- NEW!
by Disturbed in a Jr COAT is so confused on September 20th, 2008
They are both bullshit, and they both say that you can sell you daughter into sex slavery.
by borasalama on September 20th, 2008
The contents of the HQ (Holy Qur’an) are such that a rational person does not feel he has to abandon reason to believe in them. By taking on board the contents of the HQ he gets a concept of God that is acceptable to the mind and a code of life that is based on justice and can deliver inner peace to the individual and outer peace and prosperity to society
In the video below there's a long and short perspective on it. Both, Mr Estes and Mr Phillips, were Christians and have had the Bible as their main scripture. So they know what they're talking about.
.
by LuckyLefty on September 20th, 2008
They both derive from Abrahim...
They are both people of the book...
They both follow one god...
No major difference really. Perhaps the stories are a bit differed, but Noah, Jesus, all the major prophets are still the same and what they did is also the same.
This is an awesome source I never knew about...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biblical_narratives_and_the_Qur'an
Good question. Thanks.
by Piso on September 20th, 2008
They are both Abramic Based
by Temporary Name on August 17th, 2009
It´s all terrible BS
by Moongrim on February 1st, 2009
The Q'uran is a piss poor version of the Bible. Essentially it is the Bible re-written to justify many evil acts that weren't covered in the Bible.
And it's chock full of errors, and contradictions, just like the Bible.
http://www.carm.org/islam/Koran_contradictions.htm
http://faithskeptic.50megs.com/pwb.htm
by thatsJustme on February 1st, 2009
it doesn't....familiar with prophets and characters of Bible and that is all in common...other than this all is different beliefs...
by Designer4theking...loves her kitties on November 13th, 2008
They do (Quran)believe Jesus was a prophet. (The Bible )Jesus is the Son of God and a prophet and our savior and King. He also rose again from the dead.
by Theby on October 31st, 2008
It doesn't.
by philosopher-saint on September 20th, 2008
I think some schools offer PhD degrees upon a thorough exegesis of this question, no?! ;-)
by Franklin on August 18th, 2009
The Bible is far more widely available because it has been translated into over 2,200 languages, whereas the Koran (Quran) has been translated into just over 110 languages.
by ScienceSwamy on August 18th, 2009
Same as BS compares with pig-poo.
Same 'undigestable fibre-stuff in the s**t,
but different stink.
by chenina on November 11th, 2008
How is it possible to be 14 and a sophmore? From these postings I am gonna assume you are not a genuis and are really in 8th grade as most 14yr olds are, 9th tops. Also read Spengo's comment again. BOTH men and women are bound to each other. DO you understand the context of the word bound? It doesn't mean they own each other, but are bound to each other LEGALLY, as in MARRIAGE. I took a quote from your profile. It serves well here.
“Stupidity is a talent for misconception.” - Edgar Alan Poe
I'm cot calling you stupid but naive in your choice of resources and lack thereof.
Highlight misconception
We are only trying to make you understand. You need to read everything in context and understand what you are reading.I know you are young, so get info from reliable
sources and don't call something bulls@#$ that you don't understand or care to understand.
by chenina on November 11th, 2008
OMG!!!
by chenina on November 11th, 2008
I am muslim but I used to be a Christian so I know about both religions. Is this the evil verse you are referring to?
Romans 7;2
For example, by law a married woman is bound to her husband as long as he is alive, but if her husband dies, she is released from the law of marriage.
If you read Spengo's comment this would be crystal clear.
However as you are only 14 and in 8th grade, I do not believe a 14 yr old is a sophmore. "I am a teacher and work with 14 yr old 8th graders everyday." I will help you understand. This verse is about and remarriage once a man dies. To be bound to the man literally means married. Not owned, beaten, supressed, mistreated, etc. You have to read words in context and not make your own conclusions. Also you said you read some of the Quran. Do you think it's accurate if someone reads only part of any book and then makes a judgment? You want to make a comment about the bible, fine, you supposedly read it and it's your right. However, you do not give one reference about the Quran being as you say sexist. If you have questions about what you read in the Holy Quran there are plenty Muslims here who I am sure would love to help you. If no one else would I would be delighted. I think you should edit your answer and take out Quran as being bull##$%. You have no proof and never read it or studied it to make that comment.
What is the prophet mohammed's flight in the quran called?
by Answerbag Staff on May 7th, 2011
| 1 person likes this
How does the Quran support human rights?
by qumo on April 3rd, 2011
| 1 person likes this
Why should I read the Qur'ān?
by AnonymousGirl on May 16th, 2011
| 5 people like this
How can intelligent people seriously believe that the qu'ran is the untouched word of god and has not been
influenced by man?
by AnonymousSchmonimus on April 24th, 2011
| 6 people like this
Why do the students in Pakistan madrassas rock back and forth while reciting the Qu'ran?
by mike_70 on May 6th, 2011
| 1 person likes this
You're reading How does the Bible compare with the Quran?
Your favorite Q&A site is on Facebook! Become a fan to connect with the ever-growing community of Answerbaggers, share your thoughts and find out what Answerbag's up to next!
Comments
How does the bible teach this?
by Coexist on September 20th, 2008
++++++
by Jen-Jen on September 20th, 2008
please provide evidence for your answer
by borasalama on September 20th, 2008
Jen-Jen did you post a comment? My alert says you did two hours ago, but I can't see that comment. Could you post it again please.
by borasalama on September 20th, 2008
Maybe he got scared by not having any evidence to support his claim.
by Coexist on September 20th, 2008
borasalama, note the avatar name. I rest my case.
by Theby on October 31st, 2008
it's hate that makes them do that, they think they'll feel better after venting their frustrations, but ironically, and sadly for them, it only increases their hatred. It's a vicious circle, but they realise it not.
by borasalama on October 31st, 2008
It's alright, borasalama, we know the truth and act on it and that is all that matters. Insh'allah, we will not the ones going down. You know what they say: "Ignorance is bliss".
by Theby on November 1st, 2008
It's sad. TY Theby
by borasalama on November 1st, 2008
how does an answer like this get +points?
by Spengo on November 1st, 2008
As borasalama says, it's sad.
by Theby on November 1st, 2008
Unbelievable. You should do more research and not listen to one persons crazy opinion. The biible nor the noble quran ever condoned this. They hold women in high regard and allow sex between spouses only.
by chenina on November 8th, 2008
Of course! :-]
by Theby on November 8th, 2008
I have just looked at her summary and she is only 14! She practices Wicca. I hope as she gets older she will grow out of it. Salaam
by Theby on November 8th, 2008
Inshallah
by rorlan27 on November 8th, 2008
I will never grow out of it. It is a much better religion than any you people practice. I used to be Catholic. I have read the bible all the way through. I think it is sick.
by Disturbed in a Jr COAT is so confused on November 9th, 2008
ok so you "think it (the Bible) is sick". Well, that's YOUR opinion, but at least you've formed it after you "read the bible all the way through". On what basis did you decide that the HQ fell in the same category?
by borasalama on November 9th, 2008
Also being 14 reading the whole Bible could take years, are you sure you were ready to comprehend it. It sounds like you picked and chose passages and twisted them. Being so young you should have had guidance. Also you read the Bible not the Quran, so why are you judging it when you know nothing about it?
by chenina on November 9th, 2008
http://members.shaw.ca/tfrisen/Bbl/Sexism/Sexism.html
Read this. It is sick.
I have also read parts of the Quran.
by Disturbed in a Jr COAT is so confused on November 9th, 2008
the link you've given sets out specifically to highlight Sexism in the Bible. I am not here to defend what is bad in the Bible. The Muslim's view is that the Bible as we have it today, whichever of the hundreds of version you take CANNOT be entirely God's word because of the bad bits in it.
.
However, is it reasonable to condemn the whole book because of the bad bits in it? Would it not be better to check up yourself on the selected references in the link and on those you can't explain away yourself approach the Christians to give them a chance to explain.
.
That's what Muslims do. Where they find differences between the HQ and the Bible they question the Christians, and in many cases they find that the Christian is either not familiar with what he regards as his scripture or has found excuses within the Bible itself for not following most of its requirements.
.
I hope you'll see that your basis for condemning the WHOLE Bible is not fair and for condemning the HQ not stated.
by borasalama on November 9th, 2008
I would just like to point out that many of those passages weren't sexist, you had some stating that women are legally bound to their husbands....which is true. Some that stated that crossdressing isn't appropriate, some saying that women were made for men...none of these things sound unreasonable or agressively sexist to me.
by Spengo on November 10th, 2008
That just proves that YOU are sexist as well, Spengo. Those passages ARE sexist. Women are not made JUST for men. And men are also made somewhat for women which it did not mention. Women are not COMPLETELY bound to their husbands. And men are also somewhat bound to their wives which it did not mention. Crossdressing is perfectly fine if that is what you like.
by Disturbed in a Jr COAT is so confused on November 10th, 2008
If women are not made for men and men are not made for women, who ARE they made for? I am bound to my husband just as he is to me. Cross dressing? What are you talking about?
by Theby on November 10th, 2008
Disturbed girl, google women in islam and research why the bible and Quran say men are head of the family. It's not God being sexist it's because men have the responsibility of working and paying for bills and such. In Islam a woman is not required to work if she doesn't want and can be educated and successful in her own right. The man also has the responsibility to protect the family. No matter what you think, the majority of men are physically stronger than women. Both religions require women are to be treated equally and with respect. Men are also head as to pass on the Islamic or Christian beliefs to their family also a big responsibility. God is not sexist but practical. Please research women in Islam online or from a reliable source.
by chenina on November 10th, 2008
disturbed...your naivite is very apparent here. When a couple is married, they are legally bound to each other. That means that the woman IS legally bound to the man. That is not only in the Bible, Qur'an, Torah, and every other major religious text, but also US law, and the laws of every non poligimist region in the world. You are saying that, for a woman to be bound to a man, is sexist...if you feel that, then you saying that every religious and political group in the world is sexist. I'm sorry, you need to finish middle-school, move on to high-school, finish that, vote a couple times, and have a family, then talk about what is and isn't fair/sexist in family matters.
by Spengo on November 11th, 2008
If you want to assume that I'm sexist because I believe that women are equal to men in every way, so be it
by Spengo on November 11th, 2008
good points spengo
by chenina on November 11th, 2008
Spengo, I am saying that the bible tells us that women are bound to men, but it never tells us that men are bound to women. THAT is sexist.
.
P.S. I am in highschool not middleschool. You are the one that is acting like you are in middleschool. I am a sophmore.
.
Thebyann, Crossdressing came up in spengo's response. The meaning of life has yet to be discovered. So women are not made FOR men. If they are, the bible still does not state that men are made for women. Just that women are made for men. THAT is sexist.
~
Blessed Be
by Disturbed in a Jr COAT is so confused on November 11th, 2008
Disturbed, I know the meaning of my life from the Holy Qur'an. But you are right in saying it has yet to be discovered; by people who are not Islamic. We Muslims know exactly why we are here on earth. Salaam Alykom
by Theby on November 11th, 2008
I am muslim but I used to be a Christian so I know about both religions. Is this the evil verse you are referring to?
Romans 7;2
For example, by law a married woman is bound to her husband as long as he is alive, but if her husband dies, she is released from the law of marriage.
If you read Spengo's comment this would be crystal clear.
However as you are only 14 and in 8th grade, I do not believe a 14 yr old is a sophmore. "I am a teacher and work with 14 yr old 8th graders everyday." I will help you understand. This verse is about and remarriage once a man dies. To be bound to the man literally means married. Not owned, beaten, supressed, mistreated, etc. You have to read words in context and not make your own conclusions. Also you said you read some of the Quran. Do you think it's accurate if someone reads only part of any book and then makes a judgment? You want to make a comment about the bible, fine, you supposedly read it and it's your right. However, you do not give one reference about the Quran being as you say sexist. If you have questions about what you read in the Holy Quran there are plenty Muslims here who I am sure would love to help you. If no one else would I would be delighted. I think you should edit your answer and take out Quran as being bull##$%. You have no proof and never read it or studied it to make that comment.
by chenina on November 11th, 2008
I am a young sophmore. I am not in 8th grade. And actually I have read parts of the Quran.
by Disturbed in a Jr COAT is so confused on November 11th, 2008
Disturbed, None of us Muslims are trying to attack you or belittle you. We are just giving our points of view as you are but if you tone down your objections to our comments you will find that you sound more credible and people will not be offended. Salaam
by Theby on November 11th, 2008
I know you read parts of the Quran. Read my comment again. I asked "if someone only read part of any book and gave a judgment would that be considered fair." You can't just make a judgment like calling a holy book bull%%$# when you haven't even studied it or began to understand it. Please read my comment again. You are not paying close enough attention.
by chenina on November 11th, 2008
Key word is 'parts" not "all' or even "most"
by chenina on November 11th, 2008
chenina, You ARE a teacher judging from your last sentence! Ha ha
by Theby on November 11th, 2008
I can't help it. It comes out. :)
LOL, the fact she is 14 and in the 8th grade like my kids doesn't make it easier.
by chenina on November 11th, 2008
I am not in 8th grade, I am in NINTH! I just looked it up and realized 9th grade is freshman. Sorry for my missunderstanding, but I am NOT in 8th grade!
by Disturbed in a Jr COAT is so confused on November 11th, 2008
so you are a freshmen, that doesn't change the rest of the conversation. I understand that people as kids think they know everything, at your age, you get a piece of information and hold on to it as though it is the only truth that exists. We have all gotten quite off topic though...I would like for you to site from the bible AND the Qur'an what YOUR ORIGINAL ANSWER claimed that "they both say that you can sell you daughter into sex slavery". If you can not show where both say this, then your answer is based on unwarranted opinion of false facts. Back up your statement with real sources...as you will learn in your next few years of school for english classes, you must site your sources.
by Spengo on November 11th, 2008
I got my information from the book "Letter To A Christian Nation". I don't remember that page, but it is in there somewhere, and yes it has evidence from both the Bible and the Quran.
by Disturbed in a Jr COAT is so confused on November 11th, 2008
show me or it's just a story....I can say all day that the Qur'an tells me that Disturbed isn't telling the truth, but you would want me to back that up. If you can't support your evidence, it's not true. You say you can't find it now, go look...take some time...research, read them both and get back to me when you can.
by Spengo on November 11th, 2008
Quite true Spengo. Thanks for getting us back on course. I to am curious about this supposed letter. I am going to do a little research myself about it. Let us know if you find anything.
by chenina on November 11th, 2008
Go to your local library and take the book out. If they dont have it, have them order it from another library close by.
by Disturbed in a Jr COAT is so confused on November 11th, 2008
So not only are you are going to disrespect people's religions you are going to make us go to the library and research YOUR point ourselves? Don't you have any other sources to back up your claims of sex slavery? If you are so passionate about it you should really learn to do research by using multiple resources. Using one source is biased and can be completely wrong such as in your case. Just because something is in a book doesn't make it right 100% of the time.
by chenina on November 11th, 2008
There's truckloads of earth for every nugget of gold. The amount of earth is amazing but it's the gold that people go for. Anyone can put pen to paper as many have done. The number of publications out there is amazing but it's the HQ that one should go for, first :) :)
.
The above comes from this gem from HQ 5:100 "Say: 'Not equal (in value) are things that are bad and things that are good, even though the abundance of the bad may amaze thee; so be God conscious, O ye that have understanding; so that ye may prosper'"
by borasalama on November 11th, 2008
Mashallah great verse
by chenina on November 11th, 2008
chenina, that is EXACTLY my point! Just because it is in a book, doesn't make it right!
by Disturbed in a Jr COAT is so confused on November 11th, 2008
TY it's just one of over 6000, Alhamdulillah
by borasalama on November 11th, 2008
Disturbed, but you were absolutely sure that it was right, just because you THOUGHT you'd seen it in a book that's why you offered it as your answer.
by borasalama on November 11th, 2008
Yes but i have proof to back up my book do you? And if you don't believe in the Quran and think it's not true, why do you believe the misconceptions of it? You don't make any sense. In order for you to be offended by something the bible or Quran says, you have to believe what it says is true. Go do some research and let us know more about this sex slavery thing and quit trying to avoid it and talk in circles.
by chenina on November 11th, 2008
Disturbed, you quoted "Just because it is in a book, doesn't make it right!" so we told you where else you can look and have offered scripture and help. We asked you to site a source and told you that your book may be wrong and you shut down and told us to go find it for ourselves. I will likely check the book out tonight as one of my college classes tonight is in a library...I will get it and likely have it read by the weekend and I'll post my findings...until then...please read from the Qur'an or the Bible and try to find out for yourself.
by Spengo on November 11th, 2008
There is NO evidence that the Bible or the Quran is true.
by Disturbed in a Jr COAT is so confused on November 11th, 2008
All you have to do is look outside. There is proof around you. You are proof. But if you want more proof, since we are the only one giving any proof, watch this video http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=b22_1204483588. The whole thing please. Look, just answer our question so we can move on to another topic. Also take at look at this one here. http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=e7ba39edfd. Personally, I should just say I read it somewhere and not give any proof at all. I hope the other link opens your eyes to women in Islam.
by chenina on November 11th, 2008
Also you should state your comment is that YOU don't know of any proof of the Quran or Bible.
by chenina on November 11th, 2008
Here's something about that book letter to a Christian nation" http://www.tektonics.org/gk/harrisletter.html
Not many people took it very seriously, in fact many reject it as unresearched garbage.
by chenina on November 11th, 2008
Disturbed, Don't go to an Atheist with the proposition "There is NO evidence that the Bible or the Quran is true", that would not be a good test. To be fair approach a staunch Christian about your claim regarding the Bible.
.
As for the HQ what sort of proof were you after?
Take for example the statement in HQ 79:30 "And the earth, moreover, hath He made (like the shape of) an ostrich egg" - the scientific word for that is geospherical. Knowing that, which of the three possibilities a, b or c below would you tick as most likely:
Verses like HQ 79:30 could possibly be
a) from Mohammed
b) from other human being(s)
c) from God.
by borasalama on November 11th, 2008
Ok guysand gals,I think I made a break through here. But first I must point out to Disturb, is that NOWHERE in the section dealing with sex slavery is the Quran mentioned. Well, as you know there area lot of different translations of the bible, this in fact is one main reason I converted to Islam. Any way look at these 2 translations of the same verse
King James Version: And if a man sell his daughter to be a maidservant, she shall not go out as the menservants do. and the
New American Standard Bible:
"If a man sells his daughter as a female slave, she is not to go free as the male slaves do.
FIrst nowhere is sex even mentioned and second these two verses say 2 different things. A maidservant is just a female servant while we all know what a slave is.
Next, yes it says selling a daughter as a servant was permitted and actually to her benefit. If the master did not marry her she was set free.
“And if a man sell his daughter to be a maidservant, she shall not go out as the menservants do. If she please not her master, who hath betrothed her to himself, then shall he let her be redeemed: to sell her unto a strange nation, he shall have no power, seeing he hath dealt deceitfully with her. And if he have betrothed her unto his son, he shall deal with her after the manner of daughters. If he take him another wife: her food, her raiment, and her duty of marriage, shall he not diminish”
by chenina on November 11th, 2008
2:228
"Women who are divorced shall wait, keeping themselves apart, three (monthly) courses. And it is not lawful for them that they should conceal that which Allah hath created in their wombs if they are believers in Allah and the Last Day. And their husbands would do better to take them back in that case if they desire a reconciliation. And they (women) have rights similar to those (of men) over them in kindness, and men are a degree above them. Allah is Mighty, Wise."
lol at sexism
by Talimze on November 11th, 2008
Most times the reason a daughter was sold was because of poverty and was to her benefit. In fact if she married one of the masters sons she is like a daughter and if the master decides not to marry her or anyone else in the family, she still has to be completely taken care of; food, clothes, and has to find her a husband. There she would be taken care of and possibly have a husband. SO I am finished with this. Again,nothing about this is in the Quran and don't confuse yourself with the bible and Quran. Good luck and good night.
AsaamAlaikum
by chenina on November 11th, 2008
Asaamalaikum lolatu, I like your nickname and the surah you quoted. If you continue in this conversation, expect to be frustrated.
Good luck
by chenina on November 11th, 2008
Oh, I'm already frustrated, and I get the feeling that you've misinterpreted my position.
by Talimze on November 11th, 2008
no, i was using sarcasm. have fun
by chenina on November 11th, 2008
That's actually all I wanted to say.
by Talimze on November 11th, 2008
WE are not proof of the Bible. The Bible is proof oif US. If we did not exist, the Bible would have never been writen. It is just a good piece of literatue, and that is all.
by Disturbed in a Jr COAT is so confused on November 11th, 2008
Disturbed, why do you keep challenging the Bible here - this section of AB is Islam > Qur'an. Shouldn't you be making those comments under Christianity > Bible?
.
You included the HQ in your earlier challenge and I responded above at 03:24 PM. Of the three options possible which one did you go for?
by borasalama on November 11th, 2008
I doubt if they have even been read, borasalama.
by Theby on November 11th, 2008
Seems like a lot of talk in here. I decided it would be fun if I got in on this conversation!
.
Disturbed, there is plenty of proof to back the Bible and the Quran up, all you have to do is look with sincerity. You can't just look at the con without seeing what the pro has to say, that's ignorance.
.
What exactly makes these two books a lie?
by Coexist on November 11th, 2008
You know, I think it is the place of the believer to tell the non-believer why the books are not lies, not the other way around.
by Talimze on November 11th, 2008
actually no, much like in the court system...Burden of Proof falls on the prosecution. If you have 1.4 billion people living peacefully in the glory of the Qur'an and one person says "The Qur'an is false" it is up to that person to provide supporting evidence...if they want to have open discussion it is a Muslims responsibility to share their knowledge, but if the purpose is to assail, the responsibility lies on the assailant.
by Spengo on November 12th, 2008
That is why what we call "progress" is just people becoming more accustomed to social stagnation.
1.4 billion people believing in something is not proof for it. There is no reason why I, or anyone else, should believe that anyone's holy book is true.
by Talimze on November 12th, 2008
but the fact that 1.4 billion believe it means that, if you plan on changing peoples minds for your "progress" you are going to have to be the one to compel us to change our minds...not force us to tell you why we believe.
by Spengo on November 12th, 2008
I don't give a shit what people believe, and I don't think that I could ever have the ability to change that. I just point things out like I see them, and I have never come across a holy book for any religion that has not required me to discard all of my cognitive faculties to believe even a little of it.
by Talimze on November 12th, 2008
so...you don't care what people believe, you can't believe, you are too stubborn to change, and you don't like holy books...I think you have given me substantial evidence to not respond to your line of religious reasoning from here out.
by Spengo on November 12th, 2008
The only part of what I said that you got right was that I don't care what people believe. I'm not too stubborn to change, I'd just need a good reason to, which I don't have and, at this point, don't expect to ever receive. Similarly, I could potentially like a holy book if it wasn't complete bullshit, although in that case I probably wouldn't call it a "holy book." I'd need to be able to rationally explain at least most of the reasons why I would be attached to it.
But if you still want to ignore me, that's fine.
by Talimze on November 12th, 2008
you said "I don't think I have the ability to change" That tells me you are too stubborn..you don't believe in your own ability to see it other than you do. The fact that you say a holy book is complete bulls*#t tells me that you haven't actually read one.
by Spengo on November 12th, 2008
check out my answer at http://www.answerbag.com/q_view/357481 it is a long one but it might help clear up some answers you might be looking for...if not...so be it.
by Spengo on November 12th, 2008
"I don't have the ability to change THAT."
"That" would be referring to "what people believe." I don't think that I could change someone's beliefs, in response to you saying "you are going to have to be the one to compel us to change our minds." See?
I saw your obscenely long answer and I read about a quarter of it, but I realized that I didn't need another explanation of what god was, or why people should believe, or anything like that. All believers seem to have their own little theology, so I don't see the point in hearing about yours. Plus, I saw your conclusion and it said "it is a matter of unshakable faith." I am aware of this position and I am fine with people having it. It's just not for me. I can have faith in something, but I must have something to go along with it to back it up, to make it at least somewhat rational.
by Talimze on November 12th, 2008
If you only read 1/4 of it you missed the point to it. Towards the bottom are arguments against religion as well as reasons people do and do not believe. If you aren't willing to read a couple pages of belief..it's no wonder you haven't read the Koran
by Spengo on November 12th, 2008
It's people like you that give me a headache...you ask for evidence and it's given so you argue it..you ask for proof and it's given and you say it isn't proof enough...at some point you should just admit that you are an atheist with no intention of finding religion and leave those of us that do believe out of your anger.
by Spengo on November 12th, 2008
"Unshakable faith."
Don't need to say much more than that. Not for me. If I am required to believe in something to the point that I cannot fathom anything different, then I realize there is a problem. Not every belief is equal, and it is perfectly fine to shift focus from a nonsensical one to one that is more rational.
You haven't given me any evidence or proof apart from "unshakable faith." That's okay though, because I didn't ask for any. I know you can't give it, so why bother? I wanted to be a believer most of my life, and I was for a time. I was angry at myself for ever doubting the existence of God. Things have changed since then, however...
by Talimze on November 12th, 2008
you again didn't read the context of that. I'm done responding to you because the statement of unshakable faith was ONLY IF THERE WAS NOT EVIDENCE TO THE CONTRARY. If there is evidence that proves the situation false, faith doesn't work. You missed the part in bold where I made a joke about using that statement as fact
by Spengo on November 12th, 2008
I read your arguments for theism as well, and I realized that they aren't arguments, they're just statements. I think it's funny that you feel like you are changing lives. Whatever happened to humility?
by Talimze on November 12th, 2008
And even if you're really done responding to me, I just want to say that having unshakable faith never works. Just believing in something does not make it real. Even if there is nothing to say that it isn't real, there is still nothing to say that it is.
by Talimze on November 12th, 2008
apparently you don't know what an argument is. An argument is a firm statement that starts a debate. Not the traditional "fight" between people. I could say that "the sky is blue because of light refraction" and that is an argument. People then debate that statement. I never stated in my post that there was going to be humility. And I bet you have an unshakable faith in the earths continual rotation. You are trying so hard to find fault with the layout of what I said, but nothing of the context.
by Spengo on November 12th, 2008
Making a statement that starts a debate is not an argument, it's a statement that starts a debate. What comes with the debate (support for that statement) makes it an argument. You don't need to have a debate for this though, as you can include support without needing someone to point out that you don't have any. Also, arguments usually have some kind of importance that it clearly stated or at least implicit. In this case, it is that all people should be theists. The only problem is that your "arguments" don't link up with this, as you provide no decent support for them.
And I don't need pure faith to know that the Earth rotates, as I can see it and it can be explained naturally in a way that makes sense. Sure, you could posit that we are all merely imagining what we are seeing, or it's some kind of optical illusion, and those ideas are ridiculous, but not completely impossible. That's where the faith comes in. However, this is not complete or unshakable faith.
by Talimze on November 12th, 2008
You misunderstand...the statement that the earth rotates told before columbus crossed the ocean and people began to understand that the earth is round...that is where faith played a part. It was holding faith until science backed it up or disproved it. Since science supported the faithful conviction of that statement, it lends to the merit of other statements of the same faith.
by Spengo on November 12th, 2008
You have to try to have "faith" (if you want to call it that) when you first try to prove something is true or not true. Otherwise, why would you bother? The problem with the "god hypothesis" is that no evidence has ever been found to prove it. If there was any evidence found (such as making a truly amazing and modern scientific breakthrough thanks to the Bible, or an extremely specific, clear, non-self-fulfilling prophecy from the Bible coming true), then I would seriously consider the theist position to be a rational one. Until then, bullshit.
by Talimze on November 12th, 2008
there are truths...but what science are you using? What kind of evidence do you "need"? Do you need something physically tangible? Because you don't even have that in math. So what do you feel you need?
by Spengo on November 12th, 2008
I told you what I need: a truly amazing and modern scientific breakthrough thanks to the Bible, or an extremely specific, clear, non-self-fulfilling prophecy from the Bible coming true. Those are just examples. There are plenty of things that could potentially help to make me a believer. I just need a reason other than "just because."
by Talimze on November 12th, 2008
So what you are saying is that you need the full religion and all things religious to comply to your wants and desires? It seems that you are setting a high bar for something that you aren't willing to look into anyhow.
by Spengo on November 12th, 2008
I said nothing of the sort. My demands are not unreasonable at all, especially for something considered to be the word of the divine. However, I will not bother explaining it any further to you. If the best you can do is to twist my words into something that you can only wish I said, I having nothing left to say to you.
by Talimze on November 12th, 2008
lolatu you said "You have to try to have "faith" (if you want to call it that) when you first try to prove something is true or not true. Otherwise, why would you bother?" Now your position is "there is no God" is that based on faith?
by borasalama on November 12th, 2008
Yeah, I don't deny that. Faith is not a bad thing to have. It's only bad when you base your beliefs purely on faith and nothing else.
by Talimze on November 12th, 2008
again...if you had read my other post as you claim that you had...you would know the limitations of faith and when it is and isn't properly applicable. You are saying that being stubborn is wrong, we are in agreement...you however are also saying that having too much faith is wrong...when by definition, that isn't possible.
by Spengo on November 12th, 2008
By who's definition? Yours?
If you have 100% faith in something and that is all you have for believing it, that is no good.
by Talimze on November 12th, 2008
These two websites seem to be good if you are willing to read them lolatu.
http://www.100prophecies.org/
http://islambyquestions.net/Quran/wordOfGod.htm
by Coexist on November 12th, 2008
The first link contains a list of prophecies that are in no way impressive. Most of them are self-fulfilling prophecies, meaning it was something that people could replicate based off of what it said in the Bible (such as the forming of the nation-state of Isreal), and they certainly aren't compelling. The rest are all further examples of the Bible proving the Bible, and it's embarrassing that they are even mentioned.
As for the link to the Quran thing, that is probably the most fallacious so-called "proof" for anything that I have ever seen. I don't even know where to begin.
by Talimze on November 12th, 2008
lolatu, the definition of faith that I gave is THE DEFINITION OF FAITH. Not mine, but the one that is the actual definition of the word. If you don't accept that, then you are just randomly choosing things to believe and things not to and forming opinions and beliefs based on random unbased opinion.
by Spengo on November 12th, 2008
I know what the dictionary definition of faith is, and it is not "an acceptable method of reasoning." It is "belief that is not based on proof." Faith is not an argument.
by Talimze on November 12th, 2008
lolatu you said your position is (partly) based on faith, so what's wrong with other positions being based on it?
by borasalama on November 12th, 2008
There's a difference between something being partly based on faith and something being totally based on faith that transcends parentheses. Almost all aspects of what we know of our universe are based partly on faith. The only things that we can 100% prove are things that can be proven mathematically (and that isn't subject to faith no matter what you say). However, if something is totally based on faith, then it is believed "just because" and for no other reason, and that will never, ever be a good reason.
by Talimze on November 12th, 2008
So nothing but mathematics is the ultimate decider of reality? Isn't mathematics too perceived through the senses?
by borasalama on November 12th, 2008
okay...yes...you are right...as I had described in my paper you claimed to have read "belief that is not based on proof"...that implies that if there is proof that disputes that statement...it can not be taken on faith. We are in complete agreement, but I'm religious and you are not so you want to find a reason to find flaw in my statements.
by Spengo on November 12th, 2008
actually bora..interestingly enough when it comes to math...it is a science that has not empirical basis...everyone wants proof so they say "you know...like math" but there is not proof for math...think about it "3" isn't actually 3, it is a symbol we use to define the concept of more than 2 but less than 4 whole units. Math is a non Empirical science...but people use it as proof...so people use things that can not be proven to be seen touched or measured as proof, but when it comes to religion, they feel they MUST HAVE empirical evidence..kind of a double standard.
by Spengo on November 12th, 2008
You got it. If you can prove it with math, then you don't need any more proof. The good thing about math is that it is constant and there are absolutely no grey areas. There is no room for speculation, and certainly no room for faith. Even if we weren't around to perceive it, it would still be just by it's very nature.
But math is not needed to prove something convincingly. If there is enough good evidence for something, you don't need mathematics to rationally believe it.
by Talimze on November 12th, 2008
I think you didn't see Spengo's post. It addresses part of yours. Also it's good to see you are realising that it's not ONLY maths, and that there are things outside the range of our senses which occupy only a miniscule part of the whole spectrum.
by borasalama on November 12th, 2008
Working from what you said lolatu...that math is not needed to prove something convincingly. If there is enough good evidence for something, you don't need mathematics to rationally believe it...what do you need to rationally believe Islam? What would it take that you don't believe is there...if you say that you don't need math or science but enough "good evidence". What constitutes "good evidence". Mind you that you can't back track and say math or science at this point since you just said they weren't necessary. So what non-scientific evidence do you need?
by Spengo on November 12th, 2008