Brother Mansur has finally been convinced to join Twitter, inshallah follow him as he answers some of the arguments that have been put forward on his official Twitter account @MansurXAhmed
@GuruTruthSpeak your mansur has the reasoning skill of an idiot, he should stay away from science if he doesn't understand it he had his ass kicked by this young lad.😂😂😂
@@ericdumont610 I think the distinction here is one should base their belief on what they know and not what they don't know. The young boy, I like his sincerity, is basing his belief on something he doesn't fully understand (you can clearly see that when he can't explain it in layman's terms.) Mansur is basing his belief on what he knows and doesn't reach beyond it. That's called being rational.
Jacob VG How does atheism or agnosticism is more sensical than religion? If you want to get really deep. Believing in a Creator is actually logical. It’s a metaphysical thing, you cannot examine it using science. It’s the wrong tool to use. Consciousness is also metaphysical, yet science cannot detect this thing. Yeah you can say that science can examine the brain activity and look at it and see different part of the brain light up BUT how does it explain how consciousness work? It doesn’t and they’re still struggling to figure that out. Consciousness is not a physical or materialistic thing. Nothing is the absence of everything. The fact that most atheists believes it’s possible for something to arise from absolute nothingness is nonsensical. But most of them remain “I don’t know”.
Jacob VG You do realize that those atheists that believes in absolute nothingness can create something is a fallacy right? A humble position would be agnosticism yet they don’t even use logic to recognize there is a Creator.
John Don if god exist it can happen prophet mohamed pbuh to fly with abruqa but how the hell did u believe the universe came from absolutely nothiness is dat ur logical
@@user-el6xm2pk7x Yes, that was clear from when he began speaking Arabic. But why should I care if I don't believe the Quran is legitimate in the first place? I could say that jesus is God, and when you tell me there's no evidence for that, I could simply say "you do realise this argument is from the Bible itself?" I appreciate this can be difficult for you, but take some time to contemplate that perhaps the Quran is not pure truth (much like the Bible).
@@mubarakisonline Oh do they? I'd very much like to see this evidence. Because from where I'm standing, the evidence favours atheism pretty strongly. And no, the Muslims were confused, by Mansur's own admission (nothing to be ashamed of, it's my fault for not speaking in more layman's terms). Even if you were right, that doesn't grant you the ability to understand everything. Unless of course, you are God.
@@mubarakisonline Good. Then you've realised that I never claimed everything was possible except god (in fact I made the point of saying God is one possibility of many). I think you may have misunderstood the 'realisation' that I came to - I maintain that time is neither linear nor infinite - rather it is curved four dimensional. I think the problem was the Muslims were unable to understand much of the technical terminology I used (which is my fault, I should have spoke more in layman's terms). In this sense, you could perhaps say that existence is non-temporally eternal.
@@UltimateFreekickerzdok I can't quite remember what I was feeling at that point, but it might have been poorly concealed exasperation at the reference to the quran. Mansur is a lovely bloke but you theists need to realise that it's meaningless to use your qurans and bibles and torahs to argue against nonbelievers, since we don't believe them to be legit in the first place.
@@camusminor Certainly, good on you for being interested. Steven Hawking's work would be a good place to start, in my opinion (particularly 'A brief history of time'). His sequel with Leonard Mlodinow is also great. Hawking is the one who sets out this proposal best, but he refers a lot to the work by Galileo, Newton, Einstein, Feynman. Kant's antinomies are also interesting to get an understanding of. For more general works on the nature of time and existence, Sean Carroll and Lee Smolin are pretty clued up too. Lawrence Krauss is also pretty smart, but I think he's somewhat notorious among believers because of his questionable moral statements, but his 'a universe from nothing' is still worth reading. Hope that's all useful.
It's not necessarily "they". It's me, an individual. I suggest you read what the cosmologists have to say on this matter (I promise you they know more than you, Mansur and certainly me).
He picked up some particle physic theories and consider himself a physicist...he may say e=hf then he has to explain what is e he will reply energy than come question what is energy he will present e=mc2...what is matter...and what is c2..what is h...it is too deep for a Lyman like me...case closed... Mohammad shahzada
@@shahidanoor7165 Wrong. I unashamedly admitted to not being an expert in physics whatsoever. I'm just interested in the subject and have done some reading into this. The theory I was discussing is actually a highly regarded model in cosmology. All the rest of what you said is nothing I ever actually made reference to. I'm sorry that you don't understand the technicality behind it, but that's never a reason to just give up and say 'case closed'.
@@jacobvg3204 Young man as a 3 dimensional being, it is very difficult to understand a 4 dimensional model of time. And I guarantee you most people will find it easier to believe in a possibility of god over a 4d time model, where time is not "infinite" but is circular so it keeps looping with no beginning or end.
@@stephenburdess2914 Did you go to school? If we have 3 options, x, y and z, but we don't know which is true, our uncertainty does not constitute one of the aforementioned options? Why is that so difficult to grasp?
@@jacobvg3204 What I'm saying is that the third option (z) is the uncertainty. Unless you can prove x or y, for now, z is default correct (i.e., the *truth* is that we don't know). It's not that uncertainty is "correct," because by definition it can't be. But it is still *true* that we don't *know.* And, no, I didn't go to school. I went to prison. Lol
Great conversation Masha'Allah. I've seen the guy Mansur was talking to has been replying to some comments in this comment box, and his name is Jacob. Jacob was respectful may Allah guide him 👍
@@jacobvg3204 You're welcome! And also thank you because you're not wrong in your guess; I can always be misguided so the same applies to me as a reminder to stay steadfast. All the best Jacob 😀
I really enjoyed this discussion. Heard a lot of mansur. This young white guy has very good manners. And seems open minded. Willing to discuss. Not just shout his point across. I'd like to hear more of him.
Thank you Zoro, I appreciate your comment. I try and be civil at the best of times, and Mansur is a very decent bloke, and thoroughly deserving of my respect. I hope I can appear in more dawah videos for you and others.
Can someone please explain how time can bend. How can it bend if it is simply a manmade concept to divide the earth's orbit of the sun into 365 parts, or a day into 24 segments. Time does not exist. The only thing that exists is our perception of the position of the earth in relation to the sun, wether it's the orbit or the spin.
Sure. You're correct that human divisions of time are manmade and thus arbitrary. However, the fact that years, hours, milliseconds etc are arbitrary does not mean that time is a mere illusion (though the philosopher John Mctaggart would agree with you that time doesn't exist). I think we can safely say mctaggart is wrong however, due to the fact that as well as the psychological arrow of time, we also have the cosmological and thermodynamic arrows of time.
Why talk about the Universe and its existence and how it existed? This so-called atheist would have first started with his own body and the complexity of the organs that make it up ... for example, see the extraordinary link between brain, glands and hormones and their roles in safeguarding our body. Allah said in Qur’an : (77) Does man not consider that We created him from a [mere] sperm-drop - then at once he is a clear adversary? (78) And he presents for Us an example and forgets his [own] creation. He says, "Who will give life to bones while they are disintegrated?" (79) Say, "He will give them life who produced them the first time; and He is, of all creation, Knowing." (80) [It is] He who made for you from the green tree, fire, and then from it you ignite. (81) Is not He who created the heavens and the earth Able to create the likes of them? Yes, [it is so]; and He is the Knowing Creator. (82) His command is only when He intends a thing that He says to it, "Be," and it is. (83) So exalted is He in whose hand is the realm of all things, and to Him you will be returned. Soura Yassin.
Well, we started with the universe because the Kalam cosmological argument was brought up. It's sort of worthless bringing up the Quran if we haven't both established its truth.
Why, then, do you rely on philosophers and physicists to support your argument? They, too, speak of things that aren’t established facts, just one of the ways of explaining existence.
Over reliance on circular polemical-philosophical jargon only to leads to more technical nonsensical jargon coupled with hubris and rejection of the Creator only leads to further and further misguidance. Just keep it clear, simple, be sincere and ask Allah for guidance and he will guide you.
Firstly, I over relied on nothing. There are a number of intellectual talking points I could have raised, we really only scratched the surface. This was more physics jargon than philosophy, but I understand your point, I should have spoken in clearer, easier terms. My rejection of your creator is not hubris in itself I'm afraid. Just as your rejection of my objectivism is not hubris. Please don't just throw around words just because you disagree. Unfortunately, whilst I will try to be clearer in future, and would regard myself as a sincere chap, this is an issue that requires intense analysis from philosophy, science, history and theology. We cannot overlook these, nor dismiss people who use technical arguments simply because people don't understand them. Please, read Ayn Rand's philosophy and see if you can open your heart to the truth, just as I will endeavour to do with the quran.
Man if this atheist boy met Bro Shabir Yusuf he will be blown by his own intellect :) But Bro Mansur did a great Job. Hopefully, the young atheist can overcome his biased and have Hidayah. Amiin
I don't know of shabir yusuf, I'll try and find some of his debates. Perhaps he will be blown by my intellect ;) Hopefully you will have hidayah and come to the truth of Objectivism.
search the channel @alltruthrevealed shabir yusuf is a living legend he talks very politely and always open people perspective by their own intellect and understanding.
@Ayra Qureshi 🆓🇵🇸 Yes, I will. I've been going much less frequently whilst at uni, especially during Covid, but I should be around a bit this summer. There are more recent videos too (which are much better than this, at risk of sounding self-congratulatory).
Well, logically, its pretty simple to deduce more options. Something Began, something has always existed, something neither began nor always existed, something both began and always existed.
the two option something does not have began nor always existed we are waitin to began to exist it doest yet exist nd did not began to start beginin the second option something begin and always existed its contradiction it just began how can it exist before coz u tellin us that it has beginin
I don't wish to be presumptuous, but I think you might find I'm more well informed that you might think, thank you. There are plenty of people older than Mansur who I could invoke as an argument, but we're not getting anywhere by arguing on grounds of age, thank you.
Hmm! Existence has always been, if something is, it is in existence, Much the same as an invention or a discovery! A invention is a discovery of elements that are artificially arranged, as opposed to it being found in nature, therefore it's the elements that are in existence, the same as everything "that is"
Your model goes against the basic laws of thermodynamics. In order for an invention to be invented it doesn't happen by randomness. You have to add energy/effort to make things "work." If that wasn't the case light bulbs would light itself without any electricity/volts/watts to drive it. Nothing comes from "free." (Energy wise.) You have to "spend" energy to create order/ work. You're proposing that order happens by itself. I'm here to remind you of the 2nd law of thermodynamics which says that cannot and doesn't happen.
@@jacobvg3204 your laundry will never come out folded neatly and in order no matter how many times you try. Randomness creating order goes against science.
@@GhettoArabSage I see what you're trying to say but I wouldn't have phrased it the way you did. But yes, disorder generally arises from order, entropy is a thing, thermodynamics exist. It just so happens that I'm aware of this. What exactly do you think this information does for my argument?
the moment he said he has a 3rd option i gave up on this video even tho i kept watching to understand his 3rd option then i gave up on him again for not having a 3rd option
Yes, I realise I was at fault for speaking in too complicated terms. But you see, how can I be expected to show acceptance and openness to Islam, if you will just give up on anything an atheist says that you don't understand? Now that we're in hindsight, would you like me to try and elucidate myself better?
good debate...the young kid did well to elucidate what scientists have hypothesized....unfortunately those findings dont satisfy those looking for EASY answers...i dont believe in easy answers,
I agree, the young lad made a good attempt at trying to put across some theoretical science. However, I feel like you're falsely conflating 'easy' answers to logical and rational answers. Correct me if I'm wrong.
No, Einstein proposed the gravitational field is represented by curved spacetime. The Euclidean spacetime arrives from incorporating Feynman's sum over histories, which uses imaginary time.
Yeah, that's very cute, except most of the time nobody's got anything very interesting to say. Try to be a little less arrogant. Perhaps it is you who should be listening more; you might learn something.
@@hamidchakir3257 It's only arrogant insofar as it's true. That the majority of my interlocutors are incompetent is not my fault. You are the one who presumed to know that I'm the one who needs to shut up and listen to people like you, on no basis whatsoever. Read a book, for Christ's sake.
@@jacobvg3204 If you feel a person is incompetent then you must be too for choosing him as your adversary in a conversation, or even to watch and comment on his videos 😂
@@hamidchakir3257 Well I probably don't know someone is incompetent/ignorant until after speaking to them, do I? As for commenting, I'm replying to people who are engaging with my position, sincerely or otherwise. Aside from that, it's just interesting to me seeing how different people respond to certain facts and arguments. Nice try though.
Depending on intelligent n bright cosmologists biologists researchers philosophers etc who hold atheistic positions eloquently explain scientifically n materialistically n mathematically all the queries of reality without admitting or accepting the limited capability we have of understanding or comprehensing the unknown. By acknowledging the existence of a Creator or Designer who has wisely communicated with us through His chosen prophets n His Scriptures seriously these brilliant but arrogant n biased geniuses could formulate formidable conclusions! The reason being we individuals having limited time for proof n observable solid evidence during our brief lifetimes! By acknowledging Him these brilliant geniuses in their respective fields can arrive at believable n evidential conclusions to query situations of existence! Most unfortunately end their lifetimes with "we do not know" to most of their theories n models!
So for the religious, you can't say you don't know, and "it's necessary" to take a position that is according to your myth or the other where one that is wrong, pathetic.
I completely agree with you, there's nothing wrong with admitting lack of knowledge, but please refrain from calling them pathetic. I only ask this because it tarnishes the atheist argument and they can turn round and say that we are being unreasonable to them.
Who said that LOL? . We say “we don’t know “ a lot( a lottttt) , we say it when we don’t know, AND we say the opposite “ we know “ when we KNOW, as simple as that brother in humanity.
This comment proves how little you have understood, I'm sorry to say it. If you refrain from offering me mere insult again, I can educate you as to how this is not the case, if you like?
@@jacobvg3204 Dude take it easy why you are replying to everyone.Your in this video so people talk about you ,don't be obsessed with what people say learn about islam and read the quran,that was a good discussion May Allah guide all of us.
@@eddyyusuf7034 No of course, I get what you're saying, but I'm afraid I don't possess the restraint to ignore the comments. Whilst I'm sure to keep myself completely civil to people (and many Muslims, to their credit, have done the same), I just can't stand by while people demonstrate their obvious misunderstanding or misrepresentation of my argument. For instance, I feel obliged say to you, that I am currently reading the Quran and have been educating myself about religion for some time. Thank you for your comment and I'm glad you enjoyed the discussion. May you find truth.
do you mean scientist bringing new religion to follow .in this religion where is the justice ,how to fix this is justice through scientist for helping poor people
The justice comes from the implementation of capitalism my friend, as Rand herself said, this is the only way towards actualising rational self-interest and thus happiness.
Atheist you don't see your body, how is it complicated, would you think that nature which is doesn't have mind can do all this complexity ..... where is your mind ??
@@jacobvg3204 whatever bro just make the prayer of a skeptic, if u exist guide me to the ultimate truth. secondly bro if you are sure about your stance why wont u pick the Quran and give it a read.
@@blasty-gg Well I tend not to pray these days bro, since I know from my own experience and from experimental evidence that prayer is ineffective. However, I have asked this multiple times, so if God does exist, he will have heard if he's omniscient, and my atheism will be a part of his plan. Meanwhile, I'll search for the ultimate truth without him. I'm not sure about anything but my own existence, I'm just very very confident in a great many things. I don't know why you'd ask that, since I'm reading at the Quran at present. If you think you are sure about your beliefs (or even if you're not, which is even better), why don't you give the Fountainhead a read? We should all be exposing ourselves to accounts of the truth, as you've rightly pointed out. Although your response of 'whatever' suggests you're uninterested and not as open minded, but I'll give you the benefit of the doubt.
The atheist confused himself.by the constitution of constellation of the matter of quantum and its purpose to manipulate its massive manifestation of the germination of the earth in by space time of the matter of existence to be.this.my third option. Mansur:🤪🤪🤪
There is zero evidence for a god or gods. That goes for all 3,000+. Atheism is the default position. And because no one can *know* whether one of these thousands of gods exists, every single human is, by definition, agnostic. Game. Set. Match.
@@fengsports2063 Hi, I'd just like to say, you can't actually be 100% sure of anything other than your own existence (although you can be 99.9% on many things), and also, I'm afraid the Quran is not evidence.
@@UltimateHibz agnosticism refers to knowledge, whereas atheism refers to belief. Two different things. The default position can be both agnosticism and atheism.
@@UltimateHibz So if it's possible for something to always be there, why do we need a god at all? The universe can have just always been here! Still no need for a god.
Mansur says several times that there can only be two possible answers. Maybe... i have thought similarly many times watching magic tricks, only to find that the actually answer was something outside of what I thought the set of possible answers was. This simple fact belies the problem in Mansur's argument. Sometimes we just don't know all the possibilities.
I believe you've just made a false analogy there. You're comparison to a magic trick to the potential start of existence doesn't work. Pulling a specific card from a deck could be done in several ways - and then someone could find a new way of doing it. However, whether the universe came into existence or if it always existed is a different matter altogether. In terms of comparing it and using an analogy. It would be more of a closed question (yes or no) whereas your analogy of a magic trick is an open question.
Man if this atheist boy met Bro Shabir Yusuf he will be blown by his own intellect :) But Bro Mansur did a great Job. Hopefully, the young atheist can overcome his biased and have Hidayah. Amiin
Brother Mansur has finally been convinced to join Twitter, inshallah follow him as he answers some of the arguments that have been put forward on his official Twitter account @MansurXAhmed
Lol. Finally been convinced... Haha
May Allah swt guide this young atheist and give him happyness . He was really respectful
Thank you sir, may you be guided as well.
One of the better conversations with an atheist
Thanks bro Mansur and may God guide this boy to the truth.
I hope you find truth as well sir, thank you.
Ameen
@GuruTruthSpeak your mansur has the reasoning skill of an idiot, he should stay away from science if he doesn't understand it he had his ass kicked by this young lad.😂😂😂
@@ericdumont610 I think the distinction here is one should base their belief on what they know and not what they don't know. The young boy, I like his sincerity, is basing his belief on something he doesn't fully understand (you can clearly see that when he can't explain it in layman's terms.)
Mansur is basing his belief on what he knows and doesn't reach beyond it. That's called being rational.
Were they created out of nothing.
Or were they created themselves.
None of the above.
This young man is very respectful. I'll give him credits for that.
Thank you.
Very convinced by Mansur and make sense. Thank you for sharing the videos that enlighten us the muslims as well.
Wow, how much they try ultimately to deny the CREATOR.
Really its all just nonsense. How simple and straightforward is the Islamic model.
Completely nonsensical when taken to its logical conclusion, just like all other religions.
Jacob VG How does atheism or agnosticism is more sensical than religion?
If you want to get really deep. Believing in a Creator is actually logical. It’s a metaphysical thing, you cannot examine it using science. It’s the wrong tool to use.
Consciousness is also metaphysical, yet science cannot detect this thing. Yeah you can say that science can examine the brain activity and look at it and see different part of the brain light up BUT how does it explain how consciousness work? It doesn’t and they’re still struggling to figure that out. Consciousness is not a physical or materialistic thing.
Nothing is the absence of everything. The fact that most atheists believes it’s possible for something to arise from absolute nothingness is nonsensical. But most of them remain “I don’t know”.
Jacob VG You do realize that those atheists that believes in absolute nothingness can create something is a fallacy right?
A humble position would be agnosticism yet they don’t even use logic to recognize there is a Creator.
Asif I know akhi, the prophet Muhammed fly on donkey to see the heaven fml haha
John Don if god exist it can happen prophet mohamed pbuh to fly with abruqa but how the hell did u believe the universe came from absolutely nothiness is dat ur logical
Awesome 👏🏻 video SCDawah
Another confused atheist. Atheist doesn't have any ground to stand on...😀😁😆
I think it was some of our Muslim audience that was confused my friend 😂
@@jacobvg3204 you realise the arguments Mansoor are making are from the Quran itself
@@jacobvg3204
Muslims have solid evidence. So why would they confuse.
@@user-el6xm2pk7x Yes, that was clear from when he began speaking Arabic. But why should I care if I don't believe the Quran is legitimate in the first place? I could say that jesus is God, and when you tell me there's no evidence for that, I could simply say "you do realise this argument is from the Bible itself?" I appreciate this can be difficult for you, but take some time to contemplate that perhaps the Quran is not pure truth (much like the Bible).
@@mubarakisonline Oh do they? I'd very much like to see this evidence. Because from where I'm standing, the evidence favours atheism pretty strongly. And no, the Muslims were confused, by Mansur's own admission (nothing to be ashamed of, it's my fault for not speaking in more layman's terms). Even if you were right, that doesn't grant you the ability to understand everything. Unless of course, you are God.
I'm thinking why Hatun doesn't even bother to hackles into this type of conversations 🤔
jazak Allah khair brother Mansur .
Atheist :: "Everything is possible except god". Hahahaha
You keep making this comment. I never actually said that. Have you actually watched the whole discussion?
@@jacobvg3204
Yeah.. I watched the whole. Finally you've realized that something must have always existed. Good progress..
@@mubarakisonline Good. Then you've realised that I never claimed everything was possible except god (in fact I made the point of saying God is one possibility of many). I think you may have misunderstood the 'realisation' that I came to - I maintain that time is neither linear nor infinite - rather it is curved four dimensional. I think the problem was the Muslims were unable to understand much of the technical terminology I used (which is my fault, I should have spoke more in layman's terms). In this sense, you could perhaps say that existence is non-temporally eternal.
@@jacobvg3204 Jacob at 16:17 when brother mansour speaks about islam and Allah, you eyes fall down and you seem weird, why?
@@UltimateFreekickerzdok I can't quite remember what I was feeling at that point, but it might have been poorly concealed exasperation at the reference to the quran. Mansur is a lovely bloke but you theists need to realise that it's meaningless to use your qurans and bibles and torahs to argue against nonbelievers, since we don't believe them to be legit in the first place.
Very clear position. Thats the argument of Islam. Very logical.
@@abdourahman873 did you apostate?
@@abdourahman873 Good for you! I hope life is happier now you are free from religion.
Your comment itself doesnt make any sense but ok.
Great debate at least no one is shouting and each one is trying to understand the other person’s perspective
Much appreciated. I have to say, Mansur is a complete gentleman and it was a pleasure to speak with him.
Jacob VG im still very curious as to the third option presented. can you please direct me to some reading material?
@@camusminor Certainly, good on you for being interested. Steven Hawking's work would be a good place to start, in my opinion (particularly 'A brief history of time'). His sequel with Leonard Mlodinow is also great. Hawking is the one who sets out this proposal best, but he refers a lot to the work by Galileo, Newton, Einstein, Feynman. Kant's antinomies are also interesting to get an understanding of. For more general works on the nature of time and existence, Sean Carroll and Lee Smolin are pretty clued up too. Lawrence Krauss is also pretty smart, but I think he's somewhat notorious among believers because of his questionable moral statements, but his 'a universe from nothing' is still worth reading. Hope that's all useful.
9:46
He just doesn't want to subscribe. Hahahaha. Lol.😂
Not without evidence I don't!
The young guy is very gentle and respectful, may he find the truth
When atheist come to dead end, their only respond is I don't know.
They know picking one of the two options will mean theists win.
Therefore they have some imaginary non-existent 3rd option.
It's not necessarily "they". It's me, an individual. I suggest you read what the cosmologists have to say on this matter (I promise you they know more than you, Mansur and certainly me).
He picked up some particle physic theories and consider himself a physicist...he may say e=hf then he has to explain what is e he will reply energy than come question what is energy he will present e=mc2...what is matter...and what is c2..what is h...it is too deep for a Lyman like me...case closed... Mohammad shahzada
@@shahidanoor7165 Wrong. I unashamedly admitted to not being an expert in physics whatsoever. I'm just interested in the subject and have done some reading into this. The theory I was discussing is actually a highly regarded model in cosmology. All the rest of what you said is nothing I ever actually made reference to. I'm sorry that you don't understand the technicality behind it, but that's never a reason to just give up and say 'case closed'.
@@jacobvg3204 Young man as a 3 dimensional being, it is very difficult to understand a 4 dimensional model of time.
And I guarantee you most people will find it easier to believe in a possibility of god over a 4d time model, where time is not "infinite" but is circular so it keeps looping with no beginning or end.
@@UltimateHibz You're completely right. The fact that people find it easier to believe doesn't make it true though.
At least the young guy is very humble and respectlful, contrary to many others these days.
The third option is we don't know.
You haven't understood if you're saying that. We don't KNOW for certain whether ANY of the options are true.
@@jacobvg3204 Your comment seems to confirm exactly what I said
Perfect thank you for agreeing.
@@stephenburdess2914 Did you go to school? If we have 3 options, x, y and z, but we don't know which is true, our uncertainty does not constitute one of the aforementioned options? Why is that so difficult to grasp?
@@jacobvg3204 What I'm saying is that the third option (z) is the uncertainty. Unless you can prove x or y, for now, z is default correct (i.e., the *truth* is that we don't know). It's not that uncertainty is "correct," because by definition it can't be. But it is still *true* that we don't *know.*
And, no, I didn't go to school. I went to prison. Lol
Great conversation Masha'Allah.
I've seen the guy Mansur was talking to has been replying to some comments in this comment box, and his name is Jacob.
Jacob was respectful may Allah guide him 👍
Thanks, back at you I guess
@@jacobvg3204
You're welcome! And also thank you because you're not wrong in your guess; I can always be misguided so the same applies to me as a reminder to stay steadfast.
All the best Jacob 😀
Anyone in Mecca at the moment? Really like to meet and talk with someone who follows Hyde Park SC arguments.
I really enjoyed this discussion. Heard a lot of mansur. This young white guy has very good manners. And seems open minded. Willing to discuss. Not just shout his point across. I'd like to hear more of him.
Thank you Zoro, I appreciate your comment. I try and be civil at the best of times, and Mansur is a very decent bloke, and thoroughly deserving of my respect. I hope I can appear in more dawah videos for you and others.
Can someone please explain how time can bend. How can it bend if it is simply a manmade concept to divide the earth's orbit of the sun into 365 parts, or a day into 24 segments. Time does not exist. The only thing that exists is our perception of the position of the earth in relation to the sun, wether it's the orbit or the spin.
Sure. You're correct that human divisions of time are manmade and thus arbitrary. However, the fact that years, hours, milliseconds etc are arbitrary does not mean that time is a mere illusion (though the philosopher John Mctaggart would agree with you that time doesn't exist). I think we can safely say mctaggart is wrong however, due to the fact that as well as the psychological arrow of time, we also have the cosmological and thermodynamic arrows of time.
Subhanallah..
08:45 a religious talking about reading something and not thinking of it lol
It was admittedly rather ironic.
Why talk about the Universe and its existence and how it existed?
This so-called atheist would have first started with his own body and the complexity of the organs that make it up ... for example, see the extraordinary link between brain, glands and hormones and their roles in safeguarding our body.
Allah said in Qur’an :
(77) Does man not consider that We created him from a [mere] sperm-drop - then at once he is a clear adversary?
(78) And he presents for Us an example and forgets his [own] creation. He says, "Who will give life to bones while they are disintegrated?"
(79) Say, "He will give them life who produced them the first time; and He is, of all creation, Knowing."
(80) [It is] He who made for you from the green tree, fire, and then from it you ignite.
(81) Is not He who created the heavens and the earth Able to create the likes of them? Yes, [it is so]; and He is the Knowing Creator.
(82) His command is only when He intends a thing that He says to it, "Be," and it is.
(83) So exalted is He in whose hand is the realm of all things, and to Him you will be returned.
Soura Yassin.
Well, we started with the universe because the Kalam cosmological argument was brought up. It's sort of worthless bringing up the Quran if we haven't both established its truth.
Why, then, do you rely on philosophers and physicists to support your argument?
They, too, speak of things that aren’t established facts, just one of the ways of explaining existence.
What about the stance that "existence may have began, or may have always been there, and we can not know which"?
Over reliance on circular polemical-philosophical jargon only to leads to more technical nonsensical jargon coupled with hubris and rejection of the Creator only leads to further and further misguidance.
Just keep it clear, simple, be sincere and ask Allah for guidance and he will guide you.
Firstly, I over relied on nothing. There are a number of intellectual talking points I could have raised, we really only scratched the surface. This was more physics jargon than philosophy, but I understand your point, I should have spoken in clearer, easier terms. My rejection of your creator is not hubris in itself I'm afraid. Just as your rejection of my objectivism is not hubris. Please don't just throw around words just because you disagree. Unfortunately, whilst I will try to be clearer in future, and would regard myself as a sincere chap, this is an issue that requires intense analysis from philosophy, science, history and theology. We cannot overlook these, nor dismiss people who use technical arguments simply because people don't understand them. Please, read Ayn Rand's philosophy and see if you can open your heart to the truth, just as I will endeavour to do with the quran.
Man if this atheist boy met Bro Shabir Yusuf he will be blown by his own intellect :) But Bro Mansur did a great Job. Hopefully, the young atheist can overcome his biased and have Hidayah. Amiin
I don't know of shabir yusuf, I'll try and find some of his debates. Perhaps he will be blown by my intellect ;) Hopefully you will have hidayah and come to the truth of Objectivism.
search the channel @alltruthrevealed shabir yusuf is a living legend he talks very politely and always open people perspective by their own intellect and understanding.
@Ayra Qureshi 🆓🇵🇸 Yes
@Ayra Qureshi 🆓🇵🇸 Yes, I will. I've been going much less frequently whilst at uni, especially during Covid, but I should be around a bit this summer. There are more recent videos too (which are much better than this, at risk of sounding self-congratulatory).
Well, logically, its pretty simple to deduce more options. Something Began, something has always existed, something neither began nor always existed, something both began and always existed.
the two option something does not have began nor always existed we are waitin to began to exist it doest yet exist nd did not began to start beginin
the second option something begin and always existed its contradiction it just began how can it exist before coz u tellin us that it has beginin
@@lacag-lacag lol, wut?
What is the difference between the 'universe' and 'existence'? I don't understand
Existence is self-explanatory. The universe may or may not be the totality of what is in existence.
Masha Allah, mey Allah bless brother mansur. Very intellectual dialog.
May Allah guide this nice man.
Thank you sir, may you find truth as well.
He is just a young chap, will be difficult for him to have a true argument with Mansur
I don't wish to be presumptuous, but I think you might find I'm more well informed that you might think, thank you. There are plenty of people older than Mansur who I could invoke as an argument, but we're not getting anywhere by arguing on grounds of age, thank you.
Hmm!
Existence has always been, if something is, it is in existence,
Much the same as an invention or a discovery!
A invention is a discovery of elements that are artificially arranged, as opposed to it being found in nature, therefore it's the elements that are in existence, the same as everything "that is"
Interesting point.
Your model goes against the basic laws of thermodynamics. In order for an invention to be invented it doesn't happen by randomness. You have to add energy/effort to make things "work." If that wasn't the case light bulbs would light itself without any electricity/volts/watts to drive it.
Nothing comes from "free." (Energy wise.) You have to "spend" energy to create order/ work. You're proposing that order happens by itself. I'm here to remind you of the 2nd law of thermodynamics which says that cannot and doesn't happen.
@@jacobvg3204 your laundry will never come out folded neatly and in order no matter how many times you try. Randomness creating order goes against science.
@@GhettoArabSage I see what you're trying to say but I wouldn't have phrased it the way you did. But yes, disorder generally arises from order, entropy is a thing, thermodynamics exist. It just so happens that I'm aware of this. What exactly do you think this information does for my argument?
In existence or not, only two binary choices, I'd of challenged his "absolute" statement
Please explain to us another model that satisfies our rational minds.
the moment he said he has a 3rd option i gave up on this video even tho i kept watching to understand his 3rd option then i gave up on him again for not having a 3rd option
Yes, I realise I was at fault for speaking in too complicated terms. But you see, how can I be expected to show acceptance and openness to Islam, if you will just give up on anything an atheist says that you don't understand? Now that we're in hindsight, would you like me to try and elucidate myself better?
❤❤
Just because you cant think of a third option doesn't mean there isn't one. This is an argument from ignorance fallacy.
good debate...the young kid did well to elucidate what scientists have hypothesized....unfortunately those findings dont satisfy those looking for EASY answers...i dont believe in easy answers,
I agree, the young lad made a good attempt at trying to put across some theoretical science. However, I feel like you're falsely conflating 'easy' answers to logical and rational answers. Correct me if I'm wrong.
"Notevenwrong" google that blog from Columbia University to clarify the nonesense.
You're completely right, and thank you.
@@Kashif-kq3vg Cheers, much appreciated.
A million models are brought forward, time and space etc etc yet the only two options are existence infinitesimal OR non existence into existence.
Stay away from science Mansur, you are not a scientist..😂😂😂
So according to him, nothing is something you that cannot be observed (particles) - that is not nothing.
No, that's actually not what I said my friend.
Einstein proposed four dimensional theory it is not euclidian theory... Mohammad shahzada
No, Einstein proposed the gravitational field is represented by curved spacetime. The Euclidean spacetime arrives from incorporating Feynman's sum over histories, which uses imaginary time.
i believe this guy came from the tree behind there . how do i came to this conclusion " i don't know"
Except that's a false analogy to what anyone has actually said. Try and analyse the argument a little more closely.
this kid will learn something once he learns how to listen first
Yeah, that's very cute, except most of the time nobody's got anything very interesting to say. Try to be a little less arrogant. Perhaps it is you who should be listening more; you might learn something.
@@jacobvg3204 you saying that most people don't have much to say is the peak of arrogant statements
@@hamidchakir3257 It's only arrogant insofar as it's true. That the majority of my interlocutors are incompetent is not my fault. You are the one who presumed to know that I'm the one who needs to shut up and listen to people like you, on no basis whatsoever. Read a book, for Christ's sake.
@@jacobvg3204 If you feel a person is incompetent then you must be too for choosing him as your adversary in a conversation, or even to watch and comment on his videos 😂
@@hamidchakir3257 Well I probably don't know someone is incompetent/ignorant until after speaking to them, do I? As for commenting, I'm replying to people who are engaging with my position, sincerely or otherwise. Aside from that, it's just interesting to me seeing how different people respond to certain facts and arguments. Nice try though.
Depending on intelligent n bright cosmologists biologists researchers philosophers etc who hold atheistic positions eloquently explain scientifically n materialistically n mathematically all the queries of reality without admitting or accepting the limited capability we have of understanding or comprehensing the unknown. By acknowledging the existence of a Creator or Designer who has wisely communicated with us through His chosen prophets n His Scriptures seriously these brilliant but arrogant n biased geniuses could formulate formidable conclusions! The reason being we individuals having limited time for proof n observable solid evidence during our brief lifetimes! By acknowledging Him these brilliant geniuses in their respective fields can arrive at believable n evidential conclusions to query situations of existence! Most unfortunately end their lifetimes with "we do not know" to most of their theories n models!
3:29 DJ Khaled
What does a man of religion think god is made up from ?
they don't, because its pointless. God is not made remember?
@@tyo2991
I can't think of anything that isn't made
@@wizarddean So am I... You're right! Because anything that you can think is not God
@@tyo2991 that made no sense!
Please explain 😊
God is eternal & existent, not made nor begotten.
Jacob no offense if you're reading this in future... But with your approach a layman can never know or even begin to understand their purpose..
that young man is doubtful in every way you can imagine
I certainly am.
So for the religious, you can't say you don't know, and "it's necessary" to take a position that is according to your myth or the other where one that is wrong, pathetic.
I completely agree with you, there's nothing wrong with admitting lack of knowledge, but please refrain from calling them pathetic. I only ask this because it tarnishes the atheist argument and they can turn round and say that we are being unreasonable to them.
Who said that LOL? . We say “we don’t know “ a lot( a lottttt) , we say it when we don’t know, AND we say the opposite “ we know “ when we KNOW, as simple as that brother in humanity.
"i don't know " of athies is the humble way to said i'm idiot.
This comment proves how little you have understood, I'm sorry to say it. If you refrain from offering me mere insult again, I can educate you as to how this is not the case, if you like?
@@jacobvg3204
Dude take it easy why you are replying to everyone.Your in this video so people talk about you ,don't be obsessed with what people say learn about islam and read the quran,that was a good discussion
May Allah guide all of us.
@@eddyyusuf7034 No of course, I get what you're saying, but I'm afraid I don't possess the restraint to ignore the comments. Whilst I'm sure to keep myself completely civil to people (and many Muslims, to their credit, have done the same), I just can't stand by while people demonstrate their obvious misunderstanding or misrepresentation of my argument. For instance, I feel obliged say to you, that I am currently reading the Quran and have been educating myself about religion for some time. Thank you for your comment and I'm glad you enjoyed the discussion. May you find truth.
Jacob VG hey Jacob! Interested in your videos. Anyway I could email you to ask you a few questions? Thanks
@@ahmede.1375 Hi there, this is probably far too late a reply, but lmk if you're still interested.
do you mean scientist bringing new religion to follow .in this religion where is the justice ,how to fix this is justice through scientist for helping poor people
The justice comes from the implementation of capitalism my friend, as Rand herself said, this is the only way towards actualising rational self-interest and thus happiness.
Is god corporeal or energy
Atheist you don't see your body, how is it complicated, would you think that nature which is doesn't have mind can do all this complexity ..... where is your mind ??
Wut
Nice young man.
he was a weird child :D
I certainly was
@@jacobvg3204 ye i figured.May Allah open your heart for Islam bro
@@blasty-gg Your concern is appreciated. May Rand guide you to the truth of Objectivism mate.
@@jacobvg3204 whatever bro
just make the prayer of a skeptic, if u exist guide me to the ultimate truth.
secondly bro if you are sure about your stance why wont u pick the Quran and give it a read.
@@blasty-gg Well I tend not to pray these days bro, since I know from my own experience and from experimental evidence that prayer is ineffective. However, I have asked this multiple times, so if God does exist, he will have heard if he's omniscient, and my atheism will be a part of his plan. Meanwhile, I'll search for the ultimate truth without him. I'm not sure about anything but my own existence, I'm just very very confident in a great many things. I don't know why you'd ask that, since I'm reading at the Quran at present. If you think you are sure about your beliefs (or even if you're not, which is even better), why don't you give the Fountainhead a read? We should all be exposing ourselves to accounts of the truth, as you've rightly pointed out. Although your response of 'whatever' suggests you're uninterested and not as open minded, but I'll give you the benefit of the doubt.
Kids like him are the reason authors can write a bunch of nonsense theories in their books and get rich.
There are no kids like me lol
What “nonsense theories”?
Ha ha ha, Mansur can't understand.
❤️❤️❤️❤️💋
Les athées sont des gens confondues.com
John 3:16 for god so loved the world that he gave his only begotten son that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life.
bro when will your christians learn, dont come with your week proofs. Muslims laugh in your face because of your ignorance and vlind belief.
@@danial469 Rude.
The atheist confused himself.by the constitution of constellation of the matter of quantum and its purpose to manipulate its massive manifestation of the germination of the earth in by space time of the matter of existence to be.this.my third option.
Mansur:🤪🤪🤪
With respect sir, what you have said is incoherent, and I'm not entirely sure if you understand all of those words you've written.
@@jacobvg3204 that's the point
@@suleymankamran1161 Great.
@@jacobvg3204 looool
Is that the KFC guy near mansur 🍗🍗
muzabzabina baina zalik
There is zero evidence for a god or gods. That goes for all 3,000+. Atheism is the default position. And because no one can *know* whether one of these thousands of gods exists, every single human is, by definition, agnostic. Game. Set. Match.
@@fengsports2063 Hi, I'd just like to say, you can't actually be 100% sure of anything other than your own existence (although you can be 99.9% on many things), and also, I'm afraid the Quran is not evidence.
Jacob VG have you ever read Alquran?
@@viviismail7904 I'm in the process of reading it. Have you ever read the work of Ayn Rand, or any books on cosmology?
Agnostic is the default position, not atheism
@@UltimateHibz agnosticism refers to knowledge, whereas atheism refers to belief. Two different things. The default position can be both agnosticism and atheism.
The Cultists: "You can't have a universe come from nothing."
Athesist: "OK, so how did God come from nothing?"
The Cultists: " Erm."
God is eternal and outside the realms of time.
Is the standard answer by theists.
@@UltimateHibz which still contradicts their statement that you can't have something come from nothing, eternal or not.
@@Feyd01 When they use the word eternal they mean it/he/she was always there. No beginning no end
@@UltimateHibz So if it's possible for something to always be there, why do we need a god at all? The universe can have just always been here! Still no need for a god.
Mansur says several times that there can only be two possible answers. Maybe... i have thought similarly many times watching magic tricks, only to find that the actually answer was something outside of what I thought the set of possible answers was. This simple fact belies the problem in Mansur's argument. Sometimes we just don't know all the possibilities.
I believe you've just made a false analogy there. You're comparison to a magic trick to the potential start of existence doesn't work. Pulling a specific card from a deck could be done in several ways - and then someone could find a new way of doing it. However, whether the universe came into existence or if it always existed is a different matter altogether. In terms of comparing it and using an analogy. It would be more of a closed question (yes or no) whereas your analogy of a magic trick is an open question.
But surely you can only base your reasoning on what you know, what is apparent, the evidence at hand, and not what you don't know.
You trying to add more possibilities of nothing and something
There can never be a third option
@@user-el6xm2pk7x You don't actually know this for certain.
Man if this atheist boy met Bro Shabir Yusuf he will be blown by his own intellect :) But Bro Mansur did a great Job. Hopefully, the young atheist can overcome his biased and have Hidayah. Amiin