Wow that was so brutal. Good job David and Robert!
Great job David and Robert.Question, David did ever debate a muslin who was capable of having a scientific debate?
I'm sorry, it's absolutely mind numbing trying to listen to Omar and Anjem present their case I only watched for 15-20 mins and that was 15-20 mins too long.Mr Wood and Mr Spencer I watched a presentation by Gregory A. Miller http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V0xvPteadUQ These are facts you should be refuting idiot satan worshipers like Anjem and Omar with.Also I'd like to hear a debate between Mr Miller and Dr white on the King james vs new international and new king james topic if you could possibly arrange it. Would be quite an interesting debate. Alot more interesting than listening to those two backward (muslim) satan worshipers.
David,you and Spencer are undermining the baha'i...good job
I watched the video and "debate".Omar Bakri had one argument, and one argument alone, which he kept repeating ad nauseum: Muhammad existed because the Quran says so and the Quran is miraculous because the Quran says so. The Quran has issued a challenge to all mankind to produce a sura like "it" and then testifies in the very next verse that surely you cannot.Now apparently, according to Omar Bakri, people have been trying to do this very thing for 1400 years, and failed. (did they really have nothing better to do? Is that why Muslim nations are so backward?)Firstly its not very clear which sura the Quran is referring to in its challenge (it says like "it"). Then apparently, according to Omar Bakri the sura has to be in Arabic, (though the verse does not say so). Now this eliminates most of mankind from the challenge.Then finally the person who is to judge whether the sura produced is "like it", should be Omar Bakri or at the very least a committed Muslim who speaks Arabic, or failing that at the very least a person who hasn't the foggiest about Arabic but is a fanatical Muslim who takes it for granted that the sura produced is nothing "like it" and judges accordingly.Anjem Choudary had a couple of things to add. He claimed that there was only one version of the Quran. It was pointed out this was false - there are other variants which kinda destroys his argument that because of this it was the unchanging word of God.He also said that the Quran and the Hadiths were verified because of a chain of witnesses from the time they were recorded to the actual event.Something like answering "What is your proof that Merlin existed and brewed a magic potion that made you invincible?" by:"My proof is that I was told by my grandfather Ebeneezer, who was told by the friend of his granduncle Scrooge, who was told by etc etc.... who was told by Finknottle who actually knew Merlin and saw it happen".Now that should settle matters.
starting at 110:26I don't think that Ishmael is the father of the the ARABSthat is a lie whether mohammad exists or not..I don't believe the PROFIT of REVISIONIST HISTORY that his people are Abrahamic..David,I hope you are completely obliterated by Spencer.. in a good way
"King james vs new international"the marxist dabbling in bible interpretation for political bashing
David congratulation, I am here to testify that you successively met the Koran Challenge. BRAVO
I'm not so sure that someone can say that Spencer and Wood won this debate.I mean, after Omar said that "of course Muhammad exists" after the thirtieth time I think that has some weight.
Anjem said that the Quran is a linguistic, scientific, historical, mathematical, and judicial miracle.I think he forgot to include that it is also a musical, delicatessian, political, marketing, and gymnasitcal micracle as well.
I think I laughed the most when at just past halfway Robert said, "Well our interlocutors keep repeating without evidence and don't rebut what we have presented so I guess the only thing I can do is repeat myself as well."If the first half is already multiply repeated what chance does the last half have at saying anything new. I'm sure that David and Robert can interject more.
Mr. Wood and Mr. Spencer make an excellent debate team. The other side was not interested in debating, just in declaring the Qur'an was divine because it says so. They were just proselytizing and wasting everyone's time because simply declaring it so and then inviting people to accept Islam was very lame. It was an obvious glory grab and a rationalization under Islam that the non-Muslims have been given a choice. I am surprised they did not make death threats for their closing arguments.
WhatsUpDoc said... "David congratulation, I am here to testify that you successively met the Koran Challenge. BRAVO"Be careful WhatsUpDoc. The Quran says in the very next verse to its challenge "And if you do not - AND SURELY YOU WILL NOT - then fear the Fire, whose fuel is men and stones, prepared for unbelievers."And that is perfectly true because the Quran says so.. And we know the Quran is true because it has issued a challenge it says no one can meet....And (start at the beginning and repeat)...
I just realized they called me GREG. I even spelt my name so don't know how he got that wrong hahaAnyway, am looking forward to SPENCER VS WOOD, please still do this debate.
Dear Robert and David Wood. I have become an apostate from islam after reading robert spencer's books and debates on youtube and his website. Robert and David u two completely demolished Anjum and BAkri omar. Do u poeple know that Bakri omar's leave to stay in the uk was cancelled for supporting terrorism and calling for Jihad against USA and UK forces in Afghanistan. After he was sent back to his native country of lebanon a few years later Isreal attacked lebanon to destroy Hizbollah. Bakri omar the started to plead with the British govermnet to allow his to enter the UK as his life was in danger on humanitarian grounds.contact me at firstname.lastname@example.org
PaksitaniApostate said..."I have become an apostate from islam after reading robert spencer's books and debates on youtube and his website"Praise God that you have been set free from the evil and deception of Islam.I pray in Jesus' name that you find the true faith and true worship of the one true God, which I submit to you is the Lord, YHWH, and the one He sent, Jesus Christ, our Lord and our Savior.
Ugh, that was painful to watch. Seriously, Omar Bakri was awful. His argument that the Koran cannot be reproduced hardly proves Mohammed existed. Yet that was his only point. Obviously not a bright man. Did ABN deliberately pick a feeble debater to make the Muslims look bad? Was he the only person that was willing to partner with Anjem Choudry? At least they should have gotten Nadir Ahmed who is funny. I want to see competitive debates and that was not one.
I am also an apostate from Islam. I respect David and Robert for their work in increasing awareness of what Islam actually is.
Are you going to post your debate with Robert? I'd like to see that one too.
@ SamatarWhat I find funny is you wait about a week to respond to my clear rebuttals and exposing of your inability for critical thinking. And I find myself repeating the same things over and over again.I ALREADY PROVIDED THE EVIDENCE THAT THE WOMEN ARE YOUR POSSESSION. AND YOU CAn do as you please with her. and she cannot say no to your advances. and then you keep repeating the same refuted argument over and over ad nausem as if you are Omar in that debate!Why do I have to repost the evidence that I already provided?I proved to you without a Shadow of a doubt that a woman who is your possesion will be punished if she does not submit.THAT IS FORCE!YOU HAVE ABSOLUTELY NO INTEGRITY WHATSOEVER!~GO BACK AND READ MY POSTINGS WHERE I PROVED 100% THAT MUSLIMS CAN FORCE THEIR FEMALE SLAVES, AND EVEN THEIR WIVES T5O HAVE SEX.YOU ARE ONE OF THE CRAZIEST PEOPLE I HAVE EVER ENC9OUNTERED IN MY LIFEHERES WHAT TYOU DO.1.I PRESENT THE EVIDENCE THAT ISLAM PERMITS FORCED SEX WITH SLAVES AND WIVES. 2. THEN YOU CHANGE THE TOPIC TO DEUTERONOMY.3. THEN I REFUTE YOUR CLAIMS ABOUT DEUTERONOMY.4. THEN YOU SAY I DIDNT PROVE THAT IT IS FORCE.5. AND YOU ACT AS IF I HADENT ALREADY PROVEN THAT IT IS FORCE.YOU ARE A LIAR!YOU HAVE NO INTEGRITYGO READ THE FRICKEN EVIDENCE I PRESENTED IN TOTAL.YOU ARE REFUTED AND HAVE NO INTEGRITY AT ALL SAMATAR!I PROVED WITHOUT ANY SHADOW OF A DOUBT THAT ISLAM PERMITS FORCED SEX WITH FEMALE CAPTIVES! READ IT ALL AGAIN, YOU LIAR!
This was probably the most one-sided debate I've ever seen.
This Debate was very engaging, David and Spencer annihilated Omar and Amjem. David i would like to make one point here, Omar was keep going on like produce a surah like it referring to the Quranic Verse:2:23, And if you are in doubt about what We have sent down upon Our Servant [Muhammad], then produce a surah the like thereof and call upon your witnesses other than Allah , if you should be truthful.However this challenge was been already met.Islamic sources admit that Muhammed at one time was inspired by Satan to put some verses in the Quran:53:19-53:20 Have you thought of al-Lat and al-Uzza and Manat, the third.. these are the exalted Gharaniq (a high flying bird whose intercession is approved.If we take this into consideration, in conclusion this brings that this surah exists in the Quran therefore Satan took the challenge and did it, so is it not pointless having the challenge in the first place?Keep up the good work.Peace
Witness,Just in case you were unaware, Anjem Choudary was a leading member of Omar Bakri's organisation called Al Muhajiroun (the emigrants) when the latter lived in England. Even to this day Omar Bakri is Anjem's mentor and hero.The Muslims in the UK detest Anjem Choudary with a passion. He says too much :)
I cannot imagine how many Muslims will be praying for David Wood to trounce Robert Spencer in their planned debate on Muhammad's existence.This debate was so predictable from Bakri and Choudary. No wonder Islamic his-story records so much violence against people who did not want to submit to Islam.
S.15:9 Surely We have revealed the Reminder and We will most surely be its guardian. "The pen is mightier than the sword:" The sheep is mightier than Allah.
The historicity of the hadiths and Sira are known to be suspect by all mullahs, so you won't get anyone serious on the Islamic side debating with Spencer. That would mean they were blasphemous apostates who should be executed.
Dear 'Witness',You won't find any serious Muslim scholar (from a university) debating Spencer. They all know what Spencer has published and mostly agree with those facts. If they say so in public, they will be accused of being blasphemous apostates and executed.
David, you should just debate Robert as planned, so you “can win the hearts and minds of Muslims.” :D
@PaksitaniApostate,I second what Zack_Tiang said. God bless you and I pray that you'll find the true peace and love of God in Jesus Christ. Amen.I had mixed emotions watching this debate.As men whom Jesus died for, I felt sorry for Omar and Anjem because they were completely crushed and had nothing to offer in defending their false prophet's existence. But I'm glad because Islam as always has no foundation to stand upon in every way.Jesus is glorified and will continue to be so forever!
This was the most one-sided debate I've ever seen. Had it been a boxing match Spencer and Wood would have been disqualified for overkill. EkOnkar"Islamic sources admit that Muhammed at one time was inspired by Satan to put some verses in the Quran:53:19-53:20 Have you thought of al-Lat and al-Uzza and Manat, the third.. these are the exalted Gharaniq (a high flying bird whose intercession is approved.If we take this into consideration, in conclusion this brings that this surah exists in the Quran therefore Satan took the challenge and did it, so is it not pointless having the challenge in the first place?"Good point. That Muhammad bought it for a while is proof he accepted Satan's lie as revelation from Allah.
PaksitaniApostate Did you never once at any time ask why, if Muhammad was the Prophet Islam claims him to be, that his first reaction to his cave experience was to think he was demon possessed and suicidal?
Boy oh boy what a clobbering!Omar and Anjum should hide thier faces in shame. I really don't see Omar as a debater though, he is like some brainwashed mullah, who sees nothing beyond what he is taught to believe. He should be dubbed "king of circular reasoning", and Anjum his "obedient side-kick". Boy what a couple of fruit cakes. Muslims do you not have any serious people who can put forth even half of a decent argument. There seemed to have been no challange for the Christian side whatsoever.Anjum seems to think that just because Islam is spreading rapidly in Europe, and the rest of the world, Christians are "jealous". What a retard. Islam can be likened to cancer that also spreads rapidly in the body, why then should we resort to an emotion like jealousy? We should try and fight this desease of the planet to the very end.
Educated vs. Brainwashed . . . Exercise in futility!You can't lead a lame horse to water . . . limited options.
I heard Islam was a "challenge" to Christianity. That was a really good joke.
Reply to Hugh WattWhen i was living in my native country of Pakistani we were never told about these embarassing hadiths, that are now being widely used by critics of islam. Nowadays islamic apologists say that this or that critic of islam is taking Quranic verses out of context and week hadiths to discredit islam as i began to investigate islam i found out that musim apologists of islam are the ones who take quranic verses and hadiths out of context to show to the world how wonderful and peaceful islam is. When i was living in my country i was never told the complete story of how Mohammad started to receive his so colled revealations from God. No muslim preacher in the mosque ever told us that Mohammad could not make head and tail of his first encounter with the arc Angel Gabried and felt that he was demon possed and became suicidal. When one day I was browsing the internet and came across Craig winn's website prophetofdoom i was shocked when i found out the full story of how Mohammad used to receive his revealations.I started to investigate islam further, from that point on i started to visit jihad watch and watch Robert Spencer's debates with islamic apologists, in each debate Robert Spencer came out as the winner. This guy deserves the Noberl Prizeplease contact me at email@example.com
I really have to ask why these people were asked to engage in a debate in the first place? The Muslims did so poorly that it nearly comes around full circle and makes the Christian side look bad for picking on strawmen like these.I am just completely perplexed... Omar Bakri might as well have been an animatronic puppet programmed by an Islamophobic Christian trying to make Islam look bad... except he isn't. Omar is apparently a sheikh of Islam who felt himself competent to participate in a televised debate on the existence of Muhammad. I wish Anjem had been allowed to speak more, as his English is much better, but also I feel like he had a better grip on what he was saying. Really, I wish the Islamic side had been represented by someone who had any idea how to defend their faith. I prefer to see strong arguments rebutted.I am looking forward to David's debate with Robert, where I know he will present a much more rational presentation for the existence of Muhammad than that shown here.I loved the rap. Absolutely brilliant.In the end, it sounded like Omar's claim of producing a surah "like it" meant a surah with the exact same arrangement of words, i.e. the same surah.I don't see how the "produce a surah like it" challenge works as a challenge, and I wish the Muslims would have elaborated on this rather than just repeated it ad nauseam. Forget whether or not the challenge can be or has been met; on what basis can the challenge even be made? I think David's rap pointed that out wonderfully, but you could have laid it as even more absurd. You could have told them that your arguments in the debate you were having right then and there were divinely inspired, and unless they could produce an argument that matched the grammar and meaning of your argument that they have to believe your arguments come from a higher power. Anjem spoke English well, but he couldn't match your exact diction and speaking style, and he couldn't produce an argument that would match the meanings of your arguments for the nonexistence of Muhammad.You don't even have to limit it to speech. You could make a funny face in to the camera and challenge them that unless they can make the same funny face that they must accept your funny face as being inspired by God.It just is not a good argument.I don't speak Arabic, but if the Quran were the linguistic equivalent of Shakespeare, I think it would make sense to point to its beauty as a mark of God on it, maybe as collaborating evidence, but to use Muhammad's exact form of the argument and to use nothing but that argument (especially in a debate not about the Quran) is very bad argumentation.I also wonder if anyone else caught the contradiction on the nature of science. On one hand, it doesn't matter to Omar if the Quran states things profoundly wrong like the sun setting in a pool of water because "man has no finger on it". But he said this moments after Anjem finished praising the Quran for its "scientific miracles". It doesn't matter if science contradicts you because the Quran is miraculous, but it matters if science confirms you because that makes the Quran miraculous.Also, as I was watching this, I wondered how often Christians suffer from this same complete fundamental inability to connect to our audience? How often do we use language that has no meaning outside of our congregations in trying to speak to unbelievers, and how often do we keep repeating arguments that mean absolutely nothing to the people we are trying to convince? I hope this at least leads to reflection in our own evangelism efforts.
PaksitaniApostate You can reach me on antisharia.com
Hi I saw the video of your speech in Dearborn, I would have commented on it then(supportivly i assure you)but for some reason I've been blocked from Atlas Shrugs comments. I don't know why, I did write an email to her once telling her that I agree with her of the dangers islam presents to America I just don't think calling president Obama "Muslim-in-chief" is the best way to go about it. I think thats the reason I was blocked. Maybe you could talk to her about it the next time you see her, if you could remember itI was sorry to hear about the condition of two of your children, I hope things improve of them somehow
"Great job David and Robert.Question, David did ever debate a muslin who was capable of having a scientific debate?"RESPONSE:Yes, he debated this humble servant of GOD Almighty, and didn't dare to post the debate on his website. I, however, posted it both on my site and on youtube:http://www.answering-christianity.com/david_wood_rebuttals.htmhttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TOdPwGBGVEQOsama Abdallahwww.answering-christianity.comhttp://www.youtube.com/QuranSearchCom
Ha! Ha! Are you still spouting that nonsense, Osama? You were humiliated in that debate. I never got a copy, so I don't know how I'm supposed to have posted it. (Someone told me that you added all sorts of written comments in your version, in order to distract people from the actual debate.) If you'd like to give me an unedited copy, I'd be happy to post it right now. People need a good laugh.
The 'surah like it' challenge is such a load of crock.I like to cook. If I cook up a meal of a Sunday afternoon and a 5 year old child tells me that he didn't like it would I tell him 'Oh yeah? Let's see you cook up something better than that'? Of course not! No adult in his right mind would stoop so low as to compare himself, or issue a challenge, to a child. So how can the omniscient, omnipotent Creator of the universe make such a challenge (surah like it) to his puny creation?It is beyond belief that God could compare Himself with his creation when a man would be ashamed to compare himself with a child.The Quran cannot be from God.
@OsamaI hoped you did better than in the debate vs. Nabeel Qureshi on the same topic. The way you tried to explain away the blunder about the semen originating between the ribs and the backbone was quite funny. BTW, what's you're opinion about the topic of this post? Could you defend the existence of Muhammad better than Sheikh Omar and Anjem? I would be interested in seeing such a debate with better opponents.
THE MAIN ARGUMENT IN THE DEBATE WAS YOU CANNOT REPRODUCE A SURA.....AL-QURAN 2:23-24IF I AM NOT WRONG THAT CHALLENGE HAS ALREADY BEEN MET ORIGINALLY WITH THE QURAN ITSELF. SURA 53 : 19 AND 20 ABOUT AL-UZZAT; AL-LAT; MINNAT AND THE THIRD...(The Satanic Verses)THIS SURA WAS NOT FROM ALLAH (AS PER QURAN),MOHD. HIMSELF EXCEPTS IT AT FIRST THEN REJECTS IT CALLING THEM FROM SATAN, THEY ARE SO ACURATLY WRITTEN SURAS AND MUSLIMS SHY AWAY FROM IT CALLING IT FROM SATAN. SO SURA WAS DUPLICATED PERFECTLY HERE.THEN WHAT ABOUT ALLAHS PROMISE THAT HE WOULD PROTECT HIS WORD, AGAIN TT CATCHES QURAN AND ALL THE MUSLIM PROCLAIMERS LYING WHEN THEY CANNOT EXPLAIN THE MISSING SURAS. THAT TOO WHEN WE TALK FROM THE EVIDENCE ABOUT IT FORM THE QURAN ITSELF LEAVE ASIDE HISTORIANS AND ARCHEOLOGY AND OTHER IRREFUTALE SOURCES.BOTH THESE FELLOWS OMAR AND ANJUM ARE PATHETIC AND INFACT SO IS EVERY MUSLIM, BECAUSE THEY ALL KEEP REPEATING THE SAME CRAZY CHANT "Islam Is The Truth"
THE MAIN ARGUMENT IS THE CHALLENGE NO ONE CAN REPRODUCE A SURA - ALQURAN 2 : 23,24 and ALLAH SAID HE WOULD PROTECT HIS WORD SURA- 15 VER 9This challenge has already been met in sura 53 : 19,20 'al-uzza, al-lat, minnat and the third,the three cranes who have the power of intercession' Mohd. says that these verses are not from allah, they are from satan, yet they are so perfectly duplicated with the words of allah. This has made this DUPLICATION challenge shreds muslims need to just look closely.The second claim is that allah has promised to protect his word (sura: 15 verse 9). This claim too does not hold water. Muslims need to ask about the 134 verses that Ayesha Bibi says in Abu Ubaid's kitab (Al-Quran), "verses on breast feeding and stonning and adultry 10 times were revealed, the paper was with me under my pillow when the messenger of allah died we were preoccupied with his death and a tame sheep came in and ate it."......This is just one example out of so many.These are two out of so many hard core evidences which will catch the attention of any sane person, yet I have heard so many muslim apologists, debates and talk shows and muslims keep on claiming shamelessly again and again the divinity of the quran on the basis of these two verses and shout 'koran is the truth because the quran says so'.....the fundamental question is why should any literate and sane person waste even a moment with this crazy cult theory.
AND I REALLY really would like to have a round-2 debate with David Wood on "Is the Quran a Scientific Miracle?" to seriously silence all of his misunderstandings and weak sources even more thoroughly this time!Osama Abdallahwww.answering-christianity.com
The Surah Like it challenge will never be met for the following reasons:1- I agree with Mr. Wood on his "surah" (the one that he made up to meet the challenge) that in terms of context and words, anyone who is good enough in Arabic and perhaps also in poetry COULD COME UP WITH a Surah like it.2- So what am I saying here? Is the Quran's challenge refuted then? NOT EVEN BY A TRILLION MILES! The thing that everyone misses here is not necessarily the actual words themselves, but the *****Spirit that is in the Holy Words of the Holy Quran.You might find this quite odd, but even Joe of ABN (the owner) said that when he reads the Quran he feels there is this spirit in it that he can't explain that draws him to it. Here therefore recommended for all of his viewers to NOT EVEN READ THE QURAN, ESPECIALLY THE ARABIC ONE. Ask him, and he won't deny it. I saw it and heard it myself from his mouth.What I am saying here is that the Holy Words of the Holy Quran, especially especially the Arabic One to the Arabs, have the Holy Spirit in them that draws the person's heart to It. The Spirit of the Holy Quran draws the person to the Truth of Islam. This is why Mr. David Wood's "surah" would never be a match to the real Surah, even if the words and context were similar, because Mr. Wood's words don't have spirit in them. Everyone knows they're not divine. But the Holy Quran's are different. This is also why the poets of old failed with their "Qurans" to convince the people that they've actually met the challenge. LOL, on the contrary, the more they did it, the more people came to Islam by the multitudes.I hope this helps.Osama Abdallahwww.answering-christianity.com
"Ha! Ha! Are you still spouting that nonsense, Osama? You were humiliated in that debate. I never got a copy, so I don't know how I'm supposed to have posted it. (Someone told me that you added all sorts of written comments in your version, in order to distract people from the actual debate.) If you'd like to give me an unedited copy, I'd be happy to post it right now. People need a good laugh."RESPONSE:I already posted it for you, David. No need for me to give you anything. As to the comments that I added, yes, I added further quotes and proofs that further prove my claims and disprove yours. I serve Islam and the Divine Truth of Allah Almighty. This is my version-copy. Every word you spoke is there in the video. My additions are for further clarifications and refutations.And since you live in NY, according to your profile, then how about we meet and debate this again, David? We're only walking distance away from each others. No need to call any travel agent. Let's see if I could teach you, again, some Scientific Miracles in the Glorious Quran. Are you up for it champ?Osama Abdallahwww.answering-christianity.com
Like I said, Osama, give me a copy of the unedited footage, and I'll gladly post it. None of this "Yes, I added lots of comments, but your words are there, so there's no difference" nonsense. If the debate stands on its own, there's no need for your additional comments.As for future debates, so far as I recall, you backed out of the last five debates I set up with you. And now you want me to set up more? I'm tired of wasting my time.
@OsamaDear brother, I couldn't agree with you more on your perception that "You might find this quite odd, but even Joe of ABN (the owner) said that when he reads the Quran he feels there is this spirit in it that he can't explain that draws him to it" We just debated a group in South India for an exhaustive 18 hours (9 hours X 2 days) on the topic "Is the Quran the Word of God". Bottomline is that there is MOST DEFINITELY A SPIRIT IN THE QURAN. Question is "What Spirit"? I am 200% convinced that there was a spirit that gave Muhammad the revelations but that spirit was not from God. How else do you explain:1. Muhammad was tormented by the spirit when he got the revelations2. Muhammad was possessed for a period of about 6 months when he was in Medina. This would put all his Medinan revelations at suspicion.3. Muhammad uttered the Satanic verses... an unforgivable sin of Shirk but then as per his normal behavior pattern, claimed that it was not his fault4. The socalled "self sufficient Quran" won't survive without the Hadiths... the contents of which contradicts the Quran. Some Islamic scholars even suspect the authenticity of many a hadiths.5. Muhammad raped his captives6. Muhammad was into prostituion (Muta)7. Allah's paradise is nothing other than a brothel. An epitome of what is wrong with this world... an abuse of "Wine, Women and Wealth".That is just to name a few... as Christ answered well "You shall know false prophets by their fruits"... then Muhammad was the epitomisation of this teaching with direct inspiration from Satan himself.I laugh when a Muslim claims "Scientific claims" as the authenticity of the Quran. With Satan as the author of the Quran, Satan who is smarter than a few thousand Einsteins put together... even if your claims are true, they mean nothing. Such claims would work with an atheist who doesn't believe in the supernatural. We as Christians do believe in the supernatural and even the fallen angel (Lucifer) knows more than mere humansIn ChristNaren
Mr. Wood,Like James White, who also refused to post our debate (too bad I didn't get to record this one!!!), and only chose to post on youtube his "response", the people who recorded our debate didn't post our debate because your points were soundly refuted, brother. Otherwise, it would be ALL OVER YOUTUBE!So no brother, there is a good reason why the debate wasn't posted from your team. At any rate, David, I am here in NYC. I can sign a contract with you to reimburse you if I don't show up! The last time I didn't show up was because I missed the flight unintentionally. I already proved this, and George even spoke with the Agents at the airport. The geographical distance was too far that i couldn't just hop unto the next flight because I would've reached Phoenix by 6:00 pm on Sunday night. That was the earliest I could do. But now in NY, it's totally different. LOL, if I miss a subway train I'll just take the next one 10 minutes later :)).So, are you up on getting school on the Scientific Miracles in the Holy Quran, Mr. Wood? As it stands, Dr. Zakir Naik destroyed the Answering Islam team on this VERY TOPIC in his debate with your team. And now your team refuses to post YOUR DEBATE on Youtube. Hmmmmmm, something doesn't sound right here.Osama Abdallahwww.answering-christianity.com
@Osama,You are a typical Muslim "This is my version-copy. Every word you spoke is there in the video. My additions are for further clarifications and refutations." What about a chance to David to add "further clarifications and refutations" to the nonsense you spouted. You would have wailed like a baby if David would have been unfair in this manner to you. I remember in a debate, David got the last closing argument and he said some new point (which I don't remember) in his closing speech. It was a new point he said and since he spoke last, his opponent (A Muslim) didn't get the opportunity to speak his mind. David actually added additional footage to his debate video in which he gave his opponent the opportunity to speak his mind on the new point that David had raised. Most surprisingly, the video ended with just the Muslim opponent speaking his mind and David not saying a word.That Spirit which is the Spirit of fairness and love for all which resides in David is the Spirit from God unlike the spirit which resided in your prophet and now residing in you...As Christ said very very well "By your fruits you shall know them". A face to face comparison of the behavior of David and you puts this point to rest.David> I suggest a new debate topic "Is the Quran demonically inspired" Atleast we will be spared the terrible logic of the Muslims trying to showcase the socalled "Scientific miracle" of the Quran.In Christ,Naren
"@OsamaI hoped you did better than in the debate vs. Nabeel Qureshi on the same topic. The way you tried to explain away the blunder about the semen originating between the ribs and the backbone was quite funny."RESPONSE:Nabeel's point had been thoroughly refuted with ample Scientific proofs, and I posted it on Youtube. It's in my channgel at: http://www.youtube.com/QuranSearchCom.I was wrong, and Nabeel was also wrong (or lied), because the Glorious Quran never said the SPERM is generated from between the back and the ribs. THE HOLY QURAN SAID THE LIQUID (SEMEN) is what is generated.Anyway, see the rebuttal and you be the judge.Osama Abdallahwww.answering-christianity.com
@ Osama Abdallah "Let's see if I could teach you, again, some Scientific Miracles in the Glorious Quran."Maybe you could teach ME and others right here in a blog debate for all to see. Just between you and me Osama. No need for any travel agent, such are marvels of modern science.Here are some of the "Scientific Miracles" in the "Glorious Quran":1. The Sun is a small object that revolves around a flat Earth.2. It sets in the Earth in the west at night in a muddy pool. It remains "prostrated" below the throne of Allah and seeks permission to rise. This is a daily ritual. Allah gives it permission and it slides to the East and rises from there every morning at a special place on Earth.3. There are 7 layered "heavens" one on top of another like domes over a flat Earth. The stars are adorned on the nearest heaven, which places the Sun and the Moon which are in the midst of the heavens, further from the Earth than the Stars.These are just some of the "Scientific Miracles in the Glorious Quran". In fact the "Glorious Quran" is just a medieval book which has incorporated most of the myths of that time and is ignorant even of the discoveries of the Greeks of over a thousand years earlier which were known to all educated Europeans of the time.
Good one David and Robert. You guys are some of the best christian apologetics I have seen. Ha Ha Ha finally Osama Abdullah has started believing in this Holy Spirit (for his cause of course). Very soon you will also believe in the Holy Trinity as well. Shalom.
Hi Osama! Still ignoring me?
@ osamaYou have failed to show for the last three schedules debates that were scheduled months a head of time. What will be your next excuse? Allah shot missiles at the email, text, News, etc and you didnt get the noticeOsama your a laughing stock to not only kufre, but to Muslims alike! The shun you and are embarrassed by you.Osama out of the last five scheduled debates that you agreed to attend how many did you make?Muslims = LIAR!
Bravo David, and Robert Spencer was awesome too! I enjoyed that very much the cirrcular comment was right on! Thank You David for being bold and speaking the TRUTH!
Osama Abdallah said...What I am saying here is that the Holy Words of the Holy Quran, especially especially the Arabic One to the Arabs, have the Holy Spirit in them that draws the person's heart to It. The Spirit of the Holy Quran draws the person to the Truth of Islam. This is why Mr. David Wood's "surah" would never be a match to the real Surah, even if the words and context were similar, because Mr. Wood's words don't have spirit in them. Everyone knows they're not divine. But the Holy Quran's are different. This is also why the poets of old failed with their "Qurans" to convince the people that they've actually met the challenge. LOL, on the contrary, the more they did it, the more people came to Islam by the multitudes.Oh theres spirit all right but it isn't from God I can testify to that, and when I read it I myself thought it had Satan written all over it! For he was a murderer from the beginning and the father of all lies!
Osama - you spoke about the Holy Spirit moving people to appreciate the Quran. Do you mean Gabriel, or do you mean some tangible presence of God (i.e. something like what a Christian might mean by that), or do you mean something else entirely? Thanks.
Osama,I'm not sure how to make this any more clear. I never received a copy of the debate. You recorded the debate, so obviously you can give me a copy. I have said here, in front of everyone, that if you give me an unedited copy, I will post it. And yet you're just tossing around insults. Do you want me to post it or not? If you do, then give me a copy. If not, then you're the coward, not me.As for a debate in New York, let's turn the tables. You set up the debate, arrange the location, find a moderator, etc. Set it up, and I'll be there. I'm not wasting my time setting up a debate that you'll never show up for.
"Hi Osama! Still ignoring me?"RESPONSE:What's up Foolster?
@ Osama Abdallah "I was wrong, and Nabeel was also wrong (or lied), because the Glorious Quran never said the SPERM is generated from between the back and the ribs. THE HOLY QURAN SAID THE LIQUID (SEMEN) is what is generated.Anyway, see the rebuttal and you be the judge."No need to see your rebuttal. The words of the Quran are the rebuttal to any rebuttal you may have.Read them and YOU be the judge (and stop lying Osama).Quran 86:5,6,7: " So let man consider of what he was created; he was created of gushing water issuing between the loins and the breast-bones."Assuming that "created" means conceived the Quran is: 1) Ignorant to the part that the female egg plays in contributing half of the chromosomes and all of the other matter needed to produce a baby 2) Conception is "created" (happens) when the SPERM enters the EGG. 3) The SPERM is produced in the TESTES 4) The semen is produced in the seminal vesicles, which are a pair of simple tubular glands posteroinferior (behind and below) to the urinary bladder of male mammals, located within the pelvis.5) Conception does not take place by the Semen but by the sperm + the female egg.6) The Semen in any case is not "gushing water" that is issuing between the "loins and the breast-bones." "In human anatomy the term "loin" or "loins" refers to the side of the human body below the rib cage to just above the pelvis. It is frequently used to reference the general area below the ribs." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LoinWhereas the seminal vesicles are in the pelvis.Strange that the almighty Allah didn't know such things.As always the numerous errors of the Quran are defended by obfuscating about the language used when the almighty Allah could merely have clarified things had he known. The most obvious and simple explanation is that the Quran contains the contemporary knowledge (AND MYTHS) of the time it was written (many years after Muhammad's death).
Osama: Oh, only you falsely claiming I want hate crimes to happen against muslims because I said hate crimes against Muslims don't actually happen that often, refering a report that says hate crimes don't happen very offen, you misrepresenting 1 Chron 5:5 and the song of solmon, and then when I've repeatedidly called you on it here you ignored me. otherwise, nothing much.
Richard,Watch my debate with Mr. David Wood. I smashed every single one of these points with ample evidence from 7 Encyclopedic Arabic dictionaries.Meet me on youtube if you want to respond to specific points.Osama Abdallahwww.answering-christianity.com
...And back to ignoring me again when I call him on his smears and dishonesty.
@ Osama Abdallah "Watch my debate with Mr. David Wood. I smashed every single one of these points with ample evidence from 7 Encyclopedic Arabic dictionaries.Meet me on youtube if you want to respond to specific points."Not interested in meeting you on Youtube - that is not a forum for debates. And I doubt that you "smashed" David Wood. You havent shown any evidence of it so far.But you can respond to my posts here.I repeat:"Here are some of the "Scientific Miracles" in the "Glorious Quran":1. The Sun is a small object that revolves around a flat Earth.2. It sets in the Earth in the west at night in a muddy pool. It remains "prostrated" below the throne of Allah and seeks permission to rise. This is a daily ritual. Allah gives it permission and it slides to the East and rises from there every morning at a special place on Earth.3. There are 7 layered "heavens" one on top of another like domes over a flat Earth. The stars are adorned on the nearest heaven, which places the Sun and the Moon which are in the midst of the heavens, further from the Earth than the Stars.These are just some of the "Scientific Miracles in the Glorious Quran"."And I can add to that 4. There is not one place in the Quran where it says the Earth moves around the Sun, or at all, but there are several that say that the Sun is moving - just as it appears to do so. 21:33, 36:40 5. The Quran in fact, consistent with its depiction of a small Sun revolving around a still flat Earth, says the Sun moves to its "stopping place" (obviously for the night). 36:37, 38: "And a sign for them is the night; We strip it of the day and lo, they are in darkness. And the sun - it runs to a fixed resting-place; that is the ordaining of the All-mighty, the All-knowing."
@david Here is a better Idea, add more comments to Osama's video and watch him try wriggle out of it and also for entertainment purposes. i need a good laugh
"So, are you up on getting school on the Scientific Miracles in the Holy Quran, Mr. Wood? As it stands, Dr. Zakir Naik destroyed the Answering Islam team on this VERY TOPIC in his debate with your team."Wait a second, Zakir Naik had a debate against the answering islam team. Does anyone know any details on who exactly Zakir debated, cause I haven't heard of any such debate.
oh never mind. I think Osama Abdullah is referring to the debate against William Campbell.
@Osama:Hm, scientific miracle? I think thats kind of funny ... cause actually there cannot be any kind of scientific miracle! These 2 words condradict each other. Either its scientific facts, or there is a miracle. But before you start answering, i know what you want to say. The "scientific facts" in the Quran (which i doubt that they are miraculous) are some kind of miracle/wonder. Well, so lets asume, that there are scientific facts inside the Quran - is that any proof of God, a holy spirit or something divine?Well, you seem to answer this question with YES.So, tell me, was Demokrit a prophet of Islam? Or Archemedis? Or lets go not so far into the past ... Leonardo da Vinci? Or here is a good one, Albert Einstein? They all wrote about stuff, nobody else was thinking of in their time and lets be honest, they described it in a much clearer and scientific way than the Quran does ... so with your argumentation, these people must be godly inspired! Ooooh but wait - wasnt Einstein a Jew? For a muslim he must surely be inspired by the devil then ;).Even IF you asume, that the Quran has so many, great scientific facts inside - its actually no argument for its holyness or divine inspiration. Otherwise you would have to call many other Books and People as divine inspired or even prophets of Islam. Its surely your right to do that, but you will not convince anybody with that argument. And lets not forget ... most people dont even think, that there are any scientific miracles in the Quran (including me). All those parts you are bringing up, could have a completely different meaning or in some cases its even common knowlege of that time (and discribed elsewhere in a much more scientific way than in the Quran).Anyway - i only can support David Woods claim, that you set up a debate an he will come to your Place. It is kind of your "turn" to do that, after missing the last 5 Debates (even if it wasnt your fault). Why should always David Wood have the trouble with setting everything up? It would only be fair if you host at least one Debate now (actually you should set up 5 ;) )
@osama where is the evidence the debate took place with answerislam and zakir naik? and why do we have to pay for it to hear it. i smell a con?lets analyse this logically1.IF it was a so called victory you won;t need to sell it and the debate should be readily available in the media by one of the two sides. If IT was a victory then I would post it on youtube free and get it spread freely instead of limiting it with money. this is from the sitewhich made the claimhttp://www.examinethetruth.com/page_against_01.htm#Dr_Zakir_Naik_takeson_AI2. Also let us go to the link which examine the truth says where u can download it. OH dear the results is nothing when i tried it. it went to some random siteOsama you =EPIC FAIL verify your sources before making a claim
Osama. I have one scientific question to ask of you.Apparently, Allah descends to the nearest heaven every last third part of the night.Given that it is ALWAYS going to be the last third part of the night SOMEWHERE on the earth (because the earth is round), should we conclude that Allah is constantly descending and is always below his throne or does it presuppose a flat earth?The Hadith reference is Sahih Bukhari Volume 9, Book 93, Number 586.Thank you in advance for your response.
Wow, this was painful (for the Muslims)
@osama you obviously got the debate from examining the truth.com problem with it is with naik. 1. why do we have to pay for debate to get it if it was such a victory and if debate occurred which i doubt. it should be made free and spread far and wide2. links from examining the truth .com author does not allow u to down load the video of it and it is just leads to a random Muslim webpage with no downloadsosama you are ridiculous as always
Osama. Got a few questions for you: 1. The Quran challenges to bring a Surah like it to prove it's divine origin. But the question is: What criterion must the Surah like it meet? The Quran doesn't clarify what the criteria are.2. Who are to judge these criteria since yhe Quran doesn't specify the criteria for one to meet the challenge? 3. The Quran issues this challenge not only to Arabic speakers but to all mankind. Yet you muslims keep insisting that the Surah like it challenge must be met in the Arabic language alone. The question is: Why? It would be a nonsensical challenge non-Arabic speakers to produce Arabic works. Unless you want to accuse Allah of making nonsensical challenges isn't your insistance on meeting the Surah like it challenge bogus and shouldn't you therefore accept the answer to that challenge in ANY language?4. Once again the Quran, in spite of many claims of its perspicuousness, is unclear about what it means when it says "produce something like it". The Quran claims something about itself but obviously doesn't deliver when examined.Why doesn't this inconsistency/contradiction bother you? Looking forward to your answers.
Osama. you meam the debate with James White where you kept conflating John the Baptist with John the Apostle and James White kept trying to explain to you that these are different persons yet you resufed to accept the correction and continuedmaking the same argument?I got a suggestion. If you are that ipset that White doesnt post that debate why dont you post it yourself? Or are you unable to post the debate for the same reason he was unable to post it: The debate is unavailable. At least he posted parts of the debate he managed to get his hands on. What did you put online of that debate?
To everyone on here who asked Osama Abdallah a question to respond to DO NOT hold your breath for a response because he is running with his tail between his legs as he usually does on here! He is prepared to answer nothing and that is because he cannot! So nothing ever gets answered by him!
WowWhat a painful humiliation ... It just lacked the "finish him" part ...
Why don't you Mr. Obdulla (OA) prepare a platform for David to annihilate you? Coward!
Maybe Osama can't answer all the questions because twenty differet people dogpiled him with massive lists of refutations? Not like his explanations would be any good if he gave them, but it would certainly overwhelm me if I ran in to it.I do wish he would better explain what he means by his reference to the "Holy Spirit" in the Quran, as his use of this makes it sound almost like a Christian understanding. At any rate it is not something I am used to hearing from Muslims and I would like to understand those statements better.
Herakleios said... @Osama: "Hm, scientific miracle? I think thats kind of funny ... cause actually there cannot be any kind of scientific miracle! These 2 words condradict each other."That's true. However I will give Osama Abdallah (and the Quran and Almighty Allah) a chance to produce a true "scientific miracle". Under strict laboratory conditions (to ensure there is no fraud) produce a Quran that does not fall to the ground when dropped, thereby violating the Law of Gravity, or a Quran that when thrown goes faster than the speed of light, thereby violating the theory of Relativity, or does not burn when burnt or materialises out of thin air, thereby violating the law of conservation of matter (matter cannot be created or destroyed).The best he can do is produce 17 Arabic dictionaries to prove that when the Quran clearly says the Earth is flat and the Sun moves around the Earth and sets in it, in a muddy spring etc, etc, etc, it does not say so.What "miracles" indeed!My challenge to you to a debate on here remains Osama Abdallah.
Osama you are a joke. This is so embarrassing its painful. I have yer to see you refute anything. In the debate with Nabeel you were totally humiliated! I'm surprised you are still going on about these so called scientific miracles in the Quran. Please all check out on youtube 'what scientists really said about the quran'
I do not agree with Robert Spencer that Muhammad does not exist. Here is my response to him on a few points in his book which I think is sufficient to make a case against him..http://forum09.faithfreedom.org/viewtopic.php?p=178551#p178551My user name is skynightblaze in the above link.
I watched this whole debate and it is well worth the 2 hours spent. The Christians brought up sound and intelligent arguments based on historical facts that should be considered by all Muslims who blindly accept the Quran as the word of God. Sadly, the Muslims in this debate had no argument to stand on and never answered any of the historical questions that David Wood and Robert Spencer brought up. David Wood is brilliant in his delivery of information. I enjoyed this very much. Thanks for sharing!
I have a Question to Christians, How sure you are about the existence of Jesus, Moses, or Abraham? think of it rationally without bringing any verses from any book.How do you Know that christianity is right? as i heard from your great scholar that you have so many different copies of the bible. Why do you belief on jesus and other prophets that you like (except Muhammed)? since all of the prophets came from our land ( the holly land) in the middle east, therefore we are closer to them than you people because we are leaving in their land and breathing their history and see their traces all the time. Please Dr David if you want to debate, first get the right informations and find the right person to debate with you. because all i can see in your videos is not right which make me to believe that your are just making jokes about islam.1400 years culture cannot be understood from 1 or two books or even a PHD.
"Why do you belief on jesus and other prophets that you like (except Muhammed)?"It's not about "liking" it's about truth. Mohammad appears to be a fraud and not a very moral person from the very things he teaches. He gives scientifically dubious (muddy pool) and morally dubious(killing Jews, infidels, cases of hypocracy that is conviently commanded by Allah to cover) statements."since all of the prophets came from our land ( the holly land) in the middle east, therefore we are closer to them than you people because we are leaving in their land and breathing their history and see their traces all the time."This is a red herring. Just because you happen to live closer doesn't mean you automaticly know more abou the history of any one religion. "Please Dr David if you want to debate, first get the right informations and find the right person to debate with you. because all i can see in your videos is not right which make me to believe that your are just making jokes about islam."Notice, no actual refutations. Where is Dr. Woods wrong? you say it is a "joke about islam" but can't point to anything as an example. "1400 years culture cannot be understood from 1 or two books or even a PHD."Hmm. this is an interesting statement. So, it can't be understood by 1 or 2 books. Not say, just taking two random books, the Quran and the Hadiths? Do you mean to say that muslims and even Imams can't possibly understand Islam and should give up trying? I'm curious what your Imam would say to that. Do you beleive then that Christianity, which is at least 600 years older cannot be understood as well? If that is the case, do you stand against Muslims who attack Christianity and make actual faulty arguments against Christianity?
@Mazin: We could start with non-biblical sources that tell us something about Jesus. Its not just the Bible - the "Person" Jesus is pretty good traceable in history. Moses and Abraham are surely not ... So even as an atheist, one has to accept, that there is a very, very high possibility that a historical Jesus did exist. If he is the son of god, is a different thing. Taking this non-christian facts about Jesus, does support the believe in the biblical Jesus. On the other hand - what makes you as a muslim so sure, that Mohammed did exist and that the Quran is the Word of God? Just because the Book tells you so? Taking your standards, you have no reason to believe in Mohammed then. And taking the Hadith as a source.. well i am pretty sure some of the other guys here will write a much better answer about it, than i could.
@ Samatar I cant understand how you have the gull to even post here. You have been refuted in almost every single assertion and logical fallacy you have p[resented or tried to defned. But your tactice is well known. 1. post unrelated hadith2. we refute those hadith with the Quran, hadith and tafsirs not to mention your shaeks and scholars3. you bring up something unrelated in the Bible4. we refute your assertions and lies about the Bible5. you try to find something else wrong in the Hadith6. we refute you showing how it was practiced in the sunna and the definitions7. then you go back to your original complaint and say we didnt refute you.Its a vicious circle with you.Now when we talk about the same topic you will bring up the same arguments that had already clearly and succinctly refulted!Islam permits rape of female captive non Muslims even if they are married. And the destruction of families by proxy of capture!So Islam is for rape, adultery, and the destruction of families!And you KNOW IT! SAMATAR YOU ARE A LIAR! Just like Naik!
TOP Five WORST Muslims Apologists!Q I will start the List! We can have a vote at the end. 1. Osama Abdullah2. Nahdir Ahmed3. Zakir NaikPlease add to the list or put them in your order. Because these people, especially Osama and Samatar are completely out of their minds1
@Herakleios and @ Foolster41you both have a good point but i am sorry for not having the time to response to you. i will finish my exams this week and i will be back soon.thanks for your responses
Search 4 Truth said..."...And you KNOW IT! SAMATAR YOU ARE A LIAR! Just like Naik!"Hey S4T, don't leave out our enlightened prover of the "scientific miralce" of the koran Osama Abdullah.BTW, has the "Holy spirit" somehow becoming a part of Islamic theology now? seriously?What a coward. He makes claims about refuting Dr. Wood, but will not provide an unedited copy of the debate, to be posted here.Lying comes naturally if you are Muslim, it's almost like second nature. Osama Abdullah should be named "Taqiyya Tactician"
Don't forget Ehtesham Gulam. There's an young upcoming muslim apologist that can join the list as well - Abu Shujaah, known as Ijaz Ahmad from the Calling Christians website. His misuse of sources, twisting of people's words, and overall demeanor make him a strong candidate for the list.
I know you said you can't respond right now, but I noticed I didn't respond to this, and so will for when you come back. "How do you Know that christianity is right? as i heard from your great scholar that you have so many different copies of the bible. "I'm curious which "Great Scholar" said this. At any rate I think you misunderstood what they were saying, and I think should really get your facts straight before you start accusing people of being misinformed (hypocracy!). There are different TRANSLATIONS of the bible, just as there are different translations of the Koran, I'm sure. The translations of the bible all come from the same source, and there is no real descernable major theological difference between them. We have recorded manuscripts of the bible starting from around the 2nd century AD, that's about 500 or 600 years before Mohammad was even born. (So the "corruption" claim by many muslims is on it's face, false).Where as, it's acknowledged that the Koran wasn't originally written down, but memorized(Mohammad was illiterate), that mohammad forgot verses, and that there were different versions of the Koran, (which some were intentionally destroyed). Once again, your showing the complete inconsistancy that Muslims show when they attack Christianity.
The debate between Wood and Spencer was planned on 29th April 2012. Was the debate post phoned? Can anyone update me?
That was the worst debate - from the muslims - I have ever seen. I really have never heard such stupid arguments. If that is all what islam can offer, it really is doomed to failure - it has been from the beginning. Such stupidity is mind buggling.I really don't know what else to say. Best proof for Mohammeds existence - the Quran???!!! And it is full of miracles and it has a challenge - we really have to be scared of such idiocy!!!!God help us. One thing I am not sure about Mr Spencer's argumentation is, that he mentions a coin where Mohammed is depicted with a cross and I did some research and found this:http://zombietime.com/mohammed_image_archive/islamic_mo_full/my question is, how does the coin, he mentions, look?
So, how many islamic death threats have arisen from this debate? Dozens? Or Hundreds?
Hmm, 10 days and no replies. Mazin writes a rebuttal that is high on moral superiority but contains no facts on how Mr. woods is wrong, or is a complete red herring. When Herakleios and I point out the utter pointlessness of the post, and how he has gotten himself facts wrong he says we have a "good point" (as if it were a critique on part of his arguments and not pointing out the lack of any logical substance of his post), promises to post and disappears. Oh well, another drive-by muslim sniper come and gone.
@foolster41, well, the first thing is i am not in a position to debate or give any information about islam not because i don't understand islam but because it is not my speciality,i am a mathematician not religious scholar, and also I thought there is no point for me to answer or debate any of these because apparently all what david do is just insulting more than 1.5 billion Muslims and clim that they are blind and stupid, imagine one-third of the world population are fooled by prophet Muhammad(Pbuh). The second thing, books he is using and referring to in his debates are being studied for decade by thousands of islamic scholar and explained in thousands of books by scholar from all around the world and they all agree on the same thing beside some of these people are great arabs and muslims scientist like mathematicians, physicians, physicists, and astronomers whose influence have great impact in our life today. Do you think all of these people are blind and stupid?My point is if you people are interested in reading and understanding islam, be rational and look for another resources not a youtube video and dictionary with a couple of books. How can you judge and criticize people without even go to there countries and learn their language or at least to see how this people live.
I need David or someone to explain the content of this video and compare it to the Quran and convince me.http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fo8xZODgc8g&feature=relatedbecause this what i read in the bible.
David Wood @ 30 mins in is talking about methodology. He makes an observation which is quite relevant when he says that the knowledge of Muhammad increases the near to the present we get and that is the opposite of what would be expected.This observation overlooks the fact that the Arabs were generally illiterate and that very few people were able to read and write during the time of Muhammad. AS the community developed so did their writing skills (which would include the preservation of their writings) So naturally the more people who were able to write [LATER ON], there would be more recorded documents of the history of Muhammad.The only thing that these christian apologists can argue is that the Arabs should have kept clearer records for Spencer to read as he does not recognise the oral tradition that ran alongside the writings in the earliest stages of Islam.David wood to his credit seems to denounce Spencers hypothesis by saying that Muhammad did exists (but not in the way that muslims believe) - so in affect he is also discarding the "evidence" put forward by Spencer.I also feel it quite strange that ABN have brought forward to speakers (in Bakri and Chowdry) who are not well known in the muslim world for their historical knowledge on comparative religion and the history of Islam.
@ 44 mins in the debate Robert Spencer is using hadith (which he earlier has denounced a fabrications) as evidence to as to why the Qu'ran is fake! How is that consistent with his argument.So in the spirit of Robert Spence's argument, the hadith are not evidence to show the existence of Muhammad but they can be used to prove that the historicity of the Qu'ran can be brought into question. Clearly it shows that Robert Spencer is a man with an agenda which I am sure he is unashamed of.
@ 56 mins - David Wood is talking about the Qur'ans comments on sperm originating from the "backbone and rib cage. Oh dear ... here we go:The Qur'an does not say where semen is produced. Just where it comes from during coitus!The Qur'an does not mention ‘semen production’ in verses 86:5-7. Nor anywhere else!Semen is stored in vesicles that lie in the abdomen. From there it is ejaculated during coitus. Lay people still think that the ejaculate comes from the testicles.David Wood may believe something else but his believes contradicts science and the Qur'an but good luck with that!
@ 1hr 23 mins 30 secs David wood starts talking about Immam's Bukharis collection of hadith discounted 297,000 "traditions" out 300,000 tradition. He suggests that this is evidence of a whole "industry" of forgery.Very Very misleading ... tsk tsk tsk.FOr every saying ther would be many many chains or isnads corroborating the validity of a saying.Bukharis methodology was to use 4 witnesses for every saying. To avoid repettion he discounted many of teh chains that were essentially saying the same thing.If you can imagain Muhammad said something and 6 people were present. (A,B,C,D)Person A then relayed this to a1,a2,a3,a4Person A1 relayed this to A1a A1b A1c A1dPerson A1a relayed this to A1a1, A1a2, A1a3 A1a4And so on for not only all of the A group but for the B,C,D. So for the sake of repetition, although he didn't record it he was satisfied that the saying was authentic because he had researched it. As you can imagine many chains would not be included in his collection as a result.Robert Spencer has tried to portray these chains of the SAME tradition as being DIFFERENT traditions. That is VERY VERY dishonest and misleading as I am sure he knows the truth.It is also important to note that Bukhari stuck very strictly to his "4 witness" methodology. So if he only found two witnesses saying the same thing about a tradition then this tradition and it's many chains were not included. This would also lead to a very large number of the 300,000 hadith not being included.ROBERT SPENCER - you know this to be the truth and you should be ashamed for trying to deceive the lay person.
Post a Comment