Objection to some astronomers.

[Torch light]

Wow, so they were both power-tripping vandals. Did you know that God actually gave Abraham 15 commandments. But ya know, three heavy stone tablets, two hands...

You, Jinentonix, and some other members here, always deny stubbornly with your disbelief, and you bar others from God's way included in the Glorious Quran of God... so I consulted God, about you and others that are like you, and I found these ayat:

Quran 47: 1-3, which mean:
(1. Those who disbelieve [in the Quran], and bar [people] from God's way a; God [will] make their [righteous] works void [so they will not be rewarded for them.]

[Then God – be glorified – told about the believers who had been killed or who had died, and He said:]
2. But those who believed [in God alone b] and worked righteous [deeds] and believed in [the Quran] revealed to Mohammed – and it is the very truth [coming] from their Lord c – [God] concealed their sins [from the sight of souls], and improved [their condition with prosperity and happiness, in the Hereafter, so that] their minds became clear and at peace.

3. That [rewarding of the two parties] is because the disbelievers followed the falsehood [so We requited them with the punishment], while the believers followed the truth [coming] from their Lord [so We rewarded them with the prosperity and clearness of mind]; thus [your contemporary people d], and as such e does God expound to people their parables f.
................................................................................................................................................................................................................

a i.e. from His religion.
b And abandoned the worship of idols and statues.
c And it is not, as do the associaters claim, the words of man.
d Whoever of them disbelieves, his fate will be like the fate of those whom God made their [righteous] works void [so they were not rewarded for them.]
And whoever believes, his fate will be like those whom He let their minds become clear and at peace.
e i.e. with such parables.
f So that they may think about them and receive admonition.

quran-ayat.com/pret/47.htm#a47_1

Here also is the recitation of this great soora 47 of the Quran:

 

[Serryah]

You, Jinentonix, and some other members here, always deny stubbornly with your disbelief, and you bar others from God's way included in the Glorious Quran of God... so I consulted God, about you and others that are like you, and I found these ayat:

Quran 47: 1-3, which mean:
(1. Those who disbelieve [in the Quran], and bar [people] from God's way a; God [will] make their [righteous] works void [so they will not be rewarded for them.]

No one here is barring anyone from God or God's way. That's a lie.

On the other hand, you are lying to us, yourself, and God every time you post.

 

[Jinentonix]

You, Jinentonix, and some other members here, always deny stubbornly with your disbelief,

Yep, because I prefer facts and reality over the world of make-believe.

and you bar others from God's way included in the Glorious Quran of God

Nope, I don't. People are free to believe whatever they want, no matter how absurdly stupid it is.

... so I consulted God, about you and others that are like you, and I found these ayat:

Whoopee skippy. Did you smile?

 

[Torch light]

Your words of denial are in fact the trying to bar people from God's way, by distorting the truth, and revealing to others that your words are true and God's words are lies; Glory to God Almighty! ..,. you work contrary to God and His program and His commandments and His Quran.

 

[Serryah]

Your words of denial are in fact the trying to bar people from God's way, by distorting the truth, and revealing to others that your words are true and God's words are lies; Glory to God Almighty! ..,. you work contrary to God and His program and His commandments and His Quran.

That's if you believe the Quran is the Word of God, or the "Last" word of God.

Considering there are those who believe the King James Version of the Bible was Divinely inspired by God, that too could be considered the "Last" word of God.

Why would the KJV be any less credible than the Quran, or the Torah, or any other religious book?

See, that's the point; you can claim it all you want but in the end there is no PROOF other than the word of MEN. Who lie. Who want Power.

Your Quran is no more legitimate than the KJV.

 

[Torch light]

That's if you believe the Quran is the Word of God, or the "Last" word of God.

Considering there are those who believe the King James Version of the Bible was Divinely inspired by God, that too could be considered the "Last" word of God.

Why would the KJV be any less credible than the Quran, or the Torah, or any other religious book?

See, that's the point; you can claim it all you want but in the end there is no PROOF other than the word of MEN. Who lie. Who want Power.

Your Quran is no more legitimate than the KJV.

The true word is the power of the truth.
The Gospel and the Quran are the words of God, but the difference is that KJV is the English translation of a later Lattin version of what was supposed to be the Gospel, and it is not the Gospel itself, while the Quran is the original Arabic as it is without distortion or change.

This is what Abu Abd-Allah said in his book The Conflict between the Torah and the Quran :
"I have studied the present Torah (or Hebrew Bible), the Gospel, the Psalms, and the Quran: to realize that the first three books have been somewhat manipulated by the hands of men so that they altered some of their statements and distorted the truth. Therefore, from now on we cannot rely on them.
For this reason, anyone who seeks after the truth should hold fast to the Quran which no falsehood may affect whether beforehand or afterward; it is the revelation from a Wise and Praiseworthy [God.]"

Forward

 

[Torch light]

It means: the distortion that affected the Gospel and the Torah altered the principles of belief and the basic creed: from pure monotheism to some idolatry: the statues of Christ and his mother and the statues of saints in addition to adopting idolatrous ideology like the Trinity and the attributing a son to God Almighty or considering Jesus as God Himself.
In addition, the Torah (included in the Old Testament) includes many lies against the prophets: accusing them with adultery and worshiping the idols and many other lies.

The Lies Of Ezra About The Prophets

 

[Serryah]

The true word is the power of the truth.

True Word - the priests and the King who pushed for the KJV believed they had the True Word and the power of Truth.

Why are they lacking when the Quran is not?

What is in the Quran can also be found in the Torah, which means it is not originally Arabic and not without flaws or distortion.

Stating that an Arabic man sees the Torah as flawed is not exactly an unbiased view. It's like saying that the Priests who follow the KJV of the Bible state that the Torah was flawed but their book is True.

You can keep trying to deny it, but with ever post, you are invalidating yourself by posting lies and half-truths and only "beliefs", despite claiming they are 'true word's.

The Gospel and the Quran are the words of God, but the difference is that KJV is the English translation of a later Lattin version of what was supposed to be the Gospel, and it is not the Gospel itself, while the Quran is the original Arabic as it is without distortion or change.

This is what Abu Abd-Allah said in his book The Conflict between the Torah and the Quran :
"I have studied the present Torah (or Hebrew Bible), the Gospel, the Psalms, and the Quran: to realize that the first three books have been somewhat manipulated by the hands of men so that they altered some of their statements and distorted the truth. Therefore, from now on we cannot rely on them.
For this reason, anyone who seeks after the truth should hold fast to the Quran which no falsehood may affect whether beforehand or afterward; it is the revelation from a Wise and Praiseworthy [God.]"

Forward

 

[Jinentonix]

Your words of denial are in fact the trying to bar people from God's way, by distorting the truth

No, not the truth, YOUR "truth". A distinction with a very big difference.

, and revealing to others that your words are true and God's words are lies; Glory to God Almighty! ..,. you work contrary to God and His program and His commandments and His Quran.

Yep, because religions are nothing more than legitimized cults.

 

[Torch light]

True Word - the priests and the King who pushed for the KJV believed they had the True Word and the power of Truth.

Why are they lacking when the Quran is not?

What is in the Quran can also be found in the Torah, which means it is not originally Arabic and not without flaws or distortion.

Stating that an Arabic man sees the Torah as flawed is not exactly an unbiased view. It's like saying that the Priests who follow the KJV of the Bible state that the Torah was flawed but their book is True.

You can keep trying to deny it, but with ever post, you are invalidating yourself by posting lies and half-truths and only "beliefs", despite claiming they are 'true word's.

All the original Torah, the original Gospel, and the Quran are from God.
But the charlatans among kings, chiefs, and religious scholars distorted the Heavenly Books according to their personal advantages.
So we believe in the Quran revealed to Mohammed, as we believe in the Torah revealed to Moses and the Gospel revealed to Jesus.
The similarity between these heavenly books and the Quran is because the One Who revealed all these books is the same God Almighty and Most Gracious.
While the differences are because of the distortion by the impostors among kings, priests, and others.

 

[Torch light]

No, not the truth, YOUR "truth". A distinction with a very big difference.

Yep, because religions are nothing more than legitimized cults.

My "truth" is to worship God as One God without associate, peer, or son, and to follow the teachings of the Quran.
None deviates from this program unless being misguided and following the Devil or Satan.

Quran 2: 130, which means:
(Who would forsake the religion of Abraham, except one who fools his own soul?)

http://quran-ayat.com/pret/2.htm#a2_130

 

[Serryah]

All the original Torah, the original Gospel, and the Quran are from God.
But the charlatans among kings, chiefs, and religious scholars distorted the Heavenly Books according to their personal advantages.
So we believe in the Quran revealed to Mohammed, as we believe in the Torah revealed to Moses and the Gospel revealed to Jesus.
The similarity between these heavenly books and the Quran is because the One Who revealed all these books is the same God Almighty and Most Gracious.
While the differences are because of the distortion by the impostors among kings, priests, and others.

And yet, they're not really the same books at all, they just come from a similar 'source'.

But hey, at least you admit there are people who 'distort' the Holy Books...

And thus you cannot PROVE the Quran you follow now isn't one of those books.

Progress, Torchy, progress.

 

[Jinentonix]

My "truth" is to worship God as One God without associate, peer, or son, and to follow the teachings of the Quran.
None deviates from this program unless being misguided and following the Devil or Satan.

Quran 2: 130, which means:
(Who would forsake the religion of Abraham, except one who fools his own soul?)

http://quran-ayat.com/pret/2.htm#a2_130

There is no "your truth" or "my truth". There's only truth. Everything else is bullshit.

 

[Serryah]

There is no "your truth" or "my truth". There's only truth. Everything else is bullshit.

Well on that I'd have to disagree, because truth CAN be subjective. What is true for one person isn't for another.

 

[Dexter Sinister]

Well on that I'd have to disagree, because truth CAN be subjective. What is true for one person isn't for anot

I've always had trouble with that idea. A subjective truth is one that depends on one's perceptions and feelings about the world, like Torch light's "truth" that there is no god but Allah and Mohammed is his prophet. That's true for him, and it strongly affects how he thinks and feels and acts, but there's no evidence anyone can produce that would necessarily make it true for anyone else, it's not demonstrably true in any absolute sense of being a fact everyone will accept as an accurate statement about reality. A lot of subjective truths also seem to me to be fairly trivial, like where can you get the best cup of coffee in town, is it Starbucks, Tim Horton's, A&W, that little dive on the corner? (Actually it's my house, but I'm not inviting you all in to prove it.) Or somewhat less trivially: objective truth: it's snowing; subjective truth: I love the snow. In general I think I'd have to side with Jinentonix though, a real truth is something that's true for everybody and we can all agree on it based on the evidence. Or to put it another way, you might love the snow, but there's no evidence or argument you can put forward to make anyone else love it.

 

[Serryah]

I've always had trouble with that idea. A subjective truth is one that depends on one's perceptions and feelings about the world, like Torch light's "truth" that there is no god but Allah and Mohammed is his prophet. That's true for him, and it strongly affects how he thinks and feels and acts, but there's no evidence anyone can produce that would necessarily make it true for anyone else, it's not demonstrably true in any absolute sense of being a fact everyone will accept as an accurate statement about reality. A lot of subjective truths also seem to me to be fairly trivial, like where can you get the best cup of coffee in town, is it Starbucks, Tim Horton's, A&W, that little dive on the corner? (Actually it's my house, but I'm not inviting you all in to prove it.) Or somewhat less trivially: objective truth: it's snowing; subjective truth: I love the snow. In general I think I'd have to side with Jinentonix though, a real truth is something that's true for everybody and we can all agree on it based on the evidence. Or to put it another way, you might love the snow, but there's no evidence or argument you can put forward to make anyone else love it.

If it's small things you'd have a point. But there are 'bigger' issues that can be subjective truths as well. Truths can be based on lived experiences and if someone's lived experiences are different enough, that can change a person's whole fundamental outlook on life and what is "true". And then those truths, while fundamental to the person, can sometimes change if their life experiences change. Sure things in science may stay statically true - gravity exists, E=MC2 and so on - but even in science, what is "true" can change too with new information. That doesn't mean what was previous wasn't true at the time, it just was true for the limited experience of people of that time.

Truth sometimes depends on factors and factors are always in flux.

 

[petros]

Confusing truth with belief is bad for business.

 

[Jinentonix]

Well on that I'd have to disagree, because truth CAN be subjective. What is true for one person isn't for another.

No, that's called belief.

If it's small things you'd have a point. But there are 'bigger' issues that can be subjective truths as well. Truths can be based on lived experiences and if someone's lived experiences are different enough, that can change a person's whole fundamental outlook on life and what is "true". And then those truths, while fundamental to the person, can sometimes change if their life experiences change. Sure things in science may stay statically true - gravity exists, E=MC2 and so on - but even in science, what is "true" can change too with new information. That doesn't mean what was previous wasn't true at the time, it just was true for the limited experience of people of that time.

Truth sometimes depends on factors and factors are always in flux.

Subjective "truths" aren't the truth. Let's look at art. Art is subjective., What one person loves another person may think is utter crap. Your lived experiences may give you a different view of a piece of art than someone else. The problem with the subjective is there's isn't necessarily a "true" or 'false" view.
I know people who LOVE living city life and truly believe city life is the best. I know others, including myself, who fucking hate city life and prefer living in smaller communities or rural areas. Neither view is right or wrong therefore neither view is fundamentally true, even if we feel it is. Those two opposing views which are based on lived experiences are only subjectively true. The fundamental truth is in the middle Cities are good places to live for certain reasons and cities are shitty places to live for certain reasons.

 

[Serryah]

No, that's called belief.

Subjective "truths" aren't the truth. Let's look at art. Art is subjective., What one person loves another person may think is utter crap. Your lived experiences may give you a different view of a piece of art than someone else. The problem with the subjective is there's isn't necessarily a "true" or 'false" view.
I know people who LOVE living city life and truly believe city life is the best. I know others, including myself, who fucking hate city life and prefer living in smaller communities or rural areas. Neither view is right or wrong therefore neither view is fundamentally true, even if we feel it is. Those two opposing views which are based on lived experiences are only subjectively true. The fundamental truth is in the middle Cities are good places to live for certain reasons and cities are shitty places to live for certain reasons.

Art is blatantly subjective.

Is Science subjective, or is it truth based? Depending on who you ask, it's "truth" until proven wrong.

(As an aside, I dislike city life myself). Whether someone likes city or country life wouldn't be an example of 'truth' really, but belief or opinion.

Maybe the question needs to be asked what's the difference between opinion, belief, and truth?

 

[Dexter Sinister]

Is Science subjective, or is it truth based? Depending on who you ask, it's "truth" until proven wrong.

I'd have to say neither. All scientific claims but the trivial are provisional to some extent, pending receipt of more and better data, though it also seems worth noting that what's considered trivial changes. It's now considered trivially true that the Earth orbits the sun, for instance, the data are overwhelmingly in support of that claim, but it's not that long ago that some people got into serious trouble with the religious authorities for saying so. Science doesn't really deal in truth in any absolute sense, but only what the evidence indicates is most likely to be true. Truth in an absolute sense I think you'll find only in mathematics, but even there it's hedged about with conditions, such as, granting the axioms you start with are true a certain conclusion must also be true. And Godel's Theorem throws a seriously big wrench into the works, it says that in any logical system complex enough to include ordinary arithmetic there will be propositions whose truth or falsity cannot be determined. It's still an open question whether this is strictly a mathematical theorem or is more broadly applicable to other systems of thought.

But science is objective and self correcting. As a human enterprise it suffers from all the same weaknesses any other human enterprise does, ego, habit, vested interests, authority, etc., but eventually the trash will be discovered and tossed out. Nobody talks about phlogiston anymore, for instance, or tries to chemically transmute lead into gold. Science is the only reliable means we've ever found for testing the truth content of claims, it works spectacularly well in areas where it's applicable, as evidenced by the machine you're using to read this, and it has relieved much human suffering on a scope and scale nothing else ever has, or ever could; certainly it's way ahead of religion on that score. It couldn't be used to decide if something is or is not a great work of art, that's not a scientific question, but it could be used to test claims about who made it when. If we somehow lost every science book and all scientific results and theories and had to start over (credit Neil deGrasse Tyson for this idea) from a position of complete ignorance, we'd find all the same evidence and arrive at the same conclusions we have now. I don't think that's true of any other field of human activity, and certainly it's not true of religion. If we lost all scriptures and all historical knowledge of various actors like the OT prophets and Jesus and Mohammed and Buddha and so on, it seems most unlikely that we'd reinvent the same religious belief systems. That we would reinvent religions--most likely thousands of them--seems certain, but they wouldn't duplicate any contemporary ones, because they're really not evidence based.

Hmm... well, I do get up on a soapbox now and then. I'm a committed and unapologetic admirer of science. Maybe you could tell...