General/Off-topic |
|
|
|
|
|
Mt. Ararat
|
| 20. |
27 Aug 2007 Mon 06:02 pm |
|
Quoting AEnigma III: This thread does raise a question though. How do muslims (and christians) deal with Darwin and the proven existence of dinosaurs 200 million years BEFORE man?
How does religion deal with science? Do they choose to ignore it? |
I cannot speak for muslims or christians but certainly the biblical story of creation is not totally against science. As long as you accept that the '7 days' is metorphoric and that not everything should be taken totally literally then the two accounts can co-exist quite happily. And there really is no reason not to accept it as metorphoric as the cration story itself talks about events that were before mankind and there could not be observed by man.
As for Darwin, he himself was a practicing christian and never saw his theories as contradicticing biblical accounts. I think the one thing that sets human beings apart from the rest of the creatures on our planet is the ability to make reasoned decisions - other animals exist by insinct (often very developed instinct but still instinct) whereas we are able to make rational choices. Biblical stories say that man was created to oversee the existing animals and dinosaurs could therefore pre-exist humans without any conflict.
|
|
| 21. |
27 Aug 2007 Mon 06:03 pm |
|
I don't say the Ark does not exist somewhere, though I find it hard to believe - but who am I to deny?
But... I have been at the place of Noah's Ark near Doğubayazit and I don't believe it is there. A very faint shadow of something someone with very much imagination is there to see. That's all. And most of the research has been done by the team of Ron Wyatt, Bill Fry and Jerry Bowen from Anchorstone, a group of Christians who believe in it - suspicious me thinks: they are not looking hard for evidence of absence. I have also visited the Noah's Ark Visitors Centre (the 'manager' there is ehm ... someone I know  ) and again, some stones, newspaper articles are not convincing me.
For those who believe or just are curious:
http://www.anchorstone.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=blogcategory&id=28&Itemid=111
http://www.anchorstone.com/index.php?option=com_rsgallery2&Itemid=116&catid=1
|
|
| 22. |
27 Aug 2007 Mon 06:03 pm |
|
Before you call me "rude" please ask yourselves that if this was a thread about Buddists, do you think you muslims would be able to read their beliefs as "truth" without commenting????? 
|
|
| 23. |
27 Aug 2007 Mon 06:03 pm |
|
please stop to modify your post. i am confused
|
|
| 24. |
27 Aug 2007 Mon 06:05 pm |
|
Quoting AEnigma III: Before you call me "rude" please ask yourselves that if this was a thread about Buddists, do you think you muslims would be able to read their beliefs as "truth" without commenting????? |
at least i would not call their beliefs stupid
|
|
| 25. |
27 Aug 2007 Mon 06:05 pm |
|
Quoting ciko: Quoting AEnigma III: Before you call me "rude" please ask yourselves that if this was a thread about Buddists, do you think you muslims would be able to read their beliefs as "truth" without commenting????? |
at least i would not call their beliefs stupid |
Ciko, you seem to forget that you called MY beliefs stupid first
|
|
| 26. |
27 Aug 2007 Mon 06:07 pm |
|
Quoting AEnigma III: Quoting ciko: Quoting AEnigma III: Before you call me "rude" please ask yourselves that if this was a thread about Buddists, do you think you muslims would be able to read their beliefs as "truth" without commenting????? |
at least i would not call their beliefs stupid |
Ciko, you seem to forget that you called MY beliefs stupid first |
Aenigma, you seem to forget the difference between belief and view and i didnt call you view stupid..it was link
|
|
| 27. |
27 Aug 2007 Mon 06:07 pm |
|
Quoting ciko: the difference is what you believe is just your view..like anything in your life. what i told you in my post was from my holly book. |
But it could be argued that any Holy Book (note not holly) is only considered to be holy because mankind has decided that it should be that way. Even casting that aside, if we assume that a book truely is holy, do you really think that every word is to be taken literally? Surely some of the stories are written the way that they are to make it easy for people to understand the underlaying theology and doctrine.
|
|
| 28. |
27 Aug 2007 Mon 06:10 pm |
|
Quoting bod: Quoting ciko: the difference is what you believe is just your view..like anything in your life. what i told you in my post was from my holly book. |
But it could be argued that any Holy Book (note not holly) is only considered to be holy because mankind has decided that it should be that way. Even casting that aside, if we assume that a book truely is holy, do you really think that every word is to be taken literally? Surely some of the stories are written the way that they are to make it easy for people to understand the underlaying theology and doctrine. |
+ 1000000000000
|
|
| 29. |
27 Aug 2007 Mon 06:11 pm |
|
Quoting ciko: Aenigma, you seem to forget the difference between belief and view and i didnt call you view stupid..it was link |
Ciko - did you read it ALL?  You found ONE part of that text that was incorrect. What about the rest?
|
|
| 30. |
27 Aug 2007 Mon 06:15 pm |
|
Quoting bod: Biblical stories say that man was created to oversee the existing animals and dinosaurs could therefore pre-exist humans without any conflict. |
They could only pre-exist if you accept that God didn't actually create the Earth in 7 days. However, as nobody here will accept that these stories are fable and only based on "some truth", then your theory is incorrect in their eyes and it means that they ignore science.
|
|
|
