ngas who dont belive in religion are retards

[sync!]

title

 

[Mansur]

Well for them temporary pleasure which they can easily avoid and disobeyance for their comfort more important and easier to think than spending their life worshipping someone and restricting their comfort zone

It is a dumb decision either way, since what do they expect to happen after death, with all the proof we got.

Immature people all in all, going whereever their dick points at

 

[RecessedCels]

How. Can you give me one reason to believe in god

 

[arx]

Well for them temporary pleasure which they can easily avoid and disobeyance for their comfort more important and easier to think than spending their life worshipping someone and restricting their comfort zone

It is a dumb decision either way, since what do they expect to happen after death, with all the proof we got.

Immature people all in all going whereever their dick points at

there is no proof a god exists what are you talking about?

It is entirely plausible a god exist, likewise with one not existing

There is literally no way we will ever find out if one exists or not.

 

[RecessedCels]

Well for them temporary pleasure which they can easily avoid and disobeyance for their comfort more important and easier to think than spending their life worshipping someone and restricting their comfort zone

It is a dumb decision either way, since what do they expect to happen after death, with all the proof we got.

Immature people all in all, going whereever their dick points at

People don't do that because they want to have fun. There's just literally no reason to follow any religion

 

[RecessedCels]

there is no proof a god exists what are you talking about?

It is entirely plausible a god exist, likewise with one not existing

There is literally no way we will ever find out if one exists or not.

Watch them say
"The world is toi perfect to be made by randomness"
"My book has scientific miracles"
"Don't you see the signs bro!"

 

[subhumanandrew]

title

Yes, i thank God everyday

 

[Acquiescence]

Oh boy another religion debate on org I’m sure the high IQs will abound this time!

 

[Mansur]

there is no proof a god exists what are you talking about?

It is entirely plausible a god exist, likewise with one not existing

There is literally no way we will ever find out if one exists or not.

you can always stay safe and believe only when its 100% confirmed.

When your somewhat open minded tho, for example in Islam. There are a lot of predictions made, that were impossible to be made from humans and as a coincidence.

Same as with Jews ruling the world, you can say " Google doesnt say that and they didnt " but if you think about it for a little then you realize the truth without needing anything else

 

[ghoulmania]

Watch them say
"The world is toi perfect to be made by randomness"
"My book has scientific miracles"
"Don't you see the signs bro!"

another way to look at it would be post-mortem afterlife, although if one was irreligious back then they'd prolly be a menace to soyciety

 

[Mansur]

People don't do that because they want to have fun. There's just literally no reason to follow any religion

Takeaway the proofs teachings etc.

Whats the reason to live?

We simply live for 70 years die and thats it?

Then we can all simply kill ourselves since there is no point in living in the first place

 

[ghoulmania]

you can always stay safe and believe only when its 100% confirmed.

When your somewhat open minded tho, for example in Islam. There are a lot of predictions made, that were impossible to be made from humans and as a coincidence.

Same as with Jews ruling the world, you can say " Google doesnt say that and they didnt " but if you think about it for a little then you realize the truth without needing anything else

take it from me, islamic debates (or any debate pro-religion) on .org no matter how correct you are, will just end the same way the opposite party will just spam the same point no budging to see your explanation or proofs.

 

[Mansur]

The world is toi perfect to be made by randomness"
"My book has scientific miracles"
"Don't you see the signs bro!

I dont understand what is wrong with these takes

you want a God to come up to you and show you some miracles?

I got a question how you if you were God would have questioned the loyalty of your people

 

[arx]

you can always stay safe and believe only when its 100% confirmed.

When your somewhat open minded tho, for example in Islam. There are a lot of predictions made, that were impossible to be made from humans and as a coincidence.

Same as with Jews ruling the world, you can say " Google doesnt say that and they didnt " but if you think about it for a little then you realize the truth without needing anything else

You’re so idiotic.

Your vague predictions and conspiracy vibes do not prove God any more than they prove anything else.
Extraordinary claims need real evidence not just open minded wishful thinking.

the vague “verses” that were predicted are either historically obvious observations or so loosely worded that they fit anything after the fact just like every other religion’s retrofitted prophecies.


Again, you have no evidence.

 

[RecessedCels]

another way to look at it would be post-mortem afterlife, although if one was irreligious back then they'd prolly be a menace to soyciety

huh

 

[RecessedCels]

Takeaway the proofs teachings etc.

Whats the reason to live?

We simply live for 70 years die and thats it?

Then we can all simply kill ourselves since there is no point in living in the first place

This really just isn't a good point at all. "I don't like that life is meaningless, therefore it must have a meaning"
Evolution easily explains all of this. And no we can't just kill ourselves as we've evolved survival instincts that keep us alive

 

[RecessedCels]

you can always stay safe and believe only when its 100% confirmed.

When your somewhat open minded tho, for example in Islam. There are a lot of predictions made, that were impossible to be made from humans and as a coincidence.

Same as with Jews ruling the world, you can say " Google doesnt say that and they didnt " but if you think about it for a little then you realize the truth without needing anything else

The predictions really just usually are bullshit, same with scientific miracles. Either the wording is extremely ambiguous or it just isn't anything special. Could you give some examples?

 

[RecessedCels]

I dont understand what is wrong with these takes

They're not actual evidence

I got a question how you if you were God would have questioned the loyalty of your people

1. I'd never create humans in the first place
2. I wouldn't need to test any loyalty as I literally chose how humans would behave. I could also just read their minds

 

[ghoulmania]

huh

the afterlife, dying creates a lot of uncertainty that honestly feels off putting if you think deeply about it. Beliving in religion easily substitutes the uncertain with a sense of certainty meaning you can focus on anything else to do in life.

Prior to the industrial revolution however, if someone didn't follow religion it was quite possible they posed a threat to the society they lived in, since to them death has no worth. Meaning in life anything can be ruined and no one gets held accountable (kinda offrail but yeah)

 

[Mansur]

You’re so idiotic.

Your vague predictions and conspiracy vibes do not prove God any more than they prove anything else.
Extraordinary claims need real evidence not just open minded wishful thinking.

the vague “verses” that were predicted are either historically obvious observations or so loosely worded that they fit anything after the fact just like every other religion’s retrofitted prophecies.


Again, you have no evidence.

Dang idiotic already

But alr explain to me then how 1400 years ago when the science hasnt discovered it yet. The Quran has predicted the embryonic development or that the universe expands.

Or how the Romans defeated the Persians after a major loss.

You simply cant, if your stubborn to believe so. You can be but dont be inraged lol

 

[RecessedCels]

the afterlife, dying creates a lot of uncertainty that honestly feels off putting if you think deeply about it. Beliving in religion easily substitutes the uncertain with a sense of certainty meaning you can focus on anything else to do in life.

Prior to the industrial revolution however, if someone didn't follow religion it was quite possible they posed a threat to the society they lived in, since to them death has no worth. Meaning in life anything can be ruined and no one gets held accountable (kinda offrail but yeah)

Well sure religion can help people live their lives but it doesn't mean there's any truth to it

 

[m1zzeronok]

title

Whoever wants what he believes in it, it's not your fucking business and by imposing it on the backward you expose yourself

 

[RecessedCels]

Quran has predicted the embryonic development

This had been discovered earlier by greeks for example. The greek and Quranic explanations are pretty much identical. Some say both of them are off a bit compared to modern science though so

 

[Mansur]

They're not actual evidence

Then what is

. I'd never create humans in the first place
2. I wouldn't need to test any loyalty as I literally chose how humans would behave. I could also just read their minds

I asked how you would test their loyalty towards you, not if you would or not

 

[arx]

Dang idiotic already

But alr explain to me then how 1400 years ago when the science hasnt discovered it yet. The Quran has predicted the embryonic development or that the universe expands.

Or how the Romans defeated the Persians after a major loss.

You simply cant, if your stubborn to believe so. You can be but dont be inraged lol

Of course you’re a Muslim

The shitran got embryology wrong

claims bones form before flesh and describing stages that mix Greek misconceptions with vague terms not matching modern science.

But of course, Scholars retrofitted it to fit later discoveries


Roman Persian wars were ongoing events any informed person could predict outcomes for based on politics and military trends. None of this requires divine knowledge just human pattern recognition available at the time.

 

[RecessedCels]

the universe expands.

Only a few translations and interpretations of the verse actually even claim that. The one claiming that the universe is CURRENTLY expanding was made AFTER it was already discovered. Look how different these are

 

[Mansur]

This had been discovered earlier by greeks for example. The greek and Quranic explanations are pretty much identical. Some say both of them are off a bit compared to modern science though so

I don't think it's that simple. Greeks did talk about embryology before the Quran, but the descriptions aren't exactly the same. Some similarities exist, but people interpret the Quranic verses differently. Saying it's a perfect match with modern science or just a copy of Greek ideas is probably oversimplifying it.

 

[RecessedCels]

I asked how you would test their loyalty towards you, not if you would or not

ehhh no point talking about this as it's entirely subjective and won't convince either of us

 

[brielarsonbf]

title

water is wet

 

[RecessedCels]

I don't think it's that simple. Greeks did talk about embryology before the Quran, but the descriptions aren't exactly the same. Some similarities exist, but people interpret the Quranic verses differently. Saying it's a perfect match with modern science or just a copy of Greek ideas is probably oversimplifying it.

if you want I can obviously go pull them up but I checked it a few weeks ago and they were identical. Both describe the same steps (because they're both mostly true). There's one "incorrect" part in both but it could very well just be a simplification

 

[Mansur]

Of course you’re a Muslim

The shitran got embryology wrong

claims bones form before flesh and describing stages that mix Greek misconceptions with vague terms not matching modern science.

But of course, Scholars retrofitted it to fit later discoveries


Roman Persian wars were ongoing events any informed person could predict outcomes for based on politics and military trends. None of this requires divine knowledge just human pattern recognition available at the time.

I think you're presenting it as way more settled than it actually is. The embryology argument is debated, because the Arabic terms aren't as simple as the English translations make them seem. Saying "it copied Greek mistakes" is also a big claim similarities don't automatically prove borrowing.

And with the Romans, sure, people could make predictions based on politics, but the Quran gave a specific timeframe for a comeback when the Byzantines were in a terrible position. You can argue it was possible to predict, but acting like it was an obvious outcome isn't really fair either.

 

[Mansur]

ehhh no point talking about this as it's entirely subjective and won't convince either of us

There is a point, your questioning why God has created humanity to worship him

Im telling you that it is one way of testing their loyalty towards you

 

[RecessedCels]

There is a point, your questioning why God has created humanity to worship him

Im telling you that it is one way of testing their loyalty towards you

This is all subjective and I've talked about this with dozens of people. There's no point in it. Better just to talk about things you can actually prove

 

[Mansur]

if you want I can obviously go pull them up but I checked it a few weeks ago and they were identical. Both describe the same steps (because they're both mostly true). There's one "incorrect" part in both but it could very well just be a simplification

I get your point, but saying they’re "identical" is a bit of a stretch. There are similarities, but that doesn’t automatically prove the Quran copied Greek ideas. The simplification argument is possible, but critics can also argue it’s just a later interpretation to fit modern science. It really depends on how you read the wording.

 

[RecessedCels]

I get your point, but saying they’re "identical" is a bit of a stretch. There are similarities, but that doesn’t automatically prove the Quran copied Greek ideas. The simplification argument is possible, but critics can also argue it’s just a later interpretation to fit modern science. It really depends on how you read the wording.

I'm not really trying to prove it's copied, it's possible both discovered the same things independently. I'm just saying it can't be a scientific miracle as it was already written in other books

 

[arx]

I think you're presenting it as way more settled than it actually is. The embryology argument is debated, because the Arabic terms aren't as simple as the English translations make them seem. Saying "it copied Greek mistakes" is also a big claim similarities don't automatically prove borrowing.

And with the Romans, sure, people could make predictions based on politics, but the Quran gave a specific timeframe for a comeback when the Byzantines were in a terrible position. You can argue it was possible to predict, but acting like it was an obvious outcome isn't really fair either.

The embryology verses use vague Arabic terms that mirror Greek medical ideas available then and include inaccuracies


The Roman prediction was a reasonable short term guess in a fluctuating war not a miracle

 

[proxxyy11]

Unironically the other way around

 

[BigBallsLarry]

Not believing in god isn't a conscious decision. All atheists ARE atheists because they can't even force themselves to do otherwise.

I am literally unable to believe in god. All archeological, scientific and logical facts point to a creator not existing and ESPECIALLY not a christian God.

I used to be faithful many years ago but it was strictly deism. I believe all religions are tools of evil and made purely to take from the people and control the population.

That faith has since slowly disappeared the more personal research i do. Nowadays it'd be more believable to me for a whale to fit through the eye of a needle than for a creator exist.

I'd have to force myself to be religious which would make my faith fake, but then if my faith isn't real then what's the point.

 

[Mansur]

I'm not really trying to prove it's copied, it's possible both discovered the same things independently. I'm just saying it can't be a scientific miracle as it was already written in other books

Either way the strongest predictions aren't really the scientific ones. The Romans prophecy (30:2–4) predicted the Byzantines would recover from a huge defeat within 3–9 years and they did. Abu Lahab is another example, where the Quran said he would remain an opponent until his death and he never converted despite having years to challenge it. You can debate the explanations, but these are historical claims, not just vague interpretations.

The embryology verses use vague Arabic terms that mirror Greek medical ideas available then and include inaccuracies


The Roman prediction was a reasonable short term guess in a fluctuating war not a miracle

The embryology claim depends a lot on interpretation. Similar ideas existing in Greek texts doesn't automatically prove the Quran copied them, especially since the wording isn't identical. And the Romans prediction wasn't just "a war was going on so anyone could guess" it gave a timeframe while the Byzantines were in a disastrous position. You can argue against it, but calling it obvious is oversimplifying.

 

[Mansur]

Only a few translations and interpretations of the verse actually even claim that. The one claiming that the universe is CURRENTLY expanding was made AFTER it was already discovered. Look how different these are
View attachment 5401797
View attachment 5401798
View attachment 5401799
View attachment 5401800

That's a fair criticism of some "scientific miracle" arguments. Translations and interpretations do vary, and some readings became more popular after modern discoveries. But the question is whether the Arabic wording itself allows that meaning, not only when a translation became popular. It’s not a simple case of "science was discovered, then Muslims changed the verse," but it's also not as straightforward as claiming the verse is a perfect modern science statement. The debate is about interpretation.

 

[RecessedCels]

. Abu Lahab is another example, where the Quran said he would remain an opponent until his death and he never converted despite having years to challenge it.

The previous prophecy sounds plausible (haven't looked into it) but the Abu Lahab one is just a really bad one. Obviously he's not going to convert to Islam just to do a "Gotcha!" moment. He believed in his own religion and wouldn't just give it up and humiliate himself by converting to his opponents religion. We don't even know if he ever read the verse or believed anything would happen from his conversion

 

[RecessedCels]

That's a fair criticism of some "scientific miracle" arguments. Translations and interpretations do vary, and some readings became more popular after modern discoveries. But the question is whether the Arabic wording itself allows that meaning, not only when a translation became popular. It’s not a simple case of "science was discovered, then Muslims changed the verse," but it's also not as straightforward as claiming the verse is a perfect modern science statement. The debate is about interpretation.

If there's a pretty vague verse and majority of the interpretations say one thing, you can't just make a new interpretation a thousand years later to fit a new narrative. Almost all the scholars before said something different. Maybe it is the real interpretation but you can't use it as a miracle anymore.

 

[Mansur]

The previous prophecy sounds plausible (haven't looked into it) but the Abu Lahab one is just a really bad one. Obviously he's not going to convert to Islam just to do a "Gotcha!" moment. He believed in his own religion and wouldn't just give it up and humiliate himself by converting to his opponents religion. We don't even know if he ever read the verse or believed anything would happen from his conversion

That's a fair criticism. The Abu Lahab example is weaker because it assumes he would convert just to disprove the verse, which is not certain. The Romans prophecy is a stronger case since it involves a specific historical event and timeframe.

Besides the Romans prophecy, what do you have to say about the Quran predicting that Muslims would enter Mecca safely after being prevented from doing so, the Quran's preservation for over 1,400 years despite being spread across different cultures, and the prediction that the early persecuted Muslim community would gain power and security? These are historical claims, not just interpretations of scientific verses.

If there's a pretty vague verse and majority of the interpretations say one thing, you can't just make a new interpretation a thousand years later to fit a new narrative. Almost all the scholars before said something different. Maybe it is the real interpretation but you can't use it as a miracle anymore.

That is a valid criticism of some modern interpretations. If an interpretation only appears after a scientific discovery, it is weaker evidence. However, the key question is whether the interpretation is genuinely supported by the original Arabic and context, not only when it became popular.

 

[RecessedCels]

Quran predicting that Muslims would enter Mecca safely after being prevented from doing so,

The prophecy basically is just "We will have a ceasefire and enter Mecca". This isn't a major prophecy. Also I'm not sure but from what I googled they had already negotiated before he told the prophecy, therefore it's not really anything crazy. He knew it would happen before he told it to people

the Quran's preservation for over 1,400 years

Multiple other religious texts and books have done the exact same

the prediction that the early persecuted Muslim community would gain power and security?

Again many other people prophesized the same about their own people. Many were proven false, some weren't. Pretty much all religious books say the same thing and obviously some will succeed. It's not really a huge prophecy. The ones who are wrong just end up being forgotten about

That is a valid criticism of some modern interpretations. If an interpretation only appears after a scientific discovery, it is weaker evidence. However, the key question is whether the interpretation is genuinely supported by the original Arabic and context, not only when it became popular.

It's just very hard for anyone to be convinced by it. The clear quran is basically the only translation that claims it

 

[silently_said]

ngas who belive in religion are retards​