In all my writings I have made the case that Muhammad’s intolerance was the result of his narcissistic personality disorder and my book, Understanding Muhammad convinces everyone that the prophet of Islam suffered from malignant self-love.
A person with narcissistic personality disorder often reacts to criticism with rage, shame, or humiliation. He expects others to agree with him without him having to prove his claims and if contradicted, he will resort to threats. When we read the Sira (the life of Muhammad) and the Quran, this is exactly the picture we get from him.
But there was another element in shaping his character: The influence of Rabbis.
Judaism and Islam have a lot in common. They have basically the same eschatology and very similar teachings. For example few people know that stoning adulterers that is widely practiced in Islam originates from the Bible. Muhammad did practice stoning but he did not insert it in his Quran. But he said when a law is not clearly stated, Muslims should look into the Bible for guidance.
These are all secondary influences of Judaism on Islam. The main common feature between these two faiths is their intolerance. This intolerance in Judaic texts gave the narcissist Muhammad the power to do as he pleased. He could make his claim without needing to prove it and expect others to believe without questioning him. If they didn’t, he would threaten them with hellfire.
How could he get away with that? Why would people believed in his unproven and often irrational claims? The answer to this question is in Judaism. The Rabbis in Arabia had laid the psychological foundation for Islam among the tolerant pagans. For 2000 years they had preached that Yahweh, their god, is beyond reason, i.e. he is irrational, that his ways are different and they may appear unjust and even evil. But it is not up to humans to question God’s wisdom.
That kind of authority and power is a narcissist’s wet dream. By claiming to be the messenger of God, the same intolerant god of the Jews, Muhammad did not have to prove any of his claims. The reason Arabs fell into his trap was because of the groundwork laid by the Rabbis in Arabia.
I have debated with many Muslim and also Christian scholars. The only debate I had with a Rabbi was about Obama and not about religion. He was very irrational, but it was politics.
Recently I joined Twitter. I sent a tweet about a Palestinian cleric who called for the genocide of the Jews and a Rabbi tweeted back. Here is our exchanges.
AliSina_FFI When God can let 6 mil innocent people incinerate, we better rely on our own resources and stop HaSatan or HaMuhammad now.
Rabbi.Shaul You are looking at things from Man’s wisdom & not understanding how YHWH works. 2nd – How do you know they are not Saved.
Ali Sina The only wisdom the alleged God gave me is man’s wisdom. By what shall I judge things then if not by it?
Rabbi.Shaul He may have given you man’s wisdom, but Solomon Prayed for the Wisdom of Above & got it. You are offered Holy Spirit Wisdom too
Nothing is impossible for YHWH. Do you really think the 6 million or the 40 million under Stalin ALL died in vain? YHWH Knows
Ali Sina Yes I really think they died in vain. None of that should have happened. It shows God is careless, or helpless, or ignorant.
Rabbi.Shaul They did not die in vain. G-d is anything but careless, helpless or ignorant – He created you. You need to seek G-d properly
Ali Sina God allows Hitler to kill mil.s to show people are free? It shows he’s cynical. What about the rights to life of the victims?
Rabbi.Shaul I feel your pain, but until you decide to understand the Message of the Good News of Torah & Messiah, you will remain confused
We would love to help you find a True relationship with G-d. It would be wonderfully rewarding for you. Please do not hate G-d
Ali Sina Dear Rabbi, I don’t hate God bcuz he does not exist. But if He did he would be worthy of scorn and hate. Look at the suffering!
Rabbi.Shaul Sorry to tell you that you are not correct. G-d truly exists. He just won’t reveal himself to you at this time because of you.
Do want to find out that G-d really exist? Are you willing & able to find out you are wrong?
Psa 14:1 The fool hath said in his heart, There is no G-d. They are corrupt, they have done abominable works…G-d Spoke this
Pro 10:8 The wise in heart will receive commandments: but a prating fool shall fall. Do you want to Prove G-d Right about you
Ali Sina This is not proof of existence of God. It is ad hominem – a logical fallacy. I use reason and He, logical fallacies. Go figure!
Rabbi.Shaul I used them to see where your Head was at. I do not expect two verses to prove anything. ?? Would you like to live forever?
Ali Sina What I like and what is the reality R different. I’d love to be billionaire, wise n live 4ever, but I must submit to reality.
Rabbi.Shaul Unfortunately, You are not local or I would tell you to spend one week with me & you would know G-d is real. I not even talk.
oops – what I meant is that I Would not talk, Not try & Convince you – All you would do is watch & see what G-d does.
Ali Sina If I spend time with you, prob.ly I’d be captivated by your charm, but that does not prove God. Can you prove God using reason?
Rabbi.Shaul what reasoning do you want to use to prove G-d to you. We know that where Science, History & the Bible agree, you have Truth
Are you willing to reason using all Three sources at the same time? Remember Science, History & Scripture.
Well – my charm is a miracle all by itself. But I would not use my charm – I want G-d to use his so you will know. I am nothing
Ali Sina I will agree with science, history and reason (human reason). If I believed in Scriptures there would be no point debating.
Rabbi.Shaul How about this. first we look at history in scripture. Then we see if Science & Human History can verify Scripture is true/lie.
Ali Sina U can quote scrip., but it’s no evidence to me. Will you accept Quran as evidence in a debate with a Muslim? No, why should you?
Rabbi.Shaul Interesting – to Islam the Quran is a Bible – but you want me to not use my bible when discussing G-d-so the conversation is.
..G-d vs Allah – not is G-d real cause it appears you believe Allah is real. Am I correct?
Ali Sina I believe Allah and God are both fairytale, one is like Dracula the other like Santa clause. Both are fiction, but different.
Rabbi.Shaul Okay – then you have rejected the “Creator of all, no matter what Name we use” let me know when you are ready, if ever. Oh Well
I hope you realize that my Prayer is one of YHWHs love & not one hate. Because you do not accept scripture, I will not quote
Ali Sina How can I reject something that does not exist? I am ready to debate and publish it on my site. Is email good?
Rabbi.Shaul Email is great, but my prayer will stand during the process, cause that is a way for YHWH to show you he is real & Love you
Ali Sina Sure, U can pray. It’s spreading good will. Nothing wrong in that. (Unless U pray Islamicly that foment hate). Wht’s Ur email?
Rabbi.Shaul I do not pray hatred, but my prayers do not always sound loving. Torahqs@torahabesorah.com I am pleased you are willing.
After this initial exchanges I sent to Rabbi Shaul the following email. Please note that it was the Rabbi who invited me to debate and wanted to prove to me that God loves me. I told him I will publish the debate and he did not object. Also please note that I was very respectful of my opponent both in my tweets and in my email, which follows.
Dear Rabbi Shaul,
Although I generally don’t debate on the subject of God, it would be an honor to have this discussion with you. I don’t debate about the existence of God because I am pragmatic and I see no evidence that atheism makes people better. I also see no evidence that religion makes people better. As I get to know people more on a personal level, I start liking animals more. Yes I have had the good fortune to meet many wonderful souls. Some of them were believers in God and some were not. But generally, I don’t have a very high esteem of our species. If we are made in the image of God, God must be pretty much screwed up.
Anyway, that is beside the point. I just wanted to let you know that I am atheists only because I find it logical. I accept it intellectually and philosophically, but not religiously. I am not an evangelist atheist. If Prof. Richard Dawkins can show me that atheism makes people more moral, more ethical and happier, I will join his crusade against religion and God. As long as that is not happening I’ll stay out of that debate.
The truth is that atheists have committed horrendous crimes in the name of atheism. No one disputes about the fact that communists are atheist and their crimes against people of faith are well documented. But some atheists claim Hitler was a believer in God. This is a lie. Hitler used religion and sometimes evoked God for his demagogic proposes but he believed in no other god except himself. He despised Christianity for its teaching of universal love and pacifism that he interpreted as weakness. He had a great admiration for Muhammad and lamented that Islam did not conquer Germany. He thought Islamic mindless devotion to authority and its penchant for violence best suited the Germanic spirit. However, he foolishly thought that given time, Germans, thanks to their “genetic superiority” over Arabs would have become the hiers of the Islamic empire. That was of course another one of pipe dreams. We Persians are of the same genetic stock as Germans and we had a far superior civilization than Arabs. Yet when we succumbed to Islam we were reduced into a shell of what we were. Our country that issued the first charter of human rights is today one of the top violators of human rights. Had Islam conquered Germany, Germany would not have been better than Iran or any other Islamic country.
Atheists have blood on their hands. The only people who beat atheists in crimes against humanity are Muslims. Atheists have butchered over 100 million people in the last century and Muslims have killed over 280 million people in the last 14 centuries. Of course if you count the sectarian war, where Muslims kill one another, this number can be easily doubled.
So much for atheism! The problem is that religions don’t promote love and amity either. It is clear that religion is the biggest instrument of discord and hate among people. Anyone who claims otherwise is engaging in the logical fallacy of biased sampling and is ignoring the evidence. They argue that people who originally hated each other became united after embracing the same faith. What they ignore is that they have created another division in mankind and another pretext to hate and fight. As Sigmund Freud said, “It is always possible to bind together a considerable number of people in love, so long as there are other people left over to receive the manifestations of their aggression.”
I stay completely out of the debate about religion and God. Unlike Prof. Dawkins and the late Christopher Hitchens, I don’t see religion and the belief in God as the mother of all evil. I see intolerance and self-righteousness as the mother of all evil. Atheists can be just as intolerant and self-righteous as theists.
I will debate with you, purely for intellectual exercise. I don’t wish people to give up their faith in God if they are believers. I advocate doubt. I believe doubt is the greatest gift a person can give to another. Not everyone is capable of doubting. It’s an art – a skill that can be learned and honed with practice. To be able to doubt everything is the first step to enlightenment and freedom. If my younger readers see the value of doubting, I have achieved my goal.
Belief is not the exclusive trait of theists. I have met and debated with many atheists who are just as firm in their belief and sometimes as bigoted, as a fanatical religionist.
This is what I see as the source of the problem. The problem is not the belief in God or the disbelief in Him. The problem is the belief itself. Once we fall into that dark pit, we can no longer see. We develop tunnel vision. My entire philosophy is based on doubt. Although your god says doubters are foolish, my view is that belief is another name for credulity. Doubters, far from being fools are the wise ones. Truth is infinite. It is silly to say one has grasped it all and those who don’t believe are fools.
With this introduction, I leave the stage to you. Since you want to prove the existence of God, the burden of proof is on you and here is your chance.
A day after I sent my email I received the following tweets from Rabbi Shaul.
Rabbi.Shaul I am sorry to inform you that your Email has caused us to realize that you care nothing about learning truth as you agreed.
Therefore, you can watch our Video Response to you at youtu.be/pitKfhAPD0o – you are the Second email we respond to.
Beyond that – Read about Issac Newton – one of the top Scientists & Devout Atheists ever in history & see if you can relate.
Consider our offer to you Closed. You can now watch & see how YHWH deals with as we do not consider you worthy of our time.
Public Notice: I offered @AliSina_FFI to study History & Science to see where it proves Biblical History. He Agreed, then recanted by Email
Public Notice: We will no longer discuss anything with @AliSina_FFI as his email was not one desiring to learn truths from those who know.
Rabbi Shaul did not reply to my email personally. Instead he passed it to a superior of his, an elderly Rabbi who addressed my email in his Youtube broadcast.
I could not find the name of this Rabbi. This is their website http://torahabesorah.com/ If you know his name I will be grateful if you let me know.
IN this long video, the Rabbi’s response to me starts at 2:20 minutes and ends at 17:20. Here is the transcript of what he says. My response to him is at the end. The Rabbi’s response is very interesting. I am sure you’ll enjoy it. Please read it or watch his video.
The second email is in regards to a tweet, that Rabbi Shaul … a man with integrity and character…. And a person had tweeted him and he responded.
You have to understand that first of all we don’t debate Scriptures. We’ll tell you what we perceive the scriptures are saying, we give you the historic background; we’ll even add in science, but to debate it, no.
There was an individual who tweeted him and he responded and this individual said yes he was willing to be shown how through both the scripture Father Yahweh, that scripture, history and science they ‘ll be all coming together, [like] three circles, and where they intersect is where all true set. Now you can say where two of them intersect, that is true. In most cases that isw correct, but not in all cases.
This individual agreed to this and he sent me a very long email. I am not going to call your name. You know who you are if you watch this broadcast.
First of all let me say that I’m rather disappointed because the agreement and the covenant you made, you now have primarily broken, which in my way of looking at things is basically a lie. Now if you don’t like it I don’t care. I say I see it.
And you talk about your purposes and the way you do things and how you doubt. Well, I doubt your sincerity, I doubt your integrity and I doubt the way you conduct yourself. What you’re looking for is a fight – a debate and contention. And you’re wanting an opportunity to put this on your website so you can show your superiority and your intellect.
Let me say that I don’t really care how smart you are. In the world’s eyes if I wanted to look at it, most people consider me a pretty smart fellow too. And you know what? It’s all foolishness compared to Yahweh. He said, our birth is but filthy rags and he is referring to the rags used during the menstrual cycle of a woman.
So that’s our best. I take offence at how you describe first of all… God is a Teutonic name. We don’t use that name at all. We use the Hebrew name of the creator who gave his name in Hebrew, who gave the pure language in Hebrew and who confused the languages at Tower of Babble. We’re talking about historical here.
You said you don’t have a very high esteem of our species. If we are made in the image of God, God must be pretty much screwed up.
You said, “Anyway, that is beside the point. I just wanted to let you know that I am atheists only because I find it logical. I accept it intellectually and philosophically, but not religiously.
Then you say you’re not an evangelist atheist. I think you’re a liar. Else you wouldn’t caught to be provocative and provoke to try and arrange a discourse so that you can show this to whoever is following you so that you might prove your point. The point is mute.
You go one in tirades of how not only the religious theists, but also the atheists have destroyed in the name of God. First of all as I told you, God is a Teutonic name. It refers to no one in particular. We could be talking about the door and calling it god.
What I do find amazing is as you get down and you start referring to enlightenment and that how “My entire philosophy is based on doubt.”…”Once we fall into that dark pit, we can no longer see.” If there is not hereafter, if there is not creator then guess what? There is no dark pit. It doesn’t exist. Your logic is [fought with a set of star trek?] is totally illogical. You can’t have a creation without a creator. You might not like that; you might not appreciate that; you might not even believe that and that’s okay with me. If you have no hope, that’s your decision. If you’re this miserable that you feel that the species is what it is then what you don’t rid the species of another cancer as you call it and remove yourself from society? If you have got to try to make yourself and everyone else so miserable by your diatribe and what you’re speaking and the way you bring it forward you advocate doubt. If there is nothing out there for any of us and a hope, then what reason is there for these people to live in any other way that you say these people live? If there is no hope it doesn’t matter. It’s just like two dogs out there in the street knowing each other up and killing each other over a bone. It doesn’t matter.
You say that not everyone is capable of doubting; it’s an art. Yeah it’s an art alright! It’s an art of putting yourself, whoever you are, out of touch of the creator of this universe. And like I said, that’s fine. I’m not trying to convince you of anything. My friend was not trying to convince you of anything. He was just trying to merely, trying to show you, through your own logic, the errors of your way. You tried to put this in… this is the reason you’re going to debate and you’re going to publish it. Let me say there is nothing to be published because it won’t be debated. I don’t have the intelligence, the wisdom and the understanding to even to begin to debate the Father. He can take care of the situation for Himself and I assure you He will.
If there is nothing out there, whoever you might be, then we have nothing to worry about because we’ll never see each other and we’ll never end up face to face. But if you’re wrong we will, and it stand his judgment against you. You need to take this into consideration.
Isaac Newton was an atheist – a strong atheist. And one day when he looked at the intellectual facts and aaaall that he had learned though many years of his studies, he realized in order to have this organization in the creation there had to be a creator.
You say to doubt everything is the first step to enlightenment. Why find enlightenment if there is nothing? If this is all there is, if there is nothing more, what are you becoming enlightened about? So you can die and rot?
You’re pathetic and I feel extremely sorry for you. I pity you. You’re like a wounded animal that’s hurt. And I feel pity and I feel remorse for you. But this is a decision that you have made.
Now, you’ll have no more response from myself and we’re not going to get in to a knock down drag out. That’s not going to happen. I have made this clear in the past that debating and trying to have contention and scuff over these issues is a non-issue. Any fool can start a fight. When I was a young man, and I’m not young anymore – when I was a young man, I was really good at that. I know how to start a fight and I know how to finish it. But neither do I want to start one and I don’t want to finish it. But I’ll tell you this: Father will finish it. I’ve seen individuals like you; I’ve heard of individuals like you, and at the end Father rules the day. Yehueh Yahweh will make his presence known.
So, I won’t bother you. I’ve said you received my answer. You said, “With this introduction, I leave the stage to you. Since you want to prove the existence of God, the burden of proof is on you and here is your chance?
Okay, I got the stage. You’re absolutely right. You gave me permission to take the stage and I just told you that I don’t have to prove anything to you. I have nothing to prove to you. I am not looking for people like you. I am looking for likeminded believers. I am looking for family. And I assume from what I read here that you aint it. You might find out that you might end up with more than you bargained for. And when you do, it’s going to be too late.
You can say well I don’t believe that. It doesn’t matter. Time will tell. My wife has a saying. When you die you’re going to find out. So if you want to find out today, die! Or tomorrow, die! You’ll find out. And when you’re standing there trying to figure out what to say you remember these words that I’ve spoken. You had the opportunity to do something differently. And you chose not to. You chose the course and the destiny that you place your feet upon. It says the path is broad and the way is broad and the gate is wide that leadth to destruction and many there be that entereth that gate. I got a feeling that if I ever be able to see that gate that you’r probably will be strolled in there. I don’t think you going to like it. Now enough said, That all I am going to say addressing this issue. If you don’t like that, get a life.
Now I apologize to everyone else who might be watching who had witnessed that, but sometimes things need to be said straight. Ant it’s not a debate.
Although these two rabbis think I am worthless, I would still like to respond to them. I blieve you will enjoy reading it just as I enjoyed writing it.
Dear Rabbis. It was Rabbi Shaul who invited me to debate and offered to show me that God exists and he loves me. I have no interest in this kind of debate. I consider it a futile discussion. But I agreed. So is it me that is breaking the covenant or is it you?
You said you want to use the Scriptures as evidence. I told you that to prove God through Scriptures is circular reasoning. This is an elemental logical fallacy. It does not behoove a scholar of your age and rank to propose such a fallacy as evidence. It just shows you have little understanding of logic. I have this discussion with Muslims all the time. I ask them, what is the proof that Allah is God? They say it says in the Quran. I ask why should I believe the Quran? They respond because it’s the word of God. Do you see the circular reasoning?
Then you say that you doubt my sincerity, my integrity and the way I conduct myself.
That is fine. You can doubt my sincerity and integrity, but which part of my conduct is objectionable? Rabbi Shaul offered to show me that God exists. I agreed and I said in my tweets that I will publish it so everyone can benefit and he agreed. Nonetheless after revealing my thoughts about atheism, you insulted me and declared me unworthy. You said you pity me, that I am a miserable person and that when I die I will have to face YHWH and maybe go to hell because of that email. Is my conduct more objectionable or yours?
You took offence because I said I want to put this debate on my website. You say I want to do it so I can show my superiority and my intellect. You seem to be paranoid even before we start? If you have the truth on your side what are you afraid of? Let the world see the great wisdom and superior intellect of your YHWH through you. I am giving you a chance to have a larger audience. I see no one is watching your videos on youtube. A lot of people read my sites. I am offering you a portal to reach to a larger audience. Shouldn’t you jump at this opportunity? You seem to not be very convinced of your own beliefs, otherwise you’d not be so shy about them being challenged. Doesn’t this tell something about your sincerity and integrity?
You say that you don’t care how smart I am and that you yourself are pretty smart but that our smartness is foolishness compared to the intelligence of Yahweh. And you quoted Him saying our birth [I think He said righteousness] is but filthy rags like rags women use during their menstruation.
These are not very nice words for the creator to say about his creatures. He is demeaing people, degrading and humiliating them. Incidentally, this is what narcissists do. Narcissists put others down. That is the only way they know to elevate themselves. Does the creator of the universe suffer from malignant self-love?
If I were a teacher, I would praise my students. I wouldn’t degrade them. I wouldn’t constantly remind them that I am smarter and compared to me they are ignorant and stupid. I would overlook their shortcomings and highlight their achievements. I would focus on their strengths and not on their inadequacies. I would do the same with my employees if I were a boss. This is how you bring out the best in others. It seems that the maker of humans is quite ignorant when it comes to human psychology. This god of whom you talk is a freaking narcissist.
You call me a liar for saying I am not an evangelist atheist and accuse me of being provocative and to try to arrange a discourse so that I can show to people and prove my point.
I have been debating for fourteen years about Islam. My objective is to unveil the truth. Truth can spark when opposing ideas collide. Of course I believe that my views are true. That is normal. No one would believe in things that they believe to be false. But I am always open to alternative views and will change my views if someone can show me better way of looking at things. I have been doing this all my life and I have been changing my views as I learn new things. I am not afraid of publishing my discussions for the world to see and letting others scrutinize them. If I am wrong I will admit it. No one expects me to know everything. I think my readers appreciate my sincerity and my earnest desire to find the truth when they see I acknowledge my errors when I stand corrected. This admission does not deminish me. It actually elevates me in the eyes of my reader. They see that I am willing to admit that I am fallible and have no pretense of infinite wisdom.
But you are afraid to make your debates public. Why? Is that because you doubt your own self? What other explanation can you give for this knee jerk reaction to my offer to publish our debate?
If you are right, the world can see it. If you are not, you can change your views. Isn’t this the logical thing to do? Or perhaps your attachment to your ego is much stronger than your commitment to truth and you fear I may find some flaws in your reasoning and embarrass you?
Let me tell you Rabbi that all of us were born ignorant. Whatever we know, we learned them from others. A Persian proverb says, seek knowledge from cradle to grave. There is no shame in not knowing. Shame is in not wanting to know. In the course of my life, I’ve learned a few things. The most valuable of all is the insight that I am ignorant – profoundly ignorant. I cherish this insight more than all other learning.
You then talk about how Hebrew is a pure language and that all other languages were confusions that YHWH caused among people in the incident at the Tower of Babel and you added, “We’re talking about historical here.”
Really? Is that how languages have come to exist? But science has a different explanation. Linguists say languages branch off from each other and continue to evolve until they become independent languages. The story of the Tower of Babel is not history. It is fairytale. You don’t understand history Sir, and you don’t understand science. You know the Scriptures and you don’t understand them either. The Scriptures are the folklore of ancient people. If you want to cling to them, that’s fine with me, but don’t talk about science and history. Both science and history reject your Scriptures.
I said both theists and atheists have blood on their hand. You misread me. I did not say atheists kill in the name of God. But they have killed in the name of ideology, be it communism or National Socialism or whatever damn ism of hate that they may come up with.
I said people do evil because of their conviction to be righteous and because of their inability to doubt that they may be wrong or that others may have a point too. It does not matter whether one believes in God or not, if one is blinded by his faith that person can become intolerant. I inhale the stench of intolerance in you. You are prone to despise people who have views contrary to yours. I explained to you my views so you can see where I come from and make your argument more poignant. That was enough for you to scorn me, vilify me, pity me and call me a cancer, and exhorting me to rid the society from myself.
I wrote the problem is the belief itself. Once we fall into that dark pit, i.e., the dark pit of faithfulness, we can no longer see. You paid little attention to what I wrote and assumed by dark pit I am talking about your hell.
No, that thing does not exist. Assuming God exists, he must be a sadist to run such a torture house. The whole concept of hell is ridiculous. Debating with a Muslim charlatan that passes himself as scholar I made an example saying, what would people think of me if I torture my cat because he is ungrateful to me despite the fact that I raised him since he was a kitten and took great care of him? If I take offense from a cat wouldn’t it be evidence that I am insane? Of course it would be. It does not matter how ungrateful my cat may be, I could never punish him let alone torture him to death. Now the difference between humans and cats is infinitely smaller than the difference between the creator of the universe and humans. If we can’t do such thing to cats and we will forgive them no matter how misbehaved they are; if we can love them unconditionally, how could God be so unforgiving of humans and torture and burn us for eternity? This is attributing insanity to God. If God exists, you people who come up with these stupid ideas and portray Him as a sadist are blasphemers.
Then you say, “You can’t have a creation without a creator. You might not like that; you might not appreciate that; you might not even believe that and that’s okay with me. If you have no hope, that’s your decision.”
Is that your logical argument in defense of a creator? First you make a claim without bothering to prove it. “You can’t have a creation without a creator.” Yes you can. Evolution takes place through principles, the laws that govern the universe. When you pour water from a high altitude a stream is formed. The stream may take different shapes depending on the topography of the land. It turns left or right. In one place it may run calmly and in another place it may be rough. In some places puddles are forms and in other places cascades are created. The stream has a shape but no designer or maker. It comes to exist by itself because of the topography of the land and the law of gravity. In the same way mountains are formed, oceans are made, clouds are shaped. This entire planet and all other planets and stars are all subject to natural laws. Just as our hypothetical stream does not need a designer, the universe also does not need a designer. Natural laws explain everything.
Then you engage in more ad hominem and appeal to ridicule (the horse laugh) and appeal to spite and other logical fallacies as your evidence.
Instead of burying your head in that ancient book of fables why don’t you read a book on logical fallacies? You can learn them online. Read them so you don’t make obvious mistakes. Despite your claim I never said I am smart. But I learned about logical fallacies. Wining debates is not about being smart. Debating is an art like bike riding or playing violin. You can master it when you learn about logical fallacies and stay away from them. Anyone can do it.
You said, “If you’re this miserable that you feel that the species is what it is then why you don’t rid the species of another cancer you call it and remove yourself from society.”
The fact is that I don’t think I am the cancer of the society. I think cancers of the society are those who spread ignorance and hate. People who divide mankind between imaginary lines of race, class, caste, gender and religion are cancers of the society. However, my solution is not to remove them from the society but to cure them. We don’t raise a sword against darkness; we light a candle. Take a look at my Favicon. It is a candle that shines in the darkness carried on two wings. Candle represents truth and the wings symbolize freedom. The image portrays the words of Jesus, “truth will set you free.” That is my motto. I search the truth and I spread it through my writings.
But I could be wrong. That is why I am open to dialogue and allow people to comment and disagree with me because I learn only from those who disagree with me. They force me to rethink.
You asked “If there is nothing out there for any of us and a hope, then what is the reason for these people to live in any other way that you say these people live?”
Who said there is no hope? There is hope for mankind. Everything does not begin or end with us as individuals. I am here because I carry the genes and the wisdom of myriads of generations that preceded me and I pass on this torch to myriads of generations that succeed me. I contribute to the betterment of the world. I learned from those before me and I share that knowledge with the ones that come after me. I hope to add a drop to this vast sea of human knowledge. I hope that I can ease some pain and that the world will be a better place, even if in minute way, because I lived in it. So I will survive not in body or in spirit, but through my deeds. Both good and bad deeds reverberate in the world like ripples on a pond and will survive our death.
Alois Hitler was abusive to his son. Adolf grew up to become a psychopath mass murderer. Muhammad’s mother neglected him. He grew up to become a psychopath mass murderer. Annie Sullivan, a young blind woman, became the governess of Helen Keller who was not just blind but also deaf and mute. Through Annie’s love, Helen became a prolific writer, a political activist and the first deaf and blind to earn a Bachelor of Arts degree. Thanks to Annie, Helen became an inspiration to millions. All these people left their traces in history. They are not dead. They live in the pain or in the joy that they left behind. I hope to leave behind ease, not pain; happiness, not sorrow. It does not matter whether we survives or not. We will survive through our impact in the world. So why not make that impact a positive one? You on the other hand are concerned only about you and will cling to any lie that promises you eternal life. What if all that is a lie? We both die. And what if there is no heaven and no hell? What did you leave behind? You leave ignorance, hate and disunity. I leave understanding. We both survive alright! But there is a world of difference between what survives from you and what survives from me.
You want to survive in person and one day meet me and mock me and rejoice when I burn in hell. That is your level consciousness and spiritual maturity. That’s fine for you, but it is not good for me. I cannot have fun in Paradise when countless people are burning in hell. My heart is not the same as yours and I can’t silence my conscience by reminding myself that it was their fault for not believing in the absurd claims of the Bible or the Quran.
You hope for your personal survival. To me that is petty. My hope is for the survival of humanity. It’s a bigger hope and a much nobler one. While you strive for your individual salvation I endure for the salvation of our species, yes this very wretched and misguided species. I see there is evil in people but I also know there is potential for a lot of goodness. I hope to bring out that goodness.
You said, “I don’t have the intelligence, the wisdom and the understanding to even to begin to debate the Father. He can take care of the situation for Himself and I assure you He will.”
If god shows up and debates with me I will accept him. But he doesn’t do that. He sends his messages through men of questionable character and his messages are illogical. How can I know these guys were not lying? Muhammad said exactly the same thing that you say. He said if we don’t believe in him, his Allah will burn us in hell. But you don’t believe in Muhammad. Why not? The message of the Quran is just as irrational as the message of the Bible. Muhammad also said that one should not question the wisdom of God which is very different from human wisdom. So why don’t you believe in Muhammad? What if he was right?
I reject your god for the same reason that I reject Muhammad’s god. Why should I believe in one illogical god and not in another? Tell me what makes YHWH different from Allah (or to be precise Hubaal, because allah, like god is also a title and does not refer to any particular god.)
You said, “ But if you’re wrong we will, and it stand his judgment against you. You need to take this into consideration. “
Yes I have taken that into consideration and I have prepared my speech already. Here is a gist of it. I will say, O God almighty and wise. I did not reject you. I rejected what people said about you. I refused to believe you are as insane and as evil as people of religion portrayed you. They said you cannot be understood through logic. I could not agree with them because
1- I reasoned that you must be the maker of logic and hence you can’t be illogical. If the origin of light is the sun then the sun cannot be dark. But these men who spoke of you told me you are illogical. They said your logic is different from human logic. But that made no sense because logic is logic. The greater logic cannot contradict smaller logic. 2 + 2 is always 4 even in complex equations. So I rejected their argument because it denigrated you.
2- When they threatened me with hellfire and I thought maybe I should give up reason and believe blindly just in case, as Pascal had reasoned, I was left with the dilemma of which god to believe. Your creatures are promoting countless gods. They are all illogical and all fearsome and vengeful. How could I know which one are you? I feared following an impostor god, which would have been worse and would have made you really angry. So thought it is safer to not follow any god counting on your understanding. Aren’t you happy that I did not follow your rivals? Don’t I deserve some credit for that? I just didn’t want to gamble. Since you left no reliable clues to find you I waited until I die.
3- All those men who spoke of you as the god of love and mercy lived a despicable life of hate, crime, murder and deceit themselves. You picked wrong people as your messengers. I compared myself to many of them and I saw I lead a more ethical and moral life than many of them. I didn’t want to follow their bad examples. Why didn’t you send good people to guide us? They promoted hate and violence and I am a man of peace. And I looked at the mullahs, the priests and the rabbis and I saw they spew hate and are unenlightened people. That was enough for me to turn away from you.
4- I loathe cruelty to animals and didn’t eat their flesh because I couldn’t endure the thought of taking an innocent life just to satisfy my taste buds. But your preachers presented you as a bloodthirsty god that demands blood and sacrifice. I thought those practices are satanic. I thought since you are also the god of animals you must love them too and will never ask people to shed the blood of these lovely creatures. That was a big stumbling block in my belief in you. I just couldn’t envision you as a cruel god.
5- Those who told me about you also depicted you as a sadist who owns a torture house and burns humans. I could not believe that you can be so crazy and refused to attribute insanity to you. I knew if you exist you must be the god of reason and love and none of the things I read in the Torah or in the Quran gave me that impression.
If God is reasonable he will agree with my reasoning and if he is not then he is an unpredictable god and there is no way yo can be sure what will he do. He may even decide to send all the disbelievers to paradise and all the believers to hell. A crazy god is capable of anything. So why bother?
You said “Isaac Newton was an atheist and one day when he looked at the intellectual facts he realized there had to be a creator.”
There are two problems with this statement. One is that it is a logical fallacy known as argumentum ad verecundiam or appeal to authority. Even smart people can be wrong. Einstein said God does not play dice. He was talking about Heisenberg uncertainty principle and the behavior of particles in quantum physics. He was proven wrong. God plays dice all the time. Aristotle believed wales are fish. He was wrong. Newton also believed that planets’ motion around the sun is the work of angels. Later Einstein showed it is caused by the curvature in the space surrounding large masses.
The next mistake is that Newton was never an atheist. He was very much a believer all his life. In his time most people believed in God. Today few scientists believe in God.
You criticized me for saying, doubting everything is the first step to enlightenment. You asked, “Why find enlightenment if there is nothing? If this is all there is, if there is nothing more, what are you becoming enlightened about? So you can die and rot?”
I am not sure what your definition of enlightenment is. Enlightenment means to give intellectual (or spiritual) light to; instruct and impart knowledge to. Why do you think enlightenment has anything to do with dying and afterlife? Enlightenment is opposite to obscurantism AKA religious indoctrination and blind faith.
You then summed up your response by saying “You’re pathetic and I feel extremely sorry for you. I pity you. You’re like a wounded animal that’s hurt. And I feel pity and I feel remorse for you. But this is a decision that you have made.”
These are all logical fallacies. Appeal to scorn, appeal to ridicule, ad hominem, etc. And you are the person who claims to be able to prove God? Your logic is flawed. There is no logic in anything you said. And I don’t blame you because there is no logic in God at all. You can’t prove something that does not exist. You have covered all the gamma of the logical fallacies but did not produce a single logical argument.
You said “I don’t have to prove anything to you. I have nothing to prove to you. I am not looking for people like you. I am looking for likeminded believers.”
Finally you said something that I agree. You have nothing to prove. All you can do is preach to the choir – people who already believe in the same things that you believe. You are unable to convince anyone because you have nothing to prove. Maybe you should tell this to Rabbi Shaul so he does not promise people that he can prove to them that God exists.
You said, “When you die you’re going to find out.”
Isn’t that silly? Would a sane god send a message to mankind that can’t be proven by any means except through their death when it is too late? Imagine a teacher presents a dilemma to his students and does not solve it. The dilemma looks pretty much stupid and irrational. But he tells them this will be the main question in their final exam and only after the exam they will know whether they have guessed right or wrong. Isn’t that stupid? But it gets worse. He also tells them if they fail they will not only lose the year but he will beat them and torture them for years to come. I believe any sane person will see this teacher is crazy and will kick him out of the school. Well your god is no better. He’s damn crazy. You may think that it is okay for God to be crazy but I refuse to believe in a crazy god.
After listening to this rabbi, I somehow felt sympathy for Jesus. I can see now what kind of people he had to deal with. What is funny is that this rabbi offered to show me the love of God. All he showed was intense hatred for unbelievers and anyone who is not “family.”
I think this article will help Muslims to see the absurdity of Islam. Often people can’t see their own flaws and find it easier to see the flaw of others. This is exactly the kind of arguments Muslims make. That is because Muhammad copied his religion from what he learned from the Jews. The similarity between Islamic thinking and Judaic thinking is not coincidence. Rabbis like this person were the people who inspired Muhammad and taught him the fundamentals of his religion. Let Muslims see how ridiculous they look when they argue in exact same fashion that this good old rabbi does. The reasoning is identical.