iERA engages with Prof. PZ Myers, AronRa, Maryam Namazie and Richard Dawkins at the World Atheist Convention in Dublin, Ireland, June 2011
Muslims Refute Atheists
Senior researcher and lecture Hamza Andreas Tzortzis challenges Professor PZ Myers on God's existence and the Qur'an. See 00:06
Hamza Andreas Tzortzis talks to AronRa on human intellect and thought. See 23:00
AronRa invites Hamza Andreas Tzortzis to The Magic Sandwich Show. See 28:25 - Watch this space!
Lecturer Adnan Rashid challenges Maryam Namazie on Islamic law. See 29:10
Hamza Andreas Tzortzis challenges Richard Dawkins on the fine-tuning of the universe.See 32:32
A word on PZ Myers
This man comes off as a typical anti-religion bigot whom are a dime a dozen on YouTube. He really needs to invest in some house training lessons.
Feeback: yahyasnow@hotmail.com
Become a Muslim if you love Jesus (p)
Sexism: Reason to change the Bible
Discover Islam
New Testament Discussed
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
32 comments:
You actually put this up? Have you no self respect? Have you no common sense?
Anad Rashad and the other guy come off as DUMB AND EVEN DUMBER.
They were laughing at them. This was a shameless performance.
Muslim "The Quran says that bones develop first and then skin and bone attatch to it... Just like Kieth Moore says. YOu disagree with KIETH MOORE
Dr Myers "Yes I am a embreologist, my field is early develepment.. there are many stages in the development of a fetus, but bones do not form first, instead you have flesh and the flesh that will later develop into bones grows simaltaniously"
Muslim "Even if that is the case the qruan is right, becasue the word now can mean simultaniously"
Serioulsy Muslims you don't see a problem with ths? They are arguing that the quran says bones develop first then flesh attatches to the bone. Now that it is pointed out that this is not the case by a actual EMBRYOLOGIST who was not paid by the Sauid Government that that both the flesh that becomes muscle etc.. dvelops "SIMULTANIOULSY" with the flesh that will grown into bone.
Now the argument changes to "YES THE QURAN SAYS THEY DEVELOP at the same time. LOL
Muslim
Dr Myers "Mountains according the quran are to stabalize the crust or something like that"
Muslim "No thats not what the quran says..."
Dr Myers "Ok you tell me what does the quran say...
Muslim <2 second pause> "Its archamedias falcrum point."
I know I'm so going to regret asking this, but what the heck does archamedias falcrum point have to do with mountains. My eye is twitching I'm laughing so hard.
This was a disaster for those that believe in GOD.
I'm serious I say this with more respect then you guys have for yourselfs. DO NOT DEBATE ATHEISTS.
And please for the love of God take this down, its embarasasing. It really is.
That was probably one of Dawkins' better perforamances defending the atheist viewpoint at the end. Too bad there wasn't a non-Muslim there to defend the existence of God. Hamza really dropped the ball. I would say good job trying, but I think he managed to make those of us who believe in the true God and argue for His existence in a way that is more honoring and glorifying to Him look bad. No doubt atheists and other infidels love to lump Christians in with Muslims. So unfortunately Hamza dropping the ball will (falsely) reflect on us.
lol radical. does your mommy still pack your lunch for you?
good debates from muslims. christians are sad bcuz we beat them in debates and we beat atheists :)
Hi Radical Moderate. Read the verse again:
"....Then of that clot We made A (foetus) lump; then We Made out of that lump Bones and clothed the bones With flesh; then We developed Out of it another creature. So blessed be Allah, The Best to create!" (23:12-14)
We acknowledge that the chewed lump exists prior to the formation of the human being bones and 'lahm', or muscles. What's your contention here? What's PZ's contention here? State them clearly, so one of us may be able to help you better understand. Remember, it was they who said we worshipped an anthropomorphic god, which is clearly not part of Islam.
As for the mountains - I haven't done much research there, but will get back to you on that.
@RefutingActs17
Lets put aside the fact that after the Muslism were refuted that bones do not form first by a embreologist, that they changed there argument to "Ohhh it really means Simutanioulsy".
I want to know first before I continue.
Do you know if this verse (23:12-14) is part of the Um AL KITAB (The Mother of the Book, the Clear verses) or part of the Mutashabahat verses (the un clear verses)?
Radical Moderate,
I say, lets start on something easier. How about we start from our foundations? Why we hold our scriptures to be true. Shall we?
@Reftutingt
You said...
"I say, lets start on something easier. How about we start from our foundations? Why we hold our scriptures to be true. Shall we?"
How about we don't and say we didn't.
You quoted a verse from the Quran, you sort of gave a explination to taht verse and the Muslims in the video definitly gave a explination to etierh that verse or a similar one.
So I am asking you is that a Um Al Kitab verse or a Mutashabit verse? If you don't know then why are you quoting it as if you understand what it means?
Refuting mabey my question was a little to tough for you, so maybe I will need to explain.
Surah 3:7
YUSUFALI: He it is Who has sent down to thee the Book: In it are verses basic or fundamental (of established meaning); they are the foundation of the Book: others are allegorical. But those in whose hearts is perversity follow the part thereof that is allegorical, seeking discord, and searching for its hidden meanings, but no one knows its hidden meanings except Allah. And those who are firmly grounded in knowledge say: "We believe in the Book; the whole of it is from our Lord:" and none will grasp the Message except men of understanding.
So the verse you quoted is it from teh Umm AL Kitab (the mother of the book or "the foundation of the Book" or is it the part that is Allegorical?
@Yahya Snow
You wrote on anotehr thread.
"I bet you are a little relieved as the discussion on Trinitarianism has been interrupted. A welcomed respite, perhaps"
What, when have Muslims ever discussed teh doctrine of the trinity? I dont know what relegion you Muslims keep attacking, worshiping three god, beleif in a man god, etc... But what ever relegion that is I am opposed to it as much as I am opposed to Islam.
Snow man really you should take this video down, its embaraasing, it really is. Or at least change the sub title from "Muslim refutes atheist" to "Athiest refutes Muslim" becasue that is what happend.
Or change it to 'HOW NOT TO ARGUE WITH A ATHEIST".
Dr White once again exposes Muslim mistakes, errors, deception, and out right lies.
Dr James White Exposes Muslim LIES AGAIN
Yahya! We've got a response from Adnan Rashid!:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8JdJZZHuZb8&feature=channel_video_title
it is really sadening to see the amount of hatered that fundamentalists really have for muslims,you say laughbly that Hamza and Adnan came of really badly and yet you think that mr white won his debate against Bart Ehrman? you see when you hold those kind of views your opinion is really worthless. I think your faith is being shattered every time Yahya posts a video or blog gloryfying Islam so you come here with ridiculous comments made even worse by the fact you are a old man whose judgement is very doubtful.
Also we muslims are the only people who can defend ourselves against athiests unlike fundy chrisitans who are losing thier congregation to the athiest movement in large numbers, so if anyone shouldnt debate athiests it is the likes of you and your ilk.
I would also like to point out the disastorous performance radicals hero mr white has put up against a mormon apologist the first part can be veiwed here http://danielomcclellan.wordpress.com/2011/04/08/james-white-mormons-are-not-christians/ and whites response here http://www.aomin.org/aoblog/index.php?itemid=4576 now this discussion goes on through the entire month of may and is really eye opening because this mormon apologist really shows why it is so popular in america and how they can show thier absurd doctrines from the old testament and new testament using the same methods "traditional" christians do. So radical moderate i know you dont really think the video posted by yahya is bad but i suggest to you as a groupie for mr white and his kind that you e-mail mr aomin and tell them to take down that discussion because it makes him look really bad as does most of his videos on Islam.
btw radical who is the holy spirit telling you to support for the US presidential elections? herman cain? mad bachman? even madder palin? or if you ever dare to read that discussion between your hero and the mormon apologist you might convert to mormonism and support romney and huntsman!!!! lol please to inform us who the infallible holy spirt tells you to support because the last time it got it quite wrong didnt it? lolololol
To Radical Moderate:
So the Christian have a better position with your Bible. Loool
At least we argue for God who is transcendent , not a Son God generated by his father God.
Christians will start debating Atheists, when they can face scholars of NT first. Have you seen the humiliation of James White against Bart Ehrman?
Here is one excerpt if you missed it:
James White shoots himself in the foot
Bible theological contradiction
It looks like RefutingActs has gone AWOL, kind of funny how you ask a simple question about the Quran to Muslims and they all of a sudden go silent.
So are there any Muslims that can show me if those verses in teh Qur'an that Muslims so confidently use to say that the Quran is a scientific Miriracle are in fact from the UM AL KITAB?
No, net yet. Just haven't found time to respond to you.
@RF17
You wrote... "No, net yet. Just haven't found time to respond to you."
You do realize that in the time you took to inform me that you did not have time to respond to me. You could of responded to me, and how come you found the time to respond to me to let me know that you did not have time to respond to me?
I dindn't know this was such a dificult question. THink about this, you should be able to answer this right away. You after all are the one quoting this verse, so sholdn't you as a Muslimn knwo which verses you are quoting if they are Clear, or Alogorical? Especially when you and other Muslims put so much stock into there interpretation of these verses.
To Radical Moderate:
This verse of the Quran is 100 more clear than the hypostatic-Union supposedly in the Bible.
It's clear that God created man from fetus, not someone else. It's clear that God all-knowing in the Quran, that doesn't mean it's clear how that can be.
1MOREMUSLIM
So is that verse part of the UMM AL KITAB? YES OR NO
To Radical Moderate:
Om Al Kitab is a name of the Quran. It's called also Dhikr or Imam moubin and other names.
Let me now ask a question: You know where Paul says , all scripture is God's breath , is the part where he says " I, not the Lord" and where he says " I have no command from the Lord" Are these verses profitable for teaching and correction? Explain how.
1MoreMuslim Blog
Who was high priest when David went into the house of God and ate the consecrated bread?
(a) Abiathar (Mark 2:26)
(b) Ahimelech, the father of Abiathar (I Samuel 1:1; 22:20)
Was Jesus’ body wrapped in spices before burial in accordance with Jewish burial customs?
(a) Yes and his female disciples witnessed his burial (John 19:39-40)
(b) No. Jesus was simply wrapped in a linen shroud. Then the women bought and prepared spices “so that they may go and anoint him [Jesus)” (Mark 16: 1)
When did the women buy the spices?
(a) After “the Sabbath was past” (Mark 16:1)
(b) Before the Sabbath. The women “prepared spices and ointments.” Then, “on the Sabbath they rested according to the commandment” (Luke 23:55 to 24:1)
At what time of day did the women visit the tomb?
(a) “Toward the dawn” (Matthew 28: 1)
(b) “When the sun had risen” (Mark 16:2)
What was the purpose for which the women went to the tomb?
(a) To anoint Jesus’ body with spices (Mark 16: 1; Luke 23:55 to 24: 1)
(b) To see the tomb. Nothing about spices here (Matthew 28: 1)
(c) For no specified reason. In this gospel the wrapping with spices had been done before the Sabbath (John 20: 1)
Radical Moderate where have you gone? Why you leave when the conversation becomes interesting?
1moremuslim sorry I forgot about you lol.
You wrote...
"Om Al Kitab is a name of the Quran. It's called also Dhikr or Imam moubin and other names."
So Um Al Kitab is the name of the Quran, I guess that's another version.
Interesting Surah 3:7 says that the Um Al Kitab is part of the book, not the whole book, and that it is the clear part of the book. So the rest of the Quran is the unclear part.
Ibn Kathir and others say the Um Al Kitab is actually the first surah, with only 7 aya's.
Tell me what scholar do you have to back up your claim that the Um Al Kitab is the whole book?
Radical Moderate :
You forgot to answer my Question.
1moreMuslim
You wrote
"You forgot to answer my Question."
No I didn't forget, I'm still waiting for you or any Muslim o answer my question.
Is S 23:12-14 a Umm Al Kitab verse or a Mutashabihit verse?
Refutingacts17 what do you say? 1moreMuslim must have a different version of the Quran. His version doesn't seem to have S 3:7 since he stated that the name of his Quran is Umm Al Kitab.
@Refuting Acts 17
Come out come out where ever you are.
Whats wrong, can't figure out if the verse you are quoting is Clear or UNCLEAR. Wow didn't know that was going to be so hard for you.
What pathetic book you have, 99.9 percent of it is Unclear. And if you try to understand these unclear verses you have a sick heart.
Sad so sad so sad.
1moreMuslim
Maybe you should share your version of the Quran with RefutingActs17 since his Quran is unclear
Looool @ Radical Moderate
The Quran 99% unclear verses, 90% the Muslims know exactly what are the articles of faith and what are the pillars of Faith.
The Bible is supposedly a divine clear revelation, Christians can't have a 10 % consensus about the "true" doctrines, after 2000 years, Christians still arguing if a Christian can lose faith, are we saved by Faith alone or not? Can we resist grace or not...
Yeah , the bible is very Clear !!! loooool
@1moreMuslim
If the Quran is so clear then you should have no problem telling us if the verse that is being sited is actually a clear verse.
So far you and others have been unable to do so.
What a pathetic religion you have.
To Radical Moderate:
Pathetic religion ! lool
The Generated Flesh-God worshiper. lol
Dear brother Radical Moderate
Let me give some comments on the Clear (which you say ummul kitab) and Unclear Verses ( Mutashabehat), seems 1MoreMuslim is not able to clarify your point.
First of all I would like to tell brother 1Moremuslim, if you attack Bible you are indirectly attacking God himself, as God says clearly in Quran that he himself revealed the Torah and the Gospel, hence we are no one to find faults in these books as we are not aware what changes were done and by whom.
As far as the Verses of Quran are concerned, it has many type of narrations related to Laws, Lesson from the life of other nations, Some sections related to science, and life to come.
Now there are many things in the Quran which we currently don’t know the exact interpretation of such verses like as to what exactly is heaven and hell, what does it mean by seven heaven and earth, how dead will be resurrected, how will we receive our judgement, what are angels, what is Soul etc etc. These verses are called "mutashabheh" (unclear) at current time and the explanation will be clear with time.
I would make this clear with simple example, when it says in the Quran that God address to Pharaoh that he will be drowned and his body will be saved as a sign for generation to come, now till last 1300 years this ayat was mutshabhat as none were aware where his body was, as now since the Body of Pharaoh is discovered this ayat no more falls in to the category of mutashabhiat.
Similarly the Ayat related to Q:23:12-14 related to embryology was not clear (Mutashabahat) to the people until recently when it was viewed in the light of modern embryonic stages , it was identified that the stages mentioned in the Quran are inline with modern science hence this ayat is no more mutashabhiat.
Finally to all Muslims and others, Quran and Bible are not the book of Science or Technology, these are book of Guidance for us to know our creator and to live our life in accordance to his commandments. Though these books do contain reference to other sciences as required to explain certain concepts, and I should say that both these books will stand to the test of Science if the approach with unbiased attitude.
This was my humble effort to explain the concept and forgive me if I am not clear in my explanation,
God bless all believers and Guide all of us and unbelievers to right path.
Dear brother Radical Moderate
Let me give some comments on the Clear (which you say ummul kitab) and Unclear Verses ( Mutashabehat), seems 1MoreMuslim is not able to clarify your point.
First of all I would like to tell brother 1Moremuslim, if you attack Bible you are indirectly attacking God himself, as God says clearly in Quran that he himself revealed the Torah and the Gospel, hence we are no one to find faults in these books as we are not aware what changes were done and by whom.
As far as the Verses of Quran are concerned, it has many type of narrations related to Laws, Lesson from the life of other nations, Some sections related to science, and life to come.
Now there are many things in the Quran which we currently don’t know the exact interpretation of such verses like as to what exactly is heaven and hell, what does it mean by seven heaven and earth, how dead will be resurrected, how will we receive our judgement, what are angels, what is Soul etc etc. These verses are called "mutashabheh" (unclear) at current time and the explanation will be clear with time.
I would make this clear with simple example, when it says in the Quran that God address to Pharaoh that he will be drowned and his body will be saved as a sign for generation to come, now till last 1300 years this ayat was mutshabhat as none were aware where his body was, as now since the Body of Pharaoh is discovered this ayat no more falls in to the category of mutashabhiat.
Similarly the Ayat related to Q:23:12-14 related to embryology was not clear (Mutashabahat) to the people until recently when it was viewed in the light of modern embryonic stages , it was identified that the stages mentioned in the Quran are inline with modern science hence this ayat is no more mutashabhiat.
Finally to all Muslims and others, Quran and Bible are not the book of Science or Technology, these are book of Guidance for us to know our creator and to live our life in accordance to his commandments. Though these books do contain reference to other sciences as required to explain certain concepts, and I should say that both these books will stand to the test of Science if the approach with unbiased attitude.
This was my humble effort to explain the concept and forgive me if I am not clear in my explanation,
God bless all believers and Guide all of us and unbelievers to right path.
@ Khalid,
" First of all I would like to tell brother 1Moremuslim, if you attack Bible you are indirectly attacking God himself, as God says clearly in Quran that he himself revealed the Torah and the Gospel, hence we are no one to find faults in these books as we are not aware what changes were done and by whom.
Can you tell me brother, is the Bible true when it says Jesus is the Son of God? It seems like you are not aware about what the Quran teaches. You are speaking like an Ahmadi.
I respect your advice, but you have too many things to learn to give us advices. Calling Radical Moderate a "brother" is what you should correct first. Muslims do not call a Kafir, who slander our prophet a "Brother". PEACE
Post a Comment