How do I deconvert someone?

Sapient
High Level DonorRRS CO-FOUNDERRRS Core MemberWebsite Admin
Sapient's picture
Posts: 7522
Joined: 2006-04-18
User is offlineOffline
How do I deconvert someone?

Quote:
----------------- Original Message -----------------
From: Laura
Date: Oct 12, 2006 10:50 PM

How do I "dis-convert" someone I love? I try reason, I care, but she's...well..wacko Jesus crazy. What to do?

Thanks for any advice.

First she has to be willing, otherwise the best you can do is plant the seeds of doubt. Have you listened to our shows? Listen to the types of questions we ask. Asking questions of a theist that backs them into a corner are the most illustrative. You need to know many arguments, because years of brainwashing are not easy to get through.

Here's a common dialogue....

Q. Is God All loving?
Theist Answer: Yes
Q. Is God all knowing?
A. Yes
Q. Did God allow people to come into existence knowing they would go to hell?
A. (correct answer is yes, she's likely to dodge this)

If she says yes....

Q. Is it all loving to create a hell and then create someone who you know will end up spending an eternity there?

A (correct answer is no, she's likely to dodge this)

You have to know how to answer the dodged point.

She may say, "Well we can't understand god"
So you'd say "Well if we can't understand him than how do you understand you should believe in him?"

They'll inevitably go on to tell you a reason to believe in god that shows that now they miraculously UNDERSTAND god again. Point this out.

You should listen to our shows, and just do as much research as possible. All of our debates with Christians are available free on our myspace on the left side.

God less,

Sapient

- Brian Sapient


Buy popular atheist books and support the Rational Response Squad at the same time on Amazon.


Randalllord
Rational VIP!
Randalllord's picture
Posts: 690
Joined: 2006-04-12
User is offlineOffline
ALMALHAMAH wrote:Quote:Why

ALMALHAMAH wrote:
Quote:
Why is that ALMALHAMAH? What proof do you have to support this position?

Basic logic and reason that complex systems do not design themselves. (Also concerning God he has no beginning so He cannot be created)

Unless you like to believe in a dogmatic approach: complex systems design themselves and come about by themselves.

So let me get this straight. You reject the idea of the Universe begining without a creator because a creation must have a creator, but you accecpt that God exists without a creator. How can he exist without being created? If he had no begining then he can't exist!

Religion is regarded by the common people as true, by the wise as false, and by the rulers as useful. - Seneca


ALMALHAMAH
ALMALHAMAH's picture
Posts: 269
Joined: 2006-10-18
User is offlineOffline
Randalllord wrote:Quote:IT

Randalllord wrote:
Quote:
IT IS IMPOSSIBLE FOR IT (the Big Bang) TO COME ABOUT BY ITSELF.

Why is that ALMALHAMAH? What proof do you have to support this position?

In fact do you know what randallord?

The statement that the universe came about by itself is stupider than saying a computer can assemble itself or an airplane comes about by itself.

The Future of the World and the United States can be summed up in one verse:

Quran 61:9
{ He it is Who has sent His Messenger (Muhammad SAW) with guidance and the religion of truth (Islâmic Monotheism) to make it victorious over all (other) religio


ALMALHAMAH
ALMALHAMAH's picture
Posts: 269
Joined: 2006-10-18
User is offlineOffline
Quote:So let me get this

Quote:
So let me get this straight. You reject the idea of the Universe begining without a creator because a creation must have a creator, but you accecpt that God exists without a creator. How can he exist without being created? If he had no begining then he can't exist!

The universe has proof of its BEGINNING: The big Bang.

Can you prove that God had a beginning??

The Future of the World and the United States can be summed up in one verse:

Quran 61:9
{ He it is Who has sent His Messenger (Muhammad SAW) with guidance and the religion of truth (Islâmic Monotheism) to make it victorious over all (other) religio


Randalllord
Rational VIP!
Randalllord's picture
Posts: 690
Joined: 2006-04-12
User is offlineOffline
ALMALHAMAH wrote:Quote:So

ALMALHAMAH wrote:
Quote:
So let me get this straight. You reject the idea of the Universe begining without a creator because a creation must have a creator, but you accecpt that God exists without a creator. How can he exist without being created? If he had no begining then he can't exist!

The universe has proof of its BEGINNING: The big Bang.

I accecpt this statement.

ALMALHAMAH wrote:

Can you prove that God had a beginning??

What? I don't accept the idea that God exists but you want ME to prove he had a beginning? What are you smoking?

Religion is regarded by the common people as true, by the wise as false, and by the rulers as useful. - Seneca


ALMALHAMAH
ALMALHAMAH's picture
Posts: 269
Joined: 2006-10-18
User is offlineOffline
Quote:What? I don't accept

Quote:
What? I don't accept the idea that God exists but you want ME to prove he had a beginning? What are you smoking?

So why would you assume God had a beginning if you assume He does not exist. Makes no sense.

The Future of the World and the United States can be summed up in one verse:

Quran 61:9
{ He it is Who has sent His Messenger (Muhammad SAW) with guidance and the religion of truth (Islâmic Monotheism) to make it victorious over all (other) religio


Randalllord
Rational VIP!
Randalllord's picture
Posts: 690
Joined: 2006-04-12
User is offlineOffline
ALMALHAMAH wrote:Quote:What?

ALMALHAMAH wrote:
Quote:
What? I don't accept the idea that God exists but you want ME to prove he had a beginning? What are you smoking?

So why would you assume God had a beginning if you assume He does not exist. Makes no sense.

I don't assume he had a beginnig. I don't assume he exists.
You are the one that said that all things have a beginning and a few sentences later said that God had no beginning. I'm just asking you how is it possible for God to exist with no beginning. If you give me that baloney that "he always existed" non-answer, then what prevents a natural cause to the big bang like the string theory?

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/1270726.stm

Religion is regarded by the common people as true, by the wise as false, and by the rulers as useful. - Seneca


ALMALHAMAH
ALMALHAMAH's picture
Posts: 269
Joined: 2006-10-18
User is offlineOffline
Quote:I don't assume he had

Quote:
I don't assume he had a beginnig. I don't assume he exists.
You are the one that said that all things have a beginning and a few sentences later said that God had no beginning. I'm just asking you how is it possible for God to exist with no beginning. If you give me that baloney that "he always existed" non-answer, then what prevents a natural cause to the big bang like the string theory?

Good, then this means you have NO EXPLANATION of why the universe constructed itself, which is an illogical answer.

Also you have NO EXPLANATION of how the first living organism came about from no life.

Quote:
I'm just asking you how is it possible for God to exist with no beginning.

God is not human-like nor is he like his creations, he tells us in the Quran he has no beginning and no end.

This is hard for you to imagine because you are confined to a time domain where everything has a beginning and end. Well understand that God is not bound by this time domain.

The Future of the World and the United States can be summed up in one verse:

Quran 61:9
{ He it is Who has sent His Messenger (Muhammad SAW) with guidance and the religion of truth (Islâmic Monotheism) to make it victorious over all (other) religio


Sapient
High Level DonorRRS CO-FOUNDERRRS Core MemberWebsite Admin
Sapient's picture
Posts: 7522
Joined: 2006-04-18
User is offlineOffline
ALMALHAMAH wrote:Quote:So

ALMALHAMAH wrote:
Quote:
So what designed God/Allah? And if God/Allah can be eternal, so can the universe.

the universe had a beginning, the big bang tells you this.

you are saying Allah had a beginning prove this based on scieitific findings.

Beginning schmaginning you still dodged the question. You said all things must have a creator because a Boeing 747 had a creator, so WHAT CREATED ALLAH?

- Brian Sapient


Buy popular atheist books and support the Rational Response Squad at the same time on Amazon.


Sapient
High Level DonorRRS CO-FOUNDERRRS Core MemberWebsite Admin
Sapient's picture
Posts: 7522
Joined: 2006-04-18
User is offlineOffline
ALMALHAMAH wrote: Proof that

ALMALHAMAH wrote:

Proof that the Universe was created:

you have the torah, bible, and Quran all saying the earth and the heavens origionated from the same place. This was known thousands of years before Big Bang theory was introduced.

And we have the Star Wars trilogy to prove that Luke is Leahs brother. But it's just bad science to use a book to prove itself.

Quote:
Second, The Creator, God, does not have a beginning, he is omnipresent, remember? He was always around, so there can be nothing or nobody to create God.

So you're admitting something can exist without a creator, interesting. Then why do you believe that a Boeing 747 had a creator? (same logic)

Quote:
Third, the Universe is even more complex than a Boeing 747 im sure you agree with that. so is it still your position to explain the universe constructed itself??

Yes, at least until good reason to believe otherwise is given.

- Brian Sapient


Buy popular atheist books and support the Rational Response Squad at the same time on Amazon.


Hambydammit
High Level DonorModeratorRRS Core Member
Hambydammit's picture
Posts: 8657
Joined: 2006-10-22
User is offlineOffline
Picture me holding up a

Picture me holding up a little stuffed animal, and in a sing-song kiddie voice, saying, "Look at the little doggie! Look at the little doggie!"

When do parents do this to children? When they want to divert them from something else! This is what you do, Alma.

So, Alma. Let's go back to the real question. Can you defend your logic.

I have demonstrated the fallacy in your logic. I will do it again.

1) If creations exist, then there is a creator.

Since we can see clearly that some things are created by man, we know this to be true. So we move to step 2...

2) If some things are created, then a creator made some things.

We can't say more than this, because there are things we can't prove are created.

3) If some things are created, then all things are created.

This last step simply does not follow. There is no logical system in the world that will allow you to make that jump.

Would you please refute my position with the language of logic? Prove to me with an equation how you can make the jump in step 3.

Atheism isn't a lot like religion at all. Unless by "religion" you mean "not religion". --Ciarin

http://hambydammit.wordpress.com/
Books about atheism


ALMALHAMAH
ALMALHAMAH's picture
Posts: 269
Joined: 2006-10-18
User is offlineOffline
Sapient wrote:Beginning

Sapient wrote:
Beginning schmaginning you still dodged the question. You said all things must have a creator because a Boeing 747 had a creator, so WHAT CREATED ALLAH?

All created things have a beginning, all creations in the universe. Only the Creator is everlasting.

The Creator was never created, He was always in Existence.

He is outside the time domain, not restricted by it.

The Future of the World and the United States can be summed up in one verse:

Quran 61:9
{ He it is Who has sent His Messenger (Muhammad SAW) with guidance and the religion of truth (Islâmic Monotheism) to make it victorious over all (other) religio


Randalllord
Rational VIP!
Randalllord's picture
Posts: 690
Joined: 2006-04-12
User is offlineOffline
ALMALHAMAH wrote:Quote:I

ALMALHAMAH wrote:
Quote:
I don't assume he had a beginnig. I don't assume he exists.
You are the one that said that all things have a beginning and a few sentences later said that God had no beginning. I'm just asking you how is it possible for God to exist with no beginning. If you give me that baloney that "he always existed" non-answer, then what prevents a natural cause to the big bang like the string theory?

Good, then this means you have NO EXPLANATION of why the universe constructed itself, which is an illogical answer.

I have no answer so that's "good", as in, you win the argument? What? You apparently didn't read the string theory article or you didn't understand it. Given your history so far, I'd say that both are probable.

ALMALHAMAH wrote:
Also you have NO EXPLANATION of how the first living organism came about from no life.

I thought you were the one that got upset for me "jumping to conclusions" about including evolution in this discussion. I showed you how they were similar in this case but later confined myself to cosmology due to your protest and now you conclude I can't explain it!

I'll take up that argument at a later time as I suspect you'd use it to jump around the issue as you frequently do.

ALMALHAMAH wrote:

Quote:
I'm just asking you how is it possible for God to exist with no beginning.

God is not human-like nor is he like his creations, he tells us in the Quran he has no beginning and no end.

Here's the non-answer I predicted was coming! Hmm, does that make me a prophet?

ALMALHAMAH wrote:

This is hard for you to imagine because you are confined to a time domain where everything has a beginning and end. Well understand that God is not bound by this time domain.

I have difficulty imagining things that are not proven to be real, especially if they exist outside the universe, but by that definition, that makes it unreal as the universe is everything that is real.

Religion is regarded by the common people as true, by the wise as false, and by the rulers as useful. - Seneca


ALMALHAMAH
ALMALHAMAH's picture
Posts: 269
Joined: 2006-10-18
User is offlineOffline
Sapient wrote:Quote:Second,

Sapient wrote:
Quote:
Second, The Creator, God, does not have a beginning, he is omnipresent, remember? He was always around, so there can be nothing or nobody to create God.

So you're admitting something can exist without a creator, interesting. Then why do you believe that a Boeing 747 had a creator? (same logic).

Not applicable to God, youare implying that God is like the universe or God is like a boeing 747 which is completly incorrect.

God is independent of all his creations and he is independent of time. Do you understand that the TIME domain began with the BIG BANG. Makes sense that the creator of the Big Bang is INDEPENDENT of Time, and HE CREATED TIME.

Quote:
Quote:
Third, the Universe is even more complex than a Boeing 747 im sure you agree with that. so is it still your position to explain the universe constructed itself??

Yes, at least until good reason to believe otherwise is given.

you should also believe in other dogmatic ideas like airplanes assembling themselves or matter creating itself.

The Future of the World and the United States can be summed up in one verse:

Quran 61:9
{ He it is Who has sent His Messenger (Muhammad SAW) with guidance and the religion of truth (Islâmic Monotheism) to make it victorious over all (other) religio


Sapient
High Level DonorRRS CO-FOUNDERRRS Core MemberWebsite Admin
Sapient's picture
Posts: 7522
Joined: 2006-04-18
User is offlineOffline
ALMALHAMAH wrote:Sapient

ALMALHAMAH wrote:
Sapient wrote:
Quote:
Second, The Creator, God, does not have a beginning, he is omnipresent, remember? He was always around, so there can be nothing or nobody to create God.

So you're admitting something can exist without a creator, interesting. Then why do you believe that a Boeing 747 had a creator? (same logic).

Not applicable to God, youare implying that God is like the universe or God is like a boeing 747 which is completly incorrect.

And you've just proven how you're logic fails. The exact same thing is true of the Universe. We have evidence that 747's are created, we don't have the same of a god, and you need to stop implying that the rules of creation are the same amongst both, so as to stop looking ignorant.

Good job, you're mind is not completely gone, although it is completely brainwashed.

Quote:
you should also believe in other dogmatic ideas like airplanes assembling themselves or matter creating itself.

It's you who believes in dogmatic ideas, I reject them. You really need to work on your projection problem.

- Brian Sapient


Buy popular atheist books and support the Rational Response Squad at the same time on Amazon.


Hambydammit
High Level DonorModeratorRRS Core Member
Hambydammit's picture
Posts: 8657
Joined: 2006-10-22
User is offlineOffline
I'm bored with this, Alma. A

I'm bored with this, Alma.

A book told you to believe that God exists, so you do.

Since you have now spoken him into existence, you get to claim that anything that defies logic is logical because the God you decided is real is real.

If I ask you why I shouldn't believe another book that tells me how the universe came to exist, you'll quote a passage from your book.

So, let's just admit it, Alma. You believe because somebody told you to.

If you'll just admit that you can't produce any logic for your belief, we'll write you off as beyond hope and we can end this silly little discussion and you can go back to praying to your invisible friend.

Sheesh.

At least some of the other apologists try to come up with something close to logic.

Atheism isn't a lot like religion at all. Unless by "religion" you mean "not religion". --Ciarin

http://hambydammit.wordpress.com/
Books about atheism


Randalllord
Rational VIP!
Randalllord's picture
Posts: 690
Joined: 2006-04-12
User is offlineOffline
Alma, Here's another article

Alma,
Here's another article I like you to digest before you stick you foot in you mouth again:

http://www.secularhumanism.org/library/fi/smith_18_2.html

Big Bang Cosmology and Atheism
Why the Big Bang is No Help to Theists
by Quentin Smith

The following article is from Free Inquiry magazine, Volume 18, Number 2.

Since the mid-1960s, scientifically informed theists have been ecstatic because of Big Bang cosmology. Theists believe that the best scientific evidence that God exists is the evidence that the universe began to exist in an explosion about 15 billion years ago, an explosion called the Big Bang. Theists think it obvious that the universe could not have begun to exist uncaused. They argue that the most reasonable hypothesis is that the cause of the universe is God. This theory hinges on the assumption that it is obviously true that whatever begins to exist has a cause.

The most recent statement of this theist theory is in William Lane Craig's 1994 book Reasonable Faith.[1] In it Craig states his argument like this:

1. Whatever begins to exist has a cause.
2. The universe began to exist.
3. Therefore, the universe has a cause.[2]

In a very interesting quote from this book he discusses the first premise and mentions me as one of the perverse atheists who deny the obviousness of this assumption:

The first step is so intuitively obvious that I think scarcely anyone could sincerely believe it to be false. I therefore think it somewhat unwise to argue in favor of it, for any proof of the principle is likely to be less obvious than the principle itself. And as Aristotle remarked, one ought not to try to prove the obvious via the less obvious. The old axiom that "out of nothing, nothing comes" remains as obvious today as ever. When I first wrote The Kalam Cosmological Argument, I remarked that I found it an attractive feature of this argument that it allows the atheist a way of escape: he can always deny the first premise and assert the universe sprang into existence uncaused out of nothing. I figured that few would take this option, since I believed they would thereby expose themselves as persons interested only in academic refutation of the argument and not in really discovering the truth about the universe. To my surprise, however, atheists seem to be increasingly taking this route. For example, Quentin Smith, commenting that philosophers are too often adversely affected by Heidegger's dread of "the nothing," concludes that "the most reasonable belief is that we came from nothing, by nothing, and for nothing" - a nice ending to a sort of Gettysburg address of atheism, perhaps.[3]

A Baseless Assumption

I'm going to criticize this argument from scientific cosmology, which is the most popular argument that scientifically informed theists and philosophers are now using to argue that God exists.

Let's consider the first premise of the argument, that whatever has a beginning to its existence must have a cause. What reason is there to believe this causal principle is true? It's not self-evident; something is self-evident if and only if everyone who understands it automatically believes it. But many people, including leading theists such as Richard Swinburne, understand this principle very well but think it is false. Many philosophers, scientists, and indeed the majority of graduate and undergraduate students I've had in my classes think this principle is false. This principle is not self-evident, nor can this principle be deduced from any self-evident proposition. Therefore, there's no reason to think it's true. It is either false or it has the status of a statement that we do not know is true or false. At the very least, it is clear that we do not know that it is true.

Now suppose the theist retreats to a weaker version of this principle and says, "Whatever has a beginning to its existence has a cause." Now, this does not say that whatever has a beginning to its existence must have a cause; it allows that it is possible that some things begin to exist without a cause. So we don't need to consider it as a self-evident, necessary truth. Rather, according to the theists, we can consider it to be an empirical generalization based on observation.

But there is a decisive problem with this line of thinking. There is absolutely no evidence that it is true. All of the observations we have are of changes in things - of something changing from one state to another. Things move, come to a rest, get larger, get smaller, combine with other things, divide in half, and so on. But we have no observation of things coming into existence. For example, we have no observations of people coming into existence. Here again, you merely have a change of things. An egg cell and a sperm cell change their state by combining. The combination divides, enlarges, and eventually evolves into an adult human being. Therefore, I conclude that we have no evidence at all that the empirical version of Craig's statement, "Whatever begins to exist has a `cause'," is true. All of the causes we are aware of are changes in pre-existing materials. In Craig's and other theists' causal principle, "cause" means something entirely different: it means creating material from nothingness. It is pure speculation that such a strange sort of causation is even possible, let alone even supported in our observations in our daily lives.
An Uncaused Universe

But the more important point is this: not only is there no evidence for the theist's causal assumption, there's evidence against it. The claim that the beginning of our universe has a cause conflicts with current scientific theory. The scientific theory is called the Wave Function of the Universe. It has been developed in the past 15 years or so by Stephen Hawking, Andre Vilenkin, Alex Linde, and many others. Their theory is that there is a scientific law of nature called the Wave Function of the Universe that implies that it is highly probable that a universe with our characteristics will come into existence without a cause. Hawking's theory is based on assigning numbers to all possible universes. All of the numbers cancel out except for a universe with features that our universe possesses, such as containing intelligent organisms. This remaining universe has a very high probability - near 100% - of coming into existence uncaused.

Hawking's theory is confirmed by observational evidence. The theory predicts that our universe has evenly distributed matter on a large scale - that is, on the level of super-clusters of galaxies. It predicts that the expansion rate of our universe - our universe has been expanding ever since the Big Bang - would be almost exactly between the rate of the universe expanding forever and the rate where it expands and then collapses. It also predicts the very early area of rapid expansion near the beginning of the universe called "inflation." Hawking's theory exactly predicted what the COBE satellite discovered about the irregularities of the background radiation in the universe.[4]

So scientific theory that is confirmed by observational evidence tells us that the universe began without being caused. If you want to be a rational person and accept the results of rational inquiry into nature, then you must accept the fact that God did not cause the universe to exist. The universe exists uncaused, in accordance with the Wave Function law.

Now Stephen Hawking's theory dissolves any worries about how the universe could begin to exist uncaused. He supposes that there is a timeless space, a four-dimensional hypersphere, near the beginning of the universe. It is smaller than the nucleus of an atom. It is smaller than 10-33 centimeters in radius. Since it was timeless, it no more needs a cause than the timeless god of theism. This timeless hypersphere is connected to our expanding universe. Our universe begins smaller than an atom and explodes in a Big Bang, and here we are today in a universe that is still expanding.

Is it nonetheless possible that God could have caused this universe? No. For the Wave Function of the Universe implies that there is a 95% probability that the universe came into existence uncaused. If God created the universe, he would contradict this scientific law in two ways. First, the scientific law says that the universe would come into existence because of its natural, mathematical properties, not because of any supernatural forces. Second, the scientific law says that the probability is only 95% that the universe would come into existence. But if God created the universe, the probability would be 100% that it would come into existence because God is allpowerful. If God wills the universe to come into existence, his will is guaranteed to be 100% effective.

So contemporary scientific cosmology is not only not supported by any theistic theory, it is actually logically inconsistent with theism.

Notes

1. William Lane Craig, Reasonable Faith (Wheaton, Ill.: Crossway, 1994)
2. Ibid., p. 92
3. Ibid.
4. Confirmation of Hawking's theory is consistent with this theory being a reasonable proposal for the form that an (as yet) undeveloped theory of quantum gravity will take, as Hawking himself emphasizes. See Chapter 12, William Lane Craig and Quentin Smith, Theism, Atheism, and Big Bang Cosmology (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1993).

Religion is regarded by the common people as true, by the wise as false, and by the rulers as useful. - Seneca


Randalllord
Rational VIP!
Randalllord's picture
Posts: 690
Joined: 2006-04-12
User is offlineOffline
Hambydammit wrote:At least

Hambydammit wrote:
At least some of the other apologists try to come up with something close to logic.

Who needs logic when an unprovable being (since he exists outside space and time) imparts his wisdom to you through a book that has dubious origins. Smiling

Religion is regarded by the common people as true, by the wise as false, and by the rulers as useful. - Seneca


darth_josh
High Level DonorHigh Level ModeratorGold Member
darth_josh's picture
Posts: 2650
Joined: 2006-02-27
User is offlineOffline
Alma, You have sinned. You

Alma,
You have sinned.
You have listened to the infidel's lies.
Ray Comfort presented his versions of the '747' argument in a video on his website long ago to turn people to following jesus instead of Muhammad.

Are you abandoning islam?

Of course, the now infamous 'banana argument' has been conceded by him on the Hellbound Allleee show where he was educated in agricultural science and informed that the banana was a man-made alteration by cross-breeding two different plants. Ooooops. Guess it wasn't designed by 'god' after all to fit your (or ray's) hands and mouths.

Atheist Books, purchases on Amazon support the Rational Response Squad server, which houses Celebrity Atheists.


MattShizzle
Posts: 7966
Joined: 2006-03-31
User is offlineOffline
I almost fell off my chair

I almost fell off my chair laughing at that picture! Anyone know how to use Photoshop or anything to change the bananna in the picture to a pecker? :ROTF:

Matt Shizzle has been banned from the Rational Response Squad website. This event shall provide an atmosphere more conducive to social growth. - Majority of the mod team


elnathan
Posts: 81
Joined: 2006-09-13
User is offlineOffline
Randalllord

Randalllord wrote:
Hambydammit wrote:
At least some of the other apologists try to come up with something close to logic.

Who needs logic when an unprovable being (since he exists outside space and time) imparts his wisdom to you through a book that has dubious origins. Smiling


Yeah...well...that's not exactly how it is now.

His wisdom and witness is imparted in a way you seem unable to per-see-ve. You are leaving out a very important attribute of what is going on that you seem to be totally unaware of?

Trying to measure spiritual matter by earthly concepts, is like comparing apples to oranges...but with more serious interests and objections, and repercussions.

You would have to be able to understand my sig, to be able to comprehend what I veiw (with what I truly believe to be a great deal of authority) to be the true knowledge, regardless of one's preferences, or misconceived precepts. And to trade those personal perceptions, for those of someone like Dr. Dick Dawkins, is....well...kind of like De Javue...you know, like I have heard about guys like this, you, know? Eye-wink

In intellectual matters you can think things out, but in spiritual matters you will only think yourself into further wandering thoughts and more confusion. --Oswald Chambers


Yellow_Number_Five
atheistRRS Core MemberScientist
Yellow_Number_Five's picture
Posts: 1390
Joined: 2006-02-12
User is offlineOffline
ALMALHAMAH wrote:Quote:So

ALMALHAMAH wrote:
Quote:
So what designed God/Allah? And if God/Allah can be eternal, so can the universe.

the universe had a beginning, the big bang tells you this.

No, it does not, educate yourself. The universe as we know and understand it began with the Big Bang, but existence did not.

I am against religion because it teaches us to be satisfied with not understanding the world. - Richard Dawkins

Atheist Books, purchases on Amazon support the Rational Response Squad server.


Randalllord
Rational VIP!
Randalllord's picture
Posts: 690
Joined: 2006-04-12
User is offlineOffline
ALMALHAMAH, Here's a video

ALMALHAMAH,
Here's a video that explains your Boeing 747 question:

http://www.rationalresponders.com/the_blind_watchmaker

Religion is regarded by the common people as true, by the wise as false, and by the rulers as useful. - Seneca


Voided
Posts: 1195
Joined: 2006-02-20
User is offlineOffline
MattShizzle wrote:I almost

MattShizzle wrote:
I almost fell off my chair laughing at that picture! Anyone know how to use Photoshop or anything to change the bananna in the picture to a pecker? :ROTF:

I could, but I don't feel like searching the internet for penises...


ALMALHAMAH
ALMALHAMAH's picture
Posts: 269
Joined: 2006-10-18
User is offlineOffline
Yellow_Number_Five wrote:No,

Yellow_Number_Five wrote:
No, it does not, educate yourself. The universe as we know and understand it began with the Big Bang, but existence did not.

So do you believe before the Big Bang Matter Time and Space existed?

Yes or No.

The Future of the World and the United States can be summed up in one verse:

Quran 61:9
{ He it is Who has sent His Messenger (Muhammad SAW) with guidance and the religion of truth (Islâmic Monotheism) to make it victorious over all (other) religio


darth_josh
High Level DonorHigh Level ModeratorGold Member
darth_josh's picture
Posts: 2650
Joined: 2006-02-27
User is offlineOffline
Alma, That has already been

Alma,
That has already been asked and answered.
It has been said that the act of an insane person is to do the same thing many times and expect a different result each time.
Perhaps you should speak with a mental health professional regarding this aberrant behavior.

Atheist Books, purchases on Amazon support the Rational Response Squad server, which houses Celebrity Atheists.


ALMALHAMAH
ALMALHAMAH's picture
Posts: 269
Joined: 2006-10-18
User is offlineOffline
The fact is that because of

The fact is that because of the Big Bang- Matter, Time, and Space all came about.

the initial state of the universe before it was a dense gassous state, but you do not know where this gasseous state came from.

Still there is no scientific explanation for this.

The Future of the World and the United States can be summed up in one verse:

Quran 61:9
{ He it is Who has sent His Messenger (Muhammad SAW) with guidance and the religion of truth (Islâmic Monotheism) to make it victorious over all (other) religio


MarthaSplatterhead (not verified)
Posts: 4294964979
Joined: 1969-12-31
User is offlineOffline
ALMALHAMAH wrote:The fact is

ALMALHAMAH wrote:
The fact is that because of the Big Bang- Matter, Time, and Space all came about.

the initial state of the universe before it was a dense gassous state, but you do not know where this gasseous state came from.

Still there is no scientific explanation for this.

Oh man, you got us there. It was god. He passed gas. :ROTF: Sorry couldn't resist.


Hambydammit
High Level DonorModeratorRRS Core Member
Hambydammit's picture
Posts: 8657
Joined: 2006-10-22
User is offlineOffline
Alma seems to be convinced

Alma seems to be convinced that if he only says something enough times, it will be true...

I can't help thinking of looking into the mirror and saying "Candyman" three times.

Anyway, buzz over to the YOU SHOULD BE ASHAMED thread. I've posted a lengthy scholarly paper refuting some Quran-Science claims. It's cold hard math, and I'm curious if Alma can come up with some counter-math of his own.

Let's take a vote...

How many say Alma will:

1) Quote someone who says the Quran predicts science.

2) Tell us that he's given us the names of scientists who say it's true

3) Quote the Quran

4) Point us in the direction of a web page with no scientific research

or

5) Tell us something about how nasty hell is going to be.

Atheism isn't a lot like religion at all. Unless by "religion" you mean "not religion". --Ciarin

http://hambydammit.wordpress.com/
Books about atheism


Voided
Posts: 1195
Joined: 2006-02-20
User is offlineOffline
Alma find some proof

Alma find some proof everything came from absolute nothing.

Here is something that explains how most people who study it are thinking things work.

http://www.ncsu.edu/felder-public/kenny/papers/cosmo.html


Voided
Posts: 1195
Joined: 2006-02-20
User is offlineOffline
Hambydammit wrote:How many

Hambydammit wrote:
How many say Alma will:

1) Quote someone who says the Quran predicts science.

2) Tell us that he's given us the names of scientists who say it's true

3) Quote the Quran

4) Point us in the direction of a web page with no scientific research

or

5) Tell us something about how nasty hell is going to be.

6) Talks about how faith is enough.

He has done 1, 3, and 4. If he does something new it'll probably be 2 before 5 or 6. Although if he does do 5 or 6 I think that probably means he has nothing left to say or can't counter our argument.


Hambydammit
High Level DonorModeratorRRS Core Member
Hambydammit's picture
Posts: 8657
Joined: 2006-10-22
User is offlineOffline
Ah, he tricked me! He opted

Ah, he tricked me!

He opted for:

7) Ignored the evidence that I gave refuting one of his scientists' claims, then accusied me of changing the subject because my article didn't deal with the correct prophecy of future science.

Clever bugger.

Atheism isn't a lot like religion at all. Unless by "religion" you mean "not religion". --Ciarin

http://hambydammit.wordpress.com/
Books about atheism


elnathan
Posts: 81
Joined: 2006-09-13
User is offlineOffline
Faith in active opposition

Here's something for you to consider....

Quoting: Oswald Chambers

Faith in active opposition to common sense is mistaken enthusiasm and narrow-mindedness, and common sense in opposition to faith demonstrates a mistaken reliance on reason as the basis for truth. The life of faith brings the two of these into the proper relationship. Common sense and faith are as different from each other as the natural life is from the spiritual, and as impulsiveness is from inspiration.

Nothing that Jesus Christ ever said is common sense, but is revelation sense, and is complete, where as common sense falls short. Yet faith must be tested and tried before it becomes real in your life. “We know that all things work together for good . . . “ (Romans 8:28) so that no matter what happens, the transforming power of God’s providence transforms perfect faith into reality. Faith always works in a personal way, because the purpose of God is to see that perfect faith is made real in His children.

For every detail of common sense in life, there is a truth God has revealed by which we can prove in our practical experience what we believe God to be. Faith is a tremendously active principle that always puts Jesus Christ first. The life of faith says, “Lord you have said it, it appears to be irrational, but I’m going to step out boldly, trusting in Your Word” (for example, see Matthew 6:33). Turning intellectual faith into our personal possession is always a fight, not just sometimes. God brings us into particular circumstances to educate our faith, because the nature of faith is to make the object of our faith very real to us.

Until we know Jesus, God is merely a concept, and we can't have faith in Him. But once we hear Jesus say “He who has seen Me has seen the Father” (John 14:9) we immediately have something that is real, and our faith is limitless. Faith is the entire person in the right relationship with God through the power of the Spirit of Jesus Christ.

Oswald Chambers, “My Utmost for His Highest” (Oct. 30),

In intellectual matters you can think things out, but in spiritual matters you will only think yourself into further wandering thoughts and more confusion. --Oswald Chambers


Hambydammit
High Level DonorModeratorRRS Core Member
Hambydammit's picture
Posts: 8657
Joined: 2006-10-22
User is offlineOffline
Funny. I wasn't expecting a

Funny. I wasn't expecting a yes or no answer.

Odd that you have a god whose very existence prevents you from answering simple questions.

In lieu of a yes or no answer, I shall bid you and your silly arguments -- adieu.

Peace, man

Matthew 5:37 Simply let your 'Yes' be 'Yes,' and your 'No,' 'No'; anything beyond this comes from the evil one.

Atheism isn't a lot like religion at all. Unless by "religion" you mean "not religion". --Ciarin

http://hambydammit.wordpress.com/
Books about atheism


aiia
Superfan
aiia's picture
Posts: 1923
Joined: 2006-09-12
User is offlineOffline
ALMALHAMAH wrote: The fact

ALMALHAMAH wrote:
The fact is that because of the Big Bang- Matter, Time, and Space all came about.

Matter, time and space always existed.

The universe did not have a beginning; the bigbang was merely a change.

Time is nothing but a measurement, just like temperature. Temperature measures molecular activity; time measures the movement of matter through space.
Space is simply the absence of matter.
The only thing that these measurements apply to is matter/energy. Matter and energy are of the same "stuff"; they are merely in a different form. One can be the other. Burn a log in the fire place - log becomes heat and smoke, i.e. energy and gas (another form of matter).

ALMALHAMAH wrote:
the initial state of the universe before it was a dense gassous state, but you do not know where this gasseous state came from.

Actually it is believed, from mathematical models, that the universe just before the moment of bigbang was a liquid.
What was before this is pure speculation.

ALMALHAMAH wrote:
Still there is no scientific explanation for this.

Yes there is an explanation, but most science is never published in the popular media because it is not understood by anyone other than scientists.

People who think there is something they refer to as god don't ask enough questions.


aiia
Superfan
aiia's picture
Posts: 1923
Joined: 2006-09-12
User is offlineOffline
elnathan wrote:Here's

elnathan wrote:
Here's something for you to consider....

Quoting: Oswald Chambers

Faith in active opposition to common sense is mistaken enthusiasm and narrow-mindedness, and common sense in opposition to faith demonstrates a mistaken reliance on reason as the basis for truth. The life of faith brings the two of these into the proper relationship. Common sense and faith are as different from each other as the natural life is from the spiritual, and as impulsiveness is from inspiration.

Nothing that Jesus Christ ever said is common sense, but is revelation sense, and is complete, where as common sense falls short. Yet faith must be tested and tried before it becomes real in your life. “We know that all things work together for good . . . “ (Romans 8:28) so that no matter what happens, the transforming power of God’s providence transforms perfect faith into reality. Faith always works in a personal way, because the purpose of God is to see that perfect faith is made real in His children.

For every detail of common sense in life, there is a truth God has revealed by which we can prove in our practical experience what we believe God to be. Faith is a tremendously active principle that always puts Jesus Christ first. The life of faith says, “Lord you have said it, it appears to be irrational, but I’m going to step out boldly, trusting in Your Word” (for example, see Matthew 6:33). Turning intellectual faith into our personal possession is always a fight, not just sometimes. God brings us into particular circumstances to educate our faith, because the nature of faith is to make the object of our faith very real to us.

Until we know Jesus, God is merely a concept, and we can't have faith in Him. But once we hear Jesus say “He who has seen Me has seen the Father” (John 14:9) we immediately have something that is real, and our faith is limitless. Faith is the entire person in the right relationship with God through the power of the Spirit of Jesus Christ.

Oswald Chambers, “My Utmost for His Highest” (Oct. 30),

What do you think this means?? In your own words.

People who think there is something they refer to as god don't ask enough questions.


Yellow_Number_Five
atheistRRS Core MemberScientist
Yellow_Number_Five's picture
Posts: 1390
Joined: 2006-02-12
User is offlineOffline
ALMALHAMAH

ALMALHAMAH wrote:
Yellow_Number_Five wrote:
No, it does not, educate yourself. The universe as we know and understand it began with the Big Bang, but existence did not.

So do you believe before the Big Bang Matter Time and Space existed?

Yes or No.

Yes, matter-energy should have existed before the BB - why shouldn't it have? Have you a scientific basis for your answer?

Think hard before you answer this, because I WILL respond in depth.

I am against religion because it teaches us to be satisfied with not understanding the world. - Richard Dawkins

Atheist Books, purchases on Amazon support the Rational Response Squad server.