On Islam: according to the Koran, the way a person gets to heaven is by being more good than they are bad (basically), kinda like catholics (not saying Muslims and catholics are the same, just drawing an analogy). The only way a Muslim can be 100% sure he's going to heaven (because Allah didn't bless them with a good-o-meter) is by killing infidels. Seriously, I kid you not. That is why there is a jihad and why Islam was known for centuries as "the religion of the sword". The big difference in Christian and Muslim historical violence is that Mohamed himself led his followers to capture cities (and kill lots and lots of people); Jesus did not condone the violence of his followers at any time during his life
This is completely incorrect and reveals a shocking lack of ignorance about Islam. "Jihad" does not mean running around and killing random people as you seem to suggest. Jihad, as practiced by Muslims today and of its original meaning, is to struggle for spiritual or physical well-being. The overwhelming majority of Muslims are staunchly opposed to violence, and most overwhelming-majority Muslim countries like Indonesia (shock! they're not all Arab!) are modern countries with very little religiously-motivated violence. The reason Islam became the "religion of the sword" was that Mohammed actively chose to seek a political position, something no Judaic prophet ever did. In a shocking twist, political positions in the 7th century tended to include a lot of violence and conquering. That's pretty much what people did back then for fun.
And about religion and science: Interestingly enough, there has never been an instance where archeology has contradicted the bible. Ever.
Modern arch
aeology contradicts your Bible's "six days", it contradicts your Bible's "great flood", and modern biology contradicts your Bible's origins of life.
And as for the miracles in the bible being unscientific, that's...ummm...the point. God's supposed to be outside our laws of physics. This is not unscientific: it is outside the ability of science to address. The only thing it contradicts is a presupposed naturalistic philosophy (the belief that the only thing that exists is the physical universe) which is not based on science at all. It does not necessarily contradict it either, it's simply a matter of being outside the scope of science; it is a personal decision about the nature of reality. But don't say Christianity is unscientific: that's a nonsensical statement. (But an idea that's currently in vogue none-the-less.)
1. Congratulations, you just answered a question about how religion is making claims of extraordinary phenomena by presupposing the existence of another extraordinary phenomenon to explain it.
A well-known scientist (some say it was Bertrand Russell) once gave a public lecture on astronomy. He described how the earth orbits around the sun and how the sun, in turn, orbits around the center of a vast collection of stars called our galaxy. At the end of the lecture, a little old lady at the back of the room got up and said: "What you have told us is rubbish. The world is really a flat plate supported on the back of a giant tortoise." The scientist gave a superior smile before replying, "What is the tortoise standing on?" "You're very clever, young man, very clever," said the old lady. "But it's turtles all the way down!"
2. When you make naturalistic predictions (a Jewish rabbi walked across some water), you have entered The Realm Of Science (tm). If you make a "personal decision" about the nature of reality: sorry, but you're an idiot. Physics is not subjective. The makeup of the universe, its workings, and how it came to be is not something you can "agree to disagree" on. You have a hypothesis that someone can turn water into wine, you back it up with factual evidence and a theory to explain how that happens or it's not valid. End of story.
they should exchange "taking drugs" for "being overwhelmly addicted". you proof knowing nothing about drugs by stating the first.
Well yeah, but specificity isn't exactly this list's strong point, as the first reply pointed out. You can't just go "pollute" and not define it. You can also wonder what's meant by "drugs" - alcohol is a "drug", and it's taken by Catholics at communion. So I guess they're all going to hell too.
