Qur'an 2:256 and the sophistry it inspires.

[KWED]

Those are the examples of where God says "worship me or I will torture you forever"???!!!

Er, yes. Because that is clearly what Allah is saying. Even with your loose grip of English it should be pretty simple to understand.

Do you know what ‘Hell’ is

The Islamic hell is a place of eternal torture, described in detail in the Quran (you should read it).

and do you know the meaning of ‘a warning’??

Yes. It basically means "Do x or y will happen" - or something like, erm, "Worship me or I will torture you forever". You know, that kind of warning.

If you do, do you know what kind of people are destined to be in it??

Surely no one is destined to be in hell, or they would have no free will in the matter, which would make the warning incoherent (although in the Quran Allah does say that some people are destined for hell, showing that the very foundation of Islam is incoherent).
You're not very good at this, are you?

Exactly what you should do!!!! Were you facing a mirror when you wrote that??

Ah, the classic "I know you are, but what am I" response. Haven't heard that since kindergarten.
The thing is, my confused little friend, you keep displaying an ignorance of the contents of the Quran. If it looks like a duck and quacks like a duck, it's probably a duck.

It’s not only the Quran,

I asked you what was it about the Quran that convinced you.

it’s also people like you who lack the ability to think logically and rationally that convinced me of the truth of Islam.

Ironically, that statement perfectly illustrates your lack of logic and rational thought, because why would my lack of reason and logic mean that Islam is true? (Clue: it doesn't, in any way whatsoever). It's the same sort of nonsensical response as people who claim that being presented with evidence that their belief is wrong just makes their belief stronger.

A case for messrs Dunning and Kruger, I suspect.[/quote][/quote]

 

[KWED]

Let me say it again – “Mainstream faiths such as Christianity, Islam, Hinduism, Buddhism, are NOT associated with pejorative or negative connotations to be labeled as ‘cults’ while associations/groups that are often associated with pejorative and negative connotations are labeled as ‘cults’. Mainstream faiths are accepted by the masses while cults are NOT accepted by the masses as cults are often viewed as abnormal”.

Maybe not to people invested in those cults, but to others, there is little difference. The slavish adherence to weird ritual and the blinkered, idealised veneration of Muhammad are classic hallmarks of a cult.

So what proof have you got that all ‘messengers of God’ are NOT legit???

1. Burden of proof, dear thing.
If you claim that Muhammad really is a messenger of god, it is up to you to prove it, not me to disprove it.
2. Are you really claiming that all people who claim to be messengers of god really are?

Because they don’t preach what the cult atheism preaches??

Atheism doesn't fit the definition of a cult. There is no doctrine, no ritual, no venerated, magical leader.
But please enlighten us - what does atheism "preach"?

Lol… what a funny guy you are!!! Have you ever considered stand-up comedy as a profession?? You are such a natural and could make tons of money in that profession!!

I did do a bit as an undergrad. Went down fairly well TBH, although not something I fancied doing full time.

But interesting that you avoided the point yet again. If you regard cults with such distain, how do you manage with the fact that Islam was absolutely a cult, by your definition, for the first decade of so?

I suppose you don’t see much difference between ‘interfere’ and ‘intervene’ either, right??

Not really. They are often synonymous (means "words that can replace each other").
From thesaurus.com (A thesuarus is a book that provides synonyms for words)

And what ‘guilt’ got to do with it?? You mean if a criminal did not feel guilty of his crime, it means he’s innocent of his crime??

You were the one who brought up the issue of guilt. I had no idea what point you were trying to make. Seems like you didn't either.

Looks like you don’t know what ‘negatively impart’ means!!

Erm, it was "negatively impact", not "impart".
If you interfere or intervene (see, the words are interchangeable) in a mugging to stop it, you "negatively impact the mugger's plan.
However, I now realise that you are struggling to understand this simple concept. Let me know what your native langauge is and I will have a go in that. I can get by in a few, and there's always Google Translate.

Oh dear. Yes, it does display your inability to think maturely and intelligently. Do you know when to apply the word ‘interfere’ and when to apply the word ‘intervene’??

I'm starting to feel like I'm kicking a puppy here. Please stop.

It’s about acceptance, not numbers, and cults are NOT accepted by the masses.

Islam was not accepted by most Meccans, so it was a cult.
Islam is still not accepted by most people, so it is still a cult.
(I feel awful)

Never mind, don’t think your simple mind can understand that.

Maybe if I take my shoes off I won't feel so bad. I will type with only one finger.

No, mainstream faiths are not cults when they began. They have few followers in their early days because they were unknown to the masses

You just argued that "It’s about acceptance, not numbers, and cults are NOT accepted by the masses". So by your own definition, Islam was a cult in its early years.

I shall also keep one eye cloded.

but they grew in numbers through time. Cults have few followers in their early days AND remain few through time even when they are known to the masses.

Only about a quarter of people follow Islam. So relatively few followers, despite being the clear and obvious truth, etc.
So basically, a huge cult.

Atheism is a good example of a cult.

Without doctrine, ritual and charismatic magic leader, not sure how it can be. But feel free to elaborate.

 

[JerryMyers]

Er, yes. Because that is clearly what Allah is saying. Even with your loose grip of English it should be pretty simple to understand.

That’s what an ignorant simpleton who lacks logic and rationale will say. Hardly surprising!

The Islamic hell is a place of eternal torture, described in detail in the Quran (you should read it).

Yes, it is a place of eternal torture, described in detail in the Quran, and do you know why and for whom the place was created?? Ooops, I forgot you do not believe in the existence of a God, so how can I even expect you to answer that logically and rationally??!!

Yes. It basically means "Do x or y will happen" - or something like, erm, "Worship me or I will torture you forever". You know, that kind of warning.

Ahh, displaying your ignorance and inability to think logically and rationally !! You can’t even show me where in the Quran did Allah ever say “Worship me or I will torture you forever” and then you try to pretend that you have..??! What a joker!!

Surely no one is destined to be in hell, or they would have no free will in the matter, which would make the warning incoherent (although in the Quran Allah does say that some people are destined for hell, showing that the very foundation of Islam is incoherent).
You're not very good at this, are you?

Of course, they are destined to be in hell if they continue to commit sin and that’s why prophets are sent throughout the ages to guide them out of their sinning ways.
You're not very good at this, are you?

Ah, the classic "I know you are, but what am I" response. Haven't heard that since kindergarten.

Ahhh, the classic ‘dodging’ response. Heard that all the time from ignorant folks who lack the ability to think logically and rationally!!

The thing is, my confused little friend, you keep displaying an ignorance of the contents of the Quran. If it looks like a duck and quacks like a duck, it's probably a duck.

You are right! You do quack like a duck!! Is that why you are not making any sense in any of your comments, my little friend??!

I asked you what was it about the Quran that convinced you.

Read to understand the Quran, NOT read to find faults, then, you will know what convinces me of the truth in the Quran.

Ironically, that statement perfectly illustrates your lack of logic and rational thought, because why would my lack of reason and logic mean that Islam is true? (Clue: it doesn't, in any way whatsoever). It's the same sort of nonsensical response as people who claim that being presented with evidence that their belief is wrong just makes their belief stronger.

Not really. That statement basically illustrates why Islam is the fastest-growing religion today. Your persistent questioning of the existence of God clearly shows the lack of logic and rationale as it would be senseless to think that the universe and even man himself are NOT created by design but randomly by some natural forces. Do you think anyone will believe if someone says the modern cars are not created by design but randomly came into existence by some natural forces through the ages?? Even Science has to admit that the existence of a Supreme Creator is the best explanation for our very existence.
Why is it that you still deny the existence of a Supreme Creator?? (Clue: your inability to think logically and rationally has a lot to do with it)

 

[KWED]

That’s what an ignorant simpleton who lacks logic and rationale will say. Hardly surprising!

A big fan of irony, I see.

Yes, it is a place of eternal torture, described in detail in the Quran, and do you know why and for whom the place was created??

For those who reject Allah and refuse to submit to Islam. I'm genuinely surprised you didn't already know that.

Ooops, I forgot you do not believe in the existence of a God, so how can I even expect you to answer that logically and rationally??!!

Another of your classic non sequiturs.
My belief or lack of it has nothing to do with my knowledge of religions. In fact, being more objective and less subject to confirmation bias mean that I am at an advantage. As we have seen over these posts.

Ahh, displaying your ignorance and inability to think logically and rationally !! You can’t even show me where in the Quran did Allah ever say “Worship me or I will torture you forever” and then you try to pretend that you have..??! What a joker!!

I gave you a long list of verses from the Quran where Allah basically says "Worship me or I will torture you forever".
Are you really trying to claim that god never expresses that warning in the Quran? Even if you haven't read it, someone must have told you.

Of course, they are destined to be in hell if they continue to commit sin and that’s why prophets are sent throughout the ages to guide them out of their sinning ways.
You're not very good at this, are you?

If they can change their ways and avoid hell, they are not "destined for hell", by definition.
"If something is your destiny by Allah's decree, you cannot avoid it" - Umar ibn al Khattab

Ahhh, the classic ‘dodging’ response. Heard that all the time from ignorant folks who lack the ability to think logically and rationally!!

Playing the irony card again, I see.
I commented that you should read the Quran, based on your poor knowledge of it.
You responded with "You should read the Quran, blah, blah..."
There was nothing in your response to respond to.

You are right! You do quack like a duck!! Is that why you are not making any sense in any of your comments, my little friend??!

I wasn't saying you quack like a duck. It is an aphorism that things are usually what they strongly appear to be.
As English isn't your first language, I shouldn't really use such idioms. They can be confusing.

Read to understand the Quran, NOT read to find faults,

That is exactly why I read it - to understand about Islam. When I read it, I found many faults.
You are merely question begging again - that there are no faults in the Quran.

then, you will know what convinces me of the truth in the Quran.

You really do seem very reluctant to explain what it was about the Quran that convinced you it is all true. Is that because, deep down. you realise that there isn't really anything other than wishful thinking and personal incredulity?

Not really. That statement basically illustrates why Islam is the fastest-growing religion today.

Ironically, that claim highlights your lack of reasoning and logic.
Islim is growing faster than other religions because of high birth rates amongst Muslim families. Studies have been done. The data is all out there for anyone interested in rational enquiry. It is estimated that the number of converts is balanced by the number of people leaving.

Your persistent questioning of the existence of God clearly shows the lack of logic and rationale

So you think people like Einstein, Hawking, Sagan, Higgs, Crick, Nash, Penrose, etc all lack the ability to think logically and rationally?
But you do?

as it would be senseless to think that the universe and even man himself are NOT created by design but randomly by some natural forces.

1. That is just the "argument from personal incredulity" argument. Just because the child doesn't understand how their iPad works, doesn't mean it must therefore be magic. (Just to be clear, in this analogy, the iPad is the universe and the child is you).

Do you think anyone will believe if someone says the modern cars are not created by design but randomly came into existence by some natural forces through the ages??

Who has ever claimed that cars are not designed?
Do you think snowflakes are "designed"? What about blades of grass or mountain formations or river deltas? We know precisely how these are formed. No designer necessary, all natural. We know that natural processes cause complex patterns to arise.

Even Science has to admit that the existence of a Supreme Creator is the best explanation for our very existence.

No it doesn't. Because it isn't. If you claim god created the universe, you have to explain god. Then you have to explain why all the stuff we already know is wrong.

Why is it that you still deny the existence of a Supreme Creator?? (Clue: your inability to think logically and rationally has a lot to do with it)

Because there is no evidence for one, and no need for one. And because it would lead to more unanswered questions that we presently have.

You still haven't explained why you believe there is one (apart from personal incredulity/limited knowledge), or why it is the Islamic version rather than any other.
(Again, I don't blame you. Even experienced, qualified theologians and philosophers find it hard to present a cogent argument, so you've got no chance.)

 

[JerryMyers]

A big fan of irony, I see.

For those who reject Allah and refuse to submit to Islam. I'm genuinely surprised you didn't already know that.

Another of your classic non sequiturs.
My belief or lack of it has nothing to do with my knowledge of religions. In fact, being more objective and less subject to confirmation bias mean that I am at an advantage. As we have seen over these posts.

I gave you a long list of verses from the Quran where Allah basically says "Worship me or I will torture you forever".
Are you really trying to claim that god never expresses that warning in the Quran? Even if you haven't read it, someone must have told you.

If they can change their ways and avoid hell, they are not "destined for hell", by definition.
"If something is your destiny by Allah's decree, you cannot avoid it" - Umar ibn al Khattab

Playing the irony card again, I see.
I commented that you should read the Quran, based on your poor knowledge of it.
You responded with "You should read the Quran, blah, blah..."
There was nothing in your response to respond to.


I wasn't saying you quack like a duck. It is an aphorism that things are usually what they strongly appear to be.
As English isn't your first language, I shouldn't really use such idioms. They can be confusing.

That is exactly why I read it - to understand about Islam. When I read it, I found many faults.
You are merely question begging again - that there are no faults in the Quran.

You really do seem very reluctant to explain what it was about the Quran that convinced you it is all true. Is that because, deep down. you realise that there isn't really anything other than wishful thinking and personal incredulity?

Ironically, that claim highlights your lack of reasoning and logic.
Islim is growing faster than other religions because of high birth rates amongst Muslim families. Studies have been done. The data is all out there for anyone interested in rational enquiry. It is estimated that the number of converts is balanced by the number of people leaving.

So you think people like Einstein, Hawking, Sagan, Higgs, Crick, Nash, Penrose, etc all lack the ability to think logically and rationally?
But you do?

1. That is just the "argument from personal incredulity" argument. Just because the child doesn't understand how their iPad works, doesn't mean it must therefore be magic. (Just to be clear, in this analogy, the iPad is the universe and the child is you).

Who has ever claimed that cars are not designed?
Do you think snowflakes are "designed"? What about blades of grass or mountain formations or river deltas? We know precisely how these are formed. No designer necessary, all natural. We know that natural processes cause complex patterns to arise.

No it doesn't. Because it isn't. If you claim god created the universe, you have to explain god. Then you have to explain why all the stuff we already know is wrong.

Because there is no evidence for one, and no need for one. And because it would lead to more unanswered questions that we presently have.

You still haven't explained why you believe there is one (apart from personal incredulity/limited knowledge), or why it is the Islamic version rather than any other.
(Again, I don't blame you. Even experienced, qualified theologians and philosophers find it hard to present a cogent argument, so you've got no chance.)

I know I have said a lot about your ignorance and inability to think logically and rationally and the reason I keep saying that is because it’s true!! Just look at all of your comments – it’s a display of nonsense, ignorance, and the inability to think logically and rationally!!!

Again, I don't blame you for coming out with nonsense after nonsense as your belief in the non-existence of a Creator is a dead give-away of your inability to think logically and rationally. Even Science acknowledges that the existence of a Creator/God is the best explanation for our very existence!! Here’s that video again which proves that you just lack the ability to think logically and rationally - Does Science Argue for or against God? | Eric Metaxas

So, no matter how hard you try to present a ‘logical and rational’ argument, you can’t, as the ability to think logically and rationally is just NOT with you, so you've got no chance! Sad!!

 

[KWED]

I know I have said a lot about your ignorance and inability to think logically and rationally and the reason I keep saying that is because it’s true!! Just look at all of your comments – it’s a display of nonsense, ignorance, and the inability to think logically and rationally!!!

If that were the case, you would easily be able to dismantle all my arguments and refute all my points.
However, all you do it shout "Ur Stoopid!!"

And yet again, you ignore all my arguments and points and instead resort to pathetic attempts at insult.

Again, I don't blame you for coming out with nonsense after nonsense as your belief in the non-existence of a Creator is a dead give-away of your inability to think logically and rationally.

Now you are just making your self look even more foolish.
This was a terrible argument the first time you made it. But I have since dismantled it by giving many examples of the world's finest rational and logical thinkers who do not believe in gods.
So, for you to then repeat the argument without even attempting to address my response just confirms your inability to present any cogent arguments.

Even Science acknowledges that the existence of a Creator/God is the best explanation for our very existence!!

Again, same thing. "Science" absolutely does not propose a god as the best explanation for the universe. This is so self evident as to bring me back to my theory that you are a non-Muslim trolling to make Muslims and Islam look bad.

Here’s that video again which proves that you just lack the ability to think logically and rationally - Does Science Argue for or against God? | Eric Metaxas

Metaxas is a Christian apologist whose qualification is in English.
Why on earth would you think that that video presents a scientific argument or represents the scientific consensus? Truly baffling.

So, no matter how hard you try to present a ‘logical and rational’ argument, you can’t, as the ability to think logically and rationally is just NOT with you, so you've got no chance! Sad!!

I'm wondering if you are a glowing example of Dunning Kruger effect, or whether you actually realise your position is untenable and have no reasonable arguments but simply can't bear to leave quietly, tacitly admitting defeat.

 

[JerryMyers]

If that were the case, you would easily be able to dismantle all my arguments and refute all my points.
However, all you do it shout "Ur Stoopid!!"
And yet again, you ignore all my arguments and points and instead resort to pathetic attempts at insult.
Now you are just making your self look even more foolish.
This was a terrible argument the first time you made it. But I have since dismantled it by giving many examples of the world's finest rational and logical thinkers who do not believe in gods.
So, for you to then repeat the argument without even attempting to address my response just confirms your inability to present any cogent arguments.
Again, same thing. "Science" absolutely does not propose a god as the best explanation for the universe. This is so self evident as to bring me back to my theory that you are a non-Muslim trolling to make Muslims and Islam look bad.
Metaxas is a Christian apologist whose qualification is in English.
Why on earth would you think that that video presents a scientific argument or represents the scientific consensus? Truly baffling.
I'm wondering if you are a glowing example of Dunning Kruger effect, or whether you actually realise your position is untenable and have no reasonable arguments but simply can't bear to leave quietly, tacitly admitting defeat.

Right on cue, you display your ignorance and inability to think logically and rationally AGAIN!

You hardly present any arguments, to begin with… and you cannot accept my explanation to those that I did respond to as you are ignorant and incapable to think logically and rationally.

*Staff Edit*

 

[KWED]

Right on cue, you display your ignorance and inability to think logically and rationally AGAIN!

You hardly present any arguments, to begin with… and you cannot accept my explanation to those that I did respond to as you are ignorant and incapable to think logically and rationally.

You claimed that not believing in god is a sign of an inability to think logically and rationally.
I gave you numerous examples of some of the world's finest scientists - prime exponents of logical and rational thinking - who do not believe in god.
Therefore I disproved your argument.
QED.

Can you have a debate with someone who is ignorant and incapable to think logically and rationally?? Nope,

Well, I'm certainly giving it a good go.

so the best response to someone who’s ignorant and incapable to think logically and rationally is to remind him over and over again that he IS ignorant and incapable to think logically and rationally, and hopefully it will knock some sense in him!!!

Wrong again.
If someone is presenting irrational and illogical arguments, the best response is to show those arguments to be irrational and illogical - as I just did with your argument above.

Simply shouting "lol! Ur dumb!!" over and over again only shows that you are incapable of addressing the arguments you have been presented with.

 

[JerryMyers]

You claimed that not believing in god is a sign of an inability to think logically and rationally.
I gave you numerous examples of some of the world's finest scientists - prime exponents of logical and rational thinking - who do not believe in god.
Therefore I disproved your argument.
QED.

Well, I'm certainly giving it a good go.

Wrong again.
If someone is presenting irrational and illogical arguments, the best response is to show those arguments to be irrational and illogical - as I just did with your argument above.

Simply shouting "lol! Ur dumb!!" over and over again only shows that you are incapable of addressing the arguments you have been presented with.

Once again demonstrates your inability to think logically and rationally. God gave you the faculty of intelligence to think logically and rationally but, you just refuse to use it!!

Two-thirds of scientists believe in God and most of the remaining one-third do NOT really reject the existence of a Supreme Creator/God. At best they are agnostic.

Below are the sayings of some famous scientists:

- Galileo Galilei – “I do not feel obliged to believe that the same God who has endowed us with senses, reason and intellect has intended us to forego their use and by some other means to give us knowledge which we can attain by them. He would not require us to deny sense and reason in physical matters which are set before our eyes and minds by direct experience or necessary demonstrations."

- Sir Francis Bacon who was also credited as the founder of the scientific method - "God never wrought miracle to convince atheism, because his ordinary works convince it. It is true, that a little philosophy inclineth man’s mind to atheism; but depth in philosophy bringeth men’s minds about to religion. For while the mind of man looketh upon second causes scattered, it may sometimes rest in them, and go no further; but when it beholdeth the chain of them, confederate and linked together, it must needs fly to Providence and Deity."

- Charles Darwin, famous for his ‘Theory of Evolution’ - "I may say that the impossibility of conceiving that this grand and wondrous universe, with our conscious selves, arose through chance, seems to me the chief argument for the existence of God;……….. The safest conclusion seems to be that the whole subject is beyond the scope of man's intellect; but man can do his duty."

- Carl Sagan, the famous astronomer – "Science is not only compatible with spirituality; it is a profound source of spirituality”.

In fact, Sagan even denied being an atheist.

*Staff Edit*

 

[stevecanuck]

Once again demonstrates your inability to think logically and rationally. God gave you the faculty of intelligence to think logically and rationally but, you just refuse to use it!!

Two-thirds of scientists believe in God and most of the remaining one-third do NOT really reject the existence of a Supreme Creator/God. At best they are agnostic.

Below are the sayings of some famous scientists:

- Galileo Galilei – “I do not feel obliged to believe that the same God who has endowed us with senses, reason and intellect has intended us to forego their use and by some other means to give us knowledge which we can attain by them. He would not require us to deny sense and reason in physical matters which are set before our eyes and minds by direct experience or necessary demonstrations."

- Sir Francis Bacon who was also credited as the founder of the scientific method - "God never wrought miracle to convince atheism, because his ordinary works convince it. It is true, that a little philosophy inclineth man’s mind to atheism; but depth in philosophy bringeth men’s minds about to religion. For while the mind of man looketh upon second causes scattered, it may sometimes rest in them, and go no further; but when it beholdeth the chain of them, confederate and linked together, it must needs fly to Providence and Deity."

- Charles Darwin, famous for his ‘Theory of Evolution’ - "I may say that the impossibility of conceiving that this grand and wondrous universe, with our conscious selves, arose through chance, seems to me the chief argument for the existence of God;……….. The safest conclusion seems to be that the whole subject is beyond the scope of man's intellect; but man can do his duty."

- Carl Sagan, the famous astronomer – "Science is not only compatible with spirituality; it is a profound source of spirituality”.

In fact, Sagan even denied being an atheist.

So, yes, you ARE ignorant and incapable to think logically and rationally!!

I'll bet you're a hoot a parties.

 

[JerryMyers]

I'll bet you're a hoot a parties.

I'll bet you're that one-liner guy who people will just ignore at parties, right??

 

[KWED]

Two-thirds of scientists believe in God

Not at the highest level, they most certainly do not. Over 90% of members of the Royal Institution and the American Academy of Science don't believe in god.
The most optimistic claims include undergraduates and 'social scientists' in their data. When you look at proper, qualified scientists (postgrad in natural sciences), the figure is well below 50%. I even doubt that two thirds of everyday science graduates are religious. And of course it depends on culture. Places like India and Turkey have fairly high numbers of religious scientists, places like UK and France have very few.

and most of the remaining one-third do NOT really reject the existence of a Supreme Creator/God. At best they are agnostic.

Yeah, you're just making this up now.
Here are some studies that disprove your claim.
Scientists and Belief
https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/2378023116664353

Below are the sayings of some famous scientists:

- Galileo Galilei – “I do not feel obliged to believe that the same God who has endowed us with senses, reason and intellect has intended us to forego their use and by some other means to give us knowledge which we can attain by them. He would not require us to deny sense and reason in physical matters which are set before our eyes and minds by direct experience or necessary demonstrations."

- Sir Francis Bacon who was also credited as the founder of the scientific method - "God never wrought miracle to convince atheism, because his ordinary works convince it. It is true, that a little philosophy inclineth man’s mind to atheism; but depth in philosophy bringeth men’s minds about to religion. For while the mind of man looketh upon second causes scattered, it may sometimes rest in them, and go no further; but when it beholdeth the chain of them, confederate and linked together, it must needs fly to Providence and Deity."

Are you really quoting 500 year old philosophers as evidence that today's scientists are religious?

- Charles Darwin, famous for his ‘Theory of Evolution’ - "I may say that the impossibility of conceiving that this grand and wondrous universe, with our conscious selves, arose through chance, seems to me the chief argument for the existence of God;……….. The safest conclusion seems to be that the whole subject is beyond the scope of man's intellect; but man can do his duty."

And yet even Darwin, 150 years ago, realised that god was not necessary to explain the variety of life we observe in nature. Using Darwin's earlier religious beliefs as evidence that scientists believe in god is truly baffling. He described himself as an agnostic in later years.

- Carl Sagan, the famous astronomer – "Science is not only compatible with spirituality; it is a profound source of spirituality”.
In fact, Sagan even denied being an atheist.

Sagan absolutely did not believe in god, especially not the gods of religion. He also recognised that there is no evidence to support any claims for those gods. He even claimed that the term "god" was meaningless.

It is a fairly common tactic amongst apologists to try and claim that various scientists believe(d) in god. Whether this is through dishonesty or stupidity is anyone's guess.

 

[JerryMyers]

Not at the highest level, they most certainly do not. Over 90% of members of the Royal Institution and the American Academy of Science don't believe in god.
The most optimistic claims include undergraduates and 'social scientists' in their data. When you look at proper, qualified scientists (postgrad in natural sciences), the figure is well below 50%. I even doubt that two thirds of everyday science graduates are religious. And of course it depends on culture. Places like India and Turkey have fairly high numbers of religious scientists, places like UK and France have very few.

Yeah, you're just making this up now.
Here are some studies that disprove your claim.
Scientists and Belief
https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/2378023116664353

Are you really quoting 500 year old philosophers as evidence that today's scientists are religious?

And yet even Darwin, 150 years ago, realised that god was not necessary to explain the variety of life we observe in nature. Using Darwin's earlier religious beliefs as evidence that scientists believe in god is truly baffling. He described himself as an agnostic in later years.

Sagan absolutely did not believe in god, especially not the gods of religion. He also recognised that there is no evidence to support any claims for those gods. He even claimed that the term "god" was meaningless.

It is a fairly common tactic amongst apologists to try and claim that various scientists believe(d) in god. Whether this is through dishonesty or stupidity is anyone's guess.

Saying “Over 90% of members of the Royal Institution and the American Academy of Science don't believe in god” and therefore you concluded God does not exist is again a display of your inability to think logically and rationally!! That’s like saying over 90% of the Republicans don’t believe Trump lost the last presidential election, therefore, Trump won the last presidential election!!

How many scientist members are there in the Royal Institution and the American Academy of Science?? Compare that number with the overall number of scientists in the world, that percentage number is negligible to even be considered a conclusive factor.

And, really, WHO CARES whether the scientists believe in God or not?? Scientists are NOT equipped to make conclusions about God just as they are NOT equipped to make conclusions about history, philosophy, economics, and literature. The existence of God is NOT a science question because science is restricted to natural explanations of observed phenomena.

It is a fairly common tactic amongst atheists to try and use scientists to ‘support’ their ‘non-existence God’ belief. Whether this is through dishonesty or stupidity is anyone's guess. What is certain is their inability to think logically and rationally, which YOU display again and again.

SNAP! Go ahead and give me another display of your ignorance and inability to think logically and rationally!!

 

[KWED]

Saying “Over 90% of members of the Royal Institution and the American Academy of Science don't believe in god” and therefore you concluded God does not exist is again a display of your inability to think logically and rationally!!

Oh dear.
Those stats are not an argument for the non-existence of god, and I have never claimed they are. It was simply a rebuttal to your ridiculous and disproved claim that not believing in god shows an inability to think rationally and logically. Some of the greatest logical, rational thinkers in the history of humanity do not believe in god.
You were wrong. That is all.

That’s like saying over 90% of the Republicans don’t believe Trump lost the last presidential election, therefore, Trump won the last presidential election!!

You brought up the ad populum argument, now you are rejecting it as a fallacy.
You couldn't make it up!

How many scientist members are there in the Royal Institution and the American Academy of Science?? Compare that number with the overall number of scientists in the world, that percentage number is negligible to even be considered a conclusive factor.

Aaand now you are back presenting an ad pop argument! It's hilarious.

And, really, WHO CARES whether the scientists believe in God or not??

Erm, you do - because you brought the issue up.

Scientists are NOT equipped to make conclusions about God just as they are NOT equipped to make conclusions about history, philosophy, economics, and literature. The existence of God is NOT a science question because science is restricted to natural explanations of observed phenomena.

So, as the issue of god is essentially one of the supernatural, no one is qualified to comment because the supernatural is by definition, unknowable.

It is a fairly common tactic amongst atheists to try and use scientists to ‘support’ their ‘non-existence God’ belief. Whether this is through dishonesty or stupidity is anyone's guess. What is certain is their inability to think logically and rationally, which YOU display again and again.

Science can be used to disprove god under certain conditions. For example, the Quran is supposed to be the perfect, literal word of god. If Allah says something that is scientifically disproved, then it cannot have come from an omniscient, infallible being.
The Quran says that man was moulded from potter's clay. This is 100%, demonstrably disproved by science. Therefore the Quran is wrong and the god that wrote it does not exist.
(This is where you go back on your earlier position that the Quran is entirely literal and con only mean exactly what it says, and claim it is metaphor and reliant on context. )

 

[JerryMyers]

Oh dear.
Those stats are not an argument for the non-existence of god, and I have never claimed they are. It was simply a rebuttal to your ridiculous and disproved claim that not believing in god shows an inability to think rationally and logically. Some of the greatest logical, rational thinkers in the history of humanity do not believe in god.
You were wrong. That is all.

You brought up the ad populum argument, now you are rejecting it as a fallacy.
You couldn't make it up!

Aaand now you are back presenting an ad pop argument! It's hilarious.

Erm, you do - because you brought the issue up.

So, as the issue of god is essentially one of the supernatural, no one is qualified to comment because the supernatural is by definition, unknowable.

Science can be used to disprove god under certain conditions. For example, the Quran is supposed to be the perfect, literal word of god. If Allah says something that is scientifically disproved, then it cannot have come from an omniscient, infallible being.
The Quran says that man was moulded from potter's clay. This is 100%, demonstrably disproved by science. Therefore the Quran is wrong and the god that wrote it does not exist.
(This is where you go back on your earlier position that the Quran is entirely literal and con only mean exactly what it says, and claim it is metaphor and reliant on context. )

Oh dear, yet another display of ignorance and the inability to think logically and rationally.

And I like it when you do what you are being told and that is, when I snap my fingers, you immediately rush to display your ignorance and inability to think logically and rationally!!

Let me try again – SNAP! NOW give me another display of your ignorance and inability to think logically and rationally!!

 

[KWED]

Oh dear, yet another display of ignorance and the inability to think logically and rationally.

And I like it when you do what you are being told and that is, when I snap my fingers, you immediately rush to display your ignorance and inability to think logically and rationally!!

Let me try again – SNAP! NOW give me another display of your ignorance and inability to think logically and rationally!!

You will notice that I responded to your points and raised further points of my own in that post.
It is interesting that you continue to avoid addressing any of this and just continue with your strange ad homs and insults. This has applied to most of my recent posts.

If my posts really were ill-informed and irrational, you would be able to easily point this out and rebut them. But you can't. And everyone can see that. And presumably you are also aware of it. It must be awful for you.
I genuinely can't fathom what you are hoping to achieve here. You must have realised by now that your incessant trolling won't discourage me, so your approach merely serves to highlight your inability to defend your position.

 

[KWED]

Let me say it again – NONE of your so-called ‘responses’ can be taken seriously as they are just demonstrations of your ignorance and inability to think logically and rationally!

And yet, you repeatedly display your complete inability to address them. Hmm...

 

[JerryMyers]

You will notice that I responded to your points and raised further points of my own in that post.
It is interesting that you continue to avoid addressing any of this and just continue with your strange ad homs and insults. This has applied to most of my recent posts.

If my posts really were ill-informed and irrational, you would be able to easily point this out and rebut them. But you can't. And everyone can see that. And presumably you are also aware of it. It must be awful for you.
I genuinely can't fathom what you are hoping to achieve here. You must have realised by now that your incessant trolling won't discourage me, so your approach merely serves to highlight your inability to defend your position.

AMAZING… it works!! I snapped my fingers and you rush to give me another display of ignorance and inability to think logically and rationally!!

Anyway, let me say it again – NONE of your so-called ‘points’ can be taken seriously as they are just demonstrations of your ignorance and inability to think logically and rationally! Getting your ‘knowledge’ of Islam from anti-Islam sites such as WikiIslam, answeringmuslims, and the likes don’t make you an authority on Islam, but it does make you foolish, but then again, that’s who you are – an ignorant foolish troll!!

And I am not trying to discourage you, why should I?? I am having too much fun with your ignorance!! Life would be so boring without you providing the comedy!!

So, SNAP! NOW give me another display of your ignorance and inability to think logically and rationally!!

 

[JerryMyers]

And yet, you repeatedly display your complete inability to address them. Hmm...

That’s not true as I did respond to your comments but you chose to remain ignorant and highly likely you will continue to remain ignorant no matter how many times I address your so-called ‘points’. Hmm..

So, what’s there more to address when ALL of your so-called ‘points’ are just reruns of your ignorance and inability to think logically and rationally??

 

[KWED]

AMAZING… it works!! I snapped my fingers and you rush to give me another display of ignorance and inability to think logically and rationally!!

Anyway, let me say it again – NONE of your so-called ‘points’ can be taken seriously as they are just demonstrations of your ignorance and inability to think logically and rationally! Getting your ‘knowledge’ of Islam from anti-Islam sites such as WikiIslam, answeringmuslims, and the likes don’t make you an authority on Islam, but it does make you foolish, but then again, that’s who you are – an ignorant foolish troll!!

And I am not trying to discourage you, why should I?? I am having too much fun with your ignorance!! Life would be so boring without you providing the comedy!!

So, SNAP! NOW give me another display of your ignorance and inability to think logically and rationally!!

If my arguments really were ill-informed and irrational, you would be able to easily point this out and rebut them. But you can't. And everyone can see that. And presumably you are also aware of it. It must be awful for you.
I genuinely can't fathom what you are hoping to achieve here. You must have realised by now that your incessant trolling won't discourage me, so your approach merely serves to highlight your inability to defend your position.