ไม่สามารถเล่นวิดีโอนี้
ขออภัยในความไม่สะดวก
Atheist Debates - Debate Review - Is Islam True? 2 debates
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 30 ธ.ค. 2022
- Over the span of a month, I debated two different muslims on the subject "Is Islam True?" - one in person, and one online.
This review covers the similarities and differences between those debates and suggestions on how to dig in against claims that the Quran is impressively accurate on scientific statements and that this, somehow, means the religious doctrines are true.
![[Official Music Video] ฝังใจ - BOW Maylada [Prod. By Tan LIPTA]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/rSjk1jKWRN4/mqdefault.jpg)
One of my favorite parts of the second debate was "Matt wants to debate about evidence." I died laughing. That's kind of the point of the debate
A debate can only be about evidence or about reasoning.
@waxberry4 When you talk about something that impacts reality (truth is demonstrable empirically), evidences matter at least as much as reasoning.
@@waxberry4 you can reason your way to a falsehood.
@@brianharris7243 That is why you need debate.
@Waxberry don't forget about evaluative debates, they are some of the most fun :)
We could also debate if Star Wars is true. It would be more fun, and just as realistic.
And Star Wars fans are almost as easy to offend as Muslims.
@@JayMaverick Not Original Trilogy fans. We gave up years ago lol
40k is more real and more cool
@James Hodson Been there 🙂
@James Hodson I think I'm old enough to have been there before the Wurzuls were a thing! 🙂
Thanks very much for all your work, Matt.
I am particularly appreciative of these synopses of your debates. While I understand that it may be important to listen to apologetics arguments directly, they are often so tiresome and disingenuous, that I can't bring myself to sit through them.
Have a great New Year, and best wishes for 2023.
I cannot sit through them.
Kenny is a likable person who seems to value honesty. Nadir has no redeeming qualities that he was able to demonstrate in this debate. He’s dishonest, arrogant, self-righteous, and ignorant. How Matt interacts with people like him in a civilized way is beyond me. I couldn’t do it.
Who knows maybe he cooks a mean casserole but he didnt get the opportunity to demonstrate it
For those who don't know why Nadir was so obsessed with Aron ignoring him: Aron had at least 2 discussions/debates with Nadir on scientific miracles in the Quran and by the end of it he no longer wanted to speak to Nadir because Aron realized he was completely intellectually dishonest and so talking to him is a waste of time. Nadir has openly stated before that he will 'never admit Islam lost a debate' because he believes so strongly in it. He's an attention seeker and I consider him to be the 'Kent Hovind' of Islam. Like Kent he:
- Only debates one topic: scientific 'mircales' in the Quran. This is why he was so obsessed with trying to push this in Matt's debate which was not about that.
- Refuses to admit that he is wrong and accuses the other side of damage control. Side note, on this he's actually worse than Kent because he was accusing the QUESTIONERS of damage control. Apparently Nadir does not understand the purpose of Q&A.
- Thinks children can consent.
- Projects himself on the other side.
- Has an enormous ego.
- Thinks he is the ultimate debater and the only person you should debate (when he insulted Perfect Dawah, clearly he's still butthurt that Aron won't talk to him again)
Even Daniel was a better interlocutor than Nadir. Heck even the Muslims who debated for the genocide of infidels on MMD were better interlocutors than Nadir.
Yeah Nadir is awful. He's down there with Nathan Thompson as the most infuriating, dishonest interlocutors.
@@JackgarPrime more like Nathan Oakley
@@markshort9098 I mean both those two FEs are pretty bad.
I've even pointed out to Nadir in post-debate discussion ... that his methods honor neither himself, nor Islam.
@@JackgarPrime Didnt the illiterate pedofile warmonger ride a chariot drawn by firey unicorns up to the sun and heaven? Next you will be telling me J zombies cant make demons go into pigs and make then run into the sea and the earth isnt 6000 years old and flat!
That was a particularly hard debate to watch. Matt was actually getting visually frustrated, when he deals with myriad idiocy on a regular basis 😂 He's more patient than I could ever be, maybe he should be sainted?
St Matthew, of the Atheist Inner Circle.
@@user-fj6kk1vo8n that'd be rather ironic since he hates people calling him Matthew lol
Nadir's strategy seems to be to to sound clever for his sycophants while annoying his opponent to the point that he'll get angry and make a mistake. It's always entertaining to see him go up against someone who can see this and stays on point regardless of his clownish behavior. Of course most of his opponents are well aware of his juvenile tactics. He makes GMan look like a grownup.
Nadir has sycophants? He's a total a%$.
@Miguel Quintana Well, I guess I'm just assuming he appeals to somebody. Maybe I'm being too generous.
Matt D. got totally shut down by the science of the Quran. Please accept the Islamic debate victory.
While Matt's work on the Atheist Experience was monumental, I much prefer to see Matt doing debates. I hope there's lots more to come!
Thanks Matt for the review of both debates which I watched . A very accurate analysis of what were obviously quite frustrating encounters, particularly the second debate. Keep up the good work. Happy new year and much success in 2023. ✌️🇨🇦
Love your content Matt. When something new of yours pops up in my algorithm I get excited
It was uncomfortable how adversarial and childish Nadir was in that “debate”. It was as if he was plugging his ears with his fingers every time Matt talked.
Every theist ever
I saw this debate, and Nadir was not debating. He was the pigeon who craps on the chess board, knocks the pieces over then declares victory.
Happy new year Matt!!! You the man!!!!! 👍👍
_"Matt wants to debate about evidence"_
In a debate? About something being true or not? Well shit man, I'd certainly hope so.
Matt's opponent: but... but.. but my arguments will only work if we debate about beliefs and feelings
Thank you, I had logic in grad school but have sharpened my mind listening to you and your analysis.
I recommend:
The philosophers toolkit
And
The Critical thinking toolkit.
They are really, really good books to get even sharper 🖖🏻
@@ShutUpWesley *Shhhink!*
Happy New year Matt. Thank you for empowering us. We appreciate all your knowledge
and wisdom.
This is awesome Matt, found you through Aron and MDD.
Wow! Modern-Day Debates finally did something useful.
Just a notice for everyone to remember one specific fact about the earth when thinking about various scientific aspects of religious books.
The land we stand on is literally floating on an ocean of lava. There is very few scenarios where the religious imagery would get more impressive than that, but it always goes unmentioned.
I'm a big fan the Socratic method of examining assertions. I find that Islamic claims are especially vulnerable for the simple fact that so many assertions are fundamental and absolute. Simple questions are powerful exposers of the falsity of unqualified fundamental assertions.
For example, it's a basic assertion of Islam that the quran is the perfect, unchanging word of a perfect, unchanging god. Who is then justified in "interpreting" the quran so that obviously false assertions in the original text say something different from what the original, allegedly perfect text actually says?
Is it that this god is unable or unwilling to say what it means or mean what it says when it says that an ant spoke?
If this god says that there is place where the sun sets in a spring of dark mud, why it is necessary to change the words so it says that god says someone saw a sunset?
There are literally dozens of similar nonsense statements in the original text of the quran that provide tens of thousands of apologists with steady work "interpreting" these obvious errors so they mean something different from what they clearly say.
Well put Joe,l have often thought the same,lt seems this form of religion is not up to contemporary criticism.
@@iveseen1 Thanks for the confirmation. However, I have yet to know any religion that can stand up to honest, candid examination. The irony is, every religion that exists is well known, by all other religions, as false. And of course, all those other religions know any particular religion except theirs is wrong.
It's fascinating to watch a YT debate between a Christian who takes exposes the follies of Islam - followed a few minutes later by the Muslim taking apart Christianity - and both are right.
@@JoeHarkinsHimself Yes, we are obviously on the same page. Cheers.
Lets not forget Nadir really went on the "She was very mature for her age" route, you cant make this up .
But it was the 700s, people just matured much fasterer!!?!!!!
@@realGBx64 In case u arent joking, stfu. If u are, nice one and stfu.
@@DKPGames (observe the pattern in the punctuation) I am bringing it up as this is one of the other lines apologists will bring up often. So, I repeat what they say in a mocking tone, that’s what the !!!?! means.
@@realGBx64 poe's law strikes again
She was though. Aisha led a war.
Iiiit's... dat Matt guy again! lol. Happy new year, Matt-Tastic! 😺😺
I love The use of the term “fan fiction.” So true!
I like to say that the Bible is the poorly written sequal to the Torah and the Koran is the god awful fanfiction written by the edgy teenager who thinks that hes the greatest author ever, despite the fact he cant even spell the word.
I would not use mental illness to describe the average religious individual. Still, having watched a few minutes of Ahmed, this zealot seems to need an intervention. Love this channel and kudos to Matt for having the strength and patience to deal with individuals like this.
It is a delusional notion.
I have engaged with Nadir online. I am unsure as to whether he has some genuine cognitive block or is deliberately disingenuous. I tend to the latter.
I debated Moslem’s and the final killing argument of the debating counterpart was always the question of: “are you an islamic scholar?”, when entering into the details of historical Islam and they started to be far out of their depths, especially how it came to the fact that the Koran is the literally the same all over the world (although that is not entirely correct, even if moslems like to claim so).
Since I am not an islamic scholar, the debate then always over - though there are enough history books contradicting todays teachings of the source for the “modern” Koran.
Thank you for all you do for us Matt 🇺🇸
I would like to wish you and your partner, a very happy New Year 2023. I have learnt a lot from you, especially critical thinking, over the years I have watched you. Keep up the good work.
I love these debate reviews, Matt. It's some of my favorite content from you. The first debate opponent was not very good, but at least seemed like a kind human. The second one, Nadir, was very dishonest and unpleasant, and in the end a total waste of time. But you did good in both debates. Any sane person can see how badly the "truth" of Islam was defended in both cases.
If Allah (or any other God) is real, why does he need apologists?
Happy new year!
If the muslims really wanted to settle the debate, all they need to do is prove their god exists.😈
I decided to listen to this as I was walking my dogs and even with the pausing to skip TH-cam ads, the stream ended just as I got home and took their harnesses off.
How can you explain that?!!!?!?!11!? Clearly Matt is god and knew precisely how long it would take to walk my dogs and made the post mortem precisely long enough!
/s
Any science in a religious book isn't known to be science until it's been proven scientifically.
Think about it.
True but the problem is they treat it as an Easter egg that their deity put there to show how much more they knew and to prove the religion. Its impossible to get them off this nonsense. Also, the things they point to as "scientific miracles" were either known at the time or are vague poetic phrasings they are twisting into "science."
@@sypherthe297th2 Exactly my point.
Even if the statement in the religious book turns out to be scientifically true that same science would also disprove all the false claims in that same religious book.
But theists just want to claim science 'proves' their religion ignoring the science that disproves the rest of their religion.
Happy new year Matt! I saw you in Cambridge few years ago. Thanks for everything, best wishes for 2023!
Thank you Matt for this video. I think you are very clear and logic.
I am glad Matt agreed to debate Nadir, not just because I can watch Nadir getting spanked by one of my favorite counter apologists, but because if he hadn't Nadir would have taken out a full page ad in every major news daily to proclaim how "Matt was too scared to debate him". Nadir is to the Quran what Darth Dawkins is to the Bible, both are in it for their own ego and neither are a credit to their chosen arguments.
"Nadir is to the Quran what Darth Dawkins is to the Bible, both are in it for their own ego and neither are a credit to their chosen arguments." Joel Dobbs
I have to ask due to confusion, who to you is Darth Dawkins?
@@danielpaulson8838 He's one of the worst presuppositional apologists, he uses a very tired script in every conversation.
Presups are the worst of all apologists, because they don't want to argue for their religion (e.g. Christianity, Islam). Their starting point is that their god already exists, without providing any evidence for this.
I wouldn't waste any time on a cretin like DD. You can watch the video "Pinecreek shows how to handle Darth Dawkins in a debate" to see the tactics he uses. ShannonQ also debated him and exposed how DD manipulates people during a conversation.
@@htpkey Thanks. I don't stay very up on these. I thought it was a play on Richard Dawkins and they are nothing alike. Does the DD guy take that name for that reason? Or is his name also Dawkins?
@@danielpaulson8838 You're welcome!
He has no connection to the atheist Richard Dawkins. DD is a Christian presup. I think he uses the Dawkins name because it's from a famous atheist, he's just doing it for the clickbait. The Darth part is from Star Wars, they are the evil antagonists of the Jedi. The Darth part is fitting with his character.
@@htpkey Got it. Thanks. Love Richard Dawkins but watched some of the video you posted and the Darth dud is totally self disillusioned and sounds as empty as a box of rocks. Without the rocks. Glad I asked instead of defending him, not knowing the creep was riding Richard's coattails. Happy New Years
Many Muslims would actually see the 'Kiss Hank's Ass' tactic and phrasing as hard to interact with because it means that they will have to engage with phrasing itself that they are uncomfortable invoking as part of a counter. This and the farting pixies examples are not going to get the job done in an honestly earned way, Matt. That being said, I can't wait to see you school Daniel.
I posted on Nasir’s video under modern day debates “even if Harry Potter correctly outlines the toxins in belladonna it doesn’t make the wizarding world real.” It gets filtered if you mention Harry Potter or fairytales
Great video as always! Thanks Matt! 😊
I nearly did a spit take when you mentioned, "Kissing Hank's Ass." It's such a good way to show religious people how they sound to me.
Regarding the prophecy- the Simpsons are still the best I have seen lol
This was great. Thank you Matt.
"I know! Let's invent an imaginary sky god and project it out into the cosmos, then make up a bunch of BS rules to worship it by, causing thousands of years of suffering and wasted human energies!"
"Um...no thanks."
Kenny and Nadir were great at showing how unreasonable it is to believe what they believe
I have looked forward to this review since watching the debates, Matt, especially the one with Nadir, so thank you. That man is so annoying. His arguments are appalling. He is arrogant and condescending, perhaps not quite as extremely so against you, Matt, but if you’ve seen him trying to school Apostate Prophet, the condescension was so thick, you could cut it with a knife. He needs to learn a few social skills. His defence of the ridiculously unscientific passages in his Quran are absolutely laughable and show just how thoroughly his religion has brainwashed him. I think he’s a parody of a man, truly someone representing the lowest point. And the other guy, Kenny, giving you his book like that at the start… what a cheap, shoddy gesture. Keep exposing these twits, Matt.
With Nadir it happened the dame thing that happened in the debate about mariology. The subject of the debate wasnt addressed by the defender. Both Nadir and William Albrech arrived at the debate looking to win a fight.
Happy New Year, Matt. Thanks so much for your time and efforts, you have taught me so much in the last 13 years.
Great recap Matt!
7:13 Matt: "Not here to recommend alcohol at all."
Me: takes swig of champagne
Cheers!
@@trishayamada807 Cheers to you too! Happy New Year! 😄
Whenever I'm reminded of prison ministry, my mind immediately goes back to Hoodlum, where at the beginning of the movie Lawrence Fishburn's character has to convince the board evaluating his release, being asked what he thinks of the bible they heard he was reading, snd him answering in the most obvious I'm-lying-to-you-so-you'll-do-what-I-want way, saying "It's a good book."
Atheist Experience is not the same without you, that said - its still great.
However, i've got a question for you: Do you have any plans of putting your stuff on spotify or any other podplatform? Cos i love listening to your stuff while i work.
Keep up the good work Matt!
It’s unfortunately so true. As much as I love Forrest, Shannon, Jim, Dave, JMike, etc, it’s just not as entertaining as when Matt was hosting. None of the other hosts have Matts ‘take no shit’ attitude, which I personally think is the best way to deal with these irrational theists, or his depth of knowledge about the buybull or religion in general.
Hopefully they can get their differences squared away and we can get Matt back on the show.
@@norcodaev can i get a tldr on what happened? so confused about it all
@golgothas Testified Matt did a video on the issues.
Hey Ankh, if you purchase TH-cam Premium, you can listen to videos with your screen off and no ads. Basically the same as a podcast app.
@@Wishuponapancake just watch Matt’s video on leaving the ACA - you’re literally already on his channel.
the Hadith's also make counter factual claims that completely undermine all credibility, like the sun resting in a muddy pool of water.
Christ on a dildo!!!!
THANK YOU, Matt!!!!!!
I've been doing google searches for "Church of Hank/ Church of Frank/ Million dollar religion prank etc..." trying to remember the name of this thing that I remember seeing, but couldn't quite remember the name of. About 4 minutes in, Matt mentions "Kissing Hank's Ass," which was the very thing I'd spent so long searching for!!
Fuck my nose!!! It's such a relief to FINALLY scratch that itch and to be able find and watch the correct video again!!
Kenny comes off as more amicable than Nadir but don’t be fooled. If the they had their way both would support putting people in prison (or worse) for insulting their ‘prophet’.
It looked like Kerny tried to put matt in a headlock as they were hugging it out-- that and his line of argumentation (or lack thereof)struck me as an unstable person.
Thanks Matt for these reviews. To be honest I got frustrated and angry trying to watch the debate with Nadir, but you handled it really well as always.
Nadir is still claiming victory from the debate, he's delusional.
After watching this video expecting it to be a review of your conversation with Kenny, I then went back and found the conversation with Nadir. I have to say, even with low expectations going in, I was still disappointed with Nadir, and his ability to even approach the notion of critical thinking. At one point, he said something along the lines of "Matt has to explain to me why the Quran has these scientific miracles (not a thing) listed all over," and I couldn't believe he actually seemed to want you to do his job for him. Talking to him really was a waste of time.
The holy book believers need to list all the science as yet undiscovered by man that they are currently sitting on.
Then they could tick them off as we find them.
Done, that would be pretty reasonable proof of their books validity, maybe not divinity but still a good start.
It's always frustrating when a theistic debater continues to try to declare victory like in the second debate.
Only Allah knows the correct interpretation? Why isn't Allah able to make itself clear so that no interpretation will be necessary?
11:30 “the rapid spread in conversion to Islam/Christianity” is uniquely unimpressive in the context of these religions because they contain Explicit teleological proclamations which command their believers to evangelize to every man on earth.
Meanwhile Buddhism permeated a vastly more cultural/linguistically heterogeneous expanse of the planet all while having no evangelistic mandate. That a religion not about miraculous wonders and tall tales, but dispassionate self knowledge and letting go of selfish attachments would scale the Himalayas to reach the the Eurasian steppe, penetrate the fiercely isolationist Japanese archipelago, and unify the countless isolated cultures which arose in the most fertile environment on earth, in the rainforests of south East Asia… is far more compelling than the Abrahamic cults which had the power of the state behind them, yet struggled to establish themselves beyond their near eastern Mediterranean/Arabian context.
The spread of Islam and Christianity is exactly what one should expect from a false belief system which contains violent and exclusivist instructions for how to enforce those beliefs as a political ideology.
In retrospect many will be inclined to overvalue the appeal of Christianity citing its prevalence in the americas. But we cannot ignore the fact that that presence was established by force in Africa, and the new world through the moral abomination that was white christian settler colonialism of the Colombian exchange. The indignities of the Spanish Mission, the horrors of the Afrocarribean slave trade, the relentless genocide of the indigenous peoples of North America canonized into christian doctrine as the Manifest Destiny which would go on to Inspire Hitler’s Liebensraum and the Holocaust under the German Nazi party.
This is Exactly what I would expect from a false belief system which for every degree of its moral bankruptcy and utter worthlessness it made up for it with ideas perfectly adapted to exploit the frailties in human reasoning, to co-opt and exacerbate our most racist, misogynistic, xenophobic and tribalistic impulses.
I appreciate your information and understanding. If I may opine. Christianity became highly popular for one main reason. It plays on natural human fears of death, promises that you can escape it by simply believing in this. Then they hand a bible to the fearful masses. Now you get eternal life without even working for it. You see what kind of mind believes in that? Humans being naturally divided to enhance evolution in the beginning creates their own version locally. We don't share Gods until the God can't be shared. So they continue to evolve religions. Most humans have a sheep mentality. They will be led by something unless they figure it out. They are not the thinkers. But they are the masses. The many called. Not the few chosen. (Using Christian adopted lingo)
I got in an argument with Nadir in the comment section of one of his other debates. He's incredibly condescending and didn't seem to even understand the point I was making. He also wouldn't shut up about how many Christians he claims to have beat in debates in the past. I wouldn't be surprised if he's yelling at people in the comment section for this vid too.
What drives a person to want/need a god to be true? I've never had such a desire and it baffles me why people do.
Absolutely religions drive people ^#%*@&and they fall for it then follow a cowardly deity that loves to play hide and seek
The "afterlife" is my best guess... They just don't wanna admit that this life is the only one they will have. They need to convince themselves that there is a special place for them when they die, most theists probably know it is fanciful but will cling on just in case.
It think theists understand that the universe is indifferent to our existence. They don't like the idea that some people have done so much harm to society and were never punished for it during their lifetime. They believe that they will be judged for their actions in some afterlife or from reincarnation (into a "lower" life form).
That's why it's important for us to try and fix the problems we have in the world. This existence is the only one we are sure of, the rest we have no evidence for and are just wishful thinking.
A single debate is like a single chess game.
You can vary your opening moves...
Hitchens, possibly not originally, observed that if there was a god he showed no interest in his minions for the first *248000* years of their time on this planet?
It strikes me as strange that it was only really when societies started getting together & people had the luxury of time to contemplate their navel that "gods" started appearing....🤔
The easiest things to hide are the things that don't exist.
Hope subtitles appear soon 👍
Islam will enter every household before judgment?
Sounds like someone's gonna steal my wallet...
Its like Nadir call on the show of Matt hahahah.
I watched both debates, I liked Kenny (although his talking points were quite flawed), he was friendly and happy....Nadir was simply insane
of course you like Kenny - he is the weaker debater - not educated. I used the science of the Quran to body slam Matt, as he was not able to respond.
24:50 Nadir said bride-to-be's consent was required. It is insulting to accept a 6-year old could consent to marriage and a 9-year-old could consent to sex with a 57-year-old.
Did the bride complaint Against her marriage?
I always say to muslims let's start from the beginning from the moment mohamed came down from his cave and told the people of mecca hey guys I saw an angel , would you believe right away if someone told you they saw an angel and that angel said stuff to them ??? Is the Quran evidence for itself being a revelation from God to --> an Angel to--> mohamed to--> the early followers to --> us today
Why can't God skip all of this and come talk to us directly is he shy ? If God comes down says the Quran is my book I sent mohamed that's it .
Islam and christianity are equally nonsensical, IMO.
No! see, no debate needed.
Sir: I fully agree with you, because it is more reasonable for me.
And If I where you, I will do the same, repeating the debate with same way is useless.
100% am with you.
Keep up the Good work.
Happy new year, Matt!
I often find myself wishing that Matt would have an intelligent debate opponent, who didn't fall victim to uncountable numbers of fallacies, etc.
But then I remember - If they were intelligent and weren't plagued by horrendously flawed thinking, then they wouldn't be theists!!
If we want to see an exciting, compelling and 'close' debate, then Matt would need to debate a competent atheist over a non-theistic topic. He did this once before about abortion rights, but unfortunately, his opponent kind of shat herself (figuratively). Matt talked about bodily autonomy and she was expecting him to say that the foetus isn't human, so ALL her segments revolved entirely around objections that no one had made. She wasn't just arguing against a straw-man, she was arguing against an invisible, possibly an imaginary straw-man!! Every point Matt raised was entirely unanswered by her, the ONLY points that she 'rebutted' were points that no-one had raised. That isn't so much a brain-fart on her behalf, it's a brain-fart that turned into a brain-shit, hence she 'kind of shat herself.' Which is a shame, really, because she was quite sexy when she wasn't covered in figurative shit!
Anyway, my point is, I want to see more debates against attractive women! No... Hang on...
You roasted nadir in your debate hahaha.
Short answer: no
As a CO, I can tell you, religion has exactly zero effect on recidivism.
The Mediterranean and Atlantic are stratified where they meet due to the Mediterranean being saltier. But the reason the Mediterranean is saltier is because the Atlantic flows into the Mediterranean. Water in the Mediterranean evaporates, and there are not enough rivers to provide enough fresh water to cancel out the additional salt that is constantly feeding in from the Atlantic. So the waters do mix.
I'm an Atheist, and really enjoy listening to the callin shows you're associated with. However, I was wondering, does anyone know of any channels that are the opposite? I.e. Where the hosts are theists and debate with people that call in that are atheists?
I don’t think they exist. I would have heard of them by now.
If there are, they're likely very obscure. Mostly because atheists are far less interested in "converting" theists, and there's also not really a worldview to debate or defend when it comes to atheism, since it's more just a position to a proposal than a belief system in and of itself.
Yes theists have to prove their craziness, atheists,& we are right, say "prove it " that's when christians fly apart like a cheap watch
There is Hamza’s Den and Thought Adventure Podcast, both featuring 2-4 Muslims who debate/converse with non-Muslims.
Nadir was very rude
Fun fact: there are no good studies supporting benefits of alcohol consumption.
Most studies supporting this claim are either connected to the industry or methodologically weak.
We need you, Aron, Harris and as many honnest people as possible, to come to the lands of the great inquisition, Portugal and Spain. Here, our polititians say we are secular, so the EU accepts us, but the truth is that we keep the concordate between our state and te Vatican. Just to make it better, it was done between Salazar, a totalitarian dictator mix with a religious fannatic, and the pope that granted hitler's birthday Celebration inside the catolic church every year.
Sorry for the errors! Hope to see you here some day! Keep up the fight against non sense!
Both of those debates only showed just how much of their life some believers will put into a belief so removed from all that is real and good, in order to defending the indefensible, and how willing they are to resist any form of rational thought in order to take on the futile task of explaining an utterly absurd ideology into existence.
I guess the main reason the bible and quran call suicide a ticket to hell, is because some of those who made that crap up realized just how much their bullshit messed with peoples mind. I can only imagine that before they did people would rather die than serve a god who demands one mutilate their own mind to the degree of self inflicted insanity.
Both debates were ridiculous! I don’t get how Matt has patience to do these debates. I hope he’s getting paid a lot of money!
Please accept the Islamic debate victory of Matt D. the science of the Quran destroyed him
@@nadirahmed4224nothing as such happened..if it did you wouldn't be here telling ppl to accept it lmao..just take the L man you lost big time😂
I couldn't even finish watching the debate with Nadir. He was so terrible I just couldn't stand it.
Welcome to every single "debate" with a "muslim"/zealot.
Happy new year. One for the algorithm
6:03 I think Nadir is a doctor. He must have gotten tired of his patients talking about alcohol.
Alcohol makes religious people more tolerable. It is absolutely essential, and the benefit certainly outweighs the harm.
The spread of Islam is explained not by any god, but by the fact that they had a powerful army.
Other religions/cultures also have prohibitions against alcohol. Even if Islam is responsible for saving lives (debatable) look at all the lives lost due to wars and terrorism etc.
If one can't put the same amount of passion in debating the authenticity of the European religious beliefs that inspired Nazism, I could less about their opinion on non-European religions. Instead, they always emphasize how the politics were the problem without directly addressing the rooted prejudices that resulted in the Thule society that raised Hitler to be what he was.
Sounds like Nadir is appropriately named!
9:5, 9:14, 47:3-4, (Quran) countless more. How is this not "Hate speech"?
I heard the first one. You thrashed him.
I love the "white lab coat" analogy. I suppose it's akin to those who call themselves doctor all the time when they either just don't have a doctorate, or one based on an irrelevant pseudoscience.
Lord Crude de Established Titles
The verses that contradicts sceince or common logic needs Tafsir which basically means allah wasn't able to put it clearly or he was simply ignorant and now we need some random guy to clear the confusion for us.
Islam is just as true as Jack and the Beanstalk and Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs existed!
*Why did Allah allow Christianity to become such a well established religion, before introducing his real message, Islam, to the middle east?* _(confusing humanity)_
Why not just give Moses the same message he gave Muhammad? _Why wait?_
"they do not pracice what they preach."
I'm frustrated with the debate inside Christianity between Calvinism and Arminianism. There's verses that back both sides, but they're trying to cancel each other out because the modern evangelical thinks that theological purity can be attained, only if the other side admits their fault. So what you see is dodging, interpretations, Greek meaning, grammatical gymnastics, sophistry etc.
What does the Koran say about quantum gravity?
Good question.😅
Nothing...
Nothing
Just wait until some brilliant physicist finds a solution, and then all the muslims will scramble to look for the best verse that was so obviously talking about the topic all along
@@lilarrin1220 But until real physicists find the answer, no one will be able to point to any verse in any allegedly holy book.