Scientists and ......!

[chalks75]

No inaccuracies of ESTABLISHED scientific facts. Scientific theories are theories, and theories are not facts.

- - - Updated - - -



Can You Prove That God Does Not Exist?
When asked this question atheists argue that it’s not up to them to provide evidence for proof of God. The problem however with their argument is that if they claim God doesn’t exist then they should provide the evidence.
If atheists have never visited every planet; or if they have never been to every part of the universe; or if they have never seen every star in outer space – then how can they prove that God does not exist?
Atheism in itself is merely a CLAIM – it is NOT a fact.
Atheism is NOT merely a lack of belief – it is an NONFACTUAL CLAIM that God does not exist because there is no proof that He doesn’t exist.

- - - Updated - - -

Should I also ask another question?

If you were to believe a God what attributes you would think God should have?

“ can I prove a god does not exist “
That depends on which god you are talking about.

But generally no, I cannot prove a god does not exist.
That in no way proves a god does exist.

Can you prove leprechauns do not exist ?

 

['Abdullah]

You don’t understand what a scientific theory is .
Theories explain facts.

Facts and theories are two different things. In the scientific method, there is a clear distinction between facts, which can be observed and/or measured, and theories, which are scientists' explanations and interpretations of the facts which can be wrong. One such scientific theory was that sun is stationary but more evidence proved it otherwise. Today we know as a facts the sun also revolves in its own orbit. This is scientific fact not the theory anymore. I hope you see the difference.​

​

​

If an atheist makes a claim that god does not exist ... then they have the burden of proof.
As it happens , I am not making that claim, I am rejecting your claim that a god exists.

Or can I say that you are claiming God does not exist? Is that case should the burden of proof be on you?

 

[chalks75]

Facts and theories are two different things. In the scientific method, there is a clear distinction between facts, which can be observed and/or measured, and theories, which are scientists' explanations and interpretations of the facts which can be wrong. One such scientific theory was that sun is stationary but more evidence proved it otherwise. Today we know as a facts the sun also revolves in its own orbit. This is scientific fact not the theory anymore. I hope you see the difference.​

​

​

Or can I say that you are claiming God does not exist? Is that case should the burden of proof be on you?

I fully understated how science works .
A scientific theory , is the best explanation that can be offered given the facts .. it is not set in stone , it can be altered , but once a hypothesis achieves the honorary title of being called s theory it is unlikely it will change in any fundamental way.
Theories explain facts , they also have to have predictive powers.

The germ theory of disease
Gravitational theory
The theory of evolution
Which of these do you accept , which do you reject
Could I say you accept the ones that don’t contradict your religion and don’t accept the one that does ??
That is the very definition of confirmation bias .

And no , I am not claim gods do not exist , because gods are an unfalsifiable hypothesis .
The claims made on the behalf of gods are not .

I do not claim there are no gods ,
I reject your assertion that there is.

 

['Abdullah]

I fully understated how science works .
A scientific theory , is the best explanation that can be offered given the facts .. it is not set in stone , it can be altered , but once a hypothesis achieves the honorary title of being called s theory it is unlikely it will change in any fundamental way.
Theories explain facts , they also have to have predictive powers.

The germ theory of disease
Gravitational theory
The theory of evolution
Which of these do you accept , which do you reject
Could I say you accept the ones that don’t contradict your religion and don’t accept the one that does ??
That is the very definition of confirmation bias .

And no , I am not claim gods do not exist , because gods are an unfalsifiable hypothesis .
The claims made on the behalf of gods are not .

I do not claim there are no gods ,
I reject your assertion that there is.

I would anticipate for an intelligent person like you to know how the scientific theory works. I will use the same concept to build my argument and prove how existence of God is the best explanation that can be offered for the facts I will discuss below. I will start my argument with some of the universal laws you mentioned.

WHY DOES THE UNIVERSE OPERATE BY UNIFORM LAWS OF NATURE?
Much of life may seem uncertain, but look at what we can count on day after day: gravity remains consistent, a hot cup of coffee left on a counter will get cold, the earth rotates in the same 24 hours, and the speed of light doesn't change -- on earth or in galaxies far from us. How is it that we can identify laws of nature that never change? Why is the universe so orderly, so reliable?
Even the greatest scientists have been struck by how strange this is. There is no logical necessity for a universe that obeys rules, let alone one that abides by the rules of mathematics. This astonishment springs from the recognition that the universe doesn't have to behave this way. It is easy to imagine a universe in which conditions change unpredictably from instant to instant, or even a universe in which things pop in and out of existence.
Richard Feynman, a Nobel Prize winner for quantum electrodynamics, said, "Why nature is mathematical is a mystery...The fact that there are rules at all is a kind of miracle.”
Source: Richard Feynman, The Meaning of It All: Thoughts of a Citizen-Scientist (New York: BasicBooks, 1998), 43.

THE DNA CODE INFORMS, PROGRAMS A CELL'S BEHAVIOR:
All instruction, all teaching, all training comes with intent. Someone who writes an instruction manual does so with purpose. Did you know that in every cell of our bodies there exists a very detailed instruction code, much like a miniature computer program? As you may know, a computer program is made up of ones and zeros, like this: 110010101011000. The way they are arranged tell the computer program what to do. The DNA code in each of our cells is very similar. It's made up of four chemicals that scientists abbreviate as A, T, G, and C. These are arranged in the human cell like this: CGTGTGACTCGCTCCTGAT and so on. There are three billion of these letters in every human cell!!
Well, just like you can program your phone to beep for specific reasons, DNA instructs the cell. DNA is a three-billion-lettered program telling the cell to act in a certain way. It is a full instruction manual.
Source: Francis S. Collins, director of the Human Genome Project, and author of The Language of God, (Free Press, New York, NY), 2006
Why is this so amazing? One has to ask....how did this information program wind up in each human cell? These are not just chemicals. These are chemicals that instruct, that code in a very detailed way exactly how the person's body should develop.
Natural, biological causes are completely lacking as an explanation when programmed information is involved. You cannot find instruction, precise information like this, without someone intentionally constructing it.

THE COMPLEXITY OF OUR PLANET POINTS TO A DELIBERATE DESIGNER WHO NOT ONLY CREATED OUR UNIVERSE, BUT SUSTAINS IT TODAY.
Many examples showing God's design could be given, possibly with no end. But here are a few:
The Earth...its size is perfect. The Earth's size and corresponding gravity holds a thin layer of mostly nitrogen and oxygen gases, only extending about 50 miles above the Earth's surface. If Earth were smaller, an atmosphere would be impossible, like the planet Mercury. If Earth were larger, its atmosphere would contain free hydrogen, like Jupiter. Earth is the only known planet equipped with an atmosphere of the right mixture of gases to sustain plant, animal and human life.
The Earth is located the right distance from the sun. Consider the temperature swings we encounter, roughly -30 degrees to +120 degrees. If the Earth were any further away from the sun, we would all freeze. Any closer and we would burn up. Even a fractional variance in the Earth's position to the sun would make life on Earth impossible. The Earth remains this perfect distance from the sun while it rotates around the sun at a speed of nearly 67,000 mph. It is also rotating on its axis, allowing the entire surface of the Earth to be properly warmed and cooled every day.
And our moon is the perfect size and distance from the Earth for its gravitational pull. The moon creates important ocean tides and movement so ocean waters do not stagnate, and yet our massive oceans are restrained from spilling over across the continents.
Water...colorless, odorless and without taste, and yet no living thing can survive without it. Plants, animals and human beings consist mostly of water (about two-thirds of the human body is water). You'll see why the characteristics of water are uniquely suited to life:
It has wide margin between its boiling point and freezing point. Water allows us to live in an environment of fluctuating temperature changes, while keeping our bodies a steady 98.6 degrees. Water is a universal solvent. This property of water means that various chemicals, minerals and nutrients can be carried throughout our bodies and into the smallest blood vessels.
Water is also chemically neutral. Without affecting the makeup of the substances it carries, water enables food, medicines and minerals to be absorbed and used by the body.
Water has a unique surface tension. Water in plants can therefore flow upward against gravity, bringing life-giving water and nutrients to the top of even the tallest trees.
Water freezes from the top down and floats, so fish can live in the winter.
Ninety-seven percent of the Earth's water is in the oceans. But on our Earth, there is a system designed which removes salt from the water and then distributes that water throughout the globe. Evaporation takes the ocean waters, leaving the salt, and forms clouds which are easily moved by the wind to disperse water over the land, for vegetation, animals and people. It is a system of purification and supply that sustains life on this planet, a system of recycled and reused water.
The human brain...simultaneously processes an amazing amount of information. Your brain takes in all the colors and objects you see, the temperature around you, the pressure of your feet against the floor, the sounds around you, the dryness of your mouth, even the texture of your keyboard. Your brain holds and processes all your emotions, thoughts and memories. At the same time your brain keeps track of the ongoing functions of your body like your breathing pattern, eyelid movement, hunger and movement of the muscles in your hands.
The human brain processes more than a million messages a second. Your brain weighs the importance of all this data, filtering out the relatively unimportant. This screening function is what allows you to focus and operate effectively in your world. The brain functions differently than other organs. There is an intelligence to it, the ability to reason, to produce feelings, to dream and plan, to take action, and relate to other people.
The eye...can distinguish among seven million colors. It has automatic focusing and handles an astounding 1.5 million messages -- simultaneously. Evolution focuses on mutations and changes from and within existing organisms. Yet evolution alone does not fully explain the initial source of the eye or the brain -- the start of living organisms from nonliving matter.

THE EXISTENCE OF OBJECTIVE MORAL OBLIGATIONS IS BETTER EXPLAINED BY THE EXISTENCE OF GOD.
People experience a sense of morality that leads them to hold strongly that certain things are right or wrong for all people in all cultures. For example, it is wrong to torture another person just for fun. It is wrong for me today. It is wrong for a citizen of the Philippines and it was wrong for someone living in 500 BC. If it is true that it is wrong to torture another person just for fun, then our moral sense picks up something real and objective about morality.
Some philosophers have argued that without God there can be no objective morality at all. In fact, I used to argue for this claim myself. I have changed my mind about this point. I think there can be objective moral goods without God. For example, Aristotle believed that there are objective facts concerning what helps human beings flourish. Human flourishing is clearly a moral good. Thus, there can be some objective moral goods without God. It is more difficult to find room for objective moral obligations without God.
What is the difference between a moral good and a moral obligation? A moral good is a state or situation that, morally, is better to have than not. We might think that it is a better situation, morally, if a person can fulfill some of her potential than if she cannot fulfill any of it. A moral obligation is a duty. If I have a moral obligation to do some action, then I have a duty to perform it. If I refrain from doing the action, I fail at one of my duties, and I am in that sense blameworthy.
What I will argue is that objective moral obligation is better explained by the existence of God than by atheist stories. I will not argue that objective moral obligations are impossible without God. I will argue they are more likely if God exists. If I am correct, objective moral obligations will be evidence for God’s existence.
Before I go any further, I must make it clear that I am not claiming that one must believe in God in order to be moral. I am not claiming that statistically those who believe in God are more moral than those who do not. I am also not claiming that our knowledge of morality depends upon God. This argument is to the effect that objective moral obligations themselves are surprising in a universe without God. They do not fit.
We have different kinds of obligations. Some are prudential, such as “you should prepare for the final exam.” Others have to do with playing a game such as “you cannot move your bishop along the horizontal.” Others are moral. One fact that separates moral obligations from other obligations is that non-moral obligations are actually conditionals. For example, you should prepare for the final exam if you want to do well in the class. You cannot more your bishop along the horizontal if you want to play chess according to the rules.
We can call this kind of obligations conditional obligations. There are two things to observe about conditional conditions. First, if the condition is not fulfilled, the obligation does not hold. Second, it is up to the person involved if she wants to fulfill the condition. So, it is up to you if you want to play chess according to the rules. If you do want to play according to the rules, then you have the obligation not to move the bishop across the horizontal. If you do not care about doing well in the class, you don’t have the obligation to prepare for the final exam. It is up to you if you care.
Moral obligations are not conditional in this way. Suppose you are in a situation in which it would be morally wrong to lie. Someone might want to say that your obligation is conditional. In other words, the moral claim is the following: “If you want to be moral, you must tell the truth in this particular situation.” This sentence is true. If you do not speak the truth, you are not acting morally in that situation. Notice that you are free to reject the condition. You can decide to act in a way that is not moral. If you decide to reject the condition, however, you are not released from the obligation. You may choose to act to fulfill your obligation or not to fulfill it. Either way, the obligation still holds. This observation about moral obligation is a feature of our widely shared concept of moral obligations. It is part of what it means to be under such an obligation.
Part of what makes moral obligations objective is this fact that whether they apply is not up to us. We are not free to refuse to “play the morality game” the way we can refuse to play chess and move the pieces however we want.
There is one more thing to notice about our different kinds of obligations. Conditional obligations are related to conditional purposes. If my purpose is to do well in a class, the obligation to study is binding on me. If my purpose is to play chess according to the rules, the obligation about how I may move my pieces holds. As I said, these conditions are in some sense up to us. Therefore, the purposes are up to us. We can opt in or opt out. Moral obligations seem to be related to purpose as well. If we want to act the way a human being ought to act, we should not lie in a specific situation. The purpose in an unconditional obligation is an unconditional purpose. It is not up to me but it holds.
Given these observations about the nature of obligations, and about moral obligations in particular, we can see that the existence of objective moral obligations makes sense if God is real. They might not be impossible without God, but it is surprising that the universe would develop objective, unconditional purposes for human beings simply by accident.
God, if he exists, is a powerful person who creates the universe (and human beings) for his own reasons. Some of these reasons constitute human purpose. Islam, for example, specifies that part of God’s purposes in creating us is that we would embody and practice various virtues that reflect his own goodness. In this view, it is no surprise that there are unconditional obligations.
If God does not exist, then, although there is a causal story about how human beings emerged, these causes do not provide reasons or purpose for our existence. Objective moral obligations are surprising on this view.

THE EXISTENCE OF THE UNIVERSE IS BETTER EXPLAINED BY THE EXISTENCE OF GOD.
I will begin by laying out the argument:
There are things which come into existence.
Everything which comes into existence is caused to exist by something else.
There cannot be an infinite series of past causes.
Therefore, there exists a first cause which did not come into existence. In other words, the first cause always existed.
Let us look at each of the steps in the argument:
Premise 1. “There are things which come into existence.”
Many things have come into existence. This post is coming into existence as I write it. You came into existence and so did I. This premise is not controversial.
Premise 2. “Everything which comes into existence is caused to exist by something else.”
It is obvious that nothing can cause itself to come into existence. Anything that causes itself to come into existence has to exist before it exists. This is impossible. Perhaps something can come into existence from nothing without any cause whatsoever. Can a thing just pop into existence with absolutely no cause? This also does not seem reasonable.
When my children were young, they would sometimes draw on the walls. If I walked into the dining room and saw a picture of Pinky and the Brain drawn on the wall in Permanent Magic Marker I would have asked “Where did this picture come from?” My son Belal might have said “It came from nothing, Dad. Nothing caused it. It just popped there. I think it is quite strange — don’t you?” Would I have accepted this? No! Things do not come into existence from nothing without cause. So, we have good reason to think that premise two is true. Everything which comes into existence is caused to exist by something else.
Premise 3. “There cannot be an infinite series of past causes.”
Is the series of past causes infinite? Can the universe have an infinite past? The answer is that it cannot. First, there are philosophical reasons to think the past cannot be infinite. Second, there are scientific reasons which support this view.
Philosophical Reasons:
Why can’t the past be infinite? The answer is that it is impossible to complete an infinite series by addition. The series of past events is complete. Think of this mathematical fact. Why is it impossible to count to infinity? It is impossible because, no matter how long you count, you will always be at a finite number. It is impossible to complete an actual infinite by successive addition.
The past is complete. This claim means that the entire series of past events ends now. It ends today. Tomorrow is not part of the series of past events. The series of past events does not extend into the future. It is complete at the present. If it is impossible to complete an infinite series by successive addition (as it is impossible to count to infinity) the past cannot be infinite. If the past is finite, that is, if it had a beginning, then the universe had a beginning. We have strong philosophical reason to reject the claim that the universe has always existed.
Scientific Reasons:
I will not develop these. Rather, I will simply point them out.
Big Bang theory does not prove that the universe had a beginning, but it supports this claim.
The second law of thermodynamics does not prove that the universe had a beginning but it also supports this claim.
We can see that we have good philosophical and scientific reasons to reject the idea that the Universe has always existed.
About the Universe, there are only three alternatives:
1. The universe has always existed. It has an infinite past.
2. The universe was popped into existence from nothing with absolutely no cause.
3. The universe was caused to exist by something outside it.
We have strong reason to reject the first two alternatives.
Alternative Three is the most reasonable. There was a first cause. This cause existed eternally. It initiated the big bang and created the universe. Now what can we know about this cause? Why think the cause is God? I will briefly sketch a few implications.
First, the first cause is not a part of the space-time physical universe because it caused the space time universe to begin. Therefore, it is outside of space and time. It is not physical. Second, it has a great deal of power. Third, it is a personal agent. This means it is not an inert force but it must have aspects of person hood; namely, that it wills. How do we know this? This is because it is the best answer to the question of why the Big Bang happened when it did. Why not sooner? Why not later? All of the conditions for producing the Big Bang existed from eternity. The only kind of cause we know of that can initiate an effect when all of the conditions are already present is the will of a personal agent.
I have not argued that it is logically impossible that the universe popped into existence from nothing without cause. I have argued that it is more reasonable to hold that it has a cause and that this cause is a non-physical personal agent — God.
So, it seems that the first argument is fairly strong. The existence of the universe is better explained by the existence of God.

I have briefly presented several arguments for the existence of God. Of course, there are many other arguments to consider on both sides, and each could be developed in much more detail. I have presented enough, I think, to suggest that it is more reasonable to believe that God exists than that He does not exist. I have not claimed to prove with mathematical certainty that God exists. I have, however, provided good reasons to think that He does. If someone wishes to argue successfully that God does not exist, he must first, provide an answer for each of my arguments and second, he must offer arguments that God does not exist. Until He does this, we can conclude that we have good reason to claim that God does exist.

 

[chalks75]

I would anticipate for an intelligent person like you to know how the scientific theory works. I will use the same concept to build my argument and prove how existence of God is the best explanation that can be offered for the facts I will discuss below. I will start my argument with some of the universal laws you mentioned.

WHY DOES THE UNIVERSE OPERATE BY UNIFORM LAWS OF NATURE?
Much of life may seem uncertain, but look at what we can count on day after day: gravity remains consistent, a hot cup of coffee left on a counter will get cold, the earth rotates in the same 24 hours, and the speed of light doesn't change -- on earth or in galaxies far from us. How is it that we can identify laws of nature that never change? Why is the universe so orderly, so reliable?
Even the greatest scientists have been struck by how strange this is. There is no logical necessity for a universe that obeys rules, let alone one that abides by the rules of mathematics. This astonishment springs from the recognition that the universe doesn't have to behave this way. It is easy to imagine a universe in which conditions change unpredictably from instant to instant, or even a universe in which things pop in and out of existence.
Richard Feynman, a Nobel Prize winner for quantum electrodynamics, said, "Why nature is mathematical is a mystery...The fact that there are rules at all is a kind of miracle.”
Source: Richard Feynman, The Meaning of It All: Thoughts of a Citizen-Scientist (New York: BasicBooks, 1998), 43.

THE DNA CODE INFORMS, PROGRAMS A CELL'S BEHAVIOR:
All instruction, all teaching, all training comes with intent. Someone who writes an instruction manual does so with purpose. Did you know that in every cell of our bodies there exists a very detailed instruction code, much like a miniature computer program? As you may know, a computer program is made up of ones and zeros, like this: 110010101011000. The way they are arranged tell the computer program what to do. The DNA code in each of our cells is very similar. It's made up of four chemicals that scientists abbreviate as A, T, G, and C. These are arranged in the human cell like this: CGTGTGACTCGCTCCTGAT and so on. There are three billion of these letters in every human cell!!
Well, just like you can program your phone to beep for specific reasons, DNA instructs the cell. DNA is a three-billion-lettered program telling the cell to act in a certain way. It is a full instruction manual.
Source: Francis S. Collins, director of the Human Genome Project, and author of The Language of God, (Free Press, New York, NY), 2006
Why is this so amazing? One has to ask....how did this information program wind up in each human cell? These are not just chemicals. These are chemicals that instruct, that code in a very detailed way exactly how the person's body should develop.
Natural, biological causes are completely lacking as an explanation when programmed information is involved. You cannot find instruction, precise information like this, without someone intentionally constructing it.

THE COMPLEXITY OF OUR PLANET POINTS TO A DELIBERATE DESIGNER WHO NOT ONLY CREATED OUR UNIVERSE, BUT SUSTAINS IT TODAY.
Many examples showing God's design could be given, possibly with no end. But here are a few:
The Earth...its size is perfect. The Earth's size and corresponding gravity holds a thin layer of mostly nitrogen and oxygen gases, only extending about 50 miles above the Earth's surface. If Earth were smaller, an atmosphere would be impossible, like the planet Mercury. If Earth were larger, its atmosphere would contain free hydrogen, like Jupiter. Earth is the only known planet equipped with an atmosphere of the right mixture of gases to sustain plant, animal and human life.
The Earth is located the right distance from the sun. Consider the temperature swings we encounter, roughly -30 degrees to +120 degrees. If the Earth were any further away from the sun, we would all freeze. Any closer and we would burn up. Even a fractional variance in the Earth's position to the sun would make life on Earth impossible. The Earth remains this perfect distance from the sun while it rotates around the sun at a speed of nearly 67,000 mph. It is also rotating on its axis, allowing the entire surface of the Earth to be properly warmed and cooled every day.
And our moon is the perfect size and distance from the Earth for its gravitational pull. The moon creates important ocean tides and movement so ocean waters do not stagnate, and yet our massive oceans are restrained from spilling over across the continents.
Water...colorless, odorless and without taste, and yet no living thing can survive without it. Plants, animals and human beings consist mostly of water (about two-thirds of the human body is water). You'll see why the characteristics of water are uniquely suited to life:
It has wide margin between its boiling point and freezing point. Water allows us to live in an environment of fluctuating temperature changes, while keeping our bodies a steady 98.6 degrees. Water is a universal solvent. This property of water means that various chemicals, minerals and nutrients can be carried throughout our bodies and into the smallest blood vessels.
Water is also chemically neutral. Without affecting the makeup of the substances it carries, water enables food, medicines and minerals to be absorbed and used by the body.
Water has a unique surface tension. Water in plants can therefore flow upward against gravity, bringing life-giving water and nutrients to the top of even the tallest trees.
Water freezes from the top down and floats, so fish can live in the winter.
Ninety-seven percent of the Earth's water is in the oceans. But on our Earth, there is a system designed which removes salt from the water and then distributes that water throughout the globe. Evaporation takes the ocean waters, leaving the salt, and forms clouds which are easily moved by the wind to disperse water over the land, for vegetation, animals and people. It is a system of purification and supply that sustains life on this planet, a system of recycled and reused water.
The human brain...simultaneously processes an amazing amount of information. Your brain takes in all the colors and objects you see, the temperature around you, the pressure of your feet against the floor, the sounds around you, the dryness of your mouth, even the texture of your keyboard. Your brain holds and processes all your emotions, thoughts and memories. At the same time your brain keeps track of the ongoing functions of your body like your breathing pattern, eyelid movement, hunger and movement of the muscles in your hands.
The human brain processes more than a million messages a second. Your brain weighs the importance of all this data, filtering out the relatively unimportant. This screening function is what allows you to focus and operate effectively in your world. The brain functions differently than other organs. There is an intelligence to it, the ability to reason, to produce feelings, to dream and plan, to take action, and relate to other people.
The eye...can distinguish among seven million colors. It has automatic focusing and handles an astounding 1.5 million messages -- simultaneously. Evolution focuses on mutations and changes from and within existing organisms. Yet evolution alone does not fully explain the initial source of the eye or the brain -- the start of living organisms from nonliving matter.

THE EXISTENCE OF OBJECTIVE MORAL OBLIGATIONS IS BETTER EXPLAINED BY THE EXISTENCE OF GOD.
People experience a sense of morality that leads them to hold strongly that certain things are right or wrong for all people in all cultures. For example, it is wrong to torture another person just for fun. It is wrong for me today. It is wrong for a citizen of the Philippines and it was wrong for someone living in 500 BC. If it is true that it is wrong to torture another person just for fun, then our moral sense picks up something real and objective about morality.
Some philosophers have argued that without God there can be no objective morality at all. In fact, I used to argue for this claim myself. I have changed my mind about this point. I think there can be objective moral goods without God. For example, Aristotle believed that there are objective facts concerning what helps human beings flourish. Human flourishing is clearly a moral good. Thus, there can be some objective moral goods without God. It is more difficult to find room for objective moral obligations without God.
What is the difference between a moral good and a moral obligation? A moral good is a state or situation that, morally, is better to have than not. We might think that it is a better situation, morally, if a person can fulfill some of her potential than if she cannot fulfill any of it. A moral obligation is a duty. If I have a moral obligation to do some action, then I have a duty to perform it. If I refrain from doing the action, I fail at one of my duties, and I am in that sense blameworthy.
What I will argue is that objective moral obligation is better explained by the existence of God than by atheist stories. I will not argue that objective moral obligations are impossible without God. I will argue they are more likely if God exists. If I am correct, objective moral obligations will be evidence for God’s existence.
Before I go any further, I must make it clear that I am not claiming that one must believe in God in order to be moral. I am not claiming that statistically those who believe in God are more moral than those who do not. I am also not claiming that our knowledge of morality depends upon God. This argument is to the effect that objective moral obligations themselves are surprising in a universe without God. They do not fit.
We have different kinds of obligations. Some are prudential, such as “you should prepare for the final exam.” Others have to do with playing a game such as “you cannot move your bishop along the horizontal.” Others are moral. One fact that separates moral obligations from other obligations is that non-moral obligations are actually conditionals. For example, you should prepare for the final exam if you want to do well in the class. You cannot more your bishop along the horizontal if you want to play chess according to the rules.
We can call this kind of obligations conditional obligations. There are two things to observe about conditional conditions. First, if the condition is not fulfilled, the obligation does not hold. Second, it is up to the person involved if she wants to fulfill the condition. So, it is up to you if you want to play chess according to the rules. If you do want to play according to the rules, then you have the obligation not to move the bishop across the horizontal. If you do not care about doing well in the class, you don’t have the obligation to prepare for the final exam. It is up to you if you care.
Moral obligations are not conditional in this way. Suppose you are in a situation in which it would be morally wrong to lie. Someone might want to say that your obligation is conditional. In other words, the moral claim is the following: “If you want to be moral, you must tell the truth in this particular situation.” This sentence is true. If you do not speak the truth, you are not acting morally in that situation. Notice that you are free to reject the condition. You can decide to act in a way that is not moral. If you decide to reject the condition, however, you are not released from the obligation. You may choose to act to fulfill your obligation or not to fulfill it. Either way, the obligation still holds. This observation about moral obligation is a feature of our widely shared concept of moral obligations. It is part of what it means to be under such an obligation.
Part of what makes moral obligations objective is this fact that whether they apply is not up to us. We are not free to refuse to “play the morality game” the way we can refuse to play chess and move the pieces however we want.
There is one more thing to notice about our different kinds of obligations. Conditional obligations are related to conditional purposes. If my purpose is to do well in a class, the obligation to study is binding on me. If my purpose is to play chess according to the rules, the obligation about how I may move my pieces holds. As I said, these conditions are in some sense up to us. Therefore, the purposes are up to us. We can opt in or opt out. Moral obligations seem to be related to purpose as well. If we want to act the way a human being ought to act, we should not lie in a specific situation. The purpose in an unconditional obligation is an unconditional purpose. It is not up to me but it holds.
Given these observations about the nature of obligations, and about moral obligations in particular, we can see that the existence of objective moral obligations makes sense if God is real. They might not be impossible without God, but it is surprising that the universe would develop objective, unconditional purposes for human beings simply by accident.
God, if he exists, is a powerful person who creates the universe (and human beings) for his own reasons. Some of these reasons constitute human purpose. Islam, for example, specifies that part of God’s purposes in creating us is that we would embody and practice various virtues that reflect his own goodness. In this view, it is no surprise that there are unconditional obligations.
If God does not exist, then, although there is a causal story about how human beings emerged, these causes do not provide reasons or purpose for our existence. Objective moral obligations are surprising on this view.

THE EXISTENCE OF THE UNIVERSE IS BETTER EXPLAINED BY THE EXISTENCE OF GOD.
I will begin by laying out the argument:
There are things which come into existence.
Everything which comes into existence is caused to exist by something else.
There cannot be an infinite series of past causes.
Therefore, there exists a first cause which did not come into existence. In other words, the first cause always existed.
Let us look at each of the steps in the argument:
Premise 1. “There are things which come into existence.”
Many things have come into existence. This post is coming into existence as I write it. You came into existence and so did I. This premise is not controversial.
Premise 2. “Everything which comes into existence is caused to exist by something else.”
It is obvious that nothing can cause itself to come into existence. Anything that causes itself to come into existence has to exist before it exists. This is impossible. Perhaps something can come into existence from nothing without any cause whatsoever. Can a thing just pop into existence with absolutely no cause? This also does not seem reasonable.
When my children were young, they would sometimes draw on the walls. If I walked into the dining room and saw a picture of Pinky and the Brain drawn on the wall in Permanent Magic Marker I would have asked “Where did this picture come from?” My son Belal might have said “It came from nothing, Dad. Nothing caused it. It just popped there. I think it is quite strange — don’t you?” Would I have accepted this? No! Things do not come into existence from nothing without cause. So, we have good reason to think that premise two is true. Everything which comes into existence is caused to exist by something else.
Premise 3. “There cannot be an infinite series of past causes.”
Is the series of past causes infinite? Can the universe have an infinite past? The answer is that it cannot. First, there are philosophical reasons to think the past cannot be infinite. Second, there are scientific reasons which support this view.
Philosophical Reasons:
Why can’t the past be infinite? The answer is that it is impossible to complete an infinite series by addition. The series of past events is complete. Think of this mathematical fact. Why is it impossible to count to infinity? It is impossible because, no matter how long you count, you will always be at a finite number. It is impossible to complete an actual infinite by successive addition.
The past is complete. This claim means that the entire series of past events ends now. It ends today. Tomorrow is not part of the series of past events. The series of past events does not extend into the future. It is complete at the present. If it is impossible to complete an infinite series by successive addition (as it is impossible to count to infinity) the past cannot be infinite. If the past is finite, that is, if it had a beginning, then the universe had a beginning. We have strong philosophical reason to reject the claim that the universe has always existed.
Scientific Reasons:
I will not develop these. Rather, I will simply point them out.
Big Bang theory does not prove that the universe had a beginning, but it supports this claim.
The second law of thermodynamics does not prove that the universe had a beginning but it also supports this claim.
We can see that we have good philosophical and scientific reasons to reject the idea that the Universe has always existed.
About the Universe, there are only three alternatives:
1. The universe has always existed. It has an infinite past.
2. The universe was popped into existence from nothing with absolutely no cause.
3. The universe was caused to exist by something outside it.
We have strong reason to reject the first two alternatives.
Alternative Three is the most reasonable. There was a first cause. This cause existed eternally. It initiated the big bang and created the universe. Now what can we know about this cause? Why think the cause is God? I will briefly sketch a few implications.
First, the first cause is not a part of the space-time physical universe because it caused the space time universe to begin. Therefore, it is outside of space and time. It is not physical. Second, it has a great deal of power. Third, it is a personal agent. This means it is not an inert force but it must have aspects of person hood; namely, that it wills. How do we know this? This is because it is the best answer to the question of why the Big Bang happened when it did. Why not sooner? Why not later? All of the conditions for producing the Big Bang existed from eternity. The only kind of cause we know of that can initiate an effect when all of the conditions are already present is the will of a personal agent.
I have not argued that it is logically impossible that the universe popped into existence from nothing without cause. I have argued that it is more reasonable to hold that it has a cause and that this cause is a non-physical personal agent — God.
So, it seems that the first argument is fairly strong. The existence of the universe is better explained by the existence of God.

I have briefly presented several arguments for the existence of God. Of course, there are many other arguments to consider on both sides, and each could be developed in much more detail. I have presented enough, I think, to suggest that it is more reasonable to believe that God exists than that He does not exist. I have not claimed to prove with mathematical certainty that God exists. I have, however, provided good reasons to think that He does. If someone wishes to argue successfully that God does not exist, he must first, provide an answer for each of my arguments and second, he must offer arguments that God does not exist. Until He does this, we can conclude that we have good reason to claim that God does exist.

That’s quite a long post ,
I’ve heard all those arguments from Christians argument for the existence of their version of god.

You made a mistake in one of them
You said
“ everything that exists”
That used to be the argument until it was pointed out that in that case a god would need a cause ,
So the argument was changed to “ everything that begins to exist “

Those arguments can be used , and are used to argue the existence of other gods .

Basically what you are saying
I don’t know how all these things could be ,,, so I’m going to say it’s a god.

As for the earth being the perfect size ,your being very selective , most of the planet we can live on , it’s water ,parts of it are to high , to dry , to cold for us to live on , and there are any number of disasters that await us , from earthquakes to diseases ... not much of a design.
Added to that , when the sun expends all its fuel it will turn into a red giant and kill every living organism on earth.

You make quite a few assertions, can you demonstrate that any of them are true

For example , can you demonstrate the universe could have any other way other than it is?

What you are offering as “ evidence “
I see as the natural world .


Gods are not explanations , gods are the things we make up when we don’t have a good explanation.
If you want to know what a culture did not know or feared .... look at the gods they invented .

 

[Eric H]

Greetings and peace be with you chalks75;

“ can I prove a god does not exist “
That depends on which god you are talking about.

The only God worth searching for is the creator of all that is seen and unseen. God is who he is, we do not change God by calling him the Hindu God, Muslim God or any other name. God the creator exists fully and totally, or there is no god. There cannot be a probable god, its yes or no.

A scientific theory , is the best explanation that can be offered given the facts

The fossils are facts, the theory of evolution depends on making a lot of assumptions about these fossils. If you can tell us how the universe came from no beginning or it did not come from anything. Then tell us how life started from no life, then tell us how the skeletal system evolved without God, you could then be onto something.

In the spirit of searching for a greatest meaning of 'One God'.
Eric

 

['Abdullah]

That’s quite a long post ,
I’ve heard all those arguments from Christians argument for the existence of their version of god.

You made a mistake in one of them
You said
“ everything that exists”
That used to be the argument until it was pointed out that in that case a god would need a cause ,
So the argument was changed to “ everything that begins to exist “

Those arguments can be used , and are used to argue the existence of other gods .

Basically what you are saying
I don’t know how all these things could be ,,, so I’m going to say it’s a god.

As for the earth being the perfect size ,your being very selective , most of the planet we can live on , it’s water ,parts of it are to high , to dry , to cold for us to live on , and there are any number of disasters that await us , from earthquakes to diseases ... not much of a design.
Added to that , when the sun expends all its fuel it will turn into a red giant and kill every living organism on earth.

You make quite a few assertions, can you demonstrate that any of them are true

For example , can you demonstrate the universe could have any other way other than it is?

What you are offering as “ evidence “
I see as the natural world .


Gods are not explanations , gods are the things we make up when we don’t have a good explanation.
If you want to know what a culture did not know or feared .... look at the gods they invented .

People have certain presuppositions and one need to have an open mind to find the truth. I can keep trying to provide you all sort of reasoning from philosophical and scientific point of view and you will not believe in any of those. At the end of the day the guidance comes from God. He knows what is in your heart. I can only assume that you are sincere in finding the truth and will advise you to pray sincerely to ONE God and ask Him to lead you to the truth.

Be sincere to yourself, keep an open mind and never give up. Believe me when it is time, you will be convinced by the simplest argument ever. But if you are not sincere and keep holding to your presuppositions, I am afraid, the door for guidance will remain close. I did the best I could, of course I can't force my belief system on anyone. This is your personal choice.
All the best!

 

[chalks75]

Greetings and peace be with you chalks75;



The only God worth searching for is the creator of all that is seen and unseen. God is who he is, we do not change God by calling him the Hindu God, Muslim God or any other name. God the creator exists fully and totally, or there is no god. There cannot be a probable god, its yes or no.




The fossils are facts, the theory of evolution depends on making a lot of assumptions about these fossils. If you can tell us how the universe came from no beginning or it did not come from anything. Then tell us how life started from no life, then tell us how the skeletal system evolved without God, you could then be onto something.

In the spirit of searching for a greatest meaning of 'One God'.
Eric

I don’t claim to know how life or the universe began.

Evolution is a fact.
It is a fact that was recognised long before Darwin’s time.
Darwin discovered the mechanism by which it works natural selection , (another man , Jean Lamark babtiste , came to the same conclusion working independently of Darwin )

Life evolves , this is an undisputed fact ,

The theory of evolution is not just based on the fossil record , it has been confirmed using genetics , we share a common ancestry with apes.
No only that , we fall under the category of apes, not only are we descendants of apes , we are apes.

But

Even if the entire science of evolution was disproved tomorrow .... that does not make you right by default.

Disproving evolution , is not proving creationism.

Why don’t you google “ how did the skeleton system evolve “
At least you will know what you disagree with then

 

[chalks75]

People have certain presuppositions and one need to have an open mind to find the truth. I can keep trying to provide you all sort of reasoning from philosophical and scientific point of view and you will not believe in any of those. At the end of the day the guidance comes from God. He knows what is in your heart. I can only assume that you are sincere in finding the truth and will advise you to pray sincerely to ONE God and ask Him to lead you to the truth.

Be sincere to yourself, keep an open mind and never give up. Believe me when it is time, you will be convinced by the simplest argument ever. But if you are not sincere and keep holding to your presuppositions, I am afraid, the door for guidance will remain close. I did the best I could, of course I can't force my belief system on anyone. This is your personal choice.
All the best!

The only presuppositions I make are
The universe exists
It is intelligible
And I am part of it.

I see no reason to assume the existence of gods.

If you ever come across evidence that there is a god ( not philosophical arguments or quotes from a book you assign special meaning to)

Feel free to share it with me.

The truth , is that which the evidence shows is true.

Hopefully someday we all know the truth .

 

['Abdullah]

The only presuppositions I make are
The universe exists
It is intelligible
And I am part of it.

I see no reason to assume the existence of gods.

If you ever come across evidence that there is a god ( not philosophical arguments or quotes from a book you assign special meaning to)

Feel free to share it with me.

The truth , is that which the evidence shows is true.

Hopefully someday we all know the truth .

It is amazing that you can believe in theory of evolution with little to no evidence but you can't believe in God when you look at the creation of everything around you, including yourself and the environment you live in.

"I can conceive how it might be possible for a man to lookdown upon the earth and be an atheist, but I cannot conceive how he could lookup into the heavens and say there is no God." -- Abraham Lincoln

Think seriously about the advice I gave. If you can't find any reason to believe in God, perhaps all you need is to pray to God and He will open the doors of truth for you. You will not loose anything by praying sincerely to God if He does not exist.

 

[chalks75]

It is amazing that you can believe in theory of evolution with little to no evidence but you can't believe in God when you look at the creation of everything around you, including yourself and the environment you live in.



Think seriously about the advice I gave. If you can't find any reason to believe in God, perhaps all you need is to pray to God and He will open the doors of truth for you. You will not loose anything by praying sincerely to God if He does not exist.

Which god should I pray to ?

 

[chalks75]

It is amazing that you can believe in theory of evolution with little to no evidence but you can't believe in God when you look at the creation of everything around you, including yourself and the environment you live in.



Think seriously about the advice I gave. If you can't find any reason to believe in God, perhaps all you need is to pray to God and He will open the doors of truth for you. You will not loose anything by praying sincerely to God if He does not exist.

I accept the theory of evolution , just like I accept the germ theory of disease , even though I’ve never seen a germ.

Whenever a theist can offer the same evidence for god , that a biologist can offer for evolution I might be persuaded

 

['Abdullah]

Which god should I pray to ?

We need to take one step at a time. First be convinced the God exists. Then ask the second question, would it make sense to have one God or many? What is your opinion? What would you think makes most sense - to have one God or many?

- - - Updated - - -

I accept the theory of evolution , just like I accept the germ theory of disease , even though I’ve never seen a germ.

Whenever a theist can offer the same evidence for god , that a biologist can offer for evolution I might be persuaded

You can't provide any proof that God does not exist. On the other, I can provide several evidences to prove that the theory of evolution has been wrong or misunderstood largely but that's not the purpose of our dialogue. I can go in more detail if you want me to but I can give you two big clues.
1. Self organization of matter - this is one of the dogma we have to believe if we believe in theory of evolution and there is no scientific explanation for this dogma.
2. Law of entropy tells us that the entire universe is unavoidably proceeding towards a more disordered, unplanned, and disorganized state. Evolutionary theory ignores this fundamental law of physics. The mechanism offered by evolution totally contradicts the second law. The theory of evolution says that disordered, dispersed, and lifeless atoms and molecules spontaneously came together over time, in a particular order, to form extremely complex molecules such as proteins, DNA, and RNA, whereupon millions of different living species with even more complex structures gradually emerged. According to the theory of evolution, this supposed process—which yields a more planned, more ordered, more complex and more organized structure at each stage—was formed all by itself under natural conditions. The law of entropy makes it clear that this so-called natural process utterly contradicts laws of thermodynamics.

Anyways its not important from my point of view to discuss theory of evolution because one can still be an atheist and deny theory of evolution. For our discussion, it means nothing important.

 

[chalks75]

We need to take one step at a time. First be convinced the God exists. Then ask the second question, would it make sense to have one God or many? What is your opinion? What would you think makes most sense - to have one God or many?

- - - Updated - - -



You can't provide any proof that God does not exist. On the other, I can provide several evidences to prove that the theory of evolution has been wrong or misunderstood largely but that's not the purpose of our dialogue. I can go in more detail if you want me to but I can give you two big clues.
1. Self organization of matter - this is one of the dogma we have to believe if we believe in theory of evolution and there is no scientific explanation for this dogma.
2. Law of entropy tells us that the entire universe is unavoidably proceeding towards a more disordered, unplanned, and disorganized state. Evolutionary theory ignores this fundamental law of physics. The mechanism offered by evolution totally contradicts the second law. The theory of evolution says that disordered, dispersed, and lifeless atoms and molecules spontaneously came together over time, in a particular order, to form extremely complex molecules such as proteins, DNA, and RNA, whereupon millions of different living species with even more complex structures gradually emerged. According to the theory of evolution, this supposed process—which yields a more planned, more ordered, more complex and more organized structure at each stage—was formed all by itself under natural conditions. The law of entropy makes it clear that this so-called natural process utterly contradicts laws of thermodynamics.

Anyways its not important from my point of view to discuss theory of evolution because one can still be an atheist and deny theory of evolution. For our discussion, it means nothing important.

I’m not claiming a god does it exist ,I don’t believe a god or gods exist.
It’s your claim that some god exists , so you have the burden of proof.

If you could disprove evolution, there is a Nobel prize awaiting you.

Answer me this
Is evolution by natural selection , the best explanation for biological diversity being offered by science today ?

Of the people that reject evolution what is the number one reason
The science is wrong
Or
It conflicts with their religious beliefs ?

Be honest

 

[chalks75]

I’m not claiming a god does it exist ,I don’t believe a god or gods exist.
It’s your claim that some god exists , so you have the burden of proof.

If you could disprove evolution, there is a Nobel prize awaiting you.

Answer me this
Is evolution by natural selection , the best explanation for biological diversity being offered by science today ?

Of the people that reject evolution what is the number one reason
The science is wrong
Or
It conflicts with their religious beliefs ?

Be honest

The law of entropy does nit apply to us ,as we are not in a closed system , we get energy from the sun.

If physics proved gods were real, physicists would be theists

The first thing is not be convinced a god exists, because even if your convinced you could be wrong

The first thing to do is prove a god exists... then be convinced

 

[yasoooo]

The Creator created us as a free people in the world and also placed the prophets sent by exhortation to the people of the earth and had to stand up. The creator said: "The man who seeks God will go with my satisfaction and the man who seeks the satisfaction of the subject, his own path." But! Every man will be the day of resurrection to life and people will return to their masters groups. It is the day of judgment where the man can hear what she has presented and what they would have been obvious. Whoever has wronged that day to the promised punishment and whoever has done well (surrender to God) will fully reward the prize. Wait, why are we waiting with you? Time will be soon! A man lives only a fraction of a second when the actual duration of the start of creation at the end of the creation would be calculated. Therefore, the necessary awareness and research

arrogance and craving pure waste of time. For this reason, I seek the satisfaction of God, because we are not without purpose on the earth. we encourage good and good deeds. So we promised in paradise that our goal would be achieved. We have the choice between good and bad.
Common sense is the key point of our life. According to common sense, the best-informed individual on creation would be his creator, for example: the producer of a car is the one who can answer all questions related to this car, its purpose, how to use it .. .

In our case, the Creator of the human being would be best placed to determine what is good and what is bad for him. In order to fulfill this requirement, he sent different messengers and prophets (peace be upon them) to teach people how to behave.
Prophet Muhammad peace be upon him

Spoke of all religious and material matters

Because Islam
Constitution and approach to life

Eating, sleeping and praying, bathing and making transactions between people

Religion is not just a ritual

Pray and then go out to lie and drink alcohol and lack of hygiene and adultery

Like other religions

\\\

Do you think God created man on earth
Live in prosperity and happiness
You're wrong

Everyone on earth
A test of a different kind



Example
- A rich man but can not have children,
- A poor man has children but He does not have enough food
- A strong man and can use his power to do good but do not do it
- weak man, but help people his best
Unfaithful man but he has all the blessings
- Muslim man has healthy illnesses


Here everyone tries and tests his
Illness = test
Health = test
Disbelief = test
Money = test
etc.
You will succeed and reach the right path

[h=3]The Purpose of Creation, Why Islam by Dr Zakir Naik - ...[/h]
[url]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X-uLJMgvwRQ
[/URL]

- - - Updated - - -

The Day and Night
The Qur’anic description of the sequence of day and night would, in itself, be rather commonplace were it not for the fact that it is expressed in terms that are today highly appropriate. The Qur’an uses the verb kawwara in chapter az-Zumar to describe the way the night ‘winds’ or ‘coils’ itself around the day and the day around the night.
“He coils the night upon the day and the day upon the night.” Qur’an, 39:5
The original meaning of the verb kis to coil a turban around the head. This is a totally valid comparison; yet at the time the Qur’an was revealed, the astronomical data necessary to make this comparison were unknown. It is not until man landed on the moon and observed the earth spinning on its axis, that the dark half of the globe appeared to wind itself around the light and the light half appeared to wind itself around the dark.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pFoGX49QzLg

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q_1TM-Y2lUA

The Sun and Moon.

Whereas the Bible talks of the sun and the moon as two lights differing only in size, the Qur’an distinguishes between them by the use of different terms: light (noor) for the moon, and lamp (siraaj) for the sun.

“Did you see how Allah created seven heavens, one above the other, and made in them the moon a light and the sun a lamp?” Qur’an, 78:12-13

The moon is an inert body which reflects light, whereas the sun is a celestial body in a state of permanent combustion producing both light and heat.
Stars and Planets

The word ‘star’ (najm) in the Qur’an ( 86:3 ) is accompanied by the adjective thaaqib which indicates that it burns and consumes itself as it pierces through the shadows of the night. It was much later discovered that stars are heavenly bodies producing their own light like the sun.

In the Qur’an, a different word, kawkab, is used to refer to the planets which are celestial bodies that reflect light and do not produce their own light like the sun.

“We have adorned the lowest heaven with ornaments, the planets.” Qur’an, 37:6

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qNN7nznAT0E
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lBFp3Qe4r74
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q1gqGAn8y4Q

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zQu7FznVOvI

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E2s14T6x5AM

 

[yasoooo]

[h=1]Dr. Zakir Naik - Does God exist?[/h]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E2s14T6x5AM

 

[Eric H]

Greetings and peace be with you chalks75;

Answer me this
Is evolution by natural selection , the best explanation for biological diversity being offered by science today ?

Of the people that reject evolution what is the number one reason
The science is wrong
Or
It conflicts with their religious beliefs ?

Be honest

The science is wrong, too many assumptions have to be made in order for evolution to work. Even if evolution happened by natural selection, the skeletal system and the eye could not happen without the help of God.

In the spirit of searching for a greatest meaning of 'One God'

Eric

 

[chalks75]

Greetings and peace be with you chalks75;



The science is wrong, too many assumptions have to be made in order for evolution to work. Even if evolution happened by natural selection, the skeletal system and the eye could not happen without the help of God.

In the spirit of searching for a greatest meaning of 'One God'

Eric

You say the science is wrong
But that’s going against the consensus in science .

Certainly the eye can evolve , if you look throughout the natural world you can see eyes in many states of development form a single light sensor cell in sea animals to more developed eyes like the octopus , which is superior to ours.

Your objections are not held up by the science , I’m afraid to say .

 

[chalks75]

The Creator created us as a free people in the world and also placed the prophets sent by exhortation to the people of the earth and had to stand up. The creator said: "The man who seeks God will go with my satisfaction and the man who seeks the satisfaction of the subject, his own path." But! Every man will be the day of resurrection to life and people will return to their masters groups. It is the day of judgment where the man can hear what she has presented and what they would have been obvious. Whoever has wronged that day to the promised punishment and whoever has done well (surrender to God) will fully reward the prize. Wait, why are we waiting with you? Time will be soon! A man lives only a fraction of a second when the actual duration of the start of creation at the end of the creation would be calculated. Therefore, the necessary awareness and research

arrogance and craving pure waste of time. For this reason, I seek the satisfaction of God, because we are not without purpose on the earth. we encourage good and good deeds. So we promised in paradise that our goal would be achieved. We have the choice between good and bad.
Common sense is the key point of our life. According to common sense, the best-informed individual on creation would be his creator, for example: the producer of a car is the one who can answer all questions related to this car, its purpose, how to use it .. .

In our case, the Creator of the human being would be best placed to determine what is good and what is bad for him. In order to fulfill this requirement, he sent different messengers and prophets (peace be upon them) to teach people how to behave.
Prophet Muhammad peace be upon him

Spoke of all religious and material matters

Because Islam
Constitution and approach to life

Eating, sleeping and praying, bathing and making transactions between people

Religion is not just a ritual

Pray and then go out to lie and drink alcohol and lack of hygiene and adultery

Like other religions

\\\

Do you think God created man on earth
Live in prosperity and happiness
You're wrong

Everyone on earth
A test of a different kind



Example
- A rich man but can not have children,
- A poor man has children but He does not have enough food
- A strong man and can use his power to do good but do not do it
- weak man, but help people his best
Unfaithful man but he has all the blessings
- Muslim man has healthy illnesses


Here everyone tries and tests his
Illness = test
Health = test
Disbelief = test
Money = test
etc.
You will succeed and reach the right path

[h=3]The Purpose of Creation, Why Islam by Dr Zakir Naik - ...[/h]
[url]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X-uLJMgvwRQ
[/URL]

- - - Updated - - -

The Day and Night
The Qur’anic description of the sequence of day and night would, in itself, be rather commonplace were it not for the fact that it is expressed in terms that are today highly appropriate. The Qur’an uses the verb kawwara in chapter az-Zumar to describe the way the night ‘winds’ or ‘coils’ itself around the day and the day around the night.
“He coils the night upon the day and the day upon the night.” Qur’an, 39:5
The original meaning of the verb kis to coil a turban around the head. This is a totally valid comparison; yet at the time the Qur’an was revealed, the astronomical data necessary to make this comparison were unknown. It is not until man landed on the moon and observed the earth spinning on its axis, that the dark half of the globe appeared to wind itself around the light and the light half appeared to wind itself around the dark.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pFoGX49QzLg

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q_1TM-Y2lUA

The Sun and Moon.

Whereas the Bible talks of the sun and the moon as two lights differing only in size, the Qur’an distinguishes between them by the use of different terms: light (noor) for the moon, and lamp (siraaj) for the sun.

“Did you see how Allah created seven heavens, one above the other, and made in them the moon a light and the sun a lamp?” Qur’an, 78:12-13

The moon is an inert body which reflects light, whereas the sun is a celestial body in a state of permanent combustion producing both light and heat.
Stars and Planets

The word ‘star’ (najm) in the Qur’an ( 86:3 ) is accompanied by the adjective thaaqib which indicates that it burns and consumes itself as it pierces through the shadows of the night. It was much later discovered that stars are heavenly bodies producing their own light like the sun.

In the Qur’an, a different word, kawkab, is used to refer to the planets which are celestial bodies that reflect light and do not produce their own light like the sun.

“We have adorned the lowest heaven with ornaments, the planets.” Qur’an, 37:6

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qNN7nznAT0E
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lBFp3Qe4r74
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q1gqGAn8y4Q

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zQu7FznVOvI

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E2s14T6x5AM

You need to demonstrate that there is a creator .... before you make claims about what the creator can and cannot do.