Evidence for God from Science

Gman wrote:I live only a mile away from the Pacific Ocean. Maybe if I put up a smoke signal you guys could see it..

It would need to be one of those super-sized mushroom types and would probably get you into a lot of trouble, along with North Korea. A bit risky. Easier to operate your keyboard controlled cyber hot-rod and visit that way. Safer too. No highway patrols and airport nonsense.

Gman, you did make a good point there about no solid facts to prove absolutely the existence of God. Funny how He did that. He left a gap between our world and Himself, and said "come on, jump!" You've got to have faith to make that jump. But it is not a blind faith - a jump with your eyes closed. Everywhere the evidence all points to Him. The jump goes in the same direction - across to Him. And only by jumping the gap do you prove to yourself He is real, He is there. It is proof only to those who do it - which is why the aetheist types don't get their proof.

This is Michelle's legal thread, so I am staying on topic (I think).
Hey, isn't it funny when Michelle sits up in bed? (Teasing ya, Michelle). She has interesting ideas, that's for sure.

just browsing and I have to take issue with judah calling Islam totalitarian. All religions ask for devotion and faith but what I think you were referring to is the way Islam seems to permeate all strata of Muslim society. Look at Christian societies 600yrs ago (when Christianity was the same age as Islam is now) Church and state were deeply intertwined, the monarch ruled by divine providence and anyone who spoke against the church was executed as a heretic. Sound familiar? The only reason Christian societies are so "reasonable" is that people of reason questioned the status quo and after centuries we now have a seperation of church and state. This separation is the basis for all religions living together, a christian taliban is no better than a muslim one.

tj rich wrote:just browsing and I have to take issue with judah calling Islam totalitarian. All religions ask for devotion and faith but what I think you were referring to is the way Islam seems to permeate all strata of Muslim society. Look at Christian societies 600yrs ago (when Christianity was the same age as Islam is now) Church and state were deeply intertwined, the monarch ruled by divine providence and anyone who spoke against the church was executed as a heretic. Sound familiar? The only reason Christian societies are so "reasonable" is that people of reason questioned the status quo and after centuries we now have a seperation of church and state. This separation is the basis for all religions living together, a christian taliban is no better than a muslim one.

Here's a repeat of a post I just put up on a different thread that addresses some of these issues.

It's not particularly strong critical thinking in my mind to equate Christian fundamentalism with Islamic Militantism. The two are based on different things and should be examined in that light.

_________________________________________________

With all respect Lizardman, we're not speaking of "fringe" groups in terms of Islam these days.

I actually have reported activities of so-called hate groups and have been ative in other contexts with reporting child abuse, spousal abuse etc. Where I have opportunity.

The issue I have with Islam as a movement, and there have been issues in history with Christian groups is:

1. "Christian groups" that practise such things as are taking place in Islam today do so in violation of their scriptures. Islam has no such restraints upon their followers to love their enemies. Those who are "moderate" muslims can not point to anywhere in the Quran or Surah's where the Wahabbi's for instance, are violating their beliefs. Therefore they tolerate them to a far greater extent.

2. In terms of a percentage of their groups, Militant Islam is very much higher than the fringes which attempt to co-opt Christian teaching to support their hate and killing. Most of the wars taking place in the world today such as in the Sudan, Afghanistan, Indonesia, the Baltics, Chechnya etc are direct results of Islam agression and declared Jihad. Islamic theocracies are in place in the world today and combine religious power with secular power, in which Islam is the state religion, any who convert to another religion are put to death and practices such as slavery, forcible rape and concubinism very prevelent.

Can you point to contemporary issues such as this in Christianity currently? Where Christianity was claimed to protect these practices in Christian history you can point as well to Christians who put their lives at risk and fought against things like slavery or the holocaust.

Where are their counterparts today in Islam? Well? Where are they?

It's a very weak argument to just flippantly equate fundamental extremism in Islam with that in Christianity or any other group. The issue is what the movement as a whole does with it.

I have no doubt that there are many moderate Muslims who look at what is happening and do not rejoice. However, neither do they stand against and seek to stop it either. Certainly there is reason for them not to in terms of dear for their own lives.

THE KEY ISSUE IN MY MIND, EXPERIENCE, OBSERVATION AND STUDY IS THAT THEY DO NOT DO SO BECAUSE THE QURAN DOES NOT TEACH THAT THEY SHOULD RESIST MILITANT ISLAM.

If there is anything that Islam should be judged by in this regard it is the Quran itself. Where does it teach to love one's neighbors? Where does it teach restraint in killing "infidels" and "strangers."

It doesn't.

tj rich wrote:just browsing and I have to take issue with judah calling Islam totalitarian. All religions ask for devotion and faith but what I think you were referring to is the way Islam seems to permeate all strata of Muslim society. Look at Christian societies 600yrs ago (when Christianity was the same age as Islam is now) Church and state were deeply intertwined, the monarch ruled by divine providence and anyone who spoke against the church was executed as a heretic. Sound familiar? The only reason Christian societies are so "reasonable" is that people of reason questioned the status quo and after centuries we now have a seperation of church and state. This separation is the basis for all religions living together, a christian taliban is no better than a muslim one.

That Christianity may have enveloped church and state at one time back in its history does not have any bearing on the fact that Islam is indeed a totalitarian ideology. What exactly are you trying to say? That Islam isn't totalitarian despite the nature of its theocracy, er, because Christianity once didn't show that church/state separation? That is not logical. Perhaps I have misread what you are trying to say.

You are right that separation of church and state in culturally Christian societies have made for a reasonableness and eliminated totalitarianism.
Unfortunately, Islam as a theocracy is unable to do that and remain itself, Islam, without considerable reform.

Canuckster1127 wrote:THE KEY ISSUE IN MY MIND, EXPERIENCE, OBSERVATION AND STUDY IS THAT THEY DO NOT DO SO BECAUSE THE QURAN DOES NOT TEACH THAT THEY SHOULD RESIST MILITANT ISLAM.

This is very much correct... If someone could refute this from the Quran I'm all ears... The Quran calls for total domination. Let's not sugar coat the thesis..

Any religion based on divine authority through revealed texts (Islam and Christianity certainly qualify) are in danger of totalitarianism when allowed to rule as a theocracy. I hoped that I made that point by citing how Christians behaved when their religion was the same age as Islam is now. It took 600 years of religious wars, persecution, division, the enlightenment, the scientific and industrial revolutions before civil and religious liberties were won for all. Islam as a religion is no worse and no better than Christianity-it preaches submission to god, piety, charity, peace and love for your fellow man and tolerance of other religions. However just as the bible (even the new testament) can be misused to show Christians in a bad light, so the Quran has been misquoted. Equally just as scripture was used subjugate the peasantry(especially women) and enrich church and monarchy so the Quran is used in Muslim societies now. We are privilaged to live in societies which educate us and allow freedom of thought and expression. We should try to engage with other societies to give them the same freedom.

tj rich wrote:Any religion based on divine authority through revealed texts (Islam and Christianity certainly qualify) are in danger of totalitarianism when allowed to rule as a theocracy. I hoped that I made that point by citing how Christians behaved when their religion was the same age as Islam is now. It took 600 years of religious wars, persecution, division, the enlightenment, the scientific and industrial revolutions before civil and religious liberties were won for all. Islam as a religion is no worse and no better than Christianity-it preaches submission to god, piety, charity, peace and love for your fellow man and tolerance of other religions. However just as the bible (even the new testament) can be misused to show Christians in a bad light, so the Quran has been misquoted. Equally just as scripture was used subjugate the peasantry(especially women) and enrich church and monarchy so the Quran is used in Muslim societies now. We are privilaged to live in societies which educate us and allow freedom of thought and expression. We should try to engage with other societies to give them the same freedom.

I agree that religion combined with State power leads to abuse.

Drawing an analogy between Christianity and Islam in this regard is only valid if the foundations of the faith, namely the Quran and the Bible teach the same values and have the same ability to interpret themselves into temporance.

The Quran does not teach the same values of love, temporance and mbracing on's enemies. It is in that regard all "Old Testament" without the enlightenment and revelation of Jesus Christ or similar teaching to temper the all too many passages in the Quran and Surah's that command the death of infidels.

We are engaging with these societies now. Not all are militant and not all take a militant view. However, there is nothing within the Quran itself that calls upon the moderates to curtail and contain the militants and so you have the militants raising to political power and calling for jihad, fatwah's and the killing of those whom they see as infidels.

When you identify for me where the negotiating opportunities are and the moderating influences within Islam are present to work with, I think we'll have some hope. However, what negotiations take place now?

A cartoon in a newspaper = mass protests. The pope making an academic reference to a dead byzantine leader = a dead nun, protests and destroyed churches.

Where are the "reasonable" Muslims and what power do they imagine they have or will use in curtailing their militant brothers?

I'm pretty sure that we are all communicating from the comfort of a first world country with a wealth of state funded, enlightened education behind us and the benefits of a free press and judiciary. Our forefathers fought for all these privilages and I cherish them. Many Islamic societies do not have these privilages, how do you expect these people to behave? Do you think that a fundamentalist Christian society would allow freedom of speech, unlimited access to conflicting thoughts, this message board? If you do then I point you to the historical analogy I used previously. Like I said we had to struggle to free ourselves from religious totalitarianism and we owe it to all people to help them so that everyone can worship or not as they see fit. I notice there are many contributors from U.S.A. I hope you are as proud of the ideas enshrined in the constitution (especiallly the 1st amendment) as every right thinking person is inspired by them. I live in Belfast where religious intolerance flourished due to segregation (self inflicted) only education,tolerance and reconciliation have changed our society.

tj rich wrote:I'm pretty sure that we are all communicating from the comfort of a first world country with a wealth of state funded, enlightened education behind us and the benefits of a free press and judiciary. Our forefathers fought for all these privilages and I cherish them. Many Islamic societies do not have these privilages, how do you expect these people to behave? Do you think that a fundamentalist Christian society would allow freedom of speech, unlimited access to conflicting thoughts, this message board? If you do then I point you to the historical analogy I used previously. Like I said we had to struggle to free ourselves from religious totalitarianism and we owe it to all people to help them so that everyone can worship or not as they see fit. I notice there are many contributors from U.S.A. I hope you are as proud of the ideas enshrined in the constitution (especiallly the 1st amendment) as every right thinking person is inspired by them. I live in Belfast where religious intolerance flourished due to segregation (self inflicted) only education,tolerance and reconciliation have changed our society.

TJ,

What you're saying is noble in one sense. and I agree with a great deal of what you're saying.

I'm Canadian originally, now in the US. My family emigrated from Ireland's County Armaugh in the late 1800's.

Islam has been expanding for centuries. May of the Middle East countries now taken for granted as Muslim, used to be Christian until they were conquered by the sword and Isalm forcibly offered to the "infidels" on pain of death otherwise.

Judeo/Christianity has indeed had dark period of history where in their counter-crusades (the crusades of the middle ages were about pushing back the gains made by Muslims into formerly Christian lands as well as basic human desire to expand kingdom and influence).

The difference I would point out is that when these things were done, it can be shown from the Bible that they broke its principles and precepts in doing it.

I do not see the same internal violations within Islam. The Quran in many ways is the Old Testament, free from the restraint imposed by the new.

So, it sounds reasonable to make an analogy that given time the Islamic Militant Jihad will coma around. But the difference is, the book they base their movement upon is patently different, more militaristic and absent of mercy for the non-Muslim.

This is a large reason why in my opinion, moderate Muslims are so quiet and not resisting their radical factions. They have no basis in the Quran to do so.

Analogies from History are helpful. When the premises the two groups are functioning upon is radically different, then it is not a given that history will repeat itself in the manner you appeal to.

Bart

tj rich wrote:I'm pretty sure that we are all communicating from the comfort of a first world country with a wealth of state funded, enlightened education behind us and the benefits of a free press and judiciary. Our forefathers fought for all these privilages and I cherish them. Many Islamic societies do not have these privilages, how do you expect these people to behave? Do you think that a fundamentalist Christian society would allow freedom of speech, unlimited access to conflicting thoughts, this message board? If you do then I point you to the historical analogy I used previously. Like I said we had to struggle to free ourselves from religious totalitarianism and we owe it to all people to help them so that everyone can worship or not as they see fit. I notice there are many contributors from U.S.A. I hope you are as proud of the ideas enshrined in the constitution (especiallly the 1st amendment) as every right thinking person is inspired by them. I live in Belfast where religious intolerance flourished due to segregation (self inflicted) only education,tolerance and reconciliation have changed our society.

Excellent point! It is very easy for us to ignore the fact that historically there were times when the situation you wrote about occurred and we had to free ourselves from that. That is because dogmatic religion was involved which is entirely different than Christianity itself.

"Allah does not forbid you from those who do not fight you in the matters of your religion and those who did not expel you from your homes, that you show them courtesy and kindness and act justly with them because Allah loves those who are Just." (Al-Mumtahanah: 8 .)

So, it sounds reasonable to make an analogy that given time the Islamic Militant Jihad will coma around. But the difference is, the book they base their movement upon is patently different, more militaristic and absent of mercy for the non-Muslim.

This is a large reason why in my opinion, moderate Muslims are so quiet and not resisting their radical factions. They have no basis in the Quran to do so.

Actually, there is a basis in the Qur'an to do so, as you can see in the ayat with which I introduced this post. Moderate Muslims actually aren't quiet... but they aren't getting much attention because they are a small minority in this country (too bad.) I just wanted to say that the Qur'an actually mandates mercy for non-Muslims who aren't aggressing against the Muslims. As a religious text, it mandates this, which makes it, I think pretty special.

Aviatrix wrote:"Allah does not forbid you from those who do not fight you in the matters of your religion and those who did not expel you from your homes, that you show them courtesy and kindness and act justly with them because Allah loves those who are Just." (Al-Mumtahanah: 8 .)

Yes, show them courtesy and kindness before you take them over..

Sura 61:9 He it is Who sent His Messenger with the guidance and the true religion, that He may make it overcome the religions, all of them.

Sura 9:33 It is He Who has sent His Noble Messenger with guidance and the true religion, in order to prevail over all other religions - even if the polytheists get annoyed.

Sura 48:28 It is He Who has sent His Noble Messenger with the guidance and the true religion, in order to make it prevail over all other religions; and Allah is sufficient as a Witness.

Actually, there is a basis in the Qur'an to do so, as you can see in the ayat with which I introduced this post. Moderate Muslims actually aren't quiet... but they aren't getting much attention because they are a small minority in this country (too bad.) I just wanted to say that the Qur'an actually mandates mercy for non-Muslims who aren't aggressing against the Muslims. As a religious text, it mandates this, which makes it, I think pretty special.

Special? Not according to Suras 61:9, 48:28 and 9:33... Can't you tell us what Islam's real mission is to the world?

Aviatrix wrote:"Allah does not forbid you from those who do not fight you in the matters of your religion and those who did not expel you from your homes, that you show them courtesy and kindness and act justly with them because Allah loves those who are Just." (Al-Mumtahanah: 8 .)

So, it sounds reasonable to make an analogy that given time the Islamic Militant Jihad will coma around. But the difference is, the book they base their movement upon is patently different, more militaristic and absent of mercy for the non-Muslim.

This is a large reason why in my opinion, moderate Muslims are so quiet and not resisting their radical factions. They have no basis in the Quran to do so.

Actually, there is a basis in the Qur'an to do so, as you can see in the ayat with which I introduced this post. Moderate Muslims actually aren't quiet... but they aren't getting much attention because they are a small minority in this country (too bad.) I just wanted to say that the Qur'an actually mandates mercy for non-Muslims who aren't aggressing against the Muslims. As a religious text, it mandates this, which makes it, I think pretty special.

I've seen that ayat discussed before and discounted on two basis:

1. Fight you in terms of your religion is taken to mean either they are Islam or they do not in any way disagree with Islam which can be taken to a very far extreme.

2. Such verses identified in the Quran are seen as earlier and overridden by the more militant and violent verses that came later from Mohommed's increasing violence.

Where are the moderate muslims in the Middle East rising up and reining in the jihadi's?

tj rich wrote:Many Islamic societies do not have these privilages, how do you expect these people to behave? Do you think that a fundamentalist Christian society would allow freedom of speech, unlimited access to conflicting thoughts, this message board?

If the society is Christian (not fundamentalist, but thoroughly Christian in everything it does, including legislation), minorities will have freedom, even though the country places itself under submission to God's Law.

tj rich wrote:If you do then I point you to the historical analogy I used previously. Like I said we had to struggle to free ourselves from religious totalitarianism and we owe it to all people to help them so that everyone can worship or not as they see fit.

A Reformed theocracy doesn't mean people aren't allowed to worship as they see fit. It is not totalitarian; in fact, I don't believe any Christian state so far has been totalitarian. Such states appeared in the 20th century. The medieval Roman Catholic Church sought to preserve order and unity in the Christian empire; it did not seek to control minds, although sometimes it reacted harshly against those who might disturb order and unity.
My ideal is not a country in which heretical books are burned. Blasphemous books, maybe, but not heretical. Freedom of speech can exist even if a country acknowledges itself bound to the Law.

tj rich wrote:Any religion based on divine authority through revealed texts (Islam and Christianity certainly qualify) are in danger of totalitarianism when allowed to rule as a theocracy.

Even if you say there were totalitarian states in the Middle Ages, the largest ones were anti-religious and especially anti-Christian. They based themselves on the words of one leader (Hitler, Stalin, Mao). But totalitarianism can also occur in a liberal, 'reasonable' State, which is based on the misplaced total authority of 'reason' without regard to revelation. Aldous Huxley gives an idea in Brave New World. Rather than keeping the populace in fear, the strategy consists of keeping the masses in a shallow, 'happy' state of entertainment.
If revealed texts are the only way to gain some kinds of knowledge, I will not lightly discard them when it comes to ruling a people.

tj rich wrote:It took 600 years of religious wars, persecution, division, the enlightenment, the scientific and industrial revolutions before civil and religious liberties were won for all. Islam as a religion is no worse and no better than Christianity-it preaches submission to god, piety, charity, peace and love for your fellow man and tolerance of other religions.

And above all, Islam preaches fatalism, which effectively rules out human freedom. Don't forget that the Enlightenment came from a Christian climate and could not have flourished elsewhere.

Christianity originated in the pagan Roman Empire. It was not concerned with political power. Islam was a political religion from the start.

Canuckster1127 wrote:2. Such verses identified in the Quran are seen as earlier and overridden by the more militant and violent verses that came later from Mohommed's increasing violence.

If you don't mind, please post these verses, so I can point out what chapters they originated from and explain the history behind them. I don't think you understand how they apply to certain situations.

Where are the moderate muslims in the Middle East rising up and reining in the jihadi's?

That begs to question, however, what kind of action do you expect them to take?