what evidence?

Albert Einstein, considered one of the greatest scientists of the 20th century, is supposed to have said "science without religion is lame" while Religion, it is claimed, encourages science, adopting it as a tool by which to study the subtleties of God's creation. Of course the Qur'an is not a book of science. However, many scientific facts that are expressed in an extremely concise and profound manner in its verses have only been discovered with the technology of the 20th century. These facts could not have been known at the time of the Qur'an's revelation, and this is still more proof that the Qur'an is not the word of man. For example, until the dawn of the 20th century, the only view prevailing in the world of science was that "the universe has a constant nature and it has existed since infinite time". If we look at the word "heaven" in the Qur'an we see that it has the meaning of space and universe and that it is telling us that the universe "expands". And this is the very conclusion that science has reached today. The above is adapted from expands". And this is the very conclusion that science has reached today. The above is adapted from http://www.harunyahya.com/the_Quran_leads_the_way_to_science05.php where you can read much more. Or, if you prefer watching you’ll find some videos here http://www.harunyahya.com/m_video_quran_leads_way_to_science.php

Most of the early scientific world saw no contradiction between Christianity and science...it was not until the mid 1800s that problems began, and they need not have, if evolution had been presented as the theory it is and not as the fact that it is not. Nevertheless, there are many scientists who still do not see a contradiction between Christianity and science, given that they approach the same questions from different angles. Scientific evidence backing Christianity/Judaism is found mainly in the human sciences eg prehistory/genetics, linguistics etc where The Judeo Christian belief has always been that all of humanity had a common ancestry. Though that was scoffed at for many years, latest info indicates a common ancestry for modern humans, both genetically and geographically. Linguistics also backs this up. By scientific evidence, can we also mean historical evidence? The historical accuracy of the Bible is phenomenal. Even things that seemed impossible (eg the mention of the Hittites in the Abrahamic narrative, which was disbelieved by historians until the discovery of the Hittite capital) have been largely resolved. The biblical writers have been proven time after time to have their facts very right, something that could not have been achieved had the documents been written in any other era but the ones referred to.

This question made me laugh out loud. Thank you. Ya got my 2 points for what that's worth. Now - where on earth did you come up with the idea that Christianity has any scientific evidence to back it up? :-)

I remember reading a shit ton of "evidence" for the truth of Islam a few months ago. So, no, everybody tries to back up their beleifes.

I was reading some of the comments concerning the issue of the Bible supposedly referring to a spherical Earth and I could not let them go unchallenged. I would argue that there is no evidence whatsoever to support Christianity. Nowhere does the Bible suggest that the Earth is a Sphere. The passages being quoted are not being taken in their proper context. In fact, the Bible implies that the Earth is flat. Furthermore, Jesus believed in a Flat Earth. Isaiah 40:22 does not describe the Earth as being a sphere. “It is he that sitteth upon the circle (Hebrew = chuwg) of the earth, and the inhabitants thereof are as grasshoppers; that stretcheth out the heavens as a curtain, and spreadeth them out as a tent to dwell in” A circle is a flat shape and not the same thing a sphere. The ancient Hebrews did have a word that could be used for sphere. The Hebrew word is “duwr”. For example, look at Isaiah 22:18. “He will surely violently turn and toss thee like a ball (Hebrew = duwr) into a large country: there shalt thou die, and there the chariots of thy glory shall be the shame of thy Lord's house.” If Isaiah had wanted to convey the concept of a spherical shaped Earth, he could have used the word for “ball” instead of the word for “circle”. Furthermore, the sky is described as a curtain, and as the covering of a tent, both of which are solid. Isaiah’s image of the universe is that of a tent. The Earth is flat and circular, like the floor of a tent, while the sky is a solid and roughly hemispherical covering like that of a Bedouin tent. There are no spherical tents! Job 26:7 does not refer to a spherical Earth either. “He stretcheth out the north over the empty place, and hangeth the earth upon nothing” Job’s concept of the Universe is similar to that of Isaiah. Firstly, the “north” is a reference to the Celestial North Pole and is used here to refer to the whole sky. Secondly, the “empty place” is the space under the hemispherical tent like sky referred to by Isaiah. Thirdly, the word “hangeth” implies that the Earth is stationary and hanging upon something, like a garment hanging upon a peg. There are clues in the Bible to what the Earth hangs on. “He raiseth up the poor out of the dust, and lifteth up the beggar from the dunghill, to set them among princes, and to make them inherit the throne of glory: for the pillars of the Earth are the Lord’s, and he hath set the World upon them” (1 Samuel 2:8 KJV) “ Where wast thou when I laid the foundations of the Earth? Declare, if thou hast understanding. Who hath laid the measures thereof, if thou knowest? or who hath stretched the line upon it? Whereupon are the foundations thereof fastened? or who laid the corner stone thereof;” (Job 38: 4 – 6 KJV) “The Earth and all the inhabitants thereof are dissolved: I bear up the pillars of it.” (Psalm 75: 3 – KJV) From these passages, it can be seen that pillars or foundations support the Earth. The word translated, as “nothing” is the Hebrew word “Tehom” meaning “Chaos”, “disorder” or “Formless”. This is a reference to the waters of the Great Deep or Cosmic Ocean. The Pillars or Foundations of the flat circular Earth support it above or upon the Deep. In fact, the Earth looks a bit like an Oil Rig or Drilling Platform out at sea. Luke 17:34-36 does not imply that day and night occur at the same time on different hemispheres of a spherical Earth. It merely says that Jesus may return either in daytime or at nighttime. We can be sure that Jesus thought that the Earth was flat if we look at Lukes Gospel. “Again, the devil taketh him up into an exceeding high mountain, and sheweth him all the kingdoms of the World, and the glory of them; And saith unto him, All these things will I give thee, if thou wilt fall down and worship me.” (Matthew 4: 8 – 9 KJV) Here, Satan and Jesus go up a very high mountain in order to view the whole of the Earths surface. This is only possible on a Flat Earth. The Ancient Greek philosopher Pythagoras first proposed a spherical Earth around 550BC. From around 350BC onwards, all educated Greeks and Romans knew that the Earth was a sphere. The Early Christians regarded the Earth as being flat, but gradually between AD300 and AD500, they gradually accepted that the Earth was a sphere. Columbus and all other educated Europeans of his time knew that the Earth was a sphere. The Columbus Flat Earth story is a C19th Myth. The enclosed pictures show the sort of Universe imagined by the Biblical writers.

What scientific evidence are you talking about?

Here is the image of the Universe that Isaiah had.

Here is the Universe according to Job.

"Belief" and "science" = oxymoronic! ;-)

wtf is wrong with you?

Time to open a dictionary and look up some terms: "faith" and "belief." Your question is akin to asking if Peter pan is the only imaginary fictional character scientifically proven to be able to fly.