Is Atheism based on Logic or Faith?

[mikeb768]

mike768, did you miss this?

No I saw this, but I also realize that most atheist disregard books as evidence from the period which we are discussing.

I, on the other hand believe that many of the ancient text which are available have credulity, even if not 100% accurate as in the case of the many books of the Bible (imo).

Take the Dead Sea Scrolls for example.

"The manuscripts have been dated to various ranges between 408 BCE and 318 CE." So these would be considered to be some of the earliest sources for the period which we are discussing? But most atheist are likely reject even these, I can't help that.

 

[mikeb768]

Yes. He has always been a human invention.



But Religion is never based on Logic. At least some Atheists each their conclusions through reason, that is never true for Religion.

Therefore Atheism wins. Yay.

I guess that means you'll be packing your tents and moving on...

I disagree, it looks to me as if God is pulling away the last underpinnings of the atheist by showing that logic, as in numbers (which inherently do not lie) are also on the side of the God. So after Logic is also shown to point in the direction of God what is the atheist left with after that? Hope maybe, possibly faith, a crapshoot (as was previously mentioned)? I'm still here for now. Although even when I do leave, the majority of you will still be left in the same spot.

 

[Brainache]

If multiple scholars all seem to agree that the Quran can be regarded as the finest piece of literature in the Arabic language then whats to "chuckle"?

Anwar Chejne, who wrote "The Arabic Language: Its Role in History"
Kristina Nelson, who wrote "The Art of Reciting the Quran"
Stefan Wild, who wrote "Encounters of Words and Texts: Intercultural Studies in Honor of Stefan Wild"
Suha Taji-Farouki, who wrote "Modern Muslim Intellectuals and the Quran"

Maybe a similar type of chuckle was taking place on the decks of the Titanic just before the ship went down? I have heard of cases where people sometimes laugh to keep themselves from crying.

Well the chuckling is because people are saying this is the work of God, because they don't like other writings as much as the Quran. It is very silly.

All it means is that those guys think all the other Arabic writing is worse than the stuff in the Quran.

If that's the case, that must be some pretty crappy writing...

No I saw this, but I also realize that most atheist disregard books as evidence from the period which we are discussing.

I, on the other hand believe that many of the ancient text which are available have credulity, even if not 100% accurate as in the case of the many books of the Bible (imo).

Take the Dead Sea Scrolls for example.

"The manuscripts have been dated to various ranges between 408 BCE and 318 CE." So these would be considered to be some of the earliest sources for the period which we are discussing? But most atheist are likely reject even these, I can't help that.

I know those ancient texts are a record of what people believed, but we are also talking about people who still thought the world was flat hundreds of years after the Greeks worked out it was round.

There is no god in your silly book. Just ancient superstition. Sorry.

 

[Nay_Sayer]

I disagree, it looks to me as if God is pulling away the last underpinnings of the atheist by showing that logic, as in numbers (which inherently do not lie) are also on the side of the God. So after Logic is also shown to point in the direction of God what is the atheist left with after that? Hope maybe, possibly faith, a crapshoot (as was previously mentioned)? I'm still here for now. Although even when I do leave, the majority of you will still be left in the same spot.

Numbers = god....Well I give you credit for originality in woo.

 

[Nay_Sayer]

So when I point out just how lame your "not a metaphor" argument is, you then respond with Lord of the Rings. Right on.

It's just as valid, Its a metaphor, thou dost protest too much.

 

[Brainache]

I disagree, it looks to me as if God is pulling away the last underpinnings of the atheist by showing that logic, as in numbers (which inherently do not lie) are also on the side of the God. So after Logic is also shown to point in the direction of God what is the atheist left with after that? Hope maybe, possibly faith, a crapshoot (as was previously mentioned)? I'm still here for now. Although even when I do leave, the majority of you will still be left in the same spot.

Numbers don't lie, but plenty of people have been known to tell lies about numbers though. Just like the guy you quoted earlier who had to remove verses from the Quran to make his idiotic numerology work out.

Why are you listening to liars?

Muhammad was a liar who told people that an Angel was speaking to him. I think that is despicable behaviour to prey on gullible people like that. Don't you?

 

[Nay_Sayer]

Numbers don't lie, but plenty of people have been known to tell lies about numbers though. Just like the guy you quoted earlier who had to remove verses from the Quran to make his idiotic numerology work out.

Why are you listening to liars?

Muhammad was a liar who told people that an Angel was speaking to him. I think that is despicable behaviour to prey on gullible people like that. Don't you?

well you see that and his affinity for young girls doesn't matter its the message which is "100% true" and contains "Scientific facts" but is actually a metaphor.

ETA quotes do not imply mike's position.

 

[Brainache]

well you see that and his affinity for young girls doesn't matter its the message which is "100% true" and contains "Scientific facts" but is actually a metaphor.

ETA quotes do not imply mike's position.

If it truly was the message of the Universal Creator, why are they having a hard time selling it to the rest of the world?

That kind of thing should be obvious from the message, but it isn't. It just looks like your average 7th century ignorance to me.

 

[mikeb768]

Numbers don't lie, but plenty of people have been known to tell lies about numbers though. Just like the guy you quoted earlier who had to remove verses from the Quran to make his idiotic numerology work out.

Why are you listening to liars?

Muhammad was a liar who told people that an Angel was speaking to him. I think that is despicable behaviour to prey on gullible people like that. Don't you?

How was Rashad Khalifa able to delete the verses which you mentioned, if they are still there today?

[Quran 9:128-129]

The verse which were claimed to have been removed were in fact still present?

Scholars both Muslim and Non Muslim who have studied the life of the Prophet all seem to agree that he was quite an earnest individual. Link
Even the US Congress seems to think that he was a man worthy of honor, not a liar as you claim. Is it not more despicable for you to make false, and unsupported claims?

 

[Brainache]

The verse which were claimed to have been removed were in fact still present?

Scholars both Muslim and Non Muslim who have studied the life of the Prophet all seem to agree that he was quite an earnest individual. Link

OK. If he wasn't a liar, he was a madman.

Does that sound better to you?

Even the US Congress seems to think that he was a man worthy of honor, not a liar as you claim. Is it not more despicable for you to make false, and unsupported claims?
[qimg]http://s30.postimg.org/hpf67s459/561500_415673558494931_2043392189_n.jpg[/qimg]

The US Congress also honored Nixon and George W Bush amongst others, I don't think it's the cast iron guarantee of quality you seem to think it is.

 

[Aridas]

Are you suggesting that Atheism is not necessarily rooted in logic? If so then I would agree.

This is... really just a case of pointing out the blindingly obvious. Atheism is, in very short, simply the failure to accept that any gods are the case. Why atheists lack belief in any gods is irrelevant to whether they're atheists. Yes, some atheists are atheists for reasons rooted in a fairly cold logical assessment. Some atheists are atheists for reasons rooted in emotion.

That said, it seems like you're trying to argue, badly, against a couple of the arguments that tend to be meaningful to atheists who tend to have more coldly logical reasoning involved in why they are atheists.

 

[Aridas]

Deleted. Tired.

 

[Frozenwolf150]

Some Examples of Logic in Islam
Logic in Islam [1] God swears by "the Even and the Odd", #.
Logic in Islam [2] Discussion of Authorship of the Quran using Logic.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sK2r8DLvVEA Logic in Islam [3] Discussion of the Quran being interwoven with the Number "19" as a sign for those who choose to disbelieve, [Quran 74:30]. *A conversation which was so compelling that one moderator actually resorted to wholesale censorship.
Logic in Islam [4] Document X? I am still working my way through the entirety of this video, although it was uploaded by a reputable brother and has to do with a group of scientist who are are discussing science, God, and what they describe as the "inescapable conclusion".

So you're trying to prove your point that Islam is logical by linking to past threads of yours that have already been thoroughly debunked?

Epic Fail.

By the way, it doesn't help your case when you can't even be bothered to look up basic terms like the special pleading fallacy.

 

[mikeb768]

So you're trying to prove your point that Islam is logical by linking to past threads of yours that have already been thoroughly debunked?

Epic Fail.

By the way, it doesn't help your case when you can't even be bothered to look up basic terms like the special pleading fallacy.

Which of the listed threads do you feel was successfully "debunked' and how?

 

[Frozenwolf150]

You ran away from your first thread on numerology when it didn't go your way. The fact of the matter is that you can find numerical patterns in just about any book if you look hard enough. That does not prove it has some deeper meaning, or even that the author intended it that way. Language is a system of symbols, and written forms like songs and poetic verse are based on repeating patterns. So of course you're going to get numerical patterns. This in no way makes the Quran unique, or more valid than other religious texts. In case you didn't realize it, there's also a ton of numerological interpretation that's been written about the Hebrew and Christian Bibles. I don't presume you pay them any more heed than atheists pay to your holy book.

 

[devnull]

mikeb, who are you trying to convince, and of what?

 

[Astreja]

It is really actually quite simple, God never changed.

Never changed? Mike, I don't think your god even exists!

And thank you for proving My point with that "Jews accept / Christians accept / Muslims accept" nonsense. Three religions, one descended from another in a relatively small geographical area, and not even they can agree on doctrine! You've been fighting one another for centuries, call one another insulting names, and purport to be worshipping the same god.

That's a simply pathetic and inexcusable situation for any genuine god to find itself in, hence My skepticism as to the existence of your god. I'd rather celebrate the turn of the seasons with atheists, agnostics, and polytheists of all nations than get dragged into a pointless and never-ending war over one extremely boring deity.

 

[Reivax]

Presupposing that the metaphysics of causality extends beyond the universe is problematic to start with.

Most of the time we observe causes preceding effects, and we make an induction that 'the next effect I see, must have a cause'. While this might be extremely useful in the universe, given its homogeneity (cosmological principle), there is no reason to think that causality is extra-universal - perhaps it is just a regularity within the universe (which our experience is limited to). So ultimately these sorts of arguments are based on a posteriori reasoning, so I find them unconvincing.

 

[Tassman]

Numbers don't lie, but plenty of people have been known to tell lies about numbers though. Just like the guy you quoted earlier who had to remove verses from the Quran to make his idiotic numerology work out.

Why are you listening to liars?

Muhammad was a liar who told people that an Angel was speaking to him. I think that is despicable behaviour to prey on gullible people like that. Don't you?

It’s possible Muhammad truly believed an angel spoke to him. It’s thought he was epileptic and there’s an established association between temporal lobe epilepsy and intense spiritual experiences – and many such epileptics are hyper-religious. Also Paul's spiritual conversion on the road to Damascus has the hallmarks of a similar seizure, notably the bright light, falling down and temporary blindness often associated with a temporal lobe seizure. It’s an interesting thought that the two biggest religions in the world were initially based merely on the neurological pathology of their founders.

 

[Robrob]

If multiple scholars all seem to agree that the Quran can be regarded as the finest piece of literature in the Arabic language then whats to "chuckle"?.

Having read the Quran, that comment doesn't speak much to the quality of the rest of Arabic literature.

It’s possible Muhammad truly believed an angel spoke to him. It’s thought he was epileptic and there’s an established association between temporal lobe epilepsy and intense spiritual experiences – and many such epileptics are hyper-religious. Also Paul's spiritual conversion on the road to Damascus has the hallmarks of a similar seizure, notably the bright light, falling down and temporary blindness often associated with a temporal lobe seizure. It’s an interesting thought that the two biggest religions in the world were initially based merely on the neurological pathology of their founders.

Also IIRC he woke from these "spells" flushed and warm as if having exercised - more symptoms of seizure.