Ads by Muslim Ad Network


Results 1 to 28 of 28
  1. #1
    Senior Member karkooshy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2015
    Gender
    Boy Male
    Posts
    273
    Mentioned
    14 Post(s)
    Quoted
    173 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    16

    A Summarized Proof for Islam



    Introduction

    All praise is due to Allah Lord of the worlds, and peace be upon our noble messenger Muhammed ﷺ. What follows is a summarized proof for Islam, simplified for average readers.

    The key to Islam is the testimony of faith, which is to bear witness that there is only One God and that Muhammed ﷺ is His messenger. Accordingly, the foundational claims of Islam are three: that God exists, that God is One, that Muhammed ﷺ is a prophet of God.


    Section 1 - The World is Emergent

    The existence of God is established by realizing that the bodies that make up the observable world around us, are all emergent. This necessitates the existence of a being that brought them into existence.

    “Emergent” meaning: their existence is preceded by their non-existence. In other words, they began to exist. That which is emergent will be called an “event”.

    “Body” meaning: that with dimensions (a height, width or depth) stretched out in space. Like stars, planets, mountains, oceans, plants, animals, humans...etc.

    All bodies are emergent because the alternative is absurd. The alternative being the existence of a body that is beginningless.

    It is impossible for a beginningless body to exist, because a body is inseparable from either the state of motion, or the state of rest. Meaning: it is impossible for a body to be neither at rest nor moving. So if a beginningless body existed, it would either have been:
    1. moving for eternity past
    2. at rest for eternity past
    3. alternating between motion and rest for eternity past

    All three of the above is impossible, and that which entails impossibility is impossible. So it is impossible for a beginningless body to exist. Proof for the impossibility of each category follows below.

    (1) a body that was moving for eternity past

    This is impossible because the state of motion exists contingently for a body. Meaning: a body that is moving, could have been not-moving. Since the state of motion exists contingently, this means it was brought into existence by some specifier that selected motion over the possible alternative. And since the state of motion was brought into existence, it could not have been beginningless. Therefore a body moving for eternity past is impossible.

    It is also impossible for a body to have been moving for eternity past, because motion is the body changing its location over time. Every transition from one location to another is an event in time, and it is impossible for an infinite number of events to have been completed in the past. And since the number of events in the past is finite, it is the case that the state of motion is emergent.



    The statement: “it is impossible for an infinite number of events to have been completed in the past” is true because “infinite” is equivalent to endlessness, while “completed” is equivalent to coming to an end. Therefore, an infinite sequence of events cannot be completed, since that is contradictory. It is like saying an endlessness came to an end. For this same reason, it is impossible for someone to finish counting all the negative numbers and finally reach zero. There’s an infinite number of negative numbers, you cannot “finish” counting them all.

    (2) a body that was at rest for eternity past

    This is impossible for the same two reasons the first category was impossible.

    The state of rest exists contingently. A body that is at rest, could have been not-resting. Accordingly, the state of rest could not have been beginningless.

    It is also impossible for a body to be at rest for eternity past, because rest is the body maintaining its same location over time. Every moment the body remains at rest in, is an event in time. And it is impossible for an infinite number of events to have been completed in the past.

    (3) a body that was alternating between motion and rest for eternity past

    This is impossible because each alternation from one state to another is an event in time, and it is impossible for an infinite number of events to have been completed in the past.

    Therefore, All Bodies are Emergent

    Given the impossibility of the three categories, it is the case that all bodies are emergent. This means all those bodies that make up the world around us - the sun, the moon, the trees..etc. - began to exist. From there, we can deduce the existence of God.


    Section 2 - The Existence of God

    “God” meaning: the beginningless creator.

    The emergence of all bodies necessitates the existence of a being that brought those bodies into existence. Let’s call this being “the creator”, since this being brings things into existence (and this is what “create” means).

    The creator that brought those bodies into existence is either without beginning, or is emergent.

    If the creator is without beginning, then the existence of God is established. Since a beginningless creator is what we intend when we say “God”.

    If the creator is emergent, then this creator would itself be contingent upon a second creator to have brought it into existence. This could not have regressed to the past infinitely, as that necessitates the completion of an infinite number of past events (which is impossible, as detailed above). It is therefore the case that a beginningless creator necessarily exist.

    Therefore, God necessarily exists.

    It is also necessary that the Creator of the emergent world be attributed with the ability to bring the emergent world into existence. Otherwise, there would be no sense in Him being the “Creator”. This ability to bring things into existence is what we call “Power”.

    God also, cannot be a mechanical cause for the existence of the world (such that the effect only exists because the cause exists), since God is beginningless while the world is emergent (a beginningless mechanical cause, would instead yield a beginningless effect). It is therefore necessary that the Creator of the emergent world be attributed with a quality that allows Him to select existence for this specific world (with all its specific properties) over the possible alternatives. This attribute is what is called “Will”.

    God is also necessarily attributed with Knowledge. In order for a being to volitionally select one choice over others, this being must possess knowledge of those choices. As such, it is impossible for a being attributed with Will to not also be attributed with Knowledge. And since the Creator is necessarily attributed with Will, He is therefore necessarily attributed with Knowledge.


    Section 3 - God is One

    God is necessarily One because the alternative is absurd. The alternative being a multiplicity of creators.

    If there was a second creator, then this second creator would either:
    1. be able to disagree with the first creator.
    2. be unable to disagree with the first creator.

    Both of the categories listed above are impossible. And that which entails impossibility is impossible. So if we can demonstrate the impossibility of the two categories, we can demonstrate the impossibility of partnership to the Creator.

    (1) The second creator is able to disagree with the first creator

    This is impossible because possibilities are mutually exclusive with their negations. So if the two creators could disagree with one another, this would lead to contradiction.

    For example: suppose there were two creators, and suppose the existence of some body. If we believe that those creators could disagree: this means one creator can move the body, while the other creator can keep the body at rest. Obviously however, this body cannot be both at rest and in motion (since rest and motion are mutually exclusive).

    (2) the second creator is unable to disagree with the first creator

    This is impossible because it means this second creator is forced to agree with the other. This entails contingency, which is impossible for a beginningless Creator who is necessarily non-contingent.

    For example: suppose there were two creators, and suppose the existence of some body. If we believe that those creators could not disagree: this means that if the first creator moved the body, the second creator cannot keep the body at rest. This second creator is helpless, weaker than the first, and forced to comply with what the first creator decides. It means this second creator’s will and power have been specified by the will and power of the first creator, and this is impossible.

    Therefore, God is One

    The impossibility of both categories was demonstrated above. Therefore, it is impossible for there to exist a partner to the One Creator. All events that emerge into existence, emerge by this One Creator’s Will and Power, and no one else’s.


    Section 4 - Prophethood

    God can choose to reveal certain commandments to a single man so that this man can then deliver those commandments to the rest of mankind. This is possible for God to do (not necessary nor impossible). This man would be called a prophet.

    To convince mankind that a claimant to prophethood is truthful, God can aid this prophet with miracles. A miracle is an extraordinary event that God aids His prophet with in order to prove this prophet’s truthfulness to doubters. It is equivalent to God saying: “this man has told the truth about Me.” As such, if we know a miracle occurred for some claimant to prophethood, then we can know that this claimant to prophethood is truthful. A useful analogy to help conceptualize this:

    Imagine you were attending an important gathering at the Royal Palace. In the throne-room, you see the King sitting atop his throne. Surrounding the King are his guards, his viziers, as well as the noblemen of the kingdom.

    Suddenly a Stranger enters the throne-room, and begins offering a declaration to the crowd in a loud and clear voice. Everyone else falls silent and listens to this Stranger’s speech. The Stranger begins: “O people, I am a messenger from your King to you.” The Stranger points to the King, who is sitting on the throne in front of him. The Stranger continues: “The words which I will speak to you are not my own, but are the words of your King who sent me. Whatever I command, I command in your King’s name. And whatever I forbid, I forbid in your King’s name.”

    You notice that the King is silently sitting on his throne. The King is looking directly at this Stranger. He can clearly hear this Stranger make those claims. With a gesture of his hand, the King could order the guards to seize this Stranger and behead him where he stands to prove that he is a liar. But the King does not do that. The King continues to silently listen to the Stranger’s declaration.

    The Stranger continues: “Whoever obeys those commandments which I will deliver to you from your King, the King has promised to reward graciously tomorrow morning. And whoever disobeys those commandments, the King has threatened to behead tomorrow morning…”

    The King is still silently listening to the Stranger make his claims.

    The Stranger finishes his declaration by saying: “…And to prove that I really am a messenger from the King, the King has told me that he would stand up and then sit down three times consecutively after I complete this sentence.”

    Once the Stranger completes this sentence, all eyes turn to the King. Suddenly the King - and without uttering a word to the crowd - stands up then sits down, then stands up then sits down, then stands up then sits down.

    Now we ask: at this moment, and after witnessing what transpired in this gathering, can there be any doubt that this Stranger is a true messenger from the King? No. The sincere truth-seeker would hold no doubt. Even if the King verbally declared “He is my messenger” then this would not have been any more convincing. Rather, an observer to this scene would attain certainty that the Stranger was a messenger from the King.

    The King standing up and sitting down three times consecutively, was an extraordinary event that occurred upon the request of the Stranger who claimed to have been a messenger from the King. By knowing that this extraordinary event occurred, one attains certainty that this Stranger was indeed telling the truth. Similarly, we can be certain that a claimant to prophethood is truthful if this claimant is aided by an extraordinary event (i.e. a miracle).


    Section 5 - The Prophethood of Muhammed

    We can know with certainty that Muhammed ﷺ is a Prophet of God. This knowledge is established by Mass Transmitted proofs.

    Information relayed to us by Mass Transmission provides certainty because it is inconceivable for those relaying this information to all get together and conspire to tell the same lie. For example: a man today might not have personally visited Japan. However, this man can be certain that a country called Japan actually exists. This is because the information relayed to this man about Japan reached him from so many different sources, that it becomes inconceivable for all those people to have gotten together in a grand conspiracy to lie about the existence of Japan.

    We know Muhammed ﷺ claimed prophethood by Mass Transmission.

    We know Muhammed ﷺ is a true Prophet for several reasons, all supported by Mass Transmission. Three of which include:

    5.1 The Quran

    Muhammed ﷺ was aided with the Quran, which is a miracle in its own right. And a claimant to prophethood, who is aided by a miracle, is certainly a prophet.

    The Quran is a literary miracle. The language of the Quran is unlike any other Arabic text. Linguistically, it is vastly superior to anything that came before it, and vastly superior to everything that came after.

    The non-Arabic speaker might not be able to directly appreciate why the Quran is linguistically miraculous, but they can indirectly deduce this by considering the following facts:

    First: the Quran challenges the reader to produce a Chapter like it . This is a challenge that the Quran lays out for anyone who doubts its miraculousness. We know for certain that the Quran actually made this challenge, because we know the Quran has been preserved throughout history. We know it has been preserved, because it reached us by way of Mass Transmission.

    Second: the Arabs of Muhammed’s ﷺ time were expert poets. Likely, the best in the Arabic language in all of history. The Arabic language became diluted over time as Islam spread around the world. Non-Arabs learning Arabic were often not as proficient as native speakers, and quirky dialects for the language emerged all over the Muslim world. It is unlikely that Arabic - as a commonly spoken language - will ever return to the pristine condition it once enjoyed during the years of pre-Islamic and early Islamic Arabia. All of the above is known by Mass Transmission. To this day, Arabic linguists use pre-Islamic and early Islamic poetry as a template for grammatical and linguistic rules.

    Third: the pagan Arabs of Muhammed’s ﷺ time were heavily invested in destroying Islam, and disproving the prophethood of Muhammed ﷺ. This is also known by Mass transmission. It is common knowledge that Muhammed ﷺ fought many wars against the Pagans.

    From the above, one can deduce the following: if the pagan Arabs were truly capable of fulfilling the Quranic challenge, and given their extreme desire to destroy Islam, they would have saved themselves the time, money, and manpower, and they would have simply cooperated with each other in order to produce a text which rivaled the Quran linguistically. But they did not, and Islam ultimately prevailed (this is also known by Mass Transmission). And this is despite the poetic proficiency of the pagan Arabs.

    With the above, the miraculousness of the Quran’s language can be appreciated, even by the non-Arabic speaker.

    5.2 Physical Miracles

    Muhammed ﷺ was aided by many physical miracles. Miracles including accurately prophesying future events, multiplication of food and water, and instantaneously healing wounds. In totality, there are hundreds upon hundreds of different narrations reporting the miracles Muhammed ﷺ was aided with.

    All those miracles, when taken collectively, provide Mass Transmitted proof that Muhammed ﷺ was aided by some miracle. And a claimant to prophethood, who is aided by a miracle, is certainly a prophet.

    5.3 His Life

    The Prophethood of Muhammed ﷺ can also be established by considering his life.

    Either Muhammed ﷺ was sincere, or he was a liar. “Sincere” meaning: he truly believed that he was recieving revelation from God. “Liar” meaning: he knew that he was not receiving revelation from God, and deliberately lied by claiming that he was.

    The second option (that he was a deliberate liar) is certainly false, so the first (that he was sincere) is certainly true. We know the second option is false, because we know (by Mass Transmission) that Muhammed ﷺ refused bribery and suffered through hardship in order to deliver the message of Islam. Muhammed ﷺ suffered persecution in Mecca. He risked his life fighting many wars to defend the cause of Islam. He also lived humbly, spending all his wealth to serve the religion. Those are not the qualities of a liar.

    We can only conclude that Muhammed ﷺ was - at the very least - personally convinced that he was a Prophet.

    Given Muhammed’s ﷺ sincerity: either he was a true Prophet, or he was madman. “True Prophet” meaning: He truly believed to have been communicating with God, and he actually was communicating with God. “Madman” meaning: He truly believed to have been communicating with God, but he actually was not communicating with God (i.e. he was a madman who was just hearing voices in his head, a man who thought himself a prophet when he actually wasn’t).

    The second option (that he was a madman) is certainly false, so the first (that he was a true Prophet) is certainly true. We know the second option is false, because we know (by Mass Transmission) that Muhammed ﷺ was an exceedingly successful man. To assume he was successful because of his madness (i.e. because of the voices in his head) is especially ludicrous. Muhammed ﷺ started out his life as an orphan without anything, and ended his life as ruler over all of Arabia. He was a military genius, diplomat and the leader of a successful nation. His Companions were able to - thanks to his leadership and example - conquer the two super powers of the world in their time (the Sassanids, and the Byzantines).

    It is inconceivable that someone as successful as Muhammed ﷺ was a madman. It is especially inconceivable that such a man was successful because of his madness. Therefore, we can only conclude that he truly was a Prophet of God.


    Section 6 - The Rest of Revelation

    Now that the existence and Oneness of God was established, and the Prophethood of Muhammed ﷺ was established, it becomes incumbent upon the sane and mature person to affirm everything that can be reliably traced back to Prophet Muhammed ﷺ.

    The sane and mature person must believe in: the finality of prophethood with Prophet Muhammed ﷺ, the day of resurrection, in the eternal reward for the believers, in the eternal punishment of the disbelievers, as well as belief in anything else that can be reliably traced back to the Prophet ﷺ.

    The sane and mature thinker must also submit to the Law that the Prophet ﷺ delivered from Allah سبحانه و تعالى (the name of God according to revelation), and instructed mankind to abide by.


    Conclusion

    The three core claims that the Islamic faith is founded upon have been proven above. The three claims being: the existence of God, the Oneness of God, and the prophethood of Muhammed ﷺ. Examining the arguments offered above in more depth, can also provide proof against many of the false religions in the world today.

    And Allah سبحانه و تعالى is the one who guides and leads astray. With His mercy, He guides whomsoever He wills from the darkness of disbelief and ignorance, to the light of faith and knowledge.

  2. #2
    التبع اليماني obaid_m's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Gender
    Boy Male
    Posts
    5,506
    Mentioned
    191 Post(s)
    Quoted
    3340 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    200

    Re: A Summarized Proof for Islam

    This needs to be sticky.
    “Have you seen he who has taken as his god his [own] desire, and Allah has sent him astray due to knowledge and has set a seal upon his hearing and his heart and put over his vision a veil? So who will guide him after Allah ? Then will you not be reminded? And they say, “There is not but our worldly life; we die and live, and nothing destroys us except time.” And they have of that no knowledge; they are only assuming.” Quran 45:23-24

  3. #3
    التبع اليماني obaid_m's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Gender
    Boy Male
    Posts
    5,506
    Mentioned
    191 Post(s)
    Quoted
    3340 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    200

    Re: A Summarized Proof for Islam

    bump
    “Have you seen he who has taken as his god his [own] desire, and Allah has sent him astray due to knowledge and has set a seal upon his hearing and his heart and put over his vision a veil? So who will guide him after Allah ? Then will you not be reminded? And they say, “There is not but our worldly life; we die and live, and nothing destroys us except time.” And they have of that no knowledge; they are only assuming.” Quran 45:23-24

  4. #4
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Gender
    Girl Female
    Posts
    708
    Mentioned
    8 Post(s)
    Quoted
    296 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    26

    Re: A Summarized Proof for Islam

    asalamu alaikum - peace - shalom

    the proof of islam and god is the quran, it has many scientific miracles in it that were revealed to prophet Muhammad 1400 years ago. a time when there were no telescopes, or microscopes and any other geological or oceanic equipment to find out scientific evidences. yet the quran is accurate in the fields of embryology, geology, oceanography and other scientific fields. evidences that could not have been discovered by an unlettered prophet and people of the time 1400 years ago. evidences that have only come to light through science in the last century. this proves that the quran is the word of god and that islam is the truth.

    wasalam - peace - shalom

  5. #5
    Senior Member karkooshy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2015
    Gender
    Boy Male
    Posts
    273
    Mentioned
    14 Post(s)
    Quoted
    173 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    16

    Re: A Summarized Proof for Islam

    Quote Originally Posted by cloud9 View Post
    asalamu alaikum - peace - shalom

    the proof of islam and god is the quran, it has many scientific miracles in it that were revealed to prophet Muhammad 1400 years ago. a time when there were no telescopes, or microscopes and any other geological or oceanic equipment to find out scientific evidences. yet the quran is accurate in the fields of embryology, geology, oceanography and other scientific fields. evidences that could not have been discovered by an unlettered prophet and people of the time 1400 years ago. evidences that have only come to light through science in the last century. this proves that the quran is the word of god and that islam is the truth.

    wasalam - peace - shalom
    Wa Alaykum Al-Salam,

    I have expressed my dislike of the “scientific miracles” approach before, but will repeat myself here. I find this argument weak for three main reasons:

    -1- Ambiguity in the texts used. The vast majority of the verses that some Da'ees cite in order to support the scientific miracles argument are vague, and afford more than one interpretation. In fact those verses have historically been interpreted differently to how those Da'ees interpret them today. In this sense, the scientific miracles argument is a circular one. The Da'ee will insist that the correct interpretation of those verses is the one in line with the scientific theory, but they never give any real reasons for this. They’re just trying to squeeze the science into the verse in order to support their thesis.

    Another evidence for the above is the fact that most of those scientific discoveries are actually the achievements of non-Muslims. So after the Kafir discovers the science, the Muslims come along and try to interpret the Quran in light of it. If the Quran was clear in its description of scientific phenomena- as the Da'ees claim- you’d expect Muslims to be the ones doing the discovering.

    -2- Science changes. Science is ever changing, and some of the scientific theories being attributed to the Quran are actually not set in stone. What will those Da'ees do when it is discovered that the science they’re attributing to the Quran turns out to be false? What impression does this give to the non-Muslim being invited to the faith? What impression does this give to the convert who accepts Islam on the basis of those scientific theories?

    -3- The inconsistent cherry picking from science. The Da'ee only takes the science that suites him, and leaves the science that doesn’t serve his agenda. If science is to be used as the standard by which the truth of the Quran is established, more consistency is expected. For example: from a purely scientific standpoint, the evidence for the theory of evolution is just as good (if not stronger) than the evidence for the big bang theory… but the Da'ee will dismiss the theory of evolution on the basis that it is “just a theory”, while confidently claiming that the Quran so clearly talks about the big bang theory.

    For the above reasons, and others, I find the scientific miracles argument extremely weak. From my experience (watching and reading back and forth discussions between Muslims and opponents who are familiar with the science) I also find that it often makes the Muslim side look bad, ruining the image of Islam in the process.

    I also disagree that a miracle - on its own- is proof for God’s existence. Only after you have proven that God exists, and that God is the creator of all events, that you can then use a miracle to prove the prophethood of the claimant to prophethood. Arguing for the occurrence of a miracle without first establishing God’s existence doesn’t achieve anything, for the same reason “the god of the gaps” doesn’t achieve anything. That is apart from the fact that using a miracle to prove God’s existence is circular reasoning (“God exists because God created this extraordinary event”).

  6. #6
    Muslim
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Gender
    Boy Male
    Posts
    2,318
    Mentioned
    125 Post(s)
    Quoted
    1706 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    124

    Re: A Summarized Proof for Islam

    Assalamu alaykom ,

    Quote Originally Posted by karkooshy View Post
    -1- Ambiguity in the texts used. The vast majority of the verses that some Da'ees cite in order to support the scientific miracles argument are vague, and afford more than one interpretation. In fact those verses have historically been interpreted differently to how those Da'ees interpret them today. In this sense, the scientific miracles argument is a circular one. The Da'ee will insist that the correct interpretation of those verses is the one in line with the scientific theory, but they never give any real reasons for this. They’re just trying to squeeze the science into the verse in order to support their thesis.
    Well unless the Prophet(saws) interpreted a certain verse in a specific way, then isn't it possible to interpret certain verses which allude to scientific advancements? I have heard certain Du'at say that science can assist our view of scripture. I am in no way suggesting to adjust the Qur'an or misrepresent / twist the ayat, but if certain words have multiple meanings, and one of those meanings is in tune with what we have recently discovered, then can we not say that perhaps Allah is alluding to this? As long as we are within the confines of language, and remaining within context, then why should we not? Allah does speak on many issues which have to do with our 'reality/science'..

    I do however agree that some Du'at / websites appear to be reading in too much, and I dislike that. The most important thing is not to misrepresent the Qur'an and innovate in to the religion. The Religion does not need this, but it is something nice, if true. The Qur'an is a book of signs, which point directly to Allah Subhanahu wa ta'ala.

    Quote Originally Posted by karkooshy View Post
    Another evidence for the above is the fact that most of those scientific discoveries are actually the achievements of non-Muslims. So after the Kafir discovers the science, the Muslims come along and try to interpret the Quran in light of it. If the Quran was clear in its description of scientific phenomena- as the Da'ees claim- you’d expect Muslims to be the ones doing the discovering.
    I personally believe that is irrelevant. I , and many others, could care less who discovers the science. The interesting part is that it is mentioned in a book 1400 years ago which claims to be divine revelation from Allah.

    Quote Originally Posted by karkooshy View Post
    -2- Science changes. Science is ever changing, and some of the scientific theories being attributed to the Quran are actually not set in stone. What will those Da'ees do when it is discovered that the science they’re attributing to the Quran turns out to be false? What impression does this give to the non-Muslim being invited to the faith? What impression does this give to the convert who accepts Islam on the basis of those scientific theories?
    I totally agree. I believe the science aspect can not be a foundational proof or reasoning, but it can be used as a sign along with other signs which would cause one to believe in the claim. It must be clear that the Qur'an is not a book of science, it never claims to be. It is a book of guidance, direct revelation from the Creator, and within that book Allah has provided signs - Clear verses / signs

    وَإِذَا تُتۡلَىٰ عَلَيۡهِمۡ ءَايَـٰتُنَا بَيِّنَـٰتٍ۬ تَعۡرِفُ فِى وُجُوهِ ٱلَّذِينَ كَفَرُواْ ٱلۡمُنڪَرَ*ۖ

    And when Our verses are recited to them as clear evidences, you recognize in the faces of those who disbelieve disapproval. [22:72]

    Quote Originally Posted by karkooshy View Post
    -3- The inconsistent cherry picking from science. The Da'ee only takes the science that suites him, and leaves the science that doesn’t serve his agenda. If science is to be used as the standard by which the truth of the Quran is established, more consistency is expected. For example: from a purely scientific standpoint, the evidence for the theory of evolution is just as good (if not stronger) than the evidence for the big bang theory… but the Da'ee will dismiss the theory of evolution on the basis that it is “just a theory”, while confidently claiming that the Quran so clearly talks about the big bang theory.
    .
    This quote would be completely true if the Da'ee made modern science as his yardstick, as if, science is completely correct in every single aspect, and the Qur'an must conform to modern scientific theories. The Qur'an is greater in weighting (Greater source) than scientific opinion is.

    I do however agree that the Du'at may cherry pick certain verses when there are other verses we are left to stay silent on, just as Muslims in the past stayed silent on, which we later came to find out, that they are completely coherent with the Qur'an..


    I think I understand what you mean in general, but I believe the example of evolution is incorrect and I will explain why I believe that.

    Macro evolution of Homo sapiens is contrary to the Qur'anic narrative. We believe in the story of Adam as being a supernatural event. Science will never conform to the idea that Allah created Adam with His Two Hands in Paradise, just as it will never empirically prove the existence of God. We believe in God as a supernatural entity who is not apart of the material world. Adam was created in the unseen, outside of the empirical realm as we know it. Therefore, this is a matter of pure unseen theology as oppose to examinable science. It can never be 'proven', it is to be believed.

    Just on a further note, in hopes to dispel any doubts for any brothers/sisters reading. Science is based founded on naturalism. Just because the scientist assume something to be the best possible explanation, doesn't at all make that thing true. We as Muslims, have something greater than the assumption of a purely natural origin. From their perspective, evolution (Macro evolution of Humans) makes sense. If we were to assume naturalism, I could totally see and perhaps agree that evolution is the best possible explanation. In reality, it is a theory, we do not have absolute evidence, and neither I am entirely concerned with their evidences. The Qur'an is greater as far as 'weighting' of knowledge is concerned and the creation of Adam was not a natural event, and thus, outside the scope of science.


    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


    How do you define miracle? And how do you use it with regards to the Qur'an? Does your definition of miracle, only apply to the Qur'an being a linguistic miracle?


    Thank you for your time, awaiting to read a response, if you so wish.

  7. #7
    Senior Member karkooshy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2015
    Gender
    Boy Male
    Posts
    273
    Mentioned
    14 Post(s)
    Quoted
    173 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    16

    Re: A Summarized Proof for Islam

    Wa Alaykum Al-Salam,

    Quote Originally Posted by AmantuBillahi View Post
    Well unless the Prophet(saws) interpreted a certain verse in a specific way, then isn't it possible to interpret certain verses which allude to scientific advancements? I have heard certain Du'at say that science can assist our view of scripture.
    Sure. It would be possible to interpret a verse in such a way. However, the most you can say is that this a possible interpretation of the verse in question. You wouldn’t be justified in claiming that this is necessarily how that verse is to be interpreted. And if you can’t claim that this is necessarily the intended interpretation, then I don’t see how that constitutes an argument for anything.

    The entire point of the “scientific miracles” approach is to argue that the intended meaning behind a particular verse, alludes to recently discovered science. If you cannot prove that this is actually the intended meaning, then you have no argument.

    Quote Originally Posted by AmantuBillahi View Post
    I personally believe that is irrelevant. I , and many others, could care less who discovers the science. The interesting part is that it is mentioned in a book 1400 years ago which claims to be divine revelation from Allah.
    The point was: if the text was clearly referring to undiscovered science, as some Da’ees claim, one would expect Muslims to be the ones doing the discovering by extracting scientific knowledge from the Quran. The fact that this is often not the case, is evidence that Muslims are only reading those theories into the Quran.

    Quote Originally Posted by AmantuBillahi View Post
    This quote would be completely true if the Da'ee made modern science as his yardstick, as if, science is completely correct in every single aspect, and the Qur'an must conform to modern scientific theories. The Qur'an is greater in weighting (Greater source) than scientific opinion is.
    The Da’ee who uses this approach is arguing that the Quran conforms with modern science, therefore the Quran is true. Science is being used as the yardstick.

    If you’re just going to pick and choose then how is this an argument at all? This would be tantamount to assuming that the Quran is true, and then trying to find after-the-fact justifications to support this assumption. You would be (in essence) assuming the truth of the thing you’re trying to prove, before actually proving it.

    Quote Originally Posted by AmantuBillahi View Post
    How do you define miracle? And how do you use it with regards to the Qur'an? Does your definition of miracle, only apply to the Qur'an being a linguistic miracle?
    I defined miracle under section 4 of the OP.

    Quote Originally Posted by karkooshy View Post
    A miracle is an extraordinary event that God aids His prophet with in order to prove this prophet’s truthfulness to doubters. It is equivalent to God saying: “this man has told the truth about Me.”
    As for how it is used with regards to the Quran: mainly linguistically, but that’s not to say that the content can't be miraculous. There is also the prophesying of future events, the reporting of history that was unknown during the time of the Prophet… maybe even some scientific miracles (if the texts are explicit and if the science isn’t speculative)…

    More generally, I prefer the route of arguing for the truth of the Quran by arguing for the Prophethood of Muhammed ﷺ. That is to say: given Muhammed’s ﷺ prophethood, and given that the Quran can be reliably traced back to him, this suffices as proof for the authority of the Quran.

  8. #8
    التبع اليماني obaid_m's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Gender
    Boy Male
    Posts
    5,506
    Mentioned
    191 Post(s)
    Quoted
    3340 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    200

    Re: A Summarized Proof for Islam

    @Identical read the OP
    “Have you seen he who has taken as his god his [own] desire, and Allah has sent him astray due to knowledge and has set a seal upon his hearing and his heart and put over his vision a veil? So who will guide him after Allah ? Then will you not be reminded? And they say, “There is not but our worldly life; we die and live, and nothing destroys us except time.” And they have of that no knowledge; they are only assuming.” Quran 45:23-24

  9. #9
    Muslim
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Gender
    Boy Male
    Posts
    2,318
    Mentioned
    125 Post(s)
    Quoted
    1706 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    124

    Re: A Summarized Proof for Islam

    @karkooshy

    Assalamu alaykom

    I am using a phone at the moment , so I will not be able to quote you properly without some difficulty..

    I was curious about your usage of the term "Scientific Miracle" but I also see that you said "maybe" , which means you are not certain.

    If the Quran does mention something which could not have been examined 1400 years ago , and those things are coherent with reality - can we call that a miracle? Is that correct terminology? (Can't Christians bring certain texts themselves?) --- > coming back to cherry picking verses here.

    How do you understand the word 'sign' , which Allah makes mention that he will provide for his religion as He did for previous Prophets..?

    Is it not correct to say that the science is a sign , rather than a miracle? I am a little confused myself between the two terms.


  10. #10
    Senior Member karkooshy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2015
    Gender
    Boy Male
    Posts
    273
    Mentioned
    14 Post(s)
    Quoted
    173 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    16

    Re: A Summarized Proof for Islam

    Quote Originally Posted by AmantuBillahi View Post
    was curious about your usage of the term "Scientific Miracle"
    The claim that the Quran describes a wide range of scientific phenomena that could not have been known to the Prophet ﷺ due to their being only recent discoveries. And this is as such, evidence for its divine origin.

    Quote Originally Posted by AmantuBillahi View Post
    If the Quran does mention something which could not have been examined 1400 years ago , and those things are coherent with reality - can we call that a miracle? Is that correct terminology?
    Yes. Since that would be extraordinary. But the proposed conditions are that this “thing” be true with certainty, and that the verses cited be explicit and non-ambiguous (such that we can be certain that this was the intended meaning behind the verse).

    The examples given by the Da’ees who utilize the scientific miracles approach do not satisfy the aforementioned conditions as far as I’m aware. Which is why i said “maybe”. If they did, then that would be great.

    Quote Originally Posted by AmantuBillahi View Post
    How do you understand the word 'sign' , which Allah makes mention that he will provide for his religion as He did for previous Prophets..?
    Anything which serves as proof for the claims of Islam. Whether it be the world around us (by which we can infer the existence and oneness of God), or the miracles that prophets are aided with (by which we can infer that they are true messengers from Allah ﷻ).

    سَنُرِيهِمْ آيَاتِنَا فِي الْآفَاقِ وَفِي أَنفُسِهِمْ حَتَّىٰ يَتَبَيَّنَ لَهُمْ أَنَّهُ الْحَقُّ
    We will show them Our signs in the horizons and within themselves until it becomes clear to them that it is the truth

  11. #11
    Muslim
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Gender
    Boy Male
    Posts
    2,318
    Mentioned
    125 Post(s)
    Quoted
    1706 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    124

    Re: A Summarized Proof for Islam

    Assalamu alaykom

    I am curious to hear your perspective on this.

    Quote Originally Posted by karkooshy View Post

    Anything which serves as proof for the claims of Islam. Whether it be the world around us (by which we can infer the existence and oneness of God), or the miracles that prophets are aided with (by which we can infer that they
    Considering the fact that there is a difference between a miracle and a sign( Though all miracles are signs ).. Then could one say that a 'sign' could not be used as a decisive proof to establish / claim the truth of Islam?

    I could understand why the Mutakalimoon use the linguistic miracle to prove the validity of the claim as oppose to other signs, in order to keep a strong and coherent argument.

    In that case I could see why we would have to say that the Scientific Miracles in the Quran, in one aspect , is a weak argument because it is not completely coherent. I believe it could serve as a sign which would cause someone to be persuaded to the truth of Islam through common sense and a sound reflection. More of an additional reason as oppose to an overall coherent claim.

    Do you argue that the preservation of the Quran is a miracle ? Or would you say it is a sign , which gives weight to the argument (belief) that Allah did reveal this region?


    ---------------------------------------------------

    I believe everything has its time and place. Certain arguments will be received better by certain types of people.

    I agree with the majority of your OP, and I do believe it is sound and a strong proof for Islam. I also agree that the truthfulness / Character of the Prophet(s) is proof for him being a Messenger..

    ^ But do you think it is a persuasive argument for the general people? Stubborn people will not become Muslim because the Qur'an was unchallenged in Arabia.. They will also argue that the ahadith tradition could possibly be a conspiracy and Muslims had intentions to boost the Prophet to promote a new religion. Don't you think , as far as people just want to see a more 'tangible' daleel (the masses of people) then using Preservation , God's speech in first person , Numerical miracles, Science, Tawhid, clear Prophecies, as stronger as far as convincing is concerned?

    I am aware that this thread is called a summarized proof , which serves a specific purpose / intent.


    Excuse my typos , I can not edit much on the phone , inshallah the message is conveyed.
    Last edited by AmantuBillahi; 23-06-17 at 01:42 PM.

  12. #12
    Muslim
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Gender
    Boy Male
    Posts
    2,318
    Mentioned
    125 Post(s)
    Quoted
    1706 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    124

    Re: A Summarized Proof for Islam

    @karkooshy

    I could not edit my post within time , I just wanted to make sure my point gets across.

    Would you meet someone on the street and argue the linguistic miracle of the Quran to them , as your go to daleel? What about the truthfulness of the Prophet? And also do you find people converting to Islam based on the linguistic miracle of the Quran ? ( Non Arabs)

    Thank you

  13. #13
    Senior Member karkooshy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2015
    Gender
    Boy Male
    Posts
    273
    Mentioned
    14 Post(s)
    Quoted
    173 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    16

    Re: A Summarized Proof for Islam

    Quote Originally Posted by AmantuBillahi View Post
    Considering the fact that there is a difference between a miracle and a sign( Though all miracles are signs ).. Then could one say that a 'sign' could not be used as a decisive proof to establish / claim the truth of Islam?
    Quote Originally Posted by AmantuBillahi View Post
    In that case I could see why we would have to say that the Scientific Miracles in the Quran, in one aspect , is a weak argument because it is not completely coherent.
    Probabilistic arguments are valuable (i.e. ones that do not reach decisive conclusions, but argue that a proposition is more likely to be true than not). However, if an argument is incoherent then I don’t see how it’s of any use. I don’t understand what you mean by “not completely coherent”… something is either coherent or it isn’t.

    Quote Originally Posted by AmantuBillahi View Post
    But do you think it is a persuasive argument for the general people? Stubborn people will not become Muslim because the Qur'an was unchallenged in Arabia
    Quote Originally Posted by AmantuBillahi View Post
    Would you meet someone on the street and argue the linguistic miracle of the Quran to them , as your go to daleel? What about the truthfulness of the Prophet? And also do you find people converting to Islam based on the linguistic miracle of the Quran ? ( Non Arabs)
    Of course I think both are persuasive arguments… otherwise I wouldn’t have posted them lol

    Yes, the linguistic miracle can be persuasive even to the non-Arabic speaker… if the three facts listed under section 5.1 are taken into consideration. You don’t need to understand Arabic to know that sane people would rather come together to write a short poem, than spend their wealth and risk their lives in war.

    As for stubbornness: then know that you cannot convince someone who doesn’t want to be convinced. I have personally had discussions with people who claimed to doubt the reality of the world around us, just to avoid the arguments for the existence of God. The Prophet ﷺ himself preached to the Meccans for over a decade, and many of them did not accept Islam… and how much lesser are we when compared to him ﷺ? This is just how things are in this world. Some people are sincere seekers of truth, others are not.

    Quote Originally Posted by AmantuBillahi View Post
    They will also argue that the ahadith tradition could possibly be a conspiracy and Muslims had intentions to boost the Prophet to promote a new religion.
    The reliability of the tradition (and mass transmitted information more generally) is critical for some of the above arguments to hold. If the opponent criticizes the reliability of mass transmitted information, then their criticisms will be challenged. We’re not obliged to agree with them or submit that their position is a valid one just because they made the claim.

  14. #14
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2017
    Gender
    Boy Male
    Posts
    140
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Quoted
    101 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    7

    Re: A Summarized Proof for Islam

    Quote Originally Posted by karkooshy View Post
    Probabilistic arguments are valuable (i.e. ones that do not reach decisive conclusions, but argue that a proposition is more likely to be true than not). However, if an argument is incoherent then I don’t see how it’s of any use. I don’t understand what you mean by “not completely coherent”… something is either coherent or it isn’t.





    Of course I think both are persuasive arguments… otherwise I wouldn’t have posted them lol

    Yes, the linguistic miracle can be persuasive even to the non-Arabic speaker… if the three facts listed under section 5.1 are taken into consideration. You don’t need to understand Arabic to know that sane people would rather come together to write a short poem, than spend their wealth and risk their lives in war.

    As for stubbornness: then know that you cannot convince someone who doesn’t want to be convinced. I have personally had discussions with people who claimed to doubt the reality of the world around us, just to avoid the arguments for the existence of God. The Prophet ﷺ himself preached to the Meccans for over a decade, and many of them did not accept Islam… and how much lesser are we when compared to him ﷺ? This is just how things are in this world. Some people are sincere seekers of truth, others are not.



    The reliability of the tradition (and mass transmitted information more generally) is critical for some of the above arguments to hold. If the opponent criticizes the reliability of mass transmitted information, then their criticisms will be challenged. We’re not obliged to agree with them or submit that their position is a valid one just because they made the claim.
    When I discuss our Deen with non-believers who are opposed to our faith it is often hard to reach a common ground to start to reach them with the truth. The OP, has provided a decent way to archieve the basis for constructive discussion with those that are in some ways intellectually inclined.

    However, on here and in talks with someone who has preconceived ideas of what we believe, an intellgent or intellectual discussion of the truth.

    Even when others of differing views within Islam sometimes it is almost harder.

    Recently I had a discussion with a dear brother that wants me to see how a 'moderate' view of Islam is what I should embrace. However, a 'moderate' view isn't something I can rectify with the Qur'an or Sunnah of the Prophst, peace be upon him.

    In the USA, there is an alarming growth of this amongst some of the younger brothers and sisters. The 'moderate' view here is that some changes need to be made in our Deen to make it more 'inclusive':and the majority of these detract us from the real faith .

  15. #15
    Muslim
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Gender
    Boy Male
    Posts
    2,318
    Mentioned
    125 Post(s)
    Quoted
    1706 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    124

    Re: A Summarized Proof for Islam

    Quote Originally Posted by karkooshy View Post
    Probabilistic arguments are valuable (i.e. ones that do not reach decisive conclusions, but argue that a proposition is more likely to be true than not). However, if an argument is incoherent then I don’t see how it’s of any use. I don’t understand what you mean by “not completely coherent”… something is either coherent or it isn’t.
    Right, that was an incorrect usage of "not completely coherent". The aim was to say 'not a decisive'.

    The linguistic miracle/argument for the Qur'an is a very powerful and decisive proof for the Qur'an being from Allah(swt), and it certainly gives us assurance and confidence in the validity of the claim.

    I have no intention to degrade the miracle at all, in fact, it is a Qur'anic claim, and an argument used by the Muslim scholars -- which has stood the test of time throughout the millennia. The reason why I do not come from such an angle, or that I use it as a 'side evidence', as oppose to using it as my most convincing evidence, is because I find the majority of people too stubborn to be moved by something which they can not examine with their own senses. Once again, I do not degrade the miracle, but I feel it requires a level of maturity and attention span that the overwhelming masses do not have.

    I understand you have rebutted that by mentioning that this is a problem of insincere people, who the Prophet(as) had faced himself, which is completely true - but in all my speaking, and viewing converts to Islam, I have never met a single one who has said that they have become a Muslim because of the linguistic miracle of the Qur'an. Mind you, I am not saying people do not open the Qur'an and are not moved by the speech (translation) of Allah's Words. I mean the argument that the Qur'an can not be matched linguistically, and the proof for that being the incompetence of the pagan arabs, who were most qualified to meet such a challenge.


    When I present Islam to others I often go through the method of offering the abundant amount of signs/qualities which Allah has provided to establish His religion as being true. This is along with explaining how the Qur'an meets the expectations of a book which we would perceive as being from God (Speak's in His Gods own Words, Uncorrupted , Non-Contradictory, Uniqueness)

    I am not saying my route is necessarily better or worse, and mainly my dialogue with you was to only further benefit my own understanding. If you wish to rebut any of this, or further add anything, I would enjoy reading that. It is always a pleasure speaking with you.


    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


    I don't know if you missed my question earlier or were busy with the other more relevant questions, but I am curious to know your take on this, because I have had discussions with non Muslims and my mind has somewhat changed on this matter ... What is your perspective on the oft-repeated claim that the Qur'an's preservation is a Miracle.

    The sceptics I would speak to would rebut my claim of the Qur'an being a miracle due to it's preservation, by saying that the mere preservation of something does not necessarily make that thing divine / miracle. Which is actually true, if someone provides me something from the ancient world, and also provides the reasoning that such a thing has been preserved with a high degree of certainty - then surely, it would not move me to believe that such a thing was inspired by God.

    I have now shifted my stance / terminology towards reasoning that this is a foundational expectation we would have of a scripture which is claimed as revelation from God, and a clear sign that it is from Allah. Certainly the method of the Qur'ans preservation is rather exceptional (Both in manuscript, and orally) , but also the uniqueness of the Qur'an being the only ancient Book claiming to be from God, with such a quality, only adds further proof for it being a sign from God.

    I would like to know your take on the preservation of the Qur'an and what that necessarily entails from an argumentative standpoint.

    Assalamu alaykom

    Eid Mubarak
    Last edited by AmantuBillahi; 25-06-17 at 07:12 PM.

  16. #16
    Senior Member karkooshy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2015
    Gender
    Boy Male
    Posts
    273
    Mentioned
    14 Post(s)
    Quoted
    173 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    16

    Re: A Summarized Proof for Islam

    Quote Originally Posted by Fareed52 View Post
    However, on here and in talks with someone who has preconceived ideas of what we believe, an intellgent or intellectual discussion of the truth.
    Based on the context, I have a feeling this sentence is incomplete, and that you meant to say that an intellectual discussion of the truth isn’t always persuasive. If this is the case, then I agree. Most people will not be convinced by rational arguments alone. Since there’s quite a bit of emotional/social pressure that comes along with changing your religion.

    I suspect many converts accept Islam for social reasons, as opposed to purely rational ones: Maybe they’re suffering from problems in life and want a serious religion to help them manage themselves, or they have an honest Muslim at work that they’re impressed with, or a generous Muslim helped them out in a time of need…etc. and this is what triggers their consideration to convert. The role of rational arguments comes afterwards (after this prospective convert has submitted that Islam could be true). Then they start searching for rational arguments for the truth of Islam, and if they’re convinced they accept the faith.

    Without the social trigger, most non-Muslims do not really view Islam to even be a possibility. And this once again, is because of social/emotional reasons as opposed to rational ones.

    Obviously I do not claim that the above applies to all converts, but this is what seems to be the case for many.

    Quote Originally Posted by AmantuBillahi View Post
    Assalamu alaykom

    Eid Mubarak
    Wa Alaykum Al-Salam. Eid Mubarak.

    Quote Originally Posted by AmantuBillahi View Post
    in all my speaking, and viewing converts to Islam, I have never met a single one who has said that they have become a Muslim because of the linguistic miracle of the Qur'an.
    If someone claimed an argument isn’t convincing, we can’t really have a discussion with them unless they tell us why.

    Perhaps it’s because they’re not familiar with it? After all, the scientific miracles argument seems to have taken over the Da’wah scene… open any Da’wah website, and most of the top articles will be discussions about the “scientific miraculousness” of the Quran. Which is a shame in my opinion. More resources need to be spent in formalizing and presenting the linguistic miracle. Especially since it is the one most argued for by classical scholarship, and is the most obviously Quranic one.

    Quote Originally Posted by AmantuBillahi View Post
    What is your perspective on the oft-repeated claim that the Qur'an's preservation is a Miracle.
    I agree with your new stance, and see it to be more of a condition than a proof. Meaning: if a book claims that it is revelation, and this book suffered from corruptions, then this is evidence that it isn’t revelation. But if a book claims that it is revelation, and this book was perfectly preserved, then this does not necessarily mean that it actually is revelation… rather, it would mean that this book is a valid candidate.

    However, you could perhaps formulate an argument when looking at it from the memorization angle: the fact that the Quran is about 600 pages in length, and is nevertheless memorized from cover to cover by millions of people worldwide. In its original language. This is even when many of those people do not speak Arabic. And especially since the Quran explicitly claims that it will be easy to remember:

    وَلَقَدْ يَسَّرْنَا الْقُرْآنَ لِلذِّكْرِ فَهَلْ مِن مُّدَّكِرٍ

    And We have certainly made the Qur'an easy for remembrance, so is there any who will remember?

    That seems pretty extraordinary to me. At least, I am unaware of any other book of a similar length that is so wildly memorized.

  17. #17

    Account Disabled

    Join Date
    May 2015
    Gender
    Boy Male
    Posts
    214
    Mentioned
    8 Post(s)
    Quoted
    169 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    0

    Re: A Summarized Proof for Islam

    Quote Originally Posted by karkooshy View Post


    Section 1 - The World is Emergent

    The existence of God is established by realizing that the bodies that make up the observable world around us, are all emergent. This necessitates the existence of a being that brought them into existence.
    The argument is based on the assumption that the world is emergent? Unlike what most Muslims think, the theory of bing bang doesn't say that the universe didn't exist before that.

    It is entirely possible that universe (the world) may have existed forever, according to a new model that applies quantum correction terms to complement Einstein's theory of general relativity. The model may also account for dark matter and dark energy, resolving multiple problems at once.

    No Big Bang? Quantum equation predicts universe has no beginning
    Read more at: https://phys.org/news/2015-02-big-qu...-universe.html



    Section 2 - The Existence of God

    “God” meaning: the beginningless creator.

    The emergence of all bodies necessitates the existence of a being that brought those bodies into existence. Let’s call this being “the creator”, since this being brings things into existence (and this is what “create” means).

    The creator that brought those bodies into existence is either without beginning, or is emergent.

    If the creator is without beginning, then the existence of God is established. Since a beginning-less creator is what we intend when we say “God”.
    That section sounds like Kalam cosmological argument i.e. every thing brought into existence need a 'creator' but the universe may have always existed and could be the actual creator of everything around us. After all the creator in question is not visible but the universe is all around us. Why can it not be the first mover, creating matter from energy and energy from matter all the time? The beginningless one that we both agree exists?





    Section 3 - God is One

    God is necessarily One because the alternative is absurd. The alternative being a multiplicity of creators.

    If there was a second creator, then this second creator would either:
    1. be able to disagree with the first creator.
    2. be unable to disagree with the first creator.

    Both of the categories listed above are impossible. And that which entails impossibility is impossible. So if we can demonstrate the impossibility of the two categories, we can demonstrate the impossibility of partnership to the Creator.
    Possibly, if there is one.

    But why is it impossible for two or more all knowing, omniscient beings to agree with each other. If they know everything, what is there to disagree?



    Section 4 - Prophethood

    Section 5 - The Prophethood of Muhammed

    5.1 The Quran

    5.2 Physical Miracles

    5.3 His Life

    Section 6 - The Rest of Revelation

    .
    The method of prophet-hood can be criticized in many ways. First of all we cannot verify all the claims of miracles that happened centuries ago and told us by Muslim historians. Other scientific miracles are vague and could mean simple and general statements. If you look at this magnificent universe and how it works, and believe that it has a creator, it's hard to understand why he would send his final important message like that. Inhabitants of many regions like North and South America and Australia etc got the message like after thousand years.


    Can you objectively prove or define the superiority of one text over other? Don't you need some kind of criteria? that part from the OP:

    "The Quran is a literary miracle. The language of the Quran is unlike any other Arabic text. Linguistically, it is vastly superior to anything that came before it, and vastly superior to everything that came after. "


    They (miracles, events, traditions etc) sound impressive, but how do I verify them? And everything is recorded by Muslim historians by oral traditions. Can they be totally unbiased and not mistaken? Specially narrations collected like 100 years after the death of Prophet. Should I trust them because some scholars of 8th or 9th century called them authentic? Try putting yourself in the shoes of a skeptic unbeliever.

    If you can give an example of any specific miracle (literary or scientific) we can analyze and discuss it here.
    Last edited by shabbir80; 29-06-17 at 01:01 PM. Reason: fixed quoting mess

  18. #18
    Senior Member karkooshy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2015
    Gender
    Boy Male
    Posts
    273
    Mentioned
    14 Post(s)
    Quoted
    173 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    16

    Re: A Summarized Proof for Islam

    Quote Originally Posted by shabbir80 View Post
    The argument is based on the assumption that the world is emergent? Unlike what most Muslims think, the theory of bing bang doesn't say that the universe didn't exist before that.
    This wasn’t an assumption. It was a claim that was proven in the OP:

    Quote Originally Posted by karkooshy View Post
    The statement: “it is impossible for an infinite number of events to have been completed in the past” is true because “infinite” is equivalent to endlessness, while “completed” is equivalent to coming to an end. Therefore, an infinite sequence of events cannot be completed, since that is contradictory. It is like saying an endlessness came to an end. For this same reason, it is impossible for someone to finish counting all the negative numbers and finally reach zero. There’s an infinite number of negative numbers, you cannot “finish” counting them all.
    Since the series of past events cannot be infinite, it is therefore necessarily finite.

    I didn’t even mention the Big Bang theory in OP. The emergence of the world does not depend on it at all. I hope you’re not just reading the section headings, and then responding to your own preconceived notions.

    Quote Originally Posted by shabbir80 View Post
    It is entirely possible that universe (the world) may have existed forever.
    No.

    Quote Originally Posted by shabbir80 View Post
    But why is it impossible for two or more all knowing, omniscient beings to agree with each other. If they know everything, what is there to disagree?
    If they cannot disagree, then the second disjunction applies (i.e. the second creator is unable to disagree with the first creator). This is impossible, because it means the will and power of this second creator was specified by the first.

    Quote Originally Posted by shabbir80 View Post
    The method of prophet-hood can be criticized in many ways. First of all we cannot verify all the claims of miracles that happened centuries ago and told us by Muslim historians.
    The mass transmission of those reports is how we can be certain that a miracle occurred.

    Quote Originally Posted by shabbir80 View Post
    Other scientific miracles are vague and could mean simple and general statements.
    I did not mention any “scientific miracles” in the OP. In fact, every single reply I posted to this thread included my criticisms of this argument.

    Once again, I really hope you’re not just reading the section headings and responding on that basis.

    Quote Originally Posted by shabbir80 View Post
    If you look at this magnificent universe and how it works, and believe that it has a creator, it's hard to understand why he would send his final important message like that.
    This is a purely emotional argument. Appealing to the magnificence of the universe does not mean it is impossible for God to reveal a message.

    Quote Originally Posted by shabbir80 View Post
    Inhabitants of many regions like North and South America and Australia etc got the message like after thousand years.
    So?

    Quote Originally Posted by shabbir80 View Post
    Can you objectively prove or define the superiority of one text over other? Don't you need some kind of criteria?
    Quote Originally Posted by karkooshy View Post
    From the above, one can deduce the following: if the pagan Arabs were truly capable of fulfilling the Quranic challenge, and given their extreme desire to destroy Islam, they would have saved themselves the time, money, and manpower, and they would have simply cooperated with each other in order to produce a text which rivaled the Quran linguistically. But they did not, and Islam ultimately prevailed (this is also known by Mass Transmission). And this is despite the poetic proficiency of the pagan Arabs.
    To conclude: it appears to me that you didn’t actually read the OP. You just skimmed over the section headings… maybe read the first few lines after each one… then you assumed what the arguments will be, and formulated a response based on your own assumptions.

    My request: read the OP more carefully. Suspend all your assumptions for only a few minutes. Then deal with the arguments presented if you have any objections.

  19. #19

    Account Disabled

    Join Date
    May 2015
    Gender
    Boy Male
    Posts
    214
    Mentioned
    8 Post(s)
    Quoted
    169 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    0

    Re: A Summarized Proof for Islam

    Quote Originally Posted by karkooshy View Post


    It is entirely possible that universe (the world) may have existed forever.
    No.
    Can you tell me what is wrong with that new universe model proposed in 2015 that suggests the possibility of a universe with no beginning?

    No Big Bang? Quantum equation predicts universe has no beginning
    https://phys.org/news/2015-02-big-qu...-universe.html

  20. #20

    Account Disabled

    Join Date
    May 2015
    Gender
    Boy Male
    Posts
    214
    Mentioned
    8 Post(s)
    Quoted
    169 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    0

    Re: A Summarized Proof for Islam

    Quote Originally Posted by karkooshy View Post


    The mass transmission of those reports is how we can be certain that a miracle occurred.

    Can I have one example of a miracle and its mass transmission?

  21. #21
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2017
    Gender
    Boy Male
    Posts
    568
    Mentioned
    15 Post(s)
    Quoted
    341 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    7

    Re: A Summarized Proof for Islam

    Quote Originally Posted by karkooshy View Post
    a summarized proof for Islam
    If the Almighty gave us incontrovertible proof of his existence, that would destroy our free will. He clearly did not do that.

    That is why the Al-Jabiriyah point of view is unrealistic. Furthermore, the Almighty has a copy of the Theory of Everything (ToE), i.e. al-Lawhu 'l-Mahfuz, but handing it over to us would be completely pointless, since we know of the existence of statements that are true but not provable, and of statements that are provable but ineffable (cannot be expressed in language). Hence, we would most likely not even understand the ToE, since parts of it can most likely not be said in language anyway.

    Another problem is the problem raised by the Al-Qadiriyyah. The ToE being a perfect mirror of the universe, also contains us. We are simply part of the universe.

    If the Almighty has given us some kind of free will, he will still need read/write access to our essential being (our "souls") in order to complete his own copy of the ToE. Otherwise, we just become dark, black boxes in his al-Lawhu 'l-Mahfuz.

    Praying amounts to giving the Almighty read/write access to our souls. It is not optional. The more black boxes appear in the ToE, the more unpredictable that the navigation will become, even to the Almighty. If too many black boxes appear in the ToE, it may become so uncontrollable that the Almighty will have to shut it down, along with the universe itself. That is why it is also not optional to seek to convert the pagans and ask them to pray to the Almighty along with us.

  22. #22
    Senior Member karkooshy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2015
    Gender
    Boy Male
    Posts
    273
    Mentioned
    14 Post(s)
    Quoted
    173 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    16

    Re: A Summarized Proof for Islam

    Quote Originally Posted by shabbir80 View Post
    Can you tell me what is wrong with that new universe model proposed in 2015 that suggests the possibility of a universe with no beginning?
    Claiming the existence of circumstantial evidence for impossibilities does not make them any less absurd. Nonsense doesn’t become possible just because someone wearing a lab coat said so.

    Quote Originally Posted by shabbir80 View Post
    Can I have one example of a miracle and its mass transmission?
    If you are referring to the ”Physical Miracles” mentioned under section 5.2; then the claim was that when taken collectively, all those narrations (describing the various miracles the Prophet was aided with) form Mass Transmitted proof for the prophethood of Muhammed ﷺ.

    There are hundreds (if not thousands) of narrations reporting the miracles of the Prophet. Open any collection of Hadith (e.g. Sahih Al-Bukhari) and you’ll find many. If you’re looking for something a little more extensive: Imam Al-Bayhaqi compiled a seven volume work for this very purpose (i.e. he gathered those narrations pertaining to the miracles and prophetic qualities of Muhammed ﷺ) called “the Evidences of Prophethood” (Dala’il Al-Nubuwa). All in all, this collection by Al-Bayhaqi contains over a thousand reports. More than enough to be considered Mass Transmitted proof for the prophethood of Muhammed ﷺ.

    Quote Originally Posted by pronorah View Post
    If the Almighty gave us incontrovertible proof of his existence, that would destroy our free will. He clearly did not do that.
    False. Doesn’t even follow (“there is proof for God’s existence, therefore there is no free will”).

    I didn’t understand what you were trying to say with the rest of your post. Some of it sounded pretty dodgy to say the least. Elaborate, and explain how it is relevant.

  23. #23

    Account Disabled

    Join Date
    May 2015
    Gender
    Boy Male
    Posts
    214
    Mentioned
    8 Post(s)
    Quoted
    169 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    0

    Re: A Summarized Proof for Islam

    Quote Originally Posted by karkooshy View Post

    If you are referring to the ”Physical Miracles” mentioned under section 5.2; then the claim was that when taken collectively, all those narrations (describing the various miracles the Prophet was aided with) form Mass Transmitted proof for the prophethood of Muhammed ﷺ.

    There are hundreds (if not thousands) of narrations reporting the miracles of the Prophet. Open any collection of Hadith (e.g. Sahih Al-Bukhari) and you’ll find many. If you’re looking for something a little more extensive: Imam Al-Bayhaqi compiled a seven volume work for this very purpose (i.e. he gathered those narrations pertaining to the miracles and prophetic qualities of Muhammed ﷺ) called “the Evidences of Prophethood” (Dala’il Al-Nubuwa). All in all, this collection by Al-Bayhaqi contains over a thousand reports. More than enough to be considered Mass Transmitted proof for the prophethood of Muhammed ﷺ.
    Any miracle. Can I have just one example please? So I can evaluate it and it's mass transmitted reports? In OP I could not find any example. I hope I'm not asking too much.

    The link you posted is in Arabic which I don't understand sorry.

  24. #24
    Senior Member karkooshy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2015
    Gender
    Boy Male
    Posts
    273
    Mentioned
    14 Post(s)
    Quoted
    173 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    16

    Re: A Summarized Proof for Islam

    Quote Originally Posted by shabbir80 View Post
    Any miracle. Can I have just one example please?
    They’re readily available online. I just used the search bar on https://sunnah.com and was able to find 10 narrations reporting miracles of food and water multiplication… after like 5 minutes of searching.

    1. https://sunnah.com/bukhari/4/35
    2. https://sunnah.com/bukhari/7/11
    3. https://sunnah.com/bukhari/61/84
    4. http://sunnah.com/bukhari/61/86
    5. https://sunnah.com/bukhari/61/88
    6. https://sunnah.com/bukhari/61/89
    7. https://sunnah.com/bukhari/74/65
    8. https://sunnah.com/muslim/32/160
    9. https://sunnah.com/muslim/55/94
    10. https://sunnah.com/urn/403300

    You’re awfully lazy. Responding without properly reading the OP… not bothering to use a search engine… I’m not going to spoon-feed you everything.

  25. #25

    Account Disabled

    Join Date
    May 2015
    Gender
    Boy Male
    Posts
    214
    Mentioned
    8 Post(s)
    Quoted
    169 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    0

    Re: A Summarized Proof for Islam

    Quote Originally Posted by karkooshy View Post
    They’re readily available online. I just used the search bar on https://sunnah.com and was able to find 10 narrations reporting miracles of food and water multiplication… after like 5 minutes of searching.

    1. https://sunnah.com/bukhari/4/35
    2. https://sunnah.com/bukhari/7/11
    3. https://sunnah.com/bukhari/61/84
    4. http://sunnah.com/bukhari/61/86
    5. https://sunnah.com/bukhari/61/88
    6. https://sunnah.com/bukhari/61/89
    7. https://sunnah.com/bukhari/74/65
    8. https://sunnah.com/muslim/32/160
    9. https://sunnah.com/muslim/55/94
    10. https://sunnah.com/urn/403300

    You’re awfully lazy. Responding without properly reading the OP… not bothering to use a search engine… I’m not going to spoon-feed you everything.
    Sorry for being awfully lazy. I insisted on an example from you because I didn't want to be accused of cherry picking.

    And I didn't know about those miracles because most preachers have been using scientific miracles in their arguments like the earth is egg shaped etc.

    But the problem is how do I independently verify those accounts? There are even claims of splitting moon, but there is no traces of any such thing happening in the past. The hadiths were compiled long after the supposed events took place and are based on nothing more than word of mouth. How does that prove anything? Some events might be true, some mistaken and some exaggerated? That's why some hadiths are called weak and even fabricated.

    What do you make of similar miracles from thousands of polytheistic religions supposedly witnessed by many followers?

    The reason I find it hard to believe those claims is the same you have for not believing "Miracle of the sun" witnessed on 13 October 1917 near Fatima, Portugal where a crowd of 30000-40000 people gathered. Pope Pius XII himself witnessed the miracle of the sun from the Vatican gardens.
    Last edited by shabbir80; 02-07-17 at 11:48 AM.

  26. #26
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2017
    Gender
    Boy Male
    Posts
    568
    Mentioned
    15 Post(s)
    Quoted
    341 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    7

    Re: A Summarized Proof for Islam

    Quote Originally Posted by karkooshy View Post
    False. Doesn’t even follow (“there is proof for God’s existence, therefore there is no free will”).
    Well, how do you explain the existence of atheism? It is obviously a real-world choice that people make.

    The real problem is actually the term "proof" itself.

    In math, the proof is the list of successive derivation steps from the axiomatic starting point leading all the way up to the statement to be proven. If you can show that all untruth in the statement to be proven can only be the result of untruth in the axiomatic starting point, then you have "proven" the statement from that particular set of axioms.

    Given that context, I understand the term "proof" in religion as the list of successive derivation steps from the Quranic scripture as the axiomatic starting point, showing that rejecting the statement to be proven, simply amounts to rejecting the Quran. In that case, the statement can be considered Islamically proven.

    This requires, however, that you accept the Quran as the axiomatic starting point in religion. In that sense, Islam can be understood to be the full axiomatization of the Quran. You could possible even (conceptually) enumerate all statements that can be derived from the Quran and store them in a table. "Proving" then amounts to looking up the statement in the table and returning the proof. "Unprovable" would then mean that a particular statement is not somewhere in the table.

    Therefore, when the term "proof" is mentioned in the Quran, it does not necessarily have the same meaning as a proof derived from the Quran. It then undoubtedly refers to another axiomatic system with other axioms. This is perfectly possible. If an axiomatization has a sufficiently strong language associated, it can express statements from its own metamodel. So, the Quran could certainly refer to statements in its metamodel, i.e. The Theory of Everything.

    Similarly, first-order arithmetic can express statements in second-order arithmetic, but not its proofs. That can only be done in second-order arithmetic itself. Therefore, statements in first-order arithmetic about a truth in second-order arithmetic are true but not provable in first-order arithmetic.

    With proof always operating in a particular context (its axioms), proof inside the Quran and proof based on the Quran are different things altogether, as they do not share the same context. Proofs mentioned inside the Quran are therefore supposed to be derived within the context of the Theory of Everything.

  27. #27
    Senior Member karkooshy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2015
    Gender
    Boy Male
    Posts
    273
    Mentioned
    14 Post(s)
    Quoted
    173 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    16

    Re: A Summarized Proof for Islam

    Quote Originally Posted by shabbir80 View Post
    But the problem is how do I independently verify those accounts? There are even claims of splitting moon, but there is no traces of any such thing happening in the past. The hadiths were compiled long after the supposed events took place and are based on nothing more than word of mouth. How does that prove anything? Some events might be true, some mistaken and some exaggerated? That's why some hadiths are called weak and even fabricated.
    The scholars who compiled Hadith didn’t make those narrations up. They took them from their teachers, who took them from their teachers…etc. forming a chain of narrators going all the way back to the Prophet ﷺ. You can check by comparing the narrations they included in their collections, with the collections of their peers and teachers. For example: if a narrator reports a Hadith from his teacher, and you find other students who studied under this same teacher reporting this same Hadith from that same teacher, then you can know that this narrator really did take this Hadith from his teacher (i.e. that he didn’t make it up).

    Moreover, we have biographical information about each member of the chain in dedicated books of narrator biography. Their contemporaries testified to their integrity and piety, meaning it is less likely that those narrators would report lies. Their contemporaries also testified to their excellent memory and knowledge of the Hadith sciences, meaning it is less likely that they would make a mistake when reporting narrations.

    With all of the above taken into consideration, each of those singular Hadiths is probabilistic evidence for Prophet Muhammad’s ﷺ prophethood. “Probabilistic evidence” meaning: evidence that makes a thing more likely than it would have been without this evidence. In of themselves, each of those narrations is not decisive proof for prophethood (this is because despite the meticulousness of Hadith verification methods, there is still room for error).

    Taken collectively however, and since each of those reports is probabilistic evidence for the same thing (Muhammad’s ﷺ prophethood), they form decisive and mass transmitted proof for the Prophet’s prophethood. After all, hundreds of singularly transmitted reports taken as evidence for the same thing, is what is meant by “mass transmitted” information.

    Also, the fact that we can distinguish authentic narrations from weak and fabricated ones is a good thing. Not a bad thing. Those classifications are not arbitrary.

    Quote Originally Posted by shabbir80 View Post
    What do you make of similar miracles from thousands of polytheistic religions supposedly witnessed by many followers?
    False religions like Catholicism cannot be true by way of logical necessity. Their creed includes such absurdities like belief in a nonsensical trinity, belief in a God who changed into a man, or belief that Jesus is both fully man and fully God… Any probabilistic evidence for such religions will be treated the same way your article was treated earlier. That is to say: “claiming the existence of circumstantial evidence for impossibilities does not make them any less absurd”. As such we need not bother ourselves by attempting to verify those accounts, since we already know with certainty that those absurd religions are false.

    Quote Originally Posted by pronorah View Post
    Well, how do you explain the existence of atheism? It is obviously a real-world choice that people make.
    Either due to the ignorance or the stubbornness of the atheist… amongst other reasons. Some people deliberately choose to believe in nonsense. It’s called willful ignorance.

    A proof is a proof in of itself. How many people accept it is besides the point. By your logic, one might argue that there is no proof that the earth is round… just because the Flat Earth Society exists. The existence of disagreement doesn't necessarily mean that those disagreements are valid ones.

    As for the axioms utilized in the OP; then they are ones all sane people accept. They’re not axioms that assume the truth of the Quran. Things like the law of non-contradiction, or the law of identity, or the reality of the world around us…etc. The one who claims to doubt the truth of such axioms is either crazy, or is lying about his doubting them.

  28. #28
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2017
    Gender
    Boy Male
    Posts
    568
    Mentioned
    15 Post(s)
    Quoted
    341 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    7

    Re: A Summarized Proof for Islam

    Quote Originally Posted by karkooshy View Post
    A proof is a proof in of itself.
    A proof still has a context, which is its axiomatic basis. The Quran itself does not use the Quran as its axiomatic basis. That would be circular, and therefore impredicative. Hence, proofs mentioned inside the Quran must be using another axiomatic basis, i.e. they must be using the Lawh-i-hikmat, the Tablet of Wisdom, i.e. The Theory of Everything.
    Quote Originally Posted by karkooshy View Post
    The existence of disagreement doesn't necessarily mean that those disagreements are valid ones.
    The fact that these disagreements are even possible, suggests that the statement is true but not provable within the given context, but only within the meta-context. A proof that comes from outside the universe (meta-level) may not even be understood from within the universe (the model itself). It will be true, but the proof could be ineffable or even incomprehensible.

 

 

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
All times are GMT. The time now is 10:07 AM.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.2
Copyright © 2017 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.
User Alert System provided by Advanced User Tagging v3.2.7 (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2017 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
vBulletin Skin By: PurevB.com

MPADC.com Islamic Web Hosting | Muslim Ad Network | Islamic Nasheeds | Islamic Mobile App Developement Android & iPhone | Islamic Web Hosting : Muslim Designers : Labbayk Nasheeds : silk route jilbab: Hijab: : Web Islamic Newsletter: Islamic Web Hosting

Students of Arabic Forum | Hijab Shop