DBZgirl88

[COLOR=#004a6f]The title speaks for itself. Not that I'm planning to detach my myotaku account, but I would like that option available in the future.[/COLOR]

[COLOR=#004a6f][quote name='Xander Harris']Thanks a lot for the textbook recommendation... might be pricey, but if I get serious about this, it's the way to go.[/quote]Lol, it looks pricey, but I did the currency conversion and 3000 yen is only about 28 U.S dollars. Not bad if you ask me. It's too bad you can only order it from Japan. The shipping charge will be rather pricey. The price will double. I bought my book from my University's bookstore, and you know how Universities like to suck your money for all it's worth. I payed $69 canadian for mine,and it's not even hardcover![/COLOR]

[COLOR=#004a6f][QUOTE=Dagger]Wow, Chabi, those animations are really impressive and clean-looking. I would definitely love to see more. Are you planning to do the same thing for katakana? ~Dagger~[/QUOTE]Why thank you, Dagger. They would be cleaner if I hadn't used bold (why did I use bold?). I made other ones with a more simple font and took off the bold, but they're not with me right now. They're saved on the school P.C. Yes, I'm planning to make some for katakana as well, and like I said before I made several for kanjil. In fact, I made all the numbers up to 9. Now that exams are almost done, I'll have a lot more time to finish off the animations.[/COLOR]

[COLOR=#004a6f]I took Japanese this year as my elective. I enjoyed the course, but it was rather fast paced. My biggest problem was speaking and listening. It takes too long for me to form my ideas into words, and I can't understand spoken Japanese unless it's spoken very slowly. I don't do very well on the listening section of tests, and I'm awful at the oral excercises in class. However, I have a pretty good Japanese accent. When I drill what I want to say, it comes out very well. We have to record ourselves saying a dialogue, and my Japanese teacher told me I actually sound Japanese. :D Anyway, I highly recommend this textbook: [URL=http://bookclub.japantimes.co.jp/english/genki.html]Genki[/URL] [I]As used at the prestigious Harvard, Stanford and Sydney universities, GENKI Vols. I and II gives the first-time student of Japanese a solid grasp of the four basic language skills (listening, speaking, reading and writing) in 23 lessons.[/I] In addition to vocabulary and grammar, a set of Kanji is presented with each chapter. I love how this texbook just fits together. The Kanji taught in each chapter is relevant to the theme and vocabulary of the chapter, so while you're doing your grammar excercises, you get to practice the kanji along with it. The book uses the standard japanese textbook font, for both Kana and Kanji. That way, it will be easier for you to learn to write. You can also get a notebook (that's where the grammar excercises are), which has practice sheets for hiragana katakana, and the kanji taught in each chapter.[quote name='Xander Harris']That book looks really well done, Wristcutter. What books do you recommend for hiragana and katakana?[/quote]If you want to learn to write, just practice, paractice, practice. There's plenty of websites and books that have hiragana and katakana charts. They even have arrows show the proper stroke order. This site has pretty good hiragana and katakana Lessons: [url]http://japanese.about.com/blhira.htm[/url] I'f you're interested, I've made a few animations showing how each hiragana is written. Here a a few examples: [IMG]http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v149/Chabichou/a.gif[/IMG] [IMG]http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v149/Chabichou/i.gif[/IMG] I made a few for kanji, but I think it would take a looooong time to get all of those done. I think these animations would be very beneficial in learning to write. I've seen animations on other Japanese sites, but they use the Mincho font, which does not resemble handwriting, especially the kanji. Luckily, I managed to get my hands on the [URL=http://www.dhost.info/Chabichou/NTk4kp.ttf][B]standard textbook font[/B][/URL], and I'm using that for my animations. So, once I get all my animations done, I'll PM you Xander, and anyone else who's interested.[/COLOR]

[COLOR=#004a6f]I've never skipped school before. I had considered it a few times in my later years in highschool, but I had a minor setback. Even if I made up a good excuse for skipping class and the teacher bought it, my mother would still find out, and I'd be in trouble. When I was in grade 11, the entire school board had this automatic calling system that reads the attendance sheets, which were filled in like a bubble test. It would call all the homes of those who were absent from class, at random times. The call goes something likes this: "Hello. A child of yours attending (insert school name) secondary school was absent from periods (insert period number(s)). Please call the school at (insert school's phone number)."[/COLOR]

[COLOR=#004a6f][QUOTE=Siren][url=http://www.otakuboards.com/showthread.php?t=36229][u]Thread Starters[/u][/url] Wow, talk about irony, lol. Very same thing I was talking about last year, but I was on the other side of the issue. The thread there explains why there isn't that feature (rather, why the feature is no longer active).[/QUOTE][QUOTE=Siren]I have a suggestion. Normal members (Non-Mods) no longer have the ability to delete threads they start. I find it to be very questionable that a thread disappears if the thread starter happens to get decimated in it.[/QUOTE]Lol, you're so spiteful. How many people have you "decimated"? Must feel good looking back at those old threads, and patting yourself on the back. I still however, agree that members shouldn't delete their own threads, unless there is an actual error in them, like China mentioned. But keeping these threads shouldn't be for the purpose of making people who replied in a degrading manner feel good about themselves.[/COLOR]

[COLOR=#004a6f][quote name='Ryuujin']The Saudis are boycotting American goods.[/quote]I'm not sure, but I think it's because many American companies support israel's economy, and you know how most arabic countries don't like Israel, and with good reason. Saudi only boycotts companies that support Israel. Check out [url]http://www.boycottisrael.org/[/url] for the list of companies. [QUOTE]Nothing is more frustrating than the feeling that every time I fill-up the tank, I am sending my money to people who are trying to kill me, my family, and my friends.[/QUOTE]That's a pretty generic assumtion don't you think? I don't think the general Saudi population wants to kill you and your family. The Saudi government is on pretty good terms with the U.S. Sure, there are terrorists groups within the country who attack foreign workers and even Saudi citizens, but the Saudi government is trying to stop that. Therefore, boycotting their oil won't really solve anything. Besides, oil brought from Saudi was pretty cheap before the war on Iraq. I just don't undestand why you'd boycott and arab country that you're on good terms with. It doesn't make sense. You have a reason to mistrust other Arab countries, like Iraq (when it was under Saddam's rule), or Syria, but why Saudi?[/COLOR]

[COLOR=#004a6f][quote name='x kakashi x']it does sound kind of side when you compare the people who actual get the lethal injection to animals, it does sound cruel, but its death, how "un-cruel" can it be, and even if it is cruel, why should it be nice for them? was it nice for the people they killed? I doubt it, they're death should be no more peaceful then their victims[/quote]Presicely my opinion. Therefore, beheading is the best choice, or a gunshot to the head . Not a nice way to go, but not torturous either. Elfpirate mentions getting the loved ones of the victims to carry out the punishment. Not a bad idea, but it still needs to be done in a controlled manner. They shouldn't give the murderer a torturous death even if he did that to the victims. We can't go too far with "an eye for an eye", because two wrongs don't make a right. If someone steals from you, you shouldn't steal from him, you get your justice the proper way. [/COLOR]

[COLOR=#004a6f][quote name='elfpirate][b']Hey, Chabi-- what makes you so certain that lethal injection is painless? I mean, the person injected gets a vein full of poison that goes straight to their heart. I'm assuming it's not like being pumped full of morphine or something.[/b][/quote]True, I'm not [B]certain[/B] it's painless, I never said it was, but I assume it is much less painful than the electric chair. America has tried to make the death penalty less "cruel". First it was the electric chair, then it was the cyanide gas chamber, and now lethal injection. I also heard, thought I'm not sure, that the poison used in lethal injection is the the same, if not, similar to the kind they use to put down animals. Most of the time animals are put down to take them out of their misery. They wouldn't inflict pain on them. I'm assuming this poison doesn't feel like fire when injected, it just stops the body from working. A poison is just an enzyme that stops a reaction from happening, in the case of lethal injection, it stops reactions neccesary for the body to live. Anyway, I think there are disputes over subjects like the death penalty due to the fact that some people believe in God and others don't. In a secular point of view, death is the end, and the murderer is not given a chance to change his ways, nor is he forgiven. In a religious point of view (well some religions), although God can forgive you for your sins, you still must face the consequences of your actions. Therefore, it is better to be put to death and face your lord "pure" on the day of judgement, than to escape the death penalty and be damned to hell. Lol, I always somehow drag religion into everything, which probably infuriates some of you. But I honestly think this is the one of the main reasons people disagree on so many topics.[/COLOR]

[COLOR=#004a6f]I agree with the death penalty, and that it should be carried out soon after the murderer is found guilty. It should not be painless, such as lethal injection, because that would be unfair to the person who was killed. This might sound harsh, but hey peoples, an eye for an eye I say. The murderer needs to know how their victim felt when he/she murdered them. The murder needs to feel (a little) pain and fear. I say beheading, which is not too painful if done with a sharp blade. It's not as "cruel" as the electric chair, nor as "sympatheitc" as lethal injection.[quote name='Godelsensei']The main problem with the death-penalty is that the courts make mistakes.[/quote]True, so I think the only time the death penalty should be carried out is if you have good witnesses.[/COLOR]

[COLOR=#004a6f][quote name='Harry]She didn't feel a thing. She didn't feel it because she's been [b]brain dead[/b'] for 15 years.[/quote]I find it quite irritating how people (not you in particular Harry) can be so arrogant as to assume they know everything. You don't know for sure how Terri was feeling, and you don't know for sure that she isn't aware of her surroundings. So, when she first fell into her coma, she stopped breathing for 5 minutes, and then, we can safely assume that there is not hope for her? How do you even know how much of her brain is damaged? How do you know for sure how wether she feels pain or not? I find it quite appalling that people would choose to starve her to death. That's quite monstrous I must say. There have been many times where people in this type of vegetative state wake up from their comas. You don't know for sure if Terri would have woken up or not. I've read about a toddler who fell into a deep murky lake, and it took his father over [B]15 minutes[/B] to get him out since the water was so deep. The boy appeared dead at first, his eyes staring blankly, his heart not beating, nor was he breathing. Not to mention that he was inderwater for [B]15 minutes[/B]. A few days later, the boy wakes up in the hospital, and no brain damage was apparent watsoever. He asks his father: where's my shoe? (He had lost it in the lake). This type of scenario happens all the time, therefore, we have no right to take people's lives as we please. If someone was about to get hit by a car, and had the channce to save them and I didn't, it still counts as murder. If they did get hit by the car, then not taking to the hospital would be murder, unless their body was blown to smitherines. In Terri's case, the feeding tube kept her [B]alive[/B]. She was [B]alive[/B], and anyone who believes in God would agree that her body still had her soul. But even if you were athiest, you would agree that she was alive. But she still would have died eventually, even if she had stayed on the feeding tube. Even if her wishes were that she be taken off life support, I see this as suicide. Suicide is still illegal people, no matter how crappy you think your life is. In light of this incidence, I was struck by how important it is to have a will. You don't want spiteful people hurting you and your family, just because they are your "kin".[/COLOR]

[COLOR=#004a6f]I took the time to go outside today, and it seems like the weather has read my mind. It was really sunny, almost blinding, and the snow is melting faster than usual. I also saw a fly! That's so freaky, I thought that winter is gonna last longer, and when I mention it on the boards the weather suddenly changes! Most intriguing... But wow! A fly! Flys indicate warm weather! Maybe the snow will melt soon. Maybe we'll have a warm April for once. I'd say that air pollution is creating inconsistencies in weather, not specifically global warming. I suggested the idea of Global cooling, but even though winters are getting longer and colder over the years where I live, we keep getting unsusually warm days. We got rain in [I]Febuary[/I]. But if global cooling is possible, why have summer temperatures remained the same? Maybe the Earth's tilt is changing? Maybe, the earth's orbit is changing?[/COLOR]

[COLOR=#004a6f][quote name='Siren']God? God is a creation of Man.[/quote]Right, you go on thinking that way. Have a nice day.[/COLOR]

[COLOR=#004a6f]We all hear about how the rising levels of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere has slowly been making temperatures rise. The ice caps might eventually melt people think. But if the earth is warming up, how come winter has become longer and colder over the years? That's at least what I see in my region. It used to be sunny and warm by the middle of march, even hot at times, and now it might take till mid-April for all the snow to melt, and it's still very chilly, even in May! When I was younger, the snow was almost always warm enough to pack together. Now it's just very cold, dry and powdery. Any explanations for this gradual decrease in winter temperatures?[/COLOR]

[COLOR=#004a6f][quote name='Chabichou]Because almost every copy in the world is exactly the same, every sentence, every letter, every accent marking is exactly the same. The only ones that are different are made by people trying to misguide muslims. When comparing today's real copies to the very old copies from Muhammad's time, they are exactly the same.[/QUOTE][QUOTE']If it's "shallow" of me to point to literal, visual text differences and say the Quran has been changed, then it's equally shallow of you to point to literal, visual text qualities and claim the Quran is unchanged, because, clearly, from a literal, visual text standpoint, the Quran has been changed, and it makes your previous statement incorrect.[/quote]I was stressing how the words have not changed. Did you honestly think that "exactly the same" meant how the Qur'an looked as well? I apologize for the somewhat incorrect statement I have made. Therefore, I will correct the statement above. Here goes: [B]Although copies of the Qur'an may differ visually, such as size of text, the font, the color of the cover (you can get in hardcover or paperback too), the number of pages due to text size, the actual size of the book, and the designs drawn of the covers, the text within the book is exactly the same. When comparing today's copies to the first copies made, the text slightly differs because vowel markings have been added to make it easier to read and to get the final vowel markings of nouns correct. This does not however, change what the words say, simply remind you how to read them.[/B] Anyone in disagreement? [QUOTE=Siren]Now, you've asked me how changing the text changes the meaning, so I'll explain. I should mention that I don't view any text at all as having a single version and nothing more. Texts change in a variety of ways with each passing generation. This will be explained more fully at the end. Now, the "original" version of the Quran had a specific meaning. I'm not arguing with that, because every text has a specific meaning in its original version (sans some stuff from the 1890s). However, as time went on, the meaning in the Quran was changing, because a variety of new meanings were being introduced. The "set" meaning of the original version was disappearing, being replaced by the new interpretations/meanings. It was a different Quran from an interpretive standpoint, from an aesthetic standpoint, from a "meaning" standpoint. It wasn't the same Quran as the original, despite having a literal, visual similarity. Because of this, the diacritical marks were added to restore the original meaning of the Quran and act as a guide of sorts to avoid confusion (like you've said in your previous posts). The only reason they would have for altering the text would be if the "original" meaning was in danger of being replaced by the new meanings/interpretations, which it was. Hence, by adding in the marks, they did change the meaning of the current Quran, because a text doesn't remain the same from generation to generation. It changes with the times, whether it's alterations, new interpretations/meanings, etc. Nothing is a static text, because it's not going to have the same meaning/impact/interpretation as each generation comes and goes. This is what I mean when I say I view every text as having different generations, because the audience is constantly changing. Understand it now? With each generation, it's going to be a new text.[/QUOTE]Oh, I see now what you're getting at, and you do raise a good point. There are words in the Qur'an, specifically verbs and nouns, that people are not sure of their meaning. If you get a Qur'an with a commentary, It'll simply suggest different scholar's veiws on what things mean, but not stating that there is an exact answer. However, these words that we might not understand were probably not understood back then either. Although some verbs and nouns from the past aren't used today, we still know what they mean, you can still find them in an Arabic dictionary. Scholars who study the Qur'an know the vocabularay used back then. The vocabulary used in the past has not been lost. Furthermore, Arabic grammar has not changed either. As I said in my first post, Arabic was at it's peak when it comes to grammmar and vocabulary in the prophet's time. Concerning the vowel markings: You still seem to have this notion that they changed something, but they simply didn't. So I thought I might mention this: Even without the vowel markings, no two words from the same part of speech (noun, verb, adjective) are alike. Therefore, this idea that we can use different combinations of vowel markings on the same word to make new words is wrong, even if we do have additional vocabulary today. Of all the nouns, "A" "S" "D" can only be read as "asad", and there are no new nouns that use these letters either. They might be read differently for a verb, but the order of words just tells you wether the word is a noun or verb anyway. [QUOTE]Where did I ever imply that you needed to swim out into the middle of an ocean to taste saltwater? Nowhere. You haven't been to the beach much, have you, Chabi? You know, the water at the beach is roughly the same as the water in the middle of the Atlantic Ocean? Did you know that?[/QUOTE]I know you can taste the water on the shore, but how does that tell you that there is a barrier between the two seas? You would have to go very far out into the sea to find the surface tension barrier between the sea and the ocean. And even if Muhammad has been to the sea, or talked with people who have, none of them would have known it. The key word I've been pointing out is [B]barrier[/B], no one back then would have known there is a force stopping the seas' waters from mixing with eachother. [QUOTE][B]He has let loose the two seas, converging together, with a barrier between them they do not break through. (Qur'an, 55:19-20)[/B][/QUOTE]Notice the word "let loose" for those of you who think the barrier is land. The seas are let loose, they coverge, they touch, yet there is barrier they don't break through, a barrier other than land. How can "any idiot" know this back then? Sigh... okay I'm gonna stop arguing with you Siren, but I still don't agree with you. This thread is getting pretty tiresome, and I'm tired of arguing, especially over things that just take common sense to realize.... See you on the day of judgement. May God be with you 'till then.[/COLOR]

[COLOR=#004a6f][QUOTE=Siren]It's not far-fetched, Chabi, lol. Anyone can do it (I've done it). Come to Jersey and I'll prove it to you. Take a dip in the water down the shore, get a nice mouthful of that crisp, cool saltwater, then head back here to the Delaware River, and see what pollution tastes like. Then head up north to the Delaware River Watergap and taste how clean that water is. Then we'll head down to the Delaware Bay and you can experience for yourself that separation and see just how you can check that without any God telling you what's going on. Who can ever accomplish it, you say? I know I can. I know my family can. I know any able-bodied individual can. It's not as if it requires some great strength that people in ancient times never possessed. All it takes is some good ole fashioned observation, that's all, but you seem to believe that the "scientific" statements of the Quran couldn't be explained through simple worldly observation, so that's not indicative of a problem with what I'm saying.[/QUOTE]Siren, let me ask you something: Where did Muhammad live? In Saudi Arabia. The farthest place Muhammad has ever travelled was to Syria, when he was earning a living in trade and commerce. When he learned that he had become a prophet, the only cities Muhammad ever stayed in were Madina and Makkah. Actually, just from these [B]historical facts[/B], we can conclude that Muhammad has never even been to a sea or ocean at all! Earlier, I gave you the benefit of the doubt that Muhammad might have crossed a sea in his lifetime, but then I took the time to actually read his biography, and he has never been to a sea! Therefore, he wouldn't have had the opportunity to perform your "experiments". Furthermore, there is no fresh water in Middle east, except in spring and wells, which are all underground. Therefore, taking a fish out of the Mediterranean sea and dropping it into the atlantic won't do anything either. And I told you, no one is stupid enough to swim in the [B]middle[/B] of an ocean and sea. The water is just too deep. Your experience in the delaware river must have been very interesting, and I'd love to try it myself, I really would. All I'm saying is that you can't do the same thing in a very deep ocean. The water is can be almost a mile deep, and the waves are very strong. You'd have to be a fool to do such a thing. You've called me narccistic and stubborn and self absorbed, becuase I'm not "getting my way". But so far I've addmited it when I was wrong. You on the other hand have refused to ever admit that you might be mistaken, you even completely deny the possibility: [quote name='Me]Woah, you've completely misunderstood me here. I'm telling you, you really, [B]really[/B] misunderstood me. [/QUOTE][QUOTE=Siren']I'm sure I have.[/quote]Right, you go on thinking that that way. I know what I meant, and you are thinking of something completely different, hence, we have a misunderstanding. You stated that we changed the Qur'an to say everything in slang, and I never even said that. I said we [B]speak in slang[/B], and hence, not everyone is strong with Arabic grammar, and that's why they added vowel markings. Adding vowel markings does not change what the Qur'an is saying, or how it sounds. It tells you how it should sound. Here is the picture I said I was going to make to explain what I mean: [IMG]http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v149/Chabichou/arabic.bmp[/IMG] Notice how the two sentences look exactly the same exept for the vowel markings. They should be read exactly the same according to grammar. Now, an adult can read the sentence without the markings, they can fill in the correct vowels, but they might fill in the wrong [B]final vowel[/B] sound, because these change according to grammar, and not all Arabs today are strong in grammar. "they might fill in the wrong final vowel sound, because these change according to grammar, and not all Arabs today are strong in grammar."* *Hold on a sec, maybe this statement is what is confusing you. Vowel sounds don't change within a sentence. A sentence has a specific vowel for each letter. This sentence would be grammatically incorrect if the vowels are changed. If a sentence says "asada", and that is grammatically correct, I cannot change "asada" to "asadu". Hence, I leave the sentecne alone. I either write in the correct vowel marking and read it according to that, or I don't write in the vowel marking, but still have to read it the same way the sentence with the vowel markings would be read. Now, the earlier Qurans didn't have vowel markings, anyone who knows grammar will pronounce everything properly. When we invented vowel markings, they decided to put these in the Quran to make sure people will read it properly.[quote name='Siren]Chabi, answer me this: into what text did people put the vowel markings? Don't dodge the question. Don't omit the question. Just answer it. [B']Where did people add in vowel markings?[/B][/quote]Okay, I won't omit it. They added vowel markings to [B]every single letter and every single word in the Qur'an[/B]. Adding vowel markings [B]did not change the way words are pronounced[/B], they [B]tell the person[/B] reading the words [B]how to pronounce things[/B], and for most people , it's just a reminder. You cannot however, change the vowel markings, you cannot replace one vowel marking with another in a word. You either have them or you don't. Either way, the words are same. I am not good at reading without vowel markings, and I can't read Arabic newspapers well because they don't have them. If the newspaper had them, I would be able to read. People want to make it easier to read the Qur'an, so they add vowel markings to the letters, which don't change the words, just remind you how to read them. So therefore, the only thing that has changed is what you see on the page, not what it says, what it means, or how it is read. The markings have only stressed the importance of saying the words properly. After vowel markings were added, no one has changed them since, because it would be grammatically incorrect to do so. The possibility for typos exists, but I told you several times we are very careful to keep everything exactly the same, and we have succeeded. Just take two, three, four, or even more copies of the Qur'an, from different publishers that is, and you will see they are exactly the same. So now, tell me Siren, how does adding vowel markings, [B]just to specify the readings[/B], tell you that the Qur'an has actually changed, that the message and the meanings are different? The only thing that has changed is what you see. I bet you would be so shallow as to assume that a font change means the Qur'an has changed. You know what we mean by "change". In this debate, "change" meant the actual words are different, that sentences are different, that the strories are different. That's what we mean by "change". And when we say "God wrote the Qur'an" or "God wrote the Torah", we don't mean to say that he actually [B]wrote[/B] it on paper. They are his words, that's the point. You should be smart enough to know what we mean. The Quran wasn't the word of the the scribes, they simply wrote it down. And all you say is "right, so the scribes wrote the Qur'an". You've been making these stupid sorts of arguments throughout this whole thread. Stop being so shallow. Another thing is you keep asking me is: "how is this supposed to be a rebuttal, how is this supposed to counter what I said". You know I'm just explaining things. You are really arguing a point which has no relevance to this thread. Anyway.... [quote name='Heaven's Cloud']Historians would say that you are incorrect. In the writings Ka?b, Jabal, and Thabit, all three discuss how little of the Quran was written before Mohammed?s death. It is generally accepted by scholars that the written text of the Quran was collaborated upon by Mohammed?s followers. The fact that he prophesized so much right before his death makes it pretty improbable that the entire Quran was recorded before his death.[/quote]Well, I've been told, according to history alone that is, that the Quran was all written down during the life of the prophet. From the actual history I've heard, the companions of the prophet made sure to write down everthing and check with the prophet. However, the history I've heard might be wrong, or yours might be wrong, so let's just agree to disagree shall we? [quote name='Heaven's Cloud']Anyway, this brings me back to my previous question, since the Quran was not written completely or compiled during Mohammed?s lifetime, with the exception of faith, how are you certain that the text wasn?t altered? [/quote]I'd like to point out that I never said that we have complete proof from anything. I never said that I have actual proof that the Qur'an is the word of God. I said I wanted to "convince" you. People can be convinved of things just from common sense and evidence. I am convinced that matter is made of atoms, but no one has actual "proof" that they exist. No one has ever seen an atom, but from using common sense and evidence, we have come to the conclusion that they exist. There are many things in this world that we don't know for sure, but we can safely make assumptions based on what we know. In this thread I was only trying to present [B]evidence[/B], just evidence, that the Qur'an is the word of God. But I can't absolutely prove it, I simply can't. It takes some common sense, and faith to believe it. I can't absolutely prove that God exists. The only way to know for sure would be for God to show himself to us. [quote name='Cow Tipper']Chabi, your on a fool's errand, you can convince nobody that the Quran is the word of God unless they are muslim, but they would already think/know that.[/quote]Really? I wonder why people actually convert to Islam? Maybe because some come to believe the Qur'an is the word of God? Not to say that believing in the Qur'an automatically makes you muslim. Belief isn't enough. You must have faith, and live your life according to Islam.[/COLOR]

[COLOR=#004a6f][quote name='Generic NPC #3']Yet, using the idea of other religions being improbable because we've never seen any of those mythological gods do anything directly seems really strange to me. Has anyone seen their current god of choice come down from the sky/paradise/heaven/etc and do things? Has anyone witnessed their god create something or is there even an accurate, infallible, completely provable in all senses account of it happening? Has anyone flew up into the skies and actually found a Christian-type of Heaven? Does anyone seriously know what the state of the universe was before any divine being did something to it? There's a lot of people who believe that their god created the universe from nothing (ex nihilo), but what proof is there of that? People had faith in those old religions, just like people have faith in their religion now. I don't see a god riding a chariot across the sky to change the prescence of day and night any more often than I see angels floating across the sky and helping people in need. That is to say, I never have.[/quote]I know I tryed to show how the greek gods don't exist because we don't see them, but the greeks have given them positions, "the gods live on mount olympus", "Atlas is holding up the sky", "Helios drags the sun". We go to these places and they are not there. Why can't we see the God muslims jews and christians believe in? Well, he's not here! God is [B]outiside[/B] the universe, and he has decided not to show himself to us (except for the christian believe that jesus is the manifestation of God). We haven't managed to leave the universe, much less our own galaxy, so you're not gonna see God, until the day of judgement when he takes all up to him. I'm not sure if we can actually [B]see[/B] him, because he is not like us, and he created everything, such as light and matter. But we definitely will know then he exists because his presence will be obvious.[/COLOR]

[COLOR=#004a6f][quote name='Chabichou']Meanwhile, the greeks worshipped Zeus, Hera, Athena, Ares, Apollo, Demeter etc, just to name a few. These Gods are made up, they really are, believe me. What gave the greeks the right to simply assume that the Gods appeared out of chaos, and that the "fell in love" with eachother and had more baby Gods? [/quote] [quote name='Morpheus']I rest my case.[/quote]Oh, I see what made everyone so offended. Okay, I take it back and I apologize, BUT, I would like to explain what I meant by the greeks "not having the right" to make up gods. Techinically speaking, we all have the right to our opinion and we can say and do anything we want (within our countries laws). But logically speaking, what gives anyone the right to make a statement about something, when they have not witnessed it, they have not heard it from others who at least claimed that the witnessed it, and there's not a shred of evidence to support their statement? For instance, I could say: "Morpheus has blue eyes". Technically speaking, I have the right to make this statement. But I have never even seen you Morpheus, and I have never spoken to anyone who knows you or heard anyone saying that you have blue eyes. Honestly, what gives me the right, [B]logically speaking[/B] to state that you have blue eyes when I really (and I mean REALLY) do not know? Now you might ask, "well [B]logically speaking[/B], what gives you the right to assume that Allah is the only God?" Well first of all, if their had never been an books revealed that claimed that they were the word of God, I would think I only have the right to assume that some sort of god, or even gods, exist. I would not give my self the right to give him/her/them (a) name(s). [B]Logically speaking[/B], what gives me the right to even state how many gods there are? But in the case with my belief in Islam, someone has come forward, and claimed that they have seen an angel, and that they are recieving the message of God. Furthermore, I look through the book and realize that their is something quite miraculous about it, "hence" (I bet this word bugs you to no end Sepiroth) I make a conclusion that this is a message from God. The books states what God's name is and hence, [B]logically speaking[/B] I now have the right to assume that Allah is the creator's name. There is some sort of evidence, I have actually heard things, not just made up a name for the creator. So I hope I cleared up what I meant, and again apologize if that offended anyone, but that statement. But, I still stand by my belief about greek gods. They don't exist, and logically speaking, I have the right to make this statment, because I have witnessed it for myself. There is proof.[/COLOR]

[COLOR=#004a6f][quote name='Sepiroth']You mught remeber this post you put in "poll what is your religon?" You go right there and announce in a indirect way that your religon is superior to all others. You need to stop being so high and mighty every religon is riddled with holes. I can point them out easily. I reiterate Fundamentalist.[/quote]Oh wait a minute, are you still talking? I'm not being high and mighty. I have every right to believe that my religion is the correct one, just like everyone else can. You have every right to believe that my religion is wrong, and you have the right to state that it is. And others have the right to disagree with you and to state that they do. But no one is holding a gun to your head and forcing you to change your beliefs. I am simply stating my beliefs, and I really believe in them, so why is it a crime to simply try to convince others? There's something called "free speech", which as long as you don't use it to tell lies and hurt others, is completely acceptable. [quote name='Sepiroth']Right there you deal a deathblow to your own religon. by using science over faith. "hence" i come to the conclusion you are a hippocritical fundamentalist.[/quote]I don't believe in God just because of faith. I use logic as well. In my opinion, my religion explains science, so I'm not disproving my religion by using scientific examples. How does proving that Helios doesn't drag the sun behind him disprove the existance of other religion's god(s)? I believe that either God created the universe, just like that, from nothing, or he caused the big bang. Science on it's own doesn't explain to me how the big bang formed. That's why I believe that the universe was created. I believe that God created matter, energy and the the forces in the universe. So if God created the earth, and the sun, and he created gravity, to me that explains why the earth rotates around the sun. Sounds logical to me. [quote name='Morpheus']You really need to have an open mind. I don't believe in god, but I don't put in every single religious debate "OMG!!! Atheism iz te only 1!!! All must B LIk Meh!!!" as you do with Islam. I let people have their own ideas. Some of my friends are Islamic, and they fast during Ramadan. It's what they want to do, so they do it without a word from me. Like I'll radically change their beliefs in 5 minutes.[/quote]Having an open mind doesn't mean I have to pretend that other religions might be right. I don't think they are right, and try as you might, you won't convince me they are. Having an open mind means at least giving other religion's a chance. I will listen. I will hear what you have to say, and consider it. I'm still being "open minded". But I will analyze what the religion says, and I will draw my own conclusions from it and determine whether [B]in my opinion[/B] it is right or wrong. I can state out loud that the [U][blank][/U]religion is wrong, it's my opinion. I might try to [B]convince[/B] others, but as I said, I'm not hiolding a gun up to anyone's head. Anyway, let's get back to topic people. If you want to argue more with me about Greek gods, just PM me and we'll start a "Do the greek gods exist?" thread. Have a nice day. ^_^[/COLOR]

[COLOR=#004a6f][quote name='Sepiroth']You don't have proof that greek gods dont exist. You need to stop acting like a stupid religious fundamentalist :mad: . What if i said your god does not exist, which it probaly does not, you would be upset and offended. Believe it or not there other religons besides christian muslim and jewish. I am an athiest and i know better than you to talk bad about some ones religon. :mad: Get some damn tolerence and learn to think, not follow a book :mad:[/quote]Fundamentalist... ha ha ha. This discussion is getting really interesting. [QUOTE]Inventing Gods? What the hell gives you the right to say that there is a right and a wrong religion? What if I still believed in the Greek Gods? What if I said that the God you worship is completely made up and the wrong one to worship? There is a little thing called tolerance, learn some . How dare you impose your beleifs on everyone at this board. You need to get out and talk to some people once in a while, the religions you think are "real" aren't the only ones out there. [/QUOTE]I never said that my religion is correct, and I am not imposing my beliefs on anyone on this board either. But, believe me, the greek gods do not exist, they really don't. Oh, right, you want "proof". Well, here's your "proof" ladies and gentlemen: The greeks believed that the sun's rising and setting was the doing of the sun god, Helios. Apparently, Helios dragged the sun behind him, while riding a chariot drawn by fire breathing horse. Quite fascinatiing! We go into space, and what do we see? The sun doesn't revolve around the earth, but instead the other way around, and to no one's surprise, there is no god riding a chariot drawn by fire breathing horses dragging the sun behind him. Hence, I have come to the conclusion that helios does not exist. And as entertaining as it sounds, there is also no goddess named Selene hat is dragging the moon behind her while riding a chariot drawn by beautiful milky white horses. The earth revolves around the sun because of gravity, and the moon revolves around the earth because of gravity. Period. The greeks also believed that the sky was held up by Atlas, one of the Titans. But we know the sky isn't solid, it's just space as we see it from earth. Do you see anyone holding up the sky? I don't. The greeks believed the Zues, the supposed god of thunder and lightning was responsible for causing thunderstorms. But we know that rain forms because of water evaporating off the earth's surface and that lightning is cause by the clouds and the ground having opposite electrical charges. So Zues also doesn't exist. If Zues doesn't exist, then most of the other Gods wouldn't either since they are his children. [QUOTE]and just so you know, I'm an Atheist.[/QUOTE]Are you indeed? It's quite ironic how athiests stress how important common sense is, how there needs to be [I]logical[/I] explanations for everthing, yet you become so offended when I state that completely illogical religions are wrong. Your hypocrisy is quite astonishing.[/COLOR]

[COLOR=#004a6f][quote name='Morpheus']How do we know that your god isn't made up? We don't, so you have no right to denounce another religion.[/quote]What do you mean, [I]my[/I] God? No one invented the God Muslims Jews and Cristians believe in. We Just believe that a creator exists, and that he created everything. The name we give to God is simpy the name he calls himself in the his books, which we believe are the word of God. Meanwhile, the greeks worshipped Zeus, Hera, Athena, Ares, Apollo, Demeter etc, just to name a few. These Gods are [B]made up[/B], they really are, believe me. What gave the greeks the right to simply assume that the Gods appeared out of chaos, and that the "fell in love" with eachother and had more baby Gods? It's important to accept the fact that you don't know everything. I don't know "Where god came from", so I can't simply make up stories explaining his origins, the way all the ancient and [B]wrong[/B] relgions did. [I]That's[/I] what I call "inventing gods". Please be sensible people.[/COLOR]

[COLOR=#004a6f][quote name='ShadO MagE']On the assumption, true enough. But what if we find the black clothes to be attractive, not to get "Negative" attention. Because I personaly, if your going to judge me based on the way I dress, why would I want to get to know you? Seems pretty shallow to base friendships ont he way people dress.[/quote]If you simply dress in a gothic style because you actually find it attractive, I'd say that's completely fine. Sure I might not like it, but meh, you can't let me tell you how to dress. But you have to admit, that there are many people out there who dress simply to get attention, even if it's negative attention. They want to scary, and they want people to stare at them in horror. [B]These[/B] kind of people are freaks with no lives. Second of all, I never said dressing in black is wrong. I dress in full black all the time, but I don't go so far as to myself look like some sort of demon who came out hell. And who ever said I was going to judge you by your looks? I don't even know you![/COLOR]

[COLOR=#004a6f][quote name='ShadO MagE']Whats the point of dressing the way you dress or the way a "Prep" dresses, or a punk, emo, or any other stereotype's that are associated with dressing a certain way. Or whats the point of dressing the way you dress?[/quote]Some styles of dress look nice, and people like to look good, so that's why they would dress that way. Personally, I dress only to cover myself. I have no "style" as you would call it. When you dress to get negative attention (the way "Goths" do), that's something pretty pointless. Why do people want to look scary? [QUOTE]And who said I didn't act like that?[/QUOTE]Hmm, I thought you were trying to prove you do have a life. If you are studying latin and taking honour courses, you wouldn't be wasting your time freaking people out would you? I think I was making a fair assumption, wouldn't you agree?[/COLOR]

[COLOR=#004a6f][quote name='ShadO MagE']You know, I'd really like to thank you for labbling every one who wears black as freaks. Yes i wear black, and i'd wear the eyeliner, ect. If I could get away with it, but for now I'd rather not have to deal with the conflict it would cause. And I'd also like you to know, while I may be a freak, hell I'll even agree with you there, we are freaks, were different from the majority of people, I am in no way shape or form wasting my life. Yes taking all honors classes and latin right now is a such a waste, and two AP classes next year. Thanks for the steriotype. I thought people like you wern't supposed to judge others.[/quote]Oh I didn't mean people who simply dress in a "gothic" manner and act normal are freaks. Yeah there are many people like that and it's okay (though I still do not understand the point of dressing that way). The "Freaks" I was referring to were the really creepy people like the example I gave earlier, the girl who "glided" again and again past my sister, smiling like she was in some sort of trance. THAT'S a freak that has no life.[/COLOR]

[COLOR=#004a6f]Funny how the "Gothic" stereotype goes completely against what the Gothic period was about: Light! Gothic Cathedrals were designed to let in as much light as possible with their beautiful stained-glass windows. Just because they have gargoyles "protecting" them, the term [I]gothic[/I] suddenly has to do with the darkness? Therefore, I don't call people who dress in black, paint their faces white, and wear black lipstick, eyeshadow, and nail-polish "Goths". More like "anti-goths". Not all "anti-goths" act depressed and stuff, and some are pretty happy and jumpy and all those other giddy things, which makes me wonder, "Okay, why dress like that? What point are you trying to get across to me? You dress in a strange, intimidating, and (in my point of view) a frightening manner, yet at the same type, you don't want people labeling you? What is your purpose?" My sister used to work downtown and she had to take the bus home late at night. While my sister was waiting at the bus stop, this creepy girl dressed in a long black robe with a hood (which she had up), walks (more like, "glides") past her, all the while, smiling in a creepy manner, without blinking. And then a few minutes later she would "glide" past her again, that creepy smile still pasted on her face. Did I mention she had her face painted ghost-white, creepy makeup included? Honestly, what point are these freaks, yes, FREAKS, trying to get across? Stop wasting your life and do something productive for once.[/COLOR]