I am a muslim, and I have a little theory, in some Islamic (Shiites) hadiths, it says that Adam came to earth as a sole, not a body, so, I say that Apes might haved evoluted into humans, but only after the sole of Adam has been inplanted in those bodies, this is just a little thought that ran through my mind, what do you guys think?

Nope.

Religion or Reason. Pick one or the other... but please don't mix.

What is the point of reconciling the two, unless you're going to go that extra step and admit that Muslims, Christians, Jews and Hindus are all the same, with not one sect being superior to the other?

Now that's what I would call progress.

quote:Originally posted by AngryFemme:

What is the point of reconciling the two, unless you're going to go that extra step and admit that Muslims, Christians, Jews and Hindus are all the same, with not one sect being superior to the other?

Now that's what I would call progress.



Hinduism isn't an Abrahamic religion. It is a Dharmic one, which usually means that the main ideas can't be proven or disproven (e.g. karma, reincarnation, Anicca, Anatta and meditation.).

Regardless of the classification of the Religion - one sect does not have the claim of superiority over the others. From a humanistic standpoint, it doesn't matter. I guess my point is that these people should first classify themselves as being one of the same with each other, because they are all human beings who share the same biological origins. The religions themselves should be secondary to that undeniable fact.

quote:Originally posted by Kazz:

Nope.

Religion or Reason. Pick one or the other... but please don't mix.

Way to limit your thinking process there.

Don't dare to think for yourself! just pick one of the pre-made choices for you.

quote:Originally posted by KING G:

I am a muslim, and I have a little theory, in some Islamic (Shiites) hadiths, it says that Adam came to earth as a sole, not a body, so, I say that Apes might haved evoluted into humans, but only after the sole of Adam has been inplanted in those bodies, this is just a little thought that ran through my mind, what do you guys think?

Kazz nailed it. Pick reason or pick outdated religious texts that require one to put their logic and knowledge of science aside. The Qur'an uses non-scientific, ancient ways to explain the world around us, and using apologetics to implant modern science into miraculous explanations is a desperate attempt to soothe one's ego that he's picked the correct religion and that its texts are without error.



While you're at it, you're going to have to find a loophole for the Qur'an's claim that the Earth is a fixed abode and not rotating around the Sun (as was also believed before the Qur'an).

Another loophole for the Qur'an's claim that humans are formed from "a gushing fluid" that issues "from between the loins and the ribs" (which un-coincidently matches Greek physician Hippocrates' incorrect theory that sperm passes through the kidneys into the penis).

Another loophole for the Qur'an's claim that mountains were created to stop the Earth from shaking (mountains are the result of an unstable Earth that take millions of years to form and do not stop the Earth from shaking, as if they are giant paper weights).

Another loophole for the Qur'an's claim that the Sun sets in a muddy spring.

Another loophole for the Qur'an's claim that the Moon makes its own light.

And on and on and on.





[This message has been edited by Martini (edited 02-25-2007).]

quote:Originally posted by Aseren:

Way to limit your thinking process there.

Don't dare to think for yourself! just pick one of the pre-made choices for you.

Let's hear some of your "original thoughts" that has not been already outlined by scores of individuals before you in some shape, form or fashion.

quote:Originally posted by Martini:



Why the hell are you quoting me when typing out all that, how the hell does that apply to anything I've said. All I said was that you shouldn't limit yourself to thinking in certain ways because that's the way "you should think".

If you can think of a nice way to mix religion and science somehow, then how is that more real or not then science or religion apart. How is that any more real then Scientology or one of the billions of unproven scientific theories.

quote:Originally posted by AngryFemme:

Let's hear some of your "original thoughts" that has not been already outlined by scores of individuals before you in some shape, form or fashion.

How the hell does anything I said have anything to do with originality? How do people like you come to conclusions like that?

If you want a debate, or be "witty", then you can start by stop shooting crappy remarks at me that anyone can find in one of the many repetitive threads, that My God produces.

quote:Originally posted by Aseren:

Why the hell are you quoting me when typing out all that, how the hell does that apply to anything I've said.

I mistakenly used your name instead of KING G's and corrected my mistake at least ten minutes before you posted this, but I think that was obvious. Did you not realize the quote I copied and pasted matched exactly that of the OP? Did you actually think that what I quoted was my attempt to paraphrase something you said?

quote:Originally posted by Aseren:

All I said was that you shouldn't limit yourself to thinking in certain ways because that's the way "you should think".

Using "reason" is limiting yourself? I think that's maximizing yourself.



quote:Originally posted by Aseren:

If you can think of a nice way to mix religion and science somehow, then how is that more real or not then science or religion apart.

What's a "nice way to mix religion and science somehow"? There's nothing reasonable or 'nice' about using miracles as a way of explaining what we haven't figured out yet. Apologists constantly denying 'what God really meant' in order to not throw out the supposed truths of old religious texts is not in any way 'reasonable'.

quote:Originally posted by Aseren:

then how is that more real or not then science or religion apart.

Science is much more 'real' when it is apart from religion. Are you implying that science would be just as real if it accepted a religious text as dogma that should not be scrutinized? Science is light years ahead of religion as a way to explain the world around us. If you think that the Islamic explanation that mountains are giant weights that stop the Earth from shaking are just as 'real' as the explanation from geologists that mountains have no such function, that's your prerogative.

quote:Originally posted by Aseren:

How is that any more real then Scientology or one of the billions of unproven scientific theories.

Billions of unproven scientific theories? If you mean 'theory' in the casual sense, then yes, plenty of ideas in science have been discarded or improved upon. That's the beauty of science. Scientists are open to human error, unlike the religious that are convinced that their texts are divine and blindly accept the words as dogma that should not be changed, even in the presence of proven facts.

The vagueness of and this new ability to take religious texts in a 'metaphorical' sense allows them to be stretched around almost any current day piece of information.

quote:Originally posted by Martini:

I mistakenly used your name instead of KING G's and corrected my mistake at least ten minutes before you posted this, but I think that was obvious. Did you not realize the quote I copied and pasted matched exactly that of the OP? Did you actually think that what I quoted was my attempt to paraphrase something you said?

I didn't read it.

quote:Originally posted by Martini:

Using "reason" is limiting yourself? I think that's maximizing yourself.

Exactly, but you telling him what reason is, is limiting HIS thinking process.

quote:Originally posted by Martini:

What's a "nice way to mix religion and science somehow"? There's nothing reasonable or 'nice' about using miracles as a way of explaining what we haven't figured out yet. Apologists constantly denying 'what God really meant' in order to not throw out the supposed truths of old religious texts is not in any way 'reasonable'.

I'm not saying you should mix it, I'm saying it doesn't hold more or less truth if you do.

quote:Originally posted by Martini:

Science is much more 'real' when it is apart from religion. Are you implying that science would be just as real if it accepted a religious text as dogma that should not be scrutinized? Science is light years ahead of religion as a way to explain the world around us. If you think that the Islamic explanation that mountains are giant weights that stop the Earth from shaking are just as 'real' as the explanation from geologists that mountains have no such function, that's your prerogative.

Fortunately, you'll never find me saying such a thing. http://www.totse.com/bbs/biggrin.gif (http://www.totse.com/bbs/biggrin.gif)

quote:Originally posted by Martini:

Billions of unproven scientific theories? If you mean 'theory' in the casual sense, then yes, plenty of ideas in science have been discarded or improved upon. That's the beauty of science. Scientists are open to human error, unlike the religious that are convinced that their texts are divine and blindly accept the words as dogma that should not be changed, even in the presence of proven facts.

The point of telling me the difference between science and religion is? I was giving an example, of someone who doesn't need telling him that he should think a certain way. If you seriously except me to sit here and explain to you why mixing religion and science is a good idea then you're taking things way to seriously.

This is just typical, all of the atheists saying "no no no, Science can't work with religion. End of story, no debate about this", completely ignoring how Mohammed himself supported advancements in science and early Islamic states were far more developed than Europe. And BTW, the Qur'an does not have stories of Eve being made from Adam's rib or all of that jibberish. I'm not saying that science and Islam go hand in hand, but it's closer than other Abrahamic religions.

quote:Originally posted by Aseren:

Exactly, but you telling him what reason is, is limiting HIS thinking process.

Telling someone my opinion on what 'reason' is doesn't limit someone's thinking process unless you think the OP follows what ever he's told. This is what is done on forums such as this- get used to it. People like Kazz and me will tell others to use reason and logic to come to conclusions and others will tell them to blindly follow religious dogma.

quote:Originally posted by Aseren:

I'm not saying you should mix it, I'm saying it doesn't hold more or less truth if you do.

Science requires evidence before coming to the conclusion that a truth has been found. If scientists mixed this method for coming to conclusions with religious dogma, such as that that says mountains stop the Earth from shaking, science would be a joke and would absolutely hold less truth than science would alone.

quote:Originally posted by Aseren:

The point of telling me the difference between science and religion is? I was giving an example, of someone who doesn't need telling him that he should think a certain way.

And as I explained above, when someone looks for ways to pigeon hole science into their holy books as a way of making the incorrect sound correct, there are those of us who do think we should give reasons why they should think a certain way. This isn't a cocktail party where certain things shouldn't be talked about. It's MGCBTSOOYG.



quote:Originally posted by Aseren:

If you seriously except me to sit here and explain to you why mixing religion and science is a good idea then you're taking things way to seriously.

Yes, I take these discussions seriously. You are the one who asked how science is more real or not when mixed with religion- I answered.

Most of Islam is Sunni... so it would make little difference.

quote:Originally posted by shitty wok:

This is just typical, all of the atheists saying "no no no, Science can't work with religion.

Science works whether religion exists or not, but science certainly doesn't work if it blindly accepts what any religion says is true. The heavens are propelled by gravity, not angels.

quote:Originally posted by shitty wok:

completely ignoring how Mohammed himself supported advancements in science and early Islamic states were far more developed than Europe.

Mohammad supported science? Pre-Islamic Arabia had wonderful scientific and mathematical advancements- which slowed down considerably because of Mohammad and his Islam while the rest of the world moved forward.

quote:Originally posted by shitty wok:

And BTW, the Qur'an does not have stories of Eve being made from Adam's rib or all of that jibberish.

Yes, it does have the gibberish about Eve coming from Adam (depending on which translation you accept), although it doesn't specifically mention that she came form his rib. Or is the concept of two lone humans, dwelling in a garden that were created by a god who answers prayers for wanting a son, less gibberish-like to you without the rib mention?

A.J. Arberry's translation:

quote:It is He who created you out of one living soul, and made of him his spouse that he might rest in her. Then, when he covered her, she bore a light burden and passed by with it; but when it became heavy THEY cried to God their Lord, ‘If Thou givest US a righteous son, WE indeed shall be of the thankful.’ Thereafter, when He gave THEM a righteous son, THEY assigned Him associates in that He had given THEM; but God is high exalted above that they associate. What, do they associate that which creates nothing and themselves are created, and that have no power to help them, neither they help themselves?



J.M. Rodwell's translation:

quote:He it is who hath created you from a single person, and from him brought forth his wife that he might dwell with her: and when he had known her, she bore a light burden, and went about with it; and when it became heavy, THEY both cried to God THEIR Lord, "If thou give US a perfect child WE will surely be of the thankful." Yet when God had given THEM a perfect child, THEY joined partners with Him in return for what he had given THEM. But high is God above the partners they joined with Him! What! Will they join those with Him who cannot create anything, and are themselves created, and have no power to help them, or to help themselves?

Pre-Islamic Arabia wasn't even close to scientific advancement. Your statement is pure gibberish. Any credible historian agrees that Islamic Arabia was far ahead of Europe. Mohammed was quoted as saying: Look for knowledge; even as far as China. Muslim advancement was devastated by the Crusades and never fully recovered.

quote:Originally posted by shitty wok:

Pre-Islamic Arabia wasn't even close to scientific advancement. Your statement is pure gibberish. Any credible historian agrees that Islamic Arabia was far ahead of Europe. Mohammed was quoted as saying: Look for knowledge; even as far as China. Muslim advancement was devastated by the Crusades and never fully recovered.

The Islamic empire was a Jewel compared to the West at the time (no doubt) but the only "advancement" that was devastated by the Crusades was the further Muslim invasion of Europe... The Crusades were started because of Muslim aggression and invasion into Europe and Eastern Christendom (Iberia, Judea and Byzantium) not the other way around.

[This message has been edited by Jove (edited 02-26-2007).]

After Rome fell to christianity, the arabs took all of the classical works and kept them safe for a while, making huge advances in medicine, science, etc. It wasn't until right after the crusades that we met these people again, and as trade opened up with the middle east the west finally took back what the muslims had so successfully kept safe. Let's not get into a huge crusades convo though... and lets keep this to the initial topic.

You say that I am limiting myself... limiting my thought to what I'm "told to think"? How do you figure?

Is it not opened minded to have revaluated all beliefs and values that I currently hold, and come to the conclusion that my faith (and faith it is) belongs in science and reason?

It is people like you, that believe in nothing at all. Your thought process is but a paranoid and frantic last resort from nihilism... a pathetic reaction to the terminal illness your sad god is facing. Afraid to put your faith into science alone, you can't overcome the screaming logic that shouts "this ancient book just doesn't make sense."

I will admit that my beliefs in science, are both derived from and require quite a lot of unnoticed faith. The scientist usually does not notice that his rational based decisions share little difference with saying "this is God's will"... however my faith is grounded on a million theories and hypothesis, all of which are capable of being observed every single day. Your faith is blind, your faith has no shape or appearance, and it's based on an ancient small book.

With all of this said, it is impossible to for me... a preacher of logic... to accept that evolution comes from your old holy god. I do not believe in the soul, at least in a metaphysical sense, and with that said all logic and reason screams to the conclusion that you are incorrect.

All you're doing is exposing your lack of devotion. Don't get me wrong, I question my faith... but picking and scarping at parts of both worlds, what you like best... is not getting closer to truth, but adding depth to your lies. You can't take the parts that you like, and throw them together and expect things to work. They're contradictory as hell.

So no... science and religion just do not mix in this world. If there's anything close minded in this statement, then the mind has been closed to shut out delusion and lies. Science can be shaped and forced to suggest support of a lot of small theories, but religion is something that will never and by it's mere existence can never coexist with science.

When the day all logic and reason, or even my instinct point to your faith... then that's where I'll be.

I'm not holding my breath.

Religion is close to nihilism? Sure http://www.totse.com/bbs/rolleyes.gif (http://www.totse.com/bbs/rolleyes.gif). BTW, Just because we have faith does not mean we are forced to a narrow-minded interpretation of it. Your idea of religion is that it has to be extremist and absolutist; I disagree entirely.

quote:Originally posted by Martini:

Originally posted by KING G:

I am a muslim, and I have a little theory, in some Islamic (Shiites) hadiths, it says that Adam came to earth as a sole, not a body, so, I say that Apes might haved evoluted into humans, but only after the sole of Adam has been inplanted in those bodies, this is just a little thought that ran through my mind, what do you guys think?

Kazz nailed it. Pick reason or pick outdated religious texts that require one to put their logic and knowledge of science aside. The Qur'an uses non-scientific, ancient ways to explain the world around us, and using apologetics to implant modern science into miraculous explanations is a desperate attempt to soothe one's ego that he's picked the correct religion and that its texts are without error.



While you're at it, you're going to have to find a loophole for the Qur'an's claim that the Earth is a fixed abode and not rotating around the Sun (as was also believed before the Qur'an).

Another loophole for the Qur'an's claim that humans are formed from "a gushing fluid" that issues "from between the loins and the ribs" (which un-coincidently matches Greek physician Hippocrates' incorrect theory that sperm passes through the kidneys into the penis).

Another loophole for the Qur'an's claim that mountains were created to stop the Earth from shaking (mountains are the result of an unstable Earth that take millions of years to form and do not stop the Earth from shaking, as if they are giant paper weights).

Another loophole for the Qur'an's claim that the Sun sets in a muddy spring.

Another loophole for the Qur'an's claim that the Moon makes its own light.

And on and on and on.







find the refrances man, dont just make up crap, the Qu'ran DOES NOT say any of these things, if you think it does, show me.

what the hell is wrong with you guys? Religion and Science IS the same thing, they back each otehr up, Islam has hunderds of Sientific facts in it, things that were not known at the time, I have no time or desire to refrance you to it, why cant people just understand that ALL arabs were just lustfull unknowedgled pieces of Idol-praying shits, every one admits it.

99% of Arabs before islam didnt even know how to write, only afew belived in the religion of Abrahim, and Muhammed didn't even know how to write, he was extremly respected before he became a messanger, how can he make up a great book with no flaws at all? and why would he risk his position and his life for nothing?

All hadiths and all stories say that Muhammed was extremly poor after he relocated to Mhadina.

I don't understand why people just hate Islam and Muhhamed (as) for no real reason, I can defend Islam agianst any thing, when I was a little boy, I didnt understand why we had to do what muslims do, I didnt understand any thong actully, till I went through this crisis and I decided to just forget absoulty every thing I knew about religion and start Over again, I researched evry religion and even Athesim, And I decided to stick with Islam, because of these evdince that were mentioned above and more.

so, I'm ready to back up Islamm and Muhhamed(as) as long as you mention Shitte refrances.

[This message has been edited by KING G (edited 02-27-2007).]

quote:Originally posted by Kazz:

Nope.

Religion or Reason. Pick one or the other... but please don't mix.

Is it just me or is Reason and Religion together not truth?

quote:Originally posted by KING G:

what the hell is wrong with you guys? Religion and Science IS the same thing, they back each otehr up, Islam has hunderds of Sientific facts in it,

KING G:

Do you interpret the Koran literally, or do you take the same high road that most Christian Moderates do, which is to cherry-pick through passages, picking and choosing what best fits the scenario of the modern world?

why cant people just understand that ALL arabs were just lustfull unknowedgled pieces of Idol-praying shits

Hate speech?

"KING G:what the hell is wrong with you guys? Religion and Science IS the same thing, they back each otehr up, Islam has hunderds of Sientific facts in it, things that were not known at the time, I have no time or desire to refrance you to it, why cant people just understand that ALL arabs were just lustfull unknowedgled pieces of Idol-praying shits, every one admits it."

No they aren’t the same , I put religion and science at opposite ends of the spectrum. Science is based on our observable universe, which theories are tested and either proven or disproved, while religion is all based on faith.

scientific discoveries within religion isn't only restricted to Islam, look at Hindu cosmology. they are the only religion that states age of earth to be approximately around 4 billions years, and the universe itself around 9billion. And this religion Is 3000 years older than Islam! Another great example would be torah explaining how god expands the heavens like a curtain. Concurring with today’s model that the universe is much falter like a curtain and it's expanding

quote:Originally posted by KING G:

find the refrances man, dont just make up crap, the Qu'ran DOES NOT say any of these things, if you think it does, show me.

You aren't aware of any of the references I've mentioned? Have you actually read the Qur'an? I'm sure you'll want to interpret the following verses in a way to agree with scientific facts, just as you wish to believe Adam and Eve weren't made by God's special creation ( which the Qur'an clearly shows they were ) but through evolution, but you should already be aware that your statement "the Qu'ran DOES NOT say any of these things" is incorrect.



quote:Originally posted by Martini:

While you're at it, you're going to have to find a loophole for the Qur'an's claim that the Earth is a fixed abode and not rotating around the Sun (as was also believed before the Qur'an).



quote:27-61

Is not He (best) Who made the earth a fixed abode, and placed rivers in the folds thereof, and placed firm hills therein, and hath set a barrier between the two seas? Is there any Allah beside Allah? Nay, but most of them know not!



quote:21-33

And He it is Who created the night and the day, and the sun and the moon. They float, each in an orbit.

The Sun and the Moon each float in an orbit? It certainly seems obvious from our still Earth, doesn’t it?

quote: 31-29

Hast thou not seen how Allah causeth the night to pass into the day and causeth the day to pass into the night, and hath subdued the sun and the moon (to do their work), each running unto an appointed term; and that Allah is Informed of what ye do?



quote:91-1

YUSUFALI: By the Sun and his (glorious) splendour;

PICKTHAL: By the sun and his brightness,

SHAKIR: I swear by the sun and its brilliance,

91-2

YUSUFALI: By the Moon as she follows him;

PICKTHAL: And the moon when she followeth him,

SHAKIR: And the moon when it follows the sun,

The Moon follows the Sun? Since according to the Qur’an the Earth is still, it would only make sense, wouldn’t it?

quote:Originally posted by Martini:

Another loophole for the Qur'an's claim that humans are formed from "a gushing fluid" that issues "from between the loins and the ribs" (which un-coincidently matches Greek physician Hippocrates' incorrect theory that sperm passes through the kidneys into the penis).

quote:86-5-7

So let man consider from what he is created.

He is created from a gushing fluid

That issued from between the loins and ribs.



quote:Originally posted by Martini:

Another loophole for the Qur'an's claim that mountains were created to stop the Earth from shaking (mountains are the result of an unstable Earth that take millions of years to form and do not stop the Earth from shaking, as if they are giant paper weights).

quote: 16-15

YUSUFALI: And He has set up on the earth mountains standing firm, lest it should shake with you; and rivers and roads; that ye may guide yourselves;

PICKTHAL: And He hath cast into the earth firm hills that it quake not with you, and streams and roads that ye may find a way.

SHAKIR: And He has cast great mountains in the earth lest it might be convulsed with you, and rivers and roads that you may go aright,



quote:Originally posted by Martini:

Another loophole for the Qur'an's claim that the Sun sets in a muddy spring.



quote:18-86

Till, when he reached the setting-place of the sun, he found it setting in a muddy spring, and found a people thereabout. We said: O Dhu'l-Qarneyn! Either punish or show them kindness.

^Some will say that the above is to be taken metaphorically- that he only reached the place where he can watch the sunset and from his view it only seemed like the sun set into a muddy spring because of the horizon. There are three problems with that.

1. It doesn’t say that he reaches a place where he can see the sun set; it says “he reached the setting-place of the sun”.

2. One could certainly see the sun seemingly set into the ocean, but a muddy spring? That would have to be one extremely large muddy spring!

quote: 18-90

Till, when he reached the rising-place of the sun, he found it rising on a people for whom We had appointed no shelter therefrom.

3. It isn’t necessary to travel one way to see the Sun rise and another to see it set. However, it is necessary if the Earth is flat and you actually want to reach the rising and setting places of the Sun.

quote:Originally posted by Martini:

Another loophole for the Qur'an's claim that the Moon makes its own light.

quote:71-16

And hath made the moon a light therein, and made the sun a lamp?

quote:Originally posted by KING G:

I am a muslim, and I have a little theory, in some Islamic (Shiites) hadiths, it says that Adam came to earth as a sole, not a body, so, I say that Apes might haved evoluted into humans, but only after the sole of Adam has been inplanted in those bodies, this is just a little thought that ran through my mind, what do you guys think?

Sounds fishy to me!

Srsly, any holy script can be "interpreted" in a certain way in the future, in some ways that the very nature of human "knowledge". That said, I don't believe the simpleness of your theory, I mean come on...

Why is it so hard to say "I don't know why I am a conscious human being, and whilst I do have a soul, I don't know how God put it into my body; whether directly in a millisecond, or over millions of years."

I don't believe in an a classical-theistic God giggling and running around behind the scenes, though, so for me it's kinda different...

[This message has been edited by Mellow_Fellow (edited 02-27-2007).]