Debate Rounds (5)
It makes sense to me that we were put on this earth as a trial because when you look around you can notice that everything has already submitted to the will of God, animals function off instinct because that's the way God "programmed" them, so in that sense they have submitted their will to god because they have no other choice other than the way God made them. We also have instinct, but we can choose to ignore our instinct and make logical choices, that's why this a test for us because if we have the ability to make a choice we have the responsibility to make the right one. In this sense do I believe that Islam is the truth because although faith isn't evidence the logic behind the faith is.
PS. There's plenty of scientific evidence in the quran let me know if you want to dabble into that.
Also another thing which I want to get out of the way right now and we'll hopefully not have to come back to is that I know that there are some muslims (muslims by name) who you hear of on the news burning down churches and yelling "War with the West", this is not the muslim way, the only time violence is excepted in Islam is when it's used to protect your home. These people that you see doing these things and chanting these phrases are people born into the faith and inspired by the mob, that is all. Islam does NOT promote violence, there are Christians that have lived in Arabic countries for generations and generations who can testify to that. If Islam was spread by sword these people would've long been Muslims by now, but this is not the way of prophet Muhammed (pbuh) who is the best example of a good Muslim.
First off you claim that animals follow god's will because they have had that "programmed" into them. This is false. You are using to god to explain a natural phenomena, evolution. Evolution via natural selection has caused animals to exhibit the characteristics that they do, it has nothing to do with god. The instinct that god "programmed" into them is merely the result natural selection where by the animals that did not have X instinct died out thus the animals with it survived and passed it on. God is not needed.
Also, I agree that Islam is massively shown to be an "evil" religion when it really isn't (any more so than any other).
But regarding the claim that it was not spread by the sword. This is false. Around the years 622-632, almost all of the Arabian Peninsula was taken over via conquests. Then by 632-661 much of Northern Africa and Southern Europe was taken in the same manner. It is true that these conquests were not as violent as the Christian Crusades but they were still violent thus proving that the Islamic Empire was spread by the sword.
One more thing, you claim that "faith isn't evidence but the logic behind the faith is". First off, what is the logic you are referring to and how is logic evidence? If anything it would be the contrary. (allow me to pull in some science) The logical conclusion about elementary particles would be that they are just 0 dimensional points, point particles but there is minimal evidence to back that up. In fact, there is more evidence to back up the illogical deduction that they are actually vibrating strings. In some camps logic may cut it for evidence but in the god debate it sure doesn't.
In conclusion: You must prove god is real and the Islamic god is the true one. (During the next round I will post arguments against god)
Let me begin by addressing some of your previous statements before I continue with my argument. I don't disagree with the fact that animals have been going extinct due to natural selection and that some have evolved in order to survive, however there are instincts that are present in all species. Every species has the instinct to reproduce just as every species has a defensive instinct now it's about how effective (or how strong) that instinct is in comparison to its environment that allows natural selection to take its course. So, I don't believe that God isn't needed in natural selection but rather God is doing the "selecting" (*One of God's 99 names is 'Al Bari' which means 'the Evolver' in Arabic). Also, what I meant by "not being spread by the sword" was that they never forced people to convert to Islam as other religions have but rather have fought for their right to spread the message.
And as for "faith isn't evidence but the logic behind the faith is" I agree that logic does not always go hand in hand with logic, but you most agree that logic should be an important part of a true religion. As for evidence I'll give you verses from the Quran that will hopefully verify its validity: In the Surah (Chapter) 24 'An Nur' (the light), Verse 45 "And Allah has created every animal from water: of them there are some that creep on their bellies; some that walk on two legs; and some that walk on four. Allah creates what He wills for verily Allah has power over all things." We believe in evolution we just believe humans are unique from all of the other creations. In Surah 51 'Adh Dhariyat' (The winds that scatter), Verse 47 "And it is We who have constructed the heavens with might, and verily, it is We who are steadily expanding it." In Islam there are 7 heavens and this universe (on a spiritual plane) is considered the lowest heaven, what God says here is that He ('We' is used here as the royal 'We' referring to Himself) constructed the heavens and it is He who is expanding them, this universe being one of the heavens it is also expanding. It wasn't until the year 1929 that Edwin Hubble discovered that our universe was expanding implying that at one point it must have been much smaller leading to the conclusion of the Big Bang Theory, the most excepted theory on the creation of our universe. The Big Bang theory proposes that the universe emerged from a singularity at time zero and describes everything that has happened since 0.0001 of a second after the moment of creation. In Surah 21 'Al-Anbiya' (The Prophets), Verse 30 "Do not the Unbelievers see that the heavens and the earth were joined together (as one unit of creation), before we clove them asunder? We made from water every living thing. Will they not then believe?" In the first sentence "Do not the Unbelievers see that the heavens and the earth were joined together (as one unit of creation), before we clove them asunder?..." you can see that there is a clear connection between the big bang theory and God's description of how the physical universe was created. There are many more verses revealing scientific evidence in the Quran which I don't have the time nor the space to write about.
Another thing, I want you to keep in mind that all of these verses were revealed to the Quraish people by Prophet Muhammed (pbuh) roughly 1400 years ago, while these discoveries have just recently been made in the last century or so by scientists qualified to come to those conclusions. Prophet Muhammed (pbuh) was an illiterate man who lived among the Quraish (A primitive Arab people who used to kill their own daughters because of the custom that at a certain age a man's daughter no longer belonged to the family and was believed to be everyone's property.) From among this the Quran is revealed through the Prophet Muhammed (pbuh) and the Arab world changes forever. There is no way that Prophet Muhammed (pbuh) could have come up with this on his own especially not with the circumstances that he was in, this in itself is a miracle.
Finally, the Islamic God is everyone's God, the most fundamental thing about Islam is "La ilaha illah" (There is no God but God). The oneness of God and just oneness in general is the key concept of Islam, the Jewish God and the Christian God (As long as they are not talking about Jesus) is the same God as the Islamic God. Same God three revelations of the same message, the differences are man made, however we just believe that our man
To conclude this, I agree that in the following rounds we should focus this debate more on the existence of God.
I dare say this is not true. There is nothing "doing" the selecting, it is just the fact that if organisms can't survive they will die. It has nothing to do with god. But even ignoring what I just said, you have no evidence to support that it is god save for the name 'Al Bari'. With this lack of evidence being treated as true I can make any number of assertions regarding who is doing the selecting whilst each having the same amount of validity as your god does. But the only thing that has any real validity is the claim that the selecting process works via natural means.
//you most agree that logic should be an important part of a true religion.//
Mehhhhhh, somewhat. If a religion is true there would be logic behind it but as in the case of science logic alone doesn't cut it. One can make logical arguments for and against god (which is what I shall do) but you being the person claiming there is a god must prove s/he exists using more than just logic. (Also, giving Quran verses is fine but you shouldn't try to prove the Quran is true using itself. ie. The Quran is true because it says so ect.... I am aware you are not doing this I am merely warning against it) But to the actual verses.
1: What does this first verse prove? It is merely stating that Allah made the animals (much like Genesis might I add). This his absolutely nothing to do with evolution.
2: First off, I looked on Quranenglish.com for the verse in question and I found this: Surah 51:47: "And heaven – We made it with Our Own Power and We have the Power to do so." This makes no mention of the heavens being expanded.
But regardless I will answer the argument anyways. You say there are 7 heavens and this passages mentions all of them since it uses the word "heavens" (according to the version you provided) meaning that it is not necessarily talking about the universe. But since the universe is one the heavens this is somewhat valid. But before I go more in depth can I first ask for some evidence showing that the known universe is considered a heaven according to Islam? Thank you.
Now, we have a fairly good grasp of what is causing the universe to expand, first off there was the initial "bang" that propelled matter outward and that combined with the repulsive cosmological constant makes the universe expand. There is no need for a god to cause the expansion.
3: //heavens and the earth were joined together //
But they weren't... the Earth was formed roughly 10 billion years after the big bang. So no, there is not a clear connection at all. This is just saying that in the creation that the Quran talks about, the Earth and they sky were formed together which, if anything, contradicts modern science. I say, answer that.
4: May I ask what evidence there is (outside the Quran) that says that Muhammed actually saw all this stuff and wrote it? Once that is given I will refute it.
Arguments: I will propose a few paradoxes that disprove attributes of your god:
First off I will propose the simple "Problem of Evil" set fourth by Epicurus.
1: Is God able to prevent evil but not willing? Then he is not all loving ergo the god that is commonly described is false.
2: Is God willing to prevent evil but not able? Then he is not all powerful ergo the god that is commonly described is false.
3: Is God able and willing? Then why is there evil? This cannot be an option since there is evil thus god is either 1,2 or 4.
4: Is God neither willing nor able? Then why call him god?
~~Epicurus (adapted by me)
As we can see with the above argument god is either no all powerful thus your god is wrong, god is either not all loving thus your god is wrong again or your god simply isn't a god. QED.
Next is the "Omnipotence Paradox".
Can god create a rock so heavy he himself cannot lift it?
1: If yes, he is not omnipotent because he cannot lift said rock.
2: If no, he is not omnipotent because there is something god cannot do.
3: God does not exist.
This is why omnipotent beings can never exist.
The third and final logical argument is the "Omniscience and Learning argument".
(The formal argument is complex and thus I will make it simpler but I will still link to the full one)
1: An all knowing being, God, exists.
2: God is and always has been all knowing.
3: Being all knowing means you have all experimental knowledge.
4: Having all experimental knowledge means one knows what it's like to learn something.
5: 'Thus God knows and has always known what it's like to learn.'
6: Know what learning is like obviously means you have learned something!
7: Learning means that you went from not knowing to knowing.
8: Thus God went from a state of not knowing to one of knowing.
9: 'Thus God was once in a state of not knowing...'
10: Meaning God has not always been all knowing.
11: "God has always been omniscient and has not always been omniscient."
12: Thus your god does not exist.
Also, there is no scientific need for a god of any sort seeing as the universe can come from nothing. This may seem odd but listen. Observation 1: Our universe has 0 net energy. Our universe has 0 total energy due to the fact that matter/energy is positive and gravity is negative thus if you add them, the cancel to 0 exactly. The important thing about a 0 energy universe is that it can come from nothing. This will be shown in subsequent observations.
Observation 2: Quantum fluctuations can create matter from nothing. Quantum fluctuations can create matter from nothing, of course these are quite short lived since they have positive net energy but if a particle, or a universe, were to say, have 0 total energy, there would be no limit upon the longevity of said entity.
Observation 3: Since our universe has 0 total energy and quantum fluctuations can create matter from nothing our universe can come from nothing.
Therefore: Your god is not needed.
igorm13777 forfeited this round.
"God is doing the selecting"
I apologize for not explaining this in the previous post. The reason I used that verse was to show that God says that every animal was made from water, since water is necessary in order for life to form and God is "The Evolver" we assume that they were created in water and than evolved (by God).
Now let me ask you something, if an intelligent source is not behind the creation of this universe and is not behind evolution than you must assume that everything is random (natural means), than tell me what are the odds? An event with the probability of 1 in 10 to the power of 110 is so insignificant it's considered zero meaning no chance. According to Sir Fred Hoyle, who was an english astronomer and mathematician, the possibility of even the simplest form of life evolving by chance is 1 in 10 to the power of 40,000, this is the equivalent of rolling two dice 50,000 times and rolling a12 every time you rolled the dice, impossible.
Dr. Harold Morowitz, professor of Molecular Chemistry at Yale University, claims that the odds of life creating itself by chance are one in 10 to the power of one billion!
"Logic in true religion"
Now you want me to prove that God exists using more than just logic meaning you want me to provide evidence, well lets start with the definition of evidence:
I'm not so sure about 5 but 1, 2 and 4 confirms that what I've given you is evidence. However if you want to refer to number 3 in the list of definitions and ask me for facts that God exist we can start a series of philosophical questions and debates (ie. What is reality? What is truth?) that could not be solved by the end of this round.
Now lets say that you got your proof and everyone saw God and everyone knew it was God than there wouldn't be much need for faith. Surah 2 'Al baqara' (The Cow), Verse 2 and 3 "This is the Book about which there is no doubt, a guidance for those conscious of Allah / Who believe in the unseen, establish prayer, and spend out of what We have provided for them,"
It is important for us to "...believe in the unseen..." because faith is the first pillar of Islam "La ilaha illallah", the shahada, a declaration of faith.
1: I answered this question in the 1st paragraph. As for the Genesis part I told you in a previous post that the SAME message was delivered 3 times by the three most known prophets Moses, Jesus and Muhammed (pbut). The differences are man made, there shouldn't be three religions but just one.
2: The Quran was brought down in Arabic similarly to how the Torah was brought down in Hebrew. You must understand that up until 1905 no musilm attempted to translate the Quran into any other language in fear of corrupting the message or causing contradiction. (*The Quran is recited in Arabic not read*) The way the words are put together, it's poetry. You can take any word (In arabic) from the Quran and place it in a sentence with regular arabic and always be able to spot which word is form the Quran. The way the Quran is written is very unique in the language and in how the language is used. Hard to translate. As for proof that this universe is the lowest heaven I give you this: Surah 37 'As-Saffat' (Those who set the ranks), Verse 6 "Lo! We have adorned the lowest heaven with an ornament, the planets;" And in Surah 67 'Al-Mulk' (The sovereignty), Verse 5 "And We have (from of old) adorned the lowest heaven with Lamps and We have made such (Lamps) (as) missiles to drive away the Evil Ones and have prepared for them the Penalty of the Blazing Fire."
As for the expansion of the Universe I don't fully understand the repulsive cosmological constant but from what I understand it's an unknown force, if that's the case than it can be related to God.
3: Also, you must understand the concept of time does not exist for God it only exists for us, in this universe. "The Big Bang theory proposes that the universe emerged from a singularity at time zero..." that verse states that the heavens and the earth were one unit of creation, now if you look back far enough to the very moment of the big bang you would see that everything that will eventually shape our universe came from one point. If logic forces you to believe that something must come from something than we must assume that this matter and energy must have also come from something; "...the heavens and the earth were joined together (as one unit of creation), before We clove them asunder..." Meaning that all this matter was once part of another dimension (heaven) until God "clove it asunder".
4: There are two sources that Muslims use as instructions on how to live their lives, one is the Quran (The word of God) and the other are the Hadiths (The things prophet Muhammed (pbuh) said and did). These Hadith's were narrated from one person to another until they were all compiled into one book sometime after the death of the prophet. These Hadith's can range from weak hadith's to strong hadith's. A hadith is classified as weak in the case that if one of the people whom this was translated to was either unknown or there was a sight possibility he could have lied or over-exaggerated the truth than this hadith was either considered weak or not considered at all. Now the people closest to the prophet (his wives, his companions and his closest friends) or the prophet himself are normally at the source of these hadiths. If the prophet spoke this would be recorded as hadith, if someone spoke of something the prophet did or said than depending on how true it is, it too would be recorded as hadith. Also, there were many hadiths about the same thing because there were many people to listen to the prophet speak, so when scholars compare these hadiths what other hadiths about the same event and some are noticed to be slightly different from the rest this person who narrated that is now declared an unreliable source. This is how careful they were with these things.
I will have to make the following brief because I'm going to run out of characters shortly.
This life is a test therefore there is good and evil and it's our job to make the right choice. Also, if something bad happens to you it is not necessarily a bad thing because it may lead to something good.
I'm sure you've heard this before that cold is not cold but and absence of heat, similarly darkness does exist but an absence of light does, we can't measure darkness but we can measure how much light there is, well similarly there is no evil but an absence of good or rather God. God could have created everything good but than this wouldn't be a trial.
If your mother spanks you does that mean that she is evil or just trying to teach you a lesson. Similarly, bad is used to teach man good but God's plan is plenty times more complicated than your mothers so you must understand that the "spanking" would be done on a much larger scale.
God is the creator he was not created, he has always been, therefore anything God creates will always be a creation of God, making nothing equal to him. Not to mention, God is perfect, meaning that it's not a question of whether or not God can or can't create something bigger than himself but that there IS NOT something that can be bigger than himself. ie. If you know everything, can do everything, can see everything etc. than what are you going to create that can do more than everything, that can see more than everything and that can know more than everything.
God is completely different from us he is perfect and we are not. God doesn't need to learn in order to know what learning is like, he invented it. God has knowledge of what's in our minds but he doesn't have to think like us in order to have it, he invented us.
Universe from nothing, what are the odds?
Regarding probability: My opponent is making the classic probability fallacy. One cannot claim the probability of something if we don't know how many ways said thing could come about. For example, we don't know how many ways life could come about or if there are different forms of life (that are not carbon based). For this reason this entire probability argument falls. One cannot make the prediction of probability without actually knowing how rare something is!
Now regarding evidence. What you have done is provided verses from an ancient book to prove that the ancient book is true. That is called circular logic and can be used by anyone making an insane religious claim. I have provided logical arguments against your god and scientific evidence against your god and I wait to see how you respond. If I can show, even in one way that your god is not needed/has logical inconsistencies I win.
//It is important for us to "...believe in the unseen..." because faith is the first pillar of Islam "La ilaha illallah", the shahada, a declaration of faith.//
That is not evidence by your own definition. Also, believing the unseen (or unproven) leaves room to believe anything. If this is the case you should believe in farries and unicorns and dragons and genies. This is not an argument.
1: In none of your first paragraphs do you mention Muhammed this I extend.
About Genesis, fair enough. I have refuted the passage enough.
2: //The Quran was brought down in Arabic similarly to how the Torah was brought down in Hebrew//
But you said it was inspired, not brought down. Also, you have provided no evidence to support this.
//As for the expansion of the Universe I don't fully understand the repulsive cosmological constant but from what I understand it's an unknown force, if that's the case than it can be related to God.//
Well it's not entirely unknown at all. It is linked to dark energy and dark flow. But just because something is unknown you link it to god? That is terrible (for you that is) because when one does that their god gets smaller and smaller as we learn more. If you do this your god is contingent on out understanding and as our knowledge increases your god get's squeezed smaller and smaller until one can truly say that "God is dead". (also you gave no evidence to support your claim here, just speculation)
3: // now if you look back far enough to the very moment of the big bang you would see that everything that will eventually shape our universe came from one point.//
This is so scientifically inaccurate. Right after the big bang there were no atoms and even when the first ones formed there was only hydrogen, none of the major elements that make up earth were there. So this claim is false.
//If logic forces you to believe that something must come from something//
But that is not what I believe and that is not what is true. Matter came from nothing as shown in my last argument. Since this is the case and I do not comply to the aforementioned statement I can ignore the rest.
4: Fair enough. You have shown that the Quran could not have been forged but that still doesn't compete with my rebuttals of the verses.
Arg 1: Well my opponent didn't really answer this but I will give him the benefit of the doubt and say this has been disproven.
Arg2: //making nothing equal to him.//
So he cannot make a rock so heavy he cannot lift it? Then he is not omnipotent.
Regarding the next part in this argument, it does not matter if you think nothing can be bigger, omnipotence means you are all powerful thus he could do one or the other. Please flow this across.
Arg 3: //God is completely different from us he is perfect and we are not. God doesn't need to learn in order to know what learning is like, he invented it. God has knowledge of what's in our minds but he doesn't have to think like us in order to have it, he invented us.//
This is not a refutation of the argument, just saying god is not like us. Extend.
//Universe from nothing, what are the odds?//
Well, you ignored my evidence, and didn't argue against it except by asking "what are the odds" thus I flow this across beautifully.
Conclusion: My opponent has only refuted 1 of my 3 logical arguments that show his god is not real thus I extend the other 2. Also, my opponent has not refuted the claim that a universe can come from nothing which I have proven thus I extend that. That shows that there is no need for god at all!
Now regarding his claims: Verse one was conceded as being an assumption thus it holds no water. I have also shown that it is false.
Verse two has been shown to be scientifically innacurate and was also claimed that "it [the cosmological constant] can be related to God." The problem with this is that there is no evidence to support it. This argument falls.
I have disproven all my opponent's claims whist leaving mine unscratched thus I urge you to vote Con!
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by BillBonJovi 5 years ago
|Agreed with before the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Agreed with after the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Who had better conduct:||-||-||1 point|
|Had better spelling and grammar:||-||-||1 point|
|Made more convincing arguments:||-||-||3 points|
|Used the most reliable sources:||-||-||2 points|
|Total points awarded:||0||6|
Reasons for voting decision: Better arguments and Sources from Con I think, I also give Con my conduct point because Pro forfeited a round
You are not eligible to vote on this debate
This debate has been configured to only allow voters who meet the requirements set by the debaters. This debate either has an Elo score requirement or is to be voted on by a select panel of judges.