@stonesheeva7158 I know, but they're also big time jokers. I just expected that Cameron would have wanted to keep it a little more serious. But I like AP and David, watch them all the time.
Hijab also wasted way too much time trying to pin Craigs view against other held Christiain views vs actually stating HIS problem with Craig's view directly and going from there
@@whosgeno7524 Which isn’t even relevant to the debate, what Mojob at the most will achieve will be debunking Craig’s view of the Trinity and not the concept of the Trinity as a whole….
@@j.mtherandomguy8701going to trinity, Muslims really should stay well away from John. His main goal from verse 1 is the divinity and joined relationship between Jesus and god.
I dont understand why Dr. Craig would debate Hijab. Hijab says he respects Craig and regard him as the best philosopher of our time, yet Hijab is so disrespectful and childish towards Dr. Craig. I guess the only benefit for Dr. Craig is that he gets a chance to witness to Hijab's audience.
This debate showed how clownish the Muslim position is, to a larger audience. So there's the "why". Oh, you kist pointed out Momo is ridiculous. Good. More people know it. Make no mistake, Muslims watched as well. If the entire result is one more Muslim thibking deeper about this, as a stepping stone towards knowing Christ, then it is a win. Or explain me how it is a loss, otherwise. We all knew Momo was going to be eviscerated.
@@szilardfineascovasa6144 yes, Hijab would be annihilated. We knew that beforehand. But a large part of the muslim audience isnt sensitive to real arguments but power play and humilation tactics. And Hijab spent a lot of his time doing exactly that. We can't project our standards to all in Hijabs audience. And no doubt he would claim victory over Craig from now on and carry it as a trophy. Respect to Craig for suffering through such a painful debate. But in the end the gospel was preach and muslims were invited to seek Jesus which is amazing! I liked Craig's unapologetic preaching in his closing remarks.
@@PåGyngendeGrund I concur! And your closing remarks sum up what I was trying to articulate: if, among the blind, at least one started looking towards the light, yet to make a first step towards it...Dr. Craig's longsuffering was not in vain 🙂. (And he responded like a Christian, in kind. That alone should be food for thought for some seeker of truth. I liked the contrast between the two.)
As a Christian Im very thankful to mimi hijab he helped alot of muslims leave islam and accept Christ by his "wonderful" behaviour and debating style 😎🙏.
Mimi Hijab and his friends are the biggest Christian evangelists of our time. They helped spread the gospel message to so many unreached populations in the world. History will be very grateful to them. 🙏🙌✝️
Atheist here. Hijab was mostly showboating imo. The shouting and polemic rhetoric wasn’t helpful or congenial to fruitful discussion- which I suspect was his goal (avoidance). I think Craig handled it well. He didn’t get riled and seemed more perplexed at having to continually repeat himself. Basically Hijab couldn’t sufficiently handle the topic and it would have taken Craig a couple of hours to calm him down and get to a sensible exchange of ideas. Cameron should have been stronger on the moderation (imo) to keep it focussed. but trinity and Islam isn’t a walk in the park so I’m not throwing shade.
I'm perplexed why you'd be here at all. I'm happy you're here but if you don't believe in God in the first place, why would such a difficult theological subject even be interesting?
Cameron isn’t smart enough to moderate properly. But he’s a lot better behaved than hijab. Frankly everyone needs to sit down their cool guy with glasses friend and tell them wearing spectacles doesn’t make them smart.
Hijab: “uhh excuse me Dr Craig, you can’t ask me questions - I’m here to interrogate you for an hour, ignore your objections and move past the subjects you address sufficiently for the next hour” I’m not even a WLC fan but this debate was just so ridiculous
@ARmohammed1445 I'm sure he did 😐 (in your opinion) just like the early followers of islam who forgot chapters of the quaran or the goat that destroyed (ate) chapters of the quaran invalidating its wholeness and the surah that "no one can change (destroy) the words of Allah" Mohjab can't debate with a coherent argument at all.
@@ARmohammed1445Hijab did not beat him. He just spent the entire debate declaring he won and somehow Muslims believed him. He also lied about what David Wood said then argued against the strawman and again declared himself the winner. When you have to constantly say you won and the other person's career is ended during the debate after giving very surface-level responses that didn't actually address the arguments, they didn't win.
@@marknaj3026another Muslims caught in a lie, just about every Church Father believed the Trinity, please do your research before spewing lies, people read without doing their homework and will believe a lie like yours but I suppose your whole point is to deceive baby Christians.
@@marknaj3026 here is moMad & lah trinity 😅 ! Allah Doesn’t know the Christian Trinity Correctly! Read the Verse ! Below 👇! Allah / Jesus / Mary. Wow 😮 what a Trinity ! !!!! 5:116 Al-Maaida وَإِذْ قَالَ اللَّهُ يَا عِيسَى ابْنَ مَرْيَمَ أَأَنْتَ قُلْتَ لِلنَّاسِ اتَّخِذُونِي وَأُمِّيَ إِلَٰهَيْنِ مِنْ دُونِ اللَّهِ ۖ قَالَ سُبْحَانَكَ مَا يَكُونُ لِي أَنْ أَقُولَ مَا لَيْسَ لِي بِحَقٍّ ۚ إِنْ كُنْتُ قُلْتُهُ فَقَدْ عَلِمْتَهُ ۚ تَعْلَمُ مَا فِي نَفْسِي وَلَا أَعْلَمُ مَا فِي نَفْسِكَ ۚ إِنَّكَ أَنْتَ عَلَّامُ الْغُيُوبِ And (remember) when Allah will say (on the Day of Resurrection): "O 'Iesa (Jesus), son of Maryam (Mary)! Did you say unto men: 'Worship me and my mother as two gods besides Allah?' " He will say: "Glory be to You! It was not for me to say what I had no right (to say). Had I said such a thing, You would surely have known it. You know what is in my inner-self though I do not know what is in Yours, truly, You, only You, are the All-Knower of all that is hidden and unseen. & … Mary was Sister of Moses ! Another Blunder 😅 Oh Mussalman ! Funny cult Muslims jump through a lot of hoops over this obvious error in the Qur’an. Sura 3:33-36 unquestionably says that a wife of Imran is the mother of the Virgin Mary. Imran was the father of Moses, Aaron and Miriam but NOT the Virgin Mary….her father was Jaockim and he lived about 1,500 years after Imran. Sura 19:28 actually calls the Virgin Mary the sister of Aaron while Sura 66:12 calls her the daughter of Imran to further prove that the author of the Qur’an had his Mary’s mixed up.
@@MarDuBronx Why? They aren't strange at all. And in fact, he can back up those belief with thousands of years of Early Church teachings. Maybe you should debate him and see how that goes for you.
how can a muslim be any better theologically than the average muslim apologist really? in judaism christianity atheism dharmic religions sure but islam? i think there's a very low ceiling in skill
Hijab wasted 6 of his turns bascially repeating himself, asking the same question Dr Craig just answered. Then trying to end his turns by baiting Craig by saying, you're either a heretic or incoherent 😂😂
That's always his tactics he accuses the other debater of something and then his following will say, Hijab crushed him, because they don't ask themselves wether the accusation is justified or not. Another tactic is to randomly say something in Arabic to signal "how much" knowledge he has. It's unbelievable to me that someone like Hijab with his bad behaviour in general has such a huge following.
2:52:44 would be true, if Sam himself didn't repeat same points he insulted CP over. If Pope says some outlandish stuff, every Christian has every right to call it out. And no matter how you put it, his words in that meeting were unbiblical and directly condradicted basic Christian doctrines.
That's why Mohammed Hijab, like the rest of the sheikhs, is afraid to debate Sam Shamoon, Dyer, David and Bob because they know very well how certain their defeat is.
Despite WLC's weak defense of the Trinity, Mohammed Hijab selectively muted crucial responses in the video he posted on his channel, seemingly to mislead his followers and create a false narrative that supports his Islamic perspective, leveraging WLC's content for his own apologetic purposes. Indeed without lies Islam Dies
Trinity can never be defended, it's a flaw, incoherent, does not exist. Whatever a person will come up with, it's a weak defence. You cannot defend it with the Bible.
@Abdul-db8b weak defense of the trinity" - It might be in your opinion that WLC gave a weak defense of the trinity the debate was about is the trinity coherent. WLC simply gave a normal formulation of the trinity which things can be added on to as he stated in this hour-long discussion. 'Mohammad Hijab selectively muted crucial responses in the video he posted on his channel seemingly to mislead his followers and create a false narrative that supports his Islamic perspective, leveraging WLC content for his own apologetic purposes" - This is standard for Dawa guys..
Hijab resorted to quote mine because he couldnt refute craig’s arguments… , used the ignorance of the muslim audience to mischaracterize what craig was saying and pretended philosophical terms didnt mean anything.
you mean hijab did exactly what mohammed did in 7th century when preaching to arabs ... just as hamas is doing exactly what mohammed did in 7th century when waging war against jews & christians?
CP or Sam is the best opponent for Hijab. Coz all other christian apologists are too nice but CP or Sam will not only trap Hijab on his belief but also give Hijab a taste of his own medicine. I'm not a big fan of how Hijab debates but Hijab needs a taste of his own medicine, because Hijab's followers seem to understands only that language. But Hijab seems to be scared of both of them.
What hijab brought up is actually not an article but a transcript of a video which is part of a series of videos on the Trinity by WLC which is on his UA-cam Channel and in the video he literally states that Cerberus is used as a springboard. One could actually watch his full series of videos to better understand his stance on the Trinity. Also, it didn’t appear to me from that series that he actually denies the Nicene Creed but rather he affirms the second version of the creed. There’s also a whole video on it as part of the series.
@@nadirahmed4224 Not running away, keeping the topic on the topic. Muslims are the ones running away with trying to distract by bringing these topics up.
@nadirahmed4224 Let's test the Quran and I will say shahada if you convince me. Where is the wall of Dhul Qarnayn and the yaguge and majuge it protects us from? Wher are the hardened clay stone that pelted the people of the elephant? Where is the archaeology that proves Mecca is as old as Abraham? Answer two successfully, and I will say shahada.
@@chrisazure1624 yes I answer these successfully in my debate as Islam is the only religion which debate the hard topics like slavery science in the QURAN and anything else really you can watch my past debates, but you now have to admit Christians are very selective in debating topics. They don’t debate the hard ones which will destroy their religion!
Sam is a fraud. He is vile and filthy mouthed while claiming he has the Holy Spirit. Sam the scam is a fake christian and he will turn on us. Mark my words
I believe Hijab wasn't really interested in the debate itself but he was trying to demonstrate to as many Muslims as possible the argument from Authority, i.e. that Islam is on average practiced in a more literal way and nuances and differences in opinion are probably less than in Christianity. He then uses that to argue it's a sign that it's more correct. That's pretty much his tact all the way through and he generates different themes to drive the same message. He also is deliberately rude and provocative in a way that seems unsophisticated to a western thinker because it betrays the trust of the interlocutor. It probably shouldn't be interpreted as unsophisticated it should be interpreted for what it is, a disregard and disrespect for the Christian world view.
Hijab is a narcissist who likes to argue in circles and chase his fix of narcissistic supply. He lives in a bubble that he'll lie, steal and cheat to keep from bursting. He has spent his whole life trying to make square scriptures fit into round holes, but no matter how he tries to beat them into shape, they'll never fit, because he knows deep down that it's not true... but he's secretly an atheist and thinks the Bible, for all it's sense, logic and how it ages like a fine wine, isn't true either in his mind.
Surviving intellectual debate that scrutinizes every inch of Islamic history and the Quran from a logical philosophical, historical and textual angle will be an odious task for a religion not accustomed to textual criticism. Following the fact that the Quran seems completely plagiarized poorly from ancient Tanak, the gospels, Gnosticism, Arianism and Christian mythology its most likely Islam is breathing is last breath of theological oxygen
I very much appreciate the efforts to bring clarity, to unravel, to expose falsity within shifty debate strategies, the outright buffoonery in some cases …that made up the bulk of Mr. Hijab’s input to the debate. I so value the learned commentary about aspects of both the Christian faith I adhere to, but also of what I’m learning to understand are the logical, philosophical and theological issues that we as Christians observe within Islam …and the effects of Islamic teaching on Islamic societies (and therefore effecting entirely to at least partially …most parts of the world). So thank you to Cameron and team for these aspects of your debate review. As a uni-lingual person, I am pretty much always astonished by people who have not only learned another language, but it learned it well enough to not only participate in a debate like this, and in terms of pure communication… to have more than held his own in getting his ideas across… (so even though I vigorously disagreed with Mr. Hijab), I understood him clearly and well enough to know he was playing fast and loose with language, idioms, turns of phrase etc …in another language. If no one else is impressed by that, I am. My point in raising this is that most of those who may tune in … from Mr Hijab’s world and worldview, will likely be unilingual, (… and it probably won’t be the King’s English). With even a small potential for cross cultural and cross faith group dialogue or idea-exchange that this type of debate is an example of, in listening to this debate-review, I was pained and found myself wincing often as the various visual and vocalized ‘apings’ of Mr Hijab started and even dominated the commentary. Not trying to be a killjoy, and man, I get the pressure (and maybe even the pleasure) these days to “own the [fill-in-blank-opponent]”, but I think if I simply point back to Dr Craig’s way of responding in real time …with thoughtfulness, with rigour, with massive whole-life commitment to learning of Christ, while living in Christ …(and no, Bill Craig is no idol of mine …a small ‘a’ admirer of his work and what little I know of his personal life, sure) …so, if there are any out there that may tune in from other worldviews and parts of the world, and they googulate your review-conversation, hopefully they’ll hear from Christians about deep commitment to God and His ways, reverence for His word, a commitment to objective, philosophical and theological truths, and a hand reached out in a genuine effort toward neighbourliness …they hopefully wont be insulted by having (schoolyard) speech mannerisms, cultural exaggerations and cultural put-downs shoved up their nose …even though that approach to dialogue is part (or often even most) of how folks from these communities were trained up from birth in as ‘the way’ …of treating ‘the other’. Repeating myself, I think Dr. Craig …in the way of Jesus, in the way of Paul, modelled ‘a better way’ for us within the debate itself. …thank you again though (and Cameron especially) for the work of putting it all together. Really appreciated.
If this does not demonstrate that you are on the wrong side I don't know what will. You're labelling as demons the Muslims who worship 1 God, prostrate to God, fast and give charity whilst calling an atheist (someone who rejects God entirely) a guiding light.
@@MG-cc9hi Well the one God you worship, prostrate, fast, and give charity for is Satan so it's not really doing you any favors. Christians also do those things. We just do them for actual God, not the opposition. And what about this demonstrates we are on the wrong side? Thankfully I have been through clinical death and don't need blind faith to know what the truth is. I died, saw Christ, spoke to him, was shown my child 3 years before I had even met my wife to have her by him and everything that I experienced while dead is Biblically accurate. Also, AP is only an Atheist because he found out how bad he had been lied to by Islam and he probably has trust issues. AP has plenty of time to come to Christ. We are just glad he got away from the cult that will usher in the Anti-Christ. It really seems like he's coming closer and closer every day. They are a guiding light to Muslims finding the one and only true living Triune God.
@@MG-cc9hi Surah Al-Mulk (67:5): "And We have certainly beautified the nearest heaven with stars and have made [from] them what is thrown at the devils and have prepared for them the punishment of the Blaze."
Can you link to all your guests in your video descriptions? I’m new to this sort of content and would like to see more. I found Mike winger because of you!
I recommend Inspiring Philosophy (Mike), Apologetics Roadshow (David Wood), and Apostate Prophet (Ridvan). They are all fantastic and I’ve been watching them for a long time.
So they have a problem with Trinity but so cool with 52 year old man married to 6 years old child flying on a unicorn 🦄 to the 7th heavens faster than speed of light, what a logic to live by 😂😂😂
Mary was married to Joseph in the age of 12, Joseph was 93!!, it's in your book, David and Solomon married hundred of wives, that is also in your book, Jacob fought with God and defeated God!!!!, that is also in your book, how can a human defeat God??, Adam and Eve were in paradise and God sent them down to earth, so why it's not possible that God took Prophet Mohammad to the seventh sky?, knowing that paradise is more higher than the skies, or just because it's in your bible it's truth, but other scriptures aren't
Dang, Hijab got pumbled in that debate. I didn't even know it was possible to perform this bad in a debate. I disagree with W.LC on a lot however he just massecurd Hijab here. I don't think Hijab was able to effectively counter a single point or argument made by W.L.C.
☦️Nice try liars, you are so heretical that you would defend a pagan like WLC. If Hijab is so weak then how come he ended Woodhead the clown's career & ever since he is obsessed with him?🤔
@@morghe321 Sam is a smart man. Not sure why you are calling him a scam. Because he is Catholic now? He has plenty of time to come around to the true bride of Christ the Eastern Orthodox Church. They are all friends. Sam included. He is a Christian and he can quote scripture better than most. Humans are fallible creatures and sometimes we are wrong. All we can do is correct and hope he continues to search for truth. Because the Pagan Roman Catholic Church sure isn't it. We don't need to bully or talk down to him because he's wrong. We all make mistakes. He has time to fix it. AP is also Atheist and doesn't really get in between the denominational arguments Christian's debate over. It's not really his place. Simply put, people can disagree and still be friends and support each other. Exactly what Christ would want.
Du bist kein muslim du paulus. Und man muss schon ziemlich blind und arrogant sein, dass offensichtliche zu verneinen. Euer Craig David wurde REGELRECHT ZERSTÖRT 👻
I’m Jewish . I don’t believe in Jesus nor the concept of the Trinity . But I support the Christians. At least their Christianty teaches love and tolerance . Christianity today makes more civilized peaceful people ❤
Edit: (and disclaimer) After people pointed out that my explanation is modalism, I went to find out what that was, since I've truly never heard of it before. From what I saw explained as modalism, my example would fall right in. My disclaimer is that I believe in the Triune God, 1 being 3 different persons and in no way was my intention to support a heretical view, rather to find a way to explain the Trinity to someone who has difficulty understanding, especially if they don't believe in the metaphysical. I will not be deleting my comment (CC can do so if he wants, I obviously don't mind), since I think that there may be other people who don't know about modalism and I have accidentally provided a perfect example for it. About examples to explain the Trinity I have been thinking it this way : Let's talk about Matt. Matt is 1 being. Matt has a partner, Matt has a best friend, and Matt has a dog. Depending on who he is addressing, Matt is a different person. If Matt starts behaving towards his partner the same way he behaves towards his dog or his best friend, the partner is going to say "You're acting like a different person" . The same way the 1 Divine Being, the Triune God, reveals Himself to us. He revealed Himself as the strict father to initially teach us the stricktest way in order to not fall into darkness because He loves us, when we couldn't do it, He revealed Himself as the One who will sucrifice Himself for us, since we are not able to stand alone. because He loves us. And later when we need guidance and support in every day life, He reveals Himself as the Holy Spirit, to help us and guide us in our incompetence to take the best possible steps towards Him, because he loves us. And to finish up with the Matt example, when Matt has something to do, that might not be the most pleasant thing, but he knows that it is for the best, he will end up talking to himself, to see if there is another way, a different solution, but in the end he knows that this unpleasant thing is the only way.
Simply brilliant! Thank you for this, more people need to see this! In Yeshua Jesus' name, I hope more people can see this explanation on the trinity and understand and digest it and one day accept it! Amen!
@manoflowmoralvalue1560 yes, that was my goal. I though "how would you explain the Trinity to someone who doesn't believe in the metaphysical/soul/spirit.?" .
I think this explanation is a heresy. I think it's called modalism, but I could be wrong. The problem is that this explanation does not account for 3 *persons* in the Trinity. The Son prays to the Father (and not to himself).
@mortensimonsen1645 my last sentence was to account for that. The Son knows the will of the father but since the Torture is something unpleasant He will still pray to the Father . I don't know about modalism and I dont see how what I said is a herecy since I'm not claiming that this is exactly how the Trinity works, it's an explanation for someone who doesn't believe in the metaphysical. No example could possible be the Trinity, other than the Trinity it self, however, in the same way a mathematician had to start from 1+1, describing the Trinity as we believe in it may not be understood by someone whose stuck as to how 1 being can be 3 persons.
The argument that the Trinity can't be true because it is hard to understand is laughable. Are Muslim apologists suggesting that God should be easily understandable? Is that how small their God is?
Do we have to be scholars to explain it ? Or try to explain the unexplainable? So many books been written to try to explain the trinity They go through labyrinths of confusion to try to explain the unexplainable The apostles were not scholars They had normal life jobs Satan is the author of confusion not God almighty Satan has blinded the world from the truth
Ex-Muslim here. Muslim apologists often try to argue that Quran 5:116 doesn’t address the Trinity because the term "Trinity" is not explicitly mentioned, which is understandable given the theological implications of acknowledging it. However, this refusal does not change the overwhelming evidence. The word "Trinity" came from the Latin *Trinitas*, meaning "the state of being three," and the Qur'an does address this concept directly. It insists that Allah is not three, as seen in verses like 4:171 and 5:73 in the same chapter, which states, "Do not say 'three'; desist-it is better for you." Notably, 5:116 is the only verse that mentions the three-Allah and the other two-choosing Mary instead of the Holy Spirit. Thus, claiming that this verse is not about the Trinity simply because the term is absent is a non-sequitur, much like the absence of "Trinity" in the Nicene Creed does not negate its articulation of Trinity. Furthermore, if the Qur'an didn't find it necessary to address the Trinity, why are Muslims today so focused on critiquing it? Do they know more than Allah?!
I am Muslim. Here are some questions, I pose to Dr. Craig: Q1. Let us grant that your concept of one god with 3 persons is coherent. The 3 persons out of benevolence and love have the same knowledge, the same will, …. And all 3 act in concert. What would be incoherent, if these 3 persons were 3 gods with 1 person each, with the same properties of the 3 persons of the one god: “benevolence, love, the same knowledge, the same will, …. And all 3 act in concert”? If you were asked to defend polytheism (as an exercise), would you be able to construct a defensible coherent version of polytheism? Q2. Is there anything incoherent in having one god with 2 persons, 4 persons, 5 persons, … n persons (even: an infinite number of persons)?? Is there anything special in the number 3? (I thought special numbers in divine attributes are constrained to be 0,1 and infinity)?? Q3. If the doctrine of trinity is a cornerstone of the knowledge of the true God, should it not be expected that the chosen servants and messengers of God should be aware of it? Do you believe that Noah, Abraham, and Moses knew of trinity and believed in trinity? Q4. Do you believe that the doctrines of the true faith are revealed gradually (step by step), that the Old Testament only revealed one person, the Father, and that the New Testament revealed the other 2 persons? Why is it then impossible, that later, when Christ comes to earth again, he will reveal to mankind the trueness of many different persons, some of which were perhaps mistaken to be Gods in Hinduism and other polytheistic religions? Could it be, that, Hinduism (e.g.), is an evolution of an originally “monotheistic” religion with a “multi-person”-God? Q5. What is the degree of certainty, with which you state your belief in trinity, if you disregard personal experience and restrict yourself to reasonable objective arguments and facts? Is it not all grounded in the degree of certainty of the transmission of the “New Testament” and of the degree of certainty of its interpretation? Q6. But these 2 pillars are at least controversial? There are undeniable proofs of the corruption in the New Testament. Is it “unreasonable” to doubt the honesty and the integrity of Paul? Is it unreasonable to reject the “Gospel of John“ as divine revelation? Didn’t an intelligent man like Isaac Newton, conclude Unitarianism from the same bible? Q7. Do you believe that many Christian communities believed false doctrines of faith in the first centuries (Jewish Christians, Gnostics, followers of Arius, followers of Nestor, the Coptic Church, the Greek-Orthodox Church, the Catholic Church, …) and that it is possible, that all Christians have some wrong doctrines of belief ()e.g. about trinity) for centuries, until some “scientists” reveal the right interpretation of the Bible (perhaps in the 21st century)? Is it not possible, that new reliable manuscripts about the life and teachings of Jesus may be discovered, and that many new errors in the gospels are found? Could it be that these manuscripts will prove the truth of the Christian sect “Islam”?
I dont think WLC was the best representative of trinitarian thought considering he represents such a minority, as well as the fact that Hijab was right, it sounded heretical. But all in all, I don't think anyone won because it really never went anywhere.
🇵🇸☦️Stop calling it "trinitarian" or call us that, western heretics. Being a Christian is by definition entails a belief in the Trinity, and our Trinity is not a Modalistic Tri-personal being, it is 3 persons who are distinct beings - that is what all fathers taught!
@@LevDavidovichCampos Nowhere in scripture is Christianity defined as the belief in the trinity - but rather, that these are the words and beliefs of men rather than the written truth of GOD. That is why there is not one single person in all of Bible history who is worshipping, teaching or preaching a triune god - which would include, though not limited-to the son of GOD Himself - of whom we know worshiped in truth. PS, nowhere in scripture are we told to follow fathers, but rather, we are told to follow Jesus Christ - iow, follow Jesus, not men!
@@smalltimer4370 1. Tahweed as a term doesn't exist in the Quran either, but the reality of the concept is, and the Son of God has no problem in worshipping his Father YHVH who is 1st in rank, so nice try. 2. Look at your sick profile pic, you call yourself a religious person. Before talking about religion, repent.
@@bugs-bunny-k6g I mean you are supposed to have notes. But reading from them like a cue card isn't really how debates work. Imagine watching a formal debate where the guy reads directly off his notes the entire time. Almost as if he didn't memorize his lies.
@@stonesheeva7158 He had quotes, to make sure everything is accurate, didn't you see that MH accused MLC of using some analogy then MLC said no I didn't say it was an analogy then MH pulled up a quote and therr MLC's face became red, it's embarrassing.
@Aliali-vc3pk It would only be viewed as a contradiction if someone lacked the capacity to understand the simple concept. It would be like saying it's a contradiction to claim that an airplane is a type of craft which is designed to operate in a way that overcomes gravity, and to demonstrate how that is possible, I will point to a kite as an analogy of something designed to operate in a way that overcomes gravity. The kite is not an analogy of the plane, but an analogy of a craft that operates against gravity. Therefore, it's not an absurdity to suggest that a plane is designed to operate against gravity. To then argue that I am suggesting that a plain is like a kite, that's just a failed accusation due either to intellectual dishonesty, or intellectual deficiency.
I will admit that I think WLC made a misstep by bringing up Tawhid. The topic of the debate is "is the Trinity Coherent?" Not "Which is more Coherent, Trinity or Tawhid?" If I was Hijab I would have simply pointed out WLC has made a Whataboutism and Tawhid could be later debated and moved on. If Hijab had mentioned Tawhid first then he'd have opened the door for WLC to then attack it's incoherence. However Hijab took the bait, hook, line, and sinker because of his huge ego problem and he then proceeded to bumble the defense 😆
'Is the trinity coherent' lends itself to comparing the trinity to the alternative. Is hijab a jew or muslim? He's a muslim. So why wouldn't it make sense to debate the trinity in light of an alternative?
@@whm_w8833 whataboutism is excusing yourself for what the opponent does, and I clearly didn't do that, so your argument makes no sense. I posited that Craig brought up tawhid to compare the Christian history of wrestling over the trinity with the Islamic history of wrestling over tawhid, and argue that simply because there's disagreement doesn't have any bearing on the truth or falsehood of the trinity or tawhid. I thought that was obvious to an impartial observer.
Hijab did point out that WLC has made whataboutism, it's called "Tu quoque fallacy" which Hijab literally said. WLC kept repeating the point over and over, and then Hijab crushed WLC by saying "Even if I believed the moon was made of cheese, it doesn't make the trinity any more coherent"..
@@randomuser6306 The question is "why is Christianity correct", so even if what your opponent believes is incorrect, you still haven't answered the question, because this isn't white and black, there isn't 2 beliefs in the world, the question is still unanswered.
When you use two matches simultaneously to ignite a candle, it's unlikely that both matches will contribute equally to the ignition process. There are a few reasons for this: Flame interference: The flames from the two matches might interfere with each other, reducing their effectiveness in heating the wick. Heat dissipation: The heat from one match might be dissipated into the surrounding air before it reaches the wick, reducing its contribution to the ignition process. Wick saturation: If one match is able to heat the wick to a sufficient temperature to ignite it, the second match might not be able to contribute significantly, as the wick may already be saturated with heat. So Craig is completely wrong each matches is capable but when you use both then they both will contribute in igniting the candle ( 50% or
It's an imperfect analogy as all analogies are when we talk about the eternal God. Analogies aren't arguments--they're attempts to help people visualize and grasp the argument. So no argument is dependent on that analogy. But it can be a helpful starting point in trying to grasp with our finite minds the infinite God.
how boring DW (and sometimes AP) is when he overexagerates by imitating dawah people. I agree on joking but everytime like this is so annoying. I love listening to debate reviews, I couldn't wait to listen to this one, but , it's too much. Too long and too dispersive, plus screaming and yelling every single time just for the taste of imitating is so frustrating. It would be awesome if debate reviews could be more concise, dense and entertaining without slipping into useless loss of time.
I'm an ex-Hindu and I was explained the trinity as such when I was born again: The Sun is the heat+light+celestial object. You cannot imagine the celestial object without its' heat or light. It's ONE. Such is the trinity. That made a whole lot of sense to me.
this debate was a class on patience and keeping things professional! i learned a lot. I’ve only seen Hijab one other time, so I was shocked by his behavior. Hijabs behavior was quite annoying, AND the voices by the reviewers were also overkill and annoying! Great content! i’ll be subscribing for more!
Great discussion. A little note - I think it’s better if the host ( with the mic ) didn’t try to take over the discussion. Wood and AP discussions are the BEST .
Hijab spent his whole time dodging going to the scripture text, the Bible of the Quran. He kept focusing on individuals in history. They used the same text we have today.
I love how Cameron seemed a little unprepared for the shenanigans that would occur from having DW and AP on his channel.
I was a little surprised that he invited them.
@@morghe321 Why they all have a common interest in Christianity being truth and Islam being false.
@stonesheeva7158 I know, but they're also big time jokers. I just expected that Cameron would have wanted to keep it a little more serious. But I like AP and David, watch them all the time.
@@stonesheeva7158Isn’t AP still an atheist or irreligious for that matter?
@@TlowOnYT He went from being an atheist to being an agnostic after visiting Israel
Hijab also wasted way too much time trying to pin Craigs view against other held Christiain views vs actually stating HIS problem with Craig's view directly and going from there
@@whosgeno7524 Which isn’t even relevant to the debate, what Mojob at the most will achieve will be debunking Craig’s view of the Trinity and not the concept of the Trinity as a whole….
I’ve seen Hijab debate before, he does not debate in good faith.
Islamists always distract deceive and deny. So talking off topic is their brand.
@@j.mtherandomguy8701going to trinity, Muslims really should stay well away from John. His main goal from verse 1 is the divinity and joined relationship between Jesus and god.
@@chrisoakey9841 Most Muslims don’t even bother to try and understand the Trinity, expect them to know what they are doing regarding scripture.
I dont understand why Dr. Craig would debate Hijab. Hijab says he respects Craig and regard him as the best philosopher of our time, yet Hijab is so disrespectful and childish towards Dr. Craig. I guess the only benefit for Dr. Craig is that he gets a chance to witness to Hijab's audience.
This debate showed how clownish the Muslim position is, to a larger audience. So there's the "why".
Oh, you kist pointed out Momo is ridiculous. Good. More people know it.
Make no mistake, Muslims watched as well. If the entire result is one more Muslim thibking deeper about this, as a stepping stone towards knowing Christ, then it is a win.
Or explain me how it is a loss, otherwise. We all knew Momo was going to be eviscerated.
@@szilardfineascovasa6144 yes, Hijab would be annihilated. We knew that beforehand. But a large part of the muslim audience isnt sensitive to real arguments but power play and humilation tactics. And Hijab spent a lot of his time doing exactly that. We can't project our standards to all in Hijabs audience. And no doubt he would claim victory over Craig from now on and carry it as a trophy. Respect to Craig for suffering through such a painful debate. But in the end the gospel was preach and muslims were invited to seek Jesus which is amazing! I liked Craig's unapologetic preaching in his closing remarks.
It was necessary to show real face of muzzies
It's because of the audience. Apart from Muslims, not many people take MH seriously.
@@PåGyngendeGrund I concur!
And your closing remarks sum up what I was trying to articulate: if, among the blind, at least one started looking towards the light, yet to make a first step towards it...Dr. Craig's longsuffering was not in vain 🙂.
(And he responded like a Christian, in kind. That alone should be food for thought for some seeker of truth. I liked the contrast between the two.)
As a Christian Im very thankful to mimi hijab he helped alot of muslims leave islam and accept Christ by his "wonderful" behaviour and debating style 😎🙏.
Lol
lol why so Butthurt?
😂
I read that last part in hijabs voice "...wonderful behavior and debating style"
Mimi Hijab and his friends are the biggest Christian evangelists of our time. They helped spread the gospel message to so many unreached populations in the world. History will be very grateful to them. 🙏🙌✝️
Atheist here.
Hijab was mostly showboating imo. The shouting and polemic rhetoric wasn’t helpful or congenial to fruitful discussion- which I suspect was his goal (avoidance).
I think Craig handled it well. He didn’t get riled and seemed more perplexed at having to continually repeat himself.
Basically Hijab couldn’t sufficiently handle the topic and it would have taken Craig a couple of hours to calm him down and get to a sensible exchange of ideas.
Cameron should have been stronger on the moderation (imo) to keep it focussed. but trinity and Islam isn’t a walk in the park so I’m not throwing shade.
thanks for sharing, thoughts on becoming Christian?
Thank you for your balanced and valued critique.
I'm perplexed why you'd be here at all. I'm happy you're here but if you don't believe in God in the first place, why would such a difficult theological subject even be interesting?
Cameron isn’t smart enough to moderate properly. But he’s a lot better behaved than hijab.
Frankly everyone needs to sit down their cool guy with glasses friend and tell them wearing spectacles doesn’t make them smart.
I love when atheist are respectful and fair like yourself ❤
I would love to see more in this format!
Hijab: “uhh excuse me Dr Craig, you can’t ask me questions - I’m here to interrogate you for an hour, ignore your objections and move past the subjects you address sufficiently for the next hour”
I’m not even a WLC fan but this debate was just so ridiculous
So true
WLC brought up irrelevant point eg. tauhid, quran's view on the trinity. Whether it is true or not will not contribute to the coherency of the trinity
To be fair to David, why would he want to subject himself to view more of Muhammad hijab than he needs to
Yeah, once you see how stupid Hijab is once, you don't need to analyze him in the future except to be bewildered.
Because hijab annihilated him a few years earlier in a debate 😂
@ARmohammed1445 I'm sure he did 😐 (in your opinion) just like the early followers of islam who forgot chapters of the quaran or the goat that destroyed (ate) chapters of the quaran invalidating its wholeness and the surah that "no one can change (destroy) the words of Allah"
Mohjab can't debate with a coherent argument at all.
@@ARmohammed1445Hijab did not beat him. He just spent the entire debate declaring he won and somehow Muslims believed him. He also lied about what David Wood said then argued against the strawman and again declared himself the winner. When you have to constantly say you won and the other person's career is ended during the debate after giving very surface-level responses that didn't actually address the arguments, they didn't win.
@@ARmohammed1445Muhammad hijab is only capable of destroying schwarma with extra tahini sauce
They are forced to misrepresent Christianity because, if they don't, the immediate conclusion is that the Qur'an is wrong. There's no way avoiding it.
Spot on
90 % of early Christians misunderstand Craig's trinity 😢
@@marknaj3026another Muslims caught in a lie, just about every Church Father believed the Trinity, please do your research before spewing lies, people read without doing their homework and will believe a lie like yours but I suppose your whole point is to deceive baby Christians.
@@marknaj3026 here is moMad & lah trinity 😅
! Allah Doesn’t know the Christian Trinity Correctly!
Read the Verse ! Below 👇! Allah / Jesus / Mary.
Wow 😮 what a Trinity ! !!!!
5:116 Al-Maaida
وَإِذْ قَالَ اللَّهُ يَا عِيسَى ابْنَ مَرْيَمَ أَأَنْتَ قُلْتَ لِلنَّاسِ اتَّخِذُونِي وَأُمِّيَ إِلَٰهَيْنِ مِنْ دُونِ اللَّهِ ۖ قَالَ سُبْحَانَكَ مَا يَكُونُ لِي أَنْ أَقُولَ مَا لَيْسَ لِي بِحَقٍّ ۚ إِنْ كُنْتُ قُلْتُهُ فَقَدْ عَلِمْتَهُ ۚ تَعْلَمُ مَا فِي نَفْسِي وَلَا أَعْلَمُ مَا فِي نَفْسِكَ ۚ إِنَّكَ أَنْتَ عَلَّامُ الْغُيُوبِ
And (remember) when Allah will say (on the Day of Resurrection): "O 'Iesa (Jesus), son of Maryam (Mary)! Did you say unto men: 'Worship me and my mother as two gods besides Allah?' " He will say: "Glory be to You! It was not for me to say what I had no right (to say). Had I said such a thing, You would surely have known it. You know what is in my inner-self though I do not know what is in Yours, truly, You, only You, are the All-Knower of all that is hidden and unseen.
& … Mary was Sister of Moses ! Another Blunder 😅
Oh Mussalman ! Funny cult
Muslims jump through a lot of hoops over this obvious error in the Qur’an. Sura 3:33-36 unquestionably says that a wife of Imran is the mother of the Virgin Mary. Imran was the father of Moses, Aaron and Miriam but NOT the Virgin Mary….her father was Jaockim and he lived about 1,500 years after Imran. Sura 19:28 actually calls the Virgin Mary the sister of Aaron while Sura 66:12 calls her the daughter of Imran to further prove that the author of the Qur’an had his Mary’s mixed up.
Pairing mimi with a thinker like William Craig to debate on Christian doctrine was an insult to common sense. William deserved better!
To be fair WLC was the worse guy to get for this, I know many Christians would’ve enjoyed hijab going in on WLM about his strange beliefs.
@@MarDuBronx Why? They aren't strange at all. And in fact, he can back up those belief with thousands of years of Early Church teachings. Maybe you should debate him and see how that goes for you.
how can a muslim be any better theologically than the average muslim apologist really? in judaism christianity atheism dharmic religions sure but islam? i think there's a very low ceiling in skill
@@stonesheeva7158 anytime a Protestant cites a church father to affirm his beliefs, he’s misinterpreting them
Fr 😂😂😂😂
I can't understand why Dr Craig would debate very poorly behaved Hijab. People like Dr. Craig should not be platforming Hijab
He showed how silly his ideas are.
It’s good to platform Hijab because listening to him causes you to disagree with him more.
AP typing "Christ is King" in the chat, was the highlight of the debate. Who does he think he is? Candaze?
"blessed be the peacemakers... said candaze"
Guys, stop misspelling Canned Ace’s name. It’s not polite.
Candaze nuts fit in yo hadith?!?
Hijab wasted 6 of his turns bascially repeating himself, asking the same question Dr Craig just answered. Then trying to end his turns by baiting Craig by saying, you're either a heretic or incoherent 😂😂
That's always his tactics he accuses the other debater of something and then his following will say, Hijab crushed him, because they don't ask themselves wether the accusation is justified or not.
Another tactic is to randomly say something in Arabic to signal "how much" knowledge he has.
It's unbelievable to me that someone like Hijab with his bad behaviour in general has such a huge following.
I mean, every other prominent christian scholar would say Craig's view is heretical.
@@namikazeomar8001nope
@@joshwatson5561
It certainly heretical.
@@ahmaduahmed8760 nope
I was a Christian before the debate then became a Muslim after the debate. Then I watched this breakdown and converted to Christianity again.
I converted to and left Islam 3 times within this livestream.
@@gigahorse1475 haha
That is the power of Islam, you see! You were just too weak to accept the glory of Allah! You see!
Yeah of course you did 🙄
Snip snap snip snap! You have no idea the spiritual toll three apostacies DOES too a person!
IP, Cameron and David! This will be gold. With David humor on Islam and IP and AP dissection of Islam. This will be an amazing review to watch.
I love D wood because hes a fountain overflowing with intrusive thoughts….😂
Intrusive thoughts are distressing and unwelcome thoughts. David welcomes all those strange thoughts! 😂
His career started with them overflowing a little too much
2:52:44 would be true, if Sam himself didn't repeat same points he insulted CP over. If Pope says some outlandish stuff, every Christian has every right to call it out. And no matter how you put it, his words in that meeting were unbiblical and directly condradicted basic Christian doctrines.
Just watching the part about the candle analogy and Dr Craig's face is priceless. He looks physically in pain having to listen to Hijab's response.
That's why Mohammed Hijab, like the rest of the sheikhs, is afraid to debate Sam Shamoon, Dyer, David and Bob because they know very well how certain their defeat is.
sam shamoun was mentally abused and humiliated by shabir ally 20 years ago. 😂😂😂
Watch david vs mh, and you'll see😅
I watched Wood VS Shaikh Othman ben Farouq debate, Othman smashed Wood
😂bro go watch uthman vs Wood debate. Sam even runs away even after being called out by Uthman. Lie to yourself. All good.
Watch a "Debate between Mohammed Hijab vs David Wood"
This is a great review. Much better as a watch than the proper debate itself. Thanks.
Despite WLC's weak defense of the Trinity, Mohammed Hijab selectively muted crucial responses in the video he posted on his channel, seemingly to mislead his followers and create a false narrative that supports his Islamic perspective, leveraging WLC's content for his own apologetic purposes.
Indeed without lies Islam Dies
Trinity can never be defended, it's a flaw, incoherent, does not exist. Whatever a person will come up with, it's a weak defence. You cannot defend it with the Bible.
Weak? Nuts
@@jwatson181 You can't have a strong defense of it when you adhere to a couple weird heresies, so yeah id say weak
@@hunterhewitt8630 he didn't defend just his position. Did you watch the debate???
@Abdul-db8b weak defense of the trinity" - It might be in your opinion that WLC gave a weak defense of the trinity the debate was about is the trinity coherent. WLC simply gave a normal formulation of the trinity which things can be added on to as he stated in this hour-long discussion.
'Mohammad Hijab selectively muted crucial responses in the video he posted on his channel seemingly to mislead his followers and create a false narrative that supports his Islamic perspective, leveraging WLC content for his own apologetic purposes" - This is standard for Dawa guys..
I keep coming back to this stream. One of my favourites!
What muslims are doing is leveling God down to fit within their understanding whereas christians accepts it the way it is presented to us.
Cam, your wit and humour is brilliant😂 I love how Avery played along.
"Mary ate food"
"That almost got me to say my shahada"
Hijab resorted to quote mine because he couldnt refute craig’s arguments…
, used the ignorance of the muslim audience to mischaracterize what craig was saying and pretended philosophical terms didnt mean anything.
you mean hijab did exactly what mohammed did in 7th century when preaching to arabs ... just as hamas is doing exactly what mohammed did in 7th century when waging war against jews & christians?
🍿 That debate was a blast!
Hijab simply misunderstands and claims "you seeeee if I cannot understand then it must be absurd and patently false, you seeee!"
I can’t believe so many Muslims think hijab done something in that debate
God bless you all
CP or Sam is the best opponent for Hijab. Coz all other christian apologists are too nice but CP or Sam will not only trap Hijab on his belief but also give Hijab a taste of his own medicine. I'm not a big fan of how Hijab debates but Hijab needs a taste of his own medicine, because Hijab's followers seem to understands only that language. But Hijab seems to be scared of both of them.
What hijab brought up is actually not an article but a transcript of a video which is part of a series of videos on the Trinity by WLC which is on his UA-cam Channel and in the video he literally states that Cerberus is used as a springboard. One could actually watch his full series of videos to better understand his stance on the Trinity. Also, it didn’t appear to me from that series that he actually denies the Nicene Creed but rather he affirms the second version of the creed. There’s also a whole video on it as part of the series.
Once Avery was added, this became the A-Team.
There is no A-Team. They are all running away from the difficult topics like scientific errors in the Bible and sleigh beating.
@@nadirahmed4224 Not running away, keeping the topic on the topic. Muslims are the ones running away with trying to distract by bringing these topics up.
@nadirahmed4224 Let's test the Quran and I will say shahada if you convince me.
Where is the wall of Dhul Qarnayn and the yaguge and majuge it protects us from?
Wher are the hardened clay stone that pelted the people of the elephant?
Where is the archaeology that proves Mecca is as old as Abraham?
Answer two successfully, and I will say shahada.
@@chrisazure1624 yes I answer these successfully in my debate as Islam is the only religion which debate the hard topics like slavery science in the QURAN and anything else really you can watch my past debates, but you now have to admit Christians are very selective in debating topics. They don’t debate the hard ones which will destroy their religion!
@nadirahmed4224 I'm still waiting. Evidence please.
MOD: Name something you appreciate about your opponent.
HIJAB: I admire his courage to defend such stupid, dishonest, heretical fantasies….
This is the equivalent of the Christian Avengers right here. We just need Sam Shamoun added and no Muslim would stand a chance.
And Christian Prince!
@@Jaaammmbbbooo CP is on the Justice League because like Batman, he doesn't reveal his identity.
So you Christians claim AP? 🤣
Sam is a fraud. He is vile and filthy mouthed while claiming he has the Holy Spirit. Sam the scam is a fake christian and he will turn on us. Mark my words
Sam is having a meltdown defending the wolf pope.
I believe Hijab wasn't really interested in the debate itself but he was trying to demonstrate to as many Muslims as possible the argument from Authority, i.e. that Islam is on average practiced in a more literal way and nuances and differences in opinion are probably less than in Christianity. He then uses that to argue it's a sign that it's more correct. That's pretty much his tact all the way through and he generates different themes to drive the same message. He also is deliberately rude and provocative in a way that seems unsophisticated to a western thinker because it betrays the trust of the interlocutor. It probably shouldn't be interpreted as unsophisticated it should be interpreted for what it is, a disregard and disrespect for the Christian world view.
Hijab is a narcissist who likes to argue in circles and chase his fix of narcissistic supply. He lives in a bubble that he'll lie, steal and cheat to keep from bursting. He has spent his whole life trying to make square scriptures fit into round holes, but no matter how he tries to beat them into shape, they'll never fit, because he knows deep down that it's not true... but he's secretly an atheist and thinks the Bible, for all it's sense, logic and how it ages like a fine wine, isn't true either in his mind.
You man roman paganism 😅
Surviving intellectual debate that scrutinizes every inch of Islamic history and the Quran from a logical philosophical, historical and textual angle will be an odious task for a religion not accustomed to textual criticism. Following the fact that the Quran seems completely plagiarized poorly from ancient Tanak, the gospels, Gnosticism, Arianism and Christian mythology its most likely Islam is breathing is last breath of theological oxygen
Is that the same dude that keeps flexing at the Speaker's Corner whenever a Christian begins to win over a debate?????
Yeah
I very much appreciate the efforts to bring clarity, to unravel, to expose falsity within shifty debate strategies, the outright buffoonery in some cases …that made up the bulk of Mr. Hijab’s input to the debate. I so value the learned commentary about aspects of both the Christian faith I adhere to, but also of what I’m learning to understand are the logical, philosophical and theological issues that we as Christians observe within Islam …and the effects of Islamic teaching on Islamic societies (and therefore effecting entirely to at least partially …most parts of the world). So thank you to Cameron and team for these aspects of your debate review.
As a uni-lingual person, I am pretty much always astonished by people who have not only learned another language, but it learned it well enough to not only participate in a debate like this, and in terms of pure communication… to have more than held his own in getting his ideas across… (so even though I vigorously disagreed with Mr. Hijab), I understood him clearly and well enough to know he was playing fast and loose with language, idioms, turns of phrase etc …in another language. If no one else is impressed by that, I am.
My point in raising this is that most of those who may tune in … from Mr Hijab’s world and worldview, will likely be unilingual, (… and it probably won’t be the King’s English).
With even a small potential for cross cultural and cross faith group dialogue or idea-exchange that this type of debate is an example of, in listening to this debate-review, I was pained and found myself wincing often as the various visual and vocalized ‘apings’ of Mr Hijab started and even dominated the commentary.
Not trying to be a killjoy, and man, I get the pressure (and maybe even the pleasure) these days to “own the [fill-in-blank-opponent]”, but I think if I simply point back to Dr Craig’s way of responding in real time …with thoughtfulness, with rigour, with massive whole-life commitment to learning of Christ, while living in Christ …(and no, Bill Craig is no idol of mine …a small ‘a’ admirer of his work and what little I know of his personal life, sure)
…so, if there are any out there that may tune in from other worldviews and parts of the world, and they googulate your review-conversation, hopefully they’ll hear from Christians about deep commitment to God and His ways, reverence for His word, a commitment to objective, philosophical and theological truths, and a hand reached out in a genuine effort toward neighbourliness
…they hopefully wont be insulted by having (schoolyard) speech mannerisms, cultural exaggerations and cultural put-downs shoved up their nose …even though that approach to dialogue is part (or often even most) of how folks from these communities were trained up from birth in as ‘the way’ …of treating ‘the other’.
Repeating myself, I think Dr. Craig …in the way of Jesus, in the way of Paul, modelled ‘a better way’ for us within the debate itself.
…thank you again though (and Cameron especially) for the work of putting it all together. Really appreciated.
This is an ALL STAR panel. So many lanterns to throw at demons.
If this does not demonstrate that you are on the wrong side I don't know what will. You're labelling as demons the Muslims who worship 1 God, prostrate to God, fast and give charity whilst calling an atheist (someone who rejects God entirely) a guiding light.
@@MG-cc9hi Well the one God you worship, prostrate, fast, and give charity for is Satan so it's not really doing you any favors. Christians also do those things. We just do them for actual God, not the opposition. And what about this demonstrates we are on the wrong side? Thankfully I have been through clinical death and don't need blind faith to know what the truth is. I died, saw Christ, spoke to him, was shown my child 3 years before I had even met my wife to have her by him and everything that I experienced while dead is Biblically accurate. Also, AP is only an Atheist because he found out how bad he had been lied to by Islam and he probably has trust issues. AP has plenty of time to come to Christ. We are just glad he got away from the cult that will usher in the Anti-Christ. It really seems like he's coming closer and closer every day. They are a guiding light to Muslims finding the one and only true living Triune God.
@@MG-cc9hi Surah Al-Mulk (67:5):
"And We have certainly beautified the nearest heaven with stars and have made [from] them what is thrown at the devils and have prepared for them the punishment of the Blaze."
@@RJO16 Allahu Akbar. Beautiful verse. May Allah guide us all.
@@MG-cc9hi so apologise for accusing me of calling Muslims demons? Or prove I've called Muslims demons?
Don't be disingenuous.
Can you link to all your guests in your video descriptions? I’m new to this sort of content and would like to see more. I found Mike winger because of you!
I recommend Inspiring Philosophy (Mike), Apologetics Roadshow (David Wood), and Apostate Prophet (Ridvan). They are all fantastic and I’ve been watching them for a long time.
Muhammad Hijab's rebuttal to Dr. Craig's candle example is not just infantile... it's just sad.
I agree, children behave much better than MH :)
What a treat this review was, thank you
So they have a problem with Trinity but so cool with 52 year old man married to 6 years old child flying on a unicorn 🦄 to the 7th heavens faster than speed of light, what a logic to live by 😂😂😂
This 😂😂😂😂
Mary was married to Joseph in the age of 12, Joseph was 93!!, it's in your book, David and Solomon married hundred of wives, that is also in your book, Jacob fought with God and defeated God!!!!, that is also in your book, how can a human defeat God??, Adam and Eve were in paradise and God sent them down to earth, so why it's not possible that God took Prophet Mohammad to the seventh sky?, knowing that paradise is more higher than the skies, or just because it's in your bible it's truth, but other scriptures aren't
Dang, Hijab got pumbled in that debate. I didn't even know it was possible to perform this bad in a debate. I disagree with W.LC on a lot however he just massecurd Hijab here. I don't think Hijab was able to effectively counter a single point or argument made by W.L.C.
☦️Nice try liars, you are so heretical that you would defend a pagan like WLC. If Hijab is so weak then how come he ended Woodhead the clown's career & ever since he is obsessed with him?🤔
This is going to be EPIC!
Ok David but you know that Sam exaggerated nobody is perfect but CP doesn't deserve insults. Sam is wrong
Where did they talk about that
@@mathewpt4478 am end of the video
AP'S response was very cringe. He's sucking up to Scamounian. Very sad and embarrassing to see.
@@morghe321 Sam is a smart man. Not sure why you are calling him a scam. Because he is Catholic now? He has plenty of time to come around to the true bride of Christ the Eastern Orthodox Church. They are all friends. Sam included. He is a Christian and he can quote scripture better than most. Humans are fallible creatures and sometimes we are wrong. All we can do is correct and hope he continues to search for truth. Because the Pagan Roman Catholic Church sure isn't it. We don't need to bully or talk down to him because he's wrong. We all make mistakes. He has time to fix it. AP is also Atheist and doesn't really get in between the denominational arguments Christian's debate over. It's not really his place. Simply put, people can disagree and still be friends and support each other. Exactly what Christ would want.
CP mocked apostolic christians for their veneration of Mother Mary and icons. Calling them pagans and comparing them to "mohamedans".
Yes, many will try to separate! Trust with confidence with cooperation in front! Keep watch!
David's sense of humour is remarkable
IP's cat has better arguments than Mo Hijab.
Excellent video.
2:48:00 CP criticised the Pope which made Sam Shamoun upset and attacked CP
Danke shön für deine arbeit
As a muslim, I believe brother hijab got defeated
Nice try mate.
Sure, Eduard!
😂 this guy.
Du bist kein muslim du paulus. Und man muss schon ziemlich blind und arrogant sein, dass offensichtliche zu verneinen. Euer Craig David wurde REGELRECHT ZERSTÖRT 👻
@@theLYtube Yeah sure mr.eduard you're defintly a muslman, lol hahahhhahaha wtf he made me laught, checkmate, lol
Thanks for what y'all do!
I’m Jewish . I don’t believe in Jesus nor the concept of the Trinity . But I support the Christians. At least their Christianty teaches love and tolerance . Christianity today makes more civilized peaceful people ❤
love the crew here
Edit: (and disclaimer) After people pointed out that my explanation is modalism, I went to find out what that was, since I've truly never heard of it before. From what I saw explained as modalism, my example would fall right in. My disclaimer is that I believe in the Triune God, 1 being 3 different persons and in no way was my intention to support a heretical view, rather to find a way to explain the Trinity to someone who has difficulty understanding, especially if they don't believe in the metaphysical. I will not be deleting my comment (CC can do so if he wants, I obviously don't mind), since I think that there may be other people who don't know about modalism and I have accidentally provided a perfect example for it.
About examples to explain the Trinity I have been thinking it this way : Let's talk about Matt. Matt is 1 being. Matt has a partner, Matt has a best friend, and Matt has a dog. Depending on who he is addressing, Matt is a different person. If Matt starts behaving towards his partner the same way he behaves towards his dog or his best friend, the partner is going to say "You're acting like a different person" . The same way the 1 Divine Being, the Triune God, reveals Himself to us. He revealed Himself as the strict father to initially teach us the stricktest way in order to not fall into darkness because He loves us, when we couldn't do it, He revealed Himself as the One who will sucrifice Himself for us, since we are not able to stand alone. because He loves us. And later when we need guidance and support in every day life, He reveals Himself as the Holy Spirit, to help us and guide us in our incompetence to take the best possible steps towards Him, because he loves us. And to finish up with the Matt example, when Matt has something to do, that might not be the most pleasant thing, but he knows that it is for the best, he will end up talking to himself, to see if there is another way, a different solution, but in the end he knows that this unpleasant thing is the only way.
Simply brilliant! Thank you for this, more people need to see this! In Yeshua Jesus' name, I hope more people can see this explanation on the trinity and understand and digest it and one day accept it! Amen!
This would be in the logical sense the relative identity model of the Trinity.
@manoflowmoralvalue1560 yes, that was my goal. I though "how would you explain the Trinity to someone who doesn't believe in the metaphysical/soul/spirit.?" .
I think this explanation is a heresy. I think it's called modalism, but I could be wrong. The problem is that this explanation does not account for 3 *persons* in the Trinity. The Son prays to the Father (and not to himself).
@mortensimonsen1645 my last sentence was to account for that. The Son knows the will of the father but since the Torture is something unpleasant He will still pray to the Father . I don't know about modalism and I dont see how what I said is a herecy since I'm not claiming that this is exactly how the Trinity works, it's an explanation for someone who doesn't believe in the metaphysical. No example could possible be the Trinity, other than the Trinity it self, however, in the same way a mathematician had to start from 1+1, describing the Trinity as we believe in it may not be understood by someone whose stuck as to how 1 being can be 3 persons.
The argument that the Trinity can't be true because it is hard to understand is laughable. Are Muslim apologists suggesting that God should be easily understandable? Is that how small their God is?
Do we have to be scholars to explain it ? Or try to explain the unexplainable?
So many books been written to try to explain the trinity
They go through labyrinths of confusion to try to explain the unexplainable
The apostles were not scholars
They had normal life jobs
Satan is the author of confusion not God almighty
Satan has blinded the world from the truth
So allah is easily understandable, how can a lower creature like us understand the knowledge and power of Almighty God, your logic is so stupid 😂
I bet David Wood is still salty because of the fact that he got defeated by MH in a debate
😂 What an opening dudes.
This is exactly why I'm tuning in 😅
Debate is an hour. Stream is 3 hours!
was pretty interesting and funny to watch that review of the debate.
magnificent ensemble 👌
Ex-Muslim here. Muslim apologists often try to argue that Quran 5:116 doesn’t address the Trinity because the term "Trinity" is not explicitly mentioned, which is understandable given the theological implications of acknowledging it. However, this refusal does not change the overwhelming evidence. The word "Trinity" came from the Latin *Trinitas*, meaning "the state of being three," and the Qur'an does address this concept directly. It insists that Allah is not three, as seen in verses like 4:171 and 5:73 in the same chapter, which states, "Do not say 'three'; desist-it is better for you." Notably, 5:116 is the only verse that mentions the three-Allah and the other two-choosing Mary instead of the Holy Spirit. Thus, claiming that this verse is not about the Trinity simply because the term is absent is a non-sequitur, much like the absence of "Trinity" in the Nicene Creed does not negate its articulation of Trinity. Furthermore, if the Qur'an didn't find it necessary to address the Trinity, why are Muslims today so focused on critiquing it? Do they know more than Allah?!
You all are my people 😂 you guys need to do this more often.
Hijab turned it to a Q and A.
Go back and read the topic of the debate.
"Is the trinity coherent"
So of course it's Craig on the defensive side.
I am Muslim. Here are some questions, I pose to Dr. Craig:
Q1.
Let us grant that your concept of one god with 3 persons is coherent. The 3 persons out of benevolence and love have the same knowledge, the same will, …. And all 3 act in concert. What would be incoherent, if these 3 persons were 3 gods with 1 person each, with the same properties of the 3 persons of the one god: “benevolence, love, the same knowledge, the same will, …. And all 3 act in concert”?
If you were asked to defend polytheism (as an exercise), would you be able to construct a defensible coherent version of polytheism?
Q2.
Is there anything incoherent in having one god with 2 persons, 4 persons, 5 persons, … n persons (even: an infinite number of persons)??
Is there anything special in the number 3? (I thought special numbers in divine attributes are constrained to be 0,1 and infinity)??
Q3.
If the doctrine of trinity is a cornerstone of the knowledge of the true God, should it not be expected that the chosen servants and messengers of God should be aware of it? Do you believe that Noah, Abraham, and Moses knew of trinity and believed in trinity?
Q4.
Do you believe that the doctrines of the true faith are revealed gradually (step by step), that the Old Testament only revealed one person, the Father, and that the New Testament revealed the other 2 persons? Why is it then impossible, that later, when Christ comes to earth again, he will reveal to mankind the trueness of many different persons, some of which were perhaps mistaken to be Gods in Hinduism and other polytheistic religions? Could it be, that, Hinduism (e.g.), is an evolution of an originally “monotheistic” religion with a “multi-person”-God?
Q5.
What is the degree of certainty, with which you state your belief in trinity, if you disregard personal experience and restrict yourself to reasonable objective arguments and facts? Is it not all grounded in the degree of certainty of the transmission of the “New Testament” and of the degree of certainty of its interpretation?
Q6.
But these 2 pillars are at least controversial? There are undeniable proofs of the corruption in the New Testament. Is it “unreasonable” to doubt the honesty and the integrity of Paul? Is it unreasonable to reject the “Gospel of John“ as divine revelation? Didn’t an intelligent man like Isaac Newton, conclude Unitarianism from the same bible?
Q7.
Do you believe that many Christian communities believed false doctrines of faith in the first centuries (Jewish Christians, Gnostics, followers of Arius, followers of Nestor, the Coptic Church, the Greek-Orthodox Church, the Catholic Church, …) and that it is possible, that all Christians have some wrong doctrines of belief ()e.g. about trinity) for centuries, until some “scientists” reveal the right interpretation of the Bible (perhaps in the 21st century)?
Is it not possible, that new reliable manuscripts about the life and teachings of Jesus may be discovered, and that many new errors in the gospels are found? Could it be that these manuscripts will prove the truth of the Christian sect “Islam”?
Ok
1:27:18 - AP's laugh had me rolling 🤣
I love you guys ❤️. Ps: its Kerveros, not Kerberes
I dont think WLC was the best representative of trinitarian thought considering he represents such a minority, as well as the fact that Hijab was right, it sounded heretical. But all in all, I don't think anyone won because it really never went anywhere.
Tricky business the trinity, as it always seems to expose believers as followers of men rather than GOD(and/or Jesus Christ)
🇵🇸☦️Stop calling it "trinitarian" or call us that, western heretics. Being a Christian is by definition entails a belief in the Trinity, and our Trinity is not a Modalistic Tri-personal being, it is 3 persons who are distinct beings - that is what all fathers taught!
@@LevDavidovichCampos
Nowhere in scripture is Christianity defined as the belief in the trinity - but rather, that these are the words and beliefs of men rather than the written truth of GOD.
That is why there is not one single person in all of Bible history who is worshipping, teaching or preaching a triune god - which would include, though not limited-to the son of GOD Himself - of whom we know worshiped in truth.
PS, nowhere in scripture are we told to follow fathers, but rather, we are told to follow Jesus Christ - iow, follow Jesus, not men!
@@smalltimer4370 1. Tahweed as a term doesn't exist in the Quran either, but the reality of the concept is, and the Son of God has no problem in worshipping his Father YHVH who is 1st in rank, so nice try.
2. Look at your sick profile pic, you call yourself a religious person. Before talking about religion, repent.
@@LevDavidovichCampos OK, Orthobro
Love this
Based review!
Anyone notice Hitjob would run out of air talking? He got so worked up, he forgot to breathe. 😅
He lost his place in his script
And his notes 😂 he was reading from notes 😂😂😂😂😂😂
@@Swordoftruth24 doesn't know how a debate work 🤣🤣🤣
@@bugs-bunny-k6g I mean you are supposed to have notes. But reading from them like a cue card isn't really how debates work. Imagine watching a formal debate where the guy reads directly off his notes the entire time. Almost as if he didn't memorize his lies.
@@stonesheeva7158
He had quotes, to make sure everything is accurate, didn't you see that MH accused MLC of using some analogy then MLC said no I didn't say it was an analogy then MH pulled up a quote and therr MLC's face became red, it's embarrassing.
Love seeing you 4 together ❤ 💖 💕 ♥
IP looks like a fusion of AP and David Wood. Like David Wood was reincarnated as a Turk.
Hahah😅
Bravo to Catholic Christians for their Church holds the truth. 😊
Is Ap secretly Christian now? Coz he has softened his atheistsic views and agnosticism towards Christianiry latley
He's Agnostic now.
@@Rob__Jameshe is Orthodox
The Bullying will continue until Baptism Improves - D Wood, probably
@@80krauser
Well, it happened in the past, so.
His wife converted to Christianity also so I'm sure he doesn't want to offend his wife either
You can simultaneously state that something is an analogy of "a" trinity, and that it is not an analogy of "the" Trinity".
Christianity is paganism pure 😅
Lol😅 lol complete contradictions 😅
@Aliali-vc3pk It would only be viewed as a contradiction if someone lacked the capacity to understand the simple concept. It would be like saying it's a contradiction to claim that an airplane is a type of craft which is designed to operate in a way that overcomes gravity, and to demonstrate how that is possible, I will point to a kite as an analogy of something designed to operate in a way that overcomes gravity. The kite is not an analogy of the plane, but an analogy of a craft that operates against gravity. Therefore, it's not an absurdity to suggest that a plane is designed to operate against gravity. To then argue that I am suggesting that a plain is like a kite, that's just a failed accusation due either to intellectual dishonesty, or intellectual deficiency.
Bruh! You people really don't want me to work today. 😂
Remember together!
I will admit that I think WLC made a misstep by bringing up Tawhid. The topic of the debate is "is the Trinity Coherent?" Not "Which is more Coherent, Trinity or Tawhid?" If I was Hijab I would have simply pointed out WLC has made a Whataboutism and Tawhid could be later debated and moved on. If Hijab had mentioned Tawhid first then he'd have opened the door for WLC to then attack it's incoherence. However Hijab took the bait, hook, line, and sinker because of his huge ego problem and he then proceeded to bumble the defense 😆
'Is the trinity coherent' lends itself to comparing the trinity to the alternative. Is hijab a jew or muslim? He's a muslim. So why wouldn't it make sense to debate the trinity in light of an alternative?
@@randomuser6306whataboutism and stick to the topic. But hijab fell for the bait
@@whm_w8833 whataboutism is excusing yourself for what the opponent does, and I clearly didn't do that, so your argument makes no sense.
I posited that Craig brought up tawhid to compare the Christian history of wrestling over the trinity with the Islamic history of wrestling over tawhid, and argue that simply because there's disagreement doesn't have any bearing on the truth or falsehood of the trinity or tawhid. I thought that was obvious to an impartial observer.
Hijab did point out that WLC has made whataboutism, it's called "Tu quoque fallacy" which Hijab literally said. WLC kept repeating the point over and over, and then Hijab crushed WLC by saying "Even if I believed the moon was made of cheese, it doesn't make the trinity any more coherent"..
@@randomuser6306 The question is "why is Christianity correct", so even if what your opponent believes is incorrect, you still haven't answered the question, because this isn't white and black, there isn't 2 beliefs in the world, the question is still unanswered.
When you use two matches simultaneously to ignite a candle, it's unlikely that both matches will contribute equally to the ignition process. There are a few reasons for this:
Flame interference: The flames from the two matches might interfere with each other, reducing their effectiveness in heating the wick.
Heat dissipation: The heat from one match might be dissipated into the surrounding air before it reaches the wick, reducing its contribution to the ignition process.
Wick saturation: If one match is able to heat the wick to a sufficient temperature to ignite it, the second match might not be able to contribute significantly, as the wick may already be saturated with heat.
So Craig is completely wrong each matches is capable but when you use both then they both will contribute in igniting the candle ( 50% or
It's an imperfect analogy as all analogies are when we talk about the eternal God. Analogies aren't arguments--they're attempts to help people visualize and grasp the argument. So no argument is dependent on that analogy. But it can be a helpful starting point in trying to grasp with our finite minds the infinite God.
how boring DW (and sometimes AP) is when he overexagerates by imitating dawah people. I agree on joking but everytime like this is so annoying. I love listening to debate reviews, I couldn't wait to listen to this one, but , it's too much. Too long and too dispersive, plus screaming and yelling every single time just for the taste of imitating is so frustrating.
It would be awesome if debate reviews could be more concise, dense and entertaining without slipping into useless loss of time.
Thanks! I thought I was the only one who thought so. Yeah, it isn't funny anymore. Way too exaggerated and they do it too often.
Also, it gives ammunition to the Dawah guys. It makes David and AP look clownish.
@@morghe321 agreed!
You might prefer academic debates. Even secular scholars like Nicolai Sinai are overly respectful towards Muslims.
This is not that.
Send a thief to catch a thief.
May God bless you guys, AP may the force be with you! Nano, Nano!
Cameron seems to be so annoyed 😅
Dang. Am at the gym. I couldn't finish my set after hearing David's impression.
should’ve brought Mike winger here
Dawood can't allow that Nerd to be here.
Oh that would have been a bloodbath 😂
Students shared "i" Am will say, do thy best not to shame thyself. Yes, the other fingers will point back at thee!
You're finished boy 😂😂
I'm an ex-Hindu and I was explained the trinity as such when I was born again:
The Sun is the heat+light+celestial object. You cannot imagine the celestial object without its' heat or light. It's ONE. Such is the trinity.
That made a whole lot of sense to me.
Partisliisil😅
But islam believe in 4 Gods, the daughters of Allah
Your God Allah has no daughters. Where are you even gettting this info?
113 gods actually. His 13 divine attributes and his names.
@@aaroncoby5508 al-Lat, al-'Uzza, Manat...Quran 53:19
@@aaroncoby5508 history, allah was one of many pagan gods of arabia he even had a wife.
@@aaroncoby5508 Well, Momo was supposed to be demon-possessed when he gave those verses.
this debate was a class on patience and keeping things professional! i learned a lot. I’ve only seen Hijab one other time, so I was shocked by his behavior. Hijabs behavior was quite annoying, AND the voices by the reviewers were also overkill and annoying!
Great content! i’ll be subscribing for more!
*mocking voices
I love Jesus. I'm glad to be in Jesus gang❤❤🙏
☦️Jesus has no "gang", stop blaspheme as those Protestant & liberal fake Christians clowns who embarrass the Christian faith. Repent.
@@LevDavidovichCampos Says the clown who embarrasses the Christian faith
@@Furinkazan541 Get help & repent🙏❤️
@@LevDavidovichCampos You first, clown 🤡
Great discussion. A little note - I think it’s better if the host ( with the mic ) didn’t try to take over the discussion. Wood and AP discussions are the BEST .
Mohamed hijab educated by Dr William lane
Hijab spent his whole time dodging going to the scripture text, the Bible of the Quran. He kept focusing on individuals in history. They used the same text we have today.
Your faces says all.😂😂
That Hijab is an idiot?
indeed, they are full of sympathy for the misled mohamadans
@@ricetanzania4148 ohhh i see
Yess! Amen my brother! They can't stop laughing 😂 Hijab really failed bad this time😂😂
@@lotus9865 sure dude
Just go and get some info about the mental health of WLC(and i respect him).
So IP's position on Trinity is basically Orthodox. That's nice. 💯
haha all of you are right.. I like that explanation of causal determination
I was Christian but converted after watching that debate Alhamdullah
Cap
Chad
@IslamTruth-kr8voI call BS. You were never a Christian
Y’all Mudslims need to stop the Taqiyyah. Without lies Islam dies
@IslamTruth-kr8vo I used to be a Christian, after watching the debate I became even more Christian الحمد لله