PDA

View Full Version : Scientists Confirm the Sign of God



justme
06-28-2008, 12:25 PM
The attributes of the universe discovered by science point to the existence of God. Science leads us to the conclusion that the universe has a Creator and this Creator is perfect in might, wisdom and knowledge. It is religion that shows us the way in knowing God. It is therefore possible to say that science is a method we use to better see and investigate the realities addressed by religion. Nevertheless, today, some of the scientists who step forth in the name of science take an entirely different stand. In their view, scientific discoveries do not imply the creation of God. They have, on the contrary, projected an atheistic understanding of science by saying that it is not possible to reach God through scientific data: they claim that science and religion are two clashing notions.

As a matter of fact, this atheistic understanding of science is quite recent. Until a few centuries ago, science and religion were never thought to clash with each other, and science was accepted as a method of proving the existence of God. The so-called atheistic understanding of science flourished only after the materialist and positivist philosophies swept through the world of science in the 18th and 19th centuries.

Particularly after Charles Darwin postulated the theory of evolution in 1859, circles holding a materialistic world view started to ideologically defend this theory, which they looked upon as an alternative to religion. The theory of evolution argued that the universe was not created by a creator but came into being by chance. As a result, it was asserted that religion was in conflict with science. The British researchers Michael Baigent, Richard Leigh and Henry Lincoln said on this issue:

For Isaac Newton, a century and a half before Darwin, science was not separate from religion but, on the contrary, an aspect of religion, and ultimately subservient to it. ...But the science of Darwin's time became precisely that, divorcing itself from the context in which it had previously existed and establishing itself as a rival absolute, an alternative repository of meaning. As a result, religion and science were no longer working in concert, but rather stood opposed to each other, and humanity was increasingly forced to choose between them. (Michael Baigent, Richard Leigh, Henry Lincoln, The Messianic Legacy, Gorgi Books, London: 1991, p. 177-178.)

As we stated before, the so-called split between science and religion was totally ideological. Some scientists, who earnestly believed in materialism, conditioned themselves to prove that the universe had no creator and they devised various theories in this context. The theory of evolution was the most famous and the most important of them. In the field of astronomy as well certain theories were developed such as the "steady-state theory" or the "chaos theory". However, all of these theories that denied creation were demolished by science itself, as we have clearly shown in the previous chapters.

Today, scientists who still keep to these theories and insist on denying all things religious, are dogmatic and bigoted people, who have conditioned themselves not to believe in God. The famous English zoologist and evolutionist D.M.S. Watson confesses to this dogmatism as he explains why he and his colleagues accept the theory of evolution:

If so, it will present a parallel to the theory of evolution itself, a theory universally accepted, not because it can be proved by logically coherent evidence to be true, but because the only alternative, special creation, is clearly incredible. (D.M.S. Watson, "Adaptation", Nature, no. 124, p. 233)

What Watson means by "special creation" is God's creation. As acknowledged, this scientist finds this "unacceptable". But why? Is it because science says so? Actually it does not. On the contrary, science proves the truth of creation. The only reason why Watson looks upon this fact as unacceptable is because he has conditioned himself to deny the existence of God. All other evolutionists take the same stand.

Evolutionists rely not on science but on materialist philosophy and they distort science to make it agree with this philosophy. A geneticist and an outspoken evolutionist from Harvard University, Richard Lewontin, confesses to this truth:

It is not that the methods and institutions of science somehow compel us to accept a material explanation of the phenomenal world, but, on the contrary, that we are forced by our a priori adherence to material causes to create an apparatus of investigation and a set of concepts that produce material explanations, no matter how counter-intuitive, no matter how mystifying to the uninitiated. Moreover, that materialism is absolute, so we cannot allow a Divine Foot in the door. (Richard Levontin, The Demon-Haunted World, The New York Review of Books, January, 9, 1997, p. 28)

On the other hand, today, just as in history, there are, as opposed to this dogmatic materialist group, scientists who confirm God's existence, and regard science as a way of knowing Him. Some trends developing in the USA such as "Creationism" or "Intelligent Design" prove by scientific evidence that all living things were created by God.

This shows us that science and religion are not conflicting sources of information, but that, on the contrary, science is a method that verifies the absolute truths provided by religion. The clash between religion and science can only hold true for certain religions that incorporate some superstitious elements as well as divine sources. However, this is certainly out of the question for Islam, which relies only on the pure revelation of God. Moreover, Islam particularly advocates scientific enquiry, and announces that probing the universe is a method to explore the creation of God. The following verse of the Qur'an addresses this issue;

Do they not look at the sky above them? How We have built it and adorned it, and there are no rifts therein? And the earth - We have spread it out, and set thereon mountains standing firm, and caused it to bring forth plants of beauteous kinds (in pairs). And We send down from the sky blessed water whereby We give growth unto gardens and the grain of crops. And tall palm-trees, with shoots of fruit-stalks, piled one over another. (Surah Qaf, 6-7, 9-10)

As the above verses imply, the Qur'an always urges people to think, to reason and to explore everything in the world in which they live. This is because science supports religion, saves the individual from ignorance, and causes him to think more consciously; it opens wide one's world of thought and helps one grasp the signs of God self-evident in the universe. Prominent German physicist Max Planck said:

"Anybody who has been seriously engaged in scientific work of any kind realizes that over the entrance to the gates of the temple of science are written the words: Ye must have faith. It is a quality which the scientist cannot dispense with." (J. De Vries, Essential of Physical Science, Wm.B.Eerdmans Pub.Co., Grand Rapids, SD 1958, p. 15.)

All the issues we have treated so far simply put it that the existence of the universe and all living things cannot be explained by coincidences.
Many scientists who have left their mark on the world of science have confirmed, and still confirm this great reality. The more people learn about the universe, the higher does their admirations for its flawless order become. Every newly-discovered detail supports creation in an unquestionable way.

The great majority of modern physicists accept the fact of creation as we set foot in the 21st century. David Darling also maintains that neither time, nor space, nor matter, nor energy, nor even a tiny spot or a cavity existed at the beginning. A slight quick movement and a modest quiver and fluctuation occurred. Darling ends by saying that when the cover of this cosmic box was opened, the tendrils of the miracle of creation appeared from beneath it.

Besides, it is already known that almost all the founders of diverse scientific branches believed in God and His divine books. The greatest physicists in history, Newton, Faraday, Kelvin and Maxwell are a few examples of such scientists.

In the time of Isaac Newton, the great physicist, scientists believed that the movements of the heavenly bodies and planets could be explained by different laws. Nevertheless, Newton believed that the creator of earth and space was the same, and therefore they had to be explained by the same laws. He said:

This most beautiful system of the sun, planets, and comets could only proceed from the counsel and dominion of an intelligent and powerful Being. This Being governs all things, not as the soul of the world, but as Lord over all, and on account of His dominion. He is wont to be called Lord God, Universal Ruler.

As is evident, thousands of scientists who have been doing research in the fields of physics, mathematics, and astronomy since the Middle Ages all agree on the idea that the universe is created by a single Creator and always focus on the same point. The founder of physical astronomy, Johannes Kepler, stated his strong belief in God in one of his books where he wrote:

Since we astronomers are priests of the highest God in regard to the book of nature, it befits us to be thoughtful, not of the glory of our minds, but rather, above all else, of the glory of God. (Dan Graves, Scientists of Faith, . 51)

The great physicist, William Thompson (Lord Kelvin), who established thermodynamics on a formal scientific basis, was also a Christian who believed in God. He had strongly opposed Darwin's theory of evolution and totally rejected it. In 1903, short before his death, he made the unequivocal statement that, "With regard to the origin of life, science... positively affirms creative power." (David Darling, Deep Time, Delacorte Press, 1989, New York.)

One of the professors of physics at Oxford University, Robert Mattheus states the same fact in his book published in 1992 where he explains that DNA molecules were created by God. Mattheus says that all these stages proceed in a perfect harmony from a single cell to a living baby, then to a little child, and finally to an adolescent. All these events can be explained only by a miracle, just as in all the other stages of biology.
Mattheus asks how such a perfect and complex organism can emerge from such a simple and tiny cell and how a glorious HUMAN is created from a cell even smaller than the dot on the letter i. He finally concludes that this is nothing short of a miracle. (Robert Matthews, Unravelling the Mind of God, London Bridge, July, 1995, p.8)

Some other scientists who admit that the universe is created by a Creator and who are known by their cited attributes are:

Robert Boyle (the father of modern chemistry)
Iona William Petty (known for his studies on statistics and modern economy)
Michael Faraday (one of the greatest physicists of all times)
Gregory Mendel (the father of genetics; he invalidated Darwinism with his discoveries in the science of genetics)
Louis Pasteur (the greatest name in bacteriology; he declared war on Darwinism)
John Dalton (the father of atomic theory)
Blaise Pascal (one of the most important mathematicians)
John Ray (the most important name in British natural history)
Nicolaus Steno (a famous stratiographer who investigated earth layers)
Carolus Linnaeus (the father of biological classification)
Georges Cuvier (the founder of comparative anatomy)
Matthew Maury (the founder of oceanography)
Thomas Anderson (one the pioneers in the field of organic chemistry)

Jeff
06-28-2008, 01:34 PM
What are you trying to imply here mare?

echo101
06-28-2008, 02:01 PM
Gusto nyang sabihin na ang islam ang tunay kc favor daw ang science sa islam.. Gamitin ba ang science para sukatin ang katotohanan ng Diyos? what stupidity...

Yes, Science was designed by God, pero betcha-by-golly-wow naman, gatuldok lng ang science kumpara sa Diyos.. God is a supernatural God, at sa Science walang superantural, kc ang Science ay parang philosophy, always trying to explain things thru logic...

justme
06-28-2008, 02:59 PM
What are you trying to imply here mare?

Hi Mang Jeff,

Pinost ko lang yan para basahin...

Kung gusto mo magpost ka rin ng katulad ng ganyan...

smile :) (di ko nlng gagamitin ung "tawa muna :laugh" kasi di niyo type eh)

justme
06-28-2008, 03:16 PM
Gusto nyang sabihin na ang islam ang tunay kc favor daw ang science sa islam.. Gamitin ba ang science para sukatin ang katotohanan ng Diyos? what stupidity...

Yes, Science was designed by God, pero betcha-by-golly-wow naman, gatuldok lng ang science kumpara sa Diyos.. God is a supernatural God, at sa Science walang superantural, kc ang Science ay parang philosophy, always trying to explain things thru logic...

Hi echo101,

May sinabi po ba akong ganyan?

Bakit di nlng po kayo magpaskil ng Scientific evidence galing sa inyong bibliya...kasi kung ang sinabi ng Diyos eh gumawa siya ng ganito ganyan...dapat eh nadidiscover po yan ng science...

Kasi ang Diyos ang lumalang ng langit at lupa at ng lahat na nandito sa mundong ito...kaya kung may madiscover tayo na through science eh di mapapatunayan natin na sakto ang Salita niya sa kasulatan na kanyang ipinadala sa mundo...

Smile muna :)

agta
06-28-2008, 04:53 PM
Do they not look at the sky above them? How We have built it and adorned it, and there are no rifts therein? And the earth - We have spread it out, and set thereon mountains standing firm, and caused it to bring forth plants of beauteous kinds (in pairs). And We send down from the sky blessed water whereby We give growth unto gardens and the grain of crops. And tall palm-trees, with shoots of fruit-stalks, piled one over another. (Surah Qaf, 6-7, 9-10)

The references you gave here, justme, in support of the truth of God are really great! Thank you...

But the above qoute you made from quran somehow intrigued me. Who are the we mentioned therein?

justme
06-30-2008, 02:32 PM
The references you gave here, justme, in support of the truth of God are really great! Thank you...

But the above qoute you made from quran somehow intrigued me. Who are the we mentioned therein?

Sample verse:

Chapter 2:38.

We said: "Get ye down all from here; and if, as is sure, there comes to you Guidance from me, whosoever follows My guidance, on them shall be no fear, nor shall they grieve.


The transition from the plural “we” at the beginning of the verse to the “singular” late in the same verse, Allah speaks of himself usually in the first person plural “we” it is the plural respect and honour and is used in human language in Royal proclamation and decrees. But where a special personal relationship is expressed the singular “I” or “Me” is used.


Sample verses:

31:10. He created the heavens without any pillars that ye can see; He set on the earth mountains standing firm, lest it should shake with you; and He scattered through it beasts of all kinds. We send down rain from the sky, and produce on the earth every kind of noble creature, in pairs.

31:11. Such is the Creation of Allah. now show Me what is there that others besides Him have created: nay, but the Transgressors are in manifest error.

Note the change of the pronoun at this stage in the verse, before this, Allah was spoken of in the third person “he” and the acts of creation referred to were acts that in the main were completed when the universe as we see it came into being.

agta
06-30-2008, 07:59 PM
Originally Posted by justme View Post

Do they not look at the sky above them? How We have built it and adorned it, and there are no rifts therein? And the earth - We have spread it out, and set thereon mountains standing firm, and caused it to bring forth plants of beauteous kinds (in pairs). And We send down from the sky blessed water whereby We give growth unto gardens and the grain of crops. And tall palm-trees, with shoots of fruit-stalks, piled one over another. (Surah Qaf, 6-7, 9-10)
The references you gave here, justme, in support of the truth of God are really great! Thank you...

But the above qoute you made from quran somehow intrigued me. Who are the we mentioned therein?

Sample verse:

Chapter 2:38.

We said: "Get ye down all from here; and if, as is sure, there comes to you Guidance from me, whosoever follows My guidance, on them shall be no fear, nor shall they grieve.


The transition from the plural “we” at the beginning of the verse to the “singular” late in the same verse, Allah speaks of himself usually in the first person plural “we” it is the plural respect and honour and is used in human language in Royal proclamation and decrees. But where a special personal relationship is expressed the singular “I” or “Me” is used.
He he he! Palusot...! "We" is the plural respect and honour? Who said so? And if that invention is true, whom was your Allah honoring? Himself? There is no sense it in. The best guess is your Allah, peace be with you, he he he, does not know grammar.

justme
07-01-2008, 10:29 AM
He he he! Palusot...! "We" is the plural respect and honour? Who said so? And if that invention is true, whom was your Allah honoring? Himself? There is no sense it in. The best guess is your Allah, peace be with you, he he he, does not know grammar.

Ano pong palusot mam Agta...di niyo po yan alam? you're speaking in English yet you don't know about the use of "we"...

here read it in wikipedia.com:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/We

Lumalabas po na hindi kayo marunong gumamit ng grammar nyan Mam Agta...nakakahiya naman for someone like you...who is used to speaking in English here in the forum...

Smile ka muna :)

cerebro
07-01-2008, 01:17 PM
Hi echo101,

Bakit di nlng po kayo magpaskil ng Scientific evidence galing sa inyong bibliya...kasi kung ang sinabi ng Diyos eh gumawa siya ng ganito ganyan...dapat eh nadidiscover po yan ng science...

Kasi ang Diyos ang lumalang ng langit at lupa at ng lahat na nandito sa mundong ito...kaya kung may madiscover tayo na through science eh di mapapatunayan natin na sakto ang Salita niya sa kasulatan na kanyang ipinadala sa mundo...

Smile muna :)


The Bible Is God’s Word

Peter said, “Holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost.” (II Peter 1:21.) The Holy Spirit (Holy Ghost) so guided the writers of the Bible that they could not make mistakes. “Which things also we speak, not in the words which man’s wisdom teacheth, but which the Holy Ghost teacheth” (I Corinthians 2:13.) Because of this there are no real contradictions in the Bible. Those things which appear to be contradictions disappear under close investigation.

That the Bible is true may be shown by several of its characteristics. It is scientifically accurate, even though it is not a book of science. It is historically accurate. Every attempt to prove it historically wrong has failed. It is prophetically correct as is seen in many prophecies which have been fulfilled beyond question. It is impartial, presenting both good and bad of all men, not trying to gloss over the sins of any man who might be “a man after God’s own heart.” It presents the world’s highest standard of morality. Finally, it has never been destroyed in spite of dozens of attempts to exterminate it.

like the recent discovery of the archeologists that proves the existence of King David in the Old testament of the Holy Bible etc.etc. This was actually shown in the National Geographic Channel early this year.



Source(s):
For additional information about the Bible:
Check out http://www.johnfourteen.com (http://www.johnfourteen.com/) from John 14 in the Bible
Look at "Studies in the Bible" and "Lessons from the Pulpit"
The lessions from the pulpit can be read on computers with
dial up. Find out what the Bible Says - not what someone
thinks it says.

cerebro
07-01-2008, 01:27 PM
pls. don't get me wrong. i don't descriminate other religions. i have respect for them as i have respect on my own God.

but i can't help to question your so called - "paniniwala".

sa mga Muslim daw, pag mas madami kang napatay mas malapit ka daw sa inyong Allah.. i don't know how true it is. just correct me if i'm wrong..

and to cite an example, terrorists... di ba ok lang mamatay at pasabugin ang bomba na nakakabit sa kanilang katawan (suicide bomber..) dhil mas mamahalin sila ng Allah nyo? khit madaming tao ang mamatay..

another example: the incident that happend somewhere in India, (you can actually watch the video sa youtube, search " poso"). the video showed how ex-Muslims, young and old, were killed brutally by Muslims. ang dahilan? dahil gustong change ng religion ang mga kawawang Muslim. they actually wanted to be Christians. but sad to say, they were killed before it happened.

makatarungan bang gawain yan? ganyan b tlga paniniwala ng mga Muslim?

justme
07-01-2008, 04:30 PM
The Bible Is God’s Word

Peter said, “Holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost.” (II Peter 1:21.) The Holy Spirit (Holy Ghost) so guided the writers of the Bible that they could not make mistakes. “Which things also we speak, not in the words which man’s wisdom teacheth, but which the Holy Ghost teacheth” (I Corinthians 2:13.) Because of this there are no real contradictions in the Bible. Those things which appear to be contradictions disappear under close investigation.

Would you agree if it's God's words it should not contained any errors? It should not be altered, changed, added or some verses should not be ommitted?

The Jehovah's Witnesses in their "AWAKE!" Magazine dated 8 September, 1957, carried this startling headline — "50000 ERRORS IN THE BIBLE?"

http://www.jamaat.net/bible/AwakeArticle(1957).JPG



That the Bible is true may be shown by several of its characteristics. It is scientifically accurate, even though it is not a book of science. It is historically accurate. Every attempt to prove it historically wrong has failed. It is prophetically correct as is seen in many prophecies which have been fulfilled beyond question. It is impartial, presenting both good and bad of all men, not trying to gloss over the sins of any man who might be “a man after God’s own heart.” It presents the world’s highest standard of morality. Finally, it has never been destroyed in spite of dozens of attempts to exterminate it.

like the recent discovery of the archeologists that proves the existence of King David in the Old testament of the Holy Bible etc.etc. This was actually shown in the National Geographic Channel early this year.

The Bible claims that Earth has four ends and four corners. Nobody can ever think a ball or a cycle to have corners and ends! Only flat items can have corners and ends, and this is exactly what the bible is trying to express regarding the shape of the earth. The earth is not flat, as once thought and it has no corners or ends at all. If Magnetic Poles can be taken as ends or corners of earth, then this definitely opposed to the axis of rotation.

Isaiah 11:12
12 And he shall set up an ensign for the nations, and shall assemble the outcasts of Israel, and gather together the dispersed of Judah from the FOUR CORNERS OF THE EARTH. (KJV)

Revelation 7:1
1 And after these things I saw four angels standing on FOUR CORNERS OF THE EARTH, holding the four winds of the earth, that the wind should not blow on the earth, nor on the sea, nor on any tree. (KJV)

Job 38:13
13 That it might take hold of the ENDS OF THE EARTH, that the wicked might be shaken out of it? (KJV)

Jeremiah 16:19
19 O LORD, my strength, and my fortress, and my refuge in the day of affliction, the Gentiles shall come unto thee from the ENDS OF THE EARTH, and shall say, Surely our fathers have inherited lies, vanity, and things wherein there is no profit. (KJV)

Daniel 4:11
11 The tree grew, and was strong, and the height thereof reached unto heaven, and the sight thereof to the ENDS OF ALL THE EARTH: (KJV)

Matthew 4:8
Again, the devil taketh him up into an exceeding high mountain, and sheweth him all the kingdoms of the world, and the glory of them; (KJV)


Astronomical bodies are spherical, and you cannot see the entire exterior surface from any place. The kingdoms of Egypt, China, Greece, Crete, sections of Asia Minor, India, Maya (in Mexico), Carthage (North Africa), Rome (Italy), Korea, and other settlements from these kingdoms of the world were widely distributed.

Smile ka muna :)

agta
07-01-2008, 10:33 PM
Ano pong palusot mam Agta...di niyo po yan alam? you're speaking in English yet you don't know about the use of "we"...

here read it in wikipedia.com:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/We

Lumalabas po na hindi kayo marunong gumamit ng grammar nyan Mam Agta...nakakahiya naman for someone like you...who is used to speaking in English here in the forum...

Smile ka muna :)
He he he! Ito and nasa wikipedia, justme:

"We (IPA: /wiː/) is the first-person, plural personal pronoun (subject case) in Modern English."

Saan doon ang idea na "plural respect and honour"? When "we" is used in grammar, it is inconsistent with He when referring to the same person. And that is what your Allah precisely did, inconsistency in the use of pronouns.

since1980
07-02-2008, 08:35 AM
God must be thoroughly confused due to the gazillions of religions and differing opinions about His existence and ministrations.

Better pray to God directly. :cool:

justme
07-02-2008, 08:36 AM
He he he! Ito and nasa wikipedia, justme:

"We (IPA: /wiː/) is the first-person, plural personal pronoun (subject case) in Modern English."


Saan doon ang idea na "plural respect and honour"? When "we" is used in grammar, it is inconsistent with He when referring to the same person. And that is what your Allah precisely did, inconsistency in the use of pronouns.

Eto ung nakalagay...hindi mo binasa lahat mam Agta...kasi hinahanapan mo ako ng mali...first sentence lang ung binasa mo..ano ba yan!

Pakibasa ung sa table...

Personal Pronouns in Old English...kung saan ginagamit din ang "we" ng 1st person..

Yang "we" na yan na ginagamit sa pag translate sa Qur'an suggests a form of "royalty o divine right"

Atypical uses of we

Main article: Pluralis Majestatis

A nosism is the use of 'we' to refer to oneself[1]. A common example is the royal we (Pluralis Majestatis), which is a nosism employed by a person of high office, such as a monarch or pope. It is also used in certain formal contexts by bishops and university rectors. The expression was first used in 1169 when English King Henry II (d. 1189), hard pressed by his barons over the investiture controversy, assumed the common theory of "divine right of kings," that the monarch acted conjointly with the deity. Hence, he used "we" as "God and I...," or so the legend goes. (See Rolls Series, 2.12)

agta
07-02-2008, 10:19 PM
Pakibasa ung sa table...

Personal Pronouns in Old English...kung saan ginagamit din ang "we" ng 1st person..

Yang "we" na yan na ginagamit sa pag translate sa Qur'an suggests a form of "royalty o divine right"

Atypical uses of we

Main article: Pluralis Majestatis

A nosism is the use of 'we' to refer to oneself[1]. A common example is the royal we (Pluralis Majestatis), which is a nosism employed by a person of high office, such as a monarch or pope. It is also used in certain formal contexts by bishops and university rectors. The expression was first used in 1169 when English King Henry II (d. 1189), hard pressed by his barons over the investiture controversy, assumed the common theory of "divine right of kings," that the monarch acted conjointly with the deity. Hence, he used "we" as "God and I...," or so the legend goes. (See Rolls Series, 2.12)
Actually, the pronoun we is always first person. It cannot be second or third person. Granting but without admitting, he he he, that your Allah used the royal we, or so the legend goes, then he should be consistent in the use of that pronoun. He should not unnecessarily shift to the use of the pronoun He. Besides, which came first, the quran or King Henry II? Your reference says that the "royal we" was first used in 1169 and now you are telling me that the quran used it. Are you saying therefore that the quran came only after 1169?

Jeff
07-03-2008, 10:49 AM
Hi Mang Jeff,

Pinost ko lang yan para basahin...

Kung gusto mo magpost ka rin ng katulad ng ganyan...

smile :) (di ko nlng gagamitin ung "tawa muna :laugh" kasi di niyo type eh)

How can others understand what you posted and what you are trying to bring us, whereinfact you don't emphasize what we need us to know or what message you want to share. Basta ka nalang nag post dyan, if you want to share something, dapat may opening remarks ka ano ba. Kaya tuloy iba ibang speculations ang lumalabas e.

Jeff
07-03-2008, 10:56 AM
Ano pong palusot mam Agta...di niyo po yan alam? you're speaking in English yet you don't know about the use of "we"...

here read it in wikipedia.com:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/We

Lumalabas po na hindi kayo marunong gumamit ng grammar nyan Mam Agta...nakakahiya naman for someone like you...who is used to speaking in English here in the forum...

Smile ka muna :)


Alam mo Aling Justme, my point ang tanong ni Agta, ngayon kung sa akala mo mali, itanong mo sa mga alipuris mo kung tama ang gumamit ng "WE" kasi naging confusing yan sa reader, kahit ikaw magbasa naintindihan mo ba ano ibig sabihin ng WE dun, nkiki ride on kalang sa mga nag sulsul sayo, and I don't believe you noticed it na may hindi consistent sa gramar pa lang. Mag masid ka at alamin ang tama wag kang ride ng ride sa iba.

Jeff
07-03-2008, 11:01 AM
pls. don't get me wrong. i don't descriminate other religions. i have respect for them as i have respect on my own God.

but i can't help to question your so called - "paniniwala".

sa mga Muslim daw, pag mas madami kang napatay mas malapit ka daw sa inyong Allah.. i don't know how true it is. just correct me if i'm wrong..

and to cite an example, terrorists... di ba ok lang mamatay at pasabugin ang bomba na nakakabit sa kanilang katawan (suicide bomber..) dhil mas mamahalin sila ng Allah nyo? khit madaming tao ang mamatay..

another example: the incident that happend somewhere in India, (you can actually watch the video sa youtube, search " poso"). the video showed how ex-Muslims, young and old, were killed brutally by Muslims. ang dahilan? dahil gustong change ng religion ang mga kawawang Muslim. they actually wanted to be Christians. but sad to say, they were killed before it happened.

makatarungan bang gawain yan? ganyan b tlga paniniwala ng mga Muslim?

Ayan Aling justme, sagutin mo tanong nayan. You may ask your back ups why? Tama ba sya sa narinig nya? o hindi kung hindi, why kung totoo, why...
Pag hindi mo masagot ng tama naku paano na.

justme
07-03-2008, 03:08 PM
Actually, the pronoun we is always first person. It cannot be second or third person. Granting but without admitting, he he he, that your Allah used the royal we, or so the legend goes, then he should be consistent in the use of that pronoun. He should not unnecessarily shift to the use of the pronoun He. Besides, which came first, the quran or King Henry II? Your reference says that the "royal we" was first used in 1169 and now you are telling me that the quran used it. Are you saying therefore that the quran came only after 1169?

Actually Mam Agta, the Qur’an was revealed in Arabic language…and until now it is preserved in its purest form. Ni tuldok o kuwet walang nabago sa Qur’an namin.

Wala kang makikitang Qur’an in English or other language na walang Arabic…kasi pag puro English yan o ibang language hindi yan matatawag na Qur’an…at saka kaming mga Muslim at iba pang mga Balik Islam eh kinakailangang mag aral ng Arabic para namin mabasa ang aming Qur’an…

Base dyan sa research ko, ginamit ko yan para maging pagpapatunay na ang “we” na ginagamit sa mga translation ng Qur’an eh hindi nangangahulugang in plural form na “we” gaya ng iniisip ninyo…Hindi naman porke’t gumamit ako ng ganyang basehan eh sasabihin ninyong dumating ang Qur’an after 1169…ano bang klaseng pag iisip meron kayo Mam Agta…Hindi ko lubos maisip na ganyan kayo mangatwiran ngaun mam…

Na explain ko na ang “we” na yan at nakabigay na ako ng katibayan na ang “we” na yan ay maaring gamitin ng 1st person hindi kagaya ng naiisip ninyo na in plural form lang pwdeng gamitin ang “we”…

Ibang klase po pala ang style ninyo Mam Agta, sabi mo walang 1st person na gumagamit ng “we” ngaun nabigyan na kita ng patunay na pwde itong gamitin lalong lalo na sa mga “royal decree o divine (e.g God)” tapos ganyan ang ikakatwiran mo ngaun sa akin…

Sabagay ganyan naman talaga pag nasasagot ung tanong eh, it’s either hindi nila tatanggapin kasi tama ung sagot mo o di kaya’y magbabaling paksa na lamang…

justme
07-03-2008, 03:21 PM
How can others understand what you posted and what you are trying to bring us, whereinfact you don't emphasize what we need us to know or what message you want to share. Basta ka nalang nag post dyan, if you want to share something, dapat may opening remarks ka ano ba. Kaya tuloy iba ibang speculations ang lumalabas e.

Bakit po ba hindi po ba self-explanatory yang pinost ko jan? Kayo lang po gumagawa ng sarili ninyong “speculations”. At saka magkokoment kaya ng ganito si Mam Agta kung hindi niya yan naintindihan…


The references you gave here, justme, in support of the truth of God are really great! Thank you...

ang sabihin po ninyo masyado lang kaung defensive…at saka ang dami ko ng na post na ganyan ah..paki browse nlng tong board na to…eh bakit ngaun ka lang nagrereklamo? Aber?

Bakit di nalang kaya kayo magpaskil ng mga SCIENTIFIC EVIDENCE MULA SA BIBLE ninyo para sa ganon may maishare din kayo dito hindi ung lagi niyo nalang pinupuna mga post ko..nangangahulugan tuloy na apektado kayo...

justme
07-03-2008, 03:31 PM
Alam mo Aling Justme, my point ang tanong ni Agta, ngayon kung sa akala mo mali, itanong mo sa mga alipuris mo kung tama ang gumamit ng "WE" kasi naging confusing yan sa reader, kahit ikaw magbasa naintindihan mo ba ano ibig sabihin ng WE dun, nkiki ride on kalang sa mga nag sulsul sayo, and I don't believe you noticed it na may hindi consistent sa gramar pa lang. Mag masid ka at alamin ang tama wag kang ride ng ride sa iba.

Mang Jeff naexplain ko na yan..na pwdeng gumamit ng “we” ang 1st person...pakibasa nlng ung sagot ko kay Mam Agta…

Anong pong nakikiride Mang Jeff, may Qur’an ako tapos kailangan ko pang makiride sa iba? Binabasa ko ang aking Qur’an kaya na research ko rin kung bakit ang ginamit na translation ng Arabic nito ay “we” at ngaun nalaman ko na pwde itong gamitin ng 1st person especially sa mga “royal decree o divine being (e.g God)….

Ngaun ang hamon ko…may mababasa ba kaung third person sa Qur’an kagaya ng “they” at “them” na ginamit ng Allah(subhanallahu wa ta’ala)?

Sige pakipaskil ng lang dito ang sura kung meron man…at pag usapan natin....

Ganyan naman kasi kayo pagnabibisto na ang dami ng estilo na ganito ganyan…

viper
07-03-2008, 06:07 PM
Bakit di nalang kaya kayo magpaskil ng mga SCIENTIFIC EVIDENCE MULA SA BIBLE ninyo para sa ganon may maishare din kayo dito hindi ung lagi niyo nalang pinupuna mga post ko..nangangahulugan tuloy na apektado kayo...
Here are scientific facts as revealed from the bible justme.

Scientific Facts in the Bible
1. Only in recent years has science discovered that everything we see is composed of invisible atoms. Here, Scripture tells us that the "things which are seen were not made of things which do appear."
2. Medical science has only recently discovered that blood-clotting in a newborn reaches its peak on the eighth day, then drops. The Bible consistently says that a baby must be circumcised on the eighth day.
3. At a time when it was believed that the earth sat on a large animal or a giant (1500 B.C.), the Bible spoke of the earth’s free float in space: "He...hangs the earth upon nothing" (Job 26:7).
4. The prophet Isaiah also tells us that the earth is round: "It is he that sits upon the circle of the earth" (Isaiah 40:22). This is not a reference to a flat disk, as some skeptic maintain, but to a sphere. Secular man discovered this 2,400 years later. At a time when science believed that the earth was flat, is was the Scriptures that inspired Christopher Columbus to sail around the world (see Proverbs 3:6 footnote).
5. God told Job in 1500 B.C.: "Can you send lightnings, that they may go, and say to you, Here we are?" (Job 38:35). The Bible here is making what appears to be a scientifically ludicrous statement—that light can be sent, and then manifest itself in speech. But did you know that radio waves travel at the speed of light? This is why you can have instantaneous wireless communication with someone on the other side of the earth. Science didn’t discover this until 1864 when "British scientist James Clerk Maxwell suggested that electricity and light waves were two forms of the same thing" (Modern Century Illustrated Encyclopedia).
6. Job 38:19 asks, "Where is the way where light dwells?" Modern man has only recently discovered that light (electromagnetic radiation) has a "way," traveling at 186,000 miles per second.
7. Science has discovered that stars emit radio waves, which are received on earth as a high pitch. God mentioned this in Job 38:7: "When the morning stars sang together..."
8. "Most cosmologists (scientists who study the structures and evolution of the universe) agree that the Genesis account of creation, in imagining an initial void, may be uncannily close to the truth" (Time, Dec. 1976).
9. Solomon described a "cycle" of air currents two thousand years before scientists "discovered" them. "The wind goes toward the south, and turns about unto the north; it whirls about continually, and the wind returns again according to his circuits" (Ecclesiastes 1:6).
10. Science expresses the universe in five terms: time, space, matter, power, and motion. Genesis 1:1,2 revealed such truths to the Hebrews in 1450 B.C.: "In the beginning [time] God created [power] the heaven [space] and the earth [matter] . . . And the Spirit of God moved [motion] upon the face of the waters." The first thing God tells man is that He controls of all aspects of the universe.
11. The great biological truth concerning the importance of blood in our body’s mechanism has been fully comprehended only in recent years. Up until 120 years ago, sick people were "bled," and many died because of the practice. If you lose your blood, you lose your life. Yet Leviticus 17:11, written 3,000 years ago, declared that blood is the source of life: "For the life of the flesh is in the blood."
12. All things were made by Him (see John 1:3), including dinosaurs. Why then did the dinosaur disappear? The answer may be in Job 40:15–24. In this passage, God speaks about a great creature called "behemoth." Some commentators think this was a hippopotamus. However, the hippo’s tail isn’t like a large tree, but a small twig. Following are the characteristics of this huge animal: It was the largest of all the creatures God made; was plant-eating (herbivorous); had its strength in its hips and a tail like a large tree. It had very strong bones, lived among the trees, drank massive amounts of water, and was not disturbed by a raging river. He appears impervious to attack because his nose could pierce through snares, but Scripture says, "He that made him can make his sword to approach unto him." In other words, God caused this, the largest of all the creatures He had made, to become extinct.
13. Encyclopedia Britannica documents that in 1845, a young doctor in Vienna named Dr. Ignaz Semmelweis was horrified at the terrible death rate of women who gave birth in hospitals. As many as 30 percent died after giving birth. Semmelweis noted that doctors would examine the bodies of patients who died, then, without washing their hands, go straight to the next ward and examine expectant mothers. This was their normal practice, because the presence of microscopic diseases was unknown. Semmelweis insisted that doctors wash their hands before examinations, and the death rate immediately dropped to 2 percent. Look at the specific instructions God gave His people for when they encounter disease: "And when he that has an issue is cleansed of his issue; then he shall number to himself even days for his cleansing, and wash his clothes, and bathe his flesh in running water, and shall be clean" (Leviticus 15:13). Until recent years, doctors washed their hands in a bowl of water, leaving invisible germs on their hands. However, the Bible says specifically to wash hands under "running water."
14. Luke 17:34–36 says the Second Coming of Jesus Christ will occur while some are asleep at night and others are working at daytime activities in the field. This is a clear indication of a revolving earth, with day and night at the same time.
15. "During the devastating Black Death of the fourteenth century, patients who were sick or dead were kept in the same rooms as the rest of the family. People often wondered why the disease was affecting so many people at one time. They attributed these epidemics to ‘bad air’ or ‘evil spirits.’ However, careful attention to the medical commands of God as revealed in Leviticus would have saved untold millions of lives. Arturo Castiglione wrote about the overwhelming importance of this biblical medical law: ‘The laws against leprosyin Leviticus 13 may be regarded as the first model of sanitary legislation’ (A History of Medicine)." Grant R. Jeffery, The Signature of God With all these truths revealed in Scripture,how could a thinking person deny that the Bible is supernatural in origin? There is no other book in any of the world’s religions (Vedas, Bhagavad-Gita, Koran, Book of Mormon, etc.) that contains scientific truth. In fact, they contain statements that are clearly unscientific. Hank Hanegraaff said, "Faith in Christ is not some blind leap into a dark chasm, but a faith based on established evidence." (11:3)
http://www.livingwaters.com/witnessingtool/scientificfactsintheBible.shtml
Do you want more facts to support the validity of the bible?

agta
07-03-2008, 09:13 PM
Actually Mam Agta, the Qur’an was revealed in Arabic language…and until now it is preserved in its purest form. Ni tuldok o kuwet walang nabago sa Qur’an namin.

Wala kang makikitang Qur’an in English or other language na walang Arabic…kasi pag puro English yan o ibang language hindi yan matatawag na Qur’an…at saka kaming mga Muslim at iba pang mga Balik Islam eh kinakailangang mag aral ng Arabic para namin mabasa ang aming Qur’an…
Wala nga sigurong quran in English version. But the quotes from Qur'an that you posted here are all in English. Saying that your quran is all Arabic cannot be used as excuse for the grammatically faulty quran quotes that you posted here


Base dyan sa research ko, ginamit ko yan para maging pagpapatunay na ang “we” na ginagamit sa mga translation ng Qur’an eh hindi nangangahulugang in plural form na “we” gaya ng iniisip ninyo…Hindi naman porke’t gumamit ako ng ganyang basehan eh sasabihin ninyong dumating ang Qur’an after 1169…ano bang klaseng pag iisip meron kayo Mam Agta…Hindi ko lubos maisip na ganyan kayo mangatwiran ngaun mam…
You posted here the result of your research about the pronoun "we". And you alleged that the "royal we" was used in your quran in reference to your Allah. But your research/reference (wikipedia) declared that the "royal we" was used for the first time in 1169. Are you not in effect contradicting the result of your research, since the quran dates back to the time of Muhammad and not only after 1169? That is an honest question, justme, which needs an honest answer from you.


Na explain ko na ang “we” na yan at nakabigay na ako ng katibayan na ang “we” na yan ay maaring gamitin ng 1st person hindi kagaya ng naiisip ninyo na in plural form lang pwdeng gamitin ang “we”…
Pero ang ipinakita mong kattibayan, justme, ay nagsasabi na ang singular we (royal we) ay unang ginamit noong 1169 lang. Therefore, that was not used earlier than 1169. And certainly your quran was not written after 1169 only! Therefore, it is not correct to say that the quran used that singular we. The we used in quran is therefore a plural we not a royal we!


Ibang klase po pala ang style ninyo Mam Agta, sabi mo walang 1st person na gumagamit ng “we” ngaun nabigyan na kita ng patunay na pwde itong gamitin lalong lalo na sa mga “royal decree o divine (e.g God)” tapos ganyan ang ikakatwiran mo ngaun sa akin…
Don't put words into my mouth, justme. I never said anywhere that "walang first person na gumamit ng we". No! For all you know, first person could either be plural or singular! The pronoun we is first person plural, as distinguished from the pronoun "I" which is first person singular.

hedwig
07-04-2008, 10:30 AM
.... here we go again... the issue here is all about the scientests confirm the sign of God. and now the discussion went to how the world was created by the Divine Creator..
... wel if Allah the God of Muslim Created the univrse or the world, it is the same in Christians, that Our God Created also the universe or the world and evry thing.. however the presentation is quitely different from that Koran and from the Holy Bible...

...Again... lets have peace ... mauuwi nanaman ito sa walng katapusang debate...as whatate sexygurl posted her message on this furom.

acpatagnan
07-05-2008, 10:08 AM
Still those pronouncement do not give us PROOf of the existence of God.

What is "sign of God"? What does it mean? What is science?

Science is a body of knowledge about our world: physics, biology, chemistry etc.

The scientist mention in the pronouncement does not identify the existence of God. What is God? Where is God? This question cannot be answered by science. Reason: There nothing to observe but the materials in the world. The ultimate form of matter is atom. Cannot be seen by naked eye but infered from the material that can be seen.

Religion will try its best to distort, to destroy the means of acquiring knowledge. It has been done before during the medieval and dark ages and until now.:):):D:D:D:cool::cool::cool:

hedwig
07-07-2008, 11:03 AM
Still those pronouncement do not give us PROOf of the existence of God.

What is "sign of God"? What does it mean? What is science?

Science is a body of knowledge about our world: physics, biology, chemistry etc.

The scientist mention in the pronouncement does not identify the existence of God. What is God? Where is God? This question cannot be answered by science. Reason: There nothing to observe but the materials in the world. The ultimate form of matter is atom. Cannot be seen by naked eye but infered from the material that can be seen.

Religion will try its best to distort, to destroy the means of acquiring knowledge. It has been done before during the medieval and dark ages and until now.:):):D:D:D:cool::cool::cool:


.....Sir May I ask..DO you Believe in GoD? in all HIs Creation? HIs ExisTence?..

agta
07-07-2008, 06:32 PM
.... here we go again... the issue here is all about the scientests confirm the sign of God. and now the discussion went to how the world was created by the Divine Creator..
... wel if Allah the God of Muslim Created the univrse or the world, it is the same in Christians, that Our God Created also the universe or the world and evry thing.. however the presentation is quitely different from that Koran and from the Holy Bible...

...Again... lets have peace ... mauuwi nanaman ito sa walng katapusang debate...as whatate sexygurl posted her message on this furom.
Ha ha ha ha ha!:D

Jeff
07-08-2008, 04:20 PM
.....Sir May I ask..DO you Believe in GoD? in all HIs Creation? HIs ExisTence?..

Absolutely he can't answer you that! He is a believer of his own brain and understanding. Review his stand about GOD.

hedwig
07-09-2008, 02:31 PM
.. sabagay you have your point pareng jeff, kinikilabutan ako he he he..

acpatagnan
07-14-2008, 04:14 AM
.....Sir May I ask..DO you Believe in GoD? in all HIs Creation? HIs ExisTence?..

If you are asking me, why ask yourself also. How do you know that there is God? What is God? What is your means of knowing, of knowledge? If your means is reason, thinking, consciousness, the answer is NO. If you just use faith as what others say so, your answer is different.


If your means of knowing is reason, then the basis of reason is your sense perception, your senses. Your five senses is your first and only contact with the real world-reality. There is no other. And there is nothing to capture by your senses but the real-the world-surrounding you. It is called EXISTENCE, including you, me and others-the conscious being. Apply that to your questions: How do you know God exist? What do you use in knowing?

If your means of knowing is faith, then ask yourself what is exactly faith is. Is faith believing on something without using your five senses? If no, then what do you use? Or let's put it this way. Do you believe because that's what others says? Have you validated what others says? If not then, you are not using your thinking power-the attributes of potential man.:D:D:cool::cool: