The Quran Vs The Bible......

[The_Genius]

Which one is the true Word of God?

I would like to participate in a debate against a knowledgable Christian user.

Anybody up for it?

[Gods_Mercenary]

How am I supposed to know? Niether, both, I don't claim to know. I follow the Bible mostly, but I've also read the Quran and found it very enlightening. The Bible's older but has also been changed more. The Quran was just sort of written by somebody, whether that makes it better or worse is a personal thing. Either way, they both are essentially telling us about the same God, and as far as that goes, they're similar. There doesn't need to be a better one, just take them both for what they are.

[The_Genius]

Its not that I am trying to prove one is better than another. People have a right to believe what they want to.

I just want a debate...

Thats all....

[Gods_Mercenary]

Well it's not a very good one to debate, it's faith, you can't really logically debate it.

[Athena]

Both the Christian bible and the Quran are based on the Hebrew understand of the God of Abraham, which is a mix of Amenhotep IV's theology and Sumerian stories. That makes both religions something other than truth based on reality.

Both religions believe just as much in a supernatural being of evil and a supernatural being of good. That means superstition is part of both religions.
The demonology of the east was absorbed into the religions. That is, a belief in something that does not exist, demons that cause humans trouble, is part of these religions.

The original stories for these religions were Sumerian stories, interpreted by Hebrews and adjusted to fit the concept of one God. Now if you want to debate truth, start with the origin of the stories and the origin of the idea of demons. For these religions to be true, there must not only be a God but also demons. Go for it, prove the exist of demons. Give some kind of scientific explanation for demons, and for sin and how it is transmitted from generation to generation. Only by ignoring science and scientific/critical thinking can either religion appear true.

Now if you want to compare the myths of the two religions, provide a specific subject of disagreement, such as: was Jesus human and one of many a prophets, or the only begotten son of God, uniquicly different from all other human beings, or God Himself? This brings us back to the sin question.

Exactly what is sin and how is it transmitted from generation to generation, and finally how we are saved from sin? Can anyone be saved from sin without worshipping Jesus? That is your real debate with Christians, isn't it? Jesus supposedly performed mircales and that proves his Godliness (?) how is Mohammed's Godliness proven?

[Gods_Mercenary]

We are saved from sin by not sinning or at least repenting, I thought that was obvious. The Quran explicitly states that Jews and Christians are Mislims' fellows in worship, although fellows whose beliefs are considered slightly tainted, but at their core O.K.. The Jesus question is much less important than morality and the belief in one God.

[The_Genius]

Quote by: Athena Only by ignoring science and scientific/critical thinking can either religion appear true.

You are very wrong there. I do not have much of an understanding of the Bible and therefore, I can not comment. However, I am yet to see a single statement from the Quran that contradicts modern science. If you want, I can quote and give you examples.

By the way, who said Science is purely objective and non-political? Some theoretical speculations formed by desperate atheist scientists really make me laugh at times. Although, blind faith should not be encouraged. Whichever faith group you belong to, you should always be able to justify the reason for your belief with logic and reason. For me, science is a tool that we can use to prove the religious truths that have been revealed to mankind.

[Cadre]

Quote by: The_Genius You are very wrong there. I do not have much of an understanding of the Bible and therefore, I can not comment. However, I am yet to see a single statement from the Quran that contradicts modern science. If you want, I can quote and give you examples. By the way, who said Science is purely objective and non-political? Some theoretical speculations formed by desperate atheist scientists really make me laugh at times. Although, blind faith should not be encouraged. Whichever faith group you belong to, you should always be able to justify the reason for your belief with logic and reason. For me, science is a tool that we can use to prove the religious truths that have been revealed to mankind.

By the way, who said Theism is purely objective and non-political?
Some theistic theories are formed by desperate religious people who really make me laugh sometimes, with their instinctive social desire to need a "God" to protect us and make sense of questions we don't have answers too. Although, blind faith should not be encouraged. For me, theism is a tool that we can use to fill in the gaps that science has failed to reveal to us yet.

(Don't take this too seriously)

[Chaossaber314]

I think there are good and bad parts of both the Quran and the Bible. Neither one should be taken as 100% verbal truth.

[another day]

Quote by: The_Genius You are very wrong there. I do not have much of an understanding of the Bible and therefore, I can not comment. However, I am yet to see a single statement from the Quran that contradicts modern science. If you want, I can quote and give you examples. By the way, who said Science is purely objective and non-political? Some theoretical speculations formed by desperate atheist scientists really make me laugh at times. Although, blind faith should not be encouraged. Whichever faith group you belong to, you should always be able to justify the reason for your belief with logic and reason. For me, science is a tool that we can use to prove the religious truths that have been revealed to mankind.

It's not about contradicting modern science. It's about the fact that there is no reason to believe that the FOLKLORE is true. There is no evidence of divine origin. Its just well written theological myth.

For me, science is a tool that we can use to prove the religious truths that have been revealed to mankind.

In other words your a theist who would like to abuse the process of science to back already drawn conclusions (ie: pseudo science)

The idea of a supreme god being is an unnecessary assumption that stems from our position as earthly, social organisms with thinking minds. The universe does not need a personality, mind, and ego behind it, its power is derived from its system-like intelligence. More an internal force like the wind and fire, laws that govern all existance. There is no need to bring a mind like ours into play. Ours is only one form of intelligence, which is linear. The intelligence of the universe is all encompassing and does not require a consciousness with thoughts and feelings like our own. Those are simply things to aid in the survival and life of a realm-dwelling creature.

[Gods_Mercenary]

Certainly unnesecary, the fact that atheists are existing proves that.

[Lullaby Chainer]

Quote by: Gods_Mercenary Well it's not a very good one to debate, it's faith, you can't really logically debate it.

lol.. and you say this in the Philosophy & Religion section.. We've been debating issues of faith for quite some time. We've criticized both books here.. why not compare them?

[The_Genius]

Quote by: Cadre By the way, who said Theism is purely objective and non-political? Some theistic theories are formed by desperate religious people who really make me laugh sometimes, with their instinctive social desire to need a "God" to protect us and make sense of questions we don't have answers too. Although, blind faith should not be encouraged. For me, theism is a tool that we can use to fill in the gaps that science has failed to reveal to us yet. (Don't take this too seriously)

Grow up...

[Gods_Mercenary]

Quote by: Lullaby Chainer lol.. and you say this in the Philosophy & Religion section.. We've been debating issues of faith for quite some time. We've criticized both books here.. why not compare them?

Well, ya, but that's normally things that can be logically debated. But since you can't even begin to prove that they are the word of God, it's not really a topic for debate. I was saying that a discussion of which is better would be kinda hard, because from a logical stance they're just books.

[Cadre]

Quote by: The_Genius Grow up...

Uhm, Okay.

You used something called interchangeable logic, meaning that I can reverse your argument by simply using interchanging opposing terminology.

It's actually quite a 'mature' form of argument, and quite effectively illustrates a fallacious or contradictory concept/theory.

If you want to get upset with me thats fine, but at least do it under the appropriate circumstances. It just seems that everytime I put forth a reasonable and logical argument, you attempt to degrade it by insult. And only due to the mere fact that it is an opposing view point which either you can't refute, or don't bother too (perhaps due to conceit, or shock that someone could disagree with you and make perfect sense).

I think you need to be more open-minded.

[Gods_Mercenary]

You're actually pretty soft for the atheists on here.

[Cadre]

Quote by: Gods_Mercenary You're actually pretty soft for the atheists on here.

Hahaha, I'll try to be meaner?



Who said I was an atheist O_o

[Gods_Mercenary]

Well, alright, critic of religion

[Cadre]

Explorer of truth suits us all better I think

[Gods_Mercenary]

Ain't we all, though?