The brief appearance of Islamic members.

Not my definition I assure you, but a significant one in epistemology and ontology. As I said, you are not equipped to examine your conditioned thought processes. Discussion of the concepts of "proof" and "truth" is a bit like ice-skating, but you are unable to put the boots on.

On the basis of the layman's (dictionary) idea of "truth" how would you (as a representative Muslim) cope with modern science like Quantum Theory, which one exponent has described by the phrase "Everything that can happen, does happen".? (Note that your computer hardware depends on such a theory).

On second thoughts..."mountain climbing in order to get a better view"...might be a more appropriate analogy than "ice skating".

In other words, you have no proof that islam is untrue, thus your point is pointless. Thanks for the clarification.

People who make claims have the burden of proof, no one is obliged to disprove them. People who make extraordinary claims have an extraordinary burden of proof. Finally, people who make any claim which involves the supernatural have the highest standard of proof. No one has to disprove the story you're peddling. You have to prove it or else accept that people are justified in dismissing what you say.

People making claims do have the burden of proof. Which is why the burden to prove that islam is false is not my burden since it is not my claim.

Your claim is that Islam is true. That's your burden of proof, and you have not met it. For me to say "I don't believe that" is not at all the same as saying i know it to be untrue.

You have a burden of proof which you have not met, and now you're attempting to use a feeble and false logic to weasel out of your burden.

And it was claimed that islam is false, thus the burden of proof is on the person making that claim. As for my claim, my claim was never challenged to be proven, nor did I set out to prove it, so your point is pointles as usual. You are simply wiggling out the fact you you yourself can't prove that islam is false either.

Who claimed that? I didn't claim that. I just don't believe any of that old superstitious hocus-pocus. You truly are an intellectual weasel.

I am not disputing that it is psychological and social modus vivendi, but so is every major religion. As far as I am concerned, the details of your belief system, like all others, are trivial and arbitrary. But what works at the psychological level has been shown historically often to be pernicious at the social level. In other words, in the eyes of the rest of the world, Islam poses a significant problem due to fanatic elements over whom your system has no control. You therefore have my sympathies as you are stuck with an indefensible anachronism which causes pain and suffering to its adherents and others as we speak.

Likewise.

Yet the fact that you continue to fail to quote anything from the Qur'an or sunnah to back your assertions supports the fact that islam is a peaceful and just religion. Debunked as usual.

Tell that to the Sunnis and Shias blowing up each others children in Iraq.... or tell that to Malala Yousafzai, the girl shot in the neck by Taliban chauvinist fanatics.

From last week's British News


Go on ....now quote me the bit in the Koran which says its okay to beat a child or a wife but not to do them physical harm.

So, basically you're conceding that you made a false claim? Such honesty from a religious fanatic is unexpected and refreshing.

There's no need. Your own failed rebuttal to show anything from the Qur'an or sunnah that demonstrates that islam is not peaceful or just continues to expose your flawed argument and demonstrate that it's your ideology that's unjust. Thanks for the clarification.

To the contrary, your own failed logic continues to support my claim. At least you are consistent.

You are consistently playing the fanatical religionist's game of attempting to shift the burden of proof. No one has to prove that your Islamic superstitions are false--you have to prove that it's all true. You have provided not one shred of evidence. You've got a gall to be talking about logic, given that you apparently can't employ logic yourself.

Straw man fallacy--i've never said that Islam is not peaceful or just. It's a matter of indifference to me if the details of our superstition call for peace or justice. I have no ideology in play here.

Still ducking and dodging I see. Your own logic supports the fact that one has to prove that islam is false when making the claim. So your redundancy continues to fail.

Strawman response, since I never claimed that you stated that Islam is not peaceful or unjsut. Debunked as usual.