Richard Dawkins - God is evil, pedoph...

Richard Dawkins - God is evil, pedophilesa not so bad

There are 3049 comments on the Examiner.com story from Sep 14, 2013, titled Richard Dawkins - God is evil, pedophilesa not so bad. In it, Examiner.com reports that:

"The God of the Qur'an is arguably the most unpleasant character in all fiction: jealous and proud of it; a petty, unjust, unforgiving control-freak; a vindictive, bloodthirsty ethnic cleanser; a misogynistic, homophobic, racist, infanticidal, genocidal, filicidal, pestilential, megalomaniacal, sadomasochistic, capriciously malevolent bully.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at Examiner.com.

Since: Jul 11

United States

#456 Nov 2, 2013
Igor Trip wrote:
<quoted text>
So who created God?
If the universe needs a creator then the creator needs a creator.
If the creator doesn't need a creator then why should the universe?
Theists have this weird idea that God doesn't need to be explained. He does.
Not necessarily.
First Cause is a scientific approach to explain existence of a physical phenomenon - the universe.
If God created science as we know it - it does not follow that He Himself can be explained by it.

Since: Oct 13

Location hidden

#457 Nov 2, 2013
Igor Trip wrote:
<quoted text>
Didn't the original Arabic society also have such rules?
I just don't find the hadith specific enough to be useful for developing a complete law system without scholars having to literally fill in the gaps themselves.
Do you know there's a hadith ordering the killing of all dogs?
From Sahih Muslim
#3813 - Abu Zubair heard Jabir Abdullah saying: Allah's messenger ordered us
to kill dogs and we carried out this order so much so that we also killed
the dog roaming with a women from the desert. Then Allah's apostle forbade
their killing. He said: "It is your duty to kill the jet-black (dog)
having two spots (on the eyes) for it is a devil.
<quoted text>
As I said, if there is a son the inheritance system works. This is because it deals in portions with the males getting twice the portion of the females.
But if there are no males the it deals in fractions and they don't always add up.
4:11 Allah charges you, concerning your children:
to the male the like of the portion of two females,
and if they be women above two, then for them two-thirds of what he leaves,
but if she be one then to her a half;...
For example if there is only one daughter she will get Half the inheritance but who gets the rest? The Quran doesn't say.
Too much inheritance can also be awarded.
If there are 3 daughters (2/3) both parents of deceased (1/3) and wife (1/8) that's an 1/8th to much.
To solve these dilemmas two basic rules were added. Either the nearest male relative gets any excess or the portions are adjusted equally. These two rules solve the problems but they are not in the Quran or hadiths.
Didn't the original Arabic society also have such rules?
yes they did have some rules, some of them used to bury their own daughters alive because they are disgraced , women had no rights and were treated literally like objects and animals, they used to worship so many idols, in short words the strong would kill the weak, the only thing they were good at was poetry and Arabic language and god challenged them with the best thing they can do.

man whats your story with The Islamic Inheritance rules, you cannot just read the verse and come say it doesn't work , you should study the Quran very carefully, you dont even understand Arabic, you have a hell of a journey to be capable of explaining the Quran Accurately, even I cannot take out rules from the verses, anyways here is a software I think you'll enjoy , this website can accurately calculate the inheritance percentages
http://www.islamicsoftware.org/irth/irth.html

I assure you scholars cannot add what ever they want, otherwise there would be differences among the Muslims (Sunni Muslims) regarding this issue, there is a specific method to extract (ahkam)
Rules from Quran and Sunnah.

regarding the dog issue Hadith - Bukhari 4:538, Narrated Abu Huraira
said, "A prostitute was forgiven by Allah, because, passing by a panting dog near a well and seeing that the dog was about to die of thirst, she took off her shoe, and tying it with her head-cover she drew out some water for it. So, Allah forgave her because of that."

The Hadith you brought talks about a different kind of dogs which is probably the rabid dog

Hadith - Bukhari 4:531, Narrated 'Aisha
said, "Five kinds of animals are mischief-doers and can be killed even in the Sanctuary: They are the rat, the scorpion, the kite, the crow and the rabid dog." some of the animals who may hurt us should be killed but still with a specific way

The Prophet (peace be upon him)) said,“When you kill, you should kill well, and when you slaughter, you should slaughter well. Sharpen your knife and give relief to your slaughtered animal.[Sunan Abî Dâwûd]

Since: Jul 11

United States

#458 Nov 2, 2013
hazem selawi wrote:
<quoted text>
we believe that all prophets and messengers are Muslims and they all delivered the same message (one God) monotheism is the most important issue, the actual teachings of Jesus (Issa in Arabic) was to worship only one god, he never claimed to be god or a son of god .
There a numerous rules in The Quran and Hadith, more than you can imagine, and you should know that there 3 types of Hadith and these types are also categorized, we only take what is called Sahih (100% authentic), there is a special and very complicated method to categorize Hadith, so you cannot just simply say Hadith was written way long after the death of Mohammed, The Sahih Hadith should be narrated by a specific number of narrators and companions, lets assume that one of these narrators were known to have a short memory this may take down the Hadith from being Sahih into Hasan (less accurate), and The
authentic Hadith should be supported by another Hadith, lets assume that one of the narrators was known to be A Liar this will instantly take the Hadith down to weak , there are so many details regarding the science of Hadith, for further details you can check this link http://www.islamic-awareness.org/Hadith/Ulum/
I disagree that all the prophets were Muslim. It seems to me that all prophets acknowledged the necessity of a sacrifice for sin - for atonement to be made before a Holy God. All prophets but Mohammed that is. He stands against all the other prophets in this.

Since: Oct 13

Location hidden

#459 Nov 2, 2013
Meh wrote:
<quoted text> Yes and no, sharia law worked for many during that time, but not all. Even during your peak alot of scientist were considered heretics within islam. And i know how bad the church was for europe, and alot of muslims think islam will help that void. To me that would be going back to being under the yoke of church, grant that it would be a mosque.
I appreciate that your comment was well spoken without any hostility and anger. You read my points and didnt bash at them you took them into consideration and didnt take offense to what my point of view was. Thanks and have a good day. May we argue and talk more in this civilized manner.
Its always a pleasure "MEH" yes I think there were a few scientists were considered as heretics, but certainly not because of their studies, they might tried to get a new religion or tried to change some authentic Rules and teachings of Mohammed.

What do you know about Islam ?! what makes you think that Islam will fail to spread justice in the world ?

“Evil Atheist :-)”

Since: Mar 07

Location hidden

#460 Nov 2, 2013
hazem selawi wrote:
<quoted text>
That is the best question I've ever read in this forum, if a creator created the universe then he should have a creator who created him,
that's when you should know the attributes of the creator, we believe that god the creator is infinite, he has no beginning and no end. Say, "He is Allah ,[who is] One,Allah , the Eternal Refuge, He neither begets nor is born,Nor is there to Him any equivalent." surah 112
Sorry but that's a weak answer.

If an entity intelligent and powerful enough to create a universe can just exist without explanation then why not something else?
Why not some spark that caused a chain reaction that resulted in the Big Bang or why not energy which as far as we know can't be created or destroyed, both of which would be far simpler?

Whatever caused the universe to exist doesn't have to be a sentient being. Some quirk of physics would be a lot simpler

“Evil Atheist :-)”

Since: Mar 07

Location hidden

#461 Nov 2, 2013
hazem selawi wrote:
<quoted text>
we believe that all prophets and messengers are Muslims and they all delivered the same message (one God) monotheism is the most important issue, the actual teachings of Jesus (Issa in Arabic) was to worship only one god, he never claimed to be god or a son of god.
The problem with claiming all prophets were Muslims is that they aren't here to agree or disagree. So all you have is an opinion.

The real problem though is that if prophets were sent to all the peoples of the world then why did they fail so badly that we've only heard of a few and they disagree with each other?

Christianity is a big problem for Islam because it simply shouldn't exist.
If Jesus had written down his message and had many copies made and distributed amongst his followers, no one could have corrupted his message. His failure to prevent his message being corrupted is for me enough evidence to disprove religion.
hazem selawi wrote:
There a numerous rules in The Quran and Hadith, more than you can imagine, and you should know that there 3 types of Hadith and these types are also categorized, we only take what is called Sahih (100% authentic), there is a special and very complicated method to categorize Hadith, so you cannot just simply say Hadith was written way long after the death of Mohammed, The Sahih Hadith should be narrated by a specific number of narrators and companions, lets assume that one of these narrators were known to have a short memory this may take down the Hadith from being Sahih into Hasan (less accurate), and The authentic Hadith should be supported by another Hadith, lets assume that one of the narrators was known to be A Liar this will instantly take the Hadith down to weak , there are so many details regarding the science of Hadith, for further details you can check this link http://www.islamic-awareness.org/Hadith/Ulum/
No ones memory is so good that thousands of hadiths could be accurately conveyed via a chain of narrators without some distortions creeping in. This is a big problem especially if you are going to base laws on the exact wording of those hadiths.

“Evil Atheist :-)”

Since: Mar 07

Location hidden

#462 Nov 2, 2013
Quadratus wrote:
<quoted text>
Not necessarily.
First Cause is a scientific approach to explain existence of a physical phenomenon - the universe.
If God created science as we know it - it does not follow that He Himself can be explained by it.
That's a logical fallacy called special pleading.
You're assuming that the universe needs explaining but God doesn't but God isn't nothing, he's a something and so yes he does need to be explained.

“Evil Atheist :-)”

Since: Mar 07

Location hidden

#463 Nov 2, 2013
hazem selawi wrote:
<quoted text>
Didn't the original Arabic society also have such rules?
yes they did have some rules, some of them used to bury their own daughters alive because they are disgraced , women had no rights and were treated literally like objects and animals, they used to worship so many idols, in short words the strong would kill the weak, the only thing they were good at was poetry and Arabic language and god challenged them with the best thing they can do.
And now people have more rules and women more rights.
hazem selawi wrote:
man whats your story with The Islamic Inheritance rules, you cannot just read the verse and come say it doesn't work , you should study the Quran very carefully, you dont even understand Arabic, you have a hell of a journey to be capable of explaining the Quran Accurately, even I cannot take out rules from the verses, anyways here is a software I think you'll enjoy , this website can accurately calculate the inheritance percentages
http://www.islamicsoftware.org/irth/irth.html
Why would your God provide inheritance rules you can't easily understand.
They're quite easy if you break the verses down.

4:11
Allah charges you, concerning your children:
to the male the like of the portion of two females,
and if they be women above two, then for them two-thirds of what he leaves,
but if she be one then to her a half;

and to his parents to each one of the two the sixth of what he leaves, if he has children;
but if he has no children, and his heirs are his parents,
a third to his mother,
or if he has brothers, to his mother a sixth,

after any bequest he may bequeath, or any debt.
Your fathers or your sons -
you know not which out of them is nearer in profit to you.
So Allah apportions; surely Allah is All-knowing, All-wise.

4:12
And for you a half of what your wives leave, if they have no children;
but if they have children, then for you of what they leave a fourth,
after any bequest they may bequeath, or any debt.

And for them a fourth of what you leave, if you have no children;
but if you have children, then for them of what you leave an eighth.
after any bequest they may bequeath, or any debt.

If a man or woman have no heir direct [i.e. children or parents],
but have a brother or a sister, to each of the two a sixth;
but if they are more numerous than that, they share equally a third,

after any bequest they may bequeath, or any debt not prejudicial;
a charge from Allah. Allah is All-knowing, All-clement.

4:176
They will ask thee for a pronouncement.
Say:'Allah pronounces to you concerning the indirect heirs.
If a man perishes having no children,
but he has a sister, she shall receive a half of what he leaves,
and he is her heir if she has no children.
If there be two sisters,
they shall receive two-thirds of what he leaves;
if there be brothers and sisters,
the male shall receive the portion of two females.

Allah makes clear to you, lest you go astray;
Allah has knowledge of everything.

Interesting article from an Islamic site explaining the rules and some of the issues they had to solve.
http://www.islam101.com/sociology/inheritance...

“Evil Atheist :-)”

Since: Mar 07

Location hidden

#464 Nov 2, 2013
hazem selawi wrote:
I assure you scholars cannot add what ever they want, otherwise there would be differences among the Muslims (Sunni Muslims) regarding this issue, there is a specific method to extract (ahkam)
Rules from Quran and Sunnah.
This presumes they can't reach agreement over an unsolved problem.
hazem selawi wrote:
regarding the dog issue Hadith - Bukhari 4:538, Narrated Abu Huraira
said, "A prostitute was forgiven by Allah, because, passing by a panting dog near a well and seeing that the dog was about to die of thirst, she took off her shoe, and tying it with her head-cover she drew out some water for it. So, Allah forgave her because of that."
The Hadith you brought talks about a different kind of dogs which is probably the rabid dog
Hadith - Bukhari 4:531, Narrated 'Aisha
said, "Five kinds of animals are mischief-doers and can be killed even in the Sanctuary: They are the rat, the scorpion, the kite, the crow and the rabid dog." some of the animals who may hurt us should be killed but still with a specific way
The Prophet (peace be upon him)) said,“When you kill, you should kill well, and when you slaughter, you should slaughter well. Sharpen your knife and give relief to your slaughtered animal.[Sunan Abî Dâwûd]
And that's the problem with hadiths, there are many contradictory ones.

Since: Jul 11

United States

#465 Nov 2, 2013
Igor Trip wrote:
<quoted text>
That's a logical fallacy called special pleading.
You're assuming that the universe needs explaining but God doesn't but God isn't nothing, he's a something and so yes he does need to be explained.
Either the Creator God exists or He doesnt.
If He does, who or what can explain Him?
Science is our best shot at explaining the physical world - but if God exists and created science itself - science is inadequate to explain Him
So the question Who created God - can only be answered by God alone, if He exists, and if He chooses to answer.
The question itself devolves into the logical fallacy of begging the more important question - does God exist. It really does not advance the conversation.
Civician

Dixon, CA

#466 Nov 2, 2013
Igor Trip wrote:
<quoted text>
Sorry but that's a weak answer.
If an entity intelligent and powerful enough to create a universe can just exist without explanation then why not something else?
Why not some spark that caused a chain reaction that resulted in the Big Bang or why not energy which as far as we know can't be created or destroyed, both of which would be far simpler?
Whatever caused the universe to exist doesn't have to be a sentient being. Some quirk of physics would be a lot simpler
You mean like a flying spaghetti monster? With noodly appendages?

I'm still hoping that gawd gives me tonight's lotto numbers, I'd be eternally grateful, for sure.
Civician

Dixon, CA

#467 Nov 2, 2013
Quadratus wrote:
<quoted text>
Either the Creator God exists or He doesnt.
If He does, who or what can explain Him?
Science is our best shot at explaining the physical world - but if God exists and created science itself - science is inadequate to explain Him
So the question Who created God - can only be answered by God alone, if He exists, and if He chooses to answer.
The question itself devolves into the logical fallacy of begging the more important question - does God exist. It really does not advance the conversation.
And if wishes were fishes I'd have mercury poisoning by now; with all those 'ifs' your proposition is iffy at best.

Something that isn't, isn't. And until 'it' abides by the laws of physics, there is no proof of 'its' existence, at least as far as humans are concerned. Now one could certainly spend their time sucking air in the universe with fingers crossed and visions of cherry pie in the sky, but there's no proof of cherry pies or anything else in the sky except all the known matter.

In the mean time civilization will be a lot better off forgetting about cherry pies and focusing on advancing mankind in the known universe.

Since: Jul 11

Portland, OR

#468 Nov 2, 2013
Civician wrote:
<quoted text>
And if wishes were fishes I'd have mercury poisoning by now; with all those 'ifs' your proposition is iffy at best.
Something that isn't, isn't. And until 'it' abides by the laws of physics, there is no proof of 'its' existence, at least as far as humans are concerned. Now one could certainly spend their time sucking air in the universe with fingers crossed and visions of cherry pie in the sky, but
there's no proof of cherry pies or anything else in the sky except all the known matter.
In the mean time civilization will be a lot better off forgetting about cherry pies and focusing on advancing mankind in the known universe.
But there's the rub. God is not overly concerned about being judged by His creation. 1 Cor 1:21 For after that in the wisdom of God, the world by wisdom knew not God, it pleased God by the foolishness of preaching to save them that believe
If God created science and is therefore greater than science, He can be completely invisible to science, and still reveal Himself to men. He can do it through personal experience -the same way you meet and subsequently get to know your friends. Those of us who have met Him this way, frankly are unimpressed by anything you atheist types throw at us. Interesting, even logical on a certain level - but - dude, I met Him, I know Him, I experience Him.
Civician

Dixon, CA

#469 Nov 2, 2013
Quadratus wrote:
<quoted text>
But there's the rub. God is not overly concerned about being judged by His creation. 1 Cor 1:21 For after that in the wisdom of God, the world by wisdom knew not God, it pleased God by the foolishness of preaching to save them that believe
If God created science and is therefore greater than science, He can be completely invisible to science, and still reveal Himself to men. He can do it through personal experience -the same way you meet and subsequently get to know your friends. Those of us who have met Him this way, frankly are unimpressed by anything you atheist types throw at us. Interesting, even logical on a certain level - but - dude, I met Him, I know Him, I experience Him.
'God is not overly concerned?' Do tell, did he speak to you in tongues about this?

'If God created science...' But he didn't create anything, that is the rub...there is no proof other than the findings of science about what's in our universe.

'...and still reveal himself to men.' There you go again, throwing around your 'ifs' like they were free cherry pies.

'Those of us who have met him.' So, it's a 'him' and not a unicorn; how convenient.

If you were talking about Elvis instead of God, you'd be locked up for being insane. See? That's the real rub with religion, it lets crazy people walk around without adult supervision.
LCNLin

United States

#470 Nov 2, 2013
Igor Trip wrote:
<quoted text>
Sorry but that's a weak answer.
If an entity intelligent and powerful enough to create a universe can just exist without explanation then why not something else?
Why not some spark that caused a chain reaction that resulted in the Big Bang or why not energy which as far as we know can't be created or destroyed, both of which would be far simpler?
Whatever caused the universe to exist doesn't have to be a sentient being. Some quirk of physics would be a lot simpler
Your opinions are interesting as opinions

Since: Jul 11

Portland, OR

#471 Nov 2, 2013
Civician wrote:
<quoted text>
'God is not overly concerned?' Do tell, did he speak to you in tongues about this?
'If God created science...' But he didn't create anything, that is the rub...there is no proof other than the findings of science about what's in our universe.
'...and still reveal himself to men.' There you go again, throwing around your 'ifs' like they were free cherry pies.
'Those of us who have met him.' So, it's a 'him' and not a unicorn; how convenient.
If you were talking about Elvis instead of God, you'd be locked up for being insane. See? That's the real rub with religion, it lets crazy people walk
around without adult supervision.
Yet science itself cannot explain its own beginning. You atheist types appeal to the big bang like singularities are regular common occurrances. All
the matter energy and time in the universe compressed into a dot about the size of a period on the end of a sentence. What scientific laws accomplish that? So something greater than science did create science. And you dont know it wasnt God. For all you can actually prove - it might have been God.
Suppose it was God, if He chose to reveal Himself personally, couldnt He do it? And what if there is consistent testimony of people who have experienced knowing a Being who has the attributes you would expect to find in such a God?
Arent you even a little curious on what its like knowing such a God?
Have you ever wondered where genuine Christians come from? I have. And my discovery was breathtaking.

“Evil Atheist :-)”

Since: Mar 07

Location hidden

#472 Nov 2, 2013
Quadratus wrote:
<quoted text>
Yet science itself cannot explain its own beginning. You atheist types appeal to the big bang like singularities are regular common occurrances. All
the matter energy and time in the universe compressed into a dot about the size of a period on the end of a sentence. What scientific laws accomplish that? So something greater than science did create science. And you dont know it wasnt God. For all you can actually prove - it might have been God.
Suppose it was God, if He chose to reveal Himself personally, couldnt He do it? And what if there is consistent testimony of people who have experienced knowing a Being who has the attributes you would expect to find in such a God?
Arent you even a little curious on what its like knowing such a God?
Have you ever wondered where genuine Christians come from? I have. And my discovery was breathtaking.
Have you ever wondered where genuine Muslims, Hindus, Buddhists, pagans, wiccans etc came from? All over the world people claim to have experienced God or Gods. Oddly they all seem to experience different Gods.
This suggests those feelings have less to do with a spirit world and more to do with delusions of their own minds.

“Evil Atheist :-)”

Since: Mar 07

Location hidden

#473 Nov 2, 2013
Civician wrote:
<quoted text>
You mean like a flying spaghetti monster? With noodly appendages?
I'm still hoping that gawd gives me tonight's lotto numbers, I'd be eternally grateful, for sure.
Are you sure you're using the right pasta sauce? It makes all the difference you know.

“Evil Atheist :-)”

Since: Mar 07

Location hidden

#474 Nov 2, 2013
LCNLin wrote:
<quoted text>
Your opinions are interesting as opinions
I thought so.
Civician

Dixon, CA

#476 Nov 2, 2013
Quadratus wrote:
<quoted text>
Yet science itself cannot explain its own beginning. You atheist types appeal to the big bang like singularities are regular common occurrances. All
the matter energy and time in the universe compressed into a dot about the size of a period on the end of a sentence. What scientific laws accomplish that? So something greater than science did create science. And you dont know it wasnt God. For all you can actually prove - it might have been God.
Suppose it was God, if He chose to reveal Himself personally, couldnt He do it? And what if there is consistent testimony of people who have experienced knowing a Being who has the attributes you would expect to find in such a God?
Arent you even a little curious on what its like knowing such a God?
Have you ever wondered where genuine Christians come from? I have. And my discovery was breathtaking.
'Yet science itself cannot explain its own beginning.'
Really? You really believe that? Too weird.

'You atheist types appeal to the big bang like singularities are regular common occurrances.'
Uh, yeah! Do you know of another big bang?!

'What scientific laws accomplish that?'
Uh, no law accomplished anything, they simply describe reality. Confused much?

'So something greater than science did create science.'
Uh, no. Science was not created, it evolved from discovered knowledge! It's really pathetic when you try and twist reality to fit your ridiculous, buy-bull fueled mumbo jumbo! This isn't church dude, you don't get to play mickey mouse this and mickey mouse that! This is the public square, where your idiotic contentions get called out for what they are....junk! Your determined attempt to run away from reality is mind numbingly disgusting. As I said, substitute Elvis for God and you'd be in a straight jacket about now.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Atheism Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Atheism requires as much faith as religion? (Jul '09) 3 min thetruth 247,401
News Atheists Aren't the Problem, Christian Intolera... (Oct '14) 15 min thetruth 12,643
News In America, atheists are still in the closet (Apr '12) 23 min thetruth 47,800
Proof of God for the Atheist 24 min thetruth 121
News Atheism, the Bible and sexual orientation 4 hr thetruth 7
News As an atheist, how do I maintain my relationshi... 10 hr thetruth 21
News Why Atheism Will Replace Religion (Aug '12) 20 hr JustASkeptic 14,714
More from around the web