There is God? there is no God? so that should not be the Question? or, Question should How much discoverers we humans have done? are they enough or not, IF they are, then how? If not, then we are not capable of proving the GOD through uncompleted Knowledge.
@int21b Why wouldn't it be here? This is nothing more than a "God of the gaps" fallacy. An appeal to incredulity. No, science provides many more plausible explanations that don't require a god. He isn't real. Deal with it.
@int21b It isn't "pseudoscience", we rely on evidence and math to prove things. No, "god" is not the cause of all. Again, no evidence to support that. That is an opinion.
@int21b I've already seen these ridiculous mental gymnastics that try to "prove" the existence of gods and they all fail. This argument is no different. This video here looks like a modified or renamed version of Leibniz' Argument from Contingency and popularized by people like William Lane Craig and it is full of logical fallacies and one of the biggest ones is a Special pleading fallacy. Here's a good video that picks it apart logically: ua-cam.com/video/rak2YVNR1gI/v-deo.html
so Science explains ``How`` but not the ``Why`` very good brother.
Alhamdulillah brother. May Allah bless you 😊
Masha Allah
Jazak Allahu khayran ❤
Subboor btw is one of my favorites
@USA FOUND OIL IN MIDDLE EAST im turkish yes
Excellent.
@Discover Islam : Salam alaykoem, is it allowed to download the video & share a part on instagram? (& and maybe on UA-cam in the future)
woot subboor in malaysia ?...how am i not know this...
Assalamu alaikum, what happened to the Q&A for this lecture? It seems to have disappeared.
🎓
Where did the Q and A segment of this lecture go?
There is God? there is no God? so that should not be the Question? or, Question should How much discoverers we humans have done? are they enough or not, IF they are, then how? If not, then we are not capable of proving the GOD through uncompleted Knowledge.
What are you saying?
Myth.
@int21b That makes no sense at all and there is literally no proof for that claim.
@int21b Why wouldn't it be here? This is nothing more than a "God of the gaps" fallacy. An appeal to incredulity. No, science provides many more plausible explanations that don't require a god. He isn't real. Deal with it.
@int21b It isn't "pseudoscience", we rely on evidence and math to prove things. No, "god" is not the cause of all. Again, no evidence to support that. That is an opinion.
@int21b I've already seen these ridiculous mental gymnastics that try to "prove" the existence of gods and they all fail. This argument is no different. This video here looks like a modified or renamed version of Leibniz' Argument from Contingency and popularized by people like William Lane Craig and it is full of logical fallacies and one of the biggest ones is a Special pleading fallacy.
Here's a good video that picks it apart logically:
ua-cam.com/video/rak2YVNR1gI/v-deo.html
@int21b I am plenty sincere. The argument isn't logically sound. It is fallacious and does not prove a god.