FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups  Who is OnlineWho is Online   Join! (free) Join! (free)  
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 
  • Welcome
  • Guest

  • Main Menu
  • Sticky Articles
  • Open Support Tickets
Naughty hadiths
Page Previous  1, 2
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    FREE FAITH, EXPRESSION AND THOUGHT Forum Index -> Hadith and Sunnah
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Please Register and Login to this forum to stop seeing this advertising.






Add Karma

rated by members
Add Comment
Show Comments


online/offline
Posted:     Post subject:

Back to top
Baal
Moderator
Moderator


Joined: 15 Nov 2007
Posts: 445



Add Karma

rated by members
Add Comment
Show Comments


online/offline
PostPosted: Fri Jan 04, 2008 2:02 am    Post subject: Re: This!  Reply with quote

Pazuzu bin Hanbi wrote:
Baal wrote:
And who designed him? Is he such a simple little Amoeba that he was created out of nothing? Yet we the humans HAD to have been created by someone?

If god can exist from nothing, then so can humans. Find a better argument to present your god.


Q4T (Quoted for Truth). It interests me how people can claim that everything had an origin, and take this as far back as the universe itself (saying therefore God must have created the universe), yet when asked “Who created God?” their logic stops there! Why not go with Occam’s Razor, and accept the simplest logical conclusion, that of the Universe itself, without going into infinite regression (who created God? Who created that creator of God, etc)?

And the same people, when told, they can not answer you. Yet come back few month later with the same argument that god must have created the universe yet no one created him.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
brainout
Senior Member
Senior Member


Joined: 17 Nov 2007
Posts: 275


Location: Houston
Add Karma

rated by members
Add Comment
Show Comments


online/offline
PostPosted: Sat Jan 05, 2008 1:15 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

No god can exist from nothing;  nothing creates Godness, which is immaterial and nonspacetime, by definition.  The God would always just be, no beginning.  Beginning belongs to finity concepts.  

I don't even know of a single holy book ever on this planet which claims there was a time when at least 'some' version of its own gods, did NOT exist.  Life must come from Life, so that means LIFE just "is", first.  Then all other life can have existence.

Trouble with polytheism is that the "gods" aren't really gods at all.  They are unequal, usually have some birthing, have limited power and limited turf -- kinda like X-men.  That's not at all what "god" would mean.

Now for those who prefer atheism, just call it "life" and not "god".  That's what animism is, anyway.  Evolution is just animism with the "god" idea removed.  So call it "life" instead, lol.  "Life" just always existed.  Then everything else you want to say atheistically, will flow logically from that.
_________________
God needs no defending, and always begs the premise.  For belief of any kind, always needs self-auditing.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
HomoErectus
Moderator
Moderator


Joined: 27 Nov 2007
Posts: 332


Location: Germany
Add Karma

rated by members
Add Comment
Show Comments


online/offline
PostPosted: Tue Jan 08, 2008 8:14 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

brainout wrote:
No god can exist from nothing;  nothing creates Godness, which is immaterial and nonspacetime, by definition.  The God would always just be, no beginning.  Beginning belongs to finity concepts.



Hi, dear brainout

This is exactly the point where the human mind is too limited to comprehend this...

We cannot really understand something to have been there since ever, and will be there forever...

What is "forever" ?

What is "endless" ?

I confess, I always end up looking for a "beginning" and an "ending", when I TRY to make my mind fly endlessly...

Since my personal "spaceship" started at some point [on this planet] it logically must be "landing" at some other point, somewhere, at least "somewhere"...

Taking it over from this other thread, even letting my "spaceship" fly out of this "bladder", our universe... into the "space" outside, into the "nothingness", no light, no energy, no nothing, and - if possible - even "more" endless than the former endlessness, nothing applies there, my ship can fly and fly and fly, till "the cows come home" or not...

I can comprehend as much as that I am not capable of really comprehending that.

Boy, would I feel lost and lonely out there, flying endlessly...

And even knowing that flying in nothingness, NOTHING can happen to me or my ship... I would end up being scared shitless, or bored to death...


Quote:

I don't even know of a single holy book ever on this planet which claims there was a time when at least 'some' version of its own gods, did NOT exist.  Life must come from Life, so that means LIFE just "is", first.  Then all other life can have existence.



Yes, thats our human logic...


Quote:

Trouble with polytheism is that the "gods" aren't really gods at all.  They are unequal, usually have some birthing, have limited power and limited turf -- kinda like X-men.  That's not at all what "god" would mean.

Now for those who prefer atheism, just call it "life" and not "god".  That's what animism is, anyway.  Evolution is just animism with the "god" idea removed.  So call it "life" instead, lol.  "Life" just always existed.  Then everything else you want to say atheistically, will flow logically from that.



My agnosticism - I still leave the possibility of such a thing as "god" - but like All_Brains has put it, he/she/it is surely not in any of the existing "holy books", can't be - and my agnosticism questions all these concepts, including "Why can't gods die ?", why and by what logic do they HAVE to be ETERNAL, and as you can see by my diction, I also question "Why only ONE God ?" - seriously, WHO said its just ONE God, by what logic, - aaaah yes, the "prophets" of various "religions" have said so, huhh -  so we are again at the point of believing socalled "prophets", whatever religion...

See what I mean ?

Out of my eyes - and sure, I may be totally wrong on this, but then again, I might be right  - I can only try to CLEAN my picture of ALL these prefabricated limitations which are attributed to a possible god or gods...

ANYTHING goes, when thinking about such an existence like "God" !

I often refuse to let my mind think about it, since its actually a waste of my human time on this [still] wonderful planet, and if there's a "God" he surely doesn't lower himself to human limited thinking, expecting me to BOW down like before an emperor, I can't understand "him" anyway, but then maybe... who knows...

Researching religions is a good thing, you can find out a lot about the human psyche...
The more I know about them [religions], the more of an Atheist I become !
_________________
Upright is better than bent-over !
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
brainout
Senior Member
Senior Member


Joined: 17 Nov 2007
Posts: 275


Location: Houston
Add Karma

rated by members
Add Comment
Show Comments


online/offline
PostPosted: Wed Jan 09, 2008 9:30 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Reading your latest post, HomoErectus:  yeah, what is "forever" and "endless" and "beginning" and "ending"!  These are all terms which by nature presume TIME.  True Infinity would be timeLESS, hence all such terms would be subsets of infinity, and more properly belong to the FUNCTION of FINITY.  At least, mathematically.

Mathematically, there must be SOMETHING or SOMEONE who has no beginning.  The largest set containing all others must be a stasis.  Within it, all that movement, beginnings, endings, endless going on, can occur.  But what HOLDS it must be a stasis.  So you can say math was always there, and you'll have to say "life" at very least -- which makes real sense, for it's not only matter and energy, we see.  We see something (or Someone) acting on everything, and that something (etc.) has neither mass nor energy as its own property.

Atheism is not precluded here.  Actually, we have an IDENTITY question of what or who is acting on matter and energy.  But that there is action upon both, no one would deny.  It's a THIRD ELEMENT (there, that's politically neutral) which must be defined, if one is to be scientific and logical.

As for your spaceship, the "bladder" of this universe would be its boundaries.  The concept of alternative universes is, I think, specious.  Better definition would be had if one thinks of the meaning of probability.  That is, all the math which SEEMS to point to other universes is ACTUALLY pointing to OTHER POTENTIALS, rather than to reality.  For we know that math can always play WHAT IF, yet reality is always but one thing.  It depends on which variables interact in which formulas at any given moment.  And we have to SAY "moment", because all finity is confined to time (or spacetime, if you prefer).  So time is the reality in which we live, the bladder being also a spatial thing, which means finite.  But math is neither mass nor energy, but rather a set of principles which to some extent we can predictably determine.

Next, you go to the whole question of "god".  I think the correct and logical starting point is to determine WHAT "god" must mean.  When in English we type "God" with a capital "G", it means the quasi-monotheistic idea, of Infinite Personhood.  In polytheism by contrast, "god" with a little "g" is used to mean what amounts to an above-human person of limited lifespan (i.e., has a beginning and no ending or has an ending too), and limited powers, no two "gods" having the same abilities, powers, turf, etc.  That seems to be the logical gamut of ideas of "godness", for lack of a better term.

Religion is always useless, imo.  Most you can get from it are ideas about what "god" they believe in.  And then, extrapolate out the attributes presented to see if those attributes are logically true.  I prefer math, and I find Bible helpful in deciding what these attributes ought to be.  But sometimes the other 'holy books' are helpful too.  But the religions?  LOL they are all about control.  God is not people, so "control" would not be a need.  Well, when I say that I betray a belief in "God" not "gods".  For the latter being limited, would need some kind of mechanism for control.

What say you?  Enjoyed your post.  Thanks.
_________________
God needs no defending, and always begs the premise.  For belief of any kind, always needs self-auditing.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Pazuzu bin Hanbi
Senior Member
Senior Member


Joined: 01 Jan 2008
Posts: 156


Location: Save Warp
Add Karma

rated by members
Add Comment
Show Comments


online/offline
PostPosted: Wed Jan 09, 2008 2:22 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I’ve got a great one for you, drawn as usual from Sahih al–Bukhari:

Volume 5, Book 58, Number 188:

Narrated 'Amr bin Maimun:

During the pre–lslamic period of ignorance I saw a she–monkey surrounded by a number of monkeys. They were all stoning it, because it had committed illegal sexual intercourse. I too, stoned it along with them.


_________________
$_=q{$_=q{Q};s/Q/$_/;print};s/Q/$_/;print
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
HomoErectus
Moderator
Moderator


Joined: 27 Nov 2007
Posts: 332


Location: Germany
Add Karma

rated by members
Add Comment
Show Comments


online/offline
PostPosted: Wed Jan 09, 2008 7:05 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Dear brainout

Very wise comments from you like always, since I'm momentarily short of time, I will return to your input later...


Pazuzu bin Hanbi wrote:
I’ve got a great one for you, drawn as usual from Sahih al–Bukhari:

Volume 5, Book 58, Number 188:

Narrated 'Amr bin Maimun:

During the pre–lslamic period of ignorance I saw a she–monkey surrounded by a number of monkeys. They were all stoning it, because it had committed illegal sexual intercourse. I too, stoned it along with them.




As a quickie...
This is really a funny story, especially coming from a guy named "Amr bin maimoon"

In Farsi/Dari language "maimoon" means MONKEY !!!

"Nashe maimoon" would mean "drunk, stoned like a monkey" !

And the guys name "amr" = lord, "bin"= son of, and "maimoon"= monkey !

So, the "lord, son of the monkey" is telling a story about monkeys... Very Happy  Very Happy  Very Happy
isn't that cute ?
hehe...
_________________
Upright is better than bent-over !
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Pazuzu bin Hanbi
Senior Member
Senior Member


Joined: 01 Jan 2008
Posts: 156


Location: Save Warp
Add Karma

rated by members
Add Comment
Show Comments


online/offline
PostPosted: Thu Jan 10, 2008 10:04 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Makes you wonder if someone stuck that in for a laugh… Didn’t know about ‘maimoon’, but I recognise ‘nasha’ because it means ‘intoxication’ in Urdu — obviously drawn from the Parsee.
_________________
$_=q{$_=q{Q};s/Q/$_/;print};s/Q/$_/;print
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Baal
Moderator
Moderator


Joined: 15 Nov 2007
Posts: 445



Add Karma

rated by members
Add Comment
Show Comments


online/offline
PostPosted: Thu Jan 10, 2008 7:48 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

True, in Arabic Maimoon means monkey, but it is an old word that is not commonly used. I know it because it came in a song in a movie i watched as a kid.

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    FREE FAITH, EXPRESSION AND THOUGHT Forum Index -> Hadith and Sunnah All times are GMT + 11 Hours
Page Previous  1, 2
Page 2 of 2
 
 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum

Card File  Gallery  Forum Archive
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
Create your own free forum | Buy a domain to use with your forum