Ants defeat atheism

[Zeeshan]

Originally Posted by Zunaid
Why must God by definition be good?

Because God by definition is good. I am too lazy to look up the etymology of the word Doc, but aren't godspeed and goodspeed related?

On topic: I am in accordance with the view that atheism is just another 'religion' where one try to push his or her own agenda.

[Zeeshan]

I like Deepak Chopra

[Electrequiem]

Originally Posted by Zeeshan
I like Deepak Chopra

I don't. Pseudoscientists. Their numbers have been steady decreasing since time immemorial as science continues to make headways. And the whole "Sure, science is solving problems - but can it really solve [insert problem that you wish to make money of off]" argument is ridiculous. Science and rationality has slowly been pushing guys like this to the wall.

A lot of people consider science and/or scientists as arrogant SIMPLY because they are chiseling away at centuries-old myths and hoaxes in search of answers. On the contrary, I think its arrogant to claim that you have a personal relationship with the creator of the universe, not to claim that humans shared common ancestry with apes.

[goru]

Not a big Bill Maher fan (he has weird beliefs about vaccinations), but this bit did make me lol:

[al Furqaan]

Originally Posted by Electrequiem
[1] and violence is not one of those issues not demarcated by a thick line was my point. The Prophet engaged in it, the Quran seems to advocate it at times - so outside morality aside, a devout Muslim COULD choose to interpret these as an indication that violence is allowed. Just because it may conflict with YOUR morality doesn't mean it is wrong in someone else's interpretation of Islam.

Well these people still aren't following the Quran to the T because the Quran/Prophet never urged the targeting of civilians. By targeting civilians, extremists are actually contradicting their purported inspiration, not just misinterpreting it or offering an alternative interpretation. There is different and there is antithesis.

[2] I am not sure how you can start a sentence with "From a purely scientific point of view..." and then, with a straight face (I assume, here) say "commanded by God to slaughter his son." Also, the whole "God is good by definition" belief is EXACTLY why religion can lead to evil things. "Good" by WHAT moral definition of "Good"? Hitler was the moral definition of good for many Nazis, fyi. Even the Quranic Pharaoh had followers who claimed he was righteous.

I've got to work on veiling my sarcasm less!

The point is that Weinberg's quote is a fallacy. If "good" people can do "evil" than they aren't good to begin with. Its akin to saying the only black person who is present is the white one. Unless I missed some hidden element of the quote.

That's why ever-skepticism is my answer.

But to be a skeptic is to be uncertain. Most atheists don't fit that bill, because the ones who do should be re-labelled as agnostics. I know of at least one person who "knows for a fact that God doesn't exist." I have another couple of buddies who are "virtual atheists" because they believe that the probability of God's existence is greater than zero, but only just. Of course its an issue of semantics, but discussions such as these usually hinge on that.

[al Furqaan]

Originally Posted by Zunaid
Faith cannot be proved (or disproved).

So are we all agreed that if one agrees to the above statement, they cannot then be an "atheist" and are instead an "agnostic" or a "skeptic"?

[Rifat]

Sahih International
Or were they created by nothing, or were they the creators [of themselves]?

Al-qur'an: Surah At-Tur, ayah 35, Chapter 52, verse 35.

Sahih International
Or did they create the heavens and the earth? Rather, they are not certain.

Al-qur'an: Surah At-Tur, ayah 36, Chapter 52, verse 36.

http://quran.com/52

[BANFAN]

Originally Posted by Electrequiem
{1)Like all scripture, the Quran is open to interpretation. No one scholar has the final mandate on what a verse may or may not mean.

Too much generalization, even in modern days teachings we are told not to generalize too much, isn't it?? it's mentioned in the book by its author; there are different kinds of verses in Quran:

1. Verses those need no explanations, Every literate person will understand the same meaning.
2. Verses only the people with knowledge will understand; I.e. a verse related to physics will be understood better by a physicist, a verse related to medicine will be better understood by a prof of medicine, etc
3. Verses which are symbolic which can only be understood by someone creator gives that wisdom, mostly beyond human knowledge.... These are to guide the faithful and misguide the unfaithful; Allah says, those who believe in Allah, when they hear these verses, says I believe. But those who aren't believer, they question what did he mean by this? they argue with that etc and in the process gets misguided.

So the first two categories are not dependent on any interpretation and the third categories are the verses for believing, because you can never understand it by your knowledge...

Yet there have been some unnecessary misinterpretation on a very few things due to the human sayings... Imam's, Scholars, Hadith, Mollahs etc etc, I do agree but that can't be the fault ofGod or the religion. If Hasina doesn't practice democracy in a democratic country, we can't abuse the creator of democracy for that?? Should we??

Originally Posted by Electrequiem
How else do you explain the myriad of sects within Islam? Is it a physical impossibility that Shias and Sunnis exist, then? Do they point at each other and scream "You're wrong and a physical impossibility and thus I must destroy you?!" - Oh, my bad, yes, they do do that.

How do you explain democracy in USA and in UK or In another country ??

Shia's and Sunnis have no dispute on the Quran; i.e. The basic principles of Islam. They both live within the broad spectrum of Quranic guidelines, just like differently structured democracies practice it in differ ways within the broad spectrums of democratic principles.

-----

And for that "God is Good" discussion: I haven't come across in entire Quran once, where it says, God is good...neither it says he is Bad. But he is kind, merciful etc etc, at the same time he is just, uncompromising for some sins and brutal/cruel in executing punishment... Depends on how you explain it....

But at the end, he who believes, will call him good even without understanding some of his justices, how was that good with a negative worldly outcome. They believe, we humans have limitations of understanding and accepts that apparently bad outcome to be ultimate good. We often do find many things that we thought to be bad for us, turns into to be good in future.But one who doesn't believe, will pretend to have every knowledge of the world and even of future and try to prove God wrong/bad.. There is the test of faith.

Ike Some believe and have faith on Obama/Bush's trillion dollar bailout and tax exemption etc financial policies will revive American economy and abide by the laws... And some don't have faith on that.

Yet, all are forced to abide by the law (Financial) of the land. Creator has given you the freedom to abide by or to ignore his law in his land, because it's a test of faith and every soul shall answer for that....that's why you have been created with a free will. Creator isn't an inferior administrator than any government. You follow a government because the consequences are imminent, creator has a much larger time span for the consequences. So it's easy to ignore untill death...we humans have no knowledge beyond that... Do we?

[zman]

Originally Posted by Zeeshan
On topic: I am in accordance with the view that atheism is just another 'religion' where one try to push his or her own agenda.

Originally Posted by al Furqaan
So are we all agreed that if one agrees to the above statement, they cannot then be an "atheist" and are instead an "agnostic" or a "skeptic"?

Couldn't agree more. Atheism is the antithesis of science just like many a religion. It's more of a reactionary ideology to refute faith than anything else. If they claim to be agnostic now that's another story. If they claim to be a stickler for scientific methodologies, how can they fail to recognize this not so subtle distinction and call themselves atheists unless they're pushing their own agenda!

[Zunaid]

FIrst things first. Maybe second and thirds.

First - I am not an atheist. I don't even play one on TV. Neither am I an agnostic, nor am I a believer in some divine entity (malevolent or benign is immaterial). I would say I am apathetic. I simply do not give a rodent's behind.

Second - I should write a script that will periodically repost this thread at random times. Everything that will have been said has been said for millenia, and nothing new will be said. Discussions like this pop up on and off again in an internet forum like pimples on a teenager's face. Except, in this case what looked like a pimple was an ant.

Third - levity aside. It still bothers me that people do not catch up to the breadth of a thread's discussions. Whether atheism is a religion or not has been succinctly and brilliantly laid asunder by EQ - 'the off switch is NOT a channel'.

Atheism is simple the absence in the belief in a divine entity. While some uncelebrated atheists take their disbelief aggressively and, IMO, wrongfully deride the belief of others, most 'lay' atheists (pun intended) do not point to their atheism as having defined eschatology and philosophy. It is not used to understand the meaning of life and existence. 42. There is no belief in sacred objects or rituals. There is no belief in a moral code sanctified by god(s). There is no social group tied by their disbelief. Atheism is a disbelief. Not a philosophy.

Having religion means having faith. Having faith does not mean having religion. I have faith that Bangladesh will one day win the world cup. But that's not a religion.

Remember the old Afghan proverb? If god is with you, why hurry? If god is against you, why hurry?

[zman]

Using the axiomatic system, I was going to prove the off switch can also represent a channel, depending on how "channel" is defined and what axioms are chosen. On second thought, boss er shathe genjam koira labh nai

[al Furqaan]

Third - levity aside. It still bothers me that people do not catch up to the breadth of a thread's discussions. Whether atheism is a religion or not has been succinctly and brilliantly laid asunder by EQ - 'the off switch is NOT a channel'.

Well the TV with the off switch isn't receiving or emitting any signals. I think atheism is more a blank channel akin to the "this is a test, this is only a test..." that pops up from time to time.

[Zunaid]

Originally Posted by zman
Using the axiomatic system, I was going to prove the off switch can also represent a channel, depending on how "channel" is defined and what axioms are chosen. On second thought, boss er shathe genjam koira labh nai

I hope people do not really think that. When I post as myself (not admin), I am fair game like any other member. Mods can, and have in the past, issued me warnings. I have not been banned yet.

I will not smite anyone with lightning (only the brilliance of my wit and logic). Hehe.

[al Furqaan]

Originally Posted by Zunaid
I hope people do not really think that. When I post as myself (not admin), I am fair game like any other member. Mods can, and have in the past, issued me warnings. I have not been banned yet.

I will not smite anyone with lightning (only the brilliance of my wit and logic). Hehe.

Dr Admin Z Bhai has been warned by mods before! I thought you were Admin, Lord of the Forums! Imagine finding out everything you believed in was just a myth! Oh the angst!

[Rifat]

Ants are very powerful creatures by the grace of God. no doubt about that... there was a disney film called "Ants" I wish i could watch that movie sometime....

@ DR. Z, btw, It was ABCNews

Let's be honest, My original intention was to post this in the Ramadhan thread so that those who believe already in Islaam will find peace and solace in their hearts as the reminder benefits the believers in many ways(some we can observe and some we cannot observe) but if i did that having received a Mod warning recently, I should open a new thread and not divert into different topics as happened many times in past. Perhaps If i didn't include the term "Atheism" in the thread title this thread discussion may not have taken place. When I first saw the video, that was the title of the youtube video.

[Zunaid]

Rifat - nothing wrong with the discussion. So do continue to have a blessed and peaceful Ramadan (I was only joshing you with the ants and pimples line).

Asaad - yup. Contrary to popular myth, I am not quite infallible.

[Rifat]

No problem, Dr. Z.

There is a saying in Bangla "একতাই বল" which can be loosely translated as: "Unity is Strength" to me, the ant colony epitomizes just that.

The reason why Ants are so interesting to study is because Ants have communities just like human beings, Their family/society structure is just like human civilization, It is their own little world(subhanAllah!), I do not know of other creatures in the animal kingdom who resemble the human society...

[Zeeshan]

Yeah I am on same boat as zaman bhai.. lol j/k zman bhai

Off switch is a STATE. Beliefs, philosophy or whatever semantics one choose to use represent a state. No state is also a state. In fact, classic ones who come close to having no subscription at all are the ancient Pyrrhonists (skeptics) or Zen Buddhists who does not believe in Nothing but does not believe in not believing in Nothing.

At the end of the day, whatever STATE is one in, there are limitations to human knowledge and understanding for instance via Church-Turing Thesis.

Off topic: I still cannot believe Doc has been warned at times.

[Zunaid]

^^ Zee - not to derail this thread, but re your comments on state. Go bone up on automatons, particularly FSAs. In the end, we are all playing merrily with semantics in order to justify our own biases.

This thread will reappear in 1 2 3 .....

[Sohel]

"Off" Channel? "Snow" Channel? Really guys!

Organized advocacy of any creed behind a "good-for-you" way of believing, be its Islam in all of its diversity and atheism in its divergent degrees of overt and subtle aggression (Dawkins describes himself as a "fairly militant atheist"), is a proverbial channel in its own right, there to coerce "faith" in its contents, generate loyalty, and ensure the survival of its enterprise in the process. Each has a wide array of programs. We tune into the ones we want to see and don't subject ourselves to the ones that we feel serve us no real purpose as life is short and time is increasingly precious. Some decide not to any of these proverbial channels and watch other channels. Some don't watch a lot of TV and some watch none. VERY FEW watch the proverbial channels and want to be a part of the programming process in various capacities. To each his/her own.

I say those who believe, focus on deeply reflecting on your belief so that it may create happiness and peace in you and all those around you both in and outside whatever definition you have of the "Umma". Those who are skeptics, be skeptical about things you have actually researched deeply rather than just concocting a reactionary reality based on totally inadequate exposure to the volumes of erudition, both scientific and theosophical, actually out there. I think it is harder but way more beneficial and rewarding in the end to see and appreciate the complexity really out there, rather than the ephemeral comfort of seeing only what we want to see.

Reductionist thinking may be convenient and apparently useful on occasion, but is it really worthy of serious consideration in a world where diversity exists as a blessing, and therefore it may be far more important to understand than to coerce an agreement with views different from our own?

I feel we all need to separate a legitimate discourse from some of its practitioners, especially when they use and convolute the discourse to justify behavior in clear violation of its spirit as well as letter. Did Islam create Ghulam Azam, Nizami, the QCs, Bin Laden and others? Or did those men used decontexualized scripture and questionable sources to legitimize their own evil to themselves and in the eyes of their followers motivated by equally intolerant, egomanical and anti-social pathology they feel they urge to sublimate in the public arena as self-styled deputies and attorneys of GOD gratifying their egos as such, and then whenever possible through coercive oppression, trying to compel us to follow their version of the truth?

BTW, this thread is interesting because it moved away from the absurdly dumb video and whatever "topical discussion" it was supposed to generate.

Peace and GOD bless~

[Rifat]

Originally Posted by Sohel NR
...
...
...
BTW, this thread is interesting because it moved away from the absurdly dumb video and whatever "topical discussion" it was supposed to generate.

Peace and GOD bless~

The OP video contains verses of the Qur'an, While you claim to believe that Qur'an is the actual word of GOD, then how can the video be "Absurdly dumb" while it contains the words of Allah?

[Sohel]

Originally Posted by Rifat
The OP video contains verses of the Qur'an, While you claim to believe that Qur'an is the actual word of GOD, then how can the video be "Absurdly dumb" while it contains the words of Allah?

Context? Look up the word and reflect. While you're at it, look up "similitude" also in the sacred verse.

Totally expected comment from you BTW. No wonder you opened this thread and posted the aforesaid video. Your comment alone suggests that I shouldn't expect you to understand my response no matter what. I have neither the ability nor the desire to try at this point. This is Ramzan, I'm on BC with its Forum Rules and I need to be nicer to certain types of people in general until I meet them on an actual battlefield, so I won't waste my time interacting at this point.

But I'm always watching as are many, MANY believing men and women behind me. The tragic combination of dangerous and anti-social psychosomatic issues, ignorance and intellectual dishonesty, sheer stupidity and religious supremacy, and over-the-top external piety led to a great deal of terror and violence in the past, but I can assure you, WILL be met InshAllah with decisive force again and again on the battlefield -- a cohesive and coordinated force both preemptive and responsive -- no matter what sort of discourse it is hiding under.

The "religious" ones in particular are an even bigger enemies of the faith than anything outside of it and will NOT be allowed to prevail, hear us GOD. GOD defines righteousness without ambiguity, and guarantees victory to the righteous, not those who simply look the part while transgressing His commandments in His name. Religious intent without absolute deference and true submission ALSO expressed by the holistic use of the senses tempered by good faith application of the intellect, is the type of "intent" only the road to hell is paved with. How's that for a "reminder"?

It IS a dumb, VERY dumb video in my opinion but I don't expect someone who feels otherwise to share that opinion. You also have the right to have an opinion on the nature of my faith and my relationship with GOD and His word, but I don't have to qualify that more than I have already.

Peace & GOD bless~

[Rifat]

^^What is it exact content of the video that you disagree with? Why all the hate? What have I ever done to you?(It is no surprise that through your shrewd wordplay you indirectly insult me in every other thread + all these years+ all I do is say Salaam ) All the Video is trying to say is that Allah revealed to us information to Prophet Mohammad(Peace Be Upon Him) which was not discover-able at that time in human history due to a lack of technological advances and a lack of scientific knowledge. Therefore, the Qur'an had to be from God, who created the heavens and the earth and has access to all knowledge, seen and unseen. How can then a man with no formal education make up such information? again, Why All the Hate and What is the exact content of the video that you disagree with?

[Rifat]

Respected Sohel NR,

If I did insult you in the past, knowingly and/or unknowingly please forgive me as it was my ignorance and mistake, as I promise that such will not happen again in future

[Zunaid]

Time to give this a rest, guys.