If you need urgent support, call 999 or go to your nearest A&E. To contact our Crisis Messenger (open 24/7) text THEMIX to 85258.
Options
Take a look around and enjoy reading the discussions. If you'd like to join in, it's really easy to register and then you'll be able to post. If you'd like to learn what this place is all about, head here.
Comments
we have free wil and many people choose not to believe in fairy tales.
is it the power of nature? Is it fate? is it a being in a white robe?
I like the American Idea that the planet is a living breathing powerful thing, but I'm not going to pray to it!
I cannot belive that there was/Is a god but I can believe there was probably a man with a name that sounded something like Jesus who was a medicine man or something. But I'm not going to pray to him either because he's dead and he didn't really do anything special.
Now, fast forward a few millennia, when visitors from other planets visit the, now barren, Earth.
Now, what if the only surviving thing they find is, say, a Superman comic.
Would they take this to mean that an all powerfull, almost indestructable, being lived on Earth....was revered by millions.....saved humanity on countless occassion.
Would Superman be a religious icon?
Why not? after all....it was written in a book, surely it must be true.
I really do hope, that you do know that not all religious people are doing that.
Pretty much sums it up. Blind faith is a dangerous thing...
Will agree on that statement, but not on the "religion=shit" part.
Perhaps I should qualify that statement, it was referring to organised religion...
What always makes me smile (in an ironic sense) is that organised religion spends so much time with its hand out. I just see it as a massive scam...
And the morals of the various church "leaders"...
Would you care to define your sense organised religion?
As an example: Any which believes in the "one true book", be that the Koran, Bible, Torah etc or portrays themselves as the "one true faith".
I'm not saying that people shouldn't have faith, I'm saying that the faith is abused by the organisations which represents the various religions.
Much of it is based on teachings from centuries ago - hell we laugh at "new" religions - and I hold it with curiousity rather than reverence.
It's a personal thing, and I don't condemn people for having faith, I condemn those who abuse it, or claim that it means that they are "right" as a result...
A sense of religion, the belief that the world and us were created by a superior being, it is not necessarily a bad thing. However it is clear that humans have always taken this thought further and developed it into an extremely dangerous and lethal tool used to control and abuse the people for several millennia now.
Just because there might be a superior being that created life it doesn't mean he is still alive, or that he demands we pay constant worship to him, get married and refrain from having sexual relations out of wedlock, try to convert other people to the faith in question, slaughter them if they refuse, etc etc etc.
It's deeply rooted in human nature to use people's fear and ignorance as a means of control and power over them. This is what the said religions are all about, and it doesn't take a genius to work out that if there really was a God, an all-knowing with infinite wisdom being out there, he'd be utterly disgusted at organised religion.
But that doesn't mean that I am against religion as such.
For starters I don't believe that two people can percieve their common religion as exactly the same. So even when it's "organised" (I don't like that term, as basically my idea with religion has always been that it's a personal issue) it's something unique.
The religion I am most familiar with is Judaism. And I've always been told, both by more "moderate" jews to the orthodox ones, that a general thought in Judaism, isn't to rule out other religions, but merely that Judaism is the religion applying best for the jews. It's in fact "forbidden" to missionaire outside of jewish circles, and when people do come to convert into Judaism, they get declined 3 times, to check how sure they are about commiting themselves. Though, when a person has converted according to the laws of the Halacha (the oral teachings, which have been passed on, and then written down) then this person is fully concidered a jew.
The religious teachings are full of rules. Some to be taken more seriously than others. But on the whole, I don't recall any threats being made if "you don't keep this".
These are rules made to fit, what then seemed to be right and apropriate and best.
Some rules still apply today, some are highly irrlevant.
There are 613 "good deeds" in Judaism. Those are not written up like rules, but as a proper thing to do. Though it's known, that no-one can keep them all.
I don't know exactly how Christianity and Islam looks at these points. But I am sure that the basic thought in religion isn't to cause evil, but to help people get on with their lives. In some cases it has succeeded, in others not (can give examples on where religion has been succesfull, and where it hasn't, from my own family).
But I wouldn't generalise and say that all religion is shit.
Btw Mok, Torah is the same as saying Bible, just in Hebrew
These are the less serious rules. Then we have the more serious issues such the religion in question's position on out-of-wedlock relationships, homosexuality, cohabitation and to those who embrace it; 'god-given' land and willingness to expulse or kill those from other faiths who dare to live in that land, and many other things.
Of course, Torah, Bible or Koran don't necessarily say these things should happen. But it is clear that is the way religious leaders and fanatics want to see it. For as long as we have these religions there will be people prepared to exploit them and control others with it. I don't think that is ever going to change.
Mankind would be so much better off without them.
To be honest, I think that these things would still occur if we didn't have religion. People would then use political stances or ideologies to gain undeserved power.
Aisha, I think you are the one who hides your head in the sand. If you think the Qur'an is accurate in Science, here are a few examples of how inaccurate your Holy Book is :-
1) In Sura 27:18-19 Solomon overhears a conversation of ants. Fact is that ants do not use sound but smell to communicate.
2) The Qur'an teaches that there are seven heavens one above the other [67:3, 71:15], and that the stars are in the lower heaven [67:5, 37:6, 41:12], but the moon is depicted as being in/inside the seven heavens [71:16], even though in reality the stars are much further away from the earth than the moon.
3) Regarding "How did Muhammad know about Embryology?". What about The Quran's highly controversial statement that human beings are formed from a clot of blood. "Then We made the sperm into a clot of congealed blood; then of that clot We made a (foetus) lump; then We made out of that lump bones and clothed the bones with flesh" (23:14). This is hardly a scientific description of embryonic development. It ignores to mention the female egg (the second and equally important half) and the process of fertilization when egg and sperm unite to form one new cell. It mentions the obvious [the sperm], the visible, that which all mankind knew for a long time that it is necessary to "make" a baby. The Qur'an does NOT mention the invisible, that which we know only through modern medicine. Had God really wanted to reveal something nobody could know at that time, in order to prove the divine origin of his revelation, he would have talked e.g. about the "equal contribution of the female through the ovum to form the new person and how the two come together and form one being".
4) Throwing Stars at the Devils?
"And We have (from of old), adorned the lowest heaven with lamps, and we have made such (Lamps as) missiles to drive away Satans, ... -- Sura 67:5
We have indeed decked the lower heaven with beauty (in) the stars, (for beauty) and for guard against all obstinate rebellious Satans. (So) they should not strain their ears in the direction of the Exalted Assembly but be cast away from every side.
-- Sura 37:6-8" See also Suras 15:16-18, 55:33-35 etc. which seem to speak about the same thing.
The stars were created by Allah as missiles to throw at the devils? In order to not let them eavesdrop on the heavenly council? Not exactly a "scientific" world view.
Do you want me to go on Aisha? Don't be blinded by what your religon presents to you just because it is the religon of your ancestors. Islam has as many faults as any other. Use the enquiring mind you were born with. I'm not saying turn your back on Islam but just remember it is NOT the uncontestable book you seem to think it is.
Okay then ... explain this! The Qur'an says that the calf worshipped by the Israelites at mount Horeb was moulded by a Samaritan (Sura 20:85-87, 95-97). Yet the term `Samaritan' was not coined until 722 B.C., which is several hundred years after the events recorded in Exodus. Thus, the Samaritan people could not have existed during the life of Moses, and therefore, could not have been responsible for moulding the calf.
You want more? You tell me - I give you more!
I can't show you 7 but the Qur'an doesn't know whether it's 6 or 8! Duh!
Sura 7:54, 10:3, 11:7, and 25:59 clearly say that God created "the heavens and the earth" in six days. But then there is also the following passage:
Say: Is it that ye deny Him Who created the earth in TWO Days And do ye join equals with Him? He is the Lord of (all) the Worlds.
(2 days plus)
He set on the (earth), mountains standing firm, high above it,and bestowed blessings on the earth, and measure therein all things to give them nourishment in due proportion, in FOUR Days in accordance with (the needs of) those who seek (Sustenance).
Moreover He comprehended in His design the sky, and it had been (as) smoke: He said to it and to the earth: "Come ye together, willingly or unwillingly." They said: "We do come (together), in willing obedience."
(4 days plus)
So He completed them as seven firmaments in TWO Days, and He assigned to each heaven its duty and command. And We adorned the lower heaven with lights, and (provided it) with guard. Such is the Decree of (Him) the Exalted in Might, Full of Knowledge.
-- Sura 41:9-12 (Yusuf Ali)
(2 days)
Altogether these are EIGHT Days.
Two days for the creation of the earth, then four days to fill the earth with mountains, blessings and nourishment for all its inhabitants, and in the end two more days to create the seven heavens and create the stars in them. This adds up to 2+4+2 = 8 days in contradiction to the 6 days mentioned in the other verses.
Does this qualify for an Audi TT? Just the basic, bottom of the range model will do ... thank you!
You haven't even bothered to look at that book I linked to. This should be OBJECTIVE as it's a CHRISTIAN writer. IF it was a Muslim you might have an excuse. All you have done is gone to a missionary site and looked for some "errors" and neither researched whether those claims are true or false yourself. These have been refutated over the centuries by scholars. You might say well there's answers for all the "errors" in the Bible too, somewhere by someone. But you miss an important point. ONLY the Fundamentalist insists the Bible today is inerrant, rest of the Christians and Muslims believe the same that it contains God's word and man's. In Jacqueline's thread "Validity of the Bible" it's been discussed. Nowhere does the Bible demand from the reader to prove it false OR CLAIM it is perfect. The Qur'an is FILLED with this. Then it makes it something worthwhile to study. God is perfect and any revelation should be perfect - in that remarkable verse (which no other scripture has)
Do they not consider the Qur'an (with care)? Had it been from other than God, they would surely have found therein much discrepancy. 4:82
The seriousness of this is evident. It is not human nature to sit an exam and be SO confident to write to the examiner at the top "find an error in this answer book".
Your points are all answered here. Do a Ctrl+F and search for a particular point.
http://www.answering-christianity.com/quran/quranerr.htm
Your last point I actually have on video on a question and answer session on a dialogue about the Qur'an and the Bible. It's like saying
Hand out 2 dollars, that's 2
Hand out 2 dollars, that's 4 (2+2 from above)
Hand out 2 dollars, that's 2= 8 days but it's actually 6.
You quote Yusuf Ali's translation (the most popular English one (had you looked at the notes you would have found an explanation). Again go to the link above.
The argument the Qur'an is wrong as it contradicts the Bible is flawed. Shall we say the Bible is flawed because it contradicts something in scriptures prior to it? What is important is the authenticity and preservation of the revelation.
As for the religion of your ancestors - this is precisely what the Qur'an talks about, that one should search and be objective and not just assume one's fathers are right. After a degree in comparative religion and 3 years of study I concluded Islam is indeed the Truth.
Where do you get 8 from that?
4+2=6 So, in 3 years, you have managed to do what schollars havent been able to do in millenia.
Well done, you must be so proud.
Can I ask how old you are?
This style of argument is just plain sophomoric, which is typical of the missionary genre. The person is relying upon an English translation of the Qur'ân which no Muslim relies upon. Unlike the Christians' New Testament which has no Aramaic original, nor even a Greek codex from the 1st century CE, the Qur'ân has always been in Arabic as it is today and this is the standard throughout the world. Even orientalists with half a brain quote from the Arabic text..
> 1) In Sura 27:18-19 Solomon overhears a conversation of ants.
> Fact is that ants do not use sound but smell to communicate.
This is ridiculous. Ever heard of a "miracle" associated with something called a "prophet"?? If Moses can part the Red Sea, Solomon hearing the communication of ants is nothing. If you will notice the guy conveniently fails to quote the verses, but only makes wild assumptions about them without quoting them. Here is the verse:
(18) hattâ ithâ âtû `alâ wâdi-namlî qâlat namlatun yâ ayyuha-namlû-dkhulû masâkinakum lâ yahtimannakum sulaymânû wa junûduhû wa-hum lâ yash`urûn.
(19) fa-tabassama dâhika(n)-min qawlihâ wa qâla rabbî awzi`nî ann ashkura ni`mataka-llatî an`amta `alayya wa `alâ wâlidayya wa ann a`mala sâlihan tardâhû wa-adkhilnî bi-rahmatika fî `ibâdika-sâlihîn.
This is the translation:
(18) Until when they reached a valley of namlî, one of the namlatun conveyed: O you company of namlû go into your dwellings lest Solomon and his armies crush you unbeknownst to them.
(19) So he smiled, amused by her message, and said: O my Lord! Order me that I may be grateful for Your favours which you have bestowed on me and on my parents, and that I may work righteousness that will please You. And admit me, by Your Grace, to the ranks of Your righteous servants."
First of all we have the word "naml" in Arabic which is a word for ants as well as termites in the Arabic language. Ants are usually called in Arabic "an-Naml al-Abyad" meaning "the white ant".
The antagonist (typically) makes the following fallacious assumptions:
1) Ants do not communicate by sound.
Not only do ants communicate by sound , but termites are specifically known to communicate by sound. Regarding ants their acoustic communication has been thoroughly researched and documented in a study from Robert Hickling, National Center for Physical Acoustics University of Mississippi and Richard L. Brown, Department of Entomology and Plant Pathology, Mississippi State University entitled "Nearfield acoustic communication by ants".
Not only did they document ant sounds, here's the devastating blow to this missionary nonsense, they recorded the sounds YOU can hear on the web at the following URL:
http://home.olemiss.edu/~hickling/
Here it is..
Stridulation Sounds of Black Fire Ants (Solenopsis richteri) in Different Situations
Alarm signal generated by black fire ants when a microphone probe is inserted into their mound.
Normal movement sounds of a group of ants with occasional bursts of stridulation sound from a single ant.
Sounds of ants attacking a caterpillar with stridulation sound from a single ant.
Distress signals emitted by a single major worker with a caught antenna.
Now that absolutely ends the argument right there. But to take it even a step further, scholars of Qur'ânic hermeneutics have stated that due to the preceding verses it can be strongly adduced that these ants are winged termites. In verse 27:16 which is 2 verses before the topic of this discussion Solomon states: "`ullimnâ mantiqa-tayrî.." meaning, "we have been taught the mode of communication for those things which fly (birds, etc)". The word "Tayr" literally means to fly as an airplane is also called "Tayr" in the Arabic language, as is a bird. This is the opinion of ash-Shu`bî as related in al-Qurtubî's tafsîr, vol. 13 who states: "These Namlah had two wings, thus they were categorized as Tayr.." I use the word "naml" instead of "ant" and "things that fly" instead of "bird", since the English translations have failed to capture these linguistic nuances which must be explained. It is well known that termites communicate by sound and this does not require any posting of a research paper. Even the Orkin pest control guy knows that they do.
Now to take it even futher, the word used in verses 18-19 for communication are inflections of the word "qâl". This word does not only mean to speak, but also to convey something or to make sound. The cognate for this word in previous scriptures is also "Qâl" in Aramaic and is found in the Book of Daniel in the following manner:
"châzêh havêyt bê'dayin min-qâl millayyâ rabrebâtâ' dî qarnâ' memallelâh.."
"I beheld then because of the voice of the great words which the horn spake.." [Daniel 7:11]
A talking horn? The notion of an inanimate HORN talking is even more absurd than an ant talking! You will often find that the Missionaries like to cast stones from glass houses. The fact is that these are miracles and you aren't supposed to try and "scientifically explain" them anyways. However, even when we do to answer the Missionaries' challenges they end up falling on their faces anyways.
Anyone who prayed at such a time would be a believer or an ..i'm not so surer.
And YOU don't? You are such a deceitful liar!
What about your post "Who really imitates Jesus?"? Was that your research?
No, it is a direct cut and paste from an article about an obscure Westerner called Gary Miller (now known as Abdul-Ahad Omar) who allegedly converted to Islam and refuted Chrsitianity. Yes, I have used Internet resources to refute your ridiculous claims but nobody has done so more than you to promote your Islamic propaganda.
Aisha, stop lying and being deceitful. You are doing your cause no good and people on this board can see through your wickedness.
Islam is not the one true religon.
Allah is not the one true God.
Muhammed was never anything more than a man who invented a religon to achieve power.
Deal with it!
Science and human ingenuity hold the keys to life, not religion. Get a new hobby.