cont..

Foyle,
With the examples I gave I refuted Epicurus’ aphorism by refuting the proposition that “If he is able but not willing he is malevolent”.

In the case of HIV, the evil is committed by human beings, although as with everything it is only by the will of Allah. In the Qur’aan it states that the purpose of creating mankind is that we worship Him, and WE DO SO WILLINGLY (there is compulsion in religion). HIV is a consequence of not worshipping Allah, of ignoring His guidance, firstly in having sex outside of marriage and secondly not taking measures that would prevent harm to others. Our creator has given each of us the choice.

And why just speak about HIV? Why not alcohol or other drugs, gambling and so forth, all of which is resulting in enormous harm to innocents. The harm is due to people NOT following Allah's guidance.

If we as a society really cared about innocents then the harm caused by OUR actions would be taken as a sign that we need to correct our ways. What will it take before we see reason?

salaams

Grateful,
Have you looked at any of the evidence I suggested, Robert Ardrey's books for example?

In 1993 a very well respected ABC broadcaster, Terry Lane, published a book with the cheeky title "God; The Interview". The ABC republished it with a new introduction in 2004. The following is an extract from that introduction;
"It was not my intention to be a sort of anti-evangelist for atheism so much as to set out the intellectual process by which I moved from believer to unbeliever over the years. Now, as I re-read that conversation with the Almighty, I can't help thinking that it might have been better if it had a more evangelical edge.

After all, if there is one thing we have learned in the last ten years it is that as long as religion persists and flourishes just so long we will live in peril.

Ten years ago it didn't seem important to pay too much attention to Islam. Devotion to Allah was too exotic and, frankly, primitive to deserve serious consideration. Islam is a religion without a Reformation, a Renaissance or an Enlightenment, so picking an intellectual argument with it is akin to shooting fish in a barrel.

We post-Christian, post-Enlightenment European rationalists don't have a common starting point with a world view that has never been informed by the equivalent of a Voltaire or a Hume.

In 1739 David Hume declared: 'Generally speaking, the errors in religion are dangerous; those in philosophy only ridiculous'.
Right now we are living through a period in which the murderous nature of religion it is only too apparent".

I assume he is talking about 9/11 which was followed by the Spanish train explosions, and the UK subway and bus explosions (indiscriminate abominal massacres all) and who committed those atrocities.

If you were familiar with Hume, Voltaire, Bertram Russell and a few other great modern thinkers, it would be worth arguing with you.

Foyle,

Baiting once more. Reason with me, don't degrade yourself by resorting to insults.

<<If you were familiar with Hume, Voltaire, Bertram Russell and a few other great modern thinkers, it would be worth arguing with you.>>

No need for such silly, pompous remarks.

Your quote from Terry Lane illustrates how ignorant a person "familiar with Hume, Voltaire, Bertram Russell and a few other great modern thinkers" can be.

The "reformers" of Islam are the Wahhabi's, so believe me, you do not want a reformed Islam!

Contrast Terry Lane,s description with someone who has done a bit more research: Carly Fiorina, as CEO of Hewlett-Packard. The follow excert is taken from a speach delivered on 26 September 2001 in Minneapolis, Minnesota at a conference whose theme was: "TECHNOLOGY, BUSINESS AND OUR WAY OF LIFE: WHAT'S NEXT" http://www.islamfortoday.com/hewlettpackard.htm

<<There was once a civilization that was the greatest in the world.

It was able to create a continental super-state that stretched from ocean to ocean, and from northern climes to tropics and deserts. Within its dominion lived hundreds of millions of people, of different creeds and ethnic origins.

One of its languages became the universal language of much of the world, the bridge between the peoples of a hundred lands. Its armies were made up of people of many nationalities, and its military protection allowed a degree of peace and prosperity that had never been known. The reach of this civilization’s commerce extended from Latin America to China, and everywhere in between.

And this civilization was driven more than anything, by invention. Its architects designed buildings that defied gravity. Its mathematicians created the algebra and algorithms that would enable the building of computers, and the creation of encryption. Its doctors examined the human body, and found new cures for disease. Its astronomers looked into the heavens, named the stars, and paved the way for space travel and exploration.

Its writers created thousands of stories. Stories of courage, romance and magic. Its poets wrote of love, when others before them were too steeped in fear to think of such things.

cont....

cont..

When other nations were afraid of ideas, this civilization thrived on them, and kept them alive. When censors threatened to wipe out knowledge from past civilizations, this civilization kept the knowledge alive, and passed it on to others.

While modern Western civilization shares many of these traits, the civilization I’m talking about was the Islamic world from the year 800 to 1600, which included the Ottoman Empire and the courts of Baghdad, Damascus and Cairo, and enlightened rulers like Suleiman the Magnificent.

Although we are often unaware of our indebtedness to this other civilization, its gifts are very much a part of our heritage. The technology industry would not exist without the contributions of Arab mathematicians. Sufi poet-philosophers like Rumi challenged our notions of self and truth. Leaders like Suleiman contributed to our notions of tolerance and civic leadership.

And perhaps we can learn a lesson from his example: It was leadership based on meritocracy, not inheritance. It was leadership that harnessed the full capabilities of a very diverse population–that included Christianity, Islamic, and Jewish traditions.

This kind of enlightened leadership — leadership that nurtured culture, sustainability, diversity and courage — led to 800 years of invention and prosperity.

In dark and serious times like this, we must affirm our commitment to building societies and institutions that aspire to this kind of greatness. More than ever, we must focus on the importance of leadership– bold acts of leadership and decidedly personal acts of leadership.>>

Hi Grateful, I'm curious.
"In the Qur’aan it states that the purpose of creating mankind is that we worship Him, and WE DO SO WILLINGLY (there is compulsion in religion)"
What would you think of a person who would only suffer the company of toadying, obsequious little yes men?

Good question, Grim.

It's not really even a god if it experiences such petty human emotions  like egotism and insecurity now, is it?

A self-debunking god. 

Here's an interesting little question to ponder...

What's more powerful:

A god who can create worlds and save people from their sins, or;

A god who can create worlds and save people from their sins while simultaneously not existing?

Is say it's the latter.

So, god doesn't exist.