-->
@aql_reason
But then it means God is evil and deceiving us. Which could be a possibility.
Yes, its possible that Satan is the real God, which is why I pray to satan too.
Islam vs. Christianity
Posts
Total:
226
-->
@Best.Korea
Its actually fun. Praying to just one God for years gets boring quickly.I mean, you dont pray to 100 Gods at the same time. Its like, today you choose one God and pray to him/her.
Yes, I am aware of polytheism. A serial killer would say the same thing. Its fun killing people. I don't kill 100 at the same time. Today I killed a diffrent X person. You argue from emotion. Which is why you can argue anything with those arguments.
Well, that doesnt make any sense. I prefer to have a variety.
So does the serial killer.
Thats why you dont pray to 2 Gods at the same time, but go one God per day.
And that makes more sense? Today I pray to Satan tommorow Santa. If those 2 hate each other, how do you accept your prayers to be accepted?
Well, thats why it makes sense to pray to many Gods. If one of them is real, he might like you.
Yes, that's what I was talking about. But when you make a wager, you have to be smart and choose what results in the least risk. Pascals wager shows that its better to choose the abrahamic religions. If I hide my two hands and tell you that one of those hands has a 0.000001% chance you will go to heaven. You take that chance. That's the wager
-->
@Best.Korea
Yes, its possible that Satan is the real God, which is why I pray to satan too.
Yes.But why pray at all? If Satan is by definition a deceiver? Why the effort?
-->
@aql_reason
A serial killer would say the same thing.
Well, maybe, but I dont see how does that make me bad.
If those 2 hate each other, how do you accept your prayers to be accepted?
Well, if one of them turns out to be real, he might appreciate that I prayed to him.
But when you make a wager, you have to be smart and choose what results in the least risk.
But we dont know what is the least risk, because our logic could be wrong.
So we play it safer and pray to many Gods.
Pascals wager shows that its better to choose the abrahamic religions.
Well, not really. There are over 3000 revealed Gods. You are not increasing chances by going 1 out of 3000.
50 out of 3000 is mathematically the greater chance of success.
Also, whats important is balance between good and evil. You dont wanna be all good, because if Satan turns out to be real, you did nothing to please him so no happy afterlife for you.
-->
@aql_reason
Why the effort?
He might appreciate it. Even I like when people praise me.
-->
@YouFound_Lxam
So is this a debate between the two topics to argue which is correct or are we discussing similarities and differences between the two entities?
Or perchance is this a pro vs con list?
-->
@Best.Korea
Well, maybe, but I dont see how does that make me bad.
It makes your argument bad. Because you say I do X for fun. So does a serial killer.
Well, if one of them turns out to be real, he might appreciate that I prayed to him.
Yes, but if that god is God not gods, then you are in trouble
But we dont know what is the least risk, because our logic could be wrong.So we play it safer and pray to many Gods.
Playing it safe is not praying to many Gods. The whole point of Pascals wager is what is safe.
Well, not really. There are over 3000 revealed Gods. You are not increasing chances by going 1 out of 3000.50 out of 3000 is mathematically the greater chance of success.
No that's not what Pascal wager is about. Most religions like folk and polytheistic have low risk low reward. For example, in Hinduism the worst that can happen if you are bad is you get reincarnated. However, the Abrahamic religions have high risk (hell) high reward (heaven). That's the wager
Also, whats important is balance between good and evil. You dont wanna be all good, because if Satan turns out to be real, you did nothing to please him so no happy afterlife for you.
Satan is by definition a deceiver, so he can't be pleased with anyone. He doesn't care where you land, he only cares that he made you land there.
He might appreciate it. Even I like when people praise me.
Lets assume God is not all good but actually evil (i.e Satan). Absolute Evil is the absence of good. So why would any good thing (appreciation to you) come from your act of making an effort to praise him.
-->
@hey-yo
So far Best.Korea has made this about polytheism which has nothing to do with the topic. But I guess he's just here for fun.
-->
@aql_reason
It makes your argument bad. Because you say I do X for fun. So does a serial killer.
My argument has nothing to do with that, as my argument was about me. It wasnt about other people.
Yes, but if that god is God not gods, then you are in trouble
This is an assumption.
No that's not what Pascal wager is about. Most religions like folk and polytheistic have low risk low reward. For example, in Hinduism the worst that can happen if you are bad is you get reincarnated. However, the Abrahamic religions have high risk (hell) high reward (heaven). That's the wager
Thats false. Getting reincarnated as a person who gets slowly crushed by car is rather bad. And if Satan turns out to be true God, you are kinda in trouble for praying to Allah. If Valhalla turns out to be real, you are also in trouble. Even the Greeks and Egyptians had afterlife which kinda meassured how you lived life. Then there is also the spirit world if you follow native americans.
Also, you ignore the fact that pascal's wager only takes into account known Gods.
So yeah, its not just Allah and Jesus you have to fear.
Satan is by definition a deceiver, so he can't be pleased with anyone. He doesn't care where you land, he only cares that he made you land there.
Thats just an assumption made by Jesus and Allah.
Lets assume God is not all good but actually evil (i.e Satan). Absolute Evil is the absence of good.
Even evil people are "good" towards someone. If he is more evil than good or even completely evil, he still might reward me for my evil actions because rewarding evil is evil.
Thats why I prefer the balance.
If Allah or Jesus turns out to be real, I have donated to charity so gotta reward me for that.
If satan turns out to be real, well I masturbated to gay porn and prayed to Qliphoth. That should give me the benefit.
-->
@Best.Korea
My argument has nothing to do with that, as my argument was about me. It wasnt about other people.
Yes, what I was pointing out is your argument is from emotion (i.e fun) which is not used in logical arguments. If you don't want to have a logical discussion. Then there is no point in because I am a logical person.
Thats false. Getting reincarnated as a person who gets slowly crushed by car is rather bad.
But getting crushed by a car and then getting reincarnated again to another life is not worse than being eternally than being damned to Hellfire (high risk).
And if Satan turns out to be true God, you are kinda in trouble for praying to Allah.
Not just me. Everyone. And I did say that could be a possibility. But I said it's highly unlikely possibility as well.
If Valhalla turns out to be real, you are also in trouble. Even the Greeks and Egyptians had afterlife which kinda meassured how you lived life. Then there is also the spirit world if you follow native americans.Also, you ignore the fact that pascal's wager only takes into account known Gods.
None of those are as high risk as Abrahamic religions. They could also be true. There could be unkown Gods. But that is a limit of us humans. We don't know what is not known.
Thats just an assumption made by Jesus and Allah.
It was the assumption that we made when discussing this argument. Please re-read.
Even evil people are "good" towards someone. If he is more evil than good or even completely evil, he still might reward me for my evil actions because rewarding evil is evil.
If evil people are good then they are not evil they are bad or worse. Because evil means absence of good. Otherwise it is contradictory towards the defintion. If you can't reach common ground of definitions, then unfortunately I can't discuss anything with you. The whole point of having a discussion with opposing views is having some sort of common ground.
Thats why I prefer the balance.
Religion is balanced i.e fair. But of course, that's an assertion. And I can't discuss with you because you don't believe reason is main arbiter or truth.
If Allah or Jesus turns out to be real, I have donated to charity so gotta reward me for that.
God does not reward actions but intentions. You are not rewarded, my friend.
If satan turns out to be real, well I masturbated to gay porn and prayed to Qliphoth. That should give me the benefit.
Like I said if we can't agree on the defintion of Satan, then there is no point in discussing.
-->
@aql_reason
Yes, what I was pointing out is your argument is from emotion (i.e fun) which is not used in logical arguments.
Fun is an emotion. Now, you assume that emotions are not used in logical arguments. Thats incorrect. I just used the emotion as a reason for polytheism being good. Of course, you might assume that my argument was about any action or any person, but it was not. It was about me and polytheism.
But getting crushed by a car and then getting reincarnated again to another life is not worse than being eternally than being damned to Hellfire (high risk).
But both are equally possible, so best to work to prevent both, as opposed to just one.
None of those are as high risk as Abrahamic religions. They could also be true. There could be unkown Gods. But that is a limit of us humans. We don't know what is not known
More assumptions. Also, because you dont know what is not known, better play it safer and go with polytheism.
It was the assumption that we made when discussing this argument
It was an assumption that you made, to be precise.
If evil people are good then they are not evil they are bad or worse.
This is irrelevant, as I clearly pointed out that evil rewards evil, which is in itself an evil action. Maybe you mistakenly assumed that evil means absence of reward for evil, which is an absurd assumption.
because you don't believe reason is main arbiter or truth.
I like reason. I just know better than to blindly trust it.
God does not reward actions but intentions. You are not rewarded, my friend.
So Allah would not reward my intention to donate to charity? And this is your assumption?
Like I said if we can't agree on the defintion of Satan, then there is no point in discussing
As I said, possibilities of Gods are endless, but mainly, they belong in these categories:
1. Totally good
2. More good than evil
3. Equally good and evil
4. More evil than good
5. Totally evil.
The balanced life of good and evil basically guarantees rewards in each category.
-->
@aql_reason
Like I said if we can't agree on the defintion of Satan, then there is no point in discussing
Well, under your definition of Satan, Satan will screw everyone regardless of their actions, so if your definition turns out to be true God, everyone is equally screwed so nothing matters.
-->
@Best.Korea
Fun is an emotion. Now, you assume that emotions are not used in logical arguments. Thats incorrect. I just used the emotion as a reason for polytheism being good. Of course, you might assume that my argument was about any action or any person, but it was not. It was about me and polytheism.
Logical (def): of or according to the rules of logic or formal argument. Logic is the study of correct reasoning. Appeal to emotion are fallacies and do not make your argument strong. Because you don't agree with basic terms then I'm not going to discuss. Because emotions are subjective. Logic is not.
This is irrelevant, as I clearly pointed out that evil rewards evil, which is in itself an evil action. Maybe you mistakenly assumed that evil means absence of reward for evil, which is an absurd assumption.
It's not absurd. You don't argue according to rules of logic so of course its absurd to you.
I like reason. I just know better than to blindly trust it.
Faith is blind belief: (def):
1. complete trust or confidence in someone or something.
2. strong belief in God or in the doctrines of a religion, based on spiritual apprehension rather than proof.
Because of the definition of faith, you have faith because you believe have spiritual connection to God but its not backed by proof.
According to wikipedia: proof (def): A proof is sufficient evidence or a sufficient argument for the truth of a proposition.
So Allah would not reward my intention to donate to charity? And this is your assumption?
This argument comes from theory of extrinsic vs intrinsic ethics. People should do good for the sake of goodness (intrinsic) rather than the consequences (extrinsic).
1. Totally good2. More good than evil3. Equally good and evil4. More evil than good5. Totally evil.
Yes there are many possibilites. But most information on earth (religion, scripture, etc.) support 1.Of course, we assume this otherwise life is useless and we are just Gods play things if its not 1.
Well, under your definition of Satan, Satan will screw everyone regardless of their actions, so if your definition turns out to be true God, everyone is equally screwed so nothing matters.
Correct. Let's not discuss this topic further because it doesn't relate to the topic we are supposed to be discussing.
Anyway, I think I derailed this topic enough. Now, back to the actual topic. It will be fun watching Islam vs. Christianity. Of course, I think muslims are a bit outnumbered here on the forum, which is an unfair advantage, but it is what it is.
-->
@Best.Korea
I'm a one man army. Numbers don't determine truth.
-->
@Best.Korea
@aql_reason
All BS, based upon the same naive creation and purpose hypotheses.
A fascinating insight into the workings of the organic computer and how it establishes, transfers and therefore consciously perpetuates misinformation.
As opposed to sub-conscious data, which is pretty standard and necessary stuff.
Clever and stupid are the Yin and Yang of the human condition.
-->
@YouFound_Lxam
As a Christain, the obvious contradictions between the Quran, and the Bible are very clear.
The Old Testament is just as vile as the Quran. And you need your head testing if you believe it isn't.
Judges 19
Look, here is my virgin daughter, and his concubine. I will bring them out to you now, and you can use them and do to them whatever you wish. But as for this man, don’t do such an outrageous thing.”
25 But the men would not listen to him. So the man took his concubine and sent her outside to them, and they raped her and abused her throughout the night, and at dawn they let her go. 26 At daybreak the woman went back to the house where her master was staying, fell down at the door and lay there until daylight.
27 When her master got up in the morning and opened the door of the house and stepped out to continue on his way, there lay his concubine, fallen in the doorway of the house, with her hands on the threshold. 28 He said to her, “Get up; let’s go.” But there was no answer. Then the man put her on his donkey and set out for home.
29 When he reached home, he took a knife and cut up his concubine, limb by limb, into twelve parts and sent them into all the areas of Israel. 30 Everyone who saw it was saying to one another, “Such a thing has never been seen or done, not since the day the Israelites came up out of Egypt.
At least the Jews have dragged themselves into the 21st century. Islam cannot do that. Muslims are the biggest victims of Islam.
-->
@aql_reason
I'm a one man army. Numbers don't determine truth.
I agree. Hence that silly term of phrase "only a tiny minority".
It took just 19 Muslims to bring a city to its knees on the morning of Tuesday, September 11, 2001. The majority were irrelevant.
-->
@zedvictor4
Well, religions are based on bullshit.
-->
@Stephen
I agree. Hence that silly term of phrase "only a tiny minority".It took just 19 Muslims to bring a city to its knees on the morning of Tuesday, September 11, 2001. The majority were irrelevant.
Both Christians and muslims did lots of crimes, but Christians ended up being way more powerful in military and economy. In fact, for the past 500 years, Christianity had military superiority, and in the last 100 years, Christianity became about million times stronger than Islam.
When muslims attack Christians, it really does nothing to Christianity as a whole. It only makes islam look bad.
But both islam and christianity face same problem. The decline.
People simply no longer want to live by old restrictive rules. Even in muslim countries, many changes are happening. Female genital mutilation is banned almost everywhere now. Women are protesting against face covers, forced marriages and restrictive society.
The islam still has many problems, such as stoning gays, non-believers, and anyone who has sex outside of marriage. Honor killings still happen.
But gradually, muslim societies too will evolve past islam. The change is slowly happening. The islam will disappear eventually, or be reduced to minority in society.
I just wish I was born 500 years later when religions become nothing.
-->
@Best.Korea
I agree. Hence that silly term of phrase "only a tiny minority".It took just 19 Muslims to bring a city to its knees on the morning of Tuesday, September 11, 2001. The majority were irrelevant.Both Christians and muslims did lots of crimes,
Indeed. There is a slight difference between the two. The god of Islam orders that its adherents/Muslims to kill all unbelievers, Jews and Christians. <<<That is a fact.
When muslims attack Christians, it really does nothing to Christianity as a whole. It only makes islam look bad.
Well you tell that to the relatives that have just watched their loved ones be headed and raped. And it "makes Islam look bad" because Muslims are carrying out the will of their god, as it is instructed in the Quran.
But both islam and christianity face same problem. The decline.
You are half correct. Islam is on the rise. Christianity is in decline. Through sheer birth rate..
-->
@Morphinekid77
Mohammed came and affirmed the Books before him. Modern Muslims insist the Bible is corrupt, they repeat it like a mantra.That's not what their prophet taught.The Bible I believe in can stand on it's own. If the Quran is true, the Bible is true. If the Quran is false it makes no difference to my religion because my Book is still true.
Amen
-->
@Stephen
Indeed. There is a slight difference between the two. The god of Islam orders that its adherents/Muslims to kill all unbelievers, Jews and Christians. <<<That is a fact.
If Islam to you is just ISIS interpretation of Islam then sure that's the idea. If the idea of Islam was to kill disbelievers, they would have been dead a long time ago when Muslims were at their peak. The arabic word for disbeliever is Kaffir
From Wikipedia:
Etymology[edit]
The word means to cover/conceal/hide. A disbeliever is the one who knows the truth of Islam and hides it. Christians and Jews are not disbelievers, they are mentioned as people of the book.
Well you tell that to the relatives that have just watched their loved ones be headed and raped. And it "makes Islam look bad" because Muslims are carrying out the will of their god, as it is instructed in the Quran.
Clearly you are biased against Islam. Islam didn't start when ISIS came to power. It was there since 7th century. If you want to not come off as biased, don't rest your case on invalid and impractical assumptions. ISIS are takfiris an offshoot of Wahabbi Islam. Of you course you are ignorant of such things so all the information you have of 2 billion Muslims comes from BBC.
ISIS are extremist because they follow a school that takes literal interpretation. People are normal and not extreme. It takes money and influence to keep them extreme. Which is why ISIS became as powerful as it did. Of course, I doubt you care about those intricacies because you are biased and not learned on such things
If the whole forum is to bash Islam from invalid interpretations, what's the point?
Just conclude Islam = ISIS and be done.
-->
@aql_reason
Islam compared to Christianity is more reason-based. Christianity is faith-based. The belief in the trinity is contradictory: God can't be creator and created. Of course, this doesn't disprove Christianity but the concept of Trinity. Majority of the arguments against Islam are not logical arguments rather they are appeals to emotions. Like Sharia and how it functions in society. I'll answer some points and show how you guys are not arguing logically:
That is not what the Trinity belief claims.
The Father was not created by another.
The Son was not created by another.
The Holy Spirit was not created by another.
God created everything, but nothing created God.
The trinity believes in the basic fact that three persons, are in one being.
Three distinct parts, to one God.
For instance:
You are also a trinity being
You have a physical body.
A logical mind.
And a spiritual soul.
Your body is you. Your mind is you. And your soul is you. But it's three distinct parts of you as well.
Human rights according to what? Secularism? UN? Islam rejects secularism. Everything in Islam: social, legal, political is a religious matter. Human rights are a hoax that you guys believe in. Freedom for all? Really? So why do we arrest nudist, have gun laws, mandate vaccines, etc. Is that giving rights to everyone? Freedom is overrated. Truth matters more.
Your Quran also says prepubescent child marriage is acceptable.
It also says beating your wife into submission is acceptable.
It also says killing people who disagree with Islam is acceptable.
It also says killing people who leave Islam is acceptable.
-->
@aql_reason
Yes, Quran believes that they had some/most divine parts. When people make the argument by saying Quran is just a copy paste of the Bible they don't understand one important point: Quran affirms that these books came from 1 source i.e God. which is why they have mostly the same message. I could say the same thing about Christianity and Judaism. They are copy paste of Zoroastrianism - the first monotheistic religion.
Judaism (not officially) existed before. Zoroastrianism.
Yes and the modern world blows up peoples heads with bombs and drones. Same stuff, diffrent times. "Teaches about virgins" - You can get whatever you want in heaven (logically).
Would you agree that sin (bad deeds) sometimes feel good, and we want it?
If yes, then your logic doesn't make sense here.
-->
@YouFound_Lxam
This is the definition of God:
(in Christianity and other monotheistic religions) the creator and ruler of the universe and source of all moral authority; the supreme being.
So God is the creator. So how can God be creator and created (i.e "in the flesh")? That's contradictory.
God created everything, but nothing created God.
That's not what I am talking about. I am aware God is the root cause. There is no root to the root cause. However, how can an entity be creator and created at the same time? It's illogical.
Your Quran also says prepubescent child marriage is acceptable.It also says beating your wife into submission is acceptable.It also says killing people who disagree with Islam is acceptable.It also says killing people who leave Islam is acceptable.
And the Bible has a lot of violent and undertones. Which Christians did follow back then. The difference now is you guys left out all those parts and decided to focus on "faith" and person connection with God.
It does not say kill those who disagree with Islam. Criticism is allowed in Islam. Not insults. There's a difference.
-->
@Stephen
The Old Testament is just as vile as the Quran. And you need your head testing if you believe it isn't.Judges 19Look, here is my virgin daughter, and his concubine. I will bring them out to you now, and you can use them and do to them whatever you wish. But as for this man, don’t do such an outrageous thing.”25 But the men would not listen to him. So the man took his concubine and sent her outside to them, and they raped her and abused her throughout the night, and at dawn they let her go. 26 At daybreak the woman went back to the house where her master was staying, fell down at the door and lay there until daylight.27 When her master got up in the morning and opened the door of the house and stepped out to continue on his way, there lay his concubine, fallen in the doorway of the house, with her hands on the threshold. 28 He said to her, “Get up; let’s go.” But there was no answer. Then the man put her on his donkey and set out for home.29 When he reached home, he took a knife and cut up his concubine, limb by limb, into twelve parts and sent them into all the areas of Israel. 30 Everyone who saw it was saying to one another, “Such a thing has never been seen or done, not since the day the Israelites came up out of Egypt.At least the Jews have dragged themselves into the 21st century. Islam cannot do that. Muslims are the biggest victims of Islam.
Yeah, and what does that last sentence say??:
“Such a thing has never been seen or done, not since the day the Israelites came up out of Egypt.
THEY ARE CONDEMING IT
-->
@YouFound_Lxam
Judaism (not officially) existed before. Zoroastrianism.
Not really. Zoroaster existed before. Just look it up. The concepts of Zoroastrianism were all later influenced by Judaism and later religions. The article is on wikipedia.
Would you agree that sin (bad deeds) sometimes feel good, and we want it?If yes, then your logic doesn't make sense here.
How does it not make sense. What's the argument?
-->
@aql_reason
This is the definition of God:(in Christianity and other monotheistic religions) the creator and ruler of the universe and source of all moral authority; the supreme being.So God is the creator. So how can God be creator and created (i.e "in the flesh")? That's contradictory.That's not what I am talking about. I am aware God is the root cause. There is no root to the root cause. However, how can an entity be creator and created at the same time? It's illogical.
You are not understanding.
If Jesus is God in the flesh, and no one can create God, then that means that God sent himself into a physical body and was not created.
This is why the Bible, and the Quran, explicitly states that Jesus was born of a Virgin.
And the Bible has a lot of violent and undertones. Which Christians did follow back then. The difference now is you guys left out all those parts and decided to focus on "faith" and person connection with God.
Find, a violent undertone, and I can guarantee you either the book condemns it, or the Bible represents the person who committed the act as justified.
The Quran doesn't give a justification for child intercourse and marriage.
It does for the rest, but its only:
Beating your wife is ok, because your wife must submit.
Killing people who leave Islam is ok, because they are forsaking Allah.
Killing non-Muslims is ok, because they are forsaking Allah.
It does not say kill those who disagree with Islam. Criticism is allowed in Islam. Not insults. There's a difference.
Try criticizing Islam in an Islamic country. See what happens.