Science has a problem with God?

[MMohammed]

"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 your God doesn't exist. What do you say
to that, son?
Where is your God now?"
[The student doesn't answer]
"Sit down, please."
The Muslim sits...Defeated.
Another Muslim raises his hand. "Professor, may I
address the class?"
The professor turns and smiles. "Ah, another Muslim
in the vanguard!
Come, come, young man. Speak some proper wisdom to
the gathering."
The
Muslim looks around the room. "Some interesting
points you are making, sir.
Now I've got a question for you. Is there such
thing as heat?"
"Yes," the professor replies. "There's
heat."
"Is there such a thing as cold?"
"Yes, son, there's cold too."
"No, sir, there isn't."
The professor's grin freezes. The room
suddenly goes very cold.
The second Muslim continues. "You can have lots of
heat, even more heat,
super-heat, mega-heat, white heat, a little heat or
no heat but we don't
have anything called 'cold'.
We can hit 458 degrees below zero, which is no
heat, but we can't go any further after that.
There is no such thing as
cold, otherwise we would be able to go colder than
458 - 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, sir,
just the absence of it."
Silence. A pin drops somewhere in the
classroom.
"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 something,
it is the absence of
something. You can have low light, normal light,
bright light, flashing
light but if you have no light constantly you have
nothing and it's called
darkness, isn't it? That's the meaning we use to
define the word. In
reality, Darkness isn't. If it were, you would be
able to make darkness
darker and give me a jar of it. Can you...give me a
jar of darker
darkness, professor?"
Despite himself, the professor smiles at the young
effrontery before
him.
This will indeed be a good semester. "Would
you mind telling us what
your point is, young man?"
"Yes, professor. My point is, your philosophical
premise is flawed to
start with and so your conclusion must be in
error...."
The professor goes toxic. "Flawed...? How dare
you...!""
"Sir, may I explain what I mean?" >
The class is all ears.
"Explain... oh, explain..." The professor
makes an admirable effort
to regain control. Suddenly he is affability
itself. He waves his
hand to silence the class, for the student to
continue.
"You are working on the premise of duality," the
Muslim explains. "That for
example there is life and then there's death; a good
God and a bad God.
You are viewing the concept of God as something
finite, something we can
measure.
Sir, science cannot even explain a thought. It uses
electricity and
magnetism but has never seen, much less fully
understood them. To view
death as the opposite of life is to be ignorant of
the fact that death
cannot exist as a substantive thing. Death is not
the opposite of life,
merely the absence of it."
The young man holds up a newspaper he takes from the
desk of a neighbor who
has been reading it. "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 thing as injustice? No. Injustice is
the absence of justice.
Is there such a thing as evil?" The Muslim pauses.
"Isn't evil the absence
of good?"
The professor's face has turned an alarming color.
He is so angry
he is temporarily speechless.
The Muslim continues. "If there is evil in the
world, professor, and we all
agree there is, then God, if he exists, must be
accomplishing a work
through the agency of evil. What is that work, God
is accomplishing? The
Bible tells us it is to see if each one of us will,
of our own free will,
choose good over evil."
The professor bridles. "As a philosophical
scientist, I don't vie this
matter as having anything to do with any choice; as
a realist, I absolutely
do not recognize 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 in this world is
probably one of the most observable phenomena
going," the Muslim replies.
"Newspapers make billions of dollars reporting it
every week! Tell me,
professor. Do you teach your students that they
evolved from a monkey?"
"If you are referring to the natural evolutionary
process, young man,
yes, of course I do."
"Have you ever observed evolution with your own eyes,
sir?"
The professor makes a sucking sound with his teeth
and gives his 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
on-going endeavor, are you
not teaching your opinion, sir? Are you now not a
scientist, but a
priest?"
"I'll overlook your impudence in the light of our
philosophical discussion.
Now, have you quite finished?" the professor hisses.
"So you don't accept
God's moral code to do what is righteous?"
"I believe in what is - that's science!"
"Ahh! SCIENCE!" the student's face splits into a
grin.
"Sir, you rightly state that science is the study of
observed phenomena.
Science too is a premise which is flawed..."
"SCIENCE IS FLAWED..?" the
professor splutters.
The class is in uproar.
The Muslim remains standing until the commotion has
subsided.
"To continue the point you were making earlier to
the other student, may I
give you an example of what I mean?"
The professor wisely keeps silent.
The Muslim looks around the room. "Is there anyone
in the class who has
ever seen the professor's brain?". The class breaks
out in laughter.
The Muslim points towards his elderly,
crumbling tutor.
"Is there anyone here who has ever heard the
professor's brain...,
felt the professor's brain, touched or smelt the
professor's brain?".
No one appears to have done so.
The Muslim shakes his head sadly.
"It appears no-one here has had any sensory
perception of the professor's
brain whatsoever. Well, according to the rules of
empirical,
stable, demonstrable protocol, science, I DECLARE
that the professor has no brain."
The class is in chaos.
The Student was none other than..................Mohammed Ali Jinnah..Founder of Pakistan
Using a bit of brain can yourself tell you about the existence of God by using some common sense and not always standing for religious debates

 

[Lynx]

Thanks for posting a straw-man of the atheist position.

 

[جوري]

Thanks for posting a straw-man of the atheist position.

Thanks for always being the voice of dissent but with no more than a hallow objection!

all the best

 

[Lynx]

Thanks for always being the voice of dissent but with no more than a hallow objection!

all the best

Well here are some problems with this awful dialogue.

First, the guy who wrote this seems to think that if you take away Justice or Good you end up with Injustice and Evil. This is plainly false if you think about it. Just because something is not good does not imply that something is evil. It can be the case that action x is NEITHER. Similarly, if something is not Just it does not follow that it is unjust; it can be neutral. So action X is not evil by virtue of the fact that it is not good nor is state of affairs Y unjust by virtue that it is not just.

Second, the part about science is ridiculous. No reasonable person, let alone a professor of philosophy, is going to claim that God does not exist because we can't hear him, touch him, see him, smell him, taste him(?). The fact that dialogue set the prof up as someone who only believes in things that can be verifiable by this criteria is clearly a straw man argument against a naturalist/atheist. scientists and the like have no problem believing in things they can;t see as long as they have sufficient secondary evidence. That's why we know atoms exist. The argument that the Prof should have made to avoid the straw-man that is contained in this dialogue is "I don't see any direct evidence for God nor do I see any secondary evidence for God"

So all in all, the first part of this dialogue is just a bad answer to the Problem of Evil. The second part is a clear cut straw-man argument in that no atheist that I have ever met would hold the beliefs that this professor does.

Just to point out, the dialogue is even written in a crappy way. What sort of professor says "how dare you" to a student for saying his premise is flawed? Has this author ever sat in a class? The author is trying too hard to demonize the prof in the dialogue. I mean it's bad enough to give him such a crappy set of arguments but to paint him as jerk too is just a poor attempt to getting readers on the side of the student. And the last bit is hilarious about the Ali Jinnah thing. I don't think Muhammad ali jinnah would quote the Bible...so this should have been edited before being posted. Just looks bad!

 

[Mr.President]

they think that GOD is like a gas that they can test GOD accept GOD lol

they are gonna TEST the creator and accept yes u r the creator WHAT A JOKE !!!!

their hearts are locked !

 

[kashif.rock]

Stupid Creatures..... they never examine zam zam water ... how they can search god..

 

[glo]

The idea that a Muslim would quote from the Bible to make his or her argument is indeed quite amusing ... unless Mohammed Ali Jinnah was addressing a predominantly Christian audience and thought his argument might carry more weight if he quoted the Bible? :?

 

[Ramadhan]

I think this was a made up story, taken from another previous made up story.

But it does not distract from its purpose: to show foolishness of atheists.

 

[glo]

I think this was a made up story, taken from another previous made up story.

I agree.

But it does not distract from its purpose: to show foolishness of atheists.

I know many atheists, who are good and moral people - and they are anything but foolish.

I think what atheists might lack in their pursuit of exploring the world from the angle of scientific evidence, is an openness to the possibility that God exists.
I have read many arguments by atheists, and - to be honest - I cannot fault them.

Perhaps atheists need to experience God in such a way, that they would become convinced (despite the lack of scientific evidence) that he is real.

I pray that those who do not know God may have a real encounter with him!
I wonder why God does not show himself more clearly to those who don't believe.

 

[Ramadhan]

I know many atheists, who are good and moral people - and they are anything but foolish.

I think you misunderstood what I wrote. By "foolish" here is not their character or morality or whatever, but their argument that God does not exist. their belief and faith that there is no god is foolish.

I think what atheists might lack in their pursuit of exploring the world from the angle of scientific evidence, is an openness to the possibility that God exists.
I have read many arguments by atheists, and - to be honest - I cannot fault them.

I've seen/heard/read all their arguments, and they are faulty and flawed at the basic level.

Perhaps atheists need to experience God in such a way, that they would become convinced (despite the lack of scientific evidence) that he is real.

There is plenty of evidence. Either they come to their senses or God wills his guidance for those people.

I wonder why God does not show himself more clearly to those who don't believe.

I am extremely surprised that you could ever think/say that way. God has provided more than enough signs and proofs.
For the disbelievers, even if God commands the angels to appear on earth, they would still dispute it and find a way to reject.

QS 23:24

But the chiefs of those who disbelieved among his people said: "He is no more than a human being like you, he seeks to make himself superior to you. Had Allah willed, He surely could have sent down angels; never did we hear such a thing among our fathers of old.

QS 41:14

When their messengers came unto them from before them and behind them, saying: Worship none but Allah! they said: If our Lord had willed, He surely would have sent down angels (unto us), so lo! we are disbelievers in that wherewith ye have been sent.

 

[Missinglinks]

Perhaps atheists need to experience God in such a way, that they would become convinced (despite the lack of scientific evidence) that he is real.

There is no lack of scientific evidence for Allah... in science if something indicates or points toward a "thing", and we see the effects of it, then we don't have to see it to be called "existing", because the effects of it are the evidence of it's existence. Like gravity, we don't see it, but we can feel it.. the fact that we can feel it is one of the evidences of it. We see it's effects(the people don't dive or are hanging in the sky, they can't leave the ground and replace it for the sky). The fact that it we feel and see indirect his effects is the proff that it exists. So we gave some point a value, and measure from that value the things we thinkare gravity, not knowing the true nature of gravity and seeing it as a whole while there might be other things that influence our measurements, not (yet) discovered or still unknown.

Also atoms, has someone ever seen some? Their existence is still a theory, but did you know that if this theory was proven wrong (maybe by a new theory) whole parts of science would callopse and they then have to begin from the beginning building on the new theorie. We don't even see the effects of this atoms... we just suggest that the effects are due to the atoms... see how this theory is even today still on empty air!!!! OPEN YOUR EYES! so most of the arguments of the atheists are based on this.. "we don't see it, it has never been proven"... tehy forget that some or maybe even most of the basic(or fundaments) of the sciences today are never proven, just suggestion wich they agreed upon just to go further. And it is a fact that most of the inventions are even still today by accidents! The only thing what they do when this happens is try to clarify/explain/declare it according to the existing theories... so every fool will then think that it suits, not realising that the theories are constant adjusted to fit and there is a huge "war" between the scholar!

My physics teacher once said to me when we were discusing the trustworthieness of the theories of today. Because I made a joke and said that it might be possible that the theories of today are within a hundred-hundredfifty years a joke to those future people, except a small bit that survives, like most of the theories of the past nations that once were believed to be the absolute truth, "the evidence". He laughed and said: "Actually, we have a black box. We don't know what is inside it. So we fire some bullets through it and we measure with what speed they come out on the other side. We ramble it to hear what is inside it. And do some more things And then make a theory trying to evaluate what is inside this black box wich the content of it is still unknown but given a name and a theory.

Also not to forget.. I also had a disccusion with the my biology teacher... We came to the chapter "evolution" and we also went trough the other theories like creationism and the old theories that are refuted. So I knew that the theorie of Spontaneous generation or Equivocal generation, this theory is saying that there can come something from nothing! And most atheists make a joke about this theorie.... then I said to be sure(of what i remember): "So this theory is refuted and proven to be wrong" my teacher said yes (it is impossible that there comes from nothing something). Then I said, but then evolution is also wrong, since it says that life once came from nothing and not always has existed. And how can come the common ancestor from nothing if we say organism have not always existed, then from where do they come.." I swaer by Allah she was struck as far as I know... She almost cried... subhanAllah they laugh at theories while the same theory is the fundament/basic of their theory where they built on!...


the prophet pbuh once said to an atheist according to our brother Khalid Yassin: "the presence of dawn is the evidence that a camel was here, the footprints in the sand is the evidence that a person was here, and the evidence of the earth and all the planets are proof that the same one or some great power has placed them where they are"

Allah said,

﴿إِنَّ فِى خَلْقِ السَّمَـوَتِ وَالاٌّرْضِ﴾

(Verily, in the creation of the heavens and the Earth,) ﴿3:190﴾, referring to the sky in its height and spaciousness, the earth in its expanse and density, the tremendous features they have of rotating planets, seas, mountains, deserts, trees, plants, fruits, animals, metals and various beneficial colors, scents, tastes and elements.

﴿وَاخْتِلَـفِ اللَّيْلِ وَالنَّهَارِ﴾

(And in the alternation of night and day), as one follows and takes from the length of the other. For instance, at times one of them becomes longer than the other, shorter than the other at times and equal to the other at other times, and the same is repeated again and again, and all this occurs by the decision of the Almighty, Most Wise. This is why Allah said,

﴿لاّيَـتٍ لاٌّوْلِى الاٌّلْبَـبِ﴾

(there are indeed signs for men of understanding), referring to the intelligent and sound minds that contemplate about the true reality of things, unlike the deaf and mute who do not have sound comprehension. Allah said about the latter type,

﴿وَكَأَيِّن مِّن ءَايَةٍ فِى السَّمَـوَتِ وَالاٌّرْضِ يَمُرُّونَ عَلَيْهَا وَهُمْ عَنْهَا مُعْرِضُونَ - وَمَا يُؤْمِنُ أَكْثَرُهُمْ بِاللَّهِ إِلاَّ وَهُمْ مُّشْرِكُونَ ﴾

(And how many a sign in the heavens and the earth they pass by, while they are averse therefrom. And most of them believe not in Allah except that they attribute partners unto Him) ﴿12:105,106

the whole creation points towards a creator...

 

[Skavau]

MMohammed, if you are going to post that article that I have seen both Christians and Muslims use repeatedly - I suggest you do some formatting on it. It is as bad as a word block.

Anyway, what Lynx said is correct. It is a poor strawman of the atheist position (I have addressed in on other forums) which I will not waste my time with. I have never seen a philosophy professor, much less an atheist one act in such a stupid manner and the 'wisdom' of the theist student is not unique. If it impresses you, you are easily impressed.

 

[glo]

I am extremely surprised that you could ever think/say that way. God has provided more than enough signs and proofs.
For the disbelievers, even if God commands the angels to appear on earth, they would still dispute it and find a way to reject.

You misunderstand me.
I too see signs and proofs of God's existence - but no matter how convincing I find them, I have to accept and admit that none of those stand up to scientific scrutiny.

I have heard so many believers in God make claims of scientific proof, and yet none of them has ever convinced the atheist community.
Yes, people usually find some 'atheist' or another, who allegedly found scientific proof for the existance of God and became a believer ... but by large atheists remain unimpressed.

The reason I wonder why God doesn't reveal himself more clearly to non-believers, is that there are some atheists very close to my heart and I would like to see nothing more than them accepting the existence of God in their lives!
An atheist friend once said 'If God knows me so well, then he also knows the way I think and feel. If he wants me to believe in him and follow him, why does he not show himself to me in a way which he knows would convince me?'

I think it's a good question. And my prayer is that God will do just that!

 

[MMohammed]

If you don't believe in this Student.
God has kept evil for testing us.Life is a test for us.
If a student who's givin an exam is told what is the correct answer for each question, he will straightaway come first!
If achieving the victory for Jannah was so easy, wouldn't everybody go in Jannah and Hell would have no one inside it!
And if you are talking about any neutral deed, I personally didn't get you!
I'ven't heard of it.Using your common sense, you can deduce that the student is saying that if someone didnt commit any good deed, he has done an evil deed.He is talking about deed and it clearly means that something is done.
And I agree atoms exist and you have a proof for it and the proof for existence of God is given by nature daily.
Who gives us the life?
If even our body formed itself, who gave it the ability to control itself?

 

[Skavau]

If you don't believe in this Student.
God has kept evil for testing us.Life is a test for us.

I believe in the student as much as I believe in your formatting.

If a student who's givin an exam is told what is the correct answer for each question, he will straightaway come first!
If achieving the victory for Jannah was so easy, wouldn't everybody go in Jannah and Hell would have no one inside it!

This, in front of all of the apologetics I have heard for the suitability of eternal torture and and an all-loving god, has to be the strangest one yet. No-one who fails an examination in real life is told they must be tortured for the rest of their life. No-one who succeeds in an examination in real life is given eternal bliss for the rest of life. Do you even understand the purpose of examinations? The first thing that you might note with every single examination in history is that it is the conclusion, or part of the conclusion of a subject or a course in an educational establishment. Those who participate in an examination have decided to sign up for the course voluntarily.

In the heaven and hell example you present, no-one has agreed to be subject to it, and millions of people who you would claim are failing or are going to fail have even accepted that such an examination even exists. Indeed, the questions in such an 'examination' are not even questions - they are demands for subordinance based on... flimsy evidence (deliberately so in order that there is some balance, as you argue).

In short, your comparison to an examinaton makes no sense. You are saying that there exists a God, that has two destinations in mind for us: heaven or hell. One a utopia, the other pit of torture. Our fate is decided (apparently?) by whether or not we successfully recognise that God is absolute and obeyable. One specific thing of note is that this is not moral. Examinations are not moral tests and you used that as an example. So what exactly are you trying to prove?

I'ven't heard of it.Using your common sense, you can deduce that the student is saying that if someone didnt commit any good deed, he has done an evil deed.He is talking about deed and it clearly means that something is done.

I disagree entirely there. The distinction between 'moral' and 'immoral' is that moral is something which is to be considered a good action. Something that ought to be done, whereas an immoral action is something that should be ought not to be done. Evil is not the absence of good, the absence of good is simply moral neutrality and the absence of evil is simply moral neutrality too.

 

[Masuma]

Asalamu Alikum Wa Rehamtullahiu Wa Barakatuh!

Well, the OP was quite a funny dialogue;D but it’s just a made-up dialogue, right? I mean it never actually happened as I once received a message from my friend in which it was Albert Einstein talking about the “darkness part”. LOL!


I too have encountered many Atheists’ ideologies and reasoning but they fail badly in it. They take science as the ultimate criteria but still they fail to give sufficient and convincing or should I say “SCIENTIFIC EXPLANATIONS” for their widely accepted Evolution theory!:rollseyes


And as brother Missinglinks stated that the Existence of GOD CAN be proved scientifically! Want me to prove it to you Atheists out there…?;D Well I’ll inshAllah do it after my stupid exam is over.:raging:

@ sis glo:

Sis, I too many a times use quotations from the Bible to have a better dialogue with a Christian as many Christians take Bible to be their ultimate criteria!

Different people have different criterias for judging, for instance, Atheists go for science, Christians and Jews go for Bible, Muslims have their Al-Furqan,:statisfie the Quran as the ultimate criteria so the technique is to use those people’s criteria with which you are having dialogue…makes the whole discussion more convincing!

 

[Masuma]

MMohammed, if you are going to post that article that I have seen both Christians and Muslims use repeatedly -

You forgot to mention "SOME MUSLIMS".
Different Muslims have different way of addressing! :shade:

 

[MMohammed]

@Skavau. I never compared exams to life.I was just giving you an example.
What I am trying to prove is that everything has its opposite just like there won't be the expression of passion and love without violence(And remember I AM NEVER SAYING THAT YOU SHOULD FIGHT TO EXPRESS LOVE!!) !
What I am clearly trying to say is that God has not wiped out evil so that He can see who involves in it and who does not.Everyone has an equal brain and it depends upon the extent of knowledge, he tries to get.If you sit at home and make decisions, it is wrong.Instead if you go out and see whats happening in the world, that is more wiser(this is an example, do not give me a lecture on it please ).
On the other hand, fate is not involved in the person's faith.It is the person who chooses the religion after seeing the world.I never said that believe in Allah simultaneously.Its better if you see why Allah is the God.And before arguing with others, as I have previously said, see what is correct before finding the answer for my question.I will not get anything if you will do right, he will be you who will get its reward.

I disagree entirely there. The distinction between 'moral' and 'immoral' is that moral is something which is to be considered a good action. Something that ought to be done, whereas an immoral action is something that should be ought not to be done. Evil is not the absence of good, the absence of good is simply moral neutrality and the absence of evil is simply moral neutrality too.

If you do something, you must be doing something between: Good or Evil.What's the neutral action? Can you explain?

 

[Skavau]

@Skavau. I never compared exams to life.I was just giving you an example.

You were comparing how an exam works to how heaven & hell function.

If you do something, you must be doing something between: Good or Evil.What's the neutral action? Can you explain?

Eating a bag of crips. It does not hurt anyone, nor does it improve anyone. It is neutral. It is an action that is amoral.

 

[MMohammed]

I am really not in a mood of debate

You were comparing how an exam works to how heaven & hell function.

Never! I was just telling you why evil is there!

Eating a bag of crips. It does not hurt anyone, nor does it improve anyone. It is neutral. It is an action that is amoral.

The professor never even asked about it! His main point was of why did God create evil and that was my response to it! Although yes, I do not completely agree with the Student in this matter.
And an example of neutral action, please ?