Inexperienced Muslim's Argument against Atheist Professor

[AntiKarateKid]

Hey guys like the title says, I always try to debate with my teacher after class on things in philosophy but when we inevitably get into religion, because I cite that as my reasons for not doing things like killing and giving stuff to the poor, he starts off by saying that the Quran has errors like the setting the sun in a certain place, claiming taht Allah says taht all christians are my enemy, saying that the Quran claims that the earth was created before the stars and that the universe was made in six stages and that it was smoke in the begiinning then saying taht these are inaccuracies. He always finishes off by saying that we don't need God to tell us what is right and what isnt ( I tried to tell him taht this was moral relativism, taht those "inaccuracies"" he claims to point out are not what the Quran says) and today told me that in one part of the Quran God says that he would smite anyone who says he doesnt exist and started saying to the sky "God does not exist" then saying that nothing happened. By the way for you christians he claimed Jesus ( he is an ex- christian) was schizophrenic.


I know I am rambling alittle but I know in my heart that he is wrong but I really need help in responding to this stuff, especially the "we dont need God" part

Thanks brothers and sisters!

[al-muslimah]

I would have liked to debate with that Atheist myself.Wallahi he would walk back silently.The quran has no errors, its Allah's uncreated word how can Allah make mistakes.Subhanallah.
Inallaha yudilu man yasha-oo wa yahdee man yash-a

[AntiKarateKid]

thanks for responding bro, you can see the trouble I feel in debating with him yet I don't know where to begin.... I feel a need to defend the truth

[al-muslimah]

Its sister- and you are welcome just be eloquent and speak mildly to him and don't shy away anything of Islam to make him feel comfortanle with the deen.Allah will help you.

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

[AntiKarateKid]

sorry about the bro part, I forget to look at that:okay:

[snakelegs]

Hey guys like the title says, I always try to debate with my teacher after class on things in philosophy but when we inevitably get into religion, because I cite that as my reasons for not doing things like killing and giving stuff to the poor, he starts off by saying that the Quran has errors like the setting the sun in a certain place, claiming taht Allah says taht all christians are my enemy, saying that the Quran claims that the earth was created before the stars and that the universe was made in six stages and that it was smoke in the begiinning then saying taht these are inaccuracies. He always finishes off by saying that we don't need God to tell us what is right and what isnt ( I tried to tell him taht this was moral relativism, taht those "inaccuracies"" he claims to point out are not what the Quran says) and today told me that in one part of the Quran God says that he would smite anyone who says he doesnt exist and started saying to the sky "God does not exist" then saying that nothing happened. By the way for you christians he claimed Jesus ( he is an ex- christian) was schizophrenic.


I know I am rambling alittle but I know in my heart that he is wrong but I really need help in responding to this stuff, especially the "we dont need God" part

Thanks brothers and sisters!

if you are inexperienced and do not have much knowledge, i would recommend not debating with him on the subject of religion. why not something like "i'm glad to hear that you are reading the qur'an. i pray that Allah will guide you."

[Isambard]

Could always take a crack at the atheists on this forum as our arguements wouldnt be disimilar and being faceless, perhaps a little less intimidating.

[tigersabre]

If you don't have knowledge of Islam, you should not debate it with others.

What he has quoted is often mistranslated ayahs.

[جوري]

ask him if he knows what allegory is?

هُوَ الَّذِيَ أَنزَلَ عَلَيْكَ الْكِتَابَ مِنْهُ آيَاتٌ مُّحْكَمَاتٌ هُنَّ أُمُّ الْكِتَابِ وَأُخَرُ مُتَشَابِهَاتٌ فَأَمَّا الَّذِينَ في قُلُوبِهِمْ زَيْغٌ فَيَتَّبِعُونَ مَا تَشَابَهَ مِنْهُ ابْتِغَاء الْفِتْنَةِ وَابْتِغَاء تَأْوِيلِهِ وَمَا يَعْلَمُ تَأْوِيلَهُ إِلاَّ اللّهُ وَالرَّاسِخُونَ فِي الْعِلْمِ يَقُولُونَ آمَنَّا بِهِ كُلٌّ مِّنْ عِندِ رَبِّنَا وَمَا يَذَّكَّرُ إِلاَّ أُوْلُواْ الألْبَابِ {7}

[Pickthal 3:7] He it is Who hath revealed unto thee the Scripture wherein are clear revelations - they are the substance of the Book - and others (which are) allegorical. But those in whose hearts is doubt pursue, forsooth, that which is allegorical seeking (to cause) dissension by seeking to explain it. None knoweth its explanation save Allah. And those who are of sound instruction say: We believe therein; the whole is from our Lord; but only men of understanding really heed.

tell him he can't argue against a book which has not read save the orientalist websites which cater to his state of mind.. then have him explain his point of view of the world from an 'atheist view', that is where you can get him... they can't account for half the phenomenon happening in life.. sentience itself or shape eludes them.. if he gives you the familiar line of how it has been all explained before, ask him to explain it himself then, you'd be surprised how idiotic they are once they get to molecular biology while trying to reconcile it with probability of how life came to be along with all the different species....

I think atheism is the dumbest religion 2nd only to ignorance...
If I were you I wouldn't waste my time though... I am yet to meet with a lively happy atheist, I soon rather just give up, they are so angry with the world and their own lives, they'd rather drag everyone down with them....

eh maybe there is a normal atheist out there, I just haven't met him or her!

:w:

[Isambard]

I think atheism is the dumbest religion 2nd only to ignorance...

O the irony...:rolleyes:

[IbnAbdulHakim]

tell the fish to stop breathing and then claim he doesnt need God.


*calms down*


ok now you need to make this fish here understand that he doesnt know the Quran one single bit, neither does he understand islaam one single bit. He misquotes and misinterprets, so if you can make him understand that then its all good.

To make him understand, simply take ONE point and refute it to the point where he feels destroyed, that should show that fish what a fish he truelly is !

the freaking fish !!

Assalamu Alaikum

[------]

:salamext:

ALso, look at how the fish is made, the body structure, etc., Subhaan Allaah... :)

[root]

PurestAmbrosia;873812ask him if he knows what allegory is?


you'd be surprised how idiotic they are once they get to molecular biology while trying to reconcile it with probability of how life came to be along with all the different species....

You would be equally surprised how idiotic the suggestion is that the theory of evolution includes the origin of life. Purest's point here is a no brainer and anyone who does not see that does not know the theory of evolution. How can you debate the theory when the person refuting it does not even understand what it does and does not cover.

Origins of life are found in the following theories:

Panspermia
Abiogenesis

Or, go for the creationist one.

Creation from clay.

[جوري]

You would be equally surprised how idiotic the suggestion is that the theory of evolution includes the origin of life. Purest's point here is a no brainer and anyone who does not see that does not know the theory of evolution. How can you debate the theory when the person refuting it does not even understand what it does and does not cover.

Origins of life are found in the following theories:

Panspermia
Abiogenesis

Or, go for the creationist one.

Creation from clay.

excuse me, where in my post did I mention evolution the word? or do you just want to seek the opportunity to hijack another thread? Neither his question nor my answer address 'evolution' he speaks of a man who says we 'don't need God,' and I speak of how most idiotic atheists can't account for half of the occurrences in the world around us while reconciling them with laws of probability and molecular biology as we know it, short of giving us the run around of 'God of the gaps'...

I have no time for kiddy theories--once you have perfected how jack in the beanstalk gave us all the seeds and how your rock is now spontaneously generating and morphing can we have this conversation!

I have no time to waste on another worthless debate!

cheers!

[جوري]

O the irony...:rolleyes:

You are right it should be first, ignorance should be second, after all ignorance is sometimes excusable by the human condition, poverty, illness, poor upbringing-- while simply having a brain and not using it should render atheism distilled stupidity barnone!


cheers!

[czgibson]

Greetings,

You are right it should be first, ignorance should be second, after all ignorance is sometimes excusable by the human condition, poverty, illness, poor upbringing-- while simply having a brain and not using it should render atheism distilled stupidity barnone!

How rude. Imagine what would happen if someone described Islam that way.

Peace

[islamirama]

Hey guys like the title says, I always try to debate with my teacher after class on things in philosophy but when we inevitably get into religion, because I cite that as my reasons for not doing things like killing and giving stuff to the poor, he starts off by saying that the Quran has errors like the setting the sun in a certain place, claiming taht Allah says taht all christians are my enemy, saying that the Quran claims that the earth was created before the stars and that the universe was made in six stages and that it was smoke in the begiinning then saying taht these are inaccuracies. He always finishes off by saying that we don't need God to tell us what is right and what isnt ( I tried to tell him taht this was moral relativism, taht those "inaccuracies"" he claims to point out are not what the Quran says) and today told me that in one part of the Quran God says that he would smite anyone who says he doesnt exist and started saying to the sky "God does not exist" then saying that nothing happened. By the way for you christians he claimed Jesus ( he is an ex- christian) was schizophrenic.


I know I am rambling alittle but I know in my heart that he is wrong but I really need help in responding to this stuff, especially the "we dont need God" part

Thanks brothers and sisters!

First i would report him to the administration,and i would take many students with you for support and backing. He can disagree all he wants but do it in a professional manner, not in an arrogant, ignorant and disrespectful manner.

You can visit www.islam-guide.com to see if that helps.

And next time he shows such arrogance and disrespect towards islam, just say....

You are right it should be first (Atheism dumbest religion), ignorance should be second, after all ignorance is sometimes excusable by the human condition, poverty, illness, poor upbringing-- while simply having a brain and not using it should render atheism distilled stupidity barnone!


cheers!

[Keltoi]

The thing about debating an academic is that they are usually well-prepared for it. It is part of what they do. Their minds are usually set in stone too, because no matter how much academics say they are open to new possibilities, the truth is that in most cases they are not open-minded at all. To approach an academic from the standpoint of a person of faith is usually a losing proposition, because the points of reference are alien to the other.

My advice would be to take snakeleg's suggestion and simply smile and wish him the best.

[جوري]

Greetings,


How rude. Imagine what would happen if someone described Islam that way.

Peace

Many people in fact do, it is not my job to change people's feelings nor is it of consequence frankly!
see you on the other thread!

[czgibson]

Greetings,

And next time he shows such arrogance and disrespect towards islam, just say....

And show some arrogance and disrespect to someone else's faith-position! C'mon folks, let's be needlessly, hypocritically insulting! That's the way to get things done!

Peace

[Idris]

The thing about debating an academic is that they are usually well-prepared for it. It is part of what they do. Their minds are usually set in stone too, because no matter how much academics say they are open to new possibilities, the truth is that in most cases they are not open-minded at all. To approach an academic from the standpoint of a person of faith is usually a losing proposition, because the points of reference are alien to the other.

My advice would be to take snakeleg's suggestion and simply smile and wish him the best.

This is what I say to.

[Gator]

To the OP -

I would start off by asking is he claiming that since the the Quran has so called inaccuracies (which have nothing to do with morality), that the idea of not killing and giving stuff to the poor is wrong? I think he's actually trying to attack the basic authority of the Quran, but this would put him on the defensive.

Also, if he brings up the inaccuracies I would ask him to quote the specific reference. When he probably can't you can tell him he has no idea about the Quran. That should shut him down that way.

If he can, you may be screwed. Just tell him that is interesting and that you'll research it, but then look up the apologetics for the quote and give the refutation next time you talk. Don't take what he says off the cuff as authoritative in any way and don't try to refute right then if you are not prepared.

It sounds like you have a non-adversarial relationship in general if you've had these multiple talks. I'd say keep talking and at the very least it should bolster your knowledge of Islam.

Those are my thoughts anyway. Good luck.

[islamirama]

The thing about debating an academic is that they are usually well-prepared for it. It is part of what they do. Their minds are usually set in stone too, because no matter how much academics say they are open to new possibilities, the truth is that in most cases they are not open-minded at all. To approach an academic from the standpoint of a person of faith is usually a losing proposition, because the points of reference are alien to the other.

My advice would be to take snakeleg's suggestion and simply smile and wish him the best.

I would have to agree with that, unless he's one of those retards that just won't shut up no matter what. Which i think is the case since he's an academic.

in that case just say this....

Say (O Muhammad (Peace be upon him)to these Mushrikun and Kafirun): "O Al-Kafirun (disbelievers in Allah, in His Oneness, in His Angels, in His Books, in His Messengers, in the Day of Resurrection, and in Al-Qadar, etc.)!

"I worship not that which you worship,

"Nor will you worship that which I worship.

"And I shall not worship that which you are worshipping.

"Nor will you worship that which I worship.

"To you be your religion, and to me my religion (Islamic Monotheism)."

Surah Kaffiroun

[جوري]

The thing about debating an academic is that they are usually well-prepared for it. It is part of what they do. Their minds are usually set in stone too, because no matter how much academics say they are open to new possibilities, the truth is that in most cases they are not open-minded at all. To approach an academic from the standpoint of a person of faith is usually a losing proposition, because the points of reference are alien to the other.

My advice would be to take snakeleg's suggestion and simply smile and wish him the best.

I second that, though I seldom agree with Keltoi (when it comes to religion or politics) I have great respect for his opinion..


peace!

[wilberhum]

First i would report him to the administration,and i would take many students with you for support and backing. He can disagree all he wants but do it in a professional manner, not in an arrogant, ignorant and disrespectful manner.

...

Wow, did you read the first post? Do you not understand?

I always try to debate with my teacher after class

The kid starts it. Why does the teacher not have the right to answer the kid with his honest openion? After all it is after class.


(But your signiture is better)

[sudais1]

Atheism has way too much flaws and isn't 100% proved especially in the fossil department.

Ask him to give you concrete proof in every department. Even Darwin said that there were some flaws with his theories. and that's when he loses everything

Then Explain that he has no Idea what the Quran is and misquotes the Quran from Anti Muslim sites. Give him verses from the Quran and explain them to him so his closed mind may open

[wilberhum]

Atheism has way too much flaws and isn't 100% proved especially in the fossil department.

Atheism and fossils. Is that like fish and bicycles? What are you on about?

[Jayda]

Hey guys like the title says, I always try to debate with my teacher after class on things in philosophy but when we inevitably get into religion, because I cite that as my reasons for not doing things like killing and giving stuff to the poor, he starts off by saying that the Quran has errors like the setting the sun in a certain place, claiming taht Allah says taht all christians are my enemy, saying that the Quran claims that the earth was created before the stars and that the universe was made in six stages and that it was smoke in the begiinning then saying taht these are inaccuracies. He always finishes off by saying that we don't need God to tell us what is right and what isnt ( I tried to tell him taht this was moral relativism, taht those "inaccuracies"" he claims to point out are not what the Quran says) and today told me that in one part of the Quran God says that he would smite anyone who says he doesnt exist and started saying to the sky "God does not exist" then saying that nothing happened. By the way for you christians he claimed Jesus ( he is an ex- christian) was schizophrenic.


I know I am rambling alittle but I know in my heart that he is wrong but I really need help in responding to this stuff, especially the "we dont need God" part

Thanks brothers and sisters!

hola,

lol don't take it too much to heart, you are describing every one of my professors from college. i think sometimes academic people can become too lost in their thoughts...

he's using a logical fallacy called 'begging the question' when he asks you that. it's when you assume your conclusion (what he ultimately wants to prove) through one of the premises (one of the axioms accepted as true, from which a conclusion is derived). premises do not have to be outwardly stated, sometimes they are 'assumed' or implied. a classic example of this logical fallacy is "we must do something to curb violence on campus!" ... which ultimately seeks to establish that it is a fact there is violence on campus... simply by stating that there is violence on campus in the implied premise.

it's fact by fiat :)

when he says "we don't need God to tell us what is right or wrong" he is (from the start) assuming but not proving that God is something created out of necessity, rather than something which already exists and already sets the rules regardless of our thoughts on the matter, which is your point.

you could just as easily respond to him "since He is God we have no choice but to assent to what He says is right and wrong" you would both be employing the logical fallacy in the same manner... making you equally unvalid.

next time you have the debate just remind him it's a logical fallacy... it's a strong point because it doesn't hurt your argument that morality founded upon a divine authority is superior to morality founded upon agreement, and it weakens (in my opinion destroys) his argument about 'needing God' by exposing it as nothing more than a restatement of his proposition, as opposed to a genuine logical conclusion.

Que Dios te bendiga

[- Qatada -]

Hey guys like the title says, I always try to debate with my teacher after class on things in philosophy but when we inevitably get into religion, because I cite that as my reasons for not doing things like killing and giving stuff to the poor, he starts off by saying that the Quran has errors

If you think you won't have the answers, i think its better you study the religion abit more in depth first insha Allah. :) May Allah help you and us all, ameen.

like the setting the sun in a certain place,

Until, when he reached the setting of the sun, he found it [as if] setting in a spring of dark mud, and he found near it a people...

[Qur'an - Surah Al Kahf 18 : 86]

http://quranicrealm.com/quran.php?q=18

This is what alot of anti Islamic people use to attack Islam, claiming that the sun sets when science proves otherwise. There is no error in the Qur'an, its simply a figure of speech. The same way we know today that the sun does not set, yet people still use the word 'sunset' and 'sunrise.' There is no error, but those who hate Islam will do anything to try to discredit it, even though their own cultural or linguistic figure of speech is similar.

claiming taht Allah says taht all christians are my enemy,

Nope, not all non muslims are enemies;


At the time of the Messenger of Allah, there were some christians who gave refuge to Muslims in Abysinnia [ethiopia] so the following verse was revealed;

..you will find the nearest of them in affection to the believers those who say, "We are Christians." That is because among them are priests and monks and because they are not arrogant.

[Qur'an 5:82]

Anyway, this verse is important also;

Allah forbids you not, with regard to those who fight you not for (your) Faith nor drive you out of your homes, from dealing kindly and justly with them: for Allah loveth those who are just.

[Qur'an 60:8]

saying that the Quran claims that the earth was created before the stars and that the universe was made in six stages and that it was smoke in the begiinning then saying taht these are inaccuracies.

These links are all relevant insha Allah;

http://www.islam-guide.com/frm-ch1-1-c.htm

http://islamtoday.com/show_detail_se...main_cat_id=31

today told me that in one part of the Quran God says that he would smite anyone who says he doesnt exist and started saying to the sky "God does not exist" then saying that nothing happened.

Allah doesn't simply destroy a people because they deny His existence, rather He gives them trials in this life so they may return to Him, since humans are by nature dependant upon a greater power.

And verily, We will make them taste of the near torment (i.e. the torment in the life of this world, i.e. disasters, calamities, etc.) prior to the supreme torment (in the Hereafter), in order that they may (repent and) return (i.e. accept Islam).

[Qur'an 32: 21]

However, if they die being ungrateful to Allah as disbelievers - they will face the severe punishment since this life is a mixture of both good and evil, whereas the hereafter is of either pure good reward or total punishment. We pray to Allah to make us of the successful and not of the losers.

Here's a good article aswell;

Happiness In Islam
http://www.islamtoday.com/showme2.cf...sub_cat_id=869

Thanks brothers and sisters!

I know i havn't been able to address all the questions, but i think it's important you only debate once you're more knowledgable of Islam in depth. :)

[AntiKarateKid]

got it, I didn't want to get into the religion thing but for certain questions I had to cite islam as my reason for my beliefs and it continues from there. Thanks for the help, It seems that all he does is distort the verses to try and make a point, but I couldnt help myself when I saw that he rolled his eyes whenever he mentioned Allah, makes me angry but whatever, time to do research! :shade:

[جوري]

got it, I didn't want to get into the religion thing but for certain questions I had to cite islam as my reason for my beliefs and it continues from there. Thanks for the help, It seems that all he does is distort the verses to try and make a point, but I couldnt help myself when I saw that he rolled his eyes whenever he mentioned Allah, makes me angry but whatever, time to do research! :shade:

:sl: you know learning in a hostile environment is not conducive to learning, if you truly feel he is crossing the lines, you may file a grievance with the dean's office, it wouldn't be the first case of its kind.. it happens all the time. Professors are people to and subject to their own emotions, but their prejudices shouldn't preclude them from sticking to the schedule alloted for your class and not straying from it for personal reasons.

If he is inciting a provocation even in body language you should unquestionably bring it to the attention of his superiors and take it from there, if he intentionally distorts then you should correct him with proper knowledge, I am sure there is an MSA in your area? a Muslim student association? you can have meetings about this and hopefully can reach some resolution. He should leave his ignorance to jihad blog or the antimuslim blog but this has no room in academia!

:w:

[NoName55]

if you are inexperienced and do not have much knowledge, i would recommend not debating with him on the subject of religion. why not something like "i'm glad to hear that you are reading the qur'an. i pray that Allah will guide you."

exactly! thankyou

[BlackMamba]

A good site that refutes what kuffar say about the Quran is this http://answering-christianity.com/ac.htm
A also, y do atheists even come to this forum, wat is there to acomplish here. its a muslim forum. and it doesnt seem like there learning or even trying to learn anything anyway.

[Gator]

A good site that refutes what kuffar say about the Quran is this http://answering-christianity.com/ac.htm
A also, y do atheists even come to this forum, wat is there to acomplish here. its a muslim forum. and it doesnt seem like there learning or even trying to learn anything anyway.

Actually, speaking for myself, I've learned quite a lot about Islam and the many differnet ways its interpreted amongst its believers. I've also gotten a better insight into the people behind the faith and the varying lines of thought that lead people to what they believe.

I'm always interested in the specific ways how people can see the same thing and come up with utterly different conclusions.

Thanks.

[ranma1/2]

thanks for responding bro, you can see the trouble I feel in debating with him yet I don't know where to begin.... I feel a need to defend the truth

i think "speaking as an atheists"
that if you are going to claim it is the inerrant word you will have to back that up. He im sure might be reffering to the sun setting in water.

I think your best bet would be to show how you can decide between what is supposed to be story or allegory and what should be litteral. You should also back it up with evidence. the simple god says so wont fly with non muslims.

[Woodrow]

Posting links to anti Islamic sites is not acceptable. Personal arguments are not acceptable. This thread is no longer acceptable in this condition. Now let us get back to the topic.

[jouju]

bro/sis...personally i think u shudnt argue wen u don hav the ilm....y nt ask someone who's more knowledgable to do it coz u myt find urself in an unpleasant situation...he's definitely going to misqoute islamic verses to suit himself and his fantasies
jus giv him a translation of suratul ikhlaas n suratul alaq

[Whatsthepoint]

he's definitely going to misqoute islamic verses to suit himself and his fantasies

I don't think the professor has misquoted the Quran. The problem lies in his (mis)interpretation of the verses.

[Woodrow]

Everybody has a desire to refute lies, errors, misconceptions. The problem is too often people jump into a refutation unprepared and poorly qualified.

People have an inner feeling that if they can prove somebody, with opposing views, is wrong that makes their own view correct by default.


Picture this scenario Person A and person B both see a car. Person A says the car is blue Person B says the car is yellow. Person A "proves" the car is not Yellow. Does that make Person A correct? No, it only proves it is not yellow, the car might be Red or any other color.

In a refutation, it is useless to try to prove the other person is wrong. It is impossible to prove anything is wrong or non-existent. You need to prove you are correct, then leave it up to the person to either accept or reject what you say.


Somethings that are fast paths to loose a debate.

1. Getting angry

2. Getting side tracked into thinking you need to prove the other person is wrong. That is one of the oldest ploys experienced debaters use to make a novice look ridiculous.

3. Offering proof without indisputable verification.

4. Lack of knowledge about the other persons view. You need to be knowledgeable in the other persons beliefs and know in advance what that person will use as counter refutations also an understanding as to why they think you are wrong.




With that said, it is best to avoid refuting a statement, unless you are very knowledgeable in your own position and are aware of the probable reason your opponent will not believe you.

[Trumble]

lol don't take it too much to heart, you are describing every one of my professors from college. i think sometimes academic people can become too lost in their thoughts...

Not so much "lost in their thoughts" as confusion regarding their motives. Remember that for philosophy academics when talking to students it is the debate itself that is of principal importance, not the topic being discussed. They are not so much teaching you ideas as trying to teach you how to set about judging, arguing and formulating ideas of your own. And debate for them is fun... the fact your Prof chooses to debate with you may well be indicative he regards you as a particularly promising student, so be careful when talking abour 'disrespect'.

In other words he is most likely not testing your religion, he is testing you. Not your faith, but your academic competence in making an argument. I disagree with the

First i would report him to the administration,and i would take many students with you for support and backing. He can disagree all he wants but do it in a professional manner, not in an arrogant, ignorant and disrespectful manner.

... approach. In philosophy class the professor should have no 'respect' for positions that the student is incapable of supporting by argument, be they religious or not. There is no 'get out of jail free card' for religious faiths, nor should there be. He is teaching you how to argue not whether one religion is 'right' and another 'wrong' and more than one philosopher is 'right' and another 'wrong'.

As others have said, the best option is to learn more about your subject before you debate it. Don't expect it to be easy. Unless you have ambitions of getting a DPhil yourself one day your professor will usually make mincemeat of your opinion on whatever subject it may happen to be. I know, I've been there. Most claimed 'refutations', particularly those on religious rather than philosophical sites are weak or can be easily countered, so don't expect easy answers. But the point is you will be making some progress, and even if you still can't best the Prof in debate on any subject you'll be able to best your fellow students and most other people! Just don't make the other common mistake, confusing winning a philosophical debate with necessarily being 'right' or 'proving' anything...

[ranma1/2]

Atheism has way too much flaws and isn't 100% proved especially in the fossil department.

Ask him to give you concrete proof in every department. Even Darwin said that there were some flaws with his theories. and that's when he loses everything

Then Explain that he has no Idea what the Quran is and misquotes the Quran from Anti Muslim sites. Give him verses from the Quran and explain them to him so his closed mind may open

lol. atheism does not equal evo.

[Jayda]

Not so much "lost in their thoughts" as confusion regarding their motives. Remember that for philosophy academics when talking to students it is the debate itself that is of principal importance, not the topic being discussed. They are not so much teaching you ideas as trying to teach you how to set about judging, arguing and formulating ideas of your own. And debate for them is fun... the fact your Prof chooses to debate with you may well be indicative he regards you as a particularly promising student, so be careful when talking abour 'disrespect'.

In other words he is most likely not testing your religion, he is testing you. Not your faith, but your academic competence in making an argument. I disagree with the

hola Trumble

lol actually my professors were not philosophy academics... they were voice, psychology, business, economics, biology and chemistry professors. mostly biology and chemistry since that was where most of my primary major was concentrated. i think they did enjoy making me think a certain way, but there was (particularly for one) a desire to impose their religious beliefs since i was known in the department as a particularly devout roman catholic. i used to go into my one professor's office every saturday and i would basically cave into his gigantic leather chair and he made me a big cup of hot chocolate and we would just talk about everything. he is a very nice man :) i felt like a little girl...

i wish i were still in school...

que Dios te bendiga

[angrywinds]

For someone who believes that the Earth was made from “a big boom” he really shouldn’t be talking. Ask him to register on this forum, so we can all gang up on him. :D

[wilberhum]

For someone who believes that the Earth was made from “a big boom” he really shouldn’t be talking. Ask him to register on this forum, so we can all gang up on him. :D

Well why don't you just show your evidence that would make him look silly? :-[

You seem to be a vessel of great knowledge. :-\

[truemuslim]

ask him if he knows what allegory is?



tell him he can't argue against a book which has not read save the orientalist websites which cater to his state of mind.. then have him explain his point of view of the world from an 'atheist view', that is where you can get him... they can't account for half the phenomenon happening in life.. sentience itself or shape eludes them.. if he gives you the familiar line of how it has been all explained before, ask him to explain it himself then, you'd be surprised how idiotic they are once they get to molecular biology while trying to reconcile it with probability of how life came to be along with all the different species....

I think atheism is the dumbest religion 2nd only to ignorance...
If I were you I wouldn't waste my time though... I am yet to meet with a lively happy atheist, I soon rather just give up, they are so angry with the world and their own lives, they'd rather drag everyone down with them....

eh maybe there is a normal atheist out there, I just haven't met him or her!

:w:

OMG YOU TOO THINK THAT!!! lol... it really is.

[angrywinds]

Well why don't you just show your evidence that would make him look silly? :-[

You seem to be a vessel of great knowledge. :-\

Where is the evidence that is occurred? When I say evidence I don’t want some theory thought up by some crack pot scientist. If you believe in this “big boom” you are what that crazy Darwin guy called a “Neanderthal”.

[wilberhum]

Where is the evidence that is occurred? When I say evidence I don’t want some theory thought up by some crack pot scientist. If you believe in this “big boom” you are what that crazy Darwin guy called a “Neanderthal”.

Ah no you don't. You made the statement, you back it up. :scared:

[wilberhum]

OMG YOU TOO THINK THAT!!! lol... it really is.

You fall for the stupid stuff, don't you. :thumbs_do

Atheism is not a religion. :offended:

PS: PA is no longer with us.

[Keltoi]

It is a slippery slope for a theist to start demanding "evidence" for things. Faith by definition is without concrete evidence. The "Big Bang" is a theory, a theory that doesn't necessarily rule out divine creation. I'm very uncomfortable with the tendency of many theists on this board to ignore science. Science is how we understand the world that God created, and scientific knowledge is another way to understand God from a strictly material standpoint.

[DAWUD_adnan]

Wow, Everything the guy said was actually proving islam to be right Look:

he starts off by saying that the Quran has errors like the setting the sun in a certain place,

The Quran says that the sun is running towards a (setting) point this is true since the Star as we know as the Sun, is actually moving at a high speed to one direction in our galaxy

claiming taht Allah says taht all christians are my enemy,
lol, The Quran also says that christians are close in love to muslims, the fact is that the quran is trascends beyond time, so Allah sees past present and future at one and the same time,

That is why Allah says 'and remember when on the day of judgement etc.. ( how can we remember something we never saw?)

saying that the Quran claims that the earth was created before the stars

now he is just lying,
025.061 Blessed is He Who made constellations in the skies, and placed therein a Lamp and a Moon giving light;
You see here Allah says, He even created other stars before the Sun let alone the earth ( its not even mentioned)



and that the universe was made in six stages and that it was smoke in the begiinning then saying taht these are inaccuracies.

The six epos of the universe were SIX STAGES where only certian elements existed before all of them came together, and when Allah says the universe was smoke, it is pointing to the clouds of gas from whence the Stars originate from and as a result also the earth..this guy is stupid, i would of killed him (not litterally lol)

[islam_kurdi]

Salam...

I took this from Zakir Naik and typed it up...

Go through the following process to defeat the atheist...



Da3wah to an Atheist:

Most of the atheists are atheists because they believe in Science and Technology. They think that science has advanced so much that we don’t require any scripture, religion, etc.

The first question to ask them is…
1) Let’s suppose there is an equipment, there is a machinery, which no one in the world has seen before… if it’s brought in front of you (the atheist), and if we ask the question to the atheist, “Who will be the first person who will be able to tell you the mechanism of this machinery, of this object?” What can his reply be? They will reply, “The first person who will tell you the mechanism of this machinery is the manufacturer (some may say the creator - some may say the inventor – some may say the producer) (whatever they say it will be somewhat similar – just keep it at the back of your mind). Then ask them the next question…

2) “How did our universe come into existence?” The atheist will tell us that “initially there was a primary nebula; then there was a big bang, which gave right to galaxies, the sun, the moon, and the earth on which we live. This is what we call as the big bang.” Ask them, “When did you come to know about this (the big bang)?” They will tell you, “about 30-40 years back, the scientists discovered this.” You tell him, “But what you’re talking about, the big bang, is already mentioned in the Quran: in surah Al-Anbiya’, chapter #21, verse #30. Which means “Do not the unbelievers see; the heavens and the earth were joined together, then We parted them.” What they are talking about, the big bang, was already mentioned in the Quran 1400 years ago. Ask them, “Who could have mentioned that?” The atheist will say “maybe it’s a fluke (luck).” No problem. Don’t argue with him.

3) The light of the moon. Is it its own light or reflected light? The atheist will say that “previously we thought that the moon had its own light. Recently (100-200 years back) we have come to know that the light of the moon is not its own light but a reflected light. The Quran mentioned this 1400 years ago: In surah Al-Furqan, chapter #25, verse #61. Which means “Blessed is He who has placed a constellation in the sky; and placed therein a lamp, a sun, having its own light; and moon, having a reflected light, a borrowed light.” Who could have mentioned in the Quran 1400 years ago that the light of the moon is not its own light, but a reflected light, which we have come to know recently? The atheist may say, “your prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him), maybe he was an intelligent man.” Don’t argue with him, continue.

4) The world that we live on. What’s the shape of this earth on which we live? The atheist will tell you that it is spherical. Ask him, “when did we come to know?” He will tell us that “it was 1597 when Sir Francis Drake sailed around the earth and proved that the earth was spherical.” The Quran says 1400 years ago in surah An-Nazi3at, chapter #79, verse #30. Which means “And thereafter We have made the earth egg-shaped.” The Arabic word Dahaha (in this verse) is not referring to a normal egg, on the other hand it is referring to the egg of an ostrich. And we know the earth is not completely round like a ball, but it is geo-spherical in shape; it is flattened from the poles (vertically). If you analyze the egg of an ostrich, that too is geo-spherical in shape. Who could have mentioned 1400 years ago that the shape of the earth is geo-spherical? Again the atheist may say, “You know, your prophet, maybe he’s super intelligent.” Don’t argue with him. Just continue.

5) Very recently (~1982) scientists thought that the sun was stationary – it revolved but did not rotate about its own axis. However, in the Quran, 1400 years ago, in surah Al-Anbiya’, chapter #21, verse #33. Which means, “It is Allah who has created the night and the day, the sun and the moon, each one travelling in orbit with its own motion.” So the Quran says that besides the sun just revolving, it even rotates about its own axis. Who could have mentioned this in the Quran 1400 years ago? The atheist will be silent. There will be a long pause. Don’t wait for their reply. Keep on continuing.

6) Today science tells us that the universe is expanding. Which is mentioned in the Quran 1400 years ago in surah Adh-Dhariyat, chapter # 51, verse #47.

7) The Quran speaks about the water cycle. The water cycle was first described in 1580. How the water evaporates from the ocean, forms into clouds, moves into the interior, falls down as rain. This water cycle is spoken about in great detain in the Quran in several verses:
-In surah Az-Zumar, chapter #39, verse #21
-In surah Ar-RÛm, chapter #30, verse #24
-In surah Al-Hijr, chapter #15, verse #22
-In surah Al-Mu’minun, chapter #23, verse #18
-In surah An-NÛr, chapter # 24, verse #43
-In surah Ar-RÛm, chapter #30, verse #48
-In surah Al-A’raf, chapter #7, verse #17
-In surah Al-Furqan, chapter #25, verse #48-49
-In surah Fatir, chapter #35, verse #9
-In surah Ya-Sin, chapter #36, verse #34
-In surah Al-Mulk, chapter #67, verse #30
-In surah At-Tariq, chapter #86, verse #11

There are hundreds of verses in the Quran that speak about the water cycle which science has discovered recently. We can keep on talking, continue.

8) Today we have come to know that plants have got sexes, which we did not know earlier. Which the Quran says 1400 years ago in surah Ta-Ha, chapter #20, verse #53; that the plants have got sexes: male and female.

9) Today we have come to know that there are two types of waters: sweat and salty. And there is a barrier between them. Which is mentioned in the Quran in surah Al-Furqan, chapter #25, verse #53. And surah Ar-Rahman, chapter #55, verse #17-18. Which means, “It is Allah who has let free two bodies of flowing water; though they meet, they do not mix – there is a barrier between them.

10) Today science tells us that it is the mountains which prevent the earth from shaking. Which is mentioned in the Quran 1400 years ago in surah An-Naba’, chapter #78, verse #6-7.

11) The Quran speaks about Biology. Its says what means that “We have created every living creature from water – every living thing. In surah Al-Anbiya’, chapter #21, verse #30. The Quran mentioned this 1400 years ago.
12) The Quran speaks about Zoology. About the lifestyle of the spider in surah Al-‘AnkabÛt, chapter #29, verse #41.

13) About the ant in surah An-Naml, chapter #27, verse #17-18.

14) About the bee in surah An-Nahl, chapter #16, verse 68-69.

15) The Quran speaks about embryology in surah Al-‘Alaq, chapter #96, verse #1-2. Which means, “We have created the human being from ‘alaqah, a leach-like substance – which we have come through recently.

16) The Quran speaks about embryological stages in surah Al-Mu’minun, chapter #23, verse #12-14.




We can go on talking about the scientific points. There are more than 1000 verses in the Quran which speak about Science. After every scientific fact you ask the question, “Who could have mentioned that in the Quean?” The only reply the atheist can give you is, “the Creator, the Cherisher, the Manufacturer, the inventor, the Producer.
This Creator, this Manufacturer, this Producer, this Inventor; we muslims call Him as Allah.

That is the reason why Francis Bacon, a very famous philosopher said, “Little knowledge of Science takes you away from Almighty God. In-depth knowledge of Science makes you a believer in God.”
That is the reason scientists today are not eliminating God – they are eliminating models of God.

La’ilaha’illAllah!

[wilberhum]

Salam...

I took this from Zakir Naik and typed it up...
You should learn to copy/paste.

Go through the following process to defeat the atheist...
The reality is you will only make your self look stooped.

This stuff is just "Preaching to the Choir". :?

[caroline]

I am new here and I just started reading the Quran for the first time. One of the first things I read in Sura 2 is that there are people (infidels) who will never believe no matter how much truth you put before them.

Sometimes arguing just brings you down to their level.

[czgibson]

Greetings,

I took this from Zakir Naik and typed it up...

Go through the following process to defeat the atheist...

Does anyone know any atheists who have been convinced by this kind of argument? It's certainly very weak, for a number of reasons - chief among them the fact that arguments of this type have been around for centuries. If they actually had any truth to them, everyone in the world would be a Muslim by now.

Peace

[BlackMamba]

When talking about Muslims tolerance with other religions, people forget this verse from surah al-ankaboot
29:46 And dispute ye not with the People of the Book, except with means better (than mere disputation), unless it be with those of them who inflict wrong (and injury): but say, "We believe in the revelation which has come down to us and in that which came down to you; Our Allah and your Allah is one; and it is to Him we bow (in Islam)."

[wilberhum]

When talking about Muslims tolerance with other religions, people forget this verse from surah al-ankaboot
29:46 And dispute ye not with the People of the Book, except with means better (than mere disputation), unless it be with those of them who inflict wrong (and injury): but say, "We believe in the revelation which has come down to us and in that which came down to you; Our Allah and your Allah is one; and it is to Him we bow (in Islam)."

Isn't wishing people would go to hell without even being judged a bit of intolerance? :thumbs_do

[جوري]

Isn't wishing people would go to hell without even being judged a bit of intolerance? :thumbs_do

He isn't wishing people go to hell.. where did you get that from his quote?
He is wishing people would 'dispute with that which is better', as is decreed in the Quran.
i.e. refine the style of debate, which is truly a bit difficult to do the way some folks express themselves!

cheers!

[wilberhum]

He isn't wishing people go to hell.. where did you get that from his quote?
He is wishing people would 'dispute with that which is better', as is decreed in the Quran.
i.e. refine the style of debate, which is truly a bit difficult to do the way some folks express themselves!

cheers!

Now PA, you know I don't make empty statements. :embarrass
Here is the quote.

I want her to go straight to Hell. Not even wait to be judged. Just straight down to Hell. Everyone make duah for this please.

In fact he even ask you to pray that she goes to hell.

Can one get more hateful than that?

[جوري]

that is shakoor15' quote?
Honestly I have to get my eyes checked because I am not seeing that at all in the quote you quoted?

peace!

[Uthman]

:sl:

that is shakoor15' quote?
Honestly I have to get my eyes checked because I am not seeing that at all in the quote you quoted?

Yeah here. :)

:w:

[جوري]

lol.. come on now, you don't honestly expect me to go to another thread to find a reason behind the quote he quoted?.. this is nuts.

Anyhow.. I dislike that harpy myself and immensely. I hope that she is a psychologist and not a psychiatrist. I'd hate to think that there are malicious MD's out there, it would be a personal disappointment.
She is also abusing her position, which automatically casts her and her profession in a very negative light.. but we should leave that to the other thread!
:w:

[ajazz]

"researchers says the universe is between 11.2 billion and 20 billion years old."
http://www.space.com/scienceastronom...se_030103.html

and anything that ages, had a beginning, if you don't agree than prove it otherwise
Hence anything that has beginning will end and was created
(Entropy )

now the universe had a beginning


so from where this starting point came about?

either it was created by some one or it came out of nothing.

but according physics

In physics, the word nothing is not used in any technical sense. A region of space is called a vacuum if it does not contain any matter. But it can contain physical fields. In fact, it is practically impossible to construct a region of space which contains no matter or fields, since gravity cannot be blocked and all objects at a non-zero temperature radiate electromagnetically. However, supposing such a region existed, it would still not be "nothing", since it has properties and a measurable existence as part of the quantum-mechanical vacuum.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nothing

since there is no such thing as nothing


now the other possibility left is, universe was created by someone

but this someone has to be special
this someone has to have special powers and attributes
this someone has to be outside the time

Here the definition of Allah in Islam.
read them carefully


Al-'Awwal
The First, The One whose Existence is without a beginning.

Al-'Akhir
The Last, The One whose Existence is without an end.

Al-Mutakabbir
The Majestic, The One who is clear from the attributes of the creatures and from resembling them.

Al-Khaaliq
The Creator, The One who brings everything from non-existence to existence.

Al-Qayyoom
The Self-Subsisting, The One who remains and does not end.


Al-Ghaniyy
The Self-Sufficient, The One who does not need the creation.

Al-Badi^
The Incomparable, The One who created the creation and formed it without any preceding example

Al-Baaqi
The Everlasting, The One that the state of non-existence is impossible for Him.

now if you have a rational and logical mind

then yes, only an entity such as Allah
can create the universe

we Muslims believe universe was created by Allah and it was created out of nothing by Allah !!!.



According to Aristotle (atheist)

On Longevity and Shortness of Life
By Aristotle

Opposites destroy
each other, and hence accidentally, by their destruction, whatsoever
is attributed to them is destroyed. But no opposite in a real substance
is accidentally destroyed, because real substance is not predicated
of any subject. Hence a thing which has no opposite, or which is situated
where it has no opposite, cannot be destroyed.


Read full article here:

http://classics.mit.edu/Aristotle/longev_short.1b.txt


Az-Zaahir (The Manifest)

The One that nothing is above Him and nothing is underneath Him, hence He exists without a place. He, The Exalted, His Existence is obvious by proofs and He is clear from the delusions of attributes of bodies.

And there is none like unto Him. (Quran,, 112)


Hence if something exists which has absolutely no opposition, then
Such thing cannot be destroyed and logically a thing which cannot be destroyed
Must have always existed.

We know universe exist and it also has opposition which is time
And scientist tells us the one day universe will be destroyed
Hence anything that has beginning will end and was created

And only an entity that has attributes which Allah has, is capable of creating universe
Now that we know the definition of Allah

You must acknowledge he is the creator and sustainer of the universe.

Physicists describe grim end of the world

The good news is that the end is not near. The bad news is that when it does come, it's not going to be pretty.


stars will begin to die off as they burn up their nuclear fuel and the firmament as we know it ceases to shine.

"If you wait long enough," Adams says, "all of the stars in the universe will eventually run out of fuel and burn out."


http://www.cnn.com/TECH/9701/15/end.universe/




when the heavens cleave asunder; and when the stars disappear and when the seas commingled; and when the graves be over-turned; Then shall every soul know what it hath sent forth and left behind.” (82:1-5). In Suras Al-e-Imran, The Cattle,

[Trumble]

so from where this starting point came about?

either it was created by some one or it came out of nothing.

but according physics

In physics, the word nothing is not used in any technical sense. A region of space is called a vacuum if it does not contain any matter. But it can contain physical fields. In fact, it is practically impossible to construct a region of space which contains no matter or fields, since gravity cannot be blocked and all objects at a non-zero temperature radiate electromagnetically. However, supposing such a region existed, it would still not be "nothing", since it has properties and a measurable existence as part of the quantum-mechanical vacuum.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nothing

since there is no such thing as nothing


now the other possibility left is, universe was created by someone

I see. So your argument is;

1. A necessary condition of a word referring to anything that actually exists is that that word must have a technical sense in physics.

2. The word 'nothing' is not used in any technical sense in physics.

3. 'Nothing' therefore does not exist.

4. Hence the universe cannot have come from nothing.


OK, then. Try this one.

5. The word 'God' is not used in any technical sense in physics.

6. God therefore does not exist.

7. Hence the universe cannot have been created by 'God'.


Which leads us to (I'll make the assumption "someone" equals 'God' in this context);

8. "either it (the universe) was created by (God) or it came out of nothing".

9. But neither nothing or God exist.

10. Hence the universe cannot exist.

11. So who the heck is typing this?

Am I missing something? Other than the usual hopeless mess when people try to mix religion with science, that is?:)

[ajazz]

I see. So your argument is;

1. The word 'nothing' is not used in any technical sense in physics.

2. 'Nothing' therefore does not exist.

3. Hence the universe cannot have come from nothing.


OK, then. Try this one.

4. The word 'God' is not used in any technical sense in physics.

5. God therefore does not exist.

6. Hence the universe cannot have been created by 'God'.


Which leads us to (I'll make the assumption "someone" equals 'God' in this context);

7. "either it (the universe) was created by (God) or it came out of nothing".

8. But neither nothing or God exist.

9. Hence the universe cannot exist.

10. So who the heck is typing this?

Am I missing something?

Hmmm....really confused Buddhist

Go back and read the post carefully again
May be you will get enlightenment from the triple gem.



By the way can you prove absolute nothing can exist?

Just give it a try!

The problem with you people is that as soon the word god is said your neurons get short-circuited your logic goes in a tailspin and rationality goes for vacation

There is a simple and logical explanation

Since universe had a beginning, what was there before the beginning?



Nothing cannot exist hence there was something?

And this something has to be out side the physical laws including time
This something had to have always existed


And from this something came out beginning of the universe

This something is god and mind you not just any god

This god needs to be defined so that the explanation becomes more rational and logical.

let me define god that is Allah

And you will find that Allah (swt) is the most logical entity who is capable of creating the universe


Here are the attributes of Allah (swt)


Al-'Awwal
The First, The One whose Existence is without a beginning.

Al-'Akhir
The Last, The One whose Existence is without an end.


Az-Zaahir (The Manifest)

The One that nothing is above Him and nothing is underneath Him, hence He exists without a place. He, The Exalted, His Existence is obvious by proofs and He is clear from the delusions of attributes of bodies.

Al-Khaaliq
The Creator, The One who brings everything from non-existence to existence.

Al-Qayyoom
The Self-Subsisting, The One who remains and does not end.


As-Samee^
The All-Hearing, The Hearer, The One who Hears all things that are heard by His Eternal Hearing without an ear, instrument or organ.

Al-Baseer
The All-Seeing, The One who Sees all things that are seen by His Eternal Seeing without a pupil or any other instrument.


Al-Qayyoom
The Self-Subsisting, The One who remains and does not end.

Al-Haqq
The Truth, The True, The One who truly exists.



Scientist cannot give any explanation of how the beginning came about

But Allah (swt) gives us

The Originator of the heavens and the earth. When He decrees a matter, He only says to it : "Be!" - and it is.
( Al-Baqara, Chapter #2, Verse #117)


But does not man call to mind that We created him before out of nothing?
( Maryam, Chapter #19, Verse #67)

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.


Once Allah created the beginning, with it he created the physical laws and time which started its course and is still going on till Allah (swt) wills

Using this physical laws man has arrived at a conclusion at how this particular universe was at the beginning but he cannot go beyond this beginning because the physical laws that he is using to arrive at the conclusion did not exist before the beginning of this universe
Hence scientist can never arrive at the concept of god using only the physical laws of this universe

But once you acknowledge the existence of god other questions may start popping up but all these questions can be satisfactorily answered.
Science alone can never answer all the questions

There are other issues
Like how do you decide what is right and what is wrong.

Is stealing wrong?
If yes why?
If no, why?
Which science book explains us that stealing is wrong?


If I know I cannot get caught and does not feel guilty is it ok to steal, kill, cheat?

Is sex with ones own mothers and sisters right?
If not, why?

Some people are ok with such idea, so is it ok?

Who decide what is morally right and morally wrong?


every organ,every cell in your body serves a purpose
what is the purpose of you life?
you just die and vanish?



Do you get enlightened and get all your answer if you sit under a tree and mediate?

Islam is the only religion which spells out in detail how to govern, the economic system, what is morally acceptable and unacceptable,
What is right and what is wrong.
What are the Rights and duty of individuals, husband, wife, mother father, relatives even animals

Only Allah (swt) can tell us this because he is our creator and knows everything

People who do not believe in god will have their own sets of individual rules and morals because they have no guidance all the guidance they get is from theorem and statics and observations and conclusions.

.


.(Allah knows best)

[Trumble]

Hmmm....really confused Buddhist

I'm afraid it is you who are confused... which hopefully my post pointed out. I note you chose not to answer it with anything substantive... which considering your 'logic' manages to prove God cannot exist is perhaps not surprising!

Go back and read the post carefully again

I read it carefully the first time, thank you. But I don't think you did.

By the way can you prove absolute nothing can exist?

Can you prove it can't? Regardless, I can demonstrate that it does. What you have ignored is that 'nothing' is contextual. Imagine you ask a small boy what his best friend gave him for his birthday. Terribly upset, he replies "nothing". You know what he means, the absence of the contextual something, i.e. a present. He knows what he means, and to him the 'nothing' is very tangible indeed. It exists.

Your context for 'nothing' was as a technical term used (or not used, in this case) in the science of physics or, being charitable, "the laws of physics". However, you need to justify that context. You will find that impossible for two reasons. The first is that you are assuming that those same laws of physics (determining the nature of that matter and those fields)were in place before the universe was created as, according to you, 'nothing' could only exist in their absence. There is, however, no reason to believe they did exist and it is far more likely they came into existence when the universe did... indeed it's a favourite of the intelligent design crowd to point out that had the universe kicked off with an even slightly different set of laws, values for constants etc., then planets and life could never have formed. Putting a pre-universe 'nothing' in the context of the existing universe is therefore absurd; none of those objects, fields, matter or quantum mechanics existed.

The second reason is that if you assess 'nothing' in that particular context, to be consistent you have to assess God in that context as well. That you fail to do, indeed you define God in terms of one huge get-out-of-jail-free card with regard to the laws of the universe. The argument then collapses as if you can define God in those terms you can define anything else in those terms as well. For example, the universe itself might have a particular 'special power and attribute'.. that of being able to spontaneously pop into existence. Is that any less likely than the existence of a God that somehow has always existed? Nope.

The problem with you people is that as soon the word god is said your neurons get short-circuited your logic goes in a tailspin and rationality goes for vacation

Grow up, and try addressing the argument.

There is a simple and logical explanation

Since universe had a beginning, what was there before the beginning?

Nothing cannot exist hence there was something?

And this something has to be out side the physical laws including time
This something had to have always existed

We have already shown that 'nothing' can exist... your argument showing it cannot is feeble. Logical games aside, however, a cosmologist would not even agree with the choice you present as fact; most believe that the universe came not from 'nothing' but from a singularity (go look it up). We know very little about singularity, and may never be able to know more about it as at the critical point it disappears of the radar of general relativity . What we particularly don't know is whether time, causation and 'beginning' have any meaning, hence whether a 'something' was needed or what properties it needed to have.. or whether even the idea of anything having properties makes any sense at all.

And you will find that Allah (swt) is the most logical entity who is capable of creating the universe

Of course, but you are totally begging the question. If the universe was created, God is the only creator that fits the bill.. particularly as that creator is assumed to be God by definition! But you have not shown it was 'created'.

Science alone can never answer all the questions

We can agree on that, anyway. It is you clinging to 'science' for support, not me.

There are other issues
Like how do you decide what is right and what is wrong.

Is stealing wrong?
If yes why?
If no, why?
Which science book explains us that stealing is wrong?


If I know I cannot get caught and does not feel guilty is it ok to steal, kill, cheat?

Is sex with ones own mothers and sisters right?
If not, why?

Some people are ok with such idea, so is it ok?

Who decide what is morally right and morally wrong?

I could put up a complex psychological and sociological argument to answer that, but let's keep it simple and stick to religion. All of those things are morally wrong according to Buddhism, which can explain in very simple terms why they are wrong - they result in suffering, and the objective of Buddhism is to eliminate suffering. Buddhism does not accept the existence of a creator, omnipotent God. QED.

every organ,every cell in your body serves a purpose
what is the purpose of you life?
you just die and vanish?

Who knows? Why does life have to have a purpose? Even if it does, the most common scientific thought is that it is to perpetuate the gene pool.. and most people help do that before they die. Purpose achieved.

Islam is the only religion which spells out in detail how to govern, the economic system, what is morally acceptable and unacceptable,
What is right and what is wrong.
What are the Rights and duty of individuals, husband, wife, mother father, relatives even animals

One reason I view its supposed divine origin with such suspicion. It simply is not necessary to 'spell out' those details; we are quite capable of figuring them out for ourselves. Supposed 'divine authority' is, however, a great way of getting people to do what you think they should do.

People who do not believe in god will have their own sets of individual rules and morals because they have no guidance all the guidance they get is from theorem and statics and observations and conclusions.

Simply untrue. Rules and morals arise because they emphasise the conduct that best allows societies (from basic family groups, to early agricultural communities, to the huge cities of today), and the individuals within them, to best survive and then thrive. Take 'stealing'. Overall, everyone is better off if nobody steals from others as stealing would obviously lead to violence, blooshed, death, insecurity, lack of motivation to work knowing others would steal the result of your labours, etc, etc. Hence not stealing becomes 'moral' and is enforced in both informal and formal 'rules'. It doesn't take divine intervention to come to that realisation, just common sense and practical experience.

[Isambard]

Since universe had a beginning, what was there before the beginning?

Correction, the current incarnation of this universe. As far as Im aware, matter cannot be created or destroyed.

But for the sake of arguement, Ill ignore my own correction.

The answer is thus "I dont know"

Nothing cannot exist hence there was something?

Nothing is lack of existance. Thus the two or mutually exclusive

And this something has to be out side the physical laws including time

Umm why?

This something had to have always existed

How do you know?

And from this something came out beginning of the universe

How do you know what transpired before a universe existed?

This something is god and mind you not just any god

Why is it a god, and why not 'just any god'?

This god needs to be defined so that the explanation becomes more rational and logical.

It certainly does as it would appear anything you dont know = god. And God-of-the-gaps is very unconvincing


Al-'Awwal
The First, The One whose Existence is without a beginning.

Al-'Akhir
The Last, The One whose Existence is without an end.

You just violated your own arguement that everything comes from something


Az-Zaahir (The Manifest)

The One that nothing is above Him and nothing is underneath Him, hence He exists without a place. He, The Exalted, His Existence is obvious by proofs and He is clear from the delusions of attributes of bodies.

If we followed your own arguement, then God would need a meta-god to create him. This quote damages your claims.

Al-Khaaliq
The Creator, The One who brings everything from non-existence to existence.

How are you sure it isnt Vishnu?

Al-Qayyoom
The Self-Subsisting, The One who remains and does not end.

Scientist cannot give any explanation of how the beginning came about

They couldnt tell us where lightning came from either. Guess that means we shouldve just gave up and praised Zeus no?

But Allah (swt) gives us <snipped for brevity>

So because a book tells me it knows (yet offers no evidence), I should believe it eh?

Once Allah created the beginning, with it he created the physical laws and time which started its course and is still going on till Allah (swt) wills

I think you mean until mathmatics allow.

Using this physical laws man has arrived at a conclusion at how this particular universe was at the beginning but he cannot go beyond this beginning because the physical laws that he is using to arrive at the conclusion did not exist before the beginning of this universe
Hence scientist can never arrive at the concept of god using only the physical laws of this universe

A scientist cant arrive to God thru logic or deductive reasoning either.

But once you acknowledge the existence of god other questions may start popping up but all these questions can be satisfactorily answered.
Science alone can never answer all the questions

Having an answer doesnt make your answer correct

There are other issues
Like how do you decide what is right and what is wrong.

Is stealing wrong?

Fuzzy abstracts are worthless, define stealing

Which science book explains us that stealing is wrong?

Any book dealing with social evolution

If I know I cannot get caught and does not feel guilty is it ok to steal, kill, cheat?

Cultural conditioning. Or do you believe atheists commit higher crime rates than theists?

Is sex with ones own mothers and sisters right?
If not, why?

Look up inbreeding

Who decide what is morally right and morally wrong?

Whatever is agreed upon by the majority or community.

every organ,every cell in your body serves a purpose

What about cancer cells?

what is the purpose of you life?

There is no objective purpose
you just die and vanish?

yes

Do you get enlightened and get all your answer if you sit under a tree and mediate?
No. But thinking about something is better than blindly following a book just because it tells you it itself is correct.

Islam is the only religion which spells out in detail how to govern, the economic system, what is morally acceptable and unacceptable,
What is right and what is wrong.
What are the Rights and duty of individuals, husband, wife, mother father, relatives even animals

And it does those in a bizarre way or in an obselete manner. Check out my thread on Shariah and economics.

Only Allah (swt) can tell us this because he is our creator and knows everything
Then he isnt a very smart creator God is he to give you a crappy economic system is he?

People who do not believe in god will have their own sets of individual rules and morals because they have no guidance all the guidance they get is from theorem and statics and observations and conclusions.

Yes. Logic and reasoning are your friends.

Care to try again without resorting to logical fallacies?

[boriqee]

Hey guys like the title says, I always try to debate with my teacher after class on things in philosophy but when we inevitably get into religion, because I cite that as my reasons for not doing things like killing and giving stuff to the poor, he starts off by saying that the Quran has errors like the setting the sun in a certain place, claiming taht Allah says taht all christians are my enemy, saying that the Quran claims that the earth was created before the stars and that the universe was made in six stages and that it was smoke in the begiinning then saying taht these are inaccuracies. He always finishes off by saying that we don't need God to tell us what is right and what isnt ( I tried to tell him taht this was moral relativism, taht those "inaccuracies"" he claims to point out are not what the Quran says) and today told me that in one part of the Quran God says that he would smite anyone who says he doesnt exist and started saying to the sky "God does not exist" then saying that nothing happened. By the way for you christians he claimed Jesus ( he is an ex- christian) was schizophrenic.


I know I am rambling alittle but I know in my heart that he is wrong but I really need help in responding to this stuff, especially the "we dont need God" part

Thanks brothers and sisters!

why bother. sincerity is the key of open-mindedness.because both areh tep rerequisites of adhering to the truth when it coms to them. it seems both are absent fro him, so why bother. as one of out scholars said when questioned 'aren't you going to respond" he said "if i had to throw rocks to every howling dog in yemen, there would be no rocks left in yemen"

[starrryeyes]

im afraid I do not have the knowledge to help you in a debate with this proffessor but I think that you could discuss the ethics in his approach. It is not very proffessional for a teacher to be refuting and ridiculing your faith. Certainly he has the right to question but if you do not have the knowledge to counter his enquiries he should leave you be. I am not a muslim but regardless of the inaccuracies he mentioned there are inaccuracies in every scripture. The reason they are followed is because they offer moral guidelines perhaps ask him why he would follow Kant, Mill or Bentham at the end of the day it is probaly because the moral guidelines resonate with him as Islam probably resonates with you. You have every right to prove there is no God as much as prove there is one

[czgibson]

Greetings,

im afraid I do not have the knowledge to help you in a debate with this proffessor but I think that you could discuss the ethics in his approach. It is not very proffessional for a teacher to be refuting and ridiculing your faith. Certainly he has the right to question but if you do not have the knowledge to counter his enquiries he should leave you be.

Like AntiKarateKid says in the original post:

I always try to debate with my teacher after class on things in philosophy

It's not the teacher who has started it. If it was, and he was just ridiculing people's religion with no provocation, then it might well be right to question the ethics of his approach, but if you ask a philosophy professor for his opinion on something, there's no justification for getting upset when he gives it to you.

Peace