I honestly thought you were interested in having a debate. Not in one instance have I mentioned anything close to 'God moving in mysterious ways'. If you want to admit you don't have an answer, I can accept that. And I have.
Religion, what's the point?
- Thread starter TheRedFlag
- Start date
I honestly thought you were interested in having a debate. Not in one instance have I mentioned anything close to 'God moving in mysterious ways'. If you want to admit you don't have an answer, I can accept that. And I have.
He was pointing how similar the 'god's unknowable' spiel is to 'god's mysterious'. Which it is. Especially when you seem to know so much about the workings of the beyond. It's a blatant cop out.
Not really.
I've never claimed to know the answers 'of the beyond'. What I've always claimed from my very first post on this matter is that you can't classify God as rational or irrational. And I've based this assumption on the reliable information we do have.
And presented it immaculately. QEDDDD.
What reliable information about God do we have?
The information on God as is presented in the holy books.
Should we start a new debate on the authenticity of those books?
Should we start a new debate on the authenticity of those books?
Well, just on the last page you made these claims:
So, things we know about Allah, a god we couldn't possibly know anything about: He talks to prophets, he's all forgiving, unless your beliefs are the wrong ones, he transitions you from nowhere, to here, to a permanent state, and he's all knowing.
I call charlatanism.
Im convinced about the flying spaghetti monsters existence now. Not buying that God lark though.
You said you don't know where you'll end up. I was particularly responding to the bolded:
Yet you say now if you believe you will end up in heaven and if not you will end up in hell. After saying that "you don't know where we end up." Make up your mind.
I thought your connotation of 'of the beyond' and 'God is unknowable' was more on the nature of God (i.e. why does God do what the things God does), as opposed to life after death, and heaven and hell. I think you should be more clearer in your posts, if you want a clear answer.
I'm still failing to see how you can't understand my point. I think you haven't actually read the post.
The bit you bolded was a response to your query on predestination i.e. if you say 'I've been designed to go to Hell', you can't say that at any point from life to death because you don't know if your actions have qualified you for something else. Which brings me onto...
Based on actions in this life you will end up in 1 of 2 places. Heaven or Hell. The actions are entwined with religious beliefs.
Last edited:
No, I meant god and everything else. What your answer though? How do you square the circle of knowing that an unknowable god is all forgiving and 98 other things? Or how that all forgiving god sends people to hell?
I can't answer questions based on the nature of God, or what is God like, or things such as that. There are things God has revealed about Himself (such as the 99 names/attributes), or in verses etc but there's things that remain purposely hidden and unknown.
Following on from that, one of the things that we do know, through the information I just mentioned is that God is truthful and just. So if He is forgiving, we know that to be true.
Onto people being sent to heaven and hell, well, I don't really know what you want me to say. You live a life, and it's up to you to decide what type of life that is. Do you do good things or bad things? What are the intentions behind these actions? Whatever you do...do, you will be judged on that. It's not unfair.
I am always genuinely staggered by the intricate self delusion of religious people so desperate to try to defend what they believe to be true at all costs. The more they say the more obviously contradictory it is.
We are made deterministically.
Most humans will fail to go on to eternal life because most of us don't follow the correct God.( why god bothered making most people then is beyond me)
We can't change our failure because it is all part of Gods scheme.
Somehow this is all supposed to be fair because we don't know we are doomed from the start and only as we make the predetermined choices does our damnation become obvious at the point when we die and can't do anything about it.
God knows everything and built us to fail and be damned but we wouldn't accept his verdict unless we lived the life through.
I mean just how crazy and self serving can this nonsense be and the telling part is the underlying arrogance that of course the person in question has been made to be saved. He obviously has deduced the correct path and is going to live for ever, how fortunate, so that was nice for them.
Or is it more likely that the whole thing is a crock of shit invented to cow us into submission.
We are made deterministically.
Most humans will fail to go on to eternal life because most of us don't follow the correct God.( why god bothered making most people then is beyond me)
We can't change our failure because it is all part of Gods scheme.
Somehow this is all supposed to be fair because we don't know we are doomed from the start and only as we make the predetermined choices does our damnation become obvious at the point when we die and can't do anything about it.
God knows everything and built us to fail and be damned but we wouldn't accept his verdict unless we lived the life through.
I mean just how crazy and self serving can this nonsense be and the telling part is the underlying arrogance that of course the person in question has been made to be saved. He obviously has deduced the correct path and is going to live for ever, how fortunate, so that was nice for them.
Or is it more likely that the whole thing is a crock of shit invented to cow us into submission.
99 attributes is quite a lot to know about an unknowable god. It's a pretty good number as well. Kind of makes you think Muhammad was chatting shit. Charlatans are pretty well known for making up convenient and nice sounding lies.
Don't you think the rest of your posts contradicts itself? And what you said earlier about beliefs deciding where you end up? An all forgiving god wouldn't send anyone to hell. He'd be all like 'so, Hitler, the holocaust was really really naughty, but I can't be mad at you, all's forgiven!' rather than 'go to hell you unbeliever!'. Because that's what all forgiving means, to forgive all. Not to send some people to hell because they didn't pray in the right fecking direction.
Is Uzz a reincarnation of Herman van Rompy or whatever he was called.
Herman Van Rompuy part 2: The Quran.
To be honest, I can't wait for the Mormon version.
I'm holding out for a Scientology one. When they invariably say "you don't know shit!" it'll actually be true.
The Principle of Charity is a methodological presumption made in seeking to understand a point of view whereby we seek to understand that view in its strongest, most persuasive form before subjecting the view to evaluation.
Not really since the debater has put god beyond our understanding.
But God knows. And the "all loving" God will send us to hell to burn for eternity if we don't do what he wants.
Great! Let's do intolerance then. That'll help.
There's no intolerance on my part , there's just nothing to debate.
It may be information, but its certainly not reliable information. Even if we're incredibly generous, and rig the argument in your favour by assuming God exists, and had any influence in these Iron Age books (thus ignoring all the numerous arguments about proof) there's still not a single holy book that's inspired a singular consensus. Every religion, including yours, has been splintered by interpretational differences. Both Christianity and Islam, for example, have countless followers who think he's all forgiving and merciful, but also plenty who think he's righteous and vengeful. Both have basis in scripture. So even by an extremely generous and pro-religious standard, they're completely unreliable.
We can if you like, sure. Presumably you think the Qur'an is more reliable than any other Abrahamic text (let alone minor or defunct ones) so by default you're skeptical of the reliability of all but one. And your belief in that one is, in all likelihood (and I could be wrong of course) largely a product of your birth, heritage and conditioning more than your scholarly knowledge of every available option. So even your very perspective on it is unreliable.
Last edited:
Plenty on the Facebook post by Alan Colmes. I argued with Gary Metzger a few times, as did a few others. He brings up the human body and I responded about the human eye and some other tidbits.
https://www.facebook.com/AlanColmes/posts/10152605504875848
Is a bitch not one?
And who wouldn't in that person's shoes. It's their god who created the man that way and he's ridiculed for it. Well unless one feels gay people choose the lifestyle of course.
2cents said: ↑
But if all of 'pre-Muhammad' history was also pre-determined, than it doesn't really count as God intervening either, does it? It was/is ALL part of God's pre-determined plan. So the answer (as I understand al-Ghazali would have answered it) is that while God does not, and has never intervened, the entire history and course of every aspect of our cosmos has already been decided by him.
I dunno about the Islamic view but the Christian view, if this is to be believed i.e. God has predetermined everything, then this dick of a god gave life to people it already knew was going to be punished eternally. What an awesome god.
But if all of 'pre-Muhammad' history was also pre-determined, than it doesn't really count as God intervening either, does it? It was/is ALL part of God's pre-determined plan. So the answer (as I understand al-Ghazali would have answered it) is that while God does not, and has never intervened, the entire history and course of every aspect of our cosmos has already been decided by him.
I dunno about the Islamic view but the Christian view, if this is to be believed i.e. God has predetermined everything, then this dick of a god gave life to people it already knew was going to be punished eternally. What an awesome god.
Cognitive dissonance is a strange thing, ain't it Pete?
But he's also all-loving, all-forgiving, and great.
Wouldn't that mean that Muhammad visions were not real? God made the visions happen but wasn't actually there to be seen. I'm not sure but wouldn't that be blasphemous?
I've never said God is 'All Forgiving'. As always, you make something up to fit a narrative. I've seen you behave this way on other threads. God is the Most Merciful, but I haven't said he's 'All Forgiving'. There are certain things that will be unforgiven.
Again, I've haven't said in my posts that God is 'All loving'. He is the Most Compassionate, which is different.
To both-the only thing I've said that is All anything was All Knowing.
Anyone can make up something and claim another has said it, but I don't really see the point in doing so personally.
In the context of the initial discussion, several assumptions had to be made and used what was unanimously agreed upon by the faiths.
Onto your other points-'a singular consensus'. Well none of the books should be considered as a rule book. They're guidance and that's not to say there aren't rules in it. Things are open to reflection, and we're encouraged to reflect. Now the points I made to peterstorey aren't really open to interpretation, if we use the books as a source.
On a separate note-the main schism in Islam (Sunni/Shia) was borne out of a political ideology, as opposed to a religious movement. The Sunni Qu'ran is the same as the Shia Qu'ran.
Why I believe the Qu'ran is reliable shouldn't be centred on who I am as a person. If anything, it should be centred on my logic and reasoning for that assertion. It wouldn't make it unreliable. I mean, on an internet forum all I am is a blank canvas.
My assertions stem from my own reading and knowledge into it. I'm not going to go into the nitty, gritty details of why that is, but I remember you mentioning scepticism on the oral passing of knowledge by the Arabs back in those times, or on the use of the language as not being a legitimate means of confirming its authenticity.
In the end I did check the OED. Arational is in fact in it. You just spelled it wrong.
Last edited:
Well I would contend that arrational is the proper (English) construction. Since it was lifted from the Yanks and is in any case just an otiose synonym for irrational it matters little.
Is he the most forgiving? Because a god who sent no one to hell would be even more forgiving.
Yep-I don't know their line of thinking in any great depth, I should add. I don't really agree with their view on the Qu'ran.
Yea He is the Most Forgiving. Sending no one to hell would be All Forgiving which was my earlier mistake, and God doesn't forgive all.