Author |
Share Topic Topic Search Topic Options
|
Guests
Guest
|
Quote Reply
Topic: Prove your god's existence. Posted: 11-Nov-2006 at 21:53 |
I agree!
Agostics divide peoples in to cathegory: (1) the ones that pretends a knowledge, and (2) the ones that don't know.
That's why Agnostics see Religious and Atheistics as the two sides of the same coin. Both pretending they know something they don't
Therefore, Agnostics feel pitty for both
Pinguin
|
|
Emperor Barbarossa
Caliph
Joined: 15-Jul-2005
Location: Pittsburgh, USA
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2888
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 11-Nov-2006 at 22:33 |
Originally posted by pinguin
I agree!
Agostics divide peoples in to cathegory: (1) the ones that pretends a knowledge, and (2) the ones that don't know.
That's why Agnostics see Religious and Atheistics as the two sides of the same coin. Both pretending they know something they don't
Therefore, Agnostics feel pitty for both
Pinguin |
As an agnostic, I agree with you. I believe the term used to define atheists and theists is in a way "dogmatic", because you do have to accept the existance of a creator(s) or accept the non-existance of a creator(s).
|
|
|
Omar al Hashim
King
Suspended
Joined: 05-Jan-2006
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 5697
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 11-Nov-2006 at 23:15 |
Atheism is just another religion, and a highly missionary one at that.
Originally posted by Paul
I've always thought agnostic are allies to religious believers and enemies of athiests |
Your dividing the world up into theists and atheists. Thats completely
wrong. Everyone knows that the world is divided up into muslims and
non-muslims!
Alright Bulgarian, while I want to make sure you understand I'm not
trying to change your beliefs, I'm going to go through and point out
the bits where you are so blatently wrong seeing as you've posted the
same stuff in two threads now. You need to understand that the athesist
can't use logic to confirm their beliefs either.
Originally posted by the Bulgarian
How is it that you know your religion is the right
one? (this was a question directed at a particular forumer). So many of
them exist. It's a gamble whether you'll be born in a Christian,
Jewish, Buddisst, etc. family |
Have you ever put in some time to study different religions? Just because there are many doesn't mean they are all wrong! Duh!
Let's say Allah is the one true God. Then all the goodhearted
Christians, Jews, etc. go to hell. Why? Nonbelievers go to hell. It's
in the Kuran. It's as simple as that. And vice versa. But then why
didn't Allah give them the chance to worship him, after all he is
allmighty? Some would say that he did. They know about Muhhamad and are
free to convert to Islam. But what about the people born before the
birth of Muhhamad or Christ? No matter how good they were they'll still
burn. |
Obviously you have never studied Islam, nor read the Quran. Just put a big X through this paragraph.
But what's more suspicious is the concept of the entire creation
of the Universe and Mankind. They're all alike. Muhhammad coppied the
Bible and made some minor adjustments. He even went as far as steeling
Jusus from Christianity. Couldn't he have been a little more creative?
If you've read one Holy book you've read them all. How can you still
believe that the Universe is 5000 years old, that God created man
out of mud and all those things now that we know that the Universe is
12 to 20 billion years old, how life began and evolved and how mankind
eventually came into being. |
When Our Signs are rehearsed to them, they say: "We have heard
this (before): if we wished, we could say (words) like these: these are
nothing but tales of the ancients."
Remember how they said: "O Allah if this is indeed the Truth from Thee,
rain down on us a shower of stones form the sky, or send us a grievous
penalty."
But Allah was not going to send them a penalty whilst thou wast amongst
them; nor was He going to send it whilst they could ask for pardon.
[8:31-33]
If you had read the Quran you will have noted that this question is
answer multiple times. If you had read the Quran and the bible you
would know how completely different the two books are.
You're viewing your religion in an absolutistic manner - the one
true and eternal one. That is because you're immersed in it. You must
rise above that to observe it in its true essense. |
Your emmersed in your culture and beliefs too. Why don't you rise above it and accept a different religion?
All religious beliefs, starting with the first and most
primitive ones, came into being as an attempt by the first people to
explane the world around them. |
Prove it. Thats speculation, I'm about to believe that as you are that the first man was a muslim.
Any phenoemenon they didn't understand they contributed to a superior godlike force. |
Rubbish. Your going to pidgeon hole all your ancestors into superstitous people? Anything you can figure out so could they.
Now religion is nearing its end |
With 1.5 billion muslims, 2 billion Christians and 800 million hindus I seriously doubt it.
Today people don't need it to understand the reality around
them, they have science to do that. And now they know that what
religion tells them about the physycal aspect of the world is a lie and
they don't believe it any more |
Except religion is telling me the same as science is, some lie.
They don't need it any more as a moral guide either |
Where are you pulling that from? I think that depends on who the judge is.
Maybe not in this generation, probably not in the next one, but
when men land on a planet orbiting the nearest star the name Allah will
be forgotten. |
Why? Nothing in Islam is limited to earth or humans.
Originally posted by BGTurk
If we assume that God, an omnipowerful and omnipresent
entity, exists it leads to paradoxes such as the question whether God
is so powerful that she can create a stone that she cannot lift. Such
paradoxes are contradictory, and invalidate the assumption of God's
existence.
That is why I have chosen to be an atheist. |
Because your thinking is limited to the superficiallity? That sentence
is completely meaningless. What does lift mean? Whats a stone?
I can move any rock of any weight! You don't need to
be all powerful. Creating meaningless logic puzzles then taking this as
proof is ridiculous.
Edited by Omar al Hashim - 11-Nov-2006 at 23:19
|
|
Hellios
Arch Duke
Joined: 25-Sep-2006
Location: Canada
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1933
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 12-Nov-2006 at 01:48 |
|
|
Hellios
Arch Duke
Joined: 25-Sep-2006
Location: Canada
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1933
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 12-Nov-2006 at 01:55 |
Edited by Hellios - 12-Nov-2006 at 02:01
|
|
King Kang of Mu
Chieftain
(Foot)Balling DJ from da Eastside
Joined: 23-Mar-2006
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1023
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 12-Nov-2006 at 03:07 |
wow, good find, heilos. Nothing really suprising though. I thought Israel would be more religious but their numbers were more towards average. I noticed S.Korea at the bottom of the list of those willing to die for their god/belief. Perhaps that's why they picked a Korean guy for U.N. Sec Gen. Isn't life stressful enough without thinking about dying for your god, like dealing with NK, trying to compete with Japan, keeping U.S. calm, seducing China and investing in Russia? Death ain't so abstract, is it?
|
http://www.allempires.net/forum/forums.html
|
|
Antioxos
Consul
Joined: 26-Apr-2006
Location: Hellas
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 340
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 12-Nov-2006 at 15:33 |
The only way that you can prove God's existence is through every religious dogma.
Dogma is the established belief or doctrine held by a religion .
As a member of the Orthodox Christian Church i know that the Orthodox Church considers itself to be the original Church founded by Christ and His apostles. The faith taught by Jesus to the apostles, given life by the Holy Spirit at Pentecost , and passed down to future generations uncorrupted, is known as Holy Tradition. The primary witness to Holy Tradition is the Bible, texts written or approved by the apostles to record revealed truth and the early history of the Church. Because of the Bible's apostolic origin, it is regarded as central to the life of the Church.
Orthodox Christians believe (dogma) in a single God who is both three and one (triune): Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. The Holy Trinity is three unconfused, distinct, divine persons (hypostases) , with no overlap or modality among them, who share one divine essence ( ousia)uncreated, immaterial and eternal l. In discussing God's relationship to his creation distinction is made between God's eternal essence and uncreated energies.
All these are epitomized on THE CREED
You cannot add nothing ,you cannot change nothing you believe or not.
Edited by Antioxos - 12-Nov-2006 at 15:58
|
|
Guests
Guest
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 13-Nov-2006 at 11:12 |
Originally posted by Feanor
Agnosticism can lead to nontheism, not atheism. There is a huge difference between the two. |
I didn't say that agnostics are in fact atheists, but that agnosticism, if you logically continue the line of argument, leads to atheism. In other words, I don't believe agnosticism to be a tenable position.
Originally posted by Adalwolf
Originally posted by Feanor
Atheism is commonsense. |
Actually,
it is not. Throughout history mankind has always believed in some type
of religion. So, Atheism is a recent abberation in historical terms,
and not common at all.
|
Just look at it this way: All religious people only believe in the god(s) of their religion. So for example christians believe in the christian god only, and not in the thousands of other gods. It's harder to defend the statement "all gods don't exist except mine" than "no god exists"
Atheism is just another religion, and a highly missionary one at that. |
Could you elaborate? I can understand why atheism could be considered a 'belief' but calling it a relgion makes no sense to me.
Edited by Mixcoatl - 13-Nov-2006 at 11:13
|
|
TheDiplomat
Arch Duke
Retired AE Moderator
Joined: 09-Aug-2004
Location: Turkey
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1988
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 13-Nov-2006 at 11:17 |
If Allah's existance would be something like a theory that can be
proven easily, then the meaning of whole life would be menaingless, as
we are on an exam in this world.
As the NewTestament recommends People should walk by faith, not by sight.
|
ARDA:The best Turkish diplomat ever!
|
|
Reginmund
Arch Duke
Joined: 08-May-2005
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1943
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 13-Nov-2006 at 15:19 |
We all know what eventually happens to blind people who wander about.
|
|
JanusRook
Sultan
Ad Maiorem Dei Gloriam
Joined: 03-Aug-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2419
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 13-Nov-2006 at 15:21 |
But can you be so sure that what you see is real?
|
Economic Communist, Political Progressive, Social Conservative.
Unless otherwise noted source is wiki.
|
|
Cezar
Chieftain
Joined: 09-Nov-2005
Location: Romania
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1211
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 13-Nov-2006 at 19:15 |
I'm definitley an agnostic.
Bassically (maybe the speqeeellliing is not quite OK bu t s iii nnn ccccc e I'm on the "no rules" side what would it to for rules like spelling being functional?).
Not that I dislike/reject such rules!
Back to the topic: I'm quite out of the topic!
So there were some Gods that were supposed to .... whatever, but not to be "unproven".
Actually, I would (though I don't like it) rephrase the topic like: Unprove (your) God's inexistence.
|
|
Reginmund
Arch Duke
Joined: 08-May-2005
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1943
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 13-Nov-2006 at 19:16 |
No, but if I was blind I wouldn't even be able to consider it.
|
|
Cezar
Chieftain
Joined: 09-Nov-2005
Location: Romania
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1211
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 13-Nov-2006 at 19:54 |
- Are you blind?
- If you are not blind how do you think that you might be able to "consider it" whatever that "it" is?
- What does your post is supposed to mean anyway since it should be linked to the topic?
My answer to the topic is actually a question: "please unprove your god"s unexistance". It's the same question but it is somehow repharsed.
|
|
Vivek Sharma
Arch Duke
Joined: 22-Aug-2006
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1775
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 13-Nov-2006 at 23:45 |
Our gods have all along been mostly living persons, personified as Gods over a period of time but their history is too old & obscure to prove specially with the tradition disregard Indians for History.
|
PATTON NAGAR, Brains win over Brawn
|
|
Omar al Hashim
King
Suspended
Joined: 05-Jan-2006
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 5697
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 14-Nov-2006 at 00:01 |
I think Cezar was blind when he posted his last two posts. *blind there means blind drunk.
|
|
Hellios
Arch Duke
Joined: 25-Sep-2006
Location: Canada
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1933
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 14-Nov-2006 at 02:21 |
Below statements just my views & not an attempt to push them onto anybody.
Agnosticism can be seen as a 'path' that splits into 2 directions; atheism or religion:
My problem is the following:
Does agnosticism always have to lead to that?
This is how I see it:
Sorry no time to search better photo - my point is maybe agnostics can maintain course.
It's hard to explain my reasons for not choosing religion or atheism without offending religious or atheist people.
I don't choose atheism because I think mankind's understanding of the universe is very limited, therefore I can't deny the possibility of the existence of something beyond our understanding.
This doesn't mean I have to believe in "Nessy" or "Big Foot", because we have explored & studied almost every 'corner' of our planet, but the 'universe' is a different story.
I don't choose religion because I think this possible "something beyond our understanding" I mentioned earlier is not my religion of birth.
Edited by Hellios - 14-Nov-2006 at 02:39
|
|
Lmprs
Arch Duke
Joined: 30-Dec-2005
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1869
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 14-Nov-2006 at 09:54 |
Originally posted by Mixcoatl
I didn't say that agnostics are in fact atheists, but that agnosticism, if you logically continue the line of argument, leads to atheism. |
To be an atheist you must talk about the nonexistence of god.
If you don't even mention god, this is your case, you are a nontheist.
|
|
Reginmund
Arch Duke
Joined: 08-May-2005
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1943
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 14-Nov-2006 at 11:44 |
Originally posted by Omar al Hashim
I think Cezar was blind when he posted his last two posts.
*blind there means blind drunk.
|
That would explain it.
|
|
Cezar
Chieftain
Joined: 09-Nov-2005
Location: Romania
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1211
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 14-Nov-2006 at 12:42 |
Originally posted by Reginmund
Originally posted by Omar al Hashim
I think Cezar was blind when he posted his last two posts.
*blind there means blind drunk.
|
That would explain it. |
Not that blind, Omar. I was just trying to suggest that there are no limits to discussions about God.
The spelling rules I've mentioned - I have a plastered broken finger so I can't type as well as I used to . Therefore I believe that the spelling rules are not good .
You, as a muslim, believe in Allah. And you also take the Quran as being some kind of ultimate writing (the manifest of God, Allah's Mein Kampf). You keep on saying that Quran is consistent and that everything written there is true. But it's only an interpretation, your view about that textbook. I find the Quran quite inconsistent and i do not take metaphoric language as being the best way to describe reality.
You stated that you can prove the existance of Allah. I doubt it and I am certain that you won't be able to come up with an all accepted, unquestionable proof.
People like consitancy they feel safe in a consistent Universe. Both atheists and believers take into account only a consistent reality. But a consistent existence is incomplete. Paradoxes are to be accounted for since there is no rule, either divine or not, that states the existence is limited. So if you believe that Allah exists and He is the omni..everything then you must accept that He can unexist Himself. A consistent God would not be doing that but what makes you think that Allah must be consistent?
On the other hand, we humans rely on consistency, so a proof about God would require consistency, otherwise we would no accept it. But you can't have that because you would have to limit the omni attribute of God.
If you define God as a superior entity limited to creating/administering consistent universes then you may find a proff of it's existence. But that would also mean that you may escape His rule by fading into inconsistency. If God is just a ruler then He might/must/could be challenged. Either to overthrow Him or to establish new rules through negociation.
Zeus was a consistent god, limited, and was challenged. Actually people and lesser gods were fighting against him on a daily basis. Even his wife was playing tricks on him. But this kind of gods are not what Allah or the Christian God are about, are they?
Edited by Cezar - 14-Nov-2006 at 12:43
|
|