MMA GENIUS FIRAS ZAHABI ABOUT MORALITY

So your argument using the stealing example is, pain and suffering is bad and that is the criteria for what morals are without god, correct?

@@freeyourmind7538 Pain and suffering are undesirable

@@freeyourmind7538 the golden rule predates the bible but the bible puts it quite well. “Do unto others as you would have them do unto you” When you consider humans are tribal animals, these basic rules allow us to live together and thrive together.

@@heinz-sama7917 hi, im not sure what you mean. Do you mean 1. you dont need God to know that harming others is bad 2. or that you don't believe in God and you don't care about others too and will whatever as long as you're happy, even if its stealing something that you want?

Yeah, the west practiced slavery for more than 100 years and they were fine with it, even when abolished they got mad. Your point proofs firas point.

Not exactly airtight there.

People are responsible for their actions,Allah gives us free will in the context of our limited human perception,ultimately He knows and predetermines everything,but you do decisions,rejecting bad and embracing good and vice versa.If we talk about basic morality according to muslim belief all people have inner morality,the human nature called Al-Fitrah,which represents basic understanding of good and bad,like don't kill,don't steal etc.

I think he’s referring to the “god is dead” statement, and he’s correct that’s what Nietzche was saying.

“The meaning of this statement is that since, as Nietzsche says, "the belief in the Christian God has become unbelievable", everything that was "built upon this faith, propped up by it, grown into it", including "the whole [...] European morality", is bound to "collapse".[1]”

He has a masters in philosophy...

Thats all u could derive from the video?

⁠​⁠@@BarryH90dzthe whole line is “god is dead and we have killed him and their will never be enough water to wash away the blood”. If you think about a demonstrable morality being the voice Abraham heard, the way he was called to live his life than why would God be necessary in creating the divine being, rather than the adventure set forth? Isn’t it a fallacy?

He believed in tengris.

Those "athiest" countries are ALL based on Christian morality , give it another 3-4 generations and watch it turn into a drug crime ridden hell WHICH it's starting to become

like what? empty claims

@@Muhammad-bv4uu Nigeria and Afghanistan are doing pretty bad. Czech republic and China are doing much better than these countries. Not really empty claims

@@fenrir834 they're dying , the other countries are poor, and suppressed, Muslim countries were doing quit well before the age of discovery/destruction

@@MoHi-cx8py Doesn't change the fact that atheist countries still can do a whole lot better than religious countries or Muslim countries

Huh?

​​@@Jsjsusipeople can reproduce with artificial fertilization, but 99.9% percent of people on planet earth are born through sex. If everybody was gay the most likely thing is that the birth rate would drop a lot, i guess since being gay would be the norm in this scenario, people would force themselves to have sex with the opposite gender even when they are not attracted to eachother and obviously artificial fertilization would be the norm. Anyways i doubt any society will collapse because theres too much gay people. the us keeps having a higher birth rate than conservative russia, and in russia public manifestations of homosexuality are banned, but if indeed more people are becoming gay then it may be something to worry about, but as long as people keep having consensual sex between adults and the birthrate keeps being high enough, i doubt a society would collapse

are you stupid

what are you talking about smh

We got one of these progressive weird liberal gender fluid here.

Could you please elaborate and give a viable argument against his point ? Genuinely asking

Ok lets take the statement "There are morals only because there is a god" This has three assertions within it, one: there are morals, two: there is a god, three: morals exist only because of god. Let's check each assertion for evidence. If you define morals as meaning guidelines for correct behaviour, then we can just ask " do any people adhere to moral standards?" Eg stop to help strangers in peril, work hard, don't lie, don't steal, actively try not to harm others and so on. I think this has to be a yes. I would take that to be proof of the existence of morals. This leaves the burden of proof hanging over two facts; 1: there is a god, and 2: morals only exist because of that. We are left as usual waiting for proof of the first fact, as the second does not even start to be debatable until the first is proven. I don't need to argue against something I've seen no evidence for, because it is impossible. I may as well argue that there is not a galaxy somewhere in the universe which contains a planet where the overall hue is green. I can't begin to disprove it, but I also haven't seen anyone prove it yet. Another way to argue this point is to mention is that I shouldn't need to argue it at all. There's so much left unexplained in the statement that it really should be up to the one who made it to explain their reasoning.