From: salama@topaz.ucq.edu.au
Newsgroups: soc.culture.pakistan,soc.culture.indian,soc.culture.bangladesh
Subject: Re: The Quran and the Modern Science
Date: 2 Jan 93 12:38:54 AET
Organization: UCQ
Distribution: world

In article <1992Dec31.125033.46005@kuhub.cc.ukans.edu>, dchatterjee@kuhub.cc.ukans.edu writes:
> In article <1992Dec31.112841.13157@topaz.ucq.edu.au>, 
> salama@topaz.ucq.edu.au writes:
>> In article <1992Dec29.203201.45959@kuhub.cc.ukans.edu>, dchatterjee@kuhub.cc.ukans.edu writes:
>>> In article <1992Dec30.103258.13155@topaz.ucq.edu.au>, 
>>>>salama@topaz.ucq.edu.au writes:
>>>>....... (deleted)...
>>>...... (deleted)..... 
>>>   He will soon get his "reward" - in front of his Islamic brothers.
> 
>    Actually MI has been correctly characterized by Naufal A.Khan and Mirza Ilyas.
>    His reward has been duly presented to him by these gentlemen. In turn, MI
>    has defined them (Khan and Ilyas) to be in the Organization of Hidden
>    Enemies of Islam. I fail to understand how faith in God (Allah) can be
>    discriminatory ????? How Khan and Ilyas be enemies of Faith ??? Moreover, I
>    am not sure why the Almighty MSA-net has not stopped short of issuing 
>    death-threats at the behest of Ayatollah Mustafa Ibrahim ??????
>
      I have nothing to do with MSA and I condemn all sorts of death threats
or any type of threats at all.
 
>> ... . I think MI is the out cast of the net. Please, don't take
>> this as an advice/lesson but a reminder from your brother.
>>
> 
>   Thanks. I will remember that.  Anyway, I think that once you have said that,
>   we need not discuss about the low-life MI. Emulating Jesus Christ (PBUH) is
>   impossible. This is because, if emulative process would have been viable,
>   then anyone could have been Einstien, Shakespeare, Homer, Goethe etc. and
>   etc. That it is not, makes me respect, (at a distance though), Jesus Christ
>   (PBUH). That is why I cannot follow the Good Samaritan 8-).
>  
> 
     I knew it was easy to admire Jesus Christ (PBUH) but hard to follow him
that is why he says that those who want to follow him should carry their
crosses.

>> 
>>> ...... (deleted)......
> 
>> 
>>     .... (deleted).....
> 
>      No, I don't think so. I am of the opinion that there could be difficulties
>      (entirely technical) in applying Hawking's theory. However, that does not
>      say his work is invalid. Moreover, why is it exactly  that his work is
>      disputed ? I mean is it because some phenomena *cannot* be explained via
>      use of Hawking's theory ????? What is that the scientists think *cannot*
>      be explained by Hawking's theory ??? I remember that Hisenberg (who had
>      actually *failed* Ph.D oral, but, Sommerfeld pushed him thru') had the
>      same difficulty in getting Uncertainity Principle accepted. Einstien had
>      himself stated that. It does not mean that it could be *shown* in a
>      mathematical form that Hisenberg was wrong. Same is true for Hawking.
> 
     It is not what cannot be explained by Hawking's theory rather Hawking's
theories cannot be verify. Let me put it this way, what can be verified in
cosmology? Very little.


>  
>>>   ......(deleted).....
>> 
>>  ....(deleted).....   
>>> 
>>      It is not the matter of the vision of the future. I have insisted on the
>> point that Dr.B's work is NOT a "proof" of the divine nature of the Quran. It
>> is a personal testimony.
>        ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> 
>     It is exactly because of this reason we are trying to dig deeper into his
>     "personal testimony". Nothing else. Because Science does not accept any
>     personal feelings/ emotions.
> 
>  
      It seems to me that you are just scratching on the surface instead of
diggin deep. A personal testimony is NOT feelings/emotions (though sometimes
they are) but in this case it is a scientist's story of his search for the
truth. He intreprets and searches through the eyes of a scientist and draw
some significant inferences which he has presented in his book. It is that
simple. You may dispute his inferences but I don't see how you can dispute
his credibility of doing so and its technicality. I haven't seen a single
argument discrediting his inferences so far, rather the emphasis is on
discrediting him as a scientist, which I find rediculous.


> 
> 
>> ....... (deleted)......
> 
> 
>    Salam the Mathematical Physicist, *cannot* distinguish between physics and
>    metaphysics. No more 8-).

     I do. :-|) You enter metaphysics through the very questions of physics
such as "Can you see photon?". There is a very large twilight zone between
physics and metaphysics.

>> 
>> 
>>...... (deleted)..... Don't call me a Islamic
>> fundamentalist, call me a fundamentalist because I believe in the fundamental
>> of life i.e., a good healthy discussion with a good healthy person, like
>> you. :-|)
>> 
>> I could say,"Bovine yourself", but I wouldn't. :-|)
>> 
> 
>    Sorry, I take these remarks back.

  Thank you. I appreciate that.

> 
>>     Don't call me Islamic apologist, call me apologist because I don't 
>> hesitate to apologise for my mistakes. :-|)
>> 
> 
>   O.K ! I won't call you an Islamic apologist.
> 
     Thank you again. These apologies are good examples for the netters.

>>..... (deleted).....  
>>> 
>>>>    ........(deleted).......                    
>> 
>>
> 
>     Amnesty International is an organization which probably discriminates
>     between Mustafa Ibrahim and a pious sufi saint. 8-) I fail to see the
>     reason behind your diatribe.
> 
     All discriminations should be condemned. :-|)

> 
>     Happy New Year,
> 
>     - deb chatterjee
>    (a good samaritan)

    Happy New Year to you all (without discrimination) :-|)


     Salam
     (means peace)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.pakistan