Posts Tagged ‘claims and reasons’

“Does science support Atheism, positively?”

April 22, 2014

I started a discussion on my favorite religious education discussion forum on the above topic.
The viewers could read/join the discussion at the forum accessing the following link or they may comment at this blog Paarsurrey; and then after due deliberation form their own sincere opinion independently.

paarsurrey wrote:

If yes; does any text book of science or any peer reviewed Journal of science mention it for its claims and reasons?

paarsurrey wrote:

Originally Posted by Sir Doom
I assume its mentioned in a few history books here and there. As far as formal studies go, I can only guess… which I will now do!

political science

I would assume text books dealing with these subjects have a fair chance of mentioning atheism and drawing conclusions based on it.

The above subjects are not disciplined by the scientific method (proper); I meant:

“And over the course of the 19th century, the word “science” became increasingly associated with the scientific method itself, as a disciplined way to study the natural world, including physics, chemistry, geology and biology.”

Science – Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Please keep this in mind while you make your research on the topic.

Thanks and regards

paarsurrey wrote:

Originally Posted by FunctionalAthiest

In other words, science is an affirmative rejection of any god that has knowledge unobtainable by man through mere observation.

Science does not say god does not or cannot exits. Science says there is nothing we can learn from god that we cannot learn on our own.

Citations please as requested in the OP.


paarsurrey wrote:

Originally Posted by FunctionalAthiest
I never said science ‘positively’ supports atheism.

Thanks and regards

paarsurrey wrote:

Originally Posted by FunctionalAthiest
We all must make an assumption, either we accept the basic assumptions of science and believe what we see, or we accept revelation/authority and believe what we are told and what we read.

Can’t we live with an assumption in science in matters relating to our secular life and with other assumption pertaining to our ethical, moral and spiritual matters?

This is like separating “church” and “state” for life.

Secular (based on science) and spiritual (based on Revelation) models could work in their orbits like sun and moon and earth; never colliding with one another.


paarsurrey said:

Originally Posted by Quatermass
Science doesn’t support atheism necessarily just as it isn’t the antithesis* of religion, as many seem to think it is. It is simply that, since no experiment can be performed either way to determine whether there is or is not a God(s), it doesn’t deal with the matter at all.

I appreciate it.

Thanks and regards

*From Google: an•tith•e•sis: a person or thing that is the direct opposite of someone or something else.
“love is the antithesis of selfishness”
synonyms: (complete) opposite, converse, contrary, reverse, inverse, obverse, other side of the coin;

Finding claims and reasons for Truth: Atheists would first be on the run

March 20, 2014

MAR 20, 2014 @ 21:43:36

Hi everybody

One could be born in any religion or without a religion. It is beyond one to decide where to be born. Wherever one is born; that starts one’s journey to find the truth. The tools make easy for one to do a job. It is therefore important for one first to find a tool that gives equal opportunity to every religion to search.

Using a tool and then making a comparative study of religions to find which one is the most truthful religion is therefore most reasonable and rational.

I give here a principle of comparative study of religions which was suggested by Mirza Ghulam Ahmad- the Promised Messiah 1835-1908 in an essay that was read in a Conference of Great Religions held at Lahore in 1896; and was later published in a book form titled “The Philosophy of the Teachings of Islam” translated in many languages of the world. I give below the principle and its explanation in his words:

“It is necessary that a claim and the reasons in support of it must be set forth from a revealed book”

“I consider it essential that everyone who follows a book, believing it to be revealed, should base his exposition upon that book and should not so extend the scope of his advocacy of his faith as if he is compiling a new book.

As it is my purpose today to establish the merits of the Holy Quran and to demonstrate its excellence, it is incumbent upon me not to state anything which is not comprehended in the Quran and to set forth everything on the basis of its verses and in accord with their meaning and that which might be inferred from them, so that those attending the Conference should encounter no difficulty in carrying out a comparison between the teachings of different religions.”

Mirza Ghulam Ahmad adhered to this principle and answered the five important questions set by the moderators of the Conference:

1. The physical, moral and spiritual states of man
2. The state of man after death.
3. The object of man’s life and the means to its attainment.
4. The operation of the practical ordinances of the Law in this life and the next.
5. Sources of Divine knowledge.

One could access the following link to read the book available online freely:

Click to access Philosophy-of-Teachings-of-Islam.pdf

The Atheists/Agnostics/Skeptics don’t have a book to follow. They extol science to find answers to all the questions in the world. Although the questions don’t fall within the scope of science and would overburden it; yet they are open to answer with the condition that they quote some standard text book of science for the claims to the answers as also to the reasons given specifying the relative discipline of science that legitimately deals with it.

Islam fulfills the above Criteria; other revealed religions would find either claims or reasons in their books; not both of them, I think.

The Atheists/Agnostics/Skeptics would find none.

Jesus of Bible only a brain child of sinful Paul and sinful scribes

April 28, 2009

fgenej11 says:

You didn’t answer my question. Was Muhammad capable of committing sin? You have placed your entire trust in this man Muhammad’s version of the truth.

Paarsurrey says:

Hi friend fgenej11

All Messengers Prophets of God are from amongst the human beings and they have to be from the normal human being to become a role model for their kind. A normal human being is always capable of committing sins even if he is from the Messengers Prophets, if he is not capable of committing sins logically, then he is not a human being in the first place and then not fit for being role model for the mankind. Jesus of Bible is neither a human being nor a god; it is a mythical brain-child of sinful Paul and the sinful scribes; that is why It has no reality in the secular history.

The Messengers Prophets are no doubt the mortal human beings, they are one amongst the humankind; but they consistently take refuge in God Allah YHWH from the devil, and thus they desist and are saved from sins. This way they remain innocent and hence selected on merit for the high office of Messenger Prophet. Their capability being innocent therefore comes as a gift and reward from God Allah YHWH.

I put my trust in all the Messengers Prophets of the entire race of human beings all over the world; it is not based in the narrow approach of the Bible; rather I repose my entire trust in God Allah YHWH who mercifully selected and sent down from amongst the normal human being persons with a Message from Him.

If you reflect logically and reasonable you would also reach the same conclusion as I have; there is however no compulsion.

I invite you to the truthful path of Quran; the Quran presents claims with reason. The Bible is, please don’t mind, like a deaf and dumb person, its followers have constantly to spoon-feed the claims and reasons to it since it is a work of sinful persons, it is not from God Allah YHWH.

I love Jesus, Moses, Abraham, David and John the Baptist of Quran; not the mythical ones presented by sinful Paul and sinful scribes.


I am an Ahmadi peaceful Muslim

Has Armageddon already started with the advent of Second Coming 1835-1908 ?: Peaceful Version 2

February 12, 2009

Yes, of course for sure, I understand with the advent of Second Coming 1835-1908, the Armageddon has already started, not in the shape of any physical war between different religions, but in the shape of Jihad with pen.

Jihad with pen means; to prove with rational reasons and logical arguments the truthfulness and supremacy of one’s own truthful Religion over the other faiths/religions or non-religions (Atheism and the like); which could mean providing claims with straightforward text and reasons from one’s own revealed religious book and not from outside of it, in the very beginning of its two pages of the book. (This method has been named by me as ” Religious Method” as it helps to find the Truthful Religion among religions and or the truthful denomination among the many denominations of a religion. ) The Second Coming demonstrated the above golden principle in the rest of the book by adhering to it very closely..

Second Coming 1835-1908 proved this  golden  aspect of the Truthful Religions in an inter-religious conference held in the year 1896 in Lahore, in the then British India. One may like to read this intellectual discourse by accessing:

Click to access Philosophy-of-Teachings-of-Islam.pdf

I love Jesus and Mary

I am an Ahmadiyya peaceful Muslim


%d bloggers like this: