PDA

View Full Version : A question for Atheists



Al Sultan
12-21-2016, 11:09 AM
Assalamo alikum brothers and sisters,

I have been thinking about, how Atheists think this and that about our religion, and prophet, (delusional,madman, poet) you name it, and so on.

But, I have a question for Atheists.

What if, you were living at the time of prophet Mohammed (PBUH) and you saw him and listened to him, that he has received a revelation from god, would you then believe? or still confront him? (Since I've seen many Atheists saying that they didn't see it happen so they don't believe it)

I don't want to debate, i just want to discuss, because if then you'll not believe now, would you believe if you had lived at the time of the prophet Mohammed? (PBUH)



Wa assalamo alikum wa rahmintullahi wa barakato.
Reply

Login/Register to hide ads. Scroll down for more posts
fromelsewhere
12-23-2016, 09:43 AM
Salaams,
I am not quite an atheist, but to answer your question, just seeing and listening to him would not be convincing evidence in and of itself, unless he accomplished before my eyes clear miracles and predicted unlikely things to come true in my lifetime (not 2000 years later).
A 'miracle' would be something like: guy who lost a leg in battle has a new one that grows back in place the following day.
Guy who is blind and who suddenly sees again doesn't count because that could simply be a case of hysteria.
A 'prediction' needs to be something like: tomorrow, there will be rainstorm in the Sahara desert that will hit at noon, and three lightening strikes will hit this tree.
There will be a bad storm in 1000 years and many people will be swept by the rain doesn't count because it is too nonspecific in time and actions.
Reply

greenhill
12-23-2016, 12:06 PM
@fromelsewhere , so you need miracle(s) as proof? No miracles means no proof? or am I being too simplistic?


:peace:
Reply

Bosanac
12-23-2016, 03:44 PM
While I'm not an atheist, I think your question has a somewhat faulty premise.

It would obviously depend on how the conversation with the prophet pbuh went.

"Confronting" the prophet pbuh isn't necessarily a negative thing. It can be done in a mature and respectful manner. Through hadiths too we know plenty of people came to the prophet skeptical and he convinced them.

Like fromelsewhere said, people wanted to see something extraordinary to be convinced, perhaps even a prediction about an upcoming event, and not just a vague prediction that's supposed to happen long after they're not around to see it. And the prophet did just that.
Reply

Welcome, Guest!
Hey there! Looks like you're enjoying the discussion, but you're not signed up for an account.

When you create an account, you can participate in the discussions and share your thoughts. You also get notifications, here and via email, whenever new posts are made. And you can like posts and make new friends.
Sign Up
Al Sultan
12-23-2016, 03:46 PM
Hello, welcome to the forum brother :)



Originally Posted by fromelsewhere
A 'prediction' needs to be something like

But he did predict many things, he predicted BEDOUINS will be competing with tall towers, (UAE and Saudi Arabia are in a competition to build the tallest building)

he predicted "there will come a time, when the worst of you will become leaders" I mean, Donald Trump?

He predicted ISIS I believe, but I haven't read the full article about it.


But OTHER than that, if he took you to his cave, and he shows you angel Gabriel (AS) and he talks to the prophet, about a revelation or just anything, would you then believe?

but I don't understand, how come his character doesn't prove that he's not truthful? I mean if you would look at the condition of Arabia, everybody was cruel, only little people were actually nice, but others were terrible, burying their daughters (something that was common at that time) I mean, isn't that an evidence of his prophethood?


also if you witnessed the split of the moon, would you believe? so you believe in miracles right? physical miracles?
Reply

czgibson
12-23-2016, 10:47 PM
Greetings,

If I had been living in the 7th century, I would have been relatively ignorant about the natural world and its processes, as everyone was then compared to modern people. Given that, there is every chance that I could have believed in a prophet like Muhammad (pbuh).

Peace
Reply

Al Sultan
12-23-2016, 10:54 PM
Originally Posted by czgibson
Greetings,

If I had been living in the 7th century, I would have been relatively ignorant about the natural world and its processes, as everyone was then compared to modern people. Given that, there is every chance that I could have believed in a prophet like Muhammad (pbuh).

Peace
Hello sir Gibson,


So, you wouldn't think he's delusional ? And you would believe in the Quran ? So you would believe him ? surprising


But let's say in today's world, he comes, with the Quran from God,and tells us that he has received a revelation from God, would you then believe or not ? or would you still question him.
Reply

czgibson
12-23-2016, 11:25 PM
Greetings,

Originally Posted by Al Sultan
So, you wouldn't think he's delusional ? And you would believe in the Quran ? So you would believe him ? surprising
I'm not saying I would necessarily believe in him in particular. It's difficult to know what criteria I would use in such circumstances to decide which prophet to follow, if any. However, given the fact that I would then be relatively ignorant compared to a modern person, my threshold of belief would be much lower, and so I would in all likelihood be more open to the possibility of following a prophet (any prophet) than I am now.

But let's say in today's world, he comes, with the Quran from God,and tells us that he has received a revelation from God, would you then believe or not ? or would you still question him.
It's unlikely I would believe him. I would regard him with the same scepticism that I hold for anyone who says they are receiving information via supernatural means.

Peace
Reply

Al Sultan
12-24-2016, 10:31 AM
Originally Posted by czgibson
I would regard him with the same scepticism that I hold for anyone who says they are receiving information via supernatural means.
By the way, I forgot to mention, that, when the prophet comes, Arabia is the same as 2,000 years ago. All of Arabia, (KSA, UAE, Bahrain, Yemen, Oman, Qatar ) their main religion is Paganism, and they still bury their daughters just like back then, and they are barbaric just like back then, and then when he sends the message and change the entire of Arabia, what do you think about that?


Why? what do you want as proof that he received a revelation from a supernatural being?

And thanks for replying ! this thread was dying, until you came and saved it. ;)
Reply

fromelsewhere
12-24-2016, 11:41 PM
Lots of good discussion on this thread so far.
I like @ReckonerH 's comment about "confronting" not necessarily being a bad thing. I think that a healthy dose of skepticism is always warranted when someone comes along claiming that they've received a revelation from a supernatural being because many people have been (and continue to be) led astray by false-prophets.

Now to answer @Al Sultan 's, and also incidentally @greenhill 's, question:
Originally Posted by Al Sultan
Hello, welcome to the forum brother :)

But he did predict many things, he predicted BEDOUINS will be competing with tall towers, (UAE and Saudi Arabia are in a competition to build the tallest building)

he predicted "there will come a time, when the worst of you will become leaders" I mean, Donald Trump?

He predicted ISIS I believe, but I haven't read the full article about it.

But OTHER than that, if he took you to his cave, and he shows you angel Gabriel (AS) and he talks to the prophet, about a revelation or just anything, would you then believe?

but I don't understand, how come his character doesn't prove that he's not truthful? I mean if you would look at the condition of Arabia, everybody was cruel, only little people were actually nice, but others were terrible, burying their daughters (something that was common at that time) I mean, isn't that an evidence of his prophethood?

also if you witnessed the split of the moon, would you believe? so you believe in miracles right? physical miracles?
Once again, the predictions were vague and not made within a given timeframe. So, I am not convinced. The part about angel Gabriel (AS), I wasn't there to witness it. The part about him being of good character and the people of Arabia being cruel at the time, that is what Islam claims, but there is not proof outside of Islam. Remember that there are always cruel people living around at any given time, and especially in those days when people were quite ignorant.

The splitting of the moon is mentioned in the Qur'an, but I have not observed it. What I observe every night is a single moon, with no evidence of it having ever been split.
Personally, I am quite skeptic when people tell me that this and that happened but cannot offer any proof to back it up.

So in summary, for someone to convince me of their prophethood, they need to do more than being of simple 'good' character. They need to make clear predictions that are in no way vague (clear in terms of time, location, and the precise events that will happen), and they need to perform clear miracles that go beyond simple card tricks or levitation that any ordinary magician can do.
Reply

Al Sultan
12-25-2016, 02:10 PM
Originally Posted by fromelsewhere
Once again, the predictions were vague and not made within a given timeframe.
I dont see how the prophet predicted Bedouins competing with tall buildings is vague.
About the time frame,

The prophet Mohammed received these predictions from God, through Gabriel (AS) so, it was god's choice not to mention any timeframe, and the prophet predicted that the Dajjal will come, but he didn't say when he will come, so it was god's choice not to mention a timeframe.

Same as the day of judgement, God, and prophet Mohammed (PBUH) never said anything about the time, because the prophet wanted us to pray and do righteous deeds before the day comes, because if I tell my people ' the end of the world will come in 3000 years' and then in the future (lets say 2016) Some muslims will be like, '2000 more years to go' they wont do righteous deeds, they'll slack off, and be lazy.


Originally Posted by fromelsewhere
The part about him being of good character and the people of Arabia being cruel at the time, that is what Islam claims, but there is not proof outside of Islam.
And there's no proof to prove that they didn't bury their daughters, which was a known thing and practiced by some other nations, and treat slaves bad (not to mention Islam is the first religion to speak against and and ban it) And do other barbaric things, there's no proof to prove they didn't happen, if they didn't happen, why did God mention it in the Quran?

Originally Posted by fromelsewhere
Remember that there are always cruel people living around at any given time,
Sure there are, but burying daughters and being shameful of them, treating women like they are your properties, is more than cruel, this is why God speaks against it in the Quran, and God tells us in the Quran not to do these things, protect and feed our women, and respect them, dont bury our daughters, treat slaves as if they are our brothers/sisters, give them good education and good and clothes, you cant prove that the Arabs did all of this before the Quran came, they started doing this after the Quran came, because obviously their paganized religion doesn't speak about this.

Originally Posted by fromelsewhere
The splitting of the moon is mentioned in the Qur'an, but I have not observed it.
Same as the Black Plague, it did occur but I didn't see it happen, does that mean I have to say it didn't happen? just because I didn't see it?

Originally Posted by fromelsewhere
with no evidence of it having ever been split.
The Quran says it was split, then came back into it's normal being, it is mentioned in the Quran.

There is a hadith by Abu Hurayra which is authentic, and it says he saw the splitting of the moon, you cant say 'theres no evidence' while the Quran talks about it, and there's a hadith which talks about it too, if you want physical proof then, cameras didn't exist at the time of Prophet Mohammed (PUBH) Sadly.


Originally Posted by fromelsewhere
I am quite skeptic when people tell me that this and that happened but cannot offer any proof to back it up.
Strongest proof that it happened, it's mentioned in the Quran, if it wasn't mentioned, then it wasn't split, but if it was mentioned then it was split, if something didn't happen, no one would talk about it, if it did, people would, and God spoke about it in the Quran.


Originally Posted by fromelsewhere
They need to make clear predictions that are in no way vague
I dont see how its vague that he predicted the Bedouins will be competing in tall towers, I dont see how that's vague.

I dont see how its vague when he says 'there will come a time when the worst of you will become leaders' yes, you can say Arab leaders, American leaders, Iranian leaders.

There are so many predictions made by Prophet Mohammed (PBUH) and some of them were true, some of them are still not yet completed.

Originally Posted by fromelsewhere
clear in terms of time, location, and the precise events that will happen)
Where did the Prophet (PBUH) get his predictions from? God, it's god's choice not to mention a location, and time, why? it's his choice, not ours, what matters that it happened.


Originally Posted by fromelsewhere
and they need to perform clear miracles that go beyond simple card tricks or levitation that any ordinary magician can do.
[28:48] But when the truth came to them from Us, they said, "Why was he not given like that which was given to Moses?" Did they not disbelieve in that which was given to Moses before? They said, "[They are but] two works of magic supporting each other, and indeed we are, in both, disbelievers."

[29:50] But they say, "Why are not signs sent down to him from his Lord?" Say, "The signs are only with Allah , and I am only a clear warner."

[11:12] Then would you possibly leave [out] some of what is revealed to you, or is your breast constrained by it because they say, "Why has there not been sent down to him a treasure or come with him an angel?" But you are only a warner. And Allah is Disposer of all things.

[29:51] And is it not sufficient for them that We revealed to you the Book which is recited to them? Indeed in that is a mercy and reminder for a people who believe.

[17:59] And nothing has prevented Us from sending signs except that the former peoples denied them. And We gave Thamud the she-camel as a visible sign, but they wronged her. And We send not the signs except as a warning

If Arab poets couldn't bring 10 verses/chapters like of the Quran, what would ?

The Quran isn't some simple 'card trick' as you say, if you read what it says, what it teaches, maybe then you might understand what it says, but either way, its the people's choice who want to change, not god's choice
Reply

Scimitar
12-25-2016, 05:26 PM
Salaam bro Al Sultan,

Your questions seems like a good one but is faulty, I'll explain.

During the lifetime of the Prophet pbuh, in pre-Islamic Arabia, the predominant religion was paganism, after which you had Judaism and Christianity and Zoroastrianism as the popular monotheist faiths. These were pretty unpopular in Arabia. At the time, you had men who didn't believe in any God either - the atheists also existed in the time of the Prophet pbuh.

Some reverted to Islam. Others did not.

Same with the Christians and the Jews.

And the Zoroastrians.

Point I'm making is that, in the time of the Prophet pbuh - some who identified as atheist did not become Muslim.

Let's not forget, even some of the Prophet pbuh extended family did not become Muslim.

The problem with asking questions like this is that, they are "out of time". And thus, remain highly subjective and puruse a faulty line of questioning.

A better question would be, "if you was an atheist living in Arabia at the time of the Prophet Muhammad pbuh, given what you know of the man and his struggles for justice, truth and belief - do you think you would have followed him?"

Scimi
Reply

Al Sultan
12-25-2016, 06:17 PM
Originally Posted by Scimitar
Salaam bro Al Sultan,
Salaam scimi bro :D




Originally Posted by Scimitar
Your questions seems like a good one but is faulty
I'm not gonna lie, I felt like fixing my question but I couldn't think of it in any other way...

Originally Posted by Scimitar
Zoroastrianism
I never heard of that religion, I heard it was a 'wanna be monotheistic' religion by some Islamic website..



Originally Posted by Scimitar
if you was an atheist living in Arabia at the time of the Prophet Muhammad pbuh, given what you know of the man and his struggles for justice, truth and belief - do you think you would have followed him?"
Ahh! you read my feelings mashallah, that was EXACTLY what I was thinking of, but I couldn't interpret it in words, I don't know why.

Anyway, thanks for 'explaining' my question, as I was kind of unsure and felt like there was something wrong in my question..

Assalamo alikum wa rahtmillahi wa barakato.
Reply

Scimitar
12-25-2016, 06:25 PM
Originally Posted by Al Sultan
I never heard of that religion, I heard it was a 'wanna be monotheistic' religion by some Islamic website..
Zoroastrianism is traditionally Monotheist, but in the modern age has become Dualistic in theology and thus, dependent on what type of Zoroastrian you speak to, they will either be traditional Zoroastrians or modern day ones. There's a world of a difference between the two.

The Jews of ancient times recognised Zoroastrianism to be a monotheist faith but not descended from the Abrahamic faith traditions.

This is not a problem for me, as we know that Allah sent prophets and messengers to all communities and people's. The origin of Zoroastrianism goes back to approx 700 BCE but this is the latest date for it's fruition. According to some historians, Zoroastrianism goes back to around 1500-2000 BCE, so you can appreciate how according to this dating, the religion of Zoroastrianism, predates even the Abrahamic traditions.

Interesting isn't it?


Originally Posted by Al Sultan
Ahh! you read my feelings mashallah, that was EXACTLY what I was thinking of, but I couldn't interpret it in words, I don't know why.

Anyway, thanks for 'explaining' my question, as I was kind of unsure and felt like there was something wrong in my question..

Assalamo alikum wa rahtmillahi wa barakato.
Alhamdulillah, pleased to be of some help,

Walakum salaam wa rahmatullah

Scimi
Reply

Al Sultan
12-25-2016, 06:55 PM
Originally Posted by Scimitar
Zoroastrianism is traditionally Monotheist, but in the modern age has become Dualistic in theology and thus, dependent on what type of Zoroastrian you speak to, they will either be traditional Zoroastrians or modern day ones. There's a world of a difference between the two.

The Jews of ancient times recognised Zoroastrianism to be a monotheist faith but not descended from the Abrahamic faith traditions.

This is not a problem for me, as we know that Allah sent prophets and messengers to all communities and people's. The origin of Zoroastrianism goes back to approx 700 BCE but this is the latest date for it's fruition. According to some historians, Zoroastrianism goes back to around 1500-2000 BCE, so you can appreciate how according to this dating, the religion of Zoroastrianism, predates even the Abrahamic traditions.

Interesting isn't it ?

Scimi
indeed it is, is it true they pray 5 times a day like us ?
Reply

Al Sultan
12-25-2016, 06:56 PM
I heard an anti Islamic website make a claim that Islam " borrowed" the 5 daily prayers from Zoroastrianism
Reply

Scimitar
12-25-2016, 06:59 PM
Originally Posted by Al Sultan
indeed it is, is it true they pray 5 times a day like us ?
Yes, five times a day, but not like us. They have different rituals.

Did you know that the Prophet Muhammad pbuh companion Salman al Farsi RA, was a Zoroastrian before he reverted to Islam? :)

Scimi
Reply

Scimitar
12-25-2016, 07:02 PM
Originally Posted by Al Sultan
I heard an anti Islamic website make a claim that Islam " borrowed" the 5 daily prayers from Zoroastrianism
Guess what? In the future some lame brain will claim that Judaism is based on Zoroastrianism because they worshiped a Singular Deity before the Children of Israel did.

Logic? Out of the frying pan and into the fire... pun fun. lol

The idea of revelation, is not considered by those who make such erroneous claims. Pay them no mind.

Scimi
Reply

fromelsewhere
12-25-2016, 10:40 PM
Let me try and reply to some of your arguments, @Al Sultan :

Originally Posted by Al Sultan
The prophet Mohammed received these predictions from God, through Gabriel (AS) so, it was god's choice not to mention any timeframe, and the prophet predicted that the Dajjal will come, but he didn't say when he will come, so it was god's choice not to mention a timeframe.
Maybe it was God's choice not to give specific details, but it makes these predictions too vague for a skeptic like me to consider them to be of divine origin. It's a bit like Nostradamus (have you heard of him?), he made a bunch of "prophecies" that came more or less true, and there are still people nowadays that read his work to try and "predict" the future using his works. As for Dajjal, we are still waiting for him to come along. My best guess is that I will never see him, and neither will my children, nor their children's children. Same goes for the day of judgement... I fear that we will wait, and wait, and wait...

Originally Posted by Al Sultan
And there's no proof to prove that they didn't bury their daughters, which was a known thing and practiced by some other nations, and treat slaves bad (not to mention Islam is the first religion to speak against and and ban it) And do other barbaric things, there's no proof to prove they didn't happen, if they didn't happen, why did God mention it in the Quran?
The onus of the "proof" should be on the one who makes the claim. It may be true or not, but if it's true, where is the proof?

Originally Posted by Al Sultan
Sure there are, but burying daughters and being shameful of them, treating women like they are your properties, is more than cruel, this is why God speaks against it in the Quran, and God tells us in the Quran not to do these things, protect and feed our women, and respect them, dont bury our daughters, treat slaves as if they are our brothers/sisters, give them good education and good and clothes, you cant prove that the Arabs did all of this before the Quran came, they started doing this after the Quran came, because obviously their paganized religion doesn't speak about this.
I can't "prove" that Jesus isn't the 'son of God' neither, but you and I certainly don't believe that to be true.

Originally Posted by Al Sultan
Same as the Black Plague, it did occur but I didn't see it happen, does that mean I have to say it didn't happen? just because I didn't see it?
We didn't see it happen, but there are many different sources that report what happened during the Black Plague... people from different countries and of different religions and cultures who wrote about it, there are records of the people who died, mass graves that exist. Also, there is archeological evidence to support the events. It is not just one group of people from one religion who are making claims about the Black Plague.

Originally Posted by Al Sultan
The Quran says it was split, then came back into it's normal being, it is mentioned in the Quran.

There is a hadith by Abu Hurayra which is authentic, and it says he saw the splitting of the moon, you cant say 'theres no evidence' while the Quran talks about it, and there's a hadith which talks about it too, if you want physical proof then, cameras didn't exist at the time of Prophet Mohammed (PUBH) Sadly.
Well, once again, the only proof that the moon was split comes from the Qur'an. Nowhere else is it mentioned that the moon got split and back together. You would have thought that such an unusual and unique celestial event would have caught the eye of people all over the world, not just those writing the Qur'an. But for some strange reason, no other group of people living at the time report it in their writings or scriptures about the splitting of the moon. Once again, I am skeptic that it happened.

Originally Posted by Al Sultan
Strongest proof that it happened, it's mentioned in the Quran, if it wasn't mentioned, then it wasn't split, but if it was mentioned then it was split, if something didn't happen, no one would talk about it, if it did, people would, and God spoke about it in the Quran.
Really? So by the same logic, the Ancient Greek stories of Zeus and Hera and so forth are true because people were talking about it and even made temples to their numerous 'gods'? This is a very, very weak argument.

Originally Posted by Al Sultan
If Arab poets couldn't bring 10 verses/chapters like of the Quran, what would ?
Well, maybe they could.
Reply

Scimitar
12-25-2016, 11:18 PM
Originally Posted by fromelsewhere

Maybe it was God's choice not to give specific details, but it makes these predictions too vague for a skeptic like me to consider them to be of divine origin. It's a bit like Nostradamus (have you heard of him?), he made a bunch of "prophecies" that came more or less true, and there are still people nowadays that read his work to try and "predict" the future using his works. As for Dajjal, we are still waiting for him to come along. My best guess is that I will never see him, and neither will my children, nor their children's children. Same goes for the day of judgement... I fear that we will wait, and wait, and wait...
Any holy scripture requires method to study. The Qur'an especially, simply because you are not a native Arabic speaker, and so - you would no doubt - get lost in translation.

With regard to religous prophecy of end time events, these takes a lot of study to understand and not up for personal interpretations - but contextual ones. Something you failed to mention.

As for "fearing" the day of judgement will never come - I think you should be happier about it, and not so fearful, in all honesty, if that is what you believe.



Originally Posted by fromelsewhere
The onus of the "proof" should be on the one who makes the claim. It may be true or not, but if it's true, where is the proof?
Female infanticide is not unique to Arabia...

...also the absence of proof doesn't equate to a proof of absence.


Originally Posted by fromelsewhere
I can't "prove" that Jesus isn't the 'son of God' neither, but you and I certainly don't believe that to be true.
Word.


Originally Posted by fromelsewhere
We didn't see it happen, but there are many different sources that report what happened during the Black Plague... people from different countries and of different religions and cultures who wrote about it, there are records of the people who died, mass graves that exist. Also, there is archeological evidence to support the events. It is not just one group of people from one religion who are making claims about the Black Plague.
And it was a well known fact and accepted practice at that time in Arabia - just because they didn't have a tradition of recording their societal failings (hubris) doesn't mean that female infanticide did not happen.

The oral tradition in Semitic cultures is strong, and still extant today.


Originally Posted by fromelsewhere
Well, once again, the only proof that the moon was split comes from the Qur'an. Nowhere else is it mentioned that the moon got split and back together. You would have thought that such an unusual and unique celestial event would have caught the eye of people all over the world, not just those writing the Qur'an. But for some strange reason, no other group of people living at the time report it in their writings or scriptures about the splitting of the moon. Once again, I am skeptic that it happened.
What if I told you, everything NASA tells you, is a lie. Would you believe me?

Surely not.





Sahih International: And the moon - We have determined for it phases, until it returns [appearing] like the old date stalk.

Pickthall: And for the moon We have appointed mansions till she return like an old shrivelled palm-leaf.

Yusuf Ali: And the Moon,- We have measured for her mansions (to traverse) till she returns like the old (and withered) lower part of a date-stalk.

Shakir: And (as for) the moon, We have ordained for it stages till it becomes again as an old dry palm branch.

Muhammad Sarwar: how We ordained the moon to pass through certain phases until it seems eventually to be like a bent twig;

Mohsin Khan: And the moon, We have measured for it mansions (to traverse) till it returns like the old dried curved date stalk.

Arberry: And the moon -- We have determined it by stations, till it returns like an aged palm-bough.

Of course, NASA talking wet, right?

Originally Posted by fromelsewhere
Really? So by the same logic, the Ancient Greek stories of Zeus and Hera and so forth are true because people were talking about it and even made temples to their numerous 'gods'? This is a very, very weak argument.
Did their beliefs survive the test of time? No

Whereas Islam has been withstanding that test since Adam to Muhammad (peace be upon them)

Tell me, by which measure of truth do you entertain your bias?


Originally Posted by fromelsewhere
Well, maybe they could.
Challenge still stands, 14 centuries have passed, and none have.

One question, are you unilingual?

Scimi
Reply

fromelsewhere
12-25-2016, 11:50 PM
I think we are unfortunately veering off topic. You will not convince me of your position, and I will not convince you.

To answer a couple of your comments/questions nevertheless:

Originally Posted by Scimitar
...also the absence of proof doesn't equate to a proof of absence.
I don't quite get what you mean here. My argument is that I am skeptic because there is no evidence to convince me that Islam is any truer than Christianity or Judaism or Buddhism or Atheism. I am by no means trying to disprove the Qur'an, just trying to explain why I am skeptic.

Originally Posted by Scimitar
Did their beliefs survive the test of time? No

Whereas Islam has been withstanding that test since Adam to Muhammad (peace be upon them)
Islam was founded ~1,400 years ago. Judaism, Christianity and even Buddhism are older religions that have withstood the test of time for even longer. Buddhism, for instance, is 2,500 years old.

Originally Posted by Scimitar
One question, are you unilingual?
Nah. I must admit that my Arabic skills are quite limited, but I nevertheless fail to see what is so special and unique of the writing style of the Qur'an. Many Christians and Jews also similarly claim that their Holy books are 'unique' in terms of writing style. Who to believe? Personally, I find Homer's "The Iliad" to be quite a fascinating read, and I sometimes wonder what kind of an amazing man must have written such an epic poem.

Back to the topic: to answer @Al Sultan 's question: If I were living at the time of Mohammed (PBUH) but had the current knowledge and mental faculties that I have now, I may or may not have believed in him depending on what evidence he would bring forward to prove that he is indeed a prophet. I am skeptic by nature, so it would not be easy for him to convince me. I may have been peered pressured into believing him, I must admit, because I may have been scared to face death by his companions for being an 'unbeliever,' and would prefer to say 'ok you are a prophet' than to be killed. But in my heart of hearts, it is a difficult question to answer because it all depends on what Mohammed (PBUH) would do to try and convince me.
Reply

Scimitar
12-26-2016, 12:20 AM
Originally Posted by fromelsewhere
I think we are unfortunately veering off topic. You will not convince me of your position, and I will not convince you.

To answer a couple of your comments/questions nevertheless:
Sure, no praaablem (Indian accent)


Originally Posted by fromelsewhere
I don't quite get what you mean here. My argument is that I am skeptic because there is no evidence to convince me that Islam is any truer than Christianity or Judaism or Buddhism or Atheism. I am by no means trying to disprove the Qur'an, just trying to explain why I am skeptic.
If it is empirical evidence you are looking for, then you clearly have no idea what faith is and why there is no empirical evidence for God.

See, if we could prove God existed empirically, then the need for faith becomes lame, as conviction takes root - and conviction, breeds fanatics. You don't have to be a religious nut job for this to apply - any type of conviction based belief leads to fanaticism.

Take Tom Cruise for example - he'll get violent if you mock his Scientology :D not exactly a religion, but a belief system nonetheless.

Faith, on the other hand, is when you believe God exists without empirical proofs and you become aware of His signs in nature, in creation, in the cosmos, etc. Like a language made of physically manifested things - instead of a spoken word.

ONce one comes to such an understanding, like Abraham pbuh did, that's when one asks the more important questions such as "Oh God, what do you require of me? Why did you create me?"... until then, keep taking stabs in the dark - or follow your desires as you deem fit. Makes no difference to me either. lol.

Originally Posted by fromelsewhere
Islam was founded ~1,400 years ago. Judaism, Christianity and even Buddhism are older religions that have withstood the test of time for even longer. Buddhism, for instance, is 2,500 years old.
Islam was always in existence - even before the creation of the Human species - as Islam simply means "willful submission to God" and each thing created by God, is in willful submission to him, except the shayateen and the majority of humans - and this is because we have this thing called "free will" which lets us do as we like. A Muslim is one who "willfully submits his or her will to God".

So on that clarified and buttered point, you're wrong.


Originally Posted by fromelsewhere
Nah. I must admit that my Arabic skills are quite limited, but I nevertheless fail to see what is so special and unique of the writing style of the Qur'an. Many Christians and Jews also similarly claim that their Holy books are 'unique' in terms of writing style. Who to believe? Personally, I find Homer's "The Iliad" to be quite a fascinating read, and I sometimes wonder what kind of an amazing man must have written such an epic poem.
See, you already done messed up when you mentioned "writing stlye"... the Qur'an - lit. The Recital - is to be audibly heard as divine speech. It is revealed word given to Muhammad pbuh via the arch angel Gabriel. Not written word, Revealed. Gabriel didnt come to Muhammad pbuh with a book and say "here you go", nope.

The Qur'an is spoken word... revealed by God to Muhammad through the medium of Gabriel the Angel. And thus, no errors or additions, omissions, retractions, interpolations, fabrications exist in this one holy book which stands apart from the rest that have suffered at the hands of men. Cue Jermeiah 8 and "the lying pen of the scribes" in relation to the bibles.

You sure you wanna do this dance?

Originally Posted by fromelsewhere
Back to the topic: to answer @Al Sultan's question: If I were living at the time of Mohammed (PBUH) but had the current knowledge and mental faculties that I have now, I may or may not have believed in him depending on what evidence he would bring forward to prove that he is indeed a prophet. I am skeptic by nature, so it would not be easy for him to convince me. I may have been peered pressured into believing him, I must admit, because I may have been scared to face death by his companions for being an 'unbeliever,' and would prefer to say 'ok you are a prophet' than to be killed. But in my heart of hearts, it is a difficult question to answer because it all depends on what Mohammed (PBUH) would do to try and convince me.
Interesting... as a skeptic, do you just dismiss anything that doesn't fit your world view in lieu of your own need to know truth?

Scimi

EDIT: I see you have a passion for the ancient literature of Homer. I've read the illiad and odyssey too, and explain their Gods and Goddesses as nothing more than the forces of nature such as the Sea, the Winds, and the heat of the Sun.

You cannot, by any measure of logic compare the Illiad and the Odyssey to The Qur'an - they seriously fail as they are not holy books but actual fairytale adventures of great men who were deemed sons of gods and demi gods by an altogether pompous folk.

And you know this.
Reply

fromelsewhere
12-26-2016, 12:47 AM
Salaams,

I am afraid that arguing with you has become pointless. I will only succeed in making you angrier and will achieve nothing in return.
I will nevertheless attempt to argue one last time with you in 'good faith.'

P.S. I watched your moon video. I am afraid that I don't see what the point of it is.

Originally Posted by Scimitar
See, if we could prove God existed empirically, then the need for faith becomes lame, as conviction takes root - and conviction, breeds fanatics. You don't have to be a religious nut job for this to apply - any type of conviction based belief leads to fanaticism.
I am happy that you finally acknowledge that religions are based on 'faith' and not on evidence. Phewf, it took quite some time for you to acknowledge that. I am not sure however about your point on 'fanatics'. I am 100% convicted that the earth is round, for instance, and would most likely laugh at someone who tells me that it is flat like a pancake. That being said, I would not turn into a 'round earth fanatic' and start attacking people of the flat earth society for their wrong beliefs. I would just have a good lol at them.

Originally Posted by Scimitar
Islam was always in existence - even before the creation of the Human species - as Islam simply means "willful submission to God" and each thing created by God, is in willful submission to him, except the shayateen and the majority of humans - and this is because we have this thing called "free will" which lets us do as we like. A Muslim is one who "willfully submits his or her will to God".
You have just touched on one of the biggest reasons why I am a skeptic. I have an extremely difficult time understanding why a well-meaning God would punish so many non-believers in such a harsh manner (eternal burning in hell) when He hasn't exactly made himself too obvious to find.

Originally Posted by Scimitar
You sure you wanna do this dance?
Isn't dancing haram? No, I don't want to dance.
Reply

Scimitar
12-26-2016, 01:07 AM
Originally Posted by fromelsewhere
Salaams,

I am afraid that arguing with you has become pointless. I will only succeed in making you angrier and will achieve nothing in return.
I will nevertheless attempt to argue one last time with you in 'good faith.'
Wassalaam, :)

It's ok, this converation between us will fruit in sha Allah, as I am not angry but rather, excited to meet a fellow skeptic. I too am one massive skeptic, but I managed to make a leap of faith - from an agnostic position to Islam.

I been where you been, just so you know.

Originally Posted by fromelsewhere
P.S. I watched your moon video. I am afraid that I don't see what the point of it is.
Thought it was obvious. The video explains how the moon is shrinking.

The ayah explained it 1400 years ago.

Point? Lost - over the cuckoos nest? Or not?

Originally Posted by fromelsewhere
I am happy that you finally acknowledge that religions are based on 'faith' and not on evidence. Phewf, it took quite some time for you to acknowledge that.
I've always believed so - the reason why I left all faiths in my youth was because I used to believe that all faith groups require mindless faith, and no proof - little did I know that the very word "proof" is highly subjective. And faith is not blind, but full of insights which are interpersonal. That is what I experienced and so have countless others.

Learning how many types of proof there are in relation to this argument, requires a lot of thinking time and studying alongside to help get those answers. I invested... I'm wondering if you have. I think maybe you have, given that you say you are a natural skeptic, your line of enquiry should be critical and not ignorant in method. Right?

So tell me, what method do you use to help you to understand the answers to questions you have about God, reality, your purpose in this life, and all that good stuff? I'm genuinely interested.

Originally Posted by fromelsewhere
I am not sure however about your point on 'fanatics'. I am 100% convicted that the earth is round, for instance, and would most likely laugh at someone who tells me that it is flat like a pancake. That being said, I would not turn into a 'round earth fanatic' and start attacking people of the flat earth society for their wrong beliefs. I would just have a good lol at them.
I thought you'd be in agreement... let me just say this. Blame Terry Pratchett dying (lol) for the flat earth shills making it a thing again. When Terry was alive, he had them all spellbound with his virally acclaimed book series based on the DiscWorld saga's he authored... that was a flat earth shills paradise.

After his death, they all crawled out of the woodwork, and onto the web. Making it a thing again.

You have to laugh, how can you not? You couldn't make this stuff up if you tried. Seriously :D

Originally Posted by fromelsewhere
You have just touched on one of the biggest reasons why I am a skeptic. I have an extremely difficult time understanding why a well-meaning God would punish so many non-believers in such a harsh manner (eternal burning in hell) when He hasn't exactly made himself too obvious to find.
That, is a thread on it's own, and will most definitely take this one into muddier waters than it already finds itself in. But I'm game, if you are - on a new thread.

Originally Posted by fromelsewhere
Isn't dancing haram? No, I don't want to dance.
If you can't do metaphor, allegory, parable and analogy, then I give up.

Prophets and Messengers were sometimes ambiguous in those ways, and only those who knew the applied contexts would know what was being said.

Anyway,

Has been interesting. Please do feel free to respond :)

Scimi
Reply

fromelsewhere
12-26-2016, 01:38 AM
Originally Posted by Scimitar
Thought it was obvious. The video explains how the moon is shrinking.
The ayah explained it 1400 years ago.
No, the Qur'an doesn't talk about the moon shrinking, it talks about the moon splitting. This is very different. Please try again. Either way, the moon has been shrinking by a small amount over millions if not billions of years, not all of a sudden when Mohammed (PBUH) said "look!".

Then you ramble on about the subjectivity of the word "proof." I don't want to get into a whole debate about the meaning of the word "proof" because most people have a basic understanding of what a "proof" is. Sure, there are different types of "proofs", but some "proofs" are way more convincing than others. Very few people would debate about the roundness of the earth because there is sufficient, objective "proof" that the earth is round, and this "proof" can be observed and tested out by anyone living in any part of the world, of any culture/religion/background.

Originally Posted by Scimitar
So tell me, what method do you use to help you to understand the answers to questions you have about God, reality, your purpose in this life, and all that good stuff? I'm genuinely interested.
I am agnostic. Agnosticism is the view that certain metaphysical claims – such as the existence of God or the supernatural – are unknown and perhaps unknowable. You can read up more on agnosticism on Wikipedia if you want to know more about my position.

P.S. I have no literal, metaphorical, or allegorical yearning for dancing right now. :D
Reply

fschmidt
12-26-2016, 04:04 AM
Originally Posted by Al Sultan
would you then believe? or still confront him?
This phrasing is interesting, and specifically Islamic. In the Old Testament, Abraham and Moses both confront God. That doesn't mean that they didn't believe. The Quran tells these stories differently than the Old Testament does because Islam is based on submission. But with other approaches to God, like the Old Testament, there is no conflict between belief and confrontation.
Reply

Al Sultan
12-26-2016, 02:25 PM
Originally Posted by fromelsewhere
Maybe it was God's choice not to give specific details, but it makes these predictions too vague for a skeptic like me to consider them to be of divine origin. It's a bit like Nostradamus (have you heard of him?), he made a bunch of "prophecies" that came more or less true, and there are still people nowadays that read his work to try and "predict" the future using his works.
Too vague? i think it mentions the most important part (what will happen) but, whatever it is for you, not for me.

We're talking about a Prophet here, we have to look at what he said, did, act, we cant compare him to Nostradamus, he aint a prophet.

And there are still some Muslims too explaining the prophecies of prophet Mohammed whom he referred to, where maybe.



Originally Posted by fromelsewhere
We didn't see it happen, but there are many different sources that report what happened during the Black Plague... people from different countries and of different religions and cultures who wrote about it, there are records of the people who died, mass graves that exist. Also, there is archeological evidence to support the events. It is not just one group of people from one religion who are making claims about the Black Plague.
I'm speaking from an ANCIENT ARABIA view, no computers, no technology or phones.

If i heard about this, from a visitor from Europe, i would understand, but i still didn't see it.

Actually, an Indian king, came to the prophet and told him that, one of his guards saw the moon split apart, i forgot the king's name but he was living at the time of prophet Mohammed (PBUH) he came to the prophet but, he didn't convert though.






Originally Posted by fromelsewhere
Nowhere else is it mentioned that the moon got split and back together. You would have thought that such an unusual and unique celestial event would have caught the eye of people all over the world, not just those writing the Qur'an. But for some strange reason, no other group of people living at the time report it in their writings or scriptures about the splitting of the moon. Once again, I am skeptic that it happened.
Different time zones bro, How come people in London, would look at the sky in the daylight? everybody would be busy, doing their work/job/whatever

As i said, it caught the eye of an indian astronomer or guard, (either one of them I'm not sure) and there's a hadith that talks about this.

Also, it could've lasted for only 30 seconds, 5 minutes, not 5 hours? ever thought about that? that could be a reason too.

Well i am not to force you to believe in it, don't believe it, fine, I don't mind.





Originally Posted by fromelsewhere
Really? So by the same logic, the Ancient Greek stories of Zeus and Hera and so forth are true because people were talking about it and even made temples to their numerous 'gods'? This is a very, very weak argument.
Did you read my last line? "and God spoke about it in the Quran." I was referring something as the moon being split, i didn't say that, if something didn't happen within a people, no one would talk about it. (Notice the fullstop) i continued, i was referring this sentence to God, and the Muslims,Pagans, because Pagans obviously kept doubting that it happened, 'magic' and 'illusion' and so on, as they claim.

That is an extremely weak argument when you're comparing Zeus, these mythical stories didn't last long, no one even cares about them anymore, to Islam and prophet Mohammed (PBUH) Zeus was born 700 B.C , Prophet Mohammed (PBUH) was born in 570 (Georgian calendar) or 12th day of Rabi Al- Awwal (Islamic calendar) so obviously, they are far apart, and we're talking about Islam here, a monotheistic religion, not some mythical character..

Originally Posted by fromelsewhere
Well, maybe they could.
as Scimitar said, challenge is open for those who want to bring the like of it.
Reply

Al Sultan
12-26-2016, 02:26 PM
Originally Posted by fschmidt
But with other approaches to God, like the Old Testament, there is no conflict between belief and confrontation.
What i meant was, question him, reason with him, confront was the word i thought of by the way.

Different in what way? BIG differences in the stories? did you read the story in the Quran by the way?
Reply

Scimitar
12-26-2016, 04:53 PM
Originally Posted by fromelsewhere
No, the Qur'an doesn't talk about the moon shrinking, it talks about the moon splitting. This is very different. Please try again. Either way, the moon has been shrinking by a small amount over millions if not billions of years, not all of a sudden when Mohammed (PBUH) said "look!".

Then you ramble on about the subjectivity of the word "proof." I don't want to get into a whole debate about the meaning of the word "proof" because most people have a basic understanding of what a "proof" is. Sure, there are different types of "proofs", but some "proofs" are way more convincing than others. Very few people would debate about the roundness of the earth because there is sufficient, objective "proof" that the earth is round, and this "proof" can be observed and tested out by anyone living in any part of the world, of any culture/religion/background.



I am agnostic. Agnosticism is the view that certain metaphysical claims – such as the existence of God or the supernatural – are unknown and perhaps unknowable. You can read up more on agnosticism on Wikipedia if you want to know more about my position.

P.S. I have no literal, metaphorical, or allegorical yearning for dancing right now. :D
Honestly, I think you missed a lot of points in my last post to you,

*shaking head

Read through my post again.

Scimi
Reply

Scimitar
12-26-2016, 04:55 PM
Originally Posted by fschmidt
This phrasing is interesting, and specifically Islamic. In the Old Testament, Abraham and Moses both confront God. That doesn't mean that they didn't believe. The Quran tells these stories differently than the Old Testament does because Islam is based on submission. But with other approaches to God, like the Old Testament, there is no conflict between belief and confrontation.
There usually is conflict within the self, when one seeks to know truth of God. It's completely natural. Yes, Moses pbuh argued with God and usually fell humbled in prostration when he realised - one does not argue with God and win.

Abraham didn't argue with God, rather, he questioned God.

Whatever the issues - they both submitted... so in both cases, they are correct.

Scimi
Reply

fromelsewhere
12-26-2016, 08:01 PM
Salaams,

Unfortunately, my time is limited, but to reply to some of your comments:

Originally Posted by Al Sultan
We're talking about a Prophet here, we have to look at what he said, did, act, we cant compare him to Nostradamus, he aint a prophet.
Nostradamus claimed to be a prophet. Fortunately, at the time, people (for the most part) were skeptic and did not believe him. Skepticism when someone claims to be a prophet is generally a good policy. If someone truly is a prophet, he or she should be able to prove it with no ambiguity.

Originally Posted by Al Sultan
I'm speaking from an ANCIENT ARABIA view, no computers, no technology or phones.
There were also no computers, no technology, no phones in ANCIENT EGYPT neither, but there still remains a lot of evidence that was left behind about how the ancient Egyptians lived.

Originally Posted by Al Sultan
Actually, an Indian king, came to the prophet and told him that, one of his guards saw the moon split apart, i forgot the king's name but he was living at the time of prophet Mohammed (PBUH) he came to the prophet but, he didn't convert though.
As i said, it caught the eye of an indian astronomer or guard, (either one of them I'm not sure) and there's a hadith that talks about this.
Once again, the proof is held within the Islamic religion. The mention of the Indian king and astrologer is in a hadith. No proof outside of Islam.
Reply

Al Sultan
12-26-2016, 09:02 PM
Originally Posted by fromelsewhere
Nostradamus claimed to be a prophet. Fortunately, at the time, people (for the most part) were skeptic and did not believe him. Skepticism when someone claims to be a prophet is generally a good policy. If someone truly is a prophet, he or she should be able to prove it with no ambiguity
You cant call anyone a 'prophet' ...

Prophet Mohammed (PBUH) sent the message of God, encourages us to do good deeds, taught us how to love and treat our friends, neighbors, family, told us to pray to one god and never associate anything with him.

I'm 100% sure Nostradamus didn't sent the message of God in the first place (To claim he's a so called 'prophet' )

It's known that Prophet Mohammed (PBUH) is the last messenger to walk the Earth, and no one ever came after sending another message of god.





Originally Posted by fromelsewhere
ANCIENT EGYPT neither, but there still remains a lot of evidence that was left behind about how the ancient Egyptians lived.

I don't think we can compare Ancient Egypt with Ancient Arabia, Ancient Egyptians were far more strong, had more technology, they were pretty smart too, i don't think Ancient Arabia is one percent close to Ancient Egypt (saying this an Arab)

Have you ever heard the very famous Egyptian phrase? " Masr heya om el dunya" (translation) "Egypt is the mother of the world"

That's the reason why. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------^





Originally Posted by fromelsewhere
Once again, the proof is held within the Islamic religion. The mention of the Indian king and astrologer is in a hadith. No proof outside of Islam.
http://www.understanding-islam.com/a...ad-pbuh/#_ftn1



Note: I believe this event occurred and lasted about 5 mintues or less, it didn't last 4 or more hours, thing is, you cant disprove it, if you want to see it again..

The next time we'll see the moon being split is when the Day of Judgement will be near.
Reply

fromelsewhere
12-26-2016, 09:19 PM
Dear @Al Sultan ,

Once again, you are arguing that Islam is true from the perspective of Islam, but what I am saying is that outside of Islam, there is no evidence to support that Islam is true. I took a look at the link you included, and it does not change a thing to what I am saying. The story of the Indian king who apparently saw the moon splitting is based on a Muslim legend, nothing more and nothing less.

With regards to the moon splitting again when the Day of Judgement will be near, all I can say is that I will wait to see this happen...
Reply

Al Sultan
12-26-2016, 09:34 PM
Originally Posted by fromelsewhere
Once again, you are arguing that Islam is true from the perspective of Islam,
I haven't even said the line or sentence "Islam is true" , i know the website above that i posted, says things about the prophet from the hindu scriptures, but i didn't refer to it, i only wanted you to read about the moon split part.well from which perspective will you learn about Islam? Buddhist perspective?

Originally Posted by fromelsewhere
but what I am saying is that outside of Islam, there is no evidence to support that Islam is true.
There's a lot of meaning within the sentence, "Islam is true" on which basis? what do you mean exactly by this?


I can say the same thing for every religion, there's no outside evidence to support that Buddhism, Hinduism, Judaism, Christianity, is true?

From which perspective will you learn about Islam from? Buddhist perspective?


Originally Posted by fromelsewhere
The story of the Indian king who apparently saw the moon splitting is based on a Muslim legend
The thing is, the Quran doesn't claim that an Indian king came later on, met the prophet and became muslim and told him that he saw the split of the moon, the Quran doesn't talk about this, what we Muslims do know, that There's a hadith about this, the Quran talks about this, and that it was split, but the Pagans disbelieved in it and they thought it was a illusion, a trick.

It could be a Muslim legend, who knows, but remember, the Quran and the Hadith didn't write about him.
Reply

fromelsewhere
12-26-2016, 09:47 PM
Where are the Hindu scriptures about the moon splitting?

The problem with all religions is that they all claim to be true but can't offer any convincing evidence that they are indeed true. This is too bad because I wish I could be convinced and have no doubts in my own faith, but I do have doubts and rather big ones at that.

You therefore have to blindly believe that the moon splitted, for instance. This is a big leap of faith to make, and I cannot blame people who have a hard time making such a leap of faith.
Reply

Al Sultan
12-26-2016, 10:08 PM
Originally Posted by fromelsewhere
Where are the Hindu scriptures about the moon splitting?


Originally Posted by Al Sultan
i know the website above that i posted, says things about the prophet from the hindu scriptures, BUT I DIDNT REFER TO IT, i ONLY wanted you to read about the moon split part



Originally Posted by fromelsewhere
The problem with all religions is that they all claim to be true but can't offer any convincing evidence that they are indeed true.
Then why don't you LEARN and THINK about them? then you'll see which one is true?

Originally Posted by fromelsewhere
You therefore have to blindly believe that the moon splitted, for instance. This is a big leap of faith to make, and I cannot blame people who have a hard time making such a leap of faith.
Lol, 'Blindly believe that the moon splitted'

God talks about this in the Quran, there's no 'blind' or 'faith' you are NOW questioning wither the Quran is from god or not, ( Which is a good question but for another thread)
I believe in what God says, which is why I believe the moon was split, do you need other evidences from 'outside' of Islam to know the moon was split? God knows better and more than them, If God tells me that the Prophet Mohammed (PBUH) did mistakes, do I need to go ask the people to make sure he did mistakes? if you don't believe in what God says, would you choose w then this is your problem, not Islam's, not the Quran's problem.

It's not a leap of faith for those who believe in God, only those who don't believe, think like that "Its a leap of faith"
Reply

fromelsewhere
12-26-2016, 10:19 PM
Originally Posted by Al Sultan
Then why don't you LEARN and THINK about them? then you'll see which one is true?
I have. Once again, I am repeating what I have already said many times already: The problem with all religions is that they all claim to be true but can't offer any convincing evidence that they are indeed true. Therefore, I remain skeptic.

Originally Posted by Al Sultan
I believe in what God says, which is why I believe the moon was split, do you need other evidences from 'outside' of Islam to know the moon was split? God knows better and more than them, If God tells me that the Prophet Mohammed (PBUH) did mistakes, do I need to go ask the people to make sure he did mistakes? if you don't believe in what God says, would you choose w then this is your problem, not Islam's, not the Quran's problem.

It's not a leap of faith for those who believe in God, only those who don't believe, think like that "Its a leap of faith"
But the whole problem for a skeptic like me is: how do I know that this IS what God said?
Reply

Al Sultan
12-27-2016, 11:31 AM
Originally Posted by fromelsewhere
I have
For how long? have you searched about Buddhism, Hinduism, Christianity, Judaism, Islam???


Originally Posted by fromelsewhere
The problem with all religions is that they all claim to be true but can't offer any convincing evidence that they are indeed true. Therefore, I remain skeptic.
Islam never said it's the BEST religion in the world and all religions are false, it never said that, it says it's the last religion from god.

As I said, look at it's principles, morals, ethics, basics, and then think about them, or just revise the major religions in the world and see which fits, if no one does, then this is your choice.


Originally Posted by fromelsewhere
But the whole problem for a skeptic like me is: how do I know that this IS what God said?
Good question,now before I go in on how we Muslims know that the Quran is from god, we need to make sure it's not written by anyone, so we have two targets.

1 - Prophet Mohammed (PBUH) 2 - The Arabs


Prophet Mohammed - First of all, he was illiterate ! he didn't know how to write, or read, so how did he come up with such a beautiful book? no one taught him poetry, and he was a Shepherd, he used to take care of Sheeps, so who could've taught him poetry? his father died when he was 6 years old, his mother died too (I think she died when he was born) so who? he didn't know anyone that he used to talk to, he just an ordinary man, although everybody trusted him, he was called (Al Ameen)

So there's no proof that the Prophet wrote it himself, which means the Arabs might did.

The Arabs - first of all, they were PAGANS. Why would Pagans write a book that clearly goes against their religion and idols? that will get them even killed! why would they endanger their life writing a book? for what purpose?

(You may think they wrote it and gave it to the prophet) The question to this is that, why did everyone hate the Prophet Mohammed ? (PBUH) call him a magician, a poet? why did NO ONE stand with him? because obviously they were pagans, no one supported monotheism, just Polytheism.


There's no proof that the Arabs, or the prophet wrote it.

Now to your question, how do we know this is what god says?

I have to ask, have you read the Quran fully? if you didn't, I believe you should.

It's eloquence, teachings, sentences, and what it says, it's beautiful, it's beyond what humans can do, and thus, the Quran challenges it, to bring a chapter like it, 10 verses like it, or a verse like it, no one has, and no one could.
Reply

fschmidt
12-28-2016, 03:45 AM
Originally Posted by Al Sultan
Different in what way? BIG differences in the stories? did you read the story in the Quran by the way?
I read the story about Abraham but not about Moses arguing with God. Where is it? (I only heard about the Quran version.)
Reply

Al Sultan
12-28-2016, 11:28 AM
Originally Posted by fschmidt
Moses arguing with God. Where is it?
Arguing with god ? or do you mean the story about him meeting god?
Reply

fromelsewhere
12-29-2016, 02:07 AM
Originally Posted by Al Sultan
Good question,now before I go in on how we Muslims know that the Quran is from god, we need to make sure it's not written by anyone, so we have two targets.

1 - Prophet Mohammed (PBUH) 2 - The Arabs


Prophet Mohammed - First of all, he was illiterate ! he didn't know how to write, or read, so how did he come up with such a beautiful book? no one taught him poetry, and he was a Shepherd, he used to take care of Sheeps, so who could've taught him poetry? his father died when he was 6 years old, his mother died too (I think she died when he was born) so who? he didn't know anyone that he used to talk to, he just an ordinary man, although everybody trusted him, he was called (Al Ameen)

So there's no proof that the Prophet wrote it himself, which means the Arabs might did.

The Arabs - first of all, they were PAGANS. Why would Pagans write a book that clearly goes against their religion and idols? that will get them even killed! why would they endanger their life writing a book? for what purpose?

(You may think they wrote it and gave it to the prophet) The question to this is that, why did everyone hate the Prophet Mohammed ? (PBUH) call him a magician, a poet? why did NO ONE stand with him? because obviously they were pagans, no one supported monotheism, just Polytheism.

There's no proof that the Arabs, or the prophet wrote it.
I just want to reflect on one part of your post. You mention that the Quran was not written by anyone, and to justify yourself, you give as evidence that Mohammed (PBUH) was illiterate and that the Arabs were pagans at the time.

While I don't dispute that Mohammed (PBUH) was most likely illiterate and that the majority of Arabs were 'pagans' at the time, the Qur'an was clearly written down by scribes. Nobody states that God gave Mohammed (PBUH) a ready-made copy of the Qur'an. The claim is that as the Qur'an was being revealed to Mohammed (PBUH), he dictated it to scribes orally. The scribes wrote down what he had said, then Mohammed (PBUH) would have the scribes read back to him what he had dictated, and he would check for mistakes. Please correct me if I'm wrong.

Here is the Wikipedia version of how the Qur'an was compiled, which seems to be in line with what I know of how it was compiled:

The Quran most likely existed in scattered written form during Muhammad's lifetime. Several sources indicate that during Muhammad's lifetime a large number of his companions had memorized the revelations. Early commentaries and Islamic historical sources support the above-mentioned understanding of the Quran's early development.

The first caliph Abu Bakr (d. 634) decided to collect the book in one volume so that it could be preserved. Zayd ibn Thabit (d. 655) was the person to collect the Quran since "he used to write the Divine Inspiration for Allah's Apostle". Thus, a group of scribes, most importantly Zayd, collected the verses and produced a hand-written manuscript of the complete book. The manuscript according to Zayd remained with Abu Bakr until he died. Zayd's reaction to the task and the difficulties in collecting the Quranic material from parchments, palm-leaf stalks, thin stones and from men who knew it by heart is recorded in earlier narratives. After Abu Bakr, Hafsa bint Umar, Muhammad's widow, was entrusted with the manuscript. In about 650, the third Caliph Uthman ibn Affan (d. 656) began noticing slight differences in pronunciation of the Quran as Islam expanded beyond the Arabian Peninsula into Persia, the Levant, and North Africa. In order to preserve the sanctity of the text, he ordered a committee headed by Zayd to use Abu Bakr's copy and prepare a standard copy of the Quran. Thus, within 20 years of Muhammad's death, the Quran was committed to written form. That text became the model from which copies were made and promulgated throughout the urban centers of the Muslim world, and other versions are believed to have been destroyed. The present form of the Quran text is accepted by Muslim scholars to be the original version compiled by Abu Bakr.
Reply

Scimitar
12-29-2016, 06:53 PM
Originally Posted by fromelsewhere
I just want to reflect on one part of your post. You mention that the Quran was not written by anyone, and to justify yourself, you give as evidence that Mohammed (PBUH) was illiterate and that the Arabs were pagans at the time.

While I don't dispute that Mohammed (PBUH) was most likely illiterate and that the majority of Arabs were 'pagans' at the time, the Qur'an was clearly written down by scribes. Nobody states that God gave Mohammed (PBUH) a ready-made copy of the Qur'an. The claim is that as the Qur'an was being revealed to Mohammed (PBUH), he dictated it to scribes orally. The scribes wrote down what he had said, then Mohammed (PBUH) would have the scribes read back to him what he had dictated, and he would check for mistakes. Please correct me if I'm wrong.
Good stuff,

I believe you have missed a rather subtle point though fromelsewhere :)

The words al Qur'an - literally means theRecital.

Thus, the revelation is in the first instance, to be recited audibly. And this is where the Qur'an is extant even today, in the hearts of over 10million Muslims, recited to memory word for word, letter for letter.

If all the Qur'ans in the world were to be gathered and thrown into the oceans, with no surviving copy left - the Muslims can reproduce it in book form easily.

All we have to do is get Huffaz (those who have memorised the Qur'an) from a handful of nations and ask them to recite in unison. We will find the reproduction of the book form of the Qur'an to simply be, a matter of recitation checked by the Huffaz among each other.



Indeed, it is We who sent down the Qur'an and indeed, We will be its guardian. Quran - 15:9

And it remains the same as it was 1400+ years ago, a living word inside the hearts of the huffaz - logos, by Christian definition but more fitting, contextually speaking than applying to an human figure such as Jesus pbuh.

I have not heard of any person to have memorised an holy scripture word for word in totality, apart from the Muslims who memorise the Qur'an.

Of course, pre-Islam, there was the prophet Ezra pbuh from the children of Israel whom Muslims know as Uzair, he had memorised the Torah. And due to his memorisation of it, the Torah, which had been destroyed by the Baylonian invasion of Jerusalem and out of circulation for 70 years, was now back.

Can it happen now? Do the Children of Israel memorise their Torah? Answer is no.

Covenant is not theirs anymore, it passed to the first seed of Abraham, pbuh - through Ishmaels lineage (pbuh) down through the ages to Muhammad pbuh.

Originally Posted by fromelsewhere
Here is the Wikipedia version of how the Qur'an was compiled, which seems to be in line with what I know of how it was compiled:

The Quran most likely existed in scattered written form during Muhammad's lifetime. Several sources indicate that during Muhammad's lifetime a large number of his companions had memorized the revelations. Early commentaries and Islamic historical sources support the above-mentioned understanding of the Quran's early development.

The first caliph Abu Bakr (d. 634) decided to collect the book in one volume so that it could be preserved. Zayd ibn Thabit (d. 655) was the person to collect the Quran since "he used to write the Divine Inspiration for Allah's Apostle". Thus, a group of scribes, most importantly Zayd, collected the verses and produced a hand-written manuscript of the complete book. The manuscript according to Zayd remained with Abu Bakr until he died. Zayd's reaction to the task and the difficulties in collecting the Quranic material from parchments, palm-leaf stalks, thin stones and from men who knew it by heart is recorded in earlier narratives. After Abu Bakr, Hafsa bint Umar, Muhammad's widow, was entrusted with the manuscript. In about 650, the third Caliph Uthman ibn Affan (d. 656) began noticing slight differences in pronunciation of the Quran as Islam expanded beyond the Arabian Peninsula into Persia, the Levant, and North Africa. In order to preserve the sanctity of the text, he ordered a committee headed by Zayd to use Abu Bakr's copy and prepare a standard copy of the Quran. Thus, within 20 years of Muhammad's death, the Quran was committed to written form. That text became the model from which copies were made and promulgated throughout the urban centers of the Muslim world, and other versions are believed to have been destroyed. The present form of the Quran text is accepted by Muslim scholars to be the original version compiled by Abu Bakr.
Yes

This is correct, the problem with the Arabs was that some did not memorise the whole Qur'an yet would write it down - no one had given them the authority to do so - and the Abu Bakr RA was at odds with something he felt was required (the collation of the chapters to be unified in the form of a book) which the Prophet pbuh himself had not done.

With much deliberation and with discussions with the companions of the Prophet pbuh, it was decided the compilation was justified.

As you noted from the wiki, during the time of the thrid khaliph, Islam had truly reached a very large geopolitical sphere of influence, and some of the nations which were now Muslim, were not native Arabic speakers. This would become problematic for the new Muslims because a slight mispronunciation of the Qur'an could change the entire meaning of the verse. Arabic has vowel sounds which we do not make in English, and non native Arabs have to learn how to make those sounds accurately enough as to not skew the meaning of the intended verse.

Thus, the elocution and pronunciation which the Prophet Muhammad pbuh recited in, was known by the sahabi RA (companions) and they vigilantly made sure that the standardised book form of the Qur'an would be written to reflect the elocution, pronunciation and elongation of Qur'anic Arabic.

I hope this clarifies for you, the reason behind the chronology of the Qur'an's compilation into book form.

As believers in One God, we do not believe in ideas such as coincidence. Therefore we cannot attribute the first revelation given to Muhammad pbuh as a coincidence - here read this:

Surah al Alaq is the first revelation revealed to the Prophet Muhammad pbuh.

These are the opening verses:

1. Read! In the Name of your Lord, Who has created (all that exists),
2. Has created man from a clot (a piece of thick coagulated blood).
3. Read! And your Lord is the Most Generous,
4. Who has taught (the writing) by the pen,
5. Has taught man that which he knew not.

It seems the Qur'an was ordained to be in the form of an holy book also, as well as a living recitation inside the hearts of men.

God is truly the Greatest.

Scimi
Reply

ajazz
01-18-2017, 07:03 AM
Originally Posted by czgibson
Greetings,

If I had been living in the 7th century, I would have been relatively ignorant about the natural world and its processes, as everyone was then compared to modern people. Given that, there is every chance that I could have believed in a prophet like Muhammad (pbuh).

Peace
How about present day?
Assuming we are sufficiently un-ignorant..... modern people.

Would you be convinced?


Cosmological, Logical and scientific Argument for existence of God...

· _Anything that has a beginning cannot be the cause__of its own existence.

· _A deterministic system needs a designer._


In
context of cosmology, then it becomes a necessity that there exist an
uncaused, intelligent (agency, source, entity) which caused all that
exist.

You were not responsible for your own birth nor, the smartphone you use came into existence on its own.

Today
it has been established that our universe was indeed created and did
not exist, it had a beginning, *not only that scientist tells us that it*
*came out of nothing…!!!*


"All the evidence seems to indicate, that the universe has not existed forever, but that it had a beginning" : Stephen Hawking ( living Einstein )
http://www.hawking.org.uk/the-beginning-of-time.html


"entire universe, from the fireball of the Big Bang to the star-studded cosmos we now inhabit, popped into existence from nothing at all.
http://www.bbc.com/earth/story/20141...g-exist-at-all


But remember *nothing cannot create something… you still need something to create something out of nothing.*

Absolute nothing cannot exist because absolute nothing has no properties therefore neither can it act nor it can be acted upon.

So if absolute nothing existed nothing would exist.

So what caused, created, our universe?

Simple logical and rational reasoning suffice.

Let’s assume ‘A’ created our universe.

Now there are *Only two possibilities* for existence of ‘A’.

_If there is a third possibility let me know…_

First possibility: ‘A’ itself was created by say ‘B’ and then ‘B’ was created by ‘C’,
This is infinite regression which is *inconclusive, irrational and impossible.*

Let’s say you have 1000 dominoes lined up, to begin domino effect you need first initial push to the first domino.

Now
If you have infinite number of dominoes lined up, it means there is no
First domino and therefore there cannot be first initial push and hence
Domino effect cannot exist, _the sequence will never start._
Because if there is no first domino then the dominoes do not exist but our universe exist and it had a beginning.


*The first scenario for ‘A’ is therefore impossible.*

The second possibility for ‘A’ is the most *reasonable, rational, logical,* and the only possibility.

‘A’
Never had a beginning, it always existed, we can further expound that
‘A’ possesses intelligence (including all the knowledge and information
Present in our universe) and

*'A' is capable of bringing things into existence out of nothing.*

By being able to create things out of nothing *'A'* is *De-linked* from the *chain of cause and effect, and is not a part of it*

*A* is not the first cause but causes the first cause in the chain of cause and effect and since it is De-linked from the chain, *it requires no cause for itself to exist* and eliminates the problem of infinite regression.*

Also

Since 'A' always existed, it has no end and no beginning, which means it is truly infinite, unchanging, therefore it does not require the function of time for its existence *or* cause for its existence , since it has no beginning .


Moving on to second statement…

*A deterministic system requires a Designer.*

_A deterministic system cannot arise out of randomness because randomness and determinism are inimical to each other._

Actually there is no such thing as true randomness, there is no such thing as *by chance.*

What

We have is *bounded uncertainty*, for example no matter how many times
You throw a dice, throw it for a zillion times, *you will never ever get a 7.*

What we have is a *bounded uncertainty* that any number from 1 to 6 may show up.
If you plant an apple seed you don’t get randomly an orange tree (unless Monsanto is involved… :)

Even the uncertainty that exist at quantum level is a bounded uncertainty.
And randomness and uncertainty are two different things.

Scientists

Tells us that it is Higgs boson that is responsible for giving mass and
Properties to all the matter that exists in our universe.

If
True randomness existed we would be seeing all kind of different matter
Popping out into existence. In fact our universe will collapse due to
Random process taking place,

"Stephen Hawking Says 'God Particle’ (Higgs boson
Could Wipe Out the Universe
" : http://goo.gl/k2LHnE


Do you think a unicorn is yet to pop out into existence?

Ask Higgs boson, and there you have a nice little unicorn.!!!


Before

A Deterministic system comes into existence, its parameters, its
Specifications, its possible states, needs to be *pre-determined.*

For

Example our humble electronic calculator which is a deterministic
System, before it can be manufactured (created) its specification needs
To be pre-determined, how many digits it can display, to what level of
Accuracy it can perform calculation and so on.

Our universe is a deterministic system and it is governed by laws of the nature which gives it a deterministic attribute.
Therefore

Before our universe came into existence, it had to be pre-determined
What type of laws of nature it will have, what possible state it can
Have, its behavior and so on.
*And this can only come about if it has a Designer.*


Where does God come in here?

There are two mistakes that an atheist makes.
They club Gods of different religions under one roof and reject them lock stock and barrel.
This is like saying all bacteria’s are harmful for health, which is factually incorrect.

_A spoon by any other name is a spoon but A spoon by any other function is not a spoon_

The second logical fallacy an atheist commits is asking for empirical evidence for existence of God.

Any, god that has empirical evidence is a false god because anything that
Has empirical evidence means it obeys the law of nature and anything
That is subservient to the law of nature cannot be the creator of that
Law,


Let’s talk about God of Islam Allah (swt).

*Remember ‘A’ it is always existing?*

In the noble Quran Allah (swt) describes himself.

Say: He is Allah, the One and Only;
Allah, the Eternal, Absolute;
He begetteth not, nor is He begotten;
And there is none like unto Him.
(Chapter 112)

Allah does not have size , form or shape that can be described as we understand how things exists , because there is nothing that exists that can be compared with Allah.

So how do we know who is Allah?

_Through his attributes._

Allah (swt) has at least 99 names or attributes, some relevant one are…

Allah is also known as *‘al-Bâqî’* meaning…

The One whose existence has neither beginning nor end. The One whose existence is beyond the realm of time.

*‘A’ possesses all intellect present in our universe.*

Allah is also known as *‘al-'Alîm’* meaning…

The One who is intuitively aware of all things, even before they happen.
One from whom no knowledge is concealed. The One who is aware of the complete details of all matters.

*‘A’ is capable of bringing things into existence out of nothing.*

"Creator of the heavens and the earth from *nothingness*, He has only to say when He wills a thing: "Be", and it is.": Translation by Ahmed Ali

http://goo.gl/NW4Pvo


Verily, His command, when He intends a thing, is only that He says to it, “Be!”– and it is!)
[Noble Quran 36:82)

Praise
be to Allah, Who created (out of nothing) the heavens and the earth,
Who made the angels, messengers with wings,- two, or three, or four
(pairs): He adds to Creation as He pleases: for Allah has power over all
things.
(Noble Quran 35:1)

*Our universe is deterministic.*

This is in compliance with Islamic view.

" Verily, all things have We created in proportion and measure.." [Al-Qur'an 54:49]

One of the article of faith in Islam is Al-Qada' and Al-Qadr, of Allah.

Both
al-Qada' and al-Qadr mean the predestination of an action or an event.
However if they are combined then al-Qadr means the predestination of an
Act or event before it occurs and al-Qada' refers to act or event after
It takes place.

As you must have realized 'A' is the only rational and logical Agency, entity, source that is capable of creating our universe

And by function 'A' fits Allah. (Remember spoon?)

_Now all you have to acknowledge is that.._

*'A' is for Allah.*

But of course...

*Let*
_there be no compulsion in religion: Truth stands out clear from Error:_
_whoever rejects evil and believes in Allah hath grasped the most_
_trustworthy hand-hold, that never breaks. And Allah heareth and knoweth_
all things._

Noble Quran-2:256


Islam is the most logical and rational religion.
_It offers rational explanation for any query you may have._

*Related Topic:* free will predestination and determinism
https://plus.google.com/u/0/11071685...ts/LVNQrR9Sfty





And ...Allah alone knows best.


#islam #religion #atheism
Reply

ajazz
01-19-2017, 11:55 AM
Originally Posted by czgibson
Greetings,

It's unlikely I would believe him. I would regard him with the same scepticism that I hold for anyone who says they are receiving information via supernatural means.

Peace
Revelation can be a perfectly valid claim, not only that it is backed by science....!

Revelation is nothing but putting information directly into memory.
And this has been validated by science.

Previously according to science, knowledge could only be acquired empirically through our senses,
But
Today science itself invalidated this claim.

science tells us, it is now possible to acquire knowledge without making any effort or use of our senses.


"Feeding knowledge directly into your brain, just like in sci-fi classic The Matrix, could soon take as much effort as falling asleep"

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technolog...our-brain/amp/

"Like computers, human brains may be vulnerable to hackers. Technology is already allowing scientists to read people's thoughts and even plant new ones in the brain."

http://www.livescience.com/37938-how...be-hacked.html

"Neuroscientists plant false memories in the brain"

http://news.mit.edu/2013/neuroscient...the-brain-0725


"A.L.M.R. These are the signs (or verses) of the Book: that which hath been revealed unto thee from thy Lord is the Truth; but most men believe not."
(Al Qur'an 13:1)
Reply

M.I.A.
01-19-2017, 04:31 PM
Johnny mnemonic.

"/




i think its a very difficult question to answer even for muslims.

"we" are a very opinionated folk.

god knows what he would make of us.
Reply

czgibson
01-19-2017, 04:35 PM
Greetings,

Originally Posted by ajazz
How about present day?
Assuming we are sufficiently un-ignorant..... modern people.

Would you be convinced?
It's unlikely.

Cosmological, Logical and scientific Argument for existence of God...

· _Anything that has a beginning cannot be the cause__of its own existence.

· _A deterministic system needs a designer._
The obvious question remains: who designed the designer? Your God hypothesis explains very little, and in fact requires additional explanation.

Today
it has been established that our universe was indeed created and did
not exist, it had a beginning, *not only that scientist tells us that it*
*came out of nothing…!!!*
As far as we know. This position is continually open to revision upon discovering better evidence.

"All the evidence seems to indicate, that the universe has not existed forever, but that it had a beginning" : Stephen Hawking ( living Einstein )
http://www.hawking.org.uk/the-beginning-of-time.html
Do you find it at all surprising that, despite what Stephen Hawking says here, he is still a convinced atheist?

But remember *nothing cannot create something… you still need something to create something out of nothing.*
As far as we know.

The second possibility for ‘A’ is the most *reasonable, rational, logical,* and the only possibility.

‘A’
Never had a beginning, it always existed, we can further expound that
‘A’ possesses intelligence (including all the knowledge and information
Present in our universe) and

*'A' is capable of bringing things into existence out of nothing.*
You're just inventing attributes out of thin air. It's far more reasonable to say "we don't know".

There are two mistakes that an atheist makes.
They club Gods of different religions under one roof and reject them lock stock and barrel.
This is like saying all bacteria’s are harmful for health, which is factually incorrect.
There are believed to be roughly 4,200 religions in the world. You believe 4,199 of them are false. I believe 4,200 of them are false. You see how little separates us. I have yet to see anything that convinces me that religions are anything other than man-made.

The second logical fallacy an atheist commits is asking for empirical evidence for existence of God.
Evidence of any kind would be good.

Any, god that has empirical evidence is a false god because anything that
Has empirical evidence means it obeys the law of nature and anything
That is subservient to the law of nature cannot be the creator of that
Law,
This is a circular argument. You've already assumed certain attributes of this God before attempting to demonstrate his existence, the nature of which according to you must be determined by those attributes. You are not "being logical" or anything like it; you are simply making stuff up at this point.

Islam is the most logical and rational religion.
_It offers rational explanation for any query you may have._
Muslims like to believe that Islam is the most logical and rational religion. If this were true, then academic philosophers all over the world would be predominantly Muslim. In fact, most are atheists.

Revelation can be a perfectly valid claim, not only that it is backed by science....!
Revelation is almost the precise opposite of the scientific method. It's very disingenuous of you to pretend that "science" supports your beliefs. It simply isn't true.

Revelation is nothing but putting information directly into memory.
No, revelation in the context of religion is the divine or supernatural disclosure to humans of something relating to human existence.

"Neuroscientists plant false memories in the brain"

http://news.mit.edu/2013/neuroscient...the-brain-0725
Even if your analogy here was valid, how would you know that the revelation you've received was true? Using the fact that scientists have been able to plant false memories to support your position is very odd; surely this undermines every possible benefit to revelation concerning metaphysical matters that we have no independent way of checking?

Peace
Reply

ajazz
01-21-2017, 11:14 AM
Originally Posted by czgibson
Greetings,

It's unlikely.

Peace
Not Surprised... peace.

Originally Posted by czgibson
Greetings,


The obvious question remains: who designed the designer? Your God hypothesis explains very little, and in fact requires additional explanation.


Peace

Obviously you haven't paid much attention to my argument.

Only things that come into existence requires a creator, anything that has no beginning requires no creator.

"By being able to create things out of nothing *'A'* is *De-linked* from the *chain of cause and effect, and is not a part of it*

*A* is not the first cause but causes the first cause in the chain of cause and effect and since it is De-linked from the chain, *it requires no cause for itself to exist* and eliminates the problem of infinite regression.*

Also

Since 'A' always existed, it has no end and no beginning, which means it is truly infinite, unchanging, therefore it does not require the function of time for its existence *or* cause for its existence , since it has no beginning ."



Originally Posted by czgibson
Greetings,

As far as we know. This position is continually open to revision upon discovering better evidence.
It's unlikely...:)

There is no evidence that universe always existed, on the contrary there is evidence that our universe came into existence.

In fact Einstein desperately wanted a steady state universe and so he cheated.


"It was a *prejudice* of the time *that* the *universe was* constant and eternal, *forever unchanging*"

"This led Einstein to add a term to his initial equations ....called the *cosmological constant*, ...resulting in a stationary and unchanging cosmos."

"With the realization that his earlier *prejudice for an unchanging cosmos* was wrong, Einstein removed the cosmological constant from his equations"

http://goo.gl/O7Xp6Y


_Today it is universally accepted that our universe did have a beginning._

Big bang theory is the only theory that has emprical evidence for it.

"we do strongly advocate it (big bang) since it fits all the existing data and there are no plausible alternatives. It's "99.9% proven", if you will, and that's generally good enough to label it factual"

https://www.quora.com/Why-is-it-that-whenever-they-speak-on-the-creation-of-the-Universe-scientists-push-the-Big-Bang-Theory-as-if-its-100-proven-when-its-still-only-a-theory-Shouldnt-they-still-be-speaking-about-it-as-just-that-a-theory


_Why some people want steady state universe?_


Mr Stephen Hawkins the living Einstein in spite of being atheist acknowledges that....

"The motivation for believing in an eternal universe was the desire to *avoid* invoking *divine intervention* to create the universe and set it going."

_No evidence to support ever existing universe.._

"We have made tremendous progress in cosmology in the last hundred years. The General Theory of Relativity and the discovery of the expansion of the universe *shattered* the old picture of an *ever existing and ever lasting universe*. Instead, general relativity predicted that the *universe, and time itself, would begin* in the big bang."

http://www.hawking.org.uk/the-origin...-universe.html


"science has now told us that the universe is, in fact, *finite*, with a beginning, a middle, and a future."

http://www.umich.edu/~gs265/bigbang.htm



Originally Posted by ajazz
But remember *nothing cannot create something… you still need something to create something out of nothing.*

Originally Posted by czgibson
Greetings,

As far as we know.

Peace
Logic and rationality be damned....


"Absolute nothing cannot exist because absolute nothing has no properties therefore neither can it act nor it can be acted upon.

So if absolute nothing existed nothing would exist."

Originally Posted by czgibson

The second possibility for ‘A’ is the most *reasonable, rational, logical,* and the only possibility.

‘A’
Never had a beginning, it always existed, we can further expound that
‘A’ possesses intelligence (including all the knowledge and information
Present in our universe) and

*'A' is capable of bringing things into existence out of nothing.*

Originally Posted by czgibson
You're just inventing attributes out of thin air. It's far more reasonable to say "we don't know".
Nope...

These are rational and logical assertions based on axiomatic truth that "Anything that has a beginning cannot be the cause__of its own existence"

Originally Posted by ajazz
There are two mistakes that an atheist makes.
They club Gods of different religions under one roof and reject them lock stock and barrel.
This is like saying all bacteria’s are harmful for health, which is factually incorrect.

Originally Posted by czgibson

There are believed to be roughly 4,200 religions in the world. You believe 4,199 of them are false. I believe 4,200 of them are false.
in spite of being old-timer here as IB you still have a lot to learn about Islam.

Islam does not claim it is the first and only true religion.
According to Islam...

Since the time of Adam(pbuh) ( First Homo Sapien ) till the last and final Prophet Muhammed(pbuh),

Allah (s.w.t) has sent about 124000 prophets, at different places and at different times.
All of them taught the same message that *There is only one God that needs to be worshipped and he has no partners.*

These revelations to the prophets were ment only for specific time and places,
As humanity progressed, people corrupted the original message, and the concept of God.
and so....

Prophets were sent with updated revelation with basic message remaining same ie "There is only one God that needs to be worshipped and he has no partners"

When humanity had progressed enough , The last and final prophet Mohammad was sent with the revelation , which is for all humanity and for all the time to come.

Originally Posted by czgibson

I have yet to see anything that convinces me that religions are anything other than man-made.
Well, you haven't seen much...
Belief in God is hardwired in human brain.

"The £1.9 million project involved 57 researchers who conducted over 40 separate studies in 20 countries representing a diverse range of cultures. *The studies (both analytical and empirical) conclude that humans are predisposed to believe in gods and an afterlife,* and that both theology and atheism are reasoned responses to what is a basic impulse of the human mind."_

https://www.sciencedaily.com/release...0714103828.htm


Originally Posted by ajazz
The second logical fallacy an atheist commits is asking for empirical evidence for existence of God.
Originally Posted by czgibson

Evidence of any kind would be good.
This is like... reading the whole bible and asking who is this character Jesus...



Originally Posted by ajazz
Any, god that has empirical evidence is a false god because anything that
Has empirical evidence means it obeys the law of nature and anything
That is subservient to the law of nature cannot be the creator of that
Law,
Originally Posted by czgibson

This is a circular argument. You've already assumed certain attributes of this God before attempting to demonstrate his existence, the nature of which according to you must be determined by those attributes. You are not "being logical" or anything like it; you are simply making stuff up at this point.
Nope... no circular.
The argument is as straight as an arrow...

Everything that exist in our universe, its size, shape, form, and attribute are defined by the laws of the nature.

Anything that exist in our universe, whether god or Ginnie in a bottle cannot operate out side these laws.
Hence they cannot be the creator of our universe and anything that has empirical evidence means it exist inside our universe.
Therefore asking for empirical evidenc for God who is the creator of our universe is most illogical and irrational thing.

Originally Posted by ajazz
Islam is the most logical and rational religion.
_It offers rational explanation for any query you may have._
Originally Posted by czgibson
Muslims like to believe that Islam is the most logical and rational religion. If this were true, then academic philosophers all over the world would be predominantly Muslim. In fact, most are atheists.
logic and rationality is not bounded by how many people believe it to be true.
previously majority of the people believed earth was flat.
so do you believe earth is flat?

Allah (swt) says..

"Even if We did send unto them angels, and the dead did speak unto them, and We gathered together all things before their very eyes, they are not the ones to believe, unless it is in God's plan. But most of them ignore (the truth)."
(Noble Qur'an 6:111)


Originally Posted by ajazz
Revelation can be a perfectly valid claim, not only that it is backed by science....!
Originally Posted by czgibson
Revelation is almost the precise opposite of the scientific method. It's very disingenuous of you to pretend that "science" supports your beliefs. It simply isn't true.
Revelation is reveling information whether it is divine or otherwise.
and science tells us, today it is possible to deliver information without learning effort or use of our senses.

"Researchers claim to have developed a simulator which can feed information directly into a person’s brain and teach them new skills in a shorter amount of time, comparing it to “life imitating art”.
"They believe it could be the first steps in developing advanced software that will make Matrix-style instant learning a reality."


http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/2016/03/01/scientists-discover-how-to-download-knowledge-to-your-brain/


Originally Posted by ajazz
Revelation is nothing but putting information directly into memory.

Originally Posted by czgibson

No, revelation in the context of religion is the divine or supernatural disclosure to humans of something relating to human existence.
disclosure to humans of something relating to human existence.= information,knowledge.

Originally Posted by ajazz

"Neuroscientists plant false memories in the brain"

http://news.mit.edu/2013/neuroscient...the-brain-0725
Originally Posted by czgibson


Even if your analogy here was valid, how would you know that the revelation you've received was true? Using the fact that scientists have been able to plant false memories to support your position is very odd; surely this undermines every possible benefit to revelation concerning metaphysical matters that we have no independent way of checking?

Peace
Reply pending..



Allah alone knows best.....

Reply

Hey there! Looks like you're enjoying the discussion, but you're not signed up for an account.

When you create an account, you can participate in the discussions and share your thoughts. You also get notifications, here and via email, whenever new posts are made. And you can like posts and make new friends.
Sign Up

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 40
    Last Post: 03-05-2011, 01:09 AM
  2. Replies: 70
    Last Post: 02-27-2011, 07:45 PM
  3. Replies: 45
    Last Post: 11-18-2008, 03:41 PM
  4. Replies: 25
    Last Post: 08-12-2008, 10:48 AM
  5. Replies: 45
    Last Post: 08-28-2007, 02:30 AM

IslamicBoard

Experience a richer experience on our mobile app!