Hi mediadave
Heh. Well, I know a lot of goths and no one I know is a satanist. Some people might call themselves that, but they're usually just anarchists and non-religious. And if there are real satanists, and they have satanist hymns, then that is the manner of their faith and is of no concern to me.
Yeah I agree, I think most satanist are just trying to provocate or shock people. I doubt anybody would willingly and knowingly prefer eternal ****ation. To me it seems more like a statement of disbelief, something among the lines of:
"Only a true atheist who doesn't believe in satan and eternal ****ation, would take such a risk." So by worshiping satan they offer the ultimate proof of not believing in him.
I don't believe you really can or should seperate those in some matters, particularly faith/ the divine.
I beg to differ, emotional motivations can easily be inaccurate. Take for example a rape victim hating all men. It's a very understandable reaction, but everybody, probably even the victim itself, knows the reaction is unfair towards all non-raping man. Now I do agree with you that you can't rule out emotions at all. Personal experience is crucial to religious choices, I know that very well. However, my claim is not that all emotional motives are illogical. Some might be logical, some might be neutral and some might be illogical. I'm going to assume you'll agree to me that illogical choices are bad. but no, my argument is not to bar emotions completely. My argument is to be extra careful with them, because people are more prone to illogical decisions when acting emotionally. When dealing with music in specific, it's even more dangerous, because I 'm inclined to think that the majority of the population is unaware of the full effect of music, and minimalize the illogical thoughts triggered by it.
A charismatic speaker can do so with even more ease.
True! The difference though, is that such a speaker can easily be refuted by the witty among us. People will much sooner accept that the speaker is flawed when you point out these flaws. That is because an arguments, brings out the logical part of the brain, so people will use their logic to judge it. Music on the other hand brings out the emotional part of the brain, and people will tend to judge it by that. Therefor I argue that music can be more deceitful as opposed to charismatic speech.
Hi tornado
If I don't have evidence, I can only hope that such a wife wasn't cheating on me so you can never say she isn't cheating on me. Light going off? That's completely different. We know why it goes off. I believe without proof? Not really. I actually see zero evidence. Not wanted to believe? Of course I want to believe. Of course going to heaven and living forever with people you love is enticing as opposed to dying off like rest of the animals.
Well I didn't intend for you to take my examples so literary. My point simply was that people accept things as true on a regular basis. It's true that you "could" prove the light of your fridge goes out; like by drilling a peep-hole. But have you ever done that? There could always have been a manufactural flaw, but most people just assume that the machine does what it's supposed to do, on good faith. however when it comes to religion the majority of people draw a line and suddenly become high demanding of proof.
Let my try an approach on a different angle to explain it. In search of truths, it's very wise for a person to be critical. The more you question and distrust, the lower the probability of being misguided. However criticism by itself, is no path to understanding and truth. It's only half the way. When people become extreme in critical attitude, we call that paranoia. And unlike a healthy critical attitude, which lead to wisdom, paranoia becomes an obstacle to wisdom! Nothing, but really not one single thing in this universe can be
truly proven. There is always a reservation, always a presumption, always an axiom, always reliance on observation and interpretation. As the mental disease progresses, and the patient becomes increasingly aware of this, eventually with nothing to trust and no certainties, all wisdom is forfeit. Now the reason I bring this up is, that many atheist have a tendency of being slightly paranoia when it comes to religion. A sort of double standard if I way, where religious ideas
need to be proven before given the benefit of the doubt, but where all other daily facts, like the light in the fridge going out are accepted on good faith.
Is that true, because that would be wonderful. Would I be O.K. if I'm a good person but maintain the position that god doesn't exist.
I'm unable to answer that. One person cannot judge another for a large variety of reasons.
(I don't know your intentions and influence by background. I can't read your thoughts, I'm not capable of weighing out good vs. bad deeds, I'm not responsible to judge you, I don't have authority to judge, and so on...) So there are no certainties. Being a Muslim doesn't guarantee heaven, and neither does being an atheist guarantee hell. So I really can't tell you, nor can any other Muslim for that matter. What I can tell you however, is that by becoming a Muslim, and holding on to the teachings you could increase your chances enormously. What I can also tell you, is that if you anticipate to defend yourself during judgment by saying:
"I wasn't able to believe because I wasn't convinced"; that such a response will not be accepted because it's flawed according to our belief as I previously explained.
Belief in religion is largely not our choice. It's a function of where you are born. Some, I bet a very small minority, actually convert.
Belief is always a choice. I'm willing to meet you halfway though, and accept that circumstances make it easier/harder. Each person will be judged by their own capabilities. So the following people will not be judged by the same standards:
- People out of isolated communities who have never even heard of Islamic teachings; like small tribes in Africa or South-America for example.
- People who heard of it, but have been fed a wrong image regarding the faith.
-People who have studied the religion in depth, but reject it due to personal preference.
Now obviously, an atheist out of one group is definitely not the same as an atheist out of another group. And since each person will be judged by their own capabilities, it is very plausible that they'll receive a different judgment.
(I know not, and Allah subhana wa ta'ala knows best.)
However to get back to the point, none of this means that there is no such thing as a choice. You seem to be arguing that there is no free will at all, and that these circumstances like place of birth, bring forth an inescapable causal predestination. If that is the case, you're welcome to bring new life in the threads about the existence of free will. But nevertheless, your argument against religion is still flawed by circularity since you rely on presumptions out of your own viewpoints like the absence of free will.