1Man&hisBMW Posted July 31, 2006 Share Posted July 31, 2006 . In fact if you look through science history stretching back over 100 years, not a single major scientist has every come out and said that there is no deity. Don't want to lose their jobs and the generous 'research' budgets now do they! That WOULD be a no brainer! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kay_cee Posted July 31, 2006 Share Posted July 31, 2006 Oh dear. The Forum's resident 'defenders of Islam' seem to be ignoring my reference to the infamous 'Satanic Verses' which I posted earlier. Where for a time, (according to Islamic history) Muhammed was duped by Satan, caved in to the pressure from the idol worshipping Quraysh tribe and 'received' this verse where he said it was basically fine to worship - well 'idols' - the female deities of the day; 'Allat', 'Al uzza' and 'Manat'. Are none of you going to offer a rebuttal? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
plekhanov Posted July 31, 2006 Share Posted July 31, 2006 In fact if you look through science history stretching back over 100 years, not a single major scientist has every come out and said that there is no deity. In fact if you look at science history it has been a debate through relativity, general relativity and now string theory. But amazingly you have solved this problem? I take it you don't consider confirmed athiests like Richard Dawkins & Nobel Laureates such as Francis Crick & Steven Weinberg to be major scientists. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
plekhanov Posted July 31, 2006 Share Posted July 31, 2006 Oh dear. The Forum's resident 'defenders of Islam' seem to be ignoring my reference to the infamous 'Satanic Verses' which I posted earlier. Where for a time, (according to Islamic history) Muhammed was duped by Satan, caved in to the pressure from the idol worshipping Quraysh tribe and 'received' this verse where he said it was basically fine to worship - well 'idols' - the female deities of the day; 'Allat', 'Al uzza' and 'Manat'. Are none of you going to offer a rebuttal? How is this supposed to be relevant to a discussion on whether or not the Koran is compatible with modern science? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1Man&hisBMW Posted July 31, 2006 Share Posted July 31, 2006 Rzaa I wouldn't bother if Kay_cee struggles to answer it you'll get a reply along these lines. Fox news; Fair and Balanced, The No Spin Zone. Why would you need to say "unbiased"? And before answering questions about Islam maybe you should answer some about your own faith (Christianity). Rzaa I wouldn't bother if Kay_cee struggles to answer it you'll get a reply along these lines. And please, to all the Muslim posters on here who would seek to mock the crucifixtion of Jesus, I strongly urge you to take heed from what happened to Ahmed Deedat. As Christians, we are forbidden unlike you, to take personal revenge for insults waged against us or God. God promises to do that Himself. A point proved in the aforementioned person. Why would Muslims seek to mock the crucifixion of Jesus? He is afterall an Islamic prophet, infact there have been many more 'christians' who have mocked Jesus in the past. You won't see many blonde-haired blue eyed boys in the middle east around 2000 years ago. In anycase, Muslims believe that it was not Jesus who was crucifed ultimately. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rzaa Posted July 31, 2006 Share Posted July 31, 2006 Please do point out where you answered my query as to how: 7:80 And Lot! (Remember) when he said unto his folk: Will ye commit abomination such as no creature ever did before you? Is compatible with modern scientific knowledge, given that homosexual behaviour has been observed in hundreds of species. Read previous posts see what I said and what i about science and the Quran. It is you who re interpreted it some how. And "homosexual behaviour has been observed in hundreds of species"??? By whom? Firstly you have to prove that the species have homosexuals in they communities then you can see if is conflicts with the Quran or not. Theories don't count and nether does the opinion of a scientist or scholar who is trying to make a name for him self when his peers don't back up his findings. Were did you read about it? From that book in the Ricky Gervais stand-up show? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1Man&hisBMW Posted July 31, 2006 Share Posted July 31, 2006 Oh dear. The Forum's resident 'defenders of Islam' seem to be ignoring my reference to the infamous 'Satanic Verses' which I posted earlier. Where for a time, (according to Islamic history) Muhammed was duped by Satan, caved in to the pressure from the idol worshipping Quraysh tribe and 'received' this verse where he said it was basically fine to worship - well 'idols' - the female deities of the day; 'Allat', 'Al uzza' and 'Manat'. Are none of you going to offer a rebuttal? Oh that masterpiece by Mullah Rushdie. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rzaa Posted July 31, 2006 Share Posted July 31, 2006 Oh dear. The Forum's resident 'defenders of Islam' seem to be ignoring my reference to the infamous 'Satanic Verses' which I posted earlier. Where for a time, (according to Islamic history) Muhammed was duped by Satan, caved in to the pressure from the idol worshipping Quraysh tribe and 'received' this verse where he said it was basically fine to worship - well 'idols' - the female deities of the day; 'Allat', 'Al uzza' and 'Manat'. Are none of you going to offer a rebuttal? Maybe you should read the rest of that book (Satanic Verses) before trying to use it as part of an argument. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rzaa Posted July 31, 2006 Share Posted July 31, 2006 And about what happened Ahmed Deedat; old man (around 80 i think) had a stroke and died. So whats your point Kay_Cee? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
plekhanov Posted July 31, 2006 Share Posted July 31, 2006 Read previous posts see what I said and what i about science and the Quran. It is you who re interpreted it some how. And "homosexual behaviour has been observed in hundreds of species"??? By whom? Firstly you have to prove that the species have homosexuals in they communities then you can see if is conflicts with the Quran or not. Theories don't count and nether does the opinion of a scientist or scholar who is trying to make a name for him self when his peers don't back up his findings. Were did you read about it? From that book in the Ricky Gervais stand-up show? I interpreted 7:80 as stating that homosexuality was unnatural as no other animals engage in it, if you feel this interpretation is inaccurate by all means put forward your interpretation. As for who has seen homosexual activity in other species the answer is lots of scientists, this article gives a bit of a summary. I don’t understand the point you’re trying to make by going on about how ‘theories’ and ‘opinions’ ‘don’t count’, the existence of homosexual behaviour in other species is neither a ‘theory’ or an ‘opinion’ it is a documented fact and one you have to deal with like it or not if you continue to insist on pretending that the Koran is compatible with scientific knowledge. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.