The Faith & Religion mega Thread

Or you could at least attempt to clarify which "faith" you're talking about

I think that was perfectly clear from my previous post:

Sure, from an evolutionary viewpoint, it could be argued that the things we value and believe are a matter of selection but only someone who already believes that evolution is real and that it matters would take that point of view.

I don't remember even a single daily life task that requires believing in some kind of deity, and pretty much everything that surrounds me is a result some kind of scientific discovery/invention that occurred in the past or a some kind of craft that has been developed during course of many centuries.

Let's take sports. Why does football (or soccer) have different rules than, say, basketball? What empirical evidence were those rules derived from? None. They were laid down ex nihilo, without any other reason that the inventor's decision to do so. If we follow them, it is because we believe he was right. There is no way of knowing whether he was because there is no factual basis. Yet no-one (except the occasional comedian) complains that sports are groundless and that they should therefore be abandoned. And how is acceptance of those rules any different from the acceptance of a God?

Maybe you should read up on psychology. Whether a person adopts a rationalist worldview or not ultimately depends on his/her personality, i.e. perspective on the world, not on any characteristics of that world itself. To that extent, everyone is born cross-eyed; but some prefer not to see it and to mistake their own perspective for something self-evident. That would apply to both rationalists and religious fundamentalists (who, as many psychologists agree, share the same type of personality).

Originally Posted by SL00b You'd have to prove that an Angel named Jibril/Gabriel existed, and that he visited the earth, and verified the authenticity of the Koran more than once, from other historical sources. The sources would have to be authoritative (first-person accounts, not a retelling of common traditions or Koranic commentaries), and they can't be from the Koran (because obviously the Koran cannot verify the authenticity of the Koran, circular logic). Ideally, at least one source would be a non-Muslim, for credibility. Any physical evidence of Jibril's visits would be awesome as well. For instance, if Jibril were to have brought artifacts of non-earthly origin, those could be examined and tested. That would have been a perfect way for God to have established credibility for his message for all time, so he must have sent something, right?

If such evidence exists, there would be no atheist on this earth.

The only evidence i think we have is holy book and its content. Oh I just remember of one powerful Egyptian King Firawn (Firon or Pharaoh), who claimed himself as god and at his 90's he was drowned in dead sea chasing Prophet Musa and israelis. In Quran, Allah mentioned that his body will be preserved so that it will be a sign for people who come after. And after almost 3000 years his body is recovered from sea and now is in some Egypt museum.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WFq6w...eature=related


So today We will save you in body that you may be to those who succeed you a sign. And indeed, many among the people, of Our signs, are heedless. Quran 10:92

Originally Posted by jay73 I think that was perfectly clear from my previous post:

It is still unclear what exactly are you trying to prove.
The thread is about religion, and it sounds like you're trying to disqualify science (which is pointless since science is not opposite of religion).

Originally Posted by jay73 Let's take sports. Why does football (or soccer) have different rules than, say, basketball? What empirical evidence were those rules derived from? None.

You're trying to apply logic to a wrong field in order to disqualify logic, which doesn't work well with this example.
Football is not a naturally occurring phenomenon and it didn't exist originally, and its rules were not derived from evidence. It was invented - created by humans. You can't apply right/wrong or "evidence" to this category - football is not a model of universe and wasn't meant to represent some kind of truth to begin with. God is supposed to be a real natural phenomenon that has not been created by humans, and according to some religion god gave people some rules to follow.

Originally Posted by jay73 And how is acceptance of those rules any different from the acceptance of a God?

Because god is not a football game and people normally don't live entire life according to football rules?
So are you trying to say that god is fictional was invented by humans(as with football) or that god is dead (as with evolutionary links)?

Originally Posted by ShaanAli If such evidence exists, there would be no atheist on this earth.

Then as with all other religions, there is no evidence of divine origin of the book.

God is supposed to be a real natural phenomenon

Supposed by whom? That is just your imagination.
Most religions define God as transcendant i.e. not part of the world. How can such a God be a natural phenomenon? And how is something that is not natural to be verified scientifically?

Football is not a naturally occurring phenomenon

Just like God

and it didn't exist originally

as God originally didn't for mankind. Do you know what revelation means?

and its rules were not derived from evidence

just like I said

It was invented - created by humans

Really, invented? I have never liked that word because it implies way too much human initiative. Things that are "invented" often are not "made" as much as "discovered" - and discovered not in the world, but in the mind, which "produces" things that were already there but that we had not noticed yet.

Because god is not a football game and people normally don't live entire life according to football rules?

By which you are distorting my ideas. My response related to the parts in bold ("crafts").
Besides, some appear very much to want to live according to the rules of empiricism. Those are not any more based on fact than the rules of a sport.

Originally Posted by ShaanAli {...}The only evidence i think we have is holy book and its content. Oh I just remember of one powerful Egyptian King Firawn (Firon or Pharaoh), who claimed himself as god and at his 90's he was drowned in dead sea chasing Prophet Musa and israelis. In Quran, Allah mentioned that his body will be preserved so that it will be a sign for people who come after. And after almost 3000 years his body is recovered from sea and now is in some Egypt museum.{...}

Before claiming this you should ask what science has to say about it. 1st common mistake of belief is that it treats every unusual everyday event as miracle before investigating it. It is possible body was beeing protected by specific conditions where it doesn't vanish and stuff. Just because people didn't have lot of knowledge in past doesn't mean they were stupid or it doesn't mean event wasn't pure coinsidence.

Originally Posted by jay73 {...}The back of the moon is not observable therefore it does not exist?{...}

Your example is contradicting itself. First of all moon exists - you see it can go to it if have enough money and it interacts without woodoo magic tricks with us. Second you mentioned back of the moon. Your assumption it has back already uses science fact that every object has backside since they require shape. Third - by your logic if something exists because people want it to exist even if it doesn't exist outside imagination means Harry Potter, Goblins, Easter bunny Aliens Matrix etc. also exists because lot of people believe in them just like they believe in God despite noone saw existing one IRL. Finally if God really exists how do you know how it works? Maybe it will send good people in hell instead of heaven? Not mention how do you know even this God doesn't have higher Gods above it? This is what discussion is all about - science is neutral way to get to truth but religion is BIASed very much.

Originally Posted by jay73 Most religions define God as transcendant i.e. not part of the world.

If a god exist, is not a part of universe, and does not interact with it, then it is absolutely unobservable - i.e. it can never be discovered no matter what, and its existence is irrelevant - world with such deity will be identical to the world without such deity.
If a god exist, is not a part of universe, but does interact with universe, then it is not absolutely unobservable - i.e.
there should be evidence of divine intervention.

Originally Posted by jay73 as God originally didn't for mankind. Do you know what revelation means?

So are you saying god is a product of imagination?

Originally Posted by jay73 Really, invented? I have never liked that word because it implies way too much human initiative.

Not my problem.

Originally Posted by jay73 Things that are "invented" often are not "made" as much as "discovered" - and discovered not in the world, but in the mind, which "produces" things that were already there but that we had not noticed yet.

I disagree. Certain things are actually invented and do not occur naturally. Have you ever written you own software from scratch? That's one example of things that are not "discovered" but "created".

Originally Posted by jay73 By which you are distorting my ideas. My response related to the parts in bold ("crafts").

I meant to say that pretty much everything I see is unrelated to faith in any way, so faith is not "the base for everything". If you want "moral rules" from a religion, you can take the rules and throw away deities - nothing is going to change.

Originally Posted by jay73 Besides, some appear very much to want to live according to the rules of empiricism.

Not my problem.

Originally Posted by Arcane Just because people didn't have lot of knowledge in past doesn't mean they were stupid or it doesn't mean event wasn't pure coinsidence.

Who said they were stupid? But they dont had technology and instruments what we have now.

If you think this as a coincidence, I will be showing you more coincidences which are proved correct. Later apply your probability formula to know how much chances it could be being all correct.

1st common mistake of belief is that it treats every unusual everyday event as miracle before investigating it

. Atheists take every usual thing as granted and unusual things as exceptions and ignore them. But for theist every usual and unusual thing is a sign. As no "usual" thing has no way to get produced by itself.

Originally Posted by Arcane Before claiming this you should ask what science has to say about it.

And Do you think, scientist will leave without investigation anything discovered? That too dead body of 3000 years old !!!
Check book of Doctor Morris Bucaille - The Bible, The Qur'an and Science.


Doctor Morris Bucaille uncovered in his book (The Bible, The Qur'an and Science) the identity between what was mentioned in the Holy Quran about the destiny of Musa (PBUH) or (In English Moses)' pharaoh after he was sank in the sea and between the reality which is symbolized in the existence of his body till this day as a sign to the worlds as our exalted God said:

"So this day We shall save your (dead) body (out from the sea) that you may be a sign to those who come after you! And verily, many among mankind are heedless of our signs"
(Quran 10:92)


Doctor Bucaille says: "the narration of the Taurat about the departure of the Jews with Moses (peace be upon him) from Egypt is strongly supports the assumption which says that Mineptah the successor of Ramsses the second is the pharaoh of Egypt in Moses's age (peace be upon him), and the medical study which held on the Mineptah's mummy showed us another useful information about the bearable reasons for the death of that pharaoh. The Taurat mentions that the corpse was swallowed by the sea but it gives no detailing about what had happened next.


While the Holy Quran mentions that the corpse of the cursed pharaoh shall be rescued from water as it came in the previous verse, and the medical examination of that mummy showed that the corpse didn't remain in water for a long time, as it didn't show any signs of complete damage because of the long remaining in water."


Also Morris Bucaille mentioned what says "and the results of the medical investigations came to support the previous assumption, as in the year 1975 a lameness extraction from a small muscular tissue occurred in Cairo, with the valuable help that professor Michfl Durigon offered. And the accurate microscopical examination showed the perfect preserved status for the smallest dissectional muscular parts, and it points that such a perfect preservation couldn't be possible if the body remained in water for a while, even if it stayed outside the water for a long time before it submit for the preparatory operations of the mummification. And we have done more than this while we were interested in searching for the possible reasons of the pharaoh's death."


Medical legal studies took place on the mummy with the help of Ceccaldi the manger of the legal identification laboratory in Paris and professor Durigon, which allow us to make sure that there was a reason for a fast fastly death due to cranial cerebrum bruises which caused a large sized gap at the level of the vault of the skull accompanied with a break caused by a strong stroke, and it is obvious that all these investigations are agreeing with the stories of the Holy books which points out that pharaoh died when the waves came back on him.



And Doctor Bucaille declares the miracle in this case saying: "and in the age that The Holy Quran reach the humans by Mohammed prays and peace of Allah be upon him, the corpses of all the pharaohs that people doubted about them in the modern age whether correctly or wrongly that they had any relation to the departure, were buried in the tombs of the valley of the kings in Tiba on the other side of the Nile river in front of the present "Luxor" city. In the age of Mohammed prays and peace of Allah be upon him everything about that matter was unknown and these corpses did not discover except in the nineteenth century so that the corpse of Moses' pharaoh which still standing for the viewers till this day is considered a materialized evidence in a mummified body of a person that knew Moses peace be upon him, and opposed his demands, and chased him while he was escaping and died during that chase, and God saved his corpse from complete damage so he would become a sign for humans as mentioned in the Holy Quran "

And that piece of historical information about the destiny of pharaoh's corpse wasn't known by anyone of the humans when the Holy Quran came down and even after it came down by several centuries it was also unknown but it was declared in the book of Allah on the tongue of the uneducated prophet, which proves that the source of this knowledge is the inspiration from Allah.

Originally Posted by ShaanAli Atheists take every usual thing as granted and unusual things as exceptions and ignore them. But for theist every usual and unusual thing is a sign. As no "usual" thing has no way to get produced by itself.

I don't ignore unusual things I think will either already understand them, research an amount into what it was, or acknowledge that the exception is outside of my sphere of understanding, so do not attempt to explain it. If I was so inclined, I could say "I can not explain this, therefore it is a miracle!" and how is that not "ignoring" it?? It's just "ignore + credit fictional deity". So much "faith" seems to provide little more than a reason to stop thinking about things, and move on.

Originally Posted by acid_kewpie I don't ignore unusual things I think will either already understand them, research an amount into what it was, or acknowledge that the exception is outside of my sphere of understanding, so do not attempt to explain it. If I was so inclined, I could say "I can not explain this, therefore it is a miracle!" and how is that not "ignoring" it?? It's just "ignore + credit fictional deity". So much "faith" seems to provide little more than a reason to stop thinking about things, and move on.

True for scientists.... not for Atheists. Atheists has answer of every usual thing as "this is natural". They demand for scientific proof, while they even know science has limitations. FYI, Many of great scientists were (are) believing in supernatural power GOD. They couldn't prove, but they believed.

Some scientist said correctly, incomplete knowledge of science generally leads to Atheism, while complete knowledge to GOD...

Originally Posted by SigTerm Then as with all other religions, there is no evidence of divine origin of the book.

Science cant prove books are divine, same time science cant disprove also.

Originally Posted by ShaanAli True for scientists.... not for Atheists. Atheists has answer of every usual thing as "this is natural". They demand for scientific proof, while they even know science has limitations. FYI, Many of great scientists were (are) believing in supernatural power GOD. They couldn't prove, but they believed. Some scientist said correctly, incomplete knowledge of science generally leads to Atheism, while complete knowledge to GOD...

True for Atheists. I am NOT a Scientist, but I am an Atheist. If I were the scientist the the point is I would be the person who SHOULD go and understand it. I am the layman who is simply humble enough to acknowledge that just because *I* can't explain something, doesn't mean it's not explainable.

Originally Posted by ShaanAli Science cant prove books are divine, same time science cant disprove also.

Is that so? Ok i get it then - Harry Potter is real too in that case.

Originally Posted by Arcane Is that so? Ok i get it then - Harry Potter is real too in that case.

I liked your example.

As far as my religion is concern, Allah has mentioned clearly Mohammed (pbuh) was seal of Prophets and messengers. There wont be any after him. So I have no problem with harry potter or Avatar or any other....

But I am bit worried for my other brothers, if they really make him another GOD in future. No guarantee.

You wont believe in India we have several living gods. One of them died very recently, leaving multi billion dollar business behind.

Originally Posted by ShaanAli You wont believe in India we have several living gods. One of them died very recently, leaving multi billion dollar business behind.

Oh by the way, they should be Satans acc. to your faith(In fact by any mean), not Gods.

Originally Posted by ShaanAli I liked your example. As far as my religion is concern, Allah has mentioned clearly Mohammed (pbuh) was seal of Prophets and messengers. There wont be any after him. So I have no problem with harry potter or Avatar or any other.... But I am bit worried for my other brothers, if they really make him another GOD in future. No guarantee. You wont believe in India we have several living gods. One of them died very recently, leaving multi billion dollar business behind.

Why shoudl one arbitrary text over rule another?