Hamza Andreas Tzortzis

[Aram]

If you think We can do better...maybe you should step forward and show us how its done

[Ahmed]

If you think We can do better...maybe you should step forward and show us how its done

true,

this is some peoples big downfall,which also drags down the ummah

whatever someone is doing ,give support by duas and even helping them.
if you have issues talk to them by email directly.

people are needed in all fields.

[Maripat]

Exactly - except that Hamza not only copies the words, names and references, but even the hand gestures and jokes, which I have shown in my YouTube videos. It actually looks quite funny.



You find Dr. Craig's arguments effective? Why? How?
I find him overbearing and primitive. He has no compelling, factual points and only appeals to emotion and authority by dropping a huge number of names with their qualifications.

Also, a quote should back up your own arguments. Hamza is not knowledgeable enough for this so he thinks dropping a name and a sentence is sufficient.

Tell you what StopS? Brother you enjoy our company a lot. Just be a Muslim. Say there is no god but God and Muhammed (PBUH) is His messenger. It is so boring to have you on the other side. It does not just gel. I do not do it for card carrying atheists but you are an exception - I cordially invite you to Islam. I do not know why I just do not feel the same way about you as I do for other atheists. Do not forget that statement by Professor Hoodbhoy - we are Muslims because we were born Muslims, that is it. You were not born a Muslim but that is a damage which can be easily undone.

So guys join me in inviting brother StosS to Islam - give him no chance to indulge in ifs and buts.
(Beaming for StopS.)

[StopS]

If you think We can do better...maybe you should step forward and show us how its done

This is ambiguous.

Which part do you want to see improved? The arguments of Craig? The arguments for Muslims not using Craig or Tzortzis?

[StopS]

Tell you what StopS? Brother you enjoy our company a lot. Just be a Muslim. Say there is no god but God and Muhammed (PBUH) is His messenger. It is so boring to have you on the other side. It does not just gel. I do not do it for card carrying atheists but you are an exception - I cordially invite you to Islam. I do not know why I just do not feel the same way about you as I do for other atheists. Do not forget that statement by Professor Hoodbhoy - we are Muslims because we were born Muslims, that is it. You were not born a Muslim but that is a damage which can be easily undone.

So guys join me in inviting brother StosS to Islam - give him no chance to indulge in ifs and buts.
(Beaming for StopS.)

Hahaha, I like that! A lot. At last a smile from another human, instead of a scowl! Lovely.

[kakarot_999]

Salaamu alaiykum wa rahmatullah
Where are the excuses that we should make for our muslim brother? Where is the: "Maybe he agreed with him in private to use his works" "Maybe Craig is the one copying him" "Maybe it is just a coincidence" "Maybe they regularly help each other out in refuting atheist that they've adopted the same means of argument" etc. Let's face it. This brother (May Allah be pleased with him) and Adam Deen (May Allah be pleased with him) are the only two main people (according to my experience) who effectively refute the constant pressure and influence of the atheists - upon our own helpless crying for help brothers and sisters - on a large scale. Let's not look for faults, and I have a feeling this is happening subconsiously (i.e. people don't know they're doing it because I know the brothers and sisters here are sincere - so no judging from the other party)

[StopS]

Salaamu alaiykum wa rahmatullah
Where are the excuses that we should make for our muslim brother? Where is the: "Maybe he agreed with him in private to use his works" "Maybe Craig is the one copying him" "Maybe it is just a coincidence" "Maybe they regularly help each other out in refuting atheist that they've adopted the same means of argument" etc. Let's face it. This brother (May Allah be pleased with him) and Adam Deen (May Allah be pleased with him) are the only two main people (according to my experience) who effectively refute the constant pressure and influence of the atheists - upon our own helpless crying for help brothers and sisters - on a large scale. Let's not look for faults, and I have a feeling this is happening subconsiously (i.e. people don't know they're doing it because I know the brothers and sisters here are sincere - so no judging from the other party)

Interesting comment you make. And it is factual as well, so I am suitably impressed.

I have 2 questions: "who effectively refute the constant pressure and influence of the atheists"

1. What pressure? What pressure is this and in what way? An atheist like myself does not see evidence for the existence of a god. Does that put pressure on believers? An atheist does not influence anyone. I don't stand on street corners and scream about atheism, ring bells or call anyone to atheism using big speakers on all 4 sides of tall towers. I just quietly try to be a good person, help others and do not even brag about it. How is that putting pressure or influence on believers?

2. "who effectively refute" How exactly do Hamza and Adam refute anything or anyone. How exactly do they do this effectively??? Do you call using outdated and long refuted arguments used by Christians effective?

[abdulwahhab]

1. What pressure? What pressure is this and in what way? An atheist like myself does not see evidence for the existence of a god. Does that put pressure on believers? An atheist does not influence anyone. I don't stand on street corners and scream about atheism, ring bells or call anyone to atheism using big speakers on all 4 sides of tall towers. I just quietly try to be a good person, help others and do not even brag about it. How is that putting pressure or influence on believers?

You're being naive here because since the Internet has become ubiquitous, Atheists have been the most vocal presence online in so-called neutral territories. Atheists can be Atheists all they want but when you have people like Pat Condell and his cronies post online and confuse lay Muslims who don't know much about their religion, then it is a "constant pressure".

2. "who effectively refute" How exactly do Hamza and Adam refute anything or anyone. How exactly do they do this effectively??? Do you call using outdated and long refuted arguments used by Christians effective?

If they're "long refuted," then why would anyone reuse them? The fact of the matter is, some arguments cannot be "refuted" from the Atheistic side except by asking for empirical evidence, whereas the entire argument is philosophical in nature, rather than scientific - because science ends with our senses.

[kakarot_999]

Interesting comment you make. And it is factual as well, so I am suitably impressed.

I have 2 questions: "who effectively refute the constant pressure and influence of the atheists"

1. What pressure? What pressure is this and in what way? An atheist like myself does not see evidence for the existence of a god. Does that put pressure on believers? An atheist does not influence anyone. I don't stand on street corners and scream about atheism, ring bells or call anyone to atheism using big speakers on all 4 sides of tall towers. I just quietly try to be a good person, help others and do not even brag about it. How is that putting pressure or influence on believers?

2. "who effectively refute" How exactly do Hamza and Adam refute anything or anyone. How exactly do they do this effectively??? Do you call using outdated and long refuted arguments used by Christians effective?

Ermm...I wasn't really trying to start on anyone or make people "impressed" lol. Where's the sincerity in that? Just wanted to enjoin good and forbid evil upon my muslim brothers and sisters. You may not see the pressure because you're not muslim. These atheists go to muslims privately more than publicly, so you would never know about it. They try and "help others" as you put it. These two brothers don't go around refuting people upon their rules (which is a useless approach as the rules are defined by the person himself and thus subject to change and bias) and that is why you probably wouldn't think they are refuting people at all. They refute upon common grounds of logic and philosophy which all human beings share and whether you (or others) agree or not with these common grounds is a personal problem on your behalf (arrogance or ignorance may be a factor in this). This is evident by the way such people don't confront them personally or send them a mail or go to their lectures and ask a question. However, the bottom line is this and you may feel put back about this. Whether or not there is "empirical proof" or other such "proof" that MAN has set up (the real absolute definition of proof should be by the Lord himself which is present in the Quran), it doesn't change the personal experience and signs one gets from his Lord either through reading the Quran or through daily life experiences - it is not a battle of minds and intellects any more but a battle of iman (faith), ethics (sincerity, open mindedness, etc.), conscience, and natural dispositions. You may agree or not but I would just like you to know why we believe and follow what we follow (if that is what you came here for).
Peace and may all of us be guided to the truth.

[StopS]

You're being naive here because since the Internet has become ubiquitous, Atheists have been the most vocal presence online in so-called neutral territories. Atheists can be Atheists all they want but when you have people like Pat Condell and his cronies post online and confuse lay Muslims who don't know much about their religion, then it is a "constant pressure".

Maybe I am naive. If I walk down the street in Dubai I am forced to hear a muezzin calling for prayer. In Dallas I am forced to hear church bells.
Back in Europe, I am forced to hear Muslims screaming that there is only 1 god and I need to believe it and read this book, the Koran. Or else I will suffer forever and my skin will be peeled off and replaced with new skin and then peeled off again. I can't avoid religious fanatics.

As far as I know, anyone who does not want to listen to Pat Condell "and his cronies" is not forced to. Anyone can avoid it. They just don't watch the video.

So I am the one who is naive - yet when atheists voice their opinion privately it is bad and confuses people, but religious people are allowed to threaten me without me having the possibility to avoid it. And that is ok with you?

If they're "long refuted," then why would anyone reuse them?

Maybe because they are stupid. I mean everybody knows Hamza is not exactly clever or smart and is not intelligent. So that a deluded, uneducated, histrionic person like Hamza will use stuff he finds impressive sounding is not a surprise.

The fact of the matter is, some arguments cannot be "refuted" from the Atheistic side except by asking for empirical evidence, whereas the entire argument is philosophical in nature, rather than scientific - because science ends with our senses.

Are you suggesting a philosophical argument can be neither substantiated nor refuted by empirical evidence?
Are you suggesting that putting the word "philosophical" in front of nonsense validates that nonsense?

And no, you seem to have no clue what you are talking about, science does NOT end "with our senses". What are you talking about? Can your senses measure Coulomb, Tesla, Becquerel, Röntgen, etc etc etc etc

Man, get a hold of yourself!