junkshop
Otto's Favourite
Last edited:
Nobody has got ghost, according to Quran.
- Thread starter Emre_1974tr
- Start date
JayUtah
Penultimate Amazing
Factually false. We observe that it's factually false. Other Muslims interpret this verse figuratively.
Just as real as the Easter Bunny and the Tooth Fairy. You can believe in whatever you want, but it's an objective fact that there is testable evidence for the existence of a human organism and no such evidence for the existence of jinns.
That verse does not say dust (غبار)... it says DIRT (تُرَابٍ)... as in the stuff on/in the ground... which is not dust.
And other verses say Mud and Clay and Black Mud and Slimy Mud and Sticky Clay.... basically DIRT of different compositions.
What is missing in any of those compositions is Hydro-Carbons and Amino-Acids... which is what living things are REALLY made out of in addition to other elements.
So nope... this verse proves that either Muhammad was a benighted consummate liar... or that the Demon/Djinn that tricked him had no idea what Biology and Chemistry are... or he deliberately lied to confound and befuddle the poor camel caravan pillager.
Wake up man... it is 2023... and you are using the APEX of science to expose around the globe how benighted your religion is.
As real as Kali... and whatever Demon/Djinn tricked, 1400 years ago in a deserted desert cave, the wretched benighted camel caravan pillager....
Last edited:
Emre_1974tr
Graduate Poster
Norman Alexander
Penultimate Amazing
What has this to do with ghosts?
Define "universe"?
What is the Arabic word for "universe" a.k.a. "heaven"? And can you cite the verses of the Quran where this word is used??
Are you familiar with the verse
- Q2:22 Who has made the earth your couch, and the heavens your canopy; and sent down rain from the heavens; and brought forth therewith Fruits for your sustenance; then set not up rivals unto Allah when ye know (the truth).
Does rain come down from the "universe"?
Is the "universe" a canopy?
Are you familiar with thise verse
- Q3:133 Be quick in the race for forgiveness from your Lord, and for a Paradise whose width is that (of the whole) of the heavens and of the earth, prepared for the righteous
As you can clearly observe... the Quran belies your assertion.... will you ever admit your error???
.
Last edited:
Emre_1974tr
Graduate Poster
The verses I gave are talking about living beings in other material universes. So it's not the spirit world, it's people like us who live in the material world, people who are in Paradise (Floor of Lord) right now.
And did you go there and see for yourself what they are like there???
How do you know Allah is not a lying lump of Demon droppings???
Last edited:
Norman Alexander
Penultimate Amazing
You do know that is pure heresy for Islam?Emre_1974tr said:
So … in other “material universes” (whatever that means) your God is busy creating people from mud and semen, whereas in our world, it is still done in the traditional way with eggs and semen?
Gulliver Foyle
Philosopher
So it's not us in this new universe then. Unless you're claiming, contra your thread title, that we do have immaterial souls to contain our essences.
You're so bad at this debating malarkey that you can't even agree with yourself.
Gord_in_Toronto
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- Jul 22, 2006
- Messages
- 26,480
I ain't afraid of no ghosts!
JayUtah
Penultimate Amazing
Now you're getting heretical, but that's not really my problem.
If the inhabitants of Paradise are not souls, and you're arguing there is no soul, then what is living in Paradise and what got left behind in the grave? You don't seem to understand the problem.
The question seems at its core identical to the teletransporter question in philosophy. If a perfect duplicate of you including all memories is created in another location, is it okay if the original you is destroyed at the same time? Some (including myself) have argued that the result would be the same partially illusory continuity of conscious experience we commonly experience anyhow, and that they would be willing to use the transporter (at least, in the hypothetical case where it functions with perfect reliability and accuracy). Others of course disagree, and also present strong arguments (e.g. that the creation of a duplicate is irrelevant to the original individual who is killed in the process). Neither side of that argument requires a migrating soul to justify it, which Emre's position happens to coincide with.
In most religious narratives of resurrection or afterlife, a migrating soul is assumed, which does make the scenario different from the teletransporter ones.
If we assume no migrating soul and the resurrecting deity Emre depicts, the same way we assume the perfect teletransporter in philosophical arguments, then sure, I'd have no trouble accepting resurrection on those terms. (One difference from the teletransporter scenarios is that while using the device is usually assumed to be voluntary, my present self cannot opt out of dying eventually in any case.)
The real question is, which new material incarnation in another universe would I prefer to be re-created in: the one that contains no devout Muslims, or the one that contains only devout Muslims? And that question isn't difficult at all.
Last edited:
catsmate
No longer the 1
- Joined
- Apr 9, 2007
- Messages
- 34,767
Wrong. Shed tissue continues to carry the genetic imprint of the originator's body.
Garbage. Human bodies are not created from mud or earth. This is just stupid.
catsmate
No longer the 1
- Joined
- Apr 9, 2007
- Messages
- 34,767
Wrong as usual.Your "holy book" is nonsense, based on the knowledge of the primitives who wrote it.
Emre_1974tr
Graduate Poster
We don't need such ghouls in our bodies anyway.