The Religion Discussion

[bluefete]

The one common denominator amongst all people is DEATH! There is no escape from that. Science cannot even explain the process.

All the rational thinkers can only try to give a rational explanation.

Why do people and animals die?????????????

If there is no God, why do we not live forever????????

I mean, if God is not real then man should be all powerful and should be able to control the natural order of things.

Why is this not so???? Is it that the natural world is also subject to God?

that is some really terrible logic
you are saying because there is a God, that is why things die?

I do not think anything in the universe if infinite or immortal except God - even planets and stars die.

even if there are aliens far more powerful than us, they too will not live forever - though a life span of ten thousand years may seem like immortal to us humans who barely ever live past 100. In perspective, if a 'mayfly' was sentient, it would think we are immortal since an average mayfly life span lasts no more than 1 day, some species live for only 30 minutes, breed and then die. Surely we are more-or-less "immortal" when compared to them.

Trust you, Duane, to come with "logic" / rationalisation. At least you are consistent!

Basic question - Why do people and things die???? Rhetorically, your perspective on our "immortality" when compared to the "mayfly" is understandable. However, in the absence of God, why is there death? With the existence of God, a rationale is given for death.

Is it sufficient to say that in the natural world death just is?? Species and objects must give way so that new ones can come into existence. Will the cycle ever stop?

[996vtwin]

BTW Jesus (on him be peace) said : "None of those who call me 'Lord' will enter the kingdom of God, but only the one who does the will of my Father in heaven."[Matthew 7:21]

I love the misquotation here. If you must quote any scripture (Christian or otherwise) try to stick with the actual quotation of one's preferred translation - not with what you think it ought to be.

John 3:16-18
New International Version (NIV)
16 For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life. 17 For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but to save the world through him. 18 Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe stands condemned already because they have not believed in the name of God’s one and only Son.

[Humes]

I mean, if God is not real then man should be all powerful and should be able to control the natural order of things.

This is an incredibly stupid non-sequitur argument. It doesn't follow that the absence of an omnipotent being means that humans are omnipotent. How exactly did you make that link?

The absence of an omnipotent being is simply that: The absence of an omnipotent being. One not existing doh make the others stronger.

Yuh watching too much Highlander.

[bluefete]

he created us all not so, aren't we all his children?

Hey Mamoo: If God created us all why are there so many different religions with so many different Gods?

It always amazes me that the human construct is basically consistent across countries, culture and societies.

If there are so many different Gods that created all of us, how is it that not one of them thought it necessary to put an ear in the middle of our forehead or our noses where our thumbs are?

[Humes]

With the existence of God, a rationale is given for death.

Actually, with the existence of the Jumbie Marshmallow, a rationale is given for death as well.

The Jumbie Marshmallow is a grim maven who fools everyone into thinking the dead are dead, when in reality they're just taking a trip to Candyland.

See how easy it is to come up with a "rationale"?

Whatever science can't explain, it admits it can't explain, and keeps looking for an answer that can be supported by empirical evidence and/or sound logic. It doesn't just grasp at unfounded or unprovable stories to explain things.

[Humes]

And I guess it's as good a time as any to link a cool video.

[bluefete]

I mean, if God is not real then man should be all powerful and should be able to control the natural order of things.

This is an incredibly stupid non-sequitur argument. It doesn't follow that the absence of an omnipotent being means that humans are omnipotent. How exactly did you make that link?

The absence of an omnipotent being is simply that: The absence of an omnipotent being. One not existing doh make the others stronger.

Yuh watching too much Highlander.

Wha' is Highlander and noni-sequitur?

Anyways, in the absence of an omnipotent being, why is the void not filled by something else? Does not the natural world teach that a vacuum is soon filled or some such thing? I am not a physicist so the correct saying is cloudy in the mind at this time.

In the absence of an omnipotent being, is there any hope for eternal life?

[bluefete]

With the existence of God, a rationale is given for death.

Actually, with the existence of the Jumbie Marshmallow, a rationale is given for death as well.

The Jumbie Marshmallow is a grim maven who fools everyone into thinking the dead are dead, when in reality they're just taking a trip to Candyland.

See how easy it is to come up with a "rationale"?

Whatever science can't explain, it admits it can't explain, and keeps looking for an answer that can be supported by empirical evidence and/or sound logic. It doesn't just grasp at unfounded or unprovable stories to explain things.

Is God about empirical evidence and sound logic? Or is science afraid to admit that it owes its logic to a Supreme Being?

[bluefete]

Humes: At 1:58 in the video "If everyone agreed it was self evident (that God exists), there would be no one denying it."

Now from the US Declaration of Independence - "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. ..."

So is it self-evident that all men are created equal?? Or was that written just for show?

[996vtwin]

With the existence of God, a rationale is given for death.

Actually, with the existence of the Jumbie Marshmallow, a rationale is given for death as well.

The Jumbie Marshmallow is a grim maven who fools everyone into thinking the dead are dead, when in reality they're just taking a trip to Candyland.

See how easy it is to come up with a "rationale"?

Whatever science can't explain, it admits it can't explain, and keeps looking for an answer that can be supported by empirical evidence and/or sound logic. It doesn't just grasp at unfounded or unprovable stories to explain things.

So why do they persist with the idea of string theory?

[996vtwin]

he created us all not so, aren't we all his children?

Hey Mamoo: If God created us all why are there so many different religions with so many different Gods?

It always amazes me that the human construct is basically consistent across countries, culture and societies.

If there are so many different Gods that created all of us, how is it that not one of them thought it necessary to put an ear in the middle of our forehead or our noses where our thumbs are?

We were created in the image and likeness of him.

[mamoo_pagal]

he created us all not so, aren't we all his children?

Hey Mamoo: If God created us all why are there so many different religions with so many different Gods?

It always amazes me that the human construct is basically consistent across countries, culture and societies.

If there are so many different Gods that created all of us, how is it that not one of them thought it necessary to put an ear in the middle of our forehead or our noses where our thumbs are?

Am u still didn't answer the initial question l., based on the Bible didn't he create us all? Aren't we his children ?

[Kasey]

Who created God?

[sMASH]

It will be interesting if someone could interview Patrice Muamba and find out if he remembers anything when he was dead for "78" minutes. Like, which God did he see when he was dead?

That would verify whose religion is right, right?

But then the Bible says that the dead know nothing and are unconscious, like in a deep sleep.

if that person says that god is the way islam teaches, would u be willing to revert then?

he can say what ever he wants, that does not mean it is true and there is still no way to prove it, so it amounts to nothing by way of proof.

so in other words NO "spiritual" experience can ever be justified as it as an experience that is unique to the person who it experiences it (who knows if they are honest or not). Spiritual experiences can't really be proven so I guess all amounts to nothing?

I am confused: holy spirit, jinn, jumbie, angel, demon,atman,paratman.
No proof--->Nothing?

there may be spiritual experiences which are legitimate and others which can be misinterpretation due to a fanciful mind, also just plain manufacture.

the thing about a retelling of an account is that the only information about the event is provided as the subjects testimony. testimony alone is not enough to say that someone's spiritual experience is true. it may well be a manufactured vision that the person had while unconscious, or a misinterpretation of some events where a spiritual aspect is concocted.

lets do a verbal experiment. if i say that some woman down the road is a la diables, would u believe me? what i told u that i had a spiritual experience which led me to the knowledge that she is a la diables, would u believe me then?

the actuality of the woman is not the critical part here. she could be one or not. the thing is, how much proof that i have shown that she is something.

so, i am not doubting the spiritual experience of the person because i believe it is false, i am doubting it because they have not been able to prove it sufficiently.

same way i cannot prove to an atheist that there is a god by simply saying 'there is a god' nor can i prove that my religion is the one true religion by saying 'my religion is the one true religion'

just saying it does not make it real.

plenty things muslims come with i don't believe it cause they have not come with a good enough case.

but, whether it can be sufficiently proven or not, has no bearing on the actuality of the subject.... (until u get into quantum mechanics )


so by not being able to provide sufficient proof does not make it unreal.

[sMASH]

Who created God?

who created the universe!!!

[MG Man]

With the existence of God, a rationale is given for death.

Actually, with the existence of the Jumbie Marshmallow, a rationale is given for death as well.

The Jumbie Marshmallow is a grim maven who fools everyone into thinking the dead are dead, when in reality they're just taking a trip to Candyland.

See how easy it is to come up with a "rationale"?

Whatever science can't explain, it admits it can't explain, and keeps looking for an answer that can be supported by empirical evidence and/or sound logic. It doesn't just grasp at unfounded or unprovable stories to explain things.

So why do they persist with the idea of string theory?

because some think it's a viable theory worth pursuing...........

[d spike]

The absence of an omnipotent being is simply that: The absence of an omnipotent being. One not existing doh make the others stronger.

Anyways, in the absence of an omnipotent being, why is the void not filled by something else? Does not the natural world teach that a vacuum is soon filled or some such thing? I am not a physicist so the correct saying is cloudy in the mind at this time.

Humes explained your error in logic, but you are compounding that error by making yet another one.
The assumption of a void left behind by the absence of an omnipotent being is one that can only be made by a believer in the existence of that omnipotent being. Do you believe in the existence of a monster under your bed simply because there is an empty space under your bed?

he created us all not so, aren't we all his children?

Hey Mamoo: If God created us all why are there so many different religions with so many different Gods?

It always amazes me that the human construct is basically consistent across countries, culture and societies.

If there are so many different Gods that created all of us, how is it that not one of them thought it necessary to put an ear in the middle of our forehead or our noses where our thumbs are?

The existence of different religions with different Gods has been explained before. Finite mortals will not be able to experience all the facets of the infinite divine, and so the facets experienced will be expressed according to the experience itself and the culture in which the experience took place. (Recall my post about the six blind men and the elephant.)

Why this question?

If there are so many different Gods that created all of us, how is it that not one of them thought it necessary to put an ear in the middle of our forehead or our noses where our thumbs are?

Why the assumption that there are many gods? Who suggested this? This statement shows the absence of rational thinking...

[Duane 3NE 2NR]

Whatever science can't explain, it admits it can't explain, and keeps looking for an answer that can be supported by empirical evidence and/or sound logic. It doesn't just grasp at unfounded or unprovable stories to explain things.

So why do they persist with the idea of string theory?

same reason scientists persisted ages ago with the idea that the earth was not the center of the universe and the sun and moon did not rotate around the earth I guess.

[boostbeast]

Psalm 14:1-3 The fool says in his heart, "There is no God." ......i rest my case

[Duane 3NE 2NR]

^ good quote!

but how is it different from this one?

[scotty_buttons]

@ napkin religion
Good point there Duane.
I guess it depends on what people exercise their faith on. Faith is blind.. Whether its on the bible, quoran, bhagvad gita, etc being a book of truth.
Believing in something unseen is what faith really is and it's the basis of most if not all religions,if I'm not mistaken.

[AdamB]

BTW Jesus (on him be peace) said : "None of those who call me 'Lord' will enter the kingdom of God, but only the one who does the will of my Father in heaven."[Matthew 7:21]

I love the misquotation here. If you must quote any scripture (Christian or otherwise) try to stick with the actual quotation of one's preferred translation - not with what you think it ought to be.

There are many translations in THE ENGLISH LANGUAGE!! The content / meaning will be more or less the same. Quoted is the Catholic version...so your comment is directed to them...are they Christians or not?

Please quote YOUR preferred translation of that verse and explain what it means.

[AdamB]

BTW Jesus (on him be peace) said : "None of those who call me 'Lord' will enter the kingdom of God, but only the one who does the will of my Father in heaven."[Matthew 7:21]

I love the misquotation here. If you must quote any scripture (Christian or otherwise) try to stick with the actual quotation of one's preferred translation - not with what you think it ought to be.

John 3:16-18
New International Version (NIV)
16 For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life. 17 For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but to save the world through him. 18 Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe stands condemned already because they have not believed in the name of God’s one and only Son.

Jesus was not sent to you unless you are among the group below: pick your translation:

New International Version (©1984)
He answered, "I was sent only to the lost sheep of Israel."
New Living Translation (©2007)
Then Jesus said to the woman, "I was sent only to help God's lost sheep--the people of Israel."

English Standard Version (©2001)
He answered, “I was sent only to the lost sheep of the house of Israel.”

New American Standard Bible (©1995)
But He answered and said, "I was sent only to the lost sheep of the house of Israel."

King James Bible (Cambridge Ed.)
But he answered and said, I am not sent but unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel.

International Standard Version (©2008)
But he replied, "I was sent only to the lost sheep of the nation of Israel."

Aramaic Bible in Plain English (©2010)
But he answered and said to them, “I am not sent except to the sheep that have strayed from the house of Israel.”

GOD'S WORD® Translation (©1995)
Jesus responded, "I was sent only to the lost sheep of the nation of Israel."

King James 2000 Bible (©2003)
But he answered and said, I am not sent but unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel.

American King James Version
But he answered and said, I am not sent but to the lost sheep of the house of Israel.

American Standard Version
But he answered and said, I was not sent but unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel.

Douay-Rheims Bible
And he answering, said: I was not sent but to the sheep that are lost of the house of Israel.

Darby Bible Translation
But he answering said, I have not been sent save to the lost sheep of Israel's house.

English Revised Version
But he answered and said, I was not sent but unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel.

Webster's Bible Translation
But he answered and said, I am not sent but to the lost sheep of the house of Israel.

Weymouth New Testament
"I have only been sent to the lost sheep of the house of Israel," He replied.

World English Bible
But he answered, "I wasn't sent to anyone but the lost sheep of the house of Israel."

Young's Literal Translation
and he answering said, 'I was not sent except to the lost sheep of the house of Israel.'

[AdamB]

I just want to know where the muslims were, and what they were doing, when the romans were turning jesus into a conversation piece

MG, check the history books nah man...Prophet Muhammad was sent over six hundred years after Jesus.

BTW the muslims eventually defeated the Romans when they were ruling Syria - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muslim_conquest_of_Syria

[AdamB]

Dear Sir "For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life." Does this answer your question? God sent his son JESUS CHRIST to die for our sins. Whata loving God he is. He never sent Mohammed or any other prophet. The bible also speaks of false prophets and splits in religions. This was all prophesied before his death.

My friend,
If you disbelieve in any 1 of the prophets, then you have disbelieve in all including Jesus. So seek to rectify your affair, for you have disbelieved in the One True GOD.

Fact: There is NO historical EVIDENCE that Jesus ever existed. There is only the fabricated "shroud of Turin" by a jewish artifact collector. YET I BELIEVE HE EXISTED AND WAS A PROPHET TO THE JEWS 2000 YRS AGO.
Muslims don't say that any prophet is better or greater than any other but they are all equal. However look below at what men have said about this matter:

The verdict is in. Muhammad Is The Greatest Man Ever Lived

"MUHAMMAD WAS THE MOST SUCCESSFUL OF ALL RELIGIOUS PERSONALITIES." Encyclopedia Britannica, 11th Edition


1. IF GREATNESS OF PURPOSE, SMALLNESS OF MEANS AND ASTOUNDING RESULTS [The full quotation from Lamartine's book will be found in appendix''B" page 61.] ARE THE THREE CRITERIA OF HUMAN GENIUS, WHO COULD DARE TO COMPARE ANY GREAT MAN IN MODERN HISTORY WITH MUHUMMED? {Lamartine ends his lengthy segment of literary masterpiece with the words): . . . PHILOSOPHER, ORATOR, APOSTLE, LEGISLATOR, WARRIOR, CONQUEROR OF IDEAS, RESTORER OF RATIONAL BELIEFS, OF A CULT WITHOUT IMAGES: THE FOUNDER OF TWENTY TERRESTRIAL EMPIRES AND OF ONE SPIRITUAL EMPIRE, THAT IS MUHUMMED. AS REGARDS ALL STANDARDS BY WHICH HUMAN GREATNESS MAY BE MEASURED, WE MAY WELL ASK, IS THERE ANY MAN GREATER THEN HE? Lamartine, "Historie de la Turquie," Paris 1854

2. HE WAS CAESAR AND POPE IN ONE, BUT HE WAS POPE WITHOUT THE POPE'S PRETENTIONS, AND CAESAR WITHOUT THE LEGIONS OF CAESAR: WITHOUT A STANDING ARMY, WITHOUT A BODYGUARD, WITHOUT A PALACE, WITHOUT A FIXED REVENUE; IF EVER ANY MAN HAD THE RIGHT TO SAY THAT HE RULED BY THE RIGHT DIVINE, IT WAS MOHAMMAD, FOR HE HAD ALL THE POWERS WITHOUT ITS INSTRUMENTS AND WITHOUT ITS SUPPORTS." R. Bosworth Smith -Mohammad and Mohammadanism", London 1874, p. 92



3. "MY CHOICE OF MUHAMMAD TO LEAD THE LIST OF THE WORLD'S MOST INFLUENTIAL PERSONS MAY SURPRISE SOME READERS AND MAY BE QUESTIONED BY OTHERS, BUT HE WAS THE ONLY MAN IN HISTORY WHO WAS SUPREMELY SUCCESSFUL ON BOTH THE RELIGIOUS AND SECULAR LEVEL."
SINCE THERE ARE ROUGHLY TWICE AS MANY CHRISTIANS IN THE WORLD, IT MAY INITIALLY SEEM STRANGE THAT MUHAMMAD HAS BEEN RANKED HIGHER THAN JESUS. THERE ARE TWO PRINCIPAL REASONS FOR THAT DECISION.
FIRST, MUHAMMAD PLAYED A FAR MORE IMPORTANT ROLE IN THE EVELOPMENT OF ISLAM THAN JESUS DID IN THE DEVELOPMENT OF CHRISTIANITY. ALTHOUGH JESUS WAS RESPONSIBLE FOR THE MAIN ETHICAL AND MORAL PRECEPTS OF CHRISTIANITY (INSOFAR AS THESE DIFFERED FROM JUDAISM), ST. PAUL WAS THE MAIN DEVELOPER OF CHRISTIAN THEOLOGY, ITS PRINCIPAL
PROSELYTIZER, AND THE AUTHOR OF A LARGE PORTION OF THE NEW TESTAMENT.
MUHAMMAD, HOWEVER, WAS RESPONSIBLE FOR BOTH THE THEOLOGY OF ISLAM AND ITS MAIN ETHICAL AND MORAL PRINCIPLES. IN ADDITION, HE PLAYED THE KEY ROLE IN PROSELYTIZING THE NEW FAITH, AND IN ESTABLISHING THE RELIGIOUS PRACTICES OF ISLAM.
Michael H. Hart "The 100: A Ranking of the Most Influential Persons in History", New York: Hart Publishing Company, Inc., 1978,

4. "FOUR YEARS AFTER THE DEATH OF JUSTINIAN, A.D. 569, WAS BORN AT MAKKAH, IN ARABIA THE MAN WHO, OF ALL MEN EXERCISED THE GREATEST INFLUENCE UPON THE HUMAN RACE , MUHAMMAD , " John William Draper, M.D., LLD., in his "A History of the lntellectual Development of Europe",- London 1875.


5. "MUHUMMAD WAS THE SOUL OF KINDNESS, AND HIS INFLUENCE WAS FELT AND NEVER FORGOTTEN BY THOSE AROUND HIM." A Hindu scholar - Diwan Chand Sharma in his "The Prophets of the East," Calcutta 1935, p. 122.

6. "FOUR YEARS AFTER THE DEATH OF JUSTINIAN, A.D. 569, WAS BORN AT MAKKAH, IN ARABIA THE MAN WHO, OF ALL MEN EXERCISED THE GREATEST INFLUENCE UPON THE HUMAN RACE , MUHAMMAD , " John William Draper, M.D., LLD., in his "A History of the lntellectual Development of Europe",- London 1875.

7. "I DOUBT WHETHER ANY MAN WHOSE EXTERNAL CONDITIONS CHANGED SO MUCH EVER CHANGED HIMSELF LESS TO MEET THEM." R. V. C. Bodley in "The Messenger,"- London 1946, p.9.

8. "I HAVE STUDIED HIM - THE WONDERFUL MAN - AND IN MY OPINION FAR FROM BEING AN ANTI-CHRIST, HE MUST BE CALLED THE SAVIOUR OF HUMANITY." George Bernard Shaw, in "The Genuine Islam,- Vol. 1, No. 81936.

9. "BY A FORTUNE ABSOLUTELY UNIQUE IN HISTORY, MUHAMMAD IS A THREEFOLD FOUNDER OF A NATION, OF AN EMPIRE, AND OF A RELIGION." R. Bosworth-Smith in "Muhammad and Muhammadanism".- 1946.

10. "MUHAMMAD WAS THE MOST SUCCESSFUL OF ALL RELIGIOUS PERSONALITIES." Encyclopedia Britannica, 11th Edition

11. "THE GREAT MAN'S SINCERITY IS OF THE KIND HE CANNOT SPEAK OF: NAY, I SUPPOSE, HE IS CONSCIOUS RATHER OF INSINCERITY; FOR WHAT MAN CAN WALK ACCURATELY BY THE LAW OF TRUTH FOR ONE DAY? NO, THE GREAT MAN DOES NOT BOAST HIMSELF SINCERE, FAR FROM THAT; PERHAPS DOES NOT ASK HIMSELF IF HE IS SO: I WOULD SAY RATHER, HIS SINCERITY DOES NOT DEPEND ON HIMSELF: HE CANNOT HELP BEING SINCERE!" Heros and Hero-Worship, p.59

12. "A SILENT GREAT SOUL, HE WAS ONE OF THOSE WHO CANNOT BUT BE IN EARNEST, WHOM NATURE HERSELF HAS APPOINTED TO BE SINCERE. WHILE OTHERS WALK IN FORMULAS AND HEARSAYS, CONTENTED ENOUGH TO DWELL THERE, THIS MAN COULD NOT SCREEN HIMSELF IN FORMULAS; HE WAS ALONE WITH HIS OWN SOUL AND THE REALITY OF THINGS . . . SUCH SINCERITY, AS WE NAMED IT, HAS IN VERY TRUTH SOMETHING OF DIVINE. THE WORD OF SUCH A MAN IS A VOICE DIRECT FROM NATURE'S OWN HEART. MEN DO AND MUST LISTEN TO THAT AS TO NOTHING ELSE, - - - ALL ELSE IS WIND IN COMPARISON." Heros and Hero-Worship, p.71


13. "PHILOSOPHER, ORATOR, APOSTLE, LEGISLATOR, WARRIOR, CONQUEROR OF IDEAS, RESTORER OF RATIONAL DOGMAS, OF A CULT WITHOUT IMAGES; THE FOUNDER OF TWENTY TERRESTRIAL EMPIRES AND OF ONE SPIRITUAL EMPIRE, THAT IS MUHAMMAD. AS REGARDS ALL STANDARDS BY WHICH HUMAN GREATNESS MAY BE MEASURED, WE MAY WELL ASK, IS THERE ANY MAN GREATER THAN HE?"
[lamartine, histoire de la turquie, paris, 1854, vol. ii, pp. 276-277.]


14. "THE PERSONALITY OF MUHAMMAD, IT IS MOST DIFFICULT TO GET INTO THE WHOLE TRUTH OF IT. ONLY A GLIMPSE OF IT I CAN CATCH. WHAT A DRAMATIC SUCCESSION OF PICTURESQUE SCENES. THERE IS MUHAMMAD THE PROPHET. THERE IS MUHAMMAD THE WARRIOR; MUHAMMAD THE BUSINESSMAN; MUHAMMAD THE STATESMAN; MUHAMMAD THE ORATOR; MUHAMMAD THE REFORMER; MUHAMMAD THE REFUGE OF ORPHANS; MUHAMMAD THE PROTECTOR OF SLAVES; MUHAMMAD THE EMANCIPATOR OF WOMEN; MUHAMMAD THE JUDGE; MUHAMMAD THE SAINT. ALL IN ALL THESE MAGNIFICENT ROLES, IN ALL THESE DEPARTMENTS OF HUMAN ACTIVITIES, HE IS ALIKE A HERO."
Ramakrishna rao, an indian (hindu) professor of philosophy,


15. "THE LEAGUE OF NATIONS FOUNDED BY THE PROPHET OF ISLAM PUT THE PRINCIPLE OF INTERNATIONAL UNITY AND HUMAN BROTHERHOOD ON SUCH UNIVERSAL FOUNDATIONS AS TO SHOW CANDLE TO OTHER NATIONS." HE CONTINUES, "THE FACT IS THAT NO NATION OF THE WORLD CAN SHOW A PARALLEL TO WHAT ISLAM HAS DONE TOWARDS THE REALIZATION OF THE IDEA OF THE LEAGUE OF NATIONS."
IN THE WORDS OF PROFESSOR HURGRONJE:

16. "I BELIEVE IN ONE GOD, AND MAHOMET, AN APOSTLE OF GOD' IS THE SIMPLE AND INVARIABLE PROFESSION OF ISLAM. THE INTELLECTUAL IMAGE OF THE DEITY HAS NEVER BEEN DEGRADED BY ANY VISIBLE IDOL; THE HONOR OF THE PROPHET HAVE NEVER TRANSGRESSED THE MEASURE OF HUMAN VIRTUES; AND HIS LIVING PRECEPTS HAVE RESTRAINED THE GRATITUDE OF HIS DISCIPLES WITHIN THE BOUNDS OF REASON AND RELIGION."
[history of the saracen empires, london, 1870 by edward gibbon and simon ockley, p. 54]


17. "PHILOSOPHER, ORATOR, APOSTLE, LEGISLATOR, CONQUEROR OF IDEAS, RESTORER OF RATIONAL BELIEFS, THE FOUNDER OF TWENTY TERRESTRIAL EMPIRES AND OF ONE SPIRITUAL EMPIRE THAT IS MUHAMMAD. AS REGARDS ALL STANDARDS BY WHICH HUMAN GREATNESS MAY BE MEASURED, WE MAY WELL ASK, IS THERE ANY MAN GREATER THAN HE?"

Alphonse De Lamartaine In 'Historie De La Turquie,' Paris, 1854




18. "PERHAPS THE GREATEST LEADER OF ALL TIMES WAS MOHAMMAD, WHO COMBINED ALL THE THREE FUNCTIONS. TO A LESSER DEGREE MOSES DID THE SAME."
Jules Masserman In 'Who Were Histories Great Leaders?' In Time Magazine, July 15, 1974


19. "TO THE ARAB NATION IT WAS A BIRTH FROM DARKNESS INTO LIGHT; ARABIA FIRST BECOME ALIVE BY MEANS OF IT. A POOR SHEPHERD PEOPLE ,ROAMING UNNOTICED IN ITS DESERTS SINCE THE CREATION OF THE WORLD, A HERO-PROPHET WAS SENT DOWN TO THEM WITH A WORD THEY COULD BELIEVE: SEE, THE UNNOTICED BECOMES WORLD-NOTABLE, THE SMALL HAS GROWN WORLD-GREAT,' WITHIN ONE CENTURY AFTERWARD, ARABIA IS AT GRENADA ON THIS HAND, DELHI ON THAT, GLANCING IN VALOR AND SPLENDOR AND THE LIGHT OF GENIUS, ARABIA SHINES THROUGH LONG AGES OVER A SECTION OF THE WORLD. BELIEF IS GREAT, LONG-LIVING, THE HISTORY OF A NATION BECOMES FRUITFUL, SOUL-ELEVATING, GREAT, SO SOON AS IT BELIEVES. THESE ARABS, THE MAN MAHOMET AND THAT ONE CENTURY-IS IT NOT AS IF A SPARK HAD FALLEN, ONE SPARK, ON A WORLD OF WHAT SEEMED BLACK, UNNOTICEABLE SAND, BUT, THE SAND PROVES EXPLOSIVE POWDER, BLAZES HEAVEN-HIGH FROM DELHI TO GRENADA. I SAID ,THE GREAT MAN WAS ALWAYS A LIGHTNING OUT OF HEAVEN; THE REST OF MEN WAITED FOR HIM LIKE FUEL AND THEN THEY TOO WOULD FLAME." --- [Thomas Carlyle In Heroes And Hero-Worship]

[AdamB]

Whatever science can't explain, it admits it can't explain, and keeps looking for an answer that can be supported by empirical evidence and/or sound logic. It doesn't just grasp at unfounded or unprovable stories to explain things.

So why do they persist with the idea of string theory?

same reason scientists persisted ages ago with the idea that the earth was not the center of the universe and the sun and moon did not rotate around the earth I guess.

I remember from my O'Level History days that Columbus (or some seamen) was afraid to fall off the edge of the Earth because the earth was flat.
Earth is geo-spherical in shape
The Quran mentions the actual shape of the earth in the following verse: “And we have made the earth egg shaped”. [Al-Quran 79:30]

The Arabic word Dahaha means egg shaped. It also means an expanse. Dahaha is derived from Duhiya which specifically refers to the egg of an ostrich which is geo-spherical in shape, exactly like the shape of the earth.

Thus the Quran and modern established science are in perfect harmony.

[sMASH]

With the existence of God, a rationale is given for death.

Actually, with the existence of the Jumbie Marshmallow, a rationale is given for death as well.

The Jumbie Marshmallow is a grim maven who fools everyone into thinking the dead are dead, when in reality they're just taking a trip to Candyland.

See how easy it is to come up with a "rationale"?

Whatever science can't explain, it admits it can't explain, and keeps looking for an answer that can be supported by empirical evidence and/or sound logic. It doesn't just grasp at unfounded or unprovable stories to explain things.

So why do they persist with the idea of string theory?

what do u think is their purpose for pursuing these endeavors ?

[bluefete]

AdamB: Undoubtedly, Mohammed was all those things. However, did he raise people from the dead and give sight to people who were born blind?

It is true that some ancient prophets (Elijah, for example) raised people from the dead. However, Jesus' purpose was far greater.

There were instances when people came to crown him king and he ran away. He often said that His kingdom was not of this world.

I reproduce the following essay for you:

One Solitary Life

He was born in an obscure village
The child of a peasant woman
He grew up in another obscure village
Where he worked in a carpenter shop
Until he was thirty

He never wrote a book
He never held an office
He never went to college
He never visited a big city
He never travelled more than two hundred miles
From the place where he was born
He did none of the things
Usually associated with greatness
He had no credentials but himself

He was only thirty three

His friends ran away
One of them denied him
He was turned over to his enemies
And went through the mockery of a trial
He was nailed to a cross between two thieves
While dying, his executioners gambled for his clothing
The only property he had on earth

When he was dead
He was laid in a borrowed grave
Through the pity of a friend

Nineteen centuries have come and gone
And today Jesus is the central figure of the human race
And the leader of mankind's progress
All the armies that have ever marched
All the navies that have ever sailed
All the parliaments that have ever sat
All the kings that ever reigned put together
Have not affected the life of mankind on earth
As powerfully as that one solitary life

Dr James Allan Francis © 1926.



What did Napoleon Bonaparte say about Jesus?

Napoleon I (1769 -1821) was the emperor of France and one of the greatest military commanders of all time. Napoleon knew about shaping history!

"I know men and I tell you that Jesus Christ is no mere man. Between him and every other person in the world there is no possible term of comparison. Alexander, Caesar, Charlemagne, and I founded empires but on what did we rest the creations of our genius? Upon force.

Jesus Christ founded His empire upon love; and at this hour millions of people would die for Him." 2

"Everything in Christ astonishes me. His spirit overawes me, and His will confounds me ... I search in vain in history to find the similar to Jesus Christ, or anything that can approach the gospel." 3

1 Quoted from "Napoleon I," Microsoft (R) Encarta. Copyright (c) 1994 Microsoft Corporation. Copyright (c) 1994 Funk & Wagnall's Corporation.
2 Josh McDowell, Evidence That Demands a Verdict, Here's Life Publishers, San Bernardino, 25th printing, June 1986, page 127.
3 Josh McDowell, Evidence That Demands a Verdict, ibid, page 106.

http://www.changinglivesonline.org/solitary-life.html

[bluefete]

I remember from my O'Level History days that Columbus (or some seamen) was afraid to fall off the edge of the Earth because the earth was flat.
Earth is geo-spherical in shape
The Quran mentions the actual shape of the earth in the following verse: “And we have made the earth egg shaped”. [Al-Quran 79:30]

The Arabic word Dahaha means egg shaped. It also means an expanse. Dahaha is derived from Duhiya which specifically refers to the egg of an ostrich which is geo-spherical in shape, exactly like the shape of the earth.

Thus the Quran and modern established science are in perfect harmony.

If the angel Jibreel (Gabriel) gave God's word to Muhammed and he is the same angel who appeared to Daneil and Mary then there should be consistency in the messages he delivered.

The Bible also mentions:

"It is he that sitteth upon the circle of the earth, and the inhabitants thereof are as grasshoppers; that stretcheth out the heavens as a curtain, and spreadeth them out as a tent to dwell in:" (Isaiah 40:22).

We can quibble about the term "circle" but the essential meaning is clear. Both the Qu'ran and the Bible mention that the earth is round!

However, did the angel Jibreel say anything about Jesus Christ to Muhammed?

[Humes]

Humes: At 1:58 in the video "If everyone agreed it was self evident (that God exists), there would be no one denying it."

Now from the US Declaration of Independence - "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. ..."

So is it self-evident that all men are created equal?? Or was that written just for show?

It was just written for show, bluefete. It was written by politicians. It represents an ideal, not any sort of provable or objective reality.

What's your real point?