On faith...
- By: Qwaider
- On:Thursday, March 15, 2007 10:25:43 AM
- In:Thoughts
- Viewed: (4027) times
- Currently 4.5/5 Stars.
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
Rated 4.5/5 stars (145 votes cast)
Couple of bloggers make it their business to bash religion proclaiming that it's backward, dark and ignorant. Some see that it's only logical to be Atheist. While I do see their arguments for the most part, I prefer not to get into this "clash".
Personally, Atheism is just like any religion, it has it's followers, it has it's rules and guidelines, and it promises to make people's life better. The major difference between Atheism and all other religions is always .... God!
Now, I do realize that there are many differences between atheism and most religions. But there are similarities as well. The idea of not believing in anything until it's proved beyond any shadow of a doubt is somewhat too simplistic for people who think they're the progressive forward thinkers of the world.
Not believing something until it can be sensed can be very dangerous as our sense do play tricks on us. And sometimes even our minds therefore a factor in both schools of thought will always exist, Doubt!
Doubt, in this specific context is the opposite of Faith. You decide if you have faith in spite of your doubt, more on that later
The mere fact that one argument can never be proven either way, brings doubt as a scientific tool into play in both cases. I can prove that something is hot or cold in several ways. One is by touching it (and this falls under our senses and how dangerous that might be) or I can use logic to deduce it's temperature. I can rely on math. Or even a tool to know the temperature of something and then be able to state what I think
The issue is complicated even more if my view of hot or cold is different than other people's views. But this issue of proving or disproving the existence of god is a discussion that will go on for ever. And I'm positive of that. Mainly because, there is no way for us to know anything that took place before the Big Bang something that most cosmologist consider the very first event in our existence. But many will admit that certain things existed before it, like "Time". Therefore Time might be the supreme ruler of the universe. So I might start a new religion and call it "Time-ology". Tom-Cruse is invited of course.
Anyway, back to doubt, faith and certainty. The existence of a god is a matter of faith. The reason I say that is that despite what many would argue (and I may add from both side), the existence of God can never be proved. Not in a college of science. On the very same not, then non-existence of God can be equally impossible to prove. It's not about proving or disproving what people understood from one book, or from one set of teachings it's about the main question, who made the universe, and thereby, does God exist.
The interesting thing about faith is that you consider things as if they're certain, and have no doubt even though there is no hard proof. This is exactly why people can't repent after death. Because Faith is impossible when you have certainty. In other words Faith - doubt = certainty. We agree that certainty is an unknown constant. Therefore Faith= Certainty + Doubt
This formula proves that Faith is always larger than doubt, and of certainty. That's why it's so hard to understand and that's why some people prefer to take the formula: doubt = Faith - Certainty. Ending up with neither.
On a humorous note, lets consider the alternatives. If I am wrong, then nothing would happen. But if I am right then atheists have all eternity to think about it as you rot in hell.
Memories....
Maybe doubt is a better choice, because your chances of getting it right is 1/1000000000000000000 :P
Anyone who has read anything on the Big Bang, would see by overwhelming evidence that everything started from a single point, I will post something to explain this a little further one day... I would like to refer you to Big Bang, The origin of the univers by Simon Sing Former BBC producer and science writer... the book is a recent bestselling title in the US... It's a scientific book not something that is religious in any sense... Its more of an educational book...
Read without prejudice and compare that to the holy Quran script... و كانتا رتقا ففتقناهما
U can check the review on Amazon at http://www.amazon.com/Big-Bang-Origin-Universe-P-S/dp/0007162219/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1/103-0141274-3587006?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1173855078&sr=8-1
I just had a similar discussion on the subject... so most of this is copy paste...
Anyway... your theory of doubt is in doubt... it applies only to seeing and feeling and most people do believe only in that... that is a major problem...
There will always be doubt. And faith is based on this. It's when you still have doubt but choose to believe in God.
You see there will never be enough evidence to prove it either way.
*by the way, the universe IS getting colder. I hope Laila could read this and shed some more light. She's our resident cosmologist :)
"Maybe the "universe" or "nature" is super smart to have figured this out on it's own"
So the other theory is the universe first decided that it will be one tiny thing and then concluded what the hell is this?! thats not very smart lets creat a neat system, I will explode myself and create a system that will have little tiny creatures but I won't let them know how I did this or why? That's not super smart...
How can you ignore the exact description of the Big Bang theory with a Quranic verse that is 1400 years old...
From a religious point of view (Athiests don't believe in this but I'm talking to Muslims here): Muslims are ordered to think of creation and signs of God because that will lead them to believe in God, they are not accepted for simply being born Muslims... You have to think of (Ayat Allah:how do you translate that) The Quran is full of such orders... If thinking doesn't show the way then how will people choose to believe in a religion... if they are not convinced first that there is a God...
It's not only that, the message that a God exists was passed on by people who are known for their honesty and integrity... So many other factors point out towards one obvious fact... there is a God..
As for the universe getting colder, thanks for confirming that...
I have the feeling this discussion is one of those endless ones...
Thinking is what people have been doing and upon thinking you will discover, it's inconclusive! You can never prove it either way. This is the very foundation of faith. Accepting something as if it was fact when you don't have all or enough evidence that it is.
I think this is the way god has decided to test our faith. You have all signs that he exists, but not one is a solid evidence and could be argued both ways. Yet somehow the faithful continue to believe.
If I want to be scientific about your statement (There is a god) it would be, "There's a great probability that there is a god, however, we have no direct proof of his existence at this point in modern scientific standards, yet we can't prove his non-existence either" This argument is a huge dead end in the face of Atheists because, they have no way around it
I think we're on the same side here, I'm just looking at the same matter from a broader view that includes the atheist look.
I know we're almost on the same side, but the thing is when you approach something like the existance of a creator and ask for material proof (seeing, hearing, touching...) you apply standards that are not applicable... It resembles saying (ma3a fareq el tashbeeh, don't know how to translate it) I want to measure voice by seeing it or light by holding it... You cannot apply this "scientific standard" on God because you don't have the right tools for the task... One useful tool in this field is "thinking" and contemplating God's work...
I'm not going to get in more details about other ways to prove that God exists, obviously we will hit the wall you call "direct proof" & "modern sceintific standards" basically a material proof... Seeing, hearing, feeling...
oh well in short :
Mk
the universe did not start from a point-like beggining and did not explode into the existing universe
also BBT is just a theory about how it got here not about the origin of the universe
on that please read some Stephen Hawking and Henry F. Schaefer as two viewpoints on the issue it might open some doors that you have missed before.
Faith is admirable not quantifiable or logically justified.
A Proof of existence or non existence is not achievable
and if it is proofed scientifically that there is a god then that will give birth to a post modern empirical religion (sounds crappy) since alot of lore is tied to religion.
dont scientifically tailor verses to phenomenas its questionable and dangerous (clear or not) then we would have another muslim jacques Costo or that russian astronaut and ........
Religion is religion
the last "joke" was morbid and depressing.
I like to believe that our short lived life, no matter how ridden with sin would not equate to eternal condemnation.
I believe that what ever truth the is it will be a just one :D
Enjoy and hope it doesn't eat my comment again
Ps. for some view about what you said check this out
worth the time and offers a different view
I will make reference to all prominent scientists in the field... including Einshtein, Hubble and even those who stood against it but finally failed to face the overwhelming evidence...
I just googled and read a little bit on Stephen Hawking and Henry F. Schaefer, what I read strongly ties Big Bang and as proof on creation!! Both or Schaefer, speak with religious driven agenda... The book I'm telling you about doesn't support the fact from a religious point of view... it's purely scientific research, facts, figures and numbers no explanations no religion... check it out on Amazon, check the previews and the background of the author as well as the editorial reviews it got...
As for the interview with an athiest philosopher, I don't think a philosopher is the right person to take his opinion on matters of physics and astrology... I hate philosophical debates too many word games...
Which one and why?
Why I think is obvious
Quote: "If I am wrong, then nothing would happen. But if I am right then atheists have all eternity to think about it as you rot in hell."
-You are able to actually make yourself believe in superstitions, and force your brain to stop asking questions (cause I'm sure brains always wonder), and as you know in some cases it's "7aram" to think or ask about certain issues in religion as a believer, you have the ability to do that, to be on the safe side, just in case "God" was there? in other words (deceive your brain).
Congrats, that's a skill that I don't have.
Atheism is just another faith. Yes, it questions everything as skepticism and this skepticism holds true in the argument "Atheism is wrong" because it may or may not be a true statement. Right?
I doubt that there are many gods. The reason I think so is that in such a case of having unlimited power (which has it's own definitions and conditions) it would be very weird to have the gods coexist. And if one was the almighty, why would he need aids?
Now what's the name of this one? Well the name doesn't matter. Muslims (including me) call god Allah (and 98 other names). The name doesn't really matter.
You argue that these are superstitions, I argue that you're not sure of that beyond any shadow of a doubt! If you were, or if ANYONE ever does, all religions will crumble. But thank "god" it's not so.