Islam - What's your view on it?

[Dobermann92]

Oh it is. The claim is that Sadiq Khan has never been asked that question. It's not up to me to prove it's true... and so I'm asking how the claimant knows that it's true. Thanks though.

You cannot prove a negative. Like you cannot prove that the God of Islam does not exists, but there is not enough evidence for it.
Henry worded it like an absolute statement, which can be problematic, but you can easily disprove it if you cite a quote from Sadiq Khan about his opinion of muslims on the topic of LGBT+ people.

 

[TenEightyOne]

You cannot prove a negative. Like you cannot prove that the God of Islam does not exists, but there is not enough evidence for it.

Good spot, perhaps now you understand my question better? Note that the burden of proof still isn't on me...

 

[Dobermann92]

Good spot, perhaps now you understand my question better? Note that the burden of proof still isn't on me...

If you don't know the rules of argument then there is no reason to argue with you.

 

[Imari]

If you don't know the rules of argument then there is no reason to argue with you.

They're rules of logic. If you're starting with the assumption that you're having an argument instead of a discussion framed with logic then perhaps that's the problem?

 

[TexRex]

Jesus didn't massacre a town full of people and kept only the woman children to themselves

Jesus may or may not existed

 

[PocketZeven]

Jesus didn't massacre a town full of people and kept only the woman children to themselves, Muhammad and his people did. There are great videos on it, comparing Jesus and Muhammad. Even as an atheist I can say that Jesus was a much more humble person than Muhammad.

But the judicial systems are free in those other countries (at least in the European ones I know). They do not use ancient christian punishments from the middle ages. No stoning, no burning at the stakes, no cutting of body parts. Even in the USA where the death penalty is legal they do it with injections. Why is there a difference, explain that to me then please.

Both the bible and the quran are far from historical evidence. As an atheist myself, I would claim its wholly fictional based on the same story of birth and rebirth. Albeit the main protaganist is named differently. If you use "videos" (which are always biased and not a great source of facts) as your evidence I recommend to do your own research without bias.

 

[TexRex]

I recommend to do your own research without bias.

 

[PocketZeven]

Sorry you need to help me here. What are you referencing?

 

[TexRex]

Sorry you need to help me here. What are you referencing?

I think that particular ship has sailed.

 

[PocketZeven]

I think that particular ship has sailed.

Dont want to be a dick, but that isnt a sailboat or ship

 

[TexRex]

Dont want to be a dick, but that isnt a sailboat or ship

Fine...

Spoiler

That particular train has left the station.

 

[Dobermann92]

Yeah, mock me instead of providing evidence, typical of you.

They're rules of logic. If you're starting with the assumption that you're having an argument instead of a discussion framed with logic then perhaps that's the problem?

You argue for your opinion, I don't see anything wrong with that.

Both the bible and the quran are far from historical evidence. As an atheist myself, I would claim its wholly fictional based on the same story of birth and rebirth. Albeit the main protaganist is named differently. If you use "videos" (which are always biased and not a great source of facts) as your evidence I recommend to do your own research without bias.

Yes, but it is true to the believers of it. Most of the believers don't know that these books are fictional, they are not aware of it. I use both videos and papers for my evidence, I didn't know you have to watch the correct ones to form your opinion, weird isn't it?

 

[TexRex]

Yeah, mock me instead of providing evidence, typical of you.

Provide evidence of...what? You said Jesus didn't do something and then said he may not exist. What is it I'm supposed to substantiate?

 

[Dobermann92]

Provide evidence of...what? You said Jesus didn't do something and then said he may not exist. What is it I'm supposed to substantiate?

Those aren't mutually exclusive.

 

[TexRex]

Aaaaand we've come full circle...

 

[Dobermann92]

Aaaaand we've come full circle...

Then prove me the non-existence of Jesus and Muhammad please. I'm waiting.

 

[TexRex]

Then prove me the non-existence of Jesus and Muhammad please. I'm waiting.

You're an atheist. You've said so repeatedly. Why am I supposed to disprove Jesus' existence to you?

I don't know whether Jesus exists/existed or not and frankly it's of absolutely no consequence to me. What I can say with absolute certainty (and is of consquence to me) is that a thing that doesn't exist can neither do nor not do, and as such, offering up supposed acts or lack thereof by someone or something that may not exist or have existed is daft or absurd.

 

[Dobermann92]

You're an atheist. You've said so repeatedly. Why am I supposed to disprove Jesus' existence to you?

I don't know whether Jesus exists/existed or not and frankly it's of absolutely no consequence to me. What I can say with absolute certainty (and is of consquence to me) is that a thing that doesn't exist can neither do nor not do, and as such, offering up supposed acts or lack thereof by someone or something that may not exist or have existed is daft or absurd.

For you or me, yes, it is absurd, but for the religious people it isn't. And a big majority of those people act on their beliefs, that is why I brought up the difference between the alleged acts of Jesus and Muhammad. I feel like most of us give Islam a free pass because it is a minority here in Europe, but we shouldn't. Attacking ideas only hurt the feelings of others yet people are getting murdered for criticising Islam.

 

[PocketZeven]

Then prove me the non-existence of Jesus and Muhammad please. I'm waiting.

Isnt it much more logical to prove they exist in the first place?

 

[TexRex]

For you or me, yes, it is absurd, but for the religious people it isn't. And most of those people act on their beliefs, that is why I brought up the difference between the acts of Jesus and Muhammad. I feel like most of us give Islam a free pass because it is a minority here in Europe, but we shouldn't. Attacking ideas only hurt the feelings of others yet people are getting murdered for criticising Islam.

You offered up a supposed inaction by a [as you put it] possibly nonexistent entity. Do you know what atheism is?

 

[PocketZeven]

You offered up a supposed inaction by a [as you put it] possibly nonexistent entity. Do you know what atheism is?

To be fair he is trying to refer to them as historical figures. But then again he is basing that on fictional writing and trying to use them as factual, which he shouldnt.

Videos (unless peer-reviewed) aren evidence as much as writings of fiction are. I might as well say that the world is flat based on videos I saw and that the lord of the rings is a fictional account of history.

 

[Dobermann92]

You offered up a supposed inaction by a [as you put it] possibly nonexistent entity. Do you know what atheism is?

Atheism is the lack of belief in gods. I don't believe that Jesus (if he existed) was ever a god. This topic isn't about the existence of Jesus but if you think Jesus never existed then you can refute the part I was talking about him and go on.

To be fair he is trying to refer to them as historical figures. But then again he is basing that on fictional writing and trying to use them as factual, which he shouldnt.

I can't get my point across it seems. Talk with a random person from Poland or from the Middle East, they (if they are religious) will tell you that those "historical figures" were real. That is why it is a bit important what acts people associate with them. I don't care if they existed or not.

Videos (unless peer-reviewed) aren evidence as much as writings of fiction are. I might as well say that the world is flat based on videos I saw and that the lord of the rings is a fictional account of history.

That is a bit overreaching, videos may contain more errors than peer-reviewed papers, but they use peer-reviewed data themselves too to argue, they even list their sources, so you can check it yourself.

 

[PocketZeven]

Atheism is the lack of belief in gods. I don't believe that Jesus (if he existed) was ever a god. This topic isn't about the existence of Jesus but if you think Jesus never existed then you can refute the part I was talking about him and go on.



I can't get my point across it seems. Talk with a random person from Poland or from the Middle East, they (if they are religious) will tell you that those "historical figures" were real. That is why it is a bit important what acts people associate with them. I don't care if they existed or not.



That is a bit overreaching, videos may contain more errors than peer-reviewed papers, but they use peer-reviewed data themselves too to argue, they even list their sources, so you can check it yourself.

Probably religious people believe they are historical figures. Talking with a random source does not justify an atheist believing they are historical figures though.

For you or me, yes, it is absurd, but for the religious people it isn't. And a big majority of those people act on their beliefs, that is why I brought up the difference between the alleged acts of Jesus and Muhammad. I feel like most of us give Islam a free pass because it is a minority here in Europe, but we shouldn't. Attacking ideas only hurt the feelings of others yet people are getting murdered for criticising Islam.

Islam is not as violent as those "videos"are claiming. I suggest speaking with muslims and ask them about their religion. You will find that the violence are exaggerated interpertations. The bible is full of violence as well. Remember the murder of innocent firstborn children/babies by "god"? This is not exclusive to the bible as violence occurs in pretty much every religion. I would even argue that both the Quran and bible are not more or less violent then the other.

 

[TexRex]

Atheism is the lack of belief in gods. I don't believe that Jesus (if he existed) was ever a god. This topic isn't about the existence of Jesus but if you think Jesus never existed then you can refute the part I was talking about him and go on.

Jesus, as he's commonly spoken of and was indeed spoken of when you referred to his supposed inaction ("you can't prove a negative"), is the supposed product of a supposed god. Belief in such a being kind of requires belief in that god.

Also, what I refute is the notion that someone who you say may not exist is capable of not committing an act you say they didn't commit. It isn't about Jesus except you cited Jesus specifically.

 

[PocketZeven]

Jesus, as he's commonly spoken of and was indeed spoken of when you referred to his supposed inaction ("you can't prove a negative"), is the supposed product of a supposed god. Belief in such a being kind of requires belief in that god.

Also, what I refute is the notion that someone who you say may not exist is capable of not committing an act you say they didn't commit. It isn't about Jesus except you cited Jesus specifically.

Perhaps he is just saying that the people who wrote about Jesus had less violent intentions then the people who wrote about Mohammed. But then I would suggest to explore the timeframe and area were each was written.

 

[Dobermann92]

Jesus, as he's commonly spoken of and was indeed spoken of when you referred to his supposed inaction ("you can't prove a negative"), is the supposed product of a supposed god. Belief in such a being kind of requires belief in that god.

Also, what I refute is the notion that someone who you say may not exist is capable of not committing an act you say they didn't commit. It isn't about Jesus except you cited Jesus specifically.

Some christians think Jesus was God himself, some think he was the son of God. It still doesn't matter what a person said about himself. I hope I didn't misunderstood the question, I don't believe in supernatural claims. You can make a case for Jesus either existing or not, this doesn't change the fact what believers think about him. And this is important because of the aforementioned acts.

Perhaps he is just saying that the people who wrote about Jesus had less violent intentions then the people who wrote about Mohammed. But then I would suggest to explore the timeframe and area were each was written.

Both the Bible and the Quoran are from the Middle East (although historians don't know the exact location of the birthplace of the Bible, because the earliest manuscripts are written in greek), the Quoran is a much younger, yet a much more violent book.

 

[PocketZeven]

Some christians think Jesus was God himself, some think he was the son of God. It still doesn't matter what a person said about himself. I hope I didn't misunderstood the question, I don't believe in supernatural claims. You can make a case for Jesus either existing or not, this doesn't change the fact what believers think about him. And this is important because of the aforementioned acts.



Both the Bible and the Quoran are from the Middle East (although historians don't know the exact location of the birthplace of the Bible (because the earliest manuscripts are written in greek), the Quoran is a much younger, yet a much more violent book.

How do you conclude the quran is more violent? Did you read it?

edit:
There are claims it is the opposite:
https://www.independent.co.uk/arts-...han-quran-text-analysis-reveals-a6863381.html

 

[TexRex]

Some christians think Jesus was God himself, some think he was the son of God. It still doesn't matter what a person said about himself. I hope I didn't misunderstood the question, I don't believe in supernatural claims. You can make a case for Jesus either existing or not, this doesn't change the fact what believers think about him.

What does any of that have to do with YOU making a claim of inaction about an entity that YOU say may not exist?

 

[Dobermann92]

How do you conclude the quran is more violent? Did you read it?

Yes, I've read both the Bible and the Quran. They aren't easy books, that's to be sure, for example one has several verses about the religious war called "jihad".

What does any of that have to do with you making a claim of inaction about an entity that you say may not exist?

That is what I tried to say in the past several pages, yet I failed it seems. Maybe it is because English is not my native language and we both lost in the nuance of the topic.

 

[PocketZeven]

Yes, I've read both the Bible and the Quran. They aren't easy books, that's to be sure, for example one has several verses about the religious war called "jihad".



That is what I tried to say in the past several pages, yet I failed it seems. Maybe it is because English is not my native language and we both lost in the nuance of the topic.

You mean religious "crusades"? How many people have died during the crusades in the name of he christian god?

These are just a few:

Samuel 15:18
18 And the Lord sent you on a mission and said, ‘Go, devote to destruction the sinners, the Amalekites, and fight against them until they are consumed.’

Romans 13:4
For he is God's servant for your good. But if you do wrong, be afraid, for he does not bear the sword in vain. For he is the servant of God, an avenger who carries out God's wrath on the wrongdoer.

Exodus 15:3
The Lord is a man of war; the Lord is his name.

Revelation 3:21
The one who conquers, I will grant him to sit with me on my throne, as I also conquered and sat down with my Father on his throne.


Deuteronomy 20:17-18
But you shall devote them to complete destruction, the Hittites and the Amorites, the Canaanites and the Perizzites, the Hivites and the Jebusites, as the Lord your God has commanded, that they may not teach you to do according to all their abominable practices that they have done for their gods, and so you sin against the Lord your God.

Could you refer me to those verses in the quoran that explicitly say that "jihad" has to be violent?