| Author | Topic |
aijaz47
PAKISTAN
|
 Posted - Monday, October 4, 2004 - 6:54 PM 
We are trying to prove the existance of God.
Edited by: aijaz47 on Tuesday, October 12, 2004 10:47 AM |
|
shetayo
NIGERIA
|
Posted - Tuesday, October 5, 2004 - 5:28 PM
In which case I believe that YOU have to substantiate YOUR claim that if it has a name, it exists.He who aserts must bring prove not the other way round,else you are been deliberately incoherent.Let's be clear about what you mean by exist. Do you mean 'real','tangible' and 'material', or do you mean an notion or a concept which is intangible and abstract,or both?
Regards. |
|
surgeonakhlaq
PAKISTAN
|
Posted - Tuesday, October 5, 2004 - 9:23 PM
Assalaamu’alaikum,
First of all I could not understand the objectives of this topic of the discussion. However, so far as my knowledge is concerned, I try to explain the subject as under.
1. After saying Muhammad-ur-Rasool-Allah, the debate needs no more arguments regarding existence of God when the Holy Prophet, Muhammad (peace be upon him) already has solved the problem. We have to believe, according to Holy Quran the foremost criterion of the believers or one who has fear of God is “Youmenuna-Bilghaibe” (Baqra-3), that means one who believes in that one can’t see e.g. existence of God, what will be in the grave, Qiamat, heaven, hell and many others. Therefore, in Holy Quran man is said to be “Jahil” (believes in that he can not see) who took the responsibility blindly, given by God when all other creatures excused to take it.
2. If we want to confirm the existence of God, it is not difficult. Suppose, “Nauzbillah” all other things except man, in the universe are autonomous then the indirect evidences are “Man is helpless oneself, one’s all ambitions are not fulfilled, inspite of the latest technology and advanced researches doctors can not sometimes save a life, every one from servant to king has to die in spite of all the efforts” Why this is so? There is something behind, having the control and that super power is God.
3. So far as real existence is concerned, He has different names, can see, hear, likes or dislikes showing Him to have eyes, ears and brain. When it is said, “ He made Hazrat Adam” this shows that He has hands. Speaking to Hazrat Musa shows that He has a mouth and tongue also. These features conclude that He is like a man and exists physically but we can’t see Him. But there are many characteristics, which are dissimilar to man. May He forgive, He knows better.
The above-mentioned Qura’nic verse (Baqra-3) has the demand to nullify this discussion otherwise, next time we might fit a camera inside the grave, after the burial, to see “ what is happening inside” I think this is not our domain to explore such matters because these have a lot of potential of irreversible complicated confusions. I think we are crossing the boundaries, which is disliked by God. Recall the Qura’nic verse, “ Inna- araznal- amanat……………Inna-hu-kana-zaluman-jahula”. So we must be “Jahil to know” and be “zalim” to our “Nafs” by keeping it “Jahil” to know these logics or secrets. Recall Hazrat Adam when he was curious to go to that tree and we know the reaction of God. It must be remembered that we must not be “Jahil” in every aspect of Islam but in special aspects in which we are not supposed to know. The concept of “Haroof-e-Muqattea’t” also seems to be the similar as these are included in Holy Quran but we are kept ignorant. Now we can wait for the next more comprehensive approach according to the teachings of Islam.
May Allah help and forgive us, Aameen!
Allah Hafiz!
Dr. Akhlaq |
|
Naina
KUWAIT
|
Posted - Sunday, October 10, 2004 - 2:30 PM
"So far as real existence is concerned, He has different names, can see, hear, likes or dislikes showing Him to have eyes, ears and brain. When it is said, “ He made Hazrat Adam” this shows that He has hands. Speaking to Hazrat Musa shows that He has a mouth and tongue also. These features conclude that He is like a man and exists physically but we can’t see Him"
I am sorry but to me, this is blasphemous.When Allah says He spoke to Musa.We believe in it without thinking that He has a mouth and tongue etc.It seems that these lines emanates because of thinking Allah to be like us.Exalted is He from all such imperfections.Even salafi scholars don't say this.They affirm what is reported in texts without going into details.Please correct your understanding.
May Allah show us the straight Path and avoid all deviations.
Thanks |
|
Shahzad
IRELAND
|
Posted - Monday, October 11, 2004 - 12:45 AM
Salaam everyone,
I dont think it's possilbe to scientifically/rationally prove the existence of Allah by non-Quranic means, here's why:
The "Everything has a Creator" argument is fundamentally flawed - we can ask "Who Created the Creator?" .. As a Muslim, i believe Allah has always existed - but i'm afraid there's no way i can comprehend that - nevermind trying to prove it.. How is it that He has always been there - did time have a beginning, does it go back to infinity or is there some incomprehensible circle-thing going on?? The universe and time (as we know it) were created at the Big Bang - even athiests accept that.. It's makes sense to think that someone/something initiated it - but then you start over with that "who created the thing that initiated it, and who created that in turn?" and it just doesnt make any sense... But the very fact that i'm sittin at my computer today proves that something totally incomprehensible to the human mind must have happened - what is it? some crazy vicious circle going back to infinity or Allah (who's existence goes back to infinity) - either way, science and rational thinking fail us in relation to this topic. It's just something we have to accept/believe.
The only way i think we can "prove" the existence of Allah, is to scientifically analyse the one thing which is claimed to be sent down, word for word, by him - The Holy Qur'an. People have found many things mentioned in the Qur'an that have only recently been scientifically discovered - but when i say that, there "seem" to some errors in there.. Now it's up to us to clarify these "errors" (usually misunderstandings on our part - we're only human), and reinforce the scientific findings, act in a way The Qur'an tells us to - so that the people of this world will appreciate the way we go about our lives, and if the athiests/non-believers chose to ignore/deny, i'm afraid that they'll just be being unscientific... But before we reach that stage, a lot of hard work must be done by each and everyone of us - May Allah Almighty help us in our quest and guide us on to the straight path, Ameen. |
|
Shahzad
IRELAND
|
Posted - Monday, October 11, 2004 - 12:49 AM
quote:
i think sum1s alredy mentiond this bt im gna say it any way! ^.^
thers a belever and a barber **non beleving barber** and 1 day, the barber sed to the belever: i do NOT beleve in god. and the belever sed: wel y not? and the barber sed: look at all those wars and things going on. i say that if there ever was a god, he'd stop em.
so the belever went away thinking. a week or so later, he came bak and sed: excuse me sir but i do NOT believe in barbers. and the barber was like um Y?? and the belever sed: look at all these people with scraggy hair n long beards. if there was a barber wudnt he sort tht out??
barber: wel duh id sort them out if they came to me...
the belever laughd and sed: EXACTLI! ^.^ god would sort out the wars if people came to him. 
lol, that's very clever.. i'll make a note of it and duly use it (if u dont mind) the next time i get into a philosophical debate with someone  |
|
surgeonakhlaq
PAKISTAN
|
Posted - Monday, October 11, 2004 - 9:37 PM
With the name of Allah,
Assalaamu’alaikum, every one
Thank you Naina and Jazakallah,
No doubt God is exhaled from all these imperfections and we must believe without thinking. I have the same thinking as yours. You must know that I have already pointed your words “without thinking” to take guidance from Qura’nic verse (Baqra-3) and this was the only objective of my writing (see above). But I am sorry to say that you had just a bird’s eye view, selecting the text of your own choice with no comment on the remaining of what I have written above. Your way of assessment and inferring is absolutely wrong and discouraging. This is never allowed in Islam (see subsequently).
You could not differentiate between “Speaking to Hazrat Musa shows (or seems to be) that….” not Naubbillah “ I am sure that speaking to Hazrat Musa….” The first statement was just an imagination (as at various sites of Quran and Ahadith) in the light of the evidences, not an intention and you know well “The reward of the deeds depends upon the intentions” (Hadith).
The above two statements are not at all one and the same but have a lot of difference to mean like between “peace & piece” This is the use of these words, which passes or fails someone in the examination. We think that the paper was easy and we have hit that but unfortunately we are ignorant of the forthcoming “big zero”. Please don’t arrest your mind and correct your perception for the better convenience so that you understand clearly. It is very important to think having a broad spectrum, keeping in mind all the circumstances otherwise the thinking remains paralysed e.g. if someone breaks the Ramadhan fast, Will we label it as a sin? Never, first of all know whether it has broken or not, if really broken then look at the circumstances then decide. Without thinking with broad spectrum, we can not differentiate even between “Halal” & “Haram”. This paralysed thinking is the only cause of division of Islam into various sections. It must be remembered that “Halal” is not always “Halal” and vice versa e.g. I am not at all sorry to say as in Holy Quran the sexual intercourse between husband and wife is “Halal” but “Haram” in the state of menses and fasting. Marriage and divorce are opposite to each other but both are “Halal” There are many other similar examples.
Decision-making is not a one-window operation, you must have asked me first to clear the things if you were unable to understand. I have been objected to explain all those in the imagination only but I say that for example, if someone openly says that he has seen God, still we have no right to say one a blasphemer. Moreover he may be right due to extreme of his love to God due to the delusions and it must be remembered that these delusions (as medical term) are involuntary and never a part of malingering, so God can do for one’s pleasure (please do not take it serious, it is just an example).
The charge of blasphemous is a biggest decision. We are not allowed to pay such words even to the real blasphemer but alas! It is not a “Nura Kushti”(hit and trial) but a matter of “Pleasure or anger of God”, “Sin or reward”, and “Paradise or hell” which is not at all the right of any person but God. Hence you have taken the powers of God in your own hand, Naubbillah. You must do “Taoba” and seek refuge. Sometime some mistake absorbs all the rewards and vice versa.
On the other hand the assignment given in the discussion is a sort of research work and the research can not complete without the required data. This was just like a scientific approach and “Speaking to Hazrat Musa shows that” and all others are parts of the data, not the conclusion of the research which is impossible to prove even with help of the latest technology and even after thousands of years and this is not the domain of any Newton, Einstein or Archimedes. If you really mean that these words must never be used even in the data as a way of regards to God then I do admit, “ I am wrong”(but still no blasphemous) and apology to God otherwise we remember Him daily as “Samee (one who hears)” “Baseer (one who sees)” and He likes it so much that we seek help by remembering Him with these names.
Please differentiate clearly also between data and conclusion. We are not supposed to prove and reach the conclusion, therefore we are ordered clearly to believe blindly (Baqra-3) that I have already pointed out and this is the height of the believers.
In the end it is summarized as “I have expressed God in the imagination only but you have taken the powers of God in your own hands, Naubbillah”. Now my question is to you “Who is more guilty?” But do not worry God is with us and I believe that we both are not guilty because our intentions are transparent (Hahith) and the only factor is the misinterpretation, most probably due a narrow field of thinking. I have already pointed out that it is not our domain to explore such matters because these have a lot of potential of irreversible complicated confusions (see above) So these are confusions not intentions but in spite of all the transparent intentions we both must do apology and seek refuge to please God who is “Ghafur-ur-raheem”, “Ghaffar” and loves His creatures, to add more to His pleasure leading to paradise, a place free of confusions and full of smiles; Insha’allah.
May you enjoy His blessings and bounties everywhere and may He help and forgive all of us, Aameen!
Dr. Akhlaq |
|
aijaz47
PAKISTAN
|
Posted - Tuesday, October 12, 2004 - 6:51 PM
quote:
In which case I believe that YOU have to substantiate YOUR claim that if it has a name, it exists.He who aserts must bring prove not the other way round,else you are been deliberately incoherent.Let's be clear about what you mean by exist. Do you mean 'real','tangible' and 'material', or do you mean an notion or a concept which is intangible and abstract,or both?
Regards.
The idea of God is proof of His existance.
Edited by: aijaz47 on Tuesday, October 12, 2004 6:59 PM |
|
shetayo
NIGERIA
|
Posted - Tuesday, October 12, 2004 - 8:36 PM
|
shetayo
NIGERIA
|
Posted - Tuesday, October 12, 2004 - 8:42 PM
| The nature of existence is still not clear, so I'm still waiting. |
|
surgeonakhlaq
PAKISTAN
|
Posted - Tuesday, October 12, 2004 - 10:07 PM
Assalaamu’alaikum,
I also agree with Shetayo but not at all with Naina (See above).
May Allah help and forgive us, Aameen! |
|
aijaz47
PAKISTAN
|
Posted - Wednesday, October 13, 2004 - 4:20 PM
quote:
The nature of existence is still not clear, so I'm still waiting.
Let us first agree that Allah exists.
Edited by: aijaz47 on Wednesday, October 13, 2004 4:54 PM |
|
aijaz47
PAKISTAN
|
Posted - Wednesday, October 13, 2004 - 6:40 PM
| The nature of existance of Allah is absolute with no other god or grantor of existance. |
|
surgeonakhlaq
PAKISTAN
|
Posted - Thursday, October 14, 2004 - 9:44 PM
Assalaamu’alaikum,
The evidence of existence of any thing can be direct or indirect. For example the direct evidence of raining is when I see with my eyes or I becomes wet when come out but the indirect evidence is when I hear the sound of the raining, thundering of the clouds and feel the sense of cool breeze. So there is absolutely No direct evidence of “existence of God with no other god or grantor” and only the indirect evidences can be explained. The explanation of this concept of indirect evidences is two folds.
1. No doubt, there is only one God as mentioned in Quran and Ahadith. It must be remembered that almost all the religions other than Islam are agreed on oneness of God. They do not believe in the other multiple gods worshiped by them as all in all but the links, without which their access to true God is impossible. The worship of fire, sun, moon, stars, cow or other things seem to be having the similar objective. They do “sajda” before them not considering them true God but as a way of regards or respect to them. Actually, these gods are the dummies of their saints and similarly fire; sun, moon, stars, cow etc have some important background (incidences) attributed to their lives. They seek help from true God by worshiping them and their attributes and it must not be forgotten that this is the same God that we worship and He is “Rehman”, “Razzaq”, “ Samee” and “Baseer” etc here as well. He hears their prayers as well, and they too get His help like us, in miracles, Allah-ho-Akbar. Because of this worshiping the dummies and their attributes, we are strictly forbidden to have a picture especially of a person and all the attributes e.g. at the graves even at Masjid-e-Nabvi where we are beaten while doing so, to make the meanings of “La-ilaaha-illallah” more precise and comprehensive.
Now it is known that the belief in oneness of God is not only in Islam but common among all the religions. The difference between Islam and the other religion lies at the level of “La-ilaaha-illallah” (worship of nothing but Allah- True God) and “Muhammad-ur-Rasool-Allah” (the compliance of His beloved Prophet, Muhammad (pbuh). Because of this difference at this level, we can assess its efficacy by recalling “Ghazwa-e-badr” when only 313 not well-equipped men defeated more than one lac of the well-equipped men. This huge difference is only due to worshiping one God and complying “Muhammad-ur-Rasool-Allah (pbuh)”, therefore the Quranic verse (33-Ahzab, 56) and this is the order by God, which is being acted upon by God Himself as well, with His angels.
Why we are not so as in“Ghazwa-e-badr”? The answer is, we are not upto the mark and this is due to lack of the belief and Taqwa/piety (Please see the following links).
a). http://www.studying-islam.org/forum/topic. aspx?topicid=345&lang=&forumid=1
b). http://www.studying-islam.org/forum/topic. aspx?topicid=791&lang=&forumid=1
2. As it is discussed above, God being “Rabbil-Aalameen”, “Rehman”, “Razzaq”, “ Samee” and “Baseer” etc has no discrimination anywhere whether Muslim or non-Muslim, someone believes in His oneness or not, someone worships Him or not and someone complies His orders or not. I think this system of such a balance is only possible due to one God, Allah-ho-Akbar.
The rewards of one God’s worship and compliance of Muhammad-ur-Rasool-Allah (pbuh) is at the “Day of the judgement” when exchange of the currencies will show the market value.
This is the only that comes into my mind otherwise I have already pointed out to believe blindly (Baqra-3) otherwise it is absolutely impossible to prove directly or like this:
0.11+xy+14/70+1/5+0.29-xy+38/190=1
We can only beat about the bushes but He knows better.
May Allah help and forgive us, Aameen!
Dr. Akhlaq |
|
shetayo
NIGERIA
|
Posted - Friday, October 15, 2004 - 6:03 PM
| I'm supposed to agree that God exists before you prove it to me? What you have said about the nature of God's existence been absolute is true, but your arguement for it is at best unsuccessful.You may want to try harder to make it unassailable or try another more logical argument, if logic is what we are looking for. |
|
aijaz47
PAKISTAN
|
Posted - Friday, October 15, 2004 - 7:24 PM
quote:
I'm supposed to agree that God exists before you prove it to me? What you have said about the nature of God's existence been absolute is true, but your arguement for it is at best unsuccessful.You may want to try harder to make it unassailable or try another more logical argument, if logic is what we are looking for.
Yes, that is what I am trying to do. To prove that God exists I have put forwards two arguments as below:
1."If it has a name it exists", thus God exists.
2."The idea of God is proof of His existance".
If you dont find any or both these arguments to be logical enough, you are welcome to logically refute these.
I am relieved to note that finally you have accepted my argument regarding nature of existance of God.
Since you asked me to define the nature of existance, it is, but logical to agree to accept the existance, otherwise it seems illogical to discuss the attributes of something whose existance has yet to be established.
It is however very surprising for me to note that you have accepted the nature of existance without accepting the existance.
Edited by: aijaz47 on Friday, October 15, 2004 8:01 PM
Edited by: aijaz47 on Friday, October 15, 2004 8:18 PM
Edited by: aijaz47 on Friday, October 15, 2004 8:31 PM
Edited by: aijaz47 on Monday, October 18, 2004 4:19 PM |
|
 Reply to Topic 
Printer Friendly |
| Jump To: |
|
|
|