I’m a Christian but I love all Dr Ataies videos and talks . I can’t fault him at all . Every person of Abrahamic faiths can not but admire , respect and listen in rapt awe of Dr Ali’s knowledge and wisdom . I now believe the Prophet of Islam was in fact a prophet in the same lineage as Moses and Jesus . Dr Ali’s talks have turned me right around on that fact . God /Allah bless Dr Ali , an amazing person.
The belief in God is so simple to me. Anything that is defined (by size, mass, colour…) has to have a “definer” for it to be so, of which is itself defined or undefined. There must be an undefined definer, as there cannot be an infinite regress of defined definers (as we said that anything defined requires a definer). The undefined definer is God. The undefined (God) can only be One, i.e. you cannot differentiate between two “undefined” beings and therefore there can only be one undefined being. That undefined being brings the defined into existence from within itself with no external influence and therefore has pure will. That is God. Alhamdulilah.
This video should have millions of views and insha'Allah it will. The wisdom compacted in two hours here is just amazing to me. Thank you very much for your time and efforts my dear ustadh
Jazak Allah Khair ya Dr. Ali, that flow with which you transmit knowledge is a true Baraka for mankind, Al HamdulilLah . MashaAllah 3leek, i cherish every video of yours.
May some atheists with existing softened hearts and intellectual mindsets listen to you, In’sha’Allah. The examples are amazing, Alhumdullilah. “Atheism is an extremely cynical way of looking at the world.” Wow. So true.
Atheism is a terrible word. I implore my brothers and sisters who believe to stop using it as a label. Nonbelievers are simply people who reject the claims made by religion for lack of convincing evidence. Asking for evidence is something that we all do every day of our lives. Is it fair to criticize someone who asks what evidence there is for religious beliefs? I am a nonbeliever and if I ask you what you believe, it is because I care.
A syllogism (Greek: συλλογισμός, syllogismos, 'conclusion, inference') is a kind of logical argument that applies deductive reasoning to arrive at a conclusion based on two propositions that are asserted or assumed to be true. "Socrates" at the Louvre In its earliest form (defined by Aristotle in his 350 BC book Prior Analytics), a deductive syllogism arises when two true premises (propositions or statements) validly imply a conclusion, or the main point that the argument aims to get across.[1] For example, knowing that all men are mortal (major premise) and that Socrates is a man (minor premise), we may validly conclude that Socrates is mortal. Syllogistic arguments are usually represented in a three-line form: All men are mortal. Socrates is a man. Therefore, Socrates is mortal.[2]
The problem is we start with the objective, and then very soon the subjective becomes dominant. Ignoring this is at our own peril, just like the communists ignoring greed and the inate need to posses and own things inherent in humanity. One can pretend all one wants but in the end we will end up with subjectivity and greed and need to own things for it all to work out. It is therefore better recognise this and set up systems, political and cultural systems into which humanity typically will organise itself given the chance, that incorporate these insights and have work arounds and buffers for them. So far it would seem that the liberal democratic system, liberal mainly in the economic sense but also in the social sense, and democratic in the sense of a maximum number of people of that area participating in expressing their own wishes and desires while accepting that none might actually manifest themselves unless they win fair and transparently in elections of some kind, is the best attempt of humanity so far. A system that recognises doubt, uncertainty and the very real grey areas that one daily has to contend with as a human being. It is very tempting and carries tremendous allure to think that speaking of or intellectually interacting with objective morality puts us in any kind of position of strength. This type of siren call, though, leads to the abyss and has done so every time it has been heeded uncritically and unquestioningly.
Your information about Nero is incorrect. You really need to shore up those deficiencies before you try to teach people about them. Maybe you can go ask Ashish
@rayn1384 There is no argument to be countered. His statement has no substance except the denial of Dr Ali's explanation? Now you are the one rejecting, you are the one who need to present evidence. Your welcome.
Sir, either you havent understood atheism or you are being intentionally misleading. We do not hold that God doesnt exist due to the behaviours and actions of our fellow human beings, but rather due to the lack of evidence of such a being. We are simply not convinced by the arguments presented for the claims of a god(s).
U contradicted yourself in two sentences. first claiming that there is lack of evidence, without justifying it, then proceeding to claim that we are presented with an evidence but we are not just convinced by it. So make up ur mind first. Maybe, issue is not with the evidence but u not wanting to accept it and what it entails.
