Assalamualikum,
Can someone please clarify if the information Harun Yahya presents in his books and in his videos if it acurate? I have watched some his videos they are amazing but at the same time i want to be sure. My dad was telling me about not trusting some of the works online due to the fact that sometimes they are not of the same beleif or the information is given by a non-muslim and is false...
What was it that you guys removed? Only a couple of Yahya's books and movies are wrong. The rest can be benefitted from in a very big way.
As for your question, Harun Yahya is considered by alot of people to be diverted from the siraatul mustaqeem (straight path). He has a few ideas concerning life that have nothing to do with Islam, involving a "Matrix" like thing. I won't go into details about that.
Most of his works are ok. In fact, his movies are simply amazing, and I would reccomend you to watch his movies on the Signs of the Last Day, and others.
If you PM me, I'll send you one of his sites that is nothing short of beautiful concerning the nations that were destroyed by Allah.
Last edited by Samee; 08-05-2006 at 04:04 PM.
"It will be said to the pious believers in Islamic Monotheism: 'Oh you, the one in complete rest and satisfaction! Come back to your Lord well rested and well pleased!
No it was actually my fault i had extra information which wasnt relevant to the topic.
LI Islamic Staff - If I made a mistake please point it out for me to learn from them.
May Allah forgive my mistakes.
Ameen
Brother Samee,
I was told by a friend that Bilal Philips said in one of his lectures that his information was false. i am not this is correct or not
Allah knows everything indeed.
I am not sure if i should watch his movies or no.t You get to learn a lot from his movies
........well, i have read some of his books , and so far , i have found his books really good. His books include verses from Quran as well as Ahadith.
SO what's wrong..........?
As far as i know, those muslim scholars.....(who really work for the benefit of muslim ummah, and islam).....are always disliked.
Those muslim scholars who spread sectarianism, are never disliked, and nobody says anything against them, on the other hand those who try to unite the ummah, they are always called as deviated.......
Just have a look at his books, you will come to know that this brother "harun yahya"( his real name is Adnan Akhter, harun yahya is his pen name) is mashaAllah very learned.
I have been reading his articles and his books too, they provide real good islamic info.
To sum up his message, "come back to the Quran, and follow the sunnah".
Just have a look at his books, you will come to know that this brother "harun yahya"( his real name is Adnan Akhter, harun yahya is his pen name) is mashaAllah very learned.
You're joking, right? His articles routinely contain howling errors, paticularly those on the subjects of evolution and materialism.
It's upsetting that so many Muslims take his ignorant diatribes seriously.
EDIT: Here's a typical example of a Yahya article on evolution; ignorant, wrong on so many levels and, in its promotion of hatred against evolutionists, actually dangerous.
Greetings,
EDIT: Here's a typical example of a Yahya article on evolution; ignorant, wrong on so many levels and, in its promotion of hatred against evolutionists, actually dangerous.
Can you point out what you disagree with, why and provide evidence against his claims. Thanks.
OK then - here we go, point by point:
Darwinism, by arguing that life and the entire universe are the work of blind chance, is easily the most dangerous ideology confronting us today.
This first sentence shows a clearly erroneous understanding of Darwinism. Natural selection, the mechanism of biological evolution, does not operate according to blind chance.
It formed the basis of all harmful movements, including communism and fascism, devastating mankind.
The author gives no evidence for this assertion.
Despite its scientific refutation time and again there are still those who seek to keep Darwinism alive purely for ideological reasons.
The author gives no evidence that Darwinism has been scientifically refuted. In fact, the evidence points overwhelmingly in the opposite direction.
People equipped with factual or analytical want of the discussion, unaware of the grave danger that it actually represents, unaware of the terrible social and moral disasters the theory of evolution has brought with it, unaware of the damage wreaked by Darwinist thinking over the last century and a half, may also look down on such a vital intellectual struggle against it.
This is not actually a sentence, according to the rules of English grammar.
By denying the existence and oneness of God and the responsibility of each man and woman to Him, Darwinism prepares the groundwork for destruction by indoctrinating people with the idea that human beings are irresponsible products of blind chance and are no more than yet another species of animals.
Again we have the fallacy that evolution operates according to blind chance.
The most obvious heritage of the dominance of Darwinism and its symbiotic partner, the materialist philosophy, radically is the distorted answer to the fundamental question, “what is man?”.
Another dodgy sentence. What is that word "radically" doing in there?
Some people who would previously have answered “man is a being created by God to live by the moral values revealed by Him,” have now, as a result of deceptive indoctrination, fallen into the erroneous thought “man came into being by chance, and is an animal that developed through the struggle for survival.” There is a grave price attached to such a grave error in thinking, from which ruthless ideologies such as racism, fascism or communism, as all violent worldviews, have been feeding.
The author is now deliberately conflating two different ideas in order to mislead uninformed readers: Darwinism, which is overwhelmingly accepted by the scientific community, and Social Darwinism, which is a thoroughly discredited concept within the social sciences.
A look at the general history of the 20th century, a period of war, conflict, anarchy and chaos, and thus of terrible human suffering, should be enough to realize disastrous results of Darwinism.
The author does nothing to show how these calamities are the result of Darwinism.
The following paragraphs merely continue to conflate Darwinism with Social Darwinism, while never making it clear that the two are in fact very different concepts.
As we have seen, Darwinism, the social harm wreaked by which many people are unaware of, has inflicted terrible disasters on mankind. The theory of evolution, which is devoid of any scientific evidence and goes no further than being an outdated dogma, is still blindly supported today solely for the sake of propagating atheism, despite the lack of any scientific findings to back it up.
Everyone knows what a horror terrorism is; yet most people are unaware that its ideological foundation is no other than Darwinism.
This is an utterly repugnant claim to make. It is just as wrong as saying something like:
"Everyone knows what a horror terrorism is; yet most people are unaware that its ideological foundation is no other than Islam."
It is clear that the falsehood that “man is a fighting animal,” inculcated in people’s subconscious minds by Darwinism, is a highly influential one. Darwinism sets out a worldview and a method. The basic concept underlying this worldview and method is “conflict with anyone not of one’s own.”
I don't know where the author has got this idea from. The quotes are (as usual) unattributed to anybody.
No wonder young people sign up to terrorist cells while schools and universities are dominated by Darwinism.
This is a preposterous statement to make. Is the author really saying that all terrorists come from an educational background where Darwinism is dominant?
In order for a person to become a terrorist he or she must first believe that their targets are not human, that conflict is a law of nature, that killing and murdering are legitimate, and that they are not accountable to God. In other words, they have to be Darwinists.
Where, in Darwinist thinking, is the ludicrous idea propagated that 'humans are not human'? Or that 'killing and murdering are legitimate'?
There is no point in talking about “love, tolerance, compassion and peace” to someone raised for years to think that unconscious atoms came together to produce life, and that progress is impossible without conflict. Nor will questioning how they could execute ruthlessly murdering of innocent people do any good. It is pointless to expect such people to respect others, abide by the laws and obey the state.
And yet, contrary to what the author says here, the overwhelming majority of people who believe in Darwinism do in fact obey the laws of the state. If that were not the case, then around 80% of the population of Britain, for example, would be criminals.
(Again, we've got another non-sentence here: the one that begins "Nor will questioning...")
Every new discovery in every branch of science over the last 50 years has proved that evolution is a fabrication and that Creation is the manifest truth. The truth revealed by science is that God created the universe out of nothing and that the theory of evolution is of no scientific worth whatsoever.
Another utterly ludicrous view that flies totally in the face of reality. If the author had any real understanding of science, he would know that "God" does not feature in its findings at all. If what he says here were true, then most scientists would be creationists, whereas the opposite is the case.
Research shows that Darwinism is still continuing to deceive. Surveys carried out in European countries in particular, especially in France, Germany and Britain, have revealed that the great majority of people imagine that the theory of evolution is a scientific fact. People taken in by the evolution deception turn their backs on believing in God and religious moral values. A survey carried out by the United Nations made this abundantly plain. According to the survey, only 18% of Europeans believe that God created man, whereas 82% imagine that man evolved from other species.
The reasons for this are not hard to fathom. European countries have among the most advanced levels of education in the world, and as education levels improve, levels of belief in creation myths decrease rapidly. A little knowledge is a dangerous thing, certainly as far as religious dogma is concerned.
My advice to Muslims wanting to know about Darwinism is very simple: to go to the source and read Darwin, and then to make up their own minds, not to listen to the half-baked rants of ignorami like Harun Yahya. It's distressing that some people will use articles like this as their first source of information about Darwinism, and will consequently be filled with hatred against evolutionists that has no foundation.
My advice to Muslims wanting to know about Darwinism is very simple: to go to the source and read Darwin, and then to make up their own minds, not to listen to the half-baked rants of ignorami like Harun Yahya. It's distressing that some people will use articles like this as their first source of information about Darwinism, and will consequently be filled with hatred against evolutionists that has no foundation.
Peace
thansk for reply, Will do when I get the time. Just wanted some quick info from you if possible, what is the diffrence between Darwinism and Social Darwinism?
As far as I know, at the end of the day Darwinism is a theory, not a fact...well honestly I know it is a theory which can never be proven. But I will read into it and report my findings and ur opinion will be valuable.
thansk for reply, Will do when I get the time. Just wanted some quick info from you if possible, what is the diffrence between Darwinism and Social Darwinism?
If you look back at my post you'll see I've given links to information about each of them:
Darwinism, which is overwhelmingly accepted by the scientific community, and Social Darwinism, which is a thoroughly discredited concept within the social sciences.
As far as I know, at the end of the day Darwinism is a theory, not a fact...well honestly I know it is a theory which can never be proven.
May Allah give him the proper knowledge of Islam and make him a better muslim.
Ameen
Who ever he is....he is still the SLAVE of ALLAH and Allah is watching him and Allah knows better if he is a good person or not...who am I to judge a human being?
Hey there! Looks like you're enjoying the discussion, but you're not signed up for an account.
When you create an account, we remember exactly what you've read, so you always come right back where you left off. You also get notifications, here and via email, whenever new posts are made. And you can like posts and share your thoughts. Sign Up
Hide
Looks like you're enjoying the discussion, but you're not signed up for an account.
Bookmarks