WHY DO PEOPLE TRY TO FORCE THEIR RELIGION ON OTHERS??

brahmin
A. Goy is in Yiddish what a gentile is in English. Same thing.

Being born of a Jewish father and Gentile mother makes the children gentile. If they chose to follow Judaism they to must go through the conversion process.

ok ty for the goy/gentile bit.


and i knew the rest and even stated as much (ceremony/ritual needed for induction).


do you live in/near morningside heights?

I hope that's a typo au1929! Or all those lesbian couples don't have to worry about adoption any more.

hingehead
Indeed it was. Thanks

I agree. You should try to follow Christ in modern society. Then you will find out what being alone with your beliefs is really all about. If you don't think so, try walking through a mall and imagine what it would be like to go through there trying to avoid seeing sex based advertising.

everyojne in the world should become christian ?

That would be impossible. There are to many of us who like to use reason an logic, ; think for ourselves.

Booman2

I agree with you when you said : "Science, is an explanation of God "



Indeed, If there was only one scientific error in a Book that makes the book inacurate and need updates, right. That is the reason why we find so many editions of one single book treating one single subject.

Now I am asking you to be fair and read the whole posting.

Brother Booman2, the Quran has so many scientific data that God is using to prove and help intelligent people believe that it is the truth from GOD.
The Quran that was written 1400 years ago does not have a second edition. There are so many recent findings that are proving that the Quran is amazing and unique of its kind. Here is an example :

Scientific Proof by Professor Emeritus Keith L. Moore
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
We created man from an extract of clay.
Then We made him as a drop in a place of
settlement, firmly fixed. Then We made the
drop into an alaqah (leech, suspended thing,
and blood clot), thenWemade the alaqah into
a mudghah (chewed substance)...
(Qur’an, 23:12-14)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Professor Emeritus Keith L. Moore is one of the world’s most
prominent scientists in the fields of anatomy and embryology and
is the author of the book entitled The Developing Human, which
has been translated into eight languages. This book is a scientific
reference work and was chosen by a special committee in the
United States as the best book authored by one person. Dr. Keith
Moore is Professor Emeritus of Anatomy and Cell Biology at the
University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada. There, he was Associate
Dean of Basic Sciences at the Faculty of Medicine and for 8 years
was the Chairman of the Department of Anatomy. In 1984, he
received the most distinguished award presented in the field of
anatomy in Canada, the J.C.B. Grant Award from the Canadian
Association of Anatomists. He has directed many international
associations, such as the Canadian and American Association of
Anatomists and the Council of the Union of Biological Sciences.
In 1981, during the Seventh Medical Conference in Dammam,
Saudi Arabia, Professor Moore said: “It has been a great pleasure
for me to help clarify statements in the Qur’an about human
development. It is clear to me that these statements must have
come to Muhammad from God, because almost all of this knowledge
was not discovered until many centuries later. This proves
to me that Muhammad must have been a messenger of God.”2
Consequently, Professor Moore was asked the following question:
“Does this mean that you believe that the Qur’an is the word
of God?” He replied: “I find no difficulty in accepting this.”3
During one conference, Professor Moore stated: “....Because
the staging of human embryos is complex, owing to the continuous
process of change during development, it is proposed that a
new system of classification could be developed using the terms
mentioned in the Qur’an and Sunnah (what Muhammad
said,
did, or approved of). The proposed system is simple, comprehensive,
and conforms with present embryological knowledge. The
intensive studies of the Qur’an and hadeeth (reliably transmitted
reports by the Prophet Muhammad’s
companions of what he
said, did, or approved of) in the last four years have revealed a
system for classifying human embryos that is amazing since it was
recorded in the seventh century A.D. Although Aristotle, the
founder of the science of embryology, realized that chick embryos
developed in stages from his studies of hen’s eggs in the fourth
century B.C., he did not give any details about these stages. As
far as it is known from the history of embryology, little was known
about the staging and classification of human embryos until the
twentieth century. For this reason, the descriptions of the human
embryo in the Qur’an cannot be based on scientific knowledge in
the seventh century. The only reasonable conclusion is: these
descriptions were revealed to Muhammad from God. He could not
have known such details because he was an illiterate man with
absolutely no scientific training."
------------------------------------------------------------------
(1) The Developing Human, Moore and Persaud, 5th ed., p. 9.
(2) The source of this comment is This is the Truth (videotape). Visit
www.islam-guide.com/truth for a copy of this videotape or to view
the video clips of Professor Keith Moore’s comments online.
---------------------------------------------------------------

Thanking you
May Allah guide us

Read the following book you will find several scientific proofs about truthness of Islam

---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Title: A Brief Illustrated Guide To Understanding Islam
Author: I. A. Ibrahim
Pages ~80
ISBN: 9960-34-011-2
Library of Congress Catalog Card Number: 97-67654
Publisher: Darussalam, Publishers and Distributors, Houston, Texas, USA.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Download links of book:
www.islam-guide.com/islam-guide.pdf
OR
www.islam-guide.com/frm-b...wnload.htm

That particular section is so vague, it could mean anything. It could be interpreted literally, in that man was really made out of clay then turned into a leech, a blood clot and then into some sort of chewed substance.

Then there is the metaphorical interpretation that Prof. Moore came up with.

The question is, what is the intentional meaning and did Moore read too much between the lines?

Also, to come up with the answer that God must have had a hand in something just because he interpreted the Quran one way and because there is no documented evidence of them knowing about embryos, isn't really a very scientific thing to do.

Science is not an explanation of God. It is an explanation of the world and the Universe, which he may or may not have created.

The moment a scientist includes God into his calculations, lazy thinking occurs, resulting in conclusions that may be false. God must never be the explanation for anything scientific.

Wolf_

Are you trying to convince me that exact facts are not exact ? or you are trying to avoid the truth ? Ask yourself if you are happy with your analysis or if that analysis was just a way to convince yourself that there is not a possibility that God exist whatsoever or that the Quran isn't a Miracle from GOD itself.

Remember that was a very tiny example of what the Quran is talking about. I can spend years talking about other Miracles in the Quran even though the Quran does not need me to explain because you can read it by yourself. God makes it easier for others to believe in the Quran by mentioning clear facts and that was done out of Mercy from God who could just say : do this and that and not that but that could be harder for people to find the truth. So definitely "Science, is an explanation of God " believe it or not.

Michael

OH YEAH!..... Then what that make me Wolf?...huh..huh...?

....On second thought, don't answer that, my brother. Just ponder this , if you will. Okay, begining of time; God decides to create heaven, earth, mankind, plants, etc.,etc.,.. Now to make something you need material right? If there is nothing in existence except God, where else would He get the material, except from Himself? So this makes everything that is, a part of God...right?... So-o-o, If science explains everything that is.... I'm assuming that you being an intelligent person, can finish that without me right my Brother? (Yes I deliberately capitalized brother )

I couldn't even if I tried. There's no verb in that question.



Who said there was nothing in existence except God? I know at least the Christian Bible doesn't say that.

I'd say that the world and the Universe is a better explanation of God (if He exists and I doubt He exists in the form religions think He does), but still, how can you explain someone from what he creates? He could create something that doesn't reveal anything about what He's thinking or feeling.

He could have created something that is the complete opposite of what He thinks and feels, or something that gives you no clues as to His true nature.

.....brother Wolf says. "I'd say that the world and the Universe is a better explanation of God (if He exists and I doubt He exists in the form religions think He does), but still, how can you explain someone from what he creates? He could create something that doesn't reveal anything about what He's thinking or feeling."

Wolf,
.....I am a tad confused here.Every thing in this quote, up to but* is in accordance with my thinking. As a matter of fact the oriental saying, "He who knows, cannot say, he who says cannot know"rings true to me. This of course applies to a precise description of God. I believe all we can do is dance around it....However, everthing after but, I take issue with. I believe any creation reveals somethiing of the creator, just not always lucid. Of course, being limited by the perameters of my own perception, I can't speak it as law.


....*I have a friend who likes to say, "everything behind but is bulls#@t Though in this case, I'll just say, seemingly contridictory. :wink:

Re: Convert to catholocism
I guess because I was never given a strong faith, and feel that as a young adult not given a direction has made me determine my own faith as I see it & I resent that there is not a religion that suits what I believe. My kid is five, and as his parent I have a responsibility to force a lot of ideas on him, like don't pick your nose and eat it, its gross...eat your vegetables or you'll get the gout. Don't throw rocks at your friends. Obviously this is an issue I will have to develop over time, as I examine my own beliefs, and find a way to communicate it to him. I do keep it simple, and perhaps I am thinking this is a much bigger deal than it really is...I mean picking your nose & eating it is really much more socially unacceptable.
In the mean time, I appreciate reading the information on this site.

Wolf_ODonnell wrote:


What if the Universe and God are the same thing? Science becomes theology and supernatural a synonym of superstition. Any objection to Pantheism?

I think if Science explains God then the origins/nature of God become part of scientific knowledge.

I've been away from this topic for awhile so I'm not too sure where Wolf is coming from but I think s/he's a little off the mark saying '[Science] is an explanation of the world and the Universe, which he may or may not have created' because, in fact, science asks and investigates the question of creation and is seemingly getting closer to an answer. If it does find the answer than will that prove that God does or doesn't exist?

Science is a method for validating 'facts' and it is also a chaotic jumble of 'knowledge' sometimes contradictory, often mistaken, always changing. In it's favour is that philosophically it allows itself to be challenged, using it's own tools. What we called scientific knowledge 200 years ago and now are very different things but they are both science. I think if christianity or buddhism or hinduism changed as much we would not still call them by the same name. In fact that sort of change is the antithesis of faith.

Any change in religion is usually driven by etho-socio-cultural forces. This is much less so in science. A provable fact is a fact and if it changes science, it will do so in spite of vehement opposition from etho-socio-cultural forces (see Copernicus, for example).

So HH,....We Meet on a different turf...Good to see you again... Wolf was disagreeing with my signature line.

No. I meant about being out there alone with your beliefs.

Just a personal theory: is pantheism just an exuse for people who don't actually believe in any gods to convince themselves that they do?