In this debate with David Wood yesterday, Mohammed Hijab gives an ugly example of what are all too common tactics employed by Muslim debaters. This debate is an unpleasant experience to watch, because Hijab’s arrogance, contempt, and hatred are on full, open, unapologetic display, to the utter glee of the mostly Muslim audience, which twice erupts into “Allahu akbars.” Many Muslim spokesmen have directed the same arrogance, contempt, and hatred toward me on numerous occasions, and this is because Muhammad himself, the prophet of Islam, directed his followers to deal with unbelievers in this way. Consider these hadiths (thanks to Sam Shamoun), one of which David Wood refers to right at the end of the debate:
Ubayy b. Ka’b told that he heard God’s messenger say, “If anyone proudly asserts his descent in the manner of the pre-Islamic people, tell him to bite his father’s penis, and do not use a euphemism.” It is transmitted in Sarah [sic] as-sunna. (Mishkat Al Masabih, English Translation With Explanatory Notes By Dr. James Robson [Sh. Muhammad Ashraf Publishers, Booksellers & Exporters, Lahore, Pakistan, Reprinted 1994], Volume II, Book XXIV — General Behaviour, Chapter XIII. Boasting and Party-Spirit, p. 1021)
And:
Then ‘Urwah said: “Muhammad, tell me: if you extirpate your tribesmen, have you ever heard of any of the Arabs who destroyed his own race before you? And if the contrary comes to pass, by God I see both prominent people and rabble who are likely to flee and leave you.” Abu Bakr said, “Go suck the clitoris of al-Lat!” — al-Lat was the idol of Thaqif, which they used to worship — “Would we flee and leave him?” (The History of al-Tabari — The Victory of Islam, translated by Michael Fishbein [State University of New York Press (SUNY), Albany 1997], Volume VIII (8), p. 76)
And in the words of Abu Bakr As-Sideeq to ‘Urwah: “Suck Al-Lat’s clitoris!” — there is a permissibility of speaking plainly the name of the private parts if there is some benefit to be gained thereby, just as he [Muhammad] permitted a plain response to the one who made the claims of the Jahiliyyah (i.e. claims of tribal superiority), by saying: “Bite your father’s penis!”[3] And for every situation there is a (fitting) saying. (Provisions for the Hereafter (Mukhtasar Zad Al-Ma’ad), by Imam Ibn Qayyim Al-Jawziyyah, summarized by Imam Muhammad Ibn Abdul Wahhab At-Tamimi [Darussalam Publishers & Distributors, First Edition: September 2003], Chapter. Regarding the Story of Al-Hudaibiyyah, p. 383; source; words within brackets ours)
There is a great deal more that is illustrative in this debate. Note also that Mohammed Hijab, while repeatedly berating David Wood for supposedly mocking Muslims, which he never actually has done, invokes James White as a model Christian debater worthy of respect. There is one primary reason for this: White has allowed Muslim Brotherhood-linked imam Yasir Qadhi to spread lies without challenge — White is just the sort of Useful Idiot that Islamic debaters want to face if they want to score an easy victory. Hijab’s blustering and posturing was all designed to intimidate David and put him on the defensive; intimidation is a beloved tactic of Islamic spokesmen. Hijab’s liberal use of it was actually a implied admission that he had no arguments. If he were to meet White in debate, he might be friendlier, but he wouldn’t be any more receptive to White’s arguments than he was to Wood’s.
Hijab also eats up minute after minute of his allotted time thumping his chest, declaring victory, and proclaiming Wood’s ignorance, instead of actually demonstrating it by responding substantively to his arguments. This, too, is an extremely common Islamic debating tactic; I ran into it most memorably in my debate with Mubin Shaikh, a man for whom the phrase “a legend in his own mind” was coined. It plays well to the audience, which, of course, doesn’t have the slightest idea about the minutiae of this debate, that is, what Tertullian or Origen may or may not have said or meant, but who were roused by Hijab’s empty braggadocio to hearty takbirs.
As for the actual substance, Hijab didn’t have much. He repeatedly challenged Wood to produce a pre-Nicene Church Father whose Christology was the same as that of Nicaea. David ably explained why this request was irrelevant, but in any case, here’s one. It took me about 30 seconds to find:
“There is one God, the Father of the living Word, who is His subsistent Wisdom and Power and Eternal Image: perfect Begetter of the perfect Begotten, Father of the only-begotten Son. There is one Lord, Only of the Only, God of God, Image and Likeness of Deity, Efficient Word, Wisdom comprehensive of the constitution of all things, and Power formative of the whole creation, true Son of true Father, Invisible of Invisible, and Incorruptible of Incorruptible, and Immortal of Immortal and Eternal of Eternal. And there is One Holy Spirit, having His subsistence from God, and being made manifest by the Son, to wit to men: Image of the Son, Perfect Image of the Perfect; Life, the Cause of the living; Holy Fount; Sanctity, the Supplier, or Leader, of Sanctification; in whom is manifested God the Father, who is above all and in all, and God the Son, who is through all. There is a perfect Trinity, in glory and eternity and sovereignty, neither divided nor estranged. Wherefore there is nothing either created or in servitude in the Trinity; nor anything superinduced, as if at some former period it was non-existent, and at some later period it was introduced. And thus neither was the Son ever wanting to the Father, nor the Spirit to the Son; but without variation and without change, the same Trinity abideth ever.” — Gregory Thaumaturgus, “A Declaration of Faith,” from 275AD
P. Douglas says
Savages will always behave like savages! This is a universal truth! And those who’s very souls have been captured by Satan will be used by that Dark Lord as a mere puppet to further his wholey evil agenda!
These poor, ignorant creatures are far past lost. We can not save them. Most DON’T EVEN WANT TO BE SAVED.
Just say “Good By” and let them join their (not a) prophet in the burning fires of Hell.
bob nordstrom says
yes but we should be exposing them through churchs media government info. expose them instead of making excuses
FYI says
S.A.L.A.M?
Sharing Affection Love and Mercy..
Oh puleeese:stop it now!….STOP IT!
Sharing?”Oh ye who believe!take not the Jews and Christians for friends” koran 5 v 51
Affection?Not for Jews and Christians koran 9:30,k2:65
Love?..
There is no Love in islam.No genuine love of God and certainly no love for non-muslims k5 v 51
The two chief commandments are not found in islam.
Their is no Golden rule
Mercy?Not for non-muslims…..Hindus and Buddhists certainly don’t qualify
i.s.l.a.m
Ideology of Supremacist Lies Arrogance and Murder
Al says
Your ancestors in Europe will beg to differ. Let’s face it, you probably would be here spewing your hatred, if it weren’t for Islam.
Benedict says
A guy who sits vain and complacent combing his beard while listening to his opponent belongs in an episode of Monty Python’s Flying Circus, and a prophet on a flying donkey would fit in nicely there also.
gravenimage says
Video: Muslim debater Mohammed Hijab imitates Muhammad, displays Islamic debating tactics, in debate with David Wood
………………….
Ugly stuff. Kudos to David Wood for standing fast.
David Race says
I have a feeling the date for the quote of Gregory Thaumaturgus is a typo, perhaps 265 A.D., since he is believed to have died in 270 A.D.
Save Europe says
Let’s be honest. Muslims are the modern day Nazis.
Anthony says
Reciting quraic verses in Arabic, using of arabic, basing non arabic speakers are typical of moslem debaters, as if what they say is the truth, this is how they mislead people, and I notice Hijab quoted Mark 8:48 @ about 1:07:28 which is very misleading as THERE IS NO Mark 8:48, or I didn’t hear it correctly ?
Kudos to David for standing the ground and mighty tough of him to debate in their turf.
The moslems are like early Christians who didn’t believe the divinity of Christ, Nestorians ???I
I’m Indonesian Christian and quite keen about David’s works.
GBDavid
Anthony says
Just finished watching the whole debate and Hijab ended it with sour note, saying that Wood was not to be respected, basically attacking person instead of his idea, poor Hijab.
Hijab also mentioned the Book of Isaiah which was not mentioned in his Koran ( it only mentioned Torah, Injeel and Zabuur ) when the trying to bring his prophet into the picture, which is absurb.
Toward end of the session, the moslems were showing their true color, not respectful and rude toward Wood and the host.
Very bad ending for the moslems.Yuck
eduardo odraude says
Muhammed Hijab relied more on rhetoric than on substance. By rhetoric, I mean methods of persuasion, which need not have anything to do with substance. The people in the audience who were convinced by Hijab were convinced mostly by the attitudes he struck, not by a real consideration of the arguments. And with a subject as arcane as the one debated, an audience, in order to judge who won, needs incredibly in-depth knowledge not just of Islamic core texts, but also of the Old and New Testaments. I suspect most people do not learn much from debates where so much knowledge is required to judge and where so much is at stake that most people do not want to seriously entertain the opponent’s viewpoint. Then again, if only a few people learn from the encounter, maybe that makes it all worth it.
Elisha says
This man sums it up beautifully because he is eminently qualified to speak on the subject:
The Belief in Jesus as God before Nicea – Dr Michael Heiser
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z7Ry_uEMG-k&t=286s
God bless.
WPM says
Moslems want respect and tolerance , but give no respect and tolerance to others .They do no want to be mocked, but are more then happy to mock others. There are many streets in the world named for Islam that name is one way. How can he say Islam gain power and” grew organically ” with as he said no force necessary ,if chopping non-believers mans head off and making the women sex slaves .If destroying Jewish Temple, Hindu Temples ,Christian Churches, burning books ,blowing up statues , “is organically” I guess Stalin and Hitler had very organic ways of spreading their empires.
Mark Spahn (West Seneca, NY) says
I have listened to only first few minutes so far, but can someone please explain what is happening in the first five minutes? What is that sing-songy recitation or song all about? The second speaker at the podium thanks the sponsors by saying “Arigato” (at 6:47), but the rest of his greeting is in a backwoods Japanese dialect I don’t understand.
Elisha says
The debate was on muslim turf, so they got all supremacist and arrogant about it. The “singing” was presumably quranic recitation, thanking Satanallah, etc. The clapping seals in the audience were allahu akbar-ing throughout as an alternative to actually listening. The arcane subject matter is something that takes diligent study to comprehend. That Hijab character really is a piece of work. Please consider:
The Belief in Jesus as God before Nicea – Dr Michael Heiser (whose dissertation was on this subject)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z7Ry_uEMG-k&t=286s
God bless.
Mark Spahn (West Seneca, NY) says
Two further remarks…
[1] At the very beginning, David Wood is walking with exaggeratedly erect posture. I wonder if he was experiencing lower-back pain. A little swig of Cam-O-Pee might help.
[2] At 8:50, two of the prominent Muslim participants are identified as Ali DAWAH and Mohammed HIJAB. Really? Mr. Dawah? Mr. Hijab? Is this an onomastic prank? Who else attended? Kit Mann? Sonny Shea?
Carolyne says
A K Barr
Joe says
The reason that they want to center around the council of Nicea is telling. It was there that Constantine used Catholicism to assimilate his empire. However, Constantine only wanted the Catholics to agree among themselves, he was not christian at that point. So the assimilation had admirable characteristics.
Islam, or at least Allah, dates back to the ancient days of Petra which is before Abraham. Some Korans date back before Christ, and 15 to 20 Korans date to the 300s. It wasn’t until the assimilation of the empire was attempted in about 900 that the killing of apostates, hating the unbelievers, and other horrible assimilation procedures were introduced.
In other words, the debater seems to realize that Islam is all about assimilation, and that they are copying Constantine and Charlemagne. The assimilation of Charlemagne was deplorable, but the Muslims took it much further.
In addition, the Muslim debater seems to understand and agree with the Muslim fascination or adoration of sex which is a pity.
AleX says
Warning:
Skip the first 6’10”, unless you want to hear an insane Mohammedan meowing.
Relic says
fuck islam
Kurt says
Wow, David got a beating according to comments sections on youtube – well on Hijabs channel. However M. Hijab was very insulting while David kept cool, I felt uncomfortable watching this. Kudos to David going against a heavy hitter. I don’t like this debate format, better with a conversational approach, which I assume they did before this debate even started.
Seagull says
As a debate it was a farce because it was clearly a setup by the muslim organisers to demean David. Just watch the start, where David comes on stage on time and ready to roll, and the stage is empty! Hijab makes David wait, and wait. So in the meantime David asks for some help with his laptop, and is ignored. That is how they treat guests? Then it is announced that only one livecast is possible, and David’s side has to give up on livecasting; it will be controlled by the muslim organisers. Then we get 6 minutes of islamic recitation (‘singing’), with no equal time for David’s side. Can you see the pattern here?? This was not meant to be a debate; it was meant to extract revenge by any means possible.
The actual debate was supposed to be ‘moderated’ but the moderator was clearly asleep, perhaps wilfully asleep. Time and again hijab insulted David, and went off topic, and worked the crowd instead of working on the debate. It was just appalling. If the moderator had followed any debating rule book then hijab would have been warned first, then thrown off stage at the second insult. It should have been a TKO in David’s favour, even disregarding content – in which David argued very well.
Who would trust these muslim organisers again to run a debate as a civil discourse rather than as an aggressive dawa-insult event?
The errors in hijab’s early church writers statements can be seen at:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=71jBI4JAs64
The errors in hijab’s arabic arguments can be seen at:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JYWVRshU9HQ&t=6901s
A good review of the entire debate is at:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=71jBI4JAs64&t=6s
Brother Charles says
The opening statement ,
When we meet with christians we have to come to common terms ????????. NO THEY DONT , ITS ALL THEM AND NO ONE ELSE
Elisha says
“The time is fulfilled,” He said, “and the kingdom of God is near. Repent and believe in the gospel!” – Mark 1:15
This is the bottom line.
Renate says
This is like the Bannon vs Frum debate. Frum went on ad nauseam about what a big racist Trump was, Hijab went on ad nauseam about his perception that Wood mocked Muslims. I thought debates were about arguing two sides of a topic, not calling into question the character of your opponent or their associates. Why can’t supposedly educated men stay on topic?
Elisha says
Why? Because Mr “Hijab” is a filthbag.
Renate says
Muslims will be Muslims.
WPM says
True the debate was not about if David Wood is a nice likeable guy you like to hang out with , or that you like or dislike his humor. It is about truth, I did not see him defending or addressing Islam or Islamic writing it was like an Islamic Gerry Springer show. Who is Christ father ,how can God have a son with no sex ,what nonsense he created the heavens and the earth why should he not sent his only begotten son to die raise from the dead and save our souls and have mercy on us sinners. The idea of a caring loving God ,not a slave master uncaring god drives the Moslems into fits of rage. Why would God not come in the form of the Holy Sprint to help guide us .Islam the religion of army ants killing and being killed to defend allah an uncaring slave master god. Like water can be liquid, solid ice, or vapor , even all in the same room at the same time so can God be all three at once .
Renate says
One time a Hindu woman told me a Muslim didn’t like her religion because it had a monkey god. I said to her that I guessed God could take whatever form he wanted to take seeing as He is God.
FYI says
Trinity or tawheed.
The concept of the Trinity was revealed in the Gospel{a book which..allah says he wrote!}
koran 5 v 46-47,a book which allah confirms as being True{koran 3:3}
allah confirms the Gospel as TRUE k3:3,k5:46-47
In the koran 4;171,however,allah reveals that 1).he disagrees with what was previously asserted as being true in the Gospel which he claims he wrote and 2)he appears to have lost the ability to understand theology in going from the Bible{which,remember,he says he wrote} and the koran.
allah denies allah:the koran.
Cognitive dissonance in written form.
The Trinity …
Think of… a shamrock with 3 CONNECTED leaves:it is ONE plant to be seen as an integrated WHOLE.
Monotheistic:ONE God
allah’s epic theological misunderstanding{tawheed}…
he sees a shamrock with 3 UNCONNECTED leaves:allah doesn’t see it as an integrated whole
Polytheistic:3 SEPARATE gods
allah simply cannot fathom it:it is if he is obsessed with the number 3 and cannot understand how 3 gods is anything other than a polytheistic system>But it is NOT polytheism.
“say not “three” Cease!It is better for you” koran 4:171
The allah of the koran simply doesn’t get it BUT the allah who says he wrote the Gospel does.
1)If allah wrote the Gospel as he claims, then WHY bring up the concept of the Trinity in the first place,only to deny it in the koran?
2)allah’s mistaken belief that the Trinity is a polytheism means he does not know where God’s wisdom comes from or the source of Biblical prophecy{2 Peter 1 v 20-21}
3) the author of the koran{who does not understand theology)is NOT the author of the Gospel(who does understand theology:perfectly)Also,allah claims that he gave the Gospel to Jesus k5:46 but
Christians don’t believe God Himself wrote the Gospel!.. and besides,there was no Gospel in existence until many years AFTER Jesus lived on earth.How did Jesus get that Gospel.. in which is revealed the theology of the Trinity…a book that allah confirms as being true k5:46?
Regardless of whether you believe in the Trinity or not which comes from the Gospel allah says he wrote..
{“Let the people of the Gospel judge by that which allah hath revealed therein” k5v 47}
The point is that allah’s mistaken belief that the Trinity is polytheistic is ludicrous and WRONG.
muslims of course,cannot understand that:but then allah himself doesn’t get it either.
It’s a bit like looking at a shamrock with its 3 leaves..it is one plant of course but ..with 3 connected leaves{monotheistic} or
3 completely separate unconnected leaves[polytheistic,what allah and his muslims see..}
Elisha says
Simply put, ask a muslim why, if Christianity is “false”, did allah “trick” people into believing Jesus Christ was crucified? They always bang on about “logic” and how the Trinity “makes no sense” but they fail to see their own arrogance in thinking they can comprehend the mind of God. Isaiah 55:8-9.
gravenimage says
Good question, Elisha.
Rita says
Islam is the cancer, mohamedans are the cancer cells.
Elisha says
Not THE cancer but a type of cancer. Ephesians 6:12 outlines THE cancer.
Alan Ware says
You can’t debate with a Muslim. The moment you ask them a difficult question, they never answer, but do the sidestep shuffle. And change the subject. This Muslim claims that only the earliest prophets are reliable and as time goes by the prophets get less reliable as mohamed is the last prophet then by his own words mohamed was the least reliable.
Elisha says
Robert Spencer said debating muslims is like trying to nail jelly to a wall. If they actually bothered to read the Old Testament, they’d be very, very afraid:
Then the word of the LORD of hosts came, saying, “Thus says the LORD of hosts, ‘I AM EXCEEDINGLY JEALOUS FOR ZION, yes, WITH GREAT WRATH I AM JEALOUS FOR HER.’ “Thus says the LORD, ‘I WILL RETURN TO ZION and will dwell in the midst of Jerusalem. Then Jerusalem will be called the City of Truth, and the mountain of the LORD of hosts will be called the Holy Mountain.’ – Zechariah 8:1-3
“The Lord will save the tents of Judah first, so that the glory of the house of David and the glory of the inhabitants of Jerusalem shall not become greater than that of Judah. In that day the Lord will defend the inhabitants of Jerusalem; the one who is feeble among them in that day shall be like David, and the house of David shall be like God, like the Angel of the Lord before them. It shall be in that day that I WILL SEEK TO DESTROY ALL THE NATIONS THAT COME AGAINST JERUSALEM.” – Zechariah 12:7-9
For THE LORD HAS CHOSEN ZION;
He has desired it for His habitation.
“THIS IS MY RESTING PLACE FOREVER;
Here I will dwell, for I have desired it.” – Psalm 132:13-14
The LORD ROARS FROM ZION
And utters His voice from Jerusalem,
And the heavens and the earth tremble.
But the Lord is a refuge for His people
And a stronghold to the sons of Israel.
Then you will know that I am the Lord your God,
DWELLING IN ZION, MY HOLY MOUNTAIN.
So Jerusalem will be holy,
And strangers will pass through it no more. – Joel 3:16-17
I am bringing My righteousness near; it is not far away, and My salvation will not be delayed. I will grant salvation to Zion, My splendor to Israel. – Isaiah 46:13
muslims are PAGANS:
Then Zebah and Zalmunna said, “Rise up yourself, and fall on us; for as the man, so is his strength.” So Gideon arose and killed Zebah and Zalmunna, and took the CRESCENT ORNAMENTS which were on their camels’ necks. – Judges 8:21
In that day the Lord will take away the beauty of their anklets, headbands, CRESCENT ORNAMENTS – Isaiah 3:18
Then He brought me into the inner court of the LORD’S house. And behold, at the entrance to the temple of the LORD, between the porch and the altar, were about twenty-five men WITH THEIR BACK TO THE TEMPLE of the LORD and THEIR FACES TOWARDS THE EAST; and they were PROSTRATING THEMSELVES EASTWARD TOWARD THE SUN. – Ezekiel 8:16
Deal with them as with Midian,
As with Sisera,
As with Jabin at the Brook Kishon,
Who perished at En Dor,
Who became as refuse on the earth.
Make their nobles like Oreb and like Zeeb,
Yes, all their princes like ZEBAH AND ZALMUNNA,
Who said, “Let us take for ourselves
The pastures of God for a possession.” – Psalm 83:9-12
God bless.
FYI says
If muslims bothered to read the OT… they would discover that the Commandments of God,of Exodus 20, are brazenly manipulated by their god allah in his koran in such a way as to allow muslims to get away with breaking them.
Any muslim who bothered to read Exodus 20 would realize that the teachings of the koran are morally wrong.Look at the koranic teachings on murder,adultery,lying,stealing etc andd compare with Exodus 20:the Bible and its commandments disagree with the koran’s warped teachings.
What motivates the muslim to bear false witness,to murder infidels… is allah’s commandment-of-God violating koranic teachings.muslims think they can get away with murder,lying etc because their ‘holy’ koran teaches them they can.
God’s Moral laws of Exodus 20 are not obeyed in the koran or islam.We see the results of that every single day.Jews and christians at least understand that they cannot get away with breaking God’s Exodus 20 Laws.
muslim fanactics think they can.
Old Fat Bald Socially Inept Ron says
“Go Suck Clitoris” were the only worthwhile words I heard spoken during this otherwise total waste of time.
Life is short don’t spend it debating, arguing, and certainly not memorizing ancient scriptures.
What Mr Abu Bakr meant to say was:
“ Go suck a lot of clitorises”
Elisha says
My people are destroyed for lack of knowledge. – Hosea 4:6
Jean says
Gotta love the guy’s name. Is it a homage to his prophet’s habit of cross-dressing while receiving his revelations?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UlSknRlQSqs
FYI says
The Superb David Wood…..
Pointing out those delightfully unwholesome aspects of perfect Mo that muslims prefer non-muslims don’t know about{the polygamy.the pederasty,the slave owning,the camel-urine tonic recommended nto his disciples,the serial adultery,the cross-dressing…}is one of life’s great pleasures.
Imagine if Moses,Elijah and Jesus Christ visit London…
“Stay away from the mosque..this is a muslim area..muslim patrol..”
koran 2:87 “WE verily gave to Moses the scripture”
koran 5:46-47 “WE bestowed on Jesus the Gospel”
koran 11:96 “and verily WE sent Moses with OUR revelations and a CLEAR WARRANT”
Moses,Elijah and Jesus of course are Jews.Of course they couldn’t visit mecca…they are Jews.
Do you think the islamic imbeciles in their pathetic muslim patrol would be smart enough to figure out how stupid they are?
Jean says
FYI.
Sometimes it does happen.
Ayaan Hirsi Ali participated in the demonstrations against Salman Rushdie’s “Satanic verses” as a teenager, clamoring for his head. Later, as you know, she became wholly sane and is today a wise, kind and wonderfully rational woman. A role model for all women unlucky enough to be born into the cult of islam.
One of the imams in Denmark who began the 2006 cartoon crisis by travelling the MIddle East inciting Muslims against the very country that gave him asylum, later repented. Ahmed Akkari is now an atheist and islam critic, defending democracy and enlightenment values.
Therefore, it is very important to keep speaking up, always sticking to the truth, challenging evil and defining good.
Anjuli Pandavar says
I am not at all surprised by what I saw and heard. Others have justly and substantially commented on the procedures, the content, the rigging and the partisan behaviour of both the organisers and the audience. I expect nothing less from Muslims. David is brave to walk into such a cesspit. The aim was to belittle and humiliate him, in other words, to treat him like a dhimmi paying jizya. In the Dar al-Islam this would’ve gone down a treat. In the secular world, things don’t work quite that way. This is just one of the many things Muslims don’t understand (and why should they? They already know everything).
The reason there is no such thing as debate with a Muslim is encapsulated in two very short sentences, one by each of the speakers. “Brother Hijab,” (we know whose side the moderator’s on) shouted at David, to roaring crowd approval, “It doesn’t matter what you think!” David, on the other hand, invited his audience to, “Think about this.” Right there you have everything that’s wrong with allowing Muslims into a secular world. By their own standards, it doesn’t matter what Muslims think. All their thinking has already been done and perfected for them. It’s called the Qur’an. When David invites his audience to think about this, did any single Muslim member of that audience actually do that? Of course not. They cannot. They dare not. To think anything other than what “Hijab” was thundering would be blasphemy. Even if, strictly-speaking, that’s not the case, Muslims take it that way and behave accordingly. It was never about which argument was right and which was wrong. Muslims wouldn’t know the difference.
As if to reinforce what I’ve just said, a child asked, “What percentage of Christians have memorised the Holy Bible?” This set off a round of triumphant applause and jubilation. David misses something here. The question that this child had been put up to had nothing to do with the respective ways in which the Bible and the Qur’an were intended to be engaged with. It was claiming a moral victory over Christians for not even being able to memorise their Bible. Rote memorisation of the Qur’an is highly admired by Muslims. They even have a special name for people who can do this: Hafiz. But here’s the thing: it doesn’t matter one jot whether the flawless reciter understands a single word of what they’re reciting. That is entirely irrelevant. What counts is that you’ve memorised the whole Qur’an. To Muslims, only mindless repetition matters. “It doesn’t matter what you think!” or even what you know. What the child was actually saying is, “I, a Muslim child, am memorising the Qur’an. You, a Christian learned man, cannot recite your Bible. What worth are you against me?”
Finally, I couldn’t help noticing that when a member of the audience with a strong African accent questioned “Hijab”, he resumed working with his papers while the questioner was still speaking, then abused his question, and finally attacked him for having the temerity to ask the question in the first place. “Hijab” treated David Wood like a dhimmi, but treated the African like a slave. No racism there, of course, because as we all know, Islam is a race, and in any case, there are so many black Muslims.
But some good may yet come of this. Muslims cannot grasp the secular mind. There is only one way of being, and it’s theirs. All else is degrees of negation of being Muslim. There is no other frame of reference. So a secular world peopled by critical autonomous individuals is simply a world of sin like any other world of sin, differing only by degree. Unfortunately for them, the secular world doesn’t only expose Islam for what it is, any Muslim living in that world is exposed to that exposure and immersed in an environment of critical thinking. Broadcasting this appalling sham goes down well with Muslims. But not all Muslims will find affirmation of their faith in this. Muslims who have come to doubt what they’ve been brought up to believe, will be embarrassed to be associated with this behaviour. It helps them move a step closer to finally saying, “Enough is enough. I’m outta here!”
Old Fat Bald Socially Inept Ron says
David’s “Green eggs & ham” response to the memorization of the Quran was nothing short of BRILLIANT.
libertyORdeath says
While I do see David’s point, I personally do not believe that we need to invoke Christianity in order to point out the flaws in islam. In the end, it is not about islam vs. Christianity, but about the ludicrous nature of a religion followed by over a billion humans.
Anjuli Pandavar says
Agreed.
Elisha says
There is only one truth and that truth is what God has given us through His word in the Bible. Sin is the disease. Jesus Christ came to show us the way back to the Father. It’s that simple. Seek truth in your heart. Turn to God and live.
libertyORdeath says
I hate to say it, but that is relying on the same type of unproven faith that informs and motivates islamists.
Now is Christianity a more understanding and peaceful religion than islam? You bet it is. But I still think that liberty, democracy and truth are the way to a better world, not religion.
All religions foster feelings of us vs. them and we need less of this, not more.
Elisha says
Unproven faith? The Bible is historically, prophetically and scientifically consistent. There is overwhelming evidence for the life, death and resurrection of Jesus Christ. It is the religion of secular humanism, based on the philosophical delusion of Darwinism, that has enabled the rise of islam in the West. It is the religion of secular humanism that has killed hundreds of millions of humans in LESS than 100 years!
“But I still think …”
Your worldview cannot account for free will, reason and morality. If ONLY you could dare to actually think and seek truth in your heart, you would get the same result as Simon Greenleaf, Sir William Ramsay, James Warner Wallace, Lee Strobel, et al. All that requires is courage and humility.
My people are destroyed for lack of knowledge. – Hosea 4:6
henrik arboe jensen says
collective agression echochsmber of lost childhoods.
RobC says
Muslim rules for debate:
Never answer a question that may cast doubt on Koran, Islam. Always evade or ignore and change the subject, distort question, etc.
Act superior and intimidate
Misinterpret and take out of context the Bible
Cast doubt on authors of Bible
etc etc etc
IanB says
Debating with muslims is a waste of precious time and energy. They cannot respond to reason and are incapable of objective analysis and evaluation of an issue in order to form a judgement. Critical thinking is not a muslim natural aptitude. Especially faced with facts that challenge the dogmatic beliefs of their indoctrination. When they have no meaningful response they resort to ad hominem attack like we see here from this arrogant, obnoxious muslim cretin. To debate with muslims is like trying to teach music theory to goldfish: they don’t hear you and even if they could why bother? At least the goldfish don’t insult you – or want to kill you.
gravenimage says
A debate is not going to change the mind of a dogmatic Muslim. But it *does* expose what Islam is like to those in the audience.
libertyORdeath says
Only if the audience is willing to listen with an open mind, which most Muslims (and other religious people) are unwilling to do.
RobC says
https://medium.com/the-mission/5-tactics-used-by-passive-aggressive-arguers-and-the-best-forms-of-defense-42a9348b60ed
A passive aggressive arguer.
martin says
Is hijab known for anything other than mocking and insulting to cover his ignorance?
He is allways loathsome.
Rudy says
Trinity or Godhead? – Is the Trinity True?
http://www.remnantofgod.org/trinity.htm
FYI says
Apparently Mr Hijab made a number of statements in HEBREW which were laughably and seriously wrong and showed he had not any proper understanding of the language.
This is the same Mr Hijab that said he would have to give David Wood a “free arabic lesson”
Perhaps we should all send Mr Hijab a Christmas voucher for ” a free Hebrew lesson”as he has proven that he doesn’t know HEBREW.
There is little point explaining the concept of the Trinity to muslims when allah himself reveals he doesn’t understand it{k4:171}..in fact if allah could access God’s Holy Spirit he could figure it out but alas,allah doesn’t believe in God’s Holy Spirit{Nota Bene if you are Christians:it seems allah missed the outpouring of God’s Holy Spirit at the time of Christ….allah also does not know where Biblical prophecy comes from…}
Explaining the Trinity to a muslim is like trying to explain the concept of the number 3 to an obtuse kid who just can’t believe in the concept of 3{Like allah himself..”say not 3.Cease!It’s better for you”}
David Wood did very well under the circumstances.
Chris says
Love your work Robert, but I have to completely disagree with your assessment of the debate. You’re going after Muhammad Hijab tone and not his actual arguments.
David Wood has supposedly had 20 years of “study” of Islam and is a supposedly a philospher, he certainly failed to use any of that training.
The topic of the debate was Trinity vs. Tawheed, David quoting hadiths about sucking penises is a red herring logical fallacy since it has nothing to do with the topic.
Your quote from tertullian still clearly shows that Jesus and the holy spirit are subordinate to the father. Tertullian Trinity is a oneness of purpose, but there is a hierarchy, Jesus is a God but a lesser god than the father.
David has been mocking Muslims in many videos, his islamacize me was mocking how Muslims follow their religion. Ive seen the quality of David’s videos decline over the past year from seriously analyzing Islam, to talking about it as a joke, yet he calls himself a philosopher. So David got a taste of his own medicine.
David brushed off tertullian and oregin and ignaceous, not with any substantive argument, in fact it looked like he had no clue who these guys were. David doesn’t really care about the history of the church, just making whatever twisted argument possible to try to convert people.
Hijab won the debate because he was far better prepared, he quickly demolished david’s arguments.so had time to engage in more off topic remarks about David himself, but he never rested his arguments on David’s character.
Hijab won the debate because he had logical well built up arguments supported by evidence, and delivered with rhetoric. All the key components you need for a persuasive argument.
If David won the debate, why all the videos by his fanbase doing damage control? Most of the videos are just more red herrings, such as quoting Thomas Jefferson’s criticisms of Islam, which have nothing to do with Trinity vs. Tawheed. It seems the christians are the one trying to re-write history and trying to change what the debate was about.
Richard Courtemanche says
Dr Wood did well. He maintained his composure and professionalism against Mohammed’s arrogance and insults attacking his intellect. Mohammed showed his insecurity in his inability to defend / explain his arguments which he could only compensate with comedy in front of hIs mainly bias audience.
bob nordstrom says
Why was;nt Hiijab wearing his Hiijjab.. perfect example as to the ignorance and brainwashed Muslims around the world . acting like a bully in the school yard. pathetic