Atheism/Lets talk about GOD!

[Johnny B]

** Johnny jumps all over the place , collecting kiss bubbles. while singing Pet shop boys.. Western girls , Eastern Boys ..... **

 

Though its early for towels be they White or Red, an incohesive theme seems to be surfacing through the discourse, disregarding what generally language-capacity imposes, there seem to be desperate attempt of poisoning the well.

however, a sign usually witnessed at the beginning of one's abandonment of previously held position.

 

Since I can not whatsoever cede legitimacy to the shallow themes of GG where neither the persona nor the point of views get granted to be on their own right,Nor will i for now spend a breath on Norf's hedgehog defence-mechanism in that helpless corner of Faith,He has to wait sister The_Siren as she is the sole one with the kind of honesty in demand under such debates.

Therefore I will concentrate upon and follow through our Near-Death-Experienc e crux and your use of it as an evidence of an acceptable reason to allow some 'powers' ( read Gods ) at work,hence, a reasonable hint of the existence of a particular God.

 

And since you've saliently accounted for the undercurrent jab there is no reason whatsoever to continue hanging in there, so let me further agree with you regarding Brother Humble aka Paragon's unreserved honesty displayed in this and many other threads over this Forum being something we both so deeply enjoy and hope to take after.

 

 

Now,As you might already know Near Death Experiences ( NDEs ) almost always occur as a result of decreased blood flow to the brain and/or lack of oxygen,usually from shock induced either from severe infection (septic shock), from myocardial ischemia (cardiogenic shock), cardiac arrest,or the effects of anesthesia.

 

Apparently, NDEs are integrally linked to physical and not spiritual—realities.

One common misconception regarding NDEs which seems to be the case here is that when we have one, namely NDE, we literally die and are then restored to life, something which is simply not possible.

 

Some people mistakenly believe that when our heart has stopped, we are dead. Contrarily, the heart is merely a pump that sends oxygenated blood to the rest of the body. It is not until approximately six minutes after a cell has been deprived of its normal oxygen supply that it truly dies. Not until the cells in a person’s brain have died are we truly deceased, a death from which no living organism has ever returned.

 

Though NDEs are not something that is thoroughly studied it is difficult to make a plausible connection to a particular Deity, just because:

1: NDEs happen.

2: NDEs can make one experience what a particular religion promises in an after-life.

 

And there you've my bone of contention.

[Mr. Somalia]

To the Infidel in this thread:

You Must Know This Man

 

You may be an atheist or an agnostic; or you may belong to any of the religious denominations that exist in the world today. You may be a communist or a believer in democracy and freedom. No matter what you are, and no matter what your ideological and political beliefs, personal and social habits happen to be -- YOU MUST STILL KNOW THIS MAN.

 

ENCYCLOPEDIA BRITANNICA confirms:

 

"....a mass of detail in the early sources show that he was an honest and upright man who had gained the respect and loyalty of others who were like-wise honest and upright men." (Vol. 12)

 

GEORGE BERNARD SHAW said about him:

 

"He must be called the Saviour of Humanity. I believe that if a man like him were to assume the dictatorship of the modern world, he would succeed in solving its problems in a way that would bring it much needed peace and happiness." (THE GENUINE ISLAM, Singapore, Vol. 1, No. 8, 1936)

 

He was by far the most remarkable man that ever set foot on this earth. He preached a religion, founded a state, built a nation, laid down a moral code, initiated numerous social and political reforms, established a powerful and dynamic society to practice and represent his teachings and completely revolutionized the worlds of human thought and behavior for all times to come.

 

"HIS NAME IS MUHAMMAD" May Peace of God Be Upon Him (pbuh)

 

He was born in Arabia in the year 570 C.E. (common era), started his mission of preaching the religion of Truth, Islam (submission to One God) at the age of forty and departed from this world at the age of sixty-three.

 

During this short period of 23 years of his Prophethood, he changed the complete Arabian peninsula from paganism and idolatry to worship of One God, from tribal quarrels and wars to national solidarity and cohesion, from drunkenness and debauchery to sobriety and piety, from lawlessness and anarchy to disciplined living, from utter bankruptcy to the highest standards of moral excellence. Human history has never known such a complete transformation of a people or a place before or since - and IMAGINE all these unbelievable wonders in JUST OVER TWO DECADES.

 

LAMARTINE, the renowned historian speaking on the essentials of human greatness wonders:

 

"If greatness of purpose, smallness of means and astounding results are the three criteria of human genius, who could dare to compare any great man in modern history with Muhammad? The most famous men created arms, laws and empires only. They founded, if anything at all, no more than material powers which often crumbled away before their eyes. This man moved not only armies, legislation, empires, peoples and dynasties, but millions of men in one-third of the then inhabited world; and more than that, he moved the altars, the gods, the religions, the ideas, the beliefs and souls....his forbearance in victory, his ambition, which was entirely devoted to one idea and in no manner striving for an empire; his endless prayers, his mystic conversations with God, his death and his triumph after death; all these attest not to an imposture but to a firm conviction which gave him the power to restore a dogma. This dogma was two-fold, the unity of God and the immateriality of God; the former telling what God is, the latter telling what God is not; the one overthrowing false gods with the sword, the other starting an idea with the words.

 

"Philosopher, orator, apostle, legislator, warrior, conqueror of ideas, restorer of rational dogmas, of a cult without images, the founder of twenty terrestrial empires and of one spiritual empire, that is MUHAMMAD. As regards all the standards by which Human Greatness may be measured, we may well ask, IS THERE ANY MAN GREATER THAN HE?" (Lamartine, HISTOIRE DE LA TURQUIE, Paris, 1854, Vol. II, pp 276-277)

 

The world has had its share of great personalities. But these were one-sided figures who distinguished themselves in but one or two fields, such as religious thought or military leadership. The lives and teachings of these great personalities of the world are shrouded in the mist of time.

 

There is so much speculation about the time and place of their birth, the mode and style of their life, the nature and detail of their teachings and the degree and measure of their success or failure that it is impossible for humanity to reconstruct accurately the lives and teachings of these men.

 

Not so this man. Muhammad (pbuh) accomplished so much in such diverse fields of human thought and behavior in the fullest blaze of human history. Every detail of his private life and public utterances has been accurately documented and faithfully preserved to our day. The authenticity of the record so preserved are vouched for not only by the faithful followers but even by his prejudiced critics.

 

Muhammad (pbuh) was a religious teacher, a social reformer, a moral guide, an administrative colossus, a faithful friend, a wonderful companion, a devoted husband, a loving father - all in one. No other man in history ever excelled or equaled him in any of these different aspects of life - but it was only for the selfless personality of Muhammad (pbuh) to achieve such incredible perfections.

 

MAHATMA GANDHI, speaking on the character of Muhammad, (pbuh) says in YOUNG INDIA:

 

"I wanted to know the best of one who holds today's undisputed sway over the hearts of millions of mankind....I became more than convinced that it was not the sword that won a place for Islam in those days in the scheme of life. It was the rigid simplicity, the utter self-effacement of the Prophet, the scrupulous regard for his pledges, his intense devotion to this friends and followers, his intrepidity, his fearlessness, his absolute trust in God and in his own mission.

 

"These and not the sword carried everything before them and surmounted every obstacle. When I closed the 2nd volume (of the Prophet's biography), I was sorry there was not more for me to read of the great life."

 

THOMAS CALYLE in his HEROES AND HERO WORSHIP, was simply amazed as to:

 

"how one man single-handedly, could weld warring tribes and wandering Bedouins into a most powerful and civilized nation in less than two decades."

 

DIWAN CHAND SHARMA wrote:

 

"Muhammad was the soul of kindness, and his influence was felt and never forgotten by those around him." (D.C. Sharma, THE PROPHETS OF THE EAST, Calcutta, 1935, pp. 12)

 

EDWARD GIBBON and SIMON OCKLEY speaking on the profession of ISLAM write:

 

"'I BELIEVE IN ONE GOD, AND MAHOMET, AN APOSTLE OF GOD' is the simple and invariable profession of Islam. The intellectual image of the Deity has never been degraded by any visible idol; the honor of the Prophet has never transgressed the measure of human virtues; and his living precepts have restrained the gratitude of his disciples within the bounds of reason and religion." (HISTORY OF THE SARACEN EMPIRES, London, 1870, p. 54)

 

Muhammad (pbuh) was nothing more or less than a human being. But he was a man with a noble mission, which was to unite humanity on the worship of ONE and ONLY ONE GOD and to teach them the way to honest and upright living based on the commands of God. He always described himself as, 'A Servant and Messenger of God,' and so indeed every action of his proclaimed to be.

 

Speaking on the aspect of equality before God in Islam, the famous poetess of India, SAROJINI NAIDU says:

 

"It was the first religion that preached and practiced democracy; for, in the mosque, when the call for prayer is sounded and worshippers are gathered together, the democracy of Islam is embodied five times a day when the peasant and king kneel side by side and proclaim: 'God Alone is Great'... I have been struck over and over again by this indivisible unity of Islam that makes man instinctively a brother." (S. Naidu, IDEALS OF ISLAM, vide Speeches & Writings, Madras, 1918, p. 169)

 

In the words of PROF. HURGRONJE:

 

"The league of nations founded by the prophet of Islam put the principle of international unity and human brotherhood on such universal foundations as to show candle to other nations." He continues: "The fact is that no nation of the world can show a parallel to what Islam has done towards the realization of the idea of the League of Nations."

 

The world has not hesitated to raise to divinity, individuals whose lives and missions have been lost in legend. Historically speaking, none of these legends achieved even a fraction of what Muhammad (pbuh) accomplished. And all his striving was for the sole purpose of uniting mankind for the worship of One God on the codes of moral excellence. Muhammad (pbuh) or his followers never at any time claimed that he was a Son of God or the God-incarnate or a man with divinity - but he always was and is even today considered as only a Messenger chosen by God.

 

MICHAEL H. HART in his recently published book on ratings of men who contributed towards the benefit and upliftment of mankind writes:

 

"My choice of Muhammad to lead the list of the world's most influential persons may surprise some readers and may be questioned by others, but he was the only man in history who was supremely successful on both the religious and secular levels." (M.H. Hart, THE 100: A RANKING OF THE MOST INFLUENTIAL PERSONS IN HISTORY, New York, 1978, p. 33)

 

K. S. RAMAKRISHNA RAO, an Indian Professor of Philosophy in his booklet, "Muhammad, The Prophet of Islam," calls him the "PERFECT MODEL FOR HUMAN LIFE." Prof. Ramakrishna Rao explains his point by saying:

 

"The personality of Muhammad, it is most difficult to get into the whole truth of it. Only a glimpse of it I can catch. What a dramatic succession of picturesque scenes! There is Muhammad, the Prophet. There is Muhammad, the Warrior; Muhammad, the Businessman; Muhammad, the Statesman; Muhammad, the Orator; Muhammad, the Reformer; Muhammad, the Refuge of Orphans; Muhammad, the Protector of Slaves; Muhammad, the Emancipator of Women; Muhammad, the Judge; Muhammad, the Saint. All in all these magnificent roles, in all these departments of human activities, he is alike a hero."

 

Today after a lapse of fourteen centuries, the life and teachings of MUHAMMAD (pbuh) have survived without the slightest loss, alteration or interpolation. They offer the same undying hope for treating mankind's many ills, which they did when he was alive. This is not a claim of Muhammad's (pbuh) followers but also the inescapable conclusion forced upon by a critical and unbiased history.

 

The least YOU could do as a thinking and concerned human being is to stop for a moment and ask yourself: Could these statements sounding so extraordinary and revolutionary be really true? And supposing they really are true and you did not know this man MUHAMMAD (pbuh) or hear about him, isn't it time you responded to this tremendous challenge and put in some effort to know him?

 

It will cost you nothing but it may prove to be the beginning of a completely new era in your life.

 

We invite you to make a discovery of this wonderful man, MUHAMMAD (pbuh), the like of whom never walked on the face of this earth.

 

The World Islamic Propagation

Establishment (UK)

359 Rayners Lane,

Pinner, Middlesex, HA5 5EN,

U.K. Telephone: +44 (0)181 426 2216

Fax number: +44 (0)181 426 2217

Email:

wipecrc@home.virt

ual -pc.com

[Mr. Somalia]

To All:

 

The ironic aspect of atheism is that IT is as much a faith as any other religion is, since atheists, simply cannot disprove the existence of God.

 

 

To Johny B:

 

Got any proof that the Al-mighty and glorious Allah doesn't exist?

 

Remember, YOU are the one who wants the burden of proof to be on the believers. But I bet the instant that standard is turned against you, you will run and hide.

[Garmaqaate]

Originally posted by Raamsade:

quote:Originally posted by Garmaqaate:

I only see a problem, a conflict if i may say so, when a supposedly non-religious person criticizes religion

That "conflict" would never exist if the pious kept their piety to themselves and not tried to impose their beliefs on everyone else.

Raamsade, I understand the motivation behind the wahaabi follower, the tabliiq participants, even the christian evangelist, preaching about the end of the world and urging people to repent and join them in the true straight path. I understand them because the idea of "God" automatically comes with "life after death", "Justice and punishment and rewards". A person of faith believes in this deeply and is thus motivated to urge others to come along because the more he/she converts, the more happy he becomes and the more likely he will live a happy afterlife. I do not have a problem with such persons. I am such a believer.

 

What i do not understand and can not understand are the preachers and the clergy of this "atheist" religion. I call it a religion because why else will they preach, pontificate and try to explain and emphasise the righteousness of their stand when in essence they are telling anyone who listens to them "life is not important", or essentially "there is no reason to life".

 

An atheist will tell you there is no God. That we have evolved. That there is no life after death. He might be right because however much I believe in God there is no hard proof of his existence. Anything I say is always circumstantial evidence and is not beyond reasonable doubt. But what the atheist doesnt get is the implication of his statements. If there is no life after death then essentially you are saying you are here for the duration you are here on earth. Now think about that. The world is billions of years old according to these atheists, and will survive for several more billions. Now, on a scale of billions of years whether you live for 1 day or one hundred years, you have lived for approx 0% of the universal time scale. It is like a minute in 1 year. And whether you have lived for one day or one hundred years, in the end the world will come to an end and all humanity will for ever be gone. Essentially it is like making sand castles on the beach, however beautiful they look they will be swallowed by the sea. In essence what the atheist is telling you is we have evolved into what we are because our parents were lucky to survive disasters and reproduce and in the end their survival was futile because we will all perish anyway. Meaning life on earth is meaningless.

 

Now I dont mind an atheist making such a conclusion for himself/herself but the question is, what is their to preach about such a philosophy? What "hope" is there in such an idea?

[Mr. Somalia]

Originally posted by Raamsade:

quote:

---

Originally posted by G G:

The original argument went:"God exists and here is the proof/reasoning for why He exists - now it's your turn to explain why He doesn't exist."

Again, there is no such thing as proof only evidence and reason. Lets, arguendo, change proof to evidence. Furthermore, let us drop all evidence for God's existence since we know you can't produce any evidence for God's existence that's perceptible to the human senses. Supposed miracles are discounted for obvious reasons. We're now left with reasons (that is logically sound reasons) for God existence. Do you have any? I ask because none have been presented thusfar. And even though this thread was ostensibly about Atheism, people have been attacking the scientific theory of Evolution.

Raamsade, how did you come to your conclusion that there is no God? Anybody can say what you are saying and many have. So what! It is a simple sentence "There is no God," and this is all you have to say to be right.

 

Wow, it must be very easy to think like you do.

[5]

The original discussion was between Ramsaade and the Siren.

 

**ALERT! THIS IS A FRIGGIN GIANT DINOSAUR POST!** Sorry about that.

 

And massively off-topic, as this thread is supposed to be atheism/ notion of God and not evolutionary theory.

 

RAMDAASE WROTE:

 

"First of all there is no such thing as prove in the real world only evidence and arguments. So no one can prove anything notwithstanding the colloquial use of the word "prove."

 

I agree. I hope you keep this in mind while we continue.

 

"More pertinently, I have comprehensibly demolished your pathetic and error-filled screed on Evolution. The terse response in your last post against your more prolix earlier posts indicates I've done pretty good job."

 

Hmmh?

 

"Scientists are guilty of using their imagination but they're not the only ones."

 

3-D colouring and designing the iris of the dinosaurs and cashing in on them in various museums and shows and et cetera is indeed using imagination. Artificially joining a human skull and jawbones of an orang-utan on the other hand is good old lying. Or to be more specific in this case: forgery. It raises the question, why do it, hmm? If evolution really is an undeniable fact.

 

"Religious people also use their imagination and have come up with a impressive body of myths and fairy tales for which there is absolutely no evidence whatsoever."

 

I agree with you. It is no wonder evolutionary theory saw daylight in Europe which was the capital of Christianity. The Bible is inconsistent, has factual errors and very few believe it to be the true words of God. I challenge you to find lies in the Quran however. Even better; I urge you to find anything that supports the view that prophet Muhammed (sas) was a dishonest man or had bad character - unlike that old chap Darwin who was quite bit of a racist and sexist, and who would probably look down on a cheerful, talkative little Negro like yourself

 

 

"Scientists use their imagination to come up with conceptual frameworks that explain observed facts. For example, scientists have come up with the theory of Gravity to explain the fact of gravity.Similarly, scientists have come up with the theory of Evolution to explain the fact of evolution. But what distinguishes fruitful product of human imagination from non-fruitful ones is empirical evidence. Science goes where the evidence leads. If the outcome of the imagination of scientists don't conform to the empirical evidence, the former must give way to the latter."

 

Observation is not the same as imagination. Pondering why an apple falls off the tree but the moon doesn't fall on Earth is quite different to thinking "I look different from my parents - frankly, I'm much better looking - therefore my ancestors must have looked like real apes!"

The former is observation, the second imagination. You gotta give it to some evolutionary geneticist though, since without their awesome imagination we wouldn't have my favourite comic X-Men!

 

"First, it wasn't one specimen of Archeopteryx that was discovered but several over many years. Second, Archeopteryx is just but one evidence for the descent of modern birds from dinosaurs. "

 

1. Does the fact that something is thought to have evolved from something, in your opinion, constitute for a scientific fact?

2. Why do you claim Archaepteryx to be an intermediate when evolutionary scientist don't agree upon it? SJ Gould called it an odd mosaic if I remember correctly, and according to evotheory Arch is an extinct subbranch which doesn't lead to modern birds.

 

"Third, long before the theory of evolution and suggestions that birds descended from dinosaurs appeared, people including famous creationists like Linnaeus have been pointing out the close similarities between birds and reptiles."

 

Could it not also mean that they share the same maker?

 

"What they instead have is the genes that code for teeth and we occasionally see birds with teeth just like we occasionally see whales with hind legs. Evolution Theory beautifully explains these observations. "

 

Whales have structures which evolutionist interpret as hind legs. What is the beautiful evolution theory? Explain it to me please, as I get confused by all the inconsistent explanations.

 

"Well, you're simply mistaken. The evidence for the evolution of birds from dinosaurs is massive and continuing to pile up. We have evidences from varied fields as paleontology, comparative anatomy, genetics, biochemistry, behavior, biogeography... all collaborating each other. "

 

Please provide some from your mountain of evidence, and we'll have a closer look at that.

 

"I'm curious, what kind of evidence will convince you that birds descended from dinosaurs?"

 

I'm not the Siren but... The same kind of evidence that would convince your own fellow evolutionist, I suppose. You now, those who also reject the idea birds evolved from dinos?

 

"Second, humans DID descend from aep-like creatures and there is conclusive and "irrefutable" evidence if you so care to know I'm happy to disabuse you of your ignorance. "

 

So you may be able to use some of that conclusive and "irrefutable" evidence and tell us whether, according to evolutionary theory, Australopithecus is actually humans' ancestor or not? Australopithecus, you know, those ape-like creatures?

 

"Second, most animals that ever lived never fossilized because their bodies were not made of hard stuff."

 

"Their bodies were not made of hard stuff?" Whatever is that supposed to mean, did they not have bones? You do now how fossilization works, don't you? And why there are plant fossils - or is your answer perhaps that their "bodies were made of hard stuff"?

 

"Third, Evolution theory is in accord with genetics."

 

The evolutionary theory isn't even in accordance with itself.

 

"So they can't be hindering anything. Instead, they slowly add to the genetic diversity of a population so that when there is environmental pressure for particular traits, Natural Selection can filter the advantageous traits."

 

This is ill-informed. A mutation is a mutation. It doesn't "slowly add to the genetic diversity" because mutations are off-shoots, and they do not transmit to descendants. A person who has a mutation isn't a new species, but a patient. Which actually brings me to asking a pretty simple question: why aren't evolutionist teaching kids that their kids may not necessarily be the same species as them?

 

You wrote: "Dinosaurs were complex but no longer with us. Of course evolution or mutations had nothing to do with their extinction. "

 

Weren't you just arguing that birds evolved from dinosaurs? If an asteroid hit Earth and caused the mass death of dinosaurs (as the most popular theory goes), wouldn't there be more evidence of intermediates? Since at the time of their death they'd be already in the mutation process into another species (more those Arch birdies than Rexes). The fact that there are more dinosaurs than intermediates implies that freak-show birds like the Arch were a species of their own (just like many evos think) and not descendants of dinos.

 

"Each one of us is born with a new set of mutations that we didn't inherit from our parents. These new mutations code for protiens that do pretty much that same thing but slightly differently. That's why we look different from each other otherwise we"

 

We have different genetic make-up which makes us look different from our parents, this is NOT the same thing as mutation. I'm actually pretty shocked at this claim.

 

"Moreover, Evolution is not directional, ie linear progression from less complex to more complex. And it's not purposeful."

 

This is news, seeing as life apparently evolved from a single cell. Please explain what you mean (in other words, I'm giving you a chance to rephrase your words - do it wisely).

 

"Genetic diversity is continuously added to the gene pool of a population".

 

DNA changes, but the number of chromosomes does not increase (can miss).

 

"you and everyone else is evidence for this fact as you have new mutations different from the ones you inherited from your parents. "

 

Shock horror! Oh no! Does this mean I'm a mutant?

 

"There can be no free will in a world lorded over by an all knowing, omnipotent "creator" with free will who created everyone."

 

Why not?

 

"Intellectually laziness is characteristic of creationists. This is why you prefer the more lazy "God did it" to the more complex, enriching, enlightening and factually accurate Evolution theory."

 

Yes, we are intellectually lazy oh you evolutionist who are much superior to us. Forgive us our ignorance for we are just simple-minded peasants. Tell us what to think and if we dare question errors in your logic, whip us with harsh words, remind us of our ignorance and regroup yourself to think of fills for your appalling gaps, and then come back and guide us with your divine wisdom and knowledge.

 

"You are truly ignorant of what you're so against - Evolution Theory. I don't fault you though. You're a victim of religious indoctrination which makes you believe in things where there is no evidence and reject in theories backed by plenty of evidence."

 

Yes, and you just proved us how much you know about evolutionary theory, which is embarrassingly little

You, my friend, are a victim of arrogance and there's no excuse for that.

[5]

Originally posted by Raamsade:

quote:Originally posted by G G:

The original argument went:"God exists and here is the proof/reasoning for why He exists - now it's your turn to explain why He doesn't exist."

Again, there is no such thing as proof only evidence and reason. Lets, arguendo, change proof to evidence. Furthermore, let us drop all evidence for God's existence since we know you can't produce any evidence for God's existence that's perceptible to the human senses. Supposed miracles are discounted for obvious reasons. We're now left with reasons (that is logically sound reasons) for God existence. Do you have any? I ask because none have been presented thusfar. And even though this thread was ostensibly about Atheism, people have been attacking the scientific theory of Evolution.

My personal logical reasoning is presented in the second post of this thread.

[Johnny B]

To All:

 

The ironic aspect of atheism is that IT is as much a faith as any other religion is, since atheists, simply cannot disprove the existence of God.

 

 

To Johny B:

 

Got any proof that the Al-mighty and glorious Allah doesn't exist?

 

Remember, YOU are the one who wants the burden of proof to be on the believers. But I bet the instant that standard is turned against you, you will run and hide.

 

I hope there is more ( ok ok ... i want to believe my fellow 'Hamarawi' knows more than he displays ) than the above in a Doctorine one devotes a whole ( and probably one-time) Life to.

 

Firstly, it only takes you few scrolling up to the very answer of why a lack of belief in something doesen't neccessarily mean having Faith in the opposite.

 

More importantly , Theists don't believe in Gods just because Atheists can't disprove their existence, for that would mean , they have faith in the existence of all the things Atheists can't disprove, and those things are many, to mention one.. i'd say Atheists can't disprove the existence of say a Black swan, Do you worship and have Faith in its existence?, you see where beliving in something just because others can't disprove it's existence leads to?!.

* Just the thought of Alle Ubaahne praying to the almighty Johnny coulden't disprove his existence is killing ... I strongly believe that he has his Faith based on his own conviction **

 

And yes , i demand the burden of proof to be on the claimant , and i stand corrected if the contray is the normarative in any known human acquisitions of knowledge as accepting any claim at face-value can't ascertain any universal truth-value.

[Mr. Somalia]

^^^

You "DEMAND"?? Ha ha ha...(Horta saaxiib-- shactiroole weyn ayaad tahay)

 

Johnny B, by definition-- Burden of proof is "the obligation to shift the assumed conclusion away from an oppositional opinion to one's own position, this may be either a negative or positive claim. The burden of proof may only be fulfilled by evidence." It goes on to say, "under the Latin maxim semper necessitas probandi incumbit ei qui agit", the general rule is that "the necessity of proof always lies with the person who lays charges."--which in this case is you, Johnny! Your claim was made way before mine, and it was a clear denial of Allah's existence on your part. Now, I simply request that you prove what you say is true! Do not just expect us to believe your simple assertion that He does not exist. Meretricious arguments and thoughtless assertions WILL NOT convince me that you are right.

 

I know, that you know, that I know, there isn't the slightest speck of evidence to prove there is no God. Marka, don't expect me to let you get away with such a simple and careless thought process for such a complex matter. You are the one who complains about the non-existence of Allah(SWT) and who the burden of proof therefore lies with you, are those like you, who don't, in this context, believe in Allah(SWT).

 

Or maybe, I should make things easier on you...and ask you instead to prove to me the 'void' you believe in exists.

[5]

Originally posted by Johnny B:

Firstly, it only takes you few scrolling up to the very answer of why a lack of belief in something doesen't neccessarily mean having Faith in the opposite.

Are you referring to your bad analogy?

 

More importantly , Theists don't believe in Gods just because Atheists can't disprove their existence, for that would mean , they have faith in the existence of all the things Atheists can't disprove, and those things are many, to mention one.. i'd say Atheists can't disprove the existence of say a Black swan, Do you worship and have Faith in its existence?, you see where beliving in something just because others can't disprove it's existence leads to?!.

You just aren't any good with analogies, are you? I don't know whether you actually understand that you're essentially arguing FOR us. It is true that we don't believe in God just because atheists can't disprove His existence - which would mean we have a good reason to believe in Him. I mean, like you almost concluded, why else don't we run around worshipping black swans?

 

* Just the thought of Alle Ubaahne praying to the almighty Johnny coulden't disprove his existence is killing ... I strongly believe that he has his Faith based on his own conviction **

Yeah, that just didn't make any sense... Just like the rest of it.

[Johnny B]

^Mr.Somalia , Sxb , Iga qalee nooh !

What kind of ciyaalka xaafada are you?!

 

I refuse to discuss this any further, you disarmed my argument so i give up.

I suggest you read the blank in my previous post and read the same Wiki page you referred to regarding the burden of proof, this time have a little patience and read down to the fallacy of demanding a negative proof.

 

Hope you enjoyed the burden of proof table there!!

 

Let me just quote Nuune for once and go ....

Wareer badanaa.

[Mr. Somalia]

^^

 

Johnny B, you replied to me, "I refuse to discuss this any further, you disarmed my argument so i give up." But you never did have any tangible argument, in the first place, that needed disarming.

 

What you don't seem to get, Johnny, is that it is illogical to believe ANY unproven proposition, stated in the negative or in the positive, about the existence of a thing, or about anything else. So IT IS ILLOGICAL for you to believe that Allah(SWT) does not exist, unless you have explicitly seen proof that the proposition "Allah(SWT) does not exist" is true. And please don't try to repeat your silly assertion that it is logical to believe that something does not exist until its existence has been proven. That is not logical at all. Applying such reasoning will ONLY lead to incorrect beliefs on your part. However; there maybe one way by which that reasoning could possibly be logical: if believing that something didn't exist would magically make it cease to exist. Then one could never be wrong. Otherwise, you will be wrong a significant amount of the time if you believe that nothing exists except for anything for the existence of which you have seen proof. AFTER ALL, THERE ARE THINGS WHICH DO EXIST, OF WHICH YOU KNOW NOTHING.

 

So, Johnny, it might be time to stop believing that Allah(SWT)does not exist.

[Johnny B]

In an Ideal world, one would atleast expect from ( my 'xamarawi' fellow ) Mr.Somalia to go through the twisted logic of incoherency to its conclusion, and ask me to stop believing BOTH that Allah(SWT)does or does not exist, but with this not being the case , i'll have no choice but degrade it a level and say a rationally justified 'BAH', and this time mean it.

[N.O.R.F]

Not much has been offered from the resident Atheists I see. All we have had is confusion dressed as conviction written in blabber hoping it would be mistaken for intellect.

 

Waxba islama haysaan

[Mr. Somalia]

Johnny B,

 

You replied to me, "In an Ideal world, one would atleast expect from ( my 'xamarawi' fellow ) Mr.Somalia to go through the twisted logic of incoherency to its conclusion, and ask me to stop believing BOTH that Allah(SWT)does or does not exist, but with this not being the case , i'll have no choice but degrade it a level and say a rationally justified 'BAH', and this time mean it." But I never demanded that anyone believe anything; and I certainly did not say that you should "stop believing" in something just because there is no evidence against it. I actually proved the opposite, that no proposition about anything should be believed unless it is proven true.

 

Please do not pretend that I said things which I did not say, just so you can justify the cranial constipation that has clearly handicapped your debating prowess.