The Problem of Evil feat. Saf Chowdhury | Thought Adventure Podcast #13

[@RajaBabu12174]

TAP is going to the biggest Islamic podcast. InshaAllah

[@homtanks7259]

Make dua

[@HarryNicNicholas]

yep, you can't beat religion as a scam. you jsut accuse everyone you disagree with as being the devil. you're idiots.

[@iamannocent2913]

@@HarryNicNicholas just*

[@PabloSensei]

@@HarryNicNicholas why are you seething so much in the comments?

[@RajaBabu12174]

@@HarryNicNicholas What's your problem dude?

[@jaed123]

This channel needs to have way more subscribers.

[@homtanks7259]

Share it then. do something

[@EzziiG]

I've been saying this for so long. This channel and the topics discussed are so important. Every Muslim needs to see these guys videos.

[@DePeaceHunter]

Basically Pinecreek argument is: 1. Allah has two choices, to create human with freewill whom He knows some will end up in hell, or 2. Not create anything so there's no suffering. 3. Allah chose 1, which is icky (personal feeling), therefore Allah doesn't exist. My question is what makes Atheist think that if God exists, He would have only created a world where there's no suffering? Why they think God is under some sort of obligation to create only certain type of world? For all I know God is free to create whatever He wants, He can even create a universe where there's only suffering with no goodness whatsoever if He wants, that wouldn't prove/disprove His existence.

[@kutsc3792]

That's the same argument that AP makes

[@DePeaceHunter]

@@kutsc3792 AP's argument is sligtly different: 1. Allah is most merciful 2. Allah create human knowing they'll end up in hell 3. Therefore Allah not most merciful and Islam is incoherent. #3 is simply false because the second premise doesn't negate the first premise. Most merciful simply means He has the most mercy of all things that can give mercy.

[@kutsc3792]

@@DePeaceHunter their premises are different but I think they try to come to the same or similar conclusion... An emotional one

[@ibrahimx28]

To me, if God choose to not create people who will go to Hell (instead of going to both Heaven and Hell), it would be unjust to those people. Just because these people will go to Hell doesn't mean they don't have the RIGHT to EXIST.

[@dorarie3167]

@@ibrahimx28 But isn’t a main point expressed by AP that a god creates humans and bestows them with faculties to examine reality and evidence for that god’s existence. Then, when a human exercises free will and comes to conclusions based on god-given faculties and available evidence, they may be punished for not reaching the conclusion desired by that god that it, in fact, exists or that a Muslim or Christian god exists. This appears unjust and unmerciful.

[@MoSiddeek]

Mr. Icky only made me stronger in my belief. I have absolutely no problem with heaven and hell, and I'm grateful for the chance to be exposed to Allah's mercy, even if just in this world. May He include us in his mercy in the hereafter. "...To Him belongs all praise in the First life and in the Hereafter... " Al-Qasas 70 Alhamdullillah!

[@HarryNicNicholas]

well it would make you stringer, the thibker a person is the more gullible they are and the easier it is to leave the poor sucker to dig his own grave.

[@AzalDaniel]

Yes but still unfortunate for the majority of humanity who were unexposed to his mercy

[@blackcatxiii7757]

This was perhaps the most intellectually satisfying stream on TAP. Dealing with the supposed trope atheist try to use to dismantle theist ( the problem of evil. ) PineCreek got dismantled When asked to solve the problem through his worldview he strongly refused. We witnessed him struggle to find a contradiction with the Islamic answer to this supposed “problem”. Not only that PineCreek was reduced to trying to make an emotional argument aka “Make Muslims feel ICKY”. It’s almost like saying a theist who refuses Atheism is justified because they have a ICKY feeling ; not logic or reason. Anybody who really thinks this guy is a intellectual is bankrupt. TAP brothers Jazak Allahu Khair!

[@amirareads6517]

It was really satisfying. He wanted to make us feel Icky but instead we got satisfaction by seeing his "hypothetical experiment" dismantled. What a great way to start my day! His intellectual bankruptcy is exposed alas!

[@AzamatBagatov413]

I have a nickname for Pinecreek: The emotional vulnerable atheist 😂😂😂

[@arpitsarkar5718]

I mean, anything can be reduced to argument from emotion. For instance, why does Allah take offense when non believers insult him? Appeal to emotion. What is logically contradictory about insulting the prophet being an act of evil? Nothing at all, just an appeal to emotion.

[@AzamatBagatov413]

@@arpitsarkar5718Arpit bhai, You are comparing apples and oranges. Pinecreek came on the podcast and was expected to make a logical rational argument for the non existence of God. He was arguing from emotion, rather he had no arguments. He was just making emotional statements. He first said that he was making an argument about Islam being logically incoherent. Then he admitted he's using emotion. God doesn't exist because hell exists? 😂 An argument deficient of logic, but full of emotion. Anyone can make emotional arguments and throw tantrums. I don't like govt because prisons exist. Therefore govt doesn't exist.

[@arpitsarkar5718]

@@AzamatBagatov413 he did come up with an argument. I can syllogistically write it like this - P1. If God exists, then necessarily He Is good P2. If God is good, then he does not wish for anyone to go to hell and has the capable mechanisms to avoid that from happening P3. Non believers go to hell C. An omnibenevolent God therefore does not exist

[@AzamatBagatov413]

Thought Adventure Podcast is the best podcast

[@chaquirojordao9837]

How manu podcasts did you watch to reach to such conclusion?

[@20dumpling]

@@chaquirojordao9837 how many would be enough to reach the conclusion?

[@commandar88]

1:50:25 the moment Pinecreek felt defeated - because no one appealed to his particular atheistic emotion lol The level of emotions atheist use with hell is at the child's level where a parent tells their kid that if you dont eat dinner, then no desserts for you and the child grunts and puts up a trantrum

[@Nizanator]

Lol he literally said something like you guys only want to be logical and rational - like it's an insult 🤣

[@commandar88]

@@Nizanator 🤣🤣🤣

[@KingsCrossVIP]

For those atheists stuck in emotional reactions, i feel the statement below could be a cause, but they just don't know it, to acknowledge it... "For children and youth who experience child abuse or neglect and associated trauma, brain development may be interrupted, leading to functional impairments. Ongoing maltreatment can alter a child's brain development and affect mental, emotional, and behavioral health into adulthood."

[@AzamatBagatov413]

New nickname for Pine creek: the emotional atheist

[@mikkelfraskui]

@@KingsCrossVIP He was a Christian his entire youth.

[@Logia1978]

1:54:30 Abdul resumed it well.... they will go to hell because of *being freely evil* !!!!

[@blackcatxiii7757]

Agreed

[@KingsCrossVIP]

Alhumdullilah Allah has brought up all you brothers in this line of education to help the Dawah and confused Muslims.

[@MuhammadAminTily]

About skeptical theism, the following verse comes to mind: لَا يُسْـَٔلُ عَمَّا يَفْعَلُ وَهُمْ يُسْـَٔلُونَ "He cannot be questioned about what He does, but they will ˹all˺ be questioned." [Quran 21:23]

[@scambammer6102]

oh goodie more stupid threats. I'm not afraid of your fg god. Nobody with a brain is.

[@HarryNicNicholas]

don't question god. a really good way to lead your life. not.

[@MuhammadAminTily]

@@HarryNicNicholas Yup, this logically follows given our limitations (including our limited foresight into the future, etc.). As Hamza Tzortzis puts it: God has the picture, we have the pixel. Take care.

[@unhingedconnoisseur164]

❤ I also keep in mind the story of Musa AS and al Khidr AS with regards to skeptical theism

[@DePeaceHunter]

I personally think "evil" is necessary for "good" to be recognized. Like how would I appreciate full stomach if theres no hunger? how would I appreciate being healthy if theres no disease/pain? The word healthy probably won't even exist. Etc

[@muhammadd7526]

I agree, but if evil didn’t exist good would also not exist. We recognize good Because evil exists. (Playing devils advocate btw)

[@commandar88]

Absolutely 💯

[@MrBebaslepas]

@@muhammadd7526 Wrong, the existence of good is not depended on the existence of evil. We would still recognize good even without evil being existed.

[@DePeaceHunter]

@@MrBebaslepas The existence of good is not depended on the existence of evil, true. but you wouldn't recognize them as good if theres only good.

[@commandar88]

@@MrBebaslepas how would you recognize evil when in this world evil doesn't exist in the first place? Makes no sense

[@hamzazulfi]

Jake was getting mad at the end and it was pretty hilarious and on point. Jazakallahu Khairun Brothers.

[@al-mancuni]

Jake was on 🔥 -

[@ahmeda5110]

Br Abdul was having a cheeky smile at the same time.😁

[@northernlight8857]

Jake is just strawmanning and doesnt engage with the arguments.

[@northernlight8857]

@@hamzazulfi it comes off as it when he does it several times. It can be that he misunderstands things alot. He should presume less and ask more clarifing questions. His take on PineCreek was way off and so was several of the other callers.

[@hamzazulfi]

@@northernlight8857 Or maybe he is not clear as to what his actual argument is. He tried to do internal critique, external critique and appeal to emotions and mixed them all up.

[@MAT-wn5fr]

Pinecreek wanted "weak" muslims on his side, is that why he used such a weak argument? If anything he strengthened their faith 😂

[@commandar88]

Haha true. By that logic we can also use emotions by using heaven and everyone should become a believer lol

[@jasjas3642]

He is just like the Christians who say he saw Jesus in his dreams

[@al-mancuni]

Should say a lot to his admirers. Maybe they should ask if he used the same tactics on them

[@AzamatBagatov413]

Pine “weak minded” creek

[@superpenguinius1011]

@@jasjas3642 He probably saw monke ancestors in his dreams.

[@truthprevails5529]

That Matthew dude speaks like an angsty teen. There way too many holes in his points. You guys went too easy on him.

[@AzamatBagatov413]

Answer to Thinkerman: 2:29:01 this is a question of physics vs biology your question has been answered by Firas Zahabi. Essentially humans are molecules. In our brain, it’s just molecules hitting each other and atoms hitting each other. Cause and effect. Its like a pool table. If we know with what strength we are hitting the first ball, and at what angle, what is the friction of we can calculate the end result using physics. In our brain, its just molecules hitting each other. And this universe is the biggest pool shot taken in the history of universe. If we calculated all the forces, resistance, angles of molecules and atoms hitting each other, we can calculate what you are going to do 5 years from now. If we restart the universe, and came to this point in time, nothing would change. Its like taking the same pool game shot once again. So god with his infinite wisdom, he can calculate what you are going to do and where you are going to end up before the creation. It is simple physics. We can see this in the 8 ball pool game. The computer calculates all the forces and angles and gives us the result. Now we can experience free will in real life as well. When we imprison, punish crimes, the number of those crimes come down. If anyone steals your money, are you going to let them get away because they were made like that?

[@muslimwoolfy-winterequestr4344]

Makes sense

[@shahinabdul6303]

Casually toss out all living things with a few words... Thank God, that God has more sense than Pinecreek. Some folks hang themselves with their own arguments, though they do not realise.

[@AzamatBagatov413]

Pinecreek , the emotional “weak minded “ atheist 😂😂😂

[@scambammer6102]

@@AzamatBagatov413 You lot are obsessed with ridiculing the opposing speaker and don't talk at all about the actual subject. I wonder why that is.

[@HarryNicNicholas]

god kills EVERYTHING eventually.

[@mianahsan5568]

I also wanted to know if evil even exists on the naturalistic paradigm ? Can you prove evil exists emperically ?

[@whatwecalllife7034]

No and you can't either because it doesn't. It's a concept, a label we apply to thing that we dislike a lot.

[@deiov]

@@whatwecalllife7034 in a naturalistic paradigm, in a non-naturalistic paradigm, evil objectively exists and is beyond things one dislikes. Hence proving the point.

[@whatwecalllife7034]

@@deiov Can you show me (1) "evil"? How much does it weigh? What's the mass of (1) unit of "evil"? What units do we measure it in? What do you think "objective" means?

[@quranchannel4622]

@WhatWeCall Life, even though your definition of evil I am not aware. But for an evil we all aware, let say evil of killing. Counting how many people being killed would help us get the objective of evil action. It is observable because we see the blood and dead body, and we all agree it is an evil action. Furthermore, we can measure certain evil like counting how many people killed to weight the evil. Through that lens we can see the evil action.

[@whatwecalllife7034]

@@quranchannel4622 Is killing always "evil" though? Sometimes you need to kill to defend yourself, is it still evil in that situation? I mean some Muslims think that killing apostates, atheists, homosexuals, and trans people is a righteous thing to do. So obviously they don't think killing is necessarily evil. Like I said, all that word does communicates is how you feel about a particular thing. The only way to objectively measure this is if we agree on what "evil" means, what it applies to, and if we set a common goal. For example, that goal could be to reduce the harm we cause to each other, which necessarily means that we kill each other a little as possible Does this make sense to you?

[@rijadhadzic3396]

MAtthew: "thats what the Qu'ran says" Jake: "well yeah but this is why youre wrong" Matthew: "LOL THIS IS WHAT YOU THEISTS DO..." yet claims to be sincere... how sincere of you Matthew. If coming into reality after you were nothing isnt enough to convince you, then I dont know if there is anything more to say.. do you really want to be convinced? sounds like you dont. You cant blame people calling you insincere when all of your actions indicate that you arent. Maybe accept that when a Muslim correct you on the understanding of a position that you should probably listen to them rather than yourself.

[@al-mancuni]

Matthew is the new DUI guy (not). -can’t believe he introduced himself as a lawyer but was such a bad advert for any clients 🤣🤣

[@faisalrehman8198]

Dnt give that man any Redbull

[@MAT-wn5fr]

I wonder if the Atheists realise that these brothers could make a better case for Atheism

[@HappyBloke81]

😂😂

[@whatwecalllife7034]

I think just about anyone can make a case for not believing that a magical super being exists simply because some people in ancient superstitious cultures came up with that idea and it got popular.

[@HappyBloke81]

@@whatwecalllife7034 I have a case for not believing anything you said. Logic dictates that you will be ancient in the future. Hence your words now will be words of the ancient people, for those that come in the far future. So since that is the case then that is a case for not believing what you said. I just used your logic. I believe İt's called a genetic fallasy.

[@whatwecalllife7034]

@@HappyBloke81 That wasn't my logic at all 🤣. It has nothing to do with being ancient, and EVERYTHING to do with superstitious cultures. I notice you left that out in your analogy.

[@HappyBloke81]

you said Ancient superstitious cultures. Which is different from modern superstitious cultures. So I was correct in my logic. You on the other hand did not accurately write what you were considering to be the major issue which is apparently superstitious cultures. Why not just say superstitious cultures.. - you add ancient and then laugh when it's brought up?! -superstitious cultures exist till our day. - Islam is against superstition. So whether it is ancient superstition or modern superstition , Islam is against it. So I don't get your point. Anyone can make a case for believing in superstition too. So what's your point? So many atheists say so many thing's but; -They have no point. -You can literally say the opposite of what they said and it will still be true.

[@KH_Shaikh]

Mr. Icky asked a question, Question - Let us say there are 2 worlds, One where there is only GOD and in second there is GOD and Creation(with suffering). So which is better? Answer - BETTER FOR WHOM? Is the question, out of the two world which world is better for GOD or the creation? If Mr.Icky is asking which world is better for GOD, then it is simply irrelevant. Because does not suffer in either of the world. Or if Mr.Icky is asking which world is better for the CREATION(where apparently there is suffering(according to Atheists)), then for the CREATION(obviously for HUMANS) the second world is better because in the first world there is not even CREATION in the first place. For Humans the first world is simply irrelevant and the in the second world WE EXIST(Which is the best part of life) We can do something about our lives. It is beautiful. The Atheists pretends to be rational and logical for their state of being Atheists but they don't stop thinking about stupid questions.

[@slsa915]

With regards to this pre-destination, I once saw a KZbin video that explained it really well. The video showed a flow chart of a person making choices on a daily basis, then it stretched it out to a line graph spanning a 100 years of their life, then it multiplied the chart into 7 billion lines showing the entire human population as of today. So now you’ve got this block of billions of flow charts so it shows everyone has free will. The only addition is that God knows the past, present and future of this block since God is outside our time/space paradigm.

[@fr3d42]

How does that explain free will? Nobody can get out of their line.

[@slsa915]

@@fr3d42 I guess you have to see it to understand it but within each life, each individual continues to make choices with free will. It’s just that God being all knowledgeable outside of time and space was aware of what choices they will make.

[@fr3d42]

@@slsa915 Oh, that's interesting. I always thought that when god made the universe, he made it in a certain way according to his will; that everything we are and do have been decided by him. Are you saying that everyone makes choices and god cannot do anything else but know it? I'm not sure I understand.

[@kledmohd4230]

@@fr3d42 when they spoke with thinkerman, they explained it. God knows their actions and had it prewritten. It was not prewritten because God forced these actions upon Man, but Man would perform these actions with their Own freewill, and the pen just wrote it down. Secondly any motion and action is Created by God, so the free choices that Man makes is also Created by God, perpetually.

[@fr3d42]

@@kledmohd4230 From the point of view of god, humans cannot change their destinies. It was written before they were even born. How can this be free will if all your choices are known long before you make them?

[@HussainFahmy]

*_A desert dweller's logic - Evil does not vanish by rejecting God. Challenging God will not solve anything. God is in no obligation to justify His wish and commands. Masha'Allah Dr Chowdhury_*

[@HarryNicNicholas]

everyone knows it's a con, NO ONE has ever spoken to any god, no one knows what god is like, what he wants says or does, anyone who professes to know what god wants and dictate to anyone else using god is a fraud. in ANY religion.

[@tofutofu137]

An excellent stream indeed, however the guests were rather a disappointment but the arguments put on by the panel were logical balanced and easily understood by those who use their intelect to interpret the reasons we Muslims don't have an issue with explaining"evil". Terrific discussion as always.

[@amuail]

Caleb was good

[@Oneummahgeneration]

@@amuail Caleb is Christian lol.

[@dotscreativeartsmedia8877]

The discussions were great .. ive learned a lot of new things which helped to strengthen my imaan. jazakallahu khairan brothers

[@MohammadImran-kv8ek]

I think Atheism has become "emotionally challenged" persons game.

[@scambammer6102]

Islam is a medieval war cult worshipped in back water sh_ holes. How old was Mo's wife again?

[@MohammadImran-kv8ek]

emotionally challenged @@scambammer6102 great to see you proving my point 👍

[@scambammer6102]

@@MohammadImran-kv8ek great to see you dodging mine

[@scambammer6102]

@@julinaonYT he meant that he doesn't understand atheism so he just makes up sh-t.

[@fahim-ev8qq]

Pinecreek’s argument at 1:15 was actually quite strong

[@yes-wo7qn]

Thank you for the efforts brothers

[@amalia512]

1:54:16 Excuse me Pinecreek... we don't need you to know Islam, we already have giant scholars all over the world.

[@ShouVertica]

I mean he's literally repeating what is said back and they are throwing a fit.

[@HarryNicNicholas]

you don't know islam either, what do you do, invite god round for a chat and he tells you everything you need to know? NO ONE has EVER talked with god, NO ONE knows what god wants, least of all imaginary gods.

[@bllvir]

Very beneficial podcast. May Allah reward you with good.

[@mo8570]

Jake's ending comment was absolute savage :-D

[@SheikhN-bible-syndrome]

Yeah death to all who dont worship this fake god !

[@muratsen2]

These guys handled ap & creek too easy. They had to make a video tryna comfort eachothers losses😂

[@JAILBREAKER259]

Did Pinecreek really try to criticize the panelists for wanting to justify accepting and rejecting beliefs on rational and logical grounds? The way he said that part came off like a child wanting to preserve some dignity and sense of superiority after realizing that their points and arguments have completely failed to convince or otherwise sway people. It was completely uncalled for. The panelists were very patient with him and kept it respectful and avoided personal attacks. Tells me all I need to know about this Pinecreek character. He has nothing of value to add to discussions about God, religion, or any topic that stems from them. Edit: I'm actually kinda glad he came on. Now alot more Muslims can see just how vacuous he his.

[@ShouVertica]

It's more that Muslims will just say "why do I care" as if apathy = logic.

[@Mirror_Holder]

Richard Dawkins: I use the false notion that evolution undermines god to turn people into atheists. Pinecreek: I want to fool people into thinking that my emotional argument undermines god. AP: that's irrelevant.

[@kutsc3792]

Excellent stream. Is it wrong to feel so satisfied that these atheists got battered especially that icky and smarmy pinecreek? They come on pretending to be intellectual and literally stumble on the first question asked by the brothers, no wonder Jake lost it with the last guy. These atheists just remind me of Hatoon and the likes all emotions and no intellect. I would have said it was a waste of 4hrs but I reckon those atheists watching that are genuine will see these typical atheists arguments have no merit and hopefully make them really contemplate and ask sincere questions and also all the fanboys realise that the likes of pinecreek are frauds.

[@blindspot9097]

Well, that is just part of the suffering. Getting battered by believers week in week out. Ive heard, hell can be on earth as well, dont you think? :D

[@blackcatxiii7757]

@@blindspot9097 lol 😂

[@fr3d42]

Do you get hard typing those kinds of comment brother

[@Lutestick]

Pine creeks argument (I believe): god wants people to believe in him or he prefers. God knows all. God knew that people will disbelief. God created everything anyway. So god did what he didn't want. Response to the argument: using the word want is not appropriate here. What's more appropriate is god willed people to go to hell and heaven in his divine cosmic decree but god wanted (this is where wanted in the way it's being used makes more sense) in a legislative sense for people not to go to hell. As a real life example, a teacher wants the students to pass and gives them the material to study. While grading the exams, some students fail. The teachers decision (divine will in comparison) to fail the students does not change the fact that the teacher wanted the students to pass. Hope this makes sense Edit: to add. What you can't do is say this objectionable on logical grounds. You can only make an emotional argument which is not usually a good epistemological method.

[@danialfonzie246]

In order to generally compete well in any discussion with TAP- 1. Know your philosophy logic thoroughly. (This is where they chew you on mistakes) 2. Don't debate them. Get them to converse. (when they relax, they make mistakes) 3. Have a very good understanding of Allah and Islam. (This is where I see most of the good intellectuals lose against them) 4. Use subject matter expertise of the topic in such a way that leads away from a theistic vs atheistic discussion. (they will try to bring make the discussion as such but don't let them and discuss/argue solely the subject matter without too many inferences)

[@scambammer6102]

5. Threaten that allah will blow everyone up if he wants because it is his right.

[@danialfonzie246]

These guys are the top players right now. I watch other channels of highly experienced philosophers, scientists and other intellectuals but so far these guys have the intellectual debating cup. I have hardly seen them get caught out. Even experienced philosophers and debaters on KZbin such as William Craig, Matt Dillahunty and Graham Oppy will have a challenging time against them. I think the only time TAP might falter would be against an experienced academic who has a specialization on a particular topic and a narrow subset of that topic is discussed in-depth. For example, discussing a topic such as ‘Does a Mathematical Universe lead to God?’ with an accomplished Mathematician Philosopher, who focuses on Incompleteness/infinity. However, broaden such a topic even slightly and it will become hard to find flaws in TAP's arguments.

[@ninamimi1381]

amazing discussion thank you!!

[@asadullahsaaid3794]

Another beautiful stream Pinecreek's arguments were only emotional and nothing intellectual. He even admitted it 1:48:40 He got schooled 🤣🤣🤣

[@AzamatBagatov413]

atheists are so illogical and emotional people. So sad 😂😂😂

[@evanskip1]

Do you feel better now for being "intellectual" 😅

[@AzamatBagatov413]

@@evanskip1 When people make emotional arguments like A- hell exists B- therefore God does not exist 😂😂😂 One more silly argument: Babies die therefore God does not exist Prisons exist therefore govt doesn't exist 😂

[@evanskip1]

@@AzamatBagatov413 did pinecreek say god does not exist? Think. Or give a timestamp

[@northernlight8857]

@Saaid you did not listen to what PineCreek said. He did not admit that. PCs points went over their heads.

[@livingjoke3083]

There is so much deep emotion in these atheists. Proves my theory that they chose Atheism cuz they are mad at Allah, and not cuz Theism is irrational.

[@amhariqbal2524]

Anyone who reads this, Ponder upon The Story of Musa(alai) and Khidr. We have the pixel Allah has the Picture

[@ShouVertica]

Wake me up when you load the picture then.

[@ShouVertica]

@@lukimorgan228 That's a lot of preaching, maybe you should try learning instead.

[@ShouVertica]

@@lukimorgan228 this is just white noise, I can flip it back to you and it would mean nothing. Wake me up when you actually disagree on a point or care about a topic. Preaching from shallow psychoanalysis means nothing to me.

[@ShouVertica]

@@lukimorgan228 I don't believe life is purposeless or meaningless either. You're just aimlessly preaching at me lol, I don't even bother to address it because you haven't shown me anything that says you know anything about me.

[@ShouVertica]

​@@lukimorgan228 I was making a joke.....Are you serious? You thought you could give paragraphs of preaching because you did psychoanalysis from a joke? Talk about being tone deaf. Do you realize that I'm not even reading your replies? You're just irrelevant to me at this point. I don't take you seriously and I see no reason to.

[@jidh6589]

I can see why Pinecreek was formerly a Christian. Both appeal to emotion and it seems he is still doing so. He can’t get away from that.

[@HarryNicNicholas]

and doesn't religion appeal to emotion? and if you want to win an argument aren't you going to appeal to emotion? isn't god about emotion? what's your point ?

[@johnhoward2908]

Can one say that the post 911 challenge to Islam from almost every epistemological angle could be seen as an 'evil', as they have largely been rooted in Orientalist and Islamophobic frames, but in a theodicy as having served to strengthen the Ummah? TAP brother's don't enter the dialectic of atheists like pinecreek, apus, or Aaron Ra - rather they are brought into our dialectic and end up on the defensive, and fumble basic philosophical concepts and categories of critique - it's like witnessing a process whereby the poison turns to the antidote.

[@riot4478]

Wow this comment needs to be pinned

[@Someone-ct2ck]

3:01:00 This is the Quranic context. بل طبع الله عليها بكفرهم... - و اشربو في قلوبهم العجل بكفرهم... - فبما نقضهم ميثاقهم لعناهم و جعلنا قلوبهم قاسية... - ذلك بأنهم آمنو ثم كفرو فطبع على قلوبهم... - فأعقبهم نفاقا في قلوبهم بما أخلفو الله ما وعدوه و بما كانو بكذبون. - فلما زاغو أزاغ الله قلوبهم و الله لا يهدي القوم الظالمين. - و نقلب أفئدتهم و ابصارهم كما لم يؤمنو به أول مرة و نذرهم في طغيانهم يعمهون. - فاما ثمود فهديناهم فاستحبو العمى على الهدى...

[@selaluoposisisiapapunpresi7982]

@pinecreek why you have a childs while you knew there is a possibility they will disobey you?

[@whatwecalllife7034]

Because he's not a narcissistic, sadistic, violent person who only creates living, thinking, feeling beings simply so that they can kiss his feet and buttocks for the only life they can confirm they have, and then torture them for all time if they don't do that.

[@selaluoposisisiapapunpresi7982]

@@whatwecalllife7034 thats not what we believe

[@whatwecalllife7034]

@@selaluoposisisiapapunpresi7982 Yeah I know. It helps if you take the god tinted glasses off first.

[@yes-wo7qn]

@@whatwecalllife7034 blah blah blah the world is sad and dark boo hoo...can you debunk any of the arguments? Or are you just going to have an emotional breakdown in the comments section?

[@whatwecalllife7034]

@@yes-wo7qn It's a good thing I didn't actually have an "emotional breakdown". Address what I actually said, or bugger off.

[@truthprevails5529]

If God had to appear before us for us to believe in him, what is the point of giving us free will?

[@scambammer6102]

What is the point of giving us freewill anyway if it knows the outcome from the beginning? That isn't freewill. That is just divine masturbation.

[@truthprevails5529]

@@scambammer6102 That just means its in the subset of God's knowledge. How anyone equates it to no free will is amazing. Its like saying if I could predict a person's chess move, the other player didn't have any freewill on making those moves. So dumb! Another way to break it down would be if I broke an arrangement of balls on a pool table, and if I could simulate it on a computer and enter all the factors and variables, I would be able to predict every single movement. And now extending it to my point, God being all knowing, its simple and logical that He would know everything and know what will happen in the future.

[@rezaafdzal]

Mr Icky came in feeling clever. Left TAP feeling icky. He needs a cuddle from Mr Irrelevant now.

[@r.rahman12]

"it has happened not because it was written rather it has been written because it will happen."

[@whatwecalllife7034]

"and it happens because Allah decided to create"

[@commandar88]

@@whatwecalllife7034 "and it happens because people choose their actions themselves..."

[@r.rahman12]

@@whatwecalllife7034 so whats the problem?

[@whatwecalllife7034]

@@commandar88 "Actions which Allah foreknew. Actions that couldn't be made if Allah didn't create, since he doesn't need to."

[@whatwecalllife7034]

@@r.rahman12 Tell me, what do you think Pinecreek's point was?

[@amirareads6517]

Let's psychoanalyse pinecreek😂 1:46:06 is the moment he realised he's dealing with an intelligent panel and wanted to run away

[@amirareads6517]

1:50:42 is another moment of truth

[@amirareads6517]

@ 1:26:59 he realised what he said is bigger than him and is about to get rinsed so he took back what he said 🤣

[@amirareads6517]

1:30:41 here's when he started having doubts about his atheism. His body language tells

[@AzamatBagatov413]

Pine creek, the emotional atheist 😂

[@superpenguinius1011]

Pinecreek sounds like those priests he really hates. The ones who preach and use emotions instead of logic. So much for the so-called Atheism XD

[@peacenow6618]

Jazakallahu Khayran Ahsanul Jaza

[@blindspot9097]

Why atheists only mention the problem of evil? Why never mention "the problem of good"? Which will "punish and put people" in heaven for eternal bliss?

[@HappyBloke81]

Lol

[@commandar88]

Because they undermine the concept of justice and that would hurt their argument for evil. They can't argue evil without acknowledging good. But if they acknowledging good then that may undermine evil. It's a double edged sword that they arent realizing

[@whatwecalllife7034]

Some do in fact, like Doug (Pinecreek). If the god you believe in is actually malicious, "heaven and eternal bliss" could just be a lie told to get people to do whatever evil thing he wants, like killing your daughter because she was raped or because she doesn't wear face or full body coverings.

[@HappyBloke81]

@@whatwecalllife7034 God created and owns everything. He can do as he wants. He owns it. You're lucky He chose not to oppress.

[@blindspot9097]

@@whatwecalllife7034 "If the god you believe in is actually malicious, "heaven and eternal bliss" could just be a lie" that is still "problem of evil". why not discuss problem of good?

[@jasjas3642]

Here’s where PineCreeks argument fail. He usually sets it up in a situation where God was alone and had two options. To create a world with evil or create world with no evil. First of all, this relies on the assumption that PineCreek is all knowing and knows better than Allah. Basically pinecreek is trying to make himself a god, knowing he is not all knowing and doesn’t have all the wisdom. From that point case is dismissed so I won’t carry forward with him. Second of all, if Allah decided to create that world without evil, then what we are going to compare good to? For you to know good, evil must exist. If Allah decided to create a world with good only, then we won’t know it’s good because we don’t know what’s evil! We have nothing to compare it to. For good to exist, evil must exist. Third of all, in a an atheistic worldview, there is no justice. If someone murders 1000 people in this life and gets thrown jail for the rest of his life then where is the justice for the 1000 lives lost in this atheistic nihilistic world view? How does pinecreek have the guts to make these arguments knowing fully it’s even worse and perhaps more “evil” in his worldview? Pinecreek, please improve your arguments.

[@RayKosby]

Jasas, I've watched Pinecreek present the no create scenario many times. He has never stated create a world with no evil. He always presents the scenario as why create at all. In other words, no creation because an omni being is self sufficient or create what we exist in now. Even in this guest appearance he made that clear.

[@jasjas3642]

@@RayKosby With all due respect I don’t think you were actively listening to what he’s saying. Go to 1:13:30 in the stream and you will see exactly what he was saying.

[@RayKosby]

@@jasjas3642 I went there. He says "One world is just Allah and the other is Allah plus extra stuff, like the universe". When he says a world with just Allah, he means Allah didn't create. That's why he said the second world has the universe. His use of the word world does not mean earth.

[@jasjas3642]

@@RayKosby “the first world has no pain has no suffering……” continue watching the conversation from 1:13:30 onwards

[@RayKosby]

@@jasjas3642 I know "the first world has no pain and suffering..." means no creation because the second world is the one with a universe. Therefore the first world (world in this context not meaning place where we live) is just Allah alone, no cosmos, no universe, no etc.

[@abduallahamin2001]

3:14:53 loved the verse 💙

[@akeemzaman8645]

Great stream guys.

[@amuail]

They gonna bring on Matt Dillahunty on the next show 💯☝️

[@abduallahamin2001]

When did they say that brother?

[@amuail]

@@abduallahamin2001 Khalil from The EA Show said somewhere else that he was trying to get Matt Dillahunty on TAP.

[@عبدالقادر-س8ب6ض]

Matt blocked them on Twitter lol

[@PabloSensei]

@@عبدالقادر-س8ب6ض wait what?lmaoo What happened?

[@عبدالقادر-س8ب6ض]

@@PabloSensei Idk but you can check Yusufs Twitter, it happened a week ago

[@ac8934]

JazakAllah khair guys

[@vejeke]

"We believe that God wanted people to commit sin so he would forgive them" 1:24:26

[@SheikhN-bible-syndrome]

And then they turn around and call the atheist illogical

[@PabloSensei]

@@SheikhN-bible-syndrome how is it illogical?

[@supershmobo]

On the animal suffering, I'm not sure if Sharif meant to possibly deny that animals do suffer, (at least in the way we do) but that definitely cannot be the case because in Islam we are prohibited to cause suffering to animals.

[@HarryNicNicholas]

theists will make up any old bollocks to excuse gods that basically don't care what happens to humans or any creature on earth. if you'd let a chikd die you aren't really yhay bothered about the human race are you.

[@homtanks7259]

☝🏻

[@whyayyyerrlaffinfhorr2152]

absolute quality content

[@user-ee6td1tl3c]

Pinecreek doesn't like us being too logical about this topic but demands it in other philosophical domains. He actually tried to ridicule the hosts by arguing they're being too intellectual about it. I mean, how insincere is that. Imagine a Muslim said I believe in God because it makes me 'feel' good or refuse to be atheist because it makes me 'feel' worse? Is that a legitimate response? Get real man.

[@ShouVertica]

It's a very simple argument that they couldn't address at face value, that's the issue. Once you get into a cognitive domain of anything being "correct" simply by existence, then you're closing off all discussion.

[@MG-kt1nv]

@@ShouVertica no it isn’t because there wasn’t any clear indication of a logical contradiction. It was clearly an emotional Appeal. Emotions are subjective people can feel different sorts of emotions to anything so it doesn’t make anything right or wrong because the question is how do you as an atheist even determine what is considered evil or not. That still doesn’t disprove Allah at all.

[@Pantifaximile]

Morality doesn't exist outside of peoples emotions, so you can make logical arguments about those emotions. However that doesn't make the logical arguments about the emotions, emotional arguments.

[@ShouVertica]

@@MG-kt1nv It's not a logical contradiction, it's a perceptional contradiction. Sure, god can BE apathetic or evil or just sadistic, but that's not the perception of god that people hold generally.

[@MG-kt1nv]

@@ShouVertica Again if you can show me a logical contradiction with the problem of evil within the premise of Islam and Allah I am more than ready to hear it because emotional appeal or argument will never disprove Allah weather you like it or not. Again Perception is all subjective it’s no different I’m not sure what your trying to get at. Everyone can have different perceptions or views on any sort of subjects that still doesn’t prove that subject to be wrong.

[@djaxx587]

Hi guys, here is an idea you might like or dislike but has not been done very often and I think will be very informative. If you are going to review any segment of the show make sure you do it together with the person you talked to. Review video's often give a very one sided biased view in which the opponent is often misrepresented without the given chance to defend himself on the spot. Reviewing it together might give opportunity to straight away clear misconceptions plus for the speakers and audience a great way to learn about certain arguments and rebuttals.

[@CaliphForCaliphate]

Reviewing with your opponent will result another debate, that’s why no one do debate reviews with opponents

[@djaxx587]

@@CaliphForCaliphate That could be moderated though.

[@kledmohd4230]

Bad idea. It's not a review then. When Critics reviews movies, they don't have the directors or producers of the movie along with them. They review it personally, to give their own opinion on the matter.

[@djaxx587]

@@kledmohd4230 Let's say a painter who works for himself paints a house, first they talk about how and what and afterwords the customer is unhappy about certain chores, they will talk about it together and find a way to fix it right on the spot. Reviewing it personally can lead to misrepresentations of their opponent without the opponent to respond which means the panel will mislead the audience with false claims. I think it's only fair to review it together.

[@kledmohd4230]

@@djaxx587 it's like an internal review. Most youtubers have followups to their discussions without mentioning review. It's kind of the same thing. They may call it review, but it's more like an afterthought discussion etc.

[@SawarimHaqq]

"(39:47) If the wrong-doers possessed the treasures of the earth in their entirety and as much besides, they would gladly offer it on the Day of Resurrection to redeem themselves from the harrowing chastisement. This because there will appear to them from Allah something (exceedingly dismal which) they had never even imagined. (39:48) The evil consequences of their deeds will become fully apparent to them, and what they had scoffed at will encompass them. (39:49) When an affliction befalls man, he cries out to Us; but when We grant him a favour from Us, he says: “I have been granted this on account of my knowledge.” Nay; this (favour) is a test; but most of them do not know. (39:50) Their predecessors also said the same, but their earnings proved of no avail to them, (39:51) and the evil consequences of their deeds overtook them. The wrongdoers among these will also be overtaken by the evil consequences of their deeds. They will be utterly unable to frustrate (Us). (39:52)" Quran

[@HarryNicNicholas]

trouble is you have NO IDEA what is right and what is wrong, NO ONE has EVER talked with god, all you do is ake up bollocks based on a book that no one really knows the origin of, no one can inrepret no one can agree with anyone else what it means. religion is daft, believing in a god and thinking you know what god wannts is silly to say the very least.

[@PabloSensei]

@@HarryNicNicholas ermm no pinecreek was making an internal critique

[@peacenow6618]

Can you upload these to podcasts channel please?

[@amalia512]

Hi Matthew, thank you for making me laugh, that was the pure comedy

[@kledmohd4230]

The way he says Allah totally got me everytime.

[@northernlight8857]

He raised good points that they floundered and did not refute in a sufficient way.

[@kledmohd4230]

@@northernlight8857 The replies were pretty on point and they didn't flounder at all. Matthew wants God to show up in front of him and say Hi. They said that's not how God proves his existence, but rather though his Creation.

[@aishaarshadalam3412]

@@northernlight8857 His points weren't good at all. First of all, he doesn't have the correct concept of God. The Quran states that God is ONE, Eternal and absolute. There is nothing comparable unto Him. His Majesty is far exalted above anything we associate with Him. Matthew wants this Supreme Creator to just casually come down because of Matthews whim? Who is Matthew in relation to God? Who are any of us? We are His slaves. His creation. We exist because He willed it. What kind of arrogance or ignorance would even dare to command One such as The Most Exalted? He has given a whole universe, countless messengers, holy scriptures from these messengers, the world we live in, our own bodies, a conscience, a mind to reflect with as signs of His Existence but that isn't good enough? What proof would be good enough when all these signs are not? God doesn't obey His creation. He commands them. If they choose to disobey and reject Him then they are truly losers.

[@northernlight8857]

@@kledmohd4230 There is no good evidence of that.

[@ismailomar1323]

At around 3:09, Sharif provided the most convincing explanation of why the existence of Allah and His reward and punishment is vital to making sense of the rampant suffering we see in this world.

[@muhammadshahedkhanshawon3785]

Can you please invite cosmic skeptic and Joe schmid

[@faisalhakim5920]

Yes, it would be fun to invite Joe.

[@erTalhaKhan]

Allah answers Mathew bardos question in quran 41;53- We shall show them our signs in the horizons & within themselves until it becomes clear to them that this is the truth. Allah has taken the responsibility to show his signs to each individual & allah has also said that no one will object to the justice of Allah on judgement day even in the least bit and everyone will just say give us one more chance. So 2 things are clear in Qur'an. Signs will be given to everyone until it is clear to them & if anyone thinks that Allah has not shown enough signs to manifest the truth then he can object to allah's justice on judgement day, but then again Qur'an says no one will be able to object allah's justice in the least bit, they will only ask for 1 more chance but they will accept the justice of Allah. So we will see this on the day of judgement if anyone who rejects Allah's signs objects or not. If he fails to object & goes to hell then he/she fairly deserves hell.

[@DePeaceHunter]

ThinkerMan argument: 1. Allah knows what human will choose. 2. Allah creates Human with free will, they can choose freely. 3. 1 and 2 are contradictory because If Allah knows what human will choose, then human can't choose freely. If human can choose freely then it's impossible for Allah to predict their choices. Therefore freewill doesn't exist and God has determined all the outcomes. Which is unjustified. The problem with this argument is It assumes that Allah is in a timeline like us which is false, therefore it sees Allah knowledge of the future as prediction or guesswork. But Allah is NOT bound by time, He is the creator of time. Allah has an absolute knowledge of the past and the future. However His knowledge of the future doesn't interfere with our ability to make choices. He knows what we choose because He's all knowing, but he doesn't make us choose what we choose.

[@mohammedyasin2087]

Sharif's example of football replay is good

[@razer0072073]

1:06:11 1:19:24 1:26:54 2:42:57

[@jonafondow9224]

pine creek should be informed - and perhaps intuitively knows - that evil and good are not equal in their respective intrinsic value/weights - and of course it follows on from this that they are not of the same value/weight with ALLAAH. ALLAAH REWARDS every good deed to at least the power of 10 up until 700 times - or even more in accordance with HIS PLEASURE, GENEROSITY, MERCY... whereas HE only RECOMPANCES evil with it's like - if HE DOESN'T forgive/pardon the transgression all together, for example; none can earn paradise via their good deeds whereas they may enter it only by HIS MERCY, i.e., the reward is far greater than the good deed warrants, whereas people will only be made to suffer in HELLFIRE equivalent to the extent warranted by the evil of their deeds and no more - but in some cases less so due to factors such as the permitted/accepted intercession of believing relatives for example. there are abundantly many more examples of this principle in both THE QUR'AAN and The Sunnah which clarify this reality... so based upon this reckoning alone it can be concluded that it is at the very least 10 times better to have existence which entails the certainty of evil deeds being perpetrated if such existence facilitates the certain performance of an equal number of good deeds than to not have it... Al-An'am 6:160 مَن جَآءَ بِٱلۡحَسَنَةِ فَلَهُۥ عَشۡرُ أَمۡثَالِهَاۖ وَمَن جَآءَ بِٱلسَّيِّئَةِ فَلَا يُجۡزَىٰٓ إِلَّا مِثۡلَهَا وَهُمۡ لَا يُظۡلَمُونَ English - Transliteration *Man jaa bilhasanatifalahu AAashru amthaliha waman jaa bissayyi-atifala yujza illa mithlaha* wahum layuthlamoon English translation - Sahih International *Whoever comes [on the Day of Judgement] with a good deed will have ten times the like thereof [to his credit], and whoever comes with an evil deed will not be recompensed except the like thereof;* and they will not be wronged. Al-Baqarah 2:261 مَّثَلُ ٱلَّذِينَ يُنفِقُونَ أَمۡوَٰلَهُمۡ فِى سَبِيلِ ٱللَّهِ كَمَثَلِ حَبَّةٍ أَنۢبَتَتۡ سَبۡعَ سَنَابِلَ فِى كُلِّ سُنۢبُلَةٍ مِّاْئَةُ حَبَّةٍۗ وَٱللَّهُ يُضَٰعِفُ لِمَن يَشَآءُۗ وَٱللَّهُ وَٰسِعٌ عَلِيمٌ English - Transliteration *Mathalu allatheena yunfiqoona amwalahumfee sabeeli Allahi kamathali habbatin anbatatsabAAa sanabila fee kulli sunbulatin mi-atu* habbatinwallahu yudaAAifu liman yashao wallahuwasiAAun AAaleem English - Sahih International *The example of those who spend their wealth in the way of Allah is like a seed [of grain] which grows seven spikes; in each spike is a hundred grains.* And Allah multiplies [His reward] for whom He wills. And Allah is all-Encompassing and Knowing. Fussilat 41:34 وَلَا تَسۡتَوِى ٱلۡحَسَنَةُ وَلَا ٱلسَّيِّئَةُۚ ٱدۡفَعۡ بِٱلَّتِى هِىَ أَحۡسَنُ فَإِذَا ٱلَّذِى بَيۡنَكَ وَبَيۡنَهُۥ عَدَٰوَةٌ كَأَنَّهُۥ وَلِىٌّ حَمِيمٌ English - Transliteration *Wala tastawee alhasanatu walaassayyi-atu* idfaAA billatee hiya ahsanufa-itha allathee baynaka wabaynahu AAadawatunkaannahu waliyyun hameem English translation - Sahih International *And not equal are the good deed and the bad.* Repel [evil] by that [deed] which is better; and thereupon the one whom between you and him is enmity [will become] as though he was a devoted friend. حَدَّثَنَا عَلِيُّ بْنُ مُحَمَّدٍ، حَدَّثَنَا وَكِيعٌ، عَنِ الأَعْمَشِ، عَنِ الْمَعْرُورِ بْنِ سُوَيْدٍ، عَنْ أَبِي ذَرٍّ، قَالَ قَالَ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ ـ صلى الله عليه وسلم ـ ‏ "‏ يَقُولُ اللَّهُ تَبَارَكَ وَتَعَالَى مَنْ جَاءَ بِالْحَسَنَةِ فَلَهُ عَشْرُ أَمْثَالِهَا وَأَزِيدُ وَمَنْ جَاءَ بِالسَّيِّئَةِ فَجَزَاءُ سَيِّئَةٍ مِثْلُهَا أَوْ أَغْفِرُ وَمَنْ تَقَرَّبَ مِنِّي شِبْرًا تَقَرَّبْتُ مِنْهُ ذِرَاعًا وَمَنْ تَقَرَّبَ مِنِّي ذِرَاعًا تَقَرَّبْتُ مِنْهُ بَاعًا وَمَنْ أَتَانِي يَمْشِي أَتَيْتُهُ هَرْوَلَةً وَمَنْ لَقِيَنِي بِقِرَابِ الأَرْضِ خَطِيئَةً ثُمَّ لاَ يُشْرِكُ بِي شَيْئًا لَقِيتُهُ بِمِثْلِهَا مَغْفِرَةً ‏"‏ ‏.‏ It was narrated from Abu Dharr that: the Messenger of Allah (saas) said: "Allah, the Blessed and Exalted, said: *'Whoever does one good deed will have (the reward of) ten like it and more, and whoever does a bad deed will have one like it, or I will forgive him.* Whoever draws near to Me a hand span, I draw near to him an arm's length; whoever comes to Me a forearm's length, I draw near him an arm's length; whoever comes to Me walking, I come to him in a hurry. Whoever meets Me with an earthful of sins, but does not associate anything in worship with Me, I will meet it (i.e., his sins) with forgiveness equal to that.'" Grade: Sahih (Darussalam) Reference: Sunan Ibn Majah 3821 In-book reference: Chapter 58: باب فَضْلِ الْعَمَلِ The Virtue of Good Deeds, Book 33: كتاب الأدب Etiquette , Hadith 165 English translation: Vol. 5, Book 33, Hadith 3822 حَدَّثَنَا أَبُو بَكْرِ بْنُ أَبِي شَيْبَةَ، حَدَّثَنَا أَبُو مُعَاوِيَةَ، وَوَكِيعٌ، عَنِ الأَعْمَشِ، عَنْ أَبِي صَالِحٍ، عَنْ أَبِي هُرَيْرَةَ، قَالَ قَالَ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ ـ صلى الله عليه وسلم ـ ‏ "‏كُلُّ عَمَلِ ابْنِ آدَمَ يُضَاعَفُ لَهُ الْحَسَنَةُ بِعَشْرِ أَمْثَالِهَا إِلَى سَبْعِمِائَةِ ضِعْفٍ.‏ قَالَ اللَّهُ سُبْحَانَهُ إِلاَّ الصَّوْمَ فَإِنَّهُ لِي وَأَنَا أَجْزِي بِهِ"‏.‏ It was narrated from Abu Hurairah that the Messenger: of Allah (saas) said: *"Every deed of the son of Adam will be multiplied for him, between ten and seven hundred times for each merit.* Allah said: *'Except for fasting, for it is for Me and I shall reward for it.'"* (sahih) Grade: Sahih (Darussalam) Reference: Sunan Ibn Majah 3823 In-book reference: Chapter 58: باب فَضْلِ الْعَمَلِ The Virtue of Good Deeds, Book 33: كتاب الأدب Etiquette , Hadith 167 English translation: Vol. 5, Book 33, Hadith 3823 and ALLAAH KNOWS best...

[@ShouVertica]

Carrot and stick

[@sarim9574]

Can't one make that case that Allah (SWT) *does* prevent some evils, or atleast you can't claim that an all-benevolent doesn't at all prevent evils. As Br. Abdul touched on, we only experience one possible world, and we don't know the other possible worlds where every possible evil intent is actualized. We do have Quranic verses to support that claim that evils are being prevented.

[@luffyduffy2129]

if god made ppl evil then how can evil ppl change and be good, we hv examples of ppl changing, so the change means we have free will

[@scambammer6102]

did allah know they would make that change when he created them? You: "yes". Then it isn't free will.

[@MrBebaslepas]

@@scambammer6102 Allah knew what they would do based on what they wanted to do.

[@bkhan19]

@@scambammer6102 Allah is all knowing so he knows all the outcomes. Free will means free to choose many possibilities which is in line with an All knowing God.

[@scambammer6102]

@@bkhan19 you don't get to choose anything so why do you keep talking about choice. There is only one possible outcome and Allah already knows what it is. The fact we don't know doesn't make it a choice. It makes us puppets to a divine autocrat.

[@commandar88]

You first statement is something you would have to substantiate. God doesn't willy nilly create someone to be evil. Everyone is born upon the fitrah and they decide what actions they want to take I.e. good or evil. God gives guidance to the road map of to to do good and gives us warning of what to avoid to be bad

[@HussainFahmy]

*_Disbelievers have no choice but to submit to the will of Allah or face the consequence of rejecting Allah._*

[@scambammer6102]

which consequences are nothing. I couldn't care less about your backwater god and I'm doing just fine.

[@moerocco775]

I was waiting for ‘the lawyer’ to posit his assertion in trepidation.... Waiting for an iman challenging, faith shaking statement... and then he spoke and I face palmed. 😂

[@bkhan19]

Yeah. He actually had a better discussion with TAP on consciousness. I think on this one, he read up a little bit on the Quran and with his reasoning fresh out of law school, he got excited that he found a logical flaw and then tried to posit a very outlandish argument, thinking he had a 'gotcha' moment. Typical of a young lawyer lol. But kudos that he is trying and learning.

[@aishaarshadalam3412]

@@seawolf7649 He said that 1. God is All Knowing 2. God wants to be worshipped 3. God is active in human affairs. Then he demands that God appear and prove His existence now to him because he asked for it. So first of all, Matthew has an incorrect concept of God. God is not our slave. He is our Creator. He is the One who commands. He does what befits His Majesty as and when and how He wants. In His infinite knowledge and wisdom God decided that He would create a universe that can be studied, He would send messengers with a message and He would give humans a mind to think with. That's what He decided is good evidence for us. If that's not enough then what more do you want? That's why the verse quoted by Sharif that says Even if We sent angels or made the dead speak or did all these amazing supernatural things some people won't believe. The basic evidence isn't good enough so why would anything else be. It wasn't a good premise.

[@jonafondow9224]

pine creek needs to acknowledge that creating a state of affairs in which sin and disbelief are possible is not the same as creating sin and disbelief...and also that it is false to equivocate facilitating/permitting something with being pleased the said something occurred...

[@scambammer6102]

you don't understand your own religion. allah KNEW that he was creating sin and disbelief. He knew every detail of it. This is where you say "it is his right" and I say sure, because he (why is it a he?) is a homicidal maniac.

[@michaelevans4110]

Animal suffering. More reason to be grateful. Are you not grateful you're not that animal. Alhamdulillahi rabbi al'alameen

[@fr3d42]

Too bad allah doesn't care about them

[@michaelevans4110]

@@fr3d42 What's your evidence for that claim. Below is my evidence. “And there is no creature on [or within] the Earth or bird that flies with its wings except [that they are] communities like you. We have not neglected in the Register a thing. Then unto their Lord they will be gathered.” (Quran 6:38) Beat that.

[@fr3d42]

@@michaelevans4110 I don't want to beat you or harm your beliefs in anyway, you can stay a muslim. I don't understand how those words you pasted tells us that god cares about the animal suffering.

[@michaelevans4110]

@@fr3d42 Haha, YOU overestimate your influence on boobtube, son. You cannot "beat" me or "harm" my beliefs or cause me to leave Islam, NO ONE can. Understand that and learn the following ( before YOU die). YOU can only benefit yourself, save yourself and potentially loved ones (if they also become believers) by becoming Muslim. God doesn't benefit, He needs NOTHING, YOU need Him, though you don't realize it now, you will. The verse ( posted) is obviously from The Qur'an, the Holy scripture of Islam, the direct speech of God Almighty, Allah Subhanahu Wa Ta ala to all of Mankind. If He didn't care He wouldn't mention the animals, creatures and birds in the verse. If He didn't care He wouldn't register or acknowledge their lives or "communities" in this world. He obviously cares enough to '"gather" them on judgement day. Think. Do you think he's going to judge these animals, when they have no free will or the same responsibilities humans do? Or are they going to be in paradise with the believers, lovers of animals? Allah Subhanahu Wa Ta ala doesn't waste words in the Qur'an. If He mentions the animals, creatures, birds as in the verse, I posted, you can bet He cares. Go study or don't, you can save yourself or roll the dice. Your next comment should include evidence for your claim or a retraction of it. Thanks Alhamdulillahi rabbi al'alameen

[@fr3d42]

@@michaelevans4110 we agree, I want you to stay a muslim. I'm not trying to harm you or make you doubt, you can keep praying and fearing hell, it's ok. I think we talked past each other, I don't see how those words you pasted shows that god cares about animal suffering. If he created them the way he did, knowing how they would suffer without having any choice, the fact that they would end up in heaven one day doesn't negate all their suffering here on earth, does it?

[@taimur74]

Alhamdullilah every single atheist only strengthened my faith

[@ismailomar1323]

What a hilarious moment that was when Michael summoned Allah & expected him to appear like a genie to say 'Hi' ! The nerve! The arrogance!

[@DarkCrusade]

'if God realz y he no appaer infront of me???!1!!'

[@scambammer6102]

why wouldn't he? Your god could just show up and blast everyone right? So why doesn't it?

[@DarkCrusade]

@@scambammer6102 why would he?

[@ismailomar1323]

@@scambammer6102 Yes He can but that is not His will & He doesn't just pop up when summoned like an obedient slave. He is neither a genie nor a being who needs to prove anything to anyone.

[@mujahid5470]

What's Irada shareea and irada qawlia? I can't find any good explanation on the internet. Perhaps I got the spellings wrong. 1:33:40

[@SawarimHaqq]

It's Iradah Kawniyyah

[@mujahid5470]

@@SawarimHaqq Thanks. Where is the explanation bro?

[@AzamatBagatov413]

Humans have free will to commit sin.

[@dorarie3167]

But what is sin? Who determines it, who agrees upon it? Do Muslims commit sin in Christian eyes? Sin seems to be cultural and specific to religious ideologies.

[@commandar88]

@@dorarie3167 none of your questions undermines about having free will to sin, same way having free will to do good

[@dorarie3167]

@@commandar88 My issue is with the term ‘sin’. I think you missed my point. Better to say ‘Humans have free will to do wrong’. But do they? Is a deterministic world possible where what seems like free will is actually the result of conditions such as experience, character, mental faculties, social conditions and so forth which then lead one to make particular choices? Could we, if the same world were created again and all conditions were exactly the same, choose to do things differently?

[@deiov]

@@dorarie3167 sin and wrong, same thing. If you believe no is able to make free choices, there's no point in even dicussuing things as theyre already determined.

[@KH_Shaikh]

After creating the world, Heaven and paradise, Allah asked all the Human beings whether Humans want to live this life on earth. It was Humans who choose to come and live on EARTH. It was Humans choice. So the evil and suffering any Human is going through is the consequence of our FIRST CHOICE. PERIOD to the argument of EVIL from the ISLAMIC perspective.

[@RoofingConnecticut]

Pinecreek’s argument is dumb. I prefer the world that Allah SWT wants because it’s the one he chose to create simple as I don’t need to be a genius to reach this conclusion

[@whatwecalllife7034]

So you're saying that we shouldn't be fighting disease, parasites, pathogens, etc.?

[@RoofingConnecticut]

@@whatwecalllife7034 where did you read that into what I said

[@whatwecalllife7034]

@@RoofingConnecticut You said that you "prefer the world that Allah wants because it's the one he chose to create". Such a world is one where those things I mentioned exist. So I'm asking you if we should be trying to fight against those things even though Allah created them as part of this world.

[@Themuslimtheist]

@@whatwecalllife7034 He also created the world such that the laws of nature and our intelligence and our bodily abilities match up such that we can fight these things. Struggle, triumph and failure are part of our trial.

[@scambammer6102]

"I don’t need to be a genius" well you certainly chose the right religion

[@whyayyyerrlaffinfhorr2152]

pinecreep thought no one can't smell his trick

[@al-mancuni]

More like Pinecreaking now - TAP TAP TAP - like a cuckoo team TAP drilled more than expected - the pine tree is creaking

[@Allam_Games]

to my understanding, pinecreek is clearly aware of the fact that speaking rationally one cannot deny the existence of Allah s.w.t, his only hope now is emotion, because unfortunately if not all but most of the people allude to emotions, and that is what he is calling to. Just like iblees, whispers into ear, because that is what he can do...

[@SheikhN-bible-syndrome]

But you're incapable of rationality because you uphold the concept of Allah

[@Allam_Games]

@@SheikhN-bible-syndrome How does it make me irrational if i uphold the concept of allah

[@PabloSensei]

@@SheikhN-bible-syndrome The guy who invented the scientific method is is less rational than Maya over here

[@SheikhN-bible-syndrome]

@@PabloSensei the guy that invented the scientific method? can you please unretard that statement a little bit so I can make sense of it please?

[@PabloSensei]

@@SheikhN-bible-syndrome ibn al haytham upheld the concept of Allah, he was less rational than you?

[@RealVerses]

What do atheists do at funerals of loved ones? Must be depressingly icky.

[@shizoukahn1019]

Caleb Jackson was a better guest than pine creek fs, he was better composed and more respectful in understanding the arguements

[@shizoukahn1019]

nvm jus found he wasn't atheist so he would have a bias, good talk tho

[@RayKosby]

In my opinion the format of this show would improve if the hosts interrupted the guest less often. Even if they think the guests are going down the wrong path, if it doesn't take a long time, let the guests complete their statements. Even if the hosts think the guests are repeating themselves, if it is a short statement, let them repeat themselves a few times. I measure the number of interruptions as excessive when I find myself saying "let him finish" to the TV. This happened several times.

[@mooseyzed]

Thanks for the advice 👍

[@gangsterunicorns]

God makes sin so that he can forgive sinners does that mean he needs external entities to fulfil his needs? So hes not self-reliant?

[@mattsapiens9137]

Some points, 1. The way you responded to Pinecreek is basically saying if there is a God, whatever he does is justified because he is the ultimate and there is no one for him to answr. So why you asking for contradiction? If God exists? he CAN say contradictory things by choice, right? If God says something or do something contradictory, that doesnt disproove god. Hs can do whatever he choose. And there is no point in making argument. Why you asking for arguments then? Anyone can make up his own god and justify by saying, god can do whatever he wants even absurd stuffs. There is no argument against that. After all, human cannot be 100% certain you said we are limited, right? Did you think where this kind of reasoning takes? 2. Abdul's defence against Evil God Challenge fails in so many way. Please invite Stephen Law if you can. And also, the Law's evil god challenge can be modified against islamic theology with some modifications. Stephen Law dont know islam well, so stealman him there. However, Abul's argument from psychology doesnt cut it, please arrange a separate stream for it. 3. On Matthew's points, you are saying about certain methodologies to read and interpret Quran. Now who proposed these precise methodologies? Quran dont give any guidnce there. Sahih hadiths are also very vague there, you cant get such precise methodology there. As far I know, these methodolies were set gradually by 9th-11th century scholars sponsored by Qaliphs who had political and thelogical agendas which are very controversial. Also, if allah doesnt provide these methodologies, why would we rely on human made methodologies.

[@Oneummahgeneration]

Abdul rahman actually asked pinecreek to define good or evil. Pinecreek then wants to do an internal critique and thus he posited the idea that good is what god says or does is good and evil is what he says is evil. Abdulrahman said just taking that assumption from pinecreek can he now show an internal contradiction within Islam. So he was using pinecreek arguments that he himself put forward. And pine creek was simply unable to explain what the actual problem was except that he felt icky. The issue here is the panelists can only address the contentions that are being brought forward by the callers themselves and address their arguments. If the brothers start to add to the arguments the callers will then probably claim they are being strawmanned. So the only approach they have is to take their interlocutors arguments as they present them and address those arguments. So any problem is with pinecreek and his inability to show any logical or incoherent problems accept to appeal to his emotions which are built on his biases he has against Islam.

[@mattsapiens9137]

@@Oneummahgeneration but do you realise by doing that, they adopted a line of reasoning which is disasterous. do you get it? Pinecreek is successful there. He got what exactly he wanted. And he has nothing to loose either. It doesnt matter in his worldview. But at believers worldview, thats not comfortable.

[@Oneummahgeneration]

@@mattsapiens9137 what exactly did pinecreek get?

[@mattsapiens9137]

@@Oneummahgeneration to get theists of a particular religion to go to a path where any god claim can be justified and all have equal value. you know there can be millions of god claims. and there is basically no argument against any of them because god can do anything say anything, humans can not be certain.

[@Oneummahgeneration]

@@mattsapiens9137 there can’t be millions of god claims. The contingent arguments for a creator restricts what type of god claim can be made. Problem of evil is not an argument for god. It’s an argument against god. By showing that an argument against the existence of God fails doesn’t automatically prove God exists. It demonstrates that it’s no a warranted position to assume or think god is illogical

[@peacenow6618]

تقبل الله منا و منكم

[@novindrawanto]

The way pinecreek constantly cuts and overtalk the panels response shows how bankrupt his honesty is.

[@ShouVertica]

Did you even watch the same video? They overtalked themselves lol.

[@djaxx587]

Beautyful how Pinecreek showed that the religious version of god creating us makes no sense at all.

[@maazhanif8753]

Where did he show that?God does what He wills.

[@maazhanif8753]

It makes sense to me?perhaps you're not thinking hard enough?

[@hamzazulfi]

I think you need to rewatch that segment again because Pinecreek himself admits that he is appealing to emotions and that's a logical fallacy.

[@homtanks7259]

Djaxx please do me a favor, don't father children

[@djaxx587]

​@@maazhanif8753 _"God does what He wills"_ That's the point. God wills to torture his own creation. What sick animal wills to torture that which you create?

[@erTalhaKhan]

What a confused & illogical this pine creek fellow was. He had no logic, no argument & just jumping from one point to another with no sense at all. Acc to him every thing would be great if Allah had not created the universe. Firstly it's an assumption. Secondly, if Allah had not created anything then it would be a contradiction in itself. Because in islam one of the attributes of Allah is 'khaliq' i.e. creator. So he is saying that the creator should not have created anything. A painter does not do painting or a writer does not write anything then can we even use those attributes for them? Is it logical? will it not be a contradiction in the other part of the Qur'an where it says that Allah is a creator? Furthermore if you read exigisis of surah ahzab ayahs(73) it clearly mentions that after Allah created his creation he asked mountains, heavens, humans if they want to undergo this test of life where they will have free will to obey or disobey Allah then everyone rejected but we humans opted for this test & indeed we humans were fools. So this test was chosen by us & obviously we don't remember because if we remember then where is the test? The test itself is to identify Allah & worship him. So Allah is not putting us in hell, it's our deed that we choose to do here by undergoing this test will. Lastly he said Allah doesn't like disbelief, ofcourse he doesn't like but he lets humans to choose. Whether you believe or disbelieve in Allah, it will not have any impact on Allah. The only loser will be the humans if they disbelieve and thats why Allah doesn't like you to disbelieve, i.e. for your benefits. Just like doctor does not want you to eat sugar if you are diabetic, but it will not have any impact on doctor if you eat sugar and die.

[@EzziiG]

How does this video have 12k views and they only have 6k subscriber's?...if you are one of these guys who just watches their content and is not a subscriber, you are doing a disservice to these guys. In order to attract better guests and create better content we need to get the subs. SUBSCRIBE TO THE CHANNEL!

[@sarim9574]

Why was Matthew so angry?

[@commandar88]

Typical neo atheist appealing to emotions covered in "logical sophistry"

[@ayoubtalib4782]

Atheists: Imagine worshiping a being that willingly creates something that he knew will be faulty, but then be all mad when said something he created in the end is in fact faulty! Muslims: Except that faulty thing is provided instruction to better itself. So if it stays faulty in the end it means that said something is willing to stay faulty. Atheists: I don’t care if said something stays faulty willingly, I am saying God knew that said something he created will in the end stays faulty and God punishes them nonetheless. Muslims: But you can’t deny that no one knows if they are those faulty things said being created, and that they have the ability to choose to heed to the instructions provided to them or just walk away from it and stay being a faulty something. Atheists: I don’t care, coz as I am saying this, there are Muslims out there who are leaving their religion for how evil the god of Islam is. Muslims: We also don’t care. Those who want to leave their religion do so out of their free will, and if you’re willing to be honest… it is in fact a direct refutation to the “Problem of Evil”.

[@mikkelfraskui]

Nor does he have any excuse for the nobelief stemming from perceived lack of evidence.

[@whatwecalllife7034]

What happened to that thread I was in where "GuruSpeaksGarbage" said someone should be tortured forever simply because they don't believe his religion is true?

[@bengreen171]

The attempted escape from the Problem of Evil described by the lads here is to counter skepticism with extreme skepcticism. That seems pretty weak to me. And it's worth pointing out that as much as you criticise Pinecreek's argument as 'emotional' - the only response to it was to beg the question. And it's a composition fallacy mixed with a dash of equivocation to assert that if a possible counter to the PoE exists for God concept X, that means that your particular God concept is also able to use the same counter. You have to demonstrate that, or it's just worthless.

[@mohammedyasin2087]

To call something skepticism is not an adequate comeback. And the questions are legitimate from an epistemic point of view and have obvious value in philosophy. Else there wouldn't be so many floating ideas from moral objectivism to moral nhilism about the concept of morality. As for Pinecreek, he claimed to make an "internal critique" and the response stating what Islam actually says is not "begging the question". Lastly, the counters do not introduce any "new concept" to the worldview of a God concept X and hence there is no possibility of contradiction to begin with in order for it to require a demostration of compatibility with X.

[@bengreen171]

@@mohammedyasin2087 I think you misunderstood my points. countering skepticism of a particular idea with extreme skepticism, is a weak argumentive strategy. Because it's very clear hat the guys are not extremely skeptical of all thingsconsistently - they onlyresort to it to counter the notion that we should be skeptical that an omni God would allow evil. They are not extremely skeptical when it comes to the claims of hte Quran - in fact quite the opposite. They are extremely naive when it comes to the Quran, and only employ extreme skepticism towards the refutations of the Quran. This is intellectual dishonesty. It is begging the question to assume that our intuitions about morality are wrong because the Islamic position is at odds with them. Pinecreek was making an internal critique of the Islamic worldview. He did it successfully. He pointed out that God creates people that he knows will go to Hell. Howis he wrong? That fact was never convincingly addressed - in fact the guys tried to avoid dealing with that fact by refusing to address because it wasn't in the form of a syllogism. Lastly - that last paragraph is just wrong. Maybe it's my fault for not being clear. Saf and Sharif claimed that if there was a possible concept of God that the PoE didn't apply to, then they could reject the PoE. This is fallacious. This is like saying that because there are people in France that canspeak French, it is not valid to claim that you cannot speak French. The guys aren't arguing for a general concept of God X - they are arguing for their specific concept of God, let's call it A. While we can say that all 'A's are 'X', it is a fallacy to claim that all 'X's are 'A'. If they want to reject the PoE, they have to first justify the idea that being omnibenevolent doesn't involve reducing evil to the minimum possible amount under their worldview - which they cannot do beyond the weak assertion that 'God has reasons that are unknown to us'. Considering that the guys employ extreme skepticism to reject intuitive notions about what is good (on the grounds that we cannot empirically or logically demonstrate it with 100% certainty) - they cannot then use a vague assertion about 'God's mysterious ways' and expect any rational person to accept it.

[@commandar88]

@@bengreen171 all pinecreek did was state what God did I.e. create creation Simply saying that is not an argument it's just a lame attempt to appeal to emotions

[@mohammedyasin2087]

@@bengreen171 Again, you are not showing why it is weak. Which principle of logic says that it is weak? Questioning assumptions are perfectly justifiable. As for their different skepticism standards towards Qur'an, it seems like an assertion to me since you haven't provided any example of that. Even if they did, it would be tu quoque to use this as an argument against them. It's not begging the question that our intuition about morality is wrong. Who says that it is? So all these philosphers discussing about morality are unaware of such a blunder in their thought process? Not at all. In fact it is a perfectly reasonable question if the one presenting PoE believes that all of these are just a product of Darwinian evolution and only aimed at survival and nothing more. Lastly, I don't know where they made the claim you said they made. They provided four arguments, which is the one you are referring to? The French analogy is flawed and disanalogous because it is asserting a new "quality" or "property" to another group of people based on the fact that some other group has. The PoE counters are not doing that. As I said, they are not introducing any new concept to solve the PoE. Nobody made a brand new 'is/'are' claim and applied it to a different group as the format of fallacy that you mentioned requires. Likewise, who defines 'omnibenevolent'? If it is an external source, then it needs to shown why that definition is authoritative. And if it is internal, then there is no contradiction at all because the definition of omnibenevolence is derived from the whole of tradition. There no single verse defining what omnibenevolence is which you could point towards and say there's an internal contradiction because it is inconsisten with the definition provided.

[@bengreen171]

@@commandar88 if it's so lame, why is your only response to beg the question?