GodLogic Apologetics Vs Waleed Naeem | Christianity or Islam: Which Religion is Satanic?

Brother, you believe that God is spacious and that if we fly high enough, we can reach him. >> I do. >> So then >> I do. I do. >> So then how is this woman having her own seat? >> What are you trying to derive out of that? >> Well, you'll get there in a second. No trailers. >> Say this. >> No, please answer. >> I'm not Yeah, men cheat on their wives. Sure. Sure. >> Okay. Men cheat on their wives. I say as a result, I'm not a man that I should cheat on my wife. Am I saying that I'm not a man by nature or do am I saying that I don't have the characteristic of adultery? >> I would be quite confused with that if you said I if you said this. No. So what is Paul actually saying here? He's saying you were all of these things. But it's not necessarily that you stopped them. It's that the the blood of Christ the the blood of Christ has washed it from you. So you are no more that. Now, for this next debate on Christianity or Islam, which is satanic, we're going to jump into it in just a moment. But first, a quick note from our sponsor, Zack from Main First. Thanks so much for being with us, Zach. Thank you. Thank you very much. Oh, sorry about that. Well, how's everyone doing? [cheering] >> Much better than last time. We now we got it once. Now next time you're just going to just say woo, right? All right. Well, Main First Project, our goal is to stem the tide of leftist policies so they never reach your door. It starts in Maine and let it end in Maine. We need your support. Please go to mainefirstpro.org and support our mission. Thank you. >> Thanks, brother. All right, we're going to get started. Gentlemen, if you want to grab those mics, I'll join you on the stage in just a moment. I'm going to first do your introductions. Introducing first Avery, also known as God, Logic Apologetics, is a prominent Christian apologist recognized for his direct energetic approach to defending the Christian faith. Please join me in welcoming Avery >> [cheering and applause] >> Next is Wed Naim is a Muslim apologist and debater known for confidently defending Islam against challenging theological objections. Please join me in welcoming Wed Naim. [applause] As mentioned, the format will be a full dialogue for an hour and a half followed by Q&A. I'm going to join them on the stage with that. Gentlemen, the floor is all yours for that open dialogue. >> Awesome. Well, if you want to start. >> Yeah. So, I've got a few points. And by the way, I just want to say I apologize to the audience if my energy is not like normal. I just got betrayed by what I felt like was a fellow Muslim. I was going to come on stage to give him some help, give him some love, even say salam to him. And then to find out that he sells me out in front of the entire audience completely unprovoked. Uh it shows the kind of measure and man that Jake Bronantella is. So I'm in a little bit of pain. But you know all praise to God. God gives me healing. But uh this topic right now that I want to get into of which religion is satanic. I don't mean to be inflammatory but I have to talk about certain things that are difficult within the Christian religion. So the first thing I want to discuss is this Pauline religion of a man dying on the cross for your sins. This faith alone gospel. I mean this idea which Paul clearly taught that you believe in this man and he absolves you of all of your sins, faith without works of the law. This has completely and utterly degenerated society. This idea basically that so this easy belieism, you believe on Jesus and you're saved. This has allowed so much lawlessness to enter in so much degeneracy. And that's the natural outworking of such an easy faith-based belief system. I mean, look at where we live. Look at um I'm not even going to get into that. It's too controversial. >> Okay. Yeah. Yeah. Sorry. Sorry. Sorry. Is what's the format? Like I just >> open. Yeah. Yeah. Okay. So, if you have anything to say about that. Yeah. >> Well, I So, um I like movies and usually when a movie that is coming out that I really am looking forward to, I never like watch the trailer. So, I said that to say this to say this. what he's talking about is what we're going to talk about in August, whether or not Paul or Muhammad are more reliable. Oh yeah, my bad. So, yeah, sorry, I'm a rookie. Um, so I don't want to touch on that particularly yet because that will spoil our discussion later, you know. So, if you do have more though that's not necessarily direct directed at Paul, I'm willing to hear it. >> Okay, that would be one of my major points. Definitely the faith alone gospel which is what Paul taught. Um what >> that's cool. We we could talk about that as long as it's not like Paul did Paul made it up. But if that doctrine itself is what you consider the faith alone gospel the faith alone doctrine. Yeah. >> All right. Cool. >> Um teaching people save faith alone. Um >> the I should say this um let me see. >> I mean another thing this horrible injustice that Christians unfortunately ascribe to God. They believe that Jesus is God. To say God forbid that God was spit on, a holy and glorious and magnified God was spit on, mocked, tortured, put in the ground and crucified, that is a very demoralizing and I would say that's a satanic teaching undoubtedly to ascribe such things to our Lord. >> Okay. Um, if let me ask you this, w because continuity matters to you. If the prophets taught that God would come in the flesh and subject himself to humiliation for the love of his creation and to redeem mankind back to himself, if this is what the prophets taught, would you believe that? >> That isn't what the prophets taught. >> I know you I know you I'm just saying if if they taught this, would you believe it? >> It's it's kind of a tough question to answer because all I know of of the prophets is talking about a God who is exalting and magnifying himself, how amazing and glorious he is. So, it's kind of it's difficult. It's like asking me, "But what if a square was a circle or a circle was a square?" >> It's not because that what I'm asking you is not a logical contradiction. It's just something that you theologically disagree with. I'm just asking if the prophets taught that God revealed that he would come in the flesh, uh, subject himself to humiliation, uh, carry on our sins and our sorrows, um, for the redemption and regeneration of mankind back to himself. If this is what the prophet said God revealed, would you believe that message? >> Again, I know you might not like this answer, but it's like asking me if a circle is a square or a square is a circle. I I can't answer that because no, I can't answer that because the prophets, all I know of them is teaching of a magnified and glorified God. Okay? >> And a God who is God and not a human being. >> Okay? Where do you get the teachings of the prophets? >> I get them from the Quran and I get them from the majority testimony in the Old Testament. There's hiccups. There's hiccups as we discussed. >> Okay. >> But the majority of what it talks about. >> All right. So you get the majority of the teachings of the prophets from the Old Testament. Right. >> The Quran is my primary. But then I also refer to the Old Testament in its overarching narrative, its grand narrative. >> Gotcha. And so in in the >> the Quran, it's supremacy. It contains supremacy. Yeah. >> In the Old Testament um you have the incident where with Adam and Eve eating the fruit, correct? And are you familiar with the punishment and the curse that God placed upon the serpent? >> A little bit. Yeah. Rush, refresh me through it. >> So, so he goes on and he says that he's going to put immity between he and the woman, between her seed and his seed. Right. Now, last time I checked, women don't have seed. Correct? >> No. >> So, who's the only woman who had her own seed? >> Who's the only woman that had her own seed? Uh, you're going to have to answer that for me >> there. So, if women don't have seed, men have seed, right? >> Yeah. Yes. Yes. Yes. >> But yet, there was a woman who had her own seed and bore a son, right? >> Her own seed. >> Yes. She had her own seed. >> Mary, >> that's right. >> That's seedless. >> No, it's not seedless. >> That's seedless. Yeah. Women don't have seed. >> It's a seed produced by the power of God miraculously. Right. >> Well, according to the Quran, created by the command of God. God said be and he was >> right. So there was a seed that was miraculously put or created in in Mary, right? >> God doesn't talk about any seed in the Quran. >> But he talks about his seed in the Bible >> because as far as I know, if there was a seed which was involved in the conception of Jesus, that means he would have to have a a physical father. >> No, it doesn't. There's a miraculous birth. If he can if there's a seed that can be produced miraculously without a physical father, which God can do, right? >> A seed that could be produced miraculously without a physical father. theoretically perhaps, but seed usually I hate the word, but it contains the DNA sequence of somebody, right? A seed is not blank. It contains like a written code, so to speak. >> Yes. And so Jesus has DNA that traces him back to David even though he doesn't have a father that traces back to David. Right. >> But he got no seed from the male line in the first place. There was no male line given to him, >> right? But yet he but yet he still is a descendant of a male line, right? Miraculously. So what's the point you're trying to bring this to regarding Islam or Christianity? So we're talking about what the prophets taught and whether because you would agree that what the prophets teach is not satanic, right? >> Absolutely not. Okay. God forbid. >> So the prophets, prophet Moses here is teaching that God cursed the serpent and said that a woman is going to have seed that is going to be against the seed of the serpent. Right? Mhm. >> And then so this seed and we know that women don't have seed but there's only one woman who had her own seed which is Mary miraculously obviously. So can we agree with that point so far? >> I can't agree Mary had seed. I can't agree with that. >> All right. So when it says that that the seed of the woman not the seed of a man the seed of a woman. What is it talking about? >> That that's interesting wording. So according to that passage a woman has seed. I've never heard of that concept before but yeah according to that passage. Yeah. >> Yeah. So then how can a woman have seed? Because women don't have seed naturally. >> I don't believe women have seed. >> Huh? >> I don't believe women have seed. >> They don't. >> Yes. >> So then how is this woman having her own seed? >> What are you trying to derive out of that? >> I will. You'll get there in a second. No trailers. >> Yeah. No. What? I want I want you to tell me what you're trying to derive from this. >> I I promise you you will. I can't just give it to you just yet. I got to, you know, turn the burner on, you know, and >> Okay. [laughter] So see you like that. So bas So basically when we're talking about this woman who has her own seed, what is it talking about there? >> I can't speak for the Bible. I can't speak for the Bible. >> Let me let me let me rephrase it. Let me rephrase that. I can't speak for what Genesis actually means in that when it's saying that the woman has seed. >> Okay. >> I don't know cuz I know the Bible, remember I told you before, drawing of a drawing of a drawing. In general, it is true. But when you start analyzing the final finer details of the words like a drawing, then you start to see inaccuracies. So when you start like picking on this one word seed, woman seed, what does that mean from a theological perspective? Again, it's a drawing of a drawing. So I wouldn't analyze it to that much detail. >> So you would say that this part is a a mistake. >> Perhaps perhaps not. God knows best. >> See that see this is where this brother this is where the problem goes because anywhere when you say okay yeah the prophets all taught this and so I believe in the prophet's message. I ask you where you get it from. You get it from the Old Testament. And so when we start analyzing what the prophets teach and you're whenever something seems to go against what the Quran is saying or you just don't know about, oh, it could be tampered with. So it's you we don't have nothing to work with with consistency. You get what I'm saying? >> Okay. I I understand what you're saying. So the interesting thing is you in order to establish and butress your theology you find um I don't want to use a word like little humdingers little words here and there in the Old Testament to attach a whole theological principle. I'm not finding a little word here and there. I'm talking about a grand overarching most occurring narrative. Is this not true? When we read the Old Testament, the grand overarching narrative is a God who is utterly magnified at all times and exalts. >> That that that is true. Okay. However, there's also another layer to it because it's not just that. You also have a God that is gentle and is humble even with his own people. Even though he's magnified and he's glorified and he's high above everything, he still humbles himself. He has all the virtues of goodness which includes humility. C >> can you actually define for me what you mean by humble? I'll tell you what I mean after. But yeah, >> okay. So, so humble means like uh like you're you're you're not too high to come low or condescend for another. >> I would define humble would mean lowering yourself before somebody else. So if my father tells me I need you to go rake the leaves, I lower myself to my father. That's humble right there. But there is none for God to lower himself to. So ascribing humility to God is a categorical error. Uh would you agree that God is the most virtuous? >> God is the most just. I would say >> virtuous. >> Virtuous. Define virtuous. >> Let's go. Walk me through this. >> All right. Let's get let's get an actual definition here. >> Let's see. Virtue virtuous. There we go. All right. Uh, morally excellent. Um, I hate when definitions use like the word in it. One of the definitions having or exhibiting virtue. >> Okay. Okay. >> But moral excellence, righteousness is what it is second >> Okay. So the reason I'm having difficulty answering that question is because so virtue in my worldview, morals, virtue, it presupposes a law given to you. So so and so is a virtuous person because there's a law that God has made and now they are accountable to that law. There is no law God is accountable to. He makes all the laws. There's no standard by which to judge him. He judges me. He asks the questions. I don't. >> Wouldn't he be the standard? >> He would make the standard for human beings. So he's not the standard himself. >> He does what he wills. >> That's not answering the question. >> It is absolutely >> No, it's not. He does what he wills. >> Is God the standard of virtue and goodness, righteousness? Is he the standard? >> God Humans have a different moral category. God doesn't have a moral category because he does what he wills. >> Is God good? >> God is good. So what So what do I mean by good? What do I mean by good? You're probably going to ask me, right? >> No, I'm not. >> Okay. Okay. >> Because I think we we know what good means and you're So when you say God doesn't have a moral category, but you just said God is good. You just applied him applied a moral category to him. >> Good. So what do I mean by good? He's exceedingly kind. So when I when I am So yeah, but the point is he's not forced to be that way. He does that by his will. >> Okay. So So you're saying he chooses to be kind, he could choose otherwise. >> By his nature, he's kind and merciful. So God is, you know, soft in the sense that when we my Lord, please forgive me. I've committed sin against you. And he feels okay, I forgive him. No problem. >> I got you. So he has that mercy. He So he has nature. >> Yes. So he has these moral so he has these morals that innately apply to him. Correct. >> He has a personality personality. >> Is he by nature good? >> He is by nature kind. Yeah. Good. >> Okay. >> Yes. Yes. >> Would you agree that goodness is a virtue? >> Goodness is a virtue. >> Yeah. It's a goodness is a good thing. It's like you're it's like would you agree with me goodness is good because virtue is good. That's basically what you're asking me. Yes. Yes, I agree. Goodness is good. >> Okay, good. So, goodness is a virtue, right? All right, that's I'm I'm with you on that. >> So, so you would agree that God is virtuous, meaning he is righteous. He is good in every way. He's the most virtuous. Would you agree? >> Yeah. >> Okay. Yeah. Would you agree that humility is a virtue? >> Humility is a virtue in so far as it applies to beings that lower themselves before something greater. Certain things are categorical errors. >> Would you Okay. So, for example, um you would agree that a king is greater than his subjects, right? >> Of course. Yeah. >> If a king gets off of his throne and mops the palace floor, would you count that as humility? >> I would count that as inappropriate. You have servants to do that, don't you? >> Sure. And but let's say the let's say the servant broke his leg and you know to kind of help him out. Okay, that that's that's kindness he's showing there. But >> it's not actually I would say that's inappropriate. It's the it's the servant's job to do that, not the king. It's his job to rule. servants. I like it's the servants's job to do that. Yes. >> But what if the king got up from his throne and said, "You know what? Hold on. I got that. Hand me the mop. I'll do it myself." >> Would that be considered humility? >> In that context, yeah, >> absolutely considered humility. >> So the So humility is not necessarily lowering yourself to something greater. It's just lowering yourself. It could be lowering yourself out of love, out of kindness, whatever. But lowering yourself or condescending yourself for a particular purpose. That's humility. >> In that instance, yeah. The king would be showing I am not too great or grand to pick up a mop and pick up the slop. >> Yeah. >> So, so humility then is a virtue that even a king can have. You don't have to submit to something necessarily greater than you. But a matter of fact, it's even more humble if you lower yourself to someone something lower than you. That would be more humble, right? >> That's that I would not say is humble. That was that's inappropriate. It would be like like the like a father. A father reserve has the rights reserved to tell his child what to do and instruct his life. Hold on my son. Hold on Jimmy. Uh I want you to tell me what to do right now cuz I'm so humble. No, because the father by nature is higher. That would be inappropriate for him to subject himself to his child. >> If so, I'd say similar with God. >> If your son has a business and you go and work for your son, are you humbling yourself to your son? >> No, I'm helping him. >> Huh? I'm not humbling myself to his authority. I'm helping my son. Hey, you need this extra help. Okay, I'll make things easier on you. >> It's tough, man. It's tough to to reason this way. I mean, if you're if you can't if you can't see how a king I mean, you said a yes earlier because it sounds like you're kind of backtracking on it. So you said yes earlier that if a king chooses to sweep and mop the palace floor instead of the servant that that is humbling himself to do such a a deed that he is above doing right. >> Yeah. In in some instances a superior lowering themselves for certain things is humility but in other times it's inappropriate. So it's a contextual thing. >> Well you you can argue that it it's inappropriate for the king to meet tomorrow but it's still humble. >> Yeah. That was my first inclination. Yeah. Sure. Sure. >> So, it's both and it could be inappropriate for the king to do that, but yet it's still humble. >> Depends on the context. Yeah. >> Okay. Yeah. So, humility though is a virtue. It's a good thing, right? >> Humility is a virtue. >> Okay. Is God the most virtuous? >> God is the most kind and virtuous. Yeah. According according to his category. His category. >> It's so it's like this. So, would you agree with me on this? At least on principle, there's certain instances where lowering yourself to somebody beneath you is inappropriate. >> No, >> there's no such instance where it's inappropriate. >> No. Well, let me say this. If it's it can if you say inappropriate like I I wouldn't say it's like morally wrong, but inappropriate meaning not fitting for the person. Sure. I can say like if the king mops the floor, it's inappropriate for the king to do that. He's above that. However, it's not morally wrong or anything like that, you know. >> Okay. So would you think that in certain instances when a superior lowers themselves to an inferior that there's no such instance where that's a morally wrong thing to do? No. >> I would disagree with you on that. >> You have an example >> 100%. So do you have a child? >> Yeah. >> You have a child? So let's say >> I don't I don't have a child. >> You don't have a child. Okay. Well, I have a child. You know my So let's say I were to go to my dear son. He's only a year old. Let's say he was four years old. And I said to him, "My son, now you tell me what to do because I am not too proud for your service. You tell me what to do." I would think I'm committing a moral wrong. It is my job to be above my son and tell him what to do. So in a similar way, it is inappropriate and wrong for God to come and subject himself to humans. >> So I think that we're getting subjection and humility are not the same thing. I'm not talking about subjecting yourself to the like the king goes and mops the floor. He's not saying, "Hey, give me commands, right?" But he humbles himself and does something that doesn't befit him. I'm not saying he subjects himself to the lower subjects, right? I'm not saying you subject yourself to your son. I'm not saying that like you follow orders and get receive commands and instructions from your son. I'm saying so >> that would be inappropriate. >> Sure. Okay. >> To do to do something that doesn't befit you. You your your value or your status is higher than this action, but yet you com you do the action anyway. That's humility, right? >> Yes. >> Okay. And that's a good thing, right? >> Yes. >> Okay. And so God, if he's the most good and by his nature good and virtuous, then humility would be part of that. >> No, that would not be a part of it. Because again, I'm just like the example you trying to bring God into the human realm to be subjected to the torture and the humiliation and the beatings of men. I would say that is just as in fact way more inappropriate than me going to my son, all right? You know, I'm subjected to you now. Okay? Okay. Cuz cuz Jesus was subjected to this inflicted torture, right? >> Yeah. >> He was imprisoned or beat or whatever. >> Well, when you say subject, I I wouldn't say subjected in that he had no like power over it. He says that I lay my life down myself. No one takes my life from me. I lay it down of my own accord and I pick it back up again of my own accord. So Jesus, he and he literally tells Pilate, he says, "You have no authority over me. I can call out to the angels right now. My father will send a legion of angels to take y'all out." Mhm. >> You know, so he's not subjected to it, but he humbly uh, you know, gives himself over. >> Okay. I I have an interesting question for you on this topic of authority. At what point do you think a superior lowering themselves to an inferior would be an inappropriate thing? >> Um, I think that you gave it a good example. If a parent is lowering themseling to their child, um, to their adolescent, I think that that is that's not okay. I think that that's wrong. >> Okay. >> I don't know if it would be like necessarily morally wrong necessarily, but they're out of pocket. They're not they're not doing their job. >> Inappropriate. >> Yeah. >> Okay. So, but you wouldn't say that for God who is infinitely more grand than human beings than if I I am obviously grander than my son. But God, the distance between God's grandness and us is greater than the distance between me and my son. God coming down into our realm and being subjected by these Romans to this torture. You don't think that's inappropriate? >> No. Because I think that if God says, "Hey, this is how I'm going to redeem mankind." And humility is the action that he takes to do it. God being the most virtuous would mean he's also the most humble. And how much if if we have humility, we reflect our creator who is the most humble. And so there's no act of humility that we can uh can commit that matches the God of heaven and earth leaving his throne, taking on flesh and subjecting himself to humiliation and giving his life up as a ransom for you and me when we don't deserve it. >> So I think that it is an act of extreme virtue and humility if I were to subject myself before my son to take his command and to be told what to do by him. I wouldn't say that that's humility. I would say that that's uh why that's un unwise with this. >> Why? >> Well, because you're not do you're not doing anything virtuous. You're doing something inappropriate wrong. >> God is God is not doing anything virtuous by getting tortured by these Romans. That's the point I'm trying to get. >> He's saving your life. >> Yeah. According to that Christian theological framework, >> according to the prophets. >> Yeah. According to the No, not according to the prophets. That is not the religion of the prophets. Absolutely not. >> Can I show you something? >> We Yeah, we can go Yeah, we can go to whatever passage you So this is Zechariah 12:10. >> This is Yahweh speaking. He says that I will place my a spirit of grace on the house of uh the house of David and the inhabitants of Judah uh uh a spirit of pleas of grace and mercy when they look upon me whom they pierced and they will mourn as if one mourns for a loss of their only child. >> Okay. >> So God says that he's going to come and show up in these last days. He's going to appear and when they see him, >> God is going to show up. >> God is going to show up. And when they see him, they're going to see him and they're going to mourn and beg for mercy and plead for grace when they see him who they pierced. >> So God, >> I just want to know, does the pastor say God is getting pierced? >> Yes. >> It says God is going to get pierced. >> Yes. Yahweh speaking. He says, "When they look on me whom they have pierced." >> Okay. All right, man. So, [clears throat] how in the world would God be getting pierced if he doesn't take on flesh or anything? How How does God How can God get pierced? >> Again, that's another if if that's the I'd have to read the passage to make sure. But if what you're saying is true, the context is Yahweh himself talking. >> Yeah. Then that's another inappropriate thing to say about God. >> So, but here's the thing. everything that you're going to go everything that you I'm going to show you I'm going to show you what the prophets say >> and I and what you're going to say is that these things are inappropriate. So I'm going to show you that you're disagreeing with the prophets. >> I'm going with the Bible itself. I've said disagrees amongst itself. I'm going with I'm going with the majority of what I read in the Bible. The majority of what I read in the Bible is not a God who's subjecting himself before people. The majority of what I read in the Bible is a God who's exalting. There are other passages that hiccup with that that contradict with that, but the majority is a God who exalts. Would you disagree with me on that? >> Yeah, I disagree with you. Where? Really? >> Yeah. Where does the B where does the Bible contradict that God will come in flesh and be pierced by his people? Where does the Bible contradict that? >> God is praised and glorified so much in me. He listen the living God. >> Yeah. >> Death and torture is not associated with him. living, >> right? >> The living God died. That's a contradiction in terms, man. >> Okay. So, how is it a contradiction when he says that he will come and he will be pierced by his people? Where does the Bible contradict that? Cuz you're not giving me that. Him being the living God does not negate him taking on flesh and then taking on a form where he can experience death. Where do you get it from that him being pierced and coming and humbling himself goes against the what the prophets are teaching? >> The living God died is a contradiction. Yeah. >> How is that? >> The eternally living God died. How is Okay, so here here's Isaiah chapter 9:6. For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given. >> Um upon his his shoulder will be the government and his name shall be called the wonderful counselor, the mighty God, eternal father, prince of peace. So this is a verse where it just told us that God is going to come in the form of a human boy. Right. >> Quote that for me again. Yeah. Yeah. >> For unto us a child is born. >> Unto us a child is born. >> Unto us a son is given. >> Uhhuh. and the government will be upon his shoulder and his name shall be called wonderful counselor, mighty God, everlasting father, prince of peace. >> Okay. >> So this verse just told us that God is going to come in the form of a human boy, right? >> Mhm. >> So we see that God tells us very very clearly he's going to come in human form. >> Now God without human form obviously cannot experience death because death is the separation of body and spirit, right? Body and soul. Would you agree? >> Death is the loss of the life force, >> right? So, yeah. So, spirit or soul leaves the body, right? Separates from the body. >> I wouldn't ex Sure. Yeah. Fine. >> Okay. Okay. >> Yeah. Just keep my goodness. >> Yeah. >> All right. So, if God does not have a human nature or human body, he cannot experience death. There's no soul to leave a body. >> If God does not have a human nature, he cannot experience death. God itself cannot experience death. >> Right? Because God doesn't have a human body. >> But if God takes on a human body, takes on a human form, then he can separate his spirit from that flesh. Correct? >> That's just like again telling me a circle is a square. God cannot take on a human body. Because check this out. A human body by its nature is vulnerable and sufferable to calamities. I get pain. I get hurt. Like you're telling me so Jesus is God. As a baby, he was God. when he pooped himself and his mom needed to change his diaper. He was God in that moment. >> Yeah, brother. These are not good arguments himself. >> So that's that's what I'm saying. But no, that's that's that's No, I'm highlighting the categorical error of trying to make the almighty heavens and the earth a baby. >> Brother, you believe that God is spacious and that if we fly high enough, we can reach him. >> I do. >> So then >> I do. I do. >> So look, I'm bringing that up because this isn't that outlandish with your view. >> No, it's a very simple view. Okay, it's a very simple view and it is it is what the majority of the Old Testament teaches. >> It does not. So, look, if we're So, if I I just showed you the Old Testament teaches that God himself says that he's going to come in a human form. >> So, you saying that, oh, well, the Bible doesn't teach us. The prophets don't teach us. I just gave it to you twice. I gave you where Yahweh says he's going to be pierced and they're going to look at him and see the one who they pierced. And I gave you where he says that he's going to come in the form of a human boy. >> Okay. >> Right. Yeah. So, we have in the prophets that those are two. That was Isaiah and that was Zechariah. So we have the prophets teaching that God comes in a physical form and experiences death suffering for his people. For you to say, "Well, no, that that I can't accept that is fine. You have every right as a you you got your own choice. However, just know you are now going against the prophets, which then is a satanic position." >> Say that again. Sorry. Yep. Sorry, I was deep in thought with something else. I was going to make a point. Yeah. So if you if you go against the prophets, >> then you are of a satanic position. Would you agree? >> If I go against the prophets, I would be in a satanic position. Yes. >> Okay. So if the prophets are teaching like I just showed you, Isaiah and Zechariah teaching that the God Almighty is going to come in our world and enter flesh, come in the form of a human boy and suffer for our sake. If the prophets are teaching this and you as a Muslim disagree with this and Islam disagrees with this, then that means that Islam and yourself are in a satanic position because you are against the prophets. >> The prophets didn't teach that. All all you're showing to me, all listen >> is the prophets. >> All all you're showing to me is that again the Bible is filled with contradictions. So we have that. >> Where's the contradiction? >> So we have for example the one you said uh God mighty prince of peace. That passage you were saying, I'll grant it to you that it says the way you're saying it. But then you have other passages which say that God is not a man that he should lie, nor the son of man that he should so on and so forth. This is the issue. So I this is why I talk about majority. >> Do you mind quoting the verse? >> The majority. Yeah, I'll find it exactly. >> No, no, I could quote it for you if you don't memorize it. It's okay. So it says this. It's Numbers 23:19. It says, "For God is not a man that he should lie." >> Yeah. >> Nor is he a son of man that he should change his mind. Has he said it and will he not do it? Has his word gone forth and will he not complete it? So what this is saying is is that God is not like man's character who lies. Nor is he like man who's fickle and change their promises but he keeps his word. >> It says he's not a man >> that lies. So God so if God were to be for example >> because if he were a man he would lie but I'm not a man. It's like saying I'm not a dog so I don't bark. >> Okay. So no dude that means I'm not a dog. >> No. Like it's like this. It's like me saying I'm not a man that cheats on his wife. >> Am I saying I'm not a man? >> That's not what he's saying. I'm a I'm not a man that cheats on his wife. He's not a man that he should lie. >> Okay. So, look, look, let's go through this. >> No, not a man that li a man that he should lie. >> Right. So, and I'm not a man who should cheat on his wife. Am I a man? >> No. The point he's saying in this verse, No. The point he's saying in this verse, I'm not a man. Men lie, but I'm God. I'm not a man, so I don't lie. You don't got to worry about that. >> Men cheat on their wife, but I'm not a man who cheats on his wife. Am I a man? >> Men cheat on their wife, but you're not a man who cheats on his wife. >> Mhm. Am I a man? You're using a different sentence than >> I'm using the same structure, brother. Listen, men cheat on their wife. Do you agree? >> No. No. No. Say this. Say this. >> No. Please answer. >> I'm not. Yeah. Men cheat on their wives. Sure. Sure. >> Okay. Men cheat on their wives. I say as a result, I'm not a man that I should cheat on my wife. Am I saying that I'm not a man by nature or do am I saying that I don't have the characteristic of adultery? >> I would be quite confused with that. If you said I if you said this, no, I if you said I'm not a man who cheats on my wife. No confusion there. Or if I said, "I'm not a man that I should cheat on my wife." I would be thinking, "What? What? That's a misording. What's he trying to say there? You're not a man that you should you are a man. You're just not a man who cheats on his wife." >> Well, I don't I think that every single person in this room understands exactly the statement. I I even think you understand the statement, too. But you're just holding on to a point, bro. Look, >> God is my witness. God is my witness. >> Okay. So, all right. Here's another one. Exodus 15:3, it says that God is a man of war. Is it saying that God is a man? >> What's the context of that passage? Let's bring it up. >> Why does context matter? >> Because I have to reference that with the rest of the Bible, which shows God as the God of men, the creator of men. >> Okay, so >> not a man, but the creator. >> But it says that it says that God is a man of war. Exodus 15 verse three. Why do you need anything else? >> It's a very bizarre passage. So, is it saying that God is a man >> in that verse? I would say it's not implying that God is a literal man, >> but it said it. >> Yeah. Yeah. Read the So, I'd have to Okay. So, then we'd have to see the context of this. Read read the rest of the book of Okay. Hey, wait, wait, wait. So, read read the rest of the book of Exodus and see does it describe God like a human being? If so, then perhaps that definition is correct. But wait, wait, wait. If we don't have any descriptions of God being like a human being, the majority of the Bible, then yeah, I'm not going to take it in that literal sense. You have to interpret things within their framework. >> Here's the thing. I agree with you. >> Okay? >> I agree with every what you just said right now is so beautiful that we have to look at things in its context >> and in the context of Numbers 23. It isn't talking about whether God is a man or not by nature. It's saying that he does not have man's character who lies. That's the context. So, it's talking about how God's character is truthful and consistent unlike man's character is fickle and they lie. So, if God were to become a man, would he be a man that lies? >> If God were to become a man, again, you're forcing me to say, if a circle became a square, would it be a square? >> No, that's what I'm ask. If a circle became a square, would it have corners? >> I can't answer that question [laughter] any sense. Doesn't make any sense. If God if God were to become a man, would he be a man that lies? Or would he be a man that always tells the truth? >> I deny the preposition. God cannot become a man. >> I know. I know you hypothetical. >> It's like saying, "My dear son, uh, if I were to become his son, would I be would he be my father? I can't be his son." >> Yes. And the answer to that would be yes, cuz that's a hypothetical. >> Then I'm not his father anymore. I'm his son. >> It's a hypothetical. If >> God were to become a man, he's not God anymore. He's a man. That's not true. This makes no sense. >> I'm just No, you're not. You're you're choosing not to deal with what I'm asking you. The question is a hypothetical. If God were to become a man, as the prophets told us, if God were to become a man, would he be a man that has the characteristic of lying? >> I can't answer that question because make any sense. >> Let me ask you this. Does God lie? >> God [clears throat] does not lie. No. >> All right. Does man lie? >> Man lies. >> Okay. Did Jesus lie? >> Jesus did not lie. No. >> Okay. So, so here wait, wait, wait, wait, wait. Okay, this is interesting. All right, I got a question for you. I got a question for you. >> Actually, they interrupted me, bro. I >> No, no. Okay, I got a Well, yeah. The crow the crowd's in your favor. Of course, >> man. Man, they they biased, bro. >> Yeah. Yeah. They're bi I know. I know. I know. Okay. >> I I I was trying to make a point, though. >> Okay. I got an idea. How about this? Some uh >> my my Let me Let me say what my point was. >> Okay. Okay. >> My point was this is that according to the scripture, we see that it says that God will come as a man. This is what the prophets teach. We see that God says that he would suffer. He will be pierced by his own people and they will mourn when they see him. We see that God says that he's not like man who lies and and breaks his promises. >> He's the one who's truthful and he completes his word. Okay? >> So, if God were to become a man, he would be a perfect man, righteous and virtuous in every way without sin. >> Who in Christianity in the Bible, because we're talking about the biblical framework, who is the only one who is perfect without sin? no deceit in his mouth. >> In the Christian view of Jesus. >> Jesus. Yes. So according to the prophets, the Messiah is God who warned us and foretold that he would come in the flesh. If you disagree with this position, cuz remember I'm not this not my interpretation. We're showing it from the scripture. If you disagree with this position, this is then Islam is satanic. >> Okay? So I I understand what's going on here. I finally get it. So really when you're dealing with the Bible, it all dep cuz I know the Bible's filled with contradictions. Really, the parts of the Bible that you emphasize, it's going to push you either towards Christianity or Islam. If you emphasize the parts of the Bible that talk about one God and the law and exalting the Lord, then naturally you're going to find yourself gravitating to Islam. If you do however incline towards the parts of the Bible that talk about like multiple gods or kind of polytheistic or this man god coming then naturally you're going to be inclined towards Christianity. It all depends on which parts of the Bible you favor because the Bible disagrees with itself. >> So do you so you're saying that Christianity is satanic >> 100%. Yeah. >> And God would never like support a satanic religion. >> God would not support a satanic religion. No. >> Okay. All right. So now we're going to get into my favorite part. >> I don't mean to be offensive. I don't mean to be offensive. >> Okay. Amen. Don't. Okay, I got you. I got you. This is chapter uh 61 verse14. It says in the Quran. Yeah. >> Quran. Okay. Let me pull it up. One second. >> Chapter 61 verse14. >> Mhm. Uh let me give me one moment. Okay, I got it. So it says, "Oh you who believe, be you helpers of Allah >> as said Issa son of Miam to the disciples who are my helpers of Allah." The disciples said, "We are Allah's helpers." Then a group of the children of Israel believed >> and a group disbelieved. So he gave power to those who believed against their enemies and they became dominant. >> Okay. So here we see that Allah supported the followers of Jesus, the disciples against the disbelievers. >> Yes. >> And [clears throat] gave them power over them and made them dominant over them. Correct. >> Yeah. >> Made them dominant in what exactly? According to the verse, >> God knows best. God knows best. >> Okay. I think I I think I >> I would say in generally, how should I put it? Let me read this first. So strengthen those who believed against their enemy. So they became dominant. I would imagine militarily. That's what I'm inclined to. Politically and militarily. >> Okay. So, it says that the disciples are the helpers of Allah. >> Yes. >> How are they helpers of Allah? >> They are assisting the cause of God that the mission of God be spread. >> Very good. So, spreading the truth of the religion, right? Okay. So, they're spreading the message. >> Yes. >> Okay. So, it says that they're helpers of Allah, which means that they're spreading the message of Islam. And he helped them do this. Gave them power to do this against the disbelievers. Right. >> He gave them power to do this against Yes. Yes. Yes sir. >> And made them dominant in this issue against the disbelievers. Right. >> Yeah. He gave them a victory. >> Right. So they were successful in spreading the message. >> Yes. >> Amen. So we see here that the disciples were successful because of Allah >> in spreading the message of Islam. Spreading the message that Jesus was spreading. Yeah. Right. Yeah. >> Okay. and made them dominant against the disbeliever. So the disbelievers it when they try to commit come and go against their message maybe try to contradict it some way demean it or discredit it some way it didn't work they were not successful the believers remain dominant right >> yes yes at that time >> okay yeah >> at that time >> how long would were they dominant in spreading the message >> I don't have answers to that question >> I do so the Quran says in chapter 3 verse 55 >> 355 >> 355 okay [clears throat] >> 35 55. >> Chapter 3, verse 55. >> How much more time do we have, James? >> You're supposed to know it by heart, man. >> Oh, good. >> We got 51 minutes. >> Dang. >> Wow, that's quite the >> All right. >> Okay. We got time. [laughter] >> Okay. Uh, >> so 355, you there? >> Yeah. >> Okay. So it says and remember well remember it's not there but and when Allah said oh Issa I will take you to myself >> well how do you uh read that as a Quran only person >> let me read that when God said oh Jesus I will take thee and raise thee to me and purify thee of those who disbelieve and place those who follow thee above those who disbelieve until the day of resurrection then to me is your return and I will judge between you concerning that wherein you differed. >> All right cool. So it says that Allah is going to take Jesus and raise him to himself and clear him of the disbelievers. >> Yep. >> And it said, now here's the most important part. It says, "And I will make those who follow you uppermost." >> And I will make those who follow you uppermost. Yep. >> Against over the disbelievers, right? >> Yes. >> Over over the disbelievers. Over those who disbelieve. >> Until the day of resurrection. >> Y. >> So they remain dominant over the disbelievers until the day of resurrection. >> Yes. So there's no point in between this time in Jesus' time and the day of resurrection where the disbelievers can become dominant over the believers, right? >> There's no period in which the disbelievers could become dominant over the believers. Well, maybe in a microcycle it could be, but in the macro cycle eventually you'll win. So it's like this. Let's say you and I are having a boxing match. You might have a round or two, but at the end of the day I'll win or you'll win. So maybe in a micro cycle you'll see they'll look dominant but at the end of the day the believers will win. >> Okay. So it does >> you can't judge a four-quarter game based on the first quarter. >> Yes. But it it says here that they are superior and remain superior and dominant until the day of resurrection. So that's quarter 1, quarter 2, quarter 3, quarter four. >> They're dominant. There's not a round that they win that the disbelievers win. >> And the place those who follow those above those who disbelieve until the day of resurrection. >> Perhaps. Perhaps. Okay. I can see how you're getting that. >> Yeah. >> So then there So there can't be a time >> in history >> where the disbelieving message is superior or dominant over the believing message of the followers of Jesus. >> There can't be a time in history where the disbelieving message is superior and dominant over the message of belie message of Jesus. >> Mhm. >> I'd have to think about that. So when God says here that he would give a victory, when God says here that he'll purify you of those who disbelieve and those who follow you will be above you on the day of resurrection here until yeah until until the day of resurrection. I don't know here if God is talking militarily. I don't know if he's talking ideologically. I don't know if he's talking argumentatively. I don't know in what sense that they will be above. >> I can Would would you agree that >> in their living and their dying? >> Sure. Would you agree that this verse is connected to 614 where he made the believers of Jesus dominant over the disbelievers in being helpers of Allah? >> Perhaps it has some connection. Sure. >> So these two verses connect. So we see the context in which the believers of the believers and followers of Jesus are dominant over the disbelievers. We see this twice in both of these verses. They're connected, right? In spreading the message. The disbelievers try to stop them, corrupted, whatever. But they never succeed. The believers remain dominant because Allah is pushing them and giving them power over them, right? And making them successful. >> So then now here's the question. >> Okay. >> What is the dominant message at least right now? Let's say what is the dominant message among those who say they follow Jesus? >> Certainly trinitarianism. >> Trinitarianism. Is that a satanic message? >> That is a satanic message. Yes. So what we see here is that the dominant message among the followers of Jesus, those who claim to be followers of Jesus, is a satanic message, which would mean that Allah pushed a satanic message and therefore Islam is satanic. >> God did not push a satanic message. >> He says he gave them power and >> so honestly I don't have answers to all these historical questions. These are things that I'd look into. Now I'd have to I told you before that perhaps I would say militarily I'm inclined to militarily. Now maybe I'd reinterpret it. Maybe I'd say when God says he'd give dominance over them, perhaps it could be an argument. Perhaps it could be in the life that they live, not necessarily militarily. I'd have to look into it and think about that one. >> Well, so like like I said, it's specific in being helpers of Allah. And so being helpers of Allah is spreading his message, >> right? Spreading the religion. Sure. So even if I were to agree with like I I wouldn't say that that does that that that excludes militarily but >> it's primarily dealing with the message and the truth of the religion that's being spread. Okay? And so if the message being spread and dominantly is trinitarianism, >> then that would mean either two things. One, Allah helped spread trinitarianism and therefore Islam is satanic because trinitarianism is satanic according to you. >> Okay? >> Or two, Islam is still satanic because a satanic religion and message overcame the believing one and Allah failed to keep his promise. >> Okay. So then I'd have to look and see. I'd have to interpret look into history and look into these verses and see what exactly does God mean by dominant. Whether it's exclusively militarily or message-wise or let's say perhaps God can mean an argument. I mean, Muslims when they're debating against Christians in the Trinity, they always win. They always win. Muslims when they're debating against Christians about the Trinity, they always win. This idea >> you need to subscribe to my channel, man. This [laughter] this this idea okay this idea that God came down that God died on the cross but the human part died but God didn't die but he died and went and but same time God is the everlasting living God but it's three beings or one being but three in persons. This has never been able to dominate the idea than just saying your god is one god. >> Well you can you >> never been able to dominate that in an argument. That's fine and all that's I mean you could hold that opinion about trinitarians losing debates and stuff like that but that still doesn't solve the problem. >> So perhaps God could mean here in argument in argument they will be above >> but it doesn't say that >> it doesn't say that right so that that would be some interpretation I'd apply. >> Would you would you agree that in argument like that would mean that they are successful in spreading the message and being convincing to the people to make make others believe >> successful in spreading the message. Okay. I believe the early followers of Jesus were successful in spreading the message of Islam, spreading the message of oneness of God. However, I can't say what happened later on, generations afterwards. >> Yes. So, look, here's the point. If any time, generations after in any point, there was a time where the disbelievers became dominant and overcame the true message, the true believers and followers of Jesus. If the disbelievers got on top with their message, then that would mean that one, either Allah supported that message or two, Allah failed to keep his promise that the disbelievers would never win. >> I would say at the end of the day, they're never dominant. They're never dominant because the the the the f the foolish party tricks of trinitarianism, it's always so easily exposed by those who believe in one God. what you just said >> even it's not just not just the Muslims even the unarian Christians that watch the debates and the tr >> the unarians who say they believe in the Bible I mean they put the trinitarians through a spin cycle man >> you can say that and but the >> they're dominant always that that's cool and all but here's the point the point is is that you acknowledge that the dominant belief among those who fall who who claim to follow Jesus is trinitarianism so if tr it's either trinitarianism is the true message and Allah helped spread trinitarianism and therefore Islam is satanic for going against it. Or two, Allah failed to keep his promise that the false message, the disbelieving message would not succeed over the true message. And so therefore, trinitarianism overpowered Allah. He failed to keep his promise and therefore Islam is satanic. >> So God in the Quran, he never tells us to follow the majority of people. Never. And this is neither in the New Testament nor is this uh idea that the majority follow what's right. Right? It's not in the New Testament. It's not in the Quran. God says, "If you follow the majority of people, you will be led astray." Even Jesus in the New Testament, there's that passage, broad is the way to destruction, narrow is the way to life. So, when I'm looking around and I see the majority of people believing in something, that's a pretty good indication that that might not be the right path. >> You can again, that doesn't help the point. The point is is that Allah makes a promise to make the message of the followers of Jesus dominant. If there's any point where their where their message is not dominant, then therefore Allah failed. >> Okay? So, I would inclin to say dominant in argument because here's the thing. Here's the thing. It's not like like am I supposed to accept that the prophet Muhammad didn't know that trinitarianism was a big big message that a lot of Christians believe at that time? I don't think he knew it. [laughter] >> Of course, he knows that. >> I don't think so. >> Of course. >> I I don't think he understand >> because he's literally in the Quran, which you guys believe he invented. It's not revealed by God. He's talking against people who believe Jesus is God. He knew he's not talking against the trinity. >> He knew there was a sizable group of people who believe that Jesus is God along with the father. He knew that. That's why he's refuting it in the Quran. So then your interpretation would have to lead me to believe that Muhammad didn't know that there was a large group of people that disagreed with his theology. That just makes no sense. >> Well, so no, what this leads to is that Muhammad was very ignorant or uh uh or or naive because no sense at all. It it does when you read the Quran. The brother Muham so this is what this is why we're doing this. >> Muhammad not being a prophet mistakes like this make sense because when he says like he's he's claiming to be in line with Jesus and everybody else while not knowing what Jesus and everybody else taught. He doesn't know. He's relying on what other people say. He's literally called the ear in the Quran because he's taking what people say and repeating it. So when you have Muhammad who Well, I don't Do you believe he could read and write? I believe he was reading the Quran. Yeah. >> Okay. So, you believe he was literate? >> Yeah. I Okay. I believe I'm inclined to believe before the time of the revelation, he was illiterate, but God miraculously gave him the ability to read when it came to the revelation. And that was one of the miracles of his. How is this guy? Do you see this in the Quran? How is he reciting this? How where they're saying, you know, oh, somebody taught him these words because they didn't know how was this illiterate dude reading these things out. >> Yeah, fair enough. Okay. >> That's what I'm inclined to. >> Okay. So, so, so prior to all of this, he's like, you know, 40 something years when he becomes a prophet, right? >> I don't know the exact time. Oh, yeah. Yeah. That's that's right. That's ambiguous. >> So, yeah, usually traditionally he's like in his 40s or something like that. Yeah. So, he he's ignorant of what the scriptures say. He doesn't know what the scriptures say. He's never read them. He's never uh, you know, seen them for himself. He's never he's he's uh inclined to he's hearing traditions and hearing things from people around. He can't he doesn't check it himself. He doesn't know. Okay. >> So, it makes sense when we see mistakes like this, bro, where he's thinking he's in line with Jesus and Moses and everybody else when he doesn't know what they taught and then he's contradicting them. It makes sense that he's ignorant of what they taught. >> But this is something completely different you're talking about. You're talking about right now you I have to, if I accept your position, believe that Muhammad didn't know there was a sizable amount of Christians that believe Jesus is God. And he just literally stupidly just said, "Oh, they'll be dominant until the day of resurrection." But and and that's how he meant it, right? He meant it that they would be the most majority dominant view, but he couldn't look around and see that Christians believe Jesus is God. What what type of sense does that make? >> So I I I think that >> you might have believed he made contradictions and blunders, but he isn't a child. Like I can look around and see obvious if I can look around and see there's plenty of Christians that believe Jesus is God. Muhammad could have seen that too. So obviously this must mean something different. You have to, you know, give it some grace. >> I know I am. I'm giving as much grace as I can. will lead. So what I'm saying look if you have where here here's the mistake man if you have where let's say he thinks that unitarian Christians ornosticism right gnostic Christians is is like what he's surrounded by right let's say whatever he's surrounded by that's who he thinks the uh the Christians are um and that's and he thinks that you know the fringe people who say Jesus is God they're the ones who are deviating but the ones who know Jesus isn't God they're the ones who you know know the truth and they've been dominated. They they're majority. Let's say he's surrounded by most of them, right? Most >> he's surrounded by various competing Christians. >> Good. Exactly. >> Likely. Yeah. >> Right. And so this is what he does. Now we don't we don't know which view he thinks is whatever uh as far as the Christians. We don't know who exactly he's in in in um engaging with. But >> that that is assuming the Quran was developed by Muhammad. If it was revealed by God, then none of this stuff matters. Well, yeah, that that would al that would be very convenient if we just assume it's revealed by God. So, debate over. >> Yeah. Coming coming from your perspective. I mean, I don't believe that. I believe it was revealed by God. So, it doesn't matter what kind of Christians you were surrounded by. God's word is God's word. >> Okay. So, God's word is God's word. So, so it it gets worse then for we're moving Muhammad who's a fallible human being and we're putting this in the hands of who you believe God is. So if you're say God is the one who is then saying, "Hey, the believers of Jesus, they're the ones who will remain dominant in being my helpers, which means spreading the message." >> Mhm. >> Right. I'm going to help them dominate in this area against disbelievers who will come against them. There will never be a time until the day of resurrection that the disbelievers will be able to infiltrate and overcome the message of the true followers of Jesus. >> The Unitarians, the Muslims, and the monotheists have always been exposing the trinitarians from the beginning flawlessly. >> Cool. In all, are is the Unitarian message among those who claim to follow Jesus? Is the Unitarian message in theology the dominant message in theology? >> It's not the majority theology. Okay. Dominant in what sense? It's dominant in argument absolutely but it's not dominant in geopolitical power. >> Is it dominant in which the message was spread meaning that most of the people took hold of it was convinced of it successfully landed and has become the belief you know like top dog belief. >> Does it say in the Quran that it'll be the dominant spread? >> Yes it so it says they said that we are helpers of Allah >> which means to spread his message >> right? We are helpers of God. It means to yeah spread his message, >> right? So in spreading Allah's message, he says, I supported the followers of Jesus against the disbelievers and made them dominant over them and they will be dominant until the day of resurrection. So the context is in being Allah's helpers, i.e. spreading the message. >> Yeah. So we ourselves are God's helpers. Those who are spreading monotheism, those who are spreading the truth that God is one, we are the helpers of God trying to do righteousness within the world. I know you are. So when you say this, when you say this, that means that there can't be a time where the true followers of Jesus and their message is subverted by the disbelieving message. >> I don't see how that can't be the case. They're dominant. They're dominant in argument, in word, in speech. >> All right. I think does everybody follow the argument? >> All right. Cuz I don't want to go in circles. Okay. We can you can ask me something, bro. >> Okay. Yeah. So my main point is this. the satanic aspect of this religion which you said you don't want to you want to save it for later going into Paul which is what Paul taught this faith alone saved by uh law uh saved by faith alone not by works of the law this like flesh eating religion god came and got tortured and then now I'm doing this ritual like engorging myself on his flesh and his blood this is clearly a demonic and satanic religion come on man >> based on what >> it promotes savagery it's it clearly this religion has a blood lust engorging on the flesh and blood of this man. On top of that, this faith alone gospel which teaches lawlessness. It's satanic. >> You just you just told me to give grace to the verse in the Quran and you're not giving grace to our position in beliefs. >> I've heard many different positions on what are we talking about? The Eucharist in particular? >> The Eucharist, the faith by saved by faith. You're saying you're saying that uh Christianity has this obsession with gorging on the blood and flesh of their God. Really? >> 100%. So, so we So, you believe that we like actually like walk in our churches with blood dripping down our like vampires? And >> I'm saying depending on what religion, what sect you go to, either they believe there's a literal presence of Christ in the Eucharist or they simply believe it's memorial. And the question I'm asking is why are we going through this ritual where I am eating God's flesh or at least enacting it and drinking his blood? >> Yeah, but but brother, just saying that's crazy is not saying that it's not human is not Hold on. saying it's crazy and wow this is really extreme theology is not showing us how it's satanic when you say okay they might interpret it as the literal flesh and blood of Christ in some miraculous way some take it as symbolism you're saying that we're obsessed with gorging over the blood of our God and eating his flesh like cannibals that's how you're framing it and you're like yeah y'all crazy that's how it is >> but but but that's how it is but you know that's not how it is so >> you let's let's be Let's let's be real with our >> so so okay if I I compare this message again the son of God died on the cross and then you know >> which the prophets taught. >> Yeah. Son of God died on the cross. Faith alone salvation saved by faith not by works of the law. You know this ritual of eating his flesh and drinking his blood versus the other theological system. Believe in one God do good works. Believe in the last day. Do not make any partners to your Lord. I can clearly see which is holy and which has had the demonic influence. Can you show me in the Torah where it says believe in the last day? >> It doesn't say that word. I'm talking about the Quran. What the Quran says? >> No, because the the debate we're having right now is Islam or Christianity. Which religion is satanic? So, I compared the Christian theological system to the Islamic theological system. >> Let me do let me ask you this because I think this will be important. >> What is the standard or the criteria you're giving for what qualifies to be a satanic religion? >> Satanic would be counter to God. How what is your criteria for being counter to God? >> Well, obviously I'm going to use the Quran and you're going to use the Bible. >> But okay, so are you saying the Quran is what is the standard? >> But but there are Okay, fine. There are other criteria we could resort to as well. So I would say that a belief system is godly as well if it gives the best reason to promote righteousness within the population. Okay. So >> would you agree with that? >> I I think that's good. Okay. But satanic religion and a belief system which subverts the morals of a people. Would you describe that as a satanic belief system? >> I believe subverting morals is satanic. Yeah. >> Okay. There you go. That goes to the faith alone gospel. >> Okay. Well, let let's see. So, I want to show you something and you tell me if this is uh godly or satanic. Okay. >> All right. Just uh let it load. >> What What verse are we looking at? >> We're going to go to uh Hold on. Just I'm I'm going go to your favorite uh your favorite uh person in the Bible. >> You know who that is? >> Who? >> Paul. Paul. >> Okay. >> Oh, thank you. So, this is what he says. And this is Ephesians chapter 5. >> Uh what verse? >> Uh verse starting at verse number uh 25. Ephesians 25 >> is Ephesians chapter 5 verse 25. >> One moment. >> You let me know if this is satanic or not. >> All right. You there? >> Okay. Yeah. >> All right. So it says, "Husbands, love your wives just as Christ also loved the church and gave himself up for her, >> so that he might sanctify her, having cleansed her by the washing of water with the word, that he might present himself to himself the church in all her glory, having no spot or wrinkle or anything, but that she would be holy and blameless." So husbands ought also to love their wives as their own bodies. He who loves his own wife loves himself. For no one has ever a hated his own flesh, but nourishes and cherishes it just as Christ also does the church. Would you agree? Would you say that this is godly or satanic? >> No. I don't see satanicness in here. I No. No. No. I never I never said Yeah. loving Well, I'm not like, you know, talking about Christ, but in general, loving your wife and these types of things. These are beautiful things. Of course, these are things I live by. >> Amen. So I want >> these are Quranic things. >> Okay, good. So Paul taught godly teachings. I got you on record. >> Wait, I'm not saying everything that Paul taught was satanic. He says some very inspirational things. I'm saying specifically this faith alone gospel that he taught that is satanic. >> All right. So >> not everything he says is bad. >> All right. So now >> like you wouldn't say everything the Quran says is bad. Or would you? >> No. No. No. God says believe. But you're right. You're right. There there's some there's some good there's some good virtues in the Quran. That but that's but this is the thing though. We we about to see because on the surface if there can be some little good things but you take that blanket off we say Satanism about to show you how. >> So I'm I'm doing the same thing for you too. >> Okay. So So if you say then that faith alone this this idea that we are saved and redeemed justified by our faith alone and it's not of the works of ourselves. You're saying that that is satanic >> 100%. >> What makes cuz remember I'm trying to get your criteria. >> What makes that theology satanic? Remember we agreed anything that is subversive to morals is satanic. If I teach somebody they're saved by faith alone. Then they don't need to do works of the law it subverts their morals completely. >> How? Wait. Okay. So I'm just show of hands. Christians, you guys believe that you're saved by faith alone? Okay. Good. Um do you guys be going out murdering and raping and stuff? >> Someone said yes. I believe you guys. That was Lady Logic who said yes. It's on camera. So everybody, and by the way, she's a cat lover. >> No, not not everybody who believes in that. So a lot of people here, they believe in the faith alone gospel. Not everybody is going to take it and push it to the full liberty that you could. >> Okay? So >> So most people are decent enough, but there are those who will push it. Listen, man. I'm a street preacher. I'm out on the streets usually every Saturday night. Yeah. I'm a street preacher. You can find it on my channel. And I I don't know how many times I've seen and you can't argue against it from a Pauline perspective. How many women out there half-dressed like I don't even want to talk about what they're doing. And then when they discuss with me about God, they say, "Well, they're saved. They're saved because they have faith in Jesus. Jesus washes all the sins." I have talked to so many people, fornicators, disgusting people, men, women, just entrenched in their sin. And they justify that by Jesus has washed away all of it. >> You know what? And >> that's that's the Pauline gospel. And and well, if that's the Pauline gospel, let me read you something else Paul says. He says, "What shall we say then? Are we to continue in sin so that grace may increase?" This is Romans chapter 6 starting at verse one. >> Let me get there. Let me >> I'm going have you read it this time cuz you cuz you love Paul. Romans Romans 6 starting at verse one. >> Verse one. Okay. Yeah. What shall we say then? Shall we continue in sin that grace may abound? God forbid. How shall we that are dead to sin live any longer than >> Pause it. Pause there. >> Okay. >> So, what is Paul's message here in verse one and two? >> Let me continue reading. >> No, no, no, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO. >> Shall we continue? No, no. I know. I don't I don't know. I don't know in what sense is Paul saying the Psalm. >> Wait, wait, wait. Believe. You are a smart gentleman and I mean that genuinely in our conversations. I'm not being facicious. You're a smart genuine. Yeah. >> You know what verse one and two is saying when he says, "What shall we say then? Are we to continue in sin so that grace may abound? God forbid. What is he saying? >> He's saying don't do those things. >> Right. So just because you have grace, he's saying you should not continue in sin just because you have grace. Right. >> Okay. Yeah. Yeah. >> So he's saying that you should you Well, keep reading now. You can keep reading. Go ahead. >> Okay. Yeah. Keep going. >> What shall we say then? Shall we continue in sin that grace may abound? God forbid. How shall we that are dead to sin live any longer therein? Know ye not that so many of us as were baptized into Jesus Christ were baptized into his death. Therefore we we are buried with him by baptism into death that like as Christ was raised up from the dead by the glory of the father even so we should walk in the newness of life. >> Pause there. >> For if >> we should walk in newness of life. Yes. >> So not when you accept the Lord as your savior and the lord of your life and you accept the free grace that he has given you. The grace that he's given you based on your faith. He's saying now you are dead to your old life and you're walking in newness of life. You've been buried with Christ and risen again a new. Right. >> Yeah. >> So those who say, "Hey, I I've been given grace. I've been given grace. He died for my sins." And yet they live in sin according to Paul. Are they wrong or are they right? >> They're not doing the right thing. >> Okay. So when you're saying that Paul is teaching this theology that anybody can do whatever they want, >> there's there's a key difference though. Paul is saying I it's not right. you shouldn't do it. But he's not making works conditional for salvation. >> Okay, let's pause here now. Okay, now this is a different issue. Okay, so we now got over this idea that this faithbased uh uh um salvation in entices or not entices but invites a license to sin, >> right? It invites or gives a golden ticket to sin. We see that Paul denies that, right? >> He tells you you shouldn't, but he does not make it conditional to eternal life and salvation. >> He does. He says that how can we who die to sin still live in it? If we're still if we're living in sin, are we are we going to get eternal life? >> He told you that you're saved without works of the law lest any man. >> Do you want me to show you something else Paul says? >> Sure. >> Okay. So, let's go. My goodness. I told man now we're in Paul. >> So, I'm just saying next time when we talk about Paul, we're not going to talk about this. >> What verse you want me to go to? >> Uh, hold on. Hey y'all. What's that verse? I think it's in Corinthians where he talks about nor homosexual nor idoltor no huh >> thank you 1 Corinthians chapter 6 look at y'all man team god logic >> okay >> 1 Corinthians chapter 6 what verse y'all >> huh >> uh >> nine yes okay go ahead 1 Corinthians chapter 6 verse 9 >> or do you know that the wrongdoers will not inherit the kingdom of heaven do not be deceived neither the sexually immoral nor the adulterers nor the adulterers nor the men who have sex with men uh nor thieves, nor the greedy, nor the drunkers, nor the slanders, nor the swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God. And that is what some of you were. But you were washed and you were sanctified and you were justified in the name of Jesus Christ and by the spirit of God. So what is Paul actually saying here? He's saying you were all of these things, but it's not necessarily that you stop them. It's that the the blood of Christ, the the blood of Christ has washed it from you. So you are no more that because Christ has cleansed you. That's what he's saying. Okay, you start at verse 9 one more time. >> Let's do it. >> Or do you know that the wrongdoers will inherit the kingdom of heaven? >> SAY, STOP RIGHT THERE. >> STOP RIGHT THERE. >> YEAH. >> WHO? >> The wrongdoers. >> Yes. >> So the ones who do wrong what? What what what he says? >> They will inherit >> will not inherit the kingdom of heaven. >> So the people who do wrong will not inherit the kingdom of God. Right. >> I'm not a wrongdoer according to Paul. Christ has washed it away. Hold on a second. >> Christ has washed it away. >> Slow down one thing at a time. A baby if >> Christ has washed it away. >> Look, so if Paul says wed that the wrongdoers will not inherit the kingdom of God and he then he goes into detail generalizing different categories, right? And he says, "And such were some of you before before you met Christ and were justified and sanctified." Meaning you were purified, made clean. You are no longer this anymore. Now you walk in newness of life. So according to Paul, if you are a wrongdoer, meaning you are walking in sin, living in sin, can you inherit the kingdom? I think you misunderstood Paul. I think you misunderstood Paul. Yeah. Yeah. Because Paul Paul teaches the doctrine of total depravity. Nobody can keep the law. Nobody can be righteous. We are all abominable. We are all this. We are all that. Therefore, that's why we need the Savior to wash that sin. Amen. >> It is It is It is It is impossible for me. >> You're literally admitting my boy. What is this? Okay. [cheering] >> I'm not preaching. I'm declaring what Paul said. >> He said he was a street preacher, didn't he? >> I preach in Islam, bro. Bad man. >> So are they. >> That's right. [laughter] >> You guys are so silly. Oh my gosh. [laughter] >> That's right. >> No, no, no, no. I I worship the same God who Jesus worshiped. I submit to him fully. >> Okay. So listen Wii we see here that so your initial problem was this idea that um salvation by grace in your faith um alone faith alone salvation >> invites people to live how they want but we see that the scripture verbatim and explicitly goes against this idea of living in sin and living how you want but walking in newness of life to Christ now right the faith faith alone gospel of Paul says that works are not conditional for salvation. Yes, he does encourage you to do right, but they're not conditional for inheriting eternal life. >> Okay? And >> and and we we are all hopeless, adulterers, abominable, this and that and so on and so forth. We're all terrible people. That's why the savior needs to come. >> Yes. Amen. So, yeah. So, let me go. Basically, I can never be righteous. So, not without Christ. >> We're all horrible. So, why should I even bother? Christ took it away from me. That's the gospel according to him. >> You are horrible until Christ makes you righteous. >> And you are not righteous unless you are in in in engulfed in his blood and his sacrifice cuz you can't do it. You can't be made righteous in for example Jesus, this is what Jesus says, not Paul. This is what Jesus he says be perfect for your father in heaven is perfect. >> Wed are you perfect? >> Absolutely not. >> Ask me if I'm perfect. >> Of course not. >> You know I'm not perfect. I'm close but I'm not. >> [laughter] >> Nobody in here is perfect, right? This is a standard of God that we cannot meet. But this is what he calls us to. Why? Because God is holy. He's righteous. And he can't accept anything less. Or else this would diminish his character. So God requires perfection. He requires holiness. The only way that we can be perfect, made perfect and holy is in Christ. >> I don't believe God requires perfection. You don't. He does not. No. No. >> Okay. God can forgive you. For example, for example, uh let's say I'll bring up the example of my son. I don't require perfection of him. I require him to obey me, to be good, to respect me, but if he makes a mistake here and there that I can forgive him for that. It's the same thing with our Lord. If I make a mistake here and there, he'll forgive me. But, you know, God forbid, not that he would ever do it. Let's say my son slapped my wife, his mom, or these are things that I would not accept. So, there is major sins and minor sins and God is forgiving of the uh the minor sins 100%. >> Okay? and the major sins if you turn away if you turn away. >> Okay. So, so you're you're saying what you don't believe, which is okay. Like I said, you have every right to your own conviction and your belief. But we're talking about what is satanic, right? So, what we're what we're showing is that one, you at first had a misunderstanding of the faith [snorts] salvation theology. >> I understand Paul's theology quite well. >> Okay. But now, but you see now that because at first you said Paul invites people to sin and live sinful lives. Now, you see he doesn't. >> No, no. I I clarified that. So you questioned me on it and then I clarified that further. What I really should say is his theological system does not require you to be righteous in order to attain salvation because the righteousness of Christ is imputed unto you. >> No, it doesn't require works to be made righteous. >> It doesn't require works in order to inherit the kingdom of God. >> Yeah. Because Jesus says I mean Paul says that we are righteous. We can't be He says the unrighteous won't inherit the kingdom of God. Only the righteous will. That's what he just said. I just we just read that in first Corinthians. And according to Paul's system, not a single person is righteous. >> Exactly. Until >> which contradicts everything you read in the whole Old Testament. >> Until we'll see. We'll get I'm promise you we're working there. >> Okay. Okay. >> But Paul does teach that we are made righteous. Right. >> Paul does teach that. Yeah. Through Christ you are made righteous. >> That's the point. Through Christ that we are made righteous and therefore have access to the kingdom. Without that, without Christ righteousness, I got to face God with my own blemishes. And I'm not righteous. None of us are not without Christ. here. Okay. Okay. But I know you don't believe that, but this is just a >> consist. I'm saying I'm not righteous, too. Okay. I'm not I need God's forgiveness. >> All right. So then now when you say something is satanic, though, right? Meaning that maybe it goes against God or against what he taught. Where does this go against God's teaching the prophets? I did not read in any single part of the whole Old Testament or even what Jesus said in the Gospels about faith alone without works of the law. I missed that part. So that is a core feature of the Pauline gospel entirely missing in thousands of years of revelation. >> Can you go to Jeremiah 31? >> Jeremiah 31. Let's go. >> What verse? >> 31. Come on, man. >> 3131. >> Yes. >> Okay. >> You You'll be there before me because my stuff is slow. But if you if you can read that, >> the days are coming, declares the Lord, when I'll make a new covenant with the people of Israel and with the people of Judah. And it will not be like the covenant I made with their ancestors when I took them out of by the hand to lead them out of Egypt because they broke my covenant though I was a husband to them declares the Lord. This is a covenant I will make with the people of Israel. After that time, declares the Lord, I will put my law in their minds, in their hearts, and I will be their God, and they will be my people. No longer will they teach their neighbor or say to one another, "Know the Lord," because they will all know me. For them the least to the greatest, declares the Lord. >> Where would where would the law be? >> In the heart. So there won't be a physical letter that they're following, but the law will be within them. Is that correct? >> They will know intimately God's law. >> So not just know God's law intimately, but the law will be placed in their hearts. Right? >> Yeah. >> So it's no longer cuz this is a new covenant that's unlike the old. >> Okay. >> In this new covenant, I'm sorry, in the old covenant, they had to follow the letter of the law, >> right? >> Is that the law? They follow the law. The commandments the letter of the law though, right? >> Statutes. That that's Pauline's concept. The letter into this. >> No, no, that's not this is it's Torah. >> Okay. Yeah. They followed the letter of the law. They followed >> they followed what is written and read the books aloud in the in the gatherings and stuff like that. Right. >> In this covenant, it doesn't say anything about the letter of a law. The law it says the law will be written on their hearts now, >> right? >> Yeah. >> So, this shows you now where are the works of the law coming from? Is it coming from the letter or is it coming from inside? Of course, it comes from a transformation of the heart. >> And would you that's coronic too. >> Would you agree that the heart has to do with belief? >> 100%. >> So by their belief the law will be within their hearts according to their faith. >> The law not through this is saying that the law will be in their heart. Basically they will live righteously. They will because the law is in their heart. How can I not live righteously if the law is in my heart? It says, "I will put my law within them and on their heart I will write it and I will be their God and they shall be my people." >> Translation, they'll be living by the law cuz it's in their heart. >> That's not what it says. But >> if the law is in your heart, that means you're living. Let's say, let me let me give an analogy. So, let's say you have a person uh and I say that that person's a really good driver and I just say, you know, the traffic laws, they're in his heart. I'm implying he lives by those traffic laws. He never breaks them. >> Which law would they be living by? >> The law of God. Which which law is that? Is that the law of Moses? Is that the law Which law is that? >> Well, here because we're talking about the Old Testament, I'm sure it's talking about the Mosaic law. >> Nope. >> Certainly. >> Go to Isaiah 42. We're going to read today. You can start at verse one. >> You might get there faster than me. >> My my connection's a little >> Isaiah 42:1. >> Yes. So you start at verse one. >> The servant of the Lord. Um he is my servant whom I uphold, my chosen in whom I delight. I will put my spirit on him and he will bring justice to the nations. He will not shout or cry out or raise his voice in the streets. A bruised reed will he not break. A smoldering wick will he not snuff out. In faithfulness he will bring forth justice. He will not falter or be discouraged till he establishes justice on on the earth. In his teaching the islands will be put uh put their hope. This is what God the Lord says the creator of the heavens. All right, pause there. I'm sorry. Verse verse four says that the coastlands will wait for his law. In the Hebrew, it says their his Torah, his law. >> Okay. >> Okay. So, we see here that the servant whom God puts his spirit upon, this is the Messiah. >> He puts his spirit upon him. He's the one who's going to come bring forth justice to the nations, bring everybody together, bring the truth to the Gentiles. Okay? >> And they will wait for his law. So when I ask you whose law is it that we would be under in this new covenant? Well, go ahead and read uh verse six. >> Verse six. Um I the Lord have called you in righteousness. I will take hold of your hand. I will keep you and will make you to be a covenant for the people and a light for the Gentiles to open eyes that are blind and captives from >> Yeah. So we see that this servant himself, notice it doesn't say that he brings a covenant. It says that he is the covenant, right? I will make you a covenant. >> Which verse is uh the one verse six uh called you and I will take hold your hand. I'll keep you and will make you to be a covenant for the people. Yeah. Yeah. >> So he's not just bringing the covenant. He himself is the covenant. Yeah. >> Right. And so we see the Old Testament is teaching that the Messiah, the servant of the Lord, the one who has the spirit of placed upon him. He's the one who is given as a covenant to the people, not just the Israelites, but also the Gentiles, the nations, right? and that we wait for his law. So we are under the law of the Messiah, not the written law of the of Moses anymore. He feels that. But the law of the Messiah which is placed upon our hearts in the new covenant which we follow and abide by in faith. We uphold this law by our faith. >> You're sounding a lot like a Muslim now. >> No. >> Are you Yeah, you are. you are because are you let's say are you implying to me that true and sincere faith is only demonstrated if you live by live righteously >> I I agree that true faith is demonstrated >> demonstrated works that that's Islam man >> that's you believe you're saved by your works >> no okay I believe this is actually a really good topic that you brought up where most Muslims misunderstand this so I am not saved by my works I am saved by the grace okay let me put it this way So this is the whole thing that Paul talks about. If it's by works, then it's not grace. And if it's grace, then it's not works. So how do we solve this? So I have to strive to live a righteous life. I must. But God gives me more than I'm credited for. So in the Quran, God talks about how he multiplies a good deed. If I do a good deed, he'll turn it to three, four, five, seven times. So I do good. I have to strive, but he will multiply even more. And also God will forgive my sins. If I ask him, my Lord, I've done all these sins. Can you forgive me? You'll forgive me. So that's where the grace comes in. Why why does he multiply your deeds? >> That's that's the grace. He gives me more than I have merited. >> But why? >> Because of his mercy. We we discussed this. >> It's it's based on you doing good works. Right. >> Yeah. I have to strive and he'll multiply my striving. But there has to be something there. >> Right. Right. So you have to do works in order to earn God's mercy of >> I do. I have to strive. Yes. >> So again, your works is attached to your salvation. >> Yes. It plays an essential role. But it's not like I'm earning all my salvation. That's arrogance. No, I'm doing works, but God is giving me way more than I deserve. And he's forgiving me of my wrongs, too. >> I work, but his grace >> gives me a lot. >> If you died today, would you go to paradise? >> I hope so. I pray that my Lord forgives me. >> So, you don't know. >> No, he's on the judgment seat. I'm not. >> This is what Jesus says. Jesus says, "Whoever abides in me, though he die, he will live." And so Jesus says that according to him and his this is what we're saying man what the prophets teach. >> Jesus says you put your trust in him you will have eternal life. You're assured it. You're guaranteed it. This is what he promises you that when you leave this world you will join him and he'll bring you back to him. >> Okay. You're following a religion that goes against the message of Jesus where now you don't even know where you will go. >> Let let me qualify that a bit though. So in the Quran, God it's it's God who's on the judgment seat. I know not what's going to happen with me or with you. But at the same time, God does say those who believe in God, do good works, believe in the last day. They need not fear nor regret. So, uh I do I have a confidence. Yes. I believe that my Lord is so mercy, my his mercy is so vast that he will forgive me of all the wrongs that I've done in my life. But ultimately, I can't be 100% certain because he is the judge and I am not. But I have confidence definitely in his grace. >> Okay. So, I want to get your thoughts on this. >> Just like this. Like this. Like nobody can prove tomorrow that their most faithful and good wife won't cheat on them tomorrow with their best friend. You can't prove that, but you can trust based on evidence from the past. >> Okay. >> So, there's a 100% confidence. >> Can you Can you go in the Quran, go to [clears throat] chapter 81? >> Yeah. What verse? >> Verse 28 and 29. We can start at verse 28. Uh, sorry. What was that? What verse? >> Chapter 81. >> 81. >> Verse 29. >> Verse 28. >> 28. It is I'll start at verse 27. It is only a reminder to all mankind for whom among you wills to take a straight path and that you will not accept that God wills the Lord of all creation. >> Okay. So it says that verse 28 says that if you will to walk the straight path, you can. Right? >> Yeah. >> But verse 29 adds a little wrench to that. >> Can you read that again? >> It is only a reminder of mankind. For whoso among you wills to take a straight path and you will not accept that God wills the Lord. >> So you not will you will not you will not will to take the straight path unless Allah wills for you to take the straight path. Right. >> Yeah. >> So is it your choice to take the straight path or is it Allah's choice for you to take the straight path? It is my Lord who has chosen to make the faith fair in my heart >> which puts me on the straight path. >> So it's not your choice to take the straight path as a loss. >> Let me put it this way. I can make a commitment. I can make a commitment towards God but it's ultimately he who will guide me to the straight path. >> So >> but I have to choose. >> Okay. But you can't choose unless he chooses for you. Right. >> Yeah. >> So your choice isn't really yours. It's his. >> That's a good question. That's a good question. This is honestly something that I've thought about. How do I put together the determinism with the free will? It's something that I don't have full answers to. Okay. >> Yeah. So >> God's ultimate fornowledge with then also my choice as well, >> right? >> Yeah. >> So this so this is my problem with this verse. Okay. Cuz you're saying you're saved by the mercy of Allah and his grace like added unto what you've done and what he's working with multiplication. >> Yeah. >> And so my thing is is that none of that matters at all because you're only put into paradise if Allah wills you. You can't follow Allah unless Allah wills for you to even want to follow him in the first place. >> He has to expand my breast to the path. >> Right? So if someone doesn't will to follow Allah, well it's because Allah doesn't will for them to want to follow him. Right? >> Allah did not will. But then there's also another verse in the Quran where God says he does not guide the wrongdoing people. He does not guide those who do not use reason. So God does seal off and open people's hearts, but it all depends on what decision they make inside of them. But it says that you cannot even want to do that in the first place unless Allah wills for you to want to do that. >> That's true. That's true. >> So this means that them choosing the wrong path is not really them choosing it. That's Allah choosing it for them and then he's sending them to hell. >> Them choosing. But no, cuz then at the same time you have in the Quran the wrongdoers, they will not blame God on the day of judgment. They will not they will know exactly what's going to happen to them and they see that they're deserving of it. >> I know the Quran says that but again it's not their fault, >> right? So yeah, I listen I don't have answers to all these broad theological questions of how to put God's fornowledge at the same time with free will and also his power to determine I don't fully understand that's a question that I think about. >> So would you would you agree then that it would be unjust if Allah um um you know forced someone to walk the wrong path and send them to hell for it? >> If they had absolutely no choice in it. That would be unjust. Yeah. >> And that would be satanic. >> It would be his will. It would be his will, but that would be unjust. Yeah. >> Right. And that would be >> God God gives everybody the chance to salvation. It's what we choose. >> Yeah. Now, you sound like a Christian. So So >> that's in the Quran. >> It's not that's in the Quran. >> But that's that's what we're reading. So we're reading how it says to whomever among you who wills to walk the straight path and you will not unless Allah wills. The Lord of the world is um he's the lord of the of all the worlds. So you cannot will to walk the straight path unless Allah wills for you to will to walk the straight path. You cannot will to walk the unjust path unless Allah wills for you to will to walk the unjust path. So you going you doing good works is not even your choice to do the good works you're doing. Someone doing bad works is not the their choice to do the bad works they're doing. Allah is the one who places the places these bad works on them. Places your good works on you to make you do it to make the other person do it and sends you guys to hell accordingly. And it's never y'all's fault. >> Right? But then also in the Quran it says God does not wrong his servants. They wrong themselves. And that we're accountable and nobody will object to God's justice on the day of judgment. I know the see again the Quran says that but it's inconsistent with what we're reading here and because what this means is even though the Quran says no one will you know put Allah in the hot seat basically right it says that however >> if we're thinking this about this critically he would deserve to be in the hot seat >> according to that framework and that interpretation yes yes so honestly like again I don't have answers to all these questions I can sit there and meditate and think upon the verse and to reconcile it with the rest of the Quran and what it teaches and that's the principle of the principle of grace when you read something. So I want to ask you something. So do you at least agree that um >> you don't obviously believe the Bible has contradictions but through our own lack of knowledge that maybe we can perceive a contradiction that's not actually there. >> Sure. And that requires you to really pray to God and meditate upon the scriptures >> or think >> or think. Yeah. Think deeply. Pray and meditate upon the scriptures. So often times the human mind in its limited knowledge can perceive a contradiction that's not there. >> Sure. >> Right. So you got to really take time with the scriptures. So that's what if you bring up something like that to me then I would have to sit there and really think about it. You wouldn't just throw it out right away. You think about it and you pray to God. >> Well, yeah. So I for me I' I've thought about this for a long time. I've run this subject on God logic apologetics. You can take it out. >> Okay. Okay, you can see that's where the trinitarians are dominant on that on that channel. And so, um, in in looking at this subject because I because I'm I'm aware of verses in the Quran where Allah says to to those who do good and those who choose the right path and stuff like that, right? Where the Quran very clearly has verses that appeal to the choice of its constituents. But then there are verses like this what I was reading that well their choice isn't really theirs. It's Allah's choice for them. Yeah. >> Right. I'm like, okay, if I'm putting all of this together, it looks like people, it talks about man's choice, but that choice doesn't come from them. That choice comes from Allah. And so whether the choice is good or the choice is bad, Allah is choosing whether or not people choose to do good or bad and then punishing them for it, which would be a satanic religion because that wouldn't be just. >> Yeah, that would not be just. So, I would have to find a way to interpret that verse within the vast Quranic context which gives humankind accountability for their deeds. Absolutely. >> Let me give you another one >> cuz I'm not I'm not just going to make up some random interpretation. I got to be honest. >> You have no idea. These people watch me. We we watch people make stuff up on the fly. >> I can't do that. God is my witness. I'm going to face him on the day of judgment. >> What What are your thoughts on I'll give you another one on uh so chapter 10? >> One minute. Well, no, I'll give it to you since I I asked. >> Okay, cool. Cool. I just want to ask this. Um, what is the single most thing that convinces you the Christian faith is the faith of God and that Islam is satanic? If you think Islam is satanic, >> uh, the evidence >> Quranic Islam. Yeah. So, okay. So, I would say I I'll I'll give you two. I'll give you my so the evidence of the resurrection of Jesus. The fact that um [clears throat] his tomb is empty. He was historically crucified. The tomb he was buried in of Joseph of Arya is empty. And it wasn't just his followers that came into believe and preach that he was crucified but even those who disbelieved in him like James and Paul a persecutor of the church who radically changed his life for Christ claiming he saw him. So I think that go that gives a lot of a ton of evidence for the resurrection of Jesus. A lot of witnesses. Secondly, I would say really huge. It's like 1 A1B is the continuity of the of the prophets. What they teach about God coming in human form, um the new covenant coming and salvation of the Messiah and how the Islam contradicts the message of the prophets. >> Okay. So, you would think that the son of God dying on the cross that that is the true continuity of the original message of the prophets. Absolutely. Okay. I would disagree with you on that, but you're being candid with me, it seems. So, all praise to God. >> Yeah. >> Cool. very much. [applause] [applause] That was so fun, so authentic, and uniquely calming. That was very It was good. It just really hit the spot. So, we will uh have Q&A if you line up on this side. >> Somebody get some questions. And then before we do jump into the Q&A, do want to give a huge thank you to our sponsors including Main First Project as well as Roar Uncensored America, Apologetics Arc, and we want to say thank you so much for them and their support of Fair Debates. Check out their links in the description box. And with that, we will start with the first question. The floor is all yours. All right. Well, lead, I do have a question for you because you said that you think that it's satanic to believe that you're saved by faith and not by works. So, were the Israelites saved by faith or by works? Were they given the law first or were they saved first? >> Faith and works. Works played an essential role in the salvation. Yes. >> So, were they saved first or were they given the law first? Were they saved first or given the law first? >> Explain that to me. Talking >> about the Exodus. >> So in the Exodus, >> the Israelites are saved from slavery, right? >> Saved from slavery. >> That happens in Exodus 12. >> Yeah. >> We don't see the law handed down until Exodus 20 after the Exodus. >> Yeah. Now, the reason why this would be by faith is because back in Genesis 15, Abraham, God promised to Abraham that his people would be enslaved for 400 years and then they would be saved. So, the Israelites had faith in that prophecy. They had faith that God was going to save them. That's why around the time of Moses, they were looking for a savior. Where's the guy who's going to save us from this slavery? Moses was the guy who emancipated them. >> Right. So, they were saved by faith >> and then they received the law. >> Okay. I think you and I are using salvation in a slightly different sense. You're using saved as emancipated from earthly slavery. But I'm using saved as inheriting eternal life with God. >> Okay. But these things are these things are parallel. It's a foreshadowing of the thing that was to come. So, do you see the parallel here? And even if you look at the Passover in Exodus 12, it was the blood of the lamb, their faith in God and the blood of the lamb that saved them and then they were taken out of slavery. Yeah. >> And then they received the law. So they couldn't do the works of the law until after they had faith and were saved. >> Right. So that's something the Quran publishes a correction on. Specifically, this idea of blood atonement. It says that it is not the blood, it's that God's mercy reaches you. So, this is actually a horrible misunderstanding that it's the blood that washes away the sin. >> Nope. It was faith first. And remember, you said it was continuity with the prophets that stops it from being satanic. So, I just wanted to show you a little bit of that continuity. >> Yeah. Good. [laughter] Yeah. No, there's no continuity there because again, I don't see anybody inheriting paradise by faith alone in uh in the Old Testament. I don't see that. Yes, sir. Um, you mentioned that God's going to forgive you of your sins, correct? >> I hope. Yeah. God will. >> Okay. So, we know that God's character is just and that he punishes evildoers. If God forgives you, how is he still just in satisfying his character of punishing evildoers just by casually forgiving you? Is is God still just even though he's forgiven you? >> Yeah. Right. So, this is the thing. The the Christian, at least the conception that I've heard of it, it nullifies the idea of God's forgiveness. So, they say, for example, God is a just God and every sin needs to be accounted for. So, if he just lets me off scot-free, then what's the point? I mean, how is he being just? And that's the whole point. God is being more merciful to us than we even deserve. That's not injustice. that's giving us more than we even deserve. He forgave me of my sins. >> And one just quick announcement is if you're sitting in the back, if you can do us a favor, we're going to start prepping for dinner. So, if you're in those back seats, anywhere beyond those dark navy ones is if you're in any of the white seats, if you can do us a favor and find a seat among the navy blue seats, just because we want to start prepping for dinner and rolling out those tables. And quickly, I want to expand one more point on what he said as well. I want to say that in this conception, there is no forgiveness of God. basically you know somebody has to pay the price of the sin either it's me or somebody else there's no forgiveness then then from that perspective you don't believe God is forgiving it's like you know if you if you smack if you no it's paid for so there's no forgiveness you you smack me in the face and I say and you say I'm sorry for that and I say I forgive you but I only forgive you if you let me slap you back or bring me somebody else who I can slap then there's no more forgiveness anymore in that system because the price is paid by somebody. >> Yeah. >> Who paid the price for your sin? >> According to the Christian conception conception, Jesus. >> No, no, no. How How do you answer that? >> Not. >> How do How do you justify it? >> Not every sin's price needs to be paid. That's how merciful our Lord is. >> So all sin is not sin. So some some sin is permissible because we can just be forgiven of it because it just doesn't mean as much. >> God is kind and forgiving if I come to him sincerely. But how can God be kind and forgiving and just at the same time? >> God is just. So what do we mean by justice? He never punishes you with more than what you've done. So if I have done >> your own sin has already >> there's there's no justice in that system. I'm a sinner. I'm a terrible person. So let's just inflict it all on some innocent person. Jesus that you're trying to talk to me about justice. >> That's the only way that he qualifies. >> Your position is the most perverse distortion of justice. Let's inflict an innocent man for all of humanity's diabolical sins. But he chose to do that. >> Is that justice in your view? I just want to ask that. >> It's justice in God's view, not necessarily mine. To me, it's unfair, but I'll take it. >> You You were You just came and telling me that it's you you just came telling me about God's justice. Now, you just said it's unfair. >> God's justice was satisfied with Jesus on the cross. So Jesus, this is why it's all in the Old Testament is that I mean Jesus like Moses says that uh Isaac's going where's a sacrifice? He says he'll God will provide himself as the sacrifice. >> Okay. So yeah, you believe that an innocent being afflicted for somebody else's transgressions is justice. That's a strange view. Okay. >> Hey, for you W. Also to piggy back on that, I know you don't accept the hadith, but in the hadith they say that for every Muslim that a Jew and a Christian going to replace them in hellfire. So just to let you >> uh sorry, repeat that again. >> So about the sins being replaced for so you don't accept the hadith, right? But it it it touches on that and it talks about a Jew and a Christian is going to replace the Muslims in hellfire. Just something you could look into. So >> hadith is apostasy, but Yep. I agree. >> Yeah. >> So my question my question for you is um so in the Quran in surah Miam 19 uh and for context is uh verse 66-72 uh it says uh says that Allah decrees that everyone must enter hellfire first before he delivers those who fear and leave the disbelievers on their knees wobbling in hellfire. And obviously uh so >> which which verse number is that? >> So this is uh 19 and then it's 66-72. >> 66-72 >> and Sora 3 185 backs that up also. It said every soul tastes death and whoever is removed from the fire enters the garden. >> Yeah. So my question for you is why would someone who's honestly seeking God and salvation and leave the absolute safety of Christ to basically you you are guaranteed to you guaranteed an absolutely uh unavoidable brush in with hellfire. >> Okay. Why would someone leave the safety of Christ to be basically guaranteed to hell? >> Okay. Yeah. So that that's a misunderstanding of it. God says in the Quran that those who do righteous deeds and live by the Lord faithfully that they will not be touched by the fire. So we will all be on our knees in hell, but God will deliver us out and then the evildoers will be set ablaze in the fire. >> Okay. So I'm going just read it then. Yeah. >> So, so uh so >> we'll be delivered to the garden and the evildoers will be set ablaze. The fire will not touch us. That's what the Quran says. >> Okay. So, >> yeah, that's not what it says in here. Yeah. >> So, uh it says, so I'm going to start from 66 for context. >> Okay. >> And the human says after I am dead, will I come out alive? Does the human not remember that we created him before and he was not anything? So by your Lord we shall surely gather them and the Satans. Then we will bring them surrounding hell on their knees. Then we will seize them each from each sect. Those of them who have been the strongest in rebellion against the merciful. Then surely we know that those who are most deserving to be roasted. And there is none of you who will not go down into it. This was unavoidable decree of your Lord. Then we would deliver those who fear and warn against uh the unjust in their needs. And then three says, every soul will taste death and ye will be paid on the day of resurrection. Only that which ye have fairly earned. Whosoever is removed from hellfire is made into into >> hell fire. Can you give me that exact verse? I want to see it in Arabic. >> 385. >> 385. One second. >> Okay. All right. I got you. I got you. >> So, >> so yeah, you want to look up uh 385 and then Sora uh 1966-72. >> So, >> and it says everyone and it talks about them being delivered and getting poured out of hell fire. >> My my understanding of the hereafter in the Quran is everybody will be in hell. They will be in there, but God will deliver out the disbelievers and the believers and they will not be touched by the fire. >> Yeah. So, no harm will touch you. God says no harm will touch you and you will not grieve. There's there's just just quickly I want to ask this question. Does that honestly make sense to you? If you believe Muhammad made up the Quran, does that make sense? Would that be a really good proletizing tool to tell everybody, hey, even the believers are going to burn and torture in hell? It doesn't make any sense with the rest of the Quranic framework. You know, >> I agree with you, but I know you don't accept the hadith, but even he said on his deathbed, he don't know what's what's going to happen to him. So, >> it kind of goes with it. So, >> not not precisely. We we can discuss this after if you want. Yeah. >> All right. We're ready for you. >> Okay. Uh you said that early generations, you know, after Jesus were successful in spreading their message of the truth, but the earliest manuscripts of the New Testament all affirm the deity of Christ, Jesus atonement for sins, the crucifixion, which Islam denies. the four gospels, those are the earliest detailed biographies we have of Jesus and they all totally contradict uh Islam. Uh so my question then is if these scriptures are all corrupted, who corrupted them and created these false teachings, was it the original disciples who literally died proclaiming Jesus as Lord? Are you saying they were the ones who corrupted it? Because across all these different continents, we see the same scriptures promoting Christian truth against Islam. It was Paul. >> The go I I would respond by saying the gospels don't come from the disciples. They're not eyewitnesses. They're not eyewitnesses to Jesus's life, but a biography of his life. For example, you I mean like you can write me down as you witness me now, but you can't be if you wrote a biography of my life for me as a child all the way to an adult. That would not be an eyewitness. That would be a story of my life. So they're not eyewitnesses. >> Okay. But I guess my question is if the earliest strongest sources we have of Jesus also strongly contradict Islam, how does that make sense if you say Jesus' followers, you know, were strong in spreading his message? >> Okay, so we do see an echo. We see Jesus preaching. We see Jesus praying. We see him lowering to God. We see him saying he doesn't know the day or the hour. So we do see monotheistic messages in the New Testament. But then also again, it starts to get contradicted in different spots as well. Yeah, it's not totally foreign. Jesus prayed to somebody. >> We're gonna try to squeeze in just two more quick questions. >> Yeah. My main question for you. Earlier today, we saw kind of the show that happened between you and the other speaker, >> the uh Jake Fronatello. >> Yeah. So, I would never talk like that to Avery. Like I would never sit there and and try to say that he's not a Christian and embarrass him in front of everybody. So my question for you is I want to quote surah Ali Imran >> what >> chapter 3105 where it says and do not be like those who split and [snorts] deferred after clip proofs and had come to them. >> Yeah that's a great that's a great verse right there. Your verse is implicating against Jake Bronantella and these Sunnis and Shia. I don't believe in none of that. God says don't break your religion in sex. They say I'm a Sunni. I'm a Shia. I follow this school of thought. I follow I am just a Muslim. And what is the root of their sectarianism? It is their hadith and their scholarly tradition. They all carry the same Quran. It's their hadith that splits them into sex. So God is actually exposing them as being the imposter Muslim. >> That's what I mean. That's the heart that I'm trying to show you. Like that's that's the difference in in the characteristics of of the love we show each other versus the display we saw earlier. >> I I fully agree with you. These people are imposter Muslims. A lot of them. >> Yeah. You got a question for Avery. Come on up. Yeah. We'll get you in two. I promise. But you guys will be the last two. You and then you. >> Okay. And uh it was W. >> Okay. But um well, I just wanted to say thank you for your honesty. um when God logic was uh asking you about um like free will versus predestination and I actually had a question for you. I am a Christian but I feel like Christians we come into like the same problem like I was just reading um uh Ephesians 28:9 which says for it is by grace you have been saved through faith. So that part is still there but it says and this is not from yourselves it's a gift from God. Right? So it's something that God determines whether you have faith or not. And for example, there's other examples in the Bible where God kind of intervenes with people's free will. I'm thinking about uh King Pharaoh saying he hardened Pharaoh's heart against God. Right? So that's kind of another example of God like predetermining something. Uh there's another verse that says um like God willed certain people for destruction. There's another verse that says for those he predestined he like for those he forneew he predestined for salvation. So like as a Christian, how do you deal with the same thing that you kind of put on him in terms of uh wrestling with that uh that issue essentially? >> Yeah. So I I'll work um >> I work backwards with the Pharaoh thing. When when God says that he hardened Pharaoh's heart, this isn't God forcing Pharaoh to choose evil, but this is God taking his hand off of Pharaoh and giving him over to his desires. This is what Romans 1 talks about. Romans 1 talks about how the people suppressed the truth about God in their unrighteousness and as a result he gave them over to themselves and they became futile in their thinking. So the same thing with Pharaoh when he hardens his heart, it's him giving him over to himself and be and and giving him over to a debased mind, right? Um and that's that's all all that's in Romans nine, right? Where it talks about he gives some over to destruction or raised some up for destruction, raised some up for another purpose, right? Where this is where he he has mercy on who he has mercy on, right? So there's some who he gives over to the debase mind and this is for his glory. There's some who he rescues from a debaseed mind and that is also for his glory. But it's still their choice in suppressing the truth about God and their own unrighteousness. Um there was this oh yeah the uh so you you brought up Ephesians >> right so so the verse actually says that the free gift is from God not your faith right so you have you place faith in God and the gift of grace is through your faith. It's the gift that's from God. He didn't force you to believe. He doesn't choose for you to believe, right? >> Uh [clears throat] do want to just any sort of background conversation if you could do me a favor just so people aren't distracted so that they can hear the speakers. >> Okay, good. >> A quick and really really py follow-up. >> Uh like super pathy. >> No, [laughter] >> sorry to do it, man. >> Thanks for your question, man. >> And one last question. >> Mine will be short. Um I'm just going to piggyback off of something uh God Logic was saying. Uh so it seems like when I speak to Muslims uh they have an issue thinking or accepting that God would humble himself and take on flesh. Um even as humans we can recognize that humility is one of the greatest attributes of a person. Uh I mean even when we applaud you uh you show and try to you know reflect humility. Why wouldn't you think that God would be the full embodiment of that attribute? >> Because my definition of humility is lowering yourself before somebody. But God is the most high. There is literally none to lower himself towards. And there's certain aspects lowering yourself is inappropriate. If I lowered myself to my son to command me, that's inappropriate. So it all depends on the context. God coming down into human realm, that's a categorical error as much as a father lowering himself before the son to command him. Hopefully that answers the question. >> All right, with that want to conclude, but give our speakers a huge round of applause. [applause] Thank you very much, gentlemen. Special thanks to our sponsors, Main First Project, Revival of the Anointed's Rule, Uncensored America, Patrick O'Neal, Arc Apologetics, Yonauni, International Cuisine, and SDA. Special thanks to our sponsor, Maine First Project, Fighting to Put Mainers First. Check out mainfirstpro.org. Huge thanks to Revival of the Anointed's Rule, equipping Christians to fight for biblical values through policy victories. Check out revivetheroar.org. Special thanks to our sponsor, Uncensored America. Want to host a controversial speaker on your college campus? Start a chapter now on your campus at uncensoredamea. us. Huge thanks to our sponsor, Apologetics Arc. Check out their app today by downloading it. 1 Peter 3:15 says, "Always be ready to give a defense." Huge thank you to our sponsor, Yonauni International Cuisine of Aguodia, Puerto Rico. Check them out in your next trip. Special thanks to our stage sponsor, SDA.