Yamin Zakaria vs. Ali Sina
Part III Page 7
For the sake of clarity I have quoted the rebuttal of Mr. Zakaria and responded to each
paragraph separately. Mr.
Zakaria believes his rebuttal should be published in one pieces or it
loses its eficacy. To read his rebuttal in one piece and be swayed by its
power, please read his unbroken response here.
Back <
> Next
Mr. Zakaria wrote:
The
“Golden Rule” Cult of Ali Sina
$50,000 Debate
- My Second Response [1] to Mr. Ali Sina
I accepted Mr Sina’s offer to debate with him and asked him to clarify
the terms of his offer: the practical mechanism in place for determining
the winner and verifying the availability of the prize money ($50,000). It
is sensible and the norm to clarify the terms of the contract prior to
engagement. So, I am perplexed and the readers will surely judge as to why
the clarification process can amount to “silly things” or
“excuses” or “filibustering”! The only “weasel” like behaviour
that I can see is Mr Sina trying to evade this issue!
What was really silly is Mr Sina’s
incompetence to recognise that two opponents cannot be expected
unilaterally to: declare victory or admit defeat, especially when there is
a large some of money is at stake. Commonsense dictates that impartial
(not the ‘publics’ visiting Mr Sina’s forum) judicators are required
to asses the debate and issue the verdict. Any genuine freethinker even
with a miniature “logical gun” would have recognised this simple fact!
Time would be far less wasted if Mr Sina admitted that he had lied about
the money. We can continue with the debate without arguing about side
issues. I have no problem with debating regardless of the money which I
would have most probably donated to the various causes.
|
Mr. Zakaria.
The terms of my offer are spelled out clearly. I also
said if you don’t trust me, you don’t have to take the challenge.
Now you say you need an independent jury to decide
who wins the debate. I agree with that. So let us select the jury.
Naturally no Muslim can be nominated for such task. We need an unbiased
jury. Who do you suggest? How about a panel of non-Muslim
journalists, writers and others? How about advertising this debate to a
wider audience? I think that would be a great idea. So let us toss some
names. Maybe our readers can suggest a few names too. If I lose, I lose
$50,000 dollars. If you lose, that would be the loss of Islam. Let me
improve your chances by letting you bring any other Muslim scholar to
assist you. It can’t get better than that. You can form your panel of
Muslim scholars and I will be okay alone. Let millions of people read
this. How about publishing this debate in Al Jazeerah site? If you do that I
will try to get one of the MSM newspapers to publish our debate too. Here
is your chance to redeem the name of Islam and perhaps win
thousands of new converts.
However there is a problem that we have to take care
of. Somehow we must ascertain that the jury will not be assassinated
after passing their verdict if they decide in my favor. How
can they be assured that after declaring Islam is a false religion
publicly they won’t be assassinated? Based on this, I have a feeling
that finding a truly unbiased jury is not going to be easy. Only those who
have already made their minds to vote in your favor would feel comfortable
accepting the job.
|
Before getting to the actual substance of the debate I would like to
answer couple of points that Mr Sina cited in his previous response. First
of all, had Mr Sina exercised his freethinking ‘capability’ he might
have realised that I used the word “disciple” to denote sarcasm, hence
it was stated within single quotes. Instead, he should have let his cat
answer that point as it might have had a better chance in spotting the
sarcasm!
Secondly, as followers of Prophet Muhammad (SAW) we use our
intelligence correctly to verify His Prophethood and the existence of the
creator as opposed to have blind faith in a man who proclaims that he has
the truth wrapped up in his so-called “Golden-Rule”! Consequently, we
submit to our creator in obedience that is the most intelligent and
consistent thing to do. But that is another separate discussion.
|
Mr. Zakaria. It is fine to submit to the Creator. The
problem is that you must first make sure that this thing you submit to is
the Creator and not the Satan. That is the question we are dealing with.
In my view and based on my understanding of Islam, Allah is Satan and not
the Creator. So it is up to you to prove that Allah is God.
How can the teachings of the Creator not be in
harmony with the Golden Rule? .
You said you used your
intelligence correctly to verify the Prophethood of Muhammad and the existence of the
Creator. If you used your intelligence correctly you should be able to
prove it. That is what I am interested to hear from you.
Now, lets move on to the real issue of the debate. Mr Sina said that he
will be making the allegations against Prophet Muhammad (SAW) on the basis
that the Prophet (SAW) has violated the “Golden Rule”. As he says
Islam contradicts the “Golden Rule”; the rule is his “criterion”
and “yard stick”. Therefore, Mr Sina has to prove the legitimacy of
the “Golden Rule” otherwise it is a mere assumption. In the absence of
proof, Mr Sina would be violating his first rule which he stated earlier:
“he must be able to prove that assumption or withdraw it”!
|
No
Mr. Zakaria. I do not have to prove the legitimacy of the Golden Rule. I don’t think I
have to prove day is bright and night is dark to a seeing person and to a
blind, that won’t make no difference.
The
Golden Rule is a universal principle and it is self evident. We must not
measure the validity of the Golden Rule with what Muhammad said, but
rather we must establish the legitimacy of Muhammad and his claim by the
yardstick of the Golden Rule. If this is how you used your
intelligence to verify the prophethood of Muhammad, I am afraid you did
not use it correctly.
I
am very pleased that you were honest enough to question the legitimacy of
the Golden Rule. Most apologists of Islam lie about it and twist the truth
to make Islam look compatible with the Golden Rule. I commend your honesty
in this case for not falling into that temptation and for making my job so easy.
In
fact it is YOU who must prove the legitimacy of Islam. Why Islam is not
compatible with the Golden Rule? We humans measure every right and wrong
with this yardstick. That is how we know stealing is bad, murder is bad,
rape is bad, pedophilia is bad, cheating is bad, and kindness is good, generosity is good, forgiveness is good etc. But you
question the Golden Rule. You think it is nonsense. You believe that the
good and bad are what Muhammad enjoined and prohibited. So tell us Mr.
Zakaria how do you know Muhammad was not messenger of Satan or a
psychopath? This is the question that you must answer.
Tell
us how do you know Muhammad was not lying? Being truthful is a tenet of
the Golden Rule. You do not believe in the Golden Rule. Muhammad also did
not believe in the Golden Rule. He instructed his followers to lie to
their victims to win their trust and when they lower their guards, kill
them. He sent one of his disciples to the Meccans and to the Bani Quraiyza
and told him to lie to both groups and to deceive them. Then he added:
“war is a game of deception”. So a man who was capable of lying,
commit assassination, cause sedition to advance his malicious
designs, could not have lied about being a prophet of God? Once it is
established that he broke the Golden Rule and lied on several occasions,
why should we believe him when he claimed to be a messenger of God?
He
raided innocent civilians with no warning, butchered the men and took the
women and children as slaves and then he allowed his men to rape the
women. How do Muslims like to be treated that way? What Muhammad did was
against the Golden Rule. But you have no regards for the Golden Rule
anyway. You question the legitimacy of this universally acclaimed
principle. You think it is okay for a Muslim to kill non-Muslims, rape
their wives and enslave their children, but it is not okay for none
Muslims to do the same to Muslims. If this is not a Satanic religion,
please explain how it differs. Tell us what
criteria you use to determine that Muhammad was a messenger of God?
Back <
> Next
Back to Index
|
