The Religion Discussion

[mamoo_pagal]

in the mean time, we observe adam b's absence, any time he is faced with some serious points to refute, knowing he cannot, he suddenly 'remembers' he have a life, but only until a few pages blow over, then he comes back in with his junk

exactly.....................fixored!!

[Duane 3NE 2NR]

So Dawkins is a figurehead and wikipedia is authoritative and faith is always blind.

non-bias looks so cool

I said Dawkins is NOT a figurehead. Wikipedia is not authoritative but you cannot deny what it is saying here that geology and paleontology, chemistry, physics, astronomy, cosmology, biology, geophysics and stratigraphy all point to the earth being billions of years old and there being no global flood as described in the Bible.

Faith is belief in something without proof. If there is proof of something then you do not need faith. Th scientific method does not use faith. So in the context of science, faith can be blind, dumb, and deaf, it would not matter. In science it does not matter what faith is or who has it.

[djaggs]

Very good debate here with Dawkins and Prof John Lennox, iinteresting confession at 44:20....

[Duane 3NE 2NR]

Very good debate here with Dawkins and Prof John Lennox, iinteresting confession at 44:20....

irrelevant though since this isn't a discussion about the credibility of Dawkins or Prof Lennox.

As an argument FOR theism it is as viable as using the actions and statements of Jimmy Swaggert or Harold Camping as an argument FOR atheism.


Sent from my iPhone using TriniTuner mobile app

[aks]

Topic concerns the Bible, Qur'an, Ramayan and any other "Holy Book " you all may have written by a man

show me a hole in the sky your book fell out of and that this book contains all the answers of man i will believe it but mean while i think it best you all keep your speculation and your books for toilet reading o dont forget it must glow Written by God in the back of it or the front some where ok peace out

[maj. tom]

so who read that?

[djaggs]

so who read that?

[megadoc1]

lol and he wrote that for the learned minds to respond ..thank God I don't have to read that

[Duane 3NE 2NR]

Why do Muslims pray to the Kaaba instead of looking up at the sky and praying to Allah

Muslims don't pray to the Kaaba. Also they do look up at the sky, or down at their hands, or just close their eyes when praying (making du'a) to Allah.

[Habit7]

So Dawkins is a figurehead and wikipedia is authoritative and faith is always blind.

non-bias looks so cool

I said Dawkins is NOT a figurehead. Wikipedia is not authoritative but you cannot deny what it is saying here that geology and paleontology, chemistry, physics, astronomy, cosmology, biology, geophysics and stratigraphy all point to the earth being billions of years old and there being no global flood as described in the Bible.

Faith is belief in something without proof. If there is proof of something then you do not need faith. Th scientific method does not use faith. So in the context of science, faith can be blind, dumb, and deaf, it would not matter. In science it does not matter what faith is or who has it.

Well whether you want to deny it or not science is developed by figureheads. Their career and legacy plays a major role in validating the idea they present. Becoming distinguish enables your work to be published in the best journals, where it is peer reviewed by other figureheads, whose approval will make it subsequently rise to prominence where along with the idea, you name is taught with it. As demonstrated with Darwin, Newton, Einstein, Hawkins, Hubble, etc who all proposed ideas that have become synonymous with their names.

I see a world covered by predominantly sedimentary rock mostly by fluvial mechanisms, showing rapid deposition, lay down strata after strata with either no erosion between them or unconformities where layer of strata rapidly eroded, reorientated, and new strata is deposited. I see plant and animals fossilised as a result of rapid deposition, the earliest animal fossils being those most affected by high turbidity such as marine arthropods, gastropods, ostracods and other marine invertebrate organisms which make up most of our fossil record. I see rapid deformation of the earth crust as the Bible says "all the fountains of the great deep burst open" and we later observed it to result as plate tectonics. Furthermore, I see sedimentary structures like fossilised raindrop marks or deformed/bent stata without the cracks as brittle rock normal performs but smooth curvatures without the indications of metamorphic deformation by heat and pressure.
At the end of the day we both have the same evidences, it just a matter of which worldview we see it from. There are many others within the field of geology who are not educated by wikipedia but have offered proof for a global flood but does it matter, in your absolute conclusion there is no proof.

Faith is belief in something without proof

You could continue to repeat that until it becomes a creed not different than AdamB rants. Despite the fact that faith has other meanings including trust in evidence, despite so far you have only been able to reference yourself in validating this, despite those of greater scientific accomplishment disagree with you, despite I have laid out my beliefs evidentially and not appealed to blind faith, you remained unmoved. And I am supposed to the religious one? You my friend have a 'commitment' worth admiring.

[Duane 3NE 2NR]

^ nice big words.

the only people who seem to have a "worldview" are those who have a different view from reality. You really only hear apologetics who are trying to twist meanings use the term "worldview". There is only one view really: fact finding using the scientific process - any other view is delusional. Same goes for the term "apologetic" since you wouldn't need to apologise or defend a case if it was factually evident.

Well whether you want to deny it or not science is developed by figureheads. Their career and legacy plays a major role in validating the idea they present. Becoming distinguish enables your work to be published in the best journals, where it is peer reviewed by other figureheads, whose approval will make it subsequently rise to prominence where along with the idea, you name is taught with it. As demonstrated with Darwin, Newton, Einstein, Hawkins, Hubble, etc who all proposed ideas that have become synonymous with their names.

You have a preconception of figureheads and prophets and pastors as being required. Science only has the people who do the research, testing and make discoveries. They don't start off being figureheads. They become experts in their respective fields because of the work they have done in observation, testing, development etc. Their work can be refuted and debunked by anyone.

You seem to have some suggestion that there is a conspiracy that has these are evil scientists promoting the work of the devil by showing false evidence of Evolution and a billions of years old earth and brainwashing children in school into a society of secular zombies. They however are indifferent to what the Bible says - they only care to show the evidence they find.

Are you saying God is so deceptive that he makes everything look old to trick us from the truth that it's really only 6000 years old?

The evidence showing the earth is billions of years old is overwhelming. Also when tested by various fields they all have coherent results: biology (the theory of evolution and palaeontology), astronomy (starlight problem), geology (volcanic formation, sedimentation, plate tectonics), archaeology (historic development of ancient civilizations) and physics (radiometric dating). It all fits.

You are the one supporting the practice that if science finds evidence that contradicts the Bible then we should ignore the evidence and go with what the Bible says. Unfortunately I can't say that logic is worth admiring.

[Habit7]

"But our ways of learning about the world are strongly influenced by the social preconceptions and biased modes of thinking that each scientist must apply to any problem. The stereotype of a fully rational and objective ‘scientific method,’ with individual scientists as logical (and interchangeable) robots, is self-serving mythology."

Stephen Jay Gould

[maj. tom]

which is where peer review comes in.

[rocknrolla]

Very good debate here with Dawkins and Prof John Lennox, iinteresting confession at 44:20....

i watched this debate and it was crap. cant believe ppl paid money to watch these men philosophize on a stage as tho it's fact. cant even prove half of what is proposed.

[Duane 3NE 2NR]

i watched this debate and it was crap. cant believe ppl paid money to watch these men philosophize on a stage as tho it's fact. cant even prove half of what is proposed.

and we are getting the same thing from you for free!


Sent from my iPhone using TriniTuner mobile app

[bluefete]

So Dawkins is a figurehead and wikipedia is authoritative and faith is always blind.

non-bias looks so cool

I said Dawkins is NOT a figurehead. Wikipedia is not authoritative but you cannot deny what it is saying here that geology and paleontology, chemistry, physics, astronomy, cosmology, biology, geophysics and stratigraphy all point to the earth being billions of years old and there being no global flood as described in the Bible.

Faith is belief in something without proof. If there is proof of something then you do not need faith. Th scientific method does not use faith. So in the context of science, faith can be blind, dumb, and deaf, it would not matter. In science it does not matter what faith is or who has it.

But who measures these things? Who is to say that these accepted measurements are not wrong? Carbon dating is not accurate. Some men got together and decided that to make sense of things certain measurements with respect to the age of the earth should be used.

But who is to say that we are using the right measurements for the age of the earth.

We know that Newton's laws and so on are accurate because we have validated them by going to the moon and sending vehicles almost out of the solar system.

But dating the earth is a different matter.

Okay, I just read your post after this one wrt evidence in biology etc.

Let me put something out here to contradict what I just wrote.

If we follow the narrative in Genesis 1:1-2, there may be reason to link the bible and science to the earth being billions of years old.

The first 2 verses state that when the earth was created, it was without form and void. Now, the ancient texts speak to this void as being one of chaos.

When God created Adam and Eve, he gave a strange instruction:

"Be fruitful, and multiply and replenish the earth." - Genesis 1:28

"Replenish" gives the idea that something existed before and was destroyed.

Take a look at this page. It is quite interesting. Don't assume you know what it is by the address.

Its take on a global flood is most informative.

http://www.kjvbible.org/

[rocknrolla]

i watched this debate and it was crap. cant believe ppl paid money to watch these men philosophize on a stage as tho it's fact. cant even prove half of what is proposed.

and we are getting the same thing from you for free!


Sent from my iPhone using TriniTuner mobile app

yeah well at least im not conning u out of ur money.

[Sacchetto Boutique]

Duane, I have read excerpts of the bible thanks to this thread... i still believe in the Quran! I did do the research..i was refering to megadoc googling the ARABIC VERSION OF THE BIBLE.
I have read books on Sai Baba in the past, when I was younger and still trying to figure out if islam was right for me.
Most people are born into religion with the few who change their religion for many reasons. I have friends who converted to islam who said that they just had so many questions about their birth religion and the answers they got didnt make much sense to them but the teachings of islam did. Its important to also note that this holds true for muslims who have left islam as well.
I was born into islam but didnt start understanding it until much later...id say about 5yrs ago.
My sister in law told me about her experience of wearing hijab. She started wearing it soon after teh birth of my nephew. She said that she had always wanted to wear it but wasnt ready...there was a feeling for both her and myself before we took teh step to wear it. We both felt very intimidated by other muslims who were far more religious than us bc we felt that we didnt know enough islam to wear hijab but later on, we learnt that that didnt have to be the case.
When we both felt ready, we did it...we still dont know everything about islam but we feel that closeness to Allah...I cant explain it..but its a feeling most muslims get when we hear the recitation of Quran...it makes you cry...it makes u feel so emotional...Maybe other religions experience the same thing but i've never come across anything else like this except in islam.
Its a feeling where deep down in my soul I feel that this is the right thing for ME...everyone is different but if you were to ask most pious muslims, they'd most probably say the same thing but for me, islam feels like the truth. I have heard people talk about their experience at Hajj...they get so overwhelmed with emotion...I duno..I cant really explain it but they all feel pretty much the same. They say the quran softens hearts and I didnt believe it until I experienced it myself. Thats the inclination im talking about.

[Dizzy28]

^ What does truth feel like?

[rocknrolla]

^ What does truth feel like?

for me.. like flowing water ,)

[Sacchetto Boutique]

Have u ever in ur life done anything because it 'feels right'? or i've been positive about something even though logically, the outcome would be negative?

I guess that would never apply to the people who need to see to believe and since ur between teh devil and the deep blue see, not sure if you would understand what im saying or trying to say but .... all jokes welcome

[nareshseep]

The theists must obey the rules of their cult. Few had the courage to do otherwise.

[Dizzy28]

Have u ever in ur life done anything because it 'feels right'? or i've been positive about something even though logically, the outcome would be negative?

I guess that would never apply to the people who need to see to believe and since ur between teh devil and the deep blue see, not sure if you would understand what im saying or trying to say but .... all jokes welcome

I am neither Atheist nor Agnostic. I do believe in God and this is without ever having seen anything or evidence to believe in him. I am willing to accept however that there is a distinction between faith, belief and truth. I may not be right in my beliefs but this would also apply too every other believer of any other belief system.

We all have equal chance of being wrong with regards to God.

[Sacchetto Boutique]

Agreed..what I see are thruth might not be what you see as truth and thats fine...discussing is fine you know, its just sad when people insult/ ridicule you for your beliefs just because they dont understand it and thats something I am trying to stay away from and have respect for everyone's beliefs

[Dizzy28]

^ It doesn't help when you are adamant your way is the only way. (See many of AdamB's posts for reference)

[MG Man]

Have u ever in ur life done anything because it 'feels right'? or i've been positive about something even though logically, the outcome would be negative?

I guess that would never apply to the people who need to see to believe and since ur between teh devil and the deep blue see, not sure if you would understand what im saying or trying to say but .... all jokes welcome

pretty sure to some serial killers, it just feels right when the knife pushes past the initial resistance of skin and muscle, and delicately pokes its way into the soft organs underneath
good going with your logic there

[aks]

dwell in your stupidity

[Dizzy28]

^ Surely if nothing else you must believe in punctuation!!

[DFC]

Where Adamb these days?

He probably have plenty stuff to photocopy and books to bind.

[MG Man]

only fools shun real debate the questions are there they are facts taken out of both books no one can answer a bunch of critics with no credible answers that was just the top of the discussion i was about to unfold but i see now i have wasted my time trying to debate with a bunch of idiots i guess most of you guys cant read or write properly to respond accordingly to my views so i'll leave you now to dwell in your stupidity

lol sez the man who allergic to punctuation