Ten Commandments for people speaking to Athests to follow.

[playhavock]

Not believing in God, Gods, god, gods, Goddesses, goddesses, Deity, Deities, deity, deities, afterlife, reincarnation, angels, demons, devil(s), and so on is something that many of the atheist, free thinker and skeptical-minded people hold to not believing in.

Many try to argue that the atheist (typically, the label ‘atheist’ is the label used, rather than targeting other labels) has a religion and/or faith. Sometimes people argue that the non-believer(s) "know" there is a God, hate God, and/or have an agenda to deconvert people.

The word "atheist" is simply defined as "without" god; or, if you like, without theism - so the theist is one who has a belief in at least one God and a certain type of God, and the atheist lacks this belief.

I wish to present this simple "Ten Commandments" I mean... Ten things that I've seen people say towards the atheist that are logically flawed. I will simply link to this post whenever someone commits one of them, in hopes that they will stop doing them so often.

-
One: "You have faith in no God"
Fallacy: Tu Quoque (you too!)

Very well. Let us assume, for a moment, that this is the case. How does this dismantle the argument the atheist is presenting?
Is having faith good or bad? If having faith is a good thing, one would think this is a compliment to the atheist. "Why thank you, I *do* have faith in no God, and you have faith in God… isn't it nice to have faith in things?" This gets us nowhere. So where is the argument? There is none.

-
Two: "You hate God"
Fallacy: Logical incoherency, Ad hominem.

This is logically incoherent because hating something requires that you believe in it. The atheist is saying they do not; thus, they cannot hate God.
Even if we assumed that they secretly believed in God and secretly hated God - how does this emotion affect their arguments? It does not. Therefore, this objection too is invalid.

-
Three: "You can't prove God does not exist"
Fallacy: Shifting the burden of proof.

The burden is on whoever makes a positive statement, such as "There is a rock in my hand." This is a statement that requires some level of proof to show it is the case. The more extraordinary the claim, the more proof we should require of it. Uttering to someone, "You can't prove there isn't a rock in my hand" and not allowing them to look at what you are holding - if indeed you are holding anything at all - shifts the burden to them; they cannot disprove it, and it is you who should prove it.

Other "you can't prove" statements could fill libraries with things we cannot prove do not exist: goblins, orcs, dragons, etc., but the burden is clearly on the one who makes the claim that (X) does in fact exist. Typically, this statement is made because the person additionally assumes that atheists are claiming either as a single person or as a whole that "there is no God," when this is not the thing they as a whole are claiming - they as a whole are claiming, "we lack belief in a God." Although there might be a singular person who says, "there is no God," this is not the point - for that person, whoever it is, has the burden to show reasons why we should think they are correct.

But if one still wishes to press forward this statement, what does it matter if the answer is "you are correct; I cannot prove there is not a God…"? This does not mean there is a God.

-
Four: "Atheism is a religion"
Fallacy: Tu Quoque.

This is again not an argument at all. even if atheism was a religion (and it is not), how does this dismantle the arguments being made? If there is only "one true religion," as some say, and atheism is a religion, who’s to say that it is not, in fact, the one true one? However, this is not an argument, and thus should not be utilized, as it is nothing more than a "you too!" statement and not an argument at all.

-
Five: "You have an agenda to deconvert!"
Fallacy: Ad hominem.

This is attack to the person, rather than to the argument, because even if true - say the person does in fact have an agenda to deconvert people - so what? If those of faith have the right to convert (or try to convert) people, then those of non-faith have the right to deconvert (or try to deconvert) people as well. Even if true, it does not dismantle whatever arguments the person has.

-
Six: "Atheists have no morals"
Fallacy: Poisoning the well/Strawman/Ad hominem.

Three fallacies at once! Seriously, this is nothing more than an attempt to poison the well - to say this is akin to saying that Muslims are terrorists or that Catholics are pedophiles or that Christians think slavery is all right. There might be some who are, but to say all are is poisoning the well. It is a strawman because you do not know it to be true, and finally it is an attack to the person, rather than the argument. Again, perhaps they have no morals, but this does not dismantle the arguments they have at all.

-
Seven: "You believe that nothing started the universe"
Fallacy: Strawman.

There is no held statement of any kind of atheism in regards to what, if anything did start the universe, or if "start" is even the correct word. Here, atheists typically turn to whatever science is saying for answers. If science does not yet know, then the atheist typically does not know. There is at least one scientist who is promoting the idea of the universe starting from nothing, but when he says nothing he does not mean the philosopher's nothing, and honestly I really would prefer if he came up with a new word for it, but it might be the case that nothing came "before" the universe if there is no "before" or it might be the case that nothing did cause the universe, and now that we have a universe there is no more "nothing" so we can't have a new universe made.

We simply do not know, but we cannot just place aside the possibility - even if it goes against what our brains think of things and how we think things should work. If the theist really wants the atheist to allow for God as a possibility, they should be equally fair (intellectually speaking) to allow for nothing to be a possibility as well.

Still, this is nothing more than a strawman, although it could be the case that there is an atheist that thinks nothing made the universe, again such a person has the burden, and the scientist who thinks this is producing peer-reviewed papers to forward his arguments. To restate saying "you believe (X)" is a strawman - let the person tell you what they believe first, and then argue against THAT.

-
Eight: "You can't explain how life began..." (or) "You can't explain the universe" (and other you can't explain statements).
Fallacy: Appeal to ignorance.

It matters not if we cannot explain anything at all. This does nothing to make your stance any better. It appeals to ignorance- “I can't explain it, so it must be (X)" where (X) is the made up idea that you think is the explanation. Now, you might object and say, "But God is not made up!" You are free to believe that is the case, and you might be right for all I know, but you have still made a logical fallacy by placing God where it might not belong. If I cannot explain my computer, I would not say it is here because of God - it could be, but it might not be. I cannot fill the void of knowledge that I have with an explanation - and this is what these sorts of statements try to do.

-
Nine: "If there is no God, then I'd do all sorts of bad things!"
Fallacy: Appeal to emotion.

I question the morals and ethics of the person who would do bad things the moment they stopped believing in God. I think this is a harmful idea for people deconverting - and if you've managed to convince someone that if there is no God then you (or anyone) can do anything, then you've potentially made it so someone who deconverts can do anything - and that’s no good for anyone. Still, this is nothing more than an appeal to emotion, a strange blackmail that seeks to stop the arguments of the opponent in their tracks. "I'll kill myself if there is no God" is similar in nature to this. I cannot control what you choose to do or not to do if you decide that you do not believe in God, but stating this forwards no positive argument for your side.

-
Ten: "The Bible says..."
Fallacy: Circular logic.

The Chronicles of Narnia say that Lucy found Narnia in the wardrobe, and Lucy was known to not lie, therefore Narnia exists.

This is so similar to everyone who quotes scriptures at people as if that, by itself, is enough. It is not. It assumes said scriptures are true in order to assume the rest is true. This is the core of circular logic and really should stop.

If all you have is some verse quote, then you do not yet have any argument. The only place where verses matter is when you are debating your Bible.
Also, do note that Bible might be any "Holy" writings or sacred documents of anyone; the Christians do not have the only written account of their idea of God. Other religions do as well.

So no. This will not work, it cannot work. It’s circular. Cut it out already. Prove your writings are true first, and then you are free to use them as reference.


---
Finally, I'd like to invite people to not make strawmen arguments; find out what someone thinks and why. Do not assume anything about that person, or that group. Ask questions, get to know them, read what they have written, read the debates they have posted, try to understand their side.

I once asked people to do the following thought experiment, and I think it is still a great way for you the believer to step into the shoes of the unbeliever for a moment.

--
A person from a religion you have never heard of tells you there religion is true and the only real one. They have a book that contains writings about this religion and their idea of God. They have a personal story about how wonderful their God and religion is.

Questions:
What would it take for you to believe that *they* have the true religion and God?
What sort of facts, evidence, stories, accounts, history, and so on would they have to present to you?

And finally, in the end, is your mind made up? Will you continue to believe you have the real God no matter what anyone says?

--
All other God(s) that are out there, you probably do not believe in any of them. I do not either; I just also add *your* God to the list. I am a skeptic, I require facts - if you have them, just give me them; don't dodge that issue with red herrings, fallacies, or the all-too-often "you will not believe even if I gave you them," or the equivocation that some perform: "I have facts, but they are not the facts you want," or something.

Proof is proof - as far as I know, to date, no theist has presented any empirical evidence of God - if you know of one, show me them and direct me to that evidence. As far as I know, no theist has any test we can perform repeatedly that could show God is true, if you know of some test let me know. I've only studied the Christian religion, as it was my religion, and I found evidence against much of the bible.

If you have positive evidence, I'd like to see it, whatever it might be - history, dates, places, people, and so on. If you do not, then you have nothing that will convince me. The same is true of the religions I've yet to study. I know next to nothing about them, but Hinduism has many people that claim that there Gurus can levitate, heal, and do other wonderful things. Although thousands of them claim this, I've never known a Guru to submit to scientific testing to prove they can, in fact, do this. Thus, I remain skeptical of them. We are all skeptical about SOMETHING - and that is important to realize.

Other people have different reasons for not believing in God that are not my reason - and those reasons deserve to be understood before you can try to make an argument against them. Or, make a positive argument for your religion and your idea of God.

It is my hope you will obey the ten commandments- I mean, you will keep this list in mind.

[SailingCyclops]

@ Sailing cyclops

Really? Please name these "many branches of science" which say Evolution can not have happened, and that all life forms were created flawlessly. Or retract your absurd statement.

Already have please refer to pg 4 and get back to me.

This IS page 4, and nowhere have you listed the "many branches of science" which say Evolution can not have happened, and that all life forms were created flawlessly. It's also not in post #4, you did not author that post. So where is this list of many branches of science?

[HaLi8993]

@ sailing cyclops

This IS page 4, and nowhere have you listed the "many branches of science" which say Evolution can not have happened, and that all life forms were created flawlessly. It's also not in post #4, you did not author that post. So where is this list of many branches of science?

Sailing Cyclops, I am terribly sorry about that I would hope you could accept my apology. It's on Pg 3. I made a mistake.

[SailingCyclops]

Already have please refer to pg 4 and get back to me.

Please tell us which branches of science indicate that life could not begin from natural processes. You misunderstand what science is. Science only seeks answers to questions.

paleontology, biochemistry, population genetics, molecular biology, comparative anatomy and biophysics.

I am getting back to you.

This was post 28 on page (3) not (4), and it is so absurd, that when I first read it, I laughed so hard I ejected coffee out of my nose. You made the ridiculous claim that the very scientific disciplines which prove Evolution beyond doubt, are the disciplines which prove that "Evolution can not have happened, and that all life forms were created flawlessly." The very idea is farcical.

Now if this were even remotely true, there would be peer reviewed scientific papers published in reputable scientific journals in each field you listed stating this nonsense. THERE AREN'T ANY! If you think there are, please provide those scientific papers (links will do) to back up your claim. Otherwise, you need to retract the inane claims you have made. This is not an unreasonable demand, you are dealing with science here, and you have made some pretty outrageous claims, you need to substantiate them.

How can you make such a claim? Did you make this up all by yourself, or did you have help?

[playhavock]

No actually it was a correction to your stance on faith because you were under the impression that the Muslims believe in a totally different God that is different to that of Christians. This is a misconception. You have supported this with nothing more than a statement.

Frankly and no offence intended here, but I do not care if you have the same God or not as the Christans. Your version of God has no more proof offered for it then any other God from any other relgion that I know of. Unless and untill you can forward infomration about your God that is more then that of other relgions you are in the same boat as them, and as such, I dismiss your God as myth just as much as I dismiss other ideas of God as myth.

Since the beginning of time there has ever only been One God.

You clearly belive this, I would like you to prove this statment is true.

Prophets and Messengers only ever came to advice mankind to worship One God

You clearly belive this, I would like you to prove this statment is true.

The purpose  behind the sending of the Messengers was to guide mankind to the worship of God,

You clearly belive this, I would like you to prove this statment is true.

I am not concerned about man made religions that have absolutely no evidence they are from God.

What evidence do you have that your relgion is not man made?

I assume you are following my posts and are reading them

Assume nothing I respond to what posts I can, I do not read all of your posts.

As for persuasion, my mind is made up and cannot be changed

Okay, the door is over there -- please proceed to the exit. I'm done talking to ... wait hold on...

, but I am ready to admit that I am wrong if this can be achieved with evidence and I also can admit I am wrong. 

Wait a moment, let me make sure I'm clear on this before telling you to exit this conversation because your mind is made up...

Is it that you are willing to admit you are wrong about any given subject with the one exepction being about the God you belvie is true?

This is to say, on say - biolgical evoultion that you have zero evidance to suport that it is not true (it is true, so I do not understand why you contune to deny it) so you are - in theroy willing to admit that biolgical evoultion is true...

But you would never admit that the God you belvie in is not real - no matter how much evidance or facts or tests we could ever produce to the contray?

So what you need to do is figure out if you believe in God or not

I am a skeptic. I do not hold belifes in any verion of God.

if not why not,

No emperical evidance, no repeatable tests. No archolgical evidance other then a hand full of kings and places confermed. Nothing to establish it as fact other then wishfull thinking, pour logic and execuses. I am still waiting for you to give me any reasion to think that your God is any more real then any other God that one could choose from, so far you have not done this.

simply saying that there is no evidence is not substantial,

It is. Your wrong here. There is no evidance other then the handfull of evidance for some places and kings that actualy existed, beound that as far as I know you have nothing.

What you got? List all evidance you have - that is not subjective in nature or a call to a holy book that could be writen by humans. List all of it, whatever it is.

we cannot deny that Prophets and Messengers have come with miracles

Actualy, we can deny this because they have zero proof that they did any miracles and that they have any message that humans could not have made up on there own.

Besides in the Islamic faith that is where the test lies.

What test is this, is it a repeatable one we could perfom in the labatory?

I suspect it is that "test" (ha) that is not a test at all but something to do with writing poems in the same way that the koran is writen - a "test" worded in such a way as to be impossible last time I read though this so called test - its a laughable test since its made to be impossible to pass.

So - if that is what you are refering to, then no - not good enough.

[HaLi8993]

@ Sailing Cyclops

Thanks for getting back to me, do you need a tissue?

Lets have a look at the first example shall we, the study of the fossils is just one of the proofs that demolish the idea that fossils support the theory of evolution, one example is the stingray that reveal that these fish have undergone no change since they first came into being on earth. There are  numerous scientific books and articles that have revealed the invalidity of these illusory evolutionist claims. I suggest you look into this and see for yourself. It is very remarkable how different living groups on earth appear suddenly in the fossil record and with all their unique structures don't you think?? hence proving they are unaltered. I would call this flawless. But hey it's not surprising that this evidence goes ignored.

Fossil findings have been highly prone to evolutionists distorting and having biased interpretations. History is full of forgeries perpetrated in the search for supposed evidence for the theory of evolution. It is a false impression that paleontology supports the theory of evolution.

It is very common for an Evolutionist to claim to speak in the name of science, but  they actually violate it by denying the reality revealed by fossils. The fossil record was once the theory of evolution’s greatest hope but it actually shows that living things did not evolve, but were in fact created. If Evolutionists acted in the light of the conclusions that science has revealed then they must not ignore this scientific reality. It is unscientific to suggest anything else when the same animals we are dealing with are found unchanged. It's time to stop  persisting in a lie and believe in the truth.

I would like to see any fossil record that shows any evidence for the theory of evolution.

[HaLi8993]

@ playhavock

Frankly and no offence intended here, but I do not care if you have the same God or not as the Christans. Your version of God has no more proof offered for it then any other God from any other relgion that I know of. Unless and untill you can forward infomration about your God that is more then that of other relgions you are in the same boat as them, and as such, I dismiss your God as myth just as much as I dismiss other ideas of God as myth.

Now now, this is where you are wrong. Have you read my other thread yet? As I have already mentioned the Quran has never been changed or tampered with it has remained the same since the beginning, this testifies to the truth. It's follows are growing which is another proof as a religion based on falsehood is bound to perish. Prophesies predicted through the Sunnah have come true. It's content is true. It is not filled with contradictions, errors or mistakes like that of man made intervention. These are only a few things that distinguish Islam from other man made religions.

I suggest you also watch some of these videos

http://scienceislam.com/scientists_quran.php

You clearly belive this, I would like you to prove this statment is true.

The proof is the Quran, so you would need to prove it is wrong,the entire universe in the way it is created and the way it is controlled  bears witness to the oneness of God. The creation of the heavens and the earth, the alternation of night and day, the different kinds of plants and fruits, the creation of humans and animals… all of this indicate that the All-Mighty Creator is One with no partner or associate. 

All of the above indicate that this universe has a Creator, that this dominion has a Sovereign and that behind these forms is One Who gives them shape. These great created things either created themselves, which is impossible or man created himself then created them  which is also impossible so unless you can give me a better answer then I am going to dismiss anything you say as a myth. The bottom line is you have no answer.

You clearly belive this, I would like you to prove this statment is true.

It is only fair that you answer my questions first, are you denying that Jesus (peace be upon him) existed???

You clearly belive this, I would like you to prove this statment is true.

The Quran is  your proof I suggest you read it.

What evidence do you have that your relgion is not man made?

Seems like we are going round in circles, Muslims have something that offers the clearest proof of all  that it is not man made, and that is the Quran. There is no other book like it anywhere on earth. It is absolutely perfect in the Arabic language. It has no mistakes in grammar, meanings or context. The scientific evidences are well known around the entire world. This cannot be denied.

The Quran itself provides us with the test of authenticity and offers challenges against itself to prove it is not a lie. God tells us in the Quran:

QURAN: 4:82

 "Haven't the unbelievers considered if this was from other than Allah, they would find within it many contradictions?"

Another amazing challenge from Allah's Book:

QURAN: 2:23

"If you are in doubt about it, bring a chapter like it"

And Allah challenges us with:

QURAN: 11:13

 "Bring ten chapters like it." 

And finally:

QURAN:10:38

 "Bring one chapter like it" 

No one has been able to produce a book like it, nor ten chapters like it, nor even one chapter like it. It was memorized by thousands of people during the lifetime of Muhammad (peace be upon him) and then this memorization was passed down from teacher to student for generation after generation. Today every single Muslim has memorized some part of the Quran in the original Arabic language that it was revealed in over 1,400 years ago, even though most of them are not Arabs. There are millions of  Muslims living on the earth today who have totally memorized the entire Quran, word for word, and can recite the entire Quran, in Arabic just as Muhammad (peace be upon him) did centuries ago.

Assume nothing I respond to what posts I can, I do not read all of your posts.

Right......well I suggest you do, as it is very obvious that I keep repeating myself. 

Okay, the door is over there -- please proceed to the exit. I'm done talking to ... wait hold on...

Nice Try! 

Wait a moment, let me make sure I'm clear on this before telling you to exit this conversation because your mind is made up... 

Is it that you are willing to admit you are wrong about any given subject with the one exepction being about the God you belvie is true? 

This is to say, on say - biolgical evoultion that you have zero evidance to suport that it is not true (it is true, so I do not understand why you contune to deny it) so you are - in theroy willing to admit that biolgical evoultion is true... 

But you would never admit that the God you belvie in is not real - no matter how much evidance or facts or tests we could ever produce to the contray?

I am willing to accept anything is wrong provided you show me evidence for what you say. I would like to see these facts and tests. I haven't seen any so far. Give me an example of one biological evolution.

I am a skeptic. I do not hold belifes in any verion of God.

So you don't believe in God, so what do you believe in?? A skeptic is usually willing to listen with an open heart, but you just want to send me out the door lol..

No emperical evidance, no repeatable tests. No archolgical evidance other then a hand full of kings and places confermed. Nothing to establish it as fact other then wishfull thinking, pour logic and execuses. I am still waiting for you to give me any reasion to think that your God is any more real then any other God that one could choose from, so far you have not done this.

There is plenty of historical evidence type this in and see what you get. We can start just by begginning with simple logic. When something is right in front of our eyes it is difficult to deny it, right? Answer this for me, can you prove you exist? I'm hoping your answer would be yes, as all you would need to do is use your senses to determine what you can see, hear, feel, smell, taste etc. All of this is a part of your existence. But this is not how we perceive God in Islam. We can look to the things He has created and the way He cares for things and sustains us, to know there is no doubt of His existence. It would be ridiculous to  believe that a tornado came through a junkyard and tore through the old cars and left behind a nice new Mercedes with the engine running and no parts left around? Naturally not.

It is. Your wrong here. There is no evidance other then the handfull of evidance for some places and kings that actualy existed, beound that as far as I know you have nothing. 

What you got? List all evidance you have - that is not subjective in nature or a call to a holy book that could be writen by humans. List all of it, whatever it is.

The evidence is what is found in the Quran and Sunnah which is text of the statements and actions of Muhammad (peace be upon him) and his companions. Hadith are a record of the chain of transmitters all the way back to Muhammad (peace be upon him) similar to a family tree. We have life, logic and our surroundings. We have evidence from historians, for example the most successful of all Prophets and religious personalities. Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) was ranked Most Influential Persons in History, by historian Michael H. Hart. We all know that this must of been a study of historical evidence proving his existence. Moreover one cannot deny the extraordinarily rapid growth of the Arabian Empire in the period immediately following Muhammad’s death. 

Actually , we can deny this because they have zero proof that they did any miracles and that they have any message that humans could not have made up on there own.

Who has zero proof?? As Muslims we have the Quran and Sunnah as proof. Again you would have to disprove the content in the Quran and Sunnah and that it is not a miracle in and of itself to have a valid point. So what your saying is the Jews that believe in the miracles of Moses (peace be upon him) are wrong, the Christians that believe in the miracles of Jesus (peace be upon him) are wrong and Muslims that believe in all three miracles including the miracles of Muhammad (peace be upon him) are wrong. That's  a lot of people, so everything is made up and a myth?? Is this what your saying?? 

What test is this, is it a repeatable one we could perfom in the labatory? 

I suspect it is that "test" (ha) that is not a test at all but something to do with writing poems in the same way that the koran is writen - a "test" worded in such a way as to be impossible last time I read though this so called test - its a laughable test since its made to be impossible to pass. 

So - if that is what you are refering to, then no - not good enough.

No one sees or hears God not even the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him), nor are we able to use our senses to make some kind of contact with Him. However, we are encouraged in Islam to use our senses and our common sense to recognize all of this universe could not possibly come into existence on its own. Something had to design it all and then put it into motion. This is beyond our ability to do, yet it is something we can understand.

We don't have to see a watch maker to recognize a watch correct? So if we see watches without seeing the watch maker, in the same way we can believe God created everything without having to see Him or touch, or hear, etc. This is the test!

[bernee51]

Really?

Here was I thinking they both respected and followed shahada, salat, zakat, sawn and the requirement for hajj

Nope, if this were true we would both be following Islam.

I realize that the shahada differs a little… but I thought the remainder was the same

You have never once condemned the killing in the name of Islam.

Now what has this anything to do with the topic?? Lol. Give me a scenario and let us discuss it.

I was referring to your claim of compassion and the fact that you are yet to condemn killings in the name of Islam.

Seek Him inside yourself, and learn who it is that says: "My God, my spirit, my understanding, my soul and my body. Understand the source of sorrow and joy, and love and hate, and waking though you don't want to, and sleeping though you don't want to, and getting angry when you don't want to, and falling in love though you don't want to. For if you closely investigate these things, you will find Him inside yourself."

Serious question: what does this mean??, who's quote is this??

It was written in the 3rd century CE by a Gnostic called Monoimos.

What does it mean. Ask yourself “Who am I?�

In the process look at all you are not - where all you are not is anything that is an object in your awareness. Can you feel your body? If so it is an object in your awareness. What about your thoughts? Are you aware of your thoughts? Are they an object in your awareness?

What is the source of this awareness?

As for your link, we have already discussed the killings of Sunnis by Shia, you have to look at both sides of the story you are overlooking the killings of Sunnis by Shia, let's not forget about the Sunni Clerics that were killed in Karachi not long ago.

I condemn the killing of Sunni by Shia. Such killings do not justify more killing.

[playhavock]

playhavock

Frankly and no offence intended here, but I do not care if you have the same God or not as the Christans. Your version of God has no more proof offered for it then any other God from any other relgion that I know of. Unless and untill you can forward infomration about your God that is more then that of other relgions you are in the same boat as them, and as such, I dismiss your God as myth just as much as I dismiss other ideas of God as myth.

Now now, this is where you are wrong. Have you read my other thread yet?

What one? Possibly not. This topic is about what things to not do when speaking to athests, and you have derailed it into talk about your idea of God and how biolgical evoultion is not true despide the fact that it is. I'm more offended by the last part then the former.

It does not bother me to have topics derailed, as this happens on the net. But I just do not have any desire to look at other posts you have made as you lack any coherent support for much of what you are saying here, as such I expect to find the same to be true in the other posts. If you had evidance for non-evoultion (and you do not) then you would have presented it, rather you offer one video - thats not good enough, and I'm not going to bother watching it - the reasion is that the fact of biolgical evoultion is so well supported that going agenst it is akin to beliving the world is flat. You have nothing to base your idea on other then creationist lies and bull.

We will never agree on if there is or is not a God. I do not belvie in a God, and I submit you have no proof your God is real. This is one issue. I'd happly debate this in the one-on-one section with formalised rules.

The other issue is beound debate, biolgical evoultion is a fact - hands down. If you deny it, that is your problem of not understanding real science and not wanting to accept facts. The fact that you know about the fossels or claim to - and do not understand how they show evoultion is happening is sad to me, it speaks to biasied belife in something being not true without looking into it for yourself - rather you present a video or two on it not being true from a sourse that is not trustworthy - mainly that of a creationist.

I'm sorry you are living in the dark ages and invite you again to learn about biolgical evoultion without looking at the lies produced by those who oppose it, see what evidance there is for it, and study it. If you contune to deny it with no actual evidance agenst it, then I fail to see any reasion to contune to speak to you, not because my mind is closed - but because yours is.

As I have already mentioned the Quran has never been changed or tampered with it has remained the same since the beginning,

So what? Not chaning proves nothing.

this testifies to the truth.

Not at all.

It's follows are growing which is another proof as a religion based on falsehood is bound to perish.

Proof of nothing actualy. Relgions grow and end all the time, it meens nothing.

Prophesies predicted through the Sunnah have come true.

I highly suspect this is not true. I suspect strongly that they are worded to be vague and execuses are made for any misses they produce.

If you had something non-vague that could be produced on demand - say , next weeks loto numbers - then you could fund yourselfs quite well. If you could produce answers to mathamtical questions that have yet to be answered with your Sunnah (whoever/whatever that is) you could win lots of money and fame via that - both could forward your stance that this thing is able to gain knowalge that is unknown to others. If you could produce any repeatable test that shows anyone of your faith or anyone from your faith can make a prediction of the fucture that happens and is convermed on demand in a double blind test then you would have something to show for postive scientific evidance that this is a thing that is true. YOU DO NOT HAVE THIS. Thus, I dismis your Sunnah and whatever claims it has made as being unfounded in fact.

It's content is true. It is not filled with contradictions, errors or mistakes like that of man made intervention

Yes, the same claim has been made by Christans - if I bothered to read whatever holy book your refering to I'd expect to find problems in it - BUT I would say that it is possible to produce a book without errors without any supernatural help at all - so again this proves nothing.

These are only a few things that distinguish Islam from other man made religions.

Not at all. Nothing impressive here other then your own claims - being unique - even if true, still does not prove you are right.

I suggest you also watch some of these videos

No thanks I have real sceintific videos to watch.

The proof is the Quran,

Circular augment.
Your Quran proves nothing.

the entire universe in the way it is created and the way it is controlled bears witness to the oneness of God.

As long as you have faith, and I have fact - you will always be wrong and I will always, always be right.

It is only fair that you answer my questions first, are you denying that Jesus (peace be upon him) existed???

Yes, Jesus never exisid, he is a made up mytholigcal figure simular to other pagan myths of the time, created by the brains of humans to tell a story, people belvied the story and made a relgion out of it, latter your Muhamid guy came along, screwed up your culture by saying math was evil and other nonsence and also turned most of you relgous - propelling Muslam culture into the dark ages that it still sadly has yet to recover from. Your culture was the center of science and discovery at one point - then it all shatters the moment your prohpet comes to ruin it with relgion - a great sadness here - for who knows what awesome things your cutlrue would have had if not for this so called prohpet who brings not facts but faith.

For more on this (for other readers I suspect this person will not bother) here is a real scientest (Neil deGrasse Tyson) speaking on this issue:

The Quran is your proof I suggest you read it.

Its on my list. It comes after a whole bunch of real sceintific books and books on logic and facts. Mytholigy studys are last for me, I'll get to it. Your circular augment fails to impress me.

Seems like we are going round in circles, Muslims have something that offers the clearest proof of all that it is not man made, and that is the Quran. There is no other book like it anywhere on earth. It is absolutely perfect in the Arabic language. It has no mistakes in grammar, meanings or context. The scientific evidences are well known around the entire world. This cannot be denied.

I deny it. Thus it can be denied. Such circular reasioning, I had hoped to encounter better apogltics then the Christans have to offer, I see worse here. You could do better, I sugest studying logic to understand why this idea is circular and fails to work.

No one has been able to produce a book like it,

Right, this is the so called "test" I thought you were talking about. Its not a test. Its nonsence. Its writen to be unpassable and wored to be such. As such it is not a test at all.

Give me an example of one biological evolution.

http://evolution.berkeley.edu/evolibrary/article/evo_02
http://giotam.files.wordpress.com/2011/ ... pecies.jpg

There is two. The first is a whole artical about biolgical evoultion, the second is a nice picture of horses. Both are examples of biolgical evoultion.

So you don't believe in God, so what do you believe in?

I do not hold any belifes. I try to have only facts.
To put it simply, if it is not scientificly testable I probley do not think it is true.

A skeptic is usually willing to listen with an open heart, but you just want to send me out the door lol..

Yes, because I have no personal desire to speak to someone who has made up there mind on (x) issue, it is a waste of time & engery.

There is plenty of historical evidence type this in and see what you get.

You have nothing. Give me what you got, dont just tell me to google it. You've got nothing here.

We can start just by begginning with simple logic. When something is right in front of our eyes it is difficult to deny it, right?

Wrong.
Illusionists (magic) make there living on slight of hand. Optical illusions are just that. And so on.

Answer this for me, can you prove you exist?

Yes, with sceince.

The evidence is what is found in the Quran and Sunnah which is text of the statements and actions of Muhammad (peace be upon him) and his companions. Hadith are a record of the chain of transmitters all the way back to Muhammad (peace be upon him) similar to a family tree. We have life, logic and our surroundings. We have evidence from historians, for example the most successful of all Prophets and religious personalities. Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) was ranked Most Influential Persons in History, by historian Michael H. Hart. We all know that this must of been a study of historical evidence proving his existence. Moreover one cannot deny the extraordinarily rapid growth of the Arabian Empire in the period immediately following Muhammad’s death.

So, nothing. Got it. Whats with the peace be on him - is this some magical phrase that makes peace be upon someone - or just a culture thing that you do for people you think are hot stuff? Just wondering at this point. If I said Muhammad war be upon him, would that meen anything?

Who has zero proof?? As Muslims we have the Quran and Sunnah as proof

Circualr augment.

No one sees or hears God not even the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him), nor are we able to use our senses to make some kind of contact with Him. However, we are encouraged in Islam to use our senses and our common sense to recognize all of this universe could not possibly come into existence on its own. Something had to design it all and then put it into motion. This is beyond our ability to do, yet it is something we can understand.

Right so you have no emperical evidance but your relgion tells you that its true, so you belvie it is true. Circular.

We don't have to see a watch maker to recognize a watch correct?

False analigy.

Really - the watch maker augment? REALLY? Sigh.

[HaLi8993]

@ Bernee51

I realize that the shahada differs a little… but I thought the remainder was the same

Nope not at all. There are many practices and beliefs that have no basis or evidence in Islam.

I was referring to your claim of compassion and the fact that you are yet to condemn killings in the name of Islam.

Again I need a scenario so I know what your talking about, for all I know you could be referring to times of war, hence I cannot give you a yes/no answer. Do you know where I am coming from?

It was written in the 3rd century CE by a Gnostic called Monoimos. 

What does it mean. Ask yourself “Who am I?� 

In the process look at all you are not - where all you are not is anything that is an object in your awareness. Can you feel your body? If so it is an object in your awareness. What about your thoughts? Are you aware of your thoughts? Are they an object in your awareness? 

What is the source of this awareness?

Bernee51, again this is Monoimos' personal belief. So you rather apply this then what God instructs you to follow?? I don't understand why I would  need to be concerned with all that I'm not?? Lets focus on what is real Bernee51. This just proves that a person has a purpose in life to believe in something, the only problem is you guys are not looking in the right places for answers rather just believing in things that appeal to you. It would be silly to believe that we do not have a purpose in life. All this that you see and have is for a reason.

What is the source of this awareness, I would say God creating you with a brain and intellect to think and ponder over the meaning of life.

[/quote]I condemn the killing of Sunni by Shia. Such killings do not justify more killing.[/quote]

We cannot change what people take into their own hands of revenge. Do you think that they are at war with each other?

[HaLi8993]

@ playhavock 

What one? Possibly not. This topic is about what things to not do when speaking to athests, and you have derailed it into talk about your idea of God and how biolgical evoultion is not true despide the fact that it is. I'm more offended by the last part then the former. 

It does not bother me to have topics derailed, as this happens on the net. But I just do not have any desire to look at other posts you have made as you lack any coherent support for much of what you are saying here, as such I expect to find the same to be true in the other posts. If you had evidance for non-evoultion (and you do not) then you would have presented it, rather you offer one video - thats not good enough, and I'm not going to bother watching it - the reasion is that the fact of biolgical evoultion is so well supported that going agenst it is akin to beliving the world is flat. You have nothing to base your idea on other then creationist lies and bull. 

We will never agree on if there is or is not a God. I do not belvie in a God, and I submit you have no proof your God is real. This is one issue. I'd happly debate this in the one-on-one section with formalised rules. 

The other issue is beound debate, biolgical evoultion is a fact - hands down. If you deny it, that is your problem of not understanding real science and not wanting to accept facts. The fact that you know about the fossels or claim to - and do not understand how they show evoultion is happening is sad to me, it speaks to biasied belife in something being not true without looking into it for yourself - rather you present a video or two on it not being true from a sourse that is not trustworthy - mainly that of a creationist. 

I'm sorry you are living in the dark ages and invite you again to learn about biolgical evoultion without looking at the lies produced by those who oppose it, see what evidance there is for it, and study it. If you contune to deny it with no actual evidance agenst it, then I fail to see any reasion to contune to speak to you, not because my mind is closed - but because yours is.

"why were we created", it is no derailment as there are Atheists that believe in the theory of evolution. It is surprising that you ask for proof yet you are unwilling to read other posts. This represents how your mind is closed. Don't you think?? You ask for evidence and after denying all the universal evidence and the fact that the Quran and Sunnah is evidence against you as you fail to prove it wrong you have no other option but to label it as "no evidence", "lies" and "bull" I would like you to prove it is wrong as I am willing to prove how biological evolution is wrong. Let's look at the context.

Let me know when your ready for a one on one debate I will debate you using my sources you debate me using your sources.

If you could show me how the fossil record supports new life forms I will happily look into this, if you can explain to me how this is possible without any links and books again I am willing to look into this. But all I have seen thus far is the common statement that it is a "fact" from unreliable sources.

It is sad to see how you are quick to judge Islam without having actually know anything about it, I have looked into the evidence for evolution and seriously people who pose such evidence have nothing. Now I give you the same advice you have given me not because I am closed but because I know about evolution and because I care. Look into Islam with an open heart and put aside all your misconceptions and stereotypes. I am still willing to speak to you that's if you want to of course as I do not shut people off due to ignorance.

So what? Not chaning proves nothing.

Of course it does this is a miracle in and of it's self. Where in the world is there another book like it??? It testifies to the truth. Which book in the world can you find without any errors and contradictions in it?? I can find plenty in books about evolution.

Not at all.

Of course it does, why not??

Proof of nothing actualy. Relgions grow and end all the time, it meens nothing.

A religion is from God, it would not make sense for a religion to grow and end, this would suggest that it is not a religion from God. A religion is for all times and places it does not end.

I highly suspect this is not true. I suspect strongly that they are worded to be vague and execuses are made for any misses they produce. 

If you had something non-vague that could be produced on demand - say , next weeks loto numbers - then you could fund yourselfs quite well. If you could produce answers to mathamtical questions that have yet to be answered with your Sunnah (whoever/whatever that is) you could win lots of money and fame via that - both could forward your stance that this thing is able to gain knowalge that is unknown to others. If you could produce any repeatable test that shows anyone of your faith or anyone from your faith can make a prediction of the fucture that happens and is convermed on demand in a double blind test then you would have something to show for postive scientific evidance that this is a thing that is true. YOU DO NOT HAVE THIS. Thus, I dismis your Sunnah and whatever claims it has made as being unfounded in fact.

Well guess what it's true, with this attitude you are denying everything I say.  Oh brother.....why is it that whenever I speak to an Atheist they want scientific evidence, open the Quran and read it there are plenty of scientific facts that could not have been known 1400 years ago. You are denying something you don't even have knowledge of, thats typical. The Prophecies were unknown at the time. I have a feeling that even if the whole world were to gather to provide you proof you would deny it. God has already made this very clear to us about those who's hearts are sealed.

Yes, the same claim has been made by Christans - if I bothered to read whatever holy book your refering to I'd expect to find problems in it - BUT I would say that it is possible to produce a book without errors without any supernatural help at all - so again this proves nothing.

I challenge you to do so, I can name many contradictions in the bible. I fail to understand how anyone can reject something without reading it, that's strange don't you think??? Give me the name of one book free of errors.

Not at all. Nothing impressive here other then your own claims - being unique - even if true, still does not prove you are right.

That's your personal subjective opinion without any evidence. These are not my claims.

No thanks I have real sceintific videos to watch.

Your sincerity has failed.

Circular augment. 
Your Quran proves nothing.

I could say the same about you. Proves that there is a God. 

As long as you have faith, and I have fact - you will always be wrong and I will always, always be right.

Fact?? your kidding right! I would like to see some of these facts, pls.

Yes, Jesus never exisid, he is a made up mytholigcal figure simular to other pagan myths of the time, created by the brains of humans to tell a story, people belvied the story and made a relgion out of it, latter your Muhamid guy came along, screwed up your culture by saying math was evil and other nonsence and also turned most of you relgous - propelling Muslam culture into the dark ages that it still sadly has yet to recover from. Your culture was the center of science and discovery at one point - then it all shatters the moment your prohpet comes to ruin it with relgion - a great sadness here - for who knows what awesome things your cutlrue would have had if not for this so called prohpet who brings not facts but faith. 

For more on this (for other readers I suspect this person will not bother) here is a real scientest (Neil deGrasse Tyson) speaking on this issue:

Right! and what evidence would you like to provide in favor of your "opinion". And where are you getting your "facts" from?? Where in the Quran or Sunnah does it say that maths is evil?? Do you even know the origins of where Algebra came from?? 

Right back at you:



I would use my time wisely with more important things folks!

Its on my list. It comes after a whole bunch of real sceintific books and books on logic and facts. Mytholigy studys are last for me, I'll get to it. Your circular augment fails to impress me.

Don't waste your time with Mythology pick up the Quran the ultimate factual and logical book.

I deny it. Thus it can be denied. Such circular reasioning, I had hoped to encounter better apogltics then the Christans have to offer, I see worse here. You could do better, I sugest studying logic to understand why this idea is circular and fails to work.

Again your denial is proof of your sincerity, you ask for proof then your answer is either "it's not true" or "I deny it" or  "it's a lie" or it's  "bull" or "your a apologetic" or "this is a fallacy" you could try disproving what I say is wrong  first. 

Right, this is the so called "test" I thought you were talking about. Its not a test. Its nonsence. Its writen to be unpassable and wored to be such. As such it is not a test at all.

Yes yes, where is your evidence for what you say prove it wrong.

http://evolution.berkeley.edu/evolibrar ... le/evo_02 
http://giotam.files.wordpress.com/2011/ ... ecies.jpg 

There is two. The first is a whole artical about biolgical evoultion, the second is a nice picture of horses. Both are examples of biolgical evoultion.

Ahhh the good old horse example, many people  were gradually forced to admit that the horse series scenario was not based on any genuine evidence. There are many problems with this scenario and  the theory of evolution. The horse series has no basis in the fossil record and that no such gradual process as the evolution of the horse ever happened. This popularly told example of horse evolution, suggesting a gradual sequence of changes from 4 toed creatures living nearly 50 million years ago to today's much larger one toed horse, has long been known to be wrong. Instead of gradual change fossils of each intermediate species appear fully distinct, persist unchanged and then become extinct. Transitional forms are unknown.

So where is your evidence?  It's funny how when ever you ask someone to provide evidence for the theory of evolution they either give you a link or a book, I wander why?? Maybe because they cannot explain it themselves. Furthermore they want to fool the general public with such so called sophisticated diagrams and explanations into making you believe that what they say is evidence. But reality, logic and science is against what they say.

I do not hold any belifes. I try to have only facts. 
To put it simply, if it is not scientificly testable I probley do not think it is true.

But you don't have any facts lol....then you would need to reject TOE cause many things are not scientifically proven at all.

Yes, because I have no personal desire to speak to someone who has made up there mind on (x) issue, it is a waste of time & engery.

You got that right! So why respond to my posts in the first place? Last time I checked I posted a simple video which you claim you haven't even watched then before I knew it I was talking to 4 people at once. 

You have nothing. Give me what you got, dont just tell me to google it. You've got nothing here.

That's what I got, take it or leave it. 

Wrong. 
Illusionists (magic) make there living on slight of hand. Optical illusions are just that. And so on.

So are you saying that this universe is an illusion??

Yes, with sceince.

So you need science to show you if you are existent?

So, nothing. Got it. Whats with the peace be on him - is this some magical phrase that makes peace be upon someone - or just a culture thing that you do for people you think are hot stuff? Just wondering at this point. If I said Muhammad war be upon him, would that meen anything?

No this is an instruction from God, whenever we say the name of Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) we are instructed to say "peace be upon him" as a sign of respect. We send peace and blessings upon the greatest man that ever lived. 

Circualr augment.

Here we go again......

Right so you have no emperical evidance but your relgion tells you that its true, so you belvie it is true. Circular.

No, God tells us that it is the true, our logic, instinct, surroundings and even your beloved science tells us it's true.  

False analigy. 

Really - the watch maker augment? REALLY? Sigh.

Explain to me why you think it is false? Yep really. What's wrong is this a fallacy too??