16 February 2007
Allah vs. God
I’ve been reading your articles for a few years now and I agree with you on some points but I disagree with you on others. I’m die hard in favor of your quest to civilize Muslim countries. However when you say outlawing a religion it makes me a bit uneasy
For me personally I frequently get asked this question: Why are you still a Muslim?
There's a story to this. When I started college I met up with quite a few secular progressives and they influenced me a lot. I openly considered myself an atheist. However one day I was on a Train and this madman homeless guy just started cursing and attacking people at random. At that moment the only thing I could say was "Allah help me." Then it hit me that I can fool the world but I cant fool myself...<>
</><>
</>
| For me personally I frequently get asked this question: Why are you still a Muslim? There's a story to this. When I started college I met up with quite a few secular progressives and they influenced me a lot. I openly considered myself an atheist. However one day I was on a Train and this madman homeless guy just started cursing and attacking people at random. At that moment the only thing I could say was "Allah help me." Then it hit me that I can fool the world but I cant fool myself... |
Dear Kamakazi:
I am glad and flattered that despite your disagreement, you still read the site.
As for your calling Allah in the moment of danger, this is natural. If you are jailed you wish that you had wings and could escape. If you are wronged you wish that you were a superman and could take revenge against your oppressors or had a friend who had such powers and could help you. This is part of the human psyche and is necessary for our psychological well being. Children often have all-powerful imaginary friends. Oppressed nations invented messiahs. This is the psychology behind the belief in God. We need this imaginary and all-powerful patron and protector because we are aware of our weakness. In the past we were weaker and completely at the mercy of the nature. So then the belief in God was stronger. As we discover our powers and can overcome the limitations that nature imposes on us, like overcoming our illnesses, avoiding natural calamities, securing for ourselves better life, etc., the belief in God is also weakening. We do not longer need to cling to that imaginary ally and protector for our psychological well-being.
However, I know that all humans are not made alike. Many people still need to cling to God. I am not against that. I consider religion and the belief in God placebos. However, I am not against placebos and I strongly believe they have to be used more extensively. Placebos have the power to cure people and they have a respectable place in the medicine. Likewise, I think the belief in God is important for its placebo effect. This belief can transform the lives of many for the better. It should not be taken away from them. Placebos work for those who do not know they are placebos. If you tell a patient this pill is nothing but sugarcoated compressed starch, the placebo will not have any effect. In order for the placebo to work it must be believed. Unfortunately for me, I know what God is made of and he has no effect on me anymore. But it works wonders for those who believe in Him. Who am I to decry what others get from this belief?
I am not against God. I am against Allah. Allah and God are two different things. Both are figments of human imagination, but there is a world of difference between these two fictitious characters. One is the personification of everything that is good and the other is the incarnation of everything that is evil. If you must believe in a deity, why not believe in a good one? Why should you believe in something created by the mind of a psychopath? Invoke God but do not call upon Allah for he is Satan. God, as thought by Jesus, Zoroaster, Hinduism, and Mithraism is summum bonum. Allah on the other hand is a cunning, deceitful, ruthless, vengeful, sadist demon forged in the image of its creator, Muhammad, who himself was a psychopath narcissist. Allah resembles Muhammad because he is Muhammad’s alter ego.
People often complain why I do not criticize Christianity or other religions. Why should I? If Christianity makes you feel wonderful and makes you be a better person, why should I stop you? I actually encourage you to convert to Christianity or to other good religions that are out there. My only beef is with Islam, its psychopath prophet and its sadist deity.
<>
</>
| Also, another point I would like to make is when you accuse Mohammad of having bad morals. I’m not justifying what he did but that’s a double edged sword right there. In terms of the 8th century what he did fit the norms. He invaded, looted, married underage girls, etc. If you go back in the Bible and ancient history this wasn’t anything new. However in our modern times these things are horrifying. So, Muslims need to realize that these things aren't acceptable anymore in today's world. By our standards today that is bad but if you look at the bigger picture...50 years ago a black man going out with a white woman was suicide. 100 years ago women weren’t even allowed the leave the house. Who is to say that 100 years from now our actions go against the norms of that society? |
This is called moral relativism. Moral relativism is a logical fallacy. First of all 1400 years ago people were not savages. You should read a bit about Buddha, Confucius, Socrates, Plato, Jesus, and Cyrus. What these people said and did are morally acceptable even today. Muhammad was truly evil. His evilness shocked even his own followers but he managed to fool them by making his imaginary friend come out of his sleeve and validate whatever evil thing he committed. Also, no one dreaded to criticize him because they could be killed. This man had created a cult of terror and had total control over his befogged followers in his compound, Medina.
Another fallacy of this argument is that you are saying that Muhammad, who had allegedly come to guide mankind to the right path, himself was caught in the evil deeds of his contemporaries. Doesn’t this disqualify him as a divine teacher? A person who claims to have brought a divine guidance must not follow the evil deeds of his contemporaries but rather he should set a new standard for others to follow.
Another problem with your argument is that if Muhammad was following the evil deeds of his contemporaries and those deeds seem immoral and unjust today, then Muhammad can no longer be a guide to us because the morality of our time is superior to his morality that was the morality of the very people he called jahil (ignorant).
<>
</>
| I think that the message that Muslims have to learn is that you are free to practice your religion as you please as long as you do it in your homes and not try to force it on others. Sometimes the language you use is a bit extreme and turns people off. Most people just want to co exist, not exterminate others. Sincerely, Kamakazi41050 |
Here is the problem. Muslims will follow the examples set by Muhammad and because he followed the examples of a barbaric people, his followers act like those barbarians. You don’t have to be an Einstein to see that something is wrong with this picture.
How can we bring Muslims to the 21st century? Only by discrediting Islam altogether and showing them that Allah is Satan and Muhammad was a psychopath liar. I am afraid there is no other alternative or middle ground. Islam must be rejected in its entirety.
I know my language offends Muslims. I am afraid there is no other way to tell the truth. If truth hurts, Muslims can bury their heads in the sand and point their rear ends towards the sky. I will keep telling the truth, whether they like it of not. My goal is to awaken the non-Muslims. I want to see the end of Islam in the next 25 years and I am going to see it. This will not happen if I had to rely on Muslims to wake up. They are not going to wake up. You yourself are a good example. You have been reading this site for years and all you can do is to rehash the same old and trite fallacies of moral relativism and the need to cling to Allah in the moment of need. Haven’t I addressed these points a hundred times? Why it never sinks in you? Why this much resistance to see the truth? The rest of Muslims are no better than you. Thousands of people have been influenced by this site and have left Islam, but that is just a drop in a lake. This is too slow. Muslims procreate faster. So I am focusing my attention on non-Muslims. I want the entire world see Islam as evil and reject it. Only this will demoralize Muslims and force them to come to their senses and start questioning the absurdities of their faith and its fallacies.
Imagine wherever you go people looking down at you and whisper to each other, “the pedophile worshipper is coming.” You know what they think of you and your evil cult and you will be so much filled with shame that you can’t bear remaining indifferent and content. A day will come that you won’t be able to pull your head out of sand, this time because you know everyone knows what Islam is all about and who was Muhammad. You will be filled with so much shame and humiliation that you will be forced to ask yourself, is it worth it? If Islam is true why I can’t defend it? Where is that Muslim scholar that can answer to the questions that these people ask?
Why you can’t think now? It is because the fear of Allah has paralized your thiniking ability! Thanks to this fear your brain is numbed. We need to give you a pain much bigger than your fear of Allah to counter balance it and force you to think again. This is like giving a electric shock to the patient to make his heart beat again and come back to life. That is the pain of humiliation. When the truth about Islam becomes universally known, you will be humiliated so much that you will have no choice but to use your brain and once you do that you will be out of this misery and will be a free person.
| Allah vs. God | Log-in or register a new user account | 28 Comments | |
| | |
| Comments are statements made by the person that posted them. They do not necessarily represent the opinions of the site editor. |
Re: Allah vs. God(Score: 1)by abeliever on Feb 15, 2007 - 03:56 AM (User information | Send a message |
| There is NO religious scripture on the face of the earth where the word "god" is written in its original manuscript! Because there is no english speaking prophet! Moreover, the word "god" is a misnomer. If you add 's' it becomes plural form of "god", false god! If you add 'dess' it becomes female version of "god"! If you add "father" it becomes "god father"! If you add "mother" it becomes "god mother"! And so on. However, there is no male, female or plural version of "Allah". So, Muslims prefer the word "Allah" to "god". The word “Allah” is unique and it means “The GOD”, absolute. [People often complain why I do not criticize Christianity or other religions. Why should I? If Christianity makes you feel wonderful and makes you be a better person, why should I stop you? I actually encourage you to convert to Christianity or to other good religions that are out there.] - Ali Sina But Alas! ISLAM is the fastest growing religion and more Christians are converting to ISLAM than any other sect! It means that Christianity and other religions are nothing but broken boat! See what Dr. E.B. Hocking has to say about this: "All religions, save the word of Muhammad, are broken boats. They cannot take humanity to the shore of serenity." [Dr. E.B. Hocking] [First of all 1400 years ago people were not savages.] Why then Jesus Christ and Socrates were brutally killed? See what Edward Gibbon has to say about this: "The greatest crime, the greatest ‘sin’ of Mohammad in the eyes of the Christian West is that he did not allow himself to be slaughtered, to be ‘crucified’ by his enemies. He only defended himself, his family and his followers; and finally vanquished his enemies. Mohammad’s success is the Christians’ gall of disappointment: He did not believe in any vicarious sacrifices for the sins of others." [Edward Gibbon] [Another problem with your argument is that if Muhammad was following the evil deeds of his contemporaries and those deeds seem immoral and unjust today, then Muhammad can no lover be a guide to us because the morality of our time is superior to his morality that was the morality of the very people he called jahil (ignorant).] Mr. Sina is talking about hearsays and Sira that are not any integral part of Islam! These are sheer optional. It is the Quran that Muslims have to follow (not hearsays and Sira) and Quran is the best Book among all in any regard. [I want to see the end of Islam in the next 25 years and I am going to see it.] Muslims will be the majority in the next 25-50 years. So, you are obviously dreaming! |
-
Re: Allah vs. God
(Score: 1)
by kathasarita (allah_ho_suwar@hotmail.com) on Feb 15, 2007 - 04:36 AM
(User information | Send a message"[I want to see the end of Islam in the next 25 years and I am going to see it.]
Muslims will be the majority in the next 25-50 years. So, you are obviously dreaming!"
Well bacteria , germs , virus and all evils like Islam may spread like any epidemic but modern science has a cure for that or it will find a cure for that .By spreading like a disease, Islam can never prove its great/evilness. The fact is ,now, thanks to Internet every intelligent Muslim including the "Muslims by birth "are coming to know about evils of Islam and are leaving en-mass when ever they find opportune moment and place like western countries.
[ Sorry! Unregistered users cannot contribute comments. Please log-in or register a new user account ]
-
Re: Allah vs. God
(Score: 1)
by ugee on Feb 15, 2007 - 07:58 AM
(User information | Send a messageDear abeliever,
When Ali Sina uses word God, it means that supernatural power who is the creator of the universe. This super natural power can be called by any name in various languages. God is God whatever you call him.
" Islam is the maximum growing religion of the world". I have heard it thousands of time on this site and when they are given the fact that most of the muslim countries are highly backward and the Quafir west is so advanced than again a famous argument comes "There is not a single country which is a true Muslim State."
Is it not very strange that Islam is growing fast but its followers are not able to create even a single true islamic state.
I am a keen reader of this site and i have seen that the argumens of muslims keep on changing depending upon what suits them at that particular time. We quafirs can see through it and so we are convinced in most of the things ali sina says.
This site is not for Muslims as I donot expect them to change. But this is very good for non-muslims as they now know the danger that we are facing.
I also donot agree that Islam woud be wiped out in 25 yrs. but a beginning has been made. This is the First time Islam is facing intellectual attack. Let us see what happens?
[ Sorry! Unregistered users cannot contribute comments. Please log-in or register a new user account ]
-
Re: Allah vs. God
(Score: 1)
by abeliever on Feb 15, 2007 - 08:31 AM
(User information | Send a message[This is the First time Islam is facing intellectual attack. Let us see what happens?]
Maybe this is the first time you are watching this kind of ' intellectual attack'! But the FACT is that Islam is facing intellectual attack since its inception. Just watch this short video and see what is going on.
http://muslimr.com/videos/MUSLIMR@160/56/
[ Sorry! Unregistered users cannot contribute comments. Please log-in or register a new user account ]
-
Re: Allah vs. God
(Score: 1)
by Mike on Feb 15, 2007 - 09:46 AM
(User information | Send a messageThe muslim world is 600 years behind the whole world. China, Japan, the West, Russia and even India is doing better than the Muslim world. In India, there is still poor people but they have made progress in the last ten years, unlike the muslim world. The problem with muslims is arrogance. When you constantly say that islam is rational it leads to a lack of progress. Progress can only be made by being open minded, NOT rational. Why? Because in the past it was rational to believe that the earth was flat. To say that the earth was a sphere was irrational because people thought that you may fall off the planet. Thus, it takes two qualities to progress....1) you need to be curious about life 2) you need to have an open mind. Muslims have neither because all they talk about is how rational islam is, but as I mentioned whats rational and not rational changes over time. Rationality is based upon perception, until scientific truth comes along. Alot of Einsteins theory's sounded irrational to some, but they were true. So when a muslim says that the quran is rational, that is just based on perception. In THEIR minds its rational.
For example, the quran says that the earth is like a bed. A BED IS FLAT. There is no such thing as a spherical bed. I have never slept on a spherical bed. But muslims PERCIEVE this as scientific, because rationality is based upon perception(as mentioned people believed that many things were rational until they were proven wrong). Other verses claim that the earth is spread out like a carpet. A CARPET IS SPREAD FLAT ON THE FLOOR. The earth is not a spherical carpet, its just a sphere. Therefore, the muslim mind is in a mental prison that they cannot get out of. For example, why do muslims continually come to this site and criticize it. If they dont like it then they do not have to come. But, they are in a mental prison of islam where they feel like they have to defend their perception of reality. They hold on to their perception of reality and are afraid to let go. Why? Because to let go of your entire perception of reality is SCARY. Because afterwards, they will feel lost and confused. All people who are extremely religiously devout hold on tightly to their religion. They are afraid of it being proven wrong because its their whole life. Most muslims are truth-o-phobic.
[ Sorry! Unregistered users cannot contribute comments. Please log-in or register a new user account ]
-
Re: Allah vs. God
(Score: 1)
by abeliever on Feb 15, 2007 - 10:16 AM
(User information | Send a message[For example, the quran says that the earth is like a bed. A BED IS FLAT. There is no such thing as a spherical bed. I have never slept on a spherical bed.]
True, but it's you who are irrational. Because you can't think differently. You have never slept on a spherical bed does not anyway mean that spherical bed is logically impossible. Or does it?
Moreover, by the word “bed” or “carpet” it doesn’t mean the “size” or “shape” of the earth! It means that the outer surface of the earth is inhabitable or comfortable like “bed” or “carpet” (it’s an allegory). Because the inner part of the earth is very hot and as such not inhabitable. Many translators didn't even use the words “bed” and “carpet”. Moreover, the bed can also be spherical. The earth is a big spherical bed for all the humans. Why not?
[But muslims PERCIEVE this as scientific, because rationality is based upon perception(as mentioned people believed that many things were rational until they were proven wrong). Other verses claim that the earth is spread out like a carpet. A CARPET IS SPREAD FLAT ON THE FLOOR. The earth is not a spherical carpet, its just a sphere.]
Again it is you whose mind is in mental prison. Because you can’t accept the fact. Is it impossible to spread carpet on a spherical object? Of course not. So, it’s yours problem, not ours. If something is logically acceptable then where is the problem to accept it? If it is not ego then what is?
[ Sorry! Unregistered users cannot contribute comments. Please log-in or register a new user account ]
-
Re: Allah vs. God
(Score: 1)
by Mike on Feb 15, 2007 - 12:06 PM
(User information | Send a messageabeliever,
You said, "Again it is you whose mind is in mental prison". I think you missed the point. I was trying to make the point that things are considered rational, UNTIL science comes along. Science is NOT based on perception. The law of gravity is not perception. If I study science, that is not my perception. Science is based on provable laws. Therefore, it is not I who live in a mental prison but you and the rest of the muslim world. You cannot debate this fact. The west is far far far more advanced scientifically then the middle east. That's why I said muslims live in a mental prison. Can a muslim tell Albert Einstein that he lives in a mental prison just because he is not a muslim. If an individual studies science and sees errors in the quran then it is not based on perception but fact.
You said, "Moreover, by the word “bed” or “carpet” it doesn’t mean the “size” or “shape” of the earth! It means that the outer surface of the earth is inhabitable or comfortable like “bed” or “carpet” (it’s an allegory)."
lololol
How do you know?? Is the artic inhabitable? Most of the earth is covered by water. If Allah wanted humanity to accept his holy book then why didnt he put clear scientific evidence in it? Doesnt the Quran claim to be clear? Science is not perception. Only religion is! If Islam is scientific then show me the proof. Show me such a scientific verse from the quran that only God could have known back then. Free me from my mental prison with the wonderful science from the quran. Dont show me verses that is based on perception, but real scientific versus. Lets see the proof............
[ Sorry! Unregistered users cannot contribute comments. Please log-in or register a new user account ]
-
Re: Allah vs. God
(Score: 1)
by abeliever on Feb 15, 2007 - 01:00 PM
(User information | Send a message[How do you know?? Is the artic inhabitable?]
Of course! Lots of fish and animals are there. Are you only thinking about human? Gosh! Can fish and animals survive inside the earth (say 5-10 km)? NO!
[If Islam is scientific then show me the proof. Show me such a scientific verse from the quran that only God could have known back then. Free me from my mental prison with the wonderful science from the quran. Dont show me verses that is based on perception, but real scientific versus]
There is a misconception around. Let me clarify you one thing. No big scholar says that Islam is scientific. Had Muhammad used any scientific instrument to collect scientific data? NO! Had he claimed himself as a scientist? NO! Had the then people used to call him a scientist? NO! What some scholars try to say is this:
A. Quran doesn't contradict with Established Scientific FACT.
B. There are some events mentioned in the Quran in a nutshell that were unknown to human in and around 7th century but later on science has confirmed those events.
For example:
1. The event of "Big Bang" is mentioned in the Quran in a nutshell:
21:30 Do not the Unbelievers see that the heavens and the earth were joined together as one unit of creation, before we clove them asunder?
2. The "expanding universe" is mentioned in the Quran in a nutshell:
51:47 And it is We Who have built the Universe, and behold, We are steadily expanding it.
3. The idea of "Finger Print" is mentioned in the Quran in a nutshell:
75:4 Nay, We are able to put together in perfect order the very tips of his fingers.
Although there are many issues yet I have mentioned only three points. The above events were totally unknown to human in and around 7th century. In fact, these are recent discovery. It is now absolutely up to you how would you view issues like the above.
[ Sorry! Unregistered users cannot contribute comments. Please log-in or register a new user account ]
-
Re: Allah vs. God
(Score: 1)
by Mike on Feb 15, 2007 - 02:53 PM
(User information | Send a messageDo you enjoy being a brain washed zombie? Your mullahs have trained you well in the art of stupidity....
your big bang theory has already been disproven at http://www.mukto-mona.com/Articles/avijit/Quran_miracle.htm....it says...
Some Muslim interpreters tries to relate the above mentioned sura with Big-Bang. But does it really depicts any fact about Big-bang at all? Lets look the next verses to understand the Qur’anic image ...
21:30 Have not those who disbelieve known that the heavens and the earth were of one piece, then We parted them, and we made every living thing of water? Will they not then believe?
21:31 And We have placed in the earth firm hills lest it quake with them, and We have placed therein ravines as roads that haply they may find their way.
21:32 And we have made the sky a roof withheld (from them). Yet they turn away from its portents.
For further clarification let us also quote verse from Sura Al-Rad (13:2)
Allah it is Who raised up the heavens without visible supports, then mounted the Throne, and compelled the sun and the moon to be of service, each runneth unto an appointed term; He ordereth the course; He detaileth the revelations, that haply ye may be certain of the meeting with your Lord.
It looks like a very primitive image on the relationship between the heavens and earth. After Allah raise up the heavens on unseen pillars, and put down the earth, he put the mountains on the earth to not quake, like putting a heavy thing on a piece of paper to not fly?! Allah make the sky a roof withheld to not fall on people head?! How he do so? By putting the heavens on unseen pillars!! How could one pass these as twentieth century science? Still more strange is this part of verse 21:30:…the heavens and the earth were of one piece, then we parted them, …..’ If these few words are really the proof of ‘Big-Bang’, then one may legitimately ask; where is the mention of the huge explosion? The word ‘Big-Bang’, itself, is very significant here. Where do we find the sign of that famous ‘Bang?’ [5]
Moreover, Big Bang in Physics refers to the explosion of SPACE-TIME SINGULARITY (not matter). Matter was not even created when Big Bang happened. Earth was formed billions of years after the Big Bang. The above verses are clearly referring to earth and sky being "joined" (which doesn't even have a common sense or scientific meaning) together and then being split apart (again no scientific or common sense meaning), forget about comparing it to Big Bang!
[ Sorry! Unregistered users cannot contribute comments. Please log-in or register a new user account ]
-
-
Re: Allah vs. God
(Score: 1)
by Mike on Feb 15, 2007 - 02:55 PM
(User information | Send a message[ADH-DHARIYAT 51:48] And the earth, We have made it a wide extent; how well have We then spread (it) out.
Islamic scholars try to relate the above mentioned ayat with expanding universe. But there is no mention of "universe" at all in this verse. This verse here is only talking about earth. "Spreading the earth out "does not correlate with any expansion of universe by any means, rather it establishes century old incorrect Qur’anic flat earth theory [6].
Some Islamic scholars also use to quote the previous verse (51:47) of the same Soorat az-Zaariyaat to justify the identical claim. For example, one of these popular claims put forth by Harun Yaha, a renowned Islamic scholar of Muslim community wrote in his article “THE SIGNS OF THE QUR'AN”:
Another truth revealed in the Qur'an is the expansion of the universe that was discovered in the late 1920s. Hubble's discovery of the red shift in the spectrum of starlight is revealed in the Qur'an as:
It is We Who have built the universe with (Our creative) power, and, verily, it is We Who are steadily expanding it. (Surat adh-Dhariyat: 47)
The first important point to ponder whether is the actual statements of the Qur’an have been honestly presented here. Mr. Yaha quotes the Qur’an as saying in 51:47 “It is We Who have built the universe with (Our creative) power, and, verily, it is We Who are steadily expanding it”
The purpose of the above translation could have served well for Mr. Yaha and his gullible followers, but not the sceptics for obvious reasons. Let me quote the three most highly regarded English translations that generally available in the Net [18]. Their versions are:
051.047
YUSUFALI: With power and skill did We construct the Firmament: for it is We Who create the vastness of pace.
PICKTHAL: We have built the heaven with might, and We it is Who make the vast extent (thereof).
SHAKIR: And the heaven, We raised it high with power, and most surely We are the makers of things ample.
None among the above mentioned translators gives the slightest idea of an ongoing expansion of the universe. In fact, none of them refers to the “universe” at all, but to the heavens or firmament, in contrast to the Yaha immediately following which discusses the earth in the following verse (051.048) that I explained previously. Denish Giron also explained in one of his wonderfully written pieces that the verb from which the Arabic word (moosi'oon) is derived cannot mean ‘expand’ [19].
Also, according to Dr. Ali Sina the word used here is moosiAAoona which drives from word vaseun. [24] It means vast. It has nothing to do with expanding. When one says al rezwano vaseun it refers, 'the garden is vast'. It does not mean that the garden is expanding. Any Arab standing in the clear nights of the desert could lookup at the sky and see that it was vast. Muhammad is stating the obvious. There is no scientific miracle or prophecy in this.
[ Sorry! Unregistered users cannot contribute comments. Please log-in or register a new user account ]
-
-
Re: Allah vs. God
(Score: 1)
by Mike on Feb 15, 2007 - 03:04 PM
(User information | Send a messageyou say, "The idea of "Finger Print" is mentioned in the Quran in a nutshell:
75:4 Nay, We are able to put together in perfect order the very tips of his fingers."
lololol .... It talks about putting your finger tips in perfect order. Finger prints are not put in perfect order. They are unique to each individual, but this verse doesnt mention a unique finger print. Thats what science says, that every person has a unique finger print but this verse doesnt reveal that fact. WOW!! You enjoy the lies of your religious leaders. Does it help you sleep better at night. Before you tell us anymore "scientific evidence" maybe you should read around this site in order to make sure that it hasnt already been disproven. ALRIGHT! One more question...if the Quran was scientifically accurate then these discoveries should have been made in the muslim world BEFORE it was made in the West. Muslims just reinterrupt the Quran after the fact. STOP WASTING YOUR LIFE ON NONSENSE!!!
[ Sorry! Unregistered users cannot contribute comments. Please log-in or register a new user account ]
-
Re: Allah vs. God
(Score: 1)
by abeliever on Feb 15, 2007 - 03:56 PM
(User information | Send a messageDon't think that all Muslims are stupid. There are some stupid people in every society. Let's read the two consecutive verses:
75.3: Does the human being think that we will not reconstruct his bones?
75.4: Nay, We are able to put together in perfect order the very tips of his fingers.
The verses are talking about reconstruction of human’s bones (i.e. humans). To reconstruct a human’s bones out of billions one needs to identify the person first. Without identifying a person how do you reconstruct him/her? So, the unique finger tips/print will be used to first identify a person and then s/he will be reconstructed accordingly.
BTW, why didn't the verse use the tip of nose? Why didn't it use the tip of hair? Why didn't it use the tip of penis? Why it has used the tip of fingers that exactly matches with finger print technology? Can you answer this question?
[One more question...if the Quran was scientifically accurate then these discoveries should have been made in the muslim world BEFORE it was made in the West.]
This is a different issue and it has nothing to do with what we are talking about.
[ Sorry! Unregistered users cannot contribute comments. Please log-in or register a new user account ]
-
Re: Allah vs. God
(Score: 1)
by Mike on Feb 16, 2007 - 09:16 AM
(User information | Send a message75.3: Does the human being think that we will not reconstruct his bones?
75.4: Nay, We are able to put together in perfect order the very tips of his fingers.
If it talks about the reconstruction of bones and then says "we are able to put together in perfect order"....then what is put in perfect order? The bones of the finger! If it was talking about finger prints then why didnt it mention the skin of the fingers. Cant Allah speak properly. Theres an expression that says "I felt joy from the top of my head to my toes" or "I felt happyness right down to my finger tips". The Quran is clearly talking about finger bones. It talks about the reconstruction of all the bones of the body right down to the finger tips. It doesnt say "we are able to distinguish you by your finger tips", it talks about bones then says "We are able to put together in perfect order...". Why doesnt it mention the skin or the fact that the finger tips distinguish each person.
you said "BTW, why didn't the verse use the tip of nose? Why didn't it use the tip of hair? Why didn't it use the tip of penis?" lolol Because none of what you mentioned is a bone. Hair nor nose nor penis is a bone. The verse is clearly talking about bones then mentions finger bones, the reconstruction of bones right down to the tips. How do I know this? Because it never talks about any distinguishing feature of the tips.
you quoted me...
[One more question...if the Quran was scientifically accurate then these discoveries should have been made in the muslim world BEFORE it was made in the West.]
then you said...
"This is a different issue and it has nothing to do with what we are talking about."
SURE IT DOES. If this verse meant finger prints then muslim scientists should have said it before the west. Why is it that the Quran says unscientific things, then muslims reinterpret only AFTER western scientists prove it wrong. Even modern translations of the Quran are altered to sound more scientific. I saw versus from an old Quran and compared it to a modern translation and the translation is very different to make it sound more scientific. If any of these versus were scientific then the muslim should be teaching the west science and not the other way around. Besides, the Quran claims to be perfect, therefore if just ONE verse is disproven then that means that the whole Quran is wrong. Do you really believe that the Quran is perfect? Then why is it that every 20 years, muslim leaders have to reinterpret the Quran to make it fit science. This site has already disproven at least one verse. Many versus have been disproven. If its not perfect then the whole thing is a lie.
[ Sorry! Unregistered users cannot contribute comments. Please log-in or register a new user account ]
-
-
-
-
-
Re: Allah vs. God
(Score: 1)
by kathasarita (allah_ho_suwar@hotmail.com) on Feb 15, 2007 - 04:19 AM
(User information | Send a messageDear ;Kamakazi41050.
Your story is good .
" one day I was on a Train and this madman homeless guy just started cursing and attacking people at random. At that moment the only thing I could say was "Allah help me."
But I am going to tale you another true story .
" the Japanese was a longtime customer at a Greek restaurant, because he had discovered that they made especially tasty fried rice. Each evening he would come in the restaurant , and order " flied lice."
This always caused the Greek restaurant owner to roll on the floor with laughter.
Eventually the customer's pride was so hurt that he took a special diction lesson just to be able to say "fried rice" correctly. The next time he went to the restaurant he said very plainly, " fried rice, please."
Unable to believe his ears, the Greek restaurant owner said, " Sir ,would you repeat that?"
The Japanese replied , " You heard what I said , you Gleek plick!"
The thing is how long can you go on pretending ?The reality is going to come up some time or other, and it is better that it comes sooner.
"I’m die hard in favor of your quest to civilize Muslim countries". But fact is,
you yourself is just a die hard Muslim a charlatan who thinks "it's easy to make a fool of all Infidels"
I wish you best of luck against Ali Sina.
Re: Allah vs. God
(Score: 1)
by Passionate Conscience on Feb 15, 2007 - 10:51 AM
(User information | Send a messageAbeliever,
The world’s fastest growing religion is MONEY and Chinese people are the fastest growing role model for the world. Everyone is now looking up to China and Chinese people to teach their own communities on how to be rich and successful in life. Nobody is ever going to see Islam as a role model. Islam has nothing to show aside from backwardness and poverty. Islam is simply a waste of time and life.
Anyone who thinks that Mohammed’s greatest sin is NOT to allow himself to be crucified obviously has a chronic disease of immorality. Edward Gibbon is certainly such a moron. By the way, I never heard of that guy’s name. Who is he? Your invention?
Why do Muslims like to quote people’s comments as if their words carry some weight? Such a lack of self confidence that you need others to back you up.
The word Allah is unique and means the God? That is absolutely ridiculous! Tian Kong is the most unique name for God. Chinese language is definitely the BEST in the world. God loves Chinese calligraphy and as such, He only loves to be called Tian Kong. Chinese people have been blessed greatly by Tian Kong – The One and Only True God, The Creator of Universe. We are the GREATEST people in the world. We are unstoppable. We fear no other people, definitely not that Arab Allah. We are simply not afraid of Islamic Hellfire - unlike you, the longest-serving loser coward…
-
Re: Allah vs. God
(Score: 1)
by abeliever on Feb 15, 2007 - 01:19 PM
(User information | Send a message[Tian Kong is the most unique name for God. Chinese language is definitely the BEST in the world. God loves Chinese calligraphy and as such, He only loves to be called Tian Kong.]
By the way, I never heard of Tian Kong's name! Is it he or she? Or your invention?
[ Sorry! Unregistered users cannot contribute comments. Please log-in or register a new user account ]
Re: Allah vs. God
(Score: 1)
by Passionate Conscience on Feb 15, 2007 - 10:52 AM
(User information | Send a messageDear Ali Sina,
I think you should try to adopt a new strategy for the debate.
In the opening of the debate, I am comfortable with Zaheer’s and your general statements. To be fair, all debates start that way. But this has gone for 15 rounds and it is time for us to read the details.
I realize that every time you forced him to discuss some detailed instances, Zaheer would find a way to evade and divert our attention to other issues. He was able to do this because you gave him the chance to.
In your past written responses, you attacked Islam on too many fronts. This has allowed Zaheer to skip, jump and group events to his liking and offer us a misleading conclusion.
An obvious example of how he tried to fool us, the readers, can be seen by his statements to conclude the motives of Mohammed’s killings. He wrote:
In his 14th response:
“The possibility of killings mentioned in the Qur’an are either meant for those who were guilty of murder, or causing mischief on earth, or those who were declared unworthy of living in this world anymore after they had denied the clearly communicated and understood message from God.”
In his 15th response:
“As for the battles with non-believers and the later possibility of killings of some people, I have mentioned it several times that such events happened either when battles were forced upon Muslims or when at the culmination of the prophetic mission God inflicted his punishment on the intransigent disbelievers”
He had proven himself very repetitive and tried very much to evade the whole issue of murders by deceitfully offering a simple but very misleading conclusion. He knew that had he been pushed to discuss each case of killings in detail, such a conclusion would be simply impossible.
I suggest that you pick your STRONGEST case against Mohammed – just ONE, and talk nothing about other issues. This way, you will push Zaheer to discuss the issue and he cannot evade. When facing an evasive opponent, unfortunately you have to do an extra work. Not only you still need to answer him but you also need to “guide” him. You must restrict his movements and allow no gap for him to escape.
Be very careful with your writing, do not dwell on other subjects - strictly ONE topic until he runs out of gas and would have to justify his standing with some foolish reasons – which I am sure will amuse us.
Then cut him there, offer your summary and conclusion the minute you find him talking nonsense. Highlight the evil and how Zaheer defended it unreasonably (just like you always do). Then you can quickly move onto the next case! Do this every time you catch his unreasonable justifications. This will go for tens of rounds, but it does not matter.
The pleasure is yours at the end of the debate when you write the end summary of the debate – do not forget to quote Zaheer’s stupid responses.
Perhaps we could move ahead faster this way.
PS: I am not saying that these 15 rounds have gone to waste. Already many readers have seen how evasive and in denial Zaheer is. You have done well in catching some of his stupid responses. It is just that I believe with one topic at a time, Zaheer will need to write more stupidity and perhaps he will do a better job convincing us how evil his doctrine is than you do.
-
Re: Allah vs. God
(Score: 1)
by abeliever on Feb 15, 2007 - 12:24 PM
(User information | Send a messageI suggest that you pick your STRONGEST case against Mohammed – just ONE, and talk nothing about other issues. This way, you will push Zaheer to discuss the issue and he cannot evade. Be very careful with your writing, do not dwell on other subjects - strictly ONE topic until he runs out of gas and would have to justify his standing with some foolish reasons – which I am sure will amuse us.]
Hahaha ... who could be more ultra idiot than you? I didn't know that Chinese are so stupid! So far haven't you understood that Ali Sina can't stand before Khaled Zaheer in one-to-one point debate? And that's why Ali Sina goes wild with too many issues in every part? And this has been his trick all along? To make fool of his foolhardy and brain-dead followers like you?
In fact, it is Khaled Zaheer who proposed one-to-one debate in the very beginning but Ali Sina has avoided his proposal!
[ Sorry! Unregistered users cannot contribute comments. Please log-in or register a new user account ]
Re: Allah vs. God
(Score: 1)
by Leading to truth on Feb 15, 2007 - 11:01 AM
(User information | Send a messageExcellent! I salute Ali Sina for wonerful thoughts,
Muslims are in the habit of taking false pride of Islam. I use to remain surrounded by muslims all the time so below is the one simple example of their evil manner and attitude.
Long time back story, at women and men gathering. it may sound childish to some readers: It is about one film dipicting prevalent social culture. Once we were discussing about this new released film in which 3 actresses played role in it. Out of three, two were muslim actresses and one was Hindu. Now role of one muslim and hindu actress in film was very significant and at great lenght. They both are great actresses in their own way. Their acting had been applauded in many films. Another muslim actress who had just enterd in film industry had a side role, one can say. She is good actress too though.
Once the film was watched by many and reviewed all over, people started praising the significant role played by hindu and one muslim actresses. Of course people will notice their acting much as they were in leading roles. But now my all muslim friends had other version, in front of hindus they will boast of and praise only two muslim actresses, leaving hindu actress behind this two. They were ignoring to praise that hindu actress like anything as if she was not even existing in the film. I was wondering how one(muslims) can ignore the fact so bluntly? When very few noticed the acting of newly enetered muslim actress due to her side role. And infact all non-muslims were happy about both leading actresses.
So I questioned them why are they so happy with only two muslim names? Because i found them racist and delibrately being rude. They started ignoring my question like, get out of the way attitude.
Next day I showed them an artcle written in film magazine revealing the fact that other newlyt enetred muslim woman is hindu, born to hindu mother and father, however was brought up by muslim father as her mother remarried muslim man and that is how she acquired her muslim name.
They got so disgusted and started saying "magazine always spread false news". Not ready to accept even a truth said by the actress herself. As now they have to praise Hindu woman. Nope! they cant do that.
That is very short and simple example of how they take false pride in everything that is Muslim and Islam without judging and using their brain.
Re: Allah vs. God
(Score: 1)
by abeliever on Feb 15, 2007 - 01:36 PM
(User information | Send a message[While Chinese, Indian and Europeans have developed wheel-carts to link its towns, I have no doubt that Arabs were still comfortable with camels to travel around.] - Passionate
You idiot! You are in deep darkness about world history!
"Between the middle of the eighth and the beginning of the thirteenth centuries, as we have noted before, the Arabic-speaking peoples were the main bearers of the torch of culture and civilization throughout the world. Moreover they were the medium through which ancient science and philosophy were recovered, supplemented and transmitted in such a way as to make possible the renaissance of Western Europe. In all this, Arabic Spain had a large share." - Phillip K Hitti
"In only a few decades Arab scholars assimilated what had taken the Greeks centuries to develop." - Phillip K Hitti
The Encyclopedia Britannica has affirmed the supremacy and excellence of Arabs in scientific fields as follows:
"During the almost 1,000 years that science was dormant in Europe, the Arabs, who by the 9th century had extended their sphere of influence as far as Spain, became the custodians of science and dominated biology, as they did other disciplines."
“The supremacy of the East was not only military. Science, philosophy, poetry, and the arts, all flourished in the Muhammadan world at a time when Europe was sunk in barbarism. Europeans, with unpardonable insularity, call this period ‘the Dark Ages’: but it was only in Europe that it was dark --indeed only in Christian Europe, for Spain, which was Muhammadan, had a brilliant culture.” - Bertrand Russell
“It must be owned that all the knowledge whether of Physics, Astronomy, Philosophy or Mathematics, which flourished in Europe from the 10th century was originally derived from the Arabian schools, and the Spanish Saracen may be looked upon as the father of European philosophy.” - John Davenport
“It is highly probable that but for the Arabs, modern European civilization would have never assumed that character which has enabled it to transcend all previous phases of evolution. For although there is not a single aspect of human growth in which the decisive influence of Islamic culture is not traceable, nowhere is it so clear and momentous as in the genesis of that power which constitutes the paramount distinctive force of the modern world and the supreme course of its victory -- natural sciences and the scientific spirit. What we call sciences arose in Europe as a result of a new spirit of inquiry; of new methods of investigation, of the method of experiment, observation, measurement, of the development of Mathematics in a form unknown to the Greeks. That spirit and those methods were introduced into the European world by the Arabs.” - Robert Briffault
“The Book revealed to Muhammad is one and unique of its kind. It has left indelible impression on the hearts of humanity. Nothing can overcome its majesty. The Qura’n has given new dimensions to human thinking - Surprising reforms, stunning success!” - Rev. B. Margoliouth
“The Christian World came to wage crusades against Muslims but eventually knelt before them to gain knowledge. They were spellbound to see that Muslims were owners of a culture that was far superior to their own. The Dark Ages of Europe were illuminated by nothing but the beacon of Muslim civilization.” - F.J.C. Hearushaw
“The number of verses in Qur’an inviting close observation of nature are several times more than those that relate to prayer, fasting, pilgrimage etc. all put together. The Muslim under its influence began to observe nature closely and this gives birth to the scientific spirit of the observation and experiment which was unknown to the Greeks.” - Prof. K. S. Ramakrishna Rao
"The Muslims have consolidated the works of the Greeks, Persians, Indians and Chaldeans in medicine and have themselves contributed much to these sciences. For example, they have, more often, studied critically the works of Galen and Hippocrates, discovered their errors and have corrected their faulty views. They have even translated and edited many of their works with such acumen that they have become original works. They have even introduced the art of writing commentaries, glossaries and addenda on the works of the ancients. The supplementaries added by Ibne Jaljal to Materia Medica by Dioscorides contains the description of certain drugs which were not known to the predecessors.14 by Dioscorides contains the description of certain drugs which were not known to the predecessors." - Jurji Zaidan
“The Arabs became proficient in arithmetic, algebra, geometry, astronomy, mechanics and other allied subjects. They have been profited from the works in these subjects by the Indians and the Greeks. They even conducted such of the experiments which were not known to the Greeks. Many unprejudiced orientalists have acknowledged the innovations made by them. These were not known to either the Greeks or the Indians.” - Ahmed Ameen
“What the Arabs have done to the revival of the ancient Greek sciences is beyond expectatio09:05 Posted in Real Islam | Permalink | Comments (0) |
Facebook | -
The comments are closed.