Talk:Ahmed Deedat

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

WikiProject_India This article is within the scope of WikiProject India, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of India-related topics. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page.
Start This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale. (add comments)
This article is maintained by the Gujarat workgroup.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page.
Start This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale. [FAQ]
Islam This article is within the scope of WikiProject Islam, an attempt to build a comprehensive guide to Islam on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit this article, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. If you are new to editing Wikipedia visit the welcome page so as to become familiar with the guidelines.
Start This article has been rated as Start-class on the quality scale.
??? This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale.
This article is supported by the Muslim scholars task force. (with unknown importance)
 WikiProject Religion This article is within the scope of WikiProject Religion, a project to improve Wikipedia's articles on Religion-related subjects. Please participate by editing the article, and help us assess and improve articles to good and 1.0 standards, or visit the wikiproject page for more details.
Start This article has been rated as Start on the Project's quality scale.
(If you rated the article please give a short summary at comments to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses.)
This article falls within the scope of the Interfaith work group. If you are interested in Interfaith-related topics, please visit the project page to see how you can help. If you have any comments regarding the appropriateness or positioning of this template, please let us know at our talk page


See here for some information that might be able to be salvaged, but on the whole it's not so great. gren グレン 07:41, 5 November 2005 (UTC)

The link claiming he was an antisemite is false, asserting without any evidence besides lipservice. Please take it down.

Need to Wikify this page, will do it in a day or two. User:Monotheist User talk:Monotheist


While this page is a strong start, it gives the distinct impression that Deedat is 'right' and his critics 'wrong' and also downplays criticism, when in fact he is a highly controversial figure not just to christians but also to science.. Needs a rewrite. Alex Bartho 14:17, 23 January 2006 (UTC)

I think we need to organize this page

Contents

[edit] NPOV

Hero worship. Evidence used in analysis of Deedat's work prooves too much, he cannot be personally accredited with conversion without evidence and the argument in the conclusion that he demonstrated the Qur'an logically flows with the Bible is just that - an argument. Or rather a position within an argument - a point of view unsubstantianted by the supplied evidence, nor could it be considering there has been no reconciliation on the matter between the two camps on the issue.

Also the author's unsubstantiated theological perspectives bleed through the article:

e.g.

"This in turn had led to a rash of anti-Deedat sites, whilst some make legitimate claims of Deedats (at times) offensive and blunt style, they have had little success in countering the most popular of Deedat's arguments. This is mainly due to the reliance on sources external to the Bible which are subject to various interpretations, whilst Deedat has limited (as much as possible) his argument to the Bible (because Christian missionaries traditionally ignore any external sources that contradicts the Bible in debates). Another problem of these sites is that they attempt to duplicate the Deedat template, e.g. criticism of the Qur'an, which on record has had rare success only because the nature of both books are different, eg while the Bible is filled with recorded history and events, the Qur'an claims to be a revealed preaching text, only using history when it is relevant to highlighting the moral of a story."

1. There is no evidence supplied for the conclusion the author draws of why or even if criticism of deedat (anti-deedat is a value judgement) was unsuccesful.


As a general note I think this is a good rough draft - once the article is cleaned up to meet wikistandards I feel many of these issues will sort themselves out.


I find this article is an accurate portrayal of Deedat. In most of Deedat's debates, he clearly has the upper hand as his arguments are far from emotional. He uses a very logical approach to arguing his perspective, especially taking Biblical verses in their context to support his arguments. I suggest that people should watch Deedat's debates before making comments saying that he didn't win (or take dominance) in most, if not all, of them.


What was tis man's formal religious education? I find it alarming that he did not know Greek o Hebrew. Sort of undermines his credibility as a revered bilblical scholar.

I have never seen Deedat debate, although I've read his literature. All the friends I have that have seen him debate (who, by the way, are Muslims), though, have felt that he was a very poor debator, who based his arguments as much upon rhetoric and peoples ignorance of Christianity as upon actual reason. I trust that their opinion is correct, partly because they're smart, partly because they would be unlikely to be biased against him, being Muslims, and partly because it is similar to my own experience of reading his literature.
In any case, Wikipedia policy, as set out in WP:NPOV (and WP:Attribution) is that our own opinions are completely irrelevant. What we must do is provide a fair representation of what has already been written in Reliable Sources, being balanced in favour of how far that kind of literature is balanced, rather than in favour of how wikipedians feel he should should be characterised. TJ 18:47, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Family Background

Is it true Deedat's family was originally hindu brahmin? Does anyone have any info on that?Omerlives

Yes that is trueIlliterate11 04:55, 2 December 2006 (UTC)illiterate

This is false, he was a born Muslim. See his biography video documentary.

[edit] Clean up

The article needs massive clean up. Arbusto 07:22, 6 November 2006 (UTC) I think it would be fair to say that prior to judge wether this account about deedat is accurate or not, we must see the videos and judge for ourselves

[edit] Controversies?

Removing section because: para 1 is primary statement para 2 is misguiding the links with Saudi Binladin Group, as Osama Bin Laden! para 2 is about his son. This artcile is supposed to be on Ahmed Deedat --IsleScapeTalk 11:29, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

Both Deedats have circulated videos.This is about daddy and relation with junior. But I made some changes. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 128.83.131.124 (talk) 19:41, 8 February 2007 (UTC).
No balanced view, no source mentioned. The other text selectively picks from an otherwise balanced AlJazeerah article. Finally, why revert the text and add cn tags?--IsleScapeTalk 23:37, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

This article is not very balanced. It reads more like an essay critical of Deedat and as someone who came to learn more about the man, I found little neutral or non biased commnetary.72.74.16.200 02:00, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

Well then why don't you tell everyone what type of things we're missing in this article?


REGARDING: "The Stephen Roth Institute also accuses Deedat of being an anti-Semite" A search of The Stephen Roth Institute does NOT reveal that it makes any such claims itself. It merely REPORTS an unsubstantiated claim. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.106.119.15 (talk) 02:02, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Removed hate site reference

There was a link after the word "anti-semitic" in the beginning that linked to a site named Americans Against Hate, which is an anti-Islamic hate site. I removed that link since it's against the basic principles of neutrality. One such aspect of this site's unreliability is this:

"STOP THE MOSQUE (STM) was spearheaded by a group of concerned individuals who believe that radical mosques or Islamic centers do not belong in American neighborhoods. STM will use all legal means necessary to prohibit these types of institutions from being built"

http://www.americansagainsthate.org/stm/

The site is full of other similar "watch" programs of Muslim charities and organizations. —Preceding unsigned comment added by PsychoticClown (talkcontribs) 07:57, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Reliable sources

Why is Farid Esack and www.crosscurrents.org a reliable source?Bless sins (talk) 01:30, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

I don't know about crosscurrents, though it seems to be archiving a lecture given at UTS. Esack himself is a South African academic and has taught religion and identity related material at various major universities. Last academic year he was visiting Harvard Divinity School. I think he's acceptable. Relata refero (talk) 14:45, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] yusuf deedat

i do not agree with the inclusion of the 2006 anti-hindu video made by his son yusuf deedat. after all the title of this article is "Ahmed Deedat" not "Yusuf Deedat." —Preceding unsigned comment added by Av6330 (talk • contribs) 08:37, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] The joke and lie by keep saying " Western culture is essentially secular"

Dear Wikipedia You have said in the Criticisms section of Ahmad Deedat that

{..the Bible does nothing to convince Westerners of the truth of Islam since Western culture is essentially secular}

That is a JOKE and LIE

Bush whom Was "democraticly Elected Twice " said that " god /his god told him to Invade Iraq"... !!That is Not Secular

And why Israel exist?..Is not because of this Bible that estimated the creation of the whole cosmos to be less than 6000 years ago ( 6000 years AFTER Jericho been built)and about the mythical Solomon temple that has NO archeological traces?

The WEST is Not Secular.82.5.167.237 (talk) 10:55, 18 April 2008 (UTC)