Just to clear things up a bit

[newusername 10+ year member]

and....?

It's not fair to criticize someone for something they have no control over.

For example, say someone was born without an arm. Now it's not really fair to criticize them for that. If, however, they choose to have that arm amputated for cosmetic reasons, then you have every right to criticize them.

A religious person has the option of choosing something more intelligent, thus opening themselves to a critique of that choice.

 

[mugen08 10+ year member]

Try to convince Michael Jackson.

lol

 

[newusername 10+ year member]

Try to convince Michael Jackson.

His race has never changed.

//content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/confused.gif.e820e0216602db4765798ac39d28caa9.gif

 

[WhoSayWho? 5,000+ posts]

It's not fair to criticize someone for something they have no control over.
For example, say someone was born without an arm. Now it's not really fair to criticize them for that. If, however, they choose to have that arm amputated for cosmetic reasons, then you have every right to criticize them.

A religious person has the option of choosing something more intelligent, thus opening themselves to a critique of that choice.

And the caraudio.com vocabulary word for the day is...immutable.

 

[norcrawler 10+ year member]

Anybody here seen Religulous ?
I can't stand Bill Maher, but I still laughed my *** off at all the religious nuts he talked to. //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/laugh.gif.48439b2acf2cfca21620f01e7f77d1e4.gif

yes it was pretty dam funny.

wtf was up with that amish guy?!?!

dude that was trippin me out. if i saw that guy on the street i would go crazy on him and just beat his face in.

thats one of the most ignorant human beings ive seen..

 

[mugen08 10+ year member]

It's not fair to criticize someone for something they have no control over.
For example, say someone was born without an arm. Now it's not really fair to criticize them for that. If, however, they choose to have that arm amputated for cosmetic reasons, then you have every right to criticize them.

A religious person has the option of choosing something more intelligent, thus opening themselves to a critique of that choice.

Religion and intelligence have nothing to do with each other.

Christianity and wisdom go hand in hand.

Not saying you aren't wise if you aren't a Christian.

Example. Christ said that if a married man lusts after another woman in his mind, he is guilty of commiting adultery. Now, without imparting any wisdom, that statement may not make much sense. Even to someone that is extremely intelligent.

Its true meaning goes back to my discussion on repentance. If you repent in your heart, then you are forgiven. In other words, if, in your mind, you make a choice not to sin, and are truly sorry, you are forgiven and are living outside of the realm of sin. Now. When you make that conscious decision to go against the will of God, you are now living in sin.

Therefore, when you make a conscious decision that you are willing to have *** with that woman, you have just stepped out of forgiveness, because your repentance is no longer true.

 

[Pl8er 5,000+ posts]

 

[newusername 10+ year member]

Religion and intelligence have nothing to do with each other.

At least I didn't say it this time. //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/smile.gif.1ebc41e1811405b213edfc4622c41e27.gif

 

[Rashaddd 5,000+ posts]

But the planet is flat, God exists, and he controls this world. //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/rolleyes.gif.c1fef805e9d1464d377451cd5bc18bfb.gif I can't believe people believe the words of a book that's 2,000 years old. People back then knew what they were talking about....

The quran talks about things like that there are "7 levels of heaven", each with their own purpose in regards to the after-life. Scientists have figured out only recently that there are 7 distinct layers to the earth's atmosphere, each serving its unique purpose.

The quran also talks about the way the oceans meet, and the way they are huge bodies of water that don't interact at their joints. Also something we have only reletively recently discovered.

And many more things like this, which could not have been known 1400 years ago given the technology and scientific knowledge that existed at the time.

 

[newusername 10+ year member]

Enough stabs in the dark will eventually shank something.

Can you describe for me the layers of the atmosphere, and please link me to some information about it? The generally accepted atmospheric model consists of 5 layers. I often hear Islamic supporters spreading this 7 layer myth, with one of the layers called the magnetosphere. So the center of the earth is a level of heaven, and also part of the atmosphere?

In real science, there are 5 accepted layers of the atmosphere. As far as the huge bodies of water comment is concerned, I don't believe the Qu'Ran was the first to propose such an idea, but I'll have to re-read some older anthropology and science books here before I can say that with any degree of certainty....I prefer to know, rather than believe. //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/wink.gif.608e3ea05f1a9f98611af0861652f8fb.gif

There were many great Islamic scientists, especially in Middle Ages astronomy. However, the Qu'Ran is not science, and does not represent science in any way. I have not read any "pre-science" science in it, but if you can point out something legitimate, I would gladly review my position.

 

[perfecxionX 10+ year member]

I believe that some people are a little confused about this subject, so I thought I'd clear the ait a bit.
Seems like people believe that once upon a time Christians went around killing in the name of Christ.

This is a common misconception that is often used as a weapon to degrade Christians and Christianity, stating that Christians are just as sick as Muslim extremist terrorists who kill in the name of their god.

This logic is, however flawed, due to the fact that Christ did not condone murder, and the definition of a Christian is someone who follows the teachings of Christ and strives to mimic his life through theirs.

Therefore anyone who commits murder in the name of Christ is not a true Christian.

Period. Thanks for reading.

Cliffs

-Christians accused of killing in the crusades

-Christ does not condone killing

-The crusaders were not true Christians.

If you think that the Christians burning heretics and adulterers alive for 500 hundred years had not read the new testament you are sorely mistaken. In fact, I would guess that they probably read it much closer than you. As long as we regard these religious texts as something .... omniscient... or something really special, any lunatic can find some interpretation (likely a reasonable interpretation) to justify violence. You say that Christ did not condone murder but in Matthew 5:17 you can see Jesus saying

"Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. 18 I tell you the truth, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished."

As a species if we really want to see a future where Muslims believing in martyrdom and Christians believing in the rapture will make good neighbors, then we will need to eliminate these divisive self identifications entirely and learn to regard these books as no different from any other book. A good work of historical fiction maybe, but certainly not the word of God.

 

[Grinder1989 5,000+ posts]

The quran talks about things like that there are "7 levels of heaven", each with their own purpose in regards to the after-life. Scientists have figured out only recently that there are 7 distinct layers to the earth's atmosphere, each serving its unique purpose.
The quran also talks about the way the oceans meet, and the way they are huge bodies of water that don't interact at their joints. Also something we have only reletively recently discovered.

And many more things like this, which could not have been known 1400 years ago given the technology and scientific knowledge that existed at the time.

I could care less about how many layers there are in the atmosphere. I could care less about what the Qu'ran says too. It doesn't mean shit to me.

 

[Vermithrax 10+ year member]

The quran talks about things like that there are "7 levels of heaven", each with their own purpose in regards to the after-life. Scientists have figured out only recently that there are 7 distinct layers to the earth's atmosphere, each serving its unique purpose.
The quran also talks about the way the oceans meet, and the way they are huge bodies of water that don't interact at their joints. Also something we have only reletively recently discovered.

And many more things like this, which could not have been known 1400 years ago given the technology and scientific knowledge that existed at the time.

Islam = Scientology?

If I based it on just this post taken out of context it could sound that way to me. I could also determine that a 7 layer cake could be heaven to Muslims, and if you eat too much it just might kill you. I'm not trying to be a smartass, just citing how comparative speculation between science and religion can easily lead to misbelief, no matter which discipline you choose.

Scientists are wrong more often than they are right. If we base our knowledge solely on the findings of science and take their findings at face value then we're also practicing a form of faith, just faith in man rather than deity. After all, how many of us have actually performed any real experiments of our own to compare to what we're taught? How many conspiracy theories have existed in order to undermine scientific accomplishments? How many times are scientists discoveries perverted for the sake of power and destruction? How many scientific papers are regarded as the last word and heated debates arise among groups of differing thought? Sounds eerily similar to me. Almost cult-like.

 

[newusername 10+ year member]

There is a huge difference between belief in science and religion.

In science, we develop models and theories based on experimental evidence. If we find that evidence is contradicting to what we previously believed, WE CHANGE IT! Religious is so opposite to this that there is honestly no comparison.

You could, in fact, say that everything is belief (since we rely on perception), but at least science is a far more probable belief. Hence, agnostic atheism.

 

[Vermithrax 10+ year member]

DevilDriver:

I agree that there's a huge difference, to a point. I don't see science as a far more probable belief but rather just another possibility.

I also agree that the beliefs are oppisites. In religion, a deity is the supreme being, the end results of his finished word and work are considered infallible and worthy of ultimate respect, and belief is based on having faith that it is right.

In science, man is cast in the role and belief is based on having faith that it is right. I put it that way because history shows that scientific theories are accepted for decades at a time until a new genius emerges with a new theory which shoots down the previous belief. I'll cite the race to absolute 0 as an example.

For that line of reasoning I can't see science as a more probable belief since I'd have to resolve myself to accept that I may die believing in something that isn't at all right. The same holds true for religion and that's where I feel that the basis of faith draws the two closer together in practice.