Debate: Does God Exist? Hamza Tzortzis vs. Humanist

[itismehonest]

Hamza's three opening proofs for a deity have all been shown invalid. Physics/cosmology/logic demonstrate we don't need either a causal being (quantum mechanics), fine-tuning (it really *is* due to chance, probably) or divine morality -- evolution can develop morality. Even if one proof were coherent, no reason for this deity to be allah.

[mo98183]

LOL, the Humanist starts getting a bit edgy and goes "don't teach me! you're not my teacher".

Humanists compassion and humility demonstration fail.

[khalilrabee]

poor atheists...they have no idea what they are losing...i hope this man will become a muslim...

the thing is that if we assume that one of us is wrong, and assume that we muslims are wrong then there is no problem because we simply disapear, but if they are wrong and die in that state they will a lot of trouble...eternal trouble...

[lockwyn]

The humanist told us how it is, made it pretty clear to me tbh! I dont believe in any god or gods. I think that ALL religions are made by men. christianity, islam, buddism, hinduism etc. But I think its important that people can believe in what ever they want.

[ginsuthaironchef]

Who organized this debate? Hamza did a great job and make strong arguments, but Phillip did a terrible job of arguing Humanism and Atheism.

Although Hamza's argument was MUCH stronger, it was not a fair debate.

This was a "strawman" representation of Humanism and Atheism.

The question and answer portion was especially unfair and bias. The whole thing looked like they organized a fight between Mayweather and a chump paid too lose.

[glower125]

wow, this is life a heavy weight (hamza) fighting a toddler (nathan). I think hamza should debate the giants of atheism/humanism. I don't they'll dare to debate him, I think dawkins and hitchens will be totally humiliated.

[Mustamaggara]

First of all, Tzortzis first says that God, the chooser, the cause

for time and the universe, is not part of this universe and spacetime,

and is no subject to time. So that cause

is in a place with no boundaries and no time. Why could there not be

infinite number of causes behind the cause for our universe?

He desides to get to the cause behind the birth of the universe and

to stop there. But why? Even if the cause was personal, that cause

was an effect of something.

[EnjoiningKnowlege]

@Mustamaggara Infinite # of causes = infinite regression of past causes = logical impossibility. The Cause is Necessarily uncaused, and the "Necessary Existent" (i.e. needed to explain all of temporal reality, but needs nothing apart from Himself to exist).

[lemuriavi]

I think humanist and atheist are too afraid to watch this debate because they know they'll go ripped off. Might explain why this fine debate got little views.

[giftedsa]

Unfortunately some of educated people believe in such non-scientific and subjective ideas as Humanism!! If someone can't understand Newton's partial theory that does not mean that the theory is not exist or it has to be wrong!!

First you should understand then you can believe. But it's just a shame and illogical to make a different believe system because you just didn't understand the other one!!!

[CanIRunWithYou]

At 17:50 - "He says it's ten to the power of ten. Which is ten, and add 123 zeroes."

If Tzortzis is going to make arguments from probability, he should probably learn some math.

[Lizzio1980]

@CanIRunWithYou Lol do you know even what the power of ten is? Hahaha

[IsIamic]

Alhamdulilah, Hamza was very eloquent. That humanist got ripped apart! lol.

[AfghDude]

This humanist is very very boring and repeats his self all the time.

He dont goes into the arguments of brother Hamza cuz he can't.

Hamza again was very very good.

[muslimah871]

hamza used maths science as a basis for his logical argument while the other guy is just bullet pointing his humanist beliefs.

[IslamicRevolutionTV]

Masha'Allah

What is the word used in the Alexander Balankin qoute?

It begins with an "M" @ 12:18

[ALUVEEE]

i was there and brother Hamza (may Allah reward him the paradise ) was amazing , and Mr Nathan said debating with muslims is totally different of debating christians or jewishs & he took a copy from the Quraan to read it

[brightskylight686]

mashallah

[RoadtoMecca]

This topic obviously veers onto whether we need God or not, which is different to whether God exists I feel, but maybe others don't think they are different arguments.

Fascinating as ever and as always I enjoy hearing Hamza Tzortzis speak.

Just today I attended a talk on quantum science (hence all the mentions of it!) and Hinduism, which, if nothing else, made me think about perspectives interpretations of evidence. I don't know if I'll ever get answers but I'll enjoy the pursuit!

[h4qq]

Peace be upon you,

I feel like the debate focuses on the concept of why should it matter if God does exist? if God does exist, then He created us for a purpose, and we would be better off to know what the purpose is, in order to fulfill it. as a Muslim, we know that God does not need us, as prescribed in the Qur'an, so it implies that we need Him, in order to attain the reward of the Hereafter. but indeed, it was an interesting debate, and Hamza is always great to hear :)

[msunav]

MashaAllah. May Allah give this brother more and more!

[ALGfunk]

mashalah!

[izzharudeen]

Barak Allahu feek. Br. Hamza is amazing. I'm beginning to like him more and more for the sake of Allah. Learned something which I've been pondering upon for quite a while of, which I couldn't really explain through words. He summed it up quite nicely starting at 21:00 to 24:30 in regards to morality.