Is Atheism based on Logic or Faith?

[Brainache]

Sure, lets follow your premise and take a look. Can you provide us with at least one example of the things which you have mentioned. We should be able to compare and evaluate them, wouldn't you agree?

What would be the point of that? He has already said that Numerology is useless. If it's useless for the Bible it is useless for the Quran.

But it works really well on Jackie Collins and Harold Robbins.

I wonder what that means?


OOOOOOOh Spooky!

 

[Aridas]

Sure, lets follow your premise and take a look. Can you provide us with at least one example of the things which you have mentioned. We should be able to compare and evaluate them, wouldn't you agree?

Well... if we want to start on this topic, I think a nod to the assassinations predicted in Moby Dick is in order.

More directly, relatively unbiased information about the Bible codes that you asked about can be found at wikipedia. Less unbiased information can be found at Let Us Reason Ministries.

Further, something of a small hub for refuting the claims that the described phenomena are intentional or frequently even real can be found here.

Is that enough to chew on for starters, after a fairly quick search on the topic?

 

[mikeb768]

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.

So you believe that Muhammad who was considered to be a rather honest but otherwise ordinary guy before his 40th birthday, had a seizure which caused him to become (what many would consider and based on the examples which I have provided) a literary #, and mathematical # genius?

If believing that makes it easier to swallow, then sure. I actually think the theory that he may have had access to a time machine to be slightly more plausible. Consider this, he could have jumped to the future wrote everything down, preformed all of the necessary calculations, then zipped back to the past and disclosed the information the people over a prolonged period of time, also making sure to disassemble, destroy and any evidence that a time machine ever existed.

 

[mikeb768]

Well... if we want to start on this topic, I think a nod to the assassinations predicted in Moby Dick is in order.

More directly, relatively unbiased information about the Bible codes that you asked about can be found at wikipedia. Less unbiased information can be found at Let Us Reason Ministries.

Further, something of a small hub for refuting the claims that the described phenomena are intentional can be found here.

Is that enough to chew on for starters, after a fairly quick search on the topic?

OK, the "Assassinations predicted in Moby Dick" link was funny the first time. I literally had to wipe down my monitor the first time someone posted that link. But re-posting it is almost the same as admitting that you've got nothing.

 

[DC]

So you believe that Muhammad who was considered to be a rather honest but otherwise ordinary guy before his 40th birthday, had a seizure which caused him to become (what many would consider and based on the examples which I have provided) a literary #, and mathematical # genius?

If believing that makes it easier to swallow, then sure. I actually think the theory that he may have had access to a time machine to be slightly more plausible. Consider this, he could have jumped to the future wrote everything down, preformed all of the necessary calculations, then zipped back to the past and disclosed the information the people over a prolonged period of time, also making sure to disassemble, destroy and any evidence that a time machine ever existed.

well had he had a time machine, his book would surely be more accurate and contain less myths.

 

[Brainache]

OK, the "Assassinations predicted in Moby Dick" link was funny the first time. I literally had to wipe down my monitor the first time someone posted that link. But re-posting it is almost the same as admitting that you've got nothing.

It is exactly what you have.

People finding patterns in books. Big whoopee

It's not like the Quran actually has anything useful in it.

Why bother?

 

[Aridas]

OK, the "Assassinations predicted in Moby Dick" link was funny the first time. I literally had to wipe down my monitor the first time someone posted that link. But re-posting it is almost the same as admitting that you've got nothing.

Sorry, but you're a bit mistaken here. First, I'm not reposting it, though I am, admittedly, unsurprised that someone else would point at it if you've brought up the general topic before. Secondly, that's by far the least important of the links that I pointed at and was put there for the amusement value more than anything else, hence the "nod" to it. Sadly, an important point does remain even if I had stopped with that, though. What reason do we have to take your proposed interpretations any more seriously than we take those things found in Moby Dick?

 

[RayG]

The discussion is mainly aimed at people who deal in the realm of "reason" and "logic", if you read the OP. Although I realize (and some have already mentioned) that everyone does not fall into this group.

I consider myself an atheist. I lack a belief in gods.



RayG

 

[mikeb768]

What do these people you list actually say about the literary quality of the Quran, and why should we accept them as unbiased experts on the topic?

And even if you (somehow) convinced us that the Quran really is the finest work literature in the Arabic language, why should we regard this as necessarily a miracle?

For centuries Homer's epic poem The Iliad was widely regarded by the ancient Greeks as their finest work of literature, and according to some sources he couldn't read or write either (on account of being blind... assuming that the accounts of him being blind are actually true, which is questionable). Should we count that as a miracle too?

I have not read the books which these authors have put forward on the subject, but I would image that if the Wikipedia website is functioning as it should there are a number of discussion taking place and edits which have been made that allow the work of these four authors to remain listed as sources. Although anyone is welcome to visit the Quran page, and to click on and read through the revision history to retrace how they managed to arrive where they are now.

Hamza Yusuf and Nouman Ali Khan are two of the scholars which I follow regarding the topic, you may consider them to be biased (since they are both Muslim), but in many of their talks not only do they simply make the claim (such and such is miraculous/of the finest literary quality) they actually explain and show why it is such, as can be seen in the following example.

If Homer was truly blind and he was able to come up with what is considered to be the "finest piece of literature" in the Greek language. I would also consider that to be a Miracle. Although I do not think anyone has claimed this to be the case, and if they have done, then the "finest" on what basis?

 

[mikeb768]

Sorry, but you're a bit mistaken here. First, I'm not reposting it, though I am, admittedly, unsurprised that someone else would point at it if you've brought up the general topic before. Secondly, that's by far the least important of the links that I pointed at and was put there for the amusement value more than anything else, hence the "nod" to it. Sadly, an important point does remain even if I had stopped with that, though. What reason do we have to take your proposed interpretations any more seriously than we take those things found in Moby Dick?

It is pretty obvious at this point that you have not even bothered to look at what has been provided.

 

[Brian-M]

which caused him to become (what many would consider and based on the examples which I have provided) a literary #, and mathematical # genius?

You haven't provided any sound argument to support the claim that he would have to have been a genius of any kind in order to produce the Quran without divine intervention. You've made a lot of assertions, but no sound argument.

 

[tsig]

There exist a great multitude of other "isms". Some contain small portions of the truth while others not a shred.

Does there exist any process of elimination, which can help to separate fact from fiction?

All those "isms" are pretty much crap.

 

[tsig]

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.

I doubt it because the iceberg was real.

 

[tsig]

It is really actually quite simple, God never changed.

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.

I god doesn't change why is he doing thing differently?

 

[tsig]

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

Does that sound better to you?



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.

Liar, Lunatic or Prophet?

 

[Brainache]

Liar, Lunatic or Prophet?

I don't see why he can't be at least the first two at the same time. The third is less likely IMO.

 

[mikeb768]

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

Does that sound better to you?

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.

The US congress was actually trying to impeach Nixon, if I'm not mistaken. I think he resigned just prior to this taking place.

 

[tsig]

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.

In one sense god hasn't changed, he's just as non existent now as he was then.

In fact for a being to exist it must change or it could not interact with the world.

 

[tsig]

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.

Given that all religious founders claim to be talking with invisible entities can't we replace the "two biggest" with all?

 

[tsig]

That is correct within the construct of the physical universe, and in relation to whether or not consciousness exists after death science has no method in which to determine if this is or isn't the case, or even determining whether there are any alternate realities, or even multi/infinite number of universes (physical or otherwise).

So any statement from human science that pixies and gods (and even extraterrestrials) don't exist as far as human science is able to determine - things 'don't exist' if they are not able to be observed as existing.

But I haven't seen such statements from the practice of science, in the sense that scientists are categorically claiming that god/pixies/alternate universes etc positively do not exist, or that consciousness cannot in some non observable way survive the death of the body.

Science is not that presumptuous.

Therefore, your saying that "Claiming that pixies and gods don't exist is a scientific statement" is not correct.

How can science falsify god does not exist?

What is the "predictive value" in relation to this?

You depart from reality with your first sentence.

How do you gain any info from beyond the construct of the physical universe?