Why we should admit that the Qur'an is in conflict with modern science
Vložit
- čas přidán 28. 11. 2020
- I quote from The Quran and the Secular Mind: A Philosophy of Islam
by Dr Shabbir Akhtar.
www.amazon.co.uk/Quran-Secula...
For an intelligent discussion that asks the question: Does Science Point towards God or Atheism?
thehumblei.com/2016/07/29/sum...
As a Muslim I don't like to fit modern science In the Quran because science can be changed can be false
And btw this Channel is a hidden gem 👍keep up the great work Paul
Hi apuss
Totally agreed,
Scientific truth is relative while religious is absolute. Scientific knowledge or fact is derived from scientific research while religion is from divine revealation. Trying to fit religion and science is acceptable to some degree, but what if they contradict each other. It only makes impression among scientific community that religion only suppport those that fit its doctrine. Has religions lost its appeal among the people, so it needs to find proof from science to maintain its teaching?
Besides, scientific fact can change overtime include those that fit religion. So, when it changes, does religion need changing too?
Are you sure you are not apostate prophet?
@@rendiafriadi3260
"Scientific knowledge or fact is derived from scientific research while religion is from divine revelation."
The difference is that scientific theories can be corroborated by experiments and observation. Islam and Christianity are [only] claims or call it "intestable conjecture".
🤣🥔
My views on Islam have undergone serious revision since viewing your intelligent, balanced explanations and I’m considering acquiring a copy of The Qur’an - something that would have been unthinkable even a couple of months ago.
We hope that you will see the right path and convert to Islam.
Please do read it. It may change your entire fate. Do it for yourself. Download it for free from play store or app store. May god guide you and us to the right path.
I am very happy sister ☺️ to know atleast you are trying to find the right path ( only intellectuals do that and you are one) i assure you that reading the quran will be very helpful to you as it has helped me various times in different aspects of life. I pray for you to come to the family of islam
You have become more sympathetic to the view that women are deficient, that wives should under the prescribed conditions receive corporal punishment and taking the womenfolk of defeated foes as sex slaves is an acceptable practice which - under the oft lauded supremacy of objective morality - will remain true past, present and future? No, I thought not.
Its a difficult read, i would suggest picking one that has notes to the passages giving explanations as to what that meant 1500 years ago. It should help
Subhana Rabbi al A'laa. "This is the book for those who believe in the unseen!"
Technically blind people live in the unseen world.
and who is Subhana Rabbi?
@@SwiftWarrior07 it's not a person it's a statement which roughly means "praise be to the most high" and unseen doesn't just litterally mean unseen. It's closer to inaccessible with the senses.
@@UnknownSend3r ok! Thanks!
but which professional translated these texts?
@@SwiftWarrior07 what text ?
@@UnknownSend3r the religious books, short books etc
I feel this joke illustrates the two different perspectives:
Sherlock Holmes and Dr. Watson go on a camping trip. After a good dinner, they retire for the night, and go to sleep. Some hours later, Holmes wakes up and nudges his faithful friend.
"Watson, look up at the sky and tell me what you see."
"I see millions and millions of stars, Holmes," replies Watson.
"And what do you deduce from that?"
Watson ponders for a minute.
"Well, astronomically, it tells me that there are millions of galaxies and potentially billions of planets. Meteorologically, we will have a beautiful day tomorrow. Theologically, it tells me that God is all powerful, and that we are small and insignificant. What does it tell you, Holmes?"
"Watson, you bonehead! Someone's stolen our tent!"
Thank you for the laugh.
Brilliant
😄😄
👍🏼😁
Good one
the Quran is not a scientific book ... and it will never will ... the Quran as a whole is a guidance for humans to bear witness to the greatness of the One & Only God, Allah ... if humans wish to ... Al Quran touches a lot of things which are related to humans, such as science, history, trade, courtesy, warfare, inheritance etc. for humans to reflect, contemplate, act on etc. ... in my view the author is attempting to conceptualize, rationalize a physical form of Allah ... which is contrary to the islamic belief that Allah is inconceivable & has no similar attributes to humans or other beings ... Allah talks about his qualities in the Quran for humans to appreciate His Majesty ... it must also be understood, at least from my perspective & understanding & among other things, islam doesn't function by segregating faith & empirical judgement
I agree with Nor Aznan Abd Latif.
Yes it’s a book of signs not a book of science
A restriction of observation does not necessarily have to be posited as incompatibility. I may restrict myself from interacting with certain people yet that does not mean they are in any sort logically contradding my existence or me theirs.
I also believe that science doesn't "refuse" a supernatural world. It simply has "no business" with the super natural for as the latin word goes supernaturalis means "above nature" and science is all about nature.
I agree with the pseudo scientific readings of scripture, they should be dismissed.
Good one. Salaam
Exactly on point!
really it’s not the scripture that needs to be dismissed. It’s the translation that needs to be dismissed. It’s ludicrous how sometimes they translate word by word and sometimes, they make up a whole phrase unrelated to the translated text.
If I find a single contradiction in the Quran . I am out . No second chance. As a divine text it has to be 100% right all the time every time.
Lucky I can read the Quran in Arabic in its original version no mediocre tafseer.
I am a man of science I don’t believe in miracles unless the Quran tells me it happened then I consider it.
Is it you the same person who does have an twitter account with the same name and picture with black and white and know Ahmed Ijaz?
@@walidmakbouli259 i guess
Science changes all the time that's why we shouldn't rely on science when it comes to deeper matters like the unseen
That only partly true. True in a sense that science changes, but not in the sense that we should not rely on it, or how would the human race come to produce medecine for example
Right... Science changes all the time because the scientists are like the blinds and the elephant.... they describe the elephant according to which part of the elephant they touch..
@@ukaragen Precisely. But, they apply the same principle to their opinions on religion - that it should also be dynamic - whereas the religion claims to be complete. So, how would one encounter this conjecture?
@@najeegilani
The problem is, the blinds insist that elephant have to look like what they understand and denying the ALL SEING..
@@cervezaway7049 Ya science gives us lot of comfort in our lives but leave us with selfish, greedy and wildish behaviour.
By the way : The Qur'an 51:47 never say "we have the power to expand things". It rather say according to Sahih international translation and many majority of translations "And the heaven We constructed with strength, and indeed, We are [its] expander." and it is completely different from " we have the power to expand things", so be careful on translations please brother paul
spot on, I was shocked to see a person whom they present as scholar give rogue translation of quran. it discredit him totally
Quran- 64:1 Whatever is in the heavens and whatever is on the earth ˹constantly˺ glorifies Allah. The kingdom is His, and all praise is for Him. For He is Most Capable of everything.
@oneconcernedcan God “just” forgive all mankind?
@@jusimarwan do either you or "one concerned" have objectively verifiable evidence for the existence of a god?
What scientists believe is not neccesarily science.
word play. By what magic power do you know what "scientists believe?"
@@JoeHarkinsHimself Have you ever heard of theories.
@@shihabshihabi what is your definition of "theory?" Is it the same as the word "Theory" (with a capital letter) as in Gravitational Theory, Atomic Theory, Germ Theory, etc ?
Or is it the vernacular "theory" that means just an unproven idea? Or are you unaware there are two different meanings and uses of the word?
@@JoeHarkinsHimself Look it up in the dictionary.
@@shihabshihabi you are saying that you don't know?
8:55 Well, the author clearly misquoted the verse. In Quran 51:47 Allah says, "And the heaven We constructed with strength, and indeed, We are [its] expander." In this verse the word "was-sama'a" is specifically used to mention the heaven/universe, which is expanding. It's not at all ambiguous like the author claimed in his book.
The heaven is not the universe. Heaven is unseen.
@oneservant word for heavens in arabic can mean either space, sky or paradise, so it's still valid
Remember the Quran is the furqan, not science.
Unfortunately Prof Shabbir Akhtar arguments in spite of being rich in academic vocabulary are rather shallow. They revolve around the following three key points:-
1) Empirical science contradicts Quran. This is logically incorrect. To start with modern science can’t prove or disprove unseen objects. To contradict is to state the contrary which also requires empirical evidence that modern science can’t provide. Even worse. If a cell phone washes on a remote island where primitive people live and they start hearing people talk from the phone, Akhtar will be in the group that state the voices are coming only from the device and to prove it we can break it and the voices will stop. Only those with sharp mind will question that and assume there is more unseen in the story,
2) God is moving and controlling everything negating natural causes of causality. God has created the information and physical laws that govern everything, Akhtar if he walks into a kitchen where there is hot water boiling eggs won’t argue against his wife if she said I boiled eggs for you this morning by saying wait the hot water and thermodynamics were the reason why eggs are boiled not you!
3) Newton vs Einstein aka the Quran is deterministic while modern quantum mechanics follow probabilities - at least in the Copenhagen interpretation. If Akhtar was well versed in the Quran or quantum physics he wouldn’t have said this. It’s embarrassing even. God created humans as probabilities to do good or evil, it’s only when their actions are measured and judged that reality collapses and Thrown in Hell or sent to heavens. I found verses even talking about how awareness collapses reality in terms of light and it’s wave or particle behavior but that would be for a different audience. Almost all English interpretations of these verses in Surat Al Mulk 3-4 failed miserably in capturing the meanings. Akhtar is s Pakistani so his native is urdu, maybe relying on interpretation got tge best out of him.
At the end the Quran is not meant to be a scientific book, instead it encourages human to study and work hard, to build earth and keep learning. The more they learn the closer they are to God. It’s why we were created and had awareness n the first place otherwise heavens and earth would have been a very dull endeavor.
Am hooked on your series. Very intellectually stimulating. Every single analysis on your blog is a must listen by all those who seek truth.
By the way : The Qur'an 51:47 never say "we have the power to expand things". It rather say according to Sahih international translation "47. And the heaven We constructed with strength, and indeed, We are [its] expander." and it is completely different from " we have the power to expand things", so becarful on translations please.
Unfortunately Prof Shabbir Akhtar arguments in spite of being rich in academic vocabulary are rather shallow. They revolve around the following three key points:-
1) Empirical science contradicts Quran. This is logically incorrect. To start with modern science can’t prove or disprove unseen objects. To contradict is to state the contrary which also requires empirical evidence that modern science can’t provide. Even worse. If a cell phone washes on a remote island where primitive people live and they start hearing people talk from the phone, Akhtar will be in the group that state the voices are coming only from the device and to prove it we can break it and the voices will stop. Only those with sharp mind will question that and assume there is more unseen in the story,
2) God is moving and controlling everything negating natural causes of causality. God has created the information and physical laws that govern everything, Akhtar if he walks into a kitchen where there is hot water boiling eggs won’t argue against his wife if she said I boiled eggs for you this morning by saying wait the hot water and thermodynamics were the reason why eggs are boiled not you!
3) Newton vs Einstein aka the Quran is deterministic while modern quantum mechanics follow probabilities - at least in the Copenhagen interpretation. If Akhtar was well versed in the Quran or quantum physics he wouldn’t have said this. It’s embarrassing even. God created humans as probabilities to do good or evil, it’s only when their actions are measured and judged that reality collapses and Thrown in Hell or sent to heavens. I found verses even talking about how awareness collapses reality in terms of light and it’s wave or particle behavior but that would be for a different audience. Almost all English interpretations of these verses in Surat Al Mulk 3-4 failed miserably in capturing the meanings. Akhtar is s Pakistani so his native is urdu, maybe relying on interpretation got tge best out of him.
At the end the Quran is not meant to be a scientific book, instead it encourages human to study and work hard, to build earth and keep learning. The more they learn the closer they are to God. It’s why we were created and had awareness n the first place otherwise heavens and earth would have been a very dull endeavor.
We have built the heaven with might, and We it is Who make the vast extent (thereof).
- Pickthall
With power and skill did We construct the Firmament: for it is We Who create the vastness of space.
- Yusuf Ali
And the heaven We constructed with strength,1 and indeed, We are [its] expander.
- Saheeh International
Science is only part of a methodology. It's not the complete and not the only method. Sciences significant shortcomings.
Can you name any force, object or agency that exists in this world that lacks verifiable evidence that can be weighed. measured. counted, observed or demonstrated. That is the nature of reality.
@@JoeHarkinsHimself Dark matter, black hole, sun. We just observe the objects, but did we have interact with those e.g. put it on mass balance to check the mass to 99.9% accuracy with lowest possible standard deviation?
Or, did we have checked what happens to Earth when 7 billions of people jump from the ground at the same time? Theory is just one half, the other part of confirmation through sound methodology complete the science. But, there you see the shortcomings.
Science have theory, but the confirmation works, all the scientific community our own shortcomings in the latter. This does not include the papers published just for the sake of increasing number of published paper.
@@konyaku3072 May I assume that you are claiming dark matter, black hole and the sun are an answer to my question about The existence of objects or forces that lack verifiable evidence that can be measured, counted, weighed, observed, predicted or demonstrated? It isn't clear from the manner in which you answered if that is what you are saying and I don't want to misquote you if we are going to have an intelligent dialogue.
Please confirm that is what you are asserting. Or if it is not, please explain why you are listing those three things immediately after my question?
I'm not arguing with you. I'm just trying to understand what you are saying.
The quran is not a book of "science" , but it is a book of "signs"!
I am physics graduate and I think the exact opposite. The latest indeterminism in science fits perfectly with God. There is a limit what we can know described by Heisenberg uncertainty and by the probability within the wave function. This allows God to stealthily move every particle the way he wishes without breaking the laws of physics apparent to us. In fact if laws of physics were completely deterministic I would see that as more problematic.
The embryo example is a fallacy (of contradiction) too. Development of embryos is still a very mysterious field, seemingly there is not enough information content in dna to account for the detailed structure of the body. I firmly believe God is shaping the embryo as the Quran says and this is not in conflict with science because science is realising embryo development is not simplistically deterministic from DNA alone.
The other ambiguous verses which can be interpreted as big bang, pulsars, black holes, etc, do not outright contradict science, that is the important point. They appear to fit current science, and I believe are flexible enough to fit future science. Thats the miracle of the words of God.
Absolutely love your choice of vocabulary sir Paul!.. just puts everything into perfect perspective! May peace be upon you sir!
The Quran is a book of guidance. Alif laam Meem, This is the Book! There is no doubt about it-a guide for those who are conscious of God. 🙏
Dr. Ahktar is limiting his view of science to a very narrow scope. The quantum theory asserts space and time are quantized; meaning reality is not continuous, but rather all things are appearing and disappearing all the time and this is happening very quickly "Planck time unit". Thus, the Quran attributing the power to hold things in order to Allah is not contradicting true science. The meaning of this Quranic verse could be holding it physically or through an agent of Him which can be other force in the like of gravity. Now they say, it could be dark (unseen) matter!
Another issue is the metaphysical realm. We observe 3D spatial reality and time is the rate of change in the other 3D dimensions. This means time is a derivative of 3D space. However, science almost asserts the existence of other dimensions too. Each time we add a dimension, whoever reside in the additional dimension has power over residents of lower dimensions. This leaves a good room for the supernatural realm.
If the scientist destroys the living cell before studying it under the microscope and comes up with limiting conclusions, this is his personal fault and not a fault of science as a whole or the revelations in that matter.
well spoken
I think the point is to not _justify_ Al-Quran with anything, not even science. The point is Al-Quran is self-justified.
@Socrates55 Just like science and mathematics are all self-justified according to their own fundamental principles. That's the _point_. You don't justify theology using science, just like you don't justify science using theology. You can draw inspirations or benefits from other realms into another to grow/improve/find new things, but that's where it ends. One field just cannot justify another.
Brilliant
Yes. I've saw video about 4d object behavior in 3d space. Now imagine how 5d and up being behave in their dimension.
The Holy Qur'an is a book of signs, not science.
That's why Shabbir Aktar is not Allah. But again if people like him don't exist how will Muslims be # 1 in sects. Muslims with the help of Shabbir will be 73 sects , Jews 72 and Christians 71 before the last days are here. And when men get intellectually infested they try to become God themselves but only to create the doubts and increase their own followers
@@danielali5699 and yet there are thousands of denominations in christianity. They all claim to be inspired by the same holy ghost yet they differ from one another. :)
@@angrybird2734 Yes. Now I remember. That's where I heard it first.
then you agree that it is nonsense to claim that the quran contains scientific knowledge unrecognized until modern times.
@@nazeemsultan123 And yet there are major versions of Islam that are so different from each other, there have been wars and assassinations driven by those disagreements. This is common to all religions because none are based on discoverable facts or verifiable evidence. it's the flaw of all belief systems based on "faith."
"Show us your God then we'll believe in you", people who confronted the prophets of Allah said in the past. Those were amongst the great minds of the time who said that. I guess the greatest minds of our time are not much different if Allah doesn't give them permission to see it with their eyes, hear it with their ears and understand it with their hearts. May Allah preserves Bro Paul, me and the rest of the mukmin and mukminat. May Allah give hidayah to those seeking the right path.
Ameen
But we have to admit that many verses of the Quran Matches with Science for example
(57:25) And We sent down iron with its great might, benefits for humanity....
There you go Science Also Says Iron wasn't from the earth it came from the Sky
The word inzala ( sent down) quran uses for many things including revelations, i think
@@omarmeer9035 right
The same word is used for "cloth"
so you rely on the quran because of what you think is scientific evidence, yet I doubt you would be willing to have an honest dialog about the many obvious mistakes in the quran.
@@JoeHarkinsHimself would you be kind enough to tell me what the mistakes are?
Im sure you'll fail to do that
always enjoying your video, may allah gives u reward my brother..
aamiin..
Thank you so much 😀
Adding your channel to my faves .
I'm going through all your videos and I just realised the latest one is one month old.
A lot of snippets of academic level knowledge on this channel. This is awesome.
Glad you think so!
@@BloggingTheology Watch This Video (Enable The CC Button)
czcams.com/video/jxIM-Ss-01Y/video.html
Science: Space and time are fixed.
Science next day: Nope, space and time are relative.
Me: I think the idea is clear.
This is the first time I have to contradict with you, not only because I’m a Muslim, but because of my years in research for science in Quran.
With all the respect of your reference, he seems mixing things and jumped to a conclusion that it contradicts with empirical science. Unfortunately, some scientists still refer to the theories in science as facts and laws of science which is not true. As an example, we say the relativity theory, but we treat it as a fact and laws of physics. Quantum theory is the most manifestation of this. Although we can admit that some of its equations are working, yet its still a theory.
Moreover, not everything we don’t see or recognize is not true, angles or jinn, for recent years we did not understand the existence of Dark Matter.
I’m happy to debate any verse that you see is not scientific in Quran, because it helps me to deepen my research
Why do you think proving any verse scientific is any good or positive thing? You are already giving more weights to science than to Quran. Quran is a book of its own. It doesn't have to agree with science as if science itself is an infallible standard which is not the case. I don't remember the verse reference but it says that indeed we humans have very little knowledge, basically implying we have been given limited capacity of understanding . When quran literally says that we have very little understanding, there's no point comparing the book with that little knowledge we have. Why don't you research on the literary nature of the Quran. Because Quran actually challenges on that matter. Why trying to fit or compare science (our gained knowledge) with the Quran when Quran already undermined our knowledge to be its level. Those who always talk about science in the quran is actually praising science more than the word of God. Salam.
@@One-rr8um hi, thanks for your comments. My reply is as follows. We say fir each verse in Quran Aya, which means in Arabic a miracle.
١٦٤ إِنَّ فِي خَلْقِ السَّمَاوَاتِ وَالْأَرْضِ وَاخْتِلَافِ اللَّيْلِ وَالنَّهَارِ وَالْفُلْكِ الَّتِي تَجْرِي فِي الْبَحْرِ بِمَا يَنْفَعُ النَّاسَ وَمَا أَنْزَلَ اللَّهُ مِنَ السَّمَاءِ مِنْ مَاءٍ فَأَحْيَا بِهِ الْأَرْضَ بَعْدَ مَوْتِهَا وَبَثَّ فِيهَا مِنْ كُلِّ دَابَّةٍ وَتَصْرِيفِ الرِّيَاحِ وَالسَّحَابِ الْمُسَخَّرِ بَيْنَ السَّمَاءِ وَالْأَرْضِ لَآيَاتٍ لِقَوْمٍ يَعْقِلُونَ164 In the creation of the heavens and the earth; in the alternation of night and day; in the ships that sail the oceans for the benefit of mankind; in the water that God sends down from the sky, and revives the earth with it after it had died, and scatters in it all kinds of creatures; in the changing of the winds, and the clouds disposed between the sky and the earth; are signs for people who understand.
(Albaqra-164)
٨٢ أَفَلَا يَتَدَبَّرُونَ الْقُرْآنَ ۚ وَلَوْ كَانَ مِنْ عِنْدِ غَيْرِ اللَّهِ لَوَجَدُوا فِيهِ اخْتِلَافًا كَثِيرًا82 Do they not ponder the Quran? Had it been from any other than God, they would have found in it much discrepancy.
(Anisa 4- 82)
And many other verses where God ask us to study in details Quran
And when God says (Yaseen 36-40)
٤٠ لَا الشَّمْسُ يَنْبَغِي لَهَا أَنْ تُدْرِكَ الْقَمَرَ وَلَا اللَّيْلُ سَابِقُ النَّهَارِ ۚ وَكُلٌّ فِي فَلَكٍ يَسْبَحُونَ40 The sun is not to overtake the moon, nor is the night to outpace the day. Each floats in an orbit.
How you can’t see the scientific meaning in this verse
Who new 1400 years before that the speed of the moon is faster than the speed of the sun, and who new that the sun is in motion, and who new about Dark Mater, and who new that everything goes in helical motion etc..
Hi Khalil, it's hard to believe that the sun revolves around the earth. People don't consider heliocentricism as a theory any more.
@@Faiz9163 Quran doesn't say sun is revolving around the earth rather it talks about their own rotation and non static nature.
@@One-rr8um If you take into account the context of the worse, it is always mentioned in the context of night and day.
Religion and science are definitely on different realms of reality. Religion requires faith whereas science requires proof.
@@cervezaway7049 quite the opposite my friend
Where's the proof that God exist or doesn't exist?
@@Cellem17
Where's the proof that evolution occurred?
Where's the proof of a chemical code creating mechanism required to bring about DNA data for amino acid sequencing.
Where's the proof the universe has a begining without a prior cause.
Where's the proof that nothing can exist accept it must be intellegable by the human brain.
Wherese the proof that the known laws of nature can give us the total picture of reality
@@cervezaway7049 hey smarty, you couldn't be more wrong. to educate yourself on this subject, do kindly consult The Divine Reality by Hamza Tzortzis. books dont bite ;)
@@cervezaway7049 i have read it! in fact the book i recommended contains many refutations to the claims made by richard dawkins, its truly enlightening give it a try if you truly care about the finding the truth! have a good day
The author only needs to read Dr Muhammad Iqbal’s “Reconstruction of Religious Thought in Islam” to see how hollow his arguments are.
Highly recommend you read it, Paul.
Question: I have read your channel description, and, correct me if I’m wrong, from what I can understand, you reject the concept of the Trinity, but not necessarily Christianity itself. This is fascinating to me because when I went to Sunday School (for Muslims) during my high school days, my Qur’an Tafseer teacher spoke of another branch of Christianity that used to be more prominent in the past but holds a very small number of members today. According to what he told us, the branch of Christianity is often retroactively referred to as “Unitarian” (I.e. Uniterian Christians)
I haven’t actually met an Uniterian Christian in real life, so if you are one, this is really cool to finally see someone of that faith!
Yes ofcourse Modern Science is in conflict
Cuz' in Islam, a Creator created the complex Universe
but Athiests be like, "The Universe is Eternal" to "The Universe started from the big bang" to "No, we just live in a Multiverse" like seriously! HOW MANY TIMES WILL YOU CHANGE THE CREATION OF THE UNIVERSE?
You tell me, which makes more sense?
"One Allah created the Universe, simple like that"
or
"Eternal, Big Bang, Multiverse, Evolution, Darwin is my daddy and Dawkins is my mommy"
That’s the thing though, they don’t have a belief so they don’t hold firm to anything, everything is they think not they know. Even if they forget that they THINK and that they don’t KNOW, as their pride grows.
@Enacaus says "Athiests be like . . . " While individual atheists may say whatever they individually believe, your suggestion that there is an atheist belief system or dogma is wrong. A person who says I have not seen any verifiable evidence for the existence of a god is an atheist.
That still says nothing about what that person thinks or believes about the nature of the universe or the big bang, etc.
Atheists is nothing more than the simple meaning a the word. The word "thei" is the root word for belief in a god.
Theists believe in the existence of a god.
An atheist (the "a" is the Greek language root mean "lack of") do not.
Nothing more nothing less.
They admit that they don't know everything so there pov is only what they can prove; while you believe that your god created this universe without a shred of empirical evidence? Whom should i trust? Or better yet why your view is more logical than someone who is at least willing to question and (try to) find answers?
Very interesting video, I thought it was going to be a proof against Islam but rather the video is highlighting that the processes used by the two views oppose each other, which is the case and doesn't detract from scriptural veracity either.
MashAllah. A very insightful post once again. May Allah reward you. Ameen
Absolutely agree
Many of the classical scholars make the same recommendations.
I think there is a place for scientific reconciliation of the Qur'an, I will be presenting in this soon inshaa'allah, happy to share the presentation.
Science needs to modernize itself a bit more to reach the level of the Quran.
If they reject the unseen creature, 1000 years ago we were unable to see Bactria with our naked us except at the late 16th century.... What if in the future that we will able to create a device that can we able to see the jinn itself... The science is always evolve
👍 finally! ... Someone who said it!
Very informative and persuasive as always. May Allah bless you
Hi, thank you! i enjoy your videos. As for what the scholar you have quoted mentioned in his book. I think he simply took the verses of the Quran literally and didn’t go deep enough to try to understand how language was used in the Quran in a very poetic manner.
In fact, Allah says in the Quran itself in “54: 49” (We have created everything in a determined measure.)
That’s contrary to some translations which uses the word pre-destined rather pre-measured.
And this very same word “qaddara” - قدر is mentioned in 76: 16 (Clear glasses [made] from silver of which they have determined “qa-da-roha” the measure “taq-dira”.)
So the argument here is not to say Allah is literally doing everything he ascribed to himself but rather he try to make them understand that it was him who pre-designed everything to work in this order contrary to the pagan argument that nature is simply nature and God has no control over it nor can he re-create it in denial of the resurrection. It’s like when people are seen astonished of how robots do things in their own forgetting the process of manufacturing and coding involved.
Thank you for your insightful videos.
Thank you Paul. We muslims are so scared to contradict science when science keeps changing every decade or so 🙄
WAAAAAIIIT.....I MISSED THIS!!
I think a lot of your video including this one in someway is a process of faith maturity. I do enjoy your content Intellectual content.
Salam from Indonesia
Good Work bro Paul
MashaAllah
*MY REBUTTAL*
1) (to start with the side note that the author threw in there)... the fact that ideas of magic, jinn, iblees etc have existed in "pre-islamic" times is actually completely consistent with the narrative of the Quran's relation to preceding messages, in that, the Quran isn't the first book sent by Allah speaking about those things, rather, it is the last and that there were many others revealed to prophets that came before Muhammad عليه الصلاة والسلام . In the case of the Arabian peninsula... two that Allah mentions in the Quran were Ismael ibn Ibrahim عليه السلام and Saleh عليه السلام. The Arabs on Makka followed a religion that had elements of what Allah revealed to Ismael as a result of them changing it, playing around with it, adding idols and completely decimating its core tenants... hence just by understanding that, we expect that they knew about certain elements of the unseen that Allah mentions in the Quran since they received a preceding message in regards to that same subject from the same Creator. It seems like the author was Making that remark to insinuate that the Quran borrows notions and characters from sources completely irrelevant to it which puts its integrity in question. For him to think that exposes that he is lacking in the most basics of the narrative that surround the final revelation and where it stands with the rest.
2) "Modern science" does *not* contradict the Quran. The author claims that it does because modern science restricts itself to empiracle analysis (in other words, drawing conclusions exclusively based on what we can physically observe) and *refuses to acknowledge the possibility of any involvement from a dimension or an entity that cannot be physically observed* . The part I just highlighted is the sole grounds upon which the author draws his premise. The problem with that is that it is not in his place or in anyone's place to make that claim. The definition of science is: 'the intellectual and practical activity encompassing the systematic study of the structure and behaviour of the physical and natural world through observation and experiment'. That's all that science is. It's the study of the natural world. Nothing about that necessitates the belief in the absolute autonomy of the physical and natural world. For example, geography is the study of the Earth and its atmosphere... nothing about this necessitates that the Earth and its atmosphere is completely detached, independent and autonomous from outer space... but geography doesn't examine outer space in order to explain realities pertaining to geography... that is a completely different field called cosmology. This doesn't equate to geography necessitating that the very limited realm of its study isn't influenced by factors or elements it doesn't study (being factors and elements of cosmology)... athiest scientists declaring the necessary disbelief in influential factors, over elements that science observes, which are not observed by science is the equivalent of a geographer who thinks that there is nothing beyond Earth declaring that the field of geography necessitates the disbelief in influential factors, over elements that geography studies, which are not observed by geography itself... this wouldn't only be the cosmos, but even physics, chemistry and biology... all of those are studies that influence realities that geography observes yet geography doesn't directly observe, analyze or even mentions them... this doesn't mean that geography necessitates the disbelief in those things and the belief in the Earth's absolute autonomy from those factors that geography doesn't touch upon. That would be stupid. And to allow a geographer to make that absurd declaration is like allowing an athiest scientist to make the declaration that science in and of itself necessitates the disbelief in influences and causes that science doesn't observe. What is very disappointing is that the author you praised, Paul, uses that fallacy to support his belief which is very disappointing from someone who spent so much time and money to have his book published with such a fancy cover...
Science is just the study of the physical and natural world using experiments and observations. *full stop* . This it. I'm sure Lawrence Kraus and his cronies would love to add to that definition and make up conditions and tenants that tickle their tummy but thats not how the world works... im sure they can use the scientific method to come to that conclusion.
With that being said, as far as that correct definition of science goes, all of the ayaat (verses) that speak about realities which science does observe align with science completely. For example, the universe is constantly expanding, all living beings are created from water, the mountains are not fixed and rather travel across the earth themselves, the stages of the embryo and the list goes on. The ayaat or verses that speak about how it is Allah that does these things are ayaat/verses that are not speaking about what science observes or even has a stance on (it cannot). This is a field separate to science and doesn't even contradict science either... Allah is the One that creates living beings... but He does so through mechanisms that science can observe. When He tells us that He created the human being (the what)... He isn't trying to appeal to something that we can observe directly.. . He is giving you something more important and heavy... ie that He is your Rabb which necessitates worshipping Him. When He tells us that He created human beings from clay, semen or water, then this is where He goes into the mechanism that He uses (the how) which is where science is able to analyze and observe... these are the ayaat that science can do that with and these ayaat are all confirmed as accurate by modern science and hence the Quran does not contradict modern science. At all. It having a field of study that isn't observed by modern science equating to it going against modern science is like telling me that a book that has cosmology in it going against geography. That is a fallacy that I am sad I had to waste my battery on but I did so because I know that some muslims will have their eman shaken by books with big words written by mnfqeen.
If anyone has any further questions, add me on whatsapp
+962795950183
Your rebuttal has been read and acknowledged. It is a great rebuttal and I agree with everything you said. Modern Science, because it gave us so much power over matter and more, tends to forget that it can only describe what it perceives, and that there are literally Worlds it doesn’t perceive.
Calling the creation autonomous or eternal might actually be shirk in muslim terms, by the way. As a muslim, I believe in those verses telling me that Allah is actually holding existence together, without any cost to Him. The ultimate dependency of the created on the Creator is obvious when you read the Quran. Science simply observes the rules of Allah acting in His creation, but can actually never directly perceive Him. The mystery will always be there. It becomes a matter of belief.
And God knows best.
@@Dante-uj5pc
Jazaak Allah kheir bro, well said
Well, I read the paragraph from Shabbir akhtar's book that you brought during this video. You, Paul, talked about two separate things:
1. "Scientific miracles" in Quran which some people argue about and this depends on the understanding of the Quran's reader although no one across history considered Quran as a book of science neither the Quran claims to be. So, it's easy to argue with or against, makes sense! (...TBC)
Mr.Paul; first of all, thank you so much for the blogs. They're a hidden gem.
May I suggest you look up Dr.Eiyad Qunaibi? He should offer a new perspective on how you view the world
51:47 - 'And the heaven We constructed with strength, and indeed We are surely (its) expander.
21:30 - 'Have those who disbelieved not considered that the heavens and the earth were a joined entity, and We separated them and made from water every living thing? Will they not then believe?
There is seemingly no theological purpose to these statements, nor an obvious practical significance. Is it so unlikely that the intended audience was in fact the people of science?
There is no conflict between science and the Qur'an although the Qur'an is not a science book it only gives you hints. Human supposed to do their own discovery and they have a long way 😊 to go....one hundred years from now we will have totally more advance science...it's us that we need to find more but it's all going hand in hand thanks for the video and we need to be patient for eventually everything will fall into place...God with the patient
Thanks Paul for doing a great work .
Qur'an does not contradicts with science, Infact it perfectly matches with modern science, in the field of embryology , astronomy , zoology , may be some verses are misunderstood because we didn't have that technology to proof the science in the Qur'an
We live on a rock that floats on an orbit around an astonishing ball of fire in a vacuumed space to me that is supernatural…… to determine the order of what’s natural or not requires a full knowledge of our surroundings we barely know what’s beneath our oceans let alone what’s supposedly presumed to be natural or not.
The translation in English of the sura Yasin may not be correct. After God discussed the sun that rotates on its axis and moon meander into its housings. That's is the twelve months individually rotation of the months. After that God said we have carried your children into the voyage that is pressurised floating. And we created of similar that you may thank your God from His fevered.
The translation says carrying your ancestors that was the ark Noah. Not same children are not ancestors.
Thank you brother Paul for making it simple for us to understand. The great work wouldn't have been known by most of us without making it simple to understand.
As a muslim I had to listen to the hole video to find out that i actualy agree with you.
I have held a similar view since i followed a course of philosophy of science in university and at that time i heard about "changement de paradigme" for the first time "paradigm shifts".
And i don't like it when muslims start claiming some "scientific miracles in the quran". I find that It's a lack of understanding of what science is and what are it's assumptions and principales.
Keep up the good work ! Great channel.
You explained it in very intelligent and simple way and religious scholars may understand your point and consume it positively. Thank you
Greetings from Indonesia ❤️
Greetings!
Mmngnya kau ngerti ?
Thank you for insight into Dr. Akhtar's book and for your useful Vlog in general. I was not sure what your final position (and that of Dr. Akhtar's) was on the issue of reading scientific facts into the meaning of the verses of the Quran. You seem to be OK with embryology but not OK with cosmology. What is the normative basis for this conclusion? It is clear that making unfounded interpretation of verses in order to make them conform to scientific theories is a bad practice. However, to eliminate the concept of reading scientific insights into the Quran that pertain to scientific facts altogether is in one way a conformation to the secular doctrine of separating the temporal from the sacred! How do we reconcile that with the fact that the verses of Allah's book of words cannot be in conflict with the phenomena in Allah's book of works (nature). The fact that there has been overzealous poorly substantiated claims about the scientific allusions in the Quran is not a reason to eliminate the discourse altogether. It is rather a motivation to come up with a better, more rigorous and more refined methodology of approaching this subject in order to weed out those inferior interpretations. Allah knows best.
Good points!
4:45 the verse can refer to the complexity of how birds maintain n manage energy, it's a sign of an intelligent Creator. (About the verse you quoted from Surah Mulk about birds)
@Al Mudarabah What he meant was Quran says that Allah is doing all that, but science can't prove God just by using its limited method based upon observations with "Our" inadequate and limited observations, here is where Quran contradicts science. It doesn't says that all this happening automatically, it says, Allah is the One who made it so.
This analysis is an eye opener, it's true that science can only work towards moving closer to see the divine commands and laws of nature, but cannot achieve the desired purpose of how things are created with divine intention.
True indeed. Brilliant presentation by Paul.
thanks
I agree, science is limited, especially experimental science. The Qur'an is the absolute truth, it is eternal and beyond the materialistic limited view of science. The Qur'an doesn't contradict scientific facts, However, The Qur'an my be in contradiction with some "scientific theories", which are based on speculations without facts. Thus, science should follow The Qur'an and not the contrary. As an exemple of the limit of experimental science : as far as we evolve in science, we are more learning that we know only few (if nothing) from what exist, as an exemple : 95% of the univers (Dark matter) is of an unknown, and undetectable nature.
I don’t think Quran contradicts Science rather it’s the reverse. The first part explains how the understanding of science has changed (from Newton to Einstein) so as the humankind progresses, there are further discoveries that will change our current understanding of science and eventually we find that the Quran held the true understanding all along. However I do not know if we will ever live to see this to occur where Science truly will take strong reference to the Quran as the guidance to scientific knowledge.
I wish it did.. Quran should be taught in science school, medical schools etc. I study biology and psych and reading the Quran is almost like reading my science biology books
In fact if we study the structure of the shortest surah in the Quran, which has only 10 words, in 3 sentences or verses, each sentence were made using 10 arabic letters/consonants, & each sentence ended with the 10th letter & the 2nd verse/ends with a word when translated means sacrifice- interestingly we did our sacrifices on eidul adha which is the 10th day of Islamic calendar (Zulhijah).
All refuted in Maurice Bucaille's book The bible, the Quran and science
As a HCP, scientific community is not what is used to be.
Beware of those who put doubt into your heart
@Dh Alra says "Beware of those who put doubt into your heart."
Be even more wary of those who offer absolute answers without verifiable evidence.
@@JoeHarkinsHimself those of us that are firm in our belief in Allah do have the answers and the backing of logic,and intuition. We can explain God in the way that he is described in the quran and yes that makes it true.
@@JoeHarkinsHimself hi joe, theres a book that tackles your arguments reasonably well, check out The Divine Reality by Hamza Tzortzis. its a quick, enlightening read. have a blessed day dear!
@@no.964 exactly what "arguments" of mine are you referring to? All I did was ask for verifiable evidence. Let's see how that works with you. Do you have verifiable evidence for the existence of a god?
@@no.964 BTW, you did notice, didn't you, that Dh Alra never responded. And
mohammad samin irtisum says he doesn't need any.
Thanks for this excellent video Paul, I think the author of the book is deeply sunk into philosophy and is blinded by it disregarding the transcendency of the Qu'ran beyond what's natural i.e the supernatural as you mentioned, the realm of Allah, the other 6 heavens beyond our worldly lost heaven and the world of the angels i.e the unseen. Also places a great emphasis on quantum physics and space travel when it is mentioned in various surahs in the Qu'ran that the affair of this world reaches Allah 1,000 years of what we count in one of our days, Also Allah mentions the fraction of 50,000 years to 1 day of what we count. Also we cannot forget what our prophet Muhammad ﷺ mention of his travel of Isra wa Al-Miraaj and his description of the whole thing and the Buraq in which he traveled with Angel Gabriel. These things pertain belief in the unseen world beyond our physical world which science is incapable of explaining but rather it is a pillar of our belief as Muslims and you know we'll that we cannot be Muslims without believing in the articles of faith.
Absolutely agree 👍
Congratulations on your phenomenal channel!
The metaphysical is not within the realm of empirical science. This does NOT mean that they contradict. Empirical science is blind to the metaphysical the way sight is blind to smells.
Contradiction is judged, and so should it be, by the times the Quran tackles matters of the experimental world, which it often does. Whether these are in contradiction with modern science or not is up for interpretation.
The statement that they contradict based on what the author describes, in my mind, is not precise.
Couldn't agree more. Great effort 👍
I've actually stopped watching this video "half-way" and my simple answer to all what Dr. Shabbir claims is the following: "وَمَا أُوتِيتُم مِّنَ الْعِلْمِ إِلَّا قَلِيلًا", which translates to "and you were given only a little knowledge". A book from God MUST be Absolute and True in Whole. There's no room for "partial truth" in the Qu'r'aan! If nature, as Dr. Shabbir claims is "self-sustained", then it is so by the WILL of God and if God wills He can disrupt that balance in nature and its so called "self-sustenance" anytime He wants! This statement alone suffices, to at least, make you think about these "claims" and hopefully realize that the TRUE sustainer of Everything, Everywhere is GOD! I don't see this as the Qur'aan conflicting science or the other way around, instead it is our understanding of science (today) that is limited and incomplete. What is "fact" today, could be proven wrong or incomplete 100 or 200 years from now!
I think the author was just portraying how the universe is viewed by modern science, not necessarily his own view
😅 i didn't understand a single thing, so lets put the weight of understanding to scholers n good people like u n meanwhile let myself adhere to Allah. May bless ur good work brother
Write A of Almighty Allah in capital plz.
@@cartoonclips6487 in whatever language or in whatever front we write his merciful name, he is n always be the might one dear brother. Alhamdulillah, i will note your suggestions too. 😊🥰
You know the discussion was mainly about existence of Unseen - Angeles, Jinns , etc. 🆚 Natural Phenomena....
Adam & Eve So and so....
Yeah.... We have to understand it doesn't matter.... Really it doesn't matter 😁😁😁
You know why ❓
Scientists have no way to proof at all....
They have no way to disproof unseen....
Opinion doesn't matter....
Proof required.... Strong Proof...... And thats all....
Quran says : "Produce your proof, if you are truthful "
I would agree that one should be logical when structuring an argument to compare the Quran with Science. I see no conflict myself as both a Muslim and as an Engineer. I can recommend a well written book by Dr Maurice Bucaille. One in particular the science Bible and the Quran. I do enjoy your content. May Allah bless as you seek knowledge and encourage others to do so.
Ash-Shaykh Aboo ‘Iyaad حفظه الله said that it is important to distinguish between ‘Scientific Theory’ and ‘Repeatable Science’
It's simple, from the perspective of a true believer, do you believe the words of the creator or the observations of the created ? The Qur'an is meant to guide, and it's done that perfectly well, alhamdulilah.
Asalamuailakam can you tell me more about Quran, unseen and science cos sometimes I'm interested and have doubts and u seem like a logical person. Im only a teen so I didn't understand that much of the video the words are too big for my brain
Modern Science 'theories' perhaps, but Is the Quran in conflict with proven scientific 'facts'???
As salamu alaykum Akhi. Al Hamdu lillah it's not in conflict with proven science. Look for example, the light of the moon is a proven scientific fact which is aligned with Qur'an but with the Bible. Jazak Allahu Khayran
@@shazasmr1968 You are Wrong...
Facts are changeable..
The word Noor doesnt mean Borrowed light.. There is a verse which says Allah is Noor of the world.. Does that mean Allah is Borrowed light of the world.
No!!.. So please stop Mixing Quran with science if its either be Facts or Theories for Allah's sake
@@shazasmr1968 Wa Alaikkum Salam
When i read in Quran that Allah holds the birds in the sky i was very confused because we know that its the Air but then i came across the verse in which Allah says that i build the ships and your shields and so on. And that is where is understood the meaning of upholding the bird's verse.
Such an interesting explanation...in indonesia we know this part as logika mistik (mystic logical)..when every logic methodologies can enough answer all the mystery..just like advance technologies not in the place to asking all the questions...telephone todays is just like a telepathy in old time...it just my opinion...
Scientists we know every thing.
Time passes, Ohh we just discovered that new thing and we were wrong about this thing.
Well that was not what it sounds like 😂
Agreed that science is not into supernatural things like God, angels, jins etc. And m on full agreement that some verses should not be attested to science as 100% however there are some verses, say for example embryology , which goes in line with science but definitely not all Maybe Allah wanted to say something else and the dawah brothers misunderstood it . Allah knows best .
Anyways it was a nice one brother Paul.
Just curious to know that do you believe in paradise, hell and supernatural things like Angels and all ?
Yep I’m a full blown supernaturalist.
@@BloggingTheology wow good to hear that, freemonotheist.
@@BloggingTheology So you're a quantum entangelist! ;-)
@@BloggingTheology
supernaturalist?
Totally agree with you but I have one comment about the verse which talk about expanding it says (We built the heaven with might, and We widely extended it) 47 Az-Zariyat, and heaven here refer to sky in Arabic. because in what you read it sys we built or create thing!
Totally agree with your analysis on this Br Paul.
But I'm not 😁
You know why❓
The scientists have no way to disproof unseen...
Ok... Then ready to accept challenges..
Quran says:
2:111 [ These are their vain desires. Say: “Bring your proof if you are speaking the truth.]
Einstein & Newton onto different physics, one conventional the other nuclear. So even the precept is not quite on the spot. From Newton we know that E = 1/2 m.v.v and from Einstein we get E = m.c.c , (we can't combine the two) . These are 2 different realm of physics that present day science has even yet to address let alone the other realms LOL!
The Qur’an is the book of “Sign” not the book of science. So Qur’an teach us to see the sign of Allah or The Power of Allah. The science that we have today proving that the sign of the Qur’an is right and real and that is the actually happens, the science still developing and changing but the Qur’an not.
can you please tell us your top 10 best books you have ever read... please make video
Why does he think divine power is something related to the supernatural? as a Muslim, I always think that the laws of physics, such as gravity or electromagnetism, are God creation or in other words God's laws. Therefore, imo, believing divine power never contradicts our reality.
The Qur'an will be discovered fully by the end of time....I hope we have a long time to go 😊😛🌺
The example of those who take allies other than Allah is like that of the spider who takes a home. And indeed, the weakest of homes is the home of the spider, if they only knew. 29:41
As a scientist I can never understand this. Spider’s net is at least 5 times stronger than steel. Now is the Quran lying? Well that depends on how you look at it. If you ask an illiterate farmer they’ll say look, I can destroy these spiders net with least amount of effort. So it comes down to how you see them.
The way I look at it, Quran gives signs to different people in different ways. A believer will see them one way, and a non-believer will see it another way.
Fascinating!
@R Basheer you have missed my point sorry. My point was that you can explain things the way you want it. And that’s the focal point of this discussion- that Quran does not have to be scientifically correct, for science changes.
2. Conflicts between Quran and proven science that "we should admit" as you mentioned.
Shabbir said "Recently, probability laws couched in statistical terms replaced the older laws of causality as physical indeterminacy complicated the picture at sub-atomic level". I think he's talking about the Quantum theory, don't know why he needed to be vague about that, for instance Schrödinger equation and the superposition theory. How's this opposing the Causality? How at large Quantum mechanics conflicts with Causality?
Mr. Shabbir in his more than 400 pages left it to the intelligent reader to "think" about. He threw vague statements as facts and left without explaining! Man, you can't jump ahead of your shadow. Many years ago I stopped looking at people's title because in many cases it obscures from logically challenging them (titles like professor of so and so and PhDs in so and so) I stopped doing that since read David Hume argument about Causality being not an empirical law and we can be superseded!
After reading the book and watching your video, still don't know what will convince us that "We should admit that the Qur_an is in conflict with modern science" maybe you can have another video to add a little foundation to a statement like this... looking forward, please do.
Dear Paul,
I thank you for all of your videos which are very instructive. However, this one has sowed some doubts in mind: How can the Creator commit scientific blunders in His Book? I'd be grateful if you could name a few of these errors or inconsistencies.
With anticipated thanks
A Rahman
which scientific blinders did you have in mind?
@@BloggingTheology I don't have any in mind but I want to understand how the Qur'an is
in contradiction with science" with a few examples, please.
@@dauharryrahman3398 did you not watch the video? I dont understand why you are asking the question.
Because if the are errors in the Qur'an it cannot be the truth.
@@dauharryrahman3398 Who said there are errors? I don't think you watched the video did you?
Dear Sir, Salam, Thank you for this very important video Agreed that the modern science and Quran are not in total agreement but for me certain revelations prove that Quran is a word of God, like renewing of skin in hell fire so that people can feel the pain again, reference to raising people on the final day with the same finger tips, the embryology, creating all life from water etc. Now we know that our finger tips have unique finger prints, the science of embryology confirms Quran, the pain receptors reside in skin, life has evolved from water, so on. how could any one predict this all correctly so long ago. I agree that in many cases some of us try to read too much into Quran to prove a new scientific discovery but that doesn't mean that the clear revelations should be under played, remember these are meant to appeal to reason. Quran proves the existence of God, which can not be perceived by science by revealing Ayats in Quran that modern science has discovered to be true. And that is very important, you seem to be erring here.
There is always the “Unseen” that is beyond our human perception. Including for atheists, for example
What lies beyond the seen in our space/time reality. God and the unseen interacting with our reality are really the Parameters and laws of nature, physics, chemistry etc put into effect by an ultimate designer of the Qadr or possibilities within our reality.
you say "There is always the “Unseen” that is beyond our human perception'"
It's unseen. It's beyond perception. Yet you claim it exists. Do you even listen to yourself?
Any one can claim anything if that's the standard. Fairies exist, trees have spirits, the moon is made of green cheese (Oh, wait . . . we now have real evidence of what the moon is made of).
Stars are missiles that angels throw at devils to stop them from reaching earth (sounds familiar doesn't it?).
The sun sets in a muddy spring. (Oh, that.)
Do you have any objectively verifiable evidence for the existence of a god? Can you name any thing or force that exists in this world that cannot be verified by evidence that can be counted, measured, weighed, observed, predicted, replicated or demonstrated? Isn't that essential to apprehension of reality?
@@JoeHarkinsHimself We know that the unknown exists because we have proof of that there is a planetary system, That is part of a Galaxy that is part of a Cosmos, beyond that we have no proof therefore it is Unknown but a the same time we understand that the Cosmos is part of a bigger reality. The same way your conscience is part of a bigger reality, unexplored. The rest are metaphors
@@stereostream you say, "The rest are metaphors." But the whole thing is nonsense. I asked you for evidence based on reality and you tell me "We know that the unknown exists because we have proof of that there is a planetary system, "
What? Really? I asked you for evidence of a world outside this one - which you are using to claim the existence of a god - and you claim that because you personally do not know anything about what exists "outside the cosmos" - while you don't know if there is anything at all outside the cosmos - you assume there is a spiritual world?
Because you have no proof (of what?) you "understand." Exactly how do you "understand" something which you say you know nothing about and then extrapolate that admission of ignorance about what exists, into a claim it (what is that it?) exists.
I congratulate on your imagination. Thanks for the entertaining tour of words.
Now can we try again to answer the down-to-earth questions I asked that call for a very simple answer.
Do you have any objectively verifiable evidence for the existence of a god? Yes or no. If yes, what is that objectively verifiable evidence?
Can you name any thing or force that exists in this world that cannot be verified by evidence that can be counted, measured, weighed, observed, predicted, replicated or demonstrated? Yes or no? If yes, exactly what is that specific thing or force?
@@JoeHarkinsHimself : What? I never claimed that because something must lie beyond the cosmos it must be spritual. I simply stated that there is THAT unknown, and we are faced with that relaity, whether you like it or not. Whether you believe in a God or not, you must accept that there is the unknown beyond. Now what people make of it, or imagine it to be is totally a human thing, by the same token what non-believers make of it is also a human thing. So we are both faced with that unknown reality. And asking for evidence is a red herring because what each person makes of it is persobal and if it happens to be made into a spiritual conscience, it requires no proof. Do you have proof otherwise of what is beyond?
@@stereostream "simply stated that there is THAT unknown, and we are faced with that relaity,"
Read that back aloud.
What "unknown" is a "reality?"
And why are you still avoiding the questions?
One thing to note is that scientists often outdate previously believed science. It changes all the time. Most the time, they are “theories”, and not facts. Science has always changed, but the Quran had never changed.
Yes..saw the interview on this before and I got the whole picture.
i don't see this as conflictions, cause science can't proof or deny the metaphysical phenomenas ! they scientists when studying theology they should only focus on the phisical side of it .
Can you name any force, object or agency that exists in this world that lacks verifiable evidence that can be weighed. measured. counted, observed or demonstrated. That is the nature of reality.
@@JoeHarkinsHimself the Angels
@@zayan6284 the angels what? What are you saying about "the angels?"
@@JoeHarkinsHimself they exist in the world and cannot be weighed, measured, etc
@@zayan6284 how then do you confirm they exist in this world without them being measured, weighed, counted, observed or demonstrated? Or, to put it simply, how do you know they exist?
I really deeply thank you for your very helpful work and encourage you to keep up may Allah grant you Hannah
However, being from a scientific and academic back ground, none of the evidences you showed in the video contradicts Quran.
To put it simply modern physics ratherly confirms that in a micro level there is always uncertainty if we consider the movement of a quantic elementary particle : we can not establish why phenomenon we see every day are unchanged in a such precise and regular way. so the probability aspect which is the fondation of macro phenomenon is not convincing unless there is some intangible occult force to orientate it towards having the natural physical laws and phenomenons as we saw it.
So no contradictions there (it moreover approves the logic of Quran when it talks of the unseen , angels who work for Allah And are from light so they can do according to Einstein, the unseen work that organize physical laws and phenomenons)
So finally I advise you as my brother in religion to meditate on this.
Feel free to reach out to me if my response needs any clarifications
I would be glad to help
Cheers my brother
Not "stop them" but "hold them" ex like if I let go of this weight I'm holding, no body will be able to hold it, because I am the only one in power
The Quran is not a book of science, it's a book of Signs. It has many verses which is consistent with science but that not the way to measure its glory and beauty. Science and religion are two different realms that should not be brought against each other nor mixing each other. Science only explains the changing of the universe and faith is guidance for a person to set a standard for his moral value which he/she should have in this world to achieve greater reward in the afterlife. For faith, the afterlife is the ultimate goal whereas for science the goal is to explain what it is. The two concepts have different meanings, different purposes, and different ways that should not be mixed.
Love your videos.
Don't agree with this "conflict". The reason I don't agree is that the scientific method simply rests on the continuous proposition and refutation of ideas. What is acceptable scientific thought today will not be so in 100 years. How we have moved beyond Newton and Einstein are excellent examples. The concept of dark matter is another one. Science freely accepts that it does not have all the answers; what it doesn't accept is dishonest inquiry or representation.
The Quran doesn't push away from the scientific method but it had to limit its presentation to seventh century Arabian sensibilities; like Jonathan Brown has said, no one speaks entirely literally. We know the Quran had to limit itself; the Quran itself says that if all the seas were ink and all the trees were pens the word of Allah would still not run out (I'm paraphrasing, of course).
If science is "ideas" then the Quran is "truth". Thank you for that eman boost.
[ Zakir Naik left the chat ]
The famous quote by Dr. Zakir, "The Qur'an is not a Book of Science, S-C-I-E-N-C-E, it's a Book of Signs, S-I-G-N-S, it's a book of Ayaat."
@Khidr - Signs are only metaphors. They are weak estimations of truth. But the real problem is not science -vs-signs. The problem is the many errors in the quran that reveal it was written by 7th Century men who had a seriously mistaken understanding about the nature of this world.
@@JoeHarkinsHimself LOLLLLLL okay buddy. You actually made me laugh out loud. Audibly. You don't even know ARABIC. Get out 😂
I think science is just one source of knowledge which has its limits and can’t prove or disprove things like the Jinn for example.
There are other sources of knowledge of of which is the Quran which is the words of God. So, disagreement between the two is expected.
I think a more productive topic to talk about is how we should approach this disagreement when we faced with one.
Really good work you present in this channel and I enjoyed listening to many of your videos.