Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 4
al-amiyr

The Qur'aan Cosmological Model

276 posts in this topic

I'm not rejecting the possibility of multiverse or string theory I'm simply saying there is no empirical data for them nor are they philosophically sound, nor does it negate a cause to it all and that cause to be god.

But it does not infer one either. But multiverses and and infinities sure goes a long way to propose a god like being within

The realm of logic and not gaps.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This very thinking is the reason as to why scientific progress has been impeded throughout the centuries.

Another hollow assumption on your behalf.

"It is how it is; we don't NEED to understand anything any further!".

That's a typical response I expect from someone of very little understanding! I said the mechanisms ane mechanics of the process are self discovery for us, for example if I created a machine and had a conversation with you about it, I would only refer to the basic fundamentals and don't have any need to be specific to you as you would lack the expertise and understanding at that level, in the same way the author of Quran refers to the processes we mentioned which are the basic fundamentals, however with those who are more learned they delve deeper in to the words and verses which is unique to the Quran, it contains both the layman terms and a deeper meaning for those who are more learned. Ie heavens earth to the layman means the universe and everything in it, the same words carry depth which also infer other aspects. This is the bit you can't follow!

Who is to say that it is not?

To say such a statement indicates you don't even understand the god argument, and god. So you can't even begin to debate hence why you make illogical statements inferring that you have the same capacity as god......it's laughable, you don't even know what's behind you without looking!

I do not see how usage of the words "splitting", "separation", "expanse", etc. would be at all difficult to translate in to English, especially when it is being translated by a linguistic expert.

The word in Arabic for all the above is one word, you used three different English words so far maybe a few more too. Can't you see the difficulty, it's linguistic 101, sometimes there are no equivalent word in the language that the original is being translated into! You can't see after using three different meanings of the one Arabic word and meanings fit perfectly with the beginning process of the universe ;)

Just because we are uncertain as to what existed beyond singularity, that does not indicate that what existed beyond it is completely beyond our realm of scientific understanding; it simply means that we just have not found an answer yet.

So then you live in blind faith that one day your clergy will discover the metaphysical, using the religion of science! I mean come on, is that like a prophecy? ;)

These are theories, I never said that I irrefutably accepted them. I just said that there are THEORIES surrounding the notion that the universe was ALWAYS here.

Lmao, you see your still stuck way back in time, believing the universe has always been here! Lmao, do you understand the implications of that, what about the finite becoming observed by Hubble so to speak and the data related, indicating a beginning, yet you think it's always been here. Dude the theories you refer to are desperate attempts to show an infinite universe but empirical data ie science shows otherwise, you have more belief in theories with no proof, it's called blind faith!

Assuming the Michiao Kaku is right in his theory of multiverses.

It's like I said I don't reject the theories out right after the Quran says that Allah is the lord of the worlds, so it don't bother me about multiverses, I'm saying there are fallacies in them, they don't offer a cause, they have no say on god. Even if those theories are taken seriously, they require a first cause, conceptual analsys applied can show that cause to be god!

All of your arguments are laced with red herrings, straw-men and other logical fallacies. . . . And you type "Lol", "Lmao", etc. in an attempt to belittle and berate my disposition. . . .

You are an interesting character...

You too are interesting and I'm not belittling you! I genuinely do laugh at some statements, but I don't mean to offend :)

I don't reason for god based on the god of the gaps reasoning, that's entirely a Christian field!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All of your arguments are laced with red herrings, straw-men and other logical fallacies. . . . And you type "Lol", "Lmao", etc. in an attempt to belittle and berate my disposition. . . .

You are an interesting character...

Oh come on AB... Let's not play that game, lion has got you beat in the formal logic department.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh come on AB... Let's not play that game, lion has got you beat in the formal logic department.

Nothing left of skeleton. The Lion ate him.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh come on AB... Let's not play that game, lion has got you beat in the formal logic department.

And I would not expect any other kind of a response coming from you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How so. How do you/we know this? I can tell you it's not by taking our observations backwards.

You claim a vacuum existed before the singularity? Your visualising a tiny fireball in a vacuum exploding and expanding? The vacuum you refer to is a rich structure of fluctuating energy, so sub atomic particles don't just appear from nothing their a result of fluctuating energy in the vacuum, thus constituting to matter. Time, space and matter were all condensed in to a singularity. Upon expansion time, space (vacuum) and matter came into existence.

What empirical data and observations combined with physics etc show that the universe began, this is fact, the theories which refer to possible physical causes which created the singularity have no basis of proof where as the beginning of the universe is established fact.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nothing left of skeleton. The Lion ate him.

Oh come on AB... Let's not play that game, lion has got you beat in the formal logic department.

Come on guys.. Its getting to be more of a personal attack ..Lion ate no one.. I feel the smugness is oozing and it is pointless lol

Edited by Beckys_Mom
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Seriously Alien I genuinely don't mean to offend or belittle you or anyone. I enjoy our debates and everyone here knows that I always bring philosophy in to scientific debates, I do so because most people don't understand that scientific theories are rejected or accepted based on philosophical reasonings and alignment. For example all the empirical data showing us that we live in a heliocentric solar system can be interpreted to create a geo centric model showing earth at the centre of the solar system and the universe. We reject the latter on philosophical basis alone!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And I would not expect any other kind of a response coming from you.

Yet another fallacy ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Come on guys.. Its getting to be more of a personal attack ..Lion ate no one.. I feel the smugness is oozing and it is pointless

Sorry BM... Honestly I was hopeing to avoid the formal logic arguments. it's much more interesting when we leave all the fallacies out of good oled different opinions. But if it goes there one better carry a clear mirror.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Come on guys.. Its getting to be more of a personal attack ..Lion ate no one.. I feel the smugness is oozing and it is pointless lol

Don't shoot! I was eaten already.Will revive tomorrow.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

the gospel of science and it's clergy

The consensus agrees that the universe began it had a finite beginning

point being it's metaphysical theories with no science behind it, yet you prefer those theories as the cause of our universe coming into existence, although it does not meet your standards, the very same standards of proof you demand from religion, scripture, and god.

You're a broken record, Lion. It doesn't matter how many times I correct you, even with regard to my own opinion. You'll keep repeating the same falsehoods over and over as though it actually changes something.

Translating the Quran goes through the same process, judgement cant be based on the translated words it has to be based on the original. Clearly you have no clue about linguistics, etymology of words etc. The verses which refer to splitting and seperation denote expansion by virtue of contextual, historical, linguistic setting and placements. That ofcourse in the original Arabic, the English translation is a best attempt to bring the meaning to you in English, but a lot is lost in translation

And I predicted that you would say this as well.

you will simply maintain that I cannot access the original material in the original language, so my understanding is inherently inferior, as you are wont to do.

I'll let the OP get back to his theories.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry BM... Honestly I was hopeing to avoid the formal logic arguments. it's much more interesting when we leave all the fallacies out of good oled different opinions. But if it goes there one better carry a clear mirror.

I find ALL of your posts interesting.. ( Yourself, al-amiyr, Lion, AB and a few others ) I like to just read and observe more in this particular thread

Don't shoot! I was eaten already.Will revive tomorrow.

:P You are like the terminator ..get destroyed and gel back to yourself in no time ...You should put - I'll be back - at the bottom of your posts lol

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't shoot! I was eaten already.Will revive tomorrow.

That was good.

Say, I have a question. Are you a follower, adherent or believer in the Muslim sharia law?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'll let the OP get back to his theories.

What theory?

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I find ALL of your posts interesting.. ( Yourself, al-amiyr, Lion, AB and a few others ) I like to just read and observe more in this particular thread

:P You are like the terminator ..get destroyed and gel back to yourself in no time ...You should put - I'll be back - at the bottom of your posts lol

There was a young lady called Bright

Who could travel much faster than light

She started one day

In the relative way

And returned home on the previous night.

3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That was good.

Say, I have a question. Are you a follower, adherent or believer in the Muslim sharia law?

Are you crazy??? Joking! ....What Sharia Law?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'll let the OP get back to his theories.

I cannot find my theories. Since they saw a Lion chasing a skeleton they disappeared. I think they will be back tomorrow.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There was a young lady called Bright

Who could travel much faster than light

She started one day

In the relative way

And returned home on the previous night.

There was a UMer named John

His posts were strange but long

When he got back

They were right on track

What he stated?

Was heavily debated

So he closed his account, and was gone !!

Ohh my what am I like? I couldn't make up one that relates to yours, so I made up one about a Umer instead lol :P

EDIT - Sorry.. I meant to add..A UMer is a member of this forum..( All of us are UMers )

Anyhoo hope your night is good.. Catch you later

Edited by Beckys_Mom
2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There was a UMer named John

His posts were strange but long

When he got back

They were right on track

What he stated?

Was heavily debated

So he closed his account, and was gone !!

Ohh my what am I like? I couldn't make up one that relates to yours, so I made up one about a Umer instead lol :P

EDIT - Sorry.. I meant to add..A UMer is a member of this forum..( All of us are UMers )

Anyhoo hope your night is good.. Catch you later

I was wondering what a UMer was. How humorous! It brought to mind this one.

There once was a fellow from Yuma

who told an elephant joke to a puma

Now his skeleton lies

under hot western skies

The Puma had no sense of huma

Put the arrows in a safe place;hope to dodge them tomorrow again.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There was a UMer named John

His posts were strange but long

When he got back

They were right on track

What he stated?

Was heavily debated

So he closed his account, and was gone !!

Ohh my what am I like? I couldn't make up one that relates to yours, so I made up one about a Umer instead lol :P

EDIT - Sorry.. I meant to add..A UMer is a member of this forum..( All of us are UMers )

Anyhoo hope your night is good.. Catch you later

Lol, I miss JVE

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There was a UMer named John

His posts were strange but long

When he got back

They were right on track

What he stated?

Was heavily debated

So he closed his account, and was gone !!

Ohh my what am I like? I couldn't make up one that relates to yours, so I made up one about a Umer instead lol :P

EDIT - Sorry.. I meant to add..A UMer is a member of this forum..( All of us are UMers )

Anyhoo hope your night is good.. Catch you later

You have got to send that to Sakari. He will love it.

Edited by Seeker79

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lovely debates. Continue!----------->

I gather your avoidance is the closest you'll admit to your equation being a failure. Edited by Rlyeh

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

from the way i see it .. the topic was derailed by side arguements

it's ignorant to claim some one else has failed when he said he'll reply tomorrow

maybe this " sudden urge " to finish the debate and claim the opposite side was failed

is a sign of your own failure to keep up with debate ?

but what do i know .. am just watching the debates

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

from the way i see it .. the topic was derailed by side arguements

it's ignorant to claim some one else has failed when he said he'll reply tomorrow

And when he does reply it is meaningless banter.

The fact is he claimed to have supported his equation when he has not. Now is that ignorance or just an out right lie?

maybe this " sudden urge " to finish the debate and claim the opposite side was failed

is a sign of your own failure to keep up with debate ?

The OP has clearly thought out these claims for sometime, but as soon as it is analyzed mathematically he goes AWOL.
but what do i know .. am just watching the debates

Exactly. It's easier to watch, than comprehend. Edited by Rlyeh

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 4

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.