Is Islam true?.

[drone]

As for derailing, that's a cherished feature of this forum(see the israel-turned-viking-thread). It has its upsides and its downsides, and is really just something you need to adopt to. It will happen, learn ways to focus your attention on the topics you find interesting. It really isn't very hard.

I don't really think the thread has been derailed. The OP is about Islam not being the one true religion, and the Bible is being used as proof to that theory. The validity of the Bible is thus open to dispute.

[HoreTore]

I don't really think the thread has been derailed. The OP is about Islam not being the one true religion, and the Bible is being used as proof to that theory. The validity of the Bible is thus open to dispute.

Of course, related subjects don't count as derailing. Posting a thread doesn't make you "evil nazi overlord" of said thread... I was talking generally, not about this specific thread(which I haven't read very carefully, except for PVC's posts).

[total relism]

Do you argue in the same way when you 1v1?

IE, no thinking of your own, no listening in to the other person, and a bombardment of questionable sources?

You have only been here a short while, and you have already on at least two separate occasions mixed up who you are addressing and why! This, if anything, made it completely obvious to me that you purely are interested in using these boards to get HEARD, but you have no interest what so ever to learn anything about the world or the people that inhibit it.

I for one find such a person uninteresting to debate with.

If you see koran/bible as questionable sources than I can do nothing, after all this is thread on Islam turned bible. The sources used against my posts, wiki. I have quoted scholars as well, but it matters not, the content and information matters more than a logical fallacies attacking what some arbitrarily see as a bad source.
What makes you think I dont think on my own? in fact if i did not, would I not automatically agree with anyone with different opinion? If I could not think on my own than I would agree with all post. No its that I have studied deeply, that all the common o objections I respond to. I do care to learn what others think/believe, that does not mean I have to agree with them. I dont share same bias/presupisitions/worldview. so I will not agree with them. But if you feel there has been evidence presented i ignore, let me now please. This questions may seem off topic but, what are your opinions on islam/Muhammad?.

[total relism]

The bolded sentence is contradictory.

In order to establish "who is correct", one cannot simply rely on two individuals. The more people you include, the closer you can get to "correct".

If you meant to say "who can post the most convincing argument", then you would be correct. But in that case, getting close to the truth is irrelevant, and it's no more than a pissing contest. While pissing contests can be fun to watch, I certainly hope this forum does not devolve into it. We need more meaningful discussions here, not measurements of the posters e-penises.

As for derailing, that's a cherished feature of this forum(see the israel-turned-viking-thread). It has its upsides and its downsides, and is really just something you need to adopt to. It will happen, learn ways to focus your attention on the topics you find interesting. It really isn't very hard.

Certain claims, such as john 1 and matt 4 contradict, can be shown true by 2 people who disagree on it, I believe. I care mostly only for truth claims, is islam true etc. These things should be discussed debated. I dont care if I "win" a argument, I care about truth.

[HoreTore]

Certain claims, such as john 1 and matt 4 contradict, can be shown true by 2 people who disagree on it, I believe. I care mostly only for truth claims, is islam true etc. These things should be discussed debated. I dont care if I "win" a argument, I care about truth.

If you do care about the "truth", then you will drop the "1v1"-thing. All it does is limit the number of possible viewpoints down to 2, as well as limiting the amount of knowledge in those viewpoints. If two people discuss, the maximum amount of knowledge is the sum of the knowledge those two persons have. Add a third, and you've expanded that sum by 50%, assuming all three are at about the same level of knowledge. Add a fourth, and you have twice as much knowledge available as in your "1v"1-consept.

You made another interesting claim earlier though: I got the feeling that you believed your message had hit home when others reacted in a certain way. I believe it was anger, disbelief and general uninterest... Anyway, such reactions does not mean "his points are valid", rather they mean "this discussion is too dumb for me to waste my time on it". Quite the opposite, eh? If people continue to offer rebuttals, however, it may indicate that they are taking your opinions into account and are considering them. That's a big "may" though, the other poster might very well still disregard your posting as rubbish.

If people stop responding to your arguments, your conclusion should not be "he's considering what I'm saying", it shiuld rather be "I haven't presented my argument well enough for the other guy to even consider". I've ran my share of debates into the ground on this forum, and when the person I'm debating stops posting, that's a sure sign my argument is either 1) plain wrong or 2) badly presented.

If you want to check if other posters are taking your opinions into consideration, you will have to follow them over time, and look for sliding changes in opinion. If you see signs of that happening, you can pet yourself on the back and think "jolly well done old sport!" to yourself.

[Kadagar_AV]

If you see koran/bible as questionable sources than I can do nothing, after all this is thread on Islam turned bible. The sources used against my posts, wiki. I have quoted scholars as well, but it matters not, the content and information matters more than a logical fallacies attacking what some arbitrarily see as a bad source.
What makes you think I dont think on my own? in fact if i did not, would I not automatically agree with anyone with different opinion? If I could not think on my own than I would agree with all post. No its that I have studied deeply, that all the common o objections I respond to. I do care to learn what others think/believe, that does not mean I have to agree with them. I dont share same bias/presupisitions/worldview. so I will not agree with them. But if you feel there has been evidence presented i ignore, let me now please. This questions may seem off topic but, what are your opinions on islam/Muhammad?.

My view on Mohammad is that he viewed from the perspective of his time was delusional, and that he from a modern perspective are a child molester.

My view on Islam is that it is a set of fables, created by a half civilized desert people a long time ago.

My view on your stance towards evidence, is that I envy your world view. Must be a much easier place to live in. Too bad it can only be considered delusional.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

FYI - I can't debate with TR any more because I've excommunicated him from myself for his gross, and frankly dangerous, heterodoxy.

Would someone mind explaining that to him, please?

[Kadagar_AV]

TotalRelism, FYI - PVC can't debate with You any more because he has excommunicated You from Himself for Your gross, and frankly dangerous, heterodoxy.

[Sarmatian]

What's a heterodoxy?

[Fragony]

What's a heterodoxy?

RELIGIOUS EXTREMISM

[Hax]

My view on Islam is that it is a set of fables, created by a half civilized desert people a long time ago.

Then it's not Islamophobic, simply Arabophobic.

In any case, I think that cultural practices in that area of the world in this particular time were not less civilised than practices in any other part of the world. You're saying silly things.

[Kadagar_AV]

Then it's not Islamophobic, simply Arabophobic.

In any case, I think that cultural practices in that area of the world in this particular time were not less civilised than practices in any other part of the world. You're saying silly things.

Sorry Hax, I think you read to much islamophobia into things.

Do you think I would rate the contemporary Viking civilization any higher? The Arabic world at that time was a shining beacon that held on to knowledge throughout the western dark ages.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

What's a heterodoxy?

Heresy.

[Papewaio]

So Homodoxy is the truth not a ladyboy?

[Hax]

Sorry Hax, I think you read to much islamophobia into things.

Yeah, because all my posts are about I really love Islam, right? Did you even read my post? I was talking about you making a racist, rather than an Islamophobic statement. Unless of course, you extend that same notion of "half civilised" to other civilisations of the time.

EDIT: My bad, you just did that.

[Idaho]

Couldn't be arsed to read the whole thread. I imagine that someone has already said that most modern "Islamic" beliefs are not based on the Koran but on Arab custom and folklore cobbled together hundreds of years after. The Koran only mentions muhammad twice, doesn't mention Mecca once... Etc.

[total relism]

If you do care about the "truth", then you will drop the "1v1"-thing. All it does is limit the number of possible viewpoints down to 2, as well as limiting the amount of knowledge in those viewpoints. If two people discuss, the maximum amount of knowledge is the sum of the knowledge those two persons have. Add a third, and you've expanded that sum by 50%, assuming all three are at about the same level of knowledge. Add a fourth, and you have twice as much knowledge available as in your "1v"1-consept.

You made another interesting claim earlier though: I got the feeling that you believed your message had hit home when others reacted in a certain way. I believe it was anger, disbelief and general uninterest... Anyway, such reactions does not mean "his points are valid", rather they mean "this discussion is too dumb for me to waste my time on it". Quite the opposite, eh? If people continue to offer rebuttals, however, it may indicate that they are taking your opinions into account and are considering them. That's a big "may" though, the other poster might very well still disregard your posting as rubbish.

If people stop responding to your arguments, your conclusion should not be "he's considering what I'm saying", it shiuld rather be "I haven't presented my argument well enough for the other guy to even consider". I've ran my share of debates into the ground on this forum, and when the person I'm debating stops posting, that's a sure sign my argument is either 1) plain wrong or 2) badly presented.

If you want to check if other posters are taking your opinions into consideration, you will have to follow them over time, and look for sliding changes in opinion. If you see signs of that happening, you can pet yourself on the back and think "jolly well done old sport!" to yourself.

I can see what your saying sure, but when it is a 1v1 than those 2 people can focus 1005 on the topic, that is what I enjoy.


you could be very right in second paragraph, but i think if you go back and read the back and forth's, you will see why the objections have slowly dwindled from certain persons. That is why I believe [this happens all the time on many forums] they bounce around from one objection to another, trying to get one to stick. They never really objected for these reasons, they are excuses.


Thank you for the advice. Nice post. Just wondering, what are your opinions on Islam?.

My view on your stance towards evidence, is that I envy your world view. Must be a much easier place to live in. Too bad it can only be considered delusional.

I feel the same way, there is no better time in history to be atheist, have sex with multiple woman, easy, meet online etc drink/drugs easily and cheep. Than to imagine there is no right and wrong no sin, i dont have to answer to anyone for my thoughts/actions, just die and that is the end. But again, I cannot given the evidence follow that worldview, care to debate me 1v1? what does the evidence support, chirtianity or atheism?.

RELIGIOUS EXTREMISM

Then it's not Islamophobic, simply Arabophobic.

In any case, I think that cultural practices in that area of the world in this particular time were not less civilised than practices in any other part of the world. You're saying silly things.

It is generally called
you have committed the logical fallacy known as chronological snobbery by assuming the age of an idea demonstrates its truth or falsity. The age of the biblical record does not invalidate its witness or render it irrelevant.

people tend to think they are better than others simply because they were born later, and building on what those that came before them created [Muslims included].

[total relism]

Couldn't be arsed to read the whole thread. I imagine that someone has already said that most modern "Islamic" beliefs are not based on the Koran but on Arab custom and folklore cobbled together hundreds of years after. The Koran only mentions muhammad twice, doesn't mention Mecca once... Etc.

This may be true to some extant, but often these customs etc are just the result o following the koran or a "holy" book.But I do disagree on koran only mentioning Muhammad twice, it does often. Mecca is good question 1 sec. Here are some reasons Muslims see mecca as important [posted b-4].

Muhammad was born in mecca
mecca was center of worship before Islam, 360 tribal deities tribes in Arabia made the pilgrimage to mecca before Islam.
week long pilgrimage to mecca pillar number 5
In mecca is the ka'bah a black cubed shape building, they march around it 7 times believing this is were Abraham offered Ishmael as a sacrifice on the alter,they believe Abraham built it. Than they go to 3 pillars to stone it believing they are stoning satan, and freeing themselves from sin for the year. Than they go to the cave they believe Mohammad received revaluations to form Koran

walking around ka'bah at mecca 2.124-130
mecca is called the mother city 6.92-93
pilgrimage to sacred house-shaving heads 2.196
no meat during pilgrimage 5 1-3
pilgrimage to mecca 3.95-100
circling of mosque made for Abraham on pilgrimage 22.25-30
mecca center of islam
only Muslims can enter mecca
on the pilgrimage Muslims go to a place adam and eve found each other outside eden, and spot of final sermon of Muhammad.

[rvg]

Couldn't be arsed to read the whole thread. I imagine that someone has already said that most modern "Islamic" beliefs are not based on the Koran but on Arab custom and folklore cobbled together hundreds of years after. The Koran only mentions muhammad twice, doesn't mention Mecca once... Etc.

Still, Koran all on its own is filled with plenty of hate.

[Hax]

you have committed the logical fallacy known as chronological snobbery by assuming the age of an idea demonstrates its truth or falsity. The age of the biblical record does not invalidate its witness or render it irrelevant.

Where the hell did you get the idea that I was saying anything about truth? I'm not even remotely interested in that, and as a matter of fact, the Qur'an and the Bible as well as the Torah are right next to Harry Potter, the Lord of the Rings and other works of fiction.

[Idaho]

Still, Koran all on its own is filled with plenty of hate.

Not particularly. It's a fairly moderate book, generally just advising and suggesting the wisest course.

[rvg]

Not particularly. It's a fairly moderate book, generally just advising and suggesting the wisest course.

This is just plain false. It's filled with hatred towards Jews and Christians. Loaded with it.

[Idaho]

This may be true to some extant, but often these customs etc are just the result o following the koran or a "holy" book.But I do disagree on koran only mentioning Muhammad twice, it does often. Mecca is good question 1 sec. Here are some reasons Muslims see mecca as important [posted b-4].

Muhammad was born in mecca
mecca was center of worship before Islam, 360 tribal deities tribes in Arabia made the pilgrimage to mecca before Islam.
week long pilgrimage to mecca pillar number 5
In mecca is the ka'bah a black cubed shape building, they march around it 7 times believing this is were Abraham offered Ishmael as a sacrifice on the alter,they believe Abraham built it. Than they go to 3 pillars to stone it believing they are stoning satan, and freeing themselves from sin for the year. Than they go to the cave they believe Mohammad received revaluations to form Koran

walking around ka'bah at mecca 2.124-130
mecca is called the mother city 6.92-93
pilgrimage to sacred house-shaving heads 2.196
no meat during pilgrimage 5 1-3
pilgrimage to mecca 3.95-100
circling of mosque made for Abraham on pilgrimage 22.25-30
mecca center of islam
only Muslims can enter mecca
on the pilgrimage Muslims go to a place adam and eve found each other outside eden, and spot of final sermon of Muhammad.

I made a mistake. Muhammed is mentioned 5 times and jesus 25 times in the Koran. Mecca is not mentioned. A place called Bacca is referred to. It's a site that modern historians think is probably near the dead sea. Mecca was nowheresville back then.

[Idaho]

This is just plain false. It's filled with hatred towards Jews and Christians. Loaded with it.

Possibly lots of criticism of Christianity, but not Judaism. It's a Jewish repost to Christianity.

[rvg]

Possibly lots of criticism of Christianity, but not Judaism.

Yes Judaism. It hates them equally and usually bundles them together when referencing them.

[total relism]

Where the hell did you get the idea that I was saying anything about truth? I'm not even remotely interested in that, and as a matter of fact, the Qur'an and the Bible as well as the Torah are right next to Harry Potter, the Lord of the Rings and other works of fiction.

I was just pointing out his logical fallacie, that he believes he is better than Muslims who lived back at time of Muhammad just because he is born now.

I made a mistake. Muhammed is mentioned 5 times and jesus 25 times in the Koran. Mecca is not mentioned. A place called Bacca is referred to. It's a site that modern historians think is probably near the dead sea. Mecca was nowheresville back then.

mecca and bacca are same thing, koran not written in english. also meeca is mentioned 48:24 And He it is Who held back their hands from you and your hands from them in the valley of Mecca after He had given you victory over them; and Allah is Seeing what you do.

But there is no question to the importance of the city/reasons why for Muslims. also, mecca was leading worship/pilgarmaige place for pre islamic arabia pagans.

Possibly lots of criticism of Christianity, but not Judaism. It's a Jewish repost to Christianity.

both, look to post 20 and 23.

[Idaho]

Here's a link to a site which has selectively chosen and highlighted what it takes to be the most divisive and anti Jewish and Christian passages specifically to further an agenda:

http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/...koranjews.html

I have to say that if that is as bad as it gets when presented in as bad a context as possible then it doesn't amount to much. The worst of it is just saying that God will judge the Jews and Christians and that anyone else who is an unbeliever will feel the wrath. Slightly more tolerant than Christianity really. No one but the inner circle get on the guest list there.

[Hax]

Idaho​, you been readin' Tom Holland?

[Idaho]

No mecca is mecca. Bacca was somewhere else.

[Idaho]

Idaho​, you been readin' Tom Holland?

Yeah I read that. I read a few Bible histories too.