Are you an atheist? (21 Viewers)

[aziz rasul]

I agree with a lot of what Jesus says in the New Testament. This does not mean that I believe that he was divine.

Jesus (peace be upon him) never said he was divine.

The story of Jesus (Arabic – Isa, pronounced Eesaa) is scattered in 13 chapters of the Qur’an. Some of the verses in the Holy Qur’an refer to Prophet Jesus (peace be upon him) as simply ‘Jesus’, but others refer to him by the appellation, ‘Al Maseeh’, which means ‘the Messiah’ or ‘the Anointed One’.

His birth is a unique miracle, but his message is the same as the previous prophets and that of Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) after him i.e. to submit to the One God.

Like Moses (peace be upon him), Jesus (peace be upon him) is directly descended from the line of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob (peace be upon them). Specifically, Jesus (peace be upon him) also descends directly from Aaron (the elder brother of Moses). Therefore, Mary (Arabic - Maryam) and Jesus (peace be upon them) came from a noble line of prophets and priests who preached the worship and obedience of the One God.

“And Jesus answered him, The first of all the commandments is, Hear, O Israel; The Lord our God is ONE Lord”
The New Testament - Mark 12:29 See also John 5:30, Matthew 5:17.

On more than 80 occassions in the NY Jesus (peace be upon him) says he is the son of man.

On a few occasions in the NT he is referred to as the son of David, meaning that he is spiritually on the same message i.e. the worship of the one True God, Alaha (aramaic) or Allaah (Arabic) or Eloha (Hebrew).

 

[Lightwave]

Aziz this Hellfire place

Got any more details...?

I've long suspected I'm headed there and if you're right I'm a definite gonner.

I was at Newcastle weekend fair in a field when the rain hit.. nightmare.

I also find Cornonation street pretty grim to watch.

 

[Vassago]

One of my favorites:

 

[Galaxiom]

Whether one or both of them attain old age in thy life, say not to them a word of contempt, nor repel them, but address them in terms of honour. Qur’an - Surah al-Isra (The Night Journey) 17:23 See also 2:83.

If you agree with the principle of respecting parents, then you cannot reject the Qur'an completely if there is a verse which you indirectly agree with.

So you simply repeat the same quote that started this line of discussion. That is not addressing the debate. Moreover as I pointed out I do not believe that all parents have the right to respect hence I obviously do not agree with that verse of the Qur'an despite your assertion.

And of course there will be other verses that I am sure you will agree with indirectly. Australia have laws that are enshrined in the Qur'an, Australia like all countries around the world are agreed that there are certain principles of sharia that man should follow.

A coincidental concurrence of some of my values with some of those in the Qur'an does not constitute agreement with Sharia. Indeed the presence of certain revolting aspects in Sharia indicates that I do not accept it and never will.

If you should wish to continue your futile line of argument perhaps I can point out that, on these terms, you accept the Bible and even the work of Joseph Smith and Mao-Tse-Dong because they contain at least one sentence you agree with.

Oh and your charge regarding my arrogance. There were many arrogant people during the time of the last Prophet (peace be upon him) and even before then as there are now. They also rejected God and His Scriptures. [+ several irrelevant quotes]

Pointing out that Mohammed didn't like those who disagreed and called them arrogant does not ameliorate your own arrogance. Mohammed is demonstrably one of the most outstandingly arrogant and morally corrupt figures in history so his accusation of arrogance is hardly valid.

[The misogyny of the Qur'an is] just a statement. No evidence to give I see.

I would have thought it obvious. I am sure you can quote the passages that tell a man can have four wives but a woman can only have a single husband. This is sufficient to demonstrate undeniable prejudice against women but I have no doubt the superior position of the male and the order that a woman is to obey her husband is well and truly enshrined in the Qur'an.

You bet I'm going to quote the Qur'an much as you hate it. I just love quoting from the Qur'an.

Your love of quoting from the Qur'an is not disputed. What I said was there was no mention of Christ in any text until circa 93 CE to which you responded (in the way of all religious) by simply denying it without evidence. "Rubbish" was the word you used.

I then invited you point out a contemporary publication that mentioned Christ. You have not done this so no matter how much bullcrap you quote from the Qur'an, my assertion stands. There is no contemporary evidence for the existence of Jesus. Moreover study of several later texts where Jesus is mentioned reveals that they had been altered much later to include the references, presumably by Christians eager to validate their hero. Clearly faith was not quite enough for some.

 

[Galaxiom]

Generally I agree. However, there are some people that are not totally committed to their religion. They may have doubts based on scientific discoveries, or the lack of observable miracles, using common sense, etc. I'd like to think debates like these would engage them to further research and seek answers.

In addition, for those people living in fiercely religious areas, these debates may provide a level of sanity for them.

I truly believe that the more of a spotlight that is shined on religion around the world, the more it will recede to live in the shadows. These discussions/debates enhance that spotlight.

Who knows how many hundreds (perhaps thousands) of people have read parts of this very thread which got their mind in gear. And this is only 1 site not even dedicated to religion.

I enter these debates not with the goal of making the religious come to their senses at all. This would be a futile quest since their cause is already lost.

My goal is to provide information to those who have not yet been taken under the spell of religion and lost their ability to think critically about their beliefs.

Fortunately contributors like Aziz provide a fantastic opportunity to reveal the true nature of the devotee such that their delusional perspectives are quite apparent to any discerning reader. In the long term they do far more to undermine their doctrine than any atheist could ever hope to achieve.

 

[aziz rasul]

Thats good Vassago although in the case of Jesus (peace be upon him) he was not born on the 25th of December, nor did he die and hence was not resurrected. The fact is that out of all the prophets only Jesus (peace be upon him) did not die but was raised up into the heavens alive and it is he who will be returning back down to earth and will be following the tenets of Islam.

Lightwave, no one who is alive today needs to go to Hell fire. All that is required is to obtain the necessary info to believe in God and hence save themselves and their loved ones.

And those who believe and whose families follow them in Faith, - to them shall We join their families: Nor shall We deprive them (of the fruit) of aught of their works: (Yet) is each individual in pledge for his deeds.
Qur’an - Surah at-Tur (The Mount) 52:21

The only true faith in God's sight is Islam. (Surah 3:19)

"Say, 'Obey Allah and the apostle.' If they give no heed, then truly, Allah does not love the unbelievers." (Surah 3:29)

O ye who believe! Save yourselves and your families from a Fire whose fuel is Men and Stones, over which are (appointed) angels stern (and) severe, who flinch not (from executing) the Commands they receive from Allaah, but do (precisely) what they are commanded.
Qur’an – Surah at-Tahrim (Banning) 66:6 Compare and contrast with 31:33.

And whoso disobeyeth Allah and His messenger and transgresseth His limits, He will make him enter Fire, where he will dwell for ever; his will be a shameful doom. 4.14

If any one does evil or wrongs his own soul but afterwards seeks Allaah's forgiveness, he will find Allaah Oft-forgiving, Most Merciful.
Qur’an - Surah an-Nisaa’ (The Women) 4:110 See also 2:160, 4:17-18, 6:54, 25:70-1, 42:25, 42:30, 34 etc.

O mankind! Now hath a proof from your Lord come unto you, and We have sent down unto you a clear light;

As for those who believe in Allah, and hold fast unto Him, them He will cause to enter into His mercy and grace, and will guide them unto Him by a straight road. 4.174-5

 

[aziz rasul]

A coincidental concurrence of some of my values with some of those in the Qur'an does not constitute agreement with Sharia. Indeed the presence of certain revolting aspects in Sharia indicates that I do not accept it and never will.

So why do you live in a country which follows some aspects of sharia? Is murder and stealing not a crime in Australia? Are people allowed openly to commit promiscuity and not be punished?

If you should wish to continue your futile line of argument perhaps I can point out that, on these terms, you accept the Bible and even the work of Joseph Smith and Mao-Tse-Dong because they contain at least one sentence you agree with.

Exactly if they agree with the Qur'an. Just as you have to as well in terms of common laws around the world.

A Muslim man marry up to 4 women, that is correct. But from what you said again you fail to understand the concepts behind it. Your hatred and prejudice blinds you to accepting the truth.

040.063 Thus are they perverted who deny the revelations of Allah.

078.021 Lo! hell lurketh in ambush,

078.022 A home for the rebellious.

078.023 They will abide therein for ages.

078.024 Therein taste they neither coolness nor (any) drink

078.025 Save boiling water and a paralysing cold:

078.026 Reward proportioned (to their evil deeds).

078.027 For lo! they looked not for a reckoning;

078.028 They called Our revelations false with strong denial.

078.029 Everything have We recorded in a Book.

078.030 So taste (of that which ye have earned). No increase do We give you save of torment.

As there normally are more women than men, to prevent lewdness, men could marry up to 4 women providing they treated them equally. Women could not have married more than 1 man as there would not have been a way to show who the father of a child would be.

 

[Alc]

So why do you live in a country which follows some aspects of sharia? Is murder and stealing not a crime in Australia? Are people allowed openly to commit promiscuity and not be punished?

The fact that Sharia contains some common sense ideas required for society to function doesn't mean that they originated in Sharia. Murder and stealing are outlawed in places where Sharia is not taken into account in the slightest.

 

[aziz rasul]

Fortunately contributors like Aziz provide a fantastic opportunity to reveal the true nature of the devotee such that their delusional perspectives are quite apparent to any discerning reader. In the long term they do far more to undermine their doctrine than any atheist could ever hope to achieve.

In your opinion.

People who have reverted to Islam may not have done so if Muslims had not actively given the knowledge of the Qur'an. So whilst you may hate what I say, others may not.

002.171 The likeness of those who disbelieve (in relation to the messenger) is as the likeness of one who calleth unto that which heareth naught except a shout and cry. Deaf, dumb, blind, therefore they have no sense.

015.081 And we gave them Our revelations, but they were averse to them.

 

[Adam Caramon]

So why do you live in a country which follows some aspects of sharia?

Exactly if they agree with the Qur'an. Just as you have to as well in terms of common laws around the world.

You're not understanding aziz. Australia did not base its laws on sharia. If an Australian law coincides with something in sharia law, it is pure coincidence. Which means there is no value to you pointing out, though you seem to think so.


As a point of curiosity, you said:

Lightwave, no one who is alive today needs to go to Hell fire. All that is required is to obtain the necessary info to believe in God and hence save themselves and their loved ones.

What about people that were alive before Islam was invented/introduced (based on what you believe)? Do they get a free pass, or do they all go to Hell because they just happened to be born before salvation was introduced?

 

[aziz rasul]

Murder and stealing are outlawed in places where Sharia is not taken into account in the slightest.

I agree, but the point I'm making to those who utterly reject Islam and the Sharia is that they are rejecting through a lack of knowledge. Hate clouds there judgement. The following verse is given in the Qur'an in context to the very first murder that took place when Qabil (Cain) murdered his younger brother Habil (Abel).

005.027 But recite unto them with truth the tale of the two sons of Adam, how they offered each a sacrifice, and it was accepted from the one of them and it was not accepted from the other. (The one) said: I will surely kill thee. (The other) answered: Allah accepteth only from those who ward off (evil).

005.028 Even if thou stretch out thy hand against me to kill me, I shall not stretch out my hand against thee to kill thee, lo! I fear Allah, the Lord of the Worlds.

005.029 Lo! I would rather thou shouldst bear the punishment of the sin against me and thine own sin and become one of the owners of the fire. That is the reward of evil-doers.

005.030 But (the other's) mind imposed on him the killing of his brother, so he slew him and became one of the losers.

005.031 Then Allah sent a raven scratching up the ground, to show him how to hide his brother's naked corpse. He said: Woe unto me! Am I not able to be as this raven and so hide my brother's naked corpse ? And he became repentant.

005.032 For that cause We decreed for the Children of Israel that whosoever killeth a human being for other than manslaughter or corruption in the earth, it shall be as if he had killed all mankind, and whoso saveth the life of one, it shall be as if he had saved
the life of all mankind. Our messengers came unto them of old with clear proofs (of Allah's Sovereignty), but afterwards lo! many of them became prodigals in the earth.

 

[aziz rasul]

You're not understanding aziz. Australia did not base its laws on sharia. If an Australian law coincides with something in sharia law, it is pure coincidence. Which means there is no value to you pointing out, though you seem to think so.

I know that Australia did not base their laws on sharia, but that simply makes my argument even stronger. If unbelievers independently can come with laws that are enshrined in sharia, the they cannot logically say Islam is completely wrong. That is the point I keep stressing. Utter rejection of Islam makes no sense just as we cannot utterly reject other religions of which some aspects we can accept. So when in the UK a few years ago people were up in arms as to why the archbishop of Canterbury advocated some Sharia to be part of the UK laws, what people weren't understanding was that UK follows some of the principles of Sharia already.

What about people that were alive before Islam was invented/introduced (based on what you believe)? Do they get a free pass, or do they all go to Hell because they just happened to be born before salvation was introduced?

Islam began at the time of Adam (peace be upon him) so there were no 'people' before Islam as you put it. No one gets a free pass. Those who ACCEPT God will PASS, those who REJECT God will FAIL. Simple as that. That is why God has sent 124,000 prophets over the past many thousands of years to warn each community. After all there are many people who are reverting to Islam even as I write and they were brought up in an unIslamic environment.

A recent case was a 19 year woman, in the town that I stay, accepted Islam and she wanted to wear the Jilbaab. Her parents told her she couldn't do that while she lived inside their home. She didn't say anything. Her mother asked her why don't you say anything as you normally did. She replied that Islam does not allow her to disrespect her parents. At this comment, her father relented and said she could wear the jilbaab as she wanted.

There are many stories I can give having met many people who have reverted to Islam over the past many decades that I have met.

 

[Alc]

I agree, but the point I'm making to those who utterly reject Islam and the Sharia is that they are rejecting through a lack of knowledge. Hate clouds there judgement.

Unless I misunderstand, to be a TRUE Muslim you need to accept the whole book? If I agree with one part of it, I still reserve the right to reject the book as an entire entity if there is one thing I find untrue/unrealistic.

Harry Potter leaves from a London train station to go to wizard school. London is real, I worked there. That station exists, I've seen it. Schools exist, I went to one. I still reject the book as being a true story.

 

[Galaxiom]

So why do you live in a country which follows some aspects of sharia? Is murder and stealing not a crime in Australia? Are people allowed openly to commit promiscuity and not be punished?

As we keep pointing out but you refuse to accept, the concurrence of some of our laws with Sharia is purely coincidental.

While murder and theft are crimes in Australia, the sexual behaviour of consenting adults is consider a personal decision. These matters are only crimes in the fascist doctrine of religion.

A Muslim man marry up to 4 women, that is correct. But from what you said again you fail to understand the concepts behind it. Your hatred and prejudice blinds you to accepting the truth.

The truth is the concepts behind it are firmly rooted in the domination of women by men based on the misogynistic beliefs of primitive men. It is you that fails to understand because you are incapable of conceiving of anything beyond a book written by a man who was suffering from an recognised cognitive disorder that made him presume that he was communicating with a supernatural entity.

You demonstrate this by the endless irrelevant quotes denigrating any who choose to believe other than the doctrine of your so called "prophet" and threatening retribution against them.

 

[Galaxiom]

I know that Australia did not base their laws on sharia, but that simply makes my argument even stronger. If unbelievers independently can come with laws that are enshrined in sharia, the they cannot logically say Islam is completely wrong.

So you also accept some of the laws of Australia. If you have independently come to these laws then you must logically (using your version of logic) you must accept that all Australian Laws are not completely wrong.

These laws also state that you you must treat all people, both men and women with the same standards. You cannot punish people in Australia for what you term as adultery.

So just as you do not accept Australian law I do not accept sharia.

I reject sharia from its fundamentally fascist foundations. Arbitrary laws based on the psychotic musings of an ancient Arab do not constitute a sound basis for the operation of a democratic society. This is especially so when those arbitrary laws conflict starkly with the values of the society.

If you want to live by sharia law then either stay in or (more likely) go back to the primitive theocratic societies that prefer it. Most of these societies would still be living in the stone age if it was not for their oil and it would be their stupid fascist misogynist philosophy that kept them there.

 

[Galaxiom]

There are many stories I can give having met many people who have reverted to Islam over the past many decades that I have met.

Considering you mix with Muslim people this is hardly surprising. Obviously you won't actually meet people who have left the Muslim faith at a Mosque.

There are vastly more people who have decided to reject all forms of religion and this is clearly shown in the statistics gathered by the government rather than by your personal anecdotes.

 

[Adam Caramon]

I know that Australia did not base their laws on sharia, but that simply makes my argument even stronger. If unbelievers independently can come with laws that are enshrined in sharia, the they cannot logically say Islam is completely wrong.

I think you're not understanding Galaxiom though. He's saying he does not care about Islam, does not have respect for it, etc. He's not saying every word in the Qur'an is wrong, he's saying it is beneath his notice, essentially.

Using your logic, we could say that no one can completely disregard Hitler's Mein Kampf (sp?) as a moral compass, as I am sure there is something in there with a redeemable quality.

When you use terms in this way, you strip away their meaning. Saying something is "completely wrong" means that it is full of errors, or that the person making the statement disagrees with a large percentage of it. If the term "completely wrong" is used in the way you're thinking, i.e. 100% of every letter in a written document, the phrase would then have no meaning.

Islam began at the time of Adam (peace be upon him) so there were no 'people' before Islam as you put it.

And what date, according to you, is "the time of Adam"? And why did you put apostrophes around people?

More importantly, Islam as it is commonly known, did not exist before Muhammad introduced it. Before that people certainly did exist. And there are clear differences between Islam and other major world religions, as well as non-belief.

So, while there was millions of people living in the world, and none of them had ever heard of Islam, when they died, did they go to hell according to your religion for not being followers of Islam?

As another question of curiosity, and I hope this is not culturally insensitive, but as you seem to be a very devoted follower of Islam, and proponent of sharia, why do you live in the UK?

 

[MikeLeBen]

Aziz is allowed to live in the UK probably because he abides by its laws.

Consider this, Aziz:
you are allowed such freedom there, whereas in a country based on Shari'a anyone not following the leader's religion would be persuaded by means of violence, stoning or imprisonment.

Also consider:
when a comic strip is out on the newspapers in that very country that allows such freedom of speech and thought (or other european countries that share the same view, please read this for reference to the most relevant case), why is it that agitations, violence on the streets and panic are only aroused in such cases by the followers of your creed?
The answer is: because they are indoctrinated, cannot accept different cultures and beliefs, and above all are convinced only they possess the shining, incontrovertible truth, in the shape of the dusty quotations you repeatedly posted on this board in bold.

Even so, I think in due time the islamic culture can and shall catch up with some of the more evolved countries, and look past the medieval swamp it's stuck in.

 

[Vassago]

Aziz is allowed to live in the UK probably because he abides by its laws.

Consider this, Aziz:
you are allowed such freedom there, whereas in a country based on Shari'a anyone not following the leader's religion would be persuaded by means of violence, stoning or imprisonment.

Also consider:
when a comic strip is out on the newspapers in that very country that allows such freedom of speech and thought (or other european countries that share the same view, please read this for reference to the most relevant case), why is it that agitations, violence on the streets and panic are only aroused in such cases by the followers of your creed?
The answer is: because they are indoctrinated, cannot accept different cultures and beliefs, and above all are convinced only they possess the shining, incontrovertible truth, in the shape of the dusty quotations you repeatedly posted on this board in bold.

Even so, I think in due time the islamic culture can and shall catch up with some of the more evolved countries, and look past the medieval swamp it's stuck in.

Don't confuse the Islamic culture with extremists. Extremists are no more true Muslims than Christian extremists are true Christians. People need to stop lumping them together. I have many Muslim friends who came from places that are peaceful. There are extremists out there inciting violence to those who don't believe what they do, taking Sharia to a higher level, but the overall majority do not.

 

[Lightwave]

Aziz

You are aware that in many Muslim countries apostasy (in this case rejection of Islam) is illegal and carries the death penalty in some?

I suspect this will be a bit of a hindarance to people admitting that they are leaving the faith.
Very likely they live in fear of expressing their true opinions or even thinking about lapsing in faith.

You are maybe lucky you live here surely you wouldn't want people criminalised simply for losing their faith? How can this be justified?