× Register Login What's New! Contact us
Proof of God
Page 14 of 14 First ... 4121314
Results 261 to 269 of 269

Thread: Proof of God

  1. #1
    Array Protected_Diamond's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Dunya
    Religion
    Unspecified
    Posts
    1,569
    Threads
    172
    Reputation
    2972
    Rep Power
    84

    Proof of God (OP)


    The Islamic belief and subsequently the Islamic way of life are premised on an intellectual basis. Therefore, Islam is neither a religion nor a set of values and rituals that arise from blind faith. Rather, Islam is an intellectual belief from which emanates a comprehensive socio-political and economic system. To understand the unique system that Islam offers necessitates the explanation of the Islamic belief i.e. the belief in God, Allah (swt) and the word of God, and the Qur'aan.


    God: The arguments



    Today if you mention God then you'll probably get a negative reaction. It has become the trend to get on with life and not bother to ask the question whether there is a God or not. In fact this question was not even asked much in the days of old, when you simply had to believe in God or be persecuted. Therefore, it is not surprising that people find it easy to believe that the existence of God is a myth, simply because they have never thought deeply about the idea.



    It is because people continued to believe in God blindly i.e. blind faith, rather than use ration, that science and its attempted explanations of universal phenomena was hailed as the 'new (false) God'.



    But let us deal with both arguments - for and against the existence of a Creator - from a rational perspective. A common argument by many Christians and some other religions is that God is the God of many abstract attributes such as Love, Peace, Mercy which indeed are admirable qualities for human beings to aspire to. This characterisation of God is based upon an implicit assumption that God can be likened to human beings thus the attempt to understand God in a human framework. Accordingly, we find in some societies, such as early Greek, that individual gods were used to represent single human attributes, and in other cultures gods have the quality to reproduce.



    The question this begs is whether the essence of an unlimited Creator is understandable through a limited, imperfect human mind when God lies beyond our perception? Rational thought would dictate that if God exists then knowledge of God's attributes can only come from itself. Therefore, famine in the world leading to the deaths of millions would not deny the Justice, Mercy or Love of a supposed God, but would only if one attributed the human essence to God. Similarly, if one understands God as the Governor and Controller of the universe then the notion of God dying is nonsensical. This is the failure of Christianity and indeed all religions, as their belief becomes a matter of blind faith. Consequently, they allow themselves to be plagued by rational contradictions, which inevitably lead to intellectual rise to disprove the existence of God. Are these arguments valid? To understand the validity of any proposed argument the premise should be examined. Science is concerned with the methodology of processes in the physical world, i.e. it deals with 'how' and not 'why'. Thus scientists are not concerned with why gravity exists but how gravity influences bodies to shape this universe.



    The scientific method is limited in that it can only deduce rules by repeated observation of physical phenomena. Thus the question of the existence of God does not and cannot fall into the realm of scientific thought because science deals with the mechanisms of events and phenomena within the universe i.e. the tangible and not the intangible. To test the hypothesis to apply scientific proof for or against God, one would effectively have said that God is "testable'. Therefore, logically one would conclude God to be within the universe since God must be physically tangible in order to test. Since God is tangible and contained within the universe, God must be limited and therefore cannot be God.



    Thus scientists are falling into the same trap as the blind followers of religion that is they are implicitly defining a role to God as the 'one who makes things work'. Since scientists have explained how things work the question of God does not arise. Those who argue from this angle have falsely assumed an attribute/essence of God in the same way Christians say God has a son or is Love.



    To prove or disprove the existence of a Creator we need to go beyond the limitations of the scientific method and proceed rationally for it is only the rational thought which has the ability to deal with an issue like this.



    The rational thought



    Man progresses as a result of his thoughts concerning everything around him. Thoughts are what distinguish man from other animals and without them man would be lost. Thought occurs when man receives information about something through his five senses. He then distinguishes it by linking it to previous information and experiences he has encountered. For example, a person comes across a plant. He knows that it is a plant due to previous knowledge of what a plant looks like. But only when he links it with previous information on the various types of plants will he be able to tell if it is edible or poisonous.



    Hence, just receiving information is not enough. It will remain only as information that we cannot appreciate or understand. However the process of linking it to previous information and distinguishing the information is the process of thought and is the key of understanding and progressing.



    Consequently, when man becomes convinced of the correctness of a thought, it becomes a concept, which he carries, thus, affecting his behaviour. For example, if we carry a concept of dislike of someone, it will affect our behaviour towards that person. So we see that carrying false ideas has serious implications for a person and if such false ideas are carried widely it has serious implications for society.



    Thus the idea and question of God has serious implications because the answer obtained becomes the very basis by which we understand the creation and purpose of man, life and the universe. Therefore, the method used should not merely be the rational thought but be comprehensive and agree with reality. Anything hypothetical or emotional should be rejected since their basis disagrees with ration and reality.



    The rational proof



    When we look around at everything we can sense one factor is shared by these things, they are all limited. By limited we mean that they have restrictions, a starting point and an ending point, and they all have definable attributes, i.e. they are finite.



    Man is born and he dies. There is no one alive who will not die. During his life span, he will grow to a certain shape, height and volume. The universe is defined as all the celestial bodies and planets. All these objects have a certain mass, shape, volume and so on. The life span of a star may be very long, but a point in time will come when it will cease to exist.



    The universe is large, but is still a 'finite' space. No scientist could ever prove using hard facts that the universe has no bounds. In fact when they say the universe arose from a Big Bang and is expanding they inherently admit it is finite in size, otherwise it could not expand! There is nothing in reality, which is unlimited. No matter how hard we try, man is unable to find anything unlimited around him. All he can perceive is the finite and limited.



    A further attribute of everything around us is that they are all needy and dependent in order to continue existing. They are not self-sustaining or independent. Man has needs. He has to satisfy in order to survive. He has organic needs. Man must eat and drink if he is to survive. If he does not he will die. We see need and dependency in plants and animals. They depend on other parts of the food chain for their existence. The water cycle is dependent on the sun, which is dependent on the laws of the galaxies and of burning mass, and so on... Nothing man can perceive is self-subsistent. So things exist, but do not have the power of existence. They cannot control when they die or when other bodies die.



    There is one fact that emerges from all this. If something is limited and finite, and does not have the power to be self-subsistent then it must have been created. Applying this to everything we see will bring us to a conclusion. If everything in the universe is created because it has not the power of being in existence on its own, and is finite and limited, then there must be a Creator. This Creator by contrast has to be unlimited and not needy and dependent on anything to bring it into, or sustain its existence.



    The universe; the sum of finite and dependent objects is finite and dependent - but dependent on what? It is dependent on something to start and sustain life; and something to plan and develop life.



    The only rational and intellectual solution to the question of creation is that there is a Creator, which has accounted for all that we see and perceive. Ration tells us that nothing can be created without a creator. Ultimately there must be a Creator who is unlimited in every aspect.



    Some scientists challenge this with a theory that everything depends on something for existence, which in turn depends upon something for existence, and so on ad infinitum. This theory is irrational, as it does not explain how anything came into existence in the first place. It uses an idea of ' Infinity’, which we know does not exist in reality. It does not, or even make an attempt, to explain-the very first step in the sequence. It is illogical and incomplete in its theory, and far from being scientific. If at its basis the theory is weak, how is it possible to trust the proceeding theoretical argument for the creation of the universe?



    Conclusion




    Hence, looking at any planet in the universe, contemplating on any phase of life, or comprehending any aspect of man provides a conclusive evidence for the existence of a Creator, what Muslims call Allah (swt).



    This intellectual proof of the existence of Allah (swt) is an understanding open for everyone and obligatory for all Muslims to be convinced of. Each person must explore to the limit of his understanding. Blind belief has no place in Islam. Believing through instinctive emotions is unreliable and dangerous as emotions can change and add error to ones belief and actions. And if the basis of the belief is irrational and weak, how can a system of life be built upon it?
    Proof of God

    “Whoever puts his trust in Allah, sufficient is Allah for him.”

  2. #261
    Woodrow's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Grant County, Minnesota
    Gender
    Male
    Religion
    Islam
    Posts
    17,222
    Threads
    244
    Reputation
    163070
    Rep Power
    174
    Likes (Given)
    177
    Likes (Received)
    690

    Re: Proof of God

    Report bad ads?

    Quote Originally Posted by Isambard View Post
    It would seem you lived an interesting life Woodrow.
    That is an understatement. Hopefully by the time you reach my age there will be many wonderful memories you will cherish and may you achieve them without needing to pay the price I paid for some of mine.

    In response to the thread. I just want to address the statement that all of existance is proof of Gods existance. I think ppl are simply attributing it based on ignorance as to what a "godless universe" would look like.
    to be honest I agree with you. I can not even begin to envision what a godless universe would be as I see that as an impossibility.

    To give an example why this is silly; "All of existance is proof that Mars is red".
    I'm too brain dead to catch what your intent is, for that.

    In regards to weak/strong atheist, Id say alot of atheists are actually both. Even agnostics, deists and even most theists are the majority of the time strong atheists.
    I tend to think that is more accurate if worded: "Even some agnostics, deists and even some theists may some times have strong atheistic thoughts."

    This is because the deities of almost all formal religions can be tested for at least indirectly.
    a test can only test what the test is designed to test. I person in need of designing a test to prove the existance of God(swt) has already flawed the test by an inherent desire to determine God(swt) does not exist.

    This can be done either thru science, logic, or just believing your faith to be superior.
    I have no connotation of a superior faith. Faith either is or it is not. It may differ in strength and degree of belief but it is still faith that God(swt) exists.

    Im only a weak atheist when it comes to the deist God. He left as an undefined abstract which I then have no way to prove/disprove so it would be dishonest of me to say it doesnt exist.
    Only you know that.
    Proof of God




  3. Report bad ads?
  4. #262
    Mikayeel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Hatfield, England
    Gender
    Male
    Religion
    Islam
    Posts
    1,993
    Threads
    90
    Reputation
    20990
    Rep Power
    77
    Likes (Given)
    119
    Likes (Received)
    48

    Re: Proof of God

    the actuall post are these the words of hassanain rajabali? because thats the sort of style he uses
    salam
    Proof of God


  5. #263
    Muezzin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Gender
    Male
    Religion
    Islam
    Posts
    10,764
    Threads
    180
    Reputation
    67506
    Rep Power
    124
    Likes (Given)
    575
    Likes (Received)
    820

    Re: Proof of God

    Quote Originally Posted by Omari View Post
    Isn't the proof of the authencity of the Quran sufficient enough to prove that it's god's word and by extention prove the existAnce of god? [existence]
    Assuming everybody else believes you, it would be.

    But things cease to be 'proof' when the person you're trying to convince doesn't believe it, if you see the kind of semantic game I'm playing.

    Also, note to Internet people: It's 'existence'. With an 'e'. 'Persistence'. 'Pestilence'. 'Recompense'. Um... 'past tense'. Yeah.

  6. #264
    Omari's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    In the land of the wise
    Gender
    Male
    Religion
    Islam
    Posts
    251
    Threads
    6
    Reputation
    802
    Rep Power
    66
    Likes (Given)
    0
    Likes (Received)
    0

    Re: Proof of God

    lol. Yes I see what you're pointing at, but its still [in my opinion] a muslims duty, to debate, argue and prove the existence of god thorough the Quran. Wether they believe it or not didn't stop our beloved prophet, did it?

    But yeah I definatly get your point, and it's the one important challenge we all face today.

    peace be with you brother.
    Omari
    Proof of God


  7. Report bad ads?
  8. #265
    Muezzin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Gender
    Male
    Religion
    Islam
    Posts
    10,764
    Threads
    180
    Reputation
    67506
    Rep Power
    124
    Likes (Given)
    575
    Likes (Received)
    820

    Re: Proof of God

    Obviously, we all have to press on. We just shouldn't get too depressed when people don't believe us. He who Allah guides, none can misguide him; He who Allah misguides, none can guide him.

  9. #266
    Omari's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    In the land of the wise
    Gender
    Male
    Religion
    Islam
    Posts
    251
    Threads
    6
    Reputation
    802
    Rep Power
    66
    Likes (Given)
    0
    Likes (Received)
    0

    Re: Proof of God

    Yes, those who get emotional don't make the best debaters.
    Proof of God


  10. #267
    Whatsthepoint's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Religion
    Unspecified
    Posts
    3,710
    Threads
    19
    Reputation
    12661
    Rep Power
    0
    Likes (Given)
    0
    Likes (Received)
    2

    Re: Proof of God

    Quote Originally Posted by Omari View Post
    Isn't the proof of the authencity of the Quran sufficient enough to prove that it's god's word and by extention prove the existAnce of god? [existence]
    Authenticity proves nothing but authenticity.

  11. #268
    Isambard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Canada
    Religion
    Unspecified
    Posts
    764
    Threads
    16
    Reputation
    1547
    Rep Power
    0
    Likes (Given)
    0
    Likes (Received)
    0

    Re: Proof of God

    Quote Originally Posted by Woodrow View Post
    I'm too brain dead to catch what your intent is, for that.

    We dont know what a Universe with a green Mars would look like. Who knows? If Mars stopped being Red existence may end!. Sure it may be speculation and most indicators point to that beinghighly unlikely, but there is still that margin of uncertainty.

    Same goes with God governing the universe. It seems to do fine on its own, but hey, maybe God is responsible the same way Mars being red is responsible. In both cases we cant test for it.

    Just an example of false attribution.


    I tend to think that is more accurate if worded: "Even some agnostics, deists and even some theists may some times have strong atheistic thoughts."



    a test can only test what the test is designed to test. I person in need of designing a test to prove the existance of God(swt) has already flawed the test by an inherent desire to determine God(swt) does not exist.

    Well the concept of God is so broad it can mean anything you want. I personally feel that "God" is the ultimate abtract because it incorporates other vague concepts into the definition (love, merciful, wisdom etc etc.)

    Defined though it gets a little easier. There is still that vagueness, but if you see a contradiction in what is observed in the physical world and what is proclaimed by X deity, then either the deity is lying or god is a human construct.

    For. In Homeric epics, Zeus is responsible for lightning and he does it when he's mad. (Greek gods are very vengeful) There has been no formal test for Zeus, but our testing in regards to weather phenomena is pretty conclusive that lightning and thunder is a natural event and not pre-planned.

    So either Zeus has gotten lazy over the yrs/ he's hiding, or he doesnt exist.

    This is what I mean for testing indirectly.

    Of course the more inconsistancies/contradictions you find the more likely X deity doesnt exist.


    I have no connotation of a superior faith. Faith either is or it is not. It may differ in strength and degree of belief but it is still faith that God(swt) exists.

    That wasnt meant for anyone in particular. Just something Ive noticed among more "enthusiastic" believers. Believing your god is The God = true faith requiering stregnth. Other ppls beliefs in their gods = self-deception in order to serve their evil ends. (Or so the tv bible thumpers claim)
    Muezzin. You're gonna hate my spelling/grammar alot more pretty soon. Feeling inspired by A Clockwork Orange, I'm trying to make nadsat my native tongue :P

  12. #269
    Muezzin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Gender
    Male
    Religion
    Islam
    Posts
    10,764
    Threads
    180
    Reputation
    67506
    Rep Power
    124
    Likes (Given)
    575
    Likes (Received)
    820

    Re: Proof of God

    Quote Originally Posted by Isambard View Post
    Muezzin. You're gonna hate my spelling/grammar alot more pretty soon. Feeling inspired by A Clockwork Orange, I'm trying to make nadsat my native tongue :P
    Just make sure you don't make rape and ultraviolence your favourite pastimes.

    And as to the topic, I still don't think God's existence can be proved as such. Such a concept requires faith, which is distinct from logic.

    Just something Ive noticed among more "enthusiastic" believers. Believing your god is The God = true faith requiering stregnth. Other ppls beliefs in their gods = self-deception in order to serve their evil ends. (Or so the tv bible thumpers claim)
    Funny how certain 'enthusiastic' athiests are guilty of the very same. Just substitute 'God' for '(dis)belief system' and you're there.

    Point being, it's not nice when religious people have this smarmy, snotty attitude to other people's dearly held beliefs, and it's not nice when athiests display the same. The people on the receiving end may be insulted or offended, but they will not be convinced, thus making such tactic an exercise in self-gratification. And a rather ugly one at that.

  13. Hide
Page 14 of 14 First ... 4121314
Hey there! Proof of God Looks like you're enjoying the discussion, but you're not signed up for an account.

When you create an account, we remember exactly what you've read, so you always come right back where you left off. You also get notifications, here and via email, whenever new posts are made. And you can like posts and share your thoughts. Proof of God
Sign Up

Similar Threads

  1. proof of god?
    By sugaray21 in forum Clarifications about Islam
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: 09-08-2014, 02:20 AM
  2. I need proof
    By AnonymousPoster in forum Advice & Support
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 06-11-2009, 09:56 AM
  3. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 08-04-2008, 09:42 PM
  4. What is the Proof ??
    By asadxyz in forum Clarifications about Islam
    Replies: 67
    Last Post: 07-20-2007, 05:03 PM
  5. No proof...?
    By Al-Zaara in forum Miscellaneous
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 08-19-2006, 09:25 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
create