The reliability of Christian and Muslim texts compared

Axl888

Established
Joined
Jul 29, 2019
Messages
259
No Manama is just saying that God created the Universe :)

Scientific theories are based off empirical observation and prediction, among other things.

What Manama is saying is that these observations about the objective universe are in fact not in any way contradictory to the Muslim perspective on the matter (and I do agree with her mostly). As I mentioned way earlier here, in Islam, the doctrine of God being "Creator and Sustainer" is very literal. These are also two of the many names of God (al-Khaliq, and, Ar-Razzaq) as well.

Also, saying that she is saying that God is merely "employing such theories" is both strawmanning and missing the point.
aren't you tired of rescuing her? :)
 






manama

Star
Joined
Mar 15, 2017
Messages
3,525
OK (muslim apologetics 101 detected as always...hahaha), aren't we talking about the creation of the universe, the first 6-days according to the Book of Genesis, where God spoke everything (including natural laws) into existence...the process of birth and how trees grow are just effects of the natural laws the God put in existence during and after the 6-day creation...doesn't need big bang for that :)
And where does in the Bible say that God created the physical laws after the 6th day?

Oh my, OK so you now believe that allah employed big bang, string theory and multiverse, all three theories in creation? LOL

But then again, if one really believe in God (omnipotent and omniscient), why one's God needs big bang/string/multiverse theory to create the universe when He can just speak it into existence like the God in the Bible? And again, to me, a diety who needs to employ such theories in creation is just a weak god.

Are you sure you are not an atheist? :)
Like infinity also mentioned, i'm saying that God created the universe. And God is superior to all and so should be his "design". The theories are us trying to study that process and what we have come to know fall in lines with only one religion on earth.

So no i'm not an atheist, its because I'm not, that I can say my religion is true because its logical.
 






manama

Star
Joined
Mar 15, 2017
Messages
3,525
Christians have to discard everything we currently know about the universe in order to make it fit their genesis creation model. We have to do none of that, through Quran i understand the scientific aspect more and through science i understand the verses more. Its truly magnificent and genuinely fun.

This is why I say, that if you have to debunk the Quran as "not a holy book" feel free to point out the contradictions, which you can't though some do try useless attempts. And yet when we pull the reverse card on the challenge and use it on you, you have to try and debunk the science to fit the Bible lol.
 






manama

Star
Joined
Mar 15, 2017
Messages
3,525
Please stop using the word clock, its making you sound completely braindead regarding 8th grade physics.
 






Axl888

Established
Joined
Jul 29, 2019
Messages
259
And where does in the Bible say that God created the physical laws after the 6th day?
Not after the 6th day, it was included in the creation week.

25 This is what the Lord says: ‘If I have not made my covenant with day and night and established the laws of heaven and earth, 26 then I will reject the descendants of Jacob and David my servant and will not choose one of his sons to rule over the descendants of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. For I will restore their fortunes and have compassion on them.’” - Jeremiah 33:25-26
 






manama

Star
Joined
Mar 15, 2017
Messages
3,525
Not after the 6th day, it was included in the creation week.

25 This is what the Lord says: ‘If I have not made my covenant with day and night and established the laws of heaven and earth, 26 then I will reject the descendants of Jacob and David my servant and will not choose one of his sons to rule over the descendants of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. For I will restore their fortunes and have compassion on them.’” - Jeremiah 33:25-26
So where does the Bible say that the world was created first and the laws were established later? That verse clearly doesn't mention that it was "after".
 






Red Sky at Morning

Superstar
Joined
Mar 15, 2017
Messages
9,264
Christians have to discard everything we currently know about the universe in order to make it fit their genesis creation model. We have to do none of that, through Quran i understand the scientific aspect more and through science i understand the verses more. Its truly magnificent and genuinely fun.

This is why I say, that if you have to debunk the Quran as "not a holy book" feel free to point out the contradictions, which you can't though some do try useless attempts. And yet when we pull the reverse card on the challenge and use it on you, you have to try and debunk the science to fit the Bible lol.
As I have already stated, I suggest taking a thoroughly scientific mindset and applying it to evidence for both creation and evolution. The analysis may take some time but being aware of both accounts is a very worthwhile exercise, and may teach those who take the journey more about science, truth and logic than those who don’t bother with the effort.

As well as popular science information, Nature, Scientific American, New Scientist and National Geographic can be counted of no provide the present evolutionary account, ICR, Answers in Genesis and Creation.com provide a great resource for counter arguments from a scientific perspective.
 






manama

Star
Joined
Mar 15, 2017
Messages
3,525
As I have already stated, I suggest taking a thoroughly scientific mindset and applying it to evidence for both creation and evolution. The analysis may take some time but being aware of both accounts is a very worthwhile exercise, and may teach those who take the journey more about science, truth and logic than those who don’t bother with the effort.

As well as popular science information, Nature, Scientific American, New Scientist and National Geographic can be counted of no provide the present evolutionary account, ICR, Answers in Genesis and Creation.com provide a great resource for counter arguments from a scientific perspective.
And yet it says that astronomy doesn't work as an argument because we can't experiment. And thus the world might be 6000 years old and yet it fails to address the fact that we have bacteria on earth that are millions of years old and CAN be experimented upon.

Willful ignorance to fit a certain narrative can hardly be considered "being aware of both sides" especially when we take a scientific mindset like you said.
 






Axl888

Established
Joined
Jul 29, 2019
Messages
259
Quantum physics meets biblical imagery, explains the “Pioneer Anomaly” and indicates that gravity does interesting things to time.

Puzzled or intrigued?

For anyone interested in how distant starlight harmonises with a young earth, Dr Russell Humphries has some very interesting observations...

To be fair, all cosmologies are just theory, hypothesis, guess, conjecture if you will, nobody can actually and scientifically prove the exact beginning/origin of the universe as it is already in the past, nobody can go back to the past, either people believe on some man's guess based on his own thoughts/imagination or believe those who take the word of God according to the Scriptures by heart and then work (scientifically) and attempt to prove it (like Dr. Humphreys), your choice.

As tribute to Dr. Russel Humphreys, below is his short biography and summary of his achievements.

D. Russell Humphreys, Ph.D.
Physicist

Biography
Dr Humphreys was born on 2 February 1942 in Wyandotte, Michigan, U.S.A., and was raised in a scientifically aware but non–Christian household. Not surprisingly, Russell himself always had a love for science, and in 1959, he was one of the 40 winners of the Westinghouse National Science Talent Search.


He received a B.S. degree in physics at Duke University, 1959–1963. After this, he moved to Louisiana State University (LSU) to study postgraduate physics. In 1969, while doing his dissertation research for LSU in the mountains of Colorado, he committed his life to Christ. In 1972, he was awarded a Ph.D. in physics, on cosmic rays and ultrahigh energy nucleon–nucleon interactions, by which time he was a fully convinced creationist due to both the biblical and scientific evidence. For the next 6 years he worked in the High Voltage Laboratory of General Electric Company, designing and inventing equipment and researching high–voltage phenomena. While there, he received a U.S. patent and one of Industrial Research Magazine’s IR–100 awards.

Dr Humphreys has been married since 1963, and they have three children.

Research
Beginning in 1979 he worked for Sandia National Laboratories (New Mexico) in nuclear physics, geophysics, pulsed-power research, and theoretical atomic and nuclear physics. In 1985, he began working with Sandia’s ‘Particle Beam Fusion Project’, and was co-inventor of special laser-triggered ‘Rimfire’ high-voltage switches, now coming into wider use.


The last decade at Sandia saw greater emphasis on theoretical nuclear physics and radiation hydrodynamics in an effort to help produce the world’s first lab–scale thermonuclear fusion. Besides gaining two other U.S. patents, Dr Humphreys has been given two awards from Sandia, including an Award for Excellence for contributions to light ion–fusion target theory.

Overall, Dr Humphreys’ reseach has been very wide-ranging:

  • Designed and theoretically analyzed thermonuclear fusion targets using radiation hydrodynamic codes.
  • Designed key high-voltage parts of Sandia’s 100-Terawatt Particle Beam Fusion Accelerator II and conducted fusion power experiments on it. Same designs are in use today on Sandia’s Z machine.
  • Research on low-temperature solids and studies on superconductors.
  • Nuclear weapons projects, including stockpile engineering for W87 firing set.
  • Helped design new inkjet printer component and shared patent on it.
  • Developed high repetition-rate neutron tube driver and gamma-ray spectrometer for borehole logging applications. Patent on high-voltage power supply for it.
  • Patents on wide-bandwidth electric field sensor and high-voltage neutron tube supply. Designed lightning current waveform recorder which won IR-100 Award.
  • Studied electric fields and ion currents under ultrahigh voltage DC transmission lines.
  • Theoretical studies of relativistic velocity dependence of nuclear forces.
 






Last edited:

manama

Star
Joined
Mar 15, 2017
Messages
3,525
Every scripture has its own version of the "beginning". If i were to take one as the truth discarding all else even when it doesn't fit what we know via science, then i'd be awfully blind to not take EVERY scripture as the truth despite the fact that they too all don't fit what we know via science.
The story of Abraham teaches us to use logic when choosing faith because otherwise you are just as bias and blind like the ones astray.

By the way, Dr russell hasn't scientifically proven his hypothesis. His very reasoning behind water on earth is that "Somehow God carried it over" and he gives the time for earth creation to be 6 days again without reason. Why not 5? why not 10?
I'm not the one to take one scientist as being "Right" over a thousand others just because what he said fits my narrative, especially when the "one" can't even provide reasons.
He hasn't proven scientifically anything that he has said.

Science demands answers not "somehow God carried it over".
 






manama

Star
Joined
Mar 15, 2017
Messages
3,525
Funny enough we are just at the first 5 verses of the Bible and you already have to discard multiple branches of science and hundreds of years of knowledge and effort to prove that them to be right.
 






Robin

Veteran
Joined
Jun 26, 2019
Messages
607
And I'm not discussing it from Biblical point of view, my very point of bringing this up was that the biblical version doesn't go hand in hand with what we know through science.
But if you are going to criticise the biblical perspective then it only makes sense to look at things from a biblical perspective. "What we know" about science also tells us that random fluctuations can produce matter and energy out of nothing.

The difference is that they are saying that it just needs "physical laws" but someone had to create and put those physical laws in place. Its like saying "birth doesn't need God, you just need the necessary gametes" or "you just need a man and a woman". While the latter is true, the design and the ability must be given to the gametes by someone. Those genes have to be coded by someone.

I guess that is the difference between thinking of theists and atheists. They think of laws, we think of the very creation of those laws.
So let me ask you this: if this is the case and science is perfectly reconcilable with religion and science itself, by uncovering the laws of nature, point to the intervention or existence of a creator, then why are the vast majority of scientists atheists? Why do they still vehemently reject the possibility? Fear of accountability?

I'm not saying science is evil, I'm just saying that I don't put all my faith on it. Science in many ways has been wonderful in not only allowing for progress and innovation but also in understanding just how magnificent God's mind is in creating the world He has. But when it comes to explaining the origin of it all, the vast majority of scientists who support the Big Bang theory do not believe anything divine was necessary to spark it.

If scientists tomorrow declare that they've found the answer to the origin of the universe and it isn't God and in fact it categorically disproves the existance of God -would you cast off your faith? Because there are many atheist scientists who, like you, mock people who not only believe in a six-day creation, but creationists altogether. Legitimate question, not a jab -I genuinely want to know.
 






Robin

Veteran
Joined
Jun 26, 2019
Messages
607
Funny enough we are just at the first 5 verses of the Bible and you already have to discard multiple branches of science and hundreds of years of knowledge and effort to prove that them to be right.
From one of the greatest scientific and knowledgeable minds to comment on the issue:

"When people ask me if a god created the universe, I tell them that the question itself makes no sense. Time didn’t exist before the big bang, so there is no time for god to make the universe in. It’s like asking directions to the edge of the earth; The Earth is a sphere; it doesn’t have an edge; so looking for it is a futile exercise. We are each free to believe what we want, and it’s my view that the simplest explanation is; there is no god. No one created our universe,and no one directs our fate. This leads me to a profound realization; There is probably no heaven, and no afterlife either. We have this one life to appreciate the grand design of the universe, and for that I am extremely grateful."

-Steven Hawking
 






Red Sky at Morning

Superstar
Joined
Mar 15, 2017
Messages
9,264
And yet it says that astronomy doesn't work as an argument because we can't experiment. And thus the world might be 6000 years old and yet it fails to address the fact that we have bacteria on earth that are millions of years old and CAN be experimented upon.

Willful ignorance to fit a certain narrative can hardly be considered "being aware of both sides" especially when we take a scientific mindset like you said.
Are the bacteria dated by the supposed age of the rock layers by any chance?
 






Red Sky at Morning

Superstar
Joined
Mar 15, 2017
Messages
9,264
From one of the greatest scientific and knowledgeable minds to comment on the issue:

"When people ask me if a god created the universe, I tell them that the question itself makes no sense. Time didn’t exist before the big bang, so there is no time for god to make the universe in. It’s like asking directions to the edge of the earth; The Earth is a sphere; it doesn’t have an edge; so looking for it is a futile exercise. We are each free to believe what we want, and it’s my view that the simplest explanation is; there is no god. No one created our universe,and no one directs our fate. This leads me to a profound realization; There is probably no heaven, and no afterlife either. We have this one life to appreciate the grand design of the universe, and for that I am extremely grateful."

-Steven Hawking
I find it interesting that Biblical “Higher Criticism”, Marxism and Evolution all emerged around the same period. It is almost as if the world were ready to embrace an anti-God philosophy, and just needed the right political, scientific, philosophical and religious mix to achieve dominance within culture.

As nobody has successfully engaged with Dr James Tour’s questions on the viability of Abiogenesis, I think his voice has a place in this kind of discussion:-

 






Robin

Veteran
Joined
Jun 26, 2019
Messages
607
I find it interesting that Biblical “Higher Criticism”, Marxism and Evolution all emerged around the same period. It is almost as if the world were ready to embrace an anti-God philosophy, and just needed the right political, scientific, philosophical and religious mix to achieve dominance within culture.

As nobody has successfully engaged with Dr James Tour’s questions on the viability of Abiogenesis, I think his voice has a place in this kind of discussion:-

Exactly. A world emancipated from the idea of a creator is unfettered by the idea of accountability.
 






manama

Star
Joined
Mar 15, 2017
Messages
3,525
Are the bacteria dated by the supposed age of the rock layers by any chance?
Nope, by the colonies and spores formed.

But if you are going to criticise the biblical perspective then it only makes sense to look at things from a biblical perspective. "What we know" about science also tells us that random fluctuations can produce matter and energy out of nothing.
LOL why would I criticize the biblical perspective through biblical perspective. That makes no sense, we are criticizing scientific facts not contradictions in the text, which i did before and still havent received an answer for.
If a hindu tells me that sun is God, im not going to look at the hindu texts for it when i can tell that a giant ball of gas can't be God.

From one of the greatest scientific and knowledgeable minds to comment on the issue:

"When people ask me if a god created the universe, I tell them that the question itself makes no sense. Time didn’t exist before the big bang, so there is no time for god to make the universe in. It’s like asking directions to the edge of the earth; The Earth is a sphere; it doesn’t have an edge; so looking for it is a futile exercise. We are each free to believe what we want, and it’s my view that the simplest explanation is; there is no god. No one created our universe,and no one directs our fate. This leads me to a profound realization; There is probably no heaven, and no afterlife either. We have this one life to appreciate the grand design of the universe, and for that I am extremely grateful."

-Steven Hawking
I hope you do realize what you just posted, goes against what you and red have been trying to tell me regarding the 6 days thing lol
 






Top