Excellent statement; and a ringing endorsement of what you don't understand.
so there is no scientific evidence for the most important thing of the world?
what does that say of the scientific method?
?? Rather, what does it say about God?
Your assumption here is that there
is a God. Well, all right then: it should be easy to demonstrate evidence of Him, even with so purportedly flawed a tool as the scientific method: being, of course, a kind of flawed tool yourself.
Put more directly: the scientific method is a system of evaluating the cause and incidence of naturalistic phenomena. If God is outside such a naturalistic plane of existence, then it means the scientific method (SM) cannot be used to locate Him. It says nothing at all about the SM since, as I've explained to you
twice now already, the SM is intended for
naturalistic phenomena. Your initiation of a challenge is therefore obviated right at the start. It is like you asking what value a screwdriver has, since it cannot be used as a wrench.
then you're unreasonable.
No: you're assuming atheists are unreasonable. Perhaps what you don't understand is a) your poll was directed at something less than twenty or so individuals. b) I think you misunderstand the intent of those responses: several of those people undoubtedly responded "no" because they think Islam (as practiced rather than the "optimal", "final version" Islam) is a hateful religion, and that the appearance of such a God demanding respect would be akin to the Devil showing up for brunch; and they have a certain right to feel so, given some of the things adherents of your religion have done and the things that are said about - and done to - non-believers in its name. After all, we have the example of yourself in this regard, admitting that you believe in executing those who insult your faith. What, then, are they to make of this? I expect some might have the same response to the same question posed by
my faith, with respect to Jesus' Second Coming. They would at the least need assurance that we would anticipate His arrival as a good thing rather than a shake-up of the world and mass casualties. Since even our Revelation suggests that the latter is more likely, perhaps they could be forgiven for thinking so. This is my perspective, so far as it matters.
uh, so, it's absurd that Jesus descended to the earth and proclaimed himself god?
Not to me: not at all. I consider it of the greatest seriousness. But others will believe differently, and they might pose the same question to me that I pose to you:
what is the empirical naturalistic evidence of your god? Why should I believe in Him? And why should I say they have no right to ask?
do you read, geoffp? or do you just blabber an opposition and hit reply?
Close: I
reply to
blabber. I have an exceptionally sharp knife for dealing with it.
no my dear sir, YOU have to understand, they voted no because they have shit in their skills, filling the gap between their ears.
Please: don't be stupid if you can help it. I've explained their dissonance above. It's not my fault if by certain standpoints you are a coward.
you'd go to hell for eternity because islam is shit.
Actually, I would
not go to hell for eternity, because Islamic law is shit.
BTW: it's now customary to capitalize "Islamic" along with "Christian" and - even, yes - Jewish on the forum. Best you follow that rule; I would hate to see you get an infraction for Islamophobia.
