» Earn on-going rewards and help us do more! «

Does God exist & How do we know there is only one God

share this pageShare Page
Abdullah al Andalusi

Channel: Abdullah al Andalusi

Episode Notes

Episode Transcript

© No part of this transcript may be copied or referenced or transmitted in any way whatsoever. Transcripts are auto-generated and thus will be be inaccurate. We are working on a system to allow volunteers to edit transcripts in a controlled system.


00:00:16--> 00:00:18

The benefits of it

00:00:19--> 00:00:26

to see English alone and to help inshallah thank you personally processes in Islam

00:00:28--> 00:00:43

we welcome you to today's talk which is the title is God and concept of God can it be more than one word can it can actually good code as well and today's to be unfortunately Hans's Otis is not present, we have a

00:00:44--> 00:00:50

good replacement, Abdullah andalusi here, and inshallah we'll be doing a talk today. And

00:00:54--> 00:00:58

by the way he also had recording, so just to make sure that he knows that this will be recorded. So in the video

00:01:00--> 00:01:01

I presented

00:01:13--> 00:01:14

him hand at home.

00:01:25--> 00:01:29

I'd like to thank the City University isop for inviting me today.

00:01:31--> 00:01:37

In case you're wondering, Al Andalus, yes, I am from Spain or Portugal, but don't have Spanish and Portuguese but.

00:01:39--> 00:01:48

And obviously, in the tradition of anyone that's from the Muslim family. We used to be also known as extended Portugal. I call myself Lucy.

00:01:49--> 00:01:50

Short again.

00:01:53--> 00:02:40

Now, I think the topic today in this discussion is Does God Exist? And how do we know if he's won or not? What is this? These are questions that a lot of people atheists are going to ask Christians and Hindus with anonymous close is going to ask. And it's very important that we don't just leave things with blind faith. But we actually question how we see it as an inducible. very specifically, the Islamic claim that there's such an individual as a person who believes in monotheism, and come to this conclusion by themselves by their own thinking processes, there's no revelation is required. For this, this assignment should be thought about and come to that conclusion. So if this is the

00:02:40--> 00:02:54

case, how do we do this? How does someone in any culture come to the conclusion that God exists? And that there is only one God? inshallah, we'll discuss the first premise that how do we know that God exists?

00:02:55--> 00:03:39

First I want to discuss the principle was called of causality. causality, as some of you might already know, is that something is caused by something else. Generally speaking, the principle of causality encompasses things within time. So obviously, there is a a prior stage, the next stage, each stage is caused by the previous one. However, I want more fundamental, because a person might say, well, I can just believe something always existed, or why does that have to be caused a causality for everything? Okay? Why does causality Well, how do we know causality exists for anything we see? Now there's nothing natural and everything's meant to use an object. But if I was

00:03:39--> 00:04:20

to hold up a book, yeah, obviously, I was gonna hold this up. People might say, well, we noticed Matt may notice was created. But if I was to put up a rock, and the book is just someone that you get from is naturally occurring rock you get from the ground. Now, how do we know that this rock was created? I mean, obviously, human beings did make rocks we didn't make it. So we can't say that I've seen a rock being made by human beings. I know it's created now. So how do we know that rocks were created? If we haven't seen a human beings have manufactured it? And what we know it's about the rock or any object you'll see is it has a certain size or shape or color definition, certain mass or

00:04:20--> 00:04:59

volume or any other kind of area of measurement, which a scientist or physicist will start measuring. So the simple question is that any objects you see or any force that because nature has certain limitations of his existence, certain parameters it operates in now the simple question is, what gave that object or that force? its parameters, its limits, its measurements. I mean, why the wrong customer walk this big? Why is it not twice as big? Why not half as big? Why is it not blue? Is that agreeable, or what have you, why is it a specific limitation? It has

00:05:00--> 00:05:22

The only natural conclusion would be that Well, whatever process whatever process caused it to come into existence, this process caused it to come with that specific attribute. And the job of the scientist is now to investigate what process caused that particular kind of rockets have its color, its shape, its smoothness or genuineness or what have you.

00:05:24--> 00:05:46

But as a general rule, there can only be three possibilities when we examine any object or any phenomenon that we can observe. One that this object made itself to that is not an object has always existed as it is, internally, or free, that it was made by something else. Now, I'm not talking about multiple my goal here.

00:05:47--> 00:06:33

This is very simple, common sense everyday thinking an atheist, a theist, we could all agree on this very simple common sense thinking. So let's take a possibility did an object let's say this imaginary rock component didn't make itself? Well, that's absurd, because in order to make itself has to exist, it doesn't exist, then how can you make it? So this is obviously critical. So we all can agree on this? Has it always been the way it was? Has it existed eternally? initiate has always been like this. Well, if it has always been eternally in that shape that it was, then why is it not bigger than it is or half the size is a different color, why that's specific that you arrive at the

00:06:33--> 00:07:17

same problem. And it has certain limitations, these limitations are limited, obviously, is limited, it's finite, it has parameters, what the finals parameters, you can't say, it always has been like this, because it exists in a certain form. So what the find its limitations or parameters. So the only conclusion anyone with common sense will come to is that this object was created by something else caused by something else a natural process, or stolen comes out whatever. So this is simple, common, everyday common sense in which we approach any subject, any subject you can think of whether it be a painting, whether it be a waterfall, whether it be the planets, the sun, the cosmos, is what

00:07:17--> 00:07:27

you observe about is you ask every scientist to every observe artist or whoever that observes any particular phenomena will say, what caused it to have the certain attributes it has.

00:07:28--> 00:08:03

Now, let me expand our thinking to from this rock to everything that we can see the cosmos as it's called, everything that exists. Now we see from the cosmos that the cosmos has different components, each components are finite and limited adjusting to each other and with natural forces, and so on and so forth. Whether it be gravity or electromagnetic force, that would be atoms or, or quantum particles, or then we can protect whatever issue might be observing whatever object from a planet or even a, like the big massive

00:08:04--> 00:08:28

galaxy, we see that it is limited, it has certain attributes. It is finite, it exists within a certain set of premises for his existence. So let's apply the same criteria we do with it. common household, so to speak, objects that we see. So did the universe make itself? No, because obviously, they have to exist prior to doing something and if it doesn't exist in our

00:08:29--> 00:08:45

existence, has the universe always existed? Now this one, because of the Grand size the universe, a lot of people are easily fooled into thinking that well, maybe it has, because I haven't seen the whole universe maybe has always existed? Well, let me give it and some people use this.

00:08:47--> 00:09:34

explanation that, well, yes, it has always existed in a kind of infinite chain of, you know, prior stages. So for example, let's say there's a big bang, okay, fine. But before that, there was a lot of the type of universe which destroyed itself, and then it calls next universe to exist and so on, has been doing that forever, in ad infinitum. If this is the case, then do you think that infinity an infinite chain of anything can be transversed? That you can actually reach one Point A to Point A to Point B on an infinite chain? I mean, let's make it more simpler. Take some dominance, say I had a chain of dominoes, and I say was infinitely large introduction of dominoes. Would any of those

00:09:34--> 00:09:53

dominoes fall over? If the chain extended infinitely in the in the past with any of those dominoes would you ever see the dominoes going past you would be knocked out? They'll have to transfer an infinite amount dominoes to get to any point in that Domino chain. And how did you traverse infinity? How can you exhaust infinity? How can you

00:09:54--> 00:10:00

fathom infinity you can't. So nothing would exist it though. It

00:10:00--> 00:10:30

Or maybe it's you know, knology, then have a similar kind of similar client. Let's say that I was very poor. And I need and I had no money to my name, and I wanted some money for a sandwich or something. And I needed one pound that's really cheap sandwich. And I have to I got asked this person over here, could you give me one pound for a sandwich, and he too, is very poor and has no money. And then he asked his brother, and he has no money off this one over there, and he has no money

00:10:33--> 00:10:38

going on. Let's say that you have infinite amount of brothers amount of people.

00:10:39--> 00:10:45

If we were poor had no money to the name, because infinite amount of them for one pound, would you ever get one pound?

00:10:46--> 00:11:19

If they hadn't, if you didn't have any money, you wouldn't get nothing. And that's thing. So you say this infinite chain of stages before this stage of infinite chain of university that created this, you reach this point, in a universal chain, it's infinite, we'd never reached this point. And nothing would exist, there'd be no stop point to anything. So it can't be this, this would be completely absurd. And even now, cosmologists in the atheist ones are alleging that they can't be an infinite regress they have another theory. I'll get to that in a second.

00:11:21--> 00:11:42

So then we arrive at the question. Okay, so there must have been something else. The last possibility is that something else made this Cosmos that we can observe the world around us something else called this Cosmos to exist? What kind of thing is this? Now? What is it that started this universe, this cosmos and so on? We have two possibilities.

00:11:44--> 00:11:59

Either it's a it was, again, an infinite chain of universes, which has been refuted, or it was a infinite uncaused force. So a force it's a force itself, that has eternally existed

00:12:00--> 00:12:34

and has no limits. No, no limitations on it. Because if it had limitations, then the question is, what the finals invitations. So it can't there has to be some point. I don't know where this point is, we have to be some point where you said that at some point, there is a causer, which has no limits, and therefore does not need to be created itself or defined itself because it has no limit a central limitation at some point. I don't know how, where that point is. But at some point, there must have been a cause and one that define Linux and caused things to exist, ie to create.

00:12:35--> 00:13:16

So what is this thing? Well, this thing must also be absolute, and self subsistent. Because if it wasn't self subsistent, then it will depend on somebody else to give it its existence to cause it to exist to maintain its existence. And since this thing we we postulated was the beginning or was the cause of every every other thing in the cosmos, then this thing has to be self subsistent not dependent on anything else to maintain his existence, or call it to exist. The only this thing has to also be absolute, and absolute means that it has no divisions. It's not made of any substances itself has internal processes. Why do I say that? Is because if this thing which caused everything

00:13:16--> 00:13:27

to exist, had substances inside itself, then this thing is not the absolute cause this thing, the substance is inside itself. Its material is the first cause, not the thing itself.

00:13:29--> 00:13:37

And then of course, the question is, okay, well, how Why can't you have something that has multiple components being the first cause? We'll get to that in a second?

00:13:39--> 00:14:19

Those the force having will is a very important question. Does it have a will? There are two possibilities to this either, it has never will. It's random. And the universe atheist called this the multiverse theory of the multiverse concept, which is essentially that there is some kind of multiverse that just shoots out random universes to an infinite degree shoots at random University. It has no no intentionality behind it. It's random process. What is it? There are two problems with this one, that what causes this multiverse to create these different?

00:14:20--> 00:14:59

Why is this multiverse have to create these multiple different universes? What makes it do it? If somebody is making it, do it then there's something behind this multiverse which is making this multiverse having to make all these different infinite amounts of universes. Barney's analogy for you take I call this the infinite factory line analogy. Today, there's a factory line and it produces an infinite amount of objects in different kinds of objects randomly, so it might produce a mobile phone they might be used in selling a car might be the widescreen TV might use a jumbo jet. At any point in time or any point in its production. It produces a jumbo jet for example, then the

00:14:59--> 00:14:59

question is

00:15:00--> 00:15:45

Why did they produce a jumbo jet? At that point in time, I'm not a chair, and not a mobile phone. While at that point in its production, it produces a jumbo jet. Why? What caused it to define the limits of that object as what it was. And this is the problem, because there must be something else behind the multiverse that any point in time decides what was causing it to make a certain product of a certain type or certain shape, and so on. So there can't be a multiverse. Because the multiverse needs, it depends on something else to tell you what to do to tell it to, to make universes and to tell it what each particular universe, why it must be a certain shape. So that's

00:15:45--> 00:16:29

the same above or beyond this multiverse to do this, and the only possibility that's left is that this force has a will. What I mean by will, will means that it chooses it determines it has intentionality and purpose purposefulness that this thing chooses, because choice is the ultimate cause. To choose something, if for example, you put a you know, if a rock is just falling, being pushed by a stream, the rock has no choice, it's been moved by processes beyond its control, the stream is being pulled by gravity or seeking the ocean and so on and so forth. There's no choice, this is just a process. And of course, the person will sit in action by previous processes or

00:16:29--> 00:17:13

previous states. So the only the ultimate uncaused origin of anything has to be choice has to be someone decided to choose that whatever is created is created in that particular way. And it can't be there is no rational explanation for that. It must be that it has a winner. Now, what do we know so far? We know that an infinite force, force exists, and is infinite force possesses a will. Now if it isn't a force exists, which causes everything to exist, and it has a will. This fits the dictionary definition of God, the word God, so let's call it God, you know, for the sake of argument.

00:17:15--> 00:17:31

Now, the second part is how do we know that this God is one? How do you know there's not multiple gods? Maybe, maybe there could be multiple gods? Maybe there could be one god that has multiple components? Like I mentioned earlier on? How do we know what this thing is for?

00:17:33--> 00:17:43

I'm gonna posit that God is one in uniqueness as in this, this being or whatever this thing is, is the only thing that exists of its life. How do I know?

00:17:44--> 00:18:27

Well, if there were multiple gods, let's say, if there were three gods, four Gods $5, from eternity, then why four, five, why not six, or seven, or 10, or 100, my specific number, who define his number, you see, if something is marked as numbered, or multiple of there's multiples of it, then there is an origin for it. Because what made these different, different things will have in the same power, the same thing existed. For example, if you see a cat or Pepsi for the first time, and then you see 10 other cans of Pepsi, you can deduce that there must have been something that's creating all these purposes, because there's multiples of them.

00:18:28--> 00:18:47

But secondly, and this is, perhaps the more important one is that if there is a morality of infinite beings, then they limit each other. And if they limit each other, then they're not unlimited, and they're not infinite, they find that they limited the limits. And if the limits, that they have limits and parameters then they are created.

00:18:49--> 00:18:50

This is a simple argument.

00:18:51--> 00:19:13

And I'll show a little bit about where in the Masonic sources, the same argument is used. But this is a very fine one. If there are many gods, then can one go destroy? If yes, then that God is more powerful than if no, then that goes no, go. Come on you can do would be infinite wouldn't be omnipotent.

00:19:15--> 00:19:24

And now, the second, the second point is, I'm going to posit that God is wanting composition. So he's absolutely fundamental. There's nothing you can't divide him further.

00:19:25--> 00:19:58

If I prove this is if there is a reality within God that has multiple components within God, and God is infinite, then you have multiple, infinite, if God is infinite, everything inside it must be infinite to quote unquote, inside must be infinite. And if these are all infinite, and they are different components, then that's multiple gods and you fall into the same problem. As I said, with having multiple gods in the first place. This is also the same argument that we use against the Christian Conservatory, that there is three Gods within one book and which one which one is most is the most powerful.

00:19:59--> 00:20:00

The

00:20:00--> 00:20:44

Impossible. The second point is the possibility of substance within God. Because if God is the infinite, unlimited, then how can they be, and he's the most, he's the first cause, then how can they be something more fundamental than him, that causes him I mean, your arms, your legs, your eyes, your your face with the cells in your body define what you are, they define what you are the good genetic code defines what you are. So, this is not as more fundamental than the new you are not competent in this, this thing defines you. Now, if God is made up of a substance, then there is something inside him that is in reality, that is God, because that is the finding of God, this gives

00:20:44--> 00:20:51

him his powers, so that things actually go not not God itself. So it doesn't work.

00:20:52--> 00:20:57

And thirdly, that God is not subject to a previous disposition or nature.

00:20:58--> 00:21:39

God doesn't have a nature that compels him to do what he has to do. Because if he is compelling him, like, you know, he's got instincts for some like we'd like creatures have, then these instincts are more fundamental than God, it is a prior, a prior cause to go. And definitely, he's been forced to do things by site even greater than him. So what I'm saying is that the first, my first one argument was that there must be something, I don't know where it is, but there must be something that that is the ultimate cause. And there's nothing, there is nothing, it's not intermediate or anything else. It's the ultimate what it is, or how far the chain of causality is. All I know is that there is

00:21:39--> 00:22:13

somebody has ultimate goals. And if anything, if I imagined anything, substance, or nature, or product, morality within these things are not the ultimate things. These things are just, I'm just intermediaries like like, we are the made up of the substance, ourselves more fundamental in us, genetics are more fundamental than ourselves. So we are not the most fundamental aspects of ourselves, and our genes are also our atoms. And you can you can break it down even smaller. So, in summary, God exists.

00:22:15--> 00:22:36

God exists, and he possesses omnipotence, as an infinite, he's not limited. There's no limits on existence. God possesses will, intentionality, if his name is infinite, and he has Well, this is the definition of gods. God is a God, if you had infinite power, but no will it will just be a process by the multiverse. To claim

00:22:37--> 00:23:08

God is unique, there are no other gods because if he existed, all the gods, then he would be limited by them, and he and they all wouldn't be gone, they'd be something beyond them that created in the first place. And even if you look up pagan villages, which have multiple gods, there was always a Father God, ahead, God that created all the gods, the demigods, always, you always notice this, but even they realize, at some basic level, that always got to come from must have been a head got that spider started the whole family, so to speak,

00:23:09--> 00:23:50

and go is indivisible and absolute. Because whatever this thing is, is the first cause and there can't be anything beyond him, or so he can't have a substance, he can't be divided. And there is nothing beyond him, or that transcends him. And God is not subject to internal processes, or nature. So there's nothing that is inside him. That's an internal process that he can't control. If that's the case, then those internal processes will that nature is God and not and not God Himself. So for example, we are slaves to our instincts, our instincts compel us to do actions, and obviously we have the will to choose how we satisfy those actions, according to the concept of its nature,

00:23:50--> 00:24:40

whereas God doesn't have a happy nature because he wasn't defined as such. And inshallah I think this, this other proves of how we know I've kept it very basic as I can, how God exists, how anyone can know that God exists, and that there is only one ultimate origin of which there can be no other that shares its highest attributes of being the ultimate cause of everything that exists. And I'll finish off with just highlighting a few songs of Quran which show these points, for example, in Surah 21, verse 22, he says, and and why would they go to heaven and earth other than God, they would surely go to ruin. So they will fight each other and everything that exists or wait one goal

00:24:40--> 00:24:50

was to create something for example, who else could change it and destroy it and they fight and they be limited? So the Quran uses this very same argument that there's more than one God, then how is it gonna be?

00:24:51--> 00:24:59

There'll be tumbled and jostling forces that fight each other. And, in essence, they will none of that would be good because they'll be like bickering

00:25:00--> 00:25:47

creation as we fight each other, because we believe it will clash with each other, and also the source of the class, the soul 112, In the Name of Allah, the Merciful, compassionate side from habit, he is the one the self sufficient, he was not forgotten more than he would get, and there is not equal to him. And if you contemplate this verse, it has virtually every every aspect, which I presented today. So although this is a very generic discussion, I'd like to posit that Islam in the vein of people who believe in one God and believe in a Unitarian concept, as in, there's no other dots, as long as one of the most purest manifestations of this concept, and I invite you to read the

00:25:47--> 00:25:57

Quran to understand this fabric conception of God, which I think is one of the best accounts of the existence of God and the unitary existence of God, calling on

00:26:02--> 00:26:29

this committee, informative talk. If there are any questions you want to ask or the comments are open the floor for any comments, or any questions, and please make sure that the questions are related to this topic. And I just have a couple of announcements for tomorrow, there's going to be a general q&a. Any questions we were asked to base on Thursday is going to be a tool on Easter. Excellent. So

00:26:31--> 00:26:38

please attempt as well. Any questions, raise your hands, you could either write your questions on a piece of paper or raise your hands.

00:26:40--> 00:26:42

Feel free to play devil's advocate and just

00:26:47--> 00:26:59

the more you charge, the more you're going to actually solidify the concept in your mind. So try and see if you can find any reputation or some partner that you think there is a hole, then try and actually invoke it just for the sake of everyone to see

00:27:00--> 00:27:02

if there is a call to criticism.

00:27:07--> 00:27:08

That good?

00:27:12--> 00:27:15

Yeah, I just didn't understand, at least

00:27:19--> 00:28:02

talk to us to that. Sure. But you just explained that the atheist concept of God or the multiverse, what they believe is that they try to understand as to what caused this universe to come to existence with its limitations and events. And if they should go down the path of what's intentional, then they have to go meet to theism. And they don't want to do this. So they try to find a different explanation. And a different explanation was that it was this universe is the result of a random process. But the question is a random process of what so they had this idea of a multiverse, which is, there is an infinite number of universes. And this universe exists as one of

00:28:02--> 00:28:34

an infinite number of every possibility of universal can ever imagine. And beyond, is it that concept. So there's an infinite number. And we just happen to be in one of those many variations, we just happen to be in one particular variation of infinite number of universes. This is the concept of multiverse and the refutation to this is, well, in this particular universe, or any particular universe, you might pick one then model and then that they have, why does each particular universe have the specific limitations that it has? What decided that?

00:28:35--> 00:28:37

What produced that?

00:28:38--> 00:28:44

And then they come back, because then they have to say, well, maybe a little bit more diverse. And what did that make a lot of

00:28:45--> 00:29:03

ad infinitum to infinity, of course, then you they fall foul of the infinite regress on which the infinite chain of things can't exist. And even they are willing to admit this, but it's like very interesting that even when they talk about the multiverse, which in essence is that is that you could say as atheists God is a random God

00:29:04--> 00:29:42

is that they have to use the word infinite. The word infinite always comes it always has to be used by someone at some point. And infinite is the realm of God. This is the the attribute of God. But even they say infinite regress or infinite amount of universe death used to be the one infinite form of you just can't escape from the concept of infinity, there must be at some point some infinity. Now the question is, as to what kind of infinity is infinity that has finite things in it? Or is infinity there's purely infinite. And this is the concept that we as theists hold on to basic concepts of infinite that is purely not contradictory. How infinite have finite things inside. It's

00:29:43--> 00:29:59

just, it's infinite and it's fine at the same time. Doesn't make sense. So we want people to be consistent, you're gonna believe in the infinite be consistent in everything, not just infinite in its time span, infinite existence or infinite chains of no it had

00:30:08--> 00:30:09

Basically, there's a theory that

00:30:11--> 00:30:22

where the universe is infinite, and we're in the process of fine. So process in between infinity, but root cause to what you just said is

00:30:23--> 00:30:30

not big enough finite process, you can have finite things that's acceptable. So it can go

00:30:31--> 00:30:33

against what you said,

00:30:34--> 00:30:38

was in a finite process to find that process, I'm sure find objects

00:30:39--> 00:30:48

within that. So in essence, that's acceptable. Whereas you just said that you can't have infinite in finite.

00:30:49--> 00:30:50

Yeah.

00:30:52--> 00:30:56

Infinite and finite, and you cannot find an infinite, you cannot find I find that

00:30:57--> 00:30:58

makes sense?

00:31:00--> 00:31:28

Yeah, but what was the contention? So? It's because there's like a infinite process going on? Oh, you mean, like, an infinite chain of? Yeah, oh, it's a chain of timeframes or stages, or what have you, we're just one finite part of that. But there's still a problem. How do you get from infinite infinite chain, whatever, from eternity to now? How do you, you know, how do you get to that this point, to this point in the infinite chain? Well, if

00:31:30--> 00:31:36

there's some sort of trigger in between that time, where there's some sort of causation, football, they call

00:31:37--> 00:31:53

it triggers it often it brings in a finite sort of component, it just said there must be causation then. So then they fall into the into the first argument that there has to be a cause for finite things to begin. Okay. All right, playing that play their game, we say, okay,

00:31:54--> 00:32:10

God's existence infinite. And at some point, he initiated a finite process, not some point in existence, but some point in the finite existence, finally popped into existence, and it goes to finance, stocks and finance. And we believe this.

00:32:11--> 00:32:58

It doesn't contradict our belief that God is infinite. And just maybe two, because you might go back and think about this, God is not in time or not in a chain of causality. He just exists. So there was no at some point in his infinity, which you can't have, he decided to make find that no, it doesn't exist in a chain, or chain of time or chain of timeframe, whatever. And we keep when he creates, we don't know, how can we understand this? We can't comprehend how Infinite Creation from nothing and where does this nothing existed in the infinite? We can't even ask that question. Because it makes sense. There's no location locations also finite. So the creative just pops into

00:32:58--> 00:33:10

existence to create things and exist for a certain time or certain amount of change, time has changed. And that's stopped existing. And that's all because that's all we can comprehend freshmen.

00:33:15--> 00:33:17

Does that mean that we are fine?

00:33:18--> 00:33:20

Which is fine, what happens?

00:33:22--> 00:33:31

Well, when we die, when we still exist in a different kind of finite state, it also come from the Muslim perspective, of course, then we will

00:33:34--> 00:33:34

have

00:33:39--> 00:33:43

we all have a shape, a size, this is fine artists

00:33:46--> 00:34:06

will often die does that mean they live forever in paradise. So don't, don't confuse living without end from Final infinite because any point in time if I was to go to any point in time in the Hereafter, and measure how much time has passed, it would always be finite.

00:34:08--> 00:34:20

So I could go 1000 years in the art into the Hereafter, and it will still be 1000s of past 10,000 years into I can't go into the infinite amount of time into the future, because I

00:34:22--> 00:34:30

come across infinity. So any any point in time in the hereafter theists perspective, it will always be a finite amount of time as was passed.

00:34:31--> 00:34:41

But it just that God who is the who does not is distant doesn't end chooses to perpetuate the existence of the financial

00:34:43--> 00:34:45

or health dependent.

00:34:47--> 00:34:54

Does not forget it. So I still care about the concept that is mentioned about being finite.

00:34:55--> 00:35:00

Okay. Let me let me give an example. The people

00:35:00--> 00:35:01

Say the number line.

00:35:02--> 00:35:33

But it's not, the number line is the counting board. That's all it is. So how to count, that's all it is. You can't say that the the number line doesn't exist. In reality, it is a set of just the rules of, you know, plus one, and then you changes. If we choose 10, you the decimal system, of course, then you must add a zero and so on. So it's just a counting book, all it is, and it can only goes as far as you can count or as the best computer can count. But the best computer the best mind can only count to a finite amount.

00:35:35--> 00:36:04

So it's just like to hear often that there is no end, there is no no, there is no end, there's not another one, there is no end to how much you can count. But that at any point in time you're counting, you only have counted a finite amount of bumpers, or a finite amount of time in here after, and so on. So it's not infinite, infinite means with no limits, whereas we're limited by the amount of time at each point in time that you want to measure. The time for that makes sense.

00:36:13--> 00:36:17

Manual, I will try to ask more questions, and I'll come back to your

00:36:18--> 00:36:23

knowledge that might make it might make sense to you. Some of the questions

00:36:24--> 00:36:31

can create something that he cannot destroy, similar to the scenario that he gave a one word describe.

00:36:32--> 00:36:34

So how would you tackle that problem?

00:36:35--> 00:36:57

Well, it's very simple, they cannot make something more heavy than you can lift the most common one. And the question is not about, you know, kennel cough is, the real question is, does God limit himself by making himself only limited? And if he makes himself limited, then he's no longer God?

00:36:58--> 00:37:16

You see, and so he couldn't do that if he was no longer God. So if I say, if God cease to become God becomes limited. Can he you know, count to infinity? Well, no, because he's limited. So if God can make like, he's happy that he can live more than he did, he may

00:37:18--> 00:37:22

as well and then he be limited, and the number will be gone, and everything will cease to exist.

00:37:23--> 00:37:25

Because there's no course there's no maintainable

00:37:29--> 00:37:41

code, so powerful. So in essence, Mike has the power to become limit, limiting something and then destroying it. God can do anything, but he is not anything.

00:37:43--> 00:37:57

You see, God can do anything. But he is not anything. Because the definition of infinite comes from a Latin infinity, which means not finite. So when you say God is infinite, you already saying that God is something he's not?

00:37:58--> 00:38:39

He's not and he is not finite. So the question is saying is that can infinite be not finite? Which is a contradiction? You see, because God is said, God can do anything he can do, we can create him has infinite power, but he himself is not anything. He is not finite. So to say, well, say can you make Can you make that he could live is essentially saying, Can God be in finite and still have infinite power? Well, obviously you can't be finite and still have infinite power. Because not all God. That makes sense.

00:38:42--> 00:38:43

But it's good questions. Right?

00:38:50--> 00:38:52

says one question is wait one

00:38:53--> 00:39:03

does doesn't understand the command of the law? And why a law says certain things, how do we fully submitted a criminal law even if we don't understand it?

00:39:12--> 00:39:32

Well, understanding is not a prerequisite to be a bank. And some of the people give us almost all the time, which we don't understand when we do it. For example, you might be told that you can't go into the state as a big traffic disturbance and you can't go into central and

00:39:34--> 00:39:58

you don't say no, no, I'm gonna keep going in until someone tells me why. I can't go in central London. What's causing this? Yeah. All that's necessary for a human being to know is that it exists something exists a command an issue a problem. I mean, we all the time you say I want to have some ice cream today. Why I feel like it. Why don't you Question No, do you question Why? Why you must do that.

00:40:00--> 00:40:18

Do we don't understand? Obviously, looking into it, it could be our body as deficient of sugar is telling our brain to find sugar, and therefore we are supposed to get ice cream. Maybe that's explanation, but do you think like this, do you understand like, I just feel like ice cream or, you know, reading some sweet shop, and so on, and then having to go to dentist.

00:40:19--> 00:40:22

So this is, you know, this is what

00:40:23--> 00:40:48

we need to understand something to follow it however, many things are explained in terms of the command, many commands are explained for our benefit. And they're explained, because we need to know this explanation in order to follow that command better. But just give an example from a Muslim perspective and the Jewish perspective, which is we're not allowed to eat pork, is there a reason given no reason given, but in all circumstances, you know,

00:40:49--> 00:40:50

there's no situation whereby

00:40:51--> 00:40:52

people will know,

00:40:53--> 00:40:54

however,

00:40:55--> 00:41:39

when the crisis, advising on the safe foreign policy of a Muslim man saying that, tell your horses, the seeds of war, to strike fear into the hearts of enemies of those people who want to hurt you, or hurt the land under control by Muslims. And you should develop that you should get your steamer for your horses and make sure that if the strike fields has enemies, they won't attack you You're, you're defended by people's fear of you, they will attack you. But in today's world, if you came with horses, you strike humor into the house, and then probably good in bed. But then what is the first concept that says, so that you construct fear. So this is what we call the law, the reason

00:41:39--> 00:42:08

behind it. And for this reason, we know that we can apply in today's world, we need tanks, planes, submarines, and so on so forth. You see the reasons given. So in a different context, we know how to follow that rule. But rules that don't have that are just given to us and don't require us to know that the reason behind it, we're told not to do it, and no situation is going to turn up whereby knowing the reason will be of any benefit to us. And if you think about it, God created us.

00:42:09--> 00:42:35

You couldn't from our perspective or arbitrary, he will have to exist, not because he had a desire to fulfill or a previous nature caused him to do that. Because he got bored or whatever. No, he just quite simply, he just decided for us to exist. So if we cannot understand the very cause of why God even made us in the first place. I mean, what I mean by Why is and what prompted him to do it.

00:42:36--> 00:43:14

He does it literally. And we can't understand this, because for us boys, of course, when we make a decision, whereas God does it. So if you can't understand that, and then you know, of course, by analogy, we also a lot of the commands of God, which is not fitting our purpose, which has ordained for us well, a lot of them, we don't know the reason for it, but the very fact of their commands. And the fact that our purpose is given that you know, is not great managing except to worship in worship is to obey. So, in order to obey God have that choice to fill up purpose, we have to have commands. If we didn't know commands, then there's no how can we?

00:43:15--> 00:43:36

How can we make that choice use our freewill to make that choice in the first place and fulfill our purpose to worship? We can't so you need commands to give us the law in the first place. So then we can make that choice. And of course, I could go on about this. But you know, these commands will fit our human nature in some some different discussion. But suffice to say, I hope I've answered that satisfactory, please come, come back.

00:43:43--> 00:43:47

If there is a God, how does he deal justly with creation?

00:43:48--> 00:44:40

Interesting question. I suppose the real question is what is justice? What is being just in the first place? I would say that dealing justly with creation is giving the crave that given the creation, the ability to realize itself to be what it was intended to be, at some point, to be, for example, if a human being is not satisfied in this life, and has let's say, he lives in a very difficult time. And he's suppressed or oppressed, then in the Hereafter, to create a balance between him and his lack of realizing who he truly was as a human being the fifth law, he's given a redress of balance in the hereafter. And this is justice. Obviously, how to give justice to a rock for the

00:44:40--> 00:45:00

rock has already got justice, because it is it only it only exists to exist and, and God has allowed it to be what it is. So even if we can't realize our true nature, because we are pressed or there's a certain problem that we didn't have a troublesome title area. God always redress that balance in the hereafter and hence justice will be

00:45:00--> 00:45:42

Complete, anything can be fully realized and maybe given, let's say there's a husband, and doesn't treat his wife properly and his wife feels that she doesn't have a fully loving relationship with her husband. And she was eligible to take the husband to court to submit court. And they will say, to say, my husband hasn't done justice to me why she's at work, because he hasn't allowed me my full rights as a as a human being a creation with the human nature. So I the judge will get justice, the judge will demand that the husband fulfills those rights. Or if the court doesn't exist, and the hospital gets away, that in a day of judgment, Allah will make sure that those the rights are filled

00:45:42--> 00:46:30

by balancing it with a suitable punishment. And if you could think about what punishment is, it is a frustration of your of your humanity. So pain is a frustration of who you are, we always seek to be pleasure, because pleasure is what we perceive to be are satisfied by the central nature. So the concept of Hell is a permanent frustration, of human nature, pain, that you feel unhappy, you feel, obviously, that you can't, you know, at peace with yourself. So go for dresses it in that sense with with creation that has a soul as well. And we appreciate the house, though, will like rocks in the mountains and so on, then, there just is the existing

00:46:31--> 00:46:40

they can exist. And in and that's essentially I guess that the quantum my definition of justice is how God gives justice to his creation.

00:46:45--> 00:46:50

Why did it just God create hospital as Muslims and test us why normals?

00:46:54--> 00:47:06

Well, if you think about it, we have free will. Why do we have free will? Now why did God curiosity free? Well, why did the God does not create these kind of,

00:47:07--> 00:47:27

you know, a bunch of robots that will just worship Him? Or say that he is? He is great, infinite, and so on, why don't this Why did you have to create freewill in the first place? Because if you know, there's this kind of self help cassettes, recommended cassettes, when you put them in, and you listen, and when you go to sleep, and it says you are a strong, confident person and

00:47:28--> 00:47:46

make yourself feel better about yourself and so on. But that doesn't have any real value to it, does it? Because it's the table play that for anyone, doesn't matter who's listening. You don't there's no value in this. So what is real value come from? real value comes from choice choosing, you have to choose?

00:47:47--> 00:48:35

Now, the question is on Muslim to test us in order to create models things well, here's a great concept of justice, to give us a great understanding of justice. Imagine talking strictly from the sonic perspective here. So imagine that there was a poor person, a person that was born into a poor family, and a person born into a rich family. The poor person has the same obligations to be a moral and virtuous person as the rich person. But according to God's justice, the rich person will be accounted more by more questions to be asked of him because he had more power given to him to do good to be virtuous to help his fellow human being, whereas the poor person, maybe just just about

00:48:35--> 00:49:07

home with his family and having much money. The more blessing you have, the more responsibility you have, and the more you are accounted for it. Some could say that the more blessing you have is almost more of a curse as well, because a rich person giving lots of blessing of riches, most rich people forget about, forget about their genius, their fellow human beings and become arrogant and don't do that. And therefore their riches was a curse for them. And maybe they wished on the detriment they were poor and didn't happen in the first place.

00:49:09--> 00:49:54

So likewise, a non Muslim only is accounted for believing in God and believing in one God and do the best you can with whatever virtues morals in society follow. That's only accounted for. We're actually counted more harsher than the non Muslims that never had the option. So a guide as the rain forest doesn't, is not going to be accounted for by God from the Muslim because he didn't know about it. Maybe even according to law scholars, those people who are small, but for it was originally every other kind of religion, made it think about it. I've had the opportunity to know about it. Maybe you know all of them

00:49:57--> 00:49:59

but they will be counted less

00:50:00--> 00:50:08

Then a Muslim Muslim becomes much harder, because you had all the guidance. You had all the guidance to make your life easier. What did you do?

00:50:10--> 00:50:18

Whereas most people just be asked, Did you believe in God? Did you pick only one God? And did you do the best you can with what you what you knew, or what you thought was good.

00:50:19--> 00:50:43

Meditation took interest, they didn't know it was bad, we'll go into that now. Because they don't, they didn't know about the commands, and didn't didn't know there was commands from God, that said, interest was bad, they won't be comfortable, if we did it, we'd be punished for it. So with every blessing, there is greater responsibility, and to some people, they will regret the blessings that they got. So for Muslims, especially very scary, because

00:50:45--> 00:51:03

a lot of non Muslims out there, or have got orders in history will not be counted as worse, as far as we are. But we got the blessing to make our lives easier by allowing, having guidance that allows us to fulfill our fitrah of human nature and seek peace in this world and inshallah next. So bear that in mind.

00:51:09--> 00:51:12

How can you be a god if there is so much evil in the world?

00:51:13--> 00:51:14

This question,

00:51:16--> 00:51:32

this question, very interesting question is asked is this But you see, this has the assumption behind it. The assumption is that the purpose of our existence is to enjoy ourselves.

00:51:33--> 00:51:34

I see a

00:51:35--> 00:51:58

lot coming from the Western society, a lot of Western society. And in this society, people want to enjoy themselves. And they are told the purpose of your life is to fulfill your desires, whichever way you deem fit, whatever you like. And the purpose of life is to enjoy yourself. As always, people coming from an ex Christian background come from Christian legacy, so to speak, from Western countries,

00:51:59--> 00:52:34

still believed in the god they still held an idea that God exists, but they were taught his new ideology, which is, I guess liberalism, that commits enjoy life, the purpose in life is to enjoy it to the max. So they simply ask yourself the question, well, if my purpose in life is to enjoy myself, and God created me, why did he deny me this, this enjoyment? Why this life to the misery? And why is life full of hardship and tests? But they've made the wrong assumption, Who told you that the purpose of life is to enjoy yourself? I'm not saying you should be miserable. But it's as one I think.

00:52:36--> 00:53:16

Two people who have denied the truth don't want to follow truth. This, they've made this their paradise, but to a person who wants to follow the truth to the one who believes in truth or the truth. This is their prison. And the interesting he didn't say, this is the hell, this is that prison. Why? Because even in prison, you're getting drugs. There are miseries and there are enjoyments, even in the prison is balance. And if there was no balance there, where is where's the tests, you can only make a choice, you're given two options. And the only options, the options, more options, you have you have to obviously be wanting to avert harm from yourself or misery from

00:53:16--> 00:53:38

yourself to make use options like should I invest in houses? Or should I invest in cars as a business, I don't want to lose money and be poor, destitute, because then I have to feed my family. That's a hardship. So I'm going to try and make that decision is motivating me to choose. So good, the good and bad exists to give you the motivations to choose. But

00:53:39--> 00:54:03

we have now upon us to make the right choice, not about not avoiding the house and trying to seek good but also seeking the transcendent good as in falling on purpose in life, which is the ultimate good and avoiding purpose. And let me even give a definition of what is good and what is evil because people like to say evil Good. Good. The definition of good in Islam

00:54:04--> 00:54:17

or actually maybe starts from analogy a better thing. What makes a good cop? Yeah. What do you think? What What do you think makes a good car? When you said this car is good? What do you think? suggestions?

00:54:19--> 00:54:22

get you to me reliably, okay. Anything else?

00:54:25--> 00:54:28

fuel economy, very important that recession.

00:54:29--> 00:54:32

appearance, or you'd like to call function?

00:54:33--> 00:54:59

engine, okay, fine. So, the car is meant to be for transportation. It's meant to be the purpose of coffee from A to B quicker than just walking. That's the point of it. So the better it fulfills its purpose. The more good a car it is. Yes. So if we have a purpose than those who fulfill our purpose, more are good for fulfilling, fulfilling our purpose is good. And what is bad

00:55:00--> 00:55:18

With a bad cop, cop, no engine, COMM The wheels taken off, you know, a car that breaks down every five minutes bad cop. Why? Because it doesn't fit its purpose. So the good and the evil, The Good, the Bad is is what? What follows the purpose? And what

00:55:20--> 00:55:46

if you say, How can your God be a good God is evil in the world, I say, but, but God defines purpose, he doesn't follow a purpose. You can't even say to that God is God is good as a Christian and say, God is good, like, God, he's this like, great, and God for good. And God just happened to be following this thing, which is great, you know, God defines the purpose of what is good and bad. And we are the ones who are charged with a good backup God.

00:55:48--> 00:55:48

So

00:55:50--> 00:56:03

then you realize this question has no meaning. For us. It's assumed from Christian theology, and of course, modern Western mentality of the purpose of life is to enjoy as much misery in the world. Anyway, the system

00:56:17--> 00:56:18

the question

00:56:19--> 00:56:22

how can that be a god if there is such evil in the world? Obviously,

00:56:24--> 00:56:24

this

00:56:26--> 00:56:28

is an object.

00:56:33--> 00:56:34

Once

00:56:39--> 00:56:42

again, I mentioned how to stay

00:56:44--> 00:56:47

sane in a prison you have hardships and pleasures.

00:56:52--> 00:56:53

Yes.

00:56:56--> 00:56:57

Yes.

00:56:58--> 00:56:59

Yes.

00:57:01--> 00:57:02

One

00:57:04--> 00:57:05

last question.

00:57:15--> 00:57:19

mean the truth of the Quran? But how do you know the points we've got?

00:57:22--> 00:57:28

Using get using as an okay? All these rational arguments I've quoted, it's all in the Quran.

00:57:29--> 00:58:11

Nothing you can you can't find it upon the crime. What is mentioned in the first verse they engage with you is, you know, due to displacement, don't say, No, do you not see, the I article, other science signs of God that is coming through as well, the signs of God, the proofs of God in everything, and the alternation of it day, which is obviously the face of time and change all these things, of the planets, the mountains, the even manly things being thrown around the world, the ships that bring what is good for all these this all sides, we contemplate this is a science. And it's the first base Now, most of make mistake of just quoting the verse thinking, the verse itself,

00:58:11--> 00:58:20

as the verse will just change someone's mind. And they miss the substance that the verse is asking you to understand the meaning and the meaning is pointing you in the right direction.

00:58:21--> 00:58:35

The first revelation of God is everything that exists everything that exists is optimal. And it's very interesting because the one I asked also can apply for a paragraph of the Quran. So it's

00:58:36--> 00:59:14

also in some way I explained that there is almost a say, like two holy books. One is the first revelation of God he created everything in existence which attests to his existence. And of course the Quran. And the Quran is pointing the people who are atheist or whatever, to the wider, wider coration saying, look, and let me give an example of the Prophet Mohammed sauce on how we have the latest. A better way to snake it. And before he approaches guide this competitor from having been debating for hours and hours, and the guy wasn't supposed to budget so the Prophet Muhammad sat down

00:59:15--> 00:59:23

and discovered a better way and he just said that look, if you saw footprints in the sand

00:59:25--> 00:59:36

if you saw footprints in the sand, but you saw you saw nothing around what would you conclude it's a well they must have been accountant or there must have been obviously sent McCurry that went by, but even though you didn't see it.

00:59:39--> 00:59:58

So then the Prophet Muhammad Salaam Salaam said, well look at the stone sky. These are the footprints of our knowledge, of course, but it's the it's the same things that are caused, which you don't see the cause. But you see the effect most of the cause of the effect and then the veteran said

01:00:00--> 01:00:31

Benjamin realized because I could understand from his own world, how a very simple common sense causality how it plays out with the cosmos. And the perfect didn't just call him and saying, Well, you know, you'll believe in God just because these these verses of the Quran, no probably engage with a very rational discussion. And the quiet self urges you to look at the universe and point to that as evidence. And then after they believe in God not to believe in one God would demonstrate purely rationally, then the discussion goes into how we know that the Quran is

01:00:33--> 01:00:38

a very interesting one. But I want to just keep on topic for the time being, time limited, like many things.

01:00:46--> 01:01:00

Actually, just one, I think once more point, I think maybe just a follow up question about why this isn't even what if you think about it, what, even from a different perspective, what is evil, is evil is a person shouldn't do some bad voices free will.

01:01:02--> 01:01:38

free will to fill a purpose. And when one person is free, is free will hurt someone else. God has justice redress, for this to equal to that there is no he doesn't prevail, if you're looking for this, but if a tsunami happens, or an earthquake and people die and someone's evil, evil, you're gonna die anyway, at some point, and you're gonna go to here off to any at some point, why is dying earlier than you think you would or die earlier than you think you would evil good in the grand scheme of things, even to an atheist, you say, was an atheist defeating belief and he just things just happened? As they said,

01:01:40--> 01:01:44

if you really, you know, push it down to it. So

01:01:45--> 01:01:58

the natural disasters or whatever you want to call them are not evil intrinsically. And you're gonna die at any point in time anyway. So what makes death evil intrinsically, if you're gonna die anyway?

01:01:59--> 01:02:03

And it's just, it's just transitioning to a different existence?

01:02:09--> 01:02:10

What do you have a question to ask

01:02:13--> 01:02:15

God that God's

01:02:16--> 01:02:19

time or towards God create

01:02:20--> 01:02:27

directly that God exists in the argument has gone into that kind of thing. God always exists in time.

01:02:29--> 01:02:32

right time, you know, God's

01:02:33--> 01:02:39

time itself is a limited construction, with what we say enables change.

01:02:41--> 01:02:43

Assuming that there is always

01:02:45--> 01:02:47

when were times when they exist,

01:02:50--> 01:02:50

outside?

01:02:52--> 01:03:01

Well, yes, God is not in time, because he's not limited by subject to anything, time, subjects and everything within his space, time and spaces, it also

01:03:03--> 01:03:30

is subject to change. But God doesn't change. Because if if an infinite thing does change, and then there will be now a chain of causality, which you can't have an infinite chain. So this is the news that God is outside of time and doesn't change. And whereas that which exists, which is great, is, is great time to create space, great objects within time and space, as well.

01:03:37--> 01:03:38

Audience

01:03:40--> 01:03:41

justice,

01:03:43--> 01:03:43

if

01:03:45--> 01:03:45

you have no

01:03:47--> 01:03:52

idea, then you're going to judge harshly. But then let's say you're an unbelievably

01:03:56--> 01:04:19

and, you know, if you knew the ability to be a Catholic, you have those two things. Well, you have to know what the truth is, and and be convinced your mind who investigates would have been would have said, Yeah, you know, I'm pretty convinced that this is probably better or is more trouble, or makes more sense that I'm following now. And to that you made the conscious decision to ignore that.

01:04:20--> 01:04:59

Now do I know looking at a normal student if they are a Catholic, really in the true reality of it? Why can't see people's hearts you could be a person who could say that he's a Muslim, but but not being a practicing Muslim, they could respond because everyone else was calling it a boon to family. They don't follow it. In the Islamic world economic hypocrites they portray as wrong but reality they, they just pragmatic people that follow because it's easier. So only our knows God knows what's inside of his heart. That's not for us to to make that judgment. And I would say that I prefer that because judgment is far better.

01:05:00--> 01:05:33

Then my judgment or anyone else's judgment, we all know that is on a case by case basis between that person and God. Well, I will say is just to keep people confused, but in the legal sense and how we use it in the legal sense we saw we call person a Muslim. Even if you're not we they're not fully practicing, we might say they are they are Muslim, and non Muslim, then the word Catholic can mean just generically normals, the generic word normals, so it's not a bad word. It just inaccurate. It's using that sense, but how does?

01:05:34--> 01:05:40

How does anyone know if someone's a real Catholic? Well, there's only only Allah knows this. And we have to defer that.

01:05:42--> 01:05:42

So if I

01:05:44--> 01:05:54

can clear conscience, say to God, look, if I really need to know that it's not the truth, I would have followed it then or even between them,

01:05:55--> 01:06:16

and so on. And there's many hundreds talking about people and their judgment. And all that, if I had known the truth I would have been there would be a test perhaps given to them there or you know, some kind of have to deal with it as he sees as he sees fit. But justice will be done to that person. So in essence, my goal was to help

01:06:17--> 01:06:18

on the bottom line, just because

01:06:19--> 01:06:21

obviously there are a lot

01:06:34--> 01:06:35

there are any more questions?

01:06:39--> 01:06:44

Just a quick reminder for tomorrow there's going to be a

01:06:46--> 01:06:54

purely q&a tomorrow returning to 130 Okay. unpleasant to be true when he said a select

01:06:56--> 01:07:01

essential, thank you for attending today's talk, separates and I wanted to live