- Home
- न्यूजग्राम
- NewsGram USA
- India
- World
- Politics
- Entertainment
- Culture
- Lifestyle
- Economy
- Sports
- Sp. Coverage
- Misc.
- NewsGram Exclusive
- Jobs / Internships
Key Points:
The Lallantop hosted a respectful philosophical debate where Javed Akhtar and Mufti Shamail Nadwi discussed God’s existence without using religious scriptures or mythology.
Mufti Nadwi argued for God’s existence using contingency, infinite regression, and free will, while Javed Akhtar questioned God through global injustice, human suffering, and scientific reasoning.
The well-moderated debate upheld India’s constitutional values, focusing on logic, free thought, and mutual respect, without aiming to prove or disprove God’s existence.
The Lallantop hosted a debate on the topic: “Does God Exist?”, moderated by Saurabh Dwivedi. Saurabh Dwivedi is the Editor of India Today (Hindi) Magazine and The Lallantop, a YouTube News Channel. The debate consisted of Mufti Shamail Nadwi, an Islamic scholar, author and researcher. On the other hand, Javed Akhtar, renowned poet, writer and lyricist was present.
The debate took place at the Constitution Club of India, on Saturday, December 20, 2025. It was also aired live on YouTube. The debate consisted of two rounds for the speakers to respectively present their arguments, and then another two rounds for rebuttals. Then, there was a cross questioning segment, following which closing statements by both speakers took place. Finally, both the speakers took questions from the audience.
Saurabh Dwivedi emphasised on the use of simple and comprehensible language, and not to indulge or engage in any religious debate. The debate was purely a philosophical debate, without drawing inferences from any religious scriptures or mythology, and focused on atheism and theism. It was organised in a purely academic, respectful and friendly manner, with the shared goal of fostering intellectual dialogue.
See Also: Arnab Goswami’s “Kabir Singh” Moment: What Forced “Modi-Paglu” Arnab to Go Back to Doing Journalism?
Mufti Shamail Nadwi started the debate. He explained the theory of contingency, which states that the being of any thing is bound by a cause that is a greater entity. This implies that our existence on earth was implied by the existence of God, our creator.
Mufti Nadwi also focused on infinite regression, which states that if we try to go to the past to find out how things occurred, the path will be an endless one. He said that one would not be able to deduce this in their lifetime. He also stated that God is timeless, he was there before time was, and will continue to be after time ceases to exist. God is eternal in its being, not bound by any physical restrictions that we can comprehend, he said
Javed Akhtar highlighted the point of atrocities happening in the world. He asked that if God does exist, why is evil prevailing on Earth? “Why are children dying in Gaza, if God exists?”, he asked. He also highlighted the injustice around the world, the sufferings weak human beings have to endure, and also brought in focus of different civilisations praying to different Gods over a period of time.
Answering the infinite regression argument, Javed Akhtar agreed that it was indeed not possible to go back and back again in order to find out the beginning of the truth. However, he stressed that Science gives the reasoning and ability to go back and look beyond, as much as one can, in order to find the truth.
See Also: “One Month to Learn Hindi”: Delhi BJP Councillor Threatens Foreign Football Coach in Language Row
Responding to the question of evil persisting in the world, despite God’s presence, Mufti Nadwi said that God has given free will to people, to use in their capacity to do good. However, many people ignore this and use their free will to cause harm, and exploit people, he said.
Mufti Nadwi added that the situation happening in Gaza was indeed inhumane and evil, but justice to all will be done after their period on Earth is over. He explained that the period we are living on Earth is a test period, and after this test period will be over, all human beings will be held accountable for their actions by God. Those who are innocent and did good deeds, will get rewarded handsomely, while those who committed evil acts, will be punished accordingly.
Both the speakers were careful in presenting their arguments respectfully, avoiding shouting or disturbing each other. Javed Akhtar took the support of science to present his argument, explaining that science and reasoning is the main cause of development of this Earth, and human beings. He also said that religion and faith is not based on science and reasoning, it is based on the unquestionable belief that there is a higher power above us.
Mufti Shamail Nadwi said that religion does not stop science from evolution and development, rather it is an important tool for human civilization. However, he added that science, in all its vast knowledge, could only provide explanations for all physical phenomena present in the world. Science could not explain metaphysics, he said.
In the question and answer session, both speakers were asked important questions. A young fellow, studying at Aligarh Muslim University, where Javed Akhtar had also studied, asked a question referencing Sir Syed Ahmed Khan. He remarked the words of Sir Syed Ahmed Khan, who said that one should look into the boundaries of one’s own mental understanding to find God, rather than defying his existence. Javed Akhtar replied that he couldn’t find God in his own mental boundaries.
A Professor from JNU (Jawaharlal Nehru University) asked Mufti Nadwi about the use of free will, that if God indeed gave free will to all, then anyone who is committing acts of terror is working within his own free will capacity, so how could God allow that? Mufti Nadwi replied by saying again, that God created free will so people could act in their own freedom. However, those who misuse their free will, will be punished, whereas those who put their free will to good use, will be rewarded.
It was a well moderated debate, with everyone present showing professionalism. The point of this debate was not to prove whether God existed, or to defy his existence, rather, it was to present both sides of the argument in a logical and reasonable way. The Constitution of India states that one is free to practice any religion, accept or refuse the existence of God, and follow their religious practices.
The Constitution does not impose any one specific religion on the citizens, rather it gives religious freedom and rights. India is a secular country, where every religion is respected, and rules and regulations are followed from the Constitution, not any particular religious book or scripture. In essence, this was the way of discussion and debate the session followed.
Javed Akhtar ended the session on a light note. He said that after the debate, he and Mufti Nadwi, along with others will have dinner together. This highlighted the ideal way a debate should take place, where everyone respects each other and engages in intellectual dialogue and discussion, in spite of ideological differences
Suggested Reading:
