Aupmanyav
Be your own guru
Did anyone say that here?
Of course, the sentence is meaningless. We have this kind of view in one Upanishad (Brihadaranyaka) and among Hindus - "Prajnanam Brahma" (Consciousness is Brahman). I have always rejected that.
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Gravity and the Expanding Universe
- Thread starter rrobs
- Start date
Of course, the sentence is meaningless. We have this kind of view in one Upanishad (Brihadaranyaka) and among Hindus - "Prajnanam Brahma" (Consciousness is Brahman). I have always rejected that.
My apologies for presuming your perspective. It may be beneficial for me to become a more active observer of this site again.
paarsurrey
Veteran Member
The more we explore the more we realize that our level of ignorance has also increased manifold. We get to know that G-d encourages our learning and exploring, I understand. Right, please?
Regards
______________
[20:115] فَتَعٰلَی اللّٰہُ الۡمَلِکُ الۡحَقُّ ۚ وَ لَا تَعۡجَلۡ بِالۡقُرۡاٰنِ مِنۡ قَبۡلِ اَنۡ یُّقۡضٰۤی اِلَیۡکَ وَحۡیُہٗ ۫ وَ قُلۡ رَّبِّ زِدۡنِیۡ عِلۡمًا ﴿۱۱۵﴾
Exalted then is Allah, the True King! And be not impatient for the Qur’an ere its revelation is completed unto thee, but only say, ‘O my Lord, increase me in knowledge.’
The Holy Quran - Chapter: 20: TaHa
Aupmanyav
Be your own guru
I do not think you understand correctly. God is non-existent and and those who claim to be his prophets / sons / messengers / manifestations / mahdis will be the last people to encourage learning, explore. Any questioning will be blasphemy. Have your imagined God or people who claim to be his representatives ever given any evidence?
gnostic
The Lost One
You still don’t get it, rrobs.
Knowledge of natural reality have been history of learning from past mistakes, correcting outdated and faulty knowledge, through progress and advance. Science is one that develop models that explain what nature is and how it all work and then test the models (through observations, evidence).
Intelligent Design don’t do any of that.
It failed in being falsifiable model. More importantly, it failed to be tested (on the account, there have never been any evidence). And it has never been peer reviewed. Hence, Intelligent Design isn’t science.
For Intelligent Design to be a reality, then there must be evidence that the Designer itself exist. But apparently the Designer exist o more than fairies or unicorns do.
All ID adherents ever do, use propaganda and make excuses of not needing evidence. ID disciples use exactly the same tactics that creationists do, by substituting “God did it” with the “Designer did it”.
So basically, ID creationists are using the same ignorant and primitive superstition to promote their theological belief, as YEC creationists do.
Don't know who is an idiot - one who believes in evidence or one who believes in a 3rd Century old book of conflicting stories.Many a times I want to give you a winner's reputation, but then I see that you are a Bahai and not a humanist. So, Allah gave a message to Bahaollah but not to countless others who too espouse brotherhood and universal peace. Gandhi, Mandela, Martin Luther King, Dalai Lama, for example. A few things are difficult to understand.
As with the history of our dialogues you apparently have some walls the prevent constructive and meaningful dialogue with those who believe differently.
First, Revelation is universal and potentially given through the enlightenment of individuals throughout the history of humanity in an evolving spiritual nature of humanity as well as the point of Revelation for the New Age. Creation evolves through cyclic Revelation.
Last edited:
gnostic
The Lost One
Aupmanyav
Be your own guru
Revelation is a farce, no evidence of any Allah / God choosing any one as messenger. The revealed is what is beneficial to the reveler (that is why his false 1000 year cycle of manifestations). If you are talking of knowledge, then many people in 19th Century had more knowledge than Bahaollah. And world peace activists existed even in 19th Century. See the list here: List of peace activists - Wikipedia
I counted 36 with surnames starting with A and B. (Simple, check for occurrence of 18 in the page)
So What is special with Bahaollah?
I counted 36 with surnames starting with A and B. (Simple, check for occurrence of 18 in the page)
So What is special with Bahaollah?
ecco
Veteran Member
Anyone fond of the Book of Job might want to consider reading Robert Heinlein's Job: A Comedy of Justice.
ecco
Veteran Member
Dover proved that ID is Creationism. Only the name was changed in a silly attempt to try to fool rational people. It didn't work.
paarsurrey
Veteran Member
It is a chain: ignorance >* knowledge > ignorance > it goes on and onGood grief...
Has one seen any end to knowledge, please?
Regards
___________
* leads to
paarsurrey
Veteran Member
I have never seen Atheism giving any proof/evidence from among itself, it has no method of its own (Atheist Method) of exploring, it lives in doubt, ignorance and illusion or hasten to Science/Scientific Method for refuge but Science/Scientific Method has nothing to do with Atheism, I understand. Right, please?
Regards
Aupmanyav
Be your own guru
Yeah, it is in Qur'an and in "Khutba Ilhamiyya" revealed by Mirza Ghulam Ahmad.
The method of science is the method of atheism. Science searches for evidence, atheism also searches for evidence before it will accept anything. We use data provided by science. Yeah, we live in doubt but not in untruth.
Last edited:
rrobs
Well-Known Member
Where in the scriptures does it say the earth is flat?
Subduction Zone
Veteran Member
If you read it at all literally several places. When Satan showed Jesus all of the Earth from a "tall mountain". Climbing a tree to see the entire Earth is another example. The "visions" excuse does not work because even in visions this implies a Flat Earth. Then of course there is Religious Forums. The original Hebrew word for "circle" means an inscribed circle, as with a compass. That cannot be a sphere. The Bible describes the Earth as flat in word and deed, but never spherical.
paarsurrey
Veteran Member
It is one's wrong perception, please? Quran encourages exploration and learning, of course it has to be done according to the nature of the issue in hand, please. Right, please?
Regards
________________
[20:115] فَتَعٰلَی اللّٰہُ الۡمَلِکُ الۡحَقُّ ۚ وَ لَا تَعۡجَلۡ بِالۡقُرۡاٰنِ مِنۡ قَبۡلِ اَنۡ یُّقۡضٰۤی اِلَیۡکَ وَحۡیُہٗ ۫ وَ قُلۡ رَّبِّ زِدۡنِیۡ عِلۡمًا ﴿۱۱۵﴾
Exalted then is Allah, the True King! And be not impatient for the Qur’an ere its revelation is completed unto thee, but only say, ‘O my Lord, increase me in knowledge.’
[2:112] وَ قَالُوۡا لَنۡ یَّدۡخُلَ الۡجَنَّۃَ اِلَّا مَنۡ کَانَ ہُوۡدًا اَوۡ نَصٰرٰی ؕ تِلۡکَ اَمَانِیُّہُمۡ ؕ قُلۡ ہَاتُوۡا بُرۡہَانَکُمۡ اِنۡ کُنۡتُمۡ صٰدِقِیۡنَ ﴿۱۱۲﴾
And they say, ‘None shall ever enter Heaven unless he be a Jew or a Christian.’ These are their vain desires. Say, ‘Produce your proof, if you are truthful.’
ecco
Veteran Member
Is Allah the One True God?
Is Shiva the One True God?
Is Jesus, along with the Father and the Holy Ghost, the One True God?
Science says they cannot all be the One True God.
What say you?
gnostic
The Lost One
Good grief...Did you really just say all that codswallop?
Due to the complexity of nature and the fundamental mechanisms behind that nature, there would be always be some unknown factors that natural/physical scientists wouldn’t know or understand at the time.
So it would take time to learning more about what scientists are investigating/researching.
What you are basically saying in your reply, that man should stop learning. That’s sort of nonsense that I would expect from SOME theists, who preferred ignorance over knowledge, because it would clash with your religious belief.
You are sounding like a YEC creationist or like a literal fundamental. Creationists and some theists are so insecure in their faiths that people like yourself, don’t like scientific knowledge to exceed the boundaries of your respective scriptures.
Knowledge are never perfect. There will always more to learn, more to add to knowledge. There are always better ways to explain what we learn and know, and better ways to test any “knowledge”.
I said “some” theists, because it is obvious NOT ALL theists would think or feel as you do. Other theists, thrive in the unknown, and wanted to uncover the mysteries, through learning, researching and testing.
Scientific theories, every single one of them, are provisional knowledge only. New and better observations and evidence, better explanations or explanatory models can question and challenge existing theories.
Old theories can be replaced, if it is outdated. But it could also be corrected, improved, modified or expanded. That’s the beauty of science, the self-correcting mechanisms of science, and advances that can be made, by learning more.
Knowledge that don’t change, will eventually become outdated, and will stagnate and become irrelevant.
The Bible, the Qur’an, and all other ancient and modern scriptures are not perfect, and have become outdated when it come to describing natural phenomena. The descriptions in the passages in scriptures are often vague, imprecise and often incorrect.
The people who contributed and wrote scriptures like bible and Quran, were still believing the ancient (Bronze Age) Babylonian astronomy, that the earth was fixed, and the Sun and planets moving across the sky - hence the Geocentric Model of Planetary Motion.
Heliocentric model was first theorized and predicted by Greek astronomer and mathematician Aristarchus of Samos during the 3rd century BCE, where the planets, including Earth itself orbited around the Sun.
But Aristarchus’ heliocentric model was so unpopular, that geocentric was considered science for another 1700 years. Nicolaus Copernicus would revive Aristarchus’ heliocentric model, and the discovery would be made about 50 years later by Galileo. Then Johannes Kepler and Isaac Newton contributed to the Copernicus’ heliocentric model, with Newton adding gravity into heliocentric motions.
Each people who contributed to the existing science, will help science progresses and advances our knowledge. And that’s a good thing.
Milton Platt
Well-Known Member
Great....so you just offered an argument that if the universe was not what it is, then it would be something else. Bid deal........
paarsurrey
Veteran Member
Kindly quote from Science in this connection, please.
I understand that Science/Scientific Method never took up this issue. It is none of its business, please. Right, please?
Regards