04 Response to a Materialist Objection Why Islam is True with Shaykh Hamza Karamali

Summary

In this presentation, the speaker argues for the truth of Islam by asserting that God exists as a necessary being, essential for explaining the contingent nature of the universe. The argument refutes materialist objections that deem the concept of God as arbitrary, emphasizing that both the universe and the Big Bang are contingent and require an explanation beyond themselves. The speaker highlights the fallacy of materialism, which assumes all existence is material, and dismisses the question of 'Who made God?' as invalid. Ultimately, the argument for God's existence stands firm against such objections, reaffirming the rational basis for belief in Islam.

Takeaways

• 😀 The crisis in Mexico is marked by an alarming rise in violence and homicides.
• 😀 Criminal organizations have gained significant power, impacting various societal sectors.
• 😀 Drug trafficking is a major contributor to ongoing violence and instability.
• 😀 Comprehensive reforms in law enforcement and judicial systems are urgently needed.
• 😀 The effects of violence reach beyond victims, severely affecting families and communities.
• 😀 Youth are particularly at risk, often becoming victims or being recruited by gangs.
• 😀 International cooperation is essential in tackling the transnational issue of drug trafficking.
• 😀 Prevention programs targeting education and social services are crucial for at-risk youth.
• 😀 The media significantly influences public perception regarding violence and crime in Mexico.
• 😀 A multifaceted approach is necessary to tackle the roots of violence and foster lasting peace.

Q & A

What is the main goal of the presentations discussed in the script?

The main goal is to demonstrate why Islam is true by evaluating the evidence supporting and opposing the claim.

How does the speaker define the claim 'Islam is true'?

The speaker defines it as the belief that God created the universe with a purpose and sent messengers to guide humanity toward eternal happiness in the afterlife.

What is the significance of the claim that 'God exists' in the context of the presentations?

It is the most important subclaim supporting the larger claim that Islam is true, and it serves as the foundation for the subsequent arguments presented.

What is the materialist objection to the claim of God's existence?

Materialists argue that claiming 'God made everything the way that it is' is an arbitrary solution and question, 'Who made God?'

How does the speaker respond to the materialist objection regarding the arbitrariness of ending the explanation at God?

The speaker argues that this objection fails to recognize that contingent facts cannot ultimately explain themselves; a necessary being, or God, must exist to account for the existence of contingent facts.

What does the speaker mean by 'contingent' and 'necessary' in the context of existence?

'Contingent' refers to things that could exist differently or not at all, while 'necessary' refers to a being that must exist and does not depend on anything else for its existence.

What fallacy does the speaker identify in materialist reasoning?

The speaker identifies the fallacy of materialism, which erroneously concludes that because all observed objects are material, everything that exists must also be material.

Why is the question 'Who made God?' considered a loaded question?

It presupposes that God needs to be made, which contradicts the argument that God is a necessary being who does not require anything else for existence.

What characteristics of the physical universe do contingent objects share, according to the speaker?

Contingent objects in the physical universe share characteristics such as location, size, motion, and change, all of which require explanation by a necessary being.

What conclusion does the speaker reach regarding the existence of God?

The speaker concludes that God is not an arbitrary solution but a reasoned conclusion based on the necessity of a non-contingent, non-material being to explain the existence of contingent facts.

Outlines

00:00

😀 The Truth of Islam and the Existence of God

In this part, the speaker outlines the goal of the presentation series: to demonstrate the truth of Islam by evaluating evidence supporting and opposing its claims. The central assertion is that Islam is true, defined as the belief that God created the universe for a purpose and sent messengers to guide humanity toward eternal happiness. To explore this claim, the speaker breaks it down into smaller claims, focusing first on the existence of God, which he argues is necessary due to the contingent nature of the universe. The speaker summarizes the argument for God's existence, highlighting that everything in the universe is contingent and requires a necessary being—God—to explain its existence. He anticipates materialist objections, particularly the assertion that the claim of God's existence is arbitrary, and prepares to address them in the following sections.

05:02

😀 Addressing Materialist Objections to God's Existence

This section addresses materialist objections to the claim that God exists, specifically the assertion that claiming 'God made everything the way it is' is an arbitrary solution. The speaker explains that materialists often suggest that if something must exist to explain contingent facts, one could just as easily stop the explanatory chain at the universe or the Big Bang rather than at God. However, the speaker argues that this line of reasoning is flawed; contingent facts cannot explain other contingent facts without eventually leading to a necessary being. He asserts that the existence of God is not arbitrary but a reasoned conclusion stemming from the contingency of the universe, which necessitates an independent, non-material entity—God. The speaker further clarifies that the materialist viewpoint stems from a misunderstanding of the nature of existence and the role of necessary beings.

10:03

😀 The Fallacy of Materialism and Its Implications

In this part, the speaker explores the fallacy of materialism, which posits that only material objects exist based on our sensory observations. This perspective leads to misconceptions about God, as people mistakenly consider Him a material object that requires a cause. The speaker emphasizes that God's status as a necessary being fundamentally distinguishes Him from contingent material objects. He argues that materialism ignores evidence of non-material existence, particularly the necessity of a non-contingent being to explain the contingent universe. The conclusion drawn is that God is not subject to the same limitations as material objects, and thus the question 'Who made God?' is based on a flawed premise. This highlights the misunderstanding that leads to the objection regarding God's existence.

15:04

😀 Refuting the Question of God's Causation

The speaker continues to dismantle the objection regarding the necessity of God's existence, specifically the question 'Who made God?'. He categorizes this question as a loaded question, which presupposes that God needs to be caused or made. The speaker argues that this is an invalid question because it contradicts the nature of God as a necessary being who does not require a cause. By establishing that God is fundamentally different from contingent objects, he concludes that the existence of God is a logical necessity derived from the contingent nature of the universe. The speaker reiterates that the argument for God's existence remains robust despite materialist objections, emphasizing that God is the ultimate explanation for the existence of everything contingent.

Keywords

💡Islam

Islam is defined as the belief system that posits a singular God who created the universe and sent messengers to convey humanity's purpose. This concept is central to the video's message, as it frames the argument that Islam is true by establishing its foundational beliefs about God and existence. For example, the speaker mentions the purpose of life and the afterlife as intrinsic elements of Islamic teaching.

💡God

In the video, God is presented as the necessary being whose existence underpins the universe. The argument for God's existence is a critical aspect of the video's theme, emphasizing that God is the reason everything exists as it is. The speaker highlights the difference between contingent beings, which rely on other factors for existence, and God, who does not.

💡Contingency

Contingency refers to the state of being dependent on external factors for existence. The speaker argues that everything in the universe is contingent, meaning it could have been otherwise and requires a necessary being to account for its existence. This concept is used to support the idea that a non-contingent entity, or God, is necessary to explain why the universe exists in its current form.

💡Necessary Being

A necessary being is defined as an entity that must exist and cannot not exist, which in this context is identified as God. The speaker contrasts necessary beings with contingent beings, arguing that only a necessary being can account for the existence of all contingent realities. This distinction is crucial for establishing the argument that God is not arbitrary but essential.

💡Materialism

Materialism is presented as a philosophical viewpoint that asserts everything that exists is material. The speaker critiques this perspective, arguing that it leads to fallacies in understanding the existence of God. By examining how materialism reduces all entities to physical explanations, the video suggests that this view limits comprehension of non-material realities such as the necessary being.

💡Arbitrary Solution

An arbitrary solution, in the context of the video, refers to the objection raised by materialists that posits God as an unnecessary endpoint in the explanation of existence. The speaker rebuts this notion by asserting that God's existence is a reasoned conclusion rather than a mere convenience. This concept illustrates the critique of simplistic reasoning that fails to account for deeper philosophical implications.

💡Evidence

Evidence in the video is discussed in relation to supporting or opposing the claim of God's existence. The speaker emphasizes the importance of evaluating evidence for the claim that Islam is true, using logical reasoning and observations of the universe to substantiate the argument. This notion reinforces the video's theme of engaging critically with both supportive and opposing viewpoints.

💡Existential Claims

Existential claims are assertions regarding the nature of existence, such as 'God exists.' The speaker addresses these claims by deconstructing the arguments for and against them, emphasizing the need for rigorous analysis. This ties into the main theme of the video, which is to methodically demonstrate why the claim 'Islam is true' holds validity.

💡Logical Fallacy

A logical fallacy is an error in reasoning that undermines the logic of an argument. The speaker identifies the objection 'Who made God?' as a logical fallacy known as a loaded question, which assumes that God requires a maker. This analysis helps illustrate the flaws in materialist objections and reinforces the validity of the argument for God's existence.

💡Supernatural

The supernatural refers to phenomena or entities beyond the physical and natural world, particularly relating to the existence of God. The video argues against the materialist view by positing that God, as a necessary being, is fundamentally different from material objects. This distinction supports the claim that God is not bound by the same limitations that apply to contingent beings.

Highlights

The primary goal of the presentation series is to demonstrate the truth of Islam by evaluating supporting and opposing evidence.

Islam is defined as the belief that God created the universe for a purpose and sent messengers to guide humanity towards eternal happiness.

The existence of God is presented as a crucial subclaim in the overarching argument for the truth of Islam.

The argument for God's existence hinges on the contingent nature of the universe, suggesting it requires a necessary being.

The concept of a 'necessary being' is elaborated upon, highlighting its importance in distinguishing God from contingent entities.

The argument is structured simply: the universe exists, and since it could not exist, God must be the creator.

Materialists challenge the argument by labeling it an 'arbitrary solution' and questioning the necessity of God as the final explanation.

The objection 'who made God?' is explored as a common counterargument that needs careful analysis.

The presentation clarifies that contingent facts cannot explain other contingent facts, leading to the necessity of a non-contingent being.

The materialist objection misunderstands the argument by equating God with contingent entities like the universe or the Big Bang.

God is posited as a necessary fact that does not require an explanation, unlike contingent facts that need external justification.

The fallacy of materialism is identified as a reasoning error that assumes all existence is material, limiting the understanding of non-material entities.

The characteristics of the physical universe are contingent, necessitating a non-contingent, independent source for existence.

The loaded question 'who made God?' is discussed as a presupposition that incorrectly assumes God is contingent.

The presentation reaffirms that the existence of God is a reasoned conclusion and counters the fallacious objections raised by materialists.

The conclusion asserts that the objection does not weaken the argument for God's existence, maintaining its validity.

Transcripts

my goal in this series of presentations

is to show why islam is true as i

explained in the first presentation my

approach will be to take the statement

islam is true as a claim

and then to evaluate the evidence that

supports this claim as well as the

evidence that may

uh may argue against this claim

in order to make this evaluation i need

to clearly define what i mean by the

word islam

and i explained in the first

presentation that what i mean when i say

islam is true is that it is true that

god created the universe put us in it

for a great purpose and sent us

messengers to tell us our purpose so

that we might gain eternal happiness in

our life after death

in order to evaluate this large claim i

need to break it up into a series of

smaller claims and the most important

subclaim of this large claim is the

claim that god exists in the second

presentation i showed you

why it is that god must exist and we saw

that the contingent universe requires a

necessary being in order for it to exist

in the next presentation i explained

what i mean by necessary being what the

quran means by necessary being what the

prophet sallallahu alaihi wasallam means

meant by necessary being and i showed

that the concept of nest of necessary

existence is the most important concept

um that relates to the concept of god

and it is what distinguishes god from

everything else that exists

now i promised that i would examine the

evidence for the claim islam is true and

also the evidence against the against

that claim

so in this presentation i'm going to

respond to a materialist objection to

the claim god exists

in particular a materialist objection to

the argument that i presented in the

second presentation for the existence of

god

before i present that objection let's

recap the argument in a very in very

simple terms the argument goes like this

the universe exists but it could have

not existed therefore god made it exist

it's night but it could have been day

it's day but it could have been night

therefore god made it night and god made

it today

ships sail but they could have sank

therefore god makes them sail

it is rainy but it could have been sunny

therefore god is making it rain

everything in the universe could have

been other than the way that it is

therefore god made everything the way

that it is it's a very simple and in

fact intuitive presentation uh of the

argument for the existence of god the

objection that materialists

raise against this

argument is that

this is an arbitrary solution they say

that therefore god made everything the

way that it is is an arbitrary solution

and then they ask they say then who made

god before we respond

to this objection which you will hear

very frequently

in

in contemporary debates around the

existence or

around the existence of god

we need to understand what exactly it

means because this objection is often

made and it's not and its meaning is not

carefully analyzed and until we

carefully analyze its meaning

we cannot respond to it and explain why

it is an invalid objection this

objection consists of two parts the

first part is the statement that that is

an arbitrary solution

the second part is the question who made

god

let's start with the first part of this

objection

that is an arbitrary solution what

exactly does this mean

let's do a quick recap of the argument

that i presented in the second

presentation in that presentation i

explained that everything in the

universe is contingent

the fact that ships sail is contingent

the fact that rain falls is contingent

the fact that wind blows is contingent

everything in the universe is contingent

meaning that it could have been other

than the way that it is since it's

contingent it needs something else to

make it true what a scientist does is he

explains one contingent fact in terms of

another contingent fact but that doesn't

solve the problem because the second

contingent fact needs a third contingent

fact to explain it which will then need

another contingent fact to explain it

we saw that i explained that this series

of contingent explanation cannot

continue forever because no contingent

fact really explains anything else

because it remains something that needs

to be explained by something else and

the only way to

explain the existence of the contingent

things in the universe is to end the

chain at a necessary fact which i

explained in

the third presentation is what religious

believers mean

when they refer to the entity called god

so the materialist who is objecting to

this argument is saying that

that

necessary fact is an arbitrary solution

to the problem of contingency

what does he mean by arbitrary what he

means by arbitrary is that there is no

reason why ending the chain at a

necessary fact in other words god

is any better than ending it at a

contingent fact

that is why the materialist will follow

his objection with statements like this

he will say that why do you want to end

it at god why don't you just end the

contingent contingent chain at the

universe or better still end it at the

big bank if you want to end it at

something why choose god rather than the

universe or the big bang in fact ending

it at the universe or the big bang is

better than ending it at god because god

is something that is magical and

unscientific the existence of god can

never be demonstrated through scientific

through the scientific method and so one

should

choose something in the universe and

that would be a better explanation

of the contingent causation if you have

to stop somewhere stop at something that

you can easily touch

smell

grasp with your mind something that has

evidence for ex for its existence rather

than something that has no evidence for

its existence that's how the objection

goes now if you've carefully followed

the argument for god's existence for the

existence of a necessary being

and if you've carefully followed

my explanation of the objection that

that is an arbitrary solution you will

quickly see that this objection

completely misses the point it misses

the point because the whole point of the

argument is that contingent facts cannot

be made true by some other contingent

fact

to say that all of the contingent facts

are made true by the universe or the big

bang

is not

a solution because the universe and the

big bang are both contingent facts and

they need something else to make them

true

when we say that god is the one who made

all of the contingent facts in the

universe true

god does not need to be made true by

anything else that's why he is a

necessary fact

the existence of god is not a fairy tale

that doesn't have any evidence behind it

the existence of god is a reasoned

conclusion

god must exist if you think god must

exist

if you skipped ahead to this

presentation without watching the second

presentation in which i explained the

argument for god's existence more

thoroughly go back right now and listen

to that presentation before continuing

ahead with this presentation

if you did listen to that presentation

then some of you will have grasped why

the objection is an invalid fallacious

objection

some of you however will still not have

grasped this because there is an

underlying problem that exists in the

minds of most of us today that

underlying problem is what i call the

fallacy of materialism the fallacy of

materialism reasons like this

it reasons that

everything that i observe is material

the sun is a material object the moon is

a material object the table in front of

me is a material object

rain

stars wind everything that i touch and

observe is a material object therefore

everything that exists must also be a

material object

it's because of this fallacy that the

objection that we are studying arises

because of this fallacy when we observe

one contingent fact and then we go to

another contingent fact and another

contingent fact reaching the conclusion

that all of these contingent facts must

have been made true by a necessary fact

because of this underlying fallacy in

many of our minds

we

consider the necessary fact god in other

words to be a material object because we

think that everything that exists is a

material object the only difference

between god and the other material

objects in our minds when we have this

fallacy embedded within us is that god

is somehow more powerful than all of the

other material objects

and since god is a material object

albeit more powerful just like all other

material objects this is what leads us

to ask the question

what made god

it is because of this fallacy that the

objection that we are studying arises

since somebody with this fallacy thinks

that everything is material

there appears to be no difference

between ending the chain at god or

ending the chain at some other material

object

but what the argument shows is that the

fallacy of materialism is a hasty

generalization

it's a hasty generalization because it's

a generalization that is not only based

on insufficient evidence

it's actually

based on ignoring evidence to the

contrary we have evidence the argument

is evidence that god is not a material

object

based on evidence we therefore know the

existence of at least one non-material

object and that is the necessary fact

for whose existence we have we have this

argument god is not a material object

and the fact that he is super powerful

is not what makes him god what makes him

god is that he is a necessary fact that

he is not contingent that he is not

material

matter is contingent

god cannot be material this argument

argues from the contingency of the

physical universe the physical universe

is the total of all material objects and

when we look at the

characteristics of the material objects

in the physical universe everything in

the physical universe all of these

characteristics location size motion

matter or energy change time all of

these are contingent characteristics

they need to be made true by something

other than themselves

so the physical universe because it is

composed of material objects is

contingent to say that it's contingent

is the same thing as to say that it's

needy which is the same thing

as to say that it is dependent

and the physical universe the universe

therefore needs a necessary fact and the

necessary fact must be non-contingent

and it can only be non-contingent if it

is non-material

the physical universe from its

contingency from its neediness from its

dependence

points to the existence of a necessary

fact that is necessary which is the same

as to say that it is self-sufficient

which is the same as to say that it is

independent and it's being necessary

self-sufficient and independent can only

be the case if it does not possess any

of the characteristics of material

objects because all of those

characteristics are contingent

and that non-material non-contingent

being

is what we mean when we say god

and so when we say that god is the

solution to the problem of contingency

it is not an arbitrary solution it is

not an arbitrary solution at all

god is non-contingent non-material

completely different than all of the

other material things that we observe

and touch

that is why the question what made god

is an invalid question

we'll return to this question in just a

little bit because this was the second

part of the objection with which we

began

this

presentation what's important at this

point

is to understand

that the necessary fact the

non-contingent non-material fact the

fact of god

is not an arbitrary solution it is a

reasoned conclusion

and the fallacy of materialism that

might lead some of us to imagine that it

is an arbitrary solution is a baseless

hasty generalization that flies in the

face of evidence to the contrary

let's return to where we began this

presentation we began with the

conclusion from the contingency of the

universe that god made everything the

way that it is

the objection that this is an arbitrary

solution then who made god we saw was

composed of two parts

and we've just seen that the first part

is a baseless objection that does not

advance any evidence against the claim

that god exists

now that we understand why the first

part of the objection is

baseless and fallacious we can move on

to see that the second part of the

objection is also fallacious

the second part of the objection commits

a logical fallacy that logicians call

the fallacy of multiple questions or in

in simpler terms it's often called a

loaded question a loaded question is

like the question have you stopped

beating your wife this question

presupposes another question namely were

you beating your wife

if the answer to this

previous question were you beating your

wife is yes

then you can validly ask have you

stopped beating your wife

but if

the question that is presupposed were

you beating your wife the answer to that

question is no

then the question have you stopped

beating your wife is an invalid question

it cannot be posed because it's based on

an unjustified assumption if someone

insists anyway and asks have you stopped

beating your wife knowing that you have

never beaten your wife

then

the proper way to answer this question

is to return it to the question that it

hinges on namely were you beating your

wife and to say that i have never beaten

my wife

i have never beaten my wife and then to

say that therefore your question is an

invalid question it's based on an

unjustified assumption

similarly the question who made god is a

loaded question it presupposes another

question namely does god need to be made

if god needs to be made then one can

validly ask who made god but if god does

not need to be made then the question

who made god is an invalid question if

someone insists on asking anyway who

made god knowing that god does not need

to be made remember that that's the

whole argument that we

that the presentation in lesson two was

dedicated to and that i've explained

several times in this lesson the whole

point of that argument is that god does

not need to be made god is a necessary

fact so the question who made god is an

invalid question if someone asks it the

proper way to answer it is to return it

to the question that it presupposes and

to answer that question by denying

emphatically that god does not need to

be made and your question who made god

is therefore an invalid question it's a

loaded question that is based on an

unjustified assumption

so the second part of the objection is

also salacious

let's return once again to the beginning

of our presentation in which we saw that

everything in the universe is contingent

because it could have been otherwise

this is proof that god is the one who

made everything the way that it is

because god is a necessary being who

does not need to be made the way that he

is by anyone else

the objection that

this is an arbitrary solution

or the question that who made god

this objection is a fallacious objection

it's a baseless objection it is not

based on any evidence and the argument

for the existence of god still stands

just as strong as it stood before this

objection was made

mohammed

[Music]

allah