On Tue, Apr 26, 2016 at 6:31 PM, Bruno Marchal <marc...@ulb.ac.be> wrote:
> > On 26 Apr 2016, at 04:35, Samiya Illias wrote: > > > > On Tue, Apr 26, 2016 at 5:54 AM, Telmo Menezes <te...@telmomenezes.com> > wrote: > >> >> >> On Mon, Apr 25, 2016 at 11:50 PM, Samiya Illias <samiyaill...@gmail.com> >> wrote: >> >>> The Quran, Chapter 112 >>> <http://www.searchtruth.com/chapter_display.php?chapter=112&translator=4> >>> Say: He is Allah, the One! Allah, the eternally Besought of all! He >>> begetteth not nor was begotten. And there is none comparable unto Him. >>> >>> The God I worship is not part of creation but rather outside and >>> independent of creation. My God, Allah, The Deity is The One who >>> *conceived* the entire creation, *coded* the software, *executed* to >>> create the hardware, and *sustains* the program wholly and entirely. >>> Allah is independent of the program and all within it. Everything and >>> everyone within the program is dependent on the All-Knowing God for >>> everything. >>> >> >> That's fine, except that now we need a theory of Allah, because >> everything else is irrelevant under that model. In fact, you just renamed >> "everything" to "Allah". So what's your theory of Allah? >> > > Allah: there is nothing comparable to Him > The Quran introduces us to the attributes of Allah, but does not describe > the form of Allah, and that is where we must stop if we are believers. > > G* introduces the machines to the attributes of the Arithmetical Truth, > but does not describe the form of Arithmetical Truth (and even explain why > that is impossible), and that is where we must stop (to try to justify > rationally what is Truth) if we are believers (in Truth). > > > > As per Quran 112:4 there is nothing like Allah, thus a believer in the > Quran should not try to imagine or state what Allah is. > > To state? I agree. But to imagine or conceive new axioms is *always* > possible. If you state that we must stop to not only justify but to search > new axioms, you are explicitly using an argument per authority of the kind > of those who want religion opposed to science. That is obscurantism. It > often lead to persecution of the honest modest researchers. > > > > Quran 31:30 describes Allah as Al-Haq. > > ذَٰلِكَ بِأَنَّ اللَّهَ هُوَ الْحَقُّ وَأَنَّ مَا يَدْعُونَ مِن دُونِهِ > الْبَاطِلُ وَأَنَّ اللَّهَ هُوَ الْعَلِيُّ الْكَبِيرُ > > Al-Haq is among the many names or attributes of God. Though generally > translated as The Truth, the word al-Haq encompasses a range of meanings, > and as contrasted to baatil [falsehood], the primary signification the word > ‘haq’ is suitableness to the requirements of wisdom, justice, right, or > rightness, truth, reality, or fact. The state, or quality, or property, of > being just, proper, right, correct. Lane’s Lexicon covers around six pages: > http://www.tyndalearchive.com/tabs/lane/ > Al-Haq is merely one of the aspects of Allah (God) who is much more than > any word or concept that we can imagine or relate to. This link has a list > of names/attributes mentioned in the Quran: > http://www.whyislam.org/god/names-and-attributes-of-allah/ > > > No problem here, a priori. But not all branches of Islam will interpret > the names in the same way. What I say, is that the evidence from logic and > observation might be much closer to the Bektashi interpretation than any > interpretation dismissing automatically the other interpretations. They > take correctly into account that we are humans or even that we are finite > creature, and so must be modest and cautious when discussing possible > attribute of the One Which has no name at the source of everything. > > > > > > Quran 17:85 informs us that: > > وَيَسْأَلُونَكَ عَنِ الرُّوحِ قُلِ الرُّوحُ مِنْ أَمْرِ رَبِّي وَمَا > أُوتِيتُم مِّنَ الْعِلْمِ إِلَّا قَلِيلًا > > We are informed by verse 17:85 that the Ar-Ruh, generally translated as > Spirit, is the Command of God, and of it we have been given very little > knowledge. Thus, it would be erroneous to think that God is Spirit. With > reference to what was breathed into Mary, mother of Jesus, please see: > http://signsandscience.blogspot.com/2015/10/virgin-birth.html > > Quran 24:35 informs us that: > > اللَّهُ نُورُ السَّمَاوَاتِ وَالْأَرْضِ مَثَلُ نُورِهِ كَمِشْكَاةٍ فِيهَا > مِصْبَاحٌ الْمِصْبَاحُ فِي زُجَاجَةٍ الزُّجَاجَةُ كَأَنَّهَا كَوْكَبٌ > دُرِّيٌّ يُوقَدُ مِن شَجَرَةٍ مُّبَارَكَةٍ زَيْتُونَةٍ لَّا شَرْقِيَّةٍ > وَلَا غَرْبِيَّةٍ يَكَادُ زَيْتُهَا يُضِيءُ وَلَوْ لَمْ تَمْسَسْهُ نَارٌ > نُّورٌ عَلَىٰ نُورٍ يَهْدِي اللَّهُ لِنُورِهِ مَن يَشَاءُ وَيَضْرِبُ > اللَّهُ الْأَمْثَالَ لِلنَّاسِ وَاللَّهُ بِكُلِّ شَيْءٍ عَلِيمٌ > > The verse uses the term Nur to describe the presence of Allah in Samawaat > (Heavens/Skies) and Earth. The verse itself says that Allah is using > examples here for humans. Hence, the following are some of the terms as I > understand them: > Nur: light or something with similar properties which helps us see in the > dark > Glass: Nur is enclosed in Glass, an amorphous substance which we are very > familiar with on Earth, having the properties of transmitting, reflecting > and refracting light > Kawkab: the glass is likened to a Kawkab. The term ‘كَوْكَبٌ’ used in the > Quran seems to refer to objects which do not produce light, but shine due > to the light of another source. I think they are solid objects made from > sand/soil/clay, and have rocky features. Planets, asteroids, meteoroids and > comets, all fit in this description. [ > http://signsandscience.blogspot.com/2014/08/kawakib-planets-comets-and-other-rocky.html] > > The verse goes on to give an example of the external source of the Nur as > an olive, a blessed tree, whose oil almost glows forth even if not touched > by fire, hence a radiant, continuous source of Nur in the As-Samawaat (the > seven concentric skies) and Al-Ard (the Earth). > I understand the terms لَّا شَرْقِيَّةٍ وَلَا غَرْبِيَّةٍ as 'not of the > two origins and not of the two endings' that is the source of Nur is > external to the first(this) and second(Hereafter) creation of السَّمَاوَاتِ > وَالْأَرْضِ. I've discussed the reasons in some detail at: > http://signsandscience.blogspot.com/2014/08/guarding-sky.html > Allah can use examples as Allah knows everything. > However, we should not use examples for Allah, as we do not know, as Quran > 16:74 warns us: > > فَلَا تَضْرِبُوا لِلَّهِ الْأَمْثَالَ إِنَّ اللَّهَ يَعْلَمُ وَأَنتُمْ لَا > تَعْلَمُونَ > > Multiple translations of the verses are available at: > http://www.islamawakened.com/index.php/qur-an > > May Allah guide us to His Nur, increase us in guidance, be well-pleased > with us when we meet Him, and perfect our nur for us. > > > http://islam-qna.blogspot.com/2016/01/allah-there-is-nothing-comparable-to-him.html > > > > > Does it make sense to pray an All Knowing One full of Endless Mercy? > > Is not praying God an insult at His Perfection? A symptom of doubt on what > might be closed to the undoubtable (the experienced or lived truth)? There > might be less problem (in the machine theology) by adding "My"before, like > in "My God!", or like in "Monsieur, Madame, etc." > > I really don't know, but as a scientist I professionally doubt all > theories, all texts. I doubt the Human theories, the Machine's theories, > the Plant's theories, ... It is the only way to progress. > > Finding mistakes = harm reduction. It is the same path from bad to less > bad or good to more good. > > Science is an art of being (shown) wrong. It asks only for a sort of > humility in front of the Unknown. > > You can't use science to confirm a theology, you can only use science to > refute or improve a theology. > > When a religion disallows comments and variate interpretations of texts, > it means only that it has become a tool for some people to control and > manipulate others (for quite unreligious reason if that needs to be said). > > Then I agree with Telmo, if God exists, it means that a theory of > everything needs to explain God among the other "things", entities, > "beings", and why it has no name, etc > > Note that this is exactly what the Universal Löbian machines do, with > respect to what *we-humans* can call "Arithmetical Truth"). > From inside arithmetic we are automatically confronted to a bigger ONE, > which is not there ontologically, but quite "real" phenomenologically. That > internal ONE is absolutely not nameable and even the full paradise of > Cantor cannot render it justice (it is *big*). > > Bruno > Bruno, You are so close, yet so far! Based on your emails of the past few years, explaining your work and its background, it seems to me that once you were full of faith in your pursuit of theology. You were guided towards the truth in the language you best understood: arithmetic. Later on, you chose doubt, and now you're surrounded with so many counter-examples that you are simply going in circles. If this is so, then you do need to pray and open yourself to faith and guidance. Let God guide you through the scriptures. For a while, suspend your belief that they are human poetic works. Study the scriptures with the reverence of a believer and the comprehension of a person who is seeking knowledge. Should you decide to act upon my advise, may I suggest that every time you begin to pray, start with seeking God's protection from Satan <http://corpus.quran.com/translation.jsp?chapter=16&verse=98>, then read and focus on the words of this prayer <http://searchtruth.com/chapter_display_all.php?chapter=1>, and follow it by reading some verses of the Quran. The Quran guides us to be alert <http://corpus.quran.com/translation.jsp?chapter=4&verse=43> and ritually clean <http://corpus.quran.com/translation.jsp?chapter=5&verse=6>, and to recite in a softly audible voice <http://corpus.quran.com/translation.jsp?chapter=17&verse=110> when we stand in prayer. The above is a part of our formal obligatory daily prayers. May Allah shower His mercy on you and bless you with guidance and success. Samiya > > > > Samiya > > > >> Cheers >> Telmo. >> >> >>> >>> I worship not that which you worship, nor worship you that which I >>> worship! Unto you your religion, and unto me my religion. >>> <http://www.searchtruth.com/chapter_display.php?chapter=109&translator=4> >>> >>> Samiya >>> >>> >> -- >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >> "Everything List" group. >> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an >> email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. >> To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. >> Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. >> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. >> > > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Everything List" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. > To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. > Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. > > > http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/ > > > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Everything List" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. > To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. > Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
