The supernatural

[Chanakya]

heydarian, I know that in now introducing a fresh question I'm actually pushing you to deviate from my own advice of focusing on and resolving one issue before moving on to another, but I can't help asking you at this point: What exactly might be a "divine religion"?

To my knowledge only Theravadin Buddhism, and maybe Daoism, might be thought of as religions that aren't (overtly) theistic. Is that what you mean, all religions apart from these two? But that still leaves all the rest of them there, bar these two, including the ones that Susheel mentioned upthread (and in response to whose post, if I remember correctly, you first mentioned these "divine religions").

Or do you mean only the Abrahamic religions? That makes no sense, because why wouldn't the others be divine as well, since they all claim divinity of some kind or the other, and in any case you claim that the Quran supports all religions?

----

Short question: What are "divine religions", as you used that term in this thread? (And an additional question: What, according to you, is the Quran's take on non-divine religions and the followers of those religions?)

 

[JoeMorgue]

Hi dear friend. I answered your questions. If I have left a question, please ask again. Thank you very much

No you didn't. Doesn't your God have rules against lying?

 

[MarkCorrigan]

Hi dear friend. I answered your questions. If I have left a question, please ask again. Thank you very much

Lies. These are the posts of mine you haven't dealt with:

In it's current form.



This is mostly gibberish, but yes we do want to know. That's why we study it.


forever is meaningless because time didn't exist before the big bang event. Spacetime only started with the expansion from the singularity.


Nonsense. The Quran is a book of myths written by a warlord who wanted to write his own fanfiction bible, essentially.

It wasn't an explosion. The big bang was the event whereby the singularity expanded. That's all. No smoke. No explosion. No real bang of any kind. All of matter was condensed into a single point of infinitely small space and then it expanded and is continuing to expand.

Yes it does. Are you claiming that Adam and Eve is a literal story or not?

Absolutely none. Adam and Eve as a metaphor is a story of innocent people being punished by a god that set them up to fail. It's a vile story.

No. Just no. If you're trying to claim that the Quran contains real science and history it matters if you think Adam and Eve were real. If you claim that it's just allegory then fine, it's just a story to tell a terrible lesson, but if you claim it is a true story that's another matter.

Right, and there are no morals that can be gleaned from Adam and Eve.

Really now? So why are you still refusing to deal with my posts from earlier in the thread where I detail some of the horrific cruelties that the Quran teaches as good morality?

The Quran is a horrible book that teaches a supremacist, violent ideology. It isn't alone in that at all, but attempting to claim it is a moral book is laughable. You would actually need to deal with all of the moral problems in it rather than just pretending they don't exist.

Are you claiming that the Quran is a moral book, yes or no?

God isn't real though, at least not Allah. Allah is a self refuting logical absurdity, and based on the proclamations "he" makes in the Quran is thoroughly evil. Just like Yahweh is thoroughly evil if the bible it accepted.

But you're claiming that the Quran is a science textbook, essentially. Why shouldn't scorpion use a moment of obvious nonsense like talking ants to show just how poor the science is in this book?

No you haven't. You've just mentioned scientific advances or knowledge then attempted to hamfistedly ram parts of the Quran to fit them. Despite many of your examples needing a misunderstanding of what the science actually says, like the big bang = explosion with smoke garbage.

All you're doing is stating your belief over and over again. That isn't persuasive. It certainly isn't logical or scientific.

Absolute rot. You have proved nothing. No one is convinced by your arguments heydarian. Provide evidence for a soul. Provide evidence for god. Anything at all.

You know that Allah is logically self refuting, right?

How patronising. I've read quite a lot of philosophy. None of what you are doing is proof or evidence of anything. You're just constantly restating your claim over and over again and expecting everyone to accept it as true. That isn't going to happen.

Hilarious. Of course I understand them, but you are very much NOT using logic and philosophy isn't a very good method of determining objective truth. That's what science is for.

Didn't you say you could prove the supernatural using science though? Didn't you also say you had done so in a lab? Walking back that claim are we?

Mysticism is garbage. Logic only works in certain ways and you're not using it.


Again, patronising garbage. I understand what you are saying, I just think it's nonsense. Do you get that yet?

Let's take a hypothetical. I come to you and I say that flowers are opened by faeries as it says in the great book of flower faeries. Do you accept my claim?

What if I said that this book was written by god. Do you accept it now?


All you do is repeat yourself. Over and over again. You never answer questions. You never provide evidence. You just restate your nonsense claims and act like it's some great revelation. It isn't. You're simply incapable of defending your arguments.

You've completely ignored the argument and gone right into preaching again. In fact not only have you ignored the argument you've simply refused to accept that it is true and carried on regardless.

Stephen Hawking stated that the universe runs according to physical laws, yes. He also said that there was no design, there was no god, and there was no direction to the universe outside of those physical laws. He thought it was effectively chance.

What on earth does robotics have to do with the Quran?

No. The universe in it's present form came into being all but instantly when the singularity expanded. Since space-time only started with the Big Bang event there was no way of measuring the existence of the singularity, but in laymans terms it always existed.

Nonsense. Why on earth would we have to search using methods that don't work?

Mysticism does not work. It is utterly worthless.

Logic and scientific examination are not only the best but realistically the only way to produce verifiable evidence for things. Philosophy is great when discussing the subjective but it doesn't work for objective questions.

Everything objective we as a species have ever discovered was through science, mathematics and logic. None of those offer any credence to the idea of the supernatural.

God isn't real. Souls aren't real. Spirits aren't real. The Quran is a book of fiction.

Telling the magazine that he was asked why he did not give "credit" to God, Attenborough added: "They always mean beautiful things like hummingbirds. I always reply by saying that I think of a little child in east Africa with a worm burrowing through his eyeball. The worm cannot live in any other way, except by burrowing through eyeballs. I find that hard to reconcile with the notion of a divine and benevolent creator."

Nature is so beautiful

This is special pleading. All you are doing is claiming that something is true then stating it you are unable to test it. If something affects the world we can test it.

God is not real. Provide evidence he is and I will change my mind. Why would you believe something there is no evidence for? It's inane.

What is your best evidence for god. Your single best argument for the existence of a creator deity.

You can't say that the signs and works are visible but god isn't. That's just pointing to something and saying "God did this". You have no evidence your god did it so there is no reason to believe he did.

Heydarian, do you believe the story of Noah's ark to be literally true?

 

[heydarian saeed]

Hello madam.
- I did not understand what you mean. Tolfa, upload the statement you said with its document and source.
- So it makes sense that cars and buildings have a builder. Not random. Can you not conclude from this simple logical analogy that the universe is also constructive?
You seem to believe in Darwin's theory. Please read my explanation:
The reason why I chose the interpretation of verse 14 of Surah Al-Mu'minun according to what I have said is because the view of the Qur'an is varied in expressing the creation of man and does not refer to a specific scientific theory and does not refer to it in general and does not go into detail. The above details the developmental stages of the fetus, not the general creation of man), so different interpretations can be offered and there is no problem.
I have already said that there are 76 verses in the Qur'an about the creation of man. The song of Quranic verses is the song of human independent creation. Even if there were stages such as evolutionary types between the creation of man from earth to man (which he said symbolically), the Qur'an never mentions such types. Because it does not refer to scientific details and theories. Over time, if proven otherwise, the Qur'an will not be questioned. And remains perfect. This conveys the author's wisdom that he is God.
In this regard, the reasons for the evolution of types of types of theory have not yet emerged. On the other hand, the content of the verses of the Qur'an is such that it has not explicitly rejected these stages of the evolution of types. Of course, there is no reason to prove it according to the Qur'an. If this theory is ever proven, there is no contradiction with the Qur'an. I have a question: how is it that species evolution does not occur in the case of early animals (such as fish) ?! So that they, like humans, become human after evolution ?!
Darwin's theory is a hypothesis and has not yet reached the stage of scientific and certainty. On the other hand:
The theory of evolution and selection of species, which considers the way of human origin from the natural evolution of apes, does not prove that this is the only way of human and human realization. And man has entered the realm of existence exclusively in this way. Because experience has only one proof message and indicates that something happens in this way.
But it never means that it is impossible to happen otherwise. That is, there may be other ways. Therefore, it does not reject the view of the Qur'an in any way. Also, this theory is never responsible for proving the quality of human origin. Suspicious fossils and researchers' research on proving the theory of evolution of species Although the language is proven, but never the language of negation of other theories.
Therefore, the view of the Qur'an remains strong. Thirdly, this theory, assuming proof and correctness, is never responsible for determining the fate of man in religious texts and the Qur'an. And not responsive.
Out of this discussion; None of the religious texts and the Qur'an claim that the creation of man in man is unique and that no human being before Adam was realized in the historical Adora. That is, the Qur'an does not reject the fossils discovered before man. But Adam was not a descendant of any of them. And is a chosen and chosen being. Who has intellect and responsibility.
I apologize for the long article. Because your question and text needed an explanation.
I am at your service, dear friends.

Hello pixel. I would like to hear your logical reasons for being the creator of the universe. And what is your logical reason why alternative explanations are preferred to God? If possible, provide a relevant alternative description.
Thanks

 

[heydarian saeed]

Hello heydarian. You can call me Pixel.


I'm afraid I can't explain it any more simply than I already have.


No of course not. The analogy is to things for which only two possible explanations (created by a conscious entity or assembled by chance) are possible. It does not therefore apply to things for which there are more than those two possible explanations, like complex life forms and the universe.


I accept the overwhelming evidence that every living thing around us is the result of billions of years of evolution by natural selection, yes.


Your "explanation" is apologetic hand waving which attempts to reconcile well debunked stories with recent scientific discoveries so that you can tell yourself that the Qu'ran is not contradicted.

We've learned a lot since the book was written, of course it doesn't contain that recently acquired knowledge. No further explanation is required.

It is clear from what you write that you are profoundly ignorant of the theory of evolution and the evidence for it. To address some of the more basic misunderstandings:


Because 'human' is not the end point to evolution. There is no end point to evolution. Natural selection tailors different species to different environments. The various species of fish are as well suited to their environments as we are to ours. It's entirely possible that our species, like most, will eventually become extinct and other new species will evolve.


Wrong. An hypothesis becomes a theory when it is tested and sufficient evidence is found for it to become accepted. Evolution passed that milestone more than a century ago.


That is just a story, and a pretty silly one. Unless you're saying Adam had no descendants it's refuted by simply examining the human genome, which shows the common ancestry of every human being alive today with all the other species that still exist.

The complexity and grandeur of the universe is the second priority in the discussion of how it came into being. The first priority of this discussion is to consider having a manufacturer. Does it have a manufacturer? And then the second priority is examined. This is a logical procedure.

 

[heydarian saeed]

... Continuation of the final part of the article:
- If man can do this great and unique work, he must be bound by moral principles. Social and moral laws must provide a strong and necessary framework for the production of this process.
Because if the moral and social principles and the observance of the protocols of humanity are not observed, we will witness great human catastrophes. And it will eventually destroy the world. And this puts us in a dilemma as to whether achieving this process is more beneficial to man or harmful?
I suggest that the esteemed James Randy Institute pay the $ 1 million prize for this challenge to conduct my proposed experiment. I guarantee my claim as stated above.
I also make a new suggestion that; Considering all the legal restrictions and after removing these restrictions: Provide all the conditions for the existence of two living human sex cells (male and female) and these two cells have the ability to multiply and grow. (Contains DNA and makes amino acids, proteins, etc.)
Then provide all the laboratory conditions for fertilization and continued fetal development (such as nutrition, growth and bio-embryonic conditions in the mother's womb) so that a human fetus can be born after all the steps. In fact, you are doing a human simulation. And you have created a perfect living being. God says in the Qur'an that man can do this.
I repeat, my reason is to cite the special point of verse 14 of Surah Al-Mu'minun of the Qur'an (exactly the phrase; then we give a new creation - the word "then" indicates that after time and after the evolution of the body, a new creation occurs which is the same The soul enters the body, if it is not this stage, the body of the fetus is just a cell mass and has no life) and is one of the principles of divine philosophy (existential philosophy).
...

 

[heydarian saeed]

... Therefore, if man could use nature and matter to create all the conditions for the formation of the most primitive unit of a living being, the cell, the first living structure would emerge. And in case of embryonic conditions and after going through different stages, the soul enters this creature.
And has a soul. And life will take shape and this creature will come to life. Remind an important point; This is true of plant, animal and human life. And there is no difference in doing this process. Of course, the complexity and details of human life are clearly greater.
The result of this discussion is that; If God creates all the conditions of matter and nature in the construction of living beings, He will give life to them. This happens at every moment and it happens in nature and it can be seen all over the world. Look at this verse: "Whoever is in the heavens and the earth asks Him and calls on Him. He (God) is always busy." (Sura al-Rahman, 29)
I stand by my beliefs and claims. And I believe that this is possible. And man can do it. I am here to raise this issue wherever my presence is needed. And I am accountable.
In the following, I remind you that; If the process of making living beings, and especially human cloning, is successful, we will see many amazing achievements and advances in various scientific fields, especially in medicine, psychology and technology in industry. And the world will enter a new phase with an extremely high technique.

 

[heydarian saeed]

... The last word is that;
I emphasize again, in order to answer the important questions in the universe, its creator and the supernatural and to prove it, although matter and the senses are important tools and great help, but the end result is through logic-philosophy (analogy and rational abstraction). ) Or is done mystically.
And these are complementary. And they will not work alone. The important thing is that through matter and nature, we can understand and know the transcendental, and especially God. Because these exist. However, we cannot perceive or see them with the external senses. But they are intellectually quite clear and recognizable. Also, their effects and signs can be seen and observed.
Proof of the supernatural is easy. But what about denying it? Can it be denied? If all the wealth of the world is spent to deny the supernatural, it will not be able to. I hope one day man will be able to understand what sex is supernatural. And how does it work? And what are its rules and regulations?
And we humans have a duty to pursue this discovery like any other human unknown. And I hope that this research will be successful as soon as possible. Of course, we know that the supernatural works for us through nature itself. And to some extent we know the mechanism. But human knowledge about it is limited.
My conversation language is Persian and I apologize for not being able to express my meaning in your conversation language and culture in a correct and complete way, or for editing the article and having problems with written phrases.
If you have any questions or ambiguities regarding the contents of the article, I am at your service. And after reviewing, I will be held accountable. I am also ready to present the contents of my article in person wherever needed. Of course, I have a hearing loss due to a serious car accident. And I hear with a hearing aid. And I prefer to communicate via email or virtual group.
Thank you all very much for taking the time to listen to me. And I wish you health and success in all aspects of science.

 

[heydarian saeed]

References:
- Scientific information about space and matter and photos are taken from the website of NASA.
-https://www.theguardian.com/science/2019/may/15/cambridge-scientists-create-worlds-first-living-organism-with-fully-redesigned-dna-
-Popularmechanics
-www.iranianfuturist.com
- http://ibelieveinsci.com - http://www.bbc.com/…/20170215-the-strange-link-between-the-…
-Wikipedia ,Newscientist, pbs Nova
-www.mavaraha.blogsky.com
-www.zoomit.ir/space/1730-weight-loss-ground
-Nature Cell Biology Journal of Nature and
-https://www.migna.ir
- Medical Embryology Longman, Sedler, You.
- Goodarzi. Forensic medicine.
- Shahnaz Razavi. Science and religion research. Institute of Humanities and Cultural Studies
- Manijeh Jahanian. The First National Congress on the Adherence of Medical Affairs to the Standards of the Holy Sharia
- Verses of the Holy Quran.
-Excerpts from the article "Method of Realism" by Professor Allameh Tabatabai.

 

[heydarian saeed]

Email: hseheydar14@gmail.com
Date of research and writing: 08/01/2004
Edited and updated: 07/01/2021
Signature: Heydarian Yazdalee Saeed

 

[Pixel42]

Hello pixel. I would like to hear your logical reasons for being the creator of the universe. And what is your logical reason why alternative explanations are preferred to God? If possible, provide a relevant alternative description.
Thanks

I have already explained my logic to you in detail.

The complexity and grandeur of the universe is the second priority in the discussion of how it came into being. The first priority of this discussion is to consider having a manufacturer. Does it have a manufacturer? And then the second priority is examined. This is a logical procedure.

No, that is not a logical procedure. All possible answers to the question we are discussing should be given equal consideration.

A manufacturer is one of the possible explanations for the existence of the universe, but it is an unsatisfactory explanation for the reasons I have explained. Other explanations are preferred because they do not raise a new, even more difficult, question than the one they are attempting to answer.

 

[Pixel42]

I suggest that the esteemed James Randy Institute pay the $ 1 million prize for this challenge to conduct my proposed experiment. I guarantee my claim as stated above.

The James Randi Educational Foundation and the million dollar challenge were both wound up some years ago when Randi retired. James Randi sadly died last year.

There are other organisations which still offer a prize for a successful demonstration of the existence of the supernatural but, as was also the case with JREF, the prize will only be awarded after the demonstration, it cannot be used to fund it.

I don't understand exactly what the experiment is that you are proposing but it sounds like you are talking about cloning a human being, which I believe is currently illegal everywhere in the world.

Is it your contention that a cloned embryo will not be entered by a soul, i.e. will not start to move at the usual stage of development? If so I'm impressed, because that is an actual, testable, prediction which would indeed be evidence for the supernatural.

I would, however, point out that (a) in vitro fertilisation of human beings has been carried out successfully for years and (b) other animals have been successfully cloned whose embryonic development proceeded normally.

You do understand that there is a point at which the embryo starts to move in all mammals, not just in human beings? So if you're saying this is the point at which a soul enters the embryo then all mammals have souls? And some mammals (e.g. the famous Dolly the Sheep) have already been successfully cloned?

 

[heydarian saeed]

And who or what had the ability to build the creator? Because, according to your "logic and philosophy" something must have, because nothing complex (like a car or a building) can exist without being created, right? And there's nothing more complex than your hypothetical God. Even the universe is nothing like as complex as your imagined God would need to be.

And once again: if your answer is the assertion "the creator can exist without having been created" then there is no need to insert a creator into the process at all, because the assertion "the universe can exist without having been created" is just as valid. It's also more parsimonious, and hence preferable.


Ignoring my answer to your question and asking it of another poster will not get you anywhere, heydarian.


The same mechanism by which you are assuming your imagined creator made himself, perhaps? Or maybe the universe/multiverse has always existed in some form, and didn't need to be created? Or maybe it was an uncaused quantum fluctuation? Or ...

But the point, once again, is that explaining the existence of A by postulating the existence of B does not actually explain the existence of A. It just replaces that mystery with the even greater mystery of the existence of B.

- God has no creator. And this is irrelevant. Because if he has a builder, we will ask again, who made him? And this question will continue. Logic and philosophy say: This procedure means bypassing and rejecting. And does not accept logic. This question must end somewhere. That is, one person is God. And this question should not continue. This procedure is accepted by logic and philosophy. Please refer to logic and philosophy. And study.
-Nothing is complicated for God. It's simple for him. Builds without any prior design. It just says: Be and be. His power and knowledge have no limits. We can not even say it is infinite. Because infinity is a limit for God and is not acceptable. We just say there is a God. God knows. God is able. I do not know the experimental sciences. Because it is not in its scope. These issues are in the field of logic and philosophy.
- Your answer is not enough and logical for the mechanism of having the universe built. Please answer logically, not out of your own imagination. Keep in mind that the answer to this question is not in the field of experimental science. You have to prove it with logic and philosophy.
- If A is a component and B is a whole. The result is obtained by comparing the parts to the whole. And the opposite is also true. Apart from this, it must be examined by another method of logic.
- You said in one of your posts: And the period of human creation continues to be extinct. And another generation is coming. I checked in the Quran. Yes, the Qur'an also considers this hypothesis possible. It may happen. Look at the meaning of verse 61 of Surah Al-Waqi'ah. This is what you said 14 centuries ago! He says, and it's not a new thing: "[and we can] put creatures like you in your place and make you appear in a way that you do not yet know.!"
Good luck

 

[Pixel42]

God has no creator.

The universe has no creator.

And this is irrelevant. Because if he has a builder, we will ask again, who made him? And this question will continue. Logic and philosophy say: This procedure means bypassing and rejecting. And does not accept logic. This question must end somewhere.

Exactly.

The most logical place to end it is at the first step, the universe. Adding an additional step, God, and arbitrarily deciding to end it there is not logical. It creates an unnecessary additional level of complication with no additional explanatory power.

 

[heydarian saeed]

Often, yes. Some are inherently more plausible than others, and some are preferred due to the amount they explain without raising new, more difficult, problems, but until they are tested and evidence gathered in support or opposition to each none can be ruled out entirely.


Depends on whether (a) the evidence that confirms one hypothesis also contradicts the others and (b) the confirmed hypothesis completely accounts for the evidence, leaving nothing further for competing hypotheses to explain.

We can rule out the existence of Adam, for example, as even a partial explanation for the current existence of homo sapiens because it fails both those tests.


Yes, of course. Some events have multiple causes - mass extinction events, for example, are rarely due to just one thing.

But if we look at all the available evidence for the cause of any particular event and it all supports one hypothesis and contradicts certain others, we can at least safely rule out those others.

In this post, you have explained the logical reasons well. And I was satisfied. Can you give the same logical explanation to prove that the universe is constructive by God? Or reject God?
Waiting. Thank you

 

[heydarian saeed]

No it does not, it says the curse of God is on unbelievers, surah 2.161

Those who reject faith and die rejecting it- On them is Allah's curse and, and the curse of angels and of all mankind.

Hello. The curse and curse of God and ... is the continuation of the action of the infidels. See how the disbelievers acted that God cursed them ?! Every disability has a cause. Find the cause.

 

[Jack by the hedge]

- God has no creator. And this is irrelevant. Because if he has a builder, we will ask again, who made him? And this question will continue. Logic and philosophy say: This procedure means bypassing and rejecting. And does not accept logic. This question must end somewhere. That is, one person is God. And this question should not continue. This procedure is accepted by logic and philosophy. Please refer to logic and philosophy. And study.

That does not look like logic to me. That looks like a lack of imagination. It's an argument that everything must have a maker, which in turn had a maker, until eventually there's something that doesn't need a maker, therefore that final thing must be the God of my religion. No. That does not follow.

If it is possible for anything to spontaneously come into existence, or possible for any thing to somehow always have existed, then it is not necessarily the case that this thing has to be a conscious all-powerful entity which chooses to create the universe. It might be the universe itself.

 

[heydarian saeed]

Unbelievers in Muhammad are cursed to eternal hell by Allah.

Chapter 4 The Women - An-Nisa: Verse 151
They are in truth (equally) unbelievers; and we have prepared for unbelievers a humiliating punishment.

Chapter 18 The cave - Al-Kahf: Verse 102
Do the Unbelievers think that they can take My servants as protectors besides Me? Verily We have prepared Hell for the Unbelievers for (their) entertainment.

Chapter 18 The cave- Al-Kahf: Verse
And We shall present Hell that day for Unbelievers to see, all spread out,-

Chapter 33 The Coalition - Al-Ahzab: Verse 64
Verily Allah has cursed the Unbelievers and prepared for them a Blazing Fire,-

Chapter 38 Sad - Sad: Verse 27
Not without purpose did We create heaven and earth and all between! that were the thought of Unbelievers! but woe to the Unbelievers because of the Fire (of Hell)!

Chapter 40 The Forgiver - Ghafir: Verse 6
Thus was the Decree of thy Lord proved true against the Unbelievers; that truly they are Companions of the Fire!

Chapter 51 The winnowing winds - Adh-Dhariyat: Verse 60
Woe, then, to the Unbelievers, on account of that Day of theirs which they have been promised!


Chapter 9 Repentance - At-Taubah: Verse 73
O Prophet! strive hard against the unbelievers and the Hypocrites, and be firm against them. Their abode is Hell,- an evil refuge indeed.

Chapter 13 The Thunder- Ar-Rad: Verse 32
Mocked were (many) messengers before thee: but I granted respite to the unbelievers, and finally I punished them: Then how (terrible) was my requital!


Chapter 14 Abraham - Ibrahim: Verse 2
Of Allah, to Whom do belong all things in the heavens and on earth! But alas for the Unbelievers for a terrible penalty (their Unfaith will bring them)!-


Chapter 21 The Prophets - Al-Anbiya: Verse 98
Verily ye, (unbelievers), and the (false) gods that ye worship besides Allah, are (but) fuel for Hell! to it will ye (surely) come!


Chapter 24 The Light - An-Noor: Verse 57
Never think thou that the Unbelievers are going to frustrate (Allah's Plan) on earth: their abode is the Fire,- and it is indeed an evil refuge!

Chapter 32 The Prostration - As-Sajda: Verse 29
Say: "On the Day of Decision, no profit will it be to Unbelievers if they (then) believe! nor will they be granted a respite."

Chapter 33 The Coalition - Al-Ahzab: Verse 8
That (Allah) may question the (custodians) of Truth concerning the Truth they (were charged with): And He has prepared for the Unbelievers a grievous Penalty.

Chapter 41 Explained in detail - Fussilat: Verse 27
But We will certainly give the Unbelievers a taste of a severe Penalty, and We will requite them for the worst of their deeds.


Chapter 42 Council, Consultation - Ash-Shura: Verse 26
And He listens to those who believe and do deeds of righteousness, and gives them increase of His Bounty: but for the Unbelievers their is a terrible Penalty.

Chapter 66 Banning - At-Tahrim: Verse 9
O Prophet! Strive hard against the Unbelievers and the Hypocrites, and be firm against them. Their abode is Hell,- an evil refuge (indeed).

Chapter 8 Spoils of war, booty- Al-Anfal: Verse 36
The Unbelievers spend their wealth to hinder (man) from the path of Allah, and so will they continue to spend; but in the end they will have (only) regrets and sighs; at length they will be overcome: and the Unbelievers will be gathered together to Hell;-


Chapter 22 The Pilgrimage - Al-Hajj: Verse 72
When Our Clear Signs are rehearsed to them, thou wilt notice a denial on the faces of the Unbelievers! they nearly attack with violence those who rehearse Our Signs to them. Say, "Shall I tell you of something (far) worse than these Signs? It is the Fire (of Hell)! Allah has promised it to the Unbelievers! and evil is that destination!"

Chapter 3 The family of Imran -Aal-e-Imran: Verse 151
Soon shall We cast terror into the hearts of the Unbelievers, for that they joined companions with Allah, for which He had sent no authority: their abode will be the Fire: And evil is the home of the wrong-doers!


Chapter 3 The family of Imran - Aal-e-Imran: Verse 178
Let not the Unbelievers think that our respite to them is good for themselves: We grant them respite that they may grow in their iniquity: But they will have a shameful punishment.

Chapter 5 The Table Spread - Al-Maeda: Verse 80
Thou seest many of them turning in friendship to the Unbelievers. Evil indeed are (the works) which their souls have sent forward before them (with the result), that Allah's wrath is on them, and in torment will they abide.

Chapter 8 Spoils of war, booty - Al-Anfal: Verse 50
If thou couldst see, when the angels take the souls of the Unbelievers (at death), (How) they smite their faces and their backs, (saying): "Taste the penalty of the blazing Fire-

Chapter 9 Repentance - At-Taubah: Verse 26
But Allah did pour His calm on the Messenger and on the Believers, and sent down forces which ye saw not: He punished the Unbelievers; thus doth He reward those without Faith.


Chapter 9 Repentance - At-Taubah: Verse 49
Among them is (many) a man who says: "Grant me exemption and draw me not into trial." Have they not fallen into trial already? and indeed Hell surrounds the Unbelievers (on all sides).


Chapter 9 Repentance - At-Taubah: Verse 90
And there were, among the desert Arabs (also), men who made excuses and came to claim exemption; and those who were false to Allah and His Messenger (merely) sat inactive. Soon will a grievous penalty seize the Unbelievers among them.

Chapter 21 The Prophets - Al-Anbiya: Verse 39
If only the Unbelievers knew (the time) when they will not be able to ward off the fire from their faces, nor yet from their backs, and (when) no help can reach them!


Chapter 21 The Prophets- Al-Anbiya: Verse 97
Then will the true promise draw nigh (of fulfilment): then behold! the eyes of the Unbelievers will fixedly stare in horror: "Ah! Woe to us! we were indeed heedless of this; nay, we truly did wrong!"

Unfortunately, you only read God's punishment for the infidels and polytheists in the Qur'an. Please see what the disbelievers and the polytheists did that they deserved to be punished. Do not judge one-sidedly, it is not good for you. And it does not make sense. I have a question for you; If you are a judge, do you hear the two sides talking and judge? Or do you just judge the verdict of one party you heard and issue a verdict? What a misconception this is. Please think better and see.

 

[heydarian saeed]

You can't brush the issue aside that easily. The crucifixion is more than mentioned in the bible. There are lengthy and detailed accounts of it taking up many verses. The Quran, on the other hand, says he was not crucified. So either the bible is fiction or the Quran is lies.
(For the skeptics there is also the option that both books are lies)

Of course Christians think Jesus is still alive, because according to the bible he was resurrected after three days.

What is mentioned in the Qur'an and the Bible is one with a slight difference. And it is absolutely correct. And it is not a lie. Do not insist. If you do not accept the Qur'an and the Bible, I suggest you read the history of Jesus. To be completely clear to you. I do not want to continue this discussion and other questions about the text of the Qur'an. Please do not continue. If you have any questions, refer to these books with their complete and correct meaning. sincerely

 

[Pixel42]

In this post, you have explained the logical reasons well. And I was satisfied. Can you give the same logical explanation to prove that the universe is constructive by God? Or reject God?
Waiting. Thank you

I cannot give you objective evidence for rejecting the God hypothesis as I did for the Adam hypothesis, no. I can only give you logical reasons for preferring the hypotheses which do not postulate a God, which I have already done. Several times.