Page 68 of 89 FirstFirst ... 1858636465666768697071727378 ... LastLast
Results 1,341 to 1,360 of 1780
  1.    #1341  
    Quote Originally Posted by gsonspre View Post
    I was thinking about this post for some reason, ( I normally ignore anti god outbursts like this) but I was home today and cleaning up. Then I realized when I was vacuuming... My dog acts like Im her god! She always listens to everything I say, im the source of all of her fun, food and life! (im sure if she understood, she would pray to me too! )
    But when I vacuum she gets sooo nervous and scared.. My point here is she has no idea or understands why I do this awful, cruel thing... why would "her god" do something soo mean! And it makes me think of this question. I do it cause its neccassary (and my GF would kill me) but that is completely beyond her understanding, as is, why if there is a God we can not understand why he lets things happen that he does... IMO religious people paint this beautiful Da Vinci'esque picture of God, but no one really knows what his agenda is we just cant comprehend it bc no one can truly comprehend him!
    Wiser words were never spoken ...

    ... until this part!
    Quote Originally Posted by gsonspre View Post
    This thread helped me realize that I am not neccasarily anti God as I used to be (very much so) as much as I am anti-religion. Too many conflicts, too many figurative interpretations, too many people involved, too many religions and too many different beliefs in each religion.
    I'd say that with "so much chatter" and "every religion thinking they are right", that it would be easy to become disheartened with the whole "religion" thing.
    I'm both super! ... and a doer!
  2. #1342  
    Quote Originally Posted by sudoer View Post
    In effect, people who were given the Qu’ran are essentially believing in the "same God" as Catholics, other Christians, and J e w s.
    You're correct on this front yet, from my findings (which i'll explain in due course) the Gods are indeed the same, but the religion and varying practises/Holy books are artificial, apart from the Quran. Again strong words yes, but rest assured i will explain in due course.

    Quote Originally Posted by sudoer View Post
    I have yet to read and study the Qu’ran. If you believe Muhammad's word that the angel Gabriel (who is a real angel) gave him these words, and you agree with them that the parts of the Bible he rejected are true, then you should feel comfortable following it. Our Church teaches "public revelation" ended with what Jesus taught to the apostles. Any divine revelation received after the death of the last apostle (John, around 100 A.D.) can be used by individuals but is not binding on the faithful. When someone teaches contrary to this (such as Muhammad saying that the angel Gabriel gave him "some corrections"), we cannot agree with the teachings that they add (no matter how valuable or logical they might seem). I'm sure there is much value in Islam but since it differs from what Christ taught I'd only consider it I were to somehow prove to myself that the Christian message is incorrect (and I'm not "there" yet). I have a high degree of respect for people who faithfully follow their understanding from our one true God to the best as they understand his message.

    I'll try and address some of Shadow-360's initial comments and gsonspre's questions after this in some later posts I will make. (I really appreciate everyone's questions and I apologize that sometimes it takes me a few days to answer.)
    I actually began reading the background of (Prophet) Muhammed from when he was young, and then proceeded to the Quran, and it's revelation. In islam the beliefs are that Isa (Jesus) was a prophet, with no elevated status of such which would ascribe partners unto God (Some may call this trinity, calling him son of god is ascribing parters). The Quran mentions Jesus 25 times. And indeed, it coincides with Bible in that he has a virginal birth from Marium (Mary). He was neither killed nor crucified however, he was brought upto the heavens, from which he will come down near the day of judgement (Islam mentions many minor and major signs of the day of judgement (here and here), and i was shocked to find they are becoming a reality as we speak (what we merely pass off as a more 'westernized' culture).

    The angel jibra'il (Gabriel) didnt offer corrections as such but came to Muhammed in the cave of Hira (where he would often come to worship god alone in his own was, disregarding other religions as he thought they were corrupt) and revealed the words of God. Not all at once, but through a series of revelations at a time (some revelations were related to scenarios which happened, to which god replied, so to speak). These revelations were written on leaves and were memorized (whilst i'm on the topic, there are around 500,000 hafez! You may ask what is a hafez? It is a person who has memorized the whole quran - i find this a miracle in itself /admiring and unequalled by other major religions).

    Sorry for going off topic there. Didnt really address your statement, but on a somewhat related note, please, watch the following link, it will be most beneficial, and to all other's;



    Apologies for the delay in reply, will now address your direct statements to me . but firstly i must commend you, i really see youve thought about your beliefs, and it;s inspiring in every sense of the word.
    First Evar 1.4.0 Screenshot's Leaked By Your's Truly
  3. #1343  
    Quote Originally Posted by sudoer View Post
    If I haven't said so before, I applaud the approach you are using and I hope if you find God, He will give you blessings.
    Thankyou, that really helps, i must admit looking in depth into the religions is very time consuming but i am convinced it is worth i. (sorry if my posts seem slurred, i live in the UK, it's night, and i'm tired But i will do my best to answer )


    Quote Originally Posted by sudoer View Post
    Yes, but since we were each "writing about what we know", this meant we had to wait for someone knowledgeable to help us with Islam (and any other faith, for that matter). No faith is excluded from discussion and all are welcome when someone can explain their beliefs and why they believe what they do. I made this very clear early on in this thread.
    Yes you are correct, i feel i must thankyou for creating this thread, im sure it's been very beneficial and educational for all participants.

    Quote Originally Posted by sudoer View Post
    I believe the Bible is a book that requires a lot of effort to understand. It's rich set of writing styles as well as needing to understand the historical context when each book was written make this a challenge. I agree that the Bible can be easily misunderstood. I do not see the same major flaws that you do, so I'm assuming that simply means you likely have questions about the Bible that we should answer. I'm happy to research and answer any questions you have (given my time constraints as a "voluntary participant" here).
    You're correct on all accounts. I find the corruption of the bible in many areas have overwhelmed me in my research i must admit. I have a few questions, and will ask in due course, if you may. It's good to know someone like yourself is willing to answer, so thankyou.

    EDIT: The youtube video i linked to on trinity, whats your take on it?

    Quote Originally Posted by sudoer View Post
    Your logic impresses me! I shamefully must admit I never considered the possibility of what's outside of the universe if there is no God. I just assumed (mathematically, not logically) that the universe could be infinite. I respect the thought and logic you've put into this question.
    It's a well documented fact however the universe is not indeed infinite, and it is in coherence with what religion says. There is something outside the universe, and it is indeed expanding. So if the universe is finite, whats on the outside? This is where physics hits a dead end, because the laws of physics are only applicable inside the known universe, not outside it. Outside, anything goes, so to speak. Further proving God no?
    First Evar 1.4.0 Screenshot's Leaked By Your's Truly
  4. #1344  
    Quote Originally Posted by sudoer View Post
    Here is a beautiful introduction to Islam (as it should be seen by Catholics). I'm still reading it as I write this (well, I don't really multitask ).
    That content in the link you provided is accurate and has displayed the fundamental information on islam in the correct context. Yes, it's a very good reference. I just wish they would concentrate more on the actual Quranic teachings and the difference between it and other significant holy books. But on the whole, i'm happy for you to use that as reference.

    On a side note, a beautiful story i heard from a muslim regarding fasting when i enquired;

    When God created man, he created 3 things, the Mind (Intellect), the Soul, and Nafs (Desire). He asked each the following question, "who are you and who am i?"

    The mind replied; I am the intellect and you are my creator
    The soul replied; I am the soul and you are my creator

    However the desire replied; "You are you and i am i"

    On hearing this, God punished the Nafs. First in the scorching fires of hell for a 1000 years. upon this punishment he again asked the question to which the Nafs replied the same answer above. God then punished the Nafs in the freezing cold for a 1000 years, Upon return the same question asked, again same reply...

    This time, god starved the Nafs. Upon this punishment the Nafs (Desire) god asked "who are you and who am i?" to which the Nafs replied;

    " Iam the Nafs and you are my Creator".

    Fasting kills the desire so to speak, and 'recharges' the believers faith so to speak. For what many consider 'harsh' to be fasting for a month it has proved quite useful in their faith, i may try myself in the coming ramadhan for my own purposes hopefully.

    Ahh, i'm good at going off topic arent i?
    First Evar 1.4.0 Screenshot's Leaked By Your's Truly
  5.    #1345  
    Quote Originally Posted by Shadow-360 View Post
    EDIT: The youtube video i linked to on trinity, whats your take on it?
    Still watching it. I don't believe those in the video understand either the trinity or the bible.
    I'm both super! ... and a doer!
  6. #1346  
    Quote Originally Posted by sudoer View Post
    @Shadow-360,
    The above helped me tremendously in understanding Islam. I can see from what I read (without reading the apparently beautiful Qu’ran) the beauty you see here. I almost don't want to ask the questions which are on my mind. I promise I will ask them, but I want to pause in my writing to you so that others can appreciate the beauty of the faith you are seeking before I try to "discect" it.
    You know what tipped me towards looking away from the bible? Dr Zakir Naik. He is amazing, his knowledge of all religions is phonomenal, he knows all the major holy books by heart (it seems).

    I kid you not, the debate between the bible (By dr william campbell) vs Dr Zakir Naik (Quran) revealed to me how the Bible is wrong (in my opinion);

    Please, if you have anything to comment as to why he may be wrong, please state, but his logic is amazingly proficient and he provides evidence clearly and succintly;

    Part1;
    Part 2;

    Theres 10 parts (if you need the other links, feel free to ask, but theyre easy to find in YT), theyre short, and i recommend you and others watch the above.

    That being said, i'm still sceptical, it's hard to find criticism comments on his logic, if you could please comment as to how his statements are wrong, i'd much appreciate it.
    First Evar 1.4.0 Screenshot's Leaked By Your's Truly
  7.    #1347  
    Quote Originally Posted by Shadow-360 View Post
    (sorry if my posts seem slurred, i live in the UK, it's night, and i'm tired But i will do my best to answer )
    Let's just take our time (and hope the world does not end before we get to finish!)
    I'm both super! ... and a doer!
  8. #1348  
    Quote Originally Posted by sudoer View Post
    I knew you were checking out the PDK, so I figured you were busy.
    You know me too well kind sir

    Btw, please watch them Video links. He makes it seem so simple, i want to find criticism, but it's getting pretty frustrating finding anything which logically disproves him. Again, apologies for taking up your time. What's your take? I believe the questions he poses against the bible are pretty much most i have too.
    First Evar 1.4.0 Screenshot's Leaked By Your's Truly
  9.    #1349  
    Quote Originally Posted by Shadow-360 View Post
    You know me too well kind sir

    Btw, please watch them Video links. He makes it seem so simple, i want to find criticism, but it's getting pretty frustrating finding anything which logically disproves him. Again, apologies for taking up your time. What's your take? I believe the questions he poses against the bible are pretty much most i have too.
    His videos are totally new to me. I still haven't finished watching the first one you mentioned. I have to note all the Bible verses and what he says about them, then I have to study the verses and prepare answers. Giving you correct and complete answers will take me a considerable amount of time. The short of it is that this guy does not have a leg to stand on (in my opinion).
    I'm both super! ... and a doer!
  10. #1350  
    Quote Originally Posted by sudoer View Post
    His videos are totally new to me. I still haven't finished watching the first one you mentioned. I have to note all the Bible verses and what he says about them, then I have to study the verses and prepare answers. Giving you correct and complete answers will take me a considerable amount of time. The short of it is that this guy does not have a leg to stand on (in my opinion).
    Recommend watching, will take a good few hours, but are invaluable. Ahh, I forgot to mention, i sent you the links regarding the first section (solely willaim campbell).

    Dr Zakir naik's replies are here (1st part of part 2 the rest of the parts linked in YT); <---Better watching the video series below, much easier!

    No you dont need to do that (debunk each quote), it's fine. I understand that would be quite a lengthy process!

    Heres a better series of the video;



    I should advise to skip straight to part 8 (where Dr zakir naik starts to talk).
    Last edited by Adam Carr; 03/10/2010 at 07:02 PM.
    First Evar 1.4.0 Screenshot's Leaked By Your's Truly
  11. #1351  
    Hmmmm

    *Stops spamming now*

    EDIT: I am going to address your last question hopefully later on, i think it would be best in light of the recent videos (And not when im tired )
    Last edited by Adam Carr; 03/10/2010 at 07:11 PM.
    First Evar 1.4.0 Screenshot's Leaked By Your's Truly
  12.    #1352  
    Thanks for all the links. Here are some quick comments before I go to bed (feeling tired and it's only 8pm here).
    • I never heard anyone explain the trinity that way. (It sounded just plain weird.)
    • The doctrine of the trinity is supported totally in the Bible (although the word never appears).
    • Jesus had both human and divine natures. Most of his false conclusions are due to his not understanding this.
    • The RSV has the verse that he says was taken out.

    The way I would research this is to check everything he says the Bible says against the Catholic Church who defined the Bible and has defended this book for 2 millenniums. I can guarantee you brighter people than this dude have tried and all have failed so far.
    I'm both super! ... and a doer!
  13. #1353  
    Quote Originally Posted by sudoer View Post
    Thanks for all the links. Here are some quick comments before I go to bed (feeling tired and it's only 8pm here).
    • I never heard anyone explain the trinity that way. (It sounded just plain weird.)
    • The doctrine of the trinity is supported totally in the Bible (although the word never appears).
    • Jesus had both human and divine natures. Most of his false conclusions are due to his not understanding this.
    • The RSV has the verse that he says was taken out.

    The way I would research this is to check everything he says the Bible says against the Catholic Church who defined the Bible and has defended this book for 2 millenniums. I can guarantee you brighter people than this dude have tried and all have failed so far.
    Thanks, i would appreciate if you looked at the links. No problem, i should head to bed now (1:30 am here);

    Just want to address what you said;

    - In what way did you find it weird?
    - That was something which i found very hard to understand, divinity is not stated anywhere in the bible, so how can it be? Look at these;

    John 14:28: “My Father is greater than I"
    John 14:29: "My Father, which gave them me, is greater than all; and no man is able to pluck them out of my Father's hand."

    When Jesus begs the Father to save him, Doesnt it show that life and death is controlled by the Father and NOT Jesus?

    - I cant wrap my head around both human/divine natures. Could you please explain? Why did Jesus have a need to Eat?
    - All these revised bibles, different churches etc are some of the reasons i slowly crept away from the fold of Christianity. Theres no coherence, with the quran, theres one book, and one only. You wont find a revised edition.
    First Evar 1.4.0 Screenshot's Leaked By Your's Truly
  14. #1354  
    To qualify;
    I didn't say this was the "total" message, or even the "main" message of the Bible.
    Quote Originally Posted by berdinkerdickle View Post
    (This is the most fundamental part of this whole issue - We need to first truly appreciate this to understand why the father does what he does next, and why he does what he does when.)
    Quote Originally Posted by sudoer View Post
    I think the "main" message is that God established a "covenant" with Adam and God's covenants are never broken (by Him). In addition to always giving man free will, God also has always been waiting and giving man a chance to redeem "himself". In short, that's why he never wiped man off the Earth and started over.
    Yes, but man was never able to redeem himself:
    Psalm 49:7 Yet they cannot redeem themselves from death by paying a ransom to God.--
    So the need for Christ.

    God didn't wipe Noah out with the wicked because God saw good in Noah.
    Just as he didn't wipe out Lot in Sodom & Gomorrah.

    2 Pet 2:5-7
    5And God did not spare the ancient world—except for Noah and the seven others in his family. Noah warned the world of God’s righteous judgment. So God protected Noah when he destroyed the world of ungodly people with a vast flood. 6Later, God condemned the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah and turned them into heaps of ashes. He made them an example of what will happen to ungodly people. 7But God also rescued Lot out of Sodom because he was a righteous man who was sick of the shameful immorality of the wicked people around him.

    @dbd,
    thinking God could of finished the job by wiping out Noah along with the wicked doesn't sound just. Noah, though imperfect (sinful), wasn't wicked.
    Just call me Berd.
  15. #1355  
    Quote Originally Posted by berdinkerdickle View Post
    Part 2.
    A stranger from a distant land who wanted the wise and loving father's property, decided to try and get the children to turn against the wise and loving father. This stranger was cunning and figured if he could get the children to ignore the father's guidelines, they would now be subject to him.
    This stranger was a powerful person and yet was selfish and wanted more under his authority. He figured because he had this desire for independence that others would also want this independence. So that's what he appealed to. He told the children that their father wasn't looking out for their interest, but rather, was denying them this privileged to decide these things for themselves.
    (This is the most fundamental part of this whole issue - We need to first truly appreciate this to understand why the father does what he does next, and why he does what he does when.)



    to be continued.....
    Part 3.
    To continue this story, let's put ourselves in the place of the wise and loving father.
    Sudoer mentions the original covenant. A covenant is like a contract/agreement.
    You gave your children a home. You and them made an agreement. A stranger convinces your children to try and get out of this 'contract.' Your children have children of their own. Some of your grandchildren know of this original contract and want to get back into a good relationship with you. You are good with that. You love your grandchildren. So you immediately write a contract with them to help them get back what their parents lost.
    At certain times some of your grandchildren imitate their bad parents and rebel against the agreement you and them made. You don't evict all your grandchildren out of the land, you only evict those that refuse to live up the contract/covenant.

    to be continued.....
    Just call me Berd.
  16. #1356  
    About: YouTube - Dr. Zakir Naik Exposes a Major Error in the Bible

    Sorry If I sound harsh again but these all argument that one religion is more 'correct' than the other just because of a 'possible' 'maybe' 'semantic' variation in the word 'day' for the muslims as to opposite to 'day' for the catholics, making it more 'scientific', is just plain stupid. First because science never said earth was created in 6 'long periods' of anything, second because it based the age of earth on radiometric age dating of meteorite material not because it was 'said' in an old religious book. If one was to look for 'scientific' inconsistencies in the quran I'm sure there are many like when it's said that night and day exist because of the movement of the sun (instead of the earth) or that the earth is flat. These are just a couple of examples I've found just now, I'm sure there are many others. It makes sense for a person that lived centuries ago and had no notion of science whatsoever to imagine these astronomic absurdities. It shows how weak of an argument it is to try and justify your religion with science, it also just demonstrates how these books were written by people of different historical times with different notions of the universe and different morality and to follow them literally today is just stupid.
  17. #1357  
    Quote Originally Posted by dbd View Post
    why, if he truly wanted to end that system (back in Noah's Day),
    He only needed to end what was going on. The wickedness was what he removed.
    To illustrate: He didn't need to destroy the house, he just needed to get rid of the termites.

    how could he have left behind a "straggler" that was still connected to Adam?
    Since Noah was "born in sin", he had no chance to make things right. He was doomed from the get-go.
    No, Noah wasn't a 'straggler' he loved God and was loved by God.
    He obeyed God to his best ability, and it was counted to him as righteousness.
    There was no reason to destroy Noah along with the wicked. Sinner doesn't necessary equal wicked.
    We are all sinners, but doesn't mean we're wicked. Noah wasn't wicked.

    Using the illustration of these children who were given property and a home; Just because they messed up their opportunity, didn't mean that the wise and loving father didn't hope that others (the children of the children) might not want to be good tenants. If some of your children are bad, you don't kick them all out.
    Just call me Berd.
  18. #1358  
    What on Earth are you bantering on about?! Let's just disect the 'argument' you just made shall we;

    Quote Originally Posted by sloopjohnb View Post
    Sorry If I sound harsh again but these all argument that one religion is more 'correct' than the other just because of a 'possible' 'maybe' 'semantic' variation in the word 'day' for the muslims as to opposite to 'day' for the catholics, making it more 'scientific', is just plain stupid
    I'm pretty sure the argument of one religions legitimacy over another is not solely based upon one statement, it's many, combined.

    Okay, so what is the catholic's version of a 'day'? Please enlighten me.

    Quote Originally Posted by sloopjohnb View Post
    First because science never said earth was created in 6 'long periods' of anything
    Your point is? I think we know science never stated anything about 6 periods of the earths creating, so what exactly are you trying to get at here?

    All you just managed to say is that the bible mentions the earths creation through 6 days/ (periods for arguments sake) - and that it's not proved by science. which leaves a gaping fundamental hole in your logic.

    How do you explain fruit and vegetation being created on earth without sunlight? why is it so wrong to base a religions legitimacy on science?

    Surely if it coincides with science, then that is the perfect litmus test?

    Quote Originally Posted by sloopjohnb View Post
    second because it based the age of earth on radiometric age dating of meteorite material not because it was 'said' in an old religious book
    What are you getting at here then, that the bible is wrong?

    Quote Originally Posted by sloopjohnb View Post
    If one was to look for 'scientific' inconsistencies in the quran I'm sure there are many
    If you have any valid scientific inconsistencies, feel free to point them out, the ones you just mentioned are pure %^&*, and i will explain what i mean;

    Quote Originally Posted by sloopjohnb View Post
    when it's said that night and day exist because of the movement of the sun (instead of the earth)
    This is just plain ignorant, i'll just let the quotes do the talking;

    “The sun runs its coarse to a settled place That is the decree of the Almighty, the All Knowing.” Qur’an, 36:38

    Please explicitly specify quotes. And Using your logic, okay, the earth orbits, but there is no sun. wheres the day and night, without sunlight? Ponder on that.

    Quote Originally Posted by sloopjohnb View Post
    that the earth is flat
    Urgh, again, showing ignorance

    Seest thou not that Allah merges Night into Day and He merges Day into Night..(Al-Qur'an 31:29)

    Merging here means that the night slowly and gradually changes to day and vice versa. This phenomenon can only take place if the earth is spherical. If the earth was flat,there would have been a sudden change from night to day and from day to night.

    The following verse also alludes to the spherical shape of the earth:

    He created the heavens and the earth in true (proportion): He makes the Night overlap the Day, and the Day overlap the Night..(Al-Qur'an 39:5)

    The Arabic word used here is 'Kawwara' meaning 'to overlap' or 'to coil' - the way a turban is wound around the head. The overlapping or coiling of the day and night can take place if the earth is spherical. The earth is not exactly round like a ball, but geo-spherical, i.e. it is flattened at the poles.

    The following verse contains a description of the earths shape:

    "And the earth, moreover, hath He extended" (to a wide expanse). (Al-Qur'an 79:30)

    The Arabic word for egg here is 'Dahaha' which means an ostrich-egg. The shape of an ostrich-egg resembles the geo-spherical shape of the earth. footnote: The Arabic word Dahaha has been translated by A. Yusuf Ali as 'vast expanse', which is also correct. The word Dahaha also means an ostrich-egg.

    Quote Originally Posted by sloopjohnb View Post
    These are just a couple of examples I've found just now, I'm sure there are many others
    Correct me if im wrong, but i just rendered that particular argument invalid

    Quote Originally Posted by sloopjohnb View Post
    It makes sense for a person that lived centuries ago and had no notion of science whatsoever to imagine these astronomic absurdities
    If you say so sherlock

    Quote Originally Posted by sloopjohnb View Post
    It shows how weak of an argument it is to try and justify your religion with science
    I, on the other hand, just shown how strong it is. Isnt a religion which is scientifically correct ultimately better than one which directly conflicts with modern day science?

    Quote Originally Posted by sloopjohnb View Post
    to follow them literally today is just stupid
    Why? Because the bible cant be followed literally? So other religions are also at fault?

    Heres a few more quotes to ponder over (and please read, not post without researching, thankyou);

    “Do not the Unbelievers see that the heavens and the earth were joined together (as one Unit of Creation), before We clove them asunder?” [Al-Qur’aan 21:30]

    Big Bang proved right there by the quran, i'm pretty sure Muhammed didn't have access to sophisticated astronomical equipment during the time.

    “And it is We who have constructed the heaven with might, and verily, it is We who is steadily expanding it.” (The Qur’an, 51:47)

    The Quran explains how the universe is expanding! Comments?

    Sorry for being harsh, but i hope you can understand, it's just that i fail to find any reasoning behind your logic.
    Last edited by Adam Carr; 03/11/2010 at 12:05 PM.
    First Evar 1.4.0 Screenshot's Leaked By Your's Truly
  19. #1359  
    Shadow-360

    I will answer your comments.
    'I'm pretty sure the argument of one religions legitimacy over another is not solely based upon one statement, it's many, combined.

    Okay, so what is the catholic's version of a 'day'? Please enlighten me.'

    - I was refering to the specific video you posted where the legitimacy of the bible was questioned because it says earth was created in 6 days while the quran also says 6 days but the word 'day' in there can have different meanings. It's extremely vague and extremely biased to try to make a point that the quran is more 'accurate' scientifically than the bible, first because science never said that earth was created in 6 long periods of anything second because you are just choosing one of the possible meanings of day in the quran to try and stay 'a bit less' distanced from science. By the way, Catholic's day lasts 24h. I'm not trying to defend the bible, I believe, which is obvious, that both are wrong.


    'What are you getting at here then, that the bible is wrong?'

    - I'm saying both bible and quran are wrong, which is obvious.

    'If you have any valid scientific inconsistencies, feel free to point them out, the ones you just mentioned are pure %^&*, and i will explain what i mean;

    - I had to google a bit but I've found this: 'Quran 15: 19 And the earth We have spread out (like a carpet); set thereon Mountains firm and immovable';
    Well, so the earth is flat like a carpet and it hangs from immovable mountains? Allah just beated Eisntein with this one
    'Quran 18: 86 Till, when he (the traveller Zul-qarnain) reached the setting-place of the Sun, he found it going down into a muddy spring…' 'Quran 18: 90 Till, when he reached the rising-place of the Sun, he found it rising on a people for whom We had appointed no shelter from it.'
    So the sun has a setting place and a rising place? Hum... probably because the earth is flat right?

    'Quran 31: 29 Seest thou not that Allah merges Night into Day and He merges Day into Night; That He has subjected the sun and moon (to His law), each running its course for a term (time) appointed.
    Quran 21: 33 It is He who created The Night and Day, And the Sun and Moon; each of them Swim (float) along in its own course.'

    Hum.. So the moon AND the sun move around earth? And that's why we have day and night? Pretty predictable for a person with no education in modern science to look at the sky and imagine this.

    You do realize that ALL your interpretations of the quran are subjective and biased? Some passages are plain scientifically wrong and the ones you try to say are correct are totally subject to interpretation and biased feelings towards your specific religion.

    I'm not saying that the quran is wrong and the bilble is right or vice-versa. I'm just saying that believing in the quran instead of the bible because it's 'supposedly' more 'scientifically' accurate is just plain silly. That idea just died and it only took 5min and google to do it. Religion is based on faith, not science, and there's a logic for that because if it was science there would be no religion in the world today.
  20.    #1360  
    Quote Originally Posted by Shadow-360
    - In what way did you find it weird?
    Comparing the trinity to a (non-living) molecule seemed "impersonal". It didn't seem weird from an "intellectual" sense, but I never in my life ever heard any Christian describe the trinity using that analogy. The question/analogy felt like a "set-up" for Dr. Zakir to answer (rather than a legitimate characterization of what Christians understand).

    Quote Originally Posted by Shadow-360
    - I cant wrap my head around both human/divine natures. Could you please explain?
    I know I'm not the most qualified to answer this, so I might try and see if I can "phone a friend" (a non-Catholic Christian) who knows this area much better than me. Whether or not he's willing to help me (either by coaching or by answering directly) I will research and provide you the best explanation/understanding of this as I can. (If others want to jump in and explain things, you are welcome, and I will add to the discussion where I can.)
    I'm both super! ... and a doer!

Posting Permissions