View Poll Results: Does the Bible have a legitimate place in modern debates when it has something to say

Voters
361. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes

    96 26.59%
  • No

    235 65.10%
  • Undecided

    30 8.31%
Page 13 of 36 FirstFirst ... 39101112131415161723 ... LastLast
Results 301 to 325 of 884

Thread: BECAUSE THE BIBLE SAYS SO!! Does the Bible have a legitimate place in modern debate?

  1. #301
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    'Straya
    Posts
    1,332

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Dragontamer1011 View Post
    Where are the animals that didn't completely develop lungs and died off?
    Extinct or still fish... are you serious?
    *EDIT* That is my entire point is there is no moving backwords. Yet what about floods and things that overwhelm land? If we had the ability to breathe both, we could survive massive floods of certain areas. Seems to me thats quite a step backwards.
    This is not the place for a debate on basic evolution theory. If you are interested I will be happy to enlighten you via PM, however.

  2. #302
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    1,365

    Default

    [QUOTE=Dragontamer1011;13398580]I also didn't edit, it was there from the start, you just didn't read all the way through..

    And if something is limited how can we explain all these different outcomes on our world? In order for things to have evolved to a certain extent there are variables that need to be met for the animal even to survive. If were taking limitations (Whatever those happen to be) into account, things become very.. Unstable. Also, I've never a species wiped out because it didn't evolve correctly. Where are the animals that didn't completely develop lungs and died off?

    Also, what is the difference between adaptation and evolution? (Not looking for a definition, I want your answer)

    [QUOTE]

    Actually no, for a "Half Wing" Is better then on wing for a creature that lives in trees, as anything that might lessen the fall damage is benifical. Those creatures will mate and have more children with differing lengths, eventually leading to full fledge wings. There is no difference between Adaptation and evolution.

    Thanks to treeco123


    LIGHT SIDE HAS CUPCAKES
    DARK SIDE OFFERS COOKIES
    JOIN THE DERPY SIDE.... WE GOT MUFFINS

  3. #303
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    United States
    Posts
    545

    Default

    Like I said before I was trying to think at 1:30 am which wasn't really the best time for logical debates.. Anyway, I went way off topic and I'm not going to do that again.
    Battle Subway Singles team (Black): (RECORD: 59)

    Working on a new Singles team for Y:

    Friend Safari: Type: Fighting Pokemon - Pancham, Medicham, and Breloom.
    FC: 4613 - 7267 - 1185

  4. #304
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    On the Grid
    Posts
    1,172

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by chuboy View Post
    The first one is trivial, but I'm sure you kept reading and noticed that there are hypothetical situations where mutations occur but evolution can still be disproved.

    In any case, as long as we do not observe anything which contradicts that list, the theory of evolution holds.
    What you've said here makes it sound like we don't need even one single observation from the fossil record to confirm that the theory fits the evidence of the past. I don't think you mean that as long as mutations occur in the present, and can be observed to have some small benefits in the present, that means that evolution must be true whatever the evidence from the past. Do you?

    Quote Originally Posted by chuboy View Post
    Before I respond to your edit, for clarity's sake I'd like you to define the distinction between Creationism and ID because from what I see they amount to the same thing as far as explaining biodiversity goes.
    That's not the traditional claim of the people who have banned it from classrooms. To them, the reason it should be banned is because it is religion. The problem with this claim is that the idea that an intelligent being designed life forms is not identical to the claim that a specific religion's divine being brought life forms into existence (with other religion-specific claims being involved. For example, a designer could be a fully natural agent. Famous scientist Francis Crick had once proposed a theory of "directed panspermia,", which proposed that intelligent aliens sent the first life forms to earth. That theory is not theistic at all, and quite consistent with Crick's tending-toward-atheistic view.

    Quote Originally Posted by belbackinblack View Post
    Whenever did I say that the field absolutely contradicts with the Book? Had you read more sympathetically as opposed to antagonistically you would see that I wrote the vague term "large portions" and not "everything in the bibel has been debunked lololololol"

    The events of Exodus are largely contradictory by the actual artifacts of the older Hebrews and the accounts and artifacts of the Egyptians.
    I actually discussed this a way back. Some have tried to use the absence of evidence of Hebrews inhabiting Egypt as evidence that they did not. In what way is the evidence contradictory to the idea of Hebrews living in Egypt? Remember, absence of evidence is not evidence of absence (and since Egypt has been continuously inhabited, evidence could be easily eliminated even if the Egyptians had no desire to cover up such an embarrassment).

    Also, I am relatively certain that there are Egyptian depictions of nomadic people coming to Egypt to buy grain, just as Genesis reports.

    Quote Originally Posted by belbackinblack View Post
    Different writers have different styles; these are noticebale. We will be completely oblivious because we read an English translation. . . translated from Greek. . . translated from Hebrew.
    I don't have information in front of me at this moment to discuss much of what you've said, but first of all, it is entirely inaccurate to suggest that modern translation of the Old Testament are literally taken out of Greek translations of the Hebrew. While numerous translations consult the Septuagint, few if any actually translate from it. I know that the King James did not, nor did the New King James, the Revised Standard Version, or the New International Version. I'd like to know where this claim of multistep translation comes from.

    Second, the JEDP hypothesis is supposed to be based largely on features of the text (such as different divine names) that are completely obvious even in English translation.

    Quote Originally Posted by belbackinblack View Post
    TFP, I'm not arguing that the Wellhausen hypothesis is correct; it has been edited and reworked. Currently, actual scholars agree that there was not a singluar author.
    When something is wrong with the hypothesis, scholars who study the text rework the hypothesis until it makes sense.


    When you hear Moses isn't the actual author of the Tanakh, well. . . you just disagree. The difference between these responses is worth noting. (snarkiness of course aimed at mattj, not TFP)
    Remember, some believe that Moses wrote the Pentateuch, the five books of the Law; no one believes that he wrote the Tanakh, the whole Hebrew Bible. Just to clarify--why did you use the same term after what I said?

    Sprites ripped by Yoshi Clone of spritersresource.com. Banner by my brother ShinySandshrew.

  5. #305
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    In your mind
    Posts
    3,869

    Default

    Just because I forgot to mention it earlier.

    When amphibians colonize the land, they did so because the water was full of predators and there where sources of food on land. Why would they need to go back to the water extensively with gills, so they can go back to the predators that made them go on land in the first place?
    It's clear to me. Orre, Unova and Kalos proves it. Pokemon is running out of Japan!
    3DS friend code: 2148-8189-4401 (Rock Type) Nosepass/Pupitar/Barbaracle
    Dream Code: 5400-2204-6955

  6. #306
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    1,117

    Default

    Please excuse the briefness of this post. I am rather tired from this week and need to sleep and get ready for a party.

    Quote Originally Posted by TheFightingPikachu View Post
    That's not the traditional claim of the people who have banned it from classrooms. To them, the reason it should be banned is because it is religion.
    It's not scientific which is why we don't allow it into the classroom. End of discussion. I've already discussed his before.

    Quote Originally Posted by TheFightingPikachu View Post
    I actually discussed this a way back. Some have tried to use the absence of evidence of Hebrews inhabiting Egypt as evidence that they did not.In what way is the evidence contradictory to the idea of Hebrews living in Egypt? Remember, absence of evidence is not evidence of absence (and since Egypt has been continuously inhabited, evidence could be easily eliminated even if the Egyptians had no desire to cover up such an embarrassment).
    I'm sorry, you clearly misunderstand what I have said. The evidence is not so much about the absence of evidence as you claim, but of the actual evidence we possess.

    posting to wiki, because I am too tired to cite the sources.

    According to Exodus 12:37-38 NIV, the Israelites numbered "about six hundred thousand men on foot, besides women and children," plus many non-Israelites and livestock.[9] Numbers 1:46 gives a more precise total of 603,550.[10] The 600,000, plus wives, children, the elderly, and the "mixed multitude" of non-Israelites would have numbered some 2 million people,[11] compared with an entire estimated Egyptian population of around 3 million.[12] Marching ten abreast, and without accounting for livestock, they would have formed a line 150 miles long.[13] No evidence exists that Egypt ever suffered such a demographic and economic catastrophe, nor is there evidence that the Sinai desert ever hosted (or could have hosted) these millions of people and their herds,[14] nor of a massive population increase in Canaan, which is estimated to have had a population of only 50,000 to 100,000 at the time.[15] Some scholars have interpreted these numbers as a mistranslation - reading the Hebrew word eleph as "600 families" rather than 600,000 men, reduces the Hebrew population involved to roughly 20,000 individuals,[16][17]—but the view of mainstream modern biblical scholarship is that the Exodus story was written not as history, but to demonstrate God's purpose and deeds with his Chosen People, Israel; the essentially theological motivation of the story explains the improbability of the scenario described above.[18] It has also been suggested that the 603,550 people delivered from Egypt (according to Numbers 1:46) is not simply a number, but contains a secret message, a gematria for bene yisra'el kol ros, "the children of Israel, every individual;"[19] while the number 600,000 symbolises the total destruction of the generation of Israel which left Egypt, none of whom lived to see the Promised Land.[20]
    The archaeological evidence of the largely indigenous origins of Israel is "overwhelming," and leaves "no room for an Exodus from Egypt or a 40-year pilgrimage through the Sinai wilderness."[21] For this reason, most archaeologists have abandoned the archaeological investigation of Moses and the Exodus as "a fruitless pursuit."[21] A century of research by archaeologists and Egyptologists has found no evidence which can be directly related to the Exodus narrative of an Egyptian captivity and the escape and travels through the wilderness,[18] and it has become increasingly clear that Iron Age Israel - the kingdoms of Judah and Israel - has its origins in Canaan, not Egypt:[22][23] the culture of the earliest Israelite settlements is Canaanite, their cult-objects are those of the Canaanite god El, the pottery remains in the local Canaanite tradition, and the alphabet used is early Canaanite. Almost the sole marker distinguishing the "Israelite" villages from Canaanite sites is an absence of pig bones, although whether this can be taken as an ethnic marker or is due to other factors remains a matter of dispute.[24]
    If the Israelites had been in Egypt for such a duration there would be signs in the culture; There are none.

    Quote Originally Posted by TheFightingPikachu View Post
    Also, I am relatively certain that there are Egyptian depictions of nomadic people coming to Egypt to buy grain, just as Genesis reports.
    Yet the actual trading, enslavement, and subsequent escape do not cohesively fit the archaeological and factual time line developed, tested, and proven.

    Quote Originally Posted by TheFightingPikachu View Post
    I don't have information in front of me at this moment to discuss much of what you've said, but first of all, it is entirely inaccurate to suggest that modern translation of the Old Testament are literally taken out of Greek translations of the Hebrew. While numerous translations consult the Septuagint, few if any actually translate from it. I know that the King James did not, nor did the New King James, the Revised Standard Version, or the New International Version. I'd like to know where this claim of multistep translation comes from.
    Whether or not your modern translation of the Bible consults the older Hebrew texts, the earlier Bibles in Christianity consulted the Greek.

    There are also many different translations. I honestly don't give a fuck about your defense of the KJV. Grats that you absolutely love it. It is one of the more modern literal translations. I'm not here to attack it.

    You should not underemphasize the influence that different translations have had created over time throughout the many different groups within Christianity. i.e. Not every Christian has a copy of KJV. [B]Not everyone is like you. Deal with it.[/B]

    The English translation I just recently read and refer to is approved by the 3 main brances of Judaism in the U.S. by the Jewish Publication Society.

    If you would like we can compare translations.

    Quote Originally Posted by TheFightingPikachu View Post
    Remember, some believe that Moses wrote the Pentateuch, the five books of the Law; no one believes that he wrote the Tanakh, the whole Hebrew Bible. Just to clarify--why did you use the same term after what I said?
    I'm sorry, I meant to type first five books of the Tanakh. I was tired after doing hw and riding.

    Now what are you talking about in terms of clarity? I'm not sure if your referencing the post you made inbetween my two. If that is the case, realize there was a lapse in time between when I hit "reply to post" [to mattj] and "submit reply," in which you made a post.

  7. #307

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by belbackinblack View Post
    When you hear Moses isn't the actual author of the Tanakh, well. . . you just disagree. The difference between these responses is worth noting. (snarkiness of course aimed at mattj, not TFP)
    I'll get to the rest when we get back, but this quote really made me el-oh-el. We can't really have a discussion if you don't know what I (or even just Christians in general) believe.
    and yes i saw you corrected yourself after TFP pointed out your error

    @Psychic Politoed & Co:

    You guys obviously have a good discussion concerning evolution going on. Respectfully, I would appreciate it if you either took it to PM/VM, or whipped up a decent, thoughtful OP so it would have its own thread. I don't see how that discussion is relevant to the OP.

  8. #308
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Shiver Star
    Posts
    2,136

    Default

    I really hated the blackout that southern California faced last night, because I couldn't post.

    True or false? If you don't accept Jesus as the son of God, then you don't accept the Bible as true.
    We can all agree that the second generation was either Pokémon's Golden Age or its Silver Age.

    Black and White gave me a theory that the Pokémon world and the Mother world are one in the same.

    Werster is without a doubt the Pokémon Master.

  9. #309
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    1,117

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by mattj View Post
    I'll get to the rest when we get back, but this quote really made me el-oh-el. We can't really have a discussion if you don't know what I (or even just Christians in general) believe.
    and yes i saw you corrected yourself after TFP pointed out your error
    I made a mistake with naming something because I was tired, therefore my entire arguement is invalid. Grats.

    I edited something within my post directly after posting last night because TFP made a post as I was in the process of responding to you, but not after TFP's post today. (Much like how I just edited this post to add the white background comment and this tidbit of info). I'm not sure if that is the "edit" you refer to. As far as I know, my mistake is still there for all to see because I am not douchey enough to do what you are accusing me of.

    Check yoself before you wreck yoself.

    O btw, I use a white background (for next time)
    Last edited by bel9; 9th September 2011 at 11:17 PM.

  10. #310
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    In your mind
    Posts
    3,869

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by mattj View Post

    @Psychic Politoed & Co:

    You guys obviously have a good discussion concerning evolution going on. Respectfully, I would appreciate it if you either took it to PM/VM, or whipped up a decent, thoughtful OP so it would have its own thread. I don't see how that discussion is relevant to the OP.
    I'm sorry, I guess I got a little bit "sidetracked".

    However, mattj, I did give you a response when you said something along the lines of "The Bible is not supported by physical evidence". I responded that the physical evidence is there, but it isn't going to prove the Bible as valid. I would suggest you see my original response to get the 411.
    It's clear to me. Orre, Unova and Kalos proves it. Pokemon is running out of Japan!
    3DS friend code: 2148-8189-4401 (Rock Type) Nosepass/Pupitar/Barbaracle
    Dream Code: 5400-2204-6955

  11. #311

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by marioguy View Post
    I really hated the blackout that southern California faced last night, because I couldn't post.
    Thank God for blackouts.
    Quote Originally Posted by marioguy View Post
    True or false? If you don't accept Jesus as the son of God, then you don't accept the Bible as true.
    False. For the love of God. Many secular people, Jews, Muslims and others believe that the Bible is inspired of God. They accept and reject certain parts, and interpret certain parts differently, just like normal Christians do. Seriously man. Drop it.

    Quote Originally Posted by belbackinblack View Post
    I'm not sure if that is the "edit" you refer to. As far as I know, my mistake is still there for all to see because I am not douchey enough to do what you are accusing me of.

    Check yoself before you wreck yoself.

    O btw, I use a white background (for next time)
    Oh, not edit, "correct". You corrected yourself in a later post.

    Quote Originally Posted by Psychic Politoed View Post
    However, mattj, I did give you a response when you said something along the lines of "The Bible is not supported by physical evidence". I responded that the physical evidence is there, but it isn't going to prove the Bible as valid. I would suggest you see my original response to get the 411.
    Oh! Heehee! I think you misread that post. I definitely didn't say that "The Bible is not supported by physical evidence." I said that the J, E, D, P hypothesis was based completely and entirely from beginning to end on complete assumption with not a single shred of physical evidence to support it. It's about as credible a conspiracy theory as when any conservative claims that the APA is secretly a corrupt liberal organization bent on subverting our culture.

  12. #312
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    where do you think i live
    Posts
    127

    Default

    i dont believe in one religion being right over the other one..i like the way gandhi said it..it doesnt matter what religion you are as long as god is being taught/being worshipped and you are a nice person(that includes any style of worshipping)..people ask me

    sometimes about what religion i am and all i can say is was gandhi said..of course these arnt his exact words but that the underlining meaning of what he was talking about..and no the bible has no legitimate place in modern society..thats why there is seperation of

    church and state in the usa(even though the president swears by it at the ignagural (spelling?)speech and when in court you swear on the bible)ahh america
    DRAGONITE
    Dream team:     Spoiler:- thanks:
        Spoiler:- thanks:
        Spoiler:- thanks:
    [IMG]http://i52.*******.com/rjmtxt.png[/IMG]    Spoiler:- click it..if you dare:

    (if you are some of the people who want a game where YOU get to choose YOUR own destiny and can make YOUR own decisions, then add this to YOUR signature)....started by me but you dont have to put my name down if you dont wanna

  13. #313
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    In your mind
    Posts
    3,869

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by mattj View Post
    Oh! Heehee! I think you misread that post. I definitely didn't say that "The Bible is not supported by physical evidence." I said that the J, E, D, P hypothesis was based completely and entirely from beginning to end on complete assumption with not a single shred of physical evidence to support it. It's about as credible a conspiracy theory as when any conservative claims that the APA is secretly a corrupt liberal organization bent on subverting our culture.
    Maybe I was more nitpicking on how you said it than exactly what you said.

    I would say that your simile is a bit off. I wouldn't say the Bible is the epitome of credible. However, a conspiracy theory doesn't measure against anything, not even against a book with historical flaws. It is a text written sometime before our time, and though anybody in the clergy could mess with it, which I'm sure it was, the text was still conceived by well literate people. A conspiracy theory is a word of mouth that spreads and its nature is completely different from the Bible. Thus, comparing the two would be a bit off.

    As I said earlier in this thread, the Bible is more of a piece in philosophical debate than anything. Science is science, and religion is religion.
    It's clear to me. Orre, Unova and Kalos proves it. Pokemon is running out of Japan!
    3DS friend code: 2148-8189-4401 (Rock Type) Nosepass/Pupitar/Barbaracle
    Dream Code: 5400-2204-6955

  14. #314
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Shiver Star
    Posts
    2,136

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by mattj View Post
    Thank Din for blackouts.False. For the love of Nayru. Many secular people, Jews, Muslims and others believe that the Bible is inspired of God. They accept and reject certain parts, and interpret certain parts differently, just like normal Christians do. Seriously man. Drop it.
    Rejecting one part of something is the same thing rejecting the whole of something. Especially because non-Christians reject the main point of the Bible. Imagine there was a history book that was historically accurate for the most part, but then it mentions that George Washington was actually a cyborg sent from the future to ensure America won the revolutionary war. You'd think the history book is false regardless of what truth it has in other parts.
    We can all agree that the second generation was either Pokémon's Golden Age or its Silver Age.

    Black and White gave me a theory that the Pokémon world and the Mother world are one in the same.

    Werster is without a doubt the Pokémon Master.

  15. #315
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    In a fortune cookie.
    Posts
    10

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by mattj View Post
    Oh! Heehee! I think you misread that post. I definitely didn't say that "The Bible is not supported by physical evidence." I said that the J, E, D, P hypothesis was based completely and entirely from beginning to end on complete assumption with not a single shred of physical evidence to support it. It's about as credible a conspiracy theory as when any conservative claims that the APA is secretly a corrupt liberal organization bent on subverting our culture.
    I like how you said conservatives accusing liberals when the media is almost completely liberal (yes, minus the hated fox news) and constantly flames republicans.

    Any way, swearing on the bible is more like a custom. If we elected a Jewish president, they would get to choose what to swear on. If we elected an athiest/secular person (which, seeing the decline in religion in the USA, I wouldn't be surprised if that is soon), they could choose Green Eggs and Ham, it honestly doesn't matter.

    Religion has NO place in politics, though. All religions boil down to do unto others as they would do unto you. Would you treat a gay man the way he would treat you? Just leave out the religion, and keep this message.
    I've got the sun in the morning and the moon at night
    [IMG]http://i53.*******.com/b88rqh.png[/IMG]
    Black FC: 0432 7790 8501

    Credit to Mew_ for the smudge banner!!

  16. #316

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Psychic Politoed View Post
    Maybe I was more nitpicking on how you said it than exactly what you said.

    I would say that your simile is a bit off. I wouldn't say the Bible is the epitome of credible. However, a conspiracy theory doesn't measure against anything, not even against a book with historical flaws. It is a text written sometime before our time, and though anybody in the clergy could mess with it, which I'm sure it was, the text was still conceived by well literate people. A conspiracy theory is a word of mouth that spreads and its nature is completely different from the Bible. Thus, comparing the two would be a bit off.

    As I said earlier in this thread, the Bible is more of a piece in philosophical debate than anything. Science is science, and religion is religion.
    Oh, lol, I think you misunderstood me yet again. The J, E, D, P hypothesis is what I was comparing to a baseless conspiracy theory, not the Bible.
    Quote Originally Posted by marioguy View Post
    Rejecting one part of something is the same thing rejecting the whole of something. Especially because non-Christians reject the main point of the Bible.
    You may believe that if a person rejects one part of the Bible, they reject it all. That's your opinion. If you personally want to believe that anyone who rejects, or ignores, any one part of the Bible rejects the whole of the Bible, feel free to think that way. Meanwhile, millions upon millions of people will reject or ignore certain parts of it, and still accept it's authority in some form or another.

    This silly spat boils down to me sharing info that supports the idea that more people than just Christians accept the Bible at least in some parts and in some fashion, and you saying "I disagree" i.e. "NUH-UH". There's nothing more to say. I really am done here. I'd appreciate it if you moved on.
    Last edited by mattj; 10th September 2011 at 3:07 AM.

  17. #317
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Shiver Star
    Posts
    2,136

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by mattj View Post
    You may believe that if a person rejects one part of the Bible, they reject it all. That's your opinion. If you personally want to believe that anyone who rejects, or ignores, any one part of the Bible rejects the whole of the Bible, feel free to think that way. Meanwhile, millions upon millions of people will reject or ignore certain parts of it, and still accept it's authority in some form or another.
    So, do you accept the Qu'ran as true?
    We can all agree that the second generation was either Pokémon's Golden Age or its Silver Age.

    Black and White gave me a theory that the Pokémon world and the Mother world are one in the same.

    Werster is without a doubt the Pokémon Master.

  18. #318

    Default

    I can't think of any one part of the Quaran that I know of that I agree with, and I absolutely do not believe it is inspired by the same God who inspired the Bible.

    There is nothing to discuss here. Stop trolling this thread.
    Last edited by mattj; 10th September 2011 at 3:19 PM.

  19. #319
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Inna House... With Cable!!!
    Posts
    3,829

    Default

    An interesting perspective mattj. You believe your holy book is right and true, yet a different book of holy truths is not at all believable. How is one religious source book more accurate than another? Plus on top of that, if you can pick and choose which holy tome is worth referencing in an argument why cannot a Muslim quote the Qurʾān to counter your "truth/fact"? After all, to them they are quoting their deities words right?

    So true!

  20. #320
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    511

    Default

    Quite simply, no. Perhaps the bible/whatever religious book you care to quote has some insights on morality or how to live your life well, but taking anything for fact just because it is in that book would be stupid. Eg. If the bible told you to go jump off a cliff would you do it?


    Sig credit: Extroph. I still love you Azu!! And pkmnfn for the userbar :3

    Psychotic Revolution Xat

    (01:20:25) *** Your rank in Standard OU is 139/49693 [1341 points / 99 battles]! *I suck at laddering*

  21. #321

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Malanu View Post
    ...yet a different book of holy truths is not at all believable...
    ...if you can pick and choose which holy tome is worth referencing in an argument why cannot a Muslim quote the Qurʾān to counter your "truth/fact"?
    Where did I say either of those things? I don't accept the Quaran as authoritative for various reasons that are not pertinent to this thread. I completely agree that the Quaran is believed by millions of good, reasonable people, and has had a profound effect on history and the world. I completely agree that it has a place in any debate where it has something pertinent to say.

  22. #322
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Inna House... With Cable!!!
    Posts
    3,829

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by mattj View Post
    Where did I say either of those things? I don't accept the Quaran as authoritative for various reasons that are not pertinent to this thread. I completely agree that the Quaran is believed by millions of good, reasonable people, and has had a profound effect on history and the world. I completely agree that it has a place in any debate where it has something pertinent to say.
    My apologies for misunderstanding your argument. That is also quite open minded of you.

    So true!

  23. #323
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Shiver Star
    Posts
    2,136

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by mattj View Post
    Where did I say either of those things? I don't accept the Quaran as authoritative for various reasons that are not pertinent to this thread. I completely agree that the Quaran is believed by millions of good, reasonable people, and has had a profound effect on history and the world. I completely agree that it has a place in any debate where it has something pertinent to say.
    You just don't think it's the truth, which was exactly what I'm saying. If you believe the Qu'ran is true, you're a Muslim. If you believe the Bible is true, you're a Christian. No one believes both are true, because they contradict each other.
    We can all agree that the second generation was either Pokémon's Golden Age or its Silver Age.

    Black and White gave me a theory that the Pokémon world and the Mother world are one in the same.

    Werster is without a doubt the Pokémon Master.

  24. #324
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Temple of Time
    Posts
    945

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by mattj View Post
    Where did I say either of those things? I don't accept the Quaran as authoritative for various reasons that are not pertinent to this thread. I completely agree that the Quaran is believed by millions of good, reasonable people, and has had a profound effect on history and the world. I completely agree that it has a place in any debate where it has something pertinent to say.
    Perhaps the thread should be changed to "Does religion have a place in a debate?". Of course you can never keep religion out of debates completely.
    "Love without truth is not real love, truth without love is not real truth"
    [IMG]http://oi51.*******.com/qn1ftl.jpg[/IMG]
    Credit to Wolftamer
        Spoiler:- Quote:

  25. #325

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by marioguy View Post
    If you believe the Bible is true, you're a Christian.
    You are the densest human being alive. I will not link you again. Many people who do not at all identify as Christians accept the Bible in one form or another. Hindus, Jews, Muslims, Seculars. None of them are "quote-unquote-Christians". They don't meet any common definition of Christian, nor do they identify themselves as Christian. You can respond to this if you like, but I will not be responding again. No one cares what your petty, uninformed, personal definition of Christian is, nor what twisted, ridiculous line of logic you're trying to demonstrate from it.

    goodbye

Page 13 of 36 FirstFirst ... 39101112131415161723 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •