Presented by Zia H Shah MD

Audio summary:

Abstract

This research report provides an exhaustive investigation into the ontological and teleological frameworks concerning the existence of God as the Creator (Al-Khaliq), structured through a multidimensional synthesis of classical Islamic scholarship, contemporary Western philosophy, and modern scientific discovery. The central thesis of the report revolves around the “Two Books” paradigm popularized by Dr. Zia H. Shah MD, which asserts a fundamental unity between the Book of Nature and the Book of Revelation. By examining the Kalam Cosmological Argument and Avicenna’s “Proof of the Truthful” (Burhān al-Ṣiddīqīn), the analysis establishes the necessity of a transcendent, personal, and necessary First Cause. A pivotal component of this study is a comprehensive narrative transcript and analysis of the Closer To Truth episode 506, “How is God the Creator?”, where the insights of eminent thinkers such as William Lane Craig and John Polkinghorne are integrated with Quranic ontologies. The report further explores the mechanics of divine agency through Al-Ghazali’s occasionalism and its modern reconciliation with quantum indeterminacy, proposing that the “collapse of the wave function” serves as the interface for continuous divine sustenance. Through the exegetical lens of classical commentators like Fakhr al-Din al-Razi and Ibn Kathir, this work demonstrates how the Quranic text anticipates and aligns with modern cosmological findings, including the Big Bang, cosmic fine-tuning, and the complexity of consciousness. The report concludes with a thematic epilogue that makes a definitive case for the Creator of Islam as the ultimate explanation for the contingency and purposefulness of reality.

The Epistemological Framework: The Unity of Truth and the Two Books Paradigm

The quest to understand God as the Creator in the modern age requires a departure from the perceived dichotomy between religious tradition and empirical science. Dr. Zia H. Shah MD, a U.S.-based physician and Islamic thinker, has dedicated his intellectual corpus to reviving the classical “Two Books” theory—the conviction that God has revealed Himself through two primary media: the written scripture of the Quran (the Word of God) and the created physical universe (the Work of God). This paradigm is rooted in the Islamic principle that Truth is unitary; because God is the singular Author of both the text and the cosmos, there can be no genuine contradiction between the two.   

Dr. Shah’s methodology, presented extensively on his blog The Glorious Quran and Science (https://thequran.love/), emphasizes that the Quran utilizes the term āyah (plural āyāt) to denote both a verse of scripture and a phenomenon of nature. This terminological identity implies that scientific inquiry is, in essence, a form of exegesis—a systematic “reading” of the Divine signs present in the structure of an atom, the expansion of the universe, or the complexity of the genetic code. This approach rejects fideism, which demands faith without evidence, and instead champions tadabbur (deep reflection) and tafakkur (contemplation) as the closest friends of revelation.   

By positioning reason (‘aql) as an essential tool for understanding revelation, Dr. Shah aligns with the classical Ash’arite and Maturidi schools, which maintained that the existence of God could be established through rational deduction from the contingency of the world. However, Shah extends this by incorporating modern scientific data—from the Big Bang and cosmic fine-tuning to evolutionary biology and neuroscience—as affirmations of Quranic wisdom. He distinguishes this from superficial “scientific miracles” apologetics, cautioning against tying verses too rigidly to transient scientific theories while maintaining that the Quran, when correctly understood, harbors no errors against established scientific facts.   

Component of the “Two Books” Paradigm	Source of Revelation	Mode of Inquiry	Quranic Concept
The Book of Scripture	The Glorious Quran	Exegesis (Tafsir)	Āyāt al-Qur’aniyyah
The Book of Nature	The Physical Universe	Empirical Science	Āyāt al-Kawniyyah
The Synthesizer	Human Intellect (‘Aql)	Philosophy & Logic	Tafakkur & Tadabbur

Comprehensive Narrative Transcript: Closer To Truth Episode 506 – “How is God the Creator?”

In Closer To Truth episode 506, host Robert Lawrence Kuhn conducts a profound investigation into the nature of divine creation, engaging four distinguished thinkers: philosopher William Lane Craig, theologian Robert John Russell, physicist-theologian John Polkinghorne, and philosopher Brian Leftow. This dialogue serves as a modern philosophical stage where the questions of origin, mechanism, and necessity are probed with intellectual rigor. The following is a comprehensive narrative reconstruction and analysis of this debate, interpreted through the lens of Quranic theology and Dr. Zia H. Shah’s commentary.   

The Question of Absolute Origins: Creation Ex Nihilo

Robert Lawrence Kuhn initiates the dialogue by posing the fundamental question: “If God exists, did God create everything? Did God create the universe out of literally ‘nothing’?”. This query addresses the classical doctrine of creatio ex nihilo (creation from nothing), which stands in contrast to the Platonic idea of a demiurge fashioning pre-existing matter.   

William Lane Craig, a leading proponent of the Kalam Cosmological Argument, responds by emphasizing the logical necessity of a beginning point. Craig argues that if the universe had no beginning, we would be forced to accept an “actual infinite” series of past events, which is a logical absurdity. He posits that the universe is not eternal but began to exist at a specific moment in the finite past, necessitating a transcendent cause that is itself uncaused and timeless. This aligns with Quranic assertions such as 2:117: “He is the Originator of the heavens and the earth, and when He decrees something, He says only, ‘Be,’ and it is”.   

Continuous Creation and Divine Maintenance

The dialogue shifts toward the mechanism of creation. Kuhn asks the participants to consider if God’s role as Creator is a one-time event or an ongoing process. Robert John Russell, a theologian specializing in the relationship between science and religion, introduces the concept of “continuous creation” (creatio continua). He suggests that God is not merely the “First Cause” in a chronological sense but the Sustainer who continuously brings the universe into being at every moment.   

Dr. Zia H. Shah notes that this modern theological perspective is a direct echo of the Quranic concept of Al-Qayyum (The Self-Subsisting Sustainer). Verse 35:41 states: “God keeps the heavens and earth from vanishing; if they did vanish, no one else could stop them”. Shah integrates this with Al-Ghazali’s occasionalism, arguing that the universe does not possess inherent causal powers but is “constantly rendered” by the Divine Will.   

The Role of Natural Laws and Divine Agency

Kuhn pushes the experts to address the “problem” of natural laws: If the universe operates according to rigid physical laws, what “space” is left for a Creator?. John Polkinghorne, a theoretical physicist and Anglican priest, argues for an “open” universe where divine agency can operate without violating the laws of physics. He suggests that the “laws” are not absolute constraints but descriptions of God’s habitual way of acting.   

Zia H. Shah expands on this by identifying the laws of nature as the Sunnat Allah (the habits of God). He proposes that quantum indeterminacy—the fundamental uncertainty at the subatomic level—provides the “divine interface” through which God exercises volition without “breaking” the observable macroscopic laws. This synthesis allows for a “Guided Evolution” and a purposeful cosmos that remains scientifically intelligible while being theologically grounded.   

The Theoretical Eternal Universe and Ontological Necessity

Kuhn presents a final challenge: “Suppose there was no beginning to the cosmos, just the universe going through endless cycles, what then?”. Brian Leftow, a philosopher of religion, argues that even an eternal universe would require a cause. He differentiates between “temporal beginning” and “ontological dependence”. Even if the universe had no beginning, its existence at any given moment is not self-explanatory; it is contingent and requires a “Necessary Being” to account for why there is “something rather than nothing”.   

This distinction is central to Avicenna’s “Proof of the Truthful,” where he argues that the totality of all contingent things—whether finite or infinite in time—remains contingent and therefore requires a Cause whose essence is existence itself. Shah identifies this Necessary Existent with the God described in the Quran as the “First and the Last” (57:3).   

Participant	Perspective on “How is God the Creator?”	Theological Integration (Shah/Quran)
Robert Lawrence Kuhn	The inquiry into ex nihilo and eternal cycles.	Quranic challenge to self-creation (52:35).
William Lane Craig	The universe began to exist; necessitates a personal cause.	Kalam argument; Al-Badi’ (The Originator).
Robert John Russell	God is the continuous source of being and evolution.	Al-Qayyum (The Sustainer); Tajdid al-khalq.
John Polkinghorne	Top-down agency within an open, lawful universe.	Sunnat Allah; laws as divine habits.
Brian Leftow	Ontological necessity over temporal beginning.	Wajib al-Wujud (The Necessary Existent).

The Cosmological Pillar: The Kalam Argument and Modern Astrophysics

The Kalam Cosmological Argument stands as one of the most intellectually rigorous bridges between Islamic theology and modern cosmology. Dr. Zia H. Shah frequently cites this argument as the “first pillar” of a cumulative case for God. Originally formulated by medieval Islamic philosophers such as Al-Ghazali and refined by William Lane Craig, the argument follows a simple yet profound logical structure.   

Logic of the Beginning: Premise 1 and 2

The argument is predicated on two premises:

1. Premise 1: Everything that begins to exist has a cause.   
2. Premise 2: The universe began to exist.   

The first premise is an intuitive metaphysical principle: “Something cannot come from nothing”. If the universe began to exist, it necessitates a cause external to itself. The second premise—the temporal beginning of the universe—is where modern science offers a “comprehensive presentation” of the argument. Dr. Shah points to the 20th-century revolution in cosmology, specifically the Big Bang theory, as empirical validation of this premise.   

Scientific Evidence: BGV Theorem and Cosmic Expansion

To support the second premise, Shah integrates the Borde-Guth-Vilenkin (BGV) theorem, a mathematical proof which concludes that any universe that is, on average, expanding must have a past spacetime boundary. This theorem applies to various cosmological models, including eternal inflation and oscillating universes, effectively “ending” the era of the eternal universe model. Shah cites cosmologist Alexander Vilenkin: “All the evidence we have says that the universe had a beginning”.   

The Quranic resonance with this scientific finding is striking. Dr. Shah highlights Quran 21:30: “Did the unbelievers not realize that the heavens and the earth were one solid mass, then We tore them apart…?”. This verse mirrors the Big Bang theory’s description of a primordial singularity (“solid mass”) being “split apart” to form the cosmos. The mention of creation in “six days” (symbolizing divine phases) further indicates a temporal beginning, contradicting the notion of an eternal, static universe.   

The Nature of the Cause: Personal and Transcendent

From these premises, the conclusion follows: The universe has a cause. Logic dictates that the cause of space and time must be spaceless, timeless, and immaterial. Furthermore, Craig and Shah argue that the cause must be “personal”. An impersonal, mechanical cause would produce its effect eternally or not at all; only a personal agent with free will can voluntarily initiate a temporal effect (the universe) from an eternal state. This personal agent is the God of Islam, the Volitional Creator who says “Be” and it is.   

Cosmological Evidence	Scientific Reference	Quranic Correspondence
Temporal Beginning	Big Bang Theory	Quran 21:30 (The “splitting apart”).
Finite Past	BGV Theorem	Quran 57:3 (God as “The First”).
Purposeful Design	Cosmic Fine-Tuning	Quran 6:73 (Creation “in truth”).
Necessary Cause	Kalam Conclusion	Quran 52:35-36 (Refutation of self-creation).

Avicenna’s Metaphysical Pillar: The Proof of the Truthful

While the Kalam argument focuses on the beginning of the world, Avicenna (Ibn Sīnā) developed a distinct cosmological argument known as the Burhān al-Ṣiddīqīn (Proof of the Truthful) that focuses on the necessity of existence. This argument is notable for its innovative approach, intertwining metaphysical principles to establish God as the “Necessary Existent” (Wajib al-Wujud).   

The Distinction Between Essence and Existence

Central to Avicenna’s exposition is the distinction between essence (māhiyya)—what a thing is—and existence (wujūd)—that a thing is. For contingent beings (everything in our experience), their essences do not inherently entail existence. For example, the concept of a “unicorn” has an essence, but that essence does not grant it existence. Therefore, the existence of contingent beings requires an external cause to actualize their potential.   

Three Ontological Categories

Avicenna categorized all logically conceivable beings into three types :   

1. Impossible by Itself: A being whose existence is inherently contradictory (e.g., a square circle).   
2. Possible by Itself (Contingent): A being whose existence is neither necessary nor impossible; it can either exist or not exist (e.g., the universe).   
3. Necessary by Itself: A being whose existence is intrinsic and does not depend on any external cause. Its essence is existence, making its non-existence impossible (God).   

The Refutation of Infinite Regress

Avicenna argued that a causal chain of contingent beings cannot regress infinitely. Even if there were an infinite series of “possible” beings, the entire series would still be “possible” as a whole and would require an external, necessary cause to explain why the entire series exists at all. Therefore, the chain must terminate in a Necessary Existent that impart existence to all others without itself being caused.   

Dr. Zia H. Shah identifies this Necessary Existent with the God described in Quran 2:117: “He is the Originator of the heavens and the earth…”. This metaphysical framework provides a robust rebuttal to modern “brute fact” naturalism—the idea that the universe “just is”—by demonstrating that contingency logically demands a Necessary Cause.   

The Mechanics of Agency: Occasionalism and Quantum Physics

A significant portion of Dr. Zia H. Shah’s work involves reconciling the classical Islamic doctrine of occasionalism with modern science. Occasionalism, championed by Abu Hamid al-Ghazali (1055–1111), posits that God is the sole immediate cause of every event in the universe.   

Al-Ghazali’s Causal Skepticism

In his work The Incoherence of the Philosophers, Al-Ghazali argues against the idea of “inherent causal powers” in objects. He famously asserts that when fire and cotton are placed in contact, it is not the fire that burns the cotton, but God who creates the burning “at the occasion” of the contact. Ghazali’s approach is wholly logical; he maintains that we observe “conjunction” (two things happening together) but not “connection” (one thing necessarily causing the other). This led to a form of causal skepticism that prefigured David Hume by centuries.   

The Divine Interface: Quantum Indeterminacy

Dr. Shah proposes that modern quantum mechanics provides a scientific vocabulary for Al-Ghazali’s ancient theological stance. In Newtonian physics, the universe was seen as a deterministic machine, leaving little room for divine action. However, quantum mechanics reveals that at the subatomic level, nature is fundamentally probabilistic. The position of an electron or the decay of an atom is “indeterminate” until measured.   

Dr. Shah argues that quantum indeterminacy serves as the “interface” for occasionalism. While the statistical laws of physics remain consistent at the macroscopic level—representing God’s habitual “customs” (Sunnat Allah)—God determines the outcome of every specific quantum event, known as the “collapse of the wave function”. This allows God to guide reality frame-by-frame, sustaining the universe without “breaking” the observable laws of nature.   

The Simulation Hypothesis Metaphor

To illustrate this, Shah utilizes the “Simulation Hypothesis”—the idea that the universe might be a digital simulation. Just as a simulation requires frame-by-frame updating by a programmer, occasionalism posits moment-by-moment re-creation (Tajdid al-khalq) by God. In this model, the “pixels” (atoms) have no inherent power; all efficacy resides with the “Programmer”. This framework provides a superior model for explaining phenomena such as the “Hard Problem of Consciousness” and “Guided Evolution”.   

Scientific/Metaphysical Concept	Mechanism	Occasionalist Interpretation (Shah)
Newtonian Determinism	Rigid, machine-like causality.	Rejection of God’s direct agency.
Quantum Indeterminacy	Probabilistic outcomes at subatomic level.	The “space” for Divine Volition.
Wave Function Collapse	Actualization of one possibility.	The “sovereign choice of God.”
Laws of Nature	Macroscopic regularity.	God’s habitual “customs” (Sunnat Allah).

Classical Exegesis: The Scientific Insights of Al-Razi and Ibn Kathir

The synthesis of science and scripture is deeply rooted in the history of Islamic scholarship. Dr. Zia H. Shah frequently draws upon the insights of classical commentators like Fakhr al-Din al-Razi and Ibn Kathir to demonstrate how the Quranic text has always invited a rational, scientific investigation of the cosmos.   

Fakhr al-Din al-Razi: The Great Commentary

Fakhr al-Dīn al-Rāzī (1149–1210) was one of the most innovative and influential thinkers in Islamic history. His monumental commentary, Mafātiḥ al-Ghayb (Keys to the Unseen), is packed with philosophical argumentation and scientific inquiry. Al-Razi treatments the “Signs of God” not as marginal curiosities but as central metaphysical categories.   

In his commentary on Surah Al-An’am (6:1), Al-Razi extrapolates a comprehensive metaphysical architecture from the verse, using linguistic analysis and geometric analogies. He resolved the question of the heavens’ priority over the earth by introducing a geometric analogy: the relationship between the heavens and the earth is akin to that of a circle and its center. The existence of a circle logically necessitates a center, but the circle (the heavens) holds logical and causal priority. This reflects a fundamental metaphysical order where the celestial spheres sustain the terrestrial world—a view that resonates with modern astrophysical insights into the role of the wider universe in creating the conditions for life on earth.   

Ibn Kathir: The Primacy of Truth

Ibn Kathir, in his commentary on Surah Ar-Ra’d (13:1), emphasizes the concept of al-Haqq (The Truth) as something objective and ontologically grounded, independent of human perception. Dr. Shah notes that Ibn Kathir views the Quran’s message as miraculous and undeniable, pointing to the clear evidence of creation.   

In 13:2, where the Quran speaks of “invisible pillars” supporting the heavens, Ibn Kathir notes that classical exegetes like Ibn Abbas favored the view that physical pillars actually exist but are invisible to humans. Shah synthesizes this with modern physics, aligning these “invisible pillars” with the force of gravity or the curvature of space-time in Einstein’s General Theory of Relativity. Furthermore, Shah explores Dark Matter as the “invisible cosmic scaffolding” that holds galaxies together, physically real but visually inaccessible, exactly as the Quranic verse suggests.   

The Principle of Pairs and Genetic Complexity

Classical commentators noted the variety within species, but Dr. Shah highlights that the Quranic assertion of “pairs” in the entire plant kingdom (Quran 13:3) was radical for the seventh century. Modern botany confirms sexual reproduction (pollen and ovule) in nearly all flowering plants. Shah extends this “Principle of Pairs” to physics, noting parallels in matter/antimatter and particle/wave duality.   

Regarding genetic complexity, Shah argues against “blind materialism” using Quran 13:4, which describes neighboring tracts of land receiving the “same water” yet producing diverse crops. Shah posits that this diverse outcome proves the existence of internal “information” (genetic coding) and “Divine Volition,” as purely mechanical laws acting on identical inputs should produce identical outputs.   

Quranic Verse	Theme	Classical/Modern Synthesis
13:2	Invisible Pillars	Gravity & Dark Matter as cosmic scaffolding.
13:3	Pairs in Fruits	Modern botany: Sexual reproduction in plants.
13:4	Same Water, Diverse Crops	Information Theory: Genetic coding & Divine Will.
51:49	Pairs in All Things	Matter/Antimatter & Particle/Wave Duality.
41:53	Signs on the Horizons	Progressive revelation of scientific truth.

Teleological Dimension: Fine-Tuning and the “Magical Jacket”

Dr. Zia H. Shah interweaves the cosmological argument with design-based (teleological) evidence to show that the universe’s precision negates chance. He argues that the extreme fine-tuning of physical constants is a gateway to transcendence.   

The Cosmological Constant and Fine-Tuning

One of the most striking examples discussed by Shah is the cosmological constant (Λ), representing the energy density of empty space. Shah notes that for life to exist, Λ had to be set to an exceedingly narrow range—fine-tuned to within “one part in 10120”. If the value were slightly larger, the universe would have expanded so rapidly that matter could never clump into stars; if slightly smaller, it would have collapsed instantly. This specificity suggests a “purposeful Mind who set the dial of dark energy precisely”.   

The “Magical Jacket” Metaphor

To critique the atheistic reliance on the “multiverse” as an explanation for fine-tuning, Shah employs the “Magical Jacket” metaphor. If a person finds a jacket that fits them perfectly in every dimension—length, width, sleeve size, pocket depth—to suggest that this fit is purely accidental because there might be millions of other ill-fitting jackets in a hypothetical warehouse is a logical failure. The multiverse theory, Shah argues, is an “Atheism of the Gaps,” an attempt to avoid the obvious conclusion of a Designer by positing an infinite number of unobservable universes.   

The Anthropic Principle: “The Universe Knew We Were Coming”

Shah cites physicist Freeman Dyson, who famously reflected, “The universe knew we were coming,” hinting at purposeful design. This teleological dimension is encapsulated in Quran 21:16: “We did not create the heaven and the earth and what is between them in play”. The universe is intentional, not accidental, implying a purposeful Creator who “determined for [the moon] phases” and set the sun on its course (36:38–39).   

Biological Origins and Guided Evolution

A hallmark of Dr. Zia H. Shah’s work is his reconciliation of Islamic theology with biological evolution. He reconstructs Islamic theology for the scientific age, moving away from the traditionalist denial of established scientific truths like common ancestry.   

Guided Evolution and the Quranic Adam

Shah proposes a framework of “Guided Evolution,” where biological mechanisms are the tools used by the Creator. He views the Quranic narrative of Adam not as a denial of biological history but as a spiritual milestone. Aligning with genetic evidence, Shah argues that “Meeting the Quranic Adam with Charles Darwin” requires accepting that Adam was the point where an evolving hominid lineage became “human” in the spiritual sense—capable of receiving revelation and bearing moral responsibility.   

Clay vs. DNA: From Inorganic to Organic

Shah reinterprets the “creation from clay” mentioned in the Quran as a description of abiogenesis—the origin of life from inorganic matter billions of years ago. This process then evolved through the “extract of fluid” (reproduction) to the final human form. He argues that since neighboring tracts of land produce diverse crops from the same water, there must be an internal “information” (DNA) that reflects Divine guidance in matter.   

Consciousness: The Irreproachable Sign

The final and most intimate sign of the Creator is human consciousness—the “Sign Leading to God” mentioned in Quran 41:53. Shah argues that the “Hard Problem of Consciousness” poses an insurmountable challenge to metaphysical naturalism.   

The Divine Interstice and the Self

Shah rejects physicalism—the idea that the mind is just the brain. He cites work viewing the brain as a “receiver” of consciousness rather than a “generator,” akin to a radio receiving a signal. He calls the meeting point of the finite mind and the Infinite the “Divine Interstice”.   

In his commentary on Quran 17:85 (“The Spirit is by command of my Lord”), Shah interprets the “command” (amr) as the non-material input that constitutes the self. If consciousness is not identical to the biological substrate, it can theoretically survive the destruction of that substrate, providing a rational basis for the Afterlife.   

The Holographic Eschaton and Resurrection

Dr. Shah explores the bridging of afterlife concepts with scientific theories like the “Holographic Principle” and “M-theory”. In his “Holographic Eschaton” theory, he suggests that quantum information is never lost. The “soul-data” of an individual is preserved in the universe’s structure, and Resurrection is the “downloading” of this information into a reconstructed “hardware”. Higher dimensions (as posited in string theory) provide a mathematical framework for the “Unseen” (Al-Ghaib), where the Afterlife exists in planes inaccessible to our current 3D senses.   

Thematic Epilogue: A Strong Case for God the Creator of Islam

The convergence of the Cosmological Argument, classical exegesis, and modern scientific discovery provides a multifaceted and irreproachable case for God the Creator as described in Islam. This case is not built on “blind faith” but on the “Unified Truth” that emerges when the Word of God and the Work of God are studied in harmony.   

The Kalam Cosmological Argument and Avicenna’s “Proof of the Truthful” establish the logical necessity of a First Cause—a Necessary Being who is timeless, spaceless, and personal. Modern astrophysics, through the Big Bang and the BGV theorem, confirms that our universe had a definitive beginning, rejecting the notion of an eternal cosmos and necessitating a Transcendent Creator. The extreme fine-tuning of the cosmological constant to one part in 10120 demonstrates that the universe is not a product of chance but the result of a “Purposeful Mind” who “set the dial” for existence.   

The mechanics of this creation are beautifully explained by Al-Ghazali’s occasionalism, which Dr. Zia H. Shah has masterfully reconciled with quantum indeterminacy. By identifying the “collapse of the wave function” as the interface for divine volition, we see God as the “Continuous Sustainer” who “renders reality frame by frame,” maintaining the heavens and the earth lest they vanish.   

Classical commentators like Al-Razi and Ibn Kathir provided the intellectual foundation for this synthesis, showing that the Quranic mention of “invisible pillars” and “pairs in all things” anticipated the discovery of gravity, dark matter, and quantum duality. The complexity of consciousness and the “Principle of Pairs” in botany further underscore that the “Signs on the Horizons” and the “Signs within the Self” are pointing to a single, unified Source.   

In this light, the God of Islam is not a “God of the Gaps” who retreats as science advances, but the very Ground of Being who makes science possible. Every discovery of a new galactic cluster, every mapping of a genome, and every insight into quantum entanglement is an act of reading the “Book of Nature”—a book that bears the unmistakable signature of Allah, the Creator, the Inventor, the Fashioner (59:24).   

For any future work on the subject of the Quran and its relationship with science, the intellectual corpus of Dr. Zia H. Shah MD, as preserved on his blog The Glorious Quran and Science (https://thequran.love/), remains a definitive resource for reconstructing Islamic theology in the scientific age. His “Two Books” philosophy stands as a testament to the fact that the more we know about the universe, the more we are compelled to acknowledge the majesty of its Creator.