• Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!

So GAF..I think I'm turning Agnostic

Status
Not open for further replies.
Second said:
What are you talking about? I love reading books.
I've read Bram Stokers Dracula, for instance. But I'm not going to fill my house with garlic to protect myself. Because I know Dracula doesn't exist.

You know that people actually believed that Dracula existed thanks to that book? Weren't those people pretty stupid to believe a book?
And Upton Sinclair's "The Jungle" showed people who horrible the meat packing industry could be. Thanks to that book, we now have the FDA to regulate the quality of food. Were those people stupid to believe a book?
 
Second, now the question comes: is the Bible more like Soren Kierkegaard's Fear And Trembling or Bram Stoker's Dracula? Let's keep this focused on the original poster's topic.
 
Zapages said:
There is scientific evidence in Islam... You just have to look for it. Jeez.
I can't believe you are going to push that.

If anything, that is huge embarrassment to Islam and discredits it more than supports it. Hey look, we delude ourselves with really transparently bogus 'scientific' arguments, join us!

There is no hard scientific evidence supporting any religion. It is all faith. Believe it if you want but don't push that 'scientific support' argument.
 
The thing that bothers me most about atheists and agnostics is the self-righteous arrogance and self-satisfaction that they somehow have "logic" on their side. You guys frame the argument that religion is anti-logic and therefore non-religion is logical.

Of course the true problem is your exposure to religion is by people that are dogmatic and follow blindly. There are many many out there that are smarter and more logical and have deep faith and committed beliefs.

I suppose my point is: don't use logic as a reason to forsake religion because it's actually not logical. That's the great irony!

I think it would be a lot more constructive if non-believers really dug down and REALLY truly honestly examined why they're forsaking religion. Because it's not logic. And if it is then you're a fool.
 
Welcome to the beginning of your spiritual enlightenment. Personally I dislike organized religion and more importantly its followers that feel that "their" god or beliefs needs defending.
 
Omar Ismail said:
The thing that bothers me most about atheists and agnostics is the self-righteous arrogance and self-satisfaction that they somehow have "logic" on their side. You guys frame the argument that religion is anti-logic and therefore non-religion is logical.

Of course the true problem is your exposure to religion is by people that are dogmatic and follow blindly. There are many many out there that are smarter and more logical and have deep faith and committed beliefs.

I suppose my point is: don't use logic as a reason to forsake religion because it's actually not logical. That's the great irony!

I think it would be a lot more constructive if non-believers really dug down and REALLY truly honestly examined why they're forsaking religion. Because it's not logic. And if it is then you're a fool.

Uh . . . we do have science & logic on our side. Faith is literally belief without evidence.

If you disagree, we would all love to see your scientific evidence & logic. You are eligible for a million dollars if you can scientifically prove some supernatural forces.
 
Omar Ismail said:
The thing that bothers me most about atheists and agnostics is the self-righteous arrogance and self-satisfaction that they somehow have "logic" on their side. You guys frame the argument that religion is anti-logic and therefore non-religion is logical.

Of course the true problem is your exposure to religion is by people that are dogmatic and follow blindly. There are many many out there that are smarter and more logical and have deep faith and committed beliefs.

I suppose my point is: don't use logic as a reason to forsake religion because it's actually not logical. That's the great irony!

I think it would be a lot more constructive if non-believers really dug down and REALLY truly honestly examined why they're forsaking religion. Because it's not logic. And if it is then you're a fool.
either you believe or you don't,
if one starts doubting and questioning and entering into agnostic zone.. you can't start calling them arrogant or self righteous.

if you are religious and believe in your faith without a doubt.. than good for you!! good that you have inner peace

but when you start questioning and searching for answers that don't add-up, than you are no longer 100% a believer

why force yourself to believe when you doubt? you can't force believe...

once one enters agnostic zone, it is hard to go back to religious zone.. the questions and the doubts conflict with trying to believe for real when parts of you don't
 
Try to skip the disillusionment phase where you make fun of religious ideas. Lots of people including myself are guilty of that.

Being agnostic can be somewhat less comforting when you think about mortality. There may be something more to life, but there may not. Don't fall into the fallacy that because our understanding of science is limited to what we can measure and observe that the possibility of some sort of afterlife must be true. Conversely, don't fall into the fallacy that it is not true. Just make the best of life that we understand.
 
Omar Ismail said:
The thing that bothers me most about atheists and agnostics is the self-righteous arrogance and self-satisfaction that they somehow have "logic" on their side. You guys frame the argument that religion is anti-logic and therefore non-religion is logical.

Of course the true problem is your exposure to religion is by people that are dogmatic and follow blindly. There are many many out there that are smarter and more logical and have deep faith and committed beliefs.

I suppose my point is: don't use logic as a reason to forsake religion because it's actually not logical. That's the great irony!

I think it would be a lot more constructive if non-believers really dug down and REALLY truly honestly examined why they're forsaking religion. Because it's not logic. And if it is then you're a fool.
I don't hear many atheists or agnostics use logic as an argument for their viewpoint, more like them feeling that it's an more rational and logical stance as it does not require faith in an entity of which there is no signs or evidence for.

As the existence of god cannot be proved or disproved, the logical stance is not to consider this being as relevant to the world and just carry on as if he do not exist.
Now they can point out to religions being illogical and irrational because they make claims about reality which sound absurd or just plain wrong.

Posted this in Kinitari's thread:

Incorrect stuff

  • Humans created from a single man. 4: 1
  • Homosexual acts are condemned as unnatural. (Will ye commit abomination such as no creature ever did before you?) But, in fact, such acts are common in many other species. 7:80-81
  • Crucifixion is a Roman punishment, unknown in Egypt at the time this story supposedly occurred. 7:124
  • "And thy Lord inspired the bee, saying ... eat of all fruits."
    Allah told bees to eat from all fruits, but decided to eat nectar and pollen instead. 16:68-68
  • All things We have created by pairs."
    This is not true. Many bacteria, protists, fungi, and plants reproduce asexually. 51:49
  • "He is created from a gushing fluid that issued from between the loins and ribs."
    Semen, according to the Quran, is formed not in the testicles, but somewhere "between the loins and ribs." 86:5-7
  • "He is created from a gushing fluid."
    Humans are not created from semen, but from fertilized eggs. 86:6

A list of absurdities:

  • "And He taught Adam all the names."
    Allah taught Adam all the names of the plants and animals, which must have taken a while since there are 1.7 million species that are known today, with probably another 10 million or so that are yet to be discovered. And this only includes those that are alive today. If extinct species are included (~99%), then Allah must have taught Adam a billion or so names. 2:31
  • Allah turned the Sabbath-breaking Jews into apes. 2:65-66
  • Christians and Jews must believe what Allah has revealed to Muhammad or Allah will disfigure their faces or turn them into apes, as he did the Sabbath-breakers. (See 2:65-66) 4:47
  • Only religious people help orphans or those in need. 107:1-3
  • The Christian Trinity is the Father, Mother, and Son. 5:116
  • Allah warns believers not to ask to many questions. (Honest answers will cause them to lose their faith.) 5:101
  • If the Quran was not from Allah its critics would find some mistakes in it.
    (The Quran filled with mistakes. It is a silly, error-filled book. But even if the Quran didn't contain a single error, it would not prove that it was from Allah.) 4:82


Sexy stuff in the Quran


  • It's OK to have sex with your wives on the night of the fast. 2:187
  • Don't have sex with menstruating women. 2:222
    When it is in reality healthy and recommended by most doctors as it can relieve menstruation cramps and pains.
  • Have sex with your women whenever, however, and as often as you like. 2:223
  • "Pure companions, and contentment from Allah"
    Virgins await those who enter paradise. 3:15
  • "All married women (are forbidden unto you) save those (captives) whom your right hands possess."
    You can't have sex with married women, unless they are slaves obtained in war (with whom you may rape or do whatever you like). 4:24

[sarcasm]Let's make fun of the Qu'ran yay [/sarcasm]
 
Science is ever changing as we learn more about us and the world around us. The hints in the Holy Quran are there to intrigue us to do more research about them. Then with our scientific knowledge we can combine the two to fully/better understand or interrupt the meaning of those passages.
 
Omar Ismail said:
You guys frame the argument that religion is anti-logic and therefore non-religion is logical.

I suppose my point is: don't use logic as a reason to forsake religion because it's actually not logical. That's the great irony!

I think it would be a lot more constructive if non-believers really dug down and REALLY truly honestly examined why they're forsaking religion. Because it's not logic. And if it is then you're a fool.
This post makes no sense. I don't think you understand the definition of logic.
log·ic -noun
the science that investigates the principles governing correct or reliable inference.
There is absolutely nothing about faith that follows principles of reliable inference. That's why it's called faith.
 
wRATH2x said:
Wat!?

Anyway man I actually did do that, and for 6 years I didn't get what I want. So now I'm working hard for it.

Well, half brother. I didn't know he was an atheist until about 5 months ago. When he and his wife came to visit, my parents went on about jesus/god when they were around, etc.

So, I figure it's best to just let her believe what she wants about me. I just know I'll never raise my kids as a catholic(like we are supposed to).

Yeah, well after 2 years, I had to lay down the law, lol. I just couldn't understand why he was given his sign, but I was never given mine. It all makes sense now, of course, but at the time it didn't.
 
Omar Ismail said:
The thing that bothers me most about atheists and agnostics is the self-righteous arrogance and self-satisfaction that they somehow have "logic" on their side. You guys frame the argument that religion is anti-logic and therefore non-religion is logical.

Of course the true problem is your exposure to religion is by people that are dogmatic and follow blindly. There are many many out there that are smarter and more logical and have deep faith and committed beliefs.

I suppose my point is: don't use logic as a reason to forsake religion because it's actually not logical. That's the great irony!

I think it would be a lot more constructive if non-believers really dug down and REALLY truly honestly examined why they're forsaking religion. Because it's not logic. And if it is then you're a fool.

I don't speak for everyone, but I am not religious just because I don't want to be, I think it's dumb - that's really it. Logic and Science (things I like) rampantly knocking theology down over the last two hundred years - isn't why I am non religious. I just use it to better argue with those who are religious.

Essentially when it comes down to it, being Religious is an act of blind faith - which in itself is illogical - sure there are those who are religious who can also be logical, but it does not therefore making faith logical. It's like saying that because someone is really good at math, him claiming that he can predict the future by adding up peoples birth days is also logical. It's not how it works.
 
Siebzehn50 said:
And wrong on the first one. Agnostics believe that any claim about a deity (its existence or otherwise) is unknowable

My understanding is that they believe that about claims of knowledge, not about claims of belief. I think many (most?) atheists wouldn't go so far as to make the claim that they know for certain that there is no god - just that based on what they do know, they don't believe.

And I imagine many theists are the same way about their belief in God - though the stronger you get in your faith, the more it seems like there is a claim of knowledge being made.

In any case, it had always seemed to me that agnostic / gnostic and theistic / atheistic referred to two different scales - one around claims of knowledge and the other around claims of belief.
 
wRATH2x said:
I know people who act like it and then ambush you with others trying to humiliate you, that happened to my friend once and it was nice to have a legitimate reason to fuck up some muttawa's!
C'mon, we both know that mutawwas and haia are the Saudi Talibans. Heck, these guys are driving Islam into ground. Recently, some mutawwa suggested that we should "demolish" Masjid al Haram and "reconstruct" it so that there is no gender mixing during Tawaf. These guys shouldn't be taken seriously. They're nothing more than a relic from Islamicization campaign of King Khalid in the early 80's.
I also spent the better part of my teen years reading up on ever religion imaginable, and its when I realized Islam was changed and altered from what it was like other religions. So I tried being a muslim like the old actual muslims, then I realized that I really can't since thats lost in time.

Now I'm just trying to be the best and nicest person I can be.
Wrath2x, personally, I believe that you and anyone else who believes in oneness of God (tawhid) will not be forsaken regardless of what you believe. You can't really be like "old Muslims" in this day and age. Islam was spread over all the continents except Americas and Australia in a span of 100 years. It is due to Islam's tolerant nature that so many sects and traditions evolved. A person following Islam in Iran is different than a person following Islam in Brundei. Yet at the same time during the call to prayer they turn towards the same direction. They have their own customs and local beliefs inter-mixed with Islamic traditions. But what does that has to do with anything, as long as they believe in one God and his prophet?
 
crowphoenix said:
And Upton Sinclair's "The Jungle" showed people who horrible the meat packing industry could be. Thanks to that book, we now have the FDA to regulate the quality of food. Were those people stupid to believe a book?
if the FDA was founded solely on the testimony of the book, yes.
 
Omar Ismail said:
The thing that bothers me most about atheists and agnostics is the self-righteous arrogance and self-satisfaction that they somehow have "logic" on their side. You guys frame the argument that religion is anti-logic and therefore non-religion is logical.

Of course the true problem is your exposure to religion is by people that are dogmatic and follow blindly. There are many many out there that are smarter and more logical and have deep faith and committed beliefs.

I suppose my point is: don't use logic as a reason to forsake religion because it's actually not logical. That's the great irony!

I think it would be a lot more constructive if non-believers really dug down and REALLY truly honestly examined why they're forsaking religion. Because it's not logic. And if it is then you're a fool.

This post sure is devoid of righteous arrogance and self-satisfaction.
Thanks for calling me a fool by the way, that's a good way to prove your point.

Seriously, is that what you think? If all us poor atheist fools just "dug down a little deeper" and "really truly examined" ourselves we'd see that we were being illogical all along? Please. We're not idiots, I have my reasons for not believing any more and they're not illogical, whatever you may think.
 
AFreak said:
Well, half brother. I didn't know he was an atheist until about 5 months ago. When he and his wife came to visit, my parents went on about jesus/god when they were around, etc.

So, I figure it's best to just let her believe what she wants about me. I just know I'll never raise my kids as a catholic(like we are supposed to).


Yeah, well after 2 years, I had to lay down the law, lol. I just couldn't understand why he was given his sign, but I was never given mine. It all makes sense now, of course, but at the time it didn't.
Sorry AFreak but you have me confused.
RustyNails said:
C'mon, we both know that mutawwas and haia are the Saudi Talibans. Heck, these guys are driving Islam into ground. Recently, some mutawwa suggested that we should "demolish" Masjid al Haram and "reconstruct" it so that there is no gender mixing during Tawaf. These guys shouldn't be taken seriously. They're nothing more than a relic from Islamicization campaign of King Khalid in the early 80's.
Never liked them, and I agree you shouldn't use them as an example of all muslims.

Wrath2x, personally, I believe that you and anyone else who believes in oneness of God (tawhid) will not be forsaken regardless of what you believe. You can't really be like "old Muslims" in this day and age. Islam was spread over all the continents except Americas and Australia in a span of 100 years. It is due to Islam's tolerant nature that so many sects and traditions evolved. A person following Islam in Iran is different than a person following Islam in Brundei. Yet at the same time during the call to prayer they turn towards the same direction. They have their own customs and local beliefs inter-mixed with Islamic traditions. But what does that has to do with anything, as long as they believe in one God and his prophet?
If you go back and reread my posts here, you'd find my answer. I'm still kind of a muslim but I'm not really following it since true Islam is lost in time. And at this point I really don't care about religion, or want to do anything religious for that matter. I'm just sick of religion, like fuck this shit.

Will I go back when I'm older and near death? I don't know. But what I do know is I don't really care much to try and label myself and do things I don't want to do.

Rusty you are an actually smart and polite gaffer who knows how to argue, but believe me even with your posts nothing can change my mind.

Whiskers where my weed at!?
 
crowphoenix said:
And Upton Sinclair's "The Jungle" showed people who horrible the meat packing industry could be. Thanks to that book, we now have the FDA to regulate the quality of food. Were those people stupid to believe a book?

No, because meat packing industries exist. I've seen a few.
 
GhaleonQ said:
This is in the tone of someone who thinks he's clever, but with the content of someone who doesn't understand basic Christian theology. This is a pretty common type of person.
I grew up in Catholic school and was an altar boy for 6 years, friend. I'm aware the Old Testament is co-opted theology and the New Testament relaxes the God-fearing aspects, but it's part of the Good Book all the same. You can't say, "That doesn't count."

Doesn't the idea that there's even a hard divide between Angry Vengeful God and Radical Loving God strike you as really strange? It seems totally out of whack to me that He Who is at All Places at All Times would be subject to such a pronounced mood swing, such clearly discernible eras of temperament and philosophy. I simply decided to err with Occam's Razor; the requirements changed because people wanted them to change. And once you suppose that religion is shaped at the whims of human desire, everything falls apart pretty nicely from there.
 
To clarify: believing or not believing is neither more or less logical. That's the point. As someone above said - you either have faith or you don't. Faith is the starting point and from there you logically get to atheism or to religion depending on which direction you go.

Important points:
science does not prove or disprove religion.
Logic does not prove or disprove religion.
Experience does not prove or disprove religion.

It all comes down to your faith.

Though I must admit. And take this as condescending if you must. But I'm not super religious and yet I still feel that warmth of faith in my heart. I can't imagine what life would be like without it. I can understand why people don't "get it" though. It's like trying to explain red to someone who is colour blind.

You may find that arrogant but logically speaking the religious experience is a superset of "regular" experience. I can imagine what it's like to NOT have this feeling but you can't imagine what it's like TO have it. Take that for what it's worth.
 
Chairman Yang said:
Jibril/Veidt, people like you make me feel better about the world. It can be difficult to run against strong family and cultural tradition, but I'm glad you did in this case.

Anyways, I was wondering...how much of an impact did discussions/research on the Internet have on you? I used to be dismissive about the prospects that arguing on the Internet would change anyone's mind, but I've started thinking that over a long period of time it can. I'd be happy to hear from Himuro, Masenkame, or any other ex-Muslims about this, too.

I do think GAF had a part in me becoming an atheist, But it was me finding out about my friend's atheism and having a small debate with him that sparked the change at first.

The rest happened gradually over time. I started thinking about religion and god's existence which was a taboo to me before. And being exposed to the different ideas and views on the subject on GAF did really help me. Especially since such views are rare in an Islamic country where people are afraid to express their views.

So after a while I realized that I don't believe anymore. and I told my atheist friend. He was really surprised by it since the last time I had a debate with him I was defending Islam.:D

It been over 2 years since that time and only a few of my friends know about me.

I hope that I can one day leave my country so I can finally come out of the closet. But I don't know if I ever will. It's not an easy step.
 
speculawyer said:
I can't believe you are going to push that.

If anything, that is huge embarrassment to Islam and discredits it more than supports it. Hey look, we delude ourselves with really transparently bogus 'scientific' arguments, join us!

There is no hard scientific evidence supporting any religion. It is all faith. Believe it if you want but don't push that 'scientific support' argument.
I once visited a mosque as part of a field trip and I remember the imam's son telling us that "Muhammad split the moon in two and there is now scientific evidence to show that this actually happened."

Perhaps I should have challenged him, but I was a guest and I'm usually too polite about these things.
 
Omar Ismail said:
Of course the true problem is your exposure to religion is by people that are dogmatic and follow blindly. There are many many out there that are smarter and more logical and have deep faith and committed beliefs.

That's not true. I've known a lot of religious people in my life. The vast, vast majority, in fact - and some of them were even very smart.

I don't think my problem is lack of exposure.

I think it would be a lot more constructive if non-believers really dug down and REALLY truly honestly examined why they're forsaking religion. Because it's not logic. And if it is then you're a fool.

Sure. Honest introspection powers go:

The reason that I first abandoned religion was pretty simple - I had never believed. It wasn't logical - it was that I didn't quite realize I was supposed to believe, and I didn't realize everyone else really, truly believed. I thought that the stories that I read in my copy My Very First Golden Bible were unbelievable. I don't recall that period in my life before I was aware that things like talking snakes and consistently accurate prophecies don't happen in reality, but by the time I was in elementary school, it seemed unbelievable. I also didn't understand some aspects of Christian dogma (How is it that God has always existed? And how can God have always existed, but Mary is the Mother of God? And how did Jesus die if he was God? How is it possible to be "fully" two things? And if he just rose again, what was the point of his sacrifice? Why couldn't we just say, "Sorry about eating from the tree," and God say, "Okay, apology accepted" or something?)

So, when I went through a difficult period when I was in my early teens, I realized this about myself - that I didn't really believe. I decided I was agnostic. It wasn't a logical decision by any means.

Of course, at the time, I called myself an agnostic.

But as I've learned more about the superfluousness of God for explaining the natural universe, and the more I've learned about the history of Christianity, I've felt more comfortable calling myself an atheist. If there is a god, I believe that it is a god that does not meaningfully interact with the universe (or leaves no evidence that he does) and has left no evidence of his supposed involvement in making it.
 
Omar Ismail said:
The thing that bothers me most about atheists and agnostics is the self-righteous arrogance and self-satisfaction that they somehow have "logic" on their side. You guys frame the argument that religion is anti-logic and therefore non-religion is logical.

Of course the true problem is your exposure to religion is by people that are dogmatic and follow blindly. There are many many out there that are smarter and more logical and have deep faith and committed beliefs.

I suppose my point is: don't use logic as a reason to forsake religion because it's actually not logical. That's the great irony!

I think it would be a lot more constructive if non-believers really dug down and REALLY truly honestly examined why they're forsaking religion. Because it's not logic. And if it is then you're a fool.
Could you give some examples of deep faith and committed beliefs which result from smart, logical thought? I think that would be really helpful and give your argument a lot more weight.
 
Second said:
No, because meat packing industries exist. I've seen a few.
But all you referred to is books. You said nothing about what was written in the book. The Jungle is fiction. It just happened to show what was real as well.
 
Costanza said:
if you ever need to talk I'm here man.
seinfeld_episode075_337x233_040420061510.jpg
 
crowphoenix said:
But all you referred to is books. You said nothing about what was written in the book. The Jungle is fiction. It just happened to show what was real as well.
right, which is why the answer is yes if the formation of the FDA was based solely on the testimony and contents of that book.
which it wasnt.
which is a problem for your comparison.
 
Shig said:
I grew up in Catholic school and was an altar boy for 6 years, friend. I'm aware the Old Testament is co-opted theology and the New Testament relaxes the God-fearing aspects, but it's part of the Good Book all the same. You can't say, "That doesn't count."

Doesn't the idea that there's even a hard divide between Angry Vengeful God and Radical Loving God strike you as really strange? It seems totally out of whack to me that He Who is at All Places at All Times would be subject to such a pronounced mood swing, such clearly discernible eras of temperament and philosophy. I simply decided to err with Occam's Razor; the requirements changed because people wanted them to change. And once you suppose that religion is shaped at the whims of human desire, everything falls apart pretty nicely from there.

I wasn't asking about how often your presence at church or religion class was required, I was questioning how often you listened. No, I don't find it peculiar that the god in time interacts with different people in different ways, and I certainly don't think covenant theology is odd. Characterizing Passover as some kind of vulgar pagan ritual is purposefully ignorant if you're so well-read. If you have some theological objection to it, state it. If your 1st response is, "Jesus was, first and foremost, about peace and love, man," don't bother. Please, make it short so that Veidt can control his topic.
 
Pandaman said:
right, which is why the answer is yes if the formation of the FDA was based solely on the testimony and contents of that book.
which it wasnt.
which is a problem for your comparison.
Fair enough, and I apologize for missing your quote earlier.

Ah, never mind. I'm just getting heated and incoherent.
 
I'm late to the thread, but I have also been a Muslim and became an atheist about 2 month ago.
I was never a religious person I prayed most of the time and fasted in Ramadan. And I was once talking with a friend of mine who is used to be a Muslim but is now agnostic about Islam and Quran in general and he had some interesting points to make. And when I returned back home I started doing some research about Islam and Prophet Muhammad which made me ask much more questions I also asked some of these question in the Islamic thread here.
I tried to find the "scientific evidences" in Quran but I couldn't find any, instead I found out that It contradicts with Evolution and Big bang theory as well as allowing slavery, Polygamy and wife beating in addition to scientific errors and contradiction in the text it self. At that point I became an Atheist, I still have to tell my family about it at some point though.
 
Omar Ismail said:
To clarify: believing or not believing is neither more or less logical. That's the point. As someone above said - you either have faith or you don't. Faith is the starting point and from there you logically get to atheism or to religion depending on which direction you go.

Important points:
science does not prove or disprove religion.
Logic does not prove or disprove religion.
Experience does not prove or disprove religion.

It all comes down to your faith.

Though I must admit. And take this as condescending if you must. But I'm not super religious and yet I still feel that warmth of faith in my heart. I can't imagine what life would be like without it. I can understand why people don't "get it" though. It's like trying to explain red to someone who is colour blind.

You may find that arrogant but logically speaking the religious experience is a superset of "regular" experience. I can imagine what it's like to NOT have this feeling but you can't imagine what it's like TO have it. Take that for what it's worth.
Whatever you want to tell yourself, buddy.

"SOME say faith is illogical.. but in fact it is the most logical stance of all!"

You sound like you're trying to convince a bunch of children.
 
Druz said:
Whatever you want to tell yourself, buddy.

"SOME say faith is illogical.. but in fact it is the most logical stance of all!"

You sound like you're trying to convince a bunch of children.
Pretty much, I'm a firm believer, but honestly religion is illogical. Don't get what's so hard to understand about that. Does that make me less of a believer? Nope there's a lot of things in the world that make no sense and people believe in it. Modern basic human theory is based on that humans are indeed irrational beings(I study economics mind you).

That's some people only believe in what they see makes perfect sense, but that I have faith based on a feeling that I have, isn't crazy. Certainly not to the point where I have to be ridiculed.
 
Omar Ismail said:
The thing that bothers me most about atheists and agnostics is the self-righteous arrogance and self-satisfaction that they somehow have "logic" on their side. You guys frame the argument that religion is anti-logic and therefore non-religion is logical.

Of course the true problem is your exposure to religion is by people that are dogmatic and follow blindly. There are many many out there that are smarter and more logical and have deep faith and committed beliefs.

I suppose my point is: don't use logic as a reason to forsake religion because it's actually not logical. That's the great irony!

I think it would be a lot more constructive if non-believers really dug down and REALLY truly honestly examined why they're forsaking religion. Because it's not logic. And if it is then you're a fool.

This doesn't make any sense. Logic would dictate that we not buy into or start believing things that have not been sufficiently born out by evidence. If a person decides to not believe in something because this evidence is wholly lacking then of course that is logical, and they would be completely justified in declaring the opposite position to be illogical.

Your argument is a long winded "I know you are but what am I?!"
 
Here's my point in a very simple terms. Belief in religion and being an atheist are both equal LOGICALLY.

Neither position has an advantage when it comes to logic.

The implication of that is that you can't use "atheism is more logical therefore it's right" as an argument which most agnostics/atheists proclaim (at least in this thread).

So now we can discuss two things. 1) Is religion and Islam specifically as logically sound as atheism? Or 2) if they're equally logical on what basis can we even have a discussion and what are we even discussing at all?

Methinks the first question is going to get more action.
 
Rejoice! You can now play video games!

The hadiths do not single out Muhammad’s picture. Rather, in the hadith we find the prohibition of all pictures of people or animals, which would include pictures from a camera.

Well . . . the way I read that, it would haraam for Muslims to play video games since they involve pictures of people and animals.

Now enjoy without guilt.
 
Zapages said:
I guess Crazy monkey and few others will be the only Muslims left here... :\

I just don't feel your reasons to stop being Muslim are strong. Its just lack of faith in humanity (more or less) that is making you rethink about everything.

PM me man. :)
agree. I can't even say anything. Good luck with Nizar and co. Zibril. Zapages you share my view on many things. Zibril I hope you don't start to view everything with single mind. For me I will always be Muslim .

لا اله الا الله محمد رسول الله
some advice video i was gonna post it in official islam thread but i guess i will just post here
Some advice
 
Omar Ismail said:
Belief in religion and being an atheist are both equal LOGICALLY.

Where are you getting this terrible opinion from?

One is having faith in a Deity and a set moral code dictated by said deity. The other is merely the rejection of this faith and is definitely more logical because it is the belief in what can be proven.
 
Chairman Yang said:
Jibril/Veidt, people like you make me feel better about the world. It can be difficult to run against strong family and cultural tradition, but I'm glad you did in this case.

Anyways, I was wondering...how much of an impact did discussions/research on the Internet have on you? I used to be dismissive about the prospects that arguing on the Internet would change anyone's mind, but I've started thinking that over a long period of time it can. I'd be happy to hear from Himuro, Masenkame, or any other ex-Muslims about this, too.
The internet saved my brain. I say with complete and utter seriousness, it gave me a place to trot out my views to be challenged (something I had never really had in RL). Battering after battering followed and eventually I was ready to contemplate the "unthinkable".
 
Siebzehn50 said:
Where are you getting this terrible opinion from?

One is having faith in a Deity and a set moral code dictated by said deity. The other is merely the rejection of this faith and is definitely more logical because it is the belief in what can be proven.
Logical from different perspectives. And those different viewpoints are entirely where conflicts arise from.

Mutual respect is apparently too much to ask for though.
 
The truly enlightened man leaves his religion he was brought up on, yet understands its importance to the rest of society and respects it's place.
 
Buckethead said:
Logical from different perspectives. And those different viewpoints are entirely where conflicts arise from.

Mutual respect is apparently too much to ask for though.

The objective quality(or presence) of evidence isn't a matter of perspective.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom