THE END OF ATHEISM - Ft. Mohammed Hijab (Full Episode)

On our latest episode of Destroying Doubts we are joined by Mohammed Hijab to discuss the contingency argument in detail. We also respond to various claims made by atheists against the argument.

🔔 Subscribe to our YouTube to help us reach our 𝟏 𝐌𝐢𝐥𝐥𝐢𝐨𝐧 subscriber goal.

Download the OnePath Network App for access to the latest and exclusive videos:

Join this channel to get access to perks:

[zxcv]

Please do pray for my father, he is being wrongly accused of crime by the court, May Allah help him, and May Allah accept our supplications and grant all of us Jannah❤

[ilmfeed]

May Allah guide us all and strengthen our Iman.

[Taha-Aamamou]

So mohammed hijab just destroyed atheism while being half asleep ? 😂😂

[serk-s]

It's weird to see Mohammed Hijab talking this calm.

[RafayShakeel]

"And declare, “The truth has come and falsehood has vanished. Indeed, falsehood is bound to vanish.”

Quran [17: 81]

[arkaazizul]

Looks like one path just pulled hijab out of him in his sleeping time 😅
Hijab looks sleepy, tired & exhausted! ☹️

[ahsanaliiqbalansari]

Atheism is mainly coming from the liberal movement and the root of liberalism movement was Christianity.There Priest had the authority to convert the sins and forbidden things in Christianity to permissible and permissible to forbidden.These things caused problems and oppression and a oppressed community from Europe came to existence and they took all the religions in the world useless and they said only work hard the industrial Revolution (also capitalism) is also part of this.

[giren]

Can someone get Mr. Hijab some coffee he looks quite tired.

[amalia]

MashaAllah great episode, Jazakumullahu khayr

[sammy-pgbg]

ma cha Allah, qu’Allah vous récompense pour votre travail, est-ce qu’il est possible d’avoir les sous-titres en français, baarakAllahoufikum.

[davidbest]

But there are flying mythical creatures in islam.
Fantasy and fairy tales.
islam is not based on any facts, just like horoscope it can mean something to someone, but means nothing to the majority.

[AM-izdg]

I would say that it’s important to note that, at least as far as I know, the fallacy of composition is not at all applicable to the Kalam Cosmological Argument. The reason is the following: We don’t say: Everything that we have witnessed in the Universe, that began to exist, has a cause, therefore the Universe as a whole has a cause. That of course would be fallacious. However, we say that based on axiomatic knowledge, the first premise of the Kalam is true (Everything that begins to exist has a cause). Since if that premise were untrue, it would mean that there are things that begin to exist and don’t have a cause, which would mean that they came from nothing, which is impossible and absurd. Thus, when atheists say that we don’t know if for example Universes cannot come out of nothing, they have already lost the debate because they have proven their arrogance. They prefer to believe that the Universe comes out of nothing without any cause whatsoever, just so that they can disbelieve in God. When they do that, you have to expose them, gently of course, and say that you claiming that the Universe came out of nothing is equally absurd as someone claiming that his mother gave birth to herself. Both entail that the mother/Universe was existent and non-existent at the same time, which is absurd. Furthermore, you can ask them why it is that only Universes have this unique ability to pop into existence out of nothing? Why not Elephants and human beings? How can nothingness, which doesn’t have any properties, will or preferences, prefer to let Universes pop out of it but not Elephants? You see that atheism leads to absurdities. May Allah guide us all.

[brotherben]

What is the best way to stop the rise in atheism?

[uponsunnah]

It seems brother MH has a fever or didn't sleep at all. May Allah heal him. He doesn't seem himself.

[TheSilvereagle]

Typical, a bunch of claims and little else. These ideas and concepts exist as ideas and concepts. I prefer that which can be verified.

[_fiza___]

Assalamualaikum .one of Christian speaker told in a debate in club House that .Allah pray for prophet Muhammad in chapter 33:56 . And he says that salah means blessings but salat means praying .i don't know arabic meaning actually.is anyone help me? Is salah can spell as salat too??pls reply

[acalltowardstruthnpeace]

Ma sha Allah👏👍

💎Last 10 nyts To do list:
1)Read Quran with meaning
2)Pray nawfil (do qiyam n tahajjud)
3)Give charity every nyt hw mch u cn afford..
4)Make duas..
5)Do azkaar.. you can include this1: Mohammad (peace be upon him) said with
"Subhanallah Walhamdulillah WalaIlaha Illallah Wallahu Akbar" sins fall in the same way like the leaves of this tree has fallen. (Al-Tirmidhi: 3533) [u cn also include wala haula wala quwatta illahbillah]
meaning: "Glory be to Allah and all praise be to Allah, there is none worthy of worship except Allah, and Allah is the Greatest. There is no might or power except from Allah, the Exalted, the Great One."
6)Read 1 hadith
🌹U cn read it frm the daily ramadan journals tht i post on youtube (it contains 1 hadith, 1dua, 1deed of the day and checklist..)
May Allah bless us with laylatul qadr n its treasures.. May Allah be pleased with us and always make our iman(faith) and taqwa(god-conciousness) grow stronger and stronger..

[markh]

Just to update you, atheism didn't end. It's still growing.

[Enigmatic_philosopher]

Here are some philosophical critiques of the contingency argument

1. The argument makes questionable assumptions about the distinction between necessary and contingent beings. The definitions provided of "self-sufficient" versus "dependent" are imprecise. More clarity is needed on what makes something necessarily existing rather than just asserting it.

2. The impossibility of an infinite regress is stated but not proven. The argument claims there cannot be an infinite chain of contingent beings, but does not provide a justification for why this regress is impossible.

3. There is a significant leap from establishing a necessary being to attributing to it divine qualities of classical theism. Even if a necessary being is proven, more steps are needed to conclude this being has God's traditionally ascribed attributes.

4. The argument relies heavily on a priori philosophical reasoning rather than empirical evidence. Some may find pure logic insufficient for establishing something as significant as God's existence. Stronger inductive arguments from observable evidence could bolster the case.

5. The composition argument makes questionable assumptions about parts and wholes. More needs to be done to demonstrate the universe's contingency just because the things within it are contingent.

In summary, the contingency argument is thought-provoking but has some gaps in its underlying logic and reasoning that require further support and clarity. Building acumulative case with multiple arguments and evidence would strengthen the position overall. Relying solely on this argument may not be sufficient to convince skeptics of God's existence.

[MrGustavier]

9:31 "The proposition is one sentence, there cannot be a world with only dependent things, which depend upon other dependent things as infinitum."

10:36 "And if they disagree with it, then we have an argument from composition, which we make."

34:14 "which means that the universe cannot be the necessary existence by logical necessity and that is a compositional argument "

Isn't the "compositional argument" the same thing as the "argument from composition" ?
I thought the argument from composition was supposed to address the person rejecting the postulate (the person accepting infinite regress), how does saying "the universe cannot be the necessary existence" addresses the infinite regress ?
Someone who believes there is an infinite regress (or circular construct) of dependent things would readily agree that the universe is not !