Posts by J1

@Oscar Pops 12:50 Re: @J1 gimme what I want..

Let me try to shorten this abit.

logic and reason.

The point is that atheism does not require you to make use of either. Atheism has only one thing, God does not exist.

You agree with this, and your contention is that it is logic and reason that brought you to atheism.. which may well be the case.

However, you have accepted that the use of these tools is due to circular reasoning (there are lots of forms of logic, fuzzy logic quantum logic.. you could have used dreams or tossed coins to come to your conclusions etc.. that God does not exist.. atheism does not care), in which case, your conclusion may not be sound.

Further, I get the impression that you have not made use of some relevant information to hand.. Revelation for example.. specifically the Quran. I'd suggest to you that once you incorporate it into your reasoning, your conclusions would change.. and atheism would no longer be the outcome.

Why look at this particular book claiming to be a revelation, and not others.. its in the news at the moment.. the numbers of its adherents are growing.. more and more likelyhood of you having to deal with them.

Just to be clear.. when you are researching into Islam...

Islam does not advocate blind following. It does not ask you to close your eyes and jump into the abyss so to speak. God says that you should make use of reason, come with all the criticisms you may have against Islam, and see if they match up. Atheists claim to think for themselves, Islams calls them out on this, and says to use that ability wrt the Quran. How did a man who could not read or write, and was in the public eye so much, produce in secret such a book.

Islam says the position of one who believes just because they were born into a faith, is a weak position.. This was a common excuse at the time of the Last Prophet, peace be upon him.. 'we are only doing what our fathers did', one that God refuted again and again..

Islam does not ask you to believe because, for instance, the Holy Prophet Moses, peace be upon him, split the sea by Gods permission. You were not there to see it.

God does provide you with something for you to look at, listen to, feel, think about, that something is the Quran. The claim being made is that this book is Gods word, and is a greater miracle than any other miracle given to any other Prophet before. Further, it has been preserved, and it is here for you to analyse. The claim becomes even more audacious, that you will not be able to understand it all, that you cannot reproduce the like of it.

There are lots of other things that can be looked at, the Holy Prophet, peace be upon him, his life, his honesty, his effect... the history of the message, the prophecies, the way revelation was sent down, Quranic verses about the world/Universe..

21:30 Do not, see, those who, disbelieved, that, the heavens, and the earth, were, a joined entity, then we parted them, and we made, from, water, every, living thing, then will not, they believe.

For the one willing to look, there is alot to look at.

The above is when you are coming to Islam, checking into it, learning about it, deciding whether it is from God or not, or does God actually exist etc..

Once you have made the determination, that God does exist, and that Islam is the truth, that the Quran is the word of God, then you are saying that there is One who knows better than you. That whether you understand or not, He still knows better than you.

God at this point places responsibilities upon you.. that you will be subservient to Him, that what He says goes.. whether or not you understand. You have every right and indeed it is a duty upon you to try to understand. Note the word try.

Ofcourse, if you make the determination that Islam is not what it claims.. then you have actually lost nothing much.. just gained understanding.

---Agreed and I am interested, hence continuing this debate despite being pretty certain we're not going to change each other's minds.

Understanding does not require you to change your position.

I'd suggest that you have a look at the couple of links I posted in my earlier posts on this topic.. one is about 'Muhammad, peace be upon him, the Greatest', its a small booklet, that gives a background on why muslims and others say he is so special, that he is the greatest of human beings.

http://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=muhammad%20the%20greates&source=web&cd=2&cad=rja&ved=0CDAQFjAB&url=http%3A%2F%2Fsabr.com%2Fdownloads%2Fcategory%2F4-seerah%3Fdownload%3D10%253Amuhammad-the-greatest-doc&ei=7IVZUOGEB6jB0QXPrIHQDA&usg=AFQjCNFS6M90NUmbvG0wdSQi6fegVB6KRQ

The other is a link to a TED lecture (10 mins or so), about reading the Quran, by a self described agnostic jew..

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3Y2Or0LlO6g

She was quite amusing.

Both will give you some insights.

http://www.medialens.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=697:us-consulate-killings-spontaneous-religious-or-planned-political&catid=25:alerts-2012&Itemid=69

The above is a link to a medialens article, this is about their take on the consulate killings. Keep in mind, that they are not muslims.

@Oscar Pops 13:49 Re: gimme what I want.. @J1

-No, that's because nobody disagrees with that.

There have been plenty who did.

-The bit that's being disputed is where you assert that "atheism does not give you any basis for right and wrong" therefore atheists have no basis for right and wrong (you said it here: "For a bunch of people who do not even have a basis for good or bad, right or wrong, atheist appear to love...") - obviously atheists *do* have a basis for right and wrong, it is just not a result of, nor related to, their absence of religious faith. Rather, their absence of faith is a result of the same source of their basis of right and wrong - principally logic and reason.

Atheism has nothing also to do with logic and reason.. it does not specify that you have to use either. You can equally toss a coin to decide if you want.

Further, I would say that most do not decide on what is right and wrong. They merely use whatever is already defined for them, based on whichever society they live in, whatever are the prevailing views of the time. Within the context of that society, what it allows, atheists make a choice. Which is no different from anyone else, ie. the level of the choice being made. So for example, there will be very few if any who will ever go back to first principals and try and address why lying is bad, or taking some else's land is bad.

Even you are saying that logic and reason are what you are basing you conclusions on.. Why use logic/reason... it is just one tool out of many that can be employed (what kind of logic?).. why is it first on your list.. do you think that no one else can employ the same tool.. so in the case of Islam... we are told time and time again in the Quran to think, to understand, to see behind what is on the surface.. to contemplate deeply... so I could quite justifyably say that muslims are required to make use of such tools (whether we do or not, is a different matter) ... however, the atheist has no such reason to make use of these tools.

If, as you suggest above, its your logic and reason that is primary, and atheism is just as a result of the use of these tools.. even then you have a problem. Why employ these, is it perhaps logical to use logic? or only sensible to be reasonable. One persons reason is not anothers, neither is logic always correct.

As to it clearing the way to allow rational behaviour, the example of the comments here are evidence against this... since plenty have seen fit to use all sorts of foul language. Is that rational behaviour? I'd suggest it is one step removed from physical violence.. which is the same thing these same people are decrying.

Islam makes the claim, that revelation trumps logic, reason etc.. The only way to confirm or reject this claim, is to study the Quran. If the Quran is truly the Gods word, then it is only rational to follow it. What most atheists do, is they reject, perhaps Christianity, and because of the little that they know about that faith, they decide that all the rest must be the same... and so with one brush, they tar the lot as nonesense, irrational.. unfortuanately, for the one who claims to think for themselves.. you do not have this as a get out.. your claim itself requires you to weigh each claiment on its merits.. Islam is not Christianity, nor is the Quran the Bible.

Further, I'd suggest its in your own interests, purely from a worldly perspective, to have some understanding of Islam. I heard that the UN is predicting that within a few years, that 1 out every 2 people born, will be born a muslim. At work and home you will be dealing with more and more of them. It is only reasonable for you to be prepared to deal with so many people who are professing the same faith.

gimme what I want.. @Andrew Jones 2 16:13

-the ability to tell right from wrong - does not require faith - it requires the ability to use logic, reasoning and common sense.

surely your logic would require you to read what I actually wrote first.. and then comment on it.

I said that atheism does not give you any basis for right and wrong. Nobody has yet been able to show otherwise.

What is harm? this requires a good and bad basis, which atheism does not provide you. Is it harmful to someone to offend them? most atheists have no problem with doing so all the time claiming they do not like to harm.

You mention that none of the faiths have any benefit for you.. which is an atheistic view.. what can I get out of it.. rather than, what is the truth here.

You appear not to be interested in truth, just in getting what you want. In which case, atheism is exactly what you will want, since it cannot say to you anything about good or bad, and make you even more depressed.

@Peter Johnstone 18:39 Re: atheist 'sense'

-No God means probably no afterlife.

Thats an assumption.. which atheism does not give you, one particular to you.

notice also the probably.. a bit unsure are we??

you got your break, at your first step.

Re: atheist 'sense' (AC @ 11:56)

-You can add one to your list, as I am more than happy to state with total conviction that 'there are no gods".

I agree, there are no gods.

The begining of Islam is come to the conclusion that there are no gods.. that there is nothing worthy of worship. No man can be, no sun moon fire etc.. nothing in creation is worthy of worship.

The literal meaning of the creed of Islam begins with, "There is nothing worthy of worship"...

It then goes on to, ", except Allah", the one and only worthy of worship

It completes with, ", and Muhammad is His messanger.". ie. the messenger, peace be upon him, is not God, is not worthy of worship.. keep it straight in your heads, and don't make the same mistake others have made in the past.

Now, where would like to go with this?

Re: atheist 'sense' (J1 @ 09.20)

-"I said atheism does not give any basis for good and bad.. which is true.. atheism is only 'there is no god', it is nothing else."

-What you actually said was:

-"For a bunch of people who do not even have a basis for good or bad, right or wrong, atheist appear to love to talk alot about how bad others are. They do not appear to realise that atheism gives one no way to determine either."

-The two sentences are not the same.

How so.. atheism is 'there is no god', nothing else.. and atheism gives no basis to determine right and wrong etc.. seem to be saying the same thing.. no?

While true the statements are not identical, they are saying the same thing.

-And people are merely saying that they have observed the 'religion of peace' being terrifically violent.

The word Islam, in Arabic, means to get to peace by submitting ones will to the Will of God. This means following whatever He says, whether one agrees with it or not.

Islam is a way of life of strength and justice. If someone strkes you, you have every right under law to get redress.. however, it is better to forgive. It is not for nothing that it has grown ever since the time of the Holy Prophet, peace be upon him.. and is still growing.

Peace does not mean that you allow others to beat you up, and keep doing so for years.. and you do not respond. It seems to be a common misunderstanding that being a muslim means that you should be a monk or something. Do not raise a hand to defend yourself.. this is not Islam.

As to violence and who is being the most 'terrific' at it. If one only views the standard media.. yes one will ofcourse get the view that Islam and Muslims are the baddest people on the planet. Hardly a surprise there.

However, if you were to view independent media..

http://www.counterpunch.org/

http://www.medialens.org/

..these are non-muslim examples.. you get quite a different picture of what actually is going on.

-And if you'd have been born in a different society, your religious views would most likely be different to what they are now. The number of people who change religions are tiny. The number of people who stay in the religion of their birth group is vast. The number of people who renounce their religion because they see the problems and injustice that religions cause are growing, and growing quite rapidly.

Agree with most of this. However, the number of people entering into Islam is growing aswell.. and such people are not people who are uneducated, or have been picked up from some cave and popped into this time.

-"Good" and "Bad", "moral" and immoral" are all culturally relative, but with thought and compassion a reasonable personal code can be constructed that can change over time. Having a fixed code that is hundreds or thousands of years old can only lead to conflict with a modern society and viewpoints.

This is only the case where one has no basis for good and bad.. if you take God out of the equation, then ofcourse its your word, your opinion against mine.. the point to keep in mind is that with God in the picture, your and my views do not count for anything. God's view trumps ours.

In the house of Islam, the point being made is exactly this, that I am not trying to push my view upon you. Just passing on the view of God.. I expect you'll want evidence.. God provides evidence.. the Quran is the evidence, the creation is evidence, you are evidence.

I expect you do not accept the creation as evidence.. in which case, stick with the Quran. It claims to be a miracle, it claims that you cannot produce even 3 sentences like it, challenges you to do so. It claims that it is with out contradictions, it contains no doubts.. essentially, God is saying, come take me on if you can. He even goes further.. He says, get all your buddies together, your equipment etc.. and produce something like the Quran.

Now, if you are truly after evidence, I posted a link earlier.. have a read, think about it. This man, Muhammad, peace be upon him.. we are claiming is the greatest of all human beings. Does what is presented in the booklet make sense. At the very least, it may dispel some views one may have picked up.

The Quran is evidence, take up its challenge.. read it, deconstruct it..

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3Y2Or0LlO6g

This is a TED lecture, 10 mins, on the take of an agnositc Jew, on her reading of the Quran.

Atheist like to claim that they are free thinkers.. people that think for themselves.. well the Quran is addressing you. People of intellect, people who think, those that know, those that think deeply etc...

Re: atheist 'sense'

So essentially you have agreed that atheism gave you nothing but, 'God does not exist'.. the rest did not come from atheism, it came from which ever other sources you happened to like at the time.

None of which is universal and can be applied to anyone else other than you (your experiences, perceptions, conclusions are yours alone), and also has to be subordinated to the prevailing views (which are applied to everyone).. and within the limit of the law (again applied to everyone).. in other words.. you have come up with pretty much nothing. Or have you actually come up with something that one could not attribute as I have done so above, something from athiesm?

Please note, I did not say that atheists do not have morality.. I said, that they cannot claim that atheism gives it to them.

As to limited free speech not being free, agreed.

Quoting Mr Fry does not help.

Neither does the use of bad language. It merely shows a lack of self control, and the ability to come up with an argument, whether it is quoted or not.

Saying anything, providing proof on top of proof, to most people makes no difference.. they do not care.

However, to say that I am offended to someone who has the empathy/compassion etc.. that you mention, will mean that they will be more careful with the subject in question. Their empathy/compassion etc..leads to such behaviour. They may not agree, but they will be careful. Mr Fry, is wrong, it does make a difference, depends on who your are talking to. Most of the posters on this site, are in the camp of offend away.. which one are you in? and yet at the same time they will claim to have the empathy etc.. as you claimed above.

Re: atheist 'sense'

I said atheism does not give any basis for good and bad.. which is true.. atheism is only 'there is no god', it is nothing else.

It does not tell you anything else, it does not say that you had to come to this understanding, using logic, science, having a dream etc.. are all equally valid ways of getting to the understanding that 'there is no God'.

If you have a look at atheist websites.. thats what they say.

I merely said what atheists say.

As to good and bad, most people follow the prevailing views. Atheism did not give it to them, society did.

In order to promote more understanding, if you are really that interested...

http://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=muhammad%20the%20greates&source=web&cd=2&cad=rja&ved=0CDAQFjAB&url=http%3A%2F%2Fsabr.com%2Fdownloads%2Fcategory%2F4-seerah%3Fdownload%3D10%253Amuhammad-the-greatest-doc&ei=7IVZUOGEB6jB0QXPrIHQDA&usg=AFQjCNFS6M90NUmbvG0wdSQi6fegVB6KRQ

should be a link to a short pdf booklet about the Holy Prophet, peace be upon him.

@Titus Technophobe .. nakedness .. 20120720 09:58

I was not going to reply to this.. but came across this while I was reading Quran the other day.

If you read what I have been saying in the posts to Graham, good and bad in the house of Islam, are defined by God. Once one accepts that this particular revelation, the Quran, is a revelation from God. Then it becomes incumbent on one to follow the dictates as sent down by God. Whether or not one understands something, whether or not an explanation is provided is irrelevant, ones obligation is to obey.

So at its basic, if God says jump, you do not ask how high, you just do.

If on the other hand if it is not God who is telling you to jump, then you can ask as many questions as you like. It is not your obligation to obey.

Gods creation, His rules.

If its your creation, its your rules.

I found the following about nakedness in the Quran.. this is the from Pickthall translation. Iblis is Satan, further, Iblis is not an Angel as in the Christian conception. Angels in Islam are beings of light, that do not have a choice.. Iblis is jinn, a being of fire.. these are beings like humans who are also given the ability to choose.

007.011 And We created you, then fashioned you, then told the angels: Fall ye prostrate before Adam! And they fell prostrate, all save Iblis, who was not of those who make prostration.

007.012 He said: What hindered thee that thou didst not fall prostrate when I bade thee ? (Iblis) said: I am better than him. Thou createdst me of fire while him Thou didst create of mud.

007.013 He said: Then go down hence! It is not for thee to show pride here, so go forth! Lo! thou art of those degraded.

007.014 He said: Reprieve me till the day when they are raised (from the dead).

007.015 He said: Lo! thou art of those reprieved.

007.016 He said: Now, because Thou hast sent me astray, verily I shall lurk in ambush for them on Thy Right Path.

007.017 Then I shall come upon them from before them and from behind them and from their right hands and from their left hands, and Thou wilt not find most of them beholden (unto Thee).

007.018 He said: Go forth from hence, degraded, banished. As for such of them as follow thee, surely I will fill hell with all of you.

007.019 And (unto man): O Adam! Dwell thou and thy wife in the Garden and eat from whence ye will, but come not nigh this tree lest ye become wrong-doers.

007.020 Then Satan whispered to them that he might manifest unto them that which was hidden from them of their shame, and he said: Your Lord forbade you from this tree only lest ye should become angels or become of the immortals.

007.021 And he swore unto them (saying): Lo! I am a sincere adviser unto you.

007.022 Thus did he lead them on with guile. And when they tasted of the tree their shame was manifest to them and they began to hide (by heaping) on themselves some of the leaves of the Garden. And their Lord called them, (saying): Did I not forbid you from that tree and tell you: Lo! Satan is an open enemy to you ?

007.023 They said: Our Lord! We have wronged ourselves. If thou forgive us not and have not mercy on us, surely we are of the lost!

007.024 He said: Go down (from hence), one of you a foe unto the other. There will be for you on earth a habitation and provision for a while.

007.025 He said: There shall ye live, and there shall ye die, and thence shall ye be brought forth.

007.026 O Children of Adam! We have revealed unto you raiment to conceal your shame, and splendid vesture, but the raiment of restraint from evil, that is best. This is of the revelations of Allah, that they may remember.

007.027 O Children of Adam! Let not Satan seduce you as he caused your (first) parents to go forth from the Garden and tore off from them their robe (of innocence) that he might manifest their shame to them. Lo! he seeth you, he and his tribe, from whence ye see him not. Lo! We have made the devils protecting friends for those who believe not.

007.028 And when they do some lewdness they say: We found our fathers doing it and Allah hath enjoined it on us. Say: Allah, verily, enjoineth not lewdness. Tell ye concerning Allah that which ye know not ?

007.029 Say: My Lord enjoineth justice. And set your faces upright (toward Him) at every place of worship and call upon Him, making religion pure for Him (only). As He brought you into being, so return ye (unto Him).

Please keep in mind, that a translation is not the Quran... just someones understanding of it. It will have errors, etc.. within it. The Quran is only in Arabic.

Further, God gives us many things in life as a test. So for instance, we have nails which grow.. yet we are meant to cut them, when we go to the loo, we make a mess, yet we are meant to clean ourselves and the mess afterwards. Why, because God says it is better for us.

Some things we will agree with, some we will not understand or agree with. Our obligation however, in the house of Islam, is still to obey.

Re: @ J1 - One question and some answers

----I have one yes or no question for you 'Do you believe god condemns the actions of the people who attacked the world trade centre'?

All oppression, whether great or small, is condemned by God.

All acts where innocents, as you said, are targetted. That includes your personal favourites, and those of everyone else.

Just to make something clear, I have mentioned this before, however it seems it needs repeating, in the house of Islam, I cannot say something about God, that He has not said so Himself. So whether God condems the WTC attacks, I do not know. I neither have the ear of God, nor converse etc.. with Him.

All I can say is based on what He has revealed.. and in the revelation He says that any innocent that is killed, unjustly, will be counted as if all of humankind was killed.

It is immaterial the numbers invovled, a single innocent person killed, is an atrocity.

A single bad word said to someone, will have to be answered for.

----Are your an Atheist?

----Why is it relevant? The points I have put to you are raised from a secular perspective.

Why hide it?

It is relevant so that one knows what mindset you purport to come from.. do you claim to think for yourself?

Secular is basically the same mentality of make it up as you go along.. God and His revelation have nothing to do with anything.

----Why is that an atrocity?

----The dictionary definition of an atrocity (in this context) is 'acts of extreme cruelty'. By cruelty we mean unjustified actions that harm others, and 'extreme' would mean either of numbers, or actions that cause excessive harm. (This also answers your first question for a generic definition of atrocity)

----The September 11th attack on the World Trade Centre was an atrocity because it was an unjustified action resulting in both excessive harm (killing somebody is about the most harm possible) to a large number of people.

This is a subjective opinion.. You are touting around words like harm, cruelty and extreme that not everyone will agree to your opinion on, or that of your dictionary.

Take for instance the word cruelty, the dictionary definition is not the same as what you have given.

Callous indifference to or pleasure in causing pain and suffering.

There is no mention of justification at all in the definition above.

This is still however subjective.

I said objective, not generic.

You seem to be implying, that there could be a justification for killing so many innocent people. That as long as it was justified.. then thats all ok. Are you?

As to whether killing someone is the most harm that can be done to someone. From an Islamic point of view, losing ones hereafter is much much worse. Since the hereafter is forever, and not for a few short years in this realm.

----Logic is a test of truth and falls outside the bounds of religion.

Logic is a tool, that does not always work. It does not get you to truth, if your assumptions are wrong etc. Even in some cases where they are correct, it still does not get you there. There are also many types of logic.

---As to my question above I asked that particular question because you don't seem to subscribe to either my belief in condemning atrocities, or tolerance of other people.

If you read your previous post, you will notice that you said..

---- I have never read an outright statement by Islam that this was against the will of God...

You obviously are not that interested as you did not carry out the simplest of searches. Such a search would have lead you to the long lists that existed at the links I sent you.. (did you bother to read them?), if you are not that interested, why are you questioning?

I gave you what you wanted, what you requested, outright statements that condemned the attacks. Rather than appreciating the statements, you now somehow want to turn this on its head, and say that I do not subscribe to your beliefs.

How did you come up with your beliefs by the way?

As to tolerance, the very fact we are discussing, shows that tolerance exists.. yet, somehow, you are the only one who somehow is tolerant.

Perhaps this is a different take on the arrogance and presumption game played by Graham in the posts above.

----Whilst you have supplied references to Islamic condemnations of the attack, you then go onto albeit vaguely provide justification for the attacks.

It's what you asked for, is it not.. on the one had if I try to answer you, your going to say that I'm justifying murder, on the other hand, if I don't, well I'm not answering.

You asked a question, I said, I do not know.

However, the kind of thing that people use in such instances.. as it appears you have agreed with in your response, is what I pointed out.

How does this become a justification even if vague?

Do you equate the possibility of understanding something, to a justification for it.. I suppose you would then also say that the justification for something is actually an agreement of it, which I suppose leads to an involvement in it, which I suppose requires one to be strung up for it etc.. is this logic, and how it is supposed to be used?

Going forward, I will be looking at this site less and less.. it is Ramadan after all, a time to get closer to God by fasting etc.... so please forgive me if I am not as prompt as you would like in responding to you.

Re: @Titus Technophobe - 20120724 09:47

> First you'll have to say what an atrocity is..

----How about the attacks on the World Trade Centre in the US on September 11th? That's an atrocity from my perspective.

Are your an Atheist?

Why is that an atrocity?

Can you objectively justify it as one?

Your saying from your perspective.. Is that your subjective opinion?

---- I have never read an outright statement by Islam that this was against the will of God, and that the people involved would be accountable to god.

If you were to carry out the simplest of google searches.. you can find lots..

'islam condemns 9 11'

http://www.islamicity.com/articles/articles.asp?ref=am0109-335

http://kurzman.unc.edu/islamic-statements-against-terrorism/

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reactions_to_the_September_11_attacks

Would you expect other populations to also come out with statements condemning atrocities commited by a few of their numbers?

----If so much of Islam is for the benefit of mankind, as you have said, how does killing close to 3000 innocents fit logically into the religion?

Quran 5:32. Because of that We ordained for the Children of Israel that if anyone killed a person not in retaliation of murder, or (and) to spread mischief in the land - it would be as if he killed all mankind, and if anyone saved a life, it would be as if he saved the life of all mankind. And indeed, there came to them Our Messengers with clear proofs, evidences, and signs, even then after that many of them continued to exceed the limits in the land!.

Read the condemnations.

Does Atheism recognise innocence? Suppose if the victims had not been innocent of whatever you think they were innocent off.. would it not count as an atrocity? Does it make a difference in Atheism, which has no right and wrong, no good or bad. Is it not bad enough if 3000 people where killed?

Why do you want logic to be used? Does Atheism require its use?

As to a justification, you'd have to ask those that committed the act, what their logic for it was.

Perhaps its similar to the following, if part of a population commits something awful.. then the whole population is to be condemned and held accountable.

There are loads of people with that kind of mentality around.. all over the news, internet.. but perhaps you've never seen them either.

This kind of mentality only works for the other, not for ones own society, since ofcourse the individual or group from ones own neck of the woods cannot be a representative of the whole in that case... since one knows better ofcourse.

You have ducked the question.. what objectively is an atrocity?

The rest of the discussion, do accept it? you have not answered this one either,

@Titus Technophobe - 20120724 09:47

Quran 4:135: You who believe! be upholders of justice, bearing witness for Allah alone, even against yourselves or your parents and relatives. Whether they are rich or poor, Allah is well able to look after them. Do not follow your own desires and deviate from the truth. If you twist or turn away, Allah is aware of what you do.

I would imagine you have been keeping up with the rest of the discussion so far.

The only thing of concern you have is the issue following.

Can I assume that you have no problems with the rest of it?

----So Islam implements all the rules regarding say porn and alcohol for the good of society.

The laws that God sends down are for the benefit of humankind, yes.

Whether or not people follow them is up to them as individuals and as a whole. We will all be held responsible for them. So the case for the Muslims at the moment is indeed dire.. since there are many laws that we as a whole are not adhering to.. take the example of interest/usury on money. The majority of banking across the Muslim world is interest based. This is in the house of Islam classed as one of the major sins.

----How does Islam justify the atrocities that some of it's proponents have committed?

First you'll have to say what an atrocity is.. as I have said, for the Atheist, there is no such thing, not objectively.

In the case of Islam, it does not justify even any bad deeds a person carries out. Anything that breaks Gods laws are to be dealt with in this world by the authorities.. if they are not, then both the authorities, and those responsible for the deeds will be held accountable on the day of reckoning. The day on which there will be no freedom, no lawyers, just one, ones deeds, and ones Lord.

Being in authority is not a good position to be in, in the house of Islam, if one is building up more and more sins that one will have to answer for before God and those you oppressed/betrayed/persecuted/took advantage of etc.. the responsibility is much greater than that for the common man. Any and every position that puts one in authority over others is counted. So a parent over his/her children, is also a position of authority.

People seem to think that being a Muslim means that you can do whatever you want. This is far from the case. As I mentioned in one of the previous posts, the responsibility is much greater, the questioning will be much more intense, the standard expected of one is higher. Lots of Muslims will be punished for the sins that they commited here on earth that they had not atoned for before the end of their test period (death). So for instance, if a Muslim steals, and does not apologise and make amends for it to the one he stole from etc.. then he will be faced with making such amends for this deed on the day of Judgement. The situation of those who commit murder etc.. is ofcourse much worse.

Contrasting this with the case of what the Atheist believes.. nothing after death, good and bad, whatever you want them to be.. therefore no responsibility for anything. No justice, in this world, or the next. Infact, for the Atheist, justice does not even exist... no such thing objectively after all.

Part3 Re: @J1 - Graham Marsden ... 20120722 22:39...

Now I am finished with this discussion

----What a shame. Though it is a good place to go away and spend sometime on self examination. Somethings to concentrate on.

----1. What does it mean to be respectful.

----2. What is logic, how does one use it, why should it be used.

----3. Proofs, what are they, why are they important, what would you accept.

----4. Why did you reject all the 3000 gods. Do you actually have any reasons, did you look at the proofs (if they exist) for each of them, or is it just something everyone else does, so you did to, just not to be laughed at by your drinking/porn buddies.

----5. Why do you enjoy drinking, and why should that be more important for a society than the harm it causes.

----6. Why do you enjoy porn, and why should that be more important for a society than the harm it causes.

----to 5 and 6 you can add the many other things you may have on your list of activities that you enjoy, that are a detriment to a society, the people invovled, and to you.

----7. If God exists, and the revelation in ones hand is His.. then is it possible for ones own opinion to be on the same level as His. You will notice the if.. then.

----8. What is good and bad. Where did you get the usage that you appear to apply. Was it just from the society, or did you actually make it up yourself.

----9. What does it mean to think for yourself. Does it mean that you rely on others, to repeat the words of others.

----10. The items at the top wrt to Islam.. do any of them make sense. If not, why not, just personal desire, or something more.

----apologies, this list does appear to be getting quite long.

and will leave you with what I said back in my first post: "So please, feel free to hold to whatever beliefs you want and don't do things that you consider are "forbidden" to you, but do not be so arrogant as to consider everyone else to be so weak-minded and morally bankrupt that they need *you* to protect them from all the bad things in the world with a "Nanny (or god) knows best" attitude."

----Again, the riots, the prison population etc.. are all proofs agaisnt what you are saying.. however proofs appear to count for little.. such is the world of the Atheist.

If you wish to declare victory or get the last word in, please feel free.

----Oh no you don't, that was your game.. not mine. The jokes, the point scoring etc.. all yours.. this winning thing seems to be pretty important to you.. you've bought it up again. Perhaps its a rear guard action.

----For what its worth, I consider this a dissapointment, at the moment. Perhaps I could have explained something a bit better.. perhaps not. I do however have hope.. it could be that in the future, you will appreciate more what I have been saying, or trying to say. Human beings are such creatures, that it does take time for things to sink in. People change overtime, experience, age all have a part to play. Take the example that I gave above of the people who wanted the sign of the moon splitting.. they rejected the sign, fought against the Holy Prophet, peace be upon him, and only years later accepted it. Their behaviour was more extreme than is your.. you've just called me arrogant etc.. hardly anything in comparison.. if they could learn and change.. perhaps we all can.

Part2 Re: @J1 - Graham Marsden ... 20120722 07:50...

I have pointed out that your view is as subjective as mine, but you refuse to accept this, continuing to expect me to accept that, since Atheism is "made up" whilst your "objective" holy book is divinely inspired, thereby it is *you* who "have won".

----Wrong again. I said that if God exists, and my book is indeed the word of God, then it is objective. Notice the if.. then.

I have to say, by the way, that I wish I could find it astonishing that you seem to be proud of the fact that you "never claimed to be able to think for myself".

----I did not say I was proud of it. I just said that I never made the claim.. remember, your the one making that particular claim.. and showing a singular lack of ability on that front. Really, you have got to start dealing with what people are saying, this could yet be another reason that you for the moment should not take part in discussions.

You gave me some reasons "to reject such names as god", based on what, it seems, you want to believe a god should be and you seem incapable of realising that those are, once again, totally subjective.

----I asked you whether you agreed to the reasons. As I said, its immaterial where they came from if we are already in agreement on them.

When you can objectively and logically justify that a god *should* be such things in the first place, *then* you can start asking me for my reasons of rejecting such claims.

----In your world, objectivity does not exist.. therefore its an impossible task. However, you can see above.

----As to the use of logic. see below.

Of course that's not likely to happen since you admit you're unable to think for yourself and question what you have blindly accepted "on faith".

----Err, again I did not say that either. You said that you can think for yourself... thats your claim.. I did not make that same claim.. how does this lead you to saying that I admitted that I cannot think for myself.. how are you going to be able to judge the logic of an argument, if you cannot even work out the logic of this.

You bring up drinking, porn,

----No, it was you who brought them up.. you'll also recall that the particular article is about stopping porn getting into the Indonesia.

free sex etc and say "I suspect these are all to do with the Atheist attitude... of you only live once.. enjoy it while it lasts. You claim to be the exception, but still want to enjoy drinking, porn and free sex in all their forms", well, yes, at least you pretty much get that right, albeit for the wrong reasons. Sure, if people abuse drink etc, it causes problems, but that is *not* justification for banning them. There are plenty of people who enjoy such things *without* causing problems, yet once again you seem to think that the Nanny State should step in and say "well *some* people can't enjoy these things without abusing them, so *nobody* should be allowed to enjoy them at all!"

----Ofcourse its a justification, just not one that you like. If the harm produced is greater than the enjoyment you are getting, its a pretty good justification. However, in your Atheistic world, there is no good and bad.. therefore its probably all ok.. the abuse etc..

You say "You don't even know what 'good' is, yet you say you behave in a 'good' way. That is the problem. Other people also claim to be doing good.. and justify it in the same manner as you. Yet their good is not yours.. and may end up being to your detriment. So which is good? Your subjective opinion gets you nowhere", yet you fail to remember that there are those who follow the same god as you, who have read the same holy book as you and who have undertaken some truly despicable actions against innocents, yet they still believe that they are "doing good".

----Wrong again. Those that have carried out such actions will be punished accordingly, with an exemplary punishment. Those that said they were doing it in the name of Islam, will be dealt with severely since they tarnished the image of Islam also. Justice will prevail.

----As to those that did things based on their own subjective views.. ie. the vast majority of people.. in your view.. nothing will happen to them.. since there is nothing after death. No justice..

----Its pretty poor to bring this one up, since it turns on you so badly.. If I am being held responsible for all those that profess the Islamic faith, and have committed bad deeds.. then you can jolly well be responsible for all those that have done whatever they have done based on their own whims and desires. You have many many many times the horrors committed on your side. Just based on that, and your Wiccan rede, you'd have to reject your position.

So where does *your* allegedly objective opinion get you? Sure, *if* you're right and there's some deity passing out judgements after death, they may get punished, but that doesn't do any good(!) in *this* world, does it?

----It does a world of good, oh yes that word again.. what is good by the way? Perhaps I should take the same tag line you appear to like.. once you can objectively and logically justify that the things you mention are good or bad, then you can start asking me for reasons for rejecting your claims.. feels to you like I'm ducking the issue right?

----Good in this world is pretty relative. Good for one guy can be bad for another. And you cannot judge something as good or bad, if you cannot see the end outcome of it all. If you are limiting your self to this world.

----However, if God exists, and the revelation is indeed from Him, then it is possible that the suffering, difficulties etc.. that people endured, while in this world, lead to something alot better. Suppose for instance if they get a massive compensation for being tortured.. they may well come to view that as a price worth paying. An eternal life of bliss, for a few difficult hours.. if one were to put it in terms of exams.. and preparing for them. You have to put in alot of effort to prepare to sit an exam, thats the hardship that you are undergoing. Once you sit the exam and pass it, you have the ability to enjoy the fruits of that hardship you endured for the rest of your life.

----In the house of Islam, the joy, pleasure, happiness etc.. that is on offer is way beyond comprehension.. and is eternal.. therefore the limited amount of difficulties one has to endure on this end may well be worth it on the other end. You have to gain a longer term view.

----Further, in the case of the believer doing bad deeds, one can show them the evidence, in the case of Islam from the Quran and Sunnah, to get them to change their behaviour.. if they are a believer, they will change, if not, then they are just someone who wants to do as they please... an Atheist perhaps.

----If you do not know that there is a hereafter, that one needs to prepare for.. then sure it does not help you here.. but that choice of accepting the hereafter, based on plenty of evidence, is up to you. You are putting yourself in the position of, it doesn't do you any good in this world.

----Actually from various items in the media it appears that even if you just belive in it based on nothing, it still helps you deal with the difficulties better than one who does not.

Regarding the quote from Shakespeare, you're really reaching now. Nobody has *told* me to accept what he wrote without question, nobody has threatened me with damnation if I don't believe it, those words simply are a good summation of my feelings, not holy writ.

----I did not say anyone had, I just said that you are repeating the words of another, which does not sit well with your claim of thinking for yourself. If you think for yourself, you have no need to rely on others.. yet you do, and so do not.

And so you dismiss me as "not thinking for myself" because you again admit that you are not capable of doing so and have to rely on the crutch of faith, but if your faith is so weak that jokes at its (or your) expense upset you then perhaps it's not as good(!) as you think.

----In that case we are in the same boat.. you get upset because you have no objective reason for anything. Want to paint the other as arrogant and presumptious.. and me because someone makes a mockery of God, or me, or whatever else you can come up with.

----As to a crutch.. its been pretty good to me so far.. and proving to be better and better all the time. Atheism seems to be giving you nothing... perhaps not even a crutch. You appear to be lurching from side (drinking) to side (porn), with no help to keep you upright. The position of Islam is that man is created weak, and needs the crutch of his Lord to help him to stand up. Without it, all he can manage is the lurching, and falling over.

----You might recall the point about respect that was being made, on the one hand you are claiming to respect, yet on the other are happy to trade jokes etc.. with your buddies. The two are not consistent. I pointed this out. You do not appear to like it.

----The thing I did say, was that I would not be capable of carrying out the massive task/undertaking of building a moral framework.. what is right and wrong, from the ground up. It's a massive task. You seem to think you have already done so.. yet you have shown nothing of the sort.

----Here's something else for you.. the very fact that someone gets upset, shows that they have strong emotions attached with whatever that thing is.

----So, should I suggest that your Atheism is weak because you get upset when someone says something about it that you don't like.. I think you would disagree.

----Similarly, when one has strong association with Islam, it is not a sign that you feel threatened or weak when you stand up for it strongly. Its actually a sign of strength. Islam is way of life for dealing with the real world.

Part1 Re: @J1 - Graham Marsden ... 20120722 22:39...

J1 - I wasn't planning on replying again, but you make comments that I wil not leave unaddressed.

----Hmmm, perhaps I'll do so again, and then you will feel compelled again.

Firstly it is not "arrogant to dismiss all gods in one fell swoop", it is a simple fact that there is *no proof* of the existence of *any* gods.

----Oh really, how much proof have you looked at? Which proofs have you looked in relation to 3000 list of names.. it must have taken quite alot of time. So far you haven't given any reason for rejecting any, just there's 'no proof'. Which proofs did these gods make, and how did you reject them. What you actually are doing, is repeating the standard view of the society.. the likes of your comedian for instance. Otherwise, it should not be hard to provide a number of examples.. lets not go for the full list.. but take your pick out of the 3000, perhaps a few from each hundred or so would suffice.

----As to Islam, there is plenty of proof around.. what counts as proof to you? Note, one could just discount this as a subjective request for stuff to fit into your world view.. something I will not be able to fulfill.

----Anyway, here goes.

----A miracle perhaps, the Quran claims to be one.. one which is not reproducable.. ie. it lays down a challenge to those who say it is not to produce a chapter like it.. many have tried over the years.. you can even see examples on the the net. This claim is falsifyable. Perhaps you could take it up. Muslims became masters of cryptography of the time.. why.. they wanted to be able to analyse the language, and see if they could just distinguish different peoples writings/speaches just based on the word usage, structure etc.. There is a very distinct difference between the Quran, and the sayings of the Holy Prophet, peace be upon him. People have overtime been able to mimic the words of the Prophet, peace be upon him, but not the Quran.

----Perhaps history, When Islam came, over the period of 23 years.. everything changed in the society that it came to. From the way the people eat to what they wear, to how they go to the toilet, to how they marry, how they run their government, finance, social system, what they considered as good and bad.. there was nothing that was left untouched. In the case of revolutions, the only thing that normally changes.. is the government.. in this case everything was changed. It's a pretty striking example on a large scale, if one where to pay attention.

----The US tried prohibition in the 1930's. They realised the danger of drinking (something you still do not appreciate), and tried to do something about it. They spent alot of money, put people in prison etc.. to make it work.. and failed. In the case of Islam, one revelation came down.. and the people stopped. Why, because the people where prepared beforehand to receive the commandment. Its a pretty outstanding example. Peoples hearts had been imbued with the love of God.. ie. something greater than themselves. So when the revelation came down, they were happy to accept it. As opposed to the example of yourself.. you have no trust of your government etc.. and would reject their commandments.. if they went against you subjective views..

----Perhaps you like wars etc.. The Muslims fought in many wars, always outnumber heavily, took on 2 superpowers (the Romans and the Persians), at the same time, without superior weaponary or tactics, yet they won.

----Quran 21:30 Do not, see, those who, disbelieved, that, the heavens, and the earth, were, a joined entity, then we parted them, and we made, from, water, every, living thing, then will not, they believe.

----There are many of the above type of verses which talk about matters beyond the wit of the Arab of the desert at the time. In this case, those being addressed are those that claim this is not from God.. The heavens and earth, one entity.. God parted them.. made from water every living thing.. will you not then believe.. its not even being addressed to the believer.. but to the self professed free thinker type.. where did this man in the desert get this from?

----Quran 51:47 And the heaven, we constructed it, with strength, and indeed we, surely expanders.

----Expanding the heaven.... how did he know that.. people only worked that out a few years ago.. required alot of work to get there.. needed the invention of alot of equipment... yet the man in the desert is saying it 1500 years ago.

----You mentioned that you'd want God to come and tell it to you face to face.. He does not do that for most people. That is the reason for the Prophets, and that line is at an end. So your on your own with this type.

----The Quran makes the claim that the day and night are signs, mountains, sea's etc.. however, I am sure you have already discounted all these, based on what?

----There are the many prophecies.. ones that were fulfilled, ones that are yet to be so..

----Perhaps a mention of the honesty and trustworthiness of the final Prophet, peace be upon him, would help??

----Perhaps you want to be sure that the Quran we have today is what was revealed to the Holy Prophet, peace be upon him.. how was it preserved etc..

----How about a sign to do with how to clean oneself when one goes to the loo. This is sign that impressed a particular Christian, that he started to look seriously at Islam because of it.. however, for you, it may only be a justification for more mirth.

To claim existence and expect others to accept this without proof is arrogance.

----I never said I expect you to accept anything. Infact I am pretty sure that you will accept nothing. An example of this kind of mentality (one I've used before)...

----The splitting of the moon. The people of Mecca asked (again and again) for a sign. What sign would you like.. we'd like to see you split the moon in two. You sure about that? sure were sure.. will you believe in the revelation if God does this for you? defintely (got nothing to lose, not possible to split the moon after all)... ok then, lets meet in area abc, and get your people together so they can see this aswell. At area abc, the people meet up, and the moon is split. The people are blown away. Ok, you saw that right? errr, our eyes were bewitched. hmmmn, you were given the sign you asked for, are you now going to believe? errr, no, you are a magician, you bewitched our eyes.. no one accepted.

----Over the next few days, weeks, as caravans came in to the city from the desert, people in the caravans also described the splitting of the moon.. man did you see a couple of nights ago, I saw the moon, it was in two bits. Did you see it? err yeah.. I saw it.

----Many years passed, Mecca becomes Muslim. Now it becomes a source of shame for them to admit that they saw the sign, yet did not believe.

----This kind of behaviour is normal, people are always doing it.. take for example the signs of the Holy Prophet Moses, peace be upon him. He showed sign after sign, yet the people still did not believe and follow him. They still came after him with an army. Even his own people, built the golden calf after witnessing the signs..

----Even when a sign hits one between the eyes.. I expect most people to reject it. In the house of Islam, we are told that most people will reject God.. only 1 out of every 1000 will accept Him and enter paradise.

If you can provide demonstratable proof, I'm entirely willing to admit that I am wrong and gods exist, but even without proof you insist that your god does exist. (BTW calling this "faith" instead does not eliminate the total absence of proof).

----See above. What is demonstratable proof? What does it look like, do you have an example of any?

----If you are asking for something you can try.. well sure there is. Give up on your drinking, porn etc.. spend a number of months away from the world you are immersed in, you will need the time to clean you up, detox yourself so to speak.. listen to the Quran in Arabic, as recited by a master. Listen for a few hours every day. The Quran makes the claim that it is a healing, you can try it out.

----Will you, I doubt it.

----You could try and take up the challenge of the Quran, to produce a chapter like it. Will you, I doubt it.

----There is a difference between the one who is really interested, and being honest with such a request as above.. and the one who is just using it as cludge to win an argument. Well, I'm throwing your cludge back at you.. lets see if you pick it up, or run for the hills.

Next, why should I not "get involved"? This is a public discussion, not a private conversation.

----You already say that all you have to offer is subjective.. and you also say that whatever someone else has, carries as much weight, no good or bad... that is why you should not get invovled.. it would be consistent with your stated view. Getting involved is not. It suggests you actually think your view is superior. Which is not consistent with what you claim.

You claimed (incorrectly) that "for Atheists there is not right and wrong", justifying this by claiming that only god (or, at least, your god) could a) do this and b) judge it.

----Wrong, I said there is no objective right and wrong in Atheism.. please try and stick with what is being said. You may recall you agreed with this previously, and now you don't. Atheism on display.

Re: @J1 - Graham Marsden ... 20120722 07:50...

J1, it is not me who is missing the point. Yes, "Personal opinion, is just that. You can put them up against each other and decide for yourself which you prefer" I agree entirely, however when someone then goes on to say "my holy book or my prophet or my deity says X,Y and Z and that trumps your personal opinion, so you *cannot ever* win the argument", that is arrogance, plain and simple.

----I suppose its not arrogance to then dismiss all gods etc.. in one foul swoop? or to say that someone else is arrogant, while all the time saying that you could be wrong..

----Further, I am not trying to win an argument. Just trying to explain a position. Jake asked a question (I suspect the question was not sincere), I tried to answer it, you decided you wanted to get involved.

----If you want to score points, and say you won, go for it.

And, no, my Atheism does not "tell me anything" because there is no "Big Book of Atheism" which tells people what to think, unlike the many and multifarious holy books which purport to be the sole bearers of "the only truth", so all of your arguments questioning the basis of my arguments because "atheism doesn't tell you A, B or C" fall based on your lack of understanding of what Atheism is (or, rather, is not).

----Ok, which part of Atheism have I not grasped? Afterall there is not much to it to grasp. I have checked various Atheism websites in the past, and they informed me of what I said.. you have not disagreed with any of it.. wrt to what Atheism gives you. Yet, somehow it is I who am the one who does not understand it.

----I thought I explained it pretty well in my first post.. ie. make up whatever you like, base it or not on anything you like or don't like. How is this incorrect?

You ask "If you acknowledge the possiblity that you could be wrong.. then why take it so badly when it is pointed out?" but again you fail to understand.

----Since Atheism does not tell you that arrogance is bad thing.. why get upset. It makes no sense. I suppose your own thinking would tell you that arrogance is bad.. based on what? a dream? you have already acknowledged that you have nothing objective to go on.

----Now comes along someone purporting to have something objective.. why not try and follow the reasoning and see if it leads anywhere. I asked you a set of questions.. asking, do you agree? but appears its to no avail.

When I mentioned various other claimed deities you " provided a brief set of reasons for rejecting them", but those are simply opinions, not facts. Who says that a god has to be infallible, untirable, indomitable etc etc? Can you prove any of those by any logical or rational argument? Or do you simply have to fall back on the "it says so in $BOOK" which is just a way of dodging the issue. Well, you give the answer yourself: "As soon as God has said something on a subject, ie. do not steal.. I can't now consider the options." you are no longer thinking for yourself, you're letting someone else do it for you.

----I never claimed to be able to think for myself. You are making that claim. I asked you whether you agreed with the reasons.. whether they are made up by me or not is irrelevant.. do you agree with them? afterall you must have rejected the 3000 or so names on your list based on something.. what reasons do you have to reject them? or perhaps you have no reasons... I gave you some reasons, perfectly reasonable, simple to use, to reject such names as God. What were your reasons?

---- As to comparing ones opinion to that of God.. surely this is a simple enough concept to understand.. If God exists, and says something, then is it possible for your opinion to be comparable? The answer would appear to be self evident. Yet you refuse to accept it.

----Something further on your I'm a free thinker claim.. I'd suggest that much that you claim to have decided upon, you did not in actuality. The examples you mentioned, are things that were decided for you, and enforced upon you.. by the law of the land. You are merely repeating what others say, since it is the common view. If one where to seriously look at each of these, one would see that they all cause problems for not only the individual, but also the society at large.. whether it is in the form of broken homes, or pressure on the health service. They do not even live up to your self chosen Wiccan Rede of "An it harm no other, do what thou wilt.". Just based on this you would have to reject them.

----So for instance the case of drinking, lots has been written about the effects of it on the NHS, on crime, peoples homes, the amount that needs to be spent on cleaning up the mess afterwards.. yet, it appears to mean nothing to you.. it appears to not even register as relevant evidence in opposition to your subjective opinion.

----I suspect these are all to do with the Atheist attitude... of you only live once.. enjoy it while it lasts. You claim to be the exception, but still want to enjoy drinking, porn and free sex in all their forms.

As for "Which means that your actions in the world of the living add up to a big nothing. Which means there is no responsibility", this is ridiculous.

----How so. It is the result of what the Atheists push.. or is it not? do you not say that there is nothing after death? Life is only these few years.. and then nothing more. Enjoy it while you can. etc.. with such thinking, where is the responsibility for ones actions? For those that do not share your, 'do no harm' choice... why would they be responsible, self controlled.. why would they not want to enjoy their drinking, porn etc..

To quote Shakespeare "This above all: to thine own self be true". I don't need threats of some putative hell and damnation or being refused entry into some equally putative heaven to make me behave in a "good" way, I *CHOOSE* to behave that way. Why do *you* have such a problem with that?

----You don't even know what 'good' is, yet you say you behave in a 'good' way. That is the problem. Other people also claim to be doing good.. and justify it in the same manner as you. Yet their good is not yours.. and may end up being to your detriment. So which is good? Your subjective opinion gets you nowhere.

-----The case of the riots shows that there are many who actually do need rules, punishments, and rewards in order to keep them in line.

----When you start quoting Shakespeare and the like, you essentially are saying that you could not think this thing up yourself. Where does that leave your claim of thinking for yourself? All your doing is repeating which on the other hand you don't like others doing.

You go on to say "People tend to do whatever they want to, whatever they can get away with. The riots are evidence of that." but how many people actually *participated* in those riots? How many just tagged along? How many wanted nothing to do with them? The last group is, of course, by far the largest, but they're not newsworthy, yet they are the ones who *had* the opportunity to "do whatever they wanted" but *chose* not to!

----Which is besides the point. The point is the ones who did not live up to your standards, and did go out. They are strong evidence that your opinion is far off the mark. They are the reason for laws and enforcment.. in your world.. these people do not appear to exist, you just wish them away with a 'well the majority are not like them'. I'd suggest that once people saw that they could get away with it.. more would also riot and you would find that very few people would be left behind.

J1 I see little point in continuing this discussion with you because whatever I say, it seems you're going to fall back on "my holy book, my god, his prophet said this, so I can't argue against it". Well fine, that's your choice and I respect your right to believe it.

----Dissapointing, but hardly surprising.. people claiming to think for themselves are a dime a dozen, however actually running across one that has carried out the task is rare. In order for one to actually carry out the great task of free thinking wrt good and bad etc.. one needs to spend alot of time and effort on deciding on what to base right and wrong, and then build a framework from there.

----I know I would not be capable of it.

What I will not respect and what I will not submit to is someone telling me "I believe this, I don't like that, so just because of that *you* are not allowed to do it" which is where we came in and this is where I *choose* to step out.

----I'd suggest you reread my first post again.. Jake was asking about the Islamic justification for his curiosity.. I provided it. You might recall I did mention that 'in the case of Islam' etc... whether you like it or not, the answer was for the question.

----Perhaps you would have been happier if others poked a bit more fun at the expense of Islam?? probably wouldn't have ruffled any feathers that way.. cause that would not be classed as arrogance or presumption. Would probably have sat well with the rest of the drinking, porn etc.. that you guys seem eager to protect.

----When one is content with jokes at the others expense.. this does not show any respect. You were even happy to quote a comedian. If this is what respect looks like...

Re: @J1 - Graham Marsden ... 20120720 23:26...

I think you are missing the point.

Personal opinion, is just that. You can put them up against each other and decide for yourself which you prefer. I think this is agreed.

However, when God is brought into the picture, ones personal opinion is longer comparable against His. One cannot hope to compete with one who has all knowledge etc.

Do you agree?

All that is left is to be convinced that the opinion being touted as Gods, His words, are indeed His words. If this can be achieved, then the personal opinion problem goes away.

Do you agree?

In order to be convinced that the word being put forward is indeed Gods word.. one has to have some idea of what God is/is not. So, you gave a list of names.. I provided a brief set of reasons for rejecting them. Here are some more..

Can God make a mistake.. no.

Does God get tired.. no.

Can you overpower God.. no.

Is He a He.. no.

Does He have any needs.. no.

etc..

Taking the example of Thor (someone mentioned they liked him and his hammer).. Thor has a human form, gets hurt, makes mistakes, eats and drinks, gets tired.. does not create, etc. therefore cannot be God, ie. the supreme being.

One can quickly reduce the list from around 3000 to a few. With the few remaining it would become just a matter of names being applied to the same being.

Do you agree?

With that addressed, if it is addressed, one could proceed on to giving arguments in support of the revelation.

As to the rest.

Objective/Subjective.. if one can show that the words the Holy Prophet, peace be upon him, was passing on as revelation, were indeed not his own.. then that would be objective.. and this problem would also disappear.

Underlying your postings so far, is the understanding that arrogance is a bad thing. Why, on what have you based this, since your Atheism does not tell you anything of the sort.

Arrogance is however a major sin in Islam, a crime for which one will not be permitted entrance in to paradise.

wrt justifying atrocities etc..the first problem you have is in deciding what is an atrocity.. since again Atheism does not give you any help with this one either.

People use whatever they want to justify whatever they want. Whether it makes any sense or not, and it can change on fly. Essentially they want to do something, and they use their intellect to grab at whatever is available to act as justification for it. Rather than not have to think about it, they have to sell it to themselves, and then sell it to others. That takes effort. Christ says 'turn the other cheek', yet you still have Christians willing to fight etc..

Responsibility for ones actions. Again, Atheism does not give you this. You seem to be indicating that this is a good thing.. on what basis.

Infact, I'd contend that it is quite the reverse for the Atheist. Since most Atheists consider that there is nothing after death.. there is no accountability etc.. just nothing. Which means that your actions in the world of the living add up to a big nothing. Which means there is no responsibility.

Just to point out, that in Islam, we are held responsible for every word we utter.. every second we are alive is to be answered for.. and these responsibilities cannot be foisted off on someone else (Imaam, Vicar etc..).. since when one is to stand and answer for ones life.. one will be alone. This level of responsibility is way more than what you mention, and extends beyond the few years one is alive for.

You mention that your opinion could be wrong.. which is the whole point about subjective opinions. That is why we try to get to an opinion that is not subjective.

If you acknowledge the possiblity that you could be wrong.. then why take it so badly when it is pointed out?

Islamically, my opinion is worthless. As soon as God has said something on a subject, ie. do not steal.. I can't now consider the options. If I do so, then I am essentially saying that God does not exist.

As to law and law enforcement.. you may well be able to control yourself, though your display of getting upset with someone just saying you are wrong would suggest otherwise. What I said is that other people will not. People tend to do whatever they want to, whatever they can get away with. The riots are evidence of that.

As to English law is based on.. I do not know the truth of your statement.. however, I do know that this is what Islam teaches. In the case of ones normal day to day life.. everything is permitted, the exceptions being what is explicitly forbidden by revelation. In the case of religious observance, the case however is reversed.. what is not explicitly permitted, is forbidden.. ie. one is not permitted to make up a religious observance.. however, in normal day to day life. one can make up whatever one likes.

Graham Marsden ... 20120720 12:19.. Re: @J1

Interestingly enough, the begining of Islam is exactly what you have just enunciated.

Islam starts with the conviction that nothing is worthy of worship, so all the mentioned god's (in the various posts) are rejected. They have qualities unbecoming to god.. either they are offspring of others, parents of others.. eat, drink, make mistakes etc.. all are rejected in the Islamic view. God is unlike anything one can think or imagine. The only knowledge we have of Him, comes from Him.

As to your other issues as to being able to choose your own destiny, obviously you already have that choice.

You will recall, that jake is the one who asked the question. Mine was a response to that question.. an attempt at an explanation. There was neither presumption, or arrogance involved, just an attempt at an explanation.

From the Islamic point of view, there is indeed good and bad, right and wrong, and these are defined by God.

As you have pointed out, that if I were to say that you are wrong doing a b c, then that is only my opinion, and worth as much as anyone else's opinion.. you will recall the point I was making in my first post.

However, if I point out that your creator is the one who said that a b c are wrong, then it is not my opinion that you have to contend with. To then say that one's personal opinion is on a level with that of God, now that would indeed be arrogance.

Whether you choose or not to lie, is not the issue.. why do you choose to not lie, is the point being made. On what basis do you say, as an atheist, that it is wrong to lie? the response you have given is that you consider the world to be a better place because of it.. however, this is a subjective view. Not something necessarily shared by others. There are plenty of people who lie, and have no problem with it, how is your view superior to theirs, how did you come to this conclusion? you cannot derive it from Atheism.

On what basis do you take exception to my previous post? The post, from an Atheistic point of view, was neither bad nor good.. it was just a post. However, you have decided, that it was a bad post, one requiring you to respond and express your view that I am in error. From the Atheistic point of view.. its just one view against another.

Essentially, all you have said is.. do what ever you want. No one should tell anyone else a better way, because that would be classed as arrogance, or presumption.

Islamically, there is agreement with your position in this instance.. I cannot tell you want to do, I do not have any such position.. however, God does and can.

wrt weak minded, most people do not care one way or other.. they neither care what is true, and are content to enjoy the 'bread and circus'. In the Islamic context, humankind was not created for such a purpose.

wrt morally bankrupt.. Atheism does not provide one with any morals. All it takes to be an Atheist, is to not believe in a supernatural being, God. That is the end of it. The rest is up to you, alone.. subjective.

In a society, you will always find people that will take advantage of the other.. that is why you have rules, laws and punishments if you break the laws.. what you seem to be suggesting is that the world can do without the laws, and law enforcement.. because everyone is able to decide for themselves, and does not need a 'nanny' to keep them in check.. the evidence would suggest otherwise.

I have also noticed mention of man made in the image of God.. this is not the Islamic view. Such a notion is unbecoming to the majesty of God. God has no image.

Re: Out of curiosity ...

The issue is one of what is right and wrong. Who defines it, who sets the limits, who enforces.

For the Atheist, there is no such thing.. Objectively, it does not exist.. Subjectively, make up whatever you like. Change it whenever you like.. base it on whatever you like.. it does not have to make sense etc.. your call. With such a situation, one would not consider lying, cheating, stealing, murder etc. as bad or wrong acts.. they are just acts.. similarly, telling the truth, helping others, saving lives are also just acts.. not good acts.

In the case of Islam, the law, right and wrong are defined by God. The acts of telling the truth etc.. are said to be good, and the others are evil. Furthermore, God is the judge, and enforces the laws/limits He has set.

In the case of Islam, you have a limited choice, and you will be held responsible for every choice that you make by the one that gave you that choice.

As to this particular issue, since God defines what is right and wrong, He also defines when it is right and wrong.. so for instance eating, normally is fine. However, in the month of Ramadan, it is prohibited during certain hours of the day. ie. it has been made wrong.

Similarly, relations with ones spouse, normally are fine.. however, during the month of Ramadan, between certain hours, are also made forbidden.

Why, for you to show that you are bending your will to the will of your Lord.. you are acknowledging His Lordship, something most people will not undertake. You are the creation, He the creator.. He has all the power, control etc.. you have none. You are to be questioned, held to a standard set by Him, He cannot be put in the same place.

wrt taking images of your private encounters with your spouse, or disseminating them. Pornography is amongst the things prohibited by God. If one keeps this in mind, then the government in this case is merely living up to its duties and obligations to its population in trying to protect them from this vice.

wrt the Holy Prophets of God, peace be upon them all.. they are not to be made a mockery of. They are the best of humankind, chosen to be God's representatives to the rest of humankind.

There is ofcourse much much more that can be said on all of the above. I am trying to be brief however.

Back to the Atheist. The curious thing, if there is one, is that of those without any objective grounding of good bad etc.. making value judgements based on the same.

Going forward, I do not use this site much, so keep that in mind If you wish to discuss further. Please keep in mind that I will not respond to any bad language, applied to God, His Prophets, peace be upon them all.. etc. , or to me. You can have your foul language party without me. The use of such language is merely an advert for ones state of mind, lack of self control, and ability to communicate.

translation.. trust... privilege

My previous one seems to have made it through, let me try a third time.

I find it difficult to understand how you can accept anything as historical. How do you know that there was a Roman empire or the Greeks did this that or the other? All the excuses/points you put forward could be equally applied to everything else you think you know.

Translation..

One of the things that the Muslims first did, was to invent a dictionary. To record what the words of the language actually meant.

The language is protected by the Quran, the rules and regulations of Arabic, are in the Quran. If you want to be a master of Arabic, you have to learn from the Quran. It's that important.

The Quran is always and only in Arabic. A translation is just someone's feeble attempt to give one access to it. It is not the Quran. Is it a lenient translation, to go back to the words being used in a text, and put forward what they mean? Or is it an accurate translation.

Let's take a little look at a couple of the texts I've mentioned... This is a word by word translation..

21:30 Do not, see, those who, disbelieved, that, the heavens, and the earth, were, a joined entity, then we parted them, and we made, from, water, every, living thing, then will not, they believe.

For one to translate this as,

Do not the unbelievers see that the heavens and the earth were one unit of creation, then we cleft them asunder, and we made all living things from water, will they then not believe.

is neither lenient, extravagant, wrong etc.. seems to me to be in keeping with what has been said.

Try another,

51:47 And the heaven, we constructed it, with strength, and indeed we, surely expanders.

To translate this as,

We constructed the heaven with power, and we are expanding it.

Again is not taking things too far..

Just a little more on the water front, a couple more passages from the Quran..

25:54 It is He Who has created man from water: then has He established relationships of lineage and marriage: for thy Lord has power (over all things).

24:45 And God has created every animal from water: of them there are some that creep on their bellies; some that walk on two legs; and some that walk on four. God creates what He wills for verily God has power over all things.

If you are still going to say that the water thing is dependent on false translations, or the like, please imagine a good looking person (make the person real good looking), throwing their hands in the air in frustration and disbelief. If not, then please imagine the person (you know, the good looking one), nodding sagely.

Numbers..

I have only heard of the 19, and that one was discredited many years ago. I do not know of others.

Gain trust..

So essentially, what you are proposing is along the lines of the following.

This man wanted power, so what he does is that from a very young age, he concocts a master plan. What he first implements is being the most honest of people. Till he gets a noteriety for this, so much so that he is the most beloved of people to the city. He gains a name, the most trustworthy. Now that he has this title, he bides his time. For many years. Till he hits the age of 40. Now, out of the blue, he announces that he is a Prophet of God. The people as a whole reject him, he is persecuted, ostracised, mocked, attempts are made on his life. Many attempts. He is offered a compromise, give up this Islam stuff, we will make you our King, their leader. He rejects this, prefers instead to suffer more attacks against him and his followers. This culminates with him leaving the city, with the Meccan's in hot pursuit. He makes it to Medina, where again he and his followers are harrassed by the Meccans, who send armies to exterminate the Muslims. This ends when a truce is signed between the parties. This agreement of peace is very one sided, all in the favour of the Meccans. However, by means of this very agreement, the Muslims end up returning to Mecca in triumph. Everyone becomes Muslim at this point. There is no rape, pillage, rioting etc..

Note how the people rejected him when he announced his Prophethood, he had gained so much trust, that they did not follow him. So much for gaining their trust in order to be their leader.

I'd say that the first one that should reject this proposition of yours, should be you.

If you learn anything about this man, you quickly realise that his nickname was not in vain. He was indeed worthy of the most trust. Even when he was being persecuted in Mecca, the Meccan's themselves were entrusting him with the safe keep of their wealth. When he fled from Mecca, he ensured that the wealth in his safe keeping, was returned to its rightful owners, thats while people are after him, trying to kill him.

Social privilege..

If you have what I wrote, you will note that social privelage was understood by the people, and was prior to the announcement of the Prophethood. People saw what he was like, and they wanted to be a part of that. So they were lining up to be part of his family.

After the announcement of Prophethood, the situation changed drastically. Now they were hell bent on breaking all alliances with him. They put pressure on their sons to divorce the Prophets, peace be upon him, daughters. They went alot further, in their minds any relationship to the Prophet of God, peace be upon him, was a social death kiss.

Only after the conquest of Mecca, many many years later, did it suddenly become fashionable to be in with the Prophet, peace be upon him.

I really don't see how you can apply this one to the Prophet of God, peace be upon him.

twice replied, not appearing

I have tried to reply twice to this now, a heroic effort on each occasion... however, my post has not appeared.. dunno why.

sorry

You may be right, in which case I wish to apologise to you for my lack of understanding.

so special

Quranic behaviour..

What an argument, I guess you mean that no Atheists do any bad deed at all? Which I guess is true, since in Atheism, there is no such thing as a bad deed. If an Atheist kills someone, or steals from someone, its just an action, not a bad, wrong action.

Taking this a bit further, if anyone carries out any 'bad' action, in the world of the Atheist, it matters not, its not bad. Since there is really no such thing.

Going one step further, why are you getting wound up by squiggles, and teddy bears.. there is no moral context around such actions.. not to an Atheist. The thinking, choices, actions, of those who do the killing for squiggles and teddy bears, are as good as yours.

In order to know whether someone is exhibiting Quranic behaviour, one would have to know the Quran, and match the behaviour with it. An exercise I think you should undertake. Then you would no longer have any need to ask such questions.

Or perhaps you are being rhetorical.

Selective data, prejudices..

I neither have all knowledge, nor the ability to weigh it all. It is hardly surprising that I will be selective, prejudiced etc.

I'd suggest that if what you say is true, you should be able to tease out my deficiencies, and point me in the right direction. It probably won't help much though.

Human rights..

Why should human rights matter to an Atheist? There is no good, or evil in the land of the Atheist after all, its all subjective. What definition of human rights would every Atheist agree with, on what basis?

In the house of Islam, God sets the rules, they apply equally on everyone. Fair that way.

God and justice..

Is God just to all? Most Atheists point to evil in the world (of course evil does not exist in Atheism, but use any old bat to beat the enemy), and say that God is not just, that's if He exists.

In the house of Islam, God is the most just. This world is not the end of life, and everyone will get their comeuppances in the next world. Complete justice, no freedom on the day of reckoning.

Special..

Aren't Atheists special? They are always telling others how they think for themselves. That must be pretty special. Something the rest of poor humanity haven't been able to evolve yet.

Are Muslims special? I'd suggest that the answer to that one could be found in the Quran. This could be one of those behaviours that may or may not match up to the quranic thinking you referred to earlier.

missing the point

It is indeed subjective, to an Atheist ofcourse. All moral questions, good, bad, or inbetween types are up to the individual to decide.

Since in Atheism there is no good or bad, your feeling of pain, is neither good nor bad, its just a feeling.

Why should one care what happens to others, its neither good, nor bad for an Atheist. They are just collections of atoms, as are you. There is nothing that much different from one set of atoms as opposed to another set. To an Atheist that is.

To help a million people, or to oppress the same million, means nothing, they will become dust regardless of what happened to them, they will not recall what happened, neither will you, nor will any one else. Meaningless.. to an Atheist that is.

At least, thats what they say. For you to project your own, non-Atheist view, on Atheists, is missing the whole point.

subjective

Lack of empathy

Everything you say is subjective. As I have pointed out time and again, not every Atheist would share your view.

With Atheism, there is no way to say, this is good. Rather the best you can say is, I think this is good based on x y z. Everyone else may disagree.

Taking this a bit further, why is empathy good in any case? Why is it good to to help others? rather than to oppress others? Why is it good to help/care for your wife and kids?

What makes something good or evil in the land of the Atheist?

From what I have seen, read, talked to Atheists about, there is no such thing in Atheism.. no good, no evil.. just action. If you describe a particular action as good, another may describe it as evil. subjective.

Essentially, what the Atheist is doing, is making use of what other people say is good or evil.. since he/she cannot be bothered to work it out for themselves, it is after all an enormous task. In the west, that would be primarily from the Christian faith.

presumption

How does J1 know what Atheists are thinking..

Thats what they say. Perhaps you should read their websites, see their videos, talk to them.

something convincing, like what? err something convincing...

convincing..

You could use the Quran, that way you can experience it again and again. Better than a one off event that way, whether now or in the past.

moon split..

Split is correct. I mentioned this to an Atheist once, he came up with the same kinds of thoughts on it. Even came up with a pic a few days later with a cloud partially across the moon. Such thinking showed to me that he did not believe that people in the past knew what a cloud was, that they could not tell the difference between two half's of the moon, either side of a mountain top, and a moon with a cloud over part of it. That they were so easily fooled, yet they still did not believe.

One who does not believe in something will look for the slight of hand. Maybe he setup some big mirrors on the mountain top to make it appear like the moon was in two bits.. hmmn those would have had to have been big mirrors, and you'd need some kind of remote control.. none of that kind of tech existed in those days. Then how else did he 'fool' the people. i.e.. the thought is that he definitely fooled them, but how.

The people of the time could not come up with any explanation, so blamed it on magic, and still rejected the sign.

People of the past also knew of lunar and solar eclipse's. Indeed had an occasion to see one a few years later at the death of the son of the Holy Prophet, peace be upon him. When his son died, a rumour quickly started spreading round the city, a great man has died, and the sun has gone dark. i.e.. This is a miracle showing the truth of the last Prophet. The holy Prophet, peace be upon him, heard the rumour, and immediately called the people together. He said, the sun and the moon are signs of God, and care nothing for man, or the death of a son of Muhammad. i.e.. It does not show I am a Prophet. It is nothing to do with me.

There are many such events in the life of the last Prophet, peace be upon him, where he does not take the easy way, rather the more difficult route. The honest route. That is why, he was called Al Amin, the trustworthy, even before he was chosen as a Prophet. Even by his enemies.

Having people, who did not even believe in you, as plants. Keep in mind, that these same plants would have had to have been set up months before, seeing as caravans took that long to go somewhere, and come back (no planes or cars.. just walking, horses and camels). Further, keep in mind that the caravans are made up of money centric people, the very people who where most opposing Islam.

The example of the moon split was used only for illustrative purposes, to show the very thing that you displayed. If one mentions it now, people will come up with all sorts of reasons why it didn't, couldn't have happened. The point was not to convince you, rather that even the people at the time did not become Muslim because of it.

No matter what most people are given, it is just not enough. That is the point.. most people are more than happy not to change from what they are already in.

Take for instance alcohol consumption. People will not give it up, as a society, no matter how much you tell them they will be better off without it. The example of the US and prohibition is pretty instructive. Even when forced to give it up, people will continue to indulge themselves, and force the law to be changed back. It is very interesting to note however, that when in Islam the message came down that intoxicants were not prohibited, there was no police force used to enforce it, no millions of dollars spent, no prisons filled with violators. The message was given to some companions who were present. These companions ran round the streets of Madina, passing on the message. The people in the process of serving and drinking emptied their glasses, broke the bottles, some even went as far as to induce vomiting to get it out of their stomachs.

These very same people, loved their drink more than the people of now, or the people of US prohibition loved their drink.. yet they gave it up, just like that. How come? They had been readied to accept a command from God. A command came, they accepted.

Take the same people, a few years before, and they would have fought to have kept their old habits.

Irrefutable..

The point I was making is that no sign is irrefutable. People will come up with all sorts of excuses to reject it.

Essentially you are after something just for you, which will then not be transferable to any one else. If you got your 'moon split', no one else will accept that this proves that God exists.

That is why we have a sign that everyone can look at, time and time again. Will everyone accept it, ofcourse not.

You do not have to believe in it to start with. You just have to see if it matches up to its grand claims. Did the people of the past know that all life was made of water, or that the universe was expanding? what kind of tech is required to know such things, did they have access to it? Were these just guesses? why would a guy in the desert, be making up such stuff?

Why would a man that has a notoriety for complete honesty, is so honest he is given such a nickname by the people, suddenly give it up, and become the biggest of liars? The most beloved of people in the city, the one everyone wanted to get in with, they were lining up to get their kids married to his.. gives all that up, and becomes the most hated of people.

Is any of the above proof, nope, however they are pointers to where the truth may be found.

There are not that many possible explanations for the Quran. Is it as it claims, from God. If so, you would expect it to be all correct, no errors.. there should be no discrepancies with in it, either between its own pages, or with the rest of creation.

Perhaps its man made. In which case, one should be able to find many issues with it. One should also be able to replicate its like, quite easily.

Was the Holy Prophet, peace be upon him, deluded/crazy? He would still be honest that way, but just seeing things, hearing things. Does such a description match up with his life story?

He may just have been an out and out liar. Does that fit with his life story.

Perhaps he was, as he claimed, a Prophet of God. Does his life fit with such a claim?

Science in the Quran..

I have not seen this site before. I do not know of the verse in question's application to the quasar and grav lens effect that is referred to in the link you have. Seems a bit far fetched, though I really haven't the tools to tell.

There was a non-muslim French scientist who wrote a book comparing the Quran and the Bible to Science.. http://www.witness-pioneer.org/vil/Books/MB_BQS/default.htm. You could probably just jump past the Bible stuff.

Let me be clear. I am not trying to convince you, that is not my role, and is beyond my capability.

I am learning for myself as we go along. I am trying to answer every question that is raised.. see where my own limits are. What else do I need to learn.

It's your job to convince yourself, if you are so interested.

In the sight of God, one stands for oneself, in this world and the hereafter.

empathy

Dear Sir/Madam,

I did not say Atheists could not tell the difference, rather there is no such thing in Atheism. Good and evil do not exist to an Atheist. It is subjective, whatever you want. What is good to you, is not so good to the next Atheist.

The point of using 'lack of empathy' as a definition of evil, is that at best it is what someone has come up with. The fact that you and lots of other people may agree to it, is immaterial, there will be lots of others who will not. Their thinking, their choice.

You have no right to enforce your will on them, neither do they have a right to enforce theirs on you. Their view would be just as 'good' since this is all subjective.

Only when the Creator of all says x is evil, is it fair to all, and applicable on all.

Further, consider is drinking alcohol an evil act? how about gambling or fortune telling?

I am not sure how one would apply 'lack of empathy' to such social ills.

Can man figure it out?

If one does not have all the information, and one does not know the weighting to apply to each part, how can one judge what is right and what is wrong? One can make a best guess, but thats about all.

The one who has all knowledge, and created it all in the first place, is best placed to tell you what is right, and what is wrong.

Is it built into our souls?

I think you are pointing to the fitrah in Islam with this one. ie. the human nature that is planted into human beings, the knowledge of right and wrong etc.

However, one cannot base laws which apply to everyone on fitrah.

The fitrah can get messed up. Take for example, something massively prevalent on the internet. Nudity, good or bad, right or wrong? The original fitrah of man is to cover himself up. However, you expose the same man to lots of nudity, and it becomes acceptable, even normal. The next step is that it becomes something that one can see nothing wrong with. For such a man to then generate laws based on his 'fitrah' would lead to conflict with those who do not share his specially upgraded fitrah.

One quickly comes to the conclusion that basing right and wrong, laws etc. on the fitrah, is not going to work.

One needs something beyond it, something incorruptable, independant etc.. and that something is God.

Enjoy your holiday.

proof, what will you accept?

Revelation from God or Man..

I thought I had addressed this issue. As you say, it is imperative to work out whether whatever claims to be revelation is indeed so. I was hoping that the statements made in the Quran, about for instance the knowledge that was not known at the time would go some way to answering this concern.

Ofcourse, the challenge to produce its like should also be borne in mind. As you intimate, if it is from man, it will be reproducible.

Proof..

What would one count as proof for a revelation?

When there is a Prophet on the earth, then proof can be provided in other forms. So for instance, the miracles that are so often mentioned. That were rejected even at the time by those that saw the miracle.

An example of this, from the time of the last Prophet, peace be upon him. The splitting of the moon. The people of Mecca asked (again and again) for a sign. What sign would you like.. we'd like to see you split the moon in two. You sure about that? sure were sure.. will you believe in the revelation if God does this for you? defintely (got nothing to lose, not possible to split the moon after all)... ok then, lets meet in area abc, and get your people together so they can see this aswell. At area abc, the people meet up, and the moon is split. The people are blown away. Ok, you saw that right? errr, our eyes were bewitched. hmmmn, you were given the sign you asked for, are you now going to believe? errr, no, you are a magician, you bewitched our eyes.. no one accepted.

Over the next few days, weeks, as caravans came in to the city from the desert, people in the caravans also described the splitting of the moon.. man did you see a couple of nights ago, I saw the moon, it was in two bits. Did you see it? err yeah.. I saw it.

Many years passed, Mecca becomes Muslim. Now it becomes a source of shame for them to admit that they saw the sign, yet did not believe.

This kind of behaviour is normal, people are always doing it.. take for example the signs of the Holy Prophet Moses, peace be upon him. He showed sign after sign, yet the people still did not believe and follow him. Hell, they still came after him with an army.. completely nuts.

Further, the signs of the past, were specific to the people they were being displayed to. So for instance at the time of the Holy Prophet Jesus, peace be upon him, the people were well proud of their medical prowess. So along comes a Prophet, who can blow them away in their speciality. He can heal leprosy, cure the blind, raise the dead. They can't touch that. At the time of the Holy Prophet Moses, peace be upon him, the people claimed to be experts in magic.. so along comes the Prophet, and blows them away.

For us, these signs, if they happened, are all in the past. Not much use to us.

As I said, that is the reason for providing a sign, one which remains. What is the best sign to send to a people that you know are coming? Well, what are these people most proud of? knowledge.. they think they know it all, they have the equipment to search and find out knowledge that is currently unknown. In that case, lets give them signs that only they will appreciate. The people of now will over look, since they will not understand, but those yet to come, blow their socks away with knowledge.

If the above is not enough of a sign, what would you count as enough?

I've asked this question on a few occasions to Atheists. The response has been always along the lines of, something undeniable, something that can't be rejected.. something extraordinary.

Like what?

How about splitting the moon? well that was done, and the people rejected it.

There were plenty of other signs, however the behaviour has been the same again and again. People reject the signs, that are shown them. In direct opposition to the prevalent view of Atheists, that people of the past were easy to mislead, show them any old thing, and they will swallow it. People tend not to want to change from what they already have. Even in the past, they did not want to become Muslim.

Anything can be rejected, as someone said earlier, there are people that say the earth is flat..

So the question comes down to you.. what would you accept as a sign?

right or wrong?

One would have to know what is a good life, is being compassionate a good thing, or a bad thing?

In the Atheistic worldview, there is no such thing as good or evil, therefore being compassionate is not good, or bad, neither is wiping out a million people.. they are just actions, nothing more, no moral context around them.

Your thoughts are as good as mine.

In the Islamic world view, only God can say what is right, and what is wrong, and what we need to adhere to. That is why we all need to have read that one certain book and submit to it. The one who's thoughts and actions are in accordance with God's will, is good, the other is bad.

God is the only one who can say how we can approach Him, that is why the revelation was given to the masses, and not to the few elite to allow them to control the masses.

I hope this goes some way to providing an answer.

why, why, why????

God has no needs, is self sufficient, independent.

However, we do have needs, are not self sufficient, and are dependant on a great many things.

Purpose of creation..

To recognise your Lord and follow Him. Why gratitude. But why? If God has no needs, why create us. In the Quran, God says that He did not create us for play. We were created to worship Him. But why I hear you ask.

There is a story in the Quran, about the creation of man.

Quran 2:30 Behold, thy Lord said to the angels: "I will create a vicegerent on earth." They said: "Wilt Thou place therein one who will make mischief therein and shed blood?- whilst we do celebrate Thy praises and glorify Thy holy (name)?" He said: "I know what ye know not."

God says to the Angels, I'm going to create someone who will represent Me on the earth. They say, why would create one that will do all these bad things in the world, when we are already here, and we do good things. God said, I know that which you don't.

A few points, the Angels are beings without free will to choose between right and wrong, they do as they are told. However, they do have advanced knowledge. And upon hearing that man was going to be created, they were perplexed. They already knew alot about what man was capable of. So why create such a creature.. essentially the same question as yours.

To be His representative. But why? As an honour? But why? God has no need of us, He does as He pleases, and answers to no one. He cannot be prodded, or forced to do anything He does not want to. The answers we are given are that we are to be His vicegerent on earth, to worship Him.. the why's wherefores that go beyond that, I do not know of. A lacking most likely on my part.

Does it make a difference?

Don't think so. We are told that we have been given all we need.

All we need to essentially do, is be certain that there is a creator, and that this is indeed the revelation from Him. Once we have done that, then it becomes incumbent upon us to submit to it.

For us to ascertain that the revelation is from Him, we do not need to have answers to every possible why. The revelation takes care of solving those issues for us. It provides us with knowledge, that the people at the time had no access to. It tells us about past events, that people did not know about. It goes further, and predicts future events, correctly. It goes further and challenges all of creation to match it.

We are very used to being able to replicate what other people have done. So to make a claim that you can't replicate this makes one take note. For that claim to stand for 1500 years now, is impressive. It's not like people haven't been trying their damndest, at the time of the last Prophet, peace be upon him, they tried, even now they have been trying.

Lets accept for a moment that God does exist, and that this revelation is from Him, then why do we have to do as He says? Because he says so. He knows what is better for us. It is justice, in a universe full of obedience to His will, we get to do whatever we want, that would not be unjust to everything else. But then why give us free will.. because the role demands it. To be Gods representative, you have to be pretty special. The will makes us special. By giving it up, we are merely saying that we will operate under the parameters laid out by God. But why? It is more fair than any other approach. Any other approach means that you make alliances with those you agree with, might makes right, the majority get to impose their view on society. This way, no ones view matters.. only God's view. I cannot tell you what to do, neither you tell me what to do. However, both of us can tell the other what God wants us to do. Fair.

Giving your will to God, being in adherence with His will, means that you are in sync with everything else in creation.

Now lets do the do the opposite, and accept for a moment that God does not exist. In which case, we still have no right to tell each other that what I say goes. My thoughts are as good as yours. We have no right to enforce anything on another, there is no right and wrong, no purpose in creation. Nothing matters, or has any meaning. When you die, its all over.

There are no answers to the why's.

Extrapolation..

God says that if you do what He says, then He will give you much much better in return. In the case of the example, the guy is going to die, regardless of whether that particular food saves him or not. He is still some day going pass away. That food can only help him for a little while, before he needs help again. In the example of God, the return is going to help one for eternity. No comparision on that level.

Which laws..

The examples of driving on the wrong side of the road etc.. are to illustrate a point. The point being that you did not create those laws. You may well agree with those particular ones, so substitue ones that you don't agree with in their place. You did not create those laws, yet are still subject to them. Who is subjecting you to them? your own will, you are choosing to abide by them. This is the crux of the matter, you have already given up your ability to choose.

Giving it up to God rather than society seems to me much preferable.

This is yet again getting way too long. My apologies.

I'll end it with this, no matter what you do, you are not going to get answers to all the why's in this world. Indeed, you have already shown that you do not need answers to so many why's, by the answer you gave to my question about 'a feeling?'.

I'd go further and say, no one needs answers to all the why's, most ask them to show their smarts, to make the other look foolish. If I have done so, I wish to apologise to you for it.

choices

idiots point of view..

Appreciate the advice.

Choices..

Human beings always make their own choices.. they just use different inputs to make the decisions. This is in effect the test. Which inputs will you use, which framework will you base your choices within. Will it be that of external society, or of your creator.

As a Muslim, all my choices are meant to be in accordance with the revelation. ie. I have the option of drinking alcohol today, do I do it, did God say anything about this, yes, 'stay away from it', ok, therefore I will stay away from it. I still made the choice, however, I did it by looking at what God said first.

Everyone does the same, however, they take other sources as their inputs/framework.. am I gonna get a high from it, will I get into trouble for it, what will my dad say, etc.

This is why in Islam we will be held accountable for every choice we make. On the awful/terrible day of Judgement, we will be asked about the tiniest of things, that we said/did, and that all in the most public of arenas. Every hurt we caused another, no matter how small will have to be accounted for, recompensed.

One of the conversations I had with an Atheist, the Atheist mentioned how they are responsible for everything they do, they stand on their two feet for it. They do not shirk of the fault onto God.

My response was that in Islam, our responsibility is much much greater, I cannot even give you a bad look, without knowing I am going to maybe have to pay you back for it on that day of reckoning.

That day there will be no freedom, there will be only justice. And that on a scale which will be overwhelming.

For the Atheist, the responsibility ends with death. No matter what they have done, its over.

For a Muslim it continues.

Belief but no action..

Why give it back?

Shows that you know who to thank for it. Shows you know how to thank Him. Shows you know what your position in creation is. Shows you know who is in charge. Shows you realise who knows better than you. Shows you know that by giving it, you are actually getting much much more back. Because He says so.

On what do you base that He does not want you to give it back to Him? A feeling?

Your example is not the same as that under discussion. When you bring God into the picture, its not the same. Since He has power over all things.

At the present, you can only exercise your will within the parameters that society allows you. ie. what are you going to eat, which mortgage are you going to have. Can you however decide to decide to drive on the opposite side of the road to what society has already determined? Will it let you?

Your not willing to give up your ability to choose to anyone, however your too late, you've already done so.

Are you willing therefore to give it up to your creator rather than society.

In Islam, faith has a price tag. It requires you to learn to control and better yourself throughout your life. It requires you to follow the path laid out by God, not the one of ones whims and desires.. which puts one in the same place as the one who does not believe in God. Do what ever you like. Faith becomes meaningless. God gives you the test to show the honesty of your faith through thick and thin.

As to fabrications of man, what basis do you have for such a statement? Have you been checking?

There is another post where I have listed some of the reasons why the Islamic revelation is different. For believing that it is indeed from the creator.

Now if you said Islam is a fabrication of God, then sure I'd go along with that.

Atheist viewpoint??

Firstly, thanks much for the time you have taken with this.

Next, your right, I do indeed disagree.

What I have said, I stick to, I got from the horses own mouth. I have had many conversations with Atheists, watched many of their youtube and other vids and read some of their literature. This is indeed what has come out of all that.

No good, no evil, no morality..

http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/mathew/intro.html

"Unexceptional? But aren't atheists less moral than religious people?"

That depends. If you define morality as obedience to God, then of course atheists are less moral as they don't obey any God. But usually when one talks of morality, one talks of what is acceptable ("right") and unacceptable ("wrong") behavior within society.

"Is there such a thing as atheist morality?"

If you mean "Is there such a thing as morality for atheists?" then the answer is yes, as explained above. Many atheists have ideas about morality which are at least as strong as those held by religious people. See "More research concerning atheist morality."

If you mean "Does atheism have a characteristic moral code?" then the answer is no. Atheism by itself does not imply anything much about how a person will behave. Most atheists follow many of the same "moral rules" as theists, but for different reasons. Atheists view morality as something created by humans, according to the way humans feel the world 'ought' to work, rather than seeing it as a set of rules decreed by a supernatural being.

If one merely follows whatever the society dictates, or one makes it up on a whim as one goes along, one has no morals.

I have asked on several occasions questions of the type, on what basis do you decide that helping people is good.. nothing much has come back.

If one says, just because others are doing it. Well thats not much of answer, especially one who prides himself on not following the crowd, of thinking for oneself.

Afterlife..

http://www.atheistfoundation.org.au/articles/atheists-perspective-death

Atheists believe that when they die, there is nothing more.

That ofcourse means that whatever you do in this life has no meaning, since as soon as you become nothingness, its as if you never existed. You helped this or that person, or you didn't. You butchered a million people, you saved a million lives, they will die eventually, matters not.. it will be nothingness for all.

Such a universe view is full of injustice.

Add to the above that we are only a certain form of animal, just atoms in a certain arrangement.. and you have the potential for dealing with human beings as objects, resources, numbers. Which is exactly what is happening.

Lack of thought..

Atheists are very fond of telling eveyone about how much they think for themselves. So exactly what do these Atheists actually think for themselves. Which mortgage to get?

If they are going with the flow of current practice with respect to right, wrong and morality, then what is all that brain power actually being used on.

The argument I'm putting forward is that if someone thinks for themselves, then one actually has a very difficult job ahead of oneself. One has to decide whether right or wrong are terms they wish to deal with. Whether they are willing to lie to cheat or steal from others, does one define them as good or bad, on what basis.

It becomes a massive undertaking. One which hardly anyone would take on.

I think that Atheists are pretty much like anyone else. As said before, they go with the flow most of the time. Easy enough to just follow the norms of a society, its good to tell the truth, to not steal etc. don't have to work hard on working out the why that way.

Essentially, they cannot make any special claim to being able to think better than anyone else.

Let me add, I don't make any claim that I can think better than anyone else. As I said, I am a follower, and a pretty poor one at that.

Viewpoints..

As I said, I think that I am indeed dealing with the viewpoint as put forward by Atheists. Though perhaps it would behove me to revisit this.

Instinctual knowledge of right and wrong..

That just doesn't cut it. If you use the same excuse to say I believe in God, you will get heavily derided by the mob.

It is just not something that can be put in a test tube and prodded, so they just will not accept it. Therefore, why should I accept the same excuse?

Further one guys instinctual leanings are not the same as anothers. It leads essentially to all sorts of abuse, one guy says 'I think stealing is grrrreat', another says 'stealing is baaad'.. both make the claim to instintual knowledge.

In any case, differences aside, thank you for your time. May God guide us all to what is better.

free will

Because He knows what is better for you, than you do.

You put your trust in Him.

If you think about it, you do not have total free play to your will regardless. You only have limited free will, free range to do what you choose in small spheres. You are limited by society, by the weather, by gravity etc.

As an example. You do not get to decide if it right or wrong to steal, its imposed on you. God imposes the same thing, indeed did it first. Would you rather accept it from Him, or society?

Who will you submit to?

A little further thought, the only gift that you have to give Him, is your free choice. Everything else is already His. He is the creator the maker, the evolver of it all. Will you give Him this one most precious of gifts. Remember, He gave even that to you first.

Alhamdulillahi rabil aalameen.

the beef

The first 3 posts were Atheistic posts to my mind. "this god fella", "balls of fire", such terms are normally used by this bent of mind, get a quick laugh.

However, behind the humour, nothing.

2nd point, agreed.

amazing

I like the prayer, not going to happen though, especially if you have all the world turn Atheist.

Why?

Because at the crux of Atheism is the claim that everyone thinks for themselves, decides for themselves what is right and wrong. A simple look at the world shows that people do not agree on pretty much anything. With this kind of world view in place, you will never have peace.

The Islamic view is quite different. In it, one submits ones most precious gift, free will, the ability to choose, to God. The idea is to put our will second, and the will of God, first. I would submit that only with such a world view in place in the hearts of humankind, will you ever get to peace. And that is the meaning of the word Islam, 'peace, through the submission of oneself to God'. Most people can't manage it. Most Muslims can't manage it.

Taking this line of thought a little further, I'd say that if all people became Atheist, they too would have to submit to a higher authority, which would override their own personal desires on various issues. It would still mean a subjection of ones will to either the majority view, or some other arrangement.

For the Atheist, there is actually no point to life, the one follows the other. If we all go to nothingness as soon as we die, i.e. no matter what you did in this life, it makes no difference, there is actually no point at all. You could be a mass murderer, or a saint.

Since Atheists all decide on what is right and wrong for themselves, there is no criterion to judge either, and you cannot therefore say it is bad to be the mass murderer, or its good to be the saint, its all subjective.

You can't use the excuse of we'll come to a common view, i.e.. what the majority decides.. which at the end of the day is might makes right. No one agrees to such a view when the might is on the opposing side.

Why are things amazing? As an Atheist you have to ask yourself that very question.. its all just patterns of energy, that your senses are taking in. There should be nothing more amazing for one set of said inputs as another. I suppose you could attribute it to your evolution, but since you have sussed out that it is just pre-programming made up of various evolutionary steps of your ancestors, controlled of course by natural selection, then you should be able to reject such feelings of amazement and see them for what they are.

I like the 'our religious person'. Though I disagree with it. I do not support religion. I only support Islam.

I know to Atheists, its all the same, there is no distinction, one set of superstitions is the same as another. However, Islam is not the same.

I saw the four horsemen of the apocalypse, have their little chit chat, back slapping go at all things religious. The lack of knowledge about Islam was apparent.

One of the things they said was that there was no external proof to any religion. In the case of Islam, that just is not the case.