"It's all right to hate, as long as you hate what God hates and love what God loves"

peace iron fist

see the thing is u have to realize that the religion has an agenda... any and all claim that allegedly provide proofs or evidence for their view must always be taken with a grain of salt!

why?

because they have an agenda and motive!

rational thought and science on the othe rhand dont have an agenda or hidden motive! whatverthe evidence dictates, is what will be reported and belived in...

religion begins with an interpretation and then lastly tries to come up with arguments that allow their interpretation to seem valid! its actually quite funny and sad at the same time because most humans are preyed upon by this ever since they are infants!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by My First Timbs

i base all beliefs on what th evidence dictates! this is the power and burden of free thought.. the evidence dictates what to believe.........

---

I overstand why you say the things you say and write the things that you write. You thinking is limiting to this "evidence" realm based on earthly proof. If there is not documented evidence than you feel what is being discussed is useless. And that's you opinion. It is free thought but this free thought is regulated by how much evidence is in that square. By your own words, evidence places limits on your free thought. That's you opinion also, I'm not knockin' it. But I know for a fact that my free thought is as limitless as the universe which has yet to be fully explored and contains infinite amounts of wisdom. Your case about the "invisible pink unicorn" is absurd. If someone wants to know whats under their bed all they have to do is look.

Quote:

---

Your case about the "invisible pink unicorn" is absurd. If someone wants to know whats under their bed all they have to do is look.

---

ahhh so u admit that belief in an invisible diety, power or entity is absurd.. congrats

there is no difference between a claim that there is an invisible pink unicorn under my bed , and a claim that an invisible force, god, supernatural realm, power or entity exists and presides over the universe

congrats on admitting this to us all and yourself

how can someone look under their bed to see if the unicorn is there if its allegedly invisible?
congrats

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by My First Timbs

ahhh so u admit that belief in an invisible diety, power or entity is absurd.. congrats

there is no difference between a claim that there is an invisible pink unicorn under my bed , and a claim that an invisible force, god, supernatural realm, power or entity exists and presides over the universe

congrats on admitting this to us all and yourself

how can someone look under their bed to see if the unicorn is there if its allegedly invisible?
congrats

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Legato

dude you like totally proved his point.

---

This is where both of you are totally wrong. The God I know is not invisible. That's what happens when someone's thinking is limiting to an "evidence" box.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by My First Timbs

how can someone look under their bed to see if the unicorn is there if its allegedly invisible?
congrats

---

There are numerous references in the Bible and Qu'ran that verifies that God is not invisible. But since you have built up this atheist/evolutionist veneer it would be pointless to list this information. My beliefs are solidified and it appears you are confident in your beliefs. This is not a contest to say, "ahhaa" your wrong and I am right. Those games are for children.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wamukota X

There are numerous references in the Bible and Qu'ran that verifies that God is not invisible. But since you have built up this atheist/evolutionist veneer it would be pointless to list this information. My beliefs are solidified and it appears you are confident in your beliefs. This is not a contest to say, "ahhaa" your wrong and I am right. Those games are for children.

---

what are u referring to? no childish opinions coming from me (regarding im rite and your wrong)
thats not what its about! Dont try and "belittle" the issue......
ive read and studied the Quran vigorously and objectively without emotional attachment (which is truly beneficial).
And I am a totally open minded individual..

the problem is that open minded to you = allowing irrational beliefs to have merit that have no evidential base

open minded to me = willing to accept any and everything as long as it has some verifiable merit (even if that something goes against what im comfortable with.. im obligated to accept it!)
you claim now that Allah is not invisible (a weak rebuttal to your claim's dismissal due to my invisible pink unicorn) and you openly admitting (and shooting urself in the foot) by stating how absurd that mode of reasoning is..

please share the proof or evidene that allah is not invisible... (and dont hide behind symbolism)

P.S... none of this is childish.. i take all of this as a serious issue.

it is truly a serious issue because basically and bluntly one of us is totally incorrect! There is no gray area or ambiguity. The claims are decidedly polarized. One of us is wrong!


the way to determine who is "right" and who is "wrong" rests on the nature of "objective reality" and evidence. The ball is in your court because Im sitting comfortably within the realm of objectivity and evidence!



you, yourself claim that evidence is a "limiting factor".. and that individuals should open themself up to possibilities that dont reside in a rational realm based on evidence and proof. thats just plain silly and an excuse for that which has no evidential base to back it up! Next time I go skydiving, i will disregard checking my parachute beforehand, because who cares, "evidence is limiting factor" and who cares if my pack shows "evidence" of being tampered with....

The ball is in your court (and the court of those who follow your reasoning) to provide some sort of merit to your claim. The invisible pink unicorn under my bed is the same thing as the Quran's Allah .. If we really wanna get serious, im bold enuff to say that they have the same exact powers and abilities! My invisible pet unicorn under my bed is not visible.......not able to be subjected to science......not able to be detected........and i can make any claim about my pet invisible unicorn and simply justify it by saying that i dont have to rely on "evidence" because "evidence" is a limiting factor.. LMAO whats the difference?


I am open minded to possibilities, as long as they have merit (verifiable merit)
the question is.. are you open to the possibility that your claim and philosophical stance could potentially be faulty? I (and any rational person) willingly admits that their stance could be faulty, but it has to be demonstrated to be faulty. My stance could indeed be faulty, but before i abondone it.......it must be shown (demonstrated thru reason of course)

its a sad day when the individual siding with reason is ridiculed as being unreasonable......

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by My First Timbs

The invisible pink unicorn under my bed is the same thing as the Quran's Allah .. If we really wanna get serious, im bold enuff to say that they have the same exact powers and abilities! My invisible pet unicorn under my bed is not visible.......not able to be subjected to science......not able to be detected........and i can make any claim about my pet invisible unicorn and simply justify it by saying that i dont have to rely on "evidence" because "evidence" is a limiting factor..

---

I am diffinitely not demeaning this issue. I have not shot myself in the foot as you say. There is a major difference between an unseen force such as gravity and fantasy land animals. That fact that Allah is visible and regulates such forces, is were the disagreement resides. Again it is pointless for me to guide you to evidence that you already disagree with in reference to the existence and visibility of God. There is no symbolism to hide behind it is clear to anyone who can read.

You said you have vigorously and objectively studied the Qu'ran. With all of that work put in, it is obvious that the words I post cannot begin to compare to the Qu'ran, no matter what I say or show you will not influence your "open mind". It is true there is no gray area here, I will leave with the notion that I am right and you will probably do likewise. There is no court, this is not a game and there are no projectiles being thrown around. Are you saying that this invisible pink unicorn and Allah have the same powers? If so, what more can I say to a person with that mentality? If that is what you think so be it. I will not even try to contend with your mind on that issue. Mocking Allah does not prove your point.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wamukota X

I am diffinitely not demeaning this issue. I have not shot myself in the foot as you say. There is a major difference between an unseen force such as gravity and fantasy land animals. That fact that Allah is visible and regulates such forces, is were the disagreement resides. Again it is pointless for me to guide you to evidence that you already disagree with in reference to the existence and visibility of God. There is no symbolism to hide behind it is clear to anyone who can read.

You said you have vigorously and objectively studied the Qu'ran. With all of that work put in, it is obvious that the words I post cannot begin to compare to the Qu'ran, no matter what I say or show you will not influence your "open mind". It is true there is no gray area here, I will leave with the notion that I am right and you will probably do likewise. There is no court, this is not a game and there are no projectiles being thrown around. Are you saying that this invisible pink unicorn and Allah have the same powers? If so, what more can I say to a person with that mentality? If that is what you think so be it. I will not even try to contend with your mind on that issue. Mocking Allah does not prove your point.

---

i wasnt mocking "allah" to prove my point.

i was mocking your own argument to prove the very point which u unknowingly helped me prove about your stance...that being the absurdity of belief in something that is not verifiable.

im just puzzled how u claim that allah is not invisible...and if allah isnt invisible, how is the entity seen ?(so to speak)..its a very simple issue

there is no difference between an imaginary unicorn that cant be verified compared to an unseen entity that cant be verified to exist other than in the mind of the believer

Quote:

---

It is true there is no gray area here, I will leave with the notion that I am right and you will probably do likewise.

---

see here is the crux of te issue Wamukota,

im not "leaving" thinking im "right" and your "wrong"

it honestly isnt as simple as that..

what i am leaving with is a profound confidence in knowing that all of my arguments and viewpoints fall in line with evidential thinking, rationalism and objectivity..and rely heavily on that which can be substantiated objectively.......



normally, these 3 tenets will steer one in the right direction of truth.

lets say 10000 years from now, if humans are no longer here and our planet is visited by a foregn alien species, it is reasonable to conclude that they would be a prime example of an "objective unbiased observer".... with that in mind, im pretty sure any writngs or ideas or stances that could be substantiated with reason and rationality would aid them greatly in trying to understand the reality of homo sapiens......

thats the power of that which is verifiable

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by My First Timbs

see here is the crux of te issue Wamukota,

im not "leaving" thinking im "right" and your "wrong"

it honestly isnt as simple as that..

what i am leaving with is a profound confidence in knowing that all of my arguments and viewpoints fall in line with evidential thinking, rationalism and objectivity..and rely heavily on that which can be substantiated objectively.......



normally, these 3 tenets will steer one in the right direction of truth.

lets say 10000 years from now, if humans are no longer here and our planet is visited by a foregn alien species, it is reasonable to conclude that they would be a prime example of an "objective unbiased observer".... with that in mind, im pretty sure any writngs or ideas or stances that could be substantiated with reason and rationality would aid them greatly in trying to understand the reality of homo sapiens......

thats the power of that which is verifiable

---

I did not prove any point of yours. Allah is verifiable to those with an "open mind". You believe in invisible pink unicorns and I believe in Allah. That just gives me a glimpse into your mentality.

Maybe its just me, but you really aren't making any sense. You are beginning to appear quite desperate to prove something to who knows who. I know you have a few degrees and such but just because one man gives another man a piece of paper that says degree that does not make that man an expert on the subject. All the degrees around this planet not one of them are experts in their so-called field. I am pretty sure you spent at a minimum of 4 years for your undergraduate degree, a minimum of 2 years for a Masters if you have one and a range of 2-3 years for you Doctorate of Philosophy in whatever field that you studied. So, I see you have at a minimum of 8 years of your life, maybe a few books, maybe somemore paid speaking engagements at various Universities and such all vested in this Evolutionary theory. I said all that to say you are trying to hard to rationalize your stance on Evolution and the existence of Allah. I have a degree that I obtained with honors but that doesn't make me an expert in that field. This modern science has not even skimmed the surface of knowledge.

I am about to veer off our subject just a little if I haven't already.
You said:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by My First Timbs

ive read and studied the Quran vigorously and objectively without emotional attachment

---

As I stated above you obviously have alot invested in this belief of
Evolution. You might not have had any "emotional attachment" when you "read and studied the Quran vigorously and objectively" but I am positive you had other motivations or else why read the Qu'ran if you don't believe in Allah? I'm not looking for no answers from you at this point. But of course the author of "A Call to Sanity" cannot agree with a muslim. Maybe your motivation is pride or financial, but who cares. I don't have any questions for you at this point and leave you to your invisible pink unicorns.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wamukota X

I did not prove any point of yours. Allah is verifiable to those with an "open mind". You believe in invisible pink unicorns and I believe in Allah. That just gives me a glimpse into your mentality.

Maybe its just me, but you really aren't making any sense. You are beginning to appear quite desperate to prove something to who knows who. I know you have a few degrees and such but just because one man gives another man a piece of paper that says that degree does not make that man an expert on the subject. All the degrees around this planet not one of them are experts in their so-called field. I am pretty sure you spent at a minimum of 4 years for your undergraduate degree, a minimum of 2 years for a Masters if you have one and a range of 2-3 years for you Doctorate of Philosophy in whatever field that you studied. So, I see you have at a minimum of 8 years of your life, maybe a few books, maybe somemore paid speaking engagements at various Universities and such all vested in this Evolutionary theory. I said all that to say you are trying to hard to rationalize your stance on Evolution and the existence of Allah. I have a degree that I obtained with honors but that doesn't make me an expert in that field. This modern science has not even skimmed the surface of knowledge.

I am about to veer off our subject just a little if I haven't already.
You said:



As I stated above you obviously have alot invested in this belief of
Evolution. You might not have had any "emotional attachment" when you "read and studied the Quran vigorously and objectively" but I am positive you had other motivations or else why read the Qu'ran if you don't believe in Allah? I'm not looking for no answers from you at this point. But of course the author of "A Call to Sanity" cannot agree with a muslim. Maybe your motivation is pride or financial, but who cares. I don't have any questions for you at this point and leave you to your invisible pink unicorns.

---

You are just avoiding the subject.


Why can’t someone read the Qu'ran if they don’t believe in Allah? Maybe to learn, to be able to discuss something instead of just talking out of ones ass. to see the other sides point of view. Any of those possibly?


And you still don’t get the point of what he’s saying. All evidence at present time points to evolution and not some god being the creator of all things. He’s not going out with a set agenda to prove evolution because he fancies it more than Allah. He’s coming with that point of view because logic and reason point him in that direction. Because believing in Allah is like believing in the pink unicorn. It is just a figment of people’s imagination with no discernable proof to back up your claims. You’re still missing the point of his analogy between the pink unicorn and Allah/god/instert religious deity.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by whitey

You are just avoiding the subject.


Why can’t someone read the Qu'ran if they don’t believe in Allah? Maybe to learn, to be able to discuss something instead of just talking out of ones ass. to see the other sides point of view. Any of those possibly?


And you still don’t get the point of what he’s saying. All evidence at present time points to evolution and not some god being the creator of all things. He’s not going out with a set agenda to prove evolution because he fancies it more than Allah. He’s coming with that point of view because logic and reason point him in that direction. Because believing in Allah is like believing in the pink unicorn. It is just a figment of people’s imagination with no discernable proof to back up your claims. You’re still missing the point of his analogy between the pink unicorn and Allah/god/instert religious deity.

---

I am not avoiding the subject, the subject has been addressed and I am through with that. Anyone can read the Qu'ran, Timbs said that he didn't have any emotional attachment. I was addressing the emotional attachment and objectivity. He made his stance I made mine and both of our minds are still were we begin.

wamukota

u have missed or are deliberately avoiding addressing my correlation with the IPU (inv pink unicorn) (a recognized analogy referring to the unverifiable) and your Allah... u are skating around the issue "o so conveniently",

but meanwhile ever since your post a few ways back where u admitted that belief in the unverifable is absurd.(and consequently proved my point better than i had imagined). u are the one who is appearing desperate....

like i said b4.... the ball is in your court to provide a rational claim that gives credence to Allah not being invisible and wholy different from my imaginary pet unicorn... u still havent..

as i stated earlier.. being open mided = willing to accept whatever the evidence dictates......

with that understand.. please help "free my mind" some more by providing some reason and evidence to believe in the qualities of the Quran and Allah (that would be any different than my pet invisible unicorn)

P.S... i prayed to my invisible unicorn last nite to help get rid of my migraine headache.... and wouldnt u know it! it worked!

(but then again.. i also was relaxing and taking tylenol at the same time)

next time, i will try another unverifiable entity and see what happens....
Timbs

"being open mided = willing to accept whatever the evidence dictates"
it's sad to see even your being "open minded" is attached with bias.
o·pen-mind·ed (http://cache.lexico.com/dictionary/g.../GIF/omacr.gifhttp://cache.lexico.com/dictionary/g.../GIF/prime.gifphttp://cache.lexico.com/dictionary/g.../GIF/schwa.gifn-mhttp://cache.lexico.com/dictionary/g.../GIF/imacr.gifnhttp://cache.lexico.com/dictionary/g.../GIF/prime.gifdhttp://cache.lexico.com/dictionary/g...GIF/ibreve.gifd)
adj. Having or showing receptiveness to new and different ideas or the opinions of others.

^ Word!

And, where Timbs stumbles at is when he assumes that the knowledge of God is based on something invisible and un verifiable.

The truth is, Timbs never asked Wamukota X to explain his knowledge before he went about trying to disprove it.

Wamukota said that the God he knows is not invisible and Timbs went on to argue that it is.

To be soo gun ho about "science", it seems that Timbs is quite open to taking things on face value without doing his research and then proclaiming that his initail fallacy proves his point.

That is circular reasoning at it's best.