Dan Barker VS Hassanain Rajabali.

Previous page 1 2« Previous thread | Next thread »
- DigDeep
- Pub Regular
- Prophet of Orgasm
- offline
Re: Dan Barker VS Hassanain Rajabali.
Reply #30 - August 26, 2009, 06:29 PM

Agreed. But still Baker comes off better in the end i think. He is just calmer and focused.

on another note, Pakmans avatar makes me realy horny... I will need to confront my girlfriend with my newest erotic roleplay fantasy... *drool*

"We are never deceived, we deceive ourselves." - from Goethes Faust
"Only the wisest and the stupidest men never change." - Confuzios
"there is no religion of peace, only people who are peaceful while being religious."
- Omaar Khayaam
- Ex-Muslim
- offline
Re: Dan Barker VS Hassanain Rajabali.
Reply #31 - October 07, 2009, 01:50 AM

Quote from: Omaar Khayaam on August 26, 2009, 07:34 AM
.....and there's more! I've not seen this one. It's the same two guys and two others.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oocFLfoT0Q4&feature=PlayList&p=E5AB5FD77DBAF50A&index=0

I just finished watching this debate. I thought both parties were slightly wishy washy. One note to add is that there was a fair bit of question begging on the part of the muslims. The best part of the debate was the Q & A. One of the things that the muslim side did state is the "big bang" in the Quran, this resulted in a fair bit of "takbirs" from the audience. However this issue was rebutted by the atheist side by stating Thales and how he said similar things 1000 years before it was stated in the Quran. The debate is worth watching for entertainment value more than anything else.
- Omaar Khayaam
- Ex-Muslim
- offline
Re: Dan Barker VS Hassanain Rajabali.
Reply #32 - October 11, 2009, 12:16 AM

Guy's, I've just read the reviews written by Richard Carrier on these debates. If you are not familiar, Riachard Carrier is a philosopher and writer on infidels.org. His lectures and essays are very clear and thought out.

In the first debate which was in 2003 Richard had this to say about it:-

http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/richard_carrier/barker-rajabali.html

Richard took part in the second debate and had this to say:-

http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/richard_carrier/barkercarrier.html

Richard has made some very thought provoking comments on both debates.
- NineBerry
- Tame Wolf
- Pub Regular
- offline
Re: Dan Barker VS Hassanain Rajabali.
Reply #33 - October 11, 2009, 12:40 AM

I like the part at the very beginning where the muslim organizer says:

"hopefully today after everybody speaks, then we'll all be better educated on the belief in God and the belief in ... eh .. the other ... eh groups ... eh ... who *mumble* mumbe*"

bleed for me...kill for me...die for me
- NineBerry
- Tame Wolf
- Pub Regular
- offline
Re: Dan Barker VS Hassanain Rajabali.
Reply #34 - October 11, 2009, 12:49 AM

Woah. 18 minutes in and it's still introduction.

I want to see some action

bleed for me...kill for me...die for me
- Omaar Khayaam
- Ex-Muslim
- offline
Re: Dan Barker VS Hassanain Rajabali.
Reply #35 - December 01, 2009, 12:10 AM

Guys,

Did anyone attend the Dan Barker vs Adam Deen debate at all today? Apparantly Dan Barker got a hard time. Here is some feedback I got off someone.

Quote
Dan had a bit of a tough time , was a very muslim crowd-- applauses all round for when adam deen made a point- that kind of thing. I think the worst time for Dan was when he was challenged for contradictions in quran, he couldnt think of much -- thus pleasing the crowd , but if anyone does a search on google -- there are a lot, much like the bible. -- maybe he should brush up on his knowledge of islam before he takes on another muslim guy because they will definately bark up that tree and he should get some real ammunition as muslims think the quran is some kind of perfect supernatural text.

Adam deen himself is well spoken and very good at arguing , still no substance, just a shiny new cover, its not as if many muslims actually think of stuff the way he does, most just follow culture, a lot dont even know arabic or even the history of islam. He is quite slimy and will turn the argument from his direction to the opposite , its quite skilled. This is the Islamic answer to the new wave of athiests-- someone who studies a lot and talks crap!
- kaiwai
- Pub Regular
- Meh, could be worse
- offline
Re: Dan Barker VS Hassanain Rajabali.
Reply #36 - December 01, 2009, 05:45 AM

The debate is a well tuned piece of wankery - the better debate would be over a Muslim proving Islam is the truth based on empirical evidence and no linguistic gymnastics and vague ayah's taken out of context.

"It's just a job. Grass grows, birds fly, waves pound the sand. I beat people up." - Muhammad Ali
- osmanthus
- Cave dwelling
- Pub Regular
- Fingerer of piglets
- offline
Re: Dan Barker VS Hassanain Rajabali.
Reply #37 - December 01, 2009, 07:08 AM

I haven't watched all the vids yet but I did read Carrier's summary of the first debate. This point in particular stood out:

Quote from: Richard Carrier
By the time Q & A was about to begin, it was clear to me that Rajabali had not established any reason to believe even if God existed. I was also curious what the Muslim position was on this, since it ties directly into the ethics of condemning to eternal torture those whose only crime is a mere lack of belief. So my first question was, in short, Why believe? Won?t Allah treat all equally good men equally regardless? Rajabali?s answer was decidedly uncompassionate (basically, atheists deserve what they get) and Barker was able to employ this to show how ethically questionable Rajabali?s belief in God was (a fair enough tactic given Rajabali?s own attacks on the character and moral position of atheists).

Devious, treacherous, murderous, neanderthal, sub-human of the West.
- Omaar Khayaam
- Ex-Muslim
- offline
Re: Dan Barker VS Hassanain Rajabali.
Reply #38 - December 01, 2009, 02:46 PM

I suppose Adam Deen will be feeling fairly smug about this, having got one over Dan Barker, who is considered a prolific debater.
- King Koopa
- Ex-Muslim
- Your Mom's Favorite Lover
- offline
Re: Dan Barker VS Hassanain Rajabali.
Reply #39 - February 27, 2010, 06:46 PM

Quote from: DigDeep on August 25, 2009, 10:22 PM
Oh here we go again...

now he is attacking Dan personalie... Wow, worst debater EVER!

Still saying that atheists cant see the *bigger picture*

Oh, and i absolutly hate it when theist take statements out of context.
Im talking about the angry about nature argument... STUPID!!

Edit: OMG is this guy serious?! Only God can give us morality?! ONLY GOD?!
Okay, i have to go beat a nun to death on a pile of dead puppies now! Why?! because i dont believe in God...

Aaaaaand still. Life is complex so there must be a creator! *puke*

Edit2: I cant believe there are people out there who are convinced by this absolute nonsense that there is a god. I mean... really?! REALLY?!

You get my BD Seal of Funny

it has the logo of a baby seal ROFL
- King Koopa
- Ex-Muslim
- Your Mom's Favorite Lover
- offline
Re: Dan Barker VS Hassanain Rajabali.
Reply #40 - February 27, 2010, 07:07 PM

That people don't realize being a great debater is not something of real value. It does not change truth. It does not change reality. Or facts. It just proves presentation. That people at the end of the day don't try to find the truth themselves is incredible.

Would they put their life and faith into the hands of politicians? No of course not! How many times have we not been disappointed with politicians and governments? Or with Kings,, Queens and Emperors?

What besides faith can prove that Imams and Priests and Temples and Mosques don't deceive us? Just because an Imam sincerely believes in something and acts well does not mean anything. He could be acting. If so, then everybody else that believes just as much and acts just as well but does not believe in the same thing is also saying the truth. How is this possible?

Just because something is incredible does not make it true. The creationism of Scientology is incredible and fantastic, does it make it more true? Or even true at all?

At the end of the day studying and thinking for yourself is all that matters. Clapping your hands when your party makes a point turns the whole thing into a spectacle, an "intellectual" 8 Mile rap battle contest. Minus the raising of roofs and hollerings of "choke, choke, choke".
- Mughal
- Ex-Muslim
- offline
Re: Dan Barker VS Hassanain Rajabali.
Reply #41 - February 27, 2010, 08:43 PM

Yes I posted this link on another thread.

http://www.atheistforums.com/judaism-v-christianity-v-islam-v-atheism-t20451.html

Did anyone notice how muslims constructed the proposition? They tried to lay burden of proof on dan. Obviously muslims are showing lack of knowledge to begin with because the claim of existence for muslim god is made by muslims not by dan.

Dan was only cornered a bit by morality question but other than that he handled it very nicely.

I am a student of quran and islam and not an exmuslim.
- Omaar Khayaam
- Ex-Muslim
- offline
Re: Dan Barker VS Hassanain Rajabali.
Reply #42 - February 27, 2010, 08:54 PM

I think the reason why the burden of proof was shifted to Dan was because the in islamic theology the existence of God is supposed to be self evident, hence the onus is on the atheist to disprove him.
- Mughal
- Ex-Muslim
- offline
Re: Dan Barker VS Hassanain Rajabali.
Reply #43 - February 27, 2010, 10:07 PM

No dear Omaar Khayaam, no religious theology believes the existence of god is self evident. They believe that believing in the existence of god is a matter of faith. The reason it is a matter of faith is because there is no proof of existence of god.

In the quran in the first few verses of surah 2 this is made abundantly clear. ALLA dhina yu minoona bil ghaib=those who believe in the unseen=undetectable by senses. Only known through his revelation to his messengers.

So muslims who try to prove existence of allah through evidences are actually going against the quran but then the quran itself uses such philosophical arguments ie it tells people look at this or that, how do you think it came about if allah did not create it?

So cause and effect chain is used to show that ultimate cause has to be the creator ie allah. These are all circular arguments. Also they keep switching between revelation and philosophy as proof of their god's existence. They also bring in miracles in this equation as and when it suits them. So their tree has a few branches they try each in turn. Starting with revelation then philosophy then miracles then back to revelation and so on and so forth.

regards and all the best.

I am a student of quran and islam and not an exmuslim.
- deusvult
- O......O
- Pub Regular
- offline
Re: Dan Barker VS Hassanain Rajabali.
Reply #44 - February 27, 2010, 10:32 PM

The argument is so damn weak though.

" Look how pretty everything is! God must have done it!"

" Now go kill everyone who doesn't see those exact same things and think wow there must be an invisible person who Iv never seen or heard of to create it"

" Oh without this invisible being everyone would be totally immoral, stupid immoral heathens, make sure you kill them and rape their women "

So once again I'm left with the classic Irish man's dilemma, do I eat the potato or do I let it ferment so I can drink it later?
My political philosophy below
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bwGat4i8pJI&feature=g-vrec
Just kidding, here are some true heros
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dBTgvK6LQqA
- King Koopa
- Ex-Muslim
- Your Mom's Favorite Lover
- offline
Re: Dan Barker VS Hassanain Rajabali.
Reply #45 - February 27, 2010, 10:36 PM

Morals before Judaism existed. Morals outside the Judeo-Christian world existed and exists. That somehow the Abrahamic religions have a monopoly on morals is absurd. Especially in the light of them not agreeing between the morals and moral values changing. How many people today do not cringe at a flogging? Or repulsed by a stoning? Or marriage to a 9 year old?
Previous page 1 2« Previous thread | Next thread »