Do you believe in God?

[zzz_pt]

Dave Allen is great!

 

[Scaff]

Take one Creationist Pastor from the US and let him talk to Scandinavians about god and religion.

I so want to see this when its broadcast, fingers crossed someone in the UK picks it up as the total culture clash involved is very interesting.

 

[Imari]

Take one Creationist Pastor from the US and let him talk to Scandinavians about god and religion.

I so want to see this when its broadcast, fingers crossed someone in the UK picks it up as the total culture clash involved is very interesting.

There's a full upload of the episode with English subtitles as appropriate linked in the description.

 

[Scaff]

There's a full upload of the episode with English subtitles as appropriate linked in the description.

Many thanks - will give that a watch later.

 

[MisterWhiskers]

I am Muslim. Here's a good website. http://www.aljazeerah.info/Islamic ...sage to Humanity By Hassan Ali El-Najjar.htm4. *thunder rumbles* Let the games begin.

 

[BobK]

I am Muslim. Here's a good website. http://www.aljazeerah.info/Islamic ...sage to Humanity By Hassan Ali El-Najjar.htm4. *thunder rumbles* Let the games begin.

So... what's the obvious conclusion here?

 

[MisterWhiskers]

View attachment 258697
So... what's the obvious conclusion here?

Maybe I linked it wrong. http://www.aljazeerah.info/Islamic Editorials/2007/September/The Scientific Evidence That God Exists and the Holy Qur'an Is His Message to Humanity By Hassan Ali El-Najjar.htm

 

[Exorcet]

The link is a common religious argument disguising itself as science. Basically predicitions that only work because the holy tests are so vague they say nothing. The text being vague is not a good thing.

. For example, there is an invitation for humans to fly, indicating the possibility of flying, more than 1428 years ago.**
In Surat Al-Rahman (Chapter 55), Verse 33 states, we read:***

O You jinn and men, if you can penetrate zones of the heavens and the Earth, then penetrate! You will never penetrate them except with (the) power (of science).

That line says practically nothing. It is not a prediction or foreshadowing of anything. It is not testable. What is "the power"? How does it enable flight? Why is flight called penetrating, apparently?

 

[Dennisch]

So, because the Quran says that female bees make honey, god exists.

That's it, I am converted.

 

[MisterWhiskers]

No, no. It's the fact that people had never heard of these facts before. They would be considered blasphemy back then, but now that we have the technology, we can confirm these things. @Exorcet I'm pretty sure it's referring to an airplane. By "penetrating", doesn't that sound like what airplanes do? Don't they penetrate the clouds/heavens? Isn't science involved in making an airplane? It obviously hinted to this (foreshadowing). It's just that people back in 600 AD would not be able to comprehend with such advanced technology. Think of flying cars. They aren't a reality yet (at least in large numbers), right? It is something that we do not know how to make, but we do understand what it generally does.

 

[Exorcet]

No, no. It's the fact that people had never heard of these facts before.

That's kind of it. No one looked to the Quran when researching flight because it contained no useful information on the subject. People didn't understand it as the author in the link does because the author is presenting a subjective (and flimsy) interpretation of the text.

They would be considered blasphemy back then, but now that we have the technology, we can confirm these things.

As long as you try to confirm what is actually in the text. What it says is basically, "you can't fly without the power".

The author puts belief before impartiality and says that refers to aircraft. If you just read what is there, it doesn't point to anything.

I'm pretty sure it's referring to an airplane. By "penetrating", doesn't that sound like what airplanes do? Don't they penetrate the clouds/heavens?

That's hardly a scientific way of putting of it, which goes back to the problem of being vague. If we mean penetrate as in pass through, everything on earth penetrates the air.

Arrows and spears went fairly high. Gunpowder powered projectiles went even higher, and some cannons eventually fired people. Balloons and gliders also predate planes. It's not really clear at all.

Also, in my opinion, penetrating the air is a very bad analogy for aircraft. Drag is the enemy of flight. Planes try to go through the air with as little disturbance as possible. The rear end of an atmospheric vehicle is very important, because that is where pressure recovery occurs. Pressure recovery is basically putting the air back to the way it was before you passed by.

Isn't science involved in making an airplane? It obviously hinted to this (foreshadowing).

If it was obviously, people would have been talking about planes immediately after reading the book.

It's just that people back in 600 AD would not be able to comprehend with such advanced technology.

A perfect being should be able to explain it to people. At least some kind of basic, specific piece of information. Why wouldn't an all knowing being say that wings are better off wider in span? That feathers aren't the secret to flight (would have saved many lives)? That force grows with V^2?

 

[Imari]

3. Earth is described as egg-shaped

(not a perfect circular globe), a fact which was discovered recently in the human history.

In Chapter 79, Verse 30, the Holy Quran mentions that:

And the Earth, after that, He made it egg-shaped.

Not really.

An egg is narrower at one end and fatter at the other, and extended along it's axis of symmetry.
The earth is shortened along it's axis of symmetry, and identical at both ends.

The earth is more like the shape of a mandarin than the shape of an egg, and no one would say that a mandarin is the same shape as an egg.

It's interesting that the Quran doesn't say it's round, but they're still wrong.

4. In Verses 68-69, we are told that it is the female bee that makes honey, a very recent bit of knowledge for humans. We know now that male bees die after mating with the queen and live only for about 90 days. Only female bees survive to be the workers, which gather nectar and make honey. This bit of knowledge could never be known to humans before the invention and use of microscopes. It is another piece of evidence that the author of the Holy Quran could never be a human being about 1428 years ago. Rather, He is the All Knowledgeable One.

And your Lord inspired the female bees to take (build) its houses (hives) on mountains, trees, and in (people's) gardens

Then (you female bee) eat from all the fruits and (you female bee) follow the ways of your Lord laid down (for you). There emerges from their bellies a drink, varying in colors, in which there is healing (cure) for people. In that, (there) is a sign for a people who give thought (Al-Na'hl, 16: 68-69).

وَأَوْحَىٰ رَبُّكَ إِلَى النَّحْلِ أَنِ اتَّخِذِي مِنَ الْجِبَالِ بُيُوتًا وَمِنَ الشَّجَرِ وَمِمَّا يَعْرِشُونَ

ثُمَّ كُلِي مِن كُلِّ الثَّمَرَاتِ فَاسْلُكِي سُبُلَ رَبِّكِ ذُلُلًا ۚ يَخْرُجُ مِن بُطُونِهَا شَرَابٌ مُّخْتَلِفٌ أَلْوَانُهُ فِيهِ شِفَاءٌ لِّلنَّاسِ ۗ إِنَّ فِي ذَٰلِكَ لَآيَةً لِّقَوْمٍ يَتَفَكَّرُونَ (النحل ، 16: 68-69).

In dealing with Verse 68, some translators did not pay attention to the feminine form of the Arabic verb (اتَّخِذِي), which refers to female bees in particular, not bees in general. The same meaning is confirmed in Verse 69, in verbs (كُلِي), which means "you female bee eat," and verb (فَاسْلُكِي), which means "you female bee follow."

Well, it was either the male bee, or the female bee, or both. At worst the writer had a one in three chance of being correct, which seems like decent odds to me.

5. In 27: 18, there is a reference to a female ant speaking to other ants, which is also a recent bit of knowledge. We know now that male ants die after mating with the queen and only female ants survive to be the workers, just like the case with bees mentioned above. This bit of knowledge could never be known to humans before the invention and use of microscopes and the advanced studies in biology.

" ... a female ant said: "O you ants enter your dwellings" (Al-Nahl, 27: 18).

You know how lots of children's books have talking animals in them? We don't read anything into that, we simply let it pass for the sake of a good story.

But when it's convenient you're willing to assume that this particular book had a talking ant because ants really talk? That seems like a reach.

7. In Chapter 24, Verse 43 of the Holy Quran, Allah (Praise to Him) vividly describes the water cycle, from winds to clouds, then to rain. He says:

Do not you see that Allah makes the clouds move gently, then joins them together, then makes them into a heap? Then, you will see rain coming out of it. And He sends down hail from the sky mountains (of clouds). He strikes with it whom He wills and He turns it away from whom He wills. The vivid flash of its lightning is close to blinding the sights (of people). (Al-Noor, 24: 43).

أَلَمۡ تَرَ أَنَّ ٱللَّهَ يُزۡجِى سَحَابً۬ا ثُمَّ يُؤَلِّفُ بَيۡنَهُ ۥ ثُمَّ يَجۡعَلُهُ ۥ رُكَامً۬ا فَتَرَى ٱلۡوَدۡقَ يَخۡرُجُ مِنۡ خِلَـٰلِهِۦ وَيُنَزِّلُ مِنَ ٱلسَّمَآءِ مِن جِبَالٍ۬ فِيہَا مِنۢ بَرَدٍ۬ فَيُصِيبُ بِهِۦ مَن يَشَآءُ وَيَصۡرِفُهُ ۥ عَن مَّن يَشَآءُ‌ۖ يَكَادُ سَنَا بَرۡقِهِۦ يَذۡهَبُ بِٱلأًبۡصَـٰرِ (النور ، 24: 43).

In Chapter 30, Verse 48, Allah (Praise to Him) also says:

It is Allah Who sends the Winds, and they raise the Clouds. Then, He spreads them in the sky as He wills, and break them into fragments, until you see rain-drops coming out from the midst of it. When He makes them reach whoever He wills of his servants, then they rejoice! (Al-Room, 30: 48).

Let's be honest, this is pretty obvious to anyone with eyes. Little clouds don't rain. Big clouds do. Wind moves clouds. Clouds can join together. Put all these simple observations together and you can write the verses above, no problem.

This is not science, this is basic observation that anyone can perform. Don't make the mistake of assuming that just because people lived a long time ago that they were stupid.

==========

Frankly, most of this stuff is pretty iffy. The main problem is establishing that these statements aren't correct simply by chance.

Just because someone has a good night at the poker table, it's not safe to assume that they're good at poker or that they understand how the game works. A few statements that if interpreted in specific ways may be indicative of advanced knowledge are not scientific proof. They're an indication that there may be something there that needs more research, at the very best.

If what is in that article is all that exists in the Quran, I'll tell you right now that it's not enough.

Simply cherry picking the correct ones is not enough when talking about the creator of the world. To even start to be a serious claim, you'd have to go through and rank every concrete statement in the Quran as to it's accuracy as a statement about the real world. This is a book from an omniscient creator, who should be correct in every detail. Even given some leeway for interpretation by humans, it should be overwhelmingly accurate in almost every statement.

I rather suspect it isn't. That a list of "scientific" statements from the Quran is a thing rather makes me think that there isn't that many of them, and there's probably a lot more statements in there that turned out to be false. Basically, that there's a lot of statements in what's a fairly sizeable book, and by the law of averages some of them turned out to be correct.

Getting a couple of lottery numbers right isn't proof that you have broken the system of the lottery. Getting 95%+ lottery numbers right for weeks on end probably is. In the same way, a few accurate statements amongst a sea of inaccurate ones isn't proof of anything. A book full of accurate statements with no likely ways of getting that information other than divine intervention would be.

 

[Scaff]

The article in question is clearly conflating hypothesis for proven fact (when its not being so vague as to be unclear/inaccurate/wrong), and many of these hypothesis predate the Koran, in some case by quite a bit of time.

Lets take the dark ocean depths bit, which is then turned into a claim of revelation about the scientific understanding of why it dark at depths. What we have here is a basic bit of observation that is clearly recorded by every sea going nation ever.

Homer wrote about the sea being darker as you travel away from land, in 325BC Pytheas wrote more about the oceans and travel on them (including references to latitude) than just 'its gets darker when you go further out beacuse its deeper. Alexander made use of a diving bell in the same year!
Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pytheas#Pytheas.27_measurements_of_latitude
Source: http://www.seasky.org/ocean-exploration/ocean-timeline-5000bc-1bc.html

What @MisterWhiskers is claiming 'was never said before' has indeed been said (and written) about before the Koran, I'm surprised he didn't pull the embryology one (Greeks first again) as well, given that I notice that one is also claimed on a sub-link from his source.

This is a mix of nonsense, vagueries and already proven or hypothesized information regurgitated for a new audience (in its contemporary era) as revelation. Let be clear, for his time 'Mo' was a well traveled and well read man, that he was aware of many of the earlier works of older civilizations is no surprise, but that doesn't make it divine revelation.

Oh and lets not forget the wish fulfillment translations as well, spread out is not the same as egg shaped at all, and god spread the earth out reads quite a bit differently (and could be argued to be a flat earth clam far more than an egg shaped claim).
Source:http://www.answering-islam.org/Quran/Science/earth_egg.html
Source: http://www.answering-islam.org/Quran/Science/earth_flat.html

 

[TenEightyOne]

Well, it was either the male bee, or the female bee, or both. At worst the writer had a one in three chance of being correct, which seems like decent odds to me.

I'd say it was a better chance than that actually... the Egyptians were "domesticating" hives about 5,000 years ago while it's believed that honey was collected as long as 15,000 years ago.

Humans are pretty resourceful farmers, I suspect that by the time of making a prophet the workings of a hive were pretty well known

All Allah had to do was ask around

 

[Liquid]

We knew the shape of the earth long before Islam came around. Just saying. The Greeks, and one Greek in particular, knew its shape and even its dimensions. Does that not give more credence to the idea that it was the Titans and Olympians who created the earth, given that it was their followers who calculated and discovered this?

None of what was posted was indicative of the Koran being a scientific reference book or look into the future.

 

[TheCracker]

No, no. It's the fact that people had never heard of these facts before. They would be considered blasphemy back then, but now that we have the technology, we can confirm these things. @Exorcet I'm pretty sure it's referring to an airplane. By "penetrating", doesn't that sound like what airplanes do? Don't they penetrate the clouds/heavens? Isn't science involved in making an airplane? It obviously hinted to this (foreshadowing).

Or perhaps it just talks about a very tall ladder? - There's no more evidence to suggest it means airplanes. Didn't Nostradamus (and Mother Shipton) prophesies the future like this too? Being incredibly vague doesn't make one a soothsayer.

 

[GBO Possum]

No, no. It's the fact that people had never heard of these facts before.

No, and no.

1. They are not "facts", they are wishful interpretations of vague language.
2. And it's not true that these interpretations, even if that was the original meaning, were previously unknown.

The very vagueness of the language puts the lie to these being divine revelations. Anything sentient which could create a universe with its fabulous complexity and precise laws could be reasonably expected to be able to communicate with some level of precision.

There is nothing in the Bible nor the Koran which was not known to the people of their times. Neither "reveals" anything new. On the contrary, both books contain stuff which is clearly BS and in most, if not all cases, was plagiarized from prior writings.

Want an example? The Noah flood story. Both BS and plagiarized.

 

[BobK]

Do not you see that Allah makes the clouds move gently, then joins them together, then makes them into a heap?

Frankly, no I don't.

Let's see, the claim here is clouds move because Allah/God/Jehovah/skypixie makes them move? Here I thought it would be blasphemous to say Allah/etc is just a bag of wind. Because it's wind that makes them move.

The quoted author doesn't even know what atheism is. Given his ignorance, I don't see why I should take anything else he says seriously. Like the claim that the Earth is "egg-shaped".

 

[TenEightyOne]

Some child star I've never heard of from a film/series I've never heard of is Saving Christmas... "Kirk Cameron's Saving Christmas!", soon to be showing at a stonily-silent picture house near you.

Apparently he explains away the ridiculous notion that yuletide is somehow pagan, right down to where Christmas Trees are referenced in the bible. Really? Can't wait for the reviews

 

[Scaff]

Some child star I've never heard of from a film/series I've never heard of is Saving Christmas... "Kirk Cameron's Saving Christmas!", soon to be showing at a stonily-silent picture house near you.

Apparently he explains away the ridiculous notion that yuletide is somehow pagan, right down to where Christmas Trees are referenced in the bible. Really? Can't wait for the reviews

I so want to see this, he's unintentionally hilarious.

 

[Dennisch]

Some child star I've never heard of from a film/series I've never heard of is Saving Christmas

You don't know Mike Seaver? Tssk tssk.

 

[BobK]

"Kirk Cameron's Saving Christmas!"

Dang, that looked like an interesting article, until about two sentences into it, this happened:

Needless to say I immediately closed the browser window (after grabbing a screenshot, this one time).

Protip, webmasters:
If you want me to peruse your site (and maybe look at your ads), do not repeat do NOT hit me with these screen-blocking things. Yes one click dismisses it, but one click also closes the whole mess.
[/rant]

 

[TenEightyOne]

@BobK sorry, that didn't happen for me :\ I always use Inspect Element to just kill those nodes, some webmasters use fancy onClick coding which I don't like. Apologies all

@Dennisch Maybe I would like it... but I've just never heard of it

 

[Dagger311]

Dang, that looked like an interesting article, until about two sentences into it, this happened:
View attachment 259021

Needless to say I immediately closed the browser window (after grabbing a screenshot, this one time).

Protip, webmasters:
If you want me to peruse your site (and maybe look at your ads), do not repeat do NOT hit me with these screen-blocking things. Yes one click dismisses it, but one click also closes the whole mess.
[/rant]

Tablet with auto popup blocker, I love you.

 

[TenEightyOne]

Ray Comfort interviewing scientists and science students on the proof for evolution.

 

[GBO Possum]

Here's a good reason for GTPlanet members to believe in god.

God lets you exceed the speed limit with impunity, according to Pat Robertson, wealthy evangelist and Corvette owner -

http://gmauthority.com/blog/2014/11...es-over-100-mph-apparently-god-says-it-is-ok/

 

[CodeRedR51]

It will be a great day when he finally leaves this planet.

 

[Imari]

Here's a good reason for GTPlanet members to believe in god.

God lets you exceed the speed limit with impunity, according to Pat Robertson, wealthy evangelist and Corvette owner -

http://gmauthority.com/blog/2014/11...es-over-100-mph-apparently-god-says-it-is-ok/

While the "God says it's OK" stuff is clearly nonsense, I'm kind of with him on there being some roads where driving 100mph really isn't particularly dangerous. Australia has big long straight roads in places, a bit like what I hear Texas is like. Driving down those at 60 or 65 mph in a good car is about as challenging as walking down a hallway.

You pick your time and place obviously, and going faster is always going to entail some element of increased risk, but on some roads that increased risk really isn't that large.

 

[Dotini]

The link is a common religious argument disguising itself as science. Basically predicitions that only work because the holy tests are so vague they say nothing. The text being vague is not a good thing.

". For example, there is an invitation for humans to fly, indicating the possibility of flying, more than 1428 years ago.**
In Surat Al-Rahman (Chapter 55), Verse 33 states, we read:***

O You jinn and men, if you can penetrate zones of the heavens and the Earth, then penetrate! You will never penetrate them except with (the) power (of science)."


That line says practically nothing. It is not a prediction or foreshadowing of anything. It is not testable. What is "the power"? How does it enable flight? Why is flight called penetrating, apparently?

I find the reference to jinn interesting. It implies jinn exist naturally like men, and do penetrate the sky and the earth according to the laws of physics. It predicts men will do the same thing - just as we have done.

 

[Scaff]

I find the reference to jinn interesting. It implies jinn exist naturally like men, and do penetrate the sky and the earth according to the laws of physics. It predicts men will do the same thing - just as we have done.

It mentions nothing of the laws of physics (unless you wish to be rather generous with the word 'power') and a desire to fly was hardly borne out of the Koran.

Let be honest the Greeks beat them to the punch a good few centuries earlier with that, and its a fairly safe bet that a desire to have the 'power' of flight predates them.