Skip navigation
Sidebar -

Advanced search options →

Welcome

Welcome to CEMB forum.
Please login or register. Did you miss your activation email?

Donations

Help keep the Forum going!
Click on Kitty to donate:

Kitty is lost

Recent Posts


Marcion and the introduct...
by zeca
Yesterday at 11:36 PM

Lights on the way
by akay
Yesterday at 06:36 AM

Qur'anic studies today
by zeca
November 18, 2024, 05:41 PM

Dutch elections
by zeca
November 15, 2024, 10:11 PM

Random Islamic History Po...
by zeca
November 15, 2024, 08:46 PM

اضواء على الطريق ....... ...
by akay
November 13, 2024, 05:18 PM

AMRIKAAA Land of Free .....
November 07, 2024, 09:56 AM

Do humans have needed kno...
November 04, 2024, 03:51 AM

The origins of Judaism
by zeca
November 02, 2024, 12:56 PM

New Britain
October 30, 2024, 08:34 PM

Tariq Ramadan Accused of ...
September 11, 2024, 01:37 PM

France Muslims were in d...
September 05, 2024, 03:21 PM

Theme Changer

 Topic: Islam or Atheism - The Big Debate

 (Read 37296 times)
  • Previous page 1 ... 3 4 56 7 ... 10 Next page « Previous thread | Next thread »
  • Re: Islam or Atheism - The Big Debate
     Reply #120 - June 04, 2010, 01:14 PM

    oops sorry - i forgot in the previous post i said we'll agree to disagree, lol

    ''we are morally and philisophically in the best position to win the league'' - Arsene Wenger
  • Re: Islam or Atheism - The Big Debate
     Reply #121 - June 04, 2010, 01:14 PM

    I think your reaching for something that's not their my freind.

    sig-worthy - particularly considering that you said it  grin12

    My Book     news002       
    My Blog  pccoffee
  • Re: Islam or Atheism - The Big Debate
     Reply #122 - June 04, 2010, 01:14 PM

     Cheesy Cheesy Cheesy
  • Re: Islam or Atheism - The Big Debate
     Reply #123 - June 04, 2010, 01:15 PM

    Just the feel I get from reading all related quotes from Einstein on this matter.  Atheists/deists/pantheists are normally clear to distinguish about what they do/and dont believe as their are subtle differences between one position and the next.  

    Although your questions do raise an air of ambiguity, I think the best fit scenario is that is was a deist leaning closely towards pantheism but I might be wrong.


    And which group sits on the fence the most?  Agnostics!

    Quote from: StephenHawking
    If we do discover a complete theory, it should in time be understandable in broad principle by everyone, not just a few scientists. Then we shall all, philosophers, scientists, and just ordinary people, be able to take part in the discussion of the question of why it is that we and the universe exist. If we find the answer to that, it would be the ultimate triumph of human reason — for then we would know the mind of God.


    Hawking is an atheist, yet here he is not only implying that the universe's existence is linked with god but also that this god has a mind.  He is talking metaphorically.

    I've not seen a single quote from AE where he explicitly says that he thinks an intelligent being created the universe, but I have seen many similar references to this one by Hawking.  However what he does say outright is that he does not believe in the mystical; considering "mystical" covers spiritualism/deism I think he made his stance very clear on the subject of an intelligent creator of the universe.

    He was a fence sitter.


    well there's also:

    "But what really makes me angry is that they quote me for the support of such views."


    All he is saying is that there COULD be a God, and he is pissed off with people using him to try to strengthen the cause of atheism.


    You are clearly placing assumptions on what Einstein meant when he was talking - you've started to claim that when he said God he meant something else


    If I did then it was not intended.  I am trying to say that many people do it, especially within his profession.  Unless he explicitly says one way or the other we cannot know if he meant "God: The intelligent creator of the universe" or "God: Whatever the cause of the universe is".


    There's no reason to be comparing him to Stepehn Hawking either - who is an agnostic by the way and not an atheist from what I understand.


    Not according to a video I watched where a particle physicist who is currently writing a book with him stood up and confirmed that Hawking is an atheist.  But even if he were an agnostic it doesn't weaken my argument, he uses "God" to mean "the unknown cause" and not "intelligent being".


    I'm sure you'll still carry on claimimg he was an atheist or an agnostic or whatever so let's agree to disagree here - like we said earlier it doesn't give either position any credit either way.


    I'm not claiming anything on account that
    1: I don't really care.
    2: He's dead.

    What I am saying though is that your evidence that he believed it isn't as strong as the outright statement where he dismisses mysticism.  I don't think Einstein's position on God is any more important than my Nan's position, I am just calling it how I see it (objectively too by the way.)

    I don't come here any more due to unfair moderation.
    http://www.councilofexmuslims.com/index.php?topic=30785
  • Re: Islam or Atheism - The Big Debate
     Reply #124 - June 04, 2010, 01:16 PM

    shot myself in the foot there  Cheesy  Cheesy

    ''we are morally and philisophically in the best position to win the league'' - Arsene Wenger
  • Re: Islam or Atheism - The Big Debate
     Reply #125 - June 04, 2010, 01:17 PM

    He also said I believe in Spinoza’s God. Nuff said.
  • Re: Islam or Atheism - The Big Debate
     Reply #126 - June 04, 2010, 01:17 PM

    "I have never imputed to Nature a purpose or a goal, or anything that could be understood as anthropomorphic. What I see in Nature is a magnificent structure that we can comprehend only very imperfectly, and that must fill a thinking person with a feeling of humility. This is a genuinely religious feeling that has nothing to do with mysticism."


    He says that the amazing feeling he gets (which he has also described as his "religion") when adoring the universe is nothing to do with mysticism.  Can you explain how you can look at the awe of the universe and feel it has nothing to do with mysticism yet at the same time believe that some God created it?

    I don't come here any more due to unfair moderation.
    http://www.councilofexmuslims.com/index.php?topic=30785
  • Re: Islam or Atheism - The Big Debate
     Reply #127 - June 04, 2010, 01:19 PM

    ok rationaliser we agree to disagree - the quotes are there for people to make up their own minds anyway. I don't really care too much about Hawking btw - don't really care what he believes. It's just that Einstein is my favourite scientist of all time and a bit of a hero of mine - i think he likes it when i stick up for him - just kidding  grin12

    ''we are morally and philisophically in the best position to win the league'' - Arsene Wenger
  • Re: Islam or Atheism - The Big Debate
     Reply #128 - June 04, 2010, 01:20 PM

    Einstein was a wife-beater.
  • Re: Islam or Atheism - The Big Debate
     Reply #129 - June 04, 2010, 01:20 PM

    ok rationaliser we agree to disagree - the quotes are there for people to make up their own minds anyway. I don't really care too much about Hawking btw - don't really care what he believes. It's just that Einstein is my favourite scientist of all time and a bit of a hero of mine - i think he likes it when i stick up for him - just kidding  grin12


    I am sure we will continue to disagree, however I'm still trying to understand how you think someone can get a non-mystical association to God?

    I don't come here any more due to unfair moderation.
    http://www.councilofexmuslims.com/index.php?topic=30785
  • Re: Islam or Atheism - The Big Debate
     Reply #130 - June 04, 2010, 01:23 PM

    It's just that Einstein is my favourite scientist of all time and a bit of a hero of mine

    Besharram, that guy was a Yahuddi. 

    My Book     news002       
    My Blog  pccoffee
  • Re: Islam or Atheism - The Big Debate
     Reply #131 - June 04, 2010, 01:23 PM

    He also said I believe in Spinoza’s God. Nuff said.


    Another commonly propagated idea, but once again if we look at Einsteins actual words, this is not an accurate statement:

    ''It seems to me that the idea of a personal God is an anthropomorphic concept which I cannot take seriously. I feel also not able to imagine some will or goal outside the human sphere. My views are near to those of Spinoza: admiration for the beauty of and belief in the logical simplicity of the order and harmony which we can grasp humbly and only imperfectly. I believe that we have to content ourselves with our imperfect knowledge and understanding and treat values and moral obligations as a purely human problem — the most important of all human problems.''

    ''we are morally and philisophically in the best position to win the league'' - Arsene Wenger
  • Re: Islam or Atheism - The Big Debate
     Reply #132 - June 04, 2010, 01:24 PM

    Einstein was a wife-beater.


    he did a lot of things not to be proud of

    ''we are morally and philisophically in the best position to win the league'' - Arsene Wenger
  • Re: Islam or Atheism - The Big Debate
     Reply #133 - June 04, 2010, 01:26 PM

    I am sure we will continue to disagree, however I'm still trying to understand how you think someone can get a non-mystical association to God?


    it depends how you define mystical - i'm sure there are a lot of people who would claim that they beleive in a creator God but that there is nothing 'mystical' about it

    ''we are morally and philisophically in the best position to win the league'' - Arsene Wenger
  • Re: Islam or Atheism - The Big Debate
     Reply #134 - June 04, 2010, 01:27 PM

    ''It seems to me that the idea of a personal God is an anthropomorphic concept which I cannot take seriously. I feel also not able to imagine some will or goal outside the human sphere. My views are near to those of Spinoza: admiration for the beauty of and belief in the logical simplicity of the order and harmony which we can grasp humbly and only imperfectly. I believe that we have to content ourselves with our imperfect knowledge and understanding and treat values and moral obligations as a purely human problem — the most important of all human problems.''

    Thanks, I am sticking that it the quotes thread..

    My Book     news002       
    My Blog  pccoffee
  • Re: Islam or Atheism - The Big Debate
     Reply #135 - June 04, 2010, 01:28 PM

    he did a lot of things not to be proud of


    That's why I admire the achievement rather than the achiever.....actually, if god does exist then I could say the same Smiley

    Einstein
    Pro: Special / General relativity + other achievements.
    Con: Wife beater

    God
    Pro: Created a beautiful universe
    Con: Burns souls in hell and let's people suffer from incurable diseases

    Einstein is dead and there is no evidence God exists.  I'll stick to admiring the achievements Wink

    I don't come here any more due to unfair moderation.
    http://www.councilofexmuslims.com/index.php?topic=30785
  • Re: Islam or Atheism - The Big Debate
     Reply #136 - June 04, 2010, 01:29 PM

    it depends how you define mystical - i'm sure there are a lot of people who would claim that they beleive in a creator God but that there is nothing 'mystical' about it

    I think it means like Ive said before, and the kind of God I entertain the possibility of,  a bottle of cherryade bubbling at 0 degrees kelvin.  

    It cuts out all the mumbo-jumbo & superstitious religious nonsense that I am sure Einstein would have had little tolerance for.

    My Book     news002       
    My Blog  pccoffee
  • Re: Islam or Atheism - The Big Debate
     Reply #137 - June 04, 2010, 01:32 PM

    it depends how you define mystical - i'm sure there are a lot of people who would claim that they beleive in a creator God but that there is nothing 'mystical' about it


    I take it upon myself not to define anything I didn't discover, especially the common meaning of a word so I looked it up in the Oxford English Dictionary.

    mystical
      • adjective
      1 relating to mystics or mysticism.
      2 having a spiritual significance that transcends human understanding.
      3 inspiring a sense of spiritual mystery, awe, and fascination.

    He obviously didn't mean #3 because it DID fill him with mystery, awe, and fascination.  He wasn't talking about people claiming to be mystics so that rules out #1.  That leaves item #2 - spiritual.

    Also the definition of mystic

    mystic
      • noun a person who seeks by contemplation and self-surrender to attain unity with the Deity and reach truths beyond human understanding.


    These aren't my definitions.  If he meant something else then he sure chose the wrong word.

    I don't come here any more due to unfair moderation.
    http://www.councilofexmuslims.com/index.php?topic=30785
  • Re: Islam or Atheism - The Big Debate
     Reply #138 - June 04, 2010, 01:32 PM

     a bottle of cherryade bubbling at 0 degrees kelvin.  


    I thought there was zero energy at 0 Kelvin?

    I don't come here any more due to unfair moderation.
    http://www.councilofexmuslims.com/index.php?topic=30785
  • Re: Islam or Atheism - The Big Debate
     Reply #139 - June 04, 2010, 01:33 PM

    That's why I admire the achievement rather than the achiever



    a little unfair on the achiever in my opinion

    ''we are morally and philisophically in the best position to win the league'' - Arsene Wenger
  • Re: Islam or Atheism - The Big Debate
     Reply #140 - June 04, 2010, 01:33 PM

    Source for the Spinoza Reference

        I believe in Spinoza's God who reveals Himself in the orderly harmony of what exists, not in a God who concerns himself with fates and actions of human beings.

    The quotation above may be Einstein's most familiar statement of his beliefs. These words are frequently quoted, but a citation is seldom given. The quotation can be found in Albert Einstein: Philosopher-Scientist edited by Paul Arthur Schilpp (The Open Court Publishing Co., La Salle, Illinois, Third Edition, 1970) pp. 659 - 660. There the source is given as the New York Times, 25 April 1929, p. 60, col. 4. Ronald W. Clark (pp. 413-414) gives a detailed account of the origin of Einstein's statement:

        While the argument over his birthday present had been going on, the theory of relativity had been used to pull him into a religious controversy from which there emerged one of his much-quoted statements of faith. It began when Cardinal O'Connell of Boston, who had attacked Einstein's General Theory on previous occasions, told a group of Catholics that it "cloaked the ghastly apparition of atheism" and "befogged speculation, producing universal doubt about God and His Creation." Einstein, who had often reiterated his remark of 1921 to Archbishop Davidson-"It makes no difference. It is purely abstract science"-was at first uninterested. Then, on April 24, Rabbi Herbert Goldstein of the Institutional Synagogue, New York, faced Einstein with the simple five-word cablegram: "Do you believe in God?"

       "I believe in Spinoza's God who reveals himself in the orderly harmony of what exists," he replied, "not in a God who concerns himself with fates and actions of human beings."

        Years later he expanded this in a letter …. "I can understand your aversion to the use of the term 'religion' to describe an emotional and psychological attitude which shows itself most clearly in Spinoza," he wrote. "[But] I have not found a better expression than 'religious' for the trust in the rational nature of reality that is, at least to a certain extent, accessible to human reason."

    A further quotation on the subject of Spinoza's god follows. This material comes from G. S. Viereck, Glimpses of the Great (Macauley, New York, 1930), quoted by Brian, p. 186.

    You might want to take this quotation with a grain of salt. According to Brian, the Americanized German Viereck became known as a "big-name hunter" after "capturing" Kaiser Wilhelm II; Premier Georges Clemenceau of France; Henry Ford; Sigmund Freud, the inventor of psychoanalysis; and the playwright George Bernard Shaw. Because of his desire to interview the great and because of his inordinate egotism, Freud accused him of having a "superman complex." Upton Sinclear referred to him as "a pompous liar and hypocrite," and George Bernard Shaw questioned his accuracy.

    Is the quotation authentic? For what it's worth, here it is.

    When asked whether he believes in the God of Spinoza, Einstein is supposed to have replied as follows:

        I can't answer with a simple yes or no. I'm not an atheist and I don't think I can call myself a pantheist. We are in the position of a little child entering a huge library filled with books in many different languages. The child knows someone must have written those books. It does not know how. The child dimly suspects a mysterious order in the arrangement of the books but doesn't know what it is. That, it seems to me, is the attitude of even the most intelligent human being toward God. We see a universe marvelously arranged and obeying certain laws, but only dimly understand these laws. Our limited minds cannot grasp the mysterious force that moves the constellations. I am fascinated by Spinoza's pantheism, but admire even more his contributions to modern thought because he is the first philosopher to deal with the soul and the body as one, not two separate things.

    Did Einstein actually say this? The nonsense phrase "mysterious force that moves the constellations" troubles me. This seems much more likely to have been inserted by the scientifically ignorant Viereck than it does something that Einstein would say.

    The Viereck interview with Einstein appeared first in the Saturday Evening Post (Oct. 26, 1929, p.17) under the title "What Life Means to Einstein."It is curious that Einstein's statement about Spinoza does not appear in that article. Did Viereck choose not include it? Did Einstein object to its inclusion in the article? Or was the Spinoza material removed by the editors?

    I have chosen to enter the quotation on this page, because it is found in several places on the net. Perhaps someone who has seen it elsewhere, can learn here that there is some question about the accuracy of the statement.

    The quotation may not be completely inauthentic. It seems improbable that Viereck could have recorded Einstein's answer verbatim during an interview. Surely Viereck would have taken brief abbreviated notes that he expanded later. Or perhaps he jotted down the conversation at some time afterwards, putting down Einstein's answers from memory. In neither case would you expect 100% accuracy.

    I don't think that Viereck would have made up the statement out of whole cloth. What would be the point? The quotation is not particularly striking. There's nothing that Viereck could regard as a coup in obtaining. The quotation is merely a statement of views that Einstein was not shy about expressing and would later express again at many other times and in many other ways.

    The simile of the child in a library seems like the quintessential Einstein. It is not something that Viereck would or could make up. Einstein's praise of Spinoza for treating body and soul as a single unit seems genuine too, and unlikely to be a creation of Viereck.

    Material from the Viereck interview is reproduced in Brian and also in Jammer. Both books are based on extensive research, but neither book reports that Einstein ever disavowed anything attributed to him by George Viereck. In fact Brian reports that Einstein confirmed part of the interview. See Brian pp. 277 - 278.

    Is the quotation something that Einstein really said? Maybe not — at least not exactly in the words that Viereck attributes to him. Nevertheless, the quotation seems to be consistent with Einstein's views. Certain elements of the quotation could come from no one but Einstein. While the statement may not be exactly verbatim, it cannot differ very greatly from what Einstein actually said.

    http://www.einsteinandreligion.com/spinoza.html
  • Re: Islam or Atheism - The Big Debate
     Reply #141 - June 04, 2010, 01:34 PM

    I thought there was zero energy at 0 Kelvin?

    Yes, from what I remember its close to 0 but they can never quite get there.  However the closer you get to that temperature, the weirder things begin to behave.

    My Book     news002       
    My Blog  pccoffee
  • Re: Islam or Atheism - The Big Debate
     Reply #142 - June 04, 2010, 01:34 PM

    Thanks, I am sticking that it the quotes thread..


    Read my previous post first.
  • Re: Islam or Atheism - The Big Debate
     Reply #143 - June 04, 2010, 01:36 PM

    a little unfair on the achiever in my opinion


    Why?  The achievement may have come easily for a start.  But more importantly, why would you admire (fictitious example) someone who discovered anti-gravity but then used his fame and fortune to molest children?

    I'd admire the achievement, it would be remarkable, but admiration for the person based on their achievements is not something I do.  You end up shelving facts about them that you are aware of, just as you must with god.

    I don't come here any more due to unfair moderation.
    http://www.councilofexmuslims.com/index.php?topic=30785
  • Re: Islam or Atheism - The Big Debate
     Reply #144 - June 04, 2010, 01:37 PM

    Yes, from what I remember its close to 0 but they can never quite get there.  However the closer you get to that temperature, the weirder things begin to behave.


    Importantly you cannot get to 0 and observe it, because to observe it you must introduce energy which then brings the temperature above 0 Kelvin. I think pop would stop fizzing long before 0 Kelvin though Wink

    I don't come here any more due to unfair moderation.
    http://www.councilofexmuslims.com/index.php?topic=30785
  • Re: Islam or Atheism - The Big Debate
     Reply #145 - June 04, 2010, 01:39 PM

    Source for the Spinoza Reference

        I believe in Spinoza's God who reveals Himself in the orderly harmony of what exists, not in a God who concerns himself with fates and actions of human beings.

    The quotation above may be Einstein's most familiar statement of his beliefs. These words are frequently quoted, but a citation is seldom given. The quotation can be found in Albert Einstein: Philosopher-Scientist edited by Paul Arthur Schilpp (The Open Court Publishing Co., La Salle, Illinois, Third Edition, 1970) pp. 659 - 660. There the source is given as the New York Times, 25 April 1929, p. 60, col. 4. Ronald W. Clark (pp. 413-414) gives a detailed account of the origin of Einstein's statement:

        While the argument over his birthday present had been going on, the theory of relativity had been used to pull him into a religious controversy from which there emerged one of his much-quoted statements of faith. It began when Cardinal O'Connell of Boston, who had attacked Einstein's General Theory on previous occasions, told a group of Catholics that it "cloaked the ghastly apparition of atheism" and "befogged speculation, producing universal doubt about God and His Creation." Einstein, who had often reiterated his remark of 1921 to Archbishop Davidson-"It makes no difference. It is purely abstract science"-was at first uninterested. Then, on April 24, Rabbi Herbert Goldstein of the Institutional Synagogue, New York, faced Einstein with the simple five-word cablegram: "Do you believe in God?"

       "I believe in Spinoza's God who reveals himself in the orderly harmony of what exists," he replied, "not in a God who concerns himself with fates and actions of human beings."

        Years later he expanded this in a letter …. "I can understand your aversion to the use of the term 'religion' to describe an emotional and psychological attitude which shows itself most clearly in Spinoza," he wrote. "[But] I have not found a better expression than 'religious' for the trust in the rational nature of reality that is, at least to a certain extent, accessible to human reason."

    A further quotation on the subject of Spinoza's god follows. This material comes from G. S. Viereck, Glimpses of the Great (Macauley, New York, 1930), quoted by Brian, p. 186.

    You might want to take this quotation with a grain of salt. According to Brian, the Americanized German Viereck became known as a "big-name hunter" after "capturing" Kaiser Wilhelm II; Premier Georges Clemenceau of France; Henry Ford; Sigmund Freud, the inventor of psychoanalysis; and the playwright George Bernard Shaw. Because of his desire to interview the great and because of his inordinate egotism, Freud accused him of having a "superman complex." Upton Sinclear referred to him as "a pompous liar and hypocrite," and George Bernard Shaw questioned his accuracy.

    Is the quotation authentic? For what it's worth, here it is.

    When asked whether he believes in the God of Spinoza, Einstein is supposed to have replied as follows:

        I can't answer with a simple yes or no. I'm not an atheist and I don't think I can call myself a pantheist. We are in the position of a little child entering a huge library filled with books in many different languages. The child knows someone must have written those books. It does not know how. The child dimly suspects a mysterious order in the arrangement of the books but doesn't know what it is. That, it seems to me, is the attitude of even the most intelligent human being toward God. We see a universe marvelously arranged and obeying certain laws, but only dimly understand these laws. Our limited minds cannot grasp the mysterious force that moves the constellations. I am fascinated by Spinoza's pantheism, but admire even more his contributions to modern thought because he is the first philosopher to deal with the soul and the body as one, not two separate things.

    Did Einstein actually say this? The nonsense phrase "mysterious force that moves the constellations" troubles me. This seems much more likely to have been inserted by the scientifically ignorant Viereck than it does something that Einstein would say.

    The Viereck interview with Einstein appeared first in the Saturday Evening Post (Oct. 26, 1929, p.17) under the title "What Life Means to Einstein."It is curious that Einstein's statement about Spinoza does not appear in that article. Did Viereck choose not include it? Did Einstein object to its inclusion in the article? Or was the Spinoza material removed by the editors?

    I have chosen to enter the quotation on this page, because it is found in several places on the net. Perhaps someone who has seen it elsewhere, can learn here that there is some question about the accuracy of the statement.

    The quotation may not be completely inauthentic. It seems improbable that Viereck could have recorded Einstein's answer verbatim during an interview. Surely Viereck would have taken brief abbreviated notes that he expanded later. Or perhaps he jotted down the conversation at some time afterwards, putting down Einstein's answers from memory. In neither case would you expect 100% accuracy.

    I don't think that Viereck would have made up the statement out of whole cloth. What would be the point? The quotation is not particularly striking. There's nothing that Viereck could regard as a coup in obtaining. The quotation is merely a statement of views that Einstein was not shy about expressing and would later express again at many other times and in many other ways.

    The simile of the child in a library seems like the quintessential Einstein. It is not something that Viereck would or could make up. Einstein's praise of Spinoza for treating body and soul as a single unit seems genuine too, and unlikely to be a creation of Viereck.

    Material from the Viereck interview is reproduced in Brian and also in Jammer. Both books are based on extensive research, but neither book reports that Einstein ever disavowed anything attributed to him by George Viereck. In fact Brian reports that Einstein confirmed part of the interview. See Brian pp. 277 - 278.

    Is the quotation something that Einstein really said? Maybe not — at least not exactly in the words that Viereck attributes to him. Nevertheless, the quotation seems to be consistent with Einstein's views. Certain elements of the quotation could come from no one but Einstein. While the statement may not be exactly verbatim, it cannot differ very greatly from what Einstein actually said.

    http://www.einsteinandreligion.com/spinoza.html


    Again, Einstein is quite clearly saying he doesn't beleive in religion or a personal God and in that sense he belives in Spinozas God:

    "I believe in Spinoza's God who reveals himself in the orderly harmony of what exists," he replied, "not in a God who concerns himself with fates and actions of human beings."


    ''we are morally and philisophically in the best position to win the league'' - Arsene Wenger
  • Re: Islam or Atheism - The Big Debate
     Reply #146 - June 04, 2010, 01:42 PM

    ROFL

    And how was I wrong?
  • Re: Islam or Atheism - The Big Debate
     Reply #147 - June 04, 2010, 01:44 PM

    I take it upon myself not to define anything I didn't discover, especially the common meaning of a word so I looked it up in the Oxford English Dictionary.

    mystical
      • adjective
      1 relating to mystics or mysticism.
      2 having a spiritual significance that transcends human understanding.
      3 inspiring a sense of spiritual mystery, awe, and fascination.

    He obviously didn't mean #3 because it DID fill him with mystery, awe, and fascination.  He wasn't talking about people claiming to be mystics so that rules out #1.  That leaves item #2 - spiritual.

    Also the definition of mystic

    mystic
      • noun a person who seeks by contemplation and self-surrender to attain unity with the Deity and reach truths beyond human understanding.


    These aren't my definitions.  If he meant something else then he sure chose the wrong word.


    In addition we shouldn't forget the context in which he said it:

    "I have never imputed to Nature a purpose or a goal, or anything that could be understood as anthropomorphic. What I see in Nature is a magnificent structure that we can comprehend only very imperfectly, and that must fill a thinking person with a feeling of humility. This is a genuinely religious feeling that has nothing to do with mysticism."

    ''we are morally and philisophically in the best position to win the league'' - Arsene Wenger
  • Re: Islam or Atheism - The Big Debate
     Reply #148 - June 04, 2010, 01:45 PM

    Abu. Do you believe in a Creator God or a Personal God?

    Is Allah a Personal God?

  • Re: Islam or Atheism - The Big Debate
     Reply #149 - June 04, 2010, 01:47 PM

    Besharram, that guy was a Yahuddi. 


    Grin
  • Previous page 1 ... 3 4 56 7 ... 10 Next page « Previous thread | Next thread »