Ban and delete those who ban and delete

[Damir9000]

This is why I say you are not here to learn.

I am not going in circles.

When Atheist say that the Universe came from nothing it means that there was and there is still no observable creator. Or for that matter, there is no evidence that some being designed and creator the universe. Evidence shows that it all came on its own, without being created.

Therefore, Atheist could claim that the Universe could have had no beginning; that the Universe always existed. Atheist could argue that the Universe did not come from anything. It just was.

However, intellectual honesty requires one to do research and figure out the why and the what. Thus, it has been theoretically retraced back that the universe must have had a beginning, due to the existence of time and due to a theoretical assumption; and, one of the theories is that it all started with the Big Bang (meaning, coming from nothing, and that what prior to the Big Bang, always was, it was not created)

The Big Bang is not a truth, it is an assumption. It is popular because we all talk about it in the science and philosophy communities. Another theory of how the universe came about is God. However, that has not been proven either. It was an easy way to explain things before science was discovered. Thus, in the religious communities it has become the status quo to refer everything back to God, otherwise it would defeat the existence of religion.

Like I said earlier, human beings can be programmed to believe anything, whether they are religious or not. The difference with Atheists is that they are not assuming anything when teaching that God does not exist: because there is no evidence of Him, therefore, He does not exist. While the religious folks assume that God exists and then teach arguments to prove his hidden existence.

The religious communities like to use the observable world to show that God exists: there has to be a Creator argument. For example, they say that Picasso had to design and create the Mona Lisa: it would be absurd to assume that the Mona Lisa came all on its own. So, when their logic is used against them they don't allow us to use the observable world to derive arguments. Then, when they are asked as to who created God, they say that God was not created, He always was. I don't mind this kind of reasoning. However, God is not observable. So, does He even exist for Him to have even created in the first place?

To postulate that God always was, that He was not created and did not come from anything, and there was no beginning, is easy. What you are doing is finding ways to keep God hidden. If He exists, He is hidden, so it is easy to develop arguments to keep Him hidden and feel good about yourself that you kept Him hidden.

Islam and the Judeo-Christian theology was the brainchild of Greek philosophy. A lot of the arguments the Abrahamic faiths present have already by thought of by Greek philosophers, like the Alpha-Omega argument. The Awwal-Akhir argument.

While I will give you an A for being persistent to trying to prove that God always was, no beginning and no end, you have to admit, that this gets us no where. Why? We cannot observe this in the physical world. Further, no Prophet has ever seen God. They have claimed to have talked to Him and have received revelation, but no accounts of seeing Him.

Seeing is believing, EVEN for theists. But, remember what I said about religion? It is the opiate of the masses. That is why religious people can be bipolar, and shift whenever it suits them.

Also, in religious texts it is mentioned that God created everything and that you will see Him one day, in the Hereafter. However, there is no evidence that He created and there is no evidence that we will ever see Him.

Sorry, I digressed. For all we know, the Big Bang theory might be wrong and that the Universe always was. However, because we can observe time, therefore, it is only intellectually honest to assumption it had a beginning.

Since, God cannot be observed, therefore, it is foolish to assume that he created or that he exists.

So...long story short, if God can be, coming from nothing, therefore, the Universe can come from nothing. Or better yet, that which was before the Big Bang always was, was not created; in other words, it came from nothing, because it has always existed.

ps

coming from nothing, coming from nowhere=always has been, coming into being suddenly.

pps

If you are going to use physical world arguments to prove God always was, then you have to accept physical world arguments when that idea is countered. We are only limited to our physical senses.

If someone tells you that he has an imaginary friend, you don't further ask anymore question, because neither that person can explain their imaginary friend neither will you be able to comprehend even if he attempts.

It is wise for him to stay quiet about his imaginary friend, and it is wise for you to not probe him on it. There is no analogous yard-stick to convey that message. Thus, if they resort to explaining using the physical world, then they will be scrutinized.

This is exactly what is happening here. You are being scrutinized, yet instead of saying sorry, I cannot explain it in a way which makes it easy, you resort to insults.

So, it is does not help you when you make personal attacks. Stay mature and learn something. I am not here to convert you, but I will do my best to impart you with any knowledge I have.

[Tamim]

Be careful of how you freely believe in "miracles." First you would have to define what a miracle is, then you would have to prove that God performed that miracle.

Put another way, I am pretty sure that Muslims would agree that Jesus turned water to wine (John 2:1-11).

If you reject this "miracle" then you would have to explain why this is not a miracle. The caveat is that the moment you explain why this is not a miracle, then Muslims do not believe in an all-powerful God.

[Bengal_Tiger]

I personally have seen divine "miracles" in my life, due to the power of the Quran and other things. I am sure that [MENTION=1753]Manzareh[/MENTION] has seen other things.

Logically speaking if we affirm an omnipotent eternal creator than we by default accept his ability to perform miracles and do not detract from his omnipotence by rejecting that.

I actually have an Islamic blog (only 2 members of this forum know it, neither of whom participate here anymore) and instead of wasting time writing here, I might address some of these points in my blog.

[Tamim]

I have met so many Christians and Hindus who have claimed that they have seen miracles. I believe they are not lying. But, their miracles can be explained. They have to simply research the details of their miracles and they will see that their "miracle" happened due to some law of nature. And, if science cannot explain it now, it eventually will.

Tell me the miracles you have seen and I will try to explain it.

Remember, magnets were the awe of people at the beginning; they were "miracles" at one point. Now they can be explained.

Today, it is the miracle of the the Atheist, or non Muslim world that is keeping the Muslim world alive. Yet, the cowards and non appreciate people that you are, are not grateful. You still condemn them to Hell only because some Mullah has said that this is THEIR world. Pretty lame! Perhaps this is God's miracle to feed a bunch of judgmental people.

ps

you still need to tell answer if Jesus turned water to wine.

[Bengal_Tiger]

I have met so many Christians and Hindus who have claimed that they have seen miracles. I believe they are not lying. But, their miracles can be explained. They have to simply research the details of their miracles and they will see that their "miracle" happened due to some law of nature. And, if science cannot explain it now, it eventually will.

Tell me the miracles you have seen and I will try to explain it.

Remember, magnets were the awe of people at the beginning; they were "miracles" at one point. Now they can be explained.

Today, it is the miracle of the the Atheist, or non Muslim world that is keeping the Muslim world alive. Yet, the cowards and non appreciate people that you are, are not grateful. You still condemn them to Hell only because some Mullah has said that this is THEIR world. Pretty lame! Perhaps this is God's miracle to feed a bunch of judgmental people.

ps

you still need to tell answer if Jesus turned water to wine.

1. I respect you because you are a polite poster.

I am happy to have a productive discussion with anyone who displays the aforementioned and other similar characteristics.

I am not here to fight and thus tend to block people who get personal.

However I tend to keep my personal life precisely that personal and private, so in terms of your question about the miracles I've witnessed, no they were not flying carpets or things or visible instant miracles e.g. special effects stuff, though 2 of them were akin to that.

They were more to do with situations, problems which were resolved through the use of reading Quran.

I know the standard non-theist response is to cite that as an example of theists "delusional" thinking by interpreting two random events as being connected by an unrelated action, however I was there and I know the exact specific situation as well as (for those two events where I saw something visibly "miraclous" i.e. not natural) seeing it myself.


2. The Jesus (alaihi salam) story is Biblical and not really relevant, and I don't fully understand what point you are trying to make with that specifically?

Yes, miracles do happen, and...?

As someone who doesn't believe you will question that.


3. We live in a western-centric world and are the beneficiaries of western innovation and technology.

We are communicating in English (a "Kafir", "Ferengei" language) using Vbulletin an American company using the internet an essentially American invention.

However this doesn't negate the huge suffering that the west has also bought upon the world including 60 million people killed in WW2, genocide of north and south America, Australia as well as genocides in Africa, Asia and even to fellow Europeans.

I also believe that traditional Islam (both Sunni and Shi'i and the 4 madhabs, Hanafi, Maliki, Hanbali, Shafi) deviates from the true Islam of the Quran and has non-Quranic, post-Quranic practices which are possibly derived from rabbinical Judaism e.g. execution of apostates, stoning of the adulterer, prohibition on depicting images etc.

I have "studied" (had informal private sessions) with an Arab sayed (descendant of a well known figure in the Arab and Islamic world) who has explained to me using the Quranic text itself why the whole hadith tradition is dubious and traditional scholastic Islam is problematic, anyway that's a separate topic.

I have a degree of respect for certain "secularists" from Muslim lands be they believers/agnostics/atheists who challenge the injustices caused by traditional scholastic "Islam" of the Mullahs, who even camouflage their non-theism by saying "I'm not religious" or "let's keep religion and government separate".

I don't agree with them i.e. their non-theism.

I respect the fact that they're trying to challenge some injustices.

What I don't respect is deliberately provocative and counter-productive troll threads by internet fan boys from Canada, just trying to insult the beliefs of the majority of users on this forum and trying to offload their own personal inadequacies, pathologies and complexes on the rest of the forum.

[Tamim]

I am pretty sure that no one likes trolls.

[Manzareh]

This is why I say you are not here to learn.

I am not going in circles.

When Atheist say that the Universe came from nothing it means that there was and there is still no observable creator. Or for that matter, there is no evidence that some being designed and creator the universe. Evidence shows that it all came on its own, without being created.

Where is this 'Evidence' that the universe came on it's own??. You don't have EVIDENCE you have FAITH, the same way i don't have EVIDENCE but have FAITH, its BELIEF SYSTEM.



Therefore, Atheist could claim that the Universe could have had no beginning; that the Universe always existed. Atheist could argue that the Universe did not come from anything. It just was.

You just said there was evidence though, therefore this paragraph is contradicting the paragraph above because. Also, Atheist's believe in science and logic - it goes against science and logic to believe something does not have a starting point, in science if a thing does not have a starting point called an 'action' means there can be no 'reaction' to follow. Either you believe in science or you dont, make your mind up.


However, intellectual honesty requires one to do research and figure out the why and the what. Thus, it has been theoretically retraced back that the universe must have had a beginning, due to the existence of time and due to a theoretical assumption; and, one of the theories is that it all started with the Big Bang (meaning, coming from nothing, and that what prior to the Big Bang, always was, it was not created)

Your talking about intellectual honesty and research.. and then you go on to say the Big Bang means 'coming from nothing' .. No, have some intellectual honesty and research yourself the Big bang is with the assumption that there was 'Dark Matter' prior to this which was a particle like substance.


The Big Bang is not a truth, it is an assumption. It is popular because we all talk about it in the science and philosophy communities. Another theory of how the universe came about is God. However, that has not been proven either. It was an easy way to explain things before science was discovered. Thus, in the religious communities it has become the status quo to refer everything back to God, otherwise it would defeat the existence of religion.

First of all if the Big Bang is not a truth and just an assumption then how come in your first paragraph you claimed to have evidence? surely if you have evidence then it is no longer an assumption but a fact. Also, before or after science it's still the same thing that has not been made easier to explain, which is the origin of the universe.. truth is you will never come with evidence for the origin because the evidence will go against your science and logic, however it does not go against my personal logic because i have my beliefs of Allah, certain things are not comprehendable such as time as we know it not having a begging in terms of Quantum Physics but that is part of my FAITH.

Like I said earlier, human beings can be programmed to believe anything, whether they are religious or not. The difference with Atheists is that they are not assuming anything when teaching that God does not exist: because there is no evidence of Him, therefore, He does not exist. While the religious folks assume that God exists and then teach arguments to prove his hidden existence.

Based on this statement, who is better and why?

The religious communities like to use the observable world to show that God exists: there has to be a Creator argument. For example, they say that Picasso had to design and create the Mona Lisa: it would be absurd to assume that the Mona Lisa came all on its own. So, when their logic is used against them they don't allow us to use the observable world to derive arguments. Then, when they are asked as to who created God, they say that God was not created, He always was. I don't mind this kind of reasoning. However, God is not observable. So, does He even exist for Him to have even created in the first place?


It's the same with atheists, you like to point to science when debated but when science cant explain certain phenomena its easy to say "we dont know....but but your still wrong" Another main factor in terms of this is religious people do not need evidence for ALL of the things in the world, creation etc, Atheists automatically assume religious people have and claim to have EVIDENCE for everything, when infact we don't have evidence of supernatural things we have a BELIEF SYSTEM and FAITH, therefore the 2 opposites will never come to the end of an argument.

To postulate that God always was, that He was not created and did not come from anything, and there was no beginning, is easy. What you are doing is finding ways to keep God hidden. If He exists, He is hidden, so it is easy to develop arguments to keep Him hidden and feel good about yourself that you kept Him hidden.

It's not about easy or hard, its not a game. You atheists use this debate to earn brownie points or something. I could say the same about you, its easy to assume the big bang, meaning there was nothing, and nothing happened to nothing and then nothing magically exploded for no reason creating everything - and when your asked questions you just say "we dont know yet, we're still finding out" its very easy.

Islam and the Judeo-Christian theology was the brainchild of Greek philosophy. A lot of the arguments the Abrahamic faiths present have already by thought of by Greek philosophers, like the Alpha-Omega argument. The Awwal-Akhir argument.

So what.

While I will give you an A for being persistent to trying to prove that God always was, no beginning and no end, you have to admit, that this gets us no where. Why? We cannot observe this in the physical world. Further, no Prophet has ever seen God. They have claimed to have talked to Him and have received revelation, but no accounts of seeing Him.

Unfortunately I wouldn't give you any marks for disproving God because your stance is inconsistent and all over the place, one hand your saying you have evidence and then on the other hand you are stating the origins are incalculable and speculative.

Seeing is believing, EVEN for theists. But, remember what I said about religion? It is the opiate of the masses. That is why religious people can be bipolar, and shift whenever it suits them.

Again you are asking for evidence, Islam is not based on evidence, we go to heaven/hell based on our FAITH, we don't have evidence of Angels, Satan etc, some things we have evidence for, other things we dont, the some things we have evidence for are enough for some people to believe (and have) solid faith for the things which they do not have evidence for. I would argue Atheism is the opiate of the masses and just an easy ticking and free ride to do what you want when you want to whom you want, life becomes much more easier if you dont have to worry about sin's or deeds.


Also, in religious texts it is mentioned that God created everything and that you will see Him one day, in the Hereafter. However, there is no evidence that He created and there is no evidence that we will ever see Him.

Still talking about evidence.

Sorry, I digressed. For all we know, the Big Bang theory might be wrong and that the Universe always was. However, because we can observe time, therefore, it is only intellectually honest to assumption it had a beginning.

Your going back and forth here, in this post you have contradicted yourself numerous times.

Since, God cannot be observed, therefore, it is foolish to assume that he created or that he exists.

If God could be observed then there would be no need for religion, there would be no test of faith from Allah.

So...long story short, if God can be, coming from nothing, therefore, the Universe can come from nothing. Or better yet, that which was before the Big Bang always was, was not created; in other words, it came from nothing, because it has always existed.

This does not make sense. neither is any of it evidence, and an invalid assumption IMO

.

[Brown Skinned Savage]

The idea of how people can be duped into religion or an ideology blindly is perfectly illustrated by how the Pashtun, a pure race,
The more you are kept in the dark, the more your arguments are loud. The more you are enlightened, the more you keep quiet.

You say this and then you pull his "Pure Race" nonsense which is rooted in archaic out-dated beliefs about genetics.

[Tamim]

Im sure you got the point that I was making. Damn, people on this forum do not comprehend how to read something holistically.

You guys are itching to disagree.


ps

so, what races are mixed with the pashtun? are they aryan? children of israel? afghan? german? americano?