The Religion Discussion

[Duane 3NE 2NR]

^ LOL

I am carrying you on fool's errand.

which one is the fool? the driver or the passenger?

To ask for empirical evidence for the existence of God is as relevant as asking for evidence to disprove the existence of God. You want to quantify a supernatural being by using natural observations.

you are the one who made the claim. I merely asked for you to back up your claims with proof. Remember the burden of proof is on the person making the claim, not the person he is trying to convince!

Evidence must be interpreted

why must evidence be interpreted? The sky is blue, we can observe this. Does that evidence need to be interpreted?
Is it that blue really means green but without yellow? Um that's still blue.
Light blue, dark blue, sky blue? Um that doesnt change it from still being blue.

and one's interpretation is based on their worldview which has its inherent presuppositions.

you are referring to rationalism which is in direct contrast, almost opposite to empirical evidence. Rationalism is where "the criterion of the truth is not sensory but intellectual and deductive".

You presuppose that naturalism/materialism is an arbiter of truth.

truth is truth. You cannot say your truth is different to AdamB's truth because your interpretation of what you consider to be evidence is different, therefore two different truths - they can't both be true and conflicting at the same time!

Also with regards to your claim of materialism. The fact that you cannot prove leprechauns do not exist, is not proof that they do.

I believe the Bible is the arbiter of truth.

that's GREAT! Why?

You have faith in your system based on your worldview and when your system cannot answer questions by its own parameters, you have faith that someday it will.

no I don't have faith in it. I can assume based on past and current research that science would discover many things. I am not waiting for science to prove anything. I know that based on the scientific method of testing and observation that anything science finds or creates hypotheses and theories for will be tested using this open method and stand up to further testing and peer reviews. if it's not the truth then they will discard it and continue looking.

Science does not set out to disprove religion. Science only sets out to find the truth. There is no faith involved.

I likewise have faith in my system based on my worldview, and when my system cannot answer questions, I believe that God knows the answer and will reveal it in time.

yup, if you don't have an answer then default to "God did it".

To ridicule that I or any other bases my worldview on the Bible (which I believe is a supernatural book) places you at no greater elevation because you only quantify that which is observable,

I didnt' ridicule, I only asked for proof, which so far has not been forthcoming.
Do you think you are at a greater elevation than someone who does not believe what you believe? Are you at a greater elevation for believing in what you do believe?

and just because you haven't observed my truth, doesn't mean it doesn't exist.

so just because you haven't seen the tooth fairy, doesn't mean it doesn't exist?

Furthermore, when asked, what empirical evidence will warrant proof, you replied "any." Are you placing a requirement of God that is not realistic? Do you want Him to write "I exist" across the sky? Do you want his to appear to in shining glory? How would you know it is true and you are not hallucinating?

well some people in the holy texts of various religions have claimed to see these things and you believe the ones that claim it in the Bible but you reject that the Angel Gabriel appeared to Muhammad and the Qur'an was revealed as the word of God.

So how do you know which is true?

Please, "any" is not an answer, because a designed and organised universe where repeatable tests can be done to determine empirical truth seems not to be enough for you, so be more specific.

I said "any" because so far I have not seen any!

You claim a designed and organised universe. But what if cows flew and we walked on the sky instead of the ground? How would we know that was not how things supposed to be? We only know what we know from observing things around us - so we assume that is what perfect is!

If our nose was on our chest, we wouldn't think it should be on our face!

Also you think it is intelligent design that the same tube we breathe from is the same tube food goes down, and that we can't breathe and swallow at the same time?

You think it is intelligent design that we are "created" with foreskin yet major religions claim we need to cut it off at birth? What was the point in that?

If we are God's greatest creation, why can't we fly?

BTW, In my worldview, his actions in creating me and His emotions in loving me to send His Son to die in my place, among other things proves He exists.

assuming the accounts of his actions and emotions are true. Why do you believe they are true?

why do you believe the actions and emotions of Lord Shiva are not true?

using that logic then Santa Claus actions and emotions among other things proves He exists?

[Habit7]

To ask for empirical evidence for the existence of God is as relevant as asking for evidence to disprove the existence of God. You want to quantify a supernatural being by using natural observations.

you are the one who made the claim. I merely asked for you to back up your claims with proof. Remember the burden of proof is on the person making the claim, not the person he is trying to convince!

Again you are asking for natural proof for a supernatural God. You want inductive reasoning for a deductive claim

Evidence must be interpreted

why must evidence be interpreted?

Because uninterpreted evidence proves nothing. A blue sky says nothing unless one interprets the sky's colour corresponds with the blue colour in our visible spectrum or it proves that we have an atmosphere.

and one's interpretation is based on their worldview which has its inherent presuppositions.

you are referring to rationalism which is in direct contrast, almost opposite to empirical evidence. Rationalism is where "the criterion of the truth is not sensory but intellectual and deductive".

Call it what you want but it is not absent in science. Theories are rationalised explanations based on scientific fact, and as I showed with the Continental Drift theory, it can be wrong.

You presuppose that naturalism/materialism is an arbiter of truth.

truth is truth. You cannot say your truth is different to AdamB's truth because your interpretation of what you consider to be evidence is different, therefore two different truths - they can't both be true and conflicting at the same time!

I can say my truth is different because AdamB interpretation is wrong. You believe that only things that naturally can be explained are true and I think that is wrong because that limits existence to my own perception, understanding and observation.

I believe the Bible is the arbiter of truth.

that's GREAT! Why??

Because it claims to be. And that claim is not hollow, it is backed up by substantial fulfilled prophecies, historical/archaeological fact, a consistent philosophical message that brings one into a supernatural relationship with the one and true God.

Science does not set out to disprove religion. Science only sets out to find the truth. There is no faith involved.

It times past I just post the link, let me post the entire statement. Do scientists ever need faith?Not in the sense of faith as meaning belief in something for which there is no evidence. There are various senses of faith in which we do -- scientists do participate. There's branches of science which I don't understand; for example, physics. It could be said, I suppose, that I have faith that physicists understand it better than I do. And so when I say something that physicists tell me, such as that there was nothing before the big bang -- they're not allowed to talk about the word "before" in the context of the big bang -- I sort of have faith that physicists understand enough to be allowed to say that, even though I don't understand why they're allowed to say that. But it's not blind faith; it's not faith in the absence of evidence. It's faith that's based upon confidence in the scientific method, in the scientific peer review process, the fact that I know that there are other physicists who can test, verify, criticize the views of any one physicist. So it's not the same as religious faith, which is based upon no evidence at all. Richard Dawkins

I likewise have faith in my system based on my worldview, and when my system cannot answer questions, I believe that God knows the answer and will reveal it in time.

yup, if you don't have an answer then default to "God did it".

Even when I have an answer I say "God did it." Random chance doesn't create order, whatever scientific principle or law, it is designed and sustained by the Creator, it could not have evolved out of slight progresses because the lack of them prior would not allow for any progress.

*getting tired now*
To straw man my is worldview as just "God did it" is to ridicule it. The proof you have been given is not accepted based on your interpretation through your worldview.

I dont know if the tooth fairy exists, she has lost relevance to me when I attained adult teeth.

You ask me a question prior about Christianity and Islam which is easy because Islam is based on Christianity. Therefore, I can answer the question theologically, based on the Bible, where the Apostle Paul says in Galatians 1:8 But even if we, or an angel from heaven, should preach to you a gospel contrary to what we have preached to you, he is to be accursed!

However we perceive order, it is order, it is not a result of chance.

Lord Shiva won't mind, in Hinduism I can follow another path.

[hong kong phooey]

very true
Hinduism accepts all, Hinduism is a way of life that is why there are so many names for the same god.
Hindus accept Jesus Christ as a form of god as well as Allah. The problem again is translations and con men.
When people came across from India, to many men of god appeared and they knew nothing. Many people just want something to believe in, and as the say "the Baba say that it must be true". People accept blindly, knowledge is lost,sheit is believed.
Does not matter which god you pray too, live your life by certain rules, the most famous "And do unto all men as you would have them do unto you"
if we all stop donating money to the churches, pundits, mosque. see which one will continue. it is all about business. the more followers there is the more money some people will make.

[AdamB]

very true
Hinduism accepts all that the con men thr[facebookvideo]ow at them[/facebookvideo],

Hinduism is a way of life that is why there are so many names for the same god.
Every person, religious or not, believer or non-believer has "a way of life". What does that have to do with having multiple "gods" or names for the same god?

Hindus accept Jesus Christ as a form of god as well as Allah. The problem again is translations and con men.
What does "accept" mean? Do they pray to Jesus and Allah?

When people came across from India, to many men of god appeared and they knew nothing. Many people just want something to believe in, and as the say "the Baba say that it must be true". People (Hindus)accept blindly, knowledge is lost,sheit is believed.

Does not matter which god you pray too, (this is your opinion)live your life by certain rules, the most famous "And do unto all men as you would have them do unto you"

if we all stop donating money to the churches, pundits, mosque. see which one will continue. it is all about business. the more followers there is the more money some people will make.

Do you have evidence of this claim? I don't doubt that there are persons making personal use of the monies collected but you need proof when making a claim, you can only say what you have witnessed.

As a muslim and being involved in managing the affairs of a mosque, I can say that, by Allah, we do not use the funds for "personal gain" but for the maintenance of the facilities and running beneficial programmes for the community and for charity. We make our financial statement available for all who want to peruse and we have them audited every year.

Can any other mosque, church or mandir make that claim?

People should not make "blanket statements", otherwise it's just PHOOEY-LISH!! (Not to mention SLANDERING people's name and reputation.)

[AdamB]

Habit7,
You just don't get the point and yuh talking rubbish by saying, "I can say my truth is different because AdamB interpretation is wrong" and "In my worldview, his actions in creating me and His emotions in loving me to send His Son to die in my place, among other things proves He exists.


Your interpretation is wrong because IT IS AN INTERPRETATION HANDED TO YOU, you DON'T and CANNOT THINK AND INTERPRET FOR YOURSELF and those who interpreted for you are WRONG because it has NO BASIS from the scriptures they claim it comes from.

WHY? Because the scriptures were changed, not preserved and they don't really know who wrote them!!

Your criteria is "all out of whack"!! May Allah guide you to the truth before your last breath...Ameen.

[Dizzy28]

The biggest irony in this thread for the year so far is AdamB asking for evidence.

[AdamB]

The biggest irony in this thread for the year so far is AdamB asking for evidence.

You might think so but if you also think that GOD killed HIMSELF to save you, then you may need psychological help...

[Dizzy28]

The biggest irony in this thread for the year so far is AdamB asking for evidence.

You might think so but if you also think that GOD killed HIMSELF to save you, then you may need psychological help...

God no. His son yes.

[AdamB]

^^^help still needed. Maybe you should put an ad in the Classifieds...

[AdamB]

In other news, "It's Lent, so the pope FASTING from being the pope!"

[16 cycles]

^ take one post and throw all the insults in there....

get it off your chest....then thread can move on

[hong kong phooey]

very true
Hinduism accepts all that the con men thr[facebookvideo]ow at them[/facebookvideo],

Hinduism is a way of life that is why there are so many names for the same god.
Every person, religious or not, believer or non-believer has "a way of life". What does that have to do with having multiple "gods" or names for the same god?

Hindus accept Jesus Christ as a form of god as well as Allah. The problem again is translations and con men.
What does "accept" mean? Do they pray to Jesus and Allah?

When people came across from India, to many men of god appeared and they knew nothing. Many people just want something to believe in, and as the say "the Baba say that it must be true". People (Hindus)accept blindly, knowledge is lost,sheit is believed.

Does not matter which god you pray too, (this is your opinion)live your life by certain rules, the most famous "And do unto all men as you would have them do unto you"

if we all stop donating money to the churches, pundits, mosque. see which one will continue. it is all about business. the more followers there is the more money some people will make.

Do you have evidence of this claim? I don't doubt that there are persons making personal use of the monies collected but you need proof when making a claim, you can only say what you have witnessed.

As a muslim and being involved in managing the affairs of a mosque, I can say that, by Allah, we do not use the funds for "personal gain" but for the maintenance of the facilities and running beneficial programmes for the community and for charity. We make our financial statement available for all who want to peruse and we have them audited every year.

Can any other mosque, church or mandir make that claim?

People should not make "blanket statements", otherwise it's just PHOOEY-LISH!! (Not to mention SLANDERING people's name and reputation.)

I got to agree with you churches(of all religions/religious organisations ) should be made accountable for all monies received and all money given to charity. you never know when the charity will end up using it for wrong reasons, or how much the middle men get.
All these organisations should also be taxed.

Some Hindus do pray to Jesus, cannot verify for Allah because i don't know of any personally.

my opinion yes it is. i do not follow blindly why can't god speak to another man?

[Duane 3NE 2NR]

To ask for empirical evidence for the existence of God is as relevant as asking for evidence to disprove the existence of God. You want to quantify a supernatural being by using natural observations.

you are the one who made the claim. I merely asked for you to back up your claims with proof. Remember the burden of proof is on the person making the claim, not the person he is trying to convince!

Again you are asking for natural proof for a supernatural God. You want inductive reasoning for a deductive claim

YOU are making claims. Claims need to be backed up by proof.

We might as well state that it's a fact that Thor and his hammer exist since we don't need empirical evidence to prove these supernatural things.

Evidence must be interpreted

why must evidence be interpreted?

Because uninterpreted evidence proves nothing. A blue sky says nothing unless one interprets the sky's colour corresponds with the blue colour in our visible spectrum or it proves that we have an atmosphere.

I think you mean analyze, not necessarily interpret.

Also if you are going to interpret the evidence derived from the failed logic above, i.e. natural proof is not needed for a proving the supernatural, therefore Thor is real because he is supernatural, then we might as well throw in some Avengers stuff in there too! Just to add to the Greek and Norse religious beliefs.

and one's interpretation is based on their worldview which has its inherent presuppositions.

you are referring to rationalism which is in direct contrast, almost opposite to empirical evidence. Rationalism is where "the criterion of the truth is not sensory but intellectual and deductive".

Call it what you want but it is not absent in science. Theories are rationalised explanations based on scientific fact, and as I showed with the Continental Drift theory, it can be wrong.

Science is wrong all the time, but then it uses the scientific method to correct itself.

A regular theory is a contemplative and rational type of abstract or generalizing thinking.
A scientific theory is a well-substantiated explanation of some aspect of the natural world, based on a body of knowledge that has been repeatedly confirmed through observation and experiment.

By the way, the theory of continental drift was superseded by the theory of plate tectonics, which builds upon and better explains why the continents move.

You presuppose that naturalism/materialism is an arbiter of truth.

truth is truth. You cannot say your truth is different to AdamB's truth because your interpretation of what you consider to be evidence is different, therefore two different truths - they can't both be true and conflicting at the same time!

I can say my truth is different because AdamB interpretation is wrong. You believe that only things that naturally can be explained are true and I think that is wrong because that limits existence to my own perception, understanding and observation.

here we go with Thor and the Avengers again! Why limit Thor's or the Tooth Fairy's existence to my own perception, understanding and observation! right?

You can dream up anything you want, the issue here is when you want to also claim them as real, you need to show proof. That is all.

Also what makes AdamB's interpretation wrong?

I believe the Bible is the arbiter of truth.

that's GREAT! Why??

Because it claims to be. And that claim is not hollow, it is backed up by substantial fulfilled prophecies, historical/archaeological fact, a consistent philosophical message that brings one into a supernatural relationship with the one and true God.

"this book is right because the book says it's right" - that is circular logic

Remember this?


All religious books say they are right, yet you say all of them are wrong except the one you believe in.

Science does not set out to disprove religion. Science only sets out to find the truth. There is no faith involved.

It times past I just post the link, let me post the entire statement. Do scientists ever need faith?Not in the sense of faith as meaning belief in something for which there is no evidence. There are various senses of faith in which we do -- scientists do participate. There's branches of science which I don't understand; for example, physics. It could be said, I suppose, that I have faith that physicists understand it better than I do. And so when I say something that physicists tell me, such as that there was nothing before the big bang -- they're not allowed to talk about the word "before" in the context of the big bang -- I sort of have faith that physicists understand enough to be allowed to say that, even though I don't understand why they're allowed to say that. But it's not blind faith; it's not faith in the absence of evidence. It's faith that's based upon confidence in the scientific method, in the scientific peer review process, the fact that I know that there are other physicists who can test, verify, criticize the views of any one physicist. So it's not the same as religious faith, which is based upon no evidence at all. Richard Dawkins

I don't know why you keep directing me to Richard Dawkins, like i said I've never read his books

but the man said "Not in the sense of faith as meaning belief in something for which there is no evidence." - so I guess he wants to use the word faith here to mean "confidence". That's really his prerogative!

Humans have emotions and thoughts, a scientist is human and may have hope and faith that their research will heal patients. Faith is not needed and will not alter the result though. You don't need to have faith in acetaminophen for it to work. It will inhibit the enzymes that work to cause us to feel pain whether you believe it will or not.

I likewise have faith in my system based on my worldview, and when my system cannot answer questions, I believe that God knows the answer and will reveal it in time.

yup, if you don't have an answer then default to "God did it".

Even when I have an answer I say "God did it." Random chance doesn't create order, whatever scientific principle or law, it is designed and sustained by the Creator, it could not have evolved out of slight progresses because the lack of them prior would not allow for any progress.

where do you see order? Like I said how do you know that your nose is not supposed to be on your chest? Or that cows should be able to fly. You see the world around you and assume that is the way it should be and so it was intelligently designed.

the lack of what prior?

*getting tired now*
To straw man my is worldview as just "God did it" is to ridicule it. The proof you have been given is not accepted based on your interpretation through your worldview.

so a 5 year old believing in Santa makes Santa real because the 5 year old is interpreting the proof through his worldview and faith and willingness to believe in Santa - that would make Santa real?

I dont know if the tooth fairy exists, she has lost relevance to me when I attained adult teeth.

so your belief is based on relevance?

What about Leprechauns? There are rainbows in the sky almost every day!

You ask me a question prior about Christianity and Islam which is easy because Islam is based on Christianity. Therefore, I can answer the question theologically, based on the Bible, where the Apostle Paul says in Galatians 1:8 But even if we, or an angel from heaven, should preach to you a gospel contrary to what we have preached to you, he is to be accursed!

earlier you said the new testament abrogated some parts of the old testament. AdamB claimed that the Qur'an abrogated some parts of the bible.

so which of you is correct?

However we perceive order, it is order, it is not a result of chance.

and how do you know this?

also evolution is not about chance. Whales have remnants of hind legs not by chance. It's not like options rolled and said "oops you will get no legs!". Whales have no full legs as their legs evolved into remnants and their forearms into large fins suitable for their environment.

Lord Shiva won't mind, in Hinduism I can follow another path.

but you are not following Hinduism

so lets see, circular logic, alot of big words and no direct answers.

[AdamB]

adamB, why should people beat her?
wouldnt God provide a perfectly just punishment for her in the hereafter?
Why should man have to help God with his punishment program?

Punishment in this word is:
1. Less severe than that of the hereafter.
2. Atonement of sins (meaning that there will be no further punishment in the hereafter).
3. Beneficial in curbing the ills of society.
4. Leads to order in the society.
5. The result of breaking laws (cause and effect).

http://www.examiner.com/article/saudi-arabia-islamic-cleric-rapes-tortures-kills-daughter-pays-fine

Saudi Arabia: Islamic cleric rapes, tortures, kills daughter, pays fine.




In Saudi Arabia an Islamic cleric who admits to raping, torturing and killing his daughter received a fine but no jail time for his heinous crime. Saudi media reports that the father paid 200,000 riyals ($50,000 US) in “blood money” for his crime, but will not be required to serve any time in prison.

In response to the heinous crime, and lack of justice for five-year old victim Lama al-Ghamdi, the women's rights activist Manal al-Sharif and others issued a press release on Feb 2, and launched a Twitter campaign using the hashtags #AnaLama (Arabic for "I am Lama") and #IamLama, demanding legislation criminalizing violence against women and children.

Fayhan al-Ghamdi, the victims father and a popular Islamic preacher who has made numerous television appearances promoting Islam, confessed to the heinous crime. Ghamdi told Saudi officials he used cables and a cane on his five-year-old daughter, leaving her with multiple injuries, including a crushed skull, broken ribs and left arm, extensive bruising and burns. In addition, one of Lama’s fingernails had been torn off. Hospital staff reports the child’s rectum had been torn open and the abuser had attempted to burn it closed.

Reports indicate the father had doubted his five-year old daughter's virginity.

Lama al-Ghamdi died last October. The amount her father was fined for the brutal rape, torture and murder, would have been doubled if Lama had been male. In Saudi Arabia, Islamic law is interpreted to be that a father cannot be executed for murdering his children, nor can husbands be executed for murdering their wives.

Human rights activists point out that judicial leniency towards male abusers and murderers reflects the highly problematic nature of the male guardianship system in Saudi Arabia. Currently all women in Saudi Arabia are considered minors, and all are automatically assigned to the care and judgment of their most immediate male relative. This system of male guardianship gives the male relatives the power to sell girls legally into child marriages and to ban adult women from work, travel and obtaining medical operations.

How do you verify the truthfulness of reports like these and the LATEST NEWS on the topic / case? The report above was dated Feb 3rd, 2013. Below is a report dated Feb 16th, 2013.

It's obvious though, from reading the report, that there is tremendous bias against Islam. Were there reports from BBC and CNN and other reputable sources? Why not quote from them instead? Because DFC and Co. are biased against Islam also.

http://beforeitsnews.com/alternative/20 ... 66524.html

Saudi Royal Family Intervenes to Keep Child-Murderer Fayhan al-Ghamdi Behind Bars

Saturday, February 16, 2013 12:42

(Before It's News) An update on this story.

It isn't often that we receive good news from Saudi Arabia, but today is one of those rare examples of public outrage forcing Muslim leaders to do the right thing.

Fayhan al-Ghamdi is a popular Muslim preacher who discusses Islam regularly on Arab television programs. He's also a rapist and a murderer who brutally raped and tortured his five-year-old daughter Lama to death.

Due to the abominable doctrines of Islamic law laid down by Muhammad, al-Ghamdi was set to be released after agreeing to pay "blood-money" (an amount of money paid to relatives of a victim that blocks further punishment).

Instead of quietly going free, however, al-Ghamdi became the focus of international outrage as human rights groups condemned Saudi law.

In an effort to protect their reputation, the Saudi royal family has intervened in the case, saying now that al-Ghamdi will remain in prison.

Of course, groups like CAIR, ISNA, and their allies will continue to claim that only racist, Islamophobic bigots complain about Sharia. But don't ever forget that critics of Sharia are sometimes the only people willing to stand against the release of a murdering pedophile.

[Habit7]

Before I begin, let me debunk your straw man tactics. I argue for the case of the God of the Bible, due the extensive historicity of the Bible, the fulfilled prophetic nature of the Bible and the supernatural impact of the Bible over many peoples and nations since its canonization (among other things). If you want to compare it to Norse or Greek mythology of children's fables as if they share equal footing then that is an argument you have to make. I however take responsibility for proofing the God of the Bible over all others as Creator, Saviour and Lord.

There is proof for a creator being, you however wanted this proof to be limited to empirical science, which in my view is a fool's errand. Empirical science represents science that is testable, repeatable and observable by agreed upon scientific principles. To have a god that can be subjected to this would mean that he either entered into his own creation or he is not God because is omnipotence is limited by the very creation he made and wholly exists in. A person of the Godhead of the Bible once entered into His own creation and though displaying divine attributes was rejected and submitted Himself to the castigation of His foes. What has not been said is that you believe that because God has come to you on your terms, He worthy of being disregarded. But He being God wants you to come to Him on His terms which primarily include faith (in His Word) and repentance. Otherwise you are no difference than Jesus contemporaries who even though being witnesses of His divine nature, still cried out for His crucifixion.

We scientists interpret evidence. We may analyse it for its veracity, but then we interpret. Evidence without interpretation is stuff.

Science is wrong all the time, but then it uses the scientific method to correct itself.

*vortex too strong*
*must escape being sucked in to circular logic*

AdamB’s interpretation is wrong because it is not based on truth. The apparent truth of AdamB's worldview is rife with contradiction of its Judeo-Christian foundation and internal contradiction such as the unjustness of Allah of the Quran, a point I dealt with prior.

Back again to circular logic "the Bible is right because it says it is right" well then let us look into the Bible's individual claims and see if they are right as it claims to be?

I quote Dawkins to show that even ppl outside my camp disagrees with you. Science is not as absolute as you are making it out to be. BTW your example of acetaminophen is pretty poor, because beside rigorous drug testing to ensure its safety and effectiveness, doctors still have to hope that the drug is effective on their individual patient as it is with the general public.

We are in "order." Any other configuration will be either order or disorder; disorder would result in nonexistence due to lack of order.
"the lack of what prior?" the lack of scientific law and principle could not allow for slight modifications over time to give us everything today, scientific law and principle had to come about instantly or established simultaneously with matter.

What makes the 5 year old worldview true?

See initial paragraph

See 5-6 lines up

I know I am not following Hinduism, I am not required to according to Hinduism

[AdamB]

^^^Muslims are outraged, just like every else, when crimes are committed, when injustice is meted out. I have a young daughter as well, if this is true that the father did those things to his daughter, then he is sick, psychopathic and knows nothing of Islam (muslim or non-muslim alike).

The problem is that there are sick, retarded people out there who are imposters, pretenders, posing as imams, priests, pundits, etc. They give religion a bad name but religion does not preach injustice and criminal activity, FULL-STOP!!

[metalgear2095]

^^^Muslims are outraged, just like every else, when crimes are committed, when injustice is meted out. I have a young daughter as well, if this is true that the father did those things to his daughter, then he is sick, psychopathic and knows nothing of Islam (muslim or non-muslim alike).

The problem is that there are sick, retarded people out there who are imposters, pretenders, posing as imams, priests, pundits, etc. They give religion a bad name but religion does not preach injustice and criminal activity, FULL-STOP!!

Islam seems to make people sick

[AdamB]

To have a god that can be subjected to this would mean that he either entered into his own creation or he is not God because is omnipotence is limited by the very creation he made and wholly exists in.
Based on the above, you have proven that Jesus is neither GOD nor THE SON OF GOD.

A person of the Godhead of the Bible once entered into His own creation and though displaying divine attributes was rejected and submitted Himself to the castigation of His foes.
There is no evidence in the bible for the "Godhead of the bible". Prove me wrong, bring your evidence.

Otherwise you are no difference than Jesus contemporaries who even though being witnesses of His divine nature, still cried out for His crucifixion.

There is no real,physical evidence that Jesus ever existed. The Shroud of turin is the closest but has not been conclusive. It can only be deduced that "someone" was wrapped in it.

What divine nature? Who witnessed what attributes of divinity wrt Jesus?

Jesus was not crucified and again, there is no evidence for this!! Bring it! What, your napkin??

He who speaks without knowledge is a ****

[AdamB]

^^^Muslims are outraged, just like every else, when crimes are committed, when injustice is meted out. I have a young daughter as well, if this is true that the father did those things to his daughter, then he is sick, psychopathic and knows nothing of Islam (muslim or non-muslim alike).

The problem is that there are sick, retarded people out there who are imposters, pretenders, posing as imams, priests, pundits, etc. They give religion a bad name but religion does not preach injustice and criminal activity, FULL-STOP!!

Islam seems to make people sick

"Seems" is the verb / operative word used...perception.

Another popular quote: "Money is the root of all evil." Do you give away all that you earn?

[metalgear2095]

^^^Muslims are outraged, just like every else, when crimes are committed, when injustice is meted out. I have a young daughter as well, if this is true that the father did those things to his daughter, then he is sick, psychopathic and knows nothing of Islam (muslim or non-muslim alike).

The problem is that there are sick, retarded people out there who are imposters, pretenders, posing as imams, priests, pundits, etc. They give religion a bad name but religion does not preach injustice and criminal activity, FULL-STOP!!

Islam seems to make people sick

"Seems" is the verb / operative word used...perception.

Another popular quote: "Money is the root of all evil." Do you give away all that you earn?

Seems like the media is lying everyday? Lol

[Habit7]

There is no real,physical evidence that Jesus ever existed.

Those are the messengers some of whom We have given excellence over some others. Among them there are ones to whom Allah spoke (directly) and He raised some of them steps higher (in other respects), and We gave clear signs to lsa, (jesus), the son of Maryam (Mary) and supported him with the Holy Spirit. If Allah so willed, those succeeding him would have not fought against each other after clear signs had come to them. But they disagreed among themselves. So, there were some who believed and there were some who disbelieved, and if Allah so willed, they would have not fought against each other. But Allah does what He intends Parah: 3 Surah: 2 Ayat: 253





case in point

[DFC]

Adamb, yes i am against Religion on the whole.
I detest any kinda indoctrination, blind belief, stone age customs and practices.

i will never suport any sort of scripture that teaches/glorifies segregation, division, hate, violence and intolerance.


You're somewhat of a Johnny come lately so you getting full blast too.
Just like everybody else got their share.

This is just an online forum, in real life if i see you i will stop and say hello and call ya out. All of we is people too. No matter our beliefs may vary, if you need help in something i will support and help.
Same goes for bluefete, megadoc and habit7 and everyone else.

My organisation does a lot of charity work, we give freely to muslim, hindu, christian, muggle, wizard, athiest, black, white, brown and yellow, orc, elf, hobbit, and guyanese too.
It fits with my utopian beliefs.

I believe in Tolerance, but how can you tolerate the intolerant?

[Daran]

Adamb, yes i am against Religion on the whole.
I detest any kinda indoctrination, blind belief, stone age customs and practices.

i will never suport any sort of scripture that teaches/glorifies segregation, division, hate, violence and intolerance.


You're somewhat of a Johnny come lately so you getting full blast too.
Just like everybody else got their share.

This is just an online forum, in real life if i see you i will stop and say hello and call ya out. All of we is people too. No matter our beliefs may vary, if you need help in something i will support and help.
Same goes for bluefete, megadoc and habit7 and everyone else.

My organisation does a lot of charity work, we give freely to muslim, hindu, christian, muggle, wizard, athiest, black, white, brown and yellow, orc, elf, hobbit, and guyanese too.
It fits with my utopian beliefs.

I believe in Tolerance, but how can you tolerate the intolerant?

Sad thing is that all of them hope you go to hell.

[Habit7]

^^^ouch Daran that is not true, at least for Christianity

1 Timothy 2:3-4 This is good and acceptable in the sight of God our Savior, who desires all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth.

2 Peter 3:9 The Lord is not slow about His promise, as some count slowness, but is patient toward you, not wishing for any to perish but for all to come to repentance.

[Sacchetto Boutique]

"Lakum deenukum waliya deeni"...
"To you be your religion, and to me be my religion"

[Habit7]

Yeah but "kal ho naa ho" and what is going to happen to you after?

[Sacchetto Boutique]

lol my post is the last line from a surah from the quran...
Everyone is entitled to their opinion and i respect ppl's opinion. I am not trying to force islam on any person and when ppl ask questions, I think its awesome bc it shows that that person is interested in gaining knowledge but when they ask inorder to make a mockery off and cause hatred, thats when i feel, there is no point in continuing anything. I honestly believe that no religion spreads hate but there are those who misinterpret religion and twist it to suit themselves and then an entire community is judged by the actions of a few. You know how many times I hear ppl refer to the women being treated badly in afghanistan? islam doesnt teach us to treate anyone badly but they change religion to suit themselves and then the wolrd believes it. As bad as ppl may try to make any particular religion, there will always be those who will continue to follow.

[Duane 3NE 2NR]

ah yes I forgot to address those claims in my last post - thanks for reminding me!

Before I begin, let me debunk your straw man tactics.

asking for proof or empirical evidence is a straw man?

I argue for the case of the God of the Bible, due the extensive historicity of the Bible,

What extensive historicity? You say the Bible tells us the earth is 6000 years old
where is the evidence?

the fulfilled prophetic nature of the Bible

What fulfilled prophecies?

and the supernatural impact of the Bible over many peoples and nations since its canonization (among other things).

Hindu's Muslims, Christians, Buddhists, even Voodoo / Voodooists claim the supernatural impact of their doctrine and practise over many peoples and nations. It is not exclusive to Christianity nor the flavour of Christianity you are apologetic for.

If you want to compare it to Norse or Greek mythology of children's fables as if they share equal footing then that is an argument you have to make.

it is considered to be Mythology now, but for the nearly 1000 years that the ancient Greek religion flourished in the civilized part of the world it was considered by its practitioners to be THE true religion!

Ancient Egyptian religion was practiced for over 3000 years from pre-history until the Roman empire and Egypt was the center of modern civilization and structure in those times. It was the major religion of the civilized world at that time. Who is to say that modern religions today will not suffer the same fate 1000 years from now? it may not even take that long given our exponentially growing global communication abilities.

Vedic religions such as Hinduism seem to have stood the test of time so far, being perhaps the oldest religion still being practiced today.

I however take responsibility for proofing the God of the Bible over all others as Creator, Saviour and Lord.

when do you plan to start?

There is proof for a creator being, you however wanted this proof to be limited to empirical science, which in my view is a fool's errand.

I'm not sure why you have retreated to this position. But first you claim there is empirical evidence, when asked to show it you retreat to claiming that scientific proof is too limited to prove the supernatural. When I ask about other supernatural claims such as the tooth fairy or Thor you claim those are just stories. AdamB says your stories are just stories too.

Empirical science represents science that is testable, repeatable and observable by agreed upon scientific principles. To have a god that can be subjected to this would mean that he either entered into his own creation or he is not God because is omnipotence is limited by the very creation he made and wholly exists in. A person of the Godhead of the Bible once entered into His own creation and though displaying divine attributes was rejected and submitted Himself to the castigation of His foes. What has not been said is that you believe that because God has come to you on your terms, He worthy of being disregarded. But He being God wants you to come to Him on His terms which primarily include faith (in His Word) and repentance. Otherwise you are no difference than Jesus contemporaries who even though being witnesses of His divine nature, still cried out for His crucifixion.

so basically what you are saying is that because God is supernatural, he can be what ever you say he is and there is no way to prove you wrong.

The same could be said by someone claiming to know magical Leprechauns. But most people will just think that they are crazy.

We scientists interpret evidence. We may analyse it for its veracity, but then we interpret. Evidence without interpretation is stuff.

LOL @ "we scientists"

call yourself what you want, but ignoring some proof just because it doesn't agree with your worldview is NOT science.

Science is wrong all the time, but then it uses the scientific method to correct itself.

*vortex too strong*
*must escape being sucked in to circular logic*

I can't see how this is circular. Science finds X to be true and so forms a hypothesis that X is true. It then repeatedly tests this hypothesis and finds X is true and forms a theory. New evidence or an anomaly is discovered and finds that X is not entirely true in all instances, the scientific process starts again testing X to form new hypotheses and theories. This is not circular logic, it is repeated testing.

At least science can admit when it is wrong and change it's conclusion. Religion does not do that.

AdamB’s interpretation is wrong because it is not based on truth. The apparent truth of AdamB's worldview is rife with contradiction of its Judeo-Christian foundation and internal contradiction such as the unjustness of Allah of the Quran, a point I dealt with prior.

You use terms such as "I dealt with" and "I defeated you" etc, but really you haven't brought up a point that couldnt be countered, of course other than your supernatural claims which according to you are immune from scrutiny.

You claim the Qur'an is wrong using an example of an unjust God, however you are using your own human concepts of just-ness to determine that Allah is unjust - but you claim I can't use natural concepts of proof to prove the supernatural. Make up your mind!

Back again to circular logic "the Bible is right because it says it is right" well then let us look into the Bible's individual claims and see if they are right as it claims to be?

OK!

I quote Dawkins to show that even ppl outside my camp disagrees with you.

agreement in numbers does not make something true or truer.

Science is not as absolute as you are making it out to be. BTW your example of acetaminophen is pretty poor, because beside rigorous drug testing to ensure its safety and effectiveness, doctors still have to hope that the drug is effective on their individual patient as it is with the general public.

but that hope is NOT part of the scientific process!!!

They can hope how much they want - the only way to see how effective it truly is, is through scientific testing. Hope will not change the result.

We are in "order." Any other configuration will be either order or disorder; disorder would result in nonexistence due to lack of order.

So you are saying any iteration is order therefore intelligent design?

What if our nose was on our foot and people drowned when walking in a puddle of water? Would that be intelligent design?

Like i mentioned before, I'm not sure what is so intelligent about having the same tube we use to breathe as the same tube we swallow food with. So we can suffocate if food gets stuck on its way down.

also shouldnt the greatest creation be able to fly on its own?

"the lack of what prior?" the lack of scientific law and principle could not allow for slight modifications over time to give us everything today, scientific law and principle had to come about instantly or established simultaneously with matter.

WHAT?!!!

so you think gravity only existed from the time when Newton discovered it?

the laws of physics have existed from the moment there was matter. However our learning about it has been gradual over time and using the scientific method to discover as we go along. Black holes have always existed, scientists are attempting to observe and then create hypotheses and theories based on those observations.

What makes the 5 year old worldview true?

the SAME thing that makes your worldview true apparently - because the book you read said it's true.

I know I am not following Hinduism, I am not required to according to Hinduism

[/quote]well you are doing what you want anyway!

[Duane 3NE 2NR]

There is no real,physical evidence that Jesus ever existed

but you are a Muslim, Jesus (Esa) is one of the most revered prophets in the Qur'an! Not so?

[Habit7]

Your straw man tactics I explained in the ensuing paragraph, which it seems you ignored and now I have to respond to your red herring. Logical fallacy much?

The Bible is the most verified book of antiquity, that is I refer to as the extensive historicity of the Bible.
Through the genealogies of the Bible we can establish an age of the Earth to be no earlier than 6,000 years and no later than 12,000 years.

What fulfilled prophecies?

We are going over covered ground viewtopic.php?f=4&t=267363&hilit=fulfilled&start=12900#p6880876

I don't doubt that other religions have had some impact, but which one exceeds Christianity?

Greek Mythology flourished until it encountered met Christianity, then it died. A lot of the New Testament is addressed to former adherents of Greek mythology as God's gospel message spread throughout to the Gentiles. Speaking of which, I see your graphic shows Judaism also having no starting point, then it shows a connecting line down where Christianity begins as some of the Jews of that time found the Messiah prophesied about since in the Garden of Eden. Those who disagree still to this day look out for a messiah. Just something you may have overlooked.

I have been since before ten pages ago viewtopic.php?f=4&t=267363&p=6884985&hilit=rationally#p6884985 come on, keep up.

But first you claim there is empirical evidence

Please, inform me where I did this.

so basically what you are saying is that because God is supernatural, he can be what ever you say he is and there is no way to prove you wrong.
The same could be said by someone claiming to know magical Leprechauns. But most people will just think that they are crazy.

Well let that someone argue for the existence magical Leprechauns. The existence of a Creator God that promises to judge every man according to his deeds, weighs in higher importance than Leprechauns, Tooth Fairies, Santa Claus and an alive Tupac Shakur all combined.

Being incredulous is not a counterpoint, evidence must be interpreted.

“Science is right because is corrected by the scientific method”
Welcome to circular logic  (don’t forget when leaving to exit through door you enter)

I am not using my own concept, I am using the moral concept ascribed in the Bible and followed in the Quran, and Allah’s justice is contradictory. You keep trying to equate AdamB’s worldview with mine yet you too are pointing out his own gross contradictions with the faith he claims to believe in and the words he types viewtopic.php?f=4&t=267363&start=13230#p6912471 . Be fair please.

Faith not being needed in science is view that doesn’t have widespread consensus within the scientific community, a community whose widespread view you rely on for your worldview and makes you so absolute about faith not being needed in science.

I never said hope effects the results.

If your nose was on your lowest appendage, you might have gone extinct way before you had a chance to walk anywhere. One might see us sharing the same “tube” for food and breath as unintelligent. But gratefully we have a redundancy with our nose to breathe while food is in our mouth. Furthermore that “tube” they share is relatively short before the epiglottis hinders your bolus of food from enters your air passage. There are muscles that controls peristalsis which controls the movement of the bolus to the stomach. In the rare event food enters the air passage there is a gag reflex to expel it. For the past 27 years I have never died from aspiration, and I am sure I can say the same for you.

WHAT?!!! so you think gravity only existed from the time when Newton discovered it?

It appears you misunderstood me. When I say prior, I mean before the earliest point of existence, science can conceive.

Is the book the 5 year old and I read of equal value?

I am falling into down into submission to the only wise God.