The man in red underpants

[eesa the kiwi]

abdur raheem green wrote this book that leads its reader down a logical path towards their maker and i find Alhamdulilah its an excellent resource for the sincere seeker of truth, i may have posted this book before (i cant remember i know i did on uf but im not sure here) but i feel its more appropriate in this sub forum anyway


Who is the man in the red underpants? What does he want and why are his pants red and not pink? Did he really get his red underpants from Agent Provacateur and what does he want anyway?
None of these questions are dealt with in this book! Rather this book asks you to think about how you would deal with the man in the red underpants. It will take you on a journey in which you will encounter some startling conclusions. If you believe in unbelievable things without proof, then put this book down now, and if you think that you’re a thinker, think again!
The man in the Red Underpants will make sure your life is never the same again




https://islamhouse.com/en/books/345803/


enjoy

[eesa the kiwi]

Bump

So basically this book takes the reader down a logical path questioning the validity of their belief set up

Would be interested in feedback from non muslims

[eesa the kiwi]

Bump

[Scimitar]

Bump

i volunteer with IERA and have a whole box full of this book!!! Along with boxes of other Iera/one reason publications.

Hey there! Looks like you're enjoying the discussion, but you're not signed up for an account.

When you create an account, you can participate in the discussions and share your thoughts. You also get notifications, here and via email, whenever new posts are made. And you can like posts and make new friends.
Sign Up

[eesa the kiwi]

Perhaps another book they don't want you to read @Bushwackk

[czgibson]

Greetings,

Bump

So basically this book takes the reader down a logical path questioning the validity of their belief set up

Would be interested in feedback from non muslims

I read the first chapter, on which the rest of the book seems to be based. From the writing style I presume it is aimed at children or teens. The author begins by attempting to get the reader onside with a guilt trip. The second page begins with a misuse of the term 'universals', and then continues with a rendition of the famous argument from design. The author mentions the impossibility of an infinite regress of creators, apparently not noticing that this is fatal to the argument he is proposing.

I stopped reading at this point. Does it get any better?

Peace

[fwancwah]

The path to truth is very simple.
Personnally, I like to explore philosophies, and various ways, but fasting has always brought me back to the main path. Many thinkers out there who drive men astray with a provocative attitude, but that really drive you away from the heart.

- - - Updated - - -

The path to truth is very simple.
Personnally, I like to explore philosophies, and various ways, but fasting has always brought me back to the main path. Many thinkers out there who drive men astray with a provocative attitude, but that really drive you away from the heart.

[eesa the kiwi]

Greetings,



I read the first chapter, on which the rest of the book seems to be based. From the writing style I presume it is aimed at children or teens. The author begins by attempting to get the reader onside with a guilt trip. The second page begins with a misuse of the term 'universals', and then continues with a rendition of the famous argument from design. The author mentions the impossibility of an infinite regress of creators, apparently not noticing that this is fatal to the argument he is proposing.

I stopped reading at this point. Does it get any better?

Peace

I see your point about how it could be aimed at a younger audience but I think at least this way it has a more universal appeal whereas if it was stuffy and formal I think a lot of the target audience would be turned away

It does get a lot better. Why don't you read it and share your thoughts

- - - Updated - - -

Greetings,



I read the first chapter, on which the rest of the book seems to be based. From the writing style I presume it is aimed at children or teens. The author begins by attempting to get the reader onside with a guilt trip. The second page begins with a misuse of the term 'universals', and then continues with a rendition of the famous argument from design. The author mentions the impossibility of an infinite regress of creators, apparently not noticing that this is fatal to the argument he is proposing.

I stopped reading at this point. Does it get any better?

Peace

I see your point about how it could be aimed at a younger audience but I think at least this way it has a more universal appeal whereas if it was stuffy and formal I think a lot of the target audience would be turned away

It does get a lot better. Why don't you read it and share your thoughts

[czgibson]

Greetings,

It does get a lot better. Why don't you read it and share your thoughts

You appear to be telling me that the opening, the foundation on which the rest of the author's conceptual superstructure depends, is actually the weaker part of the book. Is that correct?

Peace

[eesa the kiwi]

Greetings,



You appear to be telling me that the opening, the foundation on which the rest of the author's conceptual superstructure depends, is actually the weaker part of the book. Is that correct?

Peace

No I'm not saying that at all. I'm saying the book gets better as you progress through it

[czgibson]

Greetings,

No I'm not saying that at all. I'm saying the book gets better as you progress through it

Well, his argument is basically dead by the end of chapter one. There really doesn't seem to be much point in reading any further, unless you're about to tell me he corrects all of his obvious mistakes later on?

Peace

[eesa the kiwi]

Bump

[eesa the kiwi]

Bump

[Abz2000]

,


...The author mentions the impossibility of an infinite regress of creators, apparently not noticing that this is fatal to the argument he is proposing.

I stopped reading at this point. Does it get any better?

Peace

From one of the recent lessons with the children, if there were an infinte chain of creators - every answer is no better than the previous answer - why do you think those who falsely reject God gave in and stopped thinking at the cleaving asunder ( "big bang" ) ? They might as well have falsely claimed that there was no cleaving asunder and that we just exist in the moment with nothing that took place before their parents' big bang and nothing to take place after other than their random cat and dog big bangs - something that the atheist capitalist compound usury dependent brave new world mindset chasing its own tail is devolving into - and that is fatal - as can be seen from the current and inevitable results by any who possesses a mind to think with.



Attachment 6505

https://www.islamicboard.com/attachm...achmentid=6505