Search This Blog

Featured post

Index

View my Flipboard Magazine. Read books Online here, or Download  as <PDF> or   < Word > UNIVERSE SCIENCE, GOD : ...

Showing posts with label Qur'an. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Qur'an. Show all posts

UNIVERSE SCIENCE, GOD

UNIVERSE SCIENCE, GOD
By Aftab Khan

“Soon shall We show them Our signs in the universe and in their own selves, until it becomes clear to them that this Qur’an is indeed the truth. Is it not enough that your Lord is a witness over everything?” (Qur’an;41:53); “We did not create heaven and earth and everything between them to no purpose. That is the opinion of those who disbelieve..” (Qur’an; 38: 27), “Verily in the heavens and the earth are Signs for those who believe. (Qur’an; 45:3). “To God belongs the Mystery of the heavens and the earth. And the Decision of the Hour (of Judgement) is as the twinkling of an eye, or even quicker: for God hath power over all things.” (Qur’an; 16:77). “Let there be no compulsion in religion: Truth stands out clear from Error: whoever rejects evil and believes in God hath grasped the most trustworthy hand-hold, that never breaks. And God hears and knows all things.” (Qur’an; 2:255).
Read online or download:
WebDoc ,   PDF

Science Leads to God
“Soon shall We show them Our signs in the universe and in their own selves, until it becomes clear to them that this Qur'an is indeed the truth. Is it not enough that your Lord is a witness over everything?”(Qur’an;41:53); “We did not create heaven and earth and everything between them to no purpose. That is the opinion of those who disbelieve…” (Qur’an; 38: 27), “Verily in the heavens and the earth are Signs for those who believe. (Qur’an; 45:3). “To God belongs the Mystery of the heavens and the earth. And the Decision of the Hour (of Judgment) is as the twinkling of an eye, or even quicker: for God hath power over all things.” (Qur’an; 16:77).
Introduction:
Religion is increasingly playing more part in human behaviour and their daily lives. A new Pew Research Center study of the ways religion influences the daily lives of Americans finds that people who are highly religious are more engaged with their extended families, more likely to volunteer, more involved in their communities and generally happier with the way things are going in their lives. Such trends are also noticed in other communities worldwide with varying degrees. The followers of three Abrahamic faiths believe that God created the universe and governs it as per His laid down rules. The atheists reject such a set of beliefs. In philosophy there are many rational, metaphysical, logical, empirical, or subjective arguments for the existence of God. Interestingly the conclusions reached by science recently were mentioned 1400 years ago in the last Testament; The Quran, which provides theological, philosophical and scientific evidence of existence of God.
The rapid progress in the scientific knowledge during last few centuries has opened new windows of knowledge thus giving new dimensions in understanding theology. Science is beginning to see the entire universe as an interlinked network of energy and information. Our capacity for fulfillment can come only through faith and feelings. But our capacity for survival must come from reason and knowledge. Anyone who endeavors to seek the way to God, with an open mind keeping aside the existing ideas can reach Him. This study is presented in two parts:
Part-1 
Introduction
Principle of Conceptualization of Faith:
Philosophical Arguments:
Universe Models
Quantum Entanglement
Part-2 
Holographic Universe
Religious Arguments
Attributes of God & Science
Proofs of God, Attributes
God, Science & Universe
Allah Has Power Over Everything
The Design in the Cell
Coordination in Human Body
Heart: The pump of life
The delicate balance in the universe
The Delicate Balance on Earth
Allah is Known Through Reason
Conclusion
Keep reading  >>>>> http://justonegod.blogspot.com/2017/05/science-leads-to-god.html
INDEX
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
THE UNIVERSE SCIENCE & GOD

Chapter 1 : Introduction

A central, common core of Islam, Judaism & Christianity is the affirmation of the reality of One, and Only One, God. Adherents of Abrahamic faiths believe that there is a God who created the universe out of nothing and who has absolute sovereignty over all his creation; this includes, of course, human beings, who are not only utterly dependent on this creative power but also sinful and who, or so the faithful must believe, can only make adequate sense of their lives by accepting, without question, God's ordinances for them. The varieties of atheism are numerous, but all atheists reject such a set of beliefs. In philosophy there are three major, purely rational, arguments for the existence of God that have had a significant influence on the history of philosophy of religion. A wide variety of arguments exist which can be categorized as metaphysical, logical, empirical, or subjective. The existence of God is subject to lively debate both in philosophy, the philosophy of religion being almost entirely devoted to the question—and in popular culture. Certain theists acknowledge that belief in the existence of God may not be amenable to demonstration or refutation, but rests on faith alone. The atheistic conclusion is that the arguments and evidence both indicate there is insufficient reason to believe in the existence of God, and that personal subjective religious experiences are indistinguishable from misapprehension.

Philosophers and theists have come out with many popular arguments to support the existence of God: The cosmological argument argues that there was a "first cause", or "prime mover" who is identified as God. The teleological argument argues that the universe's order and complexity are best explained by reference to a creator God. It starts with a rather more complicated claim about the world, i.e. that it exhibits order and design. The hypothesis of Intelligent design proposes that certain features of the universe and of living things are the product of an intelligent cause. The ontological argument is based on arguments about a "being greater than which cannot be conceived". The anthropic argument suggests that basic facts, such as humanity's existence, are best explained by the existence of God. Some philosophers see the existence of Qualia (or the hard problem of consciousness) as strong arguments against materialism and therefore for the existence of material and immaterial entities. The transcendental argument suggests that logic, science, ethics, and other serious matters do not make sense in the absence of God, and that atheistic arguments must ultimately refute themselves if pressed with rigorous consistency. The atheists believe that existence of God cannot be proved through science. However the Muslims scholars like Harun Yahya, Dr.Zakir Naik and many others have done a lot of research work to prove it scientifically, which forms basis for this paper. Let’s start with the biggest thing, The Universe.
Next >>>>   Chapter-2: Universe Models


Read e-Book online or download: Web/Doc ,   PDF
Summarise video 31 minutes: http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x28k7d9_universe-science-god-summarised_school

Labels: , , , ,

Chapter-2: Universe Models

UNIVERSE SCIENCE & GOD

Chapter-2: Universe Models

Universe: Sign of Creator:

The universe is commonly defined as the totality of everything that exists, including all matter and energy, the planets, stars, galaxies, and the contents of intergalactic space. Definitions and usage vary and similar terms include the cosmos, the world and nature. Scientific observation of earlier stages in the development of the universe, which can be seen at great distances, suggests that the universe has been governed by the same physical laws and constants throughout most of its extent and history. There are various multiverse theories, in which physicists have suggested that our universe might be one among many universes that likewise exist.
The universe is immensely large and possibly infinite in volume. The region visible from Earth (the observable universe) is a sphere with a radius of about 46 billion light years, based on where the expansion of space has taken the most distant objects observed. For comparison, the diameter of a typical galaxy is only 30,000 light-years, and the typical distance between two neighbouring galaxies is only 3 million light-years. As an example, our Milky Way Galaxy is roughly 100,000 light years in diameter, and our nearest sister galaxy, the Andromeda Galaxy, is located roughly 2.5 million light years away. There are probably more than 100 billion galaxies [1011] in the observable universe. Typical galaxies range from dwarfs with as few as ten million [107] stars up to giants with one trillion [1012]  stars, all orbiting the galaxy's center of mass. A 2010 study by astronomers estimated that the observable universe contains 300 sextillion  3×1013 stars.
The part where the Universe isn't just bigger than you can possibly comprehend, but according to recent evidence, billions of times larger than that. What It Says: That the universe is big, so big, that just that fact, just its mere bigness, is enough to blow your tiny ant mind. And it just keeps getting bigger. Let’s examine the famous Hubble Ultra Deep Field image, the most massive photo ever taken. It shows that there are approximately 10,000 galaxies. Each of those galaxies contains anywhere from ten million to one trillion stars. The average star is roughly a million times the size of Earth.

And yet with all that junk, the Universe is more than 90 percent empty space. All of that, in this tiny photo. A photo that took 400 orbits and 800 exposures to take. And the kicker? The photo covers one thirteen-millionth of the entire night sky.
If you are like us, it leaves you alternately awash with spiritual wonder and horrified feelings of utter insignificance. Actually imagining just how infinitesimal you are in the scope of the universe is like autoerotic asphyxiation: it’s not as pleasant as you would think, and if you do it wrong you can end up a vegetable. You possibly imagine that much space and that many planets and stars and atoms smashing together without intelligent life forming? Now its just a matter of getting around that pesky general relativity and well be chilling with aliens in no time. Or, like, a million years.

So all that just said about how big the universe is (at least 90 billion light years)? That is small beans. The Cosmological Horizon is here to make your day a whole lot more complicated. Since we can only observe stellar bodies that have had some effects on us (usually bombarding us with light), there is an outer limit to what we can see of the universe. Hence, the observable universe. What about the rest? The parts of the universe beyond our Starcraft-style fog of war? Well, according to some math we have no interest in going into, the size of the actual universe is so large that if the universe we just described (the impossibly, mind-bogglingly large one) were the size of a quarter, the actual universe would be the size of the Earth.  Level Of Mind Blowingness: The sound of one hand clapping for a tree falling in the woods while no ones around except a guy whose skull is wired with C4 explosive. Hence the mere vastness of universe indicates the greatness of its Great Creator.

The Eternal Universe:

Towards the end of the 19th century, atheists formulated a world view that they thought explained everything; they denied that the universe was created saying that it had no beginning but had existed forever. They claimed that the universe had no purpose but that its order and balance were the result of chance; they believed that the question of how human beings and other living things came into being was answered by Darwinism. They believed that Marx or Durkheim had explained history and sociology, and that Freud had explained psychology on the basis of atheist assumptions.
However, these views were later invalidated in the 20th century by scientific, political and social developments. Many and various discoveries in the fields of astronomy, biology, psychology and social sciences have nullified the bases of all atheist suppositions. In his book, God: The Evidence, The Reconciliation of Faith and Reason in a Postsecular World, the American scholar Patrick Glynn from the George Washington University writes:
The past two decades of research have overturned nearly all the important assumptions and predictions of an earlier generation of modern secular and atheist thinkers relating to the issue of God. Modern thinkers assumed that science would reveal the universe to be ever more random and mechanical; instead it has discovered unexpected new layers of intricate order that bespeak an almost unimaginably vast master design. Modern psychologists predicted that religion would be exposed as a neurosis and outgrown; instead, religious commitment has been shown empirically to be a vital component of basic mental health…
Few people seem to realize this, but by now it should be clear: Over the course of a century in the great debate between science and faith, the tables have completely turned. In the wake of Darwin, atheists and agnostics like Huxley and Russell could point to what appeared to be a solid body of testable theory purportedly showing life to be accidental and the universe radically contingent. Many scientists and intellectuals continue to cleave to this worldview. But they are increasingly pressed to almost absurd lengths to defend it. Today the concrete data point strongly in the direction of the God hypothesis. Science, which has been presented as the pillar of atheist, materialist philosophy, turns out to be the opposite. As another writer puts it, "The strict materialism that excludes all purpose, choice and spirituality from the world simply cannot account for the data pour in from labs and observatories."
Assuming the validity of the old model of an ‘Eternal Universe’, Hugh David Politzer, an American theoretical physicist who shared the 2004 Nobel Prize in Physics, opposed the idea of a creation: The universe was not a created object, if it were, then it would have to be created instantaneously by God and brought into existence from nothing. To admit creation, one has to admit, in the first place, the existence of a moment when the universe did not exist, and that something came out of nothingness. This is something to which science can not accede. By supporting the idea of an eternal universe against that of creation, Politzer thought that science was on his side. However, very soon, the fact that Politzer alluded to by his words, “if it is so, we must accept the existence of a creator”, that is, that the universe had a beginning, was proven.

The Big Bang:

This proof came as a result of the “Big Bang” theory, perhaps the most important concept of 20th century astronomy. The Big Bang theory was formulated after a series of discoveries. In 1929, the American astronomer, Edwin Hubble, noticed that the galaxies of the universe were continually moving away from one another and that the universe was expanding. If the flow of time in an expanding universe were reversed, then it emerged that the whole universe must have come from a single point. Astronomers assessing the validity of Hubble’s discovery were faced with the fact that this single point was a “metaphysical” state of reality in which there was an infinite gravitational attraction with no mass. Matter and time came into being by the explosion of this mass-less point. In other words, the universe was created from nothing. In the face of proven scientific facts, atheists have been squeezed into a corner. Anthony Flew, an atheist professor of philosophy at the University of Reading and the author of Atheistic Humanism, makes this interesting confession:
Notoriously, confession is good for the soul. I will therefore begin by confessing that the Stratonician atheist has to be embarrassed by the contemporary cosmological consensus. For it seems that the cosmologists are providing a scientific proof of what St. Thomas contended could not be proved philosophically; namely, that the universe had a beginning. So long as the universe can be comfortably thought of as being not only without end but also without beginning, it remains easy to urge that its brute existence, and whatever are found to be its most fundamental features, should be accepted as the explanatory ultimates. Although I believe that it remains still correct, it certainly is neither easy nor comfortable to maintain this position in the face of the Big Bang story.
Some materialists have a relatively logical view of this matter. For example, the English materialist physicist, H.P. Lipson, unwillingly accepts the scientific fact of creation. He writes: I think …that we must…admit that the only acceptable explanation is creation. I know that this is anathema to physicists, as indeed it is to me, but we must not reject that we do not like if the experimental evidence supports it.
Thus, the fact arrived at finally by modern astronomy is this: time and matter were brought into being by an eternally powerful Creator independent of both of them. The eternal power that created the universe in which we live is God who is the possessor of infinite might, knowledge and wisdom.

Creation Models: Criticism & Analysis:
It is patently obvious that the Big Bang means the creation of the universe out of nothing and this is surely evidence of willful creation. Regarding this fact, some materialist astronomers and physicists have tried to advance alternative explanations to oppose this reality. Mention has already been made of the steady state theory and it was pointed out it was clung to, by those who were uncomfortable with the notion of "creation from nothingness", despite all the evidence to the contrary in an attempt to shore up their philosophy. There are also a number of models that have been advanced by materialists who accept the Big Bang theory but try to exorcise it of the notion of creation. One of these is the "oscillating" universe model; another is the "quantum model of universe". Let us examine these theories and see why they are invalid.

Oscillating Universe Model:

The oscillating universe model was advanced by the astronomers who disliked the idea the Big Bang was the beginning of the universe. In this model, it is claimed that the present expansion of the universe will eventually be reversed at some point and begin to contract. This contraction will cause everything to collapse into a single point that will then explode again, initiating a new round of expansion. This process, they say, is repeated infinitely in time. This model also holds that the universe has experienced this transformation an infinite number of times already and that it will continue to do so forever. In other words, the universe exists for eternity but it expands and collapses at different intervals with a huge explosion punctuating each cycle. The universe we live in is just one of those infinite universes going through the same cycle.
This is nothing but a feeble attempt to accommodate the fact of the Big Bang to notions about an infinite universe. The proposed scenario is unsupported by the results of scientific research over the last 15-20 years, which show that it is impossible for such an "oscillating" universe idea to come into being. Furthermore the laws of physics offer no reason why a contracting universe should explode again after collapsing into a single point: it ought to stay just as it is. Nor do they offer a reason why an expanding universe should ever begin to contract in the first place.
Even if we allow that there is some mechanism by which this cycle of contraction-explosion-expansion does take place, the crucial point is that this cycle cannot go on for ever, as is claimed. Calculations for this model show that each universe will transfer an amount of entropy to its successor. In other words, the amount of useful energy available becomes less each time and every "opening" universe will open more slowly and have a larger diameter. This will cause a much smaller universe to form the next time around and so on, eventually petering out into nothing. Even if "open and close" universes can exist, they cannot endure for eternity. At some point it becomes necessary for "something" to be created from "nothing". Put briefly, the "oscillating" universe model is a hopeless fantasy whose physical reality is impossible.

Quantum Model of Universe:

The "quantum model of universe" is another attempt to purge the Big Bang of its creationist implications. Supporters of this model base it on the observations of quantum (subatomic) physics. In quantum physics, it is to be observed that subatomic particles appear and disappear spontaneously in a vacuum. Interpreting this observation as "matter can originate at quantum level, this is a property pertaining to matter", some physicists try to explain the origination of matter from non-existence during the creation of the universe as a "property pertaining to matter" and present it as a part of laws of nature. In this model, our universe is interpreted as a subatomic particle in a bigger one.
However this syllogism is definitely out of question and in any case cannot explain how the universe came into being. William Lane Craig, the author of The Big Bang: Theism and Atheism explains why:
A quantum mechanical vacuum spawning material particles is far from the ordinary idea of a "vacuum" (meaning nothing). Rather, a quantum vacuum is a sea of continually forming and dissolving particles, which borrow energy from the vacuum for their brief existence. This is not "nothing," and hence, material particles do not come into being out of nothing.
So in quantum physics, matter "does not exist when it was not before". What happens is that ambient energy suddenly becomes matter and just as suddenly disappears becoming energy again. In short, there is no condition of "existence from nothingness" as is claimed. In physics, no less than in other branches of the sciences, there are atheist scientists who do not hesitate to disguise the truth by overlooking critical points and details in their attempt to support the materialist view and achieve their ends. For them, it is much more important to defend materialism and atheism than to reveal scientific facts and realities. In the face of the reality mentioned above, most scientists dismiss the quantum universe model. C. J. Isham explains that "this model is not accepted widely because of the inherent difficulties that it poses." Even some of the originators of this idea, such as Brout and Spindel, have abandoned it.
A recent and much-publicized version of the quantum universe model was advanced by the physicist Stephen Hawking. In his book A Brief History of Time, Hawking states that the Big Bang doesn't necessarily mean existence from nothingness. Instead of "no time" before the Big Bang, Hawking proposed the concept of "imaginary time". According to Hawking, there was only a 10-43 second "imaginary" time interval before the Big Bang took place   and "real" time was formed after that. Hawking's hope was just to ignore the reality of "timelessness" before the Big Bang by means of this "imaginary" time.  Stephen Hawking also tries to advance different explanations for the Big Bang other than Creation just as other Materialist scientists do by relying upon contradictions and false concepts. As a concept, "imaginary time" is tantamount to zero or non-existence–like the imaginary number of people in a room or the imaginary number of cars on a road. Stephen Hawking also tries to advance different explanations for the Big Bang other than Creation just as other Materialist scientists do by relying upon contradictions and false concepts. Here Hawking is just playing with words. He claims that equations are right when they are related to an imaginary time but in fact this has no meaning. The mathematician Sir Herbert Dingle refers to the possibility of faking imaginary things as real in math as:
In the language of mathematics we can tell lies as well as truths, and within the scope of mathematics itself there is no possible way of telling one from the other. We can distinguish them only by experience or by reasoning outside the mathematics, applied to the possible relation between the mathematical solution and its  physical correlate.
To put it briefly, a mathematically imaginary or theoretical solution need not have a true or a real consequence. Using a property exclusive to mathematics, Hawking produces hypotheses that are unrelated to reality. But what reason could he have for doing this? It's easy to find the answer to that question in his own words. Hawking admits that he prefers alternative universe models to the Big Bang because the latter "hints at divine creation", which such models are designed to oppose.
What all this shows is that alternative models to the Big Bang such as ‘Steady-State’, the ‘Open and Close Universe Model’, and ‘Quantum Universe Models’ in fact spring from the philosophical prejudices of materialists. Scientific discoveries have demonstrated the reality of the Big Bang and can even explain "existence from nothingness". And this is very strong evidence that the universe is created by Allah, a point that materialists utterly reject.
An example of this opposition to the Big Bang is to be found in an essay by John Maddox, the editor of Nature (a materialist magazine), that appeared in 1989. In "Down with the Big Bang", Maddox declares the Big Bang to be philosophically unacceptable because it helps theologists by providing them with strong support for their ideas. The author also predicted that the Big Bang would be disproved and that support for it would disappear within a decade. Maddox can only have been even more discomforted by the subsequent discoveries during the next ten years that have provided further evidence of the existence of the Big Bang. Some materialists do act with more common sense on this subject. The British Materialist H. P. Lipson accepts the truth of creation, albeit "unpleasantly", when he says:
If living matter is not, then caused by the interplay of atoms, natural forces, and radiation, how has it come into being?…I think, however, that we must…admit that the only acceptable explanation is creation. I know that this is anathema to physicists, as indeed it is to me, but we must not reject that we do not like if the experimental evidence supports it.
In conclusion, the truth disclosed by science is this: Matter and time have been brought into being by an independent possessor of immense power, by a Creator. Allah, the Possessor of almighty power, knowledge and intelligence, has created the universe we live in.
Allah says: “And it is We Who have constructed the heaven with might, and verily, it is We Who are steadily expanding it”. (Qur'an, 51:47) “Do not the Unbelievers see that the heavens and the earth were joined together (as one unit of Creation) before We clove them asunder? (Big Bang) We made from water every living thing. Will they not then believe?”(Qur’an;21:30), “Moreover He Comprehended in His design the sky and it had been (as) smoke: He said to it and to the earth: "Come ye together willingly or unwillingly. "They said: "We do come (together) in willing obedience."(Qur’an;41:11);“Who hath created and further given order and proportion”  (Qur’an;87:2).

Random Universe:

A second atheist dogma rendered invalid in the 20th century by discoveries in astronomy is the idea of a ‘Random Universe’. The view that the matter in the universe, the heavenly bodies and the laws that determine the relationships among them has no purpose but is the result of chance, has been dramatically discounted. For the first time since the 1970’s, scientists have begun to recognize the fact that the whole physical balance of the universe is adjusted delicately in favor of human life. With the advance of research, it has been discovered that the physical, chemical and biological laws of the universe, basic forces such as gravity and electro-magnetism, the structure of atoms and elements are all ordered exactly as they have to be for human life. Western scientists have called this extraordinary design the “Anthropic Principle”. That is, every aspect of the universe is designed with a view that makes the existence of intelligent life inevitable.

Anthropic Principle:

The basics of the “Anthropic Principle” may be summarized the as follows:
·       The speed of the first expansion of the universe (the force of the Big Bang explosion) was exactly the velocity that it had to be. According to scientists’ calculations, if the expansion rate had differed from its actual value by more than one part in a billion billion, then the universe would either have recollapsed before it ever reached its present size or else have splattered in every direction in a way never to unite again. To put it another way, even at the first moment of the universe’s existence there was a fine calculation of the accuracy of a billion billionth. If the rate of expansion of universe would have been less or more than the size of a sand particle the universe would have not existed as is now.
·       The four physical forces in the universe (gravitational force, weak nuclear force, strong nuclear force, and electromagnetic force) are all at the necessary levels for an ordered universe to emerge and for life to exist. Even the tiniest variations in these forces (for example, one in 1039, or one in 1028; that is—crudely calculated—one in a billion billion billion billion), the universe would either be composed only of radiation or of no other element besides hydrogen.
·       There are many other delicate adjustments that make the earth ideal for human life: the size of the sun, its distance from the earth, the unique physical and chemical properties of water, the wavelength of the sun’s rays, the way that the earth’s atmosphere contains the gases necessary to allow respiration, or the Earth’s magnetic field being ideally suited to human life.
This delicate balance is one of the most striking discoveries of modern astrophysics. The well known astronomer, Paul Davies, writes in the last paragraph of his book The Cosmic Blueprint, “The impression of Design is overwhelming”. In an article in the journal Nature, the astrophysicist W. Press writes, “There is a grand design in the Universe that favors the development of intelligent life.” The interesting thing about this is that the majority of the scientists that have made these discoveries were of the materialist point of view and came to this conclusion unwillingly. They did not undertake their scientific investigations hoping to find a proof for God’s existence. But most of them, if not all of them, despite their unwillingness, arrived at this conclusion as the only explanation for the extraordinary design of the universe.
In his book, The Symbiotic Universe the American astronomer, George Greenstein, acknowledges this fact: How could this possibly have come to pass [that the laws of physics conform themselves to life]? …As we survey all the evidence, the thought insistently arises that some supernatural agency—or, rather Agency—must be involved. Is it possible that suddenly, without intending to, we have stumbled upon scientific proof of the existence of a Supreme Being? Was it God who stepped in and so providentially crafted the cosmos for our benefit?
By beginning his question with “Is it possible”, Greenstein, an atheist, tries to ignore that plain fact that has confronted him. But many scientists who have approached the question without prejudice acknowledge that the universe has been created especially for human life. Materialism is now being viewed as an erroneous belief outside the realm of science. The American geneticist, Robert Griffiths, acknowledges this fact when he says, “If we need an atheist for a debate, I go to the philosophy department. The physics department isn’t much use.”
In his book Nature’s Destiny: How the Laws of Biology Reveal Purpose in the Universe, which examines how physical, chemical and biological laws are amazingly calculated in an “ideal” way with a view to the requirements of human life, the well-known molecular biologist, Michael Denton writes: The new picture that has emerged in twentieth-century astronomy presents a dramatic challenge to the presumption which has been prevalent within scientific circles during most of the past four centuries: that life is a peripheral and purely contingent phenomenon in the cosmic scheme.
In short, the idea of a ‘Random Universe’, perhaps atheism’s most basic pillar, has been proved invalid. Scientists now openly speak of the collapse of materialism. The supposition whose falsity God reveals in the Qur’an: “We did not create heaven and earth and everything between them to no purpose. That is the opinion of those who disbelieve…” (Qur’an; 38: 27) was shown to be invalid by science in the 1970’s.

Next: >>>>> Chapter-3: Quantum Entanglement



Labels: , , ,

Who are atheists?

Science, religion and philosophy would have you believe they are, in one way or another, 'abnormal'

“There are two ways to be fooled. One is to believe what isn’t true; the other is to refuse to believe what is true” (Soren Kierkegaard-1833-1855)


Newsweek reported in 1992 that more than three quarters of all Americans pray at least once a week. Even among the 13 % who are atheists or agnostics, nearly one in five prays daily believing that “there is God who hears them”
Life Magazine story of 1994 says that nine out of ten Americans, ignoring speculation that God is dead, pray frequently and earnestly—and almost all say “God has answered their prayer” Time Magazine poll 1996. (Faith and healing) found that 82 % believed that “prayers could heal”

William James (scientist of late 19the century) said “No mental modification ever occurs which is not accompanied or followed by a bodily change” Hundred year later, Norman Cousin succinctly summarized the modern view “belief becomes biology”
Reality—Atheists are simply lying through their teeth.

Scriptural validation
Qura’an repeatedly mentions about the deniers that “there is a disease in their hearts” I took this as an expression of God’s disdain for the deniers in allegorical terms. Until, I came across a study conducted by some German scientists; which confirms it’s reality in unequivocal terms. With this conclusive finding there, remains no doubt that the HOLY Qura’an is the revealed word of God. Because such a revelation, with such a certainty– 1500 years ago– would simply have been beyond the scope of Human imagination.
Here is what is said about disbelieving people in Qura’an:
Surah Baqarah 2, V – 7 & 10:
“God has sealed their hearts and their hearing, and on their eyes there is a covering. Theirs will be an awful doom”
“In their heart is a disease, and God increases their disease, a painful doom is theirs, because they lie”

Surah Baqarah 2, V 6, 7, 13 & 136:
As for the disbelievers, whether you warn them or not it is all one for them, they believe not. God has sealed their hearts and their hearing and on their eyes is a covering. Theirs will be an awful doom. And when it is said to them to believe; as the people do, they say, Shall we believe as the foolish believe? Beware! They indeed are the foolish but they know not.


Philosophical vindication
Here is a meaningfully befitting; worth pondering, quote of Maya Angelou:

“We allow our ignorance to prevail upon us and make us think we can survive alone, alone in patches, alone in groups, alone in race, even alone in genders”

Shocking Vindication by Scientific research
Excerpts from the research are reproduced here below.
New information from a 22-year old study at a German University has many psychiatrists and psychologists throughout the world wondering if atheism is a sign or warning of a more serious mental illness already present or in the process of developing. Doctors are searching for a gene that might cause a correlation between serious mental illness and what they are calling “Overt Atheism.” For the time being psychiatrists and research psychologists in Germany and Switzerland are calling this medical anomaly, “The Misfit Syndrome.”

Doctors at the University in Hamburg Germany have been investigating the connection between religious beliefs and overall mental health and the results of the study have unnerved even the most stoic scientists, physicians and researchers. in other words, Overt Atheism, that is professed as a way of life by some individuals — a manifesto of sorts — was found to be a common component inherent to many people suffering from other forms of severe mental illness,” said Dr. Hans Zimmerman MD PhD
“We started to notice that many of our experimental volunteers - those who were defiantly atheistic in their beliefs — are suffering from various forms of dissociate disorders and social adaptation manias also. This came as quite a shock to us as we studied patient after patient because for years we have been led to believe that religious zeal was often a patently obvious sign of mental illness, but in fact this is not the case. Quite the contrary !
“The individuals we have studied, especially those under the age of forty who actively participate in open debate about theiravowed atheism, or people who are very strident about their atheism are heavily prone to mental illness — and most of the illnesses are quite severe. This was not a handful of subjects who were studied, mind you. There were 17,809 people in the study. It was a very large model as far as psychological experiments go.”
Until a neurotransmitter or a definitive brain anomaly can be identified and positively identified as a trigger, Dr. Zimmerman and his colleagues have given this condition a temporary name — “The Misfit Syndrome” — owing to the fact that nearly 100% of patients studied who professed openly about atheism also had other severe social adaptation issues and many major forms of mental illness that kept them from interacting normally with other people in general.
“The Misfit Syndrome” as we have described it in our literature, is actually a profound psychosis in and of itself,” said Zimmermann. It should be understood that atheism alone is not a mental illness, but overt atheism — the need to profess one’s atheism and to openly debate the existence of a deity of any kind — is almost always a sign of serious mental illness. Many people walk around without a thought about a God or Creator and these people are essentially atheists. These people do very well. The overt atheist, however, people who openly state, ‘I am an atheist,’ and then go on to debate their anti-religious issues, are, according to 22 years of intensive research, often very unwell as far as mental illness is concerned. I say ‘unwell’ because aside from the obvious mental illnesses we have observed, we have also seen a vast amount of yet to be understood mental aberrations
The overt atheist, or those who are believed to be suffering from The Misfit Syndrome, may carry a genetic defect — and that’s the rub.
“The study is virtually infallible and after nearly thirty double-blind studies we cannot come to any other conclusions.
Does this mean that the face of overt atheism is an ugly face? We are not sure, but evidence seems to point in that direction.
They might blame the Creator and by denying the existence of a Creator, they are denying their own ugliness. I do not mean to imply that one has to be ugly to be an atheist but there is an inherent inner ugliness that the patients perceive about themselves. (This is clearly evident in social media passionate discussions on the topic)
We have found that to be true in about 97% of the cases. You never have any medical study where 97% of your results are positive. It’s almost impossible to make a mistake with numbers like that. Something is going on here and the common thread with almost all overt atheists is serious mental illness or an inclination to develop a profound mental illness by age thirty-five. “It’s hard to accept something like this — something like the results of our study — in an enlightened society,but there is no getting around the scientific proof. Every variable and every model that has been used comes to the same conclusion.
“People who openly do not believe in a Creator or a Greater Spirit and opt to debate it as part of their definition of self, are almost always suffering from a serious mental illness, and if they are not currently sick, the odds are nearly 100% that they eventually will become mentally ill“
Anorexia and bulimia are also rare in the Overt Atheist, but much more serious ‘mental un-wellness,’ such as schizophrenia and serious forms of Socio-Pathology are very often seen in the overt atheists with percentages approaching 100%.

Believers,
In other words, people who proclaim to be believers are prone to the more mundane Generalized Anxiety Disorders or various phobias, but— Overt-Nnon-Believers— suffer from much more profound mental issues and Socio-Pathologies.

Here is an explanation of this anomaly from a scientific & philosophical angle:

What is God?
The mystical scriptures of religions express the idea of a single underlying reality embodied in GOD–The absolute self. The idea of mass consciousness (reflective of super consciousness) suggests a continuum of nonlocal intelligence, permeating space and time. This is in contrast with neuroscience inspired Newtonian view of perceptive tissues locked in the skull.


Natural test of Assumption
At Princeton University graduation ceremony it was noticed that the rain is always, miraculously, held off for that particular day or time. Proving the existence of all hearing, Living God.


Catharsis
We delude ourselves with the thoughts that we know much more about things around us than about metaphysical mind or God. So we overestimate material causation and believe that it only affords us a true explanation of life. But materiality is just as inscrutable as God. As the ultimate things we can know nothing, and only when we admit this—do we return to a state of sanity. God reveals to those who earnestly ask for. Materiality is just one of His instruments.


Logical and reasoned psychological validation
Nevertheless, stressed/sickened individuals create an atmosphere of stress and sickness in collective consciousness that reciprocally affects the thinking and actions of every individual in that system (same frame of mind)…..Collective problems of society are more than just the problem of sick individuals—-such problems are more fundamentally symptoms of stress/sickness in collective consciousness (of the society) pushing our youngsters towards—Avowed-Overt- Atheism.
nation.com.pk
Read More: 
·       Universe, Science & God
·       Faith & Reason
·       The Creator
·       The Creation /Why We Exist? 
·    The Myths and Legends of Ancient Greece and Rome: By E. M. Bernes 
·       The Hindus: An Alternative History by Wendy Doniger  
·       Bible: Myths and their Parallels in other religions By T. W. Doane  
·       RELIGION CAUSE WARS?
And More >>>>
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~  ~ ~ ~  ~
Humanity, Religion, Culture, Science, Peace
 A Project of 
Peace Forum Network
Books, Articles, Blogs, Magazines,  Videos, Social Media
Overall 2 Million visits/hits
http://JustOneGod.blogspot.com
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Labels: , , , ,
Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)