Big Atheism-Theism Debate: Dr Arif Ahmed VS Abdullah al Andalusi [Nottingham University, 2017]
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 23 ส.ค. 2024
- Atheism-Theism Debate on the Proof for God & Justifying Morality
Dr Arif Ahmed VS Abdullah al Andalusi
Debate Title: ‘Is God Necessary to Explain Reality, and provide a consistent basis for values?’
Cambridge lecturer on Philosophy and renown public advocate for Atheism, Dr Arif Ahmed vs Abdullah al Andalusi, co-founder of Muslim Debate Initiative
(4th April 2017, Nottingham University)
![ทางเดินชีวิต - ธีเดช ทองอภิชาติ x อ.ไข่ มาลีฮวนน่า [Official MV]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/1f3wcG16dd4/mqdefault.jpg)
![รวมมิตร ภาพนี้ก็ฮาเหมือนกันนะเนี้ย #4 SS2 [ พากย์นรก MEME.EXE ] | easy boy](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/kl86m9gnLt8/mqdefault.jpg)
Amazing and intelligent argument were put forward by Abdullah, but arif failed to address them logically and says you just have to accept the way things are without any reason behind it.
Can you justify that you don't have to accept the way things are without any reason behind it? Abdullah used his stone as an argument (finite stone has to have been caused by something), but this reasoning itself relies on the assumption that anything you observe within the universe ( that stones are created by something for example) can be used to induce properties of the universe itself. As for Abdullah's arguments for why the universe is finite, they are just mathematically wrong.
In mathematics we have some sort of infinity, but can we have infinity in real world. There is no evidence to suggest that infinity exits in real world for example can we have infinite number of stars, galaxies or any other object, if the answer is yes, then could you provide evidence for it. There is a great deal of discussion between philosophers about nature of maths and whether it actually exist in real world let alone using it to suggest that something is has an infinite nature.
Indeed, the question of whether infinity actually exists in the real world remains unanswered. So does the question of whether mathematics have a physical reality, or are just a human invention. We don't know whether the universe is finite or not. However, the statement made by Abdullah isn't "we don't know", it's "the universe is finite" (for example, it has a beginning). He justified that by supposing that the universe is infinite, then arriving at a contradiction. However, when he supposed the universe was infinite, he brought mathematics into play.
You can't try to imagine what would happen if the universe was infinite but discard the mathematics of infinity. If you assume that the universe is infinite, you have to use the maths of infinity to make your arguments, even if what you're trying to prove is that there is a contradiction and therefore the universe is finite. As a math student, I can tell you that, in fact, an infinite universe isn't incoherent in the way he says it is.
Alternatively, if you don't want to deal with infinity, you could assume the universe is finite. I'm fine with that, but in the end you haven't proven the universe is finite, you've merely reached conclusions on what happens if it is. However, that doesn't seem to be what Abdullah is trying to do, since he later bring in the infinity of God, so I'm guessing he's not trying to avoid infinity.
what about Infinite regress?
Arif says it. Mathematically, there's no problem with the universe going back through time infinitely far, or being infinitely wide, or shrinking down to an infinitely small size. In practice, some of these theories may or may not be favored by modern science, but in any case finiteness of the universe cannot be logically deduced like Abdullah says they are.
Masha Allaah,barakallah bro Abdullah,i always look forward to your debates.Always so enlightening.May Allaah azza wa increase your ilm and preserve you and all Muslimeen.Ameen
Dr. Ahmed is talking about randomness here and something is only random when you don't have enough data input to understand the calculation of what is happening. Randomness is the God of the gaps for atheists.
Randomness is a thing which we cannot understand so we say this is random
@@saeedahmed1177 Yes, thank you for giving a simple explanation of this. I was saying the something but you say it much simpler.
@@canhaktan9674 you can say randomness is a by-product of ignorance
1:19:25 for when the atheist rationalizes incest between a mother and her son and then wraps his answer approving such a repulsive act with (attempts of) comedic and irrelevant comments to dumb down his response to try and safe guard from humiliation. Then you hear the atheists in the audience applaud him. They applauded someone not objecting to mother and son incest, what sick times we’re living in.
I agree, incest is objectively morally wrong… just like having sex with minors.
settle down, Muslims believe they are children of incest from Adam children. Adult breastfeeding, prostitution etc.
The reality of order in the Universe can only be at the direction of One Who does all ordering. You can not escape the reality of the Creator, the One Who maintains and sustains. I came to Islam from atheism, after realizing that Allah is One, about Whom I could only know by His revelation to mankind, as although we are high in the creation, we are no way near the Creator. Atheism is in itself, arrogance. Agnosticism is ingratitude. I'm truly thankful that Allah freed me from pursuing these negative traits 40 years ago.
Oh you poor idiot.
I too have reached this conclusion that without the one behind all the creation that exists, nothing makes sense!
@@climacticlearnings994 it works without that assumption
@@nathanter7622 Insulting because he came to a different conclusion proves that his conclusion is right, he wouldn't insult you back, because it's forbidden in our religion. Again, thx for proving him right :)
@@-AEON- LOL allah isnt real... people dying left and right praying allah to save them and yet STILL NO ALLAH... delusional
An intelligent atheist comes crumbled and confused in his logic
I came in as unbiased as I could and to be honest Abdullah had the overwhelming better arguments.
@Swoosh Swish I am an unbiased observer
@Swoosh Swish this is not a Muslim vs atheist debate. Its a theist vs atheist debate
@Swoosh Swish A Muslim or thiest still can be a rational person as an atheist could by not believing in God, as I assume you are an atheist you are in the same position as Salman
OK, good. Why?
@@benkippax224 I suggest a better exercise for you instead of me summarizing the video for you: 1. Watch the video again and actually listen to the Abdulllahs points. 2. Then post a comment explaining what Abdullahs points are and how those raised by Airf are superior to Abdullahs.
The analogy of bouncing ball doesn't work because it was "dropped" on the ground, hence having a starting point. However in an infinite regress of finite temporal causes, you are having no starting point to begin with. And well done Abdullah Andalusi sir, you were precisely addressing the problems.
Doesn’t matter. We can just continue with your logic, God must have a cause as well.
I thought Christian apologetics was the most annoying thing on the planet, until I was introduced to Muslim apologetics
it's annoying because you can't admit you're wrong
a convert to islam and someone who left islam debate both good
U r hindu
Let me guess: The one you preferred before the debate started has won the debate?
Amazing comment :D
Nah... It's more subtle to adress that the one you preferred before the debate started has lost the debate.
Exactly..... in his mind Abdulla is always right that is what believe without prove
How about your judgement? I havent listenet yet but let me hear yours first please.
Let me guess..
I agree with Abdullah TORTURE is wrong because The Most Merciful God says so
May want to read your own Quran and Hadith before saying that.
Quran [5:33] - "Indeed, the penalty for those who wage war against Allah and His Messenger and strive upon earth [to cause] corruption is none but that they be killed or crucified or that their hands and feet be cut off from opposite sides or that they be exiled from the land. That is for them a disgrace in this world; and for them in the Hereafter is a great punishment"
Sahih Bukhari [52:261] - "[Muhammad] had their hands and feet cut off. Then he ordered for nails which were heated and passed over their eyes, and whey were left in the Harra. They asked for water, and nobody provided them with water till they died."
You ever notice how almost every single religious person typically avoids discussing the brutality in their so-called holy book, and continuously blames it all on culture or politics, or just resorts to personal attacks?
Please allow me to answer your question. In every single Muslim country, apostasy can be punishable by jail time or death. In the western world, people are a bit more civilized. Speaking openly as an Ex-Muslim will only have you labeled as Islamophobic or somehow racist. Furthermore you run the risk of be ostracized by family, friends, and the Muslim community. Hopefully that address’s your point.
even you accept torture in at least some cases..... dont you ?
be rational then...
+Haram Imam I would agree with you on that. But I also believe that he is too afraid to disagree with the Quran because he doesn't want to burn in Hell.
Muslims often accuse ex-Muslims of leaving Islam because of emotional reasons. However the reality is that people stay, or become, Muslims because of their fear of God. Fear is the lowest human emotion.
Why Muhammad and his sahaba tortured people?
The atheist guy got battered in this debate
Dr Arif does not the grand claim to understand the wishes of a mythical supernatural man made God unlike your religious friend.
Do you have any evidence for your God of choice ?
@@iainrae6159 Did you not watch the debate?
Īthān bin ʾĀndī al-Kālīfwrnī These haters knows how to bark but can’t bite. Atheists don’t have anything to stand on firmly. Only muslims have a ground to stand on firmly, which is Allah.
Iain Rae yes proving God is like proving gravity and you just proved your stupidity because I doubt you even watched the debate and you immediately began babbling about “mythical, supernatural, man made God” when in reality God isn’t man made my friend he made man and that’s why it’s natural for us to believe in his existence
from the opening statement especially the ball that is bouncing infinitely the ashiest started crumbling
Please re-phrase: this is incomprehensible.
@@blaxtru atheist*
People, if you write in the comments that one debater 'won' the argument over the other, it helps if you if clarify 'why' that might be the case. Otherwise, it looks like you simply favour the debater whom agrees with your preexisting views.
It's good to see this honest discussion, not the norm of some inflammatory Atheist like Laurence Krauss. I agree with the Islamic notion of morality and need limitations in order to stop evil from both and Islamic perspective, and what many human beings would consider wrong and evil (Torture, murder, adultery, etc.,)
Is it wrong to beat your wife?
Strand FPV Films - Yes, Islam taught me it's wrong to beat one's wife. are there any restrictions written out in your belief against beating women?
@Carl....so how do you interpret the Sura which explains how to beat your wife if she is disobedient? You may hit her but not leave a bruise or bleeding, and it is forbidden to hit in the face. How do you interpret that?
Why would I need a book of written text to write out why it is bad to hit women. My Mom and all my sisters are women and I wouldn't want them to suffer distress, so that just get's engrained you. Most children are born with empathy.
Strand FPV Films - There's actually no surah that states what you just said, hence you didn't post it. Try again with misinformation, and I'll call it out again. 👍
Yes there is...THERE IS A SPECIFIC verse in the quran...if you dont know that then you havent been reading your quran...if you dont have a quran, ask your local imam, so he will point it to you...
At first the whole talk of Arif is about the negation of the scientific research that “space and time have also beginning”. Then in just one or two sentences he said there was no time before 14 billion years ago so nothing was there. Now the main question, which we all wanted to be answered, is that how and by whom the space and time was created? And we get no answer. It is just his believe that there is nothing and he questions religious people of having believe without complete knowledge ☺
Remember, you don’t know either. You just assert to know.
A apostate from Islam and a convert to Islam. This will be interesting.
On the point of torture, I have to agree that it should be prohibited under all circumstances EXCEPT where the person to be tortured holds the key to saving innocent lives by providing the necessary information, we are SURE he HAS that information, time is very critical, and all other means are exhausted and/or will not prevent loss of innocent life on time. Other than such a specific scenario, torture could be used as an excuse for getting any sort of information or merely using such excuse to act sadistically, which has been done and continues to be done massively in and by many countries, even torturing individuals or groups of people for merely belonging to an undesirable or disliked group.
Lying is a serious sin in Islam, but if a lie saves innocent people or prevents a greater evil to be committed (for example, some criminals looking for someone's family to kill them all, and you lie about its location), then it is both allowed or even commended in such situation.
Same with killing or taking a life: killing an innocent person is strictly prohibited, but killing someone who is trying to kill you or other people for no reason is commended, in order to prevent the greater evil, which is the taking of innocent life by a murderous person.
Thank you Abdullah :)
Abdullah as usual brilliant.
Yeah. "Brilliant". Muahahah...
@Raine Riny 7
Rather worried. People of his mental capacity, honesty and temper serve well as suicide bombers.
Atheist wants religion to provide predictions as proof. Prophesy is definitely qualifies as "predictions" that he asked for as the quran and the hadith literature have many prophesy that predicts the future that have come true from the big bang to end of time events.
Last comments of Abdullah are phenomenal In my view he won the debate
Ofcourse he did.
You know sometimes I wonder what you guys mean by freedom, considering we're pretty much slaves to everything
(ie. food, water, air, living space, other people, society, and so on)
Are you in your senses.
@@EpicAlcatraz99 then show us the bad bits, the evidence for it and show us that there can be no other intepretations except yours. Simple as that.
(Behavior of Muslims or current regimes which are in fact a product of Victorian colonies don't count. Im asking for the allowance or command of this so called "Islamic" oppression and atrocities committed by Individuals )
What's the Atheistic position? It's all over the place. For all the skepticism, Sounds like blind belief the way he explained certain things.
Masha Allah
Arif just waffling as usual
Legend!
Thank God im a muslim.
Thank no god I'm an Atheist ;)
OnceUponAtimeThereWasAyoutubeUserWithAlongName 1992 Hahahahahahaha...torture is right!
.
.
Thank god I'm an atheist.
Arif did not address the infinite problem satisfactorily.
If the universe went back in time infinitely then we should not be here right now as there yet remains an infinite amount of time till our existence.
It has to be concluded that the universe, or the material of the universe (quantum particle), could not have gone back in time forever. It must have had a definite beginning at which it came from non-being.
I do not see why you would want to complicate this matter and obfuscate a clear concept.
"If the universe went back in time infinitely then we should not be here right now as there yet remains an infinite amount of time till our existence." That statement is not true by itself. Can you prove that there must be an infinite amount of time till our existence just because there are infinitely many things before it?
In fact, 28:30 deals with this: th-cam.com/video/EJLSAA_w4PY/w-d-xo.html
@@omarhaque7194 To add to this, there is no time "t = neg infinity", which is how it seems DrKildem is thinking about it
Abdullah's points are clear and robust
I totally agree! Most atheists don’t have a stable ground to stand on
Blue Beetle that’s why I threw atheism away like trash, I was born a Muslim but I bought in to the whole “ we believe only in science and reason” garbage put forward by atheists and deists and became one for a long while in my early and mid teens however I started seeing the inconsistency and stupidity of the atheists arguments especially since science is ever changing therefore it cannot be used as a consistent tool for absolute truth nor can atheism give consistent morals and ethics because it’s like waves in the oceans or long grass in the wind they always bend and move with the wind or the “current trends” or the “current norms” without any solid or grounded beliefs, values or ethics
Saber Exactly! Back then went I was ignorant of atheism and science, I thought they knew everything and that they were the absolute truth.
I even had doubts in Islam because some of the ayats contradicts science and atheism. I was so threatened by them but once I get into philosophy and see how flawed the atheism ideology is, it woke me up and I studied Islam a bit more seriously and Islam so far has been the most rational ideology.
In fact I am very confident that Islam is the MOST rational and perfect ideology compared to all the ideologies in the world. Islam is way more superior than all of them if we actually think about it. This blew my mind and I never seen Islam like this until I studied it and be more critical about Islam. In fact it says so in the Quran(48:28)
هُوَ الَّذِي أَرْسَلَ رَسُولَهُ بِالْهُدَىٰ وَدِينِ الْحَقِّ لِيُظْهِرَهُ عَلَى الدِّينِ كُلِّهِ وَكَفَىٰ بِاللَّهِ شَهِيدًا
He it is Who has sent His Messenger (Muhammad SAW) with guidance and the religion of truth (Islam), that He may make it (Islam) superior over all religions. And All-Sufficient is Allah as a Witness.
Suddenly I can see better what is the truth and falsehood. Islam also gave us the purpose of our existence and life. All the ideologies doesn’t know or isn’t very clear and sometimes confusing.
I am so blessed to be brought back to Islam and finally realize how profound Islam actually is, Alhamdulillah. Everything points towards Allah inevitably and ultimately. Without Allah, our life is absolutely meaningless and most of us make our own meanings and following our desires to the point of worship.
@@Saber23tell me what "eternal truths" religion has told you ? Have you given up on phones and vaccines yet ? Do you think religion will ever cure cancer ?
@@KryptonKrwhat is so rational about splitting the moon ? Or talking ants, hands and feet ? Allahs throne? Flying donkeys? Jinns ? Black magic ? Whale swallowing a man ?
Abdullah's best performance so far. Mashallah
You certainly meant "Muahahah" !
Torrriate what?
Only 407 comments? Are all Muslim channels deleting comments?
no
Yes definitely , look at other debates on similar idea with other channels ,
Here 31 k views and only 400 comments. This is stupid .
They can't take any criticism , and can't address the critisism without an adhominem .
Insha allaaa
"...the only thing likely to ensure our survival may be *a nuclear first strike of our own.* Needless to say, this would be an unthinkable crime-as it would kill tens of millions of innocent civilians in a single day-but it may be the only course of action available to us..." ---Sam Harris, End of Faith, pg 128-129
They are just a bunch of attention seeking prima donna.
:{ , Muslim, would you allow your family to die in-order to 'save' your nation?
A 'nation' is a fiction; it's an enforced-upon (100 years ago by some bloodthirsty colonialist who drew some lines on a map); totally arbitrary collection of boundaries, customs, and laws. We have no concept of 'nation state'. I'm not about to kill people I love in order to 'save' some sort of geopolitical fiction. No way. In fact, its a shame muslims still define themselves by those lines.
I K W i wish i could save your comment. It's a breath of fresh air to see, truly!!! I rarely find people who thinks like me on that topic even within the athiest and science community. It's like people know it but don't embrace the illusion of country or value in money if that makes sense. Well i won't stain your great comment with my thoughts that want to dive into deeper conversation as they flood my mind lol.
So yeah, Great comment!!...
glad we're on the same wavelength. "the atheist and science community", the scientific community does comprise d/f beliefs :)
Abdullah was easy on him and lit him run away with many things. Subboor or Hamza would trash him completely
No he didn't have time. Arif used the "machine gun method" that Hamza mentions
I Doubt Arif has even studied philosophy and mathematics, cause if he would have he wouldn’t have made those fallacious statements.
Yeah it is absolutely impossible for there to be an infinite past assuming time moves forward linearly.
Um, have you studied math?
Arif is saying things we know from first year university math.
These arguments about infinite regress have been shown to be flawed for about 100-400 years.
Yeah ... I mean he is just a professor at Cambridge
Every one knows these guys are so stupid
@@turdferguson3400 So what's the solution for infinite regress?
@@maxpayne3628 easy: infinite regress is not a real problem. Just as you can believe in heaven or hell forever into the future, you can believe in an infinite past. For many centuries it was taken for granted that an infinite regress is not possible but nobody brought a solid demonstration. That means it's a perfectly reasonable possibility.😊
what was the the name of the debate ?
The final 2 minutes sum up the debate
*** Arif VS the muslim version William Lane Craig ***
That's an insult to Craig
That's an insult to Abdulla
@@Dylansftp haha Craig uses arguments made by gazali centuries ago, and I agree Craig is good but if u knew things, he uses arguments put forward by Muslims in the first place
@@wolvezoid8729 Actually if you knew anything about the history of the argument it originated with the greeks and was developed by the christians before muslims knew anything about it. This is all beside the point, Craig is way smarter than this muslim guy.
@@Dylansftp the philosophical argument why the universe must have been start was made by al ghazali greeks did not used in that way. by the way
william lane craig is really an intellectual
and i have immense respect for that guy
Pretty cheap for this Atheist Murtad to say "I can think for myself to establish values" clearly its as subjective and this self-worshipping has lead to dystopia.
how do you know a god is infinite if you're only assuming it's real?
Good thing the existence of an infinite existence, which fits the traditional understanding of God, was concluded instead.
because finite is his creation
because time and space is his creation
Because it necessitates that the explanation of finite reality has to be an infinite reality.
How do you know everything was created from nothing if you can't even imagine NOTHING,we don't even know that NOTHING ever existed.
1:16:16 for the first Nazi reference to be mentioned by Abdullah. You’re welcome.
what's the matter? is it not okay to mention them when it's relevant because you get upset?
Aref Ahmed looks like he suffer from depression. I hope he gets better but the only way to fight depression is by believing in God.
MrAlio84 “the only way to fight depression is believing in god” - ever heard of psychology?
Which God? There are hundreds on offer. Does it matter if folks worshipped the Spaghetti Flying Monster instead of say Thor?
Abdullah smashed him
no he didnt lol. Abdullah made a fool of himself like he always does.
Nope he didnt...dont let your bias corrupt your senses... arif ahmed easily won the argument
Abdullah has no more clue a supernatural God exists than my granny. Dr Arif is much too smart for him
The arrogance of atheists is funny.
Please do more with atheists .
it is better to learn how to deal with their points.
jazaak allahu gair.
53:59
Fantastic. He got that completely right about Israel and it being a cause of the major problems in that region.
Amazing Abdullah
GOD or no GOD, i dont care. I just want to exist forever on earth and ever.
This was THE most civilized and respectful theist/atheist debate I have ever seen. Especially the atheist here seemed slightly more respectful, didn't do any personal attacks or introduced skewed logic or prejudices based on politics or nationality, nor did he display arrogance, as I have seen from all other atheists (especially arrogance or disrespect).
I have to say, hats off to Dr. Arif Ahmed here, even though I am Muslim and I don't agree with many atheist views. He has remained completely civilized and professional in this debate, using only his logic and reasoning without displaying any negative human traits. Bravo!
This here should be a model debate for all to follow, especially to atheists on proper human behavior during a debate.
They always feel superior to theists, and look at all of them from a height, especially regarding human and humane values and the treatment of fellow human beings, yet they display such an amount of hubris/arrogance that their main and strongest negative character or folly (which can, and frequently does, easily become the source of all sorts unfair/inhumane treatment of others) becomes blatantly and painfully obvious.
It is truly a shame that this debate had such a low number of attendees, while the debates filled with arrogance by atheist debaters are witnessed by hundreds or thousands (and even more via the media).
54:00 as a Muslim, I gotta respect Dr Arif for his honesty.
Abdullah was very articulate
Andalusi,..cakeep
Why is it that the cameraman only pans over to someone asking a question when they’re female 🤔
Yeah I noticed that too..
Lol
My question for Abdullah especially, or any other Muslim.
1. Why does your god outlaw torture but, he does not outlaw war which kills more people, including civilians, than torture?
2. He is all powerful, he has a choice to take away the warring instinct, for lack of a better word, right out of humanity's capacity. But he has not since Islam started. Why?
3. What is his goal to farvour to ban torture but choose to allow war?
4. Is war moral?
Theron Kolokwe 1) torture is immoral act. That's because u r harming a human being without any evidence that he's guilt of any wrong doing with the intention to make them confess. War on the other hand cannot be looked at in the same way as torture. that is because what is not clear first of all is that there is lack of justification (as in the case of torture). What should be figured out first is whether a certain community or people are justified to wage a war or in other words kill people in hundreds. If its found that they were, then there's no immorality. If they are not, there is. And its wrong to consider all wars and acts of killing immoral because what u r denying then is that there could be a justification for harming someone. For example a punishment for killing innocent someone would certainly involve a certain level of pain and harm to make the wrong doer realize the extent of his crime, regardless of what form of punishment u'd prefer. Also, Islam/God outlaws unjustified acts of killing regardless of the number of people to be killed.
2) As human beings we were not created robots. We have the ability to make choices for ourselves within a set of options from which can choose to either make wars and kill each other or never to kill anyone. We have what's being called a free-will. That's after we are told right from wrong and bad from good we are given the choice to do as we choose and none other than us can be held responsible or be blamed for what we choose. And its something we can't despute that its in fact we who chooses to wage wars.
3) torture is immoral☝ and justified war (for example the one against opreessive colonialists) is moral on the bases that it is intended to end unjust and immoral rule. So the goal is to forbid bad/immorality and enjoin good/morality.
4) yes if it is justified and for the right reasons and waged against the right people, for example opressors which today's world is full of.
I hope that makes sense to you.
Thanks for asking tho.
Maxamuud Ugaas No, it doesn't make any sense. But thank you for trying.
Torture happens most often during war. Torture is a part and parcel of war.
Theron Kolokwe it will. Some day.
I don't think it is that difficult to seperate the two. And i don't agree with u on that its part and parcel of war. Its in certain cases, as its a tactic used by the US military for example.
Have a huge amount of respect for Arif Ahmed. He supervised me very briefly at Cambridge, and is frighteningly intelligent, as is evident in this video. But it is rather disappointing to hear him say that UK "support of Israel and connivance in oppression of the Palestinians is the cause of all, or perhaps most, of the world's problems, certainly in that region". There would seem to me to be many problems in that region -- the Syrian civil war, Yemeni civil war, and sundry human rights abuses across the Arab world, come to mind -- that have little or nothing to do with Israel-Palestine or the UK's role in that conflict. Disappointing to hear someone so smart speak about Israel as a great Satan responsible for all the world's problems
Everything can be arbitrary because we don’t (currently) understand the exact cause of radioactive decay and an infinite past is possible? Terrible arguments from the atheist.
A circle has infinite points, to draw a line from point to point to infinite points would take an infinite amount of time. How long does it take you to draw a circle?
The problem is that the atheist defines a point as a hypothetical one dimensional object that doesn’t actually exist. So they’re basically begging the question because defining a point as infinitely small by definition means there are infinitely many points in any length.
Arif doesn't seem to even understand the Islamic moral compass at all.
1:13:00 - Question: Why do you do the things that you have (or others have) defined as moral?
(I believe this question my have been influenced by a point Arif made earlier in that there is a decision in itself to follow the 'intended' purposes that God made when he created the universe and humanity, and so there is the question of how/why Abdullah chooses to do what has been understood as 'moral')
Abdullah: That question only matters when the easy action is immoral and I am enticed to do the wrong thing because it is easier and can benefit me. Let me now talk about Bosnia, Serbia, and Nazi Germany for three minutes....
God said he created man of clay and then some of those ungrateful start arguments about the existence of his creator. When atheists were infants they cried to God so he sends his mommy to feed him. After God raise him and give him intellectual then he says there is no creator!! There is no atheist in other creature except in mankind and Jinn
It's like Abdullah has never heard of Rawls' social contract theory, or he has but neglects to mention it because it doesn't fit his narrative. Also, Abdullah needs to get comfortable saying "I don't know", because he makes assertion after assertion without evidence where "I don't know" is the intellectually honest response to "gaps" in knowledge. Prove your god dictated statements to an angel Abdullah. Then prove the angel told a man those statements without witnesses. Then prove that man relayed those statements accurately and that they were remembered accurately that they ended up in a book, despite the dubious history of that book. While you're at it, how come there's little evidence Mecca existed as recorded in the book and even little evidence your revered prophet existed?
roxee57
All of the proofs have been documented in the sira. So you ignorance of their existence, doesn’t take them out of existence. Miracles witnessed and attested to by Muslims and non Muslims alike on the hands of the prophet.
Mate how u wanna us prove it to you❓
First, a belief can be true even without evidence, if there are good and logical reasons for it.
Example:
A: Do u believe your father is ur father?
B:Yes.
A Any proof for it ?
B not right now but I could get a DNA test
A a DNA test is not a 100% proof for it, maybe someone forged it and if not, then it is not even 100% accurqte anyway
B hmm.. I still believe it though, coz I grew up and he cared and looked after me wholeheartedly, he looks like me, I have even some traits that he has.....
A So you ve no proof but still you believe it
B yes
Second, what kind of proof do u demand❓
Because there is no empirical evidence that God exists.❗
Empiricism is not even proved to be the only way to ascertain truth, let alone the right way.❗
‼Science cannot and will never be able to prove God's existence unless it changes its phlisophical premises that are naturalistic in nature.‼
So according to naturalism for everything in this world, there is a natural explanation for it.
( Although in reality there are some things which cant be explained by naturalism and are still unsolved questions)
Therefore you shouldn't be surprised that God cannot be detected by Science because Science does not even account for metaphysical realities
Even if God could be somehow detected, there's a possibility that this theory could change due to later evidence.
So science can never be the ultimate way to ascertain truth, it is a working model no doubt about that but its not the only way to look at things.
This would be scientism, which says that everything should be rejected, if not proven by science.
This is false, because the scientific method itself is not proven by science.
It would be a circular reasoning.
But belief can sometimes be stronger than any proof, it its backed up by solid reasons.
Now its time to challenge the reasons behind the belief in a creator. (Not religion) ❗
If you doubt testimony, you have to take a step forward and refute even the statements of all historical data.
@@marioracchelli4881 refute history and science if testimony is fake
@Ayesha Ayesha
Theists think they know everything they need to know based on what God supposedly told men in some holy scriptures but when asked simple questions their answers either contradict direct observations or are pulled out of thin air without any empiric evidence. Basically they will find any silly reason and will even confuse their gut feelings and innermost convictions with logic, in order to embrace the random God of the country they grew up in, while denying reality.
I got a gut feeling that you are bullshit.
@@taiseeralam113 'gut feeling' you must be a theist.😂😂
If you people use Facebook then we can have a chat
@@taiseeralam113 I don't have Facebook. I only got TH-cam; well, and WhatsApp.
A. al Andalusi didn't grow up in Islam, he's worse, he became a Muslim OUT OF CHOICE!! Can you believe it? He's without excuse.
Good Abdullah
Seems like religion has reduced the thinking capability of Abdullah to the point of not able to what is right and what is wrong and need god's advise.
The main purpose of Islam(religion) is guidance for all mankind not to prove the existence of God.
We(muslim) believe existence of God because of Al-Quran and life of prophet Muhammad S.A.W.
Atheist just do not believe in God cause no evidence of God.
Both of them just assume.In reality,they both don't know like detective who do not know the murder but use evidence around him to solve the case.
We(muslim) believe wholeheartedly in Quran and teaching of the prophet as ultimate solution and guidance for mankind not prove of existence God.
What atheists need to do is analyze the book and learn it from muslim.Understand what the wisdom of God behind this rule.If this regulation can cause solutions with human problems today than just accept it.If not then reject it.
E-one Apalz but why does Quran talks about disbelievers? Him being God you should understand it’s a challenge don’t be an hypocrite please thanks
is he saying 'Freads' and 'artists ' really? anytime he speaks the 'th' as a 'f ' it makes my toe nails curl. the moderator called it stimulating talk. it's really stimulating my nerves. bloody hell!
Worshipping the supernatural, note (hundreds of different Gods on offer) without any evidence, is surely deluded wishful thinking and interesting how 'offended ' religious clerics can get when this is pointed out.
Lack-of-beliefers missing the point of the arguments, once again. As predicted.
Priests do not like to lose power
It's since religion has appeared
On this planet
So it threatens
And blackmail those who believe
I'm fooling them
With hell
Or heaven
Or punishments
its funny how far can one go just to denie existence of God, and say there was no inception of our universe. I mean atheists gonna come up with most idiotic ideas theories that doesn't make any sense just to try to denie God. We cant comprehend the idea that the universe always existed, but its easy to say it.
I'm not going any further to deny the existence of God than I would have to go to accept it. For me, it seems that the explanation of the existence of the universe through God is at least as far fetched and complicated as it's other explanations.
So far, I have never heard any explanation for the existence of the universe which didn't seem insufficient and leave unanswered questions and disturbing consequences. That's because our brain just hasn't evolved to consider concepts such as non-existence, so they always seem weird to us.
Ikr, those illogical Atheist and their lack of emotional attachment and naive belief in any ancient desert scribblings; why can't they just be simple-minded for once and say god did it all? Is it really that difficult for them?!?!?!
i dont think we will ever have such an answer. Therefore it all makes sense to me to believe in God. If we are here to be tested, it will always remain a belief we will never have an definitive answer and irrefutable fact how did we come here. So for me believing in God makes more sense than we came out of nothing, for no reason and accidentally we ended up with consciousness and now we can be arrogant and say naah, this just happened for no reason.
I agree with you on one thing : we cannot know for sure. It is possible that god doesn't exist, or that he does but made the world how it is now, purposefully not putting any scientific evidence of his existence. Because the two hypotheses cannot be distinguished by observation, all we're left with to decide which one to believe is philosophical tools like Occam's razor.
Now here's the part I disagree with : "believing in God makes more sense". It probably does make more sense to you. You grew up learning about God, and therefore are more comfortable with the idea of God existing than with the idea of life being meaningless. More generally, humans are more comfortable, due to the way their brain works and their evolutionary history, with the idea that life has meaning than with the idea that it just happened. However, I don't want to believe what's comfortable, I want to believe what's correct. And Occam's razor tells us that what's correct is the absence of God.
Occam's razor states that we should prefer the theory which requires the fewest number of assumption. Now let's compare :
theory 1 : The universe exists. It follows a certain number of rules, which are : .... There are a certain number of physical constants, which are : ....
theory 2 : God exists. He is an intelligent, omniscient and omnipotent being, with a purpose. Achieving that purpose has required, among other things, to create a universe, with all the laws of physics and constants given above, and to cause the appearance of intelligent beings. God has either not acted on the universe since it's creation or acted on it in a way too subtle to be noticed by human observation.
Now, you might think that theory 2 doesn't require that many more hypotheses than theory 1, and that's... possible to say I guess. However, you'll notice that theory 2 doesn't include any aspect of religion as we know it : no holy book, nothing about morality, or what humans should do. Basically, if I believed theory 2, I'd still be an atheist. The implications for the observable universe and what we should do in it are the same in theory 2 and in theory 1. In order to get a religion, you need to add more assumptions : the assumption that one of the holy books on the planet is actually the word of God, or that heaven and hell exist, or that there is a moral code set by God. And this is where Occam's razor starts cutting. Because anything which would make a religion requires adding assumptions to theory 2, theory 2 is preferable to any religion. And because theory 1 is equivalent to theory 2 in practice (and I even think it requires fewer assumption, but you could debate that so I'm not even going to use it.) then being an atheist is the most scientific choice given our current knowledge of the universe. QED.
@Amir Azemi. Another case of Pascal's wager. Don't forget to convert to the 5,000 other religions that exist around the world just in case they might be true.
This is one of the most bias debate channels I've ever viewed. The comment section is constantly modified to remove conversation which has athiests that are making valid points and even the channel owners them self are shutting down arguments by liking the ones that's in favour of their views and by commenting against the ones they don't like. It's clear by deleting valid comments the channel is trying to prevent discourse and are clearly hiding info from their main viewership. For most this channel is what they think real open debate is and that's a danger for progress. This is a sorry excuse for a debate platform and I strongly advice viewers to just watch the debate video and discuss it elsewhere!
Thank you, you might have prevented me from wasting a lot of time here :) I'll just watch it then
I mean... you’re here
@@zaidaanshibuya4160 true but not sure why but a week after this video was uploaded comments were disappearing left, right and centre.
Not true, as you can see by the comments section, there are both strong comments for and against each speaker. Including yours being (wrongly) critical of our channel.
Our comments section is unmoderated. (However, rarely though if someone reports a comment containing foul language, threats and racism (etc), we may remove it. Your critical comment against us doesn't fall into that category, and so it remains.
@@MagicSecretsandMysteries I have to wonder why you youtube comments atheists don't just debate abdullah directly since you constantly refute him so easily, why didn't share your massive intellects with Arif maybe he would have fared better in the debate and not waffled as much.
Phil zuckerman is highly biased
Dr. Arif Ahmed did an amazing job and made much more sense.
Loved how Arif destroyed Abdullah's every argument with his amazing elegant explanations. Strictly rational and logical. Completely uncovered religious fallacy.
Atheism is an advanced form of ignorance, some mental gymnastics to distract you from the real questions
Gaumuttvadis will suck any guy who has anything to say against Islam even if they make shity arguments.
@@primeminister1040 he's Hindu.
It seems to me that the point of arguing for different ethical systems is to convince other people that your view is superior in some way. The muslim just bit the bullet saying that he would allow all of humanity to be genocided rather than torture a single person. In my opinion that's one of the most ridiculous views of morality I've ever heard and I hope that most people wouldn't want to live in a world like that.
Arid Ahmed needs more exposure. He's brilliant.
DR. Arif, how did you get a Dr. when you do not know there is nothing like "Islamic" God?
what are you trying to say.
Abdullah "Begging the Question" al Andalusi
yarro "unsubstantiated claims" slavus
Abdullah al Andalusi uses examples of Western colonists and conquerors only. Perhaps he's ignorant of the Moors in Spain or the Turkish Ottoman empire, for instance.
46:15 Here in Austria most of us don't actually believe in a god or practice our religion. Being catholic is just a tradition. Most of us don't go to church on Sunday or ever pray. (We know that prayer works at the rate of chance and is therefore useless. It has been scientifically tested.)
Arif is so cool.
Seriously?😂
I'm really disappointed that this turned into some vague math and science lecture. Neither speaker addressed the actual topic in any meaningful way.
I’m an atheist and I agree to an extent that Arif wasn’t as convincing as he usually is in debates I have seen him in before ; but Abdullah didn’t bring anything new to the table , using a lot of big words, but really actually empty sentences, didn’t make me question my beliefs at all
@@maxpayne3628 no need to be insulting as you don’t know me ; I’m actually highly educated ; the fact that you felt strongly enough to react to my comment in such a manner just re-enforces what I said
The Atheist says that reality is simply the existence of finite and limited things. So that would put God in another category since He/She/it is infinite. So God is not real then!!!
at least arif supports palestinians
That's nice of him.
Surprising since according to him causes don’t require explanations. Maybe the Palestinian suffering just is? And doesn’t require an explanation? What a silly man.
First...Morality has changed as society has changed through the years. "Good" and "Bad" is based on what or will not harm you. Tribal people early on figured you could benefit by having more people whether it was for protection, war, hunting, etc. So "Good" just meant safety, security and well being? You don't need any book for that, and in fact people did it for thousands of years with no book and that is how you are all here.
Furthermore, Confuscious's Golden Rule, came well before the New Testament or the Quran if you want to look to even older religious text for a moral code.
Also, the only text which is worse than the Quran or Hadith to find your moral code is the Old Testament. It is Ironic a Muslim Scholar could talk about moral codes when the majority of Islamic Countries with Sharia Law have the worst morals being given to the people in those countries. Especially to women. Is it moral to treat your neighbors of other religions as demis or second class citizens.
Finally, purpose is what you make of it. There doesn't have to be a "meaning" to life other than what you make it. As advanced beings we strive to do good, because we don't want people to be bad back to us. Empathy is now engrained in the majority of humans.
So what if my purpose in life is suicide or genocide?
41:58 "Scientists won't make predictions when talking about the big-bang"
Apparently this guy missed the huge gravitational wave discovery; a prediction of Einstein in relation to the big bang.
Dude you obviously don't have a tiny little idea about what you are talking about... Please stop trying to look smart. You've just made yourself look even more stupid.
a human 21st century finite mind has no chance of conclusively defining and characterising the origins of a billion years old a infinite universe.
'If you don't want to call it god, you can call it deus or theo?' Aren't these just Latin and Greek words for god, though? So if we don't want to call it god, we can call it god or god? Thanks for the varied choices, dude.
You got a problem with those words, eh?
@@helsharidy123 You got a problem understanding things, eh?
I think that maybe that suggestion was made because many people have become uneasy with the English word “God”. Therefore, you can refer to the same Being with a word from a different language. Or maybe the suggestion was made because all these different words can be thought of as referring to the same Being. The Being who is the Originator of all else that exists apart from Him.
@@MrJMont21 Surely most people know that Theo and Deus mean God anyway? Unless you're trying to sneak in a term you think people won't understand to get them to agree with something unknowingly. I can't imagine anyone saying, 'Oh, I feel uncomfortable saying God, let's say Theo instead.'
Abdullah, an amazing speech at the beginning, I have never heard someone make so many points and every single one without exception is wrong and hypocritical!
Care to point one out?
Highly impressed with Arif. Feel content to be out of Islam and religion in general.
Congrats! I got out of Catholicism last year, not quite the same, but I feel very content as well :)
@Raine Riny 7
I've never seen nothing, did you?
@Raine Riny 7
Yes, I did. The effects of all of these theories are right in front of you.
I'm glad you're content, there's no compulsion in religion, according to Islam anyway, may you live your life according to what you believe. Although I am a muslim, may peace ever be upon you
"An infinite regress is rationally impossible."
Leibniz would like to have a word.
Mate, are you implying an infinite regress is possible?
If the past is eternal, then how come we are in the present? An eternal past is logically impossible
Jamal The Biker
He doesn’t know what he is talking about just here to spam comment section as usual many fake accounts
Leibniz didn’t believe an infinite regress could exist either. Specifically, an infinite regress in the principle of sufficient reason
Yet again, another muslim debater has a very poor understanding of philosophy and morality and psychology...you can never reason with these people...
Nath Anter it’s you that is unrealistic
The islamic guide to a debate:
* Say as many false things as possible (your opponent will not have time to refute them all)
* Try to correct mathematicians on mathematics, physicists on physics, and refuse to admit that you are talking out of your ass
* Claim that a moral god tests us by being evil
* End with "And thank god that i'm a muslim"
VolodyA! V Anarhist so...u.r.like.da.dog..hu.plays.with.his self...go.ahead.
@Tom Harry No need to try, when you win an argument you already sound cool.
@Tom Harry Hitchens said many bad things politically, he's not my cup of tea, but he did rip all islamists apart in all of the arguments. Perhaps he didn't sound as cool as somebody like Dawkins or others, but still much cooler than somebody who hides behind the hypocrisy of their religion.
And also it doesn't follow that if another person didn't say that you lied then you didn't lie. That is "called out for lying" and i didn't say that.
ABDULLAH GOT A NUMBER OF FACTS WRONG, INCLUDING THE RATE OF DECAY OF ATOMS BEING CONSTANT. THE RATE OF DECAY IS PROPORTIONAL TO THE NUMBER OF ATOMS PRESENT!!
Constant It doesen't mean fixed, It means that It Is a regulated pattern.
Abdullah made some really bad points...
If so, what are they, and did Dr Arif Ahmed, who had ample time to speak, address them?
Middle Eastern Atheist - didn't name one "bad" point, but ok.
middle eastern atheist his goal in life is to be respected by westerners lol
There were two bad points that stood out to me.
Abdullah clearly misunderstood the point the questioner made about the infinite series converging at 2 and started talking about the number line which is not the same thing.
His statement that theories can only make predictions about things that are yet to happen. That's just wrong and shows a lack of understanding of science and Arif did address this. For instance the theory of evolution predicts a fossil record that would contain transitional forms.
From what I can see he's like Hamza Tzortzis in that he's taken William Lane Craig's template does and given it a Muslim context and some of his own historical examples. Not a bad strategy but he doesn't seem to have the same grasp of the material WLC does (and his is far from perfect).
I guess that's why I stopped listening to these debates. They get repetitive after a while, both sides tend to make the same point and there's a lot of talking past each other. I find direct discussions are more interesting.
Muslim Debate Initiative
Stating and claiming things that he took more time than arif. But, providing no evidence at all.
1:20:35 delivered like a comedian! Brilliant lol
i think you missed the part where he was okay with incest
@@harun3811 nope
@@chagal3299 so u agree with him about incest? youre skipping over it like its inconsequential
@@harun3811 did I say I did? Just because I mentioned one comment of his that I found funny, doesn't mean I'm "skipping over" his previous comments or think it's "inconsequential".
@@chagal3299 u called it "brilliant", lmao. i just wanna know whats so brilliant about acknowledging that incest could be rationalised in his worldview
This is the problem with debates, the audience only sees what they already believe. I only see Abdullah as a bumbling idiot who cant prove why he believes god exists, but muslims in the comments see him as an intellectual. What people need are 1 on 1 conversations, pick out your topics and sit down, they would be able to exchange more information with each side in one and a half hour than a "Debate".
He drew different aspects that lead to the belief of the existence of superior being. He wasn't mumbling. His objective was to highlight the facts that scientific knowledge alone can't give proper explanation. This branch of knowledge is about fitting the reality with something that sustain at some level that we can control or engineer. The beginnings, origins, the very origin fact of knowledge, they can't be explained by science. This is why he backed up his argument drawing the cases that leads to theism. I can guess, you don't know the format of debates regarding metaphysical talks, beliefs or theological topics. Watch some, study some, you will get it. It's not merely a single question that can have 'yes' or ' no' answer. You need to make considerable validation. Study science, theology, understand them then call someone fool if he really is. You clearly lack tolerance, knowledge in science and debates.
good thing reality isn't decided by what your brain comprehends and if you are too stupid to understand his first premise (it is logically impossible not to have a first cause because of infinite regress) that's your problem and not ours.
Abdullah gets owned again!
The fact he would allow millions of people to die rather than go against one of his Islamic teachings is quite telling! And the fact 100,000s of the people dying will be going to hell to be tortured for eternity anyway makes it even more bonkers!
@17:00, there are some crimes that can cause society to collapse.
What is wrong with you?
The same good old empty theist secretions ... still no big G.
Arif hands down won this debate , abdullaa learn atleast something , research and have openmindedness