Mustafa Kemal on religion
How man created god
Too good not to share
Random thoughts
Random musings about everything.
Mustafa Kemal on religion
How man created god
An Inclusive Site Dedicated to Life-Long Learning
Any thoughts worth writing about
On the lookout for more joy
Observations and reflectionsf
You - philosophical, thoughtful, witty. Me - still thinks fart jokes are funny. We should DEFINITELY get together!
Questioning the conventional wisdom
Everything random... At 3am 😊
These are unedited versions of my thoughts straight from the mind, a relieve from the ‘pressure cooker’, snippets and flotsam of a mundane existence, collected over time, at the early morning hours at sunrise. I have no intensions to start a self-help group or a forum for complains!
Blossoming: A Story of Beauty, Pain, Struggle & Growth
The African Environmental Blog site
The world inside my head is beautiful 🌷🌷
Videos of feral cats on the streets, and my own four feral felines at home, feline humor, advice, and gifts for your cat.
My journey to finding love through the sea Fuckboys
A blog by the Global Governance Centre, Graduate Institute, Geneva
Nicole
Cogito Ergo Sum
Sustainable Living & Wildlife Conservation
Where The Eagles Fly . . . . Art Science Poetry Music & Ideas
One minute info blogs escaping the faith trap
Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn’t…
Mark and Abbie Jury
Life is intuition woven on fickleness.
Life is a journey. Let us meet at the intersection and share a story.
Random musings about everything.
With(out) Predicates
I call architecture frozen music. – Johann Wolfgang von Goethe
Random thoughts 
These are real gemstones, my friend!
LikeLike
I liked them too and I like the quote by Mustafa. Any leader who relies on religion has no business being in government
LikeLike
If there is no god, then from were did the universe come from?!
LikeLike
what has god existing got to do with the universe?
LikeLike
I don’t know what’s your point of view about this, but the way I see it is that all of this huge universe with all wonderful amazing things in it that we discover every day and every moment through the laws which they follow and physicists record in voluminous books must have had an Originator, a Creator whom people call “God”.
LikeLike
My point of view is that all I know is that I exist and that the universe is. I am not going to speculate that there is a creator somewhere responsible when there is no evidence for such an entity existing anywhere.
LikeLike
What kind of evidence do you mean? Can you explain by giving a brief example!
LikeLike
You have made a claim that there must be a creator, I have said all I know is that the universe is. Don’t you think you are the one to provide me with evidence in support of your claim.
LikeLike
You’re right 🙂
I think that this whole universe with every thing in it is evidence. For instance, when ever I see a car moving in the street I don’t need any evidence on the fact that it has been designed by a knowledgeable engineer, them manufactured by a capable one till it reached the final product that we use. So is the case with the universe, it is an inanimate being following prescribed physical rules that we discover every day, Who designed the universe and gave it the laws and rules which it is following.
If the books written explaining these laws in all science branches were to be used as bricks, they would build huge cities. Imagine that thousands of years later, the humans receiving those books claim that they did not have any knowledgeable intelligent authors, but they were the result of an explosion that occurred in a publishing house, causing the ink to scatter over the paper sheets forming the books! Of course we can’t imagine something like this happening. The question here is why do you imagine that the universe have come to exist with all of its constellations, planets, stars, etc., guided by physical laws that scientists have discovered, are still discovering and writing down in voluminous books; merely through some kind of creative chaos, without any need for organization and guidance from an “Intelligent Capable Designer” or an “Omniscient Omnipotent Creator”?!
LikeLike
I guess you are well read and know of Paley with his watchmaker analogy? You cannot assume there is a designer without first showing there is design and purpose. The engineer who designs a car has an end in mind. To what end do you think the designer you assume the universe had, had in mind?
The so called physical or natural laws do not guide the universe, they are explanations of what has been observed about the universe, for example, gravity helps to explain why objects always fall towards the heavier one.
I have a question or two; what do you mean by an omniscient and omnipotent creator and what evidence do you have of this being or whatever it is?
LikeLike
Regarding the end the designer had in mind for the universe: I have always wondered about that ever since I were a child. I asked my teachers, my parents, religious men, etc.. No one seemed to really know, until I met a friend in college who gave me a nice answer, he said:
“Not knowing the purpose of creation doesn’t nullify the fact that it happened, or else we will deny our own existence. We know that we exist, and we know that we didn’t create ourselves, we know that the universe exists, and we know that it’s changing so it cannot be eternal, so who is behind all of this?! Not knowing the purpose of creation is like not understanding the purpose for which painters draw paintings or why musicians make music, it’s a capability that they have and we can’t ask them why do you paint or why do you make music. So is the Creator, he can create beautiful things, this is His attribute, so why ask Him why do you create?! Even if you will say that artists make art so that people will get to know their talent and admire it, then why do you deny this right to the Creator himself?!”
And of course I agree with you that Gravity does help explain why objects always fall towards the heavier one. But who created the objects themselves, I mean from where did these inanimate objects come from with their laws; gravity and others? This was my original question that your answer doesn’t respond to and I still want an answer.
Regarding your questions:
I mean by an omniscient and omnipotent creator the originator of the objects that we are talking about, the maker of substance and material, the one who guided those inanimate bodies after creating them till they reached their current status. In short the maker of the universe.
Again you are asking about the evidence. I think that what I have stated was an evidence but you refused it. So please give me an example of the scientific evidence you find acceptable from any other subject so that I may bring you a similar one in this subject, other than this we will be revolving in closed circles.
LikeLike
I forgot to say thank you for taking time to comment.
I said before you can claim a designer, you have first to show design. You haven’t proved that the universe is designed. And the answer your friend gave is nothing but special pleading. It starts with an assumption that the universe is designed and ergo a designer without any proof. I told you in an earlier response that the existence of a tree or of man is not proof of a god, no, the much that you can deduce is that the tree exists. Any claim as to knowing that a designer or creator exists is not based on evidence but follows from what you have been fed since you were a child and never took time to think about it.
If everything that exists require a creator, it must follow that your god or whatever it is you have conceived as being responsible for the universe is in need of a creator and so on ad infinitum and the only way to excuse your god is by special pleading. It is also fallacious to claim that what is true of man made objects, ie paintings, is true of everything that exists. You or I have no proof of this and as such we don’t do ourselves any favours by speculating a creator who itself needs to be explained as being responsible for things we know so little about. It is irresponsible and careless to say the least.
It is presumptuous for anyone to claim that they have evidence that the universe was created and list for this evidence the things that exist without giving any proof that the supposed creator exists! How would I know that such and such creator exists? You claim things were created. Indulge me, how would I know the type or size of the first created stone?
You have not demonstrated why you think the universe is in need of a creator. I also told you that the fact that a tree exists is not proof of god and to claim that as evidence then turn around and ask me for what type of scientific evidence, a demand I have not put, is to be credulous. The natural laws do not translate to there being a god, not by a mile. If you think that a god exists, there has to be evidence that must independent of the trees as proof of this being and this being should in the least be obvious to everyone anywhere and all the time. This being would not require apologists like you to prove that it exists. Being, however, that gods were created by men, they need men to explain them.
LikeLike
I have enjoyed this conversation. It reminded me of a past stage in my life. This shall be my final response for today cause I have to go.
Regarding your words: “You haven’t proved that the universe is designed.”
“You have not demonstrated why you think the universe is in need of a creator.”
“How would I know that such and such creator exists?”
According to the established modern scientific theories; the universe was originated from an explosion in a very dense hot singularity point turning it in to a universal celestial gaseous dust cloud. The cloud produced by that “Big Bang” was mostly formed of hydrogen alongside tiny dust particles. Gravity took its role between the close particles, the end product of which is that stars and galaxies were formed. While galaxies continue to move away from each other due to the primary explosion, some of them are moving relative to each other due to their gravitational interaction. In 1925, Edwin Hubble (after whom the Hubble Space telescope is named) provided the conclusive observational evidence for the expansion of the universe. The whole space itself is expanding, carrying galaxies with it, like spots on an inflating balloon.
Now to what makes me believe that this incident up there requires without any doubt a knowledgeable intelligent designer:
Inanimate matter need a designer to shape them and transform their state from an unorganized form or in our case (i.e. the universe); the chaos resulting from the big bang to an organized balanced state following certain rules. This is not my opinion, this is what the second law of thermodynamics says:
“The entropy (i.e. Lack of order or predictability; gradual decline into disorder) of an isolated system (i.e. a system that receives no energy or organization from outside) never decreases, because isolated systems spontaneously evolve towards thermodynamic equilibrium ; the state of maximum entropy. (i.e. In other words, the arrow of entropy has the same direction as the arrow of time). Increases in entropy correspond to irreversible changes in a system, because some energy is expended as waste heat, limiting the amount of work a system can do and pushing it towards slow death.”
This consequently means that “Time” alone is a destructive factor, not a constructive one. So if you leave a random system on its own; it shall decay and fall apart, its situation will never get any better. If you want to preserve it and push it towards progress and stability; you shall have to guide it through some kind of special precautions, or what I call the intelligent design.
Regarding your words: “If everything that exists require a creator, it must follow that your god or whatever it is you have conceived as being responsible for the universe is in need of a creator and so on ad infinitum and the only way to excuse your god is by special pleading.”
This has always been the knot facing the minds of the mightiest philosophers. By all means; thinking of an endless chain of creators is meaningless, it’s against logic, there must be a point where everything started from. To understand and deduce through science and logical analysis that there is a Creator for all that exists is one thing, but to think of the nature of this creator is something else. Not knowing His nature doesn’t negate His existence. Exactly as not knowing the description of the engineer who designed “BMW M3 Coupé” doesn’t mean that he does not exist.
Regarding you saying: “Any claim as to knowing that a designer or creator exists is not based on evidence but follows from what you have been fed since you were a child and never took time to think about it.”
Well this was a bit offensive, but I think that I deserved it. I know that I have been a schmuck bothering you on your blog like this and I apologize. Please accept my apologies.
LikeLike
First, I meant no offense. This has been an interesting dialogue. As long as one believes, through faith, the things he was taught in childhood as true and especially regarding questions that we have come to classify as important such as is there a god, where do we come from and what is the meaning of life, changing ones mindset is not easy. It is this that I refer too and it may be true of you or not but it happens in many cases.
You commit the same mistake WLC makes by saying one cannot think of an endless line of causes and why not? As I have said before to excuse god or gods from the chain of causes is special pleading and only arises once a person posits that the universe needs a creator which I would posit it doesn’t.
An expanding universe does not translate to a created universe especially given that matter is always in motion. My science could be rusty, but last I read on a science blog and it is quite up to date, the author says the BB is a place marker and doesn’t mean there was an explosion per se and that our knowledge so far is based on measurements taken Plank seconds after the event, whatever it was. It also does not tell us the initial conditions of the universe rather, it describes and explains the general evolution of the universe going forward from that point on.[from wiki]
To claim that inanimate matter needs a designer to shape them is a really funny statement. Which intelligent designer shapes sand dunes in the deserts or the sand ripples seen along the beaches around the world? Isn’t nature acting on its own enough to shape these features? Don’t we see around us beautiful land features formed after years of erosion either by wind or water or through glacial movements? Don’t you reckon that these are indeed natural features that didn’t require the involvement of an intelligent designer?
You quote the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics but leave out the 1st Law which states
and whereas the 2nd law that you refer to states as you have above, you would have to show whether the universe is bounded or it is an open system for the second law applies to a closed system.
LikeLike
An awesome posting, my Nairobi brother! A great start for a Saturday morning! Thank you! Be safe, my friend! 🙂
LikeLike
You too enjoy your weekend my friend!
LikeLike
I totally subscribe to what Ataturk said – totally!
LikeLike
The guy is so right
LikeLike
I believe you couldn’t agree more!
LikeLike
You are more than right!
LikeLike
I knew it 😀
LikeLike
Brilliant. He has my vote. Where do I put my X
LikeLike
Just vote for me to be mayor of my house, that will be good enough
LikeLike
Wow! Don’t know who that guy is, but I’d vote for him. (Alatiirk)
Looks like you got a live one Mak. He even trotted out the 2nd law of thermodynamics lol. I do believe you may have a copy/paste AiG/DI troll. if that be the case, congratulations! Don’t chew it up all at once my friend, savor the moment.
Nice job on the rebuttals BTW.
LikeLike
Mate, I think some of these apologists are really lazy. They start to read on topic, get to the point where they think it supports there theories and stop there, then they parrot it all over like it’s gospel truth.
He, however, was a fine one to listen to.
That guy should run for office
LikeLike
Ataturk… The man had guts.
Good quotes to keep handy. 🙂
LikeLike
Such men should run for office
LikeLike
Indeed!
LikeLike
Ataturk was certainly interesting, one of those people that you wind up admiring a lot, but not without some reservations. In recent years, it’s struck me as a shame that the religious party has come to power in Turkey.
Have you read the novel Snow? It’s really enjoyable. In the story there’s a traveling theatre troupe that is doing a play on the life of Ataturk.
http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/11691.Snow
LikeLike
No, I haven’t read the book and for the time being will contend myself with reviews of it.
The situation in Turkey does not inspire so much hope
LikeLike
ABSOLUTELY fascinating Mayor. 🙂 I have but one thing to say,
Transpermia and I’m sticking with it !
LikeLike
Now that you, my friend, has already declared me mayor, I have a few laws to pass.
1. I am still thinking and will revert 😛
Hope you are doing great
LikeLike
Convert or revert ?? :))))))))~
LikeLike