Challenge

Previous page 1 ... 4 5 67 8 Next page « Previous thread | Next thread »
- bogart
- Pub Regular
- offline
Challenge
Reply #150 - June 28, 2016, 12:28 AM

Quote from: A Muslim on June 27, 2016, 03:12 PM
The Universe was most definitely created. The Universe and its complexity could not have come out of nothing. Speaking of complexity, let's have a look with at a few constants which determine the structure of our Universe:

Speed of Light: c=299,792,458 m s-1

Gravitational Constant: G=6.673 x 10-11 m3 kg-1 s-2

Planck's Constant: 1.05457148 x 10-34 m2 kg s-2

Planck Mass-Energy: 1.2209 x 1022 MeV

Mass of Electron, Proton, Neutron: 0.511; 938.3; 939.6 MeV

Mass of Up, Down, Strange Quark: 2.4; 4.8; 104 MeV (Approx.)

Ratio of Electron to Proton Mass: (1836.15)-1

Gravitational Coupling Constant: 5.9 x 10-39

Cosmological Constant: (2.3 x 10-3 eV)

Hubble Constant: 71 km/s/Mpc (today)

Higgs Vacuum Expectation Value: 246.2 GeV

These are the fundamental constants and quantities of the universe. Scientists understand that each of these numbers have been carefully dialed to an astonishingly precise value - a value that falls within an exceedingly narrow, life-permitting range. If any one of these numbers were altered by even a hair's breadth, no physical, interactive life of any kind could exist anywhere. There'd be no stars, no life, no planets, no chemistry.

Consider gravity, for example. The force of gravity is determined by the gravitational constant. If this constant varied by just one in 1060 parts, none of us would exist. To understand how exceedingly narrow this life-permitting range is, imagine a dial divided into 1060 increments. To get a handle on how many tiny points on the dial this is, compare it to the number of cells in your body (1014) or the number of seconds that have ticked by since time began (1020). If the gravitational constant had been out of tune by just one of these infinitesimally small increments, the universe would either have expanded and thinned out so rapidly that no stars could form and life couldn't exist, or it would have collapsed back on itself with the same result: no stars, no planets, no life.

Or consider the expansion rate of the Universe. This is driven by the cosmological constant. A change in its value by a mere 1 part in 10120 parts would cause the universe to expand too rapidly or too slowly. In either case, the universe would, again, be life-prohibiting.

Or, another example of fine-tuning: If the mass and energy of the early Universe were not evenly distributed to an incomprehensible precision of 1 part in 1010123, the universe would be hostile to life of any kind.

The fact is our Universe permits physical, interactive life only because these, and many other numbers, have been independently and exquisitely balanced on a razor's edge. How do you reconcile this with your beliefs that there is no God? Do you really take the position that the Universe could have come from chance?

Conclusion: We can rationally deduce that the Universe was created. Thus, God could not have been created. Besides, we cannot rationally deduce that God was created, (check my example above, which shows that our Universe existing today is in itself proof of an independent and absolute creator).

Argument from incredulity. Big numbers are scary.... Also nice quote of William Lane Craig. Do you support his conclusion regarding Christianity. After all this argument is part of his argument for Christianity not Islam. At best you get Deism, if accepted without his concluded true religion, not Islam. Also take note of some of his quote such as Hawking who is an atheist..... After all you can not ignore his views given the quote since these views are based on his work. What about Hoyle, another atheist? Quotes are lovely until one spents 10 seconds thinking about who said it...

http://www.reasonablefaith.org/transcript-fine-tuning-argument

Good job at plagiarizing a source which itself has next to no sources. You also added a conclusion never made by Craig nor any source he used. So this conclusion is injected by you or whomever you copied this from.
- A Muslim
- ... Just a scary ex-Muslim. Boo!
- Member
- offline
Challenge
Reply #151 - June 28, 2016, 12:51 AM

Quote from: bogart on June 28, 2016, 12:01 AM
Events which there is no evidence for. Islam has far less details surrounding the figures and events but the core still remains, a core that has no evidence in support.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_ymjwT2cI4M

Ahl as-sunnah wal-jamāʻah and following the way of the Salaf. - nope, not anymore.
- A Muslim
- ... Just a scary ex-Muslim. Boo!
- Member
- offline
Challenge
Reply #152 - June 28, 2016, 12:54 AM

Quote from: bogart on June 28, 2016, 12:17 AM
This is the strong ACP which is rejected by far more than those in the field that accept it. It is also heavily teleological thus this bias is ever present. This make it a philosophical point as it can not be falsified, nothing more. Tautology, nothing more. I guess you never heard of competing ideas nor of the criticism of your sources. You should read your sources more especially Tipler when he writes about Christianity and goes over the deep end

I don't care about what they say about Christianity. I just care about Barrow and Tipler's calculations done in this field, which they talked about in their book, 'The Anthropic Cosmological Principle'.

Ahl as-sunnah wal-jamāʻah and following the way of the Salaf. - nope, not anymore.
- A Muslim
- ... Just a scary ex-Muslim. Boo!
- Member
- offline
Challenge
Reply #153 - June 28, 2016, 12:56 AM

Quote from: bogart on June 28, 2016, 12:28 AM
Argument from incredulity. Big numbers are scary.... Also nice quote of William Lane Craig. Do you support his conclusion regarding Christianity. After all this argument is part of his argument for Christianity not Islam. At best you get Deism, if accepted without his concluded true religion, not Islam. Also take note of some of his quote such as Hawking who is an atheist..... After all you can not ignore his views given the quote since these views are based on his work. What about Hoyle, another atheist? Quotes are lovely until one spents 10 seconds thinking about who said it...

William Lane Craig is a Christian philosopher. One of his arguments that he uses to prove the existence of a God, is through the well-known fine-tuning argument. This argument is NOT exclusive to Christianity. Please, don't be ridiculous. We Muslims believe in a God too!

Ahl as-sunnah wal-jamāʻah and following the way of the Salaf. - nope, not anymore.
- A Muslim
- ... Just a scary ex-Muslim. Boo!
- Member
- offline
Challenge
Reply #154 - June 28, 2016, 01:02 AM

Quote from: yeezevee on June 27, 2016, 04:02 PM
"Jews and Christians, and Sabians, whoever believes in Allah and the Last Day and do righteous good deeds shall have their reward with ~~their~~ Lord"

well that is good allahgod does accept Jews, Christians, and Sabians..........

yeezevee, 2:62 of the Qur'an is talking about the Jews, Christians and Sabeans which came before Muhammad (S.A.W). These groups of people would obviously be judged by the Shariah of Islam that Muhammad (S.A.W) came with, when he did arrive.

Ahl as-sunnah wal-jamāʻah and following the way of the Salaf. - nope, not anymore.
- bogart
- Pub Regular
- offline
Challenge
Reply #155 - June 28, 2016, 01:03 AM

Point is you do not follow his conclusion which are supported by his arguments including the above. His work contains no sources, neither does your own. You, or the author of your post has willfully plagiarized his work and included points he never made. Hawking's own work allows him to make a conclusion that God is not required thus to quote him is a distortion hence quoting out of context. You posted statements but didn't show any of the math behind it. You just showed the result not the calculations involved. Like I said, big scary number therefore God.
- bogart
- Pub Regular
- offline
Challenge
Reply #156 - June 28, 2016, 01:05 AM

Quote from: A Muslim on June 28, 2016, 12:54 AM
I don't care about what they say about Christianity. I just care about Barrow and Tipler's calculations done in this field, which they talked about in their book, 'The Anthropic Cosmological Principle'.

As I said the work is philosophical not scientific. It is one version of principle, shocking there are more than your favorite flavour which has major issues within the field. You are free to continue to ignore this if it makes you happy.
- A Muslim
- ... Just a scary ex-Muslim. Boo!
- Member
- offline
Challenge
Reply #157 - June 28, 2016, 01:05 AM

I recommend you go to the corner of your room, sit down and cry like the little baby you are, as that hilarious reply won't change anything. The point stands.

Ahl as-sunnah wal-jamāʻah and following the way of the Salaf. - nope, not anymore.
- A Muslim
- ... Just a scary ex-Muslim. Boo!
- Member
- offline
Challenge
Reply #158 - June 28, 2016, 01:09 AM

Quote from: bogart on June 28, 2016, 01:05 AM
You are free to continue to ignore this if it makes you happy.

Ciao!

Ahl as-sunnah wal-jamāʻah and following the way of the Salaf. - nope, not anymore.
- Helaine
- Not Religious
- Member
- offline
Challenge
Reply #159 - June 28, 2016, 02:25 AM

Quote from: A Muslim on June 28, 2016, 12:54 AM
I don't care about what they say about Christianity. I just care about Barrow and Tipler's calculations done in this field, which they talked about in their book, 'The Anthropic Cosmological Principle'.

At this point, let's face it: You don't want to hear anything that doesn't support Islam. You don't even care about reading your own sources, and at this point, since all your sources came from supporters of Christianity, you're actually telling people that Christianity is true.
- Iceman
- Ex-Muslim
- offline
Re: Challenge
Reply #160 - June 28, 2016, 02:30 AM

Quote from: A Muslim on June 27, 2016, 07:12 PM
I begin by saying that the Multiverse theory is speculation. We don't have a theory in which that speculation is mathematically realized. Now, we exist in this observable Universe, so I would agree that there could be another. I have an issue though. Do you know how many Universes we would need to postulate in this, 'Multiverse' would be very large. How large? 10^120.

Pick one:
(a) God - which you all refuse to accept.
(b) At least 10^120 Universes.

Wait! Before you pick, I want to make sure you understand how large this number is, (if you pathetically choose to pick option b): 10^120 is more then all atoms of our Universe, multiplied by a trillion, trillion and another trillion times. In other words, all atoms of the observable Universe, with another 40 zeros to it. Still thinking its quite plausible of a theory? Don't be ridiculous.

I think you missed the point. I wasn't arguing for (or against) multiverse theory, or suggesting that there are actually multiple universes (though there could be--unless you possess perfect and omniscient knowledge of everything, I don't think you can say for certain one way or the other). I brought up multiple universes as a thought exercise to help with visualizing the previous point I was making regarding selection bias. My argument had nothing to do with the actual existence (or lack thereof) of multiple universes. I have absolutely no opinion on the validity or lack thereof of multiverse theory, I am completely indifferent to it.
- A Muslim
- ... Just a scary ex-Muslim. Boo!
- Member
- offline
Challenge
Reply #161 - June 28, 2016, 02:50 AM

Quote from: Helaine on June 28, 2016, 02:25 AM
At this point, let's face it: You don't want to hear anything that doesn't support Islam. You don't even care about reading your own sources

Utter face-palm. You ignored everything in my last few replies. Pathetic.

Ahl as-sunnah wal-jamāʻah and following the way of the Salaf. - nope, not anymore.
- A Muslim
- ... Just a scary ex-Muslim. Boo!
- Member
- offline
Challenge
Reply #162 - June 28, 2016, 02:59 AM

Quote from: Iceman on June 27, 2016, 05:31 PM
If our universe couldn't support life, we wouldn't exist. In other words, it's a major selection bias; of course the constants of the universe allow life to exist, otherwise we wouldn't be here to think about those constants and their relation to the universe. That's not miraculous or amazing. It's coincidence.

Think of it this way: how do you know there aren't 1,000,000,000,000,000 other universes, each with a slightly different set of universal constants? What if ours is the only universe in which the universal constants allow life to exist, and that in the other 999,999,999,999,999 universes the universal constants don't allow life to exist? What if there is an infinite number of other universes? This would make our existence coincidental, at worst, and a statistical certainty, at best--either way, not the work of a creator.

Great! However, please clarify as you did attempt to somewhat jump to the Multiverse theory in your second paragraph.

By the way, if there were, ''1,000,000,000,000,000 other universes, each with a slightly different set of universal constants'' and we, somehow, were the Universe that had the constants to, ''allow life to exist'' and that, ''in the other 999,999,999,999,999 universes the universal constants don't allow life to exist'', doesn't this support my position? Why do you want to remain in a position of high improbability? It doesn't seem reasonable. Why not accept that it was God that superseded the creation of our Universe that we know of, to be the one to allow the existence of life within it?

Ahl as-sunnah wal-jamāʻah and following the way of the Salaf. - nope, not anymore.
- ibn Bilal
- Global Moderator
- سلاسي هو المسيح
- offline
Challenge
Reply #163 - June 28, 2016, 04:32 AM

Quote from: A Muslim on June 27, 2016, 07:59 PM
I can't believe how you are supporting it. How embarrassing. By the way, that's irrelevant to what I had asked. Besides, anyone would pick an alternative to being thrown into a woodchip machine, so it's a ridiculous argument.

I see your edit, and I actually like what you did here. Albeit unwittingly, you demonstrated the issue perfectly.

We have two options, option a and option b, neither of which are particularly satisfying. Given the ambiguity around the matter, one might readily be deemed reasonable to simply say "I don't know."

Some extra-curious parties might continue to search for an answer, while others will likely say "Aww, fuck it, forget this nonsense!" and just get on with the business of living, if the choice were inconsequential.

The moment I throw in the fear element, however, demonstrated in this case by the threat of being thrown into a woodchip machine, the easiest and safest answer becomes the one that does not risk your body being shredded to bits.

Even if it didn't make much sense to you a moment before, your fear now kicks in and overrides any other faculty. As you said, "anyone would pick an alternative to being thrown into a woodchip machine," even though you otherwise had no reason to believe it, even though you otherwise found it as unbelievable as you claim to find option b.
- A Muslim
- ... Just a scary ex-Muslim. Boo!
- Member
- offline
Challenge
Reply #164 - June 28, 2016, 05:34 AM

Refer to my reply below.

Ahl as-sunnah wal-jamāʻah and following the way of the Salaf. - nope, not anymore.
- A Muslim
- ... Just a scary ex-Muslim. Boo!
- Member
- offline
Challenge
Reply #165 - June 28, 2016, 05:39 AM

Quote from: ibn Bilal on June 28, 2016, 04:32 AM
even though you otherwise had no reason to believe it, even though you otherwise found it as unbelievable as you claim to find option b.

I think any sane and rational human being would choose an option other than being thrown into a woodchip machine. Whatever the scenario. However, this still is irrelevant to my earlier post. I would rather believe in the existence of a Creator, (one of whom I can rationally deduce to exist and to have created the Universe) than to believe the contrary which is highly improbable. That was my point.

Besides, are you stating that believing in the contrary, (not in the existence of a God that created the Universe) is, "unbelievable" as there is, "no reason to"? Albeit unwittingly, you demonstrated the issue perfectly .

Ahl as-sunnah wal-jamāʻah and following the way of the Salaf. - nope, not anymore.
- yeezevee
- Pub Regular
- offline
Challenge
Reply #166 - June 28, 2016, 10:24 AM

Quote from: A Muslim on June 28, 2016, 05:39 AM
I think any sane and rational human being would choose an option other than being thrown into a woodchip machine. Whatever the scenario. However, this still is irrelevant to my earlier post. I would rather believe in the existence of a Creator, (one of whom I can rationally deduce to exist and to have created the Universe) ~~than to believe the contrary which is highly improbable~~. That was my point............

what is highly improbable A Muslim? Nonsense ., that is explorable open ended subject with countless questions. Your blind faith in Islam really constrained you in using your science background(whatever little you have) and worse is, your faith constrained you using your commonsense ..

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KZsobWW1pQQ

Do not let silence become your legacy.. Question everything
I renounced my faith to become a kafir,
the beloved betrayed me and turned in to a Muslim
- cosmicdancer
- Pub Regular
- offline
Challenge
Reply #167 - June 28, 2016, 10:46 AM

Can you name this God?
-No.

Is it a specific one, or a general one
-I don't know. I believe there is a God - some sort of intelligence and creative power that is outside everything i know and understand. I base this on my feelings - but I can't define or quantify this God and admit I could be wrong.

Do you call it: 'The Creator of the Heavens and the Earth'?
-Yes, sometimes.

If so, wouldn't you think that this, 'God' would want to guide his creation, to whatever it may be, through revelation?
-Yes I would have thought so.

Why would God have created us without a purpose?
-Why, indeed. It makes no sense to me.

The Holy Qur'an, 51:56 - ''And I did not create the jinn and mankind except to worship Me.''
The Holy Qur'an, 23:115 - ''Then did you think that We created you uselessly and that to Us you would not be returned?"

-How do you know those are God's words?

You see this is the crux of the matter. I don't disagree with what you said above but I don't see any convincing evidence that the Qur'an is God's word and I've yet to see you provide any.

So why do you believe the Qur'an is God's word?
- ibn Bilal
- Global Moderator
- سلاسي هو المسيح
- offline
Challenge
Reply #168 - June 28, 2016, 11:14 AM

Quote from: A Muslim on June 28, 2016, 05:39 AM
I think any sane and rational human being would choose an option other than being thrown into a woodchip machine. Whatever the scenario. However, this still is irrelevant to my earlier post. I would rather believe in the existence of a Creator, (one of whom I can rationally deduce to exist and to have created the Universe) than to believe the contrary which is highly improbable. That was my point.

Besides, are you stating that believing in the contrary, (not in the existence of a God that created the Universe) is, "unbelievable" as there is, "no reason to"? Albeit unwittingly, you demonstrated the issue perfectly .

My first instinct was to question your reading compensation skills, but I realize that in your zeal to make your point, you missed mine.

I didn't say that I found option b unbelievable, I said that, clearly, YOU do. I am, as I said earlier, agnostic. I simply don't have enough evidence one way or another to claim to KNOW what happened at the beginning of time.

The God hypothesis is one possibility, though I can find no real evidence for it apart from my own intuitive senses - the same ones that would have me believe the earth is flat and the moon and sun are the same size. Intuitively, a creator could make sense, but the universe does not run based on my intuition.

The God described in the Quran, however, seems very unlikely to me as Gods go. So, even if we were to go with the "God did it" option, the evidence still appears to point away from your particular version of God.

Consider, though, that if you personally find option b unbelievable but would choose it to avoid being shredded in my woodchip machine, your fear doesn't make it more true or believable for you. It just makes it the "safest bet" based on your own fear.
- Ursus
- Godless heathen
- Member
- offline
Challenge
Reply #169 - June 28, 2016, 12:50 PM

Quote from: A Muslim on June 27, 2016, 11:46 PM
I was being serious of Islam being a Dīn/Deen, or, 'Complete way of life'. However, don't think that I didn't pick up on his nonsense. No, I don't believe in half of the things that he stated.

How should I understand that?

Do you mean that nothing in this quote has any relevance for the moslem?
Quote
"Islam is a totalitarian religion* and the basic text has remained unaltered since the iron age"

*it tells you how to sleep, how to wash, what to eat, how to dress, how to have sex (and with whom). It is permeated by a fixation on sex, reducing women to livestock that must be covered up and not be left on their own, lest they stray or get stolen, and it reduces men to mindless horny animals, that must rape anything female not covered up in three black cloth sacks.
(Black thick clothing under tropical temperatures.... How is that for "stupid"?)

That Islam has nothing to say about how to sleep, how to wash, what to eat, how to dress, how to have sex (and with whom). That islam has a constant focus on sex, and that women must be covered up and not be left on their own?
You know, because they are temptresses, and they must be covered, lest they make men do things they should not!

You can mark them here (you said half were wrong):
- the koran is unaltered (since the editing finished)
- islam has nothing to say about how women should dress (nor why)
- islam has nothing to say about how a moslem should sleep
- islam has nothing to say about personal hygiene at different occasions
- islam has nothing to say about how women should go about their daily life outside the house
- islam has nothing to say about sex
- islam has nothing to say about what to eat
- islam has nothing to say about how to take a crap (You forgot that one, didn't you?)

Or that you agree, that so many moslems are really bloody stupid to think that way?
- ibn Bilal
- Global Moderator
- سلاسي هو المسيح
- offline
Challenge
Reply #170 - June 28, 2016, 01:55 PM

Quote from: A Muslim on June 27, 2016, 03:12 PM
The Universe was most definitely created. The Universe and its complexity could not have come out of nothing. Speaking of complexity, let's have a look with at a few constants which determine the structure of our Universe:

Speed of Light: c=299,792,458 m s-1

Gravitational Constant: G=6.673 x 10-11 m3 kg-1 s-2

Planck's Constant: 1.05457148 x 10-34 m2 kg s-2

Planck Mass-Energy: 1.2209 x 1022 MeV

Mass of Electron, Proton, Neutron: 0.511; 938.3; 939.6 MeV

Mass of Up, Down, Strange Quark: 2.4; 4.8; 104 MeV (Approx.)

Ratio of Electron to Proton Mass: (1836.15)-1

Gravitational Coupling Constant: 5.9 x 10-39

Cosmological Constant: (2.3 x 10-3 eV)

Hubble Constant: 71 km/s/Mpc (today)

Higgs Vacuum Expectation Value: 246.2 GeV

These are the fundamental constants and quantities of the universe. Scientists understand that each of these numbers have been carefully dialed to an astonishingly precise value - a value that falls within an exceedingly narrow, life-permitting range. If any one of these numbers were altered by even a hair's breadth, no physical, interactive life of any kind could exist anywhere. There'd be no stars, no life, no planets, no chemistry.

Consider gravity, for example. The force of gravity is determined by the gravitational constant. If this constant varied by just one in 1060 parts, none of us would exist. To understand how exceedingly narrow this life-permitting range is, imagine a dial divided into 1060 increments. To get a handle on how many tiny points on the dial this is, compare it to the number of cells in your body (1014) or the number of seconds that have ticked by since time began (1020). If the gravitational constant had been out of tune by just one of these infinitesimally small increments, the universe would either have expanded and thinned out so rapidly that no stars could form and life couldn't exist, or it would have collapsed back on itself with the same result: no stars, no planets, no life.

Or consider the expansion rate of the Universe. This is driven by the cosmological constant. A change in its value by a mere 1 part in 10120 parts would cause the universe to expand too rapidly or too slowly. In either case, the universe would, again, be life-prohibiting.

Or, another example of fine-tuning: If the mass and energy of the early Universe were not evenly distributed to an incomprehensible precision of 1 part in 1010123, the universe would be hostile to life of any kind.

The fact is our Universe permits physical, interactive life only because these, and many other numbers, have been independently and exquisitely balanced on a razor's edge. How do you reconcile this with your beliefs that there is no God? Do you really take the position that the Universe could have come from chance?

Conclusion: We can rationally deduce that the Universe was created. Thus, God could not have been created. Besides, we cannot rationally deduce that God was created, (check my example above, which shows that our Universe existing today is in itself proof of an independent and absolute creator).

Basically, all you are saying here is that if things were any different, they’d be different. This is pretty obvious.

I’d venture to bet you know next to nothing about the numbers you ~~plagiarized from William Lane Craig~~ quoted. Could you explain, for example, exactly what would happen if “Mass of Up, Down, Strange Quark” was: 2.4; 4.785; 104 MeV (Approx.) instead of 2.4; 4.8; 104 MeV (Approx.)

Of course you can’t. It is a classic argument from incredulity. You literally don’t understand what would happen if things were different, therefore, you believe they could never be any different.

Unless you can prove me wrong here and enlighten me as to exactly what would happen.
- A Muslim
- ... Just a scary ex-Muslim. Boo!
- Member
- offline
Challenge
Reply #171 - June 28, 2016, 06:34 PM

Quote from: ibn Bilal on June 28, 2016, 11:14 AM
I didn't say that I found option b unbelievable, I said that, clearly, YOU do. I am, as I said earlier, agnostic. I simply don't have enough evidence one way or another to claim to KNOW what happened at the beginning of time.

The God hypothesis is one possibility, though I can find no real evidence for it apart from my own intuitive senses - the same ones that would have me believe the earth is flat and the moon and sun are the same size. Intuitively, a creator could make sense, but the universe does not run based on my intuition.

The God described in the Quran, however, seems very unlikely to me as Gods go. So, even if we were to go with the "God did it" option, the evidence still appears to point away from your particular version of God.

Consider, though, that if you personally find option b unbelievable but would choose it to avoid being shredded in my woodchip machine, your fear doesn't make it more true or believable for you. It just makes it the "safest bet" based on your own fear.

The analogy that you gave is based on fear. My analogy has nothing to do with fear. Mine is to do with logic.

If you want to believe in the improbability of us venturing upon this specific Universe, or even planet which bares life, out of the millions; billions; trillions or whatever amount that there may be, then I believe that is irrational. However, I am quite pleased that you are an agnostic, at least.

Ahl as-sunnah wal-jamāʻah and following the way of the Salaf. - nope, not anymore.
- A Muslim
- ... Just a scary ex-Muslim. Boo!
- Member
- offline
Challenge
Reply #172 - June 28, 2016, 06:37 PM

Quote from: Ursus on June 28, 2016, 12:50 PM
Do you mean that nothing in this quote has any relevance for the moslem?

May he explain where he got these ideas from, ''reducing women to livestock'' and, ''it reduces men to mindless horny animals, that must rape anything female not covered up in three black cloth sacks''?

Ahl as-sunnah wal-jamāʻah and following the way of the Salaf. - nope, not anymore.
- A Muslim
- ... Just a scary ex-Muslim. Boo!
- Member
- offline
Challenge
Reply #173 - June 28, 2016, 06:43 PM

Quote from: ibn Bilal on June 28, 2016, 01:55 PM
Could you explain, for example, exactly what would happen if “Mass of Up, Down, Strange Quark” was: 2.4; 4.785; 104 MeV (Approx.) instead of 2.4; 4.8; 104 MeV (Approx.)

Of course you can’t. It is a classic argument from incredulity. You literally don’t understand what would happen if things were different, therefore, you believe they could never be any different.

Unless you can prove me wrong here and enlighten me as to exactly what would happen.

Here's a great piece on the issue: ''We can calculate all the ways the universe could be disastrously ill-suited for life if the masses of these particles were different. For example, if the down quark’s mass were 2.6 x 10-26 grams or more, then adios, periodic table! There would be just one chemical element and no chemical compounds, in stark contrast to the approximately 60 million known chemical compounds in our universe.

With even smaller adjustments to these masses, we can make universes in which the only stable element is hydrogen-like. Once again, kiss your chemistry textbook goodbye, as we would be left with one type of atom and one chemical reaction. If the up quark weighed 2.4 x 10-26 grams, things would be even worse — a universe of only neutrons, with no elements, no atoms, and no chemistry whatsoever.

The universe we happen to have is so surprising under the Standard Model because the fundamental particles of which atoms are composed are, in the words of cosmologist Leonard Susskind, “absurdly light.” Compared to the range of possible masses that the particles described by the Standard Model could have, the range that avoids these kinds of complexity-obliterating disasters is extremely small. Imagine a huge chalkboard, with each point on the board representing a possible value for the up and down quark masses. If we wanted to color the parts of the board that support the chemistry that underpins life, and have our handiwork visible to the human eye, the chalkboard would have to be about ten light years (a hundred trillion kilometers) high. That’s just for the masses of some of the fundamental particles.''

Ahl as-sunnah wal-jamāʻah and following the way of the Salaf. - nope, not anymore.
- A Muslim
- ... Just a scary ex-Muslim. Boo!
- Member
- offline
Challenge
Reply #174 - June 28, 2016, 06:46 PM

Quote from: Hassan on June 28, 2016, 10:46 AM
Can you name this God?
-No.

Is it a specific one, or a general one
-I don't know. I believe there is a God - some sort of intelligence and creative power that is outside everything i know and understand. I base this on my feelings - but I can't define or quantify this God and admit I could be wrong.

Do you call it: 'The Creator of the Heavens and the Earth'?
-Yes, sometimes.

If so, wouldn't you think that this, 'God' would want to guide his creation, to whatever it may be, through revelation?
-Yes I would have thought so.

Why would God have created us without a purpose?
-Why, indeed. It makes no sense to me.

The Holy Qur'an, 51:56 - ''And I did not create the jinn and mankind except to worship Me.''
The Holy Qur'an, 23:115 - ''Then did you think that We created you uselessly and that to Us you would not be returned?"

-How do you know those are God's words?

You see this is the crux of the matter. I don't disagree with what you said above but I don't see any convincing evidence that the Qur'an is God's word and I've yet to see you provide any.

So why do you believe the Qur'an is God's word?

Aha. I see. You believe in a God, but your faith in Islam isn't as strong for you to believe that the Qur'an is a divine revelation from this, 'God'? I have went through many reasons for me believing in the, 'divinity' of the Qur'an as, 'afghan hassan' put it. This can be found on page 4. Remember, these are only a few - out of many.

Ahl as-sunnah wal-jamāʻah and following the way of the Salaf. - nope, not anymore.
- ibn Bilal
- Global Moderator
- سلاسي هو المسيح
- offline
Challenge
Reply #175 - June 28, 2016, 06:47 PM

Quote from: A Muslim on June 28, 2016, 06:37 PM
May he explain where he got these ideas from, ''reducing women to livestock'' and, ''it reduces men to mindless horny animals, that must rape anything female not covered up in three black cloth sacks''?

You’re right. It doesn’t reduce them to livestock; it reduces them to dirt.

“Your women are your tilth” 2:223

"O Prophet! Tell thy wives and daughters, and the believing women, that they should cast their outer garments over their persons that is most convenient, that they should be known and not molested." 33:59

The logical deduction here is that women who do not cast their outer garments over their persons conveniently should not be known and should be molested.
- ibn Bilal
- Global Moderator
- سلاسي هو المسيح
- offline
Challenge
Reply #176 - June 28, 2016, 06:54 PM

Quote from: A Muslim on June 28, 2016, 06:34 PM
The analogy that you gave is based on fear. My analogy has nothing to do with fear. Mine is to do with logic.

If you want to believe in the improbability of us venturing upon this specific Universe, or even planet which bares life, out of the millions; billions; trillions or whatever amount that there may be, then I believe that is irrational. However, I am quite pleased that you are an agnostic, at least.

On what other planet would you expect to find life apart from on a planet which can bear life? There are far more planets that are not within the hospitable zone for their host stars and guess what, there is no life there! Did God just make a mistake with those planets?

I’m not sure why this is difficult for you to gasp. The probabilities display themselves through the reality we observe. The conditions are not always just right. More often than not, they are not just right. But when they are just right, they are just right.
- cosmicdancer
- Pub Regular
- offline
Challenge
Reply #177 - June 28, 2016, 06:54 PM

Quote from: A Muslim on June 28, 2016, 06:46 PM
Aha. I see. You believe in a God, but your faith in Islam isn't as strong for you to believe that the Qur'an is a divine revelation from this, 'God'? I have went through many reasons for me believing in the, 'divinity' of the Qur'an as, 'afghan hassan' put it. This can be found on page 4. Remember, these are only a few - out of many.

Thanks, I just took a look. I'm not going to mock your belief and I respect your opinion - but please also respect my opinion that such miracle claims as the number 19 claims are less than convincing to me - to put it mildly.

Peace
- A Muslim
- ... Just a scary ex-Muslim. Boo!
- Member
- offline
Challenge
Reply #178 - June 28, 2016, 06:59 PM

Here is a great academic piece on 2:223 of the Qur'an: http://goo.gl/oZuiJx

Towards 33:59, what's wrong? The purpose is given, ''that they should be known and not molested''. Other translations do say, ''abused'', but I would accept it to be somewhat the same thing. In all, this is for the betterment of the female in being protected from many evils. It is also for purposes of the female to have recognition, safety and honor.

Ahl as-sunnah wal-jamāʻah and following the way of the Salaf. - nope, not anymore.
- A Muslim
- ... Just a scary ex-Muslim. Boo!
- Member
- offline
Challenge
Reply #179 - June 28, 2016, 07:08 PM

Quote from: ibn Bilal on June 28, 2016, 06:54 PM
On what other planet would you expect to find life apart from on a planet which can bear life? There are far more planets that are not within the hospitable zone for their host stars and guess what, there is no life there! Did God just make a mistake with those planets?

I’m not sure why this is difficult for you to gasp. The probabilities display themselves through the reality we observe. The conditions are not always just right. More often than not, they are not just right. But when they are just right, they are just right.

This is my view: I believe that God superseded this planet in creation, to allow it to bare life for us to exist. I CANNOT believe that because our planet permits life to exist out of the other millions; billions or even trillions of other planets in the observable and unknown parts of the Universe, this makes it a complete coincidence. How can you believe that? ''We are here now, it's just chance''. If you want to believe that, fine. I can't come to that conclusion. Sorry.

By the way, there is a difference in: making a mistake, and a difference in choosing not to give other planets the same properties in order for them to also bare life.

Ahl as-sunnah wal-jamāʻah and following the way of the Salaf. - nope, not anymore.
Previous page 1 ... 4 5 67 8 Next page « Previous thread | Next thread »