Where did your morals come from!? Mansur Vs Atheist Girl (Speakers Corner)
Vložit
- čas přidán 14. 06. 2024
- #Scdawahchannel #Speakerscorner
Donate and help build a masjid in Norway and a house for you in Jannah www.saveiman.com/en?affiliate...
HELP SHARE
SCDAWAH URDU CHANNEL - / @scdawahurduchannel
SCDAWAH ARABIC CHANNEL -
/ majidyat
SCDAWAH NUSANTARA - / @scdawahindonesia
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
For sponsorship opportunities contact us at SCDawah@gmail.com
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
*Request to all to please not abuse or swear in comments, Dawah is to invite not to insult. Jazak Allah Khair
*If you see any inappropriate Ads please report them to us at Scdawah@gmail.com so they can be banned Jazak Allah Khair*
Disclaimer: The views and opinions of partakers in these debates and videos in no way represent the views of SCDawah but are a representation of what takes place at speakers Corner.
*LIKE AND SHARE*
*DONATE* to support the Norway Masjid and help spread the dawah, LINK IN DESCRIPTION*
Keep spreading the light of truth, May Almighty give you more and more success here and in the world after, Ameen
Yess ...mansur go go go
So much confidence in her ignorance!
Same could be said for Mansur.
@@Moltenstardeath I didn't hear anything irrational from him. Perhaps you can enlighten.
@@ShoaibAhmedNZ He makes a ton of assertions about the creation of the universe and the cosmology of the afterlife but doesn't present any evidence to back up these fantastical claims.
Yogan the Thamby....where are you.....😂😂😂
👌🏻👍🏻
Is it old video?
i can understand people turning away from religion because somewhere along the line the interpretation was used wrongly and practiced for far too long so when people today see those practices, its literal definition of atrocities. Things that were committed that people never typically attribute to being godly. Sati tradition was a great example or stoning of women or burning them at stakes and more brutal atrocities committed against men and women or humanity itself. The biggest problem with these things committed in the name of religion is, it was committed by humans when humans have no place to do so. "those of you who are free of sins cast the first stone" If thats the message of the religion which even makes logical sense proving that the message actually can be from god as consciousness does, then its not the religion thats wrong, its the people who do what theyre not worthy of just in the name of religion and using gods name in vain, which is the biggest sin of them all and that makes logical sense too.
Of she looks at a mirror and doesn't think God created her, i don't know what to say other than she is the perfect proof of the existence of God
Juwairiyah (radhi Allaahu anha) reported that one day the Prophet, peace be upon him, left her apartment in the morning as she was busy observing her dawn prayer in her place of worship. He came back in the forenoon and she was still sitting there. The Prophet, peace be upon him, said to her, “You have been in the same place since I left you?” She said, “Yes.” Thereupon the Prophet, peace be upon him, said, “I recited four words three times after I left you and if these were to be weighed against what you have recited since morning these would outweigh them, and these words are:
سُبْحـانَ اللهِ وَبِحَمْـدِهِ عَدَدَ خَلْـقِه ، وَرِضـا نَفْسِـه ، وَزِنَـةَ عَـرْشِـه ، وَمِـدادَ كَلِمـاتِـه
Subhaanallaahi wa bihamdihi: ‘Adada khalqihi wa ridhaa nafsihi, wa zinata ‘arshihi wa midaada kalimaatihi.
Glory is to Allaah and praise is to Him, by the multitude of his creation, by His Pleasure, by the weight of His Throne, and by the extent of His Words (Recite 3 times in Arabic)
Muslim 4/2090
Ya Muqallib al-quloob thabbit qalbi 'ala deenik
يَا مُقَلِّبَ الْقُلُوبِ ثَبِّتْ قَلْبِى عَلَى دِينِكَ
“O Controller of hearts, make my heart firm in Your religion.”
the Prophet (saas) said: "There is no Muslim - or no person, or slave (of Allah) - who says, in the morning and evening: '
Radaytu billahi Rabban wa bil-Islami dinan wa bi Muhammadin
رَضِيتُ بِاللَّهِ رَبًّا وَبِالإِسْلاَمِ دِينًا وَبِمُحَمَّدٍ نَبِيًّا
(I am content with Allah as my Lord, Islam as my religion and Muhammad as my Prophet),' but he will have a promise from Allah to make him pleased on the Day of Resurrection.
Reading the comments of 'geniouses', I want to say don't sit on your chair and just comment BS. If you think you have something worth, go have a debate. Or can you only comment?
What a misinformed dude regarding sati Partha, the women used to self immolate because of Muslim invaders because they knew what would happen to them when their husband dies, in mass self immolation we used to call it Johar. It was common among north west because of invasions , later the missionary under British rule wrote a lot of atrocity literature to justify their actions just like they do to the native Indians if America. Please have informed knowledge it was not a forced practice and was not a norm at all 😅.
1. She gets interupted a lot by surrounding muslims. He pretty much never gets interupted. This is unfair, because it creates a pressure, that only one party is exposed to. Also this one party will not be able to verbalise their thoughts completely. This is very scummy behaviour.
2. Where do morals come from for wolves? How does a wolf know, that it is not supposed to eat other wolves, but allowed to eat sheep? Does god speak to wolves? If yes, proof it. If no, how does the wolf know?
3. Human morals do not have to come from a god. Even without any god, there would have been an evolution of the way humans live together in a society. They certainly did for literal hundreds of thousands of years before any of the abrahamic gods or any other gods for that matter were a thing. How did they do it? How did someone from two hundred thousand years ago know, that they are not supposed to eat their sibling? How did someone from an unconnected tribe during the last two thousand years know about morals? And why do all of these people, who never ever were in contact with any god, in whatever way, share many of our morals, if our morals came from god, but they never knew about any god?
4. What we call "the creator" must not have no beginning. There are scenarios in which there would have been a beginning, but we as humans simply would not be able to know or even understand if we knew. A goldfish for example has no idea about the factory, in which its aquarium was produced. It does not know about water treatment or how a tap works. How did the plants get into the tank? How did itself get into the plant? The goldfish has no idea and even if you were to tell it, it would never be able to understand or, if it could understand you, process what you were talking about.
5. Why must a god be unique and perfect and eternal and all those buzzwords, that we humans perceive as the pinnacle of existence? A god could certainly have a beginning, just as a human has a beginning, but the goldfish doesn't know. A god could certainly be an asshole (even literally for all we know), but too complex for us to understand, while other gods say "what an asshole". And what even is perfection? Is a pool billiard ball perfectly round and smooth? What tools are you using to determine that and how far do you zoom in? What is your wiggle room in what is perfect? What if plate tectonics, a super nova or the end of the universe are mistakes, but we just see them as that this is how it is supposed to be? Maybe it is not, but the creator's work simply is not flawless.
6. There could be more than one god, just like a child has more than one parent. For the kid the parents pretty much are god-like, yet there are two of them, that sometimes have contradicting wants, but still there is only one reality, only one thing that will become reality. How is it possible, that two entities want two different things, yet only one will become true? And why should this not apply to any gods? If a god is all powerful and all knowing, why would it not be able to agree? There is, as an example, no "true" colour for a car. It is based on opinion, on ones liking. How do two gods agree on which colour a car should have?
None of my questions will be answered.
Thanks for coming to my TED talk.
Firstly having a crowd around you is normal in speakers corner. Brother Mansur has been in many situations were he alone is surrounded by christians and is constantly being interrupted by yellling and hollering yet is still able to articulate his points clearly. If you cant take this kind of crowd you shouldnt go to speakers corner in the first place.
Secondly, wolves are not "moral". Most animals act in a way to ensure the continuity of their species. If eating each other meant their species will continue to thrive they would probably do it. In fact alot of animals do eat their weak children to as it would "cost" more to raise them then to eat them. It has nothing to do with morality.
Drawing from the second point and also getting to the third, by extension humans should also have the "survival of the fittest" instinct assuming you believe in evolution. However we know that through archaeological discoveries early humans had healed serious bone fractures which displayed empathy for tribesmen, contradictory to the survival of the fittest model. Now we ask how all of these animal instincts for survival, human morality and empathy seem to have come about? The simple answer is God has created the animals and humans with these traits. If you dont believe in God then there is no way to "prove" anything to you. So i will hand proving God to you over to a man who died a thousand years ago.
your 4th 5th and 6th point were already answered 1000 years ago by Avicenna or Ibn Sina. The Proof of the Truthful by Ibn Sina answers all 3 points that you have brought up
4) Why God must have no beginning
5) Why God is "unique and perfect and eternal"
6) Why there can only be one God
Assuming you are searching for the truth i hope the answers i have provided are adequate. While the points I have brought up may not be up to your liking, The Proof of the Truthful by Ibn Sina will surely answer your last 3 points in a much better manner than I can and i hope you go and do your research on it. If you still choose to remain ignorant and ignore what i have sent, theres nothing i can do to convince you.
The points you have made show that you have no basic knowledge of the foundations and doctrines of Islam and seem to be coming from a general theist vs atheist perspective
(which is why i answered in a general instead of islamic way), which makes it weird that you decided to comment on an islamic channel. I implore you to do more research on the doctrines and teachings of islam before making such comments. Once you have researched on The Proof of the Truthful by Ibn Sina and established that God does exist, you should look into islam to teach you your purpose on earth and how to worship the One Creator.
I pray that God guides you to the truth.
Hello @@thetoastedgibus and thank you for your answer!
I do indeed come from a general theist vs atheist perspective, because to prove that a god, whoever it might be, is in fact a or even the god, it has to be proven first, that there is a god at all. After it has been proven, we can talk about what is that god, what makes it, how it behaves etc. And this brings me to my first criticism of your post: "The Proof of the Truthful" does not convince me, that the necessary existent - on which I do agree, that there has to be a start to the chain, but simply because I as a human or probably even we as humans can not comprehend infinity and are constantly searching for the root cause, the source, the start of it all, and will never be satisfied by "it just goes on and on" - is equal to god. My biggest objection, that I can come up with after reading Ibn Sina's "proof" for the first time, is, that if god is equal to the necessary existent entity and if god is omnipotent, omnipresent, omniscient, and omnibenelovent, then god depends on those characteristics and therefore is not the necessary existent entity, because that one does not depend on anything.
My second criticism would be, that you seem to criticise me for commenting on an islamic channel, when I seem to come from a more general perspective. The reason why I wrote my comment on an islamic channel, is not that it is an islamic channel. The title of the video is about morals and it got me interested. The first thing, that came to my mind after watching the video, was, what I wrote as my very first point. This was what made me comment in the first place. I just kept on writing as I rewatched the video, coming up with questions, that I felt were not answered.
Also, on a third note, I do not "choose" to remain ignorant, which in itself is a very rude assumption. You simply do not convince me. You might believe, that telling me about Ibn Sina's "proof" will convince me, because it convices you, I assume, but it just does not. It is also not a choice. I can not choose to know, believe, be aware of etc. I either do or I do not.
Coming back to the wolves, it also does not convince me, when you claim, that wolves not eating each other has nothing to do with morality, since it certainly has something to do with morality, when we humans to not eat each other. This begs two questions. First, what makes the difference? Second, if our morals truly come from god, then there should be proof, that we humans showed immoral behaviour, i. e. eating each other, before god spoke to us. Show me.
Adding to this, if we, humans and animals, were simply created with the traits of moral behaviour, how is there immoral behaviour? Why do some animals, as you said, eat their children, if it "costs" them too much to keep them alive, thus behaving immoral, when you also claim, that animals have been created as moral beings?
As a last point, I would like to comment on your view on the survival of the fittest model. Yes, for the strongest individual to survive it would be beneficial to get rid of competition, so one can have more ressources for themself, but what if the best strategy for survival, even on an individual basis, is the survivability of the group, therefore making empathy a valid survival strategy and not contradicting the survival of the fittest model?
Have a great day and thank you again for you long post!
@@moenchone I want to start off by apologising if I came off as rude and confrontational, that was not my intention. I usually reply to christians not atheists and christians always leave hate comments on muslim posts be it on instagram or youtube. When I answer their questions and i present them with evidences against their own religion they start going off tangent and actually choose to remain ignorant. This is why i have developed a bad habit of assuming all comments are from people who refuse to learn. I should not have assumed you were such a person. When i talked about ignorance i meant actually taking the time to research what i had brought forth instead of ignoring it and attacking me with another point like many christians do. I decided to reply to you because you said none of your questions would be answered and it seemed like you took time out of your day to bring forth your points and it would be a waste if no one had replied to you.
On your first point i am assuming this is a critique of the ontological argument, which posits that God's existence is a necessary condition of its existence. The argument you provided is trying to show that God's existence is not necessary, as it depends on external characteristics from what i gather.
However, this argument does not necessarily disprove Ibn Sina's concept of necessary existence. In Ibn Sina's view, God's omnipotence, omniscience, and omnibenelovence is a direct consequence of God's necessary existence. If God's existence is necessary, then God must be able to sustain its own existence and create its own effects, without dependence on external factors. These attributes are not seen as external qualities added to God's essence but are rather seen as necessary implications of God's necessary existence.
On your point on the wolves, humans do eat each other, even till today. One example of this is the Korowai people. I do not claim that animals are created as moral beings rather are created in a way that ensures the survival of their species with the exception of humans. I agree that the points i made about empathy are weak and what you are saying is true. However, humans do exhibit altruistic behaviors, like helping others at personal cost, which contradicts the self-interest driving the survival of the fittest model. While you can say perhaps on a grander scale such behaviours do in fact help drive humanity forward, it is impossible to prove. Many have proposed the idea of eugenics as a way to make humanity stronger, yet we do not see it being practiced on a grand scale today. This shows that humans now at least seem to have moved away from this inate instinct for whatever reason.
Ending this off you asked if humans exhibited immoral behaviour before contact with God. Islamically we believe that islam started with Adam, the first human. We know from the story of Cain and Abel that despite knowing God, Cain still acted immorally by deciding to kill Abel. Imagine how he would behaved if he didnt even know God. Obviously now with our advanced societies atheists and people of differing beliefs can base their morality on the societies and cultures around them. However this is merely subjective morality. What we deemed as moral 200 years ago may not be moral now. We need someone outside of humanity to determine objective morality, and who best to do that than our Creator who knows us better than ourselves.
I apologise if i missed any points or am not up to mark. I am very busy and am unable to articulate my thoughts as well and have tried to give a summarised version of my reply. Its hard to condense Ibn Sinas works into a few sentences and i may not have done his work justice with my reply. It is such a breath of fresh air that someone has finally responded to my points one by one instead of attacking me or my religion and i hope more people can be like you. i thank you from the bottom of my heart for being civil and understanding despite believing that i was being critical of you. I hope you have a great day as well.
yes confident non muslim, lets watch it till finish
Are this muslim soo good people no they will take something not theirs great lies
Now say it...."I hate Islam"...come on...don't be coward...
Muslim not allowed to jokes about hinduism so....😊
"Where did your morals come from?" They didn't come from the koran that's for sure.
Well actually they did as all morals came from the creator but do tell what’s a bad moral from the Quran? Seeing as you read it right?
Your mother's moral comes from the Eziekiel 23 The Two Adulterous Sisters...you should be proud...its a verse from the Holy Bible...word of God...cheers!
Bible does not have morals surely sleeping with daughters left right and center that is bible
@@darkhorsecloud2421 The creator is a natural creator, not a supernatural creator. And morals come from the harm principle, not a god.
@@scottholder4431 so your morals come from the harm principle? So your ok with things as long as they don’t harm anyone is that what you’re saying?
In india they have seen 100 of mohd come n gone only this india convert talk tooo much
This poki should must know how things are in pokistan what they do to women now😂😂😂😂😂
Eh Thamby.....pun........dek....lah deh...
Sati, an obsolete Hindu practice of widows burning themselves alive-willing or unwilling-on the funeral pyres of their husbands
He's actually Bangladeshi . I can only grieve on your ignorance and racism
Morals come from the harm principle, not a god. You don't need a god to tell you that stealing is wrong. Do you want to live in a society where it's ok for someone to steal your possessions? If not, then you just learned that stealing is wrong without a god. Simple as that!
So if society decides that stealing is ok cos it helps the person and his family who is stealing then its ok?
@@M.M1997 Answer my question that you avoided. Do you want to live in a society where it's ok for someone to steal your possessions?
@@M.M1997 I know the answer, Im just trying to see if you are being honest or are you trolling.
No , noone wants to live in that
@@M.M1997 Well you just learned that stealing is wrong without a god. You just proved god isn't needed.
This fake abdul 😂😂😂😂
Aren't jokes suppose to be funny.
....but i can see you are a very authentic Thamby....eh padiapah lah deh....Johny Liver.....MGR?
@@josantai2691 ok
@@josantai2691 mohd gulam rahim MGR 😄😄😄😄😄
@@josantai2691 ya mgr Mohd gulam rahim MGR 😂😂😂😂😂😂