Jump to content
In the Name of God بسم الله

Need help answering atheist question

Rate this topic


Recommended Posts

  • Veteran Member
Posted

Salaam

It seems that in any debate with atheists, it always comes down to them challenging you "well, who created God?" (astaghfirullah).  Unforunately, I don't have a satisfactory answer to this myself.  I remember reading the Imams (as) used to frequently debate with atheists (and win).  Is there any hadees where they answer this kind of question?  Thanks.

  • Advanced Member
Posted

Asalaam Alaikum,

Brother Ali,

Let's move this discussion into the appropriate forum...do you mind asking your question again in the "Atheism/Theism Debates"

I will tell you exactly how you should deal with such people.

wa'salaam

Edited By optikalfilter on 1028064554

  • Veteran Member
Posted

Salaam

Rather than reposting it to the other forum, I'll wait for the moderator to move it.

Br. a, you're right that it doesn't.  If you play devil's advocate, then the question becomes who created god's creator and who created that creator and so on you can go on infinitely.  So at some point you have to have an original creator and that creator is God.  But I'm sure there's a better explaination than that.

  • Advanced Member
Posted

Assalamu Alaykum,

I was having a discussion with my uncles brother in law over the weekend. And I was pretty much doing well with all the questions he was asking me.. Then he asked that question "Who created God". I tried my best in answering it, But I guess it didnt satisfy him.

So OptikalFilter, your assistance would greatly be appreciated.

Wa alaykum assalam,

Khoder.

  • Advanced Member
Posted

salam,

There is the explanation of the brother above. Another possibility is to define the term "God".So the question : what do you define as God ?

If we include "The Creator" in this definition so the creation of The Creator is a nonsense. If you include "Creator" without "The", then you open the possiblity of the existence of several* Creators, but the existence of several Creators is not possible since : suppose that we've a Creator C1 and a Creator C2, if C1 creates everything and C2 creates everything then we will get a contradiction since there exists a Creation CR1 created by C1 which will not be created by C2 which contradicts the fact that C2 can create whatever he wants (and also contradicts the "free will" of a Creator, a Creator without free will is a nonsense since if C2 wants to create CR1 he will not be able to do it since C1 did it "before" him and so he wasn't able to create CR1) so the only possibility is the existence else of One Creator or An Infinity of Creators. Now suppose that we have an infinity of creators, the question will be : what do you define as infinity ?, if you give it the definition in mathematics then this definition is bounded by the possibilities of the human mind. Since , for example, Kurt Godel* proved that in the human mind there are logical propositions wchich are auto-referenced and so the definition of infinite given by the human mind is "bounded"... so the definition of infinite if in reality Finite (with capital F) in the case of Finite Creators you can apply recursively the arguing above (consider Creator C1, .... Cn with n bounded). If you give a definition of "infinite" independant of the human mind, then you agree that there is an Entity which is beyond the human mind, and this Entity is defined as God.

Moreover, proving that God exists or not is beyond the possibilities of the human mind as proved by Emmanuel Kant in his "criticism of the pure reason". This book is a very good reference and also "crticism of the practical reason". In the later book, Kant proved that the only way to prove that God is, is using Moral and not reason, which corresponds to the Way He defined Himsel in Islam through The Holy Names.

Sorry about my english if it not clear :(

Wa Allah a'alam,

*: Another possibility is to set a Creator for each Universe, wo we will get the theory of "independant" extra-universes as in cosmology (if the extra-universes were dependant then we will contradict ourselves concering the creators since they will not be able to crete something that was already created by another creator) , but a well know result is that the number of extra-universes is infinite and not finite. So in this case God=Union of the "all" the Creators.

** : cf. http://www.logic.tuwien.ac.at/kgs/home.html

Edited By Al_Radhiy on 1028077684

  • Advanced Member
Posted

Asalaam Alaikum,

I won't wait for the moderator to move the discussion.  According to the verses of the Quran, whenever people ask such questions, they are either too arrogant to submit to Allah(swt) or just really stupid and are blinded by their "puedo reasoning."

There is a story in Al-Kafi Vol. 1 about a man that came to Imam Jafar(as) and asked a similar question.  Imam Jafar(as) reply was that every effect has a cause.  And when you can no longer trace an effect, the cause of that effect is Allah(swt).

Let me explain it further and show you how atheist rationalize against this reasoning.

The thing to keep in mind is that we are dealing with reality.  And the reality of our universe is that every effect has an origin, which we call "cause."  Simple everyday example, I eat because of hunger.  I sleep because of tiredness.  More complicated examples are from physics.  Newton's second law is "F=ma"  If you exert a force, the effect is acceleration.  From electrodynamics, if there is a moving charge somewhere in space, the effect is an electric and magnetic field.  And so on on on...  Basically, every effect in our universe has a cause.

At this point, an atheist will start saying stupid things like "see, everything has a cause and therefore we just keep going back and back."  

Well, the point is you cannot go back forever.  It makes no sense to keep looping back.  The reason is that looping back "infinitely" is an unrealistic concept.  In fact, the concept of "infinity" is an abstraction because in reality, there is no such thing as "infinity."  Simple example is when people say "my computer program has an infinite loop." Well, the program will run until it uses up all the RAM.  It will then switch to virtual memory and eventually it will run out of virtual memory.  At that point, the computer will crash.  And no matter how much memory you put in, the memory will always be finite.  Eventually it will run out and the computer crashes.

Another simple example is from mathematics.  In calculus, you can take the limit of functions as they go to really large or small values.  Whenever the limit of a function is taken, you says "the limit of f(x) as x goes to infinity" NOT "the limit of f(x) as x=infinity."  By saying "as x goes to infinity", you recognize that there is no such thing as infinity, but rather "infinity" is an abstraction for something really really really really big.

In conclusion, every effect has a cause and one can trace all the effects to ONE cause and that cause is Allah(swt).  Those people who claim that you can indefinitely loop back to causes/effects have mixed up reality with abstraction.  I challenge them to show me anything that is "infinite" except Allah(swt).

wa'salaam

  • Advanced Member
Posted

Asalaam Alaikum,

I just want to point out that I completely disagree with Brother Al_Radhiy.  Kant did not prove anything.

I advise you to dump Kant and pick up Allah(swt) book, it will open your eyes, mind and heart.

  • Advanced Member
Posted

salam,

Kant proved that we can't prove :). If you read (or already read) this book you'll see that he talked about mental categories which are bounded and so can't "access" to God.

Edited By Al_Radhiy on 1028078431

  • Advanced Member
Posted

Asalaam Alaikum,

Kant proved it from the perspective of "abstract logic."  Abstract logic does not necessarily correspond to reality.  I urge you to read Godel's incompleteness theorm.

Also, there is a big difference between proving "Allah" and proving "ONE cause."  In my argument above, I proved that there is ONE cause.  We have to go step by step as the Quran says "We revealed it in stages to raise you in faith."

wa'salaam

Edited By optikalfilter on 1028079742

  • Advanced Member
Posted

salam,

I refered to Godel above, did you see it ?.

What Kant proved is that mental categories can't prove the existence or inexistence of God. Which clearly correspond to Godel's theorem since he proved that in logic there are proposition which are autoreferenced (i'm not sure about the word but i'm talking about autoreferencement). So there is limit of logic. He said also that it is also Moral (Heart) that can access to God, so it is not a rational arguing, and here we deal with 'irfan in a certain sense.

Edited By Al_Radhiy on 1028079890

  • Advanced Member
Posted

Asalaam Alaikum,

Personally, I do not find any logic attractive.  After reading it enough, I found out that most logic is "abstract logic" and it doesn't deal with reality.  I must admit, I really enjoy reading about Mulla Sadra's "hikmat-e-muta'liah"

Where do you live Brother?

wa'salaam

  • Advanced Member
Posted

salam,

I like logic, but when "dealing" with God we can't use it (cf. Godel for example).

For Mulla Sadra, i like him, but i didn't read a lot of his books, but i like reading Ibn 'Arabi who said : Reality can only be perceived with two eyes : reason (logic) and heart. And so any "abuse" of one of these two eyes will give a wrong picture about reality. He also said that reason has an important role : showing its limits and proving the necessity of the language of heart.

Edited By Al_Radhiy on 1028136819

  • Advanced Member
Posted

salamon alaikum

i think the the best way is to show the greatnes of the QURAN, you can find alot of fact that scientist are just understanding to be in the QURAN. if you tell some one that mettal came from the sky he would think you are mad, and if you read it you just might not believe it, but its in the QURAN and it has recently been proven. so look for theses miracles,

http://www.answering-christianity.com/links.htm  

you can find some help on this site, go down and return to the main page. look at the pagan catg.

  • Advanced Member
Posted

Assalamu alaykum,

But even though the Quran speaks these wonderful truth that it does. You cant take the Quran to these fools and say to them, here look at this.

They dont believe. So you have to show them other ways that God exists.

Anyone elses thoughts?

Wa alaykum assalam

Khoder

  • Advanced Member
Posted

Salam,

Here are my 2 cents:

They taught us in the Hawza that Athiests always argue as to who created God!  A good way to explain it would be to compare it to a materialistic object.  Let's take the following example:

Take a cup of tea with sugar in it and give it to the Athiest and tell them to take a sip.  Then ask: "Why is the tea so sweet?"  They will answer: "Because you put sugar in it".  Then take a sugar cube and tell them to taste it and ask "Why is the sugar sweet?"  From my experience they will say something like "Because that is the nature of sugar.  It is just sweet".  So then you turn aroudn and say: "That is also the nature of Allah.  Just as it is the nature of the sugar to be sweet, so is the nature of Allah to be Allah".

Hope this helps.

reza

  • Advanced Member
Posted

Assalamu alaykum,

Brother Reza, Your 2 cents is worth a lot more than that.. Masha'Allah I like the way you put it.. This weekend insha'Allah I will be meeting up with my uncles brother in law again. I will try this with him and see what kind of respose he has to this..

Ill keep you updated insha'Allah.

wa alaykum assalam

Khoder.

  • Advanced Member
Posted

salam,

They dont believe. So you have to show them other

ways that God exists.

I don't believe in the existence of a Proof cocnerning the existence of God: He is not a solution of an equation or a set of equations. Indeed, if it was possible then God would have been contained in our reason so would be "inferior" to us ; because reason is bounded and an entity contained in a bounded domain is bounded.

But, there are signs which "prove" the existence of God as in Quran 41:53 : [i:post_uid0]"Soon will [u:post_uid0]We show them our Signs[/u:post_uid0] in the (furthest) regions, and in their own souls, until it becomes manifest to them that this is the Truth. Is it not enough that thy Lord doth witness all things?" [/i:post_uid0]

But How to see these Signs ? : through relection as in Quran 34:46 in the bottom of this message.

Wa Allah a'alam,

Edited By Al_Radhiy on 1028166352

  • Advanced Member
Posted

Assalamu alaykum brother,

These people dont believe in a God.. They dont believe in a divine existance.. Some believe that we came from monkeys (Astaghfur'Allah).. Others say we just happened to believe. This is how they are..

I would like to know if anyone just took a Quran to an Atheist and asked her/him to read.. and what her/his reaction was?

wa alaykum assalam

Khoder.

  • Advanced Member
Posted

Answering Atheism!(1)

Answering Atheism!(2)  

Answering Atheism!(3)  

Answering Atheism!(4)  

Answering Atheism!(5)  

Answering Atheism!(6)  

Answering Atheism!(7)  

Answering Atheism!(8)  

Answering Atheism!(9)  

Answering Atheism!(10)

  • Advanced Member
Posted

You see brother, your logic would not work with the athiest because he does not believe in God to begin with, let alone the Prophet Muhammad or the Koran.  The only way to convince them that God exists is through the common denominator that we all share: The human brain.

reza

  • Advanced Member
Posted

Assalamu alaykum brother Reza,

I agree completely.. Thats what I was trying to tell brother Al-Radhiy..

wa alaykum assalam

Khoder.

  • Advanced Member
Posted

salam,

The human brain.
I don't know if you were talking to me, but i've just a comment : the human have limits and i recommend you to read the two books of Kant and the Godel Theorem as in http://www.logic.tuwien.ac.at/kgs/home.html , in order to deal with atheists, because their "logic" is in reality illogic.

This is what i wrote before :

There is the explanation of the brother above. Another possibility is to define the term "God".So the question : what do you define as God ?

If we include "The Creator" in this definition so the creation of The Creator is a nonsense. If you include "Creator" without "The", then you open the possiblity

of the existence of several* Creators, but the existence of several Creators is not possible since : suppose that we've a Creator C1 and a Creator C2, if C1 creates everything and C2 creates everything then we will get a contradiction since there exists a Creation CR1 created by C1 which will not be created by C2 which contradicts the fact that C2 can create whatever he wants (and also  contradicts the "free will" of a Creator, a Creator without free will is a nonsense since if C2 wants to create CR1 he will not be able to do it since C1 did it "before" him and so he wasn't able to create CR1) so the only possibility is the existence else of One Creator or An Infinity of Creators. Now suppose that we have an infinity of creators, the question will be : what do you define as infinity ?, if you give it the definition in mathematics then this definition is bounded by the possibilities of the human mind. Since , for example, Kurt Godel* proved that in the human mind there are logical propositions wchich are auto-referenced and so the definition of infinite given by the human mind is "bounded"... so the definition of infinite if in reality Finite (with capital F) in the case of Finite Creators you can apply recursively the arguing above (consider Creator C1, .... Cn with n bounded). If you give a definition of

"infinite" independant of the human mind, then you agree that there is an Entity which is beyond the human mind, and this Entity is defined as God.

Moreover, proving that God exists or not is beyond the possibilities of the human mind as proved by Emmanuel Kant in his "criticism of the pure reason". This book is a very good reference and also "crticism of the practical reason". In the later book, Kant proved that the only way to prove that God is, is using Moral and not reason, which corresponds to the Way He defined Himsel in Islam through

The Holy Names.

*: Another possibility is to set a Creator for each Universe, wo we will get the theory of "independant" extra-universes as in cosmology (if the extra-universes

were dependant then we will contradict ourselves concering the creators since they will not be able to crete something that was already created by another creator) , but a well know result is that the number of extra-universes is infinite and not finite. So in this case God=Union of the "all" the Creators.

** : cf. http://www.logic.tuwien.ac.at/kgs/home.html 

The conclusion is : yes for the brain, but you've to use it correctly by rigorously defining the terms. When an atheist tell you "God", "infinite" he must define them properly.

Edited By Al_Radhiy on 1028246678

  • Advanced Member
Posted

salaams

the topic about who created the creater(ASTAQFRALLAH)

reminds me of an article by a christian Dr. brother turnd sunni, he said if you think about this you will go crazy, and i agree in my more ignorant days this topic would hurt my head till i gave up. either they stay athiest and not think about it or they accept or go mad.

  • Advanced Member
Posted

Salamun Alaykum,

If God was created (nauzubillah) don't bother calling him God. Every creation has a creator, if God was creator, than we should be worshipping the entity which created God. And if the creator of God was created by another creator, we should be worshipping the God's creator creator..... All creations stop at God. There is a reason why God is omnipotent, omnipresent, etc. He is unbounded, that's why we worship Him (SWT). I guess there is a problem with people's definition with the word God itself and what is attributable to it.

Edited By 145_turbo_16V on 1028582098

  • Advanced Member
Posted

Salaams 2 all

there is more than one god (god father,goddes,godson etc),however there is only one Allah(swt) he is the creator and NOT the created.

To the the aeteist this whole univerese and all that is within it is accidental ie it just happend without a cause.

If they accept that this is an effect of a cause than that cause is Allah (swt)

Logic(aql) tells us that for every effect there is a cause and those who donot believe in cause/effect are without logic, and no argument will stand in front of those without logic.

  • Advanced Member
Posted

Extremely Impressed with Al-Radhy Brothers points put forward for a society with more belief in science than in religionism. Excellent answers.

  • Site Administrators
Posted

Assalamu 3alaikum wa ra7matallah

I feel sorry for the brothers that have to argue with the athiests on these topics. It can be frustrating. It's like teaching a dog a trick and watching the dog run away like an idiot..lol

Anyways, here's something else that may help you.

There are only two men in history who truly understood who or what Allah(swt) is. Rasoolallah(sawa) and Imam Ali(as).

Anyways.

One athiest and i had a conversation kinda like this

Athiest: Do you believe God is almighty?

Me: yeppp.

Athiest: Then you believe he can make a really big rock?

Me: yeppp.

Athiest: Can he make such a big rock that he can't lift?

What he was trying to get at is, if God is All-Mighty, if He can make such a big rock that He can't lift, He is limited, and if He can't make such a big rock, he is limited again.

I had two answers for him. One is that God is not such that you can give Him physical attributes. Secondly, i asked him, what's infinity + 1 ??? He said, infinity. I said, what is infinity - 1??? He said, infinity. I said, how far does infinity go? What is beyond infinite? He said, i don't know, i can't answer that, it's beyond human capacity.

I said, EXACTLY. A rock so big is beyond human capacity and so is the creation of such a rock or the capability to lift it. It'd be an infinatly large rock, with infinate power to lift it. We humans are created in such a way that we exist in a domain. God's domain. Do we know what is beyond the universe? Do we know what is beyond every physical matter? Do we know what was before the big bang, before the eneregy collisions, in other words, every single theory in the universe testifies that one element came into being through an action of one or more other elements. We cannot explain how NOTHING came into SOMETHING. It is beyond human capacity.

So when the athiest asks, who created God, it is the same principle. It is beyond human capacity even to think of such.

Inshallah this helped.

Wassalamz

  • Advanced Member
Posted

Salaam

The question being asked is logically incorrect. The best answer to give to this double-positive, is to reply with a double-negative.

God did not not create God.

Perhaps a fool will understand a foolish response.

:o)

  • Advanced Member
Posted

Perhaps you all noticed the error in my previous post, but were just too modest to say anything!

It should read;

God can not not create God.

Sincere apologies.

I am a monotheist, honest  ;)

Peace and Love

Wahid Amin

  • 2 weeks later...
Posted

The attributes of the universe discovered by science point to the existence of God. Science leads us to the conclusion that the universe has a Creator and this Creator is perfect in might, wisdom and knowledge. It is religion that shows us the way in knowing God. It is therefore possible to say that science is a method we use to better see and investigate the realities addressed by religion. Nevertheless, today, some of the scientists who step forth in the name of science take an entirely different stand. In their view, scientific discoveries do not imply the creation of God. They have, on the contrary, projected an atheistic understanding of science by saying that it is not possible to reach God through scientific data: they claim that science and religion are two clashing notions.

As a matter of fact, this atheistic understanding of science is quite recent. Until a few centuries ago, science and religion were never thought to clash with each other, and science was accepted as a method of proving the existence of God. The so-called atheistic understanding of science flourished only after the materialist and positivist philosophies swept through the world of science in the 18th and 19th centuries.

Particularly after Charles Darwin postulated the theory of evolution in 1859, circles holding a materialistic world view started to ideologically defend this theory, which they looked upon as an alternative to religion. The theory of evolution argued that the universe was not created by a creator but came into being by chance. As a result, it was asserted that religion was in conflict with science. The British researchers Michael Baigent, Richard Leigh and Henry Lincoln said on this issue:

For Isaac Newton, a century and a half before Darwin, science was not separate from religion but, on the contrary, an aspect of religion, and ultimately subservient to it. ...But the science of Darwin's time became precisely that, divorcing itself from the context in which it had previously existed and establishing itself as a rival absolute, an alternative repository of meaning. As a result, religion and science were no longer working in concert, but rather stood opposed to each other, and humanity was increasingly forced to choose between them. (Michael Baigent, Richard Leigh, Henry Lincoln, The Messianic Legacy, Gorgi Books, London: 1991, p. 177-178.)

As we stated before, the so-called split between science and religion was totally ideological. Some scientists, who earnestly believed in materialism, conditioned themselves to prove that the universe had no creator and they devised various theories in this context. The theory of evolution was the most famous and the most important of them. In the field of astronomy as well certain theories were developed such as the "steady-state theory" or the "chaos theory". However, all of these theories that denied creation were demolished by science itself, as we have clearly shown in the previous chapters.

Today, scientists who still keep to these theories and insist on denying all things religious, are dogmatic and bigoted people, who have conditioned themselves not to believe in God. The famous English zoologist and evolutionist D.M.S. Watson confesses to this dogmatism as he explains why he and his colleagues accept the theory of evolution:

If so, it will present a parallel to the theory of evolution itself, a theory universally accepted, not because it can be proved by logically coherent evidence to be true, but because the only alternative, special creation, is clearly incredible. (D.M.S. Watson, "Adaptation", Nature, no. 124, p. 233)

What Watson means by "special creation" is God's creation. As acknowledged, this scientist finds this "unacceptable". But why? Is it because science says so? Actually it does not. On the contrary, science proves the truth of creation. The only reason why Watson looks upon this fact as unacceptable is because he has conditioned himself to deny the existence of God. All other evolutionists take the same stand.

Evolutionists rely not on science but on materialist philosophy and they distort science to make it agree with this philosophy. A geneticist and an outspoken evolutionist from Harvard University, Richard Lewontin, confesses to this truth:

It is not that the methods and institutions of science somehow compel us to accept a material explanation of the phenomenal world, but, on the contrary, that we are forced by our a priori adherence to material causes to create an apparatus of investigation and a set of concepts that produce material explanations, no matter how counter-intuitive, no matter how mystifying to the uninitiated. Moreover, that materialism is absolute, so we cannot allow a Divine Foot in the door. (Richard Levontin, The Demon-Haunted World, The New York Review of Books, January, 9, 1997, p. 28)

On the other hand, today, just as in history, there are, as opposed to this dogmatic materialist group, scientists who confirm God's existence, and regard science as a way of knowing Him. Some trends developing in the USA such as "Creationism" or "Intelligent Design" prove by scientific evidence that all living things were created by God.

This shows us that science and religion are not conflicting sources of information, but that, on the contrary, science is a method that verifies the absolute truths provided by religion. The clash between religion and science can only hold true for certain religions that incorporate some superstitious elements as well as divine sources. However, this is certainly out of the question for Islam, which relies only on the pure revelation of God. Moreover, Islam particularly advocates scientific enquiry, and announces that probing the universe is a method to explore the creation of God. The following verse of the Qur'an addresses this issue;

Do they not look at the sky above them? How We have built it and adorned it, and there are no rifts therein? And the earth - We have spread it out, and set thereon mountains standing firm, and caused it to bring forth plants of beauteous kinds (in pairs). And We send down from the sky blessed water whereby We give growth unto gardens and the grain of crops. And tall palm-trees, with shoots of fruit-stalks, piled one over another. (Surah Qaf, 6-7, 9-10)

As the above verses imply, the Qur'an always urges people to think, to reason and to explore everything in the world in which they live. This is because science supports religion, saves the individual from ignorance, and causes him to think more consciously; it opens wide one's world of thought and helps one grasp the signs of God self-evident in the universe. Prominent German physicist Max Planck said:

"Anybody who has been seriously engaged in scientific work of any kind realizes that over the entrance to the gates of the temple of science are written the words: Ye must have faith. It is a quality which the scientist cannot dispense with." (J. De Vries, Essential of Physical Science, Wm.B.Eerdmans Pub.Co., Grand Rapids, SD 1958, p. 15.)

All the issues we have treated so far simply put it that the existence of the universe and all living things cannot be explained by coincidences. Many scientists who have left their mark on the world of science have confirmed, and still confirm this great reality. The more people learn about the universe, the higher does their admiration for its flawless order become. Every newly-discovered detail supports creation in an unquestionable way.

The great majority of modern physicists accept the fact of creation as we set foot in the 21st century. David Darling also maintains that neither time, nor space, nor matter, nor energy, nor even a tiny spot or a cavity existed at the beginning. A slight quick movement and a modest quiver and fluctuation occurred. Darling ends by saying that when the cover of this cosmic box was opened, the tendrils of the miracle of creation appeared from beneath it.

Besides, it is already known that almost all the founders of diverse scientific branches believed in God and His divine books. The greatest physicists in history, Newton, Faraday, Kelvin and Maxwell are a few examples of such scientists.

In the time of Isaac Newton, the great physicist, scientists believed that the movements of the heavenly bodies and planets could be explained by different laws. Nevertheless, Newton believed that the creator of earth and space was the same, and therefore they had to be explained by the same laws. He said:

This most beautiful system of the sun, planets, and comets could only proceed from the counsel and dominion of an intelligent and powerful Being. This Being governs all things, not as the soul of the world, but as Lord over all, and on account of His dominion. He is wont to be called Lord God, Universal Ruler.

As is evident, thousands of scientists who have been doing research in the fields of physics, mathematics, and astronomy since the Middle Ages all agree on the idea that the universe is created by a single Creator and always focus on the same point. The founder of physical astronomy, Johannes Kepler, stated his strong belief in God in one of his books where he wrote:

Since we astronomers are priests of the highest God in regard to the book of nature, it befits us to be thoughtful, not of the glory of our minds, but rather, above all else, of the glory of God.(Dan Graves, Scientists of Faith, . 51)

The great physicist, William Thompson (Lord Kelvin), who established thermodynamics on a formal scientific basis, was also a Christian who believed in God. He had strongly opposed Darwin's theory of evolution and totally rejected it. In 1903, short before his death, he made the unequivocal statement that, "With regard to the origin of life, science... positively affirms creative power." (David Darling, Deep Time, Delacorte Press, 1989, New York.)

One of the professors of physics at Oxford University, Robert Mattheus states the same fact in his book published in 1992 where he explains that DNA molecules were created by God. Mattheus says that all these stages proceed in a perfect harmony from a single cell to a living baby, then to a little child, and finally to an adolescent. All these events can be explained only by a miracle, just as in all the other stages of biology. Mattheus asks how such a perfect and complex organism can emerge from such a simple and tiny cell and how a glorious HUMAN is created from a cell even smaller than the dot on the letter i. He finally concludes that this is nothing short of a miracle. (Robert Matthews, Unravelling the Mind of God, London Bridge, July, 1995, p.8)

Some other scientists who admit that the universe is created by a Creator and who are known by their cited attributes are:

Robert Boyle (the father of modern chemistry)

Iona William Petty (known for his studies on statistics and modern economy)

Michael Faraday (one of the greatest physicists of all times)

Gregory Mendel (the father of genetics; he invalidated Darwinism with his discoveries in the science of genetics)

Louis Pasteur (the greatest name in bacteriology; he declared war on Darwinism)

John Dalton (the father of atomic theory)

Blaise Pascal (one of the most important mathematicians)

John Ray (the most important name in British natural history)

Nicolaus Steno (a famous stratiographer who investigated earth layers)

Carolus Linnaeus (the father of biological classification)

Georges Cuvier (the founder of comparative anatomy)

Matthew Maury (the founder of oceanography)

Thomas Anderson (one the pioneers in the field of organic chemistry)

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

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...