[zakir Naik's Arguments]

[gemini16114]

i need answer this question is asked by a non muslim



Supposed “scientific facts”[ha ha ha ha] in the Quran:

Cosmology:

“Big Bang in the Quran”:

My friend already proved it wrong in another post but I will reply it again.

The Quran States In Verse 21.30

021.030
YUSUFALI: 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?
PICKTHAL: Have not those who disbelieve known that the heavens and the earth were of one piece, then We parted them, and we made every living thing of water? Will they not then believe?
SHAKIR: Do not those who disbelieve see that the heavens and the earth were closed up, but We have opened them; and We have made of water everything living, will they not then believe?



The above verses indicate clearly:

1-Heavens and earth already in existence

2-splitting of this “continuum”[ooooo…]



Refutation 1:

Heavens and earth were not in existence in the first place when the big bang occurred.

Even particles did not exist.

This fallacious concept erupts from the misconception that, the heavens and earth were continuous and rigidly packed into a ball or something.

The truth is that “heavens” were formed much much much later and “earth” even more later. There was never a time when both ere united.

[So much for the big bang!!! Zakir goes crashing]



. Will they not then believe?……….

[Yeah sure… we will now believe after you just shout out the ****, who ever you are…]

[laughinglion]

What you are asking is not very clear. But if I have understood you correctly, I feel the answer to the problem is that: We can only measure, record, etc., the existence of the universe from its beginning in time/space. It would make no sense to say that, "before the universe was it was 'nothing' and from that nothing was created absolute singularity, in space and time. And from that absolute singularity everything else has come into existence." We are unable to record pre-time/pre-existence.

As for the heavens and earth being joined, they were joined in the absolute singularity that was the beginning of space and time, from which 'all existent' things of preceeded.

I hope this is sufficient, and simply enough for your purpose.

with peace

[AbdulQahhar]

surely this Universe was created at time 0, which modern science estimate as T - 15 billion years, T being now.

Kaafir on that site said this, quote:
The above verses indicate clearly:

1-Heavens and earth already in existence


Kaafi is wrong. Kaafir maybe didn't read these verses where creation is mentioned.

The Qur'aan : Ad-Dukhaan

وَمَا خَلَقْنَا السَّمَاوَاتِ وَالْأَرْضَ وَمَا بَيْنَهُمَا لَاعِبِينَ

And We created not the heavens and the earth, and all that is between them, in play.
44:38

مَا خَلَقْنَاهُمَا إِلَّا بِالْحَقِّ وَلَكِنَّ أَكْثَرَهُمْ لَا يَعْلَمُونَ

We created them not save with truth; but most of them know not.
44:39

To create means to bring into existence from nothing. Simple as that. And as already mentioned, Earth and the rest of the Universe were nicely packed in a singular point at the beginning of time as we measure it, so no problems with that.

Kaafir on that site also failed to realize that something can be called XYZ now that it exists and before it came into existence, i.e. the Universe at time 0, although it wasn't really Universe as it is now, but maybe even a singular point, and if there's a singular point, then it exists, so using that relation we can easily say that Universe was in existence (through a singular point).

[gemini16114]

Thanx for both of you i have more question of the same person he is actually an atheist and disturbing it if i give you the reference of that forum will you answer him .i am very much depressed by his illogical questions

[AbdulQahhar]

Thanx for both of you i have more question of the same person he is actually an atheist and disturbing it if i give you the reference of that forum will you answer him .i am very much depressed by his illogical questions

Don't worry too much about him akhi, out there many people trying to ridicule Islam. They all try to "cover" the Truth of Islam with misquoting the Qur'an, the Ahadith, etc. All you really need is some basic knowledge of the scientific branch and good Tafseer. And if there are things we can't answer, well, there's always somebody who can answer them properly.

[gemini16114]

brother if i give you the forum name will you let him down because he is irritating all of us and no one is there good enough to respond him well


some guys are working well but he is not accepting any comments if it is not possible to come on that forum than OK i will tell you what he will comment after word

and once agian thanx very much

[gemini16114]

http://www.drzakirnaik.com/OfficialF...c/Default.aspx

this is the link you should check what he said and answer him or answer on this forum i will answer him after that please i need the help of you people

i am pasting it on this page but problem is the whole text is not pasting well so it is better that you check the above link.

Thanx

[gemini16114]

The Myth Of Theist Morality and The True Meaning of Morality.

This is some thing thrown around by Theists at Atheists.

“Atheists are immoral. They do not believe in God. So they think they can do what ever they want.”



Refutation of Theist Morality.

The definition of morality:

“The quality of being in accord with standards of right or good conduct out of one’s true nature or free will”

This means the following:

1-Must do actions that are acceptable according to general standards of good and bad.

2-The person must do it out of his free will (Forcing some one to give charity doesn’t make him Moral)



Situation:

Man 1:

Does some thing good (gives charity) out of his own free will and out of his nature as a kind and merciful man.

Man 2:

Some one puts a gun on this man’s head and asks him to do a good thing (asks him to give money to the poor) but this is not his nature. He does it out of fear (of death in this case)



Conclusion:
Man 1
Man 2

Moral
Immoral





This cannot be contested

Now this situation can be extended:



Situation:

Atheist:

Does good deed out of his nature as a righteous man or out of his own free will

Theist:

Does good deed when faced with fear of Hell fire and temptation of Benefits in Paradise



Conclusion:
Atheist
Theist

Moral
Immoral



Explanation:

The fact that theists do good deed to “Please God” or “Save oneself from Hell fire” or “To attain paradise” makes them Immoral. The Atheist on the other hand does good deed out of his free choice makes him Moral or Righteous.



Possible counter arguments by theists:

1-Who will decide what is “Right” or “Wrong”
Answer Firstly, there are certain universally accepted norms of good and evil like Murder, Rape, Perversion, Oppression (wrong), Truthfulness, kindness (right)
Secondly, the practice of framing one’s standards is not uncommon. Most secular world governments do that. For example, a panel headed by Dr. Bhim Rao Ambedkar wrote Indian constitution. This constitution defines what is “good” or “evil” for the people living in that country based on its cultural leanings and modern ideas of democracy and freedom.

An individual has freedom to frame his moral standards as long as he does not make a nuisance out of himself.



2-God decides what we do so Atheists, due to their disbelief, are immoral by default.

Answer Consider this situation.

There are two classrooms. Room 1 has a camera system that monitors their activities and hence, they behave in a proper manner. So far so good. In the next classroom, the students are well behaved by nature and organize themselves in a proper manner. This is a higher moral level. But it would be wrong on the part of the students of Room 1 to think that the students of Room 2 aren’t well behaved since they have no camera monitoring them.



3-There needs to be some force to maintain the society at good moral standards, and hence, belief in God is essential for society.

Answer Consider an out-of-movie situation:

In the movie “A Clockwork Orange”, police arrests an 18-year-old rapist/murderer/gangster. He volunteers for a new procedure which essentially meant forcing, by unnatural means “righteousness” upon its subjects such that they feel intense head ache when an “impure” thought comes to their mind. The procedure is successful and the subject is unnaturally made “a perfect Christian”. Not surprisingly, the first person to object this is a priest of the prison. And the scientists use the above argument to justify their act. (Directed by Stanley Kubrick)

So, this too is an example of force to maintain moral standards in the society. Why do theists contest this?



THE CONCLUSION THAT CAN BE DRAWN FOM THE ABOVE ARGUMENTS ARE:

1- Theist morality is self-contradictory

2-Theist claim that Atheists are immoral in unjustified

3-You don’t have to be a theist to be Moral

4-Moral justification of existence of religion is irrational

[gemini16114]

The Myth Of Theist Morality and The True Meaning of Morality.

This is some thing thrown around by Theists at Atheists.

“Atheists are immoral. They do not believe in God. So they think they can do what ever they want.”



Refutation of Theist Morality.

The definition of morality:

“The quality of being in accord with standards of right or good conduct out of one’s true nature or free will”

This means the following:

1-Must do actions that are acceptable according to general standards of good and bad.

2-The person must do it out of his free will (Forcing some one to give charity doesn’t make him Moral)



Situation:

Man 1:

Does some thing good (gives charity) out of his own free will and out of his nature as a kind and merciful man.

Man 2:

Some one puts a gun on this man’s head and asks him to do a good thing (asks him to give money to the poor) but this is not his nature. He does it out of fear (of death in this case)



Conclusion:
Man 1 Man 2

Moral Immoral





This cannot be contested

Now this situation can be extended:



Situation:

Atheist:

Does good deed out of his nature as a righteous man or out of his own free will

Theist:

Does good deed when faced with fear of Hell fire and temptation of Benefits in Paradise



Conclusion:
Atheist Theist

Moral Immoral



Explanation:

The fact that theists do good deed to “Please God” or “Save oneself from Hell fire” or “To attain paradise” makes them Immoral. The Atheist on the other hand does good deed out of his free choice makes him Moral or Righteous.



Possible counter arguments by theists:

1-Who will decide what is “Right” or “Wrong”
Answer Firstly, there are certain universally accepted norms of good and evil like Murder, Rape, Perversion, Oppression (wrong), Truthfulness, kindness (right)
Secondly, the practice of framing one’s standards is not uncommon. Most secular world governments do that. For example, a panel headed by Dr. Bhim Rao Ambedkar wrote Indian constitution. This constitution defines what is “good” or “evil” for the people living in that country based on its cultural leanings and modern ideas of democracy and freedom.

An individual has freedom to frame his moral standards as long as he does not make a nuisance out of himself.



2-God decides what we do so Atheists, due to their disbelief, are immoral by default.

Answer Consider this situation.

There are two classrooms. Room 1 has a camera system that monitors their activities and hence, they behave in a proper manner. So far so good. In the next classroom, the students are well behaved by nature and organize themselves in a proper manner. This is a higher moral level. But it would be wrong on the part of the students of Room 1 to think that the students of Room 2 aren’t well behaved since they have no camera monitoring them.



3-There needs to be some force to maintain the society at good moral standards, and hence, belief in God is essential for society.

Answer Consider an out-of-movie situation:

In the movie “A Clockwork Orange”, police arrests an 18-year-old rapist/murderer/gangster. He volunteers for a new procedure which essentially meant forcing, by unnatural means “righteousness” upon its subjects such that they feel intense head ache when an “impure” thought comes to their mind. The procedure is successful and the subject is unnaturally made “a perfect Christian”. Not surprisingly, the first person to object this is a priest of the prison. And the scientists use the above argument to justify their act. (Directed by Stanley Kubrick)

So, this too is an example of force to maintain moral standards in the society. Why do theists contest this?



THE CONCLUSION THAT CAN BE DRAWN FOM THE ABOVE ARGUMENTS ARE:

1- Theist morality is self-contradictory

2-Theist claim that Atheists are immoral in unjustified

3-You don’t have to be a theist to be Moral

4-Moral justification of existence of religion is irrational

[AbdulQahhar]

brother if i give you the forum name will you let him down because he is irritating all of us and no one is there good enough to respond him well


some guys are working well but he is not accepting any comments if it is not possible to come on that forum than OK i will tell you what he will comment after word

and once agian thanx very much

It's not a problem to put a kaafir down, if Allah Wills so. But you must know that some kuffaar never listen, no matter what one says to them.

PS What is that website BTW?