Agnostic Cara and Muslim Nur, A Dialogue

[xiinfaniin]

^^Soo dhowow yaa Alle-ubaahane.

 

Castro, everything seems to be working well to me. Except good JB's recycled argument of burden of proof being on the believer, that is. Ha la isku daayo sheekha iyo Cara baan weli taaganahay.

[Socod_badne]

Originally posted by S.O.S:

quote: JB writes:

Quoting from the Quran to a nonbeliever doesn't suffice

Ok JB,

 

The name is Socod, Socod Badne... I like my Martiny shaked but not stirred. I'm not that confused, purposeless, sorry case for life Scandinavian gaal dhabo dhilif JB.

 

 

Sh. Nur's quotation from the Qur'an is to prove its

divine qualities

, and if he succeeds (which Allah willing, he will) he has proven, since the Qur'an cannot be written by man, the existence of a deity external to human limits of time and space.

 

 

From my understanding the issue at debate is Allah's existance and convincing the nay sayers. Isn't that right? In that case, relying on the Quran -- the word of Allah -- to prove his existance is like convincing a car shopper that Honda civic is best car in its class because Honda said so. You'll be playing zero sum game, the perfect circular arguement. Use the Quran to prove or demonstrate Allah existance by all means but in conjection with other efforts... to buttress and further other points you're making. This isn't subtle point I'm asking you to note and if you can't see why you can't use the Quran to prove Allah's existance to a nonbeliever who doesn't share your views of the Quran doesn't cut mustard, then you're not cut out for these sorts of discussions/debates. Pick another trade chief.

 

 

it's authorship by man, and you've proven the non-existence of Allah.

 

 

Chief, I have already explained to you that NO ONE can prove a negative or the non-existance of something. Be it God or otherwise. The onus of proof always rests with the person making the positive claim, ie the theist.

 

Here is a challenge for you: prove the non-existance of loch nech monster.

[Socod_badne]

Originally posted by Nur:

You tell me the aim of an athiest in this life, or yours for that matter, and I will take that statement back.

 

 

Transcendental self-interests: reproducing, peace, security, justice, equality, cherity, forbearance, forgiveness, tolerance, learning and teaching, volunteering, building & developing, feeding starvlings, advocating for the disenfranchised, competent governance etc.

 

These are worthy aims (among others) in life for both the religious and the irreligious.

[Viking]

Socod_badne,

The irony is that those who deny the existence of Allah SWT do not realise that it is the divine aspect in us that seeks to establish these qualities. A mechanical/aimless world hardly equip us with guilt or goodwill.

[Nur]

e-Nuri Road Maps

 

Presents:

 

 

Are You Fit For The Purpose?

 

 

 

That is right!, are you successful?, because success is a measure of how much of a desired result you have attained within a given time frame.

 

In school you learn that good grades are the ticket to success later in life, only to see, those despised in school riding high with better jobs and more prestigious social status than you the nerd. So, let us ask, are grades a measure of success?

 

At work, in the corpprate world, it is monkey business, monkeys on a tree, the Corporate tree, fighting for bananas (Money), some monkeys climb higher up on the corporate tree, while other unsuccessfull monkeys struggle by hanging on lower branches. Smart monkeys who made it to the top look down at monkeys on the bottom with pride as all they see are lowly smiling monkeys below, while monkeys on the bottom look up at monkeys on top and laugh as all they see is their shining naked rear ends. So, does that mean that the monkey who rides the highest branch and dies with the most bananas in his possession is the most successful?

 

 

So, what is success? how do you measure success?

 

Well, success is simply being fit for a purpose, if you are still undecided of the purpose for which you exist, I assure you with certainty that you will never succeed in life while in this state of aimlessness, because success is a vector quantity, it has direction as well as magnitude, without direction, no matter what quantity you base your success with, it will be hollow and you will feel a big void in your life, a void so large, even a large size Pizza with mushrooms, olives, green peppers would not fill.

 

Therefore, what we need is to define a Purpose for which we exist, live for and are willing to die for, if it is required.

 

Having no purpose in life is like travelling toward unknown destination, you can never be sure of your accomplishment, and hence you may never be happy.

 

So, the next logical step is to ask the difficult question, who should set that direction for us ? is it us, humans, in other words are some fellow humans ( like our Politicians)the architects of our fate and destiny? are they indeed capable in solving our problems? Contrary to that notion, Einstein said, a problem is never solved at the same intellectual level it was created in the first place, Solution to our problems can only come from a higher authority not from big belly politicians, which means that humans can never be the masters of their destiny since they had no control of events that brought them to life and continues to lead their daily lives.

 

Now, think with me, before we tackle the problem of success in life, let us define what success means once more.

 

Success means Fitness For A Purpose .

 

We all know what fitness means, it means, a set of requirements that measure how close we are to a desired goal or a purpose.

 

As a runner, I would measure how fast I run a lap or how many minutes it takes me to run a mile. I would also measure my heart pulse, blood pressure, muscle mass, and at one time, for curiosity, I weighed myself before running eight mile distance, and after completing the run at the desired speed , I found that I almost lost a pound and a half, mostly water, which explains that life is a zero sum, you decide what you want to take and what price you are willing to pay for it. So in that example, my fitness meant that I was well within the range of measures that I set for myself to achieve.

 

 

Now that we have figured out what fitness means, lets define what a Purpose means.

 

A Purpose , is an internal picture of a decision, an intention( Niyah )desire to reach an objective or a goal, this definition is not from a dictionary, its a native e-Nuri definition, so in case it agrees with any dictionary rest assured that it is a genuine e-Nuri, since I did not have the time to look it up.

 

So, success means Fitness For A Purpose ,

 

The first part, the Fitness is a tangible quantity.

 

The second part, Purpose , is abstract, it is like beauty, a purpose or an intention to reach a goal is an abstract quantity that can only be measured with a predetermined set of metrics we call Fitness .

 

Now, the piecs of the puzzle are finally coming together, our success in this life depends on how much we meet requiremensts the stake holder of our life has desired.

 

As Muslims we all know, the stake holder of our life is Allah SWT, who clearly communicated through revelations that His intention behind our creation was Solely His worship. Allah SWT said in the Quran " I have not created the Jinn and Mankind except for the purpose of my worship "

 

Therefore our success in the next life depends on how much we have worshiped Allah SWT in this present life.

 

So, what is Worship?

 

 

That is another story altogeher, a very interesting one, and the purpose for which you were created, for which you are given for sensing a pair of eyes, ears, a nose and finger tips, for analysing the data you collect with a brain, all of which are optimized for finding your way back to your maker, the better understanding you have for the true meaning of Worship , the closer you will be to approach success and hence genuine happiness in this life and the next.

 

 

............ To be continued

 

Nur

 

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

2005 e-Nuri Road Maps

If You Don't Stand For Allah's Cause Alone, You Will Fall For Everything Else

[xiinfaniin]

So, success means Fitness For A Purpose ,

The first part, the Fitness is a tangible quantity. The second part, Purpose , is abstract, it is like beauty, a purpose or an intention to reach a goal is an abstract quantity that can only be measured with a predetermined set of metrics we call Fitness .

 

^^Very competent, wouldn't you say! I really liked. Thanks Nur.

[Cara.]

Nur,

 

Walaal, I'm sorry about taking so long to reply.

 

Originally posted by Nur:

You beat me to it, My kitchen or yours? please follow the link below for the joy of Cooking, from eNuri Culinary Corps.

http://www.somaliaonline.com/cgi-bin/ubb/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=3;t=000641#000003

I was rather hoping for the recipe to a scrumptious cheese cake. Alas, it's another tract in which metaphors are stretched to the breaking point!

 

the purpose of the first part of Surah Romans in Quran was not intended as a direct proof of the Existence of Allah; rather, it was a first step to show Muhammad’s prophethood, which is necessary condition to validate the Quraan he delivered to us from Allah SWT.

Not really, it's merely a precondition. But I'm glad to see that this was only the first step towards proofing Muhammed's prophethood. Let's see the rest please.

 

A prophet in Arabic, means some one who predicts the future with accuracy, the accuracy of the incidents therefore by itself is not the proof of His prophethood, but the culmination of many other incidents, teachings and events in his lifetime that together made Muhammad a phenomenon not many could have resisted are the proofs.

The question, brother, is what are these proofs? Each one of them must be impressive, but like you said a whole host of them would be truly compelling. That's why I suggested 1 accurate prediction in 23 years/6000 verses is hardly clearcut proof of divine guidance. So I assume we will shortly get a numbered list of these proofs that together make it unquestionably clear that Muhammed received direct communication from a god.

 

In short 23 years, his message fundamentally challenged all others, religious, social, political and even military powers that existed, his followers decisively winning on all fronts, establishing a nation that spanned the globe risen from the lowly barren desert, from tribal division to a national unity, from moral decadence, to the height of moral justice, a beacon of light that connected the Eastern wisdom to the western innovation, a nation that was (Wasatan) (Middle, moderate, media) in every aspect.

All of this is debatable, but even if true, proves absolutely nothing. Muhammed's kind are called revolutionaries, rebels, etc. History is all about recounting their exploits. They arise in every culture and community, they shake things up, protest the status quo, gain dominance, spread their message, become the status quo, attain decadence, until another revolutionary is born to start the cycle once again. Compare Muhammed's birthplace (Saudi Arabia) in his time to the state it is in today. Just how similar are they? Rule by tyrants, check. Injustice against women, check. Decadent wealth cheek-by-jowl with abject poverty, check. Ignorant superstition, check. Where's the lasting change? The only way you could differentiate the social order of 21st century Saudi Arabia from 6th century Saudi Arabia is that instead of having slaves wealthy Saudis have servants they treat like slaves.

 

Let us visit the verses of the Surah Romans as they:

 

1. Narrate of the place as The Dead Sea, Palestine.

2. Narrate The elevation of the place to be ( Adnal Ard) , meaning (Lowest Point on Earth ) which is proven to be 402 meters below sea level.

3. The Romans would win final decisive battle

4. The Time Span would be within Ten years ( Bidca siniin)

5. Credit to the victory belongs to Allah not to Muhammad.

1. I notice that your interpretation/translation is markedly different from that for three translations of the Qur'an I've seen. These translations make no mention of the Dead Sea, instead translating the first two verses as "The Roman empire has been defeated in a land close by". Please explain what you mean by referances to the Dead Sea.

 

2. The Romans did not win a decisive battle against the Persians until 627 AD, which is 12 years after their defeat on 614-615.

 

The point here is not to count prediction or two to be correct, rather, its to show that Muhammad SAWS who was an illiterate could not possibly have known all of that without a superior source of knwoledge, as to be so specific to mention that the location of the battle, the Dead Sea to be the lowest point on earth which is a scientific fact.

1. Again, please clarify what you mean by the references to the Dead Sea, which is in not in the Qur'an nor in any explanation of these verses from that time.

 

2. Muhammed was illiterate, but illiterate does not mean deaf and dumb. Muhammed's knowledge of current events is unremarkable. He was a businessman and a traveller. He lived in a city with massive amount of pilgrims and visitors each. Obviously he would be aware if the Romans were defeated in a neighboring country. In fact, he wasn't the only one that knew the Romans were recently defeated in a battle--the whole town knew! Isn't that the tafsiir for why the verses were "revealed", as a response to Muslims being disappointed at hearing the news? So knowing 1) That the Roman Empire was defeated, and 2)That they were defeated in Palestine is out as proof of his powers of prophecy.

 

What's left? The actual prophecy, which is really 1 part: The Romans would soon win against the Persians. No real mention of exactly how long this was supposed to take, which is a little strange. All we can say is that Muhammed predicted in this verse that the Romans would win against the Persians sometime in the next few years. I would think communication from on high would be a little bit more specific than that, to say the month and year if not the day.

 

So far, Nur, your "evidence" consists of regaling me with a story about a prediction made 1400 years ago by someone who claimed to speak with God. I'm assuming you're employing the time-tested technique of debate by starting with your weakest point and working up from there.

 

As you can see Cara, its more than two predictions in one Surah,

Now that's a little strange. How did it become TWO predictions? There is only one prediction. Your spurious mention of the Dead Sea hardly counts as a prediction, since it's additional to the text. Maududi's tafsiir makes no mention of it. The Hadith collections don't make any mention of it either. Padding the numbers looks a little suspect, bro.

 

For you to put Muhammad with David Koresh, or Ahmed Qadyan, is a fallacy of a scale, showing again what I was guessing when I asked about your exposure to religions, a fundamental deficiency of History of monotheist Religions.

Actually, not at all. My intention was to demonstrate that, contrary to your assertion, people have gone to great lengths to promulgate their beliefs. Thus willingness to suffer does not provide any evidence of truthfullness. But you moved the goal posts by making it a question of impact. These cult leaders are, by your standards, either misguided or liars, yet they willingly face persecution and death. Thus, motivation-wise, the scale is exactly right. It's your belief in Muhammed that causes you to put in a league of his own. The people who followed these cults sincerely believed in their leaders, and consider their leader to be right and all others to be wrong. At any rate, what is a cult today, may be the next absolutely astonishing religious movement of tomorrow. Granted, it's a little bit more difficult to get away with claims of divine prophethood today. The unforgiving glare of modern technology, like newspapers, cameras and widespread literacy makes founding religions a little challenging. That's why gods only communicated with people a long time ago.

 

Your unbalanced analogy of Prophet Muhammad SAWS to US based cult leaders was neither fair, nor intellectually acceptable, the only credible exception to the your line-up cult leaders is your selection of Buddha, but again, the analogy fails since Muhammad is not worshipped, nor was he a monk, Mohammed was a Statesman, spiritual teacher, husband, father, peacemaker, fighter and a friend.

Again, you move the goal-posts. Buddha abandoned wealth and power, and endured great deprivation. You initially asserted that Muhammed could have had no reason but the truth to make the sacrifices he did. I demonstrated that plenty of people you would consider to be lying or misguided made the same sacrifices. It doesn't matter what the outcome is, only the motivation is in question here.

 

 

What made these magicians change their minds?

What made Cinderella run away from Prince Charming after the ball without giving him her email address? Really, Nur. Try to step back a little and be more objective. You are presenting as absolute fact something you must suspect I would view as Middle Eastern mythology. I don't stay up nights wondering why Zeus disliked Hera, or what possessed Krishna to reveal his true identity as the Supreme Diety to Arjuna, or why those magicians decided to believe in Moses. If I believed in magicians and Hebrew prophets turning sticks into snakes, then perhaps the question would have some merit. Rhetorical questions can only take you so far.

[Nur]

Cara Yaa Ghaaliya!

 

The topic was posted April 30, your timely response was on First May, but as we progressed, I am finding that its taking you longer each time for you to respond, as your next response was on May 4, then 8, and now on the 13th, unless you live in remote Somali village off kurtunwaarrey city limits without an access to the internet, the spontaneous responses will be missed by Nomads who were folloing the dialogue with great interest, but later aired frustration and thought it is a dead topic, i am a bit taken why is it taking you this long to respond? I have responded on the same day, the 8th to keep the spontaneous spirit of the dialogiue, if you are doing a research before answering each and every claim I a make, as evident from the Historical dates which you have posted, or if I am debating with more than a person, please let me know, I trust that you will tell me the truth although you do not believe in accountibility after death. But let me assure you walaalo that i welcome wholeheartedly for your to resreach in detail, not only am I confident that it would lead you to find the truth that you are after, but also it will make you a better informed person about Islam and possibly a Muslim sister which is my sincerest wish, a good result on its own merit.

 

Said, that, let me hit on one of your questions quickly walaalo to keep the spontaneous spirit flourish on this thread.

 

The tafseer of al Quraan was made some 1400 years ago, the word Adnaa in Arabic comes from the root word DANAA, which is something that gets closer, or lower, in the Quraan, when Allah describes the fruit bearing branches in Paradise hovering close over people in Paradise says " Wa DAANIYATUN " meaning lowered, the DUNYAA, or earth is the low planet, as opposed to heaven which is higher, thus when the tafaaseer were written they used one aspect of the meaning of the DANAA which is close, the problem is close relative to where? it doesnt say, some scholars claimed it is closer to Makka, the problem with that interpretaion is that Palestine houses both Al Aqsa ( which means the FARTHEST MOSQUE) and Dead Sea , same place from which Prophet Muhammad SAWS was raised to heaven as Masjidul Aqsaa, so, how can the Dead Sea be the closest and farthest to Makka at the same time, the conflict in semantics of the choices of meanings of DANAA can thus be resolved if it means LOWEST point on earth.

 

Now, in our age, when more scientific facts became available, the conflict was reseolved, ADNAA which means either closest or lowest can now be understood in the context of the available scientific and geographical facts, that of the area where the battle took place between Romans and Persians, ( will resolve history of dates later) The Dead Sea area is the lowest point on earth and the battle ground was around it, in that sense, when Allah says, Adnaal ard, it means the lowest point on earth, not the closest point on earth, because the latter would need a reference point which it doesnt have, thus leaving Lowest point as the right translation in the context.

 

Thus, as an Agnostic, Dear Cana accept it or call it insufficient, which is your right, since any proof short of direct contact with God can be challenged by any agnostic, in my attempt I am trying to explore more of these in the days to come to see which one makes sense to you, and as you have cleverly guessed, yes, this Surah was an ice breaker, inshAllah we shall explore and scrutinize Quraan more in depth to qualify the claims.

 

I gotta run now, but inshAllah I will answer the rest of your reponses soon.

 

 

Nur

[Cara.]

Nur walaal, I did apologize for the delay. Sometimes one must prioritize and unfortunately SOL must always remain at the bottom of the list, below professional and familial obligations. No, I'm not doing any extensive research, and there is only little old me debating under the Cara moniker. I'd be a little flattered but instead I'm hoping you yourself are taking a few days to prepare a one-two punch like never before seen on SOL.

 

how can the Dead Sea be the closest and farthest to Makka at the same time, the conflict in semantics of the choices of meanings of DANAA can thus be resolved if it means LOWEST point on earth.

Ah, I see where you are coming from now. Is there any questioning of this puzzling word usage during Muhammed's lifetime or in the centuries since?

[Pig]

Finally, if there be still persons who are not sufficiently persuaded of the existence of God and of the soul, by the reasons I have adduced, I am desirous that they should know that all the other propositions, of the truth of which they deem themselves perhaps more assured,as that we have a body, and that there exist stars and an earth, and such like, are less certain; for, although we have a moral assurance of these things, which is so strong that there is an appearance of extravagance in doubting of their existence, yet at the same time no one, unless his intellect is impaired,

can deny, when the question relates to a metaphysical certitude, that there is sufficient reason to exclude entire assurance, in the observation that when asleep we can in the same way imagine ourselves possessed of another body and that we see other stars and another earth, when there is nothing of the kind. For how do we know that the thoughts which occur in dreaming are false rather than those other which we experience when awake, since the former are often not less vivid and distinct than the latter? And though men of the highest genius study this question as long as they please, I do not believe that they will be able to give any reason which can be sufficient to remove this doubt, unless they presuppose the

existence of God. --- Descartes

[Haneefah]

La xawla walaa quwata ilaa bilaah

[Nur]

Cara

 

Thaks for the clarification, I would realy like to do a detailed eNuri quality paper on this topic if I could get the time, but since I have posted my Dead Sea response, no time was afforded me at all to look beyound pressing business concernes, but inshAllah I promise you I wont let you down, just need time to sit and jot my thoughts on all points that you ahve made, then open very new interesting outlook on th issues at hand, again, your patience and gracefil debate is appreciated.

 

 

Nur

[S.O.S]

Cara writes:

 

That's why I suggested 1 accurate prediction in 23 years/6000 verses is hardly clearcut proof of divine guidance

Leaving aside your inaccurate figure of 6000 verses, and assuming (for convenience) that there are 6000+ verses; are you saying that they're all predictions? If not, what justice do you have for your statistical cynicism (i.e. if this "1 accurate prediction" is the only 1 prediction in 6000+ verses, at least so far, then we have a 1:1 accuracy, no)?

 

Cara writes:

 

The Romans did not win a decisive battle against the Persians until 627 AD, which is 12 years after their defeat on 614-615

Your dates are misleading; Romans were not defeated in 614-615, rather what you're referring there is the fall and massacres of Jerusalem which took place in April/May 614 CE to be precise. However, it was not the defeat of the Romans who were still powerful in the lands between Jerusalem and Egypt including the Dead Sea area. The defeat of the Romans should be considered as a motion indicating one particular decisive victory from the time of interest (when revealed this Surah) and between the times of Persian conquests of the Dead Sea area which paved the easy way through to Sinai valley and completed by the capture of Alexandria by 617 CE, or when the Persians completed their occupation of Egypt in 619 CE. Therefore the trick is not to pick a battle which predates the revelation of the verses in question here, in fact, we need not look elsewhere for answers other than the outcomes and reactions of Makkan atheists and agnostics themselves between the times of exchanged defeats.

 

First, it's believed that these particular verses were revealed some five years into Allah's apostle's prophetship (9 Rabic-al-Awwal during the year of the Elephant, or Monday 22 April 571 CE plus 40 years and then added five more) which corresponds to circa 615-1616 CE. So the disbelieving atheists and agnostics of Makkah at that time (btw you're no match to their sarcasms) offered Abubakr (ra) to bet against them for huge amounts of money that this prophecy won't be fulfilled within three years. However, the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) advised Abubakr (ra) to set the bet for nine years. Such a high profile had this bet, that ever since it was set, thousands of Muslims, atheists and agnostics were anticipating in its outcome. Then, still few years short of the Hijra of the Prophet (pbuh) and Abubakr (ra) in September 622 CE, the prophecy was not to be realised until the second year after Hijrah at the battle of Badr. When finally the news of the Roman (motion of decisive) victory came which ended the long and anxious waiting of nine years, and as a consequence, countless number of agnostics like you came into the fold of Islam. Surely, no agnostic would've ever embraced Islam if this prophecy was not within nine years as you seem to imply, yet, there should've been Muslims going other direction and becoming agnostics, no?

 

One should note that this Surah was revealed when Muslims were suffering from a lot of oppression and a state of low morale. So when the defeat of the Persians on Romans hands came few years into the Hijrah, Muslims were joyful on their own right and were experiencing their highest morale. This, on closer look at the second part of verse four that states "..on that Day shall the believers rejoice" (30:4), confirms that their joy was also related to their victorious battle of Badr against the Makkans which happened on the same day. All and all, after examining the situation in which these verses were revealed, especially the following verses stating "With the help of Allah. He helps whom He wills....(it is) a Promise of Allah, and Allah fails not in His Promise, but most men know not" (30:5-6), and Allah's fulfilments thereof, we encounter some surprising facts of interconnected multidimensional joy and happiness, and other less apparent prophecy within prophecy, but in the context of Muslims from their respective situations as mentioned above, which so far hasn't been considered in this discussion.

 

For this we need to go back in history again, this time it's 17 Ramadan 02 AH and the Muslim army stood face to face with the Makkan army. It was in Badr and the Muslim army consisting of some weak, some sick, some old, and otherwise not well equipped at all, were facing an army trice their number with superior weaponry equipments. Upon seeing this, Utbah bin Rabiah boastfully remarked "let's go back without a fight"! Meanwhile the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) turned to his Lord saying "O Allah! If You were to exterminate this small group of Muslims, You will be worshipped on earth no more." Thus Allah sent His army of angels to aide the believers, and against all odds, the weak Muslim army defeated the much stronger army by the leave of Allah. Not much time now, but will go into much more depth some other time and explore many verses relating to this matter...

 

In the mean time look for: (Qur'an, 3:12-13, 8:9,12,13,42-44)

[Simple_Nomad]

Wow agnostic yaa ina baray?

http://www.washtimes.com/world/20050303-115733-9519r.htm

 

Two developments are plaguing atheism these days. One is that it appears to be losing its scientific underpinnings.

The other is the historical experience of hundreds of millions of people worldwide that atheists are in no position to claim the moral high ground.

British philosopher Anthony Flew, once as hard-nosed a humanist as any, has turned his back on atheism, saying it is impossible for evolution to account for the fact that one single cell can carry more data than all the volumes of the Encyclopedia Britannica.

[Simple_Nomad]

And they said, No matter what sign you bring us with which to bewitch us, we will not be believers for you." 35

 

"And even if We had sent down to them the angels and the dead spoke to them and We gathered together every [created] thing in front of them, they would not believe unless Allah should will. most of them, [of that], are ignorant." 36

 

"And even if We opened to them a gate from the heaven and they continued therein to ascend, they would say, Our eyes have only been dazzled; rather, we are a people affected by magic." 37

 

Whilst doing some reading i found this interesting qoute.

"If the atheist can trick the theist into bearing the burden of proof he will escape bearing that burden and escape having it exposed that his atheism is non-rational. He wants the theist to say, "I cannot prove it, but I believe in the existence of faith." Then the atheist will crow, "See, Theism is irrational." Then he will pose for the audience as a rational man and conceal that he came to atheism by irrational means."