Islam is of the Devil?

#77
#77
turambar85 said:
Ignoring the fact that logical scientists believe it...and it sure beats the hell out of an invisible megalomaniacal superman with a worship fetish.
Click to expand...

Exactly how? Science had been dead wrong far more than it has been right in our history.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#78
#78
BigPapaVol said:
Exactly how? Science had been dead wrong far more than it has been right in our history.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
Click to expand...

But yet, unlike religion, it has been right at times. And, science is working with testable date, and is progressing by eliminating false hypothesis. Religion, stuck in the stone age.

And, this is obviously ignoring the fact that my post was in response so someone saying that it wasn't logical or scientific. Denouncing science doesn't refute my post.
 
#80
#80
turambar85 said:
But yet, unlike religion, it has been right at times. And, science is working with testable date, and is progressing by eliminating false hypothesis. Religion, stuck in the stone age.
Click to expand...

How are those cutting edge Big Bang and evolution tests going?
 
#81
#81
kptvol said:
How are those cutting edge Big Bang and evolution tests going?
Click to expand...

Evolution, pretty well. Logical extrapolation from the fossil records, and the existence of species. The fact that it explains all life, with likely necessary and definitely sufficient conditions.

The big bang? Better than this ridiculous creation story, through which human culture and society apparently developed over night to satisfy the young earth lunatics.
 
#82
#82
kptvol said:
How are those cutting edge Big Bang and evolution tests going?
Click to expand...

Not to mention, science doesn't have to answer an origin question to eliminate false hypothesis like religion. For example, science does not have to say exactly how the galaxy got here to say that it clearly did not happen from somebody microwaving a milky way bar in a universal microwave. Absurd beliefs can simply be discarded, the lack of sciences ability to guarantee an answer to the origin question doesn't reflect poorly on it's being a better option.
 
#83
#83
turambar85 said:
Evolution, pretty well. Logical extrapolation from the fossil records, and the existence of species. The fact that it explains all life, with likely necessary and definitely sufficient conditions.

The big bang? Better than this ridiculous creation story, through which human culture and society apparently developed over night to satisfy the young earth lunatics.
Click to expand...

Why couldn't a higher power have set off evolution? There is no reason the two theories can't coexist.

And don't be so close minded that you dismiss the whole creation theory based on periods of time listed in the Bible. "7 days" doesn't necessarily refer to the same amount of time we would consider a week.
 
#84
#84
turambar85 said:
Not to mention, science doesn't have to answer an origin question to eliminate false hypothesis like religion. For example, science does not have to say exactly how the galaxy got here to say that it clearly did not happen from somebody microwaving a milky way bar in a universal microwave. Absurd beliefs can simply be discarded, the lack of sciences ability to guarantee an answer to the origin question doesn't reflect poorly on it's being a better option.
Click to expand...
I can understand logic and evidence behind evolution, but the big bang theory doesn't seem to be much more than a guess.
 
#85
#85
tvolsfan said:
You can say that if you want to. It doesn't sound the least bit logical or scientific, does it?
Click to expand...

It doesn't sound scientific in the least. I was just illustrating the fact that by even by the absurd rules the theologians play, the explanation of everything regressing back to an unmoved mover still fails.

You have your opinion and I have mine. If the theologians and believers want to lay credence to an explanation that everything regresses back to an unmoved mover, my unmoved mover is going to be something I can actually see and study.

The "We don't know, so why say it's God?" approach is still best, IMO.
 
#86
#86
BigPapaVol said:
Exactly how? Science had been dead wrong far more than it has been right in our history.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
Click to expand...

I would say religious and superstitious belief fails in this regard as well. Take into account that since the dawn of man there has been consistent increase in standard of living as a whole....and that is primarily due to scientific discovery and a healthy curiousity about how everything works, and science is far more beneficial and practical than religion can ever dream to be.
 
#87
#87
tvolsfan said:
Why couldn't a higher power have set off evolution? There is no reason the two theories can't coexist.

And don't be so close minded that you dismiss the whole creation theory based on periods of time listed in the Bible. "7 days" doesn't necessarily refer to the same amount of time we would consider a week.
Click to expand...

Personally, the whole bit about lush gardens, talking snakes, and magic fruit make the idea of dismissing the creation "theory" rather easy for me.
 
#88
#88
turambar85 said:
Evolution, pretty well. Logical extrapolation from the fossil records, and the existence of species. The fact that it explains all life, with likely necessary and definitely sufficient conditions.

The big bang? Better than this ridiculous creation story, through which human culture and society apparently developed over night to satisfy the young earth lunatics.
Click to expand...

That pretty much doesn't go with your "at least science is based on data that can be tested". And you really think the creation stories were created overnight? And a lot of those fossils that have been used as evidence for the evolution of man have been exposed as misinterpretations.
 
#89
#89
turambar85 said:
Not to mention, science doesn't have to answer an origin question to eliminate false hypothesis like religion. For example, science does not have to say exactly how the galaxy got here to say that it clearly did not happen from somebody microwaving a milky way bar in a universal microwave. Absurd beliefs can simply be discarded, the lack of sciences ability to guarantee an answer to the origin question doesn't reflect poorly on it's being a better option.
Click to expand...

Science is awesome because I can use experiments to prove/disprove my hypotheses. And if no experiment is possible, I can just throw out the stuff I don't believe and call it ridiculous. I guess I just missed that part of the scientific method.
 
#90
#90
I am a Christian and nothing will ever shake my faith. You can not tell me that this is by chance and that there is not someone out there who does not care about me and listens too my prayers.
 
#91
#91
kptvol said:
Science is awesome because I can use experiments to prove/disprove my hypotheses. And if no experiment is possible, I can just throw out the stuff I don't believe and call it ridiculous. I guess I just missed that part of the scientific method.
Click to expand...

Excellent point!
Science is a very convient vail for people with no faith.
 
#92
#92
rjd970 said:
Personally, the whole bit about lush gardens, talking snakes, and magic fruit make the idea of dismissing the creation "theory" rather easy for me.
Click to expand...

And it should, since it sounds like something out of a Harry Potter movie. However, most clergy of Jewish, Islamic and Christian faiths don't believe it either.
 
#93
#93
MontereyVol said:
And it should, since it sounds like something out of a Harry Potter movie. However, most clergy of Jewish, Islamic and Christian faiths don't believe it either.
Click to expand...

SSHHHH......that blows his whole "I'm too intellegent to believe that crap" theory.
 
#94
#94
T-TownVol said:
SSHHHH......that blows his whole "I'm too intellegent to believe that crap" theory.
Click to expand...

Most of those arguments come from people who have never had the opportunity to actually talk to someone who has devoted their life to the subject that has an open mind.

I went through a whole slew of idiotic priest and imams until I found some who actually would talk to you without calling you evil. On the flip side most Rabbi's like nothing more than to be challenged.
 
#95
#95
turambar85 said:
Well, as for your second post, you really need to improve your understanding of history. It is verrrrry selective. Christianity, at around the same point in it's temporal development as Islam, was as violent and aggressive. (not at all true, gs) After basically the same time in existence, the Christian world was mired in crusades, witch burnings, and religious persecution. They didn't accept other versions of Christianity, and were killing each other. Not to mention, Muslims doing evil things does NOT make Muhammed evil! (but Muhammed doing evil this does make him evil.)

It isn't Islam that is evil, it is religion that tends to be so. Lucky for us, the Christian west has had a steady infusion of secularism to dampen the evils of a religious state. Islam is Christianity without the benefits of a secular governing system.

As for your first paragraph, I'm confused as to your definition of proof. Jesus cannot prove anything, as you cannot tell a false experience of Christ from a true one. The mystics, Muslims, Hindi, etc. all have vivid experiences that they base their entire life on. Religion is built on faith, and faith does not rest of proof. Again, "Jesus" cannot prove "himself" at any moment, because "Jesus" cannot prove "himself at all. (Mr T has it right.)

Not to mention, even above and beyond these difficulties of proof, Jesus isn't real. He is a long decomposed Jewish body, the most "he" can hope is that the body isn't entirely decomposed. That would be the miracle! (Khristos voskreshnie.)
Click to expand...

Muhammed was an illiterate man who was more violent that Charles Manson.

Study your own history, I've had this discussion countless times with those who have been brainwashed into believeing what you do, I don't see any of the previous debaters even on this board anymore.

How can you read the koran and not say that islam itself is evil??

I%20pity%20the%20fool!.jpg
 
#96
#96
gsvol said:
Muhammed was an illiterate man who was more violent that Charles Manson.

Study your own history, I've had this discussion countless times with those who have been brainwashed into believeing what you do,
Click to expand...

Maybe thats the problem?

gsvol said:
I don't see any of the previous debaters even on this board anymore.

How can you read the koran and not say that islam itself is evil??
Click to expand...

Have you read the Koran? Do you understand what the rift is in interpreting it?
 
#97
#97
rjd970 said:
I would say religious and superstitious belief fails in this regard as well. Take into account that since the dawn of man there has been consistent increase in standard of living as a whole....and that is primarily due to scientific discovery and a healthy curiousity about how everything works, and science is far more beneficial and practical than religion can ever dream to be.
Click to expand...
I simply asked how one was so much more believable than the other.
 
#99
#99
MontereyVol said:
Maybe thats the problem?



Have you read the Koran? Do you understand what the rift is in interpreting it?
Click to expand...

I am not sure what you are referring to. I do know there are multiple copies of the Koran. Some have been edited to be more peace minded. The original version is quite violent from my understanding. Although, it is sectional. In one part you are reading it is all rainbows and peace loving. Then in the next it is all describing in detail how to butcher a man if he does not except Allah. I think it goes cut off left arm the right arm then head. I mean I always found that to be very odd when reading it.

Is the mutiple copies the rift you speak of? :dunno:

I am truly curious btw.
 
#100
#100
The Different Arabic Versions of the Qur'an Koran Quran

I think we are both thinking of same thing. There are different versions based on the people who transcribed it to text. Then after that there are dmbed down Qurans when translated to English. In fact sometimes it may say in Arabic "chop his head off" and then in the English version it wills say punish him appropriately lol. It was an intentional thing done to appease English speakers.

But I think you are referring more to the multiple versions in the link based on who interrpretted and transcribed.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top