Why cant we scientifically prove god?

G_Omar

Or even better why doesnt he just show himself to us?? Im really struggling with my religion at the moment and it probably hasnt helped watching all those atheist youtube clips challenging my faith!

I believe God does in fact reveal himself in the infinite complexity of the DNA code wow. This has also convinced one of the world's most dedicated Atheists, Sir Antony Flew, the late world-famous philosopher.
"DNA is made up of four chemicals, abbreviated as letters A, T, G, and C. Much like the ones and zeros, these letters are arranged in the human cell like this CGTGTGACTCGCTCCTGAT and so on. The order in which they are arranged instructs the cell's actions.
What is amazing is that within the tiny space in every cell in your body, this code is three billion letters long!! To grasp the amount of DNA information in one cell, "a live reading of that code at a rate of three letters per second would take thirty-one years, even if reading continued day and night"
Quote from Perry Marshall
Read more here http//www.ucg.org/science/hey-hey-dna-proving-gods-existence-genetically

Ahmad_Bilal

Peace, hawkninetynine.

We cannot apply the scientific method to that which is beyond natural laws (God).

As natural beings, how can we detect, know and understand something that is (allegedly) beyond nature?

Our basis should be knowledge, not belief. We can rationalize that God has sent all these prophets and messengers to guide humanity, and we can conclude that his "final testament" is the Qur'aan, developed with the purpose of saving humanity from God's wrath. However, in reality, how do we know this? If belief is our foundation, then all religions are inherently the same; theists are all believing in the supremacy of their gods, and by their assessment, everyone who doesn't subscribe to their specified religious tenets are going to be thrown into hell and tortured for all eternity.

If we merely base our understanding of God on our personal beliefs and convictions, then how can we conclude which god (if any of them) is the right one? And what gives us the basis to conclude that anyone else's beliefs are wrong? For instance, whether you're a Jew, a Christian, a Wahhabi (Salaafi) or "Qur'aanist", you're worshipping God in the way in which you understand him. So, who is right, and who is wrong?

This is important because, based on fundamentalist theology, being "wrong" can have drastic consequences, namely being thrown into hell. In addition, being "right" has some very great rewards, such as being ushered into heaven...

Peace,

Ahmad

Ahmad_Bilal

Peace, GODsubmitter.

I do not like polemics nor vane pseudo-philosophic discussions.
We have God's Words in Scriptures, and the Final Testament the Qur'an.
All that is worth to know is there!

With all due respect, that position makes absolutely no sense! You're free to base your understanding concerning God on these books, but it's impossible for you to authenticate that position that these are "God's words"; and this nullifies the idea that the Qur'aan is God's "final testament". You can make this claim, based on your preestablished convictions; but you don't know it to be the case, which ultimately places you in the same boat as the atheist and/or agnostic. You're not sure that your perspective is correct; you're just hoping (wishing) for the best.

Peace,

Ahmad

Man_of_Faith

Why can we not scientifically prove God?

Peace,

As mentioned previously, if God could be proven scientifically everyone would believe and we would no longer be respited and the test thus nullified.

Obviously, God cannot be measured and since the entity called God goes beyond the law of physics as we know it, how can it then theoretically be proved?

It is certainly difficult to argue with convinced disbelievers and maybe also in vain. If one has absolutely not even a doubt that there is no God, and cannot see any truth in the Quran and also think there are contradictions in it, then there is little one can do about it. The choice to believe or not to believe is up to ourselves.

There is absolutely no scientific proof of God's existence directly. We can never discover this massive "force"(?), we can only see its signs, the world around us and all miracles.

By the way, define the phenomena "fire" or gravity and explain them scientifically thoroughly. I am certain you will start talking about the relativity theory by Einstein in the case of gravity, and even if you can mathematically determine how gravity works, you still do not know what it is.

Same goes for the fire, you can describe it and you somehow know how it works, but you cannot explain it.

How did all materials/substances know how to assemble after the Big Bang (or what theory you have chosen to believe in)? It is an extremely low probability that the world as we know it was created by mere coincidence.

You can most probably not explain neither of these phenomena satisfactorily. If you can I am impressed.

So let us return to the original question. Can God be proven scientifically? No, God cannot be. The same as we can most likely not prove what the universe is or the world as we know it. Can you prove scientifically why we are here? Can you prove scientifically what happened before Big Bang?

There is little true scientific knowledge we can actually prove, or if you prove it, you cannot explain why it works, just that it exists, as in the case with gravity.

If you then imagine God's massive energy which cannot be gauged, not with the instruments or senses of human origin anyway. If God would show Himself to you, you know God exist and this life has no longer any meaning. God expects you to discover and appreciate His signs. Seeing God would be cheating.

I recommend at least give the Quran a try, it is a guide, a blessing from God. Even without it you may reach Heaven if you are a monotheist, believe in the Hereafter and lead a righteous life. The terms Islam, Christianity, Judaism are just man-made definitions. You are a believer if you submit yourself to God alone. No need to celebrate, commemorate a single prophet/messenger, simply believing in His signs is enough.

I am a human, and all I said is relative, I may be wrong, but, Go willing, I am somehow right in what I just stated, even if not 100% accurate, especially the science part since I am no scientist. Yet I think I challenge you to explain certain science. You may know how it works and describe it, but you cannot explain the origin etc. Do not tell me it simply exists because then it is as bad an scientific explanation as religious folks say God simply exists.

May the Force be with you.

(sorry, could not help draw a Star Wars parallel)

Ahmad_Bilal

Peace, Man of Faith.

Your position is an interesting one, and I agree with some of the points you made. However, there are some discrepancies too. For example

As mentioned previously, if God could be proven scientifically everyone would believe and we would no longer be respited and the test thus nullified.

What "test" are you referring to? If you're talking about some type of examination concerning our belief in God, and having proof of him would nullify this concept, that doesn't seem plausible for a number of reasons. For starters, the Qur'aan asserts that all of us were required (forced?) to swear to a stance of monotheism prior to our births. So, from that standpoint, all of us have already gotten the necessary proof for God's existence, to the extent of possibly meeting him personally, even if we don't remember the event. Can't we still be respited, according to your ideology, even though we've received this degree of 'proof'?

The choice to believe or not to believe is up to ourselves.

According to modern scopes of psychology, we don't necessarily choose to believe. It's not a concept of will at all. For instance, if I told you that I'd pay you $1,000 to believe in a magical purple pony outside, you wouldn't be able to do it, no matter how hard you tried to believe in it. The lack of evidence, and your logical functional abilities, would stop you from being able to believe in this. Now, you could say that you believe in it; but that doesn't mean you actually do. In either case, belief is not particularly a choice in the general sense. In other words, we can't will ourselves to believe in something. Either you believe in it, or you don't.

By the way, define the phenomena "fire" or gravity and explain them scientifically thoroughly. I am certain you will start talking about the relativity theory by Einstein in the case of gravity, and even if you can mathematically determine how gravity works, you still do not know what it is.

Same goes for the fire, you can describe it and you somehow know how it works, but you cannot explain it.

The problem with your proposal is the naturalistic depiction of the factors themselves. Fire and gravity are principles and properties, not ideas. The belief in fire or gravity is totally irrelevant from a scientific perspective, since you can effectively prove that these factors are real. Even if you can't particularly explain what they are, you can prove that they exist, and you're naturally affected by them. Gravity, in particular, is a force that affects all of us directly. Sure, we can't see it; but we can detect it, and we feel the effects of its existence everyday. That's not the case with believe in a god (or gods).

Not only can "God" not be seen or heard, but he can't be detected at all. There's no way to measure God or determine the reality of his existence. We're not directly influenced by God in any way (at least, not in any way that we can scientifically determine). The only "evidence" for God in the theistic sense is the belief in him, which can't reasonably be authenticated by anything other than their own religious scriptures and guidelines.

I recommend at least give the Quran a try, it is a guide, a blessing from God. Even without it you may reach Heaven if you are a monotheist, believe in the Hereafter and lead a righteous life. The terms Islam, Christianity, Judaism are just man-made definitions. You are a believer if you submit yourself to God alone. No need to celebrate, commemorate a single prophet/messenger, simply believing in His signs is enough.

Indeed, we can submit ourselves to "God". But what God? Can we submit ourselves to Zeus and still be alright? Can we identify Jesus, Baal, Mithras, Apollo, Amun-Ra, or Ahura Mazda as the supreme power and still be good in the Islamic sense? Or, are we required to submit ourselves to your god? That's where the line is drawn. In a basic sense, if we can submit ourselves to any god(s) and still be good, then what's the point of reading and adhering to the Qur'aan? And, if we can only be saved by submitting ourselves (I still haven't entirely figured out what this means) to the god identified in the Qur'aan, then aren't we really required to accept the Islamic religion as a whole and adhere to the principles established in the Islamic holy book?

And, for the record, what "signs" (you said we must 'believe in his signs&#039 are you referring to? Are you speaking with regards to miraculous events and supernatural happenings? Or, are you speaking about something else?

Thanks for your insight on this matter.

Peace,

Ahmad

Man_of_Faith

Peace,

You did not answer my question. I said you can describe fire or gravity, but you can still not tell me what it is. I knew you could prove why it exists or what it is. Mankind cannot see/gauge gravity, just prove it exist because objects are drawn closer to Earth for example.

God is a very abstract matter, proving Him scientifically, when He has not allowed you to discover the existence, will be impossible. We who believe in God think this is a test, hence I told you no one would be respited if God came around.

You can discover God on the personal level, but probably not with your attitude. You will likely not receive anything to assure your soul. Wait and see and I will wait along with you.

You are completely disbelieving in God and the hidden truth, right? What do you do on a believer forum? Trying to convince people that there is no God or do you have doubt about the religious question? Or is it mere amusement?

We will not be able to prove God scientifically, so you win this discussion. The only "proof" is the signs you seem not to believe are from God.

God will not show up either, you will live your life without having any interference from Him. Upon your death you will know whether we were right or you were.

Personally, I have confidence in God's existence, shame I cannot prove it to others, except by showing strong faith. You can laugh, but I believe in code 19, the signs of God with or without signature 19. The Quran itself is strong proof for me, but even without it I believe. I believe and God has rewarded me with further signs and I am made certain about life and the reason why we live.

This is my last reply, it is sufficient for this matter.

May God guide you.

Ahmad_Bilal

Peace, Man of Faith.

I'm not disregarding your position, nor am I attempting to encourage anyone to abandon faith in God. Personally, I don't completely disregard the notion of God, since I don't know if he/she/it exists or not... Now, is my aim to poke fun at all the funny believers? Of course not! For starters, I know exactly what it means to be a believer. I've been through nearly every avenue of Islam that I can think of, including

Sunni and Wahhabi (Salaafi) Islam
Shi'a Islam
Hanaafi Islam
Moorish Science Temple of America (e.g. Islamism)
Ahmadiyya Islam
Lahore Ahmadiyya Islam (similar in certain ways to the one mentioned above, but different)
Qur'aanist
Submitters (Rashad Khalifa's organization, which propagates the "code 19" concept)
Nation of Islam
Maliki Islam
Hanbaali Islam
Sufiyya Islam

There are probably others too! laugh So, trust me - I have no desire to criticize anyone for believing in the tenets of Islam, since I've been down more paths than most. In fact, in addition to those Islamic sects, I've also had my mergers with Christianity, Judaism, Catholicism, Ebionitism, Buddhism, Zoroastrianism, (certain facets of) Hinduism, Jainism, and even Philosophical Satanism (as crazy as that may sound to some)! I've been through a lot, and I don't regret any of it.

Due to (formerly) being a dedicated believer, I feel the need to ask questions concerning the factors that seem to have weakened my faith (or belief) in God and the Qur'aan. If Allah guides who he chooses to the straight path, then what can be said of someone like me, who was on the Islamic path but who somehow fell off of it? Does that make me destined for hellfire? Who knows... In any case, as mentioned, I haven't completely disregarded the notion of divinity. I just haven't seen any type of evidence to believe in God now, the way I once did; and now that I've arrived to this point, I'm not sure if it's even possible for me to go back to the way I was.

So, again, if you feel that my aim is to mock or criticize you and other believers, then you're horrendously mistaken. I'm just asking questions and hoping that someone is able to adequately answer them.

Peace,

Ahmad

mirjamnur

Salam Ahmad
i'm not following all the discuss but read the last pages

What you understand under a proof for the existence of God? How do you explain the emergence of a new human being in the womb - this is not proof? The perfection and the diversity of nature? This beautiful Earth and this wonderful universe, which depends on the smallest factors, so it is convinced, not?
I see the evidence of God in the observation of nature rather than in the revealed scriptures.

You ask "which God"- there is only one power that we call God, others call it Allah or Zeus and others call it the universal power.(etc etc.) Why do we find everywhere a central figure (with other 'Gods&#039 whatever name? Just because the human needs a 'God' to explain the bad destiny, fatal illness or natural disasters?
Play the name a role? Or religions? For me No. Religions are man-made systems, policy I believe in God, I believe in Jesus, I in Satan --- In contrast, the Deen of 'the only" is "worship" in accordance with our own choice - we are part of this system, we live and we die- we have all choice how we want to live.
I see few signs in the revelations, which contains similar wisdom, as an appeal to me. I came after i read much scriptures to the Quran and followed him and I felt much better - It is neither violence nor illogical nor abuse or injustice - the few commandments do me good - I only get good, if I follow this wisdom - that's enough proof ;D (I know his is not scientific )

I was a stubborn Sunni and I felt bad. The sign of a mistake. ;D yeah
Paradise and the hell we create for ourselves, if we do not live in the system of God - if we don't try to be a part in this complex system. So, depending on the intensity of our wrongdoing, we punish ourselves.
But for all the injustices and cruelties which are not punished, it needs God - otherwise existence would be completely pointless. It would be no longer worth living because then all the best characteristics and the good itself would become useless -I could not live a second longer, if I can't TRUST/BELIEVE, that this all will be compensated one time. So is not the real issue How we can prove God? But Prove to me that life is pointless then I will become an atheist.
Sorry, english is a foreign language for me- - peace

Nashrullah84

Or even better why doesnt he just show himself to us?? Im really struggling with my religion at the moment and it probably hasnt helped watching all those atheist youtube clips challenging my faith!

But I really can not understand why god doesnt just prove himself to me like he did to the rest of the prophets? Is it not unfair that the prophets got 1st hand evidence which I will not get and the prophets only believed in god once they did receive this special evidence (e.g. moses and muhammed who werent believers until they received the word of god)?

God is fair, He gave us thoughts and ability to distinguish right from wrong. If He just showed up Himself there's no point He tests us in this world.

Atheists can say anything to deny God's existence, they only believe in materialism but ironically their "minds" are neither material nor matter. But the truth is there, the beginning of universe has a cause. If you use your logic for every reaction there must be a cause and the cause is nothing but God. Who would have such power to create something out of nothing?

Zulf

Prophets were not just ordinary people like most of us. They were very, very high on the spiritual ladder, in the sense that they were very spiritually pure... so they were already "close" to God.

Talking about proving God scientifically is like for a software to prove the color of the fan cooling the microprocessor in the computer. God is not a thing to prove or examine because God is not subject to our tools of our 3d-world. God is not an object to study. I find it easier to simply say that since we exist, God is by definition there. God's reality can however be experienced.

An advice Stop worrying. Stop the mental wrestling. Your mind will just get exhausted. Instead, go inside and wish, desire, intent and pray, that you will become soft, open, receptive, clear sighted, so that you will start perceiving how this world and life works. There is so much there under the surface, unseen. It's not a matter of proof. It's not a matter of belief or fooling oneself. It's a matter of being able to see. Yes, some people pretend to see things. Atheists think all people who are into God or even spiritual things, are fooling themselves and only see what they wish to see. Well, some people do, but some people actually see for real, but they usually keep it to themselves because they know that it doesn't matter how much you talk about it, or try to convince other people about it, they will still never be able to convince someone just by words. For anyone to see beyond the mere material, whether it is unseen things or apparently unseen connections of cause and effect... we first must do the inner work, the inner gardening an cultivation. It takes alot of work, correct work. Like I said, it's not about intellectual knowledge... rather it is about knowing through experience and glimpses. Experience you only get when you are soft enough and open enough to perceive it. What it takes is purification. In other words, one has to be able to tune in to that part of reality. Just like some insects can see wavelengths beyond the spectrum of colors that are visible to us... we can get more tuned in to unseen aspects of reality... but it takes purification.

Peace

uq

In any case, as mentioned, I haven't completely disregarded the notion of divinity. I just haven't seen any type of evidence to believe in God now, the way I once did; and now that I've arrived to this point, I'm not sure if it's even possible for me to go back to the way I was.

Peace Ahmad,

Two points.

(1) This depends wholly on your definiton of "evidence". What I might observe in the natural world that qualifies as "evidence" for the existence of the Creator, may not be seen by others as "evidence". Thus, define "evidence".

(2) As I have pointed out in my above post, I have not seen a single argument in the Quran that makes an argument for the "existence" of God, rather, all arguments are based on the oneness of God.

huruf

Peace Ahmad,

Two points.

(1) This depends wholly on your definiton of "evidence". What I might observe in the natural world that qualifies as "evidence" for the existence of the Creator, may not be seen by others as "evidence". Thus, define "evidence".

(2) As I have pointed out in my above post, I have not seen a single argument in the Quran that makes an argument for the "existence" of God, rather, all arguments are based on the oneness of God.

You should stop at "Onenness", full stop.

Salaam

Mazhar

(2) As I have pointed out in my above post, I have not seen a single argument in the Quran that makes an argument for the "existence" of God, rather, all arguments are based on the oneness of God.

Excellent; but we should be sure about it. What we understand by "existence" and how are we convinced - have knowledge to perceive existence of someone-person-entity; object; phenomenon? Does argument for evidence of existence is only "visual observation"?

What can be the tangible evidence of existence of something or some person whom I cannot see or touch because of my own limitations even if I hear his voice or read a communication from him? Can we see or touch to have the feel or evidence of existence of non-matter?

Interestingly we have a Book named Qur'aan but the person who gave it in writing did not claim to be its author; instead said it is the Word of Sustainer Lord of the Worlds.

Existence

being real the state of being real, actual, or current, rather than imagined, invented, or obsolete evidence for the existence of other world
presence in place or situation the presence or occurrence of something in a particular place or situation

Ahmad_Bilal

Peace, uq.

(1) This depends wholly on your definiton of "evidence". What I might observe in the natural world that qualifies as "evidence" for the existence of the Creator, may not be seen by others as "evidence". Thus, define "evidence".

By "evidence", I was referring to an accumulation of facts and substantiated information that verify the existence of a supernatural being or force. In other words, I was looking for something irrefutable, something that could ultimately prove the existence of a Creator... My position, since I posted that comment, has changed over time, however. I tend to view ALLAH as certainly being real, and there is very little distinction in the natural world, from my perspective, between God and the Universe (although there is a definite difference between the two). Again, though, that's just my perspective.

Ultimately, God can't be "proven" in an objective sense because there is no concrete definition of what a "god" is. And, besides that, there are many concepts of God that can never be substantiated in reality, e.g. the idea that God is 'an invisible man in the sky', etc. From my position, the concept of ALLAH being equated to the Universe (or, at least the idea of nature being an extension of God) can definitely be proven, because we can witness the wonders of the Universe with our physical senses.

(2) As I have pointed out in my above post, I have not seen a single argument in the Quran that makes an argument for the "existence" of God, rather, all arguments are based on the oneness of God.

I agree. I also think the Qur'aan tends to point to the unity ("oneness&quot of everything - existence as a whole. From my perspective, ALLAH isn't something separate from us. He's all around, and within, all of us.

Peace,

Ahmad

uq

Peace Ahmad,

I think we are mostly in agreement.

Evidence, in the scientific sense, I believe, does not exist. As the object of study?God?transcends all things material and immaterial alike; how then is God to be quantified and qualified in any such manner when the Scientific Method is fundamentally concerned with the constituent parts of the universe itself?

I say that the only forms of evidence that exist in proof of God are twofold.

The first is in the form of order, that is to say, an orderly universe, a universe in which laws are relatively constant in our perception and have been facilitative of the development of life on this tiny rock.

The second is in the form of observation. In this regard, the evidence for God, I believe, is wholly sensory. The observation that the universe is ordered, that the earth is in revolution, that there is an alternation of night and day, that all living things are made of water, that water is caused to descend from the sky thereby causing a growth of plants edible and otherwise, that many of today's animals have been made docile rendering them suitable for our laborious tasks, that the diversity of human colours and tongues does exist, that embryonic development is such that the observer's breath is nigh on suspended!?all such observations lend the observer not merely recognition of God's being, but also of God's oneness.

Ahmad_Bilal

Peace, uq, and I apologize for the late reply.

Evidence, in the scientific sense, I believe, does not exist. As the object of study?God?transcends all things material and immaterial alike; how then is God to be quantified and qualified in any such manner when the Scientific Method is fundamentally concerned with the constituent parts of the universe itself?

That was a major issue of mine for quite a while. My viewpoint now, though, differs from this. I think that God actually CAN be proven scientifically; most people just don't know where to look and, more importantly, what to look for. There are various definitions for what a "god" is to most people, and people are looking for what they believe to be God. And, of course, this god can never be found... Since I look at things more along the lines of pantheism (or even panentheism), I see God every time I look out of my window, every time I look in the mirror, and every time I look at my children. God, to me, is life. God is everywhere and in everything.

Tying that in from a scientific perspective, I guess I'd illustrate it in the form of the five senses

I see God when I look in the mirror.
I hear God when I listen to a thoughtful and inspiring speech or lecture.
I smell God when I take a whiff of roses.
I taste God when I bite into an orange.
I feel God when I hold my children, or shake a friend's hand.

Now, I wouldn't necessarily characterize things in that specific context; but I think you get the overall point I'm referring to.

And, ultimately, all of these things are ONE ("waahiyd"/singular and unique) - working in complete unity and harmony. The Universe is a gigantic, pluralized singularity operating as a unit. That's what God is to me.

Peace,

Ahmad

good_logic

Peace Ahmad Bilal.

I liked the way you explained your point. I also agree with you.

I was discussing "God" with a friend and I was asked the following questions

If God exists, then He must have been somewhere before He started His creations,where?

In that case "somewhere existed with/before Him?

I said I would put his questions as one statement

At the beginning there was only GOD!!!! He must have been, because everything else was created including"somewhere" and "nothing"!

GOD bless you.
Peace.

runninglikezebras

Good point. I often return the question as well. I ask them to explain Big Bang to me without God. They can't. Not one 1 microsecond before Big Bang they can explain. All they can bring is conjecture like "Hawkings thinks matter can exist out of nothing" or some hypothetical multiverse-theory that only shifts the issue a bit further without resolving it. I guess Hawkings is their God/idol, but he brings little proof to the table.

Next to that I often challenge them to produce a verse of equal quality, challenging to produce an equal palindrome verse like the ones in Quran that is still meaningful and without using google or dictionaries in any language they choose. I haven't seen one successfully live up to that challenge they either avoid it or start googling non-sensical palindromes (= cheating).

Peace

Ahmad_Bilal

Peace, good logic.

If God exists, then He must have been somewhere before He started His creations,where?

In that case "somewhere existed with/before Him?

I said I would put his questions as one statement

At the beginning there was only GOD!!!! He must have been, because everything else was created including"somewhere" and "nothing"!

I actually get that question a lot, and that's part of what made me reassess my ideas about God. For example, if God is a "person", like Salaafis claim, with a giant human-like body, then He couldn't have created space and time, since He would've had to have been somewhere when everything began to take shape. In other words, if God is limited to a fixed physiology, then He must have existed in a designated location, which must've been present before He was. If He is described as being eternal, then His location (e.g. space) must also be eternal, since, being supposedly designated to a physicality, He has (and had) to exist somewhere.

The concept of matter existing without space is an illogical paradox. If there is something, it has to exist somewhere.

When I start saying things like that, people generally tend to back down, since there's no way they could possibly justify the contrary... laugh

Peace,

Ahmad

Student_of_Allah

Good point. I often return the question as well. I ask them to explain Big Bang to me without God. They can't....

The Big Bang theory refers to the expansion of the universe from a singularity to its present state. Done. I just explained it without invoking a pink unicorn or a God for that matter. I wonder who you were asking to explain Big Bang to you.

....Not one 1 microsecond before Big Bang they can explain. All they can bring is conjecture like "Hawkings thinks matter can exist out of nothing" or some hypothetical multiverse-theory that only shifts the issue a bit further without resolving it. I guess Hawkings is their God/idol, but he brings little proof to the table.

Argument from Ignorance(click me to learn what I am and avoid further public embarassments)

A lot of the times, a lot of religious people have difficulty wrapping their heads around things to which they have no answer. They were trained either by others or themselves to lose the intellectual honesty to say "I don't know" when they don't know something. The fact of the matter is that we have no idea about things "before" The big bang. We simply don't know. This doesn't mean that your random weird belief becomes true automatically. That would be an argument from ignorance.

Let me give you an example. Thousands of years ago in a land foreign, there were two kinds of people. Those who believed that Zeus is the one throwing the lightning bolts and those who didn't have a clue but refused to believe that Zeus was throwing it. The fans and followers of Zeus often said things like "I challenge anyone to explain to me how lightning strikes the earth. Not a single one can answer my question. They always say things like 'may be this process is going on/may be something out there is causing it', all conjectures". They used to never understand that just because the non-Zues-believers couldn't explain how lighting strikes the earth, it doesn't make their belief that Zeus throws it to be true. Just because you can't say what is in my bag right now doesn't mean that I get to claim arrogantly that because you can't say what it is, it must be a x/y/z/anything!

Not to mention that you are tiptoeing around the God of the gaps fallacy. You are just conveniently placing God in places where we have yet to learn a lot about the place. Your ancestors did the same with rain/food/weather/name it. Over the centuries as science explained so many things, these Gods and Goddesses now hides in places like "before Big Bang". You can keep doing it and playing this God of the gaps game. Its just that doing such a thing ends up defining your God as "The ever receding pocket of our scientific ignorance".

Next to that I often challenge them to produce a verse of equal quality, challenging to produce an equal palindrome verse like the ones in Quran that is still meaningful and without using google or dictionaries in any language they choose. I haven't seen one successfully live up to that challenge they either avoid it or start googling non-sensical palindromes (= cheating).

Answer

Shalom Aleikhem,

I am sorry, that is not a falsifiable thing. First of all, Qur'an may tell you to "bring another chapter like it", but it doesn't tell you who you should bring it to. See the problem? Who will be the judge? A Hindu values and respects his/her Vedas and will most likely never agree with you that whatever you wrote is better than his/her veda. A christian values his/her Bible and will not agree that your writings are better than his/her Bible or even the same for that matter. In the same sense, it makes no sense to ask someone to "bring a chapter/verse like it". No matter how many chapters I bring, Muslims can always get away saying that "I don't find it good enough". This is because Qur'an provides no objective means of falsification.

Having said that, there is also a logical flaw in what you said about divinity. There is no direct link between writing a similar chapter like Qur'an and divinity. To claim that "God" wrote that book, you have to demonstrate that He did write that book. You can not shift the burden of proof on others by asking them to write something similar, which to begin with doesn't prove or disprove divinity in any shape or form.

Peace
---------- Student of Allah