An Atheist Argued On The Religion But A Blind Faith ~ Dr Zakir Naik

[Sunny Ahmed]

 

[Wake up Pak]

I can not understand what he preaches...

 

[Sunny Ahmed]

I can not understand what he preaches...

He is trying to explain to atheist who crated the earth, moon, sun is Called ALLAH and it’s written in the Koran 1400 years ago. scientists are discovering some answers now but all these things were written 1400 years ago. So blind faith is not allowed in Islam. That’s why science, education, research is important in Islam, that’s why it’s taken 23 years Imran Khan to struggle because in Pakistan education poor, islamic knowledge of public poor, poverty, corruption, all these thing are against Islam. Muslims also divided and weak because away from Islam

 

[CANSUK]

اِقرا

 

[Vitamin_C]

In science its not about what you know, its about what you can back with evidence. So far there is nothing that you can measure or observe that can lead us to God. Which why its said religions are based on faith.

Also Zakir Naik is lying when he says there is no material evidence for Stars and the distance between them. You can directly observe the star for one and you can detect and measure their radiation.

He is trying to explain to atheist who crated the earth, moon, sun is Called ALLAH and it’s written in the Koran 1400 years ago. scientists are discovering some answers now but all these things were written 1400 years ago. So blind faith is not allowed in Islam. That’s why science, education, research is important in Islam, that’s why it’s taken 23 years Imran Khan to struggle because in Pakistan education poor, islamic knowledge of public poor, poverty, corruption, all these thing are against Islam. Muslims also divided and weak because away from Islam

 

[Prince of Dhump]

there is nothing that you can measure or observe that can lead us to God.

Not that i wanna start a discussion but can u give us a hypothetical evidence/experiment that could have/ will lead to God. Say i measure distance from here to there and that means there is God..

 

[Vitamin_C]

Its hard to imagine. In the real world we find evidence first and then make a conclusion based on the evidence we see.

In religion people make the conclusion first and then look for evidence to fit it. So its hard to say what evidence could lead us to that conclusion especially since we have nothing to work with to start off.

Before we discovered cosmic background radiation of big bang, we already knew what to look for because we could see almost every galaxy in universe is red shifted (moving away from each other). that led us to make a hypothesis that everything originated at one point.

Not that i wanna start a discussion but can u give us a hypothetical evidence/experiment that could have/ will lead to God. Say i measure distance from here to there and that means there is God..

 

[Prince of Dhump]

Its hard to imagine. In the real world we find evidence first and then make a conclusion based on the evidence we see.

In religion people make the conclusion first and then look for evidence to fit it. So its hard to say what evidence could lead us to that conclusion especially since we have nothing to work with to start off.

Before we discovered cosmic background radiation of big bang, we already knew what to look for because we could see almost every galaxy in universe is red shifted (moving away from each other). that led us to make a hypothesis that everything originated at one point.

I see..
But say we make a wrong conclusion scientific/belief wise we can discard them when proven wrong in some aspect. How can we disprove the conclusion of a mighty supernatural being that has created everything

 

[Vitamin_C]

By asking that question, you are presupposing that a mighty supernatural being exists. The reality is that no one can show evidence of God. There is no evidence that the universe was created by a God. All the mysteries that we have solved so far always point to natural explanations.

Supernatural is simply a fill in the blank of human ignorance. Once the ignorance gap is filled by knowledge the explanation always turns out to be natural one. For example people in the past believed that earthquakes are caused by a bull that is holding the Earth on its horn. Now we know its because of movements in tectonic plates.

I see..
But say we make a wrong conclusion scientific/belief wise we can discard them when proven wrong in some aspect. How can we disprove the conclusion of a mighty supernatural being that has created everything

 

[Prince of Dhump]

By asking that question, you are presupposing that a mighty supernatural being exists. The reality is that no one can show evidence of God. There is no evidence that the universe was created by a God. All the mysteries that we have solved so far always point to natural explanations.

Supernatural is simply a fill in the blank of human ignorance. Once the ignorance gap is filled by knowledge the explanation always turns out to be natural one. For example people in the past believed that earthquakes are caused by a bull that is holding the Earth on its horn. Now we know its because of movements in tectonic plates.

Does science fill the gaps in our understandings or does it shift the question...

Do u think we will ever reach a point where we wont ask anymore questions..
for example what caused earthquakes? its tectonic plates..what moves them ? its physical laws..how physical laws came into being?..??

another example could be what created human?its evolution..how did it all started? it was physics chemistry biochemistry etc..how did they came into being?..??

so would there be a phase where we wont ask another question..where an answer wont produce more questions..where we will be satisfied with the answer to our heart content

If so..could u give us an example of say a chain of questions where there is a full stop at the end of the last answer.

 

[Vitamin_C]

Science fills the gap in specific questions. For examlle evolution is not an answer to where we come from, its an answer to how life forms change over time.

Where life comes from is not a question for evolutionary biology but a seperate field of study called abiogenisis which is researching how non living matter transition to living matter.

Where that matter came from is a question in physics. We understand very well that the larger elements that form our bodies and planets didnt exist when big bang happened but they are formed from super nova explosions.

Where the matter came from to form the stars that caused the super nova explosion? It came from the hydrogen and helium in the aftermath of big bang.

Where did big bang come from? Was it God? Do we live in a multiverse with billions of big bangs happening all the time? Are we in a simulation created by our future selvles? Those are some of the questions on which we do not yet have sufficient evidence to base our conclusion on.

The universe does not owe us explanations or answers but some people feel uneasy or scared when they dont have an answer for something and thats why they make up their own answers to fill in that blanks not based on any evidence but on faith

In science we have to be humble and honest, sometimes that means admitting that you do not have the answer to somethings. I think thats a much more respectable position to have than to make up an explanation on faith.

Does science fill the gaps in our understandings or does it shift the question...

Do u think we will ever reach a point where we wont ask anymore questions..
for example what caused earthquakes? its tectonic plates..what moves them ? its physical laws..how physical laws came into being?..??

another example could be what created human?its evolution..how did it all started? it was physics chemistry biochemistry etc..how did they came into being?..??

so would there be a phase where we wont ask another question..where an answer wont produce more questions..where we will be satisfied with the answer to our heart content

If so..could u give us an example of say a chain of questions where there is a full stop at the end of the last answer.