Asking (evolutionary) Atheists & Biologists?

Question 1- In biological mutations how did some species evolve with inter-dependency and some with in-dependency concerning nourishment of their offspring post-natal period?

Question 2- How did their instincts even align to observe the change of offspring needing nourishment? In other words how capable are random genetic mutations aided by natural selection to induce responsibilities to wean & care toward offspring?

Freewill and Determinism -does Determinism Shear Free will?

This work is designed exclusively for modern readers who are best at exerting to fight-out bias. Let me divulge a quick analogy before you, in that our likes & dislikes and their swapping positions in our consciousness are a good example to allude towards freewill & its realism, but a grandeur argument underpins this work to disqualify freewill in-compatibilism. This book ushers the Quranic narrative on the long standing philosophical subject of freewill & its in-compatibilism with determinism. In this book I have dealt with the subject thoroughly utilizing realism found in the Quran. And have highlighted traditional wrongs that did subtly slip in diluting the understanding of the subject among the adherents of Abrahamic faiths.
I have noticed philosophical subjects of this nature are popular amongst non-religious and often religious people are brought to present their apology. Which they have best done in the last century earning the prestigious title “the apologists”.

Atheism – The First Questions, what is the Source of this World?

One of the most wonderful books I have ever read is a book called “There is a God”, by Anthony Flew, who was a professor of philosophy at Oxford University. Anthony Flew was perhaps the most notorious atheist throughout the world. Through his work related to the philosophy and religion, he must have been responsible for converting tens or even hundreds of thousands to Atheism. However, in 2004, he turned the tables and astonished everyone when he wrote a book called ‘There is a God’, in which he declared that he now believes in the existence of God.

When you ask an atheist: ‘where did we come from?’ They merely answer: ‘We came into being by chance’. The word chance here is quite amusing really, because, not only did we not come by chance, but there is not a single thing in the world that came by chance.

Why is disbelief in God the biggest sin according to Islam?

I was once approached by someone who told me, ‘I am an atheist; I do not believe in God. But I am a very kind and good person. I volunteer in many charitable organizations, and I give to the poor; so, given all that, when I die, will I go to Hell? Is this the justice of you people – just because I don’t believe in God, I should enter Hell?’

An Atheist claim is that, he does all of his good deeds such as volunteering and giving to charity for the good of mankind, not in the hope of reaching Heaven, nor out of fear of going to Hell. So what is he complaining of, then? He should be pleased that he will not be going to heaven, and not be bothered if he is going to hell. After all, he is doing all of his good deeds for the sake of mankind, so he should feel secure in his knowledge of that and it should be sufficient for him.

Problem of Evil solved before Religion and God

We will begin asking how come a God under His prowess did allow evil to manifest? or how apologetically would anyone attempt to reconcile the coexistence of God and evil. Since middle ages, the ensuing theories by theists in favor of the omnibenevolent, omniscient and omnipotent God’s plausibility in the face of the evidential evil are clubbed under compilations known as ‘Theodicy’. Atheists have deemed these theories as unworthy defenses to logical arguments of the form modus Tollens and have since attained some leeway in professing theists as merely apologetic towards the paradox of problem of evil. In this pretext the problem of evil is driven to disqualify God by reflecting that God cannot exist because there is evil which does necessarily rule out His existence in their argument. In my opinion the problem of evil is theorized to refer to God condescendingly. In man’s anciently thought & carved philosophy of religion which now on documentation has ticked over 2500 years is a sort of philosophy which is concocted in downright ignorance from the knowledge of what God explains as truth in His revealed messages.
So then is it fair that man hijacks God’s understanding by capsuling Him in his own whims?