As I expected, the self-contradictory approach: you accept your god just "exists" but consider it illogic that life was created "out of nothing".<quoted text>
1. Islam is purely based on intelligence to start with unlike atheism which has no logic at all.
.....it is scienticly accespted that nothing can be created from nothing but rather there must always a cause of its existance...and so to say that the life was created out of nothing has no logic .
(of course, science does not say life was created "out of nothing")
And why would "god" be an acceptable explanation? As I already noted, it just moves the question further: who created god? And if god can just exist, why even come with the god hypothesis, since you already accepted something can just exist?<quoted text>
..something that the Quran consantrates the mind of the people and leading them to use their intelect saying:
...."Or were they created by nothing, or were they the creators [of themselves]?"
As I said already that nothing is created out of nothing and we could not created ourselves upon which we should reflect and search the cause of our creation.
"might" is the right word. In science we use the word "might" for explanations that we consider highly ulikely. It is indeed unlikely that this is an explanation for my lack of belief. After all, I can easily *make* a religion that suits my worldy desires and involves the belief in some kind of deity. Many people have done so.<quoted text>
2. It might be that in reality there is explanation for everithing but the explanation opposes your worldly desires and so you don't want to accept it.....making the only reason that you can't believe in something you don't see or can't touch.
Not quite. For example, regardless of his remarkable intelligence, he didn't want to accept that *his own ideas* invariably led to quantum mechanics, and the uncertainty principle. Because he stuck to his unproven belief that everything was causal, he could not accept what was shown to be a better description of nature.<quoted text>
Indeed there are many evidence of the existance of the Creator of the heavens and the earth but these can be only relelazed throgh reflection.
Albert Einstein was the scientist that all the scentists look to.
Actually, that would be a lie. Einstein noted quite clearly that "It was, of course, a lie what you read about my religious convictions, a lie which is being systematically repeated. I do not believe in a personal God and I have never denied this but have expressed it clearly. If something is in me which can be called religious then it is the unbounded admiration for the structure of the world so far as our science can reveal it."<quoted text>
He was a person who studied the creation and who reflected upon it. I am not claiming he agreed with Islam but without doubt he believed that due to the perfect harmony of the universe there must be a Wise Creator.
(March 24, 1954)
Earlier he had already said "My position concerning God is that of an agnostic. I am convinced that a vivid consciousness of the primary importance of moral principles for the betterment and ennoblement of life does not need the idea of a law-giver, especially a law-giver who works on the basis of reward and punishment." (1950).
Both make it clear he did not believe in a sentient creator. Since you use him to make a point, I assume you will now give up your religion, since you believe he is such a worthy person to refer to in terms of religion. However, knowing how religious zealots react to contrary information, you are likely to just dismiss Einstein from now on, since you find out he actually contradicts your beliefs.