:-)

Hi again Ibn Alsunnah

I am trying to have a relaxed conversation. It is not always easy. I refuse to let people treat me personally in a bad way. It would have been easier if you helped your brother to see what he did wrong. If he manipulates my word, no matter, if he did it by purpose, or by mistake, it is just to admit that and correct it as a man. No more problems. Instead he continues with "enjoying" the debate, when he just heard he made me upset with a good reason. Up to him. I also prefer to #go on with our debate. 0

It is obvious that our worlds are very far from each other. I have a completely different view at how a good world should look like. Cutting off hands can never be accepted in my mind. Who should judge after all? You say it is "accepted" to steal if there is poverty. Not literally that way, but something like that. If I steal to give food for a child who is starving, than it sounds like I would be forgiven. If I am very poor, than maybe I would be forgiven stealing for myself too. But what if I am a little bit poor... Where goes the limit? Who should judge there? We talk about destroying a human life. How would this make a world better? You get a person who will probably not get a job and will be depending on begging for money or food or to steal again. Killing people to make a better world has been practiced throughout the whole history, with no good result anywhere. Do you know that countries with dead penalties also has the biggest crimes like homocides, in the whole world. US, is a good example. I don't have the numbers here, but I am sure you can easily find them on Internet. Compare for #example US, with Norway, or any of European countries without death penalties. In my opinion, if killing is not accepted as a method of solving problems, than the state should not kill either, but show good example
of how to solve problems. 0
My friend also told me that by stoning someone to death, you ensure he will end up in , paradise. I will ask you this. If you for any reason would get in a situation to be stoned (I really hope no one will ever be in that situation, but IF), than would you gladly accept it cause it should be a way to paradise, or would you ask for mercy? Would you accept to get your hand cut off, if promised a place in paradise? 0

Please don't look at this a not important. It is very important, and since I was following your way of debate for 12 looong pages, than it is not more than fair to let me steer the conversation a bit too. I understand you feel uncomfortable about this, but this is the reality. No other religion that I know is talking about such cruelties. What is cruel and what is not cruel is maybe relative, but this should go far behind any limit of cruelty. How can you deny that? Be objective about that. 0

Yes, Ibn Alsunnah, I want to continue our discussion about god.. I am doing it right now. We are talking about a book that you claim is written by god. I claim it is not and that many things in it shows it is much more likely it is written by a human. Much more likely! 0

Please answer me at this question. I asked it already before: 0
Is Quran talking about evolution or about creation, without evolution? 0

Best regards from Charlie

Dear Charlie,
Sorry that I didn't sign in the last message
It is me Ibn Alsunnah
please lets be on track again
I believe I was the last one to talk about our topic , so please go back and have a look to what I said previously
Lets try to relax in our discussion and hope at the end that we will understand each other more.

Hello "Thank you" 0

If it is Ibn Alsunnah talking, than I would love to continue the debate. If it is Stranger talking, than I think we have finished. I prefer to talk to people who are showing respect to my opinion, regardless if they agree or not and who have the strength to admit they did a mistake, when doing so. So who is "Thank you"? 0

Charlie

Hi Ibrahim

Welcome to this forum. I will gladely look for new ways to tackle the problem. However after 12 sides of playing with words I would prefer any other sort of evidences. I don't want to disrespect your try, but looking for evidences for god this way is not a good way I feel. What Ibn Alsunnah can prove in best case is that there must be some explanation for the missing link in his chain. Nothing else. This link could be a god, but could also be any kind of abnormal behavior of universe due to the extreme conditions that universe obviously was in at the time for BB.#I will develope it more in the messages with IA, butI mention this cause I have a feeling you are at the same way. 0
Straight to your questions. First I feel we are playing a new word gamethat will not lead us anywhere and I feel there is no meaning for me to reply them and let you continue. I guess you would insist anyway, so I will try, but everything depends on what meaning you give to these words. ok..let's go: o
Nothingness is the opposite of being as a whole
Nothingness sounds to me more like the opposite of everything. 0
Nothingness does not exist
It is a typical way of playing with words. If we say there is nothingness in the box, than it is a word that describes the situation in the box and the empty box does exist. 0
Any statement that implies the existence of nothingness is necessarily false
I just gave you the example above. It is all about what meaning we give to the word. Nothingness can also be a completely abstract word, explained by number 0 (zero) in mathematics. To say that this is false is not true. So the statement should be false, because it talks about "any statement" 0
To say being as a whole is limited in extension and in duration implies the existence of nothingness- Therefore being as a whole is unlimited
Honestly I am not understand this statement. Maybe it is my poor English that does it, or your english. Could you put it in some other way? If my trousers are whole, without any holes, does it mean they are unlimited, or they are not whole? You see we play with words... or maybe I missunderstood this latest statement. 0
Is the world equal to being as a whole ie is it the only being? 0
This one I also did not understand. Are we talking about world as the planet earth, or the whole universe? However it all depends on where we put the limit of what is universe. This is a question for the cosmology and there are so far just theories about is there only one universe, or more than that.... You maybe know. 0

Best regards from Charlie

It is the first case. Yes you are wrong because you accuse islam for being cruel. Your friend Abdalah told you that it is mentioned in the sharia and yes it is. But you may not be aware of how these punishments apply and what are the conditions that are applied before doing any punishment.
This is a way to help the community from Criminals. Please Charlie, "Cruel " "justice" and things like that are very vague. Can you define for me these terms
If you say it is cruel to cut hands, I will tell you not it is just, It is cruel to steal someone's wealth. And again you cannot apply these rules except if their conditions are satisfied, so if there is hunger, poverty or you cannot prove stealing by 100% then the punishment will not be done
So if someone just doesn't care of the punishment and was proven 100% to be guilty then the punishment will be applied if not then it will be suspended

Let me ask you do you want to our discussion about existence of God or no
?
because if you don't want to continue we can close this discussion and start another one about whatever you like

Thank you

Hi Ibn Alsunnah

Well, maybe my words can sound aggressive when I am upset, but I am not an aggressive person. In fact I am a very peaceful person, but I become upset when I hear what people can do to each other for some "higher purpose". I was actually thinking, should I mention the thing about cutting off hands, cause there was a risk it would steer away the debate from the main part of my message, about misbehavior that I saw in Strangers way of debate. However I took the risk because I realized that he refuses to see what he did wrong and you certainly did not help him, by "understanding him", and not understand me. It is up to you guys. 0
I will always be against cruelties that people do to each other. When you say you are all hurt by this, I did not understand if you are hurt cause I mentioned it, or because this happens in Islam? If it is the later case, than I completely sympathize with you and agree , with you. If it is the first case, than I have to ask you. Am I wrong? Is this not written in Sharia? If I am bad informed, than I would feel ashamed for saying this and even ask for apologize. If I am correctly informed (by my friend Abdellah, who wanted me to join this forum) than anyone who supports this should be ashamed. And I repeat the question: "Is this a way to help a brother"? 0
Finally I don't think this is so far from our initial debate. I would like to move it forward and show that Quran can impossibly be written by any kind of a god, but by a human with all human weaknesses, like Sharia shows. So far we spoke for 12 sides about "logic" and did not come very far. It is time to go further. 0

Best regards from Charlie

Hello guys,

Charlie, I read Ibn Alsunnah's post after I posted mine (although his was posted first) Do you see the following coincidental similarities:
Ibn Alsunnah:

Me:

Does this at least tell you something about how we're perceiving your comments? Would you please apologize for it?

Charlie,
I have no problems to say sorry I misunderstand your words, but I truely think that you're completely misunderstanding my entire argument. I probably said it 10 time so far. What really matters is the actual debate which has different points of views. What you think or believe and what I think and believe are already different. It seems to me like you just want to argue too much for something too personal. I can take things personal and show you how you have already showed disrespectful to us in many previous statements you made . We ignore these because we know you don't necessarily mean to be disrespectful and move on to the actual debate to get some intellectual profit out of a fruitful discussion>> .
The main problem I see here is to "agree" on anything. you're approaching a very different mentality and different way of thinking so don't expect assumptions on either side to be necessarily clear to the other side.
it's simple: you believe I intentionally manipulated your statements. I'm saying no that's sincerely not true. If we will get into each other's "intention" we will never go anywhere trust me.
I don't by the way see how the talk about helping others is relavent in this matter.
so hope we're clear now. If not then feel free to let us know. if so, let's finally move forward
stranger

Dear Charlie,
I am not supporting Stranger for doing something wrong. Actually I understood that he doesn't mean to hurt you , he was just giving examples.
Actually Charlie, many times you say very agressive statements and I just skip them because first they are out of our discussion and second because I know that your point of view is very different and I assume always that you don't mean any hurt
For example
Well this is hurting to all of us, But I always try to skip such statements
Believe me Charlie, There is no bad feelings or intentions here. In contrary we are doing our best to make you enjoy your stay here
As I see from Stranger's comments in other places here, I infer that he is open minded and trying to b good with everyone. So I interpret what he says in a good way
Lets go to the real meat Charlie.
Best Regards

No Stranger, we can not go back to the topic as long as you don't understand what is a nice custom in having a conversation. The problem is not that you said I am the only one who think god is unlikely. The problem is that in next message you claim I said most of the worlds population is atheists, and you talk in a way "Are you serious!?" That is manipulation. The problem is not that you tell me about the US constitution, but that you talk in a way as if I claimed that there is no freedom of speech or freedom of religion in US law, which I never claimed. And you continue with "Obviously you don't know much about US law", or something like that. What is obvious? That you talk of what you want to hear from me, not what you heard. The problem is also that in the first message after i pointed this, you say "I already enjoy this debate" . What was so enjoyable in starting with manipulating my comments and making me upset? 0
What would you say if i debate this way: "Stranger! You are are so cruel! You should never beat up your mother! That is a bad custom!" You would be upset and say you never do it.... And than I could reply "I did not say you did! I just said you should not do it!" That would be a pathetic way to debate and would not lead us anywhere. As long as you don't understand that, what is the point of debating with you? 0

By the way, helping a human being is nice, by correcting him when doing wrong. Ibn Alsunnah who I respect highly as a conversation partner, (although I disagree with his way of thinking) is not doing that. He supports you in doing wrong. That is not what your prophet teaches, if I understand correctly. But since we talk about that, I agree that people should get a support when doing wrong. I support politic parties that are thinking that way. No one is born evil and if someone steals, the society should help him to come back to the right way. Not cut of his hands. No thanks, for that kind of help. 0
However, there is no need for you to reply this. At least don't expect much of an answer by me. Would have been easy to say:"Sorry Charlie". I did not read your message properly and that is why i misunderstood your messages." We would have put a line over it and continue the talk. Instead you try to make me "understand" that I did not understood your message.... I will continue my discussion with Ibn Alsunnah and the others online till you do what you should have done. I really don't need this way of debating. It is quite boring. We have much more interesting things to talk about.0

Charlie

Hi guys

It is amazing me that Ibn Alsunnah is saying I misunderstood Strangers words. It would have been more honest to defend him by saying he misunderstood my words. That would help him more.
This is very clear: I wrote #"It is maybe not written in law that you have to believe, but it is not really accepted to speak open against god in US (i was talking about arab countries too), for example. For example a candidate for president in US has no chance at all if he would say he is an atheist..." 0
Stranger replies: "Once again you got it wrong my friend. You obviously don’t know much about the US or the US law, so I don’t know where you get you opinions from. It’s called
freedom of speech and is in the first amendment of the US constitution..." 0

Next example. I wrote: "It is new to me that God is unlikely only to me (Stranger said so in the previous message). I thought many people around the world would agree with me, so even the science." 0
Stranger replies: "Are you serious man? I hope you’re kidding. You’re probably too confined to your experiences that are limited in Sweden. The last survey I’ve seen from the CIA’s world Fact book conducted in 2004 shows only 2.4% of the world’s population to be atheists. So yes God is only unlikely to you and the rest of the 2.4% in the world. God is likely to 97.6% of the world’s population! So NO! Most people in the world would NOT agree with you." 0

I never said they would. Read my messages more carefully before you reply. Is it a Muslims duty to always defend another Muslim#against a non-Muslim, regardless if he is right or wrong? If I had an Atheist here who would talk like that, I would not try to defend him, but correct him. I don't need any false evidences or arguments to defend the truth, which I always look for. 0

Charlie

Hi Charlie,
Hope all is fine for you. Take it easy my friend>,
Once again I do think you misunderstood my words. You're demanding an apology for me manipulating your words, but I thought I clarified in the previous post how I never manipulated your words.
I'm not saying your stupid at all and I never claimed that.
I really want to spend the time on a fruitful discussion and don't want to waste time on such things
I said it before and I'll say it again: I do respect you by all means .
If you will insist, show me again where I manipulated your words, and I will be more than glad to apologize if you can prove it.

Dear Charlie
Sorry for interruption but I feel that you misunderstood Stranger. Stranger means that we shouldn't discuss things which we cannot prove. Either from your side or from muslims side
I enjoy the discussion too and I hope we call it discuassion rather than debate because "discussion " is more friendly to me
I actually hope at the end, that you will learn more about how we think. Please be sure that I am not going to manipulate logic to convience you of something
I will not gain anything of doing that.
Again, I think you misinterpreted stranger's words

Best Regards
Ibn Alsunnah