Religion, Science, Bla! Bla!

[diwana]

From other thread:

I don’t want some of these posts get deleted being off topic…and Monk being upset of ruining his thread.

@IceSoul

And also, another “Expert”, Zakir Naik blatantly lied to his audience that evolution had not been proved since it was a "Theory. It’s a theory in the same sense that the Heliocentric theory is a theory.

Islamic Experts have brought Pakistan to a point of collapse and led to hundreds of thousands of deaths worldwide over the years. Muslims would be much better of without these “Experts”.

@TLK

Zakir Nayak is not a Pakistani.

@IceSoul

I didn’t say he was. But he sure as hell is an “Islamic Expert”.

Tell me one thing, why must you always twist words?

@diwana

Since when you think Islamic experts run Pakistan and led to hundreds of thousands of deaths worldwide?

Did they make any weapon of mass killers?

About Zakir naik you have been answered.

@diwana

I never used Quran to refute evolution. :chai:

@Dr.LuLworth

that’s alright. no one can.

@diwana

No one can prove that scientifically, hence no need to refute by Quran.

(Not as place to discuss. Refer to Philosophy and Spirituality section)

@Dr.LuLworth

They have tried (and trying) and backed that up with theories whose gaps are still CONSTANTLY being filled, with more studies, fossils and understanding.

the religious folks have zero scientific effort behind their claims, except for a book. the book states that we were made from keechar, and not evolution.

@diwana

Please post there if you like.
http://www.paklinks.com/gs/philosophy-and-spirituality/487571-why-are-muslims-against-evolution.html

@queer

not really… they were mostly atheists, who use “god” as a metaphor for the physical universe.

@IceSoul

Um, they can. A scientific theory is something that tries to basically tries to explain a phenomenon. The Theory of Evolution fits in perfectly with current observations.

@hareem01

Ice soul do you agree with Daactar?

the religious folks have zero scientific effort behind their claims, except for a book. the book states that we were made from keechar, and not evolution.

@Disney_Princess

No, they used God when they had no real scientific explanation. They clearly surrendered to the fact that there is some divine force, which even they couldn’t comprehend.

@diwana

Einstein was not an atheist!

P.S. Have you done searching all posts of mine to see if I used Quran to refute evolution? Or you are still clicking through?

@IceSoul

No. The book, “Quran” doesn’t state that we are made of “Keechar” literally. It would be foolish to take the Quran COMPLETELY LITERALLY.

Another way of looking at it Hareem, what makes you think that Allah SWT couldn’t cause his creatures to evolve, just like He created the universe with the Big Bang?

@Dr.LuLworth

plus i’m just going to leave this here.

http://www.dailytech.com/Neanderthal+Sex+Gave+Europeans+and+Asians+Stronger+Immune+Systems/article22555.htm

@IceSoul

Einstein was an atheist. If you want proof, read “The God Delusion” Expand your horizon mate and stop listening to Zaid Hamid.

Some Christian priests even sent him angry letters, asking him why he had come to the “Christian” nation of America.

These scientists used the word God as a metaphor as Queer said. However, this is a large topic and difficult ot explain. It would be best if you researched it yourself.

@hareem01

Sure, Allah has power over all things. I haven’t done much research on this topic nor do I find it important…I don’t know who decides what is literal and what isn’t in Quran so can’t really comment on that bit.

Anyway, so what are we discussing? Global warming and Islam?

@diwana

I was waiting for queer to take the question but you jumped on. Fine.
(bbcue rescued you before by removing some posts)

Lets wait for queer to respond. :khumar:

You are disappointing me. :naraz: Please take the best shot in refuting like our friend icesoul is trying.

@IceSoul

As an example, the thing we were discussing earlier: Fixed Planetary Paths. If you take the Quran literally, there shouldn’t be any variation, but its clear that fixed means predictable. And sure as hell the paths are predictable.

@hareem01

Thanks. That’s more like Astronomy…don’t know why it should be called “Allah and global warming”?

@IceSoul

@ Diwanna, at the risk of angering BBQ, I’ll send you the proof directly.

Check your messages.

@diwana

As if that has been proven.

So many scientific theories are controversial/half baked and then people blame religion.

@IceSoul

Such as?

@diwana

Read about Fringe Science.

There are lots of controversial issues and science has been used to refute or support those issues.

May I ask if you read any scientific journals or news at all?

They have lots of theories and ideas which get debunked or are considered controversial.

**Science is an ever changing field. Some rules are fixed but a lot of concepts which revolve around these fixed rules keep changing as we gain more knowledge.
**

Hence, science is not always perfect nor it is always proven as fact.

Just one site for you to read:

Reddit - The heart of the internet

P.S. Still don’t have message but: Einstein was not an atheist.
Search his info yourself.

@IceSoul

Bhai, I’m talking about major theories. And what you are talking about is called “On Going research”. I wrote it on your visitor messages, but I’ll write it here too:

I don’t try to imagine a personal God; it suffices to
stand in awe at the structure of the world, insofar as it
allows our inadequate senses to appreciate it.

---

It was, of course, a lie what you read about my religious
convictions, a lie which is being systematically repeated. I
do not believe in a personal God and I have never denied
this but have expressed it clearly. If something is in me
which can be called religious then it is the unbounded
admiration for the structure of the world so far as our
science can reveal it.

---

The idea of a personal God is quite alien to me and seems
even naive.

---

So Said Einstein.

“Search his info yourself.”

@diwana

Those were merely examples. Big theories like big bang theory , evolution theory, Global warming are among a lot of other ‘theories’/ideas which even scientists acknowledge being controversial.

As to Einstein: He was not an atheist. None of your examples proves he was.

Actually he DID believe in existence of God. The God of Spinoza. Some thoughts which are mentioned may say he was an agnostic. But still NOT an atheist.

Religious and philosophical views of Albert Einstein - Wikipedia

Baruch Spinoza - Wikipedia

Sorry, I thought your message would come as Private message. I rarely check my personal page.

@IceSoul

My GOD! You refuse to acknowledge the evidence when it is staring you in the face. What part of “It was, of course, a lie what you read about my religious convictions, a lie which is being systematically repeated. I do not believe in a personal God…” do you NOT understand?

Mate, you need to get off that acid. No serious scientist contests the Big Bang Theory and the Evolution Theory. Please give evidence for your claims. U talked about scientific magazines, show me articles printed in RESPECTABLE JOURNALS, by RESPECTABLE SCIENTISTS that oppose these theories. These theories are only considered controversial by ultra-religious people like you.

@diwana

do you even know what atheist means?

@IceSoul

Can you even read? I seriously doubt it? But we will do it your way.

“A person who denies or disbelieves the existence of a supreme being or beings.”

According to Dictionary.com. Prove to me that Einstein believed in the existence of “A supreme being or beings.”

@diwana

^Will do when mods split the thread.

[diwana]

Re: Religion, Science, Bla! Bla!

IceSoul you mentioned the meaning of atheist.

Now, when I said Einstein DID believe in a God. Does that not mean he was not an Atheist?

Here is proof that he himself said he was NOT atheist.

"‘I am not an atheist, and I don’t think I can call myself a pantheist. We are in the position of a little child entering a huge library filled with books in many languages. The child knows someone must have written those books. It does not know how. It does not understand the languages in which they are written. The child dimly suspects a mysterious order in the arrangement of the books but doesn’t know what it is. That, it seems to me, is the attitude of even the most intelligent human being toward God. We see the universe marvelously arranged and obeying certain laws but only dimly understand these laws. Our limited minds grasp the mysterious force that moves the constellations.’ (Quoted in M. Jammer, Einstein and Religion, Princeton 1999, p. 48.)

Einstein and atheism

[IceSoul]

Re: Religion, Science, Bla! Bla!

IceSoul you mentioned the meaning of atheist.

Now, when I said Einstein DID believe in a God. Does that not mean he was not an Atheist?

That would, if not for the fact that Einstein did not believe in God.

[IceSoul]

Re: Religion, Science, Bla! Bla!

[QUOTE]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, Verdana][size=3]**[size=5][size=2]From the viewpoint of a Jesuit priest I am, of course, and have always been an atheist.... I have repeatedly said that in my opinion the idea of a personal God is a childlike one. You may call me an agnostic, but I do not share the crusading spirit of the professional atheist whose fervor is mostly due to a painful act of liberation from the fetters of religious indoctrination received in youth. I prefer an attitude of humility corresponding to the weakness of our intellectual understanding of nature and of our being.

**[/size][/size]
[/QUOTE]
Einstein was talking about GOD in a METAPHORICAL way. Not about God in the sense of Allah.[/size]

[diwana]

Re: Religion, Science, Bla! Bla!

Einstein was talking about GOD in a METAPHORICAL way. Not about God in the sense of Allah.

I never said he believed in Allah. And one does not have to believe in Allah to be called religious.

Your own definition proves he was NOT atheist. He did NOT deny existence of supreme being or beings.

[IceSoul]

Re: Religion, Science, Bla! Bla!

[QUOTE]
The word god is for me nothing more than the expression and product of human weaknesses, the Bible a collection of honourable, but still primitive legends which are nevertheless pretty childish. No interpretation no matter how subtle can (for me) change this.
[/QUOTE]

[QUOTE]

[QUOTE]
TALKING ABOUT GOD AS A METAPHOR
[/QUOTE]
:
I believe in Spinoza's God who reveals himself in the orderly harmony of what exists, not in a God who concerns himself with the fates and actions of human beings.

[/QUOTE]

He is calling the Order of the universe "God". Does not mean that the order was "created"

[IceSoul]

Re: Religion, Science, Bla! Bla!

I never said he believed in Allah. And one does not have to believe in Allah to be called religious.

Your own definition proves he was NOT atheist. He did NOT deny existence of supreme being or beings.

He does here:

[QUOTE]
It seems to me that the idea of a personal God is an anthropological concept which I cannot take seriously.** I also cannot imagine some will or goal outside the human sphere....** Science has been charged with undermining morality, but the charge is unjust. A man's ethical behavior should be based effectually on sympathy, education, and social ties and needs; no religious basis is necessary. Man would indeed be in a poor way if he had to be restrained by fear of punishment and hope of reward after death.
[/QUOTE]

"Cannon imagine some will outside the human sphere" Meaning no "Super Being"

Also Indirectly:

[QUOTE]
Scientific research is based on the idea that everything that takes place is determined by laws of nature, and therefore this holds for the action of people. For this reason, a research scientist will hardly be inclined to believe that events could be influenced by a prayer, i.e. by a wish addressed to a Supernatural Being.

[/QUOTE]

[diwana]

Re: Religion, Science, Bla! Bla!

@IceSoul

He does here:

“Cannon imagine some will outside the human sphere” Meaning no “Super Being”

Also Indirectly:

So when he says " I am definitely not an atheist" you do not believe himself and adamant of making him one?

He even said these and was angry on those who wanted to portray him as atheist.

He even said he is deeply religious.

He was from jewish family. Had problem with Bible.

---

"Einstein also stated: “I have repeatedly said that in my opinion the idea of a personal God is a childlike one. You may call me an agnostic, but I do not share the crusading spirit of the professional atheist whose fervor is mostly due to a painful act of liberation from the fetters of religious indoctrination received in youth. I prefer an attitude of humility corresponding to the weakness of our intellectual understanding of nature and of our own being.”

According to Hubertus, Prince of Löwenstein-Wertheim-Freudenberg, Einstein said, “In view of such harmony in the cosmos which I, with my limited human mind, am able to recognize, there are yet people who say there is no God. But what really makes me angry is that they quote me for the support of such views.”[SUP][6]
Attempts by the press to present Albert Einstein as a conventionally religious man provoked a self-made man from New Jersey, J. Dispentiere, to write to Einstein on 22 March 1954. He declared himself an atheist and expressed doubts as to the accuracy of what he had read about Einstein’s beliefs. Einstein answered forthwith on 24 March 1954:[SUP][S2][/SUP]It was, of course, a lie what you read about my religious convictions, a lie which is being systematically repeated. I do not believe in a personal God and I have never denied this but have expressed it clearly. If something is in me which can be called religious then it is the unbounded admiration for the structure of the world so far as our science can reveal it.

In his 1949 book The World as I See It, he wrote: "A knowledge of the existence of something we cannot penetrate, of the manifestations of the profoundest reason and the most radiant beauty, which are only accessible to our reason in their most elementary forms—it is this knowledge and this emotion that constitute the truly religious attitude; in this sense, and in this alone, I am a deeply religious man."[SUP][size=2][8]](http://www.paklinks.com/gs/#cite_note-7)[/SUP][/size]

[IceSoul]

Re: Religion, Science, Bla! Bla!

@diwana

So when nhe says " I am definitely not an atheist" you do not believe himself and adamant of making him one?

He even said these and was angry on those who wanted to portray him as atheist.

He even said he is deeply religious.

He was from jewish family. Had problem with Bible.

---

"Einstein also stated: “I have repeatedly said that in my opinion the idea of a personal God is a childlike one. You may call me an agnostic, but I do not share the crusading spirit of the professional atheist whose fervor is mostly due to a painful act of liberation from the fetters of religious indoctrination received in youth. I prefer an attitude of humility corresponding to the weakness of our intellectual understanding of nature and of our own being.”

According to Hubertus, Prince of Löwenstein-Wertheim-Freudenberg, Einstein said, “In view of such harmony in the cosmos which I, with my limited human mind, am able to recognize, there are yet people who say there is no God. But what really makes me angry is that they quote me for the support of such views.”[SUP][6]
Attempts by the press to present Albert Einstein as a conventionally religious man provoked a self-made man from New Jersey, J. Dispentiere, to write to Einstein on 22 March 1954. He declared himself an atheist and expressed doubts as to the accuracy of what he had read about Einstein’s beliefs. Einstein answered forthwith on 24 March 1954:[SUP][S2][/SUP]It was, of course, a lie what you read about my religious convictions, a lie which is being systematically repeated. I do not believe in a personal God and I have never denied this but have expressed it clearly. If something is in me which can be called religious then it is the unbounded admiration for the structure of the world so far as our science can reveal it.

In his 1949 book The World as I See It, he wrote: "A knowledge of the existence of something we cannot penetrate, of the manifestations of the profoundest reason and the most radiant beauty, which are only accessible to our reason in their most elementary forms—it is this knowledge and this emotion that constitute the truly religious attitude; in this sense, and in this alone, I am a deeply religious man."[SUP][size=2][8]](http://www.paklinks.com/gs/#cite_note-7)[/SUP]

He said “I’m religious” in this context:

To sense that behind anything that can be experienced
there is a something that our mind cannot grasp and whose
beauty and sublimity reaches us only indirectly and as a feeble
reflection, this is religiousness. In this sense I am religious.’

Again, using God as a metaphor. Also, I gave a lot more evidence in which he said that he WAS an ATHEIST.[/size]

[IceSoul]

Re: Religion, Science, Bla! Bla!

@diwana

In his 1949 book The World as I See It, he wrote: "A knowledge of the existence of something we cannot penetrate, of the manifestations of the profoundest reason and the most radiant beauty, which are only accessible to our reason in their most elementary forms—it is this knowledge and this emotion that constitute the truly religious attitude; in this sense, and in this alone, I am a deeply religious man."[SUP][8]](http://www.paklinks.com/gs/#cite_note-7)[/SUP]

Where does he say here that he believes in a Super Natural being called God. He is again using God as a metaphor. Richard Dawkins says it better than I can:

Einstein was
using ‘God’ in a purely metaphorical, poetic sense. So is Stephen
Hawking, and so are most of those physicists who occasionally slip
into the language of religious metaphor.

[diwana]

Re: Religion, Science, Bla! Bla!

He said "I'm religious" in this context:

Again, using God as a metaphor. Also, I gave a lot more evidence in which he said that he WAS an ATHEIST.

You are making up his context.

I thought you would give up when I quoted Einstein himself.

1- "I am definitely not an atheist"

2- "I am deeply religious man"

He is angry at people quoting him as an atheist and you are hell bent on proving him one. :D
You need to give up my friend. Read entirely these two quotes again.

[IceSoul]

Re: Religion, Science, Bla! Bla!

**
[QUOTE]
From the viewpoint of a Jesuit priest I am, of course, and have always been an atheist

[/QUOTE]

[QUOTE]
I do not believe in a personal God
[/QUOTE]

[QUOTE]
The idea of a personal God is quite alien to me and seems
even naive.
[/QUOTE]

[QUOTE]
The word god is for me nothing more than the expression and product of human weaknesses,
[/QUOTE]

[QUOTE]
I also cannot imagine some will or goal outside the human sphere....
[/QUOTE]

Atheism is:
"A person who denies or disbelieves the existence of a supreme being or beings."

He denies the existence of a supreme being. Hence he is an atheist. All educated people are in agreement except the owners of fanatic Judeo-Christian websites.

**Are you in Pakistan? If yes, toh please ja ke so jaye. Uth ke thanday dimagh se sochna.

[dhanya_podena]

Re: Religion, Science, Bla! Bla!

Isnt that a moot point?

[IceSoul]

Re: Religion, Science, Bla! Bla!

And BTW, I already refuted your point about him saying "I'm a deeply religious man". Ah, if you only knew how to read...

[diwana]

Re: Religion, Science, Bla! Bla!

@IceSoul

**

Atheism is:
“A person who denies or disbelieves the existence of a supreme being or beings.”

He denies the existence of a supreme being. Hence he is an atheist. All educated people are in agreement except the owners of fanatic Judeo-Christian websites.

**Are you in Pakistan? If yes, toh please ja ke so jaye. Uth ke thanday dimagh se sochna.

None of your points weigh against just two quotes I brought.

If a woman writes you a text and says she is a woman and likes you.

Will you ask her if that statement of her was a metaphorical sense or real sense?

[BarbieCue]

Re: Religion, Science, Bla! Bla!

And who cares what Einstein had to say about God? What could we possibly achieve from this discussion about a dead man's spirituality? To him religion was just a bunch of "childish superstitions" and holy scriptures were just "primitive legends" but he was actually offended when atheists claimed him to be one of their own. He remarked "The eternal mystery of the world is its comprehensibility".

John Brooke of Oxford summarised it very well: "Like other great scientists he does not fit the boxes in which popular polemicists like to pigeonhole him. It is clear for example that he had respect for the religious values enshrined within Judaic and Christian traditions ... but what he understood by religion was something far more subtle than what is usually meant by the word in popular discussion. His position on God has been widely misrepresented by people on both sides of the atheism/religion divide but he always resisted easy stereotyping on the subject."

[diwana]

Re: Religion, Science, Bla! Bla!

And who cares what Einstein had to say about God? What could we possibly achieve from this discussion about a dead man's spirituality? To him religion was just a bunch of "childish superstitions" and holy scriptures were just "primitive legends" but he was actually offended when atheists claimed him to be one of their own. He remarked "The eternal mystery of the world is its comprehensibility".

John Brooke of Oxford summarised it very well: "Like other great scientists he does not fit the boxes in which popular polemicists like to pigeonhole him. It is clear for example that he had respect for the religious values enshrined within Judaic and Christian traditions ... but what he understood by religion was something far more subtle than what is usually meant by the word in popular discussion. His position on God has been widely misrepresented by people on both sides of the atheism/religion divide but he always resisted easy stereotyping on the subject."

That was just to refute the position of some atheists who want to show the world they are smart and all others are not. And they uses crutches and stunts like this one, saying scientists were atheists.

No,.............. the scientists can be and are religious.

[Fbi786]

Re: Religion, Science, Bla! Bla!

Is there a bloody point to this waste of time ..useless discussion thread ?You people are weird ...discussing something which ain't gona benefit no one except that these discussions have no real answer but rather a waste of time.Discuss something which is important like hoe we could be better Muslims and how we can evolve to be a benefit to Islam or what we can give in service to the way of Allah... No one discusses these ..It's very shameful we Muslims have very little knowledge about our deen .. have no clue as to where we re coming from or where we re going.

[sharaabee]

Re: Religion, Science, Bla! Bla!

hahah fbi.. rant rant rant!

[goddamniamsoawesome]

Re: Religion, Science, Bla! Bla!

Is there a bloody point to this waste of time ..useless discussion thread ?You people are weird ...discussing something which ain't gona benefit no one except that these discussions have no real answer but rather a waste of time.Discuss something which is important like hoe we could be better Muslims and how we can evolve to be a benefit to Islam or what we can give in service to the way of Allah... No one discusses these ..It's very shameful we Muslims have very little knowledge about our deen .. have no clue as to where we re coming from or where we re going.

You go girl!

You know you don't have to waste your time reading a thread which does not interest you. Both sides of the divide think there is enough material to warrant a discussion, however circular it might be. Sure, it may be a pointless discussion but hey, don't regulate speech bru.