Posts Tagged ‘creationism’

Quran here comes to the rescue of the Bible

January 12, 2014

Dan Wilkinson has written a post on Patheos blog on January 9, 2014 titled “Creationist Ken Ham versus the Truth”;The post could be viewed by the viewers of Paarsurrey blog at the following link:

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/unfundamentalistchristians/2014/01/creationist-ken-ham-versus-the-truth/

I have contributed many comments on the post; some of them have already been published in my blog “paarsurrey” together with the comments of those who have commented on my comments; yet more are given below for the benefit of the viewers of this blog:

paarsurrey @ Dan Wilkinson:

@ Dan Wilkinson; he says in the main article, and I quote from him:

“They’re leaving the church because by essentially demonizing everyone who doesn’t agree with you, you’ve made believing in Young Earth Creationism* more important than Jesus’ explicit commandment to love God and neighbor.” and the sign (*) has been elaborated in the end:

“*The belief, born of a literal interpretation of the creation narrative in Genesis, that God created the world in six 24-hour days only 6,000 years ago.”

Here Quran comes to the rescue of Bible:

[32:6] He will plan the Divine Ordinance from the heaven unto
the earth, then shall it go up to Him in a day the duration of which is a
thousand years according to what you reckon.

http://www.alislam.org/quran/s…
[70:5] The angels and the Spirit ascend to Him in a day the measure
of which is fifty thousand years.
http://www.alislam.org/quran/s…

A day is a period; its duration would change as the subject changes.

“Creationist Ken Ham versus the Truth”

January 11, 2014

Dan Wilkinson has written a post on Patheos blog on January 9, 2014. The post could be viewed by the viewers of Paarsurrey blog at the following link:

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/unfundamentalistchristians/2014/01/creationist-ken-ham-versus-the-truth/

I have contributed following comments on the post:

paarsurrey wrote:

I think I agree with Dan Wilkinson.
Jesus talked in parables; so why should one insist on being a literalist? Please give a chance to Bible to use symbolism like Jesus and let Bible reconcile with the modern science where science has proved with constant experiments and observations against the literal understanding of the Bible.
Please focus on the core teachings of Moses and Jesus:

Matthew 22:36-40

36 “Teacher, which is the greatest commandment in the Law?”
37 Jesus replied: “‘Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.’[a] 38 This is the first and greatest commandment. 39 And the second is like it: ‘Love your neighbor as yourself.’[b] 40 All the Law and the Prophets hang on these two commandments.”

http://www.biblegateway.com/pa…

Please let the present generation concentrate and to follow the Core Teachings of Moses and Jesus.
Please don’t derail them from the right path of salvation.

“Religion is a form of Child Abuse” – An un-natural and unscientific concept

August 3, 2008

Les’s Life Lessons Says:

Hi

I believe that religion being forced onto children a form of child abuse – I wholeheartedly believe that it is, and I am NOT alone on that one.

Religion comes with so much baggage – it’s full of dogma that forces a particular view of the world into line with other people’s view. It simply is not a case of right and wrong – we have laws for that – to which most of us believe in and adhere to. We do not need to go once a week to have those laws reinforced to us in a sermon unlike religion. For the majority of our society the following is true: We know them – we understand them – at least in principal, and we adhere to them.

Religion on the other hand is a view of the world, and indeed the universe as a whole. It can be argued that it is the opposite to the scientific version of the same. A universe where god is “universally” known to exist 100% and accepted as such, would be a radically different universe to the one we have, where only a segment of society believes this. Therefore it can be argued that forcing this belief onto a child without common cause for explanation or debate is a form of child abuse.

The baggage it contains is enormous – from intelligent design, to life-after death. It’s just not fair to force such heavily weighted opinions on a child who has no capacity to either debate or refute them.

http://leslifeson.wordpress.com/2008/08/03/religion-is-a-form-of-child-abuse/

Paarsurrey says:

I don’t think that the above is a correct concept. It should be compared with a language and other social behaviour a child is moulded into from the infancy. It is a right of a child and it parents that he receives his traits from his parents. If we favour one and deny another; that would be a most unreasonable thing to do, a biased approach I must say. The child learns say learns English from his parents; would it be reasonable to say that it is biased towards French or other languages and the child should not be allowed to learn any language from his parents.

Let the child learn all the social behaviours from his parents with love; it is his right and his parents’ right. Those whe deny this; their approach is most un-natural and unreasonable.

Thanks

I am an Ahmadi peaceful Muslim