Jump to content
In the Name of God بسم الله

Proove Me Why Islam Is False

Rate this topic


Recommended Posts

  • Advanced Member

Bismillahi 

 

Assalamu aleikum Brothers and Sisters in humanity,

 

This goes for Atheists who believe that Islam is false religion. Why you believe so, and what are the dotrines that you consider to proov that Islam is false religion. Looking forward to depate, for the sake of gaining more knowledge, ensa Allah.

 

So, let discuss. Why Islam is false religion, or why its not?

 

I think Islam is perfect religion for two main reasons. Because of the Sharia that contains all things  how to distinuis right from wrong, and success from failure. Secondly, because of theology of absolute GOD that can not be discriped by any words, thoughts, or physics.

 

t

The theology goes something like this. From nothing by nothiing comes nothing. Therefore always is something. That what has been always is eternal, and therefore unique. I use causality to disproov that something can come from nothing by nothing. Also eternal matter is illogical by its essence. Eternal matter that is non-moving can not start its own movement if it has not outside force to give it energy. Therefore matter is not eternal, but a mear creation that has movement in it by its essence. All things have and are in rations of other things. And all rations are changing all the time. The thing that is eternal have no rations to anything so that it could be discriped trought words, or thought or matter. Thats why I believe in Allah. More explanation can be found from www.al-islam.org/quran from Al-fAtihas tafsir (explanation).

 

 

 

 

I am not faqih, so i have no deep understanding of sharia, but what I need in everyday life. So, you can approach to prooving islam wrong also by using sharia. I am interested to hear why you think something inside religion of ISlam you concider to be proof of voidness of ISlam. Please give deep thought before you post, so that we can lift the rock bottom of this subject. 

 

 

Why Islam is right/wrong? 

 

ps. If you thinking only to say that because i believe in another religion, then, this topic is not quit right for you, because what we are trying to see, is Islam trough Islam. :)

 

I thank you before handedly for your participation. Lets have nice and freshing conversation. 

 

 

massalam.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Veteran Member

Bismillahi 

 

Assalamu aleikum Brothers and Sisters in humanity,

 

This goes for Atheists who believe that Islam is false religion. Why you believe so, and what are the dotrines that you consider to proov that Islam is false religion. Looking forward to depate, for the sake of gaining more knowledge, ensa Allah.

 

So, let discuss. Why Islam is false religion, or why its not?

 

I think Islam is perfect religion for two main reasons. Because of the Sharia that contains all things  how to distinuis right from wrong, and success from failure. Secondly, because of theology of absolute GOD that can not be discriped by any words, thoughts, or physics.

 

t

The theology goes something like this. From nothing by nothiing comes nothing. Therefore always is something. That what has been always is eternal, and therefore unique. I use causality to disproov that something can come from nothing by nothing. Also eternal matter is illogical by its essence. Eternal matter that is non-moving can not start its own movement if it has not outside force to give it energy. Therefore matter is not eternal, but a mear creation that has movement in it by its essence. All things have and are in rations of other things. And all rations are changing all the time. The thing that is eternal have no rations to anything so that it could be discriped trought words, or thought or matter. Thats why I believe in Allah. More explanation can be found from www.al-islam.org/quran from Al-fAtihas tafsir (explanation).

 

 

 

 

I am not faqih, so i have no deep understanding of sharia, but what I need in everyday life. So, you can approach to prooving islam wrong also by using sharia. I am interested to hear why you think something inside religion of ISlam you concider to be proof of voidness of ISlam. Please give deep thought before you post, so that we can lift the rock bottom of this subject. 

 

 

Why Islam is right/wrong? 

 

ps. If you thinking only to say that because i believe in another religion, then, this topic is not quit right for you, because what we are trying to see, is Islam trough Islam. :)

 

I thank you before handedly for your participation. Lets have nice and freshing conversation. 

 

 

massalam.

 

Hello Ali Askari.

 

Atheists do not believe that Islam is wrong, they believe that there are no such things as Gods.  

Because there is and never has been any evidence for God.

 

The burden of proof lies with the person making the positive claim, if you say that God exists ... you should be able to prove it.

 

Questions similar to yours have been addressed in this thread:

http://www.shiachat.com/forum/topic/235027310-any-atheist-plse-help-answer/

 

Do read it and if you think there is more to discuss I will gladly participate in a fresh conversation.

 

wslm.

*

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

Bismillah,

 

 

Hi Quisant,

 

 

Maybe you are not familiar with the religion of Islam, so that you could say anything from its doctrines why you think they are false? You use word "believe" in gods, as a plural, but my question is that why you dont believe in Allah, One God, that is same for all creation? Or should i say like this what kind of contradictions you find in believing in Allah or in sharia? I am able to prove for myself using science of philosophy that there is One, Unique thing that is GOD of all, but its not the idea of this thread. The idea is to gain knowledge from the otherside of thinking, from atheist point of view. What you say about me making positive claim, I found that you are also making one positive claim that says: "There is no gods.". That is the thing that interest me, when we put it in light of Islam, meaning, why you think and believe Allah does not exist?

 

About the burden of proof. I dont think we are burdened to proof anything to anybody but to ourselves. And thats the main goal of this discussion. To gain more understanding. When you say that "there is and never has been any evidence for God." Then how do you prove that the evidences given by Muhammed (SAAS) or all other prophets during the history are false, and therefore Islam musit be wrong? 

 

So that you understand, this is about Islam, not any other faith. Like i said in the OP. As person who is ahtheist, why are you ahteist concidering the religion of Islam? Is there any particular verse in Quran that made you think that way about Islam, or is there some part in theology that you find contradictin itself, and therefore you dont have faith in One God? 

 

Ok, Thats about it now. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Veteran Member

Bismillah,

 

 

Hi Quisant,

 

 

Maybe you are not familiar with the religion of Islam, so that you could say anything from its doctrines why you think they are false? You use word "believe" in gods, as a plural, but my question is that why you dont believe in Allah, One God, that is same for all creation? Or should i say like this what kind of contradictions you find in believing in Allah or in sharia? I am able to prove for myself using science of philosophy that there is One, Unique thing that is GOD of all, but its not the idea of this thread. The idea is to gain knowledge from the otherside of thinking, from atheist point of view. What you say about me making positive claim, I found that you are also making one positive claim that says: "There is no gods.". That is the thing that interest me, when we put it in light of Islam, meaning, why you think and believe Allah does not exist?

 

About the burden of proof. I dont think we are burdened to proof anything to anybody but to ourselves. And thats the main goal of this discussion. To gain more understanding. When you say that "there is and never has been any evidence for God." Then how do you prove that the evidences given by Muhammed (SAAS) or all other prophets during the history are false, and therefore Islam musit be wrong? 

 

So that you understand, this is about Islam, not any other faith. Like i said in the OP. As person who is ahtheist, why are you ahteist concidering the religion of Islam? Is there any particular verse in Quran that made you think that way about Islam, or is there some part in theology that you find contradictin itself, and therefore you dont have faith in One God? 

 

Ok, Thats about it now. :)

 

 
I simply don't believe in the supernatural .... unless you can you show me how the supernatural (above nature) can be observed in the natural Universe?
 
Lack of belief is not a belief. Absence of Belief is not a belief. Not a claim that needs proof.
It is not a stance that is intended to lead to something else. Atheism is a conclusion.
 
Atheism is a negation of theistic beliefs, not a belief in itself.
The evidence is clear that many theists cannot understand this simple point.
 
I have no problem with people saying they BELIEVE in God, because that is an opinion based on faith rather than fact.
I only have a problem when they DECLARE that God exists, because that is a claim, and it requires evidence.
Those who advance such a claim should be able to prove it.
 
It is therefore pointless talking about prophets unless you can first prove that there is a God that needed prophets.
 
I hope you understand this? :)
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

Its either belief, or then its agnostisim. I assume you mean by supernatural that you believe  that miracles are impossible to happend, and thats because you never observed a miracle therefore miracles dont exist? Is this your logic? Or do you have any evidence that miracles actually can not happen in any case?

 

 

We can understand simple points, my IQ is high enough to understand simple poinst, or more complex ones. (Its between 133-140points). You did not use the term lack of faith, but you used thie term believe. So, its your, with all respect, its your problem if you get misunderstood by reader. 

 

Then to the core itself. Allah is not supernatural. No way, He has no nature at all, that is, description is inside this world. He is simply a Thing that can notdescriped. If you think that there cant be one unique thing that can not be imagine, or defined by words, and you think thats imppossibility by itself, then whats your proof of that? 

 

My proof is like this. By nothing from nothing comes nothing and therefore always is something. That something, is a thing. If you learn more about Arabic sematics its simply natural to call that thing Allah, because IT has created all other things, as we can see from the logic, by nothing from nothing comes nothing. So, I denounc your supernatural god, and call it IT. Thing that is first cause for all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Veteran Member

My proof is like this. By nothing from nothing comes nothing and therefore always is something. That something, is a thing. If you learn more about Arabic sematics its simply natural to call that thing Allah, because IT has created all other things, as we can see from the logic, by nothing from nothing comes nothing. So, I denounc your supernatural god, and call it IT. Thing that is first cause for all.

 

I never doubted your high IQ but you offer no proof, just assumptions.

 

The biggest problem with all cosmological arguments is that the final step - identifying the first cause with God - is not justified at all.
 
Why does the first cause have to be intelligent? 
 
Your definition is lacking because it assumes facts not in evidence. 
 1). Is this something  by necessity a singular entity? What prevents multiple causal agents? 
 2). "cause of all things": Is this a single event causal action or chain of descending or ascending events with multiple agents acting independently? 
 3). "does not itself have a cause": By what supposition can a casual agent be necessary if that agent is independent of cause? Doesn't this beg the question? 
 
wslm.
*
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Veteran Member

1) First cause is not intelligent. 

2) Its limitless and therefore cause to all things all time.

3 Have no parts, therefore need no cause.

 

I bow to your greater knowledge.

 

I call it physical energy, why do you call it God?

 

Have to go now, thanks for the interesting conversation.

All the best.

:)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

I bow to your greater knowledge.

 

I call it physical energy, why do you call it God?

 

Have to go now, thanks for the interesting conversation.

All the best.

:)

 

 

Because it cant be physical energy. Energy itself has rations to other matters and energies. I call it thing, and GOD, because all things are in existence because of It.

Edited by Ali Askari
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...
  • Veteran Member

Why universe is so calm for earth? quisant

 

Hello aqeelfair4u, we haven't spoken for some time, I trust you are keeping well.

 

 

Is the universe calm?

I am not really sure what you mean but I think you are judging "calm" with the wrong scale and a very parochial yardstick.
 
Our Earth is 4.54 billion years old, we (homo sapiens) have lived around 2 hundred thousand years, dinosaurs lived much longer: around 165 million years.
 
Dinosaurs extinction , was caused by a giant asteroid crashing into earth. 
As recently as 1908 a massive asteroid destroyed over 80 million trees in Siberia.
 
The surface of our planet and the moon has been pounded millions of times by collisions with other objects.
It's only a matter of time until another substantial asteroid hits our planet. 
 
On our own planet animal species (us included) survive only by predating, destroying and consuming other life forms. Even in the relative safety of our own homes we are constantly under attack from bacteria, viruses, parasites and radiation. 
 
The universe is a great ocean of energy fields.
Stars collide. Galaxies collide. Stars explode in supernovas that destroy everything around them for hundreds of light years. Black holes and quasars abound. For billions of years the material in our solar system has been caught up in a swirling mass (that we call a galaxy) all of which is being drawn to an inevitable confrontation with a super-massive black hole at the centre of our own galaxy.
 
But not to worry, if you are a good believer you will go to heaven.   :)
 
wslm.
*
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

Hello aqeelfair4u, we haven't spoken for some time, I trust you are keeping well.

 

 

Is the universe calm?

I am not really sure what you mean but I think you are judging "calm" with the wrong scale and a very parochial yardstick.

 

Our Earth is 4.54 billion years old, we (homo sapiens) have lived around 2 hundred thousand years, dinosaurs lived much longer: around 165 million years.

 

Dinosaurs extinction , was caused by a giant asteroid crashing into earth. 

As recently as 1908 a massive asteroid destroyed over 80 million trees in Siberia.

 

The surface of our planet and the moon has been pounded millions of times by collisions with other objects.

It's only a matter of time until another substantial asteroid hits our planet. 

 

On our own planet animal species (us included) survive only by predating, destroying and consuming other life forms. Even in the relative safety of our own homes we are constantly under attack from bacteria, viruses, parasites and radiation. 

 

The universe is a great ocean of energy fields.

Stars collide. Galaxies collide. Stars explode in supernovas that destroy everything around them for hundreds of light years. Black holes and quasars abound. For billions of years the material in our solar system has been caught up in a swirling mass (that we call a galaxy) all of which is being drawn to an inevitable confrontation with a super-massive black hole at the centre of our own galaxy.

 

But not to worry, if you are a good believer you will go to heaven.   :)

 

wslm.

*

i hope you are fine.

After all these bombardments and vast energy floods and universal collisions, nothing even slightly disturb our daily life..why is this happening? But this is not the way we should talk about..btw you are muslim or related to another religion or don't believe in religion?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Veteran Member

i hope you are fine.

After all these bombardments and vast energy floods and universal collisions, nothing even slightly disturb our daily life..why is this happening? But this is not the way we should talk about..btw you are muslim or related to another religion or don't believe in religion?

 

It may seem so to you because our Earth is a lonely spec at the edge of a small galaxy, a tiny stage in an immense arena.
 
I have enjoied this short video:
 
 
 
 
My Grandparents (father side)  are Druze, whilst my other Grandparents (mother side) are Christian.
My parents (perhaps for the sake of diplomacy and family harmony) are non religious.
I have never been instructed into any religion...you might say a religious virgin?   :)
 
ws.
*
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

i hope you are fine.

After all these bombardments and vast energy floods and universal collisions, nothing even slightly disturb our daily life..why is this happening? But this is not the way we should talk about..btw you are muslim or related to another religion or don't believe in religion?

If disasters happened every day, but you were only living for a second of a single minute of the day, you likely wouldn't be aware of the disturbances around you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 
I simply don't believe in the supernatural .... unless you can you show me how the supernatural (above nature) can be observed in the natural Universe?
 
Lack of belief is not a belief. Absence of Belief is not a belief. Not a claim that needs proof.
It is not a stance that is intended to lead to something else. Atheism is a conclusion.
 
Atheism is a negation of theistic beliefs, not a belief in itself.
The evidence is clear that many theists cannot understand this simple point.
 
I have no problem with people saying they BELIEVE in God, because that is an opinion based on faith rather than fact.
I only have a problem when they DECLARE that God exists, because that is a claim, and it requires evidence.
Those who advance such a claim should be able to prove it.
 
It is therefore pointless talking about prophets unless you can first prove that there is a God that needed prophets.
 
I hope you understand this? :)

 

 

Peace be with you,

 

Although atheists claim that atheism is simply the witholding of believing in a creator, or the supernatural , or a purposeful originator of the universe, or God, it in essence is a belief:

 

1. Atheists believe human conciousness can be explained wholly by material causes

2. Atheists affirm that matter and energy are sufficient to be a necessary existence, while muslims affirm they do not possess the attributes philosophically concretely determined to be needed for a necessary existence.

3. Atheists deny the arguments in favour of the existence of God - they believe them to be false.

 

So atheism is a belief that matter and energy or atleast physical existence is the necessary existence, conciousness (dubbed the 'the hard problem' which has evaded everyone will one day be proven to be a purely physical thing, and that the innate human belief of something higher - even if it can be learned or unlearned- is a delusion or illusion, and that there is no proof for the existence of God - i.e God exists anymore so than a flying sphagetti monster.

 

Atheism is a belief in my view, it's not as passive as you make it seem. It isn't a sitting on the fence belief, where if you had good evidence you would convert. Rather it's a belief system of its own as to what is the necessary existence , what is eternal, and the insufficiency of every argument for the existence of God.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Atheists don't need to believe the universe or life or consciousness can arise without God, they simply have to say, they don't know God is necessary and hence don't believe in him.  Although a lot of Atheists say they don't deny God, they do deny him in debates or say he would be evil if he existed. But to be an Atheist, you don't need to take a stance. You don't even need to believe in evolution. All you have to believe, is there is no proof you are aware of for God neither are you aware of God's existence.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

this is not an answer

 

What I am saying is, just because you dont see utter chaos when you walk outside every morning, doesnt mean that utter chaos is not all around us.

 

Just because you havent had your whole society whiped out by a meteorite or a volcanic eruption, doesnt mean that others elsewhere or before you, have not.

Edited by iCambrian
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Veteran Member

Peace be with you,

 

Although atheists claim that atheism is simply the witholding of believing in a creator, or the supernatural , or a purposeful originator of the universe, or God, it in essence is a belief:

 

1. Atheists believe human conciousness can be explained wholly by material causes

2. Atheists affirm that matter and energy are sufficient to be a necessary existence, while muslims affirm they do not possess the attributes philosophically concretely determined to be needed for a necessary existence.

3. Atheists deny the arguments in favour of the existence of God - they believe them to be false.

 

So atheism is a belief that matter and energy or atleast physical existence is the necessary existence, conciousness (dubbed the 'the hard problem' which has evaded everyone will one day be proven to be a purely physical thing, and that the innate human belief of something higher - even if it can be learned or unlearned- is a delusion or illusion, and that there is no proof for the existence of God - i.e God exists anymore so than a flying sphagetti monster.

 

 

 

Hello Tawheed313,
 
There are, in the world, in excess of a billion secular thinkers and I confess that I don't know what they believe or don't believe.
I can only speak for my personal world view and say that it does not include belief in the supernatural.
 
I believe, for instance, in 'static electricity' rather than 'Thor,'  or 'bacteria' rather than 'demons,' or 'fusion' rather than 'a sun god.'
And as for what caused everything, I'm advancing the "I don't know and neither do you" theory. 
 
A stark contrast to the religious and faith based explanations that usually go something like " God made everything happen. We know this because it was revealed by God.
Don't question it, for if you do, you will be punished".
 
But even if you could prove that atheists have strong beliefs against God you're still not offering any evidence that atheists are wrong, or that creation is true. 
It seems to just be an effort to taunt atheists. A straw-man argument.
 

 

Atheism is a belief in my view, it's not as passive as you make it seem. It isn't a sitting on the fence belief, where if you had good evidence you would convert. Rather it's a belief system of its own as to what is the necessary existence , what is eternal, and the insufficiency of every argument for the existence of God.

 

 

This is not true...if I were to witness the sea being parted, a stick turned into a snake, water turn into blood or the Moon splitting I would believe. 
 
Just out of curiosity, what would make you disbelieve?
What would need to happen for you to disbelieve?
 
wslm.
*
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

What I am saying is, just because you dont see utter chaos when you walk outside every morning, doesnt mean that utter chaos is not all around us.

Just because you havent had your whole society whiped out by a meteorite or a volcanic eruption, doesnt mean that others elsewhere or before you, have not.

Why why why utter chaos do not disturb us?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

 

I believe, for instance, in 'static electricity' rather than 'Thor,'  or 'bacteria' rather than 'demons,' or 'fusion' rather than 'a sun god.'

And as for what caused everything, I'm advancing the "I don't know and neither do you" theory.

 

 

Two things you said resonated with me, the mention of bacteria (since I majored in Biology) and that you are advancing the "I do not know and neither do you" theory.  For the first one, I became religious ever since I went through Cell Biology.  People talk about cosmos, et cetera, and while I have no knowledge of it, each one of us has an universe within.  In order to have one simple functional amino acid, we must beat the following odds: 1/10^160 or 1 x 10^-160.  An atheist said that since it is a deterministic process, it goes to completion quite easily.  But the problem is that such are the odds for a simple amino acid not what we require for existence and sustenance.  Furthermore, deterministic - although a poor attempt - might explain how not why.  Lastly, if you have an eukaryotic cell punctured in a solvent that supports life, as they say life began, with all organelles and nutrients in place, you will still not achieve cell reproduction nor life.

 

All that been said, I have met quite a few atheists and agnostics who say "I do not know but neither do you" and assert that we (theists) are guilty of the gods of the gaps fallacy.  But every scientist walks into the lab thinking that there is an answer and hoping that they will get to it some day.  Is that not belief?  So why is it wrong for me to believe that there is a God but okay for a scientist to believe that there are answers for most of what science cannot answer today? 

Edited by muslim720
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

All that been said, I have met quite a few atheists and agnostics who say "I do not know but neither do you" and assert that we (theists) are guilty of the gods of the gaps fallacy.  But every scientist walks into the lab thinking that there is an answer and hoping that they will get to it some day.  Is that not belief?  So why is it wrong for me to believe that there is a God but okay for a scientist to believe that there are answers for most of what science cannot answer today? 

 

It is a belief but it's justified since science has progressed our knowledge to a degree where me and you can communicate across borders while sipping tea at home.

 

However, as our knowledge in science increases, God seems to become less and less relevant. It used to be said that God created the Heavens and Earth in 6 days; and that God strikes the Jinn that dare to eavesdrop with a meteor. Even in the Creation Story, God had a clear role---He created Adam & Eve from whom we all descend. But now, where does God fit in the evolution process? He seems to be redundant.

 

So as theists, I think we have to acknowledge our ignorance and admit to ourselves that our reasons (and assumptions) for believing God may turn out to be false, as they have many times in the past.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

1.  It is a belief but it's justified since science has progressed our knowledge to a degree where me and you can communicate across borders while sipping tea at home.

 

2.  However, as our knowledge in science increases, God seems to become less and less relevant. It used to be said that God created the Heavens and Earth in 6 days;

 

3.  He created Adam & Eve from whom we all descend. But now, where does God fit in the evolution process? He seems to be redundant.

 

 

1.  Justified since science has progressed our knowledge?  Science, along with probability, says that there is 1 x 10^-160 chance of a simple amino acid forming itself and you might believe that this universe and life itself came out of nothing.  Are you going with the progress of science or your own whims?

 

2.  Six days is not literal but even if taken literally, God is not restricted by time, space or position.  Therefore, six days with Him is not the same as understood by humans.  And it used to be said that God created the Heavens and Earth.  Today, it is believed that the universe came from "nothing".  Either ways, the universe had a beginning and it is far more rational to believe it was created by a Supreme Being than for it to come from nothing.  Nothing comes from nothing and this you can test for yourself.

 

3.  You speak of evolution process but have no answer for origin of life.  When Miller and Urey in 1953 produced amino acids in the "primordial soup", they had greatly altered the conditions from what scientists believe the conditions on the Earth were 3 to 4 billion years ago.  And for life, you need polymers which can only be formed via dehydration not in a primordial soup since water breaks down protein chains.  Although erroneous on even more levels than what I have brought forth, it is believed that this is how life came into existence.  To you my belief - that God created everything - is without proof; to me an atheist's belief is wrong (even by scientific standards).  And while we both believe in something or some concept, evolution does nothing for traits that offer no survival advantage like music, art, ability to ponder, belief in God, et cetera.

Edited by muslim720
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Veteran Member

Two things you said resonated with me, the mention of bacteria (since I majored in Biology) and that you are advancing the "I do not know and neither do you" theory.  For the first one, I became religious ever since I went through Cell Biology.  People talk about cosmos, et cetera, and while I have no knowledge of it, each one of us has an universe within.  In order to have one simple functional amino acid, we must beat the following odds: 1/10^160 or 1 x 10^-160.  An atheist said that since it is a deterministic process, it goes to completion quite easily.  But the problem is that such are the odds for a simple amino acid not what we require for existence and sustenance.  Furthermore, deterministic - although a poor attempt - might explain how not why.  Lastly, if you have an eukaryotic cell punctured in a solvent that supports life, as they say life began, with all organelles and nutrients in place, you will still not achieve cell reproduction nor life.

 

All that been said, I have met quite a few atheists and agnostics who say "I do not know but neither do you" and assert that we (theists) are guilty of the gods of the gaps fallacy.  But every scientist walks into the lab thinking that there is an answer and hoping that they will get to it some day.  Is that not belief?  So why is it wrong for me to believe that there is a God but okay for a scientist to believe that there are answers for most of what science cannot answer today? 

 

 

Your calculation assumes abiogenesis (the initial formation of life from simpler molecules) was a totally random process. 
It also assumes that in order for abiogenesis to be successful, a complete 'modern like' microbe would have had to form spontaneously.
In fact, it was Natural Selection which propelled biological evolution and abiogenesis . 
 
You can read objections to your statistics here:
 
If you do not agree with that, please feel free to provide the conceptual model and the mathematics to quantify your assertions that life is impossible in the universe without directed processes acting on its creation. Maybe a Nobel Prize awaits your thesis.
 
But even if you were right, as far as I am concerned, stupefying coincidence is still just a coincidence, unless you can show that there's intent, not just assert it.
 
There is nothing wrong in believing there is a God, it probably adds an extra dimension to your life and it is none of my business but if you declare there is a God, you should be able to prove it, not just say it. 
 
wslm.
*
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

For Muslim 720 and viewers, that 10 to the -160 th power number seems to be made out of thin air.

If you're going to use numbers like that, post the research you're referencing, otherwise I'll assume you're just making it up.

Also for Muslim 720, I don't know where you get off making the claim that our ability to ponder offers no survival advantage. Our ability to ponder is one of the most empowering traits we have.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

 

1.  Your calculation assumes abiogenesis (the initial formation of life from simpler molecules) was a totally random process. 
 
2.  It also assumes that in order for abiogenesis to be successful, a complete 'modern like' microbe would have had to form spontaneously.
 
3.  In fact, it was Natural Selection which propelled biological evolution and abiogenesis . 
 
4.  You can read objections to your statistics here:
 
5.  If you do not agree with that, please feel free to provide the conceptual model and the mathematics to quantify your assertions that life is impossible in the universe without directed processes acting on its creation. Maybe a Nobel Prize awaits your thesis.
 
6.  But even if you were right, as far as I am concerned, stupefying coincidence is still just a coincidence, unless you can show that there's intent, not just assert it.
 
7.  There is nothing wrong in believing there is a God, it probably adds an extra dimension to your life and it is none of my business but if you declare there is a God, you should be able to prove it, not just say it. 

 

 

 

1.  No, I believe abiogenesis, or life coming into existence, was a well-coordinated process or event.  Atheists give a random explanation but somehow dislike the odds against it.  They say, as is stated on the link you shared, "Firstly, the formation of biological polymers from monomers is a function of the laws of chemistry and biochemistry, and these are decidedly not random" but give no explanation how these polymers are formed from monomers.  What is the driving force?  Not to mention, you might have missed my other post, a "primordial soup" means a wet environment and forming of polymers is a dehydration process.  Chemistry 101!

 

2.  Outright buffoonery!  Modern microbe, lol!  I will get to this in a minute because you are trying to reduce size and break things into simpler molecules to lower the improbability. 

 

3.  How did Natural Selection propel abiogenesis?  By definition, Natural Selection is "the gradual process by which heritable biological traits become either more or less common in a population as a function of the effect of inherited traits on the differential reproductive success of organisms interacting with their environment".  We are discussing coming into existence of life and you have already jumped onto Natural Selection which deals with what works upon individuals.  So it is said that on rare occasions a mutation in DNA improves survivability, so it is more likely to reproduce (natural selection).  Like I read somewhere, believing in beneficial mutations is like saying that a short-circuit in your motherboard is beneficial to your computer since nearly all mutations are neutral, harmful or fatal in animals and plants.  Natural selection would not choose parts that did not have all their components existing, in place, connected, and regulated because the parts would not work.  Thus all the right mutations (and none of the destructive ones) must happen at the same time by pure chance.

 

And do you not know that a new generation of bacteria grows in as short of a time as 12 minutes.  When did you see Natural Selection drive bacteria to evolve into virus or something else?  Even with micro evolution, the bacteria remains bacteria.  So does the fruit fly with a generation time of 9 days.

 

4.  I read that article and it is so silly to have had you believe that RNA is behind abiogenesis when "RNA cannot perform all of the functions of DNA adequately to allow for replication and transcription of proteins."  Furthermore, "the best claimed evidence of an 'RNA World' includes the fact that there are RNA enzymes and genomes, and that cells use RNA to convert the DNA code into proteins.  However, RNA plays only a supporting role in the cell, and there is no known biochemical system completely composed of RNA."

 

http://www.ideacenter.org/contentmgr/showdetails.php/id/838

 

5.  I am far more interested in setting the record straight than competing for a Nobel Peace Prize.  But if you can prove the "RNA World" concept, then a Nobel Peace Prize might be waiting for you.

 

6.  At least we know Natural Selection is neither intent nor the driving force for abiogenesis (not even for macro evolution).

 

7.  Asking for proof?  Evolutionary theory claims that there once existed a whole series of successive forms of the various organisms alive today.  Can you show us fossil records for these forms?  Trust me, the more they dig, the more they find the same stuff, never these "successive forms" of the organisms we see today.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

1.  For Muslim 720 and viewers, that 10 to the -160 th power number seems to be made out of thin air.

2.  If you're going to use numbers like that, post the research you're referencing, otherwise I'll assume you're just making it up.

3.  Also for Muslim 720, I don't know where you get off making the claim that our ability to ponder offers no survival advantage. Our ability to ponder is one of the most empowering traits we have.

 

 

For points one and two, you need to look into probability since what I said was pretty straight-forward.  Amino acid chains have base pairs and trust me, 160 is for a simple protein.  We require much complex ones than that.  Sure, to ponder may offer us some survival advantage but what about music, art, religion?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Veteran Member

(salam)

 

A couple of thoughts on what we have read in this thread:

 

1]  What separates a science from a philosophy is that a science is self-correcting.

 

2] Energy in religion. This is like the old  "God is a Mathematician"  line, that, somehow, "god is supposed to drop out one of the equations".

.    This is a distraction, and kind of blasphemous. Look at Sura 2:260, the illustration given to Ibrahim (a.s.). This is another extension of "kun fayakun". Energy, or Mathematics or Science has nothing to do with Creation.

 

3] Assembling nucleic acids. Mixing methane and inorganics in a flask in 1953 and then froze it, Stanley Miller 'created' an acid of DNA and gained instant fame.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

As I thought, no research just a claim...I'll be moving on now...

Your ideas are baseless.

 

 

Are you playing dumb or seriously believe that proteins are not built of amino acids and that there are enzymes to proofread every strand of protein or DNA synthesized?  How is any of what I said a claim when we have enzymes making sure that base pairs are coupled correctly?  And every mismatch, every error gives rise to some type of mutation.  Therefore, to get a functional strand, you have a probability at every base pair.  Apart from that, the "primordial soup" itself is problematic since protein synthesis is a dehydration process.

 

Yes, do us all a favor and move along and maybe not reproduce either!

 

 

 

 

 

(salam)

 

3] Assembling nucleic acids. Mixing methane and inorganics in a flask in 1953 and then froze it, Stanley Miller 'created' an acid of DNA and gained instant fame.

 

 

Walaykum as salaam,

Except they altered the environment and what they introduced to the mix was not found to be in Earth's atmosphere billions of years ago.

Edited by muslim720
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Veteran Member

1.  No, I believe abiogenesis, or life coming into existence, was a well-coordinated process or event.  Atheists give a random explanation but somehow dislike the odds against it.  They say, as is stated on the link you shared, "Firstly, the formation of biological polymers from monomers is a function of the laws of chemistry and biochemistry, and these are decidedly not random" but give no explanation how these polymers are formed from monomers.  What is the driving force?  Not to mention, you might have missed my other post, a "primordial soup" means a wet environment and forming of polymers is a dehydration process.  Chemistry 101!

 

2.  Outright buffoonery!  Modern microbe, lol!  I will get to this in a minute because you are trying to reduce size and break things into simpler molecules to lower the improbability. 

 

3.  How did Natural Selection propel abiogenesis?  By definition, Natural Selection is "the gradual process by which heritable biological traits become either more or less common in a population as a function of the effect of inherited traits on the differential reproductive success of organisms interacting with their environment".  We are discussing coming into existence of life and you have already jumped onto Natural Selection which deals with what works upon individuals.  So it is said that on rare occasions a mutation in DNA improves survivability, so it is more likely to reproduce (natural selection).  Like I read somewhere, believing in beneficial mutations is like saying that a short-circuit in your motherboard is beneficial to your computer since nearly all mutations are neutral, harmful or fatal in animals and plants.  Natural selection would not choose parts that did not have all their components existing, in place, connected, and regulated because the parts would not work.  Thus all the right mutations (and none of the destructive ones) must happen at the same time by pure chance.

 

And do you not know that a new generation of bacteria grows in as short of a time as 12 minutes.  When did you see Natural Selection drive bacteria to evolve into virus or something else?  Even with micro evolution, the bacteria remains bacteria.  So does the fruit fly with a generation time of 9 days.

 

4.  I read that article and it is so silly to have had you believe that RNA is behind abiogenesis when "RNA cannot perform all of the functions of DNA adequately to allow for replication and transcription of proteins."  Furthermore, "the best claimed evidence of an 'RNA World' includes the fact that there are RNA enzymes and genomes, and that cells use RNA to convert the DNA code into proteins.  However, RNA plays only a supporting role in the cell, and there is no known biochemical system completely composed of RNA."

 

http://www.ideacenter.org/contentmgr/showdetails.php/id/838

 

5.  I am far more interested in setting the record straight than competing for a Nobel Peace Prize.  But if you can prove the "RNA World" concept, then a Nobel Peace Prize might be waiting for you.

 

6.  At least we know Natural Selection is neither intent nor the driving force for abiogenesis (not even for macro evolution).

 

7.  Asking for proof?  Evolutionary theory claims that there once existed a whole series of successive forms of the various organisms alive today.  Can you show us fossil records for these forms?  Trust me, the more they dig, the more they find the same stuff, never these "successive forms" of the organisms we see today.

 

 

 

 

 

It was stupid of me to even enter this conversation, it always produces an extraordinary amount of speculative waffle.
No evidence for supernatural entities.
I should have known better. 
 
The proper debate about these matters occurs in scientific journals, laboratories, and the field, and by published scientists only. 
 
Thanks for talking to me,
All the best
Edited by Quisant
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

1.  Justified since science has progressed our knowledge?  Science, along with probability, says that there is 1 x 10^-160 chance of a simple amino acid forming itself and you might believe that this universe and life itself came out of nothing.  Are you going with the progress of science or your own whims?

 

I assure you I have more faith in science than my whims. So, I too, demand a reference from an authoritative scientific source to back your claims, otherwise I'll have to accuse you of following your whims and of propagating baseless claims.

2.  Six days is not literal but even if taken literally, God is not restricted by time, space or position.  Therefore, six days with Him is not the same as understood by humans...

 

Oh, now it's not literal... or maybe literal but we can stretch these numbers to whatever we want (the whims again LOL). I love these post-hoc interpretations. I mean, seriously, on what metric do we measure these time periods? Because if God is not bound by time then there cannot be one which renders these verses meaningless!

 

You can make up whatever answer you want to save your faith; that is your prerogative. I let the Quran speak for itself. It borrows the 6-day creation myth from Genesis. These days are our 24-hour days, or the God-days which are equivalent to a thousand of our days (Bible, 2 Peter 3:8) (Quran, 22:47). It also gets the order of creation wrong (41:9-12), and borrows the Seven Heavens myth from the ancient Greco-Persian tradition.

 

Notice, I'm a theist, so your something-from-nothing argument is irrelevant here.

 

3.  You speak of evolution process but have no answer for origin of life...

 

Fine. You can believe the Adam & Eve story. Since science hasn't established the exact way in which life emerged, I'll leave you to your belief, as silly as it is.

 

By the way, you forgot to comment on the shooting stars phenomenon. I need an explanation for it as well :)

Edited by Sea Ocean
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

 

It was stupid of me to even enter this conversation, it always produces an extraordinary amount of speculative waffle.
No evidence for supernatural entities.
I should have known better. 
 
The proper debate about these matters occurs in scientific journals, laboratories, and the field, and by published scientists only. 
 
Thanks for talking to me,
All the best

 

 

 

It is also stupid of you to believe that life came from nothing, that life lacks a purpose - therefore you live for nothing - and that you will end up dying and hence, account for nothing.  And no evidence for the lack of the Divine because you can see the precision within, and around, us to contemplate over it.

 

While these debates are better in laboratories and what not, thus far, I see only me approaching Biology and its details whereas the atheists here are only coming up with attacks on my posts without any real substance.  I wonder how many of you all have even stepped foot in a laboratory, something nearly all of my atheist co-workers have never experienced yet they make such spurious "scientific" claims.

 

 

 

 

 

 

1.  I assure you I have more faith in science than my whims. So, I too, demand a reference from an authoritative scientific source to back your claims, otherwise I'll have to accuse you of following your whims and of propagating baseless claims.

 

2.  Oh, now it's not literal... or maybe literal but we can stretch these numbers to whatever we want (the whims again LOL). I love these post-hoc interpretations. I mean, seriously, on what metric do we measure these time periods? Because if God is not bound by time then there cannot be one which renders these verses meaningless!

 

3.  It borrows the 6-day creation myth from Genesis. These days are our 24-hour days, or the God-days which are equivalent to a thousand of our days (Bible, 2 Peter 3:8) (Quran, 22:47). It also gets the order of creation wrong (41:9-12), and borrows the Seven Heavens myth from the ancient Greco-Persian tradition.

 

4.  Notice, I'm a theist, so your something-from-nothing argument is irrelevant here.

 

5.  By the way, you forgot to comment on the shooting stars phenomenon. I need an explanation for it as well :)

 

 

1.  Everything I have said regarding science, Biology specifically, which one is false?  Glad you have faith, you are from the believers too!

 

2.  The metric to measure time periods exists with humans.  God is free, and above, time, space and position.  These are philosophical arguments, an arena that atheists best not venture to because they will not be able to account for much since they cannot answer the purpose of life, the ontological basis for morality, emotions, so on and so forth.  Like I said before, if Natural Selection only makes us more capable beings, how does music, art, emotions, etc, make us more adaptable to our environment?

 

3.  This age-old accusation that Qur'an has borrowed from the Bible is downright pathetic and we can discuss that elsewhere.  The fact that you had to go there shows how helpless you are.  The verses in chapter 41 do not talk about any chronological order for creation of Heavens and Earth.  That been said, up until the 1940s, scientists believed that the universe always existed, therefore, Qur'an was subjected to ridicule for saying that Heavens and Earth were "split asunder".  And then came Big Bang which was somewhat similar to the concept of splitting asunder.  Let me say this, I do not believe that Qur'an is a book of science or scientific miracles, only miracles, but time and again, we have seen new findings align themselves with the Qur'an.......at least not contradict it.

 

Another example, to shatter your other claim, is Haman, the chief architect of Pharaoh.  The book of Esther in the Bible mentions Haman 1000 years after the episode between Musa [as] and Pharaoh at Pharaoh's court.  So the Judeo-Christian made fun of Islam for copying Haman erroneously and placing him a 1000 years before his time.  When Egyptology became popular around the mid 1900s, they found out that indeed this Haman fellow was the chief architect at the court of Pharaoh.

 

Lastly, the Greeks made many errors.  Somehow the Qur'an left all of them and maintained all the correct ones.  If we are to assume that Qur'an was copied from the Greeks, the fact that the Qur'an left out their mistakes and maintained their correct findings is a miracle in of itself.  The probability to maintain all the correct answers while discarding the flawed ones are great enough to make it seem like a miracle.

 

4.  That is good news.  What do you believe in, flying cookie monster?

 

5.  Sorry I studied Biology.  I tend not to venture out of what I know.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...