Failure of Atheism

Foreword:
Atheism is not a theology or religion but disbelief on any theology and religion. This idea is mostly based upon scientific, philosophical and psychological arguments. But the question is, how much reliable and authentic are science and these arguments and what is true about today’s human conception of reality. This question is very important. In order to understand the degree of misconception one could have about reality and consequently making a decision about what reality is, this question has to be answered. Atheism totally depends upon human wisdom and the brain interpretation about reality or any natural phenomena. Is this brain interpretation or human wisdom is enough and reliable to reach any decision about accepting or rejecting any conception or teaching that tell us about another world with totally different set of natural rules and immortal in its character, Or is that human wisdom is proved to be a perfect tool to make a judgment about existence of any divine being such as God, or is it true that all our observations are vague illusions that can’t prove or tell anything, whatsoever, about reality.
In this article real facts are presented to prove:
• The inability of science to define reality.
• That the human wisdom and his brains limited interpretation of facts, as explained in modern science, are incapable of understanding the reality.
• That the modern human observations of natural phenomena strongly contradict the previously accepted theories of science. So scientific theories are always changing and are not a final verdict on any law of nature.
All these facts prove that science is not a reliable tool due to its poorness (limitation of brain) to grasp reality, stranding mankind in confusion, therefore demand of scientific evidence to accept God is baseless. And leave no ground to accept an atheist idea which is claimed to be based on scientific arguments.

Atheism at a glance:
Atheists are people who believe that supernatural beings such as God, angels and others are man-made constructs, myths and legends or who believe that these concepts are not meaningful. Atheism is the absence of belief in any Gods or spiritual beings. The word Atheism comes from a, meaning without, and theism meaning belief in god or gods.

The Basic Argument (Occam's razor)
The argument is based on a philosophical idea called Occam's Razor, popularized by William of Occam in the 14th century.In Latin it is Pluralitas non est ponenda sine necessitate or in English... "Entities should not be multiplied unnecessarily". This is usually simplified to say that the simplest answer is the best answer.
Therefore, since the entire universe and all of creation can be explained by evolution and scientific cosmology, we don't need the existence of another entity called God.
Therefore God doesn't exist.

Brief history
First atheist writers
In most histories of atheism the Greek and Roman philosophers Epicurus, Democritus, and Lucretius are presented as the first atheist writers. These writers didn't entirely deny the existence of God but they changed the idea of God.

In 1651, philosopher Thomas Hobbes had noted, that Moses could not actually have written all the books (Old Testament) that were attributed to him.
In 1779 J G Eichhorn said that the stories in the Book of Genesis, were not actual history, but were myths. As Hegel thought that the religion, religious stories and beliefs, in general, are symbolic ways of demonstrating truths about the spiritual life of humankind, other theologians began to work with this ideas of Hegel to portray religion.

Atheism was accepted during 19th and 20th century:
Until 1828 a public office could be held only if one signs up to the beliefs of the Church.
Until 1836 only Church of England ministers could conduct marriages.
Until 1871 only members of the Church of England could teach at the universities of Oxford and Cambridge.
In 1842 George Holyoake (1817-1906) was the last person in England to be imprisoned for being an atheist. The law against blasphemy was strict in Victorian Britain.

Charles Bradlaugh
Bradlaugh (1833-1891) was one of the most prominent of the Victorian atheists. Bradlaugh was elected to Parliament in 1880 and also re-elected several times over five years, but did not take his seat until 1886 because he didn’t want to swear a religious oath. When he eventually took his seat, he became Britain's first openly atheist member of Parliament.

The discovery of evolution
In the second half of the 19th century the theory of evolution put forward by Charles Darwin, and other scientific discoveries, undermined the value of religion as a way of explaining the nature and existence of the world.
During the 18th and 19th centuries, academic research began to undermine the literal truths of religion and throw doubt on the existence of God.

Teachings of Atheism:

There is no prescribed teaching of atheism. There are a few arguments to not believe in God based upon no evidence of existence of God or any supernatural divine being.

Epicurus put forward the theory of "materialism": The only things that exist are bodies and the space between them. The soul is also a material object, and so when the body dies the soul dies with it. There is no afterlife. Gods might exist, but if they did, they did not have anything to do with human beings.

Lucretius did not deny the existence of gods either, but he felt that human ideas about gods combined with the fear of death to make human beings unhappy. He followed the same materialist lines as Epicurus; he said that humankind had no need to fear the supernatural, because gods could not influence our world.

Believe in God could be explained by an atheist as follows:
For most of human history God was the best explanation for the existence and nature of the physical universe. People saw the whole universe in a religiously structured way; they had no other way to see it at that time. In olden times - and still today in some traditional societies - natural phenomena that people didn't understand, such as the weather (storms, flood, earthquakes etc.) sunrise and sunset, and so on, were seen as the work of gods or spirits.

For the ancients, God provided the power that made the universe work, and God provided the structure within which the universe worked and human beings lived.
But during the last few centuries, scientists have developed solutions that are much more logical, more consistent, and better supported by evidence.

The presumption of Atheism:
Atheist assumes that God does not exist, and the people who believe in God have to prove that God does exist. This assumption is based upon philosopher Anthony Flew who said: If it is to be established that there is a God, then we have to have good grounds for believing that this is indeed so.

W. K. Clifford (1879) wrote: It is wrong always, everywhere, and for anyone to believe anything upon insufficient evidence.

Atheists and morality:
Atheists are as moral (or immoral) as religious people. In practical terms atheists often follow the same moral code as religious people, but they arrive at the decision of what is good or bad without any help from the idea of God. Atheists say that human beings can devise suitable moral codes to live by without the aid of Gods or scriptures.

Why people are atheist:
Many people are atheists because of the way they were brought up or educated, or because they have simply adopted the beliefs of the culture in which they grew up. So someone raised in Communist China is likely to have no belief in God because the education system and culture make being an atheist the natural thing to do.
Other people are atheists because they just feel that atheism is right.
Many people are atheists because they think there is no evidence for God's existence - or at least no reliable evidence. They argue that a person should only believe in things for which they have good evidence.

SOURCE: https://www.bbc.co.uk/religion/religions/atheism/

Atheism in scientific prospective
Reasons the atheist find that atheism is superior

Science explains everything:
In 14th century and before science knew nothing about evolution or how the universe came into being. God was the only explanation available. Now because everything in the universe can be explained in a satisfactory way without using God as part of the explanation, then there is no point in saying that God exists. Evolution and scientific cosmology can explain the universe and all creation; we don't need the existence of another entity called God.

An atheist is not convinced with the traditional arguments used to prove that God exists; Such as:

1. God as Designer
Argument: The universe is such a beautiful and orderly thing that it must have been designed. Only God could have designed it. Therefore since the universe exists, God must exist. Atheist refute: Modern science shows that most of the natural things we think of as designed are just the products of processes like evolution.

2. The First Cause
Argument: Everything that happens has a cause. Therefore the universe must have had a cause. That cause must have been God. Therefore since the universe exists, God must exist in order to have caused it to exist. Atheist asks: What caused God. (And what caused the cause of God, and so on.) The argument might proceed that if God didn't need a cause, then maybe the universe didn't need a cause either. If God was already perfect before he created the universe, why did he create it? How did it benefit him? Why would he bother? And if the universe was caused, perhaps something other than God caused it?

3. The problem of evil
Most religions say that God is completely good, knows everything, and is all-powerful.
An atheist might say: The existence of evil seems inconsistent with the existence of a God who is wholly good, and can do anything. The world is full of wickedness and bad things keep happening. This can only happen if...
God is unwilling to prevent evil, in which case he is not good
Or God doesn't know about evil, in which case he does not know everything
Or God can't prevent evil, in which case he is not all powerful
Or some combination of the above.
So there is no being that is completely good, knows everything, and is all powerful. And so, there is no God.

4. God perfectly loves
This is one of the more unusual arguments used to show that God can't exist:
God knows that human beings would be happier if they were aware of the existence of a loving God, so if such a God existed, he would make sure that everyone knew it. There are lots of people who aren't aware of the existence of a loving God. Therefore such a God does not exist

Religion harm the world:
Human beings should abandon religion so that they can grow to respond appropriately to deal with the world as it is. Religions seem to have done a lot of harm in the world.

Atheism in psychological prospective:
(Criticism of the scholars of atheism about religion)
God is a human invention:
In 1841 Ludwig Feuerbach argued that God was a human invention, a spiritual device to help us deal with our fears and aspirations. This was bad news, because human beings projected all their good qualities onto God and saw him as compassionate, wise, and loving and so on, while they saw themselves as greatly inferior. Thus humanity alienated itself from its true self.

Religion comes from emotions
Human beings believe in God because they want a father figure to protect them from this frightening world.
• Sigmund Freud said: The religion stems from the individual's experience of having been a helpless baby totally dependent on its parents. The infant sees its parents as all-powerful beings that show it great love and satisfy all its needs. This experience is almost identical to the way human beings portray their relationship with God. Religion is a mass-delusion that reshaped reality to provide a certainty of happiness and a protection from suffering
Mankind wants:
• Someone who gives their lives meaning and purpose
• Something that stops death being the end.
• To believe that they are an important part of the universe.
• Some component of the universe (God) cares for and respects them.

The socialism (Karl Marx's criticisms of religion)
• Karl Marx thought that religion was an illusion, with no real God or supernatural reality standing in the background. Religion was a force that stopped human societies from changing.
• Religion is a social institution, and reflects and sustains the particular society in which it flourishes.
• It is a tool used by the capitalists to keep the working-class under control.
• Religion distracted the workers from trying to make this life better by focusing attention on the joys to come after death. It provided the working-class with comfort in their miserable oppressed circumstances.
• Religion took the noblest human ideals and gave them to a non-existent God, thus cheating human beings of realizing their own greatness and potential.
• The illusory happiness provided by religion should be eliminated by putting right the economic conditions that caused people to need this illusion to make their lives bearable.
• Religion is like a pain-killer (hence Marx's famous reference to it as "the opium of the people"), but what was needed was to cure the sickness, not sedate the patient.
Since Karl Marx ideas have already been failed in USSR socialist system in last century therefore it useless to discuss his teaching in this article. Its failure is self evident.





Logical Positivism or Verificationism
Reasons that treat religious language as meaningless

Logical Positivists argued that a sentence was meaningless if it wasn't either true or false, and they said that a sentence would only be true or false if it could be tested by an experiment, or if it was true by definition.
Some philosophers think that religious language doesn't mean anything at all and therefore that there's no point in asking whether God exists. They would say that a sentence like "In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth" is neither true nor false, it's meaningless; in the same way that "colorless green” is meaningless.

A more accurate version of this idea can be found here:
Since you couldn't verify the existence of God by any sort of "sense experience", and it wasn't true by definition (e.g. in the way "a triangle has 3 sides" is true), the logical positivists argued that it was pointless asking the question since it could not be answered true or false.

The groups such as rationalist, humanist and secularist have more or less same ideas like an atheist. Nihilism and Existentialism etc are newer terms for the same ideas.
Modern Atheism
Scientific determinism
The famous physicist Hawking writes in his book, the grand design, under heading The Rule of Law:
Though we feel that we can choose what we do, our understanding of the molecular basis of biology shows that biological processes are governed by the laws of physics and chemistry and therefore are as determined as the orbits of the planets. Recent experiments in neuroscience support the view that it is our physical brain, following the known laws of science that determines our actions, and not some agency that exists outside those laws. For example, a study of patients undergoing awake brain surgery found that by electrically stimulating the appropriate regions of the brain, one could create in the patient the desire to move the hand, arm, or foot, or to move the lips and talk. it is hard to imagine how free will can operate if our behavior is determined by physical law, so it seems that we are no more than biological machines and that free will is just an illusion.

Modern psychological point of view about religion:
Neuroscientist Chris Frith says in his book Making up the Mind: How the Brain Creates Our Mental World
Many people believe that, because they hold certain ideas, they are morally superior to those who do not hold these ideas. In believing this they commit the deadliest of the deadly sins, namely pride, but they do this willingly because they believe that their moral superiority entitles them to patronize, proselytize, and, under certain conditions, maim and kill those they despise.
The way our brain functions means that we are constantly choosing which interpretation we will give to every event. From each interpretation come our decisions about how to act. However, our freedom of choice has the consequence that we cannot avoid the two necessary conditions of choice. Choices exist only in a state of uncertainty, and we are responsible for our choices.
When people fear uncertainty and dislike taking responsibility for what they do, they create for themselves the illusion of certainty and irresponsibility by choosing to be a child who is obedient to a god or to a political or religious leader. In doing this they refuse to accept their very nature, that is, what it is to be a human being. Further at a place he writes, If God made us then this is how He made us. One of the consequences of this is that there are as many forms of Christianity as there are people who call themselves Christian. The same can be said of every religion.
A great many people interpret what they have been taught by their religious leaders in ways that cause them and/or others considerable pain and suffering.
Unfortunately this is true for many religious groups operating in the world today.

The Failure of atheism:
Since an atheist believes in laws of nature (as observed by human five senses) called science, he finds no way to prove the existence of a God or any supernatural being using the laws of nature or science.
The presumption that God does not exist is due to the no belief. Atheism has no teaching of its own. It has no ideology; therefore it puts the burden on others to prove their concepts. However, evidence or proof will always be insufficient because they depend upon limited human senses or instruments that man invents, instruments are consistently being improved. If one say in the year 1000 A.D, for example, that gamma ray doesn’t exist because there is no evidence that it exists, he might be right as per Clifford rule above. But after the observation of radioactivity it was shown that alpha, beta and gamma rays do exist, the only thing needed was the invention of photographic plate to record it. In the modern times now the gamma camera is being used in a lot of application to benefit humanity. There are quite a number of things accepted today that has no place in olden days. Thus the demand of evidence is not the grounds to not accept any fact.

The atheist claim that science explains or has explained everything is false. Now on the basis of observations made during the last fifty years or so, we know that many concepts and scientific theories are proved to be wrong or inapplicable in certain domains of universe. Improved and high quality instruments showed that the natural laws believed to be true before are now thought to be not true in the sense as they were used to be understood. Now new explanations are needed to define them. For example recently detected speed of neutrino that is higher than speed of light raises serious objection on constancy of speed of light or theory of creation of a solar system out of a disc is in a need to be redefined.

The perimeter institute of theoretical physics Waterloo Ontario has described the limitations of science in finding reality as follows:

These two theories together – quantum and relativity – provide the tools to explain virtually everything we currently have the technology to test. In practice they have never failed despite nearly a century of intense efforts to push them to the breaking point. However, extreme situations, which are not yet accessible to experiments, reveal their limitations, and here both the quantum and relativity theories fail.
There is some key aspect of the nature of reality that our theory is failing to take into account. For example, near "time zero" (during the Big Bang), the billions of galaxies worth of matter in the observable universe today (not to mention an even larger amount of dark matter) occupied a region of space much smaller than the nucleus of a single atom! To describe such a bizarrely extreme situation will require a theory that seamlessly combines our best understanding of the very small (quantum theory) with our best understanding of space, time, and gravity (general relativity). What general relativity fails to take into account is the quantum nature of space, time, and gravity.
https://www.perimeterinstitute.ca/Outreach/What_We_Research/Quantum_Gravity/

This is the failure of two great theories i.e. quantum and relativity, although they work well in their respective domains. But they don’t accommodate each other. This is totally unscientific!

Here are a few of unexplainable observations that challenge basic scientific theories:

Newfound Planet Orbits Backward
By Jeanna Bryner and Robert Roy Britt
posted: 12 August 2009
09:56 am ET
Planets orbit stars in the same direction that the stars rotate. They all do except one.
A newfound planet orbits the wrong way, backward compared to the rotation of its host star. Its discoverers think a near-collision may have created the retrograde orbit, as it is called. The star and its planet, WASP-17, are about 1,000 light-years away. The setup was found by the UK's Wide Area Search for Planets (WASP) project in collaboration with Geneva Observatory. "I would have to say this is one of the strangest planets we know about," said Sara Seager, an astrophysicist at MIT who was not involved in the discovery.
There is no theory available to explain this event. Assumption of near collision is very improbable.
Extrasolar Hot Jupiter: The Planet That 'Shouldn’t Exist'
ScienceDaily (Aug. 27, 2009) — A planet has been discovered with ten times the mass of Jupiter, but which orbits its star in less than one Earth-day.
The discovery, reported in this week’s Nature by Coel Hellier, of Keele University in the UK, and colleagues, poses a challenge to our understanding of tidal interactions in planetary systems.
Theory of tidal interaction fails to explain this universal event.
Particles Found to Travel Faster Than Speed of Light
An Italian experiment has unveiled evidence that fundamental particles known as neutrinos can travel faster than light. Other researchers are cautious about the result, but if it stands further scrutiny, the finding would overturn the most fundamental rule of modern physics—that nothing travels faster than 299,792,458 meters per second.
Breaking the law
The idea that nothing can travel faster than light in a vacuum is the cornerstone of Albert Einstein's special theory of relativity, which itself forms the foundation of modern physics. If neutrinos are traveling faster than light speed, then one of the most fundamental assumptions of science—that the rules of physics are the same for all observers—would be invalidated. "If it's true, then it's truly extraordinary," says John Ellis, a theoretical physicist at CERN.
This observation has very serious consequences on fundamental assumptions of science; all the framework of science could be demolished. In order to avoid this controversy, about two months later, it was said that the measurements were defective. In my and many others opinion this statement is made to close the subject for now and avoid controversy. But this will not be going to last long. Also the scientific experiments are liable to more uncertainty and unreliability after this statement.

Quantum Entanglement Links 2 Diamonds
Usually a finicky phenomenon limited to tiny, ultra cold objects, entanglement has now been achieved for macroscopic diamonds at room temperature
By John Matson | December 1, 2011 | 55
A group of researchers report in the December 2 issue of Science that they managed to entangle the quantum states of two diamonds separated by 15 centimeters. Quantum entanglement is a phenomenon by which two or more objects share an unseen link bridging the space between them—a hypothetical pair of entangled dice, for instance, would always land on matching numbers, even if they were rolled in different places simultaneously.
The unseen link as mentioned above is the proof of limitation of science. The unseen is something unobservable or unknown to science.
Neutron stars are presumed to contain the densest matter in the cosmos. These remnants of core-collapse supernovae pack more than the Sun’s mass (M ⊙) into a sphere less than 30 km across. There is considerable uncertainty about the character of matter squeezed to such ultrahigh densities, which cannot be reproduced in the laboratory.
Young’s double slit experiment:
This experiment shows that the observation changes the past. How it is possible nobody knows. It also shows the strange phenomena of Interference of single photon or electron by itself!

Understanding of reality is impossible:
A modern neuroscience view
What neuroscientists have shown is that we are free to make choices about how we interpret events. It is our interpretations of events, and not the events themselves, that determine what we do. Research by neuroscientists has revealed that the way our brains have been constructed means that we do not see reality directly but only the images or interpretations that our brain has created. As the neuroscientist Chris Frith says in his excellent book Making up the Mind: How the Brain Creates Our Mental World (Blackwell), "Even if all our senses are intact and our brain functioning normally, we do not have direct access to the physical world. It may feel as if we have direct access, but this is an illusion created by our brain." Our brain creates these images and interpretations out of our past experience, that is, the memories which are stored in our brain. Since no two people ever have exactly the same experience, no two people ever interpret anything in exactly the same way.
People's interpretations can vary greatly, not just in meaning but in the degree they relate to what is actually going on. Some people try to create interpretations that are as close to the truth as they can make them. In scientific terms, these interpretations have a high degree of validity. Some people create interpretations that are based solely on their fantasies, and any relationship to the truth is accidental. Most of us operate somewhere between these two extremes.
The ability to interpret events that create meanings and to choose between alternative meanings arises out of the way our body and brain function. Creating meaning is one of the systems whereby our body/brain/mind operates.
However, the range of meanings we can choose from is limited by how much we have learned in our life. This is why being a child is so difficult. This is why organizations that want to have power over us, like the State, the Church, and Big Business, try to control what we know. The less we know the less choice we have.
That is why the pure justice can’t be determined and implemented and reality is out of reach of mankind. Man needs a divine guidance for life and a day of absolute judgment to find justice and reality as it is.
To claim to be in possession of an absolute truth is to claim the impossible because all we can possess is our interpretation of what we have experienced or been told.
Whether our interpretations are close to the truth or not, they are guesses about what is going on.
This argument is equally valid for scientific knowledge. Scientists, too, have the ideas that are taught to them, they also interpret what they have experienced, and they have the same brain. Although they are on a higher wisdom level, they are also human therefore this rule applies to them as well. The theories of science are always subject to change whenever something new is observed or discovered. This means that any scientific idea or scientific theory is not a final word to prove anything.
The claim that science explains or has explained everything is false.
It has been a practice that the observation and evidences or theories posing serious challenges to any basic rule or assumption of science is either disregarded or discouraged, keeping it pending for time being as we have seen in the case of higher than speed of light neutrino.
Let us read and ponder this statement:
Dr. Hilton of Apollo Campus Pennsylvania State University, studied the evidence presented at the Glen Rose stated: "I would have to say that the belief in evolution is in a state of terminal illness but its death will only be admitted by a new generation of scientists whose minds have not been prejudiced by the type of education now prevalent in the nation's public schools, an education which starts with the belief that evolution has happened, which interprets all evidence according to that faith and simply discards any evidence which cannot be fitted into the evolutionary framework" (Quoted from "Dinosaurs" by Dr. Carl E. Baugh, 1987. Promise Publishing Co., Orange , CA 92667

The argument that the religious language is meaningless is baseless.
The meaningless could also be meaningful:
To say that a word or a statement is meaningless is nonsense, for, it is evident that a lot of words spoken today are meaningless if were spoken 100 years ago for example multimedia, CD, DVD, blue ray, computer, neutron star, or gravitational lensing, even radio. Even when first mechanical calculator was invented, there was no idea or concept about computer. Thus the words are meaningful but the human knowledge was limited. This is a universal truth and is valid in all times. The criteria that proves a statement to be true or false changes with time and knowledge. For example before Copernicus the idea that earth revolves around sun was thought to be false and even punishable. A piece of truth that is not known at a certain time cannot be explained using the words from the set of words available in any language at that time. The human dictionary is and will always be poor in vocabulary. Another example is the sentence, air has weight or pressure, was meaningless before, later experimentally proved and accepted. Does it mean that meaningless sentence became meaningful only after experiment or was it an all time universal fact, even without an experiment?! This means that experiment or evidence is not the criteria to prove the meaningfulness of a sentence.

Dr. Adel M.A. Abbas wrote in his book (Throne was on water chapter. 8):
It is true that when one addresses a child, one has to speak in a manner that a child’s brain can understand. In other words, a child is not lied to but rather is given information in a manner that is comprehensible to him. Similarly when God addresses men in a book of teaching, he has to touch on the some of the scientific aspect that are present in the surrounding environment. This is how various scientific phenomena and facts are presented in Quran. For the purpose of teaching or telling something one has to use the vocabulary which is familiar to and understood by the listener. Therefore God uses the word day for different time periods in creation of universe. The Quran state that time, far from being absolute, is variable in different parts of the universe. In other words, it introduces the idea of relativity. A day with God id eternal, as he is the first, the last, and the light of the heavens and earth. He uses the term day in order to give the periods of the creation of universe. In some estimates, the days of creation are calculated in terms of billions and billions of years of man counting. He gave other examples to show that a day in other parts of universe could be shorter. Example of fifty thousand years and one thousand years were given. Thus the relativity of time cannot be disputed.


Reality in a modern physicist view
In his book The Grand Design, Hawking writes:
Most people believe that there is an objective reality out there and that our senses and our science directly convey information about the material world. Classical science is based on the belief that an external world exists whose properties are definite and independent of the observer who perceive them. In philosophy that belief is called realism.
There is another possibility: ones concept of reality can depend on the mind of the perceiver. That view point, with various subtle differences, goes by names such as anti realism, instrumentalism, or idealism.
According to those doctrines, the world we know is constructed by the human mind employing sensory data as its raw material and is shaped by the interpretive structure of our brain. This viewpoint may be hard to accept, but it is not difficult to understand.
This point of view also points to the fact that understanding of reality is not possible.
Thus if classical science encouraged human to deny God or religion and created a group of people called atheist, the modern science has proved that all that classical science knew was a drop in sea and reality is still far to be understood and science is not mature enough yet to tell us what reality is!.

Let us ponder on the following to understand what actually should be known to human:
Quotation from the book, Life after Death, by Abul ala
The laws that govern the present system of the Universe do not allow an opportunity for the full unfolding of the moral consequences of human actions. Secondly, the actions of men during their short span of life on earth often have reactions and effects so widespread and lasting that their full consequences must take thousands of years to unfold and manifest themselves fully; and it is obviously impossible for any person, under the present laws of nature, to attain such a long career on earth. From this it logically follows that while the present physical world and its natural laws are enough for the material and animal constituents of man, they are utterly inadequate for the moral element of his being. This component calls for another world where the law of ethics is the governing law and the laws of nature are subservient, to it; where life is unlimited; where all the moral consequences of human actions in the material world that could not manifest themselves there, should manifest themselves fully and in the proper form. It demands a world where truth and righteousness, and not gold and silver, carry weight; where fire burns only such things as deserve to be burned according to the moral law; where happiness and the lot of the virtuous and plain and misery the plight of the wicked. Both nature and reason demand such an order.
If the existing system of the Universe with its present natural laws is a possibility and a reality, why should another world with a different set of natural laws be regarded as an impossibility?

Ways of securing knowledge as per Islamic teaching:
A quotation from the book Quran and science p.35

And do not pursue that of which you have no knowledge. Indeed, the hearing, the sight and the heart - about all those [one] will be questioned…17: 36

Here Hearing points to revelation (heard), sight points to sensation or observation through human five senses and heart points to reflection upon what is gained through these two mediums i.e. revelation and observation. Thus:

1. Securing knowledge and wisdom through reflection based upon what is gained by means of revelation and observation & experience is the quranic way of securing wisdom.

2. Quran first presents the realities and then proofs are presented from within this universe and its constituents. Sometimes it invites man to ponder upon universe and signs of nature to find the evidence to truth.

3. In view of Quran the revelation is a solid and reliable medium of knowledge.

4. Quran puts a few limits on the human rational and reflection. It treats the struggle to find evidence or rational arguments for a few things as unnecessary, Such as the news of the undiscovered or hidden facts like the events in the hereafter or heaven and hell etc. It visualizes it as beyond the scope of human wisdom.

The above quote of verse and its explanation is so true. As we have seen that now there is sufficient scientific knowledge based upon observation and experiment that points to limitation of human brain, therefore it is quite justified to put limit on human rational and reflection on the matters about the unseen. This also proves the necessity of a divine guidance. Read the above mentioned verse again.

The perfectness:
A positive all perfect whole sole authority do exist.

Ayat al kursi
Allah - there is no deity except Him, the Ever-Living, the Sustainer of [all] existence. Neither drowsiness overtakes Him nor sleep. To Him belongs whatever is in the heavens and whatever is on the earth. Who is it that can intercede with Him except by His permission? He knows what is [presently] before them and what will be after them, and they encompass not a thing of His knowledge except for what He wills. His Kursi extends over the heavens and the earth, and their preservation tires Him not. And He is the Most High, the Most Great. 2:255

The perfect reality, The perfect existence, the perfect attentiveness, the perfect ownership, the perfect authority, the perfect knowledge, the perfect occupation, the perfect possession, the perfect power, the highest, the greatest. Do exist and should exist.

Lack of the means to understand the basic manifesto of this huge divine empire and ruling system of this vast universe is the cause of the failure to understand the purpose and cause of creation of this universe. This understanding cannot be achieved with the brain power only. A true and preserved revealed guidance has to be there for mankind. So which revealed teaching is preserved and sustained from all historical, physical, lingual and social disorders and destructions? Think about this miraculous book of teaching. This miracle is proof of its truthfulness.