The Islamic perspective of God

[@memetmemet5251]

Subhanallah..greeting from Indonesia 🙏

[@qudsiaraja9332]

MashaAllah 👍

[@theoskeptomai2535]

I have never encountered any evidence of a god.

[@AsFewFalseThingsAsPossible]

Hi, I will comment on the various claims made in this video. Firstly, I just want to point out that what religious beliefs you have is very very closely correlated with geography and the beliefs of those who raised and educated you. That does not make them true. Much of what is in this video is just a repetition of claims made in other YT videos, but since it's being viewed by young New Zealanders, I want to help them resist its claims, and to help the video maker reconsider his position. 1. Just Pascal's Wager - so well refuted I don't need to. 2. We have evidence that both camels and camel dung exist. The existence of the universe does not support the argument that any god was responsible. It may be something else. It may be a natural process. All the evidence we have is that is/was a natural process which is still continuing as the universe expands. We still have no evidence that any gods exist. Or any mechanism which could generate gods. The time to accept a claim is when there is evidence for it. Until then "I don't know" is best. Going on to the argument from design. Noone is proposing that the Eiffel Tower just popped into existence. There was clearly a well documented design and build process. Only religions such as Islam propose that things magically pop into existence fully formed, so you are really defeating your own position here. Noone is suggesting that the solar system (your graphic is quite misleading) formed by chance. There are natural forces, which are well known which cause planets and stars to form, and to later explode, seeding heavy elements into the universe. We can observe this process. It's called a supernova. Gravitation causes planets. You show a picture of Einstein, have you ever studied physics or cosmology ? 3. Talking about the appearance of life, using the phase "by themselves' is again indicative of your lack of understanding. It is not the claim of biology, that living things arise "by themselves" They have ancestors. Look at your own head. You have eyes above nose above mouth. Just take a moment to compare this to other vertebrates. You share a common ancestor with them. 4. Why are you interpreting the formation of the sun and the water cycle as having an agent responsible ?? The simplest explanation is that nature can result in solar systems and life. You don't need to invent a very complex entity like a god, which must have its own origin story. 5. This claim about the time required for a protein molecule to form is obviously not made by anyone who knows about how biochemical evolution works. Just non sense. Chemical reactions occur, and are highly predictable. 6. Again no this does not infer "There should be a god". The correct conclusion is "There is a process which gives rise to these things." Let's do some science and find out what it is." 7. "Certainty of Sight" It is best to reject these claims because this is the argument from popularity. Just as millions of honest people have seen the sun rise in the morning and die believing that the sun is moving, they can all be wrong. Especially when they are are indoctrinated as children into such a belief. Hearing voices and seeing visions is not a mentally healthy position. 8. The correct way to evaluate "prophesies" is to look at what was claimed and then what happened. Unfortunately many so called "prophesies" are of the form where the prophet gets to write the history book. So the prophesy comes AFTER the event. In any case, correctly predicting the future is no evidence for any gods. Claiming that there is knowledge which was not available to someone in the 7th C in the Koran has been well debunked. infidels.org/library/modern/denis_giron/islamsci.html "While the Muslims argued that advanced scientific knowledge in the Qur'an is a sign of divine origin, the rational thinker points out that the numerous and obvious scientific errors point to a wholly human origin." 9. Predictive dreams happen whether one believes in a a god or not. We remember the ones which come true, that is a biased data set. 10. Of course if you live in a religious community, you will become more convinced and religious, but that does not make the existential claims made by the religion, whichever it is, true. Absolute certainty. This is just religious delusion, possibly aligned with mental illness. The truth of a claim is determined by evidence for that claim, not falling prostrate before anyone. The obvious difficulty is that this presupposes that a god exists, for you to be appealing to. You run the great risk of causing a delusion by reinforcing that delusion over 40 days, and may end up accepting claims without evidence, other than that generated by your own psychological processes. I hope this helps to refute the claims made in this video. Feel free to reply with any further questions.

[@mikaeljohansson7921]

No proof of gods.