A person who disputes the existence of God is one who refuses to look past the end of his nose. For example, the person who wants to buy a garment will not argue that before he can buy it, it has to be made from cloth which requires a tailor or seamstress to take the cloth, cut it out, and sew the garment together. Similarly, the one who goes into a desert and finds no house built, waits for mud to turn into bricks and be laid to form a house without a builder, would be called mad, stupid, or ignorant.
So what can one say who looks at the universe with all the planets, the stars, the sun and the moon moving in great precision. It is obvious that it has to have a Creator, and if someone thinks about the human body developing from an infant to an adult, maintaining the complex human body, this could not happen by chance. It had to have a Creator. For just as you cannot have a house without a builder, you cannot have this world or living beings without a Creator.
Nevertheless, there are those who insist on denying the existence of the Creator. Everyone who denies the existence of the Creator can be classified into one of two groups. The first group consists of those who deny the existence of God and deny that the world has a beginning. The second group are those who deny the existence of God, but admit that the world has a beginning. Now, let us turn our attention to the first group and prove that the world has a beginning, then the two groups will have merged, since both groups will be forced to admit that the world has a beginning, though they still maintain that God does not exist.
Before proceeding, let us define some terminology. An event is anything which has a beginning. According to this definition the motion of a moving hand is an event, and the hand itself is an event. As you can see the world is a huge set of events. We ourselves are events as we develop from birth to death. Our emotions, the seasons and growing plants are all events.
To show that the world has a beginning, let us consider this example. If someone promises to give you a dollar with the condition that he is not going to give you a dollar unless he gave you a dollar before, and the previous dollar has the same condition (that you received a dollar from him), and this dollar and each previous dollar promised has the same condition. Now the question is, “Will you ever get the dollar he promised?” The answer is simply, “No!”
In the same way, the events that make up the world are like the dollar and could never have happened unless there is a beginning. If these events had no beginning, then we would not be able to reach the present event, in this case, the moment during which you are reading this essay. Thus, if someone says that the world has no beginning, he is saying that no event took place, which is obviously contradictory, and there is no way to get out of this contradiction except by admitting that the world has a beginning.
Another example to clarify this point is that if someone tells you to go to a wall, but says you have to take an infinite number of steps to reach the wall, he is saying you will never reach it. Because infinity, by definition does not end, you can never reach the wall. This is exactly what the person who claims that the world has no beginning is saying one must do to reach the event we are now experiencing. Since we have reached this event, the person who claims the world has no beginning has been proven wrong.
Mathematically if you consider the year 1066 and this year and ask what is the difference between them the one who claims that the world does not have a beginning will have to answer none. Because if you look at the year 1066 and now. You can express it in a formula where now (a) and 1066 is also (a). However if you consider it carefully Now is 1066 plus the number of years from 1066 till Now (b). In other words the one who claims that the world has no beginning are saying the a+b=a where b is a non-zero number. A beginning algebra student will tell you that it can’t be. So this proves that the world has to have a beginning
So as promised, we have proven that this world has a beginning. Now we will turn our attention to prove that the Creator exists to those who deny His existence but admit that the world has a beginning.
Before proceeding, there are some facts that must be faced. Those who insist on denying the existence of God must first understand that there are things which are possible to the mind and things which are impossible to the mind. For example, it is impossible for the mind to accept that a person could fit into a normal cup. However, it is possible for the mind to accept that a cup could be made large enough for a person to fit inside it. So, one must be rational and accept only things which are possible to the sound intellect. Keeping this point in mind, let us proceed with our discussion.
People who deny the existence of God can be divided into three groups. One group says the world created itself, one group says the world happened by chance, and one group says nature created the world.
For those who claim that the world created itself, they claim a logical contradiction. Because, if somebody says Mr. X created himself that means that he had to exist and not exist simultaneously. According to their claim, for Mr. X to create himself, he has to exist already, while to be created he does not yet exist. This is impossible, and this same principle applies to the world.
Another proof of this point is that if someone is sitting in a room, knows that there is a book on the table, leaves the room and when he returns, finds the book on the chair, he will not say that the book moved by itself, because being able to move is not an attribute of the book. In the same way creating is not an attribute of the world. So the world cannot create.
Now, for those who maintain that the world exists by chance, we don’t have to pass the human body to see the great order and precision in the world, much less looking at the universe and the precise movement of the stars, sun and moon. Statistically, you cannot get such order from randomness. It is like a man who stands by a river with logs in it. No one will accept that the logs will come together and form a raft to take him to the other side by chance. So if one cannot accept this small bit of order from randomness, how can he accept the order of the entire universe or the human body as occurring by chance? It is impossible.
As for those who claim that the world was created by nature, it is obvious that nature is a part of the world. We observe and marvel at it. Since nature is a part of the world, it is as if they are saying a part of the world created the entire world. To these people we refer them back to those who say that the world created itself, and as we have already proved, this cannot be.
Having discussed and disproved what some people might claim to be how the world originated, it is more than obvious that the world has to have a Creator. It is further evident that the Creator does not resemble any of His creations. It is important to note that God is not His attributes, nor is He other than them. So God has the attribute of power but He is not power.
It is required for us to believe in God and His Messengers. The first Prophet was the first man, Adam (may Allah increase his honor), and the last Prophet was Muhammad (may Allah increase his honor). To believe properly in God, one must believe in all the Prophets and Messengers. To have the proper belief in God, one must be Muslim. One becomes Muslim by believing and saying, “I firmly believe that there exists only one Creator, His name is Allah, and Muhammad is His Prophet and Messenger,” with the intent in one’s heart to become Muslim and leave anything contrary to this belief.
Famous question of the atheists
Famous question of the atheists and I quote ''Can God make a stone which He can't lift Himself''? If you answer yes that means God can make a stone which He canot lift Himself so His powers are limited, yet if you answer no then again His powers are limited. But the answer to this question is very simple and is found in the book of Imam Ghazzali (refer to Islamic belief detalied). The answer is ''This question doesn't apply on God''. Why? it is because the atheists have made a terrible mistake in their perception of God and thus they have committed a conceptual fallacy.
Imam Ghazzali states in his book ''The Foundation of Islamic belief'' and I quote
''Allah is not a body possessing form, nor a substance restricted and limited: He does not resemble other bodies either in limitation or in accepting division.He is not a substance and substances do not reside in Him; He is not a quality of substance, nor does a quality of substance occur in Him.Rather, He resembles no existent and no existent resembles Him. Nothing is like Him and He is not like anything. Measure does not bind Him and boundaries do not contain Him. Directions do not surround Him and neither the earth nor the Heavens are on different sides of Him'' (elaborations are below)
Any man with a simple knowledge of physics will know that for gravity to act on something it must have a mass, must possess a body, must be subjected to the laws of creation which Allah created. The conceptual fallacy which the atheists have committed is that they have attributed to God a body which is subjected to His own created Laws, and God is not subjected to His creation but the oppossite. So this question is not applicable on God Al-Mighty
Asharis' (the orthodox scholars of Islam) proof of God's existence:
All bodies, they argued, are ultimately one in so far as their essence is concerned. But, in spite of this basic unity, their characteristics are different. Hence there must be an ultimate cause for these divergent characteristic, and that ultimate cause is God. The world is contingent. Every contingent thing must have a cause; therefore, the world must have a cause, and as no contingent thing can be the cause, that cause must be God. The major premise (i.e., every event must have a cause) does not require a proof. The minor premise‑the world is contingent‑they proved in the following manner: Everything that exists in the world is either a substance or a quality. The contingent character of a quality is evident, and the contingence of substance follows from the fact that no substance could exist apart from qualities. The contingence of quality necessitates the contingence of substance; otherwise, the eternity of substance would necessitate the eternity of quality.
