Proof of that there is one God

[Hollie]

The fact that there is God and that he is only one is obvious and simply proved, it is independent of any religion.

we should first consider three points:

1) The universe is constrained by fixed laws, all beings dead or alive are constrained by these law.

2) The world is very complicated and well designed system, it should be designed by alive and capable entity.

3) The complicated systems in this world sustain to work, even with the many sources of degradation and randomness.

these three points leads directly to the conclusion that the world is created, supervised and constrained by an alive entity which shouldn't be constrained by any physical laws (otherwise it is part of the world not the creator of it).


why this entity should be unique?

assume it is not unique, and there is many entities that are unconstrained by any physical laws.

it is either one of them is more (stronger) than the others that means those others have constraints put on them by the stronger entity..... but this means they are not really unconstrained entities, they are like any other living being that are constrained.

or no one of them is more stronger than the others so every one of them is constrained by the others, but this means none of them are unconstrained.

in the two cases (or any other cases you can think of) there is a contradiction with the assumption that they are unconstrained.

so there is only one entity....... The God ..... Allah.

Allah is not constrained by any physical law, he is the creator, supervisor of all world including earth, skies, galaxies and every thing. The laws that govern this world is imposed by God.

It's complicated™ is not proof of gods.

 

[deltex1]

YHWH is ALLAH who is also GOD, who has been called ADONAI, who is also known as ELOHIM, among many other names.
​

Does God have hooters?

 

[Delta4Embassy]

"Goddess_Ashtara said: ↑

YHWH is ALLAH who is also GOD, who has been called ADONAI, who is also known as ELOHIM, among many other names."

True. In addition, Islam has some 99 names for God, Judaism too.

"And you are?"

"My name is not important..."

"Trust you, a man who wont tell me his name?"

"Slartibartfast."

That there's so much confusion over "God's" name is suspect.

 

[deltex1]

"Goddess_Ashtara said: ↑

YHWH is ALLAH who is also GOD, who has been called ADONAI, who is also known as ELOHIM, among many other names."

True. In addition, Islam has some 99 names for God, Judaism too.

"And you are?"

"My name is not important..."

"Trust you, a man who wont tell me his name?"

"Slartibartfast."

That there's so much confusion over "God's" name is suspect.

As long as you believe....


PAUL SIMON LYRICS - You Can Call Me Al

 

[MaxGrit]

After 9/11 I worked around Muslims a lot...They're respectful when they're trying to recruit you. Start asking troublesome questions and the respect goes bye-bye.

A rabblerouser! What does sharia law proscribe for you?

 

[sealybobo]

The fact that there is God and that he is only one is obvious and simply proved, it is independent of any religion.

we should first consider three points:

1) The universe is constrained by fixed laws, all beings dead or alive are constrained by these law.

2) The world is very complicated and well designed system, it should be designed by alive and capable entity.

3) The complicated systems in this world sustain to work, even with the many sources of degradation and randomness.

these three points leads directly to the conclusion that the world is created, supervised and constrained by an alive entity which shouldn't be constrained by any physical laws (otherwise it is part of the world not the creator of it).


why this entity should be unique?

assume it is not unique, and there is many entities that are unconstrained by any physical laws.

it is either one of them is more (stronger) than the others that means those others have constraints put on them by the stronger entity..... but this means they are not really unconstrained entities, they are like any other living being that are constrained.

or no one of them is more stronger than the others so every one of them is constrained by the others, but this means none of them are unconstrained.

in the two cases (or any other cases you can think of) there is a contradiction with the assumption that they are unconstrained.

so there is only one entity....... The God ..... Allah.

Allah is not constrained by any physical law, he is the creator, supervisor of all world including earth, skies, galaxies and every thing. The laws that govern this world is imposed by God.

OMG what a fucking retard you are. First, God is not a fact, obvious or proven.

Then you say....it should be designed by alive and capable entity.

It should be? In other words you can't believe or understand a world without a god?

Argument from incredulity / Lack of imagination and Argumentum ad Ignorantiam. Ignores and does not eliminate the fact that something can seem incredible or unlikely and still be true, or appear to be obvious or likely and yet still be false.

The world is the way it is. Reality does not bend to our personal whim and facts do not cease to exist because they are ignored. Our personal belief in something does not automatically make it real or true and, conversely, our lack of understanding of a topic does not make it false.

Until we understand something we “do not know”. Positing a ‘god’ in place of admitting personal ignorance is an unfounded leap which demonstrates a fundamental lack of humility.

The existence and non-existence of a god are not equally probable outcomes. The majority of things we can possibly imagine do not exist. Thus, belief is not as valid a position as skepticism when dealing with unsupported or unfalsifiable claims. Agnostic atheism is the most rational position.

 

[September]

I like your attitude, Mohamed.

You tend to share your opinions in a very respectful manner, and you are not spiteful to others who's religious and spiritual views are unlike your own...

I feel that the majority of "Christians" and Atheists here could learn a lot from you.

You appear to be openminded, you ask interesting questions and you seem... serene.

It pleases me ;-)
​

After 9/11 I worked around Muslims a lot...They're respectful when they're trying to recruit you. Start asking troublesome questions and the respect goes bye-bye.

I will cross that bridge when I get to it, if that bridge ever comes. Until then, my own respect for Mohamed will remain as is.

​

 

[Mohamed]

I will cross that bridge when I get to it, if that bridge ever comes. Until then, my own respect for Mohamed will remain as is.

​

Thank you. but i wish to inform you that Islam ideology and western ideology are very different and in many times contradictory. so i expect that we will have much to disagree about.

but I believe that even enemies can make benefit of clean debate.

 

[Mohamed]

I think your logic is flawed on why there must be an all-powerful creator but let's for the sake of argument say it is correct. I don't see any evidence that this universe creator takes any interest in people lives beyond the claims of people and can be given a name.

I have a fish tank in my home. I set it up and placed the fish and plants there but I don't intercede in the interactions of the fish with each other. They are fish and they do what fish do. Some are aggressive some are docile but they are all fish and cannot be judged good or evil. We are no different.

what type of evidence is sufficient for you to believe?

would you suggest (seeing God)?

if this happened, wouldn't you say (this can't be God, God should be powerful to the extent we can't see him)
or say (i can't make sure he is the God, may be some one used some advanced technology to elude my eyes)?

 

[Mohamed]

Probably caught me treating some issue fairly and balanced, and here as everywhere else, I"m pointing out the truth of things which this time seems unfair due to your ignorance of it.

Muslims actively seek converts. Probably a lot of quotations about honey tongues you can think of, but that's all it is. Islam does not encourage debate or dissent like other faiths do. So it's important to understand that the seemingly polite and tolerant ones are in all likelyhood recruiters.

you seem ignorant about (debate) in islam.

God says:

ادْعُ إِلَى سَبِيلِ رَبِّكَ بِالْحِكْمَةِ وَالْمَوْعِظَةِ الْحَسَنَةِ وَجَادِلْهُمْ بِالَّتِي هِيَ أَحْسَنُ إِنَّ رَبَّكَ هُوَ أَعْلَمُ بِمَنْ ضَلَّ عَنْ سَبِيلِهِ وَهُوَ أَعْلَمُ بِالْمُهْتَدِينَ (125)

Invite to the way of your Lord with wisdom and good instruction, and argue with them in a way that is best. Indeed, your Lord is most knowing of who has strayed from His way, and He is most knowing of who is [rightly] guided.
(surat al nahl:125)

 

[Hollie]

Probably caught me treating some issue fairly and balanced, and here as everywhere else, I"m pointing out the truth of things which this time seems unfair due to your ignorance of it.

Muslims actively seek converts. Probably a lot of quotations about honey tongues you can think of, but that's all it is. Islam does not encourage debate or dissent like other faiths do. So it's important to understand that the seemingly polite and tolerant ones are in all likelyhood recruiters.

you seem ignorant about (debate) in islam.

God says:

ادْعُ إِلَى سَبِيلِ رَبِّكَ بِالْحِكْمَةِ وَالْمَوْعِظَةِ الْحَسَنَةِ وَجَادِلْهُمْ بِالَّتِي هِيَ أَحْسَنُ إِنَّ رَبَّكَ هُوَ أَعْلَمُ بِمَنْ ضَلَّ عَنْ سَبِيلِهِ وَهُوَ أَعْلَمُ بِالْمُهْتَدِينَ (125)

Invite to the way of your Lord with wisdom and good instruction, and argue with them in a way that is best. Indeed, your Lord is most knowing of who has strayed from His way, and He is most knowing of who is [rightly] guided.
(surat al nahl:125)

It was Uthman you're "quoting". It was he who wrote/compiled the Koran.

None of the gods said what you wrote, claiming they said.

 

[Mohamed]

If was Uthman you're "quoting". It was he who wrote/compiled the Koran.

None of the gods said what you wrote, claiming they said.

The Quran is God's words. It was written down and saved in the memory of believers during the life of the Messenger (peace be upon him). It was collected through the life of the first caliphate (abu baker). during the life of the third caliphate (othman) it was revised again and a reference copy was sent to each capital of the islamic states to copy from.

 

[Hollie]

If was Uthman you're "quoting". It was he who wrote/compiled the Koran.

None of the gods said what you wrote, claiming they said.

The Quran is God's words. It was written down and saved in the memory of believers during the life of the Messenger (peace be upon him). It was collected through the life of the first caliphate (abu baker). during the life of the third caliphate (othman) it was revised again and a reference copy was sent to each capital of the islamic states to copy from.

There is no original manuscript, no reason to believe anyone's memory is perfect, so there is no way to make a defendable claim that the Koran is anything but the word of Uthman.

 

[Mohamed]

There is no original manuscript, no reason to believe anyone's memory is perfect, so there is no way to make a defendable claim that the Koran is anything but the word of Uthman.

what?

Quran was written (on paper or by whatever method) during the life of the messenger. It also were saved in the memory of believers.

The collection process performed by the first caliphate was as follows:

1) (Ayas) of Quran were collected from the written manuscripts
2) it was required that at least two trustable believer people testifies that they heard it from the messenger.

I think some of the original manuscripts written during the third caliphate's period are still existing today. so what type of original manuscripts you talk about?

Do you think muslims wouldn't be able to memorize Quran well?
ok we have five prays a day each requiring reading some Quran ayas from memory, and believers should read the whole Quran at least once every month.

 

[alang1216]

I think your logic is flawed on why there must be an all-powerful creator but let's for the sake of argument say it is correct. I don't see any evidence that this universe creator takes any interest in people lives beyond the claims of people and can be given a name.

I have a fish tank in my home. I set it up and placed the fish and plants there but I don't intercede in the interactions of the fish with each other. They are fish and they do what fish do. Some are aggressive some are docile but they are all fish and cannot be judged good or evil. We are no different.

what type of evidence is sufficient for you to believe?

I'm not particular. Moses got a burning bush, Mohammad and many others before him got a visit from angel either of those would be outstanding. Jesus worked miracles and brought people back from the dead, those too would do.

However, I'd be satisfied with anything that would convince me there is a supernatural. In my many years I've never encountered it. I've seen plenty I couldn't explain but nothing supernatural.

 

[dblack]

There is no original manuscript, no reason to believe anyone's memory is perfect, so there is no way to make a defendable claim that the Koran is anything but the word of Uthman.

what?

Quran was written (on paper or by whatever method) during the life of the messenger. It also were saved in the memory of believers.

Gods exist in the memory of believers.

 

[Hollie]

There is no original manuscript, no reason to believe anyone's memory is perfect, so there is no way to make a defendable claim that the Koran is anything but the word of Uthman.

what?

Quran was written (on paper or by whatever method) during the life of the messenger. It also were saved in the memory of believers.

The collection process performed by the first caliphate was as follows:

1) (Ayas) of Quran were collected from the written manuscripts
2) it was required that at least two trustable believer people testifies that they heard it from the messenger.

I think some of the original manuscripts written during the third caliphate's period are still existing today. so what type of original manuscripts you talk about?

Do you think muslims wouldn't be able to memorize Quran well?
ok we have five prays a day each requiring reading some Quran ayas from memory, and believers should read the whole Quran at least once every month.

You haven’t accounted for the obvious breaks in the chain of transmission from Mohammed’s tales and fables to Uthman’s eventual writing / re-writing of the Koran.
Let’s understand that the lineage of the Koran is irreparably broken in three places. Those places are:

1. The ‘Uthmanic rescension.
2. The Compilation under Abu Bakr.
3. The chain of transmittal prior to Muhammad.

The fact remains that “Qur’an” means “recitation,” not book. It did not become a book until years after Muhammad’s death.

Without going into too much detail, rather than “numerous” sahabahs with perfect recollections of the Koran, there is compelling evidence that these earliest sahabahs had different and differentially complete memories. How else is one to make sense of the ahadith (repeated in one form or another at least seven times) concerning the last verse being found in the memory of only a single man; Abi Khuzaima Al-Ansari? Doesn’t that require the understanding that every other sahabah had an incomplete memory?

How does one further account for the conflicts among those sahabahs that required the Uthmanic rescension?

In fact, how does one account for Uthman’s rescension at all?

It is pretty clear that the “perfect preservation” of the Koran did not commence until after the rescension. And even then, we could get into a wonderful discussion of the multiple readings, but why bother. The point is made. Second, giving the fact we have a historical record of the event during which the Koran was standardized and competing versions burned, the maintenance of a standard since that time hardly qualifies as suggesting that Mohammed would have even recognized the writings. The completely human engine for that standard is evident and obvious. We have in our possession, at best, the musshaf of Uthman. We really do not know what the musshaf of Muhammad contained, and how different the two might be.


Mere Muslim tradition does not provide a basis for ignoring the obligation of historians to be comprehensive and unprejudiced.

 

[Mohamed]

You haven’t accounted for the obvious breaks in the chain of transmission from Mohammed’s tales and fables to Uthman’s eventual writing / re-writing of the Koran.
Let’s understand that the lineage of the Koran is irreparably broken in three places. Those places are:

1. The ‘Uthmanic rescension.
2. The Compilation under Abu Bakr.
3. The chain of transmittal prior to Muhammad.

The fact remains that “Qur’an” means “recitation,” not book. It did not become a book until years after Muhammad’s death.

it seems that you depend in your argument on quoting the writings of the European orientalists. These writings are not confident for the following reasons:

1) orientalists were biased against islam and Quran, they were affected by their aversion toward muslims due to known historical reasons.
2) the methodology of orientalists is inferior to the islamic methodology regarding historical verification of events.
Orientalists based their methodology on written manuscripts. while islamic methodology is based on:
a) confidentiality of oral or written information is based on the confidentiality of its (teller). muslims recorded information about the private history of thousands of people to be able to judge their confidentiality. they prepared a ranking system for the people (strong / weak / liar). there are many details regarding this issue.
b) muslims used (التواتر) which may be translated as consensus as a proof for confidence. its meaning is that sufficiently many confidential people are telling the same information.

so what you describe as (break) is in fact a highly confident (information transmission) process.

the preservation of Quran proceeded in the following stages:

1) it was written immediately during the life of the messenger (peace be upon him), besides written manuscripts sahaba (early muslims) were reciting and preserving the Quran (sura)s in their memory.

2) during the life of the first caliphate, it was collected from the various written parts. Each aya(verse) were required to have at least two witnesses who heard the aya directly from the mouth of the messenger. this copy was saved.

3) during the life of the third caliphate (around 15 years) after the death of the messenger (peace be upon him). the islamic state was highly expanded, muslims were in control of egypt,syria, iraq, yemen and persia, all ruled by the caliph. the areas was so wide such that weeks of time were required from a place to another place inside the islamic state. many foreigners converted to islam while arabic wasn't their original language.
since the copying process of musshef (quran conveying book) was manual (someone should rewrite it again for each copy), a risk of copying errors arose, for all these reasons, the third caliph (Osman) decided to write reference messhaf, these reference copies were used as references for other people to copy from. the musshaf of the first caliph was acquired (since it was written by elaborate precise process) and copied many times, the procedure used in the time of first caliph were repeated. two witnesses were required for each aya.
it is to be noted here that the restriction that the two wittnesses should have (heard it directly from the mouth of the messenger) restricted the number of acceptable people for the witness role because many sahabas left al-madina to syria and iraq.

the preservation of quran didn't depend on written manuscripts only, it also depended on thousands of muslims that were (reciting/memorizing) the quran. the combination of both (written on paper) and (saved in memories of many people) gives this process a high confidentiality.

i hope this be clear because i have difficulty expressing my ides in english.

 

[Mohamed]

The fact remains that “Qur’an” means “recitation,”

]

the mean of word (القرأن) Quran is (read), there are other names like (الكتاب) which means (book).

 

[Skull Pilot]

Is Allah the same God as the Christian God?

the name may vary from language to language or from culture to another culture.

but any human believes in one God, is really believing in allah.

Anyone who believes in Allah really believes in Yaweh.

and do you not realize that you are basing your proof on assumptions.

I can assume anything and base a proof on it but that does not mean I would be right.