Somehow, if science managed to validate the existence of God what do you think would happen? - The Best Online Debate Website | DebateIsland.com - Debate Anything The Best Online Debate Website | DebateIsland.com
frame

Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

DebateIsland.com is the largest online debate website globally by activity where anyone can anonymously and easily debate online, casually or formally, while connecting with their friends and others. Users, regardless of debating skill level, can civilly debate just about anything online in a text-based online debate website that supports five easy-to-use and fun debating formats ranging from Casual, to Formalish, to Lincoln-Douglas Formal. In addition, people can improve their debating skills with the help of revolutionary artificial intelligence-powered technology on our debate website. DebateIsland is totally free and provides the best online debate experience of any debate website.









DebateIsland Referral Program: Get a Free Month of DebateIsland Diamond Premium Membership ($4.99 Value) Per Each New User That You Refer!

Somehow, if science managed to validate the existence of God what do you think would happen?

Debate Information

Somehow, if science managed to validate the existence of God what do you think would happen?  Would we all worship God or would you deem that Science is more superior than God himself?
ZeusAres42JeffreyBlankenship
«1



Debra AI Prediction

Predicted To Win
Predicted To Win
Tie

Details +




Post Argument Now Debate Details +

    Arguments


  • KhasimAmeduKhasimAmedu 123 Pts   -  
    I'm very curious to see what you guys say
  • Somehow, if science managed to validate the existence of God what do you think would happen?  Would we all worship God or would you deem that Science is more superior than God himself?


    I think that's a very interesting question. Hence for the fist bump. However, I guess it could be argued that God wanted his existence to be known and allowed Scientists to prove it and therefore, making God still more superior than science.



  • KhasimAmeduKhasimAmedu 123 Pts   -  
    I agree with your idea, that God would be more superior because his simply willed his existence to be known.

  • I agree with your idea, that God would be more superior because his simply willed his existence to be known.

    However, I can also see this ending up with a possible endless loop of questions. For example, what if scientists were able to prove that God willed his existence to be known? Then it could be argued that God also willed the existence of him willing his existence to be known. And so the cycle of never-ending questions continues. With that being said, I am not sure that is a logically valid objection at this time.



  • KhasimAmeduKhasimAmedu 123 Pts   -   edited March 13
    Hm, interesting point. But how exactly would this "will" be discovered. Isn't will metaphysical rather than logical?

    @ZeusAres42
    ZeusAres42
  • Hm, interesting point. But how exactly would this "will" be discovered. Isn't will metaphysical rather than logical?

    @ZeusAres42

    Idk. It was just a hunch. Also, even if the will is metaphysical I think we still need a logical framework to be able to understand it. In any case, what I meant was that I am not sure my argument was logically valid. Probably due to the fact that I am somewhat inebriated right now..

    It's kind of ironic really. Usually, when people get drunk they often think of themselves as infallible. So, I guess I am looking pretty good right now in comparison to those other drunken fools. ;)




  • FYI, you will likely get more people responding to you within the next 24 hours. For some reason, at this time of day on this particular day, it often appears quieter here than normal. So, don't let the current lack of responses put you off.



  • KhasimAmeduKhasimAmedu 123 Pts   -  

    Idk. It was just a hunch. Also, even if the will is metaphysical I think we still need a logical framework to be able to understand it. In any case, what I meant was that I am not sure my argument was logically valid. Probably due to the fact that I am somewhat inebriated right now..

    Mhm, I agree that your argument has some logical errors but I definitely saw where you were coming from. Also from what I'm seeing on this website there are a lot of Atheists who drink? How does drinking feel? Cause I never tried nor do I plan to.

    It's kind of ironic really. Usually, when people get drunk they often think of themselves as infallible. So, I guess I am looking pretty good right now in comparison to those other drunken fools. 

     You have better vocabulary then I do even in your drunken state. Wow I don't know how I should feel about that. :)

    Seems like Atheism is as free as it gets. Am I right?
  • PlaffelvohfenPlaffelvohfen 2609 Pts   -  
    @KhasimAmedu

    If science explained God, then God would just become another scientific fact... Do we worship Gravity? Should we?
    Happy_KillbotZeusAres42xlJ_dolphin_473AlofRIbjinthirty
    " Adversus absurdum, contumaciter ac ridens! "
  • Keal192NXQ2Keal192NXQ2 246 Pts   -  
    @KhasimAmedu

    I'd believe in God if he were proven. Doesn't exactly suck the essence of life out. Contrary actually. If God were an actual relatable manifestation of a person, he'd be an awesome .
    ZeusAres42


  • Idk. It was just a hunch. Also, even if the will is metaphysical I think we still need a logical framework to be able to understand it. In any case, what I meant was that I am not sure my argument was logically valid. Probably due to the fact that I am somewhat inebriated right now..

    Mhm, I agree that your argument has some logical errors but I definitely saw where you were coming from. Also from what I'm seeing on this website there are a lot of Atheists who drink? How does drinking feel? Cause I never tried nor do I plan to.

    That seems like a very personal question. In any case, right now it feels pretty good.

    It's kind of ironic really. Usually, when people get drunk they often think of themselves as infallible. So, I guess I am looking pretty good right now in comparison to those other drunken fools. 

     You have better vocabulary then I do even in your drunken state. Wow I don't know how I should feel about that.


    Well, thanks for the compliment. 


    Seems like Atheism is as free as it gets. Am I right?

    Atheism is basically free from any theistic belief.





  • Keal192NXQ2Keal192NXQ2 246 Pts   -  
    You can't say d--u-d-e on this website. ?
  • Keal192NXQ2Keal192NXQ2 246 Pts   -  
    You can't say d--u-d-e on this website. ?

  • You can't say d--u-d-e on this website. ?

    That's because Debra has become somewhat r-e-t-a-r-d-ed.


    AlofRI



  • Keal192NXQ2Keal192NXQ2 246 Pts   -  
    Who's that?
  • Who's that?

    Reply Debra AI Analytics



  • KhasimAmeduKhasimAmedu 123 Pts   -  
    Nice answers!
  • DeeDee 4051 Pts   -   edited March 13



    Well if that was the case and science proved there was only one god and that was the christian god you  as a Muslim would have to either reject him/her or fall to your knees and beg repentance, I assume you would renounce your adherence to Islam right?

    Also if science proved a god it would be proving over 4,000 of them who’s followers all believe their particular one is the  true god 


    Regards me I wouldn’t worship the Christian or Muslim gods as they are not worthy of worship , they’re petty , vindictive vile entities that deserve no respect 

    I would like to ask your god Allah why he detests women and why he thought it permissible that his “prophet” should be given free reign by Allah to consummate marriage with a 9 year old child and  the prophet being then 53........

    Child marriage


    'A'isha (Allah be pleased with her) reported: Allah's Apostle (may peace be upon him) married me when I was six years old, and I was admitted to his house when I was nine years old.

    Sahih Muslim 8:3310



    Women are equal to dogs


    Narrated 'Aisha: It is not good that you people have made us (women) equal to dogs and donkeys.

    Sahih Bukhari 1:9:498; see also Sahih Muslim 4




    The “impeccable “ behaviour of the “prophet” 


    Narrated 'Aisha: The Prophet and I used to take a bath from a single pot while we were Junub. During the menses, he used to order me to put on an Izar (dress worn below the waist) and used to fondle me.

    Sahih Bukhari 1:6:298



    KhasimAmedu
  • KhasimAmeduKhasimAmedu 123 Pts   -  
    Well if that was the case and science proved there was only one god and that was the christian god you as a Muslim would have to either reject him/her or fall to your knees and beg repentance, I assume you would renounce your adherence to Islam right?

    We believe that God is one, absolute deity, so naturally the God of Christianity is a opposition to this. The Bible itself, is a troublesome with no ambiguous statement regarding the divinity of Jesus Christ. Many early saint leaders of the Church as well as Greek philosophers agree that Christianity has pagan origins. The bread and wine ritual, the idea of a 3-being and the idea of a man-God are not new and have been prevalent in paganistic religions before. Many early saint leaders of the Catholic Church agreed that Christianity had monotheism and polytheism mixed, and there were even forbidden books in the Church regarding the divinity of Jesus and the trinity doctrine.

    Now whether science can prove a man-god or a 3-being is not the topic but if the existence of the Christian God was prevalent that would give the possibility that other religions have some truth due to similarity in pagan 
    origins. For example:

    Ancient Egypt worshipped the trinity of Amun, Re and Pt [Leiden Hymns]

    Babylonians worshipped the trinity of Nanna, Shamash and Ishtar

    Hinduism, has the concept of trimurti in which Brahman the eternal god is said to manifest in 3 forms, Brahma, Vishnu and Shiva

    The Greeks had a goddess known as Hakate which was labelled as triple-headed. [Greek Magical Papyri, Prayer to Selene]

    The Romans venerated Diana as "DIVA TRIFORMIS' which means three-formed goddess

    You get the idea, if Christianity had the truth and so would these religions.

    Islam doesn't have this problem though, as the message came down from God, and origins cannot be traced to another natural source. Christianity on the other hand has mixed polytheism with monotheism. 

    I would like to ask your god Allah why he detests women and why he thought it permissible that his “prophet” should be given free reign by Allah to consummate marriage with a 9 year old child and  the prophet being then 53........

    Applying the standards of 21st century to the Middle Ages would be the historically incorrect thing to do. First thing, Calling Aisha a child is wrong as 9-14 is the age of maturity during that time. So Aisha was a young woman not a child. 

    The problem with people with who use this problem is that they cannot accept the fact that child marriages were a normal thing back then which would be rejecting history. It's almost like your implying that the Prophet had done the dirty with Aisha, which is completely untrue. The Prophet had no children with Aisha and their relationship has been deemed as spiritual according to Muslim scholars and historians. 

    Allah detest women? 

    Muslim women have been scholars, teachers and leaders in the academic aspect of Islam since the very start. Even in the hadith your mentioning Aisha is educating Muslims, about what nullifies prayer. How can this be when Aisha has narrated more than 2,000 hadiths and a majority have been deemed authentic by male and women Islamic scholars? Aisha is arguably one of the best educators for Islamic history. How can this be when the Prophet declared in the hadith that Khadija has been given the title of the best woman on earth? When Virgin Mary has been given the title as the best woman in the heavens? Name any human besides the Prophets that have been given such grand titles!

    Aisha became so wise that one of her contemporaries used to say that if the knowledge of Aisha was placed on one side of the scales and that of all other women on the other, Aisha’s side would outweigh the other. She used to sit with the other women and transmit the knowledge that she had received from the Prophet SAW long after he had died. As long as she lived, she was a source of knowledge and wisdom for both women and men. Abu Musa once said, “Whenever a report appeared doubtful to us, the Companions of the Prophet SAW, and we asked Aisha about it, we always learned something from her about it.”

    And Allah detests women? LOL!


    Narrated 'Aisha: It is not good that you people have made us (women) equal to dogs and donkeys.

    You took a small part of this hadith and concluded that woman are equal to dogs. Here's the full hadith:

    "The things which annul the prayers were mentioned before me. They said, “Prayer is annulled by a dog, a donkey and a woman (if they pass in front of the praying people).” I said, “You have made us [i.e., women] dogs. I saw the Prophet praying while I used to lie in my bed between him and the Qibla. Whenever I was in need of something, I would slip away for I disliked to face him.”

    In this context, Aisha is talking with uneducated Muslims that believe  if a donkey, dog or a woman pass in front of someone's prayer, that prayer becomes invalidated. Then Aisha sarcastic remarks, You have made us women as dogs if you believe that such a thing. Your mistake is that you took this hadith too literally and ignored the context of the hadith.

    She then states that she lays down in front of the prayer direction of the Prophet, but the Prophet's prayer does not become invalid. The conclusion is that women do NOT invalidate the prayer by passing in front the Qibla. 

    Narrated 'Aisha: The Prophet and I used to take a bath from a single pot while we were Junub. During the menses, he used to order me to put on an Izar (dress worn below the waist) and used to fondle me.

    The first and most fatal issue is Izar, here's the correct defintion:

    Izar - a long, usually white cotton dress that covers the body completely, worn by women of North Africa and the Middle East.

    So according to this Hadith, the Prophet ordered Aisha to be completely dressed when they both took a bath together. This is further evidence of the spiritual relationship between Prophet Muhammad and Aisha. 

    fondle - stroke or caress lovingly or erotically.

    In order to conclude what fondle means here, we need to look at the context. If the Prophet ordered Aisha to be completely dressed then the only logical conclusion is that the Prophet touched her in a loving manner. If the Prophet intended to erotically stroke her then he would have demanded her to be undressed. But is that the case? Nope.

    @Dee







  • KhasimAmeduKhasimAmedu 123 Pts   -  
    @Dee I hope you actually read this because I counter everything you say. I expect some feedback for my counters. Thanks!
  • KhasimAmeduKhasimAmedu 123 Pts   -  
    Regards me I wouldn’t worship the Christian or Muslim gods as they are not worthy of worship , they’re petty , vindictive vile entities that deserve no respect.

    I cannot speak for the Christian God but Allah is certainly of worthy of worship. There are many reasons but a very simple one is this:

    He created you. If you believe that this has no importance then you have no sense of reason. 
    Allah created mankind and therefore mankind belongs to him rightfully. If we belong or owned by the Creator this makes us slaves of that Creator by default. When I speak of slavery I am not referring to the ville human slavery but rather a much more justifiable slavery. This makes the Creator, the Master of Mankind and all of creation. Since we are slaves by default obeying the Master's command is simply our priority as rightful slaves. What has the Master commanded us to do? To worship him alone. Is there any vile injustice in this? To give the Master of all creation his rightful and deserving praise is unjust or vile? What ludicrous claims! Now to abandon this command and declare it false would make that slave disobedient.

    Now if personally you don't like to submit to anything, then that's more personal and emotional belief.
    If one is ignorant of his Lord's existence then it logically follows that he won't submit regardless of the reasons.




    I can personally say being a slave of Allah has been nothing but a beneficial journey, and I have been given goodness and justice. 


    @Dee

    Plaffelvohfen
  • DeeDee 4051 Pts   -   edited March 13
    @KhasimAmedu


    Before we commence you claimed yesterday that credible historians agree that Mo interacted and conversed  with an angel I’m still waiting for your proof of this ridiculous claim and how an individuals opinion is somehow evidence ?


    Islam doesn't have this problem though, as the message came down from God, and origins cannot be traced to another natural source. Christianity on the other hand has mixed polytheism with monotheism. 


    Utter nonsense Islam is a bastardized religion like most ......


    Courtesy of Quora  S G 

    If one really researches the practices and teachings of Islam, they will find these are nothing but copy-paste-modify from Christianity, Judaism and pre-islamic Arabia.

    • Allah is nothing but Jewish Elah

    • Many of the verses in Quran are actually copied from pre-Islamic poet called Imru Al Qays from Mecca.

    • Monotheism copied from Jews

    • Jummah is nothing but Jewish Shabbath copied & modified

    • Halal is nothing but Jewish Kosher copied & modified

    • Haram is nothing but Jewish Kashrut copied & modified

    • Abraham, Moses stories are originally Jewish, copied & modified

    • Taqiya cap is nothing but Jewish Kippah cap copied & modified

    • 5 times prayers is nothing but Zoroastrianism 5 times prayers copied & modified

    • 10th day of Muharram fasting is nothing but 10th day fasting of pre-Islamic Quraish tribe copied & modified by Muhammed

    • Jerusalem was originally a Jewish hopy city, copied by Muhammed

    • Assalamu-alaikum is nothing but Jewish Shalom Alechem copied & modified by Muhammed

    • Muslim praying method is nothing but a praying technique of Coptic Christians, copied & modified by Muhammed

    • Concept of Judgement day is copied from Christians

    • Mecca and Umrah pilgrimages existed from pre-Islamic times

    • Kabaah was a pre-Islamic temple which contained 360 idols and was under the custodianship of the Quraish tribe

    • Tawaf: Circumambulation 7 Times around Kaaba was a pre-Islamic religious practice copied & modified by Muhammed

    • Crescent Moon Symbol was a symbol of pre-Islamic moon God Hubal, copied and used by Muhammed



    Applying the standards of 21st century to the Middle Ages would be the historically incorrect thing to do. First thing, Calling Aisha a child is wrong as 9-14 is the age of maturity during that time. So Aisha was a young woman not a child. 



    Nonsense a chid is a 9 year old not a “woman”.....


    Aisha (Allah be pleased with her) reported: Allah's Apostle (may peace be upon him) married me when I was six years old, and I was admitted to his house when I was nine years old.

    Sahih Muslim 8:3310



    The problem with people with who use this problem is that they cannot accept the fact that child marriages were a normal thing back then which would be rejecting history. It's almost like your implying that the Prophet had done the dirty with Aisha, which is completely untrue. The Prophet had no children with Aisha and their relationship has been deemed as spiritual according to Muslim scholars and historians. 



    Having sex with a 9 year old was not “normal” also you say ..... it's almost like your implying that the Prophet had done the dirty with Aisha, which is completely untrue.


    Your “sacred “ books back me up so you’re  caught being dishonest again .....


    Here is Mo “not doing the dirty “ as you put it 


    Narrated 'Aisha: The Prophet and I used to take a bath from a single pot while we were Junub. During the menses, he used to order me to put on an Izar (dress worn below the waist) and used to fondle me.

    Sahih Bukhari 1:6:298


    Then Aisha sarcastic remarks, You have made us women as dogs if you believe that such a thing. Your mistake is that you took this hadith too literally and ignored the context of the hadith.


    Stop with your nonsense it’s straight from Aishas mouth .....


    Narrated 'Aisha: It is not good that you people have made us (women) equal to dogs and donkeys.

    Sahih Bukhari 1:9:498; see also Sahih Muslim 4


    In order to conclude what fondle means here, we need to look at the context. 


    A “context “ for a 53 year old man fondling a 9 year old you’re one sick puppy 


    If the Prophet ordered Aisha to be completely dressed then the only logical conclusion is that the Prophet touched her in a loving manner


    Is there no level you will not stoop to to protect this child abuser?


    . If the Prophet intended to erotically stroke her then he would have demanded her to be undressed. But is that the case? Nope.


    What do you think fondle a child means you clown ?

    Narrated 'Aisha: The Prophet and I used to take a bath from a single pot while we were Junub. During the menses, he used to order me to put on an Izar (dress worn below the waist) and used to fondle me.

    Sahih Bukhari 1:6:298


    KhasimAmedu
  • DeeDee 4051 Pts   -  
    @KhasimAmedu

    I cannot speak for the Christian God but Allah is certainly of worthy of worship. 

    To brainwashed Muslims .....agreed 

    There are many reasons but a very simple one is this: 

    He created you. If you believe that this has no importance then you have no sense of reason. 

    Nonsense my mother did not have sex with Allah and if that is true you must worship me 


    I can personally say being a slave of Allah has been nothing but a beneficial journey, and I have been given goodness and justice. 

    Well a slave in captivity will say that lest his master beats him 
  • DeeDee 4051 Pts   -   edited March 13
    @KhasimAmedu

    I hope you actually read this because

    I did yes

     I counter everything you say. 

    You offer a defence which I’ve dismantled 


    I expect some feedback for my counters. Thanks!

    Cool you got it . Thank you also 
  • KhasimAmeduKhasimAmedu 123 Pts   -  

    Utter nonsense Islam is a bastardized religion like most ......

    The Qur'an is not copied from the Bible or Torah but rather it's based on it. Keep in mind, Islam is a Abrahamic religion just like Judaism and Christianity, so it's not bizarre that content from previous scriptures are present in the Qur'an. The only reason the Quran was sent down was to confirm the revelations that came before it and to redirect humanity back to the message of all the Abrahamic religions which is to worship Allah alone. How is the Qur'an supposed to confirm what came before it the content isn't even there?

    "It is He Who has sent down the Book to you with truth, confirming what came before it. And He sent down the Tawrah and the Injil, 4.  Aforetime, as a guidance to mankind. And He sent down the criterion. Truly, those who disbelieve in the Ayat of Allah, for them there is a severe torment; and Allah is All-Mighty, All-Able of Retribution. (Surah Ale-Imran 3:3-4)"

    Remember Islam existed since the beginning of time, therefore nothing could have been "copied".  And our inspiration for prayer comes from when Abraham fell on his face before God.

    Zoroastrianism and Islam both believe in one God but to conclude that Islam copied Zoroastrianism is wrong because Islam has been around since the beginning long before Zoroastrianism.

    Nonsense a child is a 9 year old not a “woman”.....

    This is not a argument and in fact you just rejected basic medieval history. I predicted you would have this reaction I even stated it:

    The problem with people with who use this argument is that they cannot accept the fact that child marriages were a normal thing back then which would be rejecting basic history.

    The age range for maturity is 9-14 years old to be historically precise.

    Today's accepted standards support that Aisha was a child but that was the not accepted normative back then. Standards are merely subjective not objective and therefore cannot be used as a universal basis. Whether you can prove that the Middle Ages did not practice child marriages or not the fact remains Aisha was mature.

    Having sex with a 9 year old was not “normal"

    You just ignored what I said, so I'll put it clearly for you. There is zero historical or islamic evidence suggesting that Aisha and Muhammad were sexually active. This is merely a uneducated assumption and nothing more than that. If you consider taking a bath with your loved one as evidence for sexual activity then this means I have had sex with my mom. Sounds ridiculous but that's your reasoning, simply illogical. 

    A “context “ for a 53 year old man fondling a 9 year old you’re one sick puppy 

    Again you just ignored my explanation of this hadith you used as evidence for your claims. I really fear for you. I already proved that fondle in this context means touching a loving manner. This could be as simple as patting Aisha's head. But you reject this, because you simply cannot comprehend how old man fondling a child can be 'loving'. This is a illogical argument and has no basis whatsoever. 

    Your “sacred “ books back me up so you’re  caught being dishonest again .....

    Your the dishonest one. You took the meaning of Izar and completely modified it to fit your claims. That's intellectually dishonest.

    Izar - a  long, usually white cotton dress that covers the body completely, worn by women of North Africa and the Middle East

    You claimed the Izar is a dress below the waist or something of that manner. False.

    Your evidence doesn't even fit your claims that's why you had to either change them or go out of context.


    Is there no level you will not stoop to to protect this child abuser?

    This is not a argument but a emotional statement. I understand that your frustrated as too why I won't give in, but I'm not going to let my beloved Prophet be disrespected and I'm certainly not going to let false and untrue claims be said about him. I'm merely doing my job as a Muslim. Also "child abuser" but there is no evidence suggesting so.

    What do you think fondle a child means you clown ?

    Narrated 'Aisha: The Prophet and I used to take a bath from a single pot while we were Junub. During the menses, he used to order me to put on an Izar (dress worn below the waist) and used to fondle me.

    This is not the definition of Izar as I previously stated.

    Izar - a  long, usually white cotton dress that covers the body completely, worn by women of North Africa and the Middle East

    This means that Aisha was completely covered when she was in the bath.

    Fondle has certainly been given a negative connotation but if we look into the context which you ignored completely the only logical conclusion is that the Prophet Muhammad touched Aisha in a loving or endearing manner. If the Prophet intended to maybe touch her in a more mature manner then why would he demand Aisha be covered?

    Fondle - stroke or caress lovingly or erotically.

    @Dee





  • KhasimAmeduKhasimAmedu 123 Pts   -  
    @Dee

    To brainwashed Muslims .....agreed 

    Yeah, this is my own belief. Wouldn't call Muslims brainwashed though just because we are people of faith. That's an assumption not a claim.

    Nonsense my mother did not have sex with Allah and if that is true you must worship me.

    If God was able to reproduce, he wouldn't be much a God at all. If God allowed the laws of the material world to constrict his existence this would be a problem, because then God's existence would then be bound by these laws (laws of physics) therefore rendering his being not absolute.
    But your claim is the PERFECT example of a prophecy of Prophet Muhammad.  

    Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) said, "From among the portents of the Hour are (the following):
    1. Religious knowledge will be taken away (by the death of Religious learned men).
    2. (Religious) ignorance will prevail. 
    3. Drinking of Alcoholic drinks (will be very common).
    4. There will be prevalence of open illegal sexual intercourse.

    Your claim is a example of religious ignorance, in which you disregard religious sources and revelation.
    Also I think the drinking prophecy also applies to you.

    Well a slave in captivity will say that lest his master beats him 

    So I was beaten to believe in Allah? xD
    Slave in captivity is in contradiction with free will. I could leave Islam whenever I wanted and not be restricted in any way. Of course the existence of Hellfire is a possibility but regarding the natural world I am not constrained in any way because of free will.






  • DeeDee 4051 Pts   -   edited March 13


    Before we commence you claimed yesterday that credible historians agree that Mo interacted and conversed  with an angel I’m still waiting for your proof of this ridiculous claim and how an individuals opinion is somehow evidence ?

    You keep fleeing from this question



    I’ve had enough of your nonsense it’s unbelievable that anyone can defend sex with a child but you do so with relish ....

    You state .... you simply cannot comprehend how an  old man fondling a child can be 'loving'.

    Wow! Unbelievable statement , you’re a very sick individual.

    Hisham's father: Khadija died three years before the Prophet departed to Medina. He stayed there for two years or so and then he married 'Aisha when she was a girl of six years of age, and he consumed that marriage when she was nine years old.



  • KhasimAmeduKhasimAmedu 123 Pts   -  
    @Dee

    Before we commence you claimed yesterday that credible historians agree that Mo interacted and conversed  with an angel I’m still waiting for your proof of this ridiculous claim and how an individuals opinion is somehow evidence ?

    I never claimed this, I claimed that the Hadith are authentic historical records of the life of the Prophet which go through process of verification in order to be deemed reliable by credible historians and Muslims scholars. Stop avoiding my claims and evidence and address them directly.

    I’ve had enough of your nonsense it’s unbelievable that anyone can defend sex with a child but you do so with relish ....

    I am not defending a man that had sex with a 9-year old, I'm defending a man that has never had sex with a child. There is no evidence suggesting this nor have you provided any reliable evidence supporting this ludicrous claim. You have not provided any single reliable evidence that suggests these Prophet Muhammad and Aisha were sexually active. All the evidence you provided contradict with your claims. You either modified them or went out of context. I have countered all your claims and evidence and in your return you provide either illogical statements or emotional statements . You have had enough once again because you cannot back your claims properly. Once again your evading

    You state .... you simply cannot comprehend how an  old man fondling a child can be 'loving'. 
    What your doing here is asserting the principles and standards of the 21st century into the Middle Ages. Once again these standards or principles are subjective and cannot be used as a universal basis for all ages. So what your doing here is rejecting history.

    Wow! Unbelievable statement , you’re a very sick individual.

    Do I believe that child marriages should be done? No.

    Does Islam encourage child marriages? No.

    Are child marriages an Islamic tradition or a societal normative in the Middle Ages? A societal normative in the Middle Ages.

    Did Muhammad follow the normative practices of child marriage because he was sick or would rejecting societal norms of his time be illogical? Answer he followed the societal practices because they were normal by Middle Age standards. What reason does he have to reject a society norm?

    Did Muhammad have sex with Aisha the 9 year old? No.

    Did he own sex slaves? No.

    I need proper evidence that has been deemed authentic or else your claims invalid. And going out of context or altering any historical evidence is intellectually dishonest (which you did)

  • DeeDee 4051 Pts   -  
    @KhasimAmedu


    You say.......Did Muhammad have sex with Aisha the 9 year old? No.

    Then you state .... you simply cannot comprehend how an  old man fondling a child can be 'loving'.

    Wow! Unbelievable statement , you’re a very sick individual.

    Hisham's father: Khadija died three years before the Prophet departed to Medina. He stayed there for two years or so and then he married 'Aisha when she was a girl of six years of age, and he consumed that marriage when she was nine years old.


    Now go away I’ve had my fill of your lies and overall dishonesty I’m done here ....





    KhasimAmedu
  • KhasimAmeduKhasimAmedu 123 Pts   -   edited March 13
    @Dee

    Go ahead and withdraw, but it's clear your claims are invalid.

    Then you state .... you simply cannot comprehend how an old man fondling a child can be 'loving'.

    This is not my claim but rather I'm using your claim and countering it with evidence. The wording was intended to be sarcastic but it seems you take everything in religion literally. You are going out of context and making it seem I support creepy old men fondling innocent children. This is was not the case for Prophet Muhammad and Aisha. Calling the Prophet Muhammad old is actually historically incorrect. Here's a source: Link

    Contrary to the accepted view that people in the Middle Ages and the Renaissance were considered old from their forties, in fact they were classified as old between the ages of 60 and 70. According the National Library of Medicine.

    Prophet Muhammad was 53 and therefore considered a healthy middle-aged man that had astounding youth and beauty. Here are some authentic hadith regarding just how clean and handsome he was.

    Abu Hurairah (may Allah be pleased with him) says: “The messenger of Allah (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) was so clean, clear, beautiful and handsome, as though his body was covered and moulded in silver. His hair was slightly curled.”

    Abu Hurairah (may Allah be pleased with him) says, “I did not see anyone more handsome as the messenger of Allah (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him). It was as if the brightness of the sun had shone from his auspicious face. I did not see anyone walk faster than him, as if the earth folded for him. A few moments ago he would be here, and then there. We found it difficult to keep pace when we walked with him, and he walked at his normal pace.”

    Aisha was not underage either, here's a source from Quora.

    While women of normal families would be marry off at age between 9 to 21.

    Here's what a credible Islamic source, Islamiqate has to say about her age.

    From a
    historical and traditional perspective, A'isha (ra) was biologically and mentally mature for marriage, the Prophet (saw) not consummating the marriage until she had reached puberty - deemed a young adult in his society.

    T
    his is evidence that Aisha was deemed a young adult as the ages 9-14 are the ages for young men and women in the Middle Ages. Age 15 and over are the ages of adolescence. I didn't know I had to educate you on basic Middle Ages history. What exactly have you studied?

    If you choose to ignore this comment, I have no choice but to conclude that you lost this discussion.











    Dee
  • @KhasimAmedu

    If science explained God, then God would just become another scientific fact... Do we worship Gravity? Should we?
    Actually, this is about all we can say, without getting imaginative.



  • KhasimAmeduKhasimAmedu 123 Pts   -  
    @ZeusAres42

    Actually, this is about all we can say, without getting imaginative.

    I agree. God cannot be constricted by the laws of physics or nature mainly because the basis for these laws are not absolute, therefore the laws are not absolute. Of course there is a logical contradiction because God is a absolute being therefore using the  relative or non-absolute methods of the natural world to narrow or constrict his existence is illogical. I do disagree with the imaginative part though.




  • Starlord616Starlord616 361 Pts   -  
    @KhasimAmedu

    If science explained God, then God would just become another scientific fact... Do we worship Gravity? Should we?
    well, gravity isn't sentient so there's probably less chance it will punish or reward people based on their actions
  • KhasimAmeduKhasimAmedu 123 Pts   -  
    .Starlord616 said:
    @KhasimAmedu

    If science explained God, then God would just become another scientific fact... Do we worship Gravity? Should we?
    well, gravity isn't sentient so there's probably less chance it will punish or reward people based on their actions
    Nice point.
  • AlofRIAlofRI 1412 Pts   -  
    I think NASA would send a space probe to look for him, maybe take some samples?
    ZeusAres42
  • KhasimAmeduKhasimAmedu 123 Pts   -  
    @AlofRI

    Let me ask you a question. Does it seem that using non-absolute methods such as Science to uncover the existence of a Absolute being is in anyway reasonable? There's a logical contradiction. And not only this, but I cannot comprehend how using something as feeble and incompetent as a space probe can discover the existence of a hidden, boundless and All-Encompassing being.

    What do you think? Can science possible validate the existence of God using these methods or is there another way?
  • Can the science of mathematics validate GOD as a numerical axiom?
  • KhasimAmeduKhasimAmedu 123 Pts   -  
    Can the science of mathematics validate GOD as a numerical axiom?

    Nope, validating the existence of God as a numerical axiom or scientific fact would be attempting to constrict his existence with the methods (mathematics) or laws (laws of physics or nature) of the Natural world.

    Why doesn't this work?

    1. Mathematics and Science are not absolute but rather based on logic and observation. Therefore attempting to use the non-absolute methods to validate the existence of a Absolute being is a logical contradiction.

    2. Secondly, God's existence is boundless, which means it cannot be bound by any law, method or principle of the material world.
    So trying to narrow down his existence into a scientific or a numerical axiom is a contradiction with his very attributes.

    @John_C_87
  • Nope, validating the existence of God as a numerical axiom or scientific fact would be attempting to constrict his existence with the methods (mathematics) or laws (laws of physics or nature) of the Natural world

    A numerical axiom is written in the Bible, you misunderstand the question is mathematics science? As the Bible uses this science, in fact, to create order to its own principles as the beginning of creation.
  • SkepticalOneSkepticalOne 1017 Pts   -  
    @KhasimAmedu

    I suppose that's all dependent on which diety science validates.
    ZeusAres42Dee
  • KhasimAmeduKhasimAmedu 123 Pts   -   edited March 14
    Very interestingI think I just learned something new from you.

    I know that axioms are unprovable statements that have been established as true and self-evident but if such axioms are applied to the human world aren't they subjective? Would this mean then that existences created by axioms are objective? This cannot logically follow as God's existence cannot be created by anything abstract or material.

    I just learned that mathematics is an abstract science and cannot be sensed or seen at all, just like the existence of God. Although I don't believe that God is abstract, as God's existence is not bound by any abstract or natural idea or law. Many times in revelation God's "abstract" existence has interacted with the material universe, which logically makes no sense. But then again God's existence is not restricted by human logic or reason nor by any abstract idea.

    Also, I don't believe in the Bible but I believe in the Qur'an.

    @John_C_87
  • KhasimAmeduKhasimAmedu 123 Pts   -  
    @SkepticalOne

    Are you implying that whatever deities science validates is the TRUE deity? I personally would not imply such a thing, because  science is contingent in other words liable to change. Sociologists often argue that a scientific result is contingent because, in a given situation of scientific decision-making, an alternative result could have been rationally accepted. Since science is liable to change this is a direct contradiction with the many aspects or attributes of God.

    Here are some logical contradictions:

    Science is not absolute while God is a absolute being.

    Science is imperfect and liable to change, while God is perfect, not liable to change and therefore independent.

    Science is based on logic and observation while God is not based or bound by any law of his creation.

    Dee
  • AlofRIAlofRI 1412 Pts   -  
    @AlofRI

    Let me ask you a question. Does it seem that using non-absolute methods such as Science to uncover the existence of a Absolute being is in anyway reasonable? There's a logical contradiction. And not only this, but I cannot comprehend how using something as feeble and incompetent as a space probe can discover the existence of a hidden, boundless and All-Encompassing being.

    What do you think? Can science possible validate the existence of God using these methods or is there another way?
    It was supposed to be a joke. To my mind, the only absolute in the whole question is that it would be an absolute waste of time to waste scientific time looking for a myth.
  • KhasimAmeduKhasimAmedu 123 Pts   -  
    @AlofRI

    I can agree 100%. It's incompetent to use something as feeble as science to uncover the boundless and unobservable existence of God. 

    I disagree with the myth as calling the existence of God a fallacy or misconception merely because he cannot be constricted by laws of the material reality is at best an assumption with no basis whatsoever. God explicit demands in revelation that you believe in him, not use logic or observation in order deem his existence plausible but rather to have faith. 

    Do you really think that we are to exist on this earth just to become dust? I simply cannot accept such lame and undeserving demise. My reason and intellect goes against that very conclusion.


    The trees have a particular fashion and arrangement, when I sit and look at one, I ask why are there leaves at all? Why can't they be at the bottom or the side of the tree? My reason and intellect leads to me to conclude that there is a fashioner that has created creation in a particular fashion or design.

    My reason and intellect also lead me to believe that when humans beings are in danger or in some hardship they will instinctively turn to God whether they believe in him or not. I personally have friends who follow Atheism who claimed that in times of hardship they would randomly think of God like as if they were gonna call out to him. Then of course they say they remove that thought from their heads and assure themselves that there is no God. But why did they think of God in the first place? There's a Qur'anic verse, that beautifully explains why.

    So [Prophet Muhammad] as a man of pure faith, stand firm and true in your devotion to the religion. This is the natural disposition God instilled in mankind—there is no altering God’s creation—and this is the right religion, though most people do not realize it.

    What is this natural disposition God instilled in mankind? A: Belief in a higher power.

    Here's an explanation from a credible Islamic source, Yaqeen Institute.

    "All people were born to be believers in God, and the revelations of the Prophets simply awaken and reinforce the disposition that is already inside us. Even polytheists, who believe in multiple gods and deities, often believe that there is an even higher power, an even greater God over all of them.".

    Have you personally felt the need to call out randomly to a higher God even though your sure that he doesn't exist? CosmicSkeptic a famous youtuber and advocate for Atheism has claimed that he has felt this natural disposition but never acts on it because "I let my logic and reason take over".


    DeeAlofRI
  • SkepticalOneSkepticalOne 1017 Pts   -  
    @KhasimAmedu

    Science is not absolute while God is a absolute being.

    Science is imperfect and liable to change, while God is perfect, not liable to change and therefore independent.

    Science is based on logic and observation while God is not based or bound by any law of his creation.
    If the definition of "god" is an absolute, perfect being not based or bound by logic, there is no scientific validation to be had. This would be like suggesting a bathroom scale can 'validate' height - its nonsensical.




    Dee
  • KhasimAmeduKhasimAmedu 123 Pts   -   edited March 14
    Your making the right statement but making the wrong conclusions.

    If the definition of "god" is an absolute, perfect being not based or bound by logic, there is no scientific validation to be had

    I have absolutely have no objections with this claim and I couldn't agree more. But then your concluding that he's a myth just because he's not bound by logic is merely an assumption with no basis whatsoever.

    The question that you should be asking is, "Since science cannot validate or give an answer for God existence then what will? 

    The answer is faith, because faith or revelations are the only things in the natural world that offer an answer for his existence that is not based on observation or any sort of logic, but rather claim to be based on the very Speech Of God. This already makes faith more capable, competent and compatible then science in giving an answer for God's existence. 

    As I like to say, faith is merely an excuse Atheists use to label any existence that is not bound by their beliefs.

    @SkepticalOne



    DeeAlofRI
  • SkepticalOneSkepticalOne 1017 Pts   -   edited March 14
    Your making the right statement but making the wrong conclusions.

    If the definition of "god" is an absolute, perfect being not based or bound by logic, there is no scientific validation to be had

    I have absolutely have no objections with this claim and I couldn't agree more. But then your concluding that he's a myth just because he's not bound by logic is merely an assumption with no basis whatsoever.

    The question that you should be asking is, "Since science cannot validate or give an answer for God existence then what will? 

    The answer is faith, because faith or revelations are the only things in the natural world that offer an answer for his existence that is not based on observation or any sort of logic, but rather claim to be based on the very Speech Of God. This already makes faith more capable, competent and compatible then science in giving an answer for God's existence. 

    As I like to say, faith is merely an excuse Atheists use to label any existence that is not bound by their beliefs.

    @SkepticalOne



    First, I did not draw a conclusion on god(s) being myth. I pointed out the tool (science) cannot do what the OP suggests.

    On the other hand, the proposed question assumes the reality of 'God' before validation has occurred. This is backward. The existence of X should be accepted only when it has been objectively established with verifiable evidence and not before. Otherwise, belief is not justified.

    As for faith, it has no methodology to weed out subjectivity and cannot secure a meaningful conclusion because it can be used to arrive at any conclusion. We have historical examples of this. For example, faith was used to support and argue against slavery in the US. 
    PlaffelvohfenAlofRIKeal192NXQ2
  • @KhasimAmedu
    Also, I don't believe in the Bible but I believe in the Qur'an.
    I wanted to be sure but the Qur'an does have a numerical axiom defining its order of creation.
  • KhasimAmeduKhasimAmedu 123 Pts   -  
    @SkepticalOne

    On the other hand, the proposed question assumes the reality of 'God' before validation has occurred. This is backward. The existence of X should be accepted only when it has been objectively established with verifiable evidence and not before. Otherwise, belief is not justified.

    This claim contradicts itself. Objective or independent existences require no external explanation whatsoever because objective existences are self-evident. Likewise evidence falls under external explanation and therefore cannot be applied to a independent or objective existence such as God. This does not make the existence of God any less objective but even more objective than you perceived. In other words, you can think of God as a axiom

    As for faith, it has no methodology to weed out subjectivity and cannot secure a meaningful conclusion because it can be used to arrive at any conclusion. 

    Faith already is more competent in validating God's existence merely because the basis of faith of is not based on observation and God's existence is not bound by observation. Faith is not even subjective but rather a form of knowledge that leaves no room for falsification. This makes faith absolute in a sense and can therefore be used for an Absolute being.

    We have historical examples of this. For example, faith was used to support and argue against slavery in the US. 

    Your claim is vague. Faith did not support slavery but rather according to your example the Bible did. Whether the Bible supports rape and human enslavement is a problem with Christianity not faith. If what your implying is true this could mean more than 3,000 other faithful religions support slavery. This is simply not the case.

    Europeans justified slavery because they viewed their race more superior and believed that slavery was a form of discipline for the 'uncivilised' races and countries. This belief was based on their own economical, political, social and technological standing compared to the rest of the world. 
     

  • KhasimAmeduKhasimAmedu 123 Pts   -  
    @John_C_87

    Can you provide some evidence?
Sign In or Register to comment.

Back To Top

DebateIsland.com

| The Best Online Debate Experience!
© 2021 DebateIsland.com, all rights reserved. DebateIsland.com | The Best Online Debate Experience! Debate topics you care about in a friendly and fun way. Come try us out now. We are totally free!

Contact us

customerservice@debateisland.com
Terms of Service

Get In Touch