"The weakest link in a chain determines its strength"

[morphesium]

Most or holy books claim to have element divineness in its creation; so it is supposed to be flaw less. But in reality, each and every one of them contain

1. Sentences that contradict one another;
2. many sentences that have been proved to be false scientifically;
3. sentence that supports practices that are unacceptable to our ethics or morality.

So strangely, we have a God(s) who created human beings but doesn’t know the working of the human body.

We have a God(s) who created the universe itself – but doesn’t know that the sun is a star or anything about stars. A God who still believes that it is a geocentric universe!

(Now if you still believe or say that there is no fault in your/these holy books, then it is you who don’t know your religion.)

Just like the weakest link in a chain determines its strength, it is the false statement like these that determine the validity of these books.

For this reason to believe that this book is god sent and that it is flawless – is equivalent to considering/teasing ones God as a moron.

To believe that this book is not god sent, that it has no divineness in its creation and that it is just man made – well, it seems it is the nonbelievers and non-religious people who keep much more ethical and more rightful godly concepts. aren't they?

 

[DawudTalut]

Peace be on you. As far as Holy Quran, it is the Words of same God, whose working is called science. There is no opposition. There are about 750 verses which talk about natural phenomenon.

[Quran @ alislam.org/quran]

QUOTE
Any divide between revelation and rationality, religion and logic has to be irrational. If religion and rationality cannot proceed hand in hand, there has to be something deeply wrong with either of the two. .............

The main emphasis is on the ability of the Quran to correctly discuss all important events of the past, present and future from the beginning of the universe to its ultimate end. Aided by strong incontrovertible logic and scientific evidence, the Quran does not shy away from presenting itself to the merciless scrutiny of rationality.

Source:Al Islam -Revelation, Rationality, Knowledge and Truth
wwwDOTalislamDOTorg/library/books/revelation/

 

[Quintessence]

I'm hardly a fan of the Abrahamic sacred texts, but I'm not following your logic.

For a moment, put yourself in the seat of a writer. When you sit down to write a book, what are some of the things you consider when writing that book? At a minimum, you'd be thinking about what subject you want to write about and who your audience is. Basically, you'd determine what the purpose the book is intended to serve. From that, you tailor your book to its intended purpose and the audience. As an author, if you leave something out of your book because it isn't appropriate for its purpose or audience, what does that mean? Does it mean, as you suggest, that you as the author don't know anything about subjects you chose to omit from your book? What if you use allegory and metaphor because it serves the purpose of the book you want to write and you like that narrative style? What if you introduce paradox? Mixed messages to get people thinking for themselves? When you use these sorts of narrative elements, what, if anything, does it say about the author? Can we conclude it means anything without making assumptions?

I look at the works of Shakespeare, and I'd describe them as near as to flawless examples of elegant English writing as the world as ever seen. As with all writers, he was inspired by the gods - the Μουσαι. His works contain sentences that contradict themselves, scientific inaccuracies, and some horribly unethical and immoral acts. Does this mean we can reasonably conclude that Shakespeare was a moron?

Really not following your logic.

 

[GoodbyeDave]

I don't have scriptures, so I don't have the problem, but in defence of the Bible, I'd quote Augustine of Hippo. He wrote that if God called someone to be a prophet, that writer was inspired to teach religion: not science or history. Anything else, was their own work and, naturally, they would be ignorant of many things which we now know to be true. Of course, that didn't deal with the OT claims that Yahwe had commanded genocide and ethnic cleansing...

 

[morphesium]

Peace be on you. As far as Holy Quran, it is the Words of same God, whose working is called science. There is no opposition. There are about 750 verses which talk about natural phenomenon.

[Quran @ alislam.org/quran]

QUOTE
Any divide between revelation and rationality, religion and logic has to be irrational. If religion and rationality cannot proceed hand in hand, there has to be something deeply wrong with either of the two. .............

The main emphasis is on the ability of the Quran to correctly discuss all important events of the past, present and future from the beginning of the universe to its ultimate end. Aided by strong incontrovertible logic and scientific evidence, the Quran does not shy away from presenting itself to the merciless scrutiny of rationality.

Source:Al Islam -Revelation, Rationality, Knowledge and Truth
wwwDOTalislamDOTorg/library/books/revelation/

well, much of it is trying to correlate the inherent blunders in quran to the accepted scientific theories.

"Allah is He Who created seven heavens" => seven' can be treated as a specific term of the Quran in this verse and many other similar ones. As such it would mean that the universe comprises many units of heavens, each divided into groups of seven (a perfect number)

NO , wrong. seven heavens is not many units of heavens each divided into groups of seven.

He it is Who created for you all that is in the earth. Then turned He to the heaven, and fashioned it as seven heavens. And He is knower of all things.
Qur'an 2:29

http://www.usc.edu/org/cmje/religious-texts/quran/verses/002-qmt.php#002.029

Wrong - Most of the stars were created much before the formation of earth
please go through this site - it clearly shows a few of the errors. perhaps it should help you. and here

The Prophet said "If a house fly falls in the drink of anyone of you, he should dip it (in the drink), for one of its wings has a disease and the other has the cure for the disease."
Sahih Bukhari 4:54:537

http://www.usc.edu/org/cmje/religious-texts/hadith/bukhari/054-sbt.php#004.054.537 link here - terrific scientific findings!!! and this is one of the many.

 

[morphesium]

I'm hardly a fan of the Abrahamic sacred texts, but I'm not following your logic.

For a moment, put yourself in the seat of a writer. When you sit down to write a book, what are some of the things you consider when writing that book? At a minimum, you'd be thinking about what subject you want to write about and who your audience is. Basically, you'd determine what the purpose the book is intended to serve. From that, you tailor your book to its intended purpose and the audience. As an author, if you leave something out of your book because it isn't appropriate for its purpose or audience, what does that mean? Does it mean, as you suggest, that you as the author don't know anything about subjects you chose to omit from your book? What if you use allegory and metaphor because it serves the purpose of the book you want to write and you like that narrative style? What if you introduce paradox? Mixed messages to get people thinking for themselves? When you use these sorts of narrative elements, what, if anything, does it say about the author? Can we conclude it means anything without making assumptions?

I look at the works of Shakespeare, and I'd describe them as near as to flawless examples of elegant English writing as the world as ever seen. As with all writers, he was inspired by the gods - the Μουσαι. His works contain sentences that contradict themselves, scientific inaccuracies, and some horribly unethical and immoral acts. Does this mean we can reasonably conclude that Shakespeare was a moron?

Really not following your logic.

Humans are prone to mistakes and error, however intelligent one is - not just Shakespeare. So it is just human nature to make mistakes. on the other hand,
I believe gods are supposed not to make mistakes. An error in gods work is not acceptable - it has to be flawless. So these holy books- since it contain a lot of errors (of all kinds) - can only mean one thing; that it is man made and there is nothing holy in its creation. This is the reason why i wrote in my threading post

For this reason to believe that this book is god sent and that it is flawless – is equivalent to considering/teasing ones God as a moron.

 

[rusra02]

Most or holy books claim to have element divineness in its creation; so it is supposed to be flaw less. But in reality, each and every one of them contain

1. Sentences that contradict one another;
2. many sentences that have been proved to be false scientifically;
3. sentence that supports practices that are unacceptable to our ethics or morality.

So strangely, we have a God(s) who created human beings but doesn’t know the working of the human body.

We have a God(s) who created the universe itself – but doesn’t know that the sun is a star or anything about stars. A God who still believes that it is a geocentric universe!

(Now if you still believe or say that there is no fault in your/these holy books, then it is you who don’t know your religion.)

Just like the weakest link in a chain determines its strength, it is the false statement like these that determine the validity of these books.

For this reason to believe that this book is god sent and that it is flawless – is equivalent to considering/teasing ones God as a moron.

To believe that this book is not god sent, that it has no divineness in its creation and that it is just man made – well, it seems it is the nonbelievers and non-religious people who keep much more ethical and more rightful godly concepts. aren't they?

Can you give an example in the Bible of 1 or 2 above? Since what is "unacceptable " morally varies according to a person's beliefs, I do not see 3 as relevant.

 

[Quintessence]

Humans are prone to mistakes and error, however intelligent one is - not just Shakespeare. So it is just human nature to make mistakes. on the other hand,
I believe gods are supposed not to make mistakes. An error in gods work is not acceptable - it has to be flawless. So these holy books- since it contain a lot of errors (of all kinds) - can only mean one thing; that it is man made and there is nothing holy in its creation. This is the reason why i wrote in my threading post

1. The one-god didn't write the Bible. Humans did. They may (or may not) have been channeling the one-god, but the one-god itself certainly did not directly write anything. "Errors" in the Bible are not necessarily indicative of errors on the behalf of the one-god. They can easily be "errors" made by the channelers, or, by translators and interpreters.
2. The presence of "errors" in the Bible itself is debatable. Again, think about being an author. Ask what the intended audience and purpose of the Bible was. Unless we go mythological literalist, which is a stupid, stupid position to take on mythology, there are not "errors," there is storytelling.
3. Assessing what is a "mistake" or "error" versus "flawless" or "perfect" is a subjective value judgement that you, as a human being, are projecting onto reality. The one-god may or may not have your limited human judgement of perfection in mind. Considering how non-human the one-god is, it seems to me there is more reason to believe its idea of perfection is not the same as ours.
4. If you choose to believe gods must be perfect by your own standards, you are creating your map of the territory in a way that ensures their failure to meet this criteria. This says far more about you than it does about the the gods, be it the one-god or any other gods. For the record, the idea of gods needing to be perfect is a classical monotheist thing, and atypical of other theisms.

 

[morphesium]

Can you give an example in the Bible of 1 or 2 above? Since what is "unacceptable " morally varies according to a person's beliefs, I do not see 3 as relevant.

The followers of a particular religion contributes to 1/4 of the world population but commits 95% of world terrorism With this thread, I was targeting them since I wish to eliminate this barbaric and unethical practice of killing innocents. Their blind religious faith hampers their progress in science and technology, prohibits entertainment, and is governed with very unethical laws. Though common people are suffering a lot because of this religion, they haven't got the strength, courage or rational thinking to free themselves from the clutch of their religion.

No religious texts are exempted from any of these - contradictions, scientific errors, and supporting amoral acts. It seems you have seen only the "good things" in the bible. I appreciate that.

You may look into these links (if you want to) which shows the contradictions (and here), scientific errors (and here) and acts supporting slavery ( and here) in the bible.

 

[bishblaize]

Most or holy books claim to have element divineness in its creation; so it is supposed to be flaw less. But in reality, each and every one of them contain

1. Sentences that contradict one another;
2. many sentences that have been proved to be false scientifically;
3. sentence that supports practices that are unacceptable to our ethics or morality.

So strangely, we have a God(s) who created human beings but doesn’t know the working of the human body.

We have a God(s) who created the universe itself – but doesn’t know that the sun is a star or anything about stars. A God who still believes that it is a geocentric universe!

(Now if you still believe or say that there is no fault in your/these holy books, then it is you who don’t know your religion.)

Just like the weakest link in a chain determines its strength, it is the false statement like these that determine the validity of these books.

For this reason to believe that this book is god sent and that it is flawless – is equivalent to considering/teasing ones God as a moron.

To believe that this book is not god sent, that it has no divineness in its creation and that it is just man made – well, it seems it is the nonbelievers and non-religious people who keep much more ethical and more rightful godly concepts. aren't they?

This is just another criticism of bible inerrancy, which tbh doesn't get us very far.

 

[morphesium]

1. The one-god didn't write the Bible. Humans did. They may (or may not) have been channeling the one-god, but the one-god itself certainly did not directly write anything. "Errors" in the Bible are not necessarily indicative of errors on the behalf of the one-god. They can easily be "errors" made by the channelers, or, by translators and interpreters.
2. The presence of "errors" in the Bible itself is debatable. Again, think about being an author. Ask what the intended audience and purpose of the Bible was. Unless we go mythological literalist, which is a stupid, stupid position to take on mythology, there are not "errors," there is storytelling.
3. Assessing what is a "mistake" or "error" versus "flawless" or "perfect" is a subjective value judgement that you, as a human being, are projecting onto reality. The one-god may or may not have your limited human judgement of perfection in mind. Considering how non-human the one-god is, it seems to me there is more reason to believe its idea of perfection is not the same as ours.
4. If you choose to believe gods must be perfect by your own standards, you are creating your map of the territory in a way that ensures their failure to meet this criteria. This says far more about you than it does about the the gods, be it the one-god or any other gods. For the record, the idea of gods needing to be perfect is a classical monotheist thing, and atypical of other theisms.

With the threading post "the weakest link in a chain determines its strength" I was targeting Islamic religion (though I mentioned Gods, it was kind of various monotheistic gods ). Due to their intense brain washing, most of the Muslims believe that there is no error in Quran. The followers of this particular religion contributes to 1/4 of the world population but commits 95% of world terrorism. Their blind religious faith is hampering their progress in science and technology, prohibits entertainment, and is governed with very unethical laws. Though common people are suffering a lot because of this religion, they haven't got the strength, courage or rational thinking to free themselves from the clutch of their religion. This is the reason why I posted this thread.

I agree with you (1,2,3,4) - in polytheism, there are grievous crimes committed by the gods itself. At the time of posting, this didnt came to my mind. Thank you for reminding.

 

[rusra02]

The followers of a particular religion contributes to 1/4 of the world population but commits 95% of world terrorism With this thread, I was targeting them since I wish to eliminate this barbaric and unethical practice of killing innocents. Their blind religious faith hampers their progress in science and technology, prohibits entertainment, and is governed with very unethical laws. Though common people are suffering a lot because of this religion, they haven't got the strength, courage or rational thinking to free themselves from the clutch of their religion.

No religious texts are exempted from any of these - contradictions, scientific errors, and supporting amoral acts. It seems you have seen only the "good things" in the bible. I appreciate that.

You may look into these links (if you want to) which shows the contradictions (and here), scientific errors (and here) and acts supporting slavery ( and here) in the bible.

I realize there are claims that the Bible has scientific errors and contradictions, but I have found these claims to be untrue. Is there a specific supposed error that convinces you the Bible is not God's Word?