What’s Your Biggest Objection To Islam? Muslim Apologitic Speakers Corner

Added: 2026-05-19

[00:00:00]pantheistic way. Because like, I I think you know, if I'm like in nature or something like this, like I I can really feel uh you know, like some sort of presence, but it's maybe not like earthly or worldly. But at the same time, like uh I would have to probably say that that's due to kind of like some mental, biological, evolutionary effect until I can I'm proven otherwise. And that definitely doesn't speak I think like the the difference between deism and like organized religion is then another huge leap, which I'm not willing to make. Like I don't think that because I feel the presence of God, that makes like, you know, the church real or something like this. I see. So, you're saying that it's it's more plausible that we can be have like an idea or that God exists, but we don't necessarily have to make that jump of saying there's a specific religion or specific God, whether it's Islam or Christianity.

[00:00:51]Yeah, I just think that there are different stages. So, like I I think I'm an atheist right now. I think it takes a certain amount of like leap of faith to believe in like deism or pantheism or the fact that there's something extra natural, and then a whole 'nother leap of faith to believe in the core tenets of organized religion, that like let's say the Bible or the Quran is true or something like that.

[00:01:07]Okay, so >> another one to say that it has a positive effect on the earth, which is like I think another one after that. Do you know what I mean? So, you you would say that it having a positive effect on society or like on individual basis would be like a criteria for it being true. Meaning that it would have a negative effect, then it would redact it from being true.

[00:01:22]>> Well, well it depends, right? If a if a religion like I I know like Satanists, you know, they say and and you know, for me as an atheist, you have to like you may not believe in in Satanism or whatever, but like I have to take it with a certain grain of salt cuz I'm looking at it trying to From the outside looking Yeah, from an outside perspective, third party trying to figure out what's right. So, I I would say that like for them, the existence of evil is a core tenant. So, then that makes it more believable. But then like if, you know, if Islam, for example, is preaching peace, and then there's a lot of violence done in the name of Islam, that then affects my belief in its credibility because I think that like it's something that it's saying it enacts in the world and then I don't see that effect necessarily. Okay, two things. Islam doesn't deny that evil exists. So, Islam So, we we as as in theism we we agree that God can allow for partial evil.

[00:02:10]Yeah. As long as it doesn't entail like some sort of greater evil or ultimate evil.

[00:02:15]God would allow for And what is what is the definition of I'm I'm I'm unfamiliar with this. What what is the difference between minor evil and ultimate evil?

[00:02:21]So, for example like you could take it like a partial evil to be like some sort of immediate consequence that would lead to like a greater effect. Like a better effect. For example, So, like Israel existing or something like that is like a minor evil? Yeah, probably. Yeah. Yeah, something something like that. In in in your eyes?

[00:02:36]Yeah, yeah, exactly. Like the ultimate outcome would be ultimate justice with and and humans being reconciled with God.

[00:02:41]>> Okay, yeah, yeah. But the point I'm trying to make is is regarding the approach that the Muslims or the Muslim philosophers took regarding proving Islam, making aka making that big jump from agnosticism to deism to theism.

[00:02:53]Mhm. Uh was two approaches mainly. The The we split into two approaches. The first approach was mainly the philosophical route, which is arguments purely from reason to prove that there's a God, that this God has power, omniscient, that has all all these other properties, he has wisdom, and then making that jump saying that he must send prophets through humans, and then that Muhammad specifically is the final prophet. That that's one approach that the philosophers take. But it was a slight battle of the orthodox Muslims because it was a very philosophical approach and had a lot of jargon, had a lot of uh philosophical jargon attached to it.

[00:03:26]Now, there's also a simpler approach to actually making that jump that they took, which is simply looking at the man Muhammad and see if he made anything that broke spoke anything or did anything that broke nomic necessity, aka the natural laws of the universe Like miracles? Like miracles or making prophecies or making statements about the unknowable past that he could not have known or about the unknowable future that he could not have known. Through these metrics, because we know from the natural world that these are unlikely and you couldn't have done the done done it naturally, then the only other explanation or the inference to the best possible explanation is that there will be some sort of divine being that will be communicating this information to him and that's why he's able to act it out.

[00:04:06]Miracles, whatever sorts of. Now, when it comes to miracles, it's a it's a bit more inductive meaning it's based more on probability because it's based upon like transmission meaning we have >> reasoning based on probability. Yeah.

[00:04:17]Exactly. That makes sense to me but again I think miracles are for are for the people that were there. Like I using my inductive reasoning and probability, I can say that it probably didn't happen, right? But then like if you were there and you saw it happen, more life to you, better for you. You have a reason to believe. You know, it's like we were even talking about how like miracles like they're often times disregarded by atheists as not being proof but the thing is that they're not really meant to be proof in a universal sense. They're meant to be proof for the people that were there. At least that's what I think. It it it it depends. So, number one, when it comes to evidence for Islam, I agree with you that there can be more better contemporary evidence that one can give to better suit for the agnostic mind. That's number one. And number two, when it comes to ascertaining knowledge, for example, knowledge through empirical means or through other means such as reduction and post-reduction, which simply means that if you have a chain of transmission meaning I say something to you, you say something to your friend, right? And let's say we're able to verify that I'm a sound away, I'm someone who can can be trusted. You are someone who can be trusted. We're both contemporary each other and therefore that study in in in Western academic school as reduction and post-reduction can be then used as a source of knowledge. Yeah, I agree.

[00:05:25]>> it can epistemologically can satisfy to know that this event did actually occur.

[00:05:29]Especially what if what we call it is masterly transmitted. Yeah. So, if it's masterly transmitted, then it's impossible for let's say one person to make it up because there's other chains of transmission that also narrated the same event.

[00:05:40]>> what you're saying but the thing is like the way I understand the world, right?

[00:05:43]There are certain like natural laws etc, right? And so for me to take the leap to believe in a miracle, I have to believe that the probability of me taking like even if I believe let's let's just grant for the sake of argument that everyone told the truth Okay. from the original people. So, the original from the witnesses, they told people and since then everyone told the truth. Yep.

[00:06:03]For me to believe that these miracles happened or existed, I would have to say that the probability of all the natural laws of which I and many others have based our lives on can be destroyed or at least like put on pause or suspended has to be higher than the probability of the witnesses lying to make a point that someone is a prophet.

[00:06:23]>> Wait, so sorry. Repeat that point one more time for me. You're saying that the probability of what is higher than the Like like I'm not saying I'm not saying that all of the witnesses to Muhammad or Christ's miracles were lying about it.

[00:06:33]You're saying that the cost of saying that they the probability of that to me is higher than the laws of nature being suspended. Even if we grant that henceforth from that point everyone told the truth about it. Okay. So So, because you're saying that it's very improbable Yeah, but that the that the laws of that the laws of nature would be suspended. Therefore, because miracles are less probable than that, we can we can come to conclude that miracles probably didn't happen in comparison to the probability of natural laws being suspended.

[00:06:59]>> Exactly, yeah. That's what you're saying. Yeah, yeah. Okay. So, the only thing I would say to that is is that uh when you come to conclude that the probability of natural laws being suspended is something very unlikely, Mhm. it would be based upon induction.

[00:07:13]Meaning that you uh uh witness this every day that the natural laws aren't suspended.

[00:07:17]>> Right. And therefore, you conclude that they probably weren't suspended in the past and won't won't be suspended in the future, right? But that is inductive in its means and it's inductive in its nature, just like the argument that I'm giving is also inductive in its means and its nature.

[00:07:29]>> Right, but inductive but inductive arguments can have different levels of of of reasonableness in my case that I would say. Like you we also are are acting upon inductive reasoning that I'm understanding what you're saying, that you're understanding what I'm saying, that the ground won't fall out of between us, and that like I can be able to breathe in the next minute, you know?

[00:07:48]But then there's there's a to to compare these kinds of natural law inductive reasoning with like human let's say morality, which is constantly in flux. We see people acting ethically and unethically. I would say that like your the inductive reasoning you're using, I would say is >> less probable. Yeah, it's based on something that is less probable.

[00:08:10]>> Probable. Well, we we could look at something more concrete in this case, which for example things like prophecies. Okay.

[00:08:15]>> So, when it comes to prophecies, they're a bit more You're talking about predicting the future, stuff like this.

[00:08:19]No, prediction because prediction is based upon you look at data, you analyze data, you can't be you look at the best outcome that can come from this.

[00:08:24]>> Then then what would you say Muhammad did? So, when it comes to prophecy specifically, they wouldn't be predictable. They'll be something that would supposed to happen in the future, mentioned in detail, and it's unlikely to happen. So, for example in the Quran, there's a very clear prophecy found in the Quran. Uh it's called chapter of Rome, where it talks about how the Romans were defeated by the Persians, and in 3 to 9 years the Romans are going to win over the Persians, all right? So, what we have is is that at the time when this prophecy was made, according to a non-Muslim scholar known as Edward Gibbons, he specifically mentioned that at the time when this prophecy was made, it was very unlikely for the Romans to defeat the Persians. So, it was something that was said by the Prophet Muhammad, although it was very unlikely, that's number one, and it's time bound cuz as a time gap, 3 to 9 years. That this is when it's going to happen, that the Romans are going to defeat the Persians. And this actually did actually happen. So, it's very improbable for a few a few reasons.

[00:09:12]Number one, he didn't need to risk his prophet. He didn't need to say, "Well, look, this is going to happen." You know, he didn't need to say it. People already believed him as a prophet before he did that. Yet, he still risked that on on a very improbable means because the Persians were winning over the Romans, and he gave a time bound uh frame time frame for it. Yeah.

[00:09:29]Yeah, no, I understand that.

[00:09:31]Unfortunately, I don't think I'm going to be able to do this argument justice just because I'm much more I'm with Christianity.

[00:09:36]>> Yeah. what I would say is that like if I'm going to compare it relatively to Christianity, I believe that you also said that Muhammad is the last prophet you believe in.

[00:09:42]>> Yeah.

[00:09:42]>> Christ as a prophet.

[00:09:44]>> Yes. Yeah. So if we we can just extrapolate that and say that you also believe in Christianity and kind of move the debate over, I would say that like probably for Islam in a similar way to Christianity, I think that the Bible gets some things right. I also think it gets some things wrong. And so I I for me it would be very impressive if the Bible got everything right or if the Quran got everything right, right? What I'm saying is like for example, yes.

[00:10:05]Like for example some people say like the Bible is true because how how could it have predicted that there was a beginning to the universe?

[00:10:13]Right? And they will say like how could it have predicted this? I would say it's kind of like a 50/50 guess.

[00:10:17]>> Yeah. And then also it says something so it's not exactly And it's not set in stone. We don't even know if there's a beginning or not.

[00:10:21]>> Exactly. Exactly. And so but it also says some things like you know the earth was created before the sun where now we know that the sun is created before the earth. So I would say that it would be very impressive to me and very convincing to me if the if the Bible were able to make true claims about everything >> that that corresponds to reality. But for me in at least with Christianity, I don't see this happening. I see it kind of haphazardly happening. It's right about some things. It's right about it's wrong about other things. It's exactly what I would expect to from a religious book. to see it from a religious book that doesn't have any external or supernatural influence on it. And I would probably say the same applies to Islam if I looked further.

[00:10:58]Okay. I I I love this objection.

[00:11:01]The response is going to be two-way.

[00:11:03]Okay. So the first one is that because someone Muslim might not believe in Christ that therefore this binds me to some sort of level to Christianity.

[00:11:09]Yeah, I'm not sure about that actually.

[00:11:11]Yeah, this would just be incorrect just because if I'm accepting Christ as the Messiah, we as Muslims we believe that the Bible did undergo change. Meaning that we don't we don't believe it's perfectly preserved. Why? Because we have an original source aka the Muhammad who clarifies to us what is revelation, what is not revelation. So He comes to correct it. Yeah, exactly. He'll be the first point of contact, right? So because he's the first point of contact, we as Muslims aren't theologically affected by mistakes found within the Bible, right? If it's correct and if it lines up with what the Quran says and Islam says, then that's fine. We can accept it. If it's not, then it's not going to have any sort of theological implications. That's number one. And number two, regarding the Bible and what you expect to see from a text that's not influenced by God, you're right. You would expect mistakes and we do find mistakes in the Bible.

[00:11:51]More more mistakes. The difference is is when you look at the Quran and we're looking at the claims that the Quran makes about the natural world. For example, every living thing being made out of water and so on and so forth.

[00:11:59]What you find is is that I'm I'm I'm not going to say that it was unprecedented for his time. What I'm going to say is is that it's factually correct to what we see in reality. Given the incentive that he didn't need to do that. For example, when the Quran But but in in a way he kind of did need to do that because Muslims now, like yourself, are using it as evidence for atheists.

[00:12:17]>> No, no, I'm I'm not saying that the mere fact that he um gets it right is evidence by itself.

[00:12:24]What I'm saying is is that if it reinforces exactly. It reinforces. And also, regarding the point, the Quran says that every I don't believe to to begin with. How can it reinforce my belief? That's why we're looking at the prophecies. We're looking at these more advantageous ways to prove Islam is true and that would allow you to then bridge that gap. But before we get into that, the point I'm trying to make is is that the Quran, for example, says that every living thing was made out of water.

[00:12:45]At the time when the Quran said that, there was a lot of theories passing around. Some Greeks said that everything was made out of water, not just living things, even non-living things.

[00:12:54]The Quran, seemingly, when it comes to making these scientific claims, it never picked up if it was merely reiterating what we had. It never picked up wrong details about things. It never said that, for example, that the sun was created before the earth was created before the sun. It never said that any things that are factually known to be false. It always gets it right. Not that it proves Islam. All it does is that it shows it doesn't have the same hindrance as in the Bible.

[00:13:16]Right? So, if we know that the Quran is independent of the Bible and we know that the Quran has prophecies that come true and we know that it factually corresponds to reality when it comes to scientific claims, we have good reason or justification beyond reasonable doubt we can take Islam to be true. Yeah, I I agree, but I but again, like I said, I don't think I can do this justice because I just haven't looked into it enough. I I know in Christianity there are um there there are contradictions. I would also deduce that probably there are some kinds of minor contradictions in the Quran as well, otherwise I think more people would believe in it like myself, but I but I would have to look into it in until like uh Sounds good. I can give you a book recommendation of a very small book.

[00:13:53]>> Is it the Quran? No, no, no. No, I I I have a more specific one that talks about prophecies. It's called 101 prophecies in Islam. It's it's it's composed of 101 prophecies that are accurate, that are time-bound, that are very specific about things that are coming in the future, and they do come true. You can look into it, and you can also read the Quran for yourself to examine these claims that I'm saying.

[00:14:11]>> think I have to read it in Arabic? No, no, no, no. You don't have to. But, what's your name?

[00:14:15]Nabeel. Nabeel, nice nice to meet you, man. Appreciate it. My name is Ameer.

[00:14:18]Ameer. I appreciate the conversation.

[00:14:20]Thank you. Thank you. Good night, guys.

[00:14:21]Thank you.

[00:14:22]Man, beautiful conversation, beautiful guest.

[00:14:25]Uh yeah, it's done.

[00:14:28]Sound good.