Originally Posted by TedMosby

I'm not sure how interpretations can be proven flawed with other interpretations? You do see what's going on here, right? There are several interpretations for quotes in every ancient religious book, but if each one is slightly different than the other, and people only choose to believe the ones that fall with the logic and facts we know today, then what's the point of using these quotes to "prove" anything at all? In that webpage, the poster takes a word that could have several different meanings, and then picks and chooses what he he/she wants it to be so that it would be scientifically correct. That's not a translation, that's an interpretation. People are only going to make what they want to make of the quotes (i.e. make them scientifically correct in that case). That's why I'm saying, believe in God if you want to, not because some book says so.

http://www.guidedways.com/chapter_di...lator= 4&mac=

If you go through the various English translations, you'll see the various interpretations.
I believe most Muslims understand that this is an inherent flaw with following most scholars and translators. But that's precisely it. If you follow a scholar, who is also human and subject to misinterpretation, you're not following God directly.

That's why one of the first Surahs emphasizes the importance of reading, and I believe most of the Muslim community has a consensus that while reading a translation is definitely a step, if you can teach yourself Arabic, and not just modern Arabic, but devote the time to learning the art of the Quranic script, and attempt to understand the Quran yourself in its Arabic form, which of all forms is likely the least altered, that's a much better step.

I think that's something that most religions encourage - self enlightment and understanding. Even your professors encourage you to challenge them and research by yourself.

I don't think many present day Muslims read through the Quran once and accept their understanding as the absolute truth. I think they accept that the Book contains God's word, which is an absolute truth, and that they have the responsibility to constantly attempt to better understand it.

Originally Posted by TedMosby

That quote hints at the Big Bang? Seriously? There is no reference to any "Bang", Muslim scholars only seem to be translating/interpreting it as THAT now since the Big Bang Theory has gained a lot of ground, and even then, the Earth was created billions of years after the Big Bang. Furthermore, if the Big Bang was acknowledged 1500 years ago, why did no one ever bring it up before?

Now on to the expanding universe one. Huh? No universe is mentioned, and no expanding is mentioned.

It's all just wishful interpretation from a language thousands of years old.

Now let's look at some errors in the Quran, which is the "Word of Allah".

Quran 86:6-7 says that semen comes from between a man's backbone and ribs.

Quran 51:49 says that everything living thing is made in pairs. Was whoever wrote this Holy Book oblivious of asexual producing organisms?

Qur’an 22:65 says "He witholds the sky from falling on the earth except by his leave: for Allah is most kind and most merciful to man." So there is an invisible man holding the sky from falling down on us?

Muhammad says that a fever is caused by the fires of hell, in the Hadith (Bukhari 4:483, 486).

I can see how most of these verses could have been accepted 1500 years ago, but come on, in the 21st century? How can the Quran reference (if you could call it that) the Big Bang and an expanding universe, yet it can't get something as simple as (compared to) where semen comes from right? There's also plenty of verses where the Quran says that the Earth is flat, a verse that says the Sun is orbiting the Earth, and that mountains were placed on the Earth so that it will not float away (like a rock on paper). All good stories 1500 years ago, not in this day and age though.

What I'm saying is don't let the basis of your belief in God come from a book that was written by people who were most likely less knowledgeable than you. Have faith in God if you believe he exists, not because some Book says so.

"Behold! In the creation of the heavens and the earth;
in the alternation of the night and the day;
in the sailing of ships through the ocean, for the profit of mankind;
in the rain which Allah sends down from the skies,
and the life which He gives therewith to an earth that is dead;
in the beasts of all kinds that He scatters through the earth;
in the change of the winds,
and the clouds which they trail like their slaves between the sky and the earth;
here indeed are Signs for a people that are wise"
(Qur'an 2:164)

/discussion [Not implying that you are unwise though, that's just the wording]

btw, check this.

From an atheistic point of view:
If you follow religion, you might go to Heaven. If you don't you MIGHT go to Hell if it turns out to be true. Therefore, one has nothing to lose but only gain from religion (i.e Safe side )

Originally Posted by TedMosby

Quran 51:49 says that everything living thing is made in pairs. Was whoever wrote this Holy Book oblivious of asexual producing organisms?

Um its clearly referring to the pair production of electrons/positrons during high energy photon collisions with atomic nuclei and living refers to being in motion, just like subatomic particles, duh...

Originally Posted by zombiejesus

Um its clearly referring to the pair production of electrons/positrons during high energy photon collisions with atomic nuclei and living refers to being in motion, just like subatomic particles, duh...

that is interesting while you might be sarcastic...that could be one more interpretation but really if you told the people of that time in Arabia that there were asexual organisms, they wouldn't have believed it

@TedMosby: btw it says "everything" and not "Every living thing" and you must realized that not every word of every sentence is to be taken literally
but i believe there could be some other interpretation of it too...well that's how it is, you give a person enough time and he'll prove that that verse is somehow referring to asexual organisms too (keeping open mind )

Originally Posted by Afzal

/discussion [Not implying that you are unwise though, that's just the wording]

btw, check this.

From an atheistic point of view:
If you follow religion, you might go to Heaven. If you don't you MIGHT go to Hell if it turns out to be true. Therefore, one has nothing to lose but only gain from religion (i.e Safe side )

That's known as Pascal's Wager.
Wikipedia outlines a few counterarguments, for your consideration:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pascal%...r#Crit icisms

Originally Posted by Afzal

that is interesting while you might be sarcastic...that could be one more interpretation but really if you told the people of that time in Arabia that there were asexual organisms, they wouldn't have believed it

@TedMosby: btw it says "everything" and not "Every living thing" and you must realized that not every word of every sentence is to be taken literally
but i believe there could be some other interpretation of it too...well that's how it is, you give a person enough time and he'll prove that that verse is somehow referring to asexual organisms too (keeping open mind )

Actually, the word "everything" includes "every living thing", no? That's why I said that, because the topic of my sentence was organisms, not something like a lamp.

And anyways, you just proved my point. These quotes can't be used at all cause everyone has their own interpretations of them, therefore they have no use as "proof" that God does or does not exist. Just like my quotes, just like your Big Bang and expanding universe quotes. So when I asked for your "reasons", it was silly of you to quote the quotes you quoted.

That's what makes this arguement useless. You either believe in God or you don't; you have faith in God or you don't. A book is just a book. The Bible, the Quran, the Guru Granth Sahib are just books. There's no way of proving or disproving God. Just like there's no way of proving or disproving my invisible friend in the sky who hears my prayers (but isn't to be blamed for war, poverty, and natural disasters), or my good friend Harry Potter, who has a book written about him too. xD Right?

Originally Posted by Afzal

that is interesting while you might be sarcastic...that could be one more interpretation but really if you told the people of that time in Arabia that there were asexual organisms, they wouldn't have believed it

@TedMosby: btw it says "everything" and not "Every living thing" and you must realized that not every word of every sentence is to be taken literally
but i believe there could be some other interpretation of it too...well that's how it is, you give a person enough time and he'll prove that that verse is somehow referring to asexual organisms too (keeping open mind )

There was a little sarcasm, but I was sort of trying to make a point that someone of faith and someone not in faith can look at a religious text and draw absolutely different interpretations. So, when a religious person tells me that when I read their book I will see god, I will instead be drawn to other conclusions... bibles are around to help the religious to practice their religion, but as a tool for conversion? Probably not that relevant anymore. I think maybe a century ago and in developing countries, these texts often are VERY powerful for the unbelievers, but thats because missionaries often teach them to read with the very book (don't think I'm saying thats a bad thing!).

I think the emphasis on becoming literate in Arabic is a fantastic attribute of Islam. If only the Catholic church had that attitude before the reformation instead of discouraging the public from reading the bible in other languages and keeping literacy amongst the priesthood... I think society would be a century ahead in terms of science, philosophy, and human rights! Despite that though, I know literacy rates in many Middle Eastern and North African countries are still not up to par, which is a shame.

That's almost funny. ^ Almost.

As soon as he made a Nazi comparison I knew it was a parody lol

I realize this will sound weird, you will have to be a bit open and don't set your flame to auto. But walking around seeing the KGP everywhere makes me think of what if I was walking around and there were swastikas everywhere. I know it seems like a bit of a stretch. I am not saying that is what it is, it just makes me think of that.

The fact that campus / MSU / McMaster is allowing it and not taking any action does make me feel a bit anxious, unwelcome, and unsafe (I know that sounds odd). As if the school was a pro-christian school and not interested in other ways of thinking.

If you write on the ground in chalk that is fine, even religious. Just not everywhere, and put some time into it so it looks nice. Draw a picture, put work into the lettering, etc. If you want to promote an activity, the MSU has policies on this and poster monkeys to help out.

I think KGP has gone a bit too far and I would definitely support the school moving against this sort of display.

Religion is a private matter, and people should express it, but you shouldn't be allowed to have any sort of recruiting on campus the way KGP has done. It passes the line of intrusive. The KGP campaign I dont mind, just the chalking.




As far as people who go door to door about Christianity; I like talking to them. From the performing I have done I have picked up a wealth of information about Christianity. I almost always know more than the people who come to my door. It is always interesting to see how they react when I am more knowledgeable about the subject they are trying to sell me on. I'm not saying I know everything, but a few one sided small group bible study classes dont give you a good view of all the stories contained in the christian bible. I dont sass them or put them down, just talk. Ha.



I think religion needs to be removed from all campus activities. Clubs can still operate, but not be supported by the MSU other than room bookings. The divinity college shouldn't be there either. It is a sad fact that divinity colleges aren't real academia. We can start another thread to discuss it, but I have seen a reoccurring theme of low research/writing standards, and a lack of objective opinion. University is about academics, and divinity colleges make no attempt to remain objective. : (

This is an old video I stumbled upon.
I'm pretty sure some of you have seen it.
It's a debate between Prof. John Lennox and Prof. Richard Dawkins over the existence of God. It's very interesting

http://fixed-point.org/index.php/vid...-lennox-debate

Originally Posted by Rossclot

The fact that campus / MSU / McMaster is allowing it and not taking any action does make me feel a bit anxious, unwelcome, and unsafe (I know that sounds odd). As if the school was a pro-christian school and not interested in other ways of thinking.

But but but but...

"Ta panta en Christoi synesteken" ("In Christ all things hold together" or "All things cohere in Christ")


yeah, I hope you know that's the Insignia of McMaster University
http://www.mcmaster.ca/coat/motto.htm

@hmmmcurious: didn't know there was a name for that...have people left ANYTHING for me to name after myself!?!

Hey people, check this out:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JrluY_VCDvM

you be the judge!

Originally Posted by gholitf

Hey people, check this out:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JrluY_VCDvM

you be the judge!

I'm not entirely sure what we're supposed to be getting out of that, but that sounds like the same group that protests at army funerals.
If they weren't doing it in the name of Christianity, they would be doing it in the name of some other religion. If religion didn't exist, they would STILL be doing it.