Category Archives: God

Existence of God ,The Creator

“Only fools say in their hearts, “There is no God.” They are corrupt, and their actions are evil; not one of them does good!” (Psalm 14:1 )
Hear, O Israel: The Lord our God is one Lord” (Deuteronomy;6:4; Jesus,Mark;12:29).
“Wherefore thou art great, O LORD God: for there is none like thee, neither is there any God beside thee,” ( 2 Samuel;
7:22 )
“And he (Jesus) said unto him, Why you call me good? there is none good but one, that is, God: but if you want to enter into life, keep the commandments.” (Mathew;
19:17).
Genesis 1:1 – In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.
Hebrews 11:6 – We must believe that God exists.
Deuteronomy 4:35,39; 6:4 – The God who claims to speak through the Bible is the one and only true God.
Mark 12:29 – “The most important one,” answered Jesus, “is this: ‘Hear, O Israel: The Lord our God, the Lord is one.
1 Corinthians 8:4-6 – So then, about eating food sacrificed to idols: We know that “An idol is nothing at all in the world” and that “There is no God but one.”
James 2:19 – You believe that there is one God. Good! Even the demons believe that–and shudder.
1 Timothy 2:5 – For there is one God and one mediator between God and mankind, the man Christ Jesus.
Also Isaiah 43:10-13; 44:6-8,24; 45:5,6,14,18,21-23; 52:6; Matthew 4:10; 2 Samuel 7:22; 1 Chronicles 17:20; Exodus 20:3-6; 34:14; Deuteronomy 6:13-15; 32:39; Psalm 86:10; Zech 14:9.

“GOD is the Creator of all things, and He is the One, the Almighty” (Qur’an;13:16).
“GOD – there is no deity save Him, the Ever-Living, the Self-Subsistent Fount of All Being. Neither slumber overtakes Him, nor sleep. His is all that is in the heavens and all that is on earth. Who is there that could intercede with Him, unless it be by His leave? He knows all that lies open before men and all that is hidden from them, whereas they cannot attain to aught of His knowledge save that which He wills (them to attain). His eternal power overspreads the heavens and the earth, and their upholding wearies Him not. And He alone is truly exalted, tremendous.”(Qur’an;2:255).
“Say: He is Allah the One and Only; God the Eternal, the Uncaused Cause of All Being ; He begets not, and neither is He begotten; And there is nothing that can be  compared with Him.”(Qur’an;112:1-4).


Read books online:

CHAPTER-1:

INTRODUCTION

Introduction

e-book pdf- Download

The idea of a Supreme Power who is the First Cause of all things, the Creator and Ruler of heaven and earth has always been part of human nature from the beginning. He was not represented by images and had no temple or priests in His service. He was too exalted for an inadequate human cult. Hence there had been a primitive monotheism before people had started to worship a number of deities. Generally He faded from the consciousness of his people who formed images of many deities, His assistants, thus began the paganism. The name given to this divine Supreme Creator and Sustainer in English is God. The belief of a Supreme deity who created the world and governs it, still remains among the primitive African tribes. The belief on God was followed by His worship in different cultures. The relation of a group of human beings to God or the gods or to whatever they consider sacred or, in some cases, merely supernatural is known as religion. The word ‘religion’ is derived form Latin ‘religio’ means ‘to bind’. Thus the religion is the way of binding the people together through common deity worship and rituals. The religions differ in their set of principles or beliefs or the body of dogmas; the theological virtue as secure belief in God and a trusting acceptance of God’s will. Allah says: “In fact, your religion is one religion, and I am your only Lord: so fear Me Alone. Yet people have divided themselves into factions and each faction rejoices in its own doctrines”(Qur’an;23:52-53).
Rudolf Otto (1869-1937), the German theologian, philosopher, and historian of religion, coined the term ‘numinous’ (supernatural, mystical or spiritual) to designate the nonrational element of religious experience—the awe, fascination, and blissful exultation inspired by the perception of the divine. He believed that religion provided an understanding of the world that was distinct from and beyond that of science. He said; “The most important part  of religion can not be stated through words. This is (apparently) illogical part of religion. Stable part of religion is the ideological part which is very important. But we should not forget that there is more which can not be put in to words’. Each religion has its own set of beliefs generally shared by a community, and they express the communal culture and values through myth, doctrine, and rituals. Worship is probably the most basic element of religion, but moral conduct, right belief, and participation in religious institutions also constitute elements of the religious life. Religions attempt to answer basic questions intrinsic to the human mind like: existence of God, creation of universe and humanity, human sufferings, evil, death and its aftermath etc. The main outwardly focused Abrahamic religions e.g., Judaism (Hebrews), Christianity, and Islam attempt to satisfy human quest through the Revealed knowledge received by the prophets and messengers of God, while inwardly focused religions like Jainism, Buddhism make use of perception of the true nature of reality. While exploring the historic development in theosophical and scientific aspects about ‘The God’ and ‘The Creation’ specifically in the three religions linked to Abraham  (who was neither Jew nor Christian, rather the one who had totally surrendered in obedience to the will of God). This original religion of Abraham was revived in its unique spirit of monotheism, fourteen hundred years ago in concordance with the light of reason; exclusive of mysterious doctrines to cast a shade of sentimental ignorance round the original truths rooted in the human intellect, representing the latest development of the religious faculties. Hence Islam emerges as true legacy of Abraham contrary to the common perception that it was a new religion founded by Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him).

Main Doctrines:

The beliefs supporting the existence of God or against it, including the middle positions have resulted in an array of doctrines, the most prominent among them are; Theism, Monotheism, Theodicy, Deism, Agnosticism and Atheism. Theism, is the view that all observable phenomena are dependent on but distinct from one supreme being. The view usually entails the idea that God is beyond human comprehension, perfect and self-sustained, but also peculiarly involved in the world and its events. Theists seek support for their view in rational argument and appeals to experience. A central issue for theism is reconciling God, usually understood as omnipotent and perfect, with the existence of evil. Monotheism; is the belief in the existence of one God. It is distinguished from polytheism. Monotheism is characteristic of Judaism, Christianity, and Islam, which view God as the creator of the world, who oversees and intervenes in human events, and as a beneficent and holy being, the source of the highest good. Most other religions throughout the history have been polytheistic, believing in numerous gods dominated by a supreme god or by a small group of powerful gods. The monotheism that characterizes Judaism began in ancient Israel with the adoption of Yahweh as the single object of worship and the rejection of the gods of other tribes and nations without, initially, denying their existence. Islam is clear in confessing one, eternal, unbegotten, unequaled God, while Christianity holds that a single God is reflected in the three persons of the Holy Trinity. The Theodicy is an argument for the justification of God, concerned with reconciling God’s goodness and justice with the observable facts of evil and suffering in the world. Most such arguments are a necessary component of theism. Under polytheism, the problem is solved by attributing evil to a conflict of wills between deities. The solution is less simple in monotheism, and it can take several forms. In some approaches, the perfect world created by God was spoiled by human disobedience or sin. In others, God withdrew after creating the world, which then fell into decay.
The Deism; is the belief in God based on reason rather than revelation or the teaching of any specific religion. A form of natural religion, Deism originated in England in the early 17th century as a rejection of orthodox Christianity. Deists asserted that reason could find evidence of God in nature and that God had created the world and then left it to operate under the natural laws he had devised. The philosopher Edward Herbert (1583–1648) developed this view in ‘On Truth’(1624). By the late 18th century Deism was the dominant religious attitude among Europe‘s educated classes; it was accepted by many upper-class Americans of the same era, including the first three U.S. presidents. According to the doctrine of Agnosticism; One cannot know the existence of anything beyond the phenomena of experience. It is popularly equated with religious skepticism, and especially with the rejection of traditional Christian beliefs under the impact of modern scientific thought. T.H. Huxley popularized philosophical agnosticism after coining the term agnostic (as opposed to Gnostic) in 1869, to designate one who repudiated traditional Judeo-Christian theism but was not a doctrinaire atheist. Agnosticism may mean no more than the suspension of judgment on ultimate questions because of insufficient evidence, or it may constitute a rejection of traditional Christian tenets. Finally, the Atheism is the critique and denial of metaphysical beliefs in God or divine beings. Unlike agnosticism, which leaves the question of existence or non existence of God as open; the atheism positively denies the existence of God. It is rooted in an array of philosophical systems. Ancient Greek philosophers such as Democritus and Epicurus argued for it in the context of materialism. In the 18th century David Hume and Immanuel Kant, though not atheists, argued against traditional proofs for God’s existence, making belief a matter of faith alone. Atheists such as Ludwig Feuerbach held that God was a projection of human ideals and that recognizing this fiction made self-realization possible. Marxism exemplified modern materialism. Beginning with Friedrich Nietzsche, existentialist atheism proclaimed the death of God and the human freedom to determine value and meaning. Logical positivism holds that propositions concerning the existence or nonexistence of God are nonsensical or meaningless.


CHAPTER-2:

EXISTENCE OF GOD

The main issue which have remained the center of attention of believers of the God has been; How to prove the existence of God rationally? God is infinite, incomprehensible; His essence is beyond the perception through the human senses and intellect. Infinite can not be comprehended by finite human cognizance. What ever theories about existence of God are evolved, they remain with in the ambit of human intellect for understanding in the parables and allegories which remain far from the reality as “there is none comparable to Him”. God is not a ‘being’ like any creatures or thing known to human. Hence the man has reached the conclusion that the God can be comprehended through ‘His works’ or ‘signs’. The God of Abrahamic faiths is Supreme, Creator and Sustainer who created the universe and all creatures. According to the Hebrew traditions the God of their forefathers had been known mostly as El ‘Elyon (God Most High) or El Shaddai (God of the Mountain or Almighty God), but He identified Himself to Moses as Yahweh (Jehovah) (Exodus;6:3).  As the causative form of the verb “to be,” Yahweh means; ‘He Who Creates’ (Brings Into Being). This revelation enabled Moses to understand the God of the Hebrews as the sovereign Lord over nature and the nations of the world. After the Exile (6th century BC), and especially from the 3rd century BC on, Jews ceased to use the name Yahweh for two reasons. As Judaism became a universal religion through its influence in the Greco-Roman world, the more common noun ‘elohiym,(el-o-heem) is plural of gods in the ordinary sense; but specifically used (in the plural thus, especially with the article) of the supreme God tended to replace Yahweh to demonstrate the universal sovereignty of Israel‘s God over all others. At the same time, the divine name was increasingly regarded as too sacred to be uttered; it was thus replaced vocally in the synagogue ritual by the Hebrew word Adonai (“My Lord”), which was translated as Kyrios (“Lord”) in the Septuagint, the Greek version of the Old Testament. In Arabic the unique name of God is ‘Allah’; which is pure, does not conjure up any mental picture nor can it be played around with unlike the English word ‘God’. Allah can also be called with other beautiful names suitable to His attributes: “He is Allah! There is no deity worthy of worship except Him! To Him belong the most beautiful Names.”(Qur’an;20:8). Islamic traditions mention ninety nine (number not fixed) names of Allah  like;  Ar-Rahman (The Merciful), Al- Hayy  (The Ever Living), Al-Qayum (The Self-Subsistent): The  knowledge about God available with the followers of Abraham (peace be upon him) is not based upon speculation or guess work but what God has Himself revealed about Himself in the Revealed Scriptures (i.e. Torah, Palms, Injeel  and Qur’an). God has kept the allowance for limitation of human perceptions hence His description about Himself should not always be taken literally but  allegorically. For example He Sees and Hears,  it is not to be understood literally, the way human sees through eyes or hears through ears. How God sees or hears, human intellect can not perceive, because He is Unique and there in none like Him.(Qur’an;112:4, Exodus;9:14; Deutronomy;33:26; 2Sameul;7:22; Isaiah;46:5,9). He has not abandoned the world after creation but, remains actively involved in its affairs. He desires the humanity to live according to His Commandments, by their free choice, He  will reward them accordingly on the Day of Judgement. Among the followers of the Revealed religions there had not been doubt about the existence of God because the messengers and prophets of God had made the believers to believe in the God through the power of ‘signs’ and Revelations. However with the passage of time there has been deterioration and the people frail in faith started to raise questions. The theologians made efforts to satisfy them through the interpretation of scriptures and other rational arguments.
The God of Greek philosophers was very different from the God of Revelations. Socrates (469-399 BC) found it easy to combine his own strong belief in God as ruler of the world with the view that, in practice, one could worship God in the way prescribed by “the usage of the city.” God’s existence is shown, he held, not only by the providential order of nature and the universality of the belief in him but also by warnings and revelations given in dreams, signs, and oracles. Plato (427-346 BC) believed in the existence of a divine, unchanging reality beyond the world of the senses, that the soul was a fallen divinity, out of its element, imprisoned in the body but capable of regaining its divine status by the purification of the reasoning powers of the mind. The Supreme Deity of Aristotle or Plotinus was timeless and impassible; He took no notice of mundane events, did not reveal Himself in history, had not created the world and would not judge it at the end of time.
Zoroastrianism influenced the Judaism during Babylonian exile, the Babylonians were Zoroastrians. Zoroastrianism is based on the teachings of Zoroaster, the Iranian prophet. Founded in the 6th century BCE, they rejects polytheism, accepting only one supreme God, Ahura Mazdā who created the universe and maintains the cosmic order, and that the history of the world consists of the battle between two spirits he created—the beneficent Spenta Mainyu and the destructive Angra Mainyu. The Avesta (the sacred book of Zoroastrianism.) identifies Ahura Mazda himself with the beneficent spirit and represents him as bountiful, all-knowing, and the creator of everything good. In late sources (from the 3rd century), Zurvan (“Time”) is the father of the twins Ormazd (Ahura Mazda) and Ahriman (Angra Mainyu), who in orthodox Mazdaism (Zoroastrianism and Parsiism) reign alternately over the world until Ormazd’s ultimate victory. Zoroastrians are often referred as fire worshipers, but they claim not to worship fire but honor it and in so doing honoring their God, Ahura Mazda.
Hinduism denotes the Indian civilization of approximately the last 2,000 years, which evolved from Vedism, the religion of the Indo-European peoples who settled in Indiain the last centuries of the 2nd millennium BC. Hinduism also have monotheistic doctrines buried under the dust of polytheistic, idolatrous, mystic and other practices. The sacred Hindu scriptures, urge: “O friends, do not worship anybody but Him, the Divine One. Praise Him alone.”(Rigveda;8:1:1). The Upanishads, (each of a series of Hindu sacred treatises based on the Vedas) mentions ‘Brahman’, the eternal, infinite, and omnipresent spiritual source of the finite and changing universe.Generally speaking, Vedic gods share many characteristics: several of them (Indra, Varuna, Vishnu) are said to have created the universe, set the Sun in the sky, and propped apart heaven and earth. All of them are bright and shining, and all are susceptible to human praise. Some major gods were clearly personifications of natural phenomena, and for these deities no clearly delineated divine personalities were perceived. The three most frequently invoked gods are Indra, Agni, and Soma. Indra, the foremost god of the Vedic pantheon, is a god of war and rain. Agni (a cognate of the Latin ignis) is the ‘holy fire’, particularly the fire of sacrifice, and Soma is the intoxicating or hallucinogenic drink of the sacrifice, or the plant from which it is pressed; neither is greatly personified. The concept of transmigration of soul and incarnation also exists. Buddhism, is considered non committal on God, historical criticism has proved that the original teachings of Buddha can never be known, because his teachings and doctrines were written down 400 years, after his death. Moreover little attention was paid to its authenticity, genuineness and purity. However prophesies of advent of Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) in Buddhist scriptures points towards some missing links.

Rational Arguments for the Existence of God:

The arguments generally adduced by theologians in proof of the being of God are: Firstly the ‘Priori Argument’, which is the testimony afforded by reason. Secondly, the ‘Posteriori Argument’, by which one proceed logically from the facts of experience to causes. These arguments include (a) The ‘Cosmological’, by which it is proved that there must be a First Cause of all things, for every effect must have a cause. (b) The ‘Teleological’, or the argument from Design seen all around the operations of an intelligent Cause in nature. (c) ‘Ontological Arguments’, that proceeds from the idea of God to the reality of God(d) Morality and Probability Arguments. The  other stream of arguments for God’s existence, recently proposed in contemporary western philosophy are the proofs from ‘Religious Experience’.  The cosmological argument was first introduced by Aristotle (384-322. B.C) and later refined in western Europe by the celebrated Christian theologian, Thomas Aquinas  (1225-1274 CE). The basic first-cause argument states: ‘Every event must have a cause, and each cause must in turn have its own cause, and so forth.  Hence, there must either be an infinite regress of causes or there must be a starting point or first cause. The conclusion thus follows that there must be an initial prime-mover, a mover that could cause motion without any other mover; the God.’ Teleology is the use of ultimate purpose or design as a means of explaining natural phenomena. St. Paul, with many others in the Greco-Roman world, believed that the existence of God is evident from the appearances of nature: “Ever since the creation of the world his invisible nature namely, his eternal power and deity, has been clearly perceived in the things that have been made”(Romans;1:20). The extraordinary design is evident from planets and galaxies at the cosmic level to human cells and atoms at the quantum level.  Therefore this world must have an intelligent supreme creator. Most Muslim philosophers recognized the Qur’anic emphasis on the uniformity and logical order of nature, accepting it as such.
Allah draws the attention of mankind towards His signs: “Verily in the heavens and the earth are Signs for those who believe.”(Qur’an;45:3); “And in the creation of yourselves and the fact that animals are scattered (through the earth) are Signs for those of assured Faith. And in the alternation of Night and Day and the fact that Allah sends down Sustenance from the sky and revives therewith the earth after its death and the change of the winds are Signs for those that are wise.”(Qur’an;45:4-5). It is pertinent to note that according to Qur’an the ‘reason’ properly used must lead man to cognition of God’s existence and, thus of the fact that a definite plan underlines all His creation; reward for pious believers and punishment for rebellious non believers and sinners: “And they (disbelievers) will add: “Had we but listened (to those warnings). Or (at least) used our own reason, we would not (now) be among those who are destined for the blazing flame!” (Qur’an;67:10). Because Allah says: “Not for (idle) sport did We create the heavens and the earth and all that is between!”  (Qur’an;21:16).
Ontological Argument is developed on the basis that;God is a being, than which nothing greater can be conceived to exist in thought. Either a being than which nothing greater can be conceived exists in thought alone and not in reality or a being than which nothing greater can be conceived exists both in thought and in reality. If the greatest conceivable being existed in thought alone we could think of another being existing in both thought and reality. Existing in thought and reality is greater than existing in thought alone. Therefore: A being than which nothing greater can be conceived (God) exists in thought and in reality. Allah says: “For verily it is thy Lord Who is the Master-Creator knowing all things”(Qur’an;15:86), “Allah is Creator of all things, and He is Guardian over all things.”(Qur’an;39:62).The Moral Argument also called the ‘Anthropological Argument’ is based on the moral consciousness and the history of mankind, which exhibits a moral order and purpose which can only be explained on the supposition of the existence of God. Conscience and human history testify that: “Verily there is a reward for the righteous: verily he is a God that judges in the earth.”(Psalms;58:11). “.. Maintaining His creation in justice, there is no God save Him, the Almighty, the Wise.”(Qur’an;3:18), “On that Day, Allah will give them the full reward they deserve, then they will realize that Allah is the One Who manifests the Truth.”(Qur’an;24:25).
Religious experience as proof for existence of God must be understood against the background of a general theory of experience, the reports of the world received through the senses. Experience, as an issue of sensible content, was set in contrast to reason, understood as the domain of logic and mathematics. Specifically religious experience has been variously identified in different ways: (1) The awareness of the holy, which evokes awe and reverence; (2) The feeling of absolute dependence that reveals man’s status as a creature; (3) The sense of being at one with the divine; (4) The perception of an unseen order or of a quality of permanent rightness in the cosmic scheme; (5) The direct perception of God; (6) The encounter with a reality “wholly other”; (7) The sense of a transforming power as a presence. Sometimes, as in the striking case of the Old Testament prophets, the experience of God has been seen as a critical judgment on man and as the disclosure of his separation from the holy. All interpreters are agreed that religious experience involves what is final in value for man and concerns belief in what is ultimate in reality. Religious experience may be distinguished from the aesthetic aspect of experience in that the former involves commitment and devotion to the divine, while the latter is focused on the appreciation and enjoyment of qualities, forms, and patterns in themselves, whether as natural objects or works of art. Generally the mystics, lay their claim of having experienced presence of God each in own way. The Islamic traditions support the prophets having such an experience, which make their faith very strong due to firm vision (ain-ul-yaqeen). The night journey of mair’aj by Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) is a unique experience, Allah says: “Glorified be He Who took His servant (Muhammad) one night from Inviolable Place of Worship (Masjid-al-Haramin Makka) to the Far Distant Place of Worship (Masjid-al-Aqsa in Jerusalem), whose vicinity We have blessed, so that We may show him some of Our signs: surely He is the One Who is the Hearer, the Observer.”(Qur’an;17:1): In the Book of Enoch, (I Enoch), the first treatise (chapters 1-36) also describes Enoch’s celestial journeys, in which divine secrets were revealed to him. Yet another example is when Abraham said: “My Lord! Show me how you give life to the dead.” He replied: “Have you no faith in this?” Abraham humbly submitted: “Yes! But I ask this to reassure my heart.” Allah said: “Take four birds; train them to follow your direction, cut their bodies into pieces and scatter those pieces on hilltops then call them back; Allah will bring them back to life and they will come to you right away. Thus you will know that Allah is All-powerful and Wise.”(Qur’an;2:260).

Other Arguments:

There are certain things which exist in reality where as their opposite do not exist, but they have been just named due to perception. The ‘Light exists, the main sources being sun, moon, fire, electricity etc. Its intensity could be very high, moderate or low. The power of light varies, it is measurable through instruments. There is some thing called as ‘Darkness’: Does the Darkness exist?  If it does, is there less or more darkness, which could be measured. In fact the darkness does not exist; we can not get a source of darkness like the source of Light. If there is no light there is darkness. It is the absence of lightwhich is called ‘darkness’. The ‘darkness’ is just a perception, a name given to the absence of light. Similarly the ‘sound exists, it could be low, medium, and high sound. There are different sources which generating sound, it is measurable, decibel is the unit of its measure. There is some thing called ‘Silence’, it can not be measured, but we call more or less silence. Actually it is the more or less sound which creates more or less silence. We can not have a source of silence, it can not be said that bring so much silence. Silence is just a perception. Analogous is the case of ‘heat’ which exists. There are various sources of heat like, sun, fire, electricity etc. Heat is measurable, through BTU, Kelvin or Celsius units. There could be more, high heat, or less heat. What about ‘Cold’? does it exist? The cold does not exist beyond  -273 Co, after this temperature there will not be more cold. Absence of ‘heat’ is ‘cold’, just a perception. The God exists, a reality also evident from preceding arguments, the non existence of God is just a perception! 
<!–[if !mso]>st1\:*{behavior:url(#ieooui) } <![endif]–>

PHILOSOPHICAL ARGUMENTS FOR EXISTENCE OF GOD
Explained

The main issue which has remained in focus of philosophers is about the ‘Existence of God’ and the related issues i.e. the existence of ‘Evil’, ‘Predestination and Free Will’. 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; the Cosmological, Teleological and Ontological arguments. Other arguments put forth for the existence of God are the arguments from morality and probability. The three major arguments presented in modern philosophy may be compared with the arguments for the existence of God presented by ancient and modern Islamic philosophers. The main argument against the existence of God has been the problem of evil. This has posed many problems to the theist, and Islamic philosophy is only beginning to tackle the problem in western terms.  Another stream of arguments for God’s existence, recently proposed in contemporary western philosophy are the proofs from religious experience.  This is a theme also present in Islamic philosophy.

COSMOLOGICAL ARGUMENTS:

The cosmological argument was first introduced by Aristotle (384-322. B.C) and later refined in Western Europe by the celebrated Christian theologian, Thomas Aquinas (1225-1274.CE). The cosmological argument uses as a technique for disclosure such questions as “Why is this thus?” or “Why is there anything at all?” In receiving replies to these questions in causal terms, the cosmological argument builds up an ever-increasing causal spread until a disclosure occurs, whereupon the phrase “first cause” specifies what is disclosed and advocates certain ways of talking.

The Basic First-Cause Argument:

It states: “Every event must have a cause, and each cause must in turn have its own cause, and so forth.  Hence, there must either be an infinite regress of causes or there must be a starting point or first cause.” The conclusion thus follows that there must be an initial prime-mover, a mover that could cause motion without any other mover; the God.

Views of Muslim Philosophers:

Among the Muslim Al-Kindi, and Averroës support it while Al-Ghazzali and Iqbal maybe seen as being in opposition to this sort of an argument. [Sir Muhammad Iqbal (1877-1938); the great modern Muslim philosopher & poet of Ido-Pak subcontinent] A second argument of Thomas Aquinas draws its inspiration from Islamic and Aristotelian sciences.  He argues that only God is indivisible, and everything other than God is in some way composite or multiple. In Kindi’s theory only God’s oneness is necessary whereas that of all others is contingent upon God.  Hence all other beings single or multiple must emanate from the ultimate essential being. In addition this first being must be uncaused, since it is the cause of everything else. The world requires a creator, or rather a generator (mudhith) in Kindi’s scheme, who could generate the world ex nihilo. 
Ghazzali and Dr. Muhammad Iqbal rejects the argument, as per Iqbal; “Logically speaking, then, the movement from the finite to the infinite as embodied in the cosmological (the astrophysical study of the history, structure, and constituent dynamics of the universe.) argument is quite illegitimate; and the argument fails in toto.” For Iqbal the concept of the first uncaused cause is absurd, it is, however, obvious that a finite effect can give only a finite cause, or at most an infinite series of such causes.  To finish the series at a certain point, and to elevate one member of the series to the dignity of an ‘Un-Caused First Cause’, is to set at naught the very law of causation on which the whole argument proceeds. It is for these reasons that modern philosophers almost unanimously reject the cosmological argument as a legitimate proof for the existence of God.  Kant for example also rejects any cosmological proof on the grounds that it is nothing more than an ontological proof in disguise. He argued that any necessary object’s essence must involve existence, hence reason alone can define such a being, and the argument becomes quite similar to the ontological one in form, devoid of any empirical premises.

TELEOLOGICAL ARGUMENTS:

Teleology is the use of ultimate ‘Purpose’ or ‘Design’ as a means of explaining natural phenomena. St. Paul, with many others in the Greco-Roman world, believed that the existence of God is evident from the appearances of nature: “Ever since the creation of the world his invisible nature, namely, his eternal power and deity, has been clearly perceived in the things that have been made”(Romans;1:20). The most popular, because the most accessible, of the theistic arguments is that which identifies evidences of design in nature, inferring from them a ‘Divine Designer’. The argument from design takes a story with acknowledged disclosure possibilities–e.g., the interrelated parts of a clock –and uses this as a catalyst to evoke a disclosure around some ever-broadening purpose patterns of the universe, in relation to which one can speak of God in terms, for example, of eternal purpose.  William Paley (1805 C.E) in his ‘Natural Theology’ presented it with an analogy of a ‘clock’ found in a remote desert which existed not be by pure chance, being complex machine it has to be a product of an intelligent designer. i.e. there must be a clockmaker. In the same way Paley argues that the universe is much more complex and manifestly designed. The extraordinary design is evident from planets and galaxies at the cosmic level to human cells and atoms at the quantum level.   Therefore this world must have an intelligent creator. This form of the argument can be seen as an inference to the best explanation. That is given the remarkable phenomena of the universe, the best possible explanation for this, must be the existence of God. Paley next argues that if one accepts the above reasoning one is then obliged to accept the reasoning he gives for the universe as a whole. The world is intricate and well-designed for the purpose of supporting life it is the product of an ‘Intelligent Designer’. Else the world is the product of random physical processes. Sober later rejects the notion presented by Paley, and argues that the likelihood of an evolutionary hypothesis supersedes the likelihood of a creationist hypothesis (The position that the account of the creation of the universe given at the beginning of the Bible is literally true).

Views of Muslim Philosophers:

Al-Kindi also attempts to make reference to the ‘Teleological Proof’ (dalil al-‘indyah) for the existence of God.  As he argues that “the orderly and wonderful phenomena of nature could not be purposeless and accidental”. It is also supported by Iqbal.  The two cases, the ‘clock’ and the ‘universe’, are however, different. Unlike the case of the clock, where its builder put the complex machine together given pre-existing material, the universe and its material itself created by God also. That is, there is no point in finding it extra-ordinary that God would be able to organize pre-existing “intractable” (difficult to mold or manipulate) material in such an elegant fashion. The only reason we would have of thinking so, would be if it was a difficult task to design the universe. But then why would God, first create a difficult task for Himself and then go on resolve the difficulty by arranging into a sophisticated pattern? In addition, God would be limited in what He could create by this pre-existing material. This, to Iqbal, does not seem consistent with the Islamic concept of an omnipotent God. Iqbal writes, perhaps in response to Paley, “There is really no analogy between the work of the human artificer and the phenomena of Nature.” Both Iqbal and Russell point out that it is inappropriate for a person who believes in God to put forth an argument for His existence on teleological grounds. The British philosopher David Hume rejected the teleological argument, for different reasons. For him the argument from the best explanation is an inductive argument (Marked by or involving inference), and Hume had argued that inductive knowledge and causation is not possible.
Most Muslim philosophers have attempted to get around this vexatious (persistently disturbing or worrisome) problem by simply recognizing the Qur’anic emphasis on the uniformity of nature, accepting it as such and thus avoiding this problem. The Qur’an says: “Not for (idle) sport did We create the heavens and the earth and all that is between!”  (Qur’an;21:16). The Qur’an says: “Verily in the heavens and the earth are Signs for those who believe. (Qur’an;45:3). “And in the creation of yourselves and the fact that animals are scattered (through the earth) are Signs for those of assured Faith. And in the alternation of Night and Day and the fact that Allah sends down Sustenance from the sky and revives therewith the earth after its death and the change of the winds are Signs for those that are wise. (Qur’an;45:4-5).  The above problem of induction gave rise to modern skepticism (feeling of uncertainty about a situation : misgivings, doubtfulness,) and remains a fascinating unsolved puzzle. 

Immanuel Kant: (1724-1804 C.E):

He was the German idealist (an imaginative or idealistic but impractical person), philosopher. He was, one of the foremost thinkers of the Enlightenment. He argued that reason is the means by which the phenomena of experience are translated into understanding raises a powerful objection to any theory that claims to grasp knowledge of God. He claims that in terms of knowledge there can be no jump from the physical to the metaphysical. Kant distinguishes between ‘noumenal’ and ‘phenomenal’ objects. An object that can be intuited only by the intellect and not perceived by the senses. The noumenonal are objects that lie beyond all possible experience, and the phenomena are the ones we directly experience. Hence, for him the metaphysical is the noumenonal realm. He argues that there can be no possible relation between two realms that have no connection between them. He questions that how can we prove that a certain noumenonal object exists from phenomenal premises?.

Iqbal:

Iqbal responds to Kant’s criticism of metaphysical existence from empirical (experimental, pragmatic) experience: “Kant’s verdict can be accepted only if we start with the assumption that all experience other than the normal level of experience is impossible. The only question, therefore, is whether the normal level is the only level of knowledge-yielding experience?” He argues that there are other levels of experience that can bear knowledge as well.   It is pertinent to note that according to Qur’an the ‘reason’ properly used must lead man to cognition of God’s existence and, thus of the fact that a definite plan underlines all His creation; reward for pious believers and punishment for rebellious non believers and sinners: “And they (disbelievers) will add: “Had we but listened (to those warnings). Or (at least) used our own reason, we would not (now) be among those who are destined for the blazing flame!”(Qur’an; 67:10).

ONTOLOGICAL ARGUMENTS:

Anselm’s Argument:

The modern form of the ontological argument in modern western philosophy was made famous by St.Anselm (1033-1109 C.E) and Descartes (1596-1650). The argument rests on the premise that existence is a predicate that a being could have or lack. Anselm’s argument can be summarized as: “God is a being than which nothing greater can be conceived, a being than which nothing greater can be conceived to exist in our thought. Either a being than which nothing greater can be conceived exists in thought alone and not in reality or a being than which nothing greater can be conceived exists both in thought and in reality. If the greatest conceivable being existed in thought alone we could think of another being existing in both thought and reality. Existing in thought and reality is greater than existing in thought alone. Therefore: A being than which nothing greater can be conceived (God) exists in thought and in reality.”  Simply by pure reason, without any reference to the world, Anselm argues for God. A key feature of these kinds of arguments is that they try to show not only that God exists, but that he necessarily exists. That is, He cannot, not exist. The existence of God is an essential feature of its being just like the angles of a triangle always add up to 180 degrees. It would be impossible to think of God without it existing. Descartes [French mathematician, scientist, and philosopher, considered as the father of modern philosophy] writes: “From the fact that I cannot think of a mountain without a valley, it does not follow that a mountain and a valley exist anywhere, but simply that a mountain and a valley, whether they exist or not are mutually inseparable. But from the fact that I cannot think of God except as existing, it follows that existence is inseparable from God. Hence, the very essence of God, to even make the concept of God intelligible it must exist”. 
Criticism:
This argument has been widely criticized. Kant criticized the argument from two perspectives.   First he points out that, although, the concept that all three sides of the triangle add up to 180 is an analytical concept, there is still nothing that shows that it must exist. Similarly the idea that existence analytically belongs to the concept of God is an illegitimate inference. He writes: “To posit a triangle, and yet to reject its three angles, is self-contradictory; but there is no self-contradiction in rejecting the triangle together with its three angles. The same holds true of the concept of an absolutely necessary being”. Secondly, he rejects Descartes argument on the grounds that existence is not a predicate that can be added or taken away from a concept. That is; existence is not like any of the other properties that are associated with ‘things.’ To say that something exists, is simply to say that the concept is instantiated in the world. He claims this on the basis of his distinction between analytic and synthetic statements. An analytic statement is one of the kinds, “all bachelors are unmarried males,” or “the sum of the angles of a triangle is 180.” In these statements the predicates, “unmarried males” or “sum of angles is 180” does not add any new information to the concept of “bachelors” or “triangle.” Analytic statements are true by virtue of their meaning alone.

Synthetic Statement:

A synthetic statement is something that adds more information about the object in question. For example, “all ravens are black,” is synthetic.  The predicate “are black” tells us more information about the subject “ravens.”    Kant’s claim is that statements of the sort, “X exists” are analytic. It does not add anything additional to the concept. Hence the inference that existing in reality is greater than existence in thought alone is false. The reduction of absurdum from pure thought to God, of Anselm (1033-1109 C.E) and Descartes (1596-1650 C.E) thus fails according to Kant. The closest form of parallel thought to this can be found in the thought of Avicenna [Ibn Sīnā ;980-1037 C.E, philosopher and scientist] who proposed a somewhat similar ontological argument for the existence of God. Avicenna also propounded that God is a necessary being; however, his argument unlike Descartes is not a purely rational one. Avicenna believed that we possess a direct intuitive apprehension of the reality and existence of this necessary being. He believed that it would be impossible to think concretely without the existence of such a being. Averroës [Ibn Rushd-1126-1198 C.E; trained in law, medicine, and philosophy, rose to be chief judge of Córdoba. His series of commentaries on most of the works of Aristotle, written between 1169 and 1195, exerted considerable influence on both Jewish and Christian scholars in later centuries], however, insists that there can be no rational proof for God’s existence and it can only be grasped via the medium of intuition.

Thoughts of Muslim Philosophers on ‘GOD’:

The God that Avicenna argues for is a Necessary Being. A being that necessarily exists, and everything else besides it is contingent and depends upon it for its existence. God has no other essence besides his existence.  His essence (Mahiyah: Quidditas), just is His existence.  Since, God is the only being in which the essence and existence are to be found together, the essence of all other beings precedes their existence. Thus He is absolutely simple, and no has no further attributes. In his book ‘al-Shifa’ Avicenna explains that since the ‘Necessary Being’ has no genus or differentia it is both indefinable and indemonstrable. As such “neither its being or its actions can be an object of ‘Discursive Thought’ (proceeding to a conclusion through reason rather than intuition.), since it is without cause, quality, position or time.” All other entities do not exist necessarily or essentially, rather they are merely contingent beings (per accidents).  
The characteristics of God offered by Avicenna drew major criticisms from the contemporary Muslim orthodoxy, who found his definition incompatible with Islamic doctrine. “..If there be (but) the weight of a mustard-seed and it were (hidden) in a rock or (anywhere) in the heavens or on earth Allah will bring it forth: for Allah understands the finest mysteries (and) is well-acquainted (with them).”(Qur’an;31:16).How can God be omniscient if He has no attributes? He does try to explain, however, how his description would be compatible with God having knowledge of the world. In knowing Himself, God is capable of knowing everything that emanated from Him.  Since God does not have sense-perceptual knowledge He cannot know the particulars, but rather only the essences or universal principles. But according to Avicenna this does not exclude him knowing the specifics of any given event. Knowing all the antecedents and consequences in the causal chain, allows God to place the event temporally and differentiate it from all other events. Hence, his theory does not preclude God’s knowledge of the specifics. Al-Ghazzali (1058-1111C.E) was not satisfied with this account and criticized Avicenna stating that the theory being presented would not allow for change in divine knowledge with the introduction of the time factor.  

Criticism of ‘Perpetual Universe’:

Another important characteristic of Avicenna’s ontology was the fact that he believed that the universe is eternal. This was another belief, which was not acceptable to the Islamic orthodoxy. He thought the creative ability of God was linked to His intellectual nature and thus flowed eternally of rational necessity from Him. Although the universe exists as an independent body, its existence is still contingent upon God. God and the world are different, but the existence of the world depends upon God. This can be seen as refinement, or rather ‘Islamisation’ of the Aristotelian views that God and the universe were two distinct beings which did not interact with each other. What is, in different ways, implied by these arguments is that the word God is unique in its logic, that it works in discourse as no other word exactly works. Thus, one cannot say “God exists” but rather “God necessarily exists.”This is sometimes expressed by remarking that the existence of God is not the existence of a physical object or even the existence of a person, though what can be said about persons is less misleading in speaking about God than in speaking about the logic of things. This point is sometimes made, albeit misleadingly by saying that God does not exist, but this is only a picturesque way of saying that he does not exist in the way that a table exists.

Verifiable Evidence:

The Verifiable Evidence is the blend of all the three i.e. Cosmological, Teleological and Ontological Arguments.

Proof of Existence of God through Scientific Facts in Qur’an:

Islam encourages reasoning, discussions and dialogues. The Qur’an contains more than 6000 verses (ayaats-‘Signs’) out of which more than thousand refer to various subjects of science, such as Astronomy, Physics, Geography, Geology, Oceanology, Biology, Botany, Zoology, Medicine, Physiology, Embryology as well as General Science, mostly un known to humanity fourteen centuries ago. It may be kept in view that Qur’an is not a book of ‘science’, but a book of ‘signs’ i.e. a book of Ayaats. It is found that the Qur’anic information on science does not conflict with the established scientific facts. It may go against certain scientific hypothesis or theories, which are not grounded in facts as many a times, the science retract its position.
Many facts mentioned in the Qur’an have been discovered in the last few centuries. But science has not advanced to a level where it can confirm every statement of the Qur’an concerning science. According to Dr.Zakir Naik; suppose 80% of all that is mentioned in the Qur’an has been proved 100% correct, while for the remaining 20%, science makes no categorical statement, since it has not advanced to a level, where it can either prove or disprove these statements. With the limited knowledge through science available today one cannot say for sure whether even a single percentage or a single verse of the Qur’an from this 20% portion is wrong. Thus when 80% of the Qur’an is 100% correct and the remaining 20% is not disproved, logic says that even the 20% portion is correct.  The details of scientific facts mentioned in Qur’an are available in the book ‘Qur’an and Science’ by Dr.Zakir Naik & “The Bible, The Qur’an and Science” by Dr. Maurice Bucaille, details follows.


CHAPTER-3:

MONOTHEISM (TAWHID) AND POLYTHEISM
The great Messenger of God, Abraham (peace be upon him), the patriarch of Jews, Christians and Muslims, through his vision, reasoning and Mercy of God, arrived at the truth of the existence of One God. It is narrated in Qur’an, God says: “We showed Abraham the kingdom of the heavens and the earth, as We show you with examples from nature, so he became one of the firm believers. (while pondering) When the night drew its shadow over him, he saw a star and said, “this is my Lord !” But when it set, he said: “I do not love to worship such a god that fades away.” Afterwards he saw the moon shining, he said; “This is my Lord !” But when it also set, he cried: “If my Lord does not guide me, I shall certainly become one of those who go astray.” Then when he saw the sun with its brighter shine, and he said: “This must be my Lord! it is larger than the other two.” But when it also set, he exclaimed: “O my people! I am done with your practice of associating partners with God. As far as I am concerned, I will turn my face, being upright, to Him Who has created the heavens and the earth, and I am not one of the idolaters.”(Qur’an;6:75-78).
Islam is based on the strict adherence to monotheism (The doctrine or belief that there is only one God) called Tawhid, which was preached by Abraham (peace be upon him); Allah, the One and Only God, the Creator, Cherisher and Sustainer of all the Worlds: “And He is Allah: there is no god but He. To him be praise at the first and at the last: for Him is the Command and to Him shall ye (all) be brought back.”(Qur’an;28:70);“Thus said the LORD the King of Israel, and his redeemer the LORD of hosts; I am the first, and I am the last; and beside me there is no God.”(Isaiah;44:6);  “No just estimate have they made of Allah: for Allah is He Who is strong and able to carry out His Will” (Qur’an;22:74). Abraham said: “For me I, have set my face firmly and truly toward Him Who created the heavens and the earth, and never shall I give partners to Allah.”(Qur’an;6:79). Moses (peace be upon him) said: “Shama Israelu Adonai Ila Hayno Adna Ikhad ”[“Hear, O Israel: The Lord our God is one Lord”] (Deuteronomy;6:4). Jesus (peace be upon him) also believed in One God, when he said: “Shama Israelu Adonai Ila Hayno Adna Ikhad ”[“Hear, O Israel: The Lord our God is one Lord”](Mark;12:29) and Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) was commanded: “Your God is one God; there is no one worthy of worship except Him, the Compassionate, the Merciful.(Qur’an;2:163).
Tawhid, the basis of Islam, needs deep understanding. Tawhid relates to the oneness of God, in the sense that He is one and there is no god but He, as stated in the “witness” creed (shahadah): “There is no one worthy of worship except Allah (God) and Muhammad (peace be upon him) is His messenger”. Tawhid further refers to the nature of God, that He is a unity, not composed, not made up of parts, but simple and uncompounded: “Say, He is the One God” (Qura’n;112:1). The doctrine of the unity of God and the issues that it raises, such as the question of the relation between the essence and the attributes of God, reappear throughout most of Islamic history. Tawhid  can not be visualized in a pantheistic sense: (Pantheism; a doctrine identifying the Deity with the universe and its phenomena) that it is wrong to say that; “all essences are divine, and there is no absolute existence besides that of God”. To majority Muslims, the science of Tawhid is the systematic theology through which a better knowledge of God may be reached.

Monotheism in Bible:

The existence of God is taken for granted in the Bible. There is nowhere any argument to prove it. The miracles and signs by the messengers and prophets were enough to satisfy the followers. However even then immediately after coming out of Egypt under miraculous circumstances, the Israelites indulged in the worship of calf.  He who disbelieves the truth of God, is spoken of as one devoid of understanding: “The fool hath said in his heart, There is no God. They are corrupt, they have done abominable works, there is none that doeth good.”(Psalms;14:1). The First Commandment declared in the Old Testament as well as New Testament states the Oneness of God (Deuteronomy;6:4, Mark;12:29);He is the Rock, his work is perfect: for all his ways are judgment: a God of truth and without iniquity, just and right is he.”(Deuteronomy;32:4). The infinite nature of God is indicated explicitly: “Then Moses said to God, “If I come to the people of Israel and say to them, ‘The God of your fathers has sent me to you,’ and they ask me, ‘What is his name?’ what shall I say to them? God said to Moses, “I AM WHO I AM.” (Ehyeh asher ehyeh)…”(Exodus;3:13-14). So when Moses asks who he is, God replies in effect: ‘Never you  mind who I am!’ Or ‘Mind your own business!’ There was to be no discussion on God’s nature and certainly no attempt to manipulate him as pagans sometimes did when they recited the names of their gods. Yahweh is the Unconditioned One: I shall be that which I shall be. He will be exactly as he chooses and will make no guarantees.
God’s attributes are spoken of by some as ‘Absolute’, i.e., such as belong to his essence as Jehovah, Jah, etc.; and Relative, i.e., such as are ascribed to him with relation to his creatures. Others distinguish them into ‘Communicable’, i.e. those which can be imparted in degree to his creatures: goodness, holiness, wisdom, etc; and ‘Incommunicable’, which cannot be so imparted: independence, immutability, immensity, and eternity. They are by some also divided into ‘Natural Attributes’, eternity, immensity, etc.; and Moral, holiness, goodness, etc. The attributes of God are set forth in order by Moses: “And the LORD passed by before him, and proclaimed, The LORD, The LORD God, merciful and gracious, longsuffering, and abundant in goodness and truth, Keeping mercy for thousands, forgiving iniquity and transgression and sin, and that will by no means clear the guilty; visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children, and upon the children’s children, unto the third and to the fourth generation.”(Exodus;34:6-7).
In the Bible, God is declared to be; Eternal (Deutronomy;33:27; Psalms;90:2), Immortal (1Timothy;1:17;6:16), Light (Isaiah;60:19; James; 1:17, 1John;1:5), Invisible (Job;23:8-9) Un-searchable (Job;11:7; 37:23;Psalms; 145:3; Isaiah; 40:28; Romans; 11:33), Incorruptible (Romans;1:23), Absolute sovereign (Daniel;4:25,35), Mighty (Job;36:5),Omnipotent (Geneses17:1; Exodus;6:3), Omniscient (Psalms;139:1-6; Proverbs;5:21), Omnipresent (Psalms;139:7; Jeremiah;23:23), Immutable (Psalms;102:26-27), Glorious. (Exodus;15:11; Psalms;145:5), Most High (Psalms;83:18; Acts;7:48), Perfect (Mathew; 5:48, Job;36:4; 37:16), Holy (Psalms;99:9; Isaiah;5:16), Just (Deutronomy;32:4; Isaiah;45:21), True (Jermiah;10:10), Upright (Psalms;25:8; 92:15), Righteous (Ezra;9:15; Psalms;145:17), Good (Psalms;25:8; 119:68), His being alone good.(Mathew;19:17), Incomparable (Isaiah;44:7; Jeremiah;10:7), Great(Psalms;86:10), Gracious (Exodus;34:6, Psalms;116:5), Merciful (Exodus;34:6-7), Long-suffering (Numbers;14:18; Micah;7:1), Jealous (Joshua;24:19; Nahum;1:2), Compassionate (2Kiings;13:23), None beside Him (Deutronomy;4:35; Isaiah; 44:6), None before Him (Isaiah;43:10), None like to Him (Exodus;9:14; Deutronomy;33:26; 2Samuel;7:22; Isaiah;46:5,9), Fills heaven and earth (1Kings;8:27; Jeremiah;23:24). Should be worshipped in spirit and in truth. (John;4:24), A consuming fire (Hebrews;12:29). His being alone possessed of foreknowledge (Isaiah;46:9-11). His being the sole object of worship in heaven and earth.(Nehemia;9:6; Mathew;4:10).His being the only Saviour. (Isaiah;45:21-22). His being the only source of pardon.(Micah;7:18; Mark;2:7),Universal (Job;28:24; Daniel;2:22; Act;15:18), Infinite (Psalms;147:5; Romans;11:33), Wonderful, Beyond human comprehension (Psalms;139:6), and Underived. (Job;21:22; Isaiah;40:14). The idol worship is condemned in the Old Testament” (Exodus;20:3-5, Deuteronomy;5:7-9). According to Bible Adam was created in the image of God (Geneses;1;26-27,5:1), but an other place it is mentioned: “I am God, and there is none like me.”(Isaiah;46:9). Some theologians have interpreted ‘image’ as ‘vicegerent’. Allah says: “We have indeed created man in the best stature;”(Qura’n;95:4). Islam reject to draw any semblance between the attributes of Allah and His creatures; because; “there is none like unto Him.”(Qura’n;112:4).
However Bible narrates certain attributes, of God like His creatures, which are not befitting to the elegance, grace and greatness of The Supreme Creator and Sustainer. They appear to contradict the attributes of God mentioned elsewhere in Bible. Some examples are: And they heard the voice of Jehovah God walking in the garden in the cool of the day: and the man and his wife hid themselves from the presence of Jehovah God amongst the trees of the garden.”(Genesis;3:8), “And Jehovah God called unto the man, and said unto him, Where art thou?(Genesis;3:9). God showing repentance:” And it repented Jehovah that he had made man on the earth, and it grieved him at his heart”(Genesis;6:6), “Thou hast rejected me, said Jehovah, thou art gone backward: therefore have I stretched out my hand against thee, and destroyed thee; I am weary with repenting.”(Jeremiah;15:6). God shaving like a “barber”: In that day will the Lord shave with a razorthat is hired in the parts beyond the River, even with the king of Assyria, the head and the hair of the feet; and it shall also consume the beard.”(Isaiah;7:20) God showing his back parts to Moses: “And I (God) will take away my hand and thou shalt see my back parts”(Exodus;33:23). God “riding” a cherub: And he rode upon a cherub, and did fly; Yea, he was seen upon the wings of the wind.”(2 Samuel;22:11). There are some other contradictory attributes of God, at some places God saying that no one can see Him: “No man hath seen God at any time”(John;1:18), “(God) whom no man hath seen, nor can see”(I Timothy;6:16), “And he (God) said, Thou canst see my face: for there shall no man see me, and live”(Exodus;33:20). It is contradicted at other verses: “And they (Moses, Aaron and seventy others) saw the God of Israel”(Exodus;24:10), “And the Lord spoke unto Moses face to face, as a man speaks unto his friend”(Exodus;33:11). A very strange incidence is narrated, that Jacob wrestled with God and prevailed: “And Jacob was left alone; and there wrestled a man with him until the breaking of the day. And when he saw that he prevailed not against him, he touched the hollow of his thigh; and the hollow of Jacob’s thigh was strained, as he wrestled with him. And he said, Let me go, for the day breaketh. And he said, I will not let thee go, except thou bless me. And he said unto him, What is thy name? And he said, Jacob. And he said, Thy name shall be called no more Jacob, but Israel: for thou hast striven with God and with men, and hast prevailed. And Jacob asked him, and said, Tell me, I pray thee, thy name. And he said, Wherefore is it that thou dost ask after my name? And he blessed him there. And Jacob called the name of the place Peniel: for, said he, I have seen God face to face, and my life is preserved”(Geneses;32:24-30).

Trinitarianism:

The complex doctrine of Trinitarianism” called as ‘Trinitarian Monotheism” was the deviation introduced by Paul against the monotheistic teachings of Old Testament and Prophet Jesus (peace be upon him). According to this docrine; God is considered to consist of three persons, The Father (God), the Son (Jesus), and the Holy Spirit,all three as One. Trinity is totally opposed to monotheisim preached by Abraham (peace be upon him), which Jews, Christians and Muslims claim to follw.The use of the terminology ‘son of God’ and Father (for God) need to be understood as per its use among Hebrews and the Biblical text. The Hebrews believed that God is One, and had neither wife nor children in any literal sense, hence it is obvious that the expression “son of God” merely meant to them “Servant of God”; the one who, because of his faithful service, was close and dear to God, as a son is to a father. Christians who came from a Greek and Roman background, later misused this term. In the Greek-Roman heritage, “son of God” signified an incarnation of a god or someone born of a physical union between male and female gods. When the Church cast aside its Hebrew foundations, it adopted the pagan concept of “son of God”, which was entirely different from the Hebrew usage, just to make the new faith familiar and acceptable to new gentile converts of pagan origin. Consequently, the use of the term “son of God” should only be understood from the Semitic symbolic sense of a “servant of God”, and not in the pagan sense of a literal offspring of God. In the Gospel, Jesus is recorded as saying: “Blessed are the peace-makers; they will be called sons of God.”(Mathew;5:9). Son of God has been used numerously in the Old & New Testaments in similar sense. (Hosea;1:10,Jeremiah;31:9,Job;2:1,38:4-7,Genesis; 6:2,Deuteronomy; 14:1, Exodus;4:22-23, 2Samuel;8:13-14, Psalms;2:7, Book of Job;1:6, Luke; 3:38, 9:22 & 4:41). Likewise use of the term ‘abba’, “dear father” by Jesus’ when he said: “For ye have not received the spirit of bondage again to fear; but ye have received the Spirit of adoption, whereby we cry, Abba, Father”. (Romans; 8:15), should be understood similarly, because the word ‘Father’ is used for the ‘God’  or the ‘Lord’ not as biological father but in the spiritual sense as The Creator & Sustainer: “For all who are led by the Spirit of God, are the sons of God.” (Romans;8:14). “He shall cry unto me, Thou art my father, my God, and the rock of my salvation”(Psalms;89:26), “Be ye therefore perfect, even as your Father which is in heaven is perfect.” (Mathew;5:48), similarly God is mentioned as Father at many other places (Mathew;5:16,45,48, 6:1,6,8,9,32, 7:11,21, 10:32,33, 12:50, John; 5:30, 5:37, 14:16, 20:17, 2Samuel; 7:14,  Psalms;89:26). Moreover word ‘Father’ has also been used as a token of reverence or messenger or  domination: Joseph (peace be upon him) is called a father to Pharaoh (Genesis; 45:8), Abraham (peace be upon him) is called the father of a multitude of nations (Genesis;17:5), and Job is called the father of the needy (Job;29:16). Again by theologians alluding to Psalms 110; Jesus is  called Priest or a Father of the priesthood, forever. The only person who has blasphemously been given attributes like God is Melchisedec: “For this Melchisedec, king of Salem, priest of the most high God, who met Abraham returning from the slaughter of the kings, and blessed him; To whom also Abraham gave a tenth part of all; first being by interpretation King of righteousness, and after that also King of Salem, which is, King of peace; Without father, without mother, without descent, having neither beginning of days, nor end of life; but made like unto the Son of God; abideth a priest continually.  Now consider how great this man was, unto whom even the patriarch Abraham gave the tenth of the spoils.” (Hebrews;7:1-4). In the literal sense here Melchisedec, appears to be higher than Jesus! 
The early Chrisitans rejected the new doctrine of Trinity.According to doctrine of Christianity, God literally became incarnate as a human in the form of son i.e. Jesus Christ. This “Trinitarian Monotheism” has been rejected by several Christian denominations and Christian-based religions. Arianism, was founded by the Alexandrian presbyter Arius (4th century), according to his doctrine, God alone is immutable and self-existent, and the Son is not God but a creature with a beginning. The Council of Nicaea (325 C.E) condemned Arius and declared the Son to be “of one substance with the father.” Arianism had numerous defenders for the next 50 years but eventually collapsed when the Christian emperors of Rome Gratian and Theodosius assumed power. The First Council of Constantinople (381 C.E) approved the Nicene Creed and proscribed Arianism. However it continued among the Germanic tribes through the 7th century, and similar beliefs are held in the present day by the Jehovah’s Witnesses and by some adherents of Unitarianism. The Strict Unitarian Christians believe that God, the Father, to be unipersonal, the only divine being, salvation to be granted to the entire human race, and that the Reason and Conscience to be the criteria for belief and practice while some others believe that Jesus is a created deity. Jehovah’s Witnesses, for example, do not religiously worship the Logos (Jesus), but they believe that the Father created the worlds by means of the Logos.
It is striking that the basic teachings of the Church such as Trinity and Vicarious Atonement find no mention in the Bible. There is not a single unambiguous statement in the entire Bible where Prophet Jesus (peace be upon him) himself says, “I am God” or where he says, “worship me” rather he said: “..There is none good but one, that is, God..”(Mathew;19:17). The only single verse in the whole of Bible which, the supporters of Trinity interpreted to supports this Christian dogma that: “For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost; and these three are one.”(The first Epistle of John; 5:7,8). In some volumes this  verse is written as : “There are three witnesses, the Spirit, the water, and the blood; and these three agree”. In the foot note of this verse in ‘New International Version Bible’ it is written; ‘not found in any Greek manuscript before the sixteen century’. Dr C.I, Scofield, D.D. backed by eight other D.D.’s in a footnote to this verse opine: “It is generally agreed that this verse has no manuscript authority and has been inserted. “The fundamentalist Christians still retain this fabrication whereas, in all the modern translations including the Revised Standard Version (RSV) this pious deceit has been unceremoniously expunged.  On the contrary Jesus (peace be upon him) also said: “Shama Israelu Adonai Ila Hayno Adna Ikhad ”[“Hear, O Israel: The Lord our God is one Lord”](Mark;12:29). In fact, various verses of the Bible point to the actual mission of Jesus (peace be upon him), which was to fulfill the Commandments and the Law revealed to Prophet Moses (peace be upon him) (Mathew; 5:17,18,19). Indeed Prophet Jesus (peace be upon him) rejected any suggestions that attributed divinity to him, and explained his miracles as the power of the One True God. Prophet Jesus (peace be upon him) thus reiterated the message of monotheism that was given by all earlier prophets of God.
Islam toltallly despise the Trinity, for it is mentioned in Qur’an:“They do blaspheme who say: Allah is one of three in a Trinity: for there is no god except One Allah.  If they desist not from their word (of blasphemy) verily a grievous penalty will befall the blasphemers among them.”(Qur’an;5:73); “O people of the Book! Do not overstep the bounds [of truth] in your religious beliefs, and do not say of God anything but the truth. The Christ Jesus, son of Mary, was but God’s Messenger – [the fulfillment of] His promise  which He had conveyed (kalimah, “word”) unto Mary – and a soul created by Him. Believe, then, in God and His Messengers, and do not say, “[God is] a trinity”. Desist [from this assertion] for your own good. God is but One God; utterly remote is He, in His glory, from having a son: unto Him belongs all that is in the heavens and all that is on earth; and none is as worthy of trust as God.”(Qur’an;4:171).  M. Asad logically explains this verse: “His word which He conveyed unto Mary and a soul from Him”. According to Tabari, the “word” (kalimah) was “the announcement (risalah) which God bade the angels to convey to Mary, and God’s glad tiding to her” (Qur’an;3:45) – which justifies the rendering of kalimatuhu as “[the fulfillment of] His promise”.  As regards the expression, “a soul from Him” or “created by Him”, it is to be noted that among the various meanings which the word ruh bears in the Qur’an (e.g., “inspiration” in Qur’an;2:87, 253), it is also used in its primary significance of “breath of life”, “soul”, or “spirit”: thus, for instance, in Qur’an;32:9, where the ever-recurring evolution of the human embryo is spoken of: “and then He forms him [i.e., man] and breathes into him of His spirit” – that is, endows him with a conscious soul which represents God’s supreme gift to man and is, therefore, described as “a breath of His spirit”. The verse (Qur’an;4:171) stresses the purely human nature of Jesus and refutes the belief in his divinity, the Qur’an points out that Jesus, like all other human beings, was “a soul created by Him”.

Polytheism:

Opposite to Tawhid is Shirk (associating partners or other deities with God: Polytheism). Shirk is considered synonymous with any belief or practice rejected by Islam. The Qur’an stresses in many verses that God does not share his powers with any partner (sharik): Say: “My Lord has forbidden only indecencies whether , such of them as are apparent and such as are within, and sin and wrongful oppression, and that you associate with Allah (shirk) for which He has granted no sanction, and saying things about Allah of which you have no knowledge.”(Qur’an;7:33); “Never has Allah begotten a son, nor is there any god besides Him. Had it been so, each god would govern his own creation, and each would have tried to overpower the others. Exalted be Allah, above the sort of things they attribute to Him!”(Qur’an;23:91). The shirk is distinguished, by different grades apart from pure and blatant polytheism. The shirk al-‘adah (“shirk of custom”), which includes all superstitions, such as the belief in omens and the seeking of help from soothsayers. Shirk al-ibadah(“shirk of worship”) is manifested in the belief in the powers of created things, the reverencing of saints (an act showing respect by bowing, only reserved for Allah), kissing holy stones (except black stone at Ka’ba), and  asking to grant favours from dead or alive people (grant of favours is only by Allah), “shirk of knowledge”  (shirk al-‘ilm) isto credit anyone, such as astrologers and palmists etc with the knowledge of the future. All of these types of shirk are shirk saghir (“minor shirk”) in comparison with polytheism. The Muslims totally reject all types of Shirk and Kufir (Disbelief), they firmly believe in Tawhid, ONE GOD, Supreme and Eternal, Infinite and Mighty, Merciful and Compassionate, Creator and Provider. God has neither father nor mother, no sons nor was He fathered. None is equal to Him. Allah is the God of Adam, Noah, Abraham, Moses, Jesus and all mankind; He is not the God of a special tribe or race. He is the Creator and Sustainer of humanity and all other creatures. He is the God for the Christians, the Jews, the Muslims, the Buddhists, the Hindus, the atheists, and all others. He extends His favours in this world to all, believers or non-believers, as a test, which is part of His wisdom and plan.

God created humanity and formed nations and tribes, He says: “O mankind! We created you from male and female, and made you into nations and tribes that you might get to know one another.(Qur’an;49:13). He provided guidance through His messengers: “No doubt We raised in every nation a Messenger, saying: “Serve Allah and keep away from false gods and idols.” After that, Allah guided some of them while deviation proved true against the others. So travel through the earth and see what was the end of those who denied Our Message.” (Qur’an;16:36). Hence in the major religions the traces of monotheism (Tawhid) are still found in the scripture even if not practiced. Hinduism is commonly perceived as a polytheistic religion because the common Hindus are observed worshiping many gods. However Hindus, well versed in their scriptures, insist that a Hindu should believe in and worship only one God. The sacred Hindu scriptures, urge monotheism (Tawhid), it is stated: “Those whose intelligence has been stolen by material desires surrender unto demigods and follow the particular rules and regulations of worship according to their own natures.”(Bhagavad Gita;7:20); “He is One only without a second.” (Chandogya: Upanishad;6:2:1), “Of Him there are neither parents nor lord.”(Svetasvatara: Upanishad;6:9), “There is no likeness of Him.”(Svetasvatara: Upanishad; 4:19), “His form is not to be seen; no one sees Him with the eye.”(Svetasvatara: Upanishad; 4:20).According to Vedas: “There is no image of Him.” (Yajurveda;32:3);“He is bodiless and pure.”(Yajurveda;40:8);“They enter darkness, those who worship the natural elements (air, water, fire, etc.);“ They sink deeper in darkness, those who worship sambhuti (created things, for example table, chair, idol, etc)”(Yajurveda;40:9);“O friends, do not worship anybody but Him, the Divine One. Praise Him alone.”(Rigveda;8:1:1).The Brahma Sutra of Hinduism is: “There is only one God, not the second; not at all, not at all, not in the least bit.” (Ekam Brahm, dvitiya naste neh na naste kincha).


CHAPTER-4:

THE ONLY ONE GOD OF ALL
Islam urges deep rooted faith in Allah on the basis of knowledge and research and leaves wide open, the thought process for the human intellect to penetrate as far it can reach. “Say: “It is He Who has created you (and made you grow) and made for you the faculties of hearing seeing feeling and understanding: little thanks it is ye give.”(Qur’an;67:23); “They (non believers) will further say: “Had we but listened or used our intelligence we should not (now) be among the Companions of the Blazing Fire!”(Qur’an;67:10). Islam stresses to firmly believe in Allah (one God), the Lord of the worlds, submit to Him and worship Him only. Qur’an repeatedly draws the attention of man towards existence of God through various ‘Signs’ and other arguments. Islamic philosophers of the middle ages did not address the problem of existence of God in any direct fashion. This maybe because in the context of Muslim thought, the existence of God was a prerequisite. However it is evident that the orderly and wonderful phenomena of nature could not be purposeless and accidental. It is pertinent to note that the ‘reason’ properly used must lead man to cognition of God’s existence and, thus of the fact that a definite plan underlines all His creation; reward for pious believers and punishment for rebellious non believers and sinners.
Muslims put their trust in Allah and they seek His help and His guidance. God is High and Supreme but He is very near to the pious thoughtful believers; He answers their prayers and helps them. He loves the people who love Him and forgives their sins. He gives them peace, happiness, knowledge and success. A Muslim  has to believe in Allah, His Angels, His Books, His Messengers, the Day of Judgment and Qadaa and Qadar, which is related to the ultimate power of Allah. Qadaa and Qadar means the Timeless Knowledge of Allah and His power to plan and execute His plans. Allah is the sole Divine; that is He is the Lord, the Creator, the Sovereign, and the Manager of all affairs. Allah is the only true God and every other so-called deity is false. He is One (Ahad), that is, He has no associate in His divinity, His Godhood, His names, or in His attributes. Allah says about Himself: “He is the Lord of the heavens and the Earth and all that is in between them, so worship Him and be patient in His worship; do you know any equal to Him?” (Qur’an;19:65); “Allah there is no God but He, the Living, the Everlasting. Slumber does not seize Him, neither sleep; to Him belongs all that is in the heavens and the Earth. Who is there that shall intercede with Him except by His permission? He knows what is before them and what is behind them, and they do not encompass anything of His knowledge except what He wills. His throne extends over the heavens and the Earth, the preservation of them does not burden Him; He is the High, the Great” (Qur’an;2:255); “He is Allah, there is no god but He, the Knower of the Unseen and the Visible. He is the Most Gracious, Most Merciful. He is Allah, there is no God but He, the King, the Holy One, the Source of Peace, the Keeper of Faith, the Guardian, the Almighty, the Subduer, the Sublime. Glory be to Allah above what they associate with Him. He is Allah, the Creator, the Maker, the Shaper. His are the most beautiful Names. All that is in the heavens and the Earth glorifies Him. He is the Almighty, the Wise” (Qur’an;59:22-24).

Attributes of God:

 The Attributes,Words and Signs and Mercies of Allah are manifest in His Creations, and can never be fully set out in human language, however extended human means may imagined to be, Allah says: “Say: “If the ocean were ink (wherewith to write out) the words of my Lord sooner would the ocean be exhausted than would the words of my Lord even if we added another ocean like it for its aid.”(Qur’an;18:109). However all that is mentioned about Allah’s attributes, whether briefly or in detail and affirmatively or negatively, based on Qur’an, and the traditions of Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) are final some are also mentioned in Bible. It also agrees with the practice of the previous generations of Muslims and the rightly guided scholars who came after them. It is obligatory for a Muslim to take the texts of the Qur’an and the prophetic traditions conceding Allah’s attributes at their face value and to interpret them in a way that is suitable to Almighty Allah. The practice of those who twist the meanings of these texts and understand them in a way that was not intended by Allah and His messenger be rejected. The practice of those who make them devoid of their meanings as conveyed by Allah and His Messenger should also be rejected. As per Qur’an; “He is the One Who has revealed to you the Book. Some of its verses are decisive (muhkmat) they are the foundation of the Book – while others are allegorical (mutshabehat). Those whose hearts are infected with disbelief follow the allegorical part to mislead others and to give it their own interpretation, seeking for its hidden meanings, but no one knows its hidden meanings except Allah. Those who are well grounded in knowledge say: “We believe in it; it is all from our Lord.” None will take heed except the people of understanding.”(Qur’an;3:7). Allah has most perfect attributes;  Allah can be called by any name, signifying the attributes of perfection, suitable to Him. Allah says: “Say: “Invoke God, or invoke the Most Gracious: by whichever name you invoke Him, (He is always the One-for) His are all the attributes of perfection(Asma’ Allah al-Husna), …”(Qur’an;17:110 also 20:8, 59:24, 7:180).

The Ninety Nine Names:

According to Hadith, narrated Abu Huraira: Allah has ninety-nine Names, i.e., one hundred minus one, and whoever believes in their meanings and acts accordingly, will enter Paradise; and Allah is Witr (one) and loves ‘the Witr’ (i.e., odd numbers). (Sahih Bukhari Hadith number 419, Volume.4 ).The Ninety nine beautiful names of Allah (Asma’ Allah al-Husna), based upon His attributes are mentioned in the Islamic traditions (compiled by scholars from Qur’an and Hadith). There is no fixed authentic list of 99 names of God; one compilation which includes many common names and attributes of God are:  The All Beneficent (Ar-Rahman), The Most Merciful (Ar-Rahim), The King, The Sovereign (Al-Malik), The Most Holy (Al-Quddus), The Peace and Blessing (As-Salaam), The Guarantor (Al-Mu’min), The Guardian, The Preserver (Al-Muhaymin), The Almighty, The Self Sufficient (Al-Aziz), The Powerful, The Irresistible (Al-Jabbar), The Tremendous (Al-Mutakabbir), The Creator (Al-Khaliq), The Rightful (Al-Bari’), The Fashioner of Forms (Al-Musawwir), The Ever Forgiving, (Al-Ghaffar), The All Compelling Subduer (Al-Qahhar), The Bestower (Al-Wahhab), The Ever Providing (Ar-Razzaq), The Opener, The Victory Giver (Al-Fattah), The All Knowing, The Omniscient (Al-`Alim), The Restrainer, The Straightener (Al-Qabid), The Expander, The Munificent (Al-Basit), The Sufficient, Who Suffices (Al-Kafi), The Exalter (Ar-Rafi‘e), The Giver of Honour (Al-Mu‘ezz), The Giver of Dishonor (Al-Mudhell), The All Hearing (As-Sami‘e), The All Seeing (Al-Basir), The Judge, The Arbitrator (Al-Hakam), The Utterly Just (Al-‘Adl), Subtle, Unfathomable, (Al-Latif), The All Aware (Al-Khabir), The Forbearing, The Indulgent (Al-Halim) The Magnificent, The Infinite (Al-Azeem), The All Forgiving (Al-Ghafur), The Grateful (Ash-Shakur), The Sublimely Exalted (Al-Aliyy), The Great (Al-Kabir), The Preserver (Al-Hafiz), The Nourisher (Al-Muqit), The Reckoner (Al-Hasib), The Majestic (Al-Jalil), The Bountiful, The Generous (Al-Karim), The Watchful (Ar-Raqib), The Responsive, The Answerer (Al-Mujib), The Vast, The All Encompassing (Al-Wasse‘e), The Wise (Al-Hakeem), The Loving, The Kind One (Al-Wadud), The All Glorious (Al-Majid), The Restrore – The Reviver (Al-Ma’ied), The Witness (Ash-Shaheed), The Truth, The Real (Al-Haqq), The Trustee, The Dependable (Al-Wakil), The Strong (Al-Qawaie), The Firm, The Steadfast (Al-Matin), The Protecting Friend, Patron and Helper (Al-Wali, Al Maula), The All Praiseworthy (Al-Hamid), The Healer (Al-Sha’fii), The Producer, Originator, and Initiator of All (Al-Mubdi, Al Badi’), The Salvator-The Reliever (Al-Kashif), The Giver of Life (Al-Muhyi), The Bringer of Death, The Destroyer (Al-Mumit), The Ever Living (Al-Hayy), The Self Subsisting Sustainer of All (Al-Qayyum), The Perceiver, The Finder, The Unfailing (Al-Wajid), The Illustrious, The Magnificent (Al-Majid), The One, The Unique, Manifestation of Unity (Al-Wahid), The One, the All Inclusive, The Indivisible (Al-Ahad), The Self Sufficient, The Impregnable, The Eternally Besought of All, The Everlasting (As-Samad), The All Able (Al-Qadir),   The All Determiner, The Dominant, (Al-Muqtadir), The Expediter, He Who Brings Forward (Al-Muqaddim), The Delayer, He Who Puts Far Away (Al-Mu’akhir), The First (Al-Awwal), The Last (Al-Akhir), The Manifest, The All Victorious (Az-Zahir), The Hidden, The All Encompassing (Al-Batin), The Master, The Lord of Universe(Rab-ul-Ala’min), The Encompasser (Al-Mahsi), The Most Kind and Righteous (Al-Barr), The Ever Returning, Ever Relenting (At-Tawwab), The Avenger (Al-Muntaqim), The Pardoner, The Effacer of Sins (Al-‘Afuww), The Compassionate, The All Pitying (Ar-Ra’uf), The Owner of All Sovereignty (Malik-al-Mulk), The Lord of Majesty and Generosity (Dhu-al-Jalali wa-al-Ikram), The Equitable, The Requiter (Al-Muqsit), The Gatherer, The Unifier (Al-Jami‘e), The All Rich, The Independent (Al-Ghanaie), The Enricher, The Emancipator (Al-Mughni), The Withholder, The Shielder, the Defender (Al-Mani’e), The Authority (Sultan), The Propitious, The Benefactor (An-Nafi‘e), The Light (An-Nur), The Guide (Al-Hadi), The Incomparable, The Originator (Al-Badi), The Ever Enduring and Immutable (Al-Baqi), The Heir, The Inheritor of All (Al-Warith), The Guide, Infallible Teacher and Knower (Ar-Rashid), The Patient, The Timeless (As-Sabur). Some of His attributes are explained briefly:-
The Cherisher & Sustainer (Lord) of All the Worlds:Allah is The Sustainer’ (Rabb) of all the worlds. The Arabic word  Rabb  embraces a wide complex group of meanings not easily expressed by a single term in another language. It comprises the ideas of having a just claim to the possession of anything and, consequently, authority over it, as well as of rearing, sustaining and fostering anything from its inception to its final completion. Allah is exclusively the sole fosterer and sustainer of all the creations – objective as well as conceptual – and therefore the ultimate source of all authority: “Praise be to Allah the Cherisher and Sustainer (Rabb al- a’lamen) of the Worlds”(Qur’an;1:2); “Then praise be to Allah, Lord of the heavens and Lords of the earth, the Lord of the Worlds.”(Qur’an;45:36); “Cast thy burden upon the LORD, and he shall sustain thee: he shall never suffer the righteous to be moved.”(Psalms;55:22). He is the Lord of all, He creates and nourishes all, the obedient believers as well as the unbelievers, transgressors because this is the world of trial, the full accountability would be on the Day of Judgement.
Omnipotent, the Wise: He is Omnipotent: “He is the Supreme Authority over His servants; and He is the Wise, the Aware.”(Qur’an;6:18). Allah is not living with His creatures on earth, but He is closer to human than their  jugular vein: “It was We who created man and We know what dark suggestions his soul makes to him: for We are nearer to him than (his) jugular vein.”(Qur’an;50:16). It implies that Allah knows more truly the innermost state of human feeling and consciousness than does their own self; “Hast thou not seen that Allah knoweth all that is in the heavens and all that is in the earth? There is no secret conference of three but He is their fourth, nor of five but He is their sixth, nor of less than that or more but He is with them Wheresoever they may be;…”(Qur’an;58:7); “Whither shall I go from thy spirit? or whither shall I flee from thy presence?”(Psalms;139:7).
Omniscient: Allah possess absolute & infinite knowledge: “He Alone has the keys of the unseen treasures, of which no one knows except Him. He knows whatever is in the land and in the sea; there is not a single leaf that falls without His knowledge, there is neither a grain in the darkness of the earth nor anything fresh or dry which has not been recorded in a Clear Book.”(Qur’an;6:59); “Allah alone has the knowledge of the Hour, sends down rain, and knows what is in the wombs (a blessing or a curse). No soul knows what it shall earn tomorrow, and no soul knows in what land it shall die. Surely, Allah is All-knowing, All-aware” (Qur’an;31:34). The Qur’an points to the rich sources of knowledge in the whole universe. “..The knowledge thereof is with my Lord in a Record. My Lord never errs nor forgets”(Qur’an;20:52); “ For a man’s ways are before the eyes of the LORD, and he watches all his paths.”(Proverbs;5:21).
The Creator: He is the Supreme Creator:” He created the Heavens and the Earth in six eons, then He settled Himself on the throne; He manages everything” (Qur’an;10:3). His “settling on the throne” means, sitting in a way that is becoming to His Majesty and Greatness. Nobody except He knows exactly how He is sitting on His throne. He is with His creatures while He is still on His throne. He knows their conditions, hears their sayings, and sees their deeds. He regulates and governs it, as a king does, whose authority is unquestionably recognized; hence He is not, therefore, like the gods of Greeks, and pagans, who were imagined to be in a world apart, careless of mankind, or jealous of mankind. He does not do injustice to anybody, because His fairness is perfect. He is not unaware of his servants’ deeds, because He has perfect supervision and comprehensive knowledge. He provides for the poor and the broken. God Most High was a Creator before He created and a Provider before He bestowed provision. Closeness to God Most High and remoteness from Him do not refer to any spatial distance, great or small, nor do they refer to the nobility or humility in His sight. Rather the one obedient to Him is close to him, in indefinable fashion. Closeness, remoteness approaching all in fact refer to God’s action towards man (i.e., it is not man who in the strict sense defines relation to Allah; it is rather Allah who determines that relation). Proximity to God in Paradise and standing before Him are similarly realities of indefinable modality. Allah has no equal because His Attributes are perfect: “There is nothing whatsoever like unto Him. He is the All-hearing, the All-seeing” (Qur’an;42:11); “no slumber or sleep seizes Him” (Qur’an;2:255), because His life is perfect and eternal. Bible also mentions: “Have you not known? Have you not heard? The LORD is the everlasting God, the Creator of the ends of the earth. He does not faint or grow weary, his understanding is Unsearchable.”(Isaiah;40:28). However there is dichotomy with in Bible: “for in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that is in them, and rested the seventh day; therefore the LORD blessed the Sabbath day and hallowed it.”(Exodus;20:18).
Uncreated:Allah knows, but not as human knows; He has power, but not as human have power. People speak by means of the speech organs and sounds, whereas God Most High speaks with neither organs nor sounds. Sounds are created, and the word of God Most High is uncreated. He is a thing, but unlike other things; by saying “thing,” it is intended merely to affirm His reality. He has neither body nor substance, neither accidental property nor limit, neither opposite nor like nor similitude. A human being require some material to make some thing i.e. a carpenter requires wood, nails tools and other material to make a table.  God Most High creates things out of nothing and He has knowledge of them in pre-eternity, before their creation. The Prophet (peace be upon him), said: “His veil is light. Had He removed it, the sublimity of His countenance would have burnt all that His sight reached” (Muslim and Ibn Majah). The Prophet (peace be upon him) said about the Dajjal (the anti-Christ) that “he is one-eyed and your Lord is not one-eyed” (Bukhari and Muslim). It is beyond the human senses to perceive this.
The First and the Last, The Evident and The Immanent: According to Qur’an: “He is the First and the Last the Evident and the Immanent: and He has full knowledge of all things.” (Qur’an;57:3); “They shall perish, but thou shalt endure: yea, all of them shall wax old like a garment; as a vesture shalt thou change them, and they shall be changed: But thou art the same, and thy years shall have no end.”(Psalms;102:26-27). Allah is Evident in so far as there is ample evidence of His existence and providence all around the universe. On the other hand, Allah is Hidden in so far as human intellect cannot grasp His essence nor can He be seen in the present world. Narrated by Abu Hurairah; The Prophet (peace be on him) said: “Thou art the First, so that there was nothing before Thee; and Thou art the Last, so that there is nothing after Thee; and Thou art Evident, (or Ascendant) so that there is nothing above Thee, and Thou art the Hidden, the Knower of hidden things, so that there is nothing hidden from Thee.” (Extract from Sahih Muslim, Hadith Number: 1253). According to some Christians, Jesus, claimed divinity when he said: “I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the ending, saith the Lord, which is, and which was, and which is to come, the Almighty.” (King James Version; Revelation; 1:8) These are the attributes of God. However in the Revised Standard Version, biblical scholars corrected the translation and wrote: “I am the Alpha and the Omega,” says the Lord God, who is and who was and who is to come, the Almighty.”(RSV;Revelation;1:8). A correction was also made in the New American Bible produced by Catholics. The translation of that verse has been amended to put it in its correct context as follows: “The Lord God says: ‘I am the Alpha and the Omega, the one who is and who was, and who is to come, the Almighty.’ ” Hence after this correction, it becomes evident that this was a statement of God wrongly attributed to Jesus. The Bible also mentions, God as Invisible (Job;23:8-9) and Un-searchable (Job;11:7; 37:23;Psalms; 145:3; Isaiah; 40:28).
Not Similar to His Creatures: The Muslims reject the approach of those who exaggerate, who gave physical interpretation that makes Allah similar to some of His creatures. All that He assigned to Himself or what His Messenger described Him with, of names and attributes is to be believed as such. All what He negated about Himself or what His Messenger negated about Him is to be negated. That negation implies the affirmation of its perfect opposite. What He or His Messenger did not mention about Him is not to be discussed. It is essential to adhere to this approach, because what Allah affirmed or negated concerning Himself is a statement He made about Himself. He knows Himself best. His words are most just and trustful, and people cannot know everything about Him. What Allah’s Messenger affirmed or negated about Him is a statement that he made about Allah. Besides knowing Allah better than anyone, he is the most truthful, sincere, and eloquent among people. Thus, in what Allah said and what His Prophet (peace be upon him) said concerning His names and attributes is the truth, knowledge, and clarification. Therefore, the believers do not hesitate in accepting it. However, Islam reject two concepts: Firstly to say or believe that Allah’s attributes are similar to those of his creatures; and secondly to say or believe that Allah’s attributes are like such and such because; “..there is none like unto Him”(Qur’an;112:4); “..there is none like me in all the earth.”(Exodus;9:14).
Unique: He is unique. Certain attributes of Allah like His Hand, His Face a Self (nafs); are part of “unknown-allegorical”(Mutashabehat,Qur’an;3:7)  which can not be perceived by human senses and no question can be raised concerning their modality (bila kayf). It cannot be said that His hand represents His power of His bestowal of bounty, because such an interpretation would require a negation of an attribute. Rather, His hand is an attribute, of unknowable modality, in the same way that His anger and pleasure are two attributes of unknowable modality. Allah has a glorious and dignified face: ” All that is on earth will perish; There will remain the Face (Self) of your Lord, majestic and splendid” (Qur’an;55:26-27). Human can not perceive it. Allah has two generous hands: “No, both His hands are wide open; He spends how He pleases” (Qur’an;5:64); “They do not esteem Allah with the esteem that is due to Him. The whole Earth will be His handful on the Day of Resurrection, and the Heavens will be rolled up in His right hand. Glory be to Him and exalted is He above that which they associate with Him” (Qur’an;39:67). Human can not perceive it. Allah said to Noah: “And build the ark under Our eyes as We reveal” (Qur’an;11:37). He gives sovereignty to whom He pleases and takes away sovereignty from whom He pleases; He exalts whom He wills and He abases whom He wills. In His hand is all good and He is powerful over everything. “…There is nothing whatsoever like unto Him; He is the All-hearing, the All-seeing” (Qur’an;42:11); “Wherefore thou art great, O LORD God: for there is none like thee, neither is there any God beside thee, according to all that we have heard with our ears.”(2 Samuel;7:22  )
The Merciful: The Mercy of Allah is the one of the grandest themes of the Qur’an. To contemplate these boundless gifts of God, the verse: “In the name of God, the Most Gracious, the Most Merciful”: is placed before every Chapter (Sura) of the Qur’an (except the ninth), and repeated at the beginning of every act (even of routine nature like eating, reading, working) by the Muslims who dedicate their lives to God, and whose hope is in His Mercy. The Arabic words “Rahman” and “Rahim” translated as; “Most Gracious” and “Most Merciful” are both intensive forms referring to different aspects of God’s attribute of Mercy.  The Arabic intensive is more suited to express God’s attributes than the superlative degree in English.  The latter implies a comparison with other beings, or with other times or places, while there is no being like unto God, and He is independent of Time and Place. Mercy may imply pity, long-suffering, patience, and forgiveness, all of which the sinner needs and God Most Merciful bestows in abundant measure. But there is a Mercy that goes before even the need arises, the Grace which is ever watchful, and flows from God Most Gracious to all His creatures, protecting them, preserving them, guiding them, and leading them to clearer light and higher life.  He accepts of repentance of believers due to the ‘Mercy’, which He has decreed upon Himself, He says: “When those who believe in Our revelations come to you, say: “Peace be upon you. Your Lord has decreed mercy upon Himself. If anyone among you commits evil because of ignorance and thereafter repents and mends his ways; you will find Allah Forgiving, Merciful.”(Qur’an;6:54& 85:14). God’s attribute of Mercy is also highlighted in Bible at Exodus;34:6-7 and many other places: “The earth, O LORD, is full of thy mercy: teach me thy statutes.”(Psalms;119:64); “Therefore turn thou to thy God: keep mercy and judgment, and wait on thy God continually.”(Hosea;12:6); “For a small moment have I forsaken thee; but with great mercies will I gather thee.”(Isaiah;54:7); “But God, who is rich in mercy, for his great love wherewith he loved us,”(Ephesians;2:4).  
Justice: He helps all with justices and fairness: “The fact is that Allah is your Protector and He is the best of all helpers.”(Qur’an;3:150); “Rest assured that Allah does not wrong anyone even by an atom’s weight. If someone does a good deed He increases it many fold and also gives an extra great reward on His own.”(Qur’an;4:40). He is Sustainer of humanity whether believers or non believers and all other creatures:  “We bestowed on all – these as well those – out of the bounties of your Lord; the bounties of your Sustainer are not confined.”(Qur’an;17:20). He answers the prayers: “Call on Me; I will answer your (Prayer)…!”(Qur’an;40.60). His Messenger told, that He descends to the near sky before the last third of every night and says: “Who prays to Me and I will answer his prayers? Who asks Me and I will give him? Who asks My forgiveness and I will forgive him?” (Bukhari and Muslim). It is mentioned in Bible: “Touching the Almighty, we cannot find him out: he is excellent in power, and in judgment, and in plenty of justice: he will not afflict.”(Job;37:23). On the Day of Judgment He will judge among His people. He is the Doer of what He wills. True knowledge based on clear proof and indisputable evidence acquired by experience or experiment or by both.
He Does What He Wills: To Him belongs the Kingdom of the Heavens and the Earth, He does what ever He Wills:“ Whenever He intends a thing, He needs only to say: “Be,” and it is.”(Qur’an;36:82); “There is nothing whatever like unto Him, He is the All-hearing, the All-seeing. To Him belongs the keys of the Heavens and the Earth. He enlarges and restricts provisions to whom He wills. Surely He has knowledge of everything” (Qur’an;42:11-12); “He creates what He pleases. He gives, to whom He wills, females, and He gives, to whom He wills, males, or He couples them, males and females; and He makes whom He wills barren. Surely, He is the Knowing, the Powerful”(Qur’an;42:49-50). Despite being All Powerful, God does not wrong the mankind: “Lo! Allah wrongs not mankind in aught; but mankind wrong themselves.”(Qur’an;10:44).
Subtle, Unfathomable, The All Aware: Allah is Latif,  fine, subtle, so fine and subtle as to be invisible to the physical eye; so fine as to be imperceptible to the senses; figuratively, so pure as to be above the mental or spiritual vision of ordinary men but at the same time He is aware of all things. It is beyond the capability of human eye to see God In this world, Allah says: “Vision cannot perceive Him, but He perceives all vision. He is the Subtle, (Latif, Incomprehensible), the All-aware” (Qur’an;6:103). Bible also confirms that God can not bee seen (John;1:18, 1Timothy;6:16, Exodus;33:20).Prophet Moses (peace be upon him) requested for the vision of Allah: “And when Moses came to Our appointed tryst and his Lord had spoken unto him, he said: My Lord! Show me (Thy self), that I may gaze upon Thee. He said: Thou wilt not see Me, but gaze upon the mountain! If it stand still in its place, then thou wilt see Me. And when his Lord revealed (His) glory to the mountain He sent it crashing down. And Moses fell down senseless. And when he woke he said: Glory unto Thee! I turn unto Thee repentant, and I am the first of (true) believers.”(Qur’an;7:143). God Most High will be seen in the Hereafter, visible to the believers in Paradise with their corporeal vision as mentioned in Qur’an: “Upon that day (Day of Judgment) some faces shall be radiant, gazing upon their Lord”(Qur’an;75:22-23). This is said without any implication of anthropomorphism, or any notion of quality or quantity, for there is not a fixed distance between Him and His creation (to permit any comparison); “Behold, I go forward, but he is not there; and backward, but I cannot perceive him; on the left hand I seek him, but I cannot behold him; I turn to the right hand, but I cannot see him.”(Job;23:8-9).
Belief in Allah, His names, and His attributes instills in the individual the love and glorification of God that result in obeying God’s instructions and avoiding His prohibitions. These are the means of achieving ultimate happiness in this life and the hereafter for both the individual and the society: “Whoever, male or female, does righteous deed, while believing, We shall assuredly grant him a goodly life, and We shall reward them according to the best of their deeds” (Qur’an;16:97).

Experience Existence of God through His Signs,Works:

Allah is not visible to human being, then the question arises; How can human know about His existence? Allah answers: “Say: “Look at whatever exists in the heavens and the earth.” Signs and warnings do not benefit those people who do not believe.”(Qur’an;10:101);“There are many signs in the heavens and the earth which they pass by; yet they pay no attention to them!”(Qur’an;12:105). The importance of signs can be explained by a simple parable:  If one is present at the seaside and observe some foot marks on the sand, straightaway it comes to mind that some one has walked through this area. No one would say that these foot prints have been made just by coincidence or by chance through interaction of sand, sea waves and the wind. As it is per sure with the common sense that the precise foot marks with particular shape, size and intervals are only made by the human foot. If some one ponders over it, then from the size, depth and interval of foot prints one can even find out, weather the person who left those foot prints was a child, woman or male. The experts with more knowledge in this field can reveal much more information like weight, age etc. In rural areas of South Asia, it is a common practice to get the services of a foot print expert (Khojee) to trace the thief, who by observation follows the foot prints to locate the thief. From one sign (foot mark) so much can be revealed without having seen the individual with eyes. Similarly the forensic experts by picking up samples of blood, hair, cloth and finger prints from a site of crime can determine the presence of specific person by matching the DNA or finger prints, although no one would have seen the individual at the site of crime. It is through these ‘signs’ that the presence of and individual at a particular place is established. While various arguments mentioned earlier i.e.  Cosmological, Teleological, Ontological, Moral and Religious Experience do support, the Islamic traditions demands the people to look and ponder over signs of Allah, which will enable them to comprehend the existence of God.
Hence the existence of Allah, the Supreme Creator, is evident from the numerous signs all around ; what one has to do is just to ponder over them and use common sense. The galaxies, the stars, sun, moon the earth, their rotation, movement, the balance of planets through gravitational system, changing of day to night, rains, winds, life, death and many more, all this can not exist by chance. There is some one All Powerful who has created all this with a purpose and ordained laws to govern the universe; He is Allah, The Mighty, All Powerful. The Qur’an draws human attention towards these signs: “Verily in the heavens and the earth are Signs for those who believe.”(Qur’an;45:3);“And in the creation of yourselves and the fact that animals are scattered (through the earth) are Signs for those of assured Faith. And in the alternation of Night and Day and the fact that Allah sends down Sustenance from the sky and revives therewith the earth after its death and the change of the winds are Signs for those that are wise”.(Qur’an;45:4-5);“And He has subjected (made of service) to you (human) as from Him all that is in the heavens and on earth: behold in that are Signs indeed for those who reflect.”(Qur’an;45:13). “It is Allah Who causes the seed-grain and the date-stone to split and sprout.  He causes the living to issue from the dead and He is the one to cause the dead to issue from the living. That is Allah; then how are ye deluded away from the truth?”(Qur’an;6:95).


CHAPTER-5:

THE EVER LIVING SIGN (MIRACLE)
In the primitive period, Allah gave signs (miracles) to His messengers as a token while many people believed the others did not. Some ignorant people put strange demands to the prophets: “Those who have no knowledge ask: “Why does Allah not speak to us face to face or send us a sign?” The same demand was made by those before them: they all have the same mentality. We have already shown clear signs to those whose faith is firm (in their hearts).”(Qur’an;2:118).The miracles granted by Allah to His previous messengers did not have the long lasting effects. Prophet Moses (peace be upon him) brought the Israelites from Egypt, while performing miracles and wonders, but immediately afterwards the Israelites transgressed and indulged in worship of Calf. Jesus Christ (peace be upon him) performed many miracles but the Jews rejected him. Allah says: “And We refrain from sending the Signs (miracles) only because the men of former generations treated them as false: We sent the She-camel: to the Thamud to open their eyes but they treated her wrongfully: We only send the Signs by way of terror (and warning from evil).”(Qur’an;17:59). It is the way of Allah, if the people demanded the sign (miracle), which were provided and even then they declined to believe, then they were entitled for divine punishments in various forms. In the present era many Christians and Jews do not believe in the miracles performed by biblical prophets, considering them myths, while some try to justify them through rational or scientific arguments.
History records many miracles performed through Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) but Allah in His Divine wisdom provided Qur’an, the ever living sign (miracle) through Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him), which any one can read by himself, to discover that Qur’an is the true word of Allah, the last book of guidance, light and wisdom for the humanity till eternity. Islam encourages reasoning, discussions and dialogue. The Qur’an provides reason and rationale for the purpose, creation and existence of universe. It is the living sign of God and truthfulness of His last messenger, Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him). Allah says: “O mankind! Verily there hath come to you a convincing proof (Qur’an) from your Lord: for We have sent unto you a light (that is) manifest. Then those who believe in Allah and hold fast to Him soon will He admit them to Mercy and Grace from Him and guide them to Himself by a straight Way.”(Qur’an;4:174-175). The Qur’an contains more than six thousand ayaats (‘Signs’), each verse (ayah), of Qur’an is a sign from the Lord, which speaks of the greatness of its originator. It is a historical fact that Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) was ‘Ummi’ i.e. unlettered (illiterate) (Qur’an;7:157). Revelation of Qur’an in Arabic, unmatched in its eloquence and beauty, through the mouth of un-learned (Isaiah;29:12) prophet is miraculous. The prophesy of Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) and Qur’an (word of God, i.e. ‘words in his mouth’) is mentioned in Bible at Deuteronomy; 18:18,19. The universal challenge of Qur’an to produce even one ayah (verse) like Qur’an (Qur’an;2:23) is yet to be answered. This is the only scripture in the world which is available to the humanity in its original revealed form and will continue to be as such because Allah has taken responsibility to guard it (Qur’an;15:9) . It is the only scripture which is memorized by thousands of Muslims of all ages, nationalities, categories and professions (doctors, engineers, scientists, clerics and common people) the world over from last fourteen centuries, hence is transferred from generation to generation accurately. It is the most recited book in the world.
Qur’an is not a book of ‘science, but a book of ‘signs’ (ayaats), there are more than thousand verses of Qur’an referring to various subjects of science, such as astronomy, physics, geography, geology, oceanology, biology, botany, zoology, medicine, physiology, embryology as well as general science, mostly un known to humanity at the time of its revelation, fourteen centuries ago. God says: “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); “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). Allah says: “O mankind! We created you from a single pair of a male and a female, and made you into nations and tribes that you might get to know one another. Surely the noblest of you in the sight of Allah is he who is the most righteous. Allah is All-Knowledgeable, All-Aware.” (Qur’an;49:13). The complex process of pregnancy from conception till child birth, discovered recently is accurately narrated in Qur’an;23:13-14. It is found that the Qur’anic information on science does not conflict with the established scientific facts. It may go against certain scientific hypothesis or theories, which are not based on facts as many a times, the science retracts its position.
The scientific facts mentioned in Qur’an have been discovered during last few centuries. But science has not advanced to a level where it can confirm every statement of the Qur’an referring to scientific information. According to Dr.Zakir Naik; suppose 80% of all that is mentioned in the Qur’an has been proved 100% correct, while for the remaining 20%, science makes no categorical statement, since it has not advanced to a level, where it can either prove or disprove these statements. With the limited knowledge through science available today, one cannot say for sure whether even a single percentage or a single verse of the Qur’an from this 20% portion is wrong. Thus when 80% of the Qur’an is 100% correct and the remaining 20% is not disproved, logic says that even the 20% portion is correct. [The details of scientific facts mentioned in Qur’an have been deliberated upon in the book ‘Qur’an and Science’ by Dr.Zakir Naik & “The Bible, The Qur’an and Science” by Dr. Maurice Bucaille, a French doctor]. How an unlettered person brought up among the most backward desert Arabs, away from the centers of civilization and knowledge, could accurately provide the scientific information mostly discovered recently? It is God, the Creator alone Who could provide so accurate scientific information. Consequently as the scientific information mentioned in Qur’an is true then, by inference the other metaphysical information mentioned in Qur’an (correspondingly also in Bible) like; existence of God, angles, eschatology (death, judgement, heaven, hell, and the final destiny of the soul and of humankind) must also be true.
Humanity has much more to learn from Qur’an if they ponder over it (Qur’an;38:29).  Allah says: “This Book (Al-Qur’an) which We have sent down to you (O Muhammad) is highly blessed, so that they may ponder upon its verses and the men of understanding may learn a lesson from it.”(Qur’an;4:82). There are many prophecies, which have been fulfilled and the accuracy of historic narratives is confirmed through latest research and archeological evidence. The coherence in Qur’an is amazing that it gives evidence to its Divine origin through numerous  ‘Internal Evidences’, like one is quoted here: The Qur’an reminds the Christian in one short sentence to remember Adam; who neither had father nor a mother, it does not make him son of God. So that the likeness of Adam is the likeness of Jesus, they were nothing and then they became something; the servants of God (Qur’an;3:59). An equation has been set between Jesus and Adam, the Arabic word (mithel) has been used which means “likeness”, it says Jesus and Adam are equal. It can be found through the index of the Qur’an, that the name ‘Isa’  (‘Isa’ is Arabic for Jesus) is mentioned 25 times, similarly the name ‘Adam’ has also been mentioned 25 times. Dr.Gary Miller adds that if this process is followed through, it will be found that in the Qur’an there are 8 places were an Ayah says something is like something else, using this (Mithel), it will be found in every case and take both sides of it whatever that word is, look it up in the index and it will be lets say 110 times and lookup the other word and it will be said to be equal to the same 110. That is quite a project of co-ordination even in the present era of computers and high-technology, but impossible to even imagine, fourteen hundred years ago for some one unlettered, dictating a book over 23 years in small and big parts at different timings, places and occasions at times spontaneously receiving Revelations in response to some query raised by a believer or non believer! It’s amazing; there is no doubt that Qur’an is a living miracle manifesting existence of The One Creator-Allah.


CONCLUSION

The concept of a Supreme Being, the Creator and Ruler of heaven and earth is part to human nature. He is commonly called God but all the beautiful names in any language, or by whichever name He is invoked, signifying the attributes of perfection belongs to Him, (He is always the One-for). Worship of God or gods is probably the most basic element of religion, which attempts to answer questions like: existence of God, creation of universe and humanity, human sufferings, evil, death and its aftermath. The main issue is about the existence of God and to prove it rationally. God is infinite, direct comprehension of His essence is beyond human senses. He can however be perceived through His ‘signs’. The rational arguments for the existence of God are: Cosmological, Teleological, Ontological, Morality, Probability and through Religious Experience.  All those claiming to be the followers of Patriarch Abraham (peace be upon him) assert monotheism, but it is Islam which can lay claim as true legacy of Abraham, Tawheed. The complex doctrine of “Trinitarianism” (Trinity) called as ‘Trinitarian Monotheism” by Christianity; that; The Father (God), the Son (Jesus), and the Holy Spirit are one is totally opposed to monothisim preached by Prophet Abraham (peace be upon him). The “Trinitarian Monotheism” has been rejected by several Christian denominations and Christian-based religions like  Arianism, Jehovah’s Witnesses and by some adherents of Unitarianism. Opposite to Tawhid is Shirk (associating partners with God), polytheism is the source of idolatry. Shirk is considered synonymous with unbelief rejected by Islam. The Muslims strictly believe in Allah (one God), the Lord of the worlds and only worship Him without images.
The attributes of God like; The Creator, The Merciful, The Unique, and many more are absolute, mostly they are mentioned in Qur’an and Bible. Though God can not be seen visually, the existence of God can be experienced through His signs & works in cosmology and with in human creation, but they are not perceptible to the rebellious people because they have shut the doors of wisdom and faith. The effects of miracles granted to the previous messengers did not last long. Moses (peace be upon him) brought the Israelites from Egypt, performing miracles and wonders, but immediately thereafter the Israelites transgressed and indulged in worship of Calf. Jesus Christ (peace be upon him) performed many miracles but the Jews rejected him. Islam encourages reasoning, discussions and dialogue. Allah in His Divine wisdom provided Qur’an, the living sign (miracle) through Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him), which any one can read by himself, to discover that Qur’an; full of wisdom and guidance is nothing but the true word of Allah. Qur’an provides solutions to all the problems faced by humanity and answers to the basic questions like: existence of God, creation of universe and humanity, human sufferings, evil, death and its aftermath etc. The Qur’an contains many verses, referring to various subjects of science but they do not conflict with science, exhibiting its divine origin and existence of Creator. In his book ‘Islam, a Way of Life’, world’s leading authority on orientalism and Middle East, Princeton Professor Philip K. Hitti writes; “The Koran is dictated (by Allah). Any quotation from the Koran can be introduced with ”saith Allah”. It is now for the mankind to make their own choice; weather to follow the distorted and corrupted ancient scriptures or the last message of divine guidance available in its pure form- The Qur’an!  Those  who reject these signs are doomed: “Evil as an example are people who reject Our signs and wrong their own souls.”(Qur’an;7:177).
Related:
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Humanity, Religion, Culture, Ethics, Science, Spirituality & Peace
Peace Forum Network

Universe, Science and God

<!–[if !mso]>st1\:*{behavior:url(#ieooui) } <![endif]–>

Chapter1 : Introduction

e-Book

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.


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  3×1013stars.
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.

Chapter-3: Quantum Entanglement

The God Effect!

Mysteries of Quantum Physics lead to God:

“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).
If two electrons are created together, they are forever entangled, regardless of the distance between the two electrons; a change in quantum spin in one electron will immediately cause the other electron to change spin as well.
The part where you jiggle an electron on one side of the universe and an invisible force traverses millions of light years and smacks another electron into wiggling instantaneously, which is about a million years faster than is technically possible without time travel. In theory, you could separate two electrons by as much space as you wanted (say, the breadth of the universe), and they are still linked in such a way that actions taken on one would affect the other instantaneously. Meaning information is being transmitted at speeds faster than light. Meaning, if you want to really go nuts, time travel. And though the party pooping scientists have been busy coming up with limitations on the kind of information that could be transmitted, no one has yet been able to disprove the theory that there is an invisible force in the universe capable of affecting matter millions of light-years away instantly. So at Big Bang there was a point in the past in which every atom in the universe was condensed into a singularity. Which means everything is quantumly entangled. Some scientists have even gone so far as to claim that quantum entanglement shows that there is no such thing as space, and that everything in the universe is still touching.
Here is an other explanation:  When a photon (photon is a force carrier particle, usually polarized laser light) passes through matter, it will be absorbed by an electron. Eventually, and spontaneously, the electron will return to its ground state by emitting the photon. Certain crystal structures increase the likelihood that the photon will split into two photons, both of them with longer wavelengths than the original. Keep in mind that a longer wavelength means a lower frequency, and thus less energy. The total energy of the two photons must equal the energy of the photon originally fired from the laser (conservation of energy). When the original photon splits into two photons, the resulting photon pair is considered entangled.
The process of using certain crystals to split incoming photons into pairs of photons is called parametric down-conversion.  Normally the photons exit the crystal such that one is aligned in a horizontally polarized light cone, the other aligned vertically. By adjusting the experiment, the horizontal and vertical light cones can be made to overlap. Even though the polarization of the individual photons is unknown, the nature of quantum mechanics predicts they differ.  To illustrate, if an entangled photon meets a vertical polarizing filter, the photon may or may not pass through. If it does, then its entangled partner will not because the instant that the first photon’s polarization is known, the second photon’s polarization will be the exact opposite. It is this instant communication between the entangled photons to indicate each other’s polarization that lies at the heart of quantum entanglement. This is the “spooky action at a distance” that Einstein believed was theoretically implausible.
Quantum events obey the laws of quantum theory, which governs the behaviour of minute objects like atoms and subatomic particles, including photons of light. By contrast with the laws of ”classical” physics (which apply to the relatively large objects of the everyday world), quantum physics often exhibits behaviour that seems impossible. The connections that persist between distant but entangled particles are ”one of the deep mysteries of quantum mechanics. ‘These connections are a fact of nature proven by experiments, but to try to explain them philosophically is very difficult. Albert Einstein sneered at the very possibility of such a thing, calling it ”spooky action at a distance.” Scientists still (somewhat shamefacedly) speak of the ”magic” of ”quantum weirdness.” And yet all experiments in recent years have shown that Einstein was wrong and that action at a distance is real.
In the early 1930s, Einstein had problems with the whole of quantum physics, which is ironic given that it was partially based on his Nobel Prize winning paper on the photoelectric effect. What he didn’t like was the way quantum particles don’t have fixed values for their properties until they are observed. Why? Einstein couldn’t relate to a universe where probability ruled! That’s why he famously said that “Der Herrgott würfelt nicht!” or “The Lord doesn’t play dice!” Einstein believed that underneath these mathematical probabilities were fixed hidden realities that we just couldn’t see. That was why he, Podolsky and Rosen dreamed up the idea of what we now call “Quantum Entanglement” in 1935. It was to show that either quantum theory was incomplete, because it said there was no hidden information, or it was possible to instantly influence something at a distance. As that seemed incredible, he thought it showed that quantum theory was incorrect the way it had been presented with probabilistic mathematics. Quantum entanglement is at the heart of the Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen (EPR) Paradox developed in 1935.
It did take a long time to prove that Quantum Entanglement truly existed. It wasn’t until the 1980s that it was clearly demonstrated. But it has been shown without doubt that this is the case.  In 1982, at the university of Paris, a research team led by physicist Alain Aspect performed what may turn out to be one of the most important experiments of the 20th century. Aspect and his team discovered that:  under certain circumstances subatomic particles such as electrons are able to instantaneously communicate with each other regardless of the distance separating them.  The problem with this discovery is that it violates Einstein’s long-held tenet that no communication can travel faster than the speed of light.
In 1935 a famous paper by Albert Einstein, Boris Podolsky and Nathan Rosen challenged the quantum theory prediction that entangled particles could remain instantly in touch with each other. One of their objections was based on the speed limit imposed by Einstein’s Special Theory of Relativity: nothing can travel faster than the speed of light. Einstein and his colleagues preferred a more intuitive explanation of the simultaneous correlation between entangled particles, based on the idea that the match between them is ordained by their identical antecedents. The behaviour of each particle, they argued, is the product of hidden ”local” factors, not by spooky long-distance effects. But again and again in recent years, increasingly sensitive experiments have decisively proved that Einstein’s explanation was wrong and quantum theory is correct.
Since the 1970’s, physicists have been testing a prediction of quantum theory that ”entangled” particles continue to communicate with each other instantaneously even when very far apart.  Entangled particles are identical entities that share common origins and properties, and remain in instantaneous touch with each other, no matter how wide the gap between them. Past experiments on entangled particles were carried out over distances of 100 yards or less. By showing that the link between two entangled particles survives even when they are seven miles apart, Dr. Gisin set a dramatic distance record.
The twin-photon experiment by Dr. Nicolas Gisin of the University of Geneva and his colleagues in June 1997 was the most spectacular demonstration yet of the mysterious long-range connections that exist between quanta events, connections created from nothing at all, which in theory can reach instantaneously from one end of the universe to the other.
In essence, Dr. Gisin sent pairs of photons in opposite directions to villages north and south of Geneva along optical fibers of the kind used to transmit telephone calls. Reaching the ends of these fibers, the two photons were forced to make random choices between alternative, equally possible pathways. Since there was no way for the photons to communicate with each other, ”classical” physics would predict that their independent choices would bear no relationship to each other. But when the paths of the two photons were properly adjusted and the results compared, the independent decisions by the paired photons always matched, even though there was no physical way for them to communicate with each other. In principle, it should make no difference whether the correlation between twin particles occurs when they are separated by a few meters or by the entire universe. This research is interesting not only from a scientific and philosophical point of view, but because of a very practical consequence: possible completely secure code could be created.

The Measurement or Observation:

Effects on Behavior of Entangled Particles:
One of the weird aspects of quantum mechanics is that something can simultaneously exist and not exist; if a particle is capable of moving along several different paths, or existing in several different states, the ‘Uncertainty Principle of Quantum Mechanics’ allows it to travel along all paths and exist in all possible states simultaneously. However, if the particle happens to be measured by some means, [observation or instrumental measurement] its path or state is no longer uncertain. The simple act of measurement instantly forces it into just one path or state.  Physicists call this a ”collapse of the wave function.”
The amazing thing is that if just one particle in an entangled pair is measured, the wave function of both particles collapses into a definite state that is the same for both partners, even separated by great distances. The ‘double slit’ and ‘single slit’ experiments of electrons behaving as wave and particle respectively but once electron is observed it knows being observed and behaves as single shot electron not as wave. This is strange phenomena. The particle knows when it is being watched and when it was not. This shows the simple means of intelligence by reacting to visual stimuli. In the STI [Self thinking Interface] Device created by Physicst Roger R.Vogelsan in the early 70’ proved that there is ultimate knowledge in the FORCE which connects to all freed electrons. This FORCE knows everything its Omniscient.
Among several proposed explanations of all this is the ”many worlds” hypothesis: the notion that for every possible pathway or state open to a particle, there is a separate universe. For each of 10 possible pathways a quantum particle might follow, for example, there would exist a separate universe.
Since the 1970’s, Dr. John F. Clauser of the University of California at Berkeley, Dr. Alain Aspect at the Institute des Optics in Orsay, France, and others have been experimenting with pairs of entangled particles. One way to create a pair of entangled twins is to start with a single photon of ultraviolet radiation and pass it through a peculiar artificial mineral called a ”down-conversion crystal.” In the Swiss experiment, the crystal consisted of potassium niobate. The crystal splits the photon in two, producing two new photons that continue on in somewhat different directions, and whose combined energy equals the energy of their parent photon. The special quality of such pairs, as shown both by theory and experiment, is that they are entangled quantum mechanically. This means that if the polarization or energy or timing of one of the particles is measured, its indefinite state is destroyed and it falls into a definite state. The astonishing consequence of this is that the particle’s distant twin experiences exactly the same metamorphosis at the same moment, even though there is no physical link or signal between the two twins.
In Dr. Gisin’s experiment, as in earlier ones, no signal of any kind was transmitted between the photons, but despite this, one of the photons ”knew” what happened to its distant twin, and mimicked the twin’s response. This response took less than one ten-thousandth of the time a light beam would have needed to carry the news from one photon to the other at a speed of 186,282 miles per second. (In fact, the correlation between the two particles was presumably instantaneous. The Swiss experiment merely set an upper limit on the time required for the response as about three ten-billionths of a second.).  Dr. Gisin’s experiment made use of a system of paired interferometers developed by Dr. James D. Franson of Johns Hopkins University, who is also a leading investigator of quantum effects.
”You start with an ultraviolet photon and split it into two photons. One goes one way and the other goes another way, both to identical interferometers. Entering its own interferometer, each photon must make a random decision as to whether it will travel a long pathway through the device or a short one. Then you look for a correlation between the pathways taken by the photons in their respective interferometers.” If the timing between the photons is exactly adjusted, each twin seems to know what the other is doing and matches its choice of pathway to coincide with that of its distant partner. Dr. Franson said of the correlation demonstrated over a seven-mile course by the Swiss experiment, ”It’s pretty amazing.”

Faster than Speed of Light:

It is assumed that the numerical correlation between two particles different from information. Quantum theory is confirmed by experiments, and so is relativity theory, which prevents us from sending messages faster than light. It is unknown that there’s any intuitive explanation of what that means.

Tunneling:

Another deep quantum mystery for which physicists have no answer has to do with ”tunneling” — the bizarre ability of particles to sometimes penetrate impenetrable barriers. This effect is not only well demonstrated; it is the basis of tunnel diodes and similar devices vital to modern electronic systems. Tunnelling is based on the fact that quantum theory is statistical in nature and deals with probabilities rather than specific predictions; there is no way to know in advance when a single radioactive atom will decay, for example. The probabilistic nature of quantum events means that if a stream of particles encounters an obstacle, most of the particles will be stopped in their tracks but a few, conveyed by probability alone, will magically appear on the other side of the barrier. The process is called ”tunnelling,” although the word in itself explains nothing. Dr. Chiao’s group at Berkeley, Dr. Aephraim M. Steinberg at the University of Toronto and others are investigating the strange properties of tunnelling, which was one of the subjects explored by scientists attending the Nobel Symposium on quantum physics in Sweden. ”We find,” Dr. Chiao said, ”that a barrier placed in the path of a tunnelling particle does not slow it down. In fact, we detect particles on the other side of the barrier that have made the trip in less time than it would take the particle to traverse an equal distance without a barrier — in other words, the tunnelling speed apparently greatly exceeds the speed of light. Moreover, if you increase the thickness of the barrier the tunneling speed increases, as high as you please. ”This is another great mystery of quantum mechanics.” Most physicists and engineers set aside the contemplation of quantum mysteries and are content to exploit the innumerable applications quantum physics has found in technology, including lasers, solid-state electronics and much more. But the sense of mystery has never been entirely suppressed.

The Cosmic Code:

The late Rockefeller Universityphysicist Heinz Pagels, like many other theorists, believed that quantum physics is a kind of code that interconnects everything in the universe, including the physical basis of life itself. In his book ”The Cosmic Code,” Dr. Pagels, an ardent mountain climber, wrote:
”I often dream about falling. Such dreams are commonplace to the ambitious or those who climb mountains. Lately I dreamed I was clutching at the face of a rock, but it would not hold. Gravel gave way. I grasped for a shrub, but it pulled loose, and in cold terror I fell into the abyss. Suddenly I realized that my fall was relative; there was no bottom and no end. A feeling of pleasure overcame me. I realized that what I embody, the principle of life, cannot be destroyed. It is written into the cosmic code, the order of the universe. As I continued to fall in the dark void, embraced by the vault of the heavens, I sang to the beauty of the stars and made my peace with the darkness.” Dr. Pagels was killed in a climbing accident in 1988.
Quantum Entanglement or the God Effect!
One of the main scientific goals of the world’s largest atom smasher, costing some 9 billion dollars, is to prove the existence of the Higgs boson or God particle, which makes the universe possible by giving mass to everything including all of us and the objects we can touch! Quantum Entanglement (QE) or the God Effect is the working mechanism of the Higgs boson or the God particle, because it’s so fundamental.  Quantum Entanglement is at the heart of understanding how significant events across the universe operate at the macro- and micro- level in split-second synchronicity despite considerable distance between them. Quantum Entanglement suggests that information is exchanged faster between Quantum Entangled particles than the speed of light, which was deemed impossible per Einstein’s special theory of relativity proposed in 1905.

Quantum Entanglement: Applications

A ‘Type’ of “The God Connection”!
When God created the universe and the laws of physics, did He leave a ‘connection’ with all particles and forces within it?  It seems there are themes and ‘designs’ in science that seem to repeat and recur in nature. Scientists and theologians have long wondered about the ‘dualism’ in particles and forces in the universe, nature, and morality. For example, matter and antimatter, positive and negative charges, male, female, good and evil, etc. When atomic theory became the dominate theory of matter around the turn of the last century, the model of Neils Bohr, of hard round particles orbiting the atomic nucleus, was compared to the planetary system of our sun. The same theme is recurrent in galactic structure and the orbits of stars, star clusters, and gasses. It seemed that a basic structure was promulgated from the very smallest objects to the very largest.
We have since seen that the atom is much more complicated and that the objects orbiting the nucleus are not ‘hard’ and definite, but are both particle and wave in their structure. The nucleus itself is very complex and the once hard objects that we call neutrons, and protons are actually made up of ‘quarks’ and other nebulous subatomic particles.
 In religion we have a belief that in order to communicate with God, a person enters into a state of consciousness that we call prayer. Through prayer, a spiritual connection is made to God and He hears our thoughts and we receive assurance that He acknowledges our wishes. Is there a similar “type” in the physical world for that connection? “It was We who created man and We know what dark suggestions his soul makes to him: for We are nearer to him than (his) jugular vein.”(Qur’an;50:16)
 The idea in quantum entanglement is that every particle in a particle-antiparticle pair is in instant communication with the other particle, regardless of how far apart they are. It is a phenomenon that was experimentally proven, just recently, by scientists in Geneva Switzerland, in 2008. In this experiment a single particle – antiparticle pair was sent streaming away from the source in opposite directions, and they were detected when they were about 20 miles away from each other. The ‘entanglement’  phenomenon was proven when a ‘detection’ of one particle instantly produced an identical change in the other particle. This ‘instantaneous’ transmission of information defies Einstein’s theory of relativity and the speed of light. A calculation was made that determined that the speed of this experiment was at least 10,000 times the speed of light and perhaps was instantaneous.
The size of the particles of this discussion are at the subatomic level, far below ‘microscope’ level. Some scientists think that at this level, there is a universal ‘connection’ that transcends space/time and allows  all particles to be ‘in contact’ with every other particle in the universe in a way that we have yet to understand. Below the ‘quantum’ or Planck level, the definitions of space and time become obscure and tend to blur.  If all particles are somehow connected below the Planck level, it would seem to say that we all have a universal connection to each other and perhaps that is the medium through which prayer is channelled? That much is pure speculation, but if God created all the physical laws and the universe in such a way that He is never out of touch both  spiritually and physically, and is omnipresent everywhere at once, it confirms what Christians, Jews & Muslims have always said about His presence and the ease with which we are in touch with Him. It means that He knows every thought, every event, and everything that happens in the universe. It also says that no matter how far you travel, or how much you transgress His will, He is always near.
Application in Highly Secure Communications:
There are some real and amazing applications of Quantum Entanglement in our world. It can be used to produce unbreakable encryption. If we send each half of a set of entangled pairs to either end of a communications link, then the randomly generated but linked properties can be used as a key to encrypt information. If anyone intercepts the information it will break the entanglement, and the communication can be stopped before the eavesdropper picks up any data.  Teleportation, Star Trek style is an other aspect being explored.
Quantum Pseudo-Telepathy: Telepathy is the transmission of information from one person to another without using any of our known sensory channels or physical interaction, it is experienced between individuals, love one’s at far off distances. The phenomenon of quantum pseudo-telepathy is mostly used as a powerful and explicit thought experiment of the non-local characteristics of quantum mechanics. Yet, the effect is real and subject to experimental verification, as demonstrated by the experimental confirmation of the violation of the Bell inequalities. The 2nd Caliph Omar is reported to have communicated with the commander of Islamic Army in battlefield hundreds of miles away. May be entanglement phenomena have some thing to explain.

Chapter- 4: Holographic Universe

Since traveling faster than the speed of light is tantamount to breaking the time barrier, this daunting prospect has caused some physicists to try to come up with elaborate ways to explain away Alain Aspect’s findings.  It has also inspired others to offer even more radical explanations including that of the holographic universe!  The implications of a holographic universe are truly mind boggling… Aspect’s findings imply that objective reality does not exist, that despite its apparent solidity the universe is at heart a phantasm, a gigantic and splendidly detailed hologram. To understand why a number of physicists including David Bohm made this startling assertion, one must first understand a little about holograms.

Hologram:

A hologram is a three-dimensional photograph made with the aid of a laser.  To make a hologram, the object to be photographed is first bathed in the light of a laser beam. Then a second laser beam is bounced off the reflected light of the first and the resulting interference pattern — the area where the two laser beams superimpose — is captured on film. When the film is developed, it looks like a meaningless swirl of light and dark lines. But as soon as the developed film is illuminated by another laser beam, a three-dimensional image of the original object appears! The three-dimensionality of such images is not the only remarkable characteristic of holograms. If a hologram of a rose is cut in half and then illuminated by a laser, each half is still found to contain the entire image of the rose. Indeed, even if the halves are divided again, each snippet of film is always found to contain a smaller but intact version of the original image. Unlike normal photographs, every part of a hologram contains all the information possessed by the whole! The “whole in every part” nature of a hologram provides us with an entirely new way of understanding organization and order. For most of its history, Western science has laboured under the bias that the best way to understand a physical phenomenon, whether a frog or an atom, is to dissect it and study its respective parts. A hologram teaches us that some things in the universe may not lend themselves to this approach. If we try to take apart some thing constructed holographically, we will not get the pieces of which it is made, we will only get smaller wholes.
Extensions of the Same Source: This insight suggested to some scientists including David Bohm another way of understanding Aspect’s discovery. Bohm believed the reason subatomic particles are able to remain in contact with one another regardless of the distance separating them is not because they are sending some sort of mysterious signal back and forth, but because their separateness is an illusion.  Bohm suggested that at some deeper level of reality such particles are not individual entities, but are actually extensions of the same fundamental something!

Beyond Cause and Effect:

Quantum Entanglement seems to throw out the whole notion of cause and effect, as we know it! It is possible for a particle to interact with another particle in such a way that the quantum states of the two particles form a single entangled state. The definition of an entangled state is that it is not entirely independent of the other’s state. Its state is dependent on another’s state in some way. Given this dependency, it is a mistake to consider either state in isolation from the other. Rather we should combine the states and treat the result as a single, entangled state.

Space and Time:

When pairs of particles are generated by the decay of other particles, naturally or through induced collision such as at CERN or Fermi Labs, these pairs may be termed “entangled”, in that such pairs often necessarily have linked and opposite qualities, ie of spin or charge. The assumption that measurement in effect “creates” the state of the measured quality goes back to the arguments of, among others: Schrödinger and Einstein, Podolsky and Rosen concerning Heisenberg’s uncertainty principle and its relation to observation. Quantum Entanglement does underline the fact that quantum particles really do only have a range of probabilities on the values of their properties rather than fixed values. And while it seems to contradict Einstein’s theory of special relativity, which says nothing can travel faster than light, it’s increasingly likely that entanglement challenges our ideas of what space and time really mean!


Chapter-5: Attributes of God & Science

The Attributes, Words and Signs and Mercies of Allah are manifest in His Creations, and can never be fully set out in human language, however extended human means may imagined to be. However all that is mentioned about Allah’s attributes, whether briefly or in detail and affirmatively or negatively, based on Qur’an, and the traditions of Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) are final some are also mentioned in Bible. Allah has most perfect attributes;  Allah can be called by any name, signifying the attributes of perfection, suitable to Him. Traditionally in Islamic traditions 99 Names are attributed to Allah, some are also mentioned in Bible. Some Islamic attributes of God are: The Creator (Al-Khaliq), The Master, The Lord of Universe (Rab-ul-Ala’min),), The Owner of All Sovereignty (Malik-al-Mulk), The Timeless (As-Sabur), The One, The Unique, Manifestation of Unity (Al-Wahid), The All Knowing, The Omniscient (Al-`Alim), The All Seeing (Al-Basir), The All Aware (Al-Khabir), The King, The Sovereign (Al-Malik), The Almighty, The Self Sufficient (Al-Aziz), The Powerful, The Rightful (Al-Bari’), The Fashioner of Forms (Al-Musawwir), The Majestic (Al-Jalil), The Answerer (Al-Mujib), The Strong (Al-Qawaie), The Producer, Originator, and Initiator of All (Al-Mubdi, Al Badi’), The Magnificent (Al-Majid), The One, the All Inclusive, The Indivisible (Al-Ahad), The Self Sufficient, The Everlasting (As-Samad), The All Beneficent (Ar-Rahman), The Most Merciful (Ar-Rahim), The Lord of Majesty and Generosity (Dhu-al-Jalali wa-al-Ikram), The Incomparable, The Originator (Al-Badi). Some of His attributes are explained briefly:-

The Creator:

He is the Supreme Creator:” He is the Originator of the heavens and the earth.(Qur’an;6:101). Allah has no equal because His Attributes are perfect: “There is nothing whatsoever like unto Him. He is the All-hearing, the All-seeing” (Qur’an;42:11); “no slumber or sleep seizes Him” (Qur’an;2:255), because His life is perfect and eternal. Bible also mentions: “Have you not known? Have you not heard? The LORD is the everlasting God, the Creator of the ends of the earth. He does not faint or grow weary, his understanding is Unsearchable.”(Isaiah;40:28).

Uncreated:

Allah knows, but not as human knows; He has power, but not as human have power. He is a thing, but unlike other things; by saying “thing,” it is intended merely to affirm His reality. He has neither body nor substance, neither accidental property nor limit, neither opposite nor like nor similitude. A human being require some material to make some thing i.e. a carpenter requires wood, nails tools and other material to make a table.  God Most High creates things out of nothing and He has knowledge of them in pre-eternity, before their creation.

The Lord:

Cherisher & Sustainer (Lord) of All the Worlds:
 Allah is The Sustainer’ (Rabb) of all the worlds. “Praise be to Allah the Cherisher and Sustainer (Rabb al- a’lamen) of the Worlds”(Qur’an;1:2); “Then praise be to Allah, Lord of the heavens and Lords of the earth, the Lord of the Worlds.”(Qur’an;45:36); “Cast thy burden upon the LORD, and he shall sustain thee: he shall never suffer the righteous to be moved.”(Psalms;55:22).

Omnipotent, the Wise:

He is Omnipotent: “He is the Supreme Authority over His servants; and He is the Wise, the Aware.”(Qur’an;6:18). Allah is not living with His creatures on earth, but He is closer to human than their  jugular vein: “It was We who created man and We know what dark suggestions his soul makes to him: for We are nearer to him than (his) jugular vein.”(Qur’an;50:16). It implies that Allah knows more truly the innermost state of human feeling and consciousness than does their own self; “Hast thou not seen that Allah knows all that is in the heavens and all that is in the earth? There is no secret conference of three but He is their fourth, nor of five but He is their sixth, nor of less than that or more but He is with them Wheresoever they may be;…”(Qur’an;58:7); “Whither shall I go from thy spirit? or whither shall I flee from thy presence?”(Psalms;139:7).

Omniscient:

Allah possess absolute & infinite knowledge: “He Alone has the keys of the unseen treasures, of which no one knows except Him. He knows whatever is in the land and in the sea; there is not a single leaf that falls without His knowledge, there is neither a grain in the darkness of the earth nor anything fresh or dry which has not been recorded in a Clear Book.”(Qur’an;6:59); “Allah alone has the knowledge of the Hour, sends down rain, and knows what is in the wombs (a blessing or a curse). No soul knows what it shall earn tomorrow, and no soul knows in what land it shall die. Surely, Allah is All-knowing, All-aware” (Qur’an;31:34). The Qur’an points to the rich sources of knowledge in the whole universe. “..The knowledge thereof is with my Lord in a Record. My Lord never errs nor forgets”(Qur’an;20:52); “ For a man’s ways are before the eyes of the LORD, and he watches all his paths.”(Proverbs;5:21).

The First and the Last:

The Evident and The Immanent: According to Qur’an: “He is the First and the Last the Evident and the Immanent: and He has full knowledge of all things. “(Qur’an;57:3); “They shall perish, but thou shalt endure: yea, all of them shall wax old like a garment; as a vesture shalt thou change them, and they shall be changed: But thou art the same, and thy years shall have no end.”(Psalms;102:26-27). God is Evident in so far as there is ample evidence of His existence and providence all around the universe. On the other hand, God is Hidden in so far as human intellect cannot grasp His essence nor can He be seen in the present world. “I am the Alpha and the Omega,” says the Lord God, who is and who was and who is to come, the Almighty.”(RSV;Revelation;1:8). The Bible also mentions, God as Invisible (Job;23:8-9) and Un-searchable (Job;11:7; 37:23;Psalms; 145:3; Isaiah; 40:28).

God is Not Similar to His Creatures:

“There is none like unto Him”(Qur’an;112:4); “..there is none like me in all the earth.”(Exodus;9:14).

The Merciful:

The Mercy of Allah is the one of the grandest themes of the Qur’an. To contemplate these boundless gifts of God. “When those who believe in Our revelations come to you, say: “Peace be upon you. Your Lord has decreed mercy upon Himself. If anyone among you commits evil because of ignorance and thereafter repents and mends his ways; you will find Allah Forgiving, Merciful.”(Qur’an;6:54& 85:14). God’s attribute of Mercy is also highlighted in Bible at Exodus;34:6-7 and many other places: “The earth, O LORD, is full of thy mercy: teach me thy statutes.”(Psalms;119:64); “Therefore turn thou to thy God: keep mercy and judgment, and wait on thy God continually.”(Hosea;12:6); “For a small moment have I forsaken thee; but with great mercies will I gather thee.”(Isaiah;54:7); “But God, who is rich in mercy, for his great love wherewith he loved us,”(Ephesians;2:4).  

Justice:

He helps all with justices and fairness: “The fact is that Allah is your Protector and He is the best of all helpers.”(Qur’an;3:150); “Rest assured that Allah does not wrong anyone even by an atom’s weight. If someone does a good deed He increases it many fold and also gives an extra great reward on His own.”(Qur’an;4:40). He is Sustainer of humanity whether believers or non believers and all other creatures:  “We bestowed on all – these as well those – out of the bounties of your Lord; the bounties of your Sustainer are not confined.”(Qur’an;17:20). He answers the prayers: “Call on Me; I will answer your (Prayer)…!”(Qur’an;40.60). It is mentioned in Bible: “Touching the Almighty, we cannot find him out: he is excellent in power, and in judgment, and in plenty of justice: he will not afflict.”(Job;37:23). On the Day of Judgment He will judge among His people. He is the Doer of what He wills. True knowledge based on clear proof and indisputable evidence acquired by experience or experiment or by both.

He Does What He Wills:

To Him belongs the Kingdom of the Heavens and the Earth, He does what ever He Wills:“ Whenever He intends a thing, He needs only to say: “Be,” and it is.”(Qur’an;36:82); “There is nothing whatever like unto Him, He is the All-hearing, the All-seeing. To Him belongs the keys of the Heavens and the Earth. He enlarges and restricts provisions to whom He wills. Surely He has knowledge of everything” (Qur’an;42:11-12); “He creates what He pleases. He gives, to whom He wills, females, and He gives, to whom He wills, males, or He couples them, males and females; and He makes whom He wills barren. Surely, He is the Knowing, the Powerful”(Qur’an;42:49-50). Despite being All Powerful, God does not wrong the mankind: “Lo! Allah wrongs not mankind in aught; but mankind wrong themselves.” (Qur’an;10:44).

Subtle, Unfathomable, The All Aware:

Allah is Latif,  fine, subtle, so fine and subtle as to be invisible to the physical eye; so fine as to be imperceptible to the senses; figuratively, so pure as to be above the mental or spiritual vision of ordinary men but at the same time He is aware of all things. It is beyond the capability of human eye to see God In this world, Allah says: “Vision cannot perceive Him, but He perceives all vision. He is the Subtle, (Latif, Incomprehensible), the All-aware” (Qur’an;6:103). Bible also confirms that God can not bee seen (John;1:18, 1Timothy;6:16, Exodus;33:20). God Most High will be seen in the Hereafter, visible to the believers in Paradise with their corporeal vision as mentioned in Qur’an: “Upon that day (Day of Judgment) some faces shall be radiant, gazing upon their Lord”(Qur’an;75:22-23). “Behold, I go forward, but he is not there; and backward, but I cannot perceive him; on the left hand I seek him, but I cannot behold him; I turn to the right hand, but I cannot see him.”(Job;23:8-9).
Belief in God, His names, and His attributes instils in the individual the love and glorification of God that result in obeying God’s instructions and avoiding His prohibitions. These are the means of achieving ultimate happiness in this life and the hereafter for both the individual and the society: “Whoever, male or female, does righteous deed, while believing, We shall assuredly grant him a goodly life, and We shall reward them according to the best of their deeds” (Qur’an;16:97).


Chapter-6: Scientific Proofs of God

Through Four Common Attributes:

While keeping metaphysics and spirituality aside, the four primary physical attributes are being considered here that may help to describe God to any believer or disbeliever in scientific terms: 1)Eternal, independent of time, 2)Omnipresent, found everywhere, 3)Omnipotent, all powerful and 4)Omniscient, all knowing. If these primary attributes are found in one Power and are proved scientifically then that power is God.

Eternal:

Heisenberg came to the conclusion that quantum events cannot be predicted. All freed electrons behave as if they are being influenced by an outside variable or force, Uncertainty Principle. In Signal Travels Farther & Faster than light by Malcolm W.Browne, a force was found connecting two freed electrons and proved to be Eternal, was present within our time yet was not involved with the flow of our time. This Eternal force connects to all freed electrons. Every particle that releases energy connects to this Eternal force.

Omnipresent:

 Everything beyond our solar system that is visible is made of stars, which all release freed electrons, light, radiation etc. This shows that this force to also be Omnipresent everywhere in the universe.

Omnipotent:

In experiments by Russian scientists they found at that laser photons knew when a DNA molecule was added in to the vacuum.  [http://quantumbalancing.com/news/russian_dna.htm]
The photons/electrons collected around the DNA stand and began to change the order of the DNA, changing it to what is desired. After the DNA was removed and the laser turned off the excess photons remained in the position resembling the DNA for over 22 minutes. This simply proves that this force to be Omnipotent, all powerful. It is common observation that we see everything to be so complex, complex environments, complex galaxies and the complexity of nature and life itself. If this force created everything from nothing, we know that energy cannot be created, shows this force to be Omnipotent. Visual evidence is seen in the distance of stars and galaxies across the universe.
According to the first law of thermodynamics energy cannot be created or destroyed. Then where did all the energy in this universe come from? Does it have something to do with this same force being timeless? The force was able to use freed electrons to manipulate DNA, showing what this force can do on a tiny scale. What can this force do to freed electrons on a large scale? Is the universe expanding form dark matter or this Eternal Force?
Since the universe is full of freed electrons, one can only imagine what this force could do if it used to work as one single entity. Possibly how the whole universe was created in six eons.
This data implies that all freed electrons in combination or as a collective to be: Omnipotent, all powerful. This is self evident from the size and distance of galaxies that can be seen across this universe.

Omniscient:

In the Double Slit experiment mentioned earlier, light a freed electron showed that it was observant of its surroundings. It knew when it was being watched and knew when it was not. It showed simple means of intelligence by reacting to visual stimuli. The first bit of evidence that showed this force to be, Omniscient. In the STI [Self thinking Interface] Device created by Physicst Roger R.Vogelsan in the early 70’ proved that there is ultimate knowledge in the FORCE which connects to all freed electrons. This FORCE knows everything its Omniscient.
Hence science proves that God is real and His existence is scientifically proved, let’s look at the summary:
1)    God is Eternal: The twin-photon experiment by Dr.Nicholas Gisin verified by later experiments found photons, freed electrons to be connected to this Force. Nothing can go faster that light except this one Force.
2)    God is Omnipresent: This force connects to all freed electrons in our universe. Freed electrons are created when matter is converted in to energy. This force is everywhere even beyond our universe. This force is found to be everywhere in our universe’s past, present & future which we call time as time does not exist to this force.
3)    God is Omnipotent: All powerful. We observe galaxies at the furthest reaches of the universe. Not hot gas which first theorised but old galaxies. How can the light now be reaching us and show old galaxies at the furthest extents of the universe? If light has a speed limit, then how did distant galaxies form long before the universe was said to have begun? This force again shows that it is Omnipotent and Timeless.
4)    God is Omniscient: All knowing. Physicst Roger R.Vogelsang found with his STI Device that not only could this force read thoughts and knew all things in the past and future but have knowledge of every thing past, present and future.
God is Eternal, Omnipresent, Omnipotent and Omniscient, science proves it!


Chapter-7: God, Science & Universe

Scientific Facts in Qur’an on Universe
History records many miracles performed through Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) but Allah in His Divine wisdom provided Qur’an, the ever living sign (miracle) through Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him), which any one can read by himself, to discover that Qur’an is the true word of Allah, the last book of guidance, light and wisdom for the humanity till eternity. Islam encourages reasoning, discussions and dialogue. The Qur’an provides reason and rationale for the purpose, creation and existence of universe. It is the living sign of God and truthfulness of His last messenger, Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him). Allah says: “O mankind! Verily there hath come to you a convincing proof (Qur’an) from your Lord: for We have sent unto you a light (that is) manifest. Then those who believe in Allah and hold fast to Him soon will He admit them to Mercy and Grace from Him and guide them to Himself by a straight Way.”(Qur’an;4:174-175). The Qur’an contains more than six thousand ayaats (‘Signs’), each verse (ayah), of Qur’an is a sign from the Lord, which speaks of the greatness of its originator. It is a historical fact that Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) was ‘Ummi’ i.e. unlettered (illiterate) (Qur’an;7:157). Revelation of Qur’an in Arabic, unmatched in its eloquence and beauty, through the mouth of un-learned (Isaiah;29:12) prophet is miraculous. The prophesy of Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) and Qur’an (word of God, i.e. ‘words in his mouth’) is mentioned in Bible at Deuteronomy; 18:18,19. The universal challenge of Qur’an to produce even one ayah (verse) like Qur’an (Qur’an;2:23) is yet to be answered. This is the only scripture in the world which is available to the humanity in its original revealed form and will continue to be as such because Allah has taken responsibility to guard it (Qur’an;15:9) . It is the only scripture which is memorized by thousands of Muslims of all ages, nationalities, categories and professions (doctors, engineers, scientists, clerics and common people) the world over from last fourteen centuries, hence is transferred from generation to generation accurately. It is the most recited book in the world.
Qur’an is not a book of ‘science, but a book of ‘signs’ (ayaats), there are more than thousand verses of Qur’an referring to various subjects of science, such as astronomy, physics, geography, geology, oceanology, biology, botany, zoology, medicine, physiology, embryology as well as general science, mostly un known to humanity at the time of its revelation, fourteen centuries ago. Some verses related with universe are mentioned here:
“Soon shall We show them Our signs in the universeand 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)
“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).
“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)
“That Day We will fold up heaven like folding up the pages of a book. As We originated the first creation so We will regenerate it. It is a promise binding on Us. That is what We will do.” (Qur’an, 21:104)
“They do not measure Allah with His true measure. The whole earth will be a mere handful for Him on the Day of Rising the heavens folded up in His right hand. Glory be to Him! He is exalted above the partners they ascribe!” (Qur’an, 39:67)
“He Who created the seven heavens in layers. You will not find any discrepancy in the creation of the All-Merciful. Look again-do you see any gaps? Then look again and again. Your sight will return to you dazzled and exhausted!” (Qur’an, 67:3-4)
“Do you not see how He created seven heavens in layers, and placed the moon as a light in them and made the sun a blazing lamp?” (Qur’an, 71:15-16)
“No! I swear by the planets-that recede, that ride their course [and] hide themselves.” (Qur’an, 81: 15-16)
“Your Lord is Allah, Who created the heavens and the earth in six eons and then settled Himself firmly on the Throne…” (Qur’an, 7:54). When a six-eons period of time is calculated according to the relativity of time, it equates to six trillion days. That is because universal time flows a million million times faster than time on Earth. Calculated in terms of years, 6 trillion days equates to approximately 16.427 billion years. This is within the estimated range for the age of the universe.
Black Holes: “And I swear by the stars’ positions-and that is a mighty oath if you only knew”. (Qur’an, 56:75-76), “When the stars are extinguished”, (Qur’an, 77:8), “[I swear] by Heaven and the Tariq! And what will convey to you what the Tariq is? The Star Piercing [the darkness]!” (Qur’an, 86:1-3)
The Skies with ‘Woven’ Orbits: “By heaven furnished with paths;” (Quran; 51:7)
“Allah is He Who raised up the heavens without any support – you can see that – and then established Himself firmly on the Throne. He made the Sun and Moon subservient, each running for a specified term. He directs the whole affair. He makes the Signs clear so that hopefully you will be certain about the meeting with your Lord”. (Quran; 13:2)
A Red Rose in The Sky: The Rosette Nebula: When the Heaven shall be cleft asunder, and become rose red, like stained leather. (Quran; 55:37)
The Sun Will Expire after Some Time: And the sun runs to a fixed resting place. That is the decree of the Almighty, the All-Knowing. (Quran; 36:38)
“It is We Who have created you. Why, then, do you not accept the truth? Have you ever considered that [seed] which you emit? Is it you who create it? Or are We the Creator?” (Qur’an, 56:57-59)
The complex process of pregnancy from conception till child birth, discovered recently is accurately narrated in Qur’an;23:13-14.
It is found that the Qur’anic information on science does not conflict with the established scientific facts. It may go against certain scientific hypothesis or theories, which are not based on facts as many a times, the science retracts its position.
The scientific facts mentioned in Qur’an have been discovered during last few centuries. But science has not advanced to a level where it can confirm every statement of the Qur’an referring to scientific information. According to Dr.Zakir Naik; suppose 80% of all that is mentioned in the Qur’an has been proved 100% correct, while for the remaining 20%, science makes no categorical statement, since it has not advanced to a level, where it can either prove or disprove these statements. With the limited knowledge through science available today, one cannot say for sure whether even a single percentage or a single verse of the Qur’an from this 20% portion is wrong. Thus when 80% of the Qur’an is 100% correct and the remaining 20% is not disproved, logic says that even the 20% portion is correct. [The details of scientific facts mentioned in Qur’an have been deliberated upon in the book ‘Qur’an and Science’ by Dr.Zakir Naik & “The Bible, The Qur’an and Science” by Dr. Maurice Bucaille, a French doctor]. How an unlettered person brought up among the most backward desert Arabs, away from the centres of civilization and knowledge, could accurately provide the scientific information mostly discovered recently? It is God, the Creator alone Who could provide so accurate scientific information. Consequently as the scientific information mentioned in Qur’an is true then, by inference the other metaphysical information mentioned in Qur’an (correspondingly also in Bible) like; existence of God, angles, eschatology (death, judgment, heaven, hell, and the final destiny of the soul and of humankind) must also be true. Humanity has much more to learn from Qur’an if they ponder over it (Qur’an;38:29). 
Allah says: “This Book (Al-Qur’an) which We have sent down to you (O Muhammad) is highly blessed, so that they may ponder upon its verses and the men of understanding may learn a lesson from it.”(Qur’an;4:82).
It’s amazing; there is no doubt that Qur’an is a living miracle manifesting existence of The One Creator-Allah.

Conclusion:

Science is beginning to see the entire universe as a holographically interlinked network of energy and information. 
“Science is not the enemy of humanity but one of the deepest expressions of the human desire to realize that vision of infinite knowledge,” “Our capacity for fulfillment can come only through faith and feelings. But our capacity for survival must come from reason and knowledge.” Science, he warned, is not “as resilient as commerce, religion, or politics. It needs careful nurturing.” If humankind ultimately abandons science, it would be “an error that might cost us our existence.” [Pagels]
As Einstein said, “Raffiniert ist der Herrgott, aber boshaft ist er nicht!” or “The Lord is subtle, but he is not malicious!”  And as the mystic Maulana Rumi wrote around 800 years ago, “If you could get rid of yourself just once, the secret of secrets would open to you. The face of the unknown, hidden beyond the universe would appear on the mirror of your perception!”
Allah says in Quran: “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). “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).
[References & weblinks are available at: http://aftabkhan.blog.com%5D
***************************

Related:

Existance of God

 Here are 5ive straight-forward reasons to believe that God is really there.


proof of GodJust once wouldn’t you love for someone to simply show you the evidence for God’s existence? No arm-twisting. No statements of, “You just have to believe.” Well, here is an attempt to candidly offer some of the reasons which suggest that God exists.
But first consider this. When it comes to the possibility of God’s existence, the Bible says that there are people who have seen sufficient evidence, but they have suppressed the truth about God.1 On the other hand, for those who want to know God if he is there, he says, “You will seek me and find me; when you seek me with all your heart, I will be found by you.”2 Before you look at the facts surrounding God’s existence, ask yourself, If God does exist, would I want to know him? Here then, are some reasons to consider…
Videos >>>

1. The complexity of our planet points to a deliberate Designer who not only created our universe, but sustains it today.

Many examples showing God’s design could be given, possibly with no end. But here are a few:
The Earth…its size is perfect. The Earth’s size and corresponding gravity holds a thin layer of mostly nitrogen and oxygen gases, only extending about 50 miles above the Earth’s surface. If Earth were smaller, an atmosphere would be impossible, like the planet Mercury. If Earth were larger, its atmosphere would contain free hydrogen, like Jupiter.3 Earth is the only known planet equipped with an atmosphere of the right mixture of gases to sustain plant, animal and human life.
existence of GodThe Earth is located the right distance from the sun. Consider the temperature swings we encounter, roughly -30 degrees to +120 degrees. If the Earth were any further away from the sun, we would all freeze. Any closer and we would burn up. Even a fractional variance in the Earth’s position to the sun would make life on Earth impossible. The Earth remains this perfect distance from the sun while it rotates around the sun at a speed of nearly 67,000 mph. It is also rotating on its axis, allowing the entire surface of the Earth to be properly warmed and cooled every day.
And our moon is the perfect size and distance from the Earth for its gravitational pull. The moon creates important ocean tides and movement so ocean waters do not stagnate, and yet our massive oceans are restrained from spilling over across the continents.4
Water…colorless, odorless and without taste, and yet no living thing can survive without it. Plants, animals and human beings consist mostly of water (about two-thirds of the human body is water). You’ll see why the characteristics of water are uniquely suited to life:
It has an unusually high boiling point and freezing point. Water allows us to live in an environment of fluctuating temperature changes, while keeping our bodies a steady 98.6 degrees.
proof of GodWater is a universal solvent. This property of water means that various chemicals, minerals and nutrients can be carried throughout our bodies and into the smallest blood vessels.5
Water is also chemically neutral. Without affecting the makeup of the substances it carries, water enables food, medicines and minerals to be absorbed and used by the body.
Water has a unique surface tension. Water in plants can therefore flow upward against gravity, bringing life-giving water and nutrients to the top of even the tallest trees.
Water freezes from the top down and floats, so fish can live in the winter.
Ninety-seven percent of the Earth’s water is in the oceans. But on our Earth, there is a system designed which removes salt from the water and then distributes that water throughout the globe. Evaporation takes the ocean waters, leaving the salt, and forms clouds which are easily moved by the wind to disperse water over the land, for vegetation, animals and people. It is a system of purification and supply that sustains life on this planet, a system of recycled and reused water.6
The human brain…simultaneously processes an amazing amount of information. Your brain takes in all the colors and objects you see, the temperature around you, the pressure of your feet against the floor, the sounds around you, the dryness of your mouth, even the texture of your keyboard. Your brain holds and processes all your emotions, thoughts and memories. At the same time your brain keeps track of the ongoing functions of your body like your breathing pattern, eyelid movement, hunger and movement of the muscles in your hands.
existence of GodThe human brain processes more than a million messages a second.7 Your brain weighs the importance of all this data, filtering out the relatively unimportant. This screening function is what allows you to focus and operate effectively in your world. The brain functions differently than other organs. There is an intelligence to it, the ability to reason, to produce feelings, to dream and plan, to take action, and relate to other people.
The eye…can distinguish among seven million colors. It has automatic focusing and handles an astounding 1.5 million messages — simultaneously.8 Evolution focuses on mutations and changes from and within existing organisms. Yet evolution alone does not fully explain the initial source of the eye or the brain — the start of living organisms from nonliving matter.

2. The universe had a start – what caused it?

Scientists are convinced that our universe began with one enormous explosion of energy and light, which we now call the Big Bang. This was the singular start to everything that exists: the beginning of the universe, the start of space, and even the initial start of time itself.
Astrophysicist Robert Jastrow, a self-described agnostic, stated, “The seed of everything that has happened in the Universe was planted in that first instant; every star, every planet and every living creature in the Universe came into being as a result of events that were set in motion in the moment of the cosmic explosion…The Universe flashed into being, and we cannot find out what caused that to happen.”9
Steven Weinberg, a Nobel laureate in Physics, said at the moment of this explosion, “the universe was about a hundred thousands million degrees Centigrade…and the universe was filled with light.”10
The universe has not always existed. It had a start…what caused that? Scientists have no explanation for the sudden explosion of light and matter.

3. The universe operates by uniform laws of nature. Why does it?

Much of life may seem uncertain, but look at what we can count on day after day: gravity remains consistent, a hot cup of coffee left on a counter will get cold, the earth rotates in the same 24 hours, and the speed of light doesn’t change — on earth or in galaxies far from us.
How is it that we can identify laws of nature that never change? Why is the universe so orderly, so reliable?
“The greatest scientists have been struck by how strange this is. There is no logical necessity for a universe that obeys rules, let alone one that abides by the rules of mathematics. This astonishment springs from the recognition that the universe doesn’t have to behave this way. It is easy to imagine a universe in which conditions change unpredictably from instant to instant, or even a universe in which things pop in and out of existence.”11
Richard Feynman, a Nobel Prize winner for quantum electrodynamics, said, “Why nature is mathematical is a mystery…The fact that there are rules at all is a kind of miracle.”12

4. The DNA code informs, programs a cell’s behavior.

existence of GodAll instruction, all teaching, all training comes with intent. Someone who writes an instruction manual does so with purpose. Did you know that in every cell of our bodies there exists a very detailed instruction code, much like a miniature computer program? As you may know, a computer program is made up of ones and zeros, like this: 110010101011000. The way they are arranged tell the computer program what to do. The DNA code in each of our cells is very similar. It’s made up of four chemicals that scientists abbreviate as A, T, G, and C. These are arranged in the human cell like this: CGTGTGACTCGCTCCTGAT and so on. There are three billion of these letters in every human cell!!
Well, just like you can program your phone to beep for specific reasons, DNA instructs the cell. DNA is a three-billion-lettered program telling the cell to act in a certain way. It is a full instruction manual.13
existence of GodWhy is this so amazing? One has to ask….how did this information program wind up in each human cell? These are not just chemicals. These are chemicals that instruct, that code in a very detailed way exactly how the person’s body should develop.
Natural, biological causes are completely lacking as an explanation when programmed information is involved. You cannot find instruction, precise information like this, without someone intentionally constructing it.

5. We know God exists because he pursues us. He is constantly initiating and seeking for us to come to him.

I was an atheist at one time. And like many atheists, the issue of people believing in God bothered me greatly. What is it about atheists that we would spend so much time, attention, and energy refuting something that we don’t believe even exists?! What causes us to do that? When I was an atheist, I attributed my intentions as caring for those poor, delusional people…to help them realize their hope was completely ill-founded. To be honest, I also had another motive. As I challenged those who believed in God, I was deeply curious to see if they could convince me otherwise. Part of my quest was to become free from the question of God. If I could conclusively prove to believers that they were wrong, then the issue is off the table, and I would be free to go about my life.
proof of GodI didn’t realize that the reason the topic of God weighed so heavily on my mind, was because God was pressing the issue. I have come to find out that God wants to be known. He created us with the intention that we would know him. He has surrounded us with evidence of himself and he keeps the question of his existence squarely before us. It was as if I couldn’t escape thinking about the possibility of God. In fact, the day I chose to acknowledge God’s existence, my prayer began with, “Ok, you win…” It might be that the underlying reason atheists are bothered by people believing in God is because God is actively pursuing them.
I am not the only one who has experienced this. Malcolm Muggeridge, socialist and philosophical author, wrote, “I had a notion that somehow, besides questing, I was being pursued.” C.S. Lewis said he remembered, “…night after night, feeling whenever my mind lifted even for a second from my work, the steady, unrelenting approach of Him whom I so earnestly desired not to meet. I gave in, and admitted that God was God, and knelt and prayed: perhaps, that night, the most dejected and reluctant convert in all of England.”
Lewis went on to write a book titled, “Surprised by Joy” as a result of knowing God. I too had no expectations other than rightfully admitting God’s existence. Yet over the following several months, I became amazed by his love for me.
Extract from article By Marilyn Adamson : http://www.everystudent.com/features/isthere.html?gclid=CNLn6vawxbgCFZLItAod6GgAyA

“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).

The Bible claims that the God of the Bible exists and is the one true God.

Genesis 1:1 – In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.

Hebrews 11:6 – We must believe that God exists.

Deuteronomy 4:35,39; 6:4 – The God who claims to speak through the Bible is the one and only true God.

Mark 12:29 – “The most important one,” answered Jesus, “is this: ‘Hear, O Israel: The Lord our God, the Lord is one.

1 Corinthians 8:4-6 – So then, about eating food sacrificed to idols: We know that “An idol is nothing at all in the world” and that “There is no God but one.”

James 2:19 – You believe that there is one God. Good! Even the demons believe that–and shudder.

1 Timothy 2:5 – For there is one God and one mediator between God and mankind, the man Christ Jesus

[See also Isaiah 43:10-13; 44:6-8,24; 45:5,6,14,18,21-23; 52:6; Matthew 4:10; 2 Samuel 7:22; 1 Chronicles 17:20; Exodus 20:3-6; 34:14; Deuteronomy 6:13-15; 32:39; Psalm 86:10; Zech 14:9]

Why Jesus did not Say, “I am God” ?

It has always been argued that Jesus Christ should have explicitly declared his deity if he was any. To this common query, Trinitarians basically argue that if Jesus Christ would have declared his deity then masses would have “confused” themselves in recognizing the person of Father and son distinctly.
Rather than giving any concrete explanation as to how and why people would confuse between the persons of Father and son, Trinitarians compare some titles which Jesus Christ was given in the New Testament to argue for his deity! On one particular instance a Christian named Keith Thompson wrote a typical response,“Is Asking “Where did Jesus say, ‘I am God’” a Good Argument?
Thompson wa responded covering arguments directly related to the topic nevertheless, he complained in his recent publication that his “main arguments” were ignored.
Therefore, in this response it is analyzed how viable it is to argue that people would have been led into “confusion” of differentiating between the persons of Father and son if Jesus Christ would have explicitly declared his deity. Besides, we would also consider standard New Testament verses which are overused to impute divinity upon Christ.
Cliché Old “Confusion” Theory
As we introduced that it is standard Trinitarian argument to claim that multitudes would have confused between the different persons of Father and son had Jesus Christ declared his deity! Here is the same argument in Thompson’s words:
The problem is that if Jesus were to come out and say “I am God” without clearly and forcefully establishing his personal distinction from the Father, and His deity in relation to that fact, people would think He was claiming to be the same person as the Father. This is because God was used primarily in reference to the Father and virtually served as His proper name. In other words, to come out and say “I am God” instead of first establishing His distinction from the Father, would lead His followers into thinking He was making himself out to be the Father in heaven.(1) This is why Jesus didn’t just walk around saying “I am God” as the critics, monotheists demand.
If Trinitarian brand of Christianity was “the” divine religion meant for humanity then every prophet of the Old Testament came, besides other things, to explain the status of Jesus Christ  as god himself! They would have definitely expounded that Jesus is the second god-person in the trinity besides Father and Holy Ghost. Under this consideration, it is hard to assume that, “if Jesus were to come out and say “I am God” without clearly and forcefully establishing his personal distinction from the Father, and His deity in relation to that fact, people would think He was claiming to be the same person as the Father.”
Notice another point which Thompson wrote, “This is because God was used primarily in reference to the Father and virtually served as His proper name.” The simple query is, if after thousands of years of ministry by multiple Old Testament prophets, if Israelites yet believed and deemed only the “person” of Father with the title of “God” notwithstanding the Trinitarian philosophy of three divine persons then there is more reason to believe that neither prophets taught nor traditionally Israelites believed in any “triune” class of gods lest they would never reserve the term “God” for Father alone so much so that its usage by anybody other than Father, say, Jesus would confuse them between the separate identities of Father and Jesus !
In fact, traditionally Jews personalized the usage of term “God” only for Father because they had certain attributes recognized on God alone. For instance the criteria that God can never be seen:
“I will not let you see my face, because no one can see me and stay alive,” (Exodus 33:20)
Therefore, logically, if multiple Old Testament prophets really taught about any so called “triune” god(s) which included Jesus  in it, then they definitely differentiated between the person of Father who could not be seen at any time as against son, who was visible at all times. Subsequently, any attempt to explain away that followers of Jesus  could have been “confused” in differentiating the persons in the godhead is mere Trinitarian desperation because based on the attributes it was really very simple job to recognize and differentiate the “persons” in godhead (of course, provided if there was any concept of “persons” and “godheads”).
The dire desperation of Thompson further gets magnified when he made “explanation” like,
In other words, to come out and say “I am God” instead of first establishing His distinction from the Father, would lead His followers into thinking He was making himself out to be the Father in heaven.
Notice Thompson rightly used the very important word “first” but never implemented it when considering deity of Jesus Christ! That is, how difficult was it for Jesus to “first” expound the difference between his “person” and the person of Father and then claim that he is god – the second amongst the three. However he never did so – not even after his alleged resurrection when he came to meet his disciples. We believe that if at all the concept of “triune” god was viable and warranted then post-resurrection appearance was the most ripe time for Jesus Christ to “walk around saying “I am God” as the Critics demand.” Unfortunately for Trinitarians, Jesus again disappointed.
Furthermore, by relying on confusion-theory, Thompson is inadvertently giving no credit to the disciples of Jesus; it is because, let us assume that most Israelites would have misconstrued Jesus’ identity, but this cannot be extended to the immediate disciples who were under his direct tutelage, spending most of their time with him in ministry. Thus Jesus must have at least worded his identity to his disciples without any vulnerability of their being “confused”.
From the preceding, does it not imply that Thompson is taking undue liberty of disparaging the intellectual standards of multitudes of Jesus’ time. It is because on what basis can Thompson assume that masses could have been led to confusion if Jesus would have explicitly declared his deity? Did Jesus Christ ever inform so? Or did Holy Ghost reveal so anywhere? What if masses were matured enough intellectually to comprehend Jesus’  declaration about himself. Therefore, it is recklessly unwarranted to impress on masses that they all (included disciples) had cluttered mind. Even more so when Thompson accepts, as we would see shortly, that “many” Jews already recognized a separate divine god distinct from the person of Father!
To further analyze the viability of Thompson’s argument, let us take the examination to the next level. We have been dealing with humans who, as per Thompson, were vulnerable to the confusion between the persons of Father and son. So, we would now consider a very intriguing (if not embarrassing) incident from the New Testament where Jesus Christ interacts with a non-human being – Satan. Consider the following New Testament account:
Then the Devil took Jesus to a very high mountain and showed him all the kingdoms of the world in all their greatness. “All this I will give you,” the Devil said, “if you kneel down and worship me.” Then Jesus answered;

 “Go away, Satan! The scripture says, ‘Worship the Lord your God and serve only him!‘ “(Matthew 4:8-10)

Notwithstanding the bizarre audacity which mere Satan had against the very god of Trinitarian(s), we need to notice that it required Jesus Christ to “worship” Satan!! Now, if Jesus Christ was really a God then this was one of those opportune moments where he could have asserted his deity on Satan by explicitly claiming something like: “Go away Satan! You should worship me and serve only me since I created you; I am the Lord your God!” If Jesus Christ would have claimed anything of this sort then, firstly, it would have certainly shut Critics once and for all and, secondly, it would have also taught Satan that besides Father, Jesus Christ was also his god and as such he should not have the temerity to ask god-almighty to “worship” him!
Observe we said that it was an opportune moment for Jesus Christ to declare his deity explicitly on Satan. It is because, if we concentrate on the sentence construction of Satan, he asked Jesus Christ to worship him in the first person, notice: “All this I will give you,” the Devil said, “if you kneel down and worship me.”. Therefore, Jesus Christ should have taken the situation to remind Satan in the first person that it was he who created him and thus, Satan should kneel down and worship him [Jesus (p)].
However, Jesus Christ never did so. He deflected the matter to some third person. There can be either of the two reasons: Either :

(i) Jesus Christ was not divine or 
(ii) He did not want to “confuse” the poor little Satan into blurring the difference between the so-called “person” of Father and son as Thompson explains!

We think Trinitarians like Thompson would choose the second option for their defense of Jesus’ deity!
Finally, if Thompson really wants us to consider his confusion theory seriously then he should address the following issues:
1)      Why should we doubt the preaching of multiple prophets down through the ages if they were really teaching about any “triune” god concept? It is naturally expected that they must have clarified the different persons in the godhead while, presumably, teaching “triune” gods and thus, the confusion theory is not really viable.
2)      Even if we assume that Old Testament prophets did not clarify the difference between the persons of Jesus Christ and Father yet, while in his ministry, Jesus Christ could have differentiated it very precisely and then declared his deity. This never happened – we expect Thompson to address this.
3)     At least in the post-crucifixion appearance Jesus Christ could have taken the liberty to introduce himself as the second god-person amongst the three. Surprisingly, even this did not happen!
4)      Thompson should address why he has no confidence on at least the immediate disciples of Jesus Christ wherein Jesus Christ could have at least declared his deity explicitly to them. As close disciples they should have at least not “misunderstood” the “person” of Jesus Christ with Father.
5)      Finally, why did Jesus Christ shy away from asserting his deity on Satanexplicitly; wasting the situation where Satan challenged Jesus Christ – the very second god-person of Trinitarians – to worship itself in the first person. Was Jesus Christ concerned about Satan’s confusion into recognizing the persons of Father and son distinctly!?
Thus, there were more than just one opportunity where Jesus’ identity as god could have been declared without any scintilla of “confusions” between him and Father.
Consequently in the absence of clear and explicit declaration of Jesus’  deity, Thompson has no other alternative other than manufacture weak aegis of confusion theory under which he can sell the complex and very costly philosophy of Trinity.
Rather than inventing escape clauses, Thompson and other Christians should come to terms with the fact that Jesus Christ never declared himself to be god since he had no warrant of doing so:
“And behold! Allah will say: “O Jesus the son of Mary! Didst thou say unto men, worship me and my mother as gods in derogation of Allah’?” He will say: “Glory to Thee! never could I say what I had no right (to say). Had I said such a thing, thou wouldst indeed have known it. You know what is in my heart, Thou I know not what is in Thine. For You know  in full all that is hidden.”(Qur’an 5:116, Yusuf Ali’s Quran Translation)
Thompson tried to support the “confusion” theory with the so-called divine “I am” title which is applied to Jesus Christ. However rather than doing any good, as we would see, it further proves our point that there was just no room that masses of people could have been led into confusion (!):
For instance, Jesus applied an Old Testament title “I Am” to himself, which is significant since he was basically making himself out to be the OT figure known as the Angel of the Lord, the “I Am” of Exodus 3:14! There were many different Jewish strands at that time that already maintained that this figure was God and yet distinct from God.(2) Thus, by using the title “I Am” Jesus was affirming both His deity as well as His distinction from the Father since in the Old Testament “I Am” was applied to both God (cf. Deuteronomy 32:39; Isaiah 43:13, Exodus 3:14) and the prophet e Lord (John 8:28, 58). One needs to understand inter-testimental Jewish thinking in order to understand these issues properly. Without this pre-Christian Jewish backdrop in mind Critics will be unable to understand why Jesus did what He did and said the things He said.
In summary, although Christ didn’t say “I am God” without qualification, which would have led people to think he was the Father, he did apply numerous Old Testament titles of God to Himself while going out of his way to affirm that He is not the Father.
Observe carefully that Thompson, on one hand, readily accepts that “many” Jews “already” recognized a deity other than and distinct from God, i.e., Father. According to Thompson this separate god was recognized as the “angel of Lord”. So far so good!
Nevertheless the problem then begins since Thompson, on the other hand, contradictorily goes on to argue that if Jesus Christ would have explicitly declared his deity it would have “confused” the Jews into diminishing the separate identities of Father and son!?
The obvious point is, if Jews really did recognized a distinct god besides God – The Father then there is no basis for the theory that Jews would be “confused” upon Jesus’ explicit declaration about his deity!? In fact, on the contrary, Jewish faith should have been further bolstered in Jesus’  deity simply because the Jews already recognized a distinct person in the godhead besides Father! Or their faith should have at least grown on the issue that this man Jesus Christ is claiming to be the same “divine Angel of Lord” which we now for ages. Therefore, unlike as Thompson wants to portray, “many” Jews recognizing multiple (?) divine persons should have helped them recognize deity of Jesus Christ!
Without realizing the flimsy state of his argument to our fundamental query, Thompson proceeded to produce other popular New Testament verses which impute Jesus Christ with “titles”; In the process he also claimed that we neglected his “main” argument. In the following passages let us look at Thompson’s “main” argument:
DNST’s Failure to Address my Main Argument
Amazingly, in his article DNST didn’t address the issue of these divine Old Testament titles being applied to Christ in the New Testament at all. He didn’t dispute the fact that these were titles God used for Himself to establish His own unique deity which were also applied to Christ. No adequate explanation of this phenomenon was given by DNST. Instead he asserts that these are “cliché Christian arguments” and moves on, which shows that he could not deal with the central argument and chose to resort to ridicule, dismissal and mere assertion. This is not how you engage in reasonable and honest apologetics.
DNST took the route of ignoring my argument and once again tried to defend the position that if Jesus was God He would have said the three words “I am God.” He also tried to argue that there are texts which show Jesus isn’t God in the New Testament. However, his arguments literally are cliché Muslim arguments which I will refute. After I refute his specious reasoning and arguments, he will then need to deal with these numerous Old Testament titles of God that are applied to Christ in the New Testament.
[Side Note: There is something amazing with these people at answering-islam. They keep coining new names for people whom they “love”, for instance, Thompson now calls me “DNST”. That’s the new “Christ-like” vogue this Christmas, I assume.]
Very soon we will come to Thompson’s “main” argument but before that we would further check if Thompson’s own rationale (in the above quoted passage) would stand any further scrutiny.
Note that Thompson clearly wants to argue that same Old Testament “divine” titles of Father were given to Jesus Christ, but:
1)      How does Thompson confirm that applying titles of Old Testament deity which was “primarily” used for the person of Father (confirmed by Thompson as well) would not further confuse Jews into blurring the difference of person of Father and son!? After all we are using the same titles for Jesus Christ as was used for Father in the Old Testament!
How logical is it that if Jesus Christ refers to himself as “alpha and omega” (say) then it would not confuse the Jewish mass – they would be crystal clear about this construct; whereas, if he merely refers himself as “god” then Jews would, all of a sudden confuse between the persons of Father and himself. This inconsistency is further magnified in the light of the following two premises:
a)      The title “god” with all its imports was a much simpler term for Jews to understand than “alpha and omega”, even more so, when allegedly the same title – alpha and omega – was also used for God-The Father. If the term god “confuses” then “alpha and omega” or any other (indirect) title must “confuse” even more intensely!
b)      We already know as Thompson informed that “There were many different Jewish strands at that time that already maintained that this figure was God and yet distinct from God” Therefore, if “many” Jews already knew that there is a separate “divine” person besides Father then there was definitely no room for them to confuse on Jesus’ declaration about his divinity with the person of Father.
2)      On the foregoing, from a Trinitarian perspective, the “triune” gods of Old Testament were using titles and explicit declaration about themselves. Trinitarians would argue that traditionally Jews accepted triune gods which must have included Messiah in it. Therefore, they must have recognized him as a deity. Subsequently, it is straw-man argument to claim that Jews would confuse with explicit declaration but will not confuse if Jesus Christ used titles from Old Testament!
Now coming to Thompson’s “main” argument that Jesus Christ applied divine titles of Old Testament upon himself. We believe that rather than doing any good, it further jeopardizes the “monotheism”, if any, of Trinitarian brand of Christianity. It is because Bible rampantly recommends multiple Old Testament figures to take divine titles of Yahweh.
For instance, Old Testament uses the Hebrew term “adonay”, meaning Lord, for Yahweh:
“All nations whom You have made Shall come and worship (wayishtahawu) before You, O Lord (adonay), And shall glorify (wikabbadu) Your name.” Psalm 86:9
Yet it also refers to prophets with the same title “adonay”:
“So the King will greatly desire your beauty; Because He is your Lord (adonayik), worship Him (wahishtahawilow)… I will make Your name to be remembered in all generations; Therefore the people shall praise You forever and ever. Psalm 45:11, 17

This is merely one instance, please refer to the following paper for a fuller investigation of the biblical “monotheism” as it not merely uses same title of God for mere prophets but it also requires to “worship” them alongside Yahweh, pay them the same reverence as Yahweh, share Yahweh’s throne and finally to take mere church figures as “lord” him-selves and their words at par with Old Testament commandments:
John 5:23 – The Sweetest Trinitarian Honey! Visiting the darling Trinitarian argument from a neutral perspective
If it is understood that there was no room for Jews to be “confused” if Jesus Christ explicitly declared his deity, then, the initial  query still stands: Why did not Jesus Christ declare himself to be god explicitly?
Bunch of verses revolving around the banal argument that Jesus Christ shared “divine Old Testament titles” are yet to be dealt with which we propose to do in the final installment of this brief series
PART-II
In the last part of this response we addressed to Keith Thompson’s explanation wherein he argued that Jesus Christ did not explicitly claimed himself to be God because it would have confused masses into diminishing the distinct difference between the person of Father and son. We saw there were a number of issues with regards to this flimsy argument.

However, Thompson also “explained” that there was no real need for Jesus Christ to claim his deity the way Critics demand since New Testament applies “divine Old Testament titles” on him. Therefore, in this final part we would consider all the New Testament “verses” Thompson has to offer presumably acknowledging his desperate situation of absence of Jesus’  explicit declaration.
“Divine” Titles of Jesus Christ:
John 20: 28-29
Thompson argued as follows:
“John
20:28-29 Ignored Since it Refutes DNST

Notice what DNST didn’t address in his paper. He didn’t address how I argued that in John 20:28-29 Jesus blessed Thomas after he identified Him as his Lord and God.

“Thomas answered him, “My Lord and my God!” Jesus said to him, “Have you believed because you have seen me? Blessed are those who have not seen and yet have believed.”” (John 20:28-29)

This was after everyone knew Jesus was not the same person as the Father and so Jesus could now affirm that he was God. At this point in the disciples’ experience they would have properly understood what it meant for Christ to also be called theos. By blessing Thomas’ confession of faith in Him as His Lord and God, this is the equivalent of Jesus identifying Himself as the Lord God, the very thing DNST demands of Jesus. But of course DNST failed to address Jesus affirming that He is Lord and God in this text and simply brushed it aside.”

We did neglect John 20:28-29 since our main contention was Jesus Christ himself declaring his deity and not somebody else doing the favors for this “god-almighty” – Thompson needs to get this construct clear! We argued very clearly in our original paper (and ironically Thompson quoted us as well) that declaring Himself explicitly as God “has always been an insignia of traditional Judeo-Christian God” so Jesus Christ must be consistent with his Old Testament counterpart!

On the foregoing, if some set of people declare Jesus Christ to be god then there are others, in the same pages of New Testament, who claim him to be a liar and elsewhere even insinuate at the legality of his birth! His own kith and kin declared him to be “mad” and even “demon possessed”:

John 10:20  Many of them said, “He has a demon, and is insane! Why do you listen to him?”

 We hope Thompson now seriously reconsider if somebody else declaring things about Jesus Christ really matters!?

Furthermore, we are not very amazed how Trinitarians could twist their own religious texts to suit their deviated agenda since James White – a Trinitarian – also uses the same verse towards deifying Jesus Christ. We had a dedicated response to White dealing with John 20: 28-29 and its mishandling by Trinitarian apologists.

In that paper we discussed at length (i) how the context has been abused (ii) semantics twisted yet (iii) all it proved, if it proved, that Thomas just did not believe or accepted Jesus’ deity all throughout his ministry and even after his alleged crucifixion until he had to physically make post-resurrection appearance to him! All of this is documented in the following article:

The Forgotten Monotheism

Nevertheless, for the sake of completeness of this response, we would summarize the arguments from the above paper.

When Jesus Christ made his post – resurrection appearance to the disciples except Thomas (who was then absent in the scene) they all believed. When this information was given to Thomas he outright declined to believe in it with an eccentric condition that until and unless he puts his fingers in the wounds of Jesus Christ he would not believe in his resurrection.

Subsequently, Jesus Christ made a special errand to Thomas to assuage him his disbelief in post – resurrection phenomenon. Consequently, when Thomas was confirmed about Jesus’ resurrection, he exclaimed “My Lord, My God” upon which Jesus Christ confirmed his true belief in the resurrection which was hitherto absent. So, the stress of Jesus’ ratification was on Thomas’ belief in resurrection phenomenon rather than on Jesus’ deity.

On the foregoing, if we assume that Jesus Christ confirmed Thomas for his belief in his deity then we would have to agree that hitherto Thomas did not believe in the deity of Jesus Christ since Thomas unequivocally declared that he would not believe unless he himself experiences the wounds of Jesus Christ! Consequently, we would have a situation where the earliest apostles (plural) did not believe in the deity of Jesus Christ until his post-resurrection appearance even though they were moving with him day and night!

John 5:19, 30
In our original response we proposed insufficiency of Jesus’ declaration of his deity in conjunction John
5: 19 and 30 which show his definite limitations to be God-Almighty.

Thompson has the following to respond about John 5:30 (we would take John 5: 19 subsequently):

I will briefly say that although DNST’s Good News Edition translation of John 5:30 says “I can do nothing on my own authority” there is no “on my own authority” in the original Greek text. 

The Greek reads Ou (not) dynamai (am able) egō (I) poiein (to do) ap’ (from) emautou (myself) ouden (nothing). Literal translation:
 “I am not able to do anything from myself.” Hence, Christ is simply saying that he can’t do anything separately (“of myself”) from the Father. This is what Christianity has always taught. Like I said in the other article, Critics want to see limitation of Christ in these texts, but what is actually being communicated is the perfect unity and communion between the Father and Son, as well as their mutual interdependence. Jesus doesn’t act independently from the Father because He and the Father are in perfect union. Therefore, it is impossible for Him to act apart from the Father or contrary to His will. This was Christ’s point. His point wasn’t inability, but a refutation of the implicit assumption of His claiming to be an independent deity in competition with the Father, since the Jews thought that he was claiming to have equal authority with the Father as some independent being who chose to exercise it apart from the will of the Father (cf. John 5:16-18).
I would therefore exhort my friend DNST to remove his biases when reading these texts. In the other article I showed all of the proof for Jesus’ deity in John 5 which should make everyone wonder why critical apologists isolate 5:19, 30-31 when the totality of the chapter refutes their position and demonstrates that Christ is God (see John 5:15-18, 22-23, 25-26, 28-29).

Although Thompson is desperately trying to somehow “explain” that the quoted verses do not show Jesus’ impotency as God, however, the very next phrases clarify the issue that Jesus Christ was definitely portraying his limitation with respect to the boundlessness of God. Consider Jesus’ statement:

“I can do nothing on my own authority; I judge only as God tells me, so my judgment is right, because I am not trying to do what I want, but only what he who sent me wants. (Good News Edition)

I can of mine own self do nothing: as I hear, I judge: and my judgment is just; because I seek not mine own will, but the will of the Father which hath sent me. (King James Version)

I am not able of myself to do anything; according as I hear I judge, and my judgment is righteous, because I seek not my own will, but the will of the Father who sent me. (1898 Young’s Literal Translation)

Observe the construct of the verse and contrast it with Thompson’s explanation. The semantics of the verse clearly qualifies Jesus’  impotency because he was dependent on his basic source – God. He was unable to judge since judgments were to be supernaturally communicated to him, so that he could “hear” them and execute accordingly.

Furthermore, he was still impotent since Jesus Christ just did not had any will of his own; rather, the decree of Father dominated in his proceedings. Therefore, in all of these we do not find any sense of Jesus Christ and Father working in any sort of “perfect union”, on the contrary, we definitely find Jesus Christ subservient to the decrees adjudged by Father. No wonder Jesus Christ explicitly claimed “…because I am not trying to do what I want”.

We can further decide Jesus’  impotency as against his “perfect union” with God by looking at other New Testament verses of the order. For instance, consider the incidence where the wife of Zebedee demanded Jesus Christ to honor his sons by allowing them the privileged status beside him on the occasion of his second return:

“Then the wife of Zebedee came to Jesus with her two sons, bowed before him, and asked him a favour. “What do you want?” Jesus asked her. She answered, “Promise me that these two sons of mine will sit at you right and your left when you are King.” You don’t know what you are asking for,” Jesus answered the sons.  “Can you drink the cup of suffering that I am about to drink?” “We can,” they answered. “You will indeed drink from my cup,” Jesus told them, “but I do not have the right to choose who will sit at my right and my left. These places belong to those for whom my Father has prepared them.” (Matthew 20:20-23)

Notice the reply Jesus Christ gave. He clearly evinced his impotency into choosing persons for the privileged place by his side. He referred uniquely to the person of Father and attributed that only He has the divine authority to choose men for that position. Observe how Jesus Christ went out of the “Trinitarian” way to humbly claim that he does not has the right to choose! Think about it, which “God” would tell His worshiper I do not have the right to accept your petition!?
Therefore, if Jesus Christ was co-equal with Father, in any sort of  “perfect union”, then he would have never confessed that he does not has the right to choose but only Father has it.

Similarly, consider another instance where Jesus Christ denies his co-equality and subsequently “perfect union” theory:

“No one knows, however, when that day and hour will come – neither the angels in heaven nor the Son; the Father alone knows.” ( Matthew 24:36)

Notice how Jesus Christ is qualifying his declaration that “No one knows” about the end of time except the person of Father. Jesus Christ even denied his self from the prized piece of information reserving the same only to the person of Father. Thus, if Jesus Christ and Father really worked in “perfect union” then Jesus Christ as co-god must have known the information!

It is also very important to note the construct of Jesus’  statement. He recognizes his self as “Son” with respect to “Father”. According to standard Trinitarian position Jesus Christ was/is the divine son of divine Father, therefore, by referring himself as “Son” in conjunction with Father, Jesus Christ certainly declares that his divine self is also devoid of the knowledge of the hour. Therefore, it is certainly unwarranted to assume that Jesus Christ was in any sort of “perfect union” and “communion” with God at par with Him; rather he was definitely subservient to God-Almighty and lesser in efficiency than Him.

Finally we have an instance where Jesus Christ certainly displays emotions which are more than just subservient to God-Almighty. Consider the following passage:

“He went a little farther on, threw himself face downwards on the ground, and prayed, “My Father, if it is possible, take this cup of suffering from me! Yet not what I want, but what you want.” (Matthew;26:39)

According to Pauline theology crucifixion is the base of Christianity as such if there was any so-called “perfect union” between Jesus Christ and God then it should have reached its pinnacle with respect to its implementation when planning about the alleged crucifixion phenomenon. Yet exactly at the event, Jesus Christ expresses emotions which not only shows his limitations not befitting to “God” but also establishes his ignorance of the original plan he made with Father purportedly in “perfect union” with Him!

Subsequently, all the above three instances indicate that :

(i) Jesus Christ was depended on Father but the reverse is never observed 

(ii) he was limited in his information certainly notwithstanding the “perfect union” theory!

It would be very interesting to quote Dr. Lightfoot – a well respected biblical scholar – for his views on John 5:30.

Dr. Lightfoot compares Jesus’ inability of making judgments on his own with the prevailing tradition of referring to the Sanhedrin:

[As I hear, I judge.] He seems to allude to a custom amongst them. The judge of an inferior court, if he doubts in any matter, goes up to Jerusalem and takes the determination of the Sanhedrim; and according to that he judgeth. (John 5:30, John Lightfoot Commentary)

Observe how Jesus Christ is compared to any limited mortal judge who when in “doubts” refers the matter to a more knowledgeable and more efficient source – the Sanhedrim. Similarly, when in need for consistent and just decision, Jesus Christ inclines towards his greater source – the God and “hears” the same from Him.

On one hand where it is perfectly legal for a prophet Jesus Christ to refer to God for judgments, nevertheless, it horribly goes wrong when the divine Jesus, who supposedly works in “perfect union” with God, refers Him for judgments!

Let alone proving Jesus Christ working in divine sync with Father, the above comment establishes that Jesus Christ was even vulnerable to erroneous judgments thus he needed help of his Sanhedrin – Father.

John 5:19

Thompson also made a lot of hue and cry regarding our appeal to John 5:19. Here is what he had to say:

Although critics of Trinity like to also quote Jesus in John 5:19 saying “the Son can do nothing of Himself”, which is again a statement of unity and perfect harmony with the Father as opposed to limitation, why is it that the Critics never explain the rest of the verse which says “whatever the Father does, that the Son does likewise”? Why cite a half of a verse to try to disprove Jesus’ deity when the rest of the verse demonstrates that Jesus does and can do everything God does?

We have just seen the weakness in the theory of Jesus’ “unity and perfect harmony” with Father. Therefore, now we would concentrate on Thompson’s claim that: Jesus Christ can do whatever Father does:

Actually, this standard argument was already addressed when we responded to Sam Shamoun, therefore, we would briefly respond Thompson here and link to our response.

Recall we already saw a few New Testament verses where:

(i)      Jesus Christ even as the divine Son of God did not know the exact specification of end time.

(ii)    Nobody, including Jesus Christ, but Father had authority to decide who would sit beside Jesus Christ on his return.

(iii)   Dreaded by the tribulations of crucifixion, Jesus Christ – “the” god – kissed dust to plead Father to obviate it notwithstanding the fable that he self planned with Father in “perfect union”.

Therefore, it is just a flamboyant albeit hollow claim to assert that Jesus Christ could do “everything” Father could. As a matter of truth, to claim such a notion is to misrepresent what Jesus Christ actually wanted to intend:

In the context of John 5:19, Jews imputed Jesus Christ for breaking the Sabbath regulations when in reality Jesus Christ was breaking the man-made (or Rabbi made) exacting rules weaved in the name of Sabbath. He explained through multiple examples that it is perfectly permissible to help the needy even though Sabbath seemingly prohibits it; because, Father does not stop with His providences even on the Sabbath day. It was under this context Jesus Christ asserted,

“So Jesus answered them, “I am telling you the truth: the Son can do nothing of his own; he does only what he sees his Father doing. What the Father does, the Son also does. For the Father loves the Son and shows him all that he himself is doing.” (John 5:19-20)

Son “sees” Father helping the sufferers even on the Sabbath day and therefore, he also, likewise, tries to help the needy on the Sabbath and likewise teaches his disciples also to do so. By seemingly breaking the plastic rules around Sabbath, Jesus Christ wanted to teach that Sabbath was initially institutionalized for upright living of Israelites. It was never intended to push patients to their graves in the name of observing Sabbath rulings (1.).

Thus, to claim that Jesus Christ equated himself with Father in doing all things is to neglect the fact that Jesus Christ wanted to set an example for everyone to follow – the positive modus operandi of Father on the issues of Sabbath and its rulings about suffering people. Bible expositor Robertson’s ratifies the same:

But what he seeth the Father doing (an mē ti blepēi ton patera poiounta). Rather, “unless he sees the Father doing something.” Negative condition (an mē = ean mē, if not, unless) of third class with present (habit) subjunctive (blepēi) and present active participle (poiounta). It is a supreme example of a son copying the spirit and work of a father. In his work on earth the Son sees continually what the Father is doing. In healing this poor man he was doing what the Father wishes him to do. (Robertson’s Word Pictures, John 5:19)

Another noted Bible commentator John Wesley further explains that Jesus Christ merely followed the positive example of Father:

“The Son can do nothing of himself – This is not his imperfection, but his glory, resulting from his eternal, intimate, indissoluble unity with the Father. Hence it is absolutely impossible, that the Son should judge, will, testify, or teach any thing without the Father, Joh 5:30, &c; Joh 6:38; Joh 7:16; or that he should be known or believed on, separately from the Father. And he here defends his doing good every day, without intermission, by the example of his Father,from which he cannot depart: these doth the Son likewise – All these, and only these; seeing he and the Father are one.” (John 5:19, John Wesley’s Explanatory Notes)

In fact by claiming that whatever Father does, Son also does likewise – Jesus certainly proves his non-divinity since he implies working under the directions of Father. As Father allows helping on Sabbath likewise Jesus Christ makes it incumbent upon himself to also help on the Sabbath day. This is supported by renowned Trinitarian commentators like Matthew-Henry:

Secondly, The instances of it. He shows it:
 
1. In what he does communicate to him: He shows him all things that himself doth. The Father’s measures in making and ruling the world are shown to the Son, that he may take the same measures in framing and governing the church, which work was to be a duplicate of the work of creation and providence, and it is therefore called the world to come. He shows him all things ha autos poiei – which he does, that is, which the Son does, so it might be construed; all that the Son does is by DIRECTION from the Father; he shows him.
2.  In what he will communicate; he will show him, that is, will appoint and direct him to do greater works than these. (1.) Works of greater power than the curing of the impotent man; for he should raise the dead, and should himself rise from the dead. By the power of nature, with the use of means, a disease may possibly in time be cured; but nature can never, by the use of any means, in any time raise the dead. (2.) Works of greater authority than warranting the man to carry his bed on the sabbath day. They thought this a daring attempt; but what was this to his abrogating the whole ceremonial law, and instituting new ordinances, which he would shortly do, “that you may marvel!” Now they looked upon his works with contempt and indignation, but he will shortly do that which they will look upon with amazement, Luk 7:16. Many are brought to marvel at Christ’s works, whereby he has the honour of them, who are not brought to believe, by which they would have the benefit of them. (Matthew Henry’s Commentary on the Whole Bible, John 5: 17-30)

Thus, to argue from Jesus’  assertion that he claimed for himself equal potential with Father is a gauche distortion of the context and original intent of the verse.

Right after this argument, Thompson had the following to remark:

I submit that double standards must be employed because DNST cannot admit the truth about Christ as revealed in the New Testament. His Quran, which comes 600 years after the New Testament, will not permit him to accept what the Holy Bible clearly teaches and he is thereby forced to distort it. This is the major problem when it comes to Muslim apologists handling the Holy Bible.

However, after going through the above analysis we would like to re-frame the above passage:

I submit that double standards must be employed because Thompson cannot admit the truth about Christ as revealed in the New Testament. His Pauline epistles – none of whose originals are available and some of which are agreeably pseudonymous, which comes in the absence of Jesus Christ – will not permit him to accept what the Holy Bible clearly teaches and he is thereby forced to distort it. This is the major problem when it comes to Trinitarian apologists handling the Holy Bible.

Matthew 19: 16-17

We appealed to a passage from Matthew 19 wherein Jesus Christ forbade a rich man who mistakenly referred Jesus Christ as divinely “good”:

“And, behold, one came and said unto him, Good Master, what good thing shall I do, that I may have eternal life? And he said unto him, Why callest thou me good? there is none good but one, that is, God: but if thou wilt enter into life, keep the commandments. (Mat 19:16-17, King James Version)

Thompson has very interesting response to it (!):

Nowhere in the text does Jesus deny that He is good, e.g. he doesn’t come right and say the words “I am not good so stop calling me that”. He asks why the rich young ruler calls Him good. There is a difference. And nowhere does Jesus deny that He is God. He says no one is good but God, which could easily be a 3rd person reference to Himself as I will argue.

Although Thompson alleges us of, “seeing things in this text which are not there” yet he commits the same error. Notice how Thompson is trying to distort the original import of Jesus’ statement of denial of divinity with, “He asks why the rich young ruler calls Him good.”

The import of Jesus’  sentence construct is very plain; through the counter rhetoric question (“why do you call me good?”) Jesus Christ wanted to inform the young man that only God is good in absolute sense and thus the young man ought to refer only God as good! Interestingly, Thompson quotes a certain scholar on this issue which ends up further bolstering our point:

As Stephan S. Short notes in the New International Bible Commentary:

“His approach to Jesus, however, was unbecomingly obsequious, for, in contravention of normal Jewish custom, he addressed Him as ‘Good Teacher’. Jesus rebuked him for this, reminding him that ‘good’ was a designation which was normally reserved for God, only God being good without qualification. Jesus was not hereby disclaiming being either ‘God’ or ‘good’, but was merely criticizing His being addressed thus by someone who clearly was completely unaware of His divine nature.”(4)

If it was customary for Jews to refer to only God as good and if Jesus Christ was forbidding and deflecting the attribute of goodness to God then certainly Jesus Christ was denying his deity.
Therefore, when Thompson alleges that “And nowhere does Jesus deny that He is God” it certainly gets desperate in front of explicit verses.

If the foregoing is understood then let us reconsider Thompson’s following argument to check humor in it:

Nowhere in the text does Jesus deny that He is good, e.g. he doesn’t come right and say the words “I am not good so stop calling me that”. He asks why the rich young ruler calls Him good. There is a difference.

If we were to call Thompson as the president of
America and he responds back by rightly saying, “Why callest thou me president? there is none president but one, that is, Obama” then according to Thompson’s Trinitarian logic he is not denying that he is president since he “doesn’t come right and say the words “I am not president so stop calling me that”!; according to Thompson’s logic he is merely asking why the questionnaire calls him president.

Or, may be Thompson is referring to himself in the “3rd person” after all who knows if the presidential post in White House also comprises of “three persons” just like Thompson’s Trinitarian criteria!

Further observe Thompsons’ forced interpretation that Jesus Christ through his statement that only God is good was referring in the third person to himself. However, the question to be asked is why would Jesus Christ refer to himself in third person? Why not first person? Even more so because hitherto Jesus  was talking in the first person, “Why callest thou me good?

If Thompson is in any mind of repeating that rich man would have been “confused” between the person of son and Father then he needs to address at least the following two queries:

1)      The young man was not referring Jesus Christ as good “God”. He merely referred Jesus Christ as good “Teacher”. Entire region knew that Jesus Christ was a teacher and a prophet. As such there was no real danger of confusing the person of Jesus Christ with person of Father.

2)      Thompson had already declared that “many” Jews already knew about a certain divine person different from God. So, it can be assumed on fair grounds that the Jewish rich man must have also known about this (weird) phenomenon; yet Thompson claims that Jesus Christ felt a need to refer to himself as God in third person. It must be addressed that if Jews knew about different divine persons in the godhead then there was no real need for Jesus Christ to refer to himself indirectly in the “third person”.

It is also very important to note that even if Jesus Christ was really a god from a Trinitarian perspective or a good teacher; in either case, the rich man was correct in his referral and as such Jesus Christ had nothing to object! He could have tacitly accepted the label.

In fact, as Thompson was arguing earlier, that Jesus Christ “blessed” Thomas for his famous declaration; in the same way, Jesus Christ should have upheld rich man too for his declarations!? Ratified the rich young man and explained him the philosophies of Trinity. Would Thompson clarify the different reactions which Jesus Christ to rich young man and Thomas?

In the light of all of the above, the only reason why Jesus Christ forbade the rich man was because he was using a title applicable only to God-Almighty.

John 17:3

 Thompson also responded to our appeal to John 17:3 the way a Trinitarian is expected to argue. However, we would certainly try to analyze its viability from a monotheistic and logical perspective. Consider Thompson’s response:

“And this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent” (John 17:3 KJV).

DNST concludes from this text that “Jesus Christ is portrayed as anybody but God.” However, although Christ identifies the Father as the only true God, it is important to highlight what Jesus did not say. He did not say that only the Father is the only true God.

And then to do some damage control Thompson quoted 1 John 5:20:

The same John who authored this Gospel authored the book of 1 John as well. And in 1 John 5:20 we see Jesus identified as “the true God”:

“We know also that the Son of God has come and has given us understanding, so that we may know him who is true. And we are in him who is true — even in his Son Jesus Christ. He is the true God and eternal life” (1 John 5:20).

In all of the above the basic fact that Thompson neglected is that Jesus Christ was speaking in a strictly monotheistic setting. He well understood that there was only one God worthy of divinity and worship. Therefore, obviously there was no need that Jesus Christ would pander to any wild Trinitarian presupposition to redundantly qualify “that only the Father is the only true God”.

The basic logic flows like this:

    God is ONLY One
    Father is the “ONLY true God”
    Therefore there is no real need to re-state that only Father is the only true God – this would have been redundant.

To clarify Thompson, the absurdity of his logic is like the following:

    President of a United States is ONLY one.
    Obama is the ONLY President.
    Therefore it is Trinitarian desperation to claim, “only Obama is the only true President”.

As far as Thompson’s appeal to 1 John 5:20 is concerned then we would like to re-remind him that the query was where Jesus Christ claimed from his lips that he is God; what Thompson is showing are words of some John.

Yet John’s narrative does not quite help Thompson’s agenda since the subject of the phrases was not Jesus Christ but Father who commissioned Jesus Christ into this world, “…even in his Son Jesus Christ”.

In fact the attributes used in the phrases also refers explicitly to Father, “so that we may know him who is true. And we are in him who is true — even in his Son Jesus Christ.”

Quite obviously the attribute “true” in the previous phrases was applicable to the person of Father when seen in conjunction with the phrase, “his Son…” and as such the forthcoming pronoun “He” must also refer to Father. As the following Bible scholar concurs:

This God the Father. Many, however, refer it to the Son. (1 John 5:20, Vincent’s Word Studies)

Albert Barnes gives further intriguing twist to the application of subject pronoun:

This is the true God –  There has been much difference of opinion in regard to this important passage; whether it refers to the Lord Jesus Christ, the immediate antecedent, or to a more remote antecedent – referring to God, as such. The question is of importance in its bearing on the doctrine of the divinity of the Saviour; for if it refers to him, it furnishes an unequivocal declaration that he is divine. The question is, whether John “meant” that it should be referred to him? Without going into an extended examination of the passage, the following considerations seem to me to make it morally certain that by the phrase “this is the true God,” etc., he did refer to the Lord Jesus Christ. (1 John 5:20, Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible)

In his capacity Barnes accepts the phrase to be referring to Jesus Christ, however, the important point he made that there is “much difference of opinion” with regards to the application of the phrase. There is sizeable number of scholars who argue that the phrase applies to God instead of Jesus Christ!

This makes us re-remind Thompson that we requested for an explicit unambiguous, undisputed assertion of Jesus’  deity from his lips. Unfortunately, all Thompson could muster was a vague claim made by some John, which even Trinitarian scholars dispute to be applicable on Jesus Christ!

In the process Thompson even accused us of using the biblical “verses” out of context since merely two verses later Jesus Christ is portrayed sharing divine honor of Father (!):

Those who consult the totality of Holy Scripture, instead of isolating verses out of context, accept the fact that the Father and the Son are both identified as the true God. The reason why in John 17:3 Jesus says that eternal life entails knowing the only true God and Christ is because, as the Protestant Reformer John Calvin notes: “…there is no other way in which God is known but in the face of Jesus Christ, who is the bright and lively image of Him.”(7) Moreover, two verses later in v. 5 Christ clearly affirms His pre-existent unique relationship with the Father wherein He shared in the Father’s glory:

“And now, Father, glorify me in your own presence with the glory that I had with you before the world existed” (John 17:5).

Nevertheless, we are glad that Trinitarians like Thompson care for “totality of Holy Scripture” since a few verses further down in the same chapter we have Jesus Christ sharing the same “divine” honor with multiple mortals (!):

“That they all may be one; as thou, Father, art in me, and I in thee,  that they also may be one in us: that the world may believe that thou hast sent me.  And the glory which thou gavest me I have given them; that they may be one, even as we are one:” (King James (1611), John 17:21-22)

Or

“I pray that they may all be one. Father! May they be in us, just as you are in me and I am in you…I gave them the SAME GLORY you gave ME, so that they may be one, just as you and I are one:” (John;17:21-22)

No wonder Trinitarian scholars had variety of rather idolatrous interpretation to the above verse. According to John Wesley it was the honor of being the “only begotten” which Jesus Christ shared with his biblical disciples, remember that “only begotten” is a divine privilege upon Jesus Christ in Trinitarian Christianity:

John 17:22  The glory which thou hast given me, I have given them – The glory of the only begotten shines in all the sons of God. How great is the majesty of Christians. (John Wesley’s Explanatory Notes, John 17:22)

And according to the famous classical exegetes Matthew-Henry, the honor was the honor of being at the right hand of God, in His heart, “as the (divine) redeemer of the world” (!):

Those that are given in common to all believers. The glory of being in covenant with the Father, and accepted of him, of being laid in his bosom, and designed for a place at his right hand, was the glory which the Father gave to the Redeemer, and he has confirmed it to the redeemed. (Matthew Henry’s Commentary on the Whole Bible, John 17:20-23)

Therefore, if Thompson is really the one “who consult the totality of the Holy Scripture, instead of isolating verses out of context, accept the fact that the Father and the Son and other Mortals are all identified as the true God!” since, (i) Jesus Christ shares the same “divine” glory with his disciples which he allegedly had at pre-natal state of the world, (ii) he shares his exclusive position of being the only “begotten” of God and (iii) he even shares the prerogative of being at the right hand of God and his capacity of being the “redeemer” of this world!

We would definitely wait to observe how sincere Thompson is to his textual materials. For more on the issue of John 17:3, please refer to this article where we responded to Sam Shamoun his similar arguments.

Matthew 6:9-13

We appealed to Matthew 6:9-13 wherein Jesus Christ is purportedly reported to teach his disciples how to pray. We highlighted that in the prayer, Jesus Christ exclusively pointed to the person of Father thereby conclusively implying that He alone was God recognized!

However, Thompson had the following to object:

Again we witness the repeated pattern of DNST seeing things in texts which are not really there. Nowhere in Matthew 6 does Jesus say to only pray to the Father or to only pray this one prayer. Since Jesus doesn’t indicate that this is the only prayer one must offer or that only the Father is to be prayed to, Jesus’ words must be taken as meaning that this is a “model” prayer or essential (not exclusive) “pattern for our devotions.”(8)

The problem with Thompson’s argument is that for some reason he presumes that Matthew 6 was the only text we quoted in the entire paper. In fact we quoted Matthew 6 in conjunction with multiple other biblical texts and based on the “totality” of all the verses we concluded that only Father is God.

For instance (i) in the light of John 17:3 – which was just one of the many quoted “verses” – we observed how Jesus Christ declared that the person called Father is the “only” true God (ii) we also saw how Jesus Christ honestly accepted his ignorance and thus limitation when (a) Wife of Zebedee wanted Jesus Christ to choose her sons as special disciples (b) Jesus Christ accepted his lack of knowledge of the final hour etc.

On the foregoing, when Jesus Christ identified the person of Father in the prayer of Matthew 6 without naming anybody else – we could deduce that he identified only Father as the divine God who should be requested for needs.

Thompson also tried to argue that Jesus Christ at other instance asked his disciples to pray to him:

This is confirmed by the fact that Jesus commanded His followers to pray to Him directly:
“If you ask me anything in my name, I will do it” (John 14:14).

And this is why, after Christ’s resurrection, His earliest devoted followers didn’t hesitate to pray to Christ

Thompson quoted John 14:14 and only that verse; segregating it from the entire New Testament since in the context Jesus Christ explained his disciples why they need to request him. Consider the following contextual verses:

Believest thou not that I am in the Father, and the Father in me? the words that I speak unto you I speak not of myself: but the Father that dwelleth in me, he doeth the works.

Believest thou not that I am in the Father, and the Father in me? the words that I speak unto you I speak not of myself: but the Father that dwelleth in me, he doeth the works. Believe me that I am in the Father, and the Father in me: or else believe me for the very works’ sake. Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that believeth on me, the works that I do shall he do also; and greater works than these shall he do; because I go unto my Father. And whatsoever ye shall ask in my name, that will I do, that the Father may be glorified in the Son. If ye shall ask any thing in my name, I will do it. If ye love me, keep my commandments. And I will pray the Father, and he shall give you another Comforter, that he may abide with you for ever; (John 14:10-16, King James Version)

Notice in the very first place Jesus Christ declares that whatever supernatural he does are actually wrought by Father: “he [Father] doeth the works”. Therefore, when Jesus Christ asked his disciples to ask him, he indirectly implied that through him the requests would be re-directed to Father since he was ascending to Father: “I go unto my Father…And I will pray the Father”. Renowned Christian expositor Albert Barnes ratifies:

In my name – This is equivalent to saying on my account, or for my sake. If a man who has money in a bank authorizes us to draw it, we are said to do it in his name. If a son authorizes us to apply to his father for aid because we are his friends, we do it in the name of the son, and the favor will be bestowed on us from the regard which the parent has to his son, and through him to all his friends. So we are permitted to apply to God in the name of his Son Jesus Christ, because God is in him well pleased Mat 3:17, and because we are the friends of his Son HE answers our requests. Though we are undeserving, yet he loves us on account of his Son, and because he sees in us his image. No privilege is greater than that of approaching God in the name of his Son; no blessings of salvation can be conferred on any who do not come in his name.(Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible, John 14:13)

Quite obviously Barnes, through the verse, is seeing Jesus Christ as the best means to “approach God”. This is far less than assuming Jesus Christ himself was god to be prayed.

Barnes has painted Jesus Christ as more of an intercessor than “God”-Almighty! No wonder majority of other Trinitarian scholars of Bible interpret the verse to mean Jesus’ intercessory capacity! Consider the following:

Because I go unto my Father – He would there intercede for them, and especially by his going to the Father the Holy Spirit would he sent down to attend them in their ministry, Joh 14:26, Joh 14:28; Joh16:7-14.
See Mat28:18. By his going to the Father is particularly denoted his exaltation to heaven, and his being placed as head over all things to his church, Eph1:20-23; Phi2:9-11. By his being exalted there the Holy Spirit was given Joh16:7, and by his power thus put forth the Gentiles were brought to hear and obey the gospel. (Albert Barnes)

Classical commentator duos Matthew-Henry also confess the same!

Whatever we ask in Christ’s name, that shall be for our good, and suitable to our state, he shall give it to us. To ask in Christ’s name, is to plead his merit and intercession, and to depend upon that plea. The gift of the Spirit is a fruit of Christ’s mediation, bought by his merit, and received by his intercession. The word used here, signifies an advocate, counsellor, monitor, and comforter. He would abide with the disciples to the end of time; his gifts and graces would encourage their hearts. The expressions used here and elsewhere, plainly denote a person, and the office itself includes all the Divine perfections. The gift of the Holy Ghost is bestowed upon the disciples of Christ, and not on the world. This is the favour God bears to his chosen. As the source of holiness and happiness, the Holy Spirit will abide with every believer for ever. (Matthew Henry’s Concise Commentary, John 14: 12-17)

Note very carefully that Matthew Henry are Trinitarian commentators as such they do believe in the deity of Holy Ghost, Jesus Christ alongside Father (???) yet they at least do not (mis)use  John 14:14 and related verses to prove any divinity for Jesus Christ, much unlike Thompson! For them, asking in Christ’s  name “is to plead (God) his merit and intercession, and to depend upon that plea.” 

The Truth of the matter is that except Thompson no Trinitarian scholar accepts that the subject verse proves Jesus’  deity. It is because all of them highlight the mere fact that asking Jesus Christ implies using his name for acceptance of their requests with Father. Consider the remarks of Jamieson, Fausset and Brown along with Adam Clarke respectively:

whatsoever ye … ask in my name — as Mediator.

that will I do — as Head and Lord of the kingdom of God. This comprehensive promise is emphatically repeated in Joh14:14. (John 14:13-14 Jamieson, Fausset and Brown)

…Christ only preached in Judea, and in the language only of that country; but the apostles preached through the most of the then known world, and in all the languages of all countries. But let it be remarked that all this was done by the power of Christ; and I think it still more natural to attribute the greater works to the greater number of conversions made under the apostles’ ministry. The reason which our Lord gives for this is worthy of deep attention: –

Because I go unto my Father – Where I shall be an Intercessor for you, that: – (John
14:12, Clarke)

Therefore, Thompson needs to be reminded that we did not enquire whether Jesus Christ has any intercessory role in Christianity or not. Our query is very clear: whether Jesus Christ explicitly declared himself to be God!? So, by appealing to John 14:14, Thompson has merely given a classical smokescreen which is understandable especially in absence of proofs.

Finally Thompson made typical argument by writing that Bible recognizes its God as Father but Islam does not recognize God as “Father” therefore God is a false God:

However, Muhammad taught that his god was nobody’s father, and he rejected the assertion of the Jews and Christians that they were the spiritual children of God and that God was their spiritual Father (cf. Surahs 5:18; 9:30; 19:88-93; 21:26).

Once again we do not think that we have any concern in the paper whether God could be called as “Father” or not. We request Thompson to kindly concentrate on the issue whether Jesus Christ explicitly declared himself to be God-Almighty?

In any case, Islam being the final form of monotheism for humanity obviated usage of any title for God which had any worldly and comparable parallels in the fleeting realm! Furthermore, since the term “Father” is associated to humans (animals) it has imports, which if misplaced, can have blasphemous implications not suitable to the identity of God. Thus, in the Shariah (divine regulations) of Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) – the last Shariah in the line – God circumvented any element of polytheism which could sneak into pure monotheism and corrupt it.

However, we do not necessarily see an objection if pre-Mohammad (peace be upon him) Shariahs had the permission of referring to God as “Father” given adequate care was taken not to breach monotheism in the imports and the usage of the word.

So when Qur’an denies Jews or Christians to be “spiritual” children of God in Qur’an 5:18 it merely implies that their moral and spiritual degradation level reached to such limits where they could not possibly be referred to as God’s children. In fact, New Testament chimes the same:

Here is the clear difference between God’s children and the Devil’s children: those who do not do what is right or do not love others are not God’s children. (1 John 3:10)

How can one claim to be “God’s” children and yet worship the golden calf for instance or plot against God’s chosen men like John and Jesus Christ. Similarly, how can one possibly be called as God’s children when s/he worships Jesus Christ or his mother (may God be pleased with her)!

Therefore, when Qur’an denied people of the Book their right to be called as God’s children the stress was less on their calling God as Father than their calling themselves as upright children of God. New Testament further recorded Jesus Christ rebuking Jews for unjustly calling themselves as children of God – implying their uprightness – since, because of their iniquities they were abased to Satan’s children:

Jesus said to them, “If God really were your Father, you would love me, because I came from God and now I am here. I did not come on my own authority, but he sent me. Why do you not understand what I say? It is because you cannot bear to listen to my message. You are the children of your father, the Devil, and you want to follow your father’s desires. From the very beginning he was a murderer and has never been on the side of truth, because there is no truth in him. When he tells a lie, he is only doing what is natural to him, because he is a liar and the father of all lies. (John 8:42-44)

On the foregoing, we believe that Thompson was just dabbling at the few Qur’anic verses he could find somehow related to the issue. And as far as his dabble with Qur’an 9:30, 19:88-93 and 21:26 are concerned then in the text Qur’an is condemning the Jewish-Christian blasphemy of abusing God the filthiest for procreating like animals; And, thus, we do not really see an argument here because Thompson would accept that God is above siring infants and so he cannot be called as “Father” in that baser sense.

At this instant Thompson would appeal that the Jews and Christians never abused God by referring Him with the crude sense of the word “Father”.
 
It is understandable that as a monotheist Thompson does not allow God as a “physical being who sired through sexual procreation” since it does not behooves the divine attribute and nature of God; too animalistic for that reason. However, on what ground does he allows for Jesus Christ – his assumed “God” – being sired out of Mary’s womb or, answering natures call in a lavatory or, hanging “dead” on cross etc. How do these attributes settle square with “God”?

Conclusion

We began with the basic query that Jesus Christ not explicitly declaring his deity is a very valid intellectual query. We argued that if Jesus Christ was the same God of the Old Testament then he was very vocal therein for declaring his deity explicitly. As such he should have continued with his trait in the New Testament as well. However, contrary to this expected behavior, we find Jesus Christ shying away from declaring his divinity.

The standard response we got was that people would have led to a state of confusion if Jesus Christ would have declared his deity. Masses would then have confused themselves into blurring the difference between the so-called person of Father and person of son. Nevertheless, this weak theory does not address the following queries:

1.      On what basis does Trinitarians disparage the efforts of multiple prophets down the centuries who, from a Trinitarian perspective, came to enlighten people just about the identity of Jesus Christ?

2.      As per Thompson’s position, when masses had already recognized a “deity” separate and distinct from Father then why and how there remained any room for confusion between person of Father and divinity of Jesus Christ if the latter declared his deity explicitly?

3.      We hope that at least the close disciples of Jesus Christ would have not “misunderstood” him had he declared his deity to them. He did not even do that!?

4.      At least after his biblical death and subsequent resurrection, he could have declared his deity to masses or at least to his immediate disciples when he came to meet them in private and secured room.

5.      Or, finally, even if we brush aside all of the above query, we still wonder how difficult was it for Jesus Christ to explicitly declare his deity with a simple added clause that “I am god, but distinct from Father, do not mix me with Him: I am god- the son”.

Such a construct would have not just taken care of the “confusion” factor but it would have also kept Jesus Christ in line with his Old Testament insignia where he was definitely roaming around freely declaring his deity explicitly.

And on top of all of this, such an explanation would have certainly given Critics no room to inquire the age old query that “Why did not Jesus Christ declare himself to be god explicitly?”

Who is afraid of “Consistency Test”?

Thompson had accused Critics of being inconsistent when enquiring Jesus’ explicit declaration of divinity. In the process he had a counter query. He wants us to show him where in the Qur’an Jesus Christ declared his Messiah-ship explicitly!

DNST offers two responses, one of which I already addressed (“I am God” being an Old Testament insignia of God). The other response to my argument is that DNST claims that Islam has “…God – a higher authority than Christ, testifying the Jesus Christ is Messiah.” He then cites S. 3:45 and 4:171 where Allah is reported to have identified Jesus as Christ or Messiah. However, this answer from DNST demonstrates my point. He can’t show Jesus Himself saying He is the Messiah in the Quran. The question was not does Allah, your higher authority, say this. The question is: Can you be consistent and give me the words of Jesus?
No, you can’t.
We believe YHWH inspired  words in the Old and New Testaments and so when you have an inspired human author like Luke, John or Paul identifying Christ as God, it is actually God identifying Christ as God (2 Timothy 3:16; 2 Peter 1:20-21).
So according to the orthodox view of the nature and inspiration of the Holy Bible, God has indeed confessed and identified his beloved Son to be God in essence. But that is not the issue. The issue is consistency. Monotheists demand that Jesus say “I am God” and reject everything else, yet they can’t even quote Jesus saying “I am the Messiah” once in the Quran! If the testimony of anyone other than Jesus is sufficient for Jesus’ Messiahship in the Quran, then to be consistent they have to accept the testimony of others as a sufficient basis for believing in the deity of Jesus. Moreover, there New Testament texts where the Father identifies Jesus as His Son:
“This is my beloved Son, with whom I am well pleased” (Matthew
3:17 – cf. Matthew 17:5).
So according to DNST’s criteria, since a higher authority (the Father) affirmed Christ’s son-ship, he is bound to accept it. But DNST will still not accept Jesus’ son-ship. So why should anyone believe that he would accept Jesus’ deity if He said “I am God” or if the Father said “my Son is God”? Hence, DNST’s counter argument is merely a smokescreen since he can’t meet my challenge. My point still stands and until and unless Critics can be consistent and show that Jesus said “I am the Messiah” in the Quran, then logically they must cease using the “Where did Jesus say ‘I am God’” argument.

In the first place notice how conveniently Thompson had presumed that he has responded our query that it was God’s insignia in the Old Testament to explicitly declare his deity merely by throwing the “confusion” theory. However, we raised certain queries to this theory and expect Thompson to address them.

Secondly we are sorry to write but an insightful person like Thompson has badly misunderstood the logic behind asking for consistency. Consistency certainly means that something which has been declared earlier would remain the same throughout its usage. On the foregoing, when Jesus Christ purportedly in Old Testament was declaring His deity explicitly, to be consistent, he should declare his deity explicitly in the New Testament as well!  In the same way before asking Critics for Jesus’  explicit declaration for his Messiah-ship, Thompson should show us where in Qur’an came prophets prior to Jesus Christ declaring themselves to be Messiahs explicitly and Jesus Christ did not follow the suite. Or, Thompson should show where in the Islamic scriptures did Jesus Christ came earlier declaring his messiah-ship explicitly but stopped doing so in the Qur’an. Surprisingly, we explicitly wrote this in our initial response which Thompson conveniently ignored. Here is a recap for Thompson:

Our second response is a rhetorical enquiry to Keith. Show us, in Islam, which individual(s) came before Jesus Christ proclaiming “I am Messiah!”? This is because, when Critics enquire Christians for Jesus’  statement, “I am God”- they ask it consistently under the light of Old Testament Scripture wherein God was frequently proclaiming “I am God” for Himself.

On the foregoing it is illogical and “scripturally weak” for Christians to claim that Critics need to produce the statement “I am Messiah” for Jesus Christ in the Qur’an.

Furthermore, when we argued that God had declared about the Messiah-ship of Jesus Christ we were still consistent since earlier God had positively declared about the prophetic office of a number of prophets! Ironically, we even wrote this in our initial response!

However, on the other hand, because we have had individuals before Jesus Christ who came from God claiming that they are prophets/messengers/apostles etc (c.f. Qur’an 7:104), therefore, we do have written record of Jesus Christ claiming such title(s) for himself:

“He said: “I am indeed a servant of Allah: He hath given me revelation and made me a prophet;” (Qur’an 19:30)

Therefore we request Keith and Christians to enquire consistent demands and, inshallah, Critics will produce it.

Therefore, just like God declared about the prophetic office of other prophets in the same way, consistently, He declared the Messiah-ship of Jesus Christ! So when Thompson argues,

Hence, DNST’s counter argument is merely a smokescreen since he can’t meet my challenge. My point still stands and until and unless Critics can be consistent and show that Jesus said “I am the Messiah” in the Quran, then logically they must cease using the “Where did Jesus say ‘I am God’” argument.

He misses the point that unlike the God of Old Testament who was regularly declaring Himself to be God explicitly we never had anybody (including Jesus (p)) earlier declaring himself to be Messiah thus there is no room for the Christian query that Jesus, “show that Jesus said “I am the Messiah” in the Quran”

Footnote:

(1.) For more on this issue please refer the following:

The Divinity Factory of Christian Apologists – Part-1

Notes:
    Unless otherwise mentioned, all biblical text taken from Good News Edition.
    All emphasize wherever not matching with original is ours.

 By qmarkmark

The articles discussing the nature, behaviour and concept of Christ according to Christianity.
Related:
Free-eBooks: http://goo.gl/2xpiv
Peace-Forum Video Channel: http://goo.gl/GLh75

<!–[if !mso]>st1\:*{behavior:url(#ieooui) } <![endif]–>

The God of Muslims and Christians

The 9/11 has further widened the gulf between the followers of two main faiths of the world. Although Islam like Christianity or any other religion has nothing to do with the acts of few desperate heretics [takfiri in this case] using terror and violence as a tool to achieve their political objectives under the garb of religion. However now a days it is trendy to claim that the God of Muslims is different to the God of Christians. The rhetoric of the myth gave a tacitly playful acknowledgement of the existence of two Gods, but the question was understood as not asking about the existence of two actual Gods, but whether or not Christians and Muslims were imagining the same being; the entity who would be the one true GodBut it is not that simple either, because one may say that he believes in the one true God, who happens to be a wrestling with some one, or walking. One may talk of the “one true God” and mean the same thing as others think as far as the term itself goes, but it does not highlight the characteristics of God, which they would not agree on. Hence the question should not be phrased causally as; “Do Christians and Muslims worship the same God?” (as we can agree there could only be one God), but instead: “Do Christians and Muslims perceive a God with either identical or similar enough characteristics to be called the same Being?”
Perceptions:
Generally people tend to relegate the divine to an object of speculation due to their knowledge based upon intellect and common sensual perceptions. Generally people have no doubts about anything that they can perceive through their senses, which is accepted as the fundamental truth. However, if one is in the desert at noon and see a lake in the distance, but only finds sand when reaches that area, what appeared to be a lake turned out to be mirage. Likewise if a pencil is placed in a glass of water it will look as if it is broken, though in actual fact it is not. In a late night gathering, if the people start discussing about the supernatural-ghosts, while traveling back home, many get so carried away that they feel as if a ghost or demon is following them, whereas in reality it is just an illusion. A magician will produce strange objects which seem to be real, even though they are not. Hence human senses can be deceptive, but does this mean that people should doubt the existence of something they can feel? Quite the reverse because if they doubt what they see, hear and feel, there will be a conflict between fact and fantasy that will eventually drive them nuts. But another condition may be added here about obtaining knowledge – meaning, certainty regarding the existence of what is sensed. The mind may misjudge something the first time it perceives it. For example, it may think a mirage is a lake, but the second time it sees it will not make the mistake. Similarly it will soon realize that even though the pencil on the glass of water looks broken, in fact it is not. The various ways in which the senses delude us are limited and easy to recognize. This includes the tricks that magicians perform and the circus activities.
Any theological exposition which carries the idea of God, somewhat frivolously, reshaping God as an object to be discussed, is against God’s transcendence [beyond the ordinary range of human perception]. It must be appreciated that such approach may lead to erroneous conclusions. Consequently when people articulate God in such a manner, they do not speak of God, but of an idol, with what ever ‘name’ they choose. However much one may wish to accurately know of God, the divine is something that cannot be comprehended by humans in totality due to limitations of human perception, but allegory makes the incomprehensible as comprehensible. Thus many people may perceive God, in their own way depending upon his [or her] level of intellect, perceptions and knowledge, though openly may be claiming to follow a specific creed. Thus the question as to who is right and who is wrong depends upon the parameters and perceptions.
Defining God & Attributes:
“Hence, do not coin any similitude for God! Verily, God knows [all], whereas you have no [real] knowledge.”[Qur’an;16:74]
Since “definition” is, in the last resort, equivalent to a delimitation of the qualities of the object thus to be defined in relation to, or in comparison with, another object or objects: God, however, is “sublimely exalted above anything that men may devise by way of definition “Do not blaspheme against God by regarding anyone or anything as comparable with Him, or by trying to define Him in any terms whatsoever”
“And yet, some [people] have come to attribute to all manner of invisible beings a place side by side with God -although it is He who has created them [all]; and in their ignorance they have invented for Him sons and daughters! Limitless is He is His glory, and sublimely exalted above anything that men may devise by way of definition:”[Qur’an:6:100]
Utterly remote is He from all imperfection and from the incompleteness which is implied in the concept of having progeny. The very concept of “definition” implies the possibility of a comparison or correlation of an object with other objects; God, however, is unique, there being “nothing like unto Him” (Qur’an;42:11) and, therefore, “nothing that could be compared with Him” (Qur’an;112:4) – with the result that any attempt at defining Him or His “attributes” is a logical impossibility and, from the ethical point of view, a sin. The fact that He is undefinable makes it clear that the “attributes” (sifat) of God mentioned in the Qur’an do not circumscribe His reality but, rather, the perceptible effect of His activity on and within the universe created by Him. [Excerpts; ‘The Message of Qur’an’ by Muhammad Asad]
Brief Description of Names of God & His Titles in Bible:

Monotheism has been clearly emphasized in Bible, the verse from the book of Deuteronomy contains an exhortation from Moses (peace be upon him):”Shama Israelu Adonai Ila Hayno Adna Ikhad“. It is a Hebrew quotation which means: “Hear, O Israel: The Lord our God is one Lord”(Deuteronomy;6:4, Isaiah;43:11, 45:5,46:9). Jesus (peace be upon him) also said: “Shama Israelu Adonai Ila Hayno Adna Ikhad ”[“Hear, O Israel: The Lord our God is one Lord”](Mark;12:29), “..There is none good but one, that is, God..”(Mathew;19:17).  Qur’an says: “Your God is one God; there is no one worthy of worship except Him, the Compassionate, the Merciful.” (Qur’an;2:163). The monotheism in Islam is called Tawhid in Arabic; Allah, the One and Only God. Allah says:, “Say: He is Allah the One and Only; God the Eternal, the Uncaused Cause of All Being ; He begets not, and neither is He begotten; And there is nothing that can be  compared with Him.”(Qur’an;112:1-4). Attributes of Allah has been mentioned at many places in Qur’an some references are Qur’an; 2:255, 59:22-24, 42:11-12, 11:6, 6:59, 31:34, 4:164, 7:143, 31:27, 6:115, 4:87, 2:133). Similarly according to Bible, God says: “Thou shalt have no other gods before me.” “Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or any likeness of anything that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth:” “Thou shalt not bow down thyself to them, nor serve them: for I the Lord thy God am a jealous God.”(Exodus; 3:15, 20:3-5, Deuteronomy 5:7-9, 1Timothy;2:5).
Jesus cried out in a loud voice: “Eli, Eli, lema sabachthani?” (“My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?”).[Mathew 27:46., Mark 15:34]

God has been addressed with different names in Bible, the most prominent one are mentioned here ….. keep reading http://faithforum.wordpress.com/2009/11/25/god-of-muslims-and-christians/

 
Related:
Free-eBooks: http://goo.gl/2xpiv

Peace-Forum Video Channel: http://goo.gl/GLh75

Did God Commit suicide?

http://thedeenshow.com/public/mediaplayer/player.swf?autostart=true&file=http://thedeenshow.com/uploads/content/653.mp4&provider=http

Dr. Dirks a former Minister (Deacon) of the United Methodist Church. He holds a Master’s degree in Divinity from Harvard University and a Doctorate in Psychology from the University of Denver. In this video he gives plenty of evidence to prove that Jesus (peace be upon him) did not die for anyone’s sins nor was he crucified.

Read more: Free-Books  <>>

Reality of God

F.W. Norwood wrote: “Life’s greatest tragedy is to lose God and not to miss Him.”

Atheists satisfy both criteria in the above formula; Agnostics fall into a different category entirely, but most visitors to this website [http://www.realityofgod.com]  seem to feel they have lost God, and miss Him very much. These readers believe in an omniscient, omnipotent Creator and Sustainer of the universe, but have not found a religion that makes complete sense to them, or that demands tenets of faith they can fully accept.

Here at RealityofGod.com, we try to help visitors establish belief and choose religious direction, using an Islamic line of reasoning. “Using an Islamic line of reasoning?” you ask, skeptically cocking one eyebrow. Yup, you read me right. Think of it this way: You’ve probably already heard everything other religions have to say on the subject, and their arguments didn’t work for you. So here’s your chance to hear what a Muslim has to say. Atheists, Agnostics, Idol-worshippers, even lapsed Jews and Christians will find articles herein that are designed to kindle faith and enrich a person’s spiritual journey. Uncommitted Christians might bypass this website and jump straight to the next website in this series, www.TrueToJesus.com. Open-minded seekers of religious truth might prefer the author’s main website, www.LevelTruth.com. Whichever level you begin with, we welcome you to this line of investigation with the reminder that no amount of searching can take the place of a single, sincere prayer for guidance. For many, such a prayer demands faith in the first place. It is this faith we hope to kindle, nurture and guide through the articles herein.