# The Islamic Dilemma: GodLogic Vs Jake The Muslim (Full Debate)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oGmcv0CoG78

[00:23] Y'all excited for.
[00:25] I'm glad you guys are here.
[00:28] Uh, we are now in our final debate of the evening.
[00:30] Um, this is one of our main finales, our grand finale, should I say.
[00:32] One of our better debates.
[00:35] Uh, not better debates, but one of our anticipated debates, should I say.
[00:39] And so, I'm glad you guys stuck around.
[00:41] As you guys see, I have Mr. Avery Austin, God Logic.
[00:49] He's here.
[00:51] I have Jake Britella.
[00:53] Did I say that right?
[00:55] Did I say it right?
[00:57] I said it right. All right. All right.
[01:00] Also known as a Muslim metaphysician.
[01:03] And so we are going to have a fun one today or this evening in this debate.
[01:03] And so let me uh
[01:05] introduce the debaters.
[01:08] And so we can get this show on the road.
[01:11] All right.
[01:13] Starting with Avery.
[01:13] Avery is the founder of a Christian YouTube channel, God Logic Apologetics, launched in 2022.
[01:16] Avery is a Christian apologist who regularly hosts open discussions and debates with Muslims, Hebrew Israelites, Jehovah's Witnesses, and others with a focus on biblical clarity and respectful dialogue.
[01:27] Please welcome Avery Austin.
[01:36] All right.
[01:36] Jake Breant Brankantella uh also known as Muslim metaphysician is a Muslim apologist who holds a master's degree in theology and philosophy.
[01:45] uh his research focused on Islamic theology, Christian theology, and early Christian history.
[01:50] He currently resides in Morocco with his family.
[01:52] Let's welcome Jake.
[02:00] All right, the topic of this debate is does Islam teach the entire Bible?
[02:04] Uh it teach the entire Bible is true, also
[02:06] known as the Islamic dilemma.
[02:08] Uh this debate format for this will be 18-minute opening statements.
[02:10] It' be eight minute rebuttals, a 40-minute cross examination where both parties will get 20 minutes each to ask questions.
[02:15] Then we uh go to a five-minute closings and then 30-minute Q&A from the audience.
[02:20] Sounds good.
[02:24] All right.
[02:24] All right.
[02:26] Uh Avery, you're arguing affirmative this debate.
[02:28] So, you'll be up first for your opening statement.
[02:41] Testing, testing, testing.
[02:43] Can you guys hear me?
[02:43] We all good?
[02:46] What's going on, y'all?
[02:48] Man, good to be here.
[02:50] Thank you so much, Marlin, for having me for this discussion, for this debate.
[02:54] Thank you, Jake, for showing up unlike some others.
[02:59] And he knows what I'm talking about, too, man.
[03:01] Jake a real one.
[03:01] I got to let y'all know that.
[03:03] Um, does the Quran,
[03:08] does Islam affirm the Bible in its entirety?
[03:11] And the answer is a resounding heck yeah.
[03:13] Duh.
[03:13] Have you guys ever read the Quran before?
[03:15] I have.
[03:17] I've read a couple times.
[03:17] Almost said my shahada, too.
[03:19] Um, but luckily, I left Islam as soon as I was born.
[03:23] Um, because we're all born Muslims, according I guess.
[03:25] Um, but we're going to talk about the Islamic dilemma.
[03:28] When I saw the Islamic dilemma, ladies and gentlemen, I was like, "Dang, this is solid.
[03:31] There is no way I can even return to Islam after knowing this, you know.
[03:34] And so when we get into this, this has been such a plague within the Islamic community among the Da guys, the Da Bros to the point where we get a bunch of different uh responses and reactions to the Islamic dilemma.
[03:53] Matter of fact, there's a lot of infighting with these guys because they don't like how one is responding to the argument.
[03:56] They think that their response is better and the other person think that their response is better and then we just get the da drama and we can watch it all on one way apologetic.
[04:06] Shout out to you Chris
[04:09] Claus. So, with that being said, we're going to talk about what the Islamic dilemma is.
[04:15] And then we're going to also talk about what the Islamic dilemma is not because listening to Jake over the past few days, it seems that my friend does not know what in the world the Islamic dilemma is.
[04:26] And this would be a tough debate, bro, if you don't know what it is, man.
[04:30] But it's okay.
[04:32] I'm here for you, man.
[04:34] I'm I'm on your side.
[04:34] So, this is what the Islamic dilemma is, guys.
[04:35] The Islamic dilemma is this.
[04:35] It's the concept that the Quran affirms the Bible, the preservation of the Bible, the inspiration of the Bible, and the authority of the Bible.
[04:47] It affirms the inspiration, the preservation, and the authority of our scriptures.
[04:53] This is what the Quran talks about.
[04:56] Now, here's the problem.
[04:58] Unfortunately for the Quran, the Quran tends to contradict what the Bible says.
[05:04] It denies the deity of Christ.
[05:06] It denies the crucifixion.
[05:09] It denies the sunship of of Jesus.
[05:11] denies the trinity.
[05:14] So there are things that the Quran directly contradicts.
[05:17] And this is the problem.
[05:19] The fact that the Quran says that our scriptures are true
[05:21] while at the same time contradicting our scriptures means that the Quran is false.
[05:26] Oh, but there's a solution, right?
[05:28] It's been corrupted.
[05:30] It's been changed.
[05:32] Paul went to the council of Nika, traveled in time and corrupted the scriptures at the council of Nika.
[05:37] You guys heard this before.
[05:38] Yeah, I've seen y'all, you know, nodding your heads.
[05:40] We all heard this before, right?
[05:42] So, it's been tampered with.
[05:44] It's been corrupted.
[05:46] There it is.
[05:48] Oh, but this is the other side of the dilemma.
[05:49] It's because, okay, if we're going to say that these scriptures are corrupted, then the Quran is false because it's affirming false books.
[05:55] It's saying that corrupted, changed books are true.
[05:57] So either way you go, you're in trouble.
[06:00] It's a dilemma.
[06:02] That's what the Islamic dilemma is.
[06:05] Okay.
[06:08] Now, for you guys, I know we got some Christians in here.
[06:09] What's the only thing we do around here, y'all?
[06:11] We just read.
[06:11] Is that right?
[06:11] So, we're
[06:12] just going to go ahead and get a few verses in here.
[06:13] In chapter 2, verse 41 of the Quran, it says, "And believe in that I have sent down."
[06:19] Believe in what I have sent down, confirming that which is with you.
[06:26] and be not the first to disbelieve in it and sell not my signs for a little price and fear you me.
[06:35] So the Quran here is telling the Jews to believe in the Quran that which I have revealed confirming that which is already with you.
[06:43] So the scriptures that the that the Jews have, the Torah, the Psalms, these scriptures are true according to the Quran.
[06:50] And the Quran is in line with it, which is why the Jews should believe in the Quran, too, because they're all on the same side according to the Quran.
[06:58] But according to our dawa bros, we're going to hear something else.
[07:00] We're team Allah today.
[07:02] I know.
[07:03] I can't believe I'm saying this.
[07:06] We're going to defend Allah.
[07:09] Chapter 2, verse 85.
[07:11] I love this verse.
[07:11] Jake loves it, too.
[07:11] Then there are there you are killing one
[07:13] another and expelling a party of you from their habitations, conspiring against them in sin and immity.
[07:19] And if they come to you as captives, you ransom them.
[07:25] Yet their expulsion was forbidden you.
[07:28] Now this is the special part.
[07:30] Watch this y'all.
[07:30] It says, "What do you believe in part of the book while rejecting the rest?"
[07:37] Uh-oh.
[07:37] Wait.
[07:37] Our Muslim friends would tell us that.
[07:39] No.
[07:39] No.
[07:39] No, no, no.
[07:41] Uh, the the Quran is confirming part of your scripture, some of your scripture.
[07:46] Allah says, uh, uh-uh.
[07:46] He says, "Do you believe in part of the book while rejecting the rest?"
[07:50] What happens to those who do that?
[07:52] Allah, he going to tell us real quick.
[07:53] He says, "What happens to those who do so among you except degra deg degradation in this life, disgrace in this life, and in the hereafter there awaits for them the most the the most uh uh heinous torment, hell, y'all in in short terms."
[08:10] You're going to go to hell if you believe in part of the scripture and reject other
[08:13] parts of the scripture.
[08:15] So according to the Quran, we have an explicit verse, a clear verse, an unambiguous statement from the Quran itself that you cannot believe in part of the book and reject other parts of the book.
[08:26] But guess what you're going to see today?
[08:28] You're going to see that my opponent here is going to actually advocate for believing and affirming part of the scripture and rejecting other parts.
[08:36] So my challenge to Jake here today is to give me one unequivocal statement, one unambiguous verse where the Quran itself says you can believe in some parts and reject other parts.
[08:50] That's what I want to see because I gave you explicitly what I am saying from the Quran because we just read.
[08:55] I want you to show me what you're going to be saying from the Quran.
[08:59] Let's keep going.
[09:00] Chapter 2 vers 89.
[09:02] It's going to be a lot of chapter 2, y'all.
[09:04] It says, "When there came to them a book from God confirming what was with them."
[09:10] Well, uh-oh.
[09:13] The Quran is confirming what is with them.
[09:13] Again, what they have
[09:15] possession of the Torah.
[09:17] And they a four times prayed for victory over the unbelievers.
[09:22] When there came to them when there came to them that they recognized, they disbelieved in it.
[09:28] And the curse of God is is on the unbelievers.
[09:30] Now, here's a question.
[09:32] How in the world are they going to recognize the Quran or the coming of Muhammad if they don't have the scriptures to recognize him with?
[09:40] That doesn't make any sense to me.
[09:42] So, it looks like the Quran is being very clear, standing 10 toes on the truth, the inspiration, and the preservation of the previous scriptures.
[09:51] As a matter of fact, it's they're they're so true that this is the reason why the Jews and Christians should be believing in the Quran because the Quran is is a a fulfillment of what they have.
[10:03] The Quran is in line with what they have.
[10:06] So the fact that they see Muhammad, they see the Quran and reject it means that they are turning away from something they recognize.
[10:16] So there's no way there's no excuse for the people of the book.
[10:20] There's no excuse.
[10:21] We should be believing in Muhammad as a prophet and the Quran as a revelation from Allah.
[10:24] Let's keep going.
[10:24] Chapter 2 verse 91.
[10:26] Just two verses later.
[10:26] And when they were told, believe in what God has sent down, they said, "We believe in what was sent down to us."
[10:37] And they disbelieve in what is beyond that.
[10:37] Yet it is the truth confirming what is with them.
[10:41] say, "Why then were you slaying the prophets of God in former time if you were believers?"
[10:51] Again, we're going to continue to see this trend that the Quran is confirming what is with them, confirming what they have, confirming what you possess.
[11:00] But what he's going to say is they didn't have it.
[11:00] What he's going to say is believe in part of it.
[11:03] What he's going to say is, "Oh, it's corrupted."
[11:05] What team are we on, Jake?
[11:07] Or we going to be on team Allah today?
[11:09] Y'all let me know.
[11:09] I I'mma choose I'mma choose team Allah today.
[11:12] Chapter 3:3 of the Quran.
[11:14] Next chapter, he has sent
[11:16] down upon thee the book with truth,
[11:20] confirming what was before it.
[11:23] And he sent down the Torah and the Gospel.
[11:25] There it is again.
[11:27] So, we see explicitly what the Quran is confirming.
[11:29] Chapter 3:81.
[11:32] I love this.
[11:32] Let me actually save that one for later.
[11:34] Here's 4:47.
[11:36] It says, "You who have been given the book," that's you guys, the Jews and Christians,
[11:39] You guys who have been given the book, believe in what we have sent down.
[11:42] Why?
[11:42] Confirming what is with you.
[11:47] Wait, what's going to happen to me if I don't do that though, Allah?
[11:49] Before we obliterate Uhoh, that's pretty tough.
[11:55] Before we obliterate faces, I'm I'm not kidding you guys.
[11:58] I'm reading this right here.
[11:59] before we obliterate faces and turn them upon their backs or curse them as we curse the Sabbath men and God's command is done.
[12:09] So what's going to happen to us if we don't believe in the Quran which confirms the scriptures that we have which we should use to uh uh
[12:19] recognize the Quran and recognize Muhammad as a prophet.
[12:22] Our faces are going to get up turned upside down and we're going to have the same fate as those who broke the Sabbath.
[12:27] That's how serious Allah takes this.
[12:30] Jews and Christians are reprimanded for distorting their scriptures with their tongues, lying on the scriptures, misinterpreting the scriptures, and not reciting it in truth and obeying it accurately.
[12:42] In fact, this is chapter 5 68 of the Quran.
[12:45] It says, "Say, oh people of the book, Jews and Christians, you do not stand on anything until you observe the Torah, the Gospel, and what has been revealed to you from your Lord."
[13:02] Pretty clear.
[13:06] Allah is telling me, "I don't have a foundation.
[13:10] I can't stand on anything if I'm not observing the Torah, the gospel, and what has been revealed to me from my Lord.
[13:18] Let's finish the verse because I
[13:19] don't want to be accused of taking anything out of context.
[13:22] And it says, "And what has been sent down to you from your Lord will surely increase many of them in insolence and unbelief.
[13:30] So grieve not for the people of the unbelievers."
[13:33] Now, these are all verses that say that the Quran is confirming the scriptures.
[13:37] These are verses that say that we have nothing to stand on.
[13:40] But the Quran goes a little bit further.
[13:43] The Quran actually points to the previous scriptures as the authority on truth, the standard of truth.
[13:48] You don't believe me?
[13:50] What's the only thing we do?
[13:53] We just read.
[13:53] So here's chapter 10 verse 94.
[13:55] Watch what it says.
[13:56] Talking to Muhammad.
[13:59] So if you are in doubt, talking to Muhammad, regarding what we have revealed to you, the Quran, then ask those who have been reading the scripture before you.
[14:08] The truth has come to you from your Lord.
[14:10] So be not OF THOSE WHO DOUBT.
[14:12] WHAT?
[14:12] HOLD ON a second.
[14:15] You mean to tell me that Muhammad himself if he's doubting if if he's
[14:22] doubting the Quran what's been revealed to him then he's needs to go to the people who've been reading the scripture before him.
[14:29] So then this is what this this creates.
[14:31] This means cuz doubt means that you are you don't have the truth right you're uncertain about the truth of a thing.
[14:37] So in order to find the truth, to get certainty, you can go check with the people of the book who've been reading the scripture before you.
[14:45] So this is what it is.
[14:45] So for Muhammad to get certainty in case he's doubting what Allah revealed to him in the Quran, he can go to the people of the book and then they can show him like, "Yeah, man.
[14:55] This actually lines up."
[14:55] Then he'll know that what he's receiving is actually from God.
[14:59] That means that the reverse is true.
[15:02] That if he goes to these people and they showing, "Yeah, no, the Torah don't say this.
[15:06] No, the gospel don't say this is this is all contradicted.
[15:09] This is something different.
[15:09] Then he'll know that what he's receiving is actually not from God.
[15:13] So what is the authority?
[15:15] What is the standard of truth according to this verse?
[15:17] It's the previous scriptures, the Bible.
[15:19] Ladies and gentlemen, the Quran attests to the
[15:24] authority, inspiration, revelation, preservation of the Bible.
[15:30] It's as simple as that.
[15:33] I've never had to lift a finger.
[15:34] Allah's doing all the work for me.
[15:36] Again, team Allah just for this debate.
[15:38] You know what I'm saying?
[15:38] That's 1094.
[15:41] Here's another one, y'all.
[15:41] Watch what it says here.
[15:43] Yet, this is chapter 28:48.
[15:45] Yet, when the truth came to them from ourselves, they said, "Why has he not been given the the like of that Moses was given?"
[15:53] Moses was given the Torah, ladies and gentlemen.
[15:56] Now, this is when it gets interesting.
[15:59] But they But they did they not disbelieve also in what Moses was given a four time?
[16:05] They said a pair of sorceries mutually supporting each other.
[16:08] They said we disbelieve in both.
[16:11] So he's comparing the Quran with the Torah.
[16:13] And he's saying why hasn't something like the the Torah come to you?
[16:17] Why hasn't something like what was given to Moses come down to you?
[16:21] And Allah is saying that they disbelieved in
[16:24] Moses.
[16:25] They're going to disbelieve in the Quran as well.
[16:28] They they're calling both books books of sorcery that support each other.
[16:32] Now watch what the next verse says.
[16:34] Say, "Bring a book from God that gives better guidance than these and follow it if you speak truly."
[16:45] So Allah is given a challenge.
[16:47] Bring a book as good as the Torah and the Quran.
[16:50] What?
[16:52] This is the Torah in Muhammad's time, ladies and gentlemen.
[16:55] So Allah issues a challenge to the disbelievers to bring something as good as the Torah and the Quran.
[17:02] If what he [snorts] what he uh uh revealed is not from God, you bring something better than it then.
[17:10] So why in the world is the Quran, if the Torah is corrupted, why is it that Allah is putting the Torah on the same level as the Quran and saying bring something that's as good as these if you can bring if you can do it.
[17:23] If the Torah is not
[17:26] authoritative, if the Torah is corrupted, if the Torah is distorted, if the Torah doesn't exist anymore, if this is the case, why is Allah in the seventh century in Muhammad's time comparing its goodness, its authoritiveness, its truthfulness to that of the Quran?
[17:43] Allah, hey, he's doing his thing in this Quran, y'all.
[17:46] I'm telling you.
[17:47] Now, watch this.
[17:50] This is powerful as well.
[17:52] This is chapter 3, verse 81.
[17:54] This is this is a good one.
[17:54] This is it's very underused.
[17:54] It says this, "And when God took a covenant with the prophets,"
[17:58] now we as Jews and Christians, we're familiar with the term covenant, right?
[18:04] God doesn't turn his back on his covenants.
[18:05] Now, watch this.
[18:08] It says, "Now, this is the covenant that I have given you to the prophets, I've given you a book and wisdom."
[18:16] Then there shall come to you a messenger confirming what is with you.
[18:23] and you are to believe in him and to support him.
[18:26] He said, "Do you agree?"
[18:30] The prophets responded and said, "We do agree."
[18:33] God said, "Bear witness."
[18:37] So, and I shall be with you among the witnesses.
[18:40] So what we have here, ladies and gentlemen, is that we have Allah and the prophets coming into an agreement,
[18:43] building a covenant, making a solid oath amongst each other.
[18:45] Allah's end of the bargain is I've given you guys a scripture.
[18:48] I've given you guys wisdom with the scripture.
[18:51] Now what I'm going to do is I'm going to send a messenger after you to confirm what you have and you are to help him and support him.
[18:53] Do you agree?
[18:55] Prophecy is like that sounds good to us.
[18:57] So according to this verse, the prophets are supposed to be able to recognize Muhammad by his confirmation of what they have.
[18:58] But if the messenger comes and says, "Hey, what you guys have is corrupted.
[19:00] What you guys have is distorted."
[19:04] Then they're going to be like, "Oh, you're not the messenger of the covenant.
[19:07] You're not the one that Allah told us about.
[19:09] You're
[19:31] a false prophet.
[19:34] So according to the to the Quran, the determining factor of Muhammad's prophethood is if he aligns with what came before him.
[19:40] If he does not line up with the prophets from before, if he does not line up with the books that they had, then Muhammad is a false prophet according to the covenant in the Quran.
[19:51] This is the Quran's covenant, not ours.
[19:53] We ain't making this up.
[19:56] So according to the scriptures, according to the Quran, the authority, the standard of truth is the previous scriptures.
[20:06] One minute.
[20:06] One minute. Thank you so much.
[20:08] Now let's talk about what the Islamic dilemma is not because this is where Jake gets confused.
[20:12] The Islamic dilemma is not that the that the Quran uh affirms I'm sorry that the previous scriptures are a full legal authority over the Quran.
[20:21] That's not the Islamic dilemma.
[20:25] When we say that the Quran affirms the authority of the previous scriptures, by
[20:32] authority, we mean that the previous
[20:34] scriptures are a standard of truth.
[20:36] That's one. And they are a legal
[20:38] authority over the Jews and Christians.
[20:40] They're not a legal authority over the
[20:42] Muslims. But Jake got that confused,
[20:44] which is why this is going to be a tough
[20:45] debate for him. So when you look at what
[20:47] the Islamic dilemma is and what the
[20:49] Quran is saying, the the Quran is a
[20:51] legal authority over the Muslims. the
[20:53] the uh Torah is a legal authority over
[20:55] the uh Jews. The gospel is a legal
[20:58] authority over the Christians. They all
[21:01] have been given their own law according
[21:02] to chapter 5:48. That is what the
[21:05] Islamic dilemma is not.
[21:08] Thank you.
[21:17] All right. Now we have Jacob for his
[21:19] 18minut opening statement. Before
[21:29] you start, Jake, let me make this
[21:30] announcement. If someone is missing
[21:31] their car keys, I don't know if someone
[21:33] lost their car keys. My wife has them at
[21:35] the check-in desk up there. So, make
[21:38] sure you have your car keys. If not, go
[21:40] see my wife. She might have them.
[21:44] All right, Jake, you got the floor for
[21:47] 18 minutes.
[21:49] All
[22:03] right. Can you guys hear me?
[22:07] All right. I'd like to start off by
[22:09] thanking Marlin from the Gospel Truth
[22:11] for hosting tonight's debate. The debate
[22:14] before us tonight is does Islam teach
[22:17] the entire Bible is true? Now, we just
[22:21] heard from Avery about what the Islamic
[22:25] is Islamic dilemma is and what it's not.
[22:29] I'm going to have to teach him his own
[22:31] position and what he has said in the
[22:33] past. And it's going to be hard. It's
[22:35] really going to be hard on you today.
[22:37] So,
[22:39] here we go. Given this, God Logic is
[22:41] going to have even more difficult time
[22:44] than his teacher David Wood had last
[22:46] weekend. In a recent debate with John
[22:49] Fontaine, God Logic's teacher David Wood
[22:52] was asked whether the Quran affirms the
[22:55] entire Bible or not. David Wood actually
[22:59] refused to give an answer, a clear
[23:01] answer to this question, which
[23:02] demonstrates that even Avery's teacher
[23:05] doesn't clearly agree with him on
[23:07] tonight's debate topic. This is because
[23:10] would and others who use the Islamic
[23:12] dilemma argument typically make a more
[23:15] modest claim that the Quran affirms the
[23:18] Torah, Gospels, and maybe a few other
[23:20] books in the Old Testament, but it
[23:22] doesn't necessarily explicitly affirm
[23:25] the entirety of the Bible. So, this
[23:29] debate is really Avery versus Jake and
[23:32] his teacher, David Wood.
[23:35] However, following the in the footsteps
[23:37] of his teacher, David Wood, Avery
[23:39] typically claims that the Quran affirms
[23:41] the inspiration, preservation, and
[23:44] authority of the Torah and the Gospels,
[23:46] as we've just seen him do.
[23:49] Or in the case of Avery himself, he
[23:51] argues for the entirety of the Bible.
[23:54] Avery uses the same verses of the Quran
[23:56] as David, attempting to justify this
[23:59] claim.
[24:01] Okay. As for the verses regarding the
[24:03] inspiration of the Torah and Injeal, we
[24:06] agreed that the original revelations
[24:08] were sent by God. However, the clear the
[24:11] Quran is clear that Moses and Jesus
[24:13] received these revelations orally in
[24:16] their own languages. Quran 14:4 says God
[24:20] sends messengers in the language of
[24:22] their people. and Quran 57:27
[24:25] as well as several other verses
[24:27] describes the original Injil as a
[24:30] revelation given to Jesus. This is in
[24:33] the context of affirming the wholesale
[24:35] uncorrupted revelations received orally
[24:38] by Moses and Jesus respectively. The
[24:41] uncorrupted revelation of the NGO
[24:43] received by Jesus in his language
[24:46] doesn't match the gospels or the wider
[24:48] New Testament corpus written by others
[24:51] about Jesus in Greek. Avery must clearly
[24:54] demonstrate from the Quran how the how
[24:56] the word ineil is used to refer to the
[24:59] wholesale uncorrupted revelation of the
[25:02] New Testament. He won't be unable to do
[25:05] so.
[25:07] As for the verses used regarding
[25:08] preservation, although Avery didn't
[25:10] mention them now, he typically does.
[25:13] Aver's main argument is that the Quran
[25:15] states that Allah's words cannot be
[25:17] changed. But the context of these verses
[25:19] is that Allah's promises are always
[25:21] fulfilled. Quran 634 makes this clear
[25:25] regarding Quran 615. Immabari, a Muslim
[25:29] scholar says, and I quote, "none can
[25:32] change his words, i.e., He is saying
[25:35] that there is no one who could change
[25:37] what he has informed in his books about
[25:40] anything which is bound to happen during
[25:42] its time or has been postponed. It all
[25:45] happens as Allah says it would. Close
[25:48] quote. So when Avery says the Quran says
[25:51] Allah's words cannot be changed, he must
[25:53] demonstrate that there could never be
[25:55] textual corruption or revelation. I've
[25:57] provided a contextually coherent reading
[25:59] that doesn't require what Avery claims.
[26:02] He must demonstrate how his reading is
[26:04] more plausible than mine. Keep in mind
[26:07] that Avery must demonstrate that the
[26:08] Quran claims the entire Bible is
[26:11] preserved, not merely Allah's words in
[26:13] it. To draw that conclusion, he must
[26:16] prove that the Quran states the entire
[26:19] Bible is the word of God, which he will
[26:20] fail to do.
[26:23] In addition to citing a lack of positive
[26:25] evidence for the Bible being the
[26:27] uncorrupted word of God, there is also
[26:30] positive evidence in the Quran that
[26:32] demonstrates previous scriptures have
[26:34] been textually corrupted. Like Quran 279
[26:37] when it says that the people of the book
[26:39] write the book with their own hands and
[26:41] claim it is from God. This is understood
[26:43] as textual corruption, not merely
[26:46] corrupting the meaning of the text.
[26:48] Interpreting this verse, the companion
[26:50] Iban Abbas criticizes Muslims for asking
[26:53] the people of the book about anything
[26:56] because we have the uncorrupted Quran
[26:58] while they have corrupted scriptures
[27:00] with their own hands. Quran 5:13 is
[27:03] another example of the textual
[27:05] corruption of previous scriptures
[27:07] mentioned in the Quran. I can cite other
[27:10] examples from the Quran and authentic a
[27:12] hadith to support this claim, but that
[27:14] should suffice for now.
[27:17] As for the verses typically used
[27:19] regarding the supposed authority of the
[27:21] Bible, which most of this debate is
[27:23] going to focus on, and I'm gonna have to
[27:25] teach Avery his own position, they are
[27:27] numerous. Quran 543-47,
[27:31] 1094, 285, many of which have already
[27:34] heard are some of the verses typically
[27:36] mentioned. Oddly enough, much of the
[27:39] debate typically focuses on the
[27:41] interpretation of these verses. What is
[27:43] meant by authority here? That's what
[27:45] we're going to have to drill down on.
[27:47] The claim is that the Quran asserts that
[27:49] the Bible is an authority for Jews and
[27:52] Christians to follow up until today.
[27:55] However, Avery claims that it's much
[27:57] more than that, even though he just
[27:59] denied it in his opening statement. So,
[28:01] either he forgot or he's lying. Avery
[28:04] claims that the Quran states that even
[28:06] the Prophet Muhammad and all Muslims
[28:08] must follow the Bible as an ongoing
[28:11] authority, including its legal rulings.
[28:13] Now listen to this Avery. I hope you're
[28:15] going to take notes. In a recent debate
[28:17] with Daniel Hakikachu when they
[28:20] discussed Quran 10:94,
[28:23] Daniel asked, and I quote, "If the
[28:26] prophet or someone had a doubt about
[28:28] whether alcohol is prohibited, would
[28:30] they, i.e. the Muslims, have to go to
[28:33] the Bible and see, okay, is alcohol
[28:36] prohibited?" And then based off of that,
[28:39] take whatever the Bible says. Is that
[28:41] what you Avery believe in? Close quote.
[28:44] That's the question from Daniel. Avery
[28:46] responded by saying, and I quote, "Okay,
[28:50] matter of fact, let me just answer you
[28:52] fully. Yes, I do. I do believe that,
[28:56] i.e. that whatever the Quran says
[28:59] regarding its legal rulings must match
[29:02] up with the previous scriptures."
[29:06] So Avery claims that according to the
[29:07] Quran 1094 and presumably other verses,
[29:10] Quranic laws must conform to and agree
[29:14] with biblical laws. Now, he's already
[29:16] thrown that out of the window. So maybe
[29:17] he's going to say that he lost his
[29:19] debate to Daniel and that he was lying.
[29:21] I don't know. However, this results in
[29:24] an absurdity that I call Avery's
[29:27] authority absurdity. This forms a
[29:30] dilemma for Avery. According to Quran
[29:32] 10:94, which sets which which set of
[29:35] laws in the Bible are more authoritative
[29:38] for Muslims to follow? The Old
[29:41] Testament, the New Testament, or are
[29:43] they equal? If you claim that they are
[29:45] equally legally authoritative for
[29:47] Muslims to follow, then you get a
[29:49] contradiction because the Old and New
[29:51] Testament laws are not the same as
[29:53] Christians should know, such as dietary
[29:55] restrictions and divorce laws, just to
[29:57] name a few. I'll also demonstrate that
[30:00] this cannot be the Quran's position in
[30:02] just a moment. On the other hand, if you
[30:05] claim that either the Old or New
[30:07] Testament are more authoritative over
[30:09] over the other for Muslims, then you
[30:12] have just conceded the dilemma. How
[30:15] Avery's argument presupposes that the
[30:17] entire Bible is legally binding upon
[30:20] Muslims. Once you say that parts of
[30:23] either the Old or New Testament aren't
[30:26] legally authoritative for Muslims to
[30:28] follow today, according to what Avery
[30:30] said in his debate with Daniel, then you
[30:32] have embraced the Muslim position. You
[30:34] also contradict your own reading of
[30:36] Quran 285 in merely applying some of the
[30:40] laws from the book, but not all of them.
[30:43] As a Christian, the answer most
[30:45] consistent with your theology would be
[30:47] to say that the New Testament is an
[30:49] authority over the Old Testament.
[30:51] Therefore, Muslims should follow the
[30:53] laws in the New Testament. However, as I
[30:56] already stated, this results in only
[30:59] parts of the Bible being authoritative
[31:01] for Muslims and not the entire Bible,
[31:03] which means you've just conceded the
[31:05] debate and the Islamic dilemma. If we
[31:08] can read Quran 1094 as as merely a
[31:11] partial affirmation of the Bible's
[31:13] authority, then we can easily do the
[31:15] same regarding its inspiration and
[31:18] preservation. Welcome to the Muslim
[31:20] position, Avery. I will now provide
[31:24] positive arguments for the Quran being a
[31:27] legal authority over Jews and
[31:29] Christians, just in case he wants to
[31:31] deny and cop out of what he said in the
[31:33] debate with Daniel. Let's look at what
[31:36] in my previous debate I call David's
[31:39] vimme dilemma. Yes, I am here as the
[31:43] Jizia collector today. There won't be
[31:45] communion taken, but there will be Jiza
[31:47] collected. One of David Wood's top three
[31:50] verses of the Quran that he says every
[31:53] Christian must know puts him and Avery
[31:56] in a dilemma. That is Quran 9:29. It
[31:59] says, and I quote, "Fight against those
[32:02] who do not believe in Allah or in the
[32:04] last day, and who do not consider
[32:06] unlawful what Allah and his messenger
[32:08] have made unlawful and who do not adopt
[32:11] the religion of truth, i.e. Islam, from
[32:13] those who were given the scripture.
[32:15] Fight until they give the Jizia
[32:17] willingly while they are humbled." Close
[32:19] quote. According to this verse, Islamic
[32:22] law requires that Jews and Christians
[32:25] pay the Jiza based upon rejecting Islam
[32:28] and not accepting what Allah and his
[32:31] messenger deem prohibited. So if they
[32:33] were able to simply reject Islamic law,
[32:35] there wouldn't be this penalty held upon
[32:37] them. This contradicts Avery's claim
[32:40] about the Torah and the Gospels being
[32:42] complete ongoing legal authorities,
[32:44] whether over Muslims or even over
[32:46] themselves. Why? It's pretty simple.
[32:49] Jiza is part of Islamic law. It is not a
[32:52] legal requirement in the Torah or the
[32:54] Gospels for Jews and Christians to pay a
[32:56] tax of Jiza to Muslims. Therefore, the
[32:59] Quran is obliging Jews and Christians to
[33:01] follow at least one aspect of Islamic
[33:04] law instead of the laws in their own
[33:06] respective scriptures. Notice that one
[33:09] of the reasons for doing so is precisely
[33:11] because Jews and Christians refuse to
[33:14] accept what Allah and his messenger
[33:16] declare unlawful. In other words, they
[33:18] must pay the Jiza because they reject
[33:21] Islamic law. If they were allowed to
[33:23] reject it according to Avery, then it
[33:25] wouldn't make any sense. If the Quran
[33:27] allowed Christians and Jews to rect
[33:29] reject Islamic law and follow their own
[33:31] laws for salvation, then this verse
[33:34] wouldn't make any sense. Okay, as we
[33:38] continue here, Avery has a dilemma.
[33:41] Either this me demand is consistent with
[33:44] his interpretation of authority or it is
[33:46] not. If Avery says this demand is
[33:49] consistent with his claim, then he has
[33:51] conceded the Islamic dilemma is false
[33:54] because it entails that the Torah and
[33:56] the Gospels are merely partly authority
[33:59] authoritative but not entirely. There
[34:01] are aspects of which the Quran is
[34:03] authoritative over the previous
[34:05] scriptures and previous peoples. Well,
[34:07] that's just what the Muslim position is
[34:10] that Avery and David have always
[34:12] criticized. Avery needs to respond to
[34:15] his own argument regarding Quran 285.
[34:18] Are you saying that the Quran says you
[34:20] must only follow parts of your Bible but
[34:23] not all of it? On the other hand, if
[34:25] Avery says that this demand is
[34:27] inconsistent with his claim regarding
[34:29] the Islamic dilemma and ongoing
[34:32] authority, then you have also conceded
[34:34] the Islamic dilemma is false because
[34:36] it's an admission that this verse
[34:38] contradicts your ver interpretation of
[34:40] the Quran.
[34:42] Okay, I'm not a prophet, guys, but I
[34:44] will predict what Avery is going to do.
[34:47] Avery will probably claim that this just
[34:49] means that the Quran is contradicting
[34:51] itself. This means that even if I were
[34:53] to show a verse that verbatim stated,
[34:56] quote, "The original Torah and Injil are
[34:59] no longer fully preserved or
[35:00] authoritative today," Avery would just
[35:03] say, "This doesn't defeat the Islamic
[35:05] dilemma, Jake. What are you crazy?
[35:07] Because it contradicts other verses in
[35:09] the Quran.
[35:12] It's not just this verse that
[35:14] contradicts Avery's claims about ongoing
[35:16] legal authority, which we've already
[35:18] seen him change his position in light of
[35:19] seeing my debate with David, which is
[35:22] that no, the Torah and the Gospel are
[35:24] just legally authoritative for Jews and
[35:27] Christians. But the Quran contradicts
[35:29] that both in 929 and this next set of
[35:31] verses. Quran 757 and 158 says, and I
[35:35] quote, "Those who follow the messenger,
[35:37] the unlettered prophet, whom they find
[35:39] written, i.e. described in what they
[35:41] have of the Torah and the Gospel, who
[35:43] enjoins upon them what is right and
[35:45] prohibits them from what is wrong and
[35:47] makes lawful for them what is good and
[35:49] forbids them from what is evil and
[35:51] relieves them of their burden, the
[35:53] shackles which were upon them. So they
[35:55] who have believed in him, honored him,
[35:57] supported him and followed the light
[35:59] which was sent down with him. It is
[36:01] those who will who will be the
[36:03] successful. Say, "Oh Muhammad, oh
[36:06] mankind," meaning all of you, including
[36:08] you, Avery, indeed I am a messenger of
[36:11] Allah to you all. So believe in Allah
[36:14] and his messenger, the unlettered
[36:16] prophet who believes in Allah and his
[36:18] words, and follow him that you might be
[36:21] rightly guided.
[36:24] These verses make it abundantly clear
[36:26] that the Jews and Christians find the
[36:28] messenger in their scriptures and the
[36:30] prophet himself is the one who
[36:32] determines for them what is lawful and
[36:35] unlawful, not the other way around.
[36:39] One example of the prophet in the Quran
[36:41] abregating certain laws for the people
[36:43] of the book is found in 646.
[36:46] And to those who are Jews, we prohibited
[36:48] every animal of uncloven hoof. And of
[36:50] the cattle and the sheep, we prohibited
[36:52] to them their fat, except what aderes to
[36:54] their backs or the endtrails or what is
[36:57] joined with bone. By that we repaid them
[37:00] for their transgression. And indeed, we
[37:02] are truthful. Close quote. These are
[37:04] dietary restrictions that Allah required
[37:06] the Jews to follow on account of their
[37:09] transgression. This is contrasted with
[37:11] the new dietary laws in the prior verse
[37:14] that only lists pork as forbidden. Quran
[37:18] 16:124 also mentions that change the
[37:21] change in Sabbath laws. Says, and I
[37:23] quote, "The Sabbath was only appointed
[37:26] for those who differed over it." Close
[37:28] quote. The Sabbath was only appointed
[37:30] for a specific group of people. The laws
[37:33] of the Sabbath and those surrounding it
[37:36] are no longer required to be followed.
[37:38] There are plenty more examples of the
[37:40] Quran intentionally abregating laws from
[37:42] previous scriptures, but that should
[37:44] suffice to make the desired point for
[37:46] now.
[37:48] Even before the coming of the prophet
[37:50] Muhammad wasam, parts of the Torah were
[37:53] already no longer authoritative for the
[37:54] Jews. In Quran 350, Jesus says to the
[37:58] Jews, "And I have come confirming what
[37:59] was before me of the Torah and to make
[38:01] lawful for you some of what was
[38:03] forbidden to you. And I have come to you
[38:05] with a sign from your Lord. So fear
[38:07] Allah and obey me. Close quote. In this
[38:10] verse, Jesus is making lawful for the
[38:12] Jews some of what was previously
[38:14] forbidden for them. This means some of
[38:16] the laws of the Torah were no longer
[38:18] authoritative for the Jews to follow
[38:20] during Jesus's time. How could the Quran
[38:22] require the Jews to follow all of the
[38:25] Torah during the prophet Muhammad's time
[38:27] if it acknowledges it already abregated
[38:29] laws from the Torah prior to his coming?
[38:32] Avery's response results in the
[38:34] absurdity that the Quran contradicts
[38:36] itself when it tells believers to follow
[38:39] the entire Quran while at the same time
[38:41] it abrogates certain verses within it.
[38:43] The Quran initially allowed drinking
[38:45] alcohol and later prohibited it. How
[38:47] could we follow the entire Quran if some
[38:49] verses allowed drinking alcohol while
[38:51] others prohibited it? Let's look at some
[38:54] biblical examples. Mark 2:7 says that
[38:57] only God can forgive sins, but John
[38:58] 20:23 says that humans forgive sins.
[39:01] That's a contradiction. Or even worse,
[39:03] this demonstrates that the apostles are
[39:05] themselves gods. A more serious dilemma
[39:08] would be Matthew 23:1-3,
[39:11] where Jesus commands people to practice
[39:13] everything that the Pharisees tell them.
[39:15] However, Jesus also disagrees how the
[39:17] Pharisees apply certain laws like
[39:19] divorce and dietary restrictions.
[39:21] Another contradiction. Or maybe when
[39:24] Jesus said you should follow everything
[39:26] that the Pharisees tell you, he didn't
[39:28] really mean everything, did he, Avery?
[39:30] Another dilemma. Avery's interpretation
[39:33] results in a ridiculously uncharitable
[39:36] reading of the Quran that entails that
[39:38] the author of the Quran constantly
[39:40] contradicts himself, even within the
[39:42] same sentence. Nobody should take such
[39:45] reading seriously. The Quran doesn't
[39:47] blatantly contradict itself if we read
[39:49] it fairly in context. I invite you all
[39:52] to do the same. Thank you very much.
[40:01] >> All right. Now, we'll be entering our
[40:03] rebuttal portion of this debate. Avery,
[40:05] your backup for your rebuttal.
[40:17] >> Testing, testing, testing. All right,
[40:18] here we go. All right. What did I tell
[40:22] y'all, man? He said, "This is the Muslim
[40:26] position. We know, Jake. It's not the
[40:28] Quran's position. What you're giving us
[40:31] is not what Allah gives us. Like, I told
[40:33] you what was going to happen." Now, I
[40:35] know you say that you're not a prophet.
[40:36] Well, that was very clear. I'm not a
[40:38] prophet either, but I'm really good at
[40:39] predicting my opponent's moves. That's
[40:41] what's, you know, makes me the chef. So
[40:43] unfortunately for you, you ended up
[40:45] quoting uh uh Iban Abbas and who says
[40:49] that you know who says you know you
[40:51] shouldn't go and ask the people of the
[40:53] book anything because they've distorted
[40:55] their scriptures. So then whose team are
[40:58] we on guys? Team Allah or team Ian Abbas
[41:00] because Allah says if you are in doubt
[41:04] do what? Go and ask those who've been
[41:08] reading the scripture before you. David
[41:10] Abbas says don't go ask them. Allah says
[41:14] go and ask them. I think I'm going to go
[41:16] ahead and listen to Allah, ladies and
[41:17] gentlemen. But let's let's be
[41:19] charitable, right? Let's let's have a
[41:21] charitable reading of because I don't
[41:23] think he's doing Ibn Abbas a good favor
[41:25] here. Um let me read what Ibn Abbas says
[41:27] elsewhere when he uh gives a a
[41:29] commentary here in uh chapter 378. Ibn
[41:32] Abbas um is quoted by Bkari and this is
[41:35] what he says here. It says Bkari
[41:39] reported this is there's taps here
[41:40] quoting Bkari. Bkari reported that Ibn
[41:43] Abbas said that the ayah means the verse
[41:46] means that they alter and add although
[41:50] none among Allah's creation can remove
[41:55] words from Allah's books.
[41:58] He says they can remove them from
[42:00] Allah's books. Iban Abbas in another
[42:02] place I guess contradicts himself and
[42:04] says none can remove them from Allah's
[42:06] books. But what does he say? How do how
[42:08] do they distort? How do they uh corrupt?
[42:11] This is what he says. They alter and
[42:13] distort their apparent meanings.
[42:17] [snorts] So they are verbally lying on
[42:19] the scripture, misinterpreting and
[42:21] misrepresenting the scripture. So if I
[42:23] was to be charitable to Ibn Abbas, I
[42:25] would harmonize those two together and
[42:27] say when he says don't go and ask them
[42:29] about anything about their books because
[42:31] they could be lying because they
[42:32] distorted and corrupted their book and
[42:34] wrote something with their own hands. I
[42:35] would say that what Iban Abbas means
[42:37] when he says they distorted their
[42:39] scriptures is that they distort their
[42:40] apparent meanings, not the actual text
[42:43] because none can remove the words from
[42:44] Allah's books according to Ibn Abbas. So
[42:47] either he's contradicting himself or
[42:49] we'll be charitable and go ahead and
[42:51] harmonize what I says. Okay. So that's
[42:54] the that's the that's the first point.
[42:55] Here's the second thing. He said we
[42:58] believe in the original scriptures. We
[43:01] believe in the original revelation that
[43:04] was given to them. Okay? He hit us with
[43:05] the we believe rant, y'all. So this is
[43:07] what I like to give. Um this is what I
[43:10] like to give him when it comes to the we
[43:12] believe chant in chapter 20 uh 29. This
[43:14] is what it says, y'all. Chapter 29:46 it
[43:17] says, "Dispute not with the people of
[43:20] the book. Save except in the fairer
[43:24] manner except for those of them that do
[43:26] wrong and say,"This is what you say when
[43:29] you're disputing with the Jews and
[43:31] Christians." Say, "We believe in what
[43:34] has been sent down to us and what has
[43:38] been sent down to you." Uhoh. So, hold
[43:41] on a second. So, if you're only supposed
[43:43] to, according to Jake, believe in some
[43:45] of what we have, well, then does that
[43:47] mean that you're only supposed to
[43:48] believe in some of the Quran, too?
[43:51] Because once again, if the Quran puts
[43:54] the Quran and our scriptures on the same
[43:58] level, the same way you believe in the
[44:00] Quran, you believe in our scriptures. We
[44:03] believe in what was revealed to us and
[44:06] what has been revealed to you. So you
[44:08] can't be believing in part of the
[44:09] scripture or else you're going to get in
[44:12] trouble. You got to believe in part of
[44:13] the Quran as well. I guess according to
[44:15] Jake. Now again guys, what did I say?
[44:18] He's going to go ahead give the Muslim
[44:20] position. We give the Quran. We gave an
[44:23] explicit verse that says that you're not
[44:26] allowed to pick and choose what part of
[44:29] the scripture you believe in and the
[44:31] parts of the scripture you reject. But
[44:33] what Jake would have us say is, "No, you
[44:35] actually can believe in part of the
[44:37] scripture and reject other parts."
[44:40] Chapter 2:85.
[44:42] Do you believe in some of the scripture
[44:44] and reject the rest? Those who do so
[44:47] among you are disgraced in this life and
[44:49] in the hereafter, they're going to go to
[44:51] hell. I'm going just have that that
[44:53] verse on replay for the rest of the
[44:54] debate because I need a verse that says
[44:56] otherwise, Jake. I need a verse that
[44:59] says that actually you can pick and
[45:01] choose what you believe in. and Allah is
[45:02] going to send you to heaven for that.
[45:04] That's what I need. I need the opposite
[45:05] or or give me something to work with,
[45:07] dude. Now, he also misrepresented me in
[45:09] my in my debate with Jake. I'm uh I'm
[45:11] sorry, with Daniel. When Daniel was
[45:13] cornered by 1094 when he had nowhere
[45:15] else to go, he was like, "Okay, then
[45:17] fine. Okay, so then are you saying then
[45:19] do you believe that if we're in doubt,
[45:22] if the Muslims are in doubt on whether
[45:24] or not alcohol is forbidden and or or if
[45:27] it's allowed that they should go and ask
[45:29] the people of the scripture?" I said yes
[45:31] according to what the verse is saying.
[45:32] This is if they're in doubt about what
[45:34] the Quran is saying. Not saying that
[45:36] every ruling of the of the Bible is
[45:40] binding on the Muslims. However, if
[45:42] they're in doubt about what the Quran is
[45:44] saying, they can go get some insight and
[45:46] some light from the previous scriptures.
[45:48] That's what the Quran is saying. So,
[45:49] please don't straw man my position
[45:51] again. Please don't misrepresent me
[45:53] because then I got to teach you my
[45:54] position and teach you yours and teach
[45:56] you all laws. And we're just doing a lot
[45:57] of teaching, you know. So let's see what
[46:00] else he said. Now um he also threw out
[46:03] um went to to Matthew 23 talks about
[46:06] this uh oh no not Matthew 23 sorry this
[46:08] demi dilemma uh where he says that
[46:11] according to 9:29 uh it is a it is
[46:14] incumbent upon us to pay the Jizia that
[46:16] the Quran is forcing the Jiza upon us as
[46:20] Jews and Christians. Well, you're
[46:21] absolutely right about that. The Quran
[46:23] does calls for the subjugation,
[46:26] humiliation, and the violent fighting of
[46:28] those who disbelieve among the Jews and
[46:30] Christians. Thank you for bringing that
[46:31] verse up, by the way. But unfortunately
[46:33] for you, Jake, we agree that the Quran
[46:37] enforces this Jizia law on on the on the
[46:40] Jews and Christians, this Islamic law.
[46:42] But according to the Quran, is the Torah
[46:44] part of Islam? Yes. Is the Gospel part
[46:48] of Islam? Yes. So the Torah and the
[46:50] Gospel are Islamic law according to the
[46:52] Quran. Yes. So of course we're following
[46:55] Islamic law. Just because you're
[46:56] bringing me an Islamic law that's been
[46:58] in the Quran being forced on me does
[47:00] nothing to the Islamic dilemma. We're
[47:02] not arguing that the that that the uh
[47:05] the Muslims have to follow every single
[47:08] law that's in the Torah or the Gospel. I
[47:10] told you guys he doesn't know what the
[47:11] dilemma is, which is why it's going to
[47:13] be tough. So, in order for you to
[47:15] actually have a good debate with my
[47:17] position, learn the dilemma first. We're
[47:19] not saying that you have to follow every
[47:22] law within the Bible. What you have to
[47:25] believe though is that the scriptures
[47:27] are true. They're authoritative as the
[47:29] standard of truth. They're legally
[47:31] binding on the Jews and Christians, but
[47:34] not on the Muslims particularly. Now,
[47:36] when it comes to the Jiza, do we have to
[47:38] uh to to pay the Jizia? Yes. But does
[47:40] this mean that the scriptures are
[47:42] corrupted? No. Does this mean that they
[47:45] didn't have access to the Torah and
[47:46] Gospel? No. What this means is is
[47:48] because they rejected Muhammad, because
[47:51] they chose not to follow the Quran and
[47:53] follow Muhammad as a prophet, now they
[47:54] have to because of this, they have to uh
[47:57] they have to adhere to their scriptures,
[47:59] follow their scriptures, but pay the
[48:01] Jiza as well on top of that. Thank you.
[48:10] All right, Jay Bantella is up for his
[48:13] eight minute.
[48:28] Okay, testing.
[48:30] All right, so guys, we just saw that I
[48:33] collected my first Jizia from Avery.
[48:36] Thank you very much. He said that he's
[48:38] willing to pay the Jiza to the Muslims,
[48:40] but it's it's quite shocking to me that
[48:44] he openly lied regarding his debate with
[48:48] Daniel. So he claims that uh in that
[48:51] context he's just merely saying right
[48:55] that if the Muslims have any doubt they
[48:58] can kind of go and look and see what the
[49:00] Bible says and uh check what it says
[49:03] about alcohol being prohibited or not
[49:05] but they don't have to follow it. But
[49:07] that's not what he said in his debate
[49:10] with Daniel. I quoted it earlier and I'm
[49:12] going to quote it here again in just a
[49:15] second. So he said, okay, one second
[49:19] here. I just don't want to misquote him
[49:20] here. So he said, Daniel asked him,
[49:23] quote, if the prophet or someone had a
[49:26] doubt about whether alcohol is
[49:28] prohibited, would they, the Muslims,
[49:30] have to go to the Bible and see, okay,
[49:33] is alcohol prohibited? And then based
[49:35] off of that, take whatever the Bible
[49:38] says. Is that what you believe in,
[49:40] Avery? That is a direct question. Your
[49:43] answer was okay. Matter of fact, let me
[49:46] just answer you fully. Yes, I do. Yes, I
[49:49] believe that. So, you can RETRACT IT,
[49:51] BUT YOU'RE the one who doesn't know your
[49:53] own position and you don't understand
[49:55] what the Islamic dilemma is. But I'm
[49:57] here to teach you. Don't worry. Have no
[49:59] fear. Even if even if we granted him and
[50:02] he said, "Oh, no. I'm backing off, Jake.
[50:05] I went too far with Quran 1094. I went
[50:08] too far with that. I'm going to take a
[50:10] more modest position. I'm going to say
[50:13] that according to the Quran, Jews and
[50:16] Christians must follow their own
[50:20] scriptures, the Torah and the Gospels,
[50:22] and they are legal authorities over them
[50:25] as different groups. Well, the vimeie
[50:27] dilemma takes care of that because what
[50:30] it shows is at least from a Quranic and
[50:33] Islamic paradigm is it views our
[50:36] scriptures as authorities over the Jews
[50:40] and Christians. It doesn't say that you
[50:42] can just follow your own laws and you
[50:44] don't actually have to follow the
[50:45] prophet Muhammad peace be upon him for
[50:47] salvation. No, the Quran is abundantly
[50:50] clear. There are literally dozens and
[50:52] dozens of verses of the Quran requiring
[50:56] Jews and Christians to believe in the
[50:58] Quran, to follow the prophet, to follow
[51:01] the laws that he brought. You're not
[51:02] allowed to follow your own laws. And
[51:04] what the dilemma shows is that since you
[51:08] don't have that law in your Bible
[51:11] requiring you to pay a tax to the
[51:13] non-Muslims, that is from our law and it
[51:17] is being made upon you that you MUST
[51:21] FOLLOW IT. WELL, I thought the Quran was
[51:23] okay with just letting you follow your
[51:25] own laws and that there was no
[51:27] punishment for that. No, you have to
[51:30] follow an aspect of Islamic law, which
[51:32] is the Jizia. One hole in the balloon
[51:35] and the entire balloon pops. Your
[51:37] balloon has been popped, Avery. Thank
[51:39] you for the Jizia. They're going to
[51:40] start calling me the Jiza collector
[51:42] after this. I'm no longer going to be
[51:44] known as the Muslim metaphysician. Thank
[51:46] you very much. Now, besides that, I
[51:49] showed you from Quran 6146
[51:53] where it mentions what was prohibited
[51:55] for the Jews on account of their
[51:57] transgression. It contrasts that with
[52:00] what the Islamic dietary restrictions
[52:03] are, which is only pork in terms of what
[52:05] animal we're not supposed to eat. So,
[52:08] how do you explain that? You can't
[52:10] appeal to unintentional disagreements.
[52:13] That's why I think my argument, thank
[52:15] you very much, is superior to the uh
[52:18] intentional edits argument which I also
[52:20] brought forward. Okay, it's better
[52:23] because you can't say it's
[52:24] unintentional. You can't say that the
[52:26] disagreement or difference is
[52:28] unintentional. Why? Because Allah in the
[52:31] Quran is actually citing their laws and
[52:34] saying that it disagrees with them and
[52:37] it's requiring them, the Jews and the
[52:39] Christians, to follow Islamic law.
[52:42] That's why I know it's it's hard on the
[52:44] musher, but it's going to be all right,
[52:45] bro. You'll be you'll be okay. Trust me,
[52:48] you're going to learn something out of
[52:49] this. And all of the other Christians
[52:51] are going to learn about the Islamic
[52:52] dilemma as well. His own friend, David
[52:55] Wood, after getting thrashed on this
[52:57] aspect, said, "Well, you know what,
[52:59] Jake? We could just throw authority out
[53:02] of the mix. We could just remove
[53:04] authority and say, "No, no, no. We're
[53:06] just going to run the Islamic dilemma
[53:08] off of inspiration and preservation."
[53:10] I'll admit you could do that, but it
[53:12] would be a massive, massive concession.
[53:15] Why? Because you've been using the
[53:17] authority part, David Wood, and others.
[53:20] You're new in the game, but they've been
[53:21] doing it a lot longer for 20 plus years.
[53:24] They've been running the same argument,
[53:26] saying that the Quran allows them, the
[53:30] Jews and the Christians, to follow their
[53:31] own scriptures for legal authorities.
[53:33] That the Quran is not legally an
[53:35] authority over and binding upon them.
[53:38] ONCE YOU ADMIT THAT you're wrong about
[53:40] that, 543 44 45 46 47 48 568 1094 YOUR
[53:48] FAVORITE 285 ALL OF THESE different
[53:51] verses which are typically quoted in
[53:54] support of the authority section for
[53:56] Christians with the Islamic dilemma go
[53:59] out the window. So Avery, maybe you want
[54:01] to do that. I don't know. But David Wood
[54:04] was actually hypothesizing that and
[54:06] said, "You know what? Maybe we should
[54:07] actually remove the authority part."
[54:09] Why? Because Jake has completely busted
[54:13] their entire argument, shown that
[54:15] Islamic law and the Quran are actually a
[54:18] legal authority over Jews and Christians
[54:20] and their scriptures. And in that case,
[54:23] all of those verses, your favorite
[54:26] verses in Ma 5:es 43-48 about judging by
[54:31] as a legal authority over for the Jews
[54:35] and Christians, that's gone. Now, now
[54:37] once you admit that in 1094 is gone and
[54:40] 285, your beloved f one of your favorite
[54:42] texts, that is a massive admission. And
[54:46] I'm not going to let go on this point.
[54:48] Why? Because from my pos position, I
[54:51] think the most clear the most clear
[54:54] thing regarding this debate is that the
[54:57] Quran views itself as a legally binding
[55:01] authority over Jews, Christians and
[55:03] non-M Muslims uh in in the greater
[55:06] context and requires them to follow our
[55:10] prophet, his laws and our scriptures
[55:13] that we've come with basically regarding
[55:16] authority in the Islamic dilemma. It's a
[55:18] debate over whether or not the Quran
[55:20] teaches perennialism. If you don't know
[55:22] what perennialism is, it's the idea that
[55:25] there could be other religions and other
[55:27] pathways to God and they can be followed
[55:30] in order to have salvation. But guess
[55:33] what? That's not what the Quran teaches.
[55:36] Avery backed away from his more
[55:39] ridiculous claim that Muslims must
[55:41] follow the Torah and Injeal, which forms
[55:44] his own uh absurd dilemma for legal
[55:47] authority. But even if we grant him that
[55:49] and say no no no Quran is saying that
[55:51] the Jews and Christians each follow
[55:53] their own respective scriptures and yet
[55:55] they can still have salvation. This is
[55:57] basically perennialism and your claim is
[56:00] that or at least entails that the Quran
[56:04] teaches perennialism. Now what's clearer
[56:06] from my perspective? This is something I
[56:08] will actually admit. I don't have a
[56:10] problem saying this. I believe that the
[56:12] Quran does teach textual corruption of
[56:15] the previous scriptures. But I think
[56:16] it's even more clear and more abundant
[56:19] in terms of the number of verses and
[56:22] clarity that come along with it that the
[56:24] Jews and Christians must follow Islam,
[56:27] must follow the Quran and the prophet
[56:29] Muhammad in order to have salvation.
[56:31] Avery cannot deal with those points and
[56:34] that's why I've had to come and collect
[56:35] my Jizia. Thank you very much.
[56:37] >> That's time. Thank you so much.
[56:42] All right, we are about to enter the
[56:45] fire round of cross examination. So,
[56:47] this should be fun. Uh, both of these
[56:49] guys put on a great show so far. Uh,
[56:51] this cross-examination will be a total
[56:52] of 40 minutes. Uh, both parties will get
[56:54] 20 minutes each to ask questions. And,
[56:58] uh, before we start the cross text, I
[56:59] want to remind everyone once again, uh,
[57:01] we do have index cards back there. Uh,
[57:04] and if you want to, if you have a
[57:05] question, write that question down, get
[57:08] it in the little basket back there, and
[57:09] so we can have a a fantastic Q&A at the
[57:12] end of this debate. Uh, with that said,
[57:14] Avery, you're up first for your
[57:16] 20-minute cross-examination of Jake. And
[57:18] I'll start your time as soon as you
[57:19] begin to ask your first question.
[57:23] >> Testing, testing, testing, testing.
[57:25] Thank you. Appreciate it. Uh, Jake, you
[57:29] believe that Jesus is going to come
[57:30] back, right?
[57:31] >> Yes.
[57:33] Okay. Uh what's he going to do? Give us
[57:35] a couple descriptions if you can.
[57:37] >> Uh there are numerous hadith about it. I
[57:40] don't know what have you have in mind
[57:41] specifically but he's going to come and
[57:44] the different hadiths speak about him
[57:46] breaking the cross killing the pigs
[57:49] which is symbolic of actually uh the
[57:52] fact that Jews and Christians um sorry
[57:55] Christians are actually not properly
[57:57] following the correct law and they're
[57:59] eating pig and they're essentially
[58:02] worshiping the cross but that's one
[58:03] aspect and he's going to come under the
[58:06] Sharia under the laws of the prophet
[58:09] Muhammad and call people to guidance.
[58:11] >> Awesome. Um, you missed one. Um, what's
[58:14] he going to do about [clears throat] the
[58:15] Jiza?
[58:16] >> Sorry.
[58:16] >> What's he going to do about the Jizia?
[58:18] >> The Jizia at that time will no longer be
[58:21] valid because of the fact,
[58:23] >> let me let me finish. The Jizia the Jiza
[58:25] at that particular moment in time will
[58:27] no longer be valid because of the fact
[58:30] that the it's too late and the people
[58:33] either accept Islam or they don't. Those
[58:35] are the only two options at that point.
[58:36] So you agree that Jesus is going to be
[58:38] the one that abolishes the law of Jizia?
[58:41] >> No.
[58:42] >> No. Jesus Jesus is going to come and at
[58:45] the time when he comes because it's the
[58:47] end times, the Jiza is no longer
[58:50] applicable. That doesn't help with your
[58:52] Islamic dilemma. You got to try harder,
[58:53] bro.
[58:53] >> I'm going to ask you one last time. I'm
[58:54] going to give you a chance before I
[58:56] bring this up. Yeah. Go ahead.
[58:57] >> Is Jes according to the hadith, does
[58:59] Jesus abolish the Jizia? Yes, sir.
[59:01] >> No. It's Allah who abolishes the Jiza.
[59:04] It's Allah who abolishes the Jiza and
[59:07] Jesus is sent as a prophet. We don't
[59:10] believe that the prophet Jesus is making
[59:12] his own laws independent of Allah. Thank
[59:15] you.
[59:16] >> Okay, I got you. So, we're going to go
[59:17] to the hadith really quick and I want to
[59:19] just bring this up for you because you
[59:21] said according to the Hadith, Jesus is
[59:24] not the one who is abolishing the Jiza.
[59:27] So
[59:28] >> I said that prophets I said that
[59:30] prophets when they bring laws they are
[59:32] receiving revelation from God and based
[59:35] upon that that's the laws that they're
[59:36] bringing.
[59:37] >> I got you. So I'm going to ask it again.
[59:38] Does
[59:39] >> it does Jesus abolish the Jizia? Yes or
[59:43] no?
[59:43] >> I already answered that. I said that the
[59:46] prophet Jesus and all prophets receive
[59:48] revelation and based upon that they
[59:51] bring laws. But even if even if you
[59:53] wanted to say that Jesus came and
[59:56] independently
[59:57] abolished a Jiza, that would not help
[59:59] you at all whatsoever in the Islamic
[01:00:01] dilemma. Okay, here's Sahib Bukari 2476.
[01:00:04] This is one of many, ladies and
[01:00:05] gentlemen. It says, and I'm going to ask
[01:00:06] this in the question narrated Abu
[01:00:08] Herrera. Allah's apostle said, "The hour
[01:00:10] will not be established until the son of
[01:00:12] Mary descends amongst you as a just
[01:00:15] ruler. He will break the cross, kill the
[01:00:18] pigs, and abolish the jizzy attacks.
[01:00:22] >> Yeah, exactly.
[01:00:22] >> So, does the law that Jesus when Jesus
[01:00:25] is coming, is he, according to what I
[01:00:28] just read, going to abolish the jizzy
[01:00:31] attacks?
[01:00:32] >> As I said, he is doing it based upon
[01:00:35] revelation. So, he is doing it.
[01:00:36] >> He's doing it based upon revelation. And
[01:00:40] that doesn't change anything. You have
[01:00:42] to establish.
[01:00:43] >> I bet it doesn't. We just getting
[01:00:45] started, man.
[01:00:46] point. You have to explain how it
[01:00:47] changes anything related to the Islamic
[01:00:49] dilemma.
[01:00:49] >> We're going to but this is you haven't
[01:00:50] shown anything.
[01:00:51] >> The point is your your argument does not
[01:00:53] touch the Islamic dilemma. But I'm
[01:00:54] obliging. Okay. We're going to see.
[01:00:56] Okay. We're going to see. So Okay. We're
[01:00:57] going to get busted up.
[01:00:58] >> Okay. Okay. Cool. So according to you,
[01:00:59] this is a slow this is a slow
[01:01:01] >> slow simmer. Exactly. IT'S SIMMERING TOO
[01:01:04] SLOW. WE DON'T EVEN know this is.
[01:01:05] >> So according to you according to you
[01:01:07] smell you just contradicted yourself. I
[01:01:09] didn't you contradicted yourself. I know
[01:01:10] you're slow but Hold on. Hold on. Let me
[01:01:12] >> ask a question. BRO JUST TALKING. AND
[01:01:14] YOU HAVE TO ASK.
[01:01:14] >> All right, guys. Guys, guys, guys, guys.
[01:01:16] All right, ask a question.
[01:01:17] >> Come on now. Get the question out,
[01:01:18] Avery. Let's go.
[01:01:19] >> All right. So, according to what you
[01:01:21] just said, you contradicted yourself and
[01:01:22] said that Jesus does pay the uh does
[01:01:25] abolish the Jizia tax through revelation
[01:01:27] that God gives him. Okay,
[01:01:28] >> I said that from the beginning. Where's
[01:01:30] the contradiction?
[01:01:30] >> So, here's my question. Here's my Well,
[01:01:32] we we mind the tape.
[01:01:34] >> Exactly. I said it from the beginning.
[01:01:35] >> Here's my question. Okay. So when Jesus
[01:01:37] comes and abolishes the jizzy attacks,
[01:01:40] does that mean that his revelation is an
[01:01:42] authority over the Quran?
[01:01:44] >> NO.
[01:01:45] >> OH. SO, SO uh uh by bringing a new law
[01:01:49] or abregating a law in the previous
[01:01:51] revelation does not mean that this new
[01:01:54] revelation is now an authority over the
[01:01:55] previous.
[01:01:56] >> No. Because this was foretold since the
[01:01:58] beginning. The hadith that's mentioned
[01:02:01] over the hadith that's mentioned. Yeah.
[01:02:02] It's over for you because you don't you
[01:02:04] still don't understand your own
[01:02:06] argument. It's so pathetic. It's so
[01:02:08] pathetic.
[01:02:09] >> Jesus get the book out for you.
[01:02:11] >> Jesus Yeah. Jesus is receiving
[01:02:14] revelation. Jesus is receiving
[01:02:17] revelation. And at that time, the Jizia
[01:02:20] is no longer prescribed. It's no longer
[01:02:23] an option for humanity to actually take.
[01:02:26] That's the point.
[01:02:27] >> Got it. So, just to make sure I got it
[01:02:29] all down. What's the
[01:02:30] >> Yeah, get it all down. Go ahead.
[01:02:31] >> All right. So, we got that. Uh,
[01:02:34] >> can we get a question here? Are we going
[01:02:35] to get a question?
[01:02:37] >> Let's let's get a question. A, let's get
[01:02:38] a question.
[01:02:38] >> All right. Thank you. All right. So, it
[01:02:39] looks like we got rid of the the whole
[01:02:41] authority type of thing and Jizia uh
[01:02:43] dilemma.
[01:02:44] >> No, we haven't.
[01:02:44] >> So, my my my question is this now. Um,
[01:02:46] according to chapter 3:81, you agree
[01:02:48] that Allah [snorts] made a covenant with
[01:02:50] the prophets, right?
[01:02:51] >> Yeah.
[01:02:52] >> And the covenant was that he has given
[01:02:54] them a book and has given them wisdom.
[01:02:57] And um on Allah's end of the bargain,
[01:03:00] he's going to send a messenger that
[01:03:01] confirms what they have. Correct.
[01:03:03] >> Uh I don't have it up before me. Uh I'm
[01:03:06] just pulling it up now.
[01:03:07] >> You don't memorize it? You don't
[01:03:08] memorize?
[01:03:08] >> No, I don't have the entire Quran
[01:03:09] memorized. Do you?
[01:03:10] >> Oh, another one that doesn't memorize
[01:03:11] it.
[01:03:12] >> Do you?
[01:03:12] >> I don't think so.
[01:03:14] >> Uh yeah. It says, "And recall of the
[01:03:16] prophets when Allah took the covenant of
[01:03:17] the prophet saying, "Whatever I give you
[01:03:19] of the scripture and wisdom, and then
[01:03:21] there comes to a messenger confirming
[01:03:22] what is with you, you must believe in
[01:03:24] him and support him." Allah said, "Have
[01:03:26] you acknowledged and taken upon my co
[01:03:28] commitment?" They said, "We have
[01:03:30] acknowledged it." He said, "Then bear
[01:03:31] witness and I am with you among the
[01:03:33] witnesses."
[01:03:34] >> So the Allah's end of the bargain is to
[01:03:36] send a messenger that confirms what they
[01:03:38] have. Correct.
[01:03:38] >> Right. And you must including you, the
[01:03:40] people of the book, must believe in him
[01:03:43] and support him.
[01:03:44] >> Very good. How do they recognize this
[01:03:45] messenger?
[01:03:46] >> In their scriptures and based upon one
[01:03:48] way is based upon their scriptures. And
[01:03:50] there's also independent evidence in
[01:03:52] terms of miracles, prophecies, and other
[01:03:55] things.
[01:03:55] >> In the course of the covenant, how do
[01:03:56] they recognize it? Please. It's right in
[01:03:58] there in the verse. You just read it.
[01:03:59] >> Yeah. It says, "Whatever I give you of
[01:04:01] the scripture and wisdom, and then there
[01:04:02] comes to a messenger confirming what is
[01:04:04] with you. You must believe in him and
[01:04:06] support him." Show me in the verse where
[01:04:08] it actually says, "That's the reason
[01:04:09] why."
[01:04:10] >> That's not supposed to be your
[01:04:11] >> Exactly. you you It's not there.
[01:04:13] >> So, hold on a second. So, according to
[01:04:15] the to the verse, the messenger is going
[01:04:17] to come confirming what they have.
[01:04:19] Correct. Exactly. Confirming what is
[01:04:21] with you.
[01:04:21] >> I got you. So now and as a result
[01:04:24] they're supposed to believe in him and
[01:04:25] support him. Correct.
[01:04:27] >> That's part of it. Yep.
[01:04:28] >> Okay. So if a messenger comes and
[01:04:30] contradicts what they have, will they
[01:04:32] have grounds to judge that messenger as
[01:04:34] a false messenger?
[01:04:36] >> Uh the people of the book.
[01:04:37] >> Yes. The people the
[01:04:39] >> people the people of the book if they
[01:04:41] have genuine scripture that disagrees
[01:04:43] with what what a uh prophet after them
[01:04:46] comes with then yes. According to the to
[01:04:48] 381, do they have the genuine scripture?
[01:04:50] >> No, they do not.
[01:04:51] >> So they're they do not.
[01:04:53] >> So I got you. So according to the
[01:04:54] scripture [laughter]
[01:04:56] according to chapter
[01:04:57] >> I know you got to laugh because you
[01:04:58] don't have question. I'm just trying to
[01:04:59] get questions. So according to chapter 3
[01:05:01] verse 81, Allah is sending a messenger
[01:05:03] to confirm corrupted books.
[01:05:05] >> No, he's confirm he's coming to actually
[01:05:08] as the bring the foran which
[01:05:10] distinguishes what is in them.
[01:05:12] >> Why does it say bring the foran? What
[01:05:14] >> where does it say bring the forkan
[01:05:15] there? It's mentioned all throughout the
[01:05:17] Quran.
[01:05:17] >> Okay. Well, it says the Torah forces.
[01:05:19] Who cares? I'm talking about this verse
[01:05:20] right here, Jake. According to the
[01:05:22] verse, he's supposed to confirm. It
[01:05:23] means it means that it is something
[01:05:26] which distinguishes between truth and
[01:05:28] falsehood,
[01:05:29] >> which the Quran says the Torah is.
[01:05:31] That's what the Quran is actually doing.
[01:05:33] It's distinguishing between truth and
[01:05:36] falsehood over the previous scriptures.
[01:05:38] >> That's not my question though because
[01:05:39] no, the Quran doesn't say that. But it
[01:05:40] says the Torah is the criterion in the
[01:05:42] foran as well that also decides what's
[01:05:44] true and what's false, what's right and
[01:05:45] what's wrong as well. That's chapter
[01:05:46] 21:48. My question about this verse is
[01:05:50] according to this verse, it says that
[01:05:52] the messenger is going to come
[01:05:54] confirming what they have. Does that
[01:05:56] mean that what they have is true
[01:05:58] scripture?
[01:05:59] >> Not all of it. No.
[01:06:00] >> So then he's going to be confirming
[01:06:02] corrupted books.
[01:06:03] >> No. He's going to be confirming he's
[01:06:05] going to be confirming what is correct
[01:06:07] and he's going to be disagreeing with
[01:06:08] what what is incorrect as he explicitly
[01:06:11] does all throughout the Quran.
[01:06:12] >> I got you. Okay. So, in chapter 3 81
[01:06:15] when it says that there that they're
[01:06:17] going to he's going to come and he's
[01:06:19] going to confirm what's with them.
[01:06:20] You're saying that what's with them is
[01:06:22] partially true and partially uh
[01:06:25] corrupted. Is that right? Just as Quran
[01:06:26] 350 says that Isaam or Jesus is going to
[01:06:30] come and confirm the Torah while at the
[01:06:33] same time he actually abregates laws
[01:06:36] from it. So it's not a total
[01:06:38] confirmation in the way that you
[01:06:40] imagine.
[01:06:40] >> I got you. So when the Quran you you
[01:06:42] agree that the Quran abrogates itself,
[01:06:44] correct?
[01:06:44] >> Uh yeah, in certain circumstances.
[01:06:46] >> Okay. And so in circumstances when the
[01:06:48] Quran abrogates that guys, abrogation
[01:06:50] means when the Quran is bringing a a new
[01:06:52] law or something else to substitute
[01:06:54] another verse. So when the Quran comes
[01:06:56] and abregates its own verses, is the
[01:06:59] Quran saying that the Quran is partially
[01:07:00] true and partially false?
[01:07:02] >> No, it's saying that it's saying that
[01:07:04] it's partially authoritative. It's not
[01:07:05] fully authority.
[01:07:06] >> I got you. So there's some verses.
[01:07:08] >> Check the argument, buddy.
[01:07:10] >> You're not tracking the argument.
[01:07:11] >> So So according So according to even
[01:07:13] abrogation, it's still affirming that
[01:07:16] the entire thing is true. Correct.
[01:07:17] >> It could be true, but laws from it can
[01:07:20] be abregated, which you haven't dealt
[01:07:22] with at all.
[01:07:23] >> Oh yeah, I got you. So things can be
[01:07:25] true the even though certain laws are
[01:07:27] not binding anymore. Correct.
[01:07:29] >> Yes.
[01:07:30] >> So just because abrogation comes doesn't
[01:07:33] mean that what what is being abregated
[01:07:35] is false or corrupted. Correct.
[01:07:36] >> And I never said that. That meant THAT
[01:07:38] >> THAT'S WHAT YOU ARGUE. NEVER SAID THAT.
[01:07:41] What are we doing?
[01:07:41] >> I KNOW YOU'RE A LITTLE BIT SLOW, BRO,
[01:07:43] BUT YOU'RE going to catch us by the end
[01:07:44] of it.
[01:07:45] >> Allah give me
[01:07:46] I know
[01:07:47] >> you can't catch on. When did I ever say
[01:07:50] that abrogation equaled corruption?
[01:07:53] never said that.
[01:07:54] >> I got you. So, so
[01:07:55] >> I know you're slow, but David and Shimon
[01:07:56] are too. They can't catch up.
[01:07:58] >> You gonna have to watch your clip back
[01:07:59] after.
[01:07:59] >> Yeah, you're gonna have to watch it when
[01:08:00] I never said that abrogation meant
[01:08:03] corruption. Never said that. In fact, I
[01:08:05] explicitly denied it. Try to keep up,
[01:08:07] bro. You can't keep up with the
[01:08:08] argument.
[01:08:09] >> I got you. So, according to the verses
[01:08:10] that you've been bringing up in your
[01:08:11] authority argument, 9:29,
[01:08:15] you would agree does not prove
[01:08:17] corruption of the previous scripture.
[01:08:18] Correct?
[01:08:19] >> I never said that. It does. It proves
[01:08:20] that your scripture is not legally
[01:08:24] authoritative over us. Number one, and
[01:08:26] number two, that our scripture is
[01:08:28] legally authoritative over the Jews and
[01:08:30] Christians and your previous scriptures.
[01:08:33] Can you actually deal with the argument?
[01:08:34] >> Well, the actual argument today, Jake,
[01:08:37] is the Islamic dilemma. And telling me
[01:08:39] that the Bible is not fully legally
[01:08:42] binding on the Muslims or the Musl the
[01:08:43] Quran is legally binding on the on the
[01:08:46] Christians is not the Islamic dilemma.
[01:08:48] So my question So my question is in
[01:08:51] regards to the Islamic dilemma. Do you
[01:08:54] actually have AN ARGUMENT THAT ADDRESSES
[01:08:56] THE ISLAMIC DILEMMA?
[01:08:58] >> YEAH. I'm going to again have to teach
[01:09:00] you your own argument when you spoke to
[01:09:02] Danny Boy and you said that the Muslims
[01:09:05] actually have to check with the Jews and
[01:09:08] scriptures uh Jews and Christians and
[01:09:10] their previous scriptures to see whether
[01:09:13] or not alcohol is prohibited. And based
[01:09:16] upon that, we have to accept whatever it
[01:09:19] says. So you're caught. You've had to
[01:09:21] change your own argument because you
[01:09:23] can't deal with my argument.
[01:09:24] >> No, I what I have to do is correct you
[01:09:26] on a misrepresentation. Like the verse
[01:09:28] says, it's ask those if you are in
[01:09:31] doubt. If they're in doubt about what
[01:09:32] the Quran says, does it only partially?
[01:09:35] >> It says what the Quran what has been
[01:09:37] revealed to them.
[01:09:37] >> Is it only partially what's been
[01:09:39] revealed?
[01:09:39] >> Is it partially or fully?
[01:09:40] >> What's been revealed?
[01:09:41] >> That's not your question. What's been
[01:09:42] revealed?
[01:09:43] >> What's been revealed to the Jews and
[01:09:44] Christians?
[01:09:44] >> No. No. when it says, "If you are in
[01:09:46] doubt about that which we have revealed
[01:09:48] to you." Thank you. So, okay. So,
[01:09:51] according to the Quran, if they're in
[01:09:52] doubt about what the Quran says, what
[01:09:54] are they supposed to do?
[01:09:56] >> Exactly. So, now you're going back and
[01:09:58] you're restating you're restating.
[01:10:01] You're restating your own argument,
[01:10:04] which is that according to you, those
[01:10:07] previous scriptures are legally
[01:10:09] authoritative for Muslims over the
[01:10:12] Quran. Correct. If they do not So you're
[01:10:15] asking me a question. You can ask me
[01:10:16] that on your time. But let me just
[01:10:18] >> because you're not dealing WITH THE
[01:10:19] ARGUMENT.
[01:10:19] >> WE'LL SEE. SO according to 1094, right?
[01:10:22] According to the 1094, can you tell what
[01:10:24] what does doubt mean? What does it mean
[01:10:25] to doubt?
[01:10:26] >> To not know something to be true.
[01:10:29] >> Correct. Okay, that's awesome. And so if
[01:10:31] Muhammad did not know something to be
[01:10:33] true in the Quran, what does Allah tell
[01:10:35] him to do to get certainty of the truth
[01:10:37] about what the Quran is saying? It's not
[01:10:39] only speaking to the prophet Muhammad,
[01:10:41] it's speaking more generally to Muslims
[01:10:43] to go to go to the people of the book
[01:10:46] who were reading the scriptures. And if
[01:10:48] you look at, let me finish. If you look
[01:10:50] at the tapsiers, if you look at our
[01:10:53] classical authorities who actually have
[01:10:55] an authority, unlike you, we don't care
[01:10:57] about your taps. Sorry to tell you. It
[01:11:00] says it's to go to the people who
[01:11:03] actually understood the truth of Islam
[01:11:05] from their scriptures who actually
[01:11:08] became Muslims. That's the position.
[01:11:09] >> I got you. And what were those people
[01:11:11] reading?
[01:11:12] >> Those people were reading the previous
[01:11:13] scriptures.
[01:11:14] >> Thank you. So all that all that flub
[01:11:15] didn't matter. So they did. So when it
[01:11:17] comes here's my question. Now watch
[01:11:19] this. So according to the the verse for
[01:11:22] Muhammad to get certainty of the truth,
[01:11:24] he has to go ask those people who
[01:11:25] converted to Islam who are reading the
[01:11:27] previous scripture. So if he goes to
[01:11:30] these people and he sees that what he's
[01:11:32] receiving in the Quran lines up with
[01:11:33] what they have, then he'll be certain of
[01:11:35] the truth of what he was doubting in the
[01:11:36] Quran. Correct.
[01:11:37] >> The Quran in that context, let me
[01:11:39] finish. In that context, if you read the
[01:11:41] prior verses, it's talking about the
[01:11:44] stories of the prophets and the
[01:11:46] hardships that they went through. No
[01:11:48] worries. And let me finish. And the
[01:11:50] prophet peace be upon him was to go to
[01:11:53] recognize that the same thing was taking
[01:11:55] place for previous prophets. It's not
[01:11:58] all encompassing.
[01:11:59] >> Okay, no worries. So, let's your claim
[01:12:01] is no worries. For the sake of argument,
[01:12:02] let me go with you that it's not
[01:12:03] all-encompassing for those particular
[01:12:05] things. For the sake of the argument
[01:12:06] right here, you got to let me get it
[01:12:08] out. You're wasting my time. I have to
[01:12:10] follow part of the waste of my time. Ask
[01:12:11] a question.
[01:12:12] >> Okay. So, stop interrupting. Relax.
[01:12:14] >> You keep you keep commenting.
[01:12:15] >> I like when my food talks back to me,
[01:12:17] but this is tough.
[01:12:18] >> All right. Go ahead. Go ahead and ask
[01:12:19] your question.
[01:12:20] >> All right. Thank you. So then, so you
[01:12:21] said yes that if Muhammad goes and
[01:12:24] checks with these people and he sees
[01:12:25] that what he's receiving in the Quran
[01:12:26] lines up with what they've been reading
[01:12:28] in their in their books, then he'll know
[01:12:30] that what the Quran is saying is true.
[01:12:31] So this means that the opposite is true
[01:12:33] as well, right? That if he goes to them
[01:12:35] and he sees that what he what he uh what
[01:12:38] he's doubting is not in line with what
[01:12:39] they have, then he'll know that what he
[01:12:41] is receiving is not the truth. Correct.
[01:12:43] >> Give me the inference rule for that.
[01:12:45] >> So I can you answer the question?
[01:12:46] >> No, not necessarily. It doesn't follow
[01:12:48] logically.
[01:12:49] >> I got you. So
[01:12:49] >> it doesn't I know you got to learn cuz
[01:12:51] you don't know you don't know what
[01:12:52] actually follows and what doesn't.
[01:12:53] >> So So you're saying that it it works one
[01:12:56] way but it doesn't work the other way.
[01:12:57] >> It doesn't necessarily work the other
[01:12:59] way. You have to show and give an
[01:13:00] argument for that which you haven't
[01:13:01] provided.
[01:13:02] >> So when I when I
[01:13:03] >> You're the one talking over me, right?
[01:13:04] Every time I answer the question.
[01:13:05] >> No, you're I'm in the middle of asking
[01:13:06] the question.
[01:13:07] >> No, I was answering and you keep
[01:13:09] interrupting.
[01:13:09] >> All right. So you done with your answer?
[01:13:10] >> Yeah, I'm done.
[01:13:11] >> Okay. All right. [laughter]
[01:13:14] So just like you said it's you said yes
[01:13:17] if he goes to them and sees that what he
[01:13:20] has lines up with what they what they
[01:13:22] have then he'll know that he has the
[01:13:24] truth. That means that the inverse is
[01:13:27] true that if he goes to them and sees
[01:13:29] that it doesn't line up with what they
[01:13:30] have then he'll know that it is false.
[01:13:32] Correct.
[01:13:33] >> Wrong. What is the inference rule for
[01:13:35] that? Can you provide it?
[01:13:37] >> It's okay if
[01:13:37] >> you can. I know. I know. Yeah. It's not
[01:13:40] your It's not your cross. It's not your
[01:13:41] cross. It's all being exposed. It's all
[01:13:43] good. Yeah, it is.
[01:13:43] >> So, so then earlier you said that if the
[01:13:46] messenger came and disagreed with what
[01:13:49] they had, didn't confirm what they had,
[01:13:52] then they will be a they will rightfully
[01:13:53] be able to judge him as a false prophet.
[01:13:55] Correct? You said that earlier, right?
[01:13:56] >> Ask it again. Sorry.
[01:13:58] >> You said say it again.
[01:13:59] >> Yeah, I didn't hear the question.
[01:14:00] >> Okay. You said earlier that you answered
[01:14:03] yes. If according to 381, if they uh a
[01:14:06] messenger comes and contradicts what
[01:14:09] they have, then they then they will have
[01:14:11] the right to judge him as a false
[01:14:13] messenger. Correct?
[01:14:14] >> No. What I said was what I said I know
[01:14:17] you want to take your Lord you want to
[01:14:19] take your Lord's name in vain in the
[01:14:20] church. I understand he's Lord. I know.
[01:14:22] Let me finish. I said if according to
[01:14:26] what is genuine revelation which they
[01:14:29] know to be genuine revelation that if
[01:14:31] someone else comes and contradicts it
[01:14:34] doesn't matter who or what they're
[01:14:36] bringing then yes they would be deemed
[01:14:37] false.
[01:14:38] >> How do they know if it's genuine
[01:14:39] revelation?
[01:14:39] >> How do they know what
[01:14:41] >> if it's genuine revelation?
[01:14:43] >> They know if it's genuine revelation
[01:14:45] based upon what they received and based
[01:14:47] upon what THE PROPHET WHAT
[01:14:49] >> GUYS based upon what the prophet is
[01:14:52] coming with. He's able to tell them if
[01:14:54] you believe if you believe that he is a
[01:14:56] genuine messenger of God which you
[01:14:58] quoted earlier that the Jews and
[01:15:01] Christians must believe in the Quran
[01:15:04] well then they have to also see what the
[01:15:07] Quran says in matching with their
[01:15:09] supposed scriptures.
[01:15:10] >> I got you. Thank you. All right. In
[01:15:12] chapter 21 29 verse uh 46 it says to not
[01:15:15] dispute with the people of the book
[01:15:17] except in fairness um and to say to them
[01:15:20] that we believe in what was revealed to
[01:15:22] us and what was revealed to you. So my
[01:15:26] question is um according to that verse
[01:15:28] do they have to believe in part of what
[01:15:30] they have?
[01:15:31] >> Uh it says do not argue with the people
[01:15:33] of the book except in the best way. What
[01:15:34] does it have to do with anything? Can
[01:15:36] you go to the part where it says say we
[01:15:39] believe in what was revealed to us and
[01:15:41] what is revealed to you?
[01:15:42] >> Yeah.
[01:15:42] >> Okay. So, according to the verse, do
[01:15:45] they have to are they uh are they able
[01:15:47] to believe in part of what they have?
[01:15:49] >> They're referring to the genuine
[01:15:50] revelation that the people of the book
[01:15:52] had.
[01:15:52] >> So, is that a yes?
[01:15:53] >> Yeah.
[01:15:54] >> Okay. So, that so it uses it in the same
[01:15:56] context as the Quran. Believe in what
[01:15:58] what was revealed to us, which is the
[01:15:59] Quran. Correct.
[01:16:01] >> Uh part of it. Yeah.
[01:16:02] >> Oh, so you could believe in part of the
[01:16:04] Quran. No, you're you're missing the
[01:16:05] point. What is revealed? What is
[01:16:07] revealed to you? The prophet peace be
[01:16:09] upon him received the Quran and other
[01:16:12] revelation besides that. So Quran is
[01:16:14] only part of the re
[01:16:15] >> when he when it says when you're
[01:16:16] disputing with the people of the book
[01:16:17] say we believe in what was revealed to
[01:16:21] us. Is that the Quran?
[01:16:23] >> We believe in that which has been
[01:16:25] revealed to us and revealed to you. It's
[01:16:27] talking about it's talking about the
[01:16:30] previous scriptures or revelation that
[01:16:32] the people of the book received and what
[01:16:35] the prophet received is the Quran and
[01:16:38] the Sunnah.
[01:16:38] >> All right. So, stop wasting my time with
[01:16:39] that thing.
[01:16:40] >> I already
[01:16:42] got you. So, according to the verse, are
[01:16:44] you able to believe according to the
[01:16:45] verse, are you able to believe in part
[01:16:47] of the Quran?
[01:16:49] >> No.
[01:16:49] >> So, then according to the verse, you're
[01:16:51] not able to believe in part of what was
[01:16:52] revealed to them, right?
[01:16:53] >> Exactly.
[01:16:54] >> Oh, it's over. Hey, man. Hey, thanks for
[01:16:57] coming, man.
[01:16:57] >> I never said that.
[01:16:58] >> Thanks for coming.
[01:16:58] >> Yeah, thanks for coming.
[01:17:00] >> It's over. Hey, I I I relaxed my time
[01:17:02] and you can give him the rest. It's
[01:17:03] over.
[01:17:04] >> It's over.
[01:17:04] >> It's over for you. I know. It's over.
[01:17:06] >> It's a done deal.
[01:17:08] >> Yep, it is.
[01:17:08] >> All right, guys. Uh let's let's settle
[01:17:10] down. Hold your applause. And uh so
[01:17:12] we're going to um so you're you're going
[01:17:15] you're you're relinquishing the rest of
[01:17:16] your time. Avery, you good?
[01:17:17] >> Oh, yeah. It's over, bro.
[01:17:18] >> All right.
[01:17:18] >> Give it to him.
[01:17:19] >> All right. So Jake is up for his
[01:17:21] 20-minute cross-examination of Avery.
[01:17:24] And I'll start your time, Jake, as soon
[01:17:25] as you begin to ask your first question.
[01:17:27] >> Okay. When you use the Islamic dilemma
[01:17:29] and you say that the Quran affirms the
[01:17:31] authority of the previous scriptures,
[01:17:33] what does authority mean?
[01:17:34] >> It means that it is the standard of
[01:17:36] truth and it is legally binding on the
[01:17:38] Jews and Christians.
[01:17:39] >> Okay. It's legally binding on the Jews
[01:17:41] and Christians. So, if I can show to you
[01:17:43] in the Quran that the Quran and Islamic
[01:17:46] law is binding on Jews and Christians,
[01:17:48] then that defeats your claim. Correct?
[01:17:50] >> No.
[01:17:51] >> Oh, it doesn't?
[01:17:52] >> Nope. [laughter]
[01:17:53] So you just said that the authority part
[01:17:56] means that the Jews and Christians must
[01:17:59] follow their scriptures as legal
[01:18:02] authorities. Are they required to follow
[01:18:04] the Quran as legal authority?
[01:18:06] >> Yes, they are.
[01:18:06] >> They are.
[01:18:07] >> Okay. So they're they're required to
[01:18:10] follow, listen to this, the Jews and
[01:18:12] Christians are required to follow the
[01:18:14] Quran as a legal authority and they're
[01:18:17] also required to follow the Torah and
[01:18:19] Niel. Correct?
[01:18:20] >> Yeah. So let me qualify this when I say
[01:18:22] this. So [laughter] so according to you
[01:18:24] contradicted yourself.
[01:18:24] >> No I didn't. It's a both and not an
[01:18:26] either or. So according to the Quran the
[01:18:28] Jews and Christians are supposed to
[01:18:30] follow Muhammad and the Quran while also
[01:18:32] believing in their scriptures as well.
[01:18:34] However, because they reject Muhammad as
[01:18:36] a prophet and reject the Quran. The
[01:18:37] Quran says in chapter 5 43 all the way
[01:18:40] to 48. It says for the Jews judge by the
[01:18:42] Torah. Why did they come to you Muhammad
[01:18:44] when they have the Torah? For in verse
[01:18:46] 47, let the people of the gospel judge
[01:18:48] by what Allah has revealed in there. In
[01:18:49] chapter 40, in verse 48, it says, "To
[01:18:51] each of you, we have given you your own
[01:18:53] law. And if Allah wanted to make you one
[01:18:56] nation, he would have, but he didn't do
[01:18:57] it."
[01:18:57] >> Okay? So, you're contradicting yourself
[01:18:59] because you're saying you're you're
[01:19:00] saying to yourself that in 548, the Jews
[01:19:03] and Christians are supposed to follow
[01:19:06] their own laws, but now you're saying
[01:19:08] they're supposed to follow their own
[01:19:10] laws and the Quran. How can they follow
[01:19:12] their own laws and the Quran when the
[01:19:15] Quran explicitly abregates their laws?
[01:19:18] Okay. So again, you're not listening to
[01:19:20] what I'm saying. The Quran requires them
[01:19:22] to believe and follow uh Muhammad and
[01:19:25] the Quran. Yeah.
[01:19:26] >> However, they don't. When they don't,
[01:19:28] Allah says, "Okay, well, you can judge
[01:19:31] by your Torah, then judge by your gospel
[01:19:33] since you're disbelieving in the
[01:19:34] prophet." So because So they're required
[01:19:36] to believe in Muhammad and they're told
[01:19:37] to follow him. But when they reject, he
[01:19:39] says, "Fine. Follow the Torah and the
[01:19:41] Gospel. This is your legal uh legal
[01:19:42] binding on you."
[01:19:43] >> Okay. So, can they follow the Torah and
[01:19:46] the Injil as legal authorities to get to
[01:19:50] paradise according to the Quran?
[01:19:52] >> Uh, according to chapter 2, yes.
[01:19:54] >> According to chapter 2. Yeah. So, on the
[01:19:56] one hand, on the one hand, you're saying
[01:19:58] that the Quran is requiring the Jews and
[01:20:00] Christians to follow the Quran as a
[01:20:03] legal authority, but they don't actually
[01:20:05] have to. That's contradictory.
[01:20:07] >> No, you asked, do they have to to make
[01:20:08] it into paradise? So what I'm saying is
[01:20:10] is that if even when they're following
[01:20:12] their own laws, following the gospel and
[01:20:14] the Torah, they also still have to
[01:20:16] believe in the Quran and Muhammad as a
[01:20:18] revelation even if they're not uh bound
[01:20:21] by
[01:20:21] >> do they have to follow his laws?
[01:20:23] >> Uh so they are told to follow the I mean
[01:20:25] >> what are they why are they required to
[01:20:27] follow his laws? For what?
[01:20:28] >> I already told you this.
[01:20:29] >> For what? Why are they required to
[01:20:31] follow his laws?
[01:20:32] >> I'll say it again. Because he was a
[01:20:34] prophet. He's the messenger that God
[01:20:36] sent to them and that's confirming what
[01:20:38] they have. So he tells them follow him
[01:20:41] what he forbids uh you know abide by
[01:20:44] that what he doesn't forbid abide by
[01:20:47] that when they don't Allah still gives
[01:20:49] them a caveat okay judge by the Torah
[01:20:52] then that's why he says when they try to
[01:20:54] come to Muhammad for judgment he said
[01:20:56] why do they come to you for judgment
[01:20:58] when they have the Torah in which
[01:21:00] Allah's judgment is in he's giving them
[01:21:02] a caveat when they reject the Quran
[01:21:04] >> okay so when they reject the Quran and
[01:21:06] don't follow Islamic law. Are they going
[01:21:09] to be held accountable for that?
[01:21:11] >> Uh if by rejecting the Quran, yes, if
[01:21:14] they're So, what they have to do is even
[01:21:16] if they're not following, let me finish.
[01:21:17] >> Not following. Let me finish. Even if
[01:21:20] even if they're not uh bound by the
[01:21:22] legal laws of the Quran,
[01:21:24] >> you just said they were still
[01:21:25] >> You're not listen You're not even
[01:21:26] listening what I'm saying.
[01:21:27] >> You just said they were.
[01:21:28] >> You're not listening.
[01:21:28] >> You're contradicting yourself.
[01:21:30] >> Okay. So, you you can you explain how I
[01:21:32] contradicted myself? You keep saying you
[01:21:34] keep saying that the Quran says that the
[01:21:37] Jews and Christians actually have to
[01:21:39] follow the Quran as a legal authority
[01:21:41] but when they don't then they're
[01:21:43] supposed to follow their Torah and I
[01:21:46] asked you why is it the case that they
[01:21:49] are supposed to follow the Quran for
[01:21:52] Islamic rulings and legal rulings to
[01:21:54] begin with? Why are they being asked to
[01:21:56] do that? You said well because they're
[01:21:58] supposed to follow the prophet and his
[01:22:00] laws. Why? You're not answering the
[01:22:02] question.
[01:22:02] >> I did answer the question. I'll say it
[01:22:04] again. Listen slowly. Muhammad was sent
[01:22:07] as a prophet confirming what they have.
[01:22:10] So because he's a fulfillment of what
[01:22:12] they have, they are to believe in him,
[01:22:14] support him, and follow him. That's what
[01:22:16] the Quran says. However, when they don't
[01:22:19] follow the Quran and its legal bindings,
[01:22:22] Allah gives them a caveat. You can have
[01:22:24] the Torah. You can have the Gospel.
[01:22:27] while the Muslims have the Quran.
[01:22:29] Chapter, let me finish. Chapter 5:48.
[01:22:31] Well, I'm answering you. You said I
[01:22:32] didn't answer. So, chapter 5:48 makes it
[01:22:35] clear for you, uh, uh, Jake. It says,
[01:22:38] "If we wanted to, we could have made you
[01:22:41] all one nation, but to each of you, we
[01:22:44] have given to you your own law." So,
[01:22:47] according, if I'm contradicting myself,
[01:22:49] I guess Allah is cuz I'm just quoting
[01:22:51] him.
[01:22:51] >> Exactly. So here when they refuse to
[01:22:54] follow Islamic law, the Jews and the
[01:22:56] Christians, are they doing something
[01:22:57] wrong?
[01:22:58] >> Repeat that. Sorry.
[01:22:59] >> When the Jews and Christians refuse to
[01:23:01] follow Islamic law, are they doing
[01:23:03] something wrong? According to the Quran,
[01:23:05] >> they they are doing something wrong. If
[01:23:07] they are rejecting, if that is in line
[01:23:09] with them rejecting him as a prophet as
[01:23:10] a whole, as revelation,
[01:23:11] >> I I asked I'm going to ask again. I know
[01:23:13] it's hard on the Musher King. I know
[01:23:15] it's hard on the Musher King asked an
[01:23:16] answer. The question is, are they doing
[01:23:19] something wrong when they refuse to
[01:23:21] follow the Quran for Islamic rulings,
[01:23:25] Islamic laws?
[01:23:26] >> I'll answer it again.
[01:23:27] >> You didn't answer. Go ahead. Try again.
[01:23:29] >> I guess I'll repeat.
[01:23:29] >> Try again. I know it's hard on you. I
[01:23:31] know. Maybe Let me not repeat it three
[01:23:33] times. We know Allah says, "Don't say
[01:23:34] things." Go ahead. So according to the
[01:23:36] Quran, it says that they are to follow
[01:23:41] Muhammad because they're supposed to
[01:23:44] recognize him from their scriptures. If
[01:23:47] they don't recognize him as a prophet
[01:23:50] from God and therefore do not follow the
[01:23:54] legal bindings, then they are doing
[01:23:57] something wrong. However, if they choose
[01:24:01] to obey their own scriptures and still
[01:24:04] believe that Muhammad is a re is a
[01:24:06] prophet from God and the Quran is a
[01:24:08] revelation, that is not wrong. They're
[01:24:11] okay.
[01:24:12] >> Okay. So, they're okay if they follow
[01:24:14] the Quran for Islamic rulings, but they
[01:24:17] they're not allowed to reject the
[01:24:19] Quran's rulings. Correct.
[01:24:21] >> It's a revelation from God.
[01:24:22] >> Okay. So, they can believe it's
[01:24:24] revelation, but say, "We don't want to
[01:24:26] follow revelation. We stick to our
[01:24:28] >> So in Quran 285 when it says that the
[01:24:31] Jews in that case they believe in part
[01:24:33] of a book part of the book and
[01:24:35] disbelieve part of the book. Was that in
[01:24:38] regards to them choosing to follow part
[01:24:40] of the book and not follow another part
[01:24:42] of the book?
[01:24:43] >> Yeah. So according to them it was
[01:24:45] binding on them the Torah. So it's it's
[01:24:47] it's like this. When Jesus
[01:24:48] >> were they following part of the book?
[01:24:50] >> Hold on.
[01:24:50] >> Were they only following part of the
[01:24:52] book?
[01:24:52] >> Can I answer your first?
[01:24:53] >> Yeah. Try to answer. All right. You
[01:24:54] interrupting me. You gohead. Okay. Thank
[01:24:56] you such a gentleman. So when you're
[01:24:59] saying when when it says that they are
[01:25:01] uh uh disobeying a law and then uh
[01:25:03] accepting another law, they're believing
[01:25:05] in part of the book and rejecting other
[01:25:07] parts of the book, right? Following one
[01:25:09] law while rejecting another law, that's
[01:25:11] that both are uh binding on them. Now
[01:25:14] just because something is abregated
[01:25:16] let's say doesn't mean that oh because
[01:25:19] it's abregated because a new law has
[01:25:21] come and let's say superseded the
[01:25:23] previous one it doesn't mean that they
[01:25:25] don't believe in the one that was
[01:25:26] superseded. They believe in that past
[01:25:28] law it's just no longer binding. That
[01:25:30] doesn't mean that they're believing in
[01:25:31] part of scripture and following it now.
[01:25:33] >> Is is in the context is belief have
[01:25:36] anything to do with them following?
[01:25:38] >> Yeah.
[01:25:38] >> Okay. So good. So they're not supposed
[01:25:40] to. So in the concept of Quran 285 when
[01:25:44] you say it's they're believing in Jake
[01:25:46] is believing in a part of the book and
[01:25:48] disbelieving in part of the book in that
[01:25:50] context it's about following. Now you
[01:25:53] Mr. Avery are advocating that Christians
[01:25:56] and Jews are allowed to follow parts of
[01:25:59] the Quran but also not follow parts of
[01:26:02] the Quran. So how is 285 not applying to
[01:26:06] you?
[01:26:06] >> Because you're misconstring the two
[01:26:08] contexts. Yeah, [laughter] you're
[01:26:09] laughing. I know it's hard on you. I
[01:26:11] know it's tough. This is why you have to
[01:26:13] interrupt me when I answer. This is why
[01:26:14] you got to interrupt me when I answer.
[01:26:15] >> You started talking about me.
[01:26:16] >> I started talking and you interrupted.
[01:26:18] Go ahead. Go ahead. It's all good. You
[01:26:19] know, this this doesn't work.
[01:26:20] >> I know. So, according to 285, it's about
[01:26:23] them and what is binding on them. Do you
[01:26:27] get that? It's what's binding on them.
[01:26:29] So, they can't pick and choose in the
[01:26:31] Torah what they choose to follow and
[01:26:34] what they uh choose to to to reject.
[01:26:36] They can't do that. When you go to
[01:26:38] another context that you're equivocating
[01:26:41] on, it doesn't work the same way because
[01:26:43] it's not talking about what's binding on
[01:26:45] them. According to the Quran, what's
[01:26:47] binding on the Jews is the Torah. What's
[01:26:50] binding on the Christians is the Gospel.
[01:26:54] Let me finish the Quran. Allow me to
[01:26:55] finish, please. Go ahead. I appreciate
[01:26:57] it. You're taking long. I appreciate
[01:26:58] you. Ask me a question, man. You're
[01:27:00] taking long. You're taking It takes long
[01:27:01] to teach. This is my time.
[01:27:02] >> It does take long to teach.
[01:27:03] >> This is my time.
[01:27:04] >> Well, okay. I'm sorry. Just let me give
[01:27:05] me like 45 more seconds. Go ahead. Come
[01:27:07] on.
[01:27:08] >> I appreciate it. So, with with with this
[01:27:10] being said, when you're when we're
[01:27:11] talking about uh when you're talking
[01:27:13] about believing in part of the scripture
[01:27:15] and rejecting the rest, you're not
[01:27:16] talking about what's legally binding on
[01:27:19] on the a Christian as what is true.
[01:27:21] Like, they're saying this is true, this
[01:27:22] is false, this is true, this is false.
[01:27:24] That's wrong to do in their scriptures.
[01:27:26] They can't do that with the Quran. They
[01:27:28] have to believe all the Quran is true,
[01:27:30] even though not all of the Quran is
[01:27:31] binding on them legally.
[01:27:32] >> Okay. So, now we're going back. You're
[01:27:35] flip-floppy once again. an argument for
[01:27:36] the Islamic dilemma.
[01:27:37] >> You're flip-flopping once again. Is the
[01:27:40] entire Quran legally binding upon Jews
[01:27:44] and Christians?
[01:27:45] >> I'll answer it again.
[01:27:46] >> You have You just flip-flopped. You just
[01:27:47] said no.
[01:27:48] >> I'll answer it again. The Jews and
[01:27:50] Christians are initially called to
[01:27:53] follow Muhammad and the Quran. When they
[01:27:56] don't, they are called to still follow
[01:28:00] and abide by the laws in their
[01:28:02] scriptures. However, like the verse you
[01:28:04] pulled up, they have to pay the Jizia.
[01:28:06] This is why they are giving given this
[01:28:09] but not for example the polytheist. The
[01:28:12] polytheist is convert or die. Christians
[01:28:15] are convert or pay the Jiza and keep
[01:28:16] your scriptures right. And if they pay
[01:28:19] pay the Jiza, is that acceptable? Okay.
[01:28:23] In terms of them following the Quran in
[01:28:26] order to make it to paradise.
[01:28:28] >> Sure,
[01:28:29] >> it is. Where do you get that from?
[01:28:31] >> Okay. According to the Quran, it says
[01:28:32] those who believe among the Jews and
[01:28:35] Christians have nothing to fear, they're
[01:28:36] going to go to paradise. So even though
[01:28:38] they're they're uh if they're uh
[01:28:40] following their their scriptures
[01:28:41] correctly and they're following I mean
[01:28:44] they're not believing in it part of it
[01:28:45] partially, rejecting it partially,
[01:28:48] they're believing in their scriptures
[01:28:49] and they don't reject it partially and
[01:28:51] they don't reject Muhammad as a prophet
[01:28:53] and the Quran as a revelation, they're
[01:28:55] good to go. That's chapter two. So when
[01:28:57] when the Quran says and you just said
[01:29:00] that they have to accept Muhammad as a
[01:29:02] prophet. Yeah.
[01:29:03] >> Okay. And when that prophet says that
[01:29:06] you have to follow the Quran for its
[01:29:08] legal rulings and he tells you what the
[01:29:11] dietary restrictions are that you must
[01:29:14] follow and you don't follow them. Are
[01:29:16] you actually following the prophet?
[01:29:18] >> It's it's so it's it's twofold. It's
[01:29:21] similar to like this. For example, you
[01:29:23] have Jesus who came and abregated some
[01:29:25] of the Torah. And you even bring this
[01:29:27] up. You actually quoted this
[01:29:28] >> according to the Quran.
[01:29:29] >> According to the Quran. Do
[01:29:29] >> you believe that?
[01:29:30] >> According to the Quran. Don't. That's
[01:29:31] not what this is about.
[01:29:32] >> You accept that. According to the Quran,
[01:29:34] according to the Quran, that's what the
[01:29:35] Quran says. That's what you accept it.
[01:29:37] Okay. Go ahead.
[01:29:37] >> So, according to the Quran, Jesus
[01:29:39] abregated some laws of the Torah. Okay.
[01:29:42] Now, the Jews did not follow uh not all
[01:29:45] of them. Uh there are some of them that
[01:29:46] did not follow what Jesus was saying.
[01:29:48] However, guess what? way after Jesus
[01:29:51] came 600 years later chapter 543 is
[01:29:54] telling the Jews why do they come to you
[01:29:56] when they have the Torah in which
[01:29:58] Allah's judgment is in. So even still
[01:30:01] the Quran is telling the Jews to follow
[01:30:03] the Torah even though they rejected
[01:30:05] Jesus. So they can reject the they even
[01:30:08] if they reject the prophets Allah is
[01:30:10] still giving them a caveat to follow and
[01:30:12] and obey their scriptures.
[01:30:13] >> Right. So uh let me let me ask it a
[01:30:15] different way. I mentioned perennialism.
[01:30:18] So, are you saying that the Quran is
[01:30:20] advocating perennialism?
[01:30:22] >> I don't know what that is.
[01:30:23] >> Okay. I explained it in my opening
[01:30:24] statement. You should have took notes.
[01:30:26] >> Anyway, the idea that there are multiple
[01:30:30] pathways to God and as you said
[01:30:32] essentially that the Jews and Christians
[01:30:35] can have a right standing with God and
[01:30:37] make it to paradise even if they are not
[01:30:41] following the prophet Muhammad.
[01:30:43] >> Okay. So, it it's twofold. They can only
[01:30:47] make it to paradise if they are
[01:30:50] believing in all of the revelation of
[01:30:52] Allah and all of their messengers,
[01:30:55] abiding by their scriptures, if they're
[01:30:57] not they're not, you know, uh, legally
[01:30:59] bound by the Quran's laws, if they're
[01:31:01] not following the Quran's laws, but they
[01:31:03] still have to believe it's revelation.
[01:31:05] If they reject it as revelation and
[01:31:07] reject Muhammad as a prophet, they
[01:31:09] cannot make it to paradise.
[01:31:10] >> Okay? So when the Quran says that Jesus
[01:31:13] is not God and a Christian believes that
[01:31:16] Jesus is God, are they rejecting the
[01:31:18] prophet's revelation,
[01:31:19] >> they're rejecting not only the prophet's
[01:31:21] revelation, but they're also rejecting
[01:31:22] Allah's revelation in the angel because
[01:31:24] the that's that's the dilemma. The Quran
[01:31:27] does not know what is in the angel. So
[01:31:30] it says that Jesus is not the son of God
[01:31:32] while affirming the angel that says he
[01:31:34] is the son of God. Thank Welcome to the
[01:31:36] dilemma today. Thank you very much. So
[01:31:38] you finally arrived at the debate. So
[01:31:40] you're admitting that Jews and
[01:31:42] Christians, even apart from the Islamic
[01:31:45] law, that if they're actually following
[01:31:48] the Quran, they must reject your
[01:31:51] scriptures. Correct?
[01:31:52] >> No. What I'm saying?
[01:31:53] >> Oh, so they could believe. Can I finish?
[01:31:55] So no, so they could believe. [laughter]
[01:31:57] So they could believe. You said no. I'm
[01:32:00] going to respond.
[01:32:01] >> Let me finish. I didn't get the
[01:32:03] I'm the one who's controlling and asking
[01:32:05] questions. Let me at least answer.
[01:32:06] >> I'm I'm asking questions. So you're
[01:32:09] saying that a Christian a Christian a
[01:32:12] Christian could believe
[01:32:13] >> I let you finish when you when you a
[01:32:15] Christian could believe that Jesus is
[01:32:18] God and still be and still be following
[01:32:21] the Quran. I'm going to go ahead and
[01:32:23] finish what I was saying. I'm not your
[01:32:27] I'm part of the holy priesth.
[01:32:29] >> This is the holy priesthood.
[01:32:30] >> I already collected the so as as your
[01:32:32] priest this is what I'm going to say. I
[01:32:34] said no guys please settle down. Now the
[01:32:39] no and when I'm qualifying this by
[01:32:42] saying this okay when they believe in
[01:32:45] their scriptures that according to the
[01:32:47] Quran the Quran does not know what's in
[01:32:50] the script let me actually fix this
[01:32:52] Allah does not know what's in the
[01:32:55] scriptures so he's continuously saying
[01:32:58] hey follow your scriptures believe in it
[01:33:00] well actually Jesus ain't the son of God
[01:33:03] though uh Jesus wasn't crucified not
[01:33:05] knowing that's in the scriptures HE'S
[01:33:07] SAYING IT'S
[01:33:08] WELCOME TO THE DILEMMA.
[01:33:10] >> EXACTLY. YOU MADE IT TO THE DEBATE.
[01:33:12] >> SO, so when the Quran in 6146
[01:33:15] says that Allah prohibited for the Jews
[01:33:17] every animal with uncloven hoof, is that
[01:33:20] in the Torah?
[01:33:21] >> Uh, I believe so.
[01:33:23] >> Okay. So, Allah does know that that was
[01:33:26] prohibited for the Jews. And he's Let me
[01:33:28] finish. You're not asking questions.
[01:33:30] You're right. So, I know. Thanks. I got
[01:33:32] to cook. So [laughter]
[01:33:34] let me finish and tell you that in that
[01:33:36] context it's telling the Jews what was
[01:33:38] prohibited for them on account of their
[01:33:41] transgression. And in the prior verse
[01:33:44] contrast it with what is prohibited for
[01:33:46] the Muslims. So how could the Jews
[01:33:49] follow the Quran when it says that only
[01:33:52] pork is prohibited and not what was
[01:33:54] prohibited for them before?
[01:33:55] >> Oh my gosh. It's like you're not you're
[01:33:56] not getting
[01:33:57] >> you're not getting it. YOU'RE NOT
[01:33:58] GETTING IT.
[01:33:58] >> So Jake, let me let me let me go ahead
[01:33:59] answer.
[01:33:59] >> So the Quran's an authority over it.
[01:34:01] >> Can I answer you? It's in authority
[01:34:03] over.
[01:34:03] >> Can I answer it?
[01:34:04] >> Yeah, we're waiting for you. Thank you.
[01:34:05] Appreciate it, man. I appreciate it. So,
[01:34:08] dude, you're assuming you're assuming
[01:34:10] that when the Quran mentions a law that
[01:34:12] it's getting it from the scriptures. No.
[01:34:15] Muhammad used to hear the traditions of
[01:34:16] the Jews when he used to hang out with
[01:34:18] them. Matter of fact, you have hadith
[01:34:20] that say that the Jews used to recite
[01:34:22] the Torah in Hebrew and then explain it
[01:34:24] to the Muslims in Arabic. And then
[01:34:26] Muhammad goes on to say, "Don't believe
[01:34:28] what they say, nor disbelieve what they
[01:34:31] say, but say we believe in what was sent
[01:34:34] down to us and what was sent down to
[01:34:36] you." So according to Muhammad, he
[01:34:38] believed in their scriptures. He just
[01:34:39] didn't trust everything that they said.
[01:34:41] So whenever you're hearing Muhammad or
[01:34:43] seeing that the Quran is actually
[01:34:45] happens to get something right that's in
[01:34:47] our Torah, it's because he heard it and
[01:34:49] he happened to get it right this time.
[01:34:50] But there's other traditions that he
[01:34:52] hears and he adds it into the Quran as
[01:34:54] if it's part of the Torah. like when he
[01:34:56] quotes the Talmud in other places, he
[01:34:57] don't know what the Torah is, man.
[01:34:59] >> So when you said earlier that according
[01:35:01] to the Quran, the Jews and Christians
[01:35:04] are actually supposed to follow the
[01:35:06] Quran as a legal authority, does that
[01:35:10] mean that the Quran is a legal authority
[01:35:12] over the Jews and Christians in their
[01:35:14] scriptures?
[01:35:14] >> It it means that the Quran can be a
[01:35:17] legal authority over the previous
[01:35:19] scriptures. However, guess what, Jake?
[01:35:22] >> There goes the authority. Watch this.
[01:35:23] There goes the authority. Watch this,
[01:35:24] Jake. Unfortunately for you, Jake, as
[01:35:27] you already admitted, author uh the
[01:35:29] Quran or a new revelation superseding
[01:35:33] the previous in authority or legal
[01:35:35] binding does not mean the previous
[01:35:38] revelation is corrupted. It's still
[01:35:40] true, but it's not authority. Let me
[01:35:42] finish. It doesn't. So, okay. So, if
[01:35:45] this means that of parts of your Quran
[01:35:47] is not an authority, does that mean it's
[01:35:48] not true? No. That's what you said.
[01:35:51] >> Listen to the You got to let me land.
[01:35:53] You got to let me land. a question.
[01:35:54] >> No, I No, I you just asked me a
[01:35:56] question. It was rhetorical and I
[01:35:57] answered it myself.
[01:35:58] >> Okay, so finish.
[01:35:59] >> Thank you.
[01:35:59] >> You asked me a question.
[01:36:00] >> I appreciate it. So just because if we
[01:36:02] even grant that the Quran is it
[01:36:04] supersedes the scriptures in legal
[01:36:07] binding authority, it doesn't supersede
[01:36:09] the scriptures in the standard of truth
[01:36:11] in that sense of the authority. Which is
[01:36:13] why I said when I when we say authority,
[01:36:16] let me finish. Adam,
[01:36:17] >> when we say that the that the previous
[01:36:20] that the Quran affirms the authority of
[01:36:22] the previous scriptures, I specifically
[01:36:24] said meaning that the previous
[01:36:26] scriptures are the standard of truth.
[01:36:28] Good
[01:36:28] >> and they're legally binding on the Jews
[01:36:30] and Christians. Address that.
[01:36:32] >> So it's partly it's only partly
[01:36:34] authoritative. It's not fully legally
[01:36:38] authoritative. The Quran is fully
[01:36:41] legally authoritative over the previous
[01:36:44] scriptures. Correct.
[01:36:45] >> In some senses. Now, however, that's not
[01:36:48] an accept. Let me finish. Okay. So, I
[01:36:51] guess again you're you're showing how
[01:36:53] how silly you are. If if going with uh
[01:36:55] uh something that is if going with
[01:36:57] something that is legally binding over
[01:36:59] something that is no longer legally
[01:37:01] binding means picking and choosing that
[01:37:03] means you as a Muslim are picking and
[01:37:05] choosing when it comes to alcohol. When
[01:37:07] the Quran at one point said that alcohol
[01:37:09] is good, just don't come drunk to the
[01:37:12] other. Authoritative. Allow me to finish
[01:37:15] the app. you know, follow your own
[01:37:17] argument. So when the Quran in one place
[01:37:19] says that, hey, you could drink, just
[01:37:21] don't come to the majid drunk. But then
[01:37:23] in another verse, it says don't drink at
[01:37:25] all because wine is the works of Satan.
[01:37:27] I guess you're picking and choosing what
[01:37:29] you believe. Huh? Because one verse
[01:37:31] became more binding over another.
[01:37:33] According to Jake, if that is the case,
[01:37:35] then you're picking and choosing. You're
[01:37:37] in trouble, not me.
[01:37:38] >> All right, time's up, right?
[01:37:40] >> That's time right there. That's time.
[01:37:41] Thank you guys for fantastic crossex.
[01:37:49] All right, at this time we'll take a
[01:37:50] fiveminute intermission. Uh, make sure
[01:37:52] you get your questions in. We'll come
[01:37:54] back with a with a Q a closing and a Q&A
[01:37:57] 20 30-minute Q&A.
[01:38:00] Fire. So, it was great. Um, so we're
[01:38:02] going to jump into our closing uh fivem
[01:38:05] minute closings for each each opponent
[01:38:07] and then we'll follow with a 30-minute
[01:38:09] Q&A. So Avery, you're at backup
[01:38:12] for your fivem minute closing and uh as
[01:38:15] always we'll start your time as soon as
[01:38:17] you begin to speak.
[01:38:18] >> All right. So first of all, I want to
[01:38:20] give honor to the triune God who gives
[01:38:22] us victory in all our steps and all our
[01:38:24] ways. It's the father, son, and holy
[01:38:27] spirit that we are able to do this.
[01:38:28] >> Please hold your applause. Please hold
[01:38:29] your applause.
[01:38:30] >> It's uh the father, son, and holy spirit
[01:38:32] that gives us the strength to do this.
[01:38:33] Um I also still again want to thank Jake
[01:38:35] for uh doing this debate. the Islamic
[01:38:37] dilemma is probably one the toughest uh
[01:38:41] topics to do and so as a Muslim debater
[01:38:43] to have the courage to come and debate
[01:38:44] that uh is is you know something to be
[01:38:47] applauded. So thank you Jake for taking
[01:38:49] the debate. Um guys, and all in all,
[01:38:52] what we saw is that Jake wasted his
[01:38:57] entire cross-examination
[01:39:00] going over a fruitless authority or
[01:39:02] legal binding argument that by his own
[01:39:05] admission does not demonstrate that the
[01:39:07] previous scriptures are corrupted or
[01:39:09] untrue. So in his he did not touch or
[01:39:12] bring any argument against the Islamic
[01:39:15] dilemma. In fact, he affirmed it and
[01:39:18] contradicted himself over and over. But
[01:39:20] let's relay it again. Let's relay it one
[01:39:22] one last time. The Quran affirms the
[01:39:26] preservation,
[01:39:28] the inspiration and the authority of the
[01:39:32] Bible, of the previous scriptures. By
[01:39:34] authority, we mean that the the previous
[01:39:37] scriptures are the standard of truth.
[01:39:40] Without the previous scriptures, the
[01:39:42] Quran falls apart. Well, if you if
[01:39:45] you're in doubt about what the Quran is
[01:39:46] saying, go and ask those who've been
[01:39:48] reading the scripture before you.
[01:39:49] According to chapter 3:81, how the
[01:39:52] people will recognize and know that this
[01:39:54] actually is the prophet of the covenant
[01:39:56] is if he confirms and is in line with
[01:39:59] the scriptures they have. According to
[01:40:01] the Quran, our scriptures is the end
[01:40:04] all, be all 10 toes, standard foundation
[01:40:09] of truth, not the Quran. The Quran is
[01:40:12] the one that's supposed to be in line
[01:40:13] with it. If it's not, it's false. If it
[01:40:16] is, it's false again because we see that
[01:40:18] the Quran contradicts the pre uh
[01:40:20] previous scriptures. Now, what we see
[01:40:22] here with the Islamic dilemma, ladies
[01:40:24] and gentlemen, all over the place, verse
[01:40:27] after verse after verse, we see that the
[01:40:30] Quran is consistency. I I'm reading the
[01:40:32] Quran charitably. I'm letting the Quran
[01:40:35] speak for itself. Over and over and over
[01:40:37] again, we give verses where the Quran
[01:40:40] says it's confirming the previous
[01:40:42] scriptures. It's confirming what you
[01:40:45] have. It's confirming that which you
[01:40:47] possess. It's confirming what is with
[01:40:49] you. Over and over and over and over and
[01:40:53] over again, the Quran says that the
[01:40:56] previous scriptures are true. But the
[01:40:59] Muslims want to come and tell us, no,
[01:41:02] actually the Quran is arguing that
[01:41:04] they're not true. not the ones that you
[01:41:06] have currently. But when the Quran says
[01:41:08] that what we have is confirmed by the
[01:41:10] Quran, that it what we have is true,
[01:41:13] what we possess is true, it's saying the
[01:41:16] opposite of what the what the Dawa guys
[01:41:18] are saying. So there they have a uphill
[01:41:21] battle. They are arguing against Allah,
[01:41:24] not the Christians. It's not me who made
[01:41:26] this up. Allah, Muhammad, they they're
[01:41:29] the ones who are saying this. They're
[01:41:31] the ones who fought the battle for our
[01:41:33] Bible. I didn't have to lift a finger.
[01:41:35] And I want to thank the Quran for that.
[01:41:37] I didn't have to lift a finger. When you
[01:41:39] comes to the previous scriptures, the
[01:41:41] authority argument, we're not arguing
[01:41:44] over whether or not something is legally
[01:41:46] binding or not. You could have the Quran
[01:41:49] be legally binding over the previous
[01:41:51] scriptures in the present time of
[01:41:53] Muhammad and still not and still be
[01:41:57] within the dilemma because according to
[01:42:00] the Quran these scriptures are true.
[01:42:04] If there's any point where the Quran is
[01:42:07] not in line with these scriptures, then
[01:42:10] the Quran is false. whether it's a it's
[01:42:13] legally binding on the Jews and
[01:42:14] Christians or not. If it agrees with the
[01:42:17] pre if it's in line if it's not in line
[01:42:19] with the previous scriptures, it's
[01:42:21] false. If the previous scriptures are
[01:42:23] corrupted, the Quran is false. The
[01:42:26] Islamic dilemma and there it is. It's
[01:42:28] done for. So with this being said, with
[01:42:31] Allah fighting the battle for us, for
[01:42:34] the Bible, the Quran explicitly says
[01:42:37] that you are not allowed to pick and
[01:42:40] choose what parts you believe in. This
[01:42:43] doesn't mean that you go with uh legally
[01:42:47] binding verses and verses that are not
[01:42:49] legally that that's not what it says.
[01:42:51] You have to believe all of it is from
[01:42:54] Allah. All of it is from God. even the
[01:42:57] even the parts that's not legally
[01:42:58] binding on you anymore. And if you don't
[01:43:01] if you believe in part of the scripture
[01:43:03] and reject other parts of the scripture
[01:43:06] according to Allah, you're going to
[01:43:08] hell. I guess I'm in a good position
[01:43:10] because I believe in all of it. I
[01:43:12] believe all of it is from God, which is
[01:43:15] why Islam is false because it
[01:43:16] contradicts the Bible. Thank you guys so
[01:43:19] much for coming out for us.
[01:43:27] All right, we'll have five minute
[01:43:28] closing from Jake.
[01:43:45] Okay, I want to thank Marlin and the
[01:43:47] Gospel Truth once again for hosting
[01:43:49] tonight's debate.
[01:43:51] >> [clears throat]
[01:43:51] >> I have to thank Avery in some sense uh
[01:43:53] for showing up, but I don't think it
[01:43:55] really was good for him to be honest. Uh
[01:43:58] he should have stayed home if I'm if I'm
[01:43:59] actually being fair. Um listen, he keeps
[01:44:03] making this big to-do that the Quran and
[01:44:07] the Islamic dilemma has nothing to do
[01:44:09] with authority. Has nothing to do with
[01:44:11] authority. He just actually conceded the
[01:44:14] debate in the same wood that his teacher
[01:44:17] David Wood did just a few days ago. He
[01:44:20] said, "Guys, look, we could still run
[01:44:22] the Islamic dilemma if we remove the
[01:44:25] authority part and just go based off of
[01:44:28] preservation and inspiration. Yes, you
[01:44:31] could try to run the argument, but it
[01:44:34] would be a different argument. We're
[01:44:36] waiting for you to openly and explicitly
[01:44:40] concede on the authority point. Unless
[01:44:42] and until you do so, we're going to keep
[01:44:44] collecting Jiza, my friend." Now getting
[01:44:47] to the point about him saying this is
[01:44:49] not actually the argument. I want to
[01:44:50] play a clip for you guys. I hope you can
[01:44:52] hear this.
[01:44:54] >> For example, if the if the prophet
[01:44:56] sallall alaihi wasallam or someone had a
[01:44:58] doubt about whether alcohol was prohibit
[01:45:00] prohibited, do they go would they have
[01:45:02] to go to the Bible and see okay is
[01:45:04] alcohol prohibited and then based off
[01:45:06] off of that take whatever the Bible
[01:45:08] says. Is that's what is that what you
[01:45:09] believe in?
[01:45:10] >> Can I respond?
[01:45:11] >> Yep.
[01:45:12] >> Okay. M matter of fact, let me just
[01:45:14] answer you fully. Uh, yes, I do. I do
[01:45:17] believe that. Now, let me respond in
[01:45:19] full. Daniel.
[01:45:20] >> Wow. So, yes, I do believe that. When
[01:45:24] you're asked the question about
[01:45:28] Listen, you guys need to be quiet. This
[01:45:30] is my time to talk. I know it's hard.
[01:45:32] >> All right, guys. That's it. Listen,
[01:45:33] let's let's settle down. Let's go
[01:45:34] closing.
[01:45:35] >> I know it's hard on the Musher King.
[01:45:37] Trust me, nothing else in it changes
[01:45:39] anything. He goes on to give a more
[01:45:41] detailed explanation about the fact that
[01:45:44] the Torah and Injil are actually legally
[01:45:48] binding over the Quran. I know it's hard
[01:45:51] on you, brother. No, no, you're not
[01:45:53] going to be able to live this down
[01:45:54] because you got caught lying right here
[01:45:56] red-handed. The fact of the matter is
[01:45:59] that they have been using inspiration,
[01:46:02] preservation, and authority. Now, he
[01:46:05] wants to change the definition of
[01:46:07] authority to the standard of truth.
[01:46:09] Well, if it's inspired and it's
[01:46:12] preserved, then that would mean it's
[01:46:13] true. SO, WHAT DOES authority add
[01:46:16] anything to that? That was never the
[01:46:18] definition. Authority is the fact that
[01:46:20] it's still binding and able to be
[01:46:23] followed for Jews and Christians. That's
[01:46:26] what the authority is. You went even
[01:46:29] further than that. And let's listen to
[01:46:30] David Wood. What your teacher says here.
[01:46:33] If you're representing it as, well, the
[01:46:35] the Islamic dilemma is claiming that the
[01:46:37] Torah and the Gospel are legal
[01:46:38] authorities over Muslims and Muslims
[01:46:40] have to obey them and not the Quran.
[01:46:41] Okay, you can go you can run with that
[01:46:43] and we're all going to say that's not
[01:46:45] what any of us has ever said at all. So
[01:46:47] try again. Better luck next time.
[01:46:49] Interesting. I I wish I'd understood
[01:46:51] that because then I could have just
[01:46:52] >> So So there you go. David Wood says
[01:46:55] that's not what any of us have ever
[01:46:56] said. Avery just said that that if a
[01:46:59] Muslim asks and has a question about the
[01:47:03] legal ruling of alcohol, they must
[01:47:07] consult the Torah and Injil and whatever
[01:47:09] the legal ruling is, it must agree with
[01:47:12] it. The Quran must agree with all the
[01:47:15] legal rulings. You've thrown that out
[01:47:17] because you no longer can defend that
[01:47:19] position. But even you throwing that
[01:47:22] out, we still got you to concede the
[01:47:24] debate, Avery, because at the last part
[01:47:27] of the cross-examination period, he
[01:47:30] said, "Yes, Jake." And he even admitted
[01:47:33] it in his closing statement that the
[01:47:35] Quran is a legal authority in some sense
[01:47:40] over the previous scriptures. That means
[01:47:43] that according to Avery, your scriptures
[01:47:46] are only partly authoritative, not fully
[01:47:49] authoritative. And when you open the
[01:47:51] door for that, Quran 285, according to
[01:47:55] your interpretation, refute you. That is
[01:47:58] about legal authority because it's about
[01:48:00] the Jews refusing to follow certain
[01:48:04] aspects of their text. So, you fall
[01:48:06] victim to Quran 1094 and 285, your own
[01:48:10] argument. You already admitted that
[01:48:12] according to 350 Jesus abregated laws
[01:48:16] from the Torah for the Jews. So Aver's
[01:48:20] ridiculous and absurd interpretation of
[01:48:23] the Quran is Quran tells Jews and
[01:48:26] Christians to follow the legally binding
[01:48:30] aspects of the Quran but yet at the same
[01:48:33] time says oh it's okay if you don't. you
[01:48:35] could f Does it make any sense that the
[01:48:37] Quran tells you to follow a prophet and
[01:48:40] his rulings and then by the way it says
[01:48:42] oh no it's okay if you don't that's his
[01:48:44] interpretation not mine but I want to
[01:48:47] invite everybody here to read the Quran
[01:48:49] and to think and ponder about this
[01:48:51] debate and see who actually is
[01:48:54] representing the Quran correctly Jake or
[01:48:57] Avery. Thank you.
[01:49:03] All right, let's give another round of
[01:49:04] applause for the debaters.
[01:49:11] All right, we are entering into our Q&A
[01:49:13] portion. 30-minute Q&A. So, the way this
[01:49:15] Q&A is going to work is that both
[01:49:18] whoever gets the question initially has
[01:49:21] one minute to respond. Uh, then the
[01:49:23] opponent gets one minute to respond and
[01:49:26] the person who got the question
[01:49:27] initially gets 30 seconds to respond.
[01:49:30] All right. So, this question, let me
[01:49:33] make sure I get this timer right.
[01:49:36] All right. So, this question is for you,
[01:49:37] Avery. How do you reconcile Quran 5:30
[01:49:41] where Jesus confirms the Torah but makes
[01:49:44] lawful what was previously unlawful for
[01:49:47] children of Israel if they are supposed
[01:49:50] to follow the Torah?
[01:49:53] >> Yeah. So,
[01:49:53] >> I think he means 350, not 530.
[01:49:55] >> 350. Yeah.
[01:49:56] >> Okay.
[01:49:57] So uh this is just an example of
[01:50:00] abrogation or when something is legally
[01:50:02] binding or and o over something that
[01:50:06] used to be legally binding but no longer
[01:50:08] is. So again even I says that this means
[01:50:12] that Jesus is following and adhering to
[01:50:15] and affirming the Torah while at the
[01:50:19] same time he uh makes something lawful
[01:50:22] that used to be unlawful and vice versa.
[01:50:25] This doesn't mean that he doesn't
[01:50:26] believe in the Torah because it
[01:50:27] literally just said that he affirmed it
[01:50:29] and confirmed it right in the same
[01:50:30] sentence. So, he confirms it while uh
[01:50:34] bringing in his law that is the the the
[01:50:37] new law or that uh supersedes the old
[01:50:40] law. He still believes in all of the
[01:50:43] Torah. Just because he abregates
[01:50:45] something doesn't mean that he now
[01:50:47] thinks that what was previously the law
[01:50:50] is now corrupted or untrue all of a
[01:50:52] sudden. This is the problem with Jake's
[01:50:54] argument.
[01:50:56] >> All right, Jake.
[01:50:57] >> Yeah, I'm sorry. Can you just restate
[01:50:58] the rules for this in terms of the
[01:51:00] questioning?
[01:51:00] >> Yeah. So, the question was initially for
[01:51:02] Avery. So, he gets one minute to
[01:51:03] respond. Then after after him, now you
[01:51:05] get one minute, but then after that,
[01:51:07] Avery gets 30 seconds.
[01:51:09] >> Okay. Yeah. Cool. I just didn't want to
[01:51:10] go over time. All right. So, uh this is
[01:51:12] actually a good question. It's something
[01:51:14] I just mentioned in my closing statement
[01:51:16] there where in Quran 350 Jesus is
[01:51:21] actually saying that he's confirming
[01:51:23] what is in his hands right in the hands
[01:51:26] and at the same time of doing that he's
[01:51:28] actually abregating certain
[01:51:30] [clears throat] laws from the Torah.
[01:51:32] What does this mean? This means and
[01:51:34] please please stop misrepresenting my
[01:51:37] argument. I'm not saying that abrogation
[01:51:40] equals corruption. I'm arguing that
[01:51:44] abrogation equals no longer fully
[01:51:48] authoritative. Pay attention. If the law
[01:51:51] is no longer legally binding to be
[01:51:54] followed, it's no longer fully legally
[01:51:57] authoritative. That's the argument.
[01:52:00] Actually respond to it.
[01:52:02] >> That's not the Islamic dilemma. So
[01:52:05] because he's bringing up this fruitless
[01:52:08] uh uh point has nothing to do with the
[01:52:10] Islamic as he just said it. It this does
[01:52:13] not prove the previous scriptures are
[01:52:15] true or that you don't believe in them.
[01:52:17] Uh so what why what are we doing here?
[01:52:19] STOP BRINGING THIS UP.
[01:52:22] >> All right. Uh this question is for you
[01:52:24] Jake.
[01:52:24] >> Yeah.
[01:52:25] >> One word of scriptures corrupted and do
[01:52:27] any uncorrupted copies exist?
[01:52:30] >> Um this is a matter of dispute. uh the
[01:52:33] Quran and Sunnah don't explicitly say
[01:52:36] when the previous scriptures were
[01:52:38] corrupted. But my my personal position
[01:52:42] is that uh well the Quran does
[01:52:44] explicitly say that uh what was
[01:52:46] originally revealed was oral. You have
[01:52:48] to understand the Quran's position on
[01:52:50] revelation is that it's an oral
[01:52:52] revelation that's typically given from
[01:52:55] God to the angel Gabriel and then from
[01:52:58] the angel Gabriel to the particular
[01:53:00] prophet in question. and then at some
[01:53:02] point just like the Quran it is later
[01:53:05] reduced to writing. Uh my position in
[01:53:08] terms of the uh so-called Torah and in
[01:53:11] geil the original revelations to Moses
[01:53:14] and Jesus respectively is that the of
[01:53:17] course the oral revelation was
[01:53:18] uncorrupted but in virtue of it being
[01:53:21] reduced to writing very early on I don't
[01:53:23] know exactly when but very early on it
[01:53:26] was corrupted textually. That's my
[01:53:28] position.
[01:53:29] >> Avery.
[01:53:30] >> Yeah. Do you guys see how he said that's
[01:53:31] his position? Not Allah's position. Nor
[01:53:34] is it Bkari's position and I abbas's
[01:53:37] position. Bukari says that they are that
[01:53:40] these scriptures were not textually
[01:53:41] corrupted but they're only
[01:53:43] misinterpreted
[01:53:45] uh misrepresented. This is why he
[01:53:47] correctly said that there's dispute on
[01:53:49] this because their most their their most
[01:53:52] authoritative scholars believed that the
[01:53:55] scriptures textually were preserved
[01:53:57] because the Quran and they give reasons
[01:54:00] because one one of the arguments they
[01:54:01] give is actually one of the arguments
[01:54:03] that he goes against where it says that
[01:54:05] none can change the words of Allah. This
[01:54:07] is one of the arguments that they use to
[01:54:09] prove that the verse that the scriptures
[01:54:10] are textually preserved. Also they use
[01:54:13] the hadith where Muhammad says when they
[01:54:15] came to Muhammad for uh for a judgment
[01:54:18] Muhammad says bring the Torah and says I
[01:54:20] believe in you and the one who revealed
[01:54:22] you. That's in Suna Abu Dawoud.
[01:54:23] According to them this was enough to
[01:54:26] demonstrate that the scriptures were
[01:54:27] textually preserved or else Muhammad
[01:54:30] would never have said this. So yeah
[01:54:33] >> 30 seconds.
[01:54:34] >> Okay. So Avery just brought a whole
[01:54:36] bunch of stuff that I don't have enough
[01:54:38] time to respond to that he didn't bring
[01:54:40] up in the entire debate. Alb Bukari did
[01:54:42] believe in textual corruption because he
[01:54:44] quoted Ibn Abbas and what I quoted
[01:54:46] earlier and all you could say was Ib
[01:54:48] Abbas contradicted himself. The text and
[01:54:51] hadith from Sunn Abu D. The portion that
[01:54:54] you read that I believe in you and the
[01:54:56] one who revealed you that is not in all
[01:54:59] of the other hadiths that are
[01:55:01] transmitting the same report. That's why
[01:55:03] many scholars have deemed that part of
[01:55:05] the hadith to be weak.
[01:55:10] All right, Avery, this question is for
[01:55:11] you. Why do you insist on uh the Quran's
[01:55:15] absolute confirmation of the scripture
[01:55:17] when that is not required for Islamic
[01:55:19] dilemma to work?
[01:55:22] >> Um I'm just going with what the Quran
[01:55:23] says. So the Quran absolutely confirms
[01:55:26] the previous scriptures to whoever asked
[01:55:29] that. So um yeah the because the Quran
[01:55:33] absolutely affirms the truth and the
[01:55:38] authority the the previous scriptures as
[01:55:40] the standard of truth and the
[01:55:42] preservation of the scriptures. When
[01:55:43] Muslims come and tell us oh well no uh
[01:55:46] it's actually corrupted it you don't
[01:55:47] have it anymore or you have part parts
[01:55:49] of it or some of it is true they're
[01:55:51] going against what the Quran says. So
[01:55:53] I'm only reading what Allah says that's
[01:55:54] why it works. Notice that in his
[01:55:57] response now, and this is this is
[01:55:59] something that we're going to the
[01:56:00] Muslims here, we're going to have to
[01:56:02] make this go uh viral. We have to keep
[01:56:05] focusing on this authority point until
[01:56:08] they submit because of the fact now
[01:56:10] every time he responds, he only wants to
[01:56:13] talk about inspiration and preservation.
[01:56:16] They're throwing the authority part out,
[01:56:18] which is more than 50% of the verses
[01:56:21] that they t typically cite. If they're
[01:56:23] admitting now that they interpreted all
[01:56:25] those wrong, then they could be also
[01:56:27] wrong about the other verses. It's very
[01:56:30] simple. You have to follow the argument.
[01:56:32] It's going to take time, but it's going
[01:56:34] to catch on.
[01:56:35] >> This is how you know somebody is bad at
[01:56:37] debating because they can't listen.
[01:56:39] >> Did Did you guys hear me throw out
[01:56:40] authority or did I just say it? You did.
[01:56:43] >> Did I not just say what authority is?
[01:56:45] >> So, I'm including I'm including
[01:56:47] preservation. I'm including inspiration.
[01:56:50] And I'm including authority. I'm just
[01:56:52] teaching you what that means, Jake.
[01:56:58] >> All right. Question for you, Jake. Given
[01:57:00] the Islamic view of God's providence,
[01:57:02] why would God decree for the Torah in
[01:57:05] the angel to be corrupted?
[01:57:07] >> Uh, I don't know what they mean by
[01:57:09] Quran's view of God's providence, but we
[01:57:13] believe that God decrees everything. if
[01:57:15] that's what he's referring to. The
[01:57:16] questioner, uh, why would God decree for
[01:57:21] um certain scriptures to be corrupted?
[01:57:23] You could ask that about anything that
[01:57:25] you think appears to be negative. Why
[01:57:27] would God decree for so certain prophets
[01:57:30] to be killed as the Quran and the uh Old
[01:57:33] Testament affirm, right? Uh uh we
[01:57:36] believe as Muslims, as many Christians
[01:57:39] also believe the same thing. We believe
[01:57:41] that God's divine creed that he has a
[01:57:43] hecka or wisdom for everything that he
[01:57:46] does in the case of letting previous
[01:57:48] scriptures uh go away. The reason is
[01:57:52] because that they were only for specific
[01:57:53] groups of people at a specific time.
[01:57:55] Whereas the Quran and the prophet
[01:57:56] Muhammad are for all people and all
[01:57:58] times going forward.
[01:58:01] >> Yeah, this demonstrates the incoherence
[01:58:03] of the Quran. Ladies and gentlemen, why
[01:58:05] in the world would Allah decree? Now, we
[01:58:07] didn't get an answer to this, but why in
[01:58:08] the world would Allah decree, will plan
[01:58:12] for his own scriptures, his own
[01:58:13] revelation to be corrupted and distorted
[01:58:16] only to tell us later on, hey guys,
[01:58:18] follow your scriptures, uh, abide by
[01:58:20] your scriptures, judge by your
[01:58:22] scriptures. Oh, don't forget they are
[01:58:24] corrupted though. I willed it, by the
[01:58:26] way. It makes no sense. It is
[01:58:28] incoherent, which is why the Islamic
[01:58:30] dilemma is so powerful that they're
[01:58:32] stuck here.
[01:58:33] No, not at all. When you say that why
[01:58:35] did God actually decree for something to
[01:58:38] happen? I can ask you the same question
[01:58:40] about anything. I already answered the
[01:58:42] question. He decreed for this to happen
[01:58:44] because those scriptures were only for
[01:58:47] certain groups of people and it was time
[01:58:49] bound. Whereas the Quran is the final
[01:58:51] revelation. It's not time bound. It's
[01:58:53] for all people going forward.
[01:58:58] >> All right. There's a question for Ay. Uh
[01:59:01] as a Christian, I as a Christian reject
[01:59:03] and do not accept the Quran as a
[01:59:05] revelation from God. Why do you say I
[01:59:07] should I should follow the Quran? It is
[01:59:10] not God's word and I reject it. Did I
[01:59:13] mishar you?
[01:59:14] >> Yes, you mis you misunderstood what I
[01:59:15] was saying. I was I'm talking about the
[01:59:17] Quran's perspective. Ladies and
[01:59:18] gentlemen, let me make it clear. I do
[01:59:21] not believe in the Quran. I believe in
[01:59:22] the original Quran before it got
[01:59:24] corrupted. Um um and so there's some
[01:59:27] truth in the Quran today from the
[01:59:29] original. Whatever aligns with the
[01:59:30] Bible, that's the parts that's true.
[01:59:32] Whatever disagrees with the Bible,
[01:59:33] that's the part that's corrupted. And so
[01:59:36] um it was corrupted by um man. So I
[01:59:37] believe in been the original Quran
[01:59:39] before it was tampered with. Does that
[01:59:40] sound stupid? That's what he's arguing.
[01:59:45] >> That's not what I'm arguing at all. What
[01:59:46] I'm actually arguing what you haven't
[01:59:50] been able to deal with the argument. And
[01:59:51] I know I know it's hard on the musher.
[01:59:54] they can't handle it. But the reality is
[01:59:56] you haven't been able to deal with the
[01:59:58] argument when you claim that the Torah
[02:00:01] and Injil are still ongoing legal
[02:00:04] authorities and then you admit no in
[02:00:07] actual fact the Quran is a legal
[02:00:10] authority over the Jews and Christians
[02:00:12] and previous scriptures because you guys
[02:00:15] have to be our and pay the Jiza. You've
[02:00:18] admitted that we've collected Jiza and
[02:00:20] therefore we have demonstrated that your
[02:00:23] argument regarding the authority of
[02:00:25] previous scriptures is false.
[02:00:28] >> Again, legal binding is irrelevant
[02:00:31] because according to your scriptures in
[02:00:33] your own statement 929, us being demies
[02:00:37] and having to pay the jiza according to
[02:00:38] Islamic law does not have anything to do
[02:00:42] with the corruption or the falsehood of
[02:00:44] the previous scriptures. So therefore,
[02:00:46] the scriptures are still the standard of
[02:00:47] truth even though we have to pay the
[02:00:49] jizzy according to the Quran. Well, I
[02:00:51] mean, I'm waiting for you to arrive to
[02:00:52] the debate, man.
[02:00:56] >> All right, Jake, this question for you.
[02:00:58] Um, if 548 is about Jesus and Christians
[02:01:02] not following the Quran, but gives a
[02:01:04] caveat to follow the scriptures instead.
[02:01:08] Um,
[02:01:11] some of y'all penmanship is rough.
[02:01:13] >> [laughter]
[02:01:13] >> I don't even understand the question to
[02:01:15] be honest. Can you read it again from
[02:01:16] the top?
[02:01:17] >> All right. F548 is about Jews and
[02:01:19] Christians not following the Quran, but
[02:01:21] gives a caveat to follow the scripture
[02:01:24] instead. Wouldn't that still be
[02:01:26] following the Quran and not a
[02:01:28] contradiction?
[02:01:30] >> I I really don't understand the
[02:01:32] question, you know. Uh but I'll answer
[02:01:34] about 548 where it says that the Quran
[02:01:36] is a muan over uh the previous
[02:01:39] scripture. And if you read the very next
[02:01:42] verse 49, it says the prophet peace be
[02:01:45] upon him is to judge between the people
[02:01:48] of the book by the revelation that he
[02:01:51] received. Which means again that the
[02:01:54] Quran is a legal authority over previous
[02:01:58] scripture which Avery has admitted. So
[02:02:00] he's thrown the authority part out. He
[02:02:02] said no, Islamic dilemma is only about
[02:02:05] whether it's true and preserved. It's
[02:02:08] not about whether it's to be followed
[02:02:11] today. He's thrown out the aspect of
[02:02:14] your scriptures needing to be followed
[02:02:17] today.
[02:02:17] >> Where is Jake? Is he here with us?
[02:02:19] >> I'm right here, baby.
[02:02:20] >> You sure?
[02:02:21] >> Yeah.
[02:02:21] >> You good?
[02:02:22] >> I'm good.
[02:02:22] >> Okay. Uh I I I clearly said that the
[02:02:25] Quran affirms the preservation,
[02:02:29] inspiration, and authority of the
[02:02:32] previous scriptures. What does that mean
[02:02:34] by authority? It means that the the
[02:02:36] previous scriptures are the standard of
[02:02:39] truth. If the Quran is not in line with
[02:02:42] them, then the Quran is false. Whether
[02:02:45] it is a legal bind is legally binding on
[02:02:48] the Jews and Christians or not, the
[02:02:51] Quran has to line up with the previous
[02:02:53] scriptures or else the Quran is false.
[02:02:56] When are you going to touch that?
[02:02:57] >> Yeah. Good. So when Mark's gospel says
[02:03:00] that all food is lawful, including pork,
[02:03:04] and the Quran explicitly says that pork
[02:03:07] is haram, it is prohibited. That means
[02:03:11] if you are supposed to follow the Quran,
[02:03:13] that it is a legal authority over your
[02:03:16] previous scripture. You have not been
[02:03:18] able to deal with that other than just
[02:03:20] asserting. You're still affirming
[02:03:22] authority, but it means truth. Well, you
[02:03:24] already said it's preserved. And that is
[02:03:26] the aspect of regarding truth. So you're
[02:03:28] just redundant. You know that you're
[02:03:30] busted.
[02:03:32] >> Uhhuh.
[02:03:37] [laughter]
[02:03:41] >> All right, Amy, this question is for
[02:03:42] you. [clears throat] Can you address why
[02:03:45] you use rhetoric to avoid answering
[02:03:48] essential questions Jake asked you in
[02:03:50] CrossX?
[02:03:51] >> Go ahead.
[02:03:52] >> Can you give me a real question? Matter
[02:03:54] of fact, how about this? Whoever asked
[02:03:55] that question, give give the mic to that
[02:03:57] person.
[02:04:00] Oh, okay. There they go. Oh, no. Not not
[02:04:02] you. It's security. Get the big head one
[02:04:04] out of here. But you you can step up.
[02:04:06] The one in the white.
[02:04:07] >> All right, guys. All right. All right.
[02:04:08] All right. All right. All right.
[02:04:09] [laughter]
[02:04:10] All right.
[02:04:10] >> No, no, no. It it was a it was a joke.
[02:04:12] >> Oh, because you know I'm Abunori, right?
[02:04:14] >> Oh, you're Abunori. Oh, yeah. We can
[02:04:15] talk after this then.
[02:04:18] >> I would I wouldn't know. I know you. But
[02:04:20] uh do you have a a real question because
[02:04:22] that's That's stupid.
[02:04:26] >> I wish I could say the same thing when I
[02:04:28] get stupid questions. All right. But
[02:04:30] like but like like for real like does
[02:04:31] that or why did you use rhetoric to
[02:04:33] avoid the is that like a serious would
[02:04:35] you would you
[02:04:36] >> I think I think what he's trying to get
[02:04:38] at is that you're instead of answering
[02:04:40] the question directly because we use
[02:04:42] rhetoric regular that's what we use to
[02:04:44] communicate but
[02:04:46] >> I think what he's getting at is
[02:04:48] the type of phraseologies I guess to
[02:04:52] avoid the actual question
[02:04:54] >> that he's asking so it's not that you're
[02:04:56] using rhetoric fundamentally I think
[02:04:57] he's just asking you're evading the
[02:05:00] question. You're looping around the
[02:05:01] question.
[02:05:01] >> Okay. I I I just I would like evidence
[02:05:03] that I avoided anything because I've
[02:05:05] answered everything directly. So that's
[02:05:07] he's assuming that I didn't that I
[02:05:10] avoided a question. So or an argument.
[02:05:12] It's silly. Whoever asked that that was
[02:05:14] a stupid question.
[02:05:16] >> I mean, I don't have much to add. I
[02:05:18] can't really speak on his behalf, but I
[02:05:20] think it's been clear on who's answering
[02:05:23] questions, who's not, who's
[02:05:25] contradicting themselves. I'll let
[02:05:26] people be the judge. Oh yeah, they
[02:05:28] judging.
[02:05:29] >> Yeah, I know. They judging by the Quran.
[02:05:32] >> Yeah, that's your false.
[02:05:34] >> Yeah,
[02:05:35] >> the Quran is on our side. Don't you get
[02:05:37] it?
[02:05:38] >> That it's illegal authority over you.
[02:05:39] What you mean?
[02:05:40] >> Does he not get it?
[02:05:40] >> It's illegal authority, guys. All right,
[02:05:42] guys. Let's move on. Let's move on.
[02:05:43] >> Thanks, Demi.
[02:05:44] >> All right, so Jake, this question is for
[02:05:46] you. Uh, Jews and Christians had the
[02:05:48] Torah centuries before Muhammad and
[02:05:50] where it were not working together. So,
[02:05:53] when exactly was it corrupted? Who did
[02:05:55] it? And how did both sides end up with
[02:05:57] the same altered text?
[02:05:59] >> I mean at this point I'd be that
[02:06:01] question was already asked to be fair.
[02:06:03] So I could repeat the same answer which
[02:06:06] is that the Torah and NGO were
[02:06:08] originally oral revelations in virtue of
[02:06:11] them being to reduced to writing very
[02:06:14] early on they were textually corrupted.
[02:06:16] We don't have anything from G for
[02:06:19] example the Torah. I mean where is the
[02:06:21] the chain of custody going back to
[02:06:23] Moses? Where's the chain of custody of
[02:06:26] the uh New Testament going back to uh
[02:06:29] Jesus? It doesn't exist at all.
[02:06:34] >> Avery,
[02:06:34] >> what what was the question?
[02:06:39] >> Oh, it says uh Jews [clears throat] and
[02:06:41] Christians had the Torah uh the Torah
[02:06:43] centuries before Muhammad and were not
[02:06:45] working together. Uh so when exactly was
[02:06:49] it corrupted? Who did it? And how did
[02:06:51] both sides end up with the same altered
[02:06:53] text?
[02:06:54] >> And and just to clarify, Jake, did you
[02:06:56] can you repeat the last thing you said?
[02:07:00] >> Uh the last thing I said, man,
[02:07:02] >> about them not having the gospel or
[02:07:04] something like that.
[02:07:05] >> I didn't I didn't say the
[02:07:07] >> change.
[02:07:07] >> I said I said about it going back to
[02:07:09] Jesus, the uh New Testament
[02:07:11] >> that it does not go back to Jesus.
[02:07:13] >> No.
[02:07:13] >> Okay. Um Yeah. So guys, this would lead
[02:07:16] us to our favorite question, doesn't it?
[02:07:19] What's the angil?
[02:07:21] >> Because if what we have does not go back
[02:07:24] to Jesus, then I guess that would mean
[02:07:25] it's not the angil, which would mean he
[02:07:28] knows what the angil is and would be
[02:07:29] able to tell us what the angil is. Um,
[02:07:32] >> but he can't because the Quran doesn't
[02:07:34] tell him what the angel is exactly
[02:07:36] unless he relies on what we have.
[02:07:38] >> And so, um, it looks like according to
[02:07:40] the Quran, what we have does go back to
[02:07:43] Jesus because the Quran says that and a
[02:07:45] matter of fact, he quoted it chapter 7
[02:07:47] vers7.
[02:07:48] uh that those who believe in the
[02:07:50] unlettered prophet who can neither read
[02:07:52] nor write is written in the Torah and
[02:07:55] gospel with them in the seventh century.
[02:07:58] Well, we have the New Testament in the
[02:08:00] seventh century. Um that's what even
[02:08:03] your commentators quote uh that that we
[02:08:06] have when they're quoting John and and
[02:08:08] all this kind of stuff about Muhammad
[02:08:09] being in the scripture. So according to
[02:08:10] a lot of commentary, we have what goes
[02:08:12] back to Jesus. That's that's tough. But
[02:08:14] you can tell us what the angel is if we
[02:08:15] don't have.
[02:08:16] >> Yeah, I can very easily. So the Quran
[02:08:18] tells you what the NGL is. It was a
[02:08:19] revelation that was given to Jesus peace
[02:08:21] be upon him in his own language. 57:27
[02:08:24] Quran 144. Very clear. Answered your
[02:08:27] silly question. Secondly, when it comes
[02:08:29] to the New Testament, you don't have
[02:08:32] that as being revelation to Jesus. The
[02:08:34] only things we consider are what are
[02:08:36] said to be attributed to Jesus. You can
[02:08:38] say the red letter text, some of which
[02:08:40] is authentic and some which is not.
[02:08:45] I still don't know what it is, you know.
[02:08:47] >> All right. So, this question is for a
[02:08:48] >> Got to keep up, brother.
[02:08:49] >> Question for Avery. What specifically in
[02:08:51] the Torah in the and and especially the
[02:08:54] gospel contradict the Quran?
[02:08:56] >> Yeah. So, a a lot of things. So, in the
[02:08:58] in the Quran, one of the most heinous
[02:09:00] things that you can say about Allah is
[02:09:02] that he has a son. You'll find this in
[02:09:04] chapter 19 uh verses 88 to 93. And Allah
[02:09:07] is very clear that the only relationship
[02:09:09] that you can have with him is a slave to
[02:09:11] master relationship. You cannot come to
[02:09:13] him as a figurative son, metaphorical
[02:09:14] son, literal son. Not at all. While the
[02:09:17] scriptures teach that not only um uh is
[02:09:21] Jesus the actual begotten son of the
[02:09:23] father, but that believers are the
[02:09:25] adopted sons of God. That Israel is are
[02:09:28] the adopted sons of God as the nation
[02:09:30] that he created. While in chapter 5 18,
[02:09:33] the Quran says that the Jews are and the
[02:09:35] Christians, they say we are the sons of
[02:09:37] Allah, his loved ones. He says, then why
[02:09:40] does he punish you for your sins? No,
[02:09:42] you are but men and he punishes who he
[02:09:44] wills and he uh guides who he wills.
[02:09:46] Right? While in the in the Torah in
[02:09:48] Deuteronomy 8, the Bible says that as a
[02:09:51] father disciplines his son, so I
[02:09:54] discipline you. So according to the
[02:09:56] Quran, a father wouldn't discipline his
[02:09:58] son, but according to the Bible, that's
[02:09:59] exactly what a father does if he loves
[02:10:01] his son. So the Quran contradicts a very
[02:10:04] core issue about God's character and
[02:10:06] nature as being father and having a son.
[02:10:08] Uh, while it's opposite in Islam,
[02:10:10] >> yeah, I already had to correct David
[02:10:12] Wood on this the other day. The Quran
[02:10:14] does not completely negate sunship, it
[02:10:18] negates the typical meanings of sunship
[02:10:21] that Christians apply to Jesus, like him
[02:10:24] being eternally begotten of the father,
[02:10:26] which the Nyine Creed says, which
[02:10:28] doesn't make any sense at all, or being
[02:10:30] a literal son of uh God. It does not
[02:10:34] outright negate the fact that there
[02:10:36] could be uh God and scholars even talk
[02:10:39] about this in previous Sharia or
[02:10:42] previous laws. Uh just as prostration at
[02:10:44] a particular time was not in and of
[02:10:47] itself considered to be uh disbelief if
[02:10:50] you prostrated to somebody but in light
[02:10:52] of the behavior going on God then says
[02:10:56] no this can no longer be the case. It's
[02:10:58] the same thing with the terms father and
[02:11:00] son which the Christians have unfort
[02:11:03] unfortunately innovated and used in an
[02:11:05] improper way.
[02:11:07] >> Um so just to give a little bit more on
[02:11:09] this uh the Quran also contradicts like
[02:11:12] the character of God like you have a law
[02:11:14] where God says that if you divorce a
[02:11:15] woman and she marries another she's not
[02:11:17] allowed to come back to you. That is an
[02:11:19] abomination to the Lord. Um but in the
[02:11:21] Quran, she cannot come back uh to you
[02:11:23] unless she slept with uh that that that
[02:11:26] husband and then she can come back to
[02:11:28] you. So what the the Quran allows for
[02:11:32] what uh God says is an abomination,
[02:11:34] meaning a a moral depravity. So you have
[02:11:37] a bunch of examples like this in the
[02:11:38] Quran and the scriptures.
[02:11:41] >> All right, Jake, this question for you.
[02:11:42] How do you find Muhammad in the Bible?
[02:11:44] How can you trust the Bible to find
[02:11:46] Muhammad if it's corrupted? Okay. So,
[02:11:49] uh, regard this is not what the debate
[02:11:51] is about. The debate is not about where,
[02:11:54] uh, the prophet Muhammad is in the
[02:11:55] previous scripture. But if you want to
[02:11:57] see a good example of that, you can go
[02:11:59] rewatch actually I'm plugging Marlin in
[02:12:02] Gospel Truth here. They just had a
[02:12:04] debate on that topic between a Muslim
[02:12:07] and a Christian. And I think the Muslim
[02:12:08] did a fairly good job. You can go to
[02:12:12] passages like Daniel uh, chapter 2. uh
[02:12:15] you can go to passages in the New
[02:12:17] Testament like in uh Matthew when it
[02:12:19] talks about uh the parable that was
[02:12:22] mentioned. All of these points uh point
[02:12:24] to we believe the prophet Muhammad and
[02:12:27] are clearer examples of the prophet
[02:12:29] Muhammad being prophesized in the Torah
[02:12:32] and in Gil rather than uh Jesus being
[02:12:36] prophesized in the Old Testament.
[02:12:38] >> He said that this is not what the debate
[02:12:40] is about. Y'all is he okay? Yeah, I'm
[02:12:42] I'm great, bro.
[02:12:43] >> If the if the scriptures are corrupted,
[02:12:45] how can you trust them to find Muhammad
[02:12:47] in there? That's the Islamic dilemma.
[02:12:50] And he said that this is not what the
[02:12:51] debate is about, man. You're lost, bro.
[02:12:53] So, according to you, I according to
[02:12:55] this argument here, the scriptures are
[02:12:57] corrupted. How can you find Muhammad in
[02:12:59] corrupted scriptures? Now, you're going
[02:13:01] to these scriptures that you believe are
[02:13:02] tampered with and corrupted. How can we
[02:13:04] trust that these are actually accurate?
[02:13:06] You can't. You're just fishing and the
[02:13:09] the Quran sends you on a wild goose
[02:13:10] chase. doesn't tell you where to find
[02:13:12] Muhammad, doesn't quote any scriptures
[02:13:14] that say, "Yeah, this is where Muhammad
[02:13:16] is in, and just sends you, you got to
[02:13:17] pick and choose. Okay, you know what?
[02:13:19] This seems to align with me, so I'm
[02:13:20] gonna go ahead and uh and and and and
[02:13:22] and choose to believe in this and say
[02:13:24] this about Muhammad." Unfortunately, the
[02:13:26] per the places they go forces them to
[02:13:28] commit. Sherk, he just mentioned Daniel
[02:13:29] 2, the son of man who receives glory and
[02:13:32] power and everybody's going to be
[02:13:33] worshiping him. That's Muhammad. Okay.
[02:13:36] So he said that we don't have any
[02:13:38] examples of where this is being
[02:13:40] specified. In actual fact, if you
[02:13:43] understood and knew Islamic literature,
[02:13:45] you would know that in the a hadith
[02:13:47] there are specific examples like uh
[02:13:50] Isaiah chapter 42 is uh paraphrased and
[02:13:53] it's many scholars have said that it's
[02:13:55] referring to Isaiah 42 and the coming of
[02:13:58] the prophet Muhammad. So there are
[02:13:59] examples of this in our scriptures and
[02:14:02] there are examples where the early
[02:14:04] scholars who actually knew the prophet
[02:14:06] Muhammad directly explicitly tell us
[02:14:09] some examples of where he's prophesized
[02:14:11] in the in their books.
[02:14:13] >> Like where
[02:14:13] >> I just told you pay attention.
[02:14:15] >> Also they called Daniel.
[02:14:16] >> No, I said Isaiah 42. Pay attention.
[02:14:18] >> Where you getting Daniel from?
[02:14:19] >> Pay attention.
[02:14:20] >> All right, guys. Uh Jake, all the rest
[02:14:23] of the questions are for you. Um, so if
[02:14:26] you want to answer a couple more
[02:14:27] questions, give you a little more time.
[02:14:29] >> Yeah, let's do it.
[02:14:29] >> To respond to the questions and so we go
[02:14:32] for it. Uh, today if previous
[02:14:34] revelation, it's like the same question
[02:14:36] over and
[02:14:37] >> over. So let me let me move on.
[02:14:40] >> Um,
[02:14:40] >> got a good one.
[02:14:41] >> All right. So if the Exodus scroll
[02:14:43] establish a deliverance pattern, waters,
[02:14:45] wilderness, bread, covenant, how does
[02:14:48] Islam explain Jesus fulfilling that same
[02:14:51] pattern if the biblical text is
[02:14:53] corrupted?
[02:14:54] >> Uh I'm not sure what the person is
[02:14:56] referring to with that pattern there to
[02:14:58] be very honest. Know what I don't know
[02:15:00] what he's talking about.
[02:15:02] >> I can respond.
[02:15:05] >> Go ahead if you could tell me what he's
[02:15:06] referring to.
[02:15:07] >> Well, okay. So what he's referring to is
[02:15:09] that there's within within Jesus's
[02:15:11] ministry, he is reflecting the Old
[02:15:14] Testament and the path the the pathway
[02:15:17] of Israel and where Israel failed, Jesus
[02:15:20] actually does the same thing and
[02:15:22] succeeds. So like for example, uh Israel
[02:15:24] was only supposed to be in the
[02:15:25] wilderness for 40 days. Um however,
[02:15:27] because of their disobedience or
[02:15:28] rebellion, they lasted they were in
[02:15:30] there for 40 years. So Jesus, he went to
[02:15:32] the wilderness and for to be tempted and
[02:15:35] tested and he was there for only 40 days
[02:15:37] just like Israel was supposed to be. So
[02:15:39] it's stuff like this bread, all this
[02:15:41] kind of stuff. These are types uh of of
[02:15:44] uh these are typologies where Christ is
[02:15:46] fulfilling them which ironically ladies
[02:15:48] and gentlemen the corrupted scriptures
[02:15:50] are all in line with each other except
[02:15:51] until it comes to the Quran.
[02:15:53] >> Okay. So basically you're saying that
[02:15:55] the New Testament is continuous with the
[02:15:59] Old Testament and that it's fulfilling
[02:16:01] certain proph Jesus anyway is fulfilling
[02:16:04] certain uh prophecies or typologies um
[02:16:08] in the Old Testament text. That's what I
[02:16:10] understand the question to be saying. Um
[02:16:12] yeah so in in that case um as I said go
[02:16:16] and watch the recent debate between
[02:16:18] inspiring philosophy and um orthodox
[02:16:21] Muslim where he admitted that the gospel
[02:16:25] of Matthew is clearly circular that is
[02:16:28] basically assuming its position it's
[02:16:30] using certain typologies to read back
[02:16:33] into the Old Testament and if you're
[02:16:36] playing by that standard then he
[02:16:38] admitted that Muslims can do the same
[02:16:39] thing. So, I don't think it's really
[02:16:41] that impressive. I don't think that the
[02:16:43] claims of typology are really impressive
[02:16:46] from the New Testament going back to the
[02:16:48] Old Testament.
[02:16:50] >> All right, we have about two minutes, so
[02:16:52] I think this last question should finish
[02:16:54] off the Q&A here.
[02:16:55] >> Yeah. Okay,
[02:16:58] Jake, you stated that the inverse is not
[02:17:01] necessarily true regarding the Quran,
[02:17:03] but uh ne Let me start over. Jake, you
[02:17:06] stated that the inverse is not
[02:17:08] necessarily true regarding the Quran
[02:17:10] being false if tested against the Torah.
[02:17:13] Can you elaborate on that?
[02:17:15] >> Uh, I think he's referring to Quran
[02:17:18] 1094.
[02:17:19] Um, where it says to ask the people of
[02:17:22] the book, right? Um, and again, as I
[02:17:25] said, it's very clear in the context
[02:17:28] that it's referring, it's not
[02:17:30] all-encompassing, as Avery is basically
[02:17:32] admitting now, because now, as opposed
[02:17:34] to what I played from the clip in his
[02:17:36] debate with Daniel, he's saying it's not
[02:17:39] all-encompassing that we need to look at
[02:17:41] everything, including the uh legal
[02:17:44] rulings of the Torah and Injil, and that
[02:17:46] the Quran must match up with them. He's
[02:17:49] even admitting that now it's only partly
[02:17:51] an authority over the Quran. according
[02:17:53] to him. Well, I agree that it's also
[02:17:56] partly authoritative just in a different
[02:17:58] context. If you read the context, it's
[02:18:00] referring to the stories of the prophet.
[02:18:03] This is how it's read and that the the
[02:18:05] Jews and Christians who became Muslims
[02:18:07] can speak about that because they had
[02:18:09] access to those traditions and texts.
[02:18:12] >> Avery,
[02:18:14] >> uh yeah. So, I mean just again another
[02:18:17] re uh misrepresentation of what I said
[02:18:20] in 1094. The Quran points to the
[02:18:22] previous scriptures as the standard of
[02:18:24] truth, which is what an authority is. If
[02:18:27] you are the standard of truth, you are
[02:18:29] the authority. So when it comes to the
[02:18:31] truthfulness of the Quran, whether it
[02:18:33] actually is from Allah or not, it is
[02:18:36] fully reliant on the previous
[02:18:38] scriptures. If it's not in line with
[02:18:40] them and what Muhammad then if it's not
[02:18:42] in line with them, then what mua then
[02:18:43] Muhammad will know that what he's
[02:18:45] receiving is false and from Satan, not
[02:18:49] from God. So
[02:18:51] >> right. So if that includes legal rulings
[02:18:54] then your interpretation is busted.
[02:18:56] >> Never said it includes.
[02:18:58] >> Okay. So it's not all incumbent. So that
[02:19:00] means then that it's the standard of
[02:19:02] truth for some things but not for legal
[02:19:06] rulings. It's only partly a standard of
[02:19:09] truth. It's not fully a standard of
[02:19:12] truth because of the fact that the Quran
[02:19:16] explicitly abregates certain rulings and
[02:19:19] disagrees with the legal rulings in the
[02:19:21] text. Thanks for conceding the Islamic
[02:19:23] dilemma. You have admitted and thanks I
[02:19:26] love collecting Jiza.
[02:19:28] >> All right, there's uh one more one more
[02:19:30] question here. Um and I think this this
[02:19:32] ended. What can we all do from tonight
[02:19:35] on uh from tonight on to help us all
[02:19:39] Jews, Christians, and Muslims to get
[02:19:40] along better? To get better, get along
[02:19:43] better. Want to start Avery?
[02:19:47] [laughter]
[02:19:49] >> Sure. Yeah. Um the first thing that that
[02:19:52] can happen is that we all come to the
[02:19:54] believing uh faith and grace in Jesus
[02:19:56] Christ. And then uh I believe that we
[02:19:58] can all truly work together. We can all
[02:20:00] live together. Um And so, uh, but
[02:20:05] despite that, because that's more
[02:20:06] idealistic, I think that if we, um, are
[02:20:09] able to remove the emotionalism with
[02:20:12] behind our disagreements and be able to
[02:20:15] have these discussions cordally. It's
[02:20:18] not about, oh, I baked you and I I
[02:20:20] destroyed you and you're a liar this and
[02:20:22] you're a liar that, but you know, uh,
[02:20:24] you know, giving each other grace and
[02:20:25] being honest with each other, help um um
[02:20:30] um what's healthfully disagreeing with
[02:20:32] one another. I think that we'll be able
[02:20:34] to get along uh in a perfect world. But
[02:20:38] we're here, guys.
[02:20:40] Uh, I think that's rather rich coming
[02:20:43] from a guy who was literally making a
[02:20:46] spoon cooking motion during the entire
[02:20:49] debate and half the audience is
[02:20:51] laughing. I had to do this.
[02:20:52] >> I mean, it it seems it seems
[02:20:55] >> quite hypocritical coming from you and
[02:20:58] also from the same guy who hangs out
[02:21:00] with people who desecrate scripture on
[02:21:03] on the stream and do a whole bunch of
[02:21:05] foul stuff. Not to say that Muslims
[02:21:07] aren't doing the same thing. I actually
[02:21:09] condemn them when they do. Uh but the
[02:21:11] problem is that on both sides uh there
[02:21:14] are Muslims and Christians uh doing a
[02:21:17] lot of mischievous things to each other
[02:21:20] and uh much of these debates has become
[02:21:23] about rhetoric and so so-called cooking
[02:21:25] and uh yeah I'm I'm responding to that
[02:21:28] in kind. I wish it could be a more
[02:21:31] polite and uh respectful honest
[02:21:34] dialogue, but for whatever reason, it
[02:21:36] seems that that isn't the case. So, I
[02:21:39] really don't really have a good answer
[02:21:41] for that because I think we need uh
[02:21:43] people on both sides to truly uh be
[02:21:46] working towards that and I don't see
[02:21:47] that being done. So, I don't I don't
[02:21:49] really have a good solution to be
[02:21:51] honest.
[02:21:52] >> All right, we'll close that out. Um,
[02:21:54] thank you guys for the debate. Round of
[02:21:56] applause.
[02:22:02] All right. Good stuff. Good stuff. How'
[02:22:04] y'all like today?
[02:22:06] >> Was it good?
[02:22:09] Yeah, definitely. Uh, this is definitely
[02:22:11] one for for the record books here.
[02:22:13] There's a gray one.