Tallmacky had a very interesting post
</font><blockquote><font class=\"small\">Quote:</font><hr />
Has there been any physcial proof proving that the many tales and stories in the bible are true? No, right?Now we could say they were never meant to be taken as truth this and that and we could go on for years, but they were written as so and at that time were to be taken as truth, until later on as I said as the times change religion and it\'s basis seems to also. Why would solid proof of existence of god morph to fit our noble and lowly human culture(s) and personal beliefs?
<hr /></blockquote><font class=\"post\">
although the Bible in its present form contains many contradictions, its original form was pure, most accurately reflected in the Dead Sea Scrolls. These scrolls have substantial evidence of paranormal intervention including
1/ the bible code, a linguistic code in the original hebrew which has been proven to contain facts of future events, notably 20th century events involving Israel.
2/ some scientific accuracies, how the earth is a sphere for example + beneficial traits of moderate drinking
3/ the names of cities destroyed by God, as mentioned in the bible, have been seen to exist as archaeologists will prove, along with the traits of such cities, eg Pompeii, centre of homosexuality and paedophilia,
my best bet would be 1/
</font><blockquote><font class=\"small\">Quote:</font><hr />
i don\'t see how you disrupted my original point Belgareth, I told you that debates were based on facts, logic, and common sense. Is there physical proof of Evolution? YES. Is there any physical proof for Religion? No. Now I am not taking the side of either one totally, instead I am seeing that Evolution has much backing and logic in it\'s corner, go outside look at our world!
<hr /></blockquote><font class=\"post\">
evolution has no proof because the theory of evolution is fundamentally flawed as I shall explain. Therefore all possible evidence arising from these flaws are also flawed and have no merit.
Moreover, religion does have physical proof, demonstrated most potently through Islam, which is the original, pure form of Christianity, Judaism, Buddhism, and several other major beliefs as they all started with the same fundamental precedent, which only still remains in Islam.
Examples include 1/ scientific accuracy&#8217;s in the Koran, the most uptodate discovered through science in the last 15-20 years. Examples include accurate accounts of embryology, aspects of nuclear physics such as the formation of nebulae and the singular origin of multiple celestial bodies, aspects of plate tectonics, brain functions, weather cycles and formation of lightening, hail etc, amongst other things to give you an idea.
2/ 19A=B, a law discovered in the Koran, which displays the perfection of God&#8217;s creation through mathematical precision. In several ways, it is similar to the language code in the Dead Sea Scrolls, although it is numbers this time. The difference arises in that it applies to the whole universe as we know it.
3/ Abnormal phenomenon in which religious inscriptions are written on various things in the natural world, e.g., the moon, various fruits, shapes of trees, fish, clouds, bee hives, eggs, human lungs to name a few.
4/ religions such as Buddhism, Judaism back up the claims of the Koran through prophecies, hence all religions are linked
If you want more then you can use a search engine and you&#8217;ll find 100s there. Therefore the validity of religion cannot be underestimated. Furthermore, these religions have concepts contrary to evolution. Thus a flaw has to be somewhere.
Firstly, may I add that the reason why so many of us, perhaps 99.9% of us have fallen for evolution is that it is not at all obvious why it is false, without having the necessary mental capacity to refute its claims, which, once formulated and told, destroys evolution altogether. Thus it may also be difficult to understand what is being said.
I will start with a basic flaw in evolution since I have no idea to the extent of your knowledge, and will build up my arguments as the situation warrants.
1/ assuming the theory of evolution, the small physiological changes that occur through the mutating of the DNA, will gradually, over long periods of time, diverge the species into separate ones.
Flaw: a) the physiological change will have to be regulated in order to be functional , through the necessary differentiation existing in the brain/nucleus. In other words, small physiological changes cannot occur, without larger ones occuring within the same mutation,
ie an additional mechanism or part of a mechanism in the body arising through mutation would be useless unless co-ordinated by the brain + all other organs to adapt to the new physiological circumstance (ie the mutation)
This can possibly occur through huge DNA change = huge structural change in chromosomes in creating favourable characteristics for the mechanism + the mutation to create the differentiation in brain = impossible as the chances of the &#8220;mutant&#8221;, gaining 2 favourable characteristics and possibly many more from the complexity of the brain, (further implying greater changes in the DNA change in one mutation, thus further decreasing probability) is against the claims of evolution of a gradual change over thousands/millions of years.
b) Such a flaw applies to all mechanism in the human body (and indeed all organisms), and at all periods of time. In other words, in order to obtain A, B is needed, which needs C, which needs D, no matter what we take as our baseline to work with. (ie no matter where we start in the evolution process [including bacteria, although they are a special case, ie they can mutate successfully but are not the product of mutation] and for whatever mutation). And if B, C and D weren&#8217;t around, (ie. Sticking with the basic evolution theory of slow gradual change), then A is basically a pile of molecular heap, without purpose, and would be seen as unfavourable for years and years = death of organism + that mutation in cases of cruciality, which would be every case, as it is applying simultaneously to all circumstances in the evolution process . )
and so c) no organism could have mutated, unless through the mutation, everything required is also obtained.
Ie. If mutation had occurred, everything single thing would have to have been mutated in that next generation too.
And so the characteristics of any mutation are non-functional through the evolutionary mechanism, as, through such a mechanism, the organism is not highly differentiated enough in order to be functional.
Therefore, I conclude that such a simple flaw destroys all measure of evolution acting as an accurate basis for human and indeed any organisms&#8217; development, and through the analysis provided and with the appropriate understanding, it is thus guaranteed to be false. BTW, this is only a very basic flaw, there are 100s more for anyone daring enough. Personally, no professor of physiology on earth can come back from that, although I would like PhD&#8217;s and the like to try and refute my arguments.
</font><blockquote><font class=\"small\">Quote:</font><hr />
The bible was written by men who believed that a man was very special and attributed him to being the son of god? Would you believe if someone told you he was the son of god? Would you believe him 2,000 years ago?
<hr /></blockquote><font class=\"post\">
your understanding in this regard is partially correct. Jesus Christ (peace be upon him) was a messenger and Apostle of God, like tens of thousands before him. However, the authors of the original authors of the authentic Gospel/ New Testament did not even claim he was the son of God, and it was only after the destruction of Christ&#8217;s teachings in the 2nd century that such a concept was added by Roman and Jewish conspirators.
I hope my post sheds much light on these topics.
/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smirk.gif
P.S, sorry about the 8217\'£!s etc, my apostrophe is duffed up and ive just noticed now /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif