God

[a_ahmed]

If  you knew the Holy Spirit in your life you'd understand.  I'm not speaking of the angel Gabriel either.

I read the scriptures and I know enough about what Jesus said. I go by that. For divine guidance, we are to follow the prophets and messengers. Not mere sayings of ordinary men who have ulterior motives. We are able to think, but not conjure up our own false beliefs. Not paradoxical, contradictory teachings of the church that clearly go against the very fundamental sayings of Jesus using scripture. You bring no proof from the scriptures when you make blank statements like that. Keep it in the trinity/bible thread. You still are ignoring the verses where Jesus talks about not his will but the will of the father (God). And Jesus saying he doesn't know something (the hour) but only God does.

God does not contradict, mislead or misguide. Men do. Jesus was a mighty messenger of God or as the bible even says "a prophet". Yes the bible, that was one of the quotes from that video you questioned. You are the one lying against God and lying against Jesus. You are not doing yourself or others justice doing that.

So next time you say no Jesus was not a prophet read your bible:

The crowds answered, "This is Jesus, the prophet from Nazareth in Galilee."Matthew 21:11

"And he said unto them, What things? And they said unto him, Concerning Jesus of Nazareth, which was a prophet mighty in deed and word before God and all the people:"
Luke 24:19


In fact there are so many verses in the bible where Jesus is called a prophet I am posting two just to prove a poin

"And when Jesus son of Mary said: O Children of Israel! Verily! I am the messenger of Allah unto you, confirming that which was [revealed] before me in the Torah"
The noble Qur'an, Al-Saf(61):6

And in this thread you are not doing any monotheist service when you say God is a human being or 'male' (gender is something God created and certainly man is something God created). Nor is any of that pantheistic or trinitarian stuff helping you. Jesus certainly was a monotheist, not a pantheist or polytheist or trinitheist or whatever you want to dub it.

Like I said, science disproves in the absolute any false deities, but it does not disprove God. Saying God is a man, science and rational thought will prove it false quite easily.

[avxo]

An atheist telling me I don't know anything because I am not putting my faith in his belief How stereotypical. Like a child throwing a tantrum at his mom for taking away his toys.

No, I'm telling you that your statements indicate you don't know what you're talking about.

Clearly I don't understand it because I don't believe it  

Clearly you don't understand it if the statements you make are accurate indication of your understanding.

Oooh pretty pictures!

Oh so you are talking about possibilities and the impossible? Wow, your faith in evolution is that weak? You certainly are not affirming my faith in evolution just providing me faith away from it

As I explained before I don't have "faith" in evolution. Faith requires believe in the absence of or contrary to evidence.

Just ironic, that the one that's created, is basically saying hey we can create but no we weren't created

Repeating the "we were created bit" won't make it true.

“Were they created by nothing, or were they themselves the creators?
Or did they create the heavens and the earth? Nay, but they have no firm Belief.
Or are with them the treasures of your Lord? Or are they the tyrants with the authority to do as they like?”[al-Toor 52:35-37]
No I believe I am using it quite correctly.

We've already seen that your beliefs aren't all that accurate.

Your darwinian atheist faith has not proved to me anything nor shown me any evidence besides children's cartoons, broken bones and broken promises of millions of years of evidence  

There you go away with "faith"... I'll play along : my "faith" in evolution doesn't require that you believe.

Except that's not how it happened. We will not roll with that.

Oh? You don't think Allah created everything in six days? Bad Muslims! Bad! Don't make me get the spray-bottle!

You talk about raw materials of the DNA in a LAB, an EXPERIMENT that HUMANS conduct with proteins. GREAT! So that argument itself works against you. You are intervening and using your INTELLECT behind the process. The only thing you are not in command of is the raw materials. Yes a provision to us from God. Or no, the universe just magically 'came to be' by an accident and everything in it.

 

Since we chose to talk about sexual reproductive organs.

You and I would seize to exist if anything goes wrong with them. They have to be WHOLE and COMPLETE.

So no circumcision for you?

Now lets put two and two together. You conduct some lame experiment in a lab with proteins... we have genetic engineering.

No. You conduct an experiment where the raw elements that were available on earth a few billions of years ago combine to form proteins needed for DNA and RNA synthesis without any human intervention. That is not genetic engineering. Playing with genes, adding, removing, turning some off and others on, that is genetic engineering. Please use terms correctly.

We have humans who are whole. First and foremost two genders COMPLETELY seperate from one another with totally unique sexual organs.

"COMPLETELY" is a very strong word. Do you know anything about how the sexual organs develop in fetuses?

Explain me this? If even once in your imaginary tale of evolution one organ failed we'd be doomed.

Extremely unlikely. Besides, natural selection is all about selecting the fittest. Billions of organisms failed and didn't continue evolving because their mutations didn't prove beneficial or didn't bestow a significant enough genetic advantage.

Now explain to me how this organ came to be in both genders, how the genders came to be...?

You want me to explain sexual differentiation? I'm sure wikipedia has an article on the subject. Let me check on that for you... And yes, I was right: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sex_determination_and_differentiation_(human)

And now explain me this... The CONSTRUCT of the human being including the organs had to be conceived prior.

Why would you think that?

Which would require genetic engineering and a process of reproduction. BOTH have to be complete, you cannot have a human with no reproductive system then magically develop a reproductive system.

Again you are only achieving one thing. Showing just how clueless and uninformed you actually are.

And the concept of a reproductive system itself in both seperate genders is nothing without the male or female human.

This sentence makes no sense...

Therefore BOTH must be whole. Very unique and intricate, beautiful at that.

Unique? Hardly. The overwhelming majority of the animal kingdom has two distinct genders; the animals that use asexual reproduction are in the minority.

Cut off any component from that process and you have nothing.

OK, and?

[a_ahmed]

LOL earlier you were arguing about evolution theory and genetic engineering comparison and how it is not 'impossible'. Yet you ridicule that God creating the universe in 6 days/periods whatever it may be exactly as impossible and worthy of your sarcasm? Funny funny indeed. So many things we built today in the past were deemed as 'impossible'. I don't find anything to ridicule for God our creator to be able to create the whole universe in six days or six periods (periods whatever that means, not necessarily 24 hours)


LOL@ "but you dont understand it", "you dont know anything about it". You're sounding exactly what you accuse theists of and trust me I've gone through this numerous times with atheists the outcome is always the same It's just plain amusement to my ears. When someone disbelieves in your faith you tell them "no no, you dont understand", "you are clueless". Before finally resorting to childish name calling, cynicism and sarcasm. Oh wait you already have numerous times until now! I am losing faith in you Seems like I am discovering how crumbling your basis of what you believe in actually is and how that which you accuse of others applies quite well to you. You come on self glorifying, know it all, superior, yet in fact all you have is miserly beliefs that cover your atheism and uncertainty.

Do you not see the paradox of this faith of yours?

A human reproduces and only persists to exist via the availability of a male and a female with fully functional sexual reproductive systems aka procreation.

The genetic code exists so that through this process we have an outcome creature. A human? Or lets even say some other creature, but lets focus on humans. With a? Reproductive system!

So we can't just have a human without the reproductive system. Nor can we have the reproductive system and then a human coming out of no where! Kind of the like the chicken and the egg argument..

To me the chicken and egg argument is a no brainer as a theist. God created the chicken and designed a reproductive system for it, not one or the other but both.

The bottom line is. Humans WITH their respective reproductive systems, male or female... need to have this and need all their components in place. You do not have a human that 'evolves' to develop a penis or develop a vagina magically from being an asexual creature for example. It has to be whole.

Likewise with all the other systems in the body. No liver? Die. No heart? No blood, no life? No brain, a vegetable. No muscles, not going anywhere? No lungs, no oxygen for any organ or blood which passes through it.

Also you don't just stuff a male with estrogens and testosterone blockers and saw off their dick and they become a female with a vagina. Likewise with females, you don't just jack them up with AIs and testosterone and hope a penis grows with a reproductive system?

We are male or female, interfering in this process in any shape or form makes humans or any creature with a reproductive system seize to exist.

Catching my drift? All this has to be in place or there's nothing but components.

[syntaxmachine]

First you define what God is - providing specific attributes that allow us to distinguish God from, say, a potato, or an alien from the 5th dimension. You must do this without resorting to the texts that God supposedly authored. Because you must prove that God authored them. And before you can prove that you must first indepedently define what "god" means and prove that the entity in question exists.

A religious person with more ... capacious intelligence than what you're dealing with here would dispute the idea that he must provide a strict definition at the outset, pointing to a variety of investigations that do not proceed in this fashion.

If you read Plato's dialogues, a variety of important philosophical concepts that remain with us to this day (e.g., truth, knowledge, justice) are investigated, an adequate definition sought after in each work. Yet, that definition typically does not materialize. But that doesn't necessarily hinder the investigation or indicate that there is nothing there to investigate. Even if you think philosophy is utter shit, there are other examples to draw upon, e.g., linguistics' use of 'meaning' to do explanatory work despite nobody knowing precisely what the word, well, means.

Alternative methodologies include providing an ostensive definition -- basically, pointing to an example of a thing --  or by highlighting just a few essential properties of a thing. For example, it is awfully difficult to provide a precise definition of the mental state 'pain,' yet we seem to know it via acquaintance and can identify some of its salient features. Just as we have a faculty for sensations, the religious will say, there is a similar sense divinatus that allows us to experience 'God'. And they will probably continue the analogy with sensations further, indicating God too is indefinable yet known via acquaintance.

[syntaxmachine]

LOL@ "but you dont understand it", "you dont know anything about it". You're sounding exactly what you accuse theists of and trust me I've gone through this numerous times with atheists the outcome is always the same It's just plain amusement to my ears. When someone disbelieves in your faith you tell them "no no, you dont understand", "you are clueless". Before finally resorting to childish name calling, cynicism and sarcasm. Oh wait you already have numerous times until now! I am losing faith in you Seems like I am discovering how crumbling your basis of what you believe in actually is and how that which you accuse of others applies quite well to you. You come on self glorifying, know it all, superior, yet in fact all you have is miserly beliefs that cover your atheism and uncertainty.

The difference in this instance is that you are making a variety of statements that genuinely indicate you don't understand evolution. As a random example, you have reiterated the claim that evolution claims we are evolved from monkeys. And this of course is false; we are apes who share a common ancestor with monkeys. If you can't be bothered to understand elementary propositions derived from the theory, how likely is it that you really understand the theory itself and its more complex aspects?

There might just be a reason people are repeatedly telling you you are failing to comprehend. I'm confident that if you left your basement and visited a nearby university, conversing with the resident evolutionary biologist there, it would quickly become apparent you understood relatively little. I don't think internet scholarship is enough to get a full grasp on evolution.

[avxo]

A religious person with more ... capacious intelligence than what you're dealing with here would dispute the idea that he must provide a strict definition at the outset, pointing to a variety of investigations that do not proceed in this fashion.

But such a religious person should provide at least a workable definition that allows us to agree on the concept we're discussing.

If you read Plato's dialogues, a variety of important philosophical concepts that remain with us to this day (e.g., truth, knowledge, justice) are investigated, an adequate definition sought after in each work. Yet, that definition typically does not materialize. But that doesn't necessarily hinder the investigation or indicate that there is nothing there to investigate. Even if you think philosophy is utter shit, there are other examples to draw upon, e.g., linguistics' use of 'meaning' to do explanatory work despite nobody knowing precisely what the word, well, means.

Alternative methodologies include providing an ostensive definition -- basically, pointing to an example of a thing --  or by highlighting just a few essential properties of a thing. For example, it is awfully difficult to provide a precise definition of the mental state 'pain,' yet we seem to know it via acquaintance and can identify some of its salient features. Just as we have a faculty for sensations, the religious will say, there is a similar sense divinatus that allows us to experience 'God'. And they will probably continue the analogy with sensations further, indicating God too is indefinable yet known via acquaintance.

You raise interesting points. I don't necessarily know that I agree with them all, but they are interesting nonetheless.

[avxo]

LOL earlier you were arguing about evolution theory and genetic engineering comparison and how it is not 'impossible'.

I don't think I was comparing evolution and genetic engineering. Can you provide the quote you think indicates this?

Yet you ridicule that God creating the universe in 6 days/periods whatever it may be exactly as impossible and worthy of your sarcasm? Funny funny indeed. So many things we built today in the past were deemed as 'impossible'. I don't find anything to ridicule for God our creator to be able to create the whole universe in six days or six periods (periods whatever that means, not necessarily 24 hours)

I ridicule the concept that the Universe absolutely required a creator/designer that is championed by people like you, who will, in the same breath, add that the creator/designer doesn't need a creator.

LOL@ "but you dont understand it", "you dont know anything about it". You're sounding exactly what you accuse theists of and trust me I've gone through this numerous times with atheists the outcome is always the same It's just plain amusement to my ears. When someone disbelieves in your faith you tell them "no no, you dont understand", "you are clueless". Before finally resorting to childish name calling, cynicism and sarcasm. Oh wait you already have numerous times until now! I am losing faith in you Seems like I am discovering how crumbling your basis of what you believe in actually is and how that which you accuse of others applies quite well to you. You come on self glorifying, know it all, superior, yet in fact all you have is miserly beliefs that cover your atheism and uncertainty.

I think your statements speak for themselves - you either have no real understanding of the theory of evolution and natural selection, or you're intentionally distorting them. I chose to give you the benefit of the doubt and assuming that you wouldn't intentionally lie...

As for knowing everything - I don't and have never claimed to. The one making sweeping proclamations of knowledge is you.

Do you not see the paradox of this faith of yours?

As I've pointed out many times before, I don't have a "faith".

A human reproduces and only persists to exist via the availability of a male and a female with fully functional sexual reproductive systems aka procreation.

Right. But the failure of any one human's reproductive system affects only that one human. Not everyone. You claimed that a single failure in any one human would doom us all.

The genetic code exists so that through this process we have an outcome creature. A human? Or lets even say some other creature, but lets focus on humans. With a? Reproductive system!

So we can't just have a human without the reproductive system. Nor can we have the reproductive system and then a human coming out of no where! Kind of the like the chicken and the egg argument..

You are making an awful lot of assumption. Nothing prevents an evolutionary ancestor of humans from employing asexual reproduction - there are animals that reproduce this way today.

To me the chicken and egg argument is a no brainer as a theist. God created the chicken and designed a reproductive system for it, not one or the other but both.

Of course. To you everything is simple. "God did it" is your universal answer. Why is the sky blue? "God did it." Why do men have nipples? "God did it." Why <anything>? "God did it."

The bottom line is. Humans WITH their respective reproductive systems, male or female... need to have this and need all their components in place. You do not have a human that 'evolves' to develop a penis or develop a vagina magically from being an asexual creature for example. It has to be whole.

The evidence doesn't suggest that the evolutionary path of humans required the sudden and immediate evolution of a penis and a vagina, lest the species be unable to reproduce.

Likewise with all the other systems in the body. No liver? Die. No heart? No blood, no life? No brain, a vegetable. No muscles, not going anywhere? No lungs, no oxygen for any organ or blood which passes through it.

Sure. But then again, natural selection would take care of a mutation that suddenly took away, say, the heart. Or reduced brain capacity. Besides there's a ton of vestigial organs or parts that we do have. The coccyx, the vomeronasal organ, and the evolutionary remnants of a nictitating membrane in our eyes.

Also you don't just stuff a male with estrogens and testosterone blockers and saw off their dick and they become a female with a vagina. Likewise with females, you don't just jack them up with AIs and testosterone and hope a penis grows with a reproductive system?

Right and?

We are male or female, interfering in this process in any shape or form makes humans or any creature with a reproductive system seize to exist.

A lot of genetic mutations cause sterility. Many sterile people are born every year, and yet we haven't seized to exist.

Catching my drift? All this has to be in place or there's nothing but components.

I think your drift is going off on weird tangents. And it's slightly off.

[Griffith]

So since the local resident atheist swamped a thread for christian/muslims. I thought I'd create a seperate thread.

The atheist asked who is God?

God is our creator the master of all creation.

We are dependant on Him, but he is independent of us.

God is the first and last: eternal

Nothing is comparable to Him in all of creation so that includes various creatures, objects, animate or inanimate, etc...

He is not in 'the creation' or creation itself.

God has no gender, age, limiting factors of the physical. God is not bound by the rules He created for the universe.

With Him is all knowledge

As if the true God of the Universe would care what type of food we eat, what we drink or who we decide to have sex with   and then offers a whole bunch of whores for a dead man to sleep with This is just perverted and sick.

I would expect my God to at least have superior intellect to the pathetic minds of petty humans.

Your 'God' thinks like a human being.

At least Jesus Christ offers a message of peace, forgiveness, love and is against stoning or killing people who break the 'laws'.
The New Testament represented a more modern mentality due to the influence of the Greeks and Romans.

The Koran took the mentality back to the time of Abraham when people were primitive nomads who thought the world ended at the mountains in the distance.
This is what the Arabs were at the time, a very primitive people in comparison to the civilization of the Roman Empire which functioned on the principles of logic and reason they learned from the Greeks.
 
The Arabs/Moslems never had a Renaissance or Enlightenment so they never really progressed passed a superstitious medieval mentality.
Europe had its Dark Ages but they at least recovered.
Also, the Europeans realised that Monarchies are oppressors and to live in a monarchy is to be a slave.
Yet the Moslems want to live in a 'Caliphate' 

The Greeks and Romans always viewed the servile nature of these people and their opulent masters as the worst kind of degenerate weakness and not worthy of any true respect.

The European mentality is to bow to no-one, have freedom and think for ourselves as based on the Athenian model of Democracy which the Romans followed during their Republic and made their greatest gains.
That is why we conquered the world and created the worlds greatest inventions.
To blindly follow a religion is not to think for yourself and is a form of mental enslavement.

The Middle East has still not got past much of the Dark Ages phase.

[Radical Plato]

God is AN atheist!

[Man of Steel]

I read the scriptures and I know enough about what Jesus said. I go by that. For divine guidance, we are to follow the prophets and messengers. Not mere sayings of ordinary men who have ulterior motives. We are able to think, but not conjure up our own false beliefs. Not paradoxical, contradictory teachings of the church that clearly go against the very fundamental sayings of Jesus using scripture. You bring no proof from the scriptures when you make blank statements like that. Keep it in the trinity/bible thread. You still are ignoring the verses where Jesus talks about not his will but the will of the father (God). And Jesus saying he doesn't know something (the hour) but only God does.

God does not contradict, mislead or misguide. Men do. Jesus was a mighty messenger of God or as the bible even says "a prophet". Yes the bible, that was one of the quotes from that video you questioned. You are the one lying against God and lying against Jesus. You are not doing yourself or others justice doing that.

So next time you say no Jesus was not a prophet read your bible:

The crowds answered, "This is Jesus, the prophet from Nazareth in Galilee."Matthew 21:11

"And he said unto them, What things? And they said unto him, Concerning Jesus of Nazareth, which was a prophet mighty in deed and word before God and all the people:"
Luke 24:19


In fact there are so many verses in the bible where Jesus is called a prophet I am posting two just to prove a poin

"And when Jesus son of Mary said: O Children of Israel! Verily! I am the messenger of Allah unto you, confirming that which was [revealed] before me in the Torah"
The noble Qur'an, Al-Saf(61):6

And in this thread you are not doing any monotheist service when you say God is a human being or 'male' (gender is something God created and certainly man is something God created). Nor is any of that pantheistic or trinitarian stuff helping you. Jesus certainly was a monotheist, not a pantheist or polytheist or trinitheist or whatever you want to dub it.

Like I said, science disproves in the absolute any false deities, but it does not disprove God. Saying God is a man, science and rational thought will prove it false quite easily.

Ahmed, I've told you before that I don't have the capacity to quickly churn out scriptural references and supplemental discussion points in the manor you want.  Further, because I haven't doesn't mean I'm unable, it just means I don't have the capacity now.  Although, I will indulge the exercise and provide you the response putting that issue to rest.  I can quickly churn out simple replies all day....we all can.  I just don't have canned, written responses at the ready like some; that said, some responses have to be crafted and/or sourced from multiple places. 

[a_ahmed]

^The point is you can't argue against your own scripture saying something and then you saying something completely different, clearly. The bottom line is, you are following Paul's creed and as he said 'his own gospel' and what the church enforced.

If anyone reads the bible it's quite clear Jesus was a man. Alot of the verses that christians emotionally boast about are forgeries like the one about the 'three in heaven'.

Likewise you see someone in the posts mentioned how "Jesus was against the stoning of the adulterer".. Yet if only that person knew that that story was FABRICATED and found to be inserted about 400 years after Jesus. Clearly to enforce a certain view against the law.

Yet then you have Jesus talking about the law, tlaking about the commandments, saying he is not here to destroy it etc...

At least Jesus Christ offers a message of peace, forgiveness, love and is against stoning or killing people who break the 'laws'.
The New Testament represented a more modern mentality due to the influence of the Greeks and Romans.

You mean the more 'modern' pagans. And you realize the story about the adulteress not being stoned is a fabrication right and a far later insertion like 400 years after?

What will Jesus say on his return:

But I will reply, 'I never knew you. Get away from me, you who break God's laws.' Matthew 7:23

A similar thing is stated about Jesus in the qur'an. I can't recollect the verse right now off by heart.

The qur'an stuck to the original message of the prophets and continued off where Jesus left off. Ignoring indeed the church and paul's pagan inventions about Jesus

Lastly in respons to your quote. The bible RARELY talks about God's mercy or love. Are you kidding me? This is a modern phenomena post ww2 where the church was losing followers so they reformed and changed the approach of you're going to rot in hell if you dont accept Jesus as God to Jesus love you, Jesus is peace, Jesus is love, Jesus is mercy. Etc... which the scriptures contradict.

The qur'an actually pretty much solely focuses on the mercy and forgiveness of God. Almost everything is spoken of in terms of mercy and compassion that God has for us. God's 99 names and attributes in the qur'an illustrate that. The forgiving. The merciful. The compassionate. The loving. Etc...

Even when we begin something or pray we say in the name of God, the merciful, the most compassionate

The greeting of the believers is PEACE, salaam. How did Jesus greet people? SHALOM! Same thing.

However it is totally untrue what you claim if you but read the bible or a bit of even recent history. This whole phenomena of selling christianity as 'peace love mercy' is a new phenomena. Less than a hundred years ago it was all about you will rot in hell you infidel if you dont accept Jesus. Seriously.

The European mentality is to bow to no-one, have freedom and think for ourselves as based on the Athenian model of Democracy which the Romans followed during their Republic and made their greatest gains.
That is why we conquered the world and created the worlds greatest inventions.
To blindly follow a religion is not to think for yourself and is a form of mental enslavement.

The Middle East has still not got past much of the Dark Ages phase.

I think you need to brush up on history, cause your statements clearly show your lack of  know-how on the subject. The reason Europe 'spread' is because of constant bloodshed everywhere not just in Europe. Europe was in the 'dark ages' for over a thousand years.

Muslims on the other hand were prosperous for over a thousand years and wherever they went the same was true for the locals.

The crusades just slowed down progress and caused bloodshed. Eventually colonialism took over the crusades and as the british and french made a pact to never allow a caliphate to ever resurface or muslims to progress, they did a fine job of dividing the muslim world for their 'great game'.

I keep forgetting what this document is called signed by the british and french to never allow muslims to progress and to always strive to divide them.

It is quite essential to understanding the muslim world of the past say even 100 years. Nothing but puppets, dictators, military rulers and lack of islam. Only in the very recent many years has there been an awakening and as such Islam is even spreading across europe and the majority of it's converts are in fact white university educated women.

[a_ahmed]

Blabla you don't know what you're talking about you dont know science, you dont know evolution.

Bottom line we come from monkeys but you dont understand how or why but its not really monkeys but it is monkeys.

You miss the whole point. That's why you are just a fraud to me.

You keep boasting about evidence? What evidence the fossil record laughs at you.

We have whole species appear and dissapear. The end. There is no 'transitional forms' only your PERCEPTION where you will present a certain creature then say somewhere in between it became this.

That to me is as idiotic as the greek mythologies of gods and their drawings. Sorry.

You dont have me convinced.

I can use science to understand the cell, understand the human body, understand the various microscopic elements that make up all these processes. But I will not conclude that it came out of coincidence. It's pure retardation.

Keep to your blind atheist faith You as you accuse theists, actually are the one that has nothing substantial only talk talk talk. No evidence, nothing. Empty.

I laugh at your 'superiority'

[Man of Steel]

^The point is you can't argue against your own scripture saying something and then you saying something completely different, clearly. The bottom line is, you are following Paul's creed and as he said 'his own gospel' and what the church enforced.

If anyone reads the bible it's quite clear Jesus was a man. Alot of the verses that christians emotionally boast about are forgeries like the one about the 'three in heaven'.

Likewise you see someone in the posts mentioned how "Jesus was against the stoning of the adulterer".. Yet if only that person knew that that story was FABRICATED and found to be inserted about 400 years after Jesus. Clearly to enforce a certain view against the law.

Yet then you have Jesus talking about the law, tlaking about the commandments, saying he is not here to destroy it etc...

You mean the more 'modern' pagans. And you realize the story about the adulteress not being stoned is a fabrication right and a far later insertion like 400 years after?

What will Jesus say on his return:

But I will reply, 'I never knew you. Get away from me, you who break God's laws.' Matthew 7:23

A similar thing is stated about Jesus in the qur'an. I can't recollect the verse right now off by heart.

The qur'an stuck to the original message of the prophets and continued off where Jesus left off. Ignoring indeed the church and paul's pagan inventions about Jesus

Lastly in respons to your quote. The bible RARELY talks about God's mercy or love. Are you kidding me? This is a modern phenomena post ww2 where the church was losing followers so they reformed and changed the approach of you're going to rot in hell if you dont accept Jesus as God to Jesus love you, Jesus is peace, Jesus is love, Jesus is mercy. Etc... which the scriptures contradict.

The qur'an actually pretty much solely focuses on the mercy and forgiveness of God. Almost everything is spoken of in terms of mercy and compassion that God has for us. God's 99 names and attributes in the qur'an illustrate that. The forgiving. The merciful. The compassionate. The loving. Etc...

Even when we begin something or pray we say in the name of God, the merciful, the most compassionate

The greeting of the believers is PEACE, salaam. How did Jesus greet people? SHALOM! Same thing.

However it is totally untrue what you claim if you but read the bible or a bit of even recent history. This whole phenomena of selling christianity as 'peace love mercy' is a new phenomena. Less than a hundred years ago it was all about you will rot in hell you infidel if you dont accept Jesus. Seriously.

I think you need to brush up on history, cause your statements clearly show your lack of  know-how on the subject. The reason Europe 'spread' is because of constant bloodshed everywhere not just in Europe. Europe was in the 'dark ages' for over a thousand years.

Muslims on the other hand were prosperous for over a thousand years and wherever they went the same was true for the locals.

The crusades just slowed down progress and caused bloodshed. Eventually colonialism took over the crusades and as the british and french made a pact to never allow a caliphate to ever resurface or muslims to progress, they did a fine job of dividing the muslim world for their 'great game'.

I keep forgetting what this document is called signed by the british and french to never allow muslims to progress and to always strive to divide them.

It is quite essential to understanding the muslim world of the past say even 100 years. Nothing but puppets, dictators, military rulers and lack of islam. Only in the very recent many years has there been an awakening and as such Islam is even spreading across europe and the majority of it's converts are in fact white university educated women.

Who are you responding to here? 

[avxo]

You miss the whole point. That's why you are just a fraud to me.

If you think that we "come from monkeys" the only one who misses the point is you.

You keep boasting about evidence? What evidence the fossil record laughs at you.

 

We have whole species appear and dissapear. The end. There is no 'transitional forms' only your PERCEPTION where you will present a certain creature then say somewhere in between it became this.

You may be willing to pretend that evidence doesn't exist. What makes you think I'm willing to do the same?

That to me is as idiotic as the greek mythologies of gods and their drawings. Sorry.

How is your particular mythology different?

You dont have me convinced.

It's impossible to convince someone who doesn't want to be convinced. I wonder if you fall in that category...

I can use science to understand the cell, understand the human body, understand the various microscopic elements that make up all these processes. But I will not conclude that it came out of coincidence. It's pure retardation.

Hey! You do!!! At least you're honest enough to admit that you have already reached a conclusion and will ignore any evidence presented to you that contradicts that conclusion.

Keep to your blind atheist faith You as you accuse theists, actually are the one that has nothing substantial only talk talk talk. No evidence, nothing. Empty.

 

[a_ahmed]

WHAT EVIDENCE?! You have NOTHING lol and its not me saying we come from monkeys, i dont believe that crap. Your evolution theory priests do.

Wait you want to say primates, or apes? oOoOh semantics



^Primate

Looks a lot like a monkey to me.

Oh you mean you want this explanation and the various 'trees' of evolution;

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Primate

Lets go further back in your magical tale of evolution theory. We come from like rats and rodents from there on in? I want to know when we were sea creatures oh oh oh!

[Griffith]

^The point is you can't argue against your own scripture saying something and then you saying something completely different, clearly. The bottom line is, you are following Paul's creed and as he said 'his own gospel' and what the church enforced.

If anyone reads the bible it's quite clear Jesus was a man. Alot of the verses that christians emotionally boast about are forgeries like the one about the 'three in heaven'.

Likewise you see someone in the posts mentioned how "Jesus was against the stoning of the adulterer".. Yet if only that person knew that that story was FABRICATED and found to be inserted about 400 years after Jesus. Clearly to enforce a certain view against the law.

Yet then you have Jesus talking about the law, tlaking about the commandments, saying he is not here to destroy it etc...

You mean the more 'modern' pagans. And you realize the story about the adulteress not being stoned is a fabrication right and a far later insertion like 400 years after?

What will Jesus say on his return:

But I will reply, 'I never knew you. Get away from me, you who break God's laws.' Matthew 7:23

A similar thing is stated about Jesus in the qur'an. I can't recollect the verse right now off by heart.

The qur'an stuck to the original message of the prophets and continued off where Jesus left off. Ignoring indeed the church and paul's pagan inventions about Jesus

Lastly in respons to your quote. The bible RARELY talks about God's mercy or love. Are you kidding me? This is a modern phenomena post ww2 where the church was losing followers so they reformed and changed the approach of you're going to rot in hell if you dont accept Jesus as God to Jesus love you, Jesus is peace, Jesus is love, Jesus is mercy. Etc... which the scriptures contradict.

The qur'an actually pretty much solely focuses on the mercy and forgiveness of God. Almost everything is spoken of in terms of mercy and compassion that God has for us. God's 99 names and attributes in the qur'an illustrate that. The forgiving. The merciful. The compassionate. The loving. Etc...

Even when we begin something or pray we say in the name of God, the merciful, the most compassionate

The greeting of the believers is PEACE, salaam. How did Jesus greet people? SHALOM! Same thing.

However it is totally untrue what you claim if you but read the bible or a bit of even recent history. This whole phenomena of selling christianity as 'peace love mercy' is a new phenomena. Less than a hundred years ago it was all about you will rot in hell you infidel if you dont accept Jesus. Seriously.

I think you need to brush up on history, cause your statements clearly show your lack of  know-how on the subject. The reason Europe 'spread' is because of constant bloodshed everywhere not just in Europe. Europe was in the 'dark ages' for over a thousand years.

Muslims on the other hand were prosperous for over a thousand years and wherever they went the same was true for the locals.

The crusades just slowed down progress and caused bloodshed. Eventually colonialism took over the crusades and as the british and french made a pact to never allow a caliphate to ever resurface or muslims to progress, they did a fine job of dividing the muslim world for their 'great game'.

I keep forgetting what this document is called signed by the british and french to never allow muslims to progress and to always strive to divide them.

It is quite essential to understanding the muslim world of the past say even 100 years. Nothing but puppets, dictators, military rulers and lack of islam. Only in the very recent many years has there been an awakening and as such Islam is even spreading across europe and the majority of it's converts are in fact white university educated women.

I know my history very well thank you.

Actually, the reason the Crusades started was because the Moslems had invaded the Eastern Roman Empire (Byzantine Empire) and the Emperor asked for aid from the West to repel the Turks who threatened to invade Europe and launch a joint military effort to expel them from Roman territory.

The West (Latins) knew that if Constantinople fell to the Turks then Europe would be threatened (as did happen when the Turks finally conquered the city, they invaded and terrorised a large part of Europe for hundreds of years). The Crusaders agreed to help the Emperor on condition that they could lay claim to Jerusalem and that the Eastern Roman Empire would relinquish it's claim to that city which it ruled for over for hundreds of years.

The Emperor agreed, and the Crusaders after repelling the Turks from Christian territory pushed them back to Jerusalem and finally conquered the city.

Another reason for the Crusades was an appeal by the Spaniards to the Pope for aid to repel the Moslems from Spain, who also treatened to invade the France.

The Crusades had little to do about religion but more about repelling Moslem armies from Europe.

Everyone forgets about the Moslem invasions and forgets why the Crusaders entered Moslem territory in the first place.

The Middle East and North Africa was ROMAN territory. The people by that time were all Christian.
The ARAB MOSLEMS invaded it.
This came with forced conversion, enslavement and punishment of death if they refused to convert.

This whole phenomena of selling christianity as 'peace love mercy' is a new phenomena. Less than a hundred years ago it was all about you will rot in hell you infidel if you dont accept Jesus. Seriously.

Islam is still in that primitive phase....
Just look at the actions of Moslems around the world....? And all their illogical protests? It displays a primitive mentality not compatible with modern civilization.

Yes, Europe did have its Dark Ages due to religion but it recovered.
The Arab word and Middle East is still in its Dark Ages due to religion.
Only when they become secular and base their reasoning on science and logic will they begin to prosper and catch up the West and much of East Asia.

As was stated in another post, Mohammed got his ideas from travelling into the Eastern Roman Empire where he heard the stories from the Bible and Torah.
He then incorporated these ideas into a form which was more applicable to the Arabs.
As a result he gained political control and launched a WAR of aggression against the Eastern Romans, conquering people by use of the sword, overseeing the massacre of Jews and forcing others to convert.

And another thing, instead of blaming everyone else for their current state (Like most of Africa also do...) the Arabs should maybe look to themselves to see why they are in their current state.

[Radical Plato]

Awesome Thread - Bitch fight between the Bible Bashing Crusaders and the Mad Mohammed Nuthuggers - Doesn't take long reading this thread before you realise religion is tailor made for the gullible, naive and feeble minded.  The more a_ahmed talks about Islam, the more I realise why the world wants to wipe it off the face off the Earth!  Islam is obviously delusional and attempting to force everyone else to be so, it's like the resident crazy guy in the loony bin telling everyone else that they're crazy.

[a_ahmed]

Right and that's why its one of the fastest growing religions and the largest number of converts are white university educated women

[avxo]

Right and that's why its one of the fastest growing religions and the largest number of converts are white university educated women

And that (if true) proves what exactly?

[a_ahmed]

You're such a tool

That if Islam is 'the ultimate oppression of women' then why is that women and at that university educated white women are flocking to Islam.

What's your amazing atheist refutation of this 

You are a bunch of clowns. Domestic violence is present in all cultures and islam is against it. Domestic violence and rape are at high rates in north america but the media rarely addresses them or labels them as a result of 'christianity' or 'atheism' but its very there.

I find it amazing when some of you say "you mozzlmes abuse yer womenz" I am like oh? I wasn't aware, my wife and I love each other lol. Likewise with my parents since becoming muslims theyve actually become better to one another.

[Griffith]

You're such a tool

That if Islam is 'the ultimate oppression of women' then why is that women and at that university educated white women are flocking to Islam.

What's your amazing atheist refutation of this  

You are a bunch of clowns. Domestic violence is present in all cultures and islam is against it. Domestic violence and rape are at high rates in north america but the media rarely addresses them or labels them as a result of 'christianity' or 'atheism' but its very there.

I find it amazing when some of you say "you mozzlmes abuse yer womenz" I am like oh? I wasn't aware, my wife and I love each other lol. Likewise with my parents since becoming muslims theyve actually become better to one another.

Islam is anti-freedom, anti-freedom of expression, anti-freedom of speech.
It is also anti-human in how it expects woman to cover themselves up and look like lemmings.

Fundamentalist Christians call on 'sinners' to repent.
Islam calls on anyone who opposes them to 'die' or be killed.

[avxo]

That if Islam is 'the ultimate oppression of women' then why is that women and at that university educated white women are flocking to Islam.

That women "flock" to Islam (if true) isn't proof that Islam isn't oppressive to women.

What's your amazing atheist refutation of this 

Why would I care to refute what other people do? Granted this isn't amazing - or even a refutation - but it will have to do.

You are a bunch of clowns. Domestic violence is present in all cultures and islam is against it. Domestic violence and rape are at high rates in north america but the media rarely addresses them or labels them as a result of 'christianity' or 'atheism' but its very there.

Of course - such things happen everywhere. I don't think Islam, or any religion really, has a monopoly on domestic violence.

But, from a westerner's perspective, Islam is particularly... shall we say backwards when it comes to the issue of women and their freedoms. Did you speak out against the Taliban which prohibited young girls from getting an education? Or which forced women to wear burkas? Remember that they did those things in the name of Islam.

I find it amazing when some of you say "you mozzlmes abuse yer womenz" I am like oh? I wasn't aware, my wife and I love each other lol. Likewise with my parents since becoming muslims theyve actually become better to one another.

I think it's dumb to group everyone together and say "all <x> do <y>". The bottom line is that some people abuse women. Is this abuse sometimes indirectly caused by religious beliefs? No doubt. But not always.

[a_ahmed]

I think you are ranting trying to dissuade people from your fradulent and weak beliefs by falsely attacking others preemtively.

You are citing your knowledge based on what the news says, rather than what history or academics have to say about Islam. Ones that are intellectually honest.

Remember that merely what 50 some years ago women in america were fighting for the right to their own property. Islam gave this in the 7th century.

You are contradicting yourself over and over again talking about not to generalize a group or not to believe that a certain aspect of certain individuals paints the whole as that way. Yet you do it when it comes to Islam.

You can cite all kinds of crimes by individual muslims but you cannot cite the same about islam.

Islam came to liberate women and respect women not hurt them. The point is yes many white educated women are flocking to islam. If they were so 'stupid' to go and oppress themselves theyd be running the other way.

You're nothing but a fraud

[Griffith]

I think you are ranting trying to dissuade people from your fradulent and weak beliefs by falsely attacking others preemtively.

You are citing your knowledge based on what the news says, rather than what history or academics have to say about Islam. Ones that are intellectually honest.

Remember that merely what 50 some years ago women in america were fighting for the right to their own property. Islam gave this in the 7th century.

You are contradicting yourself over and over again talking about not to generalize a group or not to believe that a certain aspect of certain individuals paints the whole as that way. Yet you do it when it comes to Islam.

You can cite all kinds of crimes by individual muslims but you cannot cite the same about islam.

Islam came to liberate women and respect women not hurt them. The point is yes many white educated women are flocking to islam. If they were so 'stupid' to go and oppress themselves theyd be running the other way.

You're nothing but a fraud

That's why they acid thrown in their faces and called a 'whore' if they don't wear veils/ninja masks and don't cover up their body.

Women are free to walk around as they wish, which they can do in a western society.

In our societies we believe in freedom.

[a_ahmed]

That's why they acid thrown in their faces and called a 'whore' if they don't wear veils/ninja masks and don't cover up their body.

Women are free to walk around as they wish, which they can do in a western society.

In our societies we believe in freedom.

Are you mentally challenged? Please find me in the quran where it is advocated to throw acid on women's face?

How much longer will you keep trying to lie against islam? If cultural practices of a certain people advocate such evil, and they happen to have muslims among them doing this vile thing, does that mean it is from Islam? Absolutely not. Christians and Hindus have been doing these acts in these regions. It is the demented culture, not islam.

You believe in 'freedom'. You believe in hypocricy more like it. You don't know what real freedom is.