Originally posted by surfup
Originally posted by NEODI
There is only one thing I didn't like about the book. Is how it called the creator "Allah" and the author is in India.
What is wrong with that? I just don't see the point. Could someone please guide me to the light.
On the surface there is nothing wrong with what the author is saying. After all, he is talking about "Timelessness" and "Fate" in terms of
Science and Philosophy and the links between the two. Since the author is obviously most familiar with Islam and the Qur'an, that is what he's
chosen to represent his Philosophical side. Personally I don't find any problem with this either, in fact it seems necessary for the structure of
the book. However, upon reading more of what he had to say I can see where there is a possible problem developing.
Quoted from the link:
Materialists, however, cannot accept the fact that matter is not absolute but was created, even at the cost of conflicting with science.
To accept this fact would require them to accept the existence of Allah, and to believe in Allah would require them to accept religion and lead
religious lives. As religion primarily requires definite obedience and submission to Allah, this would prove to be troublesome for such people as
are blinded by their own arrogance.
Today, modern science verifies facts announced by the Qur'an 1400 years ago, which are unequivocally believed in by the believers. This bears
witness that the Qur'an is the word of Allah.
The example given above is where I see "Possible" Indoctrination of Religious Dogma & Control Meathods being used to claim ultimate authority and
rightfull ownership of All that is "Divine/of God/etc."
I haven't read the entire thing so I may be wrong or jumping to conclusions without reason. What I mean to say is that the Religion of Islam isn't
the only case where Modern Science, specifically Quantum Physics/Mechanics, is now showing to be in agreement with each other. Taoist, Hindu and
Buddhist "Theology/Cosmology/Philosophy" have also been found to be in agreement by todays Scientific Standards. It should also be noted that all
three of them date back even further than the Qur'an, of 1400 years ago. Plus neither Taoist or Buddhist Philosophy/Teachings have "Dieties or
Godlike Figures" such as "Allah" or "Zeus" or "Shiva" etc.
This is where statements like "definite obedience and submission to Allah" come across as "questionable" to me personally and makes me wonder if
there is a "Hidden Agenda" behind the authors writtings. The endless rumble between many Religions as to "Who is the Most Right/Correct?" really
needs to stop. The simularities between them all should be discussed instead, as well as their Unification/Acceptence of each others ideas.
Again, I'm not saying this author is "Preaching" his Religious Views as the "Only Right One" or Purposely Avoiding Comment of other valid
perspectives. As I said before, I haven't read his whole book yet. This is just my observational opinion at this point. I may just need to read
more to get the whole picture of what he's saying. The following quote leads me to believe that he does in fact mention other Religions/Philosophies
as well.
The latest point reached by science today verifies the fact that "the universe was created out of nothing," as is maintained by the
Qur'an and all other divine religions. In addition, modern science has disproved materialism and all its sub-ideologies, destroyed the
matter-dependent world of materialists, and defeated them in the war they waged against creation.