What about … #49

This is a little book of an author called Ahmed Didat which died some 20 years ago. I found it funny and interesting, I hope you enjoy it as much as I did. You may read what follows in the next post “who moved the stone”

Since  I  am  commanded  by  my  Prophet,  peace  be  upon  him,  to  seek  knowledge  I  wanted  to learn.  I  said:  “I  agree  with  all  that  you  have  read  to  me,  but  I  have  a  problem  with  your Bible.”  “What  problem  have  you  got?”  he  asked.  I  said:  “Please  open  the  Gospel  of  St.  Luke, chapter 3 verse 23.” This he did. I said: “Please read.” He read:”And  Jesus  himself  began  to  be  about  thirty  years  of  age,  being  (as  was  supposed)  the  son of Joseph, which was the son of Heli,” (Luke 3:23) I  drew  the  Reverend’s  attention  to  the  words  –  “(As  was  supposed).”  I  said:  “Do  you  see that  the  words  ‘As  was  supposed’  are  written  within  brackets?”  He  said  that  he  saw  that.  I asked  him:  “Why  are  the  brackets  there?”  He  acknowledged,  “I  don’t  know,  but  I  could  find out  for  you  from  some  Bible  scholars.”  I  admired  his  humility.  Though  I  knew  that  all Supervisors  of  Bible  Houses  in  South  Africa  are  retired  reverends,  it  was  possible  that  this aspect  of  Bible  knowledge  was  beyond  their  sphere.  I  said:  “If  you  do  not  know,  then  let  me tell  you  what  the  brackets  are  doing  there  in  this  verse.  You  do  not  have  to  take  the  trouble of looking for a Bible scholar.” I  explained  that  in  the  “most  ancient”  manuscripts  of  Luke,  the  words  “As  was  supposed” are  not  there.  Your  translators  felt  that  without  this  interpolation  the,  ordinary  Christians, not  well  grounded  in  faith,  might  slip  and  fall  into  the  error  of  believing  that  Joseph  the Carpenter  was  the  actual  physical  father  of  Jesus.  So  they  took  the  precaution  of  adding their  own  comment  in  brackets  to  avoid  any  misunderstanding.  I  said:  “I  am  not  trying  to find  fault  with  your  system  of  adding  words  in  brackets  to  assist  the  reader,  but  what intrigues  me  is  that  in  all  translations  of  the  Bible  in  the  African  and  Eastern  languages  you have  retained  the  words  “as  was  supposed”  but  have  removed  the  brackets!  Couldn’t  the nations  of  the  Earth  besides  the  English  understand  the  meaning  and  purpose  of  the brackets? What  is  wrong  with  the  Afrikaner?  Why  have  you  eliminated  the  brackets  from  the  Afrikaans Bible?  The  Supervisor  protested:  “I  didn’t  do  it.”  I  said:  “I  know  that  you  personally  did  not do  it  but  why  have  the  Bible  Society  that  you  represent  and  your  Bible  scholars  been  playing with  the  ‘Word  of  God?’  If  God  Almighty  did  not  see  fit  to  preserve  Luke  from  error  what right  has  anybody  to  add  to  or  delete  from  words  in  the  ‘Book  of  God?’  What  right  have  you to manufacture ‘God’s Words?’ Interpolations The  translator’s  own  addition  of  words  in  brackets  can  easily  be  put  into  the  mouth  of  St. Luke  by  merely  removing  the  brackets,  and  by  implication,  if  Luke  was  inspired  by  God  to write  what  he  did,  then  the  interpolations  automatically  become  the  Word  of  God,  which really  is  not  the  case.  (More  will  be  said  on  this  subject  in  the  forthcoming  publication  Is  the Bible  God’s  Word?)  I  concluded  my  explanation  with  the  words  –  ‘Your  theologians  of  the day  have  succeeded  where  the  alchemists  of  yore  failed  –  of  turning  baser  metal  into  shining gold.'” The English Language At  this  stage  the  Reverend  introduced  irrelevancies  into  the  discussion  and  the  subject changed.  He  made  some  claims  which  made  me  say:  “You  see,  sir,  you  English  people  do not  know  your  own  language.”  (With  apologies  to  my  readers  whose  mother  tongue  is English).  He  quickly  retorted:  “You  mean  to  say  that  you  know  my  language  better  than  I do?”  I  said:  “It  would  be  presumptuous  on  my  part  to  tell  –  an  Englishman  –  that  I understand  your  language  better  than  you  do.”  “Then  what  do  you  mean  that  we  English people  do  not  know  our  own  language?”  he  demanded.  I  said  again:  “You  see,  sir,  you  read your  Holy  Scripture  in  your  mother  tongue,  like  every  Christian  belonging  to  a  thousand different  language  groups,  and  yet  each  and  every  Christian  language  group  understands the facts,  opposite  to what he is reading.” “What are you referring to?” he asked. A Ghost I  continued:  “Do  you  remember  the  occasion  when  Jesus  returned  to  that  upper  room  after his  alleged  crucifixion:  ‘And  saith  unto  them,  (his  disciples),  ‘Peace  be  unto  you”  (Luke 24:36),  and  his  disciples  were  terrified  on  recognizing  him?”  He  answered  that  he remembered  that  incident.  I  inquired:  “Why  should  they  be  terrified?”  When  one  recognizes one’s  long-lost  friend  or  one’s  beloved,  the  natural  reaction  is  to  feel  overjoyed,  elated  and one  wants  to  embrace  and  kiss  the  hands  and  feet  of  the  beloved.  Why  did  they  get terrified?”  The  Reverend  replied  that  they  (the  disciples)  thought  that  they  were  seeing  a ghost.”  I  asked:  “Did  Jesus  look  like  a  ghost?”  He  said:  “No.”  “Then  why  did  they  think  that they  were  seeing  a  ghost  when  he  did  not  look  like  a  ghost?”  I  queried.  The  Reverend  was clearly puzzled. I said: “Please allow me to explain.” Disciples Not Eye Witnesses “You  see,  sir,  the  disciples  of  Jesus  were  not  eye-witnesses  or  ear-witnesses  to  the  actual happenings  of  the  previous  three  days,  as  vouched  for  by  St.  Mark  who  says  that  at  the most  critical  juncture  in  the  life  of  Jesus:  “they  all  forsook  him  and  fled.”  (Mark  14:50).  All the  knowledge  of  the  disciples  regarding  their  Master  was  from  hearsay.  They  had  heard that  their  master  was  hanged  on  the  Cross;  they  had  heard  that  he  had  given  up  the  Ghost; they  had  heard  that  he  was  dead  and  buried  for  three  days.  If  one  is  confronted  by  a  person with  such  a  reputation  then  the  conclusion  is  inescapable;  they  must  be  seeing  a  ghost. Little wonder these ten brave men were petrified.” “To  disabuse  their  minds  from  the  fear  that  gripped  them,  Jesus  reasoned  with  them.  He said:  ‘Behold  my  hands  and  my  feet,  that  it  is  I  myself’  To  put  it  in  colloquial  English,  this  is how  he  told  them:  ‘What  is  wrong  with  you  fellows,  can’t  you  see  that  I  am  the  same person  –  who  walked  and  talked  with  you,  broke  bread  with  you  –  flesh  and  blood  in  all respects.’ Why  do  doubts  enter  your  minds?  ‘Handle  me  and  see,  for  a  spirit  has  no  flesh  and  bones  as you  see  me  have.’  (Luke  24:39).  In  other  words  he  is  telling  them:  ‘If  I  have  flesh  and bones,  then  I  am  not  a  ghost,  not  a  spook  and  not  a  spirit!'”  “Is  that  right?”  I  asked.  “Yes,” he  replied.  I  continued  that,  Jesus  is  telling  them,  as  recorded  in  this  verse,  in  basic  English, that  what  the  disciples  were  asked  to  “handle  and  see”  was  not  a  translated  body,  not  a metamorphosed  body  and  not  a  resurrected  body,  because  a  resurrected  body  is  a spiritualised  body.  He  is  telling  them  in  the  clearest  language  humanly  possible  that  he  is not  what  they  were  thinking.  They  were  thinking  that  he  was  a  spirit,  a  resurrected  body, one having been brought back from the dead. He is most emphatic that  he is not!” Spiritualization “But  how  can  you  be  so  sure  that  the  resurrected  body  cannot  materialize  physically  as Jesus  had  obviously  done?”  murmured  the  Reverend.  I  replied:  “Because  Jesus  had  himself pronounced  that  the  resurrected  bodies  get  spiritualised.”  When  did  he  say  any  such  thing?”inquired  the  Reverend.  I  answered:  “Do  you  remember  the  incident  as  recorded  in  the Gospel  of  St.  Luke,  chapter  20,  where  the  learned  men  of  the  Jews-  “the  chief  priests  and the  scribes  with  the  elders”-  had  come  to  him  with  a  number  of  posers,  and  among  them was  one  about  a  Jewess  who  had  seven  husbands  in  turn,  one  after  another  according  to  a Jewish  custom,  and  in  time  all  seven  husbands  and  the  woman  too  died?”  The  Reverend said  that  he  did  remember  the  occasion.  I  continued:  “The  trap  that  the  religious  hierarchy was  trying  to  spring  on  him  was;  which  one  of  the  seven  husbands  was  going  to  possess  the woman  on  the  ‘Other  side’-  at  the  resurrection?-  since  they  reasoned  with  Jesus  that  the seven brothers  had her. There  was  no  problem  while  they  fulfilled  their  obligation  of  trying  to  give  her  a  child, because  they  had  possessed  her  one  by  one  in  turn,  and  it  was  after  the  death  of  one  that the  other  had  taken  her  to  wife.  But  since  at  the  resurrection  all  seven  will  be  brought  to  life simultaneously,  there  will  be  strife  in  heaven  because  all  seven  would  want  to  get  at  her  at the same time, specially if they had pleasure with her.” “Jesus  debunked  their  false  notion  of  the  resurrection,  by  saying  that  at  the  resurrection: ‘neither  shall  they  die  any  more’  (Luke  20:36)  meaning  that  the  resurrected  persons  will  be Immortalised.  They  will  not  be  subject  to  death  any  more,  no  more  hanger  or  thirst,  no more  fatigue.  In  short,  all  the  instruments  of  death  will  be  powerless  against  the resurrected  body.  Jesus  continues  to  explain:  ‘for  they  (the  resurrected  bodies)  are  equal unto  the  angles,’  that  is,  that  they  will  be  Angelised  –  spiritualised,  that  they  will  become spirit-creatures,  i.e.  Spirits;’and  the  children  of  God,  for  such  are  the  children  of  the resurrection.” (Luke 20:36). Jesus Not Spiritualised I  was  taken  off  from  the  theme  I  was  expounding  two  paragraphs  above  by  the  Reverend with  the  challenge:  “But  how  can  you  be  so  sure..?”  To  continue  from  where  I  had  deviated above  –  He  is  Not  what  they  were  thinking,  that  he  was  not  a  Spirit,  not  a  Ghost,  not  a Spook.  To  assure  them  further  after  having  offered  his  hands  and  feet  for  inspection  and verification  that  his  was  a  material,  physical  body,  and  that  all  their  bewilderment  and disbelief  was  unjustified,  he  asked  his  disciples:  “Have  you  here  any  meat?”  (Meaning something  to  eat).  “And  they  gave  him  a  piece  of  broiled  fish  and  of  a  honeycomb,  and  he took it, and did eat before them.” (Luke 24:41-43) A Drama? What  was  Jesus  trying  to  prove  by  all  his  demonstrations  of  wanting  his  hands  and  feet  to be  handled  and  chewing  and  masticating  broiled  fish  and  honeycomb?  Was  all  this  a pretense,  make-belief,  an  act  or  drama?  “No!”  Said  Schleliermacher  in  1819,  a  hundred years  before  I  was  born.  Albert  Schweizer  records  him  saying:  “If  Christ  had  only  eaten  to show  that  he  could  eat,  while  he  really  had  no  need  of  nourishment,  if  would  have  been  a pretense, something docetic.”(  In Quest of the Historical Jesus,  page 64). I  had  not  know  of  Schleliermacher  and  other  Christian  scholars  who  over  a  hundred  years ago  doubted  the  death  of  Jesus  on  the  cross  as  recorded  by  Albert  Schweizer,  when  I  was discussing this subject with the head of the Bible Society. No Resurrection “What  is  wrong  with  you  (Christian)  folk?”  Jesus  is  telling  you  in  the  most  unambiguous language  that  he  is  not  a  spirit  –  not  spiritualised,  not  a  resurrected  person,  and  yet  the whole  Christian  world  believes  that  he  was  resurrected,  i.e.  spiritualised.  Who  is  lying,  you or  him?  How  is  it  possible  that  you,  each  and  every  Christian,  are  reading  your  Bible  in  your own  mother  tongue  and  yet  each  and  every  groups  is  made  to  understand  the  exact opposite  of  what  they  are  reading?  If  you  read  the  Bible,  say,  in  Hebrew,  and  pleaded  that you  did  not  understand  what  you  were  reading,  I  can  appreciate  this  fact.  If  you  read  it  in Greek  and  pleaded  that  you  did  not  really  understand  the  implications  of  what  was  written; I  can  appreciate  this  fact  also.  But  the  anomaly  is  that  you  are  reading  the  Book,  each  and every  one,  in  his  own  mother  tongue,  and  are  trained  to  understand  the  opposite  of  what  is written.  How  have  you  been  brainwashed,  or  rather,  how  have  you  been  “Programmed,”  as the Americans would put it? “Please  tell  me  as  to  who  is  lying?  Is  it  Jesus  or  a  thousand  million  Christians  of  the  world? Jesus  says:  “No!”  to  his  being  resurrected,  and  all  of  you  say:  “Yes!”  Whom  are  we  Muslims to  believe,  Jesus  or  his  so  called  disciples?  We  Muslims  would  rather  believe  the  Master.  Did he not say: “The disciple is not greater than the Master.”? (Matthew 10:24) This  was  more  than  the  Reverend  had  bargained  for.  He  politely  excused  himself  by  saying that  as  he  had  to  get  ready  to  close  his  office,  he  would  look  forward  to  meeting  me  again. This was sheer evasive politeness! With  the  Bible  Society,  I  won  the  debate  but  lost  the  discount!  No  more  discount  for  me from  the  Bible  Society.  But  let  my  loss  be  your  gain.  If  you  dear  reader,  can  remove  a  few cobwebs from your thinking on the subject of the  Crucifixion, I will be amply rewarded. Now here are the verses discussed put together : “..Jesus  himself  stood  in  their  midst,  and  said  unto  them,  Peace  be  unto  you…But  they  were terrified,  and  supposing  that  they  were  seeing  a  spirit…  And  he  said  unto  them,..  ‘Behold my  hands  and  my  feet,  that  it  is  I  myself:  handle  me  and  see;  for  a  spirit  has  no  flesh  and bones,  as  you  see  me  have’…  And  showed  them  his  hands  and  feet…  And  while  they  yet believed  not  for  joy  and  wondered,  he  said  unto  them,  ‘Have  ye  here  any  meat?’..  And  they gave  him  a  piece  of  broiled  fish,  and  of  a  honeycomb…  And  he  took  it,  and  did  eat  before them.” (Luke 24:36-43)

What about … #47

Mary 19:

16. And mention in the Scripture Mary, when she withdrew from her people to an eastern location.

17. She screened herself away from them, and We sent to her Our spirit, and He appeared to her as an immaculate human.

18. She said, “I take refuge from you in the Most Merciful, should you be righteous.”

19. He said, “I am only the messenger of your Lord, to give you the gift of a pure son.”

20. She said, “How can I have a son, when no man has touched me, and I was never unchaste?”

21. He said, “Thus said your Lord, `It is easy for Me, and We will make him a sign for humanity, and a mercy from Us. It is a matter already decided.’“

22. So she carried him, and secluded herself with him in a remote place.

23. The labor-pains came upon her, by the trunk of a palm-tree. She said, “I wish I had died before this, and been completely forgotten.”

24. Whereupon he called her from beneath her: “Do not worry; your Lord has placed a stream beneath you.

25. And shake the trunk of the palm-tree towards you, and it will drop ripe dates by you.”

26. “So eat, and drink, and be consoled. And if you see any human, say, ‘I have vowed a fast to the Most Gracious, so I will not speak to any human today.’“

27. Then she came to her people, carrying him. They said, “O Mary, you have done something terrible.

28. O sister of Aaron, your father was not an evil man, and your mother was not a whore.”

29. So she pointed to him. They said, “How can we speak to an infant in the crib?”

30. He said, “I am the servant of God. He has given me the Scripture, and made me a prophet.

31. And has made me blessed wherever I may be; and has enjoined on me prayer and charity, so long as I live.

32. And kind to my mother, and He did not make me a disobedient rebel.

33. So Peace is upon me the day I was born, and the day I die, and the Day I get resurrected alive.”

34. That is Jesus son of Mary—the Word of truth about which they doubt.

35. It is not for God to have a child—glory be to Him. To have anything done, He says to it, “Be,” and it becomes.

36. “God is my Lord and your Lord, so worship Him. That is a straight path.”

37. But the various factions differed among themselves. So woe to those who disbelieve from the scene of a tremendous Day.

38. Listen to them and watch for them the Day they come to Us. But the wrongdoers today are completely lost.

39. And warn them of the Day of Regret, when the matter will be concluded. Yet they are heedless, and they do not believe.

40. It is We who will inherit the earth and everyone on it, and to Us they will be returned.

What about … #41


Confession, in most religions, is the acknowledgment of one’s sins or wrongs.

In Catholic teaching it is not mandatory, the Catholic rite is usually conducted within a confessional box. A man or a woman confess  to a priest which is believed to have the authority to forgive one’s sins accompanied by the sign of the cross.

In the Anglican tradition, confession and absolution is usually a component part of corporate worship, particularly at services of the Holy Eucharist. The form involves an exhortation to repentance by the priest, a period of silent prayer during which believers may inwardly confess their sins, a form of general confession said together by all present and the pronouncement of general absolution by the priest, often accompanied by the sign of the cross.

The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (Mormons) teaches that “confession is a necessary requirement for complete forgiveness.” The sinner must confess both to God and to those persons wronged by the sin.

In Islam confession of sins is made directly to God and not through man (except in asking for forgiveness from the victim of the sin). It is taught that sins are to be kept to oneself to seek individual forgiveness from God. God forgives those who seek his forgiveness and commit to themselves not to repeat the sin, although some sins in which another person is victimized are not forgiven unless that person forgives you, so they should also be asked for forgiveness.

In Judaism, confession is an important part of attaining forgiveness for both sins against God and another man. Confessions to God are done communally in the plural. Jews confess that “We have sinned.” In matters involving offenses against a fellow man, private confession to the victim is a requirement to obtaining forgiveness from the victim, which is generally a requirement to obtaining forgiveness from God. If the victim refuses to forgive, the offender confesses publicly, before larger and larger audience


So these are just a few methode of forgiveness among diferent religions. My problem is with the Catholics and the Anglicans who believe that a man just like them, is capable of forgiving someone’s sins that easily. How is it possible that a man which has lets say backbitten against someone else a few minutes ago, goes to church (in the catholic church, confessions are usually Saturday evening) ask forgiveness for his sin to a man (priest) who doesn’t really care and who makes sins as everybody else, and expects to be forgiven just because the christ has died for him!? Come on! So why don’t we make sins all day long? After all we can be forgiven every Saturday! No, when we feel our conscience ill at ease for something we have done, we must seek forgiveness to God the only forgiver. No human can judge and forgive in the name of God.

Ask forgiveness and repent, is the only way to feel relieved of our wrongs. The Christ isn’t dumb to die for sake of those who like to sin

What about … #40

In mathematics, two quantities are in the golden ratio if their ratio is the same as the ratio of their sum to the larger of the two quantities. The figure on the right illustrates the geometric relationship. Expressed algebraically, for quantities a and b with a > b > 0,

I found this article which I recommend to read:


who reminded me of a video that I’ve seen a few years ago:


I’m amazed at how things are created so well measured, we can find this proportion almost anywhere, especially things which aren’t man-made.

If you look closely at the trees, flowers, animals, faces (human or animal), etc… you’ll probably be amazed as well.
How is it possible that some people believe that everything is created by chance, by evolution? Can chance or evolution measure perfectly exactly 1.6180339887? How pathetic! Evolution may as well build a Boeing 747 out of a scrap depot.

The moon 54.49 Everything We created is precisely measured.

The Divorce 65.3 3. And will provide for him from where he never expected. Whoever relies on God—He will suffice him. God will accomplish His purpose. God has set a measure to all things.

What about … #40

Looking at the sky in a moonless night, seeing the Milky Way’s belt and these tiny shining stars; I believe it’s the most beautiful scenery we can wish for. It’s really breathtaking. I wish I could be among the first who will go to Mars, to look at the sky from a different planet, to touch a soil which has never been touched, to feel the sun from a further point in the universe. But of course it’s just a wish.

The universe is getting bigger and bigger each second, each minute, everything is moving either slower or faster, it seems that everything is going somewhere for a specific reason. practically we’re mere travelers of a spaceship. But it “happens” that our spaceship is fitted to sustain life.

Let’s see it this way: Where do we come from? Multiple answers might be answered, but the most reasonable one is from Adam and Eve as it is said in God’s books, which we all know that they lived in heaven before being sent down here.

Ta-Ha 20:

117. We said, “O Adam, this is an enemy to you and to your wife. So do not let him make you leave the Garden, for then you will suffer.

118. In it you will never go hungry, nor be naked.

119. Nor will you be thirsty in it, nor will you swelter.”

120. But Satan whispered to him. He said, “O Adam, shall I show you the Tree of Immortality, and a kingdom that never decays?”

121. And so they ate from it; whereupon their bodies became visible to them, and they started covering themselves with the leaves of the Garden. Thus Adam disobeyed his Lord, and fell.

122. But then his Lord recalled him, and pardoned him, and guided him.

123. He said, “Go down from it, altogether; some of you enemies of some others. But whenever guidance comes to you from Me, whoever follows My guidance, will not go astray, nor suffer.

124. But whoever turns away from My Reminder, for him is a confined life. And We will raise him on the Day of Resurrection blind.”

So thinking from the beginning, we are heavenly people who were sent to a suitable environment to live before going back to our original place (I’m speaking literally not  religiously such as who will go to heaven or hell). So If we are renting earth for a period of time, that means that we are Aliens living in a place which isn’t ours, but we’re making of it our property. That reminds me of an article I read lately in:


Bubbles of the Multiverse


the chain reaction of events that allowed life to come about on this planet is remarkable, as are the things we have achieved. However I do believe we occupy an unimaginably small place in the universe, a universe which contains billions of other Earth-like planets – perhaps we often forget this and as such overestimate our uniqueness.


All there is left to say is the Multiverse Theory, based on eternal inflation, leaves us feeling all that much tinier than before. We may no longer be just one tiny planet in a galaxy with thousands of planets, in a universe with billions of other galaxies – we could now be merely a bubble of a universe in a sea of many other bubbles. I hope this leaves you with the feeling that mankind is not special as it believes itself to be – we just happened to exist in a smidgen that allowed our particular form of consciousness to exist and with the lack of competition reaching our tiny corner we proclaim ourselves remarkable.


I really enjoyed reading these two quotes, some of us proclaim to be superior to others just because they have, they achieved, they acquired  something that others don’t have, so they lack of competition as well! How foolish to we would be if we were visited by super intelligent Aliens (they don’t have to be bad to be Alliens). There is a book called The visitors by Clifford Simak which gives a good example of what Aliens might be. Personally I think that Earth would have been better ruled if we had Aliens instead of politicians to rule us.

So are we Human beings living on Earth or Aliens?

What about … #39

If we look back half a century and backwards, we would notice that life was in a way, easier and longer than it is now. It seems that new technologies, instead of helping us to achieve things more quickly and easily, it steals time from us. New technologies is what is keeping us away from our lives. It’s not that I’m against new technologies on the contrary!

I’m just saying that these improvements are keeping us distracted from our families, from time, devotion, sleeping, …. for instance in the 18th century, when a blacksmith finished his work or project, he had time to talk with his friends or to go home early if he wanted to. Now with globalization, the blacksmith has his own project plus hundreds or thousands of other tasks to get done before due time. So he no longer has time to take enough care of his family or himself. Another example, a kid uses his smartphone going to school and returning home. When he arrives, he goes to his computer and chat with his friends online, then he makes his homework or he plays a video game sometimes online sometimes not. When super is ready, he eats quickly because he invited a neighbor to play with PlayStation with him. His mom is not so different, she was on the phone with a friend most of the afternoon, then she’ll make a video for YouTube. His father? Well he’s busy with his business project which must be ready for the next presentation.

Fortunately not every family is this crazy, but you know that this happens every day everywhere in the world.

When we go to bed at night, we may notice that the day lasted just a few hours and we didn’t have enough time to do all the things we needed to do. Where did the time go? Why is the day shorter than a century ago? Some people might say ” No, I’ve got plenty of time to do whatever I want. Today I went fishing, the day is still 12h long” probably because they still live in an ancient way, no phones, no internet, no computer, that’s good but that person misses the opportunity to learn new thing, to buy new things, to get to know new people, or even to do good deeds. Everything is good in moderation, that’s the key for “time”. Today is a day that some people call all saints day, it is to visit our beloved departed people. Does that mean that we should forget them the other 364 day of the year? Why should we visit them especially this day? Don’t they deserve to be visited every day, every Monday or every Friday? Life is short we shouldn’t waste it or share it with cool devices all the time.


What about … #38

Hello everyone, today I’ll do my best to explain the properties of consciousness – according to me.

This post is related to these pages

Seeing is Believing

Conscious thought and fuzzy reality
From which I’ll borrow some sentences.

I’ve read both of them several times to get a full understanding on the topic (I know, I’m not really smart).

To begin with, what it is to be conscious?

The state of being aware of and responsive to one’s surroundings.
Human beings and animals are among very few things which are responsive to one’s surroundings. We could say that automatic doors are responsive, car alarms as well, but we can’t call that consciousness can we? Sensors were built just to detect “anomalies”, while animals are responsive according to the degree of their intelligence, for instance you can’t pretend to find a bird saying to himself “No I won’t go near that cheese because it’s a mouse trap!” but you may see it in monkeys maybe.

Early ideas of consciousness can be traced very far back in history; it is a very human question to ponder. It is one that has troubled the minds of great thinkers for a very long time. Descartes was convinced that the human body and human consciousness were two separable items; the first a material body the second an immaterial item (if an item can indeed ever be immaterial).

Now for there first part to understand consciousness, we need to look into the non-observable domain. We’re aware that everything in the universe is made of electron, protons and neutrons but that’s not all, there are tinier things called quarks and even more tiny called bosons, unfortunately in science proof is very important, to call “it” a fact otherwise it will be just a theory.

Well, the most pertinent school of thought in philosophy of science is called Entity Realism. We cannot see quarks directly however what we can see is the effects they have on larger entities. The proponent of Entity Realism, Ian Hacking, reasons along these lines. He argues that we understand the properties of the electrons and even though we cannot see them we can change variables in the system to manipulate their behaviour in order to produce effects on larger observables which we can can see. Now this manipulation of the unobservable entities and their produced effects is though to be proof enough of their existence. As long as we can manipulate and intervene on scientific entities in a laboratory to create phenomena we expect, we are justified to believe in their existence as the causal entities at work in the observed effects.

That’s the problem why lots of scientists are atheists, if they can’t “manipulate” God or can’t see some proof of him, than he doesn’t exist. The answer lies here: We cannot see quarks directly however what we can see is the effects they have on larger entities.

Actually we can see the effects God has on small and large entities.

The Thunder 13 3-4

And it is He who spread the earth, and placed in it mountains and rivers. And He placed in it two kinds of every fruit. He causes the night to overlap the day. In that are signs for people who reflect. On earth are adjacent terrains, and gardens of vines, and crops, and date-palms, from the same root or from distinct roots, irrigated with the same water. We make some taste better than others. In that are proofs for people who reason.

The Bees 16 11-17

And He produces for you grains with it, and olives, and date-palms, and grapes, and all kinds of fruits. Surely in that is a sign for people who think. And He regulated for you the night and the day; and the sun, and the moon, and the stars are disposed by His command. Surely in that are signs for people who ponder.

And whatsoever He created for you on earth is of diverse colors. Surely in that is a sign for people who are mindful. And it is He who made the sea to serve you, that you may eat from it tender meat, and extract from it ornaments that you wear. And you see the ships plowing through it, as you seek His bounties, so that you may give thanks. And he cast mountains on the earth, lest it shifts with you; and rivers, and roads, so that you may be guided. And landmarks. And by the stars they guide themselves. Is He who creates like him who does not create? Will you not take a lesson?

The winds that scatter 51 20-25

And of His signs is that He created you from dust; and behold, you become humans spreading out. And of His signs is that He created for you mates from among yourselves, so that you may find tranquility in them; and He planted love and compassion between you. In this are signs for people who reflect. And of His signs is the creation of the heavens and the earth, and the diversity of your languages and colors. In this are signs for those who know. And of His signs are your sleep by night and day, and your pursuit of His bounty. In this are signs for people who listen. And of His signs is that He shows you the lightning, causing fear and hope. And He brings down water from the sky, and with it He revives the earth after it was dead. In this are signs for people who understand. And of His signs is that the heaven and the earth stand at His disposal. And then, when He calls you out of the earth, you will emerge at once.
The question is: why should the independent existence of objects rely on what we can see with our tiny eyeballs or what we can manipulate with our level of technology. If our technology so increases to be able to manipulate a quark, was the quark non-existent before? I think not. This reminds me of a similar philosophical line which equally gets on my grind ‘if a tree falls in a forest and no-one is around to hear it, does it still make a sound?’ Of course it does, unless you believe the laws of nature are entirely dependent upon the perception of a particular species living on one planet.

Now to get back on the topic, is there a specific location for consciousness ? Some people believe that it is stored in the brain “The consensus is that consciousness comes from the brain” but they haven’t found real evidence of it. Well someone I know thinks that it is a part of our soul (Personally I think that’s the best theory so far). I know that some people don’t believe in spirits or souls but fortunately most of us do. Each and everyone of us has a soul with which he lives till he dies, that is what the Bible says in :

Matthew 10:28

And do not fear those who kill the body but cannot kill the soul. Rather fear him who can destroy both soul and body in hell.

Ecclesiastes 12:7

And the dust returns to the earth as it was, and the spirit returns to God who gave it.

Genesis 2:7

Then the Lord God formed the man of dust from the ground and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, and the man became a living creature.

And the Quran:

The Groups 39: 42

God takes the souls at the time of their death, and those that die not during their sleep; then He withholds those on whom He has passed the decree of death and sends the others back till an appointed term; most surely there are signs in this for a people who reflect.

The Prostration 32: 7-9

(It is He) Who made good everything that He has created, and He began the creation of man from dust. Then He made his progeny of an extract of water held in light estimation. Then He made him complete and breathed into him of His spirit, and made for you the ears and the eyes and the hearts; little is it that you give thanks.

The Journey by Night 17: 85

And they ask you about the soul. Say: The soul is one of the commands of my Lord, and you are not given aught of knowledge but a little.

I think that the best approach is to say that our soul has a connection with our brain in an unknown way. Descartes said that the human body and human consciousness were two separable items, and that is precisely the thing.

Suggesting that perhaps what is responsible for our consciousness is processes which take place within neurons themselves rather than the interactions between neurons which is the conventional view.
Suggesting that the soul has connections with the brain in the quantum level, that may be the case. Now the brain will continue to run for 10 to 20 seconds after death but it remains conscious for about 3 minutes

eventually the activity will cease and the person will think no more; so what actually happens to it? If we are to take the approach that these things are stored via quantum mechanical processes then we must look to the idea that the information within the brain dissipates and is involved in irreversible reactions where it is lost from and the stored information is unwound into an unusable format

The fact that the brain remains conscious for 3 minutes makes me think that, that may be the time when we’ll be able to see our own life flashing before our eyes. Unfortunately we have very little knowledge about the soul but one thing for sure, the soul lives the body when the brain dies as well. That means that both are connected.

Some people asks themselves that if consciousness is in the quantum domain, are we real at all? aren’t we just a simulation?
That is a big question as well because some people believe that we’re not living our actual lives, this is just a memory. For example we’re already dead, we’re in our day of judgment and we’ve asked to be shown episodes of our lives for a reason or another – personally I don’t believe in this theory.

This author who has written lots of free downloadable scientific books, believe in it. According to him we could be living this life as if we were in a dream. Dreams are real when we’re dreaming them aren’t they? So for God, everything has already ended.


Because time does not exist in the sight of God, all things happen in a single moment, that is in the “present”. All events which we think of as past and future are present to God; in His sight everything is much more clear and vital than we can perceive. For example, at this moment Jonah (pbuh) is being cast into the sea as a result of the drawing of lots. At this moment Mary is speaking with Gabriel; Jesus (pbuh) is being born. At this moment Noah (pbuh) is driving the first nail into the ark and leaving the ark with his family at the place God chose for them.

This is just an extract of a book called Matter The Other Name for Illusion.

If some people don’t believe in something which can’t be proved, it doesn’t mean it doesn’t exist. But God knows best.