Jump to content

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

31 minutes ago, Quisant said:

And YOU are the exception? You know there is something and You have knowledge of 'beyond universe' ? Or are you just repeating hearsay? 

Can God make 1+1= 2 ?  Can God create another God? Can God make a square circle? Can God act without time passing?

To speak of "doing things" in any meaningful sense is to speak of them in space/time contingent terms. 

UNLESS you can actually describe a category of "doing things" without time and space and a mechanism by which they could operate, all without committing an internal contradiction by making any time/space contingent references. 

You are repeating what most apologists do in this situation: nakedly assert that there is "something" - some other vague, nebulous category of "doing things" - that is "beyond human comprehension". In this case, the discussion was over before it began, since you will have effectively admitted to speaking gibberish. 

'Existence outside time' is one of those oxymorons like 'military intelligence' or 'government work', I'm afraid. You're going to have to show how something 'outside time' can exist, not merely assert that it does. 

Or are you confessing that God is unknowable?

ws.

Honestly spoken, you have to keep a red line in your argumentation, right now you are all over the place.

Before universe existed, there was no space and there was no time, this is what the big bang theory also says. Since we know from the first law of thermodynamics that energy cannot be created merely transferred, we also know that such a massive amount of energy that was the big bang came from a source and whatever that source was, was there before universe was there, and because universe was not there, time was not relevant either so whatever there was, was beyond time, as in infinite, as in no beginning and no end.

Lastly, i am in no obligation to discuss with you or to share my understanding and view with you, so first of all dont twist my words and second of all if you define what I am saying as gibberish because you first twist what I say, make assumption based on the twisted words and then the judgement that you do not understand it because it does not make sense to you, thus defining it as gibberish, that does not make it necessarily true.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
59 minutes ago, Quisant said:

Can God make 1+1= 2 ?  

It always is.

1 hour ago, Quisant said:

Can God act without time passing?

Absolutely.

He created time.

He doesn't need time to do anything.

The other two questions in that line are meaningless.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Good day everyone.This will be a big topic.

So I was debating an atheist ex-Muslim,and he was telling me that he left Islam cause of multi religion.He said anyone is born to Muslim parents is a Muslim,same with Christians etc..

And also a am an called Sigmund Freud said that religion is a delusion created by man himself,so as Richard Dawkins..

Even though scientific proofs are more overwhelming for existence of a creator.

How can such universe come from nothing ?

Philosophy is bad.

God doesn't exist for them,they tell me,while surrounding me 3 of them came.

I need some help,I am confused.

And could you use philosophical/scientific agreements for God I would be much delighted.

If they surrounded you; first rule, stop, look at all of them directly in the eye and tell them, move out my personal space, we are having a discussion, this is not a fight. If you want to have a fight, let me call my boys you call your mamas, cause somebody gonna get hurt!

easy to defeat atheists, ask, why is the state your master?, no, no ,no, we just obey, I mean follow it, they look after us?. But they make laws that you never have a say in it? but, but, they are smarter!. You admit to being dumb and thus need someone do direct you to the grass? So is that the reason why you are the slave of the men who own the money?. erm what do you mean you conspiracy theorist! That is when you got them.

Then follow up with, is Sigmund and Dawkins their prophets?. If one follows the ideas of a particular men, thus they become their masters.

Well why did you not mention Carl Jung?, he and Sigmund worked together before Carl decided he was a retard?. What about Kant? Socrates? Emerson? Plato? Plotinus?, the list is huge. One cannot enter such discussions without having read works of around 20 authors or more.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Quisant said:

'Existence outside time' is one of those oxymorons like 'military intelligence' or 'government work', I'm afraid. You're going to have to show how something 'outside time' can exist, not merely assert that it does. 

Or are you confessing that God is unknowable?

perhaps you have missed my points:

3 hours ago, Salsabeel said:

Is it possible for anyone to measure infinity?  

Is it possible that without time there are no memories or are there memories only because there is time? Could it be that time & memories are same?

 

1 hour ago, Quisant said:

Can God act without time passing?

:) This is the question of a person who is chained within the boundaries of space & time. Where was time before the bigbang? Hawking said that time did not exist before big bang. Read his article "beginning of time"

http://www.hawking.org.uk/the-beginning-of-time.html

 

3 hours ago, Salsabeel said:

Time begins to exist with things which begins to exist to measure change. It is different everywhere.

 

Edited by Salsabeel

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

600px-Archiintroredo.png

add : debating with atheists should be based on either God or Law. Religions are Both God and law. One must ask, what is the disagreement upon. Science agrees upon Laws of religion, it just cannot agree upon the idea of God and not God it self.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, monad said:

If they surrounded you; first rule, stop, look at all of them directly in the eye and tell them, move out my personal space, we are having a discussion, this is not a fight. If you want to have a fight, let me call my boys you call your mamas, cause somebody gonna get hurt!

easy to defeat atheists, ask, why is the state your master?, no, no ,no, we just obey, I mean follow it, they look after us?. But they make laws that you never have a say in it? but, but, they are smarter!. You admit to being dumb and thus need someone do direct you to the grass? So is that the reason why you are the slave of the men who own the money?. erm what do you mean you conspiracy theorist! That is when you got them.

Then follow up with, is Sigmund and Dawkins their prophets?. If one follows the ideas of a particular men, thus they become their masters.

Well why did you not mention Carl Jung?, he and Sigmund worked together before Carl decided he was a retard?. What about Kant? Socrates? Emerson? Plato? Plotinus?, the list is huge. One cannot enter such discussions without having read works of around 20 authors or more.

you can read a thousand authors, but you are still lost and clueless.. 

 

we simply cannot debate with atheists because we cannot agree on a premise. besides Allah has blinded them and therefore they are handicapp.

Edited by kirtc

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Quisant said:

Can God make 1+1= 2 ?  Can God create another God? Can God make a square circle? Can God act without time passing?

I just want to refer you part of Stephen Hawking lecture:

"At this time, the Big Bang, all the matter in the universe, would have been on top of itself. The density would have been infinite. It would have been what is called, a singularity. At a singularity, all the laws of physics would have broken down."

You know where laws of physics would have broken down. Lets continue reading his full paragraph

"This means that the state of the universe, after the Big Bang, will not depend on anything that may have happened before, because the deterministic laws that govern the universe will break down in the Big Bang. The universe will evolve from the Big Bang, completely independently of what it was like before. Even the amount of matter in the universe, can be different to what it was before the Big Bang, as the Law of Conservation of Matter, will break down at the Big Bang."

So the law of conservation of matter breaks down somewhere. What about Law of conservation of energy then? which you think as eternal?

"Since events before the Big Bang have no observational consequences, one may as well cut them out of the theory, and say that time began at the Big Bang. Events before the Big Bang, are simply not defined, because there's no way one could measure what happened at them."

So they know that talking about time is useless somewhere.
 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, IbnSina said:

Honestly spoken, you have to keep a red line in your argumentation, right now you are all over the place.

I was wandering when the 'ad hominem' would begin...

 

1 hour ago, baqar said:

It always is.

My mistake, although there are occasions when 1+1 does not equal 2.

1 hour ago, baqar said:

He created time.

He doesn't need time to do anything.

Just assertions, as usual no proof.

1 hour ago, Salsabeel said:

Hawking said that time did not exist before big bang. Read his article "beginning of time"

I had read the article, Hawking calls imaginary time that which might have been before the Big Bang and real time after the B.B.

Hawking does not believe in the existence of God, why do you cherry pick only the bits that you like?

https://www.cnet.com/uk/news/stephen-hawking-makes-it-clear-there-is-no-god/

Time is a dimension. Like length, and width, and depth. It is possible, but not proven, at the point of singularity, everything that exists is gravitationally collapsed to an infinitely small point, which means there is no distance between any two points in space. Or time.            

It is also possible, but not proven, that such an event (collapse and subsequent explosion) could happen under purely naturalistic circumstances. 

wslm.

*

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Quisant said:

Just assertions, as usual no proof.

Proofs are there but I doubt if there is one that will convince you.

You see, if God is the Creator of everything, He must have created time as well.

Don't you think? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

kirtc , do not derail the topic. According to our chat, I have no intent in engaging with you, because I am smarter and such topics are fruitless. In fact your objective is to save your self while providing intellectual pleasure. I am here to play and not with you. Braaaaaaaaaap. I have not even immersed in any form of intellectualism, as we are all but fools in the sea of ignorance.

God has not blinded them, their objective and motive is different then yours.

qusiant is a long time member. Yet he entertains his mind with trivialities on such a subject, although he knows that he doesn't even know. The theists are of different aliases and timelines constantly attempting to refute him. The answers and refutations are always stagnant. It is simple, both atheist and theist want others to follow their version of reality, which generally is never concerned around ethics, morality, laws, but tries to win on existence, when both do not even know tomorrows end.

 

Edited by monad
genius

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Quisant said:

Hawking calls imaginary time that which might have been before the Big Bang and real time after the B.B.

This is what he said:

"Since events before the Big Bang have no observational consequences, one may as well cut them out of the theory, and say that time began at the Big Bang. Events before the Big Bang, are simply not defined, because there's no way one could measure what happened at them."

This simply means "incapability" of human intellect to reach to that point.

Lets further see his point about imaginary time:

"Quantum theory introduces a new idea, that of imaginary time. Imaginary time may sound like science fiction, and it has been brought into Doctor Who. But nevertheless, it is a genuine scientific concept. One can picture it in the following way. One can think of ordinary, real, time as a horizontal line. On the left, one has the past, and on the right, the future. But there's another kind of time in the vertical direction. This is called imaginary time, because it is not the kind of time we normally experience. But in a sense, it is just as real, as what we call real time."

:accident:Why not I laugh on this! Look at his confessions! Bringing Dr. Who, fiction into science yet saying it is a genuine scientific concept. Imaginary time is as real as what we call real time :hahaha:.
So time on the left stands for past events, time on the right represents future. What the imaginary time represents? Present? Or perhaps any new form of tense?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, monad said:

Quisant is a long time member.

I know.

He knows very well that we will never agree with him, as far as the theist/theist discussion goes.

And there are so many interesting forums in this site, where he can enjoy very healthy discussions with everyone.

Yet he ignores the rest of the site and insists on coming to this forum only.

He has been doing that for eight years when he knows that it is just a waste of everyone's time.

I would seriously advise him to try some other forums in this site.

I am sure he will have a more pleasant time there and so will we. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Baqar - The problem is, these type of subjects require a very high level of intellectual knowledge and the power of oration to written format. The only persons who came close to the positing ideas to the written context were Jibreal , MuhammedAli and Inshallah, but I am sure they too will admit, that all this is typical surface nonsense, a bit like icing on the cake. If men were to immerse in the underlining, majority would be stuck at the cream. 

The simple example is that of reading Mutahari's book on justice, where he refutes Hegel, Hume and Locke. If I recall correctly. But then one can agree upon it and leave it as is, or they would then have to read the works of those authors to understand their viewpoints. How many have the time or intellectual capacity to traverse this subject, as we know, it will take years.

I do enjoy Quisants remarks and points, but it seems with time, they have become simple questions poking at the untrained minds. Purely for pleasure.

Edited by monad

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Quisant said:

I was wandering when the 'ad hominem' would begin...

Plus points for you for using latin terms, makes you look very smart online.

Me saying that "you have to keep a red line in your argumentation, right now you are all over the place." is not me attacking you as a person but your reaction to that is another example of how you get over defensive.

No need to get so defensive because someone questioned your understanding of things.

Let me ask you a question: what is the reason for your communication with me regarding this subject? Does it even make a difference what I write?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/19/2017 at 6:44 AM, monad said:

The answers and refutations are always stagnant.

It is a good observation, it always ends up in stalemate. 

On 8/19/2017 at 9:29 AM, monad said:

I do enjoy Quisants remarks and points, but it seems with time, they have become simple questions poking at the untrained minds. Purely for pleasure.

You are partly right, but also wrong: I find the exercise useful because it gives (me anyway) a fascinating insight into the mind and tactics of other people. And one can learn a lot communicating with others.

In the beginning I could never understand how believers could cope with so many God paradoxes, with the passing of time I have come to the conclusion that people do not actually believe in God Himself. They just insist they do.

A true God believer is not fussed with any of this, has no time or need for Forum discussions and exchanges of opinions because a true believer is absorbed in the rapture of the Divine.

So called believers will go through the motions of prayer, mosque, piousness but what they really believe in is the need to keep the belief alive, the maintenance of belief  is what counts, and deemed very important.  They are convinced that without religion everything will fall apart including their way of life. 

Religion is vigorously defended by believers, everybody must endorse it; that is the only way (they are convinced) that will preserve a just and stable society.
It is a useful crutch but many societies have outgrown it (specially Europe) and by and large many simply ignore the God issue and manage to live a sane, healthy, happy life. 

:)

all the best.

*

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Quisant said:

A true God believer is not fussed with any of this, has no time or need for Forum discussions and exchanges of opinions because a true believer is absorbed in the rapture of the Divine.

So called believers will go through the motions of prayer, mosque, piousness but what they really believe in is the need to keep the belief alive, the maintenance of belief  is what counts, and deemed very important.  They are convinced that without religion everything will fall apart including their way of life. 

Religion is vigorously defended by believers, everybody must endorse it; that is the only way (they are convinced) that will preserve a just and stable society.
It is a useful crutch but many societies have outgrown it (specially Europe) and by and large many simply ignore the God issue and manage to live a sane, healthy, happy life.

This is a little disingenuous and snarky. 

People are allowed to have positions, defend their positions, and talk about it whenever they like. Faith is not "on" or "off", it is a gradual journey strengthened by discussing, examining...that's how the world works. Very few are totally "absorbed", and even if they are, they still discuss with people, silent monasticism is not a part of this faith. 

You engage people in discussion, and then question why they are doing so? That if they talk, they are somehow insincere or insecure about their faith? You think only atheists/agnostics, etc are allowed to talk? You must think of religious people as inert robots closing their eyes, humming to themselves self-fulfilling rhetoric. But I regret to tell you many religious people have their eyes wide open, are aware of this world and its disciplines, and could run circles in any conversation. Non-believers do not carry the monopoly on "logic" and "reason". 

And of course people want to maintain their beliefs and keep them alive, that's the essence of purpose and life. It's not just religious people who do this. Everyone does, including you. You're not a special exemption. What do you defend? Or do you simply sit back, and just play contrarian to whatever others say? Comfy life, I suppose. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/19/2017 at 11:17 AM, Reza said:

This is a little disingenuous and snarky. 

Perhaps, I did not intend that way.

I did also say  I find the exercise useful because it gives (me anyway) a fascinating insight into the mind and tactics of other people. And one can learn a lot communicating with others.

I did not intend it maliciously, Honi soit qui mal y pense   But I take on board what you say.

On 8/19/2017 at 11:17 AM, Reza said:

People are allowed to have positions, defend their positions, and talk about it whenever they like.

If that is what you think, why do you have a problem with my position?  

Do you think I am completely of the mark?

*

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/19/2017 at 11:02 AM, Quisant said:

In the beginning I could never understand how believers could cope with so many God paradoxes, with the passing of time I have come to the conclusion that people do not actually believe in God Himself. They just insist they do.

A true God believer is not fussed with any of this, has no time or need for Forum discussions and exchanges of opinions because a true believer is absorbed in the rapture of the Divine.

So called believers will go through the motions of prayer, mosque, piousness but what they really believe in is the need to keep the belief alive, the maintenance of belief  is what counts, and deemed very important.  They are convinced that without religion everything will fall apart including their way of life. 

Religion is vigorously defended by believers, everybody must endorse it; that is the only way (they are convinced) that will preserve a just and stable society.
It is a useful crutch but many societies have outgrown it (specially Europe) and by and large many simply ignore the God issue and manage to live a sane, healthy, happy life. 

:)

all the best.

*

You mistake us for people with sense of inferiority. It's your sense of false superiority and self inflated ness that severely hinders your approach and understanding of the Real world. As you are busy mocking others for what they believe with conviction. You demand that they follow your way or be mocked and ignoire or looked down upon. Trivialize their way to make them insecure and insignificant. Install the sense of insecurity and some how manage to stroke you own inflated and misguided ego.

Believers of Atheism. Who can’t explain to an intellectual audience how they deny the realities of Current Knowledge. And keep on marketing their agenda of we are here by chance/have no purpose/ going no place Stardust becoming stardusk again…

Some of us do not care what you are here for, or what you want to do with your personal life. You can follow your Religion.

We have a full life of our own, we do not waste our time in frivolous  pursuits.  

Some are here to defend in whatever way they can, and provide an antidote to the poison that is been marketed by the so called classy, very mild mannered, friendly, outgoing, concern and open minded people (which is an act of deception to fool people).

We question the marketing efforts of an entity(s) , who on the one hand says he/she is here by chance, has no purpose but is interested in asking purposeful question and  are purposeful pursuits-  

You and your friends who manage to always get you out of the jam you put yourself in by trick questions and you inability to answer or explain your own thought process.

Have not been able to clearly articulate your position. But you are interested in mocking others. This is not what freedom of intellectual speech is all about this abuse of it.

If someone is truly a logical,  intellectual, and a rational, and knowledgeable individual. They know that learning starts with the basics. A, b, c d ….12345 So, stop wasting our valuable time, and get on with your teaching..

Instead of been concerned with the Unknown, as you are a limited creation with limited understanding as attested by the Current Knowledge. 

Concern yourself with ; You exist and Your  surrounding ( The tangible the verifiable) 

Explain,

Your worldview if you are here by chance?

Did you Create yourself?

Did you create your surroundings? 

If not who did? Explain in the most basic sense without leaving fundamental forces/particles/elements. Not interested in a secondary process demonstration.

Does current knowledge support  your position(s)?

Here something for your reflect on, before you make a blunder

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/18/2017 at 2:34 AM, M.IB said:

:bismillah:

Good day everyone.This will be a big topic.

So I was debating an atheist ex-Muslim,and he was telling me that he left Islam cause of multi religion.He said anyone is born to Muslim parents is a Muslim,same with Christians etc..

And also a am an called Sigmund Freud said that religion is a delusion created by man himself,so as Richard Dawkins..

Even though scientific proofs are more overwhelming for existence of a creator.

How can such universe come from nothing ?

Philosophy is bad.

God doesn't exist for them,they tell me,while surrounding me 3 of them came.

I need some help,I am confused.

And could you use philosophical/scientific agreements for God I would be much delighted.

There is no such entity as a Ex- Muslim. If someone is born in a Muslim Family does not mean that they understand Islam. Religiosity is very different than understanding the true meaning of Islam.

What he or she is saying that if you were born in a Christian/Jewish/Hindu/Buddhist/Or whatever the Set of beliefs(personal/social) of your Parents you will adopt. But aaas you know In teenage years, Have you noticed that in our Teenage Years were usually are very rebellions and we question the norms? Do you think its by design?

Who was Sigmund Freud and Richard Dawkins?

What were their qualification and area of study - were they qualified to make these remarks? You don’t take advice from an engineer about your illness.

Why do people  submit to these Names(Thoughts of their Minds)? If one is enslaved by someone else's view( Intellect) it means they recognize a Higher Intellect/being in the Real world not only in the imaginary world) . A servant and slave/believer  of Freud will say that do not believe in a deity/god?

What was their understanding of Religion. A personal connection/some rituals etc.

What was their Religion, what was there upbringing like. What era did they live in and what were the socia-econo-religious environment like. Did they suffer any personal loss or were addicted to something. After all they all used their MInd to come up with something either by thinking about it, using observation data thru empirical (based on, concerned with, or verifiable by observation or experience rather than theory or pure logic.).

Could it be that their thoughts and views were the real delusions.

This stuff is mind numbly simple so stay away from the people who will try to involve you with Psychological Riddles/ Scientific Jargon/ Complicate what is very simple issue. Stick with basics.

We do submit to the Higher Intellect here and that is what guides us to the Reality/The Absolute.

"A thought provoking dialogue between Imam Ja'far al-Sadiq (a) and an atheist physician from India. Using logical arguments and the Myrobalan fruit as its theme the Imam convinces the atheist beyond doubt of the existence and attributes of Almighty Allah"

https://www.al-islam.org/tradition-myrobalan-fruit-hadith-al-halila-imam-jafar-al-sadiq

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Out of all the characteristics of mankind, self admiration/arrogance is one of the most disgusting ones. Indeed it was the downfall of ibliss(la) and atheists surely seem to have plenty of it, which is pretty self explanatory, how can you submit if you consider yourself too good for it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/18/2017 at 2:34 AM, M.IB said:

:bismillah:

Good day everyone.This will be a big topic.

So I was debating an atheist ex-Muslim,and he was telling me that he left Islam cause of multi religion.He said anyone is born to Muslim parents is a Muslim,same with Christians etc..

And also a am an called Sigmund Freud said that religion is a delusion created by man himself,so as Richard Dawkins..

Even though scientific proofs are more overwhelming for existence of a creator.

How can such universe come from nothing ?

Philosophy is bad.

God doesn't exist for them,they tell me,while surrounding me 3 of them came.

I need some help,I am confused.

And could you use philosophical/scientific agreements for God I would be much delighted.

One day on my way to library I saw a desk that was written:" Ask an atheist".

I came over and asked:"who built this desk?" That guy, university professor unfortunately (poor students), said:" What did you say?" I said:"Who built this desk?" He said:" people". I asked:" who built your glasses?" He said: "people". I asked:" who built you?" He said:" I don't know". The guy next to him said:" my parents". I said:" I'm sure your parents worked hard everyday to build your eyes, your heart, and everything."

Then they became speechless. They didn't say anything. Some people are rational. If you give them reason, they accept, but majority are biased. They won't accept anything.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

On 8/19/2017 at 1:44 PM, monad said:

oth atheist and theist want others to follow their version of reality, which generally is never concerned around ethics, morality, laws, but tries to win on existence, when both do not even know tomorrows end.

so you saying islam does not offer morality, ethics and laws... you keep blurting out false sentences.

Edited by kirtc

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/19/2017 at 11:50 AM, S.M.H.A. said:

You mistake us for people with sense of inferiority. It's your sense of false superiority and self inflated ness that severely hinders your approach and understanding of the Real world. As you are busy mocking others for what they believe with conviction. You demand that they follow your way or be mocked and ignoire or looked down upon. Trivialize their way to make them insecure and insignificant. Install the sense of insecurity and some how manage to stroke you own inflated and misguided ego.

Believers of Atheism. Who can’t explain to an intellectual audience how they deny the realities of Current Knowledge. And keep on marketing their agenda of we are here by chance/have no purpose/ going no place Stardust becoming stardusk again…

Some of us do not care what you are here for, or what you want to do with your personal life. You can follow your Religion.

We have a full life of our own, we do not waste our time in frivolous  pursuits.  

Some are here to defend in whatever way they can, and provide an antidote to the poison that is been marketed by the so called classy, very mild mannered, friendly, outgoing, concern and open minded people (which is an act of deception to fool people).

We question the marketing efforts of an entity(s) , who on the one hand says he/she is here by chance, has no purpose but is interested in asking purposeful question and  are purposeful pursuits-  

You and your friends who manage to always get you out of the jam you put yourself in by trick questions and you inability to answer or explain your own thought process.

“Oftentimes glass tries to glitter more than diamonds because it has more to prove.”

You have got everything about me wrong, you are exposing your personality and are not yet wise enough to know that hate poisons the soul.
Also, I've no idea why you think I am a teacher, I work for Insurance Underwriters and deal with freight damage claims if you are really interested.

On 8/19/2017 at 11:50 AM, S.M.H.A. said:

Concern yourself with ; You exist and Your  surrounding ( The tangible the verifiable) 

Explain,

Your worldview if you are here by chance?

Did you Create yourself?

Did you create your surroundings? 

If not who did? Explain in the most basic sense without leaving fundamental forces/particles/elements. Not interested in a secondary process demonstration.

Does current knowledge support  your position(s)?

Red Letters?

I have given a reasonable answer to these questions many times, 
I exist and my surrounding exist ..therefore God ...is not an elegant conclusion. 

I have another problem:

If I don't reply you will think me ill-mannered and arrogant, you already do.                                                            If I do reply monad will say that I am displaying my superiority complex and baqar will point out the futility of these conversations. 

So, what ever I do I am upsetting somebody...

What would you do if you were me?

wslm.

*

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What is far more interesting is how both kirtc and quisant failed to understand what i had written. Clearly there is never a perfect way to put forward opinion, as emotions always sway the rational. It Is time to retire.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


  • Recent Posts on ShiaChat!

    • Assalam-O-Alaikum !! May Allah Shower his Blessings upon you All.

      I am not a Good English Speaker. So, Please understand my words.

      After doing research on Shia Books, I came to know about Black Clothing which is Makrooh. But why and how? Prophet Muhammad(Peace Be Upon Him) wore Black if I am not wrong. Someone told me Imam Jafar Sadiq prohibited from wearing Black shoes and Black Clothes. Is it true?

      Jazaak Allah Khair.
    • Guest WestSide Story
      Looking for testimonials of being married to someone with different level of practicing Islam (Shia Islam specifically). Moderate woman to not so moderate man. Scenerio: Individually both have compatibility. Looking at them their are no apparent differences. They are happy. Neither drink.  But only one eats halal. One comes from a moderate practicing family and one from a family that has little distinction from western lifestyle and some of the family members drink but live elsewhere. Both individuals have older kids. Can it be a succesful second marriage? 
    • https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=10&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwjKjJuLttTXAhXNI1AKHbmwCnkQFghbMAk&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.slideshare.net%2Fhuseinmhanna%2Fthe-structure-of-the-universe&usg=AOvVaw1u9CB07-W2u5JxwR-e2HWP http://qfatima.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/07/tawheed.pdf
    • Feminists typically use terms like "male-dominated culture" so I just wanted to ask if you are a feminist. Also patriarchy is not inherently bad. No matter how you look at it Islam promotes a form of a patriarchal society. So just so you know. However I am not defending the patriarchy of Desi culture. Which is what we are talking about. I am advocating the patriarchy of an Ideal Shia Islamic social society (Yes these have existed historically to various extents).    Also I have seen housewives who can cook a mean paratta and clean well and still they are degraded by not only other women but by men, who tend to gravitate towards free-loving women. They are not appreciated by men as well. I am talking of the West, so I will let others respond on how accurate your statements are about the east. Something tells me you are still projecting and exaggerating.    Again, when you use the word "men" you are referring to a specific type of men. So don't generalize like the OP did. Also modesty is also a concern as well. I have seen this and I can give anecdotes as well to prove this. But let us not play the anecdote game. You would be surprised what western Muslim women, especially in college, get up to. So let us not pretend Muslim women are angels. Remember, for every Muslims man who fornicates there is often times another Muslim woman willing to do it with them. So don't think it is a "guy" issue, it is also a gal issue as well. Also there may be more reasons than the ones you and I listed too as to why an eastern man wants to marry a western woman, but it has everything to do with the guy trying to "make-up" for his guilty conscious and it may manifest in ways such as he thinking he can make it up by having his wife cook and clean (in a weird and twisted way, after all humans are psychologically complex creatures). But your cynical explanation makes it sound is as if Muslimah are dainty little flowers who earn money through a job and when they get married their hubby goes all Hollywood mustache twirling villain on them, or goes Ape on them out of nowhere. This is an incredibly naive and biased analysis and only ends up creating more questions rather than answering them.     Also you just answered your question. Replace men with "cultural Desi men". But you saying "men" is generalizing and I can also name "hundreds of examples" that run counter to yours. As can anyone here. No one here is defending Desi (primarily hindu influenced culture). But you seem to think we are.   On a tangential note Muslims nowadays are willing to blame Islam rather than Hindus for the defiencies that are present in Desi culture. Despite the fact that most of the deleterious behaviors of Desi culture had its origins in ancient Hindu culture that ancient Muslims picked up on. "Purdah" is a famous example of something that quite likely originated amongst  and was widely propagated  by Hindu culture and that Muslims adopted as well but tend to confuse with Islam in incorrect ways (the state of the prophets wives was not the same of a random Muslim woman back then and now,  most scholars agree on this).    Also you went on a tangent about working and being modest. Read my first post on the topic to know that Muslim women ALWAYS worked for 1400+ years in some job or another but had time for their family and household responsibilities. Even Umar Ibn al Khattab of all people hired a woman as "head of market operations ".  And above all else these Muslim women only thought of their job as a job and never let their job or income define them. I don't care if you earn money or not. You are not special or free or liberated or any other adjective you can name. And historically Muslim women used to be doctors way back even in the 1000s but never used to let their career define them. Except that they heal people. But modern day feminism does define a womans worth by her income and somehow she is "not tame" because she earns money. That is laughable. Sister "notme" did a good job of explaining the problem with people like you and your motivations to work. 
    • Sermon 1: Praise is due to Allah whose worth cannot be described…. In this sermon he recalls the creation of Earth and Sky and the creation of Adam and in it he mentions the Hajj Praise is due to Allah whose worth cannot be described by speakers, whose bounties cannot be counted by calculators and whose claim (to obedience) cannot be satisfied by those who attempt to do so, whom the height of intellectual courage cannot appreciate, and the divings of understanding cannot reach; He for whose description no limit has been laid down, no eulogy exists, no time is ordained and no duration is fixed. He brought forth creation through His Omnipotence, dispersed winds through His Compassion, and made firm the shaking earth with rocks. https://www.al-islam.org/nahjul-balagha-part-1-sermons/sermon-1-praise-due-Allah-whose-worth-cannot-be-described#creation-universe
×