Ben Affleck, Sam Harris and Bill Maher Debate Radical Islam | Real Time with Bill Maher (HBO)

[@mattyboyd4045]

Ben Affleck is like all 5 ladies on the View combined.

[@starcrafter13terran]

He has more estrogen.

[@tp3039]

lmao.. nailed it

[@Themindofreyrey]

Matt Boyd 😂

[@issacdavis3767]

Matt Boyd Whoopie Cushion and Joyless, my favorite.

[@christiannovay4343]

except for the conservative one.

[@aquitelastraigopiter]

Can't figure out why is Ben Affleck so angry at Ben Stiller...

[@pltatman1]

Nice.

[@ashleylavergne4327]

Mulguti Lol. That's not Ben Stiller...

[@myNarrator]

There can only be one Ben.

[@luz8010]

evil ben stiller

[@kosmosbjm]

Ben seems off, way too upset, cannot talk normally and is ruining the conversation. Overly angry and It’s a huge turnoff.

[@stephenojwang5785]

After listening to Ben rant, i realized I'm kind of a genius myself.

[@piotrfraczek7772]

yes HE MADE ME FEELGOOD ABOUT MY SELF

[@thefrontporch3591]

After listening to Ben rant, I realized why he played LEGO Batman and not The Dark Knight Batman.

[@Raffini]

@@thefrontporch3591 LEGO Batman is Will Arnett. He's awesome!

[@farruholimov7216]

Ben might bot be the best debater. But This Not fair! Everybody is mocking Ben Affleck! How about Sam?! He said he is well educated in Islam. I highly doubt that. Go watch Oxford debate about Islam, you will get answers for Sam! And stop basing your facts to polls all the time. If polls were so true, Trump would never be a president.

[@maddssane]

@@farruholimov7216 Maybe if you were well educated in that subject you would agree with Sam, I was born in a Muslim family and a Muslim country and I approve of everything he's saying; That if you announce you're leaving Islam you're a dead man and that's the original idea, not just some radical interpretation. Ben Affleck is being stupid for not listening and interrupting him constantly! My advice to you is replay the video and try to understand what Sam Harris is saying if you could hear him over Ben shouting angrily and non-stop.

[@robpolaris7272]

“That’s big of you” Matt Damon must be the most patient man on earth.

[@user-pz1bc9bc6o]

Matt Damon is as twisted as his " Cambridge " bud

[@ranro7371]

Christendom is the empirial religion, born under the auspices of constantine, the subjects were converted at the edge of the sword and rendered into slaves for his majesty, often referring to him as their lord. In Islam such slavery is unthinkable. The only lordship is that of the creator, no station into which man was brought into the lands of Islam was to any degree as bad as the repugnant chattel slavery brought by the primitive tribalism inherent in their texts. Constantine chose regularly to refer to himself as the “servant of God” (famulus dei/therapon tou theou) in official writings. By the fifth century, this metaphor of subordination had been redeployed from theological to political contexts as the subjects of the emperor came to refer to themselves as “slaves of the emperor.” And by the sixth, Justinian insisted all his officials swear an oath that they would demonstrate their service to the emperor “with genuine slavehood” (gnesia douleia).b Building on Paul’s revalorization of the vocabulary of slavery, and particularly the word doulos came to be applied to a variety of hierarchical relationships, even as it also continued to be used specifically of chattel slaves. By the middle Byzantine period, this expansion of the semantic range of the root doul- eventually gave the abstract nominal form douleia, meaning laborer Insofar as everyone who partook in labor was considered to be a participant This epistemological world view is coherent with master-slave dynamic relationship between the head of the state and his subjects, or rather slaves. The word עוֹלֵל, ʿôlēl which means 'Babe, infant, little one, a suckling' occurs 21 King James Bible Verses Of these verses: “Happy shall he be, that taketh and dasheth thy little ones against the stones.” -Psalm 137:9 “Now go and smite Amalek, and utterly destroy all that they have, and spare them not; but slay both man and woman, infant and suckling, ox and sheep, camel and ass.”-1 Samuel 15:3 “Samaria shall become desolate; for she hath rebelled against her God: they shall fall by the sword: their infants shall be dashed in pieces, and their women with child shall be ripped up.”-Hosea 13:16 The other verses are not much different. Infact it is always in association with violence. Indeed these verses are the reason why in the Crusades the sense of pious rejoicing at massacre does not appear to be the product of later theologizing; it is also found, in the account of the eye-witness Raymond of Aguilers: “in the Temple and porch of Solomon, men rode in blood up to their knees and bridle reins. Indeed, it was a just and splendid judgment of God that this place should be filled with the blood of the unbelievers, since it had suffered so long from their blasphemies.” In fact, Raymond continues, “This day, I say, will be famous in all future ages, for it turned our labours and sorrows into joy and exultation; this day, I say, marks the justification of all Christianity, the humiliation of paganism, and the renewal of our faith.” Another account by a chronicler and eyewitness-priest, Albert of Aachen, describes the killing of fleeing women, and depicts crusaders as:: “seizing [infants who were still suckling] by the soles of their feet from their mothers’ laps or their cradles…and dashing them against the walls or lintels of the doors and breaking their necks […] they were sparing absolutely no gentile of any age or kind.”The incoherence inherent in a stranger to Abraham calling the children of Abraham gentiles notwithstanding, this account evokes the very same Psalm 137:9 imprecation against Babylon, in Latin, “beatus qui tenebit et adlidet parvulos tuos ad petram.” Albert describes a massacre occurring, in cold blood, on the second day following the conquest, painting a scene that is as horrific as it is realistic and detailed: "Girls, women, matrons, tormented by fear of imminent death and horror-struck by the violent murder wrapped themselves around the Christians’ bodies in the hope to save their lives, even as the Christians were raving and venting their rage in murder of both sexes. Some threw themselves at their feet, begging them with pitiable weeping and wailing for their lives and safety. When children five or three years old saw the cruel fate of their mothers and fathers, of one accord they stepped up the weeping and pitiable clamour. But they were making these signals for pity and mercy in vain. For the Christians gave over their whole hearts to murder, so that not a suckling little male-child or female, not even an infant of one year would escape the hand of the murderer". Evoking several of these verses in practice: - (Num 31:17-18) Now therefore kill every male among the little ones, and kill every woman that hath known man by lying with him. But all the women children, that have not known a man by lying with him, keep alive for yourselves. - (Deut 7:2, 9:3, Num 21) thou shalt smite them, and utterly destroy them; thou shalt make no covenant with them, nor shew mercy unto them... - (Ezek 9:6) Slay utterly old [and] young both maids and little children and women: but come not near any man upon whom [is] mark begin at my sanctuary. This is the polar opposite in the Quran in Surah Al-Tanwir, literally "The Englightenining" Surah, Aya 8-9, we have the death of a newborn is mentioned amongst the penultimate signs of the end of times, emphasizing the gravity of such an action. That child, now resurrected, is asked for what wrong doing was she murdered. This is to emphasize that she had done nothing wrong, for she had done nothing wrong and this is the day of retribution where those who omitted the evil are to be punished. This is the polar opposite in the Qur'an, Surah Al-Baqara Aya 190, which exhorts to fight unbelievers and not be "Aggressors", in the commentary of what it means to be aggressors, this was stated Al-Hasan Al-Basri stated that transgression (indicated by the Ayah): "includes mutilating the dead, theft (from the captured goods), killing women, children and old people who do not participate in warfare, killing priests and residents of houses of worship, burning down trees and killing animals without real benefit." This is also the opinion of Ibn `Abbas, `Umar bin `Abdul-`Aziz, Muqatil bin Hayyan and others. Muslim recorded in his Sahih that Buraydah narrated that Allah's Messenger said: "Fight for the sake of Allah and fight those who disbelieve in Allah. Fight, but do not steal, commit treachery, mutilate, or kill a child, or those who reside in houses of worship." It is reported in the Two Sahihs that Ibn `Umar said, "The Prophet forbade killing women and children." بابتداء القتال أو بقتال من نهيتم عن قتاله من النساء والشيوخ والصبيان والذين بينكم وبينهم عهد أو بالمثلة أو بالمفاجأة من غير دعوة "To kill those whom you were forbidden to from women, elderly, children and those whom betwixt you is a treaty or custom or by surprise or without cause" -Tafsir Al-Zamakshari of the meaning of Aggressors in the Aya More hadith from Musannaf Ibn Abi Shaybah: حَدَّثَنَا حُمَيْدُ بْنُ عَبْدِ الرَّحْمَنِ، عَنْ شَيْخٍ، مِنْ أَهْلِ الْمَدِينَةِ مَوْلَى لِبَنِي عَبْدِ الْأَشْهَلِ، عَنْ دَاوُدَ، عَنْ عِكْرِمَةَ، عَنِ ابْنِ عَبَّاسٍ أَنَّ النَّبِيَّ صَلَّى اللهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ كَانَ إِذَا بَعَثَ جُيُوشَهُ قَالَ: «§لَا تَقْتُلُوا أَصْحَابَ الصَّوَامِعِ» "Do not kill the dwellers of monasteries" حَدَّثَنَا ابْنُ فُضَيْلٍ، عَنْ جُوَيْبِرٍ، عَنِ الضَّحَّاكِ قَالَ: كَانَ «§يُنْهَى عَنْ قَتْلِ الْمَرْأَةِ، وَالشَّيْخِ الْكَبِيرِ» سَعْدٍ قَالَ: «§نَهَى رَسُولُ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ عَنْ قَتْلِ النِّسَاءِ وَالذُّرِّيَّةِ، وَالشَّيْخِ الْكَبِيرِ الَّذِي لَا حَرَاكَ بِهِ» "The prophet forbids the killing of women, children, and the elderly" This is the polar opposite in the Qur'an, Surah Al-Anfal Ayah 61 in which even oath breaking deniers/unbelievers are allowed to sue for peace states if the unbelievers they ask for peace, give it to them. Stephen Langton, the writer of the Magna Carta (12th century, contemporary with the crusades for a reason) studied in the university of Paris which archives show had plenty of Arabic treatises in its procession, there can be no question about it being inspired by the "Sharia". both the renessiance and the european enlightenment were directly preceded by massive translation movements form Arabic (see the Republic of Letters by Alexander Bevilacqua, The House of Wisdom: How the Arabs Transformed Western Civilization By: Jonathan Lyons. The modifiable testament testament commands indiscriminate killing, genocide, plunder, mutilation, enslavement, or torture of enemies, including women, on the other hand.Surah Al-Baqara Aya 190 limits war to those who fight against Muslims, prohibits transgression, and implies respect for human dignity and life Indeed it is what precedes the famous "sword verse", always cited out of context. God did bring down the Qur’an, Mohamed is his Messenger.

[@ranro7371]

Surah Al-Imran Aya 49, of the Quran states that jesus was sent to the israelites, although written over 1,300 years ago in the 19th century (same century bible was only transtalted into Arabic in as well) they came to the same conclusion, He never used or heard the words Christian or Christianity or any equivalent of either. Paul had neither met nor seen Jesus, his relation to the twelve apostles was one of decided independence and even of opposition. He acknowledged no subordination to them. He addressed no doctrinal epistle to them or their churches, and received none from them. He made no reports to them. He did not correspond with them regularly. They never invited him to preach to their congregations and he never invited them to address his converts. He declared that he did not owe his conversion, his baptism, or his doctrine to the twelve, and that he never spent any long time in Jerusalem or in Judea as a Christian missionary. He claimed to be an apostle by a secret divine commission, but the twelve never admitted the validity of his claim. They never gave him the title of apostle; they never said anything indicative of willingness to admit him into their councils. Vacancies occurred in their number, but they never chose him to a vacant place, rather we have statements of Peter with regards to Paul which show nothing but animosity: "And if our Jesus appeared to you also and became known in a vision and met you as angry with an enemy [recall: Paul had his vision while still persecuting the Christians: Acts 9], yet he has spoken only through visions and dreams or through external revelations. But can anyone be made competent to teach through a vision? And if your opinion is that that is possible, why then did our teacher spend a whole year with us who were awake? How can we believe you even if he has appeared to you?… But if you were visited by him for the space of an hour and were instructed by him and thereby have become an apostle, then proclaim his words, expound what he has taught, be a friend to his apostles and do not contend with me, who am his confidant; for you have in hostility withstood me, who am a firm rock, the foundation stone of the Church" -Homily 17 Section XIX On the pauline credo currently called trinitanity Peter said "For some from among the Gentiles have rejected my lawful preaching and have preferred a lawless and absurd doctrine to the man who is my enemy. And indeed some have attempted, while I am still alive, to distort my words by interpretations of many sorts, as if I taught the dissolution of the law… But that may God forbid ! For to do such a thing means to act contrary to the Law of God which was made to Moses and was confirmed by our Lord in its everlasting continuance. For he said, “The heaven and the earth will pass away, but not one jot or one tittle shall pass away from the Law.” -Letter of Peter to James, 2.3-5 Soon after Jesus had selected his twelve apostles, according to Luke, he " gave them power and authority over all devils and to cure diseases. And he sent them to preach the kingdom of God, and to heal the sick. And he said unto them: 'Take nothing for your journey, neither staves nor scrip, neither bread, neither money; neither have two coats apiece. And whatsoever house ye enter, there abide and thence depart. And whosoever will not receive you, when ye go out of that city shake off the very dust from your feet for a testimony against them." This is the entire charge of Jesus to his apostles when he sent them out to convert the world, as reported by Luke, who claims to give the address or a portion of it, and that presumably the most important portion, word for word. The language here attributed to Jesus conveys no idea that he had any purpose of founding a new church. Neither here nor anywhere else, in the language attributed to him in the New Testament, does he explain the phrase " the kingdom of God " to mean a new ecclesiastical organization. In several passages he does use it to signify the celestial dominion after the destruction of the world; and this is therefore presumably its meaning everywhere. The gospel of Matthew is much further than that of Luke in its report of the charge of Jesus to his apostles: "These twelve Jesus sent forth and commanded them, saying: 'Go not into the way of the Gentiles, and into any city of the Samaritans enter ye not; but go rather to the lost sheep of the house of Israel.", "Think not that I am come to send peace on earth; I am come not to send peace, but a sword. For I am come to set a man at variance against his father, and the daughter against her mother... He that receiveth a prophet in the name of a prophet, shall receive a prophet's reward; and he that receiveth a righteous man shall receive a righteous man's reward." This charge, as reported by Matthew omitted nearly all the main ideas that would have been appropriate in an address instructing the twelve to preach the foundation of Christianity. It does not say whether Jesus wished to reform or to supersede Judaism; whether his principal purpose was ecclesiastical, moral, political, or sanitary. The remarks about healing the sick and casting out devils is the most explicit of all the instructions. Certainly no reader can learn from that charge that Jesus intended to establish a new religion; and much less can he learn any feature of the faith or discipline of a projected new church. And this address is that portion of the New Testament where such information should be given most clearly. He made no doctrinal definition and no ecclesiastical organization. He did not use the key words of the original doctrines necessary to Christianity or a new church, nor the keywords of ideas afterwards associated with Christianity, such as Incarnation, Trinity, Immaculate Conception, and Transubstantiation. The subjects to which the most space or most prominence is given in the sayings attributed, in the gospels, to Jesus, are, First, the Mosaic law; Second, judgment day; Third, faith; Fourth, the sins of the Pharisees; Fifth, ascetic morality; and Sixth, his divine commission. Triune nonsense is straight out of the Roman Pantheon. Hercules, anyone? Cerberus? The trinity of Zeus, Athena Apollo, literally called the Triune. Greek goddess Hecate was portrayed in triplicate, a three-in-one. This was all done to make the creed more digestible, followed by mental gymnastics attempting to reconcile the onsensical with elaborate theories. Why doesn't a square peg fit into a round hole? Answer by saying it's a mystery instead of geometries not lining up. No such thing as the bible, the new testament is a concoction of several books that were deemed canonical, books written in Greek that were given the hellenized names of Apotsles who neither wrote, nor spoke greek to give it an illusion of antiquity, much like the calendar we have today, which was established in the year 535 CE by Dionysus Exegesis so too was the original message altered to that of the pauline credo, a digestible religion to the yet to be converted greeks who had no desire to follow the mosaic laws. There never was such another epidemic of ecclesiastical forgery. The church was flooded with books attributed falsely to apostolic times and authors. The names of many of these books, and the texts of some, are preserved. Distinguished saints and learned fathers of the faith openly commended the invention and acceptance of false- hoods designed to aid the conversion of the world to what they believed to be truth. None of the disciples spoke of trinity, ate pork or proclaimed it is allowable to do so, yet the miracle begotten paul, whom peter called him enemy, introduced his new creed according to his whims It proclaimed the abrogation of the Mosaic ceremonial law. It announced itself as a new and independent religion; calling its adherents Christians, and their doctrine Christianity. Rationality was only born with Islam, those who cannot count have nothing to say, at the end of the day 1+1+1 will never equal 1 God did bring down the Qur’an, Mohamed is his Messenger.

[@ranro7371]

The Aramaic word for God is "Alaha" too sounds familiar? Written without the confusing vowels it is written A-L-H ܐ ܠܗܐ (alap-lamed-he) as found in Targum or in Tanakh (Daniel, Ezra), Syriac Aramaic (Peshitta), reduced from the Arabic original (of which Aramaic is a dialect continuum as will be explained) it is written in the Arabic script 'A-L-L-H' (Aleph-Lam-Lam-Ha) add an A before the last H for vocalization. The word God in another rendition in Hebrew ʾĕlōah is derived from a base ʾilāh, an Arabic word, written without confusing vowel it is A-L-H in the Arabic script, pronounced ilah not eloah. Hebrew dropped the glottal stop and mumbled it, aramic mumbled a little less and it became elaha. Infact both are written written A-L-H in Arabic, it is pronounced i in Arabic and not A because it is an Alef with hamza below (إ أ ) They are two different forms of Alef. And it mean "a god", it is the non definitive form of A-L-L-H, in which the Alef is without a glottal stop/hamza,(ا), but this kind of nuance is lost in the dialect continua. infact "YHWH" itself is an Arabic word as discussed by Professor. Israel Knohl (Professor of Biblical studies at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem) in the paper" YHWH: The Original Arabic Meaning of the Name." jesus as his name is often misspelled due to the lack of the ayin sound in Greek, which was rendered to Iesous, coupling the nearest sound to ayin, same letter found in 'Iraq', which sounds entirely different in Arabic form 'Iran' in Arabic, with the -ous Greek suffix that Greeks typically add to their names 'HerodotOS', 'PlotinUS', 'AchelOUS' and later mumbled into a J. The yeshua rendition of Isa (his name in the Qur'an) PBUH which is purported to be the name of Jesus is KNOWN to had been taken from greek. Western Syriac also use "Isho". Western Aramaic (separate from Syriac which is a dialect of Eastern Aramaic) use "Yeshu". Western Syriac has been separate from Western Aramaic for about 1000 years. And sounds don't even match up. Syriac is a Christian liturgical language yet the four letters of the name of Jesus «ܝܫܘܥ» [ = Judeo-Babylonian Aramaic: «ישוע» ] sounds totally different in West vs East Syriac, viz. vocalized akin to Christian Arabic, Hebrew, Aramaic «ܝܶܫܽܘܥ» (Yēšūʿ) in West Syriac, but pronounced more akin to Muslim Arabic Quran character name Isa in East Syriac «ܝܑܼܫܘܿܥ» (ʾĪšōʿ). The reason for this confusion is their dropping of phonemes. Only someone that has no idea what the letters are or how they sound would have a name ending in a pharyngeal fricative like the ayin, if it were to be used in a name it would have had to be in the beginning, thus the Arabic rendition is the correct one. An example in English is how the appended -d is a common error amongst the English pronouncing Gaelic names. The name Donald arose from a common English mispronunciation of the Gaelic name Donal. Just how it is with donal becoming donald and the two becoming distinct and the original being regarded as something seperate so too did Isa PBUH turn to Iesous turn to jesus and when they tried going back to the original they confused it for yeshua ( ysu is how it is actually written) for Isa PBUH ( 3'eysah ) Schlözer in his preparation for the Arabia expedition in 1781 coined the term Semitic language: "From the Mediterranean to the Euphrates, from Mesopotamia to Arabia ruled one language, as is well known. Thus Syrians, Babylonians, Hebrews, and Arabs were one people (ein Volk). Phoenicians (Hamites) also spoke this language, which I would like to call the Semitic (die Semitische)." -Before Boas: The Genesis of Ethnography and Ethnology in the German By Han F. Vermeulen. He was only half right though, Arabic is the only corollary to "proto-semitic", infact the whole semitic classification is nonsensical as will be shown. "protosemetic" Alphabet (28), Arabic Alphabet (28), Latin transliteration, hebrew (22) 𐩠 𐩡 𐩢 𐩣 𐩤 𐩥 𐩦 𐩧 𐩨 𐩩 𐩪 𐩫 𐩬 𐩭 𐩮 𐩰 𐩱 𐩲 𐩳 𐩴 𐩵 𐩶 𐩷 𐩸 𐩹 𐩺 𐩻 𐩼 ا ب ت ث ج ح خ د ذ ر ز س ش ص ض ط ظ ع غ ف ق ك ل م ن ه و ي A b t ṯ j h kh d ḏ r z s sh ṣ ḍ ṭ ẓ ʿ ġ f q k l m n h w y א ב ג ד ה ו ז ח ט י כ ל מ נ ס ע פ צ ק ר ש ת Merged phonemes in hebrew and aramaic: ح, خ (h, kh) merged into only kh consonant remain س, ش (s, sh) merged into only Shin consonant remaining ط, ظ (ṭ/teth, ẓ) merged into only ṭ/teth consonant remaining ص, ض (ṣ, ḍ/Tsad ) merged into only ḍ/Tsad consonant remaining ع, غ (3'ayn, Ghayn) merged into a reducted ayin consonant remaining ت, ث (t/taw, th) merged into only t/taw consonant remaining The reason why the protoS alphabet here is 28 and not 29, is because the supposed extra letter is simply a س written in a different position, but it was shoehorned to obfuscated. In Arabic letter shapes are different depending on whether they are in the beginning , middle or end of a word. As a matter of fact, all of the knowledge needed for deciphering ancient texts and their complexity was derived from the Qur'an. It was by analyzing the syntactic structure of the Qur'an that the Arabic root system was developed. This system was first attested to in Kitab Al-Ayin, the first intralanguage dictionary of its kind, which preceded the Oxford English dictionary by 800 years. It was through this development that the concept of Arabic roots was established and later co-opted into the term 'semitic root,' allowing the decipherment of ancient scripts. In essence, they quite literally copied and pasted the entirety of the Arabic root. Hebrew had been dead, as well as all the other dialects of Arabic, until being 'revived' in a Frankensteinian fashion in the 18th and 19th centuries. The entire region spoke basically the same language, with mumbled dialect continuums spread about, and Arabic is the oldest form from which all these dialects branched off. As time passed, the language gradually became more degenerate, Language; When one looks at the actual linguistics, one will find that many were puzzled by the opposite, that is, how the other "semetic" languages were more "evolved" than Arabic, while Arabic had archaic features, not only archaic compared to bibilical Hebrew, Ethiopic, "Aramaic" contemporary "semetic" languages, but even archaic compared to languages from ancient antiquity; Ugaritic, Akkadain. What is meant here by Archaic is not what most readers think, it is Archaic not in the sense that it is simple, but rather that it is complex (think Latin to pig Latin or Italian or Old English, which had genders and case endings to modern English), not only grammatically, but also phonetically; All the so called semitic languages are supposed to have evolved from protosemetic, the Alphabet for protosemitic is that of the so called Ancient South Arabian (which interestingly corresponds with the traditional Arabic origins account) and has 28 Phonemes. Arabic has 28 phonemes. Hebrew has 22, same as Aramaic, and other "semitic" languages. Now pause for a second and think about it, how come Arabic, a language that is supposed to have come so late has the same number of letters as a language that supposedly predates it by over a millennium (Musnad script ~1300 BCE). Not only is the glossary of phonemes more diverse than any other semitic language, but the grammar is more complex, containing more cases and retains what's linguists noted for its antiquity, broken plurals. Indeed, a linguist has once noted that if one were to take everything we know about languages and how they develop, Arabic is older than Akkadian (~2500 BCE). And then the Qur'an appeared with the oldest possible form of the language thousands of years later. This is why the Arabs of that time were challenged to produce 10 similar verses, and they couldn't. People think it's a miracle because they couldn't do it, but I think the miracle is the language itself. They had never spoken Arabic, nor has any other language before or since had this mathematical precision. And when I say mathematical, I quite literally mean mathematical. Now how is it that the Qur'an came thousands of years later in an alphabet that had never been recorded before, and in the highest form the language had ever taken? The creator is neither bound by time nor space, therefore the names are uttered as they truly were, in a language that is lexically, syntactically, phonemically, and semantically older than the oldest recorded writing. In fact, that writing appears to have been a simplified version of it. Not only that, but it would be the equivalent of the greatest works of any particular language all appearing in one book, in a perfect script and in the highest form the language could ever take. It is so high in fact, that it had yet to be surpassed despite the fact that over the last millennium the collection of Arabic manuscripts when compared on word-per-word basis in Western Museums alone, when they are compared with the collected Greek and Latin manuscripts combined, the latter does not constitute 1 percent of the former as per German professor Frank Griffel, in addition all in a script that had never been recorded before. Thus, the enlightenment of mankind from barbarism and savagery began, and the age of reason and rationality was born from its study. God did bring down the Qur’an, Mohamed is his Messenger.

[@robpolaris7272]

@@ranro7371 Christianity was not born under Constantine or it would be called Constantinism, not Christianity. It was born from Christ, his teachings and the continued preaching under his Apostles. There are ugly chapters to all religions because of man, not always because of the precepts of the faith are wrong. Do you want to discuss all the evil done under Islam? I’m guessing not. You mentioned the “evil Christians practicing slavery” 2000 years ago. Do you believe slavery is evil? Do you know the one religion under which slavery is still practiced? Islam. None of this has anything to do with the subject of what we were discussing.

[@bubediscuss]

This video title is misleading. It says Ben Affleck debates.

[@Topher_1986]

Perfection

[@new-dystopia]

He's not even taking part in the same conversation as the rest of them.

[@deuelellan2446]

this comment is so funny. it needs more likes

[@dacerobertson2968]

Facts

[@SpencerJMusic]

Lol

[@yonatanmedvedev]

The audience are just a bunch of people who enjoy clapping

[@parkervarin]

underrated comment

[@Cambrandreth]

On an episode in which he was a guest, Hitchens referred to the audience of Real Time as "The clap anything brigade"

[@estebanuno1]

The audience is the worst part of the show.

[@connorpratt4874]

Made a comment similar to this but not as clever lol

[@viveka_r]

Nope

[@jcc7508]

The audience is the most annoying person here.

[@manpreetsabharwal1492]

How?

[@JohnathanCamien]

No Ben wins that. He was showing what a part of the democrat party is today, he would not shut up so there could actually be discussion. He was trying to shut everyone else down that he didn't agree with by talking over them. That's not how you have civil discourse.

[@musiclaboratory9694]

@@JohnathanCamien well that sounds like a very republic thing to do if you base it off our current presidents average press briefing...

[@JohnathanCamien]

@@musiclaboratory9694 oh ok. If you say so.

[@CaukyAsian]

No Ben is by far.

[@anthropoid1281]

As someone who lives in a majority Muslim country, I can tell you that Sam and Bill are 100% correct on this. I once got beat up as a teenager because I was explaining to my friend why I am a non believer, on the street by adults who overheard us.

[@shironage]

Same happens to Muslims, same happens to Jewish people, same happens to Hindus, and a matter of fact one of the biggest genocides was committed by a Christian man in a European country. What is your point?

[@رعود-د6م]

سلمت أياديهم وليتهم كسروا رأسك.

[@anthropoid1281]

I don't know what that means, but translate shows something like "I wish they broke your head" lol. You are a fine example of what Sam, Bill and I talk about, you are just proving the point further.

[@beaniies]

Ooh my friend beat me up all Muslims are bad

[@anthropoid1281]

@@beaniies Where did I say "my friend beat me up", or "all Muslims are bad"? It is sad to me that you don't know how to read properly. With that "all Muslims are bad" assumption you are actually reinforcing the exact ignorance Ben Affleck was showing on the show.

[@wayn0uk]

Can tell that Ben is not used to this sort of thing, he is clearly getting angry very easily...he thinks that it is an argument...

[@LucisFerre1]

It just goes to show that leftist retards like Affleck are alergic to facts and reality they can't emotionally deal with. Leftism has nothing to do with reality and facts and everything to do with their pseudo-religion of pretend time.

[@wyldeman0O7]

First this and now batman.. so sad :(

[@majordbag2]

I remember listening to an old Opie and Anthony clip where they more or less said Ben is used to being at Hollywood parties where almost everyone agrees with him and/or wants to suck up to him so no one ever challenges his views. He's not used to debating with someone who A) is more informed than him on this issue and B) is not afraid of telling him off so he gets pissed because that never happens to him in his day to day life. It sort of reminds me of an Adam Corolla story where Adam had a huge, screaming match with a guy because Adam, to make a long story short, told this dude "fuck you" and the dude blew up with rage because, while some people get told "fuck you" every day, this guy turned out to be a high-powered Hollywood agent who was used to people kissing his ass and freaked out when after getting cussed at.

[@Distephano]

He's pissed off at ignorance. Id be mad too if I had to waste my time explaining why you're a bigot.

[@majordbag2]

No, Affleck is pissed off because he is ignorant and while there is an argument against what Harris is saying (as the much smarter guy on Ben's side makes quite well), Affleck being an actor with very limited knowledge just doesn't the intellectual chops to make it. Again he's just a big Hollywood actor who is used to everyone just nodding their heads in agreement when he talks and isn't used to people actually arguing back.

[@gaoxinglangblog]

Sam Harris is like Matt Damon in "Good Will Hunting" and Ben Affleck is like Ben Affleck in "Good Will Hunting"

[@dihe1392]

🤣 he went full retarded for that role

[@JustMe-xz2bz]

Minus the humility to see it, because his character did.

[@acraze2287]

Comment of the century lmao

[@willisverynice]

This might be the best comment ever.

[@dgmickley]

Best comment ever!!

[@EGstill85]

This is the result of having a culture that believes celebrities intrinsically hold some higher wisdom which they should be given a platform to impart on the rest of us. We are literally watching a debate on the moral virtue of 1.5 billion people between a neuroscientist and Batman...only in America

[@leahg3926]

And they believe their own press

[@ferbyfurben9640]

HAHAHAH. well said.

[@ronmullick253]

Did you even understand what Ben was saying. You think it is OK to stereotype 1.5 billion people based on their religion. When the fact is that Muslims have hundreds of different interpretations of their religion. Where was Ben wrong?????

[@ferbyfurben9640]

@@ronmullick253 That's exactly the point. Sam Harris isn't against people, he's against bad ideas. Read a few chapters of the quran (in context) and you will find it's full of awful ideas. Most muslim countries have little respect for freedom: blasphemy is punishable by law and the scripture supports this. The quran and hadith are medieval books with any number of justifications for bad behavior, from wife beating to child marriage: unfortunately, large masses of the islamic word accept this.

[@leahg3926]

@@ronmullick253 You didnt get Harris's point either!

[@youseftcg]

They all come to say what's Islam is about and not without even having a proper Muslim or a scholar representing Islam to tell them the truth

[@marciestoddard730]

Actually I believe Sam harris studied Islam academically, and knowing him as a neuroscientist I'm quite certain his research was thorough.

[@marciestoddard730]

Right....

[@offshoretomorrow3346]

Muslims are allowed to not tell the "the truth" to non-believers though, right? The truth is that the religion holds power of life and death over its followers - and there are no shortage of believers to enforce that.

[@fess3932]

Sure, you appear to be muslim, can you tell me why Mohammed married a 6 year old, and then raped her at 9. That is codified fact btw, don’t dance around, there was no misinterpretation she played with dolls, just answer the question.

[@peppyhydra4544]

What the actual fuck is this Why is Ben Affleck debating Sam Harris

[@Rob_Cary]

The correct take lol The whole time I was watching this I was just like "lol.....Ben Affleck"

[@howiegruwitz3173]

Experimental propaganda was a fun age in America.

[@hamzamahmood9565]

Because celebrities live in movies their whole lives

[@lolahernandez6871]

For OUR entertainment. 🤣🤣🤣

[@aaryagandre4740]

The comment we deserved😂😂😂

[@thunderbirdizations]

Ben makes some very interesting points. He should become an actor.

[@johnalred6086]

This made me spit my milk. Damn you.

[@JerseySlayer]

LOL

[@toughsoft321]

🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣

[@thunderbirdizations]

Hate to explain punchlines, but It’s a play on words, since Sam Harris is known to look very similar to Ben Stiller, in an argument with Ben Affleck. I was referring to Ben stiller

[@filmmekker]

He needs writers.

[@smicksmookety]

"let me unpack this for you" Ben: "please do" *Unpacks it* *Ben cries internally*

[@danielanderson2716]

The chicken Sam Harris has been running away from debating experienced Muslims & Christian apologists for years now! 😆

[@markh1011]

@@danielanderson2716 Yeah you really got Harris good with that post... Harris has done the debate circuit... he did it years ago. Get some new material.

[@danielanderson2716]

@@markh1011 You're only spamming how Ben Affleck humiliated chicken Harris with his bullshit's in front of millions. Cry up harder, kiddo. Hehe! 😛😛😛

[@markh1011]

@@danielanderson2716 Harris calmly dismantled a man well out of his depth... It must have really hurt you... because you've cried about Harris all up and down the page.... The emojis represent your tears.... lol

[@danielanderson2716]

@@markh1011 Affleck humiliated Harris in front of millions & that stings you. Try to cope, kiddo! 😛 You may commence the crying now! Hehehehe! 😜😜😜

[@timothycardoso1364]

Why is Ben Affleck sitting at the t table? One can't attack Islam but it's open season when it comes to the Catholic Church.

[@jayterra2060]

💯

[@zayyanhussain1994]

Lets say for example we try to verbally attack Israel and mind you not the religion of judaism. Watch how fast one will be labelled and called antisemitic and if they are in a public position they will get cancelled indefinitely.

[@ryanxamp]

rightfully so though. they’re both extremely bad.

[@jayterra2060]

@@ryanxamp then you don’t know about Islam

[@ryanxamp]

@@jayterra2060 no i hate islam. its evil, i fully know that. yes catholicism definitely isn’t as bad but its quite evil in its own right.

[@kateson6986]

“A fool takes no pleasure in understanding but only in expressing his opinion.” Proverbs 18:2

[@MineSomeCraftPoo]

@nabil chowdhury too bad the Qur'an is the literal word of god

[@B.P._]

@nabil chowdhury I can't tell if this is satire but if its not then I guess you need to stop proving yourself wrong by literally proving the comment you replied to absolutely correct.

[@Ephesians--zs6pv]

Amen!! When you see the son of men coming down from heaven you will know he is lord

[@typicalsweg5290]

@nabil chowdhury for the 20% thing, i think sam is referring to shia muslims which are the bad ones. sunnis represent the rest

[@tyndaleverwer4509]

@nabil chowdhury I can see where you are coming from people completely overlook the Good qualities of this culture brotherhood,hospitality e.t.c but you are not naive enough to think that jihadists are just blood thirsty maniacs .....whatever they are they are also passionate about Islam you can say these 20% have interpreted it wrongly but don't say they are fake or they don't believe ...we can do better ...we can all agree that the study and CRITIQUE of the quran/Islam is not encouraged enough

[@davidmckelvey2601]

They should use this video in college and university to show people what the straw man fallacy is.

[@thekaiser1156]

Of Sam Harris and Bill Maher right?

[@bobmanhunter]

No, Affleck claimed Sam Harris made an argument that he did not. That’s why it’s so hard to follow the argument after he joins in. They’re talking about different things. Sam Harris had to bridge the gap in the logical chasm. I think he did it pretty well. I don’t think Bill Maher helped that much. He always assumes everyone’s on the same page as him.

[@scubasteve7666]

Affleck is a tool.

[@MrTurbogreg6969]

I doubt people fully comprehend the "strawman" argument

[@Mindboggles]

@@thekaiser1156 What's the strawman that Sam made?

[@jimboucher8871]

Idea: Invite Justin Beiber on to offer his thoughts about ancient Mesopotamia. It makes about as much sense as asking Ben Affleck what he thinks about jihadism

[@valgehiir]

excellent suggestion! Beebs knows whats up, and unlike Ben here, maybe even not high on coke

[@jul9cuz]

I wonder what my car mechanic thinks about the Earth being flat? Wait, no I don't. I have my own life to live.

[@labaguette2728]

It makes about as much sense as asking Ben Affleck about how to be a good actor.

[@rockvoorhees7724]

i could also tell he was really high on coke - he wasn't even listening to anyone but himself

[@sagnikmondal4058]

Eyad Jaara Listen to his talks.

[@hsk8787]

Ben is more interested in sounding and looking righteous

[@JohnDoe-h4n]

Just put the fries in my bag bro 🍟

[@ranro7371]

He's right. Christendom is the empirial religion, born under the auspices of constantine, the subjects were converted at the edge of the sword and rendered into slaves for his majesty, often referring to him as their lord. In Islam such slavery is unthinkable. The only lordship is that of the creator, no station into which man was brought into the lands of Islam was to any degree as bad as the repugnant chattel slavery brought by the primitive tribalism inherent in their texts. Constantine chose regularly to refer to himself as the “servant of God” (famulus dei/therapon tou theou) in official writings. By the fifth century, this metaphor of subordination had been redeployed from theological to political contexts as the subjects of the emperor came to refer to themselves as “slaves of the emperor.” And by the sixth, Justinian insisted all his officials swear an oath that they would demonstrate their service to the emperor “with genuine slavehood” (gnesia douleia).b Building on Paul’s revalorization of the vocabulary of slavery, and particularly the word doulos came to be applied to a variety of hierarchical relationships, even as it also continued to be used specifically of chattel slaves. By the middle Byzantine period, this expansion of the semantic range of the root doul- eventually gave the abstract nominal form douleia, meaning laborer Insofar as everyone who partook in labor was considered to be a participant This epistemological world view is coherent with master-slave dynamic relationship between the head of the state and his subjects, or rather slaves. The word עוֹלֵל, ʿôlēl which means 'Babe, infant, little one, a suckling' occurs 21 King James Bible Verses Of these verses: “Happy shall he be, that taketh and dasheth thy little ones against the stones.” -Psalm 137:9 “Now go and smite Amalek, and utterly destroy all that they have, and spare them not; but slay both man and woman, infant and suckling, ox and sheep, camel and ass.”-1 Samuel 15:3 “Samaria shall become desolate; for she hath rebelled against her God: they shall fall by the sword: their infants shall be dashed in pieces, and their women with child shall be ripped up.”-Hosea 13:16 The other verses are not much different. Infact it is always in association with violence. Indeed these verses are the reason why in the Crusades the sense of pious rejoicing at massacre does not appear to be the product of later theologizing; it is also found, in the account of the eye-witness Raymond of Aguilers: “in the Temple and porch of Solomon, men rode in blood up to their knees and bridle reins. Indeed, it was a just and splendid judgment of God that this place should be filled with the blood of the unbelievers, since it had suffered so long from their blasphemies.” In fact, Raymond continues, “This day, I say, will be famous in all future ages, for it turned our labours and sorrows into joy and exultation; this day, I say, marks the justification of all Christianity, the humiliation of paganism, and the renewal of our faith.” Another account by a chronicler and eyewitness-priest, Albert of Aachen, describes the killing of fleeing women, and depicts crusaders as:: “seizing [infants who were still suckling] by the soles of their feet from their mothers’ laps or their cradles…and dashing them against the walls or lintels of the doors and breaking their necks […] they were sparing absolutely no gentile of any age or kind.”The incoherence inherent in a stranger to Abraham calling the children of Abraham gentiles notwithstanding, this account evokes the very same Psalm 137:9 imprecation against Babylon, in Latin, “beatus qui tenebit et adlidet parvulos tuos ad petram.” Albert describes a massacre occurring, in cold blood, on the second day following the conquest, painting a scene that is as horrific as it is realistic and detailed: "Girls, women, matrons, tormented by fear of imminent death and horror-struck by the violent murder wrapped themselves around the Christians’ bodies in the hope to save their lives, even as the Christians were raving and venting their rage in murder of both sexes. Some threw themselves at their feet, begging them with pitiable weeping and wailing for their lives and safety. When children five or three years old saw the cruel fate of their mothers and fathers, of one accord they stepped up the weeping and pitiable clamour. But they were making these signals for pity and mercy in vain. For the Christians gave over their whole hearts to murder, so that not a suckling little male-child or female, not even an infant of one year would escape the hand of the murderer". Evoking several of these verses in practice: - (Num 31:17-18) Now therefore kill every male among the little ones, and kill every woman that hath known man by lying with him. But all the women children, that have not known a man by lying with him, keep alive for yourselves. - (Deut 7:2, 9:3, Num 21) thou shalt smite them, and utterly destroy them; thou shalt make no covenant with them, nor shew mercy unto them... - (Ezek 9:6) Slay utterly old [and] young both maids and little children and women: but come not near any man upon whom [is] mark begin at my sanctuary. This is the polar opposite in the Quran in Surah Al-Tanwir, literally "The Englightenining" Surah, Aya 8-9, we have the death of a newborn is mentioned amongst the penultimate signs of the end of times, emphasizing the gravity of such an action. That child, now resurrected, is asked for what wrong doing was she murdered. This is to emphasize that she had done nothing wrong, for she had done nothing wrong and this is the day of retribution where those who omitted the evil are to be punished. This is the polar opposite in the Qur'an, Surah Al-Baqara Aya 190, which exhorts to fight unbelievers and not be "Aggressors", in the commentary of what it means to be aggressors, this was stated Al-Hasan Al-Basri stated that transgression (indicated by the Ayah): "includes mutilating the dead, theft (from the captured goods), killing women, children and old people who do not participate in warfare, killing priests and residents of houses of worship, burning down trees and killing animals without real benefit." This is also the opinion of Ibn `Abbas, `Umar bin `Abdul-`Aziz, Muqatil bin Hayyan and others. Muslim recorded in his Sahih that Buraydah narrated that Allah's Messenger said: "Fight for the sake of Allah and fight those who disbelieve in Allah. Fight, but do not steal, commit treachery, mutilate, or kill a child, or those who reside in houses of worship." It is reported in the Two Sahihs that Ibn `Umar said, "The Prophet forbade killing women and children." بابتداء القتال أو بقتال من نهيتم عن قتاله من النساء والشيوخ والصبيان والذين بينكم وبينهم عهد أو بالمثلة أو بالمفاجأة من غير دعوة "To kill those whom you were forbidden to from women, elderly, children and those whom betwixt you is a treaty or custom or by surprise or without cause" -Tafsir Al-Zamakshari of the meaning of Aggressors in the Aya More hadith from Musannaf Ibn Abi Shaybah: حَدَّثَنَا حُمَيْدُ بْنُ عَبْدِ الرَّحْمَنِ، عَنْ شَيْخٍ، مِنْ أَهْلِ الْمَدِينَةِ مَوْلَى لِبَنِي عَبْدِ الْأَشْهَلِ، عَنْ دَاوُدَ، عَنْ عِكْرِمَةَ، عَنِ ابْنِ عَبَّاسٍ أَنَّ النَّبِيَّ صَلَّى اللهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ كَانَ إِذَا بَعَثَ جُيُوشَهُ قَالَ: «§لَا تَقْتُلُوا أَصْحَابَ الصَّوَامِعِ» "Do not kill the dwellers of monasteries" حَدَّثَنَا ابْنُ فُضَيْلٍ، عَنْ جُوَيْبِرٍ، عَنِ الضَّحَّاكِ قَالَ: كَانَ «§يُنْهَى عَنْ قَتْلِ الْمَرْأَةِ، وَالشَّيْخِ الْكَبِيرِ» سَعْدٍ قَالَ: «§نَهَى رَسُولُ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ عَنْ قَتْلِ النِّسَاءِ وَالذُّرِّيَّةِ، وَالشَّيْخِ الْكَبِيرِ الَّذِي لَا حَرَاكَ بِهِ» "The prophet forbids the killing of women, children, and the elderly" This is the polar opposite in the Qur'an, Surah Al-Anfal Ayah 61 in which even oath breaking deniers/unbelievers are allowed to sue for peace states if the unbelievers they ask for peace, give it to them. Stephen Langton, the writer of the Magna Carta (12th century, contemporary with the crusades for a reason) studied in the university of Paris which archives show had plenty of Arabic treatises in its procession, there can be no question about it being inspired by the "Sharia". both the renessiance and the european enlightenment were directly preceded by massive translation movements form Arabic (see the Republic of Letters by Alexander Bevilacqua, The House of Wisdom: How the Arabs Transformed Western Civilization By: Jonathan Lyons. The modifiable testament testament commands indiscriminate killing, genocide, plunder, mutilation, enslavement, or torture of enemies, including women, on the other hand.Surah Al-Baqara Aya 190 limits war to those who fight against Muslims, prohibits transgression, and implies respect for human dignity and life Indeed it is what precedes the famous "sword verse", always cited out of context. God did bring down the Qur’an, Mohamed is his Messenger.

[@pramodwilson2354]

​@@ranro7371Messenger with eleven wives and any number of 'sex slaves'. Truly the greatest man/example to be followed

[@nrls4769]

​@ranro7371 Wait, bro, you think @hsk8787 can read? How can u assume he can read?

[@mpup54]

but only had the same thing to say for the entire show, the best part was before he joined in

[@gargrig222]

“They’re risking their lives to speak out about the atrocities of Islam.” Yes, exactly. That’s what we’re talking about. They shouldn’t have to speak under the constant threat of death. If the doctrine was reasonable, it wouldn’t be a problem.

[@jsmall10671]

@Weenddata Segda Yes, why?

[@utkur765]

@@jsmall10671 he didn't ask you idiot

[@momenkhan8838]

oh and yours is? laughable

[@gargrig222]

@@momenkhan8838 well I don’t have a doctrine, so….

[@momenkhan8838]

@@gargrig222 oh great, so then you have no room to make fun of others beliefs if you don’t have any to stand on for yourself. Atheist always manage to beat themselves.

[@stefspin3057]

Can someone tell Ben Islam isn't a race 🤦‍♂️

[@late8641]

A good definition is that a race is something you cannot decide to be part of or leave. But wait, most muslims can't leave islam because of the threat of capital punishment, so I guess they are a race after all. Maybe I should point out just in case that the latter was a joke.

[@late8641]

@@tomasp3394 Did you read the entire comment? I said it was a joke.

[@late8641]

@@hakarva2584 No, it just makes you a bigot.

[@zub41r75]

Islam - African/Arabian Judaism and Christianity - European/White Constantly attacks Islam and not the other 2 and says Islam is not a race to seem not racist. You racists are getting dumber everyday

[@late8641]

@@zub41r75 Holy shit your comment is ignorant

[@A-Duck]

Harris: “Only a complete moron would conflate criticism of an idea with hatred of a race” Ben: “Yes, I am the droid you’ve been looking for”

[@esIworld]

Especially when they were talking about a set of beliefs, not a race.

[@JohnRenfrow]

literally burst out laughing at this comment

[@jaerockchalk3216]

@@JohnRenfrow same , fucking pepsi out the nose hurts lmao

[@UmarMunir94]

Well, I as a Muslim, am clearly happy that if not a Muslim, Ben was there to call out their lies even though he doesn't know much about Islam but he probably knows some Muslims

[@vbandz2645]

Umar Munir too many people learning the religion off Islam from Sources like Jay smith, David Wood, Sam Harris and Richard Dawkins who don’t speak Arabic, haven’t learnt the Tafseer, don’t know how to compare Hadiths and distinguish weak and authentic Hadiths from each other, they will go against there Beliefs to go against Islam, when they’re exposed in debates and all there claims refuted and answered they still want to use the same argument, why has the world go against Islam all of a sudden, liberalism was founded on the principle of religious belief, John Lock, founding fathers of liberalism based his beliefs and morals to Christianity, what moral grounds do atheists have, you see when Muslims are getting oppressed in mass numbers around the world no one wants to acknowledge that but when a stupid individual does something in the name of Islam, it’s a really big problem, people need to go learn about Islam from reliable non bias sources

[@katt6452]

This couldn't be MORE TRUE NOW!!!!

[@lukaszwalczak3814]

Why is that? Has something happened?

[@Ibrahim-wr5fs]

You living in delusions

[@ququ1639]

The audience is just basicly clapping for everyone there

[@zeroplusoneequalsme]

I've been to live recordings of shows like this, it's not unusual for someone behind the camera to just hold up an applause sign at all the hits. You may not catch every person clapping, but mob mentality hits a lot of people and gets em going. It's not a reflection of people agreeing with Ben as much as just manufactured TV magic

[@abdullahtahir6186]

Like they're just glad to be there. No idea what's going on.

[@Wflowergrown]

They are being liberal 🤣

[@ajm82]

Well, I mean, come on its the Bill Maher show

[@abrahambarrero651]

Jajaha

[@papillonvu]

I now understand why it was Matt Damon who played Will Hunting!

[@Gcarse]

And Ben was just basically playing himself.

[@beautifulfeetpreachingsc]

Affleck is definitely not wickedly smart

[@markatom7913]

Damon sucks politically too. Writing Will Hunting is not being Will Hunting. They are both Affleck's character... - Great actors and writers though!

[@heydudewhatsup]

Hahah made me lol at work

[@Locateson]

smaaaaat

[@BlackHowl1]

6 years later and this doesn't get any easier to watch...

[@uhohhotdog9150]

Right? I come back to this video every now and then and it is never any less painful

[@jeffreypearce9572]

So true and every time I see Ben afflict in something this is the first thing I think about it’s burned into my brain

[@masongalioth4110]

How did Ben Actually convince himself that Sam Harris of all people was trying to be racist? It just blows my mind.

[@binal-flecki2387]

Islam is the elephant in the room we all try our best to avoid but must eventually acknowledge.

[@masongalioth4110]

Bin al-Flecki have you also noticed how many people are scared that this is a racist attack on the people? Its crazy. This is simply a battle for the ideas that are holding them. I suppose it only makes sense given that when Criticising Islam, Middle Easterners consider it an attack on them as Brown people, in the same way that when Christianity was being criticised for the first time, Westerners considered it an attack on White people.

[@SamoIsKing]

Ben Affleck couldnt have proven Harris’ point about the meme of Islamophobia better if he tried.

[@Nick-en8su]

Exactly

[@sas6561]

Affleck is well meaning but SO stupid!!!

[@blackbanditx8303]

@@sas6561 Well he is certainly smarter than you

[@AbCd-us2df]

Please watch farid responds channel videos,our arab brother farid has refuted all the anti Islamic lies

[@yusufmuslim4420]

Just because he is a neuroscientist does not make him an expert on Islam. Sam Harris has academic experience which is not the same as living experience or any traction with in the actual Muslim community. He has not really delved deeply into Muslim history or even travelled to many Muslim countries. I have listened to pretty much all his debates on Islam. The problem with having an ignorant view of history is that you fail to realize how things came to transpire and why things are the way they are specifically in the Muslim world. You should listen to his debate with Fareed Zakaria (available online and on his podcast) where he clearly lost and it shows his ignorance on issues such as history, politics, and socioeconomics.

[@willjames1630]

Sam Harris: "Islam is the motherlode of bad ideas" Ben Affleck: "REEEEEE!"

[@JohnAC4]

john tsunami oh wow. That’s something

[@europeansovietunion7372]

Sam Harris: Talks about the islamophobia meme Ben Affleck: Turns into the islamophobia meme

[@ironmagma]

“But tolerance!!” Well yeah, it’s easy to tolerate good or neutral things, that’s just called existing. It’s only called tolerance when it’s a bad thing.

[@naruii5160]

religion as a whole is a motherlode of bad ideas

[@willjames1630]

@@naruii5160 Hmmm yah let's not just jump to that claim. Don't let Islam off easy; not all religions are created equal. For instance, plenty of religions don't call for the murder of apostates.

[@garypCronshaw]

Tonight we present Ben Affleck in his role as an uninformed actor

[@clemalford]

More like an opinionated Batman (I have a lot of money so I think I am god)

[@ag4137]

clemalford wow, solid comment 🤙

[@0xsergy]

@@clemalford and steroids cause of the batman movie filming being when this podcast was done. plus, i'm thinking coke lol. He is CONSTANTLY sniffing, putting his fingers to his nose and so on. I'm not a coke dude but that to me says something is up.

[@aseelanza]

@deusEx horninn kjemnr They were ganging up on him

[@stevenpoole7235]

Clearly Bruce had a tipple before stumbling into the wrong studio.

[@calvinthompson9934]

Ben affleck is like if I don't shut up I win

[@Barkeroni]

louder voice, quick movements, weak puns, and acting annoyed and smug are just a few of the attributes of a debater that doesnt know what the f he's talking about. Well done Gigli

[@idunno5422]

Someone who focuses on the physical actions of the debater rather than the arguments they put forth is the attribute of someone that doesn't know how to judge a debate.

[@Barkeroni]

Someone who focuses on what someone else focuses on to determine their debating is someone who doesnt know what the f they are talking about

[@jeyjoo]

Barkeroni bad comeback man.

[@Barkeroni]

aww

[@AverageGypsy]

I am confused, are you actually defending the Batman here?

[@RememberingWW2]

Now I know why Bruce Willis didn't trust Ben to blow up the asteroid in Armageddon.

[@evanfitz33]

Good one :)

[@benchcg]

...now I know why jen left him

[@TR-sg9jc]

Nik D'Agostino he's a soyboy

[@perrymatwishyn2506]

that's funny!

[@samaliraqi7324]

Nik D'Agostino I like that very funny lol

[@0110-d6s]

Y'all should listen to Sam's podcast, he is way more interesting when he gets to complete his sentences without people shouting over him.

[@ezlivin44]

Yes. Sam has a degree of insight into so many issues that I wish I had. He has a gift for taking his thoughts and ideas and conveying them in a very concise manner.

[@AntonioLima-mv5cg]

Islamophobic idiot

[@ezlivin44]

@@AntonioLima-mv5cg “islamaphobic" is not a real word. It implies racism, but Islam is not a race, its an ideology, that is beyond repair. Have you ever heard a Christian say to an athiest he is "christaniphobic"? No, you havn't. Because that would be obtuse. Just like you......

[@jeremyphelps5140]

@@ezlivin44 islamaphobia is entirely a real thing, though that isn't what is being displayed here. Sam is simply saying that this is a dangerous ideology that everyone is too afraid to address. It's full of bad ideas and it's widespread across the globe, so it's something that we should be addressing.

[@davidsorensen6605]

@@ezlivin44 Agreed. Islam… Christianity is not a political system. Jesus eschewed political organizations. Islam is not a religion. It is inherently a political, theocratic philosophy and terroristic legal system for enslaving humans to their detriment. Our Bill of Rights, the first of which; guarantees our freedom, from any religion and absolutely regards it as necessary to be separated from the state. “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; …” Our Bill of Rights prohibits the establishment of Islam in America not because it “claims to be” a religion but because we are already governed by a political system established by our constitution. Sharia is not necessary or suggested for American citizens; we already have a successful political system based upon the idea of a democratic republic. Islam cannot and will not be accepted by any freedom loving individual, because it is a system of thoughts, beliefs and actions which intends to overshadow or preempt the American constitution and the political system recognized by it. Any attempts to place “Sharia” law above the rights of the citizens of these United States or our government is illegitimate and an act of sedition.. Those who will not assimilate but instead create enclaves separate from the society and culture extant in our nation are signaling their desire not to be present here but to remain separate. They are subversives and their thinking, beliefs and actions are seditious (actions or words intended to provoke or incite rebellion against government authority, or actual personal rebellion against government authority). They should be at the first opportunity, politely (or impolitely for our own protection) assisted in their return to their country of origin. TAQIYYA all Muslims must obey, means to advance and Protect Islam by any means including lying to infidels.

[@DEIDREROG]

I just saw clips of this on Twitter and 2024! I thought it was a new video boy was I wrong😂

[@usmc3058]

Affleck made Sam's point from he bat. Refused to allow any intelligent conversation, in the face of facts.

[@offshoretomorrow3346]

That's an exaggeration. He did debate, but was too invested (or pre-powdered) to think.

[@bonytony18]

Ben Affleck is making what’s called a straw man argument - he’s arguing against a point that neither of them were making.

[@JerkFrags]

Sam Harris lays out how criticism doesn't necessarily mean it is Islamophobic, Affleck pulls the strawman argument at 1:36 "So you're saying Islamophobia isn't a real thing?" Affleck just comes across so closed minded and dense.

[@24bytesandpieces]

When people get angry, they don't listen anymore

[@goobermcgilicuty3754]

When one thinks they are NEVER wrong, their immediate response is anger, name calling and the like, when really challenged!

[@BelloBudo007]

I think that's often the case. I don't know what stressed Affleck out so much but some of his 'comparisions' seemed way off and totally illogical. So why didn't he just talk about truth & facts? I think we know why. It must have been an impossible challenge for Sam Harris to get his point across with the host 'tossing more logs on the fire' (hey it's his show after all), and with Affleck & the other guy constantly wanting to defend the undeniable truth.

[@elmerbeltshire7599]

Good lord he was unhinged. It was comic relief just watching him sit there and stew.

[@dieauferstehung]

sam harris is a nazzi-

[@tomasaleman2724]

There’re called bigots.

[@richmukasa6069]

This is the prequel for the Tom Brady Roast.

[@gooddognigel9992]

Ben’s problem: no script

[@satoshinakamoto7253]

He's a modern day court jester - what do you expect?

[@mrbass1310]

hes thinking what the hell am i doing here. I wish they would talk sports

[@WorldGovernmentGeoInstitut]

Sam Harris' problem itself is no brain, which is even worse.

[@antiracistbaby1085]

@@WorldGovernmentGeoInstitut Okay Ben Affleck fangirl,

[@WorldGovernmentGeoInstitut]

@@antiracistbaby1085 What's wrong? Your idol Harris gets called what he is (a brainless snake oil salesman) and you resort to name calling?

[@Tiago-]

{Summary} Sam Harris: I think we should be able to criticize bad social structures and those who support them. Been Affleck: That's like calling someone a shifty jew. Sam Harris: ...

[@thelegend90028]

He knew what was up lmao

[@someordinarydude9147]

They speak completely different languages. Sam Harris is a true intellectual. He stays composed, doesn’t let others feelings or sensibilities keep him from talking about anything or saying his truth, always keeps cool, stays on topic, and chooses to try to understand instead of getting offended. Ben Affleck is an intellectual wannabe who isn’t as educated as he likes to pretend, operates within the rules of outrage mob culture, and is used to “debating” people who put up straw man arguments and act just like him (a big infant).

[@evilhag7732]

I really wanted to bitch slap him for that

[@yusufmuslim4420]

@@someordinarydude9147 Just because he is a neuroscientist does not make him an expert on Islam. Sam Harris has academic experience which is not the same as living experience or any traction with in the actual Muslim community. He has not really delved deeply into Muslim history or even travelled to many Muslim countries. I have listened to pretty much all his debates on Islam. The problem with having an ignorant view of history is that you fail to realize how things came to transpire and why things are the way they are specifically in the Muslim world. You should listen to his debate with Fareed Zakaria (available online and on his podcast) where he clearly lost and it shows his ignorance on issues such as history, politics, and socioeconomics.

[@yusufmuslim4420]

@@TheRealAbraxas Most Muslims see double standards with what always happens with Israel in the USA. Criticizing Israel is always seen as synonymous with antisemitism but these same critics of Islam who simultaneous make excuses for Zionism argue that we should be able to attack Islam and distinguish it from Muslims. kzbin.info/www/bejne/qHO1qadrqsuhfck

[@mrotti427]

Ben's anger towards an argument that wasn't made fries my brain

[@charliedibe4067]

Sorry to hear that you can’t handle it

[@deterpinklage4406]

@@charliedibe4067 Found Ben

[@throwsaparks9829]

Because he used strawman fallacies over and over. Memorize the logical fallacies, and you will quickly realize how many people you know (and love) are full of shit...

[@mikemoscato385]

Ben is proof that at some point, all people reveal themselves eventually.

[@crayonbouzu8578]

Lol

[@Glider34]

Aged well like a fine wine that one cannot drink in a Muslim restaurant.

[@fajita2]

There is no such thing as a “Muslim restaurant”. Shows your ignorance.

[@susanwjoh0re735]

@@fajita2 yea, muslims are too busy banging their cousins.

[@Glider34]

@@fajita2 what ? You’ve never being to a restaurant with a strict muslin kitchen , owned by a religious muslin owner? And asked for the special pork dish?

[@yungabdul1871]

Is there a problem with that?

[@FateenOsman]

Awww, wittle baby can't drink alcohol in Muslim restaurants. Boo hoo

[@maxhydekyle2425]

I love how Sam now calls this the time when "Batman called me a racist."

[@jimmypecan9371]

It’s funny because Batman didn’t need to do anything. Sam reveals who he is pretty clearly.

[@q1908]

@@jimmypecan9371 Hey hate to break it to you but they’re talking about a religion not a race lol edit: Ben can’t even get his “ists” right

[@jimmypecan9371]

@@q1908 Hate to break it to you, but racists and islamophobes care very little about that distinction.

[@hrothgr52]

@@jimmypecan9371 Are you calling sam a racist? I needed to double check because that would be absolutely ridiculous.

[@jimmypecan9371]

@@hrothgr52 i’m calling him an islamophobe. But my point is that it comes from the same mode of thinking about other people and about oneself that enables racism.

[@klumaverik]

I couldn't even watch all of this. This isn't debating. It's trying to calm down the crazy kid in the principal's office.

[@mattkamar9994]

Lol !

[@edwardadams1024]

I watched it in the expectation that they would let sam make his point. But you are right this debate was a joke. Or more like Affleck is a joke, he had no business being there.

[@carybeyondcontrol4136]

Lol I wish I could hit the like button many times

[@philippa7364]

Matt Kamar qq

[@danielanderson2716]

Poor Sam Harris has been chickening out from debating Mohammed Hijab for long now because Hijab will retire him from his debate career! 😆

[@frightendpotato3201]

“So you’re saying... *blatant misinterpretation followed by irrelevant tangent”

[@bivensrk]

It's not on topic but I learned about *that* turn of phrase about 12 years ago. And you're absolutely right! Someone used that phrase against me once and it was an "A ha!" moment. I'm about have my words twisted. The person outranked me so I couldn't really say anything back but it was an awesome datapoint, nonetheless!

[@brandoncaudill6864]

Just once I'd like to hear someone respond to that with "No that's not what I'm saying" and throw the ball back in the challengers' court.

[@brandoncaudill6864]

@Lion of Islam: سيد Umar That's an impressive amount of projection in such a short span.

[@brandoncaudill6864]

@Lion of Islam: سيد Umar What are you assuming I think of Islam? And what in my comment made you believe that?

[@brandoncaudill6864]

@Lion of Islam: سيد Umar and I'm asking what you think those misconceptions are. Because I haven't made any comments about Islam this entire thread.

[@amiwettstein1639]

Why was Affleck even in on this conversation? He demonstrated zero competency on this topic and could only shake his head in true virtue-signaling fashion. The utter refusal for celebrities to see things as they really are never ceases to amaze.

[@marcgall2684]

Exactly what did he say was incorrect.

[@ranro7371]

See things as they really are ? He's right. Christendom is the empirial religion, born under the auspices of constantine, the subjects were converted at the edge of the sword and rendered into slaves for his majesty, often referring to him as their lord. In Islam such slavery is unthinkable. The only lordship is that of the creator, no station into which man was brought into the lands of Islam was to any degree as bad as the repugnant chattel slavery brought by the primitive tribalism inherent in their texts. Constantine chose regularly to refer to himself as the “servant of God” (famulus dei/therapon tou theou) in official writings. By the fifth century, this metaphor of subordination had been redeployed from theological to political contexts as the subjects of the emperor came to refer to themselves as “slaves of the emperor.” And by the sixth, Justinian insisted all his officials swear an oath that they would demonstrate their service to the emperor “with genuine slavehood” (gnesia douleia).b Building on Paul’s revalorization of the vocabulary of slavery, and particularly the word doulos came to be applied to a variety of hierarchical relationships, even as it also continued to be used specifically of chattel slaves. By the middle Byzantine period, this expansion of the semantic range of the root doul- eventually gave the abstract nominal form douleia, meaning laborer Insofar as everyone who partook in labor was considered to be a participant This epistemological world view is coherent with master-slave dynamic relationship between the head of the state and his subjects, or rather slaves. The word עוֹלֵל, ʿôlēl which means 'Babe, infant, little one, a suckling' occurs 21 King James Bible Verses Of these verses: “Happy shall he be, that taketh and dasheth thy little ones against the stones.” -Psalm 137:9 “Now go and smite Amalek, and utterly destroy all that they have, and spare them not; but slay both man and woman, infant and suckling, ox and sheep, camel and ass.”-1 Samuel 15:3 “Samaria shall become desolate; for she hath rebelled against her God: they shall fall by the sword: their infants shall be dashed in pieces, and their women with child shall be ripped up.”-Hosea 13:16 The other verses are not much different. Infact it is always in association with violence. Indeed these verses are the reason why in the Crusades the sense of pious rejoicing at massacre does not appear to be the product of later theologizing; it is also found, in the account of the eye-witness Raymond of Aguilers: “in the Temple and porch of Solomon, men rode in blood up to their knees and bridle reins. Indeed, it was a just and splendid judgment of God that this place should be filled with the blood of the unbelievers, since it had suffered so long from their blasphemies.” In fact, Raymond continues, “This day, I say, will be famous in all future ages, for it turned our labours and sorrows into joy and exultation; this day, I say, marks the justification of all Christianity, the humiliation of paganism, and the renewal of our faith.” Another account by a chronicler and eyewitness-priest, Albert of Aachen, describes the killing of fleeing women, and depicts crusaders as:: “seizing [infants who were still suckling] by the soles of their feet from their mothers’ laps or their cradles…and dashing them against the walls or lintels of the doors and breaking their necks […] they were sparing absolutely no gentile of any age or kind.”The incoherence inherent in a stranger to Abraham calling the children of Abraham gentiles notwithstanding, this account evokes the very same Psalm 137:9 imprecation against Babylon, in Latin, “beatus qui tenebit et adlidet parvulos tuos ad petram.” Albert describes a massacre occurring, in cold blood, on the second day following the conquest, painting a scene that is as horrific as it is realistic and detailed: "Girls, women, matrons, tormented by fear of imminent death and horror-struck by the violent murder wrapped themselves around the Christians’ bodies in the hope to save their lives, even as the Christians were raving and venting their rage in murder of both sexes. Some threw themselves at their feet, begging them with pitiable weeping and wailing for their lives and safety. When children five or three years old saw the cruel fate of their mothers and fathers, of one accord they stepped up the weeping and pitiable clamour. But they were making these signals for pity and mercy in vain. For the Christians gave over their whole hearts to murder, so that not a suckling little male-child or female, not even an infant of one year would escape the hand of the murderer". Evoking several of these verses in practice: - (Num 31:17-18) Now therefore kill every male among the little ones, and kill every woman that hath known man by lying with him. But all the women children, that have not known a man by lying with him, keep alive for yourselves. - (Deut 7:2, 9:3, Num 21) thou shalt smite them, and utterly destroy them; thou shalt make no covenant with them, nor shew mercy unto them... - (Ezek 9:6) Slay utterly old [and] young both maids and little children and women: but come not near any man upon whom [is] mark begin at my sanctuary. This is the polar opposite in the Quran in Surah Al-Tanwir, literally "The Englightenining" Surah, Aya 8-9, we have the death of a newborn is mentioned amongst the penultimate signs of the end of times, emphasizing the gravity of such an action. That child, now resurrected, is asked for what wrong doing was she murdered. This is to emphasize that she had done nothing wrong, for she had done nothing wrong and this is the day of retribution where those who omitted the evil are to be punished. This is the polar opposite in the Qur'an, Surah Al-Baqara Aya 190, which exhorts to fight unbelievers and not be "Aggressors", in the commentary of what it means to be aggressors, this was stated Al-Hasan Al-Basri stated that transgression (indicated by the Ayah): "includes mutilating the dead, theft (from the captured goods), killing women, children and old people who do not participate in warfare, killing priests and residents of houses of worship, burning down trees and killing animals without real benefit." This is also the opinion of Ibn `Abbas, `Umar bin `Abdul-`Aziz, Muqatil bin Hayyan and others. Muslim recorded in his Sahih that Buraydah narrated that Allah's Messenger said: "Fight for the sake of Allah and fight those who disbelieve in Allah. Fight, but do not steal, commit treachery, mutilate, or kill a child, or those who reside in houses of worship." It is reported in the Two Sahihs that Ibn `Umar said, "The Prophet forbade killing women and children." بابتداء القتال أو بقتال من نهيتم عن قتاله من النساء والشيوخ والصبيان والذين بينكم وبينهم عهد أو بالمثلة أو بالمفاجأة من غير دعوة "To kill those whom you were forbidden to from women, elderly, children and those whom betwixt you is a treaty or custom or by surprise or without cause" -Tafsir Al-Zamakshari of the meaning of Aggressors in the Aya More hadith from Musannaf Ibn Abi Shaybah: حَدَّثَنَا حُمَيْدُ بْنُ عَبْدِ الرَّحْمَنِ، عَنْ شَيْخٍ، مِنْ أَهْلِ الْمَدِينَةِ مَوْلَى لِبَنِي عَبْدِ الْأَشْهَلِ، عَنْ دَاوُدَ، عَنْ عِكْرِمَةَ، عَنِ ابْنِ عَبَّاسٍ أَنَّ النَّبِيَّ صَلَّى اللهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ كَانَ إِذَا بَعَثَ جُيُوشَهُ قَالَ: «§لَا تَقْتُلُوا أَصْحَابَ الصَّوَامِعِ» "Do not kill the dwellers of monasteries" حَدَّثَنَا ابْنُ فُضَيْلٍ، عَنْ جُوَيْبِرٍ، عَنِ الضَّحَّاكِ قَالَ: كَانَ «§يُنْهَى عَنْ قَتْلِ الْمَرْأَةِ، وَالشَّيْخِ الْكَبِيرِ» سَعْدٍ قَالَ: «§نَهَى رَسُولُ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ عَنْ قَتْلِ النِّسَاءِ وَالذُّرِّيَّةِ، وَالشَّيْخِ الْكَبِيرِ الَّذِي لَا حَرَاكَ بِهِ» "The prophet forbids the killing of women, children, and the elderly" This is the polar opposite in the Qur'an, Surah Al-Anfal Ayah 61 in which even oath breaking deniers/unbelievers are allowed to sue for peace states if the unbelievers they ask for peace, give it to them. Stephen Langton, the writer of the Magna Carta (12th century, contemporary with the crusades for a reason) studied in the university of Paris which archives show had plenty of Arabic treatises in its procession, there can be no question about it being inspired by the "Sharia". both the renessiance and the european enlightenment were directly preceded by massive translation movements form Arabic (see the Republic of Letters by Alexander Bevilacqua, The House of Wisdom: How the Arabs Transformed Western Civilization By: Jonathan Lyons. The modifiable testament testament commands indiscriminate killing, genocide, plunder, mutilation, enslavement, or torture of enemies, including women, on the other hand.Surah Al-Baqara Aya 190 limits war to those who fight against Muslims, prohibits transgression, and implies respect for human dignity and life Indeed it is what precedes the famous "sword verse", always cited out of context. God did bring down the Qur’an, Mohamed is his Messenger.

[@faheemhaque4680]

He demonstrated more competency than Maher and Harris. You demonstrated you’re a bigot.

[@ranro7371]

Surah Al-Imran Aya 49, of the Quran states that jesus was sent to the israelites, although written over 1,300 years ago in the 19th century (same century bible was only transtalted into Arabic in as well) they came to the same conclusion, He never used or heard the words Christian or Christianity or any equivalent of either. Paul had neither met nor seen Jesus, his relation to the twelve apostles was one of decided independence and even of opposition. He acknowledged no subordination to them. He addressed no doctrinal epistle to them or their churches, and received none from them. He made no reports to them. He did not correspond with them regularly. They never invited him to preach to their congregations and he never invited them to address his converts. He declared that he did not owe his conversion, his baptism, or his doctrine to the twelve, and that he never spent any long time in Jerusalem or in Judea as a Christian missionary. He claimed to be an apostle by a secret divine commission, but the twelve never admitted the validity of his claim. They never gave him the title of apostle; they never said anything indicative of willingness to admit him into their councils. Vacancies occurred in their number, but they never chose him to a vacant place, rather we have statements of Peter with regards to Paul which show nothing but animosity: "And if our Jesus appeared to you also and became known in a vision and met you as angry with an enemy [recall: Paul had his vision while still persecuting the Christians: Acts 9], yet he has spoken only through visions and dreams or through external revelations. But can anyone be made competent to teach through a vision? And if your opinion is that that is possible, why then did our teacher spend a whole year with us who were awake? How can we believe you even if he has appeared to you?… But if you were visited by him for the space of an hour and were instructed by him and thereby have become an apostle, then proclaim his words, expound what he has taught, be a friend to his apostles and do not contend with me, who am his confidant; for you have in hostility withstood me, who am a firm rock, the foundation stone of the Church" -Homily 17 Section XIX On the pauline credo currently called trinitanity Peter said "For some from among the Gentiles have rejected my lawful preaching and have preferred a lawless and absurd doctrine to the man who is my enemy. And indeed some have attempted, while I am still alive, to distort my words by interpretations of many sorts, as if I taught the dissolution of the law… But that may God forbid ! For to do such a thing means to act contrary to the Law of God which was made to Moses and was confirmed by our Lord in its everlasting continuance. For he said, “The heaven and the earth will pass away, but not one jot or one tittle shall pass away from the Law.” -Letter of Peter to James, 2.3-5 Soon after Jesus had selected his twelve apostles, according to Luke, he " gave them power and authority over all devils and to cure diseases. And he sent them to preach the kingdom of God, and to heal the sick. And he said unto them: 'Take nothing for your journey, neither staves nor scrip, neither bread, neither money; neither have two coats apiece. And whatsoever house ye enter, there abide and thence depart. And whosoever will not receive you, when ye go out of that city shake off the very dust from your feet for a testimony against them." This is the entire charge of Jesus to his apostles when he sent them out to convert the world, as reported by Luke, who claims to give the address or a portion of it, and that presumably the most important portion, word for word. The language here attributed to Jesus conveys no idea that he had any purpose of founding a new church. Neither here nor anywhere else, in the language attributed to him in the New Testament, does he explain the phrase " the kingdom of God " to mean a new ecclesiastical organization. In several passages he does use it to signify the celestial dominion after the destruction of the world; and this is therefore presumably its meaning everywhere. The gospel of Matthew is much further than that of Luke in its report of the charge of Jesus to his apostles: "These twelve Jesus sent forth and commanded them, saying: 'Go not into the way of the Gentiles, and into any city of the Samaritans enter ye not; but go rather to the lost sheep of the house of Israel.", "Think not that I am come to send peace on earth; I am come not to send peace, but a sword. For I am come to set a man at variance against his father, and the daughter against her mother... He that receiveth a prophet in the name of a prophet, shall receive a prophet's reward; and he that receiveth a righteous man shall receive a righteous man's reward." This charge, as reported by Matthew omitted nearly all the main ideas that would have been appropriate in an address instructing the twelve to preach the foundation of Christianity. It does not say whether Jesus wished to reform or to supersede Judaism; whether his principal purpose was ecclesiastical, moral, political, or sanitary. The remarks about healing the sick and casting out devils is the most explicit of all the instructions. Certainly no reader can learn from that charge that Jesus intended to establish a new religion; and much less can he learn any feature of the faith or discipline of a projected new church. And this address is that portion of the New Testament where such information should be given most clearly. He made no doctrinal definition and no ecclesiastical organization. He did not use the key words of the original doctrines necessary to Christianity or a new church, nor the keywords of ideas afterwards associated with Christianity, such as Incarnation, Trinity, Immaculate Conception, and Transubstantiation. The subjects to which the most space or most prominence is given in the sayings attributed, in the gospels, to Jesus, are, First, the Mosaic law; Second, judgment day; Third, faith; Fourth, the sins of the Pharisees; Fifth, ascetic morality; and Sixth, his divine commission. Triune nonsense is straight out of the Roman Pantheon. Hercules, anyone? Cerberus? The trinity of Zeus, Athena Apollo, literally called the Triune. Greek goddess Hecate was portrayed in triplicate, a three-in-one. This was all done to make the creed more digestible, followed by mental gymnastics attempting to reconcile the onsensical with elaborate theories. Why doesn't a square peg fit into a round hole? Answer by saying it's a mystery instead of geometries not lining up. No such thing as the bible, the new testament is a concoction of several books that were deemed canonical, books written in Greek that were given the hellenized names of Apotsles who neither wrote, nor spoke greek to give it an illusion of antiquity, much like the calendar we have today, which was established in the year 535 CE by Dionysus Exegesis so too was the original message altered to that of the pauline credo, a digestible religion to the yet to be converted greeks who had no desire to follow the mosaic laws. There never was such another epidemic of ecclesiastical forgery. The church was flooded with books attributed falsely to apostolic times and authors. The names of many of these books, and the texts of some, are preserved. Distinguished saints and learned fathers of the faith openly commended the invention and acceptance of false- hoods designed to aid the conversion of the world to what they believed to be truth. None of the disciples spoke of trinity, ate pork or proclaimed it is allowable to do so, yet the miracle begotten paul, whom peter called him enemy, introduced his new creed according to his whims It proclaimed the abrogation of the Mosaic ceremonial law. It announced itself as a new and independent religion; calling its adherents Christians, and their doctrine Christianity. Rationality was only born with Islam, those who cannot count have nothing to say, at the end of the day 1+1+1 will never equal 1 God did bring down the Qur’an, Mohamed is his Messenger.

[@ranro7371]

The Aramaic word for God is "Alaha" too sounds familiar? Written without the confusing vowels it is written A-L-H ܐ ܠܗܐ (alap-lamed-he) as found in Targum or in Tanakh (Daniel, Ezra), Syriac Aramaic (Peshitta), reduced from the Arabic original (of which Aramaic is a dialect continuum as will be explained) it is written in the Arabic script 'A-L-L-H' (Aleph-Lam-Lam-Ha) add an A before the last H for vocalization. The word God in another rendition in Hebrew ʾĕlōah is derived from a base ʾilāh, an Arabic word, written without confusing vowel it is A-L-H in the Arabic script, pronounced ilah not eloah. Hebrew dropped the glottal stop and mumbled it, aramic mumbled a little less and it became elaha. Infact both are written written A-L-H in Arabic, it is pronounced i in Arabic and not A because it is an Alef with hamza below (إ أ ) They are two different forms of Alef. And it mean "a god", it is the non definitive form of A-L-L-H, in which the Alef is without a glottal stop/hamza,(ا), but this kind of nuance is lost in the dialect continua. infact "YHWH" itself is an Arabic word as discussed by Professor. Israel Knohl (Professor of Biblical studies at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem) in the paper" YHWH: The Original Arabic Meaning of the Name." jesus as his name is often misspelled due to the lack of the ayin sound in Greek, which was rendered to Iesous, coupling the nearest sound to ayin, same letter found in 'Iraq', which sounds entirely different in Arabic form 'Iran' in Arabic, with the -ous Greek suffix that Greeks typically add to their names 'HerodotOS', 'PlotinUS', 'AchelOUS' and later mumbled into a J. The yeshua rendition of Isa (his name in the Qur'an) PBUH which is purported to be the name of Jesus is KNOWN to had been taken from greek. Western Syriac also use "Isho". Western Aramaic (separate from Syriac which is a dialect of Eastern Aramaic) use "Yeshu". Western Syriac has been separate from Western Aramaic for about 1000 years. And sounds don't even match up. Syriac is a Christian liturgical language yet the four letters of the name of Jesus «ܝܫܘܥ» [ = Judeo-Babylonian Aramaic: «ישוע» ] sounds totally different in West vs East Syriac, viz. vocalized akin to Christian Arabic, Hebrew, Aramaic «ܝܶܫܽܘܥ» (Yēšūʿ) in West Syriac, but pronounced more akin to Muslim Arabic Quran character name Isa in East Syriac «ܝܑܼܫܘܿܥ» (ʾĪšōʿ). The reason for this confusion is their dropping of phonemes. Only someone that has no idea what the letters are or how they sound would have a name ending in a pharyngeal fricative like the ayin, if it were to be used in a name it would have had to be in the beginning, thus the Arabic rendition is the correct one. An example in English is how the appended -d is a common error amongst the English pronouncing Gaelic names. The name Donald arose from a common English mispronunciation of the Gaelic name Donal. Just how it is with donal becoming donald and the two becoming distinct and the original being regarded as something seperate so too did Isa PBUH turn to Iesous turn to jesus and when they tried going back to the original they confused it for yeshua ( ysu is how it is actually written) for Isa PBUH ( 3'eysah ) Schlözer in his preparation for the Arabia expedition in 1781 coined the term Semitic language: "From the Mediterranean to the Euphrates, from Mesopotamia to Arabia ruled one language, as is well known. Thus Syrians, Babylonians, Hebrews, and Arabs were one people (ein Volk). Phoenicians (Hamites) also spoke this language, which I would like to call the Semitic (die Semitische)." -Before Boas: The Genesis of Ethnography and Ethnology in the German By Han F. Vermeulen. He was only half right though, Arabic is the only corollary to "proto-semitic", infact the whole semitic classification is nonsensical as will be shown. "protosemetic" Alphabet (28), Arabic Alphabet (28), Latin transliteration, hebrew (22) 𐩠 𐩡 𐩢 𐩣 𐩤 𐩥 𐩦 𐩧 𐩨 𐩩 𐩪 𐩫 𐩬 𐩭 𐩮 𐩰 𐩱 𐩲 𐩳 𐩴 𐩵 𐩶 𐩷 𐩸 𐩹 𐩺 𐩻 𐩼 ا ب ت ث ج ح خ د ذ ر ز س ش ص ض ط ظ ع غ ف ق ك ل م ن ه و ي A b t ṯ j h kh d ḏ r z s sh ṣ ḍ ṭ ẓ ʿ ġ f q k l m n h w y א ב ג ד ה ו ז ח ט י כ ל מ נ ס ע פ צ ק ר ש ת Merged phonemes in hebrew and aramaic: ح, خ (h, kh) merged into only kh consonant remain س, ش (s, sh) merged into only Shin consonant remaining ط, ظ (ṭ/teth, ẓ) merged into only ṭ/teth consonant remaining ص, ض (ṣ, ḍ/Tsad ) merged into only ḍ/Tsad consonant remaining ع, غ (3'ayn, Ghayn) merged into a reducted ayin consonant remaining ت, ث (t/taw, th) merged into only t/taw consonant remaining The reason why the protoS alphabet here is 28 and not 29, is because the supposed extra letter is simply a س written in a different position, but it was shoehorned to obfuscated. In Arabic letter shapes are different depending on whether they are in the beginning , middle or end of a word. As a matter of fact, all of the knowledge needed for deciphering ancient texts and their complexity was derived from the Qur'an. It was by analyzing the syntactic structure of the Qur'an that the Arabic root system was developed. This system was first attested to in Kitab Al-Ayin, the first intralanguage dictionary of its kind, which preceded the Oxford English dictionary by 800 years. It was through this development that the concept of Arabic roots was established and later co-opted into the term 'semitic root,' allowing the decipherment of ancient scripts. In essence, they quite literally copied and pasted the entirety of the Arabic root. Hebrew had been dead, as well as all the other dialects of Arabic, until being 'revived' in a Frankensteinian fashion in the 18th and 19th centuries. The entire region spoke basically the same language, with mumbled dialect continuums spread about, and Arabic is the oldest form from which all these dialects branched off. As time passed, the language gradually became more degenerate, Language; When one looks at the actual linguistics, one will find that many were puzzled by the opposite, that is, how the other "semetic" languages were more "evolved" than Arabic, while Arabic had archaic features, not only archaic compared to bibilical Hebrew, Ethiopic, "Aramaic" contemporary "semetic" languages, but even archaic compared to languages from ancient antiquity; Ugaritic, Akkadain. What is meant here by Archaic is not what most readers think, it is Archaic not in the sense that it is simple, but rather that it is complex (think Latin to pig Latin or Italian or Old English, which had genders and case endings to modern English), not only grammatically, but also phonetically; All the so called semitic languages are supposed to have evolved from protosemetic, the Alphabet for protosemitic is that of the so called Ancient South Arabian (which interestingly corresponds with the traditional Arabic origins account) and has 28 Phonemes. Arabic has 28 phonemes. Hebrew has 22, same as Aramaic, and other "semitic" languages. Now pause for a second and think about it, how come Arabic, a language that is supposed to have come so late has the same number of letters as a language that supposedly predates it by over a millennium (Musnad script ~1300 BCE). Not only is the glossary of phonemes more diverse than any other semitic language, but the grammar is more complex, containing more cases and retains what's linguists noted for its antiquity, broken plurals. Indeed, a linguist has once noted that if one were to take everything we know about languages and how they develop, Arabic is older than Akkadian (~2500 BCE). And then the Qur'an appeared with the oldest possible form of the language thousands of years later. This is why the Arabs of that time were challenged to produce 10 similar verses, and they couldn't. People think it's a miracle because they couldn't do it, but I think the miracle is the language itself. They had never spoken Arabic, nor has any other language before or since had this mathematical precision. And when I say mathematical, I quite literally mean mathematical. Now how is it that the Qur'an came thousands of years later in an alphabet that had never been recorded before, and in the highest form the language had ever taken? The creator is neither bound by time nor space, therefore the names are uttered as they truly were, in a language that is lexically, syntactically, phonemically, and semantically older than the oldest recorded writing. In fact, that writing appears to have been a simplified version of it. Not only that, but it would be the equivalent of the greatest works of any particular language all appearing in one book, in a perfect script and in the highest form the language could ever take. It is so high in fact, that it had yet to be surpassed despite the fact that over the last millennium the collection of Arabic manuscripts when compared on word-per-word basis in Western Museums alone, when they are compared with the collected Greek and Latin manuscripts combined, the latter does not constitute 1 percent of the former as per German professor Frank Griffel, in addition all in a script that had never been recorded before. Thus, the enlightenment of mankind from barbarism and savagery began, and the age of reason and rationality was born from its study. God did bring down the Qur’an, Mohamed is his Messenger.

[@nickg0261]

Affleck is so lucky that the late great Christopher Hitchens was not on this panel.

[@brianjoe1425]

NickG 02 agreed!!!! That would’ve been epic.

[@michaelangeloright704]

Bennifer would cry if Christopher Hitchens was on that guest panel. .. So true

[@1982romit]

Haha can't agree more. Sam is much more compassionate in criticism than Hitch who would have minced him..

[@michaelangeloright704]

Listen at 2:10 Bennifer realized what he is going to say. . We are Endowed by Our Creator That All Men Are Created Equal. He stops himself to then say We are endowed by our Fore Fathers... Rich guy Bennifer what has happened. Aka Sj.snowflake now. Relax bro don't do that to yourself Bennifer. .. Well the damage is done.

[@strangerdanger1271]

Sam is great but Hitch would have not stood for any bullshit from Batman.

[@sebastianmelmoth685]

Why are movie stars consulted on intellectual issues?

[@Illumirage]

actors get eyeballs to watch I thnk

[@mykmcgrane]

Their influence. Doesn't lend credibility, but, it's why.

[@ibane7682]

Ratings

[@coolmofo123]

I think Ben was an idiot in this segment but to your question, nothing says a movie star can't also be an intellectual. Most aren't but that doesn't all.

[@A92_]

Cause they want everyone to love them.

[@kensimmerman1257]

The whole time Affleck is saying racist I want someone to say Muslims are a religion not a race

[@mike47734]

Islam is a religion that should be criticized. Muslims as people (not terrorists) are a faction of people and should be treated like everyone else and not generalized. It’s the religion not the people. Treated Muslims badly or unfairly is bigotry, criticizing Islam on real problems with the religion is fine.

[@kensimmerman1257]

@@mike47734 definitely you said it much better personally I don't care for any religion they all effect people who are not apart of them the idea that any religion causes non believers or believers in other religions any kind of problems is crazy and I definitely do not think Islam is any different than any other religion all of them are soaked in blood and suffering Islam definitely still practice as a generality more of there stone age beliefs but Christianity definitely had the same kind of beliefs and people just don't put up with it anymore hopefully we get to the same place with Islam

[@HawaiiKnut]

People calling people racist for criticizing Islamists are the real racists because they're the ones equating religious fanatics with a ethnicity.

[@konradschargel5314]

They are both....

[@nickm.5931]

Well, though I’m not a Muslim, I would say that’s not entirely true. AFAIK, many arab peoples are practicing muslims (Muslim: a person following the belief in Islam). If you were in certain parts of the Middle East, people may even use “Muslim” to describe the culture. But yes, “Muslim” does mean a believer in Islam

[@joecarino4778]

Ben Affleck is a true American.

[@rbassdo]

Afleck lost the debate when his emotions took over - which was pretty much at the outset.

[@ivankrushensky]

6:05 here's Ben, realizing he is out gunned, trying to recall another line from the Declaration of Independence- of which he Google searched just before walking on set. Poor Ben.

[@Ropeadopeya]

Christopher Hitchens would have owned this guy.

[@jfsoccervids]

+Xadem Ben Affleck doesn't even have 1% of the knowledge that Dawkins has involving religion so that would be a pretty stupid debate.

[@Task4ce534]

Why are you mentioning Dawkins, he said Christopher Hitchens? I like Dawkins, but IMO he's a terrible debater. Harris does a better job.

[@MattLeader]

+Ben Alexander I think Harris would have 'owned' Mr Affleck if he were ever allowed to get a word in edge ways. Ben Affleck has a tendency to shout down his opponents because his arguments are paper-thin, and would be easily torn to shreds by Harris if given the chance. Incidentally, Bill Maher should perhaps put a sock in it for a few minutes too. Hitchens was an incredible force and a brilliant mind, but I think he would have had similar problems in this situation. The only way to counter loud-mouths that don't let their opponents put their views across is to shout even louder.

[@ilyassebadr8389]

+Ben Alexander THAT BOY WAS OWNED BY RAMDAN

[@CryptoChanakya]

+Ben Alexander Gosh i miss Hitch.

[@westonparker5940]

Speaking as an atheist, I'd like to hear what Ben's stance would be if this discussion was about fundamentalist Christianity.

[@Homecat53]

Exactly.

[@sethfrazer7404]

He wouldn't care because somehow it's "racist" to criticize Islam, but perfectly exempt from prejudice when criticizing Christianity. MAJOR double-standard

[@GiantsOLB53]

Def. Seth

[@abdelarmstr5173]

Christianity is easy target, cause nobody comes after you.

[@beavis408]

This episode is legendary.

[@funsea4167]

Ben Affleck broke the cardinal rule of civil discourse. He let his emotions overcome him...

[@masongalioth4110]

AM_Pharaoh the first step on the path to the darkside...

[@maria369]

That's why he is a temper tantrum throwing toddler.

[@funsea4167]

Maria Bulsara To quote the Vulcans, “Logic offers us a serenity humans seldom experience.”

[@maria369]

@@funsea4167 Yes, logic and reasoning are a rarity these days.

[@funsea4167]

Maria Bulsara As is getting the news untainted so you may formulate your own opinions on a topic...

[@breadman924]

Proof that Matt Damon was 95% of the brains behind Good Will Hunting

[@breadman924]

@shea holliman thank you for restating the main idea of my comment

[@rishabhkashyap690]

@@breadman924 lmao

[@eleSDSU]

Who was the other 5%?

[@imonarollagay]

Larry Lewinsohn I dunno. Robin Williams?

[@ilovemydog3791]

Giggling like a little girl with blonde ringlets screaming "we're gonna be rich and famous" does not constitute 5% of the work.

[@SherifElnewehy]

I now understand why it was Matt Damon who played Will Hunting.

[@Tonysmithmusic]

ben looks like someones told him there’s no santa claus.

[@goranmilic442]

Disappointment on Ben's face is understanding, he didn't know that percentage of radicals is, although they are still minority, that big. Liberals need to understand that their task is not just be against conservatives of their own country. Enemy of my enemy is not necessarily my friend, he could be even worse.

[@byrons1339]

You think this is bad, check out the Cenk Ugyar (TYT) vs. Sam Harris debate

[@andrewdobson813]

@Corneilious38 No he doesn't you atheist snowflake

[@lartisteautravail]

All he did was get angry that the only time Maher ever brings up Islam is to broad brush it in a negative light. Which, true... Do you all think if religion didn’t exist people wouldn’t look to science or other things to justify their bigotry? They already have.

[@davidleomorley889]

Q: In the last one hundred years, how many Muslim nations have sent thousands of armed soldiers into western nations to overthrow their governments, torture their citizens, kill hundreds of thousands of their people, bomb their cities, conquer their societies and take the profits of their natural resources for themselves and the dictators they install in power? A: Zero times. Q: In the last one hundred years, how many western nations have sent thousands of armed soldiers into muslim nations to overthrow their governments, torture their citizens, kill hundreds of thousands of their people, bomb their cities, conquer their societies and take the profits of their natural resources for themselves and the dictators they install in power? A: Dozens of times. Name a muslim nation. I'll tell you when they were attacked. Give me a decade in the 20th century, I'll give you a list of Muslim nations that were attacked by the west during that period. Whatever anyone's views on Israel are, the very creation of Israel as a modern state was the end result of an act of white Europeans being horribly aggressive against semitic people in Europe. The backlash against that racism resulted in many European jews going south and taking out an act of aggression and terror against a native population of muslim people living in a land which had been called Palestine for decades. The muslim population were suddenly deemed unworthy of living on their land they and their ancestors had been living on since time immemorial because they weren’t jewish. Israel's race baiting, extremely violent settler movement has brought in hundreds of thousands of religious Europeans and extremist Americans who believe they have a "right" to take away a muslim family’s land and home....because they had an ancestor that was jewish and the land therefore belongs to them. Yes…the racist, violent, Israeli government has decided, with the backing of the violent empire, my own country, United States, that they have a “god given” right to take away any muslim family's home....whenever they chose to. What year is this?? It sounds more like the ancient crusades. Of course, If you dare to be honest about all of this, if you dare to point out a view that looks at the facts in a balanced and even way and doesn’t adhere to what this brainwashed society tells you you must believe,…you are called "antisemitic.” Why? Because that is the only thing they have left as a defense. After all of the excuses for their aggression and violent horrors have been examined and exposed….the last defense many have is to claim “You hate me because I’m Jewish”….or because I’m a Christian. Christian zionism is has a great deal to do with what fuels Israel’s ability to be vicious and cruel. Just imagine if the situation was the other way around, and western nations such as the US and UK had been experiencing what muslim nations have been receiving from the western nations for the last 100 years. Not only would there be more extremist views against Muslims in general, but western women would have less rights, less power and minorities would receive even more discrimination and oppression. If western nation’s governments had been overthrown by Muslim led nations, outspoken religious leaders would be controlling our governments today and those who rely on iron age theology would be dictating the nature of our political and social life. The western world, including Israel, is filled to the brim with blind, privileged, self-righteous idiots who have no idea how the world really works or why much of the developing world is such a mess. media.giphy.com/media/eTH6uICbjrc9G/giphy.gif CHRISTIANS MORE SUPPORTIVE OF TORTURE THAN NON-RELIGIOUS AMERICANS religiondispatches.org/christians-more-supportive-of-torture-than-non-religious-americans/ Churchgoers Most Supportive of Iraq War news.gallup.com/poll/21937/protestants-frequent-churchgoers-most-supportive-iraq-war.aspx

[@nulliusinverba5742]

I didnt know Batman was so dense

[@richardwinckel383]

His cowl was too tight and damaged what little active gray matter hae has.

[@maani111]

Dense because he’s defending innocent people who didn’t do anything wrong?

[@NeptuneGuy78]

Okay, why was Ben invited?

[@Cheshire090]

They wanted a new Batman

[@navylaks2]

He was Batman ;) lol

[@MrSridharMurthy]

They were hoping that Batman would save them from the Isis menace ! ..but Batman went berserk just talking about Isis..😂

[@respectfulgamer7232]

If Batman joins forces with the ISIS we're really fucked.

[@leonardocarpezano7265]

Cannon fodder

[@timmonapier8832]

" A friend of mine in Pakistan who was shot for defending people accused of apostasy...." Pretty much sums it up

[@yusufmuslim4420]

Just fyi the apostacy laws in pakistan were created by the british colonial empire not by muslims. Good to know and yes they should get rod of them.

[@drvNYK]

Salman Taseer is the name of the guy who was killed.

[@timmonapier8832]

@@yusufmuslim4420 Partition and the formation of Pakistan occurred on 15 August 1947 CE. ' For the Prophet said"If someone discards his religion , kill him" ' Comes from Sahih al Burkhari Hadith 4:52:260 Written Circa 846 C.E. Go figure!

[@timmonapier8832]

@@yusufmuslim4420 The inclusion of Sharia occurred under General Muhammed Zia ul Haq Who took over the Government through martial law in 1977. He then ran Pakistan until 1988 and was responsible for implementing the Federal Shariat Court. Why do I have to point out this to you when opening a history book and reading it for ten minutes would have stopped you saying such foolish things?

[@yusufmuslim4420]

​@@timmonapier8832 False. "The offences relating to religion were first codified by India's British rulers in 1860, and were expanded in 1927. Pakistan inherited these laws when it came into existence after the partition of India in 1947." You are conflating "sharia" from specific apostasy laws. They are not one the same. Also you missed the part where I said I was strongly against apostasy laws anywhere in the world. Muslim majority countries are post colonial construct nation states which are relatively newer in their development. The reality is that the Western Empires were doing the colonization and the majority of the Muslim world just got their independence from years of enslavement, genocide, and oppression less than a century ago. Just like it took the USA hundreds of years to end slavery and they are yet still working on racism it will take Muslim majority countries many many years to come to fruition.

[@aaronsbarker]

Affleck was triggered IMMEDIATELY. Didn't actually bother to listen the rest of the discussion. Tuned out. It's the exact response I've seen over and over from other equally blind and ignorant apologists.

[@markanthonyk1504]

Aaron Barker Affleck is not a apologist you loser

[@syrianatheist7956]

Yes, it is frustrating seeing people blame every thing on Muslims when America and Russia have killed more people then every terrorist group combined ,

[@lesfry5897]

Thats Liberals

[@danielanderson2716]

Poor Sam Harris has been chickening out from debating Mohammed Hijab for long now because Hijab will retire him from his debate career! 😆

[@srahrv]

I come back to watch this every so often just to remind myself that sometimes truly irrational and emotionally-driven exchanges *do* happen, and sometimes no amount of patience, evidence, or reason can lower the amount of influence that one unreasonable person can have on others in a conversation. This is also just an incredibly succinct depiction of that dynamic, and in this exchange it is so clear where the reason is and is not. There is a scenario where either Bill or Sam is not so knowledgeable or clear regarding the facts of what they are talking about, and in which self-doubt might lead to backtracking and equivocation and could cause Sam or Bill to think that *they* are the irrational one in the conversation. Sometimes when the world seems to be going crazy, and I start to think - could I be wrong, is it actually me? I watch this video, I read Catch-22 and The Feminine Mystique again, listen to some George Carlin, try to regain equilibrium.

[@patrickoduinn4787]

Ben made a complete idiot of himself. He tried to take on a real intellectual and looked like a teenager throwing a tantrum.

[@masonprince798]

Are you okay? He is defending a religion. He is much smarter than you so dont talk crap. Keep staying in your mom's basement.

[@Misterlikeseverythin]

Ben is exactly like the PC principal from south park.

[@גלזינגר]

this comment is the best one I've seen. so underrated!

[@thandinkosi6034]

This interview never gets old

[@devinludwig]

Ben is like "but I'm big and handsome!"

[@drew123994]

Or irrelevant. Fuck this hits hard today

[@stevefrenchize]

Ben must cringe at this daily

[@shabbydabby9976]

This aged like shit. 10 years later, now we came to know, ISIS was made by hilary clinton, Al-Qaeda was made by CIA, USA invaded over 45 countries since WW2, including Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan, Syria wars... so stop blaming muslims for what YOU have created and done. Go educate yourselves, instead of listening to mainstream media that's been pushing agendas and brainwashing your stupid asses.

[@Brocephus613]

@@stevefrenchize I'm guessing Ben still thinks he put these intolerant assholes in their place...

[@jakemalone9705]

This comment section is pitiful 😂 Years later, guess whos right

[@joecole7122]

And how was Ben right?

[@mikekeim8867]

Too much emotion can override logic.

[@Scorch428]

It happens even more on the right...

[@davidpfeifer9489]

Scorch428 Lol

[@TheKilla1777]

No Ben is right he just doesn’t know how to win a debate.

[@JSTONEMUSIK]

Ben Affleck is on the maximum amount of roids at this point ...

[@tempo869]

Toronto Rapper JSTONE Ok Joe Rogan

[@wetdog5431]

Toronto Rapper JSTONE lol anything better than Canadian fucking rap music lol

[@deadarmd]

Toronto Rapper JSTONE yeah. He's a smart guy. But somehow he's the biggest and strongest he's ever been with the most definition on his frame into his 40s lol. Then after the movie he ages 10 years.

[@vintincrows6909]

Toronto Rapper JSTONE, oh fuck, they blindsided Affleck and the result was a turinabol-infused response. I was listening to an interview w a guy that trained actors for roles that demanded a jacked physique. The trainer claimed that he'd never seen one male actor that did not run a cycle haha. I wasn't surprised.

[@Tbone.357]

Toronto Rapper JSTONE ding ding ding!!!! Yes!!! Affleck simply refused to listen. you can see his smug-ass-face when people were trying to give him facts.

[@readthebiblewm]

this is so painful to watch...

[@Bawbster1]

not for us on the right.

[@Pllayer064]

ikr, batman's coke is insane quality, where did he get that?

[@t.n.7771]

When a celebrity who probably has done research on this for a role or movie for a couple years tries to argue with an Expert who has been doing this as a career. Great example of Dunning-Kruger Effect.

[@mohamedibrahim1768]

And when this man u call expert says things wrong about my religion and not truth so i have the right to call him a “ignorant”

[@JsHd-iy8il]

Ignorance right here

[@Stitchman3875]

Sam Harris is not an expert. But he is very dishonest. When he is confronted by people who actually know what they’re talking about, he makes up some stupid thought experiment. It’s easier for Harris and Maher to argue with a drunken actor, but when they are confronted with the fact that the US contributed heavily by funding, arming, and training terrorist groups, and that the US interventions were largely to blame over there, they buckle immediately.

[@keifer7813]

Wait Ben's done research on Islam for a role?

[@Itsasony]

Affleck studied middle eastern affairs in university.

[@VR46314]

They all go on to prove Sams point for him it’s actually hilarious

[@AshaD2345]

All talking about "brave muslims" who are coming out to criticize islam. Why are they brave if not for the fact that elements of islam are damn dangerous.

[@SirBlackReeds]

So, we should ignore his TDS?

[@whiterthanyou1]

The audience can't decide what to applaud for.

[@nolmets9397]

Nathan F liberals heads exploded when they debate Islam.

[@petunia4141]

They never can

[@pladimir_vutin]

@@nolmets9397 it's called a " stack overflow ". they simply can't take anymore!

[@libertyovertyranny3991]

Nathan F bunch of clapping seals

[@rels_dna07]

"Feelings don't care about your facts" - Ben Affleck, probably

[@santiagoserna4]

Ben "Straw man Falacy" Affleck

[@birhangijam3679]

Hahahahahahahahahahahahahaha

[@husseinboulahlib2839]

What facts ?

[@husseinboulahlib2839]

" islam is the mother-load of bad ideas " says the atheist intellectual with the large fan-base , the dumbest sentence in this talk .

[@noehctuccmliw]

@@husseinboulahlib2839 ... Oh hey 👋 Ben, glad you could join us again!!

[@FladdoT]

Almost a decade ago… and it’s crazy how much bill Maher is spot on

[@KaniAbdi-bz2db]

😂😂😂😂 USA is the problem in this world and everything going wrong

[@DC3Refom]

​@@KaniAbdi-bz2db no its shtlim

[@MrSpiderlions]

He isn’t on a lot of things. He’s looking at it wrong, I haven’t met a muslim who supports isis or terrorism in general and I grew up 40 mins away from mecca. Also, Islam having the punishment for apostasy and adultery being death is true, although I don’t believe its practiced anywhere but banana republics. The way that people should look at it is, that muslims are just simply more religious than most, and one of the reasons for that, is that muslims generally come from countries that are either in war or poverty and people from those backgrounds are usually more religious or radical (think medieval europe). Because if you look at these punishments they’re identical to whats in the Old Testament. Islam in itself isn’t uniquely violent as a religion, but muslims are uniquely religious if that makes sense. And just to clear something up, terrorism has never been permitted in islam, and if you look at islamic history, there’s really nothing similar to whats going on today.

[@brandonsheets1883]

@@MrSpiderlionsWe judge religions by their source texts. In the case of Islam, the Quran explicitly states that men are superior to women, apostates and non-believers deserve death, and homosexuality is condemned. I don’t care if it’s your religion or not, these things are very problematic. I’ll never understand the stigma behind criticizing religion, it should be scrutinized as any other idea would.

[@MrSpiderlions]

@@brandonsheets1883 non of what you said is untrue except for the non-believers deserve death part. Throughout history, islamic empires always had very large non-believing populations in them because of the nature of conquest and they only had to pay

[@DrSpoculus]

When someone doesn't write your words for you ahead of time...

[@OfficialJab]

5:53 That's how it begins. The fever. The rage. The feeling of powerlessness that turns good men cruel.

[@Clifton100]

OfficialJab Also, he's been cheating on Jennifer Garner. He's not a high class guy.

[@Stratahoovius]

OfficialJab lol, I saw that too

[@RSpravus]

Clifton100 Lol where the hell did you get that information? From some gossip/rumor website? You are actually stupid if you believe that

[@Cookie41Monster]

OfficialJab Someone watched Game of Thrones.

[@OfficialJab]

Cookie41Monster Nope never have. What does that have to do with Game of Thrones?

[@ViteloElyos]

When liberals get too liberal to fight for liberal issues.

[@derekwilliamson5386]

It's like a circle. You get so liberal you become a radical conservative

[@Sheahova]

You definitely see alot of extreme liberals going extreme conservative must be that both sides are a hypocrisy

[@ViteloElyos]

Nah, it means people can be dumb. And some are hypocrites, that's never going to change.

[@Sheahova]

No and most hypocrites

[@Unoriginalswine]

Yea it's like trump supporters who yell at other trump supporters for not supporting trump enough

[@pritiahuja1]

It’s nice to hear them all talking freely. I don’t think this conversation could happen today, which is sad.

[@justgivemethetruth]

I think it could, and a lot of conversations like this happen on Real Time fairly often.

[@josealexi5141]

@7:00 when the panel on the left starts boasting about how "other brave muslims are risking their lives to speak out" they *MAKE* Sam Harris's point!! Speaking out, about _anything_ , shouldn't put your life at risk. That's the entire point Sam & Bill are making.

[@grantshalks7338]

Bang on .... precisely what I was thinking. 👍

[@HUGEACT-MAN]

Ya but that's not on script bro. Not woke enough

[@Frederick0220]

This segment is 5 years old yet it’s as timely as ever.

[@jayd1342]

It is more true today, however guys like Bill Maher are not even talking about it anymore. It is being Buried by everyone in media.

[@Frederick0220]

@@jayd1342 Sad but true!

[@danielanderson2716]

Poor Sam Harris has been chickening out from debating Mohammed Hijab for long now because Hijab will retire him from his debate career! 😆

[@tenlekdhen6647]

Ben seems to think he's Will Hunting. But turned out to be the other guy with blonde pony tail.

[@agtwolf6030]

Hilarious!

[@michaelhiggins2562]

@@agtwolf6030 So his logic is too powerful for you to handle? Interesting.

[@aaronhodgdon]

Bill mahar: "my boyz wicked smaht" Sam Harris: "how you like dem apples"

[@andrewgarratt1503]

lmao

[@gagefraw3182]

OH SHIT!

[@havesomehumour]

The religion of peace? How so? Ask them. Their answer is "Everyone must become a follower of Islam, then world peace will be achieved". Sauron...that was Sauron's method and goal in the Lord of the Rings.

[@Stitchman3875]

We invented and trained, armed, funded, and installed them. Not mentioned backed coups and installed fundamentalist dictators to do our bidding. The US aren’t the good guys by any means. We have generated far more violence in the world than all the fundamentalist groups combine by a landslide. Bill and Sam are hypocrites in to highest degree.

[@toms8393]

“So what your saying” is always a great indication of strong argument 😅😅

[@Xavier_Coogat_the_Mambo_King]

"Let me just strawman you real quick" lol

[@imadeyouwaste1.84secondsre6]

Cathy and Ben will get along really well 😂

[@alexisjuillard4816]

You could probably do a scientific study demonstrating that "so what you're saying" is followed by a strawman 99% of the time

[@alecgurdon5197]

3:43 agreed

[@danieltarraf6953]

when you are a word munpilative like harris or jp tgen you have to understand what they are thinking

[@solodolotrevino]

5 years ago I sided with Ben Affleck simply because of my bias towards compassion but as I’ve grown I realize the importance of Sam Harris’ point and that it flew right over Ben’s thick skull. I love my Muslim brothers and sisters but Islam is NOT beyond criticism.

[@solodolotrevino]

Natalie Brown the point was that it isn’t Islamaphobic to point out Islam’s particular issue with extremist ideology & people like Ben can never have an honest conversation about it without virtue signaling. Ben was not listening to the argument properly and took it as bigotry. Sam Harris has equally criticized other religions throughout his career and people don’t bat an eye. It’s because this particular religion has faced discrimination in our country that we tense up when it’s being criticized by a white guy. Edit: I do think America’s presence in the Middle East are the reason for a lot of these problems and Harris/Maher failed to acknowledge that

[@anaarkadievna]

@@nataliebrown3685"" things that would never fly if they were on Christianity or Judaism."" :)))) Christianity is attacked all time by leftist, give me a break...

[@nightprowler6336]

@@nataliebrown3685 most comedians make fun of Christianity and u don't see us threatening them or protesting. Meanwhile Muslims protest for the comedian persecution and send him death threats.

[@garylantow-humble7611]

Really

[@criert135]

@@nataliebrown3685 I hope you weren’t serious or that you have broadened your mind since you made that comment.

[@jjwallnutts]

Man, Ben couldn’t even let him finish his first thought. I bet he’s great at parties

[@LoLaughNow]

I don’t bet I KNOW he’s great at parties cuz most likely these are the kinda people that are great at parties

[@maxhydekyle2425]

He's a fun guy when he's not depressed. At this time he was very, very depressed.

[@jjwallnutts]

@@maxhydekyle2425 hanging out with him a lot during this time? Lol

[@goattoon6372]

Hey I love Jews but the thing is.... No, you should immediately stop listening. Unless you're a racist.

[@jjwallnutts]

@@goattoon6372 so you’re scared to hear the end of that sentence? And you missed sams point, just like Ben

[@anammalik_]

New found respect for Ben

[@grahamers]

Missed opportunity to rebut Ben's last point about Philippines. The proper analogy is "Assume there is an ancient law in the Philippines that says people who say they want to move out of the Philippines should be killed." Would you criticize people who want the law to be enforced? Yes. Would you support the people who want to abolish the law? Yes. Would you criticize the law? Yes. So....criticizing the LAW is not the same thing as criticizing all Filipinos, just like criticizing Islam is not the same thing as criticizing all Muslims. Get it now?

[@brianzapata6237]

Fire comment

[@marinae.3504]

👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻absolutely

[@raynic1173]

Or as Bill was trying to inject....if you made current Catholicism have old testament rules, wouldn't you criticize it. That would hit home, I assume Ben was raised Catholic.

[@MichelleVisageOnlyFans]

I don't think Ben Affleck's pea brain would have grappled well with an analogy like this one, or any analogy, for that matter. He is just a moron with an intelligence deficiency to understand parallels, metaphors and analogies! Plus he's a hollyweirdo leftie, facts don't have any effect on them, only emotions!

[@DragNetJoe]

Now add that a basic premise of Philippine law is that "The Law" a is divine revelation from God and trying to change that law is the work of the devil. The Law is so perfect that it can really only be read in it's original language. Now you have a problem that's a little deeper than a bad law. "And the word of your Lord has been fulfilled / completed in truth and in justice. None can alter His words, and He is the Hearing, the Knowing. (6:115)"

[@Bsully144]

Ben Affleck: “LOOOOOUUUUUUDDDD NOOOISSESSS!!!!”

[@alexriahi9715]

😂😂😂

[@danielanderson2716]

Sam Harris has been chickening out from experienced Muslim Apologists for years. He knows, his points will be refuted within a snap & he will cease to exist as a hero to his gullible clueless atheist audience! 😆

[@Kindaya1]

@@danielanderson2716 Right, so he avoids talking to theocratic fascists and people obscuring the threat of theocratic fascism... I'm curious, did you have someone specific in mind?

[@danielanderson2716]

Poor Sam Harris has been chickening out from debating Mohammed Hijab for long now because Hijab will retire him from his debate career! 😆

[@Kindaya1]

@@danielanderson2716 Sounds more like Hijab wants to use Harris' fame to increase his own... Just curious based on your name and views; you dont happen to be a Swedish communist, are you? I´ve noticed they suddently started loving religion in past few years, or well, Islam only really. Guess they view it as a great battering ram to destroy western philosophy... Why do you seemingly like islam...?

[@TheFeige]

Ben Affleck in this video is the definition of cognitive dissonance.

[@panzeresq5775]

Ben is a rebel, he had TDS way before it was a thing.

[@danielanderson2716]

The chicken Sam Harris has been chickening out from debating experienced Muslim & Christian apologists for years now. 😁

[@samuraicop4930]

@@danielanderson2716 lol

[@Nina-fi1tx]

@@danielanderson2716 He seems like he's looking for brownie points

[@himwhoisnottobenamed5427]

@@danielanderson2716 Except he has. But keep living in your echo chamber, trying to troll people.

[@4larenz6]

Prophet Muhammad said the greatest form of jihad is against your own temptations to sin.

[@mattz8775]

Afflec was performing. He had themes, big words, and even full sentences...pre assembled...ready to go...regardless of what else was said.

[@jakec.holdwin6544]

LMFAO, that reminds me of me to be fair. I learning to debate not professionally or anything like that but to improve my ability to form logic arguments in real time and learn see when someone is trying to trap me in argument. Each week my friends get together and we debate for an or two on a predefined topic. Sometimes I come in big words even full sentences ready to go regardless of what anyone say. Bare in mind I still learning to formulate arguments, it is not that easy.

[@HoldanOut]

In his mind he was Will Hunting. In reality he was Chuckie Sullivan.

[@DR-qi3pv]

Lmfao!!!

[@Baghuul]

dead

[@WriteCold]

Worse, man. He was Morgan Sullivan.

[@steven7650]

Watching Mr Affleck unable to control his emotions and engage in rhetorical arguments proved this point perfectly. Watch his body language. He is listening with intent to speak not understand and counter or contribute back to the narrative. Everything after the opening remark was predicated on an emotional response to feelings he has not engaged in the actual conversation.

[@MileyCyrusSwollenGums]

"Listening with intent to speak" I love that it's insane how many people do that including even myself in the past.

[@douglasschubert8101]

watch ben's physiology when he says "freedom of speech"

[@Allahfearingman]

Yea because we know how understanding republicans are towards us...just like these two are making up their own Bs lies and y'all are going right along with it

[@noehctuccmliw]

@@douglasschubert8101 ... Hunched forward, I thought he was going to wear out a hole in his lower lip with all the intense revd-up finger rub action ♨️

[@KK-jb1fy]

I see the thesaurus is coming in handy.

[@thecommongood3914]

Love Michael Steele's capacity to sift for the actual points to debate rather than the preferences.

[@maxyo288]

Just watch Ben. He is coked out of his mind. Arguments are exploding out of his brain

[@troyefunkhouser9038]

Is he coked out or on steroids? My guess is both. He was beefing up for the Batman role at the time, after all.

[@WilliamWallis]

Troye Funkhouser agree. A little from column A, a little from column B.

[@masofo4769]

You call those arguments? Hahahhaha

[@dave1927p]

No that’s Just how every Elite leftist Responds thinking everyone will agree because that’s why they are used to

[@0xsergy]

@@masofo4769 i mean for him it's like writing a paper on nuclear physics soo

[@twstf8905]

Ben Affleck clutching his pearls is just embarrassing.

[@darev6780]

Celebrity Virtue Signalling versus intellectual reasoning.

[@joshuabowman2970]

Wheres Ricky Gervais when you need him? 😆

[@SleepyGeoCave-ew3lh]

How to spot an idiot during an argument ,they won't let you complete your sentence😂.

[@devpandya1715]

And he keeps on saying that he was waiting for Sam to explain

[@BernadottesGhost]

Everything Ben Affleck said was right. Imagine if I said “the Talmud is the motherlode of bad ideas: it says every jew can have 2800 gentile slaves” and then pointed to the opioid epidemic perpetrated by a Jewish pharma family as part of the Talmudic values hurting our society…

[@Istrice963]

🙏🙏

[@Stitchman3875]

Bill Maher and Sam Harris both react in similar fashion when they are confronted by people who know they’re talking about. Ben Affleck is a lightweight. But when Bill Maher discussed the issue with Piers Morgan, he went irate. When it was Glenn Greenwald, Maher started the smug comments. Sam Harris in his argument with Noam Chomsky tried some painfully stupid thought experiment. In this particular theory, Harris and Maher’s position is very simple “It’s okay when we do it.”

[@BernadottesGhost]

Sam Harris and Bill Maher are just two logical guys who just happen to be Jewish using facts and reason to conclude that Israel is our greatest ally and Islam is the motherlode of bad ideas.