I wouldn't choose to say that it is fact whereby people are leaning more towards science instead of religion. Or is it a fact already? What criteria qualify it as a fact, when religion sects all around the world claims the believe of billions of people combined? Can it change today to a theory from fact?

IMHO, if you have to believe something, it is more relevant to believe in a creator as an attempt to explain creation, as a first step, and then try and scutinize the religion, rather than to believe first in a "religion" and then try to explain creation through what such religion dictates.

One can be a believer of a creator, but a disbeliever of all religion in this world, simply because the person comes to percieve that all religion have serious flaws that implied that it is the product of an imperfect human mind, or so it seems.

Who told you the creator creates religion in the first place? If there is one? Average people merely believe in religion first, and force their might to defend every notions given by their religion.

Understanding, or if I could put in another words, comprehension, is itself a matter of debate.

How do you know you fully comprehend and understand such thing as religion, how sure are you that you understand what you learn from it? and that you do not comprehend it incorrectly when compare to your own peers? In contrast, there are numerous branches in one particular religion that stems from only one holy book. Its interesting to see how people would have differing views and interpretations from just one version of Bible, and yet claim they are well comprehended in Christianity. Talk about protestant, catholic, anglican and what not.

In short, do not make hasty generalization to people that have different comprehension on their religion. They would probably see you as practicing an incorrect way in the same religion. Perhaps they learn more than you do. You are the wrong guy in their eyes.

This post has been edited by Vagrant: Mar 30 2010, 11:34 PM

How to study deep about religion?

How deep of a study qualify it as being deep enough to fully understand? If study can be compared in terms of deep and shallow, then define a shallow study of religion. What kind of study is a study on the surface, in such topic as religion?

The amount of time spent on studying the religion couldn't be the only yardstick. It would be hard to compare morons with genius in terms of time spent studying.

Does reading more and thinking/analyzing more on the subject of religion makes it a deep study? I hope the religion fanatics elsewhere would do just the same.

EDIT:
And even if you still manage to study it deep, it doesn't mean you had studied it right, even worst, you might had spent your energy studying a hoax all together.

This post has been edited by Vagrant: Apr 29 2010, 12:48 AM

With all due respect, perhaps I'll need to further clarify the intent of my sarcasm on the last para from my last response.

The intent is to question your own, and self proclaimed understanding of your holy book. Do you, while questioning others for not understanding your holy book, do understand it in a correct way, and the same way, as those of your other friends, that have the same faith in your holy book?

Bible is a hoax to Buddhism, as with Quran a fake to a Christian. Yet "well versed" Christians, Muslims and Buddhist alike all proclaimed that they reached the real understanding of their own belief and believe it to be so true that other religions are merely works of mortals.

Ironically, from Christianity, there are Catholics, Protestants, Anglican. From Islam, there are Sunni, Shia, Kharijite.

A twelve years old boy can shout out that his religion is so true that all other religion followers are wrong, yet fail to understand what it means to be a muslim/christian.

Badly enough, some thought that they fully understand, and engineered a plan to suicide while killing others in believe that they do so for religion.
So have you study and understand every word in your holy book? When you have done so, how would you react to a Sunni or a Shia or Kharijite muslim?

And about me, you have no idea yet if I myself have studied every word in Quran and came to my own conclusion from my own understanding.

Your understanding to my intent is already wrong. But I've a part to play as well, because I used too much sarcasm and didn't reveal much information.

See the irony here?

It was the 20th century that when a schoolboy can utter the word "big bang theory" on their mouth. But are people talking about that from 7th century to 19th century?
Does Avicenna or Ibn Khaldun hums about big bang theory?

One would always wonder why the claim that big bang theory was already in Quran only came after the theory was published worldwide by a Roman catholic priest. Why not before that?Isn't that such a nice coincidence?

In the end its still a theory, please do not be too hasty to claim this theory to be true to support the credibility of your religion, for when this theory is revealed to be false, you would have a hard time looking for obvious clue in your holy book that says it supports the new theory and reject the old theory and that you have interpret it wrongly the previous time when everyone believe big bang theory to be so true.

Or,

you can be confidence enough with your understanding right now, and citing words from Quran, that Big Bang is indeed the ultimate real event and a fact proved by Quran, not merely a theory, and that all muslim should embrace it as the real truth, now and forever.


On a more technical approach, I assume the claim come from the following intepretation from Quran 21:30:

Have not those who disbelieve known that the heavens and the earth were joined together as one united piece, Then we parted them? and we have made water Every living thing. will they not Then believe? Do not the unbelievers see that the heavens and the earth were joined together (as one unit of creation), before we clove them asunder.... Will they not then believe?

It sounds familiar to a chinese theory written during the 3rd century, by Xu Zheng:

Heaven and Earth were once inextricably commingled like a chicken's egg, within which was engendered P'an-ku .............this inchoate mass split apart, what was bright and light forming Heaven, and what was dark and heavy forming Earth.


I see the similarity here.