Atheism

[anis_z24]

Salam
sorry,
I will look again next time.
Please forgive me.
Thank you.

 

[Love_Islam]

Aslam Alkum
in the name of allah the most gracious the most merciful

I am new to this board after seeing this thread I had to say my part inshallah

first of forth most any atheist cannot prove to me or anyone that believes that god doesn't exist. If any atheist is denial of allah swt signs then they are the blind ones and lost. ALLAH swt signs is all around us everywhere through out the universe. How can you deny god when he brought you into being when you were nothing indeed this is a great lost of anyone who denies god and his existence.

First no logical mind would anyone would believe that everything that exists in this world they exist on its own. for example cars, computers anything that exists that they came to being on its own. so simply you won't not deny that computers, or cars, or houses or any objects that exists that it doesn't have no creator or manufacturer ofcourse you would say that someone created that so why would you deny that god created you but simply agree that those objects have each manufacture or creator you simply wouldn't make sense if you come to this anology it doesn't work that way. so you see its doesn't make any sense for something to exist without having creator.
indeed for those who don't comprehend or see allah's signs they are the blind ones.

Allah swt mentions in the quran

Verily, those who disbelieve, it is the same to them whether you(o muhammad sws) warn them or do not warn them, they will not believe (2:6)

Allah has set a seal on their hearts and on their hearing, (they are closed from accepting Allah's guidance) and on their eyes there is covering. Theirs will be a great torment. (2:7)

Their likeness is as the likeness of one who kindled a fire, then, when it lighted all around him, Allah took away their light and let them in darkness. (So) they could not see. (2:17)

so my dear friends True will previal whether god exist or not you will find out and you will see through eyes when ALLah will resurrect us and judge us individually, when everything will die and GOD THE MAJESTY AND THE GREAT will remain forever.

then we will see who are the fool ones

allah swt mentions in the quran (6:30)

if you could but see when they will be held(brought and made to stand) in front of their lord! he will say: "Is not this (Resurrection and the the taking of the acounts) the truth?" They will say: "Yes, by our Lord!" He will then say: :So taste you the torment because you used not to believe."

my duty is to give message however i cannot guide anyone as allah guides the hearts of individual to islam.

so I leave to say May allah swt guide you and open your eyes and heart

waslam

 

[Love_Islam]

Aslam Alkum

here is another execellent explaination that god does exists this is lecture try to listen to it with an open mind.

please follow the link

http://www.youngmuslims.ca/media/speeches.asp?offset=20
please go down to the topic Living in an Atheistic Society by Shabir Ally

 

[HeiGou]

first of forth most any atheist cannot prove to me or anyone that believes that god doesn't exist.

It may well be true that I cannot prove to you that God doesn't exist. But consider:

Can you prove to me that He does?

Even if you could, are you sure that you could prove that yuor God is the God that you have proved existed?

Can you prove that other Gods do not exist? Do you have proof that, for instance, the Invisible Pink Unicorn does not exist?

If any atheist is denial of allah swt signs then they are the blind ones and lost. ALLAH swt signs is all around us everywhere through out the universe. How can you deny god when he brought you into being when you were nothing indeed this is a great lost of anyone who denies god and his existence.

Actually I have a pretty good idea of what brought me into being. What signs do you have in mind? The wonder of the Universe is as good a proof of the Invisible Pink Unicorn as it is for your God.

First no logical mind would anyone would believe that everything that exists in this world they exist on its own. for example cars, computers anything that exists that they came to being on its own. so simply you won't not deny that computers, or cars, or houses or any objects that exists that it doesn't have no creator or manufacturer ofcourse you would say that someone created that so why would you deny that god created you but simply agree that those objects have each manufacture or creator you simply wouldn't make sense if you come to this anology it doesn't work that way. so you see its doesn't make any sense for something to exist without having creator.

But there is a difference between objects that were built and objects that were designed. For one thing, if the Universe was designed you would think that perhaps the Designer would have done a much better job of it. But more importantly things do not exist because they came from nowhere. They were shaped and moulded by Evolution. For several billion years or so evolution has been shaping life. It is not a simple random process. If it doesn't make sense for something to exist without a Creator, why does it make sense for God to exist unless He has a Creator? In which case either 1. shouldn't we worship this bigger Creator or 2. if God can exist without a creator why can't we?

indeed for those who don't comprehend or see allah's signs they are the blind ones.

Yet us Western kafirs are awfully creative and productive for blind people. Looking at our rockets, our computers, our works of Art, our buildings, you might think that perhaps we were on to something. Whereas recently the Muslim world has produced little of importance except terror. Why is it that our blindness is being rewarded in this life and your faith is not?

my duty is to give message however i cannot guide anyone as allah guides the hearts of individual to islam.

so I leave to say May allah swt guide you and open your eyes and heart

Thank you. I genuinely mean it when I say I appreciate what you are trying to do. But your argument is just not very convincing. There is, I am sure, a good reason to believe in God. I do not think this is it. Why do you believe?

 

[Ansar Al-'Adl]

Hello HeiGou,
Since you've brought up the issue of the invisible pink unicron again, why not continue the discussion on the orbiting teapot here:
http://www.islamicboard.com/comparative-religion/15241-proof-god-4.html

I haven't gotten answers to my last post on the topic.

 

[Love_Islam]

hi

you stated,

"It may well be true that I cannot prove to you that God doesn't exist.

you cannot prove to me at all and will never will, why should i believe that god doesn't exist or be conviced when you cannot give me even one proof that he doesn't

But consider:

Can you prove to me that He does?

I have already give you many proofs effect I have given you a link above to a lecture i don't even know if you listen to it has 4 different proofs that god exists and to my surprise there is a thread here on the board that has many proofs that god exists, nothing comes from nothing but something CANNOT come from nothing this is CLEAR you simply choose to not to understand or not use your brain that god give you. there is different between a person who don't want to understand and a person who doesn't you don't want to understand you are not open minded because you believe this and don't want to hear anything else even though you don't have proof for what you believe.

I believe in god 100% why because simply of the signs all around us that he has given us, i believe and know something cannot come from nothing it doesn't make sense. the universe is perfectly planned and designed by all mighty creator even though your ingorance and blindness cannot see it doesn't mean that is not perfectly planned by almighty creator. human creations is beautiful look at your self, how you are perfectly created you think that that body created on its own so perfect like that its impossible.

you also stated,

"But there is a difference between objects that were built and objects that were designed. For one thing, if the Universe was designed you would think that perhaps the Designer would have done a much better job of it. But more importantly things do not exist because they came from nowhere. They were shaped and moulded by Evolution. For several billion years or so evolution has been shaping life. It is not a simple random process. "

why are they different and how they are different when the same anology is used here these objects that were build were designed by somebody there fore would not have existed on their own so simply we would not existed on our own which therefore conclude that we have a creator who created us.
and to answer to your last question

"If it doesn't make sense for something to exist without a Creator, why does it make sense for God to exist unless He has a Creator? In which case either 1. shouldn't we worship this bigger Creator or 2. if God can exist without a creator why can't we?"

Please listen to the lecture that I posted above, the brother explain it better than me and will answer most of our questions. He does better explaining then me on proof of god existence and has more proofs on it.


the signs is all around us but only man of understanding can see it and know it if this is doesn't convice you then you choose to not believe after all you have your own will to believe and disbelieve. But iam not going to waste my time and energy to make someone understand who will never and most of all who is in denial.

take care my friend

 

[HeiGou]

"It may well be true that I cannot prove to you that God doesn't exist.

you cannot prove to me at all and will never will, why should i believe that god doesn't exist or be conviced when you cannot give me even one proof that he doesn't

Well first of all I would not try to convince you He does not exist. But I would hope that you would think more deeply about these issues and come up with your own opinion. Why do you think He, and by that I mean your God specifically, does?

Can you prove to me that He does?

I have already give you many proofs effect I have given you a link above to a lecture i don't even know if you listen to it has 4 different proofs that god exists and to my surprise there is a thread here on the board that has many proofs that god exists, nothing comes from nothing but something CANNOT come from nothing this is CLEAR you simply choose to not to understand or not use your brain that god give you. there is different between a person who don't want to understand and a person who doesn't you don't want to understand you are not open minded because you believe this and don't want to hear anything else even though you don't have proof for what you believe.

You have given me a link to someone else who cannot prove it. That is not the same as you proving it. Why can't Something come out of Nothing? You already believe that God did, why not the rest of the Universe? It is not clear to me that I am choosing not to understand, it is simply that I do not find your arguments convincing or even persuasive.

I believe in god 100% why because simply of the signs all around us that he has given us, i believe and know something cannot come from nothing it doesn't make sense.

So where did God come from? How do you know those signs are your God's signs and not those of the Invisible Pink Unicorn (who, as we all know, created the entire Universe last Tuesday)?

the universe is perfectly planned and designed by all mighty creator even though your ingorance and blindness cannot see it doesn't mean that is not perfectly planned by almighty creator.

It does not look perfectly planned to me. Take the simple issue of vestigal organs. Evolution means that many creatures have left-over and useless organs from their past. Snakes have evolved to slither and yet some of them have useless little stubby legs. Humans have a vestigal tail. I assume you will fall back very soon into the "God knows" argument, which is fine as far as it goes, but it is incompatible with a belief in a perfectly designed universe.

human creations is beautiful look at your self, how you are perfectly created you think that that body created on its own so perfect like that its impossible.

Actually I sometimes look at myself in the morning and I have to say that the idea that I am perfectly created is not the first thought to pop into my mind! Why do you think I am? To ask a simple question - mammal semen cannot survive at the temperature of the human body. So most male animals have part of their genetalia hanging outside their bodies where it is cooler - if men are infertile they are often advised to wear looser trousers for that reason. This does not strike me as a good design - as I am sure any man who has been kicked there will agree. Perfect design?

why are they different and how they are different when the same anology is used here these objects that were build were designed by somebody there fore would not have existed on their own so simply we would not existed on our own which therefore conclude that we have a creator who created us.

Sorry I am having a little trouble following this. My previous answer was not clear enough. There is a difference between objects that are designed by an intelligent designer, they tend to be clean and well adapted to their function, and objects that evolve, they work well but they have no clear plan behind them and often have oddities in them. But evolution can create animals that are not designed but are complicated. As evolution can explain why we are like we are, why would you use that as a reason for God's existence?

the signs is all around us but only man of understanding can see it and know it if this is doesn't convice you then you choose to not believe after all you have your own will to believe and disbelieve. But iam not going to waste my time and energy to make someone understand who will never and most of all who is in denial.

I think Muslims are still suffering with a legacy of Imperialism and oppression. They often are not used to dealing with people on terms of equality who so happen not to believe what they think is obvious. In tolerant plural societies this is a norm, but I assume in a Muslim country I wouldbe stoned to death about now. So instead of understanding you have opted for the Imperial Master solution - I don't agree with you therefore I must be stupid. I think that this is a legacy you would benefit from shaking off.

 

[The Ruler]

Actually I sometimes look at myself in the morning and I have to say that the idea that I am perfectly created is not the first thought to pop into my mind! Why do you think I am? To ask a simple question - mammal semen cannot survive at the temperature of the human body. So most male animals have part of their genetalia hanging outside their bodies where it is cooler - if men are infertile they are often advised to wear looser trousers for that reason. This does not strike me as a good design - as I am sure any man who has been kicked there will agree. Perfect design?

if that is not the perfect design, then why dont we evolve to give our body the perfect design :?

 

[HeiGou]

if that is not the perfect design, then why dont we evolve to give our body the perfect design :?

Because evolution is not concerned with perfect design. Engineers can see the bigger picture and so produce a perfect design. Evolution is blind and does not see a bigger picture. What happens is whatever works now, at this point in time, is good enough and so survives and reproduces. It is a series of short-term expedients, not a long-sighted design. Think of the products of evolution like a long much-battered car your brother might own - it is held together with pieces of string and tape and glue because that is all he needs to get it to work today. Evolution is indifferent to what is best or perfect in a global sense. Only what works today.

 

[root]

Additionally, evolution errors cannot be undone since it would result in the loss of survivability. Like the eye for example has some fundamental flaws;

The retina is the wrong way round making vision at night difficult, the nerve fibres pass directly across the receptor cells which results in a blind spot that is a distinct disadvantage. Such errors of evolution cannot be undone with the species that carries the flaws.

 

[Ansar Al-'Adl]

Hei Gou? Root?

 

[The Ruler]

i just thought of this a few minutes ago....if people actually evaluated, then how come they knew what is wrong and what is right? how did the laws come up? i dont think there is a logical reason...because if u say that it was evolution, evolution cannot change the way a brain works or can it :?

 

[HeiGou]

Hello HeiGou,
Since you've brought up the issue of the invisible pink unicron again, why not continue the discussion on the orbiting teapot here:
http://www.islamicboard.com/comparative-religion/15241-proof-god-4.html

I haven't gotten answers to my last post on the topic.

Again? I don't think I have ever posted on the orbiting teapot. And I am not familiar with the original argument. If you like I could think about it, but on the whole I suspect it is not a wise thing to argue with the moderator about the non-exitence of God in a thread not of my choosing. And look how long that one is anyway. It would take me a day to catch up.

 

[HeiGou]

i just thought of this a few minutes ago....if people actually evaluated, then how come they knew what is wrong and what is right? how did the laws come up? i dont think there is a logical reason...because if u say that it was evolution, evolution cannot change the way a brain works or can it :?

Of course evolution can change the way the brain works. Take social insects. Bees and ants are haplo-diploid. Humans are diploid meaning they have two copies of each chromosome - one from the Father and one from the Mother. For example sex is determined by the X and Y chromosome. You get an X from your Mother and if you get a Y from your Father you are a boy, if you get another X from your Father you are a girl (XX=girl, XY=boy). Humans have two copies of every chromosome meaning your mother and you father made equal contributions to your DNA. But some organisms are Haploid which means that they only have one copy of each chromosome - often it means they are produced without sex because they only get DNA from one parent. These sort of organisms are usually fungi and plants. Now the social insects, bees and ants for instance, are haplodiploid, meaning one sex gets two chromosomes and the other gets one. Usually the female gets two and the male gets one - only his mothers'.

This has an impact on how related they are to their children - like human children, female bees share half their DNA with their offspring, the other half comes from the father. But they share three quarters with their sisters. So their sisters are more closely related to them genetically than their children. So if their sisters survive more often than their children, oddly enough, their DNA is more likely to get passed on. So of course in social insect societies females are perfectly happy to die for their sisters in large numbers and to give up the opportunity to reproduce themselves. They focus on their sisters' success. Clearly an example of evolution resulting in a radical change of behaviour.

As for wrong and right, surely this can be interpreted in evolutionary terms too. Parents do sacrifice themselves for their children - if they did not then their children would be less likely to survive and so the children of sacrificing parents have more surviving children and breed the bad parents out. Do we think this is a morally right thing to do? If males tolerate other males having sex with their partners they partners will raise other men's children thus reducing their chances of producing offspring. Can you see how jealousy might have evolved? Can you think of any morality that people actually observe (as oppose to claim they observe) on a global scale that is not a successful strategy for reproduction?

But mostly, Richard Dawkins argues that morality is a case of memes - like genes but taught not evolved. It is a little more complicated and so I won't go into it.

 

[The Ruler]

how did u ppl no wat is rong n wat is rite :?....does science say dat thieving, robbery, adultery is rong :?

 

[czgibson]

Greetings Tagrid,

how did u ppl no wat is rong n wat is rite :?....does science say dat thieving, robbery, adultery is rong :?

Have a look at this thread:

Development of Theism?

You can find my answer to this question in post 3, where I outline the view of sociologist Emile Durkheim on religious development.

Peace

P.S. Ansar, I can't find your last post on the orbiting teapot. If you can point it out to me I can have a go at responding to it.

 

[Ansar Al-'Adl]

Hi Callum,
Here is the link:
http://www.islamicboard.com/203762-post156.html
It was post 156 in that thread.

Hi HeiGou,
I thought you had posted on the teapot before, but I may be mistaken. Anyway, the argument from the invisible pink unicorn is essentially the same, so I think it would be a good idea to discuss it. The thread is long, but only about 5 posts are actually on the topic of the teapot.

Peace!

 

[HeiGou]

how did u ppl no wat is rong n wat is rite :?....does science say dat thieving, robbery, adultery is rong :?

I don't know about you, but I think that what is wrong is clearly wrong. I believe that what is right is what makes you happy. In the short term what makes you happy may seem like a good proposition, but if it is not good it will not make you happy in the long run. So take theft. If I steal someone's iPod it may make me happy in the sense that I have an iPod but it does nothing to contribute to my sense of self-worth, or my ease of mind, or my feelings of security in the sense that someone might steal from me. If, on the other hand, I work hard and earn enough money to buy an iPod, well I probably still would not be happy, but at least I'd feel better. Adultery is easier still - whatever short term pleasures cheating on your wife might bring I remain utterly and totally convinced that long-term happiness requires a long-term committed relationship based on mutual trust. Now I don't need God to tell me that. It can't hurt that He does, but it is not necessary. A lot of people go through each and every day without believing in your God and they seem to get by fine.

A female Sufi is reported by on of the Crusader histories to have walked through the streets of the Middle East with a bucket of water and a pot of hot coals saying she was going to burn Paradise and extinguish the flames of Hell. When the Christians asked why she said that everyone ought to do the right thing for the love of God alone, and not the threat of Heaven or Hell. Do you agree with that in general?

 

[root]

If Atheism writes upon the blackboard of the Universe a question mark, it writes it for the purpose of stating that there is a question yet to be answered. Is it not better to place a question mark upon a problem while seeking an answer than to put the label "God" there and consider the matter solved? Does not the word "God" only confuse and make more difficult the solution by assuming a conclusion that is utterly groundless and palpably absurd?

To me this is representative of an orbiting teapot, you can never disprove that a teapot is in orbit around the sun between the earth and mars. So if we can't disprove it then surely it may exist? Just like God.

 

[HeiGou]

If Atheism writes upon the blackboard of the Universe a question mark, it writes it for the purpose of stating that there is a question yet to be answered. Is it not better to place a question mark upon a problem while seeking an answer than to put the label "God" there and consider the matter solved? Does not the word "God" only confuse and make more difficult the solution by assuming a conclusion that is utterly groundless and palpably absurd?

To me this is representative of an orbiting teapot, you can never disprove that a teapot is in orbit around the sun between the earth and mars. So if we can't disprove it then surely it may exist? Just like God.

OK I have been trying to do some reading. For the audience, if you would like to catch up on this subject,

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russell's_teapot

Russell's teapot was an analogy first coined by the philosopher Bertrand Russell, to refute the idea that the onus lies somehow upon the sceptic to disprove the unfalsifiable claims of religion. In an article entitled Is There a God?, commissioned (but never published) by Illustrated magazine in 1952, Russell said the following:

If I were to suggest that between the Earth and Mars there is a china teapot revolving about the sun in an elliptical orbit, nobody would be able to disprove my assertion provided I were careful to add that the teapot is too small to be revealed even by our most powerful telescopes. But if I were to go on to say that, since my assertion cannot be disproved, it is intolerable presumption on the part of human reason to doubt it, I should rightly be thought to be talking nonsense. If, however, the existence of such a teapot were affirmed in ancient books, taught as the sacred truth every Sunday, and instilled into the minds of children at school, hesitation to believe in its existence would become a mark of eccentricity and entitle the doubter to the attentions of the psychiatrist in an enlightened age or of the Inquisitor in an earlier time.​

In his book A Devil's Chaplain, Richard Dawkins developed the teapot theme a little further:

The reason organized religion merits outright hostility is that, unlike belief in Russell's teapot, religion is powerful, influential, tax-exempt and systematically passed on to children too young to defend themselves. Children are not compelled to spend their formative years memorizing loony books about teapots. Government-subsidized schools don't exclude children whose parents prefer the wrong shape of teapot. Teapot-believers don't stone teapot-unbelievers, teapot-apostates, teapot-heretics and teapot-blasphemers to death. Mothers don't warn their sons off marrying teapot-shiksas whose parents believe in three teapots rather than one. People who put the milk in first don't kneecap those who put the tea in first.​

And my favorite, the Invisible Pink Unicorn

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Invisible_pink_unicorn

It is common when discussing the Invisible Pink Unicorn to point out that because she is invisible, no one can prove she does not exist, thereby making the point that simply by claiming that something cannot be sensed in any way, shape or form, such as God in Theistic beliefs, someone could claim that any divine object or entity existed and argue that no one can prove this theory right, but no one could prove it wrong, either, and saying that this is reason to believe in said divine object/entity - which is the main point of the satire, namely pointing out that the Invisible Pink Unicorn has all the credibility of God from Theistic beliefs, and that it is no different to believe in the IPU than to believe in God. The IPU's two defining attributes, "invisibility" and "pinkness", are inconsistent and contradictory; this is part of the satire. The paradox of something being invisible yet having visible characteristics (eg. color) is reflected in the mythology of some East Asian cultures, wherein an "invisible red string" is said to connect people who have a shared or linked destiny.​