Take it from an Arabian(not muslim) (The verses in Qur'an can't be written by ANY HUMAN, because of the Arabic language itself that was used in Qur'an)
Mohammed Yousif
Banned
This is not true
Islam does NOT support slavery.
From 14 centuries ago, people (specially those who were living in Europe) couldn't have imagined life without slaves and so Islam states that as follows :
1-You cannot get new slaves (Islam closed the doors for getting new slaves , you are not allowed to kidnap people , you are not allowed to involve in wars rather than those wars which you must involve in to defend your country or defend other people...etc .........etc).
2-If your female slave got a baby , it's YOUR BABY , and must take your name.
3-There are great rewards for those who are trying to FREE slaves.
From 'Surat Al-Bakara' verse number 177:
4-If a slave wants to be free , he can work on his own and get money and buy himself, which is called 'Mokataba' and not even that , but Islam encourages people to give them money after freeing them , so they can start a life of their own!
From 'Surat Al-Noor' verse number 33:
5-A lot of sins can be cleared by just freeing slaves (for example , if you sweared to do something but didn't , Freeing a slave would clear that).
From Qura'an , 'Surat Al-Balad'
[11] But he hath made no haste on the path that is steep.
[12] And what will explain to thee the path that is steep?
[13] (It is
That was the Islamic plan toout an end to slavery without discouraging a lot of people and now Islam succeeded to do so and slavery got an end by that Islamic plan (isn't that great!)
and according to that plan, Islam doesn't allow you to get new slaves and so a muslim IS NOT ALLOWED TO HAVE SLAVES ANYMORE
NO , this is not true.
That was the case BEFORE ISLAM.
Before Islam people were founding it shame to have a girl , and so they were killing girls they got , but islam PROHIBTED THAT , and made women EQUAL to men
In the current bible, you can find it clear that men are better than women, and even have the rights to MASTER women!!!
but Islam is far better than that, a woman is a human ,and a man is human , and they are equal.
look at this:
http://www.geocities.com/window2islam/books/womeninjudeochris.html
to know to what extent Islam gives women all of their rights.
NOT TRUE
Islam only encourages you to involve in a war , if you must involve in it to DEFEND yourself or to DEFEND any innocent evenif that innocent is not a muslim.
and if defending your lands and your people is terrorism , then I'm a terrorist indeed.
Islam prevents us from OFFENDING people , we don't have the rights to go and take someone's lands and say it's our lands!!
and if you are to think such a way then I should say 'Spain is our lands because most of its people were muslims someday'!
From 'Surat Al-Anfaal':
you see
This is called 'Adaptation' not 'EVOLUTION'.
Evolution means that someday you can see a human with 4 arms for example (and this is not true)
compare the current human with a human from the Stone Age for example , you will not see much difference , you will not see that he has 4 legs , you will not see that he has one eye.
so this cannot be called 'Evolution' , this is called 'Adaptation'.
Of course I'm trying to support my belief , but these are not theories , and you saw yourself some verses from Qur'an that were discovered lately , just to prove that Qur'an is the truth in a book.
From 'Surat Fosselet'
You are absolutely right
From 'Surat Al-Qassas(The Stories)' verse number 56:
But everything should have a reason , and if we were that reason , Allah will reward us for that.
From 'Surat Al-Kahf(The cave)' verse number 30:
not again!!
this is not true , women are equal to men see this :
http://www.geocities.com/window2islam/books/womeninjudeochris.html
sk8bloke22
roll for life
ok im gonna repeat wat i said a few pages back cos it was edit and i dont think anyone noticed it. u say god is 'perfect', well- If this is the case, he cannot have flaws. He has no needs. Nor can he have any wants, for to suggest otherwise implies that he is not satisfied with his current state. Dissatisfaction is a product of imperfection, thus a perfect God would be totally satisfied with a static existence; that is to say, he would change nothing.
Yet, according to our definition, he changes everything. He creates. He spends six days doing so. Granted that to a timeless being six days would be instantaneous, but still, he is not static. This is a contradiction. An all-powerful being that neither needs nor wants to change does not change. Therefore, either God is not perfect, or he did not create the Universe.
In the latter case, either the Universe does not exist at all (a statement which we have strong reason to doubt is true) or the Universe came about without the aid of God. In either case, Gods existence becomes irrelevant; He has no importance to us for our existence, nor does our existence matter to him. Also, an unchanging, perfect being wouldn't be bothered by us at all (no interventions on his behalf, since he is satisfied with everything as it is).
-Ever-present (exists simultaneously in every point in space and every point in time)and Transcendental(exists separately from the material universe): Our definition of God says that he created and rules the Universe. It is impossible for him to be a part of the Universe, since that would suggest that he created himself. He cannot have created himself because he would have to already exist in order to create himself. Thus, God cannot be ever-present, as defined above. He can only be transcendental if he is the creator. Which is fine, since transcendentalism and ever-presence within the universe are contradictory anyway. You have to be either/or or neither, you cant be both.
-Omnipotent,createdthe Universe and Omniscient, has infinite wisdom: If God is to exist, he must either BE the Universe or be a PART of the Universe. In the former case, he can still be omnipresent, since by being the Universe he is automatically everywhere at once. In the latter, he looses his omnipresence. This limits him, since he needs to be able to travel to places that he currently does not occupy, and thus he looses his omnipotence, since someone with infinite power could by default be everywhere at once. So for God to be omnipotent he must be the Universe.
Now, if God is the Universe, he is observable, since the Universe is observable. The Universe also behaves in predictable ways, which humans have described in the scientific laws of physics, chemistry, biology, and others. Since these behaviors are true in all inertial frames of reference (all perspectives regardless of relative velocity), which indicates a finite Universe, Gods behavior is limited to those behaviors and to the resources of a finite Universe. This is contrary to the idea of omnipotence. While he would still be vastly powerful, especially to the eyes of a human, he is not all-powerful.
Yet, according to our definition, he changes everything. He creates. He spends six days doing so. Granted that to a timeless being six days would be instantaneous, but still, he is not static. This is a contradiction. An all-powerful being that neither needs nor wants to change does not change. Therefore, either God is not perfect, or he did not create the Universe.
In the latter case, either the Universe does not exist at all (a statement which we have strong reason to doubt is true) or the Universe came about without the aid of God. In either case, Gods existence becomes irrelevant; He has no importance to us for our existence, nor does our existence matter to him. Also, an unchanging, perfect being wouldn't be bothered by us at all (no interventions on his behalf, since he is satisfied with everything as it is).
-Ever-present (exists simultaneously in every point in space and every point in time)and Transcendental(exists separately from the material universe): Our definition of God says that he created and rules the Universe. It is impossible for him to be a part of the Universe, since that would suggest that he created himself. He cannot have created himself because he would have to already exist in order to create himself. Thus, God cannot be ever-present, as defined above. He can only be transcendental if he is the creator. Which is fine, since transcendentalism and ever-presence within the universe are contradictory anyway. You have to be either/or or neither, you cant be both.
-Omnipotent,createdthe Universe and Omniscient, has infinite wisdom: If God is to exist, he must either BE the Universe or be a PART of the Universe. In the former case, he can still be omnipresent, since by being the Universe he is automatically everywhere at once. In the latter, he looses his omnipresence. This limits him, since he needs to be able to travel to places that he currently does not occupy, and thus he looses his omnipotence, since someone with infinite power could by default be everywhere at once. So for God to be omnipotent he must be the Universe.
Now, if God is the Universe, he is observable, since the Universe is observable. The Universe also behaves in predictable ways, which humans have described in the scientific laws of physics, chemistry, biology, and others. Since these behaviors are true in all inertial frames of reference (all perspectives regardless of relative velocity), which indicates a finite Universe, Gods behavior is limited to those behaviors and to the resources of a finite Universe. This is contrary to the idea of omnipotence. While he would still be vastly powerful, especially to the eyes of a human, he is not all-powerful.
sk8bloke22
roll for life
ok im gonna repeat wat i said a few pages back cos it was edit and i dont think anyone noticed it. u say god is 'perfect', well- If this is the case, he cannot have flaws. He has no needs. Nor can he have any wants, for to suggest otherwise implies that he is not satisfied with his current state. Dissatisfaction is a product of imperfection, thus a perfect God would be totally satisfied with a static existence; that is to say, he would change nothing.
Yet, according to our definition, he changes everything. He creates. He spends six days doing so. Granted that to a timeless being six days would be instantaneous, but still, he is not static. This is a contradiction. An all-powerful being that neither needs nor wants to change does not change. Therefore, either God is not perfect, or he did not create the Universe.
In the latter case, either the Universe does not exist at all (a statement which we have strong reason to doubt is true) or the Universe came about without the aid of God. In either case, Gods existence becomes irrelevant; He has no importance to us for our existence, nor does our existence matter to him. Also, an unchanging, perfect being wouldn't be bothered by us at all (no interventions on his behalf, since he is satisfied with everything as it is).
-Ever-present (exists simultaneously in every point in space and every point in time)and Transcendental(exists separately from the material universe): Our definition of God says that he created and rules the Universe. It is impossible for him to be a part of the Universe, since that would suggest that he created himself. He cannot have created himself because he would have to already exist in order to create himself. Thus, God cannot be ever-present, as defined above. He can only be transcendental if he is the creator. Which is fine, since transcendentalism and ever-presence within the universe are contradictory anyway. You have to be either/or or neither, you cant be both.
-Omnipotent,createdthe Universe and Omniscient, has infinite wisdom: If God is to exist, he must either BE the Universe or be a PART of the Universe. In the former case, he can still be omnipresent, since by being the Universe he is automatically everywhere at once. In the latter, he looses his omnipresence. This limits him, since he needs to be able to travel to places that he currently does not occupy, and thus he looses his omnipotence, since someone with infinite power could by default be everywhere at once. So for God to be omnipotent he must be the Universe.
Now, if God is the Universe, he is observable, since the Universe is observable. The Universe also behaves in predictable ways, which humans have described in the scientific laws of physics, chemistry, biology, and others. Since these behaviors are true in all inertial frames of reference (all perspectives regardless of relative velocity), which indicates a finite Universe, Gods behavior is limited to those behaviors and to the resources of a finite Universe. This is contrary to the idea of omnipotence. While he would still be vastly powerful, especially to the eyes of a human, he is not all-powerful.
p.s: Mohammad Yousif, doing a good job in debating here, ur points are well explained and balanced...something that this thread has seriously been missing. im now going to hit my head against a wall after failing miserably in my history a-level...
Yet, according to our definition, he changes everything. He creates. He spends six days doing so. Granted that to a timeless being six days would be instantaneous, but still, he is not static. This is a contradiction. An all-powerful being that neither needs nor wants to change does not change. Therefore, either God is not perfect, or he did not create the Universe.
In the latter case, either the Universe does not exist at all (a statement which we have strong reason to doubt is true) or the Universe came about without the aid of God. In either case, Gods existence becomes irrelevant; He has no importance to us for our existence, nor does our existence matter to him. Also, an unchanging, perfect being wouldn't be bothered by us at all (no interventions on his behalf, since he is satisfied with everything as it is).
-Ever-present (exists simultaneously in every point in space and every point in time)and Transcendental(exists separately from the material universe): Our definition of God says that he created and rules the Universe. It is impossible for him to be a part of the Universe, since that would suggest that he created himself. He cannot have created himself because he would have to already exist in order to create himself. Thus, God cannot be ever-present, as defined above. He can only be transcendental if he is the creator. Which is fine, since transcendentalism and ever-presence within the universe are contradictory anyway. You have to be either/or or neither, you cant be both.
-Omnipotent,createdthe Universe and Omniscient, has infinite wisdom: If God is to exist, he must either BE the Universe or be a PART of the Universe. In the former case, he can still be omnipresent, since by being the Universe he is automatically everywhere at once. In the latter, he looses his omnipresence. This limits him, since he needs to be able to travel to places that he currently does not occupy, and thus he looses his omnipotence, since someone with infinite power could by default be everywhere at once. So for God to be omnipotent he must be the Universe.
Now, if God is the Universe, he is observable, since the Universe is observable. The Universe also behaves in predictable ways, which humans have described in the scientific laws of physics, chemistry, biology, and others. Since these behaviors are true in all inertial frames of reference (all perspectives regardless of relative velocity), which indicates a finite Universe, Gods behavior is limited to those behaviors and to the resources of a finite Universe. This is contrary to the idea of omnipotence. While he would still be vastly powerful, especially to the eyes of a human, he is not all-powerful.
p.s: Mohammad Yousif, doing a good job in debating here, ur points are well explained and balanced...something that this thread has seriously been missing. im now going to hit my head against a wall after failing miserably in my history a-level...
Last edited:
icepir8
Moderator
"And on the seventh day Man created God in his image."
This refelected in our language. Everyone I know say's "My God" as if they personaly own God. This is a very basic flaw(?) religion. We don't say "The God who created me." We say "My God."
By that definition My God does exist because I created him with my belife.
This refelected in our language. Everyone I know say's "My God" as if they personaly own God. This is a very basic flaw(?) religion. We don't say "The God who created me." We say "My God."
By that definition My God does exist because I created him with my belife.
Eddy
I Run This
people like eddy? You got me all wrong Mohammed Yousif, this is like the 5th time you do, and it gets tiring after a while. So what your telling me is that i cant post my opinions anymore? Because i dont agree with your opinions?
that in my opinion is wrong, the mother of the child, taking care of him 9 months, caring for him, and eventually giving birth to the baby, should be the owner of the baby, at all times.
On such a soft topic as slavery, it didnt end because of islam, maybe in the middle east. but not in the other parts of the world. It ended through protests, revolts, reform, and marches. I also hate how, a human, needs to BUY his freedom from his owner, that in my opinion is not a offense to religion, or god, but to humanity.
Well your link depicts it nice, but what it says in there, is it really carried out? Women in the mddle east (90% of em) live under their husban's shadow, and are thought of as the man's helper through life's issues and obstacles. Some are even abused.
The truth in a book? Come on now, be honest, the Quran is just a book that gives opinions on how a individual should live his life, and some facts. What i dont understand, is, why doesnt it have the cure for AIDS? It is the book of truth right? AIDS is the worst plague to hit the world, and the Quran says nothing of it?
NOT AGAIN!!!!! Evolution exists, i have been seeing alot of history channel, and a few days ago they had a show on evolution. They show how a skeleton from prehistoric times differs from a modern one. Now, the cranium has gotten smaller, weve grown taller, our skin has become more resistant to heat and diseases, our vision has improved, as well as our hearing. Humans have grown much smarter and use their brain much more than in prehistoric times. Thats only to start, so PROVE to me that evolution does not exist. I sure can prove it does.
So islam, ENCOURAGES you to involve in war? Yet another thing i disagree with, it should encourage you to seek other means of resolving the problem. So what are you trying to prove exactly?
No disrespect, but what is a vail used for? And what is it's symbolic meaning?
Sean.Miller
New member
the only interesting thing about this debate is that your morons can keep it going forever
sk8bloke22
roll for life
all things on 'evolution' can be found on www.talkorigins.org Eddy. the differences between theory and fact, the factual parts of evolution, the theoretical parts of evolution, and the misconceptions, damn useful site. a good starting place would be to visit the sites FAQ, look at some of the links and explanations there, very simple, easy and logical to understand, and certianly convincing.
- Status