I am atheist, I am agnostic, then..

[jkhan]

Laws of physics... Can anyone challenge against laws of physics? Can anyone create a false theory of laws of physics... It's not my question.. keep reading..
Those who claim I am an atheist, I am an agnostic, then answer this profound question and no one ever could respond to it, even you put your life earned money to bet on it, you will prevail..
Is there anything called a language in the entire Earth other than you hear sounds shaped to pronounce words? We, human beings have languages, thus we communicate.. Does any other creature that we have seen on this Earth speak a language that is audible in our ears? No, and we hear only sounds of animals and not language/s..
So, this Earth we seen is languageless unless humans speak the audible languages.. (Note: All creatures may be communicating but we can't consider them to be language/s, simply because we don't HEAR).. At the same time, every creature can HEAR our LANGUAGE/s...
Let me present you the QUESTION... Will a baby ever speak any language if the baby never hears a single audible word of a language? NO WAY.. laws of physics ... Keep your newborn in the jungle where the baby can only hear sounds of animals and birds.. Would the baby speak a language? Leave the language aside, it won't even speak a single meaningful word.. I bet you on that.. That's a written truth.. Then how did Mankind speak language/s after evolving as humans? As you are atheists and agnostic, we are evolved, right.. So, how did language/s evolved while no language was there in the fist place?
Did someone teach who already speaks language? Answer is in the Quran..
The Divine taught Adam i.e. first Mankind, not a single person but all mankind with its partners... The Divine created in pairs all mankind and that is Adam.. from them spread the humanity.. (if you think Adam is single person, then it is a different topic)..
So, without hearing a language from another who already speaks a language, one cannot speak a language or even a word.. Mouth, our lips shapes up while hearing a word only to pronounce it and the mouth doesn't create on its own without hearing.. without hearing mouth is with zero words..
So, tell me those who claim, I am atheist or agnostic, how did people speak? Do you want to apply miraculously? That's something that never happen.. Or you want to say, somehow with time they developed a language. prove if that is an option. criteria is .. Will a baby ever speak any language if the baby never hears a single audible word of a language? If you are not happy with a baby, then make it an adult, would any adult speak a language if it never hears a language? Through a language, another language can get birth with time, but NOT from NOTHING..
You are denying your Creator.. Answer it or wake up..

[Wakas]

I ran your post through chat gpt:

Here's a concise summary of that forum post:

The author argues that language could not have naturally evolved because a child raised without hearing spoken language would never develop speech, implying that humanity's first language must have been divinely taught (as stated in the Qur'an), and challenges atheists and agnostics to explain language's origin without invoking a Creator.


###
I then asked if it was a strong argument and how you would counter:

###

It's not a strong argument, because it confuses **how languages are learned by individuals** with **how language evolved in humans as a species**. Here's why, and how you could counter it:

---

### Key Weaknesses:

1. **Ontogeny ≠ Phylogeny**

   * The author assumes that because a baby won't learn to speak without exposure to language, humans as a species couldn't have developed language without divine teaching.
   * This is a false equivalence: an individual baby not learning language doesn't tell us how early humans gradually developed communication systems over generations.

2. **Language Evolution Evidence**

   * Linguistics, anthropology, and neuroscience show that language likely evolved **gradually**:

     * Early humans and hominins had vocalizations, gestures, and proto-languages that became more complex over time.
     * Genetic evidence (like the FOXP2 gene) suggests humans evolved unique capacities for speech.
     * Archaeological findings (symbolic tools, cave art) show cultural evolution that supports language development.

3. **Animals and Communication**

   * While animals don't have human-style speech, they do have complex communication systems (birdsong, dolphin whistles, primate calls), showing that meaningful signals can emerge naturally.

4. **False Dichotomy**

   * The author frames it as "divine teaching vs. miraculous chance," ignoring natural selection and cultural evolution as a third option.

---

### Counter-Argument in One Paragraph:

A baby raised in isolation won't learn to speak, but that's irrelevant to language evolution because species-wide language development happens across many generations, not in one lifetime. Early humans likely used gestures, vocalizations, and social learning, which slowly evolved into structured language, just as other animals' communication systems evolved naturally. Genetics, archaeology, and cognitive science provide evidence for a gradual emergence of language capacity, without requiring an initial "teacher." The fact that isolated children don't spontaneously invent full language doesn't disprove evolutionary origins—rather, it shows that cultural transmission is essential, which fits perfectly with an evolutionary model of language development.

---

####
have you got a stronger argument for God using language or especially information, they say it cannot be created nor destroyed, or dna is information, knowledge from a creator perhaps
####

That's a really interesting angle! If you want a stronger argument for God using **language or information**, you can frame it in a way that resonates with both scientific ideas and theology, without falling into easy counterarguments. Here's a polished version of that reasoning:

---

### Stronger "Information-Based" Argument for God

1. **Information as a Fundamental Reality**

   * In physics, information is considered **fundamental**—it can be transformed but not destroyed (as suggested by quantum information theory and Landauer's principle).
   * The universe appears to be **structured by information**—from the mathematical laws of physics to DNA's code-like sequences.

2. **DNA as Encoded Knowledge**

   * DNA carries highly organized instructions for building and sustaining life, resembling an advanced coding language.
   * Unlike random data, DNA's sequences contain **functional, goal-directed information** that guides development, repair, and reproduction.

3. **Analogy to Language**

   * Languages and codes don't appear spontaneously from chaos; they're created by minds with intent.
   * If we observe a meaningful code (like software), we infer a programmer. DNA's complexity and universality could point to a **Cosmic Mind** or Creator.

4. **Philosophical Implication**

   * If the universe is fundamentally informational, and information is never destroyed but only transformed, this aligns well with the concept of a timeless, intelligent source—a "Logos" or Divine Mind—from which all meaningful structure originates.

---

### Why This is Stronger

* It avoids the "baby in the jungle" analogy, which conflates personal learning with species evolution.
* It ties into **modern physics and information theory**, making it engaging for scientifically minded skeptics.
* It's harder to dismiss because it points to **information's abstract, immaterial nature**, which naturalism struggles to fully explain.

---

[jkhan]

Let me address this way...
How can AI ever speak unless AI is taught/programmed in the first place.. Two AIs speak to each other simply cus the one who created them, has programmed/taught them all words.. Can AI on their own learn any language unless they are programmed? Just for info.. lol

We, Humans are the real AIs created by the Divine.. Yes, we are AIs of the Divine.. The first Mankind/Adam was taught/programmed and given a brain, eyes, ears and a mouth... Only thing it was taught is language and right and wrong by the Divine.. and set them free.. Then they developed and spread and here we go, we are in the peak of our advancement... And We, being the AI of the Divine, have created our own AIs..
Are we better than the Divine? We may look like we are better than the Divine..
We created what the Divine never created.. The Divine never gave houses, we built houses to the sky... the Divine never made us fly, here we go, we fly in the sky, .. we make the hot room cold.. we have technologies that the Divine never made for us.. Are we better than the Divine? Most would say yes, cus we made the infrastructure in this natural world, then even forget the Divine created us or not..
Then we, humans made the AIs.. Boy they are faster than us.. when we type one page they would create for you a book.. list goes on.. Are the AIs better than Human who created them?
Let's put it this way..
Who is more knowledgeable and powerful, is it the Divine or Human? Simply, the Divine, He knows what human doesn't know. We are within the realm of created boundaries.. And the Divine doesn't teach everything to us, and when not taught, we never touch there..
Who is more knowledgeable and powerful, is it the Human or the AIs? AIs are within the parameters set for them.. They can't think beyond what human has already thought.. Cus, the program is set for them, and within that they bring all possible options, and choose the best out of it. But human, is not like that, Human still goes beyond what human has thought so far, i.e. what human has untouched, still human can go and reflect and human can dream of it.. Cus human still has that untrodden areas where it will go for sure, and when human reaches there only, AIs reach there, cus AI learns from Humans.. Would AI tell you the shape of the Earth beyond what human imagined or created about it..? When human increase its knowledge, AIs get new versions powerful than now..

Would the Divine learn from Humans? No..Cus He is the Creator of Humans i.e. the Divine's AI... Does the Divine ask questions at human using 'WHY'? Yes.. Does the Divine TEST human to know its strength and weakness? Yes.. Doesn't the human challenge the Divine? Does the Divine mind when Human go against Him? Does the Divine have the capacity to destroy human all together? Does the Divine need to know truth from Humans?
Who knows the best history, is it the Divine or the Human? Who knows the best history AIs or humans?
So to speak, if someone (AI or human) claim that an impossible action can be possible, the best way to challenge him is, to make it possible practically then speak for it.. No need theory..
The Divine could have created AIs, Adam/Mankind and leave them to learn the language/s on their own and needless to teach them to speak.. The creator of AIs could have done the same, let AIs learn to speak.. it won't happen.. Just because AI has its intelligent brain, it won't speak...
Had the Divine not taught Adam/Mankind.. Mankind can reflect still cus a brain is gifted.. Brain functions to reflect.. for instance, man can think 'I want to kill, I am hungry, I want to go, I want to sleep now, all his action and thoughts' but never will speak that in words. Thoughts will develop and there will be lots of thoughts in mind but without audible language.. Like a baby in its early stage, it hears all what we speak, but don't speak cus it did not develop to speak, but was hearing and recording in its brain and that's why suddenly when the mouth supported, it speaks whatever it learned and recorded from the day one..
Adam/Mankind was not created as baby.. But as an adult... How will it speak to Malaika if not taught.. Everything the Divine taught they learned like a baby learning.. Language is perfectly taught to Adam/Mankind... That's it, beyond it the Divine did not touch Adam/Mankind freewill.. Same, baby learned to speak since it hears lots of words in its environment, but baby's freewill is not taught by those words it hears daily.. It's a development from Baby's thought not from sounds recorded in brain.. You can't speak a word, by thinking and reflecting and by observing by eyes, if NO Sound is recorded in the brain in the first place.. Speech is totally depending on sound you hear, nothing more, nothing less..
Atheists know this, but they did not reflect on this..

[Wakas]

Just in case, i dont actually read your posts, too verbose, but here is a summary:

Humans are like the Divine's AI — just as AI can't speak or learn without being programmed by humans, humans couldn't speak without being taught by the Divine.

Language, knowledge, and thought require input; without being taught, even with a brain, speech doesn't develop. The Divine taught the first human (Adam), just as humans teach AI.

AI is limited by human programming; humans are limited by Divine design. The Divine knows all; humans and AI only know what they are taught.

Technological advancement doesn't make humans greater than the Divine — it just shows how far the Divine's creation (humans) can go.

Atheists overlook that even the ability to speak required a first teacher.

And an interesting verse:

27:82 At the right time, we will produce for them a creature, made of earthly materials, speaking to them, that the people of Our signs were not certain.


It's possible AI will reach a level to produce the world's first non-biased, ultra coherent, ultra cross-referenced, systematic, grammatical accurate/coherent translation of Quran.

It's not there yet. Currently it's very good at collab.