Results are out! Find what you need...fast. Get quick advice or join the chat
Hey there Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free

Can you solve this ??

Announcements Posted on
Got a question about Student Finance? Ask the experts this week on TSR! 14-09-2014
    • Thread Starter
    • 0 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Gofre)
    I'd identify myself as a deist until a religion can substantiate its claims.



    That reasoning can also be applied to any other religion which commands belief in its god, so the question would still stand, why Islam?
    Because Islam is the only mainstream religion that will throw me in hell fro not believing in it.
    • 3 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Gofre)
    -You have the choice of intellectual integrity
    -That's a common belief in several large sects of christianity/judaism
    -Some interpretations of Hinduism require devotion to the Hindu gods, known as Bhakti Yoga
    -Norse mythology states not being a member of a norse god will prevent you from gaining an afterlife like this one.

    Those are off the top of my head. Islam really isn't any better. And as I said, empty threats of punishment are a terrible reason to believe something.

    The truth is what where after, whether we like it or not is irrelevant in that respect.
    To workout the truth through study and questioning, after doubting, what "intellectual integrity" will they have diminished?
    The fact that they have gone out their way in search for answers, is a credit to their intellect.
    • 0 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    The point is that even if you accept the proposition that going along with Islam is the "safest bet," the one with the greatest "potential benefit," you cannot then force yourself to believe it.

    If you do believe, then you do. But just because you think you might get a better outcome if you do believe does not make you therefore believe.

    And would not any god worthy of the title see through this in an instant?

    Also, the idea that going along with Islam just in case is "not too much of a downer" is laughable, considering the number of prohibitions and limitations it puts on your freedom of choice and action.

    Plus, as others have said, there are other religions with the same "believe in my version of suffer forever" clause. What if you've chosen the wrong one?
    • 56 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by member910132)
    Because Islam is the only mainstream religion that will throw me in hell fro not believing in it.
    See my previous post.

    (Original post by sulexk)
    The truth is what where after, whether we like it or not is irrelevant in that respect.
    To workout the truth through study and questioning, after doubting, what "intellectual integrity" will they have diminished?
    The fact that they have gone out their way in search for answers, is a credit to their intellect.
    Searching for answers does not. Believing an idea unquestioningly "just in case" in the meantime is stupid.
    • 3 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by member910132)
    Because Islam is the only mainstream religion that will throw me in hell fro not believing in it.
    The purpose of a way of life, is not to destroy your curiosity. You must question and doubt until you are sure! That is essential. Sure we all have ups and downs, but some truths, no, all truths must never change. If you have no firm establishment of the truth in your mind and heart then how will you progress?

    What do you think Islam teaches about the supposed crucifixion of Jesus?
    • 3 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Gofre)
    See my previous post.



    Searching for answers does not. Believing an idea unquestioningly "just in case" in the meantime is stupid.

    I agree with you!
    Believing an idea unquestioningly is dangerous.
    • Thread Starter
    • 0 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by sulexk)
    What does it mean to disbelieve?

    Why would one even consider Islam?Why would a person consider any religious belief at all, unless they were convinced that it was the truth and that it could not have come from the Mankind. The assumption being that the creator would have laid out a guide for mankind.
    If the Qur'an is the Speech Of God, then it must be proven that it could not have come from mankind. If you can prove this, then can you prove that the creator exists?And ever, if it is mentioned "Suppose all of mankind had known that the creator existed; they had proof", then would they still obey?
    In the Qur'an a very important methodology is taught for which one uses when studying the Qur'an, it is to not a take a verse in standalone. For instance it is mentioned (in Chapter 2 verse 34) "And behold, We said to the angels: "Bow down to Adam" and they bowed down. Not so Iblis: he refused.."
    If you take this verse in Isolation, you would think that Iblis was an angel. If only this was revealed for instance, then the only option one has is to consider that Iblis is infact an angel. But if you continue reading, you will realise that Iblis is not an Angel. It will be recognised that Angels cannot disobey God. God Created them and they carry out what is Instructed.
    Unlike you guys I am looking at this from a practical standpoint, I cannot consider every other religion, so I consider the ones that make sense, which are the mainstream ones and a few other "slightly" mainstream ones. For example, you could make up a religion now where frogs are Gods in disguise and unless you lick a frog 5 times a day you would go to hell, then this religion would do great at pascal's wager against other religions/atheism but this is purely an intellectual point, I am looking for a practical way of life. So far atheism seemed to be the way but Islam (even though the laws might be strange to some) has a sensible concept of God and has great punishments for disbelief and thus it does well on Pascal's wager.
    • 5 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by member910132)
    Wait, what if he says:
    "Ok the real question is islam vs non islam, but because the pay-offs for non Islam is exactly the same as that of an atheists, my point still stands"

    Edit: Just understood some of your arguments, but I don't think there is any religion out there that openly says "if you don't believe in us then your off to hell" Islam might be the only mainstream one, ignoring all the nonsense religions that people have made up within the last 10 years just to counter this point.
    If I told you that if you don't worship me, you would get the same punishment that Islam describes, but even harsher, then you could argue that since both punishments are infinite time, but one is more painful than another, it would be better to choose the one that makes the harsher threat.

    Now, you may well say this is silly, since I just made up this religion, whereas Islam is mainstream, has books etc associated with it, but then I could ask you, to what extent does that make Islam seem more "likely" to be true?
    • 56 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by member910132)
    so I consider the ones that make sense,
    What criteria are you using to decide this?
    • 20 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by member910132)
    Unlike you guys I am looking at this from a practical standpoint, I cannot consider every other religion, so I consider the ones that make sense, which are the mainstream ones and a few other "slightly" mainstream ones. For example, you could make up a religion now where frogs are Gods in disguise and unless you lick a frog 5 times a day you would go to hell, then this religion would do great at pascal's wager against other religions/atheism but this is purely an intellectual point, I am looking for a practical way of life. So far atheism seemed to be the way but Islam (even though the laws might be strange to some) has a sensible concept of God and has great punishments for disbelief and thus it does well on Pascal's wager.
    Are you a troll? I thought you were a Muslim?
    • 3 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by member910132)
    Unlike you guys I am looking at this from a practical standpoint, I cannot consider every other religion, so I consider the ones that make sense, which are the mainstream ones and a few other "slightly" mainstream ones. For example, you could make up a religion now where frogs are Gods in disguise and unless you lick a frog 5 times a day you would go to hell, then this religion would do great at pascal's wager against other religions/atheism but this is purely an intellectual point, I am looking for a practical way of life. So far atheism seemed to be the way but Islam (even though the laws might be strange to some) has a sensible concept of God and has great punishments for disbelief and thus it does well on Pascal's wager.
    What separates the two, is the existence of a creator. Well, Pascal suggested, that "God cannot be proved or disproved" through reason and there is much to be gained from wagering that God exists and little to be gained from wagering that God doesn't exist, a rational person should simply wager that God exists, and live accordingly".
    When the Last messenger was assigned the task of spreading the message of Islam, those who did not believe mentioned to him, why does not your Lord show us evidence of your claim to be the prophet? Why does he not show us the angels. They mocked him, they said that he was a soothsayer, and that he wrote the Qur'an. But they knew he was illiterate, they knew that he was not aware of the linguistics of poetry as they were. So they said he had learnt it from the Non-Arab- a christian man- but his tongue was foreign and Qur'an was pure arabic. The Qur'an was revealed over a period of 23 years, its style remained consistent over this period.
    I know you want to take a practical approach; in Islam, it is believed that there is No God (and nothing else to be worshipped) except he who created the world.
    But I must say that Pascal's wager, almost assumes the existance of a creator, due to feeling that "Out of fear" you would believe.
    • 3 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Gofre)
    Observations of things or phenomena that confirm the validity of a proposed idea.
    There is something that immediately comes to mind. Do you think Pharaoh's body was actually discovered in 1897?
    Do you think that was pharoah's body?
    • Thread Starter
    • 0 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Gofre)
    What criteria are you using to decide this?
    Common sense agreed by humans ?? I mean had there been more than on God then by their characteristics of majesty, honour and so on they would surely have tried to destroy one another and their creations, as this hasn't happened I can say that there is either no God or one God.
    (Original post by Ayshizzle)
    Are you a troll? I thought you were a Muslim?
    I just no a lot about all religions so it seems like I am a Muslim at times due to my posts.
    • 20 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by member910132)
    I just no a lot about all religions so it seems like I am a Muslim at times due to my posts.
    Ah ok sorry

    (Original post by sulexk)
    What separates the two, is the existence of a creator. Well, Pascal suggested, that "God cannot be proved or disproved" through reason and there is much to be gained from wagering that God exists and little to be gained from wagering that God doesn't exist, a rational person should simply wager that God exists, and live accordingly".
    When the Last messenger was assigned the task of spreading the message of Islam, those who did not believe mentioned to him, why does not your Lord show us evidence of your claim to be the prophet? Why does he not show us the angels. They mocked him, they said that he was a soothsayer, and that he wrote the Qur'an. But they knew he was illiterate, they knew that he was not aware of the linguistics of poetry as they were. So they said he had learnt it from the Non-Arab- a christian man- but his tongue was foreign and Qur'an was pure arabic. The Qur'an was revealed over a period of 23 years, its style remained consistent over this period.
    I know you want to take a practical approach; in Islam, it is believed that there is No God (and nothing else to be worshipped) except he who created the world.
    But I must say that Pascal's wager, almost assumes the existance of a creator, due to feeling that "Out of fear" you would believe.
    Not sure if you're aware but written Arabic was "invented" (for want of a better word) only to write the Qur'an. Which wasn't even written fully/compiled til a while after the death of the Prophet.
    Aramaic was the most commonly spoken language at that time, so it is possible that the Qur'an was revealed in Aramaic.

    Also, not much evidence to suggest the Prophet was illiterate either.

    (Original post by sulexk)
    There is something that immediately comes to mind. Do you think Pharaoh's body was actually discovered in 1897?
    Do you think that was pharoah's body?
    Ermmm... What are you talking about?
    • 3 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by member910132)
    A Muslim came up to me the other day and said something like this:

    "You know Pascal's Wager right ? And you know the main criticisms with it is that nobody can be sure of the pay-offs and if God knew you were only doing it for the reward/punishment then he knows you aren't sincere and so on... Well what if I make the trade-off between Islam and atheism ? So you either believe and if Islam is true then you get into paradise, if it isn't true then you will have believed in a false belief for your life (which isn't too much of a downer) or you disbelieve and if it is true then you go into hell for eternity, if it isn't true then you are fine. Any rational person would choose belief since he cannot be 100% sure whether it is true or not"

    He is basically saying that we know what the trade-offs are because they are mentioned in the Quran and secondly, in Islam if you are only believing out of want of paradise or fear of hell then that is a valid belief.

    I see him again tomorrow so any ideas on a good comeback ?
    I saw an interesting blog post on how even if you add Christianity and Islam to the Pascal's wager Christianity is still the most rational http://alexanderpruss.blogspot.co.uk...-infinity.html. To be honest though I don't really think Pascal's wager is very good.
    • 56 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by member910132)
    Common sense agreed by humans ?? I mean had there been more than on God then by their characteristics of majesty, honour and so on they would surely have tried to destroy one another and their creations, as this hasn't happened I can say that there is either no God or one God.
    A) Why would they? Numerous mythologies described co-existing gods who each have their own individual roles. There's certainly no necessity for them to try and eradicate one another.
    B) Even if you were right and you did arrive at the conclusion of monotheism, why does that mean everything else about the religion(s) make sense?

    (Original post by sulexk)
    There is something that immediately comes to mind. Do you think Pharaoh's body was actually discovered in 1897?
    Do you think that was pharoah's body?
    I'm afraid I have no idea what you're talking about, but what are you suggesting this is evidence for?
    • 20 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Gofre)
    I'm afraid I have no idea what you're talking about, but what are you suggesting this is evidence for?
    I suspect she's talking about this prophecy in the Qur'an about some pharaoh.
    • 3 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Ayshizzle)
    Ah ok sorry



    Not sure if you're aware but written Arabic was "invented" (for want of a better word) only to write the Qur'an. Which wasn't even written fully/compiled til a while after the death of the Prophet.
    Aramaic was the most commonly spoken language at that time, so it is possible that the Qur'an was revealed in Aramaic.

    Also, not much evidence to suggest the Prophet was illiterate either.



    Ermmm... What are you talking about?
    Well there existed classical arabic at the time.
    • 0 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    That's cheating!
    You're getting a thousand heads into one.
    Whereas he only has his head.
    By asking on TSR, shows that inside you knew you were going to lose the argument.
    • 20 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by sulexk)
    Well there existed classical arabic at the time.
    That is also debatabable- whether the Qur'anic Arabic is the same as what they spoke.

    And you didn't answer my question about the pharaoh.

Reply

Submit reply

Register

Thanks for posting! You just need to create an account in order to submit the post
  1. this can't be left blank
    that username has been taken, please choose another Forgotten your password?
  2. this can't be left blank
    this email is already registered. Forgotten your password?
  3. this can't be left blank

    6 characters or longer with both numbers and letters is safer

  4. this can't be left empty
    your full birthday is required
  1. By joining you agree to our Ts and Cs, privacy policy and site rules

  2. Slide to join now Processing…

Updated: April 7, 2012
New on TSR

Writing your personal statement

Our free PS builder tool makes it easy

Article updates
Useful resources
Reputation gems:
You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.