|
Are All Terrorists Muslims? It’s Not Even Close
Server: Asura
Game: FFXI
Posts: 34187
By Asura.Kingnobody 2015-01-16 15:00:00
What god wouldn't want lasers? The anti-pew pew kind I guess.
Server: Asura
Game: FFXI
Posts: 200
By Asura.Alexandero 2015-01-16 15:01:20
Lakshmi.Sparthosx said: »Quote: Apparently you fail to notice the one thing common in every religion there is: A creator is born from the mind of a man.
If religion never existed, there would be no concept of God, and without a concept of God, he would cease being God and will be known as an unknown. Since the unknown cannot be known without evidence of existence, the being formally known as God would not exist because by definition of the (now nonexistent religious text) concept of God requires a defined existence which never existed.
Ok, I have to stick up for Alexandero here and say you're begging the question in a real and serious way; saying God wouldn't exist without mortals to worship it is just starting from the premise that God is a work of fiction, unless you're relying on some silly D&D/Gaiman cosmology where the gods rely on human worship for power.
Plenty, if not all religions suppose divine forces that exist without the consent of mortals, and some (Sikhism is awesome about this) are explicit that God is indifferent to mortal worship; the worship is for the benefit of the mortals. God wouldn't exist without mortals to create him. In other words, it isn't that a creator made man, it is that man made a creator.
Religion defines the illusion that a creator is responsible for any and all happenings in this world, which is a crutch from knowing how things really work in the world. Placing blame on an event instead of an action is man's greatest crutch in life.
You're failing to understand the argument from a presupposed premise. The only reason you think he can't exist without man, is that you've first decided man created him. You're stuck in a circular argument.
The argument typically in play isn't "does god exist?" but "does god XYZ exist?" and the latter is far easier to attack due to the inconsistencies of the source material (holy books) presented as definitive evidence.
Most atheists aren't going to touch the deist argument because few deists are out and about causing trouble or claiming their God has a stake in humanity. They're busy I dunno... living their lives without evangelizing.
Right. I've stated multiple times, do your research and make your own decision. I'm not trying to "convert" anyone. The real reason I am playing this game, is because I enjoy sparring with people. Sometimes I even hear a new idea that I didn't think about, or get a perspective I wouldn't have thought about. In the process, I also get to test some of my own ideas and find out what arguments there are against them, which serves to help me refine those arguments.
I am by no means attempting to convert anyone.
Server: Asura
Game: FFXI
Posts: 34187
By Asura.Kingnobody 2015-01-16 15:01:39
Evolution is still a theory. A theory that can be proven by many different people.
Theism is an concept that can never be proven.
Which one holds true more, a theory or concept?
By ScaevolaBahamut 2015-01-16 15:02:14
Lakshmi.Sparthosx said: »Quote: Apparently you fail to notice the one thing common in every religion there is: A creator is born from the mind of a man.
If religion never existed, there would be no concept of God, and without a concept of God, he would cease being God and will be known as an unknown. Since the unknown cannot be known without evidence of existence, the being formally known as God would not exist because by definition of the (now nonexistent religious text) concept of God requires a defined existence which never existed.
Ok, I have to stick up for Alexandero here and say you're begging the question in a real and serious way; saying God wouldn't exist without mortals to worship it is just starting from the premise that God is a work of fiction, unless you're relying on some silly D&D/Gaiman cosmology where the gods rely on human worship for power.
Plenty, if not all religions suppose divine forces that exist without the consent of mortals, and some (Sikhism is awesome about this) are explicit that God is indifferent to mortal worship; the worship is for the benefit of the mortals.
God is a primal? It all makes sense now.
I...can't believe I'm actually gonna
oh what the hell
The primals draw power from aetherite, not worship. The worship is only important insofar as it motivates mortals to actually go out and get more aetherite. The D&D/Gaiman thing is a system where mortal belief itself empowers supernatural beings because Reasons.
[+]
Server: Bismarck
Game: FFXI
Posts: 33979
By Bismarck.Dracondria 2015-01-16 15:04:07
Hallowed are the Ori
Great holy armies shall be gathered and trained to fight all who embrace evil. In the name of the gods, ships shall be built to carry our warriors out amongst the stars, and we will spread Origin to all the unbelievers.
[+]
Valefor.Sehachan
Server: Valefor
Game: FFXI
Posts: 24219
By Valefor.Sehachan 2015-01-16 15:06:31
I believe in the light of the Mothercrystal.
Server: Odin
Game: FFXI
Posts: 196
By Odin.Blazeoffury 2015-01-16 15:06:35
Evolution is still a theory. A theory that can be proven by many different people.
Theism is an concept that can never be proven.
Which one holds true more, a theory or concept? Changed lives, mine personally is a strong testament for the faith i hold. But in the long run i think i bother answering or attempting to answer questions for the dozens of lurkers who read. No ones ever changed their mind but i know there are many onlookers and i suppose were both giving them perspectives to look at from each side.
By Bloodrose 2015-01-16 15:07:35
You can strongly disagree that ground morals are inherent, even in the face of over overwhelming evidence to the contrary all you like.
If, in fact morals such as killing people is wrong - why are there so many people who do it without remorse? Remorse comes from a feeling of empathy - understanding the other person.
It's learned behavior. Morals are subjective, and you don't learn about what morals you have, until you see the effects around you. You would have to have a conscious awareness of the world at large, at the time of your birth, to even contemplate such things, yet the world at the fingertips of an infant is extremely limited.
The concept of the "human heart", in this context that you are personally trying to pitch, is a man-made concept as well, and is often only used to equate one's idea of humanity to another person's view.
There are children who grow up believing that lying is good, and feel good doing so.
More still that believe they are better than others, simply by virtue of birth, and use it as a means to step all over others.
Yet, by your logic, because that is what they inherently believe from birth, that they can do no wrong. (that's the logic, not what you actually said) I answered your first question in my original statement seared conscience. If you do wrong enough eventually conviction, guilt, remorse, it dissipates and is gone. Cartel hitmen were hitmen at 5 years old. It was a slow fade into the abyss. I've also stated many times to quit equating things that have no real basis to the argument.
I quite clearly stated "inherent at birth", as well as learned behavior.
Now, please do stop making false arguments. You only really hurt your cause.
@Alexandero, Gospels are not used as a means of record-keeping, but faith building. Hence the term "The Gospel Truth" comes from taking the Gospel as truth, despite evidence to the contrary.
Additionally, there are records of Alexander of Macedon from the date of his birth, to the time he died, and the explicit details of his inner sanctum, and his conquests to his concubines.
[+]
By ScaevolaBahamut 2015-01-16 15:08:05
Come on King. We've been through this. If he actually exists, then he would exists regardless of religion, or our beliefs, or w/e. If God really exists and humans never did, he wouldn't cease to exist. He is either there or he isn't and it doesn't matter if we think he is or isnt.
If we go by your way of thinking. If god exist, something created it, if something created it, something created what created it and so on infinitely. So which god do you want to believe in?
Why would God need to have been created by something?
Look, I don't believe in God but the Church was willing to say Go Home Aquinas You're Drunk like 500 years ago so I don't know why you guys think you're scoring points here.
Server: Asura
Game: FFXI
Posts: 34187
By Asura.Kingnobody 2015-01-16 15:08:27
Evolution is still a theory. A theory that can be proven by many different people.
Theism is an concept that can never be proven.
Which one holds true more, a theory or concept? Changed lives, mine personally is a strong testament for the faith i hold. But in the long run i think i bother answering or attempting to answer questions for the dozens of lurkers who read. No ones ever changed their mind but i know there are many onlookers and i suppose were both giving them perspectives to look at from each side. Somehow, I highly doubt that "because the bible said so" is going to convert people to Christianity....
Plus, blind faith is not faith, it's ignorance.
Server: Asura
Game: FFXI
Posts: 200
By Asura.Alexandero 2015-01-16 15:08:43
Evolution is still a theory. A theory that can be proven by many different people.
Theism is an concept that can never be proven.
Which one holds true more, a theory or concept? Changed lives, mine personally is a strong testament for the faith i hold. But in the long run i think i bother answering or attempting to answer questions for the dozens of lurkers who read. No ones ever changed their mind but i know there are many onlookers and i suppose were both giving them perspectives to look at from each side. This. Those of us engaged are going to be hardpressed to change out mind without any new evidence. We engage because we've developed deeply held beliefs. The real benefit of these posts are for the onlookers that are undecided. Our arguments serve to direct their research so that they can decide as well.
Server: Asura
Game: FFXI
Posts: 34187
By Asura.Kingnobody 2015-01-16 15:09:58
Evolution is still a theory. A theory that can be proven by many different people.
Theism is an concept that can never be proven.
Which one holds true more, a theory or concept? Changed lives, mine personally is a strong testament for the faith i hold. But in the long run i think i bother answering or attempting to answer questions for the dozens of lurkers who read. No ones ever changed their mind but i know there are many onlookers and i suppose were both giving them perspectives to look at from each side. This. Those of us engaged are going to be hardpressed to change out mind without any new evidence. We engage because we've developed deeply held beliefs. The real benefit of these posts are for the onlookers that are undecided. Our arguments serve to direct their research so that they can decide as well. Hey, at least you got the right character to agree with yourself this time!
[+]
Server: Lakshmi
Game: FFXI
Posts: 10394
By Lakshmi.Sparthosx 2015-01-16 15:12:50
I believe in the light of the Mothercrystal.
You should, it's how you get to Al'Taieu.
[+]
By ScaevolaBahamut 2015-01-16 15:13:29
No, that isn't what I said. I said if something exists within our space time continuum then something created it. This doesn't and wouldnt apply to something existing outside of our space-time continuum. If there is no time, then there is no beginning, thus, you don't need a creator. infinite regression only works when time is present.
Ok so God doesn't exist because it never began. Makes sense. Something with no beginning cannot exist.
The Christian God/Jesus specifically addresses this. "I am the Alpha and Omega", etc. He IS the beginning.
Server: Asura
Game: FFXI
Posts: 34187
By Asura.Kingnobody 2015-01-16 15:15:04
No, that isn't what I said. I said if something exists within our space time continuum then something created it. This doesn't and wouldnt apply to something existing outside of our space-time continuum. If there is no time, then there is no beginning, thus, you don't need a creator. infinite regression only works when time is present.
Ok so God doesn't exist because it never began. Makes sense. Something with no beginning cannot exist.
The Christian God/Jesus specifically addresses this. "I am the Alpha and Omega", etc. He IS the beginning. The Christian God/Jesus also specifically said that the earth was created in 7 days, and that the earth is only 6,000 years old....
By Bloodrose 2015-01-16 15:15:35
Except, "Alpha" and "Omega" are Greek and Roman terms, which predate the bible, and the concept of a singular God.
[+]
[+]
Server: Asura
Game: FFXI
Posts: 200
By Asura.Alexandero 2015-01-16 15:16:15
You can strongly disagree that ground morals are inherent, even in the face of over overwhelming evidence to the contrary all you like.
If, in fact morals such as killing people is wrong - why are there so many people who do it without remorse? Remorse comes from a feeling of empathy - understanding the other person.
It's learned behavior. Morals are subjective, and you don't learn about what morals you have, until you see the effects around you. You would have to have a conscious awareness of the world at large, at the time of your birth, to even contemplate such things, yet the world at the fingertips of an infant is extremely limited.
The concept of the "human heart", in this context that you are personally trying to pitch, is a man-made concept as well, and is often only used to equate one's idea of humanity to another person's view.
There are children who grow up believing that lying is good, and feel good doing so.
More still that believe they are better than others, simply by virtue of birth, and use it as a means to step all over others.
Yet, by your logic, because that is what they inherently believe from birth, that they can do no wrong. (that's the logic, not what you actually said) I answered your first question in my original statement seared conscience. If you do wrong enough eventually conviction, guilt, remorse, it dissipates and is gone. Cartel hitmen were hitmen at 5 years old. It was a slow fade into the abyss. I've also stated many times to quit equating things that have no real basis to the argument.
I quite clearly stated "inherent at birth", as well as learned behavior.
Now, please do stop making false arguments. You only really hurt your cause.
@Alexandero, Gospels are not used as a means of record-keeping, but faith building. Hence the term "The Gospel Truth" comes from taking the Gospel as truth, despite evidence to the contrary.
Additionally, there are records of Alexander of Macedon from the date of his birth, to the time he died, and the explicit details of his inner sanctum, and his conquests to his concubines.
Source please. There were early records of Alexander, but they were lost. We know of these records because people used them to write their own version centuries later. We don't have any original sources, only the sources of the sources. In contrast, we have the original sources of Christ. Maybe they were faith building gospels, that doesn't change whether they were true or not. Nor, does it explain how multiple independent sources accounted for the same things.
If you can disprove the "Independent and Correlated" source criteria and show that they were not, then contact the scholars and tell them. It will change the historicity of the Gospels. They've devoted their life to scholarly historical documents, I doubt you can prove they are wrong. At least in a meaningful sense that is accepted by the general scholar community. Go for it though.
Server: Asura
Game: FFXI
Posts: 200
By Asura.Alexandero 2015-01-16 15:17:17
No, that isn't what I said. I said if something exists within our space time continuum then something created it. This doesn't and wouldnt apply to something existing outside of our space-time continuum. If there is no time, then there is no beginning, thus, you don't need a creator. infinite regression only works when time is present.
Ok so God doesn't exist because it never began. Makes sense. Something with no beginning cannot exist. That's kind of the topic of this whole debate :)
Server: Asura
Game: FFXI
Posts: 200
By Asura.Alexandero 2015-01-16 15:18:03
No, that isn't what I said. I said if something exists within our space time continuum then something created it. This doesn't and wouldnt apply to something existing outside of our space-time continuum. If there is no time, then there is no beginning, thus, you don't need a creator. infinite regression only works when time is present.
Ok so God doesn't exist because it never began. Makes sense. Something with no beginning cannot exist.
The Christian God/Jesus specifically addresses this. "I am the Alpha and Omega", etc. He IS the beginning. The Christian God/Jesus also specifically said that the earth was created in 7 days, and that the earth is only 6,000 years old.... Lol, no he didn't. Just stop, lol.
By ScaevolaBahamut 2015-01-16 15:18:33
Except, "Alpha" and "Omega" are Greek and Roman terms, which predate the bible, and the concept of a singular God.
you can't see it but i am rolling my eyes SO HARD right now
there is a ton wrong with this but let's start here:
why would you think that God, if he deigned to speak to mortals, would not choose to speak to them in a way they would understand
Server: Asura
Game: FFXI
Posts: 34187
By Asura.Kingnobody 2015-01-16 15:19:14
Source please. There were early records of Alexander, but they were lost. We know of these records because people used them to write their own version centuries later. We don't have any original sources, only the sources of the sources. In contrast, we have the original sources of Christ. Maybe they were faith building gospels, that doesn't change whether they were true or not. Nor, does it explain how multiple independent sources accounted for the same things.
If you can disprove the "Independent and Correlated" source criteria and show that they were not, then contact the scholars and tell them. It will change the historicity of the Gospels. They've devoted their life to scholarly historical documents, I doubt you can prove they are wrong. At least in a meaningful sense that is accepted by the general scholar community. Go for it though. Wait, you are touting that the bible is a primary source but you question documents as "sources of a source"?
Seriously?
Server: Asura
Game: FFXI
Posts: 200
By Asura.Alexandero 2015-01-16 15:20:54
Source please. There were early records of Alexander, but they were lost. We know of these records because people used them to write their own version centuries later. We don't have any original sources, only the sources of the sources. In contrast, we have the original sources of Christ. Maybe they were faith building gospels, that doesn't change whether they were true or not. Nor, does it explain how multiple independent sources accounted for the same things.
If you can disprove the "Independent and Correlated" source criteria and show that they were not, then contact the scholars and tell them. It will change the historicity of the Gospels. They've devoted their life to scholarly historical documents, I doubt you can prove they are wrong. At least in a meaningful sense that is accepted by the general scholar community. Go for it though. Wait, you are touting that the bible is a primary source but you question documents as "sources of a source"?
Seriously? I don't think I said anything about the bible, I believe I was referring to the gospels. Kind of not, the same thing. The gospels are primary sources. Meaning, we have the originals. Don't confuse the gospels with the whole bible.
Who is questioning the sources of sources? Could you quote were I said I didn't believe in Alexander?
Valefor.Sehachan
Server: Valefor
Game: FFXI
Posts: 24219
By Valefor.Sehachan 2015-01-16 15:21:50
Time is our perception of the transformation of matter/energy. If god is timeless it means it's still and immutable. Which kinda begs the question of how something can create anything without having any impact at all on its surroudings. Of course this all based on our comprehension, which can obviously be missing concepts beyond our reach. Our imagination is big but it is limited by known patterns(ie: you cannot visualize in your head a new colour).
Server: Asura
Game: FFXI
Posts: 34187
By Asura.Kingnobody 2015-01-16 15:22:00
No, that isn't what I said. I said if something exists within our space time continuum then something created it. This doesn't and wouldnt apply to something existing outside of our space-time continuum. If there is no time, then there is no beginning, thus, you don't need a creator. infinite regression only works when time is present.
Ok so God doesn't exist because it never began. Makes sense. Something with no beginning cannot exist.
The Christian God/Jesus specifically addresses this. "I am the Alpha and Omega", etc. He IS the beginning. The Christian God/Jesus also specifically said that the earth was created in 7 days, and that the earth is only 6,000 years old.... Lol, no he didn't. Just stop, lol. Who said that the bible was written from God's word again?
By Bloodrose 2015-01-16 15:22:47
First, you have yet to provide a source that the earliest documentation we have of Alexander the Great, were from 600 years after his death.
Even though you admit there were early records. Except they aren't their "own" versions, but historically accurate copies, which reference the prime material - of which not all was lost.
And it does bring into question whether the gospels were true or not, as over 90% of the information contained in the gospels, have been tried, tested, and proven to be false. Even among Biblical scholars, which very few actually agree on, barring certain limited knowledge.
Additionally, we do *not* have the original sources of the Gospels, but various, inconsistent, retellings compiled in a book 400-600 years after the Advent of Christ. They continue to try and prove each other wrong, and that their suppositions and interpretations (of which is lost in translation due to the ancient language being very poorly recorded)
Server: Asura
Game: FFXI
Posts: 200
By Asura.Alexandero 2015-01-16 15:23:00
No, that isn't what I said. I said if something exists within our space time continuum then something created it. This doesn't and wouldnt apply to something existing outside of our space-time continuum. If there is no time, then there is no beginning, thus, you don't need a creator. infinite regression only works when time is present.
Ok so God doesn't exist because it never began. Makes sense. Something with no beginning cannot exist.
The Christian God/Jesus specifically addresses this. "I am the Alpha and Omega", etc. He IS the beginning. The Christian God/Jesus also specifically said that the earth was created in 7 days, and that the earth is only 6,000 years old.... Lol, no he didn't. Just stop, lol. Who said that the bible was written from God's word again? No, idea. Not me. I've even argued against that in this thread.
Quote: What percentage of terror attacks in the United States and Europe are committed by Muslims? Guess. Nope. Guess again. And again...
“Not all Muslims are terrorists, but all terrorists are Muslims.” How many times have you heard that one? Sure, we heard Fox News’s Brian Kilmeade say it, but to me, that was simply part of the Fox News plan to make their viewers dumber, as we saw again this past weekend when its terrorism “expert” Steve Emerson was caught fabricating the story that Birmingham, England, is closed to non-Muslims. But more alarmingly, even some reasonable people have uttered this statement.
And that comment is often followed up by the question: Why don’t we see Christian, Buddhist, or Jewish terrorists?
Obviously, there are people who sincerely view themselves as Muslims who have committed horrible acts in the name of Islam. We Muslims can make the case that their actions are not based on any part of the faith but on their own political agenda. But they are Muslims, no denying that.
However, and this will probably shock many, so you might want to take a breath: Overwhelmingly, those who have committed terrorist attacks in the United States and Europe aren’t Muslims. Let’s give that a moment to sink in.
Now, it’s not your fault if you aren’t aware of that fact. You can blame the media. (Yes, Sarah Palin and I actually agree on one thing: The mainstream media sucks.)
So here are some statistics for those interested. Let’s start with Europe. Want to guess what percent of the terrorist attacks there were committed by Muslims over the past five years? Wrong. That is, unless you said less than 2 percent.
As Europol, the European Union’s law-enforcement agency, noted in its report released last year, the vast majority of terror attacks in Europe were perpetrated by separatist groups. For example, in 2013, there were 152 terror attacks in Europe. Only two of them were “religiously motivated,” while 84 were predicated upon ethno-nationalist or separatist beliefs.
Or what about the (dare I mention them) Jewish terrorists? Per the 2013 State Department’s report on terrorism, there were 399 acts of terror committed by Israeli settlers.
We are talking about groups like France’s FLNC, which advocates an independent nation for the island of Corsica. In December 2013, FLNC terrorists carried out simultaneous rocket attacks against police stations in two French cities. And in Greece in late 2013, the left-wing Militant Popular Revolutionary Forces shot and killed two members of the right-wing political party Golden Dawn. While over in Italy, the anarchist group FAI engaged in numerous terror attacks including sending a bomb to a journalist. And the list goes on and on.
Have you heard of these incidents? Probably not. But if Muslims had committed them do you think you our media would’ve covered it? No need to answer, that’s a rhetorical question.
Even after one of the worst terror attacks ever in Europe in 2011, when Anders Breivik slaughtered 77 people in Norway to further his anti-Muslim, anti-immigrant, and pro-“Christian Europe” agenda as he stated in his manifesto, how much press did we see in the United States? Yes, it was covered, but not the way we see when a Muslim terrorist is involved. Plus we didn’t see terrorism experts fill the cable news sphere asking how we can stop future Christian terrorists. In fact, even the suggestion that Breivik was a “Christian terrorist” was met with outrage by many, including Fox News’s Bill O’Reilly.
Have you heard about the Buddhist terrorists? Well, extremist Buddhists have killed many Muslim civilians in Burma, and just a few months ago in Sri Lanka, some went on a violent rampage burning down Muslim homes and businesses and slaughtering four Muslims.
Or what about the (dare I mention them) Jewish terrorists? Per the 2013 State Department’s report on terrorism, there were 399 acts of terror committed by Israeli settlers in what are known as “price tag” attacks. These Jewish terrorists attacked Palestinian civilians causing physical injuries to 93 of them and also vandalized scores of mosques and Christian churches.
Back in the United States, the percentage of terror attacks committed by Muslims is almost as miniscule as in Europe. An FBI study looking at terrorism committed on U.S. soil between 1980 and 2005 found that 94 percent of the terror attacks were committed by non-Muslims. In actuality, 42 percent of terror attacks were carried out by Latino-related groups, followed by 24 percent perpetrated by extreme left-wing actors.
And as a 2014 study by University of North Carolina found, since the 9/11 attacks, Muslim-linked terrorism has claimed the lives of 37 Americans. In that same time period, more than 190,000 Americans were murdered (PDF).
In fact in 2013, it was actually more likely Americans would be killed by a toddler than a terrorist. In that year, three Americans were killed in the Boston Marathon bombing. How many people did toddlers kill in 2013? Five, all by accidentally shooting a gun.
But our media simply do not cover the non-Muslim terror attacks with same gusto. Why? It’s a business decision. Stories about scary “others” play better. It’s a story that can simply be framed as good versus evil with Americans being the good guy and the brown Muslim as the bad.
Honestly, when is the last time we heard the media refer to those who attack abortion clinics as “Christian terrorists,” even though these attacks occur at one of every five reproductive health-care facilities? That doesn’t sell as well. After all we are a so-called Christian nation, so that would require us to look at the enemy within our country, and that makes many uncomfortable. Or worse, it makes them change the channel.
That’s the same reason we don’t see many stories about how to reduce the 30 Americans killed each day by gun violence or the three women per day killed by domestic violence. But the media will have on expert after expert discussing how can we stop these scary brown Muslims from killing any more Americans despite the fact you actually have a better chance of being killed by a refrigerator falling on you.
Look, this article is not going to change the media’s business model. But what I hope it does is cause some to realize that not all terrorists are Muslims. In fact, they are actually a very small percent of those that are. Now, I’m not saying to ignore the dangers posed by Islamic radicals. I’m just saying look out for those refrigerators.
Source
|
|