Atheism and Islam

This is the continuation of our dialogue at the old forum's atheism board.

Participants:

Atheism: Element_115x, Vril, unrealdummy

Islam: Jewel (formerly whitejewel)

Evidences presented by Jewel for the existence of God:

Physical: The inimitable Qur'an, the person of Prophet Muhammad; his unmatched legacy, ect.

Philosophical arguments: No man created himself, nothing cant produce something, what has been forbidden is actually good after all.



You may proceed now Guys


Thanks.

A brief overview of my stand:

• There's no contesting the fact that God or gods really do exist on the basis of ones' psychological needs and innate predisposition to believe in one.

• Quantification is needed for Theistic God or gods claimed by believers to have openly interacted with humans, or who has done amazing feats as written down in Holy records, or noted down from memes.

• A need to analyze tendencies exhibited by said Theistic God who behaves uncannily like humans do.

• No immediate qualms with regards to the beliefs held by Deists and Pantheists.

element_115x wrote:A brief overview of my stand:

• There's no contesting the fact that God or gods really do exist on the basis of ones' psychological needs and innate predisposition to believe in one.

• Quantification is needed for Theistic God or gods claimed by believers to have openly interacted with humans, or who has done amazing feats as written down in Holy records, or noted down from memes.

• No immediate qualms with regards to the beliefs held by Deists and Pantheists.

• A need to analyze tendencies exhibited by said Theistic God who behaves uncannily like humans do.

Thanks for the response cheers:

You may proceed no bro element_115x; it was your turn to post at the old forum, post it here. Remember to take note also the ideas that had been presented so we dont start from the beginning.


Thanks

I'll post the point by point one i did to your last post #101 back there.... i hope that's ok.

http://www.thebereans.net/forum2/showthread.php?p=810789#post810789

element_115x wrote:I'll post the point by point one i did to your last post #101 back there.... i hope that's ok.

http://www.thebereans.net/forum2/showthread.php?p=810789#post810789

I see any reason to object to that; go ahead bro

@WhiteJewel

I dont think so, in fact i think that you are the one making a personal perception about God - WHY?

because you just think that God should do irrational things, and you dont have any basis for it except your own mind, WHILE as for me, I have scriptural basis for it - the Qur'an. Not only that, no sane theist on earth would agree to you that God would do irrational things because that would create confusion, and God is not the author of confusion because he is the all wise says the Qur'an.

I'm just not putting a limit on what an Almighty God can possibly do. 'Impossibility' is not a God's trademark. Now that depends / remains to be seen if He'll actually do irrational things or not. That's His decision, and it's not ours to make a definite assessment on. That's what i mean.

Yes God can do anything he wants, but he does only Godly things, not irrational or illogical things.

That's not for us humans to decide and put a finger on. The theistic God is after all a 'sovereign' being.

God is not limited by our perception; can you digest in your brilliant mind how God sees, hears, manage, know, understand every single atom of his creation without mistake and tiredness AT THE SAME TIME?? I dont think you can.

You've shown exactly the same point i'm trying to make on the possibility for Him to decide on doing irrational things IF He so desires. We simply cannot fathom the vastness of the possibilities inherent in a God.

If you think that God would do illogical things then you are not thinking about God, you are actually thinking about Satan (devil) because the devil does illogical and irrational things.

So if a Satan can do it, why not an even more powerful being such as God Himself? The duality between good and evil are but human constructs to begin with. Other lifeforms may not even be aware of such good and evil stuff as we humans perceive them. A God can easily transcend such concepts infused in our minds.

That was not the question, why did you revise it?
The question was :
Can God create a stone which is too heavy for Him to lift?
and I said that your response to that question would answer to your query. You proved me right because you cant accept the question as it is because it is illogical to say that God cant lift a stone because it is too heavy for him, you even called it mockery.
So my point is absolutely correct, we should not attribute illogical, irrational and absurdities to God because that would be a mockery as you call it.
So stop thinking that God would do illogical, irrational and absurdities because you own logic wouldnt and cant accept it.

How would you answer the question? May i know?

My point is that God CAN DO irrational things if He so wants to. It's a different matter altogether however, if He will actually do these irrational things. I hope it's clearer now? How should i put this... hmmm... it's about potentiality. Yeah, that could be the word that best suits what i mean.

Well, no Muslim claims that the Qur'an is the only mouthpiece of God, so why should i? We are told in the Quran itself that God did send revelations to all communities aforetime but those revelations were not preserved by those who were entrusted by it so they got corrupted over time. Nonetheless, there are still traces of truth in them such as the bible and the vedas, but their entirety cant be considered as fully inerrant and authentic. The Quran however is uncorrupted and was preserved not only in written form but most importantly in the memories of millions of Muslims today in its original language, how about that?
If all the scriptures on earth will be burnt and nothing is left, the hindus, the christians and others will not be able to write their scriptures back WHILE the Muslims, YES because we memorized the Quran word for word - that's how great the Quran is.

Noted. Care to talk about the Uthmanic Recension and the processes that went with it? Thanks.

Who says that God is only concerned about humans? Not at all, i never said that either.
God is concerned about all his creations. This why he informs us in the Quran that he is the LORD OF ALL THE WORLDS. There is a world for humans, there is a world for the jinns, world for the angels, world for the sea creatures, animals, plants, ect, ect - so God's concern is not confined to human world only.
The thing is that Only the human and the jinns were given free will and were given a test of faith, obey or disobey his laws and commandments - that is why God sent messengers to be the role models of their respective communities and give practical applications on how to do what God has ordered them to do and give them scriptures as manuals.
So our concern is our own world, human world. You dont have to worry about the world of the jinns because you cant do anything about it. Some people did and the became crazy. So lt us focus on our own business so to speak.

Noted.

We call that worship to God; we do it because God told us so. If I acknowledge and believe that there is God who guides me to the correct way, then I should obey him because God is always the truth, right?

Surah Baqara Aya:21~ "O mankind, worship your Lord, who created you and those before you, that you may become righteous"

‎"Verily, as for those who believed and did righteous deeds, certainly We shall not make the reward of anyone who does his deeds in the most perfect manner to be lost." Al Kahf :30

“Verily, Allaah will not change the (good) condition of a people as long as they do not change their state (of goodness) themselves (by committing sins and by being ungrateful and disobedient to Allaah)” [al-Ra’d 13:11]

Noted.

As for you, you are worshipping yourself because you only obey what your desire wants you to do -

“Have you seen him who chooses for his god his own lust? Would you then be guardian over him?” (Quran 25:43)

Noted as well. We obviously have different mindsets.

again, where is your basis?

As an atheist, i am not confined to rely on the Theistic version of God alone. My basis could run along the whole gamut of God conceptions. Like i said, i'm not a member of any one particular Fan Club.

So you would marry your mother right, tho if you are honest in your conscience you wont because you know it is not right even if 99% of the people of the world would say it is correct.
So why make the society as an excuse? There should be an objective morality which is and cant be influenced by any or whatever human development.

I illustrated my answer in terms of living in a 'closed' society where the act is almost traditional in flavor. The Oedipus Complex situation is therefore 'ingrained' in such society that i cannot possibly be aware of other, less abhorrent situations which communities 'outside of mine' would subscribe to.

In that example you gave, the absurdity of the practice will only be realized once the genetic repercussions of said practice reveal itself... so eventually if said society wants to survive and realizes such aberration, the act of marrying mothers would naturally cease. Gets? I am being honest with respect to the close society i 'theoretically' was born in.

Now how about in most Islamic countries where 'Child Brides' and 'Honor Killings' are practiced. Can't we say the same thing about them? Is their conscience or any 'objective morality' inside them dictating them to do such abhorrent acts? I want to know.

Excuse me, hijab is not for climate protection but a protection and modesty.
Nakedness is good? c'mon my friend dont be silly. Why dont you try it now, Go out naked, maybe at SM edsa or mall of asia - tell them that nakedness is okay and that their perception is somehow wrong - I dont think you would do it, I bet!

Hijab's are ok.. but not Niqabs and Burqas. I only said that it be worn as an option from amongst other fashion which could serve the same purpose.

You were NOT reading my post. I said i'd likely go naked in countries where the 'suppression levels' are low if not nil -- like in most European countries perhaps, or countries where they allow Nudist Colonies. Never in the Philippines where the suppression levels are high. I might end up in jail for that if i do it in this country.

Well, even if you discount religion, still we know the consequence for the forbidden foods and drinks. In fact, science has proven religion to be true in this regard because religion did not give us the details as to why these foods and drinks should not be drunk and eaten - it merely tells us that it is not Good for us, they are unclean - and we (theists) follow it because God is the creator and he knows best what is good or what is bad to his creation.

As for that, i would not directly point to a supernatural Deity as the source for the knowledge of certain foods being bad. I'd take it that generations of 'practice' made an ancient society notice their bad effects, and transferred this knowledge on to later civilizations. Like i said, i look for mundane explanations first to arrive at 'falsifiable' conclusions. Never an instant "GOD DID IT!!!" proclamation.

Later on, science gave us the WHY! Praise God, the knower of all things!

Noted.

That's a dream! Bring them here if you are speaking the truth, says the Quran.

There's one in particular i'm looking into right now -- the Zeitgeist Movement. It's a 'working dream', if you will. But i'm still looking into it's promising possibility. It may not mean anything for now considering the conditioning societies have in these days, but it's a start -- hopefully for the good.

Thanks

I'm just not putting a limit on what an Almighty God can possibly do.
'Impossibility' is not a God's trademark. Now that depends / remains to
be seen if He'll actually do irrational things or not. That's His
decision, and it's not ours to make a definite assessment on. That's
what i mean.

As I said, we dont limit God but also we dont attribute absurdities to Him - You already have refused to accept that God can not create a stone which He cant lift - so why think about God would do irrational stuff. Besides, if you believe that there is God, God must have said what He is right? He said that He is good - I just dont know if you consider absurdities as good.

That's not for us humans to decide and put a finger on. The theistic God
is after all a 'sovereign' being.

We believe in God based on what He said what He is, not on what we think He is. He said that he is the truth and the all wise, so how could we assume that God does illogical things. What would you say if on the day of Judgment God will put those who did good in this world in Hell and Paradise for the evil doers, that's nonsense because it is irrational and illogical right?

You've shown exactly the same point i'm trying to make on the
possibility for Him to decide on doing irrational things IF He so
desires. We simply cannot fathom the vastness of the possibilities
inherent in a God

.

So not attributing illogicality, irrationality, and absurdities to God is not making God limited because that is not what God is.

So if a Satan can do it, why not an even more powerful being such as God
Himself? The duality between good and evil are but human constructs to
begin with. Other lifeforms may not even be aware of such good and evil
stuff as we humans perceive them. A God can easily transcend such
concepts infused in our minds.

It is not only a question of "CAN" God, it is a question of "WOULD" God do absurdities. Can God throw you out of His dominion? where will that be? Why cant you accept the question, "can God make a stone which he cant lift"

The reason is that it is an absurdity, yet you wanted to attribute absurdities to God. That doesnt make sense at all.

How would you answer the question? May i know?

The answer is that it is an absurdity; why?

Because if you say no, then you limit God's power because there is something he cant lift (sign of weakness), and if you say yes, then you are still limiting God because there is something which he cant do.

So if we say God is logical, rational, ect, we mean that it is in its absolute sense. We cant say that God is rational absolutely yet he is irrational - that would be a big nonsense right?

Noted. Care to talk about the Uthmanic Recension and the processes that
went with it? Thanks.

Always feel free to do so, you are very much welcome.

As an atheist, i am not confined to rely on the Theistic version of God
alone. My basis could run along the whole gamut of God conceptions. Like
i said, i'm not a member of any one particular Fan Club.

It seems that this is an admission that you are the one defining God according to your own perception; This was your allegation to me, but it seems that you wanted to withdraw it now, right?

That is why I quote the scripture when I speak of what God is because I dont want to say something about God in which God didnt say about Himself.

I illustrated my answer in terms of living in a 'closed' society
where the act is almost traditional in flavor. The Oedipus Complex
situation is therefore 'ingrained' in such society that i cannot
possibly be aware of other, less abhorrent situations which communities
'outside of mine' would subscribe to.

In that example you gave,
the absurdity of the practice will only be realized once the genetic
repercussions of said practice reveal itself... so eventually if said
society wants to survive and realizes such aberration, the act of
marrying mothers would naturally cease. Gets? I am being honest with
respect to the close society i 'theoretically' was born in

So without your knowledge/background about religion, you would marry your mother; WOW!!!

Now how about in most Islamic countries where 'Child Brides' and 'Honor
Killings' are practiced. Can't we say the same thing about them? Is
their conscience or any 'objective morality' inside them dictating them
to do such abhorrent acts? I want to know.

There is no such thing as child brides in Islam; the minimum requirement for a bride is not the age; it is whether or not the bride has attained the age of puberty (did she already have here menses?) otherwise the marriage cant be consummated. There is no such thing as Honor killing in Islam. Killing is done only by a legitimate government as a punishment for a crime commited which only includes killing of innocent life, adultery, and murtad (treason).

If some so-called Islamic countries do wrong, it is their problem and not of Islam. In fact, there is no Islamic country today. What we have are Muslim countries who tried to be Islamic; do you know of any so-called Islamic country which follows Islam 100%? I dont think so that you know of any.

Hijab's are ok.. but not Niqabs and Burqas. I only said that it be worn
as an option from amongst other fashion which could serve the same
purpose.

Muslim women, the true believers of them, wear niqab/hijab not for fashion but as obedient to God's commandment; they use different styles but the minimum is that there awrah should not be exposed - I dont see any wrong with it.

On the otherhand, those who wear niqab/hijab because of fashion is not really worshiping God but they are worshiping their own desire.

You were NOT reading my post. I said i'd likely go naked in countries
where the 'suppression levels' are low if not nil -- like in most
European countries perhaps, or countries where they allow Nudist
Colonies. Never in the Philippines where the suppression levels are
high. I might end up in jail for that if i do it in this country

In fact I did, but I think you didnt G what I said. What is meant is that it is not practical so why defend that practice?

As for that, i would not directly point to a supernatural Deity as the
source for the knowledge of certain foods being bad. I'd take it that
generations of 'practice' made an ancient society notice their bad
effects, and transferred this knowledge on to later civilizations. Like i
said, i look for mundane explanations first to arrive at 'falsifiable'
conclusions. Never an instant "GOD DID IT!!!" proclamation.

The problem is that what you have is a mere doubt, no proof at all. When there is a claim, the claim is considered valid and true until proven otherwise. A mere doubt, or even a strong doubt is never a proof at all.

Here is a book which claims that there is God, and challenges all mankind to come together, help each other to produce a book like it if they doubt that it is not from God; that is a very strong challenge right? PLUS, here is an illiterate man from the middle of the desert rated as the #1 in history - no other human being could match - why not?

There's one in particular i'm looking into right now -- the Zeitgeist
Movement. It's a 'working dream', if you will. But i'm still
looking into it's promising possibility. It may not mean anything for
now considering the conditioning societies have in these days, but it's a
start -- hopefully for the good.

Thanks

The floor is yours to bring your proof. We'll see Zeitgeist
Movement can match Islam - first of all, does it have an inimitable book that adresses all aspects of human life, worldly and spiritual - if it doesnt have that then stop thinking about it, it is even more than an impossible dream.


Thanks

I'll post this video about the Zeitgeist Movement first, i'll tackle your other points when i get the time. It would be good if everyone can spare an hour and a half watching this video first before commenting about what's it all about.

Like i previously said, i myself am looking at it -- not meaning that i 'whole-heartedly' support it at this time. But off-hand i'd say it's a promising proposal.

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=3932487043163636261#

element_115x wrote:I'll post this video about the Zeitgeist Movement first, i'll tackle your other points when i get the time. It would be good if everyone can spare an hour and a half watching this video first before commenting about what's it all about.

Like i previously said, i myself am looking at it -- not meaning that i 'whole-heartedly' support it at this time. But off-hand i'd say it's a promising proposal.

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=3932487043163636261#

That would be a good idea.

The bottom line is that, if Zeitgeist Movement cant match the evidence which I presented for Islam especially the Qur'an and Prophet Muhammad, then it is not really important in this discussion. Perhaps in the general discussion board or make a new and separate thread for it.


Thanks

Back to regular programming.

Jewel said:

yes that's true otherwise he isnt God if he cant do that.

So stop thinking that God would do illogical, irrational and absurdities because you own logic wouldnt and cant accept it.

I say, creating something out of nothing is illogical and not possible. Therefore if what you're saying is right, that god cannot do illogical things, then it means he can't do that; he can't create something out of nothing. Otherwise we will be forced to accept that he can also create a stone that he couldn't lift which is illogical. Both are illogical.

If creating something out of nothing is not illogical, then I welcome you to explain it how it can be possibly done.

unrealdummy wrote:Back to regular programming.

Jewel said:


I say, creating something out of nothing is illogical and not possible. Therefore if what you're saying is right, that god cannot do illogical things, then it means he can't do that; he can't create something out of nothing. Otherwise we will be forced to accept that he can also create a stone that he couldn't lift which is illogical. Both are illogical.

If creating something out of nothing is not illogical, then I welcome you to explain it how it can be possibly done.

I beg to differ. I think you would be guilty of false comparison dummy. You are equating an infinite to a finite being.

What would be more illogical if God is nothing more than any human being? That's what makes your comparison to be false.

What makes us not God is that we CAN'T create something from nothing. What makes God the God is that He CAN create something out of nothing, and He himself is uncreated otherwise the one who created him is the real God, but what could be something before God?

So I believe, I still stand on a very logical ground. On the otherhand, you stand is I believe the illogical one because you are equating the Most Powerful being to a very weak one; false comparison that is.

How could an infinite be equated with a finite? That doesnt make sense at all.

Thanks

Jewel wrote:

I beg to differ. I think you would be guilty of false comparison dummy. You are equating an infinite to a finite being.

What does being an infinite have something to do with creating something out of nothing? And even if it does, you will still need to prove that god is really an infinite being capable of creating something out of nothing. Just how does he do that? His body regenerates creating matters and energy (out of nothing again) which is a part of himself and then departs from himself and turn into something not him? That's crazy stuff you've got there and that seriously needs explanation and proofs.

If he is infinite then he occupies everything, he is the everything we see including us and he doesn't need to create anything from the beginning because from the beginning or from no beginning, he's already infinite. That is assuming god is really infinite.

How can you even describe something that is not yet proven to exist such as god? Being him as infinite makes everything around as a part of him, and that sounds more like pantheism AFAIK.

You also need to explain in what sense that your god is infinite. He has infinite love and mercy or what?

What if our creator is just another life form more intelligent than us and seeded us here on earth? What if that is the fact, would you still accept that god can be finite after all? Know one knows, that's the fact.

What if the universe exists from no beginning that the universe was there all the time just like how theists describe god? And why can't universe exists from no beginning as your god? What does the god have that the universe doesn't have? Isn't it the universe is what encompasses everything? That if there something exists, the universe encompasses it? If it is outside the universe, then where that something can be located elsewhere? There's nothing else other than the universe. The universe is the totality of everything, it includes everything including even the time. We even haven't proven yet if the universe has an edge and if there is what lies beyond that edge. Take note, I'm talking about the actual universe, not the "visible" or "observable" universe. There's a lot of questions need to be answered before you can even think about proving god. I know that's not an easy task that's why I think, if god is reading my post, he really needs to be here and prove himself. I don't think that's a hard task for an all-powerful infinite god. I bet everyone, including me, will bow down to him and surrender if he just do that.

Visible Universe -> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Observable_universe

unrealdummy wrote:

What does being an infinite have something to do with creating something out of nothing? And even if it does, you will still need to prove god is an infinite being capable of creating something out of nothing. Just how does he do that? His body regenerates creating matters (out of nothing again) which is a part of himself and then departs from himself and turn into something not him? That's crazy stuff you've got there and that seriously needs explanation and proofs.

But do you accept that you have made a false comparison in your last post?

I have been presenting evidences for the existence of God since the beginning of this topic friend dummy; you may not have the time/opportunity of reading them. Anyway, I'll tell you what they are: The inimitable Quran and its challenge to all mankind including all the atheists and UFOs to create a book like it, and I had a long explanation about its WHY - My friend element_115x has been made aware of that. PLUS the legacy of Prophet Muhammad; the only human being in history whose practices are followed by more than a billion of people; he was a great statesman, a lead, a father, a general, a governor, a judge, a legislative body by himself, and a government as a whole - his main and central claim is that he is no more than a messenger of God.


Verily, when He intends a thing, His Command is, “Be!” And it is! (82)
chapter 36

For anything which We have Willed, We but say the Word, “Be!” And it is!
(40) chapter 16.

Verily, when He intends a thing, His Command is, “Be!” And it is! (59)
chapter 3.



Al-Baqara

And
if ye are in doubt concerning that which We reveal unto Our slave
(Muhammad), then produce a surah of the like thereof, and call your
witness beside Allah if ye are truthful. (23)


So meet the Qur'anic challenge if you can.

unrealdummy wrote:If he is infinite then he occupies everything, he is the everything we see including us and he doesn't need to create anything from the beginning because from the beginning or from no beginning, he's already infinite.

Watta misconception! Who says that God being infinite means he occupies everything? - That's not in Islam at all. God's infinity refers to his personality (attributes). God is different from all his creation and he is not part of his creation, so he doesnt occupy everything.

This is what I told you before, you disbelieve in God before understanding what really God is. Dont speak of something about God which God didnt say about himself, otherwise it's a big strawman.

unrealdummy wrote:How can you even describe something that is not yet proven to exist such as god? Being him as infinite makes everything around as a part of him, and that sounds more like pantheism AFAIK.

Correct, that is really pantheism if that is what we mean by God, but fortunately, that is NOT what we mean by God.

You also need to explain in what sense that your god is infinite. He has
infinite love and mercy or what?

This has been answered above.

What if our creator is just another life form more intelligent than us
and seeded us here on earth? What if that is the fact, would you still
accept that god can be finite after all? Know one knows, that's the fact

It is not another life form, and we are not speculating because God has already informed us clearly about himself:

Chapter 112 : Say: He is Allah, the One! (1) Allah, the eternally
Besought of all! (2) He
begetteth not nor was begotten. (3) And there is none
comparable unto Him. (4)

If you dont believe on that, then try to meet God's challenge to you:


Al-Baqara

And
if ye are in doubt concerning that which We reveal
unto Our slave
(Muhammad), then produce a surah of the like
thereof, and call your
witness beside Allah if ye are
truthful. (23)

What if the universe exists from no beginning that the universe was
there all the time just like how theists describe god? And why can't
universe exists from no beginning as your god? What does the god have
that the universe doesn't have? Isn't it the universe is what
encompasses everything? That if there something exists, the universe
encompasses it? If it is outside the universe, then where that something
can be located elsewhere? There's nothing else other than the universe.
The universe is the totality of everything, it includes everything
including even the time. We even haven't proven yet if the universe has
an edge and if there is what lies beyond that edge. Take note, I'm
talking about the actual universe, not the "visible" or "observable"
universe. There's a lot of questions need to be answered before you can
even think about proving god. I know that's not an easy task that's why I
think, if god is reading my post, he really needs to be here and prove
himself. I don't think that's a hard task for an all-powerful infinite
god. I bet everyone, including me, will bow down to him and surrender if
he just do that.

Well, the answer is simple, the universe is not God so it did not create itself. It is not an intelligent being either so how would you explain the fine tuning of the universe? So, since the universe did not created itself and it cant produce something out of nothing, then explain how did we exist?


That's a big, big problem. I think that you committed a false comparison again in this regard.





Thanks

I was still editing my post when you posted. Just read back again.

Anyways, you said

Jewel wrote:
This is what I told you before, you disbelieve in God before understanding what really God is. Dont speak of something about God which God didnt say about himself, otherwise it's a big strawman

Nope, it's not logical to accept things as true without understanding it first. Before I believe, I must understand it first and NOT I believe first then disbelieve later on after understanding it.

And as I said before, no one can describe god because no one has even met him nor proven to have the qualifications to describe him.

Jewel wrote:
So meet the Qur'anic challenge if you can.

This is really weird. You've got a burden to prove back there and because you can't do it, you pose a challenge like that to prove your point. I don't see any connection in how does an unchallenged challenge prove the existence of god. No connection at all. I can make the same challenge, if you can find someone the same person as me, the same DNA structures as me, the same looks and the same brain, then I'll concede. That just doesn't make sense.

unrealdummy wrote:I was still editing my post when you posted. Just read back again.


Nope, it's not logical to accept things as true without understanding it first. Before I believe, I must understand it first and NOT I believe first then disbelieve later on after understanding it.

So why say something about God which does not befit to God such as God occupies everything? Did God say that he occupies everything, or that was only what you think God is?

And as I said before, no one can describe god because no one has even met him nor proven to have the qualifications to describe him.

Well, if God has told us thru revelation about what he is, then there is no need for us to see him for now to know what he is because he himself described what he is. Who could know God better than God himself, please tell me?

This is really weird. You've got a burden to prove back there and because you can't do it, you pose a challenge like that to prove your point. I don't see any connection in how does an unchallenged challenge prove the existence of god. No connection at all. I can make the same challenge, if you can find someone the same person as me, the same DNA structures as me, the same looks and the same brain, then I'll concede. That just doesn't make sense.

Not weird at all. The book claims to be a revelation/word of God, so if it is a word of God, then God must have existed otherwise you wont have his word, so it is a very good logic rather than being weird.

Now, God knows from his infinite knowledge that people may doubt about the claim in the Quran because not all claims are true. So he put in it a challenge (falsification test). The Quran can never be produced by anyone/anything other that God. Produce/make a book/surah like it - If you cant, then here is what God has to say to you;

Al-Baqara

And
if ye do it not - and ye can never do it - then guard yourselves
against the Fire prepared for disbelievers, whose fuel is of men and
stones. (24)

Thanks

Jewel wrote:
Well, the answer is simple, the universe is not God so it did not create itself.

Saying that the universe is not god and did not create itself doesn't prove god. Why? Because you are removing the possibility that universe can exist without creator. That the universe is simply the universe itself and we've got no need to speculate anything else. You're trying to make conclusions too early. There's a lot of things that need to be proven first like does the univese need the creator if the law of energy states very clearly that energy cannot be created nor destroyed. You also need to prove that there was a time that the universe was not existing. But of course you can't prove that, because the universe encompasses the time hence there was no time that there was no universe. You need to disprove that law first before you can even begin discussing that there's a need for a creator.

Jewel wrote:It is not an intelligent being either so how would you explain the fine tuning of the universe?

Fine tuning? Do you know that there's plenty of places in the universe that we cannot survive? That the universe is so violent in a lot of places? How can you even tell that the universe is fine tuned? Are you saying that our universe can't get any better than this? What if the universe is simply the way the universe exists today? Is there a state of universe that the universe is supposed to be if there's no creator?

Jewel wrote:
So, since the universe did not created itself and it cant produce something out of nothing, then explain how did we exist?

Do you really think not answering that question proves your point? You're removing again all other possibilities and your trying to disprove the law of convservation of energy.

Jewel wrote:
Not weird at all. The book claims to be a revelation/word of God, so if it is a word of God, then God must have existed otherwise you wont have his word, so it is a very good logic rather than being weird.

Now, God knows from his infinite knowledge that people may doubt about the claim in the Quran because not all claims are true. So he put in it a challenge (falsification test). The Quran can never be produced by anyone/anything other that God. Produce/make a book/surah like it - If you cant, then here is what God has to say to you;

It is still weird. You claim that god knows from his infinite knowledge that people may doubt about the claim in the Quran because all not all claims are true so he put a challenge.

Why did he put a challenge? So that people will believe him so the people will be saved from what he's going to do to them if they don't believe? If that is the case then I'm not impressed.

Does your god know that there are skeptical people who uses their brain? His challenge is not effective. More effective way is to prove himself to us formally. That is faaaaaaaaaaar more effective than just a written challenge, which anyone can make. I can just write a book and make the same challenge, anyone can. Not because Quran was the first book to make such challenge makes it the word of god.

There's no other way he could prove himself other than coming down here and prove himself literally, formally, in a diplomatic manner in which all the media will be united in broadcasting the good news. There's just thousands of books out there and not everyone has the time to read every book found on planet Earth. Does your god know that? Does your god know that not all humans has the time to search for every book and read it? I guess your god is short sighted. No offense. If I were god, I can do the job better than him because I know what the people thinks and I know how can they be convinced. Not all people are the same, we have different levels of skepticism.

Saying that the universe is not god and did not create itself doesn't
prove god. Why? Because you are removing the possibility that universe
can exist without creator. That the universe is simply the universe
itself and we've got no need to speculate anything else. You're trying
to make conclusions too early. There's a lot of things that need to be
proven first like does the univese need the creator if the law of energy
states very clearly that energy cannot be created nor destroyed. You
also need to prove that there was a time that the universe was not
existing. But of course you can't prove that, because the universe
encompasses the time hence there was no time that there was no universe.
You need to disprove that law first before you can even begin
discussing that there's a need for a creator.

Well, you are right, saying that the universe is not God doesnt prove God, BUT that was not the idea there. What I was refuting is your claim that the universe could be the reason instead of God. It was not my evidence for God at all - you seem to assume something of me which I didnt mean.

If that is the case, the universe is not the reason at all. No strawman please.

Fine tuning? Do you know that there's plenty of places in the universe
that we cannot survive? That the universe is so violent in a lot of
places? How can you even tell that the universe is fine tuned? Are you
saying that our universe can't get any better than this? What if the
universe is simply the way the universe exists today? Is there a state
of universe that the universe is supposed to be if there's no creator?

Well, i think you dont understand what i mean by fine tuning. I didnt mean fine tuning to be peaceful everywhere in the universe.

What I meant by fine tuning is that there are places that are intended for life and there are places that are not.

Say for example the earth; Why how come that the earth is so fine tuned in as far as its distance to the sun and its atmosphere and lands and waters ect are really suitable for living things to live; one misfinetuned means total distruction - How did these things happen, please explain. big booom???

As for me, it is simple, God made it to be so. You dont believe me, then meet the challenge of the Quran, that's the bottom line.

Do you really think not answering that question proves your point?
You're removing again all other possibilities and your trying to
disprove the law of convservation of energy.

I think so because if there is no logical explanation to that question, then the belief in God is the most plausible explanation because only God can create something from nothing.


Man says, "When I am dead, will I then be brought out again alive?"
Does not man recall that We created him before when he was not
anything? (Surah Maryam: 66-67)

It is still weird. You claim that god knows from his infinite knowledge
that people may doubt about the claim in the Quran because all not all
claims are true so he put a challenge.

Why did he put a
challenge? So that people will believe him so the people will be saved
from what he's going to do to them if they don't believe? If that is the
case then I'm not impressed.

How it is weird when God gives you a falsification test? Isnt that what a scientific research is done?


And no, it is not to make the people be saved because there are people who choose not to believe despite clear evidences. The purpose of the challenge it to prove to people's mind and ability that God does exist because only God can make such a book - can you make a book like the Quran? I know, your answer is a big no.

Does your god know that there are skeptical people who uses their brain?
His challenge is not effective. More effective way is to prove himself
to us formally. That is faaaaaaaaaaar more effective than just a written
challenge, which anyone can make. I can just write a book and make the
same challenge, anyone can. Not because Quran was the first book to make
such challenge makes it the word of god.

Yeah God knew that there are skeptical people who use their brain, therefore God is challenging your brain, make a book like it. But where are the skeptic's "brains" now? why cant they make a single book like it? Does it mean that they have no brain at all?

There's no other way he could prove himself other than coming down here
and prove himself literally, formally, in a diplomatic manner in which
all the media will be united in broadcasting the good news. There's just
thousands of books out there and not everyone has the time to read
every book found on planet Earth. Does your god know that? Does your god
know that not all humans has the time to search for every book and read
it? I guess your god is short sighted. No offense. If I were god, I can
do the job better than him because I know what the people thinks and I
know how can they be convinced. Not all people are the same, we have
different levels of skepticism.

Well, you seem to suggest the Christian doctrine, god coming down to earth - that's a poor idea about God because you missed to think whether God can be accommodated by this tiny planet earth - This is what I've been saying to you all along - dont attribute something to God which God didnt say about himself.


Moreover, yes, God did know about all the books on earth past present and future that is why he is challenging, telling you that his book is not like any other book on earth, so believe in him.

I've asking since the beginning, find a book that can match the Quran, and I have put the criteria for judging/comparison - My friend vril showed my a cover of a fantasy book and made it a laughing stuff.

Perhaps you could bring one, I'll be so delighted to see/know.


Thanks.

Let's focus on the challenge you're talking about.

Sorry, even if I can make such book, I don't have time and I am not wiling to meet up the challenge because I don't even believe that the challenge came from a god, let alone meeting up with that challenge. But with regard to capability, yes we can, why not? It's just we're not willing to spend more time in this case that is not even yet proven. Challenge is not a proof and you know that. You can prove me wrong by meeting up with my challenge by finding someone exactly like me, you'll find nothing anything like me.

You see, that is illogical. You're trying to pass on the burden which is really due to the one who must prove. You're god is trying to pass the burden of proof by making such non-sense challenge. Anyone can make wonderful books and any book has level of uniqueness. And listen to this the greatness of book is subjective.

I can just write a book and make the
same challenge, anyone can.
Not because Quran was the first book to make such challenge makes it
the word of god.

Please make a book and let's say if it cant be imitated - If It cant be imitated like the quran, then I will give up Islam and any religion altogether because my proof is proven to be false.

Please do it, I beg you.


Thanks

unrealdummy wrote:Let's focus on the challenge you're talking about.

Sorry, even if I can make such book, I don't have time and I am not wiling to meet up the challenge because I don't even believe that the challenge came from a god, let alone meeting up with that challenge. But with regard to capability, yes we can, why not? It's just we're not willing to spend more time in this case that is not even yet proven. Challenge is not a proof and you know that. You can prove me wrong by meeting up with my challenge by finding someone exactly like me, you'll find nothing anything like me.

You see, that is illogical. You're trying to pass on the burden which is really due to the one who must prove. You're god is trying to pass the burden of proof by making such non-sense challenge. Anyone can make wonderful books and any book has level of uniqueness. And listen to this the greatness of book is subjective.

This is a very polite way of saying that you cant really do it, right?


The claim has been made for the existence of God by a book and with it is a falsification test to disprove its claim. Now, if you want to disprove its claim, it is your burden to do so; it is not passing the burden to you but it is the natural/normal way of disproving the proof being presented.

So, if there is no objection to the proof being presented because its falsification test shows that it is genuine, then it means that the claim is true.


Thanks

Nope, that is the polite way of saying we are capable of it but are just not willing.

You see, if we don't even believe, how can we possibly have the motivation to create something we don't even believe? We're not hypocrites after all. Creating something like Quran is like subscribing to theism and concede. Why are we supposed to do something like that?

unrealdummy wrote:You see, if we don't even believe, how can we possibly have the motivation to create something we don't even believe? We're not hypocrites after all. Creating something like Quran is like subscribing to theism and concede. Why are we supposed to do something like that?

I dont think so that you are like subscribing to theism. In fact it is disproving that the claim of the Quran and that everything about God, angels, hereafter, are false and delusion, and that more than 1 billion Muslims around the world is mistaken - that's the implication my friend.


How could all these BRAINY skeptics cant make a single book like the Quran? Isnt that Muhammad was an illiterate person in the middle of the forgotten desert 1400 years plus ago?

So if Muhammad is better than these brainy skeptics, then it is logical for me to believe in Muhammad than those skeptics.


Make a book like it, that is the challenge - can you meet the challenge yes or no, produce your evidence.


Thanks

The bottom line is I'm not willing to make a book claiming that there is a god. Something like your Quran right?

unrealdummy wrote:The bottom line is I'm not willing to make a book claiming that there is a god. Something like your Quran right?

It means therefore that the challenge is unmet and its claim therefore stands extremely firm.

You fail to disprove the claim.

Let me put it here again:


Al-Baqara

And
if ye are in doubt concerning that which We reveal unto Our slave
(Muhammad), then produce a surah of the like thereof, and call your
witness beside Allah if ye are truthful. (23) And if ye do it not - and
ye can never do it - then guard yourselves against the Fire prepared for
disbelievers, whose fuel is of men and stones. (24)

It says you can never do it. So it is a good choice for you not to do it because you would just be wasting your time my friend.

You better surrender to God, or else prepare yourself against the fire of hell because you choose to disbelieve despite clear evidence (the Quran).


Thanks