Prove that God exists

  • Thread starter Thread starter sartajc
  • Start date Start date
  • Replies Replies 33
  • Views Views 10K
:sl:

I think a very common mistake that people make in these kinds of discussions is focusing on the scientific aspect of the Qur'an to such an extent that meanings of verses are distorted and added in where they should not be - for example, using a verse speaking about altering Allaah's creation (verse 4:119 (not 4:120 as was stated)) to refer to 'genetic engineering' - more precisely, it was said that "the holy Quran has prophesied the plastic surgery, genetic engineering and cloning in this short and concise sentence". While it could be one of the meanings of the verse, it is not the obvious meaning, especially when we look at the context of the verse:

Allâh cursed him. And he [Shaitân (Satan)] said: "I will take an appointed portion of your slaves;
Verily, I will mislead them, and surely, I will arouse in them false desires; and certainly, I will order them to slit the ears of cattle, and indeed I will order them to change the nature created by Allâh." And whoever takes Shaitân (Satan) as a Walî (protector or helper) instead of Allâh, has surely suffered a manifest loss.
He [Shaitan (Satan)] makes promises to them, and arouses in them false desires; and Shaitan's (Satan) promises are nothing but deceptions. [Qur'an, 4:118-120]


And if we look at what Ibn Katheer says about this verse:
(And indeed I will order them to change the nature created by Allah.) means tattooing, according to Al-Hasan bin Abi Al-Hasan Al-Basri. In his Sahih, Muslim recorded the prohibition of tattooing the face, which in one of its wordings states: "May Allah curse whoever does this.'' ​
So this is an example of how scientific facts/prophecies are often read in where they do not exist, and while they are features of the miraculous nature of the Qur'an, they need to be put in their proper place and a proper methodology must be followed to extract such examples. It does more harm than good when certain verses are 'bent over backwards' to seek to prove that they contain certain scientific facts/prophecies.

When such facts are clear and explicit from the verse, they should be mentioned, but when they go against the intent and meaning of the verse, they should be abandoned.

:w:
 
I agree, I think it is a yasir Qadhi lecture, refuting attacks against the Quran?, maybe anyhow other pieces of bringing people to islam is good:

* Ease of Memorisation like no other Book
* Make a Surah Like it challenge, i.e. Miraculous nature in its language
*The discription of G-d, I.e. if you mention the 99 hardly anyone will disagree with them, unlike G-d being described as 'resting' or any other such thing in other religions whilst the Qu'ran says Slumber does not over take him.

And so on.
 
How can anyone in the world really claim any book or writings came from God? The Bible or the Quran, or any other book, how is it truly proven?

Take care... :peace:
 
Iwant2no2 said:
How can anyone in the world really claim any book or writings came from God? The Bible or the Quran, or any other book, how is it truly proven?

Take care... :peace:
Click to expand...

Well it would depend on what type of proof the person is asking for.
 
Al Habeshi said:
Well it would depend on what type of proof the person is asking for.
Click to expand...

What type of proof do you have?

This was my question: and I am the one who is asking!!
How can anyone in the world really claim any book or writings came from God? The Bible or the Quran, or any other book, how is it truly proven?

Just wondering!! :?

Take care... :peace:
 
I have been thinking about this also.

The argument of the verse seems to be, "no one among mankind can write like the Quran, so it must be from God"

But what if someone makes the argument, yes it's beyond the reach of man, and miracolous super intelligent Alien good have wrote it.

My response to myself when I pondered about this myself is this. The frist possibility is the argument was never a conclusive argument saying that, rather it was addressing people who thought Mohammad (pbuh) fabricated. Since Mohammad (pbuh) was human, and no human can write such a book, and it remains like that to now, it's proof Mohammad (pbuh) didn't write the book.

My 2nd respone, it may not have to with the stuctural beauty of Quran, but rather it's light, and it's light is something beyond sequitor logic (something for the opposite of neo in the matrix can't go beyond), and a person of the light would not be able to fabricate a book saying it's from God because he is good (ie. from the light) while people from the darkness don't comprehend the light and the wisdom, so cannot write such a book. Infact, I found some hadiths that can be interpeted to be saying that what the verse means is, what they can't bring is the light of God. This is what it means. They can't bring a surah like that of Allah's word and light. However it is known everything Mohammad (pbuh) said was light. Like wise, the Prophets (as) speak from revelation, and their words were light.


ws
 
Last edited:
or you can realise that your alive, and if you look at the science of it, your creation is a scientific miracle in itself.
 
:sl:
also.. from what science's latest developments tell us... the universe literally came into existance from nothing (literally nothing)... and was a totally unpredictable event.

and that exactly fits the definition of Allah, he creates at free will and creates being from non being.

besides that.... all the extra evidences in the quran that point to his existance SWT.


all the best with it!
salams :)

ps: this might b of use as well as some of the posts related to it
http://www.islamicboard.com/comparative-religion/31364-truth-god-does-not-exist-28.html#post568494
the thread is kinda just too long i guess.
 
I'm puzzled. Why can some people believe in the first law of physics.

Matter can be neither destroyed nor created.

Then they see no conflict in the idea that all matter had an original starting point. It seems to me that if matter had not been created, it would have always existed without a starting point. Yet, the age of the universe is measurable back to a common origin.

If there is some loophole in the law and matter can suddenly pop out of no where. Why isn't there new matter popping up all over the place like popcorn?
 
Woodrow said:
I'm puzzled. Why can some people believe in the first law of physics.

Matter can be neither destroyed nor created.

Then they see no conflict in the idea that all matter had an original starting point. It seems to me that if matter had not been created, it would have always existed without a starting point. Yet, the age of the universe is measurable back to a common origin.

If there is some loophole in the law and matter can suddenly pop out of no where. Why isn't there new matter popping up all over the place like popcorn?
Click to expand...

:sl:
lol well evidecne is pointing more and more to teh fact that the universe did come out of nothing.

What's crazier is how people could believe that and claim that it was created out of nothing due to some sort of inevitability given enough time :uuh: . Which is just wrong. lol

:w:
 
lolwatever said:
:sl:
lol well evidecne is pointing more and more to teh fact that the universe did come out of nothing.
What's crazier is how people could believe that and claim that it was created out of nothing due to some sort of inevitability given enough time :uuh: . Which is just wrong. lol

:w:
Click to expand...

I agree with that completly.

What I can't understand is how some people can believe it happened without a cause. If it can happen without a cause it seems like it should be a fairly common occurance. Since they place nothing as the origin, there would have been a very ample supply of that without the existance of God(swt).
 

Similar Threads

Back
Top