Jump to content
Islamic Forum
dot

Atheists: What Does It Take For You To Believe?

Recommended Posts

Opinion defines belief. My belief that there is no God invalidates Islam to me. What exactly are you expecting?

To most religious people, it is the level of their spirituality that defines religious beliefs.

 

Wassalam,

Y

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
PropellerAds
Opinion defines belief. My belief that there is no God invalidates Islam to me. What exactly are you expecting?

 

If I expected anything different, I would have said so. I just wanted to make sure that we're all on the same page.

 

Salam.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
James,

Did you carefully read the booklet I mentioned? Most of its scientific facts were discovered in the 20th century and have nothing to do with the Greek or Persian science!!!

Would you mind showing me the exact reference (Chapter and Verse) where it is mentioned in the Glorious Qur'an?

Have a look at this video: (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 yetyoutube(contact admin if its a beneficial link)/watch?v=zQu7FznVOvI"]The Qur'an and modern Geology[/url]

Islam4ever

 

Please post a link to your information and I will look at it but I will not download from unknown sources.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Well, we can talk about Islam and Qur'an later. Now, can you please list three best evidence that you would like to see so that youll certainly believe that God really exists?

Did I promise you that?

 

Wassalam,

Y

 

You can't prove god no one can. It has never been done. I'm not here to debate the existance of god I'm here to debate Islam. You are making the claims to certainty please provide evidence.

 

I don't know if there is a god or not, it's a mystery. I'm not making a claim either way. I'm yet to see any evidence for it and as for a personal god who cares what he's called and intervenes in human affairs that seems highly unlikely. You have your work cut out finding evidence for all this.

 

With all due respect Yasnov stop asking me criptic questions and reveal the evidence you implied you had. Otherwise you are wasting peoples time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
James,

Did you carefully read the booklet I mentioned? Most of its scientific facts were discovered in the 20th century and have nothing to do with the Greek or Persian science!!!

Would you mind showing me the exact reference (Chapter and Verse) where it is mentioned in the Glorious Qur'an?

Have a look at this video: (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 yetyoutube(contact admin if its a beneficial link)/watch?v=zQu7FznVOvI"]The Qur'an and modern Geology[/url]

Islam4ever

 

I have just watched your Zakir Naik clip and he doesn't prove anything. He claims mountains are here to stablise the earth but modern geologists don't agree. He himself knows that earthquakes happen in mountainous regions. He used some silly anecdote about sickness being around doctors even though doctors are there to prevent sickness to divert attention from the fact that he was talking nonsense. That clip is just silly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh here is the passage that says the sun sets in a muddy pool. "They will ask thee of Dhu'l-Qarneyn [Zul-Qarnain]. Say: I shall recite unto you a remembrance of him. Lo! We made him strong in the land and gave him unto every thing a road. And he followed a road Till, when he reached the setting-place of the sun, he found it setting in a muddy spring, and found a people thereabout. We said: O Dhu'l-Qarneyn! Either punish or show them kindness." Sura 18:83-86 (Pickthall’s translation)

 

Basically most of the scientific evidence you claim to have is just an attempt to retro-fit genuine scientific discoveries to extremely vague passages none of this is science and none of this goes to prove the truth claims of Islam.

 

In the year 1665 Issac Newton went into isolation to dodge the outbreak of plague that was laying waste to England. When he had emerged from his seclusion he had invented the integral differential calculus, he had discovered the laws of universal gravitation and motion and he had set the field of optics on it's foundation. Now many scientists think this is the most awe inspiring display of human intelligence in the history of human intelligence and yet no one is tempted to ascribe this to devine agency so why should I accept Zakir Naiks poor attempts at finding modern science in the Koran as evidence for the truth of Islam?

 

Issac Newtons discoveries alone outstrip those to be found in the Koran and Issac Newtons discoveries are scientific the Korans are just vague verses open to interpretation.

 

 

Zakir Naik saying that the Koran says that mountains are gods tent pegs placed here to secure the earth then taking the fact that mountains have roots and declaring that the Koran was right about mountains being gods tent pegs is not evidence or science. It is a desperate attempt at trying to make the world fit an old book. It will not convince anyone unless they are prepared to suspend their skepticality and replace it with faith. I'm asking for evidence not vague verses pretending to be science.

Edited by jamestaylor

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dhul-Qarnayn traveled west until he reached the spring of Hami'ah, and as he stood on the coast, it looked to him as though the sun was setting into the water, which is exactly what anyone who has ever seen a sunset over an ocean will tell you. The sun did not literally set in a "muddy pool". Imagery, and all that.

 

Addition: I think that no one should devote their time to searching for scientific miracles in the Qur'an, Muslim or otherwise. Allah knows best about His creation.

 

Salam.

Edited by Redeem

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Dhul-Qarnayn traveled west until he reached the spring of Hami'ah, and as he stood on the coast, it looked to him as though the sun was setting into the water, which is exactly what anyone who has ever seen a sunset over an ocean will tell you.

 

Don't be quick to jump to conclusions.

 

Salam.

 

"And the sun runneth unto a resting place for him. That is the measuring of the mighty and the wise" Koran 36:38

 

Narated by Abu Dhar

The Prophet asked me "Do you know where the sun goes (at time of sunset)?" I replied "Allah and his Apostle know better" He said, "It goes till it prostrates itself underneath Allahs throne and takes permission to rise again" Hadith-Sahih Bukhari (volume 4, book 54, number 421)

 

Science shows we travel around the sun and the sun does not have a resting place.

 

If it was at the coast why does it refer to a muddy spring? The sea is niether muddy nor a spring and the sun is not traveling around us or going to a resting place. You can't have it both ways. It doesn't say it was a beautiful sunset that looked as if the sun was setting in a muddy spring, it says the sun was setting in a muddy spring.

 

As you can see this is something that is said more than once in the Koran and it seems to point to the idea that the sun travels over our heads and rests at night in it's resting place. As we all know the sun does not do this.

Edited by jamestaylor

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
"And the sun runneth unto a resting place for him. That is the measuring of the mighty and the wise" Koran 36:38

 

Uhh, what translation are you using? Ibn Kathir, one of the most known scholars and whose interpretation a majority of other scholars rely on, translated it as:

38. And the sun runs on its fixed course for a term (appointed). That is the decree of the Almighty, the All-Knowing.

 

Even Yusuf Ali translates it as:

 

38. And the sun runs his course for a period determined for him: that is the decree of (Him), the Exalted in Might, the All-Knowing.

 

There is no "resting place". I would suggest that you stop using second-hand translations and study the Arabic language, and the Qur'an.

 

Narated by Abu Dhar

The Prophet asked me "Do you know where the sun goes (at time of sunset)?" I replied "Allah and his Apostle know better" He said, "It goes till it prostrates itself underneath Allahs throne and takes permission to rise again" Hadith-Sahih Bukhari (volume4 , book54 , number421 )

 

Have you ever taken the time to learn about the origins and meaning of this Hadith, rather than pulling it off some random website? Did you stop to think that it has a spiritual meaning, rather than that it describes a physical event? Do you claim to be an expert on how different cultures explain things in different ways, even if you lack the wisdom to understand the point?

 

It's one thing for you to accuse Muslims of trying to "pass off vague verses as Science". I don't really care about that. But try not to pass verses off as being against Science, when they are clearly not.

 

Salam.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Uhh, what translation are you using? Ibn Kathir, one of the most known scholars and whose interpretation a majority of other scholars rely on, translated it as:

38. And the sun runs on its fixed course for a term (appointed). That is the decree of the Almighty, the All-Knowing.

 

Even Yusuf Ali translates it as:

 

38. And the sun runs his course for a period determined for him: that is the decree of (Him), the Exalted in Might, the All-Knowing.

 

There is no "resting place". I would suggest that you stop using second-hand translations and study the Arabic language, and the Qur'an.

Have you ever taken the time to learn about the origins and meaning of this Hadith, rather than pulling it off some random website? Did you stop to think that it has a spiritual meaning, rather than that it describes a physical event? Do you claim to be an expert on how different cultures explain things in different ways, even if you lack the wisdom to understand the point?

 

It's one thing for you to accuse Muslims of trying to "pass off vague verses as Science". I don't really care about that. But try not to pass verses off as being against Science, when they are clearly not.

 

Salam.

 

The sun does not run on a fixed course. We travel around the sun. Almost every translation I can find of 38:36 refers to the sun traveling to a place of setting or rest.

 

Please don't use the old "read it in Arabic" game. It is a dishonest way to skuttle a debate, kind of like taking the ball away and refusing to play. Not many Muslims know classical Arabic so most of us are reading translations Muslims included unless we are all Scholars in classical Arabic?

Edited by jamestaylor

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The sun does not run on a fixed course. We travel around the sun.

 

The sun is not stationary. It orbits the center of the milky way, and each revolution takes hundreds of millions of years.

 

However, I'm not going to assume that the verse is speaking of the physical movement of the sun. A "fixed course" could very well describe the existance and demise of the sun, which Allah has decreed. Much like us humans run a fixed course (from birth till death).

 

Salam.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The sun is not stationary. It orbits the center of the milky way, and each revolution takes hundreds of millions of years.

 

However, I'm not going to assume that the verse is speaking of the physical movement of the sun. A "fixed course" could very well describe the existance and demise of the sun, which Allah has decreed. Much like us humans run a fixed course (from birth till death).

 

Salam.

 

Maybe, it's possible but highly unlikely.

 

These verses seem to unambiguously point to the fact that people in the 7th century thought the sun traveled across the sky and rested at night and the Muslims where no different.

 

You do a good job of trying to square the circle Redeem and I respect that but I fear you are clutching at straws.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Almost every translation I can find of 38:36 refers to the sun traveling to a place of setting or rest.

 

Get better translations.

 

Please don't use the old "read it in Arabic" game.

 

I know for a fact that if someone came up to you and started speaking ignorantly about Science, you would tell them to do learn things before speaking nonsense. Your excuse is nothing more than a distraction from the truth, which is that you are ignorant about the Qur'an and only make yourself appear foolish when you try to make points concerning it. Leave the interpretation of the Qur'an to those who are qualified to do so. You have no ability to interpret anything when you don't even know the basic language.

 

Not many Muslims know classical Arabic so most of us are reading translations Muslims included unless we are all Scholars in classical Arabic?

 

Except that educated Muslims take the time to learn the basics of Arabic, and if they wish to get more into Qur'an studies, attend Arabic universities where they can do extensive research. At the very least, most Muslims take the time to read books written by qualified scholars and dedicate some of their time to learning the interpretation of the Qur'an.

 

Salam.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Maybe, it's possible but highly unlikely.

 

What is a possibliity? I hope you're not referring to the sun's movement.

 

These verses seem to unambiguously point to the fact that people in the7 th century thought the sun traveled across the sky and rested at night and the Muslims where no different.

 

The verses do nothing, it is you who jumps to baseless conclusions without trying to understand anything. For example, Shakespeare once said in a peom "All the world is a stage". Clearly, any idiot reading this would have assumed that Shakespeare thought that the world was literally a stage, and would think himself right if he didn't try to understand the implications in that line of the poem. I hope you see the mistake that you too are making.

 

You do a good job of trying to square the circle Redeem and I respect that but I fear you are clutching at straws.

 

Clutching at straws would imply that I have no idea what I'm saying. I actually do. It's one thing for you to state your beliefs and opinions, it is an entirely different thing for you to bring the Qur'an into this.

 

Salam.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The sun does not run on a fixed course. We travel around the sun. Almost every translation I can find of 38:36 refers to the sun traveling to a place of setting or rest.

In our galaxy, the milky way, the sun does move gazillions of miles an hour in relation to other galaxies. They are all part of predictable cycles of motion. It does have its own proper motion and it is detectable, but it changes very slowly from our vantage point. We know exactly where it will be at any time of day on any date for the next several thousand years. We in Indonesia usually learned this in the 5th grade. Perhaps it's different in where you live.

 

These verses seem to unambiguously point to the fact that people in the7 th century thought the sun traveled across the sky and rested at night and the Muslims where no different.

The verses are poetic and spiritual for the people of 7th century. And it is scientific verses for us who us live in the computer age.

 

Wassalam,

Y

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To show you an example of how important learning the meaning of the Qur'an is, read this chapter and tell me what it was intended to mean:

 

[An-Nasr]

1. When comes the Help of Allah, and Victory,

2. And you see the people enter Allah's religion in crowds,

3. Celebrate the praises of your Lord, and pray for His Forgiveness: For He is Oft-Returning (in Grace and Mercy).

 

Salam.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Get better translations.

I know for a fact that if someone came up to you and started speaking ignorantly about Science, you would tell them to do learn things before speaking nonsense. Your excuse is nothing more than a distraction from the truth, which is that you are ignorant about the Qur'an and only make yourself appear foolish when you try to make points concerning it. Leave the interpretation of the Qur'an to those who are qualified to do so. You have no ability to interpret anything when you don't even know the basic language.

Except that educated Muslims take the time to learn the basics of Arabic, and if they wish to get more into Qur'an studies, attend Arabic universities where they can do extensive research. At the very least, most Muslims take the time to read books written by qualified scholars and dedicate some of their time to learning the interpretation of the Qur'an.

 

Salam.

 

Your tone is getting a bit heated calm down, I mean you no harm. This is a debate.

 

The fact is the "read it in Arabic" ploy is just a get out clause that is used when Muslims have difficulty in a debate. I don't see Muslims use this ploy when someone is complimenting the Koran on a peaceful passage.

 

It's dishonest and shows a lack of ability to argue your point. You should take a deep breath and use your amazing knowledge and evidence to prove me wrong don't try to take the ball away. If you have truth on your side then don't get angry blind me with your evidence.

 

The claim is that a translation of the Koran is not perfect therefore I have to read it in the original classical Arabic to debate you but if you only know the modern Arabic and you are not fluent in the classical Arabic that puts us both on a level pegging.

 

Anyway if the only people who can comment on the Koran are the people who can read Arabic you might as well close this forum as not many non muslims are fluent in Arabic even fewer in classical Arabic. The "read it in Arabic" ploy narrows the amount of non muslims who can debate Islam to a handful. Why bother having this forum if only people who are fluent in classical Arabic are qualified to contribute. I still stand by my point that if you don't know classical Arabic and only know modern Arabic then you have no leg to stand on using this sneaky manouvre.

 

Also what constitutes being qualified to comment on the Koran? If believing in Islam is the qualification you expect of someone before they comment on the Koran you have banished all non muslims from the debate. Which is not a debate is it.

 

You say I should read books written by qualified scholars. Once again does that mean read books by believers? If so I really think you are struggling with the idea of free thought and open debate.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Your tone is getting a bit heated calm down, I mean you no harm. This is a debate.

 

My apology.

 

The fact is the "read it in Arabic" ploy is just a get out clause that is used when Muslims have difficulty in a debate. I don't see Muslims use this ploy when someone is complimenting the Koran on a peaceful passage.

 

This could quite possibly be true. But it would help all of us if we had more knowledge on matters we wish to debate over. The matter at hand is the interpretation of the Qur'an, and who better to do it than one who knows the native language? Things tend to get lost in translation when they're put into English (for example, the translator who said "resting place" rather than "fixed course", which is misleading for those who can't experience the original verses). Also, Arabic words do not have identical English counterparts. In my native language, for example, there are certain words that describe feelings, places, and things, that would require a long explanation in English. And vice versa.

 

It's dishonest and shows a lack of ability to argue your point. You should take a deep breath and use your amazing knowledge and evidence to prove me wrong don't try to take the ball away. If you have truth on your side then don't get angry blind me with your evidence.

 

You shouldn't assume that I was angry. I'm simply a straight-forward person and I don't tend to mince words. I have no reason to be angry that someone is misunderstanding the Qur'an.

 

Also, I would advice you to take your own advice. This is a debate, and there is no reason for insults.

 

The claim is that a translation of the Koran is not perfect therefore I have to read it in the original classical Arabic to debate you but if you only know the modern Arabic and you are not fluent in the classical Arabic that puts us both on a level pegging.

 

Not really. The Arabic in the Qur'an has been preserved, and is being taught in numerous universities in Muslim countries. It's very easy to get knowledge on the Qur'an if you truly seek it.

 

Why bother having this forum if only people who are fluent in classical Arabic are qualified to contribute.

 

I'd say a majority of us Muslims on this forum are under-qualified to interpret the Qur'an, and this certainly includes me. Interpreting a verse wrongly could mislead many people, and such a person would be held responsible for uttering things he or she had no knowledge about.

 

Also what constitutes being qualified to comment on the Koran?

 

We're not speaking of commenting. We're speaking of interpreting. You are free to express your opinions on the Qur'an, as long as they are in compliance with the forum rules.

If so I really think you are struggling with the idea of free thought and open debate.

 

Free thought does not give one the right to be ignorant on a subject.

 

Salam.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
In our galaxy, the milky way, the sun does move gazillions of miles an hour in relation to other galaxies. They are all part of predictable cycles of motion. It does have its own proper motion and it is detectable, but it changes very slowly from our vantage point. We know exactly where it will be at any time of day on any date for the next several thousand years. We in Indonesia usually learned this in the 5th grade. Perhaps it's different in where you live.

The verses are poetic and spiritual for the people of 7th century. And it is scientific verses for us who us live in the computer age.

 

Wassalam,

Y

 

The Koran says the sun has a resting place more than once and it refers to stars as lamps. The Koran did not know that the stars where millions of other suns.

 

[Koran 67:5] We adorned the lowest universe with lamps

 

(Koran 67:3-5)

He Who created the seven heavens, one above the

other...And WE have adorned the lowest heaven with

lamps ...

 

You can't have it both ways, the sun doesn't travel around us and the Koran seems to be saying that it does and everyone believed that it did in the 7th century. Not once does the Koran mention the movement of the earth or the existance of billions of other suns it talks about lamps in the sky and the sun moving to it's resting place. These theories are not only wrong they are mostly Greek, Hindu and Persian theories. If they are poetically and vaguely pointing to our modern discoveries why do they sound exactly like the common wisdom of the time?

 

Why didn't a Muslim pre-empt Galileo Galilei if they already had the information at their fingertips?

 

The evidence is not coroborating your claims.

 

Anyway where is this extraordinary evidence that was hinted at?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The Koran says the sun has a resting place more than once and it refers to stars as lamps.

 

Wow. Just, wow.

 

I just read the verse in Arabic and it is exactly as Ibn Kathir and Yusuf Ali mentioned it as. In fact, word for word, it translates to "The sun runs a course that Allah had intended for her" No where does the Arabic words mention "resting place" as you are so hopelessly insisting. Who are you getting your translation from? Can you present us with a source?

 

The Koran did not know that the stars where millions of other suns.

 

Yikes. You do realize that the Qur'an refers to both the sun and the stars as lamps, right? I guess not. If Allah did not know that the sun was just another star, why would He refer to both by the same term? The characteristic of a lamp is that it gives off heat and light, which the sun (which is a star) and all other stars do. Poetically, no other word could describe a star better.

 

the sun doesn't travel around us and the Koran seems to be saying that it does

 

For someone who keeps insisting about what the Qur'an says, you have absolutely no evidence to back up your theories.

 

Not once does the Koran mention the movement of the earth or the existance of billions of other suns it talks about lamps in the sky and the sun moving to it's resting place.

 

And how would you know what it does or doesn't, when you keep making so many assumptions? When you keep making a blind point and sticking by it no matter what?

 

Also, you're still doing what you've done from the beginning. You keep accusing Muslims of making claims of Science in the Qur'an, and then in the same breath completely butcher the meaning of the Qur'an.

 

Honestly, is there a nicer way of telling someone they have no idea what they're talking about?

 

Salam.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The Koran says the sun has a resting place more than once and it refers to stars as lamps. The Koran did not know that the stars where millions of other suns.

 

You can't have it both ways, the sun doesn't travel around us and the Koran seems to be saying that it does and everyone believed that it did in the 7th century. Not once does the Koran mention the movement of the earth or the existance of billions of other suns it talks about lamps in the sky and the sun moving to it's resting place. These theories are not only wrong they are mostly Greek, Hindu and Persian theories. If they are poetically and vaguely pointing to our modern discoveries why do they sound exactly like the common wisdom of the time?

 

Why didn't a Muslim pre-empt Galileo Galilei if they already had the information at their fingertips?

 

The evidence is not coroborating your claims.

 

Anyway where is this extraordinary evidence that was hinted at?

 

The blazing lamp is obviously the sun. the moon is defined as a body that gives light (munir) from the same root as nur (the light applied to the moon) the sun however is compared to a torch. a blazing (wahhaj) lamp. a man of muhammads time could easily distinguish between the sun a blazing heavenly body wll known to the inhabitants of the desert and the moon the body of the cool of thenight the comparisons found in the quran on this subject are therefore quite normal.

 

What is interesting to note here is the sober quality of the comparisons, and the absence in the text of the quaran of any elements of comparison that might have prevailed at the time and which in our day would appear as phantasmagorial. it is know that the sun is a star that generates intense heat and light by its internal combustions an that the moon which does not give off ligth itself and is inert bedy (onits external layers at least) merely reflects thelight received from the sun there is nothing in the tex of the quran that contradicts what we know tody about these two celestial bodies.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
So, if Qur'an did clearly mention about computers and the bombing of Japanese cities, then you will believe that God does exists, Mr. Danger?

 

Wassalam,

Y

I don't think that it does. I hate when people talk about psychics and predictions but you can only tell what the prediction is AFTER the event has happened because it's so vague. What's the point in that?

 

But tell me what it says about computers and Japanese cities being bombed in the Qur'an and I'll make my mind up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You can't have it both ways, the sun doesn't travel around us and the Koran seems to be saying that it does and everyone believed that it did in the 7th century.

Everything in space is moving, this is basic fact that you have to know before continuing this discussion.

 

Not once does the Koran mention the movement of the earth or the existance of billions of other suns it talks about lamps in the sky and the sun moving to it's resting place.

"It is He who created the night and the day, and the sun and the moon, all (the celestial bodies) swim along, each in its orbit with its own motion." (21:33)

 

Wassalam,

Y

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I don't think that it does. I hate when people talk about psychics and predictions but you can only tell what the prediction is AFTER the event has happened because it's so vague. What's the point in that?

Because the people study and make a research on that only recently. Qur'an has many hidden scientific message in it. One of the reasons might be to encourage the followers to study and investigate the Qur'an and explore its meanings. That's what the Arabic word Iqra means.

 

But tell me what it says about computers and Japanese cities being bombed in the Qur'an and I'll make my mind up.

There are none. And there should be none. Mentioning the bombing of Japanese cities in Qur'an will only give more disadvantages than benefits. It will not encourage people to embrace Islam or to make you realize that God exists, it's the opposite in fact. It will make you question Islam and Qur'an even more. IMHO. So, mentioning them in Qur'an is not as important as you may think.

 

Wassalam,

Y

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Because the people study and make a research on that only recently. Qur'an has many hidden scientific message in it. One of the reasons might be to encourage the followers to study and investigate the Qur'an and explore its meanings. That's what the Arabic word Iqra means.

There are none. And there should be none. Mentioning the bombing of Japanese cities in Qur'an will only give more disadvantages than benefits. It will not encourage people to embrace Islam or to make you realize that God exists, it's the opposite in fact. It will make you question Islam and Qur'an even more. IMHO. So, mentioning them in Qur'an is not as important as you may think.

 

Wassalam,

Y

But I didn't even bring that up in the first place. You were the one who started talking about predictions in the Qu'ran. :s

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


×