1 readers online now  |  69 million page views

Nura: Darwinism is dead. Long live Nuraism! Part II

Reader comment on item: Counting Islamists
in response to reader comment: Alas! Plato believes in an unseen god, Evolution!

Submitted by Plato (India), Nov 4, 2008 at 21:30

Nura, you wrote:

>>Perhaps you see life as a purposeless existence.<<

It is purposeless, except for the purpose you imagine it has like struggling to achieve the wine and women (oops I should have said boys like pearls) in Allah's paradise but happily for people like me we give it our own purpose and meaning with not a thought to things as worldly as wine and women for eternal enjoyment.

>>How could you not when you believe that you and everything in the earth his one big mistake.<<

I said that? When? Where in my posts? Evolution does not make "mistakes". It just does its "job" without thinking of consequences. Millions of species have disappeared for ever, did evolution "care" that they were "mistakes"?

>>But your forget, according to Darwin death does have a purpose, making room for new life, which brings me to your example of the poor sick girl.<<

Do a check. Darwin never attributed any purpose to evolution and evolution does not care whether an organism lives or dies. If death makes room for new life so be it, if it does not, no matter either.

>>We looked at two perspectives, Hindu, and Islamic. The Hindu explanation that you seem to favor would imply that the girl deserved her fate because it is due to her karma. Bad Karma implies that she was evil in her past life and her suffering from cancer is its expiation.<<

You have put words into my mouth, but I will not dwell on it. The girl, even if she can't remember any of her past crimes, if she believed in karma, would have the consolation of suffering for sins past.

>>First, Islam states that hardship strikes both the good and bad so it is not assumed that it was a punishment.<<

Let us look at Islam with the same prism. What bad did the girl (her soul) do to suffer and what good did a little girl born as a princess do to deserve her position? Stating that because hardship strikes both it cannot be assumed to be punishment is silly. If Allah exists why does He strike down one innocent girl with cancer and another girl is showered with gifts by Him. He cannot put it down to their past lives. It is just one of Allah's whims as he keeps saying in the Koran He will do what He pleases.

>>Secondly, hardship is natural and necessary for humanity to realize its blessings and serves to increase the ranking of the righteous in the hereafter.<<

Allah's account book seems to have a special heading for the righteous who suffer so that He can give them special rank in heaven (what is this ranking? they can sit closer to the formless Allah to see Him better?).

You can think of a time when cancers will be cured, everyone will have enough to eat and so on. Will the righteous have a tough time achieving a high rank in heaven in the future? They probably will have to inflict suffering on themselves by flaying their bodies, sleeping in the cold, rolling down a hill and so on to attract Allah's attention from the believers who are cowards and do not self-flagellate to achieve a high ranking in paradise (Allah does love suffering humans, does He not? He has even designated a whole month of suffering for His sake).

>>Allah will reward with bliss unimaginable, forever, for those who believe and is patient through hardship and as I stated before, the pain that was suffered will be forgotten.<<

If suffering has to be forgotten what was the purpose of inflicting it? As to the bliss, Allah has left nothing to the imagination in his description of paradise. Remember the number of verses devoted to paradise you were kind enough to enumerate in your last post?

>>Darwin's theory is actually the harshest. He would view that the death of the girl was not only necessary to keep the natural order, but that helping to save her life would be unethical.<<

Nura, I wish you would get a clue to what Darwin actually said rather than post drivel, as dhimmi no more would have succinctly put it. Because a theory is harsh does that invalidate it? The theory of the life and death of stars tells us that eventually the earth will be engulfed by the sun. That is a really ‘harsh' theory. Will having a less harsh theory make the sun behave differently?

>>His view of disease is that it must exist to control world population.<<

It is not his view. It is what he (rather Malthus) has deduced from the evidence at hand. Disease is just one way that runaway populations are kept in check. If there were no diseases, it would be hunger, if not hunger our carbon footprint, it does not matter what.

>>You have heard of population control management, I'm sure. The argument, rooted in Darwinism, states that humans are living longer and are being saved form diseases and injuries that would have killed past generations. It is for this reason that the world is in trouble. There are too many people and not enough resources. There are active programs seeking to control world population for this reason.<<

If Darwin had been alive he would have sued you for defamation. Darwin made some deductions from the evidence he had. Population control and human progress being blamed for saving humanity from disease and injuries have nothing whatsoever to do with Darwin.

>>In addition, the helping of this girl would be unethical because, the law of life is survival of the fittest. Helping the weak pollutes society with weaker genes and ultimately can destroy society itself. This is the ideology you converted to?<<

That is a law you have invented and attributed to Darwin. Evolution does not bother about ethics or morality. They are our inventions to overcome the extremes of some traits ingrained in us by evolution that could be detrimental to our survival. The revulsion against incest is to ensure diversity in our gene pool and help eliminate bad genes. Allah's legislation does not have anything to do with it. Helping the weak does not pollute society, helping only the weak to survive will pollute society and that society will implode and disappear.

And get a clue, the theory of evolution is neither an ideology nor a religion, just as the theory of relativity is not.

>>That going out of existence is a great fear and we love to live are true but Darwin has shown us the reasons for the fear of death and the love of life. Simply put, as I pointed out before, without them we would not be here debating these points.

Why then do people die for ideological causes, whether it is for religion or country?<<

They die because of a greater fear than death or the false hope some religions endow weak minds with about eternal rewards for dying for it and literally invite its followers to die.

9:111SHAKIR: Surely Allah has bought of the believers their persons and their property for this, that they shall have the garden; they fight in Allah's way, so they slay and are slain; a promise which is binding on Him in the Taurat and the Injeel and the Quran; and who is more faithful to his covenant than Allah? Rejoice therefore in the pledge which you have made; and that is the mighty achievement.

Nura, if you fight and get to die in Allah's way and earn paradise will you not prefer death to life?

YUSUFALI: O ye who believe! what is the matter with you, that, when ye are asked to go forth in the cause of Allah, ye cling heavily to the earth? Do ye prefer the life of this world to the Hereafter? But little is the comfort of this life, as compared with the Hereafter.

Which believer will cling to life after reading about the greater comforts of Allah's heaven?

YUSUFALI: What is the life of this world but play and amusement? But best is the home in the hereafter, for those who are righteous. Will ye not then understand?

Nura, afte reading 6:32 do you now understand why people of your religion are eager to die??

>>In fact, most people die for nationalistic allegiances. How does this fit in with his theory?<<

Most people die of natural causes, very few die voluntarily for nationalist causes. If you delve a little more deeply into Darwinian evolution perhaps you will understand why.

>>Why do people commit suicide? Is there a glitch in the system or is the perception of life and death more complicated?<<

You got the part about a glitch in the system right but only for those who are natural born suicides. The brain circuitry or chemistry that Allah gave them went for a toss impelling them to toss themselves over a bridge or into the river.

As for the others they were disappointed with the health and wealth that Allah doled out making them unbearably sad and deciding to end it all and make an early claim on His promise of rewarding those who suffer in this life.

You also seem to have forgotten that Allah claims even suicides are a result of His decision written before the poor souls were born.

003.145 YUSUFALI: Nor can a soul die except by Allah's leave, the term being fixed as by writing. If any do desire a reward in this life, We shall give it to him; and if any do desire a reward in the Hereafter, We shall give it to him. And swiftly shall We reward those that (serve us with) gratitude

>>I have already established that there is life after death.<<

Where in your posts did you establish this proof? The fact that YOU cannot think about ceasing to exist after death? I grant you that it is Islamically foolproof evidence for life after death. But to unbelievers like me you will have to do better than that. As we are earth bound we need down-to-earth logic to be convinced not the logic of heaven.

>>Even if you perceive it as biological life, you cannot deny that there is life after death.<<

The Koran does say life after death is very biological. You have wine, women, boys like pearls, rivers of milk and honey and fruit of all kinds. And why can't I deny there is life after death??

>> The question now, is there consciousness after death? Back to the nature of the soul philosophical argument, in which I'm not going to get into, but you cannot prove that consciousness stops after death.<<

Very, very philosophical. You are getting me into the deep waters of the soul and consciousness. If you don't want to get into this argument why then do make the unilateral claim that I cannot prove that consciousness stops after death? Consciousness stops when you are in a coma, when someone knocks you on the head, it stops when chemicals are injected into you. It stops when you are in deep sleep. Why not when you are dead which is a much worse condition than any of the above?

>> A hereafter has to exist for supreme justice to prevail.<<

This is even more philosophical than soul and consciousness. The necessity for supreme justice to prevail magically brings forth the hereafter with Allah, His paradise, His Hell and dearest to your heart His Supreme Justice. You have done better than Allah, as mere necessity for supreme justice brings forth Allah. He brought the world into existence because He desired to be worshipped. A chicken and egg problem all over again.

>>Question: Would you consider religion a creation of evolution? Humans always had some form of religion; atheism is actually new on the "evolutionary" scale. <<

Everything born of biology, which includes our minds is the mindless "creation" of evolution. The corollary is that religion being a creation of the mind is a grandchild of evolution. Just as man evolved from the swamps of nature, atheism evolved from the swamps of religious superstition.

>> If so, then what would be the purpose? The purpose would have to be in terms of survival because evolution is concerned only with the survival of species.<<

Let me repeat: evolution is not "concerned" about anything, including survival of the species. Unless you understand this point clearly it is pointless going on about evolution.

>>What would be the outcome if humans got ride of an evolutionary creation.<<

This statement has gone over my head. What does it mean?

>>Your proposal does not hold water for the simple reason that because you or I cannot imagine ourselves ceasing to exist forever does not destine us to be immortal. You have not demonstrated a logical connection.

It is not a logical statement, it is a preposition. I am proposing that being unable to imagine not existing is an indicator that it will not happen. We all can imagine death! We all know death will happen which totally plummets your argument of the Darwin's answer. According to your answer, we should not be able to imagine death either.<<

Nura, your bringing poor dead Darwin into everything must be causing him even more distress than Allah is causing him in hell.

Nura, one does not have to imagine death. We see it happen constantly, if not human, the fried chicken leg or dead fish eyes staring at you from your plate. Death is reality, imagined things like the soul do not necessarily exist.

>>What kind of a conclusion have you given? I cannot imagine myself being run over if I jump into the oncoming traffic. Does that prevent a truck from hitting me?

I think if you think really, really, really, hard you could imagine the impact the truck will have on your body. You can imagine the screech of the brakes as the truck tries to avoid you. You can imagine your screams or gasps. Can you do the same with non-existence? What does it feel like? Yes, it's a trick question.<<

You caught me out with my badly constructed sentence. Instead of ‘I cannot imagine myself being run over if I jump into the oncoming traffic.' I should have written ‘I can imagine myself not being run over if I jump into the oncoming traffic. Does that prevent a truck from hitting me?' Does it, Nura? If the truck does not hit because I imagined it would not, that would indeed be a great trick and life after death would also be possible.

>>Yes, that indeed is the question. Try answering it yourself without having to fall back on the Koran and hadith. Allah has given you a brain with which to think for yourself.

This is the most infantile atheist argument there is. The first assumption that if God exists that he has to be good! Why exactly is this assumption?<<

The reason for this infantile assumption is because Allah makes exactly such an infantile claim. Now you tell me that He is not all good. He claims time and again that He is the most merciful, the most beneficent. If He is not good then why these claims. Can a being who is not good be all merciful and benevolent? Who is being infantile?

>>Secondly, as Muslims, we believe that Allah ordained justice for himself. Meaning that if he did not choose this ordainment for himself, what would prevent him from being unjust?<<

You said just before this that Allah need not be good (which He most certainly is not as He claims to be the creator of evil also). Ask yourself whether a just being can create evil which by definition is unjust when inflicted on an innocent like the little girl suffering from cancer.

A self-proclaimed ordainment of justice for Himself when He manifestly shows an evil nature and claiming that by making this ordainment He is absolved of being unjust is infantile. Not very different from our earthly dictators who can do no evil because they are themselves the law:

4:79SHAKIR: Whatever benefit comes to you (O man!), it is from Allah, and whatever misfortune befalls you, it is from yourself, and …

>>We are talking about an all powerful being. Al-humdulilah, Allah is just and good, apparently this is the superior of all dispositions.<<

Nura, you have a short memory. You have said elsewhere that Allah need not necessarily be good. And justice and good are superior "dispositions" but Allah spoils it all by also creating evil (113:2).

>>This is why it is best for us to be just and good, it is superior.<<

Yes it is superior.

>>Third, the argument is based on the assumption that all suffering is bad, all death is bad, all tragedies are bad. This is really a matter of wisdom. Humans must die!<<

What wisdom is there in inflicting suffering unnecessarily, like Allah did to the girl? What wisdom is there in the tragedy that strikes, all under Allah's guidance, when earthquakes, and tsunamis strike without warning as Allah so gleefully points out often in the Koran for the silly sin of disbelief:

YUSUFALI: How many towns have We destroyed (for their sins)? Our punishment took them on a sudden by night or while they slept for their afternoon rest.

YUSUFALI: Generations before you We destroyed when they did wrong: their messengers came to them with clear-signs, but they would not believe! thus do We requite those who sin!

>> There is no way out of it. Even if the first generations lived the food would eventually run out and humanity would die anyway! In addition, it is known that with illness brings cures.

Human body being exposed to disease and illness actually allows humanity to evolve into a stronger species.<<

It is good to know that Allah allows Darwinian natural selection to allow us to become a stronger species instead of tiring Himself out by keeping on repeating the divine ‘be'.

>> In addition, Allah has given cures with these diseases.<<

What cure has Allah given for the cancers we cannot cure yet. Is he waiting for someone to do the job for Him so He can claim credit for it in an obscure verse in the Koran?

>> He says that with every disease there is a cure. Scientists believe they will find a cure for cancer one day; why; because the formula has to be on the earth like every other cure. Unfortunately, the poor does not get access to enough help, and that is the fault of man. At least there are ways that pain can be eased, all from the mercy of Allah.<<

Your thought process is too complicated for me to follow. Especially your claim that there are ways to ease the pain by the mercy of Allah. Why did he create pain if He intended to ease it? For a lesson in forebearance?

>>I have already proven that the Hindu and Darwinist explanation is far more cruel.<<

A cruel explanation does not detract from its truth. A benign explanation does not make it true.

>> Suffering never lasts! Suffering can't last in its very nature. The human body can only take so much.<<

Thank you for a very acute observation! I had missed that! Death does put a full stop to every suffering.

>>Allah says that he never places a burden of humanity that he cannot bare.<<

Why then do people commit suicide?

>>The human body and mind is strong and can overcome amazing odds. This is all the proofs of Allah. No injure automatically insures death. There are people who are shot in the head and do not die. Doctors are amazed and how many people who were told they would die in a matter of months, and they don't die. These are all proofs in which Allah shows his existence to his creatures.<<

Great observations. Where is the connection with Allah's existence. Could they also not be evidence for Satan's existence or Al Lat or Al Uzza's for that matter?

>>Did Allah solve the little girl's problem? Don't start out- of -context arguments:<<

I brought up the little girl, remember?




Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".

Comment on this item

Mark my comment as a response to Nura: Darwinism is dead. Long live Nuraism! Part II by Plato

Email me if someone replies to my comment

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".

See recent outstanding comments.

Follow Daniel Pipes

Facebook   Twitter   RSS   Join Mailing List
eXTReMe Tracker

All materials by Daniel Pipes on this site: © 1968-2020 Daniel Pipes. daniel.pipes@gmail.com and @DanielPipes

Support Daniel Pipes' work with a tax-deductible donation to the Middle East Forum.Daniel J. Pipes

(The MEF is a publicly supported, nonprofit organization under section 501(c)3 of the Internal Revenue Code.

Contributions are tax deductible to the full extent allowed by law. Tax-ID 23-774-9796, approved Apr. 27, 1998.

For more information, view our IRS letter of determination.)