Christianity - True or Not?

Apparently he left us with several dozen various forms of guidence. Thankfully these tools that are used to communicate with/understand god have done nothing but good on the planet.

Do you assume that he in his infinate wisdom would have left so many different manuals to get into heaven?

maporsche, if you assume one of the "big" gods is true...you can spend a lifetime trying to unfathom all the weird impossible conundra that assumption produces.

If you assume no gods ever existed, everything makes perfect sense. Especially religion.

Religion has away of being distorted by men with their own selfish interests.

We should blame God, rather we should blame ourselves

Abid...as usual you miss the point. Namely...what god?

I wonder if you are actually capable of imagining the universe free of gods (as seems to be the case).

I imagine you would be terrified of even making the attempt.

sorry to interrupt, but what perfect conclusions are you telling when there is no assumption of god or even the concept of god?

Dunno as that's an interuption at all, cge (and welcome to A2K, BTW) ... the present digression revolves around the assumptive ... when it comes to any god or gods, what else is there?

A great example of wanting it both ways, timber.

'Matter has no meaning outside of our observable universe;' you insist.

Yet you contend that the 'singularity' that you postulate was 'apparently' (really, you have evidence to this effect?) composed of 'pure energy', which is simply matter in a different form.

In addition, you completely dodge the question of what became of the singularity after the Big Bang, stating that 'Where' and 'When' are 'functions of Spacetime'.

Well, the question clearly refers to AFTER the genesis of the Universe when Space and Time DID exist, as even you (I suspect) would admit.

So, why are you pretending the question is unanswerable?

Lastly, as much as you want to run from the word 'eternally', your theory (and every other) DEMANDS that someTHING or someONE is eternal.

If you think it was matter/energy, then don't be afraid to say so.

But you ought to be prepared for the ramifications of your choice.

'Twould appear you're not, since you're pussyfooting so artfully.

Not at all, r l - acknowledging "insufficient data" most certainly is not "wanting it both ways".


Straw man. I state matter as we oberve, experience, and understand it is a component of our observable universe. I offer no conjecture pertaining to anything - matter, universe, or what have you - external to or apart from our observable universe. There is no basis from which meaningfully to do so.


Straw man - I do not contend anything pertaining to the composition of the singularity, I observe, in agreement with what at present within the relevant disciplines is the overwhelmingly preponderant consensus of that which is evidenced; that apparently what emerged from the singularity very most probably was characterized by properties we now understand to be attributes of pure energy.


Straw man; the answer plainly is that "... what became of the singularity ... " is the universe we observe and experience.


No it doesn't. While apparently your belief set "DEMANDS that someTHING or someONE" be "eternal", science, math and logic suffer no such restriction; "Eternity" and "Infinity" both are abstracts, unquantifiable, unqualifiable, unfactorable, having meaning at all only in relationship to our sphere of reference and then only as computational fudgework conveniences.


Straw man - I've said precisely what I think in this context; I agree with the overwhelmingly preponderant consensus of current thought within the relevant legitimate disciplines. The "ramifications" are neither more nor less than acknowledging and coming to grips with "insufficient data" and remaining open to refinement and/or revision consequent to additional and/or improved data. I'm open mindedly living in an open-ended thought system. Your proposition is precisely the contrary.


Straw man - I present no equivocation, I don't grab a guess with no foundation in evidence and claim it to be "THE TRUTH", I don't postulate a designer or creator on the basis of unanswered questions; it is you who are dancing, and that far from artfully. Specious objections of the sort which to this point in this and related discussions on these boards is all I have seen you present are but intellectual clumsiness, screaming cries of contrarian, backward-focussed, luddite ignorance.

30 some pages, geebers I don't got that kinda time lol.

Pastors need to spend time on the internet for this lol. Ehh, we are all human so none of us know all the answers.

One thing that sticks in my mind (this might be a whole nother subject sorries) is one episode of "30 days". Or wait, was it 40, pretty sure it was 30. Arg, brain can't remember!

Anyways, it was this show on T.V. about how someone tries a lifestyle for 30 days. One guy spent 30 days in prision, one guy ate nothing but Mc. Donalds for 30 days. Crap, you know it might be 40 days, I don't remember ahhh! You get my point though.

One episode though, was where an atheist (on some of her family on certain days) spent 30 (or 40?) days with a christian family.

The only thing about the episode that I didn't like (don't remember all of it though) was when they attended church.

It was a rather large church and the main topic dealt with being God's Army. The precher or paster or what you want to call him was saying things like "Be the sword of god, defend! defend!"

Woah now, those atheist shook their heads in complete disapproval.

Religion of love, so what is this about being a sword to defend? Well, the pastor could have come across less abrasive if you know what he is talking about.

"Be the sword of God, defend! defend!"---
--Someone strikes down your God, set them straight with love instead of caving their head in with a sharp blade.

I took the message as: Be honest in your faith. Say how you really feel. It's not a matter of how serious you are that you have to cut someone else down for not thinking like you.

It's like christian children beating up another child because they say they don't believe in god. Well then those children aren't christians.

That's the kind of thing atheists focus on and it is terrible. Love and understanding is what it's all about, doesn't mean you have to give your life away and perform some "duty" like everyone else.

We all want the same thing, to just be loved. To know that someone else put you on this earth because they love you and simply expects you to love them back. Doesn't seem so demanding to me. Although, I am human and imperfect. :wink:

30 pages ain't much by local standards, acepilot - there are threads here with digressions longer than that - some threads here are literally thousands of pages, and some - which tend to get relatively long posts - are successor threads to some topic which has been at discussion across thousands of pages over many years with numerous "restarts"; sometimes a thread is "closed" after several hundred pages or so due to its text volume becoming an administrational bottleneck and the conversation just takes up in a "new" thread from where the previous one left off.


Wander around some - this place is amazing.

As my post number suggests,

I'm new here, please forgive

Everybody here was new here once - nothing to apologize for.

And some folks who've been here for years have fewer than a hundred posts, while some folks who've been here only a little while have thousands of posts. It really doesn't matter - what you say counts for far more than how much you say.

tru' dat

Scientific comparison between Qur'an and Bible
If you glance through the Bible and the Qur'an you may find several points which appear to be exactly the same in both of them, but when you analyse them closely, you realise that there is a difference of 'chalk and cheese' between them. Only based on historical details it is difficult for someone who is neither conversant with Christianity or Islam to come to a firm decision as to which of the scriptures is true; however if you verify the relevant passages of both the scriptures against scientific knowledge, you will yourself realize the truth.

Creation of the Universe in Six Days
As per the Bible, in the first book of Genesis in Chapter One, the universe was created in six days and each day is defined as a twenty-four hours period. Even though the Qur'an mentions that the universe was created in six 'Ayyaams', 'Ayyaam' is the plural of years; this word has two meanings: firstly, it means a standard twenty-four hours period i.e. a day, and secondly, it also means stage, period or epoch which is a very long period of time.

When the Qur'an mentions that the universe was created in six 'Ayyaams', it refers to the creation of the heavens and the earth in six long periods or epochs; scientists have no objection to this statement. The creation of the universe has taken billions of years, which proves false or contradicts the concept of the Bible which states that the creation of the Universe took six days of twenty-four hour durations each.

Sun Created After the Day
The Bible says in chapter 1, verses 3-5, of Genesis that the phenomenon of day and night was created on the first day of creation of the Universe by God. The light circulating in the universe is the result of a complex reaction in the stars; these stars were created according to the Bible (Genesis chapter 1 verse 14 to 19) on the fourth day. It is illogical to mention the result that is the light (the phenomenon of day and night) was created on the first day of Creation when the cause or source of the light was created three days later. Moreover the existence of evening and morning as elements of a single day is only conceivable after the creation of the earth and its rotation around the sun. In contrast with the contents of the Bible on this issue, the Qur'an does not give any unscientific sequence of Creation. Hence it is absolutely absurd to say that Prophet Muhummad (pbuh) copied the passages pertaining to the creation of the universe from the Bible but missed out this illogical and fantastic sequence of the Bible.

Creation of the Sun, The Earth and the Moon
According to the Bible, Book of Genesis, chapter 1, verses 9 to 13, the earth was created on the third day, and as per verses 14 to 19, the sun and the moon were created on the fourth day. The earth and the moon emanated, as we know, from their original star, the Sun. Hence to place the creation of the sun and the moon after the creation of the earth is contrary to the established idea about the formation of the solar system.

Vegetation Created on the third day and Sun on the fourth day According to the Bible, Book of Genesis, chapter 1, verses 11-13, vegetation was created on the third day along with seed-bearing grasses, plants and trees; and further on as per verses 14-19, the sun was created on the fourth day. How is it scientifically possible for the vegetation to have appeared without the presence of the sun, as has been stated in the Bible?

If Prophet Muhummad (pbuh) was indeed the author of the Qur'an and had copied its contents from the Bible, how did he manage to avoid the factual errors that the Bible contains? The Qur'an does not contain any statements which are incompatible with scientific facts.

The Sun and the Moon both Emit light
According to the Bible both the sun and the moon emit their own light. In the Book of Genesis, chapter 1, verse 16 says, "And God made two great lights; the greater light to rule the day, and the lesser light to rule the night".

Science tells us today that the moon does not have its own light. This confirms the Qur'anic concept that the light of the moon is a reflected light. To think that 1400 years ago, Prophet Muhummad (pbuh) corrected these scientific errors in the Bible and then copied such corrected passages in the Qur'an is to think of something impossible.

Adam (pbuh) the first man on Earth, lived 5800 years ago
As per the genealogy of Jesus Christ given in the Bible, from Jesus through Abraham (pbuh) to the first man on earth i.e. Adam (pbuh), Adam appeared on the earth approximately 5800 years ago:

1948 years between Adam (pbuh) and Abraham (pbuh)
Approximately 1800 years between Abraham (pbuh) and Jesus (pbuh)
2000 years from Jesus (pbuh) till today
These figures are further confused by the fact that the Jewish calendar is currently on or about 5800 years old.

There is sufficient evidence from archaeological and anthropological sources to suggest that the first human being on earth was present tens of thousands of years ago and not merely 5,800 years ago as is suggested by the Bible. The Qur'an too speaks about Adam (pbuh) as the first man on earth but it does not suggest any date or period of his life on earth, unlike the Bible - what the Bible says in this regard is totally incompatible with science.

Noah (pbuh) and the flood
The Biblical description of the flood in Genesis chapter 6, 7 and 8 indicates that the deluge was universal and it destroyed every living thing on earth, except those present with Noah (pbuh) in the ark. The description suggests that the event took place 1656 years after the creation of Adam (pbuh) or 292 years before the birth of Abraham, at a time when Noah (pbuh) was 600 years old. Thus the flood may have occurred in the 21st or 22nd Century B.C.

This story of the flood, as given in the Bible, contradicts scientific evidence from archaelogical sources which indicate that the eleventh dynasty in Egypt and the third dynasty in Babylonia were in existence without any break in civilisation and in a manner totally unaffected by any major calamity which may have occurred in the 21st century B.C. This contradicts the Biblical story that the whole world had been immersed in the flood water. In contrast to this, the Qur'anic presentation of the story of Noah and the flood does not conflict with scientific evidence or archaeological data; firstly, the Qur'an does not indicate any specific date or year of the occurance of that event, and secondly, according to the Qur'an the flood was not a universal phenomenon which destroyed complete life on earth. In fact the Qur'an specifically mentions that the flood was a localised event only involving the people of Noah.

It is illogical to assume that Prophet Muhummad (pbuh) had borrowed the story of the flood from the Bible and corrected the mistakes before mentioning it in the Qur'an.

Moses (pbuh) and Pharaoh of the Exodus
The story of Moses (pbuh) and the Pharaoh of the Exodus are very much identical in the Qur'an and the Bible. Both scriptures agree that the Pharaoh drowned when he tried to pursue Moses (pbuh) and led the Israelites across a stretch of water that they crossed. The Qur'an gives an additional piece of information in Surah Yunus chapter 10 verse 92:

"This day shall We save thee in thy body, that thou mayest be a sign to those who come after thee! But verily, many among mankind are heedless of Our Signs!" The Holy Qur'an, Chapter 10, Verse 92

Dr. Maurice Bucaille, after a thorough research proved that although Rameses II was known to have persecuted the Israelites as per the Bible, he actually died while Moses (pbuh) was taking refuge in Median. Rameses II's son Merneptah who succeeded him as Pharaoh drowned during the exodus. In 1898, the mummified body of Merneptah was found in the valley of Kings in Egypt. In 1975, Dr. Maurice Bucaille with other doctors received permission to examine the Mummy of Merneptah, the findings of which proved that Merneptah probably died from drowning or a violent shock which immediately preceeded the moment of drowning. Thus the Qur'anic verse that we shall save his body as a sign, has been fulfilled by the Pharaohs' body being kept at the Royal Mummies room in the Egyptian Museum in Cairo.

This verse of the Qur'an compelled Dr. Maurice Bucaille, who was a Christian then, to study the Qur'an. He later wrote a book 'The Bible, the Qur'an and Science', and confessed that the author of the Qur'an can be no one else besides God Himself. Thus he embraced Islam.

Qur'an is a book from Allah

Source
http://www.thetruecall.com/home/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=205&mode=&order=0&thold=0