Sign of God
-
Peace Ahmad,
I have read a lot of science, please do not be so arrogant. I happen to have a different view than yours, but I am very interested in science.
I drew the logical conclusion that someone who does not believe that any creator made the world then they must believe it was created by coincidence. I call that a non-existent probability, but if you believe something else I respect your opinion.
What is wrong in this logical conclusion if I may ask?
Of course, by scientific means we can neither prove or disprove it. Logical deduction however can make the answer simple.
It was not easy to reach this conclusion if you think so. I had to check a lot of studies before I made up my mind.
Your colorful reaction is outrageous, Sir.
And I have checked the theories of an eternal universe which has always been there, but that logic does not add up either. Somewhere there must be a beginning, unless the world is supernatural of course.
Unless you change your attitude I will avoid discussing with you. You searched for every tiny little error and it is all you could comment on when I sat there for hours writing a post. And you objected on something which is neither right or wrong but hypothetical thinking.
God bless you regardless
-
Peace, Man of Faith.
I have read a lot of science, please do not be so arrogant. I happen to have a different view than yours, but I am very interested in science.
I wasn't intending to appear arrogant with my comment, and I apologize if that's the way you interpreted my statement. I was merely recommending that you check out some science books on this issue (e.g. cosmology). Modern cosmology actually states that none of the events that occurred during the formation of our (visible) universe were "coincidental" at all.
I drew the logical conclusion that someone who does not believe that any creator made the world then they must believe it was created by coincidence. I call that a non-existent probability, but if you believe something else I respect your opinion.
What is wrong in this logical conclusion if I may ask?
There's a lot wrong with this conclusion, sir. The lack of a creator deity doesn't equate 'coincidence'. The concept is "cause and effect". Specific instances occurred in the past that ultimately led us to where we are today. There was nothing 'coincidental' about it... Now, if we want to be realistic about this proposition, then the concept of a creator defies the logical idea of cause and effect, since religionists claim that God has no 'cause' - he was just 'always there', whatever that means...
Isn't this a logical determination too?
Of course, by scientific means we can neither prove or disprove it. Logical deduction however can make the answer simple.
Actually, science CAN prove this. If you examine the concept of a creator deity via the scientific method, though, it doesn't hold water. That's one of the reasons why the concept of gods and goddesses is ONLY substantiated on the basis of faith and belief, not facts... Have you ever looked into the "God question" scientifically? And, more importantly, have to investigated this idea logically?
And I have checked the theories of an eternal universe which has always been there, but that logic does not add up either. Somewhere there must be a beginning, unless the world is supernatural of course.
How did you come up with this idea? The world has to be "supernatural" in order to be eternal (static), even though science clearly says that prime energy can't be created or destroyed? Please elaborate on this.
Unless you change your attitude I will avoid discussing with you. You searched for every tiny little error and it is all you could comment on when I sat there for hours writing a post. And you objected on something which is neither right or wrong but hypothetical thinking.
That's not true, and I think you know that isn't a true statement... I'm not overly concerned with small errors, even though the tiniest of infractions make a big difference when identifying a 'perfect' god. But that's another subject. I thoroughly read your posts, and I respond to them in what I see as being the most suitable manner, without trying to be rude or condescending. If I offended you, I apologize. This just happens to be a particularly passionate subject for me.
Like I said before, I don't have a problem with people believing whatever they choose to believe. I know what it means to be a believer. I've been just about everything - a Christian, Jew (and Ebionitic Jew), Hindu, Muslim (e.g. Sunni, Shia, Salafi, Ahmadi, Hanafi), Submitter (e.g. student of the teachings of Dr. Rashad Khalifa), Buddhist, Taoist, Universalist, student of Rastafarianism, Thelemite, Satanist, Rosicrucian, deist, agnostic, and a few others too! And I'm still under the age of 30. I've been on many roads, and the study of all of those religious groups and orders have inevitably led me to where I am today.
If you'd rather not discuss the issue of theology anymore, then that's your prerogative. I'm merely stating my position on the matter. I'm not trying to convert (or deconvert) anyone to anything. I'm merely providing people with a different way to think about science and philosophy, and I think that's a good thing.
Peace,
Ahmad
-
Peace, Man of Faith.
I wasn't intending to appear arrogant with my comment, and I apologize if that's the way you interpreted my statement. I was merely recommending that you check out some science books on this issue (e.g. cosmology). Modern cosmology actually states that none of the events that occurred during the formation of our (visible) universe were "coincidental" at all.
There's a lot wrong with this conclusion, sir. The lack of a creator deity doesn't equate 'coincidence'. The concept is "cause and effect". Specific instances occurred in the past that ultimately led us to where we are today. There was nothing 'coincidental' about it... Now, if we want to be realistic about this proposition, then the concept of a creator defies the logical idea of cause and effect, since religionists claim that God has no 'cause' - he was just 'always there', whatever that means...
Isn't this a logical determination too?
Actually, science CAN prove this. If you examine the concept of a creator deity via the scientific method, though, it doesn't hold water. That's one of the reasons why the concept of gods and goddesses is ONLY substantiated on the basis of faith and belief, not facts... Have you ever looked into the "God question" scientifically? And, more importantly, have to investigated this idea logically?
How did you come up with this idea? The world has to be "supernatural" in order to be eternal (static), even though science clearly says that prime energy can't be created or destroyed? Please elaborate on this.
That's not true, and I think you know that isn't a true statement... I'm not overly concerned with small errors, even though the tiniest of infractions make a big difference when identifying a 'perfect' god. But that's another subject. I thoroughly read your posts, and I respond to them in what I see as being the most suitable manner, without trying to be rude or condescending. If I offended you, I apologize. This just happens to be a particularly passionate subject for me.
Like I said before, I don't have a problem with people believing whatever they choose to believe. I know what it means to be a believer. I've been just about everything - a Christian, Jew (and Ebionitic Jew), Hindu, Muslim (e.g. Sunni, Shia, Salafi, Ahmadi, Hanafi), Submitter (e.g. student of the teachings of Dr. Rashad Khalifa), Buddhist, Taoist, Universalist, student of Rastafarianism, Thelemite, Satanist, Rosicrucian, deist, agnostic, and a few others too! And I'm still under the age of 30. I've been on many roads, and the study of all of those religious groups and orders have inevitably led me to where I am today.
If you'd rather not discuss the issue of theology anymore, then that's your prerogative. I'm merely stating my position on the matter. I'm not trying to convert (or deconvert) anyone to anything. I'm merely providing people with a different way to think about science and philosophy, and I think that's a good thing.
Peace,
Ahmad
Can I ask - what do you believe or not believe in?
-
Peace, pixelrow.
Can I ask - what do you believe or not believe in?
I don't specifically dismiss the concept of divinity, for starters, even though I haven't seen any verifiable evidence for the existence of God(s) either. I just try to look at things objectively and rationally. If there is a god, then it seems more likely that the god would be impersonal, rather than personal. Rather than this god existing "beyond" space and time, being completely transcendent and "beyond" the Universe, it would make more rational sense for this god to be a concept of Universal existence itself, such as the viewpoint of god being equated to Nature.
Personally, the idea of a personal god who performs miracles and answers prayers, who creates universes but leaves no evidence for his own existence, doesn't make much sense to me. If people choose to embrace that ideology, then I see nothing wrong with them doing so; however, I can't accept that notion, since it doesn't coincide with logic, reason and verifiable science.
Peace,
Ahmad
-
Peace, pixelrow.
I don't specifically dismiss the concept of divinity, for starters, even though I haven't seen any verifiable evidence for the existence of God(s) either. I just try to look at things objectively and rationally. If there is a god, then it seems more likely that the god would be impersonal, rather than personal. Rather than this god existing "beyond" space and time, being completely transcendent and "beyond" the Universe, it would make more rational sense for this god to be a concept of Universal existence itself, such as the viewpoint of god being equated to Nature.
Personally, the idea of a personal god who performs miracles and answers prayers, who creates universes but leaves no evidence for his own existence, doesn't make much sense to me. If people choose to embrace that ideology, then I see nothing wrong with them doing so; however, I can't accept that notion, since it doesn't coincide with logic, reason and verifiable science.
Peace,
Ahmad
In short - Agnostic Atheists?
As far as "verifiable science" goes . . . is it even meant to answer if there is a God or not? I fail to see - science - as we know it has much concern with God.
As for logic . . . that is of course - debatable. I think the most logical answer perhaps - is we do not know.
For me . . . it is quite simple. I do not accept that universe either was or came from nothing. I try my best to grasp Physics - and nothing that I have read has changed my mind. This is my thought process
-
Peace, pixelrow.
In short - Agnostic Atheists?
Not necessarily... I don't particularly dismiss that terminology, if it fits. However, the ideas I expressed could also describe a lot of other philosophical worldviews as well - pantheism or naturalism, for example, or even secular humanism. They all fit this criteria, even though they are different in scope and ideology.
As far as "verifiable science" goes . . . is it even meant to answer if there is a God or not? I fail to see - science - as we know it has much concern with God.
Actually, this isn't the case at all. Many scientists are very concerned with the idea of a god (or gods), especially when analyzing the world around us and interpreting its origin and sustainability... Personally, I'm not only interested in science, though; my primary focus is in philosophy, and the "god question" in very important in this field of investigation and inquiry.
As for logic . . . that is of course - debatable. I think the most logical answer perhaps - is we do not know.
I agree.
For me . . . it is quite simple. I do not accept that universe either was or came from nothing.
Again, I agree - I don't believe that the Universe 'came from nothing', nor was it "nothing" in expression. There was always something, regardless of how minute that 'something' may have been at one point in time... So, if the Universe was always "something", or existent, then how do we compare this to the viewpoint that God created the Universe ex nihilo (from nothing)?
I try my best to grasp Physics - and nothing that I have read has changed my mind. This is my thought process
Perhaps my views don't go beyond logic - because what I've learned from the fields of physics, biology, geology, cosmology (and astronomy), and other sciences have dramatically influenced the way I perceive the world. In fact, they're the primary reason why I question the idea of a personal god today.
Peace,
Ahmad
-
Ahmad Bilal )
Your posts are really thought provoking ) . I admire your posts though.
You are just skeptical. Skeptics often search for truths.
-
Peace, pixelrow.
I don't specifically dismiss the concept of divinity, for starters, even though I haven't seen any verifiable evidence for the existence of God(s) either. I just try to look at things objectively and rationally. If there is a god, then it seems more likely that the god would be impersonal, rather than personal. Rather than this god existing "beyond" space and time, being completely transcendent and "beyond" the Universe, it would make more rational sense for this god to be a concept of Universal existence itself, such as the viewpoint of god being equated to Nature.
Personally, the idea of a personal god who performs miracles and answers prayers, who creates universes but leaves no evidence for his own existence, doesn't make much sense to me. If people choose to embrace that ideology, then I see nothing wrong with them doing so; however, I can't accept that notion, since it doesn't coincide with logic, reason and verifiable science.
Peace,
Ahmad
Haha, you should pray that nothing ever proves to you the existence of the false conceptions of God people have.
-
Sometime, each time I cornered in life and I prayed to God. He grant my wish. But in normal condition, which I want maybe, a new laptop, tablet, game console, He never listen. But such a thing I mentioned,if I really need it, for example xbox360,and new tablet for work, as far as my experience, He granted it. I was desperatedly looking for job for 3 months, I failed. When I sujud , which is seldom, He grant me my wish and suddenly after a week someone reference me and I worked on elite university as programmer. The past 3 years I worked from home for foreign company, and my payment 3 times than my hometown.
God dont care with us, He only care with our need, based my experience. I seldomly do sujud, but when it was for ky need I dont know why, based on my life, He granted it. Even for case I should not mention. Personaly, I was dissapointed to God for 5 years, each time Im happy,He always disgrace me. but I dont want to deny the fact, maybe,He listened to my pray. Myabe b saying such a thinglike thi He mght happy. -
there are lot of situations in my life when I was totally lose hope and nothing was in my control. and nobody was able to help . and a state where nothing can achieve apart from a miracle... let say in 6th grade of my school somebody challenged me to come on title positon. the school belong to army and I was orphan , my mom told me to start pray behind her first time I pray and ask something which I really need ,,, miracously Allah granted me a title position. my first pray I still remember its 20 years ago,, after that I encounter plantey of times where only some supreme being helped me... and that help come ,,, that make me believe if u didn't transgress with law and try to be loyal with your Allah he never let u down,,, specially in the matters of respect and need... trust me.. I dnt only worship my lord,, I love him and this love is undescribeable ,,, that what Allah is even the relationship with God is amazing only a person can understand ... once my teacher challenged me u will fail in math if you never get tuition from me,,, my mom at that time was unabale to afford the tuition it was so high... I pray from my lord,,, and interestingly he failed me in school exams but in the board exams I beat his very best student with long margins... I got 86 out of 100 ... that what my lord is... he knows what u really need ..