Slevesque writes:
I don't know if this was voluntary, but that last phrase was some crudely bad logic. If they are false about the Quran, then they are false about the bible also ???
No, you've got the wrong end of the stick. I wasn't trying some sort of logical exegesis. I was simply making two statements, not trying to say that they logically followed each other.
The claims made by the Muslim website's author (perfection of Quran, fulfilled prophecy, universality) are false.
The same claims though are made by Christians (perfection of Bible, fulfilled prophecy, universality) and those claims are also false. Not because of the Quran; they are just false because they don't bear up to comparison with reality.
In short, you say that you have compared religions, but you nonetheless seem to employ all the same arguments that other religious advocates use. Doesn't this bother you?
Muslim apologist sites are full of Arguments from Design, often the very same arguments that Christian creationists employ;
Harun Yahya writes:
Just like the rest of the miracles of creation, the lobster's eye structure is an open testimony to the Creator's boundless power to create flawlessly. This is nothing but a manifestation of God's endless knowledge, wisdom and might. We can encounter such miracles as these regardless of what we examine in the world of creation.
Sound familiar? It should, this is the same argument we regularly see employed by Christian creationists. Now I can see that arguments for a creator god are going to look similar at a basic level, but what I'm interested in is how you take this to the next level; how do you distinguish between the kind of argument above (which could be made in favour of absolutely any god) and an argument specific to Christianity? What lets us know that Yaweh, not Allah is God's preferred nomenclature? What is it that make Christianity stand out for you? What is Christianity's unique selling point? What separates it from the kind of nebulous arguments that Harun Yahya uses to prop up a faith that we both agree is false?
I distinguish it as you and I do with anything else. Each belief system makes claims, which can be either true or false. Through logic and when it is possible, you determine if it is one or the other.
Okay. Makes sense. So, when you looked at Islam, what struck you as false? And when you look at Christianity, what strikes you as being good evidence that it is true?
How did you distinguish that none of them is right ? (assuming you are not religious).
No, I'm not religious and yes, it went much as you suggest. I have always been sceptical of religion and when I look into it, I see nothing but falsehood, delusion and bad arguments. I am still waiting for one really good piece of evidence for the existence of any god or supernatural being. For me, it's more about the lack of a single good argument than about counting out failed arguments.
You clearly feel different.
With the answer of this question, now simply tell yourself that instead of doing:
wrong-wrong-wrong-wrong
I did
wron-wrong-right-wrong.
That right being christianity.
Okay, I get that. So... what was the "right"? What made you think that Christianity had passed your veracity test where other faiths failed? Looking over the thread so far, you seem a little reticent about specifying what piece(s) of evidence sealed your opinion. But it seems to me that the thread is intended for exactly that purpose. Why the reluctance?
You have been asked why you think Christianity stands out above other religions. So far, your answers seem to be "The Bible" and "Evidence". You understand, people are going to want a little more than that.
Mutate and Survive