Dubai Forums Dubai Discussions Dubai Politics Talk Philosophy and Religion Forums

I really don't know how one can call him/herself an atheist when they cannot prove non existence otherwise..To my mind one can only be an agnostic for the utmost...

It s mathematic's Berrin, you cannot prove that something that does not exist, does not exist. It s laughable, you cannot put in equation something that s not there.

Since god does not exist, you can't prove he does not exist, and of course you cannot prove he exists, that s why this myth is still going around in circle.

I did not see all the video. I stopped at the stage where he says "there was a primordial dust cloud before the Big Bang and that then condensed and exploded"! Really? Thats what scientific endeavour has been aimed at and still there is no clear cut answers so far. Was there only one Big Bang, or is this a common occurence is what scientists are working on. There is the Hypothesis of the Multiverse gaining popularity now in scientific circles.

I like the scientific approach to things because that is the TRUTH. Scientific theories can be wrong, and reworked and improved. As opposed to religious dogma which is NEVER wrong
However, it is impossible to prove or disprove the existence of something like God! Obviously, you cannot get "something from nothing" as the speaker in the video says. But then what is the "something"? One can use fantasy and imagination. Or one can resort to science. We are not there yet, and might never make it, but the truth is stranger than fiction.
For years theologians have used the example of a watch and a watch-maker. If that logic is followed, then who created the watch-maker? It leads us in circels.

I have read a paper by Nick Bostrom who heads the Future of Humanity division at Oxford University. His paper is titled "The Simulation Hpothesis". He argues rather convincingly that we are all a computer simulation! In which case, there would be a Simulator. Something that one could call god. A more plausible one considering all the death and destruction and misery on this planet. The Simulator would be god and the devil rolled into one!

The question of beleif is complex. Why do we say "I beleive"? Because there is an element of uncertainty in beleif. You never say "I beleive 4 and 4 makes 8" because that is an incontrovertible fact. You only say "I beleive" when you are not certain. If I were to ask you the distance between Dubai and Dublin eg you would give a wildly approximate figure and say I beleive its that much. But if you had actually measured it, then you can say for certain and then it would not be "I beleive".

However, I respect what anyone beleives in! The Universe or the Multiverse is a lot more complex than we can ever imagine. I dont dismiss anything. Arrogance is only a fools way.

Peace

I only believe in Chardonnay

Thanks BM .

I beleive Chardonnay will get me to Heaven


--- Fri Mar 16, 2012 9:09 am ---

You might find this interesting: "Is there a Creator?"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=pl ... a4ETlshct4

zonker wrote:You might find this interesting: "Is there a Creator?"

You know I don't like that sort of thing Zonker. It's far too deep for BM. You're born because your mum and dad had a special cuddle and one day you close your eyes and you never wake up again.

And in the mean time you have some fun

I beleive Chardonnay will get me to Heaven

You could be right!

zonker wrote:I like the scientific approach to things because that is the TRUTH. Scientific theories can be wrong, and reworked and improved. As opposed to religious dogma which is NEVER wrong

You only concentrate on the understanding the mechanism of creation when you put your emphasize into science and tehnology, this has nothing to do with observing the creator in sight!. We need science and thecnology to sustain better/advanced living, I guess without this, life would be so boring, even though quite simple as we are given basic provisions to keep us going until death:)

trying to understand the creator behind all this creation is like trying to understand the innovator of a machinery in front of you that no one knows anything about, scientifically you know that there is engine, switches, cables, chips and all sorts of mechanics that make it function its assigned job, but you don't quite understand how its all functions, so you research the parts and their process... Just becouse you now research this machines doesn't mean that it has no innovator or manufacturer, trying to find or to meet its innovator is a completly different issue, but you know that s/he exists.. The same goes for the universe... Denying the innovator Allah means denying his creation, the universe and everthing in it..

Allah doesn't say that we are not going to meet him, he says we have already met him before we are sent for life on earth and will meet him again... In his revelation Allah makes it clear that there are stages of the journey of our souls..( you haven't written anything about this Zonker:) )

All of our souls have been created at once before human life started on earth.. They were kept in a place called "Lau Ho Mahfuz".. (stage 1)

Allah once asked all the created souls, "who is your Lord?". All the souls said "You are our Creator our Lord". (7:172). But souls forget the covenant when they descend to the earth.

In reality, our souls as well as elements that are made to form our physical body are billions of years old(upon creation of the universe), so our souls get new dresses every time each of us take turns to arrive for life on earth..

2. stage life in the mother's womb.
3. stage life in this world.
4. stage death, life in the grave (Barzakh period)
5. stage resurrection on the Judgment day
6. the end stage for disobedient soul is to enter Hell fire
7. the end stage for obedient soul is peaceful to enter paradise

http://www.islamicity.com/articles/Arti ... k1012-4379

The problem with humans is the perception of time(as we are creation), we consider average 70 years of human life time long long enough to meet our creator in sight, whereas it is nothing not even a picosecond at the level of Allah..(time is infinite at his level)

So if I tell you that you have a mother that abondened you after given birth but now you have the chance to meet her in few hours, you wouldn't think that it is impossible,would you? you would look forward to it and not deny existance of the mother..

The same goes for humans,if you consider 70 years of human life is a picosecond at the level of Allah, waiting for a few more months to meet him shouldn't be a problem, as in the case of meeting the mother... Does this make sense? I hope it does


--- Thu Mar 22, 2012 4:46 pm ---

zonker wrote:If that logic is followed, then who created the watch-maker? It leads us in circels.

In his revelation to humanity his says that he is timeless, he is the first and the last, the everlasting, the originator, the creator, the guide and so on..

http://www.islamicity.com/Mosque/99names.htm

But our point is coming to a conclusion that there is a creator rather than his attributes, isn't it?

Berrin ,

As you said in the OP, at best one can be an agnostic. There is no way to either prove or disprove the existence of God. The pendulum has swung from one extreme to the other. As I said, the Universe is unbeleivably complex. Scientists now concede that we know only 1% of all that is out there. We dont know what the other 99% is. Our Universe may not even be the only one there is; there may be others with entirely different laws of Physics governing them. Nobody knows. How do we find out what hides behind all this dark matter and dark energy? I think the scientific approach is a very good starting point. A Creator of this complexity must be highly complex itself, and I for one would find it hard to understand him/her, even if it was staring me in the face! I dont beleive such a Creator is going to care too much for what I do here on Planet Earth in, as you said, the nano-second that is going to be my lifetime here.

There are people who find solace and comfort in religion. But then there are so many different religions? Maybe they are all in quest of the truth. The elusive truth.

zonker wrote:I think the scientific approach is a very good starting point.

I think Agnosticism is a very valid position to take. Indeed, I think that many people who pay lip-service to religion are actually agnostics in practice - they aren't that sure God exists, but say they believe in God, but act as if He doesn't exist, or that they aren't sure He exists.

One of the functions of religion is giving solace to seekers of truth. Another is to regulate how one interacts with other creations of God - fellow humans and also the universe around us, the environment. There are guidelines and principles and indeed instructions that claim to be from God - regulating this aspect of existence.

One religious teaching says that the multitude of religious teachings merely reflects the historic social evolution of human societies - in the past the appropriate regulations and guidance was sent to the people of that area for that time. When societies evolved, the guidelines were updated - until the time when a universal and eternal guideline was viable and then it was sent down.

That's the theory - it is up to us to test it and then decide whether it passes the test of logic to our satisfaction or not.

Cheers,

Shafique

Regarding the video in the first post:
Evolution didn't bring life into existence. And that's not the atheist answer that's a scientific answer, atheism doesn't give answers it's just the lack of believing in the existence of a supreme being.

I completely disagree with the videos. Science is a method of understanding the universe and the world we live in, it does not just bring us technology and advancement but it also helps us understand the natural world.

Science cannot prove or disapprove a God, however based on evidence there is no information regarding a creator, people try using science as an excuse to prove there own religion when infact science has nothing to do with it.

Science does not care what about believe in!