:-)

ترجمة جوجل كما قال

هناك أمر يثير التساؤل...إذا كان العضو "تشارلي" لا يحسن العربية قراءة ولا كتابة...فكيف اختار أنه ملحد في خانة العقيدة ؟؟

My response appeared under the BELIEF IN ONE GOD thread.

--------

if you want to exchange abuses then it will be good to apologize and then leave never to return

--------

Use the site in the quote services
There are buttons on the transmitter fund for this purpose
To speed up the reply you and distinguish your words, from the words of others easily

or even somthing like that :
---------
=========
as a seperator

Be brief in your answer
Do not talk on what you do not believe in it at all
Focused on pursuing your thoughts
It does not interfere in explaining the beliefs of others
------------------
Know the Lord
When you know God's message
Then know about your job as a disteny
------------------
Islam is just a message, not science needs to prove its uncertain
Islam is proving his conclusion,, you to complete the rest by faith
You have faith and based upon your destiny after death
The message all you need is faith or only acceptance
Science needs to guide uncertain and experimental,,
and we do not try God

This acceptance is just a personal choice,, not to force you and others as science,,
So I hope to speak only in an individual based for that.

God willing, I will respond, when the availability of what I have time to read the branching that has occurred without the direction in which you're talking
To cover all kindly addressing it fully and apologized for concern

Only a few points,, and I want to know where you stand them,,
only of being with or against each item without refutation:
1. The existence of God
2-existence of God and his clear attributes
3-goal and function of us in this life is a must
4-There are a message from God to us is a must
5-Islam is the correct message from God to us today

Some points owed on each other, so what is not acceptable at all is not obligatory on all the consequences of it ..

There are no replies concerning my last post - should I move on to the next aspect of our discussion?

so be it !!

So am I.

I am still waiting ....

Actually it is objective to say we don’t know about the situation from before the universe emerged. So it is also unclear when it comes to the laws of physics. And the people who wouldn’t say laws of physics existed before the universe, are often the same people who wouldn’t say the universe was intelligently designed. So you take their word in one case, when it is comfortable to you, and avoid it when it’s not. How convenient.
Here are other arguments concerning laws of nature:
- they may actually depend on what gets created, being a natural consequence of things existing and things having particular properties as well as of interactions between those things - then it would depend on gods which rules would be applied,
- they may work this and not that way since it would be logically impossible for them to work another way - totally independently from any gods. Unless gods could violate logic, which I wouldn’t say could happen.

And yes, you have to prove the existence of many gods as well as of one god and you have to prove the qualities of that god or those gods. But you fail to do it which makes many gods as possible as one. Divine power may equal both one god or more.

who owns hell?! who controlls heaven or have the authority?
- Who says there are any of such places?
- Usually the stronger hold authority.
- It is likely that you should follow no god since, as I stated above, it seems risky to try to make contact with any.
- This question of yours is totally irrelevant as it comes from the unprovable doctrines you are taught which have nothing to do with logic.

Purpose and complexity don’t have to come from one god. One god would only be reasonable if you could prove it, but you can’t.

so you say the following: 1- god is not perfect or no need to be so. 2- multiple gods are simple and not complex thus reasonable.
Yes, no need and no evidence for perfectness to be even necessary. Plus many gods may be complex and reasonable to a degree, still not reaching perfectness.

You are saying that perfection is not problematic while more gods would be. But it is, since you can’t even prove perfection was ever possible in the first place. Also one father god (like in many pagan religions) could be responsible for other gods, and those gods could be responsible for this universe. That father god would have little to do with us then.
You are saying that without perfectness god is not god. Well, that is only according to your definition of god, but you can’t prove it is correct so it is a matter of believing - circular logic again.
A god or gods, even if they were responsible for the universe, wouldn’t have to know everything. They would just need to know PERHAPS how to create universes.


your speech at the universe is wrong too.. why? because it is subjective to you. another man would say: "sun is not pure white, rather has some yellow in its light... thus it is imperfect... perfect sun is purely white sun" << and this continues forever.
- Exactly. You just created an argument against perfection - making it look like a matter of subjective preferences.

life permitting callibration is so low that if one constant got changed by very tiny amount, life would not exist at all!!!
- How do you know another set of constants are impossible for life to emerge?
- How do you know there weren’t universes before this universe which collapsed because they had lame constants? You don’t know that.
- Also you are talking about a tiny fracture of the universe? This is not 70% OR 30% of it. Not even 1%. It is like 00000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 00.1% of the universe or less that allows some life on it. So no, it doesn’t look like it was finely tuned for people to live in it.
IN ORDER TO THINK WHAT YOU ARE THINKING, YOU HAVE TO LOOK AT A VERY LIMITED PICTURE. BUT THAT DOESN’T SEEM RIGHT, MY FRIEND.


actually, the word "perfect" is used by us due to our own subjective understanding of things.. so it is improper to call god "perfect" using our standards and understanding...
- So stop calling god perfect on the basis of your subjective understanding.
- Telling there is intelligence involved is also a matter of your subjective perception, not facts.

maybe you understood me wrong here, I didn't mean "flawed" but rather "sinful". no evidence? people today refuse god and most humanity today are not muslims (because islam is god's only way) and the ugly stuff they do like homosexuality, terrorism, inslaving mankind (like america does), racism.... etc. you must be new to our world if you don't recognize this. absolutely.
Maybe you don’t understand that the word SIN is a word coined by MEN, not GOD, to refer to actions WE don’t want to experience in the society, not GOD. WE gave the word that meaning, not GOD. We made up all these rules dividing things into sinful and not sinful. So it is totally subjective.
- What your religion finds sinful, like the disbelief in god, is objectively not sinful at all. Actually it is ignorant and illogical to be a part of Islam, therefore, being a Muslim could be called sinful, objectively.
- So you find homosexuality wrong and sinful. I find you wrong and sinful for holding that opinion on homosexuality.
- Enslaving mankind? - Since when is slavery bad in Islam? Can Muslims have slaves and others can’t? This is called applying double standards.

I maybe went harsher against you, but I really hope you open your mind more than that because I saw you affected by new atheism propaganda and arguing methodology which cares about bringing as much objections as there is without really thinking much on the other side.
- Your religion is proven to use a wide range of manipulation techniques and it fills little kids with propaganda from the very beginning.
- Islamic societies are proven to be less educated and also limiting other ideologies, including secular thought.
- Islam threatens people with hellfire, and promises things that are not proven existing.
- Islam alters words such as peace, love and justice.
- Lots of Muslim scholars claim apostasy is punishable by death. - Do you have something to say about that?
- ATHEISM DOESN’T DO THOSE THINGS. SO DON’T MENTION WORDS LIKE PROPAGANDA OR NARROW-MINDEDNESS, AS YOU YOURSELF BELONG TO A GROUP WELL KNOWN AS PIONNEERS OF MAKING PEOPLE MINDLESS DRONES.

Also, how is it narrow-minded if I introduce other options and show how they are as possible as your religion or even more?

1- If I told you I am a Super Saiyan God, would you believe it? why? is it possible? scientifically possible?
- I would expect clear, testable and measurable evidence for every feature you would say you have. And it is as possible as your god or many gods. Or Spaghetti Monster.
2- If a tiger killed a kid and ate it, is it a good thing or a bad thing? why? is it a sin? what if a human did the exact same thing... your answers to that?
- It would be negative to the society. It would be worse if a man did it, because that man comes from our society causing additional danger to us, since we can more easily prevent danger from animals than from the inside of our communities. Because of that such a cruel act would also create a lot of anxiety within the community where it would happen.

I have a question for you, too:
Is it okay to marry a 7 year old girl who started to have periods 3 months ago, according to Islam? And is it okay to have an intercourse with her after marriage?

continuing on

so you say the following: 1- god is not perfect or no need to be so. 2- multiple gods are simple and not complex thus reasonable.
^
this is baseless belief at its best. your response against me was simple unproven unreasonable assuptions... while I stated at least more reason in my lines. I didn't add a problematic feature at all... without this feature in god, he is not god at all. god or the first cause of the universe is omnipower and has the absolute knowledge and lacks nothing.

your speech at the universe is wrong too.. why? because it is subjective to you. another man would say: "sun is not pure white, rather has some yellow in its light... thus it is imperfect... perfect sun is purely white sun" << and this continues forever.

When you look at the fine-tunning of the universe, you know the intelligence behind it. ALL the constants were callibrated to allow life to begin... this can never be due to chance or whatever atheists say these days. life permitting callibration is so low that if one constant got changed by very tiny amount, life would not exist at all!!!

Sure you can say that perfect universe must permit life more than that tiny gap... but, again, god did not want to create a universe that is 100% good for life to exist. And if life can exist in say 70% of it which is a huge amount, I am SURE atheists will say "what about the 30%? if god exists he must have allowed life to exist 100% in the universe not just 70%" and that nonsense will keep going nonstop.

actually, the word "perfect" is used by us due to our own subjective understanding of things.. so it is improper to call god "perfect" using our standards and understanding...

maybe you understood me wrong here, I didn't mean "flawed" but rather "sinful". no evidence? people today refuse god and most humanity today are not muslims (because islam is god's only way) and the ugly stuff they do like homosexuality, terrorism, inslaving mankind (like america does), racism.... etc. you must be new to our world if you don't recognize this. absolutely.

if you look at the quran you find these facts very well documented and explained! and god always urges us to follow his commands and never revert to our sinful nature... this is to see the actual effect of believing in god and what it does to that sinful creature!

I maybe went harsher against you, but I really hope you open your mind more than that because I saw you affected by new atheism propaganda and arguing methodology which cares about bringing as much objections as there is without really thinking much on the other side.

I end up with 2 funny questions for you, please answer them:

1- If I told you I am a Super Saiyan God, would you believe it? why? is it possible? scientifically possible?
2- If a tiger killed a kid and ate it, is it a good thing or a bad thing? why? is it a sin? what if a human did the exact same thing... your answers to that?

regards,

Saiyan prince

that is a BIG mistake! I don't know how you actually said that! Physics is a part of nature, and nature itself didn't exist before the big bang. How come there was some part of nature before it even existed?! No credible scientist say that nature was there before the big bang... nature itself and everything was inside the singularity... so your line is objectivly scientifically wrong.

That is my way which is the correct one... you first have to prove the existance of god then talk about his properties. However, you seem to contradict yourself after that... Devine power = God, there is not devine power with humans or any other forms of life. so devine power is the God himself... then I follow what you have stated about believing in one God.

First we believe in one God then if someone say there are 3 gods, he has to prove it since there is no need for such assumption. And, multiple gods means that there are weak gods and powerful gods... so who is the creator? if 2 of them had differences, who should we follow? If you followed the command of god1 and me god2... we both can rest in hell because we disobeyed the other god!! but wait.. who owns hell?! who controlls heaven or have the authority?

^ that is just very simple compelxity being added for no purpose at all, thus one god is much more simpler and more reasonable that multiple gods

I will continue later on... I have no time now... please wait xD

الى اين وصل الحوار ؟
الترجمة انقطعت