*Timestamps / Chapters* 00:00 Introduction (+ background of guest) 00:50 The 3 discoveries in Cosmology, Physics, and Biology that indicate ID 07:36 The designer(s): Personal God(s) | Dawkin: origin of life 11:45 A transcendent being vs an agency within the universe 14:15 Fine tuning: A prerequisite for life 16:48 Lack of science propelled by Islam in the book: _The Return of the God Hypothesis_ 24:26 Difference between a biological designer vs a Cosmological designer 25:57 No _scientific explanation_ for the complexity in the universe? 33:21 Reception the book 35:09 Other projects of Dr Stephen | Science in history (Islam, Greeks, Judeo-Christian) 39:50 Decline in scientific activity in the _Muslim world_ | Responses by Dr Stephen 44:02 Prof. John Polkinghorne 44:58 Story of Prof. John by Dr Stephen | *Atheistic* explanation(s) (multiverse, etc.) 49:25 Conclusion _May ﷻ ألله bless everyone involved in this video: the viewers and of course our dear br Paul_
I have been on this Chanel since less than 1,000 subscribers, I truly feel that brother Paul has certainly been blessed by the most high. From the increased sophistication of his videos and the master level guests that have been interviewed, I can only say subhanallah and may Allah bless you for benefiting the ummah. And may Allah establish and elevate us all who seek his guidance amen.
@@fidelcatsro6948 i think on the old youtube there was a list of many of your subscribers, but now, not anymore... in some ways I miss the old youtube, no ads, share info etc. the only good thing google plus did was make threads for comment topics so its not one comment over the other!
Brother Paul,I am very pleased to see that you have keep pressing him to acknowledge Islamic contributions in science and finally he acknowledges little but he need to open up his mind about Islam. Thanks you brother for the wonderful discussion.
Yeah, i noticed he was overshadowing Islam using jewish and arrostatel so he won't talk about Islam. And the colonization in Islamic lands he also didn't want to talk about. Bias is a hard thing.
@@sparrow3491 I agree. You can feel besides that bias, he is a very objective person. But he does give his reasons why...he feels islamic contributions in Islam just haven't stood the test of time. Which is funny of course since even America is a fairly new country itself. So I guess it can go back and forth on this.
It's like he purposely avoids the Islamic contribution. He tries to brush off the Islamic contribution by commenting on the "lack of durability". What about the violent persecution of Muslims in Spain by Queen Isabella, which saw the destruction of Islamic Universities and libraries. Also, he talks about the Judaeo Christian contribution, when their theologies are completely irreconcilable. The Islamic theology is closer to the Jewish theology. So why exclude Islam. Doesn't make sense.
Thank you for this excellent interview. I'm a bit disappointed that Dr Meyer did not reference Islam in his book. Islam is a truly monotheistic faith; it's bedrock is the uncompromisingly belief in the One Transcendent God. This unfortunately can not be said of the Judeo Christian traditions. It is frustrating to see such open mindedness and honesty coupled with short sightedness at the same time.
Paul, i am vocal opponent of islam/christianity but i must say your content is mostly excellent and your channel is very well done with excellent choice of guests. With slightly gritted teeth but only fair to say ty for you channel. In fact im gonna subscribe just to physically say thank you
I to appreciate your honesty and morality in expressing your appreciation. In Islam it is said that he who is not grateful to people is not grateful to God. So what issues do you have with Islam and Christianity?
@@think-islam-channel for me, I'll leave this comment section free from debate but I'm sure we'll meet again. In fact I'll look forward to it. Ty for the appreciation.
RUclips is a blessing listening to intellectuals of our times sitting in the comfort of our homes is simply fantastic. Sir you have introduced us to highly sophisticated subjects opening our minds and broadening our views. With every lecture the presence of Divine becomes more and more obvious to God believing person . Amazing discussion.
My brother Paul, as-Salām 'alaikum. This was an absolutely excellent conversation, really. And, by the Permission of Allāh, the first of many to come. The arguments he makes are really important for Muslims to understand in a world surrounded and entrenched in Darwinian and Materialist ideologies. Dr. Meyers provides a very coherent and easy to understand critique, which is no way a surface level criticism. Also, may Allāh reward you for asking necessary questions; like the one regarding why the absolutely integral contributions of Islam to Sciences was omitted by the oft-repeated phrase "judeo-christian" when speaking of the formation of the Scientific method. The brief conversation that followed was cordial and well mannered, but also touched on a few really important points and issues - from both yourself and Dr. Meyers. Really, an excellent conversation, walhamdulillāh. I pray that Allāh grants Dr. Meyers guidance and opens his heart to Īmān - āmīn. Looking forward to future conversations between you both. May Allāh bless and preserve you - āmīn.
Wonderful !! Wonderful !!!. Dr Stephen Meyer is my favourite non-muslim scholar. Dr Meyer's book didn't give proper credit to Muslim civilisation's contribution to Modern science but Muslims must overlook this aspect because overall his books and lectures strengthen one's belief in Allah (SWT). Paul - May Allah bless you for this engaging Interview
Is that really Dr. Stephen Meyer? I have most of his books I think. Paul. You have probably the best content on the internet in this field. Absolutely. Unbelievable.
What a pleasant surprise this morning to have a new interview pop up from brother Paul's channel. I loved how you pressed Dr. Meyer to admit Islamic contribution to Science. I bet he wasn't expecting that HAHA :-) , I wish to comment on what he said about this as I'm an expert on Islamic Science myself. As to Dr. Meyer's claim that decoupling from Aristotelian Natural Philosophy started in Christian Europe. On the contrary, said decoupling started with the anti-Hellenistic thought in the Muslim world 7 centuries before this was adopted in Christian Europe by Copernicus, then with the rise of the Ashari school, to which Ibn Haytham & Biruni & Ghazali belonged to. In effect, it was precisely because the Asharis had a theological bone to pick with the Greeks that criticism of their methods of inquiry (or lack thereof) & their cosmological & physical models emerged, & new models came to replace them, particularly the scientific method of inquiry (tanthir & tawsif), the uniformity of nature, the non-necessity of efficient causation, the quantization of the world, the relativity of time & space...etc. - Ibn Haytham wrote several books on the criticism of Greek Natural Philosophy, among which his famous Rad where he mentions 20 objections to Hellenistic cosmological models. He solves some of these himself (6 of the 10), with the rest of the objections solved by future generations (such as by Nasr Tusi & his Tusi couple to solve ecliptic orbits)... Further criticism followed for the centuries to come, by Ghazali & Razi & Jurjani & many others, which would only be adopted by Christian Europe post-Newton, by people such as Hume & Hamilton & Berkeley... (such as the non-necessity of efficient causation which Ghazali establishes 8 centuries prior to Hume)...etc. As to Newton's inverse square law of gravity. This is what one learns in a Eurocentric view of the world, to the point of denial. In fact, it was Biruni (died 1048) & Khazini (died 1130) who established center of gravity & the subsequent inverse square law. This is also the case for other laws which are attributed to Newton, such as action-reaction & force/acceleration law, in fact established by Ibn Baja centuries prior. As to Dr. Meyer's claim that Science did not endure in the Islamic world as it did in Christian Europe. Let's examine the facts. Systematic & creative practice of Science started in the 8th century in the Muslim world, with the emergence of Ibn Hayan, Khawrizmi, Marwazi ...etc, peaked between the 10th & 15th century, with Ibn Sina, Ibn Haytham, Biruni, Tusi, Zahrawi, Ibn Nafis, Razi, Ibn Shatir, Ibn Baja... & hundreds others, & persisted until 17th century with Qushji, Taqi Deen Dimashqi, Celebi, Sanusi...etc. In contrast, Science in Europe pre-17th century was merely a transfer & replication of what already existed in the Islamic world, as Briffault said, with virtually no addition to it. From the 18th century onward, the West took the lead, so far for 3 centuries, compared to 10 centuries of Islamic scientific contribution. Another fact to consider is that the West's contribution to global Science dropped significantly the last decades, to less than 2/5th today, with the rise of China (at 1/5th) & the Muslim world (at 1/10th global output, a rapid exponential 13 times growth the last 20 years). This, knowing that on average three-quarters of researches in non-social non-health sciences in the West are foreigners, mostly from China, India & the Muslim world (with 1/5th to 1/4th share). Which means, native Western research in these fields is around 2/5th of their total output, thus equivalent to the Muslim output (Muslim world + Muslims in the West) at around 15%-20% global output. As to the claim that Science declined in the Muslim world after the 12 century. This is an early 20th century revisionist theory which emerged in Europe to remove Islam from Europe's History & justify new theories such as the Scientific Revolution, when these were thought of previously as mere transfer of knowledge from the Muslim world to Europe upon setting up Arabic chairs across European universities from the 16th century to acquire & study Islamic books, 120,000 books have been collected for that purpose, which translate to dozens of millions of pages of content (compared to the thousands of pages of content Muslims acquired from the Greeks). In effect, the most revolutionary period in Islamic Science is actually post 12th century, where the true paradigm shifts in Science emerged, know today as Modern Science. Particularly, although the Muslim world started declining mid-18th century, slowly abandoning much of their sciences, the collection, translation & studying of Islamic works continued in Europe until late 19th century. From major paradigm shifts in Science, such as Evolution, where Mu'tazilite ideas about increasing complexity of life (from minerals to plants to corals to jellyfish to vertebrates to mammals to monkeys & finally humans) to natural selection, adaptive traits, survival of the fittest, camouflage, prey & predator... gained popularity in 19th century Europe, this constituted one of the arguments against the Church then for not adopting Evolution as Muslims already have (they mistakenly thought this was mainstream belief among Muslims, it wasn't) - or that live micro organisms are the source of diseases & the cause of infections (mentioned for instance by Fatih's sheikh Akshamsidden, centuries before Antonie adopts these ideas), or that the source of heat & movement in the body is blood circulation - or Set Theory, which was founded on one-to-one correspondence, quantifying the object & infinity nature, first brought up by Hamilton then Cantor (who is credited with it), although these ideas were widely studied & taught by Muslims for centuries developed by Razi & others [Sunusi's work (Jumal, from 15th century) in fact describes 112 rules of sets, about bijection, inclusion...] - The Ash'ari atomic & cosmic theory of matter & the universe (then mainstream in the Muslim world), that efficient causation is inductive, that events are isolated & discrete, that nature is uniform by habit ('ada), that dimensions are relative contingent on perception, such as time & space, that matter is quantized, that accidents (motion/stillness, combination/separation) are probable until actualized, that time & space are quantized, that velocity is bounded.... which were adopted by the anti-Newtonian movement in Europe (by Berkley, Hume & others) to culminate into Relativity & Quantum Physics. - Classical Physics, about the laws of motion, that force proportional to acceleration, that gravity induces free fall & planetary motion, that orbits are elliptical, that the cosmos is finite & non-eternal, that equilibrium is in the center of gravitation... (later adopted by Copernicus, Newton, Kepler & others). - To groundbreaking technologies, such as: firearms & the various weapons we are familiar today, which made the Ottomans & the Mughals so dominant, including canons, torpedoes used to sink ships, tanks used to bring down gates, rockets, rapid-fire guns... acquired by Europeans who developed these even further - the steam engine in the 16th century used in by the Ottomans to carry loads or pump water but also for cooking & other mundane practices, then adopted by Europeans for more arduous tasks once coal was discovered (much denser in energy than firewood) - the mechanical clock (with hour hand, minute & seconds) invented by Taqi-deen Dimashqi in the 16th century - the variety of textile mills which made its way from the bay of Bengal to England, instigating the Industrial Revolution therein. To everyday practices, such as in Dentistry: dental restoration, implants, gold teeth, dental alignment...etc - Vaccination, adopted by Europeans from the Ottomans...etc. To even the most subtle things, such as Cancer categorization into 4 phases based on tumor size. We'll be here all day if I continue.
To comment on the Evolution part of this wonderful discussion. Finding natural explanations of natural phenomenons, including Life, does not detract from the divine origin of these phenomenons. If one day we understand more about how Life emerged & the processes which govern our bodies, this does not remove God from the picture. On the contrary, these processes & explanations themselves need an explanation, & so on, to an ultimate explanation, aka God. In fact, Atheists do not deny the existence of God, as a first cause, an ultimate explanation, a necessary being, for denying the necessary entails non-existence of all things. Rather, Atheists deny the existence of a god with choice, Free Will. Nature, Laws of Physics, Spacetime, whatever it is that fundamentally originates all things, is supposedly not with choice. In effect, this is simply a nominal argument.
This is one of the most informative and interesting comments I have ever come across on a RUclips comment section. Thank you so much for typing all this out. I think I’m even going to screenshot this and save it lol
You should have a channel to explain this event, episode by episode. I am doing little research (amateur internet browsing, old books hunting) for chemistry development. I could catch some of the timeline you mentioned but I cannot concede the jargon for major of the comment itself. Still, thank you for summarizing the important points. It connected the dots for my reading.
@@konyaku3072 Thank you brother. I do intend to start a blog or write a book on the subject & others, or maybe as you said start a channel. Inshallah. If you do have particular questions, you're free to ask me here.
I pray that Allah bless you abundently brother Paul.. Thank you for bringing up the amazing contributions of Islam and Muslims to science and development!
Having purchased the book myself, you asked him the very question I wanted to hear an explanation to. Much much respect brother Paul! and our lovely guest and author Stephen Meyer.
Good discussion. Please bring on David Berlinksi as soon as you can; he is a real genius, and has fascinating insights into Darwinism & science in general.
Its nice seeing doctor Stephen Meyer thrive. Such a great man. I have reaed the 1000-paged book theistic evolution he participated in and am most delighted to see him on here off course his preconceived notions about Islam are a bit off but so be it. And brother Paul keeps astonishing with his reach and presentation. Thank you so much.
Very nice discussion. Thanks Paul for putting up these excellent questions and thanks to Dr. Meyer for his contributions to dismantling the materialistic atheistic dogmas in an academic manner.
Actually Paul gave a fantastic answer he said that colonialism and military and economic oppression of Muslim lands played a big role in the decline. You need to rewatch it and take off your blinkers.
Brother Paul, an excellent interview. I was hoping that you would continue with your guest to discuss the necessity of the Oneness of the Creator and His uniqueness with all the attributes of perfection as described in the Qur’an. Perhaps in future interviews, God willing
Watch Sheikh Othman bin Al-Farouq's channel in his discussions on Darwin's theory and Christianity, and his dialogues with atheists are very interesting and fun
Another excellent interview. I hope Mr. Myer reads the Quran which actually encourages to use reasoning, ponder reflect those are good tools to do the science.
Brilliant brother Paul a true gem here you have really hit home the question we were thinking about after the god hypnosis release and in real detail. Mashallah
Paul’s line of questioning is very appropriate, interesting to see Stephen on the back foot there with regards to Islam’s contribution to science. Well done.
If lslam "contributed" so much to science, why don't you get your modern day muslim scientists and intellectuals to write about it?! Why do always want westerners to write your so-called islamic "contribution" to science!
Brilliant Paul but you need to bring him back again for a longer session if possible or a series of mini short ones as my enjoyment was cut short!... like you said we only scratch ed the surface!!
Attributing the scientific achievements of the Western world to Judeo-Christian tradition tells only a snippet of the story. The majority of the Jews were always in the muslim world for starters and the Christian world had always rejected them. Add to this the fact that millions of Christians also lived in the muslim world and they also had the same scriptures that the western Christians worked from. Many factors helped the Western world become dominant, such as; - intense competition. Europeans have always fought against each other for resources, land, etc. This led to rapid developments in military technology that allowed them eventually dominate and subjugate the rest of the world - Economic system. The Europeans developed the fractional reserve banking system. This allowed them to borrow huge sums of money that wasn't available to others. It is an extremely cut-throat system, you either succeed or perish. Through this system, they financed the various expeditions of nations around the world. Nations that succeeded become wealthy behind their wildest imaginations as they brought back fortunes as well as gold from the taxes they imposed upon the subjicated people - Fossil fuels. This is in my opinion the most important one. The discovery and use of coal allowed England to move away from an agrarian society to an industrial society. It gave men free time to Innovate and invent and this is what led to the breathtaking discoveries we have seen over the past 200 years. Take the fossil fuels out of the society and we'll be back to the mid 18th century at best. Fossil fuels turbocharged the West's mission to conquer the world - Religion. I am going to go against Stephen Meyer here and say the abandonment of religion allowed the West to flourish because the Judeo-Christian tradition is actually very repressive. The Jews had the same tradition for thousands of years and never achieved anything. Christianity also also didn't achieve anything in almost 1700 years much of which consisted of burning heretics at the stake. They finally achieved great things when the stranglehold of the church was finally broken.
I agree on the point of religion you mentioned. Astonishingly, the situation is different 180 degrees when it comes to Islam. Before Islam, Arabs did not have any known scientific contributions or known scholars. Then scientific contribution exploded with Islam, and then after the partial secularization of Muslims and the breakdown of Khelafa, contribution is little.
@X 10 To completely omit Islam civilisation's contributions to the development of science is flat-out an oversight. Nobody's talking about how it endured, we're talking about the origins of the scientific method etc.
Thank you gentlemen for a mind- blowing exchange! Loved the entropy factor discussion too. I do believe the ‘Judeo-Christian’ / ‘western’ vs ‘Islamic’ contribution was a valid observation to raise. Perhaps the term ‘Abrahamic tradition’ would reasonably, fairly and rationally cover off this controversy without actually having to change anything other than a subtle mental recognition of the historic ‘elephant in the room’ & indeed, arguably also improve descriptive accuracy? If Dr Myer has not yet read the Quran, then I hope he does one day to appreciate the inspirational source of enquiry of both science and nature it encourages.
wow what a really nice man, he genuinely seems to really liked the discussion Paul, so thank you for your efforts yet again and may the creator shower you with his blessings to help spread real knowledge unlike those that conceal knowledge like Richard dawkins
I admire Dr Stephen Meyer so much for his brilliant science discussions supporting intelligent design. I was pleasantly surprised to see this video today . Great interview. Thank you Paul.
You have to get your hands on George Saliba's books, and probably invite him on your podcast. He's one of the best experts on the history of Islamic science. His materials are simply brilliant.
I’m watching this video following Dr Stephen Meyer’s appearance on Pierce Morgan . This is a much more in-depth conversation. Thank you brother and I ask Allah to guide him to His path. I think it will be great to follow up with him on what he found out from his research on the Islamic contribution to science.
Thanks for the great contents and comment on his book and very much related and appropriate reminder of the contribution of muslims scientists, hope he educate himself in this case.
Stephen Meyers makes a good point regarding the durability of the scientific enterprise in the muslim world and this is something that should be looked into. My personal view is that character of the muslim world changed after the Mongol invasions, they wiped out city after city after city. After these invasions, the muslim world became more militaristic (fuelled in part by the Mongol conversion to Islam). Nothing comparable has ever happened in the west on such a large scale and if it were to happen, then scientific enterprise will also stop in the west or in fact any other nation
Entirely wrong. I commented on this and asked Paul to invite Professor George Saliba, whom I would consider the authority on this particular topic. It had nothing to do with the fall of Baghdad according to his research. This is just something that historians have proposed for so long now that it's taken as truth, but Saliba completely refutes this angle and offers far better reasons as to why the sciences in the Islamic world declined. He can give you a huge list of brilliant Muslim scientists who all worked and produced (science) long after the fall of Baghdad. So that's not the reason. Nor does the Protestant Reformation have anything to do with it. Nor does Al Ghazali's Tahafut caused the decline, as so many would parrot. Saliba is an expert on this, and I really want to see him come on and talk about the history of the Islamic sciences and what exactly caused the decline.
@@XaeeD Did you actually read what I wrote? Was Baghdad the only city in the muslim world that was destroyed by the mongols? What the hell would the protestant reformation have to do with scientific exploration in the muslim world? My argument is that after the mongol invasions (and the crusades to a lesser extent), the character of the muslim world changed from one of open mindedness interested in learning to one of a militaristic mindset. This is completely understandable as they suffered over a century of genocide. The very people who founded Islam and the ones who helped run the empire (arabs and Persians) were no longer in control. The dominant forces were the various mongol and Turkic clans and these extended all the way from India through to Egypt. Yes they may have produced brilliant scientists but their outlook was very different to that of the early Muslims
@@masterblaster4784 Yes, why would I comment on your input if I hadn't read it? You are referring to the Mongol invasions, which is something that is often mentioned as causing the decline of the Islamic sciences, but as I already stated; this is simply not the case. I mentioned the Protestant Reformations, because that's what Stephen Meyers threw in there when talking about the decline of the sciences in the Islamic world; "haven't you listened to the talk?" So my feedback is still relevant, and you're being argumentative now, but do yourself a favor and look for George Saliba's talks on YT. Saliba specifically dismisses this argument (i.e. the Mongols caused the decline), and explains why this is rejected. No need to guess at this stuff when we have brilliant thinkers out there who have studied this topic extensively.
You hit the nail on the head Paul when you said colonialism and military and economic dominance of Muslim lands played a big role in how 'durable' (in the words of Meyers), science was in the Muslim world.
Great interview.. I had suggested this some months ago and great that you’ve brought him into the platform.. it’s only because of my suggestion I am sure .😉
Brilliant program! Thank you! With regards to the contributions of Islam to science, the term “algorithm”, which the professor used, actually comes from the name of the 8th century AD Muslim mathematician & astronomer Al Khwarezmi who invented that science.
Another excellent production Paul. Many thanks! Not why Mr. Meyer has not given Islam more of a mention because the Judeo-Christian sources are so vague and very few on this subject compared to Islam. For some reason, the captions disappear after a short advert is played by RUclips.
Brother Paul, The two ayah sections in the Qur'an that point to the "big bang" theory, what Dr. Meyer called the singularity at the origin of the universe, may be interesting to him (loosely translated as): 1. The Heavens and the Earth were joined together, so we split them apart 2. We created the Heavens and the Earth, and we are (continuously) expanding (the cosmos) This is a contribution directly from God to human understanding of the creation and evolution of the universe via the Qur'an (not a contribution of Muslim scholars). It is a striking affirmation of the fact that the Quran is God's revelation1400 years ago, via the signs it gives of this seminal fact that Science has discovered in the last several decades.
The first one is not definitely the big bang, many scholars also had an unscientific theory, some said it meant rainfall The second one does not mean expanding, classical translations usually meant it as "built", "fashioned" nor does it mean the universe, it says the heavens, which could also mean the sky.
@@joeshmoe8080 Qur'an 51:47 والسماء بنيناها بايد وانا لموسعون Transliteration for you: wal-samāa banaynāhā bi-aydin wa-innā lamūsiʿūna Interpretation of the meaning: And the heaven, We constructed it with strength, and indeed, We (are) surely (its) Expanders. If this translation seems odd to you, that's probably because "lamūsiʿūna" isn't a verb, but it's actually a noun. A nominative masculine plural (form IV) active participle, to be specific, with the emphatic prefix "lām" preceding it. The Qur'an is in Arabic, so there is no "universe" in it. But what is usually meant by "heaven" is what we now call the universe. "Heaven", as opposed to the plural "heavens" being used is all-inclusive; i.e. it includes all the seven realms that are said to exist. Sometimes "heaven" can refer to the "sky" or "atmosphere", depending on the context, but mostly, it refers to the created world as a whole. "wal-samāa banaynāhā" means that the universe is "build, produced, constructed or structured", by Allah. It's usually not rendered as "fashioned", because fashioning something might imply a previous state or substance that is taken and molded into a new form or creation. And Allah says in 6:101 "Originator [without a precedent] of the heavens and the earth..", and "badīʿu" here means that He created (or originated) the universe without precedence: i.e. "from nothing". As such, "fashioned" isn't an ideal choice of translation, since this means "to give shape to a substance", or "to form a thing". The Arabic "bi-aydin" means "with strength", so that Allah strenghtens it and supports it. Then "wa-innā lamūsiʿūna" means that the agent is expanding it, as this is an active participle, i.e. an ongoing action or process. It's expressed in what we would call "an active voice". If you're baking a cake in the oven, the same root word can be used to describe how it's increasing in size; i.e. expanding. So your opinions are neither here nor there, with all due respect.
@@XaeeD Funny a similar repeated phrase is used in the Tanakh. E.g., Job 9:8: נֹטֶה שָׁמַיִם לְבַדּוֹ; וְדוֹרֵךְ, עַל-בָּמֳתֵי יָם. Who alone stretcheth out the heavens, and treadeth upon the waves of the sea. 'Noteh shamayim'/'he stretches/extends/spreads out the heavens' is an active participle of natah, thus indicating ongoing, present action. God is presently extending/expanding the heavens. The exact same phrase is in Zechariah 12:1 and Isaiah 40:22.
@@ConsideringPhlebas Good point, CP. But how does that negate or conflict with what I said about that Quranic verse? First of all, we can interpret Job 9:8 in relation to Job 37:18 תַּרְקִ֣יעַ עִ֖מּוֹ לִשְׁחָקִ֑ים חֲ֜זָקִ֗ים כִּרְאִ֥י מוּצָֽק tar-qî-a‘ ‘im-mōw liš-ḥā-qîm ḥă-zā-qîm kir-’î mū-ṣāq Have you spread out the skies with Him? Strong as a cast mirror. "Spread out" here literally seems to mean "to flatten", since it has the root word for "path" in it. See "ṭarīq", in the Arabic equivalent. It's a peculiar occurance, because it looks like this is the only place in the Tanakh where this particular derived form occurs. "Path, road, or way" in Hebrew should be "derek" if I'm not mistaken, so it's still close to the Arabic, but the word here in Job seems closer to the Arabic than a more typical Hebrew equivalent, which is kinda odd, but interesting. Psalm 18:11 ‘ā-ḇê šə-ḥā-qîm ..and thick clouds of the skies So what's spread out in 37:18? The blue sky up above during the day, and the starlit nightsky. "Strong", or "ḥă-zā-qîm", can also mean "hard". The sky up above was made solid, like a mirror, cast. After all, the strength of a mirror is in its solidity. As if the author believed the sky up above to be a solid dome, containing the celestial spheres (sun, moon, planets, stars, constellations). Matthew 24:29 And immediately after the tribulation of those days: 'The sun will be darkened, and the moon will not give its light, And the stars will fall from the sky, and the powers of the heavens will be shaken.' Here, the author of the Gospel of Matthew seems to believe that the stars are in the dome of the sky, and when this Doomsday event happens, the sun will be darkened, the moon will stop emitting light (it technically doesn't emit light of its own), and most importantly; the stars will fall down to the surface of the earth. After all, where else would they fall down to when falling from the sky? The author thought that the stars could drop out of the sky and fall to the earth. They were tiny, shining trinkets, according to this author. Obviously, stars don't fall from the sky, and even if our local star would somehow collide with the earth, it's so massive in comparison that the earth would go to ruin even before the two bodies physically connected. Stars can't fall like that. But this author didn't know that. He probably envisioned the solid dome mirror that is the sky in Job 37, which many Christians today still believe in. Job 9:8 nō-ṭeh šā-ma-yim lə-ḇad-dōw wə-ḏō-w-rêḵ ‘al-bā-mo-ṯê yām He Who alone stretched out the heavens, and treads on the high places [i.e. the waves] of the sea. This translation is from chabad, and they render the verb as such. So let's remind ourselves that the verb used here is not equivalent to the Arabic that is used in that verse we discussed from the Qur'an. The Arabic "lamūsiʿūna" in 51:47, or "mūsiʿ" is clearly different from "natah" in Hebrew. Some forms of this word that are used in the Bible: Genesis 12:8 [he] moved on to the hill country east of Bethel and *pitched* his tent Genesis 24:14 Please *let down* your jar that I may drink Genesis 38:1 Judah left his brothers and *settled* near a man named Hirah Genesis 38:16 he *went over to* her and said Genesis 39:21 [God] was with him and *extended* kindness to him, granting him favor Exodus 6:6 I will redeem you with an *outstretched* arm and with mighty acts of judgment Exodus 8:5 Tell Aaron [to] *stretch out* your hand with your staff Numbers 22:23 [the donkey] *turned* off the path and went into a field, so Balaam beat her to *return* her to the path The reason for quoting these is to show how this word is used. What most of these have in common is finitude. A hand stretched out will reach its maximum length. A donkey literally turns in its way, and is then redirected. A jar is lowered until it hits the floor or the arm is extended all the way. A tent is pitched until its maximum height. Judah goes to a man and stays with him. A man goes to the exact location where the woman is. An arm holding a staff can only stretch out so far. God extends His kindness means that He shows a man mercy, and gives him favor in the eyes of the prison warden. God stretching His Hand out means that He promises He will help and save; i.e. intervene in events. So this is part of the inherent meaning of "natah"; it refers to something being stretched or extended towards a fixed place or objective. Furthermore, in Genesis, the "expanse" that is called "heaven" was created on the first Day, and it speaks of this in a past tense. So while the verse in Job 9:8 is interesting imo, there are some issues with interpreting this as the Qur'an can be interpreted. It's not the same Semitic root word that is being used, and the root meaning of the word that is used in the Tanakh does seem to have a more restrictive meaning in the sense that it's used for finite distances and movements from one point to another fixed point. It doesn't look like an ongoing motion to me. In Genesis 1 it talks about the heaven's creation in a past tense. Then there's the issue of the solidified sky that encapsulates the earth. In light of that; what does it mean that this (same) sky is stretched out? Stretched out to where? To the edges of the flat earth, perhaps? Isaiah 40:22 He sits enthroned above the circle of the earth; its dwellers are like grasshoppers. He stretches out the heavens like a curtain, and spreads them out like a tent to dwell in. So this doesn't help, does it? Here, "stretches out the heavens" is a literary device, since it gives the analogy of a curtain being opened. Obviously, this refers to the night bleeding over into the day: curtains closed (darkness), curtains opened (light), and the passing of days and nights is obviously an ongoing process. There's also imagery used in this; that of a tent, which is quite common in Semitic expressions of the past. A tent is a place of security and rest in an otherwise barren and hostile desert environment. So the tent above the occupant is likened to the heaven above the earth. The curtains that are the entrance to the tent close during the night and open during the day, or in accordance with the outside temperature, perhaps. But this here is an expression that communicates the meaning of daytime and nighttime alternating. "The circle of the earth", according to Ellicott's exegesis means "the vault of heaven over-arching the earth". The Cambridge Bible says: "The earth with its surrounding ocean is conceived as a flat disc, on which the arch of heaven comes down." Barnes' Notes on the Bible says: "The phrase 'circle,' or 'circuit of the earth,' here seems to be used in the same sense as the phrase orbis terrarum by the Latins; not as denoting a sphere, or not as implying that the earth was a globe, but that it was an extended plain surrounded by oceans and mighty waters. The globular form of the earth was then unknown; and the idea is, that God sat above this extended circuit, or circle; and that the vast earth was beneath his feet." It also reads: "That stretcheth out the heavens - Referring to the firmament above, as that which seems to be stretched out, or expanded over our heads. The heavens above are often thus compared to an expanse - either solid Genesis 1:7, or to a curtain, or tent (compare the note at Isaiah 34:4)." How is God, in the Bible, expanding the solid dome firmament that was already finished in its creation in the past? What does it mean when it says that the heavens are stretched out? It means that God made the sky spacious, as it is spacious from the human's perspective. You know what this really means? It means that if you start walking the earth, or sailing the sea; the horizon keeps stretching out infront of you. These people didn't realize that the earth was a sphere.
Reminds me of my time at University where the tutor introduced the class to a book titled History of the World (i cannot remember the author), which set out details of the empires, chinese, russian, mongolian, british etc etc. It didnt leave anything out ........ except, wait for it, the Islamic empire, not even the recent Ottoman empire! I raised it with the tutor who acknowledged western academic ignorance of Islam and its history but nevertheless continued to teach us world history using that book!
Just finished watching. Excellent session! I appreciated your structured and prepared approach to challenge Dr Meyers on the omission of Islamic contributions in his works. I felt that he respected the challenge and will look into it. Interesting, though, how he posited his response by saying that his focus was on Western contributions in the book. I think that the history of Islamic scientific contributions is just not taught in the West. Discussions like this will, in-shaa'Allah, prompt lucid thinkers such as Dr Meyers to look more deeply into it and to realise the significance of Islamic history, possibly leading him to write and talk more about it in the future
I'm a Christian believer and I agree with your comments because I really was never taught about the "history of Islamic scientific contributions." So thanks for making us aware of this tragic omission. Peace
@@johnbrzykcy3076hey fellow cousin I am Muslim myself but I came to know about Al khawarizmi 2 years ago independently . If you are a christian I want to tell you that here in India we Muslims and christians are suffering still christians in West attack us Muslims while Hindus in India are harassing christians too . Why don't we see any uproar from Christian community in West ? . Regards your Muslim cousin .
I am a staunch Muslim and has slightest of doubt that Islam is the only true religion of God. However Quran also tells us to be fair under all circumstances. I think Muslims make a mistake when they try to aggrandise Muslims' contribution to development of sciences. I think all pre-western civilizations, Greek, Chinese, Indian and Islamic made some contributions to sciences however there combined contribution was not even close to what western civilisation has done in development of sciences and technology, More so, we Muslim have done almost nothing in last 500 years. So it is pointless trying to make it a point of Muslim contributions on a subject matter which is entirely different. Having said must say Blogging theology is one of my most favourite channel and hats off to very respected Paul for this.
I like the comment that God or necessary being is the explanation for ALL contingent things...that would include all humans, past and present, and past prophets. And God himself is not in any way contingent or needy. Fantastic Paul Alhamdulillah
Thanks Paul for all the efforts you are putting and the high quality discussions you are presenting. You raised the point of Islamic precedence in scientific method or discoveries, while I agree we should uncover al l aspects of our history, It is important not to fall in a compitition with modernists about what civilization can better control the world or exploit the Dunya resources. While it is very important to highlight the difference in basis, goals and limits of the scientific pursuit between the Islamic and modernist world views, and how these differences resulted in different fruits and different worlds historically. And I can understand Dr. Meyer point in regard to his book not covering Islamic contributions. But he makes a very interesting point about the Islamic theology being partially responsible for the lack of durability of muslim science, and here he refers to the Aristotlian effect. And while of course it is understandable for a non-Muslim to think that since the theological schools that inheritly planged with the greek thought and philosophy were dominant politically and in educational institutions after the fifth century, I think muslim scholars and academics should try and study such possible relation.
Every time I listen to such discussions about God existence or Christian theology, both being discussing the first step about what a god should be like. I feel very embarrassed in front of Allah, he gave us not only the grace to feel and know he exist but he blessed us with the Quran that give us us the ultimately accurate description of Allah perfect attributes and most noble names, but also tells us what should we do about it, what is our task, how can gain Allah's love and mercy. The first part is being servant of Allah with your mind and intellect Tawheed al Robobiyya, or Approching Allah asthe one and only Lord. The other is the message of all prophets, how to be a servant of Allah with your heart, soul, will and emotions, Tawheed Al Uloohyya. Approaching Allah as the one and only being that deserves the mixture of sincere love and humility (worship) for his own attributes and grace.
*Timestamps / Chapters*
00:00 Introduction (+ background of guest)
00:50 The 3 discoveries in Cosmology, Physics, and Biology that indicate ID
07:36 The designer(s): Personal God(s) | Dawkin: origin of life
11:45 A transcendent being vs an agency within the universe
14:15 Fine tuning: A prerequisite for life
16:48 Lack of science propelled by Islam in the book: _The Return of the God Hypothesis_
24:26 Difference between a biological designer vs a Cosmological designer
25:57 No _scientific explanation_ for the complexity in the universe?
33:21 Reception the book
35:09 Other projects of Dr Stephen | Science in history (Islam, Greeks, Judeo-Christian)
39:50 Decline in scientific activity in the _Muslim world_ | Responses by Dr Stephen
44:02 Prof. John Polkinghorne
44:58 Story of Prof. John by Dr Stephen | *Atheistic* explanation(s) (multiverse, etc.)
49:25 Conclusion
_May ﷻ ألله bless everyone involved in this video: the viewers and of course our dear br Paul_
Thank you akhii! May Allah grant you highest level in Jannah!
!لا شكر على واجب
جزاك الله خيراً
وا ايك
Many thanks!
I have been on this Chanel since less than 1,000 subscribers, I truly feel that brother Paul has certainly been blessed by the most high. From the increased sophistication of his videos and the master level guests that have been interviewed, I can only say subhanallah and may Allah bless you for benefiting the ummah. And may Allah establish and elevate us all who seek his guidance amen.
Can channel owners see when people subscribed? Because I’d like to know when I did
@@abloodorange5233 no
" I can attest" - brother its better to be humble and say I truly feel.
@@fidelcatsro6948 i think on the old youtube there was a list of many of your subscribers, but now, not anymore... in some ways I miss the old youtube, no ads, share info etc. the only good thing google plus did was make threads for comment topics so its not one comment over the other!
@@falsesectslikeshiaarejudeo6543 yes the old you tube without so much ads was better
Brother Paul,I am very pleased to see that you have keep pressing him to acknowledge Islamic contributions in science and finally he acknowledges little but he need to open up his mind about Islam. Thanks you brother for the wonderful discussion.
Yeah, i noticed he was overshadowing Islam using jewish and arrostatel so he won't talk about Islam. And the colonization in Islamic lands he also didn't want to talk about.
Bias is a hard thing.
so have you seen "Exposing the Discovery Institute Part 1: Casey Luskin" on youtube
@@sparrow3491 I agree. You can feel besides that bias, he is a very objective person. But he does give his reasons why...he feels islamic contributions in Islam just haven't stood the test of time. Which is funny of course since even America is a fairly new country itself. So I guess it can go back and forth on this.
*_Masha'Allah, brilliant conversation. Hopefully Dr. Meyer will give due credit to the Muslim's contribution to science._*
It's like he purposely avoids the Islamic contribution. He tries to brush off the Islamic contribution by commenting on the "lack of durability". What about the violent persecution of Muslims in Spain by Queen Isabella, which saw the destruction of Islamic Universities and libraries. Also, he talks about the Judaeo Christian contribution, when their theologies are completely irreconcilable. The Islamic theology is closer to the Jewish theology. So why exclude Islam. Doesn't make sense.
THE MASSIVE MONUMENTAL AND ENORMOUS CONTRIBUTIONS OF MUSLIMS STILL REMAIN LARGELY BURIED!.
so have you seen "Exposing the Discovery Institute Part 1: Casey Luskin" on youtube
@@ferozahmet195 he definitely does because, the Quran is line with the current scientific evidence, example the bible points to young earth..
ruclips.net/video/HRxq1Vrf_Js/видео.html
Paul please bring this guest again. We need more ppl like him
inshallah
Thank you for this excellent interview. I'm a bit disappointed that Dr Meyer did not reference Islam in his book. Islam is a truly monotheistic faith; it's bedrock is the uncompromisingly belief in the One Transcendent God. This unfortunately can not be said of the Judeo Christian traditions. It is frustrating to see such open mindedness and honesty coupled with short sightedness at the same time.
Paul, i am vocal opponent of islam/christianity but i must say your content is mostly excellent and your channel is very well done with excellent choice of guests. With slightly gritted teeth but only fair to say ty for you channel.
In fact im gonna subscribe just to physically say thank you
Thanks!
I to appreciate your honesty and morality in expressing your appreciation.
In Islam it is said that he who is not grateful to people is not grateful to God.
So what issues do you have with Islam and Christianity?
@@think-islam-channel for me, I'll leave this comment section free from debate but I'm sure we'll meet again. In fact I'll look forward to it. Ty for the appreciation.
so have you seen "Exposing the Discovery Institute Part 1: Casey Luskin" on youtube
RUclips is a blessing listening to intellectuals of our times sitting in the comfort of our homes is simply fantastic. Sir you have introduced us to highly sophisticated subjects opening our minds and broadening our views. With every lecture the presence of Divine becomes more and more obvious to God believing person .
Amazing discussion.
so have you seen "Exposing the Discovery Institute Part 1: Casey Luskin" on youtube
My brother Paul, as-Salām 'alaikum.
This was an absolutely excellent conversation, really. And, by the Permission of Allāh, the first of many to come.
The arguments he makes are really important for Muslims to understand in a world surrounded and entrenched in Darwinian and Materialist ideologies. Dr. Meyers provides a very coherent and easy to understand critique, which is no way a surface level criticism.
Also, may Allāh reward you for asking necessary questions; like the one regarding why the absolutely integral contributions of Islam to Sciences was omitted by the oft-repeated phrase "judeo-christian" when speaking of the formation of the Scientific method. The brief conversation that followed was cordial and well mannered, but also touched on a few really important points and issues - from both yourself and Dr. Meyers.
Really, an excellent conversation, walhamdulillāh. I pray that Allāh grants Dr. Meyers guidance and opens his heart to Īmān - āmīn.
Looking forward to future conversations between you both.
May Allāh bless and preserve you - āmīn.
so have you seen "Exposing the Discovery Institute Part 1: Casey Luskin" on youtube
Man Paul is bringing in heavy weights may allah bless both of you
Wonderful !! Wonderful !!!. Dr Stephen Meyer is my favourite non-muslim scholar. Dr Meyer's book didn't give proper credit to Muslim civilisation's contribution to Modern science but Muslims must overlook this aspect because overall his books and lectures strengthen one's belief in Allah (SWT). Paul - May Allah bless you for this engaging Interview
I agree with you. He doesn't recognize Islam's influence on the European excelling of science.
I totally agree! Imaan boosters they most certainly are!
It looks like Dr Meyer is not a Islamaphobe, his mistake seems innocent.
so have you seen "Exposing the Discovery Institute Part 1: Casey Luskin" on youtube
@@jamesginty6684 Being exposed is a badge of honor in the cancel culture we live in.
Is that really Dr. Stephen Meyer? I have most of his books I think. Paul. You have probably the best content on the internet in this field. Absolutely. Unbelievable.
What a pleasant surprise this morning to have a new interview pop up from brother Paul's channel. I loved how you pressed Dr. Meyer to admit Islamic contribution to Science. I bet he wasn't expecting that HAHA :-) , I wish to comment on what he said about this as I'm an expert on Islamic Science myself.
As to Dr. Meyer's claim that decoupling from Aristotelian Natural Philosophy started in Christian Europe. On the contrary, said decoupling started with the anti-Hellenistic thought in the Muslim world 7 centuries before this was adopted in Christian Europe by Copernicus, then with the rise of the Ashari school, to which Ibn Haytham & Biruni & Ghazali belonged to. In effect, it was precisely because the Asharis had a theological bone to pick with the Greeks that criticism of their methods of inquiry (or lack thereof) & their cosmological & physical models emerged, & new models came to replace them, particularly the scientific method of inquiry (tanthir & tawsif), the uniformity of nature, the non-necessity of efficient causation, the quantization of the world, the relativity of time & space...etc. - Ibn Haytham wrote several books on the criticism of Greek Natural Philosophy, among which his famous Rad where he mentions 20 objections to Hellenistic cosmological models. He solves some of these himself (6 of the 10), with the rest of the objections solved by future generations (such as by Nasr Tusi & his Tusi couple to solve ecliptic orbits)... Further criticism followed for the centuries to come, by Ghazali & Razi & Jurjani & many others, which would only be adopted by Christian Europe post-Newton, by people such as Hume & Hamilton & Berkeley... (such as the non-necessity of efficient causation which Ghazali establishes 8 centuries prior to Hume)...etc.
As to Newton's inverse square law of gravity. This is what one learns in a Eurocentric view of the world, to the point of denial. In fact, it was Biruni (died 1048) & Khazini (died 1130) who established center of gravity & the subsequent inverse square law. This is also the case for other laws which are attributed to Newton, such as action-reaction & force/acceleration law, in fact established by Ibn Baja centuries prior.
As to Dr. Meyer's claim that Science did not endure in the Islamic world as it did in Christian Europe. Let's examine the facts. Systematic & creative practice of Science started in the 8th century in the Muslim world, with the emergence of Ibn Hayan, Khawrizmi, Marwazi ...etc, peaked between the 10th & 15th century, with Ibn Sina, Ibn Haytham, Biruni, Tusi, Zahrawi, Ibn Nafis, Razi, Ibn Shatir, Ibn Baja... & hundreds others, & persisted until 17th century with Qushji, Taqi Deen Dimashqi, Celebi, Sanusi...etc. In contrast, Science in Europe pre-17th century was merely a transfer & replication of what already existed in the Islamic world, as Briffault said, with virtually no addition to it. From the 18th century onward, the West took the lead, so far for 3 centuries, compared to 10 centuries of Islamic scientific contribution. Another fact to consider is that the West's contribution to global Science dropped significantly the last decades, to less than 2/5th today, with the rise of China (at 1/5th) & the Muslim world (at 1/10th global output, a rapid exponential 13 times growth the last 20 years). This, knowing that on average three-quarters of researches in non-social non-health sciences in the West are foreigners, mostly from China, India & the Muslim world (with 1/5th to 1/4th share). Which means, native Western research in these fields is around 2/5th of their total output, thus equivalent to the Muslim output (Muslim world + Muslims in the West) at around 15%-20% global output.
As to the claim that Science declined in the Muslim world after the 12 century. This is an early 20th century revisionist theory which emerged in Europe to remove Islam from Europe's History & justify new theories such as the Scientific Revolution, when these were thought of previously as mere transfer of knowledge from the Muslim world to Europe upon setting up Arabic chairs across European universities from the 16th century to acquire & study Islamic books, 120,000 books have been collected for that purpose, which translate to dozens of millions of pages of content (compared to the thousands of pages of content Muslims acquired from the Greeks). In effect, the most revolutionary period in Islamic Science is actually post 12th century, where the true paradigm shifts in Science emerged, know today as Modern Science.
Particularly, although the Muslim world started declining mid-18th century, slowly abandoning much of their sciences, the collection, translation & studying of Islamic works continued in Europe until late 19th century. From major paradigm shifts in Science, such as Evolution, where Mu'tazilite ideas about increasing complexity of life (from minerals to plants to corals to jellyfish to vertebrates to mammals to monkeys & finally humans) to natural selection, adaptive traits, survival of the fittest, camouflage, prey & predator... gained popularity in 19th century Europe, this constituted one of the arguments against the Church then for not adopting Evolution as Muslims already have (they mistakenly thought this was mainstream belief among Muslims, it wasn't) - or that live micro organisms are the source of diseases & the cause of infections (mentioned for instance by Fatih's sheikh Akshamsidden, centuries before Antonie adopts these ideas), or that the source of heat & movement in the body is blood circulation - or Set Theory, which was founded on one-to-one correspondence, quantifying the object & infinity nature, first brought up by Hamilton then Cantor (who is credited with it), although these ideas were widely studied & taught by Muslims for centuries developed by Razi & others [Sunusi's work (Jumal, from 15th century) in fact describes 112 rules of sets, about bijection, inclusion...] - The Ash'ari atomic & cosmic theory of matter & the universe (then mainstream in the Muslim world), that efficient causation is inductive, that events are isolated & discrete, that nature is uniform by habit ('ada), that dimensions are relative contingent on perception, such as time & space, that matter is quantized, that accidents (motion/stillness, combination/separation) are probable until actualized, that time & space are quantized, that velocity is bounded.... which were adopted by the anti-Newtonian movement in Europe (by Berkley, Hume & others) to culminate into Relativity & Quantum Physics. - Classical Physics, about the laws of motion, that force proportional to acceleration, that gravity induces free fall & planetary motion, that orbits are elliptical, that the cosmos is finite & non-eternal, that equilibrium is in the center of gravitation... (later adopted by Copernicus, Newton, Kepler & others). - To groundbreaking technologies, such as: firearms & the various weapons we are familiar today, which made the Ottomans & the Mughals so dominant, including canons, torpedoes used to sink ships, tanks used to bring down gates, rockets, rapid-fire guns... acquired by Europeans who developed these even further - the steam engine in the 16th century used in by the Ottomans to carry loads or pump water but also for cooking & other mundane practices, then adopted by Europeans for more arduous tasks once coal was discovered (much denser in energy than firewood) - the mechanical clock (with hour hand, minute & seconds) invented by Taqi-deen Dimashqi in the 16th century - the variety of textile mills which made its way from the bay of Bengal to England, instigating the Industrial Revolution therein. To everyday practices, such as in Dentistry: dental restoration, implants, gold teeth, dental alignment...etc - Vaccination, adopted by Europeans from the Ottomans...etc. To even the most subtle things, such as Cancer categorization into 4 phases based on tumor size. We'll be here all day if I continue.
To comment on the Evolution part of this wonderful discussion. Finding natural explanations of natural phenomenons, including Life, does not detract from the divine origin of these phenomenons. If one day we understand more about how Life emerged & the processes which govern our bodies, this does not remove God from the picture. On the contrary, these processes & explanations themselves need an explanation, & so on, to an ultimate explanation, aka God.
In fact, Atheists do not deny the existence of God, as a first cause, an ultimate explanation, a necessary being, for denying the necessary entails non-existence of all things. Rather, Atheists deny the existence of a god with choice, Free Will. Nature, Laws of Physics, Spacetime, whatever it is that fundamentally originates all things, is supposedly not with choice. In effect, this is simply a nominal argument.
This is one of the most informative and interesting comments I have ever come across on a RUclips comment section. Thank you so much for typing all this out. I think I’m even going to screenshot this and save it lol
You should have a channel to explain this event, episode by episode. I am doing little research (amateur internet browsing, old books hunting) for chemistry development. I could catch some of the timeline you mentioned but I cannot concede the jargon for major of the comment itself.
Still, thank you for summarizing the important points. It connected the dots for my reading.
@@konyaku3072 Thank you brother. I do intend to start a blog or write a book on the subject & others, or maybe as you said start a channel. Inshallah.
If you do have particular questions, you're free to ask me here.
@@fire.smok3 Thanks to you brother. Be my guest. ;-)
I pray that Allah bless you abundently brother Paul.. Thank you for bringing up the amazing contributions of Islam and Muslims to science and development!
Good interview with a good guest. Should invite him back.
Well done for getting him on. Keep it up.
Paul should take note of the Dr's study - nice n tidy ;-)
Having purchased the book myself, you asked him the very question I wanted to hear an explanation to. Much much respect brother Paul! and our lovely guest and author Stephen Meyer.
so have you seen "Exposing the Discovery Institute Part 1: Casey Luskin" on youtube
Good discussion. Please bring on David Berlinksi as soon as you can; he is a real genius, and has fascinating insights into Darwinism & science in general.
Oh yeah he is actually a cool guy
so have you seen "Exposing the Discovery Institute Part 1: Casey Luskin" on youtube
Its nice seeing doctor Stephen Meyer thrive. Such a great man. I have reaed the 1000-paged book theistic evolution he participated in and am most delighted to see him on here off course his preconceived notions about Islam are a bit off but so be it. And brother Paul keeps astonishing with his reach and presentation. Thank you so much.
Very nice discussion. Thanks Paul for putting up these excellent questions and thanks to Dr. Meyer for his contributions to dismantling the materialistic atheistic dogmas in an academic manner.
Great job Br Paul, especially for pressing him about his euro/west centric view on science
Actually Paul gave a fantastic answer he said that colonialism and military and economic oppression of Muslim lands played a big role in the decline. You need to rewatch it and take off your blinkers.
He's so fluid with words and intellectualy crisp.
As-salamu alaykum! This video is gonna be one of my favorite videos.
Wa alaykumu s-salam
Wa 'alaikum as-Salām. Agreed.
Brother Paul, an excellent interview. I was hoping that you would continue with your guest to discuss the necessity of the Oneness of the Creator and His uniqueness with all the attributes of perfection as described in the Qur’an. Perhaps in future interviews, God willing
I just finished Darwin's doubt and loved it, thank you paul for this interview I will be sure to check out this book as well
Glad you enjoyed it!
Watch Sheikh Othman bin Al-Farouq's channel in his discussions on Darwin's theory and Christianity, and his dialogues with atheists are very interesting and fun
so have you seen "Exposing the Discovery Institute Part 1: Casey Luskin" on youtube
@@BloggingTheology Stephen is a bit biased against the great Muslim scientists of the past and their contributions,I have noticed that in him.
Glad to see you ask him about leaving the Islamic contributions out.
Greeaaat question on contingency, which is far more superior and robust to the complexity hypothesis he's presenting.
subhanallah! what a pleasant surprise may God preserve you brother Paul and guide our brother in humanity Dr. Stephen Meyer to the truth.
بارك الله فيك وثبتك
This is amazing! Please next Dr.Eyad!!
BTW I find it hilarious how you always say *you're most welcome sir* before anyone has ever said thank you😂😂😂
Another excellent interview. I hope Mr. Myer reads the Quran which actually encourages to use reasoning, ponder reflect those are good tools to do the science.
Brilliant brother Paul a true gem here you have really hit home the question we were thinking about after the god hypnosis release and in real detail. Mashallah
Paul’s line of questioning is very appropriate, interesting to see Stephen on the back foot there with regards to Islam’s contribution to science. Well done.
If lslam "contributed" so much to science, why don't you get your modern day muslim scientists and intellectuals to write about it?! Why do always want westerners to write your so-called islamic "contribution" to science!
Finally, I’ve been waiting for this meeting!
Thank You for sharing..
thanks to both of you so much
This is really one of the best episodes
welcome back , long time no see , my pleasure u r still doing such magnificent RUclips lectures , thanks for it.
*_Was waiting for this a long time. Thank you so much paul🙌💯_*
Wow two masters right here, im happy to be subscribed to this channel
Welcome aboard!
Brilliant Paul but you need to bring him back again for a longer session if possible or a series of mini short ones as my enjoyment was cut short!... like you said we only scratch ed the surface!!
Attributing the scientific achievements of the Western world to Judeo-Christian tradition tells only a snippet of the story. The majority of the Jews were always in the muslim world for starters and the Christian world had always rejected them. Add to this the fact that millions of Christians also lived in the muslim world and they also had the same scriptures that the western Christians worked from. Many factors helped the Western world become dominant, such as;
- intense competition. Europeans have always fought against each other for resources, land, etc. This led to rapid developments in military technology that allowed them eventually dominate and subjugate the rest of the world
- Economic system. The Europeans developed the fractional reserve banking system. This allowed them to borrow huge sums of money that wasn't available to others. It is an extremely cut-throat system, you either succeed or perish. Through this system, they financed the various expeditions of nations around the world. Nations that succeeded become wealthy behind their wildest imaginations as they brought back fortunes as well as gold from the taxes they imposed upon the subjicated people
- Fossil fuels. This is in my opinion the most important one. The discovery and use of coal allowed England to move away from an agrarian society to an industrial society. It gave men free time to Innovate and invent and this is what led to the breathtaking discoveries we have seen over the past 200 years. Take the fossil fuels out of the society and we'll be back to the mid 18th century at best. Fossil fuels turbocharged the West's mission to conquer the world
- Religion. I am going to go against Stephen Meyer here and say the abandonment of religion allowed the West to flourish because the Judeo-Christian tradition is actually very repressive. The Jews had the same tradition for thousands of years and never achieved anything. Christianity also also didn't achieve anything in almost 1700 years much of which consisted of burning heretics at the stake. They finally achieved great things when the stranglehold of the church was finally broken.
I agree on the point of religion you mentioned. Astonishingly, the situation is different 180 degrees when it comes to Islam. Before Islam, Arabs did not have any known scientific contributions or known scholars. Then scientific contribution exploded with Islam, and then after the partial secularization of Muslims and the breakdown of Khelafa, contribution is little.
After watching this video I just realised Stephen Meyers haven’t read the Quran … which is a shame , I hope he gets a chance to read the Quran one day
@Faith Eternal Thank goodness he believes in the Bible and the God of the Bible!
Thanks for sharing this wonderful discussion. May Allah bless you. Please keep them coming!
Great discussion. Thanks for bringing up the Judeo-Christian bias in the introduction of his book.
@X 10 To completely omit Islam civilisation's contributions to the development of science is flat-out an oversight. Nobody's talking about how it endured, we're talking about the origins of the scientific method etc.
@X 10 In the book? No he didn't
His claim about durability is actual nonsense. He's just being a Christian apologist. He doesn't want to admit that he's being biased.
@X 10 Are you missing the point on purpose? Or are you actually just this ignorant?
@X 10 What does it being established in Persia have to do with anything?
The Islam question made him stutter...thank you bro Paul for that question 👍
Dear Paul, you have a wonderful way of interviewing people.
God bless u!!
Mashallah Paul you’ve done it again! Another gem 💎
Thank you gentlemen for a mind- blowing exchange! Loved the entropy factor discussion too. I do believe the ‘Judeo-Christian’ / ‘western’ vs ‘Islamic’ contribution was a valid observation to raise. Perhaps the term ‘Abrahamic tradition’ would reasonably, fairly and rationally cover off this controversy without actually having to change anything other than a subtle mental recognition of the historic ‘elephant in the room’ & indeed, arguably also improve descriptive accuracy? If Dr Myer has not yet read the Quran, then I hope he does one day to appreciate the inspirational source of enquiry of both science and nature it encourages.
wow what a really nice man, he genuinely seems to really liked the discussion Paul, so thank you for your efforts yet again and may the creator shower you with his blessings to help spread real knowledge unlike those that conceal knowledge like Richard dawkins
Ooh looking forward to this one. Great guests as always
I admire Dr Stephen Meyer so much for his brilliant science discussions supporting intelligent design. I was pleasantly surprised to see this video today . Great interview. Thank you Paul.
Many thanks!
Great question brother Paul. Love how he downplayed the question.
Wow!!! Dr stephen meyer!! A huge guest br Paul! Have all his books. Reading the last one. 🤩
Excellent interview.Thank you Paul.
Wow!!!
Brother Paul asking some really tough questions 😆
Brilliant interview. Sir Stephen explained in a way which a normal level in science can understand. Thank you Paul.
You have to get your hands on George Saliba's books, and probably invite him on your podcast. He's one of the best experts on the history of Islamic science. His materials are simply brilliant.
I’m watching this video following Dr Stephen Meyer’s appearance on Pierce Morgan . This is a much more in-depth conversation. Thank you brother and I ask Allah to guide him to His path.
I think it will be great to follow up with him on what he found out from his research on the Islamic contribution to science.
Fantastic content as usual ..! Thanks Paul and happy Ramadan
Thanks for the great contents and comment on his book and very much related and appropriate reminder of the contribution of muslims scientists, hope he educate himself in this case.
Stephen Meyers makes a good point regarding the durability of the scientific enterprise in the muslim world and this is something that should be looked into. My personal view is that character of the muslim world changed after the Mongol invasions, they wiped out city after city after city. After these invasions, the muslim world became more militaristic (fuelled in part by the Mongol conversion to Islam). Nothing comparable has ever happened in the west on such a large scale and if it were to happen, then scientific enterprise will also stop in the west or in fact any other nation
Entirely wrong. I commented on this and asked Paul to invite Professor George Saliba, whom I would consider the authority on this particular topic. It had nothing to do with the fall of Baghdad according to his research. This is just something that historians have proposed for so long now that it's taken as truth, but Saliba completely refutes this angle and offers far better reasons as to why the sciences in the Islamic world declined. He can give you a huge list of brilliant Muslim scientists who all worked and produced (science) long after the fall of Baghdad. So that's not the reason. Nor does the Protestant Reformation have anything to do with it. Nor does Al Ghazali's Tahafut caused the decline, as so many would parrot. Saliba is an expert on this, and I really want to see him come on and talk about the history of the Islamic sciences and what exactly caused the decline.
@@XaeeD Did you actually read what I wrote? Was Baghdad the only city in the muslim world that was destroyed by the mongols? What the hell would the protestant reformation have to do with scientific exploration in the muslim world? My argument is that after the mongol invasions (and the crusades to a lesser extent), the character of the muslim world changed from one of open mindedness interested in learning to one of a militaristic mindset. This is completely understandable as they suffered over a century of genocide. The very people who founded Islam and the ones who helped run the empire (arabs and Persians) were no longer in control. The dominant forces were the various mongol and Turkic clans and these extended all the way from India through to Egypt. Yes they may have produced brilliant scientists but their outlook was very different to that of the early Muslims
@@masterblaster4784 Yes, why would I comment on your input if I hadn't read it?
You are referring to the Mongol invasions, which is something that is often mentioned as causing the decline of the Islamic sciences, but as I already stated; this is simply not the case. I mentioned the Protestant Reformations, because that's what Stephen Meyers threw in there when talking about the decline of the sciences in the Islamic world; "haven't you listened to the talk?" So my feedback is still relevant, and you're being argumentative now, but do yourself a favor and look for George Saliba's talks on YT. Saliba specifically dismisses this argument (i.e. the Mongols caused the decline), and explains why this is rejected. No need to guess at this stuff when we have brilliant thinkers out there who have studied this topic extensively.
@@XaeeD I will have a listen to George Saliba and see what he has to say but in truth, I doubt it affects what I am trying to say
@@masterblaster4784 Excellent decision! No but seriously, I think you should find him very interesting.
One of the favorable conversations, thank you.
Much respect to your question in 17:00 Br Paul. Thank you for highlighting the facts.
Really good discussion, I had the same questions about the omission of Islamic scientific contribution, I am not completely bought on his explanation
Absolutely fascinating interview
You hit the nail on the head Paul when you said colonialism and military and economic dominance of Muslim lands played a big role in how 'durable' (in the words of Meyers), science was in the Muslim world.
Thank you for your great guest!
Great interview.. I had suggested this some months ago and great that you’ve brought him into the platform.. it’s only because of my suggestion I am sure .😉
This was awesome thanks Paul and Dr Stephen Meyer
Brilliant program! Thank you!
With regards to the contributions of Islam to science, the term “algorithm”, which the professor used, actually comes from the name of the 8th century AD Muslim mathematician & astronomer Al Khwarezmi who invented that science.
Absolutely WRONG 100%.
@@walkietalkie8635
ruclips.net/video/oRkNaF0QvnI/видео.html
Meyer is extremely articulate; he's able to say "God did it" in such a sophisticated manner.
This is wonderful discussion, loved it. I already have the book but yet to read it :) i need to finish Signature in the Cell first
Brilliant work mashaAllah. May Allah guide us and keep us on his path and grant us Jannatul Firdous.
Salam Nishfu Sya'ban Paul and all your viewers.
God bless you brother Paul 🙏
This channel is a treasure.
This was a great interview. I'm hoping for the next one to be with Dr. Rupert Sheldrake.
I was thinking about him too!
Very profound, enlightening & thought-provoking discussion😳👍kudos👏👏👏
Brother Paul, please consider inviting Professor George Saliba. He's a scientist and an expert on the topic of Islamic science
Another excellent production Paul. Many thanks! Not why Mr. Meyer has not given Islam more of a mention because the Judeo-Christian sources are so vague and very few on this subject compared to Islam.
For some reason, the captions disappear after a short advert is played by RUclips.
I have read the book after you suggested it long ago👌. Great interview. Pls bring Gabriel said Reynolds also
Brother Paul,
The two ayah sections in the Qur'an that point to the "big bang" theory, what Dr. Meyer called the singularity at the origin of the universe, may be interesting to him (loosely translated as):
1. The Heavens and the Earth were joined together, so we split them apart
2. We created the Heavens and the Earth, and we are (continuously) expanding (the cosmos)
This is a contribution directly from God to human understanding of the creation and evolution of the universe via the Qur'an (not a contribution of Muslim scholars). It is a striking affirmation of the fact that the Quran is God's revelation1400 years ago, via the signs it gives of this seminal fact that Science has discovered in the last several decades.
The first one is not definitely the big bang, many scholars also had an unscientific theory, some said it meant rainfall
The second one does not mean expanding, classical translations usually meant it as "built", "fashioned" nor does it mean the universe, it says the heavens, which could also mean the sky.
@@joeshmoe8080 Do you have any citations for what you're talking about exactly?
@@joeshmoe8080
Qur'an 51:47
والسماء بنيناها بايد وانا لموسعون
Transliteration for you:
wal-samāa banaynāhā bi-aydin wa-innā lamūsiʿūna
Interpretation of the meaning:
And the heaven, We constructed it with strength, and indeed, We (are) surely (its) Expanders.
If this translation seems odd to you, that's probably because "lamūsiʿūna" isn't a verb, but it's actually a noun. A nominative masculine plural (form IV) active participle, to be specific, with the emphatic prefix "lām" preceding it.
The Qur'an is in Arabic, so there is no "universe" in it. But what is usually meant by "heaven" is what we now call the universe. "Heaven", as opposed to the plural "heavens" being used is all-inclusive; i.e. it includes all the seven realms that are said to exist. Sometimes "heaven" can refer to the "sky" or "atmosphere", depending on the context, but mostly, it refers to the created world as a whole.
"wal-samāa banaynāhā" means that the universe is "build, produced, constructed or structured", by Allah. It's usually not rendered as "fashioned", because fashioning something might imply a previous state or substance that is taken and molded into a new form or creation. And Allah says in 6:101 "Originator [without a precedent] of the heavens and the earth..", and "badīʿu" here means that He created (or originated) the universe without precedence: i.e. "from nothing". As such, "fashioned" isn't an ideal choice of translation, since this means "to give shape to a substance", or "to form a thing".
The Arabic "bi-aydin" means "with strength", so that Allah strenghtens it and supports it.
Then "wa-innā lamūsiʿūna" means that the agent is expanding it, as this is an active participle, i.e. an ongoing action or process. It's expressed in what we would call "an active voice". If you're baking a cake in the oven, the same root word can be used to describe how it's increasing in size; i.e. expanding. So your opinions are neither here nor there, with all due respect.
@@XaeeD
Funny a similar repeated phrase is used in the Tanakh. E.g., Job 9:8:
נֹטֶה שָׁמַיִם לְבַדּוֹ; וְדוֹרֵךְ, עַל-בָּמֳתֵי יָם.
Who alone stretcheth out the heavens, and treadeth upon the waves of the sea.
'Noteh shamayim'/'he stretches/extends/spreads out the heavens' is an active participle of natah, thus indicating ongoing, present action. God is presently extending/expanding the heavens. The exact same phrase is in Zechariah 12:1 and Isaiah 40:22.
@@ConsideringPhlebas Good point, CP. But how does that negate or conflict with what I said about that Quranic verse?
First of all, we can interpret Job 9:8 in relation to Job 37:18
תַּרְקִ֣יעַ עִ֖מּוֹ לִשְׁחָקִ֑ים חֲ֜זָקִ֗ים כִּרְאִ֥י מוּצָֽק
tar-qî-a‘ ‘im-mōw liš-ḥā-qîm ḥă-zā-qîm kir-’î mū-ṣāq
Have you spread out the skies with Him? Strong as a cast mirror.
"Spread out" here literally seems to mean "to flatten", since it has the root word for "path" in it. See "ṭarīq", in the Arabic equivalent. It's a peculiar occurance, because it looks like this is the only place in the Tanakh where this particular derived form occurs. "Path, road, or way" in Hebrew should be "derek" if I'm not mistaken, so it's still close to the Arabic, but the word here in Job seems closer to the Arabic than a more typical Hebrew equivalent, which is kinda odd, but interesting.
Psalm 18:11
‘ā-ḇê šə-ḥā-qîm
..and thick clouds of the skies
So what's spread out in 37:18? The blue sky up above during the day, and the starlit nightsky.
"Strong", or "ḥă-zā-qîm", can also mean "hard". The sky up above was made solid, like a mirror, cast. After all, the strength of a mirror is in its solidity. As if the author believed the sky up above to be a solid dome, containing the celestial spheres (sun, moon, planets, stars, constellations).
Matthew 24:29
And immediately after the tribulation of those days:
'The sun will be darkened, and the moon will not give its light,
And the stars will fall from the sky, and the powers of the heavens will be shaken.'
Here, the author of the Gospel of Matthew seems to believe that the stars are in the dome of the sky, and when this Doomsday event happens, the sun will be darkened, the moon will stop emitting light (it technically doesn't emit light of its own), and most importantly; the stars will fall down to the surface of the earth. After all, where else would they fall down to when falling from the sky? The author thought that the stars could drop out of the sky and fall to the earth. They were tiny, shining trinkets, according to this author. Obviously, stars don't fall from the sky, and even if our local star would somehow collide with the earth, it's so massive in comparison that the earth would go to ruin even before the two bodies physically connected. Stars can't fall like that. But this author didn't know that. He probably envisioned the solid dome mirror that is the sky in Job 37, which many Christians today still believe in.
Job 9:8
nō-ṭeh šā-ma-yim lə-ḇad-dōw wə-ḏō-w-rêḵ ‘al-bā-mo-ṯê yām
He Who alone stretched out the heavens, and treads on the high places [i.e. the waves] of the sea.
This translation is from chabad, and they render the verb as such. So let's remind ourselves that the verb used here is not equivalent to the Arabic that is used in that verse we discussed from the Qur'an. The Arabic "lamūsiʿūna" in 51:47, or "mūsiʿ" is clearly different from "natah" in Hebrew. Some forms of this word that are used in the Bible:
Genesis 12:8
[he] moved on to the hill country east of Bethel and *pitched* his tent
Genesis 24:14
Please *let down* your jar that I may drink
Genesis 38:1
Judah left his brothers and *settled* near a man named Hirah
Genesis 38:16
he *went over to* her and said
Genesis 39:21
[God] was with him and *extended* kindness to him, granting him favor
Exodus 6:6
I will redeem you with an *outstretched* arm and with mighty acts of judgment
Exodus 8:5
Tell Aaron [to] *stretch out* your hand with your staff
Numbers 22:23
[the donkey] *turned* off the path and went into a field, so Balaam beat her to *return* her to the path
The reason for quoting these is to show how this word is used. What most of these have in common is finitude. A hand stretched out will reach its maximum length. A donkey literally turns in its way, and is then redirected. A jar is lowered until it hits the floor or the arm is extended all the way. A tent is pitched until its maximum height. Judah goes to a man and stays with him. A man goes to the exact location where the woman is. An arm holding a staff can only stretch out so far. God extends His kindness means that He shows a man mercy, and gives him favor in the eyes of the prison warden. God stretching His Hand out means that He promises He will help and save; i.e. intervene in events. So this is part of the inherent meaning of "natah"; it refers to something being stretched or extended towards a fixed place or objective.
Furthermore, in Genesis, the "expanse" that is called "heaven" was created on the first Day, and it speaks of this in a past tense.
So while the verse in Job 9:8 is interesting imo, there are some issues with interpreting this as the Qur'an can be interpreted. It's not the same Semitic root word that is being used, and the root meaning of the word that is used in the Tanakh does seem to have a more restrictive meaning in the sense that it's used for finite distances and movements from one point to another fixed point. It doesn't look like an ongoing motion to me. In Genesis 1 it talks about the heaven's creation in a past tense. Then there's the issue of the solidified sky that encapsulates the earth. In light of that; what does it mean that this (same) sky is stretched out? Stretched out to where? To the edges of the flat earth, perhaps?
Isaiah 40:22
He sits enthroned above the circle of the earth; its dwellers are like grasshoppers. He stretches out the heavens like a curtain, and spreads them out like a tent to dwell in.
So this doesn't help, does it? Here, "stretches out the heavens" is a literary device, since it gives the analogy of a curtain being opened. Obviously, this refers to the night bleeding over into the day: curtains closed (darkness), curtains opened (light), and the passing of days and nights is obviously an ongoing process. There's also imagery used in this; that of a tent, which is quite common in Semitic expressions of the past. A tent is a place of security and rest in an otherwise barren and hostile desert environment. So the tent above the occupant is likened to the heaven above the earth. The curtains that are the entrance to the tent close during the night and open during the day, or in accordance with the outside temperature, perhaps. But this here is an expression that communicates the meaning of daytime and nighttime alternating. "The circle of the earth", according to Ellicott's exegesis means "the vault of heaven over-arching the earth". The Cambridge Bible says: "The earth with its surrounding ocean is conceived as a flat disc, on which the arch of heaven comes down." Barnes' Notes on the Bible says: "The phrase 'circle,' or 'circuit of the earth,' here seems to be used in the same sense as the phrase orbis terrarum by the Latins; not as denoting a sphere, or not as implying that the earth was a globe, but that it was an extended plain surrounded by oceans and mighty waters. The globular form of the earth was then unknown; and the idea is, that God sat above this extended circuit, or circle; and that the vast earth was beneath his feet." It also reads: "That stretcheth out the heavens - Referring to the firmament above, as that which seems to be stretched out, or expanded over our heads. The heavens above are often thus compared to an expanse - either solid Genesis 1:7, or to a curtain, or tent (compare the note at Isaiah 34:4)."
How is God, in the Bible, expanding the solid dome firmament that was already finished in its creation in the past? What does it mean when it says that the heavens are stretched out? It means that God made the sky spacious, as it is spacious from the human's perspective. You know what this really means? It means that if you start walking the earth, or sailing the sea; the horizon keeps stretching out infront of you. These people didn't realize that the earth was a sphere.
Bro Paul Williams Amazing Human ...May Allah have Mercy upon him Ameen
This is becoming one of my favorite channels on RUclips
May Allah increase you in health wealth and Emaan, JazakAllah Sir for your efforts ❤️💯👍
The best channel on youtube
Reminds me of my time at University where the tutor introduced the class to a book titled History of the World (i cannot remember the author), which set out details of the empires, chinese, russian, mongolian, british etc etc. It didnt leave anything out ........ except, wait for it, the Islamic empire, not even the recent Ottoman empire! I raised it with the tutor who acknowledged western academic ignorance of Islam and its history but nevertheless continued to teach us world history using that book!
what can I say, typical of hypocrites.
Excellent interview
Just finished watching. Excellent session!
I appreciated your structured and prepared approach to challenge Dr Meyers on the omission of Islamic contributions in his works. I felt that he respected the challenge and will look into it. Interesting, though, how he posited his response by saying that his focus was on Western contributions in the book. I think that the history of Islamic scientific contributions is just not taught in the West. Discussions like this will, in-shaa'Allah, prompt lucid thinkers such as Dr Meyers to look more deeply into it and to realise the significance of Islamic history, possibly leading him to write and talk more about it in the future
I'm a Christian believer and I agree with your comments because I really was never taught about the "history of Islamic scientific contributions." So thanks for making us aware of this tragic omission. Peace
@@johnbrzykcy3076hey fellow cousin I am Muslim myself but I came to know about Al khawarizmi 2 years ago independently .
If you are a christian I want to tell you that here in India we Muslims and christians are suffering still christians in West attack us Muslims while Hindus in India are harassing christians too . Why don't we see any uproar from Christian community in West ? . Regards your Muslim cousin .
I am a staunch Muslim and has slightest of doubt that Islam is the only true religion of God. However Quran also tells us to be fair under all circumstances.
I think Muslims make a mistake when they try to aggrandise Muslims' contribution to development of sciences. I think all pre-western civilizations, Greek, Chinese, Indian and Islamic made some contributions to sciences however there combined contribution was not even close to what western civilisation has done in development of sciences and technology, More so, we Muslim have done almost nothing in last 500 years.
So it is pointless trying to make it a point of Muslim contributions on a subject matter which is entirely different.
Having said must say Blogging theology is one of my most favourite channel and hats off to very respected Paul for this.
I love when paul says most welcome sir. 😂 thank you.
Thanks a million Paul, exhilarating talk.
Excellent Paul
I like the comment that God or necessary being is the explanation for ALL contingent things...that would include all humans, past and present, and past prophets. And God himself is not in any way contingent or needy. Fantastic Paul Alhamdulillah
You are a great man Paul.
Thanks Paul for all the efforts you are putting and the high quality discussions you are presenting.
You raised the point of Islamic precedence in scientific method or discoveries, while I agree we should uncover al l aspects of our history, It is important not to fall in a compitition with modernists about what civilization can better control the world or exploit the Dunya resources.
While it is very important to highlight the difference in basis, goals and limits of the scientific pursuit between the Islamic and modernist world views, and how these differences resulted in different fruits and different worlds historically.
And I can understand Dr. Meyer point in regard to his book not covering Islamic contributions.
But he makes a very interesting point about the Islamic theology being partially responsible for the lack of durability of muslim science, and here he refers to the Aristotlian effect.
And while of course it is understandable for a non-Muslim to think that since the theological schools that inheritly planged with the greek thought and philosophy were dominant politically and in educational institutions after the fifth century,
I think muslim scholars and academics should try and study such possible relation.
Great discussion.
I would like to suggest adding the two speakers in the thumbnail to make it more emphatic.
MashaAllah beautiful discussion.
Good job Paul.
Great guest
Paul you are really brave, true legend! Mashallah
Every time I listen to such discussions about God existence or Christian theology, both being discussing the first step about what a god should be like.
I feel very embarrassed in front of Allah, he gave us not only the grace to feel and know he exist but he blessed us with the Quran that give us us the ultimately accurate description of Allah perfect attributes and most noble names, but also tells us what should we do about it, what is our task, how can gain Allah's love and mercy.
The first part is being servant of Allah with your mind and intellect Tawheed al Robobiyya, or Approching Allah asthe one and only Lord.
The other is the message of all prophets, how to be a servant of Allah with your heart, soul, will and emotions, Tawheed Al Uloohyya. Approaching Allah as the one and only being that deserves the mixture of sincere love and humility (worship) for his own attributes and grace.