cartasamaja

[cartasamaja]

Is Agnostisim possible?

Agnosticism an idea that says we cannot know for sure if a creator exists or not. It takes people to a dead end in a way similar to atheism, because it's an idea filled with thousands of contradictions. We claim that god's existence is as clear as the sun, but how? let's answer diagnostic thought with two key sentences. The universe tells us about the existence of a creator by its every single point, but agnosticism does not accept the creator, because it has an established rule that nothing can be known with certainty unless we observe it materially. Unfortunately, people supporting this thought can find their reasoning to material beings which limits their ability of questioning. However, we cannot expect the creator of the matter to be in the formal matter right. In fact people believe in many things that they do not see materially. For example, mother's compassion. It's something you have witnessed since you came to the world isn't it? Who can deny the existence of compassion? Nobody! But nobody can show compassion materially.

Or free will. For example you read this paper of your own free will but nobody can show it materially. Or justice, brotherhood, love. We already accept many immaterial concepts.

This is a big part of our life. When it comes to the creator, the mind restricting idea that you shouldn't accept anything unless you see it materially is being imposed on us. It's interesting. It's like the devil has a trick in this. What do you think? However, even matter itself points to a creator.

The first key sentence which refutes agnosticism is that <<IF THERE IS KNOWLEDGE THE UNKNOWN DISAPPEARS>>. If a detective investigates and finds a lot of evidence of a criminal, would you say “I never know the criminal, because I did not see the criminal”. Of course, no! If there is knowledge the unknown will disappear with signs and evidence. We can see it with our minds just like that, we can read and study the universe like a book. Whatever we look at, we can see evidence for God. We can find a creator with the evidence we infer from matter. We can even say this: There isn't anything that does not point out to the creator. Even when we look at the most basic structural matter, the atom.

We come across dozens of proofs. Raindrops of mercy coming from the cloud, which lacks compassion. The emergence of a complex human being, from a simple drop of water everyday…Atoms lacking KNOWLEDGE, WILL, LIFE and POWER are all working like a skilled master soldier in every point of the universe. So everything is a window which opens to the creator for our minds. As a result, if there is knowledge, the unknown disappears.

The other key sentence, which refuse agnosticism is that << ADJECTIVES CANNOT EXIST WITHOUT SOMEONE HOLDING THEM>>. So if there is an attribute, it must have someone to hold it. For example, if we see the water droplets shining on the sea, we need to explain. Either we say there is a sun in the sky (even if we don't see it) or we have to accept the being of the tiny suns in each water droplet. Because if there are shining water droplets there has to be a source of light for their shining. We can't just leave it out. Seeing that there is no sun in every water droplet, we have to accept this sun in the sky as their source of light. Just like this example, when we look at the atoms in the universe, we see that they require dozens of adjectives such as knowledge will power and life. Atoms work like a master soldier everywhere. For example, atoms work regularly in different parts of our body. They take part in the metabolic activities of 350 000 people born every day. The atom that cannot see, seems to create an eye that can see. The atom that cannot hear, seems to create an ear that can hear. The atom that has no feelings, seems to create a person with a lot of senses. Or it can transmit thousands of different sounds in the air without ever confusing, and it can take a suitable structure wherever it enters. So they work everywhere at every stage without confusing and we see that dozens of adjectives have emerged from so many verbs.

But as we said adjectives cannot exist without holders. So the question is: Who is the holder of dozens of attributes is such as knowledge, will, power, life, compassion, wisdom that we infer from the way atoms are acting? Just as we accept a sun in the example of sun and water droplets shouldn't I accept the creator holding these attributes definitely required by Atoms? But we know these properties do not exist in atoms. So it means that there has to be a creator holding all these attributes. We can talk about dozens of more evidence for the existence of Allah (God )and we will inshaallah ("If God wills) so don't forget follow and like!

[cartasamaja]

La existencia de Dios. Sí o...

Es obvio que toda aguja debe tener su artesano y dueño. Como sabemos, cada carta debe ser escrita por alguien, de lo contrario no tendría ningún sentido. Entonces, ¿cómo puede un ser humano extremadamente bien ordenado no tener gobernante? Ignorar el milagro de la creación es muy popular en el mundo actual. Se afirma que el ser humano nació mediante átomos que se unieron. Además, se dice que un ser humano es solamente un animal que habla. Por eso les haré algunas preguntas.

Con el fin de hacer que usted piensa más en detalle sobre este tema del cuerpo humano se compone de diferentes partes como las manos y los pies u órgano interno. ¿Cómo es posible que los átomos ciegos puedan crear manos, pies y órganos? Necesito un pensamiento enfocado, ahora. Los átomos no poseen ningún conocimiento sobre las condiciones de vida, pero deberían poder crear un cuerpo humano que sea viable. ¿En serio? ¿Cómo pueden los átomos de su ojo crear un ojo que es capaz de ver el sol, mientras que ellos no pueden ver por sí mismos? ¿Es posible decir que nuestros átomos de oído han creado nuestros oídos mientras que ellos no son capaces de escuchar a sí mismos? Y los átomos de la lengua no pueden saborear, pero crean la lengua. ¿Cómo debería ser posible todo esto?

Vamos, ¿realmente tiene sentido para ti?

Sigamos. Todos sabemos que los átomos no tienen patrones, ¿verdad? Entonces, ¿cómo pueden los átomos crear órganos, que fueron diseñados tan perfectamente que uno pensaría que se usaron patrones específicos para cada uno de ellos?

Los órganos mismos son un milagro de la creación. ¿Cómo pueden los átomos simples colocar los órganos en el lugar perfecto de nuestro cuerpo? Además, ¿cómo pueden saber siquiera la cantidad de órganos que son esenciales para nuestro cuerpo? Todas estas actividades solo son posibles con atributos específicos como una vida interna, voluntad, conocimiento y una fuerza interna (poder). ¿Es posible dar todos estos atributos a los átomos, que ni siquiera poseen uno de ellos? Como consecuencia, hay dos opciones: ¿los átomos son los dueños de un conocimiento infinito, la vida, la voluntad y el poder o dices que estos átomos son la creación de Dios (Allah)?

[cartasamaja]

God's Existence! Yes or ....

It is obvious that every needle must have its craftsman and owner. As we know every letter must be written by someone, otherwise it wouldn't make any sense. Then, how can an extremely well ordered human being has no ruler? Ignoring the miracle of creation is very popular in today’s world. It is claimed that the human came into existence by atoms that came together. Also, it is said that a human is only a speaking animal. So this is why I will ask you a few questions.

In order to make you think more in detail about this topic the human body consists of different parts like our hands and feet or inner organ. How is it possible that the blind atoms can create hands, feet and organs? I need a focused thinking, now. Atoms don't possess any knowledge about life conditions, but they should be able to create a human body that is viable. Really? How can the atoms of your eye create an eye that is able to see the sun while they cannot see by themselves? Is it possible to say that our ear atoms have created our ears while they are not able to hear themselves? And, the atoms of the tongue cannot taste, but they create the tongue. How should this all be possible?

Come on, does it really make sense to you?

Let's keep going.

We all know that atoms have no patterns, right? Then, how are the atoms able to create organs, which were designed so perfectly that you would think specific patterns were used for each one of them.

The organs themselves are miracle of creation. How can simple atoms place the organs at the perfect place in our bodies? Moreover, how can they even know the numbers of the organs that are essential for our bodies? All these activities are only possible with specific attributes like an internal life, will, knowledge and an internal might (power). Is it possible to give all these attributes to atoms, which don't even possess one of them? As a consequence, there are two options either atoms are the owner of endless knowledge, life, will and might or we have to say "These atoms are the creation of God (Allah)"

[cartasamaja]

La existencia de Dios. Sí o...

Es obvio que toda aguja debe tener su artesano y dueño. Como sabemos, cada carta debe ser escrita por alguien, de lo contrario no tendría ningún sentido. Entonces, ¿cómo puede un ser humano extremadamente bien ordenado no tener gobernante? Ignorar el milagro de la creación es muy popular en el mundo actual. Se afirma que el ser humano nació mediante átomos que se unieron. Además, se dice que un ser humano es solamente un animal que habla. Por eso les haré algunas preguntas.

Con el fin de hacer que usted piensa más en detalle sobre este tema del cuerpo humano se compone de diferentes partes como las manos y los pies u órgano interno. ¿Cómo es posible que los átomos ciegos puedan crear manos, pies y órganos? Necesito un pensamiento enfocado, ahora. Los átomos no poseen ningún conocimiento sobre las condiciones de vida, pero deberían poder crear un cuerpo humano que sea viable. ¿En serio? ¿Cómo pueden los átomos de su ojo crear un ojo que es capaz de ver el sol, mientras que ellos no pueden ver por sí mismos? ¿Es posible decir que nuestros átomos de oído han creado nuestros oídos mientras que ellos no son capaces de escuchar a sí mismos? Y los átomos de la lengua no pueden saborear, pero crean la lengua. ¿Cómo debería ser posible todo esto?

Vamos, ¿realmente tiene sentido para ti?

Sigamos. Todos sabemos que los átomos no tienen patrones, ¿verdad? Entonces, ¿cómo pueden los átomos crear órganos, que fueron diseñados tan perfectamente que uno pensaría que se usaron patrones específicos para cada uno de ellos?

Los órganos mismos son un milagro de la creación. ¿Cómo pueden los átomos simples colocar los órganos en el lugar perfecto de nuestro cuerpo? Además, ¿cómo pueden saber siquiera la cantidad de órganos que son esenciales para nuestro cuerpo? Todas estas actividades solo son posibles con atributos específicos como una vida interna, voluntad, conocimiento y una fuerza interna (poder). ¿Es posible dar todos estos atributos a los átomos, que ni siquiera poseen uno de ellos? Como consecuencia, hay dos opciones: ¿los átomos son los dueños de un conocimiento infinito, la vida, la voluntad y el poder o dices que estos átomos son la creación de Dios (Allah)?

[cartasamaja]

La existencia de Dios. Sí o...

Es obvio que toda aguja debe tener su artesano y dueño. Como sabemos, cada carta debe ser escrita por alguien, de lo contrario no tendría ningún sentido. Entonces, ¿cómo puede un ser humano extremadamente bien ordenado no tener gobernante? Ignorar el milagro de la creación es muy popular en el mundo actual. Se afirma que el ser humano nació mediante átomos que se unieron. Además, se dice que un ser humano es solamente un animal que habla. Por eso les haré algunas preguntas.

Con el fin de hacer que usted piensa más en detalle sobre este tema del cuerpo humano se compone de diferentes partes como las manos y los pies u órgano interno. ¿Cómo es posible que los átomos ciegos puedan crear manos, pies y órganos? Necesito un pensamiento enfocado, ahora. Los átomos no poseen ningún conocimiento sobre las condiciones de vida, pero deberían poder crear un cuerpo humano que sea viable. ¿En serio? ¿Cómo pueden los átomos de su ojo crear un ojo que es capaz de ver el sol, mientras que ellos no pueden ver por sí mismos? ¿Es posible decir que nuestros átomos de oído han creado nuestros oídos mientras que ellos no son capaces de escuchar a sí mismos? Y los átomos de la lengua no pueden saborear, pero crean la lengua. ¿Cómo debería ser posible todo esto?

Vamos, ¿realmente tiene sentido para ti?

Sigamos. Todos sabemos que los átomos no tienen patrones, ¿verdad? Entonces, ¿cómo pueden los átomos crear órganos, que fueron diseñados tan perfectamente que uno pensaría que se usaron patrones específicos para cada uno de ellos?

Los órganos mismos son un milagro de la creación. ¿Cómo pueden los átomos simples colocar los órganos en el lugar perfecto de nuestro cuerpo? Además, ¿cómo pueden saber siquiera la cantidad de órganos que son esenciales para nuestro cuerpo? Todas estas actividades solo son posibles con atributos específicos como una vida interna, voluntad, conocimiento y una fuerza interna (poder). ¿Es posible dar todos estos atributos a los átomos, que ni siquiera poseen uno de ellos? Como consecuencia, hay dos opciones: ¿los átomos son los dueños de un conocimiento infinito, la vida, la voluntad y el poder o dices que estos átomos son la creación de Dios (Allah)?

[cartasamaja]

Answer in 1 minute: Q2 I You say different religions should come to each era, but for 1400 years it's been the same religion, Islam. Shouldn't a new religion come?

This question looks a bit like this: A person is reading a book at the highest level that s/he can interact with and benefit from. You tell this wo/man “You had such education in kindergarten, then better in university even though you're learning from the best now, why don't you just search for another book. It's the same as saying “Shouldn't a new book have come. It's the same. The Quran, I mean the last sharia to come is the most beneficial and perfect lesson humanity can learn from. It is the best education. There's nothing above it, what's to search for. He is learning from the best why would he be in search of better? There isn't any we're referring to as the perfect one. So the question becomes illogical.

[cartasamaja]

Answer in 1 minute: Q2 I You say different religions should come to each era, but for 1400 years it's been the same religion, Islam. Shouldn't a new religion come?

This question looks a bit like this: A person is reading a book at the highest level that s/he can interact with and benefit from. You tell this wo/man “You had such education in kindergarten, then better in university even though you're learning from the best now, why don't you just search for another book. It's the same as saying “Shouldn't a new book have come. It's the same. The Quran, I mean the last sharia to come is the most beneficial and perfect lesson humanity can learn from. It is the best education. There's nothing above it, what's to search for. He is learning from the best why would he be in search of better? There isn't any we're referring to as the perfect one. So the question becomes illogical.

[cartasamaja]

Answer in 1 minute: Q5 I How do we know the Creator isn't limited to time and place? Do you have proof?

Without any religious view, if we look at the universe with an objective mind, whoever completes the actions, must be excluded from time and space. Why, because if something is recorded in time and place, it can't be in different places doing things at the same time. For example, a fish can't swim in the Atlantic and the Pacific Ocean at the same time, because it is limited in time and space. Or you can't sit here and sit elsewhere at the same time. Why? We're limited with time and place, but we see if there's a Creator, God handles both your body and mind right now, all while raising a baby, providing for a fish, and growing plants and these are all interrelated actions. Certainly, if Allah(God) is associated with time and space, can't perform acts at different places at the same time. This means, that there must be a deity as mentioned in the Quran.

[cartasamaja]

Answer in 1 minute: Q5 I How do we know the Creator isn't limited to time and place? Do you have proof?

Without any religious view, if we look at the universe with an objective mind, whoever completes the actions, must be excluded from time and space. Why, because if something is recorded in time and place, it can't be in different places doing things at the same time. For example, a fish can't swim in the Atlantic and the Pacific Ocean at the same time, because it is limited in time and space. Or you can't sit here and sit elsewhere at the same time. Why? We're limited with time and place, but we see if there's a Creator, God handles both your body and mind right now, all while raising a baby, providing for a fish, and growing plants and these are all interrelated actions. Certainly, if Allah(God) is associated with time and space, can't perform acts at different places at the same time. This means, that there must be a deity as mentioned in the Quran.

[cartasamaja]

Answer in 1 minute: Q5 I How do we know the Creator isn't limited to time and place? Do you have proof?

Without any religious view, if we look at the universe with an objective mind, whoever completes the actions, must be excluded from time and space. Why, because if something is recorded in time and place, it can't be in different places doing things at the same time. For example, a fish can't swim in the Atlantic and the Pacific Ocean at the same time, because it is limited in time and space. Or you can't sit here and sit elsewhere at the same time. Why? We're limited with time and place, but we see if there's a Creator, God handles both your body and mind right now, all while raising a baby, providing for a fish, and growing plants and these are all interrelated actions. Certainly, if Allah(God) is associated with time and space, can't perform acts at different places at the same time. This means, that there must be a deity as mentioned in the Quran.

[cartasamaja]

Answer in 1 minute: Q5 I How do we know the Creator isn't limited to time and place? Do you have proof?

Without any religious view, if we look at the universe with an objective mind, whoever completes the actions, must be excluded from time and space. Why, because if something is recorded in time and place, it can't be in different places doing things at the same time. For example, a fish can't swim in the Atlantic and the Pacific Ocean at the same time, because it is limited in time and space. Or you can't sit here and sit elsewhere at the same time. Why? We're limited with time and place, but we see if there's a Creator, God handles both your body and mind right now, all while raising a baby, providing for a fish, and growing plants and these are all interrelated actions. Certainly, if Allah(God) is associated with time and space, can't perform acts at different places at the same time. This means, that there must be a deity as mentioned in the Quran.

[cartasamaja]

Prueba de la ultravida. Está ahí..? Respuesta 4

Prueba de la existencia del más allá con algunos signos que ves en tu vida diaria, pero que probablemente no te diste cuenta.

PRUEBA 4

Justicia eternal

Dios es justo. El deseo que sentimos por la justicia, incluso en la más mínima injusticia, es un sentimiento que se nos da para entender que Dios es justo. La justicia de Dios se manifiesta de dos formas. La primera es que Dios creó todo según una medida y en el lugar adecuado. Podemos ver esto en todas partes. Se pueden dar muchos ejemplos, como una cierta medida en el equilibrio de oxígeno-nitrógeno en el aire, la rotación de los planetas con una cierta medida, o una cierta cantidad de poder y propiedades dadas a los seres vivos.

La otra manifestación de la justicia es castigar al injusto y al culpable. Sin embargo, vemos que muchas crueldades e injusticias en el mundo no son plenamente castigadas. ¡Piénsalo! Las personas que mataron a millones de personas pueden vivir una vida cómoda y vivir este mundo o, por el contrario, las personas inocentes que han hecho cosas buenas durante toda su vida pueden ser sometidas a muchas injusticias y persecuciones y pueden morir de esta manera. Así, la parte más importante de las recompensas y castigos se pospone a una sala de audiencias mayor para la plena realización de la justicia. Los delitos menores se juzgan en tribunales pequeños, por otro lado, los delitos mayores se juzgan en tribunales grandes. Por ejemplo, si se produce una pequeña disputa entre dos personas, pueden reconciliarse de inmediato. Sin embargo, una discusión seria que terminó hiriendo a los demás solo puede resolverse en un gran tribunal. Del mismo modo, los principales delitos que ocurren en todo el mundo no se resuelven aquí de inmediato, se posponen a un tribunal más grande. La manifestación del nombre justo de Dios, que vemos en todo el universo, nos demuestra la vida después de la muerte y el gran núcleo allí.

[cartasamaja]

Is Agnostisim possible?

Agnosticism an idea that says we cannot know for sure if a creator exists or not. It takes people to a dead end in a way similar to atheism, because it's an idea filled with thousands of contradictions. We claim that god's existence is as clear as the sun, but how? let's answer diagnostic thought with two key sentences. The universe tells us about the existence of a creator by its every single point, but agnosticism does not accept the creator, because it has an established rule that nothing can be known with certainty unless we observe it materially. Unfortunately, people supporting this thought can find their reasoning to material beings which limits their ability of questioning. However, we cannot expect the creator of the matter to be in the formal matter right. In fact people believe in many things that they do not see materially. For example, mother's compassion. It's something you have witnessed since you came to the world isn't it? Who can deny the existence of compassion? Nobody! But nobody can show compassion materially.

Or free will. For example you read this paper of your own free will but nobody can show it materially. Or justice, brotherhood, love. We already accept many immaterial concepts.

This is a big part of our life. When it comes to the creator, the mind restricting idea that you shouldn't accept anything unless you see it materially is being imposed on us. It's interesting. It's like the devil has a trick in this. What do you think? However, even matter itself points to a creator.

The first key sentence which refutes agnosticism is that <<IF THERE IS KNOWLEDGE THE UNKNOWN DISAPPEARS>>. If a detective investigates and finds a lot of evidence of a criminal, would you say “I never know the criminal, because I did not see the criminal”. Of course, no! If there is knowledge the unknown will disappear with signs and evidence. We can see it with our minds just like that, we can read and study the universe like a book. Whatever we look at, we can see evidence for God. We can find a creator with the evidence we infer from matter. We can even say this: There isn't anything that does not point out to the creator. Even when we look at the most basic structural matter, the atom.

We come across dozens of proofs. Raindrops of mercy coming from the cloud, which lacks compassion. The emergence of a complex human being, from a simple drop of water everyday…Atoms lacking KNOWLEDGE, WILL, LIFE and POWER are all working like a skilled master soldier in every point of the universe. So everything is a window which opens to the creator for our minds. As a result, if there is knowledge, the unknown disappears.

The other key sentence, which refuse agnosticism is that << ADJECTIVES CANNOT EXIST WITHOUT SOMEONE HOLDING THEM>>. So if there is an attribute, it must have someone to hold it. For example, if we see the water droplets shining on the sea, we need to explain. Either we say there is a sun in the sky (even if we don't see it) or we have to accept the being of the tiny suns in each water droplet. Because if there are shining water droplets there has to be a source of light for their shining. We can't just leave it out. Seeing that there is no sun in every water droplet, we have to accept this sun in the sky as their source of light. Just like this example, when we look at the atoms in the universe, we see that they require dozens of adjectives such as knowledge will power and life. Atoms work like a master soldier everywhere. For example, atoms work regularly in different parts of our body. They take part in the metabolic activities of 350 000 people born every day. The atom that cannot see, seems to create an eye that can see. The atom that cannot hear, seems to create an ear that can hear. The atom that has no feelings, seems to create a person with a lot of senses. Or it can transmit thousands of different sounds in the air without ever confusing, and it can take a suitable structure wherever it enters. So they work everywhere at every stage without confusing and we see that dozens of adjectives have emerged from so many verbs.

But as we said adjectives cannot exist without holders. So the question is: Who is the holder of dozens of attributes is such as knowledge, will, power, life, compassion, wisdom that we infer from the way atoms are acting? Just as we accept a sun in the example of sun and water droplets shouldn't I accept the creator holding these attributes definitely required by Atoms? But we know these properties do not exist in atoms. So it means that there has to be a creator holding all these attributes. We can talk about dozens of more evidence for the existence of Allah (God )and we will inshaallah ("If God wills) so don't forget follow and like!

[cartasamaja]

Is Agnostisim possible?

Agnosticism an idea that says we cannot know for sure if a creator exists or not. It takes people to a dead end in a way similar to atheism, because it's an idea filled with thousands of contradictions. We claim that god's existence is as clear as the sun, but how? let's answer diagnostic thought with two key sentences. The universe tells us about the existence of a creator by its every single point, but agnosticism does not accept the creator, because it has an established rule that nothing can be known with certainty unless we observe it materially. Unfortunately, people supporting this thought can find their reasoning to material beings which limits their ability of questioning. However, we cannot expect the creator of the matter to be in the formal matter right. In fact people believe in many things that they do not see materially. For example, mother's compassion. It's something you have witnessed since you came to the world isn't it? Who can deny the existence of compassion? Nobody! But nobody can show compassion materially.

Or free will. For example you read this paper of your own free will but nobody can show it materially. Or justice, brotherhood, love. We already accept many immaterial concepts.

This is a big part of our life. When it comes to the creator, the mind restricting idea that you shouldn't accept anything unless you see it materially is being imposed on us. It's interesting. It's like the devil has a trick in this. What do you think? However, even matter itself points to a creator.

The first key sentence which refutes agnosticism is that <<IF THERE IS KNOWLEDGE THE UNKNOWN DISAPPEARS>>. If a detective investigates and finds a lot of evidence of a criminal, would you say “I never know the criminal, because I did not see the criminal”. Of course, no! If there is knowledge the unknown will disappear with signs and evidence. We can see it with our minds just like that, we can read and study the universe like a book. Whatever we look at, we can see evidence for God. We can find a creator with the evidence we infer from matter. We can even say this: There isn't anything that does not point out to the creator. Even when we look at the most basic structural matter, the atom.

We come across dozens of proofs. Raindrops of mercy coming from the cloud, which lacks compassion. The emergence of a complex human being, from a simple drop of water everyday…Atoms lacking KNOWLEDGE, WILL, LIFE and POWER are all working like a skilled master soldier in every point of the universe. So everything is a window which opens to the creator for our minds. As a result, if there is knowledge, the unknown disappears.

The other key sentence, which refuse agnosticism is that << ADJECTIVES CANNOT EXIST WITHOUT SOMEONE HOLDING THEM>>. So if there is an attribute, it must have someone to hold it. For example, if we see the water droplets shining on the sea, we need to explain. Either we say there is a sun in the sky (even if we don't see it) or we have to accept the being of the tiny suns in each water droplet. Because if there are shining water droplets there has to be a source of light for their shining. We can't just leave it out. Seeing that there is no sun in every water droplet, we have to accept this sun in the sky as their source of light. Just like this example, when we look at the atoms in the universe, we see that they require dozens of adjectives such as knowledge will power and life. Atoms work like a master soldier everywhere. For example, atoms work regularly in different parts of our body. They take part in the metabolic activities of 350 000 people born every day. The atom that cannot see, seems to create an eye that can see. The atom that cannot hear, seems to create an ear that can hear. The atom that has no feelings, seems to create a person with a lot of senses. Or it can transmit thousands of different sounds in the air without ever confusing, and it can take a suitable structure wherever it enters. So they work everywhere at every stage without confusing and we see that dozens of adjectives have emerged from so many verbs.

But as we said adjectives cannot exist without holders. So the question is: Who is the holder of dozens of attributes is such as knowledge, will, power, life, compassion, wisdom that we infer from the way atoms are acting? Just as we accept a sun in the example of sun and water droplets shouldn't I accept the creator holding these attributes definitely required by Atoms? But we know these properties do not exist in atoms. So it means that there has to be a creator holding all these attributes. We can talk about dozens of more evidence for the existence of Allah (God )and we will inshaallah ("If God wills) so don't forget follow and like!

[cartasamaja]

Is Agnostisim possible?

Agnosticism an idea that says we cannot know for sure if a creator exists or not. It takes people to a dead end in a way similar to atheism, because it's an idea filled with thousands of contradictions. We claim that god's existence is as clear as the sun, but how? let's answer diagnostic thought with two key sentences. The universe tells us about the existence of a creator by its every single point, but agnosticism does not accept the creator, because it has an established rule that nothing can be known with certainty unless we observe it materially. Unfortunately, people supporting this thought can find their reasoning to material beings which limits their ability of questioning. However, we cannot expect the creator of the matter to be in the formal matter right. In fact people believe in many things that they do not see materially. For example, mother's compassion. It's something you have witnessed since you came to the world isn't it? Who can deny the existence of compassion? Nobody! But nobody can show compassion materially.

Or free will. For example you read this paper of your own free will but nobody can show it materially. Or justice, brotherhood, love. We already accept many immaterial concepts.

This is a big part of our life. When it comes to the creator, the mind restricting idea that you shouldn't accept anything unless you see it materially is being imposed on us. It's interesting. It's like the devil has a trick in this. What do you think? However, even matter itself points to a creator.

The first key sentence which refutes agnosticism is that <<IF THERE IS KNOWLEDGE THE UNKNOWN DISAPPEARS>>. If a detective investigates and finds a lot of evidence of a criminal, would you say “I never know the criminal, because I did not see the criminal”. Of course, no! If there is knowledge the unknown will disappear with signs and evidence. We can see it with our minds just like that, we can read and study the universe like a book. Whatever we look at, we can see evidence for God. We can find a creator with the evidence we infer from matter. We can even say this: There isn't anything that does not point out to the creator. Even when we look at the most basic structural matter, the atom.

We come across dozens of proofs. Raindrops of mercy coming from the cloud, which lacks compassion. The emergence of a complex human being, from a simple drop of water everyday…Atoms lacking KNOWLEDGE, WILL, LIFE and POWER are all working like a skilled master soldier in every point of the universe. So everything is a window which opens to the creator for our minds. As a result, if there is knowledge, the unknown disappears.

The other key sentence, which refuse agnosticism is that << ADJECTIVES CANNOT EXIST WITHOUT SOMEONE HOLDING THEM>>. So if there is an attribute, it must have someone to hold it. For example, if we see the water droplets shining on the sea, we need to explain. Either we say there is a sun in the sky (even if we don't see it) or we have to accept the being of the tiny suns in each water droplet. Because if there are shining water droplets there has to be a source of light for their shining. We can't just leave it out. Seeing that there is no sun in every water droplet, we have to accept this sun in the sky as their source of light. Just like this example, when we look at the atoms in the universe, we see that they require dozens of adjectives such as knowledge will power and life. Atoms work like a master soldier everywhere. For example, atoms work regularly in different parts of our body. They take part in the metabolic activities of 350 000 people born every day. The atom that cannot see, seems to create an eye that can see. The atom that cannot hear, seems to create an ear that can hear. The atom that has no feelings, seems to create a person with a lot of senses. Or it can transmit thousands of different sounds in the air without ever confusing, and it can take a suitable structure wherever it enters. So they work everywhere at every stage without confusing and we see that dozens of adjectives have emerged from so many verbs.

But as we said adjectives cannot exist without holders. So the question is: Who is the holder of dozens of attributes is such as knowledge, will, power, life, compassion, wisdom that we infer from the way atoms are acting? Just as we accept a sun in the example of sun and water droplets shouldn't I accept the creator holding these attributes definitely required by Atoms? But we know these properties do not exist in atoms. So it means that there has to be a creator holding all these attributes. We can talk about dozens of more evidence for the existence of Allah (God )and we will inshaallah ("If God wills) so don't forget follow and like!

[cartasamaja]

Prueba de la ultravida. Está ahí..? Respuesta 4

Prueba de la existencia del más allá con algunos signos que ves en tu vida diaria, pero que probablemente no te diste cuenta.

PRUEBA 4

Justicia eternal

Dios es justo. El deseo que sentimos por la justicia, incluso en la más mínima injusticia, es un sentimiento que se nos da para entender que Dios es justo. La justicia de Dios se manifiesta de dos formas. La primera es que Dios creó todo según una medida y en el lugar adecuado. Podemos ver esto en todas partes. Se pueden dar muchos ejemplos, como una cierta medida en el equilibrio de oxígeno-nitrógeno en el aire, la rotación de los planetas con una cierta medida, o una cierta cantidad de poder y propiedades dadas a los seres vivos.

La otra manifestación de la justicia es castigar al injusto y al culpable. Sin embargo, vemos que muchas crueldades e injusticias en el mundo no son plenamente castigadas. ¡Piénsalo! Las personas que mataron a millones de personas pueden vivir una vida cómoda y vivir este mundo o, por el contrario, las personas inocentes que han hecho cosas buenas durante toda su vida pueden ser sometidas a muchas injusticias y persecuciones y pueden morir de esta manera. Así, la parte más importante de las recompensas y castigos se pospone a una sala de audiencias mayor para la plena realización de la justicia. Los delitos menores se juzgan en tribunales pequeños, por otro lado, los delitos mayores se juzgan en tribunales grandes. Por ejemplo, si se produce una pequeña disputa entre dos personas, pueden reconciliarse de inmediato. Sin embargo, una discusión seria que terminó hiriendo a los demás solo puede resolverse en un gran tribunal. Del mismo modo, los principales delitos que ocurren en todo el mundo no se resuelven aquí de inmediato, se posponen a un tribunal más grande. La manifestación del nombre justo de Dios, que vemos en todo el universo, nos demuestra la vida después de la muerte y el gran núcleo allí.

[cartasamaja]

Answer in 1 minute: Q5 I How do we know the Creator isn't limited to time and place? Do you have proof?

Without any religious view, if we look at the universe with an objective mind, whoever completes the actions, must be excluded from time and space. Why, because if something is recorded in time and place, it can't be in different places doing things at the same time. For example, a fish can't swim in the Atlantic and the Pacific Ocean at the same time, because it is limited in time and space. Or you can't sit here and sit elsewhere at the same time. Why? We're limited with time and place, but we see if there's a Creator, God handles both your body and mind right now, all while raising a baby, providing for a fish, and growing plants and these are all interrelated actions. Certainly, if Allah(God) is associated with time and space, can't perform acts at different places at the same time. This means, that there must be a deity as mentioned in the Quran.