|
Post by sweetnugs on Dec 7, 2008 18:58:19 GMT -5
Christianity * We demand ten percent of your money. * We demand at least one hour per week of your time. * We demand total allegiance. * Don't think for yourself. * Obey all of our rules, even if they're absurd or evil. * Only vote for candidates of whom we approve. * If you disagree with us, you will be roasted in the flames of hell for all eternity. * People on the other side are either knowing or unknowing agents of the devil. Atheism * We don't want your money. * We don't want your time. * We don't want your allegiance. * Think for yourself. * Live as you see fit. * Vote for whomever you want. * If you disagree with us, nothing bad will happen to you. * Most people on the other side are good people who are simply mistaken. www.secularplanet.org/2008/12/levels-of-control-christianity-versus.html
|
|
|
Post by Shmajser on Dec 8, 2008 3:57:23 GMT -5
What Christianity? There are at least 100 different versions of Bible: the king James Bible(probably the most used one),the Geneva Bible,Taverners Bible....and other 18-th,19-th and 20-th century versions of Bible. With so many different version and interpretation how can one be sure what they believe in. I think that most ppl believe in God because of the fear that they might go to hell if they don`t, just to be on the safe side. With Islam it`s different, in Quran there is science, today you have to prove with testable evidence that God exists, blind faith is fake faith. Stuff like "i saw a miracle", "i saw a vision","Jesus spoke to me in a dream" won`t cut it anymore, that`s why ppl in the West convert to Islam.
|
|
|
Post by Arthur Kane on Dec 8, 2008 13:32:36 GMT -5
Does Islam show empirically that god exists? Is it a hypothesis subject to scientific experiment? The Quran is hardly scientific and the pseudo-science proposed by the pedophile Harun Yahya to try to offer credence to his antiquated religion won't cut it.
Translations of the Quran have been less altered than the Bible since the Quran has remained in Arabic only for so many years. They're both fairy tales since they lack evidence showing the god they propose actually exists. I don't even find them an inspiring source for morality, quite the opposite actually.
|
|
|
Post by markosijekira on Dec 8, 2008 23:48:19 GMT -5
^ Indeed
The Bible, or should I say the old testament, the foundation for both Christianity and Islam was a series of scriptures written over a long period of time by religious elders of Semitic tribes. It was written by primitive men, in a primitive cultural environment with often brutal conditions. While the Old Testament speaks of love, it also speaks of blatant genocide as a good thing, not to mention the horrendous ways of executing people for what would not even be considered crime today. Christians are often very selective, and they like to pick out and quote the "nice" things the bible has to say, but will usually stay away from the more "bloody" lines in the good book. There are some particular countries out there today that implement the morality and law of the Old Testament quite literally to some extent, and that is Iran and Saudi Arabia.
|
|
|
Post by meltdown711 on Dec 8, 2008 23:54:44 GMT -5
The Old Testament is the ultimate tool of the kind of nationalism the Hebrews proposed. It established a national god, national state and cause for defending it, a unified people (Jews had give a certain amount of their wealth to their temple)... It was a perfect blend of radical nationalism and zelous faith. Defending your state was not just a necessity of defending your motherland but also of serving God. Genius!!!
And God said sand exists... and sand existed... and it was made up of little little small pieces of rocks...
And god made the water and made it wet...
|
|
|
Post by markosijekira on Dec 9, 2008 0:20:32 GMT -5
And God said sand exists... and sand existed... and it was made up of little little small pieces of rocks...
And god made the water and made it wet... Hey, thats exactly how its writen in the geology books ;D You are right about the Old Testament as a tool of nationalism. It’s also the reason why the Jews never tried to convert anybody...a nationalist religion for the chosen people. In fact even the first Christians considered themselves still only Jews and were reluctant to recruit people outside Judaism. Christianity died in the 4th century AD. Between 313 and 380 Christianity was effectively taken over and assimilated into the Roman Empire. After centuries of unsuccessful attempts to get rid of the Christians, Constantine and his followers decided to make it their own. By making Christianity suddenly a part of the Imperial power structure, not only did it quell riots, it gave the empire a new unifying force, after a century of collapse. Suddenly Christianity went from humble priests in catacombs and a sheepherding simple Jesus, and no cross symbol, to Grand Basilicas, Purple Robes (imperial color), gaudy cloths for the church hierarchy, and new titles like Bishop (Overseer), Cardinal (Chief) etc and Jesus was transformed in imagery from a simple sheepherder to Christ Pantocrator, ruler of all, depicted in Imperial robes of purple color, and a great beard, as was the custom of Emperors at the time. Anyhow little history there for ya
|
|
|
Post by meltdown711 on Dec 9, 2008 0:41:13 GMT -5
Ive never done any significant study into Constantine, so I can't say what he was truly motivated... the guy venerated Apollo and had a taste for Mithra up until late in his life; and the fact that one of the biggest sources is Eusebius, a church historian, doesnt exactly shed too much light. The whole event at the Milvian Bridge is clearly a construction. What I do know is that classical religion was dying in the 3rd century and the main religions at the time, such as Neo-Platonism, Stoicism and such, were far too complex for the common people to understand, Christianity closed that gap. Its no surprise that generally those who were more educated tended to stay more conservative. Plus, thanks to Paul, you no longer needed all the requirements Judaism needed to convert... mainly no circumcision. lol Oh yea and the army never found Christianity too appealing up until the end of the pagan era. Something about turning the other cheek and preaching peace and love that the soldiers never quite found attractive in the place of the warrior god Mithra.
|
|
|
Post by meltdown711 on Dec 9, 2008 0:43:47 GMT -5
Anyway, I don't want to disrespect faith since there are religious people -- and I want to keep my head -- so I wont go too deeply into it.
|
|
|
Post by markosijekira on Dec 9, 2008 0:52:50 GMT -5
You should read Constantine’s Sword, good book, there are some others, but it pretty much talks about Constantine simply understanding realpolitik, he could use Christianity as a tool of control, since the empires bureaucratic infrastructure was in shambles after a century of civil war, economic collapse and barbarian invasions. I took a full century after Constantine to make Christianity really the very fabric of society in Rome, like you said, because it was a religion easily understood by poor peasants (and at that time, Roman urban culture all but collapsed leaving mostly fearful peasants) and as such, it was only logical that it would be used by the Imperials for their own agenda.
|
|
|
Post by markosijekira on Dec 9, 2008 0:55:45 GMT -5
btw talking about historical facts, is not disrespecting faith at all. Now that god is about as likely to exist as the tooth fairy, now that would be disrespecting faith meaning no disrespect, badabing badaboom!
|
|
|
Post by meltdown711 on Dec 9, 2008 1:18:08 GMT -5
It also depends on what reality is accepted. There is an interesting statement in Eusebius where he states that a group of heathens worshiping a fake messiah called Simon Magus. Eusebius says that they did some wierd things, such as
they fall down before pictures and images of Simon himself and of the above-mentioned Helena who was with him; and they venture to worship them with incense and sacrifices and libations.
Helena was a prostitute who followed him. Does any Orthodox or Catholic find these acts wierd today? Praying with images? Libation and incense?
I had an argument with a very pious Serb here a while back who stated that the church was eternal and never changed, as Eusebius believed. Yet here itself there are significant breaks in continuum since it doesnt look like Eusebius did the things which modern Christians do. My argument was that ideas were adopted and the nature and identity of Christ changed radically through the ages.
|
|
|
Post by markosijekira on Dec 9, 2008 1:49:28 GMT -5
"who stated that the church was eternal and never changed"Well yes, we could pretty much destroy that argument, by just observing the change the Church went through since it's formation to the Protestant reformation. "they fall down before pictures and images of Simon himself and of the above-mentioned Helena who was with him; and they venture to worship them with incense and sacrifices and libations"Once Christianity was romanized it took on many elements of the old Greco-Roman polytheism. In the Old Testament the worship of idols was strictly forbid, but Christians increasingly resorted to Iconography, worshiping images of god, and the Christ pantocrator, and later also worshiping at the feet of statues. And then let’s not forget the various saint, and the icons relating to them as well as statues, that received as much attention as God himself. Clearly polytheism founds its way into the Holy mother church Now, the First Council of Nicaea in 325 AD is what he should look at. We have 250 years of Christianity preceding this event, but it was only at the Council that very human church leaders decided on Church doctrine, smoothing out doctrinal orthodoxy and basically unifying the dogma of the dozens of variations of Christianity that had sprung up. The Emperors could hardly use Christianity as a imperial tool, if there were to be dozen of churches all doing their own thing. The Aryans paid a heavy price for this. And even more then a thousand years later at the Council of Trent the Church ( in this now only the post schism Roman Catholic church) still had to convene numerous time ti define doctrine and modify some "details" Lets no forget the gospels that never made it into the New Testament, simply because they differ from the orthodoxy of more powerful elements of the church. Heh I love religous studies!!
|
|
|
Post by Shmajser on Dec 9, 2008 3:25:22 GMT -5
Does Islam show empirically that god exists? Is it a hypothesis subject to scientific experiment? The Quran is hardly scientific and the pseudo-science proposed by the pedophile Harun Yahya to try to offer credence to his antiquated religion won't cut it. Translations of the Quran have been less altered than the Bible since the Quran has remained in Arabic only for so many years. They're both fairy tales since they lack evidence showing the god they propose actually exists. I don't even find them an inspiring source for morality, quite the opposite actually. These are not fairy tales my friend, there is no science in fairy tales. To say that someone could of predicted these things 1400 years ago goes agains the theory of probability, which means that mathematically it is not possible. There is only one God, none of that 3 in 1 b.s, one Quran, not 100, and one last messenger Muhammed p.b.u.h. True fairy tales are b.s made by the atheists like how we all evolved from monkeys, and yet there are still monkeys around, somehow they did not evolve, isn`t that strange.LOOL Than you have Big bang theory,LOOOOOL, the earth was created when some giant rocks hit our planet, who created that rock i wonder, you see the scientists don`t want to admit that there is a creation because than they would have to admit that there is a creator,and we can`t have that now can we.
|
|
|
Post by markosijekira on Dec 9, 2008 4:25:02 GMT -5
Islam is rooted in the Old Testament, it is like Christianity an offspring of Judaism, as such our earlier comments are valid for it as well. We did not evolve from "monkeys" we and the various species of modern apes share a common root ancestor species of primate of the Hominidae family, we share up to 99% genetic compatibility with Chimps for example, what’s that Genetics? oh yeah they don’t mention that in the holy texts. Science is ever evolving; we learn new things and discard old theories that don’t hold up anymore, our medical, technological understanding evolves progressively as a result. Religion (The religions of the old book especially), is static, dogmatic, infallible(or they like to think so) and absolute.
|
|
|
Post by markosijekira on Dec 9, 2008 4:33:07 GMT -5
"the earth was created when some giant rocks hit our planet"
So the earth was created when a giant rock hit the earth, which already existed? How logical. We live in a vast universe, it is difficult to just comprehend how vast it is, we are a very young species (by young i mean a few hunder thousend years not the 7 or 8 the old book tells us), and we have soo much more to learn, and new things to discover. It is so easy to fall back on a creator myth because it simplifies everything. We can’t understand how the sun works? Well god must have made it that is all we need to know. I think i will take my chances with progressive and free thinking scientist of the modern age, then some peasant priests that lived antiquity who believed the earth was flat and "here be monsters in the see".
|
|
|
Post by meltdown711 on Dec 9, 2008 15:42:19 GMT -5
Science and Islam is like dik to dik penetration: It wont work and youll just end up ripping something...
|
|
|
Post by kapetan on Dec 9, 2008 15:49:04 GMT -5
Science and Islam is like dik to dik penetration: It wont work and youll just end up ripping something... Much more compatible then Christianity and Science. Not to mention how many breakthroughs in mathematics and astrology and other stuff Europeans in the dark ages stole from Arabs. Either way, saying "if we evolved from monkeys why is there monkeys" is about the dumbest thing ever lol. It's apes not monkeys. And saying that shows a person doesnt have even the most BASIC uunderstanding about evolution. We evolved from a CERTAIN SPECIES of ape not all apes and monkies. There used to be more then one species of "man" as well but not anymore. Neanderthals died out, Homo Sapiens survived. This is all pretty much proven, but its hard to convince reliigous people who are stuck on their bible or quran.
|
|
|
Post by Arthur Kane on Dec 10, 2008 4:16:09 GMT -5
Does Islam show empirically that god exists? Is it a hypothesis subject to scientific experiment? The Quran is hardly scientific and the pseudo-science proposed by the pedophile Harun Yahya to try to offer credence to his antiquated religion won't cut it. Translations of the Quran have been less altered than the Bible since the Quran has remained in Arabic only for so many years. They're both fairy tales since they lack evidence showing the god they propose actually exists. I don't even find them an inspiring source for morality, quite the opposite actually. These are not fairy tales my friend, there is no science in fairy tales. To say that someone could of predicted these things 1400 years ago goes agains the theory of probability, which means that mathematically it is not possible. There is only one God, none of that 3 in 1 b.s, one Quran, not 100, and one last messenger Muhammed p.b.u.h. True fairy tales are b.s made by the atheists like how we all evolved from monkeys, and yet there are still monkeys around, somehow they did not evolve, isn`t that strange.LOOL Than you have Big bang theory,LOOOOOL, the earth was created when some giant rocks hit our planet, who created that rock i wonder, you see the scientists don`t want to admit that there is a creation because than they would have to admit that there is a creator,and we can`t have that now can we. Are you seriously going to stand by the claim the Quran is a book of science? Not just science , but the all science having an advanced understanding of physics, biology, geology, etc. Hahaha. Really, you should consider picking up a real science text if you are truly interested. The Arab culture that made up Islam borrowed many ideas from the lands they conquered in the West and inherited vast reserves of philosophical and pre-scientific knowledge of the Ancient Greeks such as contained in the Great Library of Alexandria. They also inherited Judeo-Christian theology and spawned their own religion from it. You really should try to understand what atheism and evolution actually are. Atheism =/= Theory of Evolution though most atheists are rationally minded and accept the massive evidences for biological evolution. One does not need to be an atheist to accept evolution by natural selection as a fact and valid scientific theory. Just pick up a book, or even watch some documentaries about evolution and at least get a rudimentary knowledge of it before making your critique. I highly doubt you know anything about it as you seem to think evolution is linear. lol. Human evolution doesn't say we come from monkeys that are present today. Rather, we are close relatives to the other modern Great Apes, particularly the Chimpanzee with which we share over 95% of our genetic code. That is closer than mice and rats are related. We didn't evolve from any ape or monkey alive today but rather we share a common ancestor with them which is now extinct. Also, I suggest familiarizing yourself much better with the BBT ( Big Bang Theory). Earth's formation occurred a few billion years after the BB. As far as ' who created blah blah?' goes, that is a logical fallacy because you are already assuming that a 'who' created all matter and energy in the universe. On what basis? Where is the evidence of this 'creator?' That is the whole point. Science does not make absolute claims, it only points to probabilities based on the evidence. We find evidence in Astrophysics that shows us the universe 'began' ( if you really want to call it that) with a enormous explosion. Astrophysics has even discovered evidence to show, with pin point accuracy, what happened just nanoseconds after the Big Bang. In fact, in France, the new Hadron Collider is suppose to give us an even greater understanding by simulating the BB ( scaled down , of course, lol). Just about all respectable scientists, even the most atheistic ones such as Richard Dawkins, have all stated that they are more than open to accepting a creator exists. They haven't even thrown out the possibility, but many things are possible such as a teapot orbiting Jupiter but can be properly dismissed from any serious conversation since there is zero evidence showing the probability of it being true. All that is asked for is objective, verifiable, reproducible evidence to show the existence of a creator. True, but not by much. Btw, maybe you meant to say Astronomy and not Astrology. Astrology was popularized by Ptolemy and is NOT a science. And remember, the Arabs inherited many of their quasi-scientific ideas from the Ancient Greeks. It is a fact that during the European Dark Ages, Arabic culture - which was by then practicing Islam- was far more liberal towards science than their Xtian European counterparts. It wasn't until centuries later, when the Church's power began to wane, that old ideas were reintroduced. The Islamic world, unfortunately, shifted away from being at least partially open to rational thought. Indeed. But we are still apes. ;D And just as a picking point , Neanderthals were also Homo-Sapiens. We are actually Homo-sapien-sapien. Hahaha. Your point stands though. ;D
|
|
|
Post by Shmajser on Dec 10, 2008 6:17:08 GMT -5
Wow, so many replies, never knew there was so many atheists on this board, i will not be able to reply to everyone, cause i don`t have the time so i shell focus only on Arthur Kane, since he seems to be the brightest one, plus i didn`t read all the replies so it is not even possible to answer all. Are you seriously going to stand by the claim the Quran is a book of science? Not just science , but the all science having an advanced understanding of physics, biology, geology, etc. Hahaha. Really, you should consider picking up a real science text if you are truly interested.
The Arab culture that made up Islam borrowed many ideas from the lands they conquered in the West and inherited vast reserves of philosophical and pre-scientific knowledge of the Ancient Greeks such as contained in the Great Library of Alexandria. They also inherited Judeo-Christian theology and spawned their own religion from it.
You really should try to understand what atheism and evolution actually are. Atheism =/= Theory of Evolution though most atheists are rationally minded and accept the massive evidences for biological evolution. One does not need to be an atheist to accept evolution by natural selection as a fact and valid scientific theory.
Yes Quran is the book of science, many ideas may seem like they were borrowed from ancient Greek and Arab scholars, who said many correct things, but they also said many false things as well, everything in Quran is scientifically accurate, there is not a single contradiction, it is impossible only to borrow/copy correct things and leave out the incorrect ones, just because you find similarities between ancient scholars and the Quran it does not mean that Quran copied from them, besides Muhammed could not write. Yes i know there are millions of sites out there trying to disprove the Quran, but they are mostly hate sites, created by the people who don`t even speak Arabic. If you want to know the truth talk to the Islamic scholars, you will find all sorts of stuff on the internet. Many atheists demand a scientific proof for the existence of God. I agree, today is the age of science and technology. So i will use scientific facts to kill two birds with one stone, to prove the existence of God and at the same time prove that the Quran is from God. In mathematics there is a theory known as Theory of Probability. If you have two options, out of which one is right, and one is wrong, the chances that you will chose the right one is half, one out of the two will be correct. You have 50% chances of being correct.If you throw a coin the chances that your guess will be correct is 50% (1 out of 2) 1/2. If you throw a coin the second time, the chances that you will be correct in the second throw is again 50% half. But the chances that you will be correct in both times is half multiplied by half (1/2 x 1/2) which is equal to 1/4 50% of 50% which is equal to 25%. If you throw a coin the third time, chances that you will be correct all three times is (1/2 x 1/2 x 1/2) that is 1/8 or 50% of 50% of 50% that is 12½%. A dice has got six sides. If you throw a dice and guess any number between 1 to 6, the chances that your guess will be correct is 1/6. If you throw the dice the second time, the chances that your guess will be correct in both the throws is (1/6 x 1/6) which is equal to 1/36. If you throw the dice the third time, the chances that all your three guesses are correct is (1/6 x 1/6 x 1/6) is equal to 1/216 that is less than 0.5 %. If we apply this theory of probability to the Quran, and assume that a person has guessed all the information that is mentioned in the Quran which was unknown at that time. Let us discuss the probability of all the guesses being at the same time correct. At the time when the Quran was revealed, people thought the world was flat, there are several other options for the shape of the earth. It could be triangular, it could be all kinds of shapes. Lets assume there are about 30 different options for the shape of the earth. The Quran says it is spherical, if it was a guess the chances of the guess being correct is 1/30. The light of the moon can be its own light or a reflected light. The Quran says it is a reflected light. If it is a guess, the chances that it will be correct is 1/2 and the probability that both the guesses the earth is spherical and the light of the moon is reflected light is 1/30 x 1/2 = 1/60. The Quran also mentions every living thing is made of water. Every living thing can be made up of either wood, stone, copper, aluminum, steel, silver, gold, oxygen, nitrogen, hydrogen, oil, water, cement.... The options are say about 10,000. The Quran rightly says that everything is made up of water. If it is a guess, the chances that it will be correct is 1/10,000 and the probability of all the three guesses the earth is spherical, light of moon is reflected light and everything is created from water being correct is 1/30 x 1/2 x 1/10,000 = 1/60,000 which is equal to about .0017%. The Quran speaks about hundreds of things that were not known to men at the time of its revelation. Only in three options the result is .0017%. I leave it upto you, to work out the probability if all the hundreds of the unknown facts were guesses, the chances of all of them being correct guesses at the same time and there being not a single wrong guess. It is beyond human capacity to make all correct guesses without a single mistake, which itself is sufficient to prove to a logical person that the origin of the Quran is divine.
|
|
tyson
Amicus
Posts: 1,256
|
Post by tyson on Dec 10, 2008 7:37:48 GMT -5
^ Indeed The Bible, or should I say the old testament, the foundation for both Christianity and Islam was a series of scriptures written over a long period of time by religious elders of Semitic tribes. It was written by primitive men, in a primitive cultural environment with often brutal conditions. While the Old Testament speaks of love, it also speaks of blatant genocide as a good thing, not to mention the horrendous ways of executing people for what would not even be considered crime today. Christians are often very selective, and they like to pick out and quote the "nice" things the bible has to say, but will usually stay away from the more "bloody" lines in the good book. There are some particular countries out there today that implement the morality and law of the Old Testament quite literally to some extent, and that is Iran and Saudi Arabia. thats because the christian faith is based around jesus's teachings , ie. the new testament. thats why when the mass is celebrated in the church, they only referrence the new testament. for some christian protestant churches, they only have the bible with the new testament in it. the old testament is still important, like the book of genesis, the commandments, among alot of other things, but its the new testament what christians concentrate on. it defines our faith, and we also like to believe in a merciful, loving and compasionate god which is portrayed in the new testament, rather than a vengeful, angry and unforgiving god which is portrayed in the old testament. thats what is much more attractive about christianity over judaism and islam, because their god is the one portrayed in the old testament. each to their own, though
|
|