What if everyone just admits that WE DON'T KNOW

[Taverner]

I don't know that there isn't a god. I am an Atheist even. I am convinced there is no god. But I do not KNOW this.

You are say, a Christian, or a Muslim, or a practicing Jew. You believe there is a god. But you don't KNOW.

No one does for sure.

I happen to think its exactly like the teapot analogy put forth by Dawkins. But I still don't KNOW.

[Hydra]

1. But they have "faith"!

Actually, I do believe there is proof that there is a god. That doesn't mean he/she/it has human qualities or cares who we're busy sharing body fluids with.

Just had to throw that monkey wrench into it :evilgrin:

[Taverner]

3. Faith is irrelevant

Because faith does not equal know.

You can convince yourself there is a god.

You don't KNOW though.

[Speck Tater]

14. Two people can have equally strong faith in two opposing beliefs.

Hence, faith does not constitute proof of anything except that the human seems to be predisposed to having faith in "something".

[edhopper]

20. Please solve this ageless debate with your "proof".

Yes, I'm being sarcastic. I have no doubt you believe in God. But you offer something that the world has not yet seen.

[Hydra]

27. I too, was being sarcastic

And it's amazing how I got three responses that didn't get it.

YHVH does indeed exist. The idea that he is some sort of supreme being is laughable, however. He is the result of billions of butterflies flapping in a general direction for 5000 years.

Ideas have power, and they take on a life of their own in time. Ghandi's successful peaceful resistance is one of those things. Darwin's study on the Galapagos. The first atomic bomb. The wolves at Yellowstone.

YHVH is no different. An idea that shaped the thinking of many more people than it was intended to.

[Mountainman]

2. Some power greater than me works with me. I can't understand it but it has happened so many times

in the last 20 some years that I want to attribute it to a god or something.

I'm also thinking of the law of attraction. You think about something or visualize it so that you set in motion the things that will make it happen.

I am doing that right now. I can't sell my house but I want to buy an other one. I have been visualizing this for some time. This week I learned that someone wants to rent my house for a year and that would contribute to my being able to buy another one. So many convergences have to happen to make it work though. I try to not have doubts which is negative thinking.

Sounds quirky I know, but it has worked out so many times for me.

[Taverner]

6. Yes you believe this

You don't KNOW it though.

You can even feel this at work, but you don't KNOW that there is an all seeing all powerful being in charge of everything out there.

What if it were an inner power causing this?

What if it were an aspect of string theory or quantum physics that we just don't understand?

People who died of the Plague thought it was god's vengance, because they didn't have any other explanation. There was no WHO or CDC at the time.

[Bobbieo]

8. My answer has been for years - "I do not believe in Organized Religion."

[gateley]

4. I think some people are afraid not to believe, and afraid

not to KNOW their way is the best way.

[razors edge]

5. That would mess up

the whole divide and conquerer thing.

Not to mention it's drag on the church plate numbers.

[parasim]

7. Wouldn't that make you an Agnostic then?

I thought Atheists were, by definition, convinced that there is no god.

[Taverner]

9. Yes, I am convinced there is no god

But I do not KNOW this, because you cant disprove a negative.

I guess you could call it semantics, but words do mean things.

[parasim]

16. Ah, I see.

I guess I was confused by the first part of this definition of agnostic"

agnostic
1: a person who holds the view that any ultimate reality (as God) is unknown and probably unknowable; broadly : one who is not committed to believing in either the existence or the nonexistence of God or a god
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/agnostic

However, I see that the second part says "one who is not committed to believing".

whereas, the definition for athesim:

atheism
2 a: a disbelief in the existence of deity b: the doctrine that there is no deity
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/atheism

[The Night Owl]

36. To be convinced of something which is not known is to have faith.

I think that the strongest position an atheist should take is to take the position that the possibility that a God exists is so remote that belief in a God is not warranted.

[melody]

10. I'm not convinced of anything

I find too many things that confound and confuse me. Maybe you're just a lot smarter than I am. lol

But you're right, we DON'T know ... and that is the only intellectually honest road.

[Taverner]

12. Agreed

About me being smarter than you :)

Seriously, I do agree that is the only intellectually honest road

[Tangerine LaBamba]

11. My Jesuit training left me with this:

"To those who believe, no explanation is necessary. To those who do not believe, no explanation is possible."

[Taverner]

13. Damn, that is a Koan if I ever saw one

In fact, that is a pro-Atheist argument if there ever were...

[Tangerine LaBamba]

15. See why I love my Jesuit background,

and my Jesuit teachers?

They made an atheist out of me. And they'd be proud of it, because they worked me up hard enough to force me to think and think and think and then draw a conclusion.

[Taverner]

18. Like the Freemasons, I think the Jesuits were a "subvert from within" kinda group

Gotta love 'em!

[JerseygirlCT]

25. That sums it up nicely. And very Jesuit to do so! nt

[Mythsaje]

17. I don't know and I don't care.

I'll even go farther than "I don't know."

[edhopper]

19. So you say you don't KNOW

if Zeus or Odin or Oberon or Baal or any other deity exist? Or is it just the current Judeo-Chirstian-Muslum incarnation you don't Know about.
I can't say I Know that a fellow named Peter Parker isn't in reality Spider-man. But I'm pretty sure I can be 100% certain he doesn't exist.

[Taverner]

21. I am convinced there is no god

There is no god.

But I don't know this, anymore than you know there isn't a gremlin inside your television pushing buttons, and he uses a cloaking device every time you open the back of your television.

[edhopper]

22. What is this "KNOW" idea you have?

100% certitude without doubt? or something more. Because I can say with 100% certitude that there are no gremlins in my television.
And yes you can prove a negative.

There are no prime numbers in this sequence. 4,6,8,9,10,12,14,15,16,18,20.
Prime numbers between 1 and 20. 1,2,3,5,7,11,13,17
No prime numbers in the list. QED

[varkam]

31. Sure there are.

They're just very small, and hide very well whenever you look for them :D

[varkam]

30. I don't know if any of those deities exist or not.

I really don't believe that they do, but then again I could be wrong (though I think that there's about a .5% chance that I am).

[The Night Owl]

37. You're pretty sure you can be 100% sure?

:crazy:

[cosmik debris]

23. Immortality is in the balance

Some people believe that their immortality is based on the opinion they hold concerning their deity. Holding the wrong opinion or no opinion at all can lead to eternal torment, or so they believe. So the "We don't know" option is off the table.

Other people have their entire identity wrapped up in their certainty of the correctness of their opinion. Can you imagine being a preacher whose paycheck is dependent on having the right opinion of the deity? Saying 'We don't know" is a financial disaster--off the table.

And of course, there is cognitive dissonance. Can you imagine spending thirty or forty years tithing thousands of dollars and then admitting that maybe it was not such a wise thing to do? That's not going to happen.

What is known and unknown is not the real issue.

[JerseygirlCT]

24. Of course that's correct

But probably beside the point for people who wish to argue about this!

[ZombieHorde]

26. There is no money in that for any camp.

[Occam Bandage]

28. ...

I know that meditation gives great insight. I know that meditation gives no insight. I know that I have written all three of these sentences from ignorance.

[varkam]

29. I don't know, either. I don't believe, but I could be mistaken.

I think that there would be a lot less strife in the world if we could all allow for the possibility that we might be wrong.

[trotsky]

32. But can we say that we KNOW monsters under the bed don't exist?

Are you allowed to say that you KNOW there isn't a dragon in my garage?

I fully understand the point you're trying to make, but "nobody knows" is a lousy way to approach many aspects of life - in particular, when defining public policy. There ARE things we can know, or at least feel comfortable saying we know until significant evidence proves otherwise. Also there's the idea that certain concepts are so poorly defined, even defined in such a way to be self-contradictory, that their existence can be safely ruled out. Can we say that we KNOW Zeus doesn't exist? How about Minerva?

[The Night Owl]

35. Ceiling Cat can has existence? {EOM}

[SidneyCarton]

33. Indeed, faith does not equal knowing.

For if one could know with certainty, one would not need faith. As to comment by the poster who stated that the formulation of public policy on a basis of faith being an awful idea, they are spot on. Public policy must deal with realities, not impressions.

I cannot prove, nor say in any way that would be considered conclusive, that I know that there is a God. Nevertheless, I believe that one exists, as such belief helps me shape my life and give it meaning. Others do not need such a belief to give their lives meaning and structure, I respect their right to believe as they will, for they cannot know that I am wrong any more than I can know that they are.

[JerseygirlCT]

34. Exactly. That's precisely the way I see it! nt

[and-justice-for-all]

38. Saying 'We do not know' when in fact we do...

is not productive.

There is not any evidence to even hint that there is some benevolent creator. You can have all the 'faith' you want in its regards, but that does not make it true or real. Besides, if something like a benevolent creator did exist, do you think it could have done a better job at letting us know it existed, something other than bronze age scribes in the desert?

There is, without any doubt, no such thing as god(s). Sorry, the just does not work on granted wishes and answered prayers. Because if in fact it did work like that, the world would not as it is.

We are on our own.

[StateRed]

41. easy

If there is a beginning and end to the universe as theorized by the big bang and big crunch, then the matter must have been created in the beginning....unless...

Matter was not created and has always existe. Then it must be eternal and will also never cease to exhist. This theory would not be able to be mathematically proven given the inability to calculate infinity. A belief in this scenario is no different than a belief in an eternal being, both incalculable and taken only in faith.

[edhopper]

42. Not really,

a physicist that espoused this scenario would say it's a conjecture that could explain some things. (I guess this would be the ever expanding/contracting universe.) This conjecture is nothing like the faith that a believer has that God must exist. If another physicist showed him how his theory was unworkable, he would probably abandon it. This rarely happpens to people with faith in God.

[and-justice-for-all]

74. Indeed. nt

[rug]

39. Got me.

[edhopper]

40. I wish the OP

would define what he means by KNOW. Is he just playing a game of Cartesian philosophy on how we KNOW we exist. Or is he saying that there is no true reality that exist. Either way this would be metaphysics and not about the material world. (Yes, they overlap, but his statements seem to point to talking about the physical and not metaphysical.)

[Azooz]

43. what I do know - if it helps

I know that no human has ever written a single page like any in the Quran - and I base my faith (i.e. Know) on that fact till it is proven wrong. I do know that in the 3,000 years of known writing before the Quran there was nothing like it and in the 1,400 since there has been nothing like it either. I call this "language based faith" and admit it is nothing to be proud of, most Muslims do not know Arabic and have no need to learn it - but for "doubt" issues or just a need to "know" Muslims just pick up more Arabic.

I know it sounds lame, but please accept that it'll take you 6 months of Arabic to know if I am right or wrong and another 6 months of Arabic grammar to Know - and it the more Arabic you know the more you'll Know, for sure.

I have never had much doubt, and my faith increases and decreases with mood but never to actually reach the level of knowing there is no God, if only for no one else could write like that. There are 99 names of God in the Quran - that is nothing compared to how they are each used, how many times and in what order. There are 400+ names for lion in Arabic, 300 for sword, and about 1,000 for camel - poets have huge word choices but no one can know all the nouns and use them so easily. These are not fully Arabic words, these are word that enter Arabic from Africa, Europe and Asia - and the poets chose those that they liked. Arabic, back then was purely a nomad language and they picked up 100s of languages on their eons long travels.

Sorry for the length of the reply - I have had this discussion many times with Iranian ex-Muslims and do not know how to get this point thru properly. Believe or not, that is always a personal choice but you will Never know for sure till after this life is over. You make all your decisions based on that choice and try as best you can to pick right - our behavior is judged in Islam as our faith, the better we act and talk the more faith we have and avoide that hot place - language has nothing to do with this - it is just worded much more clearly in the Quran than in all known books.

Learning Arabic will not make you convinced in the existent of God, it will just make it a lot harder for you to say that you do not "know" - you'll still be able to say it, but in Arabic it will not be so easy, that I do know for sure.

Peace

[cyborg_jim]

44. Yawn

[edhopper]

45. And if we could take a single page of the Quran in Arabic

and compare it to a single page of the Bible in Aramaic, and they were similar, would you stop "knowing"?

[Azooz]

48. Aramaic

Jesus (pbuh) is mentioned in the Quran as getting his Aramaic as a baby straight from God, this means his language would have been very pure and much better than a typical adult at that time - so yes, I would love the Aramaic Bilbo over the Arabic Bible translation - and it is not about faith as I said, it is about language. I prefer the Arabic bible to the English one - that is pure taste and means preference alone - but over %90 of the Aramaic Christians of Syria converted to Islam, language past of it for Arabic and Aramaic are brother tongues and share most of the vocabulary, if not the alphabet. It's not easy for me to explain the point that the Quran is much better written than any book has a right to be - but in Arabic I do not have to explain it at all.

Add to that, I have no reason to believe the Bible as a holy book - it is not a part of Islamic theology other than the Quran itself telling Muslims to believe that the Bible is a holy book.

Lets skip comparative holy books - I am talking about comparing the Quran to the best writing humans have ever produced in any language, entertainment, fiction, science - any book that one would enjoy reading for just the sake of reading a good book - pick your favorite, if you know Arabic it will be the Quran, always - just for the way it uses words as they are meant to be used.

Give me any page, any at all and I will not hesitate myself to admit it as good as the Quran if it is, or if it comes close or not at all - or just pick up a bit of Arabic yourself and compare yourself as I do.

[edhopper]

50. And if I talk to a scholar who is fluent in both

Arabic and English and he tells me he finds Shakespeare far more eloquent in the use of language than what he reads in the Quran, does this just become your opinion on your holy book and not some undeniable truth.
I would suggest you look at the work of Ibn Warraq.

[Azooz]

51. a book

I am talking of the Quran as a normal book that I know is good from the wording point of view, religion is not important to this point and "holy" book or not is not the issue. The scholar can tell you either that the Quran is better or that Shakespeare is better, but the truth is that the Quran is much better written book. I "know" both languages well enough and have never seen anything like the Quran.

My point is that I "know" that the Quran is the best written book on Earth, it is a very easy point to disprove - just write or find something equal to it, even one single page - the Quran is not even poetry nor it's writing styled in any way so it should be very easy to write that page, and the World has been waiting for over 1,400 years for such a simple thing.

Ibn Warraq - I am not a theologian and can not understand his points in English - but all he has to do is produce as single page of normal human writing equal to the Quran, that should not be too hard should it?

I love Shakespeare and think he was wasted in English - Arabic would have given him twice as many sentence structures and over 20 times the vocabulary and he would have had many more language tools. He would still have been the same great writer - but not the greatest. Shakespeare would be able to judge that for himself had he tried.

It's not only my opinion, this is a fact that has stood up to 14 centuries of very careful examination by very good writers and poets.

[cyborg_jim]

54. Let's see the peer-reviewed analysis - i.e. not analysis from those with an obvious bias

[Azooz]

56. Then what?

Arabic reviews are many, on grammar alone the Quran always wins, the wording is also the best ever written and indicated incredible word skills - that is all undeniable, easy to prove with a little Arabic but proves nothing other than it being a very well written book - but then I come up against the "so what?".

Arab Christians call it Fitnah, Jews say it's the word of Satan, Arab Atheists say it was written by a mad man, Bedouins said it's the work of Jinn, and other Arabs say it's the product of the greatest black magic, and many other very negative reviews I could bore you with - but all agree that there is nothing they can write that comes close to it's level of expression and eloquence. I admit the bias, but I know very well that the page I am talking about does not exist in either Arabic or English. I do not know this of other languages, but I doubt they would have keep quiet about such a page if they did.

edited - fixed (may to many)

[cyborg_jim]

57. Arabics say "Arabic is the best!"

No possible bias to saying that - and I can't think of any reason whatsoever for Arabic scholars to say the Quran is the best of all the Arabic works!

but all agree that there is nothing they can write that comes close to it's level of expression and eloquence.

Where are you getting this shit? Can you point us to some Christian and Jewish sources for this? Preferably sources that are NOT native Arabic?

I do not know this of other languages, but I doubt they would have keep quiet about such a page if they did.

Pfft - you've got to be fucking kidding me - this is little more than nationalism and nationalism is widespread. You can't be looking very hard if you can't see the Christians proclaiming the KJV as the best EVAR use of English.

[Azooz]

58. The Quran says Arabs be the worst :)

Arab Muslims believe that Arab pride will take them straight to hell - but that is theology and not part of this other than saying that any nationalism about the Quran is just wrong, because no Arab could have wrote it nor write anything like it.

>>I can't think of any reason whatsoever for Arabic scholars to say the Quran is the best of all the Arabic works!

Other than it being an actual fact, that is easy to check by anyone just learning some Arabic?

It does not take a scholar to know this, a normal person like me with normal Arabic reading skills can see it for him or herself, and further proof just requires learning more Arabic. You'll find no scholar who'll dispute that the Quran is the best written of all Arabic writings, if you do find such a scholar just ask him to produce a single page like it - I know there is no such page not as a matter of faith or pride, just be language knowledge alone.

It is the Quran itself that makes this claim, and it further states that humans will never write anything like it even if they all united to try - it's repeated in the Quran and very hard to miss.

Language is the only thing you need to learn to know it is the best written book in existence, nothing else needed.

[edhopper]

59. Again

I point you to Ibn Warraq, a scholar who is a native Arabic speaker and says the very thing you say no Arabic scholar would say.

[Azooz]

60. one page?

Ibn Warraq has not produced a single page like any in the Quran. The wording in the Quran asks people like Ibn Warraq to try writing a page before leaving Islam - if he knows the Quran he would known this condition, yet you'll see that he did not produce such such a page.

When you take the view of one Arabic speaker over another, on what should you base your choice? I base it on their language skills alone, no other issue comes into this, not Ibn Warraq or any other ex-Muslim has produced such a page to date.

Please understand that this is something I know to be truth myself just by language, I would not hesitate to agree with Ibn Warraq if he had that page and I'd shout it out here to everyone - but that page just does not exist. Have you ever read a great book that you wished never ended? The Quran is like that - I read it as a book, from childhood till old, it's still a truly great read.

Ibn Warraq is Not a native Arabic speaker, but if a native Arabic speaker tells you that the Quran can be equaled just ask him to show you that page - in English it would be the nicest page anyone ever read in English and hard to miss or deny - just hard to explain properly to the French, Arabic or Spanish speakers.

I sound like a used car salesman even to myself - really sorry about that. I'll just keep on boreing you becuase it requires Arabic for proof either way.

[edhopper]

61. Okay, here you go,

"When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation."
Thomas Jefferson

"These are the times that try men's souls. The summer soldier and the sunshine patriot will, in this crisis, shrink from the service of their country; but he that stands by it now, deserves the love and thanks of man and woman. Tyranny, like hell, is not easily conquered; yet we have this consolation with us, that the harder the conflict, the more glorious the triumph."
Thomas Paine

"It was the best of times, it was the worst of times; it was the age of wisdom, it was the age of foolishness; it was the epoch of belief, it was the epoch of incredulity; it was the season of Light, it was the season of Darkness; it was the spring of hope, it was the winter of despair; we had everything before us, we had nothing before us; we were all going directly to Heaven, we were all going the other way."
Charles Dickens

" We few, we happy few, we band of brothers;
For he to-day that sheds his blood with me
Shall be my brother; be he ne'er so vile,
This day shall gentle his condition;
And gentlemen in England now-a-bed
Shall think themselves accurs'd they were not here,
And hold their manhoods cheap whiles any speaks
That fought with us upon Saint Crispin's day."
William Shakespeare

Swann's Way in French
by Marcel Proust.

Faust in German
by Goethe

And two of my favorites;
"I saw the best minds of my generation destroyed by madness, starving hysterical naked,
dragging themselves through the negro streets at dawn looking for an angry fix;
Angel-headed hipsters burning for the ancient heavenly connection
to the starry dynamo in the machinery of night."
Alan Ginsberg

"APRIL is the cruellest month, breeding
Lilacs out of the dead land, mixing
Memory and desire, stirring
Dull roots with spring rain.
Winter kept us warm, covering
Earth in forgetful snow, feeding
A little life with dried tubers."
T S Elliot

All more eloquent then many pages in the Quran

[PassingFair]

62. I like this one from Shakespeare, too...

To-morrow, and to-morrow, and to-morrow,
Creeps in this petty pace from day to day,
To the last syllable of recorded time;
And all our yesterdays have lighted fools
The way to dusty death. Out, out, brief candle!
Life's but a walking shadow, a poor player,
That struts and frets his hour upon the stage,
And then is heard no more. It is a tale
Told by an idiot, full of sound and fury,
Signifying nothing.

[Azooz]

63. English?

A badly translated Japanese or Chinese instruction booklet on how to fix a computer is also more eloquent than the English Quran - means nothing.

There is no English Quran in fact, it is called "a translation of the meanings of the Arabic words in the Quran" or something even more verbose, it can not be translated in anything close to the original because no translator is good enough in either language I am sorry to say. Give T S Elliot to a 6 year old bilingual child - will it come out much better than what the English Quran is. The English words are correct and proper and you get the same book - but it is nothing like the original Arabic.

I am not kidding, exaggerating or making this up - this is a 1,400 year old fact - there is just nothing in the whole of the Arabic language anywhere near the Quran in quality, expression, eloquence - any measure you want to chose it will break the limits humans set.

In English - find me a page that you accept as the Very Best in the English language, even if the writer "sold his soul" or used magic or other mystical stuff - if you get such a page, it will not be even close to the Quran - you will know yourself if you know both languages. I do know both languages and the poetry of both bores me silly - an English poet wished for a poem as pretty as a tree - the Quran is that "pretty" and more - and hits you right where even the best of those poems can not reach.

>>All more eloquent then many pages in the Quran

There are 114 word images in the Quran, each individually is the best thing ever written in Arabic - meaning that the least eloquent page in the Quran is more elegant than anything humans have written to date in Arabic.

Please accept that I am talking fact, Islam might be wrong or false, but from a language level the Quran is as good as I describe.

[edhopper]

64. You missunderstand me

Those quotes are more eloquent IN ENGLISH than some of the Quran pages are in Arabic.
You should also read Ibsen in Norwegian and Tolstoy or Chekhov in Russian and you will find some passages more eloquent than some Arabic pages of the Quran.

[Azooz]

67. Other languages to?

Ibsen, Tolstoy and Chekhov - are they much better than any English writer (Or Russian or Norwegian writer) has been or will be in over 4,000 years?

The Quran raises the standards so high that it is just too high for any writer or poet to even think of reaching - learn Arabic and you will know that to, there is nothing like it - it would be very nice if there were, but there is not. It starts with a child as a simple nursery rhythm and continues to be a page turner till old age. One thing that does this is the huge amount of details in the words and their combinations and the great grammar that makes learning grammar show up even more details. The layout seems horribly chopped up in English, but in Arabic it is set to answer questions that come to your mind from one verse - the answer will be exactly the right number of verses ahead and the questions those answers raise will be answered a few verses down to - forever. There are 7 levels of meaning, language is the only key to getting deeper into it - and the Quran rewards those levels by becoming a much more addictive read.

You can see the details for yourself in the "Tafseer, tafser or tafsir" books that explain the individual verses in the Quran. You will not be able to believe that that much meaning can be put in so few words - it might look unbelievable but the English words do not show most of the details that are there.

>>Those quotes are more eloquent IN ENGLISH than some of the Quran pages are in Arabic.
You believe that to be true, I "know" it to be false, I am certain of this but believe it only till I get a page equal to any in the Quran, not a second longer - language is the only thing making this hard to accept (and explain), but it really is a fact. This fact is also repeated in all the languages that the Quran is translated into, and the writers of all languages are very welcome to try it because it is not considered a sin to try, it's just unlikely not to say impossible.

[edhopper]

68. I assume you've read the works of

Chomsky, Pinker and Friedman to be such an expert and so unequivocal about language.

I hope you do at least realize that just repeating that you "know" something, is hardly a reason for anyone to accept your supposition.

[ironbark]

70. Oh contraire

"..that you "know" something, is hardly a reason for anyone to accept your supposition" edhopper


According to the often repeated Standard Operating Atheist Procedure (SOAP) a knowledge claim not only requires no substantiation if you ask for substantiation you are accusing the claimant of ‘lying’.

In regards particular (unseen) sentiments being expressed on the board-

“Just because you do not see it doesn't mean that it is not there. I assure you, it is. If you don't want to believe me, if you think that I am lying to you, then that is your prerogative. Nonetheless, you have to admit that it is logically sound to accept that if you don't see something doesn't mean that it doesn't exist.” (SOAP in action)

Even pointing out that no suggestion of ‘lying’ was made does not help-

“You are making a knowledge claim ““They say that people should be quiet, respectful, meek”…..you >could< be right, you >could< be mistaken/ misreading… and, seeing as >you< have raised it, you >could< be painting a false picture.
I have suggested >no inclination< one way or the other and sought only to see what you are talking about.....so what's all the "lying" crap about?” Ironbark


“And just because you believe/claim such sentiments are being expressed does not mean they exist.” Ironbark


And the SOAP response is-

“I have seen them with my own eyes. Oh, right, you're saying that I'm lying.”

………………………………

Now…..apparently I’m not supposed to link to the post/s in question because that would be calling the author out and against the DU R&T rules…..but that don’t matter because there are several posts that establish the unwritten SOAP rule in which substantiation is not only not required it is an insult to request substantiation….you would be calling the other person a liar.

So…..Whatever Azooz (anybody) claims/knows in a post regarding another post or text must (according to SOAP) be believed for requesting substantiation is to accuse them of lying.

".....just repeating that you "know" something, is hardly a reason for anyone to accept your supposition" edhopper

Prior to posting here I would have believed that to be the case...Now I am repeatedly told to “believe me” and “take it on faith” or be accused of accusing the other of lying.

It's difficult to adjust to….but it gets easier when you come to terms with the other SOAP principle- Folk are entitled to write or rewrite your pov for you, what you’ve actually said has nothing to do with it.

I guess it saves time having one person write both sides of an argument ;-)

Happy trails.

[Azooz]

71. agreed

Taverner framed his post as "WE DON'T KNOW", I can not answer that and think that no one can. I just claim that the Quran is better written than any book has any right to be - "I don't know" personally of any page like the Quran in either Arabic or English. True that this does not answer his post, but to me it adds a language part to the mystery of what one knows or does not know.

I have no way to present my case any better, and know that I can not convince anyone who doesn't know Arabic. Just keep in mind that if anyone like ibn Warraq says that they do have such a page that you should put their claim thru the same questioning you put my claim.

I know lots of Arabic language experts, the best have prime time shows where I can ask the experts grammar and vocabulary questions along with tens of millions of viewers from dozens of countries - the Quran itself can keep such shows running for decades with very exact questions like "Why is the palm tree's trunk mentioned here in the male form and there in the female form"? Shakespeare is good but he could never get that much detail into words.

[cyborg_jim]

72. So in other words you've just accepted that the Quran is "the best" based on clearly biased sources?

Which was my point originally.

[Azooz]

73. no - from language usage

I have accepted this because I have checked it but I still keep on checking it and all the proof I need to prove this wrong is just one single page like any in the Quran - it just does not exist to my knowledge.

>>based on clearly biased sources?
It was the other way around, if you can believe that. I was secular and did not read the Quran and first became interested in the Quran from all the biased claims against it. The claims are always worded for people who do not know Arabic, their bias made them show the Quran as something for me to check, so I checked.

[Occam Bandage]

46. I find my avatar to be far more eloquent.

[ironbark]

53. Hi Azooz

I’m not a Moslem….but-

Salam `alaikum I

;-)

From what I have read Arabic is indeed a subtle and eloquent language.

Much of my interest in and admiration of Islam was prompted by a book I read many years ago-

The Bible, The Quran & Science _ Maurice Bucaile
http://www.scribd.com/word/full/2679156?access_key=key-24lm4co7qsj5u32y8x0q

And then I was introduced to the architecture of Sinan……
and fell in love ;-) -

http://www.answers.com/topic/sinan

Stone is also an eloquent language ;-)

All the best.

[Azooz]

55. HI!

walaykom alsalaam

Thank you, that is one book I missed and I enjoyed looking up Sinan. Science in the Quran is a big subject that i know very little about. The Quran's main science for me is the science of language, it takes time to get but nice to know. Other than the Quran. Arabic is a normal language with a bit more nouns than most but nothing special that I know of.

I think sand speaks more eloquently than stone , but that is just my own biased and uninformed opinion and I can't understand either of them anyway :)

[patriotvoice]

47. Knowledge is the perception of truth.

No one may assess the absolute truth of our Universe from within the Universe itself. So we, both individually and collectively, posit axioms that fundamentally and immutably describe our Universe and serve as a foundation upon which all of our other knowledge derives. So long as one includes an axiom that asserts God exists, that person knows -- perceives as truth -- the existence of God.

Including the axiom doesn't have to be rational. Or even verifiable. We scientists tend to include axioms that force independent verification and suppose logical deduction from given predicates. But just because we, as collective scientists, don't include a God axiom, doesn't mean that I, a scientist, cannot include it in my axioms.

Trouble arises when one individual tries to force his axioms into the collective, and deduce for the collective what would be deducible only from his own. That street goes both ways, however. To force the collective onto the individual is just as faulty, as what can be derived from the collective doesn't necessarily equal that which may derive from the individual's.

Thus any assertion about knowledge will fail, because knowledge is all about perception of truth. In other words, we do not know reality: we only know our perception of reality.

I also submit that belief relates to the confidence of knowledge, not the knowledge itself:
1. I can know and believe their is a God.
2. I can know but not believe there is a God.
3. I can not know but believe there is a God.
4. I can neither know nor believe there is a God.

We each must choose into which category we fall, based on our axioms -- our fundamental perceptions of reality -- and the confidence we have in our perception. From there, we let faith inspire belief.

[trixie]

49. I believe that makes you an agnostic

I know there is no Santa, I know there is no tooth fairy, I know there is no God. I am an athiest.

[Taverner]

65. Good way of putting it...

:thumbsup:

[Marrah_G]

52. I don't know.

I think I know- I hope I am right- But no. There is no way to completely know.

That is why it is called faith.

[pegleg]

66. Some do know, but no power on earth is going to convince others.

And so it will always remain.

[LanternWaste]

69. Self-delete

Self-delete