Islam and Science with Dr Shoaib Malik at University of Edinburgh

[@intannera30]

Reminds me of my chemistry teacher. He told us students that learning science is to know Allah deeper, not to prove He exists or not

[@Dastan-t1t]

Dr Shoaib is such a cheerful guy that he cant stop smiling

[@RosewiththornsRWT]

Subhan'Allah. Glad you were able to meet up with Dr. Shoaib Malik in person, brother Paul. Great conversation!

[@naqsbandiyafoundationforis7194]

Masha'Allah Great Contribution & Achievement to start Academic Study of Islam & Science by Dr.Shoaib Malik

[@NasirAhamed-me5tg]

Sir.i am watch your every blog from Bangladesh 🇧🇩.How nicely your are spreading Islam in Europe.

[@Kirk-d7v]

He is yet to interview Avery from the *God Logic* podcast?

[@ahmaduahmed8760]

The approach is not to use science in the Qur'an to prove it is from God, but to use science to show Qur'an's superiority.

[@bigbowss9817]

Quran being from God makes it superior by default. Being congruent with established science and plausible within scientific theoritical applications proves it meets the necessary requirements of truth, since islamic narrative uses correspondence theory of epistemology. Thats why the Quran encourages observation of the natural world to find signs of Allah.

[@MoSec9]

@@bigbowss9817He said “to show Qur’an’s superiority”. The act of “showing something presupposes its existence. You can’t show something that doesn’t exist. You said a lot of interesting things, but you confused “show” with “prove”. Read the comment again and you will notice that he said that we don’t need to use the science in the Quran to prove it. I know the two verbs are interchangeable in common speech, but when we’re talking philosophy we need to be precise. With that understanding, if you go back and read the comment again you will find that you’re responding to something else.

[@munash236]

Are you sure everything we learnt as science is science, and if not?

[@blockingtheology5573]

Linguistic shows that syriac hymns have the ssme rhyme patterns as early meccan surahs. Muhammad May have just copied some preexisting stuff.

[@ahmaduahmed8760]

@@MoSec9 Bigbow speaks exactly what i said. If we show Qur'an is superior based on scientific topics it discussed, then for sure the topics concerning the unseen have to be facts. A Professor for example had to change and edit his book of embryology after getting facts from the Qur'an. Established scientific knowledge is taken as a fact, so upon showing the superiority of Qur'an in the scientific field then the all it's teachings have to be accepted. People raised so much questions on the unseen and many still fail to accept it. By the unseen i mean Allah, the angels, and the jins. Thus we need to show how true and precise are the scientific knowledge presented by the Qur'an and it's superiority in the scientific field. It was written in an era when even paper did not exist, yet it presented immense scientific knowledge. All it presented are true and precise.

[@zahramahde2096]

WOW ❤❤ I am so Happy Yeeeees finally Someone is SMART yessss شكرا لك Thank you Paul

[@PenangNorthamRd.]

Salam from Penang Malaysia, Paul Happy to see Dr Shoaib back on your show!! He's always so artistic with his design ! I remember your earlier interview with him ...

[@Juveria10]

Suban Allah this was beautiful! ❤️

[@roshanfatima2348]

Thank you Dr. Shoib Malik and Paul Williams sir, for the great intellectual conversation regarding science, evolution, AI and religion. Listening to you had been a very enriching experience ❤😊

[@abdelhakimhouari6451]

Great video. May Allah Bless you brother Paul.

[@odeebob7826]

As always, Paul hosts remarkable guests who bring unique insights and knowledge.

[@khanofcaledonia6413]

Very interesting conversation, Dr.Shoeb and Br.Paul convinced to do the Ph.d. Inshallah.

[@Mu3az523]

Thanks for this episode

[@faisalniazi1899]

Shoaib ❤️

[@MrAbstract203]

The best answer for part 19:18👉🏻 {And they ask you about the soul. Say: 👉🏻The soul is one of the commands of my Lord👈🏻, and you are not given aught of knowledge but a little}

[@blockingtheology5573]

So your soul is made from a commanded nothing.

[@Aladin-r8t]

Islam defines itself as science ... العلم

[@munash236]

World has moved from Information Technology (IT) to Artificial Intelligence (AI), and for us it's Information Theology (IT) to Allah's Intelligence (AI).

[@kalijasin]

So many people over exaggerate about what Ai can do or could do.

[@Kirk-d7v]

If you try proving that point on the god Logic livestream you’d have a real challenge?

[@brotheryosef3066]

Dr shoaib Malik of the how to read a book lecture.

[@BalarabeSallau-oo3fj]

I've been pondering on Quantum Teleportation and it's possibility when I always come across the miracle of one of the companions of Prophet Sulaiman where he instantly transported the huge throne of the Queen of Saba'. Maybe when Quantum Teleportation is finally cracked, we'll come back to the Qur'an and continue wondering of it's infinite MIRACLES!

[@waveafterwave6666]

You have misinterpreted the story, the throne here represent her domain.

[@XaeeD]

@@waveafterwave6666 No, he's pretty much spot on, except that in the language of the Qur'an, the event wasn't technically a miracle, which means that it's a type of knowledge that other human beings could potentially discover and implement (through science). Saying the throne is a metaphor for the Kingdom of Sheba is very problematic. It's quite literal, the text. And it serves a clear function, in the situational context the story presents, which would be entirely lost if "throne" just meant "her domain". Another subtle 'error', imo, that BalarabeSallau makes, is that it was some unknown companion of Sulayman(as) who achieved the feat. Some exegetes say it was Sulayman(as) himself who did that, and I agree with their proofs and reasoning for that.

[@khanPK2N]

If your looking at it sciencetificly the throne was probably not telaported though it would have appeared that way. More reasonable would be that we can not see the djinn as they live in another dimention of space and as such can warp are 3 dimensional space through say a 4 dimention so moving the throne to us appears like it went a massive distance but the djinn only moved a small distance through the 4 dimention. Its simpler to think of it in tearms of 2d and 3d in the classic example if "flatland"

[@BalarabeSallau-oo3fj]

@@waveafterwave6666 But how? Never heard of such exegesis before. The Qur'an literally mentioned that it's 'the Throne' not anything else.

[@BalarabeSallau-oo3fj]

@@khanPK2N Quite reasonable, but again there wasn't a mention of any Djinn in the process of the transport. It just said someone that has a knowledge from the book, unequivocally we can agree that it's a kind of 'advanced knowledge' that the individual used to transport the throne.

[@iamleoooo]

It would be amazing if professor Shoaib can have a discussion with the paleontologist professor Nizar Ibrahim

[@extraordinary.verses]

I converted to Islam because of the following: Quran in simple terms is a book which makes the claim "i created". He added proofs as follows: In Quran 21.30, God said heavens and the earth were a joint entity and we separated them. Joint entity was recently discovered and is referred to as ‘model of singularity’ which basically means that the entire universe existed as a singularity. Then, the big bang (separated them). God ordered the sky and Earth to come into being from smoke. 11-Then He directed Himself to the heaven while it was smoke and said to it and to the earth, "Come [into being], willingly or by compulsion." They said, "We have come willingly”. Scientists discovered the cosmic dust. It is not the same as the dust you find in your house but more like smoke. It is the raw material from which planets like the Earth are formed.

[@victoremman4639]

And the Miracle dwells the arabic language : "create" is from latin culture, and doesn't reflect the precise meaning of برء and خلق. The 1rst in creation from a separation (like in genesis 1.1) and the second it's the opposite, by addition and positioning.

[@erique-eljoven]

Smoke is not a sentient being that can evaluate requests and then refuse or oblige, apart from in fairytales. You're now going to give up Islam?

[@victoremman4639]

@@erique-eljoven You have so much to learn before asking to do anything to other.. There is a hadith, a saying from the last messenger of God which said before the Creation started, there was عماء (a'ma) translated by "clouds" or "nebula", and this word his compound by the etyma (archaic root) عم which is about a gathering, more precise an aggregate. I think you may learn astronomy and what's gravity. Then come back to learn Islam and who created you. :)

[@erique-eljoven]

​​@@victoremman4639 What are you on about? The verse says that Allah asked smoke to do something and the smoke said that it would do it. That is nonsense, as is the Quran.

[@victoremman4639]

@@erique-eljoven It's about a will carried in all creations. Do you see with your eye Allah's Wills behind Smoke ? Only the human could desobey among all the creations. Don't you read the bible ? So, a theological question : is satan able to desobey ?

[@akramassaf1711]

I wish he had a chance to meet Dr Mohamed Shahroor ❤

[@FardeenKhan-et4mt]

Bring saqlain chaudhary back @ blogging theology

[@MuhammadAbdElhalim-jh2os]

Abu Hurairah said: (The Messenger of Allah *Peace and blessings be upon him* never expressed disapproval of food; if he desired it, he ate it, and if he disliked it, he left it alone.)

[@dont-click-here-or-seeplaylist]

Good to know, jazakallaah!

[@blockingtheology5573]

The Prophet even ate poisoned lamb, as he desired it.

[@orangitulah]

InsyaAllah. I like to know science and Al Quran because sometime I had experienced unsual and abnormal incident that I like to know why and how. Wallahualam

[@N.Y.C.FreddyBling-z9u]

Wow! **Hopefully? :: WHAT a *BOOK!* :: Thank you! .,.

[@alberxenos]

Assalamu’alaikum warahmatullahi wabarakatuh السَّلاَمُ عَلَيْكُمْ وَرَحْمَةُ اللهِ وَبَرَكَاتُهُ

[@BloggingTheology]

wa alaikum assalam

[@Faisalbinomar-qx9yx]

Please use the keys we had shared in our daily conversation. It is more potent 🙏

[@Faqr-e-Ghayoor]

Great

[@Faisalbinomar-qx9yx]

How things work is explained in Chapter 11 of A Book. Hud, hierarchy of utilize with deliver. Hudan - hierarchy of utilize with create from deliver activation with numerous (Gift from The One). Thanks for reminding us.

[@maajed4687]

the best due in west

[@Mu3az523]

I have been thinking about the position of artificial intelligence and the point that occupies my mind is that artificial intelligence lacks instincts and desires. The pursuit of these desires was the motivation for humanity to make inventions, build nations and wage wars. For example, artificial intelligence does not have the instinct to preserve the species, so how will it wage a war based on racism against humans when this desire was not programmed into it? I think this part is what preventing AI to be considered Mukalaf because it's will be more like angles rather than humans because lacking of desires

[@erique-eljoven]

Islam and science: "We decide which science practices are inadmissible because they do not align with Islam, under the guise of making what we think look like scientific objections".

[@MrDoenerliebhaber]

Science and Technology in Islam (5 Volumes) by Fuat Sezgin …

[@snakejuce]

I learned recently that Scots pronounce Edinburgh as Paul did. He stays true to tradition. "Edin-burra." They make a point to remind us that "Edinbruh" is English, and they are not English.

[@RC-jr4in]

Interesting but one issue is that believing AI to have a conscience like humans is completely illogical given it is something artificial/technological and not created by Allah.

[@Faisalbinomar-qx9yx]

Alam tara - activation with way perform from link activation with automation from mechanic by Learn from memory[tantalum] activation with view from EYE receptor activation with.. Assalamualaikum

[@KaiKoerber]

All praise be to Allah, such an inquisitive mind! In regards to AI , isn’t it true that we build these thinking machines with worldly material and could it be that quantum entanglement is far more wide spread than we assume, implying divine oversight, that yes men build it but by divine inspiration just as he taught men the use of the pen?

[@mohammadnematullah9140]

نبی کریم ﷺ نے جب سورج غروب ہوا تو ان سے پوچھا کہ تم کو معلوم ہے? یہ سورج کہاں جاتا ہے ؟ میں نے عرض کی کہ اللہ اور اس کے رسول ہی کو علم ہے ۔ آپ ﷺ نے فرمایا کہ یہ جاتا ہے اور عرش کے نیچے پہنچ کر پہلے سجدہ کرتا ہے ۔ پھر ( دوبارہ آنے کی ) اجازت چاہتا ہے اور اسے اجازت دی جاتی ہے اور وہ دن بھی قریب ہے ، جب یہ سجدہ کرے گا تو اس کا سجدہ قبول نہ ہو گا اور اجازت چاہے گا لیکن اجازت نہ ملے گی ۔ بلکہ اس سے کہا جائے گا کہ جہاں سے آیا تھا وہیں واپس چلا جا ۔ چنانچہ اس دن وہ مغرب ہی سے نکلے گا ۔ اللہ تعالیٰ کے فرمان (سورۃ یٰسٓ آیت 38 ) میں اسی طرف اشارہ ہے ۔ صحیح بخاری حدیث نمبر 3199

[@Faisalbinomar-qx9yx]

Adāma - Activation with initiate from create deliver activity with automation from use mechanic activation with.. Adam is NOT a person rather creations that has automation 'programed' into it. Assalamualaikum

[@brotheryosef3066]

22:13 Dr shoaib has not talked about when a time comes and ai conquers us like in the movie matrix. He mentioned only the good part of personal robot assistants.

[@VanoinRussia-hj5sf]

Felt like an extended advertisement, more of an American thing then an English one to talk for 30 minutes, give few ideas and leave the feeling that that the listener has to sign up for something.

[@عبدالله-ن6ه2ص]

There are wonderful books about Islam and science that I suggest you buy, such as: 1. The Bible, The Quran and Science, Maurice Bucaille 2. The Qur'an & Modern Science: Compatible or Incompatible? by Dr. Zakir Naik 3. Scientific Facts revealed in the glorious Qur'an by Dr. book Zaghloul Al-Najjar 4. Scientific Miracles in the Qur'an & Sunnah by Abdullah Bin Abdul Aziz Al-Musleh 5. Miracles of the Qur'anThe fac ts that can't be denied by Science by Yūsūf Ḥājj Aḥmad 6. Science and its facts between the integrity of the Holy Qur’an and the errors of the Torah and the Bible, Dr. Sami Ameri (not translated into English)

[@sweeyong7756]

Does morality stand the test of time?

[@sabaffira]

Science is to learn and discover how this whole matrix work. Humans designed tools and now computers, robots and AI to carry out our “wills”. Imagine the Creator and the universe He has created to carry out His Will. Perhaps that’s what it means by us being created in His image. We are little creators…

[@nabilmohjazi4694]

Science can be proving wrong even Noble prize winners,,!

[@kalijasin]

Doesn't science have to be wrong to be right i.e. falsification?

[@neem-shab-sultanat]

is this an ad ?

[@SulaimanRufau]

Islam and science are compatible one another ..Islam is a rational religion. How many times Quran asks man to reflect on the creation of university. .No religion has demand man to ponder over universe; planets and all creatures as Islam does and yet why Muslims are backward now

[@aznanzuhidsaidin3512]

Respectfully disagreeing with the speaker on AI. The other commenters mention on ruh is spot on. AI will never have ruh. AI is basically machine that does complex processing. It is a machine. Period. The direction on AI for Muslims is to make technology for the benefit of mankind. Not to create another 'species'.

[@Faisalbinomar-qx9yx]

Robots and AI is mentioned in QS2:30. Only humans are given library to create choice feature with way. But will humans spill blood with mala'ikati? 🤔

[@Mu3az523]

There's another problem within evolution theory is that it's the question why we don't do some scientific experiments in humans while we do the same experiments in animals if human and animals have the same origin isn't kind of racism If the answer humans have higher IQ some diseases make humans have lower IQ even than animals is it ok to do experiments on those animals

[@Free_Falestine]

The topic is HATED by mostly Sanatanis alais Hindus.

[@waveafterwave6666]

To even insinuate that AI could have consciousness-as define in the Quran-is indicative this brother do not understand what the "ruh" represents in the Quran. Also, why does he places such high value on AI is very bizarre.

[@odeebob7826]

Can AI possess a soul like humans? I believe it’s impossible, as this verse of Quran mentioned. “ And they ask you, [O Muhammad], about the soul. Say, "The soul is of the affair of my Lord. And mankind have not been given of knowledge except a little." - Quran 17 : 85

[@matishakabdullah5874]

What was the biggest miracle scientology? The transformation of the universal nothingness(physical singularity) to the universal existence reality (non-singular physical reality) in Planks time = 10exp(-43) second!

[@waveafterwave6666]

To say one could feed the corpus of the Quran into an AI means he do not understand not just what AI are but what the Quran is. The Muslim world would continue to fall into the abyss of darkness because of these scholars. .

[@haythemlutfi]

What you said is very unclear. However, if I understood you right: then I completely agree! I was about to put my own comment about this Interview and the person being interviewed, but I will leave it at what you said. And thank you for the comment.

[@waveafterwave6666]

@@haythemlutfi Thanks, but which part of my comment is unclear?

[@haythemlutfi]

@@waveafterwave6666 When you said these scholars: it wasn’t clear who you were referring to.

[@haythemlutfi]

@@waveafterwave6666 تقصدالغزالي؟ لو اهل علم الكلام؟ لو هذا "ابو الدكتوراة" الذي استضافه پول مشكوراً؟ لأن هذا الضيف لا يُسمى scholar لا من قريب ولا من بعيد ولا ب ٥ دكتوراة

[@waveafterwave6666]

@@haythemlutfi I was referring to Dr. Shoaib who seems to lack the fundamental grasp of the words of Allah and the nature AI. In fact, to even insinuate its possible for AI to recreate a better Quran take him out of the fold of Islam.

[@rainman7769]

Khazali was Sufi Ashaary, he got in to philosophy and got in too much troubles.

[@A.--.]

First of all we have to define Humans (including everyone Adam till now) and Pre-Humans (Neanderthals etc). Then we need to describe the characteristics of each (similarities and differences). Then we need to identify how the latter are similar to animals. Evolution as a natural phenomenam among animals is acceptable but Humans are not animals (unlike Pre-Humans). God put the divine Spirit in Humans which He did not give animals. Their genotypes have similarities but their phenotype is missing the Soul. Unless we can manufacture a Soul-sensing machine, we will never be able to differentiate the phenotype of Humans from pre-Humans.

[@Faisalbinomar-qx9yx]

ET spaceships are made with electricity. Nothing special. That's what we had been talking for 2000 years but humans disagree with us. Anyway please utilize electricity every second, gift from The One. Assalamualaikum

[@ateeqn1985]

20:15.. this guy thinks ai could think... does he think it has spirit spirit? Sounds so speculative and subjective without any base or deduction

[@Truthlight403]

Where does the Quran say the earth is flat? Give me the chapter and verse Where does the Bible say the earth is spherical? The Bible suggests the earth is only a few thousand years old. Which is obviously wrong.

[@dont-click-here-or-seeplaylist]

quran never says earth is flat

[@erique-eljoven]

The heavens are above the earth and Allah's throne is above the heavens. Thus the earth is flat. Also, more subtle, the sun sets somewhere on earth. Thus the earth is flat.

[@blockingtheology5573]

Surah 36:38. The sun goes to a resting place at night

[@XaeeD]

This is addressing a Christian in the comments, who keeps spreading nonsense. My response to him isn't sticking, because YT is at it again, so I'll respond to @arnoldjackson-q2j here. "Gen 1:1,2 clearly says ... Here the instant or time of the beginning is not specified, leaving it to time indefinite,that is billions of years ago." The verse doesn't mention "billions of years". That's you talking. You claim it's billions of years. Most Jews and Christians never believed it to be billions of years. You're only saying it now, because science tells us that it's billions of years. Your reasoning here is basically this: The verse doesn't say exactly how long ago "in the beginning" was, and science says the universe is ~13,5 billion years old, so that must be the implied duration in the verse. Completely arbitrary, as such. Moreover, the chapter goes on to mention nights and mornings to indicate the passage of days relative from the perspective of the earth, and so from "the beginning", there are literally six 24 hour days that pass, until the God of Genesis takes a break on the seventh day, which is literally called the seventh day in Hebrew. If you read the classical Jewish exegeses on these verses, e.g. Rashi's commentaries; you can see that they have always interpreted this in a literal sense. These six days are literally six 24 hour days from the perspective of the earth. So the creation of everything mentioned in those verses occurred over the course of a week. Then, when the story of Adam and Eve in the Garden takes place, history further unfolds as it has, with the human species existing on the earth. When scholars add up the genealogies mentioned throughout the Bible, it's around 6000 years from Adam and Eve leaving the Garden, up until the present day. So no, it's not billions of years. Furthermore, according to Genesis, the earth was formed on the first day of creation, along with the heavens, which means that according to the Bible, the earth is the same age as the rest of the universe. If you say the universe is 13,5 billion years old, then the earth should also be 13,5 billion years old. If you say the earth is 4,5 billion years old, then the universe should also be 4,5 billion years old. You can't have it both ways. And either way leads to a scientific error, since, according to science, the earth is much younger than the universe (as a whole). So what about the Qur'an? The Qur'an also mentions six days of creation. And this too should be interpreted in the literal sense. However, the Qur'an never mentions nights and mornings in relation to this, and the creation of the universe refers to its total duration of existence. Meaning that the universe is six days old, and that it won't exist for a seventh day. The difference here, is that these six days are NOT from the perspective of the earth. They are the six days of duration of the universe, from the perspective of the Throne of God. Then the Qur'an mentions that the earth's existence (as an actual planet) pertains to the last two days of the creation. The earth isn't formed on day one. It exists in the fifth and sixth day. Whatever matter preceded its formation existed prior to that, as the matter that would eventually form our planet came from preceding stars and what-not. But the planet, as it came to be; i.e. as an actual singular object in space, only exists during the last two days. If we use scientific dates, and apply that to the Quranic ratio for the existence of the universe and the existence of the earth, which is six days and two days, then the earth should be around a third of the age of the universe (as a whole). If we say that the universe is 13,5 billion years old, then a third of that would be 4,5 billion years. If we say that the earth is 4,6 billion years old, then the universe should be 13,8 billion years old. So the Quranic ratio of 1/3 for the age of the earth compared to the age of the universe, is actually spot on. In fact, the ratio is more ideal than simply stating the ages in (billions of) years, because time is relative, and the 13,5 to 4,5 billion year comparison would only be true for observers on earth, but wouldn't be true for observers elsewhere in the universe, or near a black hole, or from the Throne of God. The ratio of 1/3, on the other hand, is true for all observers, nomatter their location. So what else do you have to say? "The six days or 6000 years you are speaking about is not about the creation of universe but the creative periods on earth" I already went over this. And you're wrong, by the way. The six Biblical days are not a thousand years long, each. They are literally six earth days: "night & morning". One day for God being like a thousand years for mankind, doesn't apply to the six days, according to the exegetes. It applies to after the fall of man. God tells Adam in Genesis 2:17 that if he disobeys God's commandment, then on that day, he would dye. But when he consumes the fruit, he doesn't dye on that day. He lives to be 930 years old, according to the Bible, and so he dyes (I'm misspelling this on purpose because of YT algos), within a thousand years (i.e. on that day, from God's perspective, and not relative to the earth and sun). "Earth is circle (Isaiah 40:22)" hayyōšêḇ ‘al-ḥūḡ hā’āreṣ It's He Who sits above the circle of the earth.. This is like Isaiah 44:13 The carpenter stretched out a line, he beautifies it with a saw; he fixes it with planes, and with a compass he rounds it, and he made it in the likeness of a man.. The "compass" there is the woodworking tool; a technical drawing instrument that can be used for inscribing circles or arcs. In Hebrew, "and with a compass he rounds it" is ūḇamməḥūḡāh yəṯā’orêhū, using the same word ḥūḡ that's used in 40:22. So the instrument that draws circles on a flat surface is called məḥūḡāh, and the circle it outlines is ḥūḡ. It's literally a circle, not a three dimensional sphere. The carpenter works with flat boards, and the decorations he carves in them may have some relief, but are made upon the surface of a flat piece of wood. Proverbs 8:27 When He established the heavens, there I was, when He drew a circle over the face of the deep. In Hebrew it says bəḥūqōw ḥūḡ ‘al-pənê ṯəhōwm, meaning "when He drew a circle upon the face of the deep", meaning a circle drawn on the surface of the deep. He didn't draw/inscribe a sphere on the surface of the deep. How do you draw a 3D sphere on a flat surface? No, this "circle" clearly describes our field of vision, which is always circular: the far horizon is always a circle from our perspective, and God sits above this circle, watching down on us, according to the Bible. Rashi comments on this, saying: "When He drew the circle of the earth over the water, to draw a boundary that it may not pass, [then] it's an expression of encircling". Song of Solomon 7:2 šārərêḵ ’aggan hassahar Your navel is a goblet; rounded The earth is never described as "rounded" in a spherical sense. "Earth is suspended without support ( job 26:7)" Irrelevant.. "Everything is created by God's energy (Isaiah 40:26)" Doesn't say that. "Every information of living beings in God's book (Psalms 139:16)" Yes, God knows everything. Irrelevant. So there you have it.

[@RayOfHope8]

🍉🍉🌹🌹❤️❤️🤲🤲

[@hassanmirza2392]

Nice 😊🎉

[@sergegaash]

Nothing new. He is just trying to reconcile religion and science, and to do so he is interpreting his religion in a way that makes it possible to align it with modern science. And from a scientific perspective, his efforts seem to water down basic scientific principles to fit religious beliefs. Very questionable.

[@Millathunmain]

Why not question the realism of scientific principles.

[@sergegaash]

@ lol, do you think scientific principles aren’t questioned?

[@AJ-pc9gu]

You sound like a rationalist. Let me ask that when the Qur'an says 21:30 "Do the disbelievers not realize that the heavens and earth were one mass then We split them apart? And We created from water every living thing. Will they not then believe?", what do you think? You're a rationalist, who analyses cause and effect. We have an effect (the verse), what's the cause? The background of the author is a good place to start, perhaps it's a copy from ancient stories. 1) Biblical: This simply isn't akin to genesis. Genesis says earth and heavens were created at the same time. Then the sky was created to separate the heavenly waters, then the stars were made to decocorate the sky. The Qur'an doesn't mention heavenly waters, nor a firmament and says the sun (our nearest star) was made before the earth 79:29-30 "He dimmed its night, and brought forth its daylight. And after that He spread the earth." Simply, there are next to zero parallels with Genesis and the Qur'an's account other than both use "6 days" as the time needed. The Qur'an treats days as indefinite periods, sometimes referring to 50,000 years (70:4) sometimes 1000 years (22:47), the bible clearly says day, evening and night and reinforces the analogy by saying that God rested on the 7th day - which J's use for sabbath. 2) Babylonian: This creation story is actually very similar to the bible. Light exists before the creation of the sun, moon, and stars. there is a division of the waters above and below, with a barrier holding back the upper waters.The sequence of creation is similar, including the division of waters, dry land, luminaries, and humanity, all followed by rest. Along with special mention of tigris and euphrates, showing this is obviously a story tied to it's people. Again, Earth is said to predate the sun, like in the bible, there is a separation of waters, there is light before there's any star. In summary only the most unfair would say the Qur'an is similar. The funny thing, and I'd be impressed if you follow me on this tangent, is that it actually seems to be aware of their stories and shows how they went wrong. Like the cosmic waters is referred to indirectly by saying in 35:12, except here the waters are just fresh river water and salty ocean water. It also says 11:7 "He is the One Who created the heavens and the earth in six Days-and His Throne was upon the waters-in order to test which of you is best in deeds." So it's clearly aware of the waters idea, and it validates it in a poetic sense (that life comes from water but not creation). Believe me I've seen my fair share of orientalists get so excited when they hear about two waters "ahah! it's the cosmic waters story" then to find out it's just haloclines. Even the the arab exegetes and scholars didn't understand what the Qur'an meant, since Arabia has no rivers. They knew it referred to fresh and saltwater but they didn't understand the concept of densities since they couldn't observe this themselves. Then also more obviously Quran 50:38 "And We did certainly create the heavens and earth and what is between them in six days, and there touched Us no weariness" to contradict how the bible said God rested on the 7th day. So it's kind of a response to these ancients stories, it validates parts, contradicts others. However I for one find it impressive that it aligns with modern science in a way that other ancient texts don't. I wish you luck on your spiritual journey (I hope that's why you're here, rather than to put other's down).

[@Millathunmain]

@@sergegaash lol do you know anything about Scientific Anti-realism in Philosophy of Science?

[@sergegaash]

@@Millathunmain i know enough about that, do you think science and scientists don’t question the scientific realism?

[@jimhuggard5398]

Hey, all you wannabe Muslim scientists, don't forget what it says in Surah 33, verse 36! 😡

[@kalijasin]

A lot of the scientific theories we have today - including the theory of evolution, come from Muslims.

[@Pax-Africana]

DID "ALLAH" SET THE ARABS UP FOR IDENTITY THEFT? Or was it just an honest misunderstanding on the part of Al-Bukhari, Ibn Ishaq, Al-Muslim, etc the early biographers of the Arabian Founding Father? Judge for yourself for somebody is fussing about something: "The Ishmaelites have sworn by God their inmost oath that If they had their own Messiah, they would become believers, now that we are trying to arise among themselves their own Muhammad, yet this only increases their hostility..." Shaking their heads, they ask in disbelief: Who is this? So you think he is a real Prince? What kind of Prince is this? He walks about market place, he eats food in the street corners..." Qur'an With this type of verses I came to think that "Allah" set the Arabs up for identity theft, and my intuition is being confirmed in the Sirah Rassul Allah, and in Al-Bukhari, Al-Muslim and the rest of the Hadith collectors... "Allah" even uses Messiah and Muhammad interchangeably as in these verses: Messiah is not but a Messenger; other Messengers have passed on before him. Surah 5:75 Muhammad is not but a Messenger; other Messengers have passed on before him. Surah 3:144 Which take us to my point that Islam is a Christian Apostolic Tradition in competition with Catholicism the actual Nazareans in the Qur'an. This Apostolic Tradition can be linked back to the First Apostolic Council of Jerusalem in Acts 15:1-32 as its proponents rejected the Councils of Nicaea and Constantinople with their Trinitarian overtone. It was not until the 9th century that Islam was severed from Christianity and turned into a full blown and independent religion through ruse and deception by Ibn Ishaq, Al-Bukhari, Al-Muslim, etc. But according to Deuteronomy 18:15:19, Messiah is still a Prophet(Messenger) in the likeness of Moses as it is written: "I will sent them the Messiah(HaMashiach), a Prophet like you Moses, him they must listen..." Acts: 3:17-24; John 4:25-26; Acts 7:1-30; Acts 17:1-3 However, it turns also out that the NAZAREANS as they are called in the Qur'an or Catholics TOO have no clue as what the issues are in the polemical exchanges between Jesus and the Jewish establishment. They think it is about "Son of God." According to the book of Acts 11:26 the Jews who fled Jerusalem for Antioch of Syria were called Christians, a derogatory term coined by the pagans to refer to anyone who confessed Jesus to be the awaited Christ foretold in the Torah of Moses. That definition still holds true. Yet in Islam Mary gave birth to the same Messiah, that is to say Christos in Greek parlance, which makes the Muslims Christians. Some of them even think that being a Christian is the belief that Jesus died for your sins on the cross. Would not "Crossianism" be a proper term to brand that belief? And since the Qur'an makes no mention of the Cross which turns out to be the symbol of the Roman Penal Law, then Islam might be ANTI-CHRIST... WHAT? Others conflate Jesus and Christ deliberately ignoring that Christos is Greek for HaMashiach(Messiah) its Hebraic counterpart... Many even think Jesus spoke Greek or English with American accent. WHAT A SEA OF CONFUSIONS! How did we get here? Martin Luther, I am looking at you ! The point being, Jesus is Muhammad, the Blessed, Praised, and Resurrected Messiah(Christ) and Muhammad actually is Abu Al-Quasim. The Muslims are Christians of a different Apostolic Tradition for the Circumcised rooted in the authority of the Apostolic Council of Jerusalem in Acts 15:1-32 SO IT WAS WRITTEN, SO IT WAS EXPOUNDED ! See Also: 1/The Council Of Jerusalem And The Partition Of Christianity Into Two Apostolic Traditions: Circumcised(Muslims) Vs. Uncircumcised(Paul and His Nazareans or Catholics). 2/The Making Of The Arabian Version Of Caesar Augustus, Sole Ruler Of Mankind.

[@A.--.]

Also, the theory of evolution has giant holes. The most striking one is lack of evidence for Abiogenesis. Without Abiogenesis there is no Evolution. Random mutations never give rise to advantage phenotypic features but rather phenotypically inferior traits. If theiry of evolution was correct, we would see a whole lot more diversity between branches than we do. How can an insect look exactly like a leaf or twig or branch in its environment but we dont find one looking a little bit less and another even less and another alot less like its environment? The gaps in phenotypic dissimilarity are so wide, simple evolution cannot explain this. In other words if evolution was correct the tree would look more like a bush of hedges than a sparsely branches date palm.

[@haythemlutfi]

The name of this video is very attractive, but what I’ve heard in this video is simply a disappointment. He wasn’t able to answer any of Paul’s questions I. A way that makes him sound as if someone who studied Islam, not even on an entry level, so never mind the number of PhD’s

[@A.--.]

You lost me Imam Ghazali...he injected the disease of Tasawuff into the Ummah and put us all to sleep. Ibn Taymia was also Sufi-Tasawuff leaning.

[@richardbradley1532]

Are not compatible

[@rafiksaibi9213]

Do you feel smart with this kind of comment ?

[@richardbradley1532]

@rafiksaibi9213 no, simply the truth. Watch Paul's on video on his red lines in evolution to see some evidence. Where the Quran and science contradict each other, Muslims have no choice but to go against the scientific evidence.

[@richardbradley1532]

​@rafiksaibi9213 Paul's own video on evolution proves my point. He states that he has red lines where evolution goes against the Quran. Where there is a conflict between the two, Muslims have no choice other than to ignore the scientific evidence.

[@rethabilefeni4694]

​​@@richardbradley1532yes, Islam and science are not compatible. tell us then, when the West was experiencing (going through) the Dark Ages in Medieval Times, why was the Middle East and Islamic West (Southern Spain, Morocco and Algeria) the most technological advanced societies then? why did the Enlightenment thinkers build on the works of ibn Rushd, ibn Suna, Al-Khwarizmi, etc., if Islam and science weren't compatible? why was the father of optics a Muslim? why was the father of early modern medicine Muslim? why was the father of Algerba Muslim? why was the father of rationality Muslim? if Islam and Science are not compatible? i just need clarity.

[@shoopinc]

@@richardbradley1532evolution is not science, it is a religious story told by atheists to explain their origin within their erroneous fundamental domain of knowledge. People of knowledge do not need to follow that aberration of human thought. We can instead orient ourselves towards the truth which God asks us to seek.

[@arnoldjackson-q2j]

Qur'an is full of scientific fallacies: 1. Qur'an 23:14 says Drop is converted in to clinging clot of blood, which transforms in to lump of mass. Up to this point, it takes 3 days. Science says: Zygote turns in Morula which in turn transforms into blastocyst ( lump of mass). There is not a single blood cell in between, Let alone clot of blood😂. It appears only after 16 days of fertilization. 2. Qur'an 23;14 says LUMP of mass transforms in to bones which is then covered by flesh to form fetus. Science says, Skin, cartilage and flesh tissues first starts to appear on the 3 rd week of fertilization, followed appearance of bone tissues on 6 th week. Hence Qur'an is Wrong. 3. Qur'an says Earth is flattened by Allah. Science says earth is spherical. 4. Qur'an says Allah created universe in 6000 years , science says it took atleast 13.7 billion years to come in to existence. 5. Muslims says Qur'an proves big Bang theory but big Bang theory is a theory like theory of evolution, not fully accepted as FACT in scientific community. Biblical scientific FACTs: 1. God created universe billions of years ago his creative activities on earth. So do science says. 2. God created everything with his energy. So do science says. 3. Genetic information of living beings are written in their genes . Bible says every detail of body is written in God's book. 4. Earth is spherical, so do the science says. 5. Earth is suspended without any support in space, so do the science says. 6. Water cycle of Bible coincides with scientific discovery. "No science is more proved than Bible" : Sir Issac Newton.

[@omarmirza9957]

Did you even watch the video above? Your own post is full of oft-refuted fallacies, and brazen misinterpretations of the Quran. I assure you the highly qualified speaker in this video, Dr. Shoaib Malik, would be shaking his head at how silly your claims are. Consider three bits of knowledge. Geography has established the fact that pearls can come from both freshwater and saltwater, something not known to centuries of highly educated medieval Quran commentators living in the Near East, but clearly stated in the Quran. Egyptology has established the fact that the word 'Pharaoh' was not used as a title for the king throughout the duration of ancient Egyptian civilization, and this perfectly correlates with the way the Quran refrains from using the word in connection with Joseph's(as) Hyksos king, while using it to name the New Kingdom king addressed by Musa(as). History has established the fact that the emperor Heraclius was able to turn the tide against the Persians after they had overrun him in the Holy Land, something predicted by the Quran at a time when it looked nearly impossible. These bits of knowledge from several different fields were not circulating among the illiterate seventh century Arabs living near Mecca or Medina before being revealed in the Quran. How did they make it into the Quran? Please consult the channel @RefutingOrientalists to learn more.

[@dont-click-here-or-seeplaylist]

your strawman argument is based on false translation, not a single word in arabic text means blood. arabic text means a clot its a single arabic word not two words

[@sparephone8228]

You're a complete waste of time

[@dont-click-here-or-seeplaylist]

number 2 your argument is backed with no evidence verse 23:14 says "then We made this drop(fluid) into a clot, then We made the clot into a lump, then We made the lump into bones, then We clothed the bones with flesh, and then We caused it to grow into another creation. Thus Most Blessed is Allah, the Best of all those that create." Before bones form, the body is primarily made up of cartilage, which is a flexible and rubbery tissue. This stage occurs during embryonic development. The early skeletal structure is shaped by this cartilage, which will later undergo a process called ossification, where it gradually turns into bone. During this time, the embryo also has a lot of fluid-filled spaces and soft tissues, allowing for flexibility and growth. The development involves complex signaling and interactions between cells, leading to the formation of the basic skeletal framework that supports the body as it grows. The process of flesh forming over bones, involving the development of muscles, connective tissues, and skin, is generally part of morphogenesis. More specifically, muscle development is called myogenesis, while the formation of skin is referred to as epidermal development. so this means that the quranic description is absolutely accurate you either misunderstood the weak translations or lack knowledge in this field. please dont copy paste fallacious arguments.

[@dont-click-here-or-seeplaylist]

number 3 is a lie present a reference to the original arabic quran not weak or false translations, i challange you.