Watch Party! - Mohammed Hijab vs Dr. William Lane Craig | Is the Trinity Coherent?
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 24 ก.ย. 2024
- Join this channel to get access to perks:
/ @hamzasden
© 2022 Hamza's Den All Rights Reserved
Please support us by donating. Jazak'Allahu Khairan to you all
Paypal: www.paypal.com...
Patreon: / hamzasden
Social media
Facebook: / hamzas-den-10066183176...
Twitter: / hamza_den
Instagram: / hamzasden4
TikTok: / hamzasden
Videos Edited & Channel Managed by: Ben Iqra
Goodbye Doctor, a fake made up concept that tortured me and my friends and family.
the fake false god allah muhamud made up ?
54:30 the amount of christians who turn into atheist because of the trinity. he don't mention that
Meaning: none. The reason a Christian becomes Atheist is the same reason a Muslim becomes Atheist. If the Trinity itself is such a big hurdle, there are Christian sects that don't believe in it without compromising the other aspects of that belief system, like the Bible. Becoming Muslim or Atheist because of that would be a bigger leap.
Hamza’s analogy of two guns shot at the head by 2 people at the same time actually proves the point Hijab is trying to highlight…a gun shot to the head means you have a bullet but 2 gunshots to the head means that you now have 2 bullets to the head. Even though 1 bullet to the head is sufficient to kill, having 2 bullets has the same effect but has changed something in the whole process
The point hijab was proving was that its impossible for the father, son and holy spirit to each be fully responsible for the creation of the universe. The example of two guns to the head shooting at the same time doesn't refute this fact because it is impossible for each bullet to be fully responsible for the death of the person. Either the one that reached first will be fully responsibility or they both contributed in the death of the person. It is impossible for two things to be fully responsible for one effect.
@@togetherWeGrow01 I know hamza is not an intellectual and doesn't pretend to be but for a popular witty debater to not understand the arguments then proceed to use an analogy that actually proves MH's point is actually laughable. It's okay for the argument to go over your head but in that case you should own up to that and get someone to explain it to you rather than saying stuffs like MH's arguments didn't make sense or you can't really say who won the debate when it was clear as day light who won.
And he also complained about the use of terminologies unknown to him, bro this is a debate between two highly educated intellectuals who both have 2-5 mins to respond to each other and you want them to waste their time defining some basic terminologies? How about you do your homework so you can understand the conversation 🤷.
If what you just said is what muhammad ment then he has a flawed philosophy you've just admitted yourself that both bullets are sufficient it's not like the man is extra dead.😊
@@arthurgoonie4596 Naa you simply didn't grasp the argument and that's fine.
The point of the argument is about assigning agency to a cause of an effect either in part or whole.
When a killer puts a gun to someone's head and shoot, the person dies. Meaning one bullet is sufficient to kill a person (and he's the sole murderer). However, when two people shoot someone in the head together we don't say because one person is sufficient to be the murderer the we'll ignore the second killer. The police would not flip a coin to choose who to prosecute because two people going to jail is unnecessary lol. The two Killers would be made to face the consequence of murdering someone. In this case, one murderer cannot both the 100% and partially responsible for the murder either it was done by both Killers or one killer did the killing.
In the case of the debate, two entities cannot be 100% responsible and simultaneously partially responsible for creating the universe. It's a logical impossibility. Hence, the Father can not be attributed to be the 100% creator of the universe and also be made a partial creator of the universe sharing the act of creation with the Son and Holy spirit, it's either one or the other.
@Uthopemus so both people are 100% responsible. Thank you thank you for proving my point. Man you people really are stupid.
Dr Craig, a lifetime of learning nothing but clinging onto a false doctrine. The audacious comment at the end when he thought Muslims were swapping Tawheed for Trinitarianism/ Atheism just proves the mush his brain has become.
The most brainded thing a human could say indeed. Bro is on par with an earthworm when it comes to IQ and/or sincirety
i cannot believe it that Craig already stumbled at his opening statement. It's literally the basic argument that being refuted countless times. did he even do his research?
I believe Craig has a college degree but I could be wrong.
WLC started by trying to deflect the debate from Trinity to Tawheed, and ended by going into preacher mode.
POV: *"An online debate between Islam and Christianity happens and a Muslim intellectual decimates the missionary"*
Christians just moments after the end of debate:
*"Reacting to Career ending debate of Muslim w/ David Wood, APuss, Sam Shamoun, IP"* 😂
Every bloody time😂😂😂 may allah guide them☝🏽
Damage control my brada
Lol. MH lost the debate. Notice he dis not use the usual muslim arguments that how can three be one
Let me explain how Craig lost this debate to lay audience:
Craig resorted to flawed analogies and examples to defend. Let's extend his flame example to next step, Just imagine two guns shot at the head at the same time. A gun shot to the head means you have a bullet but 2 gunshots to the head means that you now have 2 bullets to the head.
In the analogy, a single gunshot to the head represents something complete and effective on its own. One bullet is enough to cause death-there's no need for more to achieve the result.
Now, imagine you add a second gunshot. Although the result is still death, something has changed. You no longer have just one bullet-you now have two bullets, which is different from the original situation. It’s not the same as having just one; the overall picture has been altered, even if the outcome (death) remains the same.
How does this relate to the Trinity?
Just like in the gunshot analogy, one God is enough. Adding more persons-Father, Son, and Holy Spirit-changes the original concept of having a single, indivisible God.
With one God (like one gunshot), the concept of God is simple and straightforward: one being, one essence, one authority.
When you add the second and third persons (like adding more bullets), even if all are considered “God,” it’s no longer the same as having just one simple God. Now, you're dealing with something more complex, with multiple parts or persons, even though Christians claim it’s still “one God.”
The analogy shows that adding persons changes the basic nature of God. Just like having two gunshots isn’t the same as having one, having three persons isn't the same as having just one God. This challenges the idea that God can be truly "one" in the simplest sense if there are three distinct entities, even if they are all part of the same divine being.
So, the point is that oneness means one, without anything added. If you add something (like a second or third person), even if it’s still called “one God,” the simplicity of being just one is lost.
Dear Friend,
Thank you for your detailed analogy and thoughtful insights. While I understand the comparison of gunshots to the concept of the Trinity, it’s crucial to recognize that such analogies fall short when applied to the divine nature of God. Even in Islam, it is taught that Allah cannot be compared to anything-there is nothing like God (Quran 42:11). This shows that, whether in Islam or Christianity, no analogy can ever perfectly capture God’s nature, as He transcends all human understanding and comparisons.
God’s Nature Transcends Physical Comparisons: The Trinity isn’t about adding components like bullets or gunshots. In the gunshot analogy, adding bullets changes the outcome because it involves distinct, separate actions and results. However, the Trinity is a relational unity, not separate forces acting independently. The Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are one in essence, perfectly unified in will, purpose, and action. They are not parts of God but fully embody the one true God together.
Unity, Not Complexity: God’s oneness in the Trinity isn’t about a simplistic count but a perfect, indivisible unity. The three persons-Father, Son, and Holy Spirit-are distinct yet inseparable, operating in perfect harmony. This unity is not comparable to multiple gunshots, which represent separate and additive actions. God’s oneness includes relational depth and eternal love within Himself, which doesn’t complicate His nature but enriches it.
Divine Revelation over Human Reasoning: The question isn’t whether we can fully grasp the Trinity through human analogies-we cannot. The Trinity is a revealed truth, not a human construct. Christians believe that God has revealed Himself as one in three persons through the life and teachings of Jesus, who declared His unity with the Father.
Which Revelation Truly Comes from God?: The deeper question is, which revelation is truly from God? Christians believe in all the prophets and that their scriptures are preserved and consistent. In contrast, Islam teaches belief in Muhammad, whose teachings often contradict earlier scriptures. The claim of corruption of previous scriptures seems like a weak argument, appearing more as an excuse to dismiss the consistent message of all prior prophets. This raises questions about the truthfulness and consistency of the revelations.
Ultimately, it’s not just about the nature of God or analogies that fall short but about the authenticity of the revelation we choose to believe. Christians hold to the full witness of God’s unbroken revelation through all His prophets, while the Islamic view restricts it to one, often in contradiction with the others.
@@user-li3mv5qx4t I agree that God can't be compared to anything, as per the Quran (Quran 42:11), but that applies to the Quranic understanding of God, not for the corrupted human concepts of God like the Trinity.
The analogy of the gunshots isn't meant to capture the divine essence perfectly, but to illustrate a flaw in the Trinity's logic. While Christians claim the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are one in essence, they still distinguish between three persons. This division contradicts the pure monotheism of the Quran, where God is one without any distinctions or multiplicity.
The Trinity’s explanation of three persons being one God introduces an inherent complexity. Even if Christians argue that these persons operate in unity, the fact that they are distinct makes the claim of "one God" problematic. It changes the very concept of oneness, much like how adding more bullets changes the situation, even if the outcome (death) remains the same.
The Quranic understanding of God is simple and straightforward: one God, without division, transcending human limitations, and entirely unlike His creation. There is no need to rely on convoluted metaphysical explanations or distinctions between persons.
As for the claim that Islamic teachings contradict earlier scriptures, this overlooks the Quran's assertion that previous revelations were indeed corrupted over time. The Quran offers a final, unaltered message that restores the true concept of God, rejecting innovations like the Trinity, which had no place in the original monotheism preached by prophets like Moses and Jesus.
In summary, the analogy of gunshots may not fully capture divine complexity, but it effectively demonstrates the problem with the Trinity. While both Islam and Christianity agree that God's nature transcends human analogies, the Quran provides a clear, uncompromised understanding of God's oneness-free from the contradictions seen in human-altered doctrines like the Trinity.
Whenever Mohammed hijab debates someone, that someone gets humiliated 😂
When you decide the victory based on who can shout louder then obviously Hijab will win .... Everytime 😅
@@stan3399 Right 😂
@@stan3399 Yes, I agree with you, but his (Hijab) voice is not only louder but his arguments and points too.
@@stan3399 give me one argument made by WLC, btw your boy got so uncomfortable he had to shout during Mohammed’s time 💀
@@1sosukeaizen1 I take it you never really listened to the debate because I admit it is a little "too much" for you to understand. WLC was explaining Causal overdetermination which is a situation where a single effect is caused by multiple causes, where each cause is sufficient on its own to produce the effect. Hijab understands it, but pretends it is inaccurate to explain the trinity. So, you should go back to the 5th grade where People like Hijab can pretend to teach monotheism while offering no evidence for the diety of Allah expect the words of Mohammed ! ( I don't have to expand on his character, his life speaks for himself)
Muhammad Hijab dominated the debate by dismantling the logical incoherences and contradictions within the doctrine of the Trinity. He not only exposed the flaws in Dr. Craig’s analogies but also revealed Craig’s heretical views, which diverge significantly from mainstream Christianity. Hijab effectively critiqued Craig’s rejection of the eternal generation of the Son and his partialist views, while also highlighting the contradictions in the mainstream Christian understanding of the Trinity itself. His deep engagement with logic and philosophy made his argument far more compelling and rigorous.
It was a very beautiful debate.
Easy win for Brother Mohammad Hijab.
Alhamdulilah for Islam
The poor moderator watching his beliefs get dismantled
Even if you take the candle analogy that Craig posited to be sound, why stop at three candles? You might as well have 5, 10 or 800, it still holds up the same in that 100% of each one can have the same singe creative effect - therefore you can use it as an argument for polytheistic creation - which is essentially what the Trinity is, albeit with other properties. Craig is indirectly arguing for polytheistic creation.
Exactly! His whole argument is that God is One, but in Three Persons. Why not Five, Seven, or an even number 10. And he probably will retort with that the Three Persons is somehow derived from The Bible. Then, the discussion should really be about the authenticity and accuracy of The Bible with regards to The Message of God.
@@FromNothingComesNothingIt is 3 because the Bible says so ! 😅
@@FromNothingComesNothing Dear Friend,
From a Christian perspective, the concept of the Trinity (Father, Son, Holy Spirit) is not arbitrary but a divine revelation evident throughout the Bible, with references in both the Old and New Testaments (e.g., Matthew 28:19). The number three symbolizes completeness and harmony, reflecting how God chose to reveal Himself-not because another number would be more suitable. The Bible, regarded as the inspired Word of God, provides the foundation for the doctrine of the Trinity, unveiling God’s nature and His unique relationship with humanity. So, why not five or seven? Because God has revealed Himself as three. We believe what God has shown us.
@@user-li3mv5qx4t Thats literally made up gibberish. The fact you quote old and new testament like its not been changed multiple times as your source is a sick joke.
Because God exists as 3 persons not 10?
جزاكم الله خيرا
Brother Hamza because you didn't understand the terminology it doesn't mean that brother Muhammad failed. That's your issue Habibi. It was a debate between two intellectuals what would you expect with all due respect.
Been hearing about this guy and the Dr massively disappointed. He offered not a single shred of evidence for any of his positions. Spent the whole time trying to shift attention to Tawheed because he doesn't have a leg to stand on.
There are stronger debaters with more cogent arguments at Speakers Corner. Absolutely astonishing that this guy has multiple PhDs.
Hamzeeeee!
Big love brother ❤
May Allah bless you
Associating partners with god is making gods looks weak weaker when tried to earn monotheism
Hamza brother, you are a very honest man in this video. I think it's so nice that you're not just one of those fanboys who just cheer without understanding what the point was
I think jake the muslim metaphysician would be the right person for William crage
Candle analogy does not work... It's a completely different product.
1 candle will have X product
2 candles will have 2X product
They're 2 different products ( 1 stronger flame than the other, with more atoms etc). Therefor, the idea of "both creating the SAME thing" no longer applies, because it's no longer the same thing.
Another example:
If I have 1 liter of water and I want to fill an empty 1 liter bottle; I can fill it completely on my own. BUT if someone else tries to fill the SAME bottle with his 1 liter of water; the water will overspill, it will NOT just be filled the same way if I had done it alone...
In no sense, will 2 people working on the same thing, result in the same product with 100% responsibility etc.
2 people can work on the same product, but then it will be "in parts".
That's what MH should have hammered down.
Father + Son + Holy spirit all working together on the same universe while each having 100% creative contribution.
That's an impossibility and a contradiction.
Dear Friend,
When it comes to the nature of God, there is no perfect analogy, neither in Islam nor in Christianity. Our human understanding will always fall short because God is infinite and beyond our comprehension. The real question is: How has God revealed Himself? What do the prophets say?
In Christianity, God reveals Himself as Triune: Father, Son, and Holy Spirit-a truth that Jesus Himself taught. Jesus claims to be the Way, the Truth, and the Life (John 14:6) and shows us God’s nature in human form. In Islam, God is viewed as absolutely one, and Muhammad is seen as the final prophet.
Ultimately, it comes down to who we choose to believe: Jesus, who revealed Himself as the Son of God, or Muhammad, who presented himself as a prophet. This choice shapes our understanding of God and His nature.
@@user-li3mv5qx4t
- Jesus was believed to be a prophet as well
- Jesus never claimed to be God
- Jesus said that the only true god is the father
- Jesus did not know the hour, only the father knows the hour and no one else
- The trinity was a doctrine established hundreds of years AD.
- You can read the bible and clearly infer that there's no trinity
- The first commandment is o hear israel, your god is 1. No mention of jesus, nor the holy spirit
- Jesus saying: I am the way; by no means establish or infer trinity. It just means that he is presenting the right way/path for people to live a good life and that we should follow this way. Similar to all other prophets in how they presented a practical way to live life/ deliver the message by god.
I can go on, but these are enough.
If you don't want to contemplate God; because he's infinite and beyond our comprehension, that's completely fine.
But nowhere in the bible does it present a triune God. No where.
Nowhere is it mentioned that God is 3 in 1.
@@user-li3mv5qx4t
The Quran explains the nature of Allah in surah 112 n His 99 attributes, no analogies needed.
Who created the candle. Why 3 gods .why would they call them self father and son.and if they're son and father could they be a more children more gods. What does the spirit do that the father can't do. Are they more sprite. And if they all gods are they capable of disagreeing.?
two drivers in same car is called earthworms two heads in one body
I wasnt a fan of the structure,
And the connection problems were so annoying,
But as far as the criticism goes regarding the breakdown of concepts, this comes down to the structure. Usually these debates would go at least 1 hr and a hlf. For it to be an hour, it was probably assumed that the onlookers would have some foundation
Prophet Abraham [pbuh] was never seen preaching trinity. End of the debate.
Neither was Moses, Jacob, Isaac or any one else for that matter
@@youtubeaccount3230How is it the end of the debate? We, as Christians, believe in progressive revelation. Also,your own logic could be used against you. No prophet taught that we should walk around the Kaaba before Muhammad.
@@thyikmnnnn Prophet Abraham and his son Ishmael [pbut] did. Arabs came from Ishmael. They installed those idols later and then prophet Muhammed [pbuh] finally came and corrected them.
@@FreePalestine_____ According to Islam. There is nothing before Islam that mentions Abraham having anything to do with the Kaaba.
@@thyikmnnnn Islam is the religion of Abraham. Islam means submitting to the will of God. And who else you think should keep the record of the kaaba except the descendant of prophet Ishmael [pbuh], who are Arabs?
Thank you for your reaction to the debate brother Hamza. Hijab did a very good job, WLG kept saying he is consistent without giving an explanation "it's the way it is" kind of argument.
I think this debate needs some level of understanding. WLG did NOT stand ground on his views. His analogy of the lighters and flame is totally ridiculous. His views is that the Father and Son are both partially responsible and fully responsible and, at the same time is logically incoherent, and he failed to explain it as the burden of proof is on him on this one. The candle could not be lit fully by the two lighters, and if they are partially participant in lightning the candle, then their are not fully responsible for the act. It's like he is saying you see it as two flames lightning a flame and moves one. But wait, both fully responsible? It's a deception, as physically they both exert a combination of direct and direct effects to light it. So they are partially responsible in reality. When he pressed him on this conflict, he said don't take it "so literal" making it impossible actually. But then let's say both flames have the capacity to light a flame, then ok why didn't one flame light it and had the need of the other flame even not by necessity which will make a more stronger flame resulting in a different act. Hijab should have pressed him as a waste of energy, which contradicts perfection.
I hope you get my explanation borther Hamza.
To summarize WLG he is trying to reconcile some issues with Christianity but fell into deeper traps.
I think this debate mill make WLG think a lot about his arguments.
MIND WAS BEST TO BE KEPT AS OUR SERVANT, BUT NOT A MASTER.. WHEN YOU MAKES IT A MASTER, BLUNDERS N CONFUSION TAKES PLACE, NO UNITY, ONLY BREAKUPS.. MIND IS GOOD AT THIS
Well done for brother hijab he did well in debate
Hamza I had to rewatch the debate to understand. His point was that there cannot be a triune God. They cannot have the same will, they cannot have different wills neither. It's just not realizable like said in the quran 'they would outstripe each other ...'
Why can’t they have the same will? Why do you assume that the 3 persons of the Trinity will be in competition with each other?
Hijab tried and did a good job, but the success in the debate is not because he is better debater than his co debater, it is because he started with an adavantage which is to support and defend the truth, his opponent had more work to do as he is exoected to opposed the truth
True, a false Concept is bound to fail
As a muslim myself for 32 years, I got to admit that Hijab's argument were all refuted by WLC concisely and i am bit worried that the concept of tawhid left more holes from this debate..
@@scv8586 why do you think that stating „as a muslim“ at the beginning gives you any say in the matter when things clearly went over your head?. Also, if you are truly a muslim, you could tell me who the current caliph is.
@@scv8586Christian lying to appeal ✝️ 🤡
@@didyouprayyour5prayers996 Why do you think that just because I am questioning other muslims logic, you instantly try to question my muslimness? We really need to be bit more coherent in our argument against anyone who question illogicality of tawhid.
I wonder about the opinions of brits that are atheist or christian and knows philosophical terms and read contingency theory and particularly those who know the 'substance' in philosophy. What do you guys have to say about this discussion about trinity.
That guest speakers voice at 1hr.40. lol
The son submits his will to that of the Father. He said, not my will but your will be done! Luke 22:42 What the Father speaks to the son, he speaks to us. He does nothing of himself but it is the Father who is the Source Spirit working in him doing the work. John 12:49, Deuteronomy 18:18, John 5:19, John 14:10.
We need to do debates with q and a format instead of 20 min then 20 min because we need to be able to ask questions fir like 20-30 min so we can have then establish a model of the trinity and since trinity is built apon a contradiction any model will arise a contradiction so we have them established a model first so that they cant go back and change and dismantle it but when you have 10 min talk vs 10 talk its harder to do that they can distract but with 30 min q and a we can essily win
Good to have a watch party when you don't even know what you're watching.
السَّلاَمُ عَلَيْكُمْ وَرَحْمَةُ اللهِ وَبَرَكَاتُهُ
Assalamu’alaikum warahmatullahi wabarakatuh
1:24:19 exactly brother... Hamza missed that part Hijad showed craig position is not coherent and even the fathers are not
Sorry - I can't remember if Allah prays for the prophet or to the prophet or on the prophet. Please can you remind me how Allah prays according to Mr Hijab? While I remember, is Allah the best of deceivers, the best of creators, the best of inheritors... or all three? Thanks guys! Also, do you know where I can buy a poor quality hijab?
Its next to impossible to know the nature of God/Allah. But everybody knows a human is a triune being
The KQHRAN 😂
34:25 the triplets think independently and have different will
What a shame this is what great deabter of Cristian offers? Unable to give a single analogy that defends his model. MashaAllah….what a victory for brother hijab.
It's hilarious mere humans are trying to make the nature of God 'coherent.' Just because we can't comprehend His nature doesn't mean it's false.
Is the Trinity Coherent?
nope!
Since the Father is capable of creating the Universe by Himself, then why does he need a Son, let alone a Holy Spirit? The Son is purposeless since the Father can do every thing on His own; no need for two matches, the second match is redundant, unless of course WLC thinks one match may be insufficient and there is a chance that the candle may not get lit by one match, so the second match is just in case, but this would imply the Father is imperfect and hence needs a helper just like the Greek Gods on Mount Olympus. The only reason "Christianity" needs the Son is to justify of the Doctrine of Atonement. The Holy Spirit is redundant.
was this the debate where Dr. Craig lasbasted hijab?😂
3 headed Dog Analogy was fun tho
@@themuhammadalifan8693 The "3 headed Dog Analogy" was indeed a completely misleading representation of the Hijab. Craig explicitly mentioned in his article that this analogy was not meant to compare to the Trinity but rather as an example to start thinking about the concept of "3 in 1." God cannot be compared to anything, and every analogy is inherently limited and can never adequately reflect the reality of God. It's important to understand the intentions behind such examples correctly and not to misrepresent them.
Hijab completely missed the point of the debate by focusing on whether Craig believes the same as other Church Fathers. That was not the topic of the debate. Instead of presenting arguments, he mainly asked questions without providing substantial counterpoints. The debate was supposed to be about the coherence of the Trinity, not about historical theological alignments.
@@user-li3mv5qx4t25:35 is?
I don't know how can you dismissed it. But I think it's fair approach for Hijab to asked why Willian Lane Craig have different believe about Trinity with the majority?
It is very fair as long as we counted that WLC trying labeling muslim regarding tahweed. And unbelievably is that he, himself, WLC was having different beliefs.
Hijab need to tackles it so Christians not putting hope on this man, and he actually established that WLC was agreeing more with Qur'an about God existence.
And WLC think Jesus is not eternal beggoten son. Which crumbling the whole promise that being promoted by Christianity.
Hijab does talk about trinity with WLC. About the necessary agreement will not support the impossibility of disagreement, about non existent harmony, about God's will that not being shown if trinity does exist.
I find it hard to understand but if a Christian came and said that this is how they think GOD works as in the trinity, I would be OK, maybe but they've made God a 3 in 1. If they said, God works through man and that is through his spirit, maybe but you said God is a 3 in 1. If something as the trinity was not given to a Christian to believe in by the prophets(pbut) or GOD himself, anyone of them, then how can you believe in something that has been created or interpreted by man and have made it a core doctrine which has created partners next to God. You can say it's still one God but why couldn't it be left as that instead of a 3 in 1 God??? I don't see the purpose or reason for having God be a 3 in 1? We can see nowadays how people want to interpret the Quran for themselves and change doctrine and their beliefs and this is why it is important to just worship the one GOD, alone, because we are creatures who are creators of imaginary stories and this will stray us far from what is right. Just because you can read a narrative into something don't mean what your outcome is, as being true. ALLAHU AKBAR
is it just me or is there always an element of dishonesty with those debates ?
What kind of dishonesty?
Hamza the great marathon runner 🏃♀️ ♥️
Says the ones who are masters are trolling behind a tiny keyboard 🙄
@IRAM_rehman one comment is not trolling, especially when he runs a way from knowledgeable Christian speakers who challenge hamza to defend his religion 🤔
👍👍👍@@IRAM_rehman
PREACHER MODE,READ MATTHEW:28V19
Hajib is a dreamer saying he dismamtled tri-une God!!
Your so-called “god” was in the belly of a 12 year old girl 😂
What a borefest.
maybe stick to teaching English. this is above your pay grade.
I know hamza is not an intellectual and doesn't pretend to be but for a popular witty debater to not understand the arguments then proceed to use an analogy (2 guns to the head) that actually proves MH's point is actually laughable. It's okay for the argument to go over your head but in that case you should own up to that and get someone to explain it to you rather than saying stuffs like MH's arguments didn't make sense or you can't really say who won the debate when it was clear as day light who won.
And he also complained about the use of terminologies unknown to him, bro this is a debate between two highly educated intellectuals who both have 2-5 mins to respond to each other and you want them to waste their time defining some basic terminologies? How about you do your homework so you can understand the conversation 🤷.
I thought Hijab studied philosophy, no? How can he not understand causal overdetermination? It's a very basic concept.
Also, bigger flame? Is Hijab joking or is he a charlatan? There's no way this person is serious, I thought he was a philosopher.
Ultimately, as far-fetched and outlandish the Trinity is, I don't think Hijab made a single argument showing it's illogical.
Get someone else. A Muslim who actually knows philosophy, not this shouting pretender. Who's a good Muslim philosopher these days?
More energy source = bigger flame
It’s so absurd that your best debater in history doesn’t even able to give a single analogy that fits his model. Apart from that you Dr. believes that 1=1 is complicated but 1+1+1=1 is easy to understand. How poor understanding. If this what best your Cristian professor can offer then I feel sorry for you. That person was unable to give a single answer. He was just trying to make square circle and it’s not possible in real world. Hijab ruined the Dr. and showed how his model of Trinity is flawed. MashaAllah
hejab and all Muslimes just wasted their time. I left islam after 29 years of being Muslim. I studied Islamic studies as well. Best decision ever
You studied “Islamic studies”. Ok 😂😂😂
a great victory for the people of Christ, el islan and his messenger lead to hell, Chist to havent, dr greg is a gentlement anwer everything, mohammed did not dare to answer the question about tauhi.
Because that isn't the topic. WLG looks like he prepared for a discussion on Tawhid vs Trinity.
Learn the point of a structured debate that stays on a single topic is. William deflected and did a tu quoque, essentially saying "God can hear and see, isn't that the same as God being three diff persons, each 100% God who are distinct? See Muslims have the same problem as us!" lmao the cope.
@@WeAreGhuraba He actually lost the debate if that's what he *insinuated.*
Bolded because someone will point out that he didn't say that.
Your so-called “god” was in the belly of a 12-year old. 😂
first learn how to spell. we will talk about academic higher learning later. it's like you skipped 5th grade but you are here to tell an academic. they are wrong. first learn how to construct a sentence. "christ to haven't" what the hell is this?
I watched the debate as just a debate and I rarely watch religious things. the truth is that hijab didn’t do any well because he was stuck in his introduction first and second he’s trying to understand what God is in Christianity to fit to his own human understanding. No matter the god you believe in, you can’t fit him to human logical mind but to only rely on what is revealed. So hijab argument is unnecessary and obsolete.
Well, if it is revealed the God is a pig, who eats drinks and sleep, would you accept it?
@@sheikhtsukki1190 Dear Friend,
I understand your concern, but the Christian belief in the Trinity is based on how God has revealed Himself through scripture, not on arbitrary ideas. God’s revelation in the Bible is consistent with His nature as holy, perfect, and beyond human weaknesses like eating, drinking, or sleeping.
If God had revealed Himself in a way that contradicted His nature as eternal, all-powerful, and all-knowing, it wouldn’t align with the message of the prophets or the teachings of Jesus. The revelation of God as Father, Son, and Holy Spirit fits with the consistent testimony of the Bible that God is love, spirit, and perfectly holy. Christians don’t follow just any revelation, but the one that is true to God’s nature as revealed through His actions, words, and the lives of His prophets.
The deeper question is, which revelation is truly from God? Christians believe in all the prophets and that their scriptures are preserved and consistent. In contrast, Islam teaches belief in Muhammad, whose teachings often contradict earlier scriptures. The claim of corruption of previous scriptures seems like a weak argument, appearing more as an excuse to dismiss the consistent message of all prior prophets. This raises questions about the truthfulness and consistency of the revelations.
This is so embarrasing for team Dawah.
Looool how . The doctor needs to do research
😂😂😂 3 god head is laughing at you.
@@sabi3052 Two right hands of Allah are slapping the ummah everyday
@@thedude9024 The bible literally talks about god showing his backside to moses, the laugh is on you mate.
@thedude9024 look up the definition of right.
Thanks God for the thousand of Muslims who are coming to the light of jesus
Because Jesus Died for them to
Mohammed didn’t answer the tauhi answer
The debate was not about tauhid it was about the logical coherence of trinity
Very fee muslims actually become Christian. But You can believe the lie if you want. I know personally dozens of ex Christians who become muslim. Personally meaning i know them and speak to them in real life
I can confidently say no Christian can say the same thing! The only converts they know are online!
Still Islam lead to hell Christianity to Paz love and eternal life
fake god allad +false profet mohammed,= to condenetion
Your religion is literally dying lol
And who told you jesus died?
😂😂😂😂
Are you kidding yourself or maybe from another planet your little boy you are sinking day by day we bought most of your church your litle boy
ONE spelled three letters is dividivity
35:43 totem Pole
ask the debate host does he knows forms of preaching
Go and eat cowdung and dont forget the urine
May Allah bless you