Dear Dan,

Yes, the desire to investigate exists, but it comes from error.

Our bodies have history and humanity has origins.
But YOU and I have not come from anywhere.
We are not bodies, we are not humans. We just happen to wear a human for 70 or 100 years and when it's used up, we drop it.

How can we better understand our past... where we have no past?
Yes, it will indeed be better if we understand this, that we have no past, only eternal present in God: it will advance us by encouraging us to move forward towards God rather than remain stuck in the mud of the origins of our bodies. The way forward is to realise our true identity as God, rather than as separate and limited human beings.

So long as we are addicted to identifying with our human bodies, yes I can understand the desire to understand their origin, but it's a waste of time and energy.

A human birth is a rare achievement - some have waited for this opportunity for trillions of years, for neither lower no higher beings can attain God in a lifetime: what a pity to waste this opportunity on trivia!

In response to

<<This [Quranic verse] implies nothing can exist without God and in particular “a situation in which He is not God” cannot exist.>>

AJ wrote: "That would be a form of circular reasoning that I spoke of earlier known as ‘Begging the Question’, because you have inserted your conclusion into the premise. It’s fallacious."

The reasoning is not circular because in using the Qur'anic verse I assume the Qur'an is the word of god. If this is the case, then god is informing us that a force that does not belong to God will not occur. A rock that God cannot lift implies a force other than God. It cannot be created because God is truthful and he has informed us it shall not occur.

Neither God being truthful nor the Qur'an being the word of God presuppose god is omnipotent. These premises can be discussed independently of one concludes about the omnipotence of god.

I notice in your response to Dan (and i dip my kufi to your resilience and knowledge) you wrote:

“Atheism [is] the rejection of religious claims as unsupported by the evidence.”

So evidence for Qur'an being the word of god must also be evaluated.

One argument for the Qur'an being the word of god is that statements are made regarding natural phenomena and the universe which have only subsequently been supported by scientific investigation.

The following 9 minute video provides a succinct summary of the position: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C-pYCf4MBwo

cont...

cont..

Some examples include:

” We made from water every living thing. Will they not then believe?” Noble Quran 21:30

“Have not the unbelievers ever considered that the skies and the earth were once one mass, then We split them asunder?” Noble Quran 21:30

“…and sends down water from the sky with which We produce pairs of various kinds of vegetation .“ Noble Quran 20:53

“The Unbelievers say “Never to us will come the hour”: say “Nay! but most surely by my Lord it will come upon you by Him Who knows the unseen from Whom is not hidden the least little atom in the Heavens or on earth: nor is there anything less than that or greater but is in the Record Perspicuous:” Noble Quran 43.3

“Then turned He to the heaven when it was smoke, and said unto it and unto the earth: Come both of you, willingly or loth. They said: We come, obedient.” Noble Quran 41.11

“We sent aforetime our apostles with Clear Signs and sent down with them the Book and the Balance (of Right and Wrong) that men may stand forth in justice; and We sent down Iron in which is (material for) mighty war as well as many benefits for mankind that Allah may test who it is that will help unseen Him and His apostles; for Allah is Full of Strength exalted in Might (and able to enforce His will)” -Noble Quran 57:25

Could Muhammad, peace be upon him, have authored this? Were these observations consistent with the beliefs of the time or even up until very recently? According to the Qur'an:

“It is no less than inspiration sent down to him: He (Muhammad) was taught by one mighty in Power.” Noble Quran 53-4, 5

Whatever your position on this and other evidence, it is clear that supposing the Qur'an is the word of god is not begging the question.

P.S.

This also addresses Dan's concern that we may have strayed from the article's topic and gives Yuyutsu something to ponder.

Grateful: One argument for the Qur'an being the word of god is that statements are made regarding natural phenomena and the universe which have only subsequently been supported by scientific investigation.

What? like

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-9Jp_XCvVto
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_FaNg_nxqns

grateful,

Those verses are pretty vague and wishy-washy. They sound like they might mean something to us now with the benefit of our relatively advanced scientific knowledge today, but would you have derived from them the same meaning if you lived back then?

No, so it’s not very compelling evidence at all for a god.

Now, if the Qur’an informed people back then that there are these microscopic organisms that will make you sick if they multiply too much, and that to avoid having them multiply too much, one should have a bath at least once a week, then that would be a bit more impressive.

And I mean in specific detail too. Not just, “Ye be the little ones that creepeth and crawleth and maketh them ill; for the water that splisheth and spasheth will kill.” 1 AJ 63:9

Heck, even that’s closer than the verses you had quoted. But would primitive people derive from my scripture that people get sick because of bacteria and that they need to wash regularly to avoid illness?

If verses, that sound like they were describing science that could not have been known in those times, are evidence that the Qur’an is the word of a god, then are the verses that are dead wrong (like those in the videos Jayb shared) evidence that the Qur’an is not the word of a god?

Sorry, grateful, but the evidence you have provided is pretty weak given the alleged power of the being that we’d be talking about here.

I don’t know what it would take to convince me that a god exists. But what I do know is that if a god does exist, then it would know what it would take to convince me of its existence. Which means either one of two things:

1. this god isn’t interested in revealing itself to me in any way that could be considered rationally justifiable, or;
2. it doesn’t exist.

If Mahomet was given the Koran by the Angel Gabriel, then where is it (the Original). I would imagine it would be the most Holy object in Islam & referred too often. It would have never been lost. I led to believe the Koran, as it is now was compiled by some Caliph 150 years after Mahomet died (or ascended into Heaven) after his own Customs & Traditions & his desire for World Conquest.

Yutsie: One thing however that it does NOT attempt to do is to explain the origins of this universe.

Yes it does. "That" is "Absolute" The closest we can get to that is by it's nature impossible to depict. Possibly "Pranava" I believe. Where nothing existed. Then there was the One, then the One became multiple. The appearance of the Universe therefore is Cyclic. This suggests that "this" Universe had a previous incarnation & one before that. It reduced to a "The One" then multiplied (The Big Bang) & will eventually reduce to the "The One" again & so it will start all over again.

Nothing to do with Gods. Unless our Universe is only an Atom as part of some bigger thing. That then would be "A God" as we would understand it.

Weather or not Humans (Intelligent live forms) existed previously & will again after this big Crunch. That's a question for the Navel Gazers amongst us.