To those who ascribe themselves to Atheists...

[CosmicPathos]

Actually, these claims do not only make sense to Atheists in general. I find it quite amusing that you brought this topic up. These claims also make sense to every other religion that does not adhere to Islamic principles (save the other Abrahamic religions of course). For example, while an Atheist (and any rational person) will laugh at the notion of angels and demons (as interpreted by Islam)---so will a Hindu, Animist, various polytheist religions, etc.

Then there is a case of blatant special pleading that you have attempted to conveniently compare with the analogy of the baby and the bathwater. You have no empirical evidence for an angel or a demon (various creatures such as unicorns and leprechauns are ironically more probable than something that can not be comprehended even in principle), Hindu's lack empirical evidence for Krishna or Vishnu. "Faith" is the only standard in which these may be measured by and so in the end it is a "my faith is better than your faith" argument which of course has no rational grounds attributed to it. You have faith that the illogical entities in your religion are real and Hindus similarly have faith in their own yet you attempt to explain that your own entities are real on the same basis that a Hindu (just one example religion btw) does. This is special pleading and it is not that Atheists categorize all absurdities to be non-existent, it is that all absurdities ARE non-existent as they all similarly lack evidence.

"That which can be asserted without evidence and be dismissed without evidence"
-Hitchens razor

Though, maybe Allah the almighty has not opened my heart yet and I am not able to understand, so please show me the way if I am misunderstanding. But, know that I was once a Muslim and a very religious one, so I am well acquainted with your own perspective as well as the one I have developed more recently.

Hey murtid zindeeq,

Actually, Hindus do believe in "demons." For example, refer to Raavan or other such "idols." "Demons" actually exist in Buddhism as well. Refer to Maara. Just throwing it out there to point the inaccuracies in your illogical claim.

Regarding the existence of angels, you have convinced your mind that it is illogical. Islam actually openly asserts that belief in angels and the jinn is a belief in the Unseen. Islam is openly saying that we dont have any material evidence of such things. Yet belief in such things is possible if one believes in the existence of a Creator.

you left Islam, thank God, good riddance.

p.s. your god poor hitchens is dying a despicable death. his "razor" is blunt.

 

[ThePhilosopher]

Reading and comprehension is your friend. I clearly stated "(as interpreted by Islam)".

No, I have not convinced my mind that it is illogical. I, like you, cannot stipulate a definition for a term. The very definition of illogical encompasses this "unseen" you speak of.
Anyways, you have not contributed anything to the argument that I was putting forward. Why are your angels and demons more believable than what Hinduism or any other religion puts forward if they are all based on faith?

I'm not so sure your Allah would be pleased that you are thanking him for an apostate. Then again, according to Islamic jurisprudence and Muhammad himself, I am to be killed.

 

[CosmicPathos]

Reading and comprehension is your friend. I clearly stated "(as interpreted by Islam)".

No, I have not convinced my mind that it is illogical. I, like you, cannot stipulate a definition for a term. The very definition of illogical encompasses this "unseen" you speak of.
Anyways, you have not contributed anything to the argument that I was putting forward. Why are your angels and demons more believable than what Hinduism or any other religion puts forward if they are all based on faith?

I'm not so sure your Allah would be pleased that you are thanking him for an apostate. Then again, according to Islamic jurisprudence and Muhammad himself, I am to be killed.

neither have you contributed anything significant to the thread. All you have asked is a question. Well I can ask you a question too. Why were your ancestors ape-like animals?

 

[Ramadhan]

Reading and comprehension is your friend.

apparently reading and comprehension are both your enemies.

Yahya wrote in plain words and very specific:

I made this post to give Qatada advice. I did not point fingers at any individual, specific people either on or off the board and I am not speaking to anyone else but Qatada: as such, I will not entertain any argument from anyone else here. Neither my hands nor my emotional state is up to the tedium of repeating the same debate we always have a twelfth time. Just save it.

Do you have that much trouble understanding very simple things?

I find it quite amusing that you brought this topic up. These claims also make sense to every other religion that does not adhere to Islamic principles (save the other Abrahamic religions of course). For example, while an Atheist (and any rational person) will laugh at the notion of angels and demons (as interpreted by Islam)---so will a Hindu, Animist, various polytheist religions, etc.

Yahya did not even mention angels and demons. Stop clutching on strawman.

You have no empirical evidence for an angel or a demon (various creatures such as unicorns and leprechauns are ironically more probable than something that can not be comprehended even in principle),

Then show us how unicorns and leprechauns are more probable than angels and demons.

I will respond to your claim as an ex muslim:

But, know that I was once a Muslim and a very religious one, so I am well acquainted with your own perspective as well as the one I have developed more recently.

with your own words and belief:

"That which can be asserted without evidence and be dismissed without evidence" -Hitchens razor

 

[ThePhilosopher]

neither have you contributed anything significant to the thread. All you have asked is a question. Well I can ask you a question too. Why were your ancestors ape-like animals?

Actually, I showed you why your beliefs in illogical entities have the same basis of evidence as those of other religions. Then I asked how this case of special pleading can be explained. Though, I still have not gotten an answer.

Our ancestors were not "ape-like" creatures, they were "apes" just like we are apes. We are hominids. Really, this is a scientific fact backed up by mountains of evidence.

you got that right, hopefully you'll be killed off this forum too :statisfie though im inclined to think that you arent really an apostate but calming to be one for abit of attention-like, most Islam hate monger loosers....poor things, must not get enough attention at home. :nervous:

I think it is disgusting that you would encourage death for me due to the mere fact of wanting a different belief system than yourself. Even if you do dispute my right to a different belief system, I will not dispute your right.

I will admit, I do hate many concepts that Islam teaches and I hate many actions of the prophet, but I am not a hate monger and I respect everyone regardless of their religion.

Well, you may believe that I am an apostate or you may believe I am not. I was born in Kabul, Afghanistan. I came to Canada at the age of 3 and have lived here ever since. Islam was taught to me by my parents and I was a devout Muslim until I discarded the religion two years ago for reasons I will not discuss here (you are free to ask though). If you don't buy my story, it is ok.

Do you have that much trouble understanding very simple things?

I apologize, I thought that was not addressed to me as I am a new member and he would not have to repeat anything to me. Even so, this is a forum where people are free to engage in discussions and thus I put my point forward. If he does not want to answer, that is his choice.

Yahya did not even mention angels and demons. Stop clutching on strawman.

Actually, he specifically stated angels. Apparently, you do not know what a strawman fallacy is. I did not misrepresent Yahya's argument, my rebuttal is directly aimed at the point he was trying to make. Yayha was trying to explain that Atheists do not acknowledge a God or angels in the Quran because they compare it with other illogical entities from mythology (and im assuming other religions). If you read my argument, you would realize that I am directly responding to claims he made.

Then show us how unicorns and leprechauns are more probable than angels and demons.

I will respond to your claim as an ex muslim

I thought I was clear but I will reiterate for your sake. I am not in any way claiming that unicorns and leprechauns have any probability, just that when we are comparing it to entities that a. cannot be comprehended. b. do not exist in our dimension and c.has no precedence in which we may take, they become more probable due to the simple fact that they are entities that are based off real concepts. (i.e Unicorns based off horse.)
Though, this is beside the point as believing any over the other would be special pleading as I described before.

Honestly, it is of little importance if you believe I am an ex-Muslim or not. I already explained, and the only reason I stated I was one in the first place was so that all of you may assume I am well grounded when it comes to Islamic knowledge and refrain from trying to tell me the basics.

 

[Ramadhan]

I apologize, I thought that was not addressed to me as I am a new member and he would not have to repeat anything to me. Even so, this is a forum where people are free to engage in discussions and thus I put my point forward. If he does not want to answer, that is his choice.

Let me show you again his post, and this time I will underline the important words (just in case you misunderstand, again):

I made this post to give Qatada advice. I did not point fingers at any individual, specific people either on or off the board and I am not speaking to anyone else but Qatada: as such, I will not entertain any argument from anyone else here. Neither my hands nor my emotional state is up to the tedium of repeating the same debate we always have a twelfth time. Just save it.

As you infer even from this part alone that Yahya is currently suffering some sort of illnesses on his hand which prevent him from doing a lot of typing, and hence he requested no one to respond his post but Qatada.
And yet you, insisted on barraging him with your opinions, which I think is cowardice since you know he won't answer.

I did not misrepresent Yahya's argument, my rebuttal is directly aimed at the point he was trying to make. Yayha was trying to explain that Atheists do not acknowledge a God or angels in the Quran because they compare it with other illogical entities from mythology (and im assuming other religions). If you read my argument, you would realize that I am directly responding to claims he made.

While knowing full well that he won't be able respond to you because of his affliction?
Only yahya fully knows what he meant by his points, so you cannot expect anyone else to fully engage with on your rebuttal to his points.

I am not in any way claiming that unicorns and leprechauns have any probability, just that when we are comparing it to entities that a. cannot be comprehended. b. do not exist in our dimension and c.has no precedence in which we may take, they become more probable due to the simple fact that they are entities that are based off real concepts. (i.e Unicorns based off horse.)

No, you have not shown exactly how something that are based off real concepts are more probable than something outside our comprehension.
Does this mean that Ganesh, zeus, leprecahuns, spgahetti monster are more probable than God as the creator of everything?

Honestly, it is of little importance if you believe I am an ex-Muslim or not. I already explained, and the only reason I stated I was one in the first place was so that all of you may assume I am well grounded when it comes to Islamic knowledge and refrain from trying to tell me the basics.

I thought as an atheist you always require hard physical evidence for something that we can believe in? Otherwise you discard those?
I am only playing by your own rule.

 

[ThePhilosopher]

No actually as a new member I was not aware that he was suffering an illness that prevented him from typing. In that case I do apologize and I sincerely hope that his illness may pass.

Though, I think it is cowardice on your part that you are refusing to answer my questions. He is not able to answer, so I will direct them towards you.

"that are based off real concepts are more probable than something outside our comprehension"

I think that just proved my point. Yes, all of those are just as probable if not more than God being the creator of anything because similarly none have any evidence to back up the claim. Unless you claim that there is evidence for God being the creator of everything. If so, pray tell.

Again, being an ex-Muslim or not is beside the point, I dont care if you do not believe me.

 

[Ramadhan]

I think that just proved my point. Yes, all of those are just as probable if not more than God being the creator of anything because similarly none have any evidence to back up the claim

You keep saying they are more probable, but have not shown exactly how.

 

[CosmicPathos]

Actually, I showed you why your beliefs in illogical entities have the same basis of evidence as those of other religions. Then I asked how this case of special pleading can be explained. Though, I still have not gotten an answer.

Our ancestors were not "ape-like" creatures, they were "apes" just like we are apes. We are hominids. Really, this is a scientific fact backed up by mountains of evidence.



I think it is disgusting that you would encourage death for me due to the mere fact of wanting a different belief system than yourself. Even if you do dispute my right to a different belief system, I will not dispute your right.

I will admit, I do hate many concepts that Islam teaches and I hate many actions of the prophet, but I am not a hate monger and I respect everyone regardless of their religion.

Well, you may believe that I am an apostate or you may believe I am not. I was born in Kabul, Afghanistan. I came to Canada at the age of 3 and have lived here ever since. Islam was taught to me by my parents and I was a devout Muslim until I discarded the religion two years ago for reasons I will not discuss here (you are free to ask though). If you don't buy my story, it is ok.



I apologize, I thought that was not addressed to me as I am a new member and he would not have to repeat anything to me. Even so, this is a forum where people are free to engage in discussions and thus I put my point forward. If he does not want to answer, that is his choice.



Actually, he specifically stated angels. Apparently, you do not know what a strawman fallacy is. I did not misrepresent Yahya's argument, my rebuttal is directly aimed at the point he was trying to make. Yayha was trying to explain that Atheists do not acknowledge a God or angels in the Quran because they compare it with other illogical entities from mythology (and im assuming other religions). If you read my argument, you would realize that I am directly responding to claims he made.



I thought I was clear but I will reiterate for your sake. I am not in any way claiming that unicorns and leprechauns have any probability, just that when we are comparing it to entities that a. cannot be comprehended. b. do not exist in our dimension and c.has no precedence in which we may take, they become more probable due to the simple fact that they are entities that are based off real concepts. (i.e Unicorns based off horse.)
Though, this is beside the point as believing any over the other would be special pleading as I described before.

Honestly, it is of little importance if you believe I am an ex-Muslim or not. I already explained, and the only reason I stated I was one in the first place was so that all of you may assume I am well grounded when it comes to Islamic knowledge and refrain from trying to tell me the basics.

well many afghanis come to canada as refugees, are you one? You remind of this crazy kabuli dude from youtube named zulfitareen, I hope its not him, if it is, then you need to get a big huge boot on your head on these forums too.

When you say that your ancestors were apes, not ape-like, you have committed a scientific blunder. Apes are an offshoot of a common ape-like ancestor, just like humans are. I do not know the tree in details but I do know that the branch through which Homo sapeins evolved separated from the branch that gave rise to the Great apes a long time ago. And the common ancestor was certainly not ape, but rather an ape-like creature. Yes, I think you need to acquaint yourself more with your own myths and ideas.

For hindus believing in their crap, what evidence do they have for their myths? The evidence for the "myths" of Quran is Quran itself. Quran is a divine book, if you can produce any Arabic text like the Quran, I will admit that the stories of angels and jinns in Quran are also made up by Muhammad pbuh, just like the stories of Hindu myths in their scriptures. Secondly, the stories of myths in Hindu scriptures were written by sages and rischis, they never claimed it was a revelation from God. Rather they themselves claim its an inspired word. Inspired word is human.

Regarding unicorns being more real than angels, are you an idiot? Unicorns are a man-made conception, an artistic tangent of a fool who thought that horses with horns might make good myths. So some idiot came up with a concept of unicorns, it is based on the existence of horses. While the concept of angels is not based on any created material thing that a human being can see. So comparing angels with unicorns is like comparing two entirely different things.

 

[Ali Mujahidin]

This a direct question to ThePhilosopher. Before we can go any further with this discussion, please consider the following:

1. The Merriam-Webster defines an atheist as one who believes that there is no deity.
2. The Oxford English Dictionary defines atheism as disbelief in, or denial of, the existence of a god.

I would like to know if ThePhilosopher describes himself as an atheist according the above-mentioned definitions.

 

[ThePhilosopher]

well many afghanis come to canada as refugees, are you one? You remind of this crazy kabuli dude from youtube named zulfitareen, I hope its not him, if it is, then you need to get a big huge boot on your head on these forums too.

No, rest assured I am not him. You wanting to exhibit violence on him leads me to believe he has disrespected you. As you may be able to tell by what I have posted so far, I mean no disrespect to anyone and have not expressed anything that is blatantly disrespectful.

When you say that your ancestors were apes, not ape-like, you have committed a scientific blunder. Apes are an offshoot of a common ape-like ancestor, just like humans are. I do not know the tree in details but I do know that the branch through which Homo sapeins evolved separated from the branch that gave rise to the Great apes a long time ago. And the common ancestor was certainly not ape, but rather an ape-like creature. Yes, I think you need to acquaint yourself more with your own myths and ideas.

No, we are part of the Great apes.

The Hominidae (anglicized hominids, also known as great apes), as the term is used here, form a taxonomic family, including four extant genera: chimpanzees, gorillas, humans, and orangutans. In the past, the term was used in the more restricted sense of humans and relatives of humans closer than chimpanzees.

Wiki.

For hindus believing in their crap, what evidence do they have for their myths? The evidence for the "myths" of Quran is Quran itself. Quran is a divine book, if you can produce any Arabic text like the Quran, I will admit that the stories of angels and jinns in Quran are also made up by Muhammad pbuh, just like the stories of Hindu myths in their scriptures. Secondly, the stories of myths in Hindu scriptures were written by sages and rischis, they never claimed it was a revelation from God. Rather they themselves claim its an inspired word. Inspired word is human.

I am not so sure the Quran itself would be logical evidence for a divine creator.
Your argument is:

P1 Quran is a perfect book that cannot have been written by man in the 7th century. (Including Science and linguistics)

Therefore,

C2 The Quran is from God

Firstly, not only is the Science and linguistics being "perfect" debatable but even assuming it was perfect, you still have "assume" that it from a divine creator. Man being knowledgeable enough to write it at the time, aliens being responsible for its construction, time travelers writing it, etc are all more probable than a non-existent-existent being, being responsible.

Secondly, there is no evidence for God in the first place.

Thirdly, similar claims can be made.

P1 Humans did not have the knowledge to create the great Pyramid during the time period it was created

Therefore,

C2 An Egyptian god(s) was responsible or they were guided by those said god(s)

P1 Humans did not have the knowledge to create the Antikythera mechanism in 200 BC

Therefore,

C2 The Greeks were divinely guided

Regarding unicorns being more real than angels, are you an idiot? Unicorns are a man-made conception, an artistic tangent of a fool who thought that horses with horns might make good myths. So some idiot came up with a concept of unicorns, it is based on the existence of horses. While the concept of angels is not based on any created material thing that a human being can see. So comparing angels with unicorns is like comparing two entirely different things.

In regards to it being a man-made conception, the same can be said for the Quran and the various entities that are said to exist within it. Except, that someone made it to be able to control people instead of conceptual mythology. The concept of angels not being based on anything that is real is what makes it less probable.

This a direct question to ThePhilosopher. Before we can go any further with this discussion, please consider the following:

1. The Merriam-Webster defines an atheist as one who believes that there is no deity.
2. The Oxford English Dictionary defines atheism as disbelief in, or denial of, the existence of a god.

I would like to know if ThePhilosopher describes himself as an atheist according the above-mentioned definitions.

I do not believe in a God. I do not claim that a God does not exist for I do not have the knowledge to make such a claim. Though, due to the absence of evidence for a God, I do not believe in one.

 

[Ramadhan]

No, rest assured I am not him. You wanting to exhibit violence on him leads me to believe he has disrespected you. As you may be able to tell by what I have posted so far, I mean no disrespect to anyone and have not expressed anything that is blatantly disrespectful.

Oh really?
Maybe you use far lower standard of respect that common sense dictate. In your 13 posts only so far you have made:
First, you responded to and started arguing with someone who respectfully and specifically asked that no one respond to his post.
Second, you started arguing a point that a muslim made in a thread, which by the title of the thread, intended for muslims only.

 

[Woodrow]

To Everybody who is active on this thread:

The thread has been woken up. Please stay on topic and direct all replies to the topic, not the the character of, nor your opinion of the person posting.

 

[Ali Mujahidin]

As salaam mualaikum.

Let me share a little story.

Once upon a time, there was a room. The room was so high that when you looked up, you cannot even see where the ceiling was. The room was also so wide and long that when you look around, you could not even see where the walls were.

In the room, there were many balls. Some were big and some were small. Some were even very big and some were really very small. The balls were in all kinds of colors. There were balls all over the place. Some balls were on the floor. Some were bouncing up and down. There were also some balls floating in the air. Some balls were moving around. Other balls were just sitting there not going anywhere.

In the room, there was a man. Not a very big man but he was definitely very full of himself. Imagine Rumpelstiltskin in a suit and tie, and you would have this man down pat. This man called himself, A the Ist. The way he said his name, it sounded like he was announcing the presence of Alexander the Great or Arthur the son of Uther or some other grand-sounding title like that.

A the Ist looked at the balls. He picked one up and threw it into the air. The ball promptly fell to the ground again.

"Aha!" declared A the Ist, "What goes up must come down."

He did not bother to look at some of the balls which were floating in the air. To A the Ist, it was sufficient that he had just proven that whatever went up must come down and therefor it must be the truth.

A the Ist picked up another ball. He threw it to the ground. The ball bounced right back up.

"Aha!" he declared, "Every cause has an equal and opposite effect."

He picked up another ball and threw that to the ground, too. The ball hit the ground and stayed right there.

"Aha!" he declared, "The exception proved the rule."

It's going to a long story but I think you should get the general drift by now. Insha Allah.

 

[Ramadhan]

^
Me likes this.
It is a refreshing and intelligent take on the thought process of atheists.

 

[Ummu Sufyaan]

I think it is disgusting that you would encourage death for me due to the mere fact of wanting a different belief system than yourself.

i didnt say i wanted you dead. YOU have assumed that. and i certainly haven't said that i wanted you dead because of different belief system that you hold other then mine. YOU have assumed that.

Even if you do dispute my right to a different belief system, I will not dispute your right.

though you are more than happy to attack my belief? oh let me guess, you're just asking questions, right?

I will admit, I do hate many concepts that Islam teaches and I hate many actions of the prophet, but I am not a hate monger and I respect everyone regardless of their religion.

so far you have demonstrated otherwise :><:

 

[Pygoscelis]

I was going to stay out of this thread after my last post, but this needs a reply

First, you responded to and started arguing with someone who respectfully and specifically asked that no one respond to his post.
Second, you started arguing a point that a muslim made in a thread, which by the title of the thread, intended for muslims only.

1. People should not be posting if they do not want people to respond to them. They should be using private messages or not be posting. This is a public board. People will respond.

2. The title of the thread specifically and explicitly invites atheists and is posted in the comparative religion section. You may have a point had this been a thread in a muslim fellowship section of the board.

 

[Pygoscelis]

As salaam mualaikum.

Let me share a little story.

Once upon a time, there was a room. The room was so high that when you looked up, you cannot even see where the ceiling was. The room was also so wide and long that when you look around, you could not even see where the walls were.

In the room, there were many balls. Some were big and some were small. Some were even very big and some were really very small. The balls were in all kinds of colors. There were balls all over the place. Some balls were on the floor. Some were bouncing up and down. There were also some balls floating in the air. Some balls were moving around. Other balls were just sitting there not going anywhere.

In the room, there was a man. Not a very big man but he was definitely very full of himself. Imagine Rumpelstiltskin in a suit and tie, and you would have this man down pat. This man called himself, A the Ist. The way he said his name, it sounded like he was announcing the presence of Alexander the Great or Arthur the son of Uther or some other grand-sounding title like that.

A the Ist looked at the balls. He picked one up and threw it into the air. The ball promptly fell to the ground again.

"Aha!" declared A the Ist, "What goes up must come down."

He did not bother to look at some of the balls which were floating in the air. To A the Ist, it was sufficient that he had just proven that whatever went up must come down and therefor it must be the truth.

A the Ist picked up another ball. He threw it to the ground. The ball bounced right back up.

"Aha!" he declared, "Every cause has an equal and opposite effect."

He picked up another ball and threw that to the ground, too. The ball hit the ground and stayed right there.

"Aha!" he declared, "The exception proved the rule."

It's going to a long story but I think you should get the general drift by now. Insha Allah.

Now picture this Ist guy writing down the claims he made above and leaving the paper on the floor when he leaves, along with some other claims he just made up based on how he feels that day.

A second guy enters the room and finds the message. He does not test anything. He has faith in the message. It must be true because he really likes it and thinks it very poetic and beautifully written, and that it is written perfectly.

Now picture a third guy enters the room. The second guy tells the third guy about the great revelation he had and shows him the paper. The third guy tells him he just sees a piece of paper and that he doesn't take what is written on authority and instead he goes on to do some thorough testing of the balls in the room, forming theories as he goes. He tests them repeatedly and replaces them when he finds new evidence. Over time his theories become more and more robust and the claims on the paper still carry little or no evidence.

Then as more people enter the room the guy with the piece of paper waves it frantically and demands equal time and equal attention and respect be paid to his "revelation" as is paid to the other guy's "science".

Is that where your story was going?

 

[Ramadhan]

1. People should not be posting if they do not want people to respond to them. They should be using private messages or not be posting. This is a public board. People will respond.

Per usual, without checking all the facts, you are making assumptions, which in light of things make you look like a fool.
I was alluding to him about a very specific post where the writer asked clearly and politely that his post was intended for one person only as he was still suffering from from some illness. Even thephilosopher apologized.

. The title of the thread specifically and explicitly invites atheists and is posted in the comparative religion section. You may have a point had this been a thread in a muslim fellowship section of the board.

Huh?
Are you really that ignorant or just dense?
anyone who have been reading my exchange of posts with thephilosopher in the last week would know right away that the thread that I was alluding is not this thread, but the thread of "Why do know Islam is the truth" in the general section where he was making a lot of mess and being extremely rude, before his posts were cleaned up by the mods.

Again, stop being so tribal, and start learning one things or two.
(I like using the word that you have often used to accuse some muslims here)

 

[Lynx]

As salaam mualaikum.

Let me share a little story.

Once upon a time, there was a room. The room was so high that when you looked up, you cannot even see where the ceiling was. The room was also so wide and long that when you look around, you could not even see where the walls were.

In the room, there were many balls. Some were big and some were small. Some were even very big and some were really very small. The balls were in all kinds of colors. There were balls all over the place. Some balls were on the floor. Some were bouncing up and down. There were also some balls floating in the air. Some balls were moving around. Other balls were just sitting there not going anywhere.

In the room, there was a man. Not a very big man but he was definitely very full of himself. Imagine Rumpelstiltskin in a suit and tie, and you would have this man down pat. This man called himself, A the Ist. The way he said his name, it sounded like he was announcing the presence of Alexander the Great or Arthur the son of Uther or some other grand-sounding title like that.

A the Ist looked at the balls. He picked one up and threw it into the air. The ball promptly fell to the ground again.

"Aha!" declared A the Ist, "What goes up must come down."

He did not bother to look at some of the balls which were floating in the air. To A the Ist, it was sufficient that he had just proven that whatever went up must come down and therefor it must be the truth.

A the Ist picked up another ball. He threw it to the ground. The ball bounced right back up.

"Aha!" he declared, "Every cause has an equal and opposite effect."

He picked up another ball and threw that to the ground, too. The ball hit the ground and stayed right there.

"Aha!" he declared, "The exception proved the rule."

It's going to a long story but I think you should get the general drift by now. Insha Allah.

Interesting story. I often find religious people drawing conclusions without ever considering the 'big picture'. When a piece of evidence or some sort of reasoning is shown to contradict their conclusions, instead of abandoning their conclusions or re-examining the premises from which their conclusion was drawn, they try to fit their original conclusions with contradictory data. The result is a truly messy world-view. So good story