the question was where in the quran does it mention that, i have given reference and provided a translation. of course you can prove it is wrong
ok and i will ignore the rest of your argument and focus on the highlighted bit athiesm does have theories, even by your admission. AND by your admission they are not reliable ps this isnt about what is athiesm? its ......**** it reread the OP
You've totally lost track of your own point, here. I never claimed that you couldn't ask the question. And I've already answered. I don't speak for all atheists, though. Demonstrate that everything needs a source. This is just another 'everything is created, therefore everything needs a creator, er... except God!' argument. Are you talking about these two quotes? (Quran 65.12) Allah is the one who created seven heavens and from Earth like them (of corresponding type); [Allahâs] command descends among them (heavens and earths) so that you may know that Allah is capable of anything and that Allah knows everything. (Quran 42.29) And from His signs He created the heavens and the Earth; and the land animals that He scattered in BOTH of them (heavens and Earth); And He is capable of gathering them (in one place) if He wishes. Neither of them mention anything like what you've claimed.
No. Atheism is the rejection of theistic claims. That's it. A Buddhist atheist may have entirely different views on the origins of the universe to a Pagan one, for example. Why is this so hard for you to accept?
well I cant think of/dont know of anything that doesnt have a source and as gfar as i am aware/know everything has a creator, unless you can show me something Those two quotes were given and subsequently explained (tafsir if you will) you are welcome to check back again I will refer you to the OP, with a change to 'creation' , any theories
If heaven is full of sandal wearing smelly bearded bare arse left hand wiping anti semites............ You can keep it
How about matter and energy? In your belief, how about god? You explained them without references. The quotes didn't appear to contain the information that you suggested that they did and you made unsupported claims about them afterwards. I reject the question. The idea that there is a start to the universe(s?) is unproven. Others have offered various theories. This proves you're wrong about atheism, for a start.
Its not hard For me a buddhist is not athiest in the true sense, buddha was athiest. modern day buddhists not so i think True athiesm is not imo a rejection of theism, that to me is anti god. True athiesm doesnt concern itself with theism at all but, and this is the question in the OP, atheists do concern themselves with how it all started. This is NOT a relgious or theist question The answers can be theist, but no way is the question related to religion. The theories put forward, are ludicrous
You're redefining atheism to suit some bizarre end. You don't get to chose who's an atheist. Sorry. If someone doesn't believe in a god or gods, then by definition they are an atheist. Totally irrelevant. The theories could all be completely untrue and it wouldn't give any weight at all to yours.
"For me a buddhist is not athiest in the true sense, buddha was athiest. modern day buddhists not so i think"
So in your belief, god must have a source then. What's the source of god? You explained your own interpretation of it. You didn't show any form of outside backing for that interpretation and it's clearly not self-evident. As I've already stated, I don't know that there was a start. So nobody has offered any theories on here about the start of the universe? That's clearly untrue.
