A Muslim journey through Creationism and Evolution

porchrat

Honorary Master
Joined
Sep 11, 2008
Messages
30,100
I don't think that cars and religion are quite the same thing in this instance. Assuming for this example that the car has no mechanical defects, it has no active responsibility in the killing of someone. However, if the car itself somehow spoke to you and enraged you to kill the heathen pedestrians, even if only 10% of the drivers were effected by this. It would be enough that we would need to scrap cars and find another less consciously destructive form of transportation.
I suppose you have a point.
 

Swa

Honorary Master
Joined
May 4, 2012
Messages
23,392
I can bet my life and my soul on the fact that I understand science far better than you do mate. I completely understand that science does not deal with the supernatural. What I am saying is that you have ZERO external basis to make the claim that an afterlife exists, apart from fanciful fairytales. Which have been shown time and time again, to be lacking of any convincing power to anyone with a rational mind that does not need a crutch.
What is sad is that you base so many of your external life choices on fairytales.
Continually employing it in ways it doesn't work shows that in fact you don't. As has been said many times what is rational to you is not rational to someone else. It's extremely arrogant to assume your view is necessarily the correct one.

You say that just because we do not know about it now, does not mean that it does not exist. Sure thing, 100% correct. But it also doesn't mean that it does exist and we simply cannot detect it. The logical position to hold in that case would be to presume that it does not exist. Just like we presume that Pegasus, Mount Olympus and the Easter Bunny do not really exist. They are folktales, nothing more.
The logical position would be agnosticism when it comes to knowledge. When it comes to believing there are other forms of evidence and here again you show your lack of understanding trying to base it as something scientific that can be "detected." It is not a question that science can even attempt to answer either way. A head in the sand approach however is not the solution and your easter bunny straw man doesn't change that fact.

Did you even read the post of mine you initially replied to? I explain it in short there, and also here. The tl;dr version is that they commit the fallacy of special pleading. God is deemed to be 'good', 'merciful', and 'just', while simultaneously it is claimed that we can't judge God because he's transcendent, non-anthropomorphic and beyond human notions of morality. So when I say God is cruel, they'll say he can't be judged by the human moral standard. Yet this is exactly what they're doing when they say God is good in the first place. It's a blatant double standard, and special pleading.
You see it as a fallacy because you're viewing it from the wrong angle. God is good by definition not by 'judging.' It would be a fallacy to judge God by human standards that we can't even agree on.

On this point, a scientist should never let his religious beliefs influence his research. This is the big mistake that the ID guys at Discovery Institute have made. They have made the assumption (without any evidence) that there is a designer and base their research on this assumption. This is unscientific and has been shown to be such in a court of law.
People on both sides of the debate make that mistake.

I agree with falcon in that science cannot be used to disprove some parts of religions. Keep in mind though that a lot of claims within religions are physical ones and those can often be disproved. Claims like a literal Genesis creation for example.
It can't.

The parts science can't disprove are the metaphysical claims. Things like "your soul goes to some spiritual realm after you die" or "my deity exists". However, while science cannot disprove these things, if you want to approach this world in a scientific manner then you should probably discard those claims as they have no support. This is ultimately how science works. It doesn't mean that the thing you discard is necessarily false, but that one cannot assume that it is true without throwing the scientific method out the window.
It is contradictory to approach the world in a scientific manner when science has no say in these matters. There is no scientific way of getting answers but there are other approaches. If you want to reject those then fine by me, but it's this arrogance of trying to put yourselves on a pedestal that's actually harming your cause.

This is part of my whole "religion usually involves some anti-science" thing. Those who hold to their religious ideas are tossing out the scientific method as a reliable way to find the truth and instead are relying on faith. It isn't so bad when those who are relying on faith have resigned their deity to an entity that has zero measurable effect on the physical world... but then that deity is kind of a pointless and impotent deity anyway.
This is a wrong idea about science but I don't blame them when the atheists are abusing science in the same way.

The difference is all those acts were done in the name of religion, im unaware of atrocities done in the name of atheism.
Many things are done in the name of something. That doesn't mean that something is the cause. When it comes to actual causes atheist beliefs have caused more atrocities than all other religions combined. If SoulTax was consistent he would thus reject it based on that.
 

falcon786

Executive Member
Joined
Jan 29, 2011
Messages
9,936
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crusades
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inquisition
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al-Qaeda

You will notice that all of them have religion in common. If you want links to all the others that I posted, a little wiki or google searching will get you plenty. But I have given 3. Now either refute them or find me Atheist equivalents in the name of atheism or stop this incessant claiming that I have no proof. All those things that I linked are widely known facts. Just like I don't need to link to an article on gravity just to have my claim of gravity taken seriously. Common knowledge is what keeps debates from being an endless deconstruction of each and every claim down to the proof of the language you are using to make that claim.
I don't know why I'm bothering doing this for you,this is your claim so you need to do the research yourself and prove it to us or admit that its just an opinion but hey here are three quick examples of atheism gone wrong and killing millions of people.I'm not going to do this again for you please if you wanna make a statement be sure to back it up with proof or rather keep quiet and admit its an opinion.,mentioning three things done wrong in the name of religion is not proof or a proper study its just three things that you've mentioned as I will mention three below but they don't prove you wrong or right either,you need to do a proper study and post it here or else stop ranting your opinion as fact.

1949-1976 Mao Zedong's China 40 000 000
1922-1953 Stalin's Russia 20 000 000
1917-1922 Russian Civil War 9 000 000

And before you cry thats not atheism because those things were not done in the name of atheism remember that that mao's army used atheism as a rally cry to get rid of the tibetians's....and thats my point exactly,atheists in general are not bad people capable of doing that and neither are religious people bad people per se.Religion has nothing to do with some people using it to get power and reach,those types of people will find a way to control the masses with or without religion.

Mao and stalin did not even need to use religion.

I'm afraid you're going to have to give a proper factual scientifically quantifiable(READ THIS WORD CAREFULLY BECAUSE THIS IS SCIENCE,NOT THOSE LOUSY THREE LINKS YOU POSTED) research which takes into account the various religions also since all religions are not the same.You cant blame Christians for the wrong doings of Muslims and visa versa.

They each bring with them their own set of values and morals etc
If you do not posses the common/general knowledge in this area, then I suggest an evening of Google and wikipedia to get yourself up to speed.
Oh so now common/general knowledge is good enough for MR SCIENCE.Lol bring scientific evidence to back your statement up or go keep quiet in the corner like a good little boy.And please don't degrade yourself by posting unscientific rubbish like three wikipedia links,it makes you seem brain dead.Come on MR.SCIENCE do this scientifically.

Or cant you....:whistling:
 
Last edited:

falcon786

Executive Member
Joined
Jan 29, 2011
Messages
9,936
So you are sort of agreeing with us that religion is used as a reason for committing atrocities.
Oh there are undoubtedly people who use religion to commit atrocities just like mao used atheism as a war cry to rally his troops.
Corrupt despots/psycho's like hitler*,stalin,mao are especially capable of doing this,you wont find the average man on the street behaving like this normally be they atheist or religious.In fact I would venture to say that if I were a dictator and needed my people to do bad things for me I would need a way to make them do it without feeling deep regret/remorse/guilty or the feeling of being punished,If I had atheists who believed they were fighting for a better world order and nobody is going to punish them because hey they think they doing it for the greater good of mankind then that would be just as dangerous as a religious person believing he will get reward in heaven for the atrocities he is doing.

The only difference is the one group believes they will get rewards here on earth and the others believe they will get it in the afterlife.Either way atrocities are committed with or without the name of religion.

*Note on Hitler:I know many claim he was Christian and many claim he was not hence I used his name because he didn't really need religion he invented his own thing "Nazism" and used Christianity where he could also, he was damn clever little psycho if you think about it!
 

OrbitalDawn

Ulysses Everett McGill
Joined
Aug 26, 2011
Messages
41,964
I don't know why I'm bothering doing this for you,this is your claim so you need to do the research yourself and prove it to us or admit that its just an opinion but hey here are three quick examples of atheism gone wrong and killing millions of people.I'm not going to do this again for you please if you wanna make a statement be sure to back it up with proof or rather keep quiet and admit its an opinion.,mentioning three things done wrong in the name of religion is not proof or a proper study its just three things that you've mentioned as I will mention three below but they don't prove you wrong or right either,you need to do a proper study and post it here or else stop ranting your opinion as fact.

1949-1976 Mao Zedong's China 40 000 000
1922-1953 Stalin's Russia 20 000 000
1917-1922 Russian Civil War 9 000 000

And before you cry thats not atheism because those things were not done in the name of atheism remember that that mao's army used atheism as a rally cry to get rid of the tibetians's....and thats my point exactly,atheists in general are not bad people capable of doing that and neither are religious people bad people per se.
I'm fairly certain you've had this explained to you before, but let's try again. Atheism has no ideology or content that can be used to fuel atrocity. Religion does. It's not alone in this, of course. There are many ideologies that has this potential, like nationalism for example.

falcon786 said:
Religion has nothing to do with some people using it to get power and reach,those types of people will find a way to control the masses with or without religion.
Of course it does. If one of the tenets of the religion is that there is a supernatural entity and some of us are fortunate enough to have access to this entity's mind, and will, then the ability to control the masses follows naturally. This is what the story of Mohammed is fundamentally based on.

falcon786 said:
Mao and stalin did not even need to use religion.
On the contrary, that's almost exactly what they used. They turned the State into a religion and established a cult of personality around the leaders. The problems in those regimes were the same as the problems religion has. They're actually incredibly similar. Absolutely revered hero figures, inquisitions, heresy, witch-hunts, unquestioning devotion, required rituals etc.

falcon786 said:
I'm afraid you're going to have to give a proper factual scientifically quantifiable(READ THIS WORD CAREFULLY BECAUSE THIS IS SCIENCE,NOT THOSE LOUSY THREE LINKS YOU POSTED) research which takes into account the various religions also since all religions are not the same.You cant blame Christians for the wrong doings of Muslims and visa versa.

They each bring with them their own set of values and morals etc
It's the premise of religion that's the problem. Claiming certain human texts are infallible and given to us by the creator of the universe, and having nothing to back this up with except 'faith' is not a good start to any human endeavor in my view. Unflinching dogma is a bad idea.
 

SoulTax

Executive Member
Joined
Feb 8, 2011
Messages
6,121
I don't know why I'm bothering doing this for you,this is your claim so you need to do the research yourself and prove it to us or admit that its just an opinion but hey here are three quick examples of atheism gone wrong and killing millions of people.I'm not going to do this again for you please if you wanna make a statement be sure to back it up with proof or rather keep quiet and admit its an opinion.,mentioning three things done wrong in the name of religion is not proof or a proper study its just three things that you've mentioned as I will mention three below but they don't prove you wrong or right either,you need to do a proper study and post it here or else stop ranting your opinion as fact.

1949-1976 Mao Zedong's China 40 000 000
1922-1953 Stalin's Russia 20 000 000
1917-1922 Russian Civil War 9 000 000

And before you cry thats not atheism because those things were not done in the name of atheism remember that that mao's army used atheism as a rally cry to get rid of the tibetians's....and thats my point exactly,atheists in general are not bad people capable of doing that and neither are religious people bad people per se.Religion has nothing to do with some people using it to get power and reach,those types of people will find a way to control the masses with or without religion.

Mao and stalin did not even need to use religion.

I'm afraid you're going to have to give a proper factual scientifically quantifiable(READ THIS WORD CAREFULLY BECAUSE THIS IS SCIENCE,NOT THOSE LOUSY THREE LINKS YOU POSTED) research which takes into account the various religions also since all religions are not the same.You cant blame Christians for the wrong doings of Muslims and visa versa.

They each bring with them their own set of values and morals etc

Oh so now common/general knowledge is good enough for MR SCIENCE.Lol bring scientific evidence to back your statement up or go keep quiet in the corner like a good little boy.And please don't degrade yourself by posting unscientific rubbish like three wikipedia links,it makes you seem brain dead.Come on MR.SCIENCE do this scientifically.

Or cant you....:whistling:
Getting a little hot under the feathers there? I thought this was going to be civil?
Every single thing that I mentioned in my first post in this chain, is a religious issue. I have given links to the most prevalent ones. You have yet to refute my claims regarding those at least, we can get onto the others later if you feel up to it. But let's stick to 3 for now shall we. In fact let's start with one. Bite sized chunks for now.
http://www.history.com/topics/crusades
And from that front page.
The first of the Crusades began in 1095, when armies of Christians from Western Europe responded to Pope Urban II's plea to go to war against Muslim forces in the Holy Land. After the First Crusade achieved its goal with the capture of Jerusalem in 1099, the invading Christians set up several Latin Christian states, even as Muslims in the region vowed to wage holy war (jihad) to regain control over the region.
As far as your claims are concerned. I am having trouble finding any link to Mao Zedong killing in the name of atheism. Could you link to something that shows this battle cry of his?

And before you cry thats not atheism because those things were not done in the name of atheism remember that that mao's army used atheism as a rally cry to get rid of the tibetians's
As you already stated in this quote, you link 3 things, but know that at least two of them were definitely not perpetrated in the name of atheism so unless you can, let's scrap those for now. You single out Mao as killing in the name of atheism, not the others. But I cannot find any reference to Mao or his army killing in the name of atheism. Would you mind? I have, in good faith, gone and found a link to support my claim. Can you be so kind as to do the same.
 

falcon786

Executive Member
Joined
Jan 29, 2011
Messages
9,936
I'm fairly certain you've had this explained to you before, but let's try again. Atheism has no ideology or content that can be used to fuel atrocity. Religion does. It's not alone in this, of course. There are many ideologies that has this potential, like nationalism for example.



Of course it does. If one of the tenets of the religion is that there is a supernatural entity and some of us are fortunate enough to have access to this entity's mind, and will, then the ability to control the masses follows naturally. This is what the story of Mohammed is fundamentally based on.



On the contrary, that's almost exactly what they used. They turned the State into a religion and established a cult of personality around the leaders. The problems in those regimes were the same as the problems religion has. They're actually incredibly similar. Absolutely revered hero figures, inquisitions, heresy, witch-hunts, unquestioning devotion, required rituals etc.



It's the premise of religion that's the problem. Claiming certain human texts are infallible and given to us by the creator of the universe, and having nothing to back this up with except 'faith' is not a good start to any human endeavor in my view. Unflinching dogma is a bad idea.
My post was specifically as a reply to soultax as a reply for his claim,if you have the same claim as him then do him a favor and give us proper quantifiable scientific evidence if you wanna reply for him,thanks.All this rambling about in circles is getting us no where.

Lets not move the goal posts further and further from the point that was made,I see a trend developing here.One topic at a time,scientific evidence or he should admit its an opinion,based on non scientific basis.
 

falcon786

Executive Member
Joined
Jan 29, 2011
Messages
9,936
Getting a little hot under the feathers there? I thought this was going to be civil?
Every single thing that I mentioned in my first post in this chain, is a religious issue. I have given links to the most prevalent ones. You have yet to refute my claims regarding those at least, we can get onto the others later if you feel up to it. But let's stick to 3 for now shall we. In fact let's start with one. Bite sized chunks for now.
http://www.history.com/topics/crusades
And from that front page.


As far as your claims are concerned. I am having trouble finding any link to Mao Zedong killing in the name of atheism. Could you link to something that shows this battle cry of his?



As you already stated in this quote, you link 3 things, but know that at least two of them were definitely not perpetrated in the name of atheism so unless you can, let's scrap those for now. You single out Mao as killing in the name of atheism, not the others. But I cannot find any reference to Mao or his army killing in the name of atheism. Would you mind? I have, in good faith, gone and found a link to support my claim. Can you be so kind as to do the same.
Again trying to make me do your work for you(I did not make the claim YOU did buddy),you're the one that says bring proof of GOD because the onus is on the one making the claim so now you're the one making the claim bring proof...we want a complete scientific study backing up your claim through the ages,one or three examples doesn't cut it we want actual absolute facts to backup your absolute claim.Your study needs to include all the massacres/evil things done in the name of religion and all of those not done in the name of religion(aka by atheists) and as far back as we have good factual evidence,also the atrocities committed by each religion is also very important since all are claiming the truth just like you claim the truth.Thats science.

If you cant do it scientifically then concede that you don't understand science or cant do it but right now you're really battling to bring scientific proof for your claim.It really shows when you keep on asking me to prove against your claims lol you should be doing the proving for your claim not me.

In fact this just proves that you just make science your whipping boy when it suits you yet you cant relate science to a simple physical fact like this?You've been caught out I'm afraid.

If you cant do it then lets get back to real science and how muslims can come to terms with real science like the theory of evolution and get back on topic.You've derailed this thread enough with your pseudo science that you use to justify your opinions as an atheist.
 
Last edited:

OrbitalDawn

Ulysses Everett McGill
Joined
Aug 26, 2011
Messages
41,964
My post was specifically as a reply to soultax as a reply for his claim,if you have the same claim as him then do him a favor and give us proper quantifiable scientific evidence if you wanna reply for him,thanks.All this rambling about in circles is getting us no where.

Lets not move the goal posts further and further from the point that was made,I see a trend developing here.One topic at a time,scientific evidence or he should admit its an opinion,based on non scientific basis.
What are you talking about? I responded to your post specifically, on specific topics.
 

SoulTax

Executive Member
Joined
Feb 8, 2011
Messages
6,121
Wow you are being so damn belligerent man. Let's start again shall we.

I claim that religion can do bad in the world, in the name of religion. In order to support the basis for this claim I need only supply one piece of evidence. Because my claim is not about quantity, I do not say that religion is always bad all of the time, just that it can on occasion be bad for religion's sake. So my one example is the crusades. As linked above, for completeness I will re-post this:
The first of the Crusades began in 1095, when armies of Christians from Western Europe responded to Pope Urban II's plea to go to war against Muslim forces in the Holy Land. After the First Crusade achieved its goal with the capture of Jerusalem in 1099, the invading Christians set up several Latin Christian states, even as Muslims in the region vowed to wage holy war (jihad) to regain control over the region.
This is proof of historical records of a war initiate by the leader of a religion, in the name of that religion, against another religion. And that religion's response is to wage a holy religious war in retaliation.

A 4 minute video if you care to watch it.
http://www.history.com/topics/crusades/videos#roots-of-the-crusades

Here a recounting of Pope Urban II's speech at Clermont that sparked the whole thing.
http://www.medievaltymes.com/courtyard/urban%27s_speech.htm

Clearly this was religious. So now I would like for you to show me some evidence of Mao's "Kill for Atheism" battle cry if you please.
 

falcon786

Executive Member
Joined
Jan 29, 2011
Messages
9,936
Wow you are being so damn belligerent man. Let's start again shall we.
Cool lets do that,maybe I'm misunderstanding your claim.

I claim that religion can do bad in the world, in the name of religion. In order to support the basis for this claim I need only supply one piece of evidence. Because my claim is not about quantity, I do not say that religion is always bad all of the time, just that it can on occasion be bad for religion's sake. So my one example is the crusades. As linked above, for completeness I will re-post this:


This is proof of historical records of a war initiate by the leader of a religion, in the name of that religion, against another religion. And that religion's response is to wage a holy religious war in retaliation.

A 4 minute video if you care to watch it.
http://www.history.com/topics/crusades/videos#roots-of-the-crusades

Here a recounting of Pope Urban II's speech at Clermont that sparked the whole thing.
http://www.medievaltymes.com/courtyard/urban%27s_speech.htm

Clearly this was religious. So now I would like for you to show me some evidence of Mao's "Kill for Atheism" battle cry if you please.
Ok I get what you are saying, you do realize that this does not imply that religion causes more bad in the world?I mean whose to say that in the absence of Christianity that very same leader would not have used another reason to launch an attack on the Islamic world?

Remember I asked why you want to so badly abolish/attack/speak out against religion and this was your answer.so do you somehow think there would be less atrocities committed in the world if there were no religion?
 

falcon786

Executive Member
Joined
Jan 29, 2011
Messages
9,936
What are you talking about? I responded to your post specifically, on specific topics.
Not to sound rude or anything....we're dealing with Soultax's personal beliefs here,so I feel its best to let him speak for himself,unless you are his nominated spokesperson,in which case go ahead chip in.:)
 

SoulTax

Executive Member
Joined
Feb 8, 2011
Messages
6,121
Cool lets do that,maybe I'm misunderstanding your claim.

Ok I get what you are saying, you do realize that this does not imply that religion causes more bad in the world?I mean whose to say that in the absence of Christianity that very same leader would not have used another reason to launch an attack on the Islamic world?

Remember I asked why you want to so badly abolish/attack/speak out against religion and this was your answer.so do you somehow think there would be less atrocities committed in the world if there were no religion?
I do. While I still believe that atrocities will be committed, I think that religion has shown itself to be one of the major driving factors in many of the worst atrocities. Even currently we would not have such a big hoo-hah about gay marriage and adoption. There might be some homophobic groups that will still be against it. But at the moment it is primarily religious groups that oppose it, the harm to human rights in this area is present.
Without religion the opposition would not be as numerous and would also not be as fervently righteous about their stance. As orbital pointed out a few posts back. It is the fact that the religious can hold a stance like this and believe that they have God on their side that makes the stance dangerous. Because you cannot reason with them, their mind's are made up.

How is a society meant to advance when they cannot reason out the best course of action in any area. When some areas are embargoed by the religious at every turn. We need to allow rational debate over things like Gay Marriage, Stem Cell Research, Cloning Research, Genetic Manipulation Research, Abortion, Morality, etc....

I don't oppose religion in all forms, I can appreciate the positive things that it can bring to communities and families, especially in times of strife. But I find that, especially in the Abrahamic Religions. There are passages and texts that, when taken literally, can be very detrimental to society. I think that if a religion contains within it, the possibility to interpret it's scriptures in such a way as to justify causing harm to people or society; then it is dangerous. And needs to be critiqued until the constituents either correct the global interpretation or simply reject it altogether.

Further thoughts:
You see I have issue with the fact that an Omniscient God would allow this dichotomy in the possible way that his scriptures can be interpreted. He would make it cut and dry as to what he means. You would not have one group claiming that Islam is the religion of peace and be able to support that stance with scriptural excerpts. Yet on the other hand have a group that can run around blowing themselves and innocents up, and yet they can support those claims with scripture too.
These two groups might disagree with the interpretations of one another, but that does not change the fact that the interpretation is true in both cases.

God would not have left it up to interpretation IMHO. And a God that does, is just needlessly toying with us.

So in closing. I think that if harm can be done in the name of something, then that something needs to be revised or scrapped. Some may see that as a 'Militant' attitude. So be it, I have no qualms with fighting the bad in religion while it keeps the bad parts in it. Until such time as religion can cut away the bad and leave only the good behind, I will keep on doing it. And if your/any religion is unable to cut away the bad without destroying/throwing out the whole, then that is a problem with the religion itself, not with my attitude towards it.
 

falcon786

Executive Member
Joined
Jan 29, 2011
Messages
9,936
God would not have left it up to interpretation IMHO. And a God that does, is just needlessly toying with us.
As we said before according to muslims this world is a test and if the ability to misinterpret a text is taken away from you then what free will would we have.

Yes everybody has the ability to interpret things the way they want but only a bigot/psycho/bad person will use his religion to take the life of an innocent person because he took the literal interpretation of a certain verse while ignoring the circumstances in which the verse was revealed and other verses which encourage mercy,understanding and tolerance.That person will certainly not get away with it no matter how well he convinces those around him that his religion told him to do it.GOD is the ultimate judge not us.

It all boils down to free will,thats the beauty/beast of it.
 
Last edited:

SoulTax

Executive Member
Joined
Feb 8, 2011
Messages
6,121
As we said before according to muslims this world is a test and if the ability to misinterpret a text is taken away from you then what free will would we have.

Yes everybody has the ability to interpret things the way they want but only a bigot/psycho/bad person will use his religion to take the life of an innocent person because he took the literal interpretation of a certain verse while ignoring the circumstances in which the verse was revealed and other verses which encourage mercy,understanding and tolerance.That person will certainly not get away with it no matter how well he convinces those around him that his religion told him to do it.GOD is the ultimate judge not us.

It all boils down to free will,thats the beauty/beast of it.
Ye I know that it is all a test. And that is your belief. But consider this from an outsiders point of view. What if your entire religion really is just man made. I know that you do not believe that, but you have to admit that there is the very real possibility that you may be wrong. There is also the possibility that I may be wrong too and I accept that. But nobody is running around killing other people in the name of my beliefs.

So if you are wrong, then there is no final judgement, no punishment for these people that kill in the name of Islam and Allah. And the deaths are completely needless. And perpetrated by people that are following a belief system that was created by man to impersonate God.

Can you see why someone like me might take issue with that, when it is a very real possibility?
 

OrbitalDawn

Ulysses Everett McGill
Joined
Aug 26, 2011
Messages
41,964
Not to sound rude or anything....we're dealing with Soultax's personal beliefs here,so I feel its best to let him speak for himself,unless you are his nominated spokesperson,in which case go ahead chip in.:)
I'm not talking on behalf of him. I replied to your post. I'm not sure why you think SoulTax has anything to do with it. :erm:
 

falcon786

Executive Member
Joined
Jan 29, 2011
Messages
9,936
Ye I know that it is all a test. And that is your belief. But consider this from an outsiders point of view. What if your entire religion really is just man made. I know that you do not believe that, but you have to admit that there is the very real possibility that you may be wrong. There is also the possibility that I may be wrong too and I accept that. But nobody is running around killing other people in the name of my beliefs.

So if you are wrong, then there is no final judgement, no punishment for these people that kill in the name of Islam and Allah. And the deaths are completely needless. And perpetrated by people that are following a belief system that was created by man to impersonate God.

Can you see why someone like me might take issue with that, when it is a very real possibility?
If you are indeed correct and if we cease to exist then what does it matter anyway,those that suffered are not suffering anymore and it doesn't matter that they did suffer no matter how bad it was, those that committed atrocities are not committing atrocities anymore no matter how bad the atrocities were so its basically just divided by zero,null and void, morality,suffering,greed, revenge ,remorse etc...we would be reduced to mere animals and humanity will still survive on earth probably until we find a way of or die off in some freak way.But what if I'm right in my beliefs then there will be justice after all,now i have used pascals wager.;)

Surely the latter is better.Belief that this entire existence of ours is not for nothing.Do you believe we exist for nothing just like animals?
 

falcon786

Executive Member
Joined
Jan 29, 2011
Messages
9,936
I'm not talking on behalf of him. I replied to your post. I'm not sure why you think SoulTax has anything to do with it. :erm:
Because my post was a reply to Soultax specifically and about his(soultax's) beliefs, not you/yours.You seem to be having a problem with context or you want to shift the goal posts again as I said earlier.I honestly don't see how you can answer for him if he is answering for himself as we go along.
 
Last edited:

OrbitalDawn

Ulysses Everett McGill
Joined
Aug 26, 2011
Messages
41,964
Because my post was a reply to Soultax specifically and about his(soultax's) beliefs, not you/yours.You seem to be having a problem with context.I honestly don't see how you can answer for him if he is answering for himself as we go along.
Because I'm not answering for him, like I just said? :wtf:

What does his beliefs have to do with your claims about Mao, Stalin and religion's role in atrocities committed over the years? That's what I was responding to.
 

SoulTax

Executive Member
Joined
Feb 8, 2011
Messages
6,121
If you are indeed correct and if we cease to exist then what does it matter anyway,those that suffered are not suffering anymore and it doesn't matter that they did suffer no matter how bad it was, those that committed atrocities are not committing atrocities anymore no matter how bad the atrocities were so its basically just divided by zero,null and void, morality,suffering,greed, revenge ,remorse etc...we would be reduced to mere animals and humanity will still survive on earth probably until we find a way of or die off in some freak way.But what if I'm right in my beliefs then there will be justice after all,now i have used pascals wager.;)

Surely the latter is better.Belief that this entire existence of ours is not for nothing.Do you believe we exist for nothing just like animals?
I agree that those people are no longer suffering. But my point is not based around the fact that their suffering is over. It is based on the fact that the suffering was perpetrated in the name of something that you believe in. Had that religion not been around, it would not have created the extremists that caused the suffering, and so the alternative is not actually that the people still died, and their suffering is over, but that the suffering never happened in the first place.

So people are doing evil in the name of something that you believe in. And if that belief is false, then they are doing evil under false pretenses. If that religion were in fact false, and so completely removed from society, then those atrocities would not be committed in the first place.

That is my issue, that if you are right, then there is cosmic equilibrium, which all sounds good. But if you are wrong, then there is a counterbalance of "Extra"(In the name of a false pretense) evil being perpetrated in the world that will never be rectified because there is no hereafter to apply the balance.
 
Top