Jump to content
Islamic Forum
parvez mushtaq

Nothing Created Everything .....a Question To Atheists

Recommended Posts

I commend your choice of the word 'rigmarole' (meaning "a lengthy and complicated procedure" or "a long, rambling statement or story").  It's obvious that the story about the creation of the universe by some god is much simpler to understand; in fact, it's easily (and, in many cases, eagerly) adopted by children and those with childish minds; it makes for a great nursery tale for mothers to use to coax their children into submission and obedience.  In contrast, trying to understand how the universe created itself (e.g., via a symmetry-breaking quantum-like fluctuation in a total void) requires trying to understand a lot of modern-physics rigmarole.
That thought (that "the god idea" is eagerly adopted by those "whom it hurts to think" about the "rigmarole" of modern physics) reminded me of the great poem by A.E Housman (1859–1936).  Even if you know the poem, perhaps you'd enjoy reading it again, as did I:


 `Terence, this is stupid stuff:
You eat your victuals fast enough;
There's nothing much amiss, 'tis clear,
To see the rate you drink your beer.
But oh, good Lord, the verse you make,
It gives a chap the belly-ache.
The cow, the old cow, she is dead;
It sleeps well, the horned head:
We poor lads, 'tis our turn now
To hear such tunes as killed the cow.
Pretty friendship 'tis to rhyme
Your friends to death before their time
Moping melancholy mad:
Come, pipe a tune to dance to, lad.'
Why, if 'tis dancing you would be,
There's brisker pipes than poetry.
Say, for what were hop-yards meant,
Or why was Burton built on Trent?
Oh many a peer of England brews
Livelier liquor than the Muse,
And malt does more than Milton can
To justify God's ways to man.
Ale, man, ale's the stuff to drink
For fellows whom it hurts to think:
Look into the pewter pot
To see the world as the world's not.
And faith, 'tis pleasant till 'tis past:
The mischief is that 'twill not last.
Oh I have been to Ludlow fair
And left my necktie God knows where,
And carried half way home, or near,
Pints and quarts of Ludlow beer:
Then the world seemed none so bad,
And I myself a sterling lad;
And down in lovely muck I've lain,
Happy till I woke again.
Then I saw the morning sky:
Heigho, the tale was all a lie;
The world, it was the old world yet,
I was I, my things were wet,
And nothing now remained to do
But begin the game anew.
Therefore, since the world has still
Much good, but much less good than ill,
And while the sun and moon endure
Luck's a chance, but trouble's sure,
I'd face it as a wise man would,
And train for ill and not for good.
'Tis true, the stuff I bring for sale
Is not so brisk a brew as ale:
Out of a stem that scored the hand
I wrung it in a weary land.
But take it: if the smack is sour
The better for the embittered hour;
It will do good to heart and head
When your soul is in my soul's stead;
And I will friend you, if I may,
In the dark and cloudy day.
  There was a king reigned in the East:
There, when kings will sit to feast,
They get their fill before they think
With poisoned meat and poisoned drink.
He gathered all that sprang to birth
From the many-venomed earth;
First a little, thence to more,
He sampled all her killing store;
And easy, smiling, seasoned sound,
Sate the king when healths went round.
They put arsenic in his meat
And stared aghast to watch him eat;
They poured strychnine in his cup
And shook to see him drink it up:
They shook, they stared as white's their shirt:
Them it was their poison hurt.
-- I tell the tale that I heard told.
Mithridates, he died old.


Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have reported that post to the mods, zoro. My report (and this post here, I suppose) will be my only response to it.

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites



Did you perhaps fail to notice that the title of this thread contains the expression:  "A Question for Atheists"?  Somehow or other it would seem consistent and appropriate to permit atheists to respond.  Which of course leads to the obvious questions:  Why are you responding?  Why are you reporting to mods a response by an atheist?  Or is it that you prefer to hide behind moderators rather than discuss the issues? 

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

"Discussing the issues"? "Responding"? Is that really what you call what you just did there? Wow.

Edited by IAmZamzam

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

No, Zamzam, I didn't "call" it that; you did!  Try to assign ideas appropriately.


Look back three or four posts.  There, I did "discuss the issue", and you responded:  "You and I have been through this rigmarole before and I'm not going to do it again."  That's what I'd call a nonresponse.


But, so be it.  You want to run and hide; go for it; I'm through with you.  But if it makes you feel better, do go ahead and report me again to your mother (whoops) mod:  we can't have these pesky atheists presenting their views.

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

I must admit I have not read every post. However, Mushtaq posted a link asking for me to join... 



It is interesting that Quantum Physics is now pointing to new evidence that something physical can actually start from nothing. Even more interesting is that something (on a quantum level), can actually come in and out of existence and be in several places at the same time. If religious people think they can discredit or refute this - they should remind themselves that they believe God / Allah has these powers. Regardless what you believe - science is trying to research and understand it. Science is the search but not the answer. The search is never complete.



All we know for certain is that life exists... If science decides Quantum Physics is the truth. Islam will believe Allah created Quantum Physics (sorry fellow Atheists - you will never win this one... they're one step ahead...) 


Salams Fish


Firstly i must thank you for giving a relevant reply regarding my article


I remember my professor who use say while taking class on radio communication "man has complicated the understanding of nature in the name of invention and discovery" .I think he was correct . We have really complicated its understanding .


You might have noticed ,In the starting of my article ,I mentioned about "can 's" and "might" .Note my highlighted part in your quote .

Again you have came with "can" .You cannot or as a matter of fact no one can explain precisely about nothing because we have complicated everything and one knows the easier way .


You are even correct when you said if quantum science explains this "nothing" then  who is the artisan of that quantum events.

So you have already lost the argument because Nothing  Gives NOTHING .


But i don't know why you don't want to know about the artisan who claims that he has made every thing out of nothing

There is a sea of proofs that for that artisan and science can only testify that artisan is telling the truth

and BTW this question was not new to us



YUSUFALI: Were they created of nothing, or were they themselves the creators? 


tell me who is asking this question to you  ,that  to even before 1400 years


You might have learned a simple mathematical induction that if something is true for n terms then it is also true for n+1th term


I recently read The Grand Design, by Stephen Hawking's, and he made a point of saying something along these lines: 


We know the universe is expanding, therefore if we go back in time we know it was more condenced. And if we go back further in time, logic would say the universe had to be similar to a single mass - therefore the theory of the big bang. Most religious and scientific people now accept this as probable - (lets exclude those who think the earth is 6000-7000 years old).




Do you know one thing , Fish , even this article was inspired by such a program on discovery channel

Stephen hawking was talking about "habitable zone" and questioning us about the artisan who has put a perfect measure and designed with sheer elegance .But he goes on explaining other things  discarding the conversation about GOD by saying that it is not necessary .


Anyway, about your quote here , sure Stephen hawking might not had dreamed about this when he put forth this logic .He might have go in depth with theories  laws and experiments  before concluding that earth and the universe must be one mass 



has he  stolen this verse from quran



YUSUFALI: Do not the Unbelievers see that the heavens and the earth were joined together (as one unit of creation), before we clove them asunder? We made from water every living thing. Will they not then believe? 


which one is true , Fish

even in my wildest imagination i will not think that Stephen hawking had read quran

Who is confirming whom , Fish


Kanyakumari,a beautiful village about 800 kms form here.I happened to visit there regularly with regards to my business .I think this is only second piece of land on the earth which witness the both sunrise as well as sunset .The other one is in Australia ,if i am correct ..

There is a rock as you see in the picture


But what made me special about this place is this image here in this rock




Can you see the calibration on the rock .they are the timing of sunrise and sunset with its  monthly position w.r.t earth

There i have seen two ends for east and two for west one.

and the verse that reflected in my mind was 



YUSUFALI: (He is) Lord of the two Easts and Lord of the two Wests: 


and the science related to this phenomena is still more amazing


And Btw how far you agree with this verse




YUSUFALI: Were they to see a piece of the sky falling (on them), they would (only) say: "Clouds gathered in heaps!" 


Now .can you remember suddenly i talked about Mathematical Induction 

can you apply it here

I can give you lots of proofs 






Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

What matters is never what's "necessary", it's more what makes the most sense. Necessity does not determine truth, it determines need. If Stephen Hawking ever has read The Qur'an then his very problem was almost certainly that when he did so he was thinking entirely in terms of these misplaced scientific paradigms which Muslims themselves too often introduce into it now. It was a nontheistic scientist, you know, who first proposed NOMA--an idea which has so often been miserably and, I think, semi-intentionally misunderstood.


By the way, if the board isn't going to take me right to the full editor immediately then why does it bother with the intermediate screen? Why tease me? Can't the administrator do something about that?

Edited by IAmZamzam

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

It should also be stated, that the only real reason the big bang is thought of as 'the start of time', is because we can not possibly comprehend how we could explore beyond this point. That does not mean that 'time' did not exist 1,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000s of billions of years before the big bang - even if there was nothing.



I would like to add few things which i could not do yesterday


I dont know to whom your pointing here , Fish


If you are pointing towards quran

Then sorry Fish as far as i know quran does not make such claims

however , there is a mention of time varying with respect to earth



For example, one the day of judgement , this earth will be changed to other and the heavens will also be changed(ayah :14:48)

Then ,a day will be of 50 thousand years what we reckon


70:4. The angels and the Rûh [Jibrael (Gabriel)] ascend to Him in a Day the measure whereof is fifty thousand years,



for further study , read the tafsir of this ayah






Regarding this small proximity that we live in from our star and the fact that we have the perfect conditions for life, if should be noted that there also 60 - 600 million sperm in an ejaculation. There is no denying we are all extremely lucky to exist. But that does not prove God... 



Put it other way ,living in tiny proximity of the billions and trillions of galaxies and stars which amounts to only four percent of the entire universe can we able to guess its Originator.

What you expect ,Fish

the Sublime ,The Ultimate,The Originator will come to you and introduce himself to you

Can you able to understand the difference in the concept of GOD that we are holding .



YUSUFALI: To Him is due the primal origin of the heavens and the earth: When He decreeth a matter, He saith to it: "Be," and it is. 


In another verse



YUSUFALI: To Him is due the primal origin of the heavens and the earth: How can He have a son when He hath no consort? He created all things, and He hath full knowledge of all things.


So science can only acknowledge the presence of GOD and science itself cannot be god






Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

From my little human perspective:

This is only relatively true, because the word "nothing" is just a word, and words are relative.

So the part of it that is true, is as follows:

Allah exists. Allah IS existence. 

Everything depends upon Allah's existence.

Non-existence doesn't exist. And the non-existence of non-existence, means, that Allah will forever exist, why? Because there is no room in Non-existence for Allah to exist in non-existence, why? Because non-existence doesn't exist! There is nothing there, there is no place for existence to exist in non-existence. It literally doesn't exist. 

So does that mean that non-existence created Allah? No... They do not even exist simultaneously, why? Because NON-EXISTENCE LITERALLY DOES NOT EXIST.

IT    DOES    NOT    EXIST. 

But Non-existence can proof the eternal/infinite existence of Allah. And that is why we can use it as proof, to say "that nothing can help you realise that existence exists, and so if you can become aware of something, it can exist, and without your awareness it cannot exist, and SO in a sense you could relatively say with relative truth, that nothing "created" everything. But to be more precise, nothing just helped us to become aware of everything. Like two circles overlapping creates the eye of awareness in the middle. Everything and nothing. And then continue that expansion, the flower of life, and vortex of all creation. Which is about awareness and sentience. Vibrational, changing, perspective. Creation. Reflection. Consciousness.

So for us humans, yes, you can say "nothing can help proof everything", but that is again a relative truth, depending on how you view that word and how you want to use that word.  Because in the end, non-existence LITERALLY BY DEFINITION, DOES NOT EXIST. THERE IS NO NON-EXISTENCE. And so same can be said for nothing. There exists no nothing, by definition, nothing is not a thing. So there is no point to talk about it, EXCEPT for the fact that it PROOFS and it CAN HELP PROOF that existence exists, eternally and infinitely. And so existence will forever exist. And so you are thereby proofing the first dimension, of oneness, of Allah. Which is the primary Source of All Existence. But even further than that. IT IS EXISTENCE ITSELF. Pure existence, and it can only be found through non-existence. Why? Because non-existence doesn't exist, so if you focus your consciousness deeply enough into non-existence, you will always find Allah. There is no denying it. Like they say, All paths lead home, everyone returns to Allah. Even if you do not focus on non-existence, you will also return to Allah. 


Which you call Allah, I've heard some call it Brahma. but brahma is just referring to the sentient aspect of TOTAL Allah. And TOTAL Allah refers to both it's sentience AND non-sentience, and EVERYTHING that exists. OR can or will ever possible exist and does exist and has existed, etc. In all dimensions and all times, in all directions, in infinite depth and broadness, ever expanding. Eternally unknowable and knowable. And well, I have no idea what I'm talking about. Better to refer to the 99 names of Allah, than me regarding this.

But if scientists worship non-existence, they do that, because non-existence proofs existence. And they love PROOF. They want something consistent. But it literally does not exist. So they are literally not worshipping anything. And so they are in a sense saying "well, if I am eternal, then hell will become paradise and paradise will become hell and together they will eventually create something greater or bigger than both together or either seperate. So they skip that part. And they just go straight to peak behind Allah, to see if Allah is an illusion or not. They wanna see if there is really something behind or before Allah. And they don't wanna become a good muslim to accomplish this. They really believe that they are allowed to see for themselves if Allah is an illusion or not. So they try to look behind the 1st dimension. To see if there exists a 0st dimension. And ofcourse it doesn't exist. But if it really really really does not exist, and logic says that it cannot even possible exist. Then This non-existence must be the source of everything. It is just a logical conjecture or conclusion they have taken. Which is a flaw, because the moment they find it, it is no longer non-existent. So it's very stupid. Indeed. :blush:

Well, scientists aren't guided by Allah, so may Allah have mercy on them. 


Daoists say this too, but they still practice the art of balancing this duality. To find a way to reach a HIGHER FREQUENCY AWARENESS OR CONSCIOUSNESS that is more divine, like in Islam we seek to find higher faith and believe. Meaning higher consciousness. Deeper alignment or attunement to or with Allah. I don't know how you call it. Faith. Well, those who are believers anyway. Or who have experienced faith in the past atleast. And many people have, even if they have never heard about Islam. But they have very different names for it. And it is a very rare thing for humans to find faith. Infact, pessimism is way more common. Even amongst muslims it can be found, if you are a disbeliever. But if you are a believer, you will be able to find faith everywhere you look. Even in a scientists, and it will be very funny for you, and they may even be completely ashamed by it. By the guidance of Allah. And without faith, there is no ability to perceive the guidance of Allah, and no way to succesfully navigate the infinite illusions of existence. Not an easy not enjoyable thing. But who is to know that, except Allah!


However, I find this assignment of sentience and non-sentience to Allah a flaw. Even tho I cannot denie that it sounds logical. According to the Quran "There is none like unto Allah." So, Can there be a nonexistence that reflects Allah's existence? NO! Allah is the eternally existing, and the fact that Allah's opposite, non-existence, literally doesn't exist, PROOFS that. But the ASPECT of Allah that can be sentient and non-sentient. Ok... That is not the TOTAL Allah that is just an aspect of Allah that happens to contain a duality and similarity. We are made out of the breath of Allah afterall, we have to have SOMETHING in common right? But we will never become the Total Allah. Atleast it's hard to believe that that is possible in this life. But everything is hard to believe. Even Allah is hard to believe. Maybe we should first believe in Allah, and then we will be guided to the correct knowledge. But if we believe in Allah to find the knowledge, then we will never find it. We have to believe in Allah, just because we believe in Allah. And because we want to believe in Allah. And we have to KNOW that our believe is because of Allah, by Allah, for Allah, through Allah, and otherwise it's not a real true faith, and it will not yield any guidance. But even if we know that, if we do not believe, we simply do not believe, and we cannot find guidance either. And those are the two aspects of non-believe. To not believe, or to believe in a petty illusion that yields nothing. And both, I know very clearly. But faith, is not easy for me. And a scientist? Forget about it. By the mercy of Allah you will enjoy helping them find faith, that they may find it. And that you may be guided to help them find it if you truely need to. Allah knows best.

Edited by Luckee

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