<p>Justinian...ok, I don't believe I'll go anywhere. As for your white light and all that crap...fading oxygenation of the brain.</p>
<p>Now tell me, is your life really so sad and empty that you need to invent some sort of figure to give you meaning? I don't. I find fulfillment and self-actualization in the things I do.</p>
<p>I'd just like to see what an atheist's response is to this:</p>
<p>The Quran, to this day, has not been changed from when it was revealed, some 1400 years ago. Not a single word has been rewritten, revised, or changed. How do you explain the verse: "Then We fashioned the sperm into a clot; then We fashioned the clot into a shapeless lump (fetus); then We fashioned bones out of this shapeless lump; Then We clothed the bones with flesh; Then We developed it into another creation. "
Tell me how, 1400 years ago, humans could have known this.</p>
<p>sydney, it is NOT hard to figure out that sex can lead to pregnancy, and that a baby starts growing inside of a womb. It's not--whoa, automatic baby!</p>
<p>1400 years ago may have been a dark time, but since people have always been having babies, it's really common sense.</p>
<p>Well as I said earlier, I am an atheist. If it makes the religious people feel any better, I have explored other religions and have tried to understand them. I was actually raised as a Christian and was pretty active in various church clubs back in high school/first year of college. I really enjoyed learning more about Christianity and Buddhism, and so on. I'm sure there are thousands of religions yet to explore, but don't really have the time to do such at the moment.</p>
<p>And using empirical evidence to prove the existence of or enhance your claim of any higher being is absurd. It would be just as absurd as me trying to prove that there is no God by empirical means. This is just what I believe by the way and I'm sure I'm starting a debate with this claim. Besides, I thought that in Christianity, one simply has faith that God is the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit and does not rely on empirical evidence in the first place.</p>
<p>sydney_bristow87,
I'm not an atheist, more of an agnostic, but I'll respond to your post.</p>
<p>
[quote]
The Quran, to this day, has not been changed from when it was revealed, some 1400 years ago. Not a single word has been rewritten, revised, or changed.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Wow. That is absolutely false. By simply comparing existing manuscripts, it can be shown that not all Quran manuscripts are the same. Therefore, the Quran has not been perfectly preserved.</p>
<p>
[quote]
How do you explain the verse: "Then We fashioned the sperm into a clot; then We fashioned the clot into a shapeless lump (fetus); then We fashioned bones out of this shapeless lump; Then We clothed the bones with flesh; Then We developed it into another creation. "
Tell me how, 1400 years ago, humans could have known this.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Where do I begin with this? So according to the Quran, the embryo tuns into solid bone then is clothed with flesh? Silly me, I thought that bones and muscles developed at the same time. Thank god the infallible Quran is here to correct my misconceptions. This theory of a 4 stage cycle of creation is EXACTLY the same as the teachings of the ancient Greek physician Galen (who lived about 750 years before mohammed). Here's a translation of part of his work:
[quote]
... The time has come for nature to articulate the organs precisely and to bring all the parts to completion. Thus it caused flesh to grow on and around all the bones, and at the same time ... it made at the ends of the bones ligaments that bind them to each other, and along their entire length it placed around them on all sides thin membranes, called periosteal, on which it caused flesh to grow.
[/quote]
Sound familiar? Galen would have been proud to know that god has read his texts and decided to use them in the Quran. Infact, almost all references to embryology in the Quran can be traced back to the ancient greeks.</p>
<p>I was raised muslim, but I never really believed in any of it. I just realized this pretty recently. It all seems more like myth or fantasy than reality to me. I'm still completely lost and confused after losing my faith. I'm not trying to be evil or go to hell, I'm just looking for the truth.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Then We fashioned the sperm into a clot; then We fashioned the clot into a shapeless lump
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Which line uses the word "sperm" and what is the word originally used?</p>
<p>
[quote]
Which line uses the word "sperm" and what is the word originally used?
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Surah 23 (Al-Muminun - The Beleivers), Ayah (verse) 14. ุงููููุทูููุฉู is the arabic word used - I'm not sure if that will show up, I pasted the word in Arabic - the translation I used was by Yusuf Ali.</p>
<p>
[quote]
I was raised muslim, but I never really believed in any of it.
[/quote]
That's sad. :( Is your name Wesam? That was my sister's name.</p>
<p>adconard, it is possible to prove that a religion is false. For example, let's invent a religion Aboogwa for the sake of discussion. The ancient text of Aboogwa, the Uhoo, says that the world will end in the year 2000. Now, we as year 2006-inhabitants, can empirically and logically test the Aboogwa framework. We say if Aboogwa is true, meaning the text of the Uhoo holds, then we should have died 6 years ago. We are not dead, so Aboogwa is not true (contrapositive of the first statement). Similarly, we can find fallacies in other religious frameworks, although they might not be as obvious as the one I just invented.</p>
<p>I'm an atheist...I like to think I am responsible for my actions and the maker of my own existence. My parents are atheists as well so I never grew up learning that there was a God, and I don't think I will ever believe in one.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Surah 23 (Al-Muminun - The Beleivers), Ayah (verse) 14. ุงููููุทูููุฉู is the arabic word used - I'm not sure if that will show up, I pasted the word in Arabic - the translation I used was by Yusuf Ali.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>The word indeed exists in the Yusuf Ali translation, but not in those of Shakir, Pickthal, or Khan. Soudns a lot like abuse of translation to try to prove a point. Something religious people aren't at all averse to.</p>
<p>
[quote]
. For example, let's invent a religion Aboogwa for the sake of discussion. The ancient text of Aboogwa, the Uhoo, says that the world will end in the year 2000. Now, we as year 2006-inhabitants, can empirically and logically test the Aboogwa framework.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>It would be nice if it were that easy. The Aboogwaians would immediately realize the danger here and send our their hordes of apologists. These would immediately create an new interpretation of the phrase and challenge anyone who thinks differently. For example, they could say that "world" referes to an entirely different thing - perhaps the world of disbelief among Aboogwa followers, or essentially anything else. Or, simply say that the year 2000 is measured differently by the Uhoo. Or perhaps that we as humans have made a mistake and it's really only 1970. They'll throw enough against the wall until something sticks, or at least make it as difficult as possible to refute arguments by creating them en masse. Don't think that the religious haven't had to deal with these kinds of contradictions.</p>
<p>*However, the order and precision in our world LOGICALLY points to a creator. *</p>
<p>No it doesn't. It points to the beauty of nature and natural selection.</p>
<p>Can you explain how the sun is perfectly positioned so that life can go on in earth. If the the earth were just a little closer to the sun, the earth would burn</p>
<p>Well, not exactly - it would be pretty toasty, but i doubt the earth would burst into flame. And the earth is perfectly placed at such a distance as to support life because it just is. Thats how it randomly happened. With all the billions of other planets in the universe, I find it very difficult to believe that there are no other planets that are able to support life.</p>
<p>Everyone talks about the earth as if it's so super special. Well, to us it is. But in the universe, there are billions upon billions of other planets. It's VERY likely that other planets formed like the earth.</p>
<p>I've always been curious. Say we encounter extraterrestrial life sometime in the future. How would that factor into the Christian belief?</p>
<p>Extraterrestial life is just ludicrous. I know so many people who follow this belief. HMM.. ever since H.G. Wells wrote about ufos and little men with oval shaped heads, people started seeing these anomalies. Before Wells, people hadn't an idea as far as ET life.
Another thought provoking question. There are hieroglyphics in egypt which tell of the plagues and scourges that God caused because of pharaohs obstinance, even of the river turning to blood. I believe this to be groovy.
Also, do you realize Noahs Ark actually rests on Mt. Ararat. Now of course some clown may deny this truth, but there are satellite images of it. I wonder why the turkish government denies archaeologists to excavate Ararat.
UCLA, it is very UNLIKELY that other planets exist like the earth because most planets have unstable atmospheres and nonexistant water supply.
HEY Y'all, I learned something today which once and for all DISPROVES evolution, the secret which darwin didn't want you to know. ALL LIVING THINGS CAN ONLY COME FROM OTHER LIVING THINGS. But, but I thought that life started in a chemically based pre mordial soup from chemical substances. Once again, a biological law shatters Darwins foolish theory.
When darwin knew this law, he sat in his room and cried, realizing the faults of his pathetic theory.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Also, do you realize Noahs Ark actually rests on Mt. Ararat. Now of course some clown may deny this truth, but there are satellite images of it. I wonder why the turkish government denies archaeologists to excavate Ararat.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>I don't understand. Are you saying that the turkish government knows its Noah's ark but hates Christianity so much that they wouldn't let the truth come out? I doubt it.</p>
<p>
[quote]
UCLA, it is very UNLIKELY that other planets exist like the earth because most planets have unstable atmospheres and nonexistant water supply.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Ok you just used the word "most." Even if "most" means 99.99999% that leaves about a billion planets for life to form on, and say the probability of life forming on earth is miraculous (1 in a million), thats 1000 planets with life. Hmm sounds like more than 1 to me...</p>
<p>
[quote]
HEY Y'all, I learned something today which once and for all DISPROVES evolution, the secret which darwin didn't want you to know. ALL LIVING THINGS CAN ONLY COME FROM OTHER LIVING THINGS. But, but I thought that life started in a chemically based pre mordial soup from chemical substances. Once again, a biological law shatters Darwins foolish theory.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Ha, that is the reasoning of a weak mind. Friedrich Wรถhler showed in 1828 that organic molecules can come from inorganic molecules, simply be putting all the inorganic molecules in a "soup," heating it up, and waiting. That sounds a lot like evolution to me doesn't it? It seems that these organic molecules have properties which let them stabilize and outcompete the inorganic molecules in the "soup," so as things bash around, they remain intact and so there become more and more. Living things can come from nonliving things. It fact, if I had a lot of time, why couldn't I take a really simple organism, like a bacteria cell, and copy it by putting together, piece by piece, a replica of it? I'm sure this will be possible in <50 years.</p>
<p>
[quote]
When darwin knew this law, he sat in his room and cried, realizing the faults of his pathetic theory.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>For some reason, I imagine you sitting in your room and crying as you are unable to defend your faith.</p>
<p>And Justinian, I suggest you do NOT bring up false evidence on this thread. There have never been any sattelite images of Mt. Ararat that make people think Noah's Ark is on it. The only reason anyone thinks so is that the Bible indicates it.</p>
<p>Ha, Zogoto! Ever heard of Louis Pasteur? He did soup tests too in flasks and found that a flask with a crooked neck hadn't bacteria in it. HA! He did numerous tests and proved the law of biogenesis. HA! sounds like you believe in spontaneous generation! HA! I bet you learn science from ancient Greek parchments. HA!
Yeah well, no one slowly piece by piece replicated a bacteria in the supposed evolutionary process.</p>
<p>False evidence?! Go look on National Geographic website and type in Noahs Ark. You will find your "evidence" there.</p>
<p>
[quote]
UCLA, it is very UNLIKELY that other planets exist like the earth because most planets have unstable atmospheres and nonexistant water supply.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>So, in a universe with billions of planets (others already having shown to have water), there are no planets like earth?</p>
<p>It's possible, but HIGHLY improbable.</p>
<p>I agree. I believe it is there.</p>