Support NeoGAF

[Arcipello]

wow thats quite the dramatic shift in perception, although you seem to want to fill that void with another religion which almost seem counter intuitive.... you will find flaws in all of religions logic, so why not simply live life without them.

 

[captive]

See, I read autopsy.

ditto.


Interesting story.

 

[Vast Inspiration]

the show me evidence schtick as you call it is perfectly fine to ask for. If someone tries to sell you a car wouldn't you wanna look at it? If it's the OP's perogative to believe in the physical world and what physically exists and what can be proven to exist then that's his choice.

Except for the fact that I already stated that people forcing their beliefs on others is wrong. The "show me evidence" is idiotic when its used to question other people's beliefs. I'm not talking about the scenario where somebody tells you to believe in God. You can't force a "belief" on anyone.

Wait, everybody always tells me only "extremist" Muslims are like this, and that Islam is a peaceful religion. I mean, there isn't a shortage of extremist Muslims trying to take over Europe to criticize, but I guess I've always drawn a line (although I hate all religions). Is this view more common than the media makes it out to be?

I can't believe "normal" people were excited that almost 3000 people died.

Do you know how many innocent civilians have died in Iraq? Didn't the American media (at least in the first year of the war) celebrate the fine work the troops where doing in getting rid of "the terrorists"?

Americans hated the Iraqis and rejoiced when they pretty much ruined the entire country's way of life. Similarly, the way news is presented in the Middle East, they see Americans as the enemy.

When someone coming to your continent with their military force in countries all around you and toppling governments, it's very easy to see why the people in the Middle East see America as a bully and "the enemy".

Not saying any of this is right, just trying to put things in context.

 

[captive]

Do you know how many innocent civilians have died in Iraq? Didn't the American media (at least in the first year of the war) celebrate the fine work the troops where doing in getting rid of "the terrorists"?

I watched media coverage as this happened. I do not recall a single instance of the media celebrating the death of Iraqi's. Not even the terrible fox news.
Granted one cannot watch every news outlet all day.

Americans hated the Iraqis and rejoiced when they pretty much ruined the entire country's way of life. Similarly, the way news is presented in the Middle East, they see Americans as the enemy.

I dont know of a single american that hats iraqi's. Nor do i know anyone that "rejoiced" at the ruining of Iraq.
I remember people being excited about catching Saddam.

 

[vooglie]

Except for the fact that I already stated that people forcing their beliefs on others is wrong. The "show me evidence" is idiotic when its used to question other people's beliefs. I'm not talking about the scenario where somebody tells you to believe in God. You can't force a "belief" on anyone.

Wait, what? Didn't Darackutny say that he had evidence that Islam was right? Now, evidence is not something that is subjective to beliefs -- it's observed and objective. So it's perfectly fine to ask Darackutny to provide the evidence for Islam which he professes to have here:

I've seen evidence. How much do you know of Islam? How much Ibn Taymiyah or Al-Bayhaqi have you read?

As for asking Nizar's dad for evidence, I think it's perfectly valid. One shouldn't make statements like "Islam is right and the rest is wrong" unless one can back it up with something more than "well I just feel that it's right". If all you have are strong beliefs without any rationale behind them, then there's no point in stating those beliefs.

 

[Atrus]

Wait, everybody always tells me only "extremist" Muslims are like this, and that Islam is a peaceful religion. I mean, there isn't a shortage of extremist Muslims trying to take over Europe to criticize, but I guess I've always drawn a line (although I hate all religions). Is this view more common than the media makes it out to be?

I can't believe "normal" people were excited that almost 3000 people died.

You don't think humans are prone to Schadenfreude? These people didn't see the death of humans, they saw the only superpower in the world get it's nose bloodied.

Is it due to their religion? In so far as particular people believe the decadent West to be the root of all their evils and against Islam, but a more significant aspect to it is that these people are simply ignorant and have little conception to the value of a human existence.

I'm sure there were people who were concerned as well, but people are people. Do you expect the average US citizen to care and empathize about the Second Congo war? No. Similarly, the same type of people exist in all countries.

 

[Vast Inspiration]

I watched media coverage as this happened. I do not recall a single instance of the media celebrating the death of Iraqi's. Not even the terrible fox news.
Granted one cannot watch every news outlet all day.

I dont know of a single american that hats iraqi's. Nor do i know anyone that "rejoiced" at the ruining of Iraq.
I remember people being excited about catching Saddam.

Are you dense or just being purposely obtuse? And I really don't think you have any idea what the world was like in 2001-2003.

 

[captive]

Are you dense or just being purposely obtuse? And I really don't think you have any idea what the world was like in 2001-2003.

are you making shit up or just trying to be a jerk?
I know plenty what the world was like in 2001-2003. I know conservatives that did not want to go into Iraq. I know rite? not possible!
Find me one single news article from a reputable news source that was celebrating the death of innocent Iraqi's or rejoiced at the ruin caused in Iraq to back up your claims you have made and i'll gladly concede.

 

[PedroLumpy]

Except for the fact that I already stated that people forcing their beliefs on others is wrong. The "show me evidence" is idiotic when its used to question other people's beliefs. I'm not talking about the scenario where somebody tells you to believe in God. You can't force a "belief" on anyone.

The show me evidence question does seem reasonable when you're questioning your own beliefs though, IMO he asks his father the question in relation to questioning his own beliefs.

You seem really angry, I think you're gonna need to be more clear to get people to understand you. The story seems harmless, guy discovers over time that religion isn't for him.

 

[Darackutny]

I guess you have some evidence so why don't you share it with us?

Ever heard of the Arabic term tawatur or mutawatir?

Let us take for example the following statement of Mohammed:

قال رسول الله (&#1589:
من كذب علي متعمداً فليتبوأ مقعده من النار

Rough translation: "The Messenger of Allah said: Hell awaits those who lie against me purposefully."

Side note: Purposefully, as opposed to unintentionally lying, which the people of Hijaz would use in order to describe the act of "making a mistake".

This statement has been recorded by numerous scholars all the way through to the companions of Mohammed who have heard it themselves.

Al-Bukhari relates chains of narrations that go up to Ali bin Abi Talib, Anas bin Malik, Salama, Al-Mugheera bin Shu'ba, Abdullah bin Amr bin Al-Aas, Abu Thar Al-Ghafaari and Abu Huraira.

Muslim bin Hajjaj relates other chains of narrations that go up to Anas bin Malik, Abu Huraira, Al-Mugheera bin Shu'ba, and Abi Sa'eed Al-Khudaree.

Abu Dawud relates other chains of narrations that go up to Imran bin Hosain, Jabir bin Abdullah and Al-Zubair bin Al-Awaam.

Al-Tirmithi relates other chains of narrations that go up to Abdullah bin Masud, Anas bin Malik, Abdullah bin Umar, Ali bin Abi Talib, and Abdullah bin Masud.

Al-Daarimi relates other chains that go up to Abdullah bin Amr bin Al-Aas, Jabir bin Abdullah, Abdullah bin Al-Abbas, Ya'la bin Murra, Al-Zubair bin Al-Awam, Anas bin Malik, and Abi Qatadah.

Ibn Maajah relates other chains that go up to Abdullah bin Masud, Anas bin Malik, Jabir bin Abdullah, Abu Huraira, Abu Qataadah, and Abi Sa'eed Al-Khudari.

Imam Ahmad relates other chains that go up to Abdullah bin Al-Zubair, Abdullah bin Amr bin Al-Aas, Uthman bin Affan, Ali bin Abi Talib, Abdullah bin Amr bin Al-Aas, Amaara bin Abi Hasan Al-Ansaari, Abu Huraira, Abdullah bin Al-Abbas and Abdullah bin Masud.

... and this will do for now.

--------

Even this may just seem like a bunch of names, it is much more than that when combined. What I have typed above proves the following:

1- Mohammed existed.
2- The companions of Mohammed believed that he was a prophet from God. We know this because they all said, "The Messenger of Allah said..."
3- Mohammed's statements and actions were witnessed by his companions and were passed on to latter generations.
4- Most importantly: Mohammed said: Hell awaits those who lie against me purposefully.

What makes #4 extremely significant is that due to the availability of several chains of narrations, we can know for certain that this specific statement was said by Mohammed. This particular line wasn't fabricated by companion, or two, but it was a large group of people that couldn't have conspired to come up with a line and attribute it to him.

Before I carry on regarding how this method helps prove the prophethood of Mohammed, do you have any objections?

 

[T Dawg]

Now let us take for example the following statement of Mohammed:

قال رسول الله (&#1589:
من كذب علي متعمداً فليتبوأ مقعده من النار

Rough translation: "Anyone know how I can make my wifes pussy tighter? It's all droopy and wide and I want it to be a bit tighter now that she's going to be ten years old soon"

 

[Kinitari]

wow thats quite the dramatic shift in perception, although you seem to want to fill that void with another religion which almost seem counter intuitive.... you will find flaws in all of religions logic, so why not simply live life without them.

Huh? He does?

Ever heard of the Arabic term tawatur or mutawatir?

Uhh... dude, I don't mean to break it to you, but recording what some dude said 1500 years ago isn't any sort of proof of God. Not even a little bit. You have something else though, right?

 

[Nemo]

Now let us take for example the following statement of Mohammed:

قال رسول الله (&#1589:
من كذب علي متعمداً فليتبوأ مقعده من النار

Rough translation: "Anyone know how I can make my wifes pussy tighter? It's all droopy and wide and I want it to be a bit tighter now that she's going to be ten years old soon"

Badass.

 

[xelios]

Now let us take for example the following statement of Mohammed:

قال رسول الله (&#1589:
من كذب علي متعمداً فليتبوأ مقعده من النار

Rough translation: "Anyone know how I can make my wifes pussy tighter? It's all droopy and wide and I want it to be a bit tighter now that she's going to be ten years old soon"

:lol

 

[ianp622]

Before I carry on regarding how this method helps prove the prophethood of Mohammed, do you have any objections?

I have a couple objections: how do you KNOW that the prophets that claimed they heard it themselves actually heard it themselves?

You haven't explained how all of those connections prove 1,2,3, or 4.

Also, you can't "prove" anything. Proof exists only in mathematics. And you would have to have some considerable evidence to make me believe in any god (which I assume is required to believe that Mohammed is a prophet).

I could just shoot you down now for a number of reasons, but I'd like you to go ahead because honestly, I'd like to hear a reasonable explanation of a religion for once.

 

[freethought]

Ever heard of the Arabic term tawatur or mutawatir?

Let us take for example the following statement of Mohammed:

قال رسول الله (&#1589:
من كذب علي متعمداً فليتبوأ مقعده من النار

Rough translation: "The Messenger of Allah said: Hell awaits those who lie against me purposefully."

Well done. You have successfully proven that Mohammed existed and that he his followers believed he was a prophet. How does any of this prove that he was a prophet though?

 

[Extollere]

Congratulations on your militant atheism! You infidel, you.

I myself deconverted from Christianity many years ago. Two books you should really read are:

A History of God - Karen Armstrong (awesome book)
The End of Faith - Sam Harris (Super awesome book, don't let haters tell you else wise)

 

[Darackutny]

Uhh... dude, I don't mean to break it to you, but recording what some dude said 1500 years ago isn't any sort of proof of God. Not even a little bit. You have something else though, right?

I'm not talking about proof of God.

I'm talking about history here. Do you usually scrutinize everything you read in history books? Do you accept every historical account you are fed?

Back in high school, I read books written by contemporaries regarding both Islamic history and Western history in general. I will admit that most of what I read was lacking when it came to references, and I couldn't be completely sure about the fine details of what exactly happened during the Civil War or the Invasion of Constantinople, but I still didn't have much trouple accepting what I read in general.

What I'm trying to say is that I understand why you are being cautious with the information that I am feeding you, but you need to understand that what I've mentioned above goes far beyond what you and I would usually accept when going through a high school history book written by an anonynous author.

Well done. You have successfully proven that Mohammed existed and that he his followers believed he was a prophet. How does any of this prove that he was a prophet though?

#1 and #2 isn't what I was really going for, but #4 is much more significant when it comes to where I am going with this. I'll wait for Nizar's reply before I go on.

 

[ianp622]

I'm not talking about proof of God.

I'm talking about history here. Do you usually scrutinize everything you read in history books? Do you accept every historical account you are fed?

Back in high school, I read books written by contemporaries regarding both Islamic history and Western history in general. I will admit that most of what I read was lacking when it came to references, and I couldn't be completely sure about the fine details of what exactly happened during the Civil War or the Invasion of Constantinople, but I still didn't have much trouple accepting what I read in general.

What I'm trying to say is that I understand why you are being cautious with the information that I am feeding you, but you need to understand that what I've mentioned above goes far beyond what you and I would usually accept when going through a high school history book written by an anonynous author.



#1 and #2 isn't what I was really going for, but #4 is much more significant when it comes to where I am going with this. I'll wait for Nizar's reply before I go on.

First of all, I trust books on modern history more because they have primary sources to back them up, and don't rely on word of mouth. How do you have primary sources when most of the population is illiterate (including the "prophet")? Plus, history books undergo constant scrutiny, whereas scriptures are not subject to the same scrutiny because anytime they are, scholars can claim that they aren't meant to be taken as fact.

Second, how many history books did you read with an anonymous author? I never read any such books.

 

[dr3upmushroom]

Haven't read through the thread just the OP. Great story bro (Seriously), I really can't imagine how much against the grain you're going, and it's great to see that you took both sides evaluated them and decided to go with Science and Physics over mythology and history. (Why are people being assholes to the OP, I'm guessing English is not his first language, quit fucking up this thread.)

 

[Darackutny]

First of all, I trust books on modern history more because they have primary sources to back them up, and don't rely on word of mouth.

Simple question: Are those primary sources usually eye witness accounts? If not, then how can you trust them? If so, then why are they sufficient for you, while eye witness accounts of Islamic history are insufficient?

How do you have primary sources when most of the population is illiterate (including the "prophet")?

Literacy isn't necessary for one to preserve history. Take for example the Qur'an. There were hundreds of Muslims at the time of Mohammed that had the Qur'an memorized by heart even though they didn't know how to write. This argument is sufficient if we assumed that nobody knew how to write.

However, we know for a fact that many of his closest companions did know how to write including Abdullah bin Amr bin Al-Aas and Ali bin Abi Talib, whom of which are two of the companions that related the hadith that I mentioned in the post a wrote a little while ago. We also know, from Islamic history, that Mohammed ordered his companions to learn how to write and had quite a few men around him that would write down the Qur'an and the hadith that he recited.

Plus, history books undergo constant scrutiny, whereas scriptures are not subject to the same scrutiny because anytime they are, scholars can claim that they aren't meant to be taken as fact.

Hahah! You need to come over to my study one day! =)

Al-Mawdoo'aat by Ibnul Jawzi
Al-Abateel by Al-Ajlooni
Talkhees Al-Mawdoo'aat by Al-Thahabi
Silsilat Al-Ahadeeth Al-Da'eefa wal Mawdoo'a by Al-Albani
Ahadeeth Mu'ila by Muqbil bin Haadi Al-Wadi'i

These are names of a few books, from off the top of my head, that filters out our false history. Yes, thousands of narrations attributed to Mohammed that has been attributed to weakness. There is group of people in the world that have been so keen on filtering out the bad from the good when it comes to Islamic history.

Second, how many history books did you read with an anonymous author? I never read any such books.

When I said anonymous authors, I mean another form of anonymity. In Arabic we refer to it as jahalat al-haal. A person does exist, has a name, but I know nothing about the credibility of these authors. When was the last time you looked up the biography of an author of a history book?

 

[Souldriver]

Wow, Nizar! What an interesting story with so many highs and lows.


All I can think while reading it is that this must've been a very lucky and rare combination of (1) outside help and (2) critical thinking.

I mean, I can fully understand how kids growing up in Islam (or any religion or dogma) gets drowned into it and don't even have the opportunity to really think about it. "That's how it is, and there's nothing else". It's basically brain washing. It's a very sad thing, but if you are completely surrounded by that religion/dogma, I can't hold it against someone that he/she believes everything he/she's been hearing her whole life. Like you said, in Saudi Arabia the internet gets censored, the news media only cover one story, the religious leaders are political leaders, ... How are you supposed to think critically in such an environment. So it's a good and very lucky thing you had some outside help: the atheist friend, your parents not going ballistic when you showed some "rebellion", going outside S-A to a country that normally is part of "the baddies" and getting to know people there, ... If you didn't have had that, I can only wonder how your story would've been.

But on the other hand, as I said, it has to be a reciprocal process. What good are opportunities to listen to/view other ideas and lifestyles, if you refuse to take them. Luckily you seem like a very bright guy that isn't afraid of critical thinking. So even if you wouldn't have gotten "outside help", going from your story it looks like you'd walk around with doubts about your religion quite often anyway. I'd hate for you to be in that deadlock situation. That feeling that there is something wrong with everything you know, but not knowing enough to actually make up your mind about it.





I personally have never really believed in religion or god or whatever. As long as I can remember I've put religion in the same category as fictional literature. I was raised a Catholic, but not in a dogmatic way. My parents never talked about religion, that only happened in school. So my environment was basically the perfect one to find out stuff for myself and make up my own mind. On the one hand I always think I'd stand the test of indoctrination, because I was one of the few kids that didn't believe in religion for at least a certain period. But then I think about how severe indoctrination from a young age can be, and that I in no way can predict how I would be/think if I were to have been in your situation instead of mine.

 

[Kinitari]

Darackunty,

I am not doubting that what you are saying - because honesty - I couldn't care less. Muhammed saying "People who willfully lie to me will face eternity in hell" is as insignificant as him saying "I really don't like eating potatoes during breakfast".

I don't see how it has anything to do with whether or not:

1. Islam is 'truth'.
2. God exists.
3. Muhammed was a prophet of said god.

I know this is part 1 of your 1-2 knockout punch, but so far, not really all that impressed. This is on par with telling me that to this day, there are many accurate renditions of what Joseph Smith said when he came out of the forest and proclaimed his prophecy.

 

[Zapages]

I am not going to involved in this discussion, but one important thing I'd like to say is that.

All the suffering in the Middle East is due to the corrupt leaders instead of the people rebellion against their leaders who will kill them. These are the same leaders who oblige to everything the west (America/Britain/France/etc) tells them to do. IE. Saudis in this example. The citizens of these countries are happy that someone is standing up to their ruler's overloads (America) although what they are celebrating is goes against their own religion by going after innocent people in the first place. :|


From nearly all of your posts that I found is that you sound like an angst ridden teenager who just takes one thing and rebels from there(i.e. Islam). This really reminds of high school and some of my class mates who had discussion about politics with me after 9/11 occurred. :| Nothing to take it, personally man.

 

[Souldriver]

I am not going to involved in this discussion, but one important thing I'd like to say is that.

All the suffering in the Middle East is due to the corrupt leaders instead of the people rebellion against their leaders who will kill them. These are the same leaders who oblige to everything the west (America/Britain/France/etc) tells them to do. IE. Saudis in this example. The citizens of these countries are happy that someone is standing up to their ruler's overloads (America) although what they are celebrating is goes against their own religion by going after innocent people in the first place. :|


From nearly all of your posts that I found is that you sound like an angst ridden teenager who just takes one thing and rebels from there(i.e. Islam). This really reminds of high school and some of my class mates who had discussion about politics with me after 9/11 occurred. :|

post does not contain enough aliens

 

[Forkball]

The western lifestyle is pretty badass, I think you made a good choice. We have a ton of cool stuff. Have you ever been to Jimmy John's?

I'd like to see Saudi Arabia top that.

 

[Dever]

What makes #4 extremely significant is that due to the availability of several chains of narrations, we can know for certain that this specific statement was said by Mohammed. This particular line wasn't fabricated by companion, or two, but it was a large group of people that couldn't have conspired to come up with a line and attribute it to him.

Before I carry on regarding how this method helps prove the prophethood of Mohammed, do you have any objections?

Couldn't the same be said of, say, Joseph Smith? Providing evidence that the prophet existed and that he said something is not proof that what he said was actually true(or moral for that matter).

 

[Darackutny]

Couldn't the same be said of, say, Joseph Smith? Providing evidence that the prophet existed and that he said something is not proof that what he said was actually true(or moral for that matter).

Agreed. This has been pointed out by Kinitari. Once again, I'll carry on when Nizar responds.

 

[FrancisH]

Nice read. I like how you have taken your decision into your own hands and studied it yourself.

I must admit I chuckled a bit at this part:

Mom: Oh, May God forgive you and guide you to the true path.
Me: Thanks, don’t worry about me.

Anyway, good luck with it all!

 

[freethought]

Agreed. This has been pointed out by Kinitari. Once again, I'll carry on when Nizar responds.

Just do it now godsdamnit. Nobody really cares about your theological debate, we just want to witness ourselves the confused internal logic that has you convinced that Islam is the one true faith.

All we want is a cheap laugh at your expense, so hurry this up because it's late here and you're beginning to bore me.

 

[Wickerbasket]

Before I carry on regarding how this method helps prove the prophethood of Mohammed, do you have any objections?

Wait, how does that help prove the prophethood of the dude? It just shows that a lot of people believed him to be a prophet, and that the dude didn't like people saying he wasn't a prophet. So that would be an objection really, wouldn't it?

That in itself is enough to doubt him as a prophet. Unless you're also willing to accept Jesus as the son of God.

 

[Anaxagoras]

Agreed. This has been pointed out by Kinitari. Once again, I'll carry on when Nizar responds.

I am back now and I will respond to your post.

 

[Monocle]

Thanks for posting your story. Congrats and good luck.

And shit like this is why you will never understand why it "faith" is enough for people. I think people really do skew a lot of teachings and beliefs (in EVERY religion), and they try to impose shit on to others. I definitely do believe that.

But your "share your evidence with us" shtick is so fucking laughable.

:lol :lol :lol

If that's really the way you think, I have a handsome pre-owned automobile to sell you.

 

[Anaxagoras]

Ever heard of the Arabic term tawatur or mutawatir?

Let us take for example the following statement of Mohammed:

قال رسول الله (&#1589:
من كذب علي متعمداً فليتبوأ مقعده من النار

Rough translation: "The Messenger of Allah said: Hell awaits those who lie against me purposefully."
Even this may just seem like a bunch of names, it is much more than that when combined. What I have typed above proves the following:

1- Mohammed existed.
2- The companions of Mohammed believed that he was a prophet from God. We know this because they all said, "The Messenger of Allah said..."
3- Mohammed's statements and actions were witnessed by his companions and were passed on to latter generations.
4- Most importantly: Mohammed said: Hell awaits those who lie against me purposefully.

What makes #4 extremely significant is that due to the availability of several chains of narrations, we can know for certain that this specific statement was said by Mohammed. This particular line wasn't fabricated by companion, or two, but it was a large group of people that couldn't have conspired to come up with a line and attribute it to him.

Before I carry on regarding how this method helps prove the prophethood of Mohammed, do you have any objections?

No, I do not have any objections with this, however this doesn't mean that I will take everything that has been narrated down through generations as facts.

This method doesn't really prove anything, it more likely supports what is being pointed out.

 

[truly101]

I've never understood the huge dilemma some have over rationalizing science and religion. As a Christian, it really doesn't matter to me how God created the world, whether it was 7 days or billions of years ago, whether creationism is to be the literal interpretation from the bible or whether evolution is the natural process that God works through. It really doesn't matter to me, but I'm also presbyterian.

 

[Rewrite]

I forgot to post here. Yesterday I did read your story and I thought it was pretty great. Thanks for sharing!

 

[Darackutny]

No, I do not have any objections with this, however this doesn't mean that I will take everything that has been narrated down through generations as facts.

You have no objections to #4? So, you do accept that Mohammed did say what I have attributed to him as a fact? Or do you find this to be questionable as well?

This method doesn't really prove anything, it more likely supports what is being pointed out.

Please elaborate.

 

[Anaxagoras]

You're just really malleable and you still don't really have a mind of your own.

Do you think about how many innocent people die in Iraq and how many Americans celebrate their troops killing "the terrorists"? Do you consider Americans or the westerners barbarians?

My point is that throughout your story, you go from one spectrum to another, and the only consistency is the shitty logic you use to justify your changing beliefs. Learn to think for yourself.

That's your opinion.

And shit like this is why you will never understand why it "faith" is enough for people. I think people really do skew a lot of teachings and beliefs (in EVERY religion), and they try to impose shit on to others. I definitely do believe that.

But your "share your evidence with us" shtick is so fucking laughable.

Uh, I really hate to explain this but I will do anyway:

The reason I choose to start that topic with my father in that way is because I can sense a head of time how he would react if I say this or that, and when he told me its your life and its your decision, I felt that he wouldn't throw me out of the window if I told him that I don't believe in Islam.

I think it was a smarter way than to jump him with questions about the scientific contradictions in the Quran, I had to start the conversation in a simple way so he keeps on the talking and discussing the topic with me.

The reason I asked him to provide me with whatever he relies on is so that it would be him that is not able to convince me and not me attacking Islam, which is a better choice for such a discussion.

I don't believe that the lack of evidence proves something's nonexistence, just because I haven't seen a green rabbit doesn't mean that there is no such thing as green rabbits, but again, I just wanted the conversation to stay simple and easy on him.

 

[truly101]

I think I'm the one percent of message board posters that thinks his faith actually enriches his life instead of shackles of doom, ignorance and superstition.

The most important thing though, if you are a "religious" person, you need to question your faith and beliefs. They will never grow if you can't question them.

 

[Anaxagoras]

You have no objections to #4? So, you do accept that Mohammed did say what I have attributed to him as a fact? Or do you find this to be questionable as well?

What I will take as a fact is that this and that is said to be said and done by Mohammed.
What I will not take as a fact is that whatever is said about him is a fact.
Do you see the difference?

This method doesn't really prove anything, it more likely supports what is being pointed out.

Please elaborate.

Witnesses and testimonies do not prove anything, they just support what is being said.

A guy witnessing at court in no way can prove that the charged person is innocent, he can only support his story in a way or another, and it is up to the judges to decide what is more reliable and more likely to be true.

Just because it is said that a scientist has found dark matter, and this peace of news have been passed on from a trust worthy scientist to another, it doesn't make prove that dark matter has been found, it might only support it, but again it proves nothing.

edit: fixed quotes.

 

[thesoapster]

Good read, OP.

My story is not nearly that epic.

 

[Timedog]

good read. good job.

 

[TheQueen'sOwn]

Read the thread title as:

"The story of my apoptosis" (been studying too much)

....was a good OP though so I wasn't too disappointed.

 

[Kinitari]

Nizar, just agree with him so he can get to the second point, I haven't been this far on the edge of my seat since Kagari posted her pics FFXIII import thread.

 

[Anaxagoras]

Nizar, just agree with him so he can get to the second point, I haven't been this far on the edge of my seat since Kagari posted her pics FFXIII import thread.

It would just make me an idiot to accept what is said about others as facts.
I assume that it is the only thing that I have to tell him, after that he will just present to me the 'facts' and it will only make me a hypocrite if I refuse to believe them.

Its too bad though that he doesn't want to continue the discussion in here any longer, he insists on taking it on PM, will see how it will work out.

 

[dr3upmushroom]

It would just make me an idiot to accept what is said about others as facts.
I assume that it is the only thing that I have to tell him, after that he will just present to me the 'facts' and it will only make me a hypocrite if I refuse to believe them.

Its too bad though that he doesn't want to continue the discussion in here any longer, he insists on taking it on PM, will see how it will work out.

it'll probably just go along the lines of that one guy in another thread who just kept posting excerpts from the bible as "facts" to why someone should believe.

 

[Anaxagoras]

it'll probably just go along the lines of that one guy in another thread who just kept posting excerpts from the bible as "facts" to why someone should believe.

Too bad, I would have really loved to see know what the evidence was

 

[Kinitari]

Too bad, I would have really loved to see know what the evidence was

My mom used to use the old "Scientists can see the line where the moon was split in half!" - even at 10 that didn't work on me.

 

[Dead Man]

Darackutny reminds me of some Latter Day Saints that used to knock on my door. Lovely people, and very earnest about saving people and everything. But they couldn't understand that circular reasoning is not proof, nor is a statement handed down verbally over many generations.

Their first proof that their religion was the right one was that in the bible there was a passage saying essentially 'watch out for false religions'. When that didn't convince me they dragged out the 'historical fact' angle, which in their case was predicated on documents mroe recent that 1CE, and word of mouth. Also did not convince me!

As I said, nice people, just very poor reasoning.

 

[Darackutny]

I assume that it is the only thing that I have to tell him, after that he will just present to me the 'facts' and it will only make me a hypocrite if I refuse to believe them.

You are a hypocrite though:

Too bad, I would have really loved to see know what the evidence was

Bullshit. If you were sincere you wouldn't mind PMs.

I'm out of this thread.