Jump to content
Guests can now reply in ALL forum topics (No registration required!) ×
Guests can now reply in ALL forum topics (No registration required!)
In the Name of God بسم الله

iCenozoic

Advanced Member
  • Posts

    964
  • Joined

Everything posted by iCenozoic

  1. Go ahead and name one and let's see how rational it is. Actually, don't even worry about it. If you want to believe in some underground society of lizard people abducting old people and forging death certificates in an effort to control the world, that's fine. I'll leave ya with the last word, all the best!
  2. No explanations for this exist but covid-19. The reason we know this is simple: A. No natural cause of death has ever reached anywhere even remotely near half a million excess deaths in any given year and for no apparent reason. For example, in a given year, the flu might cause 30,000-70,000 deaths but this is far short of 550,000. Even if the flu tripled in deadliness, it would still fall short hundreds of thousands of deaths below covid-19. The same holds true for heart conditions, diabetes, vehicle accidents etc. Nothing in nature could feasibly be responsible for what we see except covid-19. B. Deaths recorded occured at the same time in which covid-19 cases grew in the spring, summer and winter waves. Meaning that the more people who have covid-19 the more people die. And I agree that correlation does not equate to causation, however watching deaths precisely trail covid-19 cases up and down multiple times over the year demonstrates a direct relationship. More covid-19 cases = more deaths. C. And obviously these people are dying in hospitals where they are observed first hand. So this allows is to rule out many causes of death such as suicide or death by drowning, or other things that might occur elsewhere. D. The only common denominator is that 100% of these deaths occur in people who have covid-19. 2015 - 2.69 Million deaths in the US. 2016 - 2.73 (increase of 40,000 from prior year) 2017 - 2.81(increase of 80,000 from prior year) 2018 - 2.84 (increase of 30,000 from prior year) 2019 - 2.85 (increase of 10,000 from prior year) 2020 - 3.40 (increase of 0.55 or 550,000 from prior year). We don't see half a million people randomly dying who don't have covid-19 either. They die after cases rise and after they get infected.
  3. Great, we are making progress. The data is important because it highlights how deadly the virus is. Understanding every problem begins by acknowledging that there is a problem to begin with. Half a million Americans died, a problem exists, and the next step is to investigate options to resolve the issue. The truth is that many Americans simply aren't aware that half a million US citizens died on 2020. They seem to think that Covid is imaginary and that maybe it's just like the flu. When in fact, the flu has never killed 500,000 people on a single year, nor anything even close to such a number. The deadliest of flu years don't even amount to 1/5th of such a number.
  4. Yea sure, it's possible that China dropped a nuclear bomb on a city killing half a million additional people. But obviously there isn't any evidence for that. Consider the following: 2015 - 2.69 Million deaths in the US. 2016 - 2.73 (increase of 40,000 from prior year) 2017 - 2.81(increase of 80,000 from prior year) 2018 - 2.84 (increase of 30,000 from prior year) 2019 - 2.85 (increase of 10,000 from prior year) 2020 - 3.40 (increase of 0.55 or 550,000 from prior year). It's possible that McDonald's changed their recipe and killed off half a million people. But the truth is that there is no evidence for this idea either. The majority of deaths have also been reported at the exact times in which covid cases went up, in March, late summer, then into November as well. In truth, the only logical explanation for this is that covid-19 is causing people to die of comorbidities and preexisting conditions at rates never seen before in the history of the world. And once we acknowledge that covid-19 killed half a million people in 2020 in the US, then we can use this understanding to investigate further topics.
  5. Looks around to see no responses to his data*
  6. I'll give an example of what I'm trying to express here. When we think of Adam, or more specifically the name "Adam", we think of a name much like Bob or Sarah or George. "Hi my name is Adam". It's only when we look at the original Hebrew of the OT that we see the following: https://biblehub.com/text/genesis/2-7.htm And formed Yahweh God Man [from] the dust of the ground. But notice the Hebrew word for man. "Adam", in Hebrew it is HaAdam or "the man". Indeed "Adam" actually isn't a name at all, it's a descriptive statement of "a man". God formed a man from dust of the ground. Genesis 2:7. Thousands of years later we somehow decided to just call that man "Adam" as if it's a name. But only when reading the original old testament/Torah Hebrew can we make sense of this. And the same applies with dozens of instances throughout the OT that only make sense when read in historic context through the original language in which it was written. Imagine having a baby and naming the baby "the baby".
  7. Well the question is what came first, Hebrew texts on Adam, or Islamic text on Adam? The Old Testament was written many hundreds of years earlier than any Islamic text on Adam. From a historical stance, this is just the nature of the situation. There's a big difference between trusting a Christian text, and trusting in original Torah authorship in pre-Christian times. Really these are writings from pre-Torah times. But That's ok. I asked myself the same question. Because of course figures like Paul or of course scholars throughout history have also interpreted the New Testament with respect to Adam and Creation. But the thing that's interesting is that, figures throughout history, and biblical scholars up until today oftentimes misinterpret the Old Testament because they weren't the authors of the Old Testament. For example some Protestant biblical scholars would disagree with some Catholic biblical scholars over The topic of Genesis and the topic of Adam, and they dispute the intent of the original authors of Genesis of the OT. Because the documentation which includes Adam was written long before Christianity and Islam even technically existed. (And I know that all Christians and Muslims would say that their religion has existed forever, but you know what I mean). Because in a sense, even though the old testament is a part of the Bible in modern times, in reality the Old Testament has its roots long before Christianity and Islam. So I would recommend at least considering asking the question of what people wrote and believed about Adam and about creation before both Christianity and Islam even really institutionally existed. Because any Christian can go to a Protestant and Catholic scholar and can get a more modern interpretation, but it's just not quite the same as getting the opinion of the original author. And I could go find Christian scholars who wrote about Adam dating back to even Paul. Aquinas is a popular one for example. But nothing beats reading the original text itself. Or as close as we can possibly get to it. Imo. And being able to read these historic texts, In my opinion have completely transformed my view of Genesis along with many biblical scholars and Christians today. And I don't see why Muslims would necessarily be different but I guess that's up to their scholarship to choose to do. Or up to the individual if they feel that they can interpret historical texts on their own.
  8. Just more on this, Paul describes bringing the message to people who had not received it, but he also describes not travelling to places where churches were already established. Romans 15:14 is an example of Paul acknowledging the teachings of the church before he even arrives and describes the members of the church of Rome as full of knowledge and able to instruct one another. Though he had never spoken to them before. Then in Romans 15:20, he says "in order that I will not build on the foundation belonging to someone else", referring to other pre existing churches with biblical leadership. Just more reason to understand that Paul didn't found the first church. Acts 1:13 further describes meeting of the apostles. Paul just later tagged in and conducted missionary work.
  9. I'd be curious to hear what you think of my response regarding old testament commentary. Do Muslims not defer to the old testament when interpreting scripture on Adam? The Old Testament was written over 3,000 years ago, so I would think that it would have to be the most authentic source of information on Adam, as opposed to anything written by Christian or Muslim scholars hundreds and thousands of years later. We have the dead scrolls dating back to something like 200 BC, so why prioritize Hadith written hundreds or a thousand years later? Over the original writings themselves?
  10. Same deal. Take for example, a heart condition that causes a heart attack. X number of people die every year due to some form of heart failure due to pre existing conditions. Covid began, that average annual number of heart failure deaths skyrocketed. As noted above, nobody dies just of Covid-19. But rather Covid-19 arrived and all of a sudden hundreds of thousands of people above the average annual number began dying. Covid essentially amplified the risk of dying due to underlying conditions. And I just want to be clear: Consider the following: 2015 - 2.69 Million deaths 2016 - 2.73 (increase of 40,000 from prior year) 2017 - 2.81(increase of 80,000 from prior year) 2018 - 2.84 (increase of 30,000 from prior year) 2019 - 2.85 (increase of 10,000 from prior year) 2020 - 3.40 (increase of 0.55 or 550,000 from prior year). Diabetes is a pre existing condition, but diabetes would never kill half a million additional people for no apparent reason. It wasn't pre existing conditions that caused this, rather it was Covid that causes this extra half million people, in conjunction with pre existing conditions. The same logic applies across the table. And to clarify, one simple and easy way to understand that pre existing conditions are not to blame, is that never in the history pre existing conditions, had such an exceedingly high quantity of deaths occurred. Not only that, but this exceedingly high quantity of deaths also occurred in multiple waves. Waves that if you live in America, of course in March, the late summer then again in the winter.
  11. And I can further simplify it like this. We know that comorbidities are not to blame because no comorbidity would ever cause half a million deaths above background levels in a single year.
  12. Because covid-19 caused the comorbidity to kill the individual. For example, let's say in an average year 10 people die of pneumonia. Then covid-19 comes around, exacerbates pneumonia, and results in 100 pneumonia deaths. Even though pneumonia is what the person dies of, covid-19 is ultimately responsible for breaking down the individuals immune system, thereby causing the person to succumb to something that otherwise would have never happened. Consider the following: 2015 - 2.69 Million US deaths 2016 - 2.73 (increase of 40,000 from prior year) 2017 - 2.81(increase of 80,000 from prior year) 2018 - 2.84 (increase of 30,000 from prior year) 2019 - 2.85 (increase of 10,000 from prior year) 2020 - 3.40 (increase of 0.55 or 550,000 from prior year). All 550,000 (minus maybe 50,000 for aging) people died from some comorbidity, some by heart failure, some pneumonia etc. But these comorbidities in an average normal year would never cause such a vast amount of deaths. Not even close. But when the pandemic began, covid-19 caused people to succumb to these conditions and therefore covid-19 takes the blame. Covid-19 alone is never a cause of death. Covid-19 always works in conjunction with comorbidities. But the comorbidities cannot be considered the blame because in a normal year, 550,000 people would have never died. The flu has never been known to kill 550,000 people in a single year for example. So we know that the flu is not to blame despite the fact that many have the flu as a covid-19 comorbidity.
  13. I don't know what you mean in your first paragraph. All people who die of covid die with comorbidities. Covid-19 doesn't kill people on its own. For example, people might die of a heart attack because of covid-19, or people might die of pneumonia because of covid-19. And so the comorbidities would be heart attack and pneumonia. Or some kind of heart condition or something similar. Consider the following (annual deaths in the United States of all causes, including things like car accidents and heart attacks and diabetes etc.): 2015 - 2.69 Million deaths 2016 - 2.73 (increase of 40,000 from prior year) 2017 - 2.81(increase of 80,000 from prior year) 2018 - 2.84 (increase of 30,000 from prior year) 2019 - 2.85 (increase of 10,000 from prior year) 2020 - 3.40 (increase of 0.55 or 550,000 from prior year). All of the people, of that 550,000 increase, dies with some kind of co morbidity. Oftentimes it would be some kind of pneumonia, or a heart attack. But regardless of if pneumonia is the cause of death, that's still 550,000 people that would not have died of pneumonia had they not contracted the disease of COVID-19. And thus we blame Covid-19. To be fair, we could argue that maybe 100k of that 550k died of natural aging, but it's obvious that when you have 4 years straight with under 100k annual increase, and then you jump to 550k fatalities above background levels, that Covid-19 is to blame. Not only that, but of that 550,000, The number of deaths has surged simultaneously with cases of COVID-19 in the United States. Meaning that there is a direct correlation between the two. Which further demonstrates that covid-19 is to blame.
  14. In Christian circles, there is a community of Christian scientists who are part of what is referred to as the biologos foundation. Deborah Haarsma, the current president of biologos made a presentation in which she discusses the science of Adam a few times throughout the video here: https://youtu.be/kXGy6e0OoJo Biologos also has a podcast in which they discuss Adam, the image of God, references of sin entering through Adam and topics of this nature. More specifically, I think it's important to understand the historical nature of the old testament writings of Adam. When put into context, the perspective of the ancients who wrote the OT was much different than how we view the world today. And until that ancient perspective is understood, understanding Adam in a scientific sense will always be a struggle. https://biologos.org/articles/the-firmament-of-genesis-1-is-solid-but-thats-not-the-point I might also recommend Claus Westermanns Biblical commentary on Genesis 1 and 2, and OT commentary on Genesis by scholar Paul Seely of the Westminster Theological Seminary. https://christadelphiansoriginsdiscussion.wordpress.com/2017/06/23/seeley-on-the-firmament/ These details, I would argue, are most in line with the intent and message of the original authorship of the OT and those who originally wrote about Adam. As opposed to people who might have written about Adam hundreds or thousands of years later. The book of Genesis of the Old Testament of the Dead Sea scrolls was never meant to be a scientific textbook, and was never meant to be literally scientifically true. No more are there stars in the firmament where water passes through floodgates of or where birds fly across the face of it, or in which God's throne rest above like a sea of crystals or like ice. When you learn the Old Testament, And you learn it's original intent and the thoughts and minds of the authors of the Old Testament, only then will the story of Adam make sense.
  15. Regarding VAERS reporting, actually if you go back a couple more years to 2009, there was a massive spike in reporting alongside the flu epidemic. I've added a couple screenshots for reference. But basically, a year after the flu epidemic, people stopped reporting issues, all the while vaccination rates remained high, demonstrating that people who are making reports to the VAERS system were not actually reporting vaccine issues. But rather they were reporting issues and merely had recently been vaccinated and thus falsely correlated the two without demonstrating causation. VAERS data alone just doesn't tell us much. It can be used to generate hypotheses, but it alone doesn't actually take into account causation. I decided to eat carrots for breakfast this morning, a cat ran across the street, but it would be wrong for me to assume that me eating carrots caused the cat to run across the street. With VEARS data, some people get vaccinated and some of those same people have medical issues, but it would be wrong, without investigation, to assume that vaccines caused those medical issues.
  16. I would say no. Their ideas are too detached from reality.
  17. On Galatians: For the whole law is fulfilled in one statement, namely, “You shall love your neighbor as yourself.” But if you bite and devour one another, watch out that you are not consumed by one another. Galatians 5:14‭-‬15 LEB Paul basically just continues his argument that the works that people conduct should be for God and not for salvation of themselves and that these works can't be a stumbling block that results in them consuming one another. Be it worshipping on certain days or eating certain foods or praying a certain way etc. I would think that Muslims would appreciate this kind of material. Whether it's how you hold your arms when you pray or what foods you eat, or what days you celebrate on, I feel like there are really stark divisions amongst Muslims, just as there are in Christian circles, namely those discussed in Galatians. And Paul is basically saying, hey guys, don't use your acts to glorify yourself over another, don't think of yourself more highly than the one who prays differently or worships on different holidays, don't think that God views you as more special or more likely to be saved than they, and don't let your practices create divisions. Because in Paul's perspective, all saints are children of God. And then of course, everyone sins, so if God were truly a just being, then everyone who breaks the commandments would also face Gods wrath in hell. And Paul is saying that it's not about legalism but about the heart's intent. Wouldn't this all make sense, especially in Muslim circles, where division is often caused by cultural influences on religion? I would think that this would speak more to those who experience culturally influenced religious divisions. Which is arguably more common in Islam than Christianity in modern times, because Islam is typically more legalistic. And Paul isn't saying that sin is ok. Just as he does in the book of Romans, in Galatians 5:19 he rants about sin. So it's not that people can do whatever they want either.
  18. I appreciate this! Anything that doesn't cost 50 bucks? 0.0, I could get typical commentaries on Galatians for a dollar. There must be something out there. But Galatians also is much shorter than Romans and doesn't cover a handful of topics. I'd be happy to discuss if anyone has read these letters or a related commentary.
  19. I would like to read a verse by verse Muslim commentary or perhaps response to the book of Romans. Paul of course gets a great deal of criticism from Muslims, but in my opinion, his teachings are quite compelling. I'd just be curious how the book of Romans and the ideas in it, are perceived outside of a Christian perspective.
  20. Vaccines aren't 100% effective. They're more around 60-80% depending on which vaccine, the immunity of the individual and the timing of vaccination. So the vaccines work, but because they aren't 100% effective, something like 3/10 vaccinated people are still vulnerable to infection. So technically both some vaccinated and some unvaccinated could be considered a "threat" to the vaccinated. It's just that 99% of unvaccinated and not previously infected people can get infected and pass on the virus, while maybe only 20-40% (or much less with boosters) of the vaccinated can be infected and spread the virus. And so the more people vaccinated, the less likely the virus will spread, A. Because less people will get infected and thus less can spread it and B. Vaccinated people also kill the virus faster in the rare instance that they have a breakthrough case. Here in the US, roughly 8 or 9 out of every 10 deaths are now in unvaccinated people. And unvaccinated are 6 to 7 times more likely to get infected than vaccinated. So when we think about mandates, the government seeks to have a strong economy. A strong economy produces positive ratings and votes for politicians, a strong economy also produces more tax revenue and lower unemployment rates. So if mandating vaccination results in 8 out of 10 infected workers surviving covid, that's hundreds of workers who can keep working, can stay employed, can keep their jobs, can keep voting, can pay taxes etc. Whereas if nobody was vaccinated, it would result in more hospitalizations, more healthcare costs, a slower economic recovery, obstruction of tax revenues, obstruction of the education system etc etc. So vaccine mandates are just observed as something that can help fuel economic recovery and recovery of the nation (even though not everyone wants to be forced to "take the jab".
  21. If the speaker didnt think that Jesus died, did he simply deny all the verses about Thomas sticking his hand in Jesus' abdomen? Or on the transfiguration? That's another thing that's always seemed odd to me, when there are critiques who say that Jesus wasn't crucified. Well, if we are just going to reject what the Bible says, then I guess we could very well reject any particular detail of it on a whim.
  22. I wouldn't say Paul founded the first church. Paul was influenced and became a missionary by the church before him. But he didn't found the first church. And his teachings, I would say reflect what Jesus is said to have taught in books that Paul didn't write. Personally I think that Paul's letters make a great deal of sense and I'd say he hit the nail on the head with his teachings. For example, could anyone really read through a book like Romans and deny some of the obvious truths spoken of on unity? I would love to hear anyone who denies Paul's credibility to actually try critiquing something like the book of Romans. But oftentimes I think Muslims oftentimes take what many westerners view as an aggressive conservative approach on Christianity, and focus on theological contradictions (which all religions have in some area), rather than focusing on the Bibles overall message that love is above all other commandments and is the greatest commandment.
  23. I just want to note that here in the US, 8 or 9 out of every 10 deaths these days are of unvaccinated people. So if 1500 people die in a single day, 1200+ are unvaccinated. And this suggests that the vaccines are saving hundreds of lives literally every single day. 4/10 Americans are unvaccinated, but they make up 9/10 deaths.
  24. blockquote widget I think that this entire discussion boils down to, not a Paul vs Jesus discussion, because really the same discussion is held between Calvinists and Armenians that believe in both Jesus and Paul's writings of Jesus. the problem is that there is a broader theological contradiction that exists where the following two ideas butt heads: you have your Muslim/Calvinist position where people can earn salvation by following the law. As if life is some kind of competition where whoever circumcises their genitals well becomes more loved. Then God essentially changes His mind and says, ok, your genitals are circumcised, this pleases me and I will now change my mind to save you. the main issue being that God doesn't change His mind. The other position, the protestant/Armenian position, of course being that everyone sins (including those who were blameless before following Jesus), the Jews and gentiles argued over laws it further divided then anyway, just as sectarian issues divide us to this very day, and so Paul said hey, The way you fold your arms isn't as important as loving one another. And therefore loving one another is the pinnacle act of goodness above laws like How we fold our arms or whether or not we circumcise our sexual organs. But the problem with the latter position of course is the problem of evil and the idea that God might still punish relatively good people, on the basis that all sin. And not only that but God would predetermine someone's fate before they even had the option to make a choice to try to follow the law. theologically, I'd say that both positions are broken. In this case neither the Muslim or the Christian or calvanist or Armenian are correct. But I think that it is fair to say that the debates and arguments people have do act as stumbling blocks, much like those described by Paul which result in people not loving one another. Which I would presume to be a problem in our spiritual goodness in the eyes of God.
×
×
  • Create New...