Islam And the Law Of Non Contradiction.

[(s.i.e)]

general question, what is considered as blasphemy when somebody speaks for a god?

 

[GhostAnime]

These lands are some the most educated and populated; now if a foreign religion can have such pulling power, than how exactly can it be overly wrong? Popularity may not make something right, but if 33% of the world comes to accept and keep Christianity, even with the development and education of N.America, Europe, Russia and parts of Asia, than that says something about even a part of it's teachings. People don't (generally) accept things that are evil, stupid and against the ordinary flow of the world, da?

If you raise a person neutrally about religion AND also educate them, they are less likely to become religious. Most of these 'educated' people you are talking about simply have religion deeply rooted in their background and all of their families.

It is natural to believe in a deity; humans want a sense of purpose, but simply because many do doesn't mean it's right. It's ad populism. Ask these same people why they believe and they wouldn't give you much different answers than the ones you've heard on this forum.

People don't (generally) accept things that are evil, stupid and against the ordinary flow of the world, da?

You once again show how delusional you are about life itself. Ever heard of racism, politics, and world wars? Yeah humayns are too smurt for deze! They can't possibly be wrong about our views on the world and also corrupt at the same time! Humans are great people!

Did you know most scientists aren't religious, or at least overly theistic? Do YOU take their views over the world's? You already do about Evolution, because most of the people you just listed probably consider Evolution a hypothesis. The same "educated" people you seem to value so much. Looks like you're in a conflict here.

 

[Vermehlo_Steele]

Hence the reason I said generally.
My my, aren't you a bleak one, how dare we have religions preaching their hippie bulls-hit about peace, love and tolerance, eh now?

You just contradicted yourself;

If you raise a person neutrally about religion AND also educate them, they are less likely to become religious. Most of these 'educated' people you are talking about simply have religion deeply rooted in their background and all of their families.

A valid arguement.

It is natural to believe in a deity; humans want a sense of purpose

Wow.

 

[GhostAnime]

Where's the contradiction?

My my, aren't you a bleak one, how dare we have religions preaching their hippie bulls-hit about peace, love and tolerance, eh now?

Bleak? I don't understand... not to mention religion has done little to nothing to bring about real 'peace' in the world.

Hence the reason I said generally.

What difference does it make?

 

[Vermehlo_Steele]

For Arceus' sake. I'm giving up. And BTW the contradiction is shown in the quotes.

Religion isn't the problem, interpretation of it is the problem.

 

[GhostAnime]

I never said religion was a problem, and if you're never going to bother responding and arguing for your points and expecting everybody to understand it without explaining it, stop posting here. Seriously. This is the second time you've done this. If you're going to debate me, debate me. I did not type all that just to have you come back and whine about me not understanding some contradiction or you to just forget about every single thing I've said to you thus far.

edit: I think I understand what you're trying to point out, and let me clarify:

A person is less likely to become religious if he was brought up without one until a late age, but it is still natural, at least for human beings, to want a sense of purpose.. hence why religion essentially stays in the ones who you would probably call 'educated' and why religion isn't something that just disappears. Until anyone finds some truth in the answer of "Why?" Many people are just going to go with religion.

 

[Vermehlo_Steele]

I'm wasting my time on this thread, but anyway.

It is natural to believe in a deity; humans want a sense of purpose, but simply because many do doesn't mean it's right. It's ad populism. Ask these same people why they believe and they wouldn't give you much different answers than the ones you've heard on this forum.

So what makes something right then? What criteria, apart from billions of people agreeing with it, should be used to judge wether an idea is worthy or not.

 

[GhostAnime]

Um.. like you do anything else in life?

 

[Vermehlo_Steele]

Um... I not sure what you mean? You want me to debate, so I ask a reasonable question and then you back away. Intelesting...

I spend probably 5-15 minutes here most days (some days I'm not here)

 

[GhostAnime]

"What makes something right?" Is probably the strangest question I've ever heard anybody ask.

How do you determine if something is right?

1) Go with what the majority say
2) Do research, use logic, and/or only consider objective facts
3) Do the hookey-pokey

What do you want me to say?

 

[Vermehlo_Steele]

1) You shot down A as being 'ad populism'
2) Goodbye emtions, goodbye those too sick, injured, weak, silly, damaged, old and unbalanced to contribute economically to society.
3) Don't be silly.

 

[GhostAnime]

2) Goodbye emtions, goodbye those too sick, injured, weak, silly, damaged, old and unbalanced to contribute economically to society.

Emotions shouldn't be used when you're making statements about objectivity.

Sick, injured, and weak? I'm confused. We're not talking about morals here. We're talking about the existence of something; or if you would prefer, the reliability of monotheistic religions.

 

[Vermehlo_Steele]

Objective Facts:
People sick/old/damaged can't contribut directly to the economic situtation of society, thus a burden and thus need to be removed.

How is monotheistic religion unreliable? Too inefficient, too corrupt, too strict?

 

[GhostAnime]

How is monotheistic religion unreliable?

The same reason you're apparently Agnostic.

People sick/old/damaged can't contribut directly to the economic situtation of society, thus a burden and thus need to be removed.

What are you trying to prove here? If you are trying to prove that logic, research, and objective facts don't always lead to the right answer, this is a terrible way to do it.

How can you compare whether we should take care of the disabled to "Does God exist?" These questions aren't even asked in the same context. When I was responding to you about how to find out what's 'right'; I was ONLY talking about objective facts.

I thought you would get that considering we are discussing something that is objective and not subjective.

 

[Vermehlo_Steele]

The same reason you're apparently Agnostic.

What? That people aren't sure about god's role in their life and aren't sure they could be faithful to a religion? they are suspicious of those who claim to have answers.

What are you trying to prove here? If you are trying to prove that logic, research, and objective facts don't always lead to the right answer, this is a terrible way to do it.

How can you compare whether we should take care of the disabled to "Does God exist?" These questions aren't even asked in the same context. When I was responding to you about how to find out what's 'right'; I was ONLY talking about objective facts.

I thought you would get that considering we are discussing something that is objective and not subjective.

Why not? It's objective fact that those who can't work are a economc drain. It's an example, that is all.


I asked how do you know if something is right, You answered with logic, research and reasoning (a good answer) but by that line I could rape someone as I reasoned that I can feel pleasure from it. If I hate someone, then I reason that by killing them I can feel better.

 

[Chibi_Muffin]

Why is it that every time there's a religious debate, it eventually gets boiled down to 'GhostAnime and someone else proving if religion has a point or not'? Ruins the point, really, if every thread like this becomes a broken record.

Some religions do have contradictions. Everything does, though. So long as the main values of a religion are kept, then a small contradiction or two doesn't really matter in the long run.

In fact, I heard somewhere (don't remember) that religions are, at the very core, a set of base rules to live life by. Using that, the stories behind them aren't as important.

 

[Vermehlo_Steele]

Yes, he is most difficult isn't he?

 

[GhostAnime]

What? That people aren't sure about god's role in their life and aren't sure they could be faithful to a religion? they are suspicious of those who claim to have answers.

Uh.. sure I guess.

Why not? It's objective fact that those who can't work are a economc drain. It's an example, that is all.

And it's also a subjective feeling on whether to do anything for these people. It's not the same as stating whether something exists or not.

I asked how do you know if something is right, You answered with logic, research and reasoning (a good answer) but by that line I could rape someone as I reasoned that I can feel pleasure from it. If I hate someone, then I reason that by killing them I can feel better.

Both of these things are done by feelings. They aren't comparable whatsoever. These examples are worse than your economic one for these reasons alone.

Quit twisting and turning how to look at an objective fact and inserting it into subjective situations. Again, I only stated that in relation to objectivity.

Some religions do have contradictions. Everything does, though.

'Everything'? What are these 'everything'?

So long as the main values of a religion are kept

There are even contradictions in these at points.

And cry more, people.

 

[Vermehlo_Steele]

But I is also suspicious of atheists. Hence my agnosticism.

If my example of the logic of using emotion (that I know exists when you don't know it exists) for doing something sounds silly, then your declaration of there being no deity sounds just as silly. You see, your based just as much on faith and interpretation as a bible-basher who is trying to prove a deity. Just because your atheist dosn't make you more logical than us agnostics or those relgioites as we have no more fact than each other.

Why dosn't deity exist for you? It hasn't been seen. If so, then real is just your brain obtaining signals from your senses.

 

[GhostAnime]

But I is also suspicious of atheists.

Who pretty much live the same life as you and make similar arguments as you. What's there to be suspicious about?

If my example of the logic of using emotion (that I know exists when you don't know it exists)

What on EARTH are you talking about?

then your declaration of there being no deity sounds just as silly.

I never declared anything like this.

You see, your based just as much on faith and interpretation as a bible-basher who is trying to prove a deity. Just because your atheist dosn't make you more logical than us agnostics or those relgioites as we have no more fact than each other.

Most Atheists do not declare that God or gods don't exist 100%. Stereotyping Atheists when you barely know the definition of one is silly.

If so, then real is just your brain obtaining signals from your senses.

And what else would real be honestly? Even if my brain is lying to me, what else do I have to go off of?