Religions

[Bungle_Bear]

Does it matter if the passage is talking about the USA or Peru? either way, you would accuse me of adding to the Bible, wouldn't you?

You say: "maybe USA or Peru".

I say: "some European nation".

What's the difference?

Either way, "adding to the Bible" is a false accusation.

I say "maybe" you say "definitely". That's adding to the Bible.

 

[juvenissun]

Not that I can tell. But neither does the NT.

An addition (I think) is that the god of the Koran creates the animals from water (Adam is created from clay).

Sura 24:45

Allah has created every [living] creature from water. And of them are those that move on their bellies, and of them are those that walk on two legs, and of them are those that walk on four. Allah creates what He wills. Indeed, Allah is over all things competent.

I just showed that the Koran describes more about how the animals were created. I would count that as a footnote. Another example would be that the Koran describes its god as creating "the seven heavens".

Sura 2:29

It is He who created for you all of that which is on the earth. Then He directed Himself to the heaven, [His being above all creation], and made them seven heavens, and He is Knowing of all things.

Whereas you have offered:

This does not even describe the act of creation, much less tell us anything about it. It is simply a reference to 'the beginning of time'. This does not say very much about creationism.

Thanks. That is nice. And is very interesting. In Genesis or in the Bible, God does not say clearly what does He use to create animals. And the description of more than one Heaven is eye opening.

I would count them as true descriptions of creation. But why are they scattered pieces of information and are scattered in different Sura(s)? In comparison, Genesis 1 is complete and is far more beautiful.

The verse of I Peter 1 explains the relationship between the creation and Lord Jesus. This is not clearly said in Genesis.

To thank you for the verses in koran, here is another one:

I Peter 4:19 Wherefore let them that suffer according to the will of God commit the keeping of their souls to him in well doing, as unto a faithful Creator.

This one explains the nature of the creator, and our relationship with the creator. God creates human with a special purpose. This is hinted in Genesis 1, and is elaborated in Genesis 2.

 

[AV1611VET]

I say "maybe" you say "definitely". That's adding to the Bible.

So let me get this straight.

You think one of the ten toes of Daniel 2 "might be" the USA or Peru; and anyone who says it is an European nation from the breakup of the Roman empire is "adding to the Bible" ... is that it?

Suit yourself.

 

[Queller]

That's because for most Christians/creationists the Bible is not enough, that's why they argue against evolution and keep looking for Noah's Ark, they can not sit quietly and free good about what they believe they must all try to prove to themselves and every one else that there is no doubt that what they believe is true, how can they not? who in their right mind would believe something that was not true? with no supporting evidence they are caught in a vicious trap.

I do not agree the above applies to "most" Christians. Not even close. YECs are a vocal minority.

The stories in the Bible are told to the young and some of them accept them as fact but most just can not come to terms with them and deep down don't believe them, they however see what it means to their parents so they try as hard as they can to believe them in order to please them, everyone around them says the stories are true [even the people who do not believe them] so they can at least tell themselves there must be something to the stories even if they are not fully committed to believing them.

I'm sorry, it's hard to parse this run-on sentence. I'm not sure what you're trying to say.

 

[Queller]

Meaning, in other words, you've never heard it before?

That's usually the first thing I think of when I get accused of "adding to the Bible".

What they're really saying is: "I never heard that before."

The Antichrist will indeed come from a ten-nation European confederacy.

Please provide Biblical support for this claim.

You call it "adding to the Bible;" we call it "basic doctrine."

I call it making it up as you go along.

If you were to just Google it (and I find it hard to believe you and Queller didn't), I think you'd find I didn't make it up -- whether you believe what comes up or not.

Why in the world should I Google some random claim you made?

But it's much easier to accuse someone of just "adding to the Bible," isn't it?

If the truth fits...

 

[Queller]

That is an evolutional idea.

Umm, hello? Prajapati created the egg. That makes it creationism.

 

[Queller]

Just below where it talks about Babylon, Medo-Persia, the Greek empire, then the Roman empire.

Then post the specific verses you think talk about Europe.

 

[AV1611VET]

Then post the specific verses you think talk about Europe.

Sure thing.

QV please

 

[essentialsaltes]

But why are they scattered pieces of information and are scattered in different Sura(s)? In comparison, Genesis 1 is complete and is far more beautiful.

Yes, but as I've mentioned, Islam accepts Judaism and the Torah, just as Christianity does. Why are the NT scriptures you've mentioned so scattered, and don't even mention much of the creation process? In comparison, the Koran at least copies (and expands) the Genesis narrative of creation.

The verse of I Peter 1 explains the relationship between the creation and Lord Jesus. This is not clearly said in Genesis.

That's because the Israelites didn't know anything about Jesus. Just adding Jesus name does not tell us anything about creationism.

here is another one:

I Peter 4:19 Wherefore let them that suffer according to the will of God commit the keeping of their souls to him in well doing, as unto a faithful Creator.

All that says is that the god of the NT is the creator. That doesn't say very much at all.

Really, if that's the best you got, it's clear that the Koran is more creationist than the New Testament.

 

[juvenissun]

Yes, but as I've mentioned, Islam accepts Judaism and the Torah, just as Christianity does. Why are the NT scriptures you've mentioned so scattered, and don't even mention much of the creation process? In comparison, the Koran at least copies (and expands) the Genesis narrative of creation.

That's because the Israelites didn't know anything about Jesus. Just adding Jesus name does not tell us anything about creationism.

All that says is that the god of the NT is the creator. That doesn't say very much at all.

Really, if that's the best you got, it's clear that the Koran is more creationist than the New Testament.

First, your arguments totally missed the point. The creation in "Christianity" is completely described in Genesis 1.

Whatever related to creation mentioned in the NT are supplements and annotations of the creationism. As I said, John 1 and the Book of Hebrews give excellent remarks to creationism. You should read at least the first few verses of John 1.

What I quoted you are scattered pieces of verses that ALSO explain creation. The NT describes all the divinity of Lord Jesus. There is a need to related Lord Jesus, who is God, to the creationism. That is what all the related NT verses are doing.

The two verses I quoted you address two pieces of information about creationism. There are MANY others. You asked for one, I gave you two. What else do you want? If you like, I can find another one for you, easily.

 

[juvenissun]

Umm, hello? Prajapati created the egg. That makes it creationism.

Which verse in koran is that?

 

[Standing_Ultraviolet]

Tell me this, people that believe in evolution, if you disagree with creationists so much, why is Christianity the only religion thats hated?

Honestly, I don't hate Christianity. I wouldn't be on this forum if I did. I have issues with certain strands of Christianity, like the fundamentalist schools of thought that seriously hurt me and do the same to many other people. In general, though, most of us address Christianity because it's:

1.) The dominant religion in Anglophone countries, where most of us live.

and

2.) One of very few religions with an active component stressing strict creationism.

The second is important, because very few Hindus are actively opposed to evolution, and while some Muslims find human evolution problematic, the topic isn't really much of an issue in Islam (Iran even teaches evolution in its textbooks, although admittedly without a focus on human evolution).

and why do people only Use Jesus's name as a swear word and no one else's name?

A lot of it has to do with historical factors. Most of the uses of God's name without any actual meaning behind it actually started out as short "prayers" in response to extreme occasions and lost their meaning through frequent repetition. Others, like the more extreme "GD" use, are offensive because they were originally literal attempts to ask God to condemn someone to Hell.

why do people hate christianity so much but not muslims?

If it helps at all, I view Islam as inflicting more damage than Christianity on women and other marginalized or minority groups in the present day. Both religions have both good and bad, but Islam has more of the destructive strands.

so you are trying to get us Christians to disprove evolution for you?
So you basicly are always asking US to disprove it for you, while you ignore every other religion, as I said before sense you do this YOU know there is truth in the Bible, and that it is the WORD OF GOD, but you want evolution disproved, even though you know its false already.

If you have evidence that evolution is untrue other than literalist Biblical interpretations and the easily disclaimed arguments that populate Answers in Genesis and the Institute for Creation Research, I suggest that you get it published. If you actually manage to do that, I can guarantee that you will win enough prizes to literally swim in money and trophies like a human version of Scrooge McDuck.

Alot of you will disagree with what I just wrote, but every athiest/evolutionist I've seen shows that they do believe in the word of God/The Bible, if you didn't you would just ignore it, and you would also attack other religions other then Christianity.

A lot of non-religious individuals outside of the U.S. do just ignore Christianity and tend to have harsher impressions of Islam (sometimes for some very bad reasons, but that's neither here nor there). In the United States, though, it's virtually impossible to ignore religion. It's a force here, both positive and negative. If you're an open atheist in France, no one cares. If you're an open atheist in Georgia, someone might seriously hurt you.

 

[essentialsaltes]

First, your arguments totally missed the point. The creation in "Christianity" is completely described in Genesis 1.

Fine, the creation in "Islam" is completely described in Genesis 1.

I still maintain (and the evidence in this thread so far shows) that the Koran has more specific references to creation than the NT.

And yet you somehow have suggested that the Koran is evolutionary. Why do you think so?

 

[essentialsaltes]

Which verse in koran is that?

You're losing it. Prajapati is from Hinduism.

Prajapati produced the universe and all its beings"

 

[Bungle_Bear]

So let me get this straight.

You think one of the ten toes of Daniel 2 "might be" the USA or Peru; and anyone who says it is an European nation from the breakup of the Roman empire is "adding to the Bible" ... is that it?

Suit yourself.

Given that a) you don't know the reference is to the Roman Empire and b) much of the Roman Empire wasn't European then yes, stating that it definitely refers to Europe is "adding to the Bible".

 

[AV1611VET]

Given that a) you don't know the reference is to the Roman Empire and b) much of the Roman Empire wasn't European then yes, stating that it definitely refers to Europe is "adding to the Bible".

Google is your friend ... let's let it end here.

Unless your goal is to keep on assuming I'm adding to the Bible, in which case Google is your enemy.

 

[Bungle_Bear]

Google is your friend ... let's let it end here.

Unless your goal is to keep on assuming I'm adding to the Bible, in which case Google is your enemy.

Google is, indeed my friend but apparently not your friend. It tells me (quite rightly) that there are several conflicting interpretations of that passage. Therefore, anyone who states categorically "this is what the Bible says" is adding to the Bible.

Thank you for playing

FYI - there are only 7 monarchies in Europe. That would make it impossible for the Antichrist to come from a confederation of 10 European kingdoms.

But don't let reality get in the way of your religion

 

[juvenissun]

Fine, the creation in "Islam" is completely described in Genesis 1.

I still maintain (and the evidence in this thread so far shows) that the Koran has more specific references to creation than the NT.

And yet you somehow have suggested that the Koran is evolutionary. Why do you think so?

I said that based only on the one verse you quoted. Any idea of having something "from" something else is evolutional. I guess this is one of the major problem in Hinduism. In Christianity, even angels are created individually (this mystery is not mentioned in Genesis 1)

Islam does not want to copy Genesis 1 to the koran. But it does not have a version of its own. Nevertheless, it has to say something about creation. So, it mentioned pieces of Biblical creation information whenever, wherever it is needed. That is what I think.

When compared with other religions, I am surprised that Christianity has so much more content about creation. It is very very hard to give any detail of creation and not to cause problems to the rest of the theology. I think that is why almost all other religions keep their mouth tight about creationism.

 

[Queller]

Sure thing.

QV please

That doesn't link to any Bible verses, just your post. I figured as much.

 

[Queller]

Which verse in koran is that?

Are you confused now? Prajapati is a Hindu deity and has nothing to do with Islam.