Follow on Telegram: t.me/haqiqatjou Support our work: muslimskeptic.com/contribute/ 00:00:00 Pre-debate conversation 00:01:06 Intro, Wood's opening statement 00:09:16 Just War theory 00:16:45 Daniel's Opening: Violence in Old Testament 00:23:14 The Christian Governance Question 00:27:51 The Politics of Jesus Question 00:32:16 Wood's 5 minute 00:35:04 Wood Straw-Manning the Miracles of Prophet Muhammad ﷺ 00:37:22 Daniel's rebuttal on miracle of Prophet Muhammad ﷺ 00:38:10 The violent expansionism within the Bible 00:42:33 Wood avoiding the Christian Governance Question 00:46:04 Wood questions the prophethood of Muhammad ﷺ 00:47:41 Daniel makes clear we are not debating miracles and prophethood of Muhammad ﷺ 00:48:19 Daniel addresses the off-topic issues raised by Wood 00:50:34 Most if not all Christians and Jews have interpreted the Amalek genocide as expansionist teaching from Bible 00:52:15 Wood's entire argument: God can command people to kill women, babies, pagans, blasphemers 00:53:54 Wood pins the entire argument on the prophethood of Muhammad ﷺ 00:56:28 Wood straw-manning the position of Islam regarding Bible and Torah 00:57:17 Wood's entire argument thrashed 00:58:46 Daniel: Does Islam have guidance for every aspect of life, unlike Christianity? 01:01:27 Wood: Christianity is principle-based not rules 01:02:46 Wood's strawman of Islamic position on Bible and Torah continues 01:03:31 Wood has no problem with stoning and violent rules if he is shown a miracle 01:05:45 Wood caricaturing Islamic teachings about cleansing oneself 01:06:30 Daniel's rebuttal to DW's claim 01:09:24 Expansionism in Old Testament is not limited to certain times and borders 01:10:53 Wood on expansionism in Old Testament 01:11:42 Wood’s caricatured version of Islam 01:11:55 Wood has no problem with lots of laws in OT yet has a problem with Islamic ones 01:13:34 Wood contradicts his miracle question 01:15:49 Daniel exposes the war expansionism in the Bible 01:17:34 The real teachings of Islam 01:19:17 How can Christians object to the law against blasphemy? 01:26:04 The Jews did not conquer because they were bad at it 01:26:26 Wood's history is messed up on Christianity influencing the inception of Liberalism 01:28:42 Wood talks about liberal tolerance, not traditional tolerance. Islam has a different standard for tolerance 01:31:14 Wood claims Islam blasphemes Jesus just as much as atheists?! 01:33:40 If a pagan attacks a Christian nation are they going to follow Jesus and not raise the sword? 01:36:16 Daniel rips apart the Wood's liberal interpretation of Christianity and points out the huge contradiction within Christian theology and Jesus’ teaching when it comes to running a nation 01:58:14 DH: state one premodern Christian authority who has the same interpretation as you 02:11:15 Judaism, Christianity, Islam are expansionist 02:16:29 Jesus commanding to wipe out people 02:19:30 Wood: 'I'm not saying there is no killing' 02:20:37 DH I stand by the Qur'an 02:30:00 Closing statements 02:32:22 Daniel’s warm prayer for Wood’s disabled children 03:03:03 LGBT Question 03:08:37 Apuss looking for some attention again 03:18:07 DH: Choosing between secular or Christian society 03:25:11 How was Muhammad ﷺ so successful 03:27:41 Morality and expansionism 03:29:10 United States and UN are also expansionist with its Godless atheistic creed 03:35:52 Jizya, Dhimmi (DH defending Old Testament more than DW) 03:39:15 'If God told me to sacrifice my son would you do it? 03:43:43 'Why has this debate revolved around urine so much?
its Christians who protest against abortion gay marriage and any other immorality in west, its islam that sides with corrupted left in the west, you just in denial.
,Christianity is not in decline its more like immorality is rising as PROPHESIED in Bible, your own islamic countries are adopting democracy meaning islam cant even maintain this prophesied destruction.
@@khuzaimabutt392 ,again its Christians who protest against that rubbish in the west, its islam who side with the left that make up this corrupted rubbish. islam and leftist are of the same coin.
I'm a newly revert to Islam as well, who was preaching Christianity last year to Muslims, Atheists & to everyone. May Allah guides us all. David is very dishonest. I was his follower.
I recently reverted back to Islam from a seven day Adventist, I felt lost and now Alhamdulillah I was found , watching this video makes my iman stronger , may Allah guide and protect us , 🤲
I gotta say, i was pretty defensive and borderline scared of defending islamic laws before because of modern laws and ideologies. Daniel has helped open my eyes and strengthen my iman... I'm now unapologetic of Islam and the Prophet Muhammad (pbuh)... thank you for that...
Wallah the more you look into shariah, the more you realize it’s an ideal way of life when implemented correctly. Not like todays countries corrupt countries in the Middle East. But the time of prophet Muhammad (saw)
@@yurrrr9384 I agree Also when you look into alot of the later the muslim empires I.e coroba and the ottomans. When you look at their laws towards the end of their reigns they weren't shariah at all. They allowed riba and zina etc. Now you can't call yourself an Islamic empire if you aren't ruling by Islamic laws lol.
@@ahmadfrhan5265 the UN is useless on a good day. They haven't exactly done much apart from shaking their fists and yelling shame on you. Even when it's something that openly goes against all forms of human rights.
I actually do appreciate this as a Christian. I’m not in the business of apologizing for God’s actions. Without God creating, nothing ppl complain about Him destroying ever even exists in the first place. If Atheists were correct, and there were no God then there would almost be an argument against these things. But that doesn’t seem to be the case
I am a revert to Islam from Christianity, alhamdulillah!!! Mr. Wood is really helping Christians find the truth and convert to Islam. Mr. Woods ignorance is a blessing and pray he opens his eyes and shed the veil.
@@indiegirlrocking nah. The last sentence feels corny but true in a way. Ppl often let ignorance decide for them and answer for them but if they listen and think then arrogance would be reduced. This paragraph I wrote feels corny 😓
@@glados1099 the name used seems to reflect her lies, she is muslim. N btw, who can prove that she's not lying? muslims often lie (their core basic belief is lie) that they can lie to their fellow muslims justs to get what they want
That’s what I’m saying! How is Christianity supposed to be meant for humanity, when it hasn’t even provided a blueprint for an ideal Christian society?
@@abdullahk8691 Speak where the Bible speaks, and remain silent where the Bible is silent. If we believe the Bible is the word of God, then we should embrace every jot and tittle in it -- not make excuses through our silence. In this case, David should have acknowledged and responded from the beginning. I see this similarly to Muslims who make endless excuses about Aisha's age when Muhammad married and deflowered her. How can Muslims deny it when it's in the Hadith narratives? In the same way, we should not deny what's in the Bible.
@@santanav.4504 but you never answered what I asked but not to worry, I apologise. Now can you answer my question? If you want a discussion on the age of Aisha, here or elsewhere I'm willing.
Honestly, I used to be so scared of addressing Islam in an unapologetic way, but after watching Daniel’s videos, that fear is now gone, alhamdulillah. It made Islam so clear and revealed it’s true essence, beauty and absolute perfection.
Understand this and always remember that if there's something you find wrong in islam or don't understand, it is due to your ignorance. Not because islam is wrong. Everything in islam makes perfect sense. It is us who don't look deeper into our religion and study it.
@@entkalb557 Very good rule. How I like to think about it is that if i find something i don’t understand I think of the clear evidence that proves islam to be the correct religion. this helps immensely, then i generally look for an answer.
@@entkalb557 lol its very similar to conspiracy theory logic. if something is not in line with out world view, it is part of the conspiracy. any religion is just a brain loop or disease corrupting society and human brains
Daniel defended both Islam, Christianity and Judaism in one debate against David Wood and other liberal Christians. Daniel's a real one. 💯 win for Daniel.
@@brianlucena ikr? He instantly started strawmanning Islam and continued to do so throughout the debate. He wouldn’t stop claiming that Islam allows forced conversions, fighting all non-Muslims, and violently subjugating women. He kept repeating the Age of Aisha argument even tho in Numbers 31:17-18 the Israelites did it with pre-pubescent girls. His hypocrisy about the preservation of the Quran vs the Bible is palpable. He’s just copying those same refuted “holes in the narrative” arguments by those deceivers Jay Smith and Hatun. We all know the Bible cannot be depended on historically, such as the Torah, who’s oldest manuscripts are from 1000+ years after Musa(AS). David needs to stop talking about religion and get a real job.
The best part about DH: 1- Well organised & articulated contentions. 2- Stick to topic despite distractions by opposition. 3- Highly researched While his opponents get rid off the main topic & strawman. This has been consistent with all his opponents.
Whenever I was doing a very good essay the main thing to do is stick to the topic. That’s when you get A* you are intelligent enough to evaluate the topic without wandering off to another.
I once read a comment of a non Muslim guy, he said *I noticed that Islam is the only religion in the world that doesn't use/defame other religions to prove itself right*
@@8bambino where there's literally no where in the Quran that calls jews or christians pigs they're literally referred to as the people of the books idk who lied to you bro but whoever did knew he wasnt telling the truth
Not really. A liberal muslim is an insult from an islammic perspective, because it means the person isn't really following islam. But a liberal christian doesn't mean they are not following christianity. You should try to see things a bit more deeply and from different perspectives and try to understand that not all religions are the same
Thank you Mr. Haqiqatjou. Ever since i found your channel you have reminded me to not apologize for what i believe. I converted to islam and i did end up trying to find ways to make my religion sound "nice" to others. You have reminded me to stand up for what i believe in. May Allah Reward you brother.
Jazak Allah khair, brother. MashAllah. Indeed, the Prophet [PBUH] said, "The hour (the end of time) will not begin until Muslims will be shy to talk about their religion, and non believers will proudly boast their false and bad ideologies."
the late false wannabe of Muhammad, paul went to Arabia in galatians 1 :17 as final prophet is of there, lawless false prophet of mathew 24 :11 in romans 10 :3. hence lawful prophet after messia in John 1 :21, of deut 18 :18, new covenent isiah 42 & comforter! paul in acts 9 :3 saw devil of luke 10 : 18 and in addition when he removed the laws it removed the blessings of his tribe to Arabs, mathew 21 :43 - the fruitful given the kingdom is Ismael in genesis 17... Jeremia 31 says removal of laws removes the blessings! bible can't even agree if simon carried the cross and who the witnesses were... bible is a changed book bc pagan trinity of hindus was incorporated into bible over centuries! Ibrahim and Ismael were Muslims who built the Kaba, even Yaqob imitates Hujj in genesis 28! Even bible says Jesus will return as a Muslim in isiah 49 it says the one blessed in the womb will leave Zl0N and join the light of nations in isiah 42 aka Islam! paul removed the laws so farisis can pay rulers to k*ll Esa just like how ai - pac pays govt to hide moss- sad van bomber and phone tap role in 009 / 0011. as faitha says yeahood have no acts & are restrictive thalims, nasara are loose & lawless. Islam is balanced. Prophet peace & blessings on him defended and did hijrah.
Whenever i listem to David Wood I remind myself, “Never argue with stupid people. They will drag you down to their level and beat you with experience.”
@@SaSa-dk4yv to be quite honest I don’t really think you know what a Christian is. I don’t know what a Muslim is that is why I decide to watch these debates. Considering that Daniels perspective is quite more blunt than let’s say from Adnad Rashid, Shabir Ali, and especially Mufti Abulayth I clearly pointing out that this kind oversimplification of DW position does no good for the dialogue and for sure is very forgiving of Daniels interaction with the totality of DW’s arguments
@@kisntforkhalid i am not defending anyone. I am just point out that you are oversimplifying an argument and by doing so you are not really trying to understand the other side. I am not defending I am simply critiquing
Undisputable win by Daniel, seeing David Woods lack of historical and quranic knowledge was predictable, but in his own books and his ability to throw scholars and centuries of Christian scholarship under the bus was eye-opening. Jazakallah for all your work brother Daniel, seeing your unapologetic attitude and courage to stand up against liberal secularism is particularly inspiring, and further highlights your statement about how you've defended the old testament more than your interlocutor. Your initial 3 questions were barely addressed, if at all, by David and just shows his dishonesty and inconsistency when commenting on the Prophet Muhammad as compared to prophets in his own scripture; additionally, the lack of many clear rules and regulations dictating Christian practice and rule can become very problematic particularly if left to the huge range of interpretation that can arise.
@Aqeel Ishaq Islamophobia is money making machine... peewood did a video wearing his wife nightie..he is making money pushing hatred on islam/muslims... this debate with daniel ..is not a debate but for peewood to create more youtube videos for $$$ and to feed his blood thirsty viewers
Nabeel Qureshi was Qadiyani, not muslim. Qadiyani believe another prophet after Muhammad saw. just like mormon/ jw (i forgot) believe j. smith as prophet
Oh Daniel gave the best argument ever " Jesus was not critical on the ruler/ Caesar at that time so if Jesus was under Mohammed's rule he would not be critical about his ruling and military campaign"
@@MU-we8hz if Jesus lived under Mohammed rule and preached Christianity he wouldn't criticized Mohammed for killing or punishing people because Jesus didn't criticized Caesar for killing and punishing jews in fact he said give what's Caesar to Caesar give what's god to god
Mismatch. Why did David Wood even agree to this debate with Daniel? I feel bad for David because he wasn't able to follow most of Daniel's arguments :)
daniel has no argument he kept going to old testament which was only for set time Christianity is based on new testament and old testament only leads to Jesus but there are things in the old testament which are of value which are not mentioned in the new testament
@@MustafaMuhammed1981 Don't forget to mention that according to the New Testament, everyone who didn't accept Jesus as their savior will be dragged and slaughtered in front of Jesus, and that is a command by Jesus himself. And then thrown in hellfire. Liberal Christians are very hypocritical.
This debate appeared to be over in the first 20-30 minutes. I was genuinely interested in what approach David would take. But Daniel's initial points about the old testament and lack of clarity on New testament completely threw David. He had very strange responses. He wanted to make this into a modern liberal debate but ended up getting completely stuck with the questions Daniel put across. Have to respect the approach Daniel had . Simple but very effective
David's is contradictory, he renounced empires form 3rd century to John Locke.... but 4th century the bc pagn hindu trinity is incorporated. so David uses pacifism pre 3rd century but pagan trinity post 3rd century, to be consistent he should either say christianity is violent empire w/ trinity or renounce both the trinity and the empire! trinity was the compromise with the roman pagan empire in the first place anyway! David is textually wrong as well. Mathew 10 : 34 - “Do not think that I have come to bring peace to the earth; I have not come to bring peace, but a sword. 35 For I have come to set a man against his father, and a daughter against her mother, and a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law; also i think the protestants which i think evangelicals come from were created by the jesuits cryptos as a response to the inquisition... jesuits later went to rothsschild and student of sabati zevi Jacob frank to form the ... illuminati banker dynasty, the rotheschild in uk set up zionism...
@@boliusabol822 you're missing the point. David appears to use a modern liberal account of morality to attack Islam. Daniel presented the argument that the old testament was full of violence therefore Jesus(Christian God) agreed with this. Consequently, David has no Christian theological base to attack Islam and play the modern liberal/secular card of mortality. And the approach worked... From what I saw there was no emphasis on anyone turning militant. Daniel in this debate was very charitable in my opinion. He didn't make underhand and emotive comments...David did throughout. Daniel actually shared that both religions have common threats and that the approach David takes on being Islam centric is not the right one. That approach was also a winner and one that I don't think David expected either... Funny because Daniel 'turned the other cheek' and followed 'love thy neighbour' more than David did.
@@normskyyanwell4872 You write "Daniel presented the argument that the old testament was full of violence therefore Jesus(Christian God) agreed with this. Consequently, David has no Christian theological base to attack Islam"
@@boliusabol822 sorry my friend, we have different interpretations of what was said. The reason the old testament was brought up was that Jesus (God) accepted and condoned the violence in it. That's end of discussion. If you attribute the talk of wiping out pagans etc from Daniel to mean what you're saying then I'm not going to argue this...I don't think he was. Rather he was trying to present the argument that Christian scholars agreed with the old testament. Either way these are false areas IMO. David trying to present a modern, emotive approach of 'look how violent Muslims are' and how 'loving Jesus is' doesn't stack up. That was the point. Daniel argued that Jesus (Christian God) in the old testament sanctioned violence.. He couldn't disagree so began using very strange interpretations about miracles etc. He wasn't expecting this which is why from a debating perspective I thought Daniel's strategy worked. The finer detail of who said what and what he meant is not an interest for me.
Not once did Daniel insult or degrade Jesus peace be upon him. But that’s basically all that David did to Muhammad. Christians take a note: How we treat your prophet versus how you treat ours. Who is more honorable? Smh. Kudos to Daniel for doing an absolutely phenomenal job! The more I watch these videos the more faith I have in Islam. Never bow down to liberal secularists! 💪
Excuse me? What? Jesus peace be upon him is OUR prophet, he was a Muslim! He is not the Christian’s prophet, they only worship a fake version of Jesus.
DW had one agenda, and one agenda only, which was to ridicule and insult the prophet Mohammed pbuh. He failed miserably. His language, his attitude and his ignorance are such an insult to Christianity.
I know most Christians will probably troll and just pretend David did better, but I'm sure there are some sincere Christians out there who will see this and understand these arguments and think about it, they surely can't all be that illogical.
I have a friend who used to listen to David Woods channel and was so anti Muslim and that’s how I met her. The more she listened to him made her turn From Christianity and that’s when she started asking me some things (accusations really at first). Now she is Muslim Alhumdulillah
Christians consider lying to promote the faith an act of worship to glorify their biblical god. But if Christianity is true, why do Christians constantly lie to promote it? If Islam is false, why do Christians constantly lie to oppose it? Lying to promote the faith is a core Christian doctrine. The self-declared “Apostle” Paul made this a core doctrine of the religion. Read the New Testament Romans 3:7 and 1 Corinthians 9:21-23 for the proof.
David Wood literally disowned his own scripture and church fathers in the debate. He also said that he’s okay even with genocide if he thinks that his biblical god is ordering it. So he conceded the entire debate before it even started. Why did he even show up? lol, poor David! 😎🔨
Yeah so David is saying that if people are commanded by God to do things like slaying babies, then he’s okay with it. So why doesn’t he apply that same logic to Islam? Muslims believe God has commanded them to have Hudud, so by David’s logic, he should be okay with that.
Daniel, I think you should have mentioned that the early Muslim conquests were in part so rapid and successful because the local communities preferred the Muslims over the Byzantine Christians and the local Maghreb Christians joined the Muslims as the Byzantines would oppress them and close their churches.
More over. People of Central Asia, the stan countries, were never conquered by muslims. Actually the opposite happened multiple times and guess what. The conquerers have accepted Islam, the religion of the defeated. Look at the turks and mongols, they invaded the middle east and eventually accepted the Islam.
@@Nisah98 Locals in India liked the Muslim rule. It was not until British came that they used divide and rule. Only some people that were in power that lost their privileges of oppressing others hated it.
My point was to just deal the “even if” argument. Where in debates you bite the bullet of the opponents best arguments and justify why your stance is still supreme. Like let’s say - even if the locals didn’t want Muslim rule, it is still better because the Muslim rule let them be expose to the truth and bring in more prosperity in terms of wealth, knowledge and morality (seen by Andalusia and Persian rule by Islam) hence justify the albeit unwanted rule. A brother corrected my wrong knowledge and I have retracted my statement as it contained wrong information.
That closing from DH made me tear up. My son was born last at 24 weeks of pregnancy. He almost died several times (once I, entirely untrained in the medical field, had to resuscitate him). Extremely trying time. He is much better now, Alhamdulillah. May Allah make it easy for us, and make our patient perseverance (sabr) a means of us attaining ultimate salvation (jannah). Ameen.
Maasha Allah Daniel did another great Janaza after Sheikh Uthman and Mohamed Hijab🔥💪🏾👏🏾 So proud of you my brother Daniel 👏🏾❤️ may Allah SWT bless you and always with you
David arguement is my god can order rape but mohmmad can't because mohmamund did not provided proofs Daniel argument is my god can order slavery and rape and so can your god 1. This mentality of god can order rape is toxic.( Done by both Daniel and David) 2. After having that mentality mocking other god for ordering rape is Hypocrisy. (Done only by David) That being said, I have two more points to add 1. So David MENTALITY is god can order rape if he provided proof to be god( I won't be complaining about Hypocrisy and toxicity here) through my point is when David belives that God can order rape if he proved to be god then in his videos David should say ah yes mohmmad after giving order of rape can be prophet too if he gave proof to be prophet. While that's not what David does David Always says well since mohmmad ordered rape that alone makes him not a prophet, so by that logic since moses ordered rape that alone makes him not a god. The argument that David is trying to pull of Moses after ordering rape can be god if he provided proofs. So then David should have said mohmamund when ordered rape, can be prophet if he gave proof The point is there is huge difference in staying mohmmad ordered rape that alone makes him not a prophet and saying mohmmad ordered rape and yet he can be prophet if he gave proof. If David would have said that mohmmmad ordered rape and hence he can't be propeht so anyone will think of since moses ordered rape he can't be a god too. Here David comes with oh moses can be because he gave "proof". Again for that David should have said well mohmmad did ordered rape and he can be prophet too if he gave proof but he didn't said that. In simple words David belives that God can be one even if ordered rape but have given proof While what he says is ah if someone orders rape they can't be godly figure.
David's is contradictory, he renounced empires form 3rd century to John Locke.... but 4th century the bc pagn hindu trinity is incorporated. so David uses pacifism pre 3rd century but pagan trinity post 3rd century, to be consistent he should either say christianity is violent empire w/ trinity or renounce both the trinity and the empire! trinity was the compromise with the roman pagan empire in the first place anyway! David is textually wrong as well. Mathew 10 : 34 - “Do not think that I have come to bring peace to the earth; I have not come to bring peace, but a sword. 35 For I have come to set a man against his father, and a daughter against her mother, and a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law; also i think the protestants which i think evangelicals come from were created by the jesuits cryptos as a response to the inquisition... jesuits later went to rothsschild and student of sabati zevi Jacob frank to form the ... illuminati banker dynasty, the rotheschild in uk set up zionism...
He kept on claiming Islam commands Muslims to force all non-Muslims to convert to Islam and to fight anyone who does not believe in Islam. I challenge any David Wood fan here to show me evidence of this.
I am just surprised that Daniel called him a liberal Christian a few times and wood was seemingly accepting it without any hesitation . I didn't expected such a naive and immature level of debating from wood who just kept distracting from the topic over and again and just making mockery of Islam with no ground. Props to Daniel for acting like a well organised and decent professional and always sticking to the relevant topics and more importantly backing his statements by Clear and factual evidences . Great job Daniel 👍.
I don't understand why all these non-Muslims shift away from the actual debate topic? Apuss, Snailtan and now David Wood did the same tactic. Don't they have confidence in their own ideology?
There is 1 truth , if u have it , the opposition will do exactly what these guys did , change topic and deny their own beliefs , unless they are honest , but that is a rare exception.
Apart from his claims that Jesus teachings to individuals wouldn’t work for a country. It’s like Principal to students, “I don’t want kids bringing guns to school.” Daniel haqiqatjou: “But if the police don’t have guns, how are they supposed to protect us from criminals?” He also referred to Israelites taking sex slaves, which is false, was it a mistake or is he flawless because you don’t mind him lying on camera?
@@swellerferret2506 : You’re straw-manning by using false analogies. Try better next time, good buddy. It’s you who is practicing the core Christian doctrine of lying to promote your religion. Your self-declared “apostle” Paul made this a core doctrine of Christianity-and the cornerstone of Christian proselytization-in Romans 3:7 and 1 Corinthians 9:21-23.
@@samy7013 No it’s his logic: Jesus talks to an audience but Daniel says that if the people Jesus was not referring to (did what Jesus didn’t tell them to do but someone else) would be defeated. Kids don’t need guns just like a individual won’t fight back against bullies. Just like a cop needs guns and a nation must defend against against invaders, what Jesus talked about have nothing to do whether a country can defend itself or not. Yet he keeps whining about something which irrelevance should go without saying. He is simply changing the circumstances about what Jesus is talking about. He also brought in statements from people that was not a part of the early church to criticize the early church. Moreover he also blames Christianity for having similarities with the empire when the same empire became christian. It’s Christianity that influences Rome not Rome that influenced Christianity. It’s like having a coup of Salt, and then say “salt is wet.” It goes without saying but Daniel don’t care. His tactic is basically whine about and when receiving an answer he ignores it and keeps whining.
@@swellerferret2506 : You’re raving, and inventing a completely different debate than the one in this video. Why all this lying? For once I want to meet a Christian apologist who doesn’t brazenly lie to our faces when propagating his faith. Even just once, I’d like to see this.
David got uncomfortable getting interrogated for much of this debate about the Christianity and the bible, he was hoping to steer the topic on Islam! 😂
I love how David Wood was caught absolutely out of guard. He was expecting for Daniel to say “Yes, Islam is tolerant and non-violent” so that David could disprove that! But to his and my shock Daniel said “Yes, Islam doesn’t tolerate and is violent!” but Christianity is far more worse for these reasons and Daniel had to defend Christianity himself because clearly David is lost!
Honestly, when I hear Daniel, I can see knowledge. I see divine knowledge and you could hear him again and again and again. Even when he's talking about Christianity. When it's David all I could see was hatred and misconceptions. No fact, no theory, nothing Only hatred
Daniel succeeded in keeping the debate focused on Christianity and only responded to claims about Islam when it was neccessary, ignoring all the nonsensical and unsubstanciated claims. What baffles me is how some followers of DW believed he was doing well. It is like they're watching another debate!!
His fans hate Muslims so much that they will believe anything. He kept repeating the same old silly talking points about our prophet. Just go to your local library and check out some books on the prophet Muhammad and read and learn! His fans are so ignorant.
Apus was in the chat again at 03:08:37. Speak Daniel living rent free in his head. He's still not over of the catastrophe of a discussion he had with Daniel back in the day when he got schooled, he's still salty. How pathetic. 😂 David has been as far the most respectable and formal debate opponent of Daniel's what comes to him, Apus and Harris, so big ups for him for being a good sport and not relying on personal attacks. There were some real wholesome moments on this debate like the cracking of harmless jokes by David at 03:43:47 and the warm prayer for David's disabled sons by Daniel at 2:32:15.
Doesn't Apus live in Germany? I mean i'm pretty sure at the time of the debate, it was between 02:00 to 05:00 A.M or something there.. does he even have a life? Does he even sleep? Edit: ok he live in the U.S now .. thanks for correction brothers.
the late false wannabe of Muhammad, paul went to Arabia in galatians 1 :17 as final prophet is of there, lawless false prophet of mathew 24 :11 in romans 10 :3. hence lawful prophet after messia in John 1 :21, of deut 18 :18, new covenent isiah 42 & comforter! paul in acts 9 :3 saw devil of luke 10 : 18 and in addition when he removed the laws it removed the blessings of his tribe to Arabs, mathew 21 :43 - the fruitful given the kingdom is Ismael in genesis 17... Jeremia 31 says removal of laws removes the blessings! bible can't even agree if simon carried the cross and who the witnesses were... bible is a changed book bc pagan trinity of hindus was incorporated into bible over centuries! Ibrahim and Ismael were Muslims who built the Kaba, even Yaqob imitates Hujj in genesis 28! Even bible says Jesus will return as a Muslim in isiah 49 it says the one blessed in the womb will leave Zl0N and join the light of nations in isiah 42 aka Islam! paul removed the laws so farisis can pay rulers to k*ll Esa just like how ai - pac pays govt to hide moss- sad van bomber and phone tap role in 009 / 0011. as faitha says yeahood have no acts & are restrictive thalims, nasara are loose & lawless. Islam is balanced. Prophet peace & blessings on him defended and did hijrah.
Well said. My take he is just someone trying to take people away from God. He just died that from a christian perspective as that is a way for him to achieve his aim.
“Don’t hate the player, hate the game” 😂 Brother Daniel you’re amazing ma shaa Allah. May Allah always grant you victory in your struggle for the sake of Allah!
David's is contradictory, he renounced empires form 3rd century to John Locke.... but 4th century the bc pagn hindu trinity is incorporated. so David uses pacifism pre 3rd century but pagan trinity post 3rd century, to be consistent he should either say christianity is violent empire w/ trinity or renounce both the trinity and the empire! trinity was the compromise with the roman pagan empire in the first place anyway! David is textually wrong as well. Mathew 10 : 34 - “Do not think that I have come to bring peace to the earth; I have not come to bring peace, but a sword. 35 For I have come to set a man against his father, and a daughter against her mother, and a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law; also i think the protestants which i think evangelicals come from were created by the jesuits cryptos as a response to the inquisition... jesuits later went to rothsschild and student of sabati zevi Jacob frank to form the ... illuminati banker dynasty, the rotheschild in uk set up zionism...
Salaam alaikum!!! These young Muslim brothers have gained so much knowledge and wisdom in the past 20 years, that even the staunchest of the Christian apologists are running 🏃♂️ scared. Alhamdulillah for these young warriors, and Alhamdulillah for Islam!
Well sadly dw reply was like every other response , wife beating...etc to make islam look bad in the eye of liberals , but im proud really of listening to someone like daniel , our sigma Man , daniel pikachu 😊 (i mean pika as a joke out of love and respect for daniel haqiqatjo)
When David was talking about the Christian view point on violence and war he was giving references for every single statement/claim he was making but that all suddenly vanishes when he starts to make wild claims/statements about Islam. Like not a single reference....
David tries to undermine our prophet's adequacy for the role of prophet hood with wild and irrelevant assertions about him, but then ironically admits the fact that according to christianity, non of their prophets were adequate for their roles of prophet hood, as they were all capable of heinous sins and evil deeds.
💯David arguement is my god can order rape but mohmmad can't because mohmamund did not provided proofs Daniel argument is my god can order slavery and rape and so can your god 1. This mentality of god can order rape is toxic.( Done by both Daniel and David) 2. After having that mentality mocking other god for ordering rape is Hypocrisy. (Done only by David) That being said, I have two more points to add 1. So David MENTALITY is god can order rape if he provided proof to be god( I won't be complaining about Hypocrisy and toxicity here) through my point is when David belives that God can order rape if he proved to be god then in his videos David should say ah yes mohmmad after giving order of rape can be prophet too if he gave proof to be prophet. While that's not what David does David Always says well since mohmmad ordered rape that alone makes him not a prophet, so by that logic since moses ordered rape that alone makes him not a god. The argument that David is trying to pull of Moses after ordering rape can be god if he provided proofs. So then David should have said mohmamund when ordered rape, can be prophet if he gave proof The point is there is huge difference in staying mohmmad ordered rape that alone makes him not a prophet and saying mohmmad ordered rape and yet he can be prophet if he gave proof. If David would have said that mohmmmad ordered rape and hence he can't be propeht so anyone will think of since moses ordered rape he can't be a god too. Here David comes with oh moses can be because he gave "proof". Again for that David should have said well mohmmad did ordered rape and he can be prophet too if he gave proof but he didn't said that. In simple words David belives that God can be one even if ordered rape but have given proof While what he says is ah if someone orders rape they can't be godly figure.
@@m0hamed_kamz70 David arguement is my god can order rape but mohmmad can't because mohmamund did not provided proofs Daniel argument is my god can order slavery and rape and so can your god 1. This mentality of god can order rape is toxic.( Done by both Daniel and David) 2. After having that mentality mocking other god for ordering rape is Hypocrisy. (Done only by David) That being said, I have two more points to add 1. So David MENTALITY is god can order rape if he provided proof to be god( I won't be complaining about Hypocrisy and toxicity here) through my point is when David belives that God can order rape if he proved to be god then in his videos David should say ah yes mohmmad after giving order of rape can be prophet too if he gave proof to be prophet. While that's not what David does David Always says well since mohmmad ordered rape that alone makes him not a prophet, so by that logic since moses ordered rape that alone makes him not a god. The argument that David is trying to pull of Moses after ordering rape can be god if he provided proofs. So then David should have said mohmamund when ordered rape, can be prophet if he gave proof The point is there is huge difference in staying mohmmad ordered rape that alone makes him not a prophet and saying mohmmad ordered rape and yet he can be prophet if he gave proof. If David would have said that mohmmmad ordered rape and hence he can't be propeht so anyone will think of since moses ordered rape he can't be a god too. Here David comes with oh moses can be because he gave "proof". Again for that David should have said well mohmmad did ordered rape and he can be prophet too if he gave proof but he didn't said that. In simple words David belives that God can be one even if ordered rape but have given proof While what he says is ah if someone orders rape they can't be godly figure.
David arguement is my god can order rape but mohmmad can't because mohmamund did not provided proofs Daniel argument is my god can order slavery and rape and so can your god 1. This mentality of god can order rape is toxic.( Done by both Daniel and David) 2. After having that mentality mocking other god for ordering rape is Hypocrisy. (Done only by David) That being said, I have two more points to add 1. So David MENTALITY is god can order rape if he provided proof to be god( I won't be complaining about Hypocrisy and toxicity here) through my point is when David belives that God can order rape if he proved to be god then in his videos David should say ah yes mohmmad after giving order of rape can be prophet too if he gave proof to be prophet. While that's not what David does David Always says well since mohmmad ordered rape that alone makes him not a prophet, so by that logic since moses ordered rape that alone makes him not a god. The argument that David is trying to pull of Moses after ordering rape can be god if he provided proofs. So then David should have said mohmamund when ordered rape, can be prophet if he gave proof The point is there is huge difference in staying mohmmad ordered rape that alone makes him not a prophet and saying mohmmad ordered rape and yet he can be prophet if he gave proof. If David would have said that mohmmmad ordered rape and hence he can't be propeht so anyone will think of since moses ordered rape he can't be a god too. Here David comes with oh moses can be because he gave "proof". Again for that David should have said well mohmmad did ordered rape and he can be prophet too if he gave proof but he didn't said that. In simple words David belives that God can be one even if ordered rape but have given proof While what he says is ah if someone orders rape they can't be godly figure.
@@SILENCEINTHESOULS our prophet never ordered.r*pe, niether does our religion! Daniel was just addressing the fact that David would undermine islam for things that are found in christianity and even other worst things like.klling innocent non combatants at war, such as women and children and rap. ng women.
The Quran doesn't say the sun sets in a muddy pool. It says that Thul-Qarnayn (The two horned one) saw the sun set in a muddy pool. In other words Allah is simply describing the view that king was seeing. This is another disingenuous claim from David. Allah says in the Quran quite clearly "It does not behoove the sun to overtake the moon, nor does the night outstrip the daytime, and each is swimming in an orbit." (Surat Yasin)
Dishonest Christians and atheists don't care about the truth. They use literal interpretations when it suits. But watch them twist the Bible to get to their invented doctrines! (Christians)
If Christianity is true, why do Christians constantly lie to promote it? If Islam is false, why do Christians constantly lie to oppose it? Lying to promote the faith is a core Christian doctrine. The self-declared “Apostle” Paul made this a core doctrine of the religion. Read the New Testament Romans 3:7 and 1 Corinthians 9:21-23 for the proof.
How to take what Islam does, deceive, and then use that to accuse the opponent of it. Allah is the best of deceivers and Muhammad said you can lie even to your wife! Who can you then not lie to? And we’ve seen Quran affirm Paul as a messenger and we’ e seen Allah copy Paul’s words, and yet they persist in throwing mud at him. Paul and Allah: However, as it is written: "No eye has seen, no ear has heard, no mind has conceived what God has prepared for those who love him." (1 Corinthians 2:9) Narrated Abu Huraira: The Prophet said, "ALLAH SAID, ‘I have prepared for My righteous slaves (such excellent things) as no eye has ever seen, nor an ear has ever heard nor a human heart can ever think of.’" (Sahih Al-Bukhari, Volume 9, Book 93, Number 589)
@Umrah....... I didn’t need to read your post entirely to see you making assumptions. Tell me how much the Dead Sea scrolls differ from the Bible we have today? I’ll wait. Those were dated to before Jesus, so waaaay before Muhammad was even born after 4 years of his fathers death.
@@cainblue448 There is no translation of the Qur'an from any academic which says that "Allah is the best of deceivers". You Christians are so desperate that you make your own translation of the Qur'an then accuse us of deception? 😂 Meanwhile, Bible has God deceiving people numerous times: *Finally, a spirit came forward, stood before the Lord and said, ‘I will entice him.’ “‘By what means?’ the Lord asked. “‘I will go out and be a deceiving spirit in the mouths of all his prophets,’ he said. “‘You will succeed in enticing him,’ said the Lord. ‘Go and do it.’ “So now the Lord has put a deceiving spirit in the mouths of all these prophets of yours. The Lord has decreed disaster for you.” [1 Kings **22:21**-23]* *You deceived me, Lord, and I was deceived; you overpowered me and prevailed. I am ridiculed all day long; everyone mocks me. [Jeremiah 20:7]* *For this reason God sends them a powerful delusion so that they will believe the lie. [2 Thessalonians 2:11]* *Note:* These verses are from the New International Version (NIV) which is most popular English translation of the Bible. Here are some of the Hadiths of Prophet Muhammad which clearly states that lying is forbidden, should be avoided in all circumstances and is a major sin: *Abdullah reported Allah’s Messenger as saying: It is obligatory for you to tell the truth, for truth leads to virtue and virtue leads to Paradise, and the man who continues to speak the truth and endeavours to tell the truth is eventually recorded as truthful with Allah, and beware of telling of a lie for telling of a lie leads to obscenity and obscenity leads to Hell-Fire, and the person who keeps telling lies and endeavours to tell a lie is recorded as a liar with Allah. (Sahih Muslim Book 32, Hadith 6309)* *‘Abdullah b. Mas’ud reported Allah’s Messenger as saying: Telling of truth is a virtue and virtue leads to Paradise and the servant who endeavours to tell the truth is recorded as truthful, and lie is obscenity and obscenity leads to Hell-Fire, and the servant who endeavours to tell a lie is recorded as a liar. Ibn Abu Shaiba reported this from Allah’s Apostle. (Sahih Muslim Book 32, Hadith 6308)* *Aishah narrated: “There was no behaviour more hated to the Messenger of Allah than lying. A man would lie in narrating something in the presence of the Prophet, and he would not be content until he knew that he had repented.” (Jami` at-Tirmidhi Volume 4, Book 1, Hadith 1973)* *Abdullah reported that the Prophet (p) said, “You must be truthful. Truthfulness leads to dutifulness and dutifulness leads to the Garden. A man continues to tell the truth until he is written as a siddiq with Allah. Beware of lying. Lying leads to deviance and deviance leads to the Fire. A man continues to lie until he is written as a liar with Allah.” (Al-Adab Al-Mufrad: Book 21, Hadith 386)* *The Prophet (p) guaranteed paradise to anyone if they can avoid lying even when joking. The Prophet said: I guarantee a house in the surroundings of Paradise for a man who avoids quarrelling even if he were in the right, a house in the middle of Paradise for a man who avoids lying even if he were joking, and a house in the upper part of Paradise for a man who made his character good. (Sunan Abi Dawud Book 42, Hadith 4782)* Allah did not confirm the words of Paul because those were not the words of Paul, he was quoting from a unknown scripture because he says "as it is written". Also, if Allah agrees with Paul on something why does it suddenly mean that Allah now accept Paul as His messenger 😂
@@moizahmed4705 Do you know how to use an Arabic dictionary? Read the tafsir for 3:54 and find the Arabic word for makr, copy it and find the definition for it. My results, cunning and deception. We’ve long known that english translations are watered down to appear more like the Bible. Many Arabic speakers have confirmed this. We have even see that the virgin verses in Quran are surround by text that appears very much like that in the Bible. By inserting the virgin verses, it even throws off the rhyming of the verses.
Oh and quoting Jeremiah and others saying God deceived them is LIKE God himself saying he deceived? Have you read the commentary of those verses? Doubt it, or you would know that the meaning of deceived is different from today. But in Quran we know it to be deception because both Muhammad and Omar expressed fear of the hereafter near their deaths as recorded by his own people. They said they were afraid even if they had one foot in paradise because OF THE DECEPTION OF ALLAH!
As far as David went was the usual what every Christian did regarding Islam. And he us trying to reinvent the wheel on Christianty. The amount of contradictions was staggering.
Why does David keep pretending that the Bible, whichever of the many versions u subscribe to, is not so broken in its morality that you can reasonably make the same interpretation that the Byzantines, Spanish Inquisitors, and the Templars did? Does David ignore the fact that during the first 900 years of Christianity the Bible was not a canonized and unified message? Verses were being added in by people, verses were removed, who’s to say the NT that the Byzantines had was the same that David reads?
@Mansoor Ahmad Yeah, you know, it’s funny, I keep hearing about Jesus being such a “zen, groovy, peaceful guy”, …but ummm….what’s he gonna do when he comes back again???… lol
sheikh Uthman Debunked all the points he brought again to this debate directly to his face and he still used them again.... my god i can't fathom how he can walk straight anymore
The closing statement from Daniel is really overwhelming. As people, we really need to think and no afraid of change. May Allah guide the misguided people, Ameen !
I love how david kept taunting to Sheikh Uthman that he threw At Tabri under the bus while he threw under the bus literary every church father they named in this debate.
The difference is that David would be happy to say just use the Quran, but muslims want to use the Hadith. So David is happy to use the quran and Hadith, or even Quran and just Sahih Hadith, but then muslims want to go to their scholars. So it's muslims that initiate going to the scholars. David i always happy to say forget the scholars and look at what the text says. David doesn't make his arguments for what the bible says, by quoting scholars, he makes his arguments by quoting the scripture itself. If a muslim insists on using Ibn Kathir, then David will use Ibn Kathir. Islam also is heavily based on scholars so it works differently. And David is a protestant form of Christian, which is scripture first and not going to church fathers. Also you say David threw every church father under bus. How many church fathers did Daniel mention and quote? I recall one, and David said he doesn't disagree with it, but he disagreed with what Daniel said he had said.
@@boliusabol822 I have read your entire comment, I hope you read my reply too. Now this comment just goes to show that you have zero knowledge of Islam, just like David. Firstly the Quran itself says in Surah Imran verse 7 that some of the Quranic verses are allegorical while other verse are very clear, and that only the perverse of heart tries to drag meaning out of the allegorical verses, whose meaning only Allah knows. David literally always attacks the unclear allegorical verses. The reason why scholars are necessary for all three abrahamic Faiths (even christianity) is because scholars understand the language used in the scripture. For example to study the bible you have to know hebrew and greek, otherwise you'll end up like David when he faced Hijab. In that debate David argued that Genesis's opening verses mention the holy spirit because its says, "and the spirit of God hovered over the face of the water." But if he had consulted any good christian or Jewish scholar he would have realised that the correct translation of the verse is, "and the breath of God swept over the water," because the word in Hebrew which he translated as spirit is Ruakh, and it's the same word for the breath of life which God inserts into adam's nostrils. So the verse was talking about Ruakh Edonai and David due to not knowing the first thing about Hebrew mistranslated it and made a totally erroneous interpretation of his own scripture. Also you said that we tell David to use hadith, but that's because hadith according to the Quran itself is crucial for interpretation. For example, Quran tells us to pray regularly, and the Hadith tells us how to pray. Quran tells us to offer zakat, and the hadith tells us the amount of Zakat we are liable to pay. The Quran acknowledges that the Prophet has to interpret the Quran, in surah 2 verse 129, because if we leave it to the people to interpret the Quran we'll have Muslims making wrong interpretations of Quran, just as David makes wrong interpretations of the bible.
David logic #1: The ahadith regarding the miracles which are authentically attributed to the prophet sallallahu alayhi wa sallam are false, but the narrations about him sallallahu alayhi wa sallam being suicidal which are weak and the narrations regarding the satanic verses which are weak, are totally true according to David. David Logic #2: When Jesus commands the clear cut extermination of a nation including babies, it doesn’t really mean that because you have to look at the context. But when the prophet sallallahu alayhi wa sallam says he sallallahu alayhi wa sallam believes in the Torah and Injeel by pointing to the copy that was brought to him sallallahu alayhi wa sallam, David takes it literally even though the prophet sallallahu alayhi wa sallam couldn’t have possibly intended it the way that David thinks because the context is clear in which the prophet sallallahu alayhi wa sallam clarifies that these books have been altered. David doesn’t want to look at the context here. These two points are Davids major issues to deny the prophet sallallahu alayhi wa sallam but unfortunately Wood is being inconsistent in his approach.
Wood = yes violence in the bible is horrible but it’s ok because our prophets are true and Muhammad (as) is not. This debate was on tolerance and not on who’s prophets are true or not. He has no way of justifying the over the top violence in the bible so he changed the subject. Islam is the fastest growing religion in the world. Billions and billions throughout history, present day and futur disagree with Wood opinion on Muhammad (as)
According to David's weird understanding the debate should be about the prophet hood of the prophet Mohammed not violence and tolerance, this was a manipulative tactic by him.
@@ebrimajallow33 David arguement is my god can order rape but mohmmad can't because mohmamund did not provided proofs Daniel argument is my god can order slavery and rape and so can your god 1. This mentality of god can order rape is toxic.( Done by both Daniel and David) 2. After having that mentality mocking other god for ordering rape is Hypocrisy. (Done only by David) That being said, I have two more points to add 1. So David MENTALITY is god can order rape if he provided proof to be god( I won't be complaining about Hypocrisy and toxicity here) through my point is when David belives that God can order rape if he proved to be god then in his videos David should say ah yes mohmmad after giving order of rape can be prophet too if he gave proof to be prophet. While that's not what David does David Always says well since mohmmad ordered rape that alone makes him not a prophet, so by that logic since moses ordered rape that alone makes him not a god. The argument that David is trying to pull of Moses after ordering rape can be god if he provided proofs. So then David should have said mohmamund when ordered rape, can be prophet if he gave proof The point is there is huge difference in staying mohmmad ordered rape that alone makes him not a prophet and saying mohmmad ordered rape and yet he can be prophet if he gave proof. If David would have said that mohmmmad ordered rape and hence he can't be propeht so anyone will think of since moses ordered rape he can't be a god too. Here David comes with oh moses can be because he gave "proof". Again for that David should have said well mohmmad did ordered rape and he can be prophet too if he gave proof but he didn't said that. In simple words David belives that God can be one even if ordered rape but have given proof While what he says is ah if someone orders rape they can't be godly figure.
@@SILENCEINTHESOULS I think you misunderstood something here. Daniel never said Islam allows rape/killing/genocide. David said that's okay if God said so and provided evidence and those people still disbelieved. On the other hand you find that Islam does not allow killing of elderly, women, children and people that are not fighting. David said Mohammed peace be upon him had no miracles and therefore can't engage in war but that's just another lie.
First he got destroyed by Mohammad hijab , then sheikh Uthman like 5-6 times , now brother Daniel destroyed this guy in a debate , Alhumdulilah for Islam and Alhumdulilah for Allah guiding us and keeping us upon the guidance
MashaAllah, I didn't sleep all night almost for this debate😃 I really enjoyed it....we are really proud of you Daniel, you did a great job, May Allah SWT protects you and gives you the highest level of Jannah. الله پشت و پناهت باشه دانیال عزیز، خیلی دوستت داریم، افتخار مایی
It's amazing how the objections of the other faiths haven't changed over hundreds of years - we will believe in you if you show us miracles. Subhanallah. We don't have overt miracles like the others but they're enough for those with faith. And faith based just on miracles would not be a strong faith.
Majority of Christians aren't even reading their own Bible. It's enough for them to listen to these priests and follow such 'traditions' that Jesus (AS) himself never did. If they're just going to read it with an open heart and open mind, they'll end up becoming a Muslim just like me. I'm so grateful everyday that Allah ﷻ guided me to become a Muslim Alhamdulillah ☝️
@Figaroo: Barber of seville brainwashed? you're talking to yourself btw. Why not read your own book? instead of wasting your time here so that you'll know what I'm trying to say.
@Figaroo: Barber of seville the irony of calling someone else brainwashed when you spend all your time in your parents basement watching fox news and emptying their bank accounts to donate all of their savings to David Woods patreon.
Subhanallah what a beautiful debate from brother Haqiqatjou. Your method of debating is on point. I love the composure and discipline you put in your debates. I pray for you and your family. May Allah reward you abundantly for your efforts. I pray for those that think, understand and form judgments logically, to be guided on the straight path. Peace and blessings to Muhammad s.a.w. and his family and peace and blessings to his ummah. May Allah protect us all from the punishment of the grave and hell fire and grant us all Jannah. Ameen. Keep up the good work brother 👍🏽👍🏽
Lmao David shows his hypocrisy. He claims that Bukhari, Muslim and other hadith books are fabrications. If thats so, then why does he use Sihah Sittah to attack Islam ? 🤣🤣🤣
David makes fun about cleaning ourselves from impurity. Bruh, does he think hygiene should be looked down at, has he learned nothing from the pandemic?
@@jayd4ever something your version jesus didn’t tell you about did he? To be clean, you don’t even wash your backside, put a UV light on your private parts u will see how dirty you guys area let alone not being circumcised with all that bacteria inside your foreskin wait till you hit old age and the infection will come in
@@jayd4ever if a dog or baby relieved themselves on your floor in your home, you would wash, not just dry wipe. If water is available and its not a hardship to get it, every muslim must wash their privates every time they use the toilet. cleanliness is next to Godliness in Islam. Why shouldn't we strive to make it in every aspect of life. Is it such a bad thing
@@jayd4ever It is a part of every day life my friend. We use the bathroom how many times. We pray till five times a day so we have to always be in a state of purity before our Lord Almighty. Since practising Islam more I have been a lot more cleaner and more aware of my urine etc.
So the debate was simply between a muslim and a liberal That is it David reminds me of cute and secular muslims who do the same thing that he does, he should be honest with himself and leave chrstianity at least.
Can't believe that Christians think David won the debate😒, like how can they think that🤔.... but then again they think christianity is true and that a man is god, and 3 become 1 god 🤦🏼♀️... i think i got why they think he won, it's cause logic flew right out their heads and delusion enter 😅
David wood only knows how to lied about Islam and our prophet Muhammad PBUH while he has zero knowledge about his own religion and all evil acts done in the name of Christianity. Islam is perfect way of life, religion of truth and humanity. Our prophet Muhammad PBUH was great human being and sent as mercy to mankind. Long life Islam! Thank God for the blessing of Islam all praise is for Allah almighty. I am proud Muslim woman Alhamdulillh.
In some instances he realises oh my religion does preach similar if not worse things, but you can see his true religion- its liberalism. Whatever in Christianity fits his paradigm thats right everything else is false. Jesus says love everyone, hatred is wrong, treat people well and equally. Yes and that's what the prophet Muhammad taught too, but they both also bought rules. He's just fixated on one part of Christianity which also is found in islam, but he ignores the rest, bc it goes against Liberalism
Follow on Telegram: t.me/haqiqatjou Support our work: muslimskeptic.com/contribute/
00:00:00 Pre-debate conversation
00:01:06 Intro, Wood's opening statement
00:09:16 Just War theory
00:16:45 Daniel's Opening: Violence in Old Testament
00:23:14 The Christian Governance Question
00:27:51 The Politics of Jesus Question
00:32:16 Wood's 5 minute
00:35:04 Wood Straw-Manning the Miracles of Prophet Muhammad ﷺ
00:37:22 Daniel's rebuttal on miracle of Prophet Muhammad ﷺ
00:38:10 The violent expansionism within the Bible
00:42:33 Wood avoiding the Christian Governance Question
00:46:04 Wood questions the prophethood of Muhammad ﷺ
00:47:41 Daniel makes clear we are not debating miracles and prophethood of Muhammad ﷺ
00:48:19 Daniel addresses the off-topic issues raised by Wood
00:50:34 Most if not all Christians and Jews have interpreted the Amalek genocide as expansionist teaching from Bible
00:52:15 Wood's entire argument: God can command people to kill women, babies, pagans, blasphemers
00:53:54 Wood pins the entire argument on the prophethood of Muhammad ﷺ
00:56:28 Wood straw-manning the position of Islam regarding Bible and Torah
00:57:17 Wood's entire argument thrashed
00:58:46 Daniel: Does Islam have guidance for every aspect of life, unlike Christianity?
01:01:27 Wood: Christianity is principle-based not rules
01:02:46 Wood's strawman of Islamic position on Bible and Torah continues
01:03:31 Wood has no problem with stoning and violent rules if he is shown a miracle
01:05:45 Wood caricaturing Islamic teachings about cleansing oneself
01:06:30 Daniel's rebuttal to DW's claim
01:09:24 Expansionism in Old Testament is not limited to certain times and borders
01:10:53 Wood on expansionism in Old Testament
01:11:42 Wood’s caricatured version of Islam
01:11:55 Wood has no problem with lots of laws in OT yet has a problem with Islamic ones
01:13:34 Wood contradicts his miracle question
01:15:49 Daniel exposes the war expansionism in the Bible
01:17:34 The real teachings of Islam
01:19:17 How can Christians object to the law against blasphemy?
01:26:04 The Jews did not conquer because they were bad at it
01:26:26 Wood's history is messed up on Christianity influencing the inception of Liberalism
01:28:42 Wood talks about liberal tolerance, not traditional tolerance. Islam has a different standard for tolerance
01:31:14 Wood claims Islam blasphemes Jesus just as much as atheists?!
01:33:40 If a pagan attacks a Christian nation are they going to follow Jesus and not raise the sword?
01:36:16 Daniel rips apart the Wood's liberal interpretation of Christianity and points out the huge contradiction within Christian theology and Jesus’ teaching when it comes to running a nation
01:58:14 DH: state one premodern Christian authority who has the same interpretation as you
02:11:15 Judaism, Christianity, Islam are expansionist
02:16:29 Jesus commanding to wipe out people
02:19:30 Wood: 'I'm not saying there is no killing'
02:20:37 DH I stand by the Qur'an
02:30:00 Closing statements
02:32:22 Daniel’s warm prayer for Wood’s disabled children
03:03:03 LGBT Question
03:08:37 Apuss looking for some attention again
03:18:07 DH: Choosing between secular or Christian society
03:25:11 How was Muhammad ﷺ so successful
03:27:41 Morality and expansionism
03:29:10 United States and UN are also expansionist with its Godless atheistic creed
03:35:52 Jizya, Dhimmi (DH defending Old Testament more than DW)
03:39:15 'If God told me to sacrifice my son would you do it?
03:43:43 'Why has this debate revolved around urine so much?
its Christians who protest against abortion gay marriage and any other immorality in west, its islam that sides with corrupted left in the west, you just in denial.
,Christianity is not in decline its more like immorality is rising as PROPHESIED in Bible, your own islamic countries are adopting democracy meaning islam cant even maintain this prophesied destruction.
@@crucialconflict2937 what are you saying, do you even know? 😂😂 Your kid doesn't have right to vote but they got the right to select their gander
@@khuzaimabutt392 ,again its Christians who protest against that rubbish in the west, its islam who side with the left that make up this corrupted rubbish. islam and leftist are of the same coin.
@@crucialconflict2937 you need to wake up seriously 😂😂😂😂
I'm a newly revert to Islam as well, who was preaching Christianity last year to Muslims, Atheists & to everyone. May Allah guides us all.
David is very dishonest. I was his follower.
Congratulations. May Allah bless you..
Welcome to Islam. May Allah subhanahu wa ta'ala bless you.
macha Allah, may Allah bless you
SubhanaAllah. Truly hidaya is from Allah Subhanawata'alla
What made you change your mind?
I recently reverted back to Islam from a seven day Adventist, I felt lost and now Alhamdulillah I was found , watching this video makes my iman stronger , may Allah guide and protect us , 🤲
Subhanallah.. May Allah grant you the highest jannah.. Aamiin
May Allah bless you, love
SubhanAllah!! Welcome to the truth (Al-Haqq). May Allah Subhanahu Wa Ta’Ala keep you steadfast and grant you ease. Ameen
Welcome to Truth Brother. Jazak Allah Khairun. Keep spreading truth to our other brothers and sisters, around you. May Allah help you, Aameen.
Alhamdulillah
I gotta say, i was pretty defensive and borderline scared of defending islamic laws before because of modern laws and ideologies. Daniel has helped open my eyes and strengthen my iman... I'm now unapologetic of Islam and the Prophet Muhammad (pbuh)... thank you for that...
similar to me
Wallah the more you look into shariah, the more you realize it’s an ideal way of life when implemented correctly. Not like todays countries corrupt countries in the Middle East. But the time of prophet Muhammad (saw)
@@yurrrr9384 I agree
Also when you look into alot of the later the muslim empires I.e coroba and the ottomans. When you look at their laws towards the end of their reigns they weren't shariah at all. They allowed riba and zina etc.
Now you can't call yourself an Islamic empire if you aren't ruling by Islamic laws lol.
@@ahmadfrhan5265 the UN is useless on a good day. They haven't exactly done much apart from shaking their fists and yelling shame on you. Even when it's something that openly goes against all forms of human rights.
I actually do appreciate this as a Christian. I’m not in the business of apologizing for God’s actions. Without God creating, nothing ppl complain about Him destroying ever even exists in the first place. If Atheists were correct, and there were no God then there would almost be an argument against these things. But that doesn’t seem to be the case
I am a revert to Islam from Christianity, alhamdulillah!!! Mr. Wood is really helping Christians find the truth and convert to Islam. Mr. Woods ignorance is a blessing and pray he opens his eyes and shed the veil.
Masha Allah brother ❤
Hmmm...liar
@@endless782 I am a sister! 😁
@@indiegirlrocking nah. The last sentence feels corny but true in a way. Ppl often let ignorance decide for them and answer for them but if they listen and think then arrogance would be reduced. This paragraph I wrote feels corny 😓
@@glados1099 the name used seems to reflect her lies, she is muslim. N btw, who can prove that she's not lying? muslims often lie (their core basic belief is lie) that they can lie to their fellow muslims justs to get what they want
I think brother Daniel has achieved his main objective in this debate which is making dawah to David Wood followers
Sorry Daniel failed Horribly
@@Incognitoiscool okok, no problem
@@Incognitoiscool sure 😂😂😂😂
Exactly. Daniel is a very good brother in heart too. Having him beside you is a privilege.
@@Incognitoiscool then u woke up from dream lol
That’s what I’m saying! How is Christianity supposed to be meant for humanity, when it hasn’t even provided a blueprint for an ideal Christian society?
@Wallahi I am sane this is epic😂
,what kind of blueprint, like how to urinate etc, the blueprint is in scripture.
@@neogeo5115 🤦🏻♂️
@@TheGloriousQuran6236 ,explain, bet you cant
@@neogeo5115 Keep turning the cheek until your Christian societies get destroyed lol
As a Christian, I am unsettled by David dodging Daniel's question regarding the violence in the Old Testament. Poor job, David.
So what's your take on it?
I'm just curious 🤔
@@abdullahk8691 Speak where the Bible speaks, and remain silent where the Bible is silent. If we believe the Bible is the word of God, then we should embrace every jot and tittle in it -- not make excuses through our silence. In this case, David should have acknowledged and responded from the beginning. I see this similarly to Muslims who make endless excuses about Aisha's age when Muhammad married and deflowered her. How can Muslims deny it when it's in the Hadith narratives? In the same way, we should not deny what's in the Bible.
@@santanav.4504 you haven't answered my question and you have decided to jump ship! What did you want Wood to say?
@@abdullahk8691 You ask me a general question and then accuse me of jumping ship. Think before you frame your questions.
@@santanav.4504 but you never answered what I asked but not to worry, I apologise. Now can you answer my question?
If you want a discussion on the age of Aisha, here or elsewhere I'm willing.
Honestly, I used to be so scared of addressing Islam in an unapologetic way, but after watching Daniel’s videos, that fear is now gone, alhamdulillah. It made Islam so clear and revealed it’s true essence, beauty and absolute perfection.
Understand this and always remember that if there's something you find wrong in islam or don't understand, it is due to your ignorance. Not because islam is wrong. Everything in islam makes perfect sense. It is us who don't look deeper into our religion and study it.
@@entkalb557 Very good rule. How I like to think about it is that if i find something i don’t understand I think of the clear evidence that proves islam to be the correct religion. this helps immensely, then i generally look for an answer.
@@entkalb557 it only makes perfect sense if you're brainwashed!
@@entkalb557 lol its very similar to conspiracy theory logic.
if something is not in line with out world view, it is part of the conspiracy.
any religion is just a brain loop or disease corrupting society and human brains
@@entkalb557can you give an explanation on verse 4 chapter 65?
Daniel was defending Christianity from David 🪵🪵🪵🤣🤣🤣
😂😂
😂😂😂😂
😃😃😃
🤣
🤣🤣🤣
Daniel defended both Islam, Christianity and Judaism in one debate against David Wood and other liberal Christians. Daniel's a real one. 💯 win for Daniel.
Why is David Wood a pathological liar right from the getgo of his talks? He's that desperate for patreons
@@brianlucena ikr? He instantly started strawmanning Islam and continued to do so throughout the debate. He wouldn’t stop claiming that Islam allows forced conversions, fighting all non-Muslims, and violently subjugating women. He kept repeating the Age of Aisha argument even tho in Numbers 31:17-18 the Israelites did it with pre-pubescent girls. His hypocrisy about the preservation of the Quran vs the Bible is palpable. He’s just copying those same refuted “holes in the narrative” arguments by those deceivers Jay Smith and Hatun. We all know the Bible cannot be depended on historically, such as the Torah, who’s oldest manuscripts are from 1000+ years after Musa(AS). David needs to stop talking about religion and get a real job.
@@ibnmianal-buna3176 he perfect being a psyhcopat i guess
he is a 💎gem😎
The best part about DH:
1- Well organised & articulated contentions.
2- Stick to topic despite distractions by opposition.
3- Highly researched
While his opponents get rid off the main topic & strawman. This has been consistent with all his opponents.
are quran and sunnah stawmen now?
@@falsesectslikeshiaarejudeo6543 jazakAllahhukhair .
The way he speaks is very impressive.
yet, desperate Christians believe DH is twisting and lying
Whenever I was doing a very good essay the main thing to do is stick to the topic. That’s when you get A* you are intelligent enough to evaluate the topic without wandering off to another.
I once read a comment of a non Muslim guy, he said *I noticed that Islam is the only religion in the world that doesn't use/defame other religions to prove itself right*
Thé quran literally calls Christians and Jews pigs …
It does.
@@8bambino where
there's literally no where in the Quran that calls jews or christians pigs
they're literally referred to as the people of the books
idk who lied to you bro but whoever did knew he wasnt telling the truth
@@ray_light44 lol
@@ray_light44 wasn't it In Quran verse 98:6 that described chritains and Jews as the worst of creatures or is that some other book
Seeing Daniel call Wood a liberal Christian many times and Wood comfortably embracing that term is quite shocking!
Not really. A liberal muslim is an insult from an islammic perspective, because it means the person isn't really following islam. But a liberal christian doesn't mean they are not following christianity. You should try to see things a bit more deeply and from different perspectives and try to understand that not all religions are the same
@@boliusabol822
Yeah it just means that he puts the Bible and the church fathers behind his back.
@@boliusabol822 wow. Your intelligence impressed. Did you study at MIT?
@GameSlack Yes, except Islam has no flaws!
@GameSlack We (muslims) fall short, Islam doesn’t! Any mistakes made are from us and when we do good is from Allah. That’s basic Islamic theology.
Thank you Mr. Haqiqatjou.
Ever since i found your channel you have reminded me to not apologize for what i believe.
I converted to islam and i did end up trying to find ways to make my religion sound "nice" to others.
You have reminded me to stand up for what i believe in.
May Allah Reward you brother.
Jazak Allah khair, brother. MashAllah. Indeed, the Prophet [PBUH] said,
"The hour (the end of time) will not begin until Muslims will be shy to talk about their religion, and non believers will proudly boast their false and bad ideologies."
@@TheMuslimPerspective Could you share the reference for this Hadith ?
These liberals cannot even defend their own ideology when it comes to violence and intolerance 🤣🤣🤣
A magic the gathering player converting to Islam amazing I love you akhi
Welcome dear brother to the path to paradise
*hope this helps someone out there*
0:00:00 - Introduction
0:01:17 - David Wood - Opening Statement
0:16:44 - Daniel Haqiqatjou - Opening Statement
0:32:08 - 5 Minute Back-and-Forths
1:31:31 - Open Discussion
2:29:42 - 5 Minute Closing Statements
2:38:29 - Q and A Session
3:45:43 - Outro
Thank You!! Hope Daniel pins this!
JazakAllahu khair akhi.. was looking for you in the comments.. wanted to skip Dead Wood's part
🤲🏽
Jazakallahu khairan
جزاك الله خيرا
I m glad I embraced Islam! Alhamdulillah!
Mubarak mere bhai 💖💕❤
I'm glad you embraced Islam. Alhamdulillah.
Mashallah my brother
Welcome to islam brother 💞
A biggest mistake in ur life
I think Christian shall appreciate brother Daniel’s effort for defending Christianity
*for defending Jesus Christ and Mother Mary.
the late false wannabe of Muhammad, paul went to Arabia in galatians 1 :17 as final prophet is of there, lawless false prophet of mathew 24 :11 in romans 10 :3. hence lawful prophet after messia in John 1 :21, of deut 18 :18, new covenent isiah 42 & comforter! paul in acts 9 :3 saw devil of luke 10 : 18 and in addition when he removed the laws it removed the blessings of his tribe to Arabs, mathew 21 :43 - the fruitful given the kingdom is Ismael in genesis 17... Jeremia 31 says removal of laws removes the blessings!
bible can't even agree if simon carried the cross and who the witnesses were... bible is a changed book bc pagan trinity of hindus was incorporated into bible over centuries!
Ibrahim and Ismael were Muslims who built the Kaba, even Yaqob imitates Hujj in genesis 28!
Even bible says Jesus will return as a Muslim in isiah 49 it says the one blessed in the womb will leave Zl0N and join the light of nations in isiah 42 aka Islam!
paul removed the laws so farisis can pay rulers to k*ll Esa just like how ai - pac pays govt to hide moss- sad van bomber and phone tap role in 009 / 0011. as faitha says yeahood have no acts & are restrictive thalims, nasara are loose & lawless. Islam is balanced. Prophet peace & blessings on him defended and did hijrah.
Right
@@marxistsabusegermansatn-bu38 Take your schizo meds, bud.
@@lx5tgp the ones who listen to a guy who tells them Paul is in the Quran need meds
I'm a revert to Islam . Allah hu akbar
Assalamu'alaikum..... And welcome to islam
David wood is one of the reasons on why I became a Muslim .
😂😂😂
😂😂😂😂😂
My man 👨 😂, Alhamdulilah
😂😂😂 you made my day 😂
Do you have his contact information?
Whenever i listem to David Wood I remind myself, “Never argue with stupid people. They will drag you down to their level and beat you with experience.”
Well said, this is exactly what I wanted to say. David Wood is so sooo low in level
He will drag you down to his level but he can never beat anyone.
Indeed Islam is the only true religion in the world.
MaShaAllah Brother Doomer! 💚
True. It is perfected by Allah and delegated to mankind to follow as their religion and their way of life. Muslims aren't perfect but Islam is.
ALLAHU AKBAR!
@Eric Cartman Why?
@Eric Cartman okay and ur evidence?
This debate seemed like Islam vs liberalism
Another W for Daniel
No not all that’s a gross simplification
@@user-jk2po3cz7d it does seem because he does take an apolagetic stands and seems more like a liberal then a Christian
@@user-jk2po3cz7d how much u will defend the one who can't defend himself
@@SaSa-dk4yv to be quite honest I don’t really think you know what a Christian is. I don’t know what a Muslim is that is why I decide to watch these debates. Considering that Daniels perspective is quite more blunt than let’s say from Adnad Rashid, Shabir Ali, and especially Mufti Abulayth
I clearly pointing out that this kind oversimplification of DW position does no good for the dialogue and for sure is very forgiving of Daniels interaction with the totality of DW’s arguments
@@kisntforkhalid i am not defending anyone. I am just point out that you are oversimplifying an argument and by doing so you are not really trying to understand the other side. I am not defending I am simply critiquing
Undisputable win by Daniel, seeing David Woods lack of historical and quranic knowledge was predictable, but in his own books and his ability to throw scholars and centuries of Christian scholarship under the bus was eye-opening. Jazakallah for all your work brother Daniel, seeing your unapologetic attitude and courage to stand up against liberal secularism is particularly inspiring, and further highlights your statement about how you've defended the old testament more than your interlocutor. Your initial 3 questions were barely addressed, if at all, by David and just shows his dishonesty and inconsistency when commenting on the Prophet Muhammad as compared to prophets in his own scripture; additionally, the lack of many clear rules and regulations dictating Christian practice and rule can become very problematic particularly if left to the huge range of interpretation that can arise.
@Aqeel Ishaq he's able to capitalize on Islamophobia, cross dresser on TH-cam,
@Aqeel Ishaq Islamophobia is money making machine... peewood did a video wearing his wife nightie..he is making money pushing hatred on islam/muslims... this debate with daniel ..is not a debate but for peewood to create more youtube videos for $$$ and to feed his blood thirsty viewers
@Aqeel Ishaq Nabeel wasn't Muslim he was Qadiani
Nabeel Qureshi was Qadiyani, not muslim. Qadiyani believe another prophet after Muhammad saw. just like mormon/ jw (i forgot) believe j. smith as prophet
@Aqeel Ishaq nabeel qurashi was never a muslim he was an ahmedi
I want to hug Danial so hard for defending the honor of islam and our beloved Prophet (saw). May Allah bless you and your family. Ameen
There is no honor in Islam. It belongs to the garbage.
ameen
Oh Daniel gave the best argument ever " Jesus was not critical on the ruler/ Caesar at that time so if Jesus was under Mohammed's rule he would not be critical about his ruling and military campaign"
May I know the time stamp akhi. شكرا
Yah that destroyed his entire argument and the reason he asked
Jesus under mohamed? Mohamed is in hell, Jesus is in heaven.
@@bobyford8051 his first opening argument
@@MU-we8hz if Jesus lived under Mohammed rule and preached Christianity he wouldn't criticized Mohammed for killing or punishing people because Jesus didn't criticized Caesar for killing and punishing jews in fact he said give what's Caesar to Caesar give what's god to god
Mismatch. Why did David Wood even agree to this debate with Daniel? I feel bad for David because he wasn't able to follow most of Daniel's arguments :)
daniel has no argument he kept going to old testament which was only for set time Christianity is based on new testament and old testament only leads to Jesus but there are things in the old testament which are of value which are not mentioned in the new testament
He doesn't need to be , he has all he needs " very little as it is "to fool his simple audience.
@@MustafaMuhammed1981
Don't forget to mention that according to the New Testament, everyone who didn't accept Jesus as their savior will be dragged and slaughtered in front of Jesus, and that is a command by Jesus himself. And then thrown in hellfire.
Liberal Christians are very hypocritical.
@@jayd4ever
Jesus fully approved of the Old Testament.
@@quarantinejet2312 yes he did do muslims
This debate appeared to be over in the first 20-30 minutes. I was genuinely interested in what approach David would take. But Daniel's initial points about the old testament and lack of clarity on New testament completely threw David. He had very strange responses. He wanted to make this into a modern liberal debate but ended up getting completely stuck with the questions Daniel put across. Have to respect the approach Daniel had . Simple but very effective
David's is contradictory, he renounced empires form 3rd century to John Locke.... but 4th century the bc pagn hindu trinity is incorporated. so David uses pacifism pre 3rd century but pagan trinity post 3rd century, to be consistent he should either say christianity is violent empire w/ trinity or renounce both the trinity and the empire! trinity was the compromise with the roman pagan empire in the first place anyway!
David is textually wrong as well.
Mathew 10 : 34 - “Do not think that I have come to bring peace to the earth; I have not come to bring peace, but a sword.
35 For I have come to set a man against his father,
and a daughter against her mother,
and a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law;
also i think the protestants which i think evangelicals come from were created by the jesuits cryptos as a response to the inquisition...
jesuits later went to rothsschild and student of sabati zevi Jacob frank to form the ... illuminati banker dynasty, the rotheschild in uk set up zionism...
so do you think that daniel's argument, that christians should be militant because the old testament is , was a winner?
@@boliusabol822 you're missing the point. David appears to use a modern liberal account of morality to attack Islam. Daniel presented the argument that the old testament was full of violence therefore Jesus(Christian God) agreed with this. Consequently, David has no Christian theological base to attack Islam and play the modern liberal/secular card of mortality. And the approach worked... From what I saw there was no emphasis on anyone turning militant. Daniel in this debate was very charitable in my opinion. He didn't make underhand and emotive comments...David did throughout. Daniel actually shared that both religions have common threats and that the approach David takes on being Islam centric is not the right one. That approach was also a winner and one that I don't think David expected either... Funny because Daniel 'turned the other cheek' and followed 'love thy neighbour' more than David did.
@@normskyyanwell4872 You write "Daniel presented the argument that the old testament was full of violence therefore Jesus(Christian God) agreed with this. Consequently, David has no Christian theological base to attack Islam"
@@boliusabol822 sorry my friend, we have different interpretations of what was said. The reason the old testament was brought up was that Jesus (God) accepted and condoned the violence in it. That's end of discussion. If you attribute the talk of wiping out pagans etc from Daniel to mean what you're saying then I'm not going to argue this...I don't think he was. Rather he was trying to present the argument that Christian scholars agreed with the old testament. Either way these are false areas IMO. David trying to present a modern, emotive approach of 'look how violent Muslims are' and how 'loving Jesus is' doesn't stack up. That was the point. Daniel argued that Jesus (Christian God) in the old testament sanctioned violence.. He couldn't disagree so began using very strange interpretations about miracles etc. He wasn't expecting this which is why from a debating perspective I thought Daniel's strategy worked. The finer detail of who said what and what he meant is not an interest for me.
Not once did Daniel insult or degrade Jesus peace be upon him. But that’s basically all that David did to Muhammad. Christians take a note: How we treat your prophet versus how you treat ours. Who is more honorable? Smh. Kudos to Daniel for doing an absolutely phenomenal job! The more I watch these videos the more faith I have in Islam. Never bow down to liberal secularists! 💪
Because Jesus is our Prophet..😊
Because it would be blasphemy if he did
Excuse me? What? Jesus peace be upon him is OUR prophet, he was a Muslim! He is not the Christian’s prophet, they only worship a fake version of Jesus.
Because he would not be muslim if he did
It's not because we respect their God or anything like that we can't mock their fake God which is our prophet. Otherwise we will burn in hell
DW had one agenda, and one agenda only, which was to ridicule and insult the prophet Mohammed pbuh. He failed miserably.
His language, his attitude and his ignorance are such an insult to Christianity.
Indeed. Yet, they call that "love" XD
You are absolutely right!
@@superpenguinius1011 lovely religion
Allah have no respect for christians and Jews Surah 5:51
@Kordei - I don't want to participate kissing stones in mecca 🕋 We as christians obey what Jesus told us in Matthew 28:19
I know most Christians will probably troll and just pretend David did better, but I'm sure there are some sincere Christians out there who will see this and understand these arguments and think about it, they surely can't all be that illogical.
If you are looking for logic. I would not look to Islam. A contradiction in terms.
@@jeanmullen8327 keep coping
@@jeanmullen8327 you shouldn't look into mirror too. You will see no intelligence
I have a friend who used to listen to David Woods channel and was so anti Muslim and that’s how I met her. The more she listened to him made her turn From Christianity and that’s when she started asking me some things (accusations really at first).
Now she is Muslim Alhumdulillah
@Disney Princess A very wrong question to a muslimah.
well said Daniel you're not only defending Islam but the faith in God in general
As a Christian, I like Daniel here. This god of Wood is liberalism.
Davids acts of worship : talking nonsense about islam !
Thats all he got.
Wood always Googling his life.. loll
@@theeagle4083 He is now DPUSS
Did you watch his comment section full of ex Muslims
Christians consider lying to promote the faith an act of worship to glorify their biblical god. But if Christianity is true, why do Christians constantly lie to promote it? If Islam is false, why do Christians constantly lie to oppose it? Lying to promote the faith is a core Christian doctrine. The self-declared “Apostle” Paul made this a core doctrine of the religion. Read the New Testament Romans 3:7 and 1 Corinthians 9:21-23 for the proof.
u r a biased person .i m not suprised that u support pikachu over david .
David Wood literally disowned his own scripture and church fathers in the debate. He also said that he’s okay even with genocide if he thinks that his biblical god is ordering it. So he conceded the entire debate before it even started. Why did he even show up? lol, poor David! 😎🔨
@Mansoor Ahmad Also, he says wiped out is figurative. Is killing infants and everything that breathes figurative for something.
@@vol94 ewe that is heart breaking oh no 😫😫😫😫😫
Yeah so David is saying that if people are commanded by God to do things like slaying babies, then he’s okay with it. So why doesn’t he apply that same logic to Islam? Muslims believe God has commanded them to have Hudud, so by David’s logic, he should be okay with that.
Daniel, I think you should have mentioned that the early Muslim conquests were in part so rapid and successful because the local communities preferred the Muslims over the Byzantine Christians and the local Maghreb Christians joined the Muslims as the Byzantines would oppress them and close their churches.
More over. People of Central Asia, the stan countries, were never conquered by muslims. Actually the opposite happened multiple times and guess what. The conquerers have accepted Islam, the religion of the defeated. Look at the turks and mongols, they invaded the middle east and eventually accepted the Islam.
@@Nisah98 What do you mean by when Muslims conquered where the locals didn’t want them like India or Constantinople?
@@Nisah98 Locals in India liked the Muslim rule. It was not until British came that they used divide and rule. Only some people that were in power that lost their privileges of oppressing others hated it.
I see, I believe I got my information wrong. Thank you for letting me know. I’ve retracted my comment.
My point was to just deal the “even if” argument. Where in debates you bite the bullet of the opponents best arguments and justify why your stance is still supreme. Like let’s say - even if the locals didn’t want Muslim rule, it is still better because the Muslim rule let them be expose to the truth and bring in more prosperity in terms of wealth, knowledge and morality (seen by Andalusia and Persian rule by Islam) hence justify the albeit unwanted rule.
A brother corrected my wrong knowledge and I have retracted my statement as it contained wrong information.
That closing from DH made me tear up.
My son was born last at 24 weeks of pregnancy. He almost died several times (once I, entirely untrained in the medical field, had to resuscitate him). Extremely trying time. He is much better now, Alhamdulillah.
May Allah make it easy for us, and make our patient perseverance (sabr) a means of us attaining ultimate salvation (jannah). Ameen.
Maasha Allah Daniel did another great Janaza after Sheikh Uthman and Mohamed Hijab🔥💪🏾👏🏾
So proud of you my brother Daniel 👏🏾❤️ may Allah SWT bless you and always with you
😅
@@abdullahabraham4483 why did you cancel what I said allah
David arguement is my god can order rape but mohmmad can't because mohmamund did not provided proofs
Daniel argument is my god can order slavery and rape and so can your god
1. This mentality of god can order rape is toxic.( Done by both Daniel and David)
2. After having that mentality mocking other god for ordering rape is Hypocrisy. (Done only by David)
That being said, I have two more points to add
1. So David MENTALITY is god can order rape if he provided proof to be god( I won't be complaining about Hypocrisy and toxicity here) through my point is when David belives that God can order rape if he proved to be god then in his videos David should say ah yes mohmmad after giving order of rape can be prophet too if he gave proof to be prophet.
While that's not what David does
David Always says well since mohmmad ordered rape that alone makes him not a prophet, so by that logic since moses ordered rape that alone makes him not a god.
The argument that David is trying to pull of Moses after ordering rape can be god if he provided proofs. So then David should have said mohmamund when ordered rape, can be prophet if he gave proof
The point is there is huge difference in staying mohmmad ordered rape that alone makes him not a prophet and saying mohmmad ordered rape and yet he can be prophet if he gave proof.
If David would have said that mohmmmad ordered rape and hence he can't be propeht so anyone will think of since moses ordered rape he can't be a god too.
Here David comes with oh moses can be because he gave "proof".
Again for that David should have said well mohmmad did ordered rape and he can be prophet too if he gave proof but he didn't said that.
In simple words
David belives that God can be one even if ordered rape but have given proof
While what he says is ah if someone orders rape they can't be godly figure.
Yes definitely sister😁
David's is contradictory, he renounced empires form 3rd century to John Locke.... but 4th century the bc pagn hindu trinity is incorporated. so David uses pacifism pre 3rd century but pagan trinity post 3rd century, to be consistent he should either say christianity is violent empire w/ trinity or renounce both the trinity and the empire! trinity was the compromise with the roman pagan empire in the first place anyway!
David is textually wrong as well.
Mathew 10 : 34 - “Do not think that I have come to bring peace to the earth; I have not come to bring peace, but a sword.
35 For I have come to set a man against his father,
and a daughter against her mother,
and a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law;
also i think the protestants which i think evangelicals come from were created by the jesuits cryptos as a response to the inquisition...
jesuits later went to rothsschild and student of sabati zevi Jacob frank to form the ... illuminati banker dynasty, the rotheschild in uk set up zionism...
The amount of straw mans that David Wood pulled, is just astounding. What's more astounding is how he managed to get away with it.
He kept on claiming Islam commands Muslims to force all non-Muslims to convert to Islam and to fight anyone who does not believe in Islam. I challenge any David Wood fan here to show me evidence of this.
i think he won alot of people over to Christianity.......NOT
He kept dodging Daniels questions too and sounded like a broken record
Does anyone expect anymore?
, name 1.
You can see how calm and behaved Daniel is. It is such a big gap between Daniel and David. Respect from Norway Daniel!
@@Cobra-gl7or and your point was?…..
@@Cobra-gl7or i have not denied that or even mentioned it… I just commented the bad behavior of David Wood
I am just surprised that Daniel called him a liberal Christian a few times and wood was seemingly accepting it without any hesitation . I didn't expected such a naive and immature level of debating from wood who just kept distracting from the topic over and again and just making mockery of Islam with no ground. Props to Daniel for acting like a well organised and decent professional and always sticking to the relevant topics and more importantly backing his statements by Clear and factual evidences . Great job Daniel 👍.
I don't understand why all these non-Muslims shift away from the actual debate topic? Apuss, Snailtan and now David Wood did the same tactic. Don't they have confidence in their own ideology?
They don’t even believe it let alone being confident!
There is 1 truth , if u have it , the opposition will do exactly what these guys did , change topic and deny their own beliefs , unless they are honest , but that is a rare exception.
If you believed in a three in one god would you have confidence in it? Lol, Probably not right?
I love this débet
You we're listening were you? 🤣🤡
Another flawless victory for Brother Daniel and Team PikaChad! Masha2Allah!
Apart from his claims that Jesus teachings to individuals wouldn’t work for a country.
It’s like
Principal to students, “I don’t want kids bringing guns to school.”
Daniel haqiqatjou: “But if the police don’t have guns, how are they supposed to protect us from criminals?”
He also referred to Israelites taking sex slaves, which is false, was it a mistake or is he flawless because you don’t mind him lying on camera?
@@swellerferret2506 : You’re straw-manning by using false analogies. Try better next time, good buddy. It’s you who is practicing the core Christian doctrine of lying to promote your religion. Your self-declared “apostle” Paul made this a core doctrine of Christianity-and the cornerstone of Christian proselytization-in Romans 3:7 and 1 Corinthians 9:21-23.
@@samy7013 No it’s his logic: Jesus talks to an audience but Daniel says that if the people Jesus was not referring to (did what Jesus didn’t tell them to do but someone else) would be defeated.
Kids don’t need guns just like a individual won’t fight back against bullies.
Just like a cop needs guns and a nation must defend against against invaders, what Jesus talked about have nothing to do whether a country can defend itself or not. Yet he keeps whining about something which irrelevance should go without saying.
He is simply changing the circumstances about what Jesus is talking about.
He also brought in statements from people that was not a part of the early church to criticize the early church.
Moreover he also blames Christianity for having similarities with the empire when the same empire became christian. It’s Christianity that influences Rome not Rome that influenced Christianity.
It’s like having a coup of Salt, and then say “salt is wet.” It goes without saying but Daniel don’t care.
His tactic is basically whine about and when receiving an answer he ignores it and keeps whining.
@@swellerferret2506 : You’re raving, and inventing a completely different debate than the one in this video. Why all this lying? For once I want to meet a Christian apologist who doesn’t brazenly lie to our faces when propagating his faith. Even just once, I’d like to see this.
@@samy7013 Well when did David lie then?
The debate was over after Daniel's opening speech! Perfect!
Thank you Daniel for defending the Torah for us
It’s all love between us.
David got uncomfortable getting interrogated for much of this debate about the Christianity and the bible, he was hoping to steer the topic on Islam! 😂
Daniel was on offensive mode lmao, offense is the best defense hahah
It seems a lot of Christians, don’t know Christianity.
🤣🤣🤣🤣
They all will have different interpretations of same text
Based on their own whims and desires
Actually they don't, all they know is "Jesus loves you " "Jesus will save you" .
We should not be surprised. 2000 years and they still don’t have their story straight.
Really lol muhammad said the kaaba stone erases all your sins 🕋 that's idolatry not abrahamic.
I love how David Wood was caught absolutely out of guard.
He was expecting for Daniel to say “Yes, Islam is tolerant and non-violent” so that David could disprove that!
But to his and my shock Daniel said “Yes, Islam doesn’t tolerate and is violent!” but Christianity is far more worse for these reasons and Daniel had to defend Christianity himself because clearly David is lost!
Time?
Indeed
@@homtanks7259 16:58 Daniel says that Islam is Violent and intolerant and the rest of the debate he shows how Christianity is far more worse!
Yes very strategically played!
Honestly, when I hear Daniel, I can see knowledge. I see divine knowledge and you could hear him again and again and again. Even when he's talking about Christianity. When it's David all I could see was hatred and misconceptions. No fact, no theory, nothing Only hatred
Daniel succeeded in keeping the debate focused on Christianity and only responded to claims about Islam when it was neccessary, ignoring all the nonsensical and unsubstanciated claims. What baffles me is how some followers of DW believed he was doing well. It is like they're watching another debate!!
It’s like doesn’t even understand what most modern Christians believe and why. Kinda like Dawkins.
It's called delusion and selective vision
His fans hate Muslims so much that they will believe anything. He kept repeating the same old silly talking points about our prophet. Just go to your local library and check out some books on the prophet Muhammad and read and learn! His fans are so ignorant.
Every debate I’ve seen him in he loses lok
Their hearts are blinded
Apus was in the chat again at 03:08:37. Speak Daniel living rent free in his head. He's still not over of the catastrophe of a discussion he had with Daniel back in the day when he got schooled, he's still salty. How pathetic. 😂 David has been as far the most respectable and formal debate opponent of Daniel's what comes to him, Apus and Harris, so big ups for him for being a good sport and not relying on personal attacks. There were some real wholesome moments on this debate like the cracking of harmless jokes by David at 03:43:47 and the warm prayer for David's disabled sons by Daniel at 2:32:15.
Time line?
@@thought-provoking795 3:08:37
Doesn't Apus live in Germany? I mean i'm pretty sure at the time of the debate, it was between 02:00 to 05:00 A.M or something there.. does he even have a life? Does he even sleep?
Edit: ok he live in the U.S now .. thanks for correction brothers.
@@branis96 no he is from US
@@saimtanweer4145 No, he was born in Germany and went back to Turkey at some point but now he’s based in the US
The best debate over 🔥💪🏾👏🏾Maasha Allah can’t believe I was watching 3 hours without getting bored Allahu Akbar
As salam o Alaikum
please translate in Urdu and Urdu cc Captions
I'll hardly consider this the best debate. Daniel is amazing Mashallah but he needs a worthy opponent. Wood simply doesn't cut it.
Wood read that one paragraph over and over again lol. After that he kept choking 😂
@@youtubeowl9544 Wood didnt know what he is talking about through out this whole debate
Masha Allah 🤩
David wood helps people become Muslim Alhamdulillah
Yeah he is not useless after all
Can't wait for an eight hours debate analysis😎
Marathon...MaraTHON...MARATHON!!!
It's not going to be eight hour this time. One and half at most.
Please, no!!! 30 minutes of DW is already too much! I can't take it! literally MKUltra
the late false wannabe of Muhammad, paul went to Arabia in galatians 1 :17 as final prophet is of there, lawless false prophet of mathew 24 :11 in romans 10 :3. hence lawful prophet after messia in John 1 :21, of deut 18 :18, new covenent isiah 42 & comforter! paul in acts 9 :3 saw devil of luke 10 : 18 and in addition when he removed the laws it removed the blessings of his tribe to Arabs, mathew 21 :43 - the fruitful given the kingdom is Ismael in genesis 17... Jeremia 31 says removal of laws removes the blessings!
bible can't even agree if simon carried the cross and who the witnesses were... bible is a changed book bc pagan trinity of hindus was incorporated into bible over centuries!
Ibrahim and Ismael were Muslims who built the Kaba, even Yaqob imitates Hujj in genesis 28!
Even bible says Jesus will return as a Muslim in isiah 49 it says the one blessed in the womb will leave Zl0N and join the light of nations in isiah 42 aka Islam!
paul removed the laws so farisis can pay rulers to k*ll Esa just like how ai - pac pays govt to hide moss- sad van bomber and phone tap role in 009 / 0011. as faitha says yeahood have no acts & are restrictive thalims, nasara are loose & lawless. Islam is balanced. Prophet peace & blessings on him defended and did hijrah.
Sorry David. Daniel's win was pretty clear.
I am not fully convinced that you are a Christian. You sounded like an atheist more than a believer.
Protestantism and atheism are very akin
Exactly, he's more like an atheist than a Christian. Probably the product of liberalism and secularism.
Well said.
My take he is just someone trying to take people away from God.
He just died that from a christian perspective as that is a way for him to achieve his aim.
It's very clear that you don't know much about debates or fallacious arguments. Your buddy Daniel made plenty of them.
Christians are atheists by default
“Don’t hate the player, hate the game” 😂
Brother Daniel you’re amazing ma shaa Allah. May Allah always grant you victory in your struggle for the sake of Allah!
David's is contradictory, he renounced empires form 3rd century to John Locke.... but 4th century the bc pagn hindu trinity is incorporated. so David uses pacifism pre 3rd century but pagan trinity post 3rd century, to be consistent he should either say christianity is violent empire w/ trinity or renounce both the trinity and the empire! trinity was the compromise with the roman pagan empire in the first place anyway!
David is textually wrong as well.
Mathew 10 : 34 - “Do not think that I have come to bring peace to the earth; I have not come to bring peace, but a sword.
35 For I have come to set a man against his father,
and a daughter against her mother,
and a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law;
also i think the protestants which i think evangelicals come from were created by the jesuits cryptos as a response to the inquisition...
jesuits later went to rothsschild and student of sabati zevi Jacob frank to form the ... illuminati banker dynasty, the rotheschild in uk set up zionism...
@@marxistsabusegermansatn-bu38 ,out of context,
Hey mr. Woods miracles is not the point of the debate...
Would you say that today? Israel vs Palestine!
Quit hating the Jews! Hate the game
Salaam alaikum!!! These young Muslim brothers have gained so much knowledge and wisdom in the past 20 years, that even the staunchest of the Christian apologists are running 🏃♂️ scared. Alhamdulillah for these young warriors, and Alhamdulillah for Islam!
Agreed. Some of our youth are so amazing. I wish the other youth could follow them.
David dodged the questions better than Neo dodged bullets in The Matrix
hE's beGInNinG TO BeLIeVe
@@kroposman2302 apus smith infiltrated the chat big time.
Both Neo and David couldn’t save trinity 😔
@@jetm7497 Thanks for the laugh 👏😊
@@Kashkha7 you’re welcome 😊
Daniel's prayer for David's son caused him a meltdown. Thank you brother Daniel for inviting him to Islam.
Do you know which minute?
Time stamp?
@@aymanus04 2:32:15 to be more precise.
@@juxtapositionMS thx
Well sadly dw reply was like every other response , wife beating...etc to make islam look bad in the eye of liberals , but im proud really of listening to someone like daniel , our sigma Man , daniel pikachu 😊 (i mean pika as a joke out of love and respect for daniel haqiqatjo)
When David was talking about the Christian view point on violence and war he was giving references for every single statement/claim he was making but that all suddenly vanishes when he starts to make wild claims/statements about Islam. Like not a single reference....
David tries to undermine our prophet's adequacy for the role of prophet hood with wild and irrelevant assertions about him, but then ironically admits the fact that according to christianity, non of their prophets were adequate for their roles of prophet hood, as they were all capable of heinous sins and evil deeds.
💯David arguement is my god can order rape but mohmmad can't because mohmamund did not provided proofs
Daniel argument is my god can order slavery and rape and so can your god
1. This mentality of god can order rape is toxic.( Done by both Daniel and David)
2. After having that mentality mocking other god for ordering rape is Hypocrisy. (Done only by David)
That being said, I have two more points to add
1. So David MENTALITY is god can order rape if he provided proof to be god( I won't be complaining about Hypocrisy and toxicity here) through my point is when David belives that God can order rape if he proved to be god then in his videos David should say ah yes mohmmad after giving order of rape can be prophet too if he gave proof to be prophet.
While that's not what David does
David Always says well since mohmmad ordered rape that alone makes him not a prophet, so by that logic since moses ordered rape that alone makes him not a god.
The argument that David is trying to pull of Moses after ordering rape can be god if he provided proofs. So then David should have said mohmamund when ordered rape, can be prophet if he gave proof
The point is there is huge difference in staying mohmmad ordered rape that alone makes him not a prophet and saying mohmmad ordered rape and yet he can be prophet if he gave proof.
If David would have said that mohmmmad ordered rape and hence he can't be propeht so anyone will think of since moses ordered rape he can't be a god too.
Here David comes with oh moses can be because he gave "proof".
Again for that David should have said well mohmmad did ordered rape and he can be prophet too if he gave proof but he didn't said that.
In simple words
David belives that God can be one even if ordered rape but have given proof
While what he says is ah if someone orders rape they can't be godly figure.
@@m0hamed_kamz70 David arguement is my god can order rape but mohmmad can't because mohmamund did not provided proofs
Daniel argument is my god can order slavery and rape and so can your god
1. This mentality of god can order rape is toxic.( Done by both Daniel and David)
2. After having that mentality mocking other god for ordering rape is Hypocrisy. (Done only by David)
That being said, I have two more points to add
1. So David MENTALITY is god can order rape if he provided proof to be god( I won't be complaining about Hypocrisy and toxicity here) through my point is when David belives that God can order rape if he proved to be god then in his videos David should say ah yes mohmmad after giving order of rape can be prophet too if he gave proof to be prophet.
While that's not what David does
David Always says well since mohmmad ordered rape that alone makes him not a prophet, so by that logic since moses ordered rape that alone makes him not a god.
The argument that David is trying to pull of Moses after ordering rape can be god if he provided proofs. So then David should have said mohmamund when ordered rape, can be prophet if he gave proof
The point is there is huge difference in staying mohmmad ordered rape that alone makes him not a prophet and saying mohmmad ordered rape and yet he can be prophet if he gave proof.
If David would have said that mohmmmad ordered rape and hence he can't be propeht so anyone will think of since moses ordered rape he can't be a god too.
Here David comes with oh moses can be because he gave "proof".
Again for that David should have said well mohmmad did ordered rape and he can be prophet too if he gave proof but he didn't said that.
In simple words
David belives that God can be one even if ordered rape but have given proof
While what he says is ah if someone orders rape they can't be godly figure.
David arguement is my god can order rape but mohmmad can't because mohmamund did not provided proofs
Daniel argument is my god can order slavery and rape and so can your god
1. This mentality of god can order rape is toxic.( Done by both Daniel and David)
2. After having that mentality mocking other god for ordering rape is Hypocrisy. (Done only by David)
That being said, I have two more points to add
1. So David MENTALITY is god can order rape if he provided proof to be god( I won't be complaining about Hypocrisy and toxicity here) through my point is when David belives that God can order rape if he proved to be god then in his videos David should say ah yes mohmmad after giving order of rape can be prophet too if he gave proof to be prophet.
While that's not what David does
David Always says well since mohmmad ordered rape that alone makes him not a prophet, so by that logic since moses ordered rape that alone makes him not a god.
The argument that David is trying to pull of Moses after ordering rape can be god if he provided proofs. So then David should have said mohmamund when ordered rape, can be prophet if he gave proof
The point is there is huge difference in staying mohmmad ordered rape that alone makes him not a prophet and saying mohmmad ordered rape and yet he can be prophet if he gave proof.
If David would have said that mohmmmad ordered rape and hence he can't be propeht so anyone will think of since moses ordered rape he can't be a god too.
Here David comes with oh moses can be because he gave "proof".
Again for that David should have said well mohmmad did ordered rape and he can be prophet too if he gave proof but he didn't said that.
In simple words
David belives that God can be one even if ordered rape but have given proof
While what he says is ah if someone orders rape they can't be godly figure.
@@SILENCEINTHESOULS our prophet never ordered.r*pe, niether does our religion! Daniel was just addressing the fact that David would undermine islam for things that are found in christianity and even other worst things like.klling innocent non combatants at war, such as women and children and rap. ng women.
The Quran doesn't say the sun sets in a muddy pool. It says that Thul-Qarnayn (The two horned one) saw the sun set in a muddy pool. In other words Allah is simply describing the view that king was seeing. This is another disingenuous claim from David. Allah says in the Quran quite clearly "It does not behoove the sun to overtake the moon, nor does the night outstrip the daytime, and each is swimming in an orbit." (Surat Yasin)
Dishonest Christians and atheists don't care about the truth.
They use literal interpretations when it suits.
But watch them twist the Bible to get to their invented doctrines! (Christians)
@@letsbegood_
😂😂👍👍
If Christianity is true, why do Christians constantly lie to promote it? If Islam is false, why do Christians constantly lie to oppose it? Lying to promote the faith is a core Christian doctrine. The self-declared “Apostle” Paul made this a core doctrine of the religion. Read the New Testament Romans 3:7 and 1 Corinthians 9:21-23 for the proof.
How to take what Islam does, deceive, and then use that to accuse the opponent of it. Allah is the best of deceivers and Muhammad said you can lie even to your wife! Who can you then not lie to?
And we’ve seen Quran affirm Paul as a messenger and we’ e seen Allah copy Paul’s words, and yet they persist in throwing mud at him.
Paul and Allah:
However, as it is written:
"No eye has seen,
no ear has heard,
no mind has conceived
what God has prepared for those who love him." (1 Corinthians 2:9)
Narrated Abu Huraira:
The Prophet said, "ALLAH SAID, ‘I have prepared for My righteous slaves (such excellent things)
as no eye has ever seen, nor an ear has ever heard nor a human heart can ever think of.’"
(Sahih Al-Bukhari, Volume 9, Book 93, Number 589)
@Umrah....... I didn’t need to read your post entirely to see you making assumptions. Tell me how much the Dead Sea scrolls differ from the Bible we have today?
I’ll wait.
Those were dated to before Jesus, so waaaay before Muhammad was even born after 4 years of his fathers death.
@@cainblue448
There is no translation of the Qur'an from any academic which says that "Allah is the best of deceivers".
You Christians are so desperate that you make your own translation of the Qur'an then accuse us of deception? 😂
Meanwhile, Bible has God deceiving people numerous times:
*Finally, a spirit came forward, stood before the Lord and said, ‘I will entice him.’ “‘By what means?’ the Lord asked. “‘I will go out and be a deceiving spirit in the mouths of all his prophets,’ he said. “‘You will succeed in enticing him,’ said the Lord. ‘Go and do it.’ “So now the Lord has put a deceiving spirit in the mouths of all these prophets of yours. The Lord has decreed disaster for you.” [1 Kings **22:21**-23]*
*You deceived me, Lord, and I was deceived; you overpowered me and prevailed. I am ridiculed all day long; everyone mocks me. [Jeremiah 20:7]*
*For this reason God sends them a powerful delusion so that they will believe the lie. [2 Thessalonians 2:11]*
*Note:* These verses are from the New International Version (NIV) which is most popular English translation of the Bible.
Here are some of the Hadiths of Prophet Muhammad which clearly states that lying is forbidden, should be avoided in all circumstances and is a major sin:
*Abdullah reported Allah’s Messenger as saying: It is obligatory for you to tell the truth, for truth leads to virtue and virtue leads to Paradise, and the man who continues to speak the truth and endeavours to tell the truth is eventually recorded as truthful with Allah, and beware of telling of a lie for telling of a lie leads to obscenity and obscenity leads to Hell-Fire, and the person who keeps telling lies and endeavours to tell a lie is recorded as a liar with Allah. (Sahih Muslim Book 32, Hadith 6309)*
*‘Abdullah b. Mas’ud reported Allah’s Messenger as saying: Telling of truth is a virtue and virtue leads to Paradise and the servant who endeavours to tell the truth is recorded as truthful, and lie is obscenity and obscenity leads to Hell-Fire, and the servant who endeavours to tell a lie is recorded as a liar. Ibn Abu Shaiba reported this from Allah’s Apostle. (Sahih Muslim Book 32, Hadith 6308)*
*Aishah narrated: “There was no behaviour more hated to the Messenger of Allah than lying. A man would lie in narrating something in the presence of the Prophet, and he would not be content until he knew that he had repented.” (Jami` at-Tirmidhi Volume 4, Book 1, Hadith 1973)*
*Abdullah reported that the Prophet (p) said, “You must be truthful. Truthfulness leads to dutifulness and dutifulness leads to the Garden. A man continues to tell the truth until he is written as a siddiq with Allah. Beware of lying. Lying leads to deviance and deviance leads to the Fire. A man continues to lie until he is written as a liar with Allah.” (Al-Adab Al-Mufrad: Book 21, Hadith 386)*
*The Prophet (p) guaranteed paradise to anyone if they can avoid lying even when joking. The Prophet said: I guarantee a house in the surroundings of Paradise for a man who avoids quarrelling even if he were in the right, a house in the middle of Paradise for a man who avoids lying even if he were joking, and a house in the upper part of Paradise for a man who made his character good. (Sunan Abi Dawud Book 42, Hadith 4782)*
Allah did not confirm the words of Paul because those were not the words of Paul, he was quoting from a unknown scripture because he says "as it is written".
Also, if Allah agrees with Paul on something why does it suddenly mean that Allah now accept Paul as His messenger 😂
@@moizahmed4705 Do you know how to use an Arabic dictionary? Read the tafsir for 3:54 and find the Arabic word for makr, copy it and find the definition for it.
My results, cunning and deception. We’ve long known that english translations are watered down to appear more like the Bible. Many Arabic speakers have confirmed this. We have even see that the virgin verses in Quran are surround by text that appears very much like that in the Bible. By inserting the virgin verses, it even throws off the rhyming of the verses.
Oh and quoting Jeremiah and others saying God deceived them is LIKE God himself saying he deceived? Have you read the commentary of those verses? Doubt it, or you would know that the meaning of deceived is different from today. But in Quran we know it to be deception because both Muhammad and Omar expressed fear of the hereafter near their deaths as recorded by his own people. They said they were afraid even if they had one foot in paradise because OF THE DECEPTION OF ALLAH!
As far as David went was the usual what every Christian did regarding Islam. And he us trying to reinvent the wheel on Christianty.
The amount of contradictions was staggering.
Lol. Christians has this weird tendency to redefine their belief every decade or so.
Why does David keep pretending that the Bible, whichever of the many versions u subscribe to, is not so broken in its morality that you can reasonably make the same interpretation that the Byzantines, Spanish Inquisitors, and the Templars did? Does David ignore the fact that during the first 900 years of Christianity the Bible was not a canonized and unified message? Verses were being added in by people, verses were removed, who’s to say the NT that the Byzantines had was the same that David reads?
@Mansoor Ahmad that’s not what that verse means
@@ibnmianal-buna3176 all those things you mentioned were not condone by Christ or His Apostles
@Mansoor Ahmad Yeah, you know, it’s funny, I keep hearing about Jesus being such a “zen, groovy, peaceful guy”, …but ummm….what’s he gonna do when he comes back again???… lol
sheikh Uthman Debunked all the points he brought again to this debate directly to his face and he still used them again.... my god i can't fathom how he can walk straight anymore
He has no intention to walk straight
Absolutely ..a man TOTALLY obsessed with The Prophet SAW..totally obsessed shame..Sad Sack..overdraft
He is modern day Abu Jehil...
The closing statement from Daniel is really overwhelming. As people, we really need to think and no afraid of change. May Allah guide the misguided people, Ameen !
Daniel as usual with a big flawless WIN. May Allah bless you, increase you in knowledge, and reward you bro Daniel.
Ameen🤲❤️
I love how david kept taunting to Sheikh Uthman that he threw At Tabri under the bus while he threw under the bus literary every church father they named in this debate.
The difference is that David would be happy to say just use the Quran, but muslims want to use the Hadith. So David is happy to use the quran and Hadith, or even Quran and just Sahih Hadith, but then muslims want to go to their scholars. So it's muslims that initiate going to the scholars. David i always happy to say forget the scholars and look at what the text says.
David doesn't make his arguments for what the bible says, by quoting scholars, he makes his arguments by quoting the scripture itself. If a muslim insists on using Ibn Kathir, then David will use Ibn Kathir. Islam also is heavily based on scholars so it works differently.
And David is a protestant form of Christian, which is scripture first and not going to church fathers. Also you say David threw every church father under bus. How many church fathers did Daniel mention and quote? I recall one, and David said he doesn't disagree with it, but he disagreed with what Daniel said he had said.
@@boliusabol822 I have read your entire comment, I hope you read my reply too. Now this comment just goes to show that you have zero knowledge of Islam, just like David. Firstly the Quran itself says in Surah Imran verse 7 that some of the Quranic verses are allegorical while other verse are very clear, and that only the perverse of heart tries to drag meaning out of the allegorical verses, whose meaning only Allah knows. David literally always attacks the unclear allegorical verses. The reason why scholars are necessary for all three abrahamic Faiths (even christianity) is because scholars understand the language used in the scripture. For example to study the bible you have to know hebrew and greek, otherwise you'll end up like David when he faced Hijab. In that debate David argued that Genesis's opening verses mention the holy spirit because its says, "and the spirit of God hovered over the face of the water." But if he had consulted any good christian or Jewish scholar he would have realised that the correct translation of the verse is, "and the breath of God swept over the water," because the word in Hebrew which he translated as spirit is Ruakh, and it's the same word for the breath of life which God inserts into adam's nostrils. So the verse was talking about Ruakh Edonai and David due to not knowing the first thing about Hebrew mistranslated it and made a totally erroneous interpretation of his own scripture. Also you said that we tell David to use hadith, but that's because hadith according to the Quran itself is crucial for interpretation. For example, Quran tells us to pray regularly, and the Hadith tells us how to pray. Quran tells us to offer zakat, and the hadith tells us the amount of Zakat we are liable to pay.
The Quran acknowledges that the Prophet has to interpret the Quran, in surah 2 verse 129, because if we leave it to the people to interpret the Quran we'll have Muslims making wrong interpretations of Quran, just as David makes wrong interpretations of the bible.
David logic #1:
The ahadith regarding the miracles which are authentically attributed to the prophet sallallahu alayhi wa sallam are false, but the narrations about him sallallahu alayhi wa sallam being suicidal which are weak and the narrations regarding the satanic verses which are weak, are totally true according to David.
David Logic #2:
When Jesus commands the clear cut extermination of a nation including babies, it doesn’t really mean that because you have to look at the context. But when the prophet sallallahu alayhi wa sallam says he sallallahu alayhi wa sallam believes in the Torah and Injeel by pointing to the copy that was brought to him sallallahu alayhi wa sallam, David takes it literally even though the prophet sallallahu alayhi wa sallam couldn’t have possibly intended it the way that David thinks because the context is clear in which the prophet sallallahu alayhi wa sallam clarifies that these books have been altered. David doesn’t want to look at the context here.
These two points are Davids major issues to deny the prophet sallallahu alayhi wa sallam but unfortunately Wood is being inconsistent in his approach.
@TheBigKahuna
Didnt Jesus called you Evil Adulterous Generation seeker of the Sign (miracles)
Wood = yes violence in the bible is horrible but it’s ok because our prophets are true and Muhammad (as) is not.
This debate was on tolerance and not on who’s prophets are true or not. He has no way of justifying the over the top violence in the bible so he changed the subject.
Islam is the fastest growing religion in the world. Billions and billions throughout history, present day and futur disagree with Wood opinion on Muhammad (as)
According to David's weird understanding the debate should be about the prophet hood of the prophet Mohammed not violence and tolerance, this was a manipulative tactic by him.
Yeah, that is the only topic they like to debate.
@@ebrimajallow33 David arguement is my god can order rape but mohmmad can't because mohmamund did not provided proofs
Daniel argument is my god can order slavery and rape and so can your god
1. This mentality of god can order rape is toxic.( Done by both Daniel and David)
2. After having that mentality mocking other god for ordering rape is Hypocrisy. (Done only by David)
That being said, I have two more points to add
1. So David MENTALITY is god can order rape if he provided proof to be god( I won't be complaining about Hypocrisy and toxicity here) through my point is when David belives that God can order rape if he proved to be god then in his videos David should say ah yes mohmmad after giving order of rape can be prophet too if he gave proof to be prophet.
While that's not what David does
David Always says well since mohmmad ordered rape that alone makes him not a prophet, so by that logic since moses ordered rape that alone makes him not a god.
The argument that David is trying to pull of Moses after ordering rape can be god if he provided proofs. So then David should have said mohmamund when ordered rape, can be prophet if he gave proof
The point is there is huge difference in staying mohmmad ordered rape that alone makes him not a prophet and saying mohmmad ordered rape and yet he can be prophet if he gave proof.
If David would have said that mohmmmad ordered rape and hence he can't be propeht so anyone will think of since moses ordered rape he can't be a god too.
Here David comes with oh moses can be because he gave "proof".
Again for that David should have said well mohmmad did ordered rape and he can be prophet too if he gave proof but he didn't said that.
In simple words
David belives that God can be one even if ordered rape but have given proof
While what he says is ah if someone orders rape they can't be godly figure.
@@SILENCEINTHESOULS I think you misunderstood something here. Daniel never said Islam allows rape/killing/genocide.
David said that's okay if God said so and provided evidence and those people still disbelieved.
On the other hand you find that Islam does not allow killing of elderly, women, children and people that are not fighting. David said Mohammed peace be upon him had no miracles and therefore can't engage in war but that's just another lie.
Manipulative tactics?
What else can we expect
AGAIN, David got Hammered 🔨
Brother Daniel jazakallahu khairan for defending the Haq!💚❤
Daniel ended the debate in his opening statement!! 😆 Bravo 👏
First he got destroyed by Mohammad hijab , then sheikh Uthman like 5-6 times , now brother Daniel destroyed this guy in a debate , Alhumdulilah for Islam and Alhumdulilah for Allah guiding us and keeping us upon the guidance
MashaAllah, I didn't sleep all night almost for this debate😃 I really enjoyed it....we are really proud of you Daniel, you did a great job, May Allah SWT protects you and gives you the highest level of Jannah.
الله پشت و پناهت باشه دانیال عزیز، خیلی دوستت داریم، افتخار مایی
Maasha Allah may Allah SWT reward you for staying up and watching this Maasha Allah it was 🔥 and I didn’t left as well 😁
Same as me.
Alhamdulillh for the beauty and blessing of Islam. Allah Akbar
I watched it live and I’m still awake. It’s 7.26am here
@@halalpolice23 Thank u sister, May Allah reward you too, Masha ALLAH it was really worth it to stay awake, I was very excited and couldn't sleep😆
Well done Daniel you successfully won this debate
It's amazing how the objections of the other faiths haven't changed over hundreds of years - we will believe in you if you show us miracles. Subhanallah. We don't have overt miracles like the others but they're enough for those with faith. And faith based just on miracles would not be a strong faith.
الله يرسل المعجزات حسب العصر حسب الناس الذين يعشون في ذلك الوقت
Is David here for defending Christianity or Modernity?
Modernity
Modernity 😂😂he is big liar
Liberalism and Secularism
Majority of Christians aren't even reading their own Bible. It's enough for them to listen to these priests and follow such 'traditions' that Jesus (AS) himself never did.
If they're just going to read it with an open heart and open mind, they'll end up becoming a Muslim just like me. I'm so grateful everyday that Allah ﷻ guided me to become a Muslim Alhamdulillah ☝️
@Figaroo: Barber of seville LOL! Slap truth isn't? That's why I'm a fake account to you.
@Figaroo: Barber of seville brainwashed? you're talking to yourself btw. Why not read your own book? instead of wasting your time here so that you'll know what I'm trying to say.
@Figaroo: Barber of seville who is Jesus (Peace be upon him) to you?
@Figaroo: Barber of seville LOL you can't even answer it right? And yet calling me a fake account and brainwashed 😂
@Figaroo: Barber of seville the irony of calling someone else brainwashed when you spend all your time in your parents basement watching fox news and emptying their bank accounts to donate all of their savings to David Woods patreon.
David Wood after the debate : Google , Why Have You Forsaken Me?"
LMFAOOOOO
That was brutal.
Lol 😆
🤣🤣🤣
wood failed easily and we'm proud of you ,A Sunni Persian from (Tehran)
I feel like my IQ has dropped substantially listening to David Wood
Subhanallah what a beautiful debate from brother Haqiqatjou. Your method of debating is on point. I love the composure and discipline you put in your debates. I pray for you and your family. May Allah reward you abundantly for your efforts. I pray for those that think, understand and form judgments logically, to be guided on the straight path. Peace and blessings to Muhammad s.a.w. and his family and peace and blessings to his ummah. May Allah protect us all from the punishment of the grave and hell fire and grant us all Jannah. Ameen. Keep up the good work brother 👍🏽👍🏽
Lmao David shows his hypocrisy. He claims that Bukhari, Muslim and other hadith books are fabrications. If thats so, then why does he use Sihah Sittah to attack Islam ? 🤣🤣🤣
Mr Wood is doing Gods work, singling out anti Muslim arguments to be dismantled making people turn to Islam. Alhamdulilah
Maasha Allah TabarakAllah Daniel so proud of you my brother Allahumabarik 👏🏾💪🏾🔥❤️😱
The debate was 🔥 and we really enjoyed ❤️
Alhamdulillh for Islam 🥰😍❤️🇸🇴🕌💪💪🦾
Man, Daniel did great Alhamdulillah ! May Allah guide David wood and all his followers to Islam!
Amiin...
David makes fun about cleaning ourselves from impurity. Bruh, does he think hygiene should be looked down at, has he learned nothing from the pandemic?
he is talking about exaggerating and in being part of every area of life
@@jayd4ever something your version jesus didn’t tell you about did he? To be clean, you don’t even wash your backside, put a UV light on your private parts u will see how dirty you guys area let alone not being circumcised with all that bacteria inside your foreskin wait till you hit old age and the infection will come in
@@jayd4ever if a dog or baby relieved themselves on your floor in your home, you would wash, not just dry wipe. If water is available and its not a hardship to get it, every muslim must wash their privates every time they use the toilet. cleanliness is next to Godliness in Islam. Why shouldn't we strive to make it in every aspect of life. Is it such a bad thing
@@jayd4ever It is a part of every day life my friend. We use the bathroom how many times. We pray till five times a day so we have to always be in a state of purity before our Lord Almighty. Since practising Islam more I have been a lot more cleaner and more aware of my urine etc.
@@youtubeaccount9289 clean is good but not you dont need for everything
"When I was an atheist......my objection was that if god existed he would wipe us out "
Even as an atheist he was an embarrassment
Now that's funny
😂😂 What would be your objection about God existing as an atheist, Armo?
Alhamdulillah 😭🥺, we are so blessed we cant even understand how blessed we are WALLHI.
1:17:35-1:19:20
👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏
So the debate was simply between a muslim and a liberal
That is it
David reminds me of cute and secular muslims who do the same thing that he does, he should be honest with himself and leave chrstianity at least.
Than who the heck will pay him on patron ... Np he will still get some because they don't pay him to spread gospels but denounce islam ....
Can't believe that Christians think David won the debate😒, like how can they think that🤔.... but then again they think christianity is true and that a man is god, and 3 become 1 god 🤦🏼♀️... i think i got why they think he won, it's cause logic flew right out their heads and delusion enter 😅
EXACTLY…nothing don’t surprise me when it comes to Christianity because they have nothing to do with JESUS peace be upon him 🤣🤣🤣🤣
I wonder what they put in those church wafers 😁
@UCAL52zdiEqMnAhzXvjDUWNQ Try watching the debate first, then come back.
Acc to them Every1 who debates against Islam is likely to win 😆
They are blindfolded by satan 🤷♀️
Thanks 👏 DW for making our Imaan Stronger than before 😇
David wood only knows how to lied about Islam and our prophet Muhammad PBUH while he has zero knowledge about his own religion and all evil acts done in the name of Christianity. Islam is perfect way of life, religion of truth and humanity. Our prophet Muhammad PBUH was great human being and sent as mercy to mankind. Long life Islam! Thank God for the blessing of Islam all praise is for Allah almighty. I am proud Muslim woman Alhamdulillh.
In some instances he realises oh my religion does preach similar if not worse things, but you can see his true religion- its liberalism. Whatever in Christianity fits his paradigm thats right everything else is false. Jesus says love everyone, hatred is wrong, treat people well and equally. Yes and that's what the prophet Muhammad taught too, but they both also bought rules. He's just fixated on one part of Christianity which also is found in islam, but he ignores the rest, bc it goes against Liberalism
Again!!!, another victory for Islam by brother Daniel.🔥🦾👍
💩
@@danhub2330 Yeah, go ahead and eat it .
@@islamismylife22 good come back 👍
God bless you brother Daniel!
May Allah reward you brother Daniel for all of your efforts
Wood: i think ..
Danial: well, here is an evidence.
And here is the number 1 problem with corrupt christian preachers.
Thank you brother. I was looking for this comment.
Daniel is an absolute lion
🦁
You spelled liar wrong.
Topic: violence and intolerance
David :miracles and strawman
The miracle of strawmanning
@SADDALA Thing is, there's no need for a debate. We look at the actions of muslims and how they're "explained".
@@greyngreyer5 so how did you find the muslim actions when you visited a muslim nation or even your local mosque
@@saddala4439 Is that an argument?
@@greyngreyer5 Am trying to understand where you hypothesis is heading.
Wow!. I feel refreshed!
Thanks Daniel!💜