The Four Horseman hold forth! Dawkins, Hitchen et al.

[butchersapron]

I'd like a label for people who manage to take part in debates like this but seem unable or unwilling to put forward their views particularly, preferring instead to just pour scorn on the comments of those who actually DO say anything.

Hang on, you'd like a label for people whose views you don't understand or even know too? What would you call them matthews?

 

[Yu_Gi_Oh]

Would me answer begin with "yes,but" it would be not a yes but a no.
Would my answer begin with "no, but" it would be not a no but a yes.

This is exactly the conundrum I was trying to illustrate!! I'm glad you get me.

So do you think you could avoid the confusion and just say yes or no?

 

[butchersapron]

Great adlebran and matthews the two dullest posters on either side take over.

 

[Aldebaran]

We are all empty inside, if you believe the Buddhists, it is accepting this emptiness rather than filling it with dubious stories!

I know that since I began to reason but it never gave me reason to avoid gathering knowledge.

salaam.

 

[Yu_Gi_Oh]

Great adlebran and matthews the two dullest posters on either side take over.

And the comma dies a sudden death.

(teasing, don't be hurt!)

 

[Aldebaran]

So do you think you could avoid the confusion and just say yes or no?

There is no yes or no. Do you think you could go read my answer in the other thread?

salaam.

 

[sleaterkinney]

Well, yeh. But Dawkins, as a scientist, should be taking the best possible case for theology and then attacking it.

Why?. Shouldn't he attack it as it appears in most people lives, which is the mainstream religions.

 

[Gmart]

What? There is an other Qur'an, one I never heard of? Did you write it?

Chapter 4: Surat An-Nisa (Women), verse 1-4

Here's a link for you, verse 3.

 

[Aldebaran]

Great adlebran and matthews the two dullest posters on either side take over.

Haha...My red burning star just became explosive. Be aware of the consequences.

salaam.

 

[Aldebaran]

Gmarthews, where on earth does AQ 4;3 state "the necessity of slavery" in your mind?

salaam.

 

[Dillinger4]

Why?. Shouldn't he attack it as it appears in most people lives, which is the mainstream religions.

Because it is cheap and cynical.

 

[Gmart]

But if you fear that you cannot maintain equality among them, marry one only or any slave-girls you may own.

How much more clear would you like?

 

[Aldebaran]

How much more clear would you like?

Where does that say that it is a necessity to have slaves?

salaam.

 

[Gmart]

It is evidently acceptable to own slaves!

 

[Aldebaran]

It is evidently acceptable to own slaves!

Yes it is. It provides for the means to emancipate them, a highly recommended and rewarded action to untertake. (would you have read actually Al Qur'an, you would know that)

salaam.

 

[Yu_Gi_Oh]

Yes it is. It provides for the means to emancipate them, a highly recommended and rewarded action to untertake. (would you have read actually Al Qur'an, you would know that)

salaam.

lol, buy them to set them free?

Disable people to buy them a wheel chair?

Doesn't that seem a little illogical?

 

[sleaterkinney]

Because it is cheap and cynical.

Why is it cheap?, Religion comes across as an easy target because it is an easy target. I've read his writings and imo he does tackle the big questions, he doesn't just stick to cheap points.

 

[Gmart]

Not exactly what it says though, Aldeberan.

From the text itself it merely alludes to the slave girls you own. Both the existence of slaves, and the ownership itself, is allowed.

 

[jayeola]

lol sounds fun.

"religion is crap"
"I agree"
"I agree"
"I agree...especially those muslims"
"you are absolutely right"
"so are you!"
"I agree with all of you"
"how are we gonna fill up three hours? Oh, I know...i dont believe in god."
"nor do i!"
"Wow, thats amazing! I dont either!"
"nor do i!"

yeah sounds like something nobody should miss ..!!

another

 

[Dillinger4]

I think those are just willful misinterpretations really.

 

[Aldebaran]

lol, buy them to set them free?

So you think a slave would have been better off if he lived with a non Muslim where chances of being set free were nihil?

Does that seem logical to you?

Disable people to buy them a wheel chair?

Can't guess how you came to make such a link between apples and oranges.

salaam.

 

[Gmart]

I think those are just willful misinterpretations really.

We are trying to establish if Aldeberan accepts personal interpretation of the Koran, or whether he feels it is simply the word of Allah.

 

[Dillinger4]

Why is it cheap?, Religion comes across as an easy target because it is an easy target. I've read his writings and imo he does tackle the big questions, he doesn't just stick to cheap points.

Because he creates a poor caricature of belief and theology. Religion is not an easy target once you start to look at questions theologians have been considering for a long time.

I don't see Dawkins dealing with any of the difficult questions. Just creating the worst possible picture of Religion as possible.

 

[Yu_Gi_Oh]

So you think a slave would have been better off if he lived with a non Muslim where chances of being set free were nihil?

Oh right, then you'd set them free right away, you wouldn't keep 'em around slaving for you for a while first? That's good.

Can't guess how you came to make such a link between apples and oranges.

The link would have to be fruit!

 

[Aldebaran]

Not exactly what it says though, Aldeberan.

Hint: It as a verse considering marriage, not slavery.

From the text itself it merely alludes to the slave girls you own. Both the existence of slaves, and the ownership itself, is allowed.

Yes. And where does it command Muslims to have slaves.(If you want to propose yourself as a scholar of Islam, be one. Surprise me.)

salaam.

 

[Dillinger4]

Its not even Dawkins that pisses me off the most. Don't even get me started on Dennet!

 

[Aldebaran]

We are trying to establish if Aldeberan accepts personal interpretation of the Koran, or whether he feels it is simply the word of Allah.

Correction: That question being answered already in an other thread, the only thing you try to is tearing issues into this thread that have absolutely nothing to see with the thread's subject.

salaam.

 

[Aldebaran]

Oh right, then you'd set them free right away, you wouldn't keep 'em around slaving for you for a while first? That's good.

It was most certainly good when put in its correct context.
Do you think non Muslims at the time had any incentive to set free their slaves, or buy slaves to set them free?

salaam.

 

[Gmart]

In what way is it 'a poor caricature of belief and theology'? I have quoted the Koran to him, what could be a better caricature if it is the basis of Islam? If I was quoting someone else then maybe, but to quote the source cannot be poor!

And the original quote does NOT imply that these slaves are released, in fact it is suggested that these slave girls are used in the future, implying no such release!

 

[Gmart]

Correction: That question being answered already in an other thread, the only thing you try to is tearing issues into this thread that have absolutely nothing to see with the thread's subject.

salaam.

Because you refuse to see the video which this thread is about!