Jump to content
Islamic Forum
dot

Atheists: What Does It Take For You To Believe?

Recommended Posts

Peace upon those who follow the guidance

 

I'm starting this topic to ask our dear members to initiate a dialogue with our atheist members.

I've noticed, over the years, that Christians and other belief systems in which followers believe in a god, are the easiest to invite to the true religion of Islam, while atheists are usually the hardest, as they don't believe in the existence of a god in the first place.

 

But many atheists showed their sincerity in their quest for the truth, and told that they don't refuse to believe, they just need someone or something to convince them.

Sincerity in itself is a positive step. Now we need to understand how we can help them.

So, here I'm, asking you atheists: what does it take you to believe? Let us know in details.

 

I also hope, in this topic, that we, Muslims, group our efforts together to help our atheist friends find what they've been missing. Provide links to articles, ebooks, and all kind of resources that help in that regard.

 

There is no guarantees, we will only try to show you the way, but in the end.. only Allah guides whom He wants.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
PropellerAds

In a sense the answer to this question is circular - what it would take for me to believe is something that is believable. That is, I have never seen any convincing evidence that the supernatural exists, but if I saw convincing evidence I would, by definition, be convinced.

 

(And no, the supposed miracles of the Koran - or whatever claims are made for any other of the holy books in the world - do not convince me, nor does the argument from design.)

 

 

I agree with the thrust of many religions and philosophies, that reaching mastery over ones unconscious needs and desires is a good goal*, but I believe that the need for the supernatural to exist is one of those parts of the human psyche that needs to be mastered.

 

*That doesn't mean they have to be denied, just brought under conscious control.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i am simply waiting for an atheist to reply ...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

erm, don't I count? I call myself agnostic but "soft" atheists would probably argue that I'm one of them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
(And no, the supposed miracles of the Koran - or whatever claims are made for any other of the holy books in the world - do not convince me, nor does the argument from design.)

 

the miracles of the Quran are clear proofs for you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
the miracles of the Quran are clear proofs for you.

 

No, sorry, they aren't (as I have already said). No-one has shown me any 'miracle' which has not been debunked. True, I might not have seen them all but I would guess that the best ones would be the ones shown first.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
erm, don't I count? I call myself agnostic but "soft" atheists would probably argue that I'm one of them.

 

 

So are you following christianity blindly? If you think ur an atheist, then change ur profile and come here to debate

 

..... No more chatting after this .....

 

Dear atheists ... please read Dot's post and respond... ...................

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As my sig says, I'm Christian by culture, agnostic by conviction. The limited choices on the registration page don't cope with this fairly common situation.

 

So, anyway, where are the proofs that Dot asked for?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Anyway, no-one seems to be rushing in with evidence. I'll narrow it down. I would be convinced that supernatural events can occur if anyone can give me a replicable experiment which shows a physical effect of supernatural causation. That is, show me ANYTHING that happens which could not be caused by any non-supernatural process. It has to be replicable, not just theoretically but actually.

 

Once I believe in the supernatural I can then test which particular claims about the supernatural might be true.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Peace upon those who follow the guidance

 

I'm starting this topic to ask our dear members to initiate a dialogue with our atheist members.

I've noticed, over the years, that Christians and other belief systems in which followers believe in a god, are the easiest to invite to the true religion of Islam, while atheists are usually the hardest, as they don't believe in the existence of a god in the first place.

 

But many atheists showed their sincerity in their quest for the truth, and told that they don't refuse to believe, they just need someone or something to convince them.

Sincerity in itself is a positive step. Now we need to understand how we can help them.

So, here I'm, asking you atheists: what does it take you to believe? Let us know in details.

 

I also hope, in this topic, that we, Muslims, group our efforts together to help our atheist friends find what they've been missing. Provide links to articles, ebooks, and all kind of resources that help in that regard.

 

There is no guarantees, we will only try to show you the way, but in the end.. only Allah guides whom He wants.

 

 

If you can point to predictions with names and dates in the Koran that would constitute evidence for the Koran being a magic book.

 

If you could point to a passage that tells us that the nuclear weapon "Little Boy" was dropped on the city of Hiroshima on August 6, 1945, followed on August 9, 1945 by the detonation of the "Fat Man" nuclear bomb over Nagasaki. Or there was a cure for cancer in the pages of the Koran or it predicted that in the mid nineties the human race would connect itself globaly with machines called computers. Then I might start taking the Koran seriously but as it stands I see nothing remarkable in the Koran.

 

It's just another religious book and there are so many religious books. Just because The Koran says it's the word of the creator of the universe does not make it so and I can't see why you expect us to accept that as evidence.

 

If you can show me something in the Koran that couldn't have been written by a 7th century Arab I will be suprised to say the least.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

First of all before starting to reply, I must admit that I am a bit slow unlike others. It might take some time for me to respond, so please excuse me for that..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

By the way, Dr James Randi is STILL offering US$1,000,000 for anyone who can prove a paranormal event in a controlled experiment. It has been on offer since the 1960s but no-oone has won it. Hop to it, believers!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Blessings unto ye all

May Allah enlighten our hearts towards the truth... aameen

 

Firtly JAzak Allah Khair brother Dot for thsi thread creation.

 

Secondly: Allah is not Super Natural. Its is Natural to have a Creator.

 

Now coming over to saying that

"If you can show me something in the Koran that couldn't have been written by a 7th century Arab I will be suprised to say the least."

The biggest Miracle of the Quran is that it has remained unchanged for 1400 years. Has this ever happened with any other scripture. Allah Himself has taken the responsibility of preserving the Quran. There are so many Copies of the Quran in the world and all are same exactly the same.

secondly you r requested to visit this website

(you are not allowed to post links yet)"you can't post links until you reach 50 posts_you are not allowed to post links yet55a(contact admin if its a beneficial link)/"]you can't post links until you reach 50 posts_you are not allowed to post links yet55a(contact admin if its a beneficial link)/[/url]

 

You will see with scientific proof the miracles of the Quran.

 

 

The below link is with regards to the Preservation of the Corpse of Paroh

 

(you are not allowed to post links yet)"you can't post links until you reach 50 posts_you are not allowed to post links yet55a(contact admin if its a beneficial link)/en/miracles/a021.php"]you can't post links until you reach 50 posts_you are not allowed to post links yet55a(contact admin if its a beneficial link)/en/miracles/a021.php[/url]

 

 

May Allah guide us all and enlighten our hearts towards the truth..

 

Allahumma aameen

 

Taqabbal Allah minna wa minkum,

 

was Salam Alaikum wa rahmatullahi wa Barakatuhum

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
If you could point to a passage that tells us that the nuclear weapon "Little Boy" was dropped on the city of Hiroshima on August 6, 1945, followed on August 9, 1945 by the detonation of the "Fat Man" nuclear bomb over Nagasaki. Or there was a cure for cancer in the pages of the Koran or it predicted that in the mid nineties the human race would connect itself globaly with machines called computers. Then I might start taking the Koran seriously but as it stands I see nothing remarkable in the Koran.

That kind of information is not beneficial for those who lived 1400 years ago. And a good book intended for people of all time doesn't have to be that specific either.

 

Wassalam,

Y

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

{quote]The biggest Miracle of the Quran is that it has remained unchanged for 1400 years.

 

I hope you don't really mean that that is the biggest 'miracle' - if it is, then I'm not going to be very impressed by the others. That simply isn't a miracle. It's easily explainable by non-supernatural means.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is for fallow

 

Dear fallow ....

I think we need to find a way to prove whether God exist or not. Then only we can discuss whether the Quran is thr true word of God or not...

 

No need to go further .... I am going to talk about the eyes which you are currently using to read my answers...

 

 

Another subject that remains unanswered by evolutionary theory is the excellent quality of perception in the eye and the ear.

Before you finish reading this sentence, approximately one hundred billion (100,000,000,000) operations will have been completed inside your eyes. However fantastic it may seem, you possess an example (two, in fact) of the Universe's ultimate technology. No scientist has ever come close to fully grasping it, let alone inventing anything remotely similar.

Before passing on to the subject of the eye, let us briefly answer the question of "how we see". Light rays coming from an object fall oppositely on the retina of the eye. Here, these light rays are transmitted into electric signals by cells and they reach a tiny spot at the back of the brain called the centre of vision. These electric signals are perceived in this centre of the brain as an image after a series of processes. With this technical background, let us do some thinking.

The brain is insulated from light. That means that the inside of the brain is solid dark, and light does not reach the location where the brain is situated. The place called the centre of vision is a solid dark place where no light ever reaches; it may even be the darkest place you have ever known. However, you observe a luminous, bright world in this pitch darkness.

The image formed in the eye is so sharp and distinct that even the technology of the 20th century has not been able to attain it. For instance, look at the book you read, your hands with which you hold it, then lift your head and look around you. Have you ever seen such a sharp and distinct image as this one at any other place? Even the most developed television screen produced by the greatest television producer in the world cannot provide such a sharp image for you. This is a three-dimensional, coloured, and extremely sharp image. For more than 100 years, thousands of engineers have been trying to achieve this sharpness. Factories, huge premises were established, much research has been done, plans and designs have been made for this purpose. Again, look at a TV screen and the book you hold in your hands. You will see that there is a big difference in sharpness and distinction. Moreover, the TV screen shows you a two-dimensional image, whereas with your eyes, you watch a three-dimensional perspective having depth. When you look carefully, you will see that there is a blurring in the television, is there any blurring in your vision? Surely there is not.

For many years, ten of thousands of engineers have tried to make a three-dimensional TV, and reach the vision quality of the eye. Although they have made a three-dimensional television system, it is not possible to watch it without putting on glasses; moreover, it is only an artificial three-dimension. The background is more blurred, the foreground appears like a paper setting. Never has it been possible to produce a sharp and distinct vision like that of the eye. In both the camera and the television, there is a loss of image quality.

Technology In The Eye and The Ear

Evolutionists claim that the mechanism producing this sharp and distinct image has been formed by chance. Now, if somebody told you that the television in your room was formed as a result of chance, that all its atoms just happened to come together and make up this device that produces an image, what would you think? How can atoms do what thousands of people cannot?

For nearly a century, tens of thousands of engineers have been researching and striving in high-tech laboratories and great industrial complexes using the most advanced technological devices, and they have been able to do no more than this.

If a device producing a more primitive image than the eye could not have been formed by chance, then it is very evident that the eye and the image seen by the eye could not have been formed by chance. It requires a much more detailed and miraculous plan and creation than the one in the TV. The plan and creation of the image as distinct and sharp as this one belongs to God, Who has power over all things.

The same situation applies to the ear. The outer ear picks up the available sounds by the auricle and directs them to the middle ear; the middle ear transmits the sound vibrations by intensifying them; the inner ear sends these vibrations to the brain by translating them into electric signals. Just as with the eye, the act of hearing finalises in the centre of hearing in the brain.

The situation in the eye is also true for the ear. That is, the brain is insulated from sound just like it is from light: it does not let any sound in. Therefore, no matter how noisy is the outside, the inside of the brain is completely silent. Nevertheless, the sharpest sounds are perceived in the brain. In your brain, which is insulated from sound, you listen to the symphonies of an orchestra, and hear all the noises in a crowded place. However, if the sound level in your brain was measured by a precise device at that moment, it would be seen that a complete silence is prevailing there.

Let us again compare the high quality and superior technology present in the ear and the brain with the technology produced by human beings. As is the case with imagery, decades of effort have been spent in trying to generate and reproduce sound that is faithful to the original. The results of these efforts are sound recorders, high-fidelity systems, and systems for sensing sound. Despite all this technology and the thousands of engineers and experts who have been working in this endeavour, no sound has yet been obtained that has the same sharpness and clarity as the sound perceived by the ear. Think of the highest-quality HI-FI systems produced by the biggest company in the music industry. Even in these devices, when sound is recorded some of it is lost; or when you turn on the HI-FI you always hear a hissing sound before the music starts. However, the sounds that are the products of the technology of the human body are extremely sharp and clear. A human ear never perceives a sound accompanied by a hissing sound or with atmospherics as a HI-FI does; it perceives the sound exactly as it is, sharp and clear. This is the way it has been since the creation of man.

Briefly, the technology in our body is far superior to the technology mankind has produced using its accumulated information, experience, and opportunities. No one would say that a HI-FI or a camera came into being as a result of chance. So how can it be claimed that the technologies that exist in the human body, which are superior even to these, could have come into being as a result of a chain of coincidences called evolution?

It is evident that the eye, the ear, and indeed all the other parts of the human body are products of a very superior creation. These are crystal-clear indications of God's unique and unmatched creation, of His eternal knowledge and might.

The reason we specifically mention the senses of seeing and hearing here is the inability of evolutionists to understand evidence of creation so clear as this. If, one day, you ask an evolutionist to explain to you how this excellent structure and technology became possible in the eye and the ear as a result of chance, you will see that he will not be able to give you any reasonable or logical reply. Even Darwin, in his letter to Asa Gray on April 3rd 1860, wrote that "the thought of the eye made him cold all over" and he confessed the desperation of the evolutionists in the face of the excellent creation of living things.150

 

 

 

So who could have given you this beautiful gift of eyes?

Its not working with the theory of evolution, so was not created by chance …. If that is the case then who created the eyes?

 

While you are reading this sentence, thousands of chemicals react in your eyes. Each of them, much more complex then you can imagine.More complex then the screen you are gazing at. Of course a Hi-Tech company built your screen, then who built your eyes?

 

extract from : miracles of the eye

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
By the way, Dr James Randi is STILL offering US$1,000,000 for anyone who can prove a paranormal event in a controlled experiment. It has been on offer since the 1960s but no-oone has won it. Hop to it, believers!

 

What sort of "paranormal event" would you take under consideration?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
What sort of "paranormal event" would you take under consideration?

 

One that proved the existence of supernatural beings - let's say angels. And by 'proved', I mean in a replicable experiment.

 

A genuine 'miracle' would do, too, but proof will be more difficult - hearsay isn't evidence.

 

(I realise that there are claims for lesser paranormal events which I also think are wrong, but I'm not going to be able to prove or disprove vague reports of Russians doing ESP or whatnot. Anyway, it ought to be equally as easy for you to prove angels as people doing card tricks.)

 

 

Dear fallow ....

I think we need to find a way to prove whether God exist or not. Then only we can discuss whether the Quran is thr true word of God or not...

 

That's exactly what I'm asking for.

 

Sorry, but I didn't read all you 'argument from design' stuff. As I said earlier, I don't buy that argument.

 

edit - OK, I see that that's your only argument, so I read it. You can't seriously think it proves anything. It's main argument seems to be that a TV couldn't exist via evolution. Of course a TV couldn't exist via evolition! It isn't a living thing reproducing by DNA! You surely can''t believe that that's a serious argument against evolution or for a god?

Edited by fallow

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
edit - OK, I see that that's your only argument, so I read it.

 

This doesnt mean that I dont have anything else to say ....

 

Base on your reply, I assume that you are an evolutionist. Please correct me if I am wrong.

 

From what you are asking, I think you want to personally see the spirits... or in other words, you want to see God, in order to believe in God, or you want to see angels in order believe in angels.... Thats impossible. We dont have to see all in real in order to believe, but we need signs of existence in order to know whether it exists or not. For example the consciousness in the brain, the electricity, sound etc......

 

Darwin himself has said about the eye...

 

" To this day the eye makes me shudder,' ( wrote to his botanist friend Asa Gray in February, 1860)

 

To suppose," he admitted, "that the eye with all its inimitable contrivances . . . could have been formed by natural selection, seems, I freely confess, absurd in the highest degree"

 

Here is what Francis said.....

"Now it is quite evident," says Francis Hitching, "that if the slightest thing goes wrong en route-if the cornea is fuzzy, or the pupil fails to dilate, or the lens becomes opaque, or the focusing goes wrong-then a recognizable image is not formed. The eye either functions as a whole, or not at all.

 

Please answer to my this simple question...

 

So my question is how did it come to evolve by slow, steady, infinitesimally small Darwinian improvements? Is it really possible that thousands upon thousands of lucky chance mutations happened coincidentally so that the lens and the retina, which cannot work without each other, evolved in synchrony?

 

So if it was not evolved then how did it come into existence at first place?

Who created the eye in such a way that it can produce sharp images that scientist and engineers have not been able to produce till today?

 

The reason I had to compare with the television is itself an evidence! ... At first place, with all the technology and science, no one has ever been able to produce something like eye. Today, even if we compare the high tech CCTV, or Cameras with the eye, we can see the difference between the sharpness of the image. Look around you. How clear it is. Now capture an image of your surrounding from a high tech camera, and see what it was able to produce. Secondly, Someone has to create a TV in order for it to exist. If evolution was the real theory, then not only humans, other things should also evolve. I agree its not living like us, but if evolution was the universal fact and how things are created, why are other things not evolving?

 

Again, when eyes are considered, the stimulation coming from a person's eyes ears etc... travel o the brain as electro-chemical nerve impulses. If you want to see how an image is formed, then you can find details in biology, physiology, and biochemistry books. However, you will not find the most important fact: Who perceives these electro- chemical nerve impulses as images, sounds, odors ans sensory events in the brain etc... ? There is a consciousness in the brain that perceives all this without felling any need for an eye, ear and nose. To whom does this consciousness belong to ?

 

Of course it does not belong to the nerves, the fat layer and neutron comprising the brain, and that is the reason why evolutionist cannot answer these questions ...

 

This consciousness is the spirit created by God, which needs neither the eye to watch the images,not the ear to hear the sounds, also, it does not need the brain to think. (Please read what I have said carefully here, else you will be quoting out of contex )

 

 

Surathul Al Imran Chapter 3 verse 190

"190. Behold! in the creation of the heavens and the earth, and the alternation of night and day,- there are indeed Signs for men of understanding,-"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
This doesnt mean that I dont have anything else to say ....

 

Base on your reply, I assume that you are an evolutionist. Please correct me if I am wrong.

 

Of course.

 

From what you are asking, I think you want to personally see the spirits... or in other words, you want to see God, in order to believe in God, or you want to see angels in order believe in angels.... Thats impossible. We dont have to see all in real in order to believe, but we need signs of existence in order to know whether it exists or not. For example the consciousness in the brain, the electricity, sound etc......

 

Well, it will be much harder for you to provide PROOF that they exist then, won't it? I don't envy your task.

 

Darwin himself has said about the eye...

 

Sorry, I'm not going to argue evolution with you. There is simply no genuine science which doubts the broad thrust of the idea (and most of the detail, for that matter). There is a great deal of evidence for evolution and none whatsoever for creation. That's what this thread is supposed to be about - show me some EVIDENCE for the existence of a god.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Darwin himself has said about the eye...

 

" To this day the eye makes me shudder,' ( wrote to his botanist friend Asa Gray in February, 1860)

 

To suppose," he admitted, "that the eye with all its inimitable contrivances . . . could have been formed by natural selection, seems, I freely confess, absurd in the highest degree"

 

Here is what Francis said.....

 

"Now it is quite evident," says Francis Hitching, "that if the slightest thing goes wrong en route-if the cornea is fuzzy, or the pupil fails to dilate, or the lens becomes opaque, or the focusing goes wrong-then a recognizable image is not formed. The eye either functions as a whole, or not at all.

 

Please answer to my this simple question...

 

 

So my question is how did it come to evolve by slow, steady, infinitesimally small Darwinian improvements? Is it really possible that thousands upon thousands of lucky chance mutations happened coincidentally so that the lens and the retina, which cannot work without each other, evolved in synchrony?

 

So if it was not evolved then how did it come into existence at first place?

 

Who created the eye in such a way that it can produce sharp images that scientist and engineers have not been able to produce till today?

 

 

 

Again, when eyes are considered, the stimulation coming from a person's eyes ears etc... travel o the brain as electro-chemical nerve impulses. If you want to see how an image is formed, then you can find details in biology, physiology, and biochemistry books. However, you will not find the most important fact: Who perceives these electro- chemical nerve impulses as images, sounds, odors ans sensory events in the brain etc... ? There is a consciousness in the brain that perceives all this without felling any need for an eye, ear and nose. To whom does this consciousness belong to ?

 

Of course it does not belong to the nerves, the fat layer and neutron comprising the brain, and that is the reason why evolutionist cannot answer these questions ...

 

This consciousness is the spirit created by God, which needs neither the eye to watch the images,not the ear to hear the sounds, also, it does not need the brain to think. (Please read what I have said carefully here, else you will be quoting out of contex )

 

Question number 2 : So if you say its not God , then who might it be? Of course theory of evolution is not surviving in this case ...... Oh is it you who created it?

 

I would like you to answer those questions above .....

 

 

Of course.

Well, it will be much harder for you to provide PROOF that they exist then, won't it? I don't envy your task.

 

Sorry, I cannot show you God, but I can show only signs of his existence. I wonder how you believe in your thinking, conciousness of the brain, the electricity, sound while you dont see them. I know you understand what I am talking about, but you simply want to be the way you are while knowing, and thats called ignorance.... No one is going to tease you for accepting the truth. Will you tease your self for earning money in the lawful way? (In between I am not forcing you )

 

God Almighty says

Surathul Al Imran Chapter 3 verse 190

"190. Behold! in the creation of the heavens and the earth, and the alternation of night and day,- there are indeed Signs for men of understanding,-"

 

However,I would like to narrate what happened with Pharoh then.

 

In the last-minute conversion was not accepted, for it was not sincere. According to the Qur'an, Allah exclaimed:

 

"What, now! When previously you rebelled and were one of the corrupters? Today we will preserve your body so you can be a Sign for people who come after you. Surely many people are heedless of Our Signs." (Qur'an, 10:91-92)

 

######you can't post links until you reach 50 posts_you are not allowed to post links yetmiraclesofthequran(contact admin if its a beneficial link)/images_miracles_of_the_quran/firavun.jpg[/img]

(here is that guys picture)

 

To read more check this post over here (you are not allowed to post links yet)"you can't post links until you reach 50 posts_you are not allowed to post links yetgawaher(contact admin if its a beneficial link)/index.php?s=&showtopic=138134&view=findpost&p=566520"]you can't post links until you reach 50 posts_you are not allowed to post links yetgawaher(contact admin if its a beneficial link)/index.php?s=&sh...st&p=566520[/url]

-----------

Sorry, I'm not going to argue evolution with you. There is simply no genuine science which doubts the broad thrust of the idea (and most of the detail, for that matter). There is a great deal of evidence for evolution and none whatsoever for creation.

 

Thats all what evolutionist say and can say.

 

 

A little explanation of the cell will also, bring a nightmare to evolutionist that denies the creation of God.

 

The living cell, it is commonly agreed by the world of science, is the most complex structure that mankind has so far encountered. Modern science has revealed that just one living cell has a much more complex structure and mutually interconnected complicated systems than a large city. Such a complex structure can only function if all its separate parts emerge at the same time and in full working order. Otherwise, it will serve no purpose, and will fall apart over time and disappear. We cannot expect that its parts developed by chance over millions of years as claimed by the theory of evolution. For that reason, the complex design in just one cell clearly shows that God created life.

 

However, those who defend materialist philosophy do not want to accept the fact of creation for various ideological reasons. That is because the existence and spread of societies living in the light of that beautiful morality that true religion offers to man by means of God's commands and prohibitions is not in these materialists' interests. Masses devoid of any spiritual and moral values suit these people far better, since they can manipulate them for their own worldly interests. For this reason, they try to impose the theory of evolution, which encourages the lie that mankind was not created but rather emerged by chance and evolved from animals, and to keep it alive at whatever costs. Despite all the clear scientific proof that destroys the theory of evolution and confirms the fact of creation, they abandon all reason and logic and defend this nonsense at every available opportunity.

 

It has actually been proved that it is impossible for the first living cell, or even just one of the millions of protein molecules in that cell, to have come about by chance. This has been demonstrated not only by experiments and observations, but also by mathematical calculations of probability. In other words, evolution collapses at the very first step: that of explaining the emergence of the first living cell.

 

Not only could the cell, the smallest unit of life, never have come about by chance in the primitive and uncontrolled conditions in the early days of the Earth, as evolutionists would have us believe, it cannot even be synthesized in the most advanced laboratories of the twentieth century. Amino acids, the building blocks of the proteins that make up the living cell, cannot of themselves build such organelles in the cell as mitochondria, ribosomes, cell membranes, or the endoplasmic reticulum, let alone a whole cell. For this reason, the claim that evolution brought about the first cell by chance remains the product of a fantasy based entirely on imagination.

The living cell, which still harbours many secrets that have not been explained, is one of the major difficulties facing the theory of evolution.

 

It isn't a living thing reproducing by DNA!

 

Another terrible dilemma from the point of view of evolution is the DNA molecule in the nucleus of the living cell, a coding system with 3.5 billion units containing all the details of life. DNA was first discovered using X-ray crystallography in the late 1940s and early 1950s, and is a giant molecule with a superb plan and design. For many years, Francis Crick, a Nobel-prize laureate, believed in the theory of molecular evolution, but eventually even he had to admit to himself that such a complex molecule could not have emerged spontaneously by chance, as the result of an evolutionary process:

 

An honest man, armed with all the knowledge available to us now, could only state that, in some sense, the origin of life appears at the moment to be almost a miracle.

 

The Turkish evolutionist Professor Ali Demirsoy was forced to make the following confession on the issue:

 

In fact, the probability of the formation of a protein and a nucleic acid (DNA-RNA) is a probability way beyond estimating. Furthermore, the chance of the emergence of a certain protein chain is so slight as to be called astronomic.

 

Homer Jacobson, Professor Emeritus of Chemistry, makes the following admission regarding how impossible it is for life to have come about by chance:

 

Directions for the reproduction of plans, for energy and the extraction of parts from the current environment, for the growth sequence, and for the effector mechanism translating instructions into growth—all had to be simultaneously present at that moment [when life began]. This combination of events has seemed an incredibly unlikely happenstance…

 

I would like to ask you another question... If its not God who designed and created it full at the same time, then how did the creatures survive at first place according to theory of evolution? If it was not God who designed the cells, then who might it be? Is it you?

 

 

Once again, back to the eye.................

 

Imagine for a moment if our eyes were fixed somewhere on our knees or worse, our ankles. Since we could see nothing more than the path we were walking upper parts of our bodies, especially the head, would keep banging into unseen obstacles. Given such a mismatched anatomy, many routine tasks like eating or using tools would become problems in their own right. There would be countless difficulties, had our eyes been situated anywhere else than exactly where they are.

The head is the optimum location where the eyes can be maintained in health and safety. You can move your head quickly, with instant reflexes at the right time, so as to protect your eyes from the slightest contact with any harmful material.

Your eyes are also situated at a perfect position on the face. Were they anywhere else—under the nose, for example—it would be a literally uphill struggle to provide the same safe viewing angle, not to mention the aesthetic appearance.

 

So how did the eyes of all the human beings are located in its optimum place which is the head ? Eyebrows above the eyes ears side ways, nose in the middle, and mouth underneth it ..... Answer to this simple quetion ... Is it simply by chance?

 

- show me some EVIDENCE for the existence of a god.

 

Answer my questions and then tell me who could have created the living beings in such a perfect design. Is it simply by chance, God created it, or everybody design their body themselves?

[using large font size is not allowed]

 

I would like to end with the following verse in the quran

 

Surathul Baqara chapter 2 verse 171

"171. The parable of those who reject Faith is as if one were to shout Like a goat-herd, to things that listen to nothing but calls and cries: Deaf, dumb, and blind, they are void of wisdom."

 

Best Wishes

 

Vishah

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Please answer to my this simple question...

Is it really possible that thousands upon thousands of lucky chance mutations happened coincidentally so that the lens and the retina, which cannot work without each other, evolved in synchrony?

 

Yes.

 

 

 

edit - That is, yes I agree with the vast majority of scientists who accept evolution - I don't agree that your description of the way the eye had to evolve is correct, but as I said, I'm not going to debate evolution with you.

 

By the way, the Darwin quote you have used at least twice seemed to me to be incomplete and I checked. It is. Whoever gave you half the quote was being dishonest, and lead you into being dishonest - doesn't that make you doubt them? Here's the full quote:

 

 

To suppose that the eye, with all its inimitable contrivances for adjusting the focus to different distances, for admitting different amounts of light, and for the correction of spherical and chromatic aberration, could have been formed by natural selection, seems, I freely confess, absurd in the highest possible degree. Yet reason tells me, that if numerous gradations from a perfect and complex eye to one very imperfect and simple, each grade being useful to its possessor, can be shown to exist; if further, the eye does vary ever so slightly, and the variations be inherited, which is certainly the case; and if any variation or modification in the organ be ever useful to an animal under changing conditions of life, then the difficulty of believing that a perfect and complex eye could be formed by natural selection, though insuperable by our imagination, can hardly be considered real.
Edited by fallow

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yes.

edit - That is, yes I agree with the vast majority of scientists who accept evolution - I don't agree that your description of the way the eye had to evolve is correct, but as I said, I'm not going to debate evolution with you.

 

By the way, the Darwin quote you have used at least twice seemed to me to be incomplete and I checked. It is. Whoever gave you half the quote was being dishonest, and lead you into being dishonest - doesn't that make you doubt them? Here's the full quote:

 

At first place, where are answers to other questions?

 

Ok .. discussion about evolution is up to you, and as I have said, evolutionist can only give those kind of replies.

 

Hmm Thank you for your darwin quote, however, it doesnt make me doubt them because they have provided evidences with science. and please stop calling majority as the latest scientists have now started to reject it completely.

 

What ever your description of evolution of eye is, it will still have to deal with the cells. If 1 single cell cannot be formed by chance, then forget the formation of an eye.

 

If you read the darwin quote, you will understand that, all of his argument lies on "if" statements, as if he is writing a child essay imagining what will happen in the future ...

 

Secondly its only a theory ....

 

I hope you will think on the questions I have asked you ...

May Allah show you the right path....

Take care

................

 

Surathul Isra chapter 17 verse 81

"81. And say: "Truth has (now) arrived, and Falsehood perished: for Falsehood is (by its nature) bound to perish."

 

Best wishes ...

 

Vishah

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hmm Thank you for your darwin quote, however, it doesnt make me doubt them because they have provided evidences with science. and please stop calling majority as the latest scientists have now started to reject it completely.

This is simply false. The majority of scientists overwhelmingly support evolution. A 1987 estimate found that more than 99.85% of almost 500,000 US scientists in the earth and life sciences supported evolution over creation 'science'. A 1991 poll found that 95% of scientists (including those with training outside biology) support evolution.

 

The Scientific community considers the creationist movement to be pseudo-science or completely unscientific. The US National Academy of Science has rejected intelligent design because it is totally untested and unverifiable, proposes no new hypothesis and predicts nothing. In October 2005, 70,000 Australian scientists and science teachers called upon all schools not to teach Intelligent design as a science because it fails to qualify in the slightest as a scientific theory.

 

There is no doubt that evolution is quite blatantly the accepted theory amongst Scientists for the development of life through history.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


×