Debunking a Creator

[Aetherous]

You do understand the whole point of D.O. is that you are made of parts i.e. causes and conditions?

 

That's called impermanence.

 

Of course I understand that. This should have been clear by now, since we've gone over it multiple times already.

 

But this has absolutely nothing to do with point I made regarding infinite regression making manifestation or reality eternal. And it also has nothing to do with why I made that point, in saying that we can possibly have an eternal being with an intelligence and action which changes. It's not contradictory to have answered "both" when you get that explanation. Reality does not depend on false definitions of words, such as "eternal" meaning "absolutely unchanging".

 

False premise debunked. Again.

 

Nothing personal...but at this point, I fully realize how absolutely fruitless it is to continue a discussion with you, RongzomFan. You've shown very little interest in arriving at truth through logic, and as a result of this behavior, you haven't been able to 'debunk the Creator'. I refer you to the logic textbook I hyperlinked previously...it will help you in your endeavor, if it's possible.

 

From now on, I'm not spending any more of my time responding to this thread.

 

PLEASE DO NOT MISREPRESENT WHAT I'VE SAID AGAIN. Thanks.

 

This is misrepresenting Buddhist tenet systems.

 

Perhaps you're right. Explain how? Note...I'm no longer responding to anything in this thread but I'll see what you have to say and consider whether it's true or false.

Edited December 11, 2013 by turtle shell

[RongzomFan]

How is a series of causes eternal?

 

According to your logic humans are eternal, since there is a series of humans.

[RongzomFan]

Of course I understand that. This should have been clear by now, since we've gone over it multiple times already.

 

But this has absolutely nothing to do with point I made regarding infinite regression making manifestation or reality eternal.

 

Its a fucking series of causes.

 

Jesus fucking christ.

[RongzomFan]

Either a Creator changes or doesn't change.

Either way you are fucked.

End of Thread.

[yabyum24]

Jesus fucking christ.

... so you reject the creator but accept his son?

[RongzomFan]

It's not contradictory to have answered "both" when you get that explanation.

 

ITS NOT CONTRADICTORY FOR A CREATOR TO BOTH CHANGE AND NOT CHANGE????

 

LMAO

 

Fine, you just get the faults of both positions.

[yabyum24]

ITS NOT CONTRADICTORY FOR A CREATOR TO BOTH CHANGE AND NOT CHANGE????

A creator can do what he wants - surely!

[adept]

Of course it does. I wasn't raised Muslim. I have no affinity to Islam.

Neither was I but I've read the Qur'an and found that it contains information which scientists have only just discovered. It is also a mathematical masterpiece with the verse and chapter numbers corresponding with such things like the elements of the periodic table, golden ratio, fibonnaci sequence etc etc. There are many links online for further study and investigation. An illiterate sand dweller in 7th century couldn't possibly have made it up. Some of the maths need computers to make sense of it all. Therefore it is the word of God. Allah is the Arabic name. He is the same God of all Abrahamic religions

Mind boggling stuff.

[RongzomFan]

Neither was I but I've read the Qur'an and found that it contains information which scientists have only just discovered. It is also a mathematical masterpiece with the verse and chapter numbers corresponding with such things like the elements of the periodic table, golden ratio, fibonnaci sequence etc etc. There are many links online for further study and investigation. An illiterate sand dweller in 7th century couldn't possibly have made it up. Some of the maths need computers to make sense of it all. Therefore it is the word of God. Allah is the Arabic name. He is the same God of all Abrahamic religions

Mind boggling stuff.

 

http://wikiislam.net/wiki/Scientific_Errors_in_the_Qur'an

[RongzomFan]

http://wikiislam.net/wiki/Contradictions_in_the_Qur'an

[adept]

 

http://wikiislam.net/wiki/Scientific_Errors_in_the_Qur'an

That website is notorious for its unfounded attacks on Islam and so isn't a particular good resource of information.

[RongzomFan]

That website is notorious for its unfounded attacks on Islam and so isn't a particular good resource of information.

 

Then google "scientific errors in the quran".

 

There are many websites.

[RongzomFan]

That website is notorious for its unfounded attacks on Islam

 

BTW, no its not.

 

Its a great resource.

[RongzomFan]

The Koran is corrupted

 

The following is straight up Hadith from an Islamic website on the corrpution of the Koran.

 

http://sunnah.com/bukhari/66/27

 

"Narrated Ibn 'Abbas: Umar said, Ubai was the best of us in the recitation (of the Qur'an) yet we leave some of what he recites.' Ubai says, 'PI have taken it from the mouth of Allah's Messenger () and will not leave for anything whatever."

 

http://sunnah.com/muslim/12/156

 

"We used to recite a surah which resembled in length and severity to (Surah) Bara'at. I have, however, forgotten it with the exception of this which I remember out of it:" If there were two valleys full of riches, for the son of Adam, he would long for a third valley, and nothing would fill the stomach of the son of Adam but dust." And we used so recite a surah which resembled one of the surahs of Musabbihat, and I have forgotten it, but remember (this much) out of it:" Oh people who believe, why do you say that which you do not practise" (lxi 2.) and" that is recorded in your necks as a witness (against you) and you would be asked about it on the Day of Resurrection" (xvii. 13)."

 

http://sunnah.com/urn/641130

"Az-Zuhri said: "'Ubaidullah bin 'Abdullah bin 'Utbah informed me that 'Abdullah bin Mas'ud disliked Zaid bin Thabit copying the Musahif, and he said: 'O you Muslims people! Avoid copying the Mushaf and the recitation of this man. By Allah! When I accepted Islam he was but in the loins of a disbelieving man' - meaning Zaid bin Thabit - and it was regarding this that 'Abdullah bin Mas'ud said: 'O people of Al-'Iraq! Keep the Musahif that are with you, and conceal them."

Edited December 11, 2013 by RongzomFan

[adept]

 

The Koran is corrupted

 

The following is straight up Hadith from an Islamic website on the corrpution of the Koran.

 

http://sunnah.com/bukhari/66/27

 

"Narrated Ibn 'Abbas: Umar said, Ubai was the best of us in the recitation (of the Qur'an) yet we leave some of what he recites.' Ubai says, 'PI have taken it from the mouth of Allah's Messenger () and will not leave for anything whatever."

 

http://sunnah.com/muslim/12/156

 

"We used to recite a surah which resembled in length and severity to (Surah) Bara'at. I have, however, forgotten it with the exception of this which I remember out of it:" If there were two valleys full of riches, for the son of Adam, he would long for a third valley, and nothing would fill the stomach of the son of Adam but dust." And we used so recite a surah which resembled one of the surahs of Musabbihat, and I have forgotten it, but remember (this much) out of it:" Oh people who believe, why do you say that which you do not practise" (lxi 2.) and" that is recorded in your necks as a witness (against you) and you would be asked about it on the Day of Resurrection" (xvii. 13)."

 

 

http://sunnah.com/urn/641130

 

"Az-Zuhri said: "'Ubaidullah bin 'Abdullah bin 'Utbah informed me that 'Abdullah bin Mas'ud disliked Zaid bin Thabit copying the Musahif, and he said: 'O you Muslims people! Avoid copying the Mushaf and the recitation of this man. By Allah! When I accepted Islam he was but in the loins of a disbelieving man' - meaning Zaid bin Thabit - and it was regarding this that 'Abdullah bin Mas'ud said: 'O people of Al-'Iraq! Keep the Musahif that are with you, and conceal them."

Hadith's are the fabricated works of man and are therefore subject to corruption and biases. According to the Qur'an, no other book is needed in order to understand the message of the Qur'an. I have no desire to read hadith's or sunnah.

[RongzomFan]

Hadith's are the fabricated works of man and are therefore subject to corruption and biases. According to the Qur'an, no other book is needed in order to understand the message of the Qur'an. I have no desire to read hadith's or sunnah.

 

 

But the Hadith say the Koran is corrupted.

 

 

You do understand that al-Bukhari etc. are considered the best Hadith by even Muslims right?

Edited December 11, 2013 by RongzomFan

[RongzomFan]

Muhammed's own scribe, Abdullah Ibn Saad, said Muhammed was a fake.

 

Abdullah Ibn Saad wrote some of the verses of the Koran.

[adept]

 

But the Hadith say the Koran is corrupted.

That is because the authors of these hadith's wanted to control the masses by creating religious sects and dividing Islam into sunni, Shi'a, Sufi etc etc. This is why today you have crazy stuff like muslim beards, hijab, burkha, stoning, religious intolerance, touching the kaba etc etc. The Qur'an continuously warns against such corruption and deceit.

[RongzomFan]

That is because the authors of these hadith's wanted to control the masses by creating religious sects and dividing Islam into sunni, Shi'a, Sufi etc etc. This is why today you have crazy stuff like muslim beards, hijab, burkha, stoning, religious intolerance, touching the kaba etc etc. The Qur'an continuously warns against such corruption and deceit.

 

Fine.

 

Go by the Koran itself:

 

Google "contradictions in the koran" or "contradictions in the quran".

[adept]

 

 

But the Hadith say the Koran is corrupted.

 

 

You do understand that al-Bukhari etc. are considered the best Hadith by even Muslims right?

 

There is a huge difference between traditional religious sectarian Islam and Qur'anic only monotheism.

[RongzomFan]

There is a huge difference between traditional religious sectarian Islam and Qur'anic only monotheism.

 

The early Hadith contain the history of Islam. Facts are facts.

[RongzomFan]

Fine.

 

Go by the Koran itself:

 

Google "contradictions in the koran" or "contradictions in the quran".

[Dolokhov]

I think one of the problems with this thread is that we're using many different definitions of the word "creator". If you mean an invisible bearded guy sitting on a throne in the clouds, I'll agree with you that I don't believe in that sort of "God". That doesn't mean I don't believe in a God altogether though.

 

RongzomFan, the problem with the "infinite causes" thing is that that argument is only intended for created things: "every thing that comes into being must have a cause." But the creator (just like the Tao of Lao Tzu) does not come into physical being. God transcends being, at least in the Tao and in the Orthodox version of Christianity:

 

"Since God is absolute existence, absolute goodness and absolute wisdom, or rather, to put it more exactly, since God is beyond all such things, there is nothing whatsoever that is opposite to Him." -St Maximos the Confessor

[RongzomFan]

I think one of the problems with this thread is that we're using many different definitions of the word "creator". If you mean an invisible bearded guy sitting on a throne in the clouds, I'll agree with you that I don't believe in that sort of "God". That doesn't mean I don't believe in a God altogether though.

 

RongzomFan, the problem with the "infinite causes" thing is that that argument is only intended for created things: "every thing that comes into being must have a cause." But the creator (just like the Tao of Lao Tzu) does not come into physical being. God transcends being, at least in the Tao and in the Orthodox version of Christianity:

 

"Since God is absolute existence, absolute goodness and absolute wisdom, or rather, to put it more exactly, since God is beyond all such things, there is nothing whatsoever that is opposite to Him." -St Maximos the Confessor

Ok very good.

 

Does your God change or not?

[Dolokhov]

In which way specifically are you asking?