The Atheist Muslim Deal
Channel: The Deen Show
File Size: 13.09MB
This is the Atheist Muslim Deal with Dr. Laurence Brown who is a Medical Doctor and religious scholar, who was also a former Atheist who was trying very hard to be a Christian before accepting Islam
A product of Christian-American ancestry dating back to the year 1677, up until his conversion to Islam in April of 1994, Dr. Brown easily could have passed as an example of a man who lived the stereotypical American dream. A graduate from two Ivy League universities with subspecialty training in ophthalmology, Dr. Brown served as a respected ophthalmologist in the U.S. Air Force for a period of eight years.
Midway through his Air Force career, Dr. Brownâs ideal American familyâ included a wife, two children, and the requisite two cars and a dog. His country home was crowded with the full array of comforts and toys which clutter the lives of those preoccupied with materialism. Yet Dr. Brown ended up sacrificing virtually everything he had worked for when he faced a religious conviction that overturned his lifelong priorities.
Following a personal miracle through which the life of his daughter was saved, Dr. Brown redirected his focus to religious study in an attempt to make good on a promise made to God. In the process, Dr. Brown followed the chain of revelation through the Abrahamic religions from Judaism to Christianity and, in the end, to Islam.
Dr.Laurence Brown received his B.A. from Cornell University, his MD from Brown University Medical School, and his ophthalmology residency training at George Washington University Hospital in Washington, DC.
Episode Transcript ©
Transcripts are auto-generated and thus will be be inaccurate and at times crude. We are considering building a system to allow volunteers to edit transcripts in a controlled system. No part of this transcript may be copied or referenced or transmitted in any way whatsoever.
Welcome to the Dean's Show. I'm with Dr. Lawrence Brown. Let's get right into it. Dr. Lawrence Brown.
I'm not even going to ask you how you're doing this is, this is a very crucial question. We don't waste any time but how you doing anyways?
What? Salaam Alaikum alaikum Salaam.
Tell me. How do atheists explain
Good question. Well, I mean, the bottom line is that atheists explain the existence of the universe through the Big Bang, and the diversity of species through evolution by the process of natural selection.
What I find interesting is to take these explanations back to their origins.
And in that regard, what you know, what I think I would like to just talk about today is exactly that. So for example,
I'm 57 years old. 40 years old, when I was in college, they were teaching the Big Bang, but
the theory was very different from what it is now. They they were teaching back then they were taking teaching a primordial dust cloud. Are you familiar with this? No.
Okay, well, the concept was, obviously, we have so much nowadays, I mean, so much matter and energy in the universe. Where did all of this come from? And the belief, the belief back 40 years ago, was that everything compacted into a, you know, hyper dense core and exploded and exploded out into the universe that we have today. But the question was, where did all all of that matter and energy come from? So 40 years ago, they believed in a primordial dust cloud, a dust cloud of matter and energy that came together into a hyper dense core and then exploded outwards? Like I just described, the question of how it came together? Why? What were the forces that caused the explanation? These are
the unknowns and unanswered questions. Okay.
Let me try that. Again. These were the unanswered questions.
So then, the, the theory kind of evolved to the point where they suggested, you know, scientists began to suggest, well, you know, with any explosion,
things decelerate, they, you know, initially they're expanding outwards, and it slows down. So it just makes sense that as the universe is expanding, things are getting farther and farther away from one another, and they will decelerate, they will slow down in the expansion, the forces of gravity will be pulling against the expansion. At some point, the forces of gravity will overcome the forces of the expansion, and the expansion will slow, slow, slow stop. And then the forces of gravity will overcome the forces, forces of expansion, bring everything back together. And that was the Big Crunch. Basically, the universe collapsing in upon itself under the forces of gravity, forming
another hyper dense singularity, which would then explode outwards again. So you would get this sort of endless series of
big bangs, big crunches, Big Bang, Big Crunch, okay.
The problem was that when they when they measured the expansion of the universe, they found that instead of slowing down, the expansion of the universe was in fact speeding up. It's kind of surprising, huh? Yes, not what you'd expect. I mean, have you ever seen an explosion that sped up you set off a firecracker and things you know, do not fall to the ground, they just go off forever. So, in any case, this was the point. So, they found that the expansion was in fact speeding up and could not explain this.
So now we have a concept of the multiverse they said well, then there must be multiple universes, other universes out there that are pulling upon our universe causing the you know, expansion and so on. And again, another theory that has absolutely not a shred of evidence,
but this is this is how the scientists are explaining it. Now. The point is that the the theory of the Big Bang has come to the point where the the most accepted model in this day
just says okay, there was no primordial disco, dust cloud,
the using physical principles, the most eminent physicist and nuclear physicists and so on.
They extrapolated backwards and developed what is now known as the Penrose Hawking model of the Big Bang, which are of the singularity, which is, is basically that before the singularity, before the singularity formed, get this, there was no matter, there was no energy, there was no space, there was no time. Nothing.
Now, I mean, no matter no energy, Wow, that's amazing, but no space, no time, absolutely nothing.
In this model, scientists have basically shown that before the big bang, it doesn't leave room for anything except for a transcendent creator.
I mean, can you think of anything else, anything else that could exist without matter without energy without time without space? What, what could exist in that nothing.
And so in this way, now, this is this is the accepted model of the Big Bang at present. And this model conforms more with our religion than it does with science. Because our religion tells us that before creation, there was a creator. Okay? And that explains how everything came into existence. But scientists are not able to explain how the Big Bang happened. If there was no matter, space, energy, or time, where did the singularity come from? What forces acted upon it to cause an explosion? How did you know? How did the whole thing happen?
It's kind of fascinating, huh? Amazing. Yes. I mean, the scientists have basically extracted extrapolated backwards using principles of physics, and proven that nothing could have existed, except for a transcendent creator. Now, here's where we get into something, I think is just kind of fun. And that is that,
you know, it's been pointed out that because science cannot explain where the singularity came from, how it exploded, and how the process happened to, you know, to create such an intricate and perfect universe, because they cannot explain this, that they've come up with the saying that, you know, that basically, the atheists are saying, Give us one free miracle. And we can explain the rest. Give us one free miracle, and we can explain the rest. And,
you know, look,
science does not work that way. What kind of scientist says that, but this is, you know, and the scientists aren't really saying that, but you know, not explicitly, but implicitly, that's really what it comes down to. They're saying, we can't explain this. We can't explain this. So why should we believe in them if they can't explain it? But they're basically saying, give us this free miracle, and they can explain the rest. But first of all, no, you can't have it. You can't have this free miracle. You're going to tell us that something came from nothing. You're going to tell us that exploded for no reason. You're going to tell us that it became everything. And do you expect us to
believe that Why? I mean, why exactly.
You know, there's Do you know Freddie Prinze Jr. Freddie Prinze? Jr. Tell me about him. Okay. He was a comedian. Back in my day, when I was a child, a very famous comedian. And he had the stage routine, he got off this very funny line, where he was talking about how people
basically curse other people out in different areas of the country. Yeah, I forget exactly how it went. I remember the punchline, but you know, the, you know, the first.
You know, the first thing was like in San Francisco, they say, you know, you can imagine the expletive, you know, to tell a person, you know, and then in New York, they say, and in Chicago, they say, you know, so and in Atlanta, whatever, you know. And then they came, he came around to one of the big cities and they say, and such and such city, they say, trust me.
Why should we trust you? Why? I mean, just because you're a scientist. You're a scientist who can't explain it. What kind of scientist is that? So? So look, the point is that they're saying number one, you know, give us a free miracle. We explain and can explain the rest? No, we're not going to give you that. Okay, you got to explain it. You say you're a man of science. You say, you know, I mean, you have bought your box yourself and you have painted yourself into this corner. Okay.
But I tell you what, I'll make a deal with you.
I'll give you that free miracle. But you've got to give me one.
I mean, is that a fair deal? Sounds good to me. What's, what's the deal? Okay, well, look, I mean, this is trade off, okay. You're telling me to trust you. You're telling me to give you a free miracle.
I'm just saying, Okay, first, I tell you what, just for the sake of argument, I'll give you that free miracle. All right? You're saying that the singularity came from nowhere and exploded into everything for reasons you don't understand? And yet, you're asking me to give that to you. Okay? I'll give you that. But give me one, give, give me a miracle. Okay? miracle I'm asking for is give me the existence of a creator, which makes more sense. In the model you've described, then your explanation, which has nothing, okay. At least my explanation? It makes sense. Okay, a transcendent creator, that existed beyond the limits of space and time. The one who created everything now at
least we we have an explanation, but Okay, that's your miracle. This is mine. Now, let's see where we can go with it.
I said, I'll give you one miracle. Right. Now and let's make this like, you know, an open, open invitation, we'll call the atheist to miracles. Okay, a miracle. The miracle for the ace, a miracle for the atheist to the Richard Dawkins out there. Okay, do the Sam Harris out there to anybody who wants to try to refute this? Here's the deal. Okay. We've all been challenged to all atheists out there from Dr. Lawrence Brown, we've given you that miracle. Okay, go with it. Now you've given you have to be fair, you have to give us the miracle of a transcendent creator existing before all of this happened. Now, let's go with it from there.
Here's the problem. For the atheist, they have to explain how the Big Bang violated the first law of thermodynamics, that energy and matter in a closed system cannot be created or destroyed.
So you're saying that everything came from nothing, that violates the first law of thermodynamics. So you're needing a second miracle,
you're needing you're needing a miracle to explain a law of science that that you cannot break,
then you need a third miracle, because the concept of the Big Bang violates the second law of thermodynamics, which is that in a closed system, entropy will increase entropy, think of entropy as randomness, okay? Things become more random, unless an external force exerts control over it. So think of your teenager's bedroom. Okay, the sinks, the kitchen sink, and the dishes in it, right? A chemical,
you know, you know, a chemical process or a complex physical process, all of these things, unless there is an external control over it, you know, unless there's somebody to pick up those clothes in the bedroom, you know, to wash the dishes and put them in order to control the chemical reaction to control the complex physical process, unless there's an external force that is controlling that to establish order. Instead, it will degenerate into a state of higher entropy, more randomness, okay. And that tends towards chaos. And so the scientists are basically saying that the second law of thermodynamics is that everything degenerates into chaos or into increased entropy, increased
randomness, except for except for the one most cataclysmic event in the you know, the universe, actually the creation of the universe, and that is the Big Bang, the explosion, no, in that case, in that case, it all happened. Everything came from nothing. And, and it expanded out into this universe of such intricacy that it is defined by this huge number of finely tuned finely tuned, physical constants.
So that's the that's the next miracle they need.
So they need I mean, it was one miracle. It's one miracle. Okay, now there's more. All right, we're giving. I'm saying fair trade. Yeah. Okay, one one, but they're gonna they're gonna need more now. Yeah, I'm saying look, okay, just fair trade. I'm giving you the miracle of the singularity being there and exploding. But now you've got to give me the miracle of there being a creator. Okay, and let's work from there. I can explain everything. From the first miracle you've given me there was a transcendent creator who created everything he used the singularity. He, you know, he created the singularity. The singularity didn't came from come from anywhere. He created the singularity. It
exploded outwards under his control, which is which is why the universe exists in the perfection that it does because it's under his control. This was this was the mechanism that our Creator used to create the universe, okay? That that something did not come from nothing.
Okay. It's very important to
Something didn't come from nothing. That only applies to a closed system,
a closed system with no creator, something came from the Creator is the creator created. Okay? It's the Creator who controlled it. So again, second law of thermodynamics, that's the external force, controlling the expansion of the universe and keeping it from degenerating into, into chaos.
But for the scientists, they need a second miracle, they need to be able to explain violation of the first law of thermodynamics, they need a second miracle, a third miracle, they need to be able to explain how the expansion of the universe violates the law of entropy. And they need more miracles because it just goes on and on and out and via evolution. Okay, you get to the point where they are saying, you know, they they are explaining the origin of biologic species, animals or plants, you know, so on. They are explaining the origin of biologic logic species and the diversity within those species.
By the process of natural selection, stop.
First of all, where did the biologic species come? come from? That is, have you ever heard of chemical evolution? Tell us for the audience, most people probably haven't. Okay, chemical evolution, chemical evolution is the process by which I mean, it's the theory, but it's the, the theory is that, in the beginning, there was no biological material. And on earth, it was all base elements. And so the theory of chemical evolution is that these base elements, using through the forces of nature and random events, were able to combine into the building blocks of life amino acids, which then joined together into proteins, which then folded into functional forms, etc, etc,
etc. Now, scientists have basically proven
eminent sciences. So basically, you know, drawn this into question, because the original experiments that were done by Stanley,
Stanley Miller and URIs laboratory, were flawed, he was using the wrong chemicals, the chemicals that he used, it did not simulate the chemicals that were in existence in the primordial Earth. But further Furthermore, when you extrapolate out the statistics, and when you do a statistical analysis of how, you know how many events would be necessary, how many random events would be necessary to lead to the development of just simply one functional protein functional protein? Okay, the chance of that happening exceeds the number of events, the number of events in our universe over time.
It's not plausible, okay. So you need another miracle, you need an A miracle to explain how base elements developed into functioning biological material, but then you need the biggest miracle. Okay? And the biggest miracle is where does life come from? Even if, okay, even if you accept this process, even if you say, Okay, fine. Yeah, I mean, you know, you combine the different elements, they all bump into one another, and under the influence of heat, and so on. And so the, you know, they develop the building blocks, and they combine into functional proteins, and a bunch of those proteins get together and form a cell and so on and so on, so forth. You know, where did the life
come from? Now, we talked about this in the last episode, right? You know, where did the life come from?
You know, this is something that cannot be defined, you know, people die, and they cannot be resuscitated. And you have in front of you.
A completely functioning human body. Alright, but a dead one. And sometimes you can bring it back with CPR, and sometimes you can't, why can't you bring that one back? all the organs are working? Right? The physiology is there.
But you can't bring it back? What is that? What is that property of life that we can't capture? We can't, we can't put it into a body. We cannot make something live, like we talked about before you can Frankenstein together an animal from functioning organs, but you can't make it live. I told you about this cockatoo just for the audience from last time.
You know, I have this cockatoo that, that I left for two days in the care of another person and it will add itself to death out of mourning. Right now two days is not enough time to starve to death. It's not enough time to dehydrate. Remember, we're talking about a bird there there. There are birds that migrate 1000s of miles, you know with minimal eating, minimal drinking, and they make these long, laborious journeys losing a huge percentage of their body weight and so on and so forth. You're telling me a cockatoo can't survive with food and water in its cage for two days. You know it died out of mourning. You have you know animals have the ability to die. Just
Sort of willing themselves to death. And so there you have a biological, you know, material that completely intact all the organs functioning science cannot bring that back to life. So here's where again, they need the the biggest miracle life. Where did that come from?
Okay, so, you know, we've made a deal. Okay, me and the atheist, I'm just open challenge now to all the atheist saying this is challenge the Sam Harris to the Sam Harris to the Richard Dawkins to the Lawrence Krauss to anybody out there who wants to just tackle this issue I'm just saying, I give you that i
i don't believe in it. I mean, there's no reason why I should give you that the singularity just came from nothing and burst into everything. But to be fair, I gave you that if you give me a transcendent creator, both of them. Both of them are, you know, amazing concepts. But the atheists are always asking, okay, you know, who created the earth? Well, God, well, you know, who created the universe? God, and then they say, well, who created God?
And they say, gotcha. Okay, right.
Yes, the atheist. Okay, who created? You know, where did the earth come from? Oh, that came from, you know, the Big Bang. Okay. Where did the big Pancras come from? Well, that came from a singularity. We know that from the Penrose Hawking model that you know, the singularity formed and, okay, and where did the singularity come from? That a same argument, this is why it should be a fair exchange, okay, you can answer they can answer that argument. Okay. And I can answer, you know, where God came from, all I can say is, I believe in God and His messengers.
Right, and they, they can say, I believe in the singularity. Okay, fine.
But now, let's move from there.
With the concept of a transcendent creator, we can explain absolutely everything, we can explain that he used the Big Bang as a tool for creation in the universe we can use and we can explain the diversity of species we can, can explain the property of life within his creation, we can explain,
you know, the creation of something from nothing, it wasn't something from nothing, it was something from our Creator. We can explain the control over the universe. Why, why our universe is defined by all of these exquisitely fine tuned physical constants.
And we can explain many other things as well. That cannot be explained with atheism. atheism requires a miracle. Separate from the first one to explain each one of these things, and many more, and, and such a long list that they cannot explain. I'll tell you a funny story. I was watching a video on YouTube. Okay, Richard Dawkins was, was asked, Where did life come from? And from what I remember, I mean, you can look up the tube on, you can look up the YouTube video, but he was asked, Where did life come from? He said, I don't know.
Is it but I have faith. If I remember correctly, these words were. It's hard to go back. But I remember being so struck by what he said, because I think he I think he used the word faith. I think he said, You know, I have faith, that science will figure it out. And I was watching this and I was thinking, well, Happy Days, huh? So now we see that Richard Dawkins is a man of faith. It's just that he's worshiping something else. He's worshipping science, or he's worshiping worshiping his own intellect. This is their God.
Their their God is themselves, their minds, their intellect. Tell us we're almost out of time. So that's the one thing the open challenge, the miracle, and where do they go from here? The sincere person, not the one that's stubborn and resilient, and someone who's really and many have come out of this show? Where do they go from here? A couple minutes. Okay. I mean, just very quickly, a sincere humble I am seeker likes what you have to say and makes more sense. Where do they go from here? Okay, I understand first of all, first of all, I mean, I invite you to my website, level truth.com. It's changing name to Dr. lbb.com. That's not doctor the full word but just Dr. LBB calm.
So I invite you to go there. But the The main thing is, the main thing is that as we have spoken about before, I think the main difficulty for most scientists, when they have an awaking awakening of belief, when they start out upon a spiritual quest, is that they cannot find a religion that conforms to their scientific beliefs. They just can't do it. And my point is
Science criticizes Christianity on the basis of their theory or theology. Okay, science criticizes, excuse me, scientists create
backup. Scientists criticize
Christianity on the basis of its theology. Now, so to watch why, okay, I criticize Christianity on the basis of its theology, read my works. The first and final commandment read misguided, they're free downloads from my website. The message is that there is a religion out there that conforms with what we understand of scientific principles and that religion is Islam. Think about it, think about it. Most atheists know that I'm telling the truth. When I when I when I point out to them, you never criticize Islam on the basis of its theology. You always criticize Islam on the basis of things that you don't like, most of which are wrong. You just don't know it because you haven't really looked
into it in depth. You've dismissed it because you've heard Muslims are terrorists. Women are subjugated stoning you know stoning of the infidel or, you know, stoning of the of the person who commits adultery, etc. You don't like these things, and you say, okay, no, no, that can't be the right religion. That's not the way to choose a religion.
You know, learn the theology. This is a religion that believes in one God. This is a religion that believes in the continuity and the chain of prophethood. And, and the books and the messengers that came along with it. What problem do you have with that? Okay, we're if, if you, if you study the religion, you will also find Islam as a religion of science. It's the religion in which most of the science is, in which most of the sciences took their origin, because Muslims were encouraged to gather knowledge. So that's where physiology came from. That's where medicine started. That's where mathematics, chemistry, physics, so many of our sciences were born out of the, you know, out of the
you know, out of the Muslims, following the commandment to seek knowledge and to develop, you know, develop knowledge. So, not only is that a religion that conforms with scientific principles, that's a religion that basically is the beginning of most of our sciences, where we call in this again, atheists, the miracle that I see an atheist need, what was it again?
I would call this the atheist Muslim deal. This is a deal. I like the atheist Muslim day open challenge to this atheist, Sam Harris, if his people get in touch with our people, and then he wants to come on and have a nice talk with you here in a dish. Are you open? That sounds fine with me. The challenges there. Thank you very much. We're out of time.
Thanks so much. Thank you for tuning in. Follow like on our Facebook, Twitter, subscribe. If you haven't already. Answer the challenge. We'll see you next time. God want to be with you. So I'll make