The Qu'ran was dictated by Allah...A mistaken idea of the God of Abraham.
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
The Qu'ran was dictated by Allah...A mistaken idea of the God of Abraham.
Oral tradition is how myths are formed. And there is very little in the way of "ancient texts" to support your claims. Yes some early Christians were killed. But the myths of how they died is totally different. Think of George Washington and the Cherry Tree. George Washington, real, the cherry tree, not so much.Mythology ? No - ancient oral tradition and ancient texts.
What makes you think they are false ?
You are ready to believe in the annals written by classical historians - what makes you believe that the ancient Christian texts and oral traditions are any less reliable ?
Unless, of course, you are an intellectual snob who believes that only academics (and Roman big-pots) can be believed, whereas ordinary people (like the early Christians) can't be believed.
Yes it does.No - "Atheist" means A-theist, meaning No God.
I'm pretty familiar with the Original Testament. I'm certain that Moses and Samuel and such would have considered standard Christian Trinitarian theology and Jesus's divinity utter heresy. A complete breaking of the 1st Commandment, and Jesus's regular depiction in the Christian world breaking the 2nd.Muslims and Christians are in agreement on this - that the One True God is the God first worshipped clearly by Abraham.
Your etymology needs some work too. If you want to play that game it is better to use the term "atheism". Theism is having a belief in god. A-theism is without a belief in a god.No - "Atheist" means A-theist, meaning No God.
That is a different logical fallacy than I thought that you would use. You are using a combination of an argument from ignorance along with confirmation bias. It is still a fatally failed argument.But it isn't self-defeating.
The complexity and rationality and smooth-functioning (it survives !) of the universe, are excellent arguments for God's existence.
"Make believe entity" ?
You are ASSUMING A PRIORI that God is make-believe !
But that assumption can't be made.
Or suicidal mothers, who are never considered.Not good for unwanted babies, though.
If you're an atheist that is total rubbish.God is the sole source of the human mind, thus of knowledge.
God is the overall picture, the inventor of the human mind, thus of science.
Religion begins as the hope that there is hope, not as an intended explanation of the universe.
Which is God, not religion.
Why invent god as the first cause???God is the Uncreated - the first cause, the starting point of everything.
There necessarily IS one !
If not God, then who or what ?
But - with WMD's and climate change - we're so much wiser and CLEVERER than those benighted religious people of the past !
According to your explanation.God is the sole source of the human mind, thus of knowledge.
God is the overall picture, the inventor of the human mind, thus of science.
Religion begins as the hope that there is hope, not as an intended explanation of the universe.
Which is God, not religion.
Then you are darned lucky you don't have to believe in the evil God.
Does that escape you?
I see no need to thoroughly study all the religions. Did I need to go shopping and compare men before I got married? It is the same. We got married three weeks after we met and we have been married 34 years. I never had sex with anyone before or after that and neither did he. I bought all my three houses the same way. I saw them, I liked them, I knew they were one of a kind, and I bought them, and I still have all of them. Of course I had a home inspection before I bought them.That is a good point. Only those believers who believe stuff based on nothing but personal experiences or "feelings" or "faith" or indoctrination or brainwashing or ancient or modern scriptures or religious "authorities" or upbringing etc should be in that category. Those who have thoroughly studied all the religions and sects and cults and gods and the scientific explanations for why we believe in gods and religions to begin with and still have made an informed decision to believe in the existence of one or more gods should be respected at least for their effort. This is an interesting article. The Origins of Religion: How Supernatural Beliefs Evolved
That is absolutely true. Peoples’ conceptions of God do not represent the one true God.So true. All theists and religions seem to have their own personal version of God and they all contradict each other showing that we are not dealing with an actual entity here but just how different people are imagining one.
I can certainly understand how that would be the case. If I was an atheist, I would be doing my own independent research, IF I wanted to believe in God. I would not be listening to believers.Every time an atheist points out something wrong a theist can just say "Oh no, that's not the God I believe in!" An atheist always has to address the God the particular person believes in. It's a nightmare, I can tell you...
People do not brainwash themselves, they become convinced by looking at all the evidence. That is EXACTLY what Baha’u’llah has enjoined us to do, look at all the evidence and make an informed decision.So you brainwashed yourself by just feeding yourself information from one source?
Here are the ‘categories of evidence I have looked at and confirmed:Excellent! Now it's getting interesting! Make a detailed list of the information that has been confirmed to be accurate along with the corroborating evidence from other independent neutral objective sources! That would be useful and actually get us somewhere!
Nor can you show any empirical reason to deny my perceptions and embrace atheism....
And "soldiers" are merely civilians who have been given the title "soldier."The premeditated killing of civilians in war (of babies in particular) is universally regarded as a war crime, or extremely close.
But the principles are human-specific, are they not? For instance, does a fly care if a human is dead or alive? If anything, it would prefer a dead human to a living one. So our "principles" are specifically human-intrinsic - they don't apply universally to any and all interaction with our species. As a different kind of example, in lean times, hamsters will consume their young to preserve a brood and keep the babies from growing up suffering - unable to eat and likely die anyway. Humans would see that action in another human as entirely "wrong" and indefensible. For a hamster, it is deemed a necessity and their social interactions entirely permit this under those circumstances. Human principles are decidedly human - and are therefore subjective right out of the gate. Think of it this final way - if there were no more humans, then human principles would not matter to anyone/anything else in the universe. They may or may not match up to other beings' principles, but there would definitely be specific human ideals that were no longer applicable anywhere or to anything/anyone.Laws are mutable. The principles on which they are largely based are not, however. What was wrong in the Stone Age is wrong now, and vice versa.
Our version of "evil" is also entirely subjective to the human experience. I always shake my head when I am watching one of those satan-based horror movies where they have flies pouring out of someone's mouth, or a ton of flies gathering at some window, or around a house - and this is supposed to evoke a sense of "evil." It's ridiculous. What, intrinsically, makes flies "evil?" That they are nuisance to humans? That they carry bacteria that humans are subject to becoming infected with? Other animals cherish them as a food source, and they do absolutely wonders for cleaning up the Earth of other infectious/bacteria-riddled things like carcasses and feces. I would dare say they have a far more important (or at least neutral) role in the stewardship of the Earth than we humans do!Each of us has a choice between good and evil - a choice which (at death) becomes a final, thus everlasting, one.
I don't believe their are such things as "consequences" after death. To me, your statement only applies to ongoing choices and ongoing consequences during your lifetime. Make what your fellow humans regard as "good" choices, receive "good" consequences. Make what your fellow humans and yourself regard as "bad" choices" and you will likely be the recipient of "bad" consequences. There are no guarantees what happens after death... and my bet is that it is a big, fat nothing. Like being unborn... going back to the time before you were born. Do you remember that time? How could you? You didn't exist yet. My best guess is that it is something like that. No more "plug in" to reality. All gone.Good consequences flow from a final choice of good, evil consequences from a final choice of evil.
God took on human nature and died in agony on the Cross, not sparing Himself..
Why does God allow evil to exist ? - because He is Love and a libertarian, not a puppet-master.
The New Testament dates from the highly-civilised and well-educated days of the Roman Empire..
That is true, and that is why I am still a Baha'i...Belief isn't a matter of choice, you see-- once you learn the truth of that? You cannot "unsee" it again.
Wrong. Many Christians were murdered in the Soviet Union for NO OTHER reason than their religious faith - and sometimes likewise under Mao..
Hitler was a renegade Christian who hated Christianity, blaming it for pacifism and Communism; and in turn hated the Jews for having caused Christianity..
No Christians of the Dark Ages (even the most brutal) shared Hitler's belief in Social Darwinism, the survival of the fittest and the VIRTUE and VALUE of brutality..
The Inquisition pursued theological deviants (heretics) - unbelievers like atheists were usually left in peace.
You're preaching, and not giving any evidence to support your claims. Do you expect anyone to believe this fantastic claim without hard evidence?God is the sole source of the human mind, thus of knowledge.
God is the overall picture, the inventor of the human mind, thus of science.
Religion begins as the hope that there is hope, not as an intended explanation of the universe.
Which is God, not religion.
Wait -- aren't you Christians always saying that everything must have a cause? Yet God has none?God is the Uncreated - the first cause, the starting point of everything.
There necessarily IS one !
Physics. Chemistry. Biology....If not God, then who or what ?
The more Atheists have found themselves on the losing side (since the late-1970's) the shiftier and more evasive they have become.