Therefore no, you cannot lie in order to achieve a world with honesty and truth. If your life is in danger (or your loved ones, etc), you can lie and actually should lie to protect life. To lie in order to kill life is preposterous. I wonder if you actually read the article…

Also, Taliban don’t have ANY access to nuclear weapons. You might as well be scared of living in America who has 9,400 warheads, 2,623 of which are active. Also, have you called your congressman and have them disarm the following countries (not to mention the United States as well):

Russia (13,000 warheads)
UK (185 warheads)
France (300 warheads)
China (240 warheads)
Israel (80 warheads)

The hypocrisy is obvious for anyone who has a share of insight.

As for post-911 backlash, I am not sure where you have been these last 8 years to not know that Muslims have indeed been harmed in a variety of different ways. Perhaps, it is easy for you to call it fake since you have never EXPERIENCED it yourself as you are not a Muslim.

I don’t mean to offend any faith group but did you guys notice how differently the Robert Clemmens case is being treated than this one. Clemmens shot and killed four police officers in Washington State, he had previously claimed to be Jesus and a devout Christian. Not only that, he was pardoned by the self proclaimed, Right-Wing Conservative Christian Mike Hukabee while in prison after saying he’d become a good Christian. Soon after he gunned down the officers. What do you guys make of this?

This is from the Huffington Post:

http://tiny.cc/slczn

Peace.

Carlos

When i go into the classroom and i see a piece of paper with a drawing with stick figures, a multi-colored house, and a shining sun, i don’t spend years sitting around trying to figure out how did this paper form these images on the itslef–or how did the markers make themselves write on the paper. Without witnessing the act of the children, i know the children drew the image. Similarly, i don’t need to sit around trying to figure out how unintelligent random particles somehow arranged themselves and gave to others that which they don’t posses (such as, volition and intelligence). The senses observe the creation, and the mind knows that things can’t give themselves their own properties; hence it recognizes the existence of the Creator.

God is not a body, does not exist in dimensions, does not change–hence, coming and going are inapplicable to Allah. Being inside or outside of the universe is likewise inapplicable to God (Allah was before the “in” and the “out”). Allah originated the universe, and it is maintained from moment to moment by the Creator. Again, as i addressed, an entity does not give itself its properties (or its existence). A rock does not make itself a rock–just as the particles that compose the rock do not make themselves. And this evident principle is applied to all temporal beings: the originated entity can’t originate itself. The universe itself is originated (for it is itself composed of originated entites) and could not have originated itself.

Two Names of God are Adh-Dhaahir and Al-Batin. Allah’s existence is obvious (dhaahir)–as it is ingrained in the language: a doing can’t exist independent of a doer. Building can’t exist independent of a builder–creating/a creation cannot exist independent of a Creator. Allah is Al-Baatin–that is, God’s Reality can’t be fathomed by the mind. That is not a weakness on God’s part, but on the inherent limitation of the mind. We can only imagine things that exist within the dimensions of space and time. Space and time are the property of God, and God was (before the creations) and space and time were not. So God’s existence is obvious by the observable signs in the creations–but His Reality can’t be reached by the mind. That contains no contradiction.

Regarding God’s Power, it is related to what is possible. God’s Power is not related to the impossible, for it would contradict God’s Oneness, Perfection, and Eternality (such as, believing God incarnated into an infant, or became weak, or subjugated by a creation, or occupies space/direction, or any other such absurdities). What can’t exist doesn’t exist–such as, semantical sophistries, like square circles, and daughters giving birth to their mothers.

Science is restricted to the field for what it was developed: namely, the observation of created phenomena–based upon the weak and limited senses of the human beings (and the likewise weak and limited tools humans make). God is not a created phenomenon; hence, one can’t observe the Reality of God. Instead, one can study the creation, learn from it, and understand that everything points to the existence of the Eternal One Who originated and maintains everything.

Regarding the Communication of God, Allah sent Prophet who have a “faculty” beyond what common human beings have. Just as the blind don’t have the right to deny the faculty of sight, common human beings don’t have the right to deny the “faculty” of Prophethood. Lastly, a person has to submit to the fact that God owns everything–and is not obligated to do anything (this is, what Islam essentially means: submission to Allah’s Will and Orders). God cannot possibly be unjust, for no one can order, prohibit, or threaten Him. Injustice is to violate the rights of others. The creations have no rights upon God. So whatever Allah endows upon us is out of His Mercy and Generosity–and whatever Allah afflicts us with is out of His Justice. This is the reality of human existence. Muslims submit to it, and disbelievers don’t.

P.S. I believe i said that you can’t see Kasparov’s MIND–i didn’t say his BRAIN. Even if one were to perform surgery on his skull and one could see his brain, it would not entail seeing his mind. The point remains: we can’t see each other’s minds, but because we see volition and intelligence from other people, we conclude that people have minds. Hence, seeing a thing is not the only criterion for a thing’s existence.

I do not think the fact that the universe exists is proof that there is a creator. You make that assumption, but, again, I do not think the assumption I justified. You say things are the way they are because a creator wanted them to be that way. I say things are the way they are because, if they were any other way, they would be that other way instead. You say that nothing can exist prior to its existence. But nothing brings itself into existence. Everything is brought into existence by what preceded it. If one goes back far enough in time, one might come to a point where one asks what started it all. I admit I do not know, with confidence, the answer to that. Despite your confident claim of knowledge about that matter, I do not think you do either. I think the Big Bang theory makes sense, as we can observe, through the doppler shift, that most “heavenly” bodies are moving away from each other, as though they exploded out from a common source. You might then take one step farther back, and say that Allah ignited the Big Bang. Of course, you would have no evidence of that. You say Allah is not of this universe. Did he enter this universe that one time, when he was creating it, and then never came back? If he was simply involved in causing the initial blast, why has he not intervened in the universe since then? Has he? What proof do you have?

We know from astronomy, geology and biology that the universe is billions of years old. How old does the Quran say the universe is? The Quran incorporates the creation narrative from the Bible, does it not? The Bible gives the names of the ancestors of Jesus, going back to what the Bible says was the first person, Adam. But the number of human generations mentioned only goes back about six thousand years. How does one who believes in the Biblical creation story explain this? Is our knowledge of astronomy, geology and biology completely flawed?

You refer to materialistic science as “Western.” While I appreciate you crediting Western Civilization with being the source of scientific inquiry, science cannot really be called “Western,” at least any more. Scientists who use scientific methods are to be found all over the world, including in countries with large Muslim populations. Besides, Eastern Civilization, and specifically East Asian countries, seem to be becoming quite adept at science, and are on the forefront of science in many fields now.

You say God is not observable, but then you also say one of God’s names is “the One Whose existence is evident.” Which is it? Those are contradictory ideas. If God is so all powerful, why would he not be observable in our universe; observable in a way that is “evident” and not just in a philosophical faith-based way? Is he not able to visit us? I am sure you would scoff at the idea of Allah being unable to do anything. So if he is ABLE to do anything, why is he not observABLE? If God is not observable, how did he communicate the Quran to humanity? Someone would have had to have been able to observe and receive communications from him. If he can communicate with humans, there must be a scientific explanation for how those communications are being received. Science is better at explaining everything else we know about the universe, why is religion better qualified at explaining this particular phenomenon?

How do you know God is not observable? Is that what it says in the Quran? Where in the Quran?

Regarding the complexity of the human mind, I addressed, in my first posting regarding Dr. Brown’s article, that the human mind is simply an impressive development of evolution. Lower animals also have brains, ours are just more developed.

True, Gary Kasparov is a great chess player (although he did get beaten by a computer developed by IBM scientists), and I have never observed his mind. Not that I would ever do something so inhumane, of course (atheists are moral too, in fact we tend to value human life above everything else), but I am pretty sure, however, that, if one were to crack Mr. Kasparov’s head open, one would be able to observe his brain.

You say that we are God’s property, that he may do with us as he wants, and that he does not owe us anything, not even guidance. I thought he was supposed to be a good god. The Quran keeps referring to him as “the Merciful.” If you believe the Quran is his final revelation to humanity, then you believe that God has chosen to provide us with guidance. If he was going to guide us, surely he could have provided us with better guidance than I find in looking through the Quran. And if he could give us a book, which would be observable evidence of his existence, why could he not give us better, more apparent evidence? Books can just as easily be written by humans. Is Allah testing us? Is he going to punish us if we do not pass the test? Would he not forgive and understand people, like me, who used their mind to be skeptical of things that are not provable? Would he not understand the skepticism of people raised in Christian, Jewish, Hindu, Buddhist, Zorastrian or atheist households and communities? If he would not, that seems completely contrary to something a merciful deity would do. You say he does not have to be fair, but the Quran says he is.

I am not saying he is, Swarth Moor, but, if, hypothetically, you were to determine that Allah were evil instead of good, would you still worship and follow him? Why?

I have heard Muslims (and non-Muslims) refer to an evil demon named Satan. If there is no god but God, who is this Satan? Per the description of all the dastardly things he can do, he obviously is superhuman. He has powers that sound god-like. I thought Islam was monotheist. If, as you say, God created everything, then he created Satan too. Why?

You mention Hell, another concept that does not make sense in a universe created by a merciful deity. If I did not live up to God’s expectations, I might see why he would not allow me into Heaven. But why would he then do the cruel thing of throwing me into Hell, to be tortured for all eternity. It is not enough to reject me, he would have to torture me forever? I do not believe in Hell, so it does not scare me. There was a time in my life when I did believe in Hell. Teaching religion to young children can make them believe the most incredible things, and I was no exception. Perhaps I did not really believe in Hell so much as feared even the possibility of its existence, since the Bible (and apparently the Quran too) make it sound so terrible. I can see why believers might be terrified at the idea of questioning their religious beliefs, even in the privacy of their own minds.

I hope you had a nice holiday. Thank you for engaging me in vigorous and enlightening debate.

Carlos