Knowing God: Reason, Revelation, and Intuition - Yasir Qadhi

[abdelbaasit1]

30:10 Yaaaaaaa!!! Here comes my hero! =)

Shaykh-ul-Islam ;)

[blkmun86]

allah is the moon god of the low life arabs

[allahoahd]

@blkmun86 vessels only pour forth what they contain. May allah guide you and us closer to the truth of islam ameen

[abdelbaasit1]

@blkmun86 That's strange... because when any human being on the face of the Earth today opens up a copy of the CHRISTIAN Bible... [♦ not an Arabian book ♦] - the Bible... "The Book of Genesis" !!!

And go to The Very Beginning [Genesis 1:1], and read the first line - "In the beginning GOD created the heavens and the earth" - << that 1st line, translated into the Arabic language, reads: "Fee al-badi' khalaqa ALLAH as-Samaawaat..." (• In the beginning, ALLAH created the Heaven & the Earth •) ☺

[tripNatronic]

What is the name of the book that he mentions at 50 mins, can some one post a the name and a link to that book.



[worldwiderelease]

Inner-Knowledge is God's inner-guidance system, our core strength and self confidence. It is elaborately explained in God's NEW MESSAGE. And much more is revealed. A New Revelation for this time and the extreme difficult times to come for the human family.

Look at New message . org, especially the audio message/text: The burden of the messenger.

[worldwiderelease]

Inner-Knowledge is God's inner-guidance system, our core strength and self confidence. It is elaborately explained in God's NEW MESSAGE. And much more is revealed. A New Revelation for this time and the extreme difficult times to come for the human family.

Look at New message . org

[UwhoBELIEVE]

wow this is awesome!!!

[AdmiralPrice]

I find it really interesting that he completely neglects philosophers as both the Mu'tazilah and Ash'ariyyah (especially the Ahs'ariyyah) are responding to them. The Ash'ari scholars themselves said that they would rather not engage in Kalam, but with the fasaad of philosophy, it became necessary to prove Islam and Islamic theology via rationalism. The Kalam schools didn't develop in a vacuum. They developed as a response to the pure heresy and semi-atheism of the falaasifa.

[swarthmoor1]

YQ, is also distorting the sayings of Imams regarding Kalaam. Abu Hanifah used kalaam arguments against the Qadariyyah and atheists. Regarding Ibn Taymiyyah (IT), this is a person who claimed Allah was an object and that the universe is beginningless. MANY scholars spoke of IT's deviancy, but since YQ is a Wahhabi, he is going to praise Ibn Taymiyyah and his misguidance.

[swarthmoor1]

This middle section about "rationally proving the Existence of God," does not mean that the person has to know detailed proofs for the Existence of God. It is enough to understand that since the creation exists, then there must be a Creator. However, having the detailed rational proofs are needed in the Muslim community to defend the Creed from the likes of the materialists, atheists, and the likes.

[ManifestationOfTruth]

@swarthmoor1 I agree. Absolutely, detailed proofs must be developed and available in order to stand up against the Atheistic movements. This is also why more Muslims should enter scientific fields of study such as physics and particularly quantum mechanics.

[farouqnimer]

fun lecture

[extempers]

We worship God and God alone.

Jesus (as) is a but a creation. He had a beginning and he will have an end.

He needed food, water, air and he did activities all other humans do like using the bathroom, etc.

God is above and beyond such needs. He is Lord of the heavens and the earth and He does not need to beget a son to forgive humanity.

He says be and it is.

[Mathetes76]

I deliver unto you that which I also received, how that Christ died for our sins; and that he was buried, & that he rose again the third day according to the scriptures.

Ye must be born again to enter into the kingdom of God. Repent, & be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, & ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.

He that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of Jesus Christ.

Call on Him today!

salaam

[RationalConclusion]

There is no evidence for the existence of a god. It is therefore illogical to believe that one exists.

[almostafa786]

yeah...because our whole existence is a big coincidence:)....not!

[RationalConclusion]

I agree. Our existence is not a big coincidence.

Our existence is a product of evolution by natural selection which has nothing to do with chance or coincidence.

[MrTruthseaker]

"which has nothing to do with chance or coincidence."

Did you take biology?

From that kind of statement, it seems like you have no idea what is Evolution by natural selection.

[RationalConclusion]

You're the one who obviously doesn't understand evolution by natural selection.

Natural selection is the explanation for the apparent design, perfection, complexity and variation of life on earth. It is the exact opposite of chance.

I suggest you educate yourself on the subject.

[MrTruthseaker]

"I suggest you educate yourself on the subject."

Thank you for your recommendation.

This should help you to understand that natural selection is not the only mechanism of Evolution.

"Natural selection is one of the basic mechanisms of evolution, along with mutation, migration, and genetic drift."

My notes from Evolutionary Biology.

Now I want you to reflect on this statement:

"It is the exact opposite of chance."

Please take Biology as a subject...

[RationalConclusion]

I am well aware that natural selection is not the only mechanism for the complexity and diversity that we see in life. I never said it was the only mechanism. I said that natural selection is the exact opposite of chance, which is true.

[MrTruthseaker]

"I said that natural selection is the exact opposite of chance, which is true."

Yep...Take biology...this is not going anywhere.

[RationalConclusion]

If you think that natural selection is chance then you obviously don't understand what natural selection is.

[MrTruthseaker]

"I said that natural selection is the exact opposite of chance, which is true."

Just take Biology...it should help you to understand what is evolution all about and what role does Natural selection play...

Thank you for reading my comments

[RationalConclusion]

Why do you keep telling me to take biology? You do not need to take a course in biology to understand how evolution by natural selection works.

I fully understand how evolution by natural selection works and it is not reliant on luck or chance.

[harmonicamajor]

if I follow your definition of chance then surprisingly, then chance does not exist in this universe. This is has ramifications for your bed-fellows (atheists) who proclaim that big bang was an a chance accident. Well, chance does not exist according to you since you dont even consider natural selection to be working on chance.

[RationalConclusion]

I never said that chance doesn't exist in the univerese. I'm saying that evolution by natural selection is not chance.

Why are you mixing up the big bang with evolution anyway? They're two completely different things.

Evolution by natural selection is not chance. I suggest you educate yourself on the subject.

[harmonicamajor]

I am more educated on this than you ever could. You do not see natural selection as chance. I see all the natural forces working in tandem as chance. Which mutation gets selected is entirely based on the "will" of these natural forces which can be uni-directional or bi-directional. But these forces work in natural without establishing any harmony with each other. In other words, a conglomerate of forces without any will to select a certain trait. If this is not chance, then nothing is chance.

[RationalConclusion]

Precisely! As you've just said. It's "will", not chance.

Animals feed on other animals and the animals which are best suited to their surroundings are more likely to survive and pass on their genes.

[harmonicamajor]

i am talking about abiotic factors which do not "think." Inanimate matter existed before animate matter. Animate matter came into existence in animate matter. Thus the principles of genetics that you are talking about does not apply at the boundary of going from inanimate to animate.

Secondly, I define the "will" of external forces as the "physical laws" which they follow. However, these laws work in random with each other, each exerting its own "will."

[harmonicamajor]

in inanimate matter.*

[RationalConclusion]

I'm not entitely sure what you're trying to say but seem to be taling about abilgenesis which is something quite different.

I am specifically talking about evolution by natural selection. Natural selection is not relant on chance. It is reliant on the actions of living things.

[harmonicamajor]

you are wrong here. Natural selection is "partly" reliant on living things. much of the diversity of life has emerged from inanimate factors. mutations occur in DNA. DNA is "not a living thing." Most of the mutations result from action of polymerases of sunlight. None of them are living things. But those actually are the driving factors of evolution. Natural selection just selects one over the other according to what fits within it more. How natural selection decides to act?

[harmonicamajor]

or sunlight.*

Regarding how natural selection chooses its parameters, then is random. Natural selection does not know what factor to select/favor over the other one. it just creates whatever conditions following the physical laws and then life fine tunes according to it by killing the less fit. Its random.

[RationalConclusion]

It is now clear to me that you obviously have a huge misunderstanding of evolution by natural selection.

It's not chance.

To be clear explain to me what you think natural selection is and how it works.

[harmonicamajor]

natural selection is a process which selects the most "fit" organisms over the others which are less fit. the fitness is dependent on mutations and the environmental conditions. The environmental conditions which drive natural selection change randomly, hence natural selection pressures randomly change.

[harmonicamajor]

you are being very limited in your examples of natural selection. Your example of one animal eating the other can maybe explain lower animal evolution, it does not explain evolution of humans who are very rarely "eaten" by animals especially when they can modify their surroundings, even living in jungles, to avoid carnivorous encounters.

[RationalConclusion]

There are a variety of selection pressures on humans which would have come into play. Being killed by predators would have undoubtedly been one of them when we were hunter gatherers living on the african plains.

[harmonicamajor]

I never denied that. But you were the one who were restricting it to just that example. Surely, that could not be a random pressure since predators have the conscious ability to think. But abiotic factors cannot think and their actions are governed by physical laws. These physical laws work in random in nature, hence the selective pressures they exert are random, not what Richard Dawkins or you are preaching. Just taking benefit from gullible people.

[RationalConclusion]

I'm not talking about natural laws. I'm specifically referring to animal behaviour!

[harmonicamajor]

animal behavior is the result of complex interaction of chemical which follows natural laws.

[RationalConclusion]

What do you mean exactly?

[RationalConclusion]

I'm not wrong. Mutations are random. Natural selection is not.

How does natural selection decide to act?

You obviously have a misunderstanding of what natural selection is. It's nothing to do with animals making concious decisions. Animals kill off the animals which are least suited to their environments because they are the easiest prey to catch.

[harmonicamajor]

Where did I say that natural seletion is about "animals making conscious decisions?" You keep on rambling about only 1 type of natural selection: that of predator-prey ecology. You are forgetting the abiotic factors which make up most of the selective pressures. Heat, temperature, light, toxins, climate, floods, lack of nutrients in soil etc.

[RationalConclusion]

I am well aware that there are a variety of conditions which come into play. What's your point?

[harmonicamajor]

Point is that these conditions change randomly. Hence selective pressure changes randomly. its random, contrary to what you were preaching.

[RationalConclusion]

If you're referring to a pressure such as climate then yes I agree that would be a random pressure.

Another example could be the asteroid that supposedly killed of the dinosaurs. That is a completely random event.

I am specifically talking about the predator/prey battle and the many other extraordinary ways that living things are reliant on one another.

[harmonicamajor]

I can also argue that the fact you are unsure is not because I was incomprehensible but because you did not have the ability to comprehend what I said. That however would be confrontational and i would want to avoid confronting a "rationalist" lest he considers me unfit and kills me.

[RationalConclusion]

Your comment was put across poorly which is why I had trouble understanding it. I do not want to argure about language. I simply want to understand what you're trying to put across.

[harmonicamajor]

Sorry, I cannot help that. Extensive forays into intellectual world has taken away my ability to speak in the language of lay-person.

[RationalConclusion]

I just call it pretentious.

[harmonicamajor]

Of course you have the right to call anything pretentious that goes against your beliefs. i cannot help it.

[RationalConclusion]

Beliefs have nothing to do with it. I called it pretentious specifically because of the language.

[harmonicamajor]

and the factor with the chance of possessing the strongest "will" wins. Its all random, each playing with the other. There is no coherent order to their workings and consequences except the order in their existence as physical laws.

[RationalConclusion]

The strongest will? What on earth are you talking about?

By the sound of it you don't seem to understand what evoltion by natural selction is or how it works.

It's not chance.

[harmonicamajor]

By strongest will I mean the dominating natural force. I was just describing it in unorthodox terms.

[RationalConclusion]

What do you mean by "the dominating natural force"?

[harmonicamajor]

if there is strong sunlight in a certain area compared to shades, those with good mechanisms to avoid skin cancer would be "more fit" as they would live longer to reproduce. So Sunlight was a "dominating natural force" compared to lets say "shade availability."

[muslimgiga]

umm i took bio as my lab in first year at high school.

When my teacher started explaining evolution, LOL i realized its nothing but crap. Sounded like POKEMON more than it sounded like science...

[ManifestationOfTruth]

@muslimgiga Salaam, I suggest you actually study evolutionary biology before coming to these conclusions, or making such claims. What can be conclusively stated is that the notion that humans and modern apes descended from a common ancestor is one that a Muslim should not accept. This does not mean that other aspects of evolutionary biology are false, baseless, or in conflict with Islamic teachings.

[muslimgiga]

@ManifestationOfTruth Wsalam. Exactly as you said. But that part i couldn't make sense of is called "speciation" The notion that one animal "speciated" into another.

Other than that most evolutionary theories are actually very close to what Islam says as the origin of life.

[ManifestationOfTruth]

@muslimgiga Salaam, its good to know we can agree on that. Oh, I see, well speciation is an idea which proposes a sort of "branching" from a common ancestor. I could elaborate upon it, however, that would take quite a lot of time and space here. If you are really interested in it, you should google "speciation", and view the second link (it should be Evolution 101: Speciation". Take care!

[RzaaV2]

hmm, you don't seem to understand what logic is.

ps, yes there is evidence.

[RationalConclusion]

Evidence for the existence of a god? What evidence is there?

[MrTruthseaker]

Ur Brain!

[RationalConclusion]

How is my brain evidence for the existence of a god?

[MrTruthseaker]

Think about it...and reflect.

[RationalConclusion]

I have no idea what you mean.

[MrTruthseaker]

Judging by your statements it seems to me you are a "Richard Dawkins" follower...hmm makes me think...

[Ahmed127]

there's no proof for the inexistence of God

[RationalConclusion]

I agree Ahmed.

God cannot be proved nor disproved. We cannot say for sure whether a god exists or not.

The point is that due to the fact that there is no sufficient evidence for the existence of a god it is illogical to believe that one exists.

[MrTruthseaker]

Well...If you use the brain that you have in your own head...the conclusion is that there is God. What proof do you have that ur great great great great great great great great great mom exited? non...u make an indirect conclusion that she existed..if the there is creation there Must be Creator...Thank you for reading

[RationalConclusion]

I have not come to the conclusion that there is a god because I have not seen any evidence for one.

My conclusion that my great great great great great great great great great grandmother existed is based on a level of evidence and reason which makes it perfectly justifiable and logical for me to conclude that she existed. The same cannot be said for the existence of a god.

I agree that creation requires a creator, but I do not believe that the universe or life was created.

[abdelbaasit1]

Very superb & profound lecture indeed -- may Allah reward Shaykh Yasir Qadhi for his great efforts and educating the Ummah on such critical subjects - Aameen

[faizan88]

why is it lagging

[kkvh7543]

yasir qadhi bomba sheyxdi

[bm897]

JazakAllah Khair for uploading. I was there!! Its good to hear this lecture again. May Allah Subhana Wa Ta'ala reward Sheikh Yasir Qadhi!

[GerPolitiker]

Jazakallahu khair for uploading

[mtalib622]

Jazak Allah khair for uploading this interesting and scholarly lecture. Yasir Qadhi brings out the tensions between a desire to base one's religion on rational grounds and the danger that such an approach can actually undermine one's iman.  May Allah the Exalted reward Shaykh Yasir in this world and the hereafter.

[ManifestationOfTruth]

@mtalib622 I think its important to understand that many of the philosophers of the past who went astray, weren't actually being rational. They merely thought that they were, however, this is the consequence of subjective thought. What is logic? It is merely a conceptual tool that is used to string details together in a systematic way. When you don't have those details (ex. about Allah's essence), what is their to string together systematically? Nothing we can logically grasp.

[ManifestationOfTruth]

@ManifestationOfTruth Logic is also the principles that guide reasoning within a certain system. However, it is dependent upon a premise, and if that premise is wrong, then regardless of whether or not ones argument is logically sound, it is still false. It is entirely rational to say that we can't rationalize the essence of Allah given our human limitations. Limited human logic cannot be imposed on the unlimited, because the very premise is that Allah transcends the limits of this universe.

[kupekake]

@mtalib622 Type on Adam Deen "Does Allah exist" to watch a great debate with an atheist.