"Allah" is Arabic for "God", and why should I believe muhammed split the moon in half?
Why do you reject Allah? Muhammad was credited with splitting the moon in half in the sky, according to the quran. How do you know your deity and his miracles are real and the others can be dismissed?
"Allah" is Arabic for "God", and why should I believe muhammed split the moon in half?
Faith is absolutely not irrational. In Christianity, what is translated as "faith" is actually better translated as "trust" or "belief" if one goes back to the Greek or "trustworthy" if one uses the Hebrew.
So while you may disagree and reject God, we are not by any means irrational.
Faith is absolutely not irrational. In Christianity, what is translated as "faith" is actually better translated as "trust" or "belief" if one goes back to the Greek or "trustworthy" if one uses the Hebrew.
So while you may disagree and reject God, we are not by any means irrational.
"Allah" is Arabic for "God", and why should I believe muhammed split the moon in half?
I don't know. That's what I'm trying to understand; how christians can deny a miracle(s) that would strengthen the case for a non-christian prophet/deity to be the real god or of the real true god, but know that the miracles jesus is said to have performed to be true.
Lots of religions claim miraculous happenings. Lots of religions claim miraculous happenings that are said to be witnessed by many people. I see nothing special in christianity that would make me feel the miraculous stories in the bible are any more true than those in any other religious text. I would be open to seeing something that differentiates christianity from the pack, but that link from dphantom certainly wasn't it.
One does need the false promise of heaven to see the value in good deeds, solidarity, or respectable morals and ethics.
Yep...same regurgitated, brainless, atheist quotes I've seen circling the internet for quite a while.
You're dodging the question by nitpicking my example. I think you know perfectly well what I am getting at. What makes you believe the outrageous stories in the bible as true without evidence, but dismiss miraculous stories of other religions? Why does christianity get special treatment when so many other religions are dismissed? Basically, what makes your invisible friend real and believable and not all the other invisible friends?
I sincerely hope you're not trying to insinuate that atheists are without a sense of morality or ethics.
In other words, most people who were not born into their religion chose the one that they believe in because it "seems right" or is the one that they find they agree with the most. This implies, then, that they choose a religion that confirms what they already knew to be true, rather than were convinced by the religion of what is true.
You stated this like a fact, but did not explain how faith is anything other than irrational. You are only citing semantics... and really if you believe what you're saying, you should be able to do better than that.
Faith is belief in the absence of evidence. That is wholly irrational. If you have another definition of faith that you subscribe to, then explain it. Don't expect others to telepathically know your other meaning though. We all basically agree that it's belief without evidence.
No semantics. It is quite clear.
Faith is not belief in the absence of evidence though that is just one of its definitions. There are several others. As you well know. Faith is absolutely not irrational. My faith in my wife is complete. My faith in God is complete. Because I know who they are and what they can and will do.
So, all you really want to is attack believers and their beliefs, while not having to defend your position.
I asked you why should I believe in Islam's miracles, and you said "you don't know" and instantly shifted the focus back on to me, so I take it that you aren't in this for rational reasons, you just want to ridicule other's beliefs for the simple reason that they differ from yours.
And you were wrong, the Koran never said Muhammed split the moon and you failed to address that and accused me of "nitpicking" when I called you on your bullshit. Doing a bit more research, it was believed God performed that himself to show his backing of Muhammed.
You have no integrity, and are completely unaware of the details of your own arguments.
It's a lot easier to provide evidence that you know your wife than that you know God. And while you may feel a personal relationship with God, that's basically impossible to prove to anyone outside of yourself. We can witness you interacting with your wife and her subsequent interactions with you; if we witness you having a conversation with God, we never witness a response, even though you might. It's inherently unprovable. There's nothing wrong with having that faith, but from a strictly logical point of view, it can't be proven to anyone else, and that's where these discussions inevitably fall apart.
The point is, other miracles are claimed in every other religious text since the beginning of the time. You're just 'nitpicking' the particular miracle he referenced. His point stands, and again you dodge.
So, all you really want to is attack believers and their beliefs, while not having to defend your position.
I asked you why should I believe in Islam's miracles, and you said "you don't know" and instantly shifted the focus back on to me, so I take it that you aren't in this for rational reasons, you just want to ridicule other's beliefs for the simple reason that they differ from yours.
And you were wrong, the Koran never said Muhammed split the moon and you failed to address that and accused me of "nitpicking" when I called you on your bullshit. Doing a bit more research, it was believed God performed that himself to show his backing of Muhammed.
You have no integrity, and are completely unaware of the details of your own arguments.
So what?
Every politician claims to be the "best" politician, every car manufacture claims to make the "best" vehicle, every company claims to offer the "best" products, yet before making a decision, do you thoroughly examine every politician before voting, do you examine every car made by every manufacturer before buying, do you examine every product by every company before investing?
You don't.
You like to hold religious people to standards you would see as unreasonable when it comes things that interest you. You are all hypocrites, bottom line, and hence, why I hand-wave your "every religion deserves equal consideration" claim because they don't, and you know that.
There are simply too many religions...no one can equally evaluate every religion, no more than you can evaluate every car before buying one.
So what?
Every politician claims to be the "best" politician, every car manufacture claims to make the "best" vehicle, every company claims to offer the "best" products, yet before making a decision, do you thoroughly examine every politician before voting, do you examine every car made by every manufacturer before buying, do you examine every product by every company before investing?
You don't.
You like to hold religious people to standards you would see as unreasonable when it comes things that interest you. You are all hypocrites, bottom line, and hence, why I hand-wave your "every religion deserves equal consideration" claim because they don't, and you know that.
There are simply too many religions...no one can equally evaluate every religion, no more than you can evaluate every car before buying one.
But we're not cost comparing cell phone plans here or electing a politician to a four year term. We're talking about believers and eternity. I would hope that if your religious beliefs are as important as you portray them to be in your life; you might do a little more foot work and research than if you were looking for the best deal on bananas in town.
Or it might just be that christianity is socially acceptable and the 'norm' in this corner of the world where you happened to be born, and you just slid into the machine like another cog...
I only hold religious people to these standards when the they make the claim "I chose Jesus, and i know 100% that he's the son of God".
I only hold religious people to these standards when the they make the claim "I chose Jesus, and i know 100% that he's the son of God". That's the issue here. It'd be different to say, "I think it's likely that Jesus is the son of God, based on the evidence at hand, but I don't know for sure". Dphantom, as you can see above, falls into this category.
On top of this, it's clear you and Dphantom have actually never done of this research, you've just happened to follow it, because it's what you grew up with and/or convenient.
"I know a Ford Fusion is the best car, because the closer dealership to me is a Ford dealership".
Of course, there are differences as I never said the comparisons are equal, but the similarities are (1), a claim of truth (I sell the best car), and (2), you having to evaluate that truth. Analogies aren't perfect, and aren't required to be.
Secondly, being an atheist as I assume you are, did you examine all religious claims before concluding they're all false?
Oh, Christianity is more acceptable here, as Islam is in the middle-east, and as atheism is in Europe. Guess what? Most people born in Europe become atheist, most people born in Iraq are Muslim, most people born in the US are Christian, most people born in Australia are liberal.
These connections are easy to find.
On top of this, it's clear you and Dphantom have actually never done of this research, you've just happened to follow it, because it's what you grew up with and/or convenient.
No, I did not examine them all.
So are you agreeing that atheism is a product of environment as well, and that people who are born in Europe who are atheists are only atheists because of their place of birth?Right... and that suggests how people choose religion has more to do with where they are born and the social norms there than anything else
So what?
Every politician claims to be the "best" politician, every car manufacture claims to make the "best" vehicle, every company claims to offer the "best" products, yet before making a decision, do you thoroughly examine every politician before voting, do you examine every car made by every manufacturer before buying, do you examine every product by every company before investing?
You don't.
You like to hold religious people to standards you would see as unreasonable when it comes things that interest you. You are all hypocrites, bottom line, and hence, why I hand-wave your "every religion deserves equal consideration" claim because they don't, and you know that.
There are simply too many religions...no one can equally evaluate every religion, no more than you can evaluate every car before buying one.
This simple fact exposes the hypocrisy rife in atheism. One religion drove them to atheism, just as one religion turned theists to Christianity.
We're likely products of the same system of belief, but with different outcomes. No atheist I've talked to examined the myriads of religious claims, no more than Christians did. Both atheism and theism is therefore, a "faith" in its own right -- one claiming the falseness religion, and the other claiming the truthfulness of their religion.
Nor do I think atheists hold theists to unreasonable standards. If someone makes the statement that G-d exists, that statement is extraordinary and for some atheists and agnostics requires proof. If I made the statement that unicorns exist I would expect some or even all theists and atheists alike to require me to show proof. That's certainly not unreasonable.