Does God exist? (William Lane Craig vs Peter Atkins debate) (16 Viewers)

[Ford Prefect]

He was a shit stain and a huge hypocrite, i care very little about his religious(or non religious in his case) beliefs, that is his personal beliefs, i care little about the way he gets his points across when talking about atheism and theology too, these things are not what i hold against him. But he's a fucking hypocrite, he condemns the church for the thousands of deaths it caused during the crusades, he condemns Islam for the deaths that the radical groups cause these days, he generally loves to condemn religion for causing deaths. At the same time, he was firmly with the American invasion and bombing of Iraq, and obnoxiously and arrogantly claims, that the coalition forces were bringing democracy to a backward muslim state, as if the coalition forces brought democracy by bombing cities like Faluja to oblivion, by raping, pillaging and killing innocent Iraqi's and by making Iraq a chaotic state and making it more of a shithole than it ever was under Saddamn.

He is an arsehole, and i really wished his death came by a bomb on his house so that he'd feel the pain and anguish he so gleefully wished on others. Fucking shit stain that he is.

He supported the Libya intervention

 

Buy on AliExpress.com

[Fred]

He supported the Libya intervention

I know he did. So did, most of the Coalition forces that i loathe so much and blame them for much of the problems in the middle east. Does not make me forget about the chaos they caused in Iraq, Afghanistan and their support for Zionist occupation. Also, please lets not kid ourselves, the only reason the coalition forces intervened in Libya was for their own interests. Thankfully for us Libyan people, we have oil, a potential market for foreign investment and we're situated in a strategically important place.

Their is a big difference between what happened in Iraq, and what happened in Libya/ is happening in Syria. I hope you realize that.

 

[WΏΏdy?]

Read the thread title. That is what we should be talking about.

---------- Post added 19.03.2012 at 22:03 ----------



Didn't Muhammad do the same thing, though?

It's different, don't bother yourself with this convo

 

[Ford Prefect]

I know he did. So did, most of the Coalition forces that i loathe so much and blame them for much of the problems in the middle east. Does not make me forget about the chaos they caused in Iraq, Afghanistan and their support for Zionist occupation. Also, please lets not kid ourselves, the only reason the coalition forces intervened in Libya was for their own interests. Thankfully for us Libyan people, we have oil, a potential market for foreign investment and we're situated in a strategically important place.

Their is a big difference between what happened in Iraq, and what happened in Libya/ is happening in Syria. I hope you realize that.

Of course, and I don't deny that - I was just saying that at some point you agreed with him, though it is an issue it hard not to have an united concensus on.

 

[Raz]

Its very simple - Pride is a deadly sin....how can a christian be proud? Its the same thing

The problem is with people who have pride, it has nothing to do with god. It's not god who is preaching pride. Learn to see the difference.

There are christians who really proud themselfs and look down on others if they are not from their church, but also there are a lot of people believe in god and don't do that and are not lookng down on others.

 

[Fred]

Of course, and I don't deny that - I was just saying that at some point you agreed with him, though it is an issue it hard not to have an united concensus on.

Don't see how that is relevant. I agree with Karl Marx on some things, but i am as far from being a Marxist/communist as they can get and i absolutely loathe his ideology.

 

[Sheik Yerbouti]

He was a shit stain and a huge hypocrite, i care very little about his religious(or non religious in his case) beliefs, that is his personal beliefs, i care little about the way he gets his points across when talking about atheism and theology too, these things are not what i hold against him. But he's a fucking hypocrite, he condemns the church for the thousands of deaths it caused during the crusades, he condemns Islam for the deaths that the radical groups cause these days, he generally loves to condemn religion for causing deaths. At the same time, he was firmly with the American invasion and bombing of Iraq, and obnoxiously and arrogantly claims, that the coalition forces were bringing democracy to a backward muslim state, as if the coalition forces brought democracy by bombing cities like Faluja to oblivion, by raping, pillaging and killing innocent Iraqi's and by making Iraq a chaotic state and making it more of a shithole than it ever was under Saddamn.

He is an arsehole, and i really wished his death came by a bomb on his house so that he'd feel the pain and anguish he so gleefully wished on others. Fucking shit stain that he is.

I'm sorry Fred, but judging by your language and your hate for him, YOU are the shit stain. You disgust me.

It's different, don't bother yourself with this convo

Why not? How is he different from the founder of Ahmaddiya movement? They both proclaimed to be prophets of Allah, right?

 

[WΏΏdy?]

Why not? How is he different from the founder of Ahmaddiya movement? They both proclaimed to be prophets of Allah, right?

Yes but Islam, as a religion and a rule, was complete with Prophet Mohammed (saw). Tahir believes in Quran and what it teaches, you don't. You don't have a possibility to accept any of the point me or tahir will talk about, so why would you want to debate?
I mean, what's your point? That Tahir is right? so you believe in his prophet? Or is your point that Tahir is right in believing in his prophet coz according to you that situation is the same as Muhammed (saw)? In that case i would prefer Tahir to speak for himself.

 

[YasoR17]

This thread should be destroyed.

 

[AndreaCristiano]

The problem is with people who have pride, it has nothing to do with god. It's not god who is preaching pride. Learn to see the difference.

There are christians who really proud themselfs and look down on others if they are not from their church, but also there are a lot of people believe in god and don't do that and are not lookng down on others.

Very well said

 

[AndreaCristiano]

This thread should be destroyed.

Why do you bother chiming in if you add nothing to the conversation?

 

[Quetzalcoatl]

Good to see the sciencers are leading the poll again.

 

[Zé Tahir]

ze i hope you dont feel offended by my question i'm just asking bec i never understood this point regarding muslim Ahmedi's, is'nt the bolded part stated in the quran?

I'm no expert but doesnt the Quran say Prophet Muhammed (saw) will be the last prophet?

Now that i read in detail about your (sect?) 's claim the more i am astonished as to how you, of all the people, can believe in this

I mean i know you, a man of reason and you know your stuff, and yet you believe in a guy who stood up and claimed to be a prophet?

Add to that a better muslim than me.

---------- Post added 19.03.2012 at 22:00 ----------



Exactly, i was googling and it seems a couple of things they believe in directly contradicts Quran.

Before I start I too just want to add that I don't intend offend either.

Non-Ahmadi's tend to throw logic and reasoning out the window at times and there are several examples of it and I'll list off some. The verse in question reads:

That they said (in boast), "We killed Christ Jesus the son of Mary, the Messenger of Allah";- but they killed him not, nor crucified him, but so it was made to appear to them, and those who differ therein are full of doubts, with no (certain) knowledge, but only conjecture to follow, for of a surety they killed him not:-
Nay, Allah raised him up unto Himself; and Allah is Exalted in Power, Wise;-
—Qur'an, sura 4 (An-Nisa) ayat 157-158[1]

The definition of the word crucify is:"Put (someone) to death by nailing or binding them to a cross." One cannot use the word 'crucify' if the person didn't actually die. This is very important. Secondly, the verse reads "it was made to appear to them". This is true regardless of what school of thought you follow because we all believe that he didn't actually die on the cross (i.e. not crucified). It even says it at the end: "for of a surety they killed him not".

So where in that verse is it 100% clear to you that he was somehow replaced by a look-a-like? This question is so important because this determines how much hocus pocus you're willing to believe. IF you believe that Jesus was taken up (up? wherever that is) by God and that is indeed the person you're waiting for then you essentially believe that man who lived over 2000 years ago is still alive. That is a scientific impossibility and if you want to argue that I have doubt in God's powers then I'll accept that as long as you never use science to support anything related to Islam because you would have essentially blown the door of possibility wide open and therefore any scientific 'proof' from you holds no weight whatsoever.

Moving on, the question about the finality of prophethood with Prophet Muhammad (saw). For arguments sake let's accept that Jesus will return one day...tell me will he not then have come after Prophet Muhammad (saw)? If I am to accept your interpretation of Khatam Nabiyeen then this is not possible and therefore you're all waiting for a man that according to your interpretation cannot possibly arrive.

I'll go even further for the sake of argument though; let's say that Jesus did return. You know that in the Hadith it states that the Mahdi and his followers will face extreme persecution and that many will refuse to accept him. So my question is how can you be so sure that you'll be among those that will accept the return of Jesus? He won't exactly fly down from the skies for every single human being to see.

I hope you guys know enough about your beliefs to know that non-Ahmadi's (i.e. Orthodox's) believe that the Mahdi will return mounted on a type of a white horse armed with a sharp sword with which he will kill the unbelievers (Kafir) ---> To Ahmadi's this can only have a metaphorical meaning but to Orthodox this is taken literal just like the verses about Jesus (as).

 

[GordoDeCentral]

I'm sorry Fred, but judging by your language and your hate for him, YOU are the shit stain. You disgust me.

i'm sure the "i'm sorry" made that statement a whole lot better

---------- Post added 19.03.2012 at 14:27 ----------

Before I start I too just want to add that I don't intend offend either.

Non-Ahmadi's tend to throw logic and reasoning out the window at times and there are several examples of it and I'll list off some. The verse in question reads:



The definition of the word crucify is:"Put (someone) to death by nailing or binding them to a cross." One cannot use the word 'crucify' if the person didn't actually die. This is very important. Secondly, the verse reads "it was made to appear to them". This is true regardless of what school of thought you follow because we all believe that he didn't actually die on the cross (i.e. not crucified). It even says it at the end: "for of a surety they killed him not".

So where in that verse is it 100% clear to you that he was somehow replaced by a look-a-like? This question is so important because this determines how much hocus pocus you're willing to believe. IF you believe that Jesus was taken up (up? where that is) by God and that is indeed the person you're waiting for then you essentially believe that man who lived over 2000 years ago is still alive. That is a scientific impossibility and if you want to argue that I have doubt in God's powers then I'll accept that as long as you never use science to support anything related to Islam because you would have essentially blown the door of possibility wide open and therefore any scientific 'proof' from you holds no weight whatsoever.

Moving on, the question about the finality of prophethood with Prophet Muhammad (saw). For arguments sake let's accept that Jesus will return one day...tell me will he not then have come after Prophet Muhammad (saw)? If I am to accept your interpretation of Khatam Nabiyeen then this is not possible and therefore you're all waiting for a man that according to your interpretation cannot possibly arrive.

I'll go even further for the sake of argument though; let's say that Jesus did return. You know that in the Hadith it states that the Mahdi and his followers will face extreme persecution and that many will refuse to accept him. So my question is how can you be so sure that you'll be among those that will accept the return of Jesus? He won't exactly fly down from the skies for every single human being to see.

I hope you guys know enough about your beliefs to know that non-Ahmadi's (i.e. Orthodox's) believe that the Mahdi will return mounted on a type of a white horse armed with a sharp sword with which he will kill the unbelievers (Kafir) ---> To Ahmadi's this can only have a metaphorical meaning but to Orthodox this is taken literal just like the verses about Jesus (as).

what is the definition of a miracle?

 

[YasoR17]

Why do you bother chiming in if you add nothing to the conversation?

Because fuck you.

 

[Martin]

whoa, Tahir in logic mode

 

[Ford Prefect]

Good to see the sciencers are leading the poll again.

InshAllah

 

[Zé Tahir]

i'm sure the "i'm sorry" made that statement a whole lot better

---------- Post added 19.03.2012 at 14:27 ----------



what is the definition of a miracle?

Simple definition: Miracles are those that are in accordance with the laws God has created.

Read further: http://www.alislam.org/library/books/christianity_facts_to_fiction/chapter_1.html#pgfId-1006069

whoa, Tahir in logic mode

Smiley that says more than a thousand words

 

[GordoDeCentral]

Simple definition: Miracles are those that are in accordance with the laws God has created.
Read further: http://www.alislam.org/library/books/christianity_facts_to_fiction/chapter_1.html#pgfId-1006069

that means every event is a miracle, i think you mean NOT in accordance with the laws of physics. In which case how do you explain the birth of Jesus, unless of course that too you think is hocus pocus.

 

[Martin]

Smiley that says more than a thousand words

My words aren't worth much I realize