The Improbability of God

Dexter Sinister

Unspecified Specialist
Oct 1, 2004
10,168
539
113
Regina, SK
You have to study the book thoroughly then you may say it is good or not.
I have studied the book thoroughly. I can't read it in its original Arabic, I'm illiterate in Arabic, and I'm willing to concede that in the original Arabic it may be sublime poetry, I'll never know. But I have to question the judgment of a deity who'd send a message that only a small fraction of the world's population can read, and I'm not going to attempt to learn Arabic at my age. But in the English translations I've read, it's not good. It's obvious nonsense, and the translations and explanations of various ayahs that you've offered here do not change my mind. They're not much different than what I've read elsewhere. I've looked up all your references in the translations I have, and there's really no significant difference between what you say it means and what I read in my references. I still think the book is silly, boring, repetitive, dull, pointless, and wrong. Beats me how somebody who's been trained in modern medicine and thus must know something about critical thinking, as you claim about yourself, can think it makes any sense.
 

Dexter Sinister

Unspecified Specialist
Oct 1, 2004
10,168
539
113
Regina, SK
I really have lost respect for you now, you cannot understand the truth, and you don't believe my statements of truth, you answer me as though I am a dumb idiot who has no grasp of reality.
Well, yes, that's where the logical fallacy of arguments from authority lead. Don't sweat it. He's telling you, "I'm right by definition, so you must be stupid." But he's wrong, he doesn't know how to think clearly, and you're a very long way from being stupid.
 

Spade

Ace Poster
Nov 18, 2008
12,822
49
48
11
Aether Island
This is wrong.



The newly born baby cannot hear neither can he see, like the little newly born cats.

It is some illusion that the mother may think her baby is directly looking to her (this occurs by chance that his eye is directed towards her, but in fact he is not seeing at that moment), or sometimes the newly born baby may smile to her (which is merely some twitching of the related muscles, and not in fact any smile.)

Nonsense, Eanassir. All my children were aware at birth. They could see, hear, and respond.
 

eanassir

Time Out
Jul 26, 2007
3,099
9
38
Nonsense, Eanassir. All my children were aware at birth. They could see, hear, and respond.


Keep your sense for yourself; and be glad with your knowledge about this. Or else you can ask your doctor: does the infant see at birth?
 

Spade

Ace Poster
Nov 18, 2008
12,822
49
48
11
Aether Island
Eanassir,
What research says...

What Can My Baby See?
Quote:

"Although their vision is not as good as adults', research has shown that babies have many visual abilities, so that their visual experience is quite rich and well-organized. It is certainly not a "booming, buzzing", patternless confusion! Even at birth, a baby's acuity is good enough so that in your arms, he or she can see many of features of your face --your eyes, your mouth, your nose, even a fly landing on your nose! Babies at 8 months of age have acuity that’s within a factor of 2 of adult acuity. However, their sensitivity to light and dark, and subtle shading (contrast sensitivity) improves about 4 times faster than their visual acuity: thus, by 8 to 9 weeks (not 8 to 9 months!) of age, your baby will be able to distinguish two shades of gray that differ by only 1/2% in brightness, about half as good as adult sensitivity! In the first month of life a baby can see many colors, although he or she might not be able to tell the difference between very pastel colors. As the nervous system matures, especially in the fovea, color vision and acuity will improve and begin to approach adult vision."
 

Spade

Ace Poster
Nov 18, 2008
12,822
49
48
11
Aether Island
Eanassir,
You are interpreting reality through religious lenses, much like the Vatican did when they disputed the Copernican Model. Doubleplusungood!
 

talloola

Hall of Fame Member
Nov 14, 2006
19,576
113
63
Vancouver Island
Keep your sense for yourself; and be glad with your knowledge about this. Or else you can ask your doctor: does the infant see at birth?
It is not a 'general' statement that babies can or cannot see at birth, some, as
with my two daughters can see quite well, and it varies down the line, to where
some don't see very well, and everything inbetween, and as the other post
explains, color and light are another story, they develope along the way.
 

eanassir

Time Out
Jul 26, 2007
3,099
9
38
But I have to question the judgment of a deity who'd send a message that only a small fraction of the world's population can read, and I'm not going to attempt to learn Arabic at my age.

The Quran was revealed in Arabic, because the people on whom it was revealed were the Arab. So the apostle was Arab also.

The apostle will speak to his people by their language which was the Arabic.

If the Quran had been revealed in language other than Arabic, the people of the apostle: the Arab would not have understood it.

As in the Quran 41: 44

وَلَوْ جَعَلْنَاهُ قُرْآنًا أَعْجَمِيًّا لَّقَالُوا لَوْلَا فُصِّلَتْ آيَاتُهُ أَأَعْجَمِيٌّ وَعَرَبِيٌّ قُلْ هُوَ لِلَّذِينَ آمَنُوا هُدًى وَشِفَاء وَالَّذِينَ لَا يُؤْمِنُونَ فِي آذَانِهِمْ وَقْرٌ وَهُوَ عَلَيْهِمْ عَمًى أُوْلَئِكَ يُنَادَوْنَ مِن مَّكَانٍ بَعِيدٍ

The explanation:
(Had We appointed it a Quran in a foreign [language], they would have said: "Why are not its revelations expounded [in Arabic]?

How could [the Quran] be in a foreign [language], and [the messenger] be an Arab?"

Say [O Mohammed to them]:

"[The Quran], to those who believe, is guidance and healing,

[whereas] those who unbelieve have deafness in their ears, and it is blindness for them.
Such [associaters] will be summoned from a far place. )

But in the English translations I've read, it's not good. It's obvious nonsense, and the translations and explanations of various ayahs that you've offered here do not change my mind. They're not much different than what I've read elsewhere. I've looked up all your references in the translations I have, and there's really no significant difference between what you say it means and what I read in my references.


Truly, I think the available translations of the meaning of the Glorious Quran are not very good; although many translators worked hard for such goal. Such translations cannot stand in stead of the original Arabic text of the Quran.

These translators depended on some interpretations that are defective; so how can anyone translate a text that he does not understand.

However, I am not very efficient in English, but evenso I depended on the miraculous interpretation of the late inspired interpreter of the Quran and the Bible.

So my translation is only a translation of the interpretation according to my understanding and language capability of Arabic and English; my translation is only the explanation of the Quran but in English.

See the preface of A J Arberry for Volume II of his translation
http://mlivo.com/translations/Arberry.htm

, when he spoke about the difficulties that he faced in his translation of the meaning of the Quran, while he was not a Muslim, and he might have some purpose (although the evidence is established against him; for he studied the Quran and evenso he did not believe.)

Beats me how somebody who's been trained in modern medicine and thus must know something about critical thinking, as you claim about yourself, can think it makes any sense.



The Quran is superior or higher than medicine, astronomy or science.
 
Last edited:

L Gilbert

Winterized
Nov 30, 2006
23,738
107
63
71
50 acres in Kootenays BC
the-brights.net
This is wrong.
Prove it wrong.



The newly born baby cannot hear neither can he see, like the little newly born cats.
This comment must be from the witchdoctor's guide to medicine (Quran) under the rattle shaking section.

It is some illusion that the mother may think her baby is directly looking to her (this occurs by chance that his eye is directed towards her, but in fact he is not seeing at that moment), or sometimes the newly born baby may smile to her (which is merely some twitching of the related muscles, and not in fact any smile.)
The Senses and Your Newborn
There is also a myriad of sections in Johns-Hopkins' webpages that contradict what you say.
 

L Gilbert

Winterized
Nov 30, 2006
23,738
107
63
71
50 acres in Kootenays BC
the-brights.net
Unfortunately, that's not the case where determinism is concerned: the issue of God's "existence" defines our "day to day interactions" (i.e. are our actions free?).
In some people's day to day lives, yes. Not in everyone's.
The laws of most countries--including Canada's--are dependent on certain principles of free action (i.e. you are responsible for your own actions and can therefore be punished--as opposed to merely being detained and rehabilitated). Saying that there is no God would bring the law and even the Constitution to the ground.
Perhaps. If so, I think it would be a good thing to tear apart the laws and start from scratch, assuming the renovators were sensible. Same with the constitution.

I don't think it makes any difference outside of law because "God" in the fullest sense of the term must be beyond intelligibility (intelligence is dependent on existence and God is 'outside of' existence).
(I don't bother with religious arguments because religion is based on the assumption that there is a God--the topic of the thread is whether a God is probable, not what the nature of God is).
Quite right. And it is highly improbably that anyone will ever show any probability that such things as gods exist outside the imagination.



I've heard say that to some people believing in a God is just as natural as atheists not believing in one.
It probably is.

Having said that, assuming there is a God is kind of like when they call plain butter "unsalted"; you actually just start with butter (i.e. the universe), the salt (i.e. the idea of a creator, God) is something you have added--milk doesn't come from the cow pre-salted.
Cute.
 

Dexter Sinister

Unspecified Specialist
Oct 1, 2004
10,168
539
113
Regina, SK
If the Quran had been revealed in language other than Arabic, the people of the apostle: the Arab would not have understood it.
Well obviously, but what are the rest of us to do? Most of the world's people don't know Arabic and never will, the real Quran is therefore closed to them. It seems he hasn't even been able to inspire anyone to produce a good translation into another language. That was my point: if the message of the Quran is for all of humanity, and is indeed the final revelation as Muslims claim, that's a very ineffective way to get the word out. I'd expect a perfect being to do better than that.
 

Dexter Sinister

Unspecified Specialist
Oct 1, 2004
10,168
539
113
Regina, SK
... does such aya tells there are pillars for the sky or heaven or not; but you answered that you think scientifically there are no pillars, which is other than the answer that I demanded, which is: What does the aya implicate? And not what is yuor idea about the science.
This is what you wrote:
"See this aya 31: 10
خَلَقَ السّماواتِ بِغيرِ عَمَدٍ تَرَونَها، و ألقى في الأرضِرواسيَ أنْ تَميدَ بِكم
The explanation: (He created the [gaseous] heavens without pillars you see, and He cast on the earth firm [mountains], lest it sway irregularly with you …)

Now, my question is that: you said that you had read the translation of the meaning of the Quran to find it useless; ok then, what you understand from the aya:
Are there pillars for the heaven or are there not such pillars? "

You did not ask what the aya implicates, you asked only if there are or are not pillars. The aya itself explicitly says there are no pillars, emphasized in blue in your original, and I agreed, there are no pillars, though I suppose that verse might be read as saying there are pillars but we can't see them. I have no idea what casting mountains on the earth to prevent it from swaying means. Mountains don't come down from the sky, and the suggestion that they stabilize the earth is ludicrous. Or maybe it means the mountains keep the invisible pillars from swaying. And you think that book makes sense? :roll:
 

eanassir

Time Out
Jul 26, 2007
3,099
9
38
This is what you wrote:
"See this aya 31: 10

خَلَقَ السّماواتِ بِغيرِ عَمَدٍ تَرَونَها، و ألقى في الأرضِرواسيَ أنْ تَميدَ بِكم


The explanation: (He created the [gaseous] heavens without pillars you see, and He cast on the earth firm [mountains], lest it sway irregularly with you …)

Now, my question is that: you said that you had read the translation of the meaning of the Quran to find it useless; ok then, what you understand from the aya:
Are there pillars for the heaven or are there not such pillars? "​


You did not ask what the aya implicates, you asked only if there are or are not pillars. The aya itself explicitly says there are no pillars, emphasized in blue in your original, and I agreed, there are no pillars, though I suppose that verse might be read as saying there are pillars but we can't see them. I have no idea what casting mountains on the earth to prevent it from swaying means. Mountains don't come down from the sky, and the suggestion that they stabilize the earth is ludicrous. Or maybe it means the mountains keep the invisible pillars from swaying. And you think that book makes sense? :roll:


I said about this ayah in the Quran, because you said: I have read the translation of the meaning of the Quran, and you insisted the translation of the Quran itself.

The translation, any translation of any text, is only its interpretation or explanation in another language and it is not the same text originally; this is applied also to the translations of the Bible.

Therefore, when you said: I have read the translation of the meaning of the Quran to find it not worthy; I said what is then the implication of this ayah (only as an example to demonstrate the deep meaning of the ayat of the Quran.)

So see about this ayah in this link: universeandquran.t35.com/#A_Conversation_with_the_Author

"Question 2: What is the meaning of His saying – be exalted – in the Quran 31: 10
خَلَقَ السَّمَاوَاتِ بِغَيْرِ عَمَدٍ تَرَوْنَهَا ...
The explanation:
(He created the [gaseous] heavens without pillars you can see …) ?

Answer: When the Arabs want to erect their tents, which are made of goat hair, they lay the pillars down on the earth, and put the tents over them and tie the ropes and fix them to the ground, then they pull the ropes from the other side, so that the pillars will stand up and the tent will be raised with them.

This is a parable from God – be highly exalted – and its explanation:

Your tents, even though they are small in size and low in height, cannot be erected without pillars;

whereas the sky [: the gaseous layers of the high atmosphere above the troposphere], even though it is very wide and high, He has lifted it without pillars [because He made such gases of light weight; so they rose up]; He created it with His wisdom, and lifted it with His unlimited ability, and He is not in need of any assistant to do all that.

[Moreover, it may indicate also that there are invisible pillars, which they will know about their existence, in the future.]
 

eanassir

Time Out
Jul 26, 2007
3,099
9
38
So god sent us a message pointing out that tents need poles to stand up but the sky doesn't. Brilliant.


This is a serious thing, if you consider its implications (although everthing God creates is marvelous.)

These gases of the upper atmospheric layers are suffocating and poisonous like SO2, H2S, CH4 in addition to the trace gases like Neon,...etc. And when you see the sky now to find its clear, because it has been systematized and arranged in many layers; but when they were mixed at the start of their formation: they were in the form of thick smoke.
universeandquran.t35.com/#The_Gaseous_Heavens

Then when they will mix later on when Doomsday is very near and the earth will stop its axial rotation (just like Venus - don't be angry: let us say it has slowed down its rotation; while to me it has stopped its spinning); so at that time the gases of the atmosphere will mix with each other and the sky will be once again turbid just like Venus now.
solarsystem.nasa.gov/multimedia/gallery/Venus_Clouds.jpg

See Question 1 and Question 3 and their answers at this link:
universeandquran.t35.com/#A_Conversation_with_the_Author

" Question 1: You say that the ‘sky’ means the space, then what is the meaning of His saying – be exalted – in the Quran 40: 64

اللَّهُ الَّذِي جَعَلَ لَكُمُ الْأَرْضَ قَرَارًا وَالسَّمَاء بِنَاء وَصَوَّرَكُمْ فَأَحْسَنَ صُوَرَكُمْ ...
The explanation:
(God is He Who has made for you the earth for a dwelling-place, and the sky for a structure [of gaseous layers,] and shaped you in fine shapes, …)

And His saying – be exalted – in the Quran 51: 47​
وَالسَّمَاء بَنَيْنَاهَا بِأَيْدٍ وَإِنَّا لَمُوسِعُونَ
The explanation:
(And the sky – We have built with surplus [from Us], and We are Open-handed more.)

The interpretation: God says that He has constructed the sky with His surplus; because He is Merciful to people, and He is still more Open-handed; because He is Generous.

Answer: ‘To build’ means to collect the object and to compact its parts to each other. They say: The builder builds the wall, i.e. he collects the bricks and attaches them to each other by matrix. And the ‘sky’ means the gaseous layers.
The meaning of this Quranic revelation: And the gases, We have collected and packed, with Our surplus towards them and Our mercy to them; for if We let these gases at the surface of the earth, then their life will be impossible, but they will rather suffocate and die. Therefore, We have lifted these gases by Our mercy, and packed them in layers by Our surplus, so We have made the oxygen and nitrogen in the air for their inspiration and many other benefits; nevertheless, We have lifted the suffocating and harmful gases by Our mercy and surplus, and We are still more Open-handed with profuse favors and grace of God; as He says – be exalted – in the Quran 14: 34​
وَإِن تَعُدُّواْ نِعْمَتَ اللّهِ لاَ تُحْصُوهَا
The explanation: (And if you would count the bounty of God, you cannot count it.)
------------------------------------------------------------

Question 3: What is the meaning of His saying –be exalted –in the Quran 22: 65​
أَلَمْ تَرَ أَنَّ اللَّهَ سَخَّرَ لَكُم مَّا فِي الْأَرْضِ وَالْفُلْكَ تَجْرِي فِي الْبَحْرِ بِأَمْرِهِ وَيُمْسِكُ السَّمَاء أَن تَقَعَ عَلَى الْأَرْضِ إِلَّا بِإِذْنِهِ إِنَّ اللَّهَ بِالنَّاسِ لَرَؤُوفٌ رَّحِيمٌ
The explanation:
(Have you [Mohammed] not seen how God has made all that is in the earth subjected to you [people,] and the ship run on the see with His decree, and He holds back the sky from falling down upon the earth save with His leave*; surely, God is All-Compassionate [and] Most Merciful to people.) ?
[*As will it do on the Last Day, just before Doomsday.]

Answer: The ‘sky’, here, means the gaseous layers.
The explanation: God –be exalted –holds back the gaseous layers and prevents them from falling down on the earth, and if this occurs then all people will die and perish because these gases are suffocating and harmful to the health of people. The proof of this is His saying –be exalted –​
إِنَّ اللَّهَ بِالنَّاسِ لَرَؤُوفٌ رَّحِيمٌ
i.e. (Surely, God is All-Compassionate [and] Most Merciful to people.)
So the explanation of this Quranic revelation: is that God, with His mercy made these suffocating and poisonous gases light in weight in order to rise up in the sky so that they would not do harm, until before Doomsday; because at that time they will come down to the ground. This is understood from His saying –be exalted – إلاّ بِإذنِهِ i.e. (save with His leave) which means: save before the Day of Doom, when God –be exalted –will let these gases fall down and so they will fall down on the ground and mix with each other, because of the upset of the celestial system, and become like smoke; however, at the start of its formation, the sky was like smoke.
solarsystem.nasa.gov/multimedia/gallery/Venus_Clouds.jpg

This is understood from His saying – be glorified – in the Quran 21: 104​
كَمَا بَدَأْنَا أَوَّلَ خَلْقٍ نُّعِيدُهُ وَعْدًا عَلَيْنَا إِنَّا كُنَّا فَاعِلِينَ
The explanation:
(As We began [its] first creation [of the sky from the smoke] will We bring it back again [to become smoke once again] –– a promise [binding] upon Us; surely, We are going to perform it [as did We before, in the previous Doomsdays.] ) "