IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Religion and Philosophy
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Reply
Old 27th November 2022, 04:58 PM   #161
IanS
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 5,691
Originally Posted by heydarian saeed View Post
No bigoted and illiterate person in the past 14 centuries or even in the present time can tell the contents of the Quran. This content is unique and said by God alone.

You are merely making a claim when you say "This content is unique and said by God alone." ... you have no evidence at all to show that any God produced the Quran ...

... you may believe that God dictated the Quran, but your religious beliefs are not evidence ...

... you may claim that you have evidence from thinking that you have found science in the Quran, but that is again merely a claim of science from you ... and all of science, completely disagrees with you and says that there is zero evidence of any modern science revealed by a God in any Quran.

All that you have here, and it seems to be all that you have in life, is a fanatical belief in religion, for which you have no independent evidence whatsoever.

Only fanatical fundamentalist Muslims like yourself believe they have found science in the Quran … nobody else anywhere in the world, including the most highly educated scientists themselves, believes or says that any of your religious fanatical science claims have any truth at all.

Last edited by IanS; 27th November 2022 at 04:59 PM.
IanS is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th November 2022, 06:13 PM   #162
JayUtah
Penultimate Amazing
 
JayUtah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: The great American West
Posts: 22,238
Originally Posted by heydarian saeed View Post
No bigoted and illiterate person in the past 14 centuries or even in the present time can tell the contents of the Quran.
Quite a number of people over the past 14 centuries have taken it upon themselves to read and interpret the Qur'an. Quite a number of them have likely been bigoted and comparatively illiterate. Similarly, quite a number of other people have fastened onto interpretations of the Qur'an -- and, to be fair, interpretations of other holy writ -- that are not strictly fair and well-informed.

There's nothing magical about the Qur'an, or about any book, that protects it from being interpreted and preached badly.

Quote:
This content is unique and said by God alone.
No, the content is quite clearly borrowed from other contemporary texts. All religious believers claim their holy books are the words of their gods. We treat your claim no differently in the absence of distinguishing evidence.

Quote:
Your advice makes sense. But it is clear from your words that; You have no study about the history of religions and the history of Arabia in the seventh century.
You seem very certain about what your critics have not studied, but you are fairly disinterested in having a discussion that would require you to demonstrate your allegedly superior understanding. So far your ploy seems to be to spew relatively unimpressive Islamic fanaticism and then accuse everyone else of being ignorant.

In fact, your dismissive approach pretty much provides the evidence for which side of Pixel42's dichotomy you advocate.

Quote:
Besides, you are not familiar with the words and texts of the holy books and the Qur'an.
Actually your critics seem to be demonstrating a better knowledge than you. All we get from you is repeated bluster and pseudoscientific pontification.

Further, your particular claims require not only a detailed understanding of the Qur'an and the religion of Islam, but also a correct understanding of science. Both are premises to an argument that the Qur'an accurately predicts modern scientific discovery.

You are scientifically illiterate.

It would be best for you not to try to call out others for their supposed lack of understanding when you admit ignorance -- and can demonstrate that ignorance easily -- of the other premise upon which your argument lies. Your particular combination of ignorance and arrogance will not convince anyone.
JayUtah is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th November 2022, 09:23 PM   #163
Pixel42
Schrödinger's cat
 
Pixel42's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Malmesbury, UK
Posts: 15,148
Originally Posted by heydarian saeed View Post
Hi
We fully accept your remarks in this message. It is logical. Basically, my Quranic studies have been based on this. No bigoted and illiterate person in the past 14 centuries or even in the present time can tell the contents of the Quran. This content is unique and said by God alone.
Your advice makes sense. But it is clear from your words that; You have no study about the history of religions and the history of Arabia in the seventh century. Besides, you are not familiar with the words and texts of the holy books and the Qur'an. We advise you to act according to the logic you say first.
Thank you
My knowledge of history and science are more than adequate to evaluate and dismiss your claims. Not having been brainwashed from birth also helps.

We have told you over and over what would be real evidence for them, and it should be easy to provide if they are true, yet you continue to ignore us. Can you, or can you not, use the Qu'ran to predict a future scientific discovery? If you cannot then we are done here.
__________________
"If you trust in yourself ... and believe in your dreams ... and follow your star ... you'll still get beaten by people who spent their time working hard and learning things" - Terry Pratchett
Pixel42 is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th November 2022, 10:08 PM   #164
Skeptic General
Student
 
Join Date: Aug 2022
Posts: 42
What I said to Emre's thread applies to this one.

"Maurice Bucaille. The man pushed this into the muslim religion, with the Saudi funding.
You can not find infirmation about his funeral or burial site on the internet. If you do, please let me know. (Emre/... should know ?)
There are actually muslim scholars that exposed his plays with Quranic words and strongly rejected him. But to this day their voices are stifled by proponents of this deception."

Last edited by Skeptic General; 27th November 2022 at 10:11 PM.
Skeptic General is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th November 2022, 03:01 AM   #165
heydarian saeed
Graduate Poster
 
heydarian saeed's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2021
Location: Iran-Kashan
Posts: 1,155
It is said in Surah 7, verse 29 that; (Only the last three words of this verse) Just as I created the universe from nothingness (singularity) and opened it. I will return you as before. And this is very easy for me. Tell me which person or all people in the history of mankind said such a thing. And he has said this very huge and difficult claim. This claim must have been made by a being who dominates the entire universe.
His knowledge and power must dominate the entire universe from the beginning of creation to the end. Time does not surround him. And it is outside of time and universe. Only God has these qualities. It is foolish to say that an illiterate bigot said these words 14 centuries ago. And it is written in the book of the Qur'an. No way it can. No human being, not even all human beings throughout history, can ever say such words. This is a huge claim outside the scope of the universe and time. Only God alone can say. I advise you to think with the truth and reality. Do not be prejudiced.
Thanks
heydarian saeed is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th November 2022, 03:27 AM   #166
steenkh
Philosopher
 
steenkh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Denmark
Posts: 6,651
Originally Posted by heydarian saeed View Post
It is said in Surah 7, verse 29 that; (Only the last three words of this verse) Just as I created the universe from nothingness (singularity) and opened it.
Well, the Bible which is older than the Qur’an, says the same thing, and that is also written by humans. So it is not a very difficult thing to claim.

It is quite another thing to prove that there is a god who could have inspired people to such writings, because people have very good imaginations.

Tell us, who created your god? If you think that nobody created him, then tell us how that can be so, and if you think that only god could not be created, then tell us why the universe needs a creator.
__________________
Steen

--
Jack of all trades - master of none!
steenkh is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th November 2022, 03:36 AM   #167
heydarian saeed
Graduate Poster
 
heydarian saeed's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2021
Location: Iran-Kashan
Posts: 1,155
Originally Posted by Pixel42 View Post
My knowledge of history and science are more than adequate to evaluate and dismiss your claims. Not having been brainwashed from birth also helps.

We have told you over and over what would be real evidence for them, and it should be easy to provide if they are true, yet you continue to ignore us. Can you, or can you not, use the Qu'ran to predict a future scientific discovery? If you cannot then we are done here.
Please read message 165. This is also an example of the prediction of modern science in the Qur'an. I have mentioned several examples before. You are biased and unfortunately ignore. Of course, your knowledge is also very little in understanding the Qur'anic content and the history of religions. I have no advice for you.
heydarian saeed is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th November 2022, 03:41 AM   #168
Pixel42
Schrödinger's cat
 
Pixel42's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Malmesbury, UK
Posts: 15,148
Originally Posted by heydarian saeed View Post
It is said in Surah 7, verse 29 that; (Only the last three words of this verse) Just as I created the universe from nothingness (singularity) and opened it. I will return you as before. And this is very easy for me. Tell me which person or all people in the history of mankind said such a thing. And he has said this very huge and difficult claim. This claim must have been made by a being who dominates the entire universe.
His knowledge and power must dominate the entire universe from the beginning of creation to the end. Time does not surround him. And it is outside of time and universe. Only God has these qualities. It is foolish to say that an illiterate bigot said these words 14 centuries ago. And it is written in the book of the Qur'an. No way it can. No human being, not even all human beings throughout history, can ever say such words. This is a huge claim outside the scope of the universe and time. Only God alone can say. I advise you to think with the truth and reality. Do not be prejudiced.
Thanks
More preaching? Why? You know it cuts no ice with us.

Originally Posted by heydarian saeed View Post
Please read message 165. This is also an example of the prediction of modern science in the Qur'an. I have mentioned several examples before. You are biased and unfortunately ignore. Of course, your knowledge is also very little in understanding the Qur'anic content and the history of religions. I have no advice for you.
Message 165 contains no predictions of scientific discoveries at all, let alone ones yet to be made. A claim to have made the universe from nothingness is not a description of the Big Bang, however much you insist it is. It certainly isn't a description of a scientific discovery which has not yet been made.

You clearly cannot do what would be simple to do if your claims were true. Your claims are therefore dismissed.
__________________
"If you trust in yourself ... and believe in your dreams ... and follow your star ... you'll still get beaten by people who spent their time working hard and learning things" - Terry Pratchett

Last edited by Pixel42; 28th November 2022 at 03:59 AM.
Pixel42 is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th November 2022, 07:36 AM   #169
JayUtah
Penultimate Amazing
 
JayUtah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: The great American West
Posts: 22,238
Originally Posted by heydarian saeed View Post
Just as I created the universe from nothingness (singularity)...
A singularity is not "nothingness." Nor would you have thought to make that comparison (as wrong as it is) unless someone had first given you the idea of a singularity. As I mentioned either in this thread or in the other Islam-as-science thread, you're simply reading (and misunderstanding) modern science and then trying to take credit for it after the fact by comically shoehorning your scripture into what you think science says.

Quote:
Tell me which person or all people in the history of mankind said such a thing.
Literally every prior religion makes those claims about its god(s) and the creation of the universe. You tell us we must be well versed in history -- especially the history of religions -- in order to appreciate your argument. It seems all you know is one specific slice of fundamentalist Islam. You're not the teacher here.

Quote:
And he has said this very huge and difficult claim. This claim must have been made by a being who dominates the entire universe.
It's being made by a person about a deity. Further, you provide no evidence either for the existence of the deity or for the truthfulness of the claim. This is simply you preaching your religion. It's not a proof.

Quote:
It is foolish to say that an illiterate bigot said these words 14 centuries ago.
An illiterate bigot can invent a god as well as the next man, and ascribe to him -- without evidence -- all manner of magical power. You're literally unable to separate the claim from proof of the claim. If you start the discussion by saying the Qur'an must be true because it makes profound claims, then you're not really intellectually prepared to discuss your religion with those who aren't members of it.
JayUtah is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th November 2022, 07:57 AM   #170
IanS
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 5,691
Originally Posted by heydarian saeed View Post
It is said in Surah 7, verse 29 that; (Only the last three words of this verse) Just as I created the universe from nothingness (singularity) and opened it. I will return you as before. And this is very easy for me. Tell me which person or all people in the history of mankind said such a thing. And he has said this very huge and difficult claim. This claim must have been made by a being who dominates the entire universe.

Why must any such sentence have been made only by "a being who dominates the entire universe" - you have to be astonishingly naive or mentally defective to believe that!

Anyone could write a sentence like that. Any 12 year old schoolboy could write it!

What you have there is merely a silly childish claim from someone in the 7th century who said (without any evidence or any modern education) that someone had told him that a God had once said he had created this universe from "nothingness" ... anyone can say that! ...

... also I bet the word "singularity" which you decided to include does NOT appear in any original 7th century version of the Quran. And more than that ; no current version of the Big Bang model includes any "singularity" ... the state of a singularity is never reached, and that is NOT needed or included in any of the current big bang descriptions ...

... and yet more - what do you think "Nothing" actually is? What sort of thing do you think "No Thing" is?? ... as far as science can tell, there is no such state as truly "nothing"! ... that is - as far as current quantum field analysis of the big bang is concerned, it seems inescapable that the universe must always exist in some form or other ... e.g., 13.8 billion years ago it existed as a set of quantum fluctuations in an array of different fundamental/primordial energy fields which act as opposing forces to one-another and which on average cancel each other out completely (and actually there is a fairly simple mathematical proof of that, which has been published many times over more than 40 years now!) ... I have in fact explained all of that in some detail on this forum several times, but I am not going to waste even more time in this thread explaining to someone like you who simply refuses to understand or study the published science (there are in fact several papers from Alex Vilenkin and others, showing that you may not even need any initial vacuum-state energy, ie no “matter” at all, and you still inevitably get a vast array quantum fluctuations appearing, ie even when you seem to have no obvious precursor state at all!).

What you are doing here is simply to claim that because current science does not give an absolute full universally agreed explanation of exactly how the Big Bang occurred (though we have a 90% to 99% understanding/explanation of it already), you want to insert God into that tiny remaining gap in our knowledge. That's the same old idiotic God-of-the-Gaps argument that theists have been using for the last 2000+ years, and where every time science makes a new discovery and gives a new explanation its found that the answer has no such God there at all! … science has filled literally millions of such gaps, and so far the score is x-million gaps filled with entiely natural processes of chemistry, biology & physics, and zero gaps ever filled with an God!

Last edited by IanS; 28th November 2022 at 08:00 AM.
IanS is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th November 2022, 07:57 AM   #171
JayUtah
Penultimate Amazing
 
JayUtah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: The great American West
Posts: 22,238
Originally Posted by heydarian saeed View Post
Please read message 165. This is also an example of the prediction of modern science in the Qur'an.
First, you were asked to provide information from the Qur'an that would inform future scientific discovery -- the future from today, not the future from when the Qur'an was written. You continue either being unable to understand the challenge or being unable to meet it. Can you name a passage from the Qur'an that will predict a correct discovery science hasn't yet made?

Your post 165 is a perfect example of post hoc rationalization, not prediction. From modern science you learn the concept of the Big Bang: the eruption of the universe from a singularity. You weren't taught this by the Qur'an. The people who theorized the Big Bang didn't get the idea from the Qur'an. (They were, in fact, Christians.) This idea, as fully developed as we have it now, comes from modern physics textbooks. That's where you learned it; that's where the people who told it to you learned it.

With this information in mind -- and not until then -- you've gone back to the creation claims in the Qur'an and tried to interpret them to make them fit modern knowledge. In doing so, you've had to stretch your interpretations quite a bit to make them seem like they described complex modern subjects. The problem is that you've done so while already knowing what modern science has said.

This logical fallacy has a colloquial name in English: The Texas Sharpshooter's fallacy. More formally it is known as post hoc reasoning, where "post hoc" is Latin meaning "after the fact." The Texas Sharpshooter fallacy is a humorous parable that describes the error in reasoning. Imagine a man with a rifle who wants to prove he's an excellent marksman. He shoots his rifle at a blank wall. Then after he has fired, he walks up to the wall and draws targets on the wall around the bullet holes he has just made. The he tells everyone he is such a great marksman because he has hit all the targets. This is the same fallacy your argument uses to say the Qur'an predicted scientific outcomes.

Quote:
You are biased and unfortunately ignore.
Your argument is not being rejected because your critics are biased. Your argument is not being ignored. Instead your critics are pointing out that your argument fails basic logic. You really have no idea what it means to prove something with evidence.

Quote:
Of course, your knowledge is also very little in understanding the Qur'anic content and the history of religions. I have no advice for you.
No, you've provided no evidence that you are better educated in the history of religion or in the content of the Qur'an. You seem to be rather ignorant of religions besides your own. And your own exegesis of the Qur'an suggests you are merely steeped in one particular interpretational tradition to the exclusion of all others.

If all you're going to do in every post is call your critics ignorant, then you won't enjoy a very cordial reception.
JayUtah is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th November 2022, 10:21 AM   #172
IanS
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 5,691
Originally Posted by heydarian saeed View Post
Please read message 165. This is also an example of the prediction of modern science in the Qur'an. I have mentioned several examples before. You are biased and unfortunately ignore. Of course, your knowledge is also very little in understanding the Qur'anic content and the history of religions. I have no advice for you.

And by the way regarding the above piece of arrogant insistent nonsense of you criticising anyone here for not "understanding" the Quran - everyone here knows that the Quran is claiming the existence of an almighty supernatural creator God who was claimed to have been revealed to someone called Mohamed in the 7th century ; and that is all anyone needs to know in order to conclude that modern science shows how such ancient uneducated God beliefs are wrong and are in fact nothing more than exactly the same religious mythical superstitions which all religions had preached since thousands of years before the Quran and still preached and ignorantly believed thousands of years after the Quran.

The unarguable fact is that every known copy of the Quran was certainly written by mere human men of the time (about 650AD in the case of the Quran) … there is no copy ever written by a God … you do not have, and nobody has ever had, any such copy written by any God.

Your book of ancient uneducated religious faith, the Quran, is just like all the other much earlier books of almost identical religious claims, e.g. the Old Testament bible and the New Testament version of that bible … it's also just like all the even earlier writing about even earlier religions with the Gods of Egypt and gods that controlled the seas and others that controlled crops etc. … we do not need to read or study those writings to know that their claims of miracles and supernatural heavenly creatures are not merely wrong (as if a simple mistake from some faulty evidence/data), but simply the product of what at that time was worldwide monumental ignorance by today's standards …

… and when I say "education of today's standard” we are talking about what educated people have discovered through sheer hard work and dedication to finding the actual truth about the world around us. Today, now in our time, we call that “science”, but really it is just education. The reason that you continue to believe 2000 year-old ignorant superstitions and tales of miracles and the supernatural, is that, frankly, you are not properly or sufficiently educated to realise that what you have been brought-up (raised by your family and their churches/mosques) to believe, is something that no educated & honest objective person could possibly believe as credible at all now in the 21st century (and by educated, I repeat that I mean educated in current-day scientific knowledge … ie as opposed to education in anything else, such as for example Music or Economics or Politics, or anything like that, which is not at all actually an “Education” in the same sense that is provided by science – only scientific education can teach you why and how the world around us works and how all of that can be explained with evidence so vast and irrefutable that to deny it is actually an admission of deliberate and lazy wilful ignorance … which is exactly what you are showing here in every post that you make … you are in dire need of a proper education in objectivity and honesty ... though one small thing in your favour - you are not alone ; almsot all religious fanatics do exactly the same).

Last edited by IanS; 28th November 2022 at 10:25 AM.
IanS is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th November 2022, 11:07 AM   #173
heydarian saeed
Graduate Poster
 
heydarian saeed's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2021
Location: Iran-Kashan
Posts: 1,155
Originally Posted by steenkh View Post
Well, the Bible which is older than the Qur’an, says the same thing, and that is also written by humans. So it is not a very difficult thing to claim.

It is quite another thing to prove that there is a god who could have inspired people to such writings, because people have very good imaginations.

Tell us, who created your god? If you think that nobody created him, then tell us how that can be so, and if you think that only god could not be created, then tell us why the universe needs a creator.
Hi
Dear philosopher, the proof of God is not within the scope of the tasks of science. Rather, it is the duty of philosophy and logic. In the first part of this topic, I have given 6 strong philosophical arguments to prove God. My philosophical approach and view is the originality of existence. Because the principle that is always eternal is "existence". Shapes, colors, sizes and volumes and everything that makes the appearance of things are always changing. and become What remains constant is the existence of things. And the origin of existence is God. The essence of existence is one God. You can find and read my full explanation on the proof of God's existence in the first thread.
Good luck
heydarian saeed is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th November 2022, 11:23 AM   #174
heydarian saeed
Graduate Poster
 
heydarian saeed's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2021
Location: Iran-Kashan
Posts: 1,155
Dear fellow members, be careful; My reply messages to some messages will reply to many of you. I do not wish to repeat replies to your messages.
heydarian saeed is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th November 2022, 11:32 AM   #175
JayUtah
Penultimate Amazing
 
JayUtah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: The great American West
Posts: 22,238
Originally Posted by heydarian saeed View Post
Dear philosopher, the proof of God is not within the scope of the tasks of science.
You admit you're not a scientist. And you've proved quite thoroughly that your understanding of science is fundamentally flawed. It is therefore not within your expertise to declare what is or is not the proper scope of science.

Quote:
Rather, it is the duty of philosophy and logic.
Rather, lacking any sort of helpful method of proving the existence of your god to scientists -- such that your subsequent claims that what people claiming to be prophets of that god can offer as predictions of scientific fact will convince scientists -- you've cobbled up a pseudo-philosophical argument that you insist we must take seriously.

As to logic, you've committed enough common logical fallacies to convince us we should by no means trust your understanding of it.

Quote:
In the first part of this topic, I have given 6 strong philosophical arguments to prove God.
And there followed 50 pages of rebuttals showing how your "philosophy" is unconvincing. We're not going to repeat that discussion here in the second part of the thread.

Quote:
My philosophical approach and view is the originality of existence. Because the principle that is always eternal is "existence". Shapes, colors, sizes and volumes and everything that makes the appearance of things are always changing. and become What remains constant is the existence of things. And the origin of existence is God. The essence of existence is one God. You can find and read my full explanation on the proof of God's existence in the first thread.
Pseudo-philosophical gobbledy-gook. This is not science. It is not philosophy. It is not logic. It's not even theology. It's just a salad of profound-sounding words that signify nothing we can get a toehold on.

Quote:
Good luck
We certainly need it. In the meantime, some specific rebuttals have been made to your specific posts in this thread. Please respond to them with something more substantial than vague insults suggesting all your critics are ignorant compared to you.
JayUtah is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th November 2022, 11:59 AM   #176
heydarian saeed
Graduate Poster
 
heydarian saeed's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2021
Location: Iran-Kashan
Posts: 1,155
Originally Posted by JayUtah View Post
A singularity is not "nothingness." Nor would you have thought to make that comparison (as wrong as it is) unless someone had first given you the idea of a singularity. As I mentioned either in this thread or in the other Islam-as-science thread, you're simply reading (and misunderstanding) modern science and then trying to take credit for it after the fact by comically shoehorning your scripture into what you think science says.



Literally every prior religion makes those claims about its god(s) and the creation of the universe. You tell us we must be well versed in history -- especially the history of religions -- in order to appreciate your argument. It seems all you know is one specific slice of fundamentalist Islam. You're not the teacher here.



It's being made by a person about a deity. Further, you provide no evidence either for the existence of the deity or for the truthfulness of the claim. This is simply you preaching your religion. It's not a proof.



An illiterate bigot can invent a god as well as the next man, and ascribe to him -- without evidence -- all manner of magical power. You're literally unable to separate the claim from proof of the claim. If you start the discussion by saying the Qur'an must be true because it makes profound claims, then you're not really intellectually prepared to discuss your religion with those who aren't members of it.

Hello
no I do not agree with your thinking and words. The Qur'anic contents are the same reality and truth. The problem of you and most of the fellow members in this thread are two main things; 1. Despite the strong and definite proof of God's existence, you still do not believe in God. Because you are biased. 2. You will not believe that the contents of modern science were told in the Quran in the 7th century. And it has been discovered in the last two centuries. Even the end of the universe has only been theorized by scientists. But he has stated a firm rule in the Quran. And its speaker is only God.
I have no other advice for you. You have the right to choose the content. There is no obligation.
heydarian saeed is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th November 2022, 01:17 PM   #177
Pixel42
Schrödinger's cat
 
Pixel42's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Malmesbury, UK
Posts: 15,148
The problem for you, and only you, in this thread heydarian is that despite the complete absence of evidence, let alone proof, of your superstitious claims you still persist in believing them. Because you are brainwashed.
__________________
"If you trust in yourself ... and believe in your dreams ... and follow your star ... you'll still get beaten by people who spent their time working hard and learning things" - Terry Pratchett
Pixel42 is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th November 2022, 01:42 PM   #178
JayUtah
Penultimate Amazing
 
JayUtah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: The great American West
Posts: 22,238
Originally Posted by heydarian saeed View Post
no I do not agree with your thinking and words.
I assumed you would disagree. However, you don't explain what's wrong with them, so there can be no intellectual progress until you increase your effort.

Quote:
The Qur'anic contents are the same reality and truth.
I understand that you believe the Qur'an to contain true statements of divine origin. However, when trying to convince people who do not share that belief, you cannot use the purported truth of the Qur'an as a premise to an argument and expect people to accept it. You claim your arguments are based on sound logic. But proceeding from an unproven premise is an elementary error in logic. Your arguments are therefore not logically sound.

Quote:
The problem of you and most of the fellow members in this thread are two main things; 1. Despite the strong and definite proof of God's existence, you still do not believe in God.
Correct, I do not believe in your god or any other god. That is because I have not been shown convincing evidence for the existence of any.

You suggest above that you have provided "philosophical" proofs. I assume those are the ones you now attempt to characterize as "strong and definite." The restatement or summary of that proof that you gave in this thread is neither strong nor definite. It's little more than empty religious rhetoric that goes no further than expressions of belief. You refer back to the proofs you provided in the first part of this thread. You were shown many reasons why those proofs were unconvincing, and you largely did not engage with those reasons.

Therefore my disbelief in your god is not a problem. It is the proper conclusion given the course of this conversation.

Quote:
Because you are biased.
No. My disbelief in your god is solely due to the lack of convincing evidence. When you are given the reasons why your proofs fail to convince people, and you ignore those reasons, it is insulting to continue claiming that people remain unconvinced because of their bias. They remain unconvinced because of your unwillingness to rehabilitate your arguments in the face of sound refutations.

Quote:
2. You will not believe that the contents of modern science were told in the Quran in the 7th century.
That is correct. And I have explained the reasons why I do not believe that. You seem either unwilling or unable to address those reasons, so there can be no further intellectual discussion until you change your approach. Again, this is not my problem.

Quote:
And it has been discovered in the last two centuries.
Yes, that's the gist of the refutation. Everything you claim was foretold in the Qur'an as science has only been identified in the Qur'an after it was discovered by scientists, and then only by strained interpretations that most other Koranic1 scholars dismiss. A minority of Muslims are clearly using a post hoc method of revisionism to pretend these things were foretold. I have explained at length how your religion and many others have tried to do the same thing with their scriptures. I have also explained why that method is logically unsound.

Quote:
Even the end of the universe has only been theorized by scientists.
As has the beginning. These are interesting thought experiments, but they are difficult to test today. Fortunately, you claim that knowledge discovered in the interim -- in the so-called rational period of science (which has not concluded) -- was also foretold in the Qur'an. Unfortunately, all the examples you've presented are clearly post hoc revision and therefore have no evidentiary value. So please favor us with an item of interim science that we can reasonably expect to discover in our lifetime, which has not yet been discovered, but which can be testably and reliably inferred today from the Qur'an, before it is discovered.

Quote:
But he has stated a firm rule in the Quran. And its speaker is only God.
Yes, the Qur'an -- and many other religious texts -- say what they think is going to happen at the end of the world. And all those other books claim the same divine authority. Unfortunately the end of the universe doesn't satisfy our need for a testable example.

Quote:
I have no other advice for you. You have the right to choose the content. There is no obligation.
Yes, you clearly have little to say beyond expressions of your faith and disdain for what you insist is your critics' ignorance. There is little left to do but mock your inability to think about what your critics say.

____________________
1 I use the noun "Qu'ran" as the most widely acceptable transliteration. I use the adjective "Koranic" because the word is an Anglicization in grammatical form, and therefore benefits from a more Anglic root.
JayUtah is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th November 2022, 02:05 PM   #179
JayUtah
Penultimate Amazing
 
JayUtah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: The great American West
Posts: 22,238
Originally Posted by Pixel42 View Post
Because you are brainwashed.
As harsh as it may sound, I don't find it possible to unironically say
Originally Posted by heydarian saeed View Post
And he has said this very huge and difficult claim. This claim must have been made by a being who dominates the entire universe.
* * *
And it is written in the book of the Qur'an. No way it can. No human being, not even all human beings throughout history, can ever say such words. This is a huge claim outside the scope of the universe and time. Only God alone can say.
without having only a tenuous working connection to an objective reality.
JayUtah is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th November 2022, 02:35 PM   #180
Skeptic General
Student
 
Join Date: Aug 2022
Posts: 42
Originally Posted by Pixel42 View Post
The problem for you, and only you, in this thread heydarian is that despite the complete absence of evidence, let alone proof, of your superstitious claims you still persist in believing them. Because you are brainwashed.
The saddest thing in all this is not that he's brainwashed. These material that they try here on critical thinkers for their own gratification all came from Maurice Bucaille and have been being pumped in the entire Islamic world with a lot of funding behind it. Second and third generation of muslims are being brought up with these fabrications. Muslim schools in the West actually with tax prayers money are teaching these fabrications.

I admire the patience of the thinkers here, despite the insults and condescending attitude this guy(s) has been dishing out along with his superstitions and ignorance, they're seriously dissecting his claims. I'm glad this doesn't stop despite his ignoring his repeated defeat. You never know to whom he'd show these debates if he weren't properly and decisively answered..

Last edited by Skeptic General; 28th November 2022 at 02:36 PM.
Skeptic General is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th November 2022, 02:44 PM   #181
Skeptic General
Student
 
Join Date: Aug 2022
Posts: 42
Originally Posted by JayUtah View Post
No. My disbelief in your god is solely due to the lack of convincing evidence. When you are given the reasons why your proofs fail to convince people, and you ignore those reasons, it is insulting to continue claiming that people remain unconvinced because of their bias. They remain unconvinced because of your unwillingness to rehabilitate your arguments in the face of sound refutations.
But he won't care because Quran does the same thing. So"Allah can't be rude or wrong".
Skeptic General is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th November 2022, 02:52 PM   #182
IanS
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 5,691
Originally Posted by heydarian saeed View Post
Hi
Dear philosopher, the proof of God is not within the scope of the tasks of science. Rather, it is the duty of philosophy and logic.


The essence of existence is one God. You can find and read my full explanation on the proof of God's existence in the first thread.
Good luck

First of all it is YOU who has tried to "prove" God by coming here and spending over 1000 posts insisting that you have found hundreds of descriptions of science in the Quran! You are the person here who has been claiming a proof by science!!

Secondly, philosophy and what is called "logic in philosophy" are no longer the way that educated societies decide what is likely to be true vs what's most likely untrue about anything in this world (on Earth or anywhere throughout the entire universe) ... the way we do that now is through science ...

... for example, the law courts no longer call philosophers, or indeed any priests or Imam's or any other religious preachers as Expert Witnesses to guide them ... they did once call such people hundreds of years ago in an age of ignorance and superstition, but not any more ...

... against that, they do call scientists wherever they possibly can to provide expert explanation and guidance to the court ... and they do rely on scientific testing of all claimed evidence wherever possible ... the courts use that constantly now in every possible case, e.g. DNA evidence, blood typing, ballistic evidence, evidence from film and recordings ... the entire crime scene is usually tested for hundreds of different types scientific evidence ... that's essential because without that the lawyers can't make a properly convincing case and the jury can't reach the correct decision ... philosophy and so-called "philosophical logic" have no role in any of that any more, because those methods are very VERY unreliable and they cannot sustain genuine logical evidence-based testing in the face of science.

You may wish to claim that you have some sort of philosophical argument for why you should believe that your invisible miraculous God exists, but that is completely useless if it disagrees with what we have truly discovered, tested and confirmed by science … and that is certainly the case here where science completely rules out the existence of any such God (see footnote on that issue)


Footnote – when modern science first began it's slow initial steps from the early 1600's through Galileo & then Newton and then many others up to and past Darwin in the 1850's, no scientists (or “natural philosophers” as many early scientists were first called), were trying to disprove the existence of God/Allah nor trying to prove that the holy books such as the bible and the quran were seriously wrong. But what has happened is that the more that science has discovered, and the more that we can now accurately explain, the more it has become clear that there is zero evidence for God or any truth in the holy books for anything at all. In fact the more it's become blindingly obvious that all such religious beliefs and all such holy miracle claims are nothing more than ignorant fiction from a far distant past of biblical times when everyone was drowning in a sea of superstitious ignorance (where they also had all sorts of other nutty crazy beliefs as well as the crazy religious stuff).
IanS is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th November 2022, 03:11 PM   #183
steenkh
Philosopher
 
steenkh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Denmark
Posts: 6,651
Originally Posted by heydarian saeed View Post
Shapes, colors, sizes and volumes and everything that makes the appearance of things are always changing. and become What remains constant is the existence of things. And the origin of existence is God. The essence of existence is one God.
This works just as well:
The origin of existence is the universe, the essence of existence is the universe. No god needed.

Please also note that it is not based on science, but on logic and philosophy.
__________________
Steen

--
Jack of all trades - master of none!
steenkh is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 29th November 2022, 03:22 AM   #184
IanS
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 5,691
Originally Posted by heydarian saeed View Post
Hello
no I do not agree with your thinking and words. The Qur'anic contents are the same reality and truth. The problem of you and most of the fellow members in this thread are two main things; 1. Despite the strong and definite proof of God's existence, you still do not believe in God. Because you are biased.

2. You will not believe that the contents of modern science were told in the Quran in the 7th century. And it has been discovered in the last two centuries. Even the end of the universe has only been theorized by scientists. But he has stated a firm rule in the Quran. And its speaker is only God.
I have no other advice for you. You have the right to choose the content. There is no obligation.

You do not have any proof of God's existence. You do not even have any evidence of Gods existence ... you do not even have the weakest most minute tiny bit of anything that even might be a sort-of "evidence"!

I've told you this a hundred times already, and it's undeniable - if there really was any genuine evidence of God, then scientists all over the world would be concentrating on that and publishing literally hundreds of thousands of papers every year describing, investigating and testing that evidence ... it would be so important that it would occupy all of science research, it would be virtually the only thing that scientists studied and published ...

... but as you very well know, the truth is that there are NO such papers with any real scientists publishing any "proof" of God or any "evidence" of God anywhere at all ... NONE!

So, far from claiming there is proof for God ... there is most definitely zero evidence of any kind. And over the last 150 years or so, science has studied in vast depth with astonishing accuracy almost everything that anyone could even imagine about everything on Earth and everything in the entire Universe, and still not even the most microscopically small hint of any evidence for any God. That is an undeniable fact, and you actually know that, because I have asked you over 100 times now and you been completely unable to produce even one genuine research appear claiming to show proof that God spoke to Mohamed in the 7th century.

Science has studied more things about this universe than you can even imagine ... you only know about less than 0.000001% of what science has studied in the most astounding depth ... and still there is zero sign of any God. Every single study and every single discovery, has shown that God is not the answer, that God is not there, and that the answer is "proved" to be simply a natural process in chemistry, physics &/or biology ... every one of the the many millions of things that science has studied has always turned out to be explained by those natural processes, with no God in any part of it.

That's what we have discovered through modern science. We did not always know that. In the days of Mohamed, nobody knew any of that science. Everyone believed as you do that a God must have been the answer to all those things. But now science has investigated all those things, and none of them have any God anywhere as any part of them! None! No God in any of what people like you used to believe thousands of years ago.

Last edited by IanS; 29th November 2022 at 05:06 AM.
IanS is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 29th November 2022, 06:05 AM   #185
IanS
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 5,691
Originally Posted by heydarian saeed View Post
Hello
no I do not agree with your thinking and words. The Qur'anic contents are the same reality and truth. The problem of you and most of the fellow members in this thread are two main things; 1. Despite the strong and definite proof of God's existence, you still do not believe in God. Because you are biased. 2. You will not believe that the contents of modern science were told in the Quran in the 7th century. And it has been discovered in the last two centuries. Even the end of the universe has only been theorized by scientists. But he has stated a firm rule in the Quran. And its speaker is only God.
I have no other advice for you. You have the right to choose the content. There is no obligation.

Heydarian, here is something else ... this is something that atheists very often point out to theists, but I don't know if anyone here has actually mentioned this to you before/here, and it's really obvious - you are living in a Muslim country where control of everything is actually exercised by a religious government according to their beliefs in the Quran ...

... I don't know if you were born there (in Iran) but if you had been born in a different country, such as England, or America or Japan or anywhere, then you almost certainly would not believe in the God of Islam or believe that the stories in the Quran were true ... your beliefs about religion and God are very strongly determined by the prevailing beliefs of the nation in which you were raised and where your family have also been raised and indoctrinated with those same beliefs ...

... the other factor which influences peoples beliefs is of course education, and that is the factor that I have always tried to present to you and make you aware of ... but it's a fact that people who believe in any of the major religions such as Christianity, Islam, Hinduism etc., almost always have those beliefs because the beliefs are the main religion believed in the country where they live ... people simply adopt the beliefs that are being so strongly insisted upon in their particular country/region/part-of-the-world.

You are almost certainly doing exactly that. That is - the only reason why you believe in Islam and the Quran, is because you have been raised in a country amongst people who have always insisted that children must be told that Islam and the Quran have to be obeyed and believed ... if you had been born in Italy than you would probably have become a Catholic Christian ... if you had been born in England then you would have been a Christian or else as we find with todays BBC news that less than half of the people in England now describe themselves as Christian (https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-63792408), then you would probably regard yourself as an agnostic or an atheist (and not Islamic or religious at all!).
IanS is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 29th November 2022, 06:27 AM   #186
heydarian saeed
Graduate Poster
 
heydarian saeed's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2021
Location: Iran-Kashan
Posts: 1,155
Originally Posted by steenkh View Post
This works just as well:
The origin of existence is the universe, the essence of existence is the universe. No god needed.

Please also note that it is not based on science, but on logic and philosophy.
Hello, dear philosopher
Your conclusion needs to be completed. The attitude of existential philosophy is that; Existence itself is not dependent on essence. That is, it cannot be independent. The creator wants. The same question is repeated from Hawking: Who created the single because every existence in the universe needs a creator. There is only one existence, which is the origin of existence and its creator, which protects its own essence.
He is the only God. In the one and only God, the sequence or circumvention ends. There is no question here.
I need to say one more thing; Do not be too sensitive for the name of God. Whatever name you want for the origin and creator of the universe. In Islam, it is "God".
Hoping to meet the dear philosopher
heydarian saeed is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 29th November 2022, 07:31 AM   #187
JayUtah
Penultimate Amazing
 
JayUtah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: The great American West
Posts: 22,238
Originally Posted by heydarian saeed View Post
The same question is repeated from Hawking: Who created the single because every existence in the universe needs a creator.
No. That is absolutely not what Hawking meant. He asked the question rhetorically in order to demonstrate various esoteric problems with the Big Bang theory as then formulated. His solution was not to propose a creator god, but to reformulate the theory so that expansion made more sense.

You really don't understand science.
JayUtah is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 29th November 2022, 07:46 AM   #188
Pixel42
Schrödinger's cat
 
Pixel42's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Malmesbury, UK
Posts: 15,148
Originally Posted by heydarian saeed View Post
Hello, dear philosopher
Your conclusion needs to be completed. The attitude of existential philosophy is that; Existence itself is not dependent on essence. That is, it cannot be independent. The creator wants. The same question is repeated from Hawking: Who created the single because every existence in the universe needs a creator. There is only one existence, which is the origin of existence and its creator, which protects its own essence.
He is the only God. In the one and only God, the sequence or circumvention ends. There is no question here.
I need to say one more thing; Do not be too sensitive for the name of God. Whatever name you want for the origin and creator of the universe. In Islam, it is "God".
Hoping to meet the dear philosopher
This is just the First Cause argument again, the problems with which have been explained to you more than once. Simply restating it as fact, as if those problems and counterarguments did not exist, will get you nowhere.

Once again: there is no point in returning to this thread if all you are going to do is repeat the same worthless arguments which have been rejected - for good reasons, which have been explained to you at length - every previous time you made them.
__________________
"If you trust in yourself ... and believe in your dreams ... and follow your star ... you'll still get beaten by people who spent their time working hard and learning things" - Terry Pratchett
Pixel42 is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 29th November 2022, 08:24 AM   #189
Skeptic General
Student
 
Join Date: Aug 2022
Posts: 42
Originally Posted by heydarian saeed View Post
I need to say one more thing; Do not be too sensitive for the name of God. Whatever name you want for the origin and creator of the universe. In Islam, it is "God".
You're going through faith crisis.
No strong muslim would reduce/limit Islam's god Allah to the office of a creator, even for a moment. It's very easy to argue against Allah's descriptions, attributes, attitudes; show contradictions via Quran and it's first and foremost interpreter Hadith.
You're closing that door and telling others to ignore it.
You're here only to convince yourself to stay in faith. And you think the only stronghold left to defend is the office of a creator.

Last edited by Skeptic General; 29th November 2022 at 09:22 AM.
Skeptic General is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 29th November 2022, 10:03 AM   #190
steenkh
Philosopher
 
steenkh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Denmark
Posts: 6,651
Originally Posted by heydarian saeed View Post
Existence itself is not dependent on essence.
What is essence? Can you prove that it exists?

Quote:
Who created the single because every existence in the universe needs a creator.
God in your view does not seem to need a creator. Why should the universe need one?
__________________
Steen

--
Jack of all trades - master of none!
steenkh is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 29th November 2022, 10:53 AM   #191
DetectedMotion
Thinker
 
Join Date: Jan 2018
Posts: 199
Originally Posted by heydarian saeed View Post
He is the only God. In the one and only God, the sequence or circumvention ends. There is no question here.
I need to say one more thing; Do not be too sensitive for the name of God. Whatever name you want for the origin and creator of the universe. In Islam, it is "God".
Hoping to meet the dear philosopher
Who is the narrator in the Quran? And why do you Worship the "Moon God" Lah? Doesn't AL mean God in Arabic? So Who is Lah?
DetectedMotion is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 29th November 2022, 12:01 PM   #192
heydarian saeed
Graduate Poster
 
heydarian saeed's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2021
Location: Iran-Kashan
Posts: 1,155
Hello, dear philosopher steenkh
I am very pleased to have interacted with you at a turning point. "Existence" flows throughout the world. and includes all objects. In fact, we have reached the "single" point in science in philosophy. The universe started from this point. A point that is "nothing"! We are with you so far. And we completely agree. But my discussion in this topic is "Beyond the Universe". Now I have no argument to prove God with you. Just listen to me. Thank you
Science has reached "single"
He does not know beyond that and in fact he has no duty to know. It is enough for science to reach this point. But philosophy also examines the universe. Science has no say here. And if he protests, it is inappropriate. Because it is the scope of philosophy. Philosophy looks at the universe from a general perspective.
And it proves with logic that the universe is not self-contained. That is, it cannot sustain itself independently. This is the attitude of philosophy. Therefore, an independent existence must keep the universe stable. This logical and simple attitude is the proof of "One God" by philosophy. Of course, "Philosophy of And it proves with logic that the universe is not self-contained. That is, it cannot sustain itself independently. This is the attitude of philosophy. Therefore, an independent existence must keep the universe stable. This logical and simple attitude is the proof of "One God" by philosophy. Of course, "Philosophy of Existence originality" and we follow this attitude.
I hope that the answer to many doubts and doubts between "scientists of science" and "unoriginal philosophers of existence" and "Philosophy of Existence originality" has been given in this message.
thank you
heydarian saeed is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 29th November 2022, 12:11 PM   #193
JayUtah
Penultimate Amazing
 
JayUtah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: The great American West
Posts: 22,238
Originally Posted by heydarian saeed View Post
I hope that the answer to many doubts and doubts between "scientists of science"...
No, it doesn't. It's meaningless garbage filled with profound-seeming statements that convey no actual knowledge or understanding, provide no evidence, or clarify any of the questions you've been asked. I find it terribly insulting that you, a non-scientist, take it upon yourself to pontificate about what science can or cannot study.
JayUtah is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 29th November 2022, 12:17 PM   #194
heydarian saeed
Graduate Poster
 
heydarian saeed's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2021
Location: Iran-Kashan
Posts: 1,155
Originally Posted by DetectedMotion View Post
Who is the narrator in the Quran? And why do you Worship the "Moon God" Lah? Doesn't AL mean God in Arabic? So Who is Lah?
"Ilah" means God. In Arabic, they add a prefix "al" for proper nouns. This is an Arabic grammar. The original name of God is "Elah". Do not object to these things that are Arabic grammar. Every language has its own rules. The original "Ilah" means God.
heydarian saeed is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 29th November 2022, 01:03 PM   #195
Mojo
Mostly harmless
 
Mojo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Nor Flanden
Posts: 36,650
Originally Posted by heydarian saeed View Post
Philosophy looks at the universe from a general perspective.
And it proves with logic that the universe is not self-contained. That is, it cannot sustain itself independently.

Please show us this proof.

Either before or after you show us a testable prediction about as-yet undiscovered science, I don’t mind which.

But please do both.

Thanks.
__________________
"You got to use your brain." - McKinley Morganfield

"The poor mystic homeopaths feel like petted house-cats thrown at high flood on the breaking ice." - Leon Trotsky
Mojo is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 29th November 2022, 01:05 PM   #196
Mojo
Mostly harmless
 
Mojo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Nor Flanden
Posts: 36,650
Originally Posted by steenkh View Post
What is essence?

Something that General Jack D. Ripper denied women?
__________________
"You got to use your brain." - McKinley Morganfield

"The poor mystic homeopaths feel like petted house-cats thrown at high flood on the breaking ice." - Leon Trotsky
Mojo is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 29th November 2022, 01:36 PM   #197
JayUtah
Penultimate Amazing
 
JayUtah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: The great American West
Posts: 22,238
Originally Posted by Mojo View Post
Please show us this proof.
It's such an elegant argument, isn't it?

"This thing I call 'philosophy' incontestably says that the universe requires a sustaining influence. I declare that science can have nothing to say about this. Also, I arbitrarily declare that the sustaining influence has to be God."

Amazing how someone can just string together a bunch of bare assertions and think that this is "strong and definite proof" of anything.
JayUtah is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 29th November 2022, 02:49 PM   #198
IanS
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 5,691
Originally Posted by heydarian saeed View Post
Hello, dear philosopher steenkh
I am very pleased to have interacted with you at a turning point. "Existence" flows throughout the world. and includes all objects. In fact, we have reached the "single" point in science in philosophy. The universe started from this point. A point that is "nothing"! We are with you so far. And we completely agree. But my discussion in this topic is "Beyond the Universe". Now I have no argument to prove God with you. Just listen to me. Thank you
Science has reached "single"
He does not know beyond that
and in fact he has no duty to know. It is enough for science to reach this point. But philosophy also examines the universe. Science has no say here. And if he protests, it is inappropriate. Because it is the scope of philosophy. Philosophy looks at the universe from a general perspective.
And it proves with log
thank you

You are repeatedly claiming something called a "single"; what on earth do you think that is?

You have absolutely no idea what you are talking about!

If you are claiming that science claims that the universe began from a so-called Big Bang "Singularity", then that is NOT what most Big Bang models now propose.

Do you know why the earliest Big Bang models proposed a singularity? What is your answer, why did cosmologists in the early 1900's originally think there was any singularity?

Over the last 50 years or so most models of the Big Bang have realised that we have to take quantum effects into account, and those effects are likely to become huge and to dominate near the stage of the Big Bang ... those quantum interactions stop any point of singularity ever being reached ... you never get to any singularity in a Big Bang universe.

If you want to claim that the universe began from literally "Nothing" i.e. which means "No Thing at All", that is a different question and a different claim ... and for that claim (which I am not rejecting), you must explain what you mean by "nothing" ... what do you think "nothing" actually is?

And just to be clear – when I ask you those questions and when I tell you any of the above, I am not telling you what I think about any of that, I am not merely telling you ideas that I have produced … I am telling you what current published science says (in fact what most of the published papers and models have been moving towards over the last 50 years or more … ever since we started to develop big bang models following quantum field theory) ...

... and by the way, I already explaind to you all of the above re the Big Bang, and explained much more about that in some detail for you far back in this thread probably 6 months ago or more! ...


... and also - what you are talking about here with your "single" is NOT any mere thoughts from the outdated obsolete subject of mental "philosophy" ... this is most deffinitely science (an area of science where hundreds of thousands of research papers have been published).
IanS is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 29th November 2022, 03:06 PM   #199
Mojo
Mostly harmless
 
Mojo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Nor Flanden
Posts: 36,650
Originally Posted by JayUtah View Post
It's such an elegant argument, isn't it?

I think I addressed the only bit that wasn’t word salad.
__________________
"You got to use your brain." - McKinley Morganfield

"The poor mystic homeopaths feel like petted house-cats thrown at high flood on the breaking ice." - Leon Trotsky
Mojo is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 29th November 2022, 04:59 PM   #200
JayUtah
Penultimate Amazing
 
JayUtah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: The great American West
Posts: 22,238
Originally Posted by IanS View Post
You are repeatedly claiming something called a "single"; what on earth do you think that is?
I imagine it's how his translation tool is trying to render "singularity." Honestly this is not the kind of discussion one should be trying to have through a poor machine interpretation.

Quote:
If you are claiming that science claims that the universe began from a so-called Big Bang "Singularity", then that is NOT what most Big Bang models now propose.
Which is why it's so painfully funny that he botched his reference to Prof. Hawking, since the quote he maligned is the introduction to one of Hawking's most noteworthy proposals that clearly undermines how Heydarian wants to use it. But it's also a good example of how science progresses and leaves the Qur'an behind, as you note in the portion of your post I omitted. Muslims got all excited when it seemed like their holy book predicted a singularity. But now that our cosmology has evolved, they either have to keep living in the past or admit that they're just tracking modern science with post hoc handwaving. "Philosophy..."
JayUtah is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Religion and Philosophy

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 08:51 AM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2023, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.