I’ve been an atheist since I was around 15. I came to atheism via a Catholic upbringing, lots of reading, some dabbling in deism, a dive back into Christianity in my early 20s, and then the anti-climactic non-epiphany that was me realizing that, yep, I still can’t believe that nonsense no matter how many Rob Bell books I read.
This morning, I saw a couple of posts pop up on my Tumblr dashboard to the effect that [some or most] atheists are smug, arrogant intellectual elitists who think everyone who holds to some religion is just an idiot with no grasp of reason, rationality, or science. Also, that atheists should stop being that way, because it makes us look like assholes.
That second bit, I agree with–we should all strive to not be assholes. The first bit is, I think, for the most part untrue. Certainly, if you are a religious person, there will be some atheists who are just going to think you are a big dumb-head, and some of those atheists will be jerks about it. However, speaking from my own experience, I would like to point out that, often, what are sincere questions from atheists about religion and faith are perceived as intellectual bullying when believers feel put on the spot or when they don’t have ready answers. It’s perceived as “mean” if an atheist points out logical inconsistency or general incoherence in religious beliefs. It’s perceived as smug if we don’t swallow the same poisonous apologetics that believers do in order to maintain their faith.
Most of the believers that I come in contact with are progressive believers, ranging all the way from “not-in-my-church” denialists (who tend to think that they are immune to the bad things about religion) to Rob Bell accomodationists (practically universalists, who play fast and loose with Scripture to try and create the warmest, fuzziest Christianity possible). Progressive believers can often be the most frustrating to discuss religion with. The more conservative and fundamentalist believers are, the more they seem to have firm and coherent, although increasingly illogical and generally evil, answers to the questions that I usually have for religious believers.
In any case, without dragging this out too long, here’s a list of questions that I generally have for religious believers. Most of these questions, or at least my insistence on people actually answering them if they want to talk to me about religion, have gotten me the “arrogant atheist fundie” accusation.
- What verifiable evidence supports your belief in a god? Unsubstantiated “miracles” don’t count. “I just feel it in my heart” or similar nonsense is not evidence. However, I will accept “I don’t need evidence,” as a valid answer–although it will make me think you are foolish and worry about your grasp on reality.
- How do you decide which parts of your holy book(s) to accept as true and meaningful? I may bring up specific examples and ask your opinion on them regardless of your answer to this question. What I look for here is consistency. If you eat shrimp or wear cotton-polyester, I don’t expect that you will think homosexuality is a sin. If you live in this universe, I don’t expect that you will think the earth was created in less than a week or that Jonah really lived in a fish for 3 days.
- Of the numerous world religions that exist, what made you pick yours in the first place? On what basis have you decided that your particular religion is the correct religion?
- How do you make moral and ethical decisions on a day-to-day basis? To what extent do you consider yourself guided by your religion in that decision-making process?
- How do you make sense of moral and ethical contradictions in your holy book(s) or religious dogma?
- What qualities would you say make a god worthy of worship? To what extent does your god embody those qualities, and how? I will ask for examples here, and I am likely to point out contradictions if I am familiar enough with your religion to do so.
- What are your views on the afterlife? Especially, what happens to people who don’t agree that your religion is the correct one?
- How does your religion and/or how do you personally address the problem of evil?
- When members of your religion do bad things, how comfortable are you to be associated with those people? Do you still consider them to be members of the same religion as you? Indeed, how do you determine who is “in” and who is “out”? If you don’t determine that, is there an authority that does so? By what method does that authority do so, and where do they get their authority?
- What if you are wrong? How important is it to you to be part of the “right” religion? What consequences do you foresee if you have chosen incorrectly? How much doubt would you say that you have about your religious beliefs?
- Bonus question: Assuming that you are fairly content with your religious beliefs or lack thereof, what kind of evidence would convince you to change your mind?
Look for me to answer these questions myself in a future post. I feel like it’s only fair that, if I would ask these questions of believers, I would be willing to answer them myself. I will also be happy to answer any other questions from believers, and I would love to see any suggestions that other non-believers have.
I’ll have a crack at briefly answering these. If there are any couple you have any particular interest in fleshing out, I’ll play along. I don’t think we’d get far going over all of them in single comments, you know?
1. Logic is a verifiable bit of evidence. If we accept standard big bang cosmology, the universe had a begining. There needs to be a cosmic first mover. Philosophically, there needs to be a first cause, an infinite regress of causes is impossible. Therefore there is at a minimum, a Creator.
2. It is all true and meaningful. It sounds to me like you don’t take into consideration biblical theology and the difference between the Old and New covenants and the role each play. This question doesn’t take into consideration the purpose of the OT laws and the theocracy of Israel. It is a question which is based in ignorance of biblical theology. (I don’t in any way mean this disparagingly).
3. I came to the conclusion Christianity is true based on the reliability of the New Testament documents. The eye-witness testamony, the genesis of the Christian church in the face of extreme prejudice. The willingness of the earliest disciples to die for their message. Among other reasons. This question also kind of presupposes that all religions are basically the same and all have an equal possibility of being true, and I just happen to pick the one I liked. There are some which cannot possibly be true given their claims.
4. From the Christian stand point, we are governed by the Law written on our heart. I.e. our conscience informed by the Holy Spirit. The Bible does contain general standards, but is by no means exhaustive, but is adequate.
5. This is a “have you stopped beating your wife” question. It is loaded with the idea that there are unreconcilable difficulties. When alledged contradictions are carefully examined and allowed to be investigated without dismissal, they have a habit of vanishing.
6. My view is no matter what kind of God exists, He would be worthy of worship based solely on the fact that He is God. Whether a monster or a saint, God is God and deserving of worship. Stalin and Hussein commanded worship-like respect from everyone in their presence. You took your life in your hands of you ran afoul of their whims. They were evil, but given the power they weilded, they were still the one in charge, whether you thought they were worthy or not.
7. The Christian view is that people are punished for their sins against God, the breaking of His laws. Jesus is a rescue from what we would all be rightly be judged. Its not a club with a closed membership. So those without a trust in the Redeemer will bear their punishment themselves.
8. Not sure what you mean by addressing the problem of evil. If you mean how does my religious conviction reconcile what seems to be a contradiction in the existence of the perceived qualities of God and the existence of evil, this is a detailed discussion. But the God of Christianity is not mutually exclusive from the existence of evil.
9. The Bible has described necessary beliefs (there are relatively few) in order to be considered Christian. It is not my or an institutions declaration. The Bible dictates what constitutes a believer and who falls outside the body of Christ.
10. I think it is highly important to have correct views about everything. Paul said in 1 Corinthians 15, that if Christianity is not true, then our faith is in vein and worthless. Frankly, from what I have studied about comparitive religions, theology, philosophy, philosophy of religion over the last 6-8 years, and lengthy investigation during that time, I don’t believe another religion could be true. So, if I have chosen incorrectly, I have no reprocussions. I believe it is the Judeo-Christian worldview or Atheistic-materialism, which I think is logically impossible.
If a solid philosophical argument could be made which could be demonstrated as valid for the existence of God to be impossible, I could be pushed off my views. If there were reliable first century documentation or other historical evidence that showed the NT was a forgery, and/or that Jesus did not exist. Or that there was first century documentation that the entire Christian enterprise was a mass collusion, I could abandon my view.
I was not raised in a Christian environment, and I do not need Christianity to be true for my personal identity. I would rather be correct in my thinking and be disappointed, than knowingly holding a false belief because of some comfort it brings me.
BTW, I have written on nearly, if not every one of your questions on my primary blog (which I don’t think is the one my name will link to). I havent posted links to my page in my answers because I’m not trying to make your comment section a billboard for my blog. But if there is any particular topic you’d like to see my indepth commentary on, let me know.
Response to John’s answers:
1. If we accept big bang cosmology, anything regarding cause or circumstances surrounding the event or before the event is pure speculation, including the existence of a ‘prime mover’.
2. Maybe the question was worded poorly, but it appears that you blame the reader for misinterpretation and misunderstanding your holy book that you claim is true.
3. So you believe the bible is true based on alleged eyewitness accounts and opposition to the church. That sounds like most other religions in existence. I would like to hear your justification for asserting that other religions cannot be true based on their claims.
4. “the Law written in our heart” – totally indefinable and meaningless. You reference the bible and then casually excuse its shortcomings.
5. So you deny any contractions in the bible.
6. So you are inclined to worship anyone or anything you believe in power.
7. So in a nutshell, you believe that non-believers of your religion will be punished.
8. It is a rather broad question, but I would like you to expound on your claim that “the God of Christianity is not mutually exclusive from the existence of evil.”
9. Although I’m not a fan of these particular questions due to their subjectivity, you failed to address them. I think the questions were directed at your feeling toward associations with fellow Christians who exhibit non-Christian behavior.
10. So again, you believe the bible is true and after years of comparative study you believe your view is correct. You then reference Pascal’s wager.
Why would it be necessary to produce 1st century documentation as opposed to applying modern techniques of analysis for biblical claims? If you have already concluded that the bible is inerrant and true then you already set the bar impossibly high to critically examine.
I don’t know if this blog still work as I see its been two years when this was posted. I found it by coincidence even if I believe there’re no coincidences in life and I don’t feel too lazy to not comment.
I’ll try my best but you should know that English is my third language and I still have some serious work to do before perfecting it. So I apologize in advance for my mistakes.
First question: (1)
Let’s say I put in front of you a machine that no one ever saw before you and I asked you how will it work, of course you wouldn’t know so who knows? You will say: the creator, the inventor, the producer, … that guy who fabricated it will know, isn’t?
So when this machine will be known by the public, of course we will need a manual. In a way the manual will help us understand this machine as it also in another way prove that this guy is the one who invented it. Because let’s say the inventor gave us this manual and it had nothing to do with the invention, are we going to believe he was the one who invented it? I wouldn’t.
Putting this aside let’s talk about how this word came to existence. We all know about the big bang, no?! But when did we discovered about it. The science discovered it 40 years ago? 60 years, 100 years ago? Funny thing is it was mentioned in the Quran more than 1400 years ago: “Do not those who disbelieve see that the heavens and the earth were closed up, but we have opened them; and we have made of water everything living, will they not then believe?” Al Anbiya 21:30.
Let’s say that this is just a, maybe, coincidence and it doesn’t mean anything; okay fine let me ask you something, the light of the moon , is it a reflected light or it is its own?
You, of course, will say that the science discovered that the moon reflect the light of the sun. Then I’ll ask you when did they discovered it? But I’m not really interested in the reply and you know why because God already mention it more than 1400 years ago: “Blessed is He Who made the constellations in the heavens and made therein a lamp and a shining moon” Al Furqan 25:61. => the Quran was written originally in Arabic and shining in Arabic is monir that means reflected light.
Let’s also say this is just a coincidence and go on to the next one. How is the form of the earth we live on and when the science declared it? Ferdinand Magellan was the first man to sail around the world and make a practical demonstration of Earth’s sphericity (1519) I don’t have a valid reference for the date so let’s say it was discovered 500 or 600 years ago but I’m going to say again, God told us about it 1400 years ago: “And after that He spread the earth.” 30:79. Let’s see the original word for spread in Arabic; it’s dahaha meaning extended and also the verb dahaha came from daha that means egg and not any egg its the egg of ostrich. Did you ever look at it form? It look exactly like the form of earth.
But you know let’s just say this is completely a coincidence in words and go on in our discovery of the world. Its a common knowledge that the sun is still while all the planet turn around it and everything move in the vast universe and coincidentally see what God said about it: “It is He Who created the Night and the Day, and the sun and the moon: all (the celestial bodies) swim along, each in its rounded course.” 21:33
But maybe my God is just a little clever so let’s ask him about something else. The science now tell us that the universe is extending so let’s see what my God told us more than 1400 years ago: “And the heaven We constructed with strength, and indeed, We are [its] expander” 51:47
I think it’s in 1850 when the cycle of water was discovered but we already know it 1400 years ago: ” Do you not see that Allah sends down rain from the sky and makes it flow as springs [and rivers] in the earth; then He produces thereby crops of varying colors; then they dry and you see them turned yellow; then He makes them [scattered] debris. Indeed in that is a reminder for those of understanding.” 39:21
” And of His signs is [that] He shows you the lightening [causing] fear and aspiration, and He sends down rain from the sky by which He brings to life the earth after its lifelessness. Indeed in that are signs for a people who use reason.” 30:24
” And We have sent the fertilizing winds and sent down water from the sky and given you drink from it. And you are not its retainers.” 15:22
” And We have sent down rain from the sky in a measured amount and settled it in the earth. And indeed, We are Able to take it away.” 23:18
” It is Allah who sends the winds, and they stir the clouds and spread them in the sky however He wills, and He makes them fragments so you see the rain emerge from within them. And when He causes it to fall upon whom He wills of His servants, immediately they rejoice.” 30:48
” Do you not see that Allah drives clouds? Then He brings them together, then He makes them into a mass, and you see the rain emerge from within it. And He sends down from the sky, mountains [of clouds] within which is hail, and He strikes with it whom He wills and averts it from whom He wills. The flash of its lightening almost takes away the eyesight.” 24:43
” And We placed therein gardens of palm trees and grapevines and caused to burst forth therefrom some springs.” 36:34
… and so on;
When did science says that there’s two waters, one sweet, the other salty that met without being mixed? Read this: “He released the two seas, meeting [side by side]; Between them is a barrier [so] neither of them transgresses.” 55:19-20. See also: “And it is He who has released [simultaneously] the two seas, one fresh and sweet and one salty and bitter, and He placed between them a barrier and prohibiting partition” 25:53
” Have We not made the earth a resting place? And the mountains as stakes?” 78:7-8. This verse tell us that the mountains are stakes and you know while building we use “awtad” as the translation says “stakes” so the house will not shake or worst fall and when did we hear something about this? O yeah! The science LATELY says that the mountains make the earth still.
Let’s go to biology: ” Have those who disbelieved not considered that the heavens and the earth were a joined entity, and We separated them and made from water every living thing? Then will they not believe?” 21:30. Didn’t the science prove that every living is from water?
Let’s talk about animals:” The example of those who take allies other than Allah is like that of the spider who takes a home. And indeed, the weakest of homes is the home of the spider, if they only knew.” 29:41. See also: ” And gathered for Solomon were his soldiers of the jinn and men and birds, and they were [marching] in rows. Until, when they came upon the valley of the ants, an ant said, “O ants, enter your dwellings that you not be crushed by Solomon and his soldiers while they perceive not.” 27:17-18. And another: And your Lord inspired to the bee, “Take for yourself among the mountains, houses, and among the trees and [in] that which they construct. Then eat from all the fruits and follow the ways of your Lord laid down [for you].” There emerges from their bellies a drink, varying in colors, in which there is healing for people. Indeed in that is a sign for a people who give thought.” 16:68-69.
Do you still have doubt that this manual is not valid and thus the inventor is non existent?
What do you know about the creation of a human? My God know everything about it:
We have created you, so why do you not believe? Have you seen that which you emit (i.e., semen which contains the potential for human life)? Is it you who creates it, or are We the Creator? We have decreed death among you, and We are not unable, to transfigure you and create you in (forms) that you do not know. And you have already know the first creation (i.e., the creation of Adam), so will you not remember? And have you seen that [seed] which you sow? Is it you who makes it grow, or are We the grower? If We willed, We could make it [dry] debris, and you would be regretful (or left in wonderment), [Saying], “Indeed, we are [now] in debt; Rather, we have been deprived.” And have you seen the water that you drink? Is it you who brought it down from the clouds, or is it We who bring it down? If We willed, We could make it bitter (and undrinkable), why then are you not grateful (to Allah)? (Waqi’ah 56:57-70)
And Allah has brought you out from the wombs of your mothers not knowing a thing. And He gave you hearing, sight, and hearts that you might give thanks (to Allah). (An-Nahl 16:78) => note the use of the word hearing before sight.
O mankind! Be dutiful to your Lord, Who created you from a single person (i.e., Adam), and from him He created his wife (i.e., Eve), and from them both He created many men and women. And fear Allah through Whom you demand your mutual (rights), and (do not cut the relations of) the wombs (kinship). Surely, Allah is Ever an All-Watcher over you. (AnNisa 4:1)
And We have already created man and know what his soul whispers to him, and We are closer to him than [his] jugular vein. (Qaaf 50:16)
He created you (all) from a single person:then created, of like nature, his mate;and he sent down for you eight head of cattle in pairs: He makes you, in the wombs of your mothers, in stages, one after another, in three veils of darkness. Holy Qur’an (39:6)
And certainly We created man of an extract of clay, Then We made him a small seed in a firm resting-place, Then We made the seed a clot, then We made the clot a lump of flesh, then We made (in) the lump of flesh bones, then We clothed the bones with flesh, then We caused it to grow into another creation, so blessed be Allah, the best of the creators. Then after that you will most surely die. Then surely on the day of resurrectionyou shall be raised. Holy Qur’an (23:12-16) => note the use of the word bones before clothing it with flesh.
Isn’t what science says about how a baby is created in the womb?
Who know how the machine work? The inventor. And what do we call this inventor? Allah; God.
I can still show you more about the validation of this manual and inventor if you want.
Next question: (2)
I believe everything my holy book says. Everything with no exception.
Question: (3)
My parents and their parents were Muslims and so I was born as such but there was a moment in my life when I said if only I was a Christian just because I thought they were cool but in that time I was an ignorant 12 or 13 y.o girl who is attracted to looks. Then while growing up I began to do some researches about Christianity and the more I learn about it corruption and confusing verses, see also non valid facts the more I thank God for my religion. => I can prove to anyone who want to hear it about the so many lies and mistakes in the bible.
To the next one: (4)
“Say: ‘O People of the Book (i.e., Jews and Christians)! Come to common terms as between us and you: That we worship none but Allah; that we associate no partners with Him; that we erect not, from among ourselves, Lords and patrons other than Allah.’ If then they turn back, say ye: ‘Bear witness that we (at least) are Muslims (bowing to Allah’s Will).’ (The Noble Quran, 3:64)” Islam don’t ask you to do more than you can. Everything that forbid is for your own good so as I’m asked to not drink alcohol, I don’t. Everything that ask you to do is in the rang of your own strong. Pray five times a day-I do that. Believe there’s only one God, in his Angeles, books, all his prophets (including Jesus), the day of judgment and fate and I believe in all of this.
I lie sometimes, I don’t wear a hijab, I talk about people and my sins are many but I ask forgiveness each day as I completely believe if I do each word my religion ask of me I’ll live in peace and I’m talking about the internal peace, sadly I’m not that perfect.
Question: (5)
Sorry to disappoint you but if you read my Holy book you’ll find no contradiction.
Question: (6)
Just but merciful are the qualities of God and yes you can be both in the same time.
To explain how this two trait can exist in sync we have this example: We have a scenario of two men living in the West where they all, on separate occasions, had sex with one prostitute. One of them was forgiven by Allah Almighty while the other got punished for the sin. How is that fair and just when GOD Almighty’s Mercy was applied to one person and not to the other, and when GOD Almighty punished one person and didn’t punish the other? Let look at the following Noble Verses from the Noble Quran:
“Then shall anyone who has done an atom’s weight of good, see it! And anyone who has done an atom’s weight of evil, shall see it. (The Noble Quran, 99:7-8)”
“There is no moving creature on earth but its sustenance dependeth on God: He knoweth the time and place of its definite abode and its temporary deposit: All is in a clear Record. (The Noble Quran, 11:6)”
“We have enjoined on man kindness to his parents: In pain did his mother bear him, and in pain did she give him birth. The carrying of the (child) to his weaning is (a period of) thirty months. At length, when he reaches the age of full strength and attains forty years, he says, ‘O my Lord! Grant me that I may be grateful for Thy favour which Thou has bestowed upon me, and upon both my parents, and that I may work righteousness such as Thou mayest approve; and be gracious to me in my issue. Truly have I turned to Thee and truly do I bow (to Thee) in Islam.’ (The Noble Quran, 46:15)”
“Say to the Unbelievers, if (now) they desist (from unbelief), their past would be forgiven for them; but if they persist, the punishment of those before them is already (a matter of warning for them). (The Noble Quran, 8:38)”
“The Lord of the heavens and the earth, and all between,- Exalted in Might, able to enforce His Will, forgiving again and again.
Noble Quran, 38:66)”
“Those who avoid great sins and shameful deeds, only (falling into) small faults,- verily thy Lord is ample in forgiveness. He knows you well when He brings you out of the earth, And when ye are hidden in your mothers’ wombs. Therefore justify not yourselves: He knows best who it is that guards against evil. (The Noble Quran, 53:32)”
In these Noble Verses we see the following: 1- Allah Almighty records everything that His creations do, and will bring it to their attention on the Day of Judgement.
2- Allah Almighty recognizes that as the person grows up, he/she learns. His example of the age of 40 in Noble Verse 46:15 clearly proves this. 3- Allah Almighty’s Mercy and Forgiveness are vast and He always Forgives His creation.
With these points established from the Noble Quran, we can now clearly see how Allah Almighty’s Mercy and Justice do not contradict each others in anyway. In the case of sexual sinning above, while it is true that the sin itself was committed by the two men and with the same woman, but the conditions that surrounded both men and effecting their upbringing, and their intentions and faith and fear in Allah Almighty, and their age differences and mentality, and other conditions that I can’t think of right now are most definitely different between them, because each person is unique. A pornography promoter, for instance, is not the same as the victim who falls prey into the sexual sinning and lust through seeing it on the internet, VHS or DVD. So the bottom line is it is not the sin itself that always
It is rather the intentions of the person and the situation that he/she is in that caused him/her to sin it. And
matters to Allah Almighty.
equally important, the age that they were in when they committed the sin also matters. A 13-year old teenager committing fornication is not the same as a 60-year old committing it! While the sin is the same, but the mentality and maturity between the 13-year old and the 60-year old is quite different! Allah Almighty would most likely forgive the 13-year old boy while He may not forgive the 60-year old.
Also, even if the two sinners were on the same age (say 30 years old), still one of them might be forgiven while the other might not. A man committing a sin in a very conservative and anti-sex society such as the Orthodox Muslim ones is different from one who lives in California or South Beach Florida where the girls always look sexually tempting and lustful. Women in Orthodox Muslim societies don’t look sexual at all. Sexual temptation does not even exist in these societies and believe it or not, teenage boys may not even masturbate because the urge is just not there! The case is not the same in whoredom societies where Christians mostly live such as in the US and Europe, where they pride themselves with sex and lust, and sin is their way of life.
Next one: (7) I totally and completely believe in the afterlife and the existence of heaven and hell.
Quran (4:56) – Those who disbelieve Our revelations, We shall expose them to the Fire. As often as their skins are consumed We shall exchange them for fresh skins that they may taste the torment Lo! Allah is ever Mighty, Wise. => It is hell that’s awaiting the disbelievers. God may forgive anything except the sin of disbelieving in his existence as the only Creator.
Question: (8)
One of the things that are quite concerning and worrisome from the followers of any religion or faith is the allowance of temporary evil and injustice towards others! There is a common attitude among “believers” of any faith that if they do evil and then repent then it will be washed away for them. What we would be left with then is injustice done to others without punishment! This is especially common among the followers of the gospel of porn, the book that sings glory songs, praises and declarations about women’s vaginas and breasts taste like “wine” and sisters can lust after their brothers and take them to “bed”! Literally! Because of the pornography, and because of the countless errors, contradictions and corruption in the gospel of porn, this is why you see every sin imaginable being commonly praised and practiced and is at its peak among this book’s pornified societies. This includes, but not limited to, open nakedness where 99% of the body’s nakedness is exposed via wearing bikinis in public, which will in turn tempt others, open lewdness (no dress code on clothes), open sexuality (boyfriend-girlfriend relationships and dating), alcoholism, drugs, war mongering, lying, corruption, deceit, injustice and many other evil things that christians and their churches today are notorious of. Many of them believe that if they only repent then it will be forgiven for them. This corrupt and false religion has caused for so much evil to be done on earth in the Name of GOD Almighty. This is one of the many reasons why the false man-made religion of conjecture is a blaspheme against GOD Almighty.
In my religion good deeds don’t mean anything to Allah Almighty! It is the heart and the intentions that count. This is what differentiates a genuine and true person from a false one. A person could perform Hajj, or pray many upon many Prayers in Mecca or Madina or Jerusalem, or pray during the Sacred days in the year and still have little or no good deeds recorded for him/her, despite the fact that we are told that each these special Prayers could count for thousands of Prayers in any of these Sacred Times and/or Holy Sites. Allah Almighty Made this clear in the Glorious Quran: “The Day whereon neither wealth nor sons will avail, But only he (will prosper) that brings to God a sound heart;” 26:88-89. “Verily among those who followed his Way was Abraham. Behold! he approached his Lord with a sound heart.” 37:83-84. “Who feared (God) Most Gracious Unseen, and brought a heart turned in devotion (to Him)” 50:33. “No kind of calamity can occur, except by the leave of God: and if any one believes in God, (God) guides his heart (aright): for God knows all things.” 64:11
Furthermore, Prophet Muhammad, peace be upon him, Said in a very popular Hadith (Saying) for him: Actions are measured by the intentions. For every person what he/she intended.
Furthermore, Allah Almighty Commands all Muslims to not be tempting nor lead anyone, Muslim or non-Muslim, to temptation.
Every body part of yours will testify for you or against you before Allah Almighty.
The next question: (9)
We have a hadith (it means what Prophet Muhammad peace be upon him said and its totally separated from the Quran): “Whoever amongst you sees wrong doing, let him/her change it with their hand, if they are not able, then with their tongue, and if they are not even able to do so, then with their heart, and the latter is the weakest form of faith.”
We focus on intentions before judging any work and who’s better to know what the hearts hide but the great God the only one who have the right to judge.
Question: 10
I have not even the minimum doubt that my religion is not the right one and I can debate with anyone about it.
And here the bonus reply:
What will make me change my mind? If we’re living in a time before the last prophet was born and with it the last holy book was written.
Yes, I believe in the other “original” holy books but not those of today as they are corrupted and I also have proofs that the holy Quran was never corrupted and one of those many proofs is that it stills in it original language and not a simple letter was changed from it.
PS: if you have any question or comment, I’ll do my best to answer it just keep in mind that I’m a simple girl with modest knowledge and what I told you above is just common knowledge between Muslims.
1. There is no “before the big bang” it was the begining of space, time, and energy. Something from outside the universe would have had to cause it to begin to exist, since nothing can bring itself into existence. I also wrote about this in: Don’t take it personally.
2. I think anyone who attempts to read and understand any text, sacred or secular, needs to try to understand it with the intentions of the author, not the expectations of the reader. So to impose your idea of how a text should be understood, we must first attempt to figure out if that is how the writers want you to understand it.
3. Well, the majority of religions texts are written well outside the lifetimes of the events which took place. The few which fall into the category of contemporary with first hand eye witnesses are suspect due to impossible to reconcile difficulites and errors. Motivations for Muhammad: power, sex, money. Motivation for J. Smith Jr.: power, sex, money. Motivation for authors of the NT and the earliest disciples: torture, martyrdom, persecution.
4. Not sure where I excuse short commings.
5. contradictions, yes. Difficulties which may need investigation, no.
6. As far as a being such as a deity, I am inclined to worship the one which exists regardless of perceived character. If He is it, then He is it.
7. In a nutshell, yes. But I wouldn’t put it that way. Everyone including adherents of Christianity are deserving of punishment. But it is the adherents of Christianity who are pardoned from what they rightly deserve.
8. I expounded on this on my own blog titled: The World Is Full Of Awfulness
9. I understand that everyone sins. Some are more egregeous than others. I am not comfortable associating with Christians who intentionally and unrepentantly sin. However, behavioral perfection is not what is required for salvation or inclusion in Christianity.
10. I reference Pascal’s Wager to a point. As I said, I think Christianity is the only religion which can even be possibly true, so if I am wrong on Christianity, I do not believe it is by some other religious system that I will be judged. If Christianity is false, atheism is true. But I think Atheism is logically impossible.
Extra Credit: We don’t judge (any) ancient texts by modern standards because they were not written with the intent to be scrutinized with modern standards. We judge them based on their contemporary standards for accuracy. For example, there were no audio recorders in first century Palestine, so records of speeches could paraphrase a speech using notes taken, and even though it would not technecally be a word for word transcription, it was acceptable as a “quotation” as long as it accurately represented the speakers words. This is not true today. If there are “quote marks” around a text attributed to someone, it had better be a ver batum account.
Like I said above, this address of each of the 11 Q&As in comments like this will be unproductive. So maybe you’ll pick one or two that we can discuss in depth. Or perhaps you will use a few of these questions in your next writing and we can pick up a discussion there.
On the contrary, John, this is exactly what I prefer to gain a better understanding of your perspective as a whole. As you will probably agree, it is far too easy to disappear on a tangent that strays too far away from the main point of the discussion. I prefer to keep the focus on the big picture to reveal where the major dissimilarities are rather than getting distracted by relatively minor things like defining words.
As for answering your replies:
1. Your cosmological argument for causality is purely speculation. You refute your own argument by stating “Because an actual infinite cannot exist, either into the future or into the past, it is philosophically impossible”, then back-pedal to redefine “infinite” so it can’t apply to your deity. If you have any evidence for your conjecture please present it.
2. Intention can very difficult to determine and that sword cuts both ways, whether it’s an ancient text or a more recent piece of work. What leads you to the conclusion that your interpretation of any ancient text is true?
3. So you dismiss Islam and Mormonism because you feel their founders intentions were driven by power, sex and money, while the motivation of the NT authors was torture, martyrdom and persecution? I also find it interesting that you place so much credibility to eyewitness accounts even 50 years after an alleged event, while studies today increasingly show the unreliability of eyewitness accounts soon after an occurrence.
4. By shortcomings, I mean the “adequate” standards the bible provides for morality and ethics with regards to your decision-making.
5. So, in your mind there are no contradictions in the bible, just readers who take things out of context or misunderstand the intent that you have concluded?
6. Worship away.
7. Ahhh, there’s an interesting proposition – “deserving of punishment”, but pardon comes to those who meet the condition of Christian belief in Jesus Christ.
8. Oh, yes, the “unknown purpose defense” due to our limited perspective. I propose you read this- http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/keith_parsons/evil.html
9. So you’re ok with sinning in general so long as the sinner repents and regardless of their behavior they can still achieve salvation.
10. Just because you believe it doesn’t necessarily means it’s true and thus the reason for the need to defend your belief when challenged. According to your definition of atheism, I agree it is logically impossible to prove the non-existence of anything.
As for judgment of any text by modern standards, that’s all we’re really capable of since no one today was around in the time it was written and any interpretation of intent is purely speculative. The knowledge obtained since its writing has allowed us a more critical analysis to its validity. Again, if you have already concluded that the bible is inerrant and true then you already set the bar impossibly high to critically examine.
Well, I understand why you’d like to keep it broad and avoid an indepth discussion which is focused. It is easier for you to jab and move on rather than have to address the details of a particular issue which cannot be done with one-liners.
Anyway, if you are interested in discussing one or a couple of these issues with any real substance, let me know.
Wow, another character attack – not very becoming of you, John.
Now you dismiss the entire discussion and run because you actually have to defend the rubbish you believe. I’ve read your blog pages and your tactic is usually the same. You let people go until you feel you’re losing the argument and then you cry about going off-topic or whine about missing the point of your post.
My strategy is to try and gain an overall understanding of a person’s beliefs and then confront the issues in more depth with rational discussion. Oh well, at least I learned a bit more today about what you generally believe instead of trying to guess your intentions indirectly. Darn words can be so easily misunderstood.
I’m dismissing your method of attempting to gain an understanding of my views. My views cannot be summed up in one or two sentences. When this is done what you end up doing is addressing an incomplete or strawman (though probably unintentionally constructed) and it goes no where.
I offered to discuss one or a few of the above or any questions about my beliefs with you, but you don’t seem to want a discussion in an indepth manner in an effort to actually get into what I believe, but you prefer “sound bite” discussion. Well, the ball is in your court. If you want an actual discussion, I am game, if not then so be it.
Why would your views not be summed up in one or two sentences? If you subscribe to a particular religion or philosophy then you should not be afraid to say so. Personally, I approach the world from a natural standpoint, giving little weight to organized religion or traditional dogma and creed. I value reason and scientific methodology over superstition and supernatural beliefs.
See how easy that was?
If someone presents a strawman argument, just simply call them on it. If someone doesn’t understand your position, then explain it in more detail. You have to know your audience in order to have a fruitful discussion. What wastes more time is making a case only to have the other side say “well, that’s not my position” or “I never said I believed that.”
In fairness to John, he answered the questions you asked. Perhaps I missed it, but I don’t see where you intended to debate or challenge the answers. I would have asked a respondent if they cared to defend their answers more in depth.
I too am an atheist and found John’s answers readily refutable (particularly #3), but at least I gained an understanding of why he believes the things he does.
Well, Robert, that is my point. All 11 responses I wrote as they are written here should be easily refutable, hell, I could go back over them and refute each. When one is limited to–what I called–sound bite responses they are far too incomplete.
It wouldn’t matter whose worldview was being questioned. If the answers are required to be short one or two sentences, it leaves a lot open. This is exactly why I would prefer to tackle one or two indepth rather than all 11 at once. But this is exactly why Z prefers the short sound bites, because they are easily refuted in this format.
John, what I mean by “readily refutable” is not to disparage the succinctness of your reasons but to say they’re in fact poor or mistaken reasons. For example, some Christians say they believe the Bible because archaeological evidence supports it. Well, archaeology supports some, but it refutes a lot more. One can readily demonstrate this.
Robert, John is not comfortable with concise answers because it exposes his beliefs to be readily disputed. You can easily whittle down many of these questions to a mutual understanding, but as we have seen, major issues present themselves and call for more clarification or defense.
When you look at each of these questions, you can see where these were going:
1 is a philosophical debate on cosmology, not very personal.
2 is a discussion of biblical interpretation – could be interesting.
3 deals with his personal reasons for choosing his faith – could be interesting.
4 was headed for a discussion on biblical morality but never made it.
5 exposed his belief that the bible is without contradiction – probably futile to debate.
6 states his willingness to worship – good for him.
7 gets into the punishment for non-followers – would have liked to found out more.
8 proposes the problem of evil – more there, although he feels he’s already done it.
9 deals with other Christian behavior – very easy to dismiss.
10 is headed for more general philosophical debates – again, not very personal.
11 deals with the comparison of ancient vs. modern and the reason for scrutiny.
I see absolutely nothing wrong with this type of open discussion. If anyone wanted to do the same with me with regards to evolution, age of the earth, plate tectonics or any other facet of science I would be willing and able to do so. Again, major discrepancies in a debate quickly present themselves and any misunderstandings could be quickly addressed.
I have found that John likes to be on the offense in a debate and this is the first time I’ve ever seen him actually explain and almost defend what he believes. It’s a shame he has to complain about the method of the discussion.