Full Debate - Mohammed Hijab vs Edward Tabash || Does God Exist? | PART 1 (2019-04-11) ​

0:00:04 we're gonna begin with the recitation of
0:00:07 the Quran just to remind us about Allah
0:00:10 Muhammad Allah's words and that's how
0:00:12 we're gonna be starting this event sha
0:00:13 Allah I will be reciting some Hyatt or
0:00:16 some verses from Chapter number 31 and
0:00:21 these verses are going to be talking
0:00:23 about the advice that milkman gave to
0:00:27 his son and look man the scholars differ
0:00:30 about who he was some say that he was a
0:00:32 prophet allah subhanaw taala talks about
0:00:34 him as a wise person so inshallah I will
0:00:38 begin with the Arabic and then
0:00:39 translated in English Ruby la mina
0:00:47 sh-shaytani r-rajim bismillahi rahmani
0:00:53 raheem
0:00:56 voila father attained a logo Manik Mehta
0:01:00 and score lil wah - Corphish rule in FC
0:01:11 wanka father-in-law Havana you need what
0:01:20 is a local man only Benny he was ye who
0:01:24 you own a Jana - shriek billah ya
0:01:29 una yella - Shrek belong in a circle a
0:01:34 whole menagerie
0:01:37 while was slain in Sanibel Waleed a
0:01:43 Himalayan an R&R one Wafi asado hoofy
0:01:51 romania initially Wally Wally de que la
0:01:56 Elmo's lead Mahut jihad a Kerala toast
0:02:05 Rica be male Celica be here in Fela
0:02:10 Totoro Mumma was horrible Murphy dunya
0:02:14 Maroof what be recipe lemon and a fait
0:02:20 la some a la more Jericho muna b.o.b
0:02:27 makuta Merriman
0:02:31 yeah bonia in Takumi's haha Batum in
0:02:39 hora de lavit a coupie chakra
0:02:45 photography so rotten office sama where
0:02:49 the a fill or black t be hollow in law
0:02:56 hello - hobby yeah buna yeah a famous
0:03:02 toilet ever mono bill Maroof even her an
0:03:06 Eden moon was barren
0:03:12 I saw back in Natalie Caminos mill well
0:03:21 - sorry what Decca in c1 Adam she feel
0:03:26 horribly maloha in allaha yuhibbu
0:03:32 Coulomb Oh tell you what Casa de FEMA
0:03:39 she would mean so take in anger on us
0:03:46 well I mean so in this verse says allah
0:03:56 subhanaw taala begins by talking about
0:04:01 doc man mentioning that and we have
0:04:03 certainly given we referring to Allah
0:04:05 subhana WA Ta'ala we have certainly
0:04:07 given look man wisdom and said be
0:04:10 grateful to Allah and whoever is
0:04:13 grateful is grateful for the benefit of
0:04:14 himself and whoever denies a lost favor
0:04:18 and indeed Allah is free of need and
0:04:20 praiseworthy and mention o Muhammad when
0:04:26 local man said to his son while he was
0:04:29 instructing him so now doc man begins
0:04:31 that is his advice to his son he begins
0:04:34 by saying o my son do not associate
0:04:37 anything with Allah indeed associating
0:04:39 with him is a great injustice
0:04:40 so the first advice that he gives him is
0:04:42 that he's already starting off with the
0:04:46 fact that associating anything with
0:04:48 allah subhana wa ta'ala is one of the
0:04:50 greatest atrocity someone can commit and
0:04:52 this is the foundation of a visit by
0:04:55 said he begins with before telling him
0:04:56 anything else is his belief in allah
0:04:58 subhanho wa taala
0:05:01 and we have enjoyed upon man care for
0:05:04 his parents his mother carried him
0:05:06 increasing her in weakness upon weakness
0:05:08 and his weaning is in two years be
0:05:11 grateful to me and to your parents and
0:05:13 to me is the final destination but if
0:05:18 they endeavor to make you associate with
0:05:19 me that of which you have no knowledge
0:05:21 do not obey them but accompany them in
0:05:25 this world
0:05:25 with appropriate kindness and follow the
0:05:28 way of those who turn back to me in
0:05:29 repentance then to me will be your
0:05:32 return and I will inform you about what
0:05:34 you used to do and so now a loss and now
0:05:37 the man is giving advice to a son about
0:05:39 the importance of parents and how after
0:05:42 having your belief in allah subhanaw
0:05:45 taala and understanding that you're not
0:05:47 allowed to associate anything with him
0:05:48 the advice he gives them is having
0:05:50 kindness towards your parents regardless
0:05:53 of what they tell you to do or how they
0:05:54 act towards you with the exception of
0:05:56 them nullifying the first advice that
0:05:59 local man gave which was to associate
0:06:01 partners with allah subhana wa ta'ala
0:06:03 and local man said o my son indeed if
0:06:07 wrong should be the way of a mustard
0:06:09 seed and should be within a rock or
0:06:11 anywhere in the heaven or in the earth
0:06:13 Allah will bring it forth indeed Allah
0:06:16 is subtle and acquainted oh my son
0:06:19 established prayer enjoin what is right
0:06:22 forbid what is wrong and be patient over
0:06:24 what befalls you indeed all that is of
0:06:27 the matters requiring determination so
0:06:30 now he's giving his son that the
0:06:31 importance of our prayer that we have 5
0:06:33 times a day and that we need to
0:06:35 establish and make sure that we're
0:06:36 keeping up with our with our with our
0:06:38 daily prayers and the importance of when
0:06:42 you see something that is good that you
0:06:44 encourage that good and that you enjoin
0:06:46 and be part of that good and that when
0:06:47 you see something evil you do everything
0:06:49 in your power to stop what that evil
0:06:51 action is do not turn your cheek and
0:06:54 contempt toward people and do not walk
0:06:57 through the earth earth excellently
0:06:59 indeed Allah does not like everyone
0:07:01 self-deluded and boastful essentially
0:07:04 warning his son from being arrogant and
0:07:05 acting like he is something when in
0:07:08 reality all we are are the slaves of
0:07:09 allah subhanahu wa tada
0:07:10 and be moderate in your pace and lower
0:07:13 your voice indeed the most disputable of
0:07:15 sounds is the voice of donkeys and
0:07:18 indeed Allah soprano Dada has spoken the
0:07:20 truth
0:07:20 starting from what happened to lawyer
0:07:22 but I got to
0:07:28 so now I wanna come so now I wanna come
0:07:33 everyone's like a little later for
0:07:34 coming everyone thank you so much for
0:07:35 coming we really appreciate it
0:07:37 welcome to the UC Davis Muslim Student
0:07:39 Association is very first debate and we
0:07:42 are very excited to be holding it today
0:07:43 and we're very honored that you all took
0:07:45 the time on a weekday to come out and
0:07:47 listen to this beautiful debate we're
0:07:48 extremely excited to be hosting these
0:07:50 two amazing debaters who are very kind
0:07:53 very knowledgeable and have spared their
0:07:54 time in the middle of the week to come
0:07:56 and speak to us and with that we are
0:07:58 going to be debate or they're going to
0:08:00 be debating the concept or the existence
0:08:02 of God and before I give them a proper
0:08:05 well do introduction I will be passing
0:08:08 off the microphone to Ali Dawa who will
0:08:11 be talking about Saddam
0:08:15 [Applause]
0:08:32 Selam stands for sharing an affection
0:08:34 love and mercy that's what we do
0:08:37 insha'Allah specific specific at the
0:08:40 time of Asia we live where Haiti's been
0:08:42 hate it's being spread by the name of
0:08:45 given freedom of speech and this
0:08:47 sometimes comes at the cost of innocent
0:08:48 people dying and we saw at Christchurch
0:08:51 we saw that in London where we're from
0:08:54 innocent people getting killed Muslim or
0:08:56 non-muslim and we want to put an end to
0:08:58 this and one of our objectives is to
0:09:00 deconstruct false narratives and
0:09:02 reconstruct pure minds and that's our
0:09:05 main objective and I was wondering every
0:09:08 single one of you guys coming you can
0:09:09 check our websites around the world or
0:09:11 UK inshallah were planning on setting up
0:09:13 a team in California
0:09:18 [Music]
0:09:40 [Applause]
0:10:00 [Applause]
0:10:11 thank you very much for that hello hey
0:10:13 so first we'll be introducing brother
0:10:17 Mohammed hey job is a debater and public
0:10:20 speaker who engages in discussions and
0:10:22 polemics on a wide variety of topics
0:10:23 including religion politics and society
0:10:26 he completed a politics degree and a
0:10:28 master's in the history in history from
0:10:30 Queen Mary University he has taught and
0:10:32 instructed courses on humanities and
0:10:34 languages in many contexts he has come
0:10:36 he has numerous Jazz's and some Islamic
0:10:38 Sciences and his study and numerous
0:10:40 Islamic seminaries including the shin
0:10:42 plate the Institute which employs a
0:10:44 traditional Mauritian style of teaching
0:10:45 of the sacred sciences
0:10:47 Edward Eddy tabash is a constitutional
0:10:50 lawyer in the Los Angeles area he
0:10:52 graduated from UCLA in 1973 Magnum [ __ ]
0:10:55 laude with a bachelor's degree in
0:10:57 political science he graduated from
0:10:59 Loyola Law School of Los Angeles in 1973
0:11:02 he is a son of an Orthodox rabbi from
0:11:05 Lithuania and an Auschwitz surviving
0:11:06 mother from Hungary after decades of
0:11:08 spiritual reflection and seeking he has
0:11:10 determined that the universe is natural
0:11:12 with no supernatural being or beings no
0:11:15 god or gods involved in the creation or
0:11:17 perpetuation of our existence he chairs
0:11:19 the board of directors of the center of
0:11:21 Inquirer transnational a worldwide
0:11:23 organization of secular humanists and
0:11:25 scientific sceptics he's also known for
0:11:27 his legal work and separation of church
0:11:29 and state cases in which we seek to
0:11:30 preserve the equality before the law of
0:11:32 both believers and non-believers he
0:11:34 promotes a secular society based in
0:11:36 science reason and inquiry maintaining
0:11:39 strong conviction in this he's an
0:11:40 integral leader to several associations
0:11:42 which exists to separate church and
0:11:44 state a part of his work and separation
0:11:46 of church and state has specifically
0:11:48 been in opposing Trump's Muslims ban and
0:11:51 mosh although they're both extremely
0:11:53 qualified and we're very
0:11:54 excited to have them both in this debate
0:11:56 and for this reason we would like to
0:11:58 also request a certain level of
0:12:01 boundaries and guidelines for the event
0:12:03 and shot to make sure that it goes as
0:12:04 smooth as possible for both of our
0:12:06 speakers and that we ask that everyone
0:12:08 be as respectful as possible to both of
0:12:10 our speakers by doing a number of few
0:12:13 things so we would like everyone to
0:12:14 please if possible please do not shout
0:12:17 heckle Boo screen cause any form of
0:12:21 ruckus against either speakers you know
0:12:23 to in order to respect their time their
0:12:25 knowledge and everything that they're
0:12:26 doing for us today if people are causing
0:12:29 issues unfortunately we will have to
0:12:31 have security escort you out in a
0:12:33 respect for both of our speakers also
0:12:35 another request that we have is that if
0:12:37 you would like to clap please feel free
0:12:38 to but only after the speaker is
0:12:40 completed whether what they're saying
0:12:42 simply because there is a time frame
0:12:44 that each of them has to be able to get
0:12:45 their points across and we do not want
0:12:47 to disadvantage either speaker by
0:12:49 limiting the other speakers and with
0:12:54 that and said please do not go off hey
0:12:55 thank you so much for coming thank you
0:12:57 everyone I really appreciate it and then
0:12:59 I will be passing off our the microphone
0:13:01 to our moderator which is ID number was
0:13:06 [Applause]
0:13:14 hello everyone thank you for joining us
0:13:17 as I mentioned I will be moderating
0:13:19 moderating the debate we will start off
0:13:22 with opening statements each speaker
0:13:24 will have 20 minutes to give theirs and
0:13:26 we will begin with brother Mohammad hey
0:13:28 Jeb so the Malik and what happens a
0:13:43 light or a kettle first of all I want to
0:13:46 thank every single one of you for coming
0:13:48 down here I want to thank the University
0:13:49 and of course I want to thank Eddie's
0:13:51 have a she's a really prolific you know
0:13:54 formidable opponent and a very
0:13:56 experienced atheist opponent for many
0:13:58 years and so I'm very happy that all of
0:14:00 you are here today to proceed there's no
0:14:05 doubt that there is existence there is
0:14:09 no doubt that there is existence
0:14:13 existence is divided into two things
0:14:17 possible existence and necessary
0:14:20 existence possible existence is
0:14:23 existence that otherwise doesn't need to
0:14:27 exist and its existence that could be
0:14:32 arranged in any other way its existence
0:14:36 which is dependent for example I'm
0:14:38 wearing a blue blazer this is a possible
0:14:41 existence doesn't have to exist it could
0:14:44 be arranged in another way and it's
0:14:49 dependent upon materials that were
0:14:51 created used to create it necessary
0:14:55 existence on the other hand is existence
0:14:57 which is couldn't be any other way
0:15:00 existence which could not be any other
0:15:02 way is independent self-sufficient and
0:15:06 could not be how of existence now the
0:15:12 main argument today is this there cannot
0:15:16 be a world with only possible existences
0:15:19 that is the main idea there cannot be a
0:15:22 world with
0:15:24 possible existences why because we're
0:15:30 it'd be using the port a little bit it
0:15:32 is only possible existences you would
0:15:34 have dependent things depending upon
0:15:36 other dependent things now this can be
0:15:39 reasoned physically ontological and
0:15:42 cosmological this series existed in its
0:15:57 by itself it would require something
0:16:00 outside an independent thing in order
0:16:05 for that series to exist now let's say
0:16:11 if it was an infinite series we'll get
0:16:14 to that in what follows now let's use a
0:16:21 cosmological example we have a tree it's
0:16:25 very beautiful trees here by the way in
0:16:26 California like for integrity beautiful
0:16:31 that tree requires the Sun to
0:16:34 photosynthesize in order to exist I
0:16:36 think it's fair to say it's a tree
0:16:38 didn't exist or for something exists the
0:16:40 tree would know exists
0:16:41 it's fair to say yes so long listed the
0:16:44 Sun is required or so long as the tree
0:16:47 exists the Sun will exist even if that
0:16:50 was for an infinite amount of fine now
0:16:53 the Sun itself is part of its own order
0:16:57 and it's part of its own sense now it
0:17:04 requires other things in order to exist
0:17:06 and the end of this what is required
0:17:09 once again is an independent thing
0:17:12 that's this independent thing can only
0:17:16 be one wait a minute why is that because
0:17:21 if there was more than one necessary
0:17:23 existence it wouldn't be a necessary
0:17:25 existence because it could be conceived
0:17:28 that it can be arranged in another way
0:17:30 and you can't have two things which are
0:17:33 independent because which one is
0:17:35 dependent on which
0:17:38 therefore whether you conceptualize this
0:17:43 ontologically cosmologically or
0:17:45 materialism dualism idealism you must
0:17:50 conclude that what is required in order
0:17:53 for any existence to exist as an
0:17:56 independent thing that is one that is
0:18:02 always in existence why because if it
0:18:04 wasn't in existence if it could be
0:18:07 conceived that this thing is not in
0:18:08 existence it wouldn't be necessary so it
0:18:12 has to be eternal and it cannot be made
0:18:16 up of all parts
0:18:17 why because anything which is a compound
0:18:20 is generated anything that's made up of
0:18:23 parts is dependent on those parts that's
0:18:26 point number one
0:18:27 and point number two if it was a
0:18:30 possible existence if it's made up of
0:18:31 parts you can imagine those parts being
0:18:33 arranged in a different way therefore it
0:18:36 falls into the category of possible
0:18:37 existence to summarize you require any
0:18:40 independent thing outside of the series
0:18:45 of dependent things in motor for any
0:18:49 existence to exist this thing must be
0:18:51 one it cannot have parts
0:18:54 it must be immaterial in Cupra well
0:18:58 suppose to be
0:18:59 it must be eternal now this is what the
0:19:02 quran says in this basic definition of
0:19:03 god who allah say is God one and only
0:19:07 Allah who summoned the one who is
0:19:11 independent self-sufficient everything
0:19:13 depends upon him and he depends upon
0:19:15 nothing
0:19:16 let me end it well immunity baguettes
0:19:19 not nor is He begotten he is the eternal
0:19:22 one
0:19:23 three eternal post eternal well a mere
0:19:25 could never put on a hat and there is
0:19:27 nothing like him he's in material he's
0:19:30 not composed of parts he's in copra so
0:19:34 you see this is the argument if this
0:19:36 argument is tracked I have lost in the
0:19:39 bay this is my main argument everything
0:19:42 goes back to this argument which goes
0:19:44 back to the basic definition of God one
0:19:47 must be presented is
0:19:50 a formulation whether it's a
0:19:52 cosmological one or an ontological one
0:19:55 which shows us how it's possible their
0:19:57 only possible existences can exist
0:19:59 without the independent if that's done
0:20:01 I'm ready to be an atheist today now the
0:20:06 quran says in chapter 53 verse 35 I'm
0:20:08 holding woman why are you shaking I'm
0:20:11 Hollywood
0:20:12 I'm not a semi-wet you'll out ballet
0:20:14 open or were they created from nothing
0:20:17 who were they themselves the creators of
0:20:20 themselves did they create the heavens
0:20:22 and the earth certainly they have no
0:20:24 certainty saying that the atheistic
0:20:27 position is one of male speculation you
0:20:30 can never achieve certainty with atheism
0:20:32 why because in this logical disjunction
0:20:34 you have four options either the
0:20:37 universe came from nothing which is
0:20:38 impossible ontological
0:20:41 mathematically and cosmologically
0:20:43 possible no one has argued this really
0:20:46 it's a weak argument I don't think my
0:20:49 interlocutor with his experience will go
0:20:50 there he's very prominent and very
0:20:53 experienced you won't go there and oh is
0:20:57 it a channel can it be eternal well
0:21:01 let's say it is wait a minute what did
0:21:04 you say did you consider that yes no
0:21:06 problem even if it was a turnip for the
0:21:08 sake of argument dependent or
0:21:11 independent you still have the problem
0:21:13 here but my interlocutors a naturalist
0:21:18 so he believes in the beginning of the
0:21:19 universe so that's not a problem for us
0:21:24 what other option do we have
0:21:25 is it self created like my friend Thomas
0:21:28 also says is it possible for something
0:21:31 to exist an artist at the same time he
0:21:32 gives the example of a mother giving
0:21:34 birth to herself
0:21:36 is that possible no it's not possible so
0:21:40 the other thing is it was put into
0:21:42 existence by something which had the
0:21:45 ability to do so now the question is
0:21:49 what are the attributes of that thing
0:21:53 which had the ability to put the
0:21:55 universe into existence how do we reason
0:21:59 this by inference we say well if I had
0:22:01 the ability to put the
0:22:02 of us into existence it must have power
0:22:06 because that is required for that kind
0:22:08 of thing
0:22:08 it must have creative capacity it must
0:22:11 have knowledge it must have knowledge so
0:22:19 you see we start to have a formulation a
0:22:23 question now we have to ask its why is
0:22:27 the universe one way and not another way
0:22:31 it's conceivable for example you see you
0:22:33 have Celestials disappears in the
0:22:35 universe they're rotating in one
0:22:37 direction we can conceive and imagine of
0:22:40 the possibility of all of the celestial
0:22:44 spheres in the universe going the other
0:22:45 way for example we could imagine that so
0:22:50 why is the universe one way rather than
0:22:52 another way I will tell you that the
0:22:55 only rational explanation for that is
0:22:59 that there is an external particular
0:23:01 Iser
0:23:02 of the universe say that one more time
0:23:03 that there must be an external
0:23:05 particular Iser of the universe to
0:23:08 choose between different options
0:23:11 possible options because then you have
0:23:13 no explanation for why the universe is
0:23:15 one way rather than another way you have
0:23:18 to have an external sorting agents you
0:23:23 have to have an external sorting agents
0:23:25 that decides X rather than Y otherwise
0:23:28 the question will be to the atheists how
0:23:32 can you prove on naturalism or how can
0:23:35 you explain on naturalism that the
0:23:37 universe is one way rather than another
0:23:39 way it's a very straightforward question
0:23:41 now here's the thing if we know that
0:23:46 there is an external sorting agent this
0:23:49 implies will of this agent and if there
0:23:53 was more than one will there would be a
0:23:55 chaotic universe as the process by the
0:23:58 other blemishes are low
0:24:05 along with at first and that first over
0:24:09 Honolulu mobile on GLC fool if there was
0:24:15 more than one of them the universe would
0:24:17 have been corrupted they happened to
0:24:18 need us would have been corrupted
0:24:20 chapter 21 verse 22 how because if
0:24:24 there's more than one will ultimately
0:24:25 which one is steering the ship there
0:24:28 would be chaotic order but I'm also says
0:24:33 baa-baa in chapter 23 verse 91 if there
0:24:38 was one more than one Almighty they
0:24:41 would have outstripped one another
0:24:42 attempted to outstrip one another for
0:24:44 power so in otherwise you can't have
0:24:45 more than one of those things for those
0:24:47 reasons as well and this brings me to my
0:24:52 third point which is the argument of the
0:24:58 physical coherence of the universe which
0:25:00 is a Quranic argument because today
0:25:17 [Music]
0:25:27 young funny very they can bust a move or
0:25:30 see how our hands here
0:25:33 that chapter 67 verse 3 look at the
0:25:37 universe look up in the sky look at the
0:25:41 sky look at the coherence of the
0:25:45 universe do you see any inconsistencies
0:25:48 look again but I says 'women it look
0:25:51 again let me look let me see
0:25:53 is there any inconsistencies now I
0:25:56 thought about this verse and this verse
0:25:58 is telling us that there is a uniformity
0:26:02 of nature a consistency of nature a
0:26:04 coherence of nature the fact that the
0:26:08 universe is uniform coherence it is not
0:26:11 known by science its presupposed by
0:26:13 science wait a minute what did you say
0:26:16 let me say one more time if you look for
0:26:18 example any introductory guide to the
0:26:20 scientific method like you got here on
0:26:22 the illustrated guide to the scientific
0:26:24 method he said that the fact that you
0:26:26 have rationalize able actors that can
0:26:28 see the universe and see it's
0:26:29 consistency means that there's a
0:26:32 presupposition of science and what is
0:26:33 that crystal position that science is
0:26:35 uniform that the universe is uniform is
0:26:38 rationalizing Albert Einstein said in
0:26:41 his letters to solve them he said the
0:26:44 most incomprehensible thing about the
0:26:47 universe is that it is comprehendible so
0:26:52 I'm not making a fine-tuning argument
0:26:54 today because we've heard enough of that
0:26:55 every atheist and every what's this
0:27:00 fine-tuning argument the argument is
0:27:02 look at the constants of nature yes you
0:27:07 have these constants which one a
0:27:09 Goldilocks zone of life permitting range
0:27:14 if there were any way this way or that
0:27:17 way they would not the universe would
0:27:19 not just and life would not be
0:27:21 impossible minimis like Martin Rees
0:27:25 arose just six numbers and he says n
0:27:27 which is capital n and number talking
0:27:30 about you know the natural forces he
0:27:32 says is a Billy
0:27:33 billion billion billion and had any
0:27:35 zeroes been taken away yes then that
0:27:38 would have been the universe would have
0:27:40 been completely different
0:27:41 e is another letter that he talks about
0:27:44 the conversion of hydrogen into helium
0:27:46 he says that this conversion is 0.007
0:27:50 had it been 0.006 or 0.08 we would not
0:27:56 exist this is exactly right that's not
0:27:59 why I'm writing I'm not cosmologists
0:28:00 right it's why he writes that's the
0:28:03 argument from probability that's an
0:28:06 interesting argument I think the
0:28:08 interesting thing is that many people
0:28:10 theists an aunty a theists accept the
0:28:13 fine-tuning of the universe Stephen
0:28:15 Hawking's accepted it Richard Dawkins
0:28:17 accepted it so it's not really an area
0:28:19 of controversy my argument is about the
0:28:22 uniformity of nature the coherence of
0:28:24 nature which is presupposed by the
0:28:26 universe by the by the scientific method
0:28:29 the question is therefore on naturalism
0:28:33 on naturalism
0:28:35 how can you account for the coherence of
0:28:38 the universe you can't say well the
0:28:41 universe just is like Bertrand Russell
0:28:42 said because that is a circular argument
0:28:45 frankly so cop-out I'm asking for an
0:28:48 external explanation we're rational
0:28:50 people we should be able to explain if
0:28:53 nationally if naturalism has the ability
0:28:56 to to give us these answers then surely
0:28:58 we should be entitled to such answers
0:29:01 now I've got five minutes left and I've
0:29:05 made my arguments to reiterate my main
0:29:08 argument today is the argument from
0:29:10 contingency and it's not one that
0:29:12 liveness formulated it's a different
0:29:15 kind of argument from contingency that
0:29:18 many Western people are not familiar
0:29:20 with it's from our tradition and frankly
0:29:25 the main question is this the question
0:29:29 is how can you explain a world either
0:29:33 ontological or cosmologically naturally
0:29:37 that only has possibly that's the
0:29:43 question if you can prove it you've
0:29:44 cracked the argument now I know
0:29:46 I've been watching his videos he's an
0:29:48 incredible speaker and because he's a
0:29:50 lawyer he's got that charisma that if
0:29:53 when you start speaking I might have to
0:29:54 run away actually incredible speaking
0:29:57 but I know I have the feeling of what
0:30:00 he's gonna talk about and I think it's
0:30:02 gonna be the problem of evil right now
0:30:05 Epicurus an old Hellenistic philosopher
0:30:09 he had the logical form of the problem
0:30:12 of evil and the logical form as follows
0:30:16 that if God is omnipotent and all good
0:30:19 then if he's omnipotent why does he not
0:30:23 stop the evil if he's all good then how
0:30:25 come evil exists the answer our question
0:30:30 is as follows I'm going to give it to
0:30:31 you right now God is not just those two
0:30:33 things he's also also all-wise
0:30:35 so in order for the problem of evil from
0:30:39 an Islamic traditions perspective to be
0:30:41 unlocked or to make sense from a logical
0:30:43 perspective you have to show logically
0:30:45 or naturalistically or cosmologically or
0:30:48 mathematically or inductively
0:30:49 objectively any way possible
0:30:51 how how evil the existence of evil
0:30:56 contradicts the divine wisdom that's how
0:31:00 it goes if we don't believe in a God
0:31:01 with three attributes goodness or two
0:31:03 attribution and omnipotence only that's
0:31:06 not the god we believe it so you have to
0:31:07 show otherwise it's an emotional
0:31:09 argument now the other thing he talks
0:31:12 about is the divine hide earnest
0:31:14 why is God hidden from us now we believe
0:31:18 in the fifth arise Muslims the immediate
0:31:20 knowledge of God the intuitive knowledge
0:31:22 of God and by the way this is the Muslim
0:31:25 specific belief we believe that we are
0:31:29 born believing in God we have the
0:31:32 immediate knowledge of God and that
0:31:35 society strains us away from that
0:31:38 knowledge of God
0:31:39 so the Quran for instance or the
0:31:41 prophets come to reinforce what we
0:31:45 already knew prime moodily if you like
0:31:47 prime modelling from a psycho spiritual
0:31:50 perspective so God is not hiding in fact
0:31:52 he's reminding us and the Quran says
0:31:54 remark own moral demeanor
0:31:56 hat Tanabata Rasul Allah
0:31:58 atheist Isis an atheist and according to
0:32:01 us he ties an atheist has not heard the
0:32:03 message of Islam he does not go to helm
0:32:05 straight away because he knows it's not
0:32:07 a belief so God is not hiding according
0:32:10 to us so these are the two things I'm
0:32:11 anticipating he's gonna be raising up
0:32:13 some pre-empting it
0:32:15 and finally what I want to say and we'll
0:32:19 talk about this by the way the Fatah the
0:32:21 immediate knowledge of God because there
0:32:23 is empirical evidence of that by the way
0:32:24 Justin Barrett made an interesting has
0:32:26 many interesting books on this he says
0:32:29 that there is a there is a divine
0:32:32 receptivity to God and he done you know
0:32:36 studies with children cross-culturally
0:32:38 and found that children naturally
0:32:39 believe in God so atheism on this idea
0:32:42 is a social construct atheism was a
0:32:44 cultural construct so finally I want to
0:32:47 say that the Quran promises us in
0:32:49 Chapter number forty-one that Allah will
0:32:52 show us all the way in otherwise his
0:32:54 science he says but other blemishes on
0:32:57 him generally he never had and know that
0:33:21 we will certainly show them our signs in
0:33:23 the horizons and in themselves until
0:33:27 it's made patently clear that this is
0:33:31 the truth I hope today we can be as
0:33:33 sincere as possible and be open to this
0:33:35 and I hope now that we go back to that
0:33:40 question of how they can be only
0:33:41 possible existences I leave it to
0:33:46 [Applause]
0:34:13 is there some other mic I'm supposed to
0:34:16 be okay good evening everybody I want to
0:34:21 thank the Muslim Student Association for
0:34:24 putting on this debate and I want to
0:34:26 thank Mohammed for debating me I will
0:34:29 respond to his arguments in my rebuttal
0:34:31 but I will now present my positive
0:34:34 arguments for why it is more likely than
0:34:37 not that the evidence in our physical
0:34:39 universe clearly makes it so that a
0:34:43 supernatural conscious personal being
0:34:46 that is an Allgood all-knowing and
0:34:49 all-powerful deity the standard-issue
0:34:52 god of Judaism Christianity and Islam
0:34:54 does not exist argument won the argument
0:34:58 that from the way our world operates it
0:35:01 is much more likely that there is
0:35:03 nothing beyond the physical the evidence
0:35:05 shows that it is much more likely that
0:35:07 the universe is not impacted by any
0:35:09 invisible realms or by intentional
0:35:12 actions by immaterial beings the history
0:35:15 of scientific discovery has shown that
0:35:18 whenever we attributed phenomena to
0:35:20 paranormal creatures or gods further
0:35:23 examinations showed such beings did not
0:35:26 cause what was happening we learned that
0:35:28 lightning is not caused by an angry god
0:35:31 or gods diseases are not caused by evil
0:35:33 spirits and by germs and demonic
0:35:36 possession has nothing to do with mental
0:35:38 illness as humanity has gone forward
0:35:41 natural explanations have always evicted
0:35:44 previously believed supernatural ones it
0:35:48 has never been the other way around
0:35:50 there's no verifiable evidence of
0:35:52 anything supernatural which there should
0:35:55 be if the supernatural existed since we
0:35:58 have no background information of
0:36:00 supernatural beings or events there is a
0:36:02 very low
0:36:04 prior probability of them this means
0:36:07 that for instance if we were to use
0:36:09 Bayes probability theory we would be
0:36:12 predicting only natural explanations for
0:36:16 phenomena though we have never seen a
0:36:18 quark
0:36:19 we know that the category of subatomic
0:36:22 article's particles do exist evidence
0:36:25 for the existence of quarks has been
0:36:27 steadily increasing one indication of
0:36:30 the soundness of the quark model is its
0:36:33 success in predicting the outcome of
0:36:35 high-energy collisions of an electron
0:36:38 and positron there are no such
0:36:40 equivalent empirically verifiable
0:36:42 indications of God's existence so we
0:36:46 cannot infer the supernatural from a
0:36:49 mere observation of the natural number
0:36:53 two the argument from the non occurrence
0:36:55 of miracles claims of miracles have the
0:36:57 initial problem of bearing witness
0:36:59 against themselves since by their very
0:37:02 content they are violations of the laws
0:37:04 of nature that are not supposed to be
0:37:06 violated all the supposed miracles that
0:37:09 are claimed to verify God's intervention
0:37:11 and human affairs allegedly took place
0:37:14 in a pre-scientific era
0:37:16 why don't we moderns have the same
0:37:18 opportunity to observe these miracles
0:37:20 today no verifiable events in today's
0:37:24 world correspond to the types of
0:37:26 miracles that monotheistic religions
0:37:29 claim happened in ancient times thus the
0:37:32 probability that a miracle happened
0:37:35 regardless of which religion makes the
0:37:37 claim will always be lower than the
0:37:40 probability that a miracle has not
0:37:42 occurred number three the argument from
0:37:45 the dependence of conscious minds on a
0:37:48 physical body and brain there is
0:37:50 overwhelming evidence that conscious
0:37:52 thought and awareness cannot occur
0:37:54 without a functioning physical brain
0:37:57 with operative cortical neurons and
0:37:59 synapses believing in a disembodied
0:38:03 super intelligence and in life after
0:38:05 death creates a serious dilemma if even
0:38:08 Alzheimer's disease can destroy
0:38:10 conscious awareness how can that very
0:38:13 same conscious awareness survive the
0:38:15 destruction of the entire body and
0:38:17 at death this would entail believing
0:38:20 that if certain portions of our physical
0:38:22 brains are damaged we lose the awareness
0:38:25 contained in those portions but if you
0:38:28 destroy the entire brain by death your
0:38:31 awareness will somehow reappear fully
0:38:34 intact in some immaterial form highly
0:38:37 unlikely if consciousness could survive
0:38:39 independently of the brain diseases
0:38:42 brain injuries and anesthetics would not
0:38:45 eclipse consciousness like they do since
0:38:48 the evidence shows there is no conscious
0:38:51 self-awareness or thought without a
0:38:53 functional brain with operative cortical
0:38:56 neurons and synapses
0:38:58 we cannot be expected to believe in any
0:39:00 God that is supposed to have a
0:39:02 disembodied thinking mind number four
0:39:05 the argument from evolution though many
0:39:08 theists believe in evolution because of
0:39:10 its sloppiness and trial and error
0:39:13 features evolution by natural selection
0:39:16 is more likely if there is no God more
0:39:22 than 99% of all species that have ever
0:39:24 existed are now extinct this is wasteful
0:39:27 we have useless components in our bodies
0:39:30 that indeed do more harm than good like
0:39:33 the appendix known to most of us only
0:39:35 when it's about to burst evolution by
0:39:38 natural selection is established by the
0:39:40 weight of the evidence for instance
0:39:42 there is a 100% match of DNA sequences
0:39:45 in the pseudogene region of beta globin
0:39:48 that is proof that humans and gorillas
0:39:51 had a common ancestor number 5 as
0:39:55 Mohammed predicted in his prophetic
0:39:58 wisdom the argument from evil the
0:40:00 evidential argument from evil God can
0:40:03 make whatever he wants happen and
0:40:05 prevent anything he doesn't want from
0:40:07 occurring so why are there holocaust
0:40:09 extremely dangerous and violent people
0:40:11 horrible diseases extreme poverty and
0:40:14 destructive natural disasters if we
0:40:17 humans need discipline we could benefit
0:40:19 from a military-style training camp not
0:40:22 a concentration camp there was no
0:40:25 benefit from my mother's having been in
0:40:26 Auschwitz
0:40:27 another example malaria is a terrible
0:40:30 disease
0:40:30 there's a gene though that provides an
0:40:32 effective defense against malaria
0:40:34 it works by destroying any red
0:40:36 corpuscles that have been occupied by
0:40:39 any of the types of parasitic protozoans
0:40:42 that cause malaria but if one has
0:40:44 inherited this gene from both parents it
0:40:46 also causes sickle cell anemia why did
0:40:49 God have to set it up this way or allow
0:40:52 it to work this way to attempt to
0:40:55 justify or explain the horrendous evil
0:40:57 and suffering in the world the theist
0:41:00 must be able to show that God even with
0:41:02 unlimited power could not have prevented
0:41:05 an even greater evil but for the
0:41:06 horrible evil and suffering he actually
0:41:09 created or allowed or with unlimited
0:41:11 power God could not have brought about a
0:41:13 very great good but for the horrible
0:41:16 evil and suffering God actually created
0:41:18 or allowed here the theist must also be
0:41:21 able to show that the very great good
0:41:23 that could not but for this horrible
0:41:26 evil and suffering take place was indeed
0:41:29 such a great good as to morally justify
0:41:33 subjecting the victims to the agonizing
0:41:35 pain they have to endure if we take the
0:41:39 concept of God's omnipotence seriously
0:41:41 this is a very high burden for a
0:41:44 supposedly omnipotent being to meet the
0:41:48 argument number six from divine
0:41:50 hiddenness a God that wants us to know
0:41:52 that this God exists and wants a
0:41:54 relationship with us would not withhold
0:41:56 evidence of the divine existence and
0:41:58 would understand just what evidence many
0:42:01 of us would need in order to be able to
0:42:03 believe if God exists and created me God
0:42:07 knows my mind and knows that right now
0:42:09 I couldn't believe in God regardless how
0:42:11 much I wanted to just like I couldn't
0:42:14 believe in space alien visitations to
0:42:16 earth because of the absence of any
0:42:19 evidence showing these things to be true
0:42:21 God's not being forthcoming with the
0:42:24 evidence that would enable me to believe
0:42:26 that God exists while knowing that I
0:42:29 can't believe in the absence of such
0:42:31 evidence is more consistent with God's
0:42:33 non-existence than with the existence of
0:42:36 a God that wants me to know him/her or
0:42:38 it if your mother told you that your
0:42:40 father whom you've never met or spoken
0:42:42 to loves you marry very
0:42:44 and wants a father-child relationship
0:42:46 with you but just has been too busy to
0:42:48 ever come to see you ever since you were
0:42:50 born let's say around your 18th birthday
0:42:53 you would probably conclude that your
0:42:55 dad really doesn't want a relationship
0:42:56 with you we can actually see the reality
0:42:59 of human fathers on a daily basis so
0:43:01 even if the dad and the above scenario
0:43:04 is always absent we can believe he
0:43:06 exists we don't have the same evidence
0:43:08 that a God exists so if we are told
0:43:10 there is a God who loves us and wants
0:43:12 relationship with us but that God never
0:43:15 provides us with direct evidence that it
0:43:17 exists when such an all-powerful God
0:43:20 could easily provide that direct
0:43:22 evidence we are justified in doubting
0:43:24 the existence of that God and doubting
0:43:27 the desire of any such God to want a
0:43:29 relationship with us divine hiddenness
0:43:32 also furthers the argument from evil if
0:43:34 God exists such a being would know that
0:43:37 unanswered questions about why there is
0:43:39 so much evil and suffering prevent many
0:43:41 of us from believing in such a God we
0:43:43 have a right to expect that a perfectly
0:43:45 good God would not allow such horrendous
0:43:47 evil and suffering without morally
0:43:50 sufficient reasons if we are not told
0:43:53 what those morally sufficient reasons
0:43:54 are then it is more probable that a
0:43:58 perfectly good God that wants to be
0:44:00 believed in and worship does not exist 6
0:44:04 point 1 the argument from religious
0:44:06 confusion a subset of divine hiddenness
0:44:09 there's so much a green disagreement
0:44:11 over which religion is true and even if
0:44:13 over which branch of a given religion is
0:44:16 true if God exists and wants us to know
0:44:20 its will and follow divine decrees we
0:44:23 are justified in expecting that this
0:44:25 deity would not allow so much confusion
0:44:27 over who that God is what that God wants
0:44:31 us to believe in and what that God wants
0:44:33 us to do the presence of such rampant
0:44:36 confusion is more likely if a God that
0:44:39 wants us to know its will does not exist
0:44:42 so Catholics believe that when the Pope
0:44:44 speaks ex cathedra he's infallible
0:44:47 Protestants reject the concept of a Pope
0:44:49 if only one of these is true God should
0:44:52 make clear to Christians which one it is
0:44:57 Sunni and Shiite Muslims began to
0:45:00 disagree over whether Muhammad's
0:45:02 successors should be chosen by
0:45:04 qualifications alone or need to have
0:45:07 direct bloodline to Muhammad Shiites
0:45:10 believed that the 12th Imam in the 10th
0:45:12 century was taken into hiding by God in
0:45:15 a process called occultation and will
0:45:17 return at the end of time in a full
0:45:19 messianic capacity to facilitate the
0:45:22 final and full understanding of the
0:45:24 Quran and the prophets message Sunnis do
0:45:28 not accept this now even though the
0:45:30 Sunnis and Shiites share the Quran they
0:45:33 have different versions of the hadith
0:45:35 which are very important to Islamic
0:45:38 interpretation of the deeds and
0:45:40 traditions of the Prophet so if one of
0:45:45 these is true and the other is false God
0:45:48 should make clear to Muslims which one
0:45:50 it is
0:45:51 now the other also derived from divine
0:45:55 hiddenness argument from unreliable
0:45:57 revelations and translations from
0:46:00 defects and errors in the Bible and the
0:46:03 Quran if God exists we are justified and
0:46:07 expecting that this God will provide us
0:46:09 with a reliable revelation if there are
0:46:11 problems with the revelation then it's
0:46:13 more consistent with the God that is not
0:46:15 perfect both the Bible and Quran talk
0:46:18 clearly about male dominion over women
0:46:21 Genesis 3:16 says and thy desire shall
0:46:24 be to thy husband and he shall rule over
0:46:26 the surah 434 Pickthall says men are in
0:46:32 charge of women because Allah hath made
0:46:34 the one of them excel the other
0:46:36 well we modern humans have learned that
0:46:39 there is no reason for men to be in
0:46:42 charge of women because women are the
0:46:44 intellectual and moral equals of men so
0:46:48 this itself this itself shows that both
0:46:52 the Bible and the Quran are incorrect
0:46:55 insofar as they vest the man with more
0:46:58 power over the woman than the woman is
0:47:00 vested over the man also both the Bible
0:47:04 and the Quran talk about Hell
0:47:10 for those who don't believe in the
0:47:12 religion each Revelation is promoting
0:47:16 well they can't both be true it can't be
0:47:19 true that you'll go to hell forever if
0:47:21 you are not a Christian and you'll go to
0:47:25 hell forever if you're not a Muslim so
0:47:28 if in fact there is a God that bases our
0:47:33 eternity on whether we choose
0:47:34 Christianity or Islam then that God
0:47:38 should tell us which one and not let us
0:47:41 make the honest and sincere mistake of
0:47:44 picking the wrong one and falling
0:47:46 through the trap door into eternal
0:47:48 horror so the very fact that God doesn't
0:47:54 make this clear to us and give us a
0:47:57 clear choice is more consistent with
0:47:59 there not being a god that wants us to
0:48:01 find the truth now also if Islam is true
0:48:06 those of us who do not speak Arabic and
0:48:09 those of us who can't read the Koran in
0:48:12 its original should be given a clear
0:48:15 unambiguous translation which is the
0:48:20 functional equivalent of Arabic or God
0:48:22 should have revealed the Quran in every
0:48:24 major language Muhammad Pickthall was
0:48:27 one of the most prominent translators of
0:48:29 the Quran into English in the 20th
0:48:33 century and in his translators forward
0:48:36 it's a direct quote the Quran cannot be
0:48:39 translated every effort has been made to
0:48:41 choose befitting language but the result
0:48:44 is not the glorious quran it can never
0:48:47 take the place of the quran in arabic
0:48:49 but then if god wants me to be a muslim
0:48:53 god should provide me with the proper
0:48:55 translation so i don't make any errors
0:48:58 now another argument from divine
0:49:02 hiddenness a subset is the argument for
0:49:04 moral confusion so many people acting in
0:49:08 good faith even members of the same
0:49:10 religion disagree about what is right
0:49:12 and what is wrong in a bewildering
0:49:15 variety of situations both the Bible and
0:49:18 the Quran condemn gay sex but most of us
0:49:24 know gay couples and our reason and
0:49:27 experience tell us that same-sex
0:49:31 relationships are no worse than
0:49:35 heterosexual relationships just like our
0:49:38 reason and experience tell us there's no
0:49:41 reason for men to be in charge of women
0:49:43 or rule over women as opposed to women
0:49:46 being in charge of men and ruling over
0:49:49 men so if either or both the Quran and
0:49:52 the Bible were infallibly true and in
0:49:55 errant they wouldn't say these things
0:49:59 argument seven argument from scale or
0:50:01 the argument from human insignificance
0:50:04 68% of the universe is dark energy 27%
0:50:07 is dark matter so a scant five percent
0:50:10 of the universe is even conceptually
0:50:12 accessible by us of that five percent
0:50:14 virtually all of it is comprised of
0:50:16 empty space which is instantly lethal to
0:50:20 human beings
0:50:20 so ninety-nine point thirty five nines
0:50:23 of the universe is basically off-limits
0:50:26 to humans our galaxy contains around 300
0:50:29 billion stars our galaxy is one of 100
0:50:32 billion galaxies in the observable
0:50:34 universe and we have no access to any of
0:50:37 this mathematically we are just one part
0:50:40 in a hundred followed by 39 zeroes of
0:50:43 the universe there are twenty septillion
0:50:46 planets in the universe that's 20
0:50:48 followed by 24 zeroes why would God need
0:50:51 such a literally astronomical number of
0:50:55 excess planets that we are the core of
0:50:56 God's creation and concern the universe
0:51:00 is 13.7 billion years old the earth is
0:51:03 4.6 billion years old
0:51:05 we humans have been around for maybe
0:51:07 200,000 years if we are at the center of
0:51:10 creation and of God's concern why did
0:51:13 God wait 13.7 billion years for us to
0:51:17 appear an all-powerful engineer would
0:51:19 not have needed to suffer this kind of
0:51:24 inefficiency remember we are speaking of
0:51:27 a God that's supposed to be all-powerful
0:51:30 argument number eight the argument
0:51:32 against the existence of a train
0:51:33 send in person a person is by very
0:51:35 definition of being who thinks and
0:51:37 performs actions and that in turn
0:51:39 requires being in time so how could God
0:51:42 have deliberately created anything if
0:51:44 there wasn't an environment of time and
0:51:46 space in which to operate sequentially
0:51:49 so a could cause be if the theist says
0:51:52 that God exists in and functions and
0:51:56 some unknowable metaphysical time for
0:51:58 which of course there's no proof then
0:52:00 the theist is conceding that God is not
0:52:02 completely transcendent since God
0:52:05 operates in some nebulous context which
0:52:07 corresponds to time a being out that is
0:52:12 outside space and time is not working
0:52:15 within a framework in which anything can
0:52:17 be caused by anything else so we can see
0:52:22 that the overwhelming weight of the
0:52:25 evidence in our physical universe makes
0:52:27 the predictive power of atheism much
0:52:30 stronger than that of theism we see for
0:52:34 instance that the universe is not
0:52:36 perfect most of it is lethal we also see
0:52:40 that within 5 billion years the Sun will
0:52:43 burn out which means the earth will seek
0:52:46 to exist I don't see much perfection in
0:52:49 that so probabilistically taking the
0:52:53 totality of the evidence it's far more
0:52:55 likely than not that we live in a
0:52:57 natural not a supernatural universe and
0:53:00 that an all-powerful Allgood all-knowing
0:53:03 self conscious God does not exist thank
0:53:06 you
0:53:14 thank you so much for both of our
0:53:16 speakers at the next section will be the
0:53:18 rebuttal section each speaker will have
0:53:20 ten minutes to counter the other
0:53:23 speakers argument that was presented
0:53:24 during the open state opening statement
0:53:26 we will begin with Muhammad a jab and
0:53:29 then Edward tabash so on the job
0:53:47 I'll begin with everyone inspired
0:53:53 alright so everyone made a points a
0:53:56 arguments I'm gonna respond to each and
0:53:58 every sing one of them the first one the
0:54:00 verifiable evidence of something which
0:54:02 is supernatural which leads to the
0:54:03 second point which is the non evidence
0:54:05 of miracle I'm gonna prove today that
0:54:06 Edward believes in miracles what did you
0:54:09 say let me say again
0:54:10 Edward believes in miracles what as a
0:54:12 miracle according to Edward according to
0:54:14 David Hume it's a violation of the laws
0:54:17 of nature is a violation of the laws of
0:54:18 nature what is a miracle something which
0:54:21 goes outside the five senses which can't
0:54:24 be really detected by science because
0:54:26 naturalism according to the Oxford
0:54:27 concise companion is or philosophy is
0:54:31 something which can only be seen by
0:54:33 science the club responds it says I am I
0:54:50 [Music]
0:54:53 mm wah-wah because me [ __ ] I mean he
0:54:58 says they say to us
0:55:00 they say he's strict strong for example
0:55:04 and they say who's gonna raise the tents
0:55:06 when it becomes dusters the one who gave
0:55:10 him like the first time now let's think
0:55:12 of this have we ever seen the transition
0:55:16 from chemistry to biology no this is
0:55:20 referred to as a B or Genesis yes
0:55:22 when chemistry becomes biology every
0:55:25 study of biology presupposes this
0:55:27 because if there's no such thing as a
0:55:29 movement from chemistry topology they
0:55:31 cannot be biology therefore the dead
0:55:34 became the living have you seen that no
0:55:37 have you sensed that no is it scientific
0:55:39 no do you believe me yes it's a miracle
0:55:42 just like Jesus raising the dead it's a
0:55:44 miracle just like the day of
0:55:46 resurrection it's a miracle
0:55:47 so just as it were those things will
0:55:49 happen the Quran says you can believe in
0:55:53 all of that its premise on the movement
0:55:56 from nonliving chemistry to a biology
0:55:58 you believe in then we all believe in
0:56:00 miracles if that is how its defined and
0:56:03 that's how you define it number three
0:56:05 the dependence of conscious minds on the
0:56:08 brain which is a philosophical
0:56:11 discussion frankly raymond Tallis who
0:56:14 wrote a book called aping mankind he's a
0:56:16 neuroscientist he asked a question if
0:56:19 consciousness is in the brain where is
0:56:21 it in the brain what's the natural
0:56:23 explanation for where consciousness is
0:56:25 in the brain really frankly the idea
0:56:28 that you can lose consciousness through
0:56:31 anaesthetic and then being not in the
0:56:33 self consciousness is refuted by dreams
0:56:35 the existence of dreams
0:56:39 you know I closed my eyes you know why I
0:56:42 see how can you explain dreams this is
0:56:46 the problem of hard consciousness the
0:56:49 hard problem of consciousness you can't
0:56:50 bypass the academics this is something
0:56:53 that philosophers have been talking
0:56:54 about since time began
0:56:56 number four that the argument for
0:57:01 evolution
0:57:02 evolution doesn't contradict theism but
0:57:04 which evolution are we talking about
0:57:05 Darwinian evolution after 1960's one
0:57:08 thing will refute this the problem of
0:57:12 induction science has the problem of the
0:57:15 relatedness of induction interpretation
0:57:18 all of these things you can't say that
0:57:20 it's definite and he didn't say that he
0:57:21 was careful in his wording says most
0:57:23 likely but that could be reformulated if
0:57:26 new data is found it could be
0:57:28 reinterpreted it has to be interpretated
0:57:30 in fact there's more likelihood that our
0:57:34 evolutionary conceptions will change so
0:57:37 you can't really use this as an argument
0:57:40 the argument from evil what is evil
0:57:43 here's the thing ladies and gentlemen on
0:57:45 naturalism evil does not exist it's a
0:57:51 social construct look at the works of
0:57:53 Bertrand Russell of Nietzsche post
0:57:55 modernists even Richard Dawkins and the
0:57:57 blind watchmaker he says there's no such
0:57:58 thing as good there's no such thing as
0:58:00 evil it's all business
0:58:02 indifference that's what he says why
0:58:04 because on naturalism
0:58:06 you cannot put morality under a
0:58:09 microscope there's no way of
0:58:12 ascertaining that there is any morals or
0:58:14 naturalism there is no objective
0:58:17 morality why even are you talking about
0:58:19 but for the sake of argument I say okay
0:58:22 evil exists but we said it's not
0:58:25 incompatible with wisdom of God the
0:58:28 Quran says again o Allah Allah Allah
0:58:31 Delhi Italia voluma umass and one he's
0:58:37 the one who has created life and death
0:58:39 to see which one of you it's best in
0:58:41 these if there was no evil that would be
0:58:42 no test if there would be no evil there
0:58:44 would be no free will
0:58:45 what's the point of life then what is
0:58:47 the purpose of this call never seen
0:58:54 Oh whatever gonna shove you in Hawaii
0:59:00 Pfitzner ye laying there to rot down
0:59:05 everyone's gonna die nonsense wait a
0:59:08 minute
0:59:08 everyone's gonna die I'm gonna die
0:59:10 Eddie's gonna die you're gonna die and
0:59:13 we will test you with good and evil as a
0:59:17 as a test and then you'll come back to
0:59:19 us it's a test without evil the remote
0:59:21 test next Devine wilderness we've
0:59:26 already covered this the fifth one we're
0:59:28 all born with the predisposition of God
0:59:30 there is evidence for this poor blue
0:59:33 Justin barren many people have already
0:59:35 said we have seen we have analyzing
0:59:38 critical evidence of children how they
0:59:41 what is their natural instinct they is
0:59:44 mentioned just embarrasses they have a
0:59:48 natural receptivity they has a natural
0:59:52 receptivity to divine to the divine and
0:59:54 non anthropomorphic God not Jesus no
0:59:59 Buddha they have a net we have natural
1:00:01 inclination to God and the NASS
1:00:04 reinforced by the prophets that's the
1:00:06 Islamic narrative the prophets came to
1:00:08 remind us of what we already knew it
1:00:10 says that the Quran is a reminder just
1:00:13 like if you were separated from your
1:00:16 parents or your mother and then you're
1:00:19 reunited with a he is by natural
1:00:21 instinct and the same thing with God so
1:00:26 we talked about divine from confusion or
1:00:29 so unreliable revelations I do at this
1:00:30 point
1:00:31 there are unreliable revelations but I
1:00:34 would want to see how that is the case
1:00:35 with the Quran there was no argument
1:00:38 there
1:00:39 chapter 4 verse 34 bad translation when
1:00:41 in charge of woman there's only one
1:00:43 translation I think or two it's men are
1:00:44 maintained as and protectors of women
1:00:46 and frankly if you didn't believe this
1:00:49 you wouldn't draft men to the army in
1:00:50 America men protect women and they have
1:00:53 done so it's not saying that they are
1:00:55 better than them the Quran in the
1:00:57 prophets and in the many saraphilo
1:00:59 Rogell men are equal to women so I mean
1:01:04 the Quran says
1:01:06 in in the Lyle area how many me come in
1:01:09 second and almost about to come Bob that
1:01:11 God does not let to waste any action of
1:01:14 a man or woman both me but anyways
1:01:15 go back to the idea of natural selection
1:01:18 or natural selection the patriarchy on
1:01:22 feminism is justified because if men can
1:01:25 dominate women that's a natural thing
1:01:27 what's the problem on naturalism
1:01:29 how can he justify feminism second wave
1:01:32 feminism or naturalism that's an
1:01:35 impossibility you cannot do it why not
1:01:38 third wave feminism why not the works of
1:01:40 Judith Butler why not please Siri why
1:01:42 not LGBT why have to be second wave
1:01:44 equal the Eurocentric understanding of
1:01:47 equality how does that natural happen
1:01:49 that realistic I want to see how he
1:01:50 mechanistically shows us that he'll
1:01:52 eternity what both of us can be Muslims
1:01:55 and Christians can be in a both right to
1:01:58 right about that but listen solve any
1:02:00 issue doesn't quite any problem the
1:02:01 translation problem only one way to
1:02:03 understand the language there's a
1:02:06 translation problem with mathematics is
1:02:08 mathematics false therefore it's a
1:02:10 language if that's a translatable thing
1:02:13 it becomes false because of its content
1:02:15 and has to be translated than
1:02:16 mathematics is false more confusion I
1:02:20 mean yes there's more confusion but just
1:02:22 because there's controversy of something
1:02:24 it doesn't make you false as a fallacy a
1:02:27 living from scale he says 99 quizzes
1:02:29 99.9% of the universe is not just
1:02:33 repeatable to human life he's made the
1:02:34 fine-tuning argument for me and we were
1:02:37 on the 0.01 so why is there possibility
1:02:39 of that real I agree with you a
1:02:43 transcendent person a transcendent
1:02:46 person he defines person in a certain
1:02:49 way he says well God controls time and
1:02:50 space simple as that
1:02:51 I mean it's not really an argument and I
1:02:53 think I've got a minute left and we go
1:02:58 I'm in left well well well you know
1:03:06 here's the thing guys don't be swayed by
1:03:09 the red herring the red herring is a
1:03:11 moral red herring the Quran says
1:03:13 disavowed mended them here's the thing
1:03:16 on naturalism no one is born equal yes
1:03:21 why because actually liberalism is an
1:03:24 outgrowth of something which is called
1:03:26 the state of nature it's a fictitious
1:03:28 mythological construct which John Locke
1:03:30 and Thomas Hobbes wrote in their books
1:03:32 it's not scientific we came out of the
1:03:34 state a state of nature and we became
1:03:36 one we became connected socially
1:03:38 contractually into the same this saw the
1:03:41 whole of liberalism and human rights by
1:03:42 extension is the myth it's a little mini
1:03:46 showing on naturalism how liberalism is
1:03:49 true how we are all born equal the fact
1:03:51 I'm told you know your average high
1:03:54 we're all different
1:03:56 or naturalism were all different
1:04:11 Mohamad initially said that his main
1:04:15 point tonight was the argument from
1:04:18 contingency the problem is to say that
1:04:22 there must be a necessary being for
1:04:24 everything that is contingent requires
1:04:27 that the necessary contingent situation
1:04:32 plays out in an environment with cause
1:04:34 and effect and yet Mohammed has always
1:04:36 said that the universe had a beginning
1:04:40 and there was nothing before and that
1:04:44 God created the universe out of nothing
1:04:46 here is the problem you cannot analogize
1:04:50 from cause-and-effect and necessary and
1:04:54 contingent beings from within time and
1:04:58 space as opposed to the very coming into
1:05:01 being of time and space in the first
1:05:03 place if in fact the Big Bang as is most
1:05:08 likely nothing preceded it there was no
1:05:11 time and space you can have no cause and
1:05:14 effect and we can't even speak of cause
1:05:16 and effect because there was no
1:05:18 environment for a to cause B now with
1:05:23 respect to the notion of a necessary and
1:05:26 contingent being there's a problem with
1:05:29 the concept of a necessary being the
1:05:31 problem is that a necessary fact cannot
1:05:33 explain a contingent fact without
1:05:36 introducing a new contingent fact in
1:05:38 need of explanation now let's see why
1:05:40 this is so if a necessary fact cannot
1:05:43 explain a contingent fact except by
1:05:45 entailing it because any fact entailed
1:05:48 by necessary fact must itself be
1:05:51 necessary
1:05:52 however the necessary fact does not
1:05:54 entail the contingent fact then the
1:05:56 explanatory connection it has to the
1:05:58 contingent fact must be a contingent one
1:06:01 which introduces a new contingent fact
1:06:04 in need of explanation and if the Fenner
1:06:06 of the argument replies that this new
1:06:08 contingent fact can also explain by the
1:06:12 necessary fact then the same reasoning
1:06:15 will apply introducing yet another new
1:06:17 contingent fact in need of explanation
1:06:19 and so ad infinitum but the whole reason
1:06:23 for introducing necessary fact in the
1:06:27 first place was to avoid an infinite
1:06:31 regress of explanations now Mohammed
1:06:34 said that we cannot even call something
1:06:38 evil unless we have a moral foundation
1:06:41 implying that objective moral values can
1:06:45 only exist with a supernatural being but
1:06:49 he doesn't explain what the connection
1:06:51 is for instance I've shown you in the
1:06:53 Bible and the Quran where though
1:06:57 Muhammad resists it men are supposed to
1:06:59 be in charge of women I've showed you in
1:07:01 both the Bible and the Quran where
1:07:04 people are sent to hell forever for not
1:07:07 just choosing the right respective
1:07:10 religion to say that we are in no
1:07:13 position to judge whether God's doing
1:07:16 that is right or wrong
1:07:17 totally eclipses human reason and
1:07:20 there's another problem with that to say
1:07:22 objective moral values depend on God you
1:07:25 have to ask is something good just
1:07:29 because God says it is then it's
1:07:31 arbitrary and even sending sincere
1:07:34 people to hell forever for not believing
1:07:36 in the right religion would be okay just
1:07:39 because God said it or to always tell us
1:07:43 to do what is good but the standard of
1:07:45 the good is independent of God then it
1:07:49 means that objective moral values exist
1:07:53 without being created by God by God
1:07:56 recognizes them and you can't get out of
1:07:59 it by saying well no the good comes from
1:08:01 God's perfect nature because we don't
1:08:03 see that perfect nature now as far as
1:08:06 the dependence of consciousness on the
1:08:08 physical brain is concerned nothing
1:08:11 mental happens without anything physical
1:08:15 happening there is no thought or
1:08:18 awareness that comes into the human
1:08:21 brain without a physical event in the
1:08:24 brain this is very very important
1:08:27 again if consciousness could exist apart
1:08:30 from the brain
1:08:32 then diseases and anesthetics wouldn't
1:08:35 eclipse consciousness now he talks about
1:08:38 the coherence of the universe and he
1:08:42 thinks the argument from scale is not a
1:08:45 problem but it certainly is if as a
1:08:50 somebody who believes in the Quran
1:08:52 because he quotes the Quran a lot he
1:08:55 believes in a God for whom humans is
1:08:58 central in concern then why all these
1:09:01 excess septillion x' of planets also if
1:09:05 in fact the universe is so perfectly put
1:09:09 together why will the star upon which we
1:09:12 depend the Sun burn out in a very short
1:09:16 span of time and then after that we will
1:09:21 die because the earth will no longer
1:09:24 have the Sun and there can't be life on
1:09:27 Earth without the Sun also with respect
1:09:31 to the whole concept of naturalism
1:09:34 Muhammed can't just like I saw in one of
1:09:38 his tapes he tried to say that we can
1:09:40 infer the existence of God from the
1:09:42 functioning of the universe just like we
1:09:44 can infer the existence of gravity from
1:09:48 the way gravity operates but you see
1:09:50 definitionally gravity as I dropped
1:09:53 something it hits the floor or hits the
1:09:56 table
1:09:57 but that doesn't show that there is a
1:09:59 supernatural source behind it in terms
1:10:04 of the laws of nature the constants and
1:10:07 the fine-tuning as far as that's
1:10:10 concerned
1:10:11 well the laws of physics as they appear
1:10:14 cannot be violated but if they are and
1:10:17 if you change one constant and the other
1:10:20 studies have shown you can still have
1:10:22 life for instance there was a study that
1:10:25 showed that you can eliminate the weak
1:10:27 nuclear force one of the four forces and
1:10:30 stars could still form ifs could form
1:10:33 and explode becoming supernovae then
1:10:36 planets could still come about we've
1:10:39 also seen that there is a argument from
1:10:44 cosmic inflation which
1:10:46 demonstrated the Cosmic Microwave
1:10:48 Background and the way inflation works
1:10:51 with quantum mechanics that are could be
1:10:53 a multiverse numbers and numbers of
1:10:56 individual universes each with their own
1:10:59 pockets of different physical laws this
1:11:02 hasn't been established by proof but yet
1:11:04 it is a better argument than theism
1:11:07 because it has a Basics in physics and
1:11:10 it has natural laws that are explainable
1:11:13 the other thing that Muhammad has not
1:11:15 yet addressed is he would have to admit
1:11:19 that in 99% of all instances in human
1:11:24 technological process when science has
1:11:27 looked for an answer it has found a
1:11:30 natural answer so what would be those
1:11:34 instances that differentiate the need
1:11:37 for a natural answer to a supernatural
1:11:40 one in other words if we look at a cell
1:11:44 or a bacteria the way it behaves natural
1:11:47 explanation but we look at something
1:11:49 else and our answer is only God did it
1:11:52 there's a world of difference between
1:11:54 looking at the fact that planets revolve
1:11:59 around the Sun and that stars don't fall
1:12:03 out of the sky
1:12:03 except when they explode as supernovae
1:12:05 and going outside right now and seeing
1:12:09 the constellations saying Eddie and
1:12:12 Muhammad you're both wrong you better
1:12:14 become Mormons there's a world of
1:12:16 difference between those two that would
1:12:19 be a supernatural event also Muhammad
1:12:23 has never been able to and I don't blame
1:12:25 him because no one can can show how if
1:12:28 in fact consciousness depends on a
1:12:31 physical brain how the greatest
1:12:34 intelligence in the universe can exist
1:12:37 and think and function without a
1:12:40 physical brain how can there be a God
1:12:43 that doesn't have cortical neurons and
1:12:46 synapses how does God think when all the
1:12:49 evidence shows that the occurrence of
1:12:51 thought requires cortical neurons and
1:12:54 synapses and also if God is outside of
1:12:57 space and time God cannot be
1:12:59 personal being because by very
1:13:01 definition a personal being is defined
1:13:04 as something within space and time that
1:13:08 has limits
1:13:09 so again naturalism prevails over
1:13:13 supernaturalism by the weight of the
1:13:15 evidence and we can see that there has
1:13:20 never been any verified supernatural
1:13:22 occurrences and we have seen no evidence
1:13:25 of any mental process that can exist in
1:13:30 a disembodied state so the evidence to
1:13:33 date makes it more likely than not the
1:13:35 universe is natural not supernatural and
1:13:37 there is no God thank you
1:13:39 [Applause]
1:13:49 thank you very much to both of the
1:13:51 debaters both brother Muhammad a job and
1:13:53 Edward tabash so the next session would
1:13:56 be the question and answer between them
1:13:58 both however just because of the timing
1:14:00 and because not