Ex Muslim - Indoctrination
Discuss religious, spiritual, and theological issues concerning Christianity, Judaism, Islam, or any other religion.
| Announcements | Posted on | |
|---|---|---|
| Ask me ANYTHING - Andrew O'Neill - Buzzcocks comedian, amateur occultist, vegan... | 22-05-2013 | |
-
- Reputation:
- TSR Demigod
- Location: Viktoria
- Posts: 6,071
Re: Ex Muslim - IndoctrinationAtheism is the neutral position. If I said there's green men on mars, people would be entitled to not believe that until I proved it. Likewise for religions.(Original post by Perseveranze)
What's the point here? There are countless Muslims who weren't born Muslims and then became Muslims later in life.
What came before the big bang, remember, when you give your answer, please have the imperative to prove it.
I honestly don't think this is the "default" position. I think the "default" position would remain neutral (from a secular perspective of course)
What came before the big bang? I don't know, we're not able to see that far back. In fact, we can only see until around 200,000 years after the big bang. What happened before that is pure conjuncture and I don't deal in speculation. -
- Reputation:
- TSR Demigod
- Location: Manchester
- Posts: 7,060
Re: Ex Muslim - IndoctrinationJust because science cannot explain everything, it doesn't mean that a god did it.(Original post by Perseveranze)
What came before the big bang, remember, when you give your answer, please have the imperative to prove it.
There are many things that hundreds of years ago, seemed mystical and inexplicable that people thought that they were the result of the actions of gods. Today we know how much of that actually happened through natural processes down to scientific advances and research.
There are still many things that may remain unexplained as science does not have the answers yet. But the solution is not to say - 'We can't explain it or prove it, therefore a god must have done it' as we did hundreds of years ago.
Indeed, in many hundreds of years time, these things will have been explained and the people of that time will consider us as ignorant as regards knowledge as we consider those who lived hundreds of years ago.Last edited by marcusfox; 28-07-2012 at 11:20. -
- Reputation:
- Thread Starter
- Junior Member
- Posts: 42
Re: Ex Muslim - IndoctrinationLol.....science time.(Original post by At peace)
My statement "The Qur'an is the evidence" means what it reads. It is the evidence. What do "You" mean by "what do you mean the Qur'an is the evidence."
If I say the acceleration of a test test charge if placed near a charged particle is the evidence that the charged particle has an E.field. Then what would I mean by "the acceleration of a test charge if placed near a charged particle is the evidence that the charge particle has an E.field?"
lol seriously?
The theory of electrostatic field is merely a scientific model to describe the natural phenomenon, and we know that Electrostatic/magnetic field exists because it can be seen and manipulated.
Now, the Quran is a model to describe the phenomena that takes place between the creator and the worshippers, and it is a model which describes countless things.
Your logic is flawed, completely flawed. Where are the phenomena to support the model (Quran)? -
- Reputation:
- Benevolent Member
- Location: PLanet Earth!!
Re: Ex Muslim - IndoctrinationLogic? Who is discussing logic here. I was only asking what people mean when they say xyz is a proof for abc.(Original post by Ingenium)
Lol.....science time.
The theory of electrostatic field is merely a scientific model to describe the natural phenomenon, and we know that Electrostatic/magnetic field exists because it can be seen and manipulated.
Now, the Quran is a model to describe the phenomena that takes place between the creator and the worshippers, and it is a model which describes countless things.
Your logic is flawed, completely flawed. Where are the phenomena to support the model (Quran)? -
- Reputation:
- Overlord in Training
- Posts: 2,859
Re: Ex Muslim - IndoctrinationThe article says that humans have a tendency to invoke the supernatural in our experiences of nature. That doesn't mean that we are born with a belief in God, in fact, the article shows that we start as atheists by default, not theists.(Original post by B-Man.)
Just constantly teach the child that atheism is true and everything else is false, whilst he is young.
I wouldn't be so sure the atheism is the default position of a human; you may be interested in reading a secular argument opposing this idea that was published in the 'New Scientist.' -
- Reputation:
- Overlord in Training
- Posts: 2,859
Re: Ex Muslim - IndoctrinationI believe he's referring to men and women giving evidence in court - 1 man is enough for proof, but 2 women are needed for proof.(Original post by At peace)
To answer you Question: Nothing because you have understood it wrong.
Ask about an Islamic concept and some Muslims will answer. What you are asking is just some dumb concept that was form in your mind out of blind hate.
It's a husband being a degree higher than the wife just to have a stable system family with a head of the house with more responsibility than the others. And this is valid "only" for the husband and wife, not just "any" man-woman.
It'll be a lot more fruitful for you to actually "read" and use your intelligence to understand rather than hate blindly. -
- Reputation:
- Thread Starter
- Junior Member
- Posts: 42
Re: Ex Muslim - IndoctrinationBravo! Bravo! Bravo!(Original post by Hypocrism)
I believe he's referring to men and women giving evidence in court - 1 man is enough for proof, but 2 women are needed for proof.
She was teaching me about "intelligence" earlier on. -
- Reputation:
- Thread Starter
- Junior Member
- Posts: 42
Re: Ex Muslim - IndoctrinationWell, we were discussing on Quran being an evidence, and then you involved the electrostatic forces.(Original post by At peace)
Logic? Who is discussing logic here. I was only asking what people mean when they say xyz is a proof for abc.
I could look at a dragon poster and say that dragons actually exist because it is 'there'. But it is only a picture.
Logical thought (logic) is important, you can't just assume anything.
E. Field model is supported by natural phenomenon.
Quran (model) is supported by nothing.
If you still want to argue, then refer to my older replies. -
- Reputation:
- Benevolent Member
- Location: PLanet Earth!!
Re: Ex Muslim - Indoctrinationlol. Still upset about it, eh? I only asked you to use what you say you have i.e intelligence. I don't really see it offensive but I apologize for having hurt you so bad.(Original post by Ingenium)
Bravo! Bravo! Bravo!
She was teaching me about "intelligence" earlier on.
Even if he's refering to that, he's wrong. Like I promised someone else earlier, I may address this "misconception" [Just to give you the benefit of doubt] when I get time.(Original post by Hypocrism)
I believe he's referring to men and women giving evidence in court - 1 man is enough for proof, but 2 women are needed for proof.
Yes I did. Just to try and explain that when something is written, it means what it reads.(Original post by Ingenium)
Well, we were discussing on Quran being an evidence, and then you involved the electrostatic forces.
This would be relevant "only" if I were to say that my proof is that "Qur'an says Allaah's exists or Islam is the truth etc." [Whatever it is that you are looking for].I could look at a dragon poster and say that dragons actually exist because it is 'there'. But it is only a picture.
I never said that, did I?
And I didn't.Logical thought (logic) is important, you can't just assume anything.
Does the Qur'an need support? It's a proof and support in and of itself.E. Field model is supported by natural phenomenon.
Quran (model) is supported by nothing.Last edited by At peace; 29-07-2012 at 01:48. -
- Reputation:
- Junior Member
- Posts: 47
Re: Ex Muslim - IndoctrinationAnd there lies the rub. To believe it's a proof and support in and of itself, you must suspend belief in rationality and first-hand observation, and make the leap of faith. But it is so counterintuitive!(Original post by At peace)
lol. Still upset about it, eh? I only asked you to use what you say you have i.e intelligence. I don't really see it offensive but I apologize for having hurt you so bad.
Even if he's refering to that, he's wrong. Like I promised someone else earlier, I may address this "misconception" [Just to give you the benefit of doubt] when I get time.
Yes I did. Just to try and explain that when something is written, it means what it reads.
This would be relevant "only" if I were to say that my proof is that "Qur'an says Allaah's exists or Islam is the truth etc." [Whatever it is that you are looking for].
I never said that, did I?
And I didn't.
Does the Qur'an need support? It's a proof and support in and of itself. -
- Reputation:
- Vengeful, Imperial Overlord of The Student Room
- Location: Canada | Posts: ∞
Actually you're wrong. The default position is always agnosticism. You cannot deny something as a default position.(Original post by RyanT)
Atheism is the neutral position. If I said there's green men on mars, people would be entitled to not believe that until I proved it. Likewise for religions.
What came before the big bang? I don't know, we're not able to see that far back. In fact, we can only see until around 200,000 years after the big bang. What happened before that is pure conjuncture and I don't deal in speculation.
-[Posted via mobile app]- -
- Reputation:
- Overlord in Training
- Posts: 2,859
Re: Ex Muslim - IndoctrinationGo for it. Just don't spout the typical 'clutching at straws' argument about how "women haven't been involved in finance for as long as men" and "men are naturally better at financial things" so "really the other woman only needs to be there to remind the first woman if the says something wrong". An argument based on stereotype, misogyny and backwards Islamic tradition.(Original post by At peace)
Even if he's refering to that, he's wrong. Like I promised someone else earlier, I may address this "misconception" [Just to give you the benefit of doubt] when I get time. -
- Reputation:
- Overlord in Training
- Posts: 2,859
Re: Ex Muslim - Indoctrination-Atheism is not a denial. Atheism = lack of belief in gods. (Not belief in lack of gods.)(Original post by .eXe)
Actually you're wrong. The default position is always agnosticism. You cannot deny something as a default position.
-[Posted via mobile app]-
-Agnosticism is not some kind of indecision. Agnostic people believe that they cannot confirm or deny any knowledge (and it's not related to theism, either)
Since babies have not been introduced to the concept of gods, they do not have a knowledge of god, they therefore do not have a belief in god, so they are atheist. If they are introduced to the concept of god, they may become theist, they may remain atheist, or they may be agnostic in either way. As a complex philosophical view, babies are certainly not born with agnosticism, and it is certainly not a position that a baby holds. -
- Reputation:
- Overlord in Training
- Posts: 2,859
Re: Ex Muslim - IndoctrinationHow does it provide proof of itself?(Original post by At peace)
Does the Qur'an need support? It's a proof and support in and of itself.
(guys, this will be entertaining, circular arguments are HILARIOUS) -
- Reputation:
- Exalted and Worshipped Member
- Posts: 1,134
Its a secret(Original post by Hypocrism)
How does it provide proof of itself?
(guys, this will be entertaining, circular arguments are HILARIOUS)
This was posted from The Student Room's iPhone/iPad App -
- Reputation:
- Overlord in Training
- Posts: 2,859
Re: Ex Muslim - IndoctrinationTee hee(Original post by CosmicVengeance)
Its a secret
This was posted from The Student Room's iPhone/iPad App -
- Reputation:
- Thread Starter
- Junior Member
- Posts: 42
Re: Ex Muslim - IndoctrinationI tried to explain this idiot (At peace), that the Electrostatic Field is merely a scientific model that describes a natural phenomenon, and that Quran is a model, however, it doesn't have any real observations to support it.(Original post by Hypocrism)
Tee hee
She said if electrostatic exists then it exists, and the same goes for the quran.Last edited by Ingenium; 29-07-2012 at 13:56. -
- Reputation:
- Peer Of The TSR Realm
- Posts: 1,992
Re: Ex Muslim - IndoctrinationAs Neil Degrasse Tyson said, God is a receding power, the more we learn as people the more we can dispel the myths. Note how the ancient religions of the past had a God to explain even the most mundane and we're gradually lowering down on the numbers, to only a few commonly practiced Polytheistic faiths and mainly Monotheism. In the future of humanity, a split will be made between those who wish to listen to logic and evidence and those who don't.
-
- Reputation:
- Overlord in Training
- Posts: 2,859
Re: Ex Muslim - IndoctrinationI don't know what you're talking about, I never mentioned physics. All I want you to do is show me where the Qu'ran proves itself to be true.(Original post by Ingenium)
I tried to explain this idiot (At peace), that the Electrostatic Field is merely a scientific model that describes a natural phenomenon, and that Quran is a model, however, it doesn't have any real observations to support it.
She said if electrostatic exists then it exists, and the same goes for the quran.
