Meme Debunked: There’s 3000 Gods But Only Yours Is Real?

 

The popularity of some memes tend to fluctuate for some reason or another. One meme which has become popular again with internet atheists recently has Ricky Gervais saying:

There have been nearly 3000 Gods so far but only yours actually exists. The others are silly made up nonsense. But not yours. Yours is real.

Interacting with this meme is a bit difficult because it’s not really making a claim. The best I can do at this point is give different interpretations of what it’s trying to say in the form of a question or claim and respond to those. Here are some possible interpretations:

1. “Why do you believe your god exists but others don’t?”
2. “What is the probability that your god exists when all these countless others, don’t?”
3. “Did you disprove all the other gods in order to come to the conclusion that yours exists?”
4. “If you applied the same methods you used to disprove other gods to yours, then you wouldn’t believe in a god.”
5. “You’re an atheist regarding the existence of all those other gods, right? Well, I just go step further and say the same regarding the god you believe in.”

“Why do you believe your god exists but not the others?”

Because there is good evidence justifying the belief that God exists. A lot of the time, atheists try to place God, who is an immaterial and necessary being, in the same category with Harry Potter, the Flying Spaghetti monster, or Zeus. This is a fundamental error. Regarding the first two examples, see:

Refuting Fallacious comparisons of God to Harry Potter, Santa Claus and other Fictional Characters.

As for Zeus or Thor (whom I’m pretty sure Ricky had in mind when he said this) both are competing explanations for thunder or lightening people gave in the past. They aren’t an immaterial necessarily existent deity with the power to create from nothing and bring about the existence of the universe, for example. To see arguments (which are evidence, though not scientific evidence) for the existence of God see:

Divine Link: Dependency and God’s Existence

Divine Certainty: A Qur’anic and Philosophical Argument for God

“What is the probability that your god exists when all these countless others, don’t?”

The probability of existence is incredibly high (I am quite certain) and this is due to the evidence we have. If it’s being argued that the nonexistence of countless alleged deities like Zeus or Thor somehow makes God less likely to exist, than that is fallacious. It would be similar to saying that 2+2 doesn’t equal 4 since all other answers to the question are false. 2+2 not being 3 has no effect on the probability of it being 4.

“Did you disprove all the other gods in order to come to the conclusion that yours exists?”

I don’t need to disprove all the other gods in order to come such a conclusion. All I need to do is prove God exists. If God exists, then Zeus, Thor, or whatever have you, can’t exist.

“If you applied the same methods you used to disprove other gods to yours, then you wouldn’t believe in a god.”

But I do apply the same methods. Where are the valid and sound arguments for Zeus, Thor, etc?

“You’re an atheist regarding the existence of all those other gods, right? Well, I just go step further and say the same regarding the god you believe in.”

This question is based on a misunderstanding of how language works. There aren't degrees of theism, its binary, this is to say that you either are one, or aren't. For example, it would be irrational for someone to say that they are a vegetarian when it comes to eating cows (even though they eat lamb) or an anarchist when it comes republics (even though they advocate for a direct democracy). The point of this misuse of language is to make atheism sound less radical than it really is.

As it stands, I've shared 5 possible interpretations of what the meme might be trying to argue. If I think of another or come across something else trying to explain it in the best way possible, I’ll add it then respond to it as well.

Source

Prophet Muhammad's cousins "Abu Sufyan Ibn al Harith" & "Abdullah bin Abi Umayyah" embraced Islam after insults & disbelief

Abu Sufyan Ibn al Harith was the cousin of the Prophet Muhammad ﷺ and his brother in breast-milk; he used to like the Prophet ﷺ before Islam, but once he ﷺ received revelation, Abu Sufyan expressed enmity towards the Prophet ﷺ and composed poetry to defame him.

Thus, Hassaan Ibn Thabet asked for permission to answer back. 

Then Abu Sufyan embraced Islam in the year of the conquest of Makkah:
At the year of the conquest of Makkah, Abu Sufyan bin Al-Harith, his son and Abdullah bin Abi Umayyah bin Al-Mughirah, his cousin and son-in-law met the Messenger of Allah ﷺ at Al-Abwa’ and they sought to enter to him, but they were not given permission, so Umm Salamah spoke to him about them, and she said,

“Oh, Messenger of God, your cousins and your son-in-law are not the most wretched of people with you.” (she wants him to forgive their enmity and insults)

He ﷺ said,

“I have no need for them. As for my cousin, he insulted my honor. As for my cousin and son-in-law, he is the one who said in Mecca what he said”

فَقَالَ: لَا حَاجَةَ لِي فِيهِمَا، أَمَّا ابْنُ عَمِّي فَهَتَكَ عِرْضِي، وَأَمَّا ابْنُ عَمَّتِي وَصِهْرِي فَهُوَ الَّذِي، قَالَ لِي بِمَكَّةَ مَا قَالَ . 

He referred to the fact that Abu Sufyan used to frequently annoy the Messenger of God and slander him by his poets, even though before the prophetic mission he was from the most beloved of people to him. Hassaan bin Thabit then asked the permission of the Prophet (ﷺ) to respond and lampoon (i.e. compose satirical poetry defaming) the Abu Sufyan and infidels. Aisha said: he, Hassaan, used to defend the Prophet (with his poetry) (Bukhari 3531 - Muslim 2489a)

Abdullah bin Abi Umayyah, was the one who asked the prophet earlier in Mecca to punish them or do extraordinary miracles to believe. 

Ibn Qayyim's argument against atheism and the necessity of Allah's existence in his "Miftaah Daar al-Sa'aadah"

 

 

 

 

Here page 63:

 

 

فمن ذا الذي تولى ذلك كله وأحكمه ودبره وقدره أحسن تقدير ؟! 

وكأني بك أيها المسكين تقول "هذا كله من فعل الطبيعة وفي الطبيعة عجائب وأسرار"

 فلو أراد الله أن يهديك لسألت نفسك بنفسك وقلت "أخبريني عن هذه الطبيعة أهي ذات قائمة بنفسها لها علم وقدرة على هذه الأفعال العجيبة أم ليست كذلك بل عرض وصفة قائمة بالمطبوع تابعة له محمولة فيه؟"

 فإن قالت لك "بل هي ذات قائمة بنفسها لها العلم التام والقدرة والإرادة والحكمة" فقل لها 

"هذا هو الخالق البارئ المصور فلم تسمينه طبيعية ويا لله من ذكر الطبائع ومن يرغب فيها فهلا سميته بما سمى به نفسه على ألسن رسله ودخلت في جملة العقلاء والسعداء فإن هذا الذي وصفت به الطبيعة صفته تعالى"

 

 وإن قالت تلك "بل الطبيعة عرض محمول مفتقر الى حامل وهذا كله فعلها بغير علم منها ولا إرادة ولا قدرة ولا شعور أصلا وقد شوهد من آثارها ما شوهد" فقل لها

 "هذا مالا يصدقه ذو عقل سليم كيف تصدر هذه الأفعال العجيبة والحكم الدقيقة التي تعجز عقول العقلاء عن معرفتها وعن القدرة عليها ممن لا عقل له ولا قدرة ولا حكمة ولا شعور وهل التصديق بمثل هذا إلا دخول في سلك المجانين والمبرسمين؟" ثم قل لها بعد "ولو ثبت لك ما ادعيت فمعلوم أن مثل هذه الصفة ليست بخالقة لنفسها ولا مبدعة لذاتها فمن ربها ومبدعها وخالقها ومن طبعها وجعلها تفعل ذلك فهي إذا من أدل الدلائل على بارئها وفاطرها وكمال قدرته وعلمه وحكمته فلم يجد عليك تعطيلك رب العالم وجحدك لصفاته وأفعاله إلا مخالفتك العقل والفطرة ولو حاكمناك الى الطبيعة لرأيناك انك خارج عن موجبها فلا أنت مع موجب العقل ولا الفطرة ولا الطبيعة ولا الإنسانية أصلا وكفى بذلك جهلا وضلالا "

فإن رجعت إلى العقل وقلت لا يوجد حكمة إلا من حكيم قادر عليم ولا تدبيرمتقن إلا من صانع قادر مختار مدبر عليم بما يريد قادر عليه لا يعجزه ولا يؤؤده قيل لك فإذا أقررت - ويحك- بالخلاق العظيم الذي لا إله غيره ولا رب سواه فدع تسميته طبيعة أوعقلا فعالا او موجبا بذاته وقل هذا هو الله الخالق البارئ المصور رب العالمين وقيوم السموات والأرضين ورب المشارق والمغارب الذي أحسن كل شيء خلقه وأتقن ما صنع فمالك جحدت أسماءه وصفاته وذاته أضفت صنيعه الى غيره وخلقه الى سواه مع أنك مضطر الى الإقرار به إضافة الابداع والخلق والربوبية والتدبير إليه ولا بد والحمد لله رب العالمين

على أنك لو تأملت قولك طبيعة ومعنى هذه اللفظة لدلك على الخالق الباريء لفظها كما دل العقول عليه معناها لأن طبيعة فعيلة بمعنى مفعولة أي مطبوعة ولا يحتمل غيرهذا البتة لأنها على بناء الغرائز التي ركبت في الجسم ووضعت فيه كالسجية والغريزة والبحيرة والسليقة والطبيعة فهي التي طبع عليها الحيوان وطبعت فيه ومعلوم ان طبيعة من غير طابع لها محال فقد دل لفظ الطبيعة على البارئ تعالى كما دل معناها عليه والمسلمون يقولون إن الطبيعة خلق من خلق الله مسخر مربوب وهي سنته في خليقته التي أجراها عليه ثم إنه يتصرف فيها كيف شاء وكما شاء فيسلبها تأثيرها إذا اراد ويقلب تأثيرها إلى ضده إذا شاء ليرى عباده أنه وحده الخالق البارئ المصور وأنه يخلق ما يشاء كما يشاء وإِنَّمَا أَمْرُهُ إِذَا أَرَادَ شَيْئًا أَن يَقُولَ لَهُ كُن فَيَكُونُ وإن الطبيعة التي انتهى نظر الخفافيش اليها إنما هي خلق من خلقه بمنزلة سائر ملخوقاته فكيف يحسن بمن له حظ من إنسانية أوعقل أن ينسى من طبعها وخلقها ويحيل الصنع والابداع عليها ولم يزل الله سبحانه يسلبها قوتها ويحيلها ويقلبها الى ضد ما جعلت له حتى يرى عباده أنها خلقه وصنعه مسخرة بأمره أَلَا لَهُ الْخَلْقُ وَالْأَمْرُ ۗ تَبَارَكَ اللَّهُ رَبُّ الْعَالَمِينَ
فصل
فأعد النظر في نفسك وتأمل حكمة اللطيف الخبير في تركيب البدن

Re: Umdah al-Ahkam:Vol.3, Hadith no.460 ?!

Question: Is this a hadith? Is it authentic?

Narrated by Anas Ibn Malik "I heard from the Apostle of Allah (Peace and blessing be upon him) that he said "Allah was satan in the form of an angel that revealed to me the verses and his book the Quran and I' am his prophet.(Umdah al-Ahkam:Vol.3,Hadith no.460)

رواه أنس ابن مالك "سمعت من رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم أنه" كان الله شيطان في شكل ملاك كشف لي الآيات وكتابه القرآن وأنا نبي .

Answer:

Praise be to God.
There is no such a hadith in any book. It's a fabrication of desperate missionaries to deceive Muslims.
Umdat Al Ahkam itself in one volume and Hadith no.460 is shown below:

Umdah al-Ahkam:Hadith no.460

 

(The book can be found here)

Here is the  translation of  the Hadith no.460:

وَفِي رِوَايَةٍ: ((لا يَقْضِيَنَّ حَكِمٌ بَيْنَ اثْنَيْنِ وَهُوَ غَضْبَانُ)) .

and in another version "No judge must give judgment between two people when he is angry.” 

 That's the real hadith and it has nothing to do with the fabrication of missionaries.

And Allah knows best.

Re: Why did prophet Muhammad ﷺ sell the Mudabbar slave in Bukhari 6716 & 6947 ?

Hadith 2415 (Sahih al-Bukhari)

Sahih al-Bukhari » Khusoomaat - كتاب الخصومات » Hadith 2415

A man manumitted a slave and he had no other property than that, so the Prophet (ﷺ) canceled the manumission (and sold the slave for him). Nu'aim bin Al-Nahham bought the slave from him.

 

Bukhari » Expiation for Unfulfilled Oaths - كتاب كفارات الأيمان » Hadith 6716

USC-MSA web (English) reference : Vol. 9, Book 85, Hadith 80

Bukhari » (Statements made under) Coercion - كتاب الإكراه » Hadith 6947

USC-MSA web (English) reference : Vol. 8, Book 79, Hadith 707

Narrated `Amr:Jabir said: 

An Ansari man made his slave a Mudabbar and he had no other property than him. When the Prophet (ﷺ) heard of that, he said (to his companions), "Who wants to buy him (i.e., the slave) for me?" Nu'aim bin An-Nahham bought him for eight hundred Dirhams. I heard Jabir saying, "That was a coptic slave who died in the same year."

حَدَّثَنَا أَبُو النُّعْمَانِ، أَخْبَرَنَا حَمَّادُ بْنُ زَيْدٍ، عَنْ عَمْرٍو، عَنْ جَابِرٍ، أَنَّ رَجُلاً، مِنَ الأَنْصَارِ دَبَّرَ مَمْلُوكًا لَهُ، وَلَمْ يَكُنْ لَهُ مَالٌ غَيْرُهُ فَبَلَغَ النَّبِيَّ صلى الله عليه وسلم فَقَالَ ‏ "‏ مَنْ يَشْتَرِيهِ مِنِّي ‏"‏‏.‏ فَاشْتَرَاهُ نُعَيْمُ بْنُ النَّحَّامِ بِثَمَانِمِائَةِ دِرْهَمٍ، فَسَمِعْتُ جَابِرَ بْنَ عَبْدِ اللَّهِ يَقُولُ عَبْدًا قِبْطِيًّا مَاتَ عَامَ أَوَّلَ‏.‏

 

To understand this hadith, we must read other versions to get the whole story:

Bulugh al-Maram » Emancipation كتاب العتق » Hadith

Jabir bin ·Abdullah (RAA) narrated that:

A man from the Ansar declared that his slave lad would be free after his death (would be Mudabbar), yet he had no other property. When the Prophet heard of that he said, “Who will buy him from me?” And Nu'aim bin 'Abdullah bought him for eight hundred Dirhams. Agreed upon. In a narration by Al-Bukhari:

“The man became needy,’ (so the Prophet took the slave and said...).’ A version by An-Nasa’i says, “The man had a debt, so the Prophet sold the slave for eight hundred Dirhams and gave him the money and said, “Pay off your debt.”

 
عَنْ جَابِرٍ ‏- رضى الله عنه ‏- { أَنَّ رَجُلًا مِنْ اَلْأَنْصَارِ أَعْتَقَ غُلَامًا لَهُ عَنْ دُبُرٍ, لَمْ يَكُنْ لَهُ مَالٌ غَيْرُهُ, فَبَلَغَ ذَلِكَ اَلنَّبِيَّ ‏- صلى الله عليه وسلم ‏-.‏ فَقَالَ: "مَنْ يَشْتَرِيهِ مِنِّي?" فَاشْتَرَاهُ نُعَيْمُ بْنُ عَبْدِ اَللَّهِ بِثَمَانِمَائَةِ دِرْهَمٍ } مُتَّفَقٌ عَلَيْه ِ
‏ .‏ وَفِي لَفْظٍ لِلْبُخَارِيِّ: فَاحْتَاج َ وَفِي رِوَايَةٍ لِلنَّسَائِيِّ: { وَكَانَ عَلَيْهِ دَيْنٌ, فَبَاعَهُ بِثَمَانِمَائَةِ دِرْهَمٍ, فَأَعْطَاهُ وَقَالَ: " اِقْضِ دَيْنَكَ" }.‏

 

Nasa'i : The Book of the Etiquette of Judges - كتاب آداب القضاة: 49, Hadith: 5418 

 English translation : Vol. 6, Book 49, Hadith 5420

It was narrated that Jabir bin 'Abdullah said:

"A man among the Ansar stated that his salve was to be set free after he died; he was in need, and he owed a debt. The Messenger of Allah [SAW] sold him (the slave) for eight hundred Dirhams, and he gave (the money) to him and said: 'Pay off your debt and spend on your dependents.'"

أَخْبَرَنَا عَبْدُ الأَعْلَى بْنُ وَاصِلِ بْنِ عَبْدِ الأَعْلَى، قَالَ حَدَّثَنَا مُحَاضِرُ بْنُ الْمُوَرِّعِ، قَالَ حَدَّثَنَا الأَعْمَشُ، عَنْ سَلَمَةَ بْنِ كُهَيْلٍ، عَنْ عَطَاءٍ، عَنْ جَابِرِ بْنِ عَبْدِ اللَّهِ، قَالَ أَعْتَقَ رَجُلٌ مِنَ الأَنْصَارِ غُلاَمًا لَهُ عَنْ دُبُرٍ وَكَانَ مُحْتَاجًا وَكَانَ عَلَيْهِ دَيْنٌ فَبَاعَهُ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ صلى الله عليه وسلم بِثَمَانِمِائَةِ دِرْهَمٍ فَأَعْطَاهُ فَقَالَ ‏ "‏ اقْضِ دَيْنَكَ وَأَنْفِقْ عَلَى عِيَالِكَ ‏"‏ ‏.‏

Allah knows best!

"Allah" in the pre-islamic Arabia

Most of the Arabs had complied with the call of Ishmael (Peace be upon him) , and professed the religion of his father Abraham (Peace be upon him) They had worshipped Allah, professed His Oneness and followed His religion a long time until they forgot part of what they had been reminded of.

However, they still maintained such fundamental beliefs such as monotheism as well as various other aspects of Abraham’s religion, until the time when a chief of Khuza‘a, namely ‘Amr bin Luhai, who was renowned for righteousness, charity, reverence and care for religion, and was granted unreserved love and obedience by his tribesmen, came back from a trip to Syria where he saw people worship idols, a phenomenon he approved of and believed it to be righteous since Syria was the locus of Messengers and Scriptures, he brought with him an idol (Hubal) which he placed in the middle of Al-Kaabah and summoned people to worship it.

Readily enough, paganism spread all over Makkah and, thence, to Arabia, people of Makkah being custodians of not only the Sacred House but the whole Haram as well. A great many idols, bearing different names, were introduced into the area.

The Arabs believed that such idols, or heathen gods, would bring them nearer to Allah, lead them to Him, and mediate with Him for their sake, to which effect, the Qur’an goes:

“We worship them only that they may bring us near to Allah.” [39:3], and

“And they worship besides Allah things that hurt them not, nor profit them, and they say: These are our intercessors with Allah.” [10:18]

The polytheists, who faked Abrahamism, were so far detached from its precepts, and totally oblivious of its immanent good manners. They plunged into disobedience and ungodliness, and developed certain peculiar religious superstitions that managed to leave a serious impact on the religious and socio-political life in the whole of Arabia.
Religions of the Arabs

The polytheists who associated partners with Allah in worship admitted that He is the Sole Creator of the heavens, earth, sun, moon, day, and night, and that He is the Sole Sustainer of all Creation, Who grants all beings provisions, and Who has predetermined their destinies and decreed that they should be granted dissimilar amounts of provision in this worldly life, making some rich and some poor. They, just like Christ-worshippers, claimed that these idols are "the only way" to God/Allah.

Re: Abu Dawud hadith 4410 -The thief who steals repeatedly

This hadith was narrated by Abu Dawood (4410) and an-Nasa’i (4978), and it is a munkar hadith that is not authentic.

An-Nasa’i said after its narration: “This hadith is munkar, and Musab bin Thabit is not strong in the hadith.” End.

The majority of jurists did not accept this hadith due to its weakness, and because it is possible that this man apostatized, and for this reason he was killed and thrown into the well.

Sindi said: "The jurists doesn't apply what's mentioned here; it was said: he found him an apostate which is the reason for killing him . Such a humiliation, is not befitting the condition of a Muslim.” End.

 هذا الحديث رواه أبو داود (4410)، والنسائي (4978)، وهو حديث منكر لا يصح.

قال النسائي بعد روايته: "وَهَذَا حَدِيثٌ مُنْكَرٌ، وَمُصْعَبُ بْنُ ثَابِتٍ لَيْسَ بِالْقَوِيِّ فِي الْحَدِيثِ" انتهى.
ولم يأخذ جمهور الفقهاء بهذا الحديث لضعفه، ولأنه يحتمل أن هذا الرجل ارتد، ولهذا قتل، وألقي في البئر.

قال السندي: " وَالْفُقَهَاء على خِلَافه، فَقيل لَعَلَّه وجد مِنْهُ ارتدادا أوجب قَتله . وَهَذَا الِاحْتِمَال أوفق بِمَا فِي حَدِيث جَابر : أَنهم جروه ، وألقوه فِي الْبِئْر ؛ إِذْ الْمُؤمن وان ارْتكب كَبِيرَة ، فَإِنَّهُ يقبر وَيصلى عَلَيْهِ ، لَا سِيمَا بعد إِقَامَة الْحَد وتطهيره . وَأما الإهانة بِهَذَا الْوَجْه : فَلَا تلِيق بِحَال الْمُسلم" انتهى.