Mohammed Hijab – Do We Need to Believe in the New Testamant

Mohammed Hijab
AI: Summary © The speakers discuss the history and importance of the New centers of worship, including the confusion surrounding religious beliefs and the need for people to believe in the Bible for salvation. They also touch on the difficulty of the confusion surrounding the Bible's use of the New Book and the importance of science and history in understanding it. The speakers emphasize the need for evidence-based acceptance of the new gospel and the predicted acceptance of the New centers of evidence.
AI: Transcript ©
00:00:00 --> 00:00:01

So you summarize

00:00:04 --> 00:00:10

what you said today was quite impossible. It's no, I agree with what you said. Because what you're saying

00:00:12 --> 00:00:17

is actually quite powerful. You're making an admission that you should be able to,

00:00:18 --> 00:01:00

you should be able to make as a Christian, and you have made today, which I'm very grateful for, which is that it's conceivable, it's possible for you to believe in parts of the New Testament, and not all of the New Testament, and still be eligible for salvation. That is what you said, because we said, What gave Athanasius? What gave him the right to choose? What books would be in the New Testament, you agree that okay, that they became known and so on. But if you don't agree with the 27 books, it doesn't necessarily disqualify you from salvation from being a Christian. What I'm saying is the question of what should be acceptable, and what shouldn't be acceptable, should be to the

00:01:00 --> 00:01:38

good judgment of people who look into the Scripture, and do their historical research, and through rationalization, also decide that certain things are impossible. And therefore reject aspects of that scripture. If you allow some parts of the Scripture to be taken out, then it should be to the good discretion of each individual reader to decide what those parts would be, it's not good enough to say to someone, okay, you don't need to have all 27 books in the New Testament. You don't need to believe in this New Testament, but you have to believe in these parts, who gave you the authority, who gave you your story.

00:01:42 --> 00:01:43

This is my summary.

00:01:44 --> 00:01:46

This is my summary. So my summary is this.

00:01:48 --> 00:02:27

Mohammed has already accepted that it is quite proper to choose your Canon based upon your belief system, which is what he admitted when we talked about the Shia Sunni honey. Now, it follows therefore, that as Christians, we are also quite improper to do the same. The Salvation gospel that was taught by the first apostles was not written down and then handed out like a tract, it was preached, someone can be saved by knowing the good news about Jesus and believing on it without ever having a New Testament in their hands.

00:02:58 --> 00:03:00

God is the gospel,

00:03:01 --> 00:03:02

the gospel,

00:03:03 --> 00:03:57

the gospel, we believe in. And if someone believes in that gospel, yeah, and is in error, say about the lecture of James, or about the book of revelations, their faith is deficient, but not deficient in such a way that would cause them not to be saved. Because it is your faith in Christ, His crucifixion and resurrection, that complete work that saves you, not your knowledge of the Scriptures. It is obviously better if you know the scriptures. And I can't take lectures from Mohammed hijab, because Muhammad hijab is freely admitted that the 1400 years Muslims have not agreed about their hadiths, but Christians have agreed about the New Testament. And the debate was

00:03:57 --> 00:04:02

settled amongst Christians from 14 onwards. So we

00:04:11 --> 00:04:11


00:04:13 --> 00:04:19

the Christians will listen to Muhammad. Muslims are not polite to listen to the Christians.

00:04:22 --> 00:04:23

Thank you.

00:04:28 --> 00:04:54

Let us continue. The Christian faith is based upon the gospel. It is not based upon a book, the church recognized in the writings that were circulating amongst themselves, those books that he recognized as containing gospel as well. Finish Yes, let me finish one question. Let me finish. Let me finish.

00:04:56 --> 00:04:58

By contrast

00:05:00 --> 00:05:14

And so it is not an argument to say that because Christians may disagree about certain books, that therefore, the faith is invalid. If that argument is logical, Islam is invalid.

00:05:15 --> 00:05:29

argument, I made a point that the Quran makes a claim about history, it seems that there was an Injeel, given to a man called Isa, there is absolutely no evidence for this claim.

00:05:31 --> 00:05:34

Whereas the New Testament is quoted

00:05:36 --> 00:05:46

continuously to the present day. sufficient evidence for the reliability of the news? No, Mohammed, it's now Jason.

00:05:53 --> 00:05:54


00:05:55 --> 00:06:20

Okay, we had a discussion about the beginning. I'll give you four arguments. Yes. There was already in to me to chapter three, a sense of what scripture was when he says, Paul importance in Scripture, that is hard to understand. I talked about the Gnostics quote in the New Testament, that the community that the covenant community always had the idea of Covenant on word comes from Dr. Krueger, and

00:06:24 --> 00:06:48

he talks about we're on the same ground, because you can use natural religion. Yes, I talked about Cornelius van til, yes, that we have presuppositions and you look at history from an Islamic point of view. Yeah, we have to look at your glasses and critique it. That's why we need to look at the Quran. Yeah. Then we went on to talk to you and Bob talks about things and the main issues that came up for me was your

00:06:49 --> 00:07:08

is geography. Yeah, what I found very interesting is when you give the chain of narration, when I asked you for the word, you get your scientific principles from you struggled, actually given us the answer. Yeah. And then you you admitted that your scientific principles come later. Yeah. After you.

00:07:13 --> 00:07:14


00:07:19 --> 00:07:21

your reading back into history.

00:07:24 --> 00:07:26

Why do you always interrupt

00:07:27 --> 00:07:33

and interrupt us? You know, neither of us interrupted you, because we had some good manners not to get you consistently.

00:07:35 --> 00:07:46

You gave a chain of narration, we asked you a critical question. Where did you get the methodology for your scientific studies? Then you told us it came

00:07:47 --> 00:07:48


00:07:53 --> 00:07:56

Jason, your retro to history?

00:07:58 --> 00:07:59

Again, with a methodology

00:08:01 --> 00:08:02


00:08:05 --> 00:08:06

back into history

00:08:07 --> 00:08:15

is not objective. It's subjective that you've invented. Yes. And you read him back into history? Yes. With that methodology.

00:08:16 --> 00:08:16

Okay, can I

00:08:19 --> 00:08:19

go now?

00:08:22 --> 00:08:24

I'm gonna go. Okay. But can I

00:08:26 --> 00:08:26

say one thing?

00:08:31 --> 00:08:31

You said one time.

00:08:34 --> 00:08:35

You're gonna shake my hand.

00:08:37 --> 00:08:38

You look after yourself.

00:08:39 --> 00:08:40

Next week.

00:08:42 --> 00:08:43

When you bring your evidence.

00:08:51 --> 00:09:04

Where's it? Yes. Thank you. They've left me. Yes. So today, we came to some very fruitful conclusions. He said that the New Testament because he realized after we discussed about Athanasius

00:09:05 --> 00:09:10

27 books of the New Testament. Has anyone ever asked themselves?

00:09:11 --> 00:09:14

Why is it the fact that those 27 books

00:09:15 --> 00:09:18

are the 27 books? Why is it not, for example, that the Apocrypha,

00:09:20 --> 00:09:27

or is a Gospel of St. Thomas, who other books are part of it? What determines what is in the New Testament? And what is not in the New Testament?

00:09:28 --> 00:09:34

What is where is the divine authority of that determination? So today, because of the

00:09:35 --> 00:09:59

difficulty of that question, he actually admitted that actually, you don't have to believe that all 27 books of the New Testament in order to be a Christian and to get to be a salvation. In other words, you don't actually have to believe in the whole Bible to be a Christian. You can believe in parts of the Bible and not all of the Bible. That is the implication I'm afraid. For us. Obviously, as Muslims we say if God sent down a message, then as to be believed in in its entirety, then

00:10:00 --> 00:10:23

cannot be a part of it that's rejected and a part of it which is accepted the crisis ever taught me No, no be barred in kitabi. What's up, Bob? Do you believe in parts of the book and disbelieving parts of the book as a part of law? Do you know he was talking about? It's talking about the Jews and the Christians? Yes, if I told me no no be bothered kitabi will attack furuno be bought from us for mergesort omega Rosella come in come

00:10:25 --> 00:10:39

to Tonya. Well, malcare maturo Dona Isla de la de como la Hobi Hoffman and I'm a I'm a Luna, that will be the recompense of someone who does that, except for a punishment in this world. And the Day of Judgment, there'll be humiliated even further.

00:10:41 --> 00:11:24

So if God sent down a manual for people to follow, there are certain expectations that we have, as people are followers of that manual, in order for us, for us to maintain salvation. One of them is intact attachment, we want this manual for salvation, this guidance for humanity to be intact. If it's not intact, as agreed upon by those who specialize in its preservation, then surely, there's something wrong with that. You can't say that, okay, well, I believe in the Bible, but you could, but actually, it's conceivable to not believe in parts of it, and to believe in parts of it. So you know, as he kept equating the Hadees that we've had is with the Bible, which is meant to be the

00:11:24 --> 00:11:55

holiest, Holy Spirit's inspired book of God, directly from the Jesus from Jesus, that God, we accept that there are some things in Hades, which are not acceptable by historical standards. But the comparison should be made between Quran and Bible, not Quran and Hadith, especially not for either weak Hadith. And so therefore, when he realized what he was asking him to ask me the questions of preservation, that every question they had, every single question that had there was an answer. Every single question that they had,

00:11:57 --> 00:12:05

that they asked me a question. They said, Okay, give me a chain of narration, expect me to stumble, give them with a chain of narration. And

00:12:06 --> 00:12:18

then he said to me, tell me a document which, which proves the chain. So I told him the name of the document, which proves the chain. He said to me, no, no, it has to be before this guy. I said, no problem. I found it.

00:12:20 --> 00:12:34

I found this document is 95. Before Yes. I told him he said no, has to be has to be a wise it's only although I said no, no, it can't be on your eyes to be also written. What's the evidence of that? It was just he said that? He said, Okay. Well,

00:12:35 --> 00:12:38

he said, What's the evidence from the Prophet? I said, The Prophet said, write it down.

00:12:40 --> 00:12:42

Then he said to me, honestly,

00:12:44 --> 00:12:53

he said to me, show me this evidence preservation. I said, he told us he saw but it must be true of each person for each a a. So is that is that not evidence?

00:12:56 --> 00:13:05

So I said to him, please, please, please join. His name is john. Mo should know his name is john. I said, Now, let's do the same thing for the Bible. You know, he said, No.

00:13:07 --> 00:13:20

He said, No, we don't have the same standards. I said, I thought this was a historical exercise. I thought this was Yeah, so anyway, at the same point, that's why we can Santos Muslims are saved in taxman and preservation,

00:13:22 --> 00:13:30

our book, The Quran, all 114 chapters are agreed upon by the Sahaba. Someone says no, it must always be believed in 112. Not

00:13:31 --> 00:13:38

say, No, no, he changed his mind. But they don't know that he changed his mind. He said that he changed his mind. He said, No.

00:13:39 --> 00:13:50

He believed in this harder 16 No, no, no, no. He didn't believe in that he believes under 14, we have the records for that as well. Yeah, so everyone, but older Sahaba believed in this.

00:13:51 --> 00:14:27

And the Quran tells us in a manner which are meant to be forgotten tetto were interval of animals. If they believe in what you guys believe in, then they're on the right path. Who's you guys is the Sahaba. If there's a harbor, I agree that this is what the Quran is, because these people around the Prophet they heard it. And there's a consensus on this, the NASA historical evidence, a religious one, a theological one, a rational one, a philosophical one, and for me, a satisfactory one as well as satisfactory one as well. But when you think about the Bible, and you can't even provide one chain of provenance, one person,

00:14:28 --> 00:14:44

one chain of provenance, no chain, and one person who's met Jesus spoken to Jesus, I will come on and now you're telling me you can he said to me, he admitted, he said, you can. You don't have to believe in all the books of the New Testament. He said, No, I said, Okay, perfect. That's what

00:14:45 --> 00:14:54

I said to him. I that's perfect. He said, that's exactly my belief. I don't believe in all the New Testament. I believe in part of the New Testament. I reject another part.

00:14:55 --> 00:14:59

He tells me No, you have to believe in these parts salvation, crucifixion and listen died.

00:15:00 --> 00:15:25

God, no, no, no, no, you can't tell me now you have you have an intellectual right? To accept and reject parts of the New Testament on academic grounds, and then dictate to me where the rejection should be, where the accepting should be, and so on. And he even said, You don't even need the New Testament for for, for salvation and the last lecture, okay, that's, that's perfect. cuz I've got the Quran.

00:15:28 --> 00:15:32

Yeah, yeah. So the point is, ladies and gentlemen,

00:15:33 --> 00:16:13

the point is, if the if the argument is listen to this, if the argument is that you don't need the Gospels, the four gospels, because that could be the argument. So you know, you don't need to 27 bucks. It's just the four gospels, then the argument he made is actually self refuting. Because he said, the first people to go back on it, it says the first people, the first people to ever believe in Jesus was there a New Testament was four books. So no, you said no. So wait a minute, you can believe in Jesus, you can believe in Jesus's message. It's conceivable not to believe in the four gospels, and still be a Christian and be saved. That's opposition. David.

00:16:14 --> 00:16:26

Opposition, opposition. And a Moreover, whilst he was this, in the book of Corinthians, Second Corinthians, yes, verse number 18. Can Can we get it out somewhere? Can we let's see.

00:16:27 --> 00:17:04

Let's see. I want to see, it refers to a singular book. He makes an argument from silence. And he doesn't even know what that meant. When I told them an argument from silence is that he said that this new gospel, this gospel that you're referring to that singular gospel of Jesus is nowhere in history to be found. I said that just because you don't find something in history. It doesn't mean it doesn't exist. It's an argument from silence. And I gave an example of the NACA, like Hammadi texts of 1945, to prove my point. But it is in a second book of Second Corinthians, verse number 18. And we have sent with him the brother, who, whose praise is in the Gospel throughout all of the

00:17:04 --> 00:17:36

churches, the Gospels, not the Gospels, the idea is, even in the the oldest texts, the idea of a gospel, a singular gospel was being referred to. So there is evidence in the in the books that they believe in, obviously, that's Paul. So in summary, that's why Christianity now people are leaving it. And Islam. It makes sense from all perspectives, not just from a Trinitarian perspective, but from a preservation perspective. It makes sense from a rational perspective. Yes, guys, I mean, if you're a Christian, and you're watching this, yes, one question.

00:17:38 --> 00:17:38


00:17:41 --> 00:17:44

Other than arguing with non Muslims, you know, you're

00:17:46 --> 00:17:47

no, no, no.

00:17:48 --> 00:17:55

As a Muslim, are we allowed to do argument or do Dawa to a non Muslim without having have knowledge of Islam? No, you have to have some knowledge.

00:17:57 --> 00:18:06

I have seen a lot of Muslim brother, that the stack of the question yes. And they should not come here. I was telling them I was talking to them. Why mom? Yeah.

00:18:10 --> 00:18:43

So my message to the Christians is, guys look within whether you look from a preservation perspective, a textual perspective, a rational perspective, or even an intuitive perspective, the answer is always going to be one, that you believe in one God you cannot bring yourself to believe in three in one in one in three, you don't accept the story of the entire New Testament. It makes perfect sense. It made perfect sense for that to have been a renewal of the faith through another prophet, one that we believe is predicted in the New Testament and the Old Testament, who came in the form of the Prophet Mohammed in the Arabian Peninsula seventh century after after pray before

00:18:44 --> 00:18:44

I'm not gonna come

Share Page

Related Episodes