proof of god?

What does everyone think of this? I'd particularly like to hear from atheists who are 1000% convinced that there can't possibly be a god. Sorry it's so long, take your time!! (I did not write this).
WHY PSEUDO-SCIENCE FAILS TO EXPLAIN GOD "PROFESSING TO BE WISE, THEYBECOME FOOLS..."
(A DIALOGUE BETWEEN A PROFESSOR & A MUSLIM STUDENT)

The following scenario takes place at an educational institute:
"Let me explain the problem science has with God..." The atheistprofessor of philosophy pauses before his class and then asks one of his newstudents to stand. "You're a Muslim, aren't you, son?"
"Yes, sir."
"So, you believe in God?"
"Absolutely!"
"Is God good?"
"Sure! God's good!"
"Is God all-powerful? Can God do anything?"
"Yes."

The professor grins knowingly and considers for a moment.

"Here's one for you: Let's say there's a sick person over here and you cancure him. You can do it. Would you help him? Would you try?"
"Yes, sir. I would."
"So, you're good...!"
"I wouldn't say that."
"Why not say that? You would help a sick and maimed person if you could...In fact, most of us would if we could... God doesn't."

[No answer.]

"He doesn't, does he? My brother was a Muslim who died of cancer, eventhough he prayed to God to heal him. How is this God good? Hmm? Can you answerthat one?"

[No answer.]

The elderly man is sympathetic.
"No, you can't, can you?"

He takes a sip of water from a glass on his desk to give the student time torelax. In philosophy, you have to go easy with the new ones.

"Let's start again, young fella. Is God good?"
"Er... Yes."
"Is Satan good?"
"No."
"Where does Satan come from?"
The student falters.
"From... God..."
"That's right. God made Satan, didn't He?"

The elderly man runs his fingers through his thinning hair and turns to thesmirking student audience.

"I think we're going to have a lot of fun this semester, ladies andgentlemen."
He turns back to the Muslim. "Tell me, son. Is there evil in thisworld?"
"Yes, sir."
"Evil's everywhere, isn't it? Did God make everything?"
"Yes."
"Who created evil?"

[No answer.]

"Is there sickness in this world? Immorality? Hatred? Ugliness? All theterrible things - do they exist in this world?"
The student squirms on his feet. "Yes."
"Who created them?"

[No answer.]

The professor suddenly shouts at the student. "WHO CREATED THEM? TELL ME.PLEASE!" The professor closes in for the kill and climbs into the Muslim'sface. He speaks in a small, deadly voice, "God created all evil, didn'tHe, son?"

[No answer.]

The student tries to hold the professor's steady, experienced gaze, but fails.
Suddenly the lecturer breaks away to pace the front of the classroom like anageing, confident panther. The class is mesmerised. "Tell me..." hecontinues, "How is it that this God is good if He created all the evilthroughout all time?" The professor swishes his arms around to encompassthe wickedness of the world. "All the hatred, the brutality, the pain, allthe torture, all the needless deaths and ugliness, and all the sufferingcreated by this good God is all over the world - isn't it, young man?"

[No answer.]

"Don't you see it all over the place? Huh?" The professor pauses."Don't you?" The professor leans into the student's face again andwhispers, "Is God good?"

[No answer.]

"Do you believe in God, son?"
The student's voice betrays him, and in a cracked voice he mutters, "Yes,professor. I do."
The old man shakes his head sadly. "Science says you have five senses thatyou use to identify and observe the world around you. You have never seen God,have you?"
"No, sir. I've never seen Him."
"Then tell us if you have ever heard your God?"
"No, sir. I have not."
"Have you ever felt your God, tasted your God, or smelt your God? In fact,have you any sensory perception of your God whatsoever?"

[No answer.]

"Answer me, please."
"No, sir. I'm afraid I haven't."
"You're AFRAID... you haven't?"
"No, sir."
"Yet, you still believe in Him?"
"Yes..."
"That takes FAITH!" The professor smiles sagely at the underling."According to the rules of empirical, testable, demonstrable protocol,science says that your God doesn't exist. What do you say to that, son? Whereis your God now?"

[The student does not answer.]

"Sit down, please!"

[The Muslim sits, browbeaten into apparent defeat. However, 'the help of Allahis at hand and victory is imminent.']

Another Muslim, wearing a religious cap, having a beard and easily identifiedas a Muslim by his dress, lifts his hand up."Professor, may I address theclass?"
The professor turns and smiles. "Ah! Another Muslim in the vanguard. AFundamentalist, I see. Come, come, young man! Speak some proper wisdom to thegathering!"

The Muslim ignores the sarcasm in the tone of the professor. He looks aroundthe room, waits for the attention of the students and turns to the professor."Sir, you have made some interesting points. With your permission,sir, Iwould like to tackle each point individually. This subject has to be tackledlogically and scientifically, and not emotionally. The first point is yourbasic doctrine that God does not exist. The universe, therefore, started withthe doctrine of 'The Big Bang' and through a process of evolution, Man finallycame into existence. Is that not your belief, professor?"

"My son, it goes without saying. There is enough scientific evidence forthis. What are you getting at?"

"Let us not be hasty. Let us use logic and reason and proper scientificargument. As a preamble, I wish to point out that I use the word 'doctrine'knowingly, for the priests of pseudo-science are, in fact, merely promotingatheism as a religion. I have a question for you, professor. We have in thisworld millions upon millions of fireworks, ammunition and bombs. Have you heardof any going off spontaneously, or do you admit that, although the ingredientsmay be in existence in a container, there is required a detonating mechanism toset off the explosions? Two factors have to be present: firstly, the correctingredients in correct amounts in a suitable environment; and, secondly,somebody to set off the explosion, whether it be by means of a match stick, orthe hammer of a pistol, or some electrical spark. For example, if somebody saidthat he had a bullet in his hand and it went off on its own and killed somebodysitting nearby, would any scientist accept such a ludicrous statement?"
"Of course not. What are you trying to say?"
"Surely, then, if you want us to believe in the Big Bang, that a massiveexplosion took place on its own without anybody there to 'pull the trigger' or'light a match' or 'electrical spark' then explain to us how smaller bangs arenot taking place all over the world without any external agency? Any scientificclaim has to be reproducible for it to be accepted."

The professor's mouth opens, but no words come out.

"Also, we know that it is scientifically impossible for matter to createitself. Take this wooden desk. It did not come into existence by itself. Someexternal agency had to make it. Even the wood did not come into existence byitself. It came from a seed that was planted and nourished. The seed itselfcame from some source and could not come into existence by itself. Can youexplain to us how the original matter came into existence - matter that thepriests of pseudo-science state was ignited by the mysterious Big Bang toproduce the first living matter? Also, why are your priests not able toreproduce this phenomenon in the laboratory? Professor, you must know that anyscientific argument must be reproducible for it to have any scientificcredence."

"Son, it is naive to thing that we can do such a thing. The energy thatwas unleashed with the Big Bang was such that we do not have access to, otherwisewe would also have reproduced the same phenomenon."

"Professor, you have not told us who provided the basic ingredients, andyou are unable to tell us who it was who pushed the button or pulled thetrigger or lit the matches for the Big Bang to take place. Where did thistremendous energy, that you are speaking about, originate? Come, come,professor! Let us be scientific about it. Yes, professor, it takes a lot ofFAITH in the doctrinal teachings of the priests of pseudo-science to believe inthe Big Bang. Do you expect us to discard proper scientific principles andbelieve in all this hocus-pocus on blind faith in the face of definitivescientific principles?"

[No answer.]

"If you don't mind, professor, I will now go on to the doctrine ofevolution as promulgated by the priests of pseudo-science. You are aware thatno fossils have been shown that would directly link the descent of Man from theapes and that there is a constant search for what is termed, the 'MissingLink'?"

"Yes, but there is so much other evidence..."

"Sorry to interrupt, professor. You admit there is no direct link. Youmust also admit that there are no fossils showing definite intermediary stepsin the transition from ape to Man. And I'm sure you are also aware of thePiltdown Forgery, professor?"
"Piltdown...? Piltdown...?"
"Let me refreshen your memory, professor. Some fossils were discovered ina place called Piltdown in England. These fossil-remains showed all thefeatures that all the priests of pseudo-science and atheism were searching foras the 'Missing Link' in the chain of evolution. The whole world was led tobelieve in it, and even the sceptics were convinced - until it was found, someforty years later, that someone from the scientist-priest fraternity had 'doctored'the fossils to make them appear to be the missing link. It was a big lie, amassive forgery that your priests had forged to try and convince the world thatthe religion of atheism was true and Man had descended from the apes! If youwant more enlightenment on it you can read the works of Professor Tobias, ofSouth Africa, on the details of the forgery."

The professor's face goes an ashen white. Still no comment.

"Speaking about forgeries - professor, do you know what is plagiarism? Canyou explain to the class what is plagiarism?"

Rather hesitantly, the professor speaks, "Plagiarism is to take somebodyelse's work and pass it off as one's own."

"Correct. Thank you, professor. If you were to take the trouble of doing abit of honest and truthful research you will find that the Western nations hadplagiarised all the TRUE scientific works of the Muslims and then built on itand passed them off as their own 'discoveries', which led to modern scientificprogress. You don't have to take my word for it. Just write to the 'Centre forStudies on Science', Al-Humera, Muzzammil Manzil, Dodhpur, Aligarh, India, andthey will gladly send you all the relevant literature to prove thispoint."

By now the class is fully attentive to the Muslim student's words and theyhastily jot down the address.

"Let us come back to the doctrine of evolution which the priests ofpseudo-science have fostered on the world. The back-bone of all their doctrinesis the concept of 'natural selection'. This means that species adapted to thechanges in the environment by a change in morphology and physiology, changeswhich they then passed on to succeeding generations, enabling them to survive;while those species which did not adapt, became extinct. The classic examplegiven is that of the dinosaurs which could not compete with smaller, more agileanimals which had miraculously 'evolved', thus the bigger, more slower animalsbecame extinct, whilst the smaller animals survived. Also, during the course ofevolution what was of no use anymore, disappeared, like tails and claws, beingreplaced with tail-less species with hands which could hold, the final resultbeing Man. You do subscribe to this doctrine, don't you, professor?"

The poor professor is unsure whether to nod or not, as he is uncertain fromwhich angle the next salvo is coming!
"Come, come, professor! This is the cornerstone of the doctrine ofevolution which you priests have been brainwashing the unwary masses with. Letus challenge this pseudo-science with true science. Professor, has anyscientist ever produced any new species of life in his laboratory bycontrolling and changing the environment? Remember, science can only acceptmaterial doctrines if they are reproducible."

[No answer.]

"Of course not, even though attempts have been made, sure enough! Let usgo a step further: We know that the Jews circumcise their male offspring verysoon after birth. We also know that circumcision has been practised by them inan unbroken chain since the time of Abraham (A.S.). As a result, certainillness patterns have changed. Any male child with an inherited bleedingtendency would have died from bleeding and this disease would not have passedon to the next generation. You agree, professor?"

The professor nods eagerly, thinking that this is a point in his favour.

"So, tell us, professor, after thousands of years of circumcising all maleinfants, why are Jewish children not born without a foreskin? Even if the wholeforeskin was not missing, according to the doctrine of natural selection ofyour priests, there should be some signs of the foreskin getting smaller! Don'tyou agree, professor?"

The poor professor just stares blankly ahead, not knowing what hit him!

"Professor, do you have children?"
Somewhat relieved at the change of topic, the professor tries to muster some ofhis previous confidence. "Yes, I do. I have two boys and a girl." Theprofessor even manages to smile when he mentions his children.

"Professor, did you breast-feed them when they were infants?"
Somewhat taken aback by this obviously silly question, the professor blurtsout. "What a stupid question! Of course, I did not! My wife did thebreast-feeding."
"Professor, have your priests ever discovered any males who breast-feedinfants?"
"Again a stupid question. Only females breast- feed infants."
"Professor, without undressing you, I am certain that you have twonipples, just like all other males. Why have these not disappeared because ofredundancy? According to the doctrine of natural selection, such useless itemsas nipples in males, should have disappeared in all males thousands - if notmillions - of years ago! Professor," the Muslim student spoke gently, hedid not shout and he did not push his face into that of the professor's,"I'm sure that, based on proper scientific argument - and not onpseudo-science - you will agree that the doctrine of evolution is just a bigload of rubbish?"

The professor's face changes a number of colours and all he can do is splutterhelplessly.

The Muslim student turns to the class of students and addresses them with awisp of a smile on his lips. "In fact, one can go further and state thatwhoever believes he is descended from the apes, must be a monkey!"

It takes a few moments for the class to catch on to the pun in the Muslimstudent's statement, but the moment it hits home, they roar with laughter.

When the students recover from their laughter the Muslim student continues.Turning to the professor, he says, "There are so many holes in thedoctrine of evolution that it leaks like a sieve. However, time is running out- I have to rush to the Mosque for prayers shortly - so we will not deal withall the myths now. Let us go on to the topic of morality that you raised. But,before that, let us look at the point you may about your brother dying ofcancer. If you are upset that he died, then you are absolutely foolish. Thathuman beings, as well as all living matter, will certainly die is such anestablished fact, that it is believed in by all people, irrespective of whetherthey believe in God or not, and nobody can really object to the process ofdeath. Secondly, you cannot be so naive as to object to the process of illness- whether it being cancer or any other illness, or an accident, etc. - as aprelude to the process of death. Your objection stems from your misconceptionthat 'goodness' is to relieve suffering, and to cause suffering is being'cruel'. If this was so, then, professor, you have no choice but to agree thatthe cruellest people in the world are the medical research-scientists who useanimals for all their horrible experiments. Surely you must be aware of thethousands upon thousands of animals that are tortured in different ways andmade to suffer a million agonies to prove or disprove certain scientific andmedical claims? Are these experimenters not cruel? You're still with me,professor?"

The professor looks quite ill. The Muslim student goes across and gives himsome water to drink.

"Professor, I'm going to ask you another obvious question. You are awareof examinations - tests that are given to students in order for them to passand be promoted to the next grade?"
The professor merely nods his head.
"A student has to make certain sacrifices, and even live away from home,to attend a university or college; he has to deprive himself of all homecomforts; he is loaded with work; he has to give up his leisure time and hissleep in order to get ready for the examinations; then he is faced withhorribly difficult questions to answer in the examination and he may also begrilled in his oral examination - and he still has to pay the institution forputting him through this torturing process! - you do not consider all this tobe cruel? Is the professor a 'good' person for all the mental and physical sufferinghe is putting the student through?"

"I do not see your point. Of course, the institution and the professor aredoing the student a favour by putting him through a training process in orderfor him to qualify in his particular field. Only a very short-sighted personwould object to students having to write examinations, irrespective of thesacrifices they have to make."

The Muslim student sadly shakes his head. "Professor, it is amazing howyou can understand the need for tests and examinations when you have to setthem, but you can't see the same wisdom when God sets tests and examinationsfor His creatures. Take your brother - if he withstood the test of his illnessand he died with faith, what we term as Imaan - he will be rewarded abundantlyin Paradise for the suffering that he underwent here. So much so, that he wouldwish that he had suffered a hundred times more so that his reward would be somuch greater, a reward that no eye has seen and no mind has imagined!Unfortunately, 'only a very short-sighted person' - and an ignorant one - wouldobject to the tests placed on His creation by God, bearing in mind theeverlasting rewards awaiting those who are successful."

"Paradise? Huh! Have you seen Paradise, touched it, smelt it, tasted it,heard it? According to the rules of empirical, testable, demonstrable protocol,science says that your Paradise doesn't exist."

"We will come to that point also, God willing. Let us continue. Tell me,professor, is there such a thing as heat?"
The professor has recovered somewhat and he is feeling more confident."Yes, there's heat."
"Is there such a thing as cold?"
"Yes, there's cold, too."
"No, sir. There isn't!"
The professor just stares blankly. The student explains, "You can havelots of heat, even more heat, super-heat, mega-heat, white heat, or - at theopposite pole - a little heat, or no heat, but we can't have anything called'cold'. We can reach 458 degrees below zero, which is no heat, but we can't gofurther beyond that. There is no such thing as 'cold', otherwise we would beable to go colder than 458 degrees below zero. You see, sir, 'cold' is only aword we use to describe the absence of heat. We cannot measure cold. Heat wecan measure in thermal units because heat is energy. Cold is not the oppositeof heat but merely the absence of heat."

Silence. A pin drops somewhere in the room.

The Muslim student continues. "Is there such a thing as darkness,professor?"
"That's a dumb question, son. What is night if it isn't darkness? What areyou getting at...?"
"So, you say there is such a thing as darkness?"
"Yes..."
"You're wrong again, sir! Darkness is not an entity - it is the absence ofan entity. It is the absence of light. One can have dim light, normal light,bright light, flashing light. If one has no light constantly then one hasnothing, and this is called darkness, isn't it? That's the meaning we use todefine the word. In reality, darkness isn't. If it were, one would be able tocreate darkness in a positive way and make darkness darker and obtain it in acontainer. Can you fill a jar with darker darkness for me, professor?"
"Would you mind telling us what your point is, young man?"
"Yes, professor. The point I'm making is that your philosophical premiseis flawed, to start with, and so your conclusion must be in error. You are notscientific, but pseudo-scientific!"
The professor goes toxic. "Flawed...? How dare you...!"
The Muslim student is very cool and calm, and he speaks gently, as if to alittle child. "Sir, may I explain what I mean?"
The students in the class eagerly nod their heads. They are all ears. Theprofessor has no alternative but to consent. "Explain... oh,explain..." He waves his hand indifferently, in an admirable effort toregain control. Suddenly he is affability itself. The class is silent,expectant.

"You are working on the premise of duality," the Muslim studentexplains, "that, for example, there is life and then there's death, twodifferent entities; a good God and a bad God. You are viewing the concept ofGod as a finite entity, an entity we can measure. Sir, science cannot evenexplain what a thought is. It uses electricity and magnetism, but has neverseen them, much less understood them. To view death as the opposite of life isto be ignorant of the fact that death cannot exist as a substantive entity.Death is not the opposite of life, but merely the absence of life."
The young man holds up a newspaper he takes from one of the other student'sdesks. "Here is one of the most disgusting tabloids this country hosts,professor. Is there such a thing as immorality?"
"Of course there is. Now look..."
"Wrong again, sir. You see, immorality is merely the absence of morality.Is there such a thing as injustice? No, sir. Injustice is the absence of justice.Is there such a thing as evil?" The Muslim student pauses. "Isn'tevil the absence of good?"
The professor's face has turned an alarming colour. He is so angry that he istemporarily speechless.
The Muslim student continues. "If there is evil in this world, professor -and we all agree that there is - then God must be accomplishing some workthrough the agency of evil. What is that work that God is accomplishing? Islamtells us it is to see if each one of us will choose good over evil."
The professor bridles. "As a philosophical scientist, I don't view thismatter as having anything to do with any choice; as a realist, I absolutely donot recognise the concept of God or any other theological factor as being partof the world equation, because God is not observable."
"I would have thought that the absence of God's moral code is probably onethe most observable phenomena going," the Muslim student replies."Newspapers make billions of dollars reporting it every week. Professor,you have tried to put the blame of the evil in this world on the shoulders ofGod - in whom you don't believe - which is an obvious contradiction. However,let us analyse who is really responsible for the spread of evil - those whobelieve in God, or those who don't? A fundamental belief that a Muslim has isthat of being resurrected on the Day of Judgement and answering for his actionsin this world. For every good that he did he will be rewarded, and for everyevil that he committed he will be held responsible. Every Muslim has to believethat he/ she is responsible for his/her actions and that nobody else will bearhis/her burden on the Day of Judgement. The concept of Paradise being a rewardfor the believers and that Hell will be the abode of the disbelievers, theinfidels, is also a fundamental belief, as well as the belief that even Muslimwrongdoers will be punished for their misdeeds. Professor, these concepts havestopped countless millions of Muslims from committing wrong. We all know thatpunishment is a strong deterrent for committing crimes. Without this concept wewould not be able to run our worldly affairs: fines, penalties, jail sentencesare part and parcel of any civilised system. On the other hand we have thepriests of atheism who do not believe in these concepts when they are mentionedin relation to moral issues. To them there is no Day of Judgement, noaccountability, no reward, no punishment. The message to the masses is quiteclear, that 'if you can get away with it then you are O.K. You have nothing toworry about'. Also, seeing that they state that there is no such thing as sin -sin, in our context, means going against the Laws of God - each individual isfree to do anything he wishes and no action can be labelled as 'wrong'. Let meput it this way: the atheist priests maintain that God does not exist. If Hedoes not exist, then He can't have set down any rules of what is right and whatis wrong - thus there can't be sin, sin means going against the wishes of God.So, man is free to make up his own rules, his own code of 'morality'. Thus menget 'married' to men; women get 'married' to women; to spread AIDS and otherdiseases is O.K.; there is nothing sinful with adultery and fornication, aslong as those involved are 'consenting adults'; according to the logic of theatheists even incest would not be sinful if the parties are 'consentingadults', seeing incest is a sin based on a code of morality with its basisbeing religion, whereas the professor has categorically stated that he'absolutely does not recognise the concept of God or any other theologicalfactor as being part of the world factor'; to kill infants in their mothers'wombs is fine - it is exercising the 'rights' that the woman has; and so forth.The list of 'rules' passed by the atheist social pseudo-scientists priests isendless. The height of intellectual dishonesty is to place the blame for thespread of this immorality and filth on God! Let us be scientific about thewhole issue, professor. Take a group of people who are God-conscious - who believein Him as he should be believed in - and take a group of people who areadherents to your atheistic creed. Assess, objectively, who is spreading evil.I don't wish to labour the point, but any objective observer will immediatelysee that the group of God-conscious people who use the Laws of the Almighty astheir code of morality, are in fact, spreading goodness; whereas the those whomake up their own rules of 'relative morality' are, in fact, the one'sspreading evil throughout the world."

The Muslim student pauses for these important remarks to sink in. The eyes ofthe students in the class light up as they see these issues in a clearer light.Nobody had ever explained these important issues to them before, having beingbrought up on the diatribe spewed forth by the mass media.

"Professor, I am amazed, but not surprised, at your unscientific attitudeto morality. I am amazed that, even though you believe that Man evolved fromthe apes, he will not behave like an animal! I am amazed that, even though youdo not believe in angels, you expect Man to behave like one on his own accord,without the assistance of a Divine moral code. The reason that I'm notsurprised is that such muddled thinking is to be expected from those who areadherents of the false creed of atheism!"

There is a burst of spontaneous applause from the class.

"We have already discussed evolution, professor. Have you ever observedevolution with your own eyes, sir?"
The professor makes a sucking sound with his teeth and gives the student asilent, stony stare.
"Professor, since no one has ever observed the process of evolution atwork and cannot even prove that this process is an ongoing endeavour, are younot teaching a doctrine - a doctrine that leaks like a sieve and has less meritto it that any theological teachings? This is pseudo-science, not science, andits proponents are nothing but its ignorant priests!"
The professor goes blue in the face. "What impudence!" He huffs andpuffs and strides up and down in front of the class, finally managing to regainsome of his self control. "In the light of our philosophical discussion,I'll overlook your impudence, son. Now, have you quite finished?" Thewords come out as a hiss.
"Sir, you don't accept God's moral code to do what is righteous?"
"I believe in what is - that's science."
"Sir, with due apologies, what you believe in is not science, butpseudo-science - and your pseudo-science is also flawed!"
"PSEUDO-SCIENCE.....? FLAWED...?" The professor looks as if he isgoing to have a fit. The class is in an uproar. The Muslim student stands cooland calm, that wisp of a smile back on his face.

When the commotion subsides, he continues, "You see, professor, TRUESCIENCE is to discover the laws and designs that the Creator of the universehas put into the system of the running of the universe, from the mega to themicro, from the measurable to the immeasurable. Pseudo- science is an atheisticreligion that tries to oppose this concept by forgeries, manipulation ofstatistics, half-truths, etc. Pseudo-science postulates a mythical unnamedforce -their own, man-made, false deity - caused a Big Bang and then started aprocess of evolution that is contrary to what actually happened. The priests ofthis atheistic religion are the ones that try to justify the gibberish thatmust accompany such falsehood by means of forgeries, half-truths andmanipulation of data. Truth must win - the truth of the logical conclusionanybody with any sense can deduce, that there is one God (Allah) Who is the Creatorof the whole universe. He created the whole system whereby the whole universehas been running smoothly from time immemorial. Let us go back to the point youhad made earlier to the other student and which I said I will deal with later.I will give you an example which everyone can follow: Is there anyone in theclass who has seen air, oxygen molecules, atoms, the professor's brains?"
The class breaks out in laughter.
"Is there anyone here who has ever heard the professor's brain, felt it,smelt it or tasted it?" Nobody says anything. The Muslim student sadlyshakes his head. "It appears that no one here has had any sensoryperception of the professor's brains whatsoever. Well, according to the rulesenunciated by the professor himself, the rules of empirical, stable,demonstrable protocol of the professor's pseudo-science I HEREBY DECLARE thatthe professor has no brains!"
The professor buckles into a chair. The class again applauds spontaneously.

The student goes and ministers some water to the professor. After a while herecovers. He glares at the student. "Your insults in no way proves theexistence of God."
The Muslim student replies. "Professor, I'm really surprised. I would havethought that you would have conceded defeat. But, it seems that you are aglutton for punishment."

He pauses, looks very thoughtfully at the class and then at the professor. Witha heavy sigh he addresses the professor again. "Sir, you have parents -you have a father and a mother?"
"Another of your stupid questions. It is obvious that we all haveparents."
"Be patient, sir. Are you certain that your father is your father and thatyour mother is your mother?"
The professor goes livid. "How preposterous! OF COURSE, MY FATHER IS MYFATHER AND MY MOTHER IS MY MOTHER!" He is shouting.
The Muslim student pauses. The pause becomes lengthy. There is an eerieatmosphere suddenly as the students sit on the edge of their chairs. With aquiet well controlled voice, the Muslim student says, "Prove it tome!"
The atmosphere is electric. The professor is unable to control himself. Hisface changes to a purple hue. "HOW DARE YOU!" He is shouting evenlouder, quite beside himself. "I'VE HAD ENOUGH OF YOUR INSULTS..! GET OUTOF MY CLASS..! I'LL REPORT YOU TO THE RECTOR...!
The class sits petrified at the outburst. Is the professor heading for a fit ora stroke?
The Muslim student stands his ground, unruffled. Facing the class he lifts hishand up, reassuring them that there is nothing to worry about. He then turnshis compassionate eyes on the professor. A force appears to emanate from hiseyes, directed at the professor. The professor cannot maintain his stare. Hisgaze drops. His anger subsides. He flops back into his chair and holds his headin his hands.
After a few minutes, the Muslim student speaks, very gently. "Dearprofessor, I am not implying that your parents are not your parents. All I amtrying to point out is that neither you, nor me, nor any of us in this classcan prove that our parents are our parents or not."

Complete silence.

"The reason is that we did not witness the act of intercourse between ourparents when we were conceived. We were not present to identify whose sperm itwas that fertilised the ovum in our mother's womb. We take our parents word forit that they are our parents. We consider our parents to be honest and truthfulin the matter. We do not question them their integrity. In the same way, yourchildren will have to take your word that you are their father and that theirmother is really their mother. Is that not so, professor?"
The professor lifts up his head. He looks up at the Muslim student. One can seehis face clearing up as some understanding dawns on him. The anger is gone.Very slowly he repeats, "We take the words of our parents.. We take thewords of our parents..."
"Yes, professor. There are so many things that we have to take the word ofothers. The existence of air, of oxygen, of molecules, of atoms, and so forth.So, when it comes to matters that are metaphysical, from our real scientificresearch we know that there have been no persons existing in the world morehonest and reliable than those who are termed Messengers (Rasools). We Muslimsare prepared to stake our lives on the fact that Muhammed - peace be on him -had an absolutely flawless character. He never lied to anybody. His integritywas such that even his avowed enemies called him 'Al-Ameen' (the Truthful).Ifhe said that God (Allah) exists - and we are prepared to accept the word of ourparents that they are our parents- then, in all sincerity and honesty, we haveto accept his word for it, as we have to accept many other things - theexistence of Paradise and Hell; the existence of angels; the coming of the Dayof Judgement; accounting to God for our deeds in this world; and many otherconcepts. Besides this one point, there are many other pointers to theexistence of God (Allah).The Revelation called 'Al-Quran' is there for anybodyto study. It has certain specific challenges for anybody who has any doubts.These challenges have not been met in the fourteen hundred years of itsexistence. If one is not prepared to believe in such a Messenger - peace be onhim - then it is pure hypocrisy to accept the word of scientists, whosedoctrines keep on changing, and even to believe in the word of our parents.Judging from the number of law-suits that take place every year in our courts,where parents deny parentage of their offspring, and also taking into accountthat there are innumerable babies conceived from donor sperms of men who arestrangers, and also the fact that innumerable infants are adopted in infancy bychildless couples and brought up as their own children, statistically there isroom for a large degree of error in any person's claim that his/her parents arereally his/her biological parents."
Turning to the class the Muslim student concludes. "It is everyindividual's duty to learn more about Islam. Al-Quran is there for everybody tostudy. Enough literature also available on Islam. It is my duty only to informyou that the only Truth is Islam. There is no compulsion in religion. Clearlythe right way has become distinct from error; And he who rejects false deitiesand believes in Allah (God), has grasped a firm handhold which will neverbreak; And Allah is All-Hearing and All-Knowing. Having informed you, it isalso my duty to invite you to join the brotherhood of Muslims by embracingIslam. Allah is the Protecting Guardian of those who believe. He brings themout of darkness into the light. As for those who disbelieve, their guardiansare false deities. They bring them out of light into darkness... These areverses from Al-Quran - Words of the Almighty - which I have quoted toyou."

The Muslim student looks at his watch. "Professor and students, I thankyou for having giving me the opportunity to explain these issues to you. If youwould kindly excuse me, I have to go to the mosque for my prayers. Peace onthose who are rightly guided."





--------------------------------------------------------------------------------