Added: 3 years ago
From: 1RadicalOne
Views: 882
Sort by time | Sort by thread (beta)

Link to this comment:

Share to:

All Comments (185)

Sign In or Sign Up now to post a comment!
  • I am struck silent by the truthfulness of the truth of your words.

  • This fellow knows what religion offers, and his knowledge is deep and his arguments are correct. Want to know more truth, view my vids.

  • So many atheists on YouTube!  Did you see atheistichappiness attack religion.

  • great Video 5 stars!!!!

  • I'll keep this short, the Bible says it all, scientific facts that were foretold thousand of years ago, for example, The Bible foretells us Alexander the Great, and what happens before AND after him, I can send you a link for it if you wish but after reading your previous comments to others I doubt your open-minded. The Book of revelation has foretold what will happen and what has happend so far. People who say the Bible contradicts itself are clearly blind to the fact that there are none.

  • First off, I have seen the "the bible predicted this" "proof" before. It always ends up being like Nostradamus' supposed predictions, that being vague, multi-applicable, and therefore meaningless.

    No contradictions? Try the account of Jesus' resurrection. Two of the apostles seem to disagree on some rather significant matters.

    Also have a look at Matthew. He seems to diverge from the other accounts on many topics.

  • Ok, thanks I'll take a look, mind sending the specific links?

    God Bless

  • Here is one concerning the aforementioned tomb discrepancy:

    watch?v=eBvS7kfWCgg

    Here are a few "Matthewian" contradictions:

    Matt 19:26 vs Judges 1:19

    Matt 13:12 vs Psalm 92:15 (and more)

    Matt 7:8 vs Proverbs 1:28

    Matt 8:5-7 vs Luke 7:3-7

    As the last example I can fit in this comment, have a look at Genesis one and two. They disagree on the process and order of creation, and therefore at least one is wrong (and they also therefore came from different authors of different opinions).

  • Are you saying you won't listen to a non-Muslim? If so, there's no point in debating you.

  • "There are many Muslim scholars that no [sic] Arabic than any other athiest [sic] out there"

    Prove they know more.

  • Oh, please. Not the "only the original Arabic Quran is true, all other versions distort the 'true' message" canard.

  • Jihad doesn't mean holy war? Argue with Oxford University Press. Firestone, Rueven (1999). Jihad: The Origin of Holy War in Islam. Oxford University Press. ISBN 019-5125800.

  • Argue with Oxford Unversity press r u seriosue man. Y dont u ask a muslim what jihad means???

  • So you ARE saying you won't listen to a non-Muslim.

  • No i am not saying that but I rather go to an expert. Would u go to a muslim and ask him about evlution. I sugguest u watch some of dr zakir naik video on jihad. This man knows arabic and will explain what jihad means

  • Would I go to a Muslim? Sure, if they were a biologist qualified in the field of evolutionary biology.

  • Well I gave u a source so u can search it up dr zakir naik is an expert in islam so my sugguestion is to watch his videos on jihad. And if u dont accpeted the truth that fine

  • @bosnianmuslim22

    "but there r thing that r unquie in the quran but only in the arabic language"

    ...HUH??? why only in the Arabic language?? that's not too smart then is it...? so then logically that would mean only Arabian people should follow the quran and nobody else...that of course is fine with me, since I would never even be interested to follow the rules and regulations of super primitive fairytales..

  • @VastSupremacy The quran is unque in arabic because if u change the langauge u change some of its meaning. If u translate the quran to english for instance it will have the same message for most part but doesnt have the same effect because of the unquie language it use. By the way there has been proof of Moses spliting the sea and a flood occuring during Noahs time

  • @VastSupremacy And no the quran is every1 but since its the literal word of god it has to be recited in arabic while praying

  • You have to prove the assertion that the Qu'ran is the "literal word of god".

    You do realize the Christians make the EXACT same claim.

  • @1RadicalOne No wrong the Christians say that the bible was the inspired word of god. Not the actual literal word of god. And if u do actually read the holy quran it is from gods prespective.

  • Then explain this quote from the late Jerry Falwell, one of the most influential preachers of the century:

    "The Bible is the inerrant, literal word of the living God. It is absolutely infallible, without error in all matters pertaining to faith and practice, as well as in areas such as geography, science, history, etc."

  • @1RadicalOne What is there to explain. Look at the bible itself. Where is there a bible according to god? its all according to matthew, mark, luke, john. So it obvously wasnt the literal word of god.

  • I agree, though for somewhat different reasons. The bible is a load of crap, and a great deal of it is very violent disgusting crap.

    My point is that the "[scripture] is the word of god" is a claim made by at least four religions, all with the exact same "evidence".

  • @1RadicalOne Ok but ti still isnt the literal word of god. It is the word of men schaulers. But not the actual word of god. The quran means the recitation. Which is the actual word of god. 

  • So your argument is that its name means word of god, and therefore that means it is the word of god. Pathetic.

  • @1RadicalOne I dont think u understand what I am saying. Literal word of god means coming out straight from god and that the quran. But the bible is inspired word of god. Meaning his message was inspired but not his actual words.

  • You need to prove that the quran is the literal word of your god first.

  • @1RadicalOne He spoke directily to muhammad through the angel garbrial. SO whatever god told him to say he recited. Have u ever read the quran????

  • I ask you to prove that this direct speak ever occurred. And in anticipation of what I suspect you will provide, you need a source outside the Quran or hadith to prove the Quran or hadith.

  • @1RadicalOne Have u read the quran?? it is in 1st persective. u dont need an outside soruch of the quran or hadith because those r the source that r the most accuret.

  • No, you cannot use a source to prove itself. An incorrect source will provide erroneous proofs.

  • @1RadicalOne Y cant u use a source that proves itself. WOuld u say the same thing about science??? I mean u need another source to confirm what u say so its basically the same thing.

  • Science is not used to prove itself, not in the sense you are implying. Science is the process of making hypotheses - essentially educated guesses - and testing them. If the evidence acquired supports the hypotheses, they become theories - a sort of explanation.

  • @1RadicalOne Yeah but these explanation change throughout time so nothing is ever consistent. So 1 day u belive something and will die 4 that belif as an athiest but then some new theory comes out and then u change ur mind. Do u see the inconsitiancy with scinece.

  • Yes, science changes to accommodate new evidence. This makes it closer and closer to reality.

    Do you really believe that holding a belief, even after finding proof it is wrong, is more reliable?

  • @1RadicalOne No i dont think its more reliable. But what i am saying is u can be arguing 1 thing 2day but change ur opinion on it 2morrow. But the only thing the science is proving that this universe it complex which is just more evidence that god exist.

  • "what i am saying is u can be arguing 1 thing 2day but change ur opinion on it 2morrow."

    So? Would you rather argue the same thing, even long after it is shown to be false?

    "science is proving that this universe it complex which is just more evidence that god exist. "

    One, the universe is actually rather simple, being the manifestation of a few mathematical rules.

    Two, how does it specifically prove YOUR god as opposed to that of the Christians, or the Hindus, or the Ancient Egyptians?

  • @1RadicalOne No i wouldnt argue something that has been shown false. But nothing in the quran has show to be false. If there are mathemtical rules how isnt this complicating. Our earth is perfectly away from the sun to hold life. How isnt that complex right there itself.

    If u actually notice from all those relgious from chrsitainty hindus and the ancient egyptians, had a god that was limited and its creation. But god isnt part of creation, so therefore he isnt limted. That is the differnece.

  • One, the Earth is only "perfect" for OUR life. Had it been farther or closer, some other form of life would be here and say "look how perfect it was for us! It must be design!".

    More, there is actually quite a lot of leeway in how far it can be and be habitable to current life. Ten million miles further, no big difference.

    Two, not all of those religions have limited gods - Christianity and Judaism being the big ones - and how does that matter anyways?

  • @1RadicalOne Wrong if the earth moved a bit away from the son or closer. It would be to cold or to hot to ever have life on it. So that doesnt work. All i am saying is that it was prefectly placed for us to live on. Now how can something like that happend on its own. As far as the limited god's. It does matter because if they are part of creation, that means they were limited and were created from some1. But if they r not limited and r outside of creation, they arnt born or created.

  • Your opening statement is simply false, and the rest of your comment falls apart from there.

  • @bosnianmuslim22

    "But nothing in the quran has show to be false."

    um.. evolution?

  • @mcpencil evolution is a theory, ask any evolutionary biologist. the fossil record is not complete furthermore conjectures have been added to bridge the gap between the records. it is a theory, so hence not fact

  • @MrArv786

    ....and yet 99.9999999999% of scientists in the relevant fields accept evolution. May I remind you, gravity is also a theory.

    Therefore, for all practical purposes, according to real world knowledge instead of "revelations from angels", evolution is true, and the Quran is false.

  • You are misunderstanding what the word "theory" means in science; it is not what it means in casual English, but rather something closer to "explanation". Look this up anywhere you like, save for places like Answers in Genesis, and you will see what I mean. Even Wikipedia has a decent article on it.

  • @mcpencil What about evolution? It doesnt go against Islam. It is not confirmed or denied by islam. There are still scientist in the world that deny the theory of evolution because it has flaws.

  • @bosnianmuslim22

    The Quran states that "Allah" literally created man from dust/earth, in a similar way to Genesis from the Bible... so it's totally against evolution. Therefore Islam is against reality as observed by science.

  • @mcpencil LOL really shows how much u know about islam. When it was refering to creating man. Who was it talking about it was talking about Adam not the entire mankind. The quran states that god created u in stages. And also mentions that every living things was made from water. Which we know is a scentific fact today. So i think that u need to read the quran and study it before u just throw things out. So please study it and dont just google things thanks!

  • @bosnianmuslim22

    You're living in a fantasy if you get your worldview, opinions, and morality, from blind faith in an ancient book. The Quran is mostly plagiarism of earlier texts anyway.

  • @mcpencil Really thats all u got, plagarisim? If ur talking about plagiarisim from the bible, its wrong because there are many stories that are different. Again i sugguest that u read the Quran and islamic source before u make such claims.

  • @bosnianmuslim22

    Hi. Who cares about this argument? I didn't realise it was still important to you. Let's just move on, it's totally pointless. Have a nice day.

  • @bosnianmuslim22

    But you're welcome to live in a fantasy fairytale...

  • @mcpencil Fairytales lol. I think ur living in a fariytail were u belive that the universe was created on its own. LOL Lets throw logic out the window completely.

  • @bosnianmuslim22 The Qur'an is nonsense all you need to do is read the true holy book The Lord Of The Rings, there is indesputable evidence that the great prophet tolkien (peace be upon him) actually did write it, his son is actually still alive and is an eye witness! Please give yourself to the light of tolkien or you will be damning yourself to eternity in the dark lord Saurons fire pits!

  • Islam does not allow that? Really? Is that what you believe? I suggest you read Sam Harris' "The End of Faith".

  • "do all these things that r [sic] against islam"

    When they try to justify what they do with passages from the scripture, it becomes clear their actions are not secular.

  • Yes, there is. If they believe in a religious god - any god - they are, by definition, NOT an atheist. You can't try to redefine a group of people just to prove your point.

    "No relgiouse [sicx2] muslims would ever say that the muslim in jail is a true beliver [sic]"

    Same with the Christians, Jews, Hindus, etc. But that's the No True Scotsman Fallacy.

  • Every1 is a indivdual thinker in someway, but what i am saying is that socetity does play a roll in it as well

  • By definition, atheism is the lack of a belief in a god. They are NOT "all atheists".

  • Less than a quarter of a percent. That translates to less than a 250th.

    And you use the no true scotsman fallacy again. I suggest you reread the response it got the LAST two times.

  • "Every atheist out there usally [sic] has the belifs [sic] of his society for the most part"

    Not entirely. Atheists tend to be individual, independent thinkers.

    Yes, those "ppl" [sic] are "relgiouse" [sic]. Almost all Americans are.

  • You have not satisfactorily answered the questions. Yes, I am repeating myself, because you are not getting the point.

    "any1 [sic] that rapes some1 [sic] or kills inncents [sic] has a lack of belif [sic] in god"

    What? Do the research. Less than a quarter of a percent of the american prison population is atheist. Try again.

  • Read the previous comments.

  • Then why did you make a point of it? Surely you were trying to prove something.

  • Why don't you stop repeating yourself and read the responses those questions received last week?

  • You are in fact the one repeating yourself. If a great many Muslims force it because of what they read in their scriptures, it IS Islam.

    "If an atheist rapes some1 [sic] ur [sic] not ganna [sic x2] blame every athesist [sic]"

    No, but do they do it out of a lack of a belief? No.

  • That is true, yes. Does that prove its correctness nor acceptability? No.

  • Comment removed

  • Comment removed

  • Comment removed

  • Comment removed

  • The first link is Wikipedia. Not a very reliable source. And even there you've distorted it. It reads "The number of Muslims in the US is somewhat controversial. Some sources mention estimates as high as 6-7 million"

    Indicating that that is the HIGH end of the scale. Even so, it's still less than 2 percent. Compare that to the fact that 11 percent are atheists. Believe me, they ARE a major minority.

  • It says in the book "wear it".

    The people who enforce it say "follow the book or suffer"

    Surely you can figure THIS out, can't you?

  • Why don't they fear it?

    Two possible reasons:

    Moderation - in which case you go against your own arguments, as there are Muslims who do not follow the dress code you've been defending.

    Confidence/Independence - They may have parents who want it, but are aware that their life should not be a reflection of someone else's demands.

  • If the book says to wear it, and the parents and/or Islamic police say "follow the book exactly or suffer the consequences", then yes, they ARE being forced to do it.

  • You researched it? Give me a source.

  • They do it because, as I said EARLIER, they feel it is necessary to be accepted by family/friends/etc. I know one Muslim female who wears it simply out of fear of her parents' reaction. Surely she cannot be alone in that regard.

  • Stop throwing out statistics and PROVE THEM.

  • 6 Million? Hell, even WIKIPEDIA disagrees with you on that!

    "Nowhere does it force them"

    Really? Does having it in the book, then demanding that they follow the book to the letter not count as forcing?

  • How many? Not many. I do not tend to associate with those who are more concerned with instinctual desire than intellect.

    There's logic in clothing, yes, but going fanatical with the hijab is most certainly overkill.

  • What? How?

  • Saying "what are you talking about" and reasserting your incorrect "facts" does not make them right. Try again.

    Proof from the Quran? Try this:

    "Enjoin your wives, your daughters, and the wives of true believers that they should cast their outer garments over their persons"

    [sura 33:59]

    Here's one from the Hadith:

    "the Prophet hung a curtain between me and him and the Verse regarding the order for Hijab was revealed. " [Volume 7, Book 65, Number 375]

  • No. And you merely make yourself look foolish by trying to make it look like I said it was.

  • 0.6 percent of Americans are Muslims. That's not even two million. Get your facts straight. For contrast, there are more ATHEISTS in the US, and I'm sure you're aware of the evangelicals' opinions on us.

    "Just because they do it in Iraq"?

    And Iran, and Pakistan, and Afghanistan, and Saudi Arabia, and Sudan, etc etc etc. It's especially convincing when they try to use the scriptures as "justification" for that.

  • Do you really LOOK for those things? Perhaps, then, the root of the problem has been identified. Most people - sane, rational, self-controlled people - couldn't care less.

  • First off, there are NOT many Muslims (of any gender) in America. The Christians make sure of that.

    Second, yes, they can. But not because of Islam, but because the law SAYS THEY CAN. Doing to women here in Canada what would be done in Iraq lands you in JAIL.

    Third, ask? And how do you suppose I would compensate for pressure from family and friends? As was said about Christianity, "how to tell if they just follow to keep the parents happy?"

  • Oh, christ. You don't learn, do you? You used the "no true Scotsman" fallacy before. Yes, it is Islam. They are some of the most devout followers.

    And you move to strawman. "dress like hookers is that suppose [sic] 2 [sic] me [sic] moral."

    Who said anything like what you are asserting that I am promoting? What exactly is wrong with, say, an average T-Shirt and average shorts?

  • Allowed to take them off when alone with family or other females? And how exactly is that moral, to decree that women must wear certain clothing whenever in public, just because a "holy" book says so? Especially considering what happens to women who disobey.

  • You would be surprised because you don't know her.

    Anyway, "modesty"? You are saying covering all but the eyes is necessary for that? "forced on nobody"? Then why are women who disobey beaten, mutilated, and sometimes murdered?

    And don't start the "it's all a propaganda conspiracy" canard. You won't do well.

  • I don't look at the media - too much bias - but, if I did, where would I look? Not your Koran, I hope.

  • You really ARE dense. My point was not that there are muslims who drink, but that it was ridiculous to impose sanctions on it. Furthermore, cut the "atheists can do whatever they want" crap. I blew that out of the water in my first volley of comments. Try reading them.

    "U [sic] r [sic] because u [sic] have more strength."

    You'd be surprised, actually. Furthermore, what about issues that are not physically rooted, such as the "glass ceiling" and the islamic dress code?

  • No. That would be self-defense. (That said, nonlethal incapacitation would be the more desirable alternative.)

    But you missed my point entirely. What Islam teaches is Jihad, holy war, world conquest. Too often have I heard "it's in self-defense against invasion by this culture/that people/their ideology" for it to be believable.

  • There are millions of Christians who drink. Millions of others of other groups who drink. What's your point? That only the "true" muslims are lawful people? More, besides the obvious health risks, what exactly is immoral about drinking - if done appropriately, in moderation and in private?

    "Islam is not sexist...there are womens [sic] rolls [sic] in life and mens [sic]."

    Congratulations. Contradicted yourself in the same sentence.

  • Who determines what is good or bad? I answered that in a previous comment.

  • Why are you posting these quotes? They strengthen MY position, not yours? Does this really seem like the actions of a benevolent deity?

  • Riiiight. I give you two quotes. And your response? "You took it out of context!" Classic.

  • It's about both democracy and oil, but it also incorporates some of the "holy war" doctrine. In Bush's own wordsm "God told me to go to war with Iraq."

    No, it is not right. Can I stop it? No; I'm not even a US citizen.

  • No, it isn't a spelling contest, but your lack of comprehension thereof makes clear your corresponding lack of education.

  • Bzzt. Two fallacies in one comment.

    What is right and wrong? It should be intrinsically obvious that under almost all circumstances say, theft is wrong - I hope for your sake it is, even without scripture - and that something like drinking alcohol, while a bad health choice, is not morally wrong if done in private (and not done before driving).

    You also used the "no true scotsman" fallacy. I'll leave that one to you to research.

  • Why is prayer necessary to do that? Case in point: I don't drink - at all - but do I pray about it? No.

    (Moreover, who is to declare what is "good" and "bad"? Your god? Why, then, does everyone's god seem to express their personal convictions? (E.g. Phelps' god is a raging homophobe, Sharia Muslims' god is sexist, etc.)

  • Before you reply, read ALL of the comments I have replied with. There are, not including this comment, six.

  • First off, learn spelling and grammar. Your comments are nearly incomprehensible.

  • Moving on, "just because some people fight for religion doesn't mean religion is like that".

    Which religion do you want to paint as peaceful? Islam? Then why "cast terror into the hearts of those who are bent on denying the truth; strike, then, their necks!" (Koran 8.12).? God instructs his Muslim followers to kill unbelievers, to capture them, to ambush them (Koran 9.5). Everything contributes to advancing the holy goal: "Strike terror into God's enemies, and your enemies" (Koran 8.60).

  • Christianity is the same.

    "And the LORD spake unto Moses, saying ... he that blasphemeth the name of the LORD, he shall surely be put to death, and all the congregation shall certainly stone him. Leviticus 24:13-16"

    "Now go, attack the Amalekites and totally destroy everything that belongs to them. Do not spare them; put to death men and women,