Originally Posted by usman.khawar
the arguement i posted , and the book explained, it, is not the same which u told me . simply u didn't read that or miss to read.
further, if i talk about the argument which u mentioned.. is good, for atheist, what a beautiful evolution, billions of lives, so balanced so perfect system of earth and cosmos. whats a beautiful accident
O' My Lord! give us the knowledge of reality of the things. Amen.
Which is, as I said, the universe being built on design, there must be a designer, to me, that is God, and that knowledge is reality.
The person who cannot accept the existence of a supreme being, their reality and knowledge dictates chance and evolution, to them, viable truth.
Perhaps we should all cling to our own belief system, and if others disagree, let them, and let us live in peace.
Si quis autem ignorat, ignorabitur.
God bless you richly,
Thanks Pen for prays, God bless you too richly...
once again that is not the argument i m talking about.
some people say in counter argument for this design argument , for instance in a forest there is no planing for trees, but out of it, it becomes automatically a design. so as it is, in this universe it becomes automatically a design so this is not enough or final proof of God's existence. in words of my teacher, very well explained this concept also in that book i m reffering to you, are as given below:
" it is important to note that all the proofs of God’s existence that have been provided by theologians so far have been abstract and particular. They lacked absolute authority, and the possibility of doubt always remained. For instance the cosmological argument states that God was the ‘first cause’ who created the cosmos. The opponents of this claim have argued that ‘Nature’ can be regarded as the Creator and if the design of the universe is attributed to God, it can equally be ascribed to a ‘chance event’. The ‘teleological argument’ points to the complex order and design of the universe as evidence of God. In response some have claimed that the matter of the universe has evolved over time and has become more refined and complex. If the theologians point to the orbits of the planets and stars to show the fine planning that must be behind all this, their opponents simply argue that this system arose from chaos and chance collisions and upheavals led to the natural order we see today"
you just pick this pray of Muhammad The Last messenger of God from the 1st page of the thread. the book which explained this argument ,everyothers misconceptions, starts from next pages of that thread. which 1st chapter is "humanity let down by the gatekeepers of the knoweldge"
if u like to read that unbreakable scientific objective argument and which provides us absolute authourity in reason and argument in favor of God's existence, here is the link .. http://www.alamaat.com/TheArgument.php.. start from the 1st chapter..
your quote "Perhaps we should all cling to our own belief system, and if others disagree, let them, and let us live in peace"
what if other person is saying rightly and have a better beleif system and better argument then what ? should we still cling to our own beleif system ? should not we think about the other's strong argument or just turn our back towards it as we never listen that? does prejudice stops a person or is it anything else ?