Cult of Hank

[Sarbani]

[MENTION=17856]Sarbani[/MENTION]

1.) Proof in this context, would be a mathematical construct which requires rigor of all perceivable cases. Your original statement was about "nothingness causing the universe made more sense than a centaur carrying Muhammad"

I don't know for sure, but I won't say god just because the Qur'an says so. Nothingness is the closest explanation we have without resorting to superstitions. If, and IF, god does indeed exist (I don't believe he does), then it sure as hell won't be the Abrahamic god.

2.) You're side stepping, your reasoning was that there's no centaurs in heaven, therefore it's false. What are you basing this on?

Lol, I never said that centaurs not being in heaven is the only reason why it can't be true. The whole miraj story just wreaks of nonsense babbling.

[Iblis_Efreetzai]

I don't know for sure, but I won't say god just because the Qur'an says so. Nothingness is the closest explanation we have without resorting to superstitions. If, and IF, god does indeed exist (I don't believe he does), then it sure as hell won't be the Abrahamic god.

2.) You're side stepping, your reasoning was that there's no centaurs in heaven, therefore it's false. What are you basing this on?

Lol, I never said that centaurs not being in heaven is the only reason why it can't be true. The whole miraj story just wreaks of nonsense babbling.

You're doing what's called BAIT AND SWITCH. You've done this previously as well. We've established that it has nothing to do with whether you knew something for sure. Your claim was X made more sense than Y. I wanted to see your reasoning.

What makes nothingngess non-superstition, and why would it be more reasonable than the other things you allocate as superstition? Your remark still begs the question.

Why wouldn't it be the Abrahamic God?

What's nonsensical about the M'iraj, that couldn't be explained if we accept e possibility of places like Heaven as you did with your premise?

[Sarbani]

What makes nothingngess non-superstition, and why would it be more reasonable than the other things you allocate as superstition? Your remark still begs the question.

If god existed, he would have given proof. Its impossible to prove the universe came from nothingness or that it didn't come from nothingness. However, if god existed, there would be an iota of proof since he's...well god.

Why wouldn't it be the Abrahamic God?

Cause all Abrahamic texts are full of hogwash.

What's nonsensical about the M'iraj, that couldn't be explained if we accept e possibility of places like Heaven as you did with your premise

Like I would ever accept such a retarded premise, lmao.

[Iblis_Efreetzai]

If god existed, he would have given proof. Its impossible to prove the universe came from nothingness or that it didn't come from nothingness. However, if god existed, there would be an iota of proof since he's...well god.

Ok Now we're getting somewhere, But if it's impossible to prove that the universe came from nothing or not. Then that admits that God-is a reasonable hypothesis within that framework. Which thus nullifies the position that God would have have to have given proof, if he existed.

...BUT Since you accept the premise that it's impossible to prove the nature of the universe, that means that proof of God would give would be impossible for you to show, thus based on your assumptions, you've proven the existence of God, by contradiction.



QED.

Cause all Abrahamic texts are full of hogwash.

Circular reasoning, "Abrahamic texts are false because they're hogwash, they're hogwash because they're false".

Like I would ever accept such a retarded premise, lmao.

Your previous remark assumed you had information about what's in heaven. which was your reasoning to concluding what's isn't in there. Which is internally contradictory if you don't accept the premise.

[Sarbani]

...BUT Since you accept the premise that it's impossible to prove God, that means that proof God would give would be impossible for you to show, thus based on your assumptions, you've proven God the existence of God, by contradiction.

If god shows himself, then I'll believe he exists. Until then, I'm not gonna say he does.

Circular reasoning, "Abrahamic religions are false because they're hogwash, they're hogwash because they're false".

1. Islam has a prophet that can split moons, have his heart cleansed by angels, and fly on a centaur to heave.
2. Christianity believes in the trinity.
3. They believe in evolution.
4. They believe Jesus was born to a virgin.

Your previous remark assumed you had information about what's in heaven. which was your reasoning to concluding what's isn't in there. Which is internally contradictory if you don't accept the premise.

Well I'm telling you right now that the concept of heaven is retarded so stop trying to shoehorn your nonsense Muslim heaven concept into my arguments.

[Iblis_Efreetzai]

If god shows himself, then I'll believe he exists. Until then, I'm not gonna say he does.

You don't have to say it; if we take your premises, you've made the existence of God a reasonable conclusion. Well done chap!

1. Islam has a prophet that can split moons, have his heart cleansed by angels, and fly on a centaur to heave.
2. Christianity believes in the trinity.
3. They believe in evolution.
4. They believe Jesus was born to a virgin.

What in any of that is hogwash if we accept the supernatural as a premise?

Well I'm telling you right now that the concept of heaven is retarded so stop trying to shoehorn your nonsense Muslim heaven concept into my arguments.

You already did it yourself; you made a pronouncement of what can exist or can't exist in Heaven. Would you like me to relay your quote back to you?

You've essentially made your own argument internally contradictory. Sloppy work my friend.

[Sarbani]

What in any of that is hogwash if we accept the supernatural as a premise?

The fact that crazy stuff like that are mentioned should be enough proof to critical thinkers that god doesn't exist. If you accept a supernatural as premise, then all religions can be true.

You already did it yourself; you made a pronouncement of what can exist or can't exist in Heaven. Would you like me to relay your quote back to you?

Yes, show me my quote where I accepted the premise of heaven.

[Iblis_Efreetzai]

The fact that crazy stuff like that are mentioned should be enough proof to critical thinkers that god doesn't exist.

But you have internal contradictions in your own arguments; which serves as a counter example that denial of these has nothing to do with critical thinking.

Yes, show me my quote where I accepted the premise of heaven.

2) Because people don't ride centaurs to heaven, lol. .

To make this remark assumes heaven as a premise how things get there and so on.

[Sarbani]

But you have internal contradictions in your own arguments; which serves as a counter example that denial of these has nothing to do with critical thinking.

How is it possible Islam is true and that Hinduism isn't if we are under the premise that a supernatural being exists?

To make this remark assumes heaven as a premise how things get there and so on.

That doesn't necessarily mean heaven exists. But I can see where you're coming from.

I'm telling you right now though it doesn't exist, so put a rest to that argument.

[Iblis_Efreetzai]

How is it possible Islam is true and that Hinduism isn't if we are under the premise that a supernatural being exists?

Islam doesn't say that all of Hinduism is false. Islam teaches that Allah(swt) sent Prophets and Messengers all over the world. So the inner core that may have founded Hinduism maybe true.

I'm telling you right now though it doesn't exist.

How do you know what exists or what doesn't?

[Sarbani]

Islam doesn't say that all of Hinduism is false. Islam teaches that Allah(swt) sent Prophets and Messengers all over the world. So the inner core that may have founded Hinduism maybe true.

If a supernatural being capable of everything exists, why can't 100% of Hinduism be true?

[Iblis_Efreetzai]

If a supernatural being capable of everything exists, why can't 100% of Hinduism be true?

Your question is an epidemiological one about why there is a state of truth and a state of false in the first place. If there wasn't a true or false, nothing would be knowable for humans. Without an concept of true or false, you could not make any conclusion about anything.

[Sarbani]

Your question is an epidemiological one about why there is a state of truth and a state of false in the first place. If there wasn't a true or false, nothing would be knowable for humans. Without an concept of true or false, you could not make any conclusion about anything.

In other words, you're following Islam blindly. Gotcha.

[Iblis_Efreetzai]

In other words, you're following Islam blindly. Gotcha.

Care to explain how a remark about epistemology suggests following something blindly?

[Manzareh]

Why cant god do this!?? what doesnt he just do that!!?? why this and why that, i demand god, DEMAND him to be interrogated and questioned. LOL bloody spoilt brats, humble yourselves. Your human brain hasn't the capacity to understand everything or the reasons for why the supreme being has made certain decisions. This life is a test made for us and there is a recompense for those that had 'faith' and believed in the words of the Qur'an and teachings of Muhammed pbuh. You will find out what god has promised to show you when you are dead, your lack of patience cannot rush God to show you in this life (if he does not want to show you), he don't need to rush for anyone. I personally have witnessed miracles from Allah and have seem impossible things turn into possible after a simple sincere supplication.