Prove Allah exists

[piXie]

Brother Gabriel, I am sure you have the best of intentions and may Allaah have mercy upon you, but let us save our energies and valuable time for people who are sincere.

 

[Gabriel Ibn Yus]

Brother Gabriel, I am sure you have the best of intentions and may Allaah have mercy upon you, but let us save our energies and valuable time for people who are sincere.

Yeah. Probably right...

 

[FreeThinker]

Yes it does. According to your definition you are un-natural as you were "created" by your mother and your father - as there is no law of science which said that they must create you - there for according to your definition you are
un-natural.

Sexual reproduction is a natural process. It exists in nature. It was not created by humans. It is natural.

let me show you something...this book that you are so proud of...it was written in English
right? This means that it consists of the letters, the alphabet...

ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ

How beautiful...now, may I ask you a question...who gave us this alphabet?...I find it
very interesting...did you develop it? Did it come to us naturally? Did the knowledgeable
psedou-scientist that you mentioned invent them in his fancy laboratory?

No. None of us did - it just is. Perfect language which can express every idea you want
wether it be these sentences or any of the "scientific achievements" you are so proud of.

In fact, it won't be hard to say that language is a greater thing than any human achievement I know of as we can express with it anything we can possibly go through...

Yet...I do not know anybody who has any idea from where do the languages come from?....Good question no? And a very mysterious
one indeed because to the best of my knowledge - you have not needed to invent a word in
your life - they were all here one you came - and neither do we...think about it next time
that you say something - because your own words are not yours.

The Latin alphabet evolved from the Greek alphabet.
You called Hitchens a pseudo-scientists, which means you know nothing about him or his work as he never claimed to be a scientist. He's a journalist.

Umm, I know a lot of people who know where languages came from. A brief study of the parts of the brain associated with speech and speech recognition may provide some insight. Many animals have "languages" or the ability to communicate. Birds have very complex ways of communicating. And chimpanzees are able to learn sign language.
I don't see what your point is.

 

[Ramadhan]

I have not been following the thread page by page but if the allegation is that the Quran is not the word of God, or that God doesn't exist, as I just stated, that can't be proved. You can't falsify an unfalsifiable claim (that the quran is the word of Allah) or that Allah exists. That doesn't do anything at all to prove he does exist or that it is though. This point is why things like the "Flying spaghetti monster" were created (as an analogy - you can't prove the FSM doesn't exist either - doesn't give you any reason to accept it does).

We cannot directly prove that Allah SWT exists, we prove by the claims made by Allah SWT himself.

What does flying spaghetti monster claim to be/do?

 

[Vito]

Simple question (or is it?)
Prove Allah exists.
No scripture, no theoretical nor pragmatic arguments. Show me some EMPIRICAL evidence!

Just commit suicide and find out for yourself

:threadclo

 

[Woodrow]

Simple question (or is it?)
Prove Allah exists.
No scripture, no theoretical nor pragmatic arguments. Show me some EMPIRICAL evidence!

Why.


I do not believe you exist. Show me some empirical evidence to prove to me I am not having Tactile, Audio, visual hallucinations and you are no more than a product of my deranged mind.

 

[Gabriel Ibn Yus]

Sexual reproduction is a natural process. It exists in nature. It was not created by humans. It is natural.

I agree. However according to your previous definition of natural sex was excluded from the definition.

The Latin alphabet evolved from the Greek alphabet.

What do you mean evolved? I do not see any evolution ...You seem to not understand the point.
An evolution is a slow process. Do you have any notebooks or any sort of history in which you
can see on a period of years how greek "morphed" into latin?

Think about it. In order for greek to one day turn into latin is the equivalent of all the people in
America today turning one day into Japanese...you see, this argument does not hold water.
Humans use language however they did not form it and that is the end of the story. You can
say that you do not feel comfortable with that and want to hide it with all sorts of fairy tales
but this is simply the way it is.

called Hitchens a pseudo-scientists, which means you know nothing about him or his work as he never claimed to be a scientist.

First of all, I have a very firm grasp of science and I now what science is well enough to no what it is not. Secondly, so why is he making scientific claims? I do not understand it. Who put him to be the voice of science and scientific
thought as I can tell you that science in its essence does not agree with things like that. In other words science and popular science are two very different things.

The main difference is that science itself is much more boring and dry (at least the one we have today which is devoid of any natural considerations and is prone to make more harm than good). This can also be approached
from another angle by saying that popular science is dangerous as it gives the people a false impression that they
understand something while they do not...

He's a journalist.

The last people on earth I would go to in order to receive information as a journalist is interested in selling you
a story and not in giving you information (this is because nobody want to hear the truth and it has very low sales
rates usually - this is because the truth is for free and is all around you).

I know a lot of people who know where languages came from.

They say they know. There is a difference between saying you know and knowing. These people studied these
from other people who new just as nothing as they do. My simple understanding is this

Nothing + Nothing + Nothing = Nothing.

This is not knowledge its simply transferring speculations from generation to generation. In order to derive useful
knowledge you have to use some common sense and not just swallow everything other people tell you...especially
if its these people career and they make money out of making you feel that they are smarter than you.

brief study of the parts of the brain associated with speech and speech recognition may provide some insight.

A brief study? How's brain have you picked up on?....You seem to have much more equipment and people willing to
participate in your experiments which I am not sure that I can reproduce and I am also not sure that I want because I do not want to open up peoples brains...However, putting aside the fact that you have never conducted
such an experiment even though you present yourself as an expert...It teaches me absolutely nothing and let me explain you why...

I have told you that language is used by human however it is not human made. Let us look at something else...
A vase and flowers...the language is the flower...you are the vase...the vase is not the flower...

What your experiment shows is that after opening up a person's brain you discovered that the human mind is somewhat involved in the process of language...in the words of flowers and vases...you have showed that the vase is indeed a vase and that you can put flowers in it...but where did the flowers came from?....

Many animals have "languages" or the ability to communicate. Birds have very complex ways of communicating. And chimpanzees are able to learn sign language.

The language of Allah pertains to all the universe not just humans and also not just birds and chimpanzees. However, I have not yet seen a bird read and write and deliver a message over time to the next generation of birds...have you?

don't see what your point is.

You don't see or don't want to see?

 

[Masuma]

See people, some here are so much deceiving that they would **** out nonsense but would not meet your challenge!

If Freethinker, you couldn't meet my challenge, then why do you still keep going on with your absurdity?!

Now I see who has conveniently avoided some challenge here!

 

[Gabriel Ibn Yus]

See people, some here are so much deceiving that they would **** out nonsense but would not meet your challenge!

If Freethinker, you couldn't meet my challenge, then why do you still keep going on with your absurdity?!

Now I see who has conveniently avoided some challenge here!

It would be good if freethinker would consider to answer this challenge

 

[Masuma]

Nothing... Heheehehe!

 

[Gabriel Ibn Yus]

Seriously brother, didn't you have enough with my sister τhε ṿαlε'ṡ lïlÿ?!

Look, I respect you bro, but if you want a discussion with me, then its okay. but I always try my best to avoid any type of arguments with my Muslim brothers and sisters! But still if your forcing me to, then I'll accept.

Sister An33za. I am sorry if I have said something that bothered you - I would
like to know what it is. If there is something that bothers you - you should say it and I would take it to full consideration ...

 

[Mohamed_Sadiq]

Calm down people. Don't turn the thread into a supermarket or even worse a pub.

We want ceasfire immediatelty between both forces, or else the Islamic state will interfere and justice will be brought.

 

[Masuma]

Calm down people. Don't turn the thread into a supermarket or even worse a pub.

We want ceasfire immediatelty between both forces, or else the Islamic state will interfere and justice will be brought.

Heheeehe! Okay!

I want justice.... naaaa! Just kidding!

 

[Masuma]

And yupppiiiiii!!!!!! :awesome: Everyone congratulate me, I've completed the target of 300 posts, now just need sis mod to approve of my membership of the sisters' section! Heeheehe!

 

[Woodrow]

Calm down people. Don't turn the thread into a supermarket or even worse a pub.

We want ceasfire immediatelty between both forces, or else the Islamic state will interfere and justice will be brought.

Very true, good words for all to heed

 

[Mohamed_Sadiq]

And yupppiiiiii!!!!!! :awesome: Everyone congratulate me, I've completed the target of 300 posts, now just need sis mod to approve of my membership of the sisters' section! Heeheehe!

Congrats, ukhti.

 

[Muslimeen]

A dialogue between an athiest professor and a muslim student
WHY PSEUDO-SCIENCE FAILS TO EXPLAIN GOD
"PROFESSING TO BE WISE, THEY BECOME FOOLS..."
(A DIALOGUE BETWEEN AN ATHEIST PROFESSOR & A MUSLIM STUDENT)
The following scenario takes place at an educational institute:
"Let me explain the problem science has with God..." The atheist professor of philosophy pauses before his class and
then asks one of his new students 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 can cure 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, even though he prayed to God to heal him. How is
this God good? Hmm? Can you answer that 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 to relax. 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 the smirking student audience.
"I think we're going to have a lot of fun this semester, ladies and gentlemen."
He turns back to the Muslim. "Tell me, son. Is there evil in this world?"
"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 the terrible 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's face. He speaks in a small, deadly voice, "God created all evil, didn't He, 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 an ageing, confident panther. The class is
mesmerised. "Tell me..." he continues, "How is it that this God is good if He created all the evil throughout all time?" The
professor swishes his arms around to encompass the wickedness of the world. "All the hatred, the brutality, the pain, all
the torture, all the needless deaths and ugliness, and all the suffering created 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 and whispers, "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 that you 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? Where is your God
now?"
[The student does not answer.]
"Sit down, please!"
[The Muslim sits, browbeaten into apparent defeat. However, 'the help of Allah is at hand and victory is imminent.']
Another Muslim, wearing a religious cap, having a beard and easily identified as a Muslim by his dress, lifts his hand
up."Professor, may I address the class?"
The professor turns and smiles. "Ah! Another Muslim in the vanguard. A Fundamentalist, I see. Come, come, young
man! Speak some proper wisdom to the gathering!"
The Muslim ignores the sarcasm in the tone of the professor. He looks around the room, waits for the attention of the
students and turns to the professor. "Sir, you have made some interesting points. With your permission,sir, I would like to
tackle each point individually. This subject has to be tackled logically and scientifically, and not emotionally. The first
point is your basic doctrine that God does not exist. The universe, therefore, started with the doctrine of 'The Big Bang'
and through a process of evolution, Man finally came into existence. Is that not your belief, professor?"​

​

​

"My son, it goes without saying. There is enough scientific evidence for this. What are you getting at?"
"Let us not be hasty. Let us use logic and reason and proper scientific argument. 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 promoting atheism as a religion. I
have a question for you, professor. We have in this world millions upon millions of fireworks, ammunition and bombs.
Have you heard of any going off spontaneously, or do you admit that, although the ingredients may be in existence in a
container, there is required a detonating mechanism to set off the explosions? Two factors have to be present: firstly, the
correct ingredients in correct amounts in a suitable environment; and, secondly, somebody to set off the explosion,
whether it be by means of a match stick, or the hammer of a pistol, or some electrical spark. For example, if somebody
said that he had a bullet in his hand and it went off on its own and killed somebody sitting 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 massive explosion 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 are not taking place all
over the world without any external agency? Any scientific claim 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 create itself. Take this wooden desk. It did not come into
existence by itself. Some external agency had to make it. Even the wood did not come into existence by itself. It came
from a seed that was planted and nourished. The seed itself came from some source and could not come into existence
by itself. Can you explain to us how the original matter came into existence - matter that the priests of pseudo-science
state was ignited by the mysterious Big Bang to produce the first living matter? Also, why are your priests not able to
reproduce this phenomenon in the laboratory? Professor, you must know that any scientific argument must be
reproducible for it to have any scientific credence."
"Son, it is naive to thing that we can do such a thing. The energy that was unleashed with the Big Bang was such that we
do not have access to, otherwise we would also have reproduced the same phenomenon."
"Professor, you have not told us who provided the basic ingredients, and you are unable to tell us who it was who pushed
the button or pulled the trigger or lit the matches for the Big Bang to take place. Where did this tremendous energy, that
you are speaking about, originate? Come, come, professor! Let us be scientific about it. Yes, professor, it takes a lot of
FAITH in the doctrinal teachings of the priests of pseudo-science to believe in the Big Bang. Do you expect us to discard
proper scientific principles and believe in all this hocus-pocus on blind faith in the face of definitive scientific principles?"
[No answer.]
"If you don't mind, professor, I will now go on to the doctrine of evolution as promulgated by the priests of pseudoscience.
You are aware that no fossils have been shown that would directly link the descent of Man from the apes and
that there is a constant search for what is termed, the 'Missing Link'?"
"Yes, but there is so much other evidence..."
"Sorry to interrupt, professor. You admit there is no direct link. You must also admit that there are no fossils showing
definite intermediary steps in the transition from ape to Man. And I'm sure you are also aware of the Piltdown Forgery,
professor?"
"Piltdown...? Piltdown...?"
"Let me refreshen your memory, professor. Some fossils were discovered in a place called Piltdown in England. These
fossil-remains showed all the features that all the priests of pseudo-science and atheism were searching for as the
'Missing Link' in the chain of evolution. The whole world was led to believe in it, and even the sceptics were convinced -
until it was found, some forty 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, a massive forgery that your priests had forged to try and
convince the world that the religion of atheism was true and Man had descended from the apes! If you want more
enlightenment on it you can read the works of Professor Tobias, of South 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? Can you explain to the class what is plagiarism?"
Rather hesitantly, the professor speaks, "Plagiarism is to take somebody else's work and pass it off as one's own."
"Correct. Thank you, professor. If you were to take the trouble of doing a bit of honest and truthful research you will find
that the Western nations had plagiarised all the TRUE scientific works of the Muslims and then built on it and passed
them off as their own 'discoveries', which led to modern scientific progress. You don't have to take my word for it. Just
write to the 'Centre for Studies on Science', Al-Humera, Muzzammil Manzil, Dodhpur, Aligarh, India, and they will gladly send you all the relevant literature to prove this point."
By now the class is fully attentive to the Muslim student's words and they hastily jot down the address.
"Let us come back to the doctrine of evolution which the priests of pseudo-science have fostered on the world. The backbone
of all their doctrines is the concept of 'natural selection'. This means that species adapted to the changes in the
environment by a change in morphology and physiology, changes which they then passed on to succeeding generations,
enabling them to survive; while those species which did not adapt, became extinct. The classic example given is that of
the dinosaurs which could not compete with smaller, more agile animals which had miraculously 'evolved', thus the
bigger, more slower animals became extinct, whilst the smaller animals survived. Also, during the course of evolution
what was of no use anymore, disappeared, like tails and claws, being replaced with tail-less species with hands which
could hold, the final result being 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 from which angle the next salvo is coming!
"Come, come, professor! This is the cornerstone of the doctrine of evolution which you priests have been brainwashing
the unwary masses with. Let us challenge this pseudo-science with true science. Professor, has any scientist ever
produced any new species of life in his laboratory by controlling and changing the environment? Remember, science can
only accept material doctrines if they are reproducible."
[No answer.]
"Of course not, even though attempts have been made, sure enough! Let us go a step further: We know that the Jews
circumcise their male offspring very soon after birth. We also know that circumcision has been practised by them in an
unbroken chain since the time of Abraham (A.S.). As a result, certain illness patterns have changed. Any male child with
an inherited bleeding tendency would have died from bleeding and this disease would not have passed on 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 male infants, why are Jewish children not born without
a foreskin? Even if the whole foreskin was not missing, according to the doctrine of natural selection of your priests, there
should be some signs of the foreskin getting smaller! Don't you 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 of his previous confidence. "Yes, I do. I
have two boys and a girl." The professor 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 blurts out. "What a stupid question! Of course, I did
not! My wife did the breast-feeding."
"Professor, have your priests ever discovered any males who breast-feed infants?"
"Again a stupid question. Only females breast- feed infants."
"Professor, without undressing you, I am certain that you have two nipples, just like all other males. Why have these not
disappeared because of redundancy? According to the doctrine of natural selection, such useless items as nipples in
males, should have disappeared in all males thousands - if not millions - of years ago! Professor," the Muslim student
spoke gently, he did 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 on pseudo-science - you will agree that the doctrine of evolution is just a big load of
rubbish?"
The professor's face changes a number of colours and all he can do is splutter helplessly.
The Muslim student turns to the class of students and addresses them with a wisp of a smile on his lips. "In fact, one can
go further and state that whoever 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 Muslim student'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 the doctrine 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 with all 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 of cancer. If you are upset that he died,
then you are absolutely foolish. That human beings, as well as all living matter, will certainly die is such an established
fact, that it is believed in by all people, irrespective of whether they believe in God or not, and nobody can really object to the process of death. 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 a prelude to the process of death. Your objection stems from your
misconception that '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 that the cruellest people in the world are the medical research-scientists who
use animals for all their horrible experiments. Surely you must be aware of the thousands upon thousands of animals that
are tortured in different ways and made to suffer a million agonies to prove or disprove certain scientificand medical
claims? Are these experimenters not cruel? You're still with me, professor?"
The professor looks quite ill. The Muslim student goes across and gives him some water to drink.
"Professor, I'm going to ask you another obvious question. You are aware of examinations - tests that are given to
students in order for them to pass and 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 home comforts; he is loaded with work; he has to give up his leisure time and his sleep in order to
get ready for the examinations; then he is faced with horribly difficult questions to answer in the examination and he may
also be grilled in his oral examination - and he still has to pay the institution for putting him through this torturing process! -
you do not consider all this to be cruel? Is the professor a 'good' person for all the mental and physical suffering he is
putting the student through?"
"I do not see your point. Of course, the institution and the professor are doing the student a favour by putting him through
a training process in order for him to qualify in his particular field. Only a very short-sighted person would object to
students having to write examinations, irrespective of the sacrifices they have to make."
The Muslim student sadly shakes his head. "Professor, it is amazing how you can understand the need for tests and
examinations when you have to set them, but you can't see the same wisdom when God sets tests and examinations for
His creatures. Take your brother - if he withstood the test of his illness and he died with faith, what we term as Imaan - he
will be rewarded abundantly in Paradise for the suffering that he underwent here. So much so, that he would wish that he
had suffered a hundred times more so that his reward would be so much greater, a reward that no eye has seen and no
mind has imagined! Unfortunately, 'only a very short-sighted person' - and an ignorant one - would object to the tests
placed on His creation by God, bearing in mind the everlasting 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 have lots of heat, even more heat, super-heat, megaheat,
white heat, or - at the opposite 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 go further beyond that. There is no such thing as 'cold', otherwise
we would be able to go colder than 458 degrees below zero. You see, sir, 'cold' is only a word we use to describe the
absence of heat. We cannot measure cold. Heat we can measure in thermal units because heat is energy. Cold is not
the opposite of 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 are you 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 of an 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 has nothing, and this is called
darkness, isn't it? That's the meaning we use to define the word. In reality, darkness isn't. If it were, one would be able to
create darkness in a positive way and makedarkness darker and obtain it in a container. 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 premise is flawed, to start with, and so your conclusion
must be in error. You are not scientific, 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 a little child. "Sir, may I explain what I mean?"
The students in the class eagerly nod their heads. They are all ears. The professor has no alternative but to consent.
"Explain... oh, explain..." He waves his hand indifferently, in an admirable effort to regain control. Suddenly he is affability itself. The class is silent, expectant.
"You are working on the premise of duality," the Muslim student explains, "that, for example, there is life and then there's
death, two different entities; a good God and a bad God. You are viewing the concept of God as a finite entity, an entity
we can measure. Sir, science cannot even explain what a thought is. It uses electricity and magnetism, but has never
seen them, much less understood them. To view death as the opposite of life is to 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's desks. "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't evil the absence of
good?"
The professor's face has turned an alarming colour. He is so angry that he is temporarily 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 work through the agency of evil. What is that work that God is accomplishing? Islam tells 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 this matter as having anything to do with any choice; as a
realist, I absolutely do not recognise the concept of God or any other theological factor as being part of the world
equation, because God is not observable."
"I would have thought that the absence of God's moral code is probably one the 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 of God - 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 who believe in God, or those who don't? A
fundamental belief that a Muslim has is that of being resurrected on the Day of Judgement and answering for his actions
in this world. For every good that he did he will be rewarded, and for every evil that he committed he will be held
responsible. Every Muslim has to believe that he/ she is responsible for his/her actions and that nobody else will bear
his/her burden on the Day of Judgement. The concept of Paradise being a reward for the believers and that Hell will be
the abode of the disbelievers, the infidels, is also a fundamental belief, as well as the belief that even Muslim wrongdoers
will be punished for their misdeeds. Professor, these concepts have stopped countless millions of Muslims from
committing wrong. We all know that punishment is a strong deterrent for committing crimes. Without this concept we
would not be able to run our worldly affairs: fines, penalties, jail sentences are part and parcel of any civilised system. On
the other hand we have the priests of atheism who do not believe in these concepts when they are mentioned in relation
to moral issues. To them there is no Day of Judgement, no accountability, no reward, no punishment. The message to
the masses is quite clear, that 'if you can get away with it then you are O.K. You have nothing to worry 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 is free to do anything he wishes and no action can be labelled as 'wrong'. Let me put it this way: the atheist
priests maintain that God does not exist. If He does not exist, then He can't have set down any rules of what is right and
what is 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 men get 'married' to men; women get 'married' to women; to spread AIDS and
other diseases is O.K.; there is nothing sinful with adultery and fornication, as long as those involved are 'consenting
adults'; according to the logic of the atheists even incest would not be sinful if theparties are 'consenting adults', seeing
incest is a sin based on a code of morality with its basis being religion, whereas the professor has categorically stated
that he 'absolutely does not recognise the concept of God or any other theological factor 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 is endless. The height of intellectual dishonesty is to place
the blame for the spread of this immorality and filth on God! Let us be scientific about the whole issue, professor. Take a
group of people who are God-conscious - who believe in Him as he should be believed in - and take a group of people
who are adherents to your atheistic creed. Assess, objectively, who is spreading evil. I don't wish to labour the point, but
any objective observer will immediately see that the group of God-conscious people who use the Laws of the Almighty as
their code of morality, are in fact, spreading goodness; whereas the those who make up their own rules of 'relative
morality' are, in fact, the one's spreading evil throughout the world."
The Muslim student pauses for these important remarks to sink in. The eyes of the 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 being
brought up on the diatribe spewed forth by the mass media.
"Professor, I am amazed, but not surprised, at your unscientific attitude to morality. I am amazed that, even though you
believe that Man evolved from the apes, he will not behave like an animal! I am amazed that, even though you do 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 not surprised is that such muddled thinking is to be expected from those who are adherents 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 observed evolution with your own eyes, sir?"
The professor makes a sucking sound with his teeth and gives the student a silent, stony stare.
"Professor, since no one has ever observed the process of evolution at work and cannot even prove that this process is
an ongoing endeavour, are you not teaching a doctrine - a doctrine that leaks like a sieve and has less merit to it that any
theological teachings? This is pseudo-science, not science, and its proponents are nothing but its ignorant priests!"
The professor goes blue in the face. "What impudence!" He huffs and puffs and strides up and down in front of the class,
finally managing to regain some of his self control. "In the light of our philosophical discussion, I'll overlook your
impudence, son. Now, have you quite finished?" The words 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, but pseudo-science - and your pseudo-science is also
flawed!"
"PSEUDO-SCIENCE.....? FLAWED...?" The professor looks as if he is going to have a fit. The class is in an uproar. The
Muslim student stands cool and calm, that wisp of a smile back on his face.
When the commotion subsides, he continues, "You see, professor, TRUE SCIENCE is to discover the laws and designs
that the Creator of the universe has put into the system of the running of the universe, from the mega to the micro, from
the measurable to the immeasurable. Pseudo- science is an atheistic religion that tries to oppose this concept by
forgeries, manipulation of statistics, half-truths, etc. Pseudo-science postulates a mythical unnamed force -their own,
man-made, false deity - caused a Big Bang and then started a process of evolution that is contrary to what actually
happened. The priests of this atheistic religion are the ones that try to justify the gibberish that must accompany such
falsehood by means of forgeries, half-truths and manipulation of data. Truth must win - the truth of the logical conclusion
anybody with any sense can deduce, that there is one God (Allah) Who is the Creator of the whole universe. He created
the whole system whereby the whole universe has been running smoothly from time immemorial. Let us go back to the
point you had 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 the class 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 sadly shakes his head. "It appears that no one here has had any sensory perception of the professor's
brains whatsoever. Well, according to the rules enunciated by the professor himself, the rules of empirical, stable,
demonstrable protocol of the professor's pseudo-science I HEREBY DECLARE that the 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 he recovers. He glares at the student. "Your
insults in no way proves the existence of God."
The Muslim student replies. "Professor, I'm really surprised. I would have thought that you would have conceded defeat.
But, it seems that you are a glutton for punishment."
He pauses, looks very thoughtfully at the class and then at the professor. With a 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 have parents."
"Be patient, sir. Are you certain that your father is your father and that your mother is your mother?"
The professor goes livid. "How preposterous! OF COURSE, MY FATHER IS MY FATHER AND MY MOTHER IS MY
MOTHER!" He is shouting.
The Muslim student pauses. The pause becomes lengthy. There is an eerie atmosphere suddenly as the students sit on
the edge of their chairs. With a quiet well controlled voice, the Muslim student says, "Prove it to me!"
The atmosphere is electric. The professor is unable to control himself. His face changes to a purple hue. "HOW DARE
YOU!" He is shouting even louder, quite beside himself. "I'VE HAD ENOUGH OF YOUR INSULTS..! GET OUT OF MY
CLASS..! I'LL REPORT YOU TO THE RECTOR...!
The class sits petrified at the outburst. Is the professor heading for a fit or a stroke?
The Muslim student stands his ground, unruffled. Facing the class he lifts his hand up, reassuring them that there is
nothing to worry about. He then turns his compassionate eyes on the professor. A force appears to emanate from his
eyes, directed at the professor. The professor cannot maintain his stare. His gaze drops. His anger subsides. He flops
back into his chair and holds his head in his hands.
After a few minutes, the Muslim student speaks, very gently. "Dear professor, I am not implying that your parents are not
your parents. All I am trying to point out is that neither you, nor me, nor any of us in this class can prove that our parents
are our parents or not."
Complete silence.
"The reason is that we did not witness the act of intercourse between our parents when we were conceived. We were not
present to identify whose sperm it was that fertilised the ovum in our mother's womb. We take our parents word for it that
they are our parents. We consider our parents to be honest and truthful in the matter. We do not question them their
integrity. In the same way, your children will have to take your word that you are their father and that their mother is really their mother. Is that not so, professor?"
The professor lifts up his head. He looks up at the Muslim student. One can see his 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
the words of our parents..."
"Yes, professor. There are so many things that we have to take the word of others. 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 scientific research
we know that there have been no persons existing in the world more honest and reliable than those who are termed
Messengers (Rasools). We Muslims are 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 integrity was such that even his avowed enemies called
him 'Al-Ameen' (the Truthful).If he said that God (Allah) exists - and we are prepared to accept the word of our parents
that they are our parents- then, in all sincerity and honesty, we have to accept his word for it, as we have to accept many
other things - the existence of Paradise and Hell; the existence of angels; the coming of the Day of Judgement;
accounting to God for our deeds in this world; and many other concepts. Besides this one point, there are many other
pointers to the existence of God (Allah).The Revelation called 'Al-Quran' is there for anybody to study. It has
certainspecific challenges for anybody who has any doubts. These challenges have not been met in the fourteen
hundred years of its existence. If one is not prepared to believe in such a Messenger - peace be on him - then it is pure
hypocrisy to accept the word of scientists, whose doctrines 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 account that there are innumerable babies conceived from donor sperms of men who
are strangers, and also the fact that innumerable infants are adopted in infancy by childless couples and brought up as
their own children, statistically there is room for a large degree of error in any person's claim that his/her parents are
really his/her biological parents."
Turning to the class the Muslim student concludes. "It is every individual's duty to learn more about Islam. Al-Quran is
there for everybody to study. Enough literature also available on Islam. It is my duty only to inform you that the only Truth
is Islam. There is no compulsion in religion. Clearly the right way has become distinct from error; And he who rejects
false deities and believes in Allah (God), has grasped a firm handhold which will never break; And Allah is All-Hearing
and All-Knowing. Having informed you, it is also my duty to invite you to join the brotherhood of Muslims by embracing
Islam. Allah is the Protecting Guardian of those who believe. He brings them out of darkness into the light. As for those
who disbelieve, their guardians are false deities. They bring them out of light into darkness... These are verses from Al-
Quran - Words of the Almighty - which I have quoted to you."
The Muslim student looks at his watch. "Professor and students, I thank you for having giving me the opportunity to
explain these issues to you. If you would kindly excuse me, I have to go to the mosque for my prayers. Peace on those
who are rightly guided."
[Author unknown]​

 

[Pygoscelis]

Science can never disprove God or prove God, because God is a non-falsifiable claim. What science can do is disprove specific testable claims made by those who believe in God (which have become rarer over time). But once these claims are disproved, the believers then simply move the goal posts on how God did something etc. It is a futile exercise in the end. You will never be able to prove or disprove something that is subjective (exclusively of the mind) and not tangible and objectively testable.

 

[Asiyah3]

********edit******** (I'm sorry, nothing)

 

[Trumble]

What do you mean evolved? I do not see any evolution ...You seem to not understand the point.
An evolution is a slow process. Do you have any notebooks or any sort of history in which you
can see on a period of years how greek "morphed" into latin?

Think about it. In order for greek to one day turn into latin is the equivalent of all the people in
America today turning one day into Japanese...you see, this argument does not hold water.
Humans use language however they did not form it and that is the end of the story. You can
say that you do not feel comfortable with that and want to hide it with all sorts of fairy tales
but this is simply the way it is.

Minimal research will show you that the universally accepted theory among people with the slightest idea what they are talking about is that such 'evolution' (specifically from the Cumae variant) is exactly what did occur. Amazingly, this theory came about from the study of just such 'notebooks', or at least their equivalents in stone tablets!

You don't see or don't want to see?

Ahem...