To muslims are atheists worse than other theists?

[Whatsthepoint]

Did you know science owes its entire existance to the muslims, off course you dont!!! LOL

Do you know why you dont know?

Because it's false. Resigned only deals with real stuff.

 

[Skavau]

and thats really wrong, that means you can murder, steal, drink, cuss at your own tally, and still make it to heavan

This indicates that you obviously have not been reading or understanding anything I have said. Anyone can murder, steal, drink and swear as much as they like in reality. The good news of course is simply that most of humanity choose to assert moral standards. Your moral standards of course, come from Islam because it is your lifestyle. My moral standards come from ethical schools of thought such as Libertarianism, Negative Utilitarianism and Kantian thought and not from Atheism because Atheism does not assert any ethical beliefs. It is silent on the question of morality. Of course, my own conscience also plays a role in shaping my reactions.

Atheism in and of itself is not anything other than the lack of belief in a God. Why is this so hard for you to grasp? It is a simple concept.

if you even have a heavan in ur religion.

Atheism is not a religion and I do not believe in heaven.

its too sick tho...oh and there was something in the news showing a guy who is only 18 and he died, (he listened to music, never prayed, etc), then after only 3 hours his parent wanted to know what he died from, so the people went and unburied him, (when they buried him he was perfectly normal) and then when they unburied him, his eyes were all messed up and sick, same with his mouth and nose and his entire body was BLACK and smoking... staghfirallah al atheem...

Presuming the above is true, so?

do you know how funny athiests sound...no offence... no sins, no heavan, no hell, no punishments, no rewards, no god... what is there???

This indicates exactly that you do not have the slightest clue as to why people are Atheist. In fact, you are thriving in your ignorance. Atheism is a conclusion on reality based on observation of natural phenomena. It is a conclusion which asserts there is no God or no evidence/reason to suppose God.

Atheists do not suppose anything supernatural such as heaven and hell. There is however, reality.

yeah? and what if when "death" comes then allah will punish you and you regret it and its too late??

What if Thor or Zeus punish you at death?

well you can enjoy your ETERNAL LIFE after this unbelievably short life... your choice Heavan or HELL

Actually, if your world view is true - then there is no choice.

Did you know science owes its entire existance to the muslims, off course you dont!!! LOL

The above of course is either a gross error or a deliberate lie. Either way it remains utter nonsense.

Its sick, becuase you belive in a concept called survival of the fittest, weak should be elimited, there is no such thing as justice.

You obviously do not understand the naturalistic fallacy. Just because survival of the fittest exists, does not mean it ought to be so.

Moreover, what you describe is Social Darwinism.

 

[czgibson]

Greetings,

Cz, why must a religion have a dogma, a heaven or hell, a church,candles, a symbol, a big central vatican or kaaba or even fixed scriptures?

I'm not sure whether it does. The definition of 'religion' is notoriously difficult. However, atheism is a metaphysical belief in a single proposition: There is no god (or are no gods). Does that count as a faith-position? Yes. Is it a religion? I suppose it depends on your definition.

Not to streach the point, because it's a minor one really, but your religion is the relationship you have with a creator.
Weather that be worshiping a creator you think your in touch with, Looking for a creator in all the usual places and drawing blanks then continuing the search, or denying the existance of a creator completly. Thats your religion.

I'm not sure how this would apply to a religion like Buddhism, where, as far as I know, the creator of the universe does not play a central role.

On a different note, can I comment on the "debate" that is running at the moment in this thread? I don't mean to interrupt, but things seem to be going nowhere. Until certain posters are willing to read and think carefully about the responses of other members, I don't really see how any progress can be made.

Peace

 

[kay106]

here is a natural law:

http://www.ezsoftech.com/hajj/hajj10.asp


to me it seems worthless arguing with you people, all youse doo chuck nonsense. if you have proove something proove it, but you will turn around and say theres no such thing as proof, only evidence and reasoning. Isn't this the definition of proof? And you know thats exactly what mean, but all you are trying to do is twist a few words around to say i am wrong, see what mean about u guys? All you are really doing is twisting your own head around. use your reason! Someone here said, that isn't god harsher than your assumption of the law of survival of the fittest, but are you forgetting all the needs you have which are being provided for, do you recognise the source, who is proding you all of that? therefore natural disastors to you type of people, obviously you deserve it! its a warning! use your brain! If you guys keep chucking nonsense I am out of here.

 

[The_Prince]

Christians are much better than Atheists no doubt. at least they believe in God!

and i find atheists to be so arrogant and rude, i mean go around youtube and full of popular atheists are there, and all they do is mock, insult, and make fun of theists without disproving anything. they go like:

"you believe in God?" HAHAHAHA"

thats their argument, as if religion is simply false for believing in God!

atheists are hypocrites too, nagging about how religous ppl hate freedom etc yet atheists openly say they want to ban religion, and that everyone should accept evolution or their stupid.

 

[czgibson]

Greetings Kay,

to me it seems worthless arguing with you people, all youse doo chuck nonsense. if you have proove something proove it, but you will turn around and say theres no such thing as proof, only evidence and reasoning. Isn't this the definition of proof? And you know thats exactly what mean, but all you are trying to do is twist a few words around to say i am wrong, see what mean about u guys? All you are really doing is twisting your own head around. use your reason! Someone here said, that isn't god harsher than your assumption of the law of survival of the fittest, but are you forgetting all the needs you have which are being provided for, do you recognise the source, who is proding you all of that? therefore natural disastors to you type of people, obviously you deserve it! its a warning! use your brain! If you guys keep chucking nonsense I am out of here.

One more time, just for you. I'll put it in big letters if it helps:

On a different note, can I comment on the "debate" that is running at the moment in this thread? I don't mean to interrupt, but things seem to be going nowhere. Until certain posters are willing to read and think carefully about the responses of other members, I don't really see how any progress can be made.

Also, you might find that insulting people makes them less willing to discuss things with you. If you want to have a debate, then go ahead, but if you just want to insult people then you should probably take it elsewhere.

Peace

 

[Skavau]

to me it seems worthless arguing with you people, all youse doo chuck nonsense.

So why don't you leave the Comparative Religion subforum? What do you expect? Everyone to agree with you?

if you have proove something proove it, but you will turn around and say theres no such thing as proof, only evidence and reasoning.

That is because there is no such thing as proof. Call it pedantic, but I like to point it out.

Isn't this the definition of proof?

No. Proof is different to evidence. Evidence is the application of things used to show how a specific truth claim is the case. Proof is without doubt and completely and utterly true unquestionably.

It is impossible to reach the status of proving anything.

All you are really doing is twisting your own head around. use your reason!

I do, thanks.

Someone here said, that isn't god harsher than your assumption of the law of survival of the fittest, but are you forgetting all the needs you have which are being provided for, do you recognise the source, who is proding you all of that?

There is no evidence for your insinuation that all our needs are being provided by God.

therefore natural disastors to you type of people, obviously you deserve it!

How did we get onto natural disasters precisely? I personally find it sickening for a start however that you would invoke this path of thought.

its a warning! use your brain! If you guys keep chucking nonsense I am out of here.

Warning of what? There is no consistency on the impact of natural disasters in the slightest to come close to concluding that they are directed by a God. Natural disasters impact all races, religions and culture indiscriminately. I find arguments that invoke natural disasters a God's will as sickening arguments that portray God as a bloodthirsty, egotistical, spiteful tyrant.

 

[Skavau]

Christians are much better than Atheists no doubt. at least they believe in God!

What makes that good?

and i find atheists to be so arrogant and rude

Pot, meet kettle.

, i mean go around youtube and full of popular atheists are there, and all they do is mock, insult, and make fun of theists without disproving anything. they go like:

"you believe in God?" HAHAHAHA"

Some Atheists might do that. I am not one of them.

thats their argument, as if religion is simply false for believing in God!

It might be the argument of some Atheists. Not me, however.

atheists are hypocrites too, nagging about how religous ppl hate freedom etc yet atheists openly say they want to ban religion, and that everyone should accept evolution or their stupid.

Where do Atheists say that religion should be banned? Show me that the majority of Atheists say that.

 

[Pygoscelis]

If you guys keep chucking nonsense I am out of here.

That may not be such a bad thing. Go back and read your own posts. You have done little but put out bold assertions and then call people stupid and foolish and other names when they disagree with said bold assertions. You've also apparently not read or thought about what people have posted.

I started this thread SPECIFICALLY to avoid this type of trolling and bickering. But you do seem to have proven what I was wondering about to be true. You do seem to be more threatened by non-believers than believers in other Gods, it shows in how you are addressing us.

 

[kay106]

You don't believe in survival of the fittest?

So you believe that nonprofitable corporations are just as likely to survive as profitable ones? Or that a tiny lobster has just as much of a chance to win a fight against a giant lobster?

Survival of the fittest is a factual description of what happens in the world. It's not a moral precept.


Really? I wasn't aware any atheists on this board held this belief. Can you please support your absurd accusation?


Of course I believe in justice. I'm sure even the so-called nihlist atheists on this board believe in justice, at minumum as a legal concept.

We don't believe that there's an invisible spirit who will punish people we don't like after they die, but I don't see why this is "sick."


What invasions are you referring to? Iraq? Every atheist I know is opposed to the Iraq War. Nonreligious people overwhelmingly supported Gore and Kerry over Bush and his neocon cronies.

If you're going to make claims like these, either support them or have the intellectual courage to admit you're wrong.

If I am wrong I will admit i am not, i wouldnt try to twise words around like a lot u guys, I admit I could be wrong about all you guys not believing in justice. Happy?
Can you prove to me that survival of the fittest is a natural law? Are you ready to face the truth and accept it? do you have the intellectual courage to say you were wrong?

 

[kay106]

So why don't you leave the Comparative Religion subforum? What do you expect? Everyone to agree with you?


That is because there is no such thing as proof. Call it pedantic, but I like to point it out.


No. Proof is different to evidence. Evidence is the application of things used to show how a specific truth claim is the case. Proof is without doubt and completely and utterly true unquestionably.

It is impossible to reach the status of proving anything.


I do, thanks.


There is no evidence for your insinuation that all our needs are being provided by God.


How did we get onto natural disasters precisely? I personally find it sickening for a start however that you would invoke this path of thought.


Warning of what? There is no consistency on the impact of natural disasters in the slightest to come close to concluding that they are directed by a God. Natural disasters impact all races, religions and culture indiscriminately. I find arguments that invoke natural disasters a God's will as sickening arguments that portray God as a bloodthirsty, egotistical, spiteful tyrant.

Where are your sources of your definition of proof and evidence?

 

[kay106]

Greetings Kay,


One more time, just for you. I'll put it in big letters if it helps:

On a different note, can I comment on the "debate" that is running at the moment in this thread? I don't mean to interrupt, but things seem to be going nowhere. Until certain posters are willing to read and think carefully about the responses of other members, I don't really see how any progress can be made.

Also, you might find that insulting people makes them less willing to discuss things with you. If you want to have a debate, then go ahead, but if you just want to insult people then you should probably take it elsewhere.

Peace

What do you want? What did I not think carefully about? I am being honest about the way I feel, if I am wrong proove me wrong, if you can I will accept it, I do give arguments every chance they deserve!

 

[kay106]

Greetings Kay,


One more time, just for you. I'll put it in big letters if it helps:

On a different note, can I comment on the "debate" that is running at the moment in this thread? I don't mean to interrupt, but things seem to be going nowhere. Until certain posters are willing to read and think carefully about the responses of other members, I don't really see how any progress can be made.

Also, you might find that insulting people makes them less willing to discuss things with you. If you want to have a debate, then go ahead, but if you just want to insult people then you should probably take it elsewhere.

Peace

I think you need to re-read all my posts and think carefully about what I have said, I think you are getting the wrong end of the stick! Read it carefully tell me where I am going wrong, make sure you have your proof, in other words the make sure u have the statements i made, tell me what you think i have said, then i will clarifiy for you.

 

[barney]

Did you know science owes its entire existance to the muslims, off course you dont!!! LOL

oooookay. Thought we might need an example of something that you diddnt carefully think about.

 

[kay106]

Again I have to ask you to reread my post. None of these claims are mine, as I made clear by stating that they are the ideas of others. How did you miss that?

are you admitting that this claim is not true? The claim about monkeys and us having common ancestors?

 

[barney]

are you admitting that this claim is not true? The claim about monkeys and us having common ancestors?

Thats a theory. All the evidence points towards it. I'm sure Py or anyone else would not "Know" it was "True" in the same way a theist knows the truth.

 

[Pygoscelis]

are you admitting that this claim is not true? The claim about monkeys and us having common ancestors?

I don't know one way or the other. Nobody does for sure.

It does seem to fit the evidence that we have so far though.

 

[Qingu]

If I am wrong I will admit i am not, i wouldnt try to twise words around like a lot u guys,

Why do you keep on accusing us of doing things nobody is actually doing? It's very disrespectful.

I admit I could be wrong about all you guys not believing in justice. Happy?

Yes.

Can you prove to me that survival of the fittest is a natural law?

It's essentially a truism. I don't even understand on what basis you would even debate it. I've never actually met someone who didn't believe in the concept of "survival of the fittest."

But if all you're trying to say here is that "survival of the fittest" should not be a moral precept: that's fine, and I think you'll find that most atheists agree with you. Moral laws do not necessarily follow from natural observations.

Are you ready to face the truth and accept it? do you have the intellectual courage to say you were wrong?

Well, I certainly hope I do!

 

[barney]

To prove that survival of the fittest is a natural law, just do the research yourself.

Knowing about survival of the fittest dosnt mean the abcence of a creator, however it does prove that the Scriptures are flawed and therefore either mistaken or fake.

 

[Qingu]

To prove that survival of the fittest is a natural law, just do the research yourself.

I don't even think there's anything to research. Like I said, it's a truism. If two entities are struggling against each other—whether it's lobsters, chimpanzees, or multinational corporations, whichever one emerges the victor is usually defined as the "fittest."

The trick here is that "fittest" has no objective qualities and is largely dependent on the environment. For example, penguins vs. puffins.

Both birds eat fish and can dive underwater. Puffins can fly, but penguins can dive further and survive harsher cold. Which species is more "fit"—that is, which species will survive more? Well, it depends where they live. In the Antarctic penguins will survive much more than puffins. Elsewhere, puffins' ability to fly will help them survive more. Their "fitness" is determined by their environment.

Similarly, imagine two corporations: Bob's Bacon, Inc., and Faram's Falafels. Which corporation is more "fit"? It depends where you're talking about. In America, Bob's Bacon is probably going to make more money than Faram's Falafels. In Saudi Arabia, the opposite is true.

I hope that helps you understand what "survival of the fittest" means.