Do you believe in God? (1 Viewer)

[RANK 1]

Re: Do you believe is God?

i have come across many arrogant people who say but science says this and that, well heres a news flash What science has come to discover recently has been stated from over 1400 years ago in many religious texts.

such as?......

 

[Absolutezero]

Re: Do you believe is God?

What science has come to discover recently has been stated from over 1400 years ago in many religious texts. I would like to leave you all with this video, which i found relevent to this thread:

If the religious texts knew this 1400 years ago, then why didn't the followers use this information then? It was only until science established these things as truths, that the religions searched with hindsight for evidence within these texts; which mostly came to be vague interpretations and translations of passages to fit the facts. And, less relevant, why do they omit so many important things?

 

[Azure]

Re: Do you believe is God?

If the religious texts knew this 1400 years ago, then why didn't the followers use this information then?

This is an extremely over simplistic analysis of a complicated text which was written over the span of hundreds of years. How could followers 1400 years ago check for springs at the bottom of the ocean or particles that are indiscernible to the human eye? In other words, how could science validate something it was not yet aware of?

You are creating the implication that science and religion are mutally exclusive, in which they are not. The stated science in the bible could not possibly be used without scientific validation.

It was only until science established these things as truths, that the religions searched with hindsight for evidence within these texts; which mostly came to be vague interpretations and translations of passages to fit the facts. And, less relevant, why do they omit so many important things?

There is also nothing wrong with using science as hindsight, so long as the intrepretation is not wildly exagurated to a point in which it is no longer relevant or accurate. For example;

By faith we understand that the worlds were framed by the word of God, so that the things which are seen were not made of things which are visible.

Source.

I don't know if you can get anymore specific than that.

 

[ibbi00]

Re: Do you believe is God?

If the religious texts knew this 1400 years ago, then why didn't the followers use this information then? It was only until science established these things as truths, that the religions searched with hindsight for evidence within these texts; which mostly came to be vague interpretations and translations of passages to fit the facts. And, less relevant, why do they omit so many important things?

Umm, I'm assuming you're all talking about the Quran with the 1400 years reference. The Quran isn't exactly a science textbook, per se. Its use of what is now known to be scientific facts is simply for validation reasons.

 

[Absolutezero]

Re: Do you believe is God?

This is an extremely over simplistic analysis of a complicated text which was written over the span of hundreds of years. How could followers 1400 years ago check for springs at the bottom of the ocean or particles that are indiscernible to the human eye?

I'm mostly referring to concepts such as hand washing in medicine, or the spherical shape of the earth. What I'm suggesting is that evidence from the religious text in regards to things later discovered can not be used as irrefutable proof of the validity of the text text. The fact that some things may align with science is to be expected. That's why all the holy books (the Qu'ran, the Bible etc.) can make claims that they predicted events and knew facts before science did. If you make enough predictions, and manipulate meanings every so slightly, to be honest, I'd be surprised if nothing did match.

Umm, I'm assuming you're all talking about the Quran with the 1400 years reference.

I'm referring to all holy books.

The Quran isn't exactly a science textbook, per se. Its use of what is now known to be scientific facts is simply for validation reasons.

I have read it, so I know it's not meant to be taken as a science book. However, the same use of science and prediction is done with the Bible. What makes the Qu'ran's use of these facts as validation any more true than that of the Bible.

 

[Azure]

Re: Do you believe is God?

I have read it, so I know it's not meant to be taken as a science book. However, the same use of science and prediction is done with the Bible. What makes the Qu'ran's use of these facts as validation any more true than that of the Bible.

On a side note, that is actually pretty impressive. Have you read any other religious books?

 

[Chemical Ali]

Re: Do you believe is God?

Umm, I'm assuming you're all talking about the Quran with the 1400 years reference. The Quran isn't exactly a science textbook, per se. Its use of what is now known to be scientific facts is simply a classic example of the post hoc ergo propter hoc fallacy coupled with a healthy dose of confirmation bias

edited that for you bro

 

[Absolutezero]

Re: Do you believe is God?

On a side note, that is actually pretty impressive. Have you read any other religious books?

I'm reading through the bible at the moment. And I've got the book of Mormon in my house, but I haven't started on it yet.

In terms of atheism, I've read Dawkin's The God Delusion, which in more focused on an American audience, due to the way it deals with evolution/creationism. Also read Hitchens' God is Not Great, which looks at the problems religion has caused in the world.

 

[ibbi00]

Re: Do you believe is God?

That's why all the holy books (the Qu'ran, the Bible etc.) can make claims that they predicted events and knew facts before science did. If you make enough predictions, and manipulate meanings every so slightly, to be honest, I'd be surprised if nothing did match.

Well consider the following verse

They will ask you about Intoxicants and games of chance. Say "In both there is great evil as well as some benefit for man; but the evil which they cause is greater than the benefit which they bring." - Quran (2:219).

Surely the average person with the intention of advocating against intoxicants, namely alcohol, will simply mention that it is harmful for you, period, whilst overlooking any benefits it may offer, assuming you had any clue of said benefits. But the verse so immaculately mentions that it is both harmful and beneficial but its harm far outweighs any benefits it may bring about. Are you seriously going to dismiss this with the rhetoric of: 'if you make enough predictions, you'll get a couple, here and there, correct'?

 

[Absolutezero]

Re: Do you believe is God?

Drunken violence + Hangover = Worse than benefits.

Easily able to be experienced by the writer. You're claiming that the verse refers to something more specific than it does, purely based on what is already know. As just demonstrated, it is a fairly easy conclusion for someone of that time to deduce.

 

[ibbi00]

Re: Do you believe is God?

My point was that the benefits of Alcohol haven't been realised until of recent. Which is not a "fairly easy conclusion for someone at that time to deduce".

 

[Absolutezero]

Re: Do you believe is God?

Did you think about why they drank it in the first place. Obviously there was a positive reason for it, otherwise they wouldn't have done it.

That easily translates as a benefit of alcohol. It doesn't refer specifically to health or medical benefits, which is what we are learning now.

Again, the same sort of predictions are made with the bible. Why is the Qu'ran the authority over the bible, and thus, proves it's validity instead of the other?

 

[ibbi00]

Re: Do you believe is God?

Did you think about why they drank it in the first place. Obviously there was a positive reason for it, otherwise they wouldn't have done it.

Humans tend to do things they enjoy even when it has no benefit. E.g. smoking. This mentality is clearly evident in today's society, what makes you think it was different for pagan Arabs?

Again, the same sort of predictions are made with the bible. Why is the Qu'ran the authority over the bible, and thus, proves it's validity instead of the other?

Point out the same sort of prediction for me. Whilst I would love to debate why Qur'an has the authority over the Bible, I don't believe this is the thread for this.

 

[Absolutezero]

Re: Do you believe is God?

Humans tend to do things they enjoy even when it has no benefit. i.e. smoking. This mentality is clearly evident in today's society, what makes you think it was different for pagan Arabs?

Drinking for enjoyment is noted in the Ancient Greeks.

Point out the same sort of prediction for me.

Surely you can't be trying to argue that the bible makes no predictions of this nature. The bible both talks about the positive and negative effects of alcohol. Here is a brief summary:

http://wooga.drbacchus.com/bible/alcohol.html

What you have given is no more specific than the bible can provide. Azure should be able to give you more than I can, as he believes it. The wiki link should give you a few examples as well:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bible_prophecy

 

[ibbi00]

Re: Do you believe is God?

Drinking for enjoyment is noted in the Ancient Greeks.

Which brings me to my second point. Surely when you are campaigning against alcohol or anything of a similar nature, you wouldn't mention that it has some benefits in the same line unless you were certain that the benefits are both non-trivial and explicit. Enjoyment wouldn't exactly have crossed your mind.

 

[Chemical Ali]

Re: Do you believe is God?

God never ceases to shed white light on my, his divine power assists me in the good and bad times, provides me with a sense of calmness. An amazing being.

well that's nice of him

 

[Absolutezero]

Re: Do you believe is God?

Which brings me to my second point. Surely when you are campaigning against alcohol or anything of a similar nature, you wouldn't mention that it has some benefits in the same line unless you were certain that the benefits are both non-trivial and explicit. Enjoyment wouldn't exactly have crossed your mind.

I still fail to see how the line directly shows an understanding of the world that was impossible to have come up with without divine inspiration and knowledge.

 

[ibbi00]

Re: Do you believe is God?

Surely you can't be trying to argue that the bible makes no predictions of this nature. The bible both talks about the positive and negative effects of alcohol. Here is a brief summary:

http://wooga.drbacchus.com/bible/alcohol.html

Whilst I respect your open-mindedness, please don't give me links that consist of thousands of words where a quick Ctrl+F searching for keywords such as 'benefit' doesn't yield out any results. I'm not going to go through them in that case -.-

 

[ibbi00]

Re: Do you believe is God?

I still fail to see how the line directly shows an understanding of the world that was impossible to have come up with without divine inspiration and knowledge.

Understanding of the world? Really? I wasn't arguing this.

 

[Absolutezero]

Re: Do you believe is God?

Understanding of the world? Really? I wasn't arguing this.

The topic in question then, to be more specific. An understanding of alcohol.