Intelligent Agnostic And Muslim Debate! - Street Interview
Published on
-First of all, we live in a materialistic world. -We value material things more. +Then at this point, I should accept the presence of an author. -I disagree with your allegory -I think your point of view is non-secular. +It would be accepting the theory that +incapable atoms are continuously creating something new. -This would be only a series of possibilities, wouldn't it? + To speak about possibilities, a group of possibilities should exist. +I should accept the continued existence of endless impossibilities. -I am thinking of an answer to that. +What do you do? Are you a student? Or are you working? -I am a college student. +Do you believe in God? -I am an Agnostic.
-I didn't grow up in a religious family. -Of course, they were Muslims like most of the people in this country. -But, I was never forced to believe. -By the time I found myself asking ;Do I really need something to feel comfortable?; -Since I haven't found an answer to this, I am still an Agnostic. -I thought ;Do I really need it?; -Because, all these are need-based. +So, you found yourself as an Agnostic, right? +You know, ;Knowledge is dependent on the known.; +Personal opinions cannot change certain facts. +Is the non-existence of the Creator proven because you don't see Him with your eyes? -Does it? The answer absolutely depends on your feelings.
+Would you change your mind if we went on a logical deduction +and reach a conclusion that makes sense to you? -I already don't have a clear idea. So, I call myself Agnostic. -I try to be objective. +Then, let's talk about a logic and proof. +And, let's see what you will say about this. -OK +No attributes can remain unclaimed in this Universe. +If there is an existing attribute or if an attribute is needed, +we must give it to somebody. +Suppose you are an author and you publish new books one after another. +Imagine, people come to me, showing the books and asking ;Who wrote this?; +Would it be reasonable if I answered ;Of course, it is the ink who wrote it;? +It wouldn't. Why? - Yes.
+ ;Here, the ink is a tool.; +We say, ;There is an author who writes in ink and continuously publishes books.; Why? +Because, the attribute here cannot remain unclaimed. +Also, the ink cannot be the owner of the attribute. +Why? +To publish a book some attributes neeeded as life, knowladge, power, will... +Naturally, we say ;if the ink doesn't have these attributes, +there should be an author who has them; +Do you agree? -Of course. + Now, similarly, when we look at the Universe we see intertwined books. +We can think of people, animals, all living things. +When I look at the Universe, The book of the Universe... +I see a fresh book being written continuously, again and again.
+When you look at a mother you read the chapter on ;Compassion;. +When you look at food and drinks on the Earth, +we can read the chapter about ;Generosity;. +Various disciplines at universities or different departments at hospitals +show the comprehensiveness and complexity of this book. +For instance, when we look at a seed, +we can see the summary of an enormous tree in such a tiny seed. +Also, the eggs of most animals have a summary of information. +Also, when we look at a single human being, +we see that the human DNA hosts the summary of Man in its 3.5 billion letters.
+When we consider that there are thousands of cells in human beings, +even one single person + has much more knowledge than the richest library in the World. +As we mentioned the continuous writing of books at the beginning. +We see that the books of the Universe are being written again and again. +Mothers give birth to 350,000 babies every day, brand-new 350,000 books. +Also, thousands of animals are delivered every day. +We see brand-new written books of animals. +In every second, fifty million of our cells are being written, +renewed, and refreshed again and again. +That means we are talking about a book that is being refreshed continuously.
+As we agreed before that we need an author-not the ink- to write a book, + somebody living, +having power and will and knowing everything so that He can write the book. +Samely, shouldn't we need an author to write this book of Universe, +again and again by using atoms as ink, +an author who possesses the attributes of knowledge, will, power and life? +I mean, shouldn't there be a creator? +Neither the ink nor the atoms have these attributes. +We accepted the presence of the author of the ink. +Wouldn't it be reasonable to accept the author of the atom used as ink; +A creator? -Well, whether reasonable or not, it is a personal issue. -I don't think it can be restricted to reason.
-It depends on free will. -Let's look at this author theory. -First, we live in a materialistic world. -We value material things more than spiritual things. +Does it show that your point of view is correct? -I couldn't understand your question. +Not seeing the author is not proof of His non-existence. +If the ink lacks capacity, we say there must be an author even if I don't know Him. +Here, we live in a materialistic world. +Since atoms lack this capability, +naturally there must be an author who has these attributes. -I am thinking of an answer to that. -Please wait for a while. -I think your point of view is non-secular.
-Of course, there must be somebody to write these books but should this person... -how can I say? -This person needn't be a divine one. -Don't you have the slightest hope that all these are about a series of possibilities? -Let's not call it hope. -Don't you see the slightest possibility? + I should see a capability in this to say that there is a possibility. +This has no capabilities, since there is a continued creation and regeneration... +I must accept the existence of an author. +We agreed that the ink didn't write the book. +We didn't consider any possibilities, right? -Of course. +Of course, why? This is clear-cut. +Because the ink doesn't have that capability.
+There isn't a possibility to talk about it. +It's obvious there is an author. +Well then, is the book more comprehensive? +Or you who has much more knowledge than the richest library of the world? -I disagree with what you have said. -This should be among the possibilities. -Some people think all these are just, possibilities. -This also sounds reasonable to me. +How do you find it reasonable that +the birth of three babies every second is controlled by atoms +that lack knowledge, will, power and compassion? +Don't you contradict yourself by accepting impossibilities every second? -I think you are playing with words. -You say ;It was written; you are using passive.
-I am being written and somebody externally is helping me. -Thanks, I am grateful. -But, I am talking about the possibility of being itself. +How can it create itself while it lacks the capability? +Imagine you have a hat in your hand. +You put a piece of white paper into it do you expect a rabbit to come out of it? +We don't. It's clear. +Why? Because, the paper doesn't have the potential to create the rabbit, right? +No, absolutely not. +Does the hat have that capability? +No, it doesn't... +Then we will say ;There is something behind it all; +We'll look for who is behind it all. +I say, ;the atom doesn't have the capability of creating; +a human being, a peacock or a tree.
+It is blind and deaf, unable to see or hear. +It doesn't have a will, power, or life. It is unaware of its own needs. +So, I will say, ;As I seek for somebody behind the hat, and an author behind the book, +I will look for an author who uses atoms as the ink for creation.; +It is more reasonable. -We are talking about a universe 13-14 billion years old. -And I am looking for the slightest possibility, -I am looking from a Mathematical dimension. +You say ;I am looking for the slightest possibility; +Firstly, when we go the beginning of the universe, the matter is not present.
+We are talking about zero volume and infinite density +where some sort of will intervene the nothingness to create something. +To talk about possibility, we need a group of probabilities. +But, no probabilities exist in nothingness. +So, it becomes impossible to make a calculation. +Even now if they are the atoms that make the creation around, +I had to accept continued impossibilities +Because they don't stop, nothing stops. +Thousands of living organisms come to a being every second, +something happens, and somebody does something. +Action shows the presence of a doer. +The doer should have the capability to realise this action.
+If I talk about possibilities or probabilities, +we should accept a continued creation by incapable atoms and that's impossible. +And, this creation is not just for one time. -I am thinking of an answer to that. -What can I say? -I know, I am repeating myself... -There are living organisms, alright. They can't remain static. They are dynamic. + Who is doing this?; that's what I am asking. +Who is the doer if it is not the atom? -Who is the doer? -Good question. -Of course, I don't know so much about it, I am not as knowledgeable as you. -What I mean... -You are talking about the possibility of the presence of a creator. -But, I am talking about the probability of the absence of a creator.
+Think of a foolish, blind and deaf car driver. +Is it possible for him to drive, from here to Gaziantep? -No, it isn't possible. +It's not possible. Why? Because he doesn't have those skills. +He doesn't see or hear. +He is mindless. +He can't keep the car on the correct route among the numerous alternatives. +What I say is, atoms have none of the attributes of seeing, hearing, or will. +If atoms always keep the car on the right track in every living organism, +there must be an upper will that controls them. +I want to talk about a verse from The Holy Qur'an. +Your point of view might reach a different dimension.
+One of the surahs of The Holy Qur'an is called ;Al-Masad.; +It's about Abu Lahab. +He was one of the uncles of the Prophet Muhammed (pbuh) +The surah foretells that Abu Lahab would die as an unbeliever. +It says, he will not believe. +Here, we should ask the following questions; +How can a man foretell the future, and how can it become true? +It becomes true, and Abu Lahab dies as an unbeliever. +The second point is; +When this verse was revealed, Abu Lahab was a strong and healthy man. +He died seven years later. +How can a man know whether somebody will die as a believer or not seven years later? +The third point is; +To become a believer is quite a strong possibility in this time.
+Even, the biggest enemies of Islam became Muslims. +Look at Abu Sufyan, +Look at Khalid Ibn al-Walid, the great commander, + and even Wahshi, the killer of Hamza (ra), they all became believers. +It shows, to become a believer was normal at this age. +But, the verse says that Abu Lahab will not believe. +Seven years later, he dies as an unbeliever. +This was the third point. +The fourth point is; +After the revelation of the verse foretelling Abu Lahab's end, +he could announced that he was a believer, too. +If he had done so, he would have denied the verse, +he could have denied the holy message. +But, he couldn't.
He couldn't even utter a single word and say ;I am a believer; +How can a man foretell about these events? +That means, the One who revealed this Book is the One we are looking for, +the creator of the universe. +He knows about the unknown, the future and the past, all times. +He knows what is in your heart. +A human can't write this holy book. +It also shows that The Holy Qur'an is from God. +Similarly, we can find our creator, Allah, in this way. -At this point, I have nothing to say. -I will keep on researching. +Ok, then. Think about things we have discussed today. +Please feel free to contact us if you find yourself researching. +We are ready to help. +Pleased to meet you.
-Pleased to meet you too. -Thank you for the interview. +It was a nice talk. +Take care. -Thank you. -Take care.
-I didn't grow up in a religious family. -Of course, they were Muslims like most of the people in this country. -But, I was never forced to believe. -By the time I found myself asking ;Do I really need something to feel comfortable?; -Since I haven't found an answer to this, I am still an Agnostic. -I thought ;Do I really need it?; -Because, all these are need-based. +So, you found yourself as an Agnostic, right? +You know, ;Knowledge is dependent on the known.; +Personal opinions cannot change certain facts. +Is the non-existence of the Creator proven because you don't see Him with your eyes? -Does it? The answer absolutely depends on your feelings.
+Would you change your mind if we went on a logical deduction +and reach a conclusion that makes sense to you? -I already don't have a clear idea. So, I call myself Agnostic. -I try to be objective. +Then, let's talk about a logic and proof. +And, let's see what you will say about this. -OK +No attributes can remain unclaimed in this Universe. +If there is an existing attribute or if an attribute is needed, +we must give it to somebody. +Suppose you are an author and you publish new books one after another. +Imagine, people come to me, showing the books and asking ;Who wrote this?; +Would it be reasonable if I answered ;Of course, it is the ink who wrote it;? +It wouldn't. Why? - Yes.
+ ;Here, the ink is a tool.; +We say, ;There is an author who writes in ink and continuously publishes books.; Why? +Because, the attribute here cannot remain unclaimed. +Also, the ink cannot be the owner of the attribute. +Why? +To publish a book some attributes neeeded as life, knowladge, power, will... +Naturally, we say ;if the ink doesn't have these attributes, +there should be an author who has them; +Do you agree? -Of course. + Now, similarly, when we look at the Universe we see intertwined books. +We can think of people, animals, all living things. +When I look at the Universe, The book of the Universe... +I see a fresh book being written continuously, again and again.
+When you look at a mother you read the chapter on ;Compassion;. +When you look at food and drinks on the Earth, +we can read the chapter about ;Generosity;. +Various disciplines at universities or different departments at hospitals +show the comprehensiveness and complexity of this book. +For instance, when we look at a seed, +we can see the summary of an enormous tree in such a tiny seed. +Also, the eggs of most animals have a summary of information. +Also, when we look at a single human being, +we see that the human DNA hosts the summary of Man in its 3.5 billion letters.
+When we consider that there are thousands of cells in human beings, +even one single person + has much more knowledge than the richest library in the World. +As we mentioned the continuous writing of books at the beginning. +We see that the books of the Universe are being written again and again. +Mothers give birth to 350,000 babies every day, brand-new 350,000 books. +Also, thousands of animals are delivered every day. +We see brand-new written books of animals. +In every second, fifty million of our cells are being written, +renewed, and refreshed again and again. +That means we are talking about a book that is being refreshed continuously.
+As we agreed before that we need an author-not the ink- to write a book, + somebody living, +having power and will and knowing everything so that He can write the book. +Samely, shouldn't we need an author to write this book of Universe, +again and again by using atoms as ink, +an author who possesses the attributes of knowledge, will, power and life? +I mean, shouldn't there be a creator? +Neither the ink nor the atoms have these attributes. +We accepted the presence of the author of the ink. +Wouldn't it be reasonable to accept the author of the atom used as ink; +A creator? -Well, whether reasonable or not, it is a personal issue. -I don't think it can be restricted to reason.
-It depends on free will. -Let's look at this author theory. -First, we live in a materialistic world. -We value material things more than spiritual things. +Does it show that your point of view is correct? -I couldn't understand your question. +Not seeing the author is not proof of His non-existence. +If the ink lacks capacity, we say there must be an author even if I don't know Him. +Here, we live in a materialistic world. +Since atoms lack this capability, +naturally there must be an author who has these attributes. -I am thinking of an answer to that. -Please wait for a while. -I think your point of view is non-secular.
-Of course, there must be somebody to write these books but should this person... -how can I say? -This person needn't be a divine one. -Don't you have the slightest hope that all these are about a series of possibilities? -Let's not call it hope. -Don't you see the slightest possibility? + I should see a capability in this to say that there is a possibility. +This has no capabilities, since there is a continued creation and regeneration... +I must accept the existence of an author. +We agreed that the ink didn't write the book. +We didn't consider any possibilities, right? -Of course. +Of course, why? This is clear-cut. +Because the ink doesn't have that capability.
+There isn't a possibility to talk about it. +It's obvious there is an author. +Well then, is the book more comprehensive? +Or you who has much more knowledge than the richest library of the world? -I disagree with what you have said. -This should be among the possibilities. -Some people think all these are just, possibilities. -This also sounds reasonable to me. +How do you find it reasonable that +the birth of three babies every second is controlled by atoms +that lack knowledge, will, power and compassion? +Don't you contradict yourself by accepting impossibilities every second? -I think you are playing with words. -You say ;It was written; you are using passive.
-I am being written and somebody externally is helping me. -Thanks, I am grateful. -But, I am talking about the possibility of being itself. +How can it create itself while it lacks the capability? +Imagine you have a hat in your hand. +You put a piece of white paper into it do you expect a rabbit to come out of it? +We don't. It's clear. +Why? Because, the paper doesn't have the potential to create the rabbit, right? +No, absolutely not. +Does the hat have that capability? +No, it doesn't... +Then we will say ;There is something behind it all; +We'll look for who is behind it all. +I say, ;the atom doesn't have the capability of creating; +a human being, a peacock or a tree.
+It is blind and deaf, unable to see or hear. +It doesn't have a will, power, or life. It is unaware of its own needs. +So, I will say, ;As I seek for somebody behind the hat, and an author behind the book, +I will look for an author who uses atoms as the ink for creation.; +It is more reasonable. -We are talking about a universe 13-14 billion years old. -And I am looking for the slightest possibility, -I am looking from a Mathematical dimension. +You say ;I am looking for the slightest possibility; +Firstly, when we go the beginning of the universe, the matter is not present.
+We are talking about zero volume and infinite density +where some sort of will intervene the nothingness to create something. +To talk about possibility, we need a group of probabilities. +But, no probabilities exist in nothingness. +So, it becomes impossible to make a calculation. +Even now if they are the atoms that make the creation around, +I had to accept continued impossibilities +Because they don't stop, nothing stops. +Thousands of living organisms come to a being every second, +something happens, and somebody does something. +Action shows the presence of a doer. +The doer should have the capability to realise this action.
+If I talk about possibilities or probabilities, +we should accept a continued creation by incapable atoms and that's impossible. +And, this creation is not just for one time. -I am thinking of an answer to that. -What can I say? -I know, I am repeating myself... -There are living organisms, alright. They can't remain static. They are dynamic. + Who is doing this?; that's what I am asking. +Who is the doer if it is not the atom? -Who is the doer? -Good question. -Of course, I don't know so much about it, I am not as knowledgeable as you. -What I mean... -You are talking about the possibility of the presence of a creator. -But, I am talking about the probability of the absence of a creator.
+Think of a foolish, blind and deaf car driver. +Is it possible for him to drive, from here to Gaziantep? -No, it isn't possible. +It's not possible. Why? Because he doesn't have those skills. +He doesn't see or hear. +He is mindless. +He can't keep the car on the correct route among the numerous alternatives. +What I say is, atoms have none of the attributes of seeing, hearing, or will. +If atoms always keep the car on the right track in every living organism, +there must be an upper will that controls them. +I want to talk about a verse from The Holy Qur'an. +Your point of view might reach a different dimension.
+One of the surahs of The Holy Qur'an is called ;Al-Masad.; +It's about Abu Lahab. +He was one of the uncles of the Prophet Muhammed (pbuh) +The surah foretells that Abu Lahab would die as an unbeliever. +It says, he will not believe. +Here, we should ask the following questions; +How can a man foretell the future, and how can it become true? +It becomes true, and Abu Lahab dies as an unbeliever. +The second point is; +When this verse was revealed, Abu Lahab was a strong and healthy man. +He died seven years later. +How can a man know whether somebody will die as a believer or not seven years later? +The third point is; +To become a believer is quite a strong possibility in this time.
+Even, the biggest enemies of Islam became Muslims. +Look at Abu Sufyan, +Look at Khalid Ibn al-Walid, the great commander, + and even Wahshi, the killer of Hamza (ra), they all became believers. +It shows, to become a believer was normal at this age. +But, the verse says that Abu Lahab will not believe. +Seven years later, he dies as an unbeliever. +This was the third point. +The fourth point is; +After the revelation of the verse foretelling Abu Lahab's end, +he could announced that he was a believer, too. +If he had done so, he would have denied the verse, +he could have denied the holy message. +But, he couldn't.
He couldn't even utter a single word and say ;I am a believer; +How can a man foretell about these events? +That means, the One who revealed this Book is the One we are looking for, +the creator of the universe. +He knows about the unknown, the future and the past, all times. +He knows what is in your heart. +A human can't write this holy book. +It also shows that The Holy Qur'an is from God. +Similarly, we can find our creator, Allah, in this way. -At this point, I have nothing to say. -I will keep on researching. +Ok, then. Think about things we have discussed today. +Please feel free to contact us if you find yourself researching. +We are ready to help. +Pleased to meet you.
-Pleased to meet you too. -Thank you for the interview. +It was a nice talk. +Take care. -Thank you. -Take care.