The big bang theory says that matter, a mere dot, came out of nothing, that both time and space had their career with the Big Bang. It can be deduced quite easily using simple logic that whatever the cause may be it must be;(1) immaterial and,(2)above time and space.So,the cause that is immaterial and has created matter and is above time and space doesn't have a beginning and ,therefore,it can't be created.
what do you think?
came out of nothing
Re: came out of nothing
http://dawoodi-bohras.com/forum/viewtop ... ilo#p44694
Whole 2 pages in the thread discussing this issue. That was 4 years ago? Unbelievable
Whole 2 pages in the thread discussing this issue. That was 4 years ago? Unbelievable
Re: came out of nothing
That was less discussing the issue and more poking holes in each other and their arguments. Scientists to date have no clue how the universe was created simply because they are unable to accept the most glaringly obvious answer to that question right in front of them. They've come up with string theories and parallel universes and have almost discovered the God particle, sorry they don't like calling it that - the higgs boson. The science channel and Morgan Freeman tell us almost every day what it is that scientists have gotten wrong!!
Re: came out of nothing
So God created the world because the scientist have not been able to establish how the big bang came about.
Who are we kidding, all one god theorist believe that our world's existence of mankind starting with Adam and Eve started
some 6000 to maybe 10000 years. Archaeological finds prove this all wrong. Paleontology also provides us with proof that the Earth
was inhabited with other beings other than modren man whose existence is just no more than 100 thousand years old or less.
Please somebody out there tell me why did God wait billions of years after the formation of the Earth to come up with the all prophets
we worship. God wants obedience and worship him than why did he take this long to make humanity to exist so that we may
worship him.
Mono-atheism may have been a fine improvement from other religious practices but many religions back date much before the mono- atheism
beliefs. God allowed that and also allowed other naturalistic form of religious practices to exist. We in these times still have other religions
older than ours like Hinduism, Bhudaism, Zhaorastrium Etc. still in exsistence. God allowed them to flourish at one time or another, why?
We as humans with our religious beliefs of what may be are relatively just a speck of time in this history of this universe. look at the universe
en tota and you may see how insifigant Earth is all about concidering the vastness of the Universe of being created by god or otherwise.
Who are we kidding, all one god theorist believe that our world's existence of mankind starting with Adam and Eve started
some 6000 to maybe 10000 years. Archaeological finds prove this all wrong. Paleontology also provides us with proof that the Earth
was inhabited with other beings other than modren man whose existence is just no more than 100 thousand years old or less.
Please somebody out there tell me why did God wait billions of years after the formation of the Earth to come up with the all prophets
we worship. God wants obedience and worship him than why did he take this long to make humanity to exist so that we may
worship him.
Mono-atheism may have been a fine improvement from other religious practices but many religions back date much before the mono- atheism
beliefs. God allowed that and also allowed other naturalistic form of religious practices to exist. We in these times still have other religions
older than ours like Hinduism, Bhudaism, Zhaorastrium Etc. still in exsistence. God allowed them to flourish at one time or another, why?
We as humans with our religious beliefs of what may be are relatively just a speck of time in this history of this universe. look at the universe
en tota and you may see how insifigant Earth is all about concidering the vastness of the Universe of being created by god or otherwise.
Re: came out of nothing
He did that to fool the scientists.Please somebody out there tell me why did God wait billions of years
Re: came out of nothing
porus,anajmi wrote:That was less discussing the issue and more poking holes in each other and their arguments. !!
u have a sharp memory,
anajmi has given reason above ,why I didnt choose to 'bang' that thread again.
Re: came out of nothing
who told you these periods ? plz quote your source haggi with reference to Islam.Haggi wrote: Who are we kidding, all one god theorist believe that our world's existence of mankind starting with Adam and Eve started
some 6000 to maybe 10000 years. .
Re: came out of nothing
103 The great Horror [of the Day of Judgement] shall not grieve
them, and the angels will welcome them, saying, This is
your Day which you have been promised.
104On that Day We shall roll up the heavens like a scroll of
parchment. As We originated the first creation, so shall We repeat
it. This is a promise binding on Us. Truly, We shall fulfill it.
105We have already written in the Psalms following the
Reminder, My righteous servants shall inherit the earth.
106Herein, surely is a message for true worshippers.
[chapter 21]
Big bang from singularity> life from water> present phase [dunya]> cataclysm[Zalzala]> big crunch[rolling back]> Re big bang as a result of present phase[qiyamah]> New universe system[Akhirah].
them, and the angels will welcome them, saying, This is
your Day which you have been promised.
104On that Day We shall roll up the heavens like a scroll of
parchment. As We originated the first creation, so shall We repeat
it. This is a promise binding on Us. Truly, We shall fulfill it.
105We have already written in the Psalms following the
Reminder, My righteous servants shall inherit the earth.
106Herein, surely is a message for true worshippers.
[chapter 21]
Big bang from singularity> life from water> present phase [dunya]> cataclysm[Zalzala]> big crunch[rolling back]> Re big bang as a result of present phase[qiyamah]> New universe system[Akhirah].
Re: came out of nothing
We are part of creation and so are our brains.
It is impossible for us to visualize what was 'before' creation because there was no time nor space before creation.
Our ideas of time and space are bound up with our senses (brains), created matter.
Space is distance between objects. Space is a concept from perceptions of different objects.
Time is movement or change in or between objects. Time is a concept from perceptions of these movements.
Thus before universe (objects and their movements), there was nothing.
Since we cannot know what was 'before' creation, scientists are not concerned with that question. They are only concerned with what happened at the 'moment' of creation.
Human imagination transcends its physical boundaries (time and space) and imagines an existence of God before creation and it imagines that God set off the creation by a command such 'kun'.
Creation of God of course is not addressed by anyone since that will end up with an infinite regress. Thus, quite arbitrarily, humans do not discuss where God came from and accept it as an unproven hypothesis that God was there before creation of space and time.
Once humans accepted that there is a creator, then immediately they decided to give the creator attributes which are suspiciously 'human'. Religions followed and the rest is history.
If you cannot imagine that universe came from nothing, try to imagine what could be there before its creation. Whatever was there , was it not created?
It is impossible for us to visualize what was 'before' creation because there was no time nor space before creation.
Our ideas of time and space are bound up with our senses (brains), created matter.
Space is distance between objects. Space is a concept from perceptions of different objects.
Time is movement or change in or between objects. Time is a concept from perceptions of these movements.
Thus before universe (objects and their movements), there was nothing.
Since we cannot know what was 'before' creation, scientists are not concerned with that question. They are only concerned with what happened at the 'moment' of creation.
Human imagination transcends its physical boundaries (time and space) and imagines an existence of God before creation and it imagines that God set off the creation by a command such 'kun'.
Creation of God of course is not addressed by anyone since that will end up with an infinite regress. Thus, quite arbitrarily, humans do not discuss where God came from and accept it as an unproven hypothesis that God was there before creation of space and time.
Once humans accepted that there is a creator, then immediately they decided to give the creator attributes which are suspiciously 'human'. Religions followed and the rest is history.
If you cannot imagine that universe came from nothing, try to imagine what could be there before its creation. Whatever was there , was it not created?
Re: came out of nothing
And yet when it comes to GodSince we cannot know what was 'before' creation, scientists are not concerned with that question. They are only concerned with what happened at the 'moment' of creation.
Since we are not concerned with one question, let us decide not to be concerned with the other one as well. Let us just consider the existence of God and not where he came from. We can ask Him that question if and when we meet Him.Creation of God of course is not addressed by anyone since that will end up with an infinite regress. Thus, quite arbitrarily, humans do not discuss where God came from and accept it as an unproven hypothesis that God was there before creation of space and time.
Re: came out of nothing
If God gave us "human" attributes, then where did he get them from? Did he borrow them from a human? Or did he just give us some of his own attributes? That I think is more likely. In that case, we didn't give the creator attributes which are "suspiciously" human but we got attributes which are Godly. One of the attributes of God is hearing. Humans pray to God and some claim that he answered their prayers. How does he hear those prayers? If he had human attributes then he wouldn't be able to hear them in space. But maybe his hearing is Godly hearing which doesn't need space. He just gave us hearing which was limited. So hearing is not a human attribute. It is a Godly attribute. We just got a limitied portion of it.Once humans accepted that there is a creator, then immediately they decided to give the creator attributes which are suspiciously 'human'. Religions followed and the rest is history.
Re: came out of nothing
No scientist, as far as I am aware, is concerned or interested in God's existence or where he came from.anajmi wrote:Since we are not concerned with one question, let us decide not to be concerned with the other one as well. Let us just consider the existence of God and not where he came from. We can ask Him that question if and when we meet Him.Creation of God of course is not addressed by anyone since that will end up with an infinite regress. Thus, quite arbitrarily, humans do not discuss where God came from and accept it as an unproven hypothesis that God was there before creation of space and time.
Re: came out of nothing
As scientists, we believe that human attributes evolved from lifeless matter. Humans then gave these attributes to God.anajmi wrote:If God gave us "human" attributes, then where did he get them from? Did he borrow them from a human? Or did he just give us some of his own attributes? That I think is more likely. In that case, we didn't give the creator attributes which are "suspiciously" human but we got attributes which are Godly.Once humans accepted that there is a creator, then immediately they decided to give the creator attributes which are suspiciously 'human'. Religions followed and the rest is history.
Scriptures say that God created everything and gave humans the attributes in minor quantities that he himself has.
You are at liberty to choose your version like many fundamentalists choose the scriptural version. That is fine as long as you do not ram that down my children's throat.
Re: came out of nothing
Well, every scientist that I am aware of is interested in God's existence or where he came from. That is infact the first question they ask. You should look at some of your own posts inquiring about the same, not that I am accusing you of being a scientist.No scientist, as far as I am aware, is concerned or interested in God's existence or where he came from.
We all have our beliefs. Scientist's beliefs (a lot of them) have been proven to be wrong many times by the same scientists. Infact scientists are the people who have the least amount of faith in their beliefs! I wouldn't be surprised if this one bites the dust too.As scientists, we believe that human attributes evolved from lifeless matter. Humans then gave these attributes to God.
Well, maybe you should be worrying about ramming massomiyat of humans down your children's throats from these same scriptures. Your children might accuse you of hypocrisy.
Re: came out of nothing
The scientific case against atheism
All real evolution ( i.e. varieties of dogs, cats, etc.) in nature is the expression, over time, of already existing genes. Evolution is possible only if there's information (genes) directing it. Only variations of already existing genes are possible, which means only limited evolution and adaptations are possible. Nature has no ability to invent new genes via random mutations caused by random environmental forces. That's evolutionary faith, not science.
Genetic information doesn't happen by chance, so it's more logical to believe that genetic similarities between all forms of life are due to a common Designer who designed similar functions for similar purposes. It doesn't mean all forms of life are biologically related! "Junk DNA" isn't junk. These non-coding segments of DNA have recently been found to be vital in regulating gene expression.
Dawkins, Hitchens, and Hawking refuse to debate with creationists who are scientists such as the scientists at The Institute for Creation Research. Dawkins and his friends only debate non-scientist creationists. Read articles by scientists supporting creation at The Institute for Creation Research site.
http://english.pravda.ru//science/myste ... mode=print
All real evolution ( i.e. varieties of dogs, cats, etc.) in nature is the expression, over time, of already existing genes. Evolution is possible only if there's information (genes) directing it. Only variations of already existing genes are possible, which means only limited evolution and adaptations are possible. Nature has no ability to invent new genes via random mutations caused by random environmental forces. That's evolutionary faith, not science.
Genetic information doesn't happen by chance, so it's more logical to believe that genetic similarities between all forms of life are due to a common Designer who designed similar functions for similar purposes. It doesn't mean all forms of life are biologically related! "Junk DNA" isn't junk. These non-coding segments of DNA have recently been found to be vital in regulating gene expression.
Dawkins, Hitchens, and Hawking refuse to debate with creationists who are scientists such as the scientists at The Institute for Creation Research. Dawkins and his friends only debate non-scientist creationists. Read articles by scientists supporting creation at The Institute for Creation Research site.
http://english.pravda.ru//science/myste ... mode=print
Re: came out of nothing
Sermon 1 in Nahjul Balagha
Hz. Ali talks about creation of earth, creation of angels and creation of adam.
Does make an interesting read.
Hz. Ali talks about creation of earth, creation of angels and creation of adam.
Does make an interesting read.
-
Al Zulfiqar
- Posts: 4618
- Joined: Tue Mar 28, 2006 5:01 am
Re: came out of nothing
now that is in fact the perfect example of science v/s dogma or blind faith, because science inherently consists in questioning and inquiring from a purely logical and factual viewpoint starting from a universally accepted premise. science naturally evolves and never stands still. even today, as an example, scientists all over the world keep attempting to prove/disprove einstein's theory of simple relativity. that is the beauty of a scientific approach. that is of course anathema to the dogmatists, who would dismiss any scientific enquiry as blasphemy against their 'faith'.anajmi wrote:
Scientist's beliefs (a lot of them) have been proven to be wrong many times by the same scientists. Infact scientists are the people who have the least amount of faith in their beliefs!
i personally believe that the prophet muhammad and all other prophets before him were chosen, if thats the word, because of their inquiring and receptive minds, they were open to suggestion and willing to challenge, change and adapt. early islam in fact thrived precisely because it brought a fresh and 'scientific' method and perspective to all inquiry about creation and the reality around us. that is why it overcame all challenges and appealed to both the masses and the intellectuals. that is why it grew like wildfire. that same islam became bogged down when the bogeys of dogma and rigidity made it a monolith, which is where you see all these foolish mullas issuing mindless fatwas and edicts, which is where you see charlatans like the kothari mafia lording it over a gullible and fearful community.
bring back the spirit of openness and scientific enquiry which islam encouraged and then it will have accomplished its true purpose.
Re: came out of nothing
"blind faith" is a buzzword created by scientists that doesn't mean anything. For eg. if you tell me to jump off a cliff because I should have blind faith in you, I might show you the finger. When a person has faith it in something, most of the times it is not blind but based upon right or wrong reasons. We say that bohras have blind faith in Syedna, but actually they don't. Consider the example of mustafanalwalla. He has faith in Syedna because apparently, for him, it was his prayer to Syedna that helped him out of a sticky situation. You and I can argue based upon more "dogma" if that is true or not, but that is the cause for his faith. It doesn't matter how much I tell him that it was Allah that solved his problem, he will refuse to have this kind of blind faith in Allah.blind faith
I have said this before on this forum, that someday scientists might be able to prove that Einstein's theory is flawed, but they will never be able to prove that Hanuman couldn't have swallowed the sun!!
Re: came out of nothing
Please check all the mono -aestheticism reliogion's chronology and you will comprehend the time frame I'mfeelgud wrote:who told you these periods ? plz quote your source haggi with reference to Islam.Haggi wrote: Who are we kidding, all one god theorist believe that our world's existence of mankind starting with Adam and Eve started
some 6000 to maybe 10000 years. .
talking about .
Re: came out of nothing
We all have our beliefs. Scientist's beliefs (a lot of them) whether pro religion or pron have been proven to be wrong many times by the many fellow scientists. Infact scientists are the people who have the least amount of faith in established religion. I'm not against anybody receiving spiritual satisfaction of any kind by following any religion but please let me have the the freedom to my own beliefs or non beliefsanajmi wrote:Well, every scientist that I am aware of is interested in God's existence or where he came from. That is infact the first question they ask. You should look at some of your own posts inquiring about the same, not that I am accusing you of being a scientist.No scientist, as far as I am aware, is concerned or interested in God's existence or where he came from.
As scientists, we believe that human attributes evolved from lifeless matter. Humans then gave these attributes to God.
Anajmi, there are two catagories of people or may maybe three or maybe even four!
1) The very convinced the existence of the Almighty in any form
Re: came out of nothing
Sorry my posting went haywire.
Re: came out of nothing
The second one who is born into an environment where he is oblivious to any thing and just flows with the ethnicity he has been raised with.
Theses are the most dangerous as they never ask any questions and feel they do not have a choice than just follow the flock.
The third kind, probably the majority whereby come from the society who actually realise the the wrongs in our faith but are just too yellow to do anything
about it and just complain about the injustices but unable to react in any otherway to show their grievances.
Theses are the most dangerous as they never ask any questions and feel they do not have a choice than just follow the flock.
The third kind, probably the majority whereby come from the society who actually realise the the wrongs in our faith but are just too yellow to do anything
about it and just complain about the injustices but unable to react in any otherway to show their grievances.