Tuesday, September 30, 2008

Abdallah-Wood: "Was Muhammad a True Prophet?" (Google Video Version)

For those of you who don't like the superior technology of Motionbox, here's the Google Video version of my debate with Osama Abdallah.






Here's the Hadith we disputed about on killing dogs:

Sahih al-Bukhari 3323--Narrated Abdullah bin Umar: Allah's Messenger ordered that the dogs should be killed.

Osama accused me of lying and claimed that the passage says "rabid dogs." I corrected him, but then he thanked me for admitting that I had lied! I have trouble understanding how logic works in the Muslim world.

DAVID: "Al-Bukhari 3323 says that dogs should be killed."

OSAMA: "David's lying! It says 'rabid dogs.'"

DAVID: "The Hadith doesn't say anything about rabid dogs; you're thinking of a different Hadith."

OSAMA: "Thank you for admitting that you lied!"

DAVID: "???"


Jay44 said...

David when are you going to debate Shabir Ally? It's not that these types of debates aren't needed, it's just that I'm getting tired of hearing you debate these unsophisticated chaps. We all know these Muslims you debate hardly measure up to the academic/scholarly level. Shabir is good for such a debate since he is well read and in tune with the scholarly literature on both sides. It time to take it up a notch.

David Wood said...

I'd love to debate Shabir Ally (several years ago, I took him to see The Passion of the Christ). But here's the problem. I typically work with Ministry to Muslims. Ministry to Muslims insists debating two topics: one Christian topic and one Muslim topic. Shabir usually refuses to debate Muslim topics (a very intelligent move, I think). Hence, Shabir won't respond to Ministry to Muslim's pleas for some debates. I'm hoping that Muslims will begin to pressure Shabir Ally, Jamal Badawi, and Zakir Naik into defending Islam.

Yahya Hayder Seymour said...


Didn't Shabir Ally debate Smith on a Muslim topic this year?

Didn't Shabir debate Dave Hunt on a very Muslim topic?

Didn't Shabir Ally debate Anis Shorrosh on at least one Muslim topic whilst here in Scotland?

Why ascribe falsehoods to Shabir? You should go ahead an challenge him on it.

As for Badawi and Naik, didn't Badawi debate Pastor Reza Safa on a Muslim topic one which you even chose to upload on your website.....?

David Wood said...


Give me a break! Shabir debated Jay Smith on a neutral topic. Shabir was speaking second in a very short debate in which he knew Jay Smith wouldn't have adequate time to address his arguments. That hardly qualifies as stepping into a ring and dealing with the tough objections to Islam.

Dave Hunt? This was another neutral debate, against a man who was more than eighty years old. It was also Dave's third debate in a 24-hour period. Does this, according to you, count as defending Islam against the tough objections?

As for Anis Shorrosh, which "Muslim topic" are you referring to? I'm only aware of neutral topics (i.e. topics so incredibly broad because they include both positions that no one has time to carefully consider the details).

And your example from Badawi was a debate on whether Christians and Muslims can be friends! Oh man. The fact that these are your best examples shows that I'm absolutely right. What are the main Christian topics? The Deity of Christ, the Crucifixion, the Resurrection, the New Testament, etc. There are tons of Christian debates on these topics, and practically any Christian debater would defend these issues in a heartbeat. What are the main Muslim topics? The reliability of the Qur'an, the prophethood of Muhammad, violence in Islam, etc. Do you see Shabir, Jamal, and Zakir debating these topics? There are a couple of things you might be able to point to, such as Shabir's debate with Sam Shamoun. But any honest person can see that Islam's top debaters avoid these topics like they avoid pork.

As for challenging Shabir, ACP has challenged him repeatedly, and continues to challenge him. It's the same with Jamal and Zakir. But they simply won't respond. They know better. If you'd like to encourage them to accept the challenge, please do so. In the meantime, don't defend their willingness to defend Islam when they turn down virtually every opportunity to do so.

Yahya Hayder Seymour said...

Shabir debated Shorrosh on Muhammad in the Bible, which is far from a Neutral or Christian topic (In fact Ben Malik has his commentary on it).

Naik would debate Islam and Violence I'm sure, specifically since he is into that topic.

Thirdly, if one watches Badawi's debate with Safa its blatantly defensive.

Dave Hunt chose to do the debate, Ally accepted the challenge, it was still a Muslim topic.

I have reason to believe that Shabir merely rejects ACP because he doesn't believe they are worthy of spending time on, I would certainly argue that many of the speakers on their website are blacklisted as being unworthy of debate (not all). However I don't know, one of my friends is good friends with Shabir so I shall confirm with him insha Allah.

As for Ben Malik's debate with Shabir, I must admit I haven't seen it, does anyone have it on Video (I find it irritating just listening to audio).

Badawi did debate the Prophethood of Muhammad on the John Ankerbeg show, and debated Smith on the Qur'an being the Word of God (I know that the latter wasn't so good).

David Wood said...


(1) You're still missing the point. Muhammad in the Bible? I'd call this a neutral topic (Muslim prophet, Christian book). But that's not even what I mean. Where are the debates on the prophethood of Muhammad, debates in which Christians can actually raise objections to Muhammad?

(2) No, I assure you that Zakir Naik would not debate whether Islam is a religion of peace--at least, not against anyone who has experience debating. BTW, can you name me a single respected Christian debater that Zakir Naik has faced? If not, shame on you for acting like Zakir is serious about debate.

(3) Dave Hunt? Let's not forget that this was the example you used to show that Shabir is willing to take on the tough issues. Again, I'll just say: 80+ year old opponent, third debate in 24 hours. Do the math and tell me whether this shows that Shabir is willing to stand up for Islam. (And didn't you say you think that Shabir doesn't want to take on weak opponents?)

(4) When ACP arranges debates, they get James White, Sam Shamoun, and me, so your opinion of other speakers is irrelevant. Shabir has already debated James White and Sam Shamoun, so he obviously can't think they aren't worth the time. I would understand him wondering why he should debate me, which is why I'm not beating down his door right now. But the fact remains--we're willing to debate the toughest issues in both Islam and Christianity, while your debaters only want to debate Christianity. That says a lot.

Yahya Hayder Seymour said...

(1) Not really missing the point, your point was Shabir doesn't debate muslim topics, I demonstrated adequately that he does, now for you to argue that he doesn't devote adequate time and effort to defending Muslim topics, well thats a seperate issue.

(2) Someone challenge Naik then, I'm not a big fan of him but I have a feeling he would defend those topics, I never cited him firstly David you gave him as an example of a Muslim of "academic/scholarly" criteria since that is what jr4 requested and you responded with Naik's name.

(3) I never said tough issues, I said Muslim issues and since it was on a Muslim issue then I think it is safe to deduce that Shabir covers Muslim issues. Also, I never meant ACP had weaker debaters, I was more commenting on their intellectual sincerity in the eyes of the Muslims (i.e some speaker's on their website).

(4) Good for ACP, glad to see they are progressing, but since Shabir has debated Shorrosh who is endorsed as one of the Speaker's and we found him evading almost every question asked of him whilst debating in Glasgow, he might view it as unfruitful to debate with people from such an organisation. You would have to ask him! Again, also a few Muslim Apologists I've spoken to found George Saieg's performance at the end of the Shamoun/Ahmed debate to be a little distasteful and unprofessional and so perhaps they associate the organisation with that.

David Wood said...


Let me reformulate my objection in light of your response.

Shabir Ally, Jamal Badawi, and Zakir Naik are extremely reluctant to debate the most important issues concerning their religion.

How's that?

Now, if you think they're willing, I happen to know that a fair challenge is coming from ACP in the next day or two.

Ten topics.
Three debaters from each side. September.

Enough said?