The Moment Daniel Haqiqatjou Caught Out Anti-Muslim on PBD

So we've got the second clip, where he's also making an argument. Let's actually look at what he's saying. Okay, yeah. So Jesus stopped so many things in the Old Testament, you don't accept that. That's, that's, that's your choice, for example, why his disciples never killed an apostate. Why His disciples never wavered political power. As soon as Christians gain political power in the Roman Empire, they started doing things you didn't have the jurisdiction to do. So they didn't care a minority. They weren't empowered. As soon as Christians gained power within the Roman Empire. They applied the Old Testament laws, the New Testament about truth is notified in the canon law. Do you

know Are you familiar with the Canon Law? Yeah, I want to talk about that. He's got he's got literally yes, no response is no response. As you can see, he's making this argument. He's making the argument. Why did Jesus and his disciples not do anything? Why Did nothing happen, etc, you're forgetting the history is as if you don't know the history, Jesus, and we're not even in power before we raised a good point before we get to the history is I always find it so interesting like that when Christian people compare him Hamlet, Eliza Lampson was Jesus. Because Jesus for them is God. Yes. Yeah. Muhammad for us is the final prophet. Yeah, yeah. So if you want to be fair, why

don't you compare Allah with Jesus? See, in their mind is almost as if they've humanized Jesus. They've already it's like a tacit admission that Jesus is not actually a God, he must be compared man for man. Yeah. Yeah. So it's a tacit admission, okay, hey, you got Jesus, the man versus Muhammad demand this compare both careers. But if you guys believe as you do, that Jesus is God and is part of the Trinity and so on, then surely, surely, he should be compared with Allah, because we believe in Allah as I've got. That's the first thing. The second thing is, is the point that Daniel made was actually a very powerful point. Because even if we do compare now, yes, Jesus, the

historical figure, the man with Mohammed, Salah Salem, Maha cylinder, the main difference historically, between the two is that one of them was given political power. He has political power, he's a statesman. And the other one, according to their narrative is that he was humiliated and killed and across. So you can't say, well, actually, let's compare his behavior with his behavior. Because then when I come back and say, well, in the book of Revelation, when he comes back, he's going to take vengeance. Yeah, yeah. He's going to take vengeance. Yeah. So I mean, so they would say no, but then what they will do is they do the shift, they say, but he was a goddess. So God can

take vengeance if he wants to. So becomes a god when he's taking vengeance. Yes. And he's a man when he's being humiliated. Very convenient. It's all. So there's, there's no winning here. Yeah. So that's one thing. And then the argument here, which is that Daniel is making and then they deny it, how could they deny it? Because it's very, very clear and historical record. If you know, the early history of Christianity, anyone has studied the early history of Christianity, okay, that there were first a persecuted minority. And then, in 313, Christianity was made into it was allowed, it was it was tolerated in the Roman Empire. Then when,

then when Constantine became a Christian himself, he constituted it as the religion of the empire. And then after that, near the the fifth century, like the end of the fourth century, you had Theodosian stuff, which by force, you know, he, he insisted on certain theological things. And if any, forget about non pagan pagans, and some non Christians, if you didn't believe in Nicean,

Constantinople, Constantinople, type Christianity, then you could be persecuted physically for that. And this is well known historical record. And then you have a bloody history of, of Christianity. You have the Crusades, you have the Crusades, the Crusades, I mean, how can these people how can Robert Spencer, okay and Rashid Hammami sit down and speak as if they are ignorant? They're not ignorant by the way of the Crusades. He's not ignorant because I've seen what's his name? Robert Spencer speak to Java.

I can't remember his Hashmi. Yes, I had a debate with him. Yeah. And in that debate, he he quoted or he admitted that there have been people who have effectively have been inspired by Biblical verses to do violence. He admitted that point. Yeah. So um, because you have something called a papal bulls and the papal bulls, these they're authoritative,

you know, proclamations by the Pope's Yes. Okay. And, and they will papal bulls from Urban the Second as you know, you know, in 1095, in the First Crusade, when when they came in, they were requesting the cording to them. I mean, the whole initial concept of the Crusades are religiously motivated, was justified religiously motivated other people bought by the race, not just because all the things they mentioned in that thing. Yeah. Slavery, this that we're all that stuff, the machine gun tactics. All of that you have people bought, like, for example, the papal bull of Nicolas Nicolas the fifth. Yes. Now the papal bull of Nicolas, the fifth.

justified or gave the religious justification for slavery? Yeah, so all of these things having been said, you can't actually make

Second argument and I was very frustrated. A lot of the Christians, some of them, yeah. And I'm going to challenge this now, some of the Christians were saying, Well, Jake, and Daniel didn't understand

the Old Testament and didn't understand resource. Actually, I think both of them understand Christianity more than most of the Christians do. Yeah, they study that on an academic level. And moreover, number two, there's a second point. If you really think about it, yeah, you've got

you've got Christianity that's been pushed here, which is that there's a new covenant and that there's no there's no requirement for a law. Okay. That's what's being said. So that Jesus, as he mentioned in the beginning, Rashidi said, he stopped, he means to say he abrogated, he don't want to say the word. The abrogated all that was required. In the Old Testament, even though the exact opposite is mentioned the Bible, yeah, but I'm not here to do away with the law of the prophets, affirm them. But put that sort of side. If you if you look at it, and the secondary source scholarly material, people like James Dunn, EP Sanders, others, like you can look at this in the scholarly

works. non Muslims have written about this, the idea that actually it was Paul himself, Paul, who, in the early Christianity changed Christianity in a manner that would make it seem as if all you need to do is believe in the crucifixion, the resurrection, this story, and you don't have to, you can forego the Old Testament rules. This is not something which the early Christians do. And the biggest tension that you can find in the Bible is between Paul and James and people know who James is. James, according to the biblical narrative is meant to be the brother of Jesus Christ. Yes. Okay, brother, how because they believe Joseph, the carpenter had another, you know, son, which is

not through marry. Obviously, a lot of them do believe in perpetual virginity and stuff, I'm not gonna get into the doctrine. But the idea is that they believe in James, now James, you can see a clear,

you can see a clear conflict between him and Paul. And in that conflict, Paul is effectively trying to argue against the law, especially circumcision, the book of Acts, you can see, he's arguing against these kinds of things. And Paul is saying, be with the Jew, be a Jew, with the Jew and the Gentile with the Gentiles. Be pragmatic, but the point is that there's nothing definitively to show in early Christianity, that this movement away from the Old Testament laws was definitive as they want to be, make it out to be Paul seems to be spearheading this process. And that is clearly in historical record. Clearly, it's been mentioned by scholars of Christianity, non Muslim scholars of

Christianity, even Martin Luther mentioned, and I can read quotations. I mean, maybe if since we're doing this video, I can, I'll read a quotation from Martin Martin Luther, who, as you know, we're talking about Martin Luther Martin Luther King, Martin Luther, the, the who he's named after Martin Luther is the,

in many ways, the one who started the Protestant Reformation says the following. He says, though, this epistle of James was rejected by the because sometimes some will say respondents will reject it, because it wasn't made it and this is another question Who decides what books go into the Bible? I don't even want to ask an atheist society it wasn't through a council as tenacious decided, and what books go into New Testament This is channels one, however, this is this is what

this is what mine is, is he saying though, though, this epistle of James was rejected by the ancient ancients, I praise and consider a good book, to state my own opinion about it without prejudice to anyone, I do regard it as the writing of an apostle. And my reasons. Follow in the first place is flatly against Paul, and all the rest of Scripture and ascribing justification to x. In a word, he warned against those who relied on faith without works, but was unequal to task is spirit, though inwards, thoughts, sorry, and words, therefore, I will not have him in my Bible to be numbered among the true chief books, though I would not thereby prevent anyone from including or extolling him as

he pleases for the otherwise many good sayings in him. So basically, know that he understands this idea of justification justification by faith Salafi day, which was promoted in Christianity, this this idea is a poor line idea. Okay, and this is something which is clear. Why then would we throw away the Old Testament and throw on the bus, even if we by the way, let's not throw away the Old Testament by the bus? Let's just stick to the New Testament because they made it seem as if there's nothing in the New Testament, there's nothing in the New Testament. So let me just read this imagine if this this particular thing was in the in the Quran, okay. This is in the book of Luke. Yeah.

And this is something which is meant to have said, Jesus has said, Yeah, I have I have come to bring fire on Earth, and how I wish it were already kindled by have a baptism to undergo and what I can what constraint Am I under? It is completed. Do you think I came to bring peace on earth? This is Jesus. No, I tell you about Division four. Now there will be five in one family divided against each other three

against to and two against three, they will be divided father against son, son against father, mother against daughter and daughter against mother, mother in law against daughter in law and daughter in law against mother in law. Now what we're talking about here, this is the New Testament, don't make it as if the New Testament is a pacifist book.

So the thing is this is that they're coming across as if you've got violence, their whole argument against Islam is you've got violence. You've got violence in your book. And this is your narrative. By the way, this is the these are the things that we believe about Israeli cinema about Jesus. Yeah, this is from your narrative, okay, of Jesus. But the point, the point they're making, which is that Islam as far as effective, and I'll put it this way, but it's as crude as to say, look, the reason why we're not Muslim is, well, the greatest challenge that we have against Islam is, as I mentioned, Keishon of violence, and you mentioned violence. Okay, so what so what, so what you're saying,

You're Christina, throwing stones from glass houses, that's what it is. That's essentially what you're doing. It's absolutely shocking. And that's why initially, in the beginning, I think it was a very good point that Daniel made, who are we debating right now? What are we discussing? What are we discussing with atheists? Yes. Because you're coming in and you're coming across as if you're none the wiser to these verses in the Bible, you have no clue about these verses in the Bible. Okay. And both of you who, you know, put yourselves across as, you know, a Christian representatives as Christian, essentially, you know, speakers, okay. public speakers, representing the Christians. You

don't know what's in the Bible. You don't know that. And that was one of the main comments that people had is that these guys could not defend the Bible. Yeah. But at what kind of You can't throw the Bible under the bus? Just the Bible is they had an insufficient knowledge of Christianity. Yes, yeah. Oh, Jake, and Daniel had more knowledge of Christianity. And this is evidence of the fact that Jake was Quizzing. Robert Spencer, who is meant to be more knowledgeable in this matter. Yeah. Yeah. About the Trinity. And he said that, namely, someone the first few 100 years, it's all about trinity. Right? And by the obviously Jake means co equal and CO eternal. Yes. Three persons of the

Trinity. Yes. And this is and then he mentioned basil, who is one of the capitalization like we're talking about what is the time of the compilation fathers is like the late three hundreds? Yeah, that's not in the first round of Yeah, yeah, that's after the fact. So you've you've given them a timeline of 300 years and then you give them someone 400 years later,

you're using him? Okay. You're using him in order to make the point that all three persons of the Godhead are eco eco co channel, which is exactly the Nicene Constantinopolitan creed, which is not which is not what happened. And then he mentioned I don't know if he's a gracious or one of the children of all the church fathers that has mentioned all of them believed in subordination. All of them believed in subordination ism, they believe that the father was more powerful than the son the Holy Spirit. So when it came to the key matters when they did they can co equal them. Exactly.

Equal Yeah. So that when it came to the key tenants and the key credo implications, there's no doubt in my mind, they tried to avoid that like a bargepole. They have to, they have to because they're weakened. They don't want to they don't want to if it was a proper debate about Christian Islam, why not debate it how hate Trinity divinity look, there's two things that really separate Muslims and Christians number one, thank you. Yeah, Trinity the Trinity Yes. All right. So the idea of this Jesus got this is why don't we start with that and then number two, the Prophet Mohammed Salah if you resolve those areas, there's no difference between commonalities resolve those two areas.

There's no difference between Muslims and effectively we believe in the same thing. If we resolve the issue, the Trinity and Prophet Muhammad Salah that's it they then learn how to complete the point is is you guys are too scared to engage with that they as soon as JAXA is speaking about trinity they want to engage because you cannot because your belief and the modern day Christian belief that the Father the Son and the Holy Spirit are co eternal. Yes. Okay, they've all been there and they are co equal Yeah, okay. That they are equally God. Yes. Okay. This is nonsensical to the idea of monotheism it isn't against monotheism Yes, absolutely. Okay. And you cannot be as

Christians claim you cannot claim to be a monotheistic Okay, and claim to believe in this idea of the Trinity square circle I think what you've done here is right I think we've we've looked at some of the things here this Rashid guy honestly he's he's ended his career before could even start Yeah, why stars in the English speaking language against people like Daniel Pikachu and Jake Brancatelli Why would you start with a Muslim with as your he's one of the top guys? Why would you start it's like going in a boxing ring. And the first fight you want to have the issue is the issue is clearly got knocked out from him. No one wants you to ever represent them again. You are finished. You are

finished. You're absolutely done. You can go back to speaking in the Arabic speaking world where a few cops will clap for you. In Arabic speaker even they don't like you. But it's done. Now for you in the English speaking world. You've been vomited out very, very quickly. We don't know we don't like it. The Christians don't like anything

You don't like it the Americans don't like it even even the Moroccans don't like it. I mean, your own people don't like it. You're humiliated just yourself and your nation as Allah, Allah says Jamie, no, his nation is free from him. He goes, of course nation is free. Allah sent Jake. He this guy he is this is an amazing point. Allah sent Jake Yeah to ship because Morocco is one of the best for me is one of the most beautiful countries to go to. The people are fantastic, are excellent. The culture is brilliant. You have a river, and they're very tolerant people you have it's amazing because if you were to look at him Subhan Allah, someone who's got the Arabic language somebody can

attack him about what what do you call wearing the clothing? I mean, let's do a poll in Morocco. And let's see what the Moroccans have to say about this. And the guys wearing a suit. Yeah, I mean, he's wearing a suit. And he's talking about why is it Why is he wearing this Moroccan clothes? Why are you wearing my clothes? like who are you? You're in his country rough. You are in his country? What are you talking about? Man? Be quiet. You should be counting this size this and I think we should end on this. Yeah, this reminds me of an ayah of the Quran. balcells Double will help kill a major home for home family marriage. They denied they they turned away. they disbelieved in the truth when

it came to them. So they are in a confused state. They are confused. They're confused and confused. Is that cool? Now sit on watching. We'll see you next time Slavonic Warahmatullah