Agnostic Cara and Muslim Nur, A Dialogue

[Nur]

Didi Kong sis

 

Could you explain how you would handle it? I understand rationalism and skepticsim, and I decided not to employ, we call them in Islam Cilmul Kalaam ( Polemics) and its shunned, but objectivity, yes by all means, my objective on this forum and this thread is clear, I want tgo expose to a non suspecting crowd fundementally different ideas that are being mixed with Islamic topics in order to cast doubt on innocent browser of SOL.

 

Nur

[Pi]

Ummm, this thread is wrong on so many levels, I dont even know where to start. I dont even think Cara should respond to what's been written. It's all irrelevant.

[-Lily-]

Faith and religion are different. The way I see it faith is a conviction of absolute certainty & religion (although cannot be valued without faith), is the practice that accompanies it? The whole point of faith from a religious point of view is to have faith without explicit proof. You cannot proof it 100% now & here but neither can you disprove it either. To jam God into a theory, no matter how comforting, is just not appropriate. God shows his signs to those who seek Him out, and for some unfortunately nothing less than his appearance with an entourage of Angels will proof his existence.

 

It is difficult to rationalize God away in the rhetoric & discourse prepared by those who deny his existence, you wouldn’t get far, going around a circle. Not that I can think of a better way to do it, when I do figure it out…

[Castro]

Originally posted by Nur:

my objective on this forum and this thread is clear, I want tgo expose to a non suspecting crowd fundementally different ideas that are being mixed with Islamic topics in order to cast doubt on innocent browser of SOL.

Sheikh Nuroow, what "fundamentally different ideas" do you suspect have infiltrated the forum? How easy, do you think, will it be to convince an Atheist or an Agnostic to embrace Islam using dialog on a forum? Furthermore, how easy is it to convince a Muslim to reject his faith, and publicly no less?

 

In the 1950's, a US republican senator by the name of McCarthy conducted a "witch hunt", later to be known as the Red Scare, targeting communists and communist-sympathizers. The most memorable question asked of an accused was: "are you now, or have you ever been a member of the communist party?". I brought that up since you reminded me of McCarthy with your paragraph above. Atheer your intentions are wholesome, I'm sure, but your delivery when it comes to engaging the so called infiltrators and their sympathizers fares no better than, say, a Khayr's. It's crude, condescending and controversial. If the non-believers repulse you so much, don't engage them. If you have an uncontrollable urge to save them, make sure they stay long enough to hear your message. Otherwise, stick to preaching to the faithful. I assure you we need it.

 

Originally posted by Pi:

Ummm, this thread is wrong on so many levels, I dont even know where to start. I dont even think Cara should respond to what's been written. It's all irrelevant.

I too am beginning to wonder just what the good sheikh is really good at.

[xiinfaniin]

^^But Cara has been long enough on this forum, no? I see no harm in engaging her in a manner that’s civil and constructive like Sh. Nur promised to do.

 

Fundamentally different ideas are to be expected and to avoid an exposure to them is no wise possible, I agree. But good Cara has been speaking more grammar than truth, so to say, and injecting her self in religious topics as of late. In her case, I see some value in engaging her, and I appreciate when good Nur takes some time and attempts to put things in perspective. This is not fallowing a Puritan theme to silence other people’s dissension. At least I did not take it that way. Why not watch the debate unfold then, good Castro?

 

I say bring it on yaa Nur.

[ElPunto]

Originally posted by Khalaf:

quote:

Who cares about atheists? Why does anyone bother with them? Atheism is the very hieght, the apogee, of human ego and anyone who subscribes to that is beyond the pale.

 

 

--Why? because this is a matter of Nar and Al-Jannah.

 

My question to those who say there is no God: before you came to this conclusion what was your understanding level of Al-Islam, have you studied the Quran, what did you take from the Quran if you did study it and why do u think there is no God? Please explain your beliefs more clearly. Instead of I can’t see it therefore can’t belief in it…doesn’t fit my rational reasoning….or religious evidence is unconvincing. Why Why, Why?

 

Where is other party? Come on its almost summer break

 

 

Salaamun

To the blind, deaf and dumb only God can change them. It seems to me rather useless

[Castro]

Originally posted by xiinfaniin:

Why not watch the debate unfold then, good Castro?

Fair yaa sheikh Xiin but let good Nur stick to domestic affairs (non-women) and you handle the foreign ones. Whether you admit it publicly or not, you're an eNuri and there's no shame in that game. However, sheikh Nur is a little too passionate and injects much emotion into his repertoire. Works great on someone like me but sounds quite cheezy, not to mention weak, to Cara, I suspect. I don't know. It's the whole lets-corner-this-agnostic-into-submission philosophy that I see as fruitless. May be it's the only way. Maybe there is no way until someone seeks the light himself.

 

I don't mean to demean the good sheikh but he needs to sharpen his skills. A few Deedat dvds may do the trick.

 

Xiinow, I'd have said nothing had Cara accepted his challenge and made this into discussion. And if she returns, I'll just as soon return to my spot under the rock.

[Khayr]

more grammar than truth

[Cara.]

Nur,

 

Brother, you told a story and gave quotes from the Qur'an, which I'm assuming is your evidence for the existence of your god. From your post, I gather your proofs fall into three categories:

 

1)The story of the Romans defeating the Persians, which proves that the Qur'an is prophetic;

 

2)The verses you quoted, especially the ones in bold, which say that there is a god, his name is Allah, he created everything and wants to be worshipped, he will punish those who refuse to worship him, and reward those who do;

 

3) The rhetorical question "What would motivate Muhammed to fabricate the Qur'an since he did not gain any material wealth?"

 

If I've missed any key articles, feel free to correct me, please.

 

1. The Prophecy

 

If I understood the story right, the Persians defeated the Romans, the early Muslims were demoralized, but Muhammed told them in this verse that soon the Romans would be victorious, which they eventually were. As proof for the existence of god, I would say this is not particularly convincing. The Roman and Persian empires were at war with one another for nearly 700 years, with first one then the other winning battles and skirmishes all over the Middle East. The "front line" was so long that predicting that the Romans would win is like predicting it will rain next week. Even if it doesn't rain in your town, it will rain somewhere. All the same, this prophecy would be truly remarkable if it was one of many or if it had been more specific. In a book of 6000+ verses, getting one or two predictions right is no miracle.

 

2. The Quotes from the Qur'an

 

To this, I can't help but agree with JB. Your evidence here is begging the question. Unless there's some startling element I missed in the verses you quoted, you are essentially arguing that god exists because this book says god exists. What makes the Qur'an different from all the other holy books contradicting it?

 

3. Rhetorical Question

 

Think, why would he invent such a lie? what would be the driver? and how would ita have benefited him.

2500 years ago, a king in a land near India had a son. The son grew up in court, with abundant wealth and every comfort. He was destined to become a powerful king, and his father went so far as to shield his son from suffering and death so that he was never troubled. But at age 29, the prince abandoned all his wealth, his young family and his status as a prince to become a monk in search of truth. He spend the next several years traversing the land, preaching his faith and helping the poor. At 35, the ascetic ex-prince declared that he had reached Enlightment, and spent the rest of his life explain his message to everyone, from the wealthy nobles to the lowliest members of society. He curtailed all bodily appetites, practicing celibacy the rest of his life, eating only enough to sustain his life, and sleeping on the ground. This man's name was Siddhartha Gautama, better known today as the Buddha.

 

What could possibly have motivated a rich prince to become a pauper? Why would Mirza Ghulam Ahmad brave the ire of Muslim clerics and found the Ahmaddiya Movement? What motivated David Koresh to preach his message, and why would he and his followers choose to die rather turn themselves in? What motivated Joseph Smith to face violent protest to found Mormonism, for which he was later killed? The Falun Kong are persecuted severely in China, yet gain followers daily. Guru Nanak founded Sikhism, and for what?

 

Do I need to spell it out any further? People have many motivations besides money, Nur. That you would ask such a naive question is baffling. Power, acclaim, influence, a desire to help others, ambition for one's people, the list of alternative drives is endless. That's one of the problems one comes across when one attempts to discover if there is a "true religion". Each religion presents its founder as somehow free of greed for material possessions or power, yet a consequence of founding a religion is that one inevitably gains one or the other or both.

 

A quick aside, Nur: you and a couple of other people have indicated that the rules of logic and rational discourse will not be necessarily followed for some reason. If that's the case, then count me out of this discussion. I've no better tool than reason for arriving at the truth, and don't desire to spend my time rebutting irrational claims. In particular, those who think copying and pasting stories will somehow proof the veracity of their beliefs should re-think that strategy. It indicates an unability to defend your beliefs in your own words, due to lack of evidence or extreme mental laziness no doubt.

[Cara.]

Hello Xiinfaniin,

 

Originally posted by xiinfaniin:

But good

Cara

has been speaking more grammar than truth, so to say, and injecting her self in religious topics as of late.

Are there topics that are off-limits to certain forummers but open to others? Is there a list, or is this an unspoken rule I've violated?

[Johnny B]

Now that Nur and Cara decided to have a dialogue i ask the rest to hold back their comments towards Nur and Cara´s positions, untill each has posted 3 posts, that gives them the chance to both comment on the Oponent´s position and put forward their point of view and best of all not to worry about jibes from unexpected direction.

 

After 3 rounds ( it can´t go forever ), the dialogue stops and people can have their say, remember the dialogue is between Nur and Cara , so whatever you may think of Cara´s or Nur´s posts for the sake of healthy dailogue stay away. you ´re not Nur and can not be Cara.

 

Edit : As for the indication that beeing reasonable and logically sound is not necessary for communicating, let Nur make an attempt to convince SOL and the world of that without using logic and reasoning as to why, no sane person has bothered to try yet.

 

thanks!

[Nur]

Cara

 

First, let me clarify one fact for you, common sense and logic are highly welcome as tools of finding truth from your part, since that is all you have got at this point in discussion, as for me, I have chosen to rely on the Quraan as my fundemental argument which was the natural result of sound logic and common sense, by doing so, from my point of view, I engage you by common sense, logic and Quraan, in order to be prudent. Johnny Boy's redicule of my usage of Quran as my argument is not symmetrically applied across both sides of dialogue, as I can also use the same logic to suggest that you should not use any Agnostic based arguments in this discussion.

 

Thus, my arguments are based on what I firmly believe, which is Holy Quraan, yours are based on a collection of arguments that have been used by agnostics throughout the ages, that are well documented in the Quraan, and will be shared in time, till then, I must say, I am very impressed with the way you have presented your case, I think all of Somalia Online Nomads should be proud of having a debator like you, and the dialogue should start in earnst in a highly intellectual, result oriented and objective capacity, as we both may have a deffinite goal behind this dialogue, which is a positive result that gets you and me closer to the absolute truth we are both seeking leading to your happiness and mine.

 

Before i embark on answering your well structured response, I need to tailor my response to be effective enough, not wasting valuable time mentioning what is apparent while not ommitting from discussion what may be crucial, so I kindly need to know the following:

 

1. How much knowledge do you have about Islam in general? from a scale of 1 to 5, where 5 is the highest?

 

2. Particularly, how much have you read about biography of Muhammad SAWS, the advent of Islam, Islamic civilization, literature, arts, philosophy, contribution to science and the explanation of the universe and unknown? By which writers, Western or Muslim?

 

3. From what i have read, you seem to have studied other religions, in which religion were you brought up with? and which religion have you formally studied in depth and which ones have you studied on your own? either marginally or in depth?

 

 

Again, I thank you for your candid discussion, i assure you that this discussion will benefit you and me in addition to many viewers, so let us make it a success.

 

 

Nur

[Baashi]

I find it very interesting that every time a well versed polemic’s (any polemic) position on some subject is challenged, he/she will always seek shelter under the shady world of dictatorship of reason. It is fascinating. Techniques used to reach to this safe haven vary depending on the skill as well as the conviction of the polemic that is employing them.

 

In order to defend his/her turf, a well versed polemic will always try to obscure reality or put a handy and deliberate spin on the facts to either impose views or defend convictions. Disingenuous polemics, the ones that are intellectually dishonest, go further and try (deliberately) to alter terms of debate. Polemics are intelligent. They understand a key and critical fact about human reasoning and that is its flexibility - it can be readily bended to different angles as long sa one adheres to the guidelines of logic (limited in so many ways).

 

Now, take an idea, concept, hypothesis, policy, or any abstract notion and I can assure you that the same idea or policy can be rationalized in more than two different ways for audiences of two different interest groups! (ask how as food for thought) These rationalizations can be based on reasoning (note the difference btw reason and sound reason). The only exception I so far encountered is the mathematical realm and its sub-science branches. For me the divine revelations occupies different sphere as it is the word of Allah. Divine revelations are in line with natural laws as well as sound reasoning. With open mind and capacity to evaluate, to deliberate, and to understand, divine revelations can and will lead one to ultimate truth.

 

My point is that reasoning is extremely important and necessary tool to deliberate, to conduct inquiry, to solve problems, to reach understanding of ourselves and our surrounding, to infer (logic), to solve problems, and what have you. But it is and only remains as an auxiliary tool. Other human attributes such as imagination, intuition, and common sense are necessary tools as well.

 

Coming back to this unfolding dialogue between our fellow forumers namely Cara and Nur on the subject of whether God exist or not. I say this much. This dialogue should not be about who believes what. We already know that much. One believes the existence of Creator and Sustainer of this universe as described in the divine Qur’an. The other is not sure about the existence of this Supreme Being for Cara can’t prove one way or another for His existence, if I read her posts correctly. Likewise, who can take part of what SOL thread is not and shouldn’t be an issue for this is an open forum. Having said that it would be beneficial to all of us if we let them discuss on the subject.

 

What is an issue, at least from my vantage point, is what sort of proof would Cara like to see in order for her to be convinced of the existence of the Creator of this creation we call universe.

 

I let you continue this dialogue.

[Nur]

Castro

 

 

you write:

 

How easy, do you think, will it be to convince an Atheist or an Agnostic to embrace Islam using dialog on a forum?

Furthermore, how easy is it to convince a Muslim to reject his faith, and publicly no less?

 

 

1. Not quite easy, but It doesnt hurt to take a shot at it, Gretzky, the Hockey Legend said, the only shot I am sure to miss is the shot I dont take!

 

2. It all depends, one can cast doubt, but may not have an answer afterwards, my job, is to crytallize an issue, so there is no place for any idea to hide, I leave the rest for the audinece to decide, I hope that is not bothering you saaxib, you seem annoyed.

 

Your MacArthism analogy does not hold water, on many fronts, I am not out there to catch an Athiest, I am sure that you agree that Mcarthy did not offer Commies a forum or have an open dialogue with them, but Somaliaonline ISLAM page offers its visitors with such an opportunity, its the backdoor entry that we object to. In this Islam forum we do have many posters who cleverly present themselves as going with the flow, yet who diligently have an agenda in planting suspicion on basic tenets of our faith. Most of the cases, we leave it to viewers to take a note of their statements, and the silent majority does just that, Its quite OK to me for anyone to come on this show and say, "Hi Nomds, I am Falun Gong Follower, Its the greatest faith, if you are all sure about your faith, I have some quetions for you" this is called playing on level ground.

 

Poeple who browse these islam pages come in the following types;

 

1. Muslim Seekers of knowledege about islam.

2. Non Muslim seekers of knowledge about Islam

3. Non Muslims seekers of spreading their knowledege ( or ignorance in certain cases)

 

This site is primarily for the first two category, for the last category, we advice complete transparency, so that we engage them and have a fruitful dialogue, to come to a forum where Muslims are discussing their religion and continuesly make negative remarks about the religion posing as one of the regular guys is not an honest game, and my job is to identify and engage them in a constructive way, after all, we need them saved from hell.

 

Now, instead of discussing the mechanics of the discussion, it would be beneficial if you can share your genious about the topic at hand, I am sure that you have a wealth of ideas.

 

 

Nur

[Castro]

Sheikh Nurow, turn the other cheek atheer, waxba inagama xumanayaane halganka halkaa inooga wad.