BrutalOrange

Yes, I totally agree, a normal human has his own morals to stop him doing bad things. But there are people in this world who might not have those morals or are cold-hearted or might think good of something bad. EDIT: I now remember a story my school teacher once told me. He said that he lived much of his childhood in England and he says that one day the power went out in the whole town for just one hour. He says that in that one hour (when security cameras weren't working) most stores around town were robbed. Which proves to me that although most people have their own morals that prevent them from doing bad things, some people don't have morals and the only thing stopping them from doing bad things is either the law or religion. Alright, maybe I picked a bad example, I apologize. But I think you get the point, most religious countries all around the world have lower crime-rates than in the western countries.

Of course I wouldn't rob a store if I didn't believe in God, I only said that to prove a point: There are many people in this world who would do bad things if they didn't believe in god and I know a bunch of them too. I also didn't mean that all atheists are bad because I know some atheists who are really nice.

Hmm, I find your post kinda offensive. I strongly believe in logic and reason and I strongly believe in God. You're saying that all people who believe in the idea of God don't believe in logic, or basically un-intelligent people. Which is totally false. Religion is important. You don't know what kind of crap I could do if I was an atheist. I can simply buy a balaclava and a gun any day and go rob a store. If I plan myself good enough, nothing is gonna stop me and the police won't be able to catch me if I get away quick enough. But why don't I do it? Seems like a very good way to get some quick cash. I don't because I have something that keeps me in tow, religion. Explain to me why is the crime rate in stable religious countries such as the ones in the middle-east so low (when the police there is really bad) when it is so high in the not very religious western countries (where the police is actually very good).

This is always kind of a mystery to me. In my mind you can only be religious or not. How is someone just a little religious? Wouldn't that mean you aren't really religious? I used to be christian and I went to church and stuff, but for example I wouldn't read the bible or say prayers all the time. I was kind of "not very religious". Later, after a lot of thinking, I realized that I only "believed" in god because I grew up that way and was told to do so. My point is, if you are religious, i.e. believe in a god, wouldn't you fully embrace it, rather than just somewhat embrace it? Wouldn't you want to find out everything about the such a powerful being whose rules you follow? Do everything to worship such god? What is your excuse for not doing so? Simply for convenience? But if you truly believed in this god wouldn't that have more priority than your own convenience? I am not trying to attack you, or any other religious person for that matter. I don't aim to convert you or anything either. I just like questioning things. Yeah, no problem. I too like to ask questions a lot. The reason I said I'm not very religious is because although I do believe in God and all of that, I'm just not doing my duty to it's full extent. There's things I have to do but I'm only doing like half of them. I embrace the idea of God, but I'm a lazy person. Know what I mean? I'm slowing getting more and more active in life though. I never really considered Bin Laden a true Muslim. Jihad (fighting in the name of God) is part of Islam, yes, but it's not mandatory and in Islam it only says to fight whoever opposes you because of your religion, otherwise try to convert people by peaceful means (as far as I know, anyway). Killing innocent, peaceful civilians is just something a true Muslim would never do. Also it's kinda odd that he tells his children to learn in the west, where they could get bombed by his followers. I have to say, that would be amazingly ironic. Now, let's not go off topic.

Unfortunately, I don't have enough knowledge to answer these questions, I'm not a very religious person, but I'll try to answer what I can, the best I can. I don't fully understand the question (English is not my native language), but I believe the evidence that the Bible could be corrupt is because there's so many "versions" of Christianity. There's Catholic, Orthodox, and so on. I'm not sure if these "versions" have different Bibles or not but if they don't then I could be wrong (because then Islam has Sunni and Shia with same Quran but slightly different traditions, if it's the same case with Christianity, then I'm wrong) and that's my evidence BTW, this was not mentioned in the Quran or somewhere else. Any verse in the Quran could have a different meaning than you think. I know that anyone can grab the Bible or the Quran and a pen and change the words. But I believe it means that the promises and the will of God cannot be changed by man but that's just me. I do know for a fact that the Quran has much more deeper meanings than the obvious ones. In Arabic the word sister may refer to many things. It doesn't always has to mean sister as in the english form. In Arabic, the word sister or brother may mean close to in a certain way. Like for example, as young Muslims, we were taught that all Muslims are brothers. Does that mean that all Muslims have the same mother or father? No. It means we are brothers in Islam because we all worship the same God with the same ways. Ugh, It's really hard to explain when English is not my native language. Here, take a look at this explanation I found: ""Sister of Aaron" may either mean that Mary had a brother of the name of Aaron, or it may mean that she belonged to the family of Prophet Aaron. The first meaning is supported by a tradition of the Holy Prophet and the second is plausible because that is supported by the Arabic idiom. But we are inclined to the second meaning, for the wording of the said tradition does not necessarily mean that she actually had a brother named Aaron. The tradition as related in Muslim, Nasa'i, Tirmizi, etc. says that when the Christians of Najran criticised the Quranic version of stating Mary as the sister of Aaron before Hadrat Mughirah bin Shu`bah, he was not able to satisfy them, because Prophet Aaron had passed away centuries earlier. When he presented the problem before the Holy Prophet, he replied, "Why didn't you say that the Israelites named their children after their Prophets and other pious men?" That is, "You could have answered their objection like this as well."" I didn't really know about that Hadith but I did some searching and I found this story: TEL AVIV, ISRAEL - At the recent Israeli colloquium on science and religion, Dr. Shlomi Lesser of Hebrew University, and the Chairman of the Hofesh V'Mada Society (a stalwart for deeply skeptical Israeli scientists), led a heated debate between biologists and ultra-orthodox Rabbis on the origins of life. Many of the spectators, including those of a deeply religious stance, came away with the feeling that the Rabbis had not done very well against their "Epicurean" counterparts. The hi-light of the evening came when Dr. Lesser engaged in a one-on-one question exchange with Rabbi Dovid Brown of Yeshiva University. At one point Dr. Lesser asked R. Brown how tall the first man was, to which the esteemed Rabbi replied "he was roughly the size of an average man according to chazal [Jewish sages]." From there Dr. Lesser revealed that genetic research has revealed that the human race coming from a single pair of parents is impossible in light of the biological bottle-neck [a term for the strain put on successive generations by inbreeding] they would have to travel through. "Our research, in conjunction with the research of other respected institutions around the world, has demonstrated that the entire human population descending from a single pair of human ancestors is highly unlikely." stated Dr. Lesser. "It would seem that the traditional view of groups, not individuals, evolving has been corroborated; the only way man could descend from a single pair (rather than from an entire group of transitional hominids) is if the original pair were literally giants in the pre-nutrition age." As Dr. Lesser pointed out, prior to the breakthroughs in nutrition that took place in the 17th and 18th centuries, genetic evidence revealed that man would have been shrinking if he came from a single human ancestor. His calculations revealed that in order for the human race to reach the state it was in during the 17th century, the "Adam and Eve" story would only be plausible if the first man was 90 feet tall (which is fantastic to say the least). "There is no other way man could traverse the genetic bottleneck" Dr. Lesser again said. "If Adam was the size of any other man according to the learned Rabbis of the Jewish religion, this demonstrates an obvious absurdity to this myth." That's what I could answer with my limited knowledge and this vast internet. The ones I left out is because I don't think I know the answer. Again, I'm not a very religious person. I am not trying to convert anyone here. I know I can't. I'm simply trying to prove the existence of God. It's your choice whether to believe or not. And all of that wasn't made up. Here's an article to prove that cloning was mentioned in the Quran (although in a rather indirect way): http://miraclesofthequran.com/scientific_101.html The verse is true, I just checked. And the translation is correct.

For example. First off I'm a Muslim, and there's a couple reasons for that. 1. My family is Muslim, the half I grew up with anyway. 2. I'm amazed with islamic culture. 3. The Quran, it's definitely the word of God. Let me get into the final reason a bit. I've looked around a bit and found some amazing stuff in the Quran. Here's some examples. First, it mentions the fact that stars eventually die out (bear in mind the Quran is 1400 years old). It mentions the fact that the atmosphere has 7 layers (troposphere, stratosphere, mesosphere, thermosphere, exosphere, ionosphere, and magnetosphere) . It mentions the fact the universe is constantly expanding. It mentions the role of one of Pharaoh's most prominent aids, Haman, when the details of hieroglyphic translation were only discovered two centuries ago. It predicts that humans will one day explore space. It mentions the programming of genetics. Heck, it even mentions the cloning of living organisms. I doubt anyone in 7th century Arabia knew of any of that, which is why I believe in God. Also, there's so many miracles recorded in history, and miracles don't just come from nowhere. Oh, and I don't think we just came just like poof, there has to be something that created our universe.

Yeah, I believe God exists. There's so many things that prove it plus if I believed God doesn't exist and I died, he'd be pissed at me but if I believed he exists and I died, even if I was evil then he could just forgive me. It's a win/win situation know what I mean?