quote:

Originally posted by limer:

quote:

When you parse things in terms of logic you imparts the idea that it is a reasoned process.

To me it is a reasoned process hence my conclusion.

I do not doubt that you do but if the success of others who attempted to reason god into existence is to be considered and further those who attempt to "reasoned" their personal religion as absolute for humanity, I know for sure the expected batting average.

quote:

Originally posted by D2:

quote:

Originally posted by limer:

quote:

When you parse things in terms of logic you imparts the idea that it is a reasoned process.

To me it is a reasoned process hence my conclusion.

I do not doubt that you do but if the success of others who attempted to reason god into existence is to be considered and further those who attempt to "reasoned" their personal religion as absolute for humanity, I know for sure the expected batting average.

That would depend on what you consider "success" - I am almost positive your definition and mine is different.

quote:

Originally posted by limer:

quote:

Originally posted by D2:

quote:

Originally posted by limer:

quote:

When you parse things in terms of logic you imparts the idea that it is a reasoned process.

To me it is a reasoned process hence my conclusion.

I do not doubt that you do but if the success of others who attempted to reason god into existence is to be considered and further those who attempt to "reasoned" their personal religion as absolute for humanity, I know for sure the expected batting average.

That would depend on what you consider "success" - I am almost positive your definition and mine is different.

Classical logic modus ponendo ponens/modus tollens cannot be different for you and for me. Were that the case we would live in a very unstable universe. Of course we can go to fuzzy logic but even here there is very precise conclusions since the mathematics is also very stringent. Your only out is the one given by Dara at the beginning of this thread, we operate in different domains

TI: Your archaeologist friend should produce some reliable documentation. IF there were idols in the vast number reported (I don't doubt that; I am just being academic here), they were supposedly destroyed. To leave some would have given rise to uncomfortable questions.
Supposedly the only preservation was a STATUE of virgin and child...Mary and J...and that is only a report..one has not found that statue nor, to the best of my knowledge, any reports of what hsppened to it.
Limer: the arabs did worship all manner of things..stones, animals, and they were nihilists as well. It would appear that their level of paganism ranged from the actual to the symbolic...again, I don't argue about this since the only reports we have are from Muslim sources (after the fact), and problematic latin/greek sources...
Some of them were dahriyya...the english word escapes me..but basically they said, we live, we die, end of story.

DS
The sealed cave is under wraps. I doubt they would make that public. Incidentally the same man had the honor of having a glimpse inside the kaaba also when the king did his sweeping.

quote:

Originally posted by D2:

quote:

Originally posted by limer:

quote:

Originally posted by D2:

quote:

Originally posted by limer:

quote:

When you parse things in terms of logic you imparts the idea that it is a reasoned process.

To me it is a reasoned process hence my conclusion.

I do not doubt that you do but if the success of others who attempted to reason god into existence is to be considered and further those who attempt to "reasoned" their personal religion as absolute for humanity, I know for sure the expected batting average.

That would depend on what you consider "success" - I am almost positive your definition and mine is different.

Classical logic modus ponendo ponens/modus tollens cannot be different for you and for me. Were that the case we would live in a very unstable universe. Of course we can go to fuzzy logic but even here there is very precise conclusions since the mathematics is also very stringent. Your only out is the one given by Dara at the beginning of this thread, we operate in different domains

Ones definition of success will be driven by what one finds as logical, hence, my definition of success will likely not agree with yours...and like I said, I'm quite sure it is not.
If this is what you mean by operating in different domains, then I agree.

quote:

Originally posted by Terry Ishmael:
DS
The sealed cave is under wraps. I doubt they would make that public. Incidentally the same man had the honor of having a glimpse inside the kaaba also when the king did his sweeping.

Thanks dude. Something is strange. THe cave sealing story is problematic for several reasons though, which I need not get into. The Saudis would have certainly declared it when they were being dissed for not being archaeologically conscious...but re the inside..that is an honor..and the king does sweep it once a year...

quote:

Originally posted by limer:

quote:

Originally posted by D2:

quote:

Originally posted by limer:

quote:

Originally posted by D2:

quote:

Originally posted by limer:

quote:

When you parse things in terms of logic you imparts the idea that it is a reasoned process.

To me it is a reasoned process hence my conclusion.

I do not doubt that you do but if the success of others who attempted to reason god into existence is to be considered and further those who attempt to "reasoned" their personal religion as absolute for humanity, I know for sure the expected batting average.

That would depend on what you consider "success" - I am almost positive your definition and mine is different.

Classical logic modus ponendo ponens/modus tollens cannot be different for you and for me. Were that the case we would live in a very unstable universe. Of course we can go to fuzzy logic but even here there is very precise conclusions since the mathematics is also very stringent. Your only out is the one given by Dara at the beginning of this thread, we operate in different domains

Ones definition of success will be driven by what one finds as logical, hence, my definition of success will likely not agree with yours...and like I said, I'm quite sure it is not.
If this is what you mean by operating in different domains, then I agree.

I believe the topic was the success of logically proving god exists and secondly to prove that ones god is the one and only.

The first has marginal success with one argument and the fact we have different religions flourishing across the globe means not one has yet been able to do the latter despite lots of ongoing proselytizing and even forced conversions. I am not the one determining the success of the matter. It stands on its own authority.

quote:

Originally posted by D2:

quote:

Originally posted by limer:

quote:

Originally posted by D2:

quote:

Originally posted by limer:

quote:

Originally posted by D2:

quote:

Originally posted by limer:

quote:

When you parse things in terms of logic you imparts the idea that it is a reasoned process.

To me it is a reasoned process hence my conclusion.

I do not doubt that you do but if the success of others who attempted to reason god into existence is to be considered and further those who attempt to "reasoned" their personal religion as absolute for humanity, I know for sure the expected batting average.

That would depend on what you consider "success" - I am almost positive your definition and mine is different.

Classical logic modus ponendo ponens/modus tollens cannot be different for you and for me. Were that the case we would live in a very unstable universe. Of course we can go to fuzzy logic but even here there is very precise conclusions since the mathematics is also very stringent. Your only out is the one given by Dara at the beginning of this thread, we operate in different domains

Ones definition of success will be driven by what one finds as logical, hence, my definition of success will likely not agree with yours...and like I said, I'm quite sure it is not.
If this is what you mean by operating in different domains, then I agree.

I believe the topic was the success of logically proving god exists and secondly to prove that ones god is the one and only.

The first has marginal success with one argument and the fact we have different religions flourishing across the globe means not one has yet been able to do the latter despite lots of ongoing proselytizing and even forced conversions. I am not the one determining the success of the matter. It stands on its own authority.

No, the topic was me opining that Hinduism was illogical and you alluding that there are still stones/idols or whatever you define them to be, in the Kaaba today for which I corrected you.

quote:

Originally posted by limer:

quote:

Originally posted by D2:

quote:

Originally posted by limer:

quote:

Originally posted by D2:

quote:

Originally posted by limer:

quote:

Originally posted by D2:

quote:

Originally posted by limer:

quote:

When you parse things in terms of logic you imparts the idea that it is a reasoned process.

To me it is a reasoned process hence my conclusion.

I do not doubt that you do but if the success of others who attempted to reason god into existence is to be considered and further those who attempt to "reasoned" their personal religion as absolute for humanity, I know for sure the expected batting average.

That would depend on what you consider "success" - I am almost positive your definition and mine is different.

Classical logic modus ponendo ponens/modus tollens cannot be different for you and for me. Were that the case we would live in a very unstable universe. Of course we can go to fuzzy logic but even here there is very precise conclusions since the mathematics is also very stringent. Your only out is the one given by Dara at the beginning of this thread, we operate in different domains

Ones definition of success will be driven by what one finds as logical, hence, my definition of success will likely not agree with yours...and like I said, I'm quite sure it is not.
If this is what you mean by operating in different domains, then I agree.

I believe the topic was the success of logically proving god exists and secondly to prove that ones god is the one and only.

The first has marginal success with one argument and the fact we have different religions flourishing across the globe means not one has yet been able to do the latter despite lots of ongoing proselytizing and even forced conversions. I am not the one determining the success of the matter. It stands on its own authority.

No, the topic was me opining that Hinduism was illogical and you alluding that there are still stones/idols or whatever you define them to be, in the Kaaba today for which I corrected you.

You affirmed without elaboration that Hinduism is illogical. No obligation is on my part to demonstrate it is not. I say it is a more reasonable story and told you why.

Also,the black stone is there today and can be affirmed by your fellow Muslims. It is said to be made up of eight to 15 stones but the fact remains that, a stone supposedly composed of fragments of a larger stone dating back to pre Islamic times where it had other uses, still exist. You are not correcting me, you are denying the undeniable.

quote:

Originally posted by D2:

quote:

Originally posted by limer:

quote:

Originally posted by D2:

quote:

Originally posted by limer:

quote:

Originally posted by D2:

quote:

Originally posted by limer:

quote:

Originally posted by D2:

quote:

Originally posted by limer:

quote:

When you parse things in terms of logic you imparts the idea that it is a reasoned process.

To me it is a reasoned process hence my conclusion.

I do not doubt that you do but if the success of others who attempted to reason god into existence is to be considered and further those who attempt to "reasoned" their personal religion as absolute for humanity, I know for sure the expected batting average.

That would depend on what you consider "success" - I am almost positive your definition and mine is different.

Classical logic modus ponendo ponens/modus tollens cannot be different for you and for me. Were that the case we would live in a very unstable universe. Of course we can go to fuzzy logic but even here there is very precise conclusions since the mathematics is also very stringent. Your only out is the one given by Dara at the beginning of this thread, we operate in different domains

Ones definition of success will be driven by what one finds as logical, hence, my definition of success will likely not agree with yours...and like I said, I'm quite sure it is not.
If this is what you mean by operating in different domains, then I agree.

I believe the topic was the success of logically proving god exists and secondly to prove that ones god is the one and only.

The first has marginal success with one argument and the fact we have different religions flourishing across the globe means not one has yet been able to do the latter despite lots of ongoing proselytizing and even forced conversions. I am not the one determining the success of the matter. It stands on its own authority.

No, the topic was me opining that Hinduism was illogical and you alluding that there are still stones/idols or whatever you define them to be, in the Kaaba today for which I corrected you.

You affirmed without elaboration that Hinduism is illogical. No obligation is on my part to demonstrate it is not. I say it is a more reasonable story and told you why.

Also,the black stone is there today and can be affirmed by your fellow Muslims. It is said to be made up of eight to 15 stones but the fact remains that, a stone supposedly composed of fragments of a larger stone dating back to pre Islamic times where it had other uses, still exist. You are not correcting me, you are denying the undeniable.

Did you not state that hubal and al-manat still reside in the Kaaba? That's where I corrected you.

quote:

Originally posted by limer:


Did you not state that hubal and al-manat still reside in the Kaaba? That's where I corrected you.

tradition holds that the black stone was integral to the worship of both.

GNI rocks!
We started about western clothes and we end up at the Holy Kabaa, only on GNI!!!

quote:

Originally posted by D2:

quote:

Originally posted by limer:


Did you not state that hubal and al-manat still reside in the Kaaba? That's where I corrected you.

tradition holds that the black stone was integral to the worship of both.

Whose tradition?...(and I reiterate again)..Islam came and abolished this practice.

quote:

Originally posted by Chief:
GNI rocks!
We started about western clothes and we end up at the Holy Kabaa, only on GNI!!!

Only on GNI can you can start a thread on Honolulu here and end up with Islam!! With 22 pages nonetheless!! Alhamdulillah!

quote:

Originally posted by limer:

quote:

Originally posted by D2:

quote:

Originally posted by limer:


Did you not state that hubal and al-manat still reside in the Kaaba? That's where I corrected you.

tradition holds that the black stone was integral to the worship of both.

Whose tradition?...(and I reiterate again)..Islam came and abolished this practice.

..historical, Islamic as well as western sources. Whether the prophet ceased the practice or not the stones date back to that time. If you have an alternative theory then you have ample chance to clarify the matter.

quote:

Originally posted by Chief:
GNI rocks!
We started about western clothes and we end up at the Holy Kabaa, only on GNI!!!

start one with buck man clothes and see how long it will go

quote:

Originally posted by D2:

quote:

Originally posted by limer:

quote:

Originally posted by D2:

quote:

Originally posted by limer:


Did you not state that hubal and al-manat still reside in the Kaaba? That's where I corrected you.

tradition holds that the black stone was integral to the worship of both.

Whose tradition?...(and I reiterate again)..Islam came and abolished this practice.

..historical, Islamic as well as western sources. Whether the prophet ceased the practice or not the stones date back to that time. If you have an alternative theory then you have ample chance to clarify the matter.

Islamic tradition states that the Black Stone is an integral part of worship of Hubal and al-manat? You're wrong again... but you do seem to be getting closer to understanding that the Prophet (saw) came to abolish this practice.

Talking about clothes, this one is interesting.
My brother was visiting here on holiday this week. He works as a foreign language translator for a south american embassy. He told me dem consuls and male staff always hustling the female employees. They even giving him love letters to translate. The only females they don't hustle are the muslim ones wearing the hijab, and they are very respectful to them.
I found this news interesting!

quote:

Originally posted by Terry Ishmael:
Talking about clothes, this one is interesting.
My brother was visiting here on holiday this week. He works as a foreign language translator for a south american embassy. He told me dem consuls and male staff always hustling the female employees. They even giving him love letters to translate. The only females they don't hustle are the muslim ones wearing the hijab, and they are very respectful to them.
I found this news interesting!

Hijabis are perceived as women who will not be easy to approach. the same reason we stay away from nuns. Or kipa wearing Jewish women. Or wig wearing Jewish women. Sartorial statements it would seem still affect us...check out the teenagers on the subway..teh gyallos will likely talk to a dude who has his crack showing, but will avoid a mormon with his collar and tie...cuts both ways...
Plus them hijabis are stereotyped as having buddies who might be into honor killing. I wished I had circulated this stereotype when my eldest gyallo was in her last school.

quote:

Originally posted by limer:

quote:

Originally posted by D2:

quote:

Originally posted by limer:

quote:

Originally posted by D2:

quote:

Originally posted by limer:


Did you not state that hubal and al-manat still reside in the Kaaba? That's where I corrected you.

tradition holds that the black stone was integral to the worship of both.

Whose tradition?...(and I reiterate again)..Islam came and abolished this practice.

..historical, Islamic as well as western sources. Whether the prophet ceased the practice or not the stones date back to that time. If you have an alternative theory then you have ample chance to clarify the matter.

Islamic tradition states that the Black Stone is an integral part of worship of Hubal and al-manat? You're wrong again... but you do seem to be getting closer to understanding that the Prophet (saw) came to abolish this practice.

SImply saying I am wrong does not make it so.