Does God exist?

[talloola]

It fascinates me that people would suppose the knowledge of the past is more significant than ours now. We know much more than people did 6000 years ago. Why would they have any special knowledge of god that we wouldn't have today? There should be more evidence today not less.

My exact thoughts----

 

[MHz]

"Quoting Scott Free It fascinates me that people would suppose the knowledge of the past is more significant than ours now. We know much more than people did 6000 years ago. Why would they have any special knowledge of god that we wouldn't have today? There should be more evidence today not less.
​

My exact thoughts---- "

Who knows more about the people of today, us or the people alive 6,000 years from now?

 

[Scott Free]

In terms of what things we believe that are foolish then the people 6000 years from now (provided there will be any) will, yes.

 

[Dexter Sinister]

When have I ever claimed absolute knowledge?

You claim the Bible contains absolute knowledge, you cite it repeatedly as the authority for most of what you say, and you believe it to be literally true, correct, and internally consistent, which it demonstrably is not.

Everything I've ever heard about the Acta Pilates indicates it's the product of some early Christian, offering, as Wikipedia neatly summarizes it, "conjectural details about the life of Christ as a pious entertainment." It has not been authenticated as what you're suggesting it is, and the consensus among the people who study these things is that it's from the 4th century. There are no independent sources for the story of Jesus, only the traditions of the early church which produced the New Testament. The NT is a product of those traditions, not the source of them. All information about Jesus comes from those traditions and later accounts based on them. That's all there is. There are only four references outside those traditions.

1. Pliny the Younger, writing to the Emperor Trajan in 112 C.E., mentions that there are Christians in his province. This is the earliest authenticated Roman reference, 80 years after the crucifixion, and there's no mention of the name Jesus and no indication Pliny had ever heard it.

2. The reference by Tacitus we've already talked about.

3. Jesus is mentioned twice in surviving copies of Josephus' Antiquities of the Jews, both of which appear to be later interpolations by Christian copyists. The book provides no independent testimony about the existence of or any details about Jesus.

4. Jesus is mentioned in the Talmud, but too late to be independent evidence. The earliest reference is no earlier than the 2nd century at best. The Talmud also says Jesus' father was a Roman soldier, but it doesn't matter, the references are too late to have any significance. They're just Jewish responses, described as "gossipy" by at least one source I've read, to a growing Christian cult in their midst.

There are also references in the Quran, but I think you'll agree to entirely discount those. They're 7th century, way too late to mean anything.

 

[MHz]

In terms of what things we believe that are foolish then the people 6000 years from now (provided there will be any) will, yes.

That might be true if it is an issue of "is the world flat" but the knowledge of putting a liquid into a 'box' would make it move about almost at will, and which specific liquid might be lost to time. Nor would there likely be actual tax records, knowledge that there were taxes might have survived but how much each person payed is lost.

Surviving video might be view as being 'staged' rather than 'live'.

Only a person from that age would know the 'correct answer to various questions about that time' (assuming they actually knew the real truth ). Is there any chance that they would misunderstand some info about us simple because they only had a small portion of the whole story?

Can we build great pyramids today?

If some denied God and God came in 6001 how smart were they?

And if God is actually doing things back then (unlike today,) how could they know less about God than a people (us) who have never ever witnessed even one small act that was done via God

 

[MHz]

You claim the Bible contains absolute knowledge, you cite it repeatedly as the authority for most of what you say, and you believe it to be literally true, correct, and internally consistent, which it demonstrably is not.

Everything I've ever heard about the Acta Pilates indicates it's the product of some early Christian, offering, as Wikipedia neatly summarizes it, "conjectural details about the life of Christ as a pious entertainment." It has not been authenticated as what you're suggesting it is, and the consensus among the people who study these things is that it's from the 4th century. There are no independent sources for the story of Jesus, only the traditions of the early church which produced the New Testament. The NT is a product of those traditions, not the source of them. All information about Jesus comes from those traditions and later accounts based on them. That's all there is. There are only four references outside those traditions.

1. Pliny the Younger, writing to the Emperor Trajan in 112 C.E., mentions that there are Christians in his province. This is the earliest authenticated Roman reference, 80 years after the crucifixion, and there's no mention of the name Jesus and no indication Pliny had ever heard it.

2. The reference by Tacitus we've already talked about.

3. Jesus is mentioned twice in surviving copies of Josephus' Antiquities of the Jews, both of which appear to be later interpolations by Christian copyists. The book provides no independent testimony about the existence of or any details about Jesus.

4. Jesus is mentioned in the Talmud, but too late to be independent evidence. The earliest reference is no earlier than the 2nd century at best. The Talmud also says Jesus' father was a Roman soldier, but it doesn't matter, the references are too late to have any significance. They're just Jewish responses, described as "gossipy" by at least one source I've read, to a growing Christian cult in their midst.

There are also references in the Quran, but I think you'll agree to entirely discount those. They're 7th century, way too late to mean anything.

Those are pretty much the same search results I got.
The tax records and the birth records would solve the question about Jesus.
The God question will probably take an Act of God to put it to rest once and for all time, until then progress might be a tad slow, that doesn't new arguments are totally absent.

Something from the 1st century would be the best 'object' unless it is a 'letter' that has written back then but only published 100's of years later.

The Book of Enoch also mentions the Son of Man, or is that considered Scripture?

 

[Vanni Fucci]

Pontius Pilate (1 BC - circa AD 37) was the fifth Roman procurator of Judea (AD 26 - 36 ) under Emperor Tiberius, who sentenced Jesus to death by crucifixion. The quotes below refer to the Acts of Pontius Pilate. The existence of the Acts of Pontius Pilate is strongly supported by Epiphanius (Heresies 50.1), Justin Martyr (First Apology, A.D. 150) and Tertullian (Apology, A.D. 200). The Acts of Pontius Pilate were kept in the Roman archives as stated in the following quote.
The ancient Romans were scrupulously careful to preserve the memory of all remarkable events which happened in the city; and this was done either in their "Acts of the Senate" (Acts Senatus), or in the "Daily Acts of the People" (Acta Diurna Populi), which were diligently made and kept at Rome . . . In like manner it was customary for the governors of provinces to send to the emperor an account of remarkable transactions that occurred in the places where they resided, which were preserved in the "Acts of" their respective governments . . . we find, long before the time of Eusebius [3rd century], that the primitive Christians, in their disputes with the Gentiles, appealed to these "Acts of Pilate" . . . Thus, Justin Martyr, in his first "Apology" for the Christians, which was presented to the Emperor Antoninus Pius [A.D. 138-161] and the senate of Rome, about the year [A.D.] 140, having mentioned the crucifixion of Jesus Christ and some of its attendant circumstances, adds, "And these things were done, you may know from the 'Acts' made in the time of Pontius Pilate." [1]
It should be noted that some believe a fraudulent version of the Acts of Pilate was circulated later in the fourth and fifth centuries. This should not be confused with the original document that was generated in the first century, archived in Rome and was available to Caesar Antoninus Pius and the Roman Senate. Otherwise, Justin Martyr's appeal to the Acts of Pilate in his First Apology would have lacked credibility.

Well, they lack credibility anyway, as the Acts of Pilate first received mention in Justin's First Apology which were letters addressed to Roman Emperor Pius, and Pius did not become Emperor until 138 CE, well over a hundred years after the alleged crucifixion of the protagonist of your fable.

How a mouthpeice for the church, with no affiliation with the Senate would have gained access to Roman archival documents is a matter for idle speculation on my part...

 

[L Gilbert]

No wonder you can't find Him, you don't even have a clue as to who you are looking for.
He certainly can (and will) appear just like that (grumpy) to some who will eventually meet Him, but that is when He is looking for them, not the other way around.

Nice. Someone who purportedly loves everyone unconditionally won't wiggle a hair to introduce himself to those that need saving? lmao That's right in line with the all-powerful "loving" god who arranges to have millions of children suffer, arranges to have decent, hard-working people crippled and maimed, arrange to have people conflicting with each other, etc. It's all in his design right?

The reason for this post (since I find just about everything you say on the topic of religion not more that just trivial dribble) was your comment about somebody might want to kill you for your comment.
That begs this question, if somebody who says they are a Christian kills you have you been killed by a 'authentic Christian' (a person who does his/her best to live by the two Laws Jesus gave in Scripture) or by somebody who may say they are Christian (yet does little or nothing to adhere to those two Laws) which actually makes them to be an 'authentic' atheist and a liar to boot.

That is also the difference between a person who believes in God (and therefore Christ) and one who is just using lip-service.

Killing people is not unique to Muslims, Christians have certainly used that 'method' in the past and are still using that method today. The two wars the US is trying to win these days is just one example, I'm sure the board-rooms of most western corps (Christians) are making decisions that cost somebody pain and suffering and death. That does not leave atheists out of the killing game either and many may do it under the guise of religion, or protection from some sort of religion. Profit, greed, and all other vanities can be motives for all 3 groups.

All within your god's design. If this creatire exists, it is incredibly sadistic. Whatta joke on you poor believers that you should believe in someone else's opium dreams as being real.

Are you naturally this stupid or did you have to take a course?

I had to take a course, of course. If I didn't take the course in knowing what stupidity was, I wouldn't believe you exist either.

hehehe Just kidding. You've never discovered sarcasm before I made that comment? You don't get around much, do you, you poor, sad, little man. My sympathies.

 

[Scott Free]

That might be true if it is an issue of "is the world flat" but the knowledge of putting a liquid into a 'box' would make it move about almost at will, and which specific liquid might be lost to time. Nor would there likely be actual tax records, knowledge that there were taxes might have survived but how much each person payed is lost.

I agree not much physical record would probably remain but our mememic repository should have grown.

Surviving video might be view as being 'staged' rather than 'live'.

I don't see how anyone could watch our videos so far in the future.

Only a person from that age would know the 'correct answer to various questions about that time' (assuming they actually knew the real truth ). Is there any chance that they would misunderstand some info about us simple because they only had a small portion of the whole story?

They wouldn't necessarily know more scientifically speaking unless we lost our science and failed to pass it on. Even just our basic meme knowledge today, which would likely survive a cataclysm, places us way above the ancients thus giving us a higher platform from which to jump off of when starting again.

There is some indication that physics (for example) might have an evolutionary component wherein laws that exist today might have evolved as the universe aged (Richard Feynman), but in human terms the physics around us have been and will always be the same since we have been around for such a small duration.

A person in their time is going to be better able to explain social issues (the details of) but not scientific ones - at least not to someone knowledgeable in such things. It seems some people are determined to believe anything despite the evidence (or is that to spite the evidence?).

For example we know today the black plague wasn't caused by vapours, and in fact most people today know that, and so most people know more about the plague than the people dying from it knew. Being from the great plague era would give you a worse not better understanding.

Can we build great pyramids today?

Yes, of coarse we can. The biggest stumbling block would be financial not technological. The amazing thing about the great pyramid was the fantastic wealth such a project required. There isn't a country today that could afford to build one let alone an individual.

If some denied God and God came in 6001 how smart were they?

Very. There is no evidence of god. You can't "believe" in something just because it may be true. Wouldn't you feel silly if Santa came down your chimney this year but because you don't believe in him you wouldn't get any toys? Would that mean you were stupid? I don't think so.

Your argument means that, if you want to be "cleaver" you should believe in all possible contingencies! You should believe in Atlantis (it might rise up), UFO's (they might land), Zeus (he might come back) etc...

No. Intelligence is (for the purpose of this argument) being able to make a rational sound estimation of truth based on the best evidence you have at hand. Many very intelligent people have been wrong but they were intelligently wrong.

And if God is actually doing things back then (unlike today,) how could they know less about God than a people (us) who have never ever witnessed even one small act that was done via God

Many of the things god is credited with would leave some record. This is particularly true of the flood but it is cumulatively true of everything he supposedly did; there would be and should be evidence of supernatural events in the past and there simply aren't any.

What is worse is that there is evidence that there were no supernatural events. There is even evidence the stories of gods supernatural doings were fabricated by people!

Without evidence it is stupid to presume the more complicated explanation. Whenever people find what they think is the answer to a problem they should always ask themselves if it couldn't be made simpler. Odds are it can be and when done that reason is more likely to be true. This isn't just applicable in science but in every aspect of life. We tend to complicate things.

 

[Scott Free]

Penn and Teller: evolution vs creationism.

 

[L Gilbert]

no you are learning that from ambiance hooping about for you ,

Sorry, I don't believe I have ever encountered the verb hooping. Explain, please.

but you have questions and all people have questions

My questions are practical questions.

how I was become in this life ?

When my father and my mother had sexual intercourse, my father implanted several sperm into my mother. These sperm swam along till one encountered an egg that it could wiggle its way into. Then the sperm cell releases its nucleus which united with the DNA to form a zygocyte. This zygocyte then experiences many cell divisions to become a blastocyst which then forms an embryo and so on and so forth.

why I was become in this life?

Obviously, I am here to do what I do. Basically I am here to live my life. It's not so tough to figure out.

and the people need to know truth but with guide-lines not
like sightless to the following to what preachers he saying and he do not thought

the quran he have information no human can know It that time ,

Sorry, I don't understand what you are saying here.

Allah Say insurat Fussilat (Detailed) verse 11: "Then turned He to the heaven when it was smoke, and said to it and to the earth: Come both, willingly or unwillingly. They both said, "We come willingly."

What burned to make the smoke?

Allah Say in Surat (Al-Dhareyat – "Drivers of the Wind"), verse 47: "We have built the heaven with might, and We will continue to expand it."

Well, at least that's what the Muslim guess as to the origin of the universe is. Other people have different guesses.

"Have not those who disbelieve known that the heavens and the earth used to be one solid mass that we exploded into existence? And from water we have made everything living. Will they not then believe?" {surat Al-Anbeyaa (The prophets)-verse 30}

Ahh. The "big bang theory" - sorry, I don't subscribe to this theory. It has discrepancies. It does not follow 2 of the Laws of Thermodynamics, Where did the matter come from? Where did the energy come from that caused the matter to spin till it split apart? There are more questions that the big bang cannot answer. And no, I don't believe some supernatural being was playing with his chemistry and physics sets. There's even less proof for that than there is for the big bang theory.

"smoke" before 1400 years as Allah Say: "Say (O Muhammad, unto the idolaters): Disbelieve you verily in Him Who created the earth in two Days, and ascribe you unto Him equals? He (and none else) is the Lord of the Worlds [9] He set on it (the earth) mountains standing firm, and blessed it, and measured therein its sustenance in four Days, in accordance with (the needs of) those who seek (Sustenance) [10] Then turned He to the heaven when it was smoke, and said to it and to the earth: Come both, willingly or unwillingly. They both said, "We come willingly [11]" {surat Fussilat (Detailed)}

What did the smoke come from? Something has to combust in order to make smoke. Take my word for it, I fought fire for a living.

suratAl Ra'd (the Thunder), verse 2 when He Say:

"Allah is He Who raised the heavens without any pillars that you can see; then He is on the Throne, He has subjected the sun and the moon (to his Law), each one runs (in its orbit) to an appointed time. He regulates all affairs, explaining the signs in detail, that you may be certain of meeting your Lord."

No pillars? Great hovering heavens, Batman, astronauts haven't found heaven yet.

Al-fatq} which means the phase when the earth and heavens exploded after being a one solid mass).

See my comment on the big bang theory.

that good but to become very good to this world and world next that is the you are bettering next world for ever
this life like today or little today of comparable to next life .

Habitable worlds are too far apart for us to travel to yet. If I live the average length of a life by then possibly we may have found another habitable planet but I doubt you or me will travel to it.

there is one god that is the truth and the human paganize with the god other god from he misjudges ,
and the allah
It is the intendment
in arabic the " god "
and the god it

Sorry, there are many people that believe their gods are the truth, too. This makes for one heckuva lot of discrepancies in truths.

Sahih International: Say, "He is Allah , [who is] One,​

112.002​

Sahih International: Allah , the Eternal Refuge.​

112.003​

Sahih International: He neither begets nor is born,​

112.004​

Sahih International: Nor is there to Him any equivalent."​

That's what they all say. I don't have an equivalent either. I am the ONLY me. lol​

002.255

​

Sahih International: Allah - there is no deity except Him, the Ever-Living, the Sustainer of [all] existence. Neither drowsiness overtakes Him nor sleep. To Him belongs whatever is in the heavens and whatever is on the earth. Who is it that can intercede with Him except by His permission? He knows what is [presently] before them and what will be after them, and they encompass not a thing of His knowledge except for what He wills. His Kursi extends over the heavens and the earth, and their preservation tires Him not. And He is the Most High, the Most Great.​

As I said before, they all say that.​

here​

that becase the god is one



So you say. But it is only that you say so. There are no facts, no evidence supporting what you say.
no there facts the quran he have information no one can
know it that time
the quran

Yeah, Nostradamus made quite a few neat guesses, too. The Wright brothers guessed one time that man would fly. Marconi guessed one time that people would talk to each other without being in earshot of each other. A G Bell guessed the same thing.

of downright you see he system the god create It ,

Nope, I don't see it. I see parts of the universe. No-one created the universe.

of downright you see he system he is correlative

Lots of systems are correlative. I see some, I don't see others. So?

It is very useful info ,

but

002.256​

Sahih International: There shall be no compulsion in [acceptance of] the religion. The right course has become clear from the wrong. So whoever disbelieves in Taghut and believes in Allah has grasped the most trustworthy handhold with no break in it. And Allah is Hearing and Knowing.​

:smile: :smile: :smile:​

And I have a pretty firm grasp on atheism, too. So?

 

[Scott Free]

Ricky Gervais Explains Creation

 

[L Gilbert]

........

Want to know something, prayer is asking for help for yourself.

That's a pretty comical comment.
I would be greatly helped, relieved, and even ecstatic if the creatures of the planet would cease to be diseased, crippled, etc. Praying won't achieve that. Praying that I never get arthritis wouldn't work either but it'd sure help if I didn't.

 

[L Gilbert]

"Quoting Scott Free It fascinates me that people would suppose the knowledge of the past is more significant than ours now. We know much more than people did 6000 years ago. Why would they have any special knowledge of god that we wouldn't have today? There should be more evidence today not less.​

My exact thoughts---- "

Who knows more about the people of today, us or the people alive 6,000 years from now?

You missed the point and inserted your own concept of what the knowledge that Scott was referring to was. 6000 years ago people had no idea of the concept of air. 6000 years from now people quite probably will dismiss the faith in supernatural beings as we dismiss the belief in old Norse, Greek, Roman, etc. supernatural beings. Besides that, perhaps people 6000 years from now mayb be able to demostrate each and every little activity in our brain , why it does those activities, and what results from those activities. It's not very nnice of you to impose your limits on the people of the future.

 

[L Gilbert]

That might be true if it is an issue of "is the world flat" but the knowledge of putting a liquid into a 'box' would make it move about almost at will, and which specific liquid might be lost to time. Nor would there likely be actual tax records, knowledge that there were taxes might have survived but how much each person payed is lost.

Surviving video might be view as being 'staged' rather than 'live'.

Only a person from that age would know the 'correct answer to various questions about that time' (assuming they actually knew the real truth ). Is there any chance that they would misunderstand some info about us simple because they only had a small portion of the whole story?

The possibility is there, yes.

Can we build great pyramids today?

Certainly. The great wall of China is much more massive than a pyramid, and people built it.

If some denied God and God came in 6001 how smart were they?

lmao
If you spent 2/3 of your life (your awake life) depending on, thinking on, believing in, etc. the existence of a being of fantasy and then died, didn't go to heaven or hell or purgatory or wherever you think it is that you will go. How smart were you?

And if God is actually doing things back then (unlike today,) how could they know less about God than a people (us) who have never ever witnessed even one small act that was done via God

Whoa. How can anything or anyone do things in the past? I can't do anything in the past. My table lamp can't do anything in the past.
C'mon, give me the bit about the all powerful being that designed such imperfect things as humans and bees as being able to do things in the past without changing anything in the present.

 

[Vanni Fucci]

6000 years ago people had no idea of the concept of air. 6000 years from now people quite probably will dismiss the faith in supernatural beings as we dismiss the belief in old Norse, Greek, Roman, etc. supernatural beings.

Yeah, but humanity will likely conjure up a new and even scarier god figure...

God v2.1b

Feel the luv

 

[MHz]

Scott,
Your original post had this question in it. "Why would they have any special knowledge of god that we wouldn't have today?"

By the time the man called Job died, how well do you think he knew God, same for Neb?

The question would seem to have a variable answer depending if God was active or not. These days He isn't active. Even in the OT His interaction with man was quite limited, usually one person would deliver a message to many rather than many receiving a message straight from God (as did the Prophets).

Anybody alive before His return is going to know less than somebody alive after His return.

Scripture was being written back then, there isn't anything being written today. Somebody was closer to God back then than we can find today. That doesn't mean they were well, or easily, understood.
If 6,000 in our future there is still no interaction how would they know more about God. Disbelief maybe more widespread based on His absence alone, same as it is today.

 

[MHz]

If you spent 2/3 of your life (your awake life) depending on, thinking on, believing in, etc. the existence of a being of fantasy and then died, didn't go to heaven or hell or purgatory or wherever you think it is that you will go. How smart were you?

If those beliefs kept me from leading a life based on 'crime and violence' towards my fellow man then how is that being stupid, other than I may have missed out on having more material things than most people.

The great wall is not really a modern structure, it is massive but it is made of 'little stones' not 100 ton blocks.

 

[ahmadabdalrhman]

My questions are practical questions.
When my father and my mother had sexual intercourse, my father implanted several sperm into my mother. These sperm swam along till one encountered an egg that it could wiggle its way into. Then the sperm cell releases its nucleus which united with the DNA to form a zygocyte. This zygocyte then experiences many cell divisions to become a blastocyst which then forms an embryo and so on and so forth.

076.002​

Sahih International: Indeed, We created man from a sperm-drop mixture that We may try him; and We made him hearing and seeing.​

023.012​

Sahih International: And certainly did We create man from an extract of clay.​

023.013​

Sahih International: Then We placed him as a sperm-drop in a firm lodging.​

023.014​

Sahih International: Then We made the sperm-drop into a clinging clot, and We made the clot into a lump [of flesh], and We made [from] the lump, bones, and We covered the bones with flesh; then We developed him into another creation. So blessed is Allah , the best of creators.​

023.015​

Sahih International: Then indeed, after that you are to die.​

023.016​

Sahih International: Then indeed you, on the Day of Resurrection, will be resurrected.​

023.079​

​

Sahih International: And it is He who has multiplied you throughout the earth, and to Him you will be gathered. ​

023.080​

​

Sahih International: And it is He who gives life and causes death, and His is the alternation of the night and the day. Then will you not reason?​

071.014​

Sahih International: While He has created you in stages?​

Obviously, I am here to do what I do. Basically I am here to live my life. It's not so tough to figure out.

Sahih International: Competition in [worldly] increase diverts you​

102.002​

Sahih International: Until you visit the graveyards.​

102.003​

Sahih International: No! You are going to know.​

102.004​

Sahih International: Then no! You are going to know.​

102.005​

Sahih International: No! If you only knew with knowledge of certainty...​

102.006​

Sahih International: You will surely see the Hellfire.​

102.007​

Sahih International: Then you will surely see it with the eye of certainty.​

102.008​

Sahih International: Then you will surely be asked that Day about pleasure​

Sorry, I don't understand what you are saying here.

not important it wrong in writing

my language original not english

What burned to make the smoke?

After the Big Bang, the whole Universe turned into a cloud of smoke from which the earth and heavens were later created. Physical calculations tell us that the size of the Universe before the Big Bang was almost zero (the elementary minute body) as both matter and energy were greatly compressed and the dimensions of time and place had no existence. After the explosion of this elementary body (the Big Bang), it turned into a ball of radiation and elementary particles that continued to expand and cool at a great speed until it turned into a cloud of smoke.here

Well, at least that's what the Muslim guess as to the origin of the universe is. Other people have different guesses.

011.118​

Sahih International: And if your Lord had willed, He could have made mankind one community; but they will not cease to differ.​

Ahh. The "big bang theory" - sorry, I don't subscribe to this theory. It has discrepancies. It does not follow 2 of the Laws of Thermodynamics, Where did the matter come from? Where did the energy come from that caused the matter to spin till it split apart? There are more questions that the big bang cannot answer. And no, I don't believe some supernatural being was playing with his chemistry and physics sets. There's even less proof for that than there is for the big bang theory.

011.118​

Sahih International: And if your Lord had willed, He could have made mankind one community; but they will not cease to differ.​

What did the smoke come from? Something has to combust in order to make smoke. Take my word for it, I fought fire for a living.

http://www.55a.net/eng/dust1.htm#_ftnref1 Smoke in Arabic means "Dukhan" which means literally "dust and hot gas."

After the Big Bang, the whole Universe turned into a cloud of smoke from which the earth and heavens were later created. Physical calculations tell us that the size of the Universe before the Big Bang was almost zero (the elementary minute body) as both matter and energy were greatly compressed and the dimensions of time and place had no existence. After the explosion of this elementary body (the Big Bang), it turned into a ball of radiation and elementary particles that continued to expand and cool at a great speed until it turned into a cloud of smoke.here

No pillars? Great hovering heavens, Batman, astronauts haven't found heaven yet.

See my comment on the big bang theory.

The unification of forces in the Universe:
Physicists presume that the electromagnetic, strong, and weak nuclear forces were a unified force described as the "grand unification theory." This theory is considered a step to another theory that unifies all the cosmic forces into one great force, the thing that proves that Allah is only One. From this great force, the four known cosmic forces (the gravitational force, the electromagnetic force, and both the strong and the weak nuclear forces) emerged right with Big Bang {Al-fatq} which means the phase when the earth and heavens exploded after being a one solid mass). Except for the gravitational force, all the other cosmic forces reach the same rate at very high levels of energy called "Grand unification energy). Hence, these three forms of energy are three facets of one force, the gravitational force could be part of which as it is a very long-range force that has control over the cosmic bodies and the great complexes of matter. Therefore, it could be, theoretically, neglected as a kind of simplification when dealing only with elementary particles or even with atoms of elements.
This uniformity of the Universe and the energy in it, along with the spread of pairs in creation is a clear-cut evidence that the Creator of this Universe, unlike His creatures, is only One without a partner.

Habitable worlds are too far apart for us to travel to yet. If I live the average length of a life by then possibly we may have found another habitable planet but I doubt you or me will travel to it.

022.005​

Sahih International: O People, if you should be in doubt about the Resurrection, then [consider that] indeed, We created you from dust, then from a sperm-drop, then from a clinging clot, and then from a lump of flesh, formed and unformed - that We may show you. And We settle in the wombs whom We will for a specified term, then We bring you out as a child, and then [We develop you] that you may reach your [time of] maturity. And among you is he who is taken in [early] death, and among you is he who is returned to the most decrepit [old] age so that he knows, after [once having] knowledge, nothing. And you see the earth barren, but when We send down upon it rain, it quivers and swells and grows [something] of every beautiful kind.​

Sorry, there are many people that believe their gods are the truth, too. This makes for one heckuva lot of discrepancies in truths.That's what they all say. I don't have an equivalent either. I am the ONLY me. lol[/left]

As I said before, they all say that. Yeah, Nostradamus made quite a few neat guesses, too. The Wright brothers guessed one time that man would fly. Marconi guessed one time that people would talk to each other without being in earshot of each other. A G Bell guessed the same thing.​

023.091​

​

​

Sahih International: Allah has not taken any son, nor has there ever been with Him any deity. [If there had been], then each deity would have taken what it created, and some of them would have sought to overcome others. Exalted is Allah above what they describe [concerning Him]. ​

Nope, I don't see it. I see parts of the universe. No-one created the universe.​

013.016​

​

​

Sahih International: Say, "Who is Lord of the heavens and earth?" Say, " Allah ." Say, "Have you then taken besides Him allies not possessing [even] for themselves any benefit or any harm?" Say, "Is the blind equivalent to the seeing? Or is darkness equivalent to light? Or have they attributed to Allah partners who created like His creation so that the creation [of each] seemed similar to them?" Say, " Allah is the Creator of all things, and He is the One, the Prevailing."​

Lots of systems are correlative. I see some, I don't see others. So?

​

031.020​

​

​

Sahih International: Do you not see that Allah has made subject to you whatever is in the heavens and whatever is in the earth and amply bestowed upon you His favors, [both] apparent and unapparent? But of the people is he who disputes about Allah without knowledge or guidance or an enlightening Book [from Him].​

039.005​

​

​

Sahih International: He created the heavens and earth in truth. He wraps the night over the day and wraps the day over the night and has subjected the sun and the moon, each running [its course] for a specified term. Unquestionably, He is the Exalted in Might, the Perpetual Forgiver.​

And I have a pretty firm grasp on atheism, too. So?

​

041.040​

Sahih International: Indeed, those who inject deviation into Our verses are not concealed from Us. So, is he who is cast into the Fire better or he who comes secure on the Day of Resurrection? Do whatever you will; indeed, He is Seeing of what you do.​

​

 

[Scott Free]

Scott,
Your original post had this question in it. "Why would they have any special knowledge of god that we wouldn't have today?"

By the time the man called Job died, how well do you think he knew God, same for Neb?

I don't think they knew god any better than anyone else. That is a very old story that could have originated anywhere. As we have seen with the flood story in the bible the religious are quite adept at adopting and changing pagan myths into their own. So who knows? It's a cute story that obviously has no bearing on reality whatsoever.

The question would seem to have a variable answer depending if God was active or not.

Like a volcano?

These days He isn't active. Even in the OT His interaction with man was quite limited usually one person would deliver a message to many rather than many receiving a message straight from God (as did the Prophets).

That's a pretty good indicator that he isn't real. One person would make up a story and then spread that story around. Maybe he didn't make it up at all; perhaps he was insane? We know insanity was considered a sign of someone being holy. In point of fact if you were insane (visions, voices in your head, seeing things like angels) you were more likely to be listened to. Of coarse if that person were too debilitated to spread their story others were more than happy to.

Anybody alive before His return is going to know less than somebody alive after His return.

People don't return from the dead except after a few minutes, not years, not decades, not centuries and not eons.

He is dead and he is not coming back. That is a seriously childish myth.

Scripture was being written back then, there isn't anything being written today.

That isn't true. There are many new religions movements started everyday. they don't have much longevity (typically under a year) but they start. Look at Scientology, Eckankar, People's Temple, The Roberts Group, Heavens Gate, Bahia, Babi, Aum Shin Rikyo, Falun Gong, Infinity Forms Of Yellow, Mother Of God, Solar Temple, The Unification Church.... etc... on and on it goes....

There is absolutely nothing to suggest the bible and its story is any different from the stories told by the above lunatics. Just like they have no proof so too the bible has no proof. Without proof it cannot be reasonably upheld as true!

People can read the stories and derive meaning certainly, you can do that with any story, but to say it actually happened requires proof the burden of which falls on those making the claim.

Somebody was closer to God back then than we can find today. That doesn't mean they were well, or easily, understood.
If 6,000 in our future there is still no interaction how would they know more about God.

Your question assumes there is a god. Perhaps, like today, there will be more evidence there isn't a god? I'm sure some people will be saying god could come back in another 6000 years. At some point we, as a species, need to face the facts.

Disbelief maybe more widespread based on His absence alone, same as it is today.

Well yes, of coarse, there is no evidence, that's what "not being around" means. There never was any evidence. God has never "been around" actually and the people who say he is and have visions of him and hear him in their heads are bat $hit crazy. They are today and they were back then.