Ask About Islam

[KWED]

For once I agree with Muhammad. The statement about meaning is not a philosophy, but what you should do in response is.

Ok, to clarify - "Everything is ultimately meaningless" is an observation. "Therefore enjoy it while you can" is a philosophy.
Still don't see why it is a bad philosophy.

 

[KWED]

Funny that..
I wonder why we can all agree on a meaning, if it has no universal connotations.

But we can't all agree on a meaning. It varies hugely by individual, time, place, culture, etc - exactly as you would expect if we all generate our own meaning, as individuals, groups, societies, etc.

 

[ppp]

Ok, to clarify - "Everything is ultimately meaningless" is an observation. "Therefore enjoy it while you can" is a philosophy.
Still don't see why it is a bad philosophy.

honestly, I don't either.

“There was a tale he had read once, long ago, as a small boy: the story of a traveler who had slipped down a cliff, with man-eating tigers above him and a lethal fall below him, who managed to stop his fall halfway down the side of the cliff, holding on for dear life. There was a clump of strawberries beside him, and certain death above him and below. What should he do? went the question.

And the reply was, Eat the strawberries."
-- American Gods, Neil Gaiman

 

[KWED]

honestly, I don't either.

“There was a tale he had read once, long ago, as a small boy: the story of a traveler who had slipped down a cliff, with man-eating tigers above him and a lethal fall below him, who managed to stop his fall halfway down the side of the cliff, holding on for dear life. There was a clump of strawberries beside him, and certain death above him and below. What should he do? went the question.

And the reply was, Eat the strawberries."
-- American Gods, Neil Gaiman

And of course, the answer from our religionist friends would be "Pray to god!"

 

[muhammad_isa]

And of course, the answer from our religionist friends would be "Pray to god!"

You seem to be just as addicted to religion as believers.
..just in your case, it is arguing against belief instead of for.

 

[MyM]

See post 453



Why do believer always assume that you haven't read their pet books? It's like y'all cannot conceive that anyone can read you stuff and not agree with you. Pretty full of yourselves.


See post 453

See post 453

Well, that is obviously false. But I agree that science is a far superior methodology for gaining knowledge of the universe in which we live than reading an ancient book.


If you cannot demonstrate your claim to people who believe that you are wrong, then that is a failure of your methodology. Scientists do it all the time.

I can prove it to myself and that is enough for my understanding. My Creator is not a failure. Just look around you. Look at the human body. Look at the oceans the seas, the beauty of the universe. No one can duplicate them If this isn't enough proof just from the eye alone, then I don't know what to tell you. I see a beautiful Creator to create such beautiful things. I don't see the idea of us evolving from nothing when we obviously came from something. It's just not logical. The Quran is for the understanding.

 

[ppp]

You seem to be just as addicted to religion as believers.
..just in your case, it is arguing against belief instead of for.

By your reasoning someone arguing against poisoning water is addicted to poison water.
Take the time to filter you comments before you post them. Please.

 

[ppp]

I can prove it to myself and that is enough for my understanding.

I know. Typical self indulgence. Fortunately, unlike you, I know I am not the center of the universe. My cat is.

 

[MyM]

I know. Typical self indulgence. Fortunately, unlike you, I know I am not the center of the universe. My cat is.

Why do you say that? Because of my words of humbleness about my Creator? Was it intimidating to come back with a retort like that?

 

[ppp]

Why do you say that? Because of my words of humbleness about my Creator?

You haven't got a humble word in your vocabulary. Except for maybe, 'humble-brag'

Was it intimidating to come back with a retort like that?

I don't think that word means what you think it means.

 

[MyM]

You haven't got a humble word in your vocabulary. Except for maybe, 'humble-brag'

I don't think that word means what you think it means.

again, why do you say that? I said nice things yet you....see this is what I mean, one can't carry on a conversation without a ridicule or someone tryin to dominate.

In Islam it says, If you don't have anything nice to say, remain silent...think that is what I will do since yall can't talk without insulting.

 

[danieldemol]

It makes no difference whether the night and day are long or short, so long as the times of the prayers can be distinguished by the signs which were identified by the Messenger of Allah pbuh. Allah says in the Quran,

“Verily, As‑Salaah (the prayer) is enjoined on the believers at fixed hours”
al-Nisa’ 4:103

We are in Islam, to follow the shar'eea. You take from Saudia if you live in those regions. It is incumbent upon every Muslim to pray 5 times a day, fast etc.

1. What is the relevance of prayer to fasting?
2. What translation of the Quran are you using? Yusuf Ali translated 4:103 as;

'set up regular prayers: for such prayers are enjoined on believers at stated times'

Which doesn't exactly help us if the stated time is at sunset (or if the time is fixed at sunset for example).

3. What of Surah 2:187 which states (as translated by Yusuf Ali);

'eat and drink until the white thread of dawn appear to you distinct from its black thread; then complete your fast till the night appears...'

Note it says complete your fast till the night appears (ie fasting is made relevant to the observer, not to another observer at a different location).

Therefore the Muslims who break fast before the night appears appear to be practising innovation in religion.

In my opinion.

 

[stevecanuck]

I can prove it to myself and that is enough for my understanding. My Creator is not a failure. Just look around you. Look at the human body. Look at the oceans the seas, the beauty of the universe. No one can duplicate them If this isn't enough proof just from the eye alone, then I don't know what to tell you. I see a beautiful Creator to create such beautiful things. I don't see the idea of us evolving from nothing when we obviously came from something. It's just not logical. .

I find some of your wording to be odd. You sound like an Arabic speaker with a very good, but not perfect, understanding of English. Sentences such as, "The Quran is for the understanding", smacks of Arabic English. There have been a few others that have made me wonder about your story.

 

[Sheldon]

Just look around you. Look at the human body. Look at the oceans the seas, the beauty of the universe. No one can duplicate them If this isn't enough proof just from the eye alone, then I don't know what to tell you.

Humans evolved as did all living things, denying this scientific fact is not a compelling argument for a creator deity, for which there is no objective evidence. You're also using a circular reasoning fallacy again.

I don't see the idea of us evolving from nothing when we obviously came from something. It's just not logical.

You have already been told that evolution explains and evidences the origin of species, it makes no claims about the origins of life, which is an entirely different field of study. The fact you are ignorant of this is quite common among creationists, but the fact you are repeating after it, even after it has been explained, is dishonest. Again you surely can see how such dishonesty is received by those who know better, and what they must then infer about your arguments and beliefs.

It has been clear from the start, that like many theists, you use the word logic as rhetoric, and don't understand what it means. As you keep repeating the same common logical fallacies, even after they have been explained to you several times.

It is not a choice between evolution or creationism. Even were evolution entirely falsified, creationism would remain an unevidenced archaic myths, and I would still be compelled to disbelieve it.

 

[Sheldon]

You seem to be just as addicted to religion as believers.
..just in your case, it is arguing against belief instead of for.

OF course one would argue against believing anything for which no objective evidence can be demonstrated. It's just that outside of religions very few people hold such beliefs, and when they do the effect is usually not as all pervasive as religious beliefs.

If the religious belief is innocuous then I'd be inclined to let it alone, unless the person voices their belief to me of course, for instance in a public forum intended for debate.

 

[KWED]

Of course.
Isn't it amazing how so many of those that insist on G-d being responsible have trouble with being responsible themselves?

Accepting responsibility for your actions is part of being a grown up. Perhaps you should except it from your god?

Also unjustly foisting responsibility on the innocent is a classic tyrant's trick. People are right to reject such low tactics.

 

[KWED]

You seem to be just as addicted to religion as believers.
..just in your case, it is arguing against belief instead of for.

So, a doctor who works with heroin addicts is just as addicted as the addicts he treats?
Makes sense.

 

[Spirit of Light]

So, a doctor who works with heroin addicts is just as addicted as the addicts he treats?
Makes sense.

You truly believe you are treating RF Muslims because of your avertion toward Islam? From what I seen, most of what you do is making conflict between people.

Just an observation....

 

[KWED]

My Creator is not a failure. Just look around you. Look at the human body.

Oh dear. Perhaps expected as you are obviously completely uneducated in biology, human or otherwise.
The human body is a mess, full of faults and problems. If it was designed, the designer was incompetent.

Look at the oceans the seas, the beauty of the universe. No one can duplicate them

Of course we can duplicate them. Thousands of human bodies are duplicated every day by ordinary people. Science can even do the duplicating for people who have difficulty doing it themselves.
Duplicating a sea is easy (in principle). Have you never been to a marine park? It's just a matter of scale.
"The beauty of the universe" is a subjective concept duplication does not apply to. BTW, most of the universe isn't anything at all.

What you are doing is called "the argument from personal incredulity". Basically you are assuming that your own lack of knowledge applies to everyone.
Or to put it another way...just because the child doesn't understand how their iPad works, doesn't mean it must be magic.

If this isn't enough proof just from the eye alone, then I don't know what to tell you.

Perhaps provide some actual evidence or rational argument for your god, rather than stuff that can be explained through natural processes.[/quote][/quote]

 

[KWED]

Why do you say that? Because of my words of humbleness about my Creator?

I love how religionists claim humility while accusing atheists of arrogance. Just think about it...

1. "There is a god who created the universe just for humans and he has saved a special place in paradise for me where I will live forever with everything I want, and everyone who criticised me will be tortured forever!"
2. "We are all just biological machines, here by a string of random chances. None of us are special or different or more worthy, there is no greater purpose, and when we die there is nothing."

Which of those is "humble" and which is "arrogant"?

Was it intimidating to come back with a retort like that?

You don't have "retorts". You just parrot dogmatic platitudes or irrational nonsense.