GARY MILLER continued.

//In 1978, he happened to read the Qur'an expecting that it, too, would contain amixture of truth and falsehood.//

Then...(boy, I sure didn't see THIS coming:) shock horror..he discovers it is perfect in every way.(paraphrase of his words)

But he neglects to tell you that the inconsistencies in the Quran are in fact 'handled' by the doctrine of 'Abrogation' where if Mohammad came up with a 'better verse' than one previous (and different) he simply says "Allah found a better verse".... so of course, with that presupposition...its all perfect to Miller.

Miller commits a very basic sin of reasoning.

1/ Claims the sign of God is 'scientific information in a holy book'
2/ Then claims all manner of 'scientific' info in the Quran,
3/ The inescapable conclusion= "Quran must be from God"

PROBLEM 1. The 'science' referred to is verrrrry vague, broad, and capable of many interpretations.
PROBLEM 2. Much of the 'science' about origins of the world are second hand, from Genesis. i.e. He plageurized it.
PROBLEM 3. Taken as true, this would make 'Allah'
-the approver of rape/abuse of captive slave girls,
-the approver of unspeakable cruelties, and the condoner of Mohammad disobeying the very document he claims is from God, in order to make life easier from himself. (Surah 33:50 and 51 are the classics.)
-the author of institutionalized domestic violence against women.
-The declarer of war against Jews, Christians and Atheists with a view to either subjugate and humiliate us, (as well as TAX us) and in many cases he kept on killing people, and after each person killed (Jews) repeated his offer of Islam to the tribe. (FH I found that on an Islamic site)

Motes and beams, Boaz, motes and beams.

"Judge not, that ye be not judged. For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged: and with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again. And why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother's eye, but considerest not the beam that is in thine own eye? Or how wilt thou say to thy brother, Let me pull out the mote out of thine eye; and, behold, a beam is in thine own eye? Thou hypocrite, first cast out the beam out of thine own eye; and then shalt thou see clearly to cast out the mote out of thy brother's eye." Matthew 7 1-5

>>Now.. Christianity could have done the same. Constantine could have chosen ONE version, had all the rest burned, all fragments papyrus etc..and then Christians could claim "Oh Look.. this was dicated from God... there is only ONE Bible..." see where I'm heading?<<

Boaz, you know - probably better than I - that the Bible contains only the most carefully selected writings of its time. The rest condemned, if not to destruction, then to permanent "memory loss".

Constantine chose the canon on advice from Eusebius, who was influenced by Irenaeus, who specifically rejected the Gnostic texts, who was in turn influenced by Marcion, who advocated a full separation of the Jewish texts.

Merely because the (veritable mountain) of discarded books were not burned does not indicate any greater authority adhering to the remaining elements.

When push comes to shove, you believe what you choose to believe. If someone chooses to believe in one book of stories over another, that should be enough for you - it is not your place to mock their religion.

Motes and beams, Boaz, motes and beams.

Thanks Boaz, but I remember learning about the Council of Nicea and subsequent councils where the bible and its meaning took a specific bias based on those in attendance - which is of democratic value, but not necessarily any reflection on the original teachings of Jesus. Equally, if Christians believe the bible is a book of God there are passages in the old testament that speak of and support war, murder, etc etc.

I agree with Pericles, that each persons beliefs are just that - their right to believe. Who am I to judge whether my perception of one religion is better than that of another?

An analogy of the Dalai Lama was that the major religions are like fingers, they all emanate from the palm, and therefore a similar base in their belief, dogma and practice. We are so much more alike than most care to admit.