|
Post by daveshn on Feb 1, 2012 21:51:58 GMT -6
I see what you're trying to do, Jafar, but your argument has many logical flaws. About the Bible, the so-called Bible we see today is as I mentioned changed by humans. God, being perfect, does not contradict Himself. There are absolutely no contradictions in the Qur'an, none in the sayings of Prophet Muhammad, and no verse of the Qur'an contradicts the saying of Muhammad or vice versa. God promised that the Qur'an would be preserved, and His Promise is always fulfilled. I have read many books, which obviously were written by people, that have no flaws in their logic, nor contradictions in their message. Medical texts, math books, well-written stories, all these can be flawless, but aren't by God. So to say that the Qur'an doesn't have flaws is only saying it is possible that it was written by God, since a flawed writing could not be. Say someone is standing still, and feels a strike in the back. They will turn around and even if they see no one who could have delivered the blow, the person would know for certain that something hit them. The sound mind does not accept that a hit is without a hitter, a writing is without a writer, or a building is without a builder, for example, so certainly the sound mind does not accept that this entire universe and everything within it is without a Creator. It follows that a Creator must exist. I have gotten hit in the head by a pinecone that fell simply because of the force of gravity pulling it off the branch. There wasn't a person, an animal, nothing more than the way nature works combined with random chance. Now, how does one, using the sound mind, prove that this Creator is One, meaning He is without partners? Say someone made the claim that there are two "Creators". Say one of these "Creators" wanted me alive, and the other wanted me dead. It is impossible for me to be dead and alive at the same time. So the will of one of these "Creators" would be fulfilled, while the will of the other would not be, making the other weak, and that which is weak is not God. If both of these so-called "Creators" willed for me to be alive, they would need each other's permission to carry out their will, and needing anything is weakness, and that which is weak is not God. The same logic applies for three, four, five, a million, etc. claimed "Creators". So it follows that there is only One Creator, also known as God. I don't understand what you are going for here as I must be missing the forest for the trees. This entire argument, if taken at face value, falls apart by the concept of death itself. Lots and lots of things have died. Thus death has beaten the will to live. Please elaborate. You say that humans cannot imagine that which does not have a size, and you are correct... But imagining and knowing are different things. We may not be able to imagine God in our minds, since the Creator of shapes, sizes, colours and places is without any of these, but we know that God exists. The logic behind this is also simple. Everything which we imagine in our minds, whether it be as small as an atom or as big as a body six million times the size of the sky, has a limit, defined as an end. That which has a limit is in need of being specified with that limit. Who specified the limits of creations? God. In order for anything in this universe, the universe included, to exist, of course there needs to be a Creator who has perfect Power over His creations, perfect Will which cannot be opposed and perfect Knowledge of all His creations. How can there be a video game without a developer with power, will and knowledge over the game? How can there be an orange plantation without a planter with power, will and knowledge over the plantation? As I stated before, the sound mind does not accept the existence of an action without an actor who carried it out. Once again, your analogy breaks down. Programmers, farmers, and any other creator needs raw materials that are refined. Now, if you are saying that God created these raw materials and/or refined them, that's fine. But then why didn't they start out fine? Why did the universe take eons before galaxies, stars, and planets formed? Now, some people falsely claim that there is "a chain of creation". That is, they falsely claim that God created things and then these things created more things. Now, creations are of two types, those without wills and those with them. Those without wills, such as water and rocks, certainly cannot create, because they don't know anything. Those creations with wills, such as humans, have a will, but it is not always carried out, and sometimes they do things against their will! But this is possible if you accept that nature + random chance can have the same effect. We have proof of how stars explode and create nebula, which create new stars and planets. You need to prove to me that it cannot be random chance and nature when we clearly see that it is. Now, that isn't to say that God doesn't exists the same way that the 'flawless book' argument doesn't prove that the Qur'an was written by God. It simply means that there's another possibility. How can someone claim that the Creator of something does not have His will always fulfilled? It's impossible, because if the universe was created and managed by something imperfect, there would be absolutely no order. Think about the functions of the human body, the water cycle, the seasons... Certainly how these amazing processes have a Creator Whose Will is never opposed. Proofs of God's Existence are all around us. These proofs are our own existences. I'm sorry, Jafar, but this is one argument that is flat out wrong. The human body is horribly imperfect and susceptible to cancerous objects, injuries that cannot heal completely, and horrible amounts of pain caused by simple movement. People can twist their ankles by doing nothing more than simple movements in a slight wrong way.The water cycle can be NATURALLY turned into acid rain.And I don't even need a link to tell you that the temperatures of seasons can fluctuate from year to year so that you can get warm Decembers in the Northeast and cool summers in the Caribbeans. The rest of your post is hindered by the strong possibility that nature and random chance created everything at first.
|
|
|
Post by Jafar on Feb 3, 2012 12:36:03 GMT -6
I'll split this post into discussing different points...
Nature and Chance
How can nature create? It has no will. Nature, which can be defined as the processes of wind, plants, rain, etc., etc., etc. has to have a Creator which manages it. And random chance is a creation. How exactly is random chance defined? Well, a chance is a possibility.
Let's say that I intend to walk from New Westminster to Burnaby, both cities in British Columbia. The walk typically, if nothing gets in my way, takes 15 minutes. Now, what could get in my way? A traffic accident. A storm. A violent criminal deciding to shoot up the street. A number of things that can happen, that is, a number of intellectual possibilities. Also, it could happen that more than one of these possibilities occurs on the same trip between cities, even at the same moment.
But could any of these things occur if they did not have a Creator to create them? No. Would any of these occur if that Creator, God, Willed for none of them to occur? No. And this Creator is not chance, because what is chance? A probability, and a probability is a number. A number can be added to or subtracted to, and that which can be changed is not God, because that which can be changed is in need of a changer.
Take Pokemon for example. We know that the random number generator in Pokemon is programmed so that if a Pokemon uses Thunderbolt on a non-immune Pokemon, there is a 10% chance that Thunderbolt will paralyze the target if the target is not already affected by a status condition. But, if Thunderbolt is used by a Blissey with Serene Grace, the paralysis chance increases to 20%. So random chance changes. Who created Pokemon, the attack Thunderbolt, its paralysis chance, the Serene Grace ability and Blissey? Not the game developer, because if not for God creating in the developer the ideas and numbers, and if not for God creating the physical action of the developer programming the ideas and numbers, and if not for God creating the entire Pokemon franchise, and if not for God creating the entire universe, we would not have one of many, many examples of chance.
Now, if someone claims that random chance means chance that changes, for example from 10% to 26% to 76%, they are still admitting it changes and thus is in need of being changed. God created causes. God created results. God created probabilities. If He had Willed for causes to be different than they are - for example, if He had Willed for fire to never burn - this would be. But, by His Wisdom, He Willed for things to be the way they are. He is not to be questioned, because the One Who created everything, knows about everything and has Power over everything certainly is entitled to do with His creations what He wants to do with them. No creation, no human, is better than God, because the creations that do have knowledge, like humans, only know what God enabled them to know, while God knows everything.
To those who claim that nature can possibly create, I say this: if, as you claim, nature is the Creator, and it is part of the universe, then how can part of something create what it is part of? Impossible, simply impossible. Also, if someone claims that the universe created itself, I say this: it is impossible that something could create itself, because for something to do an action, the actor has to exist to start with. It doesn't take much to realize and know that this entire universe has a manager Who does not resemble anything within and including the universe, because that which resembles something which is managed is certainly itself managed. In an office, the salesperson has a sales manager who has a CEO who has a national president who has parents who have parents, who are composed of atoms, which include sub-atomic particles... And you see where this goes. Because it follows that the base, the smallest particles of any chain, is without a will and knowledge and thus cannot create anything, as far back into a chain as someone can dig they intellectually have to admit that everything with a place, and the place itself (i.e. the entire universe), was brought from non-existence into existence by a Creator Who is unlike the place and that which exists in it.
Possibilities of course exist, such as chance, but if someone claims that the Existence of God is a possibility, they are saying that this matter is up for debate, and if someone claims that there is doubt in the existence of the universe's creator, they are claiming that there is doubt in the existence of the universe and that which is within it, and I am absolutely sure that none of you would deny your own existence, or have any doubt at all in it.
Death
Yes, Dave, creations die. Humans die. Animals die. Plants die. And why? Because certainly if their state of existence was preceded by a state of non-existence, their state of existence can be succeeded by a state of non-existence. Things die because God Willed for them to die. Death shows us that we're imperfect. Death humbles a lot of people. But, unlike what some people believe, death is not the end of humans. Muslims like myself believe that when a human dies, they are ressurrected on the Day of Judgment to face judgment for the deeds they performed during their life. This worldly life is a test, and the afterlife, known by Muslims as the Hereafter, the result of the person's performance on the test.
All prophets from Adam to Muhammad had revealed to them clear details of the Hereafter. Death is something to be wary of, because if a person dies in a state of denial of their Creator, then how can they expect to be rewarded by God? How can a student expect to be told he did a good job when he disobeyed instructions and despite knowing what was right, answered with what was wrong? How can a student expect to succeed if he doesn't bother to learn the knowledge tested on the exam?
Life is full of challenges, causes and results. There's no denying that. As long as someone has worldly life, that is, their lifespan, they can learn from their mistakes and fix them... Or they can submerge more into ignorance, and destructive behaviour. But once that person dies, the test is over. Why do you think we fear death so much, instinctually? Because we fear what comes after it. That is why it's important to figure out the meaning and purpose of life before death so that someone can live their life in a responsible way, and the meaning of life is really simple: to respect and love the One Who gave the person that very same life.
|
|
|
Post by daveshn on Feb 3, 2012 20:39:47 GMT -6
I'll reply to your post more thoroughly soon. For now, I need to create a tangent so that we can get a matter settled.
The way you are talking about God's will, it sounds like predestination, that absolutely everything, down to the smallest sub-atomic movement and up to the largest shifts in the universe, are already decided by God.
Is that so, yes or no?
If yes: What is the point of warship and praise of God when God has already decided who will receive what fate in this life and any afterlife you believe in? To say that you need to pray or you won't receive a good reward in the Hereafter is meaningless because it isn't you who's praying. It's God's will praying.
If no: Then God does not create everything nor gets all the credit for creating everything. My parents are not given the credit or punishment for my actions. Sure, they will receive praise and blame from people depending on my actions, but my actions are mine. Thus, if I build a beautiful skyscraper, yes people will say my parents did a wonderful job raising me, but all payments made for the building will be given to me.
|
|
|
Post by Jafar on Feb 3, 2012 22:52:08 GMT -6
The way you are talking about God's will, it sounds like predestination, that absolutely everything, down to the smallest sub-atomic movement and up to the largest shifts in the universe, are already decided by God. Is that so, yes or no? Yes, that's what I mean. If yes: What is the point of warship and praise of God when God has already decided who will receive what fate in this life and any afterlife you believe in? To say that you need to pray or you won't receive a good reward in the Hereafter is meaningless because it isn't you who's praying. It's God's will praying. Firstly, we don't know all the future, so while our fates are already determined, the vast majority of us are unsure on what will happen to us specifically. Since we are unsure, we have to be alert and responsible and grateful to God if we wish to be truly happy now and in the future. The wisdom behind this is that if we all knew our fates (good or bad) during our lives, those who were guaranteed a good fate may get complacent and those who were guaranteed a bad fate may cause great harm to others. Now, some humans were given guarantees of their fates. The prophets, for example, knew that they would die Muslims, while Satan, a jinn as I mentioned earlier, not an angel, was damned by God following his (Satan's) blaspheming. The wisdom of some beings receiving guarantees is to show us who we should follow (the prophets) and who we should avoid and abhor (Satan); that is, clear examples of success and defeat. But as I stated before, if we all knew our destinies now, what would the state of society be? Very likely more complacent and destructive than it is. Secondly, God created for humans and jinn free will. We have a will, under the perfect Will of God. We have a choice. We get decisions and opportunities. So while our fates were chosen for us in Eternity by God, the vast majority of us don't know them, and it's the choices we get in the present that form our path. It's what we can control to an extent that we are held accountable for. A blind man won't be questioned for his blindness on the Day of Judgment; he'll be questioned for his deeds. God is the Creator of everything. The humans do not create everything, but they acquire their deeds. So if, using your example, I built a skyscraper, I would acquire the act of building the skyscraper, be rewarded for what processes of it were done in obedience to God and be held accountable for what processes of it were done in disobedience to God. But the creator of skyscrapers is not me or any other creation. The creator is God. In summary, while we don't create anything, we have choices and are responsible for them. It logically follows that God being perfect, He is Just in whatever He does. Thirdly, God ordered humans to worship Him, so the one who leaves this out is not being grateful to their Creator. Praise is due to God, the Creator of everything. We should always thank Him, and part of thanking Him is accepting that He gave us orders that, whether we fulfill them or not, does not benefit or harm God, because He being perfect, He does not change. Rather, our fulfillment are the lack thereof of our obligations benefits or harms us, as God Willed. There is a verse of the Qur'an that means: "The Creator is not to be quesitoned; rather, the slaves [among humans and jinn] will be questioned for what they did." God knows everything. We only know what He enabled us to know. So certainly we, not Him, are the needy and accountable.
|
|
|
Post by chaoman45 on Feb 3, 2012 22:52:28 GMT -6
*Didn't bother reading entire thread yet*
Whilst I appreciate the morals and lessons of religion, I don't really adhere to one anymore. I'll spare everybody the life story and just say that this switch of ideology had a lot to do with philosophy and how I perceived the world. For instance, when something good happens to somebody it's praised as a work of God. When something bad occurs, it was part of God's plan. Not once is it considered a possibility that God didn't exist in the first place (not Atheist; just saying). How can we be sure something is an act of God if it isn't tangible? How can we decipher any type of supernatural plan if we have comparatively infinitesimal knowledge of the world, quantum physics, and the 9th Dimension?
Y'know, those sort of questions.
|
|
|
Post by daveshn on Feb 3, 2012 23:42:28 GMT -6
God is the Creator of everything. The humans do not create everything, but they acquire their deeds. So if, using your example, I built a skyscraper, I would acquire the act of building the skyscraper, be rewarded for what processes of it were done in obedience to God and be held accountable for what processes of it were done in disobedience to God. But the creator of skyscrapers is not me or any other creation. The creator is God. Ok, here's where we're getting one another confused. My definition of creator: Any object, animate or inanimate, that is, to any significant degree, responsible for the end result of a process. *By saying 'end result' I mean that it is the state that something is in at the conclusion. Whether the conclusion was what was intended or not is irrelevant. Please define how you are using 'creator' and how it is different from my definition. And are you using 'acquire' with the same definition that I am using for 'creator'? Again, I apologize for this new tangent, but we must settle this issue if we are to move on.
|
|
|
Post by Jafar on Feb 3, 2012 23:55:00 GMT -6
In response to Chaoman:
Quantum physics and all that scientific complexity exists because it was brought from non-existence into existence, Chaoman. That's how everything we can imagine in our minds exists. If not for God existing without a beginning and willing for the things you mentioned to exist, you wouldn't even be mentioning them right now.
One of the Arabic names of God is transliterated as Al-Fattaah, with the h being like the one in "hen" but deeper. This name means "The One Who opens for His slaves the closed worldly and religious matters." Basically, there are many fascinating and complex knowledges most of us don't know about now, but if God Willed in eternity for us to learn them at some point in our lives, we certainly will. Examples of these "closed" matters are complex concepts such as quantum physics. But one knowledge we for certain have is the existence of a Creator of all knowledges, among them that which is obvious and has been known since the dawn of humanity with the creation of Adam, that which was learned later, that which is being learned now and that which will be learned in the future.
So don't let anything make you falsely believe anything bad about God. Rather, let everything you know about and discover reaffirm the mental necessity that this entire universe has a Creator.
Also, about our knowledge, do those quantum physicists know the exact moment and cause of their deaths? No, but the Creator of those physicists certainly does.
Another fascinating thing about knowledge is that things mentioned in the Qur'an and by Prophet Muhammad have recently come to the surface. For example, when a fly flew into the drink of one of Muhammad's companions, Muhammad told the man to dip the whole fly into the drink, and then drink it. The man was not poisoned. Scientists recently found out for themselves that one wing of a fly has a poison... And the other wing has the antidote for that poison. So by dipping the fly into a drink, one negates the poison, and the drink remains safe to consume, as known to Muhammad about 1400 years before scientists. It is also mentioned in the Qur'an that in very deep water, like in the deepest ocean trench, the water boils. Scientists just found this out recently using advanced submarines. Muhammad had no submarines and he still knew this, over a millenium before those scientists. Why? Because the Qur'an was not authored by Muhammad, or any human, jinn or angel for that matter. The Qur'an is revelation from God.
In response to David:
The definition of "creator" that I am using is bringing entities from the state of non-existence into the state of existence with absolute control over the entity. Your definition falls under my definition of "cause". For example, a creation can be the cause of something happening, but is not the creator of that something. The creation would, as you mentioned, acquire the act. (For example, a man who deliberately and unprovoked breaks his neighbour's window with a brick does not create the breaking, but he acquires the sin of breaking his neighbour's window, because he had a choice in the matter and chose disobedience to God.)
|
|
|
Post by HomicidalChicken on Feb 4, 2012 3:23:28 GMT -6
our fates are already determined, We have a choice. We get decisions and opportunities. Sounded contradictory to me. if someone wouldn't mind elaborating if I'm incorrect. Thirdly, God ordered humans to worship Him Why would something with predetermined fate need an order from what set that fate? And, through your definitions, would this imply God of need? Third, I personally dislike the use of words like certainly and anything else similarily concrete or absolute, the main cause being because it feels condescending to any other opinion of belief.
|
|
|
Post by Gooman on Feb 4, 2012 9:45:28 GMT -6
It was destiny that god would order humans to worship him.
I've struggled with the whole how-does-a-person-that-can-see-the-future-deals-with-it-scenario ever since I read Slaughterhouse 5, and it was intensified after reading Watchmen. They may still make a choice that they know ends badly because they don't think they have a choice- and maybe they really don't. It may even be predestined that he will do something that isn't predestined just to prove a point, but then if that's predestined... the lines get blurry there.
|
|
|
Post by daveshn on Feb 4, 2012 11:11:39 GMT -6
In response to David: The definition of "creator" that I am using is bringing entities from the state of non-existence into the state of existence with absolute control over the entity. Your definition falls under my definition of "cause". For example, a creation can be the cause of something happening, but is not the creator of that something. The creation would, as you mentioned, acquire the act. (For example, a man who deliberately and unprovoked breaks his neighbour's window with a brick does not create the breaking, but he acquires the sin of breaking his neighbour's window, because he had a choice in the matter and chose disobedience to God.) So, just so I have this clear, going by the Pokemon game example, the game developer took all the raw materials, which you say were created by God, and made a game out of them. But only the maker of the strings, protons, neutrons, and electrons that the game is made out of gets the title of 'creator.' Is that a correct interpretation?
|
|
|
Post by Jafar on Feb 9, 2012 11:09:43 GMT -6
A bit late, I know, but I didn't get much Internet access lately.
In response to HC:
Those two statements of mine about predestination and choice do not contradict each other. Rather, they support each other. Let me explain myself more clearly...
Everything that happens is by the Will of God, which is without a beginning and without an end. Among what God Willed is for us humans to have choices. For example, if you had the choice to eat either an orange or apple, that's because God Willed for you to have that choice, rather than a choice between an orange or pineapple. And regardless of which fruit you choose, or if you decide to not eat either, you will choose what God Willed for you to choose. But do you know what fruit you'd select at the exact moment you were given the choice? You would not be absolutely certain, because maybe, if you decided in advance to eat the orange, you would discover that the orange was obviously rotten, and so you'd either pick the apple or skip out on either fruit. When I say that humans have wills under the Will of God, I mean that they will only what God Willed for them to will, but as I explained earlier, they the vast majority of the time do not know what they will will for in the future. Hopefully that clears things up.
Onto your second point, God does not need anything. I was not saying He was in need. As I mentioned earlier, humans do not know their future, but God knows everything. So while our fates are predetermined, the large majority of people do not know them, let alone even what they will be doing exactly in an hour from the present. If you think about this fact it does make sense that the one with a predestined fate but who is uncertain about the future should obey his Creator, because God promised goodness for those obedient to them and He being perfect, He does not go against His Promise.
Onto your third point, I use terms like "certainly" because the statement that the term follows is certain. I don't speak out of arrogance. If someone says, "Certainly, the sky is always green", then the term "Certainly" would be misused, but when I use it I have not followed it up with anything illogical. I use the term to distinguish between what makes absolute sense in the mind and what is hazy, or uncertain.
In response to Goomane:
God Willed in Eternity for Him to send through Jibril (Gabriel), the angel of revelation, to humanity orders and holy books, so yes, it was the destiny of the prophets to receive those revelations and the destiny of those who heard about them to hear about them.
As for the prophets, they do not know all of the future. Only God knows all the future. Rather, prophets know what God revealed to them. This includes important events in the future and details about the afterlife. Also, everything that happens is by the Will of God, so it does not make sense for someone to call anything that happens "not predestined". For example, Prophet Muhammad told his companions that they would conquer Egypt. The Prophet died before they did, but they still conquered it. This conquest was predestined and prophecized. Now, Prophet Muhammad did not say when I, for example, or you, were born. But our births happened, because God Willed for them to happen. It follows that our births were predestined but not prophecized. Combined with the conclusion of the Egypt prophecy, it follows that everything is predestined, but not everything is prophecized.
In response to David:
The word create in English is used a lot to talk about creations, game-makers for example, but since I want to be clear when I talk about God, I use the title "creator" only for Him, and "maker" for a creation who is the cause of something, like the development of a video game. If someone calls a video game developer a creator with the meaning that the developer made the game but did not bring it or its parts from non-existence into existence then that someone is not attributing a partner to God, but the person who claims that the game developer, a creation, is a creator in the meaning of bringing things from non-existence into existence is attributing a partner to God, which as I explained earlier does not make sense.
|
|
|
Post by Zombie Clown on Feb 9, 2012 15:27:24 GMT -6
so you're saying that humans do not "create" but more or less make things. So scientists who cre- sorry make new elements don't count as creators? because they don't take the atoms and bring that element in to existence? even though prior to our knowledge it doesn't exist. Which by your definition, would class them as a creator, as they take something from non-existence and bring it to existence.
|
|
|
Post by daveshn on Feb 9, 2012 21:21:17 GMT -6
so you're saying that humans do not "create" but more or less make things. So scientists who cre- sorry make new elements don't count as creators? because they don't take the atoms and bring that element in to existence? even though prior to our knowledge it doesn't exist. Which by your definition, would class them as a creator, as they take something from non-existence and bring it to existence. I think what he's going for is that only those who can violate the law of thermodynamics, which says that matter and energy cannot be created or destroyed, just changed, count as a 'creator'. While humans certainly combine and change what exists to form new elements, we aren't violating the laws of thermodynamics to do so. Kind of esoteric to have such a limited definition for 'creator' but at least we have the matter settled. I'll address previous points this weekend when I have time.
|
|
|
Post by Jafar on Feb 10, 2012 21:37:26 GMT -6
What I mean by bringing something from non-existence to existence is knowing everything about the creation, because the one who is ignorant of anything about something he makes had something (what he is ignorant about) go against his intention. And even if a scientist had a goal and completely fulfilled it, there was a probability that he would have been unable to make the new element. But as I explained earlier, God's Will is always fulfilled, and He has the Power to do whatever He willed, and the Knowledge of everything, so nothing about what He makes (the creations) is hidden from Him.
In other words, Godhood entails having the perfect knowledge of what is being made; since it is possible that creations may not have perfect knowledge of what they make, it follows that no creation is attributed with Godhood. I like to use God and Creator interchangeably as a reminder of what is Godhood (the power to bring entities [bodies] from the state of non-existence to the state of existence), so that's why I am very strict when I personally use the term "creator". I don't want to get myself confused when talking about my religion, and if I confuse any of you, tell me so I can try to be more clear.
|
|
|
Post by daveshn on Feb 10, 2012 22:58:57 GMT -6
I don't want to get myself confused when talking about my religion, and if I confuse any of you, tell me so I can try to be more clear. You just confused the $%^@ out of me. I thought I had an idea of what you meant by 'Creator' but now it just sounds like you're saying that God and only God gets credit for everything while everyone else is just a puppet. That all goes back to asking how God can justify punishment in the afterlife if God is the one controlling everyone's actions? If this isn't what you're saying, try being less objective and just being general. Once I get a grasp of what you're saying, we can work out the details.
|
|