Boy has Arabic script from the Koran appear on skin

[Tuahaa]

Tuahaa... Let me rephrase... If your going to present scientific arguments you have to prove to us that you are a scientist with credible research and publications to back up your claims.. second.. if you are going to argue with a NON religious person you need to answer your questions without using Religious texts and argue with reason, since a non religious person does not hold religious texts to a high standard.

He said that Religion and Science have nothing to do with each other. How can I prove him wrong without referring to religious text?

So you are saying that while the Bible has been proved wrong by science, we shouldn't take heed to it because apparently the Bible isn't important to Christianity?

copy pasting your answer from a religious scripture is not going to answer the other persons question.

I don't see any other way to show Islam in the light of science other than referring to Qur'an. I'm sorry I made you angry- there is obviously no answer...

 

[justanobserver]

Such as?

Evolution

You're just presenting your scriptures and deriving a meaning which fits your agenda.

eg :

And God has created every animal from water: of them there are some that creep on their bellies; some that walk on two legs; and some that walk on four. God creates what He wills for verily God has power over all things.

and you go on to say

Oh, and if you didn't know, the first life on earth was on water and out of it God made other animals

errr wait, didn't your scripture mean that a guy with a beard 'created' or rather 'crafted' any animal of of water ?

But your reply will be ' Oh but that's the shallow interpretation, what it really means is '

With this line of argument, I can even prove that Scientology is the most scientific religion ( heck it has aliens, sci fi ! )

So you are saying that while the Bible has been proved wrong by science

What do you mean by 'proved' wrong? You mean to say Bible is the equivalent of a course in basic science and that the earth is 6000 years old ? In that sense yes, but the propose of religious books is to teach good moral values, so the Bible is sill 'right'

 

[Tuahaa]

An observation, but why is it that all this creationist mumbo jumbo an issue with Abrahamic (no disrespect intended) religions ?

I mean even in America they have creationism as an alternative to Darwinism in their schools !

Because in America, Christianity is the main religion and during the middle ages its priests heavily 'edited' the Bible to fit in theories of that time. Obviously, these theories have been proven wrong by modern science and hence, America has no option other than to accept Darwinism while trying to preserve christianity.

 

[Speaker]

Such as?

Oh really? Did they know of iron fossils? Did they practice embryology that is only just been made accurate by the latest equipment?

You answered your question yourself. In the previous post you said that the scientific theory of evolution does not agree with your faith, and so it must be incorrect. And then you go on to talk about iron fossils and embryology since that is (supposedly) mentioned in your religious text. Do you get the point?

I am sorry, as I Muslim I cannot leave it separate. I am told I must not have blind faith. Without proving my religion with science, how else can I not have blind faith?

Again, link: :: Quran and Science ::- - - - - - -:: Islam and science :: Scientific miracles in the holy Quran:: Convert to Islam::

Sure, have all the faith you want. But don't start posing as a scientific thinker when you want to follow religion to the word. All religions have pretty embarrassing gaffes when analyzed scientifically, and those "stories" are present for various political reasons. So please don't share some links of a religion-based website.

 

[justanobserver]

This 'proving religion with science' is just a new gimmick to convert more people and to reassure the oldies that their faith now comes with a seal of 'science' , so no need to turn into them damned atheists.

Zakir Naik is one cunning chap

 

[Tuahaa]

This 'proving religion with science' is just a new gimmick to convert more people and to reassure the oldies that their faith now comes with a seal of 'science' , so no need to turn into them damned atheists.

Zakir Naik is one cunning chap

Have you ever listened to his lectures? Then how can you say anything? Saying this is like saying that the sun and the moon don't run in orbit, that embryos aren't formed like they are, like rain clouds aren't formed like how science says they are. Your claim is not back with proof, while the verses I cited are. So end of argument.

 

[Tuahaa]

You answered your question yourself. In the previous post you said that the scientific theory of evolution does not agree with your faith, and so it must be incorrect. And then you go on to talk about iron fossils and embryology since that is (supposedly) mentioned in your religious text. Do you get the point?

You want quotes from the Qur'an? I don't 'supposedly' think Qur'an mentions these things, I know they do. I have read it all.

Sure, have all the faith you want. But don't start posing as a scientific thinker when you want to follow religion to the word. All religions have pretty embarrassing gaffes when analyzed scientifically, and those "stories" are present for various political reasons. So please don't share some links of a religion-based website.

Oh dear. You are adamant on the fact that science and religion don't go together. Disprove Qur'anic science and I'll believe you. There.

---------- Post added at 06:18 PM ---------- Previous post was at 06:17 PM ----------

Evolution

You're just presenting your scriptures and deriving a meaning which fits your agenda.

eg :

and you go on to say

errr wait, didn't your scripture mean that a guy with a beard 'created' or rather 'crafted' any animal of of water ?

But your reply will be ' Oh but that's the shallow interpretation, what it really means is '

It says 'created', not 'crafted'.

With this line of argument, I can even prove that Scientology is the most scientific religion ( heck it has aliens, sci fi ! )

Your argument doesn't make sense though

What do you mean by 'proved' wrong? You mean to say Bible is the equivalent of a course in basic science and that the earth is 6000 years old ? In that sense yes, but the propose of religious books is to teach good moral values, so the Bible is sill 'right'

But all religious books claim to be from God, no? Then only the authentic one can be correct- and when I mean authentic, I mean one which science can prove and each law has a reason.

 

[Tuahaa]

There was no 'argument' to begin with, to argue you need an open mind.

As far as I know none of you have even read my argument. You just dismiss it with the belief that science cannot be related to religion. You have not presented any points to counter my argument except that "Religion is good, but science is fact" or something along those lines. Sorry dude, afaik my argument is indeed real.

 

[Speaker]

You want quotes from the Qur'an? I don't 'supposedly' think Qur'an mentions these things, I know they do. I have read it all.

Oh dear. You are adamant on the fact that science and religion don't go together. Disprove Qur'anic science and I'll believe you. There.

Here's the thing Tuahaa. For every such few "scientific" facts that you can dig up from the Quran, there will be a thousand that make your assertion look silly. My grandmom used to convince me the same way about Hinduism, with equally compelling examples and stories. But I used to point out that there are many examples where it does not agree with science.

Science concurring with your religion on one occasion, and completely opposite on all other does not mean faith is scientific. Faith is personal, and relevant to self-discipline and general morals. Please stop quoting it as a scientific text.

 

[justanobserver]

@Tuhaha
The last time I presented some 'facts' about superstitions in Islam I was banned, so sorry you'll have to do all the hard work.

 

[Speaker]

As far as I know none of you have even read my argument. You just dismiss it with the belief that science cannot be related to religion. You have not presented any points to counter my argument except that "Religion is good, but science is fact" or something along those lines. Sorry dude, afaik my argument is indeed real.

Tuahaa, your arguments are not new, and this is not the first time I am hearing this from another person. Everyone likes to believe that their religion or faith is scientific, yet do not have factual evidence for everything they believe. Every child believes his/her Daddy is the strongest, yet there is no scientific basis for that claim.

Let me ask you to this - are you willing to state that everything the Quran says can be analyzed scientifically? I mean everything, not just a few facts thrown in. Assuming of course that you will not dismiss off disagreements as propaganda.

 

[Agnostic_Indian]

Have you ever listened to his lectures? Then how can you say anything? Saying this is like saying that the sun and the moon don't run in orbit, that embryos aren't formed like they are, like rain clouds aren't formed like how science says they are. Your claim is not back with proof, while the verses I cited are. So end of argument.

I watched his debate with dr. Cambel and i was very much impressed by naik's knowledge and but later i read articles which proved dr. zakir ali naik was wrong. If you are intrusted to learn can also google for it.

 

[Ahmad]

@Tuahaa, lets leave this issue. Beliefe is belief and leave it as is. You cant prove the miracles of Jesus(AS), Moses(AS), Mohammad(PBUH) and others scientifically.

 

[Luftwaffe]

Durran3...So does that make a non religious person to be correct in the first place by default? that is plain nonsense.

It would depend on the subject of science, there are many scientific answers to scientific questions The Religious Book that you're asking others to to refrain from and that would again be a plain stupid if the question is answered right from The Book but the negativity towards it is keeping someone away from believing in that scientific answer/solution.

I am sure even you consult books before preparing for a debate to prove your points merely logic doesn't work without study and research have you done your home work? Have you done you credible research/publications? I find your statements contradictory and there is no reason why someone without publications can't go for a debate I am sure that person would always do a research.

Lastly the copy paste argument. Please even atheists, scientists keep the copy paste or written stuff for their debates its no big deal and it is a part of research even researchers keep copies of thesis research thesis do you want them to throw it.

PS: i would be interested in having a debate with you off this forum perhaps on YM! would you agree.

 

[Unbeliever]

I can't believe some people here are actually taking this seriously.

Do you believe in witches, demons, fairies and angels too? I mean that they actually exist and intervene in our world and are not symbols or metaphors? Do you think magic is real? How about Vampires and Werewolves?

Which century are we living in again?