The Religion Discussion

[Duane 3NE 2NR]

Based on the archaeological and historical methods we verify documents of ancient times, the Bible supersedes the Quran by leaps and bounds.

archaeological and historical contradict the Bible far more than they support it. Especially the part where you say the Bible claims the Earth is 6000 years old and was created in 6 days.

The misunderstanding that I believe Duane and you may have is that you characterise "faith" as based on no evidence

well the meaning of the word faith according to the dictionary is

faith [feyth]
noun
1. confidence or trust in a person or thing: faith in another's ability.
2. belief that is not based on proof

So I can't see how I am misunderstanding the meaning of the word "Faith".
If there was proof then you wouldn't need faith.

Perhaps you have your own concept of what faith means to you. That however does not change the dictionary meaning.

Christian faith is belief in the overwhelming evidence that the God of the Bible is the true God, and that Jesus whom He sent was God and died and rose again for sins of those who would believe in Him.

where is this overwhelming evidence?

it's only in the Bible. using the Bible to prove the Bible is circular logic.

[Duane 3NE 2NR]

Like a broken clock is right at least 2 times a day....Bill Maher is correct here..

as Bill Maher said here, he is about truths. maybe that truth agrees with your preconception only 2 times a day.

You only agree with truths when it agrees with you. All other truths are false in your eyes.

remember this video from Dr. Jason Lisle? you rated him highly.


The real truth is truth, whether it agrees with your preconception or not.

[maj. tom]

How come prehistoric modern man never made cave paintings of dinosaurs? Weren't they impressed enough to make primitive records of such awesome, terrifying and huge land creatures if they lived alongside man in the supposed 6000 year old earth?

I mean there are records of mammoths and other species of animals that have actually lived at the same time as man. Dinosaurs weren't worthy of such cave paintings? Forget the fossils, since we are putting so much emphasis on the recorded word/ideas of humans.

[Duane 3NE 2NR]

^ cause Dinosaurs were camera shy?

budup bup ching!

[Habit7]

Duane is back

archaeological and historical contradict the Bible far more than they support it. Especially the part where you say the Bible claims the Earth is 6000 years old and was created in 6 days.

As you are familiar with a dictionary, please understand what archeaology is, and point out which archaeological claim the Bible is wrong on. Now with respect to the geological theory that the earth is millions of years old based on the axiomatic theory of uniformitarianism the Bible disagrees. We have been down this road before, but it doesnt prove your original claim that Christianity is no more right/wrong than Islam.

The misunderstanding that I believe Duane and you may have is that you characterise "faith" as based on no evidence

well the meaning of the word faith according to the dictionary is

faith [feyth]
noun
1. confidence or trust in a person or thing: faith in another's ability.
2. belief that is not based on proof

3.belief in God or in the doctrines or teachings of religion: the firm faith of the Pilgrims.
4.belief in anything, as a code of ethics, standards of merit, etc.: to be of the same faith with someone concerning honesty.
5.a system of religious belief: the Christian faith; the Jewish faith.
6.the obligation of loyalty or fidelity to a person, promise, engagement, etc.: Failure to appear would be breaking faith.
7.the observance of this obligation; fidelity to one's promise, oath, allegiance, etc.: He was the only one who proved his faith during our recent troubles.
8.Christian Theology . the trust in God and in His promises as made through Christ and the Scriptures by which humans are justified or saved.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/faith?s=t

Duane you made that same point before and I gave this same answer, dont you remember?

where is this overwhelming evidence?

This has been you battlecry for the entire thread and soon as you get them you perform you scepticism and cry their is no evidence. Being sceptical is fine, it allows you arrive at your view. But it doesn't prove your original claim that Christianity is no more right/wrong than Islam.

Other sceptics including myself have come to faith in Christianity based on the evidence presented to them, you have not. Probably you need more evidence, probably no evidence will suffice. But we won't evade your cities, pillage your towns, enslave your people and force you to convert (wink wink, nudge nudge).

[Habit7]

Sir Francis Bacon - chief proponent of the scientific method

so what, I could meme too

[Duane 3NE 2NR]

^ philosophy is subjective, science is objective

the scientific method can co-exist with all philosophy once the philosophy changes based on evidence found. If you are presented with new evidence yet do not want to change a philosophy that now contradicts that new evidence, then your philosophy is flawed as logic will dictate.

[Duane 3NE 2NR]

Duane is back

I never left

archaeological and historical contradict the Bible far more than they support it. Especially the part where you say the Bible claims the Earth is 6000 years old and was created in 6 days.

As you are familiar with a dictionary, please understand what archeaology is, and point out which archaeological claim the Bible is wrong on. Now with respect to the geological theory that the earth is millions of years old based on the axiomatic theory of uniformitarianism the Bible disagrees.

well taking maj.tom's statement above, archaeologists have not found any cave drawings with dinosaurs.

We have been down this road before, but it doesnt prove your original claim that Christianity is no more right/wrong than Islam.

well in this case, Muslims actually accept scientific evidence that the Earth is billions of years old.

The misunderstanding that I believe Duane and you may have is that you characterise "faith" as based on no evidence

well the meaning of the word faith according to the dictionary is
faith [feyth]
noun
1. confidence or trust in a person or thing: faith in another's ability.
2. belief that is not based on proof

3.belief in God or in the doctrines or teachings of religion: the firm faith of the Pilgrims.
4.belief in anything, as a code of ethics, standards of merit, etc.: to be of the same faith with someone concerning honesty.
5.a system of religious belief: the Christian faith; the Jewish faith.
6.the obligation of loyalty or fidelity to a person, promise, engagement, etc.: Failure to appear would be breaking faith.
7.the observance of this obligation; fidelity to one's promise, oath, allegiance, etc.: He was the only one who proved his faith during our recent troubles.
8.Christian Theology . the trust in God and in His promises as made through Christ and the Scriptures by which humans are justified or saved.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/faith?s=t

Duane you made that same point before and I gave this same answer, dont you remember?

I'm not sure what #8 is really saying

is it saying that in Christian Theology the word "Faith" has a different meaning than it has everywhere else?

If that's the case then we might as well have a Christian Theology meaning for the word "Truth" as meaning "Anything that is written in the Bible"!

where is this overwhelming evidence?

This has been you battlecry for the entire thread and soon as you get them you perform you scepticism and cry their is no evidence. Being sceptical is fine, it allows you arrive at your view. But it doesn't prove your original claim that Christianity is no more right/wrong than Islam.

your evidence is not only unconvincing to me, but to the scientific community in the areas of biology, geology, archaeology, physics, paleontology and others.

Other sceptics including myself have come to faith in Christianity based on the evidence presented to them, you have not. Probably you need more evidence, probably no evidence will suffice.

you are as much a sceptic to the findings of the above sciences as well as the writings in other religious texts such as the Qur'an, not so?

But we won't evade your cities, pillage your towns, enslave your people and force you to convert (wink wink, nudge nudge).

lol I'll leave that one for AdamB and Sachetto to answer.

[Habit7]

well taking maj.tom's statement above, archaeologists have not found any cave drawings with dinosaurs.

Well there are cave drawings of dinosaurs but because it doesn't mesh well with theories such as an asteroid hitting Earth and surgically killing off all the dinosaurs while leaving other reptiles and mammals, it is explained away as a snake with legs, or some other animal. But archaeology does recognise the 'dragon' depictions across various disconnected cultures. But for me personally I like how paleontologists discover dinosaur lagerstatten which are super-preserved dinosaur bone and tissue we are supposed to believe are more than 65 million years old.

well in this case, Muslims actually accept scientific evidence that the Earth is billions of years old.

Well its a free country, (at least in the West). The Quran doesn't give a detail creation summary as the Bible, probably because Muhammad could read Genesis because he was illiterate.


Crash Course in Dictionary - A book outlining the meaning of words. One word may have a varying meaning based on it context. Choose the meaning that is most relevant to its context. Example:
gay [gey]
adjective
1. pertaining to homosexuality
2. cheerful

Now despite common stereotypes, not all gay people are cheerful homosexuals. In one context it can mean cheerful and in a separate context it means homosexual.

your evidence is not only unconvincing to me, but to the scientific community in the areas of biology, geology, archaeology, physics, paleontology and others.

Both you and I agree that consensus does not make something true. And both you and I are aware that there are individuals who while being professions in their field of science disagree with what they have learnt and can produce counterarguments that can never get the same publicity of those within the consensus vis a vis Ben Stein's Expelled.

But you have to admit that the views you hold that you believe contradicts the Bible, with some new discovery or evidence, can all with one meeting in Geneva or some other European city change and represent something totally different. The result can still contradict the Bible or agree with it, but it will certainly be different than the view you have now. While this all happens the truth of the Bible remains unchanged and static. Well I hope you are honest enough to admit that

philosophy is subjective, science is objective

Well Duane I don't know if you are aware but when our young ppl leave high school, bright eyed and bushy tail, and enter the university system to study science, they are indoctrinated into the fundamentals of a scientific field. It is believed that this should be sufficient for them to apply what they have learnt in their respective field of work. However for them to further their studies they most often have the choice of a Masters of Science, which is an even further indoctrination into a more specific area of their science or, a Master of Philosophy where they can learn the philosophical principles their science is based upon. All science is based on philosophical principles. From this position a student can challenge the fundamentals to agree or disagree. At the doctorate level, new positions or addendums are proposed to all improve science.

Contrary to what you belief, I love science, I study it, I work with it, and I have taught it. But there is empirical science that I fully agree with, and there is historical science which I agree with some aspects. You are believing historical science is empirical, it is not. Sorry I gotta go for now.

[JohnR]

Ponder on this;a technological society ,a world filled with scientific achievements,Lets talk very simple here most persons wants/owns a computer acquisition of this fulfills to an extent greed,wants and yearnings.How well do you know the creator of the computer? ,was he not the one that made it credible?,the one that attributed to it a value based on its purpose and that which you desire? then why don't you know him? can you duplicate his creation? can you understand how it was made? etc etc
Who is your creator,the one that made you credible, the one who gave you life ,the same life you fight for ,suffer to keep and beg for its longevity.Do you understand its purpose,its value or its desirability?ETC ETC
If human beings are so special then there must be something more to it than just inevitably dieing or acquiring monetary wealth and possessions during life and that's where faith belief and depth in thinking comes in,now if you ask me I can see the evidence of God's existence everyday God does exist and there is a reason you are programmed to believe it ,it is in your natural thought process to at least think about it.Now we aren't nuts and bolts but we are flesh and blood ,mind/soul.
I'm just going to conclude now, the creators of the technology we so love and desire are unacknowledged by most and there creations can be repaired duplicated and explained by whatever literature they print for it and ongoing research etcetc we revolve our life around it and in a sense worship it ..so if it so easy to do this for inanimate objects on one hand and we have experiences of miracles and extraordinary testimonies from other humans about this divine force/entity having faith and believing and incredible things happening on the other hand its because human life is more sophisticated and mysterious, an unexplainable force that only faith and belief can justify ,and what makes us so different, isn't it just that?,we can have hope ,we can achieve what we believe in and nothing is impossible if we believe? the comparison here is just to show the disregard for creators of things that can be seen/unseen.The ignorance of the nature of material/immaterial on the whole...the thing is the material is disposable yet credible the immaterial is eternal yet incredible.. I hope you understand the analogy and read in between the lines as well ...I'll post some more later try to understand the grammar I rushed this i fixed as much as i could

[Duane 3NE 2NR]

well taking maj.tom's statement above, archaeologists have not found any cave drawings with dinosaurs.

Well there are cave drawings of dinosaurs but because it doesn't mesh well with theories such as an asteroid hitting Earth and surgically killing off all the dinosaurs while leaving other reptiles and mammals, it is explained away as a snake with legs, or some other animal. But archaeology does recognise the 'dragon' depictions across various disconnected cultures. But for me personally I like how paleontologists discover dinosaur lagerstatten which are super-preserved dinosaur bone and tissue we are supposed to believe are more than 65 million years old.

there dwell dragons!
Yes, many cultures have had drawings of dragons, sea monsters and mythical creatures the thing is, paleontologists have never unearthed the remains of a firebreathing dragon or of a centaur or flying horse.

and can you please show me where these cave drawings of dinosaurs were found?

lagerstatten is possible due to the make up of the soil and the circumstances in which the fossils were preserved.

Crash Course in Dictionary - A book outlining the meaning of words. One word may have a varying meaning based on it context. Choose the meaning that is most relevant to its context. Example:
gay [gey]
adjective
1. pertaining to homosexuality
2. cheerful

Now despite common stereotypes, not all gay people are cheerful homosexuals. In one context it can mean cheerful and in a separate context it means homosexual.

Faith being belief without proof is far more relevant to a discussion on all religion. Christian Theology is a subset of this entire discussion.

Though I must admit that I was surprised to find out that words carried different meanings when used by Christian Theologists!

your evidence is not only unconvincing to me, but to the scientific community in the areas of biology, geology, archaeology, physics, paleontology and others.

Both you and I agree that consensus does not make something true.

of course not. But this is not consensus based on opinion. This is consensus based on facts.

Also the evidence found in biology agrees with that found by geology and paleontology and physics etc etc etc.

And both you and I are aware that there are individuals who while being professions in their field of science disagree with what they have learnt and can produce counterarguments that can never get the same publicity of those within the consensus vis a vis Ben Stein's Expelled.

If those "lecturers" in Ben Stein's show/movie were serious scientists bringing real and empirical evidence to the table then there is no way they could be silenced. Science is not about popular truth. It is about ALL real truth.

Instead they were creationists and intelligent design proponents who's only real claim was not evidence proving their beliefs, but rather evidence that they were ostracized for their personal beliefs. However I'm sure if a lecturer decided to teach his University archaeology class about Leprechauns as fact then he'd probably get fired too.

But you have to admit that the views you hold that you believe contradicts the Bible, with some new discovery or evidence, can all with one meeting in Geneva or some other European city change and represent something totally different. The result can still contradict the Bible or agree with it, but it will certainly be different than the view you have now. While this all happens the truth of the Bible remains unchanged and static. Well I hope you are honest enough to admit that

YES it will change!!!

and that's the greatness of it! that with new evidence we can change our view.
If we didnt then we'd still be teaching that the world is flat, the sun goes around the earth, that the earth is the center of the universe and stars are not suns.

Where is the value in keeping knowledge static when faced with new evidence?

philosophy is subjective, science is objective

Well Duane I don't know if you are aware but when our young ppl leave high school, bright eyed and bushy tail, and enter the university system to study science, they are indoctrinated into the fundamentals of a scientific field. It is believed that this should be sufficient for them to apply what they have learnt in their respective field of work. However for them to further their studies they most often have the choice of a Masters of Science, which is an even further indoctrination into a more specific area of their science or, a Master of Philosophy where they can learn the philosophical principles their science is based upon. All science is based on philosophical principles. From this position a student can challenge the fundamentals to agree or disagree. At the doctorate level, new positions or addendums are proposed to all improve science.

Contrary to what you belief, I love science, I study it, I work with it, and I have taught it. But there is empirical science that I fully agree with, and there is historical science which I agree with some aspects. You are believing historical science is empirical, it is not. Sorry I gotta go for now.

They only get to that Master of Philosophy level when they understand the fundamentals of scientific research and findings.

You cannot philosophize on paleontology without having major study in the field. Are there any really qualified paleontologists who are young earth creationists? If there are then they, like Dr. Lisle, are leaving out one of the fundamental aspects of science, which is to not ignore evidence because it does not fit with the Bible.

[Habit7]

Duane you are unreasonable.


I have shown that although I have answered your questions and refuted your arguments, you misrepresent my position and probably don't understand it. viewtopic.php?f=4&t=267363&start=14280#p7051120

you choose a definition from a dictionary that suit you regardless that others more appropriately suits the discussion and even give examples.

You seem incapable of distinguishing fact from theory.

You seem incapable of distinguishing archeology from paleontology.

Science doesn't disprove God.

You remain unconvinced because you choose to, not for lack of evidence.

[Duane 3NE 2NR]

You are the one who agrees with the position that we should ignore evidence because it does not fit with the Bible - and you are saying I'm unreasonable?

I never said Science disproves God. I'm saying that you are not showing any empirical evidence to support your claims.

"You remain unconvinced because you choose to, not for lack of evidence." says the guy who claims to be a science person but thinks the earth is 6000 years old because it kind of, sort of indirectly suggests so in the Bible.

[rocknrolla]

where does the 6000 come from im not sure. i remember the lengthy family tree after adam and eve.. and back then ppl was apparently living to 1000 years old normal before thelife span of humans was lessened. never did the totals but pretty sure just the old testament covers a period of more than 6000 before the birth of christ. id guess anywhere between 10 and 20,000, maybe even more.

i also remember looking into the carbon dating process used by science and finding what i consider to be problems that make it absolutely unreliable except in certain circumstances. what if there is a hitch in the carbon dating that throw out ridiculous numbers after a certain time frame? sort of like how an object cant achieve the speed of light but can keep approaching it.. never getting there.

just did some googling.. happened to find this..

http://www.truthingenesis.com/2013/01/0 ... the-bible/

" The geologic column is where it all started. The earth was divided up into layers. Each layer was assigned a name, an age, and an index fossil. The ages were chosen without any scientific reasoning: they were picked out of the clear blue sky! Now any dating technique that comes along, like carbon dating, has to match the geologic column: or it is rejected. This is only because the geologic column has been taught for so long now and is assumed to be true. Just because something has been taught for a long time does not make it true. However, this is the logic most scientists have. They might have to test a sample 5 or 6 times until they get the age that they want. How would you know any of the dates given are right if you are getting a different one every time?"

and this..
http://www.essortment.com/carbon-dating ... 37183.html

the scientific community and it's scientific cliques has been known to force false information to fill a space that make sense to them as well as fits in with political views. i believe that carbon dating is another "the earth is flat" issue. here we have something forced by the scientific community until undeniable proof comes to show that it is an incorrect view. just like proposing the earth was round when it was forced that the earth was flat and u could lose ur head for proposing otherwise. attacking carbon dating as a scientist in the scientific community could lead to the end of ur career by extensive ridicule. this is how it goes. the scientific community has openly and in recorded history ruined the lives of men who were right. diligent scientists pioneering new discoveries.

it would also seem that 'carbon dating' is a Theory.. and not recorded as fact. meaning it cannot be 100% proven and not yet disproven. like the Theory of Relativity. to put ur faith in these things is to put ur faith in none other than a theory/'philosophy'.

[AdamB]

theories such as an asteroid hitting Earth
There is evidence in the Quran of Iron (Fe) being foreign to the Earth, therefore it came to earth via asteroid theory supported by modern science.

well in this case, Muslims actually accept scientific evidence that the Earth is billions of years old.
TRUE.

Well its a free country, (at least in the West). The Quran doesn't give a detail creation summary as the Bible, probably because Muhammad could read Genesis because he was illiterate.

Christian "faith" based on guessing? All other religions are wrong based on ridiculous guesses. Oh!! How many times have I mentioned the IN-VALIDITY of the Bible due to authorship, authenticity, preservation? Yet you take it as your "bible" (check d dictionary) based on what??

[AdamB]

The Miracle of Iron
Iron is one of the elements highlighted in the Quran. In the chapter known Al-Hadeed, meaning Iron, we are informed:


“And We also sent down iron in which there lies great force and which has many uses for mankind…” (Quran 57:25)The word “anzalna,” translated as "sent down" and used for iron in the verse, could be thought of having a metaphorical meaning to explain that iron has been given to benefit people. But, when we take into consideration the literal meaning of the word, which is, "being physically sent down from the sky, as this word usage had not been employed in the Quran except literally, like the descending of the rain or revelation, we realize that this verse implies a very significant scientific miracle. Because, modern astronomical findings have disclosed that the iron found in our world has come from giant stars in outer space.
Not only the iron on earth, but also the iron in the entire Solar System, comes from outer space, since the temperature in the Sun is inadequate for the formation of iron. The sun has a surface temperature of 6,000 degrees Celsius, and a core temperature of approximately 20 million degrees. Iron can only be produced in much larger stars than the Sun, where the temperature reaches a few hundred million degrees. When the amount of iron exceeds a certain level in a star, the star can no longer accommodate it, and it eventually explodes in what is called a "nova" or a "supernova." These explosions make it possible for iron to be given off into space.
One scientific source provides the following information on this subject:
“There is also evidence for older supernova events: Enhanced levels of iron-60 in deep-sea sediments have been interpreted as indications that a supernova explosion occurred within 90 light-years of the sun about 5 million years ago. Iron-60 is a radioactive isotope of iron, formed in supernova explosions, which decays with a half life of 1.5 million years. An enhanced presence of this isotope in a geologic layer indicates the recent nucleosynthesis of elements nearby in space and their subsequent transport to the earth (perhaps as part of dust grains).”
All this shows that iron did not form on the Earth, but was carried from Supernovas, and was "sent down," as stated in the verse. It is clear that this fact could not have been known in the 7th century, when the Quran was revealed. Nevertheless, this fact is related in the Quran, the Word of God, Who encompasses all things in His infinite knowledge.[flash=]The fact that the verse specifically mentions iron is quite astounding, considering that these discoveries were made at the end of the 20th century.[/flash] In his book Nature’s Destiny, the well-known microbiologist Michael Denton emphasizes the importance of iron:
“Of all the metals there is none more essential to life than iron. It is the accumulation of iron in the center of a star which triggers a supernova explosion and the subsequent scattering of the vital atoms of life throughout the cosmos. It was the drawing by gravity of iron atoms to the center of the primeval earth that generated the heat which caused the initial chemical differentiation of the earth, the outgassing of the early atmosphere, and ultimately the formation of the hydrosphere. It is molten iron in the center of the earth which, acting like a gigantic dynamo, generates the earth’s magnetic field, which in turn creates the Van Allen radiation belts that shield the earth’s surface from destructive high-energy-penetrating cosmic radiation and preserve the crucial ozone layer from cosmic ray destruction…
“Without the iron atom, there would be no carbon-based life in the cosmos; no supernovae, no heating of the primitive earth, no atmosphere or hydrosphere. There would be no protective magnetic field, no Van Allen radiation belts, no ozone layer, no metal to make hemoglobin [in human blood], no metal to tame the reactivity of oxygen, and no oxidative metabolism.
“The intriguing and intimate relationship between life and iron, between the red color of blood and the dying of some distant star, not only indicates the relevance of metals to biology but also the biocentricity of the cosmos…”
This account clearly indicates the importance of the iron atom. The fact that particular attention is drawn to iron in the Quran also emphasizes the importance of the element.
Moreover, iron oxide particles were used in a cancer treatment in recent months and positive developments were observed. A team led by Dr. Andreas Jordan, at the world famous Charité Hospital in Germany, succeeded in destroying cancer cells with this new technique developed for the treatment of cancer- magnetic fluid hyperthermia (high temperature magnetic liquid). As a result of this technique, first performed on the 26-year-old Nikolaus H., no new cancer cells were observed in the patient in the following three months.
This method of treatment can be summarized as follows:
1. A liquid containing iron oxide particles is injected into the tumour by means of a special syringe. These particles spread throughout the tumour cells. This liquid consists of thousands of millions of particles, 1,000 times smaller than the red blood corpuscles, of iron oxide in 1 cm3 that can easily flow through all blood vessels.
2. The patient is then placed in a machine with a powerful magnetic field.
3. This magnetic field, applied externally, begins to set the iron particles in the tumour in motion. During this time the temperature in the tumour containing the iron oxide particles rises by up to 45 degrees.
4. In a few minutes the cancer cells, unable to protect themselves from the heat, are either weakened or destroyed. The tumour may then be completely eradicated with subsequent chemotherapy.
In this treatment it is only the cancer cells that are affected by the magnetic field, since only they contain the iron oxide particles. The spread of this technique is a major development in the treatment of this potentially lethal disease. Iron has also been found to be a cure for people suffering from anemia. In the treatment of such a widespread diseases, the use of the expression “iron in which there lies great force and which has many uses for mankind” (Quran, 57:25) in the Quran is particularly noteworthy. Indeed, in that verse, the Quran may be indicating the benefits of iron even for human health. (God knows best.)

[rocknrolla]

more scientific theory
en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inner_core



The inner core of the Earth, its innermost part, is a primarily solid ball with a radius of about 1,220 km (760 mi), according to seismological studies.[1][2] (This is about 70% of the length of the Moon's radius.) It is believed to consist primarily of an iron–nickel alloy, and to be about the same temperature as the surface of the Sun: approximately 5700 K (5430 °C).[3]

[AdamB]

In the treatment of such a widespread diseases, the use of the expression “iron in which there lies great force and which has many uses for mankind” (Quran, 57:25) in the Quran is particularly noteworthy. Indeed, in that verse, the Quran may be indicating the benefits of iron even for human health. (God knows best.)

In the Arabic language, the use of "wa" meaning "and", the conjunction, refers to having a significant difference. So the "many uses for mankind" refers to different uses other than the quality of having "great force".

Subhaan Allah!! (How Perfect Allah is!!).

How could an illiterate man in the 7th Century know these particular facts about Iron being sent down? No other metal or jewel or the like was mentioned like this in the Quran!!

If anyone checks the probability of Muhammad knowing each one of the numerous scientific facts and then work out the overall probability of him knowing all of them, it would be humanly impossible for him to know!!

That is because the Quran is the Word of Allah (GOD)! This is one of the proofs that you seek Duane!!

[Habit7]

You are the one who agrees with the position that we should ignore evidence because it does not fit with the Bible - and you are saying I'm unreasonable?

I never said Science disproves God. I'm saying that you are not showing any empirical evidence to support your claims.

"You remain unconvinced because you choose to, not for lack of evidence." says the guy who claims to be a science person but thinks the earth is 6000 years old because it kind of, sort of indirectly suggests so in the Bible.

you equally come to Bible with your bias of disbelief in the supernatural.

Since you believe empirical science is the arbiter of truth, use it to prove Caesar Augustus existed.

Please quote where I said the earth only 6000 years old, or are you misrepresenting my views again.

[AdamB]

When Jesus returns, what will be the signs? Did you (habit7) accept Sai Baba as GOD and why/why not?

[metalgear2095]

When Jesus returns, what will be the signs? Did you (habit7) accept Sai Baba as GOD and why/why not?

Why would a Christian accept sai baba? Where do you get these dotish questions?

Sent from my LG-P880 using TriniTuner mobile app

[nemo]

Interesting discussion going here. Good question bluefete especially in these times we living in. More and more you wonder what going on in this world. Are we just here to have a grand old time, just live it up, dead and done or is there some purpose to our existence.

[rocknrolla]

there is a purpose. just as a caterpillar must become a butterfly.

[bluefete]

and can you please show me where these cave drawings of dinosaurs were found?

Take a read Duane! It's too long to copy.

http://www.genesispark.com/exhibits/evi ... /dinosaur/

What is interesting here is how ancient civilizations knew what dinosaurs looked like to draw them if they did not exist at the same time as humans.

Remember that modern man only started putting dinosaur fossils togeter in the last 150-200 years.

Go figure.

[Habit7]

bluefete you can try, but Duane doesn't want evidence, he wants objects to pour his scepticism on. If a guy puts more trust in Wikipedia than the Bible, they openly have a bias for the shifting sand of "crowdsource" information and not truth that has stood the test of time.

[bluefete]

bluefete you can try, but Duane doesn't want evidence, he wants objects to pour his scepticism on. If a guy puts more trust in Wikipedia than the Bible, they openly have a bias for the shifting sand of "crowdsource" information and not truth that has stood the test of time.

Duane's arguments have always been prefaced on an evidential basis. However, he has already acknowledged that scientists are "shifting sands" because new evidence can trounce existing evidence.

[rocknrolla]

the evidence was never new to begin with as we already settled as well. it was always their.. but science just didnt have the eyes to see it. and the same will come of the human soul. they dont know how to detect it yet.. but it is there.

[Duane 3NE 2NR]

and can you please show me where these cave drawings of dinosaurs were found?

Take a read Duane! It's too long to copy.

http://www.genesispark.com/exhibits/evi ... /dinosaur/

What is interesting here is how ancient civilizations knew what dinosaurs looked like to draw them if they did not exist at the same time as humans.

Remember that modern man only started putting dinosaur fossils togeter in the last 150-200 years.

Go figure.

alot of those have been debunked

http://www.livescience.com/13448-dinosa ... unked.html

if there was real empirical evidence that dinosaurs and man lived together on earth at the same time it would make major international news and it would be taught in schools.

the scientific method is unbiased. It has no reason to hold on to a lie.

[Duane 3NE 2NR]

You are the one who agrees with the position that we should ignore evidence because it does not fit with the Bible - and you are saying I'm unreasonable?

I never said Science disproves God. I'm saying that you are not showing any empirical evidence to support your claims.

"You remain unconvinced because you choose to, not for lack of evidence." says the guy who claims to be a science person but thinks the earth is 6000 years old because it kind of, sort of indirectly suggests so in the Bible.

you equally come to Bible with your bias of disbelief in the supernatural.

Since you believe empirical science is the arbiter of truth, use it to prove Caesar Augustus existed.

Please quote where I said the earth only 6000 years old, or are you misrepresenting my views again.

you said 6000-12,000 years old, viewtopic.php?f=4&t=267363&p=6912965

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

"disbelief in the supernatural."
do you believe in Leprechauns, tooth fairies and Santa Claus?
or are you biased based on your own preconceptions?

[Habit7]

you forgot one:

Since you believe empirical science is the arbiter of truth, use it to prove Caesar Augustus existed.

Or do you even believe he existed?