Answering Christianity Research Center
MAIN BOARD (You must register to post) => GENERAL TOPICS | BOARD ANNOUNCEMENTS => Topic started by: The Canadian Atheist on October 01, 2013, 01:41:46 AM
-
Before reading, you must know that there were two different trees, the tree of knowledge, and the tree of eternal life. They both made up God. Some Gnostic texts (like this one) predate the Bible, and the lesson learned in this story is to always question authority. This was later changed in the Christian bible to "Ignorance is bliss: Ignorant slavery is better than dangerous freedom".
According to Genesis 2, Eve was never told by God not to eat from this tree. In the biblical version, as opposed to the Gnostic version, she did not yet exist.
(There is a conflict between Genesis 1:27 and 2:22 as to when Eve came into existence.)
The snake represents gnosis or knowledge (the logos) in nearly all of the ancient mythologies and philosophies. Only in Christianity does the snake appear to mean something evil. When we look at the creation story in the book of Genesis, it is interesting because who lies? Does the serpent lie, or does God lie? The serpent tells Eve (Gen 3:5) " ...your eyes shall be opened, and ye shall be as gods, knowing good and evil." Eve sees (Gen 3:6) "a tree to be desired to make one wise." God tells Adam, who in turn must have told Eve (Gen 2: 17), " .. .for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die." She does not die, at least not a physical death. Adam doesn't die either. Neither died in the day of eating the fruit.
Think of the forbidden fruit as the red pill in the Matrix. The reason they chose the serpent is because snake venom was sometimes used for healing: A dangerous bite for the greater good of man.
Exodus 20:5 - You shall not bow down to them or worship them; for I, the Lord your God, am a jealous God, punishing the children for the sin of the parents to the third and fourth generation of those who hate me,
This is the story they never told you!
The Testimony of Truth
"It is written in the Law concerning this, when God gave a command to Adam, "From every tree you may eat, but from the tree which is in the midst of Paradise do not eat, for on the day that you eat from it, you will surely die." But the serpent was wiser than all the animals that were in Paradise, and he persuaded Eve, saying, "On the day when you eat from the tree which is in the midst of Paradise, the eyes of your mind will be opened." And Eve obeyed, and she stretched forth her hand; she took from the tree and ate; she also gave to her husband with her. And immediately they knew that they were naked, and they took some fig-leaves (and) put them on as girdles. But God came at the time of evening, walking in the midst of Paradise. When Adam saw him, he hid himself. And he said, "Adam, where are you?" He answered (and) said, "I have come under the fig tree." And at that very moment, God knew that he had eaten from the tree of which he had commanded him, "Do not eat of it." And he said to him, "Who is it who has instructed you?" And Adam answered, "The woman whom you have given me." And the woman said, "It is the serpent who instructed me." And he (God) cursed the serpent, and called him "devil." And he said, "Behold, Adam has become like one of us, knowing evil and good." Then he said, "Let us cast him out of paradise, lest he take from the tree of life, and eat, and live forever."
"But what sort is this God? First he maliciously refused Adam from eating of the tree of knowledge, and, secondly, he said "Adam, where are you?" God does not have foreknowledge? Would he not know from the beginning? And afterwards, he said, "Let us cast him out of this place, lest he eat of the tree of life and live forever." Surely, he has shown himself to be a malicious grudger! And what kind of God is this? For great is the blindness of those who read, and they did not know him. And he said, "I am the jealous God; I will bring the sins of the fathers upon the children until three (and) four generations." And he said, "I will make their heart thick, and I will cause their mind to become blind, that they might not know nor comprehend the things that are said." But these things he has said to those who believe in him and serve him!"
-
Lol, Mr Canadian Atheist can you clarify what the point is behind this post?
-
And your point is ?
-
And your point is ?
To prove that we're dealing with myth, not history.
-
OK , time to clear it up . When you want to talk about Islam , DON'T USE THE BIBLE ! Islam=/=Christianity .
-
OK , time to clear it up . When you want to talk about Islam , DON'T USE THE BIBLE ! Islam=/=Christianity .
The Quran also contains this myth
-
Typical atheist behavior. Throws out a claim without even bothering to provide proof. You know what? The only myth is your worldview. Nothing exploded and became something and then we got this finely tuned beauty called the universe. You know what else is a farce evolution, which violates the most fundamental law of thermodynamics. which also has no hope of explaining irreducible complexity in organisms. Which also has no hope in explaining the first cell
-
Hey Canadian Atheist. I was an Atheist who converted to Islam. Word of Warning you cannot quote the Bible and expect Islam to match it. You cannot quote the Biblical narrative of the story of Adam as the Quranic one is different.
The clich
-
Typical atheist behavior. Throws out a claim without even bothering to provide proof. You know what? The only myth is your worldview. Nothing exploded and became something and then we got this finely tuned beauty called the universe. You know what else is a farce evolution, which violates the most fundamental law of thermodynamics. which also has no hope of explaining irreducible complexity in organisms. Which also has no hope in explaining the first cell
What do you need proof of? That the Gnostic texts exist? Go to the museum and see them...
"Nothing exploded and became something and then we got this finely tuned beauty called the universe"
I know, then why do creationists keep claiming that God came out of nothing and then created the universe in six days?
"You know what else is a farce evolution, which violates the most fundamental law of thermodynamics"
The second law of thermodynamics only works on a closed system. Our Earth is driven by various forces, such as energy from the Sun (solar energy, radiation) or the Moon (tides).
Ironically, the law of conservation of energy is violated by creationists, it states that energy can't be created or destroyed.
"which also has no hope of explaining irreducible complexity in organisms."
Transitional fossils. Google it.
"Which also has no hope in explaining the first cell"
RNA -- > DNA -- > Prokaryotes --- > Eukaryotes (via endosymbiosis)
What was so hard to explain? that's fourth grade biology right there.
-
What do you need proof of? That the Gnostic texts exist? Go to the museum and see them...
No I was asking for you for proof that Adam and Eve(peace be upon them both) did not exist. Just because earlier civilization knew of them doesn't mean they didn't exist
"Nothing exploded and became something and then we got this finely tuned beauty called the universe"
I know, then why do creationists keep claiming that God came out of nothing and then created the universe in six days?
Don't put words into our mouths we never claimed that god came out of nothing and we don't claim that the universe was created in six days. 1.It is basic Islamic philosophy that god is eternal and never had a beginning. Look up the Kallam cosmological argument for the existence of god.
2.The word yawm in arabic has two meanings "day" and "any period of time".
The second law of thermodynamics only works on a closed system. Our Earth is driven by various forces, such as energy from the Sun (solar energy, radiation) or the Moon (tides).
Did you seriously think I didn't know you would respond by saying that. We all agree that any valid theory of evolution must explain how it is that life gives rise to low entropy. There are two, and only two, kinds of processes known to create low entropy:
1.Law-like processes (processes that occur in accordance with known physical laws -- gravity, quantum mechanics, Newtonian laws of motion, relativity, etc.). Crystals, planets, mountains etc. are low entropy aggregations created by law-like physical processes.
2.Mind-like processes -- intentionally planned processes, such as machines, architecture, art, etc.
Any valid theory of evolution must incorporate at least one of these two processes if it is to explain the low entropy in living things.
- See more at: http://www.evolutionnews.org/2013/09/life_explains_l076791.html#sthash.i1ie41TF.dpuf
Darwinian evolution does not fall under any of two above processes as natural selection is an unguided process with no end in mind.
Ironically, the law of conservation of energy is violated by creationists, it states that energy can't be created or destroyed.
This law only applies to the natural and not the supernatural.
"which also has no hope of explaining irreducible complexity in organisms."
Transitional fossils. Google it.
1. I don't think you know what irreducible complexity is. In organisms we find organelles of a cell and organs that if you were to take one part away from the organelle/ organ it would render the whole organelle/ organ useless. Therefore the organelle/ organ could not have developed slowly. It must have appeared in the organism complete in order for it to work. And the chances of that happening via mutation is beyond astronomical.
2. Did you seriously just cite the fossil record as proof of evolution, it only goes against evolution. Cambrean Period? all them problems it's causing darwinian evolutionists.
RNA -- > DNA -- > Prokaryotes --- > Eukaryotes (via endosymbiosis)
What was so hard to explain? that's fourth grade biology right there.
You didn't even explain the first cell, you just explained the evolution of the cell. I hope you realize this is all theoritical. They have literally zero proof for a cell that can work on RNA alone. Also lets just assume that amino acids can form spontaneously (which they can't btw) It is literally impossibble for the amino acids to randomly combine and form a single RNA that knows how to replicate itself, act as a protein, convert energy,etc.,etc.. Not only that but the "RNA Cell" has another huge flaw.the RNA world hypothesis can't explain the origin of the genetic code itself. In order to evolve into the DNA/protein-based life that exists today, the RNA world would need to evolve the ability to convert genetic information into proteins. However, this process of transcription and translation requires a large suite of proteins and molecular machines -- which themselves are encoded by genetic information. - See more at: http://www.evolutionnews.org/2012/12/top_five_probl067431.html#sthash.n2gL6BHu.dpuf
-
What do you need proof of? That the Gnostic texts exist? Go to the museum and see them...
No I was asking for you for proof that Adam and Eve(peace be upon them both) did not exist. Just because earlier civilization knew of them doesn't mean they didn't exist
"Nothing exploded and became something and then we got this finely tuned beauty called the universe"
I know, then why do creationists keep claiming that God came out of nothing and then created the universe in six days?
Don't put words into our mouths we never claimed that god came out of nothing and we don't claim that the universe was created in six days. 1.It is basic Islamic philosophy that god is eternal and never had a beginning. Look up the Kallam cosmological argument for the existence of god.
2.The word yawm in arabic has two meanings "day" and "any period of time".
The second law of thermodynamics only works on a closed system. Our Earth is driven by various forces, such as energy from the Sun (solar energy, radiation) or the Moon (tides).
Did you seriously think I didn't know you would respond by saying that. We all agree that any valid theory of evolution must explain how it is that life gives rise to low entropy. There are two, and only two, kinds of processes known to create low entropy:
1.Law-like processes (processes that occur in accordance with known physical laws -- gravity, quantum mechanics, Newtonian laws of motion, relativity, etc.). Crystals, planets, mountains etc. are low entropy aggregations created by law-like physical processes.
2.Mind-like processes -- intentionally planned processes, such as machines, architecture, art, etc.
Any valid theory of evolution must incorporate at least one of these two processes if it is to explain the low entropy in living things.
- See more at: http://www.evolutionnews.org/2013/09/life_explains_l076791.html#sthash.i1ie41TF.dpuf
Darwinian evolution does not fall under any of two above processes as natural selection is an unguided process with no end in mind.
Ironically, the law of conservation of energy is violated by creationists, it states that energy can't be created or destroyed.
This law only applies to the natural and not the supernatural.
"which also has no hope of explaining irreducible complexity in organisms."
Transitional fossils. Google it.
1. I don't think you know what irreducible complexity is. In organisms we find organelles of a cell and organs that if you were to take one part away from the organelle/ organ it would render the whole organelle/ organ useless. Therefore the organelle/ organ could not have developed slowly. It must have appeared in the organism complete in order for it to work. And the chances of that happening via mutation is beyond astronomical.
2. Did you seriously just cite the fossil record as proof of evolution, it only goes against evolution. Cambrean Period? all them problems it's causing darwinian evolutionists.
RNA -- > DNA -- > Prokaryotes --- > Eukaryotes (via endosymbiosis)
What was so hard to explain? that's fourth grade biology right there.
You didn't even explain the first cell, you just explained the evolution of the cell. I hope you realize this is all theoritical. They have literally zero proof for a cell that can work on RNA alone. Also lets just assume that amino acids can form spontaneously (which they can't btw) It is literally impossibble for the amino acids to randomly combine and form a single RNA that knows how to replicate itself, act as a protein, convert energy,etc.,etc.. Not only that but the "RNA Cell" has another huge flaw.the RNA world hypothesis can't explain the origin of the genetic code itself. In order to evolve into the DNA/protein-based life that exists today, the RNA world would need to evolve the ability to convert genetic information into proteins. However, this process of transcription and translation requires a large suite of proteins and molecular machines -- which themselves are encoded by genetic information. - See more at: http://www.evolutionnews.org/2012/12/top_five_probl067431.html#sthash.n2gL6BHu.dpuf
"No I was asking for you for proof that Adam and Eve(peace be upon them both) did not exist. Just because earlier civilization knew of them doesn't mean they didn't exist"
The burden of proof lies on YOU. You made the claim that they existed, you bring forth the proof. For example, can you prove the invisible pink unicorn does not exist?
"Don't put words into our mouths we never claimed that god came out of nothing"
Really? Then who created God?
"There are two, and only two, kinds of processes known to create low entropy"
Are you really gonna ignore the Sun?
"This law only applies to the natural and not the supernatural."
That is a fundamental law of the universe. Our universe.
"In organisms we find organelles of a cell and organs that if you were to take one part away from the organelle/ organ it would render the whole organelle/ organ useless. Therefore the organelle/ organ could not have developed slowly. It must have appeared in the organism complete in order for it to work. And the chances of that happening via mutation is beyond astronomical."
God of the gaps fallacy.
Have you heard of Miller's experiment? There is plenty of evidence, you need to start reading the other side too!
No one claimed amino acids formed 'spontaneously'.
By the way, if you apply all this logic to your own Quran, then it doesn't have a leg to stand on.
What's even more odd is that earlier there was a Muslim on here claiming that there was evolution in the Quran. Yet here you are, disagreeing. Why didn't Allah make it clear: Did evolution happen?
Has the Quran contradicted itself?
As for your rather ancient argument on the Cambrian era:
http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/CC/CC300.html
-
"No I was asking for you for proof that Adam and Eve(peace be upon them both) did not exist. Just because earlier civilization knew of them doesn't mean they didn't exist"
The burden of proof lies on YOU. You made the claim that they existed, you bring forth the proof. For example, can you prove the invisible pink unicorn does not exist?
"Don't put words into our mouths we never claimed that god came out of nothing"
Really? Then who created God?
"There are two, and only two, kinds of processes known to create low entropy"
Are you really gonna ignore the Sun?
"This law only applies to the natural and not the supernatural."
That is a fundamental law of the universe. Our universe.
"In organisms we find organelles of a cell and organs that if you were to take one part away from the organelle/ organ it would render the whole organelle/ organ useless. Therefore the organelle/ organ could not have developed slowly. It must have appeared in the organism complete in order for it to work. And the chances of that happening via mutation is beyond astronomical."
God of the gaps fallacy.
Have you heard of Miller's experiment? There is plenty of evidence, you need to start reading the other side too!
No one claimed amino acids formed 'spontaneously'.
By the way, if you apply all this logic to your own Quran, then it doesn't have a leg to stand on.
What's even more odd is that earlier there was a Muslim on here claiming that there was evolution in the Quran. Yet here you are, disagreeing. Why didn't Allah make it clear: Did evolution happen?
Has the Quran contradicted itself?
As for your rather ancient argument on the Cambrian era:
http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/CC/CC300.html
1. Lets see who made the claim first in order to see who the burden of proof lies on? The Quran also contains this myth
you wrote this in reference to creation of Adam and Eve
2. Do you not understand basic english, God is eternal he has no beginning and he has no end
3. Sun? You are employing circular reasoning, "evolution is true just because it is and the sun did it." Lulz and since when did the sun become a process?
4. Yes, yes it is. And who might you say created the universe? OUR UNIVERSE?
5. I don't think you understand what the god of the gaps fallacy is. God of the gaps is a type of theological perspective in which gaps in scientific knowledge are taken to be evidence or proof of God's existence.
Irreducible complexity is not god of the gaps because it is using KNOWN scientific facts to show intelligent design.
6 Yes, actually I have, and if you actually you studied it you would have known that the materials he used for his early earth where in fact completely different than what geologists think the materials of the early earth were.
7. Read up on Darwin's Doubt and see how the darwinists are scrambling to refute his book.
8. I don't believe the Qur'an supports nor denies evolution, furthermore the only thing I am refuting is Darwinian evolution(random mutations, natural selection, etc.,etc.). I have no stance on god guided evolution.
-
Yes, Adam and Eve is a creation myth until you can prove that it happened.
But where is the proof?
Atheism is the default position sir.
>> God is eternal he has no beginning and he has no end
Where is the proof? That's a claim. You need to back it up.
Circular reasoning is trying to prove the Quran by using the Quran.
There were many processes to drive evolution, the Sun is just one of them.
You implied that since you didn't know something about evolution, you automatically assumed God did it.
Variations of Miller's experiment have been carried out recently that have been successful. Unlike religion, we don't need to keep justifying the same book. We can change based on observation.
Honestly, people were debating Young Earth Creationism like this not too long ago, most Christians changed their bible to fit evolution, Muslims are starting to doing it too.
"I don't believe the Qur'an supports nor denies evolution"
So the Quran is agnostic? Great.
You're refuting what? Natural selection? Dude, natural selection is a fact...
-
At this point I see no point of carrying on our discussion good bye sir
-
The Quran also contains this myth
Sure , and melons are tornadoes hitting the tropical areas !
What do you need proof of? That the Gnostic texts exist? Go to the museum and see them...
A miserable failing bluff . Until you prove it's the same in Quran , your words are all trash .
I know, then why do creationists keep claiming that God came out of nothing and then created the universe in six days?
Have not I said that your ignorance will show in every single line you say about Islam ?! We don't believe Allah came from nothing . We believe he exists since ever . He's a creator , he wasn't created ! To say that the creator is created is nonsense ! As for the days , I suppose that "Golden days" are a few ? And before creating Earth , how was a day counted ? That means the mentioned days are periods of time .
Ironically, the law of conservation of energy is violated by creationists, it states that energy can't be created or destroyed.
And you think that the one who put this law is limited by it ? I might get a headache of facepalming .
Transitional fossils. Google it.
Peltdown and Nibraska men . Google them . By the way , the latter is a tooth of a pig .
RNA -- > DNA -- > Prokaryotes --- > Eukaryotes (via endosymbiosis)
Good , did you see that process ? I think not ?
The burden of proof lies on YOU. You made the claim that they existed, you bring forth the proof. For example, can you prove the invisible pink unicorn does not exist?
It seems you have difficulties understanding the unseen in Islam . Allah tells us that there are creatures called angels which are created out of light . We believe in that . Do we need to see them with telescopes or microscopes ? No we don't . It's a matter of belief . And because I know you'll jump the gun and say "Hey , the Muslim admits that he believes blindly !" I'll burst your bubble . I said it's a matter of belief that is based on believing in the whole religion which is in turn based on rational evidence . If we believe in religion , we believe in what it says even if we can't see it with our own eyes .
Really? Then who created God?
I think the whole world facepalmed to this ? For the thousand time : Allah isn't created ! He is the creator ! The creator can't be created !
Have you heard of Miller's experiment? There is plenty of evidence, you need to start reading the other side too!
Look who's talking . The few things I read about this experiment - of the "other side" - say that it was a failure because it didn't match the primitive atmosphere of Earth .
By the way, if you apply all this logic to your own Quran, then it doesn't have a leg to stand on.
Come at us , bro .
What's even more odd is that earlier there was a Muslim on here claiming that there was evolution in the Quran. Yet here you are, disagreeing. Why didn't Allah make it clear: Did evolution happen?
Has the Quran contradicted itself?
Atheists are the last to talk about differences between sects of a religion . They're the only group that doesn't agree on anything at all - besides the madness of "there is no God" - and each individual within it acts however he bloody wants . When you tell them that Dawkins says sex with immature children is ok - And if you bring the marriage to lady Aisha then be ready to get shocked - they say "Dawkins doesn't represent Atheism . What matters is evidence . So if someone decides to oppose completely what the entire nation believed for centuries than that is his own business .
Atheism is the default position sir.
Wrong . Atheism is a demonstration of emotional issues . First they take Atheism as a belief and then look for whatever supports it no matter how absurd it is .
Where is the proof? That's a claim. You need to back it up.
When you need to discuss the basic establishments of logic , you should know that there is no point in talking with such a person .
Circular reasoning is trying to prove the Quran by using the Quran.
You really need to get out of this lala world where you live . Quran is true because of rational and observable evidence .
Variations of Miller's experiment have been carried out recently that have been successful. Unlike religion, we don't need to keep justifying the same book. We can change based on observation.
In your happy dreams ! Maybe Christians need to justify their book . We on the other hand prove YOU wrong and show the error of your ways .
Honestly, people were debating Young Earth Creationism like this not too long ago, most Christians changed their bible to fit evolution, Muslims are starting to doing it too.
I don't care if some individuals choose the easy way and decide to contradict their book . I don't know what you call this fallacy but it's simply trying to prove something right through saying "People believe it , so it must be right !" .
So the Quran is agnostic? Great.
It seems the man - AGAIN - knows nothing about the differences among people of a religion which don't mean necessary that one is wrong . But no , Quran tells us of creation and Hadith backs it up and makes no room for doubt . End of the story .
You're refuting what? Natural selection? Dude, natural selection is a fact...
Sure , as in that the good characteristics remain . But did a dinosaur become a bird ? Did a bear become a whale ? Did a deer become a giraffe ? Good luck finding one example .
-
I was going to refrain from continuing our conversation, but i feel I must refute the ignorance in your post.
1.Are you changing positions first you said the burden of proof lies on the person making the claim, then when I showed that you made the claim first, then you went and said that the burden of proof lies on me because I am a theist. No, the burden of proof lies on you since you made the claim. Furthermore, The presumption of atheism is dead.
2. This statement needs no proof. God by definition is eternal this is basic theistic philososphy. If we were to go with your logic we would have an infinite regress of events.
3.You still don't understand my argument, you haven't even dealt with my second law of thermodynamics argument.
4.No, I said that it is impossible for evolution to have created irreducibly complex organs. Again, we are talking about information we already KNOW, not information we don't know.
5. all of these were lab experiments, futhermore they have never succesfully recreated these experiments in nature.
6.I don't think you know what agnosticism i, an agnostic is a person who believes that nothing is known or can be known of the existence or nature of God or of anything beyond material phenomena; a person who claims neither faith nor disbelief in God.
7.No, im not refuting natural selection, i'm refuting Darwinian evolution via natural selection
-
Assalamualykum.
Dear attheist, why can't you understand a simple thing that nothing can't be created on its own. Just like computers, televisions, cars, buildings etc. For time being lets just assume that our Universe came into being naturally. Okay, then tell me if Sun, Moon, Earth, Stars etc can come into being naturally,then why not computers,cars,buildings etc. And we know that Universe came into being from a smoke of Hydrogen. Now tell me, who created that Hydrogen smoke. Okay you may say, some particles got together and created that smoke. Then my question is, who created those particles? And how can you even think that such big heavenly bodies(Earth, Sun, Moon, Mars, Jupiter etc) can be controlled from getting crashed into one another without a Controller. So, just open your heart,look at the sky and think about these things.
-
3.You still don't understand my argument, you haven't even dealt with my second law of thermodynamics argument.
7.No, im not refuting natural selection, i'm refuting Darwinian evolution via natural selection
Brother, I hate to intervene, but the second law of thermodynamics applies to a closed system. Life is not a closed system it is an open system as the sun provides the energy for life processes to occur. This is a very basic explanation, if you are interested please look it up. Knowledge is power and we should pursue knowledge with a passion. Don't show ignorance on science and then use that ignorance to attack science.
Lets take this from a logical perspective, If I build a house: I create order instead of entropy. Does that mean I couldn't do it because I contradicted the 2nd law of thermodynamics?
Stop trying to deny Allah's method of creation, a method which is both mentioned in the Quran and explained by science. Personally, I feel this is rather insulting to your creator. I guess not even evidence can convince the unwilling.
-
A miserable failing bluff . Until you prove it's the same in Quran , your words are all trash .
The Quran has the same story, God places Adam and Eve in the Garden of Eden, they eat the fruit and get sent to Earth as a punishment, but if they repent, they can have eternal life again.
Have not I said that your ignorance will show in every single line you say about Islam ?! We don't believe Allah came from nothing . We believe he exists since ever . He's a creator , he wasn't created ! To say that the creator is created is nonsense ! As for the days , I suppose that "Golden days" are a few ? And before creating Earth , how was a day counted ? That means the mentioned days are periods of time .
You believe he's eternal. You believing something won't make it true, unfortunately. You need to provide proof of that claim. If you can't, it's false. For example, I can say that Zeus created the Earth without proof too.
And you think that the one who put this law is limited by it ? I might get a headache of facepalming .
Who put this law? Odin?
Peltdown and Nibraska men . Google them . By the way , the latter is a tooth of a pig .
All of you guys are using ancient arguments from Harun Yahya that were refuted centuries ago. We found other transitional fossils later. Scientists only did this for fame and wealth. Genetic fallacy.
Good , did you see that process ? I think not ?
And again the ancient "How do you know, were you there when it happened?" argument. Were you there when Allah created the universe?
It's a matter of belief
Believing a fairy tale doesn't make it true. Faith over objective reasoning is absurd.
I think the whole world facepalmed to this ? For the thousand time : Allah isn't created ! He is the creator ! The creator can't be created !
Circular reasoning.
False premise: The universe must have a creator
Jumping to conclusions: Therefore the creator is Allah
Circular reasoning: Allah doesn't need a creator, because I said so!
Look who's talking . The few things I read about this experiment - of the "other side" - say that it was a failure because it didn't match the primitive atmosphere of Earth .
Already went over this, there were other variants of Miller's experiment recently with the changed condition that were successful. You can't rely on Harun Yahya's book forever...
Come at us , bro .
Few examples. Allah telling Moses' followers to kill themselves (2:54), delicious cuisine magically falls from the sky (5:115), a staff turns into a serpent (7:107), Jonah gets swallowed by a fish and prays while inside (37:142), there are only seven heavenly bodies (2:29), etc etc
. They're the only group that doesn't agree on anything at all
Yes, individual ideas and being able to think for yourself is a wonderful thing, wouldn't you agree?
Atheism is a demonstration of emotional issues
Emotional issues like how Allah destroyed an entire city because they were gay? Or emotional issues like how Allah once drowned an entire city because they were not Muslims? Or emotional issues like "worship me man, I love you, too bad you have to burn in hell if you don't"
""I will become angry upon the insulting and degrading of my pious slaves, like how a lion becomes furious when its cubs are harassed." "
An all knowing deity can't be angry. That's illogical. Anger is a result of surprise, for example, if you're my loyal servant and one day you betray me, I would be angry. But if I already know you're gonna betray me, I'm not gonna get angry.
"Good luck finding one example [of transition from species]"
Here's a couple, if you believe in fossils
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_transitional_fossils#Bird_evolution
Thank you for clearing that again mclinkin94, surely an open minded person like you deserves better than Islam :)
Personally, I feel this is rather insulting to your creator.
Indeed, I've heard this before. I believe Carl Sagan said this.
Hi Farhan Uddin,
You wrote:
Dear attheist, why can't you understand a simple thing that nothing can't be created on its own. Just like computers, televisions, cars, buildings etc. For time being lets just assume that our Universe came into being naturally. Okay, then tell me if Sun, Moon, Earth, Stars etc can come into being naturally,then why not computers,cars,buildings etc. And we know that Universe came into being from a smoke of Hydrogen. Now tell me, who created that Hydrogen smoke. Okay you may say, some particles got together and created that smoke. Then my question is, who created those particles? And how can you even think that such big heavenly bodies(Earth, Sun, Moon, Mars, Jupiter etc) can be controlled from getting crashed into one another without a Controller. So, just open your heart,look at the sky and think about these things.
Good question. Even if there was a creator, how can we be certain that the creator is Allah? The Higgs Boson can create itself.
-
Quote from: abdullah on Today at 12:12:33 pm
3.You still don't understand my argument, you haven't even dealt with my second law of thermodynamics argument.
7.No, im not refuting natural selection, i'm refuting Darwinian evolution via natural selection
Brother, I hate to intervene, but the second law of thermodynamics applies to a closed system. Life is not a closed system it is an open system as the sun provides the energy for life processes to occur. This is a very basic explanation, if you are interested please look it up. Knowledge is power and we should pursue knowledge with a passion. Don't show ignorance on science and then use that ignorance to attack science.
Lets take this from a logical perspective, If I build a house: I create order instead of entropy. Does that mean I couldn't do it because I contradicted the 2nd law of thermodynamics?
Stop trying to deny Allah's method of creation, a method which is both mentioned in the Quran and explained by science. Personally, I feel this is rather insulting to your creator. I guess not even evidence can convince the unwilling.
1.Thank you for proving my point, did you read my previous post I said there are only two processes in the universe that are known to cause low entropy. Mind guided processes and physical laws( gravity, quantom mechanics, etc.,etc..) Darwinian Evolution doesn't fall under any of the two categories. Natural selection is not a mind guided process and it is not a natural law.
2.DO NOT try to force your interpretation of the Qur'an on me, I do not do it to you and I hope you can do the same for me.
3. The only thing I'm refuting is Darwinian Evolution, not God guided evolution. I have no stance on god guided evolution
You believe he's eternal. You believing something won't make it true, unfortunately. You need to provide proof of that claim. If you can't, it's false. For example, I can say that Zeus created the Earth without proof too.
All of you guys are using ancient arguments from Harun Yahya that were refuted centuries ago. We found other transitional fossils later. Scientists only did this for fame and wealth. Genetic fallacy.
Quote
I think the whole world facepalmed to this ? For the thousand time : Allah isn't created ! He is the creator ! The creator can't be created !
Circular reasoning.
False premise: The universe must have a creator
Jumping to conclusions: Therefore the creator is Allah
Circular reasoning: Allah doesn't need a creator, because I said so!
Quote
Come at us , bro .
Few examples. Allah telling Moses' followers to kill themselves (2:54), delicious cuisine magically falls from the sky (5:115), a staff turns into a serpent (7:107), Jonah gets swallowed by a fish and prays while inside (37:142), there are only seven heavenly bodies (2:29), etc etc
Quote
. They're the only group that doesn't agree on anything at all
Yes, individual ideas and being able to think for yourself is a wonderful thing, wouldn't you agree?
Quote
Atheism is a demonstration of emotional issues
Emotional issues like how Allah destroyed an entire city because they were gay? Or emotional issues like how Allah once drowned an entire city because they were not Muslims? Or emotional issues like "worship me man, I love you, too bad you have to burn in hell if you don't"
""I will become angry upon the insulting and degrading of my pious slaves, like how a lion becomes furious when its cubs are harassed." "
An all knowing deity can't be angry. That's illogical. Anger is a result of surprise, for example, if you're my loyal servant and one day you betray me, I would be angry. But if I already know you're gonna betray me, I'm not gonna get angry.
1. What kind of proof are you asking for? I can philosophically prove it to you. If you are unwilling to even understand islam I see no point in conversing with you.
2.Agreed. Harun Yahya is a fraud.
3. Same as point 1
4.The majority of your points are miracles. Which I can neither prove or disprove, unless I show you the Qur'an is from God. Seven heavenly bodies? I will give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you misread the ayah.
5.The rest of your points are opinions and I see no point of even conversing with you on these matters.
-
The Quran has the same story, God places Adam and Eve in the Garden of Eden, they eat the fruit and get sent to Earth as a punishment, but if they repent, they can have eternal life again.
OK , who among the sane people objects on this ? Allah created father Adam and mother Eve peace upon them to live on Earth . But he wanted to test them . So he told them to have whatever they wanted of the trees except one that they weren't allowed to approach . Iblis - Satan - whispered to them with evil and they did wrong . They repent and Allah accepted their repentance for he is the most merciful . I'd like to see a sane man say a thing about this .
You believe he's eternal. You believing something won't make it true, unfortunately.
The most basic rules of common sense make it true . Already explained and as usual you ignore it all .
You need to provide proof of that claim. If you can't, it's false. For example, I can say that Zeus created the Earth without proof too.
Look , I won't bear the headache and make as simple as a song of kindergarten . Logic and reason say there has to be a first , there has to be a creator that isn't created . That creator must be omnipotent and knows all and out of the system he created and other things . As for which religion is true , that's something to discuss after you're convinced of the first . And I swear that no religion on Earth would stand a chance in a debate against Islam for more than 5 minutes .
Who put this law? Odin?
Again , already explained .
All of you guys are using ancient arguments from Harun Yahya that were refuted centuries ago. We found other transitional fossils later. Scientists only did this for fame and wealth. Genetic fallacy.
Nope , those two are just the tip of the iceberg . There isn't a single transitional fossil . Unless you call a skeleton of every bloody monkey an ancestor . If so , then that's your business .
And again the ancient "How do you know, were you there when it happened?" argument. Were you there when Allah created the universe?
So you agree that this argument stands . I'll ask again : Did you see this so called evolution of a bear into a whale ? You need to stop escaping every question that you're asked by turning around and making another question . As for us , Allah told us about he created the universe . As I said , logic leaves no place for an option other than that a creator made the universe . And when you asked if it's Allah or Odin or someone else , you're dodging the main argument . If you're convinced that there's a creator , then we'll talk which religion is true .
Believing a fairy tale doesn't make it true. Faith over objective reasoning is absurd.
Eat dirt and trash ! I can't believe how low you can go ! I didn't allow any room for misunderstanding but it seems the wrong doers can't hear a thing except what they like ! Where on Earth do you see me saying we have blind faith here ? :
It's a matter of belief . And because I know you'll jump the gun and say "Hey , the Muslim admits that he believes blindly !" I'll burst your bubble . I said it's a matter of belief that is based on believing in the whole religion which is in turn based on rational evidence . If we believe in religion , we believe in what it says even if we can't see it with our own eyes .
Have you no shame ?! If you're crazy , then the readers are sane !
Circular reasoning.
False premise: The universe must have a creator
Jumping to conclusions: Therefore the creator is Allah
Circular reasoning: Allah doesn't need a creator, because I said so!
Lunatic reasoning . And yet again you can't see a thing except what you like . For the thousand time , the most basic establishments of logic and reason say that everything caused has a cause . If you object on that then please don't have a conversation with sane people . And for the millionth time , knowing who the true God is comes after knowing that there is one . We believed in Islam because nothing else makes sense .
So stop trying to look like a knowledgeable man who has no time to waste and is inventing whatever one can think of . Saying some flashy terms doesn't add a value . And showing no manners when talking about the belief of other - thanks to the freedom of nonsense - only makes you look like a teenager suffering psychological disorders .
Already went over this, there were other variants of Miller's experiment recently with the changed condition that were successful. You can't rely on Harun Yahya's book forever...
Already answered by someone other than me . And from experience with such empty bluffs , I can say for sure that they'd take anything unrelated and make it an evidence that must never be questioned . But I'll leave that to who knows better than me .
Few examples. Allah telling Moses' followers to kill themselves (2:54), delicious cuisine magically falls from the sky (5:115), a staff turns into a serpent (7:107), Jonah gets swallowed by a fish and prays while inside (37:142), there are only seven heavenly bodies (2:29), etc etc
Facepalm , Facepalm , Facepalm , Facepalm , Facepalm , etc etc . Let's start from the last . The verse - O one who can't read Arabic OR English - says that there are seven heavens . You clearly either lied or copied whatever you saw from someone else . And who would object about prophet Yuunus - Jonah - being swallowed by a whale and survive and pray inside ? First , you need to know that praying can be with words only just to burst any bubble that might show up . And haven't you heard of a man who survives lightning twice ? Of a man who falls from above 10 floors and survives ? Aside from that , he's a prophet who has been protected by the mercy of Allah . Any objections ? And the staff , is it logically impossible for this to happen ? It seems you don't know what a miracle is - no surprise - and so your judgement is based on ignorance . The funny thing is that Atheists don't mind believing aliens created them or that we live in a matrix or that there are endless universes with minor differences in each - for example , in universe X I didn't have breakfast this morning ! - and then they have the nerve talk about what's illogical . And now the first one . If you bothered look at the context or any explanation that anyone can find on the internet , you would have known that this means for the innocents of them to kill the guilty . That was an order of Allah said by a prophet at his time . Any objection ?
So yes , as I always say : Whoever claims he opposes Islam because he knows it is actually among the most ignorant of it .
Yes, individual ideas and being able to think for yourself is a wonderful thing, wouldn't you agree?
Great . So you agree you have no basis and that anyone can do whatever in the world he wants .
After that , you show the usual filth and scum of Earth street thugs like you puke everywhere . If you were in our forum , you would have been banned right away . And as usual , you try to escape answering anything that you don't like through attacking others . So yes , your disbelieve in God is based on emotional disorders . And as I said before , if you can't talk like someone civilized , don't talk at all .
-
1.Thank you for proving my point, did you read my previous post I said there are only two processes in the universe that are known to cause low entropy. Mind guided processes and physical laws( gravity, quantom mechanics, etc.,etc..) Darwinian Evolution doesn't fall under any of the two categories. Natural selection is not a mind guided process and it is not a natural law.
2.DO NOT try to force your interpretation of the Qur'an on me, I do not do it to you and I hope you can do the same for me.
3. The only thing I'm refuting is Darwinian Evolution, not God guided evolution. I have no stance on god guided evolution
Hello brother, thank you for your efforts on this forum. I just wanted to add an extremely important point. The basic idea of evolution is fact, there is no question. The mechanisms of evolution will be and will always be subject to change. This does not in any way hinder the fact that all species evolved, this is completely fact--it is as true as the Earth being round.
secondly, I believe the Quran is clear that we were created in a large and diverse process from non-human ancestors rather than an instant creation, but I respect your opinion.
God guided evolution is always a possibility, but when you think about it, an all-powerful God is not going to guide every mutation one by one or create every species one by one :P. He is going to let it do it by itself. We see this in the sustenance of the Earth, he is not directly sustaining the Earth and directly manipulating the water cycle, rather, he created the earth so that it does those things and sustains itself without his direct intervention. The water cycle and other cycles necessary for life occur and sustain the Earth by themselves. That is the Genius of Allah. This is the same way he created you, making the mutations occur without direct manipulation. I believe this supports our current mechanism of evolution that it is a natural process.
So Allah creates a self-sustaining world and a self-sustaining universe in which we and other creatures like us could thrive in a balanced biosphere with diverse ecosystems in order to be tested and given the opportunity to succeed in here and the hereafter.
-
assalamualykum bro mclinkin
1. I also appreciate your efforts on this forum.
2. I don't (:
3.With all due respect, I strongly object to this claim that Allah doesn't sustain the universe. This is nonsensical and is not supported by the Quran and Sunnah. This belief seems semi-deistic. I think the problem is you are trying to understand the nature of god through reason. Reason can only get us to the point where we 100% know god exists. Revelation lets us know about the nature of god. One of the 99 names Of Allah(swt) is Al Mugith, which means the SUSTAINER. Science tells us how god does things not why. The two are recconcilable brother I ask you to reconsider your beliefs about the nature of god and base it off the sunnah and the Qur'an
4. How can evolution be a fact when it is irreconcilable with a fundamental law of nature. I think you think I object to evolution from a theological standpoint. No, I object to evolution because of science.
-
assalamualykum bro mclinkin
1. I also appreciate your efforts on this forum.
2. I don't (:
3.With all due respect, I strongly object to this claim that Allah doesn't sustain the universe. This is nonsensical and is not supported by the Quran and Sunnah. This belief seems semi-deistic. I think the problem is you are trying to understand the nature of god through reason. Reason can only get us to the point where we 100% know god exists. Revelation lets us know about the nature of god. One of the 99 names Of Allah(swt) is Al Mugith, which means the SUSTAINER. Science tells us how god does things not why. The two are recconcilable brother I ask you to reconsider your beliefs about the nature of god and base it off the sunnah and the Qur'an
4. How can evolution be a fact when it is irreconcilable with a fundamental law of nature. I think you think I object to evolution from a theological standpoint. No, I object to evolution because of science.
I agree, Allah is the Sustainer. Just as when you make a car, Allah makes it! But he didn't directly make it, he indirectly made the car by making you. But in the end, Allah is the maker. So if Allah creates a world that is self-sustaining. Then who is the sustained of the world? Allah is! Just as you making the car, makes it Allah's creation!
I want to present a Quranic verse that alludes to the fact I just made above:
Quran 41:10-11 and He blessed it and determined therein its sustenance in four days without distinction - for [the information] of those who ask. Then He directed Himself to the heaven and it was smoke and said to it and to the earth, "Come [into being]
^In here you see that Allah has determined all the sustenance of the Earth in 4 days, then (after he determined the sustenance) he made the heavens and the earth to come into existence. So here is a case in which the sustenance of the Earth was determined before the creation of the Earth. In other words, Allah created a self-sustaining world which therefore makes him the sustainer of the world.
Here is another verse that nails it:
Quran 7:54 He created the sun, the moon, and the stars, (all) governed by laws under His command. Is it not His to create and to govern? Blessed be Allah, the Cherisher and Sustainer of the worlds!
^Everything is governed by Allah laws. This Makes Allah the Sustainer. He set the laws in motion in a self-sustaining world and therefore he is the sustainer :)
Can you please explain how evolution is irreconcilable with the fundamental laws of nature?
Further if you don't mind, present to me a Quranic verse in which you think goes against evolution. Within my intellectual honesty, I see the Quran supporting evolution or at least the basic idea in which our collective creation involved stages, but can I have your opinion as to why it does not?
-
godless people dont hate religion, they actualy hate abrahamic religions cuz ive seen how they defend ancient religions. but they actualy dont know that their godlessism has some religous stuff in it and i'll leave that for them to find out but i'll give them one.
(mother nature) guess what religion belived in the whole nature beign somthing like a deity. and godless people, stop mixing all religions with christianity plz.
peace
-
Usually The Godless people are sick of Christianity and they hate it. And to defend themselves as right they frequently quote christian's REPRESENTATION of Islam which tells about their intelligence. In the whole process they seem to be hate Abrahamic religions. but they really love the Non-Abrahamic Religions probably because Unfortunately Christianity is a Abrahamic one.