The Qur'an (1 Viewer)

[aziz rasul]

The creation of the universe:
“Do not the Unbelievers see that the heavens and the earth (meaning the universe) were (once) one single entity (ratq), which We (meaning God, the Creator) then parted asunder (fataqa) and We got every living thing out of water. Will they then not [begin to] believe?”
Qur’an - Surah al-Anbiyaa (The Prophets) 21:30 See also 6:73, 24:45 and 25:54.

The end of the universe and a new universe:
The Day when We shall roll up the heavens as a recorder rolleth up a written scroll. As We began the first creation, We shall repeat it. (It is) a promise (binding) upon Us. Lo! We are to perform it.
Qur’an - Surah al-Anbiyaa (The Prophets) 21:104 See also 10:34, 27:64, 30:27, 3:5, 39:67 and 50:15.

From the above Qur'anic verses, it's possible that we have gone through a series of universes, one after the other. Who knows, there may be many universes at the same time. However, whatever the case may be, God has always existed and one of His attributes is that He is the Creator.

 

[AccessBlaster]

The James Webb Space Telescope is giving us evidence that the Big Bang was NOT the origin of the universe, and that in fact the universe may well be eternal.

Space is curved, we exist in a sphere within a sphere surrounded by spheres. A three dimensional stack up of spherical objects. Or a four or five dimensional hypersphere where we exist on a three dimensional plane where we have yet to detect the other dimension(s).
Or I could be just full of sh*t.

 

[NauticalGent]

Or I could be just full of sh*t.

Are we voting on this...?

 

[aziz rasul]

Religion is is a form of mass hysteria based on holding beliefs without question. It is indistinguishable from mental illness.

And the parable of those who disbelieve is as the parable of one who calls out to that which hears no more than a call and a cry; deaf, dumb (and) blind, so they do not understand. Qur'an 2:171

And of men is he who takes instead frivolous discourse to lead astray from Allaah's path without knowledge, and to take it for a mockery; these shall have an abasing chastisement. Qur'an 31:6

 

[The_Doc_Man]

The Day when We shall roll up the heavens as a recorder rolleth up a written scroll. As We began the first creation, We shall repeat it. (It is) a promise (binding) upon Us. Lo! We are to perform it.

Oh, Islam is a cyclic-universe cult. Thank you for the clarification. Unfortunately, the current parameters discovered by cosmologists don't point to a cyclic universe either.

 

[aziz rasul]

Oh, Islam is a cyclic-universe cult. Thank you for the clarification. Unfortunately, the current parameters discovered by cosmologists don't point to a cyclic universe either.

There's your problem, science in some cases is fluid and changes.

 

[The_Doc_Man]

There's your problem, science in some cases is fluid and changes.

And there is YOUR problem - that even in the face of certain change, religion stays in the dark ages philosophically.

 

[Uncle Gizmo]

These are the problems.

1) Many people, many with an intellect superior to mine believe in God.

2) No one has yet proved or disproved the existence of God.

3) Science has no idea how intelligence functions.

I don't have a belief in a white old man with a long flowing beard. I don't believe a group of pious men who tell me how I should or should not behave, because some deity told them that's how I should behave.

However, I instinctively know that there is something.

Where this instinct comes from, whether it's a biological or evolutionary construct in my physical body, or comes from elsewhere, I do not know, but I cannot deny it.

 

[Jon]

I think that because of thousands of years of religion, it has wired itself into the DNA of the brain. We are born to want to believe in a higher being.

It also goes to show that highly intelligent people can believe opposite things. Just look at politics, for an example.

 

[AccessBlaster]

2) No one has yet proved or disproved the existence of God.

That's the crux of the issue. If God was provable almost everyone would be on board by default. He doesn't want that. In order to earn your place you must have faith. If you believe in him, he believes in you. Simple concept to separate the wheat from the chaff.

 

[conception_native_0123]

The James Webb Space Telescope is giving us evidence that the Big Bang was NOT the origin of the universe, and that in fact the universe may well be eternal.

how interesting! got a link to an article where I can read about this? that would catch my attention greatly!

 

[The_Doc_Man]

how interesting! got a link to an article where I can read about this? that would catch my attention greatly!

Search for JWST and maybe add in "+distant galaxy" - but beware that it is still conjectural at this point. The finding of galaxies that appear to be older than 13.75 BN years is still being peer-reviewed. But some of the big names in astronomy and cosmology are on the bandwagon. And of course the textbook publishers are groaning because they know that a lot of their publications will get dumped relatively soon.

 

[Jon]

From memory, I think they were saying that there were much larger galaxies in the early state of the Universe than they thought would be possible. Consequently, it casts some uncertainty over the big bang narrative being the same as before.

 

[aziz rasul]

And there is YOUR problem - that even in the face of certain change, religion stays in the dark ages philosophically.

Does it really or are YOU simply in denial because it's easy!

 

[aziz rasul]

but beware that it is still conjectural at this point.

Hmmm, so the discovery of earlier galaxies does not disprove the fact that the big bang occurred. You seemed to have made no meaningful point that changes anything from the status quo.

 

[Uncle Gizmo]

the fact that the big bang occurred

I believe they are considering the possibility of two big bang's at around the same time.

Don't forget, this is science and everything is a theory, some with very high probably, some having lower probability.

 

[The_Doc_Man]

Does it really or are YOU simply in denial because it's easy!

Denial isn't easy when you were raised in and live in a religious household for 35 years. It took me a lot of contemplation (heavily laced with disappointment) when I carefully read the Bible during my mother's slow decline through the stages of Alzheimer's Disease. I was looking for help, comfort, guidance, and answers. None were anywhere to be found (unless you count empty statements) and I finally figured out that there are two ways to look at the Bible (and the Qur'an).

First and simplest, you could say that they are stories about God or Allah. Second, you could say that they were stories told by and about people who believed in God or Allah, having no proof of existence of a deity and unable to understand how some things work - so they turned towards a supernatural explanation that is as hollow as a termite-ridden weeping willow tree.

As we learn more, the boundaries on that inability to understand recede in the distance. Despite continuing demonstrable advances in science as a way of explaining the unexplainable, religious adherents are the ones who remain in denial.

Yes, thanks to those recent discoveries, we have yet again proved this point: Science is a moving target. But I think you would say that as though it is a BAD thing. Science goes forward until it finds it has made a mistake. (Which can happen!) When that happens, we retreat, regroup, analyze, research, and come forward with a new explanation that is better at fitting the facts. Case in point: phlogiston theory, which was an early (and very incorrect) explanation of heat generated by combustion.

When religion runs into the inexplicable, the usual mantra is "God works in mysterious ways" or "We are not meant to know the mind of God." I.e. if there IS an answer, YOU aren't going to get it so don't bother to ask. Deflection and diversion are central themes to religious explanations.

 

[AccessBlaster]

I asked ChatGPT to summarize the book of JOB

Certainly! The Book of Job is a part of the Hebrew Bible and the Christian Old Testament. It is a poetic and philosophical work that explores the theme of suffering and the nature of God's justice. The central character is Job, a wealthy and righteous man who undergoes a series of devastating trials, including the loss of his wealth, health, and family.

Job's friends come to comfort him, but their attempts to explain his suffering lead to philosophical discussions about the nature of God, human suffering, and the concept of divine justice. Job, in his anguish, questions God and demands an explanation for his suffering.

In the latter part of the book, God responds to Job from a whirlwind, emphasizing the limitations of human understanding and the vastness of divine wisdom. God's response does not provide a direct answer to Job's questions but asserts the sovereignty and incomprehensibility of the divine plan.

The Book of Job concludes with Job's restoration, as he is blessed with double the prosperity he had before. The overarching message of the book is often seen as a meditation on the mystery of suffering and the importance of trust and faith in God, even in the face of unanswered questions.

 

[The_Doc_Man]

Ah, yes... but Job didn't have to read the Bible to find his answers. He got his proof directly and no longer had to deal purely in faith. Besides which, he got the same kind of answer that I just mentioned. "God works in mysterious ways too complex for you to understand." If EVER there was a non-answer, that is a perfect example.

Do you remember your parents telling you "You will understand better when you grow up"? Thanks, but in this case, I won't have a practical answer until I die, at which time it will be too late for the answer to do any good.

 

[aziz rasul]

Muslims are not in denial, we have the Qur'an to guide and enlighten us and ultimately give us success in the Hereafter.

It is normally the Christians who use the phrase "God works in mysterious ways ...", not Muslims.

Science may change as new evidences come to light. However, there are certain scientific facts have a higher chance of being correct as Uncle Gizmo says in #96. After all, The_Doc_Man, you did not disagree with post #60 I gave.