The Islamic dilemma isn’t based on just a 27 book New Testament. This was your straw man. Not sure where you arbitrarily came up with that. It just rests on any prior revelation being necessarily consistent with the supposed new, since the “new” claims it’s consistent. If the prior is erroneous, then the injunction to see the continuity is worthless. Sam asks you this at 1:44:00 You literally state that the gospel is what the koran says it is and thats what christians and jews must use to judge lol. Muslims don’t follow the dietary laws and this was a huge mistake bringing this in. Dr Khalil lost at 1:48:30 when you said the koran is the standard and at 1:48:30
Exactly, and no in academia you don’t give charity. You give the evidence not the conclusive charity, you argue neutrality neither it being true or false. He needs the charity for his view to have any stance of believing the Quran.
Imagine if one of the Old Testament prophets came along and told the Israelites that their existing scriptures must conform to their new revelation, when it is their new revelation that must conform to their existing scriptures. Islam (and by extension Muslims) does not seem to be aware of, or does not care for the significance of the continuity of revelation within the Jewish-Christian tradition.
The Quran acknowledges the original revelations given to previous prophets but asserts that these have been corrupted over time. It is the final, unaltered revelation and the standard by which all previous scriptures are judged. When the Quran says to judge by the Gospel or Torah, it refers to their original, unaltered versions, not the current Bible. Muslims follow their own dietary laws prescribed in the Quran, which are distinct from Jewish kosher laws. These differences reflect the Quran’s role in abrogating or modifying earlier laws for a universal message. Claiming that Dr. Khalil "lost" by stating the Quran is the standard misunderstands Islamic theology. The Quran is meant to correct and complete previous scriptures, not depend on their current state. There’s no contradiction here-it’s central to Islamic belief.
So you literally restated the thing in question lol. You guys literally are incapable of grasping the argument and I honestly think you can’t understand a hypothetical.
As an Orthodox Christian, Dr. Khalil is my favorite Muslim philosopher, but this was a definite win for Sam. Let us pray that Dr. Khalil comes to Christ☦
Mark 15:34 And at the ninth hour Jesus cried with a loud voice, saying, Eloi, Eloi, lama sabachthani? which is, being interpreted, My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me? אלהי (elāhī) is Aramaic which translates as “My God” إِلٰهِي (ilahi) is Arabic which translates as „My God“ Ezra 5:1 Then the prophets, Haggai the prophet, and Zechariah the son of Iddo, prophesied unto the Jews that were in Judah and Jerusalem in the name of the God of Israel, even unto them. Hebrew: "בְּשֵׁם אֱלָהּ" (B'Shem Elah) "בְּשֵׁם" (B'Shem) means "in the name of“ "אֱלָהּ" (Elah). Arabic: "بِسْمِ اللهِ" (Bismillah) "بِسْمِ" (Bism) means "in the name of" "اللهِ" (Allah). Mark 12:29 “The most important one,” answered Jesus, “is this: ‘Hear, O Israel: The Lord our God, the Lord is one. Quran [112:1] Say, "He is Allah, One
Wow. I've never seen a layman pummel a renowned scholar to such a degree on every conceivable angle in his own field. Surely the Hand of God is upon Sam, working mightily through him. We just witnessed the One True God, the Holy Trinity, once again use the humble to cast down the mighty, Glory to Jesus!
“Christians and Jews can check to see the prior revelation is consistent because the Koran tells you where the previous revelation is consistent. Problem solved! No dilemma.”
Yes there is no dilemma. It's just fake news created by islamophobes. It was never an issue and never will be. Islam is beyond PERFECT. We dont have dumb ideas like trinity etc.
If the Qur'an claiming itself to be an authority over all other scriptures is sufficient enough for Muslims to be justified in their beliefs, they would have to special plead in order to reject a different book making the same claim.
@@salahmohamedmoussa3998No modern Judiasm has nothing to do with Second Temple Judiasm. Orthodox Christianity IS Second Temple Judiasm. Abraham and Moses were Trinitarians.
The real debate (the Islamic dilemma) happened between 1:48:00 and 2:19:00. Sam obliterated Dr. Andani's arguments and won the debate in that timeframe. Before that timeframe Sam and Dr. Andani were just trying to understand each other. After that timeframe, they were done debating and simply answering the superchat questions.
Dr. Khalil seems like a good man but he needs to be honest with himself, it felt like he barely listened and he answered questions like a good politician, saying a lot but not really answering lol. Sam was gracious yet firm and unrelenting, he handled this well overall. May the Holy Spirit always fill him and strengthen him to take every thought captive for the glory of The Lord Jesus Christ.
@SeraphimLeo You can never trust Muslim apologists because they have alot to lose, whether financially, familially, or their life. It's a religion of bondage where bad faith argumentation is encouraged.
I disagree with the first part. I thought Andani made a good case for contradicting or denying the dilemma. BTW I don't think that the dilemma is the best argument "against" Islam. I also thought that Sam handled himself very well but he was defending a case (the dilemma) that is not specially sound. But he got stronger as the debate went on and mostly in matters of doctrine - which are Christianity's forte - rather than a supposed logical contradiction. All in all it was a good exchange and it ended beautifully, with lots of respect and genuine good wishes. Godspeed
@@MrWhocares51 Let's face it, your boy, Sam, did not understand "internal critique" from the get-go. In other words, from Sam's perspective, Andani is dancing. But standing on planet Earth, many thought the Sun revolved around the Earth. They, however, were wrong.
@@salahudin720 What revelation did the Jews and Christian’s have at the time of Muhammad according to history??? You KNOW it is the same one Jews and Christian’s have today so why are you lying ? Why do Muslims tap dance around this issue? We all know why because that revelation condemns Islam as a false religion. This is why you have to tap dance. All Dr adani is doing is a more sophisticated academic tap dance. Smoke and mirrors. The Quran internally destroys itself because it clearly references the revelation they had AT THE TIME. That revelation is a nightmare for Islam. Saying it’s corrupted without any historical evidence of corruption and verses in the Quran that assume that at the very least the revelation they have at the time is correct doesn’t help your case.
(Reposted from Facebook) Dr. Khalil Andani, while I appreciate your inputs on the argument and attempts to refute the Islamic Dilemma, I think your arguments against the Islamic Dilemma have some flaws in them. In particular are the following: 1) You assert that when the Qur'an is confirming the Injīl, it is not confirming the fourfold Gospel or the twenty-seven book canon of the New Testament. Yet I do not find any place in the Qur'an where it is even aware of the fourfold Gospel or the NT, let alone that it is making a distinction between it and the Injīl. If there isn't any evidence that the Qur'an is aware of the distinction between the two, then that severely weakens your overall argument (IMO). 2) In your rebuttal to the use of Q 2:41 and 4:47, you state that "what is with them" does not encompass the entirety of the Scriptures which the Jews and Christians possess, but only a fraction. The problem is that the verses do not state that. In fact, we know that elsewhere in the Qur'an, Christians are required to judge by what God has revealed (Q 5:47), which can only be meaningful if Christians can identify which parts of their Scriptures are from God. But if they need an external source such as the Qur'an to identify which parts those are, then that negates the command to use the Injīl as a criterion for judgment. 3) You cite Reynolds and El-Badawi to argue that the Qur'an is consciously correcting the New Testament at various points, yet it is curious that none of the passages which Reynolds and El-Badawi cite actually state that they are directly interacting with any of the previous Scriptures, which makes it problematic to say that they are being corrected at those points, since this assumes that the Qur'an knows the form and content of the NT (see point #1 above). We know that many of these teachings were being circulated orally, so it seems more parsimonious to suggest that what the Qur'an is actually correcting are orally transmitted Jewish and Christian teachings. At no point does it impute these erroneous teachings to their sacred texts. 4) You point out that some of the early church fathers pre-Irenaeus use the word "Gospel" to refer to the message of Jesus, rather than a written text. This is correct. However I don't think this establishes your point because even if we limit the idea of "Gospel" to Jesus' message (the "red letters" as they're usually called), then you still have to contend with the fact that those red letters contain teachings which contradict the Qur'an. You may argue that not all of what is attributed to Jesus actually goes back to him, but even if I were to grant that for the sake of argument, you still have a long way to go to demonstrate that it is *only* those sayings of Jesus which agree with the Qur'an that go back to the historical Jesus. 5) You mention that some Muslims agree with premise #1 of the Islamic Dilemma, and only attack premise #2. I find this to be problematic for establishing the falsity of premise #1, since it shows that even among Muslims, it is not entirely clear that premise #1 is false. While the fact that many Muslims past and present have accepted the premise doesn't automatically prove that it is true, it does at the very least show that the Qur'an may plausibly be interpreted in the manner which the Islamic Dilemma suggests, and isn't entirely the invention of Christian polemics.
The Quran explicitly says that the injeel was a revelation revealed directly to Jesus. By this statement alone it is clear that the islamic injeel and the four gospels arent the same thing, since the four gospels arent direct revelations from God to Jesus, rather they are more like biographies of Jesus' life and preachings written down by the disciples(allegedly). The mainstream Muslim view is that the four gospels do contain parts of the original injeel that was revealed to Jesus, but much of it is corrupted aswell.
A PhD doesn't mean anything when you try to defend a lie. It only makes you incoherent and illogical. Edit- I appreciate the man's hardwork to get his PhD, thats about it.
Islamic reasoning: You grant the quran is true, then anything that disagrees with it must be false. Genius! Even this academic muslim kept trying to trojan horse this reasoning into the argument by insisting that its AN INTERNAL CRITIQUE. As if person A (christian) and person B (muslim) can't have a disagreement and person C (agnostic) can't come along and use basic logic to see that the Islamic dilemma is a death nail for Islam.
I feel pity for muslims because obtain degrees in things which are full of lies. Why should someone waste his/ her time studying something which is full lies?
Muslims don't believe in the full preservation of previous scriptures but do you know who believe fully in the old and New Testaments ? It's Christians Can you answer the Christian dilemma: 1- both new and old testament are preserved 2- new testament contradict the old testament 3- therefore Christianity and new testament is a lie Waiting for you to defend your corrupted religion
Dr Andani Does 2 wobbly things: 1) He tries to pigeonhole the argument by calling it an 'internal critique' without telling use how it is internal. Is it an internal critique because Moslems are critiquing themselves? No. Is it internal because the Quran Critiques itself? Again no. The reality is, it is not an internal Critique at all. It is an observation made by Christians that the Quran has an INTERNAL CONTRADICTION. So it is outsiders doing the critique, and in order to do so, they have to compare the Quran to something outside itself, namely the Bible. It appears that Dr Andani does this because he wants to ringfence the problem and not allow what is written in the bible, or taught by (up to the time of the Quran's publication) nearly 7 Century's of Christianity or over 2000 years of Hebrew tradition. The only evidence he is prepared to admit is that which is in the Quran itself. 2) He limits the argument to only the 'ingeel' avoiding the very problematic Torah, which has been preserved intact by two antagonistic religious persuasions, and the Torah also opposes Islamic teaching. Is it the sign of an academic that they take simple things and make the complicated? The Islamic dilemma is simple: The Quran appeals to the revelation of Christian and Hebrew tradition, and not just some nebulous theological ideas, but real words written in real books (Kitab) to claim authority for itself, and then contradicts that same revelation. The only thing Dr Andani has proven is that Muslims MUST redefine Christian belief and tell Christians (and Jews) what their revelation is in order to refute them. Does he not see how arrogant this is?
I believe he does see it. But he cannot say so. If he does, he then has to walk away from this demonic religion. There is a saying going around. Especially in RUclips/tictok sites that argue against Islam. "An honest Muslim is an ex Muslim" They cannot be honest and keep their blind faith. Why do you think they kill those that leave this "religion" in Muslim controlled nations. It is a cult and NO ONE is allowed to leave. It's sad and we should keep praying for these people. Those that should see the light and protection for those that have. A little long winded, sorry.
1. Tell me you do not understand "internal critique" without actually telling me you don't understand "internal critique". 2. Christians tell Jews that Trinity is in the Old Testament and try to redefine the OT teachings. How arrogant!
Ikr. Islam really is the "religion" of deception. Whoever the heck cobbled it together made sure to affirm past Jewish and Christian scriptures so as to give an appearance of legitimacy. They wanted to create a link to what were the dominant religions at that time so that they can proclaim that theirs is the final revelation and thus their religion should be followed.
@@Tatopotatos 1. And? 2. No it isn't! The fact that Christians claim that Trinity is in the OT, with the Jews, for the most part, refusing it being in their Scripture, is worse than the "Islamic Dilemma" charge leveled against Muslims. Christians need the OT to substantiate their beliefs but also claim that the New Covenant replaced the Old. Cl0wn world!
As smart as Dr. Khalil is, the position he takes is insurmountable because he appeals to a gospel of Jesus that nobody has. According to him and most Muslims I hear defend this position is there are remnants of it. Even then, where are those remnants? How can they even assert what the gospel is if they don't know what is was? The Quran has very little to say about the life and teachings of Jesus and it even borrows from spurious texts like the Infancy gospel of Thomas. The end result is to deny the New Testament because it contradicts the Quran which ultimately is a weak argument.
The "gospel of Jesus"/real Injeel is a deus ex machina. The Christians of the 7th century had the real Injeel and accepted it as their primary divine text, this is mentioned multiple times in the Q'n Thus, they need to claim that for the first six centuries of Christianity, Christians actually had a different book as their primary divine text -- rather than the NT. Not until Paul, but until Mo. Which essentially means that the many Christian denominations of the 7th century, across the world, then unanimously decided to burn all copies of the real Injeel, their holiest book. They have the burden of proof, but no effort to prove anything.
@@andys3035 Your bible has also very little to say about the life of Jesus. Your churchfathers use apocrypha. They reject the apocrypha. They pick and choose. We can use the same argument against you. Can you tell me about the rest of the life of Jesus? Who is the mother of Mary? Who are the parents of Paul?
@@AlonzoHarris235??? Where are Muhammad’s parents right now?😂 Lol I can ask irrelevant questions too, except they make your “prophet” look MUUUUCH worse. And the fact that even YOU know of the process of Biblical compilation makes your belief in the legitimacy of how the Quran was “given to muhamed ” (we’ll just ignore how there are supposedly “quranic” fragments predating mohamed 😂😂😂) even more ridiculous
@@AlonzoHarris235 Tell me where Jesus was born using just the Quran? Give me the names of His 12 apostles using only the Quran. How about 1 parable from the Quran? Instead, we get 1 verse about the crucifixion in 4:157 which contradicts not only the New Testament, but it doesn't even say what Jesus was to be tried and crucified for! It also contradicts what scholars say. It argues for deception as a basis to deny the crucifixion. No serious scholars would take your position that we know little about Jesus' life from the New Testament. In fact, we know a lot about life in ancient Judea for Jesus, from the Sanhedrin and Pharisees, King Herod as puppet king, Roman rulership, coinage, the Apostles way of life as fishermen and tax collectors, temple worship and selling of animals for sacrifice, geography, a discovery of Pontius Pilates name inscribed on an artifact, a recent discovery of the pool of Siloam, all corroborated by archeology. And what does the Quran do? It calls Mary the brother of Aaron, the brother of Moses!! C'mon brother Ijaz, just stop.
This muslim gentleman can be an academic of all universities combined, but all he did during the debate was using an old tedious dawah script which contains circular reasoning: " when bible agrees with Qur'an it is true, when not it's fasle"
- The Qur'an is true. - The bible is mix between true and falsehood. - The Qur'an is the criterion to judge the bible. - If the bible agrees with the Qur'an then it's true, if the bible disagree then it's false. So, where is the circular reasoning???
@@AhmedSayed-gt5xg False. The Quran is the most corrupted book in history. It's no accident that it has numerous holes and contradictions. It has scientific errors. It contains fairytales. It has plagiarism from the two dominant religions of the time, with changes made. What Islam really is, is it is a heretical version of Judaism and Christianity.
@@AhmedSayed-gt5xgaccording to the Quran, Surah 10:94, it says if in doubt to check with the Jews/Christians, Bible/Torah “ask those who read the Scripture before you.”
@@AhmedSayed-gt5xg The question is why would an all knowing, all powerful God tell people to judge this new revelation by two books that do not agree with the new revelation., That’s why it’s circular. If there was no verse telling people to check the older revelations to prove this new one there would be no problem. Its like a kid telling his babysitter that his mom and dad can said he can have candy for dinner- and when the babysitter checks with mom and dad theres just a message on the counter that says “NO CANDY FOR DINNER” then the kid gets mad and says no, that’s a corrupted message! Trust me because I’m the talking to you but you can seriously check with them and they’ll tell you! No dude, they left a message that said absolutely no candy for dinner. You didn’t know that they left that clear message.
Hahahaha. Sam couldn't even substantiate the first premise of the argument let alone the whole argument. He couldn't grasp from the beginning what internal critique means (perhaps he never heard of it). Got schooled by Khalil on multiple occasions. And here you have your average Christian spamming in the comments "Undefeated", "W Sam", "W christ" , "Christ is King" ...
@@MohammadMohammad11111 Bruv Khalil couldn’t even get the argument. Sam asked him what the epistemic criterion was to determine which parts of the Gospels are corrupt and which parts are true. What did Khalil say? The Quran-the very thing in question. That’s a circular argument. And Sam doesn’t even need the entire 27 books of the New Testament to critique him; we can take just one Gospel and show that Islam still lacks continuity with prior revelation. So, like every other Muslim, what does Khalil do? He says the Gospels are corrupt. But if the Gospels are corrupted, then there’s no way for a 7th-century Christian to know that the god of the Quran is the same God of Abraham, completely undermining his position.
@@Capxnn Sam didn’t have an argument. He couldn’t respond to any argument. He kept insisting and presupposing that the Injeel is his NT. That was his script. He couldn’t operate out of this script. That’s why he dodged to show and demonstrate that the Injeel are his 27 books. This claim is only for ignorant and uneducated people.
@@AlonzoHarris235 if the Injeel isnt the Gospel, then what is it? If it is corrupt, is allah telling me that i can check the quran is in continuity with prior revelation by confirming it with CORRUPT TEXTS? how are you guys so dumb that you cant even see you are making a hole for yourself
Easy win for Sam. I expected Khalil to come with something new or different than the typical dawah Muslims, but it wasn't anything different. When you're saying that 5:68 could be telling them to follow something like Isaiah, and they actually take that command seriously, then that means the Quran is telling them to go follow books that the Quran contradicts. Then if Khalil says that it's telling the Jews there's also corruption, then it goes back to Sam's point that this would give a reason for the Jews to reject the Quran as a false book. Who comes up to someone and says "believe in my book, it confirms your book but at the same time there's actually corruption galore in your book" and thinks that's sound?
@@AlonzoHarris235 Speaking of straw man, why did Khalil say the Islamic dilemma requires every book of the New Testament for it to be a valid argument? Sam doesn’t even claim that. Khalil made something up that was never the argument or only way of making said argument.
@@JordanX767 Exactly. From an internal critique of the Islamic paradigm, we argue the injeel is contained in its entirety within the New Testament. That doesn't imply the injeel is the New Testament or that every word in the New testament is the injeel.
@louisdeniau8571 That is what Sam's intention has always been. But it is up to you to see the light. The problem is that Muslims don't want to see the light. Neither God the Father nor God the Son Jesus Christ would force themselves upon anyone, neither do Their believers. We are to tell the good news as Sam is, by teaching God's Word, to plant the seed, per say, NOT TO MAKE YOU BELIEVE IT. That is YOUR responsibility, that is between YOU and God. Sam is very fervent and knowledgeable, and I admire that. I would love for more Christians to be that focused. Many Muslims are very focused but they're focused in the wrong god and merely in keeping his laws and any other laws that their leaders, were humans, can come up with. The whole concept is so wrong.
Sam really hammered it home around 1:52:00. The argument backfires on Khalil because his point is that the Quran enjoins Christians to follow the teachings of Jesus contained in the Gospels which align with the Quran, and the way by which we know that is modern textual critical methods- something which the Christians at the time of Muhammad did NOT have access to. So the criteria that the Christians in the 7th century would have is the exact same thing which is in question (i.e. the Quran), which only kicks the can down the road and solidifies the dilemma even more. The entire debate was him not understanding the premise behind the dilemma, which is an epistemic argument against the Quran by upholding its very standards.
@@Inquisasist15 You don’t have an argument. You sound like Jay Dyer. How does your church know what text in the OT is correct and incorrect? How did your church choose the canon? The same church that still used apocrypha for the life and teachings of Jesus without accepting all of this apocrypha. What you present as ‘dilemma’. You have the same ‘dilemma’. How would Christians know? They can use their reason to know that your bible is corrupted. You don’t have to be a Muslim to know this. Even your churchfathers affirm that your bible is corrupted. Justin Martyr accuses Trypho of corruption of the OT. He doesn’t even believe in preservation. This is the reason why Sam wants to debate this ‘dilemma’. He can’t defend his bible. He doesn’t want Muslims to bring objections against his bible. He can’t defend it. You are not going to convince anyone with your non academic claims. It’s only meant for your toxic RUclips movement.
@@Inquisasist15 The critical method is based on reason. The Christians didn’t have reason?🥴 Most people today don’t know the critical method. They can recognise inconsistency and contradictions in your bible. They can know and see many different texts, chapters and books. You don’t have to be a modern professor to know that.
@@eastsideapologetics6147 The Quran doesn’t affirm your bible. The bible is not even mentioned in the Quran. The bible doesn’t even exist. There are hundreds of bibles.
@@AlonzoHarris235 Kitab(Book) isn't mentioned in the Quran? Do you know what Bible mean?... Book. Book = Bible. Sorry bro.. Surah 5:68 Say, ˹O Prophet,˺ “O People of the BOOK! You have nothing to stand on unless you observe the Torah, the Gospel, and what has been revealed to you from your Lord.
@@AlonzoHarris235…..Injeel is a transliteration of the Greek word Evangelion “Good News” what we know as the gospel. The Gospel refers to the revelation that Jesus is the messiah the Old Testament refers and points to. The one who would atone for sins. There are 4 separate historical writings of the gospels Matthew Mark Luke and John. The New Testament contains more books and letter than just the 4 gospels. So Sam is correct, they are not identical because the NT has over 20 more books than just the Gospel. This is not a refutation, it’s just being technically correct. Hope this helps
@@AlonzoHarris235How silly for you to say Sam refused himself. Of course the injeel isn't identical to the NT.. you have to consider that the teachings of the Quran contradict the teachings of the NT. Muhammad simply got it wrong when trying to confirm his own "prophethood". Just like the Quran didn't get it right when trying to represent the Trinity. Muhammad knew some of the Bible from what he was taught but he didn't know enough to get it right. Muhammad winged it 😂
Not a Muslim , but besides Allah having parts that need to occupy a space meaning he’s not immaterial…. What is the issue with Allah having 2 right hands other than it being weird?
@@CaptainPlanet337 meaning he’s not immaterial which leads to the question “who created his parts and the space that it abides in?” Am I understanding this correctly? This is actually a big issue.
Notice how each Islamic apologists has their own personal interpretation of Koranic text and will willingly oppose authoritative figures claiming heresy because conveniently each sect of Islam thinks the other are false Muslims. It’s a religion that contorts itself with contradictions and lies.
If the Quran is true, then Islam is false. Why? Because the Quran says to trust the Gospel and the Gospel contradict the Quran. This means the Quran can't be true if it says the gospel message is also true.
@@AlonzoHarris235Nice empty assertion with no evidence and completely irrelevant to the point. Again, if the Qu’ran so much as confirms the first gospel of John, the Qu’ran by its own claims falsifies itself. Keep living in your fantasy.
Wow even academic Muslims answer is "nuh uh". Then they follow that up by saying it's a Christians responsibility to prove there was a phantom injeel. 🤣😂🤣😂 sure bro it's like asking someone to prove there isn't a second sun.
You are conflating asking someone to prove there isn't with asking someone to prove there is. The former is impossible while the latter is the foundation of scientific thinking. The professor is well within their right to ask that a preposterous claim be supported by evidence.
@jansasawi1466 🤣😂🤣😂 you're clueless about the Islamic assertion. I'm not conflating anything. Islam claims Christians had a book that aligns with Islam. Except no one has ever seen evidence of that book. Christians have in their possession copies of what they had for hundreds of years before Islam. Now Muslims claim Christians have to produce the imaginary book to prove the quran wrong.
For muslims to make up something they have never seen or had 1 manuscript page for or even evidence interally in the religious texts itself and then shift responsibility onto the opposing side because they can't bring minimal proof to their claim is intellectually dishonest at it's core. Where as Christians have bibles before, during, and after islam's origin all stating the same thing. That's consistent unlike the "phathom injeel"
@@jansasawi1466 The Quran made the claim that all previous revelations are from Allah, the INjeel, the torah, the psalms, the talmud, all of it was from allah. How is it possible for Allahs revelations(words) to be corrupted before Muhammad even arrived.
I didn't expect more from him, I don't know what he could have done better. I don't know which muslim apologist or scholar would have done a better job than him. The problem isn't Khalil Andani. The problem is the Qur'an.
@@morghe321problem is you folks think you got a good argument. I haven't seen this debate but Deen responds and John fontane destroyed this supposed dilemma
Dr. Andani may consider himself to be Muslim but Muslim scholars unanimously consider his faith (Ismailism) to be outside of the fold, every sunni and mainstream shia scholar. This is like a Muslim debating a Mormon elder where a Muslim says it was a devastating blow to Christianity
@AnswersforChrist Only for the ignorant or deceitful. It's absolutely destroyed for anyone with even a little bit of brain matter. Pretty sure Christ would want honest discourse, wouldn't he? Strawmanning Islam and acting like it's a good argument isn't honest, is it?
@@rovin9547 the funny thing is that he attaches the word pHD to stupidity (islam) and muhammad ( the pedophile bastards) and expecting to sound good. His whole argument consisted mostly islamic claims and then attached the word "academic" next to each of them and expect to have legitimacy.😀
@@rovin9547 apologists and especially Sam have to know so much to counter potential arguments its insane. He probably should have a PhD for the amount of research he has done. Doesn’t really matter though because he doesn’t need a title to win debates.
Say what you want about Sam’s manners etc, but you cannot deny he’s led by the spirit. In the hundreds of clips I’ve seen he’s never ever stumped, always knows the point they’re about to make and has an answer fully loaded with scripture and commentary. Incredible.
It can’t bc the Quran already made the argument for Christians. Muslims now have to renegotiate with their Quran while the Christians just have to read it for what it says, so Muslims are on the problematic side.
They can't refute it without radically going against what sunni and shia actually believe. The have to go deep into la-la land with esoteric, often heretical points of views in Islam. How anyone takes a sufi serious in a conversation on accuracy, is astounding
@@jonathansoko1085 Agreed. Quran: The words of allah cannot be altered. Every muslim apologist: the words of allah were altered. These are the people we are supposed to take seriously? Lol
Khalil, all due respect to him, tried to debunk Islamic Dilemma by making clear Quran verses, into unclear Quran verses; and by making this theological topic into just an academic topic. Which, actually show that the dilemma is there.
I like Dr Andani but hands down it was a clear win for my favourite Christian Apologist brother Sam.I could see the resignation on Dr Khalils face, deep down a seed of doubt is sown in his spirit & I pray he comes home to the LORD.
@@AlonzoHarris235 Dr Andani made weak arguments.Ask any neutral listener, you are BIASED.Dr Andani appealed to modern Islamic scholarship & threw the Ibn Katheer's& Qurtobis under the bus...lol and liberal Christian Scholars.We don't need to listen to a Nicolai Sinai whose scholarship & chair like other academicians are supported by petrodollars from the Gulf.And yes Dr Andani is an Ismaili whose beliefs are grounded in NeoPlatinism and not in main stream Islam & not in the Finality of prophethood of the so called Mohammed.And here's a reminder for you he calls out Sunnis in debates who Mock the Trinity but can't back up Anthropomorphism and explain it away with Bila kayf wala tasbih.Go watch how he crushed Jake the MutaPhysician( That lost soul)
Wish all Muslims were like Dr Andani, regardless of disagreements... is it a coincidence that within Islam, further away you go from Sunni mainstream (not to mention the Sunni hardliners like the Salafi) the more civil the people you usually encounter? With perhaps a couple of exceptions like Shabir Ally...
@@AlonzoHarris235 No, I don't think so. I think he makes often good arguments, but I agree he is not civilized, and I condemn it when he steps over the line. Which is very often. He is however easily comparable to dawah guys in the language, and much, much, much less bad as far as doxxing, threatening, excusing atrocities, not to mention outright participating in atrocities,up to and including physical atrocities, that dawah guys and people that directly learn from dawah guys (not to mention regular Muslim imams and preachers for centuries, but let's not get into history) actually commit.
One thing i noticed in this debate is exactly "The Islamic Dillema". Its incoherent, difficult to justify, you will go into circles, hence you need resort to muslim shuffle. Well done, Bald Brother Sam!
@@TheMuslimApologist (hadith no. 1944 in sunan ibn majah) When the Messenger of Allah died, we were preoccupied with his death, and a tame sheep came in and ate the quran. 👈🏻 Islam died by a tame sheep kid.🤣🤣
Quran confirms Bible Inspiration, preservation and authority 3:3, 10:94, 5:57, 7:157, 5:47, 3:83, 3:93, 5:68, 5:68, 3:113, 3:114, 2:89, 2:91, 2:101, 2:121, 85:22, 10:15, 18:27, 15:9. 18:27, 6:115 No one can change Allahs words If the Quran is true then the Bible is true, if the Bible is true then Islam is false If Bible is false then Quran is false 💝 We are not allowed to question Allah and Mohamed 33:36, 4:65
Wow, what a great debate. Healthy yes but more so factual from Sam’s part. Sam is clearly led by the Holy Spirit…the fire of knowledge and truth that he speaks is insane!🏆
@@AlonzoHarris235 brev jake keep asking jay to explain to him using jakes terms and complete strawman and twisting the words of what Jay was arguing. Also equivating on the term universals and power, complete bs. He also collapsed on epistemology and likeness to allah and in the end starting boiling up and crying. Not a good look for u guys this year
@@Capxnn He destroyed Jay Dyer. Jay Dyer literally affirms that there are three gods by IDENTITY. He couldn’t answer why he counts god by division and persons by identity.🫠 He uses Beau Branson as his source. He goes against what Beau Branson says when it comes to universals. Jay has no epistemology. Jake demonstrated that his ‘transcendental argument’ is incoherent. He came unprepared and got demolished.
Sam, please don’t do any more of these placid debates where you let your opponent lie without proper recourse…they’re cunning and shifty in their lies. I love it when you hammer them with your passion, intensity and truth.
Andani complaining about a lack of charitable reading was hilarious. The Muslim cries out in pain as he strikes you. We all know where they learned their heresies from.
@1:17:01 Sam pivots out of Khalil Andani's long winded and winding rabbit trail to make the larger meta-point that the Quran confirms the Scriptures (Surah 6:115). Moreover, if the Quran were clearly teaching that the Scriptures were corrupt, then there would be no difference from people who either met Muhammad or people who were taught by Muhammad's disciples. Instead, Muslims face the dilemma of 3 views of Scripture: 1) Completely corrupt 2) Partially corrupt 3) Uncorrupted/Incorruptible.
The biggest problem in the Islamic Dilemma Allahs word cannot be changed or corrupted. Allah says the Torah and Injeel were his words. Who has the power to corrupt Allah's words?
U cannot corrupt god’s word but u can put ur own words in the text and say it’s from god n considering the bible wasn’t read by any common men until the Protestants came about, that will increase the likelihood of the corrupt clerics of the church to put anything they want in the bible to get their political agendas
@abdifatahabdirahman9685 I don't think you understand scripture nor the power of God, and his providence in preserving his word in the heavens and on earth for his people. And we have the prophetic word more fully confirmed, to which you will do well to pay attention as to a lamp shining in a dark place, until the day dawns and the morning star rises in your hearts, knowing this first of all, that no prophecy of Scripture comes from someone’s own interpretation. For no prophecy was ever produced by the will of man, but men spoke from God as they were carried along by the Holy Spirit. Amen
@abdifatahabdirahman9685 There came a man who was sent from God. His name was John. He came as a witness to testify about the Light, so that through him everyone might believe. He himself was not the Light, but he came to testify about the Light. The true Light who gives light to every man was coming into the world. He was in the world, and though the world was made through Him, the world did not recognize Him. He came to His own, and His own did not receive Him. But to all who did receive Him, to those who believed in His name, He gave the right to become children of God- children born not of blood, nor of the desire or will of man, but born of God... For God so loved the world that He gave the only begotten Son, so that everyone believing in Him should not perish, but should have eternal life. For God did not send His Son into the world that He might judge the world, but that the world might be saved through Him. The one believing in Him is not judged, but the one not believing already has been judged, because he has not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God. And this is the judgement, that the Light has come into the world, and men loved the darkness rather than the Light; for their deeds were evil. For everyone practicing evil hates the Light and does not come to the Light, so that his works may not be exposed; but the one practicing the truth comes to the Light, that his works may be manifest as having been done in God. AMEN
The Muslim shuffle was strong with this one, what a load of comedic cobblers. Couple of cherries on top at the end I couldn't believe he had the audacity to attempt. Jesus didn't die for sins, and he isn't God? Utterly ridiculous, and he enjoys calling himself an academic lol.
Here's what muslims are actually saying: "The allah of islam, whose words cannot be corrupted, could not preserve his previous revelations i.e., Torah, Injeel, plus the 1000s of revelations sent to all the tribes on earth. So, he tried again a final time with the quran.... and also failed there too." Just how is that a dilemma, Christians?
I just realised the problem with this debate and why Dr Khalil ended up talking past Sam. Dr Khalil prepared for this debate ready to attack a straw man of the "Islamic Dilemma" that is formulated in this way: 1. Assume the Quran is true 2. The Quran confirms the New Testament 3. The New Testament contradicts the Quran 4. The Quran is false However, this isn't how anyone has presented the argument, much less Sam Shamoun. The first premise isn't even needed to make the Islamic Dilemma. Both Jay Dyer and Sam have made clear in their recent debates with muslims that their first premise is more: "The Quran claims continuity with the prior revelation as an argument for it's veracity" Which leads to either 2. The Quran is discontinuous with the prior revelation 3. The Quran (and by extension, Islam) is false or a reductio ad absurdum if the muslim is willing to grant that the prior revelation has been corrupted beyond recognition so that there is no archaeological evidence whatsoever of the original. So Dr Khalil either didn't understand the dilemma or attacked a strawman of it.
>>"The Quran claims continuity with the prior revelation as an argument for it's veracity" -- With prior revelations, not with the CANONs of prior communities. Revelation / canon / scripture are different concepts. And it never tells people to "confirm the Quran" using their canons. Rather, it accuses Jews/Christians of corrupting their revelations and canonizing false teachings misattributed to God.
@@KhalilAndani man give it a rest... You don't understand the dilemma... And for that reason it will Always be a dilemma... Like same said Muhammad is a false prophet
@ I don’t think your distinction there rebuts the argument, as according to most interpretations of the Quran this revelation would still need to refer to something the 7th century Christians/Jews would have access to. This then leads to the reductio ad absurdum I mentioned. Also the argument isnt about the NT or OT. Just the “Torah” and “Injeel”. Whether it tells people or not, the dilemma is based on the falsifiable claim that the Quran makes (that it confirms the revelation of Jews and Christians. ) I don’t see how you can say that based off of 3 ambiguous verses in sura 2, when there is much more explicit mention of the Quran (or Jesus) confirming the Torah or the Gospel. Why does “affirming the Torah” not mean what most would interpret by the words “affirming” or “Torah” but the ambiguous verses of sura 2 means wholesale corruption of prior scriptures, which isn’t even mentioned there. It seems question begging imo. Also iirc that passage had nothing to do with Christians, just Jews. While I have the Drs attention btw, I would like to ask what’s keeping you from becoming a Christian? Is it mostly philosophical or theological reasons or something else?
First off I want to give my respect to Andani for even accepting this debate. All Dawahgandists run from this topic and Sam, so kudos to Andani. That said my good man, you completely failed at the task. We know that according to the Quran the injeel is the message given to Jesus, we don't argue that. Jesus preached this injeel message to his disciples and followers. The Quran tells us this message was written down, Christians had it in their possession in the 7th century and we can find Muhammad in it (Surah 7:157). That leads us to a series of questions Andani failed to answer coherently. What is that message Jesus gave to his disciples and followers? Did his disciples write it down? In what 7th century book or collection of texts can we find the message in? If the answer is the New Testament, that's your dilemma.
@@AlonzoHarris235 The bacha Bumzi argument. You lot are actually still using this? 🤣 Turn your brain on. If I document everything you say and do and put it together into a book about your life. What kind of book did I write Abdoolzo?
@@AlonzoHarris235 The Bumzi argument. You lot are actually still using this? 🤣 No Jesus didn't teach his biography. His followers documented the message (injeel) Jesus taught and wrote it into a collection of books about his life. If I document everything you say and do and put it together into a book about your life. What kind of book did I write Abdoolzo?
It's obvious that the Quran was referring to the Gospels as Gospel that the Christians had at the time. It's obvious Muhammad didn't know what they actually taught when making up the Quran. But people rationalize they look for logical reasons to confirm their emotional biases.
@@Aliali-vc3pk We have Manuscripts of Muhammad's time that match our Scriptures we have today. There has only been one Gospel historically and the Christians still have it. Or can Allah's words be corrupted and changed?
No it can’t. Have you been watching. Sam gave a verse from the Quran saying God’s word cannot be corrupted. That same Quran says Muslims should reference the Bible for more understanding. That’s why Muslims believe the Bible prophesied about the coming of Mohammed. So no it is not corrupted.@@eastsideapologetics6147 no
Judging by his arguments in the slides and those that follow, there is NOTHING academic about them. this yahya look alike guy argued the same way the other muslims did which is scour for information from the internet and pick and choose the ones they can use.
Mark 15:34 And at the ninth hour Jesus cried with a loud voice, saying, Eloi, Eloi, lama sabachthani? which is, being interpreted, My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me? אלהי (elāhī) is Aramaic which translates as “My God” إِلٰهِي (ilahi) is Arabic which translates as „My God“ Ezra 5:1 Then the prophets, Haggai the prophet, and Zechariah the son of Iddo, prophesied unto the Jews that were in Judah and Jerusalem in the name of the God of Israel, even unto them. Hebrew: "בְּשֵׁם אֱלָהּ" (B'Shem Elah) "בְּשֵׁם" (B'Shem) means "in the name of“ "אֱלָהּ" (Elah). Arabic: "بِسْمِ اللهِ" (Bismillah) "بِسْمِ" (Bism) means "in the name of" "اللهِ" (Allah). Mark 12:29 “The most important one,” answered Jesus, “is this: ‘Hear, O Israel: The Lord our God, the Lord is one. Quran [112:1] Say, "He is Allah, One
Song of Solomon 5:11 His head is as the most fine gold, his locks are bushy, and black as a raven. „gold“ = keṯem -> kāṯam = to carve or engrave, to inscribe indelibly:-mark (שִׁית (šîṯ) = mark, appoint, set κάθημαι (kathemai) = sit) „raven“ = ʿōrēḇ -> ʿāraḇ = braid, weave, intermingle, surety -> arab Raven -> Hatim/Hatem Black -> Hitam = End, conclusion, completion -> Khatam Katam (sanskrit) = linen, something woven (weave) „bushy“ = taltal = a trailing bough/branch -> tālal = to pile up, elevate, eminent Song of Solomon 5:14 His hands are as gold rings set with the beryl: his belly is as bright ivory overlaid with sapphires. „hands“ -> yāḏ -> hand = qātum (-> Katam = to cover, conceal) -> yāḏâ = praise -> Muhammad „Ring“ = gālîl -> Ring = ħatem/khātam/ḵātim „Overlaid“ = ʿālap̄ = to veil, cover, wrap self, enshrouded, enwrapped -> Katam = to cover, conceal Song of Solomon 5:15 His legs are as pillars of marble, set upon sockets of fine gold: his countenance is as Lebanon, excellent as the cedars. „pillars“ = ʿammûḏ -> ʻâmad = confirm, stand, establish -> māʿŏmāḏ = standing, foothold, standing ground, firm, stable Song of Solomon 5:16 His mouth is most sweet: yea, he is altogether lovely. This is my beloved, and this is my friend, O daughters of Jerusalem. „Most sweet“ = mamtaqqîm -> māṯaq = sweet, pleasant -> qatam -> Katam (cover, conceal, hidden) -> Khatam = end, last, perfect ʻârêb = sweet, pleasant -> 'āsîp̄ = gathered -> 'āsap̄ = assemble, restore, recover, gather, together „altogether“ = kōl -> kālal = to complete, perfect -> Khatam = complete, perfect, end, finish, last „lovely“ = mahmad = beloved -> Muhammad (greatly beloved = ḥāmaḏ [Arabic حَمِدَ praise, eulogize] Quran [33:40] Muhammad is not the father of any of your men, but (he is) the Messenger of Allah, and Khātam of the Prophets: and Allah has full knowledge of all things. Daniel 7:14 He was given authority, honor, and sovereignty over all the nations of the world, so that people of every race and nation and language would obey him. His rule is eternal-it will never end. His kingdom will never be destroyed.
Sam my brother. Bringing Glory to God through the power and work of the Holy Spirit!!! All Praise to God. We serve a mighty King brother!!! Hyped for the brethren!!
As an agnostic this debate should be a good for us skeptics about the dilemma in hand... Base on the debate, they don't hold the same premises as to why it is dilemma. Which breaks down the whole point of the debate. For Dr. Rani, it is just a critic internally to the quran. He ssume that the quran is the true revelation, which he himself denied in any internal contradiction, In which Sam raised an argument which the Dr. don't affirm, but can't answer, because they don't hold the exact premise. But as a philosophical take to the question of theological question of Sam to Dr. Andani, it was actually a good question, but Dr. Andani failed to answer. So basically, Sam's argument is in the perspective of non-muslim and christian Dr. Andani's inability to provide independent evidence for the corruption of the Bible without presupposing the Quran's authority. This creates a reliance on the quran's claims, which undermines the objectivity of his argument philosophically. "Where is the original Torah or Injil that you claim the Bible is corrupted from? Without such a copy, how do you substantiate the quran’s claim of corruption?" - Sam the question of Sam This forces Dr. Andani to justify the Quran’s critique of the bible with evidence outside the quran. And yes, the circular reasoning of Dr. Andani here is very strong 🤔 Dr. Andani basically argues: The Bible is corrupted because the quran says so. The quran is true because it is divinely revealed. This reasoning is very circular, as it assumes the quran’s truth without offering external validation. Well, of course he presupposes that it is the true... Another point, by claiming the bible is corrupted, Dr. Andani shoulders the burden of proving: What the original torah and injil/gospel were. at least how and when the corruption occurred... Without such proof, the argument rests entirely on faith in the quran, which is insufficient philosophically. Dr. Andani affirming the qran’s Truth: Dr. Andani’s defense hinges on asserting that the quran is the ultimate judge of scripture. However, this requires accepting the quran’s claims as true, which defeats the purpose of an external critique. No Independent Evidence, without the original Torah or Injil, Dr. Andani cannot objectively demonstrate biblical corruption. This weakens his argument, as it appears to rely on faith-based assumptions rather than verifiable evidence. Overall, Sam did great, and Dr. Andani's ethos did not help at all. P.S. I don't have a substantial theological knowledge about the debate, but philosophically, Sam really did a great job...
If we can just admit that even their own early “scholars” are inconsistent w their own opinions let alone counterparts, this “dialogue” would go along a lot faster. This is what happens when their god and profit are inconsistent. ISLAM IS INCONSISTENT IN EVERY LITERAL ASPECT.
@@AlonzoHarris235 Allah is one person. im one person. Allah shows mercy. I show mercy. Allah has a shin. I have a shin. Allah has hands. I have hands. Who is like Allah? Me.
The Muslim gave a much better challenge than most Muslims but he still lost the debate. "If they had observed the Torah and the Gospel and that which was revealed unto them from their Lord, they would surely have been nourished from above them and from beneath their feet. Among them there are people who are moderate, but many of them are of evil conduct." (Quran 5:66, Pickthall) "Say: “O People of the Book! YE HAVE NO GROUND TO STAND UPON UNLESS YE STAND FAST BY THE Law, the GOSPEL, and all the revelation that has come to you from your Lord.” It is the revelation that cometh to thee from thy Lord…" (Quran 5:68, Yusuf Ali) If the Gospel and the Torah have been actually altered, distorted, or changed, why would Allah command people to stand fast on such Books? For people to “stand fast by the Law and the Gospel” (5:68) today, it must be available and remain pure and trustworthy. Otherwise, people will submit to scriptures that are no longer the authentic Word of God. Where is the logic for Allah to give confirmation to and endorse (alleged) corrupted texts? Each time Muslims accuse the Gospel with corruption, they end up condemning the Quran as a false guide. Allah, in the Quran (10:94), even said to ask those who read the Scriptures before for verification. Yet, the Quran contradicts the message in the Gospel. Hence, the Islamic dilemma.
@@Jamaal4Jesus You still don’t get it. Your hero Sam already conceded that that the Injeel is not your bible. Why are you still arguing for it in your ‘argument’?🥴
@@Skyrexx7 He did say that. He changed his position. In the beginning of the debate he claimed that the Injeel is the NT. When Andani asked him if the Injeel is identical to his bible. He said no.🤣
This is what happens when you associate academia with authority and knowledge too tenaciously. It can be a tool to get you there… but it often times the reliance in its authority allows people to believe and presuppose stupid things.
One of the biggest misunderstandings that Muslims have about the Gospel is that they think its the stories about and/or teachings revealed to Jesus. Jesus is the Gospel You pore over the Scriptures because you presume that by them you possess eternal life. These are the very words that testify about Me, yet you refuse to come to Me to have life. John 5:39-40
1:30:00 the Dr just admitted the Torah HAS been preserved. this just destroyed the Quran in its entity as the Genesis and Moses stories differ significantly.
Now, if this isn’t a miracle, I honestly don’t know what is. Sam, a guy who didn’t even finish high school, went head-to-head with Dr. Andani-a man who graduated from Harvard with a doctorate-and actually beat him in a debate. Think about that for a second. That’s nothing short of incredible. God is truly great, man. Glory to Christ ✝️🙌❤️
Dr Andani, well educated and knows his stuff. And i must admit this debate was a little bit confusing for even me, a postgraduate 😂 but it's very interesting I've been watching these for a minute and the islamic dilemma pops up in every Muslim vs Christmas debate and it's a hit every time. I love when religions are challenged
i love to see Khalil laying out his stall fully, ready for his assumptions of how Sam will destroy him and trying to "cover himself" but Sam does it anyway!
Dr andani is one of my favorite muslim's scholar and i like some of his approach but on this Sam did a great job i hope Dr andani becomes christian one day .
this guy isn’t a academic, or at least he isn’t practicing it coherently. His first counter was bringing up a straw man; “Where does the quran affirm the 27 books of the new testament.” bro what? that’s not the argument. further more he goes on numerous tangents about law, what previous christian’s did, and even that they shouldn’t eat un cleansed meat…bro what? stick to the topic at hand ‘Dr’. Not to mention he didn’t relay his islamic position and so when caught he would say something a long the lines of ‘I don’t have to appeal to that scholars statement about the topic’ but will also use set scholar to prove a point. BRO WHAT? honestly a hard watch for me and pretty embarrassing for then ‘academic’ tbh
Im confused though why does Andani refer to all 27 books even with just the 4 fold gospel the dilemma still holds … Sam could have conceded to even a Fourfold gospel and that is still enough to show it😭
@@Capxnn He can’t make that argument. He still has to presuppose that the Injeel refers to one of your gospels. He can’t provide evidence or an argument for that.
@@Spoken-e5p we have the original. Do u actually think uthman decided what was going to be in the quran based of his likings. Learn the story. I can tell you know nothing of the story.
Allah says trust the torah and injeel the so called schorlars says i trust another schorlar Allah words mean nothing proffessors seems to know more than Allah
1:48:40... The exact moment where Khalil lost this debate... It comes down to the same bad argument Muslims bring up that "the NT has not been preserved because the later Quran tells a different story" just presented with some PhD eloquence😅.
It seems as if all of his education just gave him endless ways to run away from a dialogue that has any sort of substance. All this just to end two steps from where we started. What a disappointment!
![Sam Shamoun BADLY STUMPS Muslim With ONE QURAN VERSE [Debate] Contradiction](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/M-vTcEGHjoI/mqdefault.jpg)
![Muslim Left SPEECHLESS After Getting Schooled on Tawheed [Debate] | Sam Shamoun](/img/1.gif)
The Islamic dilemma isn’t based on just a 27 book New Testament. This was your straw man. Not sure where you arbitrarily came up with that.
It just rests on any prior revelation being necessarily consistent with the supposed new,
since the “new” claims it’s consistent. If the prior is erroneous, then the injunction to see the continuity is worthless. Sam asks you this at 1:44:00
You literally state that the gospel is what the koran says it is and thats what christians and jews must use to judge lol.
Muslims don’t follow the dietary laws and this was a huge mistake bringing this in.
Dr Khalil lost at 1:48:30 when you said the koran is the standard and at 1:48:30
Exactly, and no in academia you don’t give charity. You give the evidence not the conclusive charity, you argue neutrality neither it being true or false. He needs the charity for his view to have any stance of believing the Quran.
Imagine if one of the Old Testament prophets came along and told the Israelites that their existing scriptures must conform to their new revelation, when it is their new revelation that must conform to their existing scriptures.
Islam (and by extension Muslims) does not seem to be aware of, or does not care for the significance of the continuity of revelation within the Jewish-Christian tradition.
Why was Mohammad supposed to ask the Jews and Christian if Mohammad in doubt about the Quran??
The Quran acknowledges the original revelations given to previous prophets but asserts that these have been corrupted over time. It is the final, unaltered revelation and the standard by which all previous scriptures are judged. When the Quran says to judge by the Gospel or Torah, it refers to their original, unaltered versions, not the current Bible.
Muslims follow their own dietary laws prescribed in the Quran, which are distinct from Jewish kosher laws. These differences reflect the Quran’s role in abrogating or modifying earlier laws for a universal message.
Claiming that Dr. Khalil "lost" by stating the Quran is the standard misunderstands Islamic theology. The Quran is meant to correct and complete previous scriptures, not depend on their current state. There’s no contradiction here-it’s central to Islamic belief.
So you literally restated the thing in question lol. You guys literally are incapable of grasping the argument and I honestly think you can’t understand a hypothetical.
A high school drop out educates a PhD; that clearly showed that the Holy Spirit is working through Sam!
because Jesus Christ lives and is Almighty, and Muhammad is dead and buried!
@@PRAEDICATORVERITATIS and shows how stupid his "academia" college is.😀
Simply the power of God. Truth can’t be refuted
@@shamounian Amen, Sam!
That’s right and Well said !! This is so good!
As an Orthodox Christian, Dr. Khalil is my favorite Muslim philosopher, but this was a definite win for Sam. Let us pray that Dr. Khalil comes to Christ☦
Mr. Yapping and Mr. Assuming Dr
Khalil Ismaili scholars confirm the Gospel. Nasir Khursaw is one of them
@@dianeangel7171 ruclips.net/user/livet4-ybU3V40g?si=qjCQSS5lvUetXD0X
@@lukegeorge2022 ruclips.net/user/livet4-ybU3V40g?si=qjCQSS5lvUetXD0X
Mark 15:34
And at the ninth hour Jesus cried with a loud voice, saying, Eloi, Eloi, lama sabachthani? which is, being interpreted, My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?
אלהי (elāhī) is Aramaic which translates as “My God”
إِلٰهِي (ilahi) is Arabic which translates as „My God“
Ezra 5:1
Then the prophets, Haggai the prophet, and Zechariah the son of Iddo, prophesied unto the Jews that were in Judah and Jerusalem in the name of the God of Israel, even unto them.
Hebrew: "בְּשֵׁם אֱלָהּ" (B'Shem Elah)
"בְּשֵׁם" (B'Shem) means "in the name of“
"אֱלָהּ" (Elah).
Arabic: "بِسْمِ اللهِ" (Bismillah)
"بِسْمِ" (Bism) means "in the name of"
"اللهِ" (Allah).
Mark 12:29
“The most important one,” answered Jesus, “is this: ‘Hear, O Israel: The Lord our God, the Lord is one.
Quran
[112:1]
Say, "He is Allah, One
Sam is clearly much more inspired than Muhammad.
your religion kills everyone who doesnt convert when it has power
Wow. I've never seen a layman pummel a renowned scholar to such a degree on every conceivable angle in his own field. Surely the Hand of God is upon Sam, working mightily through him. We just witnessed the One True God, the Holy Trinity, once again use the humble to cast down the mighty, Glory to Jesus!
sam beat his own wife
The whole story adani is basing his premise on christian prince debunked 1million times. The verse says the hide the verses with thier hands
“Christians and Jews can check to see the prior revelation is consistent because the Koran tells you where the previous revelation is consistent. Problem solved! No dilemma.”
That is a statement. WHERE IS THE PROOF.
Yes there is no dilemma. It's just fake news created by islamophobes. It was never an issue and never will be. Islam is beyond PERFECT. We dont have dumb ideas like trinity etc.
@islamickno00, can you explain the empty tomb on Sunday morning? Because Allah says Jesus wasn't crucified.
If the Qur'an claiming itself to be an authority over all other scriptures is sufficient enough for Muslims to be justified in their beliefs, they would have to special plead in order to reject a different book making the same claim.
@@hackbounties114 Who are you to tell me that Jesus Christ isn't the son . My father and God yahway called him the son at his baptizing.
The fact that Islam came 600 years after already disqualifies it.
Which is exactly why they pretend that it originally came with Adam, Moses, Abraham etc but the Jews corrupted it. It’s all they can do.
By ur logic Christianity came after judaism by 2000 years so christianity must be false
@@salahmohamedmoussa3998No modern Judiasm has nothing to do with Second Temple Judiasm. Orthodox Christianity IS Second Temple Judiasm. Abraham and Moses were Trinitarians.
@@DANtheMANofSIPA laughable
@@DANtheMANofSIPA eastern quote orthodoxy is a 10th century ofshoot of a hostile gentile religion that condwmns Torah observance to Hell
Sam doesn’t debate, he educate !
@@Ex-MuslimTestimonies
Sam is uneducated.🤣
@@SilverRaysBeauty44if that's all you gathered then you're simply not listening
@@SilverRaysBeauty44 educates people on how to expose dogs like you.
@@SilverRaysBeauty44 that how you know when u can’t take the truth, you n I both know Islam is a cult n the truth hurt
@@Ex-MuslimTestimonies
Sam can’t even read.🤣
The real debate (the Islamic dilemma) happened between 1:48:00 and 2:19:00. Sam obliterated Dr. Andani's arguments and won the debate in that timeframe. Before that timeframe Sam and Dr. Andani were just trying to understand each other. After that timeframe, they were done debating and simply answering the superchat questions.
That is because the some ol Muslim tap dance. Imagine spending 10 years to get a PHD in a arab sex cult.
ty
andani didn’t even want sam to continue reading 5:48 study quran 😂😂😂
andani knew he was cooked
Thx
saw this comment 28 seconds into the start time so i’m crossing my fingers
Dr. Khalil seems like a good man but he needs to be honest with himself, it felt like he barely listened and he answered questions like a good politician, saying a lot but not really answering lol. Sam was gracious yet firm and unrelenting, he handled this well overall. May the Holy Spirit always fill him and strengthen him to take every thought captive for the glory of The Lord Jesus Christ.
@@120Pythons Amen.
I also feel I saw the usual muslim shuffle in an academic format.
😂😂😂
@SeraphimLeo You can never trust Muslim apologists because they have alot to lose, whether financially, familially, or their life. It's a religion of bondage where bad faith argumentation is encouraged.
I disagree with the first part. I thought Andani made a good case for contradicting or denying the dilemma. BTW I don't think that the dilemma is the best argument "against" Islam. I also thought that Sam handled himself very well but he was defending a case (the dilemma) that is not specially sound. But he got stronger as the debate went on and mostly in matters of doctrine - which are Christianity's forte - rather than a supposed logical contradiction.
All in all it was a good exchange and it ended beautifully, with lots of respect and genuine good wishes. Godspeed
Andani is just dancing around the barbecue , claiming he has meat to put on the grill, but he just doesntt have it
It’s what they do
@@MrWhocares51 Let's face it, your boy, Sam, did not understand "internal critique" from the get-go. In other words, from Sam's perspective, Andani is dancing. But standing on planet Earth, many thought the Sun revolved around the Earth. They, however, were wrong.
😂😂😂 I like this
Is it halal meat😂
@@salahudin720
What revelation did the Jews and Christian’s have at the time of Muhammad according to history??? You KNOW it is the same one Jews and Christian’s have today so why are you lying ? Why do Muslims tap dance around this issue? We all know why because that revelation condemns Islam as a false religion. This is why you have to tap dance. All Dr adani is doing is a more sophisticated academic tap dance. Smoke and mirrors. The Quran internally destroys itself because it clearly references the revelation they had AT THE TIME. That revelation is a nightmare for Islam. Saying it’s corrupted without any historical evidence of corruption and verses in the Quran that assume that at the very least the revelation they have at the time is correct doesn’t help your case.
(Reposted from Facebook)
Dr. Khalil Andani, while I appreciate your inputs on the argument and attempts to refute the Islamic Dilemma, I think your arguments against the Islamic Dilemma have some flaws in them. In particular are the following:
1) You assert that when the Qur'an is confirming the Injīl, it is not confirming the fourfold Gospel or the twenty-seven book canon of the New Testament. Yet I do not find any place in the Qur'an where it is even aware of the fourfold Gospel or the NT, let alone that it is making a distinction between it and the Injīl. If there isn't any evidence that the Qur'an is aware of the distinction between the two, then that severely weakens your overall argument (IMO).
2) In your rebuttal to the use of Q 2:41 and 4:47, you state that "what is with them" does not encompass the entirety of the Scriptures which the Jews and Christians possess, but only a fraction. The problem is that the verses do not state that. In fact, we know that elsewhere in the Qur'an, Christians are required to judge by what God has revealed (Q 5:47), which can only be meaningful if Christians can identify which parts of their Scriptures are from God. But if they need an external source such as the Qur'an to identify which parts those are, then that negates the command to use the Injīl as a criterion for judgment.
3) You cite Reynolds and El-Badawi to argue that the Qur'an is consciously correcting the New Testament at various points, yet it is curious that none of the passages which Reynolds and El-Badawi cite actually state that they are directly interacting with any of the previous Scriptures, which makes it problematic to say that they are being corrected at those points, since this assumes that the Qur'an knows the form and content of the NT (see point #1 above). We know that many of these teachings were being circulated orally, so it seems more parsimonious to suggest that what the Qur'an is actually correcting are orally transmitted Jewish and Christian teachings. At no point does it impute these erroneous teachings to their sacred texts.
4) You point out that some of the early church fathers pre-Irenaeus use the word "Gospel" to refer to the message of Jesus, rather than a written text. This is correct. However I don't think this establishes your point because even if we limit the idea of "Gospel" to Jesus' message (the "red letters" as they're usually called), then you still have to contend with the fact that those red letters contain teachings which contradict the Qur'an. You may argue that not all of what is attributed to Jesus actually goes back to him, but even if I were to grant that for the sake of argument, you still have a long way to go to demonstrate that it is *only* those sayings of Jesus which agree with the Qur'an that go back to the historical Jesus.
5) You mention that some Muslims agree with premise #1 of the Islamic Dilemma, and only attack premise #2. I find this to be problematic for establishing the falsity of premise #1, since it shows that even among Muslims, it is not entirely clear that premise #1 is false. While the fact that many Muslims past and present have accepted the premise doesn't automatically prove that it is true, it does at the very least show that the Qur'an may plausibly be interpreted in the manner which the Islamic Dilemma suggests, and isn't entirely the invention of Christian polemics.
Precise 💯👌🏻
Indeed. 🧐
@@Facts13404 thanks!
Solid! These are some of the weaknesses I have noticed in Dr. Andani’s thesis as well.
The Quran explicitly says that the injeel was a revelation revealed directly to Jesus. By this statement alone it is clear that the islamic injeel and the four gospels arent the same thing, since the four gospels arent direct revelations from God to Jesus, rather they are more like biographies of Jesus' life and preachings written down by the disciples(allegedly). The mainstream Muslim view is that the four gospels do contain parts of the original injeel that was revealed to Jesus, but much of it is corrupted aswell.
Watching a RUclips apologist school a Harvard scholar was hilarious. Sam schooled him easily
Sam is gifted. The dude can go toe to toe with any PHD.
to be fair to Andani, he is defending an indefensible position, in my view at least.
Power of truth
@@lilyrose8494Indeed
Sam is a polemicist
A PhD doesn't mean anything when you try to defend a lie. It only makes you incoherent and illogical.
Edit- I appreciate the man's hardwork to get his PhD, thats about it.
💯
So true!
Islamic reasoning: You grant the quran is true, then anything that disagrees with it must be false. Genius! Even this academic muslim kept trying to trojan horse this reasoning into the argument by insisting that its AN INTERNAL CRITIQUE. As if person A (christian) and person B (muslim) can't have a disagreement and person C (agnostic) can't come along and use basic logic to see that the Islamic dilemma is a death nail for Islam.
I feel pity for muslims because obtain degrees in things which are full of lies. Why should someone waste his/ her time studying something which is full lies?
Muslims don't believe in the full preservation of previous scriptures but do you know who believe fully in the old and New Testaments ? It's Christians
Can you answer the Christian dilemma:
1- both new and old testament are preserved
2- new testament contradict the old testament
3- therefore Christianity and new testament is a lie
Waiting for you to defend your corrupted religion
Dr Andani Does 2 wobbly things:
1) He tries to pigeonhole the argument by calling it an 'internal critique' without telling use how it is internal. Is it an internal critique because Moslems are critiquing themselves? No. Is it internal because the Quran Critiques itself? Again no.
The reality is, it is not an internal Critique at all. It is an observation made by Christians that the Quran has an INTERNAL CONTRADICTION. So it is outsiders doing the critique, and in order to do so, they have to compare the Quran to something outside itself, namely the Bible. It appears that Dr Andani does this because he wants to ringfence the problem and not allow what is written in the bible, or taught by (up to the time of the Quran's publication) nearly 7 Century's of Christianity or over 2000 years of Hebrew tradition. The only evidence he is prepared to admit is that which is in the Quran itself.
2) He limits the argument to only the 'ingeel' avoiding the very problematic Torah, which has been preserved intact by two antagonistic religious persuasions, and the Torah also opposes Islamic teaching.
Is it the sign of an academic that they take simple things and make the complicated? The Islamic dilemma is simple: The Quran appeals to the revelation of Christian and Hebrew tradition, and not just some nebulous theological ideas, but real words written in real books (Kitab) to claim authority for itself, and then contradicts that same revelation.
The only thing Dr Andani has proven is that Muslims MUST redefine Christian belief and tell Christians (and Jews) what their revelation is in order to refute them. Does he not see how arrogant this is?
I believe he does see it. But he cannot say so. If he does, he then has to walk away from this demonic religion. There is a saying going around. Especially in RUclips/tictok sites that argue against Islam. "An honest Muslim is an ex Muslim"
They cannot be honest and keep their blind faith. Why do you think they kill those that leave this "religion" in Muslim controlled nations. It is a cult and NO ONE is allowed to leave. It's sad and we should keep praying for these people. Those that should see the light and protection for those that have.
A little long winded, sorry.
1. Tell me you do not understand "internal critique" without actually telling me you don't understand "internal critique".
2. Christians tell Jews that Trinity is in the Old Testament and try to redefine the OT teachings. How arrogant!
Ikr. Islam really is the "religion" of deception. Whoever the heck cobbled it together made sure to affirm past Jewish and Christian scriptures so as to give an appearance of legitimacy. They wanted to create a link to what were the dominant religions at that time so that they can proclaim that theirs is the final revelation and thus their religion should be followed.
@@Tatopotatos 1. And?
2. No it isn't! The fact that Christians claim that Trinity is in the OT, with the Jews, for the most part, refusing it being in their Scripture, is worse than the "Islamic Dilemma" charge leveled against Muslims. Christians need the OT to substantiate their beliefs but also claim that the New Covenant replaced the Old.
Cl0wn world!
@@salahudin720 How have we redefine the old testament. Yes, the trinity is in the old testament prove me wrong
Christ is still undefeated 2000 plus years later. 💪💪
Which one😅
@@Aliali-vc3pkthe only one
🙌🏽 Woohoo praise God!❤
JESUS CHRIST
@@Aliali-vc3pkReligions are a platform that can be corrupted, but Jesus's teaching doesn't change.
As smart as Dr. Khalil is, the position he takes is insurmountable because he appeals to a gospel of Jesus that nobody has. According to him and most Muslims I hear defend this position is there are remnants of it. Even then, where are those remnants? How can they even assert what the gospel is if they don't know what is was? The Quran has very little to say about the life and teachings of Jesus and it even borrows from spurious texts like the Infancy gospel of Thomas. The end result is to deny the New Testament because it contradicts the Quran which ultimately is a weak argument.
The "gospel of Jesus"/real Injeel is a deus ex machina.
The Christians of the 7th century had the real Injeel and accepted it as their primary divine text, this is mentioned multiple times in the Q'n
Thus, they need to claim that for the first six centuries of Christianity, Christians actually had a different book as their primary divine text -- rather than the NT. Not until Paul, but until Mo.
Which essentially means that the many Christian denominations of the 7th century, across the world, then unanimously decided to burn all copies of the real Injeel, their holiest book.
They have the burden of proof, but no effort to prove anything.
@@andys3035
Your bible has also very little to say about the life of Jesus.
Your churchfathers use apocrypha. They reject the apocrypha. They pick and choose.
We can use the same argument against you.
Can you tell me about the rest of the life of Jesus? Who is the mother of Mary?
Who are the parents of Paul?
@@AlonzoHarris235??? Where are Muhammad’s parents right now?😂
Lol I can ask irrelevant questions too, except they make your “prophet” look MUUUUCH worse.
And the fact that even YOU know of the process of Biblical compilation makes your belief in the legitimacy of how the Quran was “given to muhamed ” (we’ll just ignore how there are supposedly “quranic” fragments predating mohamed 😂😂😂) even more ridiculous
Ok now I understand, so where does it say the new testament is different...@rexsceleratorum1632
@@AlonzoHarris235 Tell me where Jesus was born using just the Quran? Give me the names of His 12 apostles using only the Quran. How about 1 parable from the Quran? Instead, we get 1 verse about the crucifixion in 4:157 which contradicts not only the New Testament, but it doesn't even say what Jesus was to be tried and crucified for! It also contradicts what scholars say. It argues for deception as a basis to deny the crucifixion. No serious scholars would take your position that we know little about Jesus' life from the New Testament. In fact, we know a lot about life in ancient Judea for Jesus, from the Sanhedrin and Pharisees, King Herod as puppet king, Roman rulership, coinage, the Apostles way of life as fishermen and tax collectors, temple worship and selling of animals for sacrifice, geography, a discovery of Pontius Pilates name inscribed on an artifact, a recent discovery of the pool of Siloam, all corroborated by archeology. And what does the Quran do? It calls Mary the brother of Aaron, the brother of Moses!! C'mon brother Ijaz, just stop.
This muslim gentleman can be an academic of all universities combined, but all he did during the debate was using an old tedious dawah script which contains circular reasoning: " when bible agrees with Qur'an it is true, when not it's fasle"
That is not circular because the Quran is proven to be true and authentic. So it can be used to determine parts that are true and false in the Bible.
- The Qur'an is true.
- The bible is mix between true and falsehood.
- The Qur'an is the criterion to judge the bible.
- If the bible agrees with the Qur'an then it's true, if the bible disagree then it's false.
So, where is the circular reasoning???
@@AhmedSayed-gt5xg False. The Quran is the most corrupted book in history. It's no accident that it has numerous holes and contradictions. It has scientific errors. It contains fairytales. It has plagiarism from the two dominant religions of the time, with changes made. What Islam really is, is it is a heretical version of Judaism and Christianity.
@@AhmedSayed-gt5xgaccording to the Quran, Surah 10:94, it says if in doubt to check with the Jews/Christians, Bible/Torah “ask those who read the Scripture before you.”
@@AhmedSayed-gt5xg
The question is why would an all knowing, all powerful God tell people to judge this new revelation by two books that do not agree with the new revelation.,
That’s why it’s circular. If there was no verse telling people to check the older revelations to prove this new one there would be no problem.
Its like a kid telling his babysitter that his mom and dad can said he can have candy for dinner- and when the babysitter checks with mom and dad theres just a message on the counter that says “NO CANDY FOR DINNER” then the kid gets mad and says no, that’s a corrupted message! Trust me because I’m the talking to you but you can seriously check with them and they’ll tell you!
No dude, they left a message that said absolutely no candy for dinner. You didn’t know that they left that clear message.
Islamic dilemma still undefeated #WhatsTheInjeel ☦
Hahahaha. Sam couldn't even substantiate the first premise of the argument let alone the whole argument. He couldn't grasp from the beginning what internal critique means (perhaps he never heard of it). Got schooled by Khalil on multiple occasions. And here you have your average Christian spamming in the comments "Undefeated", "W Sam", "W christ" , "Christ is King" ...
@@MohammadMohammad11111 Bruv Khalil couldn’t even get the argument. Sam asked him what the epistemic criterion was to determine which parts of the Gospels are corrupt and which parts are true. What did Khalil say? The Quran-the very thing in question. That’s a circular argument. And Sam doesn’t even need the entire 27 books of the New Testament to critique him; we can take just one Gospel and show that Islam still lacks continuity with prior revelation. So, like every other Muslim, what does Khalil do? He says the Gospels are corrupt. But if the Gospels are corrupted, then there’s no way for a 7th-century Christian to know that the god of the Quran is the same God of Abraham, completely undermining his position.
@@Capxnn
Sam didn’t have an argument.
He couldn’t respond to any argument.
He kept insisting and presupposing that the Injeel is his NT.
That was his script. He couldn’t operate out of this script.
That’s why he dodged to show and demonstrate that the Injeel are his 27 books.
This claim is only for ignorant and uneducated people.
@@AlonzoHarris235Muslim take another L in debates this year 😂
@@AlonzoHarris235 if the Injeel isnt the Gospel, then what is it? If it is corrupt, is allah telling me that i can check the quran is in continuity with prior revelation by confirming it with CORRUPT TEXTS? how are you guys so dumb that you cant even see you are making a hole for yourself
Thank you Sam for defending the truth.
Easy win for Sam. I expected Khalil to come with something new or different than the typical dawah Muslims, but it wasn't anything different. When you're saying that 5:68 could be telling them to follow something like Isaiah, and they actually take that command seriously, then that means the Quran is telling them to go follow books that the Quran contradicts. Then if Khalil says that it's telling the Jews there's also corruption, then it goes back to Sam's point that this would give a reason for the Jews to reject the Quran as a false book. Who comes up to someone and says "believe in my book, it confirms your book but at the same time there's actually corruption galore in your book" and thinks that's sound?
@@y3iy334y3
You didn’t watch the debate.
Your comment is a strawman.
Nobody made this argument.
Easy Sam W
@@AlonzoHarris235 Speaking of straw man, why did Khalil say the Islamic dilemma requires every book of the New Testament for it to be a valid argument? Sam doesn’t even claim that. Khalil made something up that was never the argument or only way of making said argument.
@@AlonzoHarris235oh stone kisser in the house tough on a comment sections but too afraid to debate 😂
@@JordanX767 Exactly. From an internal critique of the Islamic paradigm, we argue the injeel is contained in its entirety within the New Testament. That doesn't imply the injeel is the New Testament or that every word in the New testament is the injeel.
God bless Sam! The light of Christ shines brighter than any darkness, Jesus always prevails.
prove your religion
@@louisdeniau8571 what’s the point. None of you listen.
@@1974Muzak Your response was so simple it was funny 😂
Why waste time 😂
@@FedetkBecause that's what you're supposed to do? Isn't the whole point to sPreAd tHe gOoD nEwS?
@louisdeniau8571
That is what Sam's intention has always been. But it is up to you to see the light. The problem is that Muslims don't want to see the light.
Neither God the Father nor God the Son Jesus Christ would force themselves upon anyone, neither do Their believers. We are to tell the good news as Sam is, by teaching God's Word, to plant the seed, per say, NOT TO MAKE YOU BELIEVE IT. That is YOUR responsibility, that is between YOU and God.
Sam is very fervent and knowledgeable, and I admire that. I would love for more Christians to be that focused. Many Muslims are very focused but they're focused in the wrong god and merely in keeping his laws and any other laws that their leaders, were humans, can come up with. The whole concept is so wrong.
Sam really hammered it home around 1:52:00. The argument backfires on Khalil because his point is that the Quran enjoins Christians to follow the teachings of Jesus contained in the Gospels which align with the Quran, and the way by which we know that is modern textual critical methods- something which the Christians at the time of Muhammad did NOT have access to. So the criteria that the Christians in the 7th century would have is the exact same thing which is in question (i.e. the Quran), which only kicks the can down the road and solidifies the dilemma even more. The entire debate was him not understanding the premise behind the dilemma, which is an epistemic argument against the Quran by upholding its very standards.
@@Inquisasist15
You don’t have an argument.
You sound like Jay Dyer.
How does your church know what text in the OT is correct and incorrect?
How did your church choose the canon?
The same church that still used apocrypha for the life and teachings of Jesus without accepting all of this apocrypha.
What you present as ‘dilemma’.
You have the same ‘dilemma’.
How would Christians know?
They can use their reason to know that your bible is corrupted.
You don’t have to be a Muslim to know this.
Even your churchfathers affirm that your bible is corrupted.
Justin Martyr accuses Trypho of corruption of the OT. He doesn’t even believe in preservation.
This is the reason why Sam wants to debate this ‘dilemma’. He can’t defend his bible. He doesn’t want Muslims to bring objections against his bible. He can’t defend it.
You are not going to convince anyone with your non academic claims.
It’s only meant for your toxic RUclips movement.
@@Inquisasist15
The critical method is based on reason.
The Christians didn’t have reason?🥴
Most people today don’t know the critical method. They can recognise inconsistency and contradictions in your bible. They can know and see many different texts, chapters and books. You don’t have to be a modern professor to know that.
@@AlonzoHarris235 So the Quran affirms a book with contradictions in it?
@@eastsideapologetics6147
The Quran doesn’t affirm your bible.
The bible is not even mentioned in the Quran.
The bible doesn’t even exist. There are hundreds of bibles.
@@AlonzoHarris235 Kitab(Book) isn't mentioned in the Quran?
Do you know what Bible mean?... Book.
Book = Bible. Sorry bro..
Surah 5:68
Say, ˹O Prophet,˺ “O People of the BOOK! You have nothing to stand on unless you observe the Torah, the Gospel, and what has been revealed to you from your Lord.
A PhD scholar gets absolutely cooked by Sam with the power of the Holy Spirit.
The fact that Sam didn't even finish high school is a testimony of how The Lord gives His servants true wisdom
@@BananaYT
Sam refuted himself. He admitted that the Injeel is not identical to his NT.
@@AlonzoHarris235…..Injeel is a transliteration of the Greek word Evangelion “Good News” what we know as the gospel.
The Gospel refers to the revelation that Jesus is the messiah the Old Testament refers and points to. The one who would atone for sins.
There are 4 separate historical writings of the gospels Matthew Mark Luke and John.
The New Testament contains more books and letter than just the 4 gospels.
So Sam is correct, they are not identical because the NT has over 20 more books than just the Gospel. This is not a refutation, it’s just being technically correct.
Hope this helps
@@AlonzoHarris235How silly for you to say Sam refused himself. Of course the injeel isn't identical to the NT.. you have to consider that the teachings of the Quran contradict the teachings of the NT. Muhammad simply got it wrong when trying to confirm his own "prophethood". Just like the Quran didn't get it right when trying to represent the Trinity. Muhammad knew some of the Bible from what he was taught but he didn't know enough to get it right. Muhammad winged it 😂
@@AlonzoHarris235
Because u dummy don't even know the difference between gospel and new testament.
Alonzo Harris believes Allah has 2 right hands
Not a Muslim , but besides Allah having parts that need to occupy a space meaning he’s not immaterial….
What is the issue with Allah having 2 right hands other than it being weird?
@@CustomGamesStudios It simply means that islamic god is a physical being having body parts and muslims refuse to accept this point.
@@CaptainPlanet337 meaning he’s not immaterial which leads to the question “who created his parts and the space that it abides in?”
Am I understanding this correctly? This is actually a big issue.
@@CustomGamesStudios Yes not only hands, islamic sources say that he has a chin and leg.
@ I heard he has gonads too. Nutz
Notice how each Islamic apologists has their own personal interpretation of Koranic text and will willingly oppose authoritative figures claiming heresy because conveniently each sect of Islam thinks the other are false Muslims. It’s a religion that contorts itself with contradictions and lies.
You mean people contort themselves, Islam does not and has no lies anyone can prove in it.
You have to jave some knowledge of Islam to deal with Muslims, otherwise they will lie to you about the Islam.
@@nunya54does the sun set in a muddy poll
and Christianity doesn't right? ahaha keep coping whilst your priests and pastors leave for Islam as well as atheists hindus and other non muslims
If the Quran is true, then Islam is false. Why? Because the Quran says to trust the Gospel and the Gospel contradict the Quran. This means the Quran can't be true if it says the gospel message is also true.
The gospel is not the NT.
Hassamo Shamoun failed to prove that.🤣
Nope. It says that theyve been corrupted by men.
@@AlonzoHarris235 If all the Injeel was was the first chapter of the Gospel of John, The Qu’ran is rendered incoherent and falsifies itself.
@@JordanX767
The prologue is written by gnostics.
@@AlonzoHarris235Nice empty assertion with no evidence and completely irrelevant to the point. Again, if the Qu’ran so much as confirms the first gospel of John, the Qu’ran by its own claims falsifies itself. Keep living in your fantasy.
Wow even academic Muslims answer is "nuh uh". Then they follow that up by saying it's a Christians responsibility to prove there was a phantom injeel. 🤣😂🤣😂 sure bro it's like asking someone to prove there isn't a second sun.
You are conflating asking someone to prove there isn't with asking someone to prove there is. The former is impossible while the latter is the foundation of scientific thinking. The professor is well within their right to ask that a preposterous claim be supported by evidence.
@jansasawi1466 🤣😂🤣😂 you're clueless about the Islamic assertion. I'm not conflating anything. Islam claims Christians had a book that aligns with Islam. Except no one has ever seen evidence of that book. Christians have in their possession copies of what they had for hundreds of years before Islam. Now Muslims claim Christians have to produce the imaginary book to prove the quran wrong.
For muslims to make up something they have never seen or had 1 manuscript page for or even evidence interally in the religious texts itself and then shift responsibility onto the opposing side because they can't bring minimal proof to their claim is intellectually dishonest at it's core. Where as Christians have bibles before, during, and after islam's origin all stating the same thing. That's consistent unlike the "phathom injeel"
@@jansasawi1466the Quran is making claims about the past multiple times . The burden of prove is on them
@@jansasawi1466 The Quran made the claim that all previous revelations are from Allah, the INjeel, the torah, the psalms, the talmud, all of it was from allah. How is it possible for Allahs revelations(words) to be corrupted before Muhammad even arrived.
The muslim was running and running making the conversation impossible.
Very true, without Lies Islam dies for sure.....
Sam dominated Khalil. I really did expect more from a scholar........ this was bad for Islam.
I didn't expect more from him, I don't know what he could have done better. I don't know which muslim apologist or scholar would have done a better job than him. The problem isn't Khalil Andani. The problem is the Qur'an.
@@morghe321problem is you folks think you got a good argument. I haven't seen this debate but Deen responds and John fontane destroyed this supposed dilemma
Dr. Andani may consider himself to be Muslim but Muslim scholars unanimously consider his faith (Ismailism) to be outside of the fold, every sunni and mainstream shia scholar. This is like a Muslim debating a Mormon elder where a Muslim says it was a devastating blow to Christianity
@@sub7se7enthey didn’t destroy it, it’s still in operation.
@AnswersforChrist Only for the ignorant or deceitful. It's absolutely destroyed for anyone with even a little bit of brain matter. Pretty sure Christ would want honest discourse, wouldn't he? Strawmanning Islam and acting like it's a good argument isn't honest, is it?
Crazy. Sam’s an apologist yet he decimated a scholar / PhD academic.
@@rovin9547 the funny thing is that he attaches the word pHD to stupidity (islam) and muhammad ( the pedophile bastards) and expecting to sound good.
His whole argument consisted mostly islamic claims and then attached the word "academic" next to each of them and expect to have legitimacy.😀
@@rovin9547 apologists and especially Sam have to know so much to counter potential arguments its insane. He probably should have a PhD for the amount of research he has done. Doesn’t really matter though because he doesn’t need a title to win debates.
Your greatest scholar of the century, Sam, got absoultely humiliated again.
@@log_17...immediately consult the psychiatrist...hurry up it's already late..
@@praveenisrael2798 If u don't honestly think Sam didn't get absolutely humiliated, you should have ur brain examined. My prayers!
To be honest this wasn't much of a debate Sam basically dismantled this gentleman
This was bad for Islam.
Sam doing the lords work !!
not really
You would think so but no matter what happens, it just causes the adherents of Islam to grow.
@@Black_X_Blade “a yu huh” lol 😂
@angelsjourney18 💀👍
Capitalize that L
The best COOKING channel on RUclips…😊
Momo and AL-Lah shish kebab 😂
Imagine Sam was cooked on his fans' chanel.
😂👍
why are you swallowing that hard
Say what you want about Sam’s manners etc, but you cannot deny he’s led by the spirit. In the hundreds of clips I’ve seen he’s never ever stumped, always knows the point they’re about to make and has an answer fully loaded with scripture and commentary. Incredible.
Sam with the easy W. I don't think this argument will ever be refuted
It can’t bc the Quran already made the argument for Christians. Muslims now have to renegotiate with their Quran while the Christians just have to read it for what it says, so Muslims are on the problematic side.
They can't refute it without radically going against what sunni and shia actually believe. The have to go deep into la-la land with esoteric, often heretical points of views in Islam. How anyone takes a sufi serious in a conversation on accuracy, is astounding
@@jonathansoko1085 Agreed. Quran: The words of allah cannot be altered. Every muslim apologist: the words of allah were altered. These are the people we are supposed to take seriously? Lol
How has he won
@@AbdirahimLMK Did you watch it?
Common Sam Shamoun W
Khalil, all due respect to him, tried to debunk Islamic Dilemma by making clear Quran verses, into unclear Quran verses; and by making this theological topic into just an academic topic. Which, actually show that the dilemma is there.
Period
Once again, Sam cooks🤫🧏🏾♂️
Always
This Khalil guy did not understand what the dilemma was throughout the whole debate. 😑
exactly
@@zhivkok.8336
What is the so called dilemma?🤣🥴
Sam didn’t even understand his own ‘argument’.
@@AlonzoHarris235
You don't know either, because if you actually understood the dilemma you wouldn't be Muslim.
@@AlonzoHarris235 take a rest, I'm beginning to pity you. Poor abdool, getting owned left, right and center.
@@AlonzoHarris235☪️ancer
Dr. Khalil is very good... In evading the questions...
I like Dr Andani but hands down it was a clear win for my favourite Christian Apologist brother Sam.I could see the resignation on Dr Khalils face, deep down a seed of doubt is sown in his spirit & I pray he comes home to the LORD.
@@julietabraham476
Sam can’t even follow an argument.
He didn’t have any response to the opening of Andani.
@@AlonzoHarris235 Dr Andani made weak arguments.Ask any neutral listener, you are BIASED.
@@AlonzoHarris235 Dr Andani made weak arguments.Ask any neutral listener, you are BIASED.Dr Andani appealed to modern Islamic scholarship & threw the Ibn Katheer's& Qurtobis under the bus...lol and liberal Christian Scholars.We don't need to listen to a Nicolai Sinai whose scholarship & chair like other academicians are supported by petrodollars from the Gulf.And yes Dr Andani is an Ismaili whose beliefs are grounded in NeoPlatinism and not in main stream Islam & not in the Finality of prophethood of the so called Mohammed.And here's a reminder for you he calls out Sunnis in debates who Mock the Trinity but can't back up Anthropomorphism and explain it away with Bila kayf wala tasbih.Go watch how he crushed Jake the MutaPhysician( That lost soul)
@AlonzoHarris235You can lie all you want
Wish all Muslims were like Dr Andani, regardless of disagreements... is it a coincidence that within Islam, further away you go from Sunni mainstream (not to mention the Sunni hardliners like the Salafi) the more civil the people you usually encounter? With perhaps a couple of exceptions like Shabir Ally...
More polite but just as insolent.
ruclips.net/user/livet4-ybU3V40g?si=qjCQSS5lvUetXD0X
@@nonomnismoriar9051
Sam is civilised?🤥
@@AlonzoHarris235 No, I don't think so. I think he makes often good arguments, but I agree he is not civilized, and I condemn it when he steps over the line. Which is very often. He is however easily comparable to dawah guys in the language, and much, much, much less bad as far as doxxing, threatening, excusing atrocities, not to mention outright participating in atrocities,up to and including physical atrocities, that dawah guys and people that directly learn from dawah guys (not to mention regular Muslim imams and preachers for centuries, but let's not get into history) actually commit.
I wished all Christians were like Dr. James white or Prophet Jesus peace be upon him. The world would be better.
Sam needs to write and sell a book. He is too good at this topic.
Khalil, we love you, but you played rhetoric tricks instead of addressing points.
you are lying when you say that jesus is god
Just like Shabir Ally 😂
@@louisdeniau8571 ahh I love the new dawah script
That's what they all do. After all they serve "the best deciever" so always be wary of deceit.
@@louisdeniau8571this is one of the most clearly stated things in the Bible. You literally have to be intellectually dishonest to say otherwise.
THE QURAN CONFIRMS THE QURAN BY QOUTING THE PASSAGES IN THE QURAN. ASTAGHFIRULLAH.
That’s what Protestants do with the Bible
And it also fails to do that correctly🤣
*mashallah
@@Capxnn
The trinity is three gods.
@@AlonzoHarris235Muhammad was a pedophile
One thing i noticed in this debate is exactly "The Islamic Dillema". Its incoherent, difficult to justify, you will go into circles, hence you need resort to muslim shuffle. Well done, Bald Brother Sam!
Without LIES Islam DIES
#whatstheInjeel
Even with LIES, Christiany DIES
@@TheMuslimApologist cry more
@@TheMuslimApologist Seethe and cope
@@TheMuslimApologist what. Is. The.
INJEEL? 🎉🎉🎉😂😂😂
@@TheMuslimApologist
(hadith no. 1944 in sunan ibn majah)
When the Messenger of Allah died, we were preoccupied with his death, and a tame sheep came in and ate the quran. 👈🏻 Islam died by a tame sheep kid.🤣🤣
sam "youtube apologist" cooked PHD man
Sam has a major advantage guys Christ is truth. Islam is a lie.
Amen!
Sam knocked down the first wall 🧱 💥 😂. Took his doctorate and is now DR. SHOUMOUN
Sam is a beast, it's easy to listen to him. The PHD should have allowed the conversation to progress/ flow easier. Thank you
"Doctor" "islamic scholar" "mohammed" lol
Quran confirms Bible Inspiration, preservation and authority 3:3, 10:94, 5:57, 7:157, 5:47, 3:83, 3:93, 5:68, 5:68, 3:113, 3:114, 2:89, 2:91, 2:101, 2:121, 85:22, 10:15, 18:27, 15:9. 18:27, 6:115 No one can change Allahs words If the Quran is true then the Bible is true, if the Bible is true then Islam is false If Bible is false then Quran is false 💝 We are not allowed to question Allah and Mohamed 33:36, 4:65
Wow, what a great debate. Healthy yes but more so factual from Sam’s part. Sam is clearly led by the Holy Spirit…the fire of knowledge and truth that he speaks is insane!🏆
Now we need a debate between Jay Dyer & Dr. Khalil Andani
😂 please!
@@Capxnn j
Jay Dyer got cooked by Jake.
He affirmed that the trinity is three gods by identity.🤣
@@AlonzoHarris235Jay Dyer would probably lose to Dr Khalil. Sam is a much better debater.
@@AlonzoHarris235 brev jake keep asking jay to explain to him using jakes terms and complete strawman and twisting the words of what Jay was arguing. Also equivating on the term universals and power, complete bs. He also collapsed on epistemology and likeness to allah and in the end starting boiling up and crying. Not a good look for u guys this year
@@Capxnn
He destroyed Jay Dyer.
Jay Dyer literally affirms that there are three gods by IDENTITY.
He couldn’t answer why he counts god by division and persons by identity.🫠
He uses Beau Branson as his source. He goes against what Beau Branson says when it comes to universals.
Jay has no epistemology.
Jake demonstrated that his ‘transcendental argument’ is incoherent.
He came unprepared and got demolished.
Sam, please don’t do any more of these placid debates where you let your opponent lie without proper recourse…they’re cunning and shifty in their lies. I love it when you hammer them with your passion, intensity and truth.
Sam was only polite here because he respects Dr.Khalil
This was a formal debate. There are rules and decorum to adhere to.
@ you had to stick your nose in didn’t you?
I prefer debates where the focus is on facts, not insults and anger.
Andani complaining about a lack of charitable reading was hilarious. The Muslim cries out in pain as he strikes you. We all know where they learned their heresies from.
@1:17:01 Sam pivots out of Khalil Andani's long winded and winding rabbit trail to make the larger meta-point that the Quran confirms the Scriptures (Surah 6:115). Moreover, if the Quran were clearly teaching that the Scriptures were corrupt, then there would be no difference from people who either met Muhammad or people who were taught by Muhammad's disciples. Instead, Muslims face the dilemma of 3 views of Scripture: 1) Completely corrupt 2) Partially corrupt 3) Uncorrupted/Incorruptible.
The biggest problem in the Islamic Dilemma
Allahs word cannot be changed or corrupted.
Allah says the Torah and Injeel were his words.
Who has the power to corrupt Allah's words?
Thank you for putting it so plainly. So telling there is no comments on this 😂
U cannot corrupt god’s word but u can put ur own words in the text and say it’s from god n considering the bible wasn’t read by any common men until the Protestants came about, that will increase the likelihood of the corrupt clerics of the church to put anything they want in the bible to get their political agendas
@abdifatahabdirahman9685 I don't think you understand scripture nor the power of God, and his providence in preserving his word in the heavens and on earth for his people.
And we have the prophetic word more fully confirmed, to which you will do well to pay attention as to a lamp shining in a dark place, until the day dawns and the morning star rises in your hearts, knowing this first of all, that no prophecy of Scripture comes from someone’s own interpretation. For no prophecy was ever produced by the will of man, but men spoke from God as they were carried along by the Holy Spirit.
Amen
@@Michael-ji5ns Christianity is not supposed to be world religion just like Jesus said he was sent to guide lost children of Judah . On Mathew 15:24
@abdifatahabdirahman9685
There came a man who was sent from God. His name was John. He came as a witness to testify about the Light, so that through him everyone might believe. He himself was not the Light, but he came to testify about the Light.
The true Light who gives light to every man was coming into the world. He was in the world, and though the world was made through Him, the world did not recognize Him. He came to His own, and His own did not receive Him. But to all who did receive Him, to those who believed in His name, He gave the right to become children of God- children born not of blood, nor of the desire or will of man, but born of God...
For God so loved the world that He gave the only begotten Son, so that everyone believing in Him should not perish, but should have eternal life. For God did not send His Son into the world that He might judge the world, but that the world might be saved through Him. The one believing in Him is not judged, but the one not believing already has been judged, because he has not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.
And this is the judgement, that the Light has come into the world, and men loved the darkness rather than the Light; for their deeds were evil. For everyone practicing evil hates the Light and does not come to the Light, so that his works may not be exposed; but the one practicing the truth comes to the Light, that his works may be manifest as having been done in God.
AMEN
The Muslim shuffle was strong with this one, what a load of comedic cobblers. Couple of cherries on top at the end I couldn't believe he had the audacity to attempt. Jesus didn't die for sins, and he isn't God?
Utterly ridiculous, and he enjoys calling himself an academic lol.
I would have asked why the empty tomb on Sunday morning?
Here's what muslims are actually saying: "The allah of islam, whose words cannot be corrupted, could not preserve his previous revelations i.e., Torah, Injeel, plus the 1000s of revelations sent to all the tribes on earth. So, he tried again a final time with the quran.... and also failed there too."
Just how is that a dilemma, Christians?
Calling it a dilemma is an understatement you're so right allah is truly the most useless and powerless being to never exist....
Sam just out here collecting heads!
I’m not buying the 3 layers of defense argument from Dr. Khalil. It’s just a way out from accepting evidence.
I just realised the problem with this debate and why Dr Khalil ended up talking past Sam. Dr Khalil prepared for this debate ready to attack a straw man of the "Islamic Dilemma" that is formulated in this way:
1. Assume the Quran is true
2. The Quran confirms the New Testament
3. The New Testament contradicts the Quran
4. The Quran is false
However, this isn't how anyone has presented the argument, much less Sam Shamoun. The first premise isn't even needed to make the Islamic Dilemma. Both Jay Dyer and Sam have made clear in their recent debates with muslims that their first premise is more:
"The Quran claims continuity with the prior revelation as an argument for it's veracity"
Which leads to either
2. The Quran is discontinuous with the prior revelation
3. The Quran (and by extension, Islam) is false
or a reductio ad absurdum if the muslim is willing to grant that the prior revelation has been corrupted beyond recognition so that there is no archaeological evidence whatsoever of the original. So Dr Khalil either didn't understand the dilemma or attacked a strawman of it.
All Muslim don't understand the dilemma and yet the claim the book is the finale revelation..
>>"The Quran claims continuity with the prior revelation as an argument for it's veracity"
-- With prior revelations, not with the CANONs of prior communities. Revelation / canon / scripture are different concepts. And it never tells people to "confirm the Quran" using their canons. Rather, it accuses Jews/Christians of corrupting their revelations and canonizing false teachings misattributed to God.
@@KhalilAndani man give it a rest... You don't understand the dilemma... And for that reason it will Always be a dilemma...
Like same said Muhammad is a false prophet
@ I don’t think your distinction there rebuts the argument, as according to most interpretations of the Quran this revelation would still need to refer to something the 7th century Christians/Jews would have access to. This then leads to the reductio ad absurdum I mentioned. Also the argument isnt about the NT or OT. Just the “Torah” and “Injeel”. Whether it tells people or not, the dilemma is based on the falsifiable claim that the Quran makes (that it confirms the revelation of Jews and Christians. ) I don’t see how you can say that based off of 3 ambiguous verses in sura 2, when there is much more explicit mention of the Quran (or Jesus) confirming the Torah or the Gospel. Why does “affirming the Torah” not mean what most would interpret by the words “affirming” or “Torah” but the ambiguous verses of sura 2 means wholesale corruption of prior scriptures, which isn’t even mentioned there. It seems question begging imo. Also iirc that passage had nothing to do with Christians, just Jews. While I have the Drs attention btw, I would like to ask what’s keeping you from becoming a Christian? Is it mostly philosophical or theological reasons or something else?
First off I want to give my respect to Andani for even accepting this debate. All Dawahgandists run from this topic and Sam, so kudos to Andani. That said my good man, you completely failed at the task. We know that according to the Quran the injeel is the message given to Jesus, we don't argue that. Jesus preached this injeel message to his disciples and followers. The Quran tells us this message was written down, Christians had it in their possession in the 7th century and we can find Muhammad in it (Surah 7:157). That leads us to a series of questions Andani failed to answer coherently. What is that message Jesus gave to his disciples and followers? Did his disciples write it down? In what 7th century book or collection of texts can we find the message in? If the answer is the New Testament, that's your dilemma.
@@nyctom08
Jesus taught his biography?🤣
@@AlonzoHarris235 The bacha Bumzi argument. You lot are actually still using this? 🤣
Turn your brain on. If I document everything you say and do and put it together into a book about your life. What kind of book did I write Abdoolzo?
@@AlonzoHarris235 The bacha Bumzi argument. You lot are actually still using this? 🤣
@@AlonzoHarris235 The Bumzi argument. You lot are actually still using this? 🤣
No Jesus didn't teach his biography. His followers documented the message (injeel) Jesus taught and wrote it into a collection of books about his life.
If I document everything you say and do and put it together into a book about your life. What kind of book did I write Abdoolzo?
@@AlonzoHarris235 Why you running Abdoolzo? I see you commenting elsewhere. The Bumzi argument backfired on you and deep fried your brain? 🤣
It's obvious that the Quran was referring to the Gospels as Gospel that the Christians had at the time. It's obvious Muhammad didn't know what they actually taught when making up the Quran. But people rationalize they look for logical reasons to confirm their emotional biases.
Prove it😅
@@Aliali-vc3pk We have Manuscripts of Muhammad's time that match our Scriptures we have today. There has only been one Gospel historically and the Christians still have it. Or can Allah's words be corrupted and changed?
No it can’t. Have you been watching. Sam gave a verse from the Quran saying God’s word cannot be corrupted. That same Quran says Muslims should reference the Bible for more understanding. That’s why Muslims believe the Bible prophesied about the coming of Mohammed.
So no it is not corrupted.@@eastsideapologetics6147 no
An internet dude just decimates an academic scholar
Judging by his arguments in the slides and those that follow, there is NOTHING academic about them. this yahya look alike guy argued the same way the other muslims did which is scour for information from the internet and pick and choose the ones they can use.
Sam Shamoun wins again, glory to God. Cameron, can we get a GodLogic and Sam Shamoun VS 2 Muslims debate?
Mark 15:34
And at the ninth hour Jesus cried with a loud voice, saying, Eloi, Eloi, lama sabachthani? which is, being interpreted, My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?
אלהי (elāhī) is Aramaic which translates as “My God”
إِلٰهِي (ilahi) is Arabic which translates as „My God“
Ezra 5:1
Then the prophets, Haggai the prophet, and Zechariah the son of Iddo, prophesied unto the Jews that were in Judah and Jerusalem in the name of the God of Israel, even unto them.
Hebrew: "בְּשֵׁם אֱלָהּ" (B'Shem Elah)
"בְּשֵׁם" (B'Shem) means "in the name of“
"אֱלָהּ" (Elah).
Arabic: "بِسْمِ اللهِ" (Bismillah)
"بِسْمِ" (Bism) means "in the name of"
"اللهِ" (Allah).
Mark 12:29
“The most important one,” answered Jesus, “is this: ‘Hear, O Israel: The Lord our God, the Lord is one.
Quran
[112:1]
Say, "He is Allah, One
@Seal-restrain a lot of yapping😂 man you just like dr. Khalil
@@FortheloveofGod07
You speak like a bot, no refutations and the use of cringe emojis confirming an utter lack of knowledge
Nah, let's get GodsLogic and Dr James White vs 2 Muslims.
Song of Solomon 5:11
His head is as the most fine gold, his locks are bushy, and black as a raven.
„gold“ = keṯem
-> kāṯam = to carve or engrave, to inscribe indelibly:-mark
(שִׁית (šîṯ) = mark, appoint, set
κάθημαι (kathemai) = sit)
„raven“ = ʿōrēḇ
-> ʿāraḇ = braid, weave, intermingle, surety
-> arab
Raven -> Hatim/Hatem
Black -> Hitam = End, conclusion, completion -> Khatam
Katam (sanskrit) = linen, something woven (weave)
„bushy“ = taltal = a trailing bough/branch
-> tālal = to pile up, elevate, eminent
Song of Solomon 5:14
His hands are as gold rings set with the beryl: his belly is as bright ivory overlaid with sapphires.
„hands“ -> yāḏ
-> hand = qātum (-> Katam = to cover, conceal)
-> yāḏâ = praise -> Muhammad
„Ring“ = gālîl
-> Ring = ħatem/khātam/ḵātim
„Overlaid“ = ʿālap̄ = to veil, cover, wrap self, enshrouded, enwrapped
-> Katam = to cover, conceal
Song of Solomon 5:15
His legs are as pillars of marble, set upon sockets of fine gold: his countenance is as Lebanon, excellent as the cedars.
„pillars“ = ʿammûḏ
-> ʻâmad = confirm, stand, establish
-> māʿŏmāḏ = standing, foothold, standing ground, firm, stable
Song of Solomon 5:16
His mouth is most sweet: yea, he is altogether lovely. This is my beloved, and this is my friend, O daughters of Jerusalem.
„Most sweet“ = mamtaqqîm
-> māṯaq = sweet, pleasant
-> qatam
-> Katam (cover, conceal, hidden)
-> Khatam = end, last, perfect
ʻârêb = sweet, pleasant
-> 'āsîp̄ = gathered
-> 'āsap̄ = assemble, restore, recover, gather, together
„altogether“ = kōl
-> kālal = to complete, perfect
-> Khatam = complete, perfect, end, finish, last
„lovely“ = mahmad = beloved
-> Muhammad
(greatly beloved = ḥāmaḏ
[Arabic حَمِدَ praise, eulogize]
Quran
[33:40]
Muhammad is not the father of any of your men, but (he is) the Messenger of Allah, and Khātam of the Prophets: and Allah has full knowledge of all things.
Daniel 7:14
He was given authority, honor, and sovereignty over all the nations of the world, so that people of every race and nation and language would obey him. His rule is eternal-it will never end. His kingdom will never be destroyed.
Cameron please stick to these debates and conversations. Definitely my favorite type of your content
We can’t do these all the time but they’re a lot of fun!
Sam my brother. Bringing Glory to God through the power and work of the Holy Spirit!!! All Praise to God. We serve a mighty King brother!!! Hyped for the brethren!!
As an agnostic this debate should be a good for us skeptics about the dilemma in hand...
Base on the debate, they don't hold the same premises as to why it is dilemma. Which breaks down the whole point of the debate.
For Dr. Rani, it is just a critic internally to the quran. He ssume that the quran is the true revelation, which he himself denied in any internal contradiction, In which Sam raised an argument which the Dr. don't affirm, but can't answer, because they don't hold the exact premise.
But as a philosophical take to the question of theological question of Sam to Dr. Andani, it was actually a good question, but Dr. Andani failed to answer.
So basically, Sam's argument is in the perspective of non-muslim and christian
Dr. Andani's inability to provide independent evidence for the corruption of the Bible without presupposing the Quran's authority. This creates a reliance on the quran's claims, which undermines the objectivity of his argument philosophically.
"Where is the original Torah or Injil that you claim the Bible is corrupted from? Without such a copy, how do you substantiate the quran’s claim of corruption?" - Sam
the question of Sam
This forces Dr. Andani to justify the Quran’s critique of the bible with evidence outside the quran.
And yes, the circular reasoning of Dr. Andani here is very strong 🤔
Dr. Andani basically argues: The Bible is corrupted because the quran says so. The quran is true because it is divinely revealed. This reasoning is very circular, as it assumes the quran’s truth without offering external validation. Well, of course he presupposes that it is the true...
Another point, by claiming the bible is corrupted, Dr. Andani shoulders the burden of proving: What the original torah and injil/gospel were. at least how and when the corruption occurred... Without such proof, the argument rests entirely on faith in the quran, which is insufficient philosophically.
Dr. Andani affirming the qran’s Truth: Dr. Andani’s defense hinges on asserting that the quran is the ultimate judge of scripture. However, this requires accepting the quran’s claims as true, which defeats the purpose of an external critique.
No Independent Evidence, without the original Torah or Injil, Dr. Andani cannot objectively demonstrate biblical corruption.
This weakens his argument, as it appears to rely on faith-based assumptions rather than verifiable evidence.
Overall, Sam did great, and Dr. Andani's ethos did not help at all.
P.S.
I don't have a substantial theological knowledge about the debate, but philosophically, Sam really did a great job...
A Muslim would rather be right than be saved.
Huh?
@@DA-0091 Saved by Jesus Christ
The problem is not adnan the problem is the Quran itself no one can defend an indefendable position
the bible cannot be defended
@@louisdeniau8571
It does not need defending. Its consistent.
@@Esico6exactly!
Show us paganism where in crucifixion birth miracles ressurction old and new testament which accounts😅
Sam shamoun definitely won this debate.
If we can just admit that even their own early “scholars” are inconsistent w their own opinions let alone counterparts, this “dialogue” would go along a lot faster. This is what happens when their god and profit are inconsistent. ISLAM IS INCONSISTENT IN EVERY LITERAL ASPECT.
@@QueenQaffir
The trinity is a logical contradiction.
@@AlonzoHarris235address the point made for once.
@@AlonzoHarris235 Allah is one person. im one person.
Allah shows mercy. I show mercy.
Allah has a shin. I have a shin.
Allah has hands. I have hands.
Who is like Allah? Me.
@@eastsideapologetics6147
Is the trinity one self or three selves?
@@AlonzoHarris235 3 Persons. One Essence.
Is God beyond your comprehension?
The Muslim gave a much better challenge than most Muslims but he still lost the debate.
"If they had observed the Torah and the Gospel and that which was revealed unto them from their Lord, they would surely have been nourished from above them and from beneath their feet. Among them there are people who are moderate, but many of them are of evil conduct."
(Quran 5:66, Pickthall)
"Say: “O People of the Book! YE HAVE NO GROUND TO STAND UPON UNLESS YE STAND FAST BY THE Law, the GOSPEL, and all the revelation that has come to you from your Lord.” It is the revelation that cometh to thee from thy Lord…"
(Quran 5:68, Yusuf Ali)
If the Gospel and the Torah have been actually altered, distorted, or changed, why would Allah command people to stand fast on such Books? For people to “stand fast by the Law and the Gospel” (5:68) today, it must be available and remain pure and trustworthy. Otherwise, people will submit to scriptures that are no longer the authentic Word of God. Where is the logic for Allah to give confirmation to and endorse (alleged) corrupted texts? Each time Muslims accuse the Gospel with corruption, they end up condemning the Quran as a false guide. Allah, in the Quran (10:94), even said to ask those who read the Scriptures before for verification.
Yet, the Quran contradicts the message in the Gospel. Hence, the Islamic dilemma.
@@Jamaal4Jesus
You still don’t get it.
Your hero Sam already conceded that that the Injeel is not your bible. Why are you still arguing for it in your ‘argument’?🥴
@@AlonzoHarris235 The point is that Quran contradicts the Injeel which is part of the Bible.
@@AlonzoHarris235Stop lying ,he never says that 😂
@@Jamaal4Jesus
The bible is not mentioned in the Quran.
Which bible are you talking about?
@@Skyrexx7
He did say that.
He changed his position. In the beginning of the debate he claimed that the Injeel is the NT.
When Andani asked him if the Injeel is identical to his bible. He said no.🤣
Muhammed never met the risen Christ and came almost 700 years later
Jesus also came after Moses and Abraham and Noah. What does that prove?
@meshari-yy9gp well both Abraham and Moses pointed to Jesus and didn't deny him like Muhammad.
They didn't point to Christ, stop lying! @@datchet11
@@datchet11
No prophet calls a man God.
@@meshari-yy9gp Jesus didnt' contradict Moses Abraham or Noah like Muhammad contradicts the prophets.
The problem is the Islamic scholar keeps saying “well that’s not what the Quran means” with no proof when reading it!!!
This is what happens when you associate academia with authority and knowledge too tenaciously. It can be a tool to get you there… but it often times the reliance in its authority allows people to believe and presuppose stupid things.
This guy is throwing the majority scholars under the bus.
If I were looking for Truth from this conversation Islam would be crossed off the list.
How is it possible that a PhD scholar has misunderstood so much the word "euaggellion" . In my humble opinion he lies knowing to lie.
Loving the content brother 🙏✝️
One of the biggest misunderstandings that Muslims have about the Gospel is that they think its the stories about and/or teachings revealed to Jesus.
Jesus is the Gospel
You pore over the Scriptures because you presume that by them you possess eternal life. These are the very words that testify about Me, yet you refuse to come to Me to have life. John 5:39-40
1:30:00 the Dr just admitted the Torah HAS been preserved.
this just destroyed the Quran in its entity as the Genesis and Moses stories differ significantly.
"Show me an honest Muslim, and I'll show you an ex-Muslim."
Now, if this isn’t a miracle, I honestly don’t know what is. Sam, a guy who didn’t even finish high school, went head-to-head with Dr. Andani-a man who graduated from Harvard with a doctorate-and actually beat him in a debate. Think about that for a second. That’s nothing short of incredible. God is truly great, man. Glory to Christ ✝️🙌❤️
At this point you have to give the muslims credit for still showing up. They always get proven wrong.
Its kinda sad ngl.
Most of them run now 😂😂😂
Dr Andani, well educated and knows his stuff. And i must admit this debate was a little bit confusing for even me, a postgraduate 😂 but it's very interesting I've been watching these for a minute and the islamic dilemma pops up in every Muslim vs Christmas debate and it's a hit every time. I love when religions are challenged
i love to see Khalil laying out his stall fully, ready for his assumptions of how Sam will destroy him and trying to "cover himself" but Sam does it anyway!
Dr andani is one of my favorite muslim's scholar and i like some of his approach but on this Sam did a great job i hope Dr andani becomes christian one day .
Remember in islam there is always an automatic L
Can’t spell Paul without L.. kinda logic
@@Ibn-Abdurrahman that was the most cringe comment I read on this whole comment thread 😂 congrats abdool
@@1974Muzak bible has an automatic L. Tell your friend that too
this guy isn’t a academic, or at least he isn’t practicing it coherently. His first counter was bringing up a straw man; “Where does the quran affirm the 27 books of the new testament.” bro what? that’s not the argument. further more he goes on numerous tangents about law, what previous christian’s did, and even that they shouldn’t eat un cleansed meat…bro what? stick to the topic at hand ‘Dr’. Not to mention he didn’t relay his islamic position and so when caught he would say something a long the lines of ‘I don’t have to appeal to that scholars statement about the topic’ but will also use set scholar to prove a point. BRO WHAT? honestly a hard watch for me and pretty embarrassing for then ‘academic’ tbh
He is an academic attempting to defend a position that is simply wrong
@@emptyunicorn384
Sam didn’t object to this.
He literally affirmed that.
Do you have hearing problems?
Im confused though why does Andani refer to all 27 books even with just the 4 fold gospel the dilemma still holds … Sam could have conceded to even a Fourfold gospel and that is still enough to show it😭
That was an option open to Sam that he didn’t take. I’m not sure he understands his own argument or how arguments in general work.
yeah, the 27 books had no relevance to the topic. Sam could make the same argument with just 1 of the Gospels
@@Capxnn
He can’t make that argument.
He still has to presuppose that the Injeel refers to one of your gospels.
He can’t provide evidence or an argument for that.
@@AlonzoHarris235 so where was the "law" written that Jesus gave to refer to?
@@landonlowe4029
The Injeel is revelation.
Even your own bible doesn’t claim the gospel is written text.🫠
Al lah 28:2 - My verses are clear.
Khalil Andani - I will need to check a tafsir on that!
🙃
Spot on 😂
Prove paganism the point that bibible is the injeel ... the bible was written 30 years after jesus in Greek cognitive dissonance 😅
@@Aliali-vc3pkwhere is the original quran
@@Spoken-e5p we have the original. Do u actually think uthman decided what was going to be in the quran based of his likings. Learn the story. I can tell you know nothing of the story.
@@Spoken-e5p ur scripture is full of error. KJV is inaccurate and if it is then all the other versions are inaccurate becuase KJV disagrees with it.
It's interesting to see the Islamic lies evolving.
Allah says trust the torah and injeel the so called schorlars says i trust another schorlar Allah words mean nothing proffessors seems to know more than Allah
And the Quran is supposed to be clear as well 🤨
1:48:40... The exact moment where Khalil lost this debate...
It comes down to the same bad argument Muslims bring up that "the NT has not been preserved because the later Quran tells a different story" just presented with some PhD eloquence😅.
This is the definition of shooting yourself in the foot. He took a bazooka and aimed at his own ankles
It seems as if all of his education just gave him endless ways to run away from a dialogue that has any sort of substance. All this just to end two steps from where we started.
What a disappointment!