>> ^Mcboinkens:

>> ^Mammaltron:
How come the many and various creators of the universe never mention this cool stuff in their books?

This is one of my biggest conflicts with religion. Not one mention of anything outside of the sun and the moon. No planets, galaxies, nebula. Then again, they didn't have words for those objects back then and it would have been a little difficult to explain something they didn't know existed, but still. Also, I suppose the Bible is more concerned with the "why" question of humanity rather than the "how" question.


your last sentence hits it. The Bible/Quran/Torah/Sruti/etc are not science books or history books even tho some tend to read them as such

nice post my friend.
i just went to the discussion you were talking about with the sam harris video.
i agree with so many of your points here concerning criticism and discussion concerning religion but when it comes to islam many westerners are unaware of the current schism in regards to islam.
there are many,a majority actually,of moderate muslims who read the quran much like a modern day catholic may read the bible.
one of the reasons you can chastise and criticize christianity with impunity is due to the reformation hundreds of years ago.this was not the case hundreds of years ago when the church ruled with an iron and unforgiving fist.we are no longer compelled to obey the edicts of the church.
if you dared to criticize the church in those days you risked being labeled an apostate,a heretic and subject to the most severe punishments and possible torture..even death in some instances.
now let us place you in indonesia or uganda.where the ruling class consists of a modern day theocracy.would you be as quick to criticize knowing that you may be executed? your family punished along side you?

so when i defend islam,i do so with these things in mind.
because what we are talking about is wholesale exploitation of the uneducated and the extremely poor dominated by those who would pervert a system of belief for their own gains.the EXACT same thing the christian church did so many years ago.

for those who would like to understand the current state of islam and the internal struggles concerning islamic theosophy might i suggest rerza aslan's "no god but god".a fantastic book that addresses the very thing that we are talking about here.

@bareboards2
Hah. Glad I could finally get your goat.

The fact that you focus on stuff like insults is proof of my point that you don't give a damn about substance, only semantics.

It's okay to be ignorant Gale. I'm ignorant of lots of things.
[Hence why I advocate learning & science. I like to be fully informed.]

The reason I phrased it as "stupid as fuck" is because.. well it is.

If you abhor result A, but you condone action B which directly contributes to result A..

..it's crazy or stupid or whatever pejorative you want to use to identify that viewpoint as a contradiction to itself.

I can't comprehend why that is so difficult for you to realize or accept.

You keep asking my plan to get rid of religion or bureaucratic brutality.

Simple, confront the mindset that "Supporting A, while condoning B" will produce a positive result.

Cause it doesn't.
~~~

Think about this Gale.

If you think sexism in Islam is awful, why condone Buddhist Dharma - it only justifies the existence of the Quran and sexist interpretations of it.

>> ^chilaxe:

The video doesn't really explain itself, and neither does the videosift description, so this is my understanding of the video's argument:
1. Muslims use this peaceful quote as a defense of the Koran.
2. The Koran does indeed contain that quote, ch. 5 verse 32, but the next verse, 33, doesn't extend that niceness to people 'who wage war against Allah and make mischief in the land,' calling for their execution.
That seems like a fair point, and Muslims should definitely be forthcoming about it instead of getting defensive, but verse 33 doesn't actually seem to me to be bad at all if you interpret it the right way.

(The full verses can be read in multiple translations at the link provided in the videosift description: http://www.usc.edu/schools/college/crcc/engagement
/resources/texts/muslim/quran/005.qmt.html )


No, verse 33 is terrible in and of itself. What is "spreading corruption"? Being of the wrong religion (or, worse, of none), for example? Being gay, or an "adulteress" woman? The list goes on.

>> ^chilaxe:

(The full verses can be read in multiple translations at the link provided in the videosift description: http://www.usc.edu/schools/college/crcc/engagement
/resources/texts/muslim/quran/005.qmt.html )


Or under the video here... from the time I posted it...

Right. I'm pretty sure Al-Queda has defined "mischief" or "corruption" as, "having a presence on Muslim land while displaying faith in the wrong religion"; and in the case of offending governments, defined the offender as, "all citizens of that country."

I think it's best to leave decisions about whom to kill to those who don't follow any religion, and who decide based on what's best for society (Who decides what's good for society is a conversation you and I are having in another thread, but I'd trust that outcome more than a religious one).>> ^chilaxe:

...verse 33 doesn't actually seem to me to be bad at all if you interpret it the right way.

Tags for this video have been changed from 'Quran, lawyered' to 'Quran, lawyered, verse 32 and 33 conflict' - edited by chilaxe

The video doesn't really explain itself, and neither does the videosift description, so this is my understanding of the video's argument:

1. Muslims use this peaceful quote as a defense of the Koran.
2. The Koran does indeed contain that quote, ch. 5 verse 32, but the next verse, 33, doesn't extend that niceness to people 'who wage war against Allah and make mischief in the land,' calling for their execution.

That seems like a fair point, and Muslims should definitely be forthcoming about it instead of getting defensive, but verse 33 doesn't actually seem to me to be bad at all if you interpret it the right way.


(The full verses can be read in multiple translations at the link provided in the videosift description: http://www.usc.edu/schools/college/crcc/engagement/resources/texts/muslim/quran/005.qmt.html )

http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/Pages/Quran-Hate.htm

"Peaceful" Muslims who disavow the commands to violence
against infidels in their holy books (or have not read them) are enemies of Islam.

>> ^shinyblurry:

Do you have an actual argument, or what? Creation could ultimately only come from a single source; it makes logical sense there is only one God. A true God is a being whom was not created by anyone else, for which whom no one is a God to Him. Humanity has worshipped many Gods, but it doesn't mean there isn't one God. Humanity has worshipped, the sun, the earth, clay, stone, wood, themselves, money, power, sex..there are a million different things that are a god to people. Still has no bearing on the argument there is only one God. And if there is, then you will answer to Him one day.


The argument is that you have no more evidence for your "one true God" than anyone else has or had for their gods. The fact that you can't see that confounds me.

We both agree that the Universe exists. We both agree that the current state of the Universe had to start at some point. But there is currently no real evidence for what caused the Universe to begin, or what was going on before that.

You take that shared human ignorance and act like it is evidence for the truth of your Bible. That's nonsense. There is no more validity to your claim than anyone else's myths. The age of a book does not make it any more true. The points at which it matches history do not add merit to the points at which it diverges from history. We know for a fact that there are things created in the world today that are made by groups of people working as a team, so there's no reason to believe that the universe itself wasn't created by a combination of many forces. There is absolutely nothing tying the existence of the universe to the Bible. Except for the single solitary fact that there are people like you who want to pretend there is.

So let me clarify my earlier post. If there were Woden worshipers who came around your neighborhood knocking on doors, preaching about the rewards of Valhalla, would that annoy you? If they were trying like crazy to get their Woden worship into school lessons, would that bother you? If they led chants praising their warrior ancestors before city council meetings, do you think that might make you question their ability to run a city? Or a state? Or the federal government?

And if you started talking about how stupid they are, they would say "You hate Woden and just want to live your life of luxury without taking up the sword to fight like a warrior! You are lazy!"

And you would say, "That's not true, I just don't believe Woden exists!"

I don't think I could make it any clearer. Atheists don't hate God. We just don't believe your God is any more real than any other god that humans have made up. If we were living in Iran then we would be saying we don't believe in Allah, and we would be pointing out the dumb stuff in the Quran. Would you accuse us of hating Allah? If we lived in India we might be pointing out the stupid beliefs of Hinduism. Would you accuse us of hating those gods? But we happen to live in an area that is predominantly Christian. And when we point out the dumb things in the bible, you feel perfectly justified in calling us Satanists. What is wrong with you? We're not "fighting for the other side", we don't believe the fight is happening at all!

And one of the biggest reasons why I don't believe in an omniscient, omnipotent, omni-loving God like yours is because you still think that this being could possibly be fighting something! What??? Do you even know what those words mean?

Anyway, I know that I'm just yelling into an abyss and that you won't really respond to what I'm saying. You are entirely consumed by the mind disease that is "magical thinking", and nothing I say will ever make a dent in that. Even when it's advice on how to argue your own side better, like "Don't call atheists Satanists, because you will just reveal yourself as a nutjob."

Your ignorance is sadly typical, but perhaps curable. There's no need to 'lie' about islam and the quran, they are their own worst enemies.

The Quran contains at least 109 verses that call Muslims to war with nonbelievers. Some are quite graphic, with commands to chop off heads and fingers and kill infidels wherever they may be hiding. Muslims who do not join the fight are called 'hypocrites' and warned that Allah will send them to Hell if they do not join the slaughter.

http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/Quran/023-violence.htm

You are presently duped into defending a pedophile warlord and the defective and inferior civilizations that are the best islam can produce. More studying on your part is required.


>> ^9547bis:


>> ^quantumushroom:
by its own "holy" book, islam demands one of 3 choices for faithful muslims encountering infidels: kill, convert or enslave. A fourth option is to pretend to assimilate into a society, until the muslim minority becomes a majority. Then, enact sharia law.
islam = freedom fail

Exactly! Which is why Muhammad invaded everyone. Ho, wait, the Muslim expansion wasn't during his lifetime.
But yeah, after that they choked all other faiths. Ho wait, it was actually forbidden to convert for two hundred years. Anyway, after that they sure enslaved all those infidels. Well except the Jews. And the Christians. And, erm, the Mazdaists.
Ha damnit, I have to give it to you QM, I can't lie as well as you do (-:

Me too..and there are a lot of these popping up all the time. I think one of the most amazing things is that he heard from Jesus "I am the way, the truth and the life" and he had never heard that before..because its certainly not in the quran. An incredibly pious man in any case

>> ^marinara:
like this. Sounds like a classic conversion. Paul from the bible would understand this guy.
This is classic evangelical material. If you don't like this, you would hate Billy Graham. (or any evangelical video)

>> ^marinara:
like this. Sounds like a classic conversion. Paul from the bible would understand this guy.
This is classic evangelical material. If you don't like this, you would hate Billy Graham. (or any evangelical video)


>> ^GenjiKilpatrick:
The only book that refers to Jesus of Nazareth more than the New Testament is the Quran.
Jesus is the second most beloved prophet in all of Islam.


That's true, but it also denies Christs divinity and says that a lookalike took his place on the cross and he didn't really die. That alone makes it an antichrist religion, by definition. Not to mention the fact that they don't follow anything He said..so, I would say if they really loved Him they would follow Him.

They also believe He is coming back and not muhammed, which in itself is strange, but they also say when He comes back He will die. It's all messed up. I'm happy they like Jesus but it's not going to do them any good.

The only book that refers to Jesus of Nazareth more than the New Testament is the Quran.

Jesus is the second most beloved prophet in all of Islam.

Oh boy, you have been "educated" on the bible, havent you. Too bad its all wrong.


Atheist error #1Translation upon translation has corrupted the original bible so now we don't know what it actually said
The truth: Today there survives more than 25,000 partial and complete, ancient handwritten manuscript copies of the New Testament alone, not to mention hundreds of Old Testament manuscripts that survive today dating back to as early as the third century B.C. These hand written manuscripts have allowed scholars and textual critics to go back and verify that the Bible we have in our possession today is the same Bible that the early church possessed 2,000 years ago.

This isnt really relevant, the bible could be the most accurately translated book of all time, and I'd still be an atheist.(its not, but I dont really care)

Atheist error #2 The bible is only confirmed by the bible, there is no outside external verification
The truth: There are over 39 sources outside of the Bible that attest to more than 100 facts regarding Jesus’ life, teachings, crucifixion, and resurrection. External sources verify that at least 80 persons from the bible were actual historical figures, 50 people from the Old Testament and 30 people from the New Testament. This includes Pontius Pilate, Caiaphas the High priest, and King David.


Again, not really relevant. The bible, along with the outside sources, were all written by superstitious desertdwellers some 2000 years ago, who gives a shit if these sources confirm eachother. Most of it confirms things like historical facts (Names of kings, major events , who lived where, and so on) None of it confirms the truth of any of the metaphysical claims, so at best, the bible is historically accurate(again, its not, but this is a long discussion)

Atheist error #3 The bible is unscientific
The truth: The bible contains no scientific errors. In fact, it reveals a number of facts about the Universe that simply were not known at the time. For instance, the bible states that the Sun is on a circuit through space, yet scientists at the time thought it was stationary. Even more amazing, the bible states the Earth is round when everyone else thought it was flat:
Isaiah 40:22 says, “It is He [God] who sits above the circle of the Earth." Job also talked about the earth being round.
This was 300 years before aristotle. The bible was over 2000 years ahead of its time. It was also widely thought at the time that the Earth was carried on the back of something else, like a turtle or the greek god Atlas. The bible taught the truth: Job 26:7 “He [God] hangs the Earth on nothing.” Scientists did not discover that the Earth hangs on nothing until 1650.
Another amazing fact that the bible uncovered far before man discovered the facts is that the number of stars is as the sand in sea.
Jeremiah 33:22 “The host of heaven [a reference to the stars] cannot be numbered, nor the sand of the sea measured.”
Before the telescope was invented, man was able to number the stars. The count was usually just over 1000. That was the prevailing scientific knowledge until the telescope was invented. The bible revealed though that there were more stars than anyone could count.

Oh boy.. Where to start here... Only a really religiously distorted mind could write this nonsense.

And nonsense like it has been written to "confirm" the accuracy of other holy texts as well. I was hit with a list of "facts" from the Quran much like this in a discussion once, one such "fact" was some nonsense about the "mountains securing the firmaments of the earth" was somehow confirmed by modern Plate-tectonics. I wonder whether you religious nuts can see through eachothers claims, can you see for instance, whats wrong with that Quran-argument, or does that seem reasonable to you? If not, why do the above arguments from the bible about god "hanging the earth in its place" seem like good decriptions of astronomical fact?

Atheist error #4 The history of the bible is made up, it is just mythology
The truth: In every instance where the Bible can be, or has been checked out archaeologically, it has been found to be 100% accurate.

Wow, thats almost 100% inaccurate. Israeli archiologists have, with great religious entusiasm and eagerness, for decades tried to document the 40-year travel through the desert from Egypt that the Jews are said to have done. One of the most famous bible stories, and, one would think, one of the best candidates to be proven true by archeology, yet they have all come up empty handed. It is, for all intends and purposes, as if it never happened.