 Ladies and gentlemen, thrilled to have you here for another epic debate. If this is your first time here at Modern Day Debate, want to let you know my name is James Coons and I'm your host as we are attempting to host neutral debates in the most fairway possible. We want to give everybody their shot to make their case on a level playing field. And so, want to let you know no matter what walk of life you are from, whether you be atheist, Christian, Muslim, you name it folks, we are thrilled to have you with us. Thanks for being here and want to let you know as well folks, if you haven't hit that subscribe button, hit that subscribe button right now as we have a lot of epic debates coming up. You will see at the bottom right of your screen folks. You won't want to miss this. This is coming up on Monday and you'll want a notification because we are going to have Dr. Ben Burgess who is a professor going against Pastor Douglas Wilson who is he was actually the kind of co-star you could say of the hit documentary collision with Christopher Hitchens. And so it's going to be epic folks, they'll be debating whether or not atheism is immoral. So you don't want to miss that folks is going to be epic. And with that, want to let you know a couple of other quick housekeeping type things. First we are on podcast. So if you pull out your favorite podcast app and you type in modern day debate, do that right now. And let me know if you can't find us on there, we will work to get on there so that I'm really, you guys I'm thrilled. I'm so excited that tons of people are downloading the podcast or finding useful and I'm so encouraged by that. So we hope that it's useful to you. And so yes, pull out your favorite podcast app. See if we're on there and we are excited folks to get into tonight's debate. I want to let you know we are so thankful for our guests want to let you know it's true tonight is a controversial topic. Want to ask you folks, please remember, attack the arguments, not the people. So, hey, actually 100% just, you know, be rabid, be vigorous in attacking arguments. That's where we want the focus on the arguments, not the people. And with that, we are going to introduce our fine people with us. We're glad that they're with us tonight. And so we'll start with AP. Apostate Prophet, we're thrilled to have you here. What can people expect to find your link? Well, thank you so much for hosting this. I'm Apostate Prophet Ridvan Aydemir. My link, I'm mostly working on talking about Islam specifically, also sometimes about religion in general, but generally, but mostly about Islam. And I focus on criticizing Islam, which is my former religion, which I practiced for many years, very devoutly and diligently. And yeah, that's what you can find if you visit me. Absolutely. Thanks very much, AP. We're thrilled to have you and Nadir, we're thrilled to have you back. Glad you're here. What can people expect to find at your link? Well, you can probably get updates on the latest debates, which I'm having. I debate several different topics like Quran and modern science, some refutations to some people, and just basically some question and answers on Islam. So you could probably come to my YouTube page and subscribe to get updated on the latest debates. Absolutely. Well, thanks so much, Nadir. And with that, folks, want to let you know we are going to jump into the opening statements. I'll give you a quick gist summary on the format, and then we'll go right into it. So format is simple. We're going to have 10 minutes from each side in terms of their openings, starting with AP. Then we're going to have, for 50 to 60 minutes, we'll kind of play it by a year, see how the conversation goes, where it'll be in two minute interval. So just to kind of keep it, you know, where we are making sure that everybody gets equal time that's important to us. And then we'll go into about 30 minutes of Q&A. So if you happen to have a question, feel free to fire it into the old live chat. If you tag me with at modern day debate, that makes it easier for me to get every question in the list for that Q&A. So thrilled to have you here, folks, and thrilled to have our guests. So I have got the timer set on my side. And so AP, when you are ready, the floor is all yours. Awesome. I'm going to share my screen quickly. I'm just, we just figured that out that I can actually do it while having myself on the screen ends that. But I hope it works. OK, I'm starting. So first off, thanks to James and modern day debate for hosting this important debate and thanks to Nader Ahmed for participating in this. Let me know if this looks OK and sounds OK. OK, wonderful. So again, again, thanks to James and thanks to Nader Ahmed for agreeing this for this crucial debate. It is kind of unfortunate, I think, that so many Muslim voices and apologists and scholars among all of them. Nader Ahmed is pretty much the only person who is willing to come and have this debate in public. Although the debate is a question about a question that is so extremely crucial is the Quran dangerous. This is a question that is on everyone's mind. If you make a simple Google search, stay with me, for the most dangerous religion, you will see that Islam is here everywhere. You will find Islam immediately. That is not because Google tells us the truth about which one is the most dangerous religion. This is because this is on everyone's mind. This is the public perception about Islam. Isn't it interesting that we constantly talk about when we talk about Islam, we constantly talk about how violent and hateful and intolerant and morally questionable it is. I mean, which other religion is constantly talked about as this violent, intolerant religion, this religion that we are supposed to be scared of, this religion that spreads so much terror in the world? The reason that Muslim apologists are not widely engaged in debates on this topic is not that they are not interested in the topic, no, on the contrary. Muslim apologists, scholars, voices everywhere constantly spend so many resources, so much of their time defending Islam, fighting Islamophobia, trying to explain that Islam is not dangerous and that we have all somehow misunderstood Islam. But they refuse to honestly talk to us to get to the bottom of this problem. And I hope that we can address this problem today. To me, a former Muslim who has basically committed social suicide by leaving Islam and criticizing Islam, the answer to the question is pretty clear. The Quran is dangerous. Islam is dangerous. Dangerous is an understatement. If you picked only a very few specific verses from the Quran, you could be introduced to the false impression that Islam is quite compassionate. Sorry, let me remove myself from here quickly. That Islam is quite compassionate, that it deals justly with the people of the scripture, which are the Jews and Christians. Or some Muslim apologists will selectively present Quran verses like one to you, which says that Muslims are not forbidden from being just and righteous towards those who did not fight them. But pay attention to the wording here. It says that Allah does not forbid you from being just and righteous. It doesn't say that you must be good to the disbelievers, that you must treat them equally. You must love them like you love yourselves. That would be indeed very far from what the Quran really says and what the Quran really is about. So let me get to that. If you start reading the Quran, you will be very quickly introduced to the Quran's strangely hostile attitude toward the reader, the disbeliever, and everyone and everything. It starts with, within the first two minutes of reading the Quran, it starts saying that this is a book about which there is no doubt. And then immediately it starts bashing everyone who disbelieves. It says that those who disbelieve for them is a great punishment. Allah will punish them. That they are deceivers who try to deceive Allah and deceive the believers. That in the hearts of disbelievers or those who pretend to believe, there is a disease and that Allah is increasing that disease. It says that the disbelievers are deaf, dumb, and blind and that they will not listen and not obey. And this is only the beginning. According to different numbers, according to numbers taken by different individuals and groups, the Quran deals in the majority of its content with hate, with disbelievers and threats and hellfire. If you go further into the Quran, it describes those who do not believe in Allah, the disbelievers, as the worst of living creatures or it describes the disbelieving Christians and Jews and the polytheists as the worst of creatures. This is directly mentioned in the Quran. I mean, just think about how awful and dehumanizing this is. If you look at a different verse, Chapter 7, verse 179, it likens the disbelievers to cattle and then adds, rather they are more astray. Just think of how this book, which is the central text of Islam, believed to be the eternal speech of Allah, dehumanizes others and treats them as unworthy, lower creatures, lower than cattle, used for milk or meat, for example. I mean, the Quran refers to us disbelievers, you disbelievers, again and again, as deaf, dumb and blind, sick, deluded, dishonest liars, not to be trusted. And by us, I mean, I'm not including myself here because I'm an ex-Muslim. I'm someone who has left Islam. And for us, for people who have left Islam, Muhammad's words were very clear. Whoever changes his religion, kill him. Pretty, pretty clear. If we go on, we can see that the Quran says several times that the Muslims are not to befriend the Christians and the Jews, that the Christians and Jews are friends of one another and whoever befriends them is one of them. And this is not about some specific historical context to which this is restricted. In no time during Muhammad's life were all Jews and all Christians together united at war with the Muslims and allied to each other. On the contrary, Jews were separate tribes in Muhammad's time and surrounding and they were all eradicated by Muhammad under different pretenses. And this command not to befriend the Jews and Christians is not something random which you cannot find anywhere. This is directly in Muslim society. For example, here is an image, a picture directly taken from a bus stop in Turkey which in Turkish presents this Quran verse. The Quran insults the Christians and Jews because it says the Christians worship the Messiah, Jesus as the Son of God. It also falsely, strangely says that the Jews say, as well as the Son of God and it insults them and says may Allah destroy them. But here, chapter nine, verse 29 is one of my favorite verses in the Quran. It says, fight those who do not believe in Allah or in the last day and who do not consider unlawful what Allah and his messenger have made unlawful until they give the Jizya willingly while they are humbled. So the Quran basically sets a principle, a policy for Muslims universally on how to deal with the disbelievers to fight them if they do not believe. The Jizya as strange as it sounds is not a bodily fluid. It is actually a form of protection money taken from the non-Muslim people living in Islamic lands so that they may be allowed to live in Islamic lands under inferior conditions in return for protection money. If they do not pay the protection money their life is not protected and they can be basically taken and killed without any consequences. Yeah, give me a second. So, and this is not simply something that is mentioned in the Quran. This order to fight the disbelievers and to rule over them was practiced in Islamic history from the beginning to the end throughout Islam's spread to the world in its fight against the disbeliever. Islam spread on the world map and applied this demi-system until the 20th century. And this is not something that I'm just saying this is actually something that is mentioned in the Mukaddima which is a book written by Ibn Khaldun one of the most prominent historians in the Muslim community. It says, in the Muslim community the holy war is a religious duty because of the universalism of the Muslim mission and the obligation to convert everybody to Islam either by persuasion or by force. Therefore, Caliphate and royal authority are united in Islam so that the person in charge can devote the available strength to both of them at the same time. The other religious groups did not have a universal mission and the holy war was not a religious duty to them. And this is one of the most prominent Muslim historians. I'm seeing that I actually wrote prepared much more than my time has left. But here is an example from Muhammad. Muhammad is described as the perfect example for Muslims to follow. And here is what Muhammad once said to his followers very prominently known a very popular hadith report about Muhammad. He said, I have been ordered to fight the people till they say, none has the right to be worshipped but Allah and whoever says that his life and property will be saved by me. And these are the words of Muhammad. You clearly see that the Quran is dangerous. Muhammad practiced it dangerously, spread it dangerously. Islamic history speaks for itself. The question is easy to answer. And I will further prove that within my responses to Muhammad in the next half hour or more. But the question, the answer to the question is very clear. The Quran is dangerous. Dangerous is an understatement. All right, thank you very much. We will kick it over to Nadir. Thrilled to have you here as well, Nadir. So the floor is all yours. It'll give you an extra 10 seconds as well. And thanks for being here. I wanna remind you folks, both of our guests are linked in the description. If you wanna hear more folks, you can, those links are at the very top of the description waiting for you right now. So with that, Nadir, the floor is all yours. Thank you so much for that, apostate prophet. So the verse which he quoted, I have been ordered to fight the non-believers until they pay the jizya. So apostate prophet made this conclusion that you see Islam is violent, it's teaching to attack non-believers. But did you know that the Quran actually states only the people who are not peaceful? You didn't know that, right? Ridwan, it states that in the Quran. So there's a lot more than that. He said basically that, the Quran teaches that you don't have to be good to the disbelievers. It also explicitly states in the Quran, you must be good to the disbelievers and we'll get into all of that today. Now he was zigzagging, going from the Quran to the Hadith, going to different commentaries. And in that zigzag, what he's doing, he's trying to cover up a problem. 95% of what he stated is actually not in the Quran. For example, he said Islam teaches to kill the apostates. This is not in the Quran. Nevertheless, I do wanna talk to you about that and we can clear up your confusion on that as well. So then he said he felt insulted by Islam by some of the statements, but that's not what we're here to talk about whether you feel insulted or your feelings got hurt. Okay, we are here to find out is the Quran dangerous? So let me share my desktop over here and let me make it, basically show you exactly where in the Quran it says you only wage war against those people who are not peaceful. So let me go ahead and share my desktop over here. So I know this might be a little bit small for you, but we're gonna look in the reasons for warfare. You're gonna find they're all noble in the Quran. We also find in the Quran, it specifically says you do not fight innocent people. And then we're gonna look and see peace. So Islam clearly teaches you don't fight peaceful people. So we're gonna go get into all of this, but before we do that, I actually had a discussion with this with a guy named David Wood. And so we had a little discussion on this. In fact, if I could find out where my little thing here is. Oh, I can't find it, but anyways, and unfortunately that video, basically there was a video clip in which me and him were in that. However, that right here, I'm sorry, I lost my thing, in which they claim that I have changed the topic. I want everybody to understand one thing. This is a hoax. Our debate was deliberately edited to make it look like I changed the topic. You can listen, you can go to my YouTube page, look at my response. And I hope that nobody will deliberately edit this debate in that same kind of dishonest manner. So okay, I just wanted to throw that out over there. So let me go ahead and let me show you where in the Quran does it explicitly state, you do not fight peaceful non-believers. This is the 491 spot check, chapter four, verse 91. It says over there, you will find others who want security from you and security from their people. But whenever they are tempted into civil discord, they plunge into it. Now this is very important, listen to this. If they withdraw from you, nor offer you peace. Did you see that, please underline that statement if you have the Quran? Nor offer you peace, nor restrain their hands. Seize them and execute them wherever you find them. Did you see, so it's not just a one-time killing. So the Quran is clearly teaching, you don't kill, it doesn't say innocent civilian. That word is not in the Quran, but a definition of what an innocent civilian is in the Quran. Again, what is that definition? If they do not withdraw from you, nor offer you peace, or restrain their hands from fighting you, then it says you can kill them and seize them wherever you find them. So it says, and we have made for you against them a clear authorization. What is this authorization, 929, go out and fight. So the Quran makes it very clear from this definition, you do not basically kill innocent people and you do not fight peaceful people. So let's take a look at another reference. In fact, if you notice, most of what apostate Prophet brought up wasn't actually in the Quran, but we'll get into that. So now he said basically, in fact, let me get to another reference over here. Yeah, so I wanna give an example from the Hadith of Prophet Muhammad, Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam, okay. Here is a statement, actually there were the group of people who actually he basically had a war with. And the context was the non-believer, the Quraysh, the non-believers whom he was defending committed horrific atrocities against the Muslims. They were killing them, engaging in religious persecution and torturing, so they have to fled from Mecca to Medina. So now in response to that, now they came after them and they still won't stop. So it became very clear they're not gonna stop until they force all the Muslims back into idolatry. So then a war was basically commenced. That's a historical background. This group of people were called the Quraysh people. So here we find over here, Muhammad now sets an army to go out to fight, to basically protect the homeland. And listen to what it says over here. He's going to fight these people, the Quraysh people. It says over here that, again going through the whole long list of people of Awaba, they basically sent a man to make peace with Prophet Muhammad Sallallahu alayhi wa sallam. So now what happens here? These are the disbelievers, which apostate Prophet was complaining about, look, you got to go fight the disbelievers. They said, listen, we don't want to fight. Look what the text here says. This is from Sira Ibn Ishaq. I'm sorry, I forgot to give you that reference. He says, then he returned to Medina without meeting war. Did you see that? So this is very important. There are many battles which took place inside the life of Prophet Muhammad Sallallahu alayhi wa sallam. And there's maybe thousands of pages of historical records. You will never find anybody in the Quran or the hadith or in any literature of innocent people being fought. People being fought just because of their religious beliefs or because they're quote non-believers, you will never find anybody like that. And if any of the non-believers want peace, look how Prophet Muhammad grants them peace and basically walks away. Why? Because God said inside chapter four verse 91, the 491 spot check. It says, if they are restraining their hands, they're not aggressively coming towards you and they offer you peace. If they're not doing this, then you can go ahead and kill them. So here we see the 491 spot check in action over here. So this is a challenge for a positive prophet over here. Show me in the Quran or the, and if you can't find it in the Quran, you should say that it's not in the Quran. You should say that rather than zigzag it. Hadith, Quran, commentary, be honest and say apostasy laws are not in the Quran. So we're going to come after him tonight and we're going to get that, we're going to extract that confession out of him. What's really in the Quran and what's not there? And then the challenge here, show me in any of our literature, if you can't find in the Quran, find and go to the Hadith. You can't find it there, then wherever, but show me where any innocent people or people who are non-believers were fought on the account of their religion. You will never find this. Okay, so now let's get to the final RIP. So we're basically RIP in his argument. So what is the reason for war? What does the Quran actually say why there is war? Now let's listen to very carefully why the Quran is actually saying what are the reasons for war? It says over here. And why don't you fight in the cause of Allah? Allah returned the question back to you, apostate. Helpless man and women and children, crying out, oh Lord deliver us from this town whose people are oppressive and appointed for one. And then it goes on. So the issue here, a presence of a protector. This is why Allah has issued jihad. And you will see, let's go on to, and then here comes the shocker. And the why you should go out and fight the non-believers. Over here it says inside chapter 22 verse 40, were it not that Allah repels one people by means of another's monasteries, churches, synagogues and mosques where God's name is being mentioned would have been demolished. So the purpose of jihad, the purpose of war according to the Quran is to protect the religious freedoms of all of mankind. So now here's the second challenge we're going to ask apostate. Where is all that fight them till you convert to Islam that whatever that quote, in fact, let me get that exact quote he was saying, fight them till you, or till everybody becomes Muslim, fight till Islam is a religion of the land or any of this stuff. I would love to see that in the Quran. And again, my challenge to you is show it to me first in the Quran. If it's not there then just say, look it's not in the Quran. Then we can go and look at other sources and that's fine too. Because remember the subject of tonight's discussion is what is specifically written in the Quran. So that's the reason. So RIP, this is why Islam is a religion of peace and why Islam is a religion of truth because the reason for warfare, as you see on your screen and this is the only reasons you're gonna find are noble and it's really, it's a great war ethics which the whole world should embrace. Secondly, because it looks out for innocent people, hey, whoa, whoa, the 491 spot check and it explicitly state you do not kill, and so you do not wage war against peaceful people. And so I guess my time is up. We'll go ahead and start this two minute back and forth. Thank you very much, Nadir. What we will do folks is wanna let you know as Nadir had mentioned, we will have two minute intervals and during that time, the speakers will give each person their chance to make their response. And so wanna let you know that will be very controlled and also wanna let you know as well folks, we are very excited to let you know, yes, in case you hadn't heard folks, we are pumped about this Monday's upcoming debate on whether or not atheism is immoral. So that should be a juicy one. Don't forget to hit that subscribe and notification bell for that one, you guys. And that's pictured at the bottom right of your screen. So with that, thank you so much gentlemen. We are going to kick it into those two minute intervals. We'll start with AP, the floor is all yours. So I find it very funny that Nadir Ahmed actually, I have no clue what just happened. I think many people who have been watching this don't know what really just happened. Nadir Ahmed suddenly started completely confusing, accusing me of going into different directions, but then was all over the place. I don't know what is going on. He declared me the loser of this thing already. But one of the most important, one of the funniest things that happened here is that he made a claim at the very beginning and said that most of what I presented is not in the Quran. I think he even gave a number and said that 90% of what I presented is not in the Quran. So I went back quickly and thought, hmm, let me check what I gave. So I looked at the sources that I just gave and I even left some out because I gave them in bulk. But the sources that I gave, I gave 12 sources in my opening statement of those 12 sources, nine of them are from the Quran, two of them are from the Hadith, which are reports about Muhammad's actions and words. And one of them is from a Muslim historian and I specifically specified that those are from Muhammad and from the historian. So to be very specific, if you want a percentage, Nadir, nine out of 12, which means over 75% of the sources that I've given you were actually from the Quran. So I don't know why we're starting this with such big dishonesty. I understand that this topic makes you uncomfortable. He asks for proof that the Quran says to fight the disbelievers and to convert them to Islam. And yet I have given it directly. In chapter nine, verse 29, it explicitly says that one should fight those who do not believe in Allah and his messenger. It doesn't say fight those who are cruel or unlawful or whatever. It says fight those who do not believe in Allah and his messenger and who do not make unlawful what Allah and his messenger have made unlawful until they are humbled and they pay the jizya. Those who do not believe, not those who are evil oppressors, Nadir. That's two minutes. Thanks very much. We'll kick it over into Deir. Let me first clarify. I didn't declare you the loser already. Okay, so let me go ahead and share my desktop over here. So we'll get down to the bottom what's going on over here. So I am gonna challenge you here in front of everybody. I gave the reasons why you should fight the non-believers chapter nine, verse 21. Why should you do it? It's specific. And I gave the reasons chapter four, verse 75. What is wrong with you that you fight not in the way of Allah for those who are the oppressed and it goes on like that. Here's my question for you. Take 30 seconds of my time. Do you see anywhere in the Quran where it says fight them because, let me make that in bold. There you go. Because all non-believers must be conquered and become Muslims. Is there any verse that you know of like that, apostate? Take 30 seconds of my time. It's very funny. The Quran explicitly says, I repeat, the Quran says in chapter nine, verse 29, fight those who do not believe in Allah in the last day. Fight until they pay the jizya. Fight those who do not believe in Allah and Muhammad. And I gave as supporting evidence to that, Muhammad, who says, I have been commanded to fight the people until they say. We will get into that, clear? Okay, that's my 30 seconds. I'll only give you 30 seconds of apostate. Sorry about that. Okay, look, we'll get into that. Why is the Quran saying and fight the non-believers? We'll get into that. And I'm not running away from that. I thought you were giving me the rest of your time. So I can start. No, no, no, no. My question to you, again, I'm gonna challenge you. Where in the Quran, could I give reasons why you should fight the non-believers? But where in the Quran did it say fight them because non-believers must be conquered and or any of the nefarious reasons? So you tell us, so the verse 929 tell us who to fight, fight the non-believers. But why? My question is, in the Quran it gave many good reasons of why you should engage in warfare. I will ask you a second time. Where does it say to fight to spread Islam or to convert or any verse like in the Quran? Give me the verse. All right, we'll go two minutes for AP. Thanks very much. It's very funny what Nader Ahmad is doing is he's basically playing with semantics and he's making a very desperate move here. For example, I will give you a different example. He mentioned before to me that the order to kill apostates like myself is not in the Quran. I agree. I never said it is in the Quran. I said at the beginning it is in the Hadith. It is Muhammad's word. Muhammad says kill those, whoever changes his religion, kill him. Now Nader Ahmad asks me to provide him with an explicit Quran verse, which says kill disbelievers because they do not believe and make Islam superior. He wants this to be spelled out instead of simply accepting the statement, kill those or fight those who do not believe. According to Nader Ahmad's logic, we should also go to Muhammad's words in which he says whoever changes his religion, kill him. And we should simply say, well, this doesn't say we should just kill those who leave their religion because it doesn't say kill those who leave their religion because they have left their religion. It only says kill those who left their religion. Do you understand how stupid that sounds? Abid al-Qurban very clearly says, fight those who do not believe in Allah or in Muhammad in the last day and who do not implement Islamic laws. It says fight them. In the supporting evidence, the Hadith, I showed it before, Sahih Bukhari 2946, Muhammad explicitly says, I have been commanded to fight the people until they testify that there is no God but Allah and that I am his messenger. So this is his mission to fight the disbelievers and convert them to Islam, which means fighting and turning them away from disbelief, converting to Islam through war. We don't need it spelled out because they disbelieve. Thank you very much. It sounds like that's his two minutes. We'll kick it back over to Nadir. I'm sorry. So have you noticed what's happening? He's going into the issue of apostasy and we'll definitely discuss that and he admits this is not in the Quran. Then he says, he gave some other references. All of them are not in the Quran. Why? Because he's running away. You see, this is a very legitimate point here. He's saying, why should it be explicitly spelled out? It's stupid. You see, why should I ask for it to be explicitly spelled out? Well, the reason why is because we want to know what the Quran teaches and what it really doesn't. Because you see, here's why I'm holding you to that standard because when I said, look, in chapter seven verse, I'm sorry, four verse 75, it gave a reason why you should fight. It was explicit. I didn't give any interpretation or anything like that. And fight in the cause of Allah for those who fight you but do not commit aggression. Okay, so this is the reason why Islam teaches to fight. That's explicitly written in the Quran. What is not in the Quran and you might think, well, it doesn't have to be explicitly written because the word fight the non-believers is there. Okay, fine, but it looks like from what you are saying, apostate prophet, fight if it, we can agree tonight that if you are looking for something in the Quran which says fight to spread Islam, fight until they all become Muslim and fight and you must convert them or kill them. These are not explicit teachings of the Quran. If we can agree on this, then we can go to 929 and look and see why does it say to fight the non-believers? Why is it worded like that? Can we agree on this so we can move on? Because I'm looking for this stuff in the Quran and it's not there. Can we move, can we agree on this apostate? It does not explicitly state on the Quran. All right, sounds like you're giving a 20 seconds of my time. Can we agree on this so we can move on? You got 10 seconds or so, but... Apostate, I'm challenging you again. Where is that verse? I don't want to go into your time. Make your two minutes and then... Okay, so again, I will ask you explicit verses in the Quran which states exactly what you see on the screen. Gotcha, and we'll kick it back over to A.V. It's very funny. I'm starting with, it's very funny again because it is very funny. It's too hilarious, I just can't resist. But not around it is actually twisting Quran verses here to make it look like the Quran forbids Muslims from fighting aggressive wars or aggressive battles. Because that is not really what that Quran verse says. The Quran verse which he showed, for some reason he only shows the chapter. He doesn't really show what chapter and verse it is. He doesn't really go into the source itself. But what the Quran verse chapter two verse 190 in reality says is fight in the way of Allah against those who fight you, but do not transgress because Allah does not love the transgressors. It does not say, do not fight aggressive wars. It does not say do not declare wars. What it says is do not transgress. Do not transgress your limits. And this is a matter of morals. It is, so if I look into the exegesis of the Quran, for example, in the exegesis of Ibn Kathir who presented one of the most famous exegesis interpretations of the Quran, he says that this is a warning that one should not turn their fight, their wars into oppression and cruelty. One should only fight, not oppress. But the thing is Islam redefines what oppression is and what a just cause is. Because Islam says that you should fight those who do not believe. That is a just war, a justification in Islam. And to us, that is dangerous, that is wrong. Not Rahmet accepts that Islam orders to fight those who do not believe, but he deals with these semantics and says, well, but not because they disbelieve, but for other reasons. He should clarify and accept that the Quran indeed does order to fight the disbelievers. And Muhammad himself said that in many reports. Thank you very much. Kick it over into the year. So as you can see, there's a saying, you can run, but you can't hide. He's running away from the fact that in the Quran, it gave many reasons why you should fight. Let me first address his canard about fight those who do not believe. It's already been refuted. I showed you a group of disbelievers who were the Quraysh, okay? He went to go fight the disbelievers. Why? Because of course they're committing terrible acts of aggression against them. When they said, listen, go find somebody to go make peace with Muhammad. Did Muhammad continue fighting them? No, the text clearly said, he then went away. Once you offer peace, because God said inside chapter four verse 91, if they offer you peace, paraphrasing, you don't fight those people. So the Quran makes it very clear. Disbelievers who are peaceful people, you don't fight them. And by the way, going back to the story which I showed you about the Quraysh, those were not peaceful people. These were the Quraysh who were engaged in fighting against the Muslims. So they're whole, let's just make peace. You know, when they brought that guy out to do it, it's all a farce. It's all a hoodwinkle. But this is the level of, you could say commitment to peace, which Islam has. And even the guilty people, because in most world wars, they will kill those people because they're the enemy Quraysh. You can not, just because you drop your weapons, you'll be taken as prisoner of war. But look at Muhammad Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam. He walked away and said, fine. In Islam, you will never find peaceful, non-believers being fought. I will return back to my question of policy because you've been running away and I need to confront you on this. Where in the Quran does it explicitly say, fight to spread Islam? Fight because they are non-believer. You should just be honest with us tonight and tell us these, if you're looking for these explicit statements in the Quran, it is not there. Now, can you just be honest with us? And so, and just admit this is not in the Quran. So we can now move on. And we can talk about apostasy and all these other issues. Please Rizwan, be honest with us. Go ahead. I think Nader Ahmad has just a big problem that he doesn't really know how to defend the Quran. He doesn't really know how to defend Islam. It is unsurprising to me that he's the only Muslim apologist who is actually willing to come here and to have this debate. He does it because, I don't know, he's pretty confused and he believes in simply ignoring so many pieces of evidence twisting Quran verses as we have just seen, which he has completely ignored too. He has made no further comment about that. And he simply wants me to accept something which simply is not true. He wants me to come to a conclusion with him, a conclusion that he has, but a conclusion that he cannot back up. I mean, I don't think we need to further argue this. The Quran clearly says, fight those who do not believe in Allah and Muhammad and the last day. Muhammad explicitly says, I have been commanded by Allah to fight the people until they testify that Allah is God and that I am his messenger. It explicitly says so, but Nader Ahmad still wants me to find a verse which says, fight the disbelievers who do not believe in Allah and his messenger because they do not believe that Allah is God and that Muhammad is his messenger. Fight them because they are not allowed to believe in that and because our religion is a very cruel and very aggressive and very violent religion, please oppress the people, please do that. I'm sorry Nader Ahmad, I cannot find such a verse, but I can find a verse which says, I can find a verse which says, fight those who disbelieve. And I can find a verse which says, fight until there is no fitna, fight until the religion belongs only to Islam. I can find a verse which says humiliate them. I can find all these verses. I can find verses which degrades and dehumanizes the disbelievers, which you have completely ignored, lying about it, saying that I took those from different sources. Go ahead. Time, thanks so much Nader. Okay, so I believe he has conceded in tonight's debate in a mocking way. You will not find in the Quran anywhere where it teaches to fight them because they are non-believers, fight to spread Islam. So when you go to the Quran, you find only noble reasons to fight, which are to help to protect people. This is what the Quran is teaching, chapter four verse 75, which is, I don't know where to look at, right over here. And then chapter 22, verse 40. People actually, many Christians are surprised that churches, mosques and synagogues are actually mentioned in the Quran. Why you should fight to protect that because that's where God's name is being revealed. Chapter 22, verse 40 of the Quran. These are the reasons the Quran teaches you to fight. So thank you so much for admitting tonight that these things are not in the Quran. Now here's why it's important. This is an article from the Jacksonville Times, Florida Times Union, I'm sorry. Look what it says over here. The Quran dictates repeatedly that its followers must convert you to Islam or kill you if you refuse to convert. But we all know this is all baloney from the testimony of Ridwan, we have our apostate prophet. This is not in the Quran. And so this is why I'm bringing this up because look at all the lies and misrepresentations against our religion. Now he is quoted a hadith. I have been ordered to fight until they testify that there's no God but Allah and Muhammad is his prophet. Let me deal with that one very quickly. Notice he had to jump out of the Quran. This is not in the Quran. Why? Because he thinks he can make his case over there. So let me first corner you and we're gonna deal with this hadith one at a time. I know a lot of issues I'm not addressing from apostate prophet because I'm juggling here. There's a lot of points here. Apostate prophet Muhammad said, I have been ordered to fight the people until they testify that there is no God but Allah, that there's no God but Allah and I am his messenger. Are you telling us today that this is a statement and order that if they say no, I don't accept you as a prophet or Allah or anything. They are to be killed. So he has to fight them. Is that what you are saying? Then I will address you. Thank you. Yeah, so all we're seeing here is again some weird bragging and distracting from the topic. As said, the Quran clearly orders to fight the disbelievers. We are circling around this again and again. He's making it look like I concede it because I sarcastically said, oh yeah, it doesn't exist. Such a verse that says, please fight the disbelievers because we are so cruel, it doesn't exist. Yes, it doesn't exist. But one that says fight the disbelievers does exist. What Nader Ahmad does here is also to take a Quran reference which is Quran chapter 22 verse 40 which speaks of churches and temples and synagogues and tries to present the Quran as this caring, peaceful, justice-loving book. And I already predicted that in my opening statement. This is something that Muslim apologists frequently do. There was also a different Quran verse, for example, which is chapter two verse 62 in which the Quran does indeed say that there is nothing to fear for the Christians and the Jews and they have nothing to fear. They are righteous and this and that. The issue here is that the Quran has, or that Islam has different stages and the Quran has different tones. These are Quran verses that come into existence on a different circumstances. Nader Ahmad believes that the Quran was divinely revealed a perfect word of God of Allah which existed forever. I do not, I do believe and know that the Quran was revealed at different times with different verses depending on circumstances. At the beginning it was peaceful, then it was about self-defense, then it was about aggression. And the verse that I cited, chapter nine verse 29, which orders to fight the disbelievers was indeed one of the final verses, one of the last verses of the revelation of the Quran. That was Islam's last attitude chronologically to fight the disbelievers and to oppress, to protect them and love them was only the beginnings of Islam when Islam was very weak and when Muhammad was among disbelievers. Like Nader Ahmad is currently among disbelievers which is why he had to sugarcoat Islam so much. And we can find this attitude very commonly in the Muslim world, it is very much known that you are not supposed to be friend the disbelievers and you are supposed to be wary of them and you will fight them in the future. But unfortunately in these discussions out here, we completely disregard these Quran verses, twist them, we disregard the Muslim attitude, we disregard 1,400 years of bloody Islamic conquests and we try to present Islam as something inclusive and loving which is simply absurd. Give me a break. How can I address everything from fight the disbelievers, carrying peaceful book, Quran has stages, first peaceful, then aggressive, don't be friends, bloody, how can I address all this in two minutes? Come on, I think apostate prophet is getting nervous here so he's taking a shotgun and blasting me with all these points because if you look, he could not find anywhere in the Quran where it explicitly stated fight them because they are non-believers. The Quran says, but the Quran says fight the disbelievers, the Quran says fight the disbelievers but it has already been explained to him that if the disbelievers are peaceful you are not to fight them. We gave an example from the Sira ibn Sakh and we also give an example from the Quran and we'll get more on it. So I need to address one issue at a time. So apostate, I will ask for you to please make it one issue at a time. Now, I wanna address your, we're going, this is no longer the Quran, this is in the Hadith. So he had to run to the Hadith and that's fine. We will chase, we have basically chased him out of the Quran and now we're chasing him into the Hadith but believe me, you're gonna be running from the Hadith as well. Now, before I address that, when Muhammad said, I have been ordered to fight the non-believers until they testify that there's no God but Allah and Muhammad is the prophet. Are you saying that this is a statement where they must be forced and killed if they refuse to accept Islam? Are you saying that tonight? Apostate, are you making that claim? I don't have time for it. This is your argument. Are you saying that Islam is- I don't have time. Okay, notice he's running away and it's a good thing, you can run, you can't hide. Are you done with this? Okay, so let me go ahead and address the Hadith. Here's an example of what it means to fight those until they testify that none has the right to be worshipped. It says over here, that basically a person stood up on top of Prophet Muhammad, he had a sword on top of him about to kill him. Then the sword fell out of his hand and then Prophet Muhammad picked up the sword and he said, who's gonna protect you from me? Do you testify that there's none but Allah and Muhammad is his prophet? He said no. Okay, he said no. So let's see what happens next and we'll catch AP, go ahead. I don't know why we keep going around and doing this game where we accuse the other side of running away and losing and getting confused and this and that. And not around me keeps doing that all the time. I gave him only nine verses or nine Quran verses and he treats it like I bombarded him with 200 different Quran verses which he doesn't have the time to respond to. I mean, we are simply dealing with basic sources, not around, I don't know what is going on. But here is another misrepresentation that not around it makes, which is that the Quran and Islam does not deal with people on an individual basis. Islam is not an individualist religion. It is not a religion that decides how to treat people based on the individual. It doesn't make rules based on that. Islam is a religion where you are one nation. You are not just you, you're not just a person. Muslims are one nation and the non-Muslims are one nation is something that Muslims say very frequently. This is a very common Muslim slogan. When it talks about confronting and fighting the disbelievers who do not believe in Allah until they believe in Allah, what it says is not to find individuals on the street and force them to believe in Allah. What it does, what it says is to confront tribes, confront groups of people and offer Islam to them. And if they refuse Islam and if they reject Islam and condemn Islam to then fight them. In fact, there is a hadith which I might pick up if I can focus on that right now in which Muhammad explicitly says that if you confront your enemies, your enemy tribes, you're supposed to stand in front of them and give them three options. Except Islam, become subjects and pay protection money or die. Those are the options or they can run away. That's the fourth option. So here it gives them options, right? We'll probably go back into the net picking and say, well, it does give them options in the end. They can just die. Thanks a lot. Okay, thanks. So remember what I said you have to be honest apostate prophet. I don't mind addressing all these points here which you're raising. You should be honest that you give them and three options, confront and the tribe of group of people or they refuse, condemn and fight them. You have to be honest with people and say, this is not in the Quran. Can you take 20 seconds of my time and admit to everybody whatever you're stating is not in the Quran. Go ahead, please. I already said it is not in the Quran. Stop net picking, please. Okay, so you see we've changed them. I already said it is not in the Quran. I already said it is in the hadith. Please stop making it look like something it is not. And don't give me your time. Be done with your time and I will come tomorrow. Okay, let me go ahead. All right, so as you can see he's being chased out of the Quran. He cannot make his case from the Quran from the text of the Quran. Let me finish by initial point. It says, I have been ordered to fight until they, I'm sorry, until they testify there's no God but Allah. So look what prophet Muhammad says over here finishing my initial point. So a lot of points there guys I'm sorry I'm not catching everything here. Okay, so then the sword drops out of his hand. He raised up the sword and prophet Muhammad says do you testify that there is none worthy of worship but God and I am his messenger? The guy said, no. So what has happened? Does he kill that person? Look what it states over here. He says, but I promise I will not fight against you nor shall I be with those who fight against you. The prophet let him go. He was not killed. Did you see that? Muhammad sallallahu alaihi wa sallam let him go. He went back to his companions and said I have come to you from one of the best of mankind. So just because you again this is not all in the Quran we've chased him out of the Quran because he can't make his case from the Quran anymore. He's going into the Hadith and we could talk about that. We could talk about apostasy but I need you to jump go back into the Quran because that's what this topic is tonight and just be honest with people and say the things, the arguments which I'm raising you're not gonna find them in the Quran they're in the Hadith. So okay, so now let me go ahead in my brief 20 seconds ask you to come back into Quran make your case from there. If you can't find it then go to any other place. So we agree that the Quran clearly teaches okay fight the disbeliever that text is there but when you look at the Quran making it clear not people who are peaceful and it makes it also very clear the 491 spot check then we see not peaceful people, please refute that, go ahead. What's very interesting is that I point out something that exists in Islam something that Muhammad explicitly said and something which the Quran explicitly says as a response to refute that Nader Ahmad then goes on and tries to find one specific incident which seemingly where this rule was seemingly not applied and then he uses that specific incident to prove that what I just said and explicitly backed up clearly showed is actually not true. This is similar to let's say we're talking about a serial killer somebody who has killed 12 people within the last one year and this guy has admitted that he's a serial killer and that he simply likes to kill people for pleasure that's what he does. Now we're talking about this guy and we're talking about how he likes to kill people and he just kills them because he likes it but then Nader Ahmad comes in and says but hey guys I have to tell you something I don't think this guy is a serial killer and I don't believe that this guy is a serial killer because there was this one incident where he had this confrontation with this one guy and he had the option to kill him but he didn't kill him therefore this guy is not a serial killer K is closed. That is basically what Nader Ahmad is doing here. The Quran says fight the disbelievers until they are humiliated. The hadith say fight the disbelievers until they convert to Islam. The Quran says fight until there is no fitna no corruption until Islam until the only religion is Islam. We have these verses but he says well in this one incident Muhammad didn't do that so therefore that must not be true. This is just beyond absurd. It's childish. Please. Thank you very much. We'll kick it over to Nader for two minutes. So as you can see we're chasing out of the Quran he's going into the hadith but you're not gonna find any refuge over there. He's saying I'm just finding one instance where this thing happened. I challenge you here tonight in front of everybody. Where in the Quran or in the, if it's not in the Quran then admit it's not in the Quran, number one. Be honest with people, okay? And just admit these things are not in the Quran. And if it's then say it's in the hadith, that's fine. Show me in the hadith where any innocent or you could say any group of non-believers were fought were peaceful. They did nothing to nobody and they are just attacked and fought and give me chapter verse and reference so we can look it up right here. Just like I am doing the same for you. Everything I have is documented with references. So I want you to take 20 seconds of my time and you accuse me, I'm just cherry picking some peaceful things out of the hadith. I'm gonna confront you on that, okay? Nowhere will you, I'm gonna challenge you right now. Where were people fought just because of their religious beliefs? They're peaceful people, where is that? Go ahead, take 30 seconds of my time. I take that as the beginning of my time and I will speak. No, no, no, I still got, take 20 seconds of my time because I still got some time after that. No, I don't. Go ahead, where is that, where is that? When you're done with your time, I'll take my time in time. Why don't you want to answer me? If there's something like that, you should just admit it. Yes. Where is it? I am answering you in my own time. Okay, so and as for your text, which you said, fight until they are humiliated, that is a fabrication. I'm gonna confront you on that. That's not what the Quran says. You said fight them until there is no more fitna, which is referring to religious persecution and other terrible things. And so I want to take it back over here. You claim this was just one incident I'm giving where Mohammed was peaceful. I want to confront you on that. And I don't want you to run away just like you ran away from the issue of that the reasons for warfare in the Quran are very noble and peaceful. So show me where that is. Go ahead, it's your time. Your time. All right. So, okay, I'm going to correct my big mistake and say Nader Ahmad does not just have one incident with which he tries to refute the general rule that everybody can clearly see and accept. No, he might have two incidents or three incidents where something seemingly didn't go the way as prescribed in the Quran or the Hadith. The point still stands, dear Nader Ahmad. The Quran explicitly prescribes to fight the disbelievers. And as long as you insist on how that is not true because it doesn't say fight the disbelievers because they disbelieve, it will just look ridiculous on your part. And we're not really getting anywhere. We're simply turning in a circle. So if we come to incidents where Muhammad did actually fight people, it is hard to pinpoint at a specific incident because what we have is that Muhammad did fight all the Jewish tribes which were in his city Medina and eradicated every single one of them. Some he killed and executed to his last member and enslaved the rest while with others, he told them to get out and he basically expelled them and took their belongings or part of their belongings. Muhammad also said in a Hadith, now I know he will say we're chasing him out of the Quran because he somehow doesn't want to accept the Quran. We also have a Hadith in which Muhammad, for example, says he will expel the Christians and the Jews while he also says that he came to fight them. And we have these incidents. We have incidents of Muhammad's successors declaring wars. We have an incident in which, as said, Muhammad instructs his armies to go and give the people three choices to convert, to become subjects or to die, to fight and die. We have incidents in which Muhammad orders his men to go and destroy temples and to kill everyone who is around. We have these incidents. The issue is that incidents are not what we are talking about. We are talking about the general order which is directly in the Quran. Kicking it over to Nadir. Yeah, so he is, as you can see, we've chased him out of the Quran. He said, fight all the Jewish tribes, eradicate every single one, enslave the rest. He expelled them and he gave them three choices, fight or die. You do admit, Apostate, none of this is in the Quran. Can you admit this tonight? Did you give chapter or verse for anything you're talking about? Apostate, did you say stuff in the Quran? Apparently you're giving me 10 seconds of your time again. Just answer your question. I said, I explicitly said, this is not part of the Quran. This is part of this. Can you come back into the Quran? Because you're asking me for incidents. That's not what we're doing. That's 10 seconds. Thank you. Dramatis, stop distracting. So, see tonight's debate was what the Quran says about non-believers. This is what you were invited to talk about and you are not anywhere in the Quran. As for your false information that he eradicated every single Jewish tribe, this is complete fabrication and now you're making up things. I'll give you an example of a Jewish tribe which was not eradicated. A Banu Jaff. If you read the charter of Medina, it lists all of the tribes of the Jewish people. Only like four of them were fought and it specifically says in the charter of Medina, no Jew will be fought on account of his religion. It is clearly stated that and we can also look at that text if you like. So again, this is not really the topic. And so most of what he's saying, I want people to ignore and throw away because he did not give you any reference. He said, fight or die, three choices. This is another fabrication which he has invented because he cannot make his case from the Quran. But I go back to my original challenge and notice he's running away. Where in all of the Quran, if it's not in the Quran, say it's not in the Quran. If it's in the Hadith and say, okay, well, here it is. Where are any innocent, peaceful non-believers fought? Stop running away and answer the question. Go ahead, time is yours. Now that I'm going to continue to do this thing where he wants me to present proof that a specific source says explicitly, these people were fought or we should fight these people because they disbelieve and that's why we are fighting them. I already said the Quran clearly has this order. I have said it again and again, the Quran has the order to fight these believers. Muhammad has the explicit statement. In fact, I should have remarked this. The Hadith, I say Hadith, please don't tell me I'm running away from the Quran. I don't even understand the whole sentiment of we should be sticking to the Quran. Why are we running away from the Quran? The Quran is not a singular thing by itself which Muslims practice exclusively. The Quran is the holy book of Islam that Muslims are inspired by. The Quran itself points at Muhammad as a perfect example. So it's completely normal that we also additionally give evidence from Muhammad's life and from Muslims who were inspired by the Quran and the Islamic state which followed from Muhammad which was begun by Muhammad. But let me tell you something. Speaking of Jewish tribes, since we have gotten into that, Jewish tribes, there were several of them. It is right, Muhammad did make an agreement when he first came there because the Jewish tribes were more and they were quite dominant, quite intimidating that people should protect each other but he found different reasons to fight every single one of them. One he fought because he accused them of treason which is not something that we can back up. One because he said that they were preparing to betray him and then he eradicated them. One because of an internal fight and then he eradicated them. He coincidentally found reasons to fight all of these Jewish tribes and funnily enough, Nader Ahmad comes here and says, well, one Jewish tribe was not eradicated. Thank you. Kick it over to Nader and I would say we have a few more rounds left before we go into Q&A folks. So thanks so much and Nader, floor is all yours. Allah Akbar, Allah Akbar. We have successfully chased apostate prophet out of the Quran. He's talking about a Jewish tribe and he's conceding to the point. I cannot make my case from the Quran which was the topic of tonight's debate. Allah Akbar, thank you. He keeps talking about fight the disbelievers and we asked him where even in the Hadith do you find any innocent people? Then he started making things up like, oh, well, he just found different reasons to fight people. Did he give you any reference, any text or anything which we can back that up was nothing. Let it show for the record that he is just making up stories. Now, without further ado, let us go and see the importance of why the Quran made it clear that you need to fight the disbelievers. Because God said inside chapter 22 verse 40 that we need to fight to protect the religious freedoms of the people. And this is the reason why, let me get to my reference here, why Allah said to basically fight the disbelievers we've already given to you. So the Quran is accusing the disbelievers of being the people of persecution. They're the ones who are committing horrific atrocities like you see right here in front of your screen right here. This is the born against spiritual Christians, Heraclius inside the land of Syria. He, I'm paraphrasing you. You've got my references, just please hit pause on the YouTube. Can I go very quickly here? Here he declared that all the Jews must be killed and exterminated. And then look what the Jewish, this is from quoting from the Jewish virtual library. We're seeing chapter 22 verse 40 in action here. Look what he said. After the Christians declared and started this terrible persecution, it says, it looked like an end for Judaism in Judea. However, things were going on into the Arab Arabian desert which within seven years would change the picture of the Near East and of the whole world. What was going on in the Arabian desert? You got it chapter nine verse 29. Fight the nonbelievers until they are subjugated, saving the Jews from the genocide of Christianity. How do you explain that? We'll switch it over to AP. We're not getting anywhere, but can you please stop the screen sharing? Oh, sorry. So we're not really getting anywhere with this. We just keep turning around the same thing. But what I find very interesting, this is almost meme-like, is Nader Ahmad tells me or asks me to present, improve from the hadith that this and this happened. I then present him a proof from the hadith or from biographies. And then he says, Allah Hu Akbar, we have chased him from the Quran. We have chased him from the Quran because he can't find anything in the Quran. Well, you have just asked me to prevent something outside, sorry, to present something from outside the Quran. I then present something from outside the Quran. And then you say, wow, we have chased you away from the Quran because you can't find anything. I mean, this is how ridiculous this debate is really going. Funny enough, he does this deceptive thing again where he's giving a specific incident. The Quran, chapter 22, verse 40, refers to Muslims who have been evicted from their homes, persecuted, driven out of their homes in Mecca. This is actually a reference to the early history of Islam. If I knew we would go into that, I would love to go into that because this is actually something that Muslim apologists frequently do. They misrepresent Islam in front of audiences who do not know the history of Islam. Muhammad started preaching in Mecca, preaching in a very hostile way, insulting the religion of his polytheist people, his ancestors, the people around him. They had fights. They eventually wanted Muhammad to leave, started persecuting them. Islam, Muhammad then declared war on them afterwards because they persecuted them. So this is one incident where the Quran says they have persecuted you, fight them. And Nader Ahmad thinks that this is sufficient proof that the Quran only wants you to fight those who have persecuted you. When we have clearly seen that the Quran says, fight those who do not believe in Allah or in the last messenger. So we are again completely misrepresenting sources here, Quran verses to make it look like those verses which say fight the disbelievers don't actually say that. They only say fight them because they have persecuted you. We don't have such proof Nader. We have clear proof that verses condemn the disbelievers and order Muslims to fight them because they are disbelievers. It doesn't matter what kind of incident you pick out. And thanks very much. Last section or interval, Nader. Okay, so let me go ahead and share my desktop. He misrepresented chapter 22 verse 40. He says, this is only referring to the Muslims who are being attacked. That is not true. Look what it says over here. It said, were it not, that God repels one group of people by means of another. Monasteries, churches, synagogues and mosques where God's name is being mentioned would have been torn down. So notice how apostate prophet is now running away from a historical fact. So let's see, the Quran says, fight the disbelievers. But why? Because the disbelievers were the one who were the culprits of committing the type of atrocities which you are seeing here in chapter 22 verse 40. How do we know that? We can also go to history. We can see the exact same thing. And I will challenge you again because the Jews were about to be exterminated by the Christians. And it says over here, the historian of the Jewish virtual library says, it looked like an end for Judaism in Judea. However, things were going on in the Arabian desert which within seven years would change the picture of the Near East and the whole world saving the Jews. What was going on in the Arabian desert? You got it chapter nine verse 29, the marching orders to go out and fight. So again, we have to also go back to these verses and which these are not defensive verses. These are offensive verses. Go out and fight on behalf of those who are persecuted. And then finally, I forgot to answer one of his questions just to get a little overwhelmed. He said, well, where in the Quran does it talk about being good to the non-believers? One thing we must understand, the fighting verses is not for us. This is just for one person. And that is the Khalifa who then delegates to the deputants, which then trickles down. But for the Muslim, for the one billion Muslims, what are they ordered to do? It says over here inside chapter 60 verse, I'm sorry, chapter 60 verse five. It says, oh Lord, make us not an object of torment for the disbelievers and forgiveness. God says in the Quran, pray that you never become a trial if fitting out for the non-believers. We are ordered to be good to all non-believers. We have to wrap up with that. So I want to say thanks very much everybody. And oh, it's just getting warmed up folks. We've got plenty more where that came from. We're going to jump into the Q and A and we are very excited for this. So thanks everybody for your questions. Thanks just for being with us folks. If you've enjoyed this debate, hit that like button. If it's been a pleasure as it has been for me, we're going to jump into it. This first one coming in from, appreciate your support. Let me make sure I pronounce. Spider the Ateo, appreciate your super sticker and Wolf Von Hinslich, appreciate your question asked. Okay, we want serious questions folks. So next up, Jay Mixon, we are for real though. Only serious questions are being read now. If you send a super chat or something like that that's goofy, we'll read the post credits if it's not attacking one of the speakers. But Jay Mixon, thanks so much for your question said if it doesn't explicitly verbalize violence, however, others misinterpret it to commit acts of war. Why isn't it inherently dangerous? So I think the question is, is that for me or? It is and I'll read it one more time because it is a little bit. So they said if it doesn't explicitly verbalize violence, however, others misinterpret it to commit acts of war, why isn't it inherently dangerous? Because, well, first of all, let me make it very clear what the Quran teaches. I'm gonna share my desktop over here. The verses which talk about violence, this is not for the one billion Muslim people. This is just for the Khalifa who then delegates to the Muslim army. What is explicitly for us as Muslims to follow, because remember, a positive prophet said it doesn't teach to be good to the non-believers. Yes, it does in the Quran. It says, oh, Lord, make us not an object of torment to the disbelievers. We are to be good to them. And so let's look at what the Quran explicitly teaches. It says over here, it's sending, when he said, Maad Ibn Jabal, he says, treat the people with ease. Don't be hard on them. Give them good tidings and don't fill them with hatred towards Islam and love each other and don't differ. So this is what we as one billion Muslims, what our attitudes are towards the apostates, towards the non-believers, this is what we have been commanded to do. Now, when he talks about things getting misinterpreted, look, the Hindu religion today is being misinterpreted too for your information. Did you know that the Hindu Nazi party, one out of every five Hindus in India today, ascribed to the Nazi party, it says over here that they believe Adolf Hitler is a kind of leader which India should have. And on this note, they are killing apostates. They are doing horrific acts of violence against Christians and Muslims. Radical Hindu, one out of every five Hindus ascribed to Adolf Hitler. So if people can misrepresent the peaceful religion of Hinduism, then I hope you can understand people do the same thing for Islam. And you can be a apostate. Can I respond to the question too? Go ahead, please, go ahead. Short and pithy, and then we must move to the next question. We have many questions, guys. I find it very interesting that it keeps deflecting from the actual topic because the question is very similar. It echoes something that I have brought up in a big chunk of my opening statement, which is that it is no coincidence that people have this perception about Islam. People globally in the world have the perception about Islam that it is violent, dangerous, hateful, intolerant, backward, and so on. Whenever we talk about Islam, we talk about bad morals and violence and all that. There is no such thing that in the world, people know any other religion for how violent it is, except for certain cases, certain incidents. Islam dominates predominantly, it dominates by far religious violence in today's time. And this is not a coincidence. This is what we mean when we're talking about how Islam is dangerous. It's also funny how, not around the... Must be quick. Here, okay, quickly. He accuses me of going outside of the Quran again, but all he has done for the last few minutes was to give examples from Jewish virtual library, the Hindus, and the Hadith, which doesn't address the issue at all. It's interesting. Interesting, these questions. All right, what I can do is, and dear, since the original objection was against you, I can give you a very short and pithy response, but then what I need from you guys is we've got so many questions. I probably need you guys to basically give your responses in half the time that you did in this case. So, Nadir, I'll give you a chance really quick, if you wanna respond, and then we've got to move to the next one. Well, you know, I think the issue here, the Quran makes it very clear, never be an object of torment to the disbelievers. We are supposed to be good to them, and I would like to see our apostate prophet responds to this verse, chapter 60, verse five, I quoted. Explain that to us. Next up. Bruce Wayne, thanks for your question, said, Nadir, are you a Quranist? No, I'm not a Quranist, but it's a matter of him being, I'm exposing the dishonesty of a apostate prophet. He ran, I chased him out of the Quran because the Quran is a book of peace. The things which he is accusing the Quran of is not there. I can debate him in the, how do you think we did go there? Soldier of science, technically it was a yes or no question. Soldier of science says, Nadir, if you believe that rules in the Hadith were spoken in the Hadith as well as the Quran is your argument kind of dishonest. No, it's apostate prophet who's being dishonest, and he's actually telling, see the problem is he's making up all these stories up here, that the Jews were killed. Wait, I want to make one thing. See, I can't chase after every lie and expose it. I can't do that. He's got to show evidence for what he's saying. He didn't. So Snake was right. Thanks for your questions. And follow up to the last comment. 812, quote, I shall cast terror into the hearts of infidels, strike off their heads, strike off the very tips of their fingers. Yeah, you want me to answer that? Yeah, it seems to be an objection to you. Yep. So this is God who's going to punish the nonbeliever. This is exactly what we as Muslims believe. Hey, listen, if you guys do evil things, God will punish you, not us. What we have been ordered to do is chapter 60, verse five. Pray that you don't be a torment to the disbelievers, which apostate prophet is still running from. Please address that verse. How can we do terror when God says we never do that? Go ahead, please. Let me respond to that quickly. First off, that is a lie that verse doesn't speak about the torment of Allah to the disbelievers. It speaks about the Muslims encountering the disbelievers in a fight and Allah will cast terror into their hearts and will make them victorious through terror by making the disbelievers scared of Islam. So that is what the Quran verse actually says. This is such a blatant huge lie. It's incredible. Secondly, his other issue, which is that the Quran says, pray that you don't become objects of oppression. This is basically something which appeals to Muslims and doesn't want them to be oppressed, which does not mean it completely forbids Muslims from oppressing others. It allows oppressing others, just hides it as fighting corruption. I can give you a super fast response, Nadir, because the original question was- I mean, I just responded to his offense, so we should just keep going. Now, if you oppress- Let's see, yeah, I mean, okay, so this is where it gets tricky because I don't wanna gang up on anybody. If you're only defending yourself, I think that's fair, but if it's regarding the last question, which- Nadir, is this about what AP just said, or is this actually addressing anything about the actual question? Oh, yes, about the question. I wanna read the verse, chapter eight, verse 12, really quickly. It's in front of your screen. It says, it states very clearly here that, and remember when your Lord inspired the angels, I am with you, so strengthen those who have believed. I will cast terror into the hearts of the disbelievers. It is God who will do that, who will then strike them upon the necks and strike them upon finger. They're the angels and the punishment coming from God, not from us. I wanna make that very clear, but the 491 spot check answered all of that, which he's running away from. Go ahead. Thank you, very much. Appreciate your question from Soldier of Science, said Nadir, to follow up, is the Hadith invalid and only the Quran to be followed, or are you just debating on the specific point regarding the Quran? Well, the Hadith are valid, and even if you go to the Hadith, you will see Islam as a religion of peace. The problem is, apostate prophet was just making up things without providing any reference, any statement, they're all lies. So I couldn't chase after lies. To the question. Yeah, no, I follow the Hadith, but the strategy tonight was, the topic was, is the Quran a book which is dangerous to the non-believers? So I just stick with the Quran, and if you wanna be honest and say these things are not in the Quran, you won't do it. Cold loyalty, thanks for your question, says, does the Quran advocate for hurting your wife? And if you lie, I will share the verse, they say. Now, this is another hoodwinkle. The Quran does not teach to beat your wife, which is inside chapter four, verse 34, because what we see inside the, again, another rose, I'll bring it up over here, when you, it did speak exactly what it meant by beating your wife. It talked about picking up a bundle of grass and hitting your wife with. Let me go grab that verse for you so we can look in and see. And when we look inside the entire Quran and Hadith, never has beating ever been more than this. But this is off topic. We're talking about how this is dangerous to non-believers. So let's stay on the topic. Can I respond quickly? If this is about the exact question, that we can do it really fast. Quran chapter five, chapter four, verse 34 says that men are in charge of women and that if men fear arrogance of their women, they are supposed to advise them, then separate them and then beat them. There is absolutely no mention of any tool, any little stick or anything at all. It simply says beat them in the Quran. That's all. Next up, the lion or Nadir, because I don't want to gang up on you. The original objection was toward you. If you have a very pithy response, I can give you one. I'm sorry, what was the question? I was in front of us. I'm sorry, I wasn't listening. All right, the next one, the lion of Christ says I love AP, let's see. The cold loyalty, thanks for your super chat. Oh, we read that. Wolf von Hinslich, thanks for your, okay, look at her serious questions. Vikyath M says, Nadir, what would happen if apostate prophet went to Pakistan and the people there have seen him rip up the Quran? Well, what would happen if he did that is exactly what will happen if he tries to mock Ganesh or Hanuman or the Hindu gods. I'm sure the people will reprise. Remember, one out of every five Hindus ascribed to the Nazi party. It's very important to understand that this is not about what Muslims or Hindus do. This is about what the Quran teaches. Now, the Quran makes it very clear that we as Muslims, we are not to be an object of torment to the disbelievers. Chapter 60, verse five. And so that is how I live my life. And this is why Islam is a religion of peace and why it is no danger to anybody. Quran makes it very clear, go ahead. Next up, Bruce Wayne, thanks for your question, said Nadir, why does the Quran say fight the disbelievers if it could have said instead fight the aggressors or something similar instead? Because the disbelievers, it is in violence and religious oppression is inherent into the disbelievers. This is the position of the Quran. So basically, when you look at what the Quran is teaching here, it gave the very clear reasons which everybody's running away from. Chapter four, verse 75. It says, what is wrong with you that you fight not in the way of Allah for those people who are suffering and crying when you hear out those voices? So who cares if it says disbelievers? It gave a very good reason to go out and fight. The Quran made it clear and forced in the 491 spot check. If they offer you peace or they're restrained their hands from fighting you, you don't fight those people. The 491 spot check, so it is irrelevant now if it says disbelievers or the bad people, the Quran makes it very explicit. And these are the verses which apostate prophet has been running away from this whole night tonight. Next up, Patrick Lowes. James, he just keeps, I mean, people are asking him because people don't find him very credible. And he keeps attacking me and I'm just sitting here having to listen to all this. It's true that, yeah. And Adir, when you do like the poke the bear and run away, like, you can't just insult him with him not being able to respond. Okay, go ahead and respond to 491 spot check. Go ahead. Jay, next up, Jay Mixon says, does the Quran give authority to the Hadith? Would the Hadith lose its power if not substantiated by the Quran? Well, I went to many Hadiths today to show, to strengthen and show you exactly what I was teaching. The problem is I can't juggle all these objections which apostate prophet is throwing at me. So I had to start with the Quran because this is where it starts from. And the issue here is not with me that I'm not going to the Hadith. I believe in the Hadith. The issue, the dishonesty of apostate prophet, he should have admitted tonight, I can't make my case from the Quran. Just admit that he didn't do it. I find it very funny. Adir Ahmed basically just confirmed my point entirely. He said, the Quran says fight the disbelievers because disbelief is inherently bad. No, not disbelief. Which is why we should fight the disbelievers. Not just because they are disbelievers and because the disbelief is bad but because disbelief is oppressive which is why we are supposed to fight the disbelievers. No, no. We basically fight the disbelievers. No, no, no. I didn't say that. I said oppression and religious persecution. Is inherent to disbelief, that's what you said. And the suffering which we saw in the Quran in 475 and 2240 that's inherent to them. So God wanted to make the world a better place. Is inherent to disbelievers, to disbelief which is why we should fight the disbelievers. How does it make any difference? Because it makes a difference because the Quran made it very clear, not the peaceful people. We saw from the Hadith which you ran away from. I showed you in Sirah Ibn-Ishaq. There were a group of people who did not want to fight. So Muhammad went away from them and you ran away from Ibn-Ishaq. You ran away from 491 and you ran away from all these references. If you have a response, APA can give you a really quick one before we go to the other one but. If the Quran somewhere says if you are currently fighting that refers to a very specific case. If you're fighting and they offered you peace then accept peace. If it says that that still does not invalidate the Quran's very explicit statement which says fight those who do not believe in Allah and Muhammad and his laws. Case closed, you have proven my point. Thank you. Let's move on. We next have one coming in from the Lion of Christ says we cannot understand the Quran without the Hadith and let me know if I mispronounce this. Tafsir and yet it claims to be clear, be a clear and fully detailed book. It utter, it's utterly nonsense if you need the Hadith and Tafsir then detail and clear agree AP. So I can answer this. First of all, it's not true that you cannot understand the Quran without Hadith. This is another hoodwinkle. And so you can definitely, in fact I gave you many Hadith tonight. I even went to Syria, Ibn Ishaq. And so this is one example of a group of non-believers who Muhammad went to go fight the non-believers. But when they say, hey, let's make peace with him. Then look what it says over here. Then he returned to Medina without meeting war. He, with people who are peaceful, Islam teaches not to fight against them. And this is a reference which apostate prophet has been running for over two hours now. And I've been asking him, where are all these peaceful non-believers from the Quran, Hadith or Syrah which were fought just because they're non-believers and he's been running all night? Next up, let's see. This one. The question was kind of also addressed to me, right? At the end it said AP, didn't it? We'll give you a chance. That is true. Can you answer that challenge? I was confused by that, but you're right. They do cite you AP. So we'll give you a chance to respond and then we'll go to the next one. Okay, I will quickly just do what Nader Ahmad has been doing for the entire time and quickly share something here which I think is very pleasant to look at here. Share my screen. Share which screen, this screen. So let's share this screen. Now look at this, look at what this Hadith here says. Can you see this? Here's an incident where Muhammad has established his rule over the region over Mecca and so on. Then there is a building called Dhul-Khalasa which is a temple in Yemen. A temple that is similar to the Kaaba. Muhammad says here, a last messenger said to me, will you relieve me from Dhul-Khalasa? Dhul-Khalasa was a house belonging to the tribe of Katham called Al-Kabali-Main or the Kaaba of Yemen, whatever. So I proceeded with 150 cavalrymen from the tribe of Ahmads who were excellent knights. It happened that I could not sit from horse, whatever. It's just that the Hadith is full of nonsense. But in the end it says, wait, what is this? I'm sorry, I took the wrong Hadith. Give me one second. Hey, you know what? Take extra time to answer the challenge. Here, here. Don't think, okay, go ahead, please, yeah. So the story happens, Muhammad sends his man to relieve him from Dhul-Khalasa which is a temple in Yemen and here's what happens. So I left for it with 150 cavalrymen from the tribe of Ahmads and then we destroyed it and killed whoever we found there. Then we came to the Prophet and informed him about it. He invoked good upon us and upon the tribe of Ahmads. So what happens is that Muhammad sends his man to destroy a temple. His men go and simply destroy the temple and kill everybody who is around the temple. Muhammad then says, thanks, good job. May Allah bless you, case closed. Okay, answer that. Well, we do, the trick is we did give you a chance to respond to the question. But we do have a lot of questions. I hate to push it, but Vikyath M asks, Nadir, which is more peaceful, Buddhism or Islam? You know, I don't know much about Buddhism. I would say Islam is more peaceful and here's the reason why. Because just being completely peaceful and watching people suffer and die and being persecuted and you sit aside on the sidelines, that's not peace. Peace, you also have to fight for those people who are oppressed and persecuted. Now, the reference which AP was pointing out, nowhere did it stay explicit. Okay, very sneaky. Innocent people were being killed. It doesn't say that. We're gonna jump into Ezekiel Houghton's question, which is just checking, okay, no. The Lion of Christ says, AP showed Nadir Ahmed Quran 47 verse 35, which proves him wrong. What was that? What was 47, 35? Did I show that? Is that what he said? That's what they say, yeah. Oh, interesting, yeah. I was thinking about that, but didn't go back to it. A Quran verse which says, let me share that on the screen quickly here before we miss it. Since we are cherry picking Quran verses, let's cherry pick this one. Share screen, here you have it. Quran chapter 47 verse 35. So do not weaken and call for peace while you are superior and Allah is with you and will never deprive you of your deeds. Do not weaken and call for peace while you are superior. Okay, can I answer that? This is a challenge to me. Yeah, I'll give you a quick response. We've got many questions. Okay, first of all, going back to the Hadith, which he quoted, nowhere did it say innocent people were being killed. Nowhere did it say that people were fought because they were non-believers. And breaking through us, we keep going back to that thing. We're not gonna let me, okay. So going back to this one verse, which you are quoting, if the, do not ask for peace, if the non-believe, I'm sorry, once you get in the upper hand, but for the 491 spot check says, but what if they ask you for peace and that's exactly what we found inside the Sira Ibn Ishaq. They asked Muhammad for peace. And though he had the upper hand, he didn't ask them for peace. But when they came to us and asked us for peace, then they were granted peace and Muhammad walked away. So there's no contradiction, it's in complete harmony. Go ahead. Do you have a response, AP? No. Okay. We'll let that one go. Tippi Baer, thanks for your question, says does Nadir practice, is this pronounced muta? And muta? They're just insults, they're just insults, move on, they're just, they're just throwing rotten tomatoes. Hindu historian says, Nadir, many Indians are not well informed of what Hitler did. No, I don't think that's why the adult Hitler is a rock star in India. It's because they know what he did and they want to do the same thing to Christians and Muslims. They're committing horrific acts of terror against apostates. And this is the hypocrisy of apostate prophet. He's talking about Muslims. Now wait, hold on a second, we gotta move on if you gotta address the question. Snake was right, has another one, says 839, quote, fight them until idolatry shall cease and God's religion shall reign supreme, unquote. I look like people are trying to help out apostate prophet here, huh? So what's the question? They're not trying to help me out, they're just adding so much to everything that you have ignored tonight. They seem to be just quoting this passage to try to... That's okay, you can have help, no problem. What's the verse again? 839. Okay, I appreciate the help. There is so much, so much that we can all put here and he will still not see it. Yeah, in the face of the fact that 95% of religious violence today is from Islam. That's not true, actually, it's false. But anyways, can I address 839? Right, yep. So okay, so basically I think what's happening here because he ran away from the Quran so that people are trying to help him. That's okay, look, it says over here and fight them until there is no more fitna and the religion, all of it is for Allah. Fitna here is referring to persecution, religious persecution is referring to any, fitna is any kind of horrible thing which is going on in your life. And when you read at the seer of this verse, I mean the explanation and you read the Hadith, this is clearly talking about a response to the religious persecution for 13 years the Muslims face at the hands of the Quraysh. And that is the reason why they went out and fought like the Hadith which he quoted, but you will never find any example of people being fought because of their religion or innocent people, none of that exists in Islam. Go ahead. That is false. Nagramit knows that he's lying. Fitna doesn't mean oppression. Fitna is a word that is commonly used for conflict or corruption. For example, Muslims refer to the first conflict in Islam as the fitna. And when today two Muslims have a disagreement and start fighting each other then that is called fitna. Fitna simply means corruption or a conflict that is out. Next up, Air Church says, Nadir, since you think references are so important what is the reference for the story with Muhammad and the sword that you brought up? Oh, okay. So let me get you that in front of you. Basically, I said I have an order to fight the people and then when the man said, no, I will not convert to Islam. Basically, Muhammad said, okay, go ahead. But he said, I promise I won't fight you. Then basically, Muhammad let him go. And then he went back to his people and said, I have come from the man who's like the best or something like that. There are my references right here. This is from, you can click on this link over here. You'll find it in Riyadh-e-Salehin. So this is, and you'll also find it in Sahih Bukhari. Let me go and click on that as well. So you can kind of look at the Hadith over here. So that's my reference for that right there. Actually, let me email me NA19711990 at gmail.com, I'll get you the exact reference. But you'll find it on that page. And this refutes a positive profit right over here. Go ahead. Next up. It's very funny that Nader Ahmad actually uses virtual Jewish library as a source to back up one thing. You should really, everybody should go and look what Jewish virtual library says about Islam in the Quran. Next up, appreciate your question. This one coming in from none other than Steve Steve, who has a complaint says, please stop giving these arbitrary time limits to their answers. We don't need their answers to be shorter at all. Put it in the complaint box, Steve Steve. Baye Ya Queen, thanks for your questions, is how many battles fought by Muslims during Mo's life? Who's Mo? Mohammed. Oh, okay, gotcha. There was something like 80 battles which were basically fought inside the life of Prophet Mohammed. But then it goes back to exact point that you will never find any battle where Mohammed instigated any of the wars. If you find battles being taken place inside the Quran, then really the issue here is the Quran is not to be blamed for it. Mohammed is not to be blamed for it. It is the people, because the question we have to ask is why does a peaceful God who wishes justice and love and harmony for all now has to fight against these people? So the question goes back to them. You should ask why are people being fought? Why does a peaceful loving God have to fight against these people when that God is desiring peaceful, plurality of different views? And now he has to use violent, aggressive behavior against them. The question goes back to them. Okay, we're going to respond to Mohammed fought over 80 battles throughout his life. He had a very busy, a very big military career. Many of them were also offensive. He sent his men constantly to rob caravans and to harass the merchants that would pass through his regions after he established his power in Medina. In fact, something that Muslims will often not mention is that the Meccan polytheists, who supposedly persecuted the Muslims, first left the Muslims in peace in Medina until the Muslims kept harassing them, harassing them and attacking them, killing them and breaking their peace, which eventually led to a maiden conflict. Sure, thanks. No references. Next up, Bruce Wayne, thanks for your question, says Nadir, do you consider the multiple hadiths about killing apostates peaceful too? Well, let me ask a question here. Well, first of all, let me point out the hadiths which I quoted about the people ask Mohammed for peace. And then Mohammed turned around and went back and did not fight them. The one which- Just answer the question, come on. That's from the caravan raids, by the way, which he said, oh, this is all wobbly. Just answer the question. So the question, okay, to answer your question, we saw that apostasy is not in the Quran. However, this is found in the hadiths. So my question for you, apostate, is how many apostates did Mohammed kill? You don't need to ask me any questions. We do have to ask many questions. We kill none. You don't need to ask me any questions. The question is for you, Nadir. You don't need to ask me any questions. The hadiths have everything to say. As again, the issue is- Nadir, we have to just engage with the question. Sure, let me engage with the question. Okay, so basically, Mohammed- You're being destroyed and lasted. Just answer the question. All right, we gotta give him a chance to respond to apostate. Just chill, apostate. Okay, so no, absolutely not. Look, Mohammed never killed any apostate. This is not a teaching of the Quran. Now you might find in a hadith where it says killed apostates- You're still different. You gotta give him a chance to respond. Please, come on, guys. Listen, the issue tonight here is, no, we do not, we don't have to kill the apostate. Where, what is the importance here? You are still deflecting from the question. All right, we hold on one second. Come on, let me talk. Just for a second. So I'm gonna put apostate on mute just for a moment. But here's the thing. You used to answer the question. Nadir, Nadir was just- I'm answering, yeah. If we just stick straight with the question and like in one sentence, if you wanna, it's- Well, give me three sentences. No, apostates do not have to be killed. Mohammed never killed any apostates. The importance is given inside chapter 60 verse five where it says over there that we are not to be an object of torment for the disbelievers. So going out and killing apostates, this is vigilante behavior. It is not from Islam. Again, this goes back to the, how does that go? All right, that was like eight sentences. Barry, Barry, thanks for your question. Said question for both. If the Quran says fight the disbelievers, quote unquote, why should anyone care about the why? It seems like the reason is a huge red herring. That's because it's just a very desperate attempt to defend the Quran from the very obvious. The Quran very clearly says, fight the disbelievers, fight those who do not believe in Allah and Muhammad and the Islamic laws until they are humiliated and they pay the jizya. So fight the disbelievers very clearly. We don't have to look at why we should fight the disbelievers or fight the disbelievers because of their disbelief. No, it says fight the disbelievers. Very clear. Any deflection, any reinterpretation of this is simply ridiculous. Can I answer that? Yeah, so that's a very nefarious and malicious way to look at the Quran. Whoever that speaker or the questioner was, the Quran made it explicitly clear. Well, here's the reasons why. The Quran made it explicitly clear, not the people who are peaceful. No, you don't do that. We found that in that caravan. We found in the hadith all over. But what these guys say, ignore all of that. It's a slightly disbeliever. Okay, if this is nothing more than your own personal interpretation and we chased AP out of the Quran because of that. Next up, okay, you just have to get that last hit and run in, okay? So, Barry, Barry, thanks for your, Tippi Baer says, AP, can you explain abrogation? I could go into that. It's a very long topic. It's basically a teaching, a doctrine in Islam which refers to, the Quran often refers to how certain teachings, certain verses or teachings within the Quran were abrogated, being replaced or removed by other rules or other verses that came afterwards. And some earlier peaceful verses, this is also known in Islam, known throughout Islamic history, earlier peaceful verses were partially or fully abrogated by later verses which explicitly ordered to fight the disbelievers. And the Quran says nowhere that you are not supposed to fight those who do not fight you. Got you. You want me to answer that? If you, I want a short and pithy response and then what do I? Yeah, the appeal to abrogation would not have saved him tonight because the verses which I gave him tonight are not abrogated and this is an interpretation. The issue is what does the Quran teach? And abrogation is a layer of interpretation people impose upon the Quran. We can talk about that but that really wasn't the topic of tonight. Next up, Patrick Lowinger, thanks for your support and soldier of science, thanks for your questions and a dear of countries who are a majority is are countries who are majority Muslim progressing specifically from a humanistic standpoint. Yeah, I think so. And I think countries like Malaysia would be a good example but this is a little bit off topic, I think. I would want to stick to what the Quran teaches and if you can't find it in there then what the Hadith teaches. Let's stick it to what the scripture is teaching. Gotcha, and thank you for your question. This one coming in from Tiffy Bear. Super Chat comments. She says, Muhammad commanded apostates to be killed, Nadir. Yeah, we've already talked about this again. Muhammad never killed any apostates himself. This is not a teaching of the Quran. And what is the importance? The importance is- Now, Muhammad said in the Hadith kill those who change their religion and he allowed those who change their religion to be killed. That's what she says. Authentic reports about that. Let me respond to that. It doesn't matter whether you have reports or if you don't have a chance to respond. Look, you conceded tonight, Muhammad never killed any apostates, though they were in his presence at that time. No, I never conceded. Okay, challenge. Where are the apostates he killed? I wouldn't just make these false claims. I never conceded. Give me an example. Give me an example of apostates. You don't have to give examples of him killing people. We're in evidence. What he clearly says, kill people. The Hadith is there. I don't want to do that. Okay, people asked you about that twice and you are deflecting from it. No, I keep getting interrupted. I don't have any evidence that he did kill people. Well, he said it. What do you think? You're right. Look, we agree that the Hadith is there. He did say it. But we also have to agree. Well, people need to answer to what you think about that statement. Apostate, listen. Refusing to answer the question. Okay, I am answering the question. Just let me explain to you. I'm agreeing with you. There is a Hadith which says this, but you have to also concede the fact that he, Muhammad, never practiced it. He never killed any apostates. And you know that. I do not. Now, what do you think of the statement? So, for us, for people to go out and kill apostates, this is vigilante behavior. This is not, Islam is not a... What do you think of Muhammad's statement to kill apostates? Just answer the question. So, when we look at the state, when we look at what Islam teaches inside chapter... Yeah, let me respond. When we look at what, for us as Muslims, we are commanded to do, we are never to be an object of torment to the disbelievers. Chapter 60, verse 5. What do you think about Muhammad's statement to kill those who leave Islam? Stop deflecting. Just answer the question. Well, you see, it's more complicated than that because when it comes to apostasy, you have to look at all the other issues. You must jump to the next question. Okay. This one coming in from... I won't get to all of the questions, but we are gonna try to get these last two in at least. And sorry, folks, if I didn't get to your question, what we do just wanna respect the time of the debate is this has gone longer than expected. So smoking tire said, question for AP under what objective standards is he labeling the Quran as quote, unquote, dangerous? Not under objective standards. That's not... I guess the point here is that I'm supposed to have an objective basis for morality based on which I am supposed to grade Islam or the Quran as dangerous. Dangerous is not even something that would necessarily have anything to do with morality in that regard. Dangerous is very clearly observable. We are individuals who want to flourish, who want to live in peace. Islam, on the other hand, is an ideology which sets objective moral values or supposedly objective moral values which are out to establish its own moral system, its own order and to disrupt our flourishing which we want to live outside of Islam. In that regard, Islam endangers our flourishing, it endangers our existence and our happiness and is therefore dangerous. That is all it is. Gosh, we've got some love for you, Nadeer, right here. Jay Mixon says, I know it might be hard to breathe for you tonight, but I commend your zeal and tenacity, Nadeer. Thanks for making it a great show. So, you guys. I do too. And, yeah, we want to first, folks, I want to say our guests are linked in the top of the description so you can hear plenty more from both of them. Also want to let you know, folks, if you happen to be a Muslim, we want to make sure that Muslim people are represented on modern day debate. We usually have atheist versus Christian every night. Not every night, but close. So, if you happen to be a Muslim debater, please email me at moderndaydebate.com. If you'd like to come on, we do want to let you know you really are welcome here as a debater or just hanging out in the audience. We're glad you're here. And thanks for your question. This one coming in from Sheephol's Phoenix. Let's see. For AP, please read Quran 3, verse 7. Start to finish. We can do those things at another time. I mean, Quran verse what? 3, 7. That's right. I don't want to go into reading different things here, but I don't know if you want to do that. It is he who has sent down to you the book and our verses precise. They are the foundation of the book and others unspecific. As for those in whose hearts is deviation, they will follow those which are unspecific, speaking this court and seeking an interpretation. And no one knows its true meanings and interpretations except Allah. But those firm in knowledge will say we believe in it, all of it is from our Lord. And no one will be reminded except those of understanding. I don't know. It depends on who the person behind this question is, what they mean to say by wanting me to read this message, but it could go into many ways. This verse basically says that much of the Quran is pretty vague and that all you have to do is simply to say we believe in all of it. The Quran echoes this in a different part where it says that you're not supposed to ask questions. You're supposed to simply say, I heard and I believe sheepishly. And if you question it, you will be beaten with grass like the wives that are beaten with grass. But thanks for the question. I appreciate it. Gotcha. And thank you very much for this question. This one coming in from Spart344, longtime friend of the channel. I appreciate you, Spart says, for AP. Oh, I'm sorry. Finally, we got some questions for you. Do you think Judaism and Christianity have the same potential for danger? Would you advocate for staying away from hashtag Abraham's God? No, I don't believe that. I don't believe that Judaism or Christianity have remotely the same potential for danger. I do disagree with them in a way. I disagree with them in terms of belief and theology. I disagree with them in terms of their morals. And I think that Judaism contains many morally wrong things or dangerous things, while Christianity also does to a certain extent. But I don't believe that these religions are remotely as dangerous as Islam or that they can be necessarily called dangerous or very dangerous. I don't think people should stay away from them. I personally choose not to believe in Christianity. And that's it. I don't think they are in any way comparable to Islam's direct war against humanity. Can I respond to that? Sure. Yeah, so I believe that the Bible, of course, explicitly teaches to kill innocent men, women, and children for Samuel chapter 15, verse 3. And that's why apologists like David Wood and the apostate prophet Cronies and even Christian Prince and Sam Shimon are running away from debating topics like this. So I do come in, apostate, for him to actually come forward. And he's not running away like those other Christian apologists, like which I named David Wood. So this is an open challenge for them to come and debate your religion. In my last debate with David Wood, he tried to change the topic in the debate. We'll talk about David Wood later. Well, I do want to give apostate a chance for respond. You shouldn't confuse. I agree that, for example, in Christian history, Christian history was violent. Christian history was very violent at some points, especially when the Catholic Church in the West was in charge. A lot of bad stuff happened. And they based that on the Bible. In that regard, certainly, yes, it is dangerous. So are many different beliefs of any different ideologies. I simply do not think that they can be put on the same level as the Quran, because not only is cherry picking here, but the Bible talks is a historical book, which mostly talks about specific things that happened, whereas the Quran is a timeless order, speech of Allah for all humankind for all times. An order that it gives is an order to the Muslim in the 21st century, whereas an order that the Bible gives is not an order to a 21st century Christian, especially not a Christian, nor a Jew, but rather to specific people in their own times, except for specific parts of the Bible. We shouldn't be conflating the nature of the Quran and the nature of the Bible here. I'm not defending it, but that is just a complete misrepresentation. Got it. We want to let you know, folks, both of our guests are linked in the description. What are you waiting for? You can click on their links and hear plenty more where all of this came from. And so we are going to be back with a post-credits scene in just a moment. That's basically where I let you know about new upcoming debates that we're going to host. And we've got a ton, you guys. It is going to be epic, and I am very excited, but I want to say one last thank you. I want to actually several thank yous. Thank you, everybody, for hanging out in the chat. We just love having you here. Appreciate you if you had a good time. Hit that good ol' thumbs up button. And we want to say a monumentous thank you to our guests who, they just do it because they love it. These guys are passionate and they're authentic. And so we appreciate these guys. We want to let you know, folks, as mentioned, encourage you to attack the arguments rather than the people. And so we do appreciate both of our guests. Thank you both. Nadir and AP, it's been a true pleasure to get to host you guys. Thanks, everybody, so much. I appreciate it. With that, our pleasure and we'll be right back, folks, in just a moment for that post-credits.