Jump to content

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

@E.L King    In the name of Allah, the most beneficient and most merciful. I praise after Allah AWJ, the final Prophet PBUHHP and his pure progeny a.s who helped us and guided us while we were in depth of ignorance that surrounding us from everywhere. Today, I am going to start this thread and will go on improving it day by day. Each day, I will write over a topic that deals with Atheism and Darwinism which the Atheist follow so much. To being with today's topic is Chance:      

Chance:-  When Atheists speak about universe they speak about chance mostly, and contend that this universe came out of a chance which they often define by coincidence. This, however, requires lots of philosophical explanations to be proved because I believe that philosophy proves it wrong. Let us see how philosophy falsifies it. Let us say that universe came out of itself, so, a philosopher would ask few questions: 1) Was universe came into being with it's intent or without it's intent.

1) if anyone says that universe came without intent, it means that there was someone else who intended to force universe to create in a particular time--------If you say that no it was universe who intended to create itself then philosopher would say that it was not universe before and was something else (like if a boy wants to be a man, but like a boy depends upon ingredients to make himself a man and for it requires nourishment, time to grow) that something also requires some elements to make itself a universe because it was not an eternal entity and it came from one thing to another. So, saying that it created itself is just saying that boy made itself into a man, while boy depended upon food and time and similarly universe depended upon various properties. And neither boy nor the food could have achieved the goal of developing of a boy into a man without boy having such properties which may consume that food and produce such elements with result in the growth of that boy.  Such is the system with universe, there is not a single chance, but many operations that are required to make something, and according to the definition of Science: "Chance" is something that happens very rare and by coincidence. But, science also says that when one operation happens repeatedly, it is not a chance but a natural law which is maintained by nature. So, to Atheists, What you are told chance, is actually a natural law, which happened repeatedly and not just once, so, you should not call it a chance but a process of development by an intelligent agent.                              

2) About universe intentions: why it did not intended before it and if you say that because it was lacking some elements or properties, then philosopher would say that it means such element was the main reason upon which universe created and not that the universe was independent of anyone to create itself.....Now, this dependence of universe proves that it is a dependable entity, if it had been such that universe were eternal, one could say that it did not created but existed without any add, but since it's properties are incapable without each other's help so they are actually a creation which required a particular time, particular ingredient and particular condition to create them, and none of it's properties created the other but all were depended on each other and none of those ingredients could produce such effect until one process has reached to it's condition after which the addition or subtraction of any property may affect.  

@Hugo Boss                

Edited by Dhulfikar
Title correction.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You can also add their main ideology "logic".

If Allah ÓÈÍÇäå æÊÚÇáì could not have existed (by their conclusion) then where did logic come from, when was it created, when will it perish and can I affect it?

They will respond with: It never came from anywhere, it was never created (always had been here) and will never die and no one can affect it. yet they have a problem if I remove the word logic with Allah ÓÈÍÇäå æÊÚÇáì.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


Big bang cosmology, a by-product of theoretical physics, infers the existence of a singularity which expanded into our universe but currently does not have the means to explain the nature of the singularity.

What we do know is this: The universe is composed of matter and energy that is constantly being rearranged in different ways. Nothing actually "begins to exist." Everything results from rearrangement of matter and energy already in existence. It is illogical to go from that to the conclusion that "therefore a Creator exists''.

There are no basis for the claim that the universe requires a cause external to itself. It is merely a philosophical/metaphysical assertion. Unless you can demonstrate otherwise.
 

wslm.

*

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Hugo Boss said:

You can also add their main ideology "logic".

If Allah ÓÈÍÇäå æÊÚÇáì could not have existed (by their conclusion) then where did logic come from, when was it created, when will it perish and can I affect it?

They will respond with: It never came from anywhere, it was never created (always had been here) and will never die and no one can affect it. yet they have a problem if I remove the word logic with Allah ÓÈÍÇäå æÊÚÇáì.

People claim Allah-s.w.t. doesn't exist because they do not have all they want. Their lives are not a continuous party.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, hasanhh said:

People claim Allah-s.w.t. doesn't exist because they do not have all they want. Their lives are not a continuous party.

On the other hand, a continuous party in the hereafter with an immortal soul and in the company of virgins is, of course, a much more plausible reason to believe.

:)

1 hour ago, Salsabeel said:

NOTHING!!!!

Really?

Ex nihilo nihil fit...and all that jazz.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nothing_comes_from_nothing#

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

so much misunderstanding in this thread. 

guys, Islam is largely silent regarding science.

we aren't those weird american Christians that think the earth is 6000 years old and dinosaurs are placed by the devil to test our faith. 

the big bang theory seems pretty legit based on our current understanding of science. it doesn't contradict our faith in any way, because that's like saying this computer that I am typing on proves Allah doesn't exist, since he didn't materialise the computer out of nothing in front of me. 

we know fairly certainly that the universe is expanding due to things like red shift and things like this. its fairly logical that if things are getting further apart as time goes forward, then if we were to go backwards in time, they would move closer together. if we go far enough back they will all join into one piece 

9 hours ago, Sindbad05 said:

When Atheists speak about universe they speak about chance mostly,

I don't think that this is a good argument from the theists. things happen in the universe every single day which have less than a 1 in a trillion chance - for example the sperm which formed you was the one that fertilised the egg out of trillions of other cells. 

something being very unlikely but happening anyway doesn't mean that it has to have been done deliberately. 

the concept of "nothing from nothing" also isnt a good one:

Quote

 

The law of conservation of energy states that the total energy of an isolated system cannot change. The zero-energy universe states that the amount of energy in the universe minus the amount of gravity is exactly zero. That is the only kind of universe that could come from nothing, assuming such a zero-energy universe is, already, nothing.[3] Such a universe would need to be flat, a state which does not contradict current observations that the universe is flat with a 0.5% margin of error.[4]

Some physicists, such as Lawrence Krauss, Stephen Hawking and Michio Kaku, define nothing as an unstable quantum vacuum that contains no particles.[5][6][7] This is different from the philosophical conception of nothing, which has no inherent properties, and is not governed by physical laws.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nothing_comes_from_nothing

to summarise - theists get tripped up all the time in this argument because the philosophical definition of the word "nothing" is not the same as the definition of the word in physics. 

if you want to discuss the universe with theists, its probably best not to point to the creation and say "see? Allah!" 

Allah is not his creation, he is not part of his creation, and his is not bound by the laws of his creation. its better to discuss Allah in the framework of those who claimed to be sent by him. i.e. how reliable and truthful is the holy prophet (s) and Imams (as) and what did they say about him. 

there are lots of really good hadith where Imams (as) debated atheists. my personal favourite is the hadith of the myrobalan fruit, which was an actual debate between Imam Ja'afar Sadiq (as) and an atheist from India. its fascinating. 

https://www.al-islam.org/tradition-myrobalan-fruit-hadith-al-halila-imam-jafar-al-sadiq

honestly, take the time and read it from start to finish. its wonderful

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Quisant said:

Ex nihilo nihil fit...and all that jazz.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nothing_comes_from_nothing#

 

:) Congratulations! You have proved the existence of God.

Now you need to elaborate as to why you think "Nothing begins to exist". An example for you is "time", which is said to be a non-existent entity before the big bang, another example is no space, another example is no particles, another example is no fields & no laws of nature. It appears that there are lot of things which begins to exist.
 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
57 minutes ago, Salsabeel said:

Congratulations! You have proved the existence of God.

Now you need to elaborate as to why you think "Nothing begins to exist". An example for you is "time", which is said to be a non-existent entity before the big bang, another example is no space, another example is no particles, another example is no fields & no laws of nature. It appears that there are lot of things which begins to exist.

 

As I mentioned in my previous post, Big bang cosmology, a by-product of theoretical physics, infers the existence of a singularity which expanded into our universe but currently does not have the means to explain the nature of the singularity.

This universe and all there is in it evolved by self-organisation of matter towards more and more complex structures.  Atoms, stars and galaxies self-assembled out of the fundamental particles produced by the Big Bang which came into existence from a Singularity, not out of nothing. 

The singularity is the only thing necessary to explain the existence of the universe. 

You need to define what you mean by "began." If you mean "came into existence ex nihilo," then no, it's not at all plausible. 
We have zero evidence of anything ever coming into existence ex nihilo. Matter and energy change form, but they are never created or destroyed. This is such a constant that it is incorporated into the laws of thermodynamics.
( Surely God wouldn't violate the laws of thermodynamics; even if you hold the belief He could, what does it say about His quality of creating the law in the first place then? Must not of been a very good law, ect..)

The one big question among cosmologists is "what was the state of the Universe before Planck time?" Mr Stephen Hawking's answer is that time existed, but was 'curved' back on itself, or "folded up." We know that space-time is curved, and that this curvature becomes more extreme in the region around heavy, dense objects such as stars or black holes. Gravity distorts space-time. 

wslm.

*

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Quisant said:

Big bang cosmology, a by-product of theoretical physics, infers the existence of a singularity which expanded into our universe but currently does not have the means to explain the nature of the singularity.

What we do know is this: The universe is composed of matter and energy that is constantly being rearranged in different ways. Nothing actually "begins to exist." Everything results from rearrangement of matter and energy already in existence. It is illogical to go from that to the conclusion that "therefore a Creator exists''.

There are no basis for the claim that the universe requires a cause external to itself. It is merely a philosophical/metaphysical assertion. Unless you can demonstrate otherwis

That theoretical Physics has basis in the Edwin Hubble's Observation which  dealt a blow to the Atheist scientific theories that has no observation to base their theories upon. 

Matter and energy are transformed from one state to another that implies that they are not eternal and they came from another state till you reach God or in the language of Atheists "Mother nature" or "Intelligence being" or whom we call God. 

6 hours ago, Quisant said:

On the other hand, a continuous party in the hereafter with an immortal soul and in the company of virgins is, of course, a much more plausible reason to believe.

 

If a celebrity like "David Beckham" could have many girls as his fan lying in waiting to marry him, why do you raise questions on "A believer" having pure wives inspiring to marry him. Believer is much more famous before Allah than "David Beckham" before God. However, no one knows number of those "Virgins" but no one can deny its possibility. 

Edited by Sindbad05

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Hugo Boss said:

You can also add their main ideology "logic".

If Allah ÓÈÍÇäå æÊÚÇáì could not have existed (by their conclusion) then where did logic come from, when was it created, when will it perish and can I affect it?

They will respond with: It never came from anywhere, it was never created (always had been here) and will never die and no one can affect it. yet they have a problem if I remove the word logic with Allah ÓÈÍÇäå æÊÚÇáì.

You have highlighted an important point bro......Logic is actually a product of intelligence

Every mystic and a big scientist have believed that without intelligence there is nothing. That is why Descartes, A mathematician says that "I think, therefore, I am" and Mystics used to say: "I am truth (Anal Haq)" meaning my creation is the evidence of God because whatever I see has a systematic origin in intelligence. And they all believed that without intelligence, there is even not chance....Because chance is when there are two things in a system and they come after millions of possibilities across each other, if an intelligence being have not created those things, chance would not have existed as well. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Quisant said:

What we do know is this: The universe is composed of matter and energy that is constantly being rearranged in different ways. Nothing actually "begins to exist." Everything results from rearrangement of matter and energy already in existence. It is illogical to go from that to the conclusion that "therefore a Creator exists''.

Matter cannot be created nor destroyed :D. 

 

8 hours ago, hasanhh said:

People claim Allah-s.w.t. doesn't exist because they do not have all they want. Their lives are not a continuous party.

Because they do not understand the purpose of life. For them big bang was a coincidence we came to existence without any reason and therefore they don't have a purpose in their life. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, DigitalUmmah said:

I don't think that this is a good argument from the theists. things happen in the universe every single day which have less than a 1 in a trillion chance - for example the sperm which formed you was the one that fertilised the egg out of trillions of other cells. 

 

Yeah but if there has been no sperm, there would have been no chance for sperm to fertile any of the eggs, and even though sperm fertilizing egg has no any intelligence of their own but it is the set properties which make sperm to fertile an egg, so those set properties define intelligence and creator. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, DigitalUmmah said:

something being very unlikely but happening anyway doesn't mean that it has to have been done deliberately. 

 

Every unlikely happening has a route to happen that is why it happened, if there had been no way for it, it would not have happened. If anything happens which you thought was impossible does not mean that it came itself, but you must think that there was a way for it to happen in that way also but we were ignorant. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Salsabeel said:

 An example for you is "time", which is said to be a non-existent entity before the big bang,

Time is a difficult think. Its very hard to understand the concept of time. Time is totally different thing if you are in 4th dimension. Imagine you are in fourth dimension you could go back in time so time is like a path you could go back and forth without any issue. 

 

As we know matter doesn't exist until you observe it. So if i exist it mean someone is observing me and the person whose observing me is being observed by someone else. so there are infinite number of observations going on. So everyone exist because there is someone out there who is observing us. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Ron_Burgundy said:

Time is a difficult think. Its very hard to understand the concept of time. Time is totally different thing if you are in 4th dimension. Imagine you are in fourth dimension you could go back in time so time is like a path you could go back and forth without any issue. 

 

Ron, Imam Jafar al Sadiq a.s said Time is thought to have a form but it has no form to be retrieved.  Everything which is created has passed it's time and achieved a new state which cannot be retrieved or undone by that thing even if that be humans. 

However, Imam Ali a.s says: "God is the time"....It means that God has everything in hand and if He AWJ wants, he can retrieve things out of nowhere and make forget what you achieved. So, Time which you associates with creation can only be brought back by God and otherwise not. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Sindbad05 said:

Ron, Imam Jafar al Sadiq a.s said Time is thought to have a form but it has no form to be retrieved.  Everything which is created has passed it's time and achieved a new state which cannot be retrieved or undone by that thing even if that be humans. 

However, Imam Ali a.s says: "God is the time"....It means that God has everything in hand and if He AWJ wants, he can retrieve things out of nowhere and make forget what you achieved. So, Time which you associates with creation can only be brought back by God and otherwise not. 

Its kinda impossible for us to go back into time but for prophets and imam it was not the issue. I am sure you have heard the story where prophet returned the sun (brought it back) for Imam Ali. because yes it is possible if you are in some other dimension. Think about occultation for a second. We know our imam born but disappeared right. He might be right here next to us but we couldn't see him because he is in another dimension. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To be Continued

As I wrote previously that everything requires ingredients and reaction time to convert to something else which defines that it undergoes a process or a program which imply that there is an intelligence doing the work. Because according to the definition of Physics for any work to be done, it requires an external agency Work = Force * Distance formula is the basis of this fact. This is the definition which I would employ to analyze Darwin's theory:

Darwin Theory

Biologists which speaking about the biology uses Darwin's Model often that has become part of modern biology that says Bacteria originates from Cells and Cells from Amino acids and Amino acids from Methan and ammonia and other elements. Every process requires a huge time and that may span over billions of time and every process is very complicated. In such thing, one may say that how can such chances be repeated again and again, or one would say that one should not call it a chance because Chance would say: "Hey I am rare and it is process being done by some intelligentia again and again and you are idiot to call it a chance. Call it a process bro". Even while explaining this pro- Darwinist  Stubbornly avoids to call it a process and say it is a chance. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Ron_Burgundy said:

Its kinda impossible for us to go back into time but for prophets and imam it was not the issue. I am sure you have heard the story where prophet returned the sun (brought it back) for Imam Ali. because yes it is possible if you are in some other dimension. Think about occultation for a second. We know our imam born but disappeared right. He might be right here next to us but we couldn't see him because he is in another dimension. 

Yes, I do not doubt it you are right, But my point was that one can only go back in time if Allah AWJ wants to. I have read many incidents of this one of which says that When Allah AWJ sees that a believer so hurt because of his sin and feels enormous shame then Allah AWJ with his might eliminates that happening from the minds of His creation so they do not remember.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, Sindbad05 said:

Yeah but if there has been no sperm, there would have been no chance for sperm to fertile any of the eggs, and even though sperm fertilizing egg has no any intelligence of their own but it is the set properties which make sperm to fertile an egg, so those set properties define intelligence and creator. 

not necessarily. we simply do not know the processes which are the "why" behind many of life's events. for example "why" does a newborn horse automatically try and stand up the second its born? "why" do newborn mammals know to seek their mothers milk? 

you cant say "look we know this bit is explained away by science, but the bits of science that we do not know - that's Allah" because then your Allah will always be decreasing, as scientific knowledge increases. for example maybe once upon a time people did not know what caused an earthquake, they would say "they're caused by god" until scientific discovery determined that its by tectonic plates. so earthquakes went from being "god" to "oh some science we discovered". 

this theory is called "the god of the gaps" and it is a really weak position to try and argue. 

instead, its better to just not try and argue science VS religion because they're two completely separate areas.

Islam is all about laws, beliefs and how to live ones life. science is all about understanding the universe around us. there's a little bit of an overlap but not enough that either theists or atheists could argue their case. 

21 minutes ago, Sindbad05 said:

Every unlikely happening has a route to happen that is why it happened, if there had been no way for it, it would not have happened. If anything happens which you thought was impossible does not mean that it came itself, but you must think that there was a way for it to happen in that way also but we were ignorant. 

see my previous point re: god of the gaps.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, DigitalUmmah said:

not necessarily. we simply do not know the processes which are the "why" behind many of life's events. for example "why" does a newborn horse automatically try and stand up the second its born? "why" do newborn mammals know to seek their mothers milk? 

It is because Allah AWJ have programmed them to do such acts such as a newborn baby cries for milk and knows how to swallow milk but do not know how to talk. 

24 minutes ago, DigitalUmmah said:

you cant say "look we know this bit is explained away by science, but the bits of science that we do not know - that's Allah" because then your Allah will always be decreasing, as scientific knowledge increases. for example maybe once upon a time people did not know what caused an earthquake, they would say "they're caused by god" until scientific discovery determined that its by tectonic plates. so earthquakes went from being "god" to "oh som

The final cause of everything is Allah AWJ. Tectonic plates do not move because of their own will but because Allah AWJ have made them like that. However, any damage which we are caused due to this does not mean that it is caused by Allah but our own ignorance that we settle near them.

Allah's role never decreases but you get to know him better with increased knowledge and scientific research. Allah AWJ says in Quran: "Allah AWJ causes to err those whom He AWJ pleases". An uneducated person may say that Allah AWJ misguides because this is what Quranic words says. But those who know that there is a in depth meaning of words, will say that by this Allah AWJ says that those who do sins never have access to goodness unless they repent and know and criticize the evil which they did and if they do not shun evil, they cannot become good. And this is the meaning of Quranic words that for evil doer there is no guidance for those who realize is goodness these are the fixed properties bro. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Sindbad05 said:

That theoretical Physics has basis in the Edwin Hubble's Observation which  dealt a blow to the Atheist scientific theories that has no observation to base their theories upon. 

 Edwin Hubble showed that our universe of galaxies is expanding. How has that dealt a blow to Atheistic scientific theories?

 

1 hour ago, Sindbad05 said:

Matter and energy are transformed from one state to another that implies that they are not eternal and they came from another state till you reach God

In which way does it imply that they are not eternal?

Because energy exists, energy has always existed. It has merely changed in form. This is the proof of First Thermodynamics.
Energy / matter can neither be created nor destroyed...therefore it has no beginning, it is eternal. 
 

1 hour ago, Sindbad05 said:

If a celebrity like "David Beckham" could have many girls as his fan lying in waiting to marry him, why do you raise questions on "A believer" having pure wives inspiring to marry him. Believer is much more famous before Allah than "David Beckham" before God. However, no one knows number of those "Virgins" but no one can deny its possibility. 

What ? I was responding to hasanhh, I do not understand, what does D.Beckham have to do with anything?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Quisant said:

 Edwin Hubble showed that our universe of galaxies is expanding. How has that dealt a blow to Atheistic scientific theories?

 

Because many Atheists including Einstein propounded theories that Universe is in steady state and neither contracts nor expands, when Edwin Hubble came up with those observations and Mathematicians said that this expansion means that there must be state from where it started and that was point of infinite mass, space, energy and time, the Atheists got failed.

After that someone other Atheist scientist, I think it was Fred Hoyle who said that Universe was always expanding, new idea, Atheist admitted they were wrong before.....

Soon, the scientists also came up with observations that universe also contracts when black holes were discovered and now Atheists were again in conundrum.....Lolz, Science cannot save you neither those idiot scientists who are trying to make fool out of you. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


  • Recent Posts on ShiaChat!

    • Did someone miss that Russia actually made a deal with Saudi Arabia and sold them S-400 air defense missile? Don't you get it, these people are playing with the resistance and it is sadness that we buy and ask help from the enemy of Islam. It is us that gonna lose every war that they create, because that is how they make easy money.
    • I live in a burb of Chicago. Population of the Metro Chicago area and it’s surrounding areas = 9.5 mil
    • actually, one such effort done is: (1) Whosoever is an adherent to one of the four Sunni schools (Mathahib) of Islamic jurisprudence (Hanafi, Maliki, Shafi`i and Hanbali), the two Shi’i schools of Islamic jurisprudence (Ja`fari and Zaydi), the Ibadi school of Islamic jurisprudence and the Thahiri school of Islamic jurisprudence, is a Muslim. http://ammanmessage.com/the-three-points-of-the-amman-message-v-1/ but extreme wahhabis reject this. let's not be extremists like them. i remember, during 2003 invasion of iraq, thousands of gi joes died. today, the modern jihadists are their foot soldiers. how to prevent this (being foot soldiers for US or some other entities) from repeating itself in future? 1. spread the fact that shiism is not majoosi/jewish creation. 2. while not belittling others, shiism has strong evidence to be the islam  propagated by the Prophet, preserved through His Ahu Bayt as. 3. let's race towards good deeds - you don't have time to throw stones during a 100m dash, do you?
    • Looking at anyone who is not your partner in marriage - with lust - is haram.
    • Al-Salamu Alaykum This is what you should do if you found a lost item: Question: Suppose that Muslim, residing in a non-Muslim country finds a suitcase (full of clothes) with or without the owner’s nametag on it. What should he do with it? Answer: A suitcase of personal belongings normally has the nametag through which the owner can be contacted. If he knows that it belongs to a Muslim or a non-Muslim whose property is sacrosanct (or even if there is a likelihood —a considerable likelihood— [that it belongs to a non-Muslim whose property is sacrosanct]), it is necessary for him to announce it for one whole year that he has found that item [so that the owner can come forward and claim it]. If he cannot find the owner [even after the lapse of one year], he should, based on obligatory precaution, give it in charity. However, if he knows that it belongs to a non-Muslim, it is permissible for him to keep it provided that he is not legally bound to announce what he finds in that country or to hand it over to the authorities, etc. (1) In the latter case, he is not allowed to take possession of it; rather it is compulsory on him to act in accordance with the legal undertaking. Question: If I find an item in a European country without any distinctive sign on it [identifying the owner], is it permissible for me to keep it? Answer: If it has no distinctive sign by which one can contact the owner, it is permissible for you to keep it except in the case [of the legal undertaking] mentioned earlier. Source:  http://www.sistani.org/english/book/46/2057/
×