Truth= god does not exist?

[Pygoscelis]

From lolwatever:

it's like the probability of spilling of 10 randomly colored paint buckets and beleiving that by coincidence you'll get a painting of monolisa formed lol.

Is it? Or is it more like spilling an infinite number of paint buckets? Asuming for this discussion that the universe hasn't always been, an infinite amount of time may have preceeded the formation of this universe.

If that is so and a universe formed once then due to the nature of infinity it or other universes have formed an infinite number of times. If that is so, then it is not unlikely but certain that some such universes would spawn life as we know it.

No, it's nto assumign.. i'm saying.. it's an experiemtn you can do for yourself.

ANd so is mine. Imagine yourself turned invisible. You can't talk or be seen by your friends though you walk amongst them. Does that mean you don't exist?

No it doesn't. But it also doesn't prove that there are invisible people following us around everywhere.

All your thought experiment does is show that it is POSSIBLE for a creator to exist. Many things are possible. In fact, pretty much anything is possible.

Regardless of what you think created it, the question is.. do you agree there must be an entity that's outside of our bousdn that created/caused all this?!

Um no. You are now trying to go from "its possible" (which of course is true) to "it must be" (which certainly doesn't follow). And why are you shouting at me? :giggling:

universe and life has been around for a finite period of time

That seems to be the case. But we don't know this for certain. We guess this to be the case from such observations as that the universe is currently in a state of expansion.

.. so does that mean you now agree one of the first two options are logical to choose from?

Well first, there are more than 2 options. Those are just two that came off the top of my head. Aliens could have planted us here. We could have migrated here from another planet. Your God could have put us here. Somebody else's God could have put us here. We may have always been. We may have come to be via evolution. We may have created ourselves in some sort of weird time loop. I'm sure there are dozens if not hundreds of other possibilities creative minds could think up.

Secondly, it isn't for us to "choose". It is what it is. And we have no way of knowing what it is.

When theists attempt to refute that the world could exist without their God they so often fall into circular pattern, as we have seen in this thread.

If you argue that the universe is so complex and unlikely that it couldn't have always been or come to be on its own, then it is inconsistent to say that God (infinitely more complex) could always have been or come to be on its/his/her/their own. And every effort the theist puts into disproving the universe's natural origin just circles right back at the theist's God.

If you start with the premise that everything requires a cause but then claim something that doesn't (God), you have violated your premise and your argument is baseless.

 

[Malaikah]

From lolwatever:

Is it? Or is it more like spilling an infinite number of paint buckets? Asuming for this discussion that the universe hasn't always been, an infinite amount of time may have preceeded the formation of this universe.

If that is so and a universe formed once then due to the nature of infinity it or other universes have formed an infinite number of times. If that is so, then it is not unlikely but certain that some such universes would spawn life as we know it.
The universe definately hasn't been around for an infinite period of time. It violates the 2nd law of thermodynamics...

And what'st he infinite bucket theory to do with responding to that analogy

ANd so is mine. Imagine yourself turned invisible. You can't talk or be seen by your friends though you walk amongst them. Does that mean you don't exist?

lol erm no it doesn't mean i dont exist.. but whats the point of that question? Turning invisible isn't something that's logically plausible.. Cause and Effect, and there having been a creator/initiator is. That doesnt prove or disprove my analogy about cause and effect and creation.

No it doesn't. But it also doesn't prove that there are invisible people following us around everywhere.

But hangon, i'm talking about an established thign here.. cause and effect, there must have been a unique control system to create this universe, soemthign that defied laws of conservation and not restricted by space/time.

As i said whether you think its an alien or what not isn't important.. the issue is, there is a creator, initiator to all of this. logic suggests its something that's not bound by the limits we're operating in.

All your thought experiment does is show that it is POSSIBLE for a creator to exist. Many things are possible. In fact, pretty much anything is possible.

You're assuming universe existed infinitely which isn't true... once you realise that, it becoems more plausible to believe that there's a creator for all of this.

Um no. You are now trying to go from "its possible" (which of course is true) to "it must be" (which certainly doesn't follow). And why are you shouting at me?

i wasn't shouting.. funny u skipped all whats in between... atleast giv a comment on each thing i say to know that you've read it.

That seems to be the case. But we don't know this for certain. We guess this to be the case from such observations as that the universe is currently in a state of expansion.

And it's more than just a guess.. you don't really believe in limits it seems? I mean, it's pretty obvious that if you could trace back the expansion of the universe, it's pretty obvious that it resulted from somethign infinitesemally small.

Which also brigns about somethign to do with god, 1400 years back, who on earth would know about expansion, or initial 'big bangs', or any of this stuff that we're now discussing? If it wasn't something "supernatural" (we'll leave it at that term for now) that ifnormed the illiterate prophet of that... then who could it have been? Some bedoin astrophycisit? lol

Well first, there are more than 2 options. Those are just two that came off the top of my head. Aliens could have planted us here. We could have migrated here from another planet. Your God could have put us here. Somebody else's God could have put us here. We may have always been. We may have come to be via evolution. We may have created ourselves in some sort of weird time loop. I'm sure there are dozens if not hundreds of other possibilities creative minds could think up.

Secondly, it isn't for us to "choose". It is what it is. And we have no way of knowing what it is.

Besides your assumptions that someoen could have created us, the rest are just illogical assumptions! Evolution doesn't contradict the existance of god, it just makes it more logical to believe that God did create this mechanism and enable for evolution to begin. If there isn't a supernatural being (we call it god, call it whatever you please, for now that's not the point) that created all this, then there's some serious questions you've got to deal with, who revealed the quran to an illiterate person which contains information that was literally beyond reach of the people of his time? As well as the prophecies that have been realised, who revealed those to the prophet? As a rational thinker, it sure does make sense that it was a being that wasn't bound by time/spatial restrictions. not?

They're miracles, miralces by definition are things that are just not part of natural occurrances, sure they can produce babies without a father these days, but no one can produce a child without a father the way it happened with mary (if people think it is, the challenge is open), ofcourse.. you probably don't believe that because you didn't see it, hence why Allah (or whoever you think it is) put on an array of other challenges and signs to appeal to our intellect that he is there. (from literary things to things like fulfilled (and yet to be fulfilled) prophecies as well as scientific things).

When theists attempt to refute that the world could exist without their God they so often fall into circular pattern, as we have seen in this thread.
Part of the issue is your understanding of god... atleast with Muslims, it's just god. not a matter of whether its their god or "our god"..

I dont think i'm going in circles... perhaps commenting on each paragraph would be more useful. And that assumption that the universe could hav existed infinitely needs to stop. Atleast after you realise it goes against second law of thermodynamics.

If you argue that the universe is so complex and unlikely that it couldn't have always been or come to be on its own, then it is inconsistent to say that God (infinitely more complex) could always have been or come to be on its/his/her/their own. And every effort the theist puts into disproving the universe's natural origin just circles right back at the theist's God.

If you start with the premise that everything requires a cause but then claim something that doesn't (God), you have violated your premise and your argument is baseless.

Not at all, when you realise that time isn't something God is bound by. Hence why he's able to tell the prophet of things to come and things that have happened. Simply because he's not restricted by time/spatial dimensions. But we know for that time does govern the universe. So the whole idea of tryign to figure what 'caused' god just falls. Hence his description 'first and the last and the eternal'.

 

[Trumble]

Re: Truth= god does not exsist!

Umm... as far as scientific facts go... the seven heaven's thing is actually one of the weaker ones. Maybe you should do some research on this also, about what the quran says about the pregnancy of a woman, or the separation between different bodies of waters.

Erm.. "one" of the weaker ones? I've researched all of them, with a reasonably open mind (believe it or not). Some are interesting co-incidences, but its easy to think of alternative explanations for all of them... usually rather more plausible than any scientific insight.

 

[جوري]

one thing people in the scientific community believe... is that there is no such a thing as a coincidence... let alone many in a series especially considering the time and place they came from.... Betcha if your "great" Buddha had come with half of which the Quran offeres... you'd have been all over it.... It is a psychological thing with people... They are unwilling to open their hearts and minds to what a an Arabic man has brought forth from barren lands...

 

[cool_jannah]

If you believe that you are accountable to nobody for your actions after you die, you have the worst intellect of all creatures ever created. What sort of justice do athiest believe in if they think that they are not responsible and hence accountable for their actions? This is a major point that athiests are missing out. If you tell me that there is no God, you are inferring to the fact that an innocent person who is born and dies physically challenged with no eyes nor limbs nor legs is the same as the person who is born and dies in a rich. peaceful, healthy family? Do you have any brains? Or you are just trying to run away from the reality of death and afterlife? Trust me there is no hiding place from your Lord! Where will you run?
How stupid is it that a person who is given life and intellect to ponder over the creations ends up concluding that everything that was ever created was by chance!
To Allah you belong and to Him you will return. Everything that is in the heavens and in the earth belons to Allah including your eyes, hands, legs, body and other blessings. It is just the "free-will" that you are misusing that is pulling you away from Allah.
If I come and break in somebody's house and shoot down every single innocent member of the family and then shoot myself, then according to an athiest its all fair game!...Wow!

You will be raised up from your graves after the long sleep on the Day of Judgement and you will definitely be accountable for every single action you ever did. And none but the Almighty ALLAH has the power to do all this. He is the all powerful and all merciful.

 

[Joe98]

What sort of justice do athiest believe in if they think that they are not responsible and hence accountable for their actions?

Of course I am responsible and accountable for my actions. I would be charged by the police and judged in a court of law.

But that doesn't mean doesn't prove the existance of Mars, or Venus or any other god!

 

[Joe98]

Religious people say: “if a man is murdered, that is the will of Allah and the murderer will be dealt with by Allah on the day of judgement”.

So why do religious people bother with a court of law on the earth????

Perhaps because deep down you know there is no god!

 

[Joe98]

He is the all powerful and all merciful.

What is "merciful"?????


Does that mean to forgive the sinners??? The same ones you punished on earth in your court of law?????

 

[جوري]

What is "merciful"?????


Does that mean to forgive the sinners??? The same ones you punished on earth in your court of law?????

The usual one line rehtoric, please get new material... YAWN!

 

[Grace Seeker]

Elaborate please.

Pygoscelis had said that he "only speak of good and bad because that is the language given to me. Those labels were not chosen by me but by the society in which I reside. I would prefer to speak in terms of socially constructive and socially destructive and in terms of social taboos." So, I was questioning to see if if was just the terms he didn't like, or if perhaps he claimed to not believe even in the concepts.

 

[Grace Seeker]

In a sense I believe in right and wrong, but not in the religious meanings of the words. Right and Wrong, Good and Evil, are not things that exist on their own in isolation, they need context. "Right" to me means socially constructive or positive and life enriching. "Wrong" means socially destructive and life destroying. This is hard for me to explain.



I think its a travesty and a completely unecesary one at that. Nobody gains from this and it hurts so many. It is truly sad.



I feel empathy for those who are hurt and outrage at those who have caused the situation. You don't need a sense of Good and Evil to feel these things.

Pygoscelis, unless I am reading you incorrectly, it does seem to me that though you would prefer simpler terms, that you do have a sense of what simplistically (not religiously) might be popularly called a sense of right and a sense of wrong. (Please don't read that to be me saying that you are simplistic, just the choice of words I/we are using.) Perhaps it isn't a moral compass, but some internal compass in you tells you that some things are good and some things it is appropriate to get outraged over. For instance the war actually illicits a sense of sadness from you. There is some sort of "wrongness" to it. Though you would not declare it so based on religious concepts but others that are intrinsic to humanity without a need for identifying them as being from God.

Do I understand you correctly?

 

[Trumble]

If you believe that you are accountable to nobody for your actions after you die, you have the worst intellect of all creatures ever created. What sort of justice do athiest believe in if they think that they are not responsible and hence accountable for their actions? This is a major point that athiests are missing out. If you tell me that there is no God, you are inferring to the fact that an innocent person who is born and dies physically challenged with no eyes nor limbs nor legs is the same as the person who is born and dies in a rich. peaceful, healthy family?

If I come and break in somebody's house and shoot down every single innocent member of the family and then shoot myself, then according to an athiest its all fair game!...Wow!

I think you may be confusing atheism with anarchism? In the latter case, it would also be "fair game" for the friends and neighbours of the deceased to do the same to your family which is, itself, justice of a sort - "an eye for an eye"?


Atheists believe in human justice, and in the idea that such justice, with an organised system of laws (anarchists aside), must exist for society to exist. It is in everybody's best interest that society, and hence such an agreed system of justice exists. Hence every 'civilised' culture has prohibitions on murder, rape, theft etc - otherwise they coould not exist as societies. Theists also believe in that justice.. otherwise why do Isamic countries have police, Judges and prisons? Why not leave punishment up to God on the "day of Judgement"? Because society has to function, and citizens need to be protected NOW.

Such justice is real. You see it every day, and if you trangress it you will face the consequences. We all know that. So what is being "missed out"? Only the idea that there must be some sort of cosmic justice that sorts out what might get missed on earth, or repairs the sort of inequality you suggest. You insult the atheist 'intellect', but there is no evidence at all that those things, or any 'afterlife' at all, exists. None whatsoever. Why should such cosmic justice should exist; we exist in the universe we have have not the one we want no matter how much we might want something else and whatever ideas we might come up with that allow us to interpret the universe in those terms.

I should point out that I do actually believe in such cosmic justice, in a rather different form. One of the great attractions of Buddhism to me is that that is possible without a God, the universe can do it all by itself without it, or us, having to conjour one up. Either way, though, that belief isn't based on 'intellect' but, as keeps being said, on faith. People are not intellectually deficient just because the nature of their faith is different from yours.

 

[Pygoscelis]

People are not intellectually deficient just because the nature of their faith is different from yours.

I think that one line is all the response needed to Cool_Jannah's rather insult laden post.

Next time, Cool_Jannah, you may want to avoid declaring people to be stupid and discuss things civilly and make points, as other Muslims here have done.

I'm sure if I "took the bait" and responded in kind, calling you stupid for your belief in the imaginary (which I don't believe to be the case btw) you would be outraged, and rightly so.

 

[Pygoscelis]

Perhaps it isn't a moral compass, but some internal compass in you tells you that some things are good and some things it is appropriate to get outraged over. For instance the war actually illicits a sense of sadness from you. There is some sort of "wrongness" to it. Though you would not declare it so based on religious concepts but others that are intrinsic to humanity without a need for identifying them as being from God.

It is a moral compas. It is one formed primarily from empathy. Empathy is powerful and isn't even unique to humans. It is found in numerous species and even across species (wimper and look in pain and see how a pet dog reacts. Many will feel your pain and seek to comfort you).

I believe that is such a common trait because it benefits us as a whole to treat each other well.

It is my belief that this moral compas exists in all of us. It is independent from the moral dictates of religion, though sometimes the two interact and one may be seen as the other

For example, I do not believe that if a randomly selected religoius person suddenly lost all faith in their religion they would lose all sense of morality.

Given my observations of deconverts (of which I know many) this has never been the case.

They may lose some arbitrary (that may be the wrong word?) religious taboos such as not eating pork or whatever but they don't start wanting to kill or rape etc.

 

[- Qatada -]

Hi Pygoscelis.


Muslims believe that we are all born in a state of fitrah. We naturally incline to do good because Allaah Almighty has created us this way. However, as man keeps commiting sin and evil - they turn away from their natural disposition and the more a person dwells into evil, the further they go astray from this natural disposition because with every evil sin commited - a black mark covers the heart, whereas when a person does a good deed - their heart gets covered with a white mark.


When a person continuously sins, their heart gets totally black and the person loses the understanding of good and bad morals. The good seems evil to them, and the evil seems good.


The only way a person can distinguish between good and evil is by understanding the Qur'an - the Criterion, and the Sunnah - ways of Allaah Almighty's messenger (peace be upon him.) When man is void of this guidance, he will keep falling into the dark.. but the Qur'an and Authentic Sunnah is a guidance, and a light for those who want to understand the truth and to live an easy life, in this world and the hereafter.




If you want to read more about fitrah, you can view more info. off this link insha'Allaah.

http://thetruereligion.org/modules/wfsection/article.php?articleid=74



Allaah Almighty know's best.



Peace.

 

[Pygoscelis]

Hi Pygoscelis.

When a person continuously sins, their heart gets totally black and the person loses the understanding of good and bad morals. The good seems evil to them, and the evil seems good.

How do you explain all of the non-muslims (who are continuously sinning by rejecting Allah) living socially constructive lives, not killing, stealing, raping, etc and doing nice things for other people? Does that not fly in the face of fitrah?

 

[- Qatada -]

The people do fall into the areas where Allaah prohibits them i.e. it may start off with bad company where swearing is common, this may lead to other acts such as joining people who promote relationships outside of marriage, which may lead to fornication etc. When a person falls into this, they find it common whereas they may feel guilty to cheat on someone before they fell into this sin.

As the person continuously does this, they don't feel sorry for the one that they've wronged, and they fall deeper and deeper into the darkness. They start enjoying evil and hating the good.



However, there are some who don't fall into these sins while being non muslims. They may not commit fornication, murder etc. They may not even like the idea of bad company. So they stay away from it due to the fitrah that Allaah Almighty has placed in them. They enjoy good company, and enjoy a simple life. If they are sincere, Allaah may even guide them to the truth because they don't fall into other major sins. This person may be more likely to accept the truth because they realise how islaam is a reflection of their personality.




Allaah Almighty know's best.



Peace.

 

[cool_jannah]

..It would also be "fair game" for the friends and neighbours of the deceased to do the same to your family which is, itself, justice of a sort - "an eye for an eye"?

WOW!...This is definitely hilarious...You seem to have no sense of justice whatsoever. So you are telling me that if a psycho kills or orders the killing of 6 million innocent people in gas chambers or tortures them to death, his family should pay for it? WOW!...where are your brains?
Listen buddy..Every soul carries the burden of its own! whether you like it or not!
and thus every soul will be accountable for every single deed, not just crimes or wrong doings, but good actions that the person did. There is no perfect justice in this world! And ALLAH IS ALL JUST....Justice will be done to those who are wronged and the ones that do wrong..
and what can be a worst crime than associating partners with God. That is indeed a horrendous crime. and every soul disbelieving soul will pay for it.

Killing the innocent family members for the crimes that a person does is justice according to athiest? SubhanAllah! What a shame on your intellect. Think about what you said. This something new I leant today and it is extremely shocking and preposterous!

Atheists believe in human justice, and in the idea that such justice, with an organised system of laws (anarchists aside), must exist for society to exist. It is in everybody's best interest that society, and hence such an agreed system of justice exists. Hence every 'civilised' culture has prohibitions on murder, rape, theft etc - otherwise they coould not exist as societies. Theists also believe in that justice.. otherwise why do Isamic countries have police, Judges and prisons? Why not leave punishment up to God on the "day of Judgement"? Because society has to function, and citizens need to be protected NOW.

Don't ever complain about adulterers and murderes getting beheaded then. That is justice for them in this world. It is far better to get punished here then to be punished in the Hell fire. Because remember the punishment over there is extremely severe...If Allah wills to punish someone..no power or creation can ever say that my punishment is worse than Allah's punishment.
And ALLAH IS ALL FORGIVING AND MERCIFUL! one sincere repentance is enough to wash away all murders and rapes and other nonsense that you use to do! Except for Shirk! DO NOT associate partners to ALLAH.

 

[Abdul Fattah]

How do you explain all of the non-muslims (who are continuously sinning by rejecting Allah) living socially constructive lives, not killing, stealing, raping, etc and doing nice things for other people? Does that not fly in the face of fitrah?

There are difrent levels of sin. Some are universally detested (like the examples you gave) while others are in some places socially accepted. Take lies for example. Although everybody knows that a lie is bad, a lot of people will tell you that it's ok if it's for a good cause. But whenever a person lies he obviously has a motive,people don't just lie foir the fun of it. So isn't that motive a good cause in their eyes? Where do they draw the line. We could go on like this for hour discussing all the sins. How about gossip. It's obviously a bad thing and almost everyone has been a victem of it once or twice and has thus felt the effect of this, yet so many people see it as something trivial. So why are these sins neglected and the others avoided? Perhaps because of the severity of the sin. Or maybe it's just because these sins are easyer to commit, whereas the more severe sins pose quite some practical objections. How about I try one of your examples. Stealing. Most people won't steal other's people belongings out of empathy because they know it's not nice to be stolen from. But how many of those same people have no problem at all taking office suplies or hotel-bathroomtowels back home? Is that not stealing?

I'll try putting it in more general terms. A disbeliever will do good and avoid bad only for personal reasons, empathy for others or punishment/reward. If the reasons don't aply to a given situation. Then they will no longer feel the need to do or not do something. They will tend to make excuses along the lines of: it won't hurt anybody (against empathy); nobody will find out; the law isn't perfect (against punishment and reward) and so on. As for the believer, he will do good and avoid bad from his faith. Yes there's also punishment and reward playing a role there, but it is also a form of worship and the believer should stick to the rules regardless the circumstances.

I think if you'll be fair you'll be forced to admit that in general religious people tend to be nicer, less agressive, more patient and sin less (in general, there are of course exceptions on both sides). And I don't say this in an attempt to be condescending towards atheist. To each his own; it's just an objective observation I'm making here.

 

[Pygoscelis]

I think you are blinded by bias when you make this statement. Religious folk are generally nicer, less agressive and more patient than non religious folk? I think not. Religion and intolerance go hand in hand more often than not. Moreover, jail populations show that the percentage of athiests incarcerated is far lower than the percentage of ahteists in the general population.

Religion is just another way to create US vs a THEM, espcially monotheistic religoin that declares that it is the only proper way to live and its God is the only God that may be worshiped and that all others are inferior. As soon as you have religions declaring this you're going to have a less than tolerant society.

It also gives believers means to justify injustice in thier minds. And a means to internally alleviate guilt.

Religoiusly caused nastiness ranges from the mild (believers decreeing that nonbelievers can not know morality, forced 'morality' such as bans on homosexual marriage and store closures on Sundays, etc) to the moderate ( stopping non believers or believers in other religions from holding land , from holding public office, or testifying in court or voting, ) to the severe (murder of heretics, human sacrifice, religious wars, forced conversions of entire foreign nations of 'savages' etc)

Through history religious folk have have frequently hated and warred against others not sharing their faith, from Ireland (Catholics vs Protestants) to the middle east (Jews vs Muslims) to the middle ages (Spanish inquisition, crusades etc) and pretty much all throghout history, from ancient Roman pagans throwing christians to lions to ancient egyptians enslaving jews (as per the bible).

And then there are those who do wild and crazy things to their followers from human sacrifice in old religions (including abrahamic) to burning witches (which went on for centuries, not just a few isolated incodents) to craziiness like Jim Jones, David Koresh, and Fred Phelps.

I could go on and on on this subject but I don't think it is necesary. Suffice it to say that I strongly disagree that religious folks are generally nicer and more accepting and less aggressive than non religious folk. They may be kinder to those who hold their same religion, but even there infighting is common.

And that you assume it to be a universally held belief that it is so (saying to be 'fair' I'd have to agree) shows a massive bias on your part.[/QUOTE]