21 replies

  1. I’m not quite seeing the analogy.

  2. When you see water in a well, do you assume it is there by chance or that some logical process got it there like someone put it there or someone created conditions that led water into a well.

    That’s at least what I got out of reading this.

  3. Atheists are narrow minded pathetic people

    • Nassima, can you explain why you think this?

      • @ kiabooks

        Because it’s based solely on their emotions and there are no objective criteria to use other than feelings. This is why I can’t have a discussion because it’s too hard to establish anything. Something can be proven to be harmful (like alcohol) on society but because they want to drink it, it’s okay. How do you have any conversation here?

      • Are you sure that emotions alone are why atheists don’t believe in God?

      • @ kiabooks

        No. I think in general the laymen are very emotional but we can break most down into 2 types:

        1. Arrogance
        2. Emotional (usually why did (insert here) happen?)

        Nobody is pure emotion or logic its both of these things working in tangent (with one being stronger). My issue is it’s hard to discuss this (especially online) because there is nothing objective in our conversation, I’ll give an example:

        Atheist: “Give me proof for God.”

        Now what most people do will start listing off stuff. The best answer really is:

        “What do you personally consider proof?”

        There has to be something established or otherwise its a default to emotions. Even in my above I have to ask what emotionally do they think. It’s just annoying because they switch when these criteria get hit because they just don’t want to believe. Couple this with most people not reading long responses so that’s why I normally don’t engage with them.

      • The best answer wouldn’t be asking them what they’d accept. They’d just answer “whatcha got?”
        Because the atheist isn’t responsible for telling you what evidence they’d accept up front. That’s a bit dishonest, and would prob result in you feeling free not to provide anything at all… Thinking that the atheist is setting a too high standard.
        The best and most honest answer to “what proof do you have for God’s existence?” Is to just give the evidence you have.. then discuss it.

      • @ kia

        Played this game several times. I usually get hit with:

        “That’s impressive”

        All we do is go around and around because people are different in experiences etc. For example, I know nothing about you so I’ll make something up. Let’s say you’re a writer (poetry, short story, etc.) at this point I would use the challenge of the Qur’an to mankind because you would understand it. If you know nothing about writing this won’t mean anything and/or you won’t understand it. That’s why I have to know what is proof to the person as Islam has a lot but it’s for the people that know about that particular subject.

      • I understand. But I still think it’s more along the lines of shifting the burden and asking the question to bias yourself into not really answering the question if you don’t want to. My opinion I guess.

      • No need for an explanation, it is the Truth😊

      • @ kia

        No, it just stops people from playing games. See how you can’t even say what you want to see but demand proof? Again there is no objective criteria other than personal feelings in play. But I’ll keep this simple as God did in the Qur’an just answer the following since you don’t believe in God:

        52:35. Were they created from nothing? Or did they create themselves?

    • A narrowminded pathetic statement

  4. Where ever water originates, we can only trace it’s origin to nature and physics. All assertions otherwise are without the ability to verify.

    • Kiabooks,

      Who created nature in the very distinct harmonious way it is? Why did it have to be that way instead of a zillion non-harmonious ways.

      Who created the amazing laws in physics that work everywhere?

      Why those elegant mathematical laws making physics? And why are the laws in such a way that amazingly we humans have the ability to decode them?

      The laws could have been a zillion more complex and impossible for beings with our intellects to decipher.

      Atheists don’t trace the origin all the way. It is as if they want to not go all the way but deliberately stop at a brute fact.

      But a brute fact is kind of illogical and insensible.

      I think it makes more sense that the ultimate cause is perfect and self-existing and not an inexplicable brute fact because anything that exists without being perfect is inexplicable.

      May you my brother or sister accept there is One who everything is traced to and that One has to be good because that One is perfect.

  5. Most atheists know the water cycle is – surprise surprise – circular.

Leave a Reply