Atheists' Lazy Delusions of Grandeur

Well, I mean, being an atheist isn't something that I would ever need to know. You don't assert this belief in something for no reason. It's not like if you're a say you're a vegan or something like that or you're a vegetarian or you're Muslim, or you're a Jew to where oh, we can't invite so and so to the barbecue because he doesn't believe in God. It doesn't make any sense. So it's not something that would come up unless you are an evangelical atheist, Meaning, you're trying to convince people against the belief in God.

I mean, like, you're an agnostic, I can have some some degree of respect for you. There's some hope for you. In some way, you are searching. Like, that's the that's the the more scientific of the two options to be agnostic. Meaning, I'm not sure.

I don't believe that it's been proven. So I I don't really have a position on God because I don't know. That's more scientific. That's a more rational position to take than an atheist. If you're atheist already, it tells me you're an irrational person, and you have generally a shallow intellect.

These are the most shallow minded, simple minded people that you will come across. Far far more simple minded than religious people. Far more narrow minded, far more shallow minded than religious people, and more so than agnostics. If you are arguing against religion and you're arguing against the existence of God, you're an evangelical atheist, meaning you are turning what is a lack of belief in something into a belief in the nonexistence of God. And you're pushing that and you're arguing with people and you're debating with people.

You look for every opportunity to criticize and denigrate religion and religious values. What that tells me is not so much that you disbelieve in God, but you wanna be God. You want to take away religion so that you can replace it with your own moral code of your own conception. You wanna replace what human beings have been following and the basis for moral values since the beginning of the human race. Since we had cognition, our moral values and the codes of behavior that we follow have been based on religion, have originated from and emerged from and been codified by religion.

And now you want to dissolve all of that and replace it with something that you come up with. Meaning, you want to it's not that you don't believe in God, it's that you wanna replace God with you. And they always make the argument that you can be a moral person and you can have moral values and not believe in God. You can be moral without religion. Okay.

Well, first of all, that is an unproven hypothesis. And the evidence that we do have contradicts that because look at the atheists, the the the the most well known atheists that we have. People like Sam Harris, people like Richard Dawkins, people like Lawrence Krauss, Daniel Dennett. Right? All of these people will argue that you don't need religion to be moral, and people like Sam Harris will say that we can actually have a sort of a scientific basis or use the scientific method for arriving at moral values as if we need to.

You know, if it's not broke, don't fix it. What we've been following has worked thus far. What we've been following has gotten us this far, but okay. You say Sam Harris, you say Daniel Dennett, you say Richard Dawkins, you say Lawrence Krausz that we don't need religion in order to be moral. But to a man, all of these people were involved with Jeffrey Epstein.

Every single one of them. And from the the the what they call the four horsemen of the of a of atheism, of new atheism, the only one who we don't know for sure was involved with Jeffrey Epstein was Christopher Hitchens, and probably that's just because he died before he had a chance. But every one of them, Sam Harris, Daniel Dennett, Richard Dawkins, Lawrence Krausz, every single one of them is connected with Jeffrey Epstein. So where's your where's your morality? Now tell me about your moral code that your science and your atheism has been able to come up with.

And someone like Lawrence Krause doesn't even want to distance himself from Jeffrey Epstein and and feels that he was elevated by his connection to Jeffrey Epstein. Okay? That's the evidence that we have about the morality that can be derived from atheists. Show me show me a a snapshot because we've we've got pictures of these people with Jeffrey Epstein. Show me a picture of a public figure, a Muslim public figure who's in a snapshot with Jeffrey Epstein.

Find one. And most of these people, people like Sam Harris, who likes to think of himself as very intellectual, very intelligent, and his followers think that he is that. Well, he has a PhD in neuroscience, so he must be intelligent. Well, that just shows how dumb you are. Even in his own bio, calls himself an author and a podcaster.

He's not a neuroscientist. He paid for a degree and got one to give himself some credibility with misanthropic, silly, credentialist minded, shallow minded people. He imagines that the prophets and that the great scholars of religion were simple minded people as if because they don't know they didn't know maybe where bacteria comes from. That that means that they were not intelligent and that they didn't understand human beings and that they didn't understand morality and that they didn't understand human nature and human character. That's so shallow.

That's so simple minded. Do you really think that you are any match for any of the scholars of the past? Muslim and non Muslim. Do you think that you're a match for Maimonides, the Jewish scholar? You think that you're a match for even Thomas Aquinas?

You think you're a match for Ibn Taymiyyah? You think you're a match for Ibn Kathir? Lazali? I mean, on and on and on. You are you are nothing compared to these people in terms of their intellect, in terms of their intelligence, in terms of the depth of their understanding, the layers of their understanding.

You just can't do the work. You see, like, for example, I was looking at something the other day because of the Salman Rushdie incident about the so called satanic verses and what the evidence what the what the Dalil is about whether or not that incident took place or not. And the Sahih evidence is that this incident never did take place. But then one of the evidences that it did take place is the ayah in Surat Hajj, which mentions how Shaitan will throw into revelation something from him. So then the question is, well, if this incident didn't happen, then why was that ayah revealed?

And so the simple answer is, oh, well, that must be evidence that this incident took place. That's the simple answer. But if you put some thought into it and do the intellectual work, you can understand that, well, perhaps that ayah was revealed and refers to what shaitan throws into the mind of the listener of the Wahid. That the that the one who who consumes or is a an audience to the Wahi can put his own interpretation onto it and his own misunderstanding, and he hears what he wants to hear, that that's from Shaitan. That's how Shaitan throws in from himself into the Wahi.

It's not the Wahi itself, but it's the way the listener hears it. So this is this is a question of doing the intellectual work and trying to figure out how you can reconcile things, but atheists don't do that work. And yet they think that they can come up with a moral code that human beings can follow until the end of time. They can solve all of the problems or can can can guide people in the right path. I mean, Sam Harris comes up with something brilliant, like, it should be to serve the well-being of the most people and to try to eliminate as much misery as possible.

Well, thank you, genius. That's that's so helpful and so specific and so not, subject to interpretation and misinterpretation and subjectivity and selfish warping of what that might mean. It's useless, and yet you think that you can compete with the greatest minds of the human race, the human species, the greatest minds, Muslim and non Muslim, who've lived throughout history, have wrestled with moral questions. It's absurd. And then on top of that, we find you're connected with a pedophile rapist like Jeffrey Epstein.

No. Atheists have nothing to offer. I can't take you seriously if you are someone who's pronouncing that you're an atheist. Now if you're quietly an atheist because you just don't believe you've in your own way, you've reached that conclusion, fine. I don't respect that conclusion.

I don't respect your mind for having reached that conclusion, and I think that you're intellectually lazy. But I don't need to hear about it. If you have any sense at all, then you won't talk about that. But if you're if you're someone who is an evangelical atheist and is always arguing on behalf of atheism, then you're not prepared to have conversations with adult human beings.