 Ali_Muslim says: A challenge to this age. Also the barber is doing this for a living. I don't think there is a point to this story. Basically it says "believe in me or suffer.." that's not quite the picture i want to have for god. I really do think if I have to see this 'theory' clipped or linked again, I'm going to blow Clipmarks up! Seriously!!  Anon, dont worry mate. You are suffering from a natural phenomena of not being able to pose a viable counter argument to it. ie its defeated you completely and you have no where to run from it. As a result everytime you see it you freak out !  My advice to you is to try to come up with counter arguments to it as best as you can. And if you find that you cant, then maybe, just maybe, it is actually correct. Then you can decide what to do. Enjoy ali mcgraf, no you got it wrong, it is saying "Follow the right way or suffer the consequences of following the many wrong ways". Belief is another issue, and it can be proven that the Creator exists. And the proof is very very simple. How? (Anonymology, try to close your eyes here, it may be dangerous for you ) , if there is no Creator then you are effectively saying that everything came from nothing. And this is impossible. So there must be something that all things came from. Some people call this something , the Creator. Simple , isnt it. Anon, some fine tuning to the malady that is affecting you, it is called "Being unable to come up with counter arguments, while desperate in wanting to" I think it's a load of bollocks - pure and simple. It has no intellectual, scientific or theorectical grounding to it at all and until you can show me some of that, I will continue to think it's a load of bollocks. In short, it's nothing more than a clumsy attempt at analogy by one very tunnel-visioned man, and it would be laughed out of any academic debate on the subject. My frustration is not at being unable to counter it; it's at seeing the same nonsense repeated over and over again. And I do think we've been here before. Don't patronise me, Ali. Further, we know where we came from. The Theory (capital T ) of Evoultion has been Tested (capital T) hundreds of times and has not been found wanting. Of course there are gaps in the knowledge - there always are - but it is, as theories go, fairly incontestable. Some of the finest minds in the world have contributed to this thesis. Put that beside the ramblings of yourself and I think we can see what we're got here. Ok, if you think it is wrong then show me what is wrong with it. Dont tell me science this and science that in vague terms. Argue your case instead and be specific. How more specific do you want me to be!? 1. There is no way to establish if a creator exists or does not exist - therefore, I will never be convinced by it. It is nothing more than a notion and it is untestable. Not only that, but the very idea itself means different things to different people. One man's creator is another man's prophet etc. 2. The tenets of the theory of evolution (say, that of natural selection) are testable and have been tested repeatedly. Therefore, it is an established theory, with an impressive and respected scientific basis. This theory explains where the world came from. I'm really not sure how I can spell it out any further. Don't get me wron... Ok You say evolution is testable, and I say it is not and has never been. So prove your allegation. You also say that there is now way to establish if a Creator exists, and I have a proof that argues that He Must exist. So where is the error in my proof? For those that dont know where my proof is , it is here http://www.clipmarks.com/clipmark/4A05C226-9E5D-4DB2-AD77-4DCD06CB8ECE/ Oh man, there is it again! Here are some links that I found very quickly. Why the theory of evolution is obviously testable (a simple Google search): http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v297/n5863/abs/297197a0.html http://portal.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=9810.9823&coll=&dl=ACM&CFID=15151515&CFTOKEN=6184618 http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2006/08/060801230141.htm Above find studies from scholars who have tested this theory and published their results from these tests. Or, even follow the extrernal links from the Wiki page (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolution#External_links) to find studies on evolution. Or, if you like, there are some links on the evidence for thi... I'm not responding again to your 'theory' - I really don't think I can stress any further why I think it doesn't 'hold water'. However, if you find me a link to a paper that says, 'We tested (scientifically, rather than over dinner one evening) Ali's theory of the existance of a creator and we found it to be valid and wise' then I'll will surely read it.' Anon, I think you have put yourself in a bad situation. You have put your life in the hands of human beings called scientists. If they happen to be all biased against the existence of the Creator , or not interested in the existence of the Creator, then you will be affected by this. You have put your reliance on a subsection of humans on this planet, and have denied yourself the ability to think for yourself and judge for yourself. This is bad. It is similar to religious people saying whatever the priests say we believe and whatever they dont say we dont believe. The priests become thier gods. And they have forfeited their own minds and thought willingly to them. A big pitty. This is the effect of the church of science. You're absolutely wrong, and more to the point, you've really let yourself down here. You don't know the first thing about me. I haven't made any judgements about your thought processes and how you form your opinions, so I will ask you not to make any about mine. You asked me to show you how the theory of evolution is testable and I did. If you can’t come back to that, and have to pass judgement on people instead, then that’s your choice - I note that it goes against everything you preach to others, however. For your information, I am informed by reading, critical thinking and using my own intelligence to make decisions about what I want to believe and what I want to question. It's what ... you're too angry man. I'd just like to point out, ali, that your claim that the evolutionary view is ridiculous because it claims that everything "came from nothing" is extremely hypocritical. Where did god come from? Also, the claim is not that something came from nothing. Look up the term "abiogenesis." I don't want to heat up the discussion here, but I would like to point some things out: First, The Big Bang theory is not related to evolutionary theory. Second, What you provide here (the 'from nothing' argument) is not evidence nor proof for the existence of a creator. Third, Try checking out alternative sources Ali. Please do some thorough research yourself & try to apprehend what 'the other side' is claiming. Here are some pointers. (I'm not asking you to agree with all these claims, you're free to do what you want with this information): Talk Origins [url=http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/astronomy/bigbang.html]Talk Origins: Evidence on th... Try checking out alternative sources Ali. Please do some thoroughNo heating intended.. just an honest question. How much of this have you done Djiezes? I think it's unfair to assume Ali Islam is ignorant about your view. I for one am very up to speed on both sides. I have a different opinion. Thanks Willhelm Well, a lot actually, As a matter of fact I'm still checking out the above evolution deceit site. I can't deny I do so from a specific framework (one with a decent background when it comes to philosophy (of science), logic, evolution, etc. But I can't help noticing glaring logical fallacies, denial of whole bodies of scientific knowledge. & About the 'trying to apprehend the other side'; that's exactly my motivation to keep reading that stuff. I'm really curious to how & why someone would be so committed to that line of thought. Furthermore, I read most of Ali's comments, & yours too. That should count for something too, don't you think?  Thx for asking. I certainly do. But I am a bit skeptical about the extent you approach things with an open mind. But thanks for answering. I respect your view. I'd just like to point out, ali, that your claim that the evolutionaryfor something to create itself would mean that something would have to have already existed. Besides Ambiogenesis provides no answers to any questions of science and particularly to philosophical questions like the existence of logic, love, beauty, ethics, order, natural law, emotion, love, and irrationality intself. Also, your point about where God came from is not a valid question because it ignores the very definition of God. willhelm said:Oh, don't worry. I get the same reaction when reading something that I think (or know) is incorrect. todolos you said "I'd just like to point out, ali, that your claim that the evolutionary view is ridiculous because it claims that everything "came from nothing" is extremely hypocritical. Where did god come from? Also, the claim is not that something came from nothing. Look up the term "abiogenesis.""Todolos: Q1) What is the claim of evolution ? If it is that everything come from something then what is that something? What does evolution say about that something? Point 2: To answer 'where did God come from?' this is quite a commonly asked question. Because I think people dont think a lot about God. God is an entity or Thing that has allways been in existence. The... Djiezes , thankyou for your comments , this is my reply for you. Your First Point: Big Bang is not related to evolutionary theory. I agree, it is not necessarily related. Your Second point: "What you provide here (the 'from nothing' argument) is not evidence nor proof for the existence of a creator." My Question : Why Not? Please clarify. If you are saying that i have only proved that there must be something that all things came from then i agree with you. Saying whether it is a Creator or not is to do with asking what are the properties or atributes of that Thing. My view is that it must be Unlimited in all aspects eg strength, intelligence, life, power, will, knowledge, choice, freedom,... Djiezes , thankyou for your comments , this is my reply for you. Your First Point: Big Bang is not related to evolutionary theory. I agree, it is not necessarily related. Your Second point: "What you provide here (the 'from nothing' argument) is not evidence nor proof for the existence of a creator." My Question : Why Not? Please clarify. If you are saying that i have only proved that there must be something that all things came from then i agree with you. Saying whether it is a Creator or not is to do with asking what are the properties or atributes of that Thing. My view is that it must be Unlimited in all aspects eg strength, intelligence, life, power, will, knowledge, choice, freedom,... oops previous posting is duplicate. Here comes the true next part: Point 3 : Alternative sources: No time before big bang etc. Please point out any other specific points you wish to be addressed and i will try to address. Just putting links makes it difficult. As i said, i am not concerned about bing bang, my questions are above whether the big band existed or not. My only concern is that it must have come from something and not nothing. Regarding time not existing before the Bing Bang. This I think is an issue where there is a very significant amount of bias. How? You see it assumes only Time related to humans rather than time related to another Being that may be outside the Bing Bang. Who... I have put the full proof on my webpage here: http://groups.msn.com/OXFORDISLAM/proofofcreator.msnw Impossible proof Ali Muslim. I think it's odd to claim God can be proved, and I am of a faith with LOTS of evidences. However, for fun... I thought you might like this impossible proof... It may be odd but it may also be correct. Proving God is limiting God. God is beyond any limitations. I, or more correctly Islam, proves that God almighty is Unlimited. I dont prove that He is limited. Or look at it another way. You claim that God is beyond limitation ie unlimited. But this will remain only a claim until you can prove it. So can you prove God is unlimited? If so can you show me the proof. If not then you cant be sure that God Almighty is unlimited can you? Willhelm, i had a look at this impossible proof. I find it too complicated and a bit confusing. If the problem is that people dont beleive God Almighty's existence can be proven because if it were then everyone would know about it. If that were the issue then what I would say about this is the following: 1) The proof of Gods existence is a proof , in my view, but its not the same as other proofs. But only from the point of view that God Almighty is unperceivable. But it doesnt mean that one cannot prove His existence. Why , because the proof is based on logic and a proof is effectively a set of logical arguments. It doesnt necessarily need perception of the thing being proven. The percept... This proof by the way is not my own, but is from Islam. I should have pointed it out before giving it. Forgive me. ali You cannot prove or not-prove God, that is the point. “If you insist only on His transcendence, you restrict Him, and if you insist only on His immanence, you limit Him. If you maintain both aspects you are right.” - Ibn ‘Arabi, (quoted in Ian Richard Netton, Allah Transcendent) arifsali, prove that that is the point please. This statement you made may be right and may be wrong. How can anyone know for sure without proof or evidence. As for the quote for ibn Arabi, i dont think it is very much related to the issue of proof. And even if it is it is not a proof, its just his statement which may also be wrong. Man is not free from error. Only statements from the Creator or His profits are 100% error free. If you had a verse from the Quran or a saying of a prophet instead of ibn Arabi then that could be regarded as strong evidence. Do you see? The proof of Gods existence is a proof , in my view, but its not the same as other proofs.I think your confusing "proof" with "valid arguments" Ali, I'm better off atheist if I were to take on the task of proving God. I don't want to. I do not agree with your statement : "statement from the Creator". To me, your statement sounds really absurd. Again, you cannot claim to prove that Creator makes statements. In fact, your insistence on proving God is all on shaky grounds, this is the area best left for internal realization. My two cents. Its not absurd arifsali if you believe that the Creator has sent communication from Him down to us. This is what the Torah , Bible and Quran are basically. And there are many more such books. So why is it absurd? But what is worrying is why you say that being atheist is better that trying to prove the existence of the Creator. That doesnt make sense to me. Can you explain? Many thanks ali Willhelm, what is the difference. A proof consists of valid arguments does it not? When I speak about proof, I am speaking in the most rigid definition of the terms. For example, to be flippant, video tape or visual proof. As we know in court proceedings, even this can be suspect. In other words, proof leaves little room for faith, and to me faith is the foundation of our relationship with God. In my faith, we have tons of evidences, none of which are proof to me. However, they may have been proof to those that walked with Christ during his life. But, the actions of the disciples is just proof to me they witnessed miracles, witnessed resurrection, and believed what they witnessed so much that they all were willing to die for Christ in spreading his message to the world. Th... Strange, how can proof exist in our own hearts? It doesnt make sense. What does it mean to have proof in your own heart? Isnt it meaningless? For me the mind looks and sees evidences for things, and also proofs and this leads to building up of faith in something being true or false. People can have faith that no Creator exists if they see evidences and proofs for it. Like the many ardant atheist or communists etc. So faith just means your strength of belief in some thing. It can be 10% (weak faith), 99% very strong faith etc. Scientists can have faith in some theories. Once they see proof of it their faith increases dramatically and it becomes very strong. But someone may find a flaw in ... Proof is something that can be generally known and accepted by all, without doubt. See my previous comments about faith and arguments. If you are relying on arguments you accept and expect everyone to believe, then your faith is not very strong because your faith hinges on what you think is proof. However, if you hold what you think to be proof as a valid support for your faith, then god bless. I just don't think you should let your faith hinge on that. Willhelm , i have been thinking about this. This is my view so far: How long does it take for a proof to become accepted? Maybe it takes a while before it becomes accepted as a true proof. What are the stages that a proof goes through before becoming accepted? It will first need to be publisized. Then critics will try to inspect it and find flaws. Then if they cant find flaws it becomes a forceful theory. Then if still no one can fault it, it can become accepted as a proof. So maybe today this proof is not accepted. But in 10 years time it may become accepted by ALL. At the moment it is in its early pulication stage. The challenge is for anyone to find a flaw or fault in it. Can anyo... so how does this theory explain the people who go to the barber but still end up with a bad haircut? Those have gone to a False god. eg they turn to Science or they turn to Money, or they turn to Scientists and worship them etc There are thousands, if not more, of false gods. But there is only one True god. And that is the Creator. Because He knows the right way for ALL the creatures. The false gods dont even know what is right for themselves. Regards, ali What is the religion of that one true God? If he's beyond any religion then why is there a need for this God to have his follower follow one religion or another? BTW, you stick with one barber (God) if you find a suitable one, you change barber, you're screwed (lol, good question maadi). Can you clarify your points please arifsali, i dont fully understand . thanks, regards, ali If I gave you a million dollars and told you it was all yours to do whatever you wanted to do with it. Let's say you squandered it in less than a month and were now two million in debt and didn't have a place to stay and everyone you knew avoided you because you were bad news. Would it be my responsibility to hunt you down in a back alley beg you to take 5 million and do the right thing? No . The earth , intelligence and free will were given along with a lot of good guides for making this place a nice place to live. God isn't creating the bad conditions. It is mankind with his free will and series of proofs and arguments defending their right to abuse the planet and their own bodies... I agree with most of what you say apart from the last paragraph about proof. Proof is just helping the people who have become 'endarkened' to see the light again. Its like evidence that you show people so that they can believe you. These things are especially important because in this age ideas have spread very widely that God doesnt exist, that God is not needed, that the Big Bang came from nothing and that all the creatures that are here today just randomly materialised ie chance brought them into existence. So you need to show people that these ideas are based on falshood, and you need to show them that the alternative is not based on falsehood but on sound reasoning eg that something ca... Oh I wasn't referring to you , You get it Ali. I do know that with time and patience that people do learn. But, when they come to you and ask you to disprove a "theory" before they would believe you, they are just doing all they can to avoid even entertaining the message. But, understanding and enlightenment will not occur during the discussion time. It will be during their own hours of solice if and when they allow their minds to think deeply on the matter and open their hearts. Yes I do admire the content and the approach to the subject. I didn't want to single out anyone and their rantings about proof. I know what I understand and what works and doesn't work. I know the m... Thanks 123clipmarks. I appreciate your comments and they are very deep. Especially about people being more interested in Challenging proofs than in actually Reading them. Very sad. Best regards ali |
View the Top Clips from October 25, 2006
|
||||||||||
|
|
|||||||||||
|
New from the makers of Clipmarks: Amplify.com - Don't just share the news...Amplify it!
|
|||||||||||
