My words are not my rationalizations, they are based on scriptures which I happen to believe in after reading, and which were written 1400 years before superman and some of them much much earlier.
That fact that you believe certain old texts doesn't make them true
- anymore than it makes other religious texts true. You need to demonstrate how you think you know these 'scriptures' are true, not just assert it. Further, it makes no difference how old an old book is. People have been lying and making up false religions for a long time - longer than Islam, Christianity, or Judaism - so what. You need more than just claims in old books to demonstrate a supernatural event took place.
Since we have a “knowledge” gap between us, I prefer to keep the Godly scriptures out of our discussion as much as possible and remain in the light of us and “awareness” to try to push my points. Then anyone who feels interested can do a proper academic search and read the revelation.
I'm sorry, that's just not going to happen. You see, it is your "scriptures" which are the very assumption in question. Again, you need to demonstrate how you think you know these things are "revelation" - not just
claim it or assert it.
b – from my point of view, It is clear that I brought forth a rich conclusion of the “non-physiological” organs, unlike the scottsman fallacy.
A conclusion which you did not backup with any evidence or rational argument - just an assertion - is easily dismissed (b/c such assertions made without evidence can be dismissed without evidence).
Well, your "point of view" is in error and that's what my rebuttal showed. It is irrational to claim that all amputees have the ability to "heal themselves" (which you have not shown is true) and then, when presented with counter evidence, just claim they are not a "real" amputee or that they don't fit the category you have made for them.
Another exp: -We can say that the composed tissue, nerves, muscles, blood… make the hand an organ of function. With the hand we can build a wall. With what can we go to space? Not with the hand of course, because the gorilla also have a hand and isn’t able even to count to three. We go to space with invisible organs; awareness, intelligence, motivation, which the gorilla also have but not good enough. So it is conclusive that there are non-physical organs and non-physical matter, everywhere.
What you have just demonstrated here is called
The Argument from Ignorance Fallacy. Awareness, intelligence, and motivation etc have nothing to do with the supernatural. They are descriptions that we human beings put upon things that we experience. And just because you personally cannot understand or explain something does not mean there are "immaterial" things. Supernatural explanations are the LAST place to think about - not the first. Why? Because you can use such explanations for just about any unknown phenomena. They are unreliable and useless for separating fact from fiction.
hai capito? You can refuse my conclusion as much as anti-matter was an irrational fantasy before its discovery. Anti-matter is spiritual, can’t you see? It is a step inside the spiritual realm. What is “spiritual” if everything un-proved with an equation doesn’t exist? When anti-matter was seen, spirituality has been proven. Spirituality is the realm beyond the physical and the organic, thus anti-matter. Please lets go forward with this correspondence or I’ll ignore you. I can’t make a blind man see his heart if he’s dead.
You can choose to ignore me, and that's fine if you do. I'll just take it that you don't really care whether or not your beliefs are actually true (just one more example of religious credulity) and that you just want to believe what you already assumed from the beginning (regarding the Koran, the Hadith, or any other part of it). But if you continue this discussion that's fine too. Neither choice will make me more gullible.
Now, do you have a full and competent understanding of particle physics? How well do you understand (or have you studied) the nature of anti-matter? I ask because your interpretation of the nature of anti-matter is in stark contradiction to those that discovered anti-matter. Nice double standard! So you're willing to quote the science when you think it goes along with your religious assumptions but not when they go contrary to them. I wonder why that is.
d – I can’t resist the temptation, I fell victim ? I have to say this; The scriptures which my points are based upon happen to be credible since they also tell me that “all matter of earth and heavens were stuck together in a singularity and God cleft them asunder and created every living thing from water” another place He says “the same way We made that creation, We will repeat it again as much as We please” and another place “We created the spaces and earth (as in solid matter in it) and We’re truly expanding it” and more importantly in few other places “We will show the unbelievers that this revelation is divinely revealed by showing them in it, signs in themselves and in the horizons until it becomes clear to them that it is truly divine from their creator” and “…for every appointed generation in history there are appointed proofs of the divinity of this revelation”.
No, I'm just wondering why you keep quoting the Koran, just like the Christians quote the bible, or thousands of other gullible men have quoted their religious texts throughout history - as if your Koran holds some kind of 'weight' here. It doesn't. And even if you could show that one thing (or more) were scientifically correct in the Koran, such statements wouldn't help you one ioto (just like any other religion) in demonstrating a deity "Allah" was responsible - nor would it show that
any other thing was correct. You seem to be suffering from the same kind of credulity and gullibility that all other religious people in the world do. However, that gullibility isn't satisfactory to justify belief in the supernatural.
In case you’re wondering why all the trouble, it is to make sure that only the grateful creation which was given freedom will “be” in the realm of God, and not the rest.
Another assumption based upon your other assumptions.
Everything works following the laws of physics and the natural flow of things, except who? The free, us. This is our trial to either take an “almost blind” path of gratitude (quality) for our existence in all of its pristine wonders, or consider that whatever made us be in it isn’t worthy of being gratified and worshiped, insisting that by being so we’re smarter. Who searches finds, did you search? Keep searching until you find, and you will.
Now you're just preaching. But you've also made yet another assumption - that there is any such thing as a supernatural "freewill". That is, yet again, another unsupported assertion. Again, just because you are ignorant and call things "pristine wonders", or assume some supernatural divine 'mind' for "creation", doesn't make your beliefs any more true. It seems, unfortunately, that your standard of evidence is a bit too low when it comes to your religion.
