Will atheist ever get the proof of God's existence?

[جوري]

p.s--I realize I stated 'scientifically' verified.. I meant unscientifically of course...
You can tell how much time I want to invest in this...

 

[MSalman]

Absolutely.

That is because teachers mark given answers to questions correctly based upon their conformity with the actual answer. The marks that people receive in examinations have absolutely nothing to do with punishment or reward. Your analogy is invalid.

my analogy will be only invalid if i'm trying convey the point which you understood. I was simply drawing the conclusion that just like a teacher isn't considered evil because he gives every student what he deserves; similarly, Allah Ta'ala is justice and will judge everyone based on what they have done.

Even I intent the meaning that you understood, my analogy still holds and your rational conlusion that teacher doesn't punish everyone isn't rational at all when in students' case the definition of punishment is different. Mind you failing a course is hell lot of physcological torture if you think about it.

Probably not. I know enough to know that none of them command infinite torture.

you either know or you don't; what you're saying is only according to your point of view. May I suggest ask a lonley child who lost his/her family in a tragic accident (i.e. war, terrorist attack)?

I am against torture, finite or otherwise.

so what do you say about worldy laws?

I am responding to the assertion that God tortures or allows people to be tortured in the hellfire for eternity based on the crimes that they have committed in a finite lifetime. I am not using my premise to justify my conclusion, I am making my moral standpoint on this issue clear from information that I am receiving. It is the same if someone told me that a trespasser got six years in jail. I would consider that absurdly disproportionate and unjust.

the argument which you're responding is based on scriptures just like the other agrument. If you think that what they are saying is correct then you also have to accept the other one.

This is all outweighed by the infinite torture that so many think he will bring to those who have crimes.

You were nothing, think about it.

In fact, the greatest injustice is shown in atheists' views. Let's a man ruled a land and he genocide his people etc. No one could do anything to him so he died peacefully as an evil man. So, how will the innocent people get any justice if there's no life hereafter? Isn't this evil and unjust? It is like saying they were born to be murdered, too bad. Off course, rationally speaking, this doesn't prove there's life after death but what's atheists solution for this dilemma.

 

[Skavau]

my analogy will be only invalid if i'm trying convey the point which you understood. I was simply drawing the conclusion that just like a teacher isn't considered evil because he gives every student what he deserves; similarly, Allah Ta'ala is justice and will judge everyone based on what they have done.

You appear to be comparing our future judgment from God as the same thing as the judgment (or rather, marks) a teacher provides to each individual student when they take an examination. The problem is that every single student knows what they have to do in order to achieve the marks and every single student enters the course, or the subject out of choice. This cannot be said concerning 'God'. I am an atheist. God does not exist to me. There is no 'examination' or 'judgment' for me. I also never actually entered this examination by choice, be it true.

Moreover, a failure of a school examination does not mean punishment. It just means you did not pass, please try again. Whereas, a failure to God (in all respects) appears to mean eternal torture.

As I said: incomparable.

Even I intent the meaning that you understood, my analogy still holds and your rational conlusion that teacher doesn't punish everyone isn't rational at all when in students' case the definition of punishment is different. Mind you failing a course is hell lot of physcological torture if you think about it.

But again, there is no punishment.

It is not fair to punish someone for being wrong.

you either know or you don't; what you're saying is only according to your point of view. May I suggest ask a lonley child who lost his/her family in a tragic accident (i.e. war, terrorist attack)?

What is the relevance of this suggestion? A lonely child who has had his family lost by conditions outside of his control. What is your point?

so what do you say about worldy laws?

Some worldly laws are just and some worldly laws are not.

the argument which you're responding is based on scriptures just like the other agrument. If you think that what they are saying is correct then you also have to accept the other one.

Do you, based on scriptures or otherwise believe that God will condemn non-believers to the hellfire for all eternity? Do you, accept that this is a just action?

In fact, the greatest injustice is shown in atheists' views. Let's a man ruled a land and he genocide his people etc. No one could do anything to him so he died peacefully as an evil man.

Right.

So, how will the innocent people get any justice if there's no life hereafter?

Well, in the analogy that you provided - they won't. The warlord or fascist that you presented would have died and therefore 'evaded' justice (if you consider 'death' a preferable way out of responsibility).

Isn't this evil and unjust?

Possibly, possibly not.

First of all though, you commit many rudimentary flaws. It is first and foremost not necessarily an 'atheist view' that there is no afterlife. The only atheist view is that God does not exist, or there is no evidence for God and therefore no reason to presume that God exists.

Secondly, you are committing the naturalistic fallacy. Many things in nature appear to be evil and unjust. Nature is completely amoral. Earthquakes strike, volcanoes erupt and hurricanes begin with no care whatsoever for the destruction caused. Nature does not measure itself against human wishes. Would you say that it is "evil and unjust" to simply accept this fact of the universe? That it is an "evil and unjust" view to understand that viruses rampage across the world killing innocent people? It isn't at all, what is true is not the same as what ought to be true. You are comparing apples and oranges. The universe is amoral and destructive to human interests. Accepting this is not unjust, it is an agreement and understanding of reality.

It is only theists that seem to have this image of a perfect universe with a cosmic arbiter that will set all immoralities right in the end. Most Atheists probably do not, and freely accept that. Morality is about what humans ought to do and ought not do. Reality is about what is.

The disbelief that a cosmic arbiter will make amends in the afterlife is not immoral - it is an acceptance. It might be nicer to believe that a cosmic arbiter will indeed, make amends - but it doesn't make it true. We do not define what is actually true by desire.

It is like saying they were born to be murdered, too bad. Off course, rationally speaking, this doesn't prove there's life after death but what's atheists solution for this dilemma.

None whatsoever.

It is part of the universe. We have to deal with it.

 

[Whatsthepoint]

says you.. I have already enclosed the definition from the dictionary.. we don't get to rename things to coax atheists!

Philosophy has two meanings. One is the one you posted (doctrine: a belief (or system of beliefs) accepted as authoritative by some group or school (or something like that)) and the other is this:
The rational investigation of questions about existence and knowledge and ethics.
Same with theology. The word theology can denote a single set of theological beliefs, for instance islamic theology, but it can also mean a philosophical study of god and god-related concepts.

 

[جوري]

^^ agree!

 

[Azy]

Sorry about the delay but I had to go away for a few days, miss me?

One thing I noticed about these long posts is it's very easy for important things to fall by the wayside, in future I shall try to break things down into smaller chunks and concentrate on one topic.

First, the text in question

67:3 He Who created the seven heavens one above another: No want of proportion wilt thou see in the Creation of ((Allah)) Most Gracious. So turn thy vision again: seest thou any flaw?

67:5 And we (He?) have, (from of old), adorned the lowest heaven with Lamps, and We have made such (Lamps) (as) missiles to drive away the Evil Ones, and have prepared for them the Penalty of the Blazing Fire.

41:12 So He completed them as seven firmaments in two Days, and He assigned to each heaven its duty and command. And We adorned the lower heaven with lights, and (provided it) with guard. Such is the Decree of (Him) the Exalted in Might, Full of Knowledge.

37:6 We have indeed decked the lower heaven with beauty (in) the stars.

Earth's atmosphere has 7 layers. The lowest layer is called troposphere. Rain, snow and wind only take place in the troposphere. There is an upper atmosphere. There is a lower atmosphere. and each indeed has a duty

http://www.physicalgeography.net/fundamentals/7b.html

There are two problems here.

1) There are not 7 layers of atmosphere.
It doesn't just stop at 100km like the diagram on that page and there is another layer, the Exosphere, above those. Furthermore the tropopause, stratopause and mesopause are not layers but names for the transition between layers (as you can imagine a layer does not have a well defined edge).
Link: [How many layers?]

2) Whether we accept your position on the makeup of the atmosphere or not, where does that leave us regarding the stars decking the lowest heaven?
It's quite clear to us that they aren't in our atmosphere.

 

[silkworm]

Any Atheist who can prove why and how the sky is staying without falling without the help of pillars???

Sky is not resting on pillars, right? So who is keeping this sky afloat on on heads in the middle of nowhere. What is the cause of "sky" hanging without any support?


Answer me and I will become an Atheist.

 

[Azy]

No need for you to convert brother.
If you keep talking like that you'll make a fantastic spokesman for atheism.

 

[Tornado]

Any Atheist who can prove why and how the sky is staying without falling without the help of pillars???

Sky is not resting on pillars, right? So who is keeping this sky afloat on on heads in the middle of nowhere. What is the cause of "sky" hanging without any support?


Answer me and I will become an Atheist.

[Edit]
The sky isn't that heavy. Why does a balloon with helium rise?

 

[جوري]

Sorry about the delay but I had to go away for a few days, miss me?

oh God, I was in agony.. what took you so long?

One thing I noticed about these long posts is it's very easy for important things to fall by the wayside, in future I shall try to break things down into smaller chunks and concentrate on one topic.

that would be preferable indeed.. but you are a chubby kid in a candy store.. what can I do to keep you from going all over the place?

First, the text in question

There are two problems here.

1) There are not 7 layers of atmosphere.
It doesn't just stop at 100km like the diagram on that page and there is another layer, the Exosphere, above those. Furthermore the tropopause, stratopause and mesopause are not layers but names for the transition between layers (as you can imagine a layer does not have a well defined edge).
Link: [How many layers?]

There are many different websites with opposing views.. who is to say I consider yours? be that as it may.. I went to the NASA one, and ound five layers that were identified .. that being the operative word-- methods of identification included below.. denoting just because you can't account for it does it mean it isn't there.. in a couple of years they will re-consider their classifications, the way pluto was recently demoted.. I am not a google scholar myself I prefer the conventional method for schooling but I can appreciate your need to rely on it for a strategic advantage!
http://www.srh.noaa.gov/srh/jetstream/atmos/layers.htm

Layers of the Atmosphere
The envelope of gas surrounding the Earth changes from the ground up. Five distinct layers have been identified using...

thermal characteristics (temperature changes),
chemical composition,
movement, and
density.
Each of the layers are bounded by "pauses" where the maximum changes in thermal characteristics, chemical composition, movement, and density occur.

Troposphere
The troposphere begins at the Earth's surface and extends up to 4-12 miles (6-20 km) high. This is where we live. As the gases in this layer decrease with height, the air become thinner. Therefore, the temperature in the troposphere also decreases with height. As you climb higher, the temperature drops from about 62°F (17°C) to -60°F (-51°C). Almost all weather occurs in this region.

The height of the troposphere varies from the equator to the poles. At the equator it is around 11-12 miles (18-20 km) high, at 50°N and 50°S, 5½ miles and at the poles just under four miles high. The transition boundary between the troposphere and the layer above is called the tropopause. Both the tropopause and the troposphere are known as the lower atmosphere.


Stratosphere
The Stratosphere extends from the tropopause up to 31 miles above the Earth's surface. This layer holds 19 percent of the atmosphere's gases and but very little water vapor.

Temperature increases with height as radiation is increasingly absorbed by oxygen molecules which leads to the formation of Ozone. The temperature rises from an average -76°F (-60°C) at tropopause to a maximum of about 5°F (-15°C) at the stratopause due to this absorption of ultraviolet radiation. The increasing temperature also makes it a calm layer with movements of the gases slow.

The regions of the stratosphere and the mesosphere, along with the stratopause and mesopause, are called the middle atmosphere by scientists. The transition boundary which separates the stratosphere from the mesosphere is called the stratopause.


Mesosphere
The mesosphere extends from the stratopause to about 53 miles (85 km) above the earth. The gases, including the oxygen molecules, continue to become thinner and thinner with height. As such, the effect of the warming by ultraviolet radiation also becomes less and less leading to a decrease in temperature with height. On average, temperature decreases from about 5°F (-15°C) to as low as -184°F (-120°C) at the mesopause. However, the gases in the mesosphere are thick enough to slow down meteorites hurtling into the atmosphere, where they burn up, leaving fiery trails in the night sky.


Thermosphere
The Thermosphere extends from the mesopause to 430 miles (690 km) above the earth. This layer is known as the upper atmosphere.

The gases of the thermosphere are increasingly thinner than in the mesosphere. As such, only the higher energy ultraviolet and x-ray radiation from the sun is absorbed. But because of this absorption, the temperature increases with height and can reach as high as 3,600°F (2,000°C) near the top of this layer.

However, despite the high temperature, this layer of the atmosphere would still feel very cold to our skin because of the extremely thin air. The total amount of energy from the very few molecules in this layer is not sufficient enough to heat our skin.

Take it to the MAX! The Ionosphere


Exosphere
The Exosphere is the outermost layer of the atmosphere and extends from the thermopause to 6,200 miles (10,000 km) above the earth. In this layer, atoms and molecules escape into space and satellites orbit the earth. The transition boundary which separates the exosphere from the thermosphere below it is called the thermopause

2) Whether we accept your position on the makeup of the atmosphere or not, where does that leave us regarding the stars decking the lowest heaven?
It's quite clear to us that they aren't in our atmosphere.

The Quran doesn't say the lowest earthly heaven is decked with 'stars'.. that is your desired rendition.
preferable you read the book you misquote from a high fidelity source, before plagiarizing from answering islam or the infidels website..


cheers

 

[silkworm]

Tornado, you are comparing a baloon filled with helium with Sky??? his is ridiclous, who feeds the worm in the stone this is not a "cycle of things just happening without a regular system", this is nature and nature just doesn't work like this bro.

GOD EXISTS!
THERE IS NO OTHER OPTION!

The Humanists, those who believe in the Humanist religion, tells us that they find "insufficient evidence for a belief in the existence of a supernatural [meaning a God.]" They also proudly boast that "the time has passed for theism [a belief in a God.]"

John Dewey, "the father of progressive education," America's leading figure in public education, and a believer in the Humanist religion, wrote "There is no God, and there is no soul."
Yet the Humanists and John Dewey are dramatically wrong! You can know with scientific certainty that there is a God, and that there is no other option but knowledge that He is real!

A belief in God can now be based upon science, logic and reason! This booklet will prove that even to the most skeptical atheist!
THERE IS A GOD!
THERE IS NO OTHER OPTION!

 

[Tornado]

Silkworm, do you know what the sky is made up of? The helium balloon example is pretty easy to understand illustrating how it's "held up" by gases beneath.

 

[Skavau]

Tornado, you are comparing a baloon filled with helium with Sky??? his is ridiclous, who feeds the worm in the stone this is not a "cycle of things just happening without a regular system", this is nature and nature just doesn't work like this bro.

GOD EXISTS!
THERE IS NO OTHER OPTION!

What are you talking about?

Even though we know that it is not possible for the sky to fall down on everyone, with or without 'pillars' - you seem to think that any lack of understanding in this area somehow demonstrates the existence of God?

God of the Gaps is not a valid argument. Not understanding the cause or something or understanding the reasoning of someone does not mean that it must have been caused by a God/s. It just means we do not understand the cause.

In relation to your request to demonstrate "how the sky is staying without falling without the help of pillars". The sky is part of the atmosphere of our planet. It just simply is not possible for it to 'crash down to earth'.

Do some basic research of it. It isn't a scientific 'unknown'. Click here and here.

 

[silkworm]

Gentlemen, the Sky is not only a protective cover but also a canopy and working as a sort of a Distribution Line, now you would be talking about stars being real-life JFK or Marilyn Monroe, Elvis Presley.

Each and everything that is existing in this world is related to each other and a perfect proof that there is someone who is behind it. The big bang theory is talked about and proved in Holy Qur'an, the days are not converted into night but it actually comes into it.

Remember "light" was created and not the darkness as it was always there.
Also keep in mind that "silence" was not created it was there, it were the sounds that we made to undo the silence.

But I would welcome your comments with a pinch of sense and siensibility.

 

[energy_22]

in this world is related to each other and a perfect proof that there is someone behind it...

No it does not.

Jungle plants cannot live in the desert. That doen't mean anything other than jungle plants cannot live in the desert.

If a jungle plant appeared in the desert that would be a miracle and evidence of a god.

Perhaps tonight, a jungle plant will suddenly appear in the desert!
-

 

[Azy]

that would be preferable indeed.. but you are a chubby kid in a candy store.. what can I do to keep you from going all over the place?

It's difficult to stop myself being drawn in with the other kids when there are so many things that are superficially appealing.
You could help (if in fact that is what you wish to do) by answering questions in a straightforward manner with less reliance on insulting folk to try make a point.

There are many different websites with opposing views.. who is to say I consider yours? be that as it may.. I went to the NASA one, and ound five layers that were identified .. that being the operative word-- methods of identification included below.. denoting just because you can't account for it does it mean it isn't there.. in a couple of years they will re-consider their classifications, the way pluto was recently demoted.. I am not a google scholar myself I prefer the conventional method for schooling but I can appreciate your need to rely on it for a strategic advantage!
http://www.srh.noaa.gov/srh/jetstream/atmos/layers.htm

I suppose NASA publish genuine work to the journals and complete fiction on their website. Just out of curiosity, how many meteorological journals did you consult when researching your response?
(You could have made your life a little easier had you read to the bottom and noticed I already posted a link to that site.)

You're right about layers and their identification, this is partly what I was getting at and a reason I disagree with people who say the Quran is talking about the atmosphere. In most cases the classification of a thing depends on the nature of your interaction with it or what information you require. The atmosphere is one continuous ocean of gases gradually changing with altitude, and it's classification into layers done to make the most sense out of it by the people who study it, there are no boundaries other than those you choose.
How many planets are there? It depends on your definition of a planet, same with layers of atmosphere, in the end it only means what you want it to mean.

It's interesting to see how people make an appeal to science to prove the accuracy of the text and then manipulate their findings to make the evidence fit.

The Quran doesn't say the lowest earthly heaven is decked with 'stars'.. that is your desired rendition.
preferable you read the book you misquote from a high fidelity source, before plagiarizing from answering islam or the infidels website..

Oh yeah, the infidels sorry.
I cannot read arabic so must work with a translation.
All quotations are from the [Quran Search] at www.islamicity.com
If you would prefer that I use a different source for my translations let me know.

Back on the point I was trying to make, could you read 37:6, 41:12 and 67:5 and tell me what it means by lamps/lights/stars and how that fits in with the 7 layers of atmosphere?

 

[جوري]

t's difficult to stop myself being drawn in with the other kids when there are so many things that are superficially appealing.
You could help (if in fact that is what you wish to do) by answering questions in a straightforward manner with less reliance on insulting folk to try make a point.

superficial folks indeed enjoy superficial things.. Is there a point to your stating the obvious?

I suppose NASA publish genuine work to the journals and complete fiction on their website. Just out of curiosity, how many meteorological journals did you consult when researching your response?
(You could have made your life a little easier had you read to the bottom and noticed I already posted a link to that site.)

I believe I have already stated, that unlike your person I am not a google scholar, and I am amused of how much you enjoy flaunting it.. as for saving myself the trouble well my index finger doesn't hurt from writing and clicking search, any more than yours I assume, but my time, is indeed wasted where you seem to have plenty of it on your hands.

You're right about layers and their identification, this is partly what I was getting at and a reason I disagree with people who say the Quran is talking about the atmosphere. In most cases the classification of a thing depends on the nature of your interaction with it or what information you require. The atmosphere is one continuous ocean of gases gradually changing with altitude, and it's classification into layers done to make the most sense out of it by the people who study it, there are no boundaries other than those you choose.
How many planets are there? It depends on your definition of a planet, same with layers of atmosphere, in the end it only means what you want it to mean.

It's interesting to see how people make an appeal to science to prove the accuracy of the text and then manipulate their findings to make the evidence fit.
Oh yeah, the infidels sorry.
I cannot read arabic so must work with a translation.
All quotations are from the [Quran Search] at www.islamicity.com
If you would prefer that I use a different source for my translations let me know.

Back on the point I was trying to make, could you read 37:6, 41:12 and 67:5 and tell me what it means by lamps/lights/stars and how that fits in with the 7 layers of atmosphere?

How would you distinguish manipulation of text really what methods do you employ when all you rely on is plagiarized material of the familiar variety? I have fwd the last of queries to the original refuter, see if he'd graciousely make time for you!

cheers

 

[Thinker]

Hi

This is an interesting thread. I am new to this group; I am an agnostic reading the Qur’an etc., and learning. Is there a discussion/debate on here that questions the validity of the words of the Qur’an being the absolute unquestionable words of God or is that sort of discussion haraam (on here)?

Thinker

 

[aamirsaab]

Hi

This is an interesting thread. I am new to this group; I am an agnostic reading the Qur’an etc., and learning. Is there a discussion/debate on here that questions the validity of the words of the Qur’an being the absolute unquestionable words of God or is that sort of discussion haraam (on here)?

Thinker

You are welcome to discuss that subject. Before you do so, make use of the search function to find an existing (if there is one) thread on that matter.

 

[Uthman]

Hi Thinker,

This is an interesting thread. I am new to this group; I am an agnostic reading the Qur’an etc., and learning. Is there a discussion/debate on here that questions the validity of the words of the Qur’an being the absolute unquestionable words of God or is that sort of discussion haraam (on here)?

Here are some links:

http://www.islamicboard.com/comparative-religion/13998-prove-quran-word-god.html

http://www.islamicboard.com/comparative-religion/13658-prove-quran-not-word-god.html