₦airaland Forum

You know what, i will assume your position for a while, if God is existence then I can equally replace the question "why is there existence", with why is there God?

So in your view, a causeless entity is existence itself?

Note that most societies are pluralistic, they have gone beyond Jewish, Christian communities and multicultures. How is this mix to be managed? Would atheists, agnostics, pagans have to live under islamic laws to manage their affairs? And what's the role of free speech? Will free speech be limited to socially correct free speech?

In your Islamic ideak govt, wouldn't defining and selecting fields compatible to islam be censoring and restricting Science. Don't you think its odd for religious sources to pick out which and which is a scientific truth?

What about bioethics as involved in the creation of synthetic life, stem cells,etc..

Little bit of truth in that. However that increases the margin of error. Besides the most basic truths are universal.

Self existent entity is such independent from a cause, simple. However it shares as much characteristics as other existing entities as with the "IS" attribute.

Ihedinobi: Regardless, self-existence means non-contingent existence. In other words, it means that which exists upon itself, not another. Its very own self is its existence.

You haven't been able to merge the concept of existence with a necessary being into one. You are still touching on its causeless nature. How does an entity establish itself as a state whuich itself is subject to?! Its ridiculous

^^

What if a couple of people and mine experiences don't account for the above, will it still be valid.

What does self existent mean to you?

What will be the place of human rights, will it be more limited to fit into the Ummah's moral code or the individual's mind is sovereign?

Will Macro evolution be entertained and sponsored? Will Researches into the natural causes of life be funded?

Because in it I said that it cannot be said that existent entities are God simply because God is existence.

By necessary inference, it is. I see no difference btw God existing and any other entity. If existence is an event to one entity, then it is to God. If not accept the necessary conclusion.

Ola fails to see how Science works! The same manner in which the Church was censoring Science is the same way most fundamentalist Christians do. How do you expect a thousand year old book to hold present day knowledge?!

Ihedinobi: I think I better put it in an absolute way so that the absurdity of your question becomes crystal.

It is actually not totally correct to say, "God exists" especially if that can be taken to mean that God is an entity experiencing an event called existence. The correct and absolute form is "God is existence". The error that is easy to fall into in this regard is to think that everything that exists is God. But if we unraveled that latter thought, it would become, "everything that experiences existence is God" which is obviously absurd. God is that which is.

As such, God is not subject to any thing or condition. That which is God is that which is the final explanation for everything and every condition that experiences existence.

Again, God did not create existence. Rather, God is the meaning of existence. "Why is there existence?" can only be answered thus: "because there is God". To proceed then to ask why there is God is to speak nonsense. If you disagree, please feel free to show what sense there is in the question.

Existence in very simple terms: a state of being, of present. Also that the concepts of existence and God are very distinct and separate, its absurd to equate both, which will lead to concluding that all existent entities are God.

Existence is more of a quality, experiencing such is limited to conscious entities, at least sentient beings. Experience implies a level of perception. So whatever is existing is first "is" then depending on its limitations can perceive it.

Besides if you still insist God is existence, then in answering "why is there existence", you because THERE IS God, obviously doesn't resolve the question, rather you paraphrased. In other words, "there is existence because of existence."

In what areas does the Quranic governance of the Ummah, differ from secular values? The world has changed so much, there are numerous cultures that come together and connect, how do islamic ideals deal with that.

And the role of Science, should it be an independent separate field or be subordinated to the Quran? And how are conflicts to be dealt with?

[quote author=Mr_Anony]Lol, I knew you wouldn't understand Reg.

The point Reyginus and Ihedinobi are trying to get across to you is that there is something wrong with your question.

The purpose of existence is God.

You are asking: What is the purpose of the purpose of existence?
The bolded question does not make any sense to us.[/quote]First of all, God exists and therefore is a subject of existence. The purpose of existence is either of higher or equal significance to God, but not lower or subordinate to God. The so called "absurd question" doesn't come up at all.

Ihedinobi: No, it could not be. Before God may be considered as to personality, God must be considered as a concept. If there is such a thing as a prime mover, that which sufficiently explains all existence, then it is a very absurdity to seek explanation for its existence. Such a query has necessarily rendered the prime mover less than prime. In that case, it is no longer God about Whom you ask.

"Why is there existence?" is a valid question perfectly squared on your God, who in your belief is the basis for existence. So I'm questioning the purported Creator of existence.

^^ No its not. It could be an inquiry into an entity's nature.

@Reg

I don't get you.

@Reg

Not that I'm attacking your God, but he seems to the mover of your world. If God doesn't create, what other purpose does he serve?

Without the function of a Creator, God will be useless?!

So we exist for the sole purpose of an afterlife? Then treating this existence in isolation, we are useless?

Why existence? Why does God exist? Why is there reality?

MacDaddy01: Why hypothetical? Hypothetical space?


Where does that exist? Hmmm?

"space" itself is something.

Therefore the " " cos I wasn't refering to the spacetime we are used to.

^^
Take an hypothetical "space" with nothing, no particles, no energy, no space, no pigments not even black, not even God, an absolute void.

Then proceed to ponder what could arise from it.

Here is another way of seeing it, define Nothing as the absence of anything. Therefore to contemplate something arising from "absence of anything" will lead to a contradiction.

Religious freedom relates only to how you in person or a group exercise religious beliefs. It doesn't include forcing and punishing others to follow your faith.

^^

In a free society, every individual is permitted express himself/herself in any manner she wishes. And there is no State sanctioned sacredness, because that will be counterproductive to secular values of freedom.

Gaga chooses to wear a hijab, she isn't to be threatened with assault or murder. Imposing sacredness of religious relic/objects on others is a form of violence: intolerance.

^^

What's the purpose of everything? Even God.

Good question.

benodic: @ Kay 17


it is okay if you accept the materialist explanations of our beingness. for me my convictions rest on my personal experiences which of course no one can take from me. like i said earlier things of the spirit are not subject to scientific dissection because material scientists do not have the instruments to penetrate the spiritual worlds to record the events there.

the instruments that can penetrate the spiritual worlds are our spiritual ears and and spiritual eyes with which your real self, soul, uses to see into and explore the inner spiritual worlds. the experiences you have there are subjective and not open to objective analysis. you can only understand it when you have the experience yourself but until then you will never understand where i am coming from.

A spiritual world built up by personal experience? The possibility of error is enormous. You could be insane, or mentally exhausted, or sick. Coupled with it is the lack of a common experience among all humans of this nature. One has to be skeptical and decipher this experience.

Uyi Iredia: But they are widespread which is my point.

I agree with you, but still not a necessary conclusion for an atheist.

Uyi Iredia: It took place in a time-period in the past which no one has ever witnessed. So, how can you accept such a stup1d hypothesis when there's no evidence and there can never be evidence that it happened. The so-called fossils which are touted as evidence are a non-sequitur since better hypothesis which can be verified real time such as the fossils are relatives of animals living today have not yet been tried out. I think it's disingenuous to postulate something which can't actually be verified real-time.

Are you implying that Science is restricted to direct observation? That Science isn't entitled to predict natural outcomes or make inferences? That fields of archaeology, cosmological physics, quantum physics, microbiology have breached the valid borders of Science?

More intolerance.

Good therapy.

@benodic

I find materialist explanations quite enlightening also, the mind is taken to be a hardware which capable of malfunctioning (hallucinations), displaying unreliable outputs.

What do your convictions rest on? Reason, empirical evidence?? Faith?

@Ola

Could you connect God's purpose for us and his attribute of independence from wants and needs.

You also should touch on interpretation bias. It will be very relevant.

^^

For the fact that nothing comes out of nowhere, is enough reason to justify the ever existence.

If you take out all that is in existence, there will be nothing left.