ChatterBank1 min ago
A ttheory.......
128 Answers
ok bare with me I don't even know if this makes sense....
Key plus always argues that islam is more 'correct' than Christianity-as in less flaws and loopholes...
And I also think Islam is younger than Christianity?
well does it follow then that the most complete religion should be scientology........does it follow that the younger the religion the more 'correct' they are?
Just the ramblings of a mad man bored whilst eating my Branflakes this morning!!!
Key plus always argues that islam is more 'correct' than Christianity-as in less flaws and loopholes...
And I also think Islam is younger than Christianity?
well does it follow then that the most complete religion should be scientology........does it follow that the younger the religion the more 'correct' they are?
Just the ramblings of a mad man bored whilst eating my Branflakes this morning!!!
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by sherminator. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
Keyplus, these are the facts:
1. Islam is only 1400 years old. It didn't exist before Mohammed. and to say otherwise, and to promote the biblical prophets as Muslim, is indisputably false. This is simply more evidence that Islam hijacked, and continues to hijack, what went before.
2. The reason Islam is growing is not, in the main, due to an enormous number of converts - it's due to the high birth rate amongst Muslims.
3. I chose the only reference in the Koran that could possibly be construed as a reference to evolution, and I think you'll find that most Muslim scholars would also offer that reference. However, you've chosen one of the most hateful and inciteful verses to demonstrate that the Koran speaks of evolution - and it's a complete nonsense. Evolution transformed men into apes and swine. It didn't.
I take it back. Despite what he says, Keyplus does not accept evolution.
1. Islam is only 1400 years old. It didn't exist before Mohammed. and to say otherwise, and to promote the biblical prophets as Muslim, is indisputably false. This is simply more evidence that Islam hijacked, and continues to hijack, what went before.
2. The reason Islam is growing is not, in the main, due to an enormous number of converts - it's due to the high birth rate amongst Muslims.
3. I chose the only reference in the Koran that could possibly be construed as a reference to evolution, and I think you'll find that most Muslim scholars would also offer that reference. However, you've chosen one of the most hateful and inciteful verses to demonstrate that the Koran speaks of evolution - and it's a complete nonsense. Evolution transformed men into apes and swine. It didn't.
I take it back. Despite what he says, Keyplus does not accept evolution.
Ah greaaaaaat? Keyplus. And exactly how does this piece of dubious enlightenment enhance our existence?
So everything was originally human and Allah punished the unfaithful by turning them into animals. Surprisingly enough that is not borne out in the fossil record. The stoneage aboriginees in Australia had a similar idea about the origins of the world. Trees and rivers were converted from animals too. Quite quaint except for the violence but then you could say that of all the major Holy Books.
Allah is clearly and completely capable of any kind of retribution he desires. However much of the infliction of punishments has been left to the Muslim faithful under the guidance of those who say know the Will of Allah. Never explained is why Allah does not simply wave his hand and sort it himself. The Hebrew's also found it necessary to undertake the slaughter themslves despite their all powerful deity.
Islam certainly does go beyond a faith. It proscribes exactly how one is to conduct their whole life. This is nothing but totalitarian facism. Like all theistic philosophies it stifles development of civilisation by locking in antiquated arbitrary beliefs conceived by men who simply reflected upon their own prejudices and wrote them down. The beliefs then dominated huge populations through conquest and brutal supression of all opposition until the entire society was indoctrined from birth. Doesn't sound like a way to find the potential of humanity.
That so many Moslem societies require women to cover their faces lest they tempt a man into carnal desires is surely clear enough evidence of the primitive state of philosophical development inherant in this faith. A decent man would not have so little character as to be dominated by such animalistic instincts. Like the Christian faiths the biggest problems in Islam stem from the sanctification of violence and unhealthy attitudes about sexuality.
So everything was originally human and Allah punished the unfaithful by turning them into animals. Surprisingly enough that is not borne out in the fossil record. The stoneage aboriginees in Australia had a similar idea about the origins of the world. Trees and rivers were converted from animals too. Quite quaint except for the violence but then you could say that of all the major Holy Books.
Allah is clearly and completely capable of any kind of retribution he desires. However much of the infliction of punishments has been left to the Muslim faithful under the guidance of those who say know the Will of Allah. Never explained is why Allah does not simply wave his hand and sort it himself. The Hebrew's also found it necessary to undertake the slaughter themslves despite their all powerful deity.
Islam certainly does go beyond a faith. It proscribes exactly how one is to conduct their whole life. This is nothing but totalitarian facism. Like all theistic philosophies it stifles development of civilisation by locking in antiquated arbitrary beliefs conceived by men who simply reflected upon their own prejudices and wrote them down. The beliefs then dominated huge populations through conquest and brutal supression of all opposition until the entire society was indoctrined from birth. Doesn't sound like a way to find the potential of humanity.
That so many Moslem societies require women to cover their faces lest they tempt a man into carnal desires is surely clear enough evidence of the primitive state of philosophical development inherant in this faith. A decent man would not have so little character as to be dominated by such animalistic instincts. Like the Christian faiths the biggest problems in Islam stem from the sanctification of violence and unhealthy attitudes about sexuality.
I think you over simplify beso.
People do have a habit of doing this when they think of Islam their first imiage is of Saudi Arabia and women covered in black.
Not of Turkey for example - a Muslim country
True there is a certain trend in Islam for increasing severity - Cairo now is much less Liberal than it was say 40 years ago.
Both these examples demonstrate that it's not Islam itself that is repressive but the interpretation of it dominant in certain places.
Is Christianity repressive because Oliver Cromwell tried similar things in England?
People do have a habit of doing this when they think of Islam their first imiage is of Saudi Arabia and women covered in black.
Not of Turkey for example - a Muslim country
True there is a certain trend in Islam for increasing severity - Cairo now is much less Liberal than it was say 40 years ago.
Both these examples demonstrate that it's not Islam itself that is repressive but the interpretation of it dominant in certain places.
Is Christianity repressive because Oliver Cromwell tried similar things in England?
Christianity is most certainly repressive, with or without Cromwell.
I acknowledge that all Muslim societies do not cover womens faces. However it is the nature of the theistic faiths to become more severe and insist not only on one god but on one personality. This philosophy of an all powerful God who can be influenced by worship and utter compliance to immutable values leads to the vulnerability of spirit that underlies so many Muslim sicieties moving into extremism.
The concept that homogenaity of all beliefs would lead to the highest potential of society was also shared by Adolph Hitler who presumed that by eliminating differences he could have universal compliance. Its a bad idea.
I acknowledge that all Muslim societies do not cover womens faces. However it is the nature of the theistic faiths to become more severe and insist not only on one god but on one personality. This philosophy of an all powerful God who can be influenced by worship and utter compliance to immutable values leads to the vulnerability of spirit that underlies so many Muslim sicieties moving into extremism.
The concept that homogenaity of all beliefs would lead to the highest potential of society was also shared by Adolph Hitler who presumed that by eliminating differences he could have universal compliance. Its a bad idea.
Hindus worships a plethora of gods and hence their religion is not theistic. They celebrate the diversity of those gods.
Bhuddism is not a theistic religion. Their focus is on influencing the world through consciousness and acceptance rather than trying to buy the favour of a god whose power lies behind everything that happens.
Bhuddism is not a theistic religion. Their focus is on influencing the world through consciousness and acceptance rather than trying to buy the favour of a god whose power lies behind everything that happens.
Well done Naomi once again you have managed to do what no one has ever done.
Beso – Yes you are right that why Allah does not simply wave a hand and sort the things himself. I believe in the same but with a difference. Allah can of course wave hand and do that but then on the day of judgement few would say that we were just not given enough time otherwise we would have done that, accepted that, wouldn’t have done so etc.
You are also right that a decent man would not have so little character. That means USA has one of the lowest number o decent men as number of rape is among the highest if not the most highest in the world. Or is there another reason. By the way Islam tells man to lower his gaze before it tells women to dress properly. And of course there is dress limitation for men too.
Waldo – Yes I have said that before that Islam does not believe in Human evolution as Adam was first human born as human. But animals and human do have some changes in their living style, body and thinking depending upon changes around them and according to the atmosphere they live in now I may call it adaptability and you may call it evolution.
Naomi – I was shocked to see that you said “probably accurate” about Waldo’s post. Are you loosing faith?
Beso – Yes you are right that why Allah does not simply wave a hand and sort the things himself. I believe in the same but with a difference. Allah can of course wave hand and do that but then on the day of judgement few would say that we were just not given enough time otherwise we would have done that, accepted that, wouldn’t have done so etc.
You are also right that a decent man would not have so little character. That means USA has one of the lowest number o decent men as number of rape is among the highest if not the most highest in the world. Or is there another reason. By the way Islam tells man to lower his gaze before it tells women to dress properly. And of course there is dress limitation for men too.
Waldo – Yes I have said that before that Islam does not believe in Human evolution as Adam was first human born as human. But animals and human do have some changes in their living style, body and thinking depending upon changes around them and according to the atmosphere they live in now I may call it adaptability and you may call it evolution.
Naomi – I was shocked to see that you said “probably accurate” about Waldo’s post. Are you loosing faith?
Keyplus, Thank you for the compliment, but I really can't take all the credit, because I haven't managed to do what no one has ever done - I've simply written something that you have never bothered to read before. The odd thing is, you don't dispute it. I wonder why?
There's no reason to be shocked, Keyplus. Just think about it logically. Yes, I did say that Waldo was probably right, and now that you've confirmed your opinion I know he was. You see, that's what rational people do. They await definite proof before declaring anything to be indisputable fact.
There's no reason to be shocked, Keyplus. Just think about it logically. Yes, I did say that Waldo was probably right, and now that you've confirmed your opinion I know he was. You see, that's what rational people do. They await definite proof before declaring anything to be indisputable fact.
One of the great ironies of the stoneage creation myths is that despite their poetic descriptions the reality actually turned out to be far more beautiful. The theists stuck in their primitive, inaccurate, irrational concepts totally miss the genuine beauty of the science.
The leading hypothesis for the origin of life details the transition from minerals to life in deposits from alkaline undersea vents in an olivine substrate. The evidence is supported by the chemistry involved in the most fundamental metabolic processes. There is no need for a creator for life because life creates itself.
The leading hypothesis for the origin of life details the transition from minerals to life in deposits from alkaline undersea vents in an olivine substrate. The evidence is supported by the chemistry involved in the most fundamental metabolic processes. There is no need for a creator for life because life creates itself.
Beso I've always wondered that! Why really when a god can make people out of sand does he never ever do it?
he just lets us create life! IF iwere god there would be dionsaurs and animals with 21 legs and all sorts of cool creatures popping up all over the place!
And as keyplus says he even turns men into monkeys and pigs! but sadly not anymore such a shame= what a waste of all those powers GOD!
also Keyplus tell me do you actually believe that a man turned into a pig? come on really really do you honestly believe that?
he just lets us create life! IF iwere god there would be dionsaurs and animals with 21 legs and all sorts of cool creatures popping up all over the place!
And as keyplus says he even turns men into monkeys and pigs! but sadly not anymore such a shame= what a waste of all those powers GOD!
also Keyplus tell me do you actually believe that a man turned into a pig? come on really really do you honestly believe that?
That was done for the reasons of punishment only to those people who did not listen to the prophets sent out to them and kept on oppressing others one way or another. Yes if God wills he can create pigs out of human. As it is said in Quran that creating something from something already there is easier than creating from nothing and He is capable of doing even that and Universe is the fine example of that.
Now why God does make people out of sand anymore? Because if that happens right in front of your eyes then you would have no reason in not to believing in that, but what about the others who did not see that? They will demand another show in the afternoon. Just like the one’s who have experienced super natural phenomenon are sure but the others believe they are off the track. So God is not like superman who has to come and prove himself to ever dick and harry.
Other reason could be because that before Muhammad (pbuh) prophets came with messages for only few people at one place (so no one missed the message as it was mainly to do with local issues tribe to tribe) so one way or another things were shown to them, but few people never believed even after that, so they were punished there and then. Since after Muhammad (pbuh) there would be no other prophet (at least Muslims believe that) so the message is global and it is reaching almost all the people due to advanced media and so on. And I believe that it is the reason why God is not intervening until a certain time (as described in Quran) because on the day of judgment few may say, "we never got the message" and human life of this world is like a blink of an eye when you talk about that millions of years ago world was like this or like that.
Beso I wonder if science can tell us how to help the poor & needy? Is there any theory about that in any scientific book? Or why do people feel satisfied when they have done so?
Now why God does make people out of sand anymore? Because if that happens right in front of your eyes then you would have no reason in not to believing in that, but what about the others who did not see that? They will demand another show in the afternoon. Just like the one’s who have experienced super natural phenomenon are sure but the others believe they are off the track. So God is not like superman who has to come and prove himself to ever dick and harry.
Other reason could be because that before Muhammad (pbuh) prophets came with messages for only few people at one place (so no one missed the message as it was mainly to do with local issues tribe to tribe) so one way or another things were shown to them, but few people never believed even after that, so they were punished there and then. Since after Muhammad (pbuh) there would be no other prophet (at least Muslims believe that) so the message is global and it is reaching almost all the people due to advanced media and so on. And I believe that it is the reason why God is not intervening until a certain time (as described in Quran) because on the day of judgment few may say, "we never got the message" and human life of this world is like a blink of an eye when you talk about that millions of years ago world was like this or like that.
Beso I wonder if science can tell us how to help the poor & needy? Is there any theory about that in any scientific book? Or why do people feel satisfied when they have done so?
@Keyplus – Some observations.
You often offer strawman propositions. In a response to Waldo you first affirm your faith in the unscientific creationist viewpoint (“Adam first born as human”). But then try to regain some scientific credibility for Islam by claiming what you term as “adaptability” is the equivalent of what others call evolution. That is a false analogy. A strawman proposition. Creationists often attempt to use this concept of “adaptability”, or “micro-evolution” as a scientific fig-leaf to cover their unscientific embarrassment. The difference between micro-evolution and evolution is non existent, a matter of time and generations only, despite protestations by creationists to the contrary. You admit to micro-evolution ,you admit to evidence of evolution.
Your response to requests for empirical evidence of a Deity is to assert they are too lazy, and cannot be bothered. (“God is not like superman who has to come and prove himself to ever dick and harry”) Leaving aside your temerity in presuming to know and therefore be able to answer on behalf of such an omnipotent deity, so much else is logically wrong with this statement that it is hard to know where to start! Firstly, this God you believe in is allegedly omnipotent, so whether we asked once or a million times for evidence, it should be a negligible task for such a powerful being.
-ctd-
You often offer strawman propositions. In a response to Waldo you first affirm your faith in the unscientific creationist viewpoint (“Adam first born as human”). But then try to regain some scientific credibility for Islam by claiming what you term as “adaptability” is the equivalent of what others call evolution. That is a false analogy. A strawman proposition. Creationists often attempt to use this concept of “adaptability”, or “micro-evolution” as a scientific fig-leaf to cover their unscientific embarrassment. The difference between micro-evolution and evolution is non existent, a matter of time and generations only, despite protestations by creationists to the contrary. You admit to micro-evolution ,you admit to evidence of evolution.
Your response to requests for empirical evidence of a Deity is to assert they are too lazy, and cannot be bothered. (“God is not like superman who has to come and prove himself to ever dick and harry”) Leaving aside your temerity in presuming to know and therefore be able to answer on behalf of such an omnipotent deity, so much else is logically wrong with this statement that it is hard to know where to start! Firstly, this God you believe in is allegedly omnipotent, so whether we asked once or a million times for evidence, it should be a negligible task for such a powerful being.
-ctd-
-ctd-
Secondly, a smart God would provide some evidence that wouldn't require continual reinforcement – how about ,for instance, rearranging the stars in the firmament to spell out, (in English obviously),a clear, unambiguous message? Something like “ Look, you Infidels, I Am Here Thank You Very Much – Listen To Keyplus! By The Way,I Will Be Visiting Next Week. Any Chance of a Nice Cup of Tea and a Digestive?” would be good. 6 billion converts overnight!
Your arguments ,Keyplus, suggest God is neither powerful or worse, smart, so why would anyone worship such a being ? The answer to that lies in conditioning and propaganda from childhood, and a blind, unquestioning faith.
You answer Beso by saying that science cannot help the poor and the needy – Well, leaving aside the obvious logical error that what you must actually mean is how can secular society help the needy (since science is merely a discipline, not a monolithic lifestyle - you know, like a religion), science can ,and does, help in many vital ways, just a few of which would be things like providing the means to obtain clean drinking water, providing antibiotics to fight against disease, developing insecticides, herbicides, and fertilisers to aid crop growth and hence feeding the hungry, anti malarial tablets to aid the fight against the worlds biggest killer, condoms and retroviral drugs to combat the spread of HIV and the effect of AIDS, indirectly all the advances in medicine underpinned by science, that aid in mundane stuff like childbirth, appendectomies etc. Explain it to me again Keyplus - just how is science deficient in aiding the poor and needy, and exactly what has religion done to aid the same demographic? How many lives of the poor and needy has your Mohammed saved in comparison by non-scientific means?
Secondly, a smart God would provide some evidence that wouldn't require continual reinforcement – how about ,for instance, rearranging the stars in the firmament to spell out, (in English obviously),a clear, unambiguous message? Something like “ Look, you Infidels, I Am Here Thank You Very Much – Listen To Keyplus! By The Way,I Will Be Visiting Next Week. Any Chance of a Nice Cup of Tea and a Digestive?” would be good. 6 billion converts overnight!
Your arguments ,Keyplus, suggest God is neither powerful or worse, smart, so why would anyone worship such a being ? The answer to that lies in conditioning and propaganda from childhood, and a blind, unquestioning faith.
You answer Beso by saying that science cannot help the poor and the needy – Well, leaving aside the obvious logical error that what you must actually mean is how can secular society help the needy (since science is merely a discipline, not a monolithic lifestyle - you know, like a religion), science can ,and does, help in many vital ways, just a few of which would be things like providing the means to obtain clean drinking water, providing antibiotics to fight against disease, developing insecticides, herbicides, and fertilisers to aid crop growth and hence feeding the hungry, anti malarial tablets to aid the fight against the worlds biggest killer, condoms and retroviral drugs to combat the spread of HIV and the effect of AIDS, indirectly all the advances in medicine underpinned by science, that aid in mundane stuff like childbirth, appendectomies etc. Explain it to me again Keyplus - just how is science deficient in aiding the poor and needy, and exactly what has religion done to aid the same demographic? How many lives of the poor and needy has your Mohammed saved in comparison by non-scientific means?
I'm a christian but I also except Evolution. The two in mind can exist side by side.
I look on God as the maker. He made the earth and all that is in or on it in 7 days.
Here I part from the Bible and other works in my thoughts.
If God is forever and these books are written to suit us then it speaks in terms that, at the time would have made sense. Of cause we now understand a lot more about how everything works.
Is it not possible that if God is eternal then 7 days in his exsitance could have been 4 billion years in ours?
Just a thought.
I look on God as the maker. He made the earth and all that is in or on it in 7 days.
Here I part from the Bible and other works in my thoughts.
If God is forever and these books are written to suit us then it speaks in terms that, at the time would have made sense. Of cause we now understand a lot more about how everything works.
Is it not possible that if God is eternal then 7 days in his exsitance could have been 4 billion years in ours?
Just a thought.
I would appear that not even 'God' (whomever) can escape the paradigm of evolution, the need to evolve with our ever increasing knowledge of and understanding about nature. To see this fact one must look no further back in time then to those who once (and those who still do) worshiped volcanoes. Science has made God redundant and perhaps with a focus shifted towards reality, philosophy will one day follow its lead.
Lazy Gun- Your name tells us a lot. First of all from your requirement from God you do need something like this.
http://uktv.co.uk/images/homepage/43979.jpg
And that tell me a lot too, so I will not waste too much time on you. As for evolution, you just get me one reference from a well known scientist that it is a FACT and I would agree with whatever you said even without reading it again. Then you could not even understand what I asked Beso, I am not against science but unfortunately science do not have answers to all of the questions. Can you prove scientifically a person’s satisfaction? Does your science speak about why people love their loved one’s. Can science read emotion?
http://uktv.co.uk/images/homepage/43979.jpg
And that tell me a lot too, so I will not waste too much time on you. As for evolution, you just get me one reference from a well known scientist that it is a FACT and I would agree with whatever you said even without reading it again. Then you could not even understand what I asked Beso, I am not against science but unfortunately science do not have answers to all of the questions. Can you prove scientifically a person’s satisfaction? Does your science speak about why people love their loved one’s. Can science read emotion?
Keyplus - What, you respond to my post by ignoring my arguments and making an ad hominem attack based upon my screenname? Wow, powerful argument.
I dont claim to want a tights -wearing superhero Keyplus - read my post again.Once again you misrepresent what others say in order to make an argument you want.
And yet another strawman argument regarding the facts of evolution. The theory of evolution best explains the observations of the natural world around us. Fact. No credible biologist would argue differently. Another Keyplus "argument" blown out of the water. Its you making the extraordinary claim, that evolution isn't right - its up to you to support that view, but you cannot. Put up or shut up.
i repeated your question to Beso verbatim. If you cannot be clear in the meaning of your questions,that is hardly my fault, but yours for being unclear. Tell us all again how your Mohammed has helped the poor and the needy more than science?
You and your merry band of fervent believers continue to make the same ridiculous claims - that your holy books contain the inerrant word of your particular brand of god - and then you torture the language to mangle original quotations from these books to support your claims. Its rubbish obvious to anyone with half a brain.
I dont claim to want a tights -wearing superhero Keyplus - read my post again.Once again you misrepresent what others say in order to make an argument you want.
And yet another strawman argument regarding the facts of evolution. The theory of evolution best explains the observations of the natural world around us. Fact. No credible biologist would argue differently. Another Keyplus "argument" blown out of the water. Its you making the extraordinary claim, that evolution isn't right - its up to you to support that view, but you cannot. Put up or shut up.
i repeated your question to Beso verbatim. If you cannot be clear in the meaning of your questions,that is hardly my fault, but yours for being unclear. Tell us all again how your Mohammed has helped the poor and the needy more than science?
You and your merry band of fervent believers continue to make the same ridiculous claims - that your holy books contain the inerrant word of your particular brand of god - and then you torture the language to mangle original quotations from these books to support your claims. Its rubbish obvious to anyone with half a brain.
It's ironic isn't it that Keyplus demands proof of evolution, and yet demands no proof, or even the vaguest evidence, of the veracity of his book. No one on this earth (or above or below it) can give any verifiable credence to that whatsoever - in fact it's a very simple matter to shoot it straight out of the water - and yet he believes it word for word - even to the extent that he makes excuses for its patently flawed assurance that childbirth is painless. The word of Allah? If that's the case, then Allah was pretty ignorant - and demonstrably so.
Latest Posts
Quizzes & Puzzles1 min ago
Crosswords10 mins ago
Will You Be Shopping At Boots This...
News15 mins ago
If You Protest You Must Be Mentally Ill.
News16 mins ago
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.