Anti-Islam Christian Preachers RUN From a Muslim

Añadido: 2026-05-16

[00:00:00]But what's the evidence that there's actually 500 eyewitnesses because he's writing to the church in Corinthians 1,200 m away from him. It's just one person saying it's that's circular because that's okay.

[00:00:10]>> So there's zero evidence is what I'm saying.

[00:00:12]>> No, I don't do that. I have independent reasonings to affirm the legitimacy of the Quran. Therefore, I can believe the Quran. What you're telling me is there's zero evidence to show that the Gospels are authentic. We just believe it's authentic.

[00:00:23]>> Wait, when do you think Mark was written?

[00:00:26]>> During the time of Christ.

[00:00:27]>> What? Yeah.

[00:00:29]Why is that a shock?

[00:00:30]>> There is not a single Christian ever on earth who agrees with this.

[00:00:33]>> Aaron, I don't care about what other Christians think.

[00:00:35]>> So, you 5 AD?

[00:00:37]>> I don't know. Like, >> well, if you don't know, how are you going to, you know, make these claims?

[00:00:40]You can't make claims without evidence.

[00:00:42]>> How do you know they didn't have it then, though?

[00:00:43]>> Because there's there's no evidence to show that there's Do you have evidence?

[00:00:46]Would you agree that Prophet Muhammad himself explicitly says it's referring to all of the text or is the group?

[00:00:51]>> I ask you the question if you you're ignoring See, you're ignoring. I ask you the question and you guys want to answer my questions.

[00:00:55]>> We did answer that though. Would you agree? You see, you won't let me ask a question.

[00:01:00]>> Can we reply what you >> But I asked a question, you ignored it.

[00:01:02]Remember, you didn't reply.

[00:01:04]>> Well, you scripture is by using scripture.

[00:01:07]>> That's circular.

[00:01:08]>> You keep you keep That's exactly right.

[00:01:10]>> But I don't agree with that. That's no evidence for that.

[00:01:12]>> Okay. So, there you go again. You're interrupting.

[00:01:14]>> Come on, man. We were just talking about Isaiah 53. You guys read the whole chapter. I haven't been able to finish the first verse.

[00:01:19]>> He's stepping in place of a people taking on their sins and he's being put to death. That's what it says. Matthew 8:16 doesn't think it's vicarious. We can continue on >> people of the book.

[00:01:27]>> Help me understand why that would even matter.

[00:01:29]>> Of course, because remember, like I said, the the people who accept the Quran's revelation, they judge by the Quran. So 1094 isn't isn't telling you to go to Christians and Jews who read their scripture and interpret it on their own whims. It's telling you just like in Deuteronomy 32:7 to go to your fathers who read the Torah. It's talking about those who understand and accept the Quran's revelation and judgment and they judge the Torah and the Gospel by the Quran. Is it talking about a specific group of people?

[00:01:57]>> No, it's not. Sah Bkari 7363 is talking about the text itself.

[00:02:02]>> You're just misinterpreting it back and forth because you're you're stern in your position and what you need to hear is the gospel.

[00:02:08]>> Okay, let's talk about it. You guys aren't wanting to talk about it.

[00:02:11]>> Can we Can we share that real quick?

[00:02:12]Yeah, but I would I would like to talk about Isaiah 53 still cuz he >> you already believe that talk because he doesn't allow people to talk.

[00:02:19]>> So So Aaron, you're going to die and you're going to see him.

[00:02:31]>> All right, guys. What's going on, bro?

[00:02:32]As y'all see, we got the street preachers out here. So y'all already know, we going to go pull up on him right now. We going to go have a conversation with them on if the gospels are reliable. So, I'm going to wait a couple minutes, let them get uh set up, and then I'm going to go ahead and walk over there and uh have a conversation with them. So, let's see how it goes.

[00:02:50]>> I bet I appreciate y'all uh being open to have that with me.

[00:02:53]>> Yeah, absolutely. Yeah, appreciate that.

[00:02:54]Thank you for reaching out to us.

[00:02:56]>> Yeah, no worries. Y'all are okay.

[00:02:58]>> I haven't met you. I just heard about you.

[00:02:59]>> Yeah, no worries. Uh my name is Aaron.

[00:03:01]>> Aaron. Greg. Aaron. Okay. Aaron.

[00:03:04]>> Y'all are okay if I record?

[00:03:05]>> Yeah.

[00:03:05]>> All right. Thank you, man. Just wanted to ask.

[00:03:07]>> Yeah. Yeah, I don't mind. Yeah.

[00:03:09]>> So, you know, like for me as a Muslim, I like to hold the uh scholarly and historical position on the gospels on it, you know, being anonymous independent uh sources as the vast majority of scholars would hold. So, like the evidence I'm kind of looking for is like what kind like I was saying like with like the vast majority of scholars would say the the gospels are made they're not from Mark, Matthew, Luke, and John, but anonymous communities who didn't have access to each other's works. So, be asking for like evidence to show like what's the evidence that shows it's really from Mark, Matthew, Luke, and John because from my knowledge, the earliest person to name it by the four gospels is Irenaeus and 180 AD. But Christians prior to him like Justin Martyr and Ignatius and stuff. They only know the gospel, but they don't know the specifics of the authorship. They don't know Ma Matthew wrote Matthew. They don't know Mark is a prespit of Peter who wrote who wrote for Mark. They don't know this. So I'll be asking for what evidence is it? because it seems like the historical reception is the earliest Christians don't know the authorship of the gospels. It's only later than they seem to attribute it to it. you can be forgiven.

[00:04:17]>> So I would say by the precious blood of the lamb.

[00:04:20]>> I guess where we would go coming from where your life >> current presupposition is is blowing from >> is you have a current bias because you're you're Muslim, right? And so what I would go is I would do I think we should move to rather to rather than going into an external critique what we should be looking at is the internal critique. And the reason why I say that is because the Quran affirms the gospels.

[00:04:47]>> So it's not a matter of the gospels of the authorship or the how how do you put it? The uh the penmanship maybe from from specifically those those four authors. We've got Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John.

[00:05:03]>> I don't think that's really the question here. I think the question really is what does the Quran say about the >> what does it say about it? So it actually affirms the previous revelation of Allah. Number one, it also says that that the angel, the Torah and the Psalms are previous revelations that they are the word of Allah and the word of Allah cannot be corrupted. So with that what we have to do with the internal critique of the Quran itself is >> to rejoice today to really see that >> the gospels that we have today have never been changed and >> dang that was loud >> seeing that they're author that they're >> that they're still reliable still reliable and affirmed in the Quran, >> then what's the question?

[00:05:58]>> Well, there's a couple of things I wouldn't agree with that is because when the Quran talks about the gospel, the angel says in 5:46, it's the gospel that was given to Christ. Like how it says in Luke and in Mark that Jesus went around preaching the gospel. It doesn't say it affirms the four biographical narrative gospels that were written by men after Jesus, but rather it affirms the revelation given to Jesus. one single gospel. It's not a narrative account.

[00:06:24]It's just teachings of Jesus. But then after that, the Quran explicitly talks about how Jews and Christians textually corrupted the scripture. We have 279.

[00:06:32]Woe to those who change the scripture with their hands and and they've changed with the with their hands and ascribed it to Allah. Uh they said we see in 512-15 the Jews and Christians textually distorted the the previous scripture. So the messenger comes to clarify and you said that the word of Allah can't be changed but the yeah the the Arabic for there is is calam which calam can be used for multiple meanings. If you go to 1064 of the Quran, for example, it uses the exact same word, but instead of translating it as the word of Allah, it's his promise or decree because it's not referring to a textual manuscript, it's referring to his revelationary decrees and fulfillments. Same thing like when Luke when the angel came to Mary and he said that your your son Jesus will be born and Mary said, "May this promise and word be fulfilled."

[00:07:26]It's in that exact same sense. It's a promise and a word being fulfilled. It's not a textual verbatim manuscript cuz that would go against free will especially when the Quran explicitly verbatim says that the Jews and Christians textually uh corrupted the scriptures.

[00:07:40]>> So my question would be when when was it corrupted >> the gospel?

[00:07:44]>> Well of course I don't think that the authorship is from Mark, Matthew, Luke and John. So the authorship itself is going to be a sense of corruption.

[00:07:50]>> Well there's going to be a lot of evidence the external evidence. So we have a plethora of evidence to show that the earliest Christians, they don't know the authorship of the gospel. We go internally and we see that the accounts and the resurrections, they don't corroborate with each other. They're they're unable to harmonize with each other. Uh for example, in Luke's account, Luke's resurrection is the first resurrection appearance, but Luke's account is in Jerusalem and Jesus says, "Stay in Jerusalem for 50 days until the Holy Spirit comes." But in Matthew's account, it comes after Luke's account cuz it's in Galilee. It's a multiple day trip. And then instead of it's in Galilee, but Luke in Luke Acts, it's Luke's in Acts Jes uh Jesus only appears to the disciples for a course of 40 days out of the 50 days that they're in Jerusalem waiting for the Pentecost.

[00:08:37]So they never left Jerusalem, but in Matthew's account, they left Jerusalem.

[00:08:41]They're in Galilee and they're now baptizing. Even though in Luke's account, they're supposed to be waiting for the Holy Spirit to come. And that's why Tatian when he makes his diet tester, he has to completely redact Luke's account and add it onto Matthew's because he understands that it's contradictory. And all scholars agree with this. This is why no scholar considers the resurrection accounts um corroborating with each other. And then we have more evidence, internal evidence. Matthew's account, which is supposed to be an eyewitness account, he copies 90% of Luke's gospel, sorry, Matthew Mark's gospel word for word using Mark's literary style. In fact, in Matthew 9:9, when it talks about how Jesus met Matthew, instead of being in the usual first eyewitness appearance, it's a verbatim copy of Mark's account, which is in third person, and it's a non eyewitness. So, you have Matthew, a supposed eyewitness, verbatim copying a non eyewitness's account for how Matthew met, sorry, for how Jesus met himself.

[00:09:35]That's just it's called an absurd reading. No one no scholar would accept that. Would >> this would this be based upon Muslim scholars? No, this is all Christian and secular scholars.

[00:09:44]>> Yeah. So those who would do textual prison. So first off, like the gospel narratives like Matthew, Mark, and Luke, and John, they're not written chronologically. Like there might be chronological order within them, but they're not all set up in a chronological order.

[00:09:57]>> I didn't mention anything.

[00:09:58]>> So there's a reason why certain things happen in different gospel accounts.

[00:10:03]I like to go back honestly back to where you talked about how the gospel was given to Jesus >> and ask you like >> what was that message then that Jesus spoke if it was if you're saying it was corrupted before the time >> yeah are you all familiar with the Q gospel >> the rest of the world >> yeah I've heard of that >> yeah I would just align with Q everything that Q teaches align with Islam the Q scholars understand that the Q gospel teaches that Jesus is only a prophet he's not a salvific speific messiah, but rather he was raised up to heaven alive like Enoch and Elijah.

[00:10:36]>> Yeah, because we can perform a reconstruction on Q and we can gain him.

[00:10:39]>> Yeah, but I could just easily say other textual different >> Well, the vast majority of scholars affirm to Q for a reason. But that would just be appealing to authority. I can demonstrate actually the reconstruction of Q. But if you can demonstrate why, then I would accept that if it's a if it's an actual argument. You know, >> I would say that the problem with your argument is you're saying that the gospels were corrupted before the time the Quran came out. But again going back to what my brother said, the Quran affirms liability. Yes, it does.

[00:11:05]>> 279 it says the Jews and Christians textually distorted the scriptures.

[00:11:08]>> So if I take the Quran, >> so it's talking about a group, not all.

[00:11:13]It's talking about a group and there are those distoring you.

[00:11:19]>> But of course, I would agree with you.

[00:11:20]Not all of them are going to be textually distorting it. But if you textually distort a manuscript, it doesn't matter if it's one person, five, 100. If the manuscripts are textually distorted, the next generation is going to naturally follow it. It doesn't necessitate that. Of course, that if I take the Quran and I begin to change the word and I begin to make copies and send it out, does that mean therefore it's corrupt?

[00:11:40]>> Yeah. Well, we have millions and millions of Quran manuscripts. But if you're going to ancient times >> today, >> yeah, that's not true.

[00:11:46]>> No, right now.

[00:11:47]>> Yeah. You don't have >> We don't have millions of Quran books.

[00:11:50]>> You have you have these.

[00:11:50]>> That's what I meant.

[00:11:51]>> But that's that doesn't that doesn't that's not your original manuscript.

[00:11:54]>> Well, what what I meant is just like a book copy. I just meant like we have millions of book copies, but in ancient times, you would only have one or two manuscripts of like the Torah or the or the Gospel either.

[00:12:04]>> Uh in 2 Kings 22, the book of the book of Deuteronomy was lost. They had literally one book of Deuteronomy and they found that one book inside the temple. They only in 2 Kings 22, they they the book of Deuteronomy was literally lost. They find it and King Josiah tears his robes out of shock.

[00:12:20]>> Okay, let's we'll hold that. We'll hold that cuz we're still we're still on a point. the precious blood of the lamb.

[00:12:25]>> But it it doesn't say that because the Arabic uses which means exchanging. What what the word yesu means is that you have something originally and you're exchanging it for something else. What the what the author 279 279 >> right here. So woe to those who distort the scripture with their own hands. Then say this is from Allah seeking of fleeting gain. So woe to them for what their hands have written and woe to them for what they have earned. But the word that's used is matter.

[00:12:54]>> So it means it's not talking about all.

[00:12:56]It's talking about a group of people.

[00:12:58]>> It doesn't matter because they're exchanging it for a fleeting name, >> right? But they've exchanging it with the word that hold on the word. It means you exchange it. So you the author of the Quran is saying they had the revelation and they're exchanging it for something else. They no longer have that. The author of the Quran is implying it. So it doesn't matter what you're implying. And if we Huh?

[00:13:22]>> Hold on. So you said So you're saying that this is happening during >> No, I didn't say that. It already it already happened prior to the to the prophet Muhammad.

[00:13:29]>> Okay. So So when when was that?

[00:13:31]>> Like I said, when when the four gospels were written, that's one of them. Cuz the four gospels use the Q source.

[00:13:36]>> How can you justify that?

[00:13:37]>> Why? Because it's authorship isn't reliable. They invent sayings like they invent the suffering son of man sayingings.

[00:13:42]>> Who told you that?

[00:13:43]>> It's not found in Q. Mark entirely invents it.

[00:13:45]>> So Q dictates truth.

[00:13:47]>> It's the earliest historical gospel. I'm going to go with this.

[00:13:49]>> How do you know that?

[00:13:49]>> Because it's the one that Mark and Matthew use, and it's going to be the earliest gospel.

[00:13:53]>> How do I know what?

[00:13:54]>> How do you know that this is the earliest that Mark and Matthew?

[00:13:56]>> How do I know is that Mark and Matthew use it?

[00:13:58]>> Yeah.

[00:13:58]>> Yeah. It's because Mark and Matthew copy off two sources. They copy off of Mark because they use Matthew uses 90% of Mark copying its literary style. Luke uses 50% of Mark copying it literary style. This is wildly accepted. You know, you don't have to be there cuz we have the literary details. You can see when they copy, they have their own writing style, but then you can see all of a sudden they just verbatim copy Mark's writing style. They don't change on Mark's writing style.

[00:14:21]>> So, how do you know that? That how do you like again, how do you know that?

[00:14:25]>> I would disagree with that because I studied the Greek and Mark's grammar is not the same as Matthew.

[00:14:33]>> That's that's what I just said. Higher level. Matthew is a higher level.

[00:14:37]>> But then when he copies Mark, he does then copy Mark's literary style. That's the whole point. If you go to Matthew 9, you'll see he verbatim copies Mark's account on how Jesus met Matthew. The author of Matthew is copying someone else's narrative for how Jesus met himself. It's most likely not the author of Matthew.

[00:14:53]>> The grammar, the the Greek words that's used, the syntactical structure is is vastly different.

[00:14:59]>> Well, let's check Matthew 9.

[00:15:01]>> For somebody who's a student of Greek, Mark is actually one of the more basic.

[00:15:05]>> I agree with you though. I agree with you. But I'm saying whenever he copies Mark, he's then starts using Mark's literary style. We know it because he starts to use >> copies, >> right? Matthew copies Mark's poor literary style as well.

[00:15:16]>> You're getting your information from >> this is this is what even Christian scholars agree >> who are either Muslims >> Christians have done Christians agree with this >> Allison he has multiple books over Q.

[00:15:27]He's a Christian himself. He holds the queue.

[00:15:29]>> Yeah. The Q is >> Tucker referred to another scholar. He's Christian. These aren't these aren't Muslims. These aren't seculars. These are Christian believers. Right.

[00:15:38]Aaron >> these don't dictate truth these people.

[00:15:44]>> I understand. I'm not appealing to them.

[00:15:45]I'm I'm demonstrating why right now.

[00:15:46]>> You're appealing them for your argument.

[00:15:48]>> You he asked if there was any Muslim. I don't have to appeal to them.

[00:15:50]>> No, no, no. He's asking for your source.

[00:15:52]Or he's saying he's saying that your source is biased. You're saying that you're saying that that bi that >> Well, I'm appealing to to history.

[00:15:58]>> But wait a second. But wait a second.

[00:16:00]Your proof to to support your argument and your claim is that you're referring to another manuscript. And you're saying that >> I'm not referring to any manuscript.

[00:16:08]>> You're referring to >> Yeah. But that's a reconstruction based on Mark and Matthew and other gospel sources. Again, how do you know that?

[00:16:15]>> Because we know that Mark and Matthew use it because they're independent.

[00:16:19]Matthew and Luke are independent gospel writers.

[00:16:21]>> According to what?

[00:16:22]>> According to their own text. That's why they're right. Yeah. That's why that's why they write uncorroborating gospels.

[00:16:27]The resurrection accounts are contradictory.

[00:16:29]>> There's no there's no contradiction accounts.

[00:16:31]>> So, let's go over the resurrection accounts.

[00:16:33]>> We don't need to do that. We have to account the argument that Matthew and Luke are independent authors. They don't have access to each other's works and writings. How do we know this? Because the writings where they don't have source material, i.e. how Q lacks a passion and resurrection narrative. They have contradictory material. The resurrection accounts are so contradictory they cannot be harmonized.

[00:16:56]This is what the vast majority of scholars agree with. Let's go over it then.

[00:17:00]>> It doesn't matter that the vast majority >> but let's go over it though. That's what I'm saying. Let's let's go over it.

[00:17:04]>> But here's the thing.

[00:17:05]>> He accomplished it.

[00:17:06]>> What's your standard of truth?

[00:17:08]>> The Quran.

[00:17:10]>> The Quran again. And back to that.

[00:17:12]>> Yeah. Yeah. I I wanted to finish my point cuz you're misinterpreting 279 because the thing is we only have one interpreter of the Quran, which is the prophet Muhammad on whom be peace.

[00:17:21]That's why 215 and 212 says he's been Well, hold on, hold on, hold on. That's why that's why 21 151 and 2132 says that the prophet has been sent with the Quran and the wisdom alongside with it. He interprets the Quran. So when we look at his interpretation in Sahib Bukari 7363 the interpretation of 279 is that the previous scripture itself is holistically corrupted. It's not that just some people corrupted it and some other groups have an uncorrupted Torah.

[00:17:51]It's that the Torah and Injil that we have right now in the time of the prophet every manuscript we have is corrupted. Wait, say that part again.

[00:17:57]That last part.

[00:17:58]>> Every manuscript of the Torah and in we have during the time of the prophet is corrupted.

[00:18:01]>> That is definitely not true because he affirms the the the revelation of God.

[00:18:06]>> So why does he say 279 back to the to to judge by the gospel? It says right here.

[00:18:10]>> So yeah, that's a perfect but how do you judge according to the Quran?

[00:18:14]>> He's not even telling you to judge by the >> How do you judge? No, no, but according to the author of the Quran, when he uses the word judge, what does he mean by that? Because when an author uses a word, they have an implied meaning. You need to show that meaning from the Quran. I can show you what it means.

[00:18:27]>> It says right here, then in the >> No, you're not showing the meaning.

[00:18:29]That's my point. If you go to 548 to 50, it shows you what judging means and 568.

[00:18:35]You judge by using the Quran as a standard of proof.

[00:18:38]>> Aaron, that's a couple verses before you get to 48.

[00:18:41]>> That's what's the point. That doesn't change anything.

[00:18:44]>> But my argument back to you, Aaron, is this is your standard. This is your book that you hold to so dearly.

[00:18:52]>> But you don't understand what I said.

[00:18:54]This is the word of God.

[00:18:55]>> What does he mean by judge?

[00:18:56]>> Wait a second. You're making a claim that the gospels that we have today are corrupted. You're claiming that the gospels that he had during that time were corrupted.

[00:19:04]>> But Muhammad himself affirms >> the the the gospels that he had.

[00:19:08]>> So that's not what that means. The word judge here, if you go to 548 to 50 and 568, he explains what judging means. You judge by using the Quran as a and the prophet as a standard of truth and a supreme authority of the arbiter of the materials. Yeah, that's the whole point.

[00:19:26]It explains the concept 68.

[00:19:28]>> I'm explaining it right now. You didn't go over You didn't go over 48 to 50.

[00:19:31]Look, >> we have revealed to you, O prophets, the book.

[00:19:36]>> Yeah, I understand. But I'm going over that. We have revealed to you, oh prophet, the book with truth, a confirmation of the previous scriptures and a of the of the uh previous scripture, the Bible, the but the word confirmation is madic, which according to secular scholars over the Quran, they're not even they're not even Muslims. Hold on, hold on, hold on.

[00:19:56]The word madic, it means it doesn't mean that it's a textual verbatim affirmation. I can quote Nikolai Sinai.

[00:20:01]He's a secular scholar. He's not even he's not even a Muslim. Hold on. Of course, you're not because you don't understand what the word What does confirm mean? According to the Quran, >> he's confirming. What was previous?

[00:20:09]>> What does it mean? But how?

[00:20:11]>> It's affirmed.

[00:20:11]>> But confirming how so?

[00:20:13]>> Confirmation.

[00:20:14]>> But how so?

[00:20:15]>> Going back to the previous revelation.

[00:20:17]>> But how so? You're not telling me how so? You just keep saying the same thing.

[00:20:20]>> Telling you, brother.

[00:20:21]>> I I'll explain. The word confirm here is a revelationary fulfillment. It's not a textual verbatim affirmation of the of the text. That's why 355 it says that Jesus confirms the Torah, but then he abrogates and changes laws in it. It's not it's not a textual >> changes laws now.

[00:20:36]>> That's what the Quran says. I'm using the word I'm showing the Quranic narrative of the words.

[00:20:40]>> That's just another reason why the Quran's false.

[00:20:43]>> That's a different argument to be made.

[00:20:45]>> So the argument here fails. Then then you're going to you're going to be you're going to be concerned that that the the word confirm doesn't mean to you're going to be affirming that the word confirm here doesn't mean a textual verbatim affirmation. That's what I was trying to say here. The word confirm here doesn't mean that. It means it's a revelationary fulfillment of what was revealed to the prophets. I need to go judge by >> so hold on I like I was in the middle of explaining because the word here for supreme authority is muim which again according to Nikolai Sinai it means it's the arbiter of the contents of the previous scripture the Quran chooses what is in the previous scripture and what is not same thing with 3 to4 the Quran has been revealed as a standard of truth over the previous scripture and if you hold on I'm not done reading I'm not done reading and if you no it says the Quran is a supreme authority we have revealed to you We have revealed to you.

[00:21:32]What did he reveal? What did what has been revealed to the prophet?

[00:21:35]>> World.

[00:21:36]>> What was revealed to the prophet?

[00:21:38]>> A a claim that this is this is the word of Allah >> which is what? What's that? What's that book called?

[00:21:44]>> There was no Quran then. There was no book.

[00:21:46]>> He doesn't call it the Quran.

[00:21:47]>> He didn't have a book then.

[00:21:48]>> No. No. But what does he call his revelation?

[00:21:50]>> He can make you pure and holy.

[00:21:52]>> I don't know what he calls.

[00:21:53]>> You don't know what he calls his revelation? The Quran.

[00:21:55]>> That's what it's called.

[00:21:57]>> Quran just means recitation.

[00:21:59]Yeah, but >> we have revealed to you this book. What did he reveal to him?

[00:22:03]>> So, this was already in play.

[00:22:06]>> I thought he couldn't read or write >> the scripture because it's a celestial scripture when it's and it's in and Allah's >> uh seculars and even the Quran itself.

[00:22:15]>> So, the Quran says that this is this is a this is a what?

[00:22:18]>> So, it's it's it's originated as a celestial scripture with Allah and he reveals it to humans.

[00:22:24]>> How do you know that?

[00:22:24]>> Because it says in the Quran.

[00:22:26]>> Okay. Um, so according to the Quran, I need to go back to >> No, we haven't. The supreme authority is Why do you keep saying that? The supreme authority is the Quran. No. Why do you keep saying that?

[00:22:35]>> Prophet, if you're in doubt. Go back to the people.

[00:22:37]>> That's a different verse. But we're not even done with this. Okay. But let's finish this. Okay. But let's but let's finish this. Then we'll go to that.

[00:22:43]>> So we're not I haven't gone over 49 to 50. So let's go over 49 to 50.

[00:22:48]>> Where's Where's verse 49?

[00:22:50]>> The wind did that.

[00:22:50]>> No, it's all good. Don't worry. I I don't believe it. It's all good. Okay.

[00:22:53]and judge between them, oh prophet, by what God has revealed. And sorry, and do not follow their desires. Sorry, let me I need to actually I need to I need to show what this is rebuking. This is Oh, you know, let me just finish this. I'm Apologies. I'm all over the place right now.

[00:23:10]>> You want me to just hold this?

[00:23:11]>> Yeah. Yeah.

[00:23:11]>> Okay. Okay. I don't want to, you know, annoy you.

[00:23:15]>> Um, >> is it the judgment of pre-Islamic ignorance they seek? What is pre-Islamic ignorance? I'll show you right now.

[00:23:24]>> Dang, I'm a little windy.

[00:23:26]>> I know. Yeah, sadly.

[00:23:28]>> Look, you have it highlighted. Yeah.

[00:23:30]Yeah.

[00:23:31]>> They eagerly listen to falsehood. So, wait, is this a reverse? I don't think >> he can save you.

[00:23:35]>> It's a good one to look at.

[00:23:37]>> There's no special prayer.

[00:23:38]>> Oh, no. Here we go.

[00:23:39]>> Indeed, we revealed the Torah containing guidance and light to which the prophets who submitted themselves to God made judgment for Jews. So too did the rabbis and scholars judge according to their God's books. So he's call he talks about do not judge by what God has revealed in those who do not judge. So >> wait wait wait which they were entrusted and of which they were made to not fear the pe people nor trade my revelations for fleeting gain. So that goes back to what the conversation there are those who are trading for a fleeting game. It doesn't mean it's all corrupt.

[00:24:12]>> Well actually 3187 to 319 says they failed this covenant. So that means they actually failed.

[00:24:17]Well, hold on. You guys stay in this text.

[00:24:20]>> I know, but you guys you guys are talking.

[00:24:22]>> You want to jump to another >> But you guys made a point. You're not letting me finish. You guys make so I would love to talk with you, but if we can't exchange like conversations back and forth without interruption, >> I had to walk away >> because he's asking he's trying to make the point of the gospel judging, but I have to finish your point when you're not allowing us to finish ours.

[00:24:40]>> But I can't finish my point either. Let me If I just finish my point, I'll allow you to finish.

[00:24:45]>> Yes. If I finish my point, I'll allow you all to finish. I just need to finish my point. Okay?

[00:24:48]>> Because you guys keep talking in the middle of my points, then I have to also correct what you're saying. If you guys keep speaking over me, then I have to keep speaking longer to correct what you're saying.

[00:24:55]>> Okay. So, that's not actually totally true. There have been times when you have communicated.

[00:24:58]>> I apologize. I'm not that I apologize.

[00:25:02]>> So, it talks about the judgment that the Jews and the scholars make, but then it calls that pre-Islamic ignorance. And again, secular, these are not even Muslim scholars agreeing with you.

[00:25:10]Secular scholars agree with you and they're saying this. So then when it says in in 68 >> that judge Oh, thank you. Yeah. You have nothing to stand on unless you observe the Torah, the Gospel, and what has been revealed to you from your Lord. That's because they judge the Gospel and the Torah by the Quran as using it as a standard of truth and a standard of truth and the arbiter of the contents.

[00:25:34]So the Quran dictates what's inside the Torah and what's inside the Injil.

[00:25:38]That's what it says. And that's what secular scholars agree to even Even secular and Christian scholars agree.

[00:25:44]>> Anybody can read this and the natural reading of what this says.

[00:25:47]>> That's what the natural reading is. I just gave it. That's the natural reading. Even secular and Christian scholars agree.

[00:25:52]>> According to >> Not all do.

[00:25:53]>> Well, if you can quote me one, >> could you quote me one Christian scholar or secular scholar who disagrees?

[00:26:00]>> It doesn't make me the issue is it's the natural reading.

[00:26:04]>> I gave you a scholar to understand then if you're going to if you're going to say that interpretation is is in in order to understand proper interpretation. Then common Muslims can't understand this. You need a scholar to interpret for it, >> which is very similar to Roman Catholicism.

[00:26:23]>> But that's not the case. I didn't actually make that case. I just showed you from the text alone. I didn't have to even quote the prophet. I showed you how the understanding of judging comes from just the same chapter. Just a couple verses down. It's the same thing.

[00:26:34]So, >> you're saying that it's the Quran that interprets the gospel, the Torah, and the Psalms, right?

[00:26:43]>> But in Surah 1094, tells the prophet Muhammad, if you're in doubt, to go to those who have the revelation before them to confirm what it is in the Quran.

[00:26:55]>> So, what's actually the what's actually the standard inah?

[00:26:59]>> Yeah. So, first we have to realize it's talking about Muslims who reverted to who reverted to Islam. Christians and Jews who accept the Islamic revelation and and revert to Islam. Do you all accept this or no? First of all, >> say that again. I'm sorry.

[00:27:12]>> The the interpretation of 1094 when it says those who used to read the scripture, it's not talking about Christians and Jews, but Christians and Jews who reverted to Islam. It's talking about Christians and Jews who are given who are who have had the book and you were given >> because the author of the Quran already says don't talk to Christians and Jews and the prophet Muhammad also says don't ask Christians and Jews to surah >> that would just be uh uncharitable >> of you of course because if the author of the Quran already says that they're not reliable people so you shouldn't be asking them the natural reading assuming 482 that the Quran is a consistent reading and just assuming it's a terrible reading just I do with the Bible. I still assume it's a charitable reading. I don't I don't cherry pick verses. Stop cherry picking, you know. I I don't cherry pick I'm saying the No, I'm saying like this is contextually I'm saying you're giving an uncharitable reading to what you're trying to demonstrate from surah 5.

[00:28:05]>> But if you're going to give an internal reading, the Quran is consistent from beginning to end because it's Allah's word. Well, if that was the case, then you wouldn't have in one part where where Allah says don't listen to the Jews and Christians cuz they're not reliable. And then another story where he says listen to Jews and Christians because what they have is reliable.

[00:28:22]>> Or you could take the third understanding is that it's not referring to Jews and Christians but Jews and Christians who referred who reverted to Islam which is which is what the acceptable usage of people of the book.

[00:28:32]>> Help me understand why that would even matter.

[00:28:33]>> Of course because remember like I said the the people who accept the Quran's revelation they judge by the Quran. So 1094 isn't isn't telling you to go to Christians and Jews who read their scripture and interpret it on their own whims. It's telling you just like in Deuteronomy 32:7 to go to your fathers who read the Torah. It's talking about those who understand and accept the Quran's revelation and judgment and they judge the Torah and the Gospel by the Quran. So when they do that, then with a context of 1094 is 46:10, they will affirm that the prophet Muhammad and whom be peace is prophesized and found within the previous scripture. So if Muhammad's in doubt about what's revealed in the Quran, what is the standard in which he goes to see if what is in the Quran?

[00:29:19]It's it's the Muslims in the Quran.

[00:29:20]>> He says to go to the revelation in which the Jew >> No, it says the people go to the people who use >> who have that revelation, >> right? But they're Muslims.

[00:29:27]>> Okay. So So they're going to the book.

[00:29:29]>> No, they're going to the people.

[00:29:30]>> They're going to the people who have the book, >> but they're judging by the Quran.

[00:29:33]>> So they're going to open up the book.

[00:29:34]They're going to look to see if what Muhammad is saying that's revealed in the Quran lines up with what the Quran says >> because they judge by the Quran. They don't judge by the by the previous scripture.

[00:29:43]>> Then why would then why would Allah tell Muhammad that if he's doubting what's in the Quran to go to those who have the previous revelation?

[00:29:48]>> It's the same thing as in Deuteronomy 32:7. If you're unfamiliar with something, then go ask your fathers or your elders. They will inform you on the Torah.

[00:29:57]>> How? How?

[00:29:58]>> Because they are knowledgeable on the Torah. So they will inform you the book, right? And they're going to look at it.

[00:30:03]No, I don't you don't understand what I'm saying. It says if you're in doubt about these events that we've told you like about the Sinai event and and these events, then go and talk to your fathers. They will agree with the Torah about these events.

[00:30:15]>> But there well, but the Torah is still being used as an authority over the fathers because the fathers still have to abide to what the Torah teaches about there being a Sinai given to Moses or a Sinai covenant given to Moses and whatnot. Yeah.

[00:30:28]>> So the Torah is still an authority, but it's giving a people as a general confirmation over that text.

[00:30:35]>> In that context though, what is the authority?

[00:30:37]>> The Quran.

[00:30:38]>> No. Yes, >> it's not because he's saying if you're in doubt about what's been revealed in the Quran, >> you go ask the Muslims who used to be Christian or >> Jew. It doesn't matter. It's it does matter. It understood. It's whether you want to say it's Muslims or not.

[00:30:51]>> Okay. Do you want me do you want to understand why it matters?

[00:30:54]>> Because a Muslim they judge by the scripture. Let me finish my >> I apologize. I'll let you. I But I The thing is, we're going back in circles.

[00:31:00]You're not You're ignoring what I said.

[00:31:02]>> You're cuz you're you're demonstrating inconsistency and you're basing your interpretation off of what men say. And if you're holding to the standard that the Quran is the very word of God and it cannot be changed, then you have to set aside what any other man says.

[00:31:15]>> Why is that? How does that follow?

[00:31:16]>> The the word of God is sufficient.

[00:31:19]>> Yeah. The word of God is sufficient, but the word of God also is an equivocal source that affirms other texts within it. The Quran affirms other texts within it.

[00:31:28]>> Exactly. You agree with me.

[00:31:29]>> With that being understood, then the Quran should line up with what the previous >> I never made that argument.

[00:31:34]>> Yes.

[00:31:35]>> I said other texts, but not not the Torah and the Gospel.

[00:31:37]>> Okay. Well, I'm talking about specific texts that supposedly Allah handed down.

[00:31:41]>> Yeah.

[00:31:42]>> So, if you go to the previous revelation, like just the B. So the Quran says to listen to the prophets uh that uh Allah handed down the the law of Moses and the psalms. That's the whole Old Testament right there.

[00:31:53]>> Mhm.

[00:31:54]>> And then it says to listen to the gospel. So if you just are consistent with what the Quran says and you go to those previous revelations, all those revelations say the same thing. It's the same message. There's no doctrine that's ever been in that's that's in in error, excuse me. But when you go to the Quran, which is written 600 years later, it denies several different things. The stories within it aren't even um uh intelligible because it mixes certain people from different time frames with other time frames.

[00:32:24]>> Those are called conscious edits.

[00:32:25]Actually, those are clarifying to the Bible. But what you're saying, you say judge by the gospel, but that's not what it says. 568, you judge. You have nothing to stand on. Nothing.

[00:32:34]>> I'm talking about surah 10 right now.

[00:32:35]>> I know. But remember, you're that's cherrypicking now. We have to look at the Quran as a single equivocal text.

[00:32:40]>> I am I'm doing an internal critique of what you're >> not though because if you're doing an internal critique, then you would accept that a Muslim doesn't judge the gospel and the Torah stand alone. They judge it by what has been revealed to the prophet and by what the prophet judges about the Torah and the Gospel.

[00:32:53]>> Okay. So then how do we know what the gospel was that Jesus spoke?

[00:32:57]>> We do a historical reconstruction of it.

[00:32:58]>> Okay. So you're not judging by the Quran.

[00:33:00]>> Of course we are because the the Quran does makes aligns with the historical reconstruction of it. The Quran isn't a scholarly book. It's a divine line up with the supposed previous revelation, the words of Allah.

[00:33:11]>> It is supposed with the historical revelation, but not the scripture that you have at your hand.

[00:33:15]>> We don't need to go to man as Christians in order to to affirm what is true. We have manuscripts that line up and that we can know that the Bible that we have in our hand is what they had at the time.

[00:33:29]>> Well, that wouldn't mean anything because the authors of the four gospels aren't reliable sources.

[00:33:32]>> Yeah. Again, you're basing your understanding upon what man says.

[00:33:35]>> That's what history says.

[00:33:36]>> And all I'm doing is I'm holding to what the word of God says.

[00:33:39]>> So, are you saying there's no historical evidence for the gospel?

[00:33:41]>> A Muslim.

[00:33:42]>> Yeah. I mean, we can go to historical evidence, but you're going to ask that area as well. Well, let's talk about it because the historical evidence there is no there is there is no stronger fact than the very crucifixion of Jesus Christ.

[00:33:55]>> I agree with the historicality of the crucifixion, but I'm asking, >> are you saying that Jesus Christ died by crucifixion?

[00:33:59]>> Well, I'm going to say I agree with the historicality of it. I interpret it in a different means with the Jewish Christian lens.

[00:34:03]>> Okay. So did Okay. So I'm not understanding what you mean by that.

[00:34:07]>> Yeah. So I agree with the historicality of it that in in the histo in a historical lens Jesus had have been appeared to crucif to have been crucified. But I interpret it the same way that the earliest Christian Jews interpret it as Jesus being raised up to heaven alive without suffering. Like you're not going Elijah.

[00:34:21]>> No, that's again that's a biased interpretation that that's what that's what the scriptures say. that's either coming from your Muslim scholars or Christian scholars, so-called Christian scholars who are not interpreting the text and secular scholars because all you have to do is again we don't have to go to other men in order to interpret the scripture.

[00:34:38]>> Well, let's talk about it though.

[00:34:39]>> It's God who promises to do that through the Holy Spirit. And so whenever you are born again because of the finished work of Jesus Christ upon the cross of Calvary and because of his resurrection, we're made alive. We have the Holy Spirit. The scriptures come alive and we can see what the scriptures are portraying not only from the Old Testament, not only from the very life of Jesus Christ, but also afterwards.

[00:35:01]The message is one harmonious message.

[00:35:03]There's no doctrine that is contradicting from the beginning of the Bible to the end. The only point in when you begin to have error is when you have false teachers who arise, false prophets who arise. And we would argue that Muhammad is a false prophet because the very revelation that he received does not line up with the previous revelations.

[00:35:22]>> Well, I would just say first Corinthians 15:4 when it says that the that the Old Testament talks about the death and resurrection of Jesus for the sins of mankind. I would say there's no prophecy in the Old Testament about that.

[00:35:33]>> I'm sorry. Say, say that again.

[00:35:34]>> There's no prophecy in the Old Testament about about uh the Messiah being uh killed and resurrected for the >> Isaiah 53. Yes, >> Isaiah 53 is about the righteous remnant of Israel after the Babylonian exile.

[00:35:44]>> That is a natural understanding of the text.

[00:35:47]>> Okay. So, let's start at verse 1:1 refers. Yeah. Verse one refers to the tendant to the servant as a tender shoe.

[00:35:54]But in Isaiah 43:10 and 60:14, the servants and the tender shoe are both groups of people. So, why would we think that the servant and the tender shoe here is one person?

[00:36:03]>> So, one thing you need to understand as you're going through Isaiah >> is it's talking about two servants of the Lord. How? So, >> so the nation of Israel is understood as a servant of the Lord, but they're not the true servant. So, you have four stanzas in the book of Isaiah that talk about the true servant of the Lord. And one of them is Isaiah 53. And so, as you're going through Isaiah, you're going to see the uh the the servant of Israel as it's applied to the rebellious nation of Israel who continue to fail to do what God commanded them to do. They were to be a light unto the nations and they failed in doing that. And so you have the true servant of Yahweh who's presented time and time again through Isaiah and he is understood as the one who would perfectly accomplish what God wanted them to accomplish.

[00:36:44]>> I'm not too sure about that though because in Jeremiah 18 and Jeremiah 50, Jeremiah says that Israel will be restored from their defilement and then they will be made spot-ree guiltless. We read that. So I think that the servant if if you're taking it to be about wicked Israel, then once they're restored and repented, it's still the same Israel. So Isaiah 53, it's still referring to the tender shoe and the servant, which is Isaiah 43:10 as witnesses. And then Isaiah 60:14 is the righteous remnant of Israel. And all the later prophets agree. Ezekiel, Jeremiah, uh Hosea, Daniel.

[00:37:15]>> Sure.

[00:37:16]>> They all agree. Zephaniah, they all agree.

[00:37:18]>> Well, agree to what? That it's about the righteous remnant of Israel. It's about a group of people, not a single person.

[00:37:24]>> No, it's both. It's both in the sense of one who it's talking about this righteous servant is is the true Israel and that's Jesus Christ. He fulfills what the nation of Israel failed to do.

[00:37:35]It was it was the full capacity of keeping God's commandments and law without without without blemish without defect without without without uh breaking his law. And they did in every which way possible. every 613 commandments of God, Israel broke them all in every way.

[00:37:57]>> I'm just a little confused if you can.

[00:37:58]>> That's okay. So, so, so as as as the nation of Israel is a chosen people of God, it is a it is it is it is through the promise through the covenant that God made with Abraham that through this seed, the seed of the promise, which is singular, not not multiple seeds. It's one it's it's going to be through him that the promised Messiah would come.

[00:38:20]And so the blessings that come from that covenant promise that God makes with Abraham is only given to Israel. But now hear me out. This Israel is the one who fulfills the covenant demands of God's law in perfect righteousness. The only one who ever did that is the Messiah, the Lord Jesus Christ. He is the true Israel.

[00:38:39]>> Not according to Jeremiah and Ezekiel.

[00:38:40]>> No. Absolutely. According Okay. So, so, so in just beginning seeing in Isaiah 53, it's 12 verses. We can read it real quick.

[00:38:48]>> Yeah. It says, "Who has believed our message and to whom has the arm of the Lord been revealed?" Now, it's interesting. The arm of the Lord is the Lord Jesus Christ. And there's there's other aspects I can show you in that.

[00:38:59]But, >> well, according to 52, what's the arm of the Lord? Because it talks about the arm of the Lord here.

[00:39:05]>> Well, let's see here first. Well, we we'll go back. I promise.

[00:39:08]>> We'll talk about that. It's Yeah, it's all good. For he grew up before him like a tender chute, and like a root out of parched ground. He has no stately form or majesty that we should look upon him, nor appearance that we should be attracted to him. He was despised, forsaken of men, a man of sorrows, and acquainted with grief.

[00:39:28]I'm just going to really suck if it wasn't recording.

[00:39:30]>> Oh, yeah.

[00:39:35]>> Yeah, it's good. So >> but there's other times when it's talking to the true servant, the Messiah, >> okay, that it'll be functioning in the same year. So that's an distinct distinction as well.

[00:39:49]>> And it says and like and like one from whom men hide their face. He was despised and we did not esteem him.

[00:39:56]Surely our griefs he himself bore and our sorrows and our sorrows he carried.

[00:40:02]Yet we ourselves esteemed him, stricken, smitten of God and afflicted. but he was pierced through for our transgressions.

[00:40:08]>> So, so the nation of Israel isn't being put to death on behalf of the nation of Israel. And so that's interesting.

[00:40:15]>> Yeah. Because the speaker here isn't isn't um Israel. It's the Gentile speakers. That's what I was asking who the arm of the Lord been revealed to in verse one.

[00:40:22]>> So So this is Isaiah, right? And >> we can talk about it later, but I'm just saying I don't agree with you um on that. I'm just making that point out. I don't agree with you on that, but we can talk about it later.

[00:40:30]>> Okay. Okay. So, so here this Messiah, this this suffering servant here, he was crushed for our iniquities. The chassening for our well-being fell upon him and by his scorging we are healed.

[00:40:41]All of us like sheep have gone astray.

[00:40:43]Each of us has turned to his own way.

[00:40:45]But the Lord has caused the iniquity of us all of Israel to fall on him. He was oppressed and he was afflicted. Yet he did not open his mouth like a lamb that is led to led to slaughter and like a sheep that is silent before its shears.

[00:40:58]So he did not open his mouth by oppression and judgment he was taken away. And as for his generation who considered that he was so look that he was cut off out of the land of living put to death for the transgression of my people. So substitutionary he's stepping in place of a people taking on their sins and he's being put to death. That's what it says.

[00:41:20]>> Matthew 8:16 doesn't think it's vicarious but we can continue.

[00:41:23]>> Hold on. Um his grave was assigned Okay.

[00:41:28]Wait. his for the transgression of my people to whom the stroke was due. His grave was assigned with wicked men yet he was with a rich man in his death. The Lord Jesus was buried in a rich rich man's tomb as a bar borrowed grave because he had done no violence nor was there any deceit in his mouth means he never sinned. But the Lord was pleased to crush him the father crushing his son putting him to grief. If he would render himself as a guilt offering he will see his offspring. He will prolong his days and the good pleasure of the Lord will prosper in his hands. So remember I was going back to the covenant promise that God made with Abraham blessing the seed and through that seed there would therefore be the blessings of the covenant promise and that's what he's saying here. He's saying that the um that he would prolong his days. So uh the to put him to grieve he would render himself a guilt offering. He would see his offspring. He will prolong his days and the good pleasure of the Lord will prosper in his hand as a result of the anguish of his soul. He will see it and be satisfied by his knowledge of the righteous one. My servant will justify the many as he will bear their iniquities which means sins transgression of the law. Therefore I will all lot him a portion with the great and he will divide the booty with the strong because he poured out himself to death. So he died and was numbered with the transgressors sinners. Yet he himself bore the sin of many and interceded for their transgression transgressors.

[00:42:49]>> I'm familiar with this.

[00:42:50]>> So so so that is a fulfillment. This is 700 years before Christ Jesus steps foot on the world stage and the fulfillment is found in the gospels which the gospels affirm this previous revelation >> if you took it out of context. Yeah. But even so then verse 10 says he's going to see his own children. But I wouldn't agree with that. But if we go back to verse one like that's why I was asking you who is the speaker in verse one because if you see who has the arm of the Lord been revealed to in Isaiah 52:12 the arm of the Lord has been revealed to the Gentiles. Let's see.

[00:43:22]Where does it say? I think it's in verse.

[00:43:26]>> But you will not go out in haste, nor will you Lord >> has comforted his people. He has the he has bared his holy arm in the sight of the nations.

[00:43:35]>> Yeah.

[00:43:35]>> And then um >> where is it?

[00:43:38]>> That all the ends of the earth may see the salvation of our God. That's >> that they may see. And then in verse one, >> yeah, >> they do see it. Look, this the king will sprinkle many nations. The kings will shut their mouths on who of account of him. Amen. For what they have not been told and what they will see and what they have not heard they will understand.

[00:43:53]>> But now it says who has believed our message. So who is it speaking about?

[00:43:57]>> Goes back to Romans 10.

[00:43:58]>> No. No. But who has believed our message? It's these people right here.

[00:44:01]>> The kings. The gentile kings. So the people here, >> huh?

[00:44:04]>> This is the world.

[00:44:05]>> Exactly. Exactly. The gentile kings.

[00:44:08]>> You know this is prophetic though, right? You're you're limiting it.

[00:44:11]>> Well, I don't really think so. Scholars hold Judo Isaiah to just be written by a an author during the exile. There's no actual evidence to show that it's from Isaiah for scripture is by using scripture.

[00:44:22]>> That's circular.

[00:44:23]>> You keep you keep That's exactly right.

[00:44:25]>> But I don't agree with that. That's that's no evidence for that.

[00:44:27]>> Okay. So there you go again. You're interrupting.

[00:44:30]>> Come on, man. We were just talking about Isaiah 53. You guys read the whole chapter. I haven't been able to finish the first verse.

[00:44:35]>> You asked a question. Who is the armor of the Lord? We're trying to answer that.

[00:44:39]>> I'm telling you, the way that you come to that conclusion is by using scripture to answer your question.

[00:44:43]>> Right. Going to man. The scripture I quoted Isaiah 52 scholars in what they say for interpretation for interpretation. And we're telling you that hermeneutic principle is scripture interpret scripture.

[00:44:57]>> But the thing is you guys keep using the gospel as if I've granted it. I have zero reason to believe anything in the >> goanuran granted.

[00:45:03]>> There is there is nothing in the Quran that grants it. We just talked about it.

[00:45:06]>> 1094 >> and 1094 is talking about Muslims who used to read the Christian talking about a specific group of people. No, it's not. Bkari 7363 is talking about the text itself.

[00:45:19]>> You're just misinterpreting it. The the Would you agree that Prophet Muhammad himself explicitly says it's referring to all of the text or is the group?

[00:45:27]>> Ask you the question. If you were >> you're ignoring you, See, you're ignoring. I asked you a question.

[00:45:30]>> You have your own bias and it's obvious.

[00:45:31]>> I just asked you a question, brother.

[00:45:32]You're What did I ask you?

[00:45:33]>> But the conclusion is this. You have your own bias. You don't want to budge in that. So, the only hope >> because what you're doing is you're misinterpreting the the Quran. I don't I don't appreciate about back and forth because you're st you're stern in your position and what you need to hear is the gospel.

[00:45:48]>> Okay, let's talk about it. You guys aren't willing to talk about it >> that it is the power of God that brings salvation to every >> I didn't bring up the Quran. Remember, I wanted to talk about the gospel reliability and then you guys immediately brought up the Quran >> because that's your standard of truth.

[00:46:00]>> Well, the thing is I already talked about how the the the Quran doesn't say that. But then you guys want to answer my questions.

[00:46:05]>> Well, we did answer. How do you know that though?

[00:46:06]>> Would you agree?

[00:46:08]>> You see, you won't let me ask a question. Well, can we reply? I feel like what you said, >> but I asked the question and you ignored it. Remember you didn't reply.

[00:46:14]>> I'll ask you going to go on anymore, but he wants to go on. And so since this >> would you agree and sibari 7363 >> who wrote that >> the it's written by Iban Abbas who >> Okay, that's a manb Abbas >> using a man to interpret the word of God.

[00:46:28]>> Yeah, because the Quran affirms the hadith of God.

[00:46:30]>> So that's your justification is even though I point out >> the Quran affirms the hadith of the prophet >> the word of God. You're saying yeah well but >> who is the who are the gospels written by? Were they written by men?

[00:46:40]>> Yes.

[00:46:40]>> Right. So you use men, >> but is it scripture >> and it's divinely inspired? Likewise, the hadith >> considered scripture.

[00:46:46]>> It's Yes, it's scripture. It's revelation from Allah.

[00:46:48]>> Is authentic hadith from the prophet is revelation from Allah.

[00:46:52]>> Oh, I've never heard that.

[00:46:53]>> Well, that's the truth.

[00:46:54]>> So, does the prophet in Bkari 7363 say that it's the holistic Torah and the holistic injil that have been corrupted, not just a group of people and not just some of it?

[00:47:05]>> Why are you adding holistic? because he's he's misinterpreting 279 and I'm showing we're just going basic.

[00:47:11]>> So would you would you answer my question? He the interpretation of 279 is found in Bkari 7363 where he says it's >> pre from the presupposition >> it's the prophet. So the prophet would you agree the prophet says that the entire the entire gospel and the entire in >> is corrupted.

[00:47:31]>> It doesn't say that.

[00:47:32]>> Let's pull it up. So I don't have my phone.

[00:47:34]>> I got to get my I left it there.

[00:47:35]>> Okay, no worries. You want me to get it?

[00:47:37]>> If you want, it's up to you. I would just say we just give him the gospel cuz he's he's a deterrence.

[00:47:41]>> Can we Can we share that real quick?

[00:47:43]>> Yeah. But I would I would like to talk about Isaiah 53 still cuz or I would like to talk about, you know, the gospel reliability.

[00:47:49]>> Cuz the thing is, you can preach the gospel, but I've read the whole Bible. I know the gospel. So, if you can show me why it's actually believable, cuz I think it's a fraudulent text. We'll begin.

[00:47:57]>> That's why I came to ask about that.

[00:47:59]>> Aaron, when you die, you know you're going to die one day. When you die and God says, "Aaron, why should I let you into my kingdom?" What's your answer?

[00:48:08]>> Because I'm Muslim. Muslims are guaranteed heaven.

[00:48:11]>> Muslims are guaranteed.

[00:48:13]>> Yeah.

[00:48:14]>> The prophet says, >> according to what?

[00:48:15]>> The prophet says if you die upon Islam, even if you're a prostitute or a theft, that you'll be entering heaven. You're guaranteed >> without even being a Muslim. Or you can be a Muslim be, right?

[00:48:26]>> So you just basically seek speak the shahada and it doesn't matter how wicked of a life you've lived. No, you can go to hell for a temporary amount of time if you're really wicked.

[00:48:33]>> But it's not eternal.

[00:48:34]>> No, only in Christianity it's eternal.

[00:48:38]>> Okay, interesting. Um, okay. Well, so, so what is the grounds and the basis that that God is allowing you into his kingdom? It's based on you being a Muslim >> based upon the fact that I accept Allah, all of his revelation and his prophets.

[00:48:52]>> Okay. Well, the Bible says that that in order for anyone to be in his kingdom, you are to be perfect. Now Jesus said that he says it doesn't matter what we agree with. What matters is what actually is true.

[00:49:05]>> And so Jesus says therefore I say to you >> uh there therefore you are to be perfect as your heavenly father's perfect. So so the prerequisite in order to get into heaven is utter perfection of his law.

[00:49:18]>> How do you know Jesus said that though?

[00:49:20]>> How do you know Jesus didn't say that?

[00:49:22]>> Because the there is no evidence to suppose that the gospels are evident are are are authentic. And if there's no evidence to assume a text is authentic, I have no reason to fake it authentic.

[00:49:32]So I can dismiss it >> based upon what source?

[00:49:34]>> The Christian Christian uh evidence itself. Ignatius Justin Bar.

[00:49:38]>> Again, man, we don't >> own Christians are are conceding that the gospels are are anonymous texts.

[00:49:44]>> But the four gospels were written by men trying to prove a point.

[00:49:46]>> So if you don't need men, then you don't need the four gospels. And then you don't need Paul either because he's he's a man as well.

[00:49:51]>> There's a difference between what's actually considered scripture and what comes after. But the thing is the earliest Christians didn't even accept that the four gospels were scripture.

[00:49:59]They all called it that is true.

[00:50:01]Ignatius calls it Ignatius calls it historical information. Justin Martyr calls it historical. The first Christian to consider the gospels divinely inspired is Tatian. And he doesn't consider the four gospels divinely inspired. Tatian the student of Justin Marty.

[00:50:15]>> The first Christian to ever what?

[00:50:18]>> To understand the four gospels as being divinely inspired texts.

[00:50:22]Paul the four gospels are written after Paul.

[00:50:25]>> How would the four gospels be affirmed by Paul?

[00:50:28]>> Because the four because Paul was writing in the 50s and 60s and Mark the earliest gospel was written in 70 AD.

[00:50:35]>> Wait, what? What are you saying? You don't when when do you think Mark was written?

[00:50:38]>> So So when did Paul come to >> Wait, when do you think Mark was written?

[00:50:42]>> During the time of Christ.

[00:50:44]>> What?

[00:50:44]>> Yeah.

[00:50:46]>> Why is that a shock?

[00:50:47]>> There is not a single Christian ever on earth who agrees with this.

[00:50:50]Aaron, I don't care about what other Christians think.

[00:50:53]>> So you guys accept you guys are the only Christians who believe that >> Mark was written during the time of Jesus.

[00:50:58]>> Aaron, this says Aaron, this says you need to be perfect.

[00:51:01]>> No, but I'm saying you think that Mark was written during the time of Jesus.

[00:51:07]>> Within that within that era within that era.

[00:51:09]>> So like 35 AD.

[00:51:13]>> I don't know. Like >> Well, if you don't know, how are you going to, you know, make these claims?

[00:51:17]You can't make claims without evidence.

[00:51:18]The the claim is is that you said that the first Christian to ever receive the gospels was like way later.

[00:51:27]>> No, I didn't say that.

[00:51:28]>> Yeah, you did. You said that >> the first person who took it divinely inspired.

[00:51:31]>> I said Paul.

[00:51:33]>> The Gospels are written after Paul, though. Can you give me evidence?

[00:51:35]>> Doesn't matter. Paul's a Christian.

[00:51:37]>> Because how would Paul affirm a text that doesn't exist is divinely inspired?

[00:51:41]>> How do you know it didn't exist then?

[00:51:42]>> Because it was written after him.

[00:51:44]>> How do you know that? There's no evidence that shows it because >> because we have manuscripts that predate.

[00:51:48]>> No, there's there it's the literary details inside the gospel that shows it's written during during 70 AD during the time of the temple destruction.

[00:51:54]>> So, how do you know they didn't have it then though?

[00:51:56]>> Because there's there's no evidence to show that there's Do you have evidence to show that?

[00:52:01]>> Paul's testimony.

[00:52:02]>> Paul's testimony is evidence of gospels though. He doesn't quote from the Gospels.

[00:52:06]>> He actually does.

[00:52:07]>> Very rarely. He has like one or two quotes and they're just attributed within the Gospels.

[00:52:12]>> He doesn't quote from the Gospels. And now you're saying very rarely. He has traditions which can be aligned to Jesus. They're not verbatim from the gospels though. They just they just hap they have a same tradition. Like if he quotes like a baptismal tradition, common traditions and themes. Yeah.

[00:52:24]>> First Corinthians, what is it? 15 is the oldest understanding of the gospel that is affirming the the four gospel accounts.

[00:52:33]>> How could it be affirming the four gospel accounts?

[00:52:35]>> The earliest manuscript, >> right? But what's the evidence that there's actually 500 eyewitnesses?

[00:52:39]because he's writing to the church in Corinthians 1,200 m away from him. It's just one person saying it's that's circular because >> that's okay.

[00:52:48]>> So there's zero evidence is what I'm saying.

[00:52:50]>> No, I don't do that. I have independent reasonings to affirm the legitimacy of the Quran. Therefore, I can believe the Quran. What you're telling me is there's zero evidence to show that the Gospels are authentic. We just believe it's authentic.

[00:53:02]>> See, this is what I was saying. Like we can go back and forth all day.

[00:53:05]>> So let us finish that point. When when Christ says that you are to be perfect, you say >> I don't even think he said that though.

[00:53:11]>> Well, it doesn't matter what you think he said.

[00:53:13]>> There's no evidence to show that he is.

[00:53:14]You have to show there's evidence.

[00:53:15]Otherwise, I can just circular. You have to give evidence for the gospels >> by twisting scripture.

[00:53:21]>> Can I have evidence for the gospels being reliable, though?

[00:53:24]>> Hear me out.

[00:53:26]You know God's law. Have you ever told a lie?

[00:53:30]>> Yeah.

[00:53:30]>> Have you ever stolen anything?

[00:53:32]>> Yeah.

[00:53:32]>> Have you ever used God's name in vain?

[00:53:34]>> Yeah.

[00:53:34]>> Have you ever looked with lust?

[00:53:35]>> Yeah. Have you ever hated somebody?

[00:53:37]>> Okay, so all of those things when you die, you're going to stand before Jesus Christ. You're going to account for your life.

[00:53:42]>> I've repented for and I'll be forgiven.

[00:53:44]Like it says in Ezekiel 8:20-22, if you repent, then God will forget you of your sin. He'll forget you ever committed it.

[00:53:50]That's what Ezekiel 18:20-22 says.

[00:53:52]That's what it says. Ezekiel 18:20 to22.

[00:53:54]>> I I find it very interesting that you appeal to the Bible.

[00:53:57]>> Well, I'm appealing to your beliefs.

[00:53:58]>> Okay. So, he >> you already believe that >> talk cuz he doesn't allow people to talk. So, so Aaron you're going to die before Jesus your life sin and because you have in life you are therefore you're guilty and guilty sinners are cast into eternal fire for God right s the thing is not like Christ in the rebellion and therefore he laid down his life Christ but although all the father he Christ will always go because another day right back as the prophet Muhammad testifies and says that he's going to come back and crush all the the cross. I don't know if he says that.

[00:54:51]>> That's what the Torah says.

[00:54:52]>> Nobody teaches that.

[00:54:53]>> The Torah says it.

[00:54:55]>> It doesn't say that. As far as like >> Daniel 27 >> crushing the crosses. It's not that's not >> Well, that's figurative speech for just proving Christianity false. But I I wanted to say, you know, I don't mean to interrupt the other guy. It's just there's three of y'all, you know. I'm trying to get my equal speaking in, you know.

[00:55:10]>> Well, he the other guy wasn't over. He was talking to somebody else.

[00:55:12]>> Sorry. Two, two, I was just trying to get my my equal speaking in.

[00:55:15]>> But okay. So, so, so with that that that command of you now that's left in your court is he commands all of us, not just you just and me too. That >> the thing is I know all of this. I've read the whole Bible. I just The thing is you keep saying this.

[00:55:29]>> I know.

[00:55:29]I I have plethora of evidence. I I love you too. That's why I'm here speaking with you. But what I'm saying is there's no evidence to show that any of this is authentic. The Old Testament Isaiah 53 is not about Jesus. It's about >> every verse in Isaiah 53 can be fulfilled by Jeremiah. I can quote you many verses. Jeremiah 26 and Lamentations 5 says he's sinless.

[00:55:49]Jeremiah 18 and 50 says he from his wound he cures Israel for based upon his transgression. And there's no vicarious atonement because in Matthew 8 he quotes he quotes Matthew 8 quotes that verse and he doesn't take it to be vicarious.

[00:56:02]He says when Jesus simply healed them of their diseases and just rid them of their disease that was bearing the iniquities. It wasn't vicarious.

[00:56:09]>> One last verse. He says here Matthew 1, she will bear his son and you shall call his name Jesus for you will what?

[00:56:17]>> No, I'm not quoting this. Go to Matthew 8. Go to Matthew 8.

[00:56:19]>> No, no, no. We're going here. This is the last but but I'm saying go to Matthew. I understand. But you say verse I got for you.

[00:56:25]>> Okay, it's okay, man. If you don't want to have a conversation with me, >> we have we have another appointment. We got to go. We're going to go preach at the mosque.

[00:56:32]>> Well, come on, brother. There's two there's two of you, you know. I got to get my equal speaking.

[00:56:35]>> Excuse, brother. When somebody's talking, we >> we can't do double speaking.

[00:56:38]>> Muslim, you're required to be respectful.

[00:56:40]>> But you are too, man. We We're doing double speaking here. You can't have two Christians double speaking over me.

[00:56:45]>> At some point, >> if you notice after he after you left, I let him speak for 2 minutes. You You would agree with that, wouldn't you?

[00:56:50]>> Let me get the gospel. I appreciate >> And you were preaching. You weren't even giving me the evidence. You were just preaching. I was letting you >> talking.

[00:56:57]You don't want another finish to hurt.

[00:56:58]>> I'm speaking to him. If if you ask him, I let him speak to me every time. But the thing is, >> you can't do a double time of letting two people speak twice as much as me.

[00:57:07]That's not fair. If we're going to have two v1, we need to at least be able to speak as much as you.

[00:57:11]>> You can't say that because it was a valid.

[00:57:13]>> It was. No, I'm not saying it wasn't valid. It was valid. We had a We had a good conversation. We had a good conversation. I I appreciate the question.

[00:57:19]>> I swear what God requires of you is that you repent and you turn to Christ and live >> if we have another time for another conversation sometimes. I would love to have one. But like evidence-based I see you read a lot of books.

[00:57:29]>> Not really. I read a lot of this.

[00:57:30]>> I saw in the background of your thing you had a lot of books in the thing.

[00:57:32]>> Which one?

[00:57:33]>> Uh you had a debate with some uh Calvinist >> while back.

[00:57:38]>> That was my old pastor's library.

[00:57:40]>> Ah okay.

[00:57:41]>> All right. Well, it was nice meeting you. I appreciate I didn't mean to cut you off. I'm not sure.

[00:57:45]>> They were they were church of Christ.

[00:57:46]>> Oh, okay. Okay.

[00:57:48]>> Did you hit me up, too, by the way?

[00:57:49]>> I did on Tik Tok. Yeah.

[00:57:50]>> So many people say, "You look familiar."

[00:57:53]>> People hit me up, bro. Sorry.

[00:57:54]>> No worries. No worries. I appreciate you guys having a combo. Um I'm And if you guys want to have another one, I would be down like sometime, you know. I'm going to be going to Vegas in like next week and stuff, but I'll be back.

[00:58:04]>> Okay. Uh maybe maybe try we could try to do like something formal. That way there's a meeting.

[00:58:10]>> Give me a topic idea and we can stick on like one single topic instead of you have our our >> I have your email. You got my email.

[00:58:16]Okay.

[00:58:17]>> I'll I'll hit you up with that like in a couple days.

[00:58:19]>> I appreciate you coming. God bless, >> man. Bro, come on, bro. That's crazy.

[00:58:30]>> Well, guys, as to be expected, they completely dodged from the gospel reliability. Instantly started talking about um if the Quran affirms the gospel. And then they didn't actually want to talk about if the Quran affirmed the gospel. Uh because anytime I ask him a question like in sahibkari 7363 when the prophet affirms that it's the Torah and the gospel holistically that's corrupted not just some people and some Toras and some gospels. The guy goes, "Well, I don't want to answer you anymore. If you don't want to answer me anymore, then why did you go to the Quran as your source of evidence for the Gospels?" And then on top of that, they kept saying that, "Well, we don't have evidence for it. It's circular. We use the scriptures to affirm the scriptures." Yeah, it's circular. So what? We don't have evidence for the gospels. So what? Well, the whole reason why I came out here today, guys, was to talk about the gospels reliability, if they're historically reliable. And if you notice, these Christians do not have any idea on how to historically validate their gospels. So, they have to they have to go to the Quran and they have to maliciously misinterpret it because they have zero way to affirm anything inside of the Gospels. There's zero historical information. That's why the second I brought out my argument, you can see the guy starts to panic. He had no idea what I was talking about. Well, well, you know, in for the gospel's authorship, I would go into the internal details.

[00:59:55]How is internal details going to validate the external authorship of a gospel? Are you serious, guys? Like, come on, guys. Anyways, guys, if you all appreciated this, be sure to like the video, subscribe, drop a comment, and uh I'll be sure to drop some more videos soon like this.