el will go ahead of you and bring you into the land of the Amorites, Hittites, Parasites, Canaanites, Hivites and Jebusites, and I will wipe them out. So this is the extermination passage. God is going to wipe them out. Verse 24, do not bow down to their gods or worship them or follow their practices. You must demolish them and break their sacred stones to pieces. Worship the Lord your God and his blessing will be on your food and water. I will take sickness from among you and none will miscarry or be barren in your land. I will give you a full life span. So this is like talking about the ongoing miracles and why these people are so responsible for rebelling against him.  I will make your enemies turn their backs and run. I will send the hornet ahead of you to drive the Hivites, Canaanites and Hittites out of your way, but I will not drive them out in a single year because the land would become desolate and the wild animals too numerous for you. Little by little, I will drive them out before you until you have increased enough to take possession of the land. I will establish your borders and I've already quoted this. I will establish your borders from the Red Sea to the Mediterranean Sea and from the desert to the Euphrates River.  And so this is the point I'm making over and over and over again in the Torah. You have these commands which talk about wiping people out. They're going to wipe them out and God says he's going to wipe them out here, but then he explains what it means.  And this is something that you see over and over and over again. The way we use language, those mean two completely different things. Saying wipe out everything that breathes is very different from saying drive someone off the land. Isn't Jesus the one who's commanding this though? So how do you reconcile Jesus's apparently universal ethic about not raised?  Also saying, fine, let me just concede the border issue and all of these little things that you're adding to the interpretation, which is again not shared by other commentators. Fine, let me concede all of that. It's still Jesus who's commanding wiping out all of these people and or driving them, I should say, driving them out of their homes, driving them out.  Well, I mean, no, if you look, this is there's God's judgment on these people, right?  And God sends them a profit and for four centuries. Why isn't that tolerated? Why doesn't Jesus tolerate that?  By Jesus, why doesn't He tolerate? Where's the tolerance there? Yeah, you're thinking I'm saying something I'm not, I'm not. You're thinking I'm saying never punish anyone. I mean, I said it very clearly in my opening statement, have no problem with proper authorities punishing people. I have no problem with with God wiping us out if we want. That was not the point of anything I'm saying here. What I'm saying here is that the commands to wipe people out are used interchangeably with drive them off the land and all of the groups, all of the groups that are supposedly wiped out. So that's the Canaanites, the Midianites, and the Amalekites, all the groups that are supposedly wiped out are all there afterwards. And so the way scholars interpret this is they're using language in a very different way from what we're using it at. Again, I have no problem with scholars. I mean, I'm citing all these scholars who say that it means wiping out. Look at, you know, all Western scholars, they say Philip Jenkins, for example, Lingdomsford, they all say that this means genocide. Not on this issue. Yeah, on the Amalek, on the Canaanites, on these tribes that are mentioned in those verses that we keep citing, those are all about genocide. According to these Western scholars, there's an entire book by Paul Copan called The God Command Genocide, where he goes through the issue. So the issue number one, which I mentioned, the command to completely exterminate are used interchangeably with commands to drive people off the land. So that should send up a flag. Wait a minute. Driving someone off the land is completely different from exterminating someone, and yet the Bible is using them interchangeably. That should make us think, hey, maybe there's something, maybe there's something going on here. But then we see this other issue where the people, the people who all the groups that are supposedly wiped out are there later. And sometimes it's in the same chapter, like Joshua goes up, he conquers Jerusalem, he wipes out the Canaanites, and then the Canaanites are there later in the same chapter. The Amalekites are supposedly wiped out.  The Amalekites are supposedly wiped out by Saul. They were down to the last Amalekite. You're saying that there's no killing involved in this. They're just not driven off the land mean.  There's so many, look at Numbers 21. The destruction of Kinsaion and King Og. So they smote and his son. Not saying there's no killing. I'm not saying there's no killing. So if you're saying there's killing, yes. As far as these groups being completely exterminated and all their children killed, I'm saying the Bible refutes that interpretation because the groups are still there later. I didn't make that interpretation. I didn't use the word genocide. All I'm just pointing out is that there's mass violence, there's mass killing of children and infants. That's where I'm having the problem. There's nothing there in Islam, by the way. There's no command in Islam. Except your God says that this is the inspired word of God. I mean, even the Quran I defend everything in the Quran. I defend everything and stand by everything, every letter, every word in the Quran. No, you don't, because you said that Jesus came and because these problems arise when the Quran says Jesus affirmed the Torah that was bina yadahi. That means between his hands. So he's affirming the Torah between his hands. This doesn't sound like he's coming to correct it. When Muhammad says... Bina yadahi is not a literal expression. This is an expression that means what's with him. So he's bringing the Torah, he's bringing the reaffirmation of the true Torah that had been corrupted over time. Doesn't Allah say that no one can change his words? No one can change this final revelation. He doesn't say that. No one can change his words. Do you know what the preserved tablet is, David? Do you know loh al-ma'footh in Islam? Like you need to understand the Islamic theology. He doesn't say no one can change the preserved tablet because no one can change his words. The preserved tablet is his words. That's where the Quran is from. Is the Torah his words? Yes, the Torah is his words. On the preserved tablet. The Torah is his words. In the heavens, it is preserved. No one can change his words. On the preserved, loh al-ma'footh, ma'footh in Arabic means preserved. That's where the Quran is from. That's where the Torah is from. That's where the injil, the revelation to Jesus Christ, may Allah peace and blessings be upon Jesus Christ. Those are all on the preserved tablet. Yes, they've been preserved by God Almighty and angels. No devil, no Satan can go and change his words. On earth, though, on pages, on material things, yes, those can be corrupted. In fact, it happens all the time. Christians are constantly, I'm sure you have your disagreements with many Christian denominations. Don't you think that they've corrupted the Word of God because they are prosperity gospel or Joel, allsteen or some of these guys? You think those guys haven't corrupted the Word of God? The text? No. Your God didn't believe that either. Muhammad tells the Jews. So when Muhammad said, told the Jews, bring me a copy of the Torah and they bring it out. You're saying they brought him the preserved tablet. And he said to the preserved tablet in heaven, even though he's pointing to the copy that they brought him, he says, I believe in you and in the one who revealed you. And then in sort of five verse 43 of the Quran, when the Jews come to Muhammad to settle a dispute and Allah says, why do they need you when they have the Torah? I mean, obviously, if the Torah has been corrupted, they do need Muhammad. Muhammad would need to correct the errors. And then just a few verses later, let the people of the gospel judge by what Allah hath revealed therein. And then in 568, where Allah says, you have no ground to stand upon unless you stand upon the Torah, the gospel and all the revelation that has come to you from your Lord. Very strange if he's talking about standing upon the preserved tablet that you no longer have access to because it's been corrupted. And then in sort of 10 verse 94 of the Quran, when Muhammad is told if you have doubts about what we have revealed to you, ask those who read the book before you. So that makes no sense if he's telling people to go to, I mean, if he's telling Muhammad himself that he can only confirm his revelations by going to the Jews, Muhammad again, pointing to a copy that they have. And then when Muhammad, intermitting, when Muhammad is said that knowledge is going to depart from his people, and the response was, what are you talking about? We have the Torah. How can knowledge depart from us? And Muhammad says, what are you talking about? The Jews and Christians have the Torah in the gospel, don't they? That makes no sense if we've had corrupt books because he's saying knowledge is going to depart from you even though you have the inspired preserved authoritative word of God. And so if he's saying, well, the Jews have it, knowledge has departed from them. That means they've got the Torah. So to look at all of this and say, nope, it's been corrupted. Daniel, I mean, I've had a lot of respect for you from you not denying what Islam says about beating women and such. I appreciate that. I appreciate that. But there's a difference. Your whole problem, David, is I thank you for the respect. But your whole problem is that you don't understand figurative language. I mean, these are not contradictions. This is, I believe in you and in the one who revealed you, that's figurative. Yeah, the Torah is referring to the Torah, not literally this book, a copy. Yeah, a copy that could be corrupted.  So it's just common. Okay, just a couple more minutes later, 2000 years after the revelation, 2000 years after the revelation, and the Jews still had a reliable copy. And yet others have somehow been corrupted. Very, very, very strange. I didn't say that that's what has that's a possibility. The other more likely possibility is that this is figurative language. The Prophet, peace be upon him, is referring to the preserved Torah, the original Torah that was revealed, not literally that one copy that he didn't even open. I mean, he says, bring me a copy and then and then talks to the copy and says, I believe in you and in the one who revealed you. I'll just say this. It's a profound statement from the Prophet to confirm his belief and his allegiance to the Torah and all the other revelations from God. That's a strong, powerful statement. But you're bringing it in the most uncharitable way and trying to make a big deal about it. I'm assuming he needs what he says. This is a huge contradiction. I'm assuming he needs what he says. Yeah, but there's something called figurative language. There's something called in human language, David. There's something called figurative language, where it doesn't mean literally this and that. I have a very charitable interpretation of the verses that I'm reading from you. When you say that, oh, it's not referring to children, it means driving them out. I conceded many of those points and showed like it's still a problem. It's still a contradiction. But I was charitable with your citing of the verses of the Bible because you know more about the Bible than I do. But I know more about the Quran than you do. So be charitable likewise. Stop bringing these Christian sound bites that we've heard a million times and that no Muslim takes seriously and no scholar of Islamic studies takes seriously, by the way. No, there are scholars of Islamic studies who take this very seriously if you want to take a look. But no, I agree with you about figurative language and I'm open to it, but there has to be a good reason to accept the figurative language. Like when we read, hey, this group was exterminated and then the group is there later, then we might want to try and figure out something that's going on here. And scholars actually say that this was a common form of hyperbole, hyperbolic language in the ancient world. It's not just from the Jews. It's all of those cultures around there who are writing about their victories. They described a military victory or something of pushing someone off the land or dethroning a king. They described it in the writings as the complete extermination of civilization. They're even writings that describe a victory over the children of Israel. In the Q&A. Pardon my interruption. We've got to jump into the Q&A. Can I just finish that point real quick? I'll be sure. I'll be super quick. I'll be super quick. So I'm open to figurative language. The problem I was pointing out with the Quran is everything I see from the Quran insist upon the inspiration, preservation, and authority of the Quran. And everything I see in the hadith that actually comes from Muhammad insist upon the inspiration, preservation authority of not just the Quran, but also the Torah and the gospel. And so I have no reason to take it as figurative. If it is figurative, I'd have to say Alayne Muhammad were very bad communicators, just as if I went with your interpretation of Jesus and Moses and so on, I'd have to conclude that they were very bad communicators. We've got to jump into the Q&A. But do want to mention, folks, a couple of things. First, our guests are linked in the description. We are going to go through as many questions as we possibly can. We have occasionally a comment in there as well. But do you want to remind you, hit that like button if you've enjoyed it so much as I've got to tell you, David and Daniel, this has been such a huge response from the audience in terms of questions, as well as just enjoyment and likes. I don't know if we've ever had this many likes so far in a live debate. But anyway, we're going to jump into it. Thanks very much for your first one. When we're sorry to interrupt you. Go ahead. I want to make a request if it's okay with David. Can we like have just five minutes, like a closing statement before we get into the questions that like for each of us just to wrap up? I'm okay with that. It sounds like David is as well. So let's do that. I'll start the timer for five minutes. And let's see if I remember right. Oh, you mean now? Yeah, before the Q&A, if that's okay with you, David, I can go first or you can go first. Go ahead. I was not anticipating a five minute. Go ahead, Daniel. Four is all yours for five minutes. Okay. So I want to say look at the cops in Egypt. Cops are Christians in Egypt. They have been practicing Christianity for 1400 years under Muslim rule. Look at the Christian Palestinians. Look at the Christians in Lebanon.  I'm not going to say that Islamic law gives full religious freedom to these Christians because that's not true. There are restrictions and there are good reasons for them. Again, we do not believe in this liberalized individualistic notion of tolerance. But the point being after 1400 years, cops in Egypt still believe in Jesus as God. They still have their religious rituals. They still have their community. They still have their traditional families. Compare that with Christians in the US and Europe under secular rule. Thousands of churches are closing permanently. There's unprecedented mass apostasy. Christian schools are being forced to teach their kids in LGBT and all matter of things that fundamentally contradict Christian values. Christianity is not going to survive in any recognizable form under liberal secular rule, the same kind of values that David has been preaching. And it's only been 200 years of dominant liberal secularism. Whereas under Islam, in contrast, Christians and others lived and thrived for 1400 years.  And unfortunately it's doing this to Muslims as well. So I want to first and foremost invite Christians to Islam. Let's fight this monster together. As Muslims, we have our criticisms of Christian theology, but we love Jesus Christ more than life itself. We recognize that he is the Messiah, which means that his time for establishing God's rule on earth was not in the past, but in the future when he will return with great wrath and fury to kill the Antichrist and once and for all, stamp out rebellion and disbelief in God Almighty. Jesus will have the final victory over the enemies of God. And as Muslims, we are eagerly awaiting his triumphant return so that we can join him and we can support him. So I invite Christians to become Muslim, but if Christians don't want to do that, then at least let's be allies or at least recognize the bigger threat to all of humanity, which is liberal secularism. I also want to say that David, on a more personal note, in one of your videos you mentioned that you have some of your sons have certain disabilities. And that really hit me hard because I have sons as well. And I know that one of the most difficult pains we can experience in this life is our children being ill. So I really lift my hands in prayer sincerely to pray to God Almighty to heal and protect your sons, David, and also to make them a source of guidance for you and your family. And I pray that that guidance will be the gate for all of you to paradise, to be in eternal paradise together. That's my sincere hope for all Christians. Amen. Amen. You got it. Thank you very much for that closing statement. We'll kick it over to David for his as well. All right. Well, thank you for the kind thoughts there, Daniel. And I do have to say, I know there are lots of people who think of Daniel as this horrible monster. And I do really, really disagree with some of Daniel's views on, you know, beating wives into submission and, you know, the various reasons for fighting people and so on. I disagree with them on those. But I meant what I said in my introduction that as long as we're trying to be truthful and not lying about things and we're trying to get to the bottom of things, you can disagree with me widely on a lot of issues. And again, my view is that you're created in the image of God. You're all worthy of a certain degree of respect. And that provides the foundation, the basis for any conversations we might want to have. You did say that Christianity will not survive what's been going on here. Historically, this is called the pendulum. There's the idea that a pendulum swings way out in one direction and then things swing back. I just want to say, Daniel, if you're worried about, you know, the threat of liberalism, there are certain things that liberalism gets right. And like any good thing, you could have too much of it. But each century has its problems that it has to deal with. And each century looks at the problems that it's dealing with. They say, ah, this is going to destroy everything. This is the end of the world. And it just doesn't. It just doesn't. And so once things tend to start going too bad for society because it has some sort of bad ideas, things start swinging in the other direction. So I don't believe that Christianity is going to end anytime soon. You said we believe that Islam is the biggest threat. Actually, I just wanted to correct.  There was a time when I did, I'm much more concerned about things like big tech right now. And so I actually have more concerns about some other things than Islam. But when it comes to Islam, I do have my objections. Muhammad did call for the violent subjugation of the world.  And it is my view as a Christian, this is Old Testament and New Testament, that human beings are created in the image of God.  As I pointed out, this doesn't, this doesn't rule out judgment from proper authorities. And as I've, as I've stated, I believe that God has the authority to give life and take life. So problem is not with God killing people or executing people or things like that is how do you know you're actually hearing from God? I've never seen any reason to think that Muhammad was speaking for God. So this isn't simply liberalism versus Islam. This is a Judeo-Christian perspective on not listening to false prophets. I see no reason to believe in Muhammad at all and therefore no reason to accept his commands about beating women, about enslaving people, about taking sex slaves, about violently subjugating the world. And it's just dangerous to have someone who claims that he's been commanded to subjugate the world. And there's no reason to believe, you can't do that.  And so I just wanted to say, your overall argument was that Christians are inconsistent from criticizing Muhammad for violence. I doubly reject that. On the one hand, we're not inconsistent because even the situation, the Old Testament is very different from the situation in Islam. Moses came accompanied by miracles. It wasn't just the Jews who were aware of the miracles. The unbelievers were aware of the miracles. And so anyone who's rebelling is rebelling against the Almighty. Very different situation from what we have with Muhammad. And the other reason I'm not consistent is, I have to go with the commands of Jesus that are directed towards me, Jesus and the apostles. I'm committed to love everyone, to do good to everyone, to live in peace with everyone. And so when someone comes along and claims to be in the same line with that and doesn't give some very, very good evidence, but he's contradicting the commands in every possible way, I have to say, no, sorry, you're a false prophet. We'll jump into the Q&A. But do and remind you, folks, couple of things. One, our guests are linked in the description. We highly encourage you to click on their links if you'd like to hear more and also have to let you know we cannot take any more new questions, folks. We do have to get the Q&A wrapped up by a decent time. And so just warning you that any questions that come into the live chat at this point, there's just no way that we can get to them. In fact, I don't think we can get to all the questions that we have in the list. So we're going to start right now. Here we go with, appreciate it. Sugarcoat says, pardon me, there was, first one was Adam Yamau says, David, why did God instruct the Israelites to stone apostates to death? They suspected we're serving other gods in Deuteronomy 17. I smell hypocrisy. Not hypocrisy, not hypocrisy at all. You would have to interpret me as saying that God has no right to execute apostates or something like that. Not what I'm saying. If you look at that situation, if you are taken out of the land of slavery, you're taken through the Red Sea, God sends food from heaven upon you to sustain you.  You're led into the Promised Land. And even after you build the temple, God descends upon the temple, fills it with His presence. God is performing ongoing miracles. God is sending prophets. If that's happening, if you're an atheist, you don't believe that that stuff happened. But if you're taking the Scripture as what happened, then there's no excuse. There's no excuse. In other words, it's this idea that your responsibility is proportional to the clearness of the revelation that you've been given. If a pillar of fire is standing there saying, do not speak in the name of other gods, do not do that sort of thing, do not go around promoting apostasy here. Again, if you didn't want to follow the revelations, the border was right over there. Go somewhere else. But if you're there and you're staying there, and it's clear where these revelations are coming from, and it's indisputable that this is from the Almighty, and you say, I don't care, I'm okay with God, God giving harsh judgments. I don't see that in Islam. And fortunately for everyone who's concerned, you don't see that a lot. You don't see that in the world today. I believe that God has given us plenty of evidence that He exists. I believe that we've got plenty of evidence that Christianity is true. But you don't have that sort of immediate presence of God clearly as a warning that you'd better not disobey Him there. If God were here in all His glory and told us to do something, and you said no, I believe that God has the right to take you out. You got it. This next one coming in. By the way, we have an occasional comment in here too. But this one for Daniel says, if you had to choose between supporting Al-Qaeda and supporting the secular liberal USA, which one would you choose? Please answer honestly. These are both terrorist actions. We'll look at all the destruction that the US has caused, killing millions of people around the world throughout its history, much more than terrorist groups. I denounced Al-Qaeda. I denounced ISIS. These are terror groups. There's arguably a lot of evidence to show that they are actually working for certain intelligence agencies from Western countries. I denounce all of these groups. This is a false choice. It's like saying, do you prefer one type of poison or another? I don't have to address a false choice like that. You got it. This one coming in from, do you appreciate this one? A comment says, Aftab Khan says, Daniel, for the win, and I don't know if I'm pronouncing this right, it says inshallah. What does inshallah mean? If God wills. You got it. And thank you very much for this one. And on, oh, we got that one. The super destroyer says, apostasy law isn't a divine law. A lot of scholars like Sufyan Al-Thari didn't think apostates should be given capital punishment. There is a lot of nuances to it. Don't you know that, David? I'm assuming Daniel would actually agree with me on this one. But yeah, Mohammed said, if anyone leaves his Islamic religion, kill him.   But yeah, I interpret it. I interpret Mohammed's words as meaning at the very least in an Islamic state that you would be executed for apostasy, whether you could do it on a personal level. Hey, that guy just left Islam. Let me go chop him up. I'm not sure about that one. But yeah, again, I'm assuming Daniel would agree with me on this one. Yeah, I agree. Like there's no difference of opinion. The only difference of opinion on apostasy is some claim that you have you would be imprisoned for life. So if someone apostates, it doesn't matter if it's public or if it's private, if someone hears you, then you've left the religion, then you have three days basically to repent. If you if you don't do so, then it's capital punishment. That's the majority of Islamic scholars throughout history have said that the only difference of opinion is some minority said it's life in prison for the apostate. And I have videos explaining the moral justification of this type of command from God. Got you on this one coming in from Jonathan Valentine. Thank you very much as Daniel mentioned a Quran verse or a Hadith that says kill all the men. What about Sinan ibn Maja 2541, where it was commanded to check boys for pubic hair? Isn't that killing all men by Islamic standards?  No, this is referring to Daniel. So this was the Jewish tribe that when the Quraysh, basically the polytheists were invading and sieging the Muslims and surrounding them at all sides, there was this plan and agreement with the Jewish tribes, specifically Banu Qurayda, to hold the flank basically or hold the rear and not allow the enemies to get through the rear to attack the Muslims, surround them and annihilate Muslims. And Banu Qurayda basically reneged and they committed this kind of treason, which put the Muslim nation, the early Ummah in existential threat where they're going to be annihilated. So the punishment for treason in all legal systems actually, not only Islam but also in Judaism and Christianity, is execution. So the males were executed. It wasn't the children, children, the point of checking if they had reached puberty is so that they wouldn't kill the children. And the Prophet, peace be upon him, asked one of the Jewish soldiers, what is the appropriate punishment according to the Old Testament? And this person said that it would be execution for all and so that's what happened. Punishment fits the crime. Got you. And this one coming in from, do appreciate your question. Q. Maltehi says, for David, you're on record cross dressing because you misinterpreted a hadith.  I mean, that was supposed to be a comedy video, but I don't know if you mean, I don't know what you mean with closeted cross dresser. I did it in video. If you mean do I do it in private? No, I don't. If you're talking about will I publicly make fun of something going to some extreme methods? Yes, I'm happy to when I'm trying to make some kind of point. And for the record, I'm kind of joking in that situation. There are these passages that talk about Muhammad and it'll say that he was in Aisha's mert or Thalb. Mert does mean dress. Thalb just means garments. Then there are Muslims who say this means in this situation means blanket or maybe she had her garment wrapped around him or something like that. I'm fine with any of that. It is consistent to say, I mean, you could interpret it to mean that he was actually prancing around in her nightly. But again, I'm not glued to that interpretation. I'm just kind of, I'm kind of joking.  Sometimes you just kind of, you got to lighten up and kind of make fun of them. You got it. And this one coming in from, do appreciate it. This is a two-parter in a row for you, David. Rum runner says Jesus himself committed violence in John 215 and then O'Flamio follows up by saying, was it wrong for Jesus to beat the money changers? I don't think he actually beat the money changers. If you have multiple passages on Jesus cleansing the temple, but it says he made a whip and drove them out.  He wasn't just driving out the people. He was driving out the animals as well. But you have to line up the various passages in the Gospels to see, to see what's going on. You got it. And this one from Asri. Schizophrenia says, for Daniel, if people are punished for insulting Muhammad, then do you agree people should be punished for being, let me know if I pronounce this right. Muserik, M-U-S. Mushrik? That's right. Thank you. Okay. Wait, they're sorry. They're punished for being, insulting Muhammad or being Mushrik? No, they said if people are punished for, if they are punished for insulting Muhammad, then do you agree people should also be punished for being Muzerik? I don't know what that's referring to. But I just stated the position, Islamic position on apostasy, the Islamic position on blasphemy. And this is critical.  It will create a nation of apostates. It'll create a nation of evildoers and the wicked as it says in the Old Testament. And so you have to have strong deterrence against those kinds of acts of disbelief. And Islam does have strict regulations on this, including capital punishment. And there's very good reason for this. We want to preserve people's faith in God. That is something the most valuable thing in existence is your faith in God Almighty and the Creator and not associating partners with Him. So Islam as a complete system that is meant to last the test of time until the anti-Christ is allowed to come by God, it has these kinds of rules of preservation.  This is attested to in the Old Testament and the Christians throughout history up until the modern period for 1700 years, arguably even longer, interpreted these verses of the Bible as meaning to preserve faith by attacking paganism and blasphemy. And they didn't see any contradiction between that interpretation and what they read in the New Testament from Jesus. Because after all, Jesus says that he affirms the Old Testament and he's not there to abrogate the law. He's there to confirm the law, as is mentioned in the Bible. They didn't see a contradiction with that. It's only David Wood and liberalized modern Christians who have this bizarre interpretation that throws the Old Testament under the bus, throws all of this Christian history under the bus. If Christians are okay with that and adopting this kind of pacifist, non-interventionist kind of position towards blasphemy, then that just means the Christian nation cannot exist and it will be exterminated. And unfortunately that is what's happening. Must move. This one comes in from Ananya Maus for David says, why does the Bible say that Dawood as a prophet had relations with a married woman? Why then was he not killed as per Leviticus 20? You're assuming that they always followed the laws and that they always carried out the punishments and so on. They didn't. And there's a mistake here that Muslims often make and I think it's related to just taking everything Muhammad did and assuming that it's all good and so on and defending everything Muhammad did and assuming that Muhammad was right and all these whatever he did. That's not the biblical perspective of a prophet, the biblical perspective of prophets is that they are fallen sometimes messed up human beings that God uses anyway in spite of themselves to get a message across to people. And so they can be praised for certain aspects of their lives like David has praised for being a man after God's own heart. You see this especially when he's young but over and over and over again we see even good kings being corrupted over time. Unfortunately someone like David, he repents, he repents afterwards. But it's common in Islam to look at bad stories about prophets doing something bad and say, why would they make this sort of thing up? They're not. And in fact that's a testament to the trustworthiness of the authors of Scripture that they're writing down even the faults and the misdeeds and the sins of even their heroes and exposing them. And so you can be like David in terms of being a man after God's own heart but you need to watch out that if you get in a position of power you don't abuse that and that's something you can see in both Christianity and Islam because we both see our religious leaders and preachers and so on fall into horrible sin and that would be the takeaway message of David falling into sin. You got it Anne. Stop scamming man says to Daniel women are only 10% of the world's prisons populations yet in so many hadiths it says the majority in jahanam are women. Why is this? The majority of the prison population or 10% women's prison population is 10%. So how does that relate to jahanam? I think I think I'm not going to comment. I'm just going to pick I think what I think what he's saying is if according to Muhammad most of the inhabitants of hell are women why is only 10% of the prison population women doesn't that suggest that women are actually better better behaved than men? So I think that's the point that the person is trying to get to. You know the questioner David or this is not no idea that you heard this question before. I've never heard this question before. I guess we'll give you a chance to respond Daniel. Yeah so I mean I don't see the connection these you can have you know a lot of people getting away with all kinds of crimes according to the secular legal system that's created the secular legal system doesn't punish all kinds of behaviors that are terrible and normities in the eyes of God. And so what God punishes in the afterlife is a separate question than what secular authorities punish in this worldly life especially in a secular liberal country.  I think that even if we take the you know literal interpretation of the hadith it's not a problem because there could be many reasons why one sex is committing more problematic things and sins and disbelief and the other sect. There could also be one interpretation of there's just more women in the world. Women are the majority in many countries historically I don't know if there's been more women than men but it can also just be a simple matter of population discrepancy between males and females. This is one amongst many other different interpretations that can be given but it's there's no contradiction I don't feel any kind of you know problem with that hadith. Next one from the super destroyer says David why when you add the passages in Genesis you get that Rebecca was three when she got married and this is the opinion of scholars for centuries even today Rabbi Chaim Minz acknowledges that she was three.  I would want to see evidence that that's not a fabricated person because there's no way you would read Genesis and conclude that.  The mistake that anyone who makes this argument makes is there's a verse which says and they heard that Abraham had a relative named Rebecca born and so the argument is well right when Abraham heard it that means that that's when she was born right there and then they start doing math. Now the ridiculousness of this is Abraham is a far a long long way away from his relatives they don't have the internet they don't have a telephone so to conclude that as soon as she's born that's when he hears it is ridiculous you can hear it I mean if you think about when you'd get messages from so far away from home you'd get messages every several years when the travelers coming through and says here's a message here here's the news from back home so it's a silly argument and the the the real reason for it is there are people who don't like criticisms against Muhammad for having sex with a nine-year-old girl and so they try to to argue that the bible teaches that Rebecca was three even again there's no reason based on the passage to conclude that when Abraham heard about Rebecca that's right when she was born like that day that's that's ridiculous she could have been 10 she could have been 15 when Abraham finally heard news from back home and but unfortunately you have to make that assumption in order to get this to work the problem is given the description of of Rebecca and her interaction with people she would have to be the most precocious three-year-old in all of human history if she's if she's three and she's already working and she's talking to her family and having the kind of discussions that she's having she would have to be the most precocious three-year-old in history so so guys stop using this this really bad argument if you want to if you want to attack the bible then attack the bible but but don't be dishonest when you do it this one from friendly ex-muslim with a comment saying epileptic epileptic prophet series explains Muhammad's strange behavior thanks for that and then has hey see a test quit out us thank you for your question says Daniel are you confident enough in your belief to be willing to have another debate with David on a topic like quote was Muhammad a true prophet well we'll see I don't know if David is interested we can talk about future debates this one coming yeah I mean this debate that we had I don't think we David addressed many of the points that I made he didn't address the questions or answer the questions we didn't even get to the Christian governance question or the politics of Jesus question we touched on them but I still don't have answers so we'll see what future debates will hold this one from Abu Mahannan thank you very much says for David you speak of the image of God but in first Corinthians 11 Paul claims only men are created in the image of God and women are subjugates of men so does this apply or does this only apply for men uh no absolutely no no he doesn't um Paul says that that Adam was created first and so on things like that but I mean Paul's not going to go against Genesis chapter one which is that God created men in his image male and female he created them so no uh men and women are created in the image of God you got it and this one coming in from stop scamming man says hello Daniel in your estimation should Abu Bakr is it Bakir BAKR have been impeached for burning gay people to death I'm not aware of any narration that mentions that in fact burning people to death is not a punishment within Sharia it's not an acceptable punishment within Sharia so I'm not even aware of what that is referring to got you the super destroyer strikes again says why did Jesus in Matthew 1526 call a woman a dog based on her ethnicity because she's not a Jew is that the sinless tolerant Jesus Jesus healing her later is irrelevant Jesus healing uh healing her later is irrelevant uh no it's not um if you look if you look at what's going on the this this goes back to the Old Testament and it's the this was a Canaanite woman so the Canaanites who are supposedly wiped out became servants in Israel and this woman is a descendant from them um Jesus it's actually puppy right you like that okay you're you're you're you're their puppy um but yeah he's pointing out hey your official status is is as a puppy and so why should I be giving you the blessing and she says yeah but even the puppies get get the crumbs from their master's table and this is part if you actually look at the broader context of what Jesus keeps doing he keeps showing that the non-Jewish the Gentiles have greater faith than a lot of the a lot of the Jews he'll show that there are certain there there are Roman leaders who have greater faith than some of the Jews that there are you know pagan Canaanites who have greater faith than some of the Jews so there are people who are rejecting him and yet these these pagans are these pagans these polytheists um are coming to the Messiah because they understand that he's uh he's performing miracles and so on so um yeah Jesus does this over and over he'll say something that that is offensive to someone he gets the reaction and then he turns out he's actually making a point to the people around him you got it and Greg Kanowitz thanks for your question said what did your Sharia law say to do to LGBTQ how is that for violence disgusting I'll give you a chance to answer yeah we have the same position as found in the Old Testament regarding same-sex behavior just refer to Leviticus refer to Deuteronomy and you'll see exactly what Islam Islam the Sharia's position is on same-sex behavior yeah it's an intolerant position you know we can call it intolerant but it's you know this is exactly what we learn from Sodom and Gomorrah this is exactly what we learned in the Quran about Sodom and Gomorrah the story is repeated in um in the final revelation of the Quran and this is something that you know all god-fearing Christians really should reflect on what have you done to resist what has become modern Sodom and Gomorrah in the world today and are you not afraid that God will bring down a tremendous calamity like he did on Sodom and Gomorrah for our tolerance of this kind of behavior that has has spread and is now in your schools it is in your home it is on your TV it is on the internet everywhere Sodom and Gomorrah is is there and you have allowed it unfortunately Christians I'm talking to you you're the majority you have the moral authority within these western nations but you conceded all of that unfortunately to liberal secularism and part of it is because of guys like David Wood who just roll over and you know basically say we're we're the real human rights defenders as Christians like this is what has caused the earth to now become Sodom and Gomorrah Muslims on the other hand we've been trying to resist this we've been trying to prevent the world falling into this pit of vice and sin but I'm not like David Wood I actually think that we are in the end of times I think that the emergence of the antichrist is eminent and it's because of these things that have been allowed to happen by the secular liberal monster that's consuming the entire world I just wish that okay Christianity Christians let's you know not forget about the past now it's time to really step up and stand for true values true family values true values of marriage because we have temperance and propriety why are you attacking Muslims on this issue why it's in your Bible you got it this one from Zach hello Vic thank you very much says for David could you clarify how Christian tradition laid out a system of governance to deal with problems such as violence and intolerance based off of the biblical verses if it is not clear isn't that a problem um no again it's it's not uh it's it's not the same as the mindset in Islam where you get this set of rules that you are supposed to impose on a society um Christians spread their their ideas about other human beings and how we're supposed to uh treat other human beings and how we're supposed to have love and have concern and seek peace with other people and they spread the ideas and these things influence the government uh and eventually you get governments that uh that have more respect for human life and so on and again the examples I gave in my opening statement this happened over and over and over again even in the Roman Empire I mean their their the the main form of entertainment in the Roman Empire was watching people hack each other up and Christians thought this is this is disgusting these are people who are created in the image of God God loves these people and you're making them hack each other up and so that happened um again infanticide things like that and so you do see how it's how it's influencing the entire it's and it's influenced the entire world because everyone pretty much everyone agrees with this now um that that would be bad it would be bad to have people uh hacking each other up for entertainment almost everyone agrees with that now where did that come from how did it go from being the favorite form of entertainment right you I mean men women and children all cheering as people are hacking each other up to something that would be disgusting to almost anyone nowadays I mean we have you know MMA fights and stuff like that but they're not they're not brutally hacking people up or having animals fight with people and having the animals eat the people and so on so uh the idea here is these ideas spread to everyone whether you're Christian or not and so that's again it's not going out and conquering and subjugating the world um the Jesus came and he establishes the church and the church has its rules that people are supposed to follow as far as the rest of the world uh you you you want them to get some points about loving other people even if they reject the message and that's that's exactly what happened you got it this one from apostate prophet says for Daniel if you had to donate $1,000 to either David Wood or Osama bin Laden whom would you choose hey you said apostate prophet yeah this is your your old buddy uh oh these people I didn't take my anxiety medication oh man sorry apus I got an anxiety attack right then and there so I don't know if I can answer your stupid question okay well I think let me actually say one thing uh I looked up the reference about Abu Bakr and the burning of uh Murtaddin uh so this I think that's in term I mean uh in Tabari I've seen it in Tabari okay so there there might be a reference there I don't know if it's authentic but the reference that I look that I'm looking up here says that this is a response because this was in the Rida wars and these were apostates and they had actually attacked Muslims and had burned some Muslims alive so this was like a fitting punishment but usually there's no burning people alive as a as a Sharia punishment now I know that you and apostate prophet have a history so but I that I don't know much about it but I know you do but I do have to say I just ask you the question though in terms of taking a crack at it oh you're actually making it you're making him answer the David Wood or Osama bin Laden that question yeah I'm pressing you a little bit Osama bin Laden is dead so I don't even understand the premise of the question yeah pick someone who's alive AP this one coming in from stop scamming man says hello hello Daniel given that the hypocrites that pretend to be Muslim burn in the worst of hell isn't the apostasy law going to coerce people into this it's not going to coerce people into hypocrisy like people have the choice to believe in God or not and reject it so yeah there are hypocrites in a healthy society because a healthy society that's based on God's vision means that there will be people who will secretly hate God and will be evil people but they have to manifest goodness in society as a whole and that's a good thing we want people to be good on the outside because the outside affects the inside and the hope is that if people are acting good and they are abiding by Islamic practices and values they're going to the mosques they're worshiping even if they don't believe at first that faith will grow in their hearts faith will grow and they will become strong true believers and that's the hope when you inculcate a society that abides by Islamic values whereas if you have a society that does not establish God's vision on earth and people are allowed to blaspheme and commit all kinds of godless acts that's going to take down the value of society the character of society that's going to spoil society and create a hell on earth so of course Islam says it's better to have a society of goodness outwardly and yes there will be some hypocrites but the sin is on them that's better than a society where there is no hypocrisy because all the evil people can manifest they're vile and they're they're they're venom they're vile venom out in public you got it thank you very much and this one coming in from shama aha it says david you can this is kind of a two parter so they said david do you consider prophet david a prophet because he didn't perform any miracles and then they have one for you let's see they said Muhammad poba i don't know if there's a typo is that no peace that stands for peace be upon oh got you okay said it did many historically recorded why don't you research it first wait what well what was the second part i didn't hear you got it they said Muhammad peace be upon him did many historically recorded why don't you research first um yeah so date my claim is not that's a prophet has to perform miracles um my claim is that if someone's coming along bringing a law and it it's about slaughtering people and what people you're gonna kill and so on and about fighting wars uh that should generally have some maybe a pretty good idea to have some good evidence because otherwise you get people who are just saying hey god sent me and now i have now you all have to go out and slaughter in my name and that's i mean that's what you have in the bible when there's when there's a law coming out and uh there are things like death penalties and so on god makes it very clear where that's coming from as for the miracles of Muhammad again as i stated i know and i i said this earlier i know that there are later sources that talk about Muhammad's miracles so you have this in the syrah you have this in the hadith those contradict the Quran because over and over and over and over again in the Quran the unbelievers are challenging Muhammad why he wasn't performing why he wasn't sent with signs like earlier prophets and i believe daniel responded that the Quran is just recording the accusations of these people who are criticizing Muhammad but you also have Allah's responses to them and if Muhammad was known for performing all these miracles then when it says you know the unbelievers say hey why was not a sign sent with him the response should have been wait what are you talking about he split the moon what are you talking about he shoots water out of his fingers what are you talking about he does all these things instead over and over and over again the Quran gives excuses for why Muhammad uh wasn't sent with any miracles and so it's it's it's basically i mean just think about it i i understand if you're a muslim and you believe that Muhammad performed miracles why you're we're not on the same page here but just think about it from my perspective i've got the Quran it repeatedly tries to explain why Muhammad's not performing miracles and we see over and over again the unbelievers are constantly pestering the muslims why isn't your guy sent with miracles why isn't your guy sent with miracles why isn't he sent with miracles and we know that this would continue afterwards so even later when muslims are going out when you have this expansion and people are saying hey why you know uh Muhammad is a prophet in line with the other prophets jews and christians would have been continuing to ask where's that where's his miracles where are his miracles where are his miracles and suddenly over a century later you get miracles in ibn asaq and two centuries later in sahih el bukhari you get miracles and so on look at it from our perspective your earliest source explains why he didn't perform miracles sources that come much later say he performed all these miracles what these later sources say doesn't line up at all with with what the Quran saying that the response in the Quran should have been what are you talking about he performs miracles all the time and it's not and so do we have good evidence that Muhammad performed miracles uh i'd say no can i just say something and then david can respond have the final word on it if it's super short and petty yeah super short like according yeah the thing david though think about it if this is such like a defeater of islam and this is like so embarrassing that all these disbelievers are saying hey Muhammad's life time you don't have miracles why according to you Muhammad wrote the Quran so why would he repeatedly mentioned this in these verses as you cited why would he keep drawing attention to that fact if this is Muhammad who's writing the Quran according to you it seems like he would not want to mention that at all why even raise the issue uh Muhammad over Muhammad throughout the Quran is responding to accusations and by the way i don't have a position on whether Muhammad is deliberately uh fabricating the Quran and claiming that it's from god or if he actually was a person who sincerely believed he was a prophet and is just you know getting his revelations from somewhere else or from from his own head or something like that i don't really have a position i can see arguments for various positions but as far as Muhammad bringing this up i mean the unbelievers are constantly coming up with these uh criticisms against Muhammad and it's not just that he can't perform miracles it's that he's a madman it's uh so he's a madman there are multiple accusations that he's a plagiarist and Muhammad it if we go with what you're saying and he's actually coming up with responses to their objections that's what he's doing right i mean his followers are then uh hearing these verses that he's revealing and what are what are what are the revelations that he's revealing their responses to these critics who who come up to him so that the muslims now memorize these responses and so the next time someone comes up and says hey Muhammad why didn't you get any revelation i mean why didn't you get any uh why don't you perform miracles like other prophets and then the muslim can respond ah it's because previous generations you know they they they didn't pay too much attention to miracles and so Muhammad has the Quran and that's that's his miracle so that would be my take on that you got to thank you very much this one coming in from do appreciate your question greg canowitz says why is daniel conflating a religious society with a society that simply has laws you don't need religion to have laws daniel why can't you see this well if you want to have a society that has laws that are just if you want to have a society because who defines justice i'm muslim i believe and i maintain that justice is based on what god says is good and evil what god says is just and unjust i assume that christians share this understanding of justice and goodness so if you want to have laws that are good and just then they have to be tied to your religious beliefs because your religion expresses your deepest or or the deepest truths about right and wrong good and evil so of course as a as a muslim and as you know you're a christian or a jew if you want a society run by just laws of course it has to be religious i mean this is the sad thing that christians in the modern period have separated law from religion and this is exactly what secularism is and therefore they've allowed this kind of atheistic understanding of the world atheistic understanding of right and wrong to be imposed through a secular system to be imposed on all people in a way that actually destroys faith in a way that actually destroys family destroys marriage this has has happened because of this separating the laws from religion i personally okay if here's here's a choice that's given if i were given a choice to live in an atheistic society with atheistic laws versus a christian society and christian laws i always choose the christian society every single time why because those laws at least are abrahamic they're based on revelation christians are people of the book they love god they care about family these are important values that i as a muslim share and i was born and raised in texas texas is a very conservative christian state and i have you know loved and enjoyed my interaction with my christian neighbors and christian community and unfortunately i'm seeing christians especially this new generation that's abandoning christianity that's abandoning traditional values and it's because of this adoption of secular liberalism and this idea that no laws shouldn't be based on religion so this is something that's traumatic for me personally i would wish that christians would wake up from this and realize this and see that muslims are not the enemy islam is not the enemy turn off the tv turn off all this garbage against muslims and see for yourself what's really happening the actual antichrist system the satanic system that's being used to wipe out humanity wipe out belief in god this is a huge problem and we have to address it you got it thank you very much and appreciate this question from youth of rhodalama you guys might have to help me decode this they said question for david ask an atheist daniel is presenting divine command theory if allah was a real prophet are all commandments under allah permissible also both of you name one act that is immoral if god ordered it um i didn't catch the first part because you read through that again slowly you bet it's basically trying to give us the youth of rhodalama okay is he trying well i understand the youth of rhodalama it's not it's not relevant to the topic at hand we don't need to get into a philosophy discussion about plato and greek philosophy well i could you read it again though just because i didn't uh i didn't catch the first part and i might i might agree with daniel and say it has nothing to do with what we're talking about but yeah i i don't i didn't actually detect that youth throw in it but maybe it is like they said question for david ask an atheist daniel is you guys folks you got to use periods or commas here sometimes like so they said if allah was a real prophet from if allah was a real prophet yeah they said is our all commandments under allah permissible i i think yeah i just don't understand i think we're both confused he it does look like he's going trying to go somewhere with the youth of rhodalama but uh we need a clearer statement of what he's saying you got it and notion slave says why is wood stuck on tiny details of the way of life and ignoring the other 99 percent of the teachings just the same way that your parents share their way of life with you so does muhammad out of love and care is love strange to you if he's talking about how i pointed out that muhammad had all these little tiny details for how to live and so on i'm not saying hey muhammad had all these rules that seem really strange to me about you know wiping with an uneven number of stones and so on or you know plucking every so often and and so on it's it's not that is i'm looking at kind of the the entire picture right what reason do i have to believe this guy what reason do i have to take this guy seriously as someone who's speaking on behalf of god because as far as i can tell he's contradicting the old testament and he's contradicting the new testament he's claiming to be in the same line with these these earlier prophets and yet he seems to be contradicting them um that's it could be that i'm misinterpreting something and i'm misinterpreting and thinking that he's he's contradicting them when he really isn't but what is the evidence that he's actually speaking from god and and every i mean every argument i get it turns out to be completely bogus right i mean the perfect preservation of the Quran no it's not uh the miracles in the Quran i mean the Quran says that the sun sets in a muddy pool so so the arguments that i'm given turn out to be complete nonsense then there are problems like muhammad affirms the inspiration preservation authority of the earlier scriptures and yet contradicts them so i'm looking at this and saying problems and then i'm looking at his life with him thinking that he's uh him thinking that he's demon possessed and needing to be talked out of that him being suicidal him thinking that uh that he's a victim of black magic and then all the moral issues and so on and then it's it's kind of assessing his his personality and when i see him making all these little these little rules that that sounds like obsessive compulsive disorders i'm trying to put together a like a like a psychological uh profile here and again the point is not oh he's got all these little rules that's a that's this huge problem it's that it's something that kind of helps us understand who we're dealing with and it just i see nothing here but i think shorter than you short and david sure sure yeah very short so if uh muhammad sallallam was obsessive compulsive he has these psychological problems as as you're characterizing him how was he so successful how was he so successful in bringing all of arabia into islam then successfully defeating the biggest superpower of the time which was the persian empire and almost defeating the roman empire and at least bringing it to its knees and and really spreading the rule of islam uh as far west as uh morocco and as far east as uh india the subcontinent like this is proof of of the divine favor on muhammad that he was so successful and to characterize him as having psychological problems like none of this would have been possible he couldn't have inspired all of these people and this is this is historical right he's the most influential person there's you know the debate about jesus versus muhammad sallallahu alaihi wa sallam peace be upon them both but you can't just characterize him with these cheap missionary arguments david to be clear you can be obsessive compulsive and be massively successful so just to be clear on that as far as how muhammad was successful it's actually i think pretty pretty straightforward when muhammad came out with his early arguments it was things like um you know my my revelations are so amazing in whatever way you you know different muslims describe it in different ways but no one can imitate my revelation so they must be from god uh and he is actually found in the earlier scriptures things like that and he didn't win a ton of converts like that it was it was a slow it was a slow process um later the message kind of changed to hey let's go out and fight people and take all their stuff and subjugate the world join me and if you uh if you if we win and you survive then we divide up the spoils of war and if you die you go to paradise where you'll you know get your your hoodies and so on your virgins and that was massively successful and uh if it's just going to be hey how could it spread so fast unless it's true i mean gosh communism spread rapidly coronavirus spread rapidly there are all kinds of rapidly spreading things but i think we have a pretty good idea of how a slum spread rapidly this one coming in from do appreciate your question nada verse says question for daniel biblical violence tends to be descriptive while chronic violence tends toward the prescriptive do you not see the difference no i fundamentally disagree and all of these christian scholars that i cited all the christian emperors all of the uh jewish scholars um memonides which i've been pronouncing as maemonites this whole time they all agree that this is prescriptive that the oldest testament is giving prescriptive instruction for uh and commands from god in order to conquer the entire globe in expansionist war in order to spread the word of god and to and to spread the justice of god um that is something that's consistent in the abrahamic faiths it is prescriptive and if you're a christian then you should expect this from jesus christ himself as well because if he didn't practice this kind of expansionism in his own lifetime that's fine that's because that was not his aim uh that was not his mission given to him by god uh when he was on earth but when he returns from heaven to earth to defeat the antichrist he will be an expansionist he will be a violent expansionist and this is very clear in the islamic tradition and it's very clear in uh as i mentioned the apocalyptic traditions within the new testament so there's i don't see how you can be a christian and have a problem with this and logically makes sense the united states and the un is the united nations they're expansionists how because they say the entire world has to abide by this human rights directive that we are imposing and if you do not abide by human rights we will attack you and we will subjugate you we will sanction you and we will bring you to heal if you do not abide by our dictates our vision of right and wrong and what is good and bad except the un and the united states have this secular godless atheistic moral system that they're imposing violently brutally across the entire globe in this kind of expansionist way uh whereas the Abrahamic faiths including Judaism and Christianity and Islam we are trying to spread the word of god we're trying to spread the justice that can only come from the creator so logically think christians please stop rehashing these old tired liberal arguments don't be liberal secular people when i say liberal i don't mean like don't be a democrat uh because republicans democrats conservative they all like the same liberal political garbage i'm talking about a higher level philosophical liberalism with these ideals of separation of church and state and individual rights this is what you need to reject so stop co-opting these stupid arguments just to score cheap points against Islam look to your own tradition look to your own pre-modern scholars and what they say about the word of god and the justice of god and then you'll realize that muslims have the same message about justice they have the same love for god they have the same love for establishing truth and justice on the earth and then you'll see that muslims are not the enemy and some of you many of you i pray and i hope that many of you will become muslim and see that the prophet muhammad is the final prophet and jesus christ peace be upon him is the messiah and he will return with wrath and fury to kill the antichrist notion slave thanks for your question as well says a laisha in the bible prayed to god to curse a group of 42 men calling for him for calling him baldy and two bears were sent by god to tear them apart so no i think this is for you david i think that they're only saying that violence is uh you could say endorsed or condoned or i've never denied that there's a violence and i mean i i think i literally started my i mean in my opening statement i mentioned old testament uh violence uh but the debate is about christian perspective on violence and what i said was that christians um we have to go with the the commands that are actually directed towards us there is is a series of covenants in the bible um there's a series of covenants in the bible and the covenant that we're actually under and you see the early you see the earlier covenants it talks about who those covenants are directed towards who are the people by the way i don't know how someone doesn't know the language we're using here a covenant is an agreement between god and a person or god in a particular group so uh and a covenant is god says i'm going to do this and here's what you need to do in response and what you have uh in the bible you have these different covenants and you have the covenant with the children of isreal you know the covenant with the children of isreal um and that's a good part of what we know as the old testament but the old testament also talks about a new covenant coming that's not just for the children of israel that's not tied to a particular piece of land um a covenant that's meant to be a light around the world a light to the gentiles it's meant to go around the world the news of the messiah this is the covenant through jesus christ and jesus christ gives commands to the people who are part of this covenant and so it's pretty straightforward um situation if i'm under a covenant with god and god tells me the obligations of the covenant that i'm under it makes no sense to say hey i'm going to go follow the commands of a different covenant if they seem to be in conflict with the commands of the the current covenant and the main difference there is um the the old covenants tied to a particular piece of land the jews are surrounded on all sides by people who want to rip them apart and destroy them and destroy their religion destroy their their people group and so it's uh they they will they can only be sustained in that environment if they have god's uh constant protection and god says hey you want protection here is the agreement if you don't if you don't if you don't you can you can leave but uh if you want this ongoing protection then here's what you have he gives laws that they have to follow they understand who they're rebelling against if they rebel but that is a very different covenant than the covenant we have uh with jesus christ uh that is not it's not tied to a land we're not in the same situation where um there are all these people just constantly trying to physically destroy our our entire country and so on and the covenant that we're under the covenant that is meant to be spread around the world um jesus died on the cross for sins and that's a simple message that uh if you want to be right with god if you want to know god if you want to spend eternity with god guess what you're not good enough you are not good enough to live in the presence of god and you can't you can't come up with a you you can't live a righteous enough life to really please god the only way you can actually live in the presence of god is if you get a righteousness that comes from him and the gospel is a message about how god gives us the righteousness of christ the righteousness of jesus and so if you accept it then you're under that covenant and that covenant tells you to love everyone you got it thank you very much and this question coming in for daniel xx wlz xx thanks so much says daniel is literally advocating for persecuting anyone who doesn't agree with his religion what are your thoughts daniel uh no as i've said before there's not this command for just um indiscriminate killing um an expansionist war in islam expansion can be used it's in the discretion of the amir the leader of muslims so if there is a need to expand or there's opportunity to to expand the rule of islam then that can happen and it doesn't involve just massacring people as described in in the old testament and affirmed by orthodox jewish law and christian authorities it involves establishing the sharia and people become ahl adhima basically the protected people who have to pay you know the jizya have to pay a certain tax but they're protected and they're under the control of of the sharia and i already addressed that there's not exactly equal rights because there's an incentive for people to become muslim they're not eradicated but this islamic society provides incentives so that people can accept islam and be muslims but if people choose not to do that they can continue to practice um christianity practice judiism according to some interpretations even hinduism that can be practiced under the islamic rule and i think that's a better system of tolerance this is the traditional tolerance that i was explaining before it's much better than the quote-unquote liberal tolerance that atomizes society and creates all of this um individualism gone awry you know we give in islam individual rights but there's a limit if you maximize individual rights without limit that causes the destruction of family that causes the destruction of community and marriage and and everything all the problems that we see with the modern world but islam's understanding of tolerance is that yes the ahlu dhimma the people of the book they practice their religious rituals they maintain their family law their inheritance law they maintain their rules of commercial transaction amongst themselves and islam protects them and yes i conceded that it's not a perfectly equal system between muslims and non-muslims because there's the incentive to convert but that i would argue that christians living under that rule of law jews living under that rule of law despite it not being liberally tolerant would prefer that much more than the destruction of their customs their traditions and their entire religions under the secular modern regime and again the proof is in the pudding because we see christians who have maintained their religion for 1400 years under sharia law this supposedly terrible barbaric intolerant law they've preserved it for 1400 years whereas christians are dying off basically becoming apostates their churches shuddering throughout the western secular world that is supposedly so much more tolerant islam is the only religion unfortunately that's standing up against this secular liberal behemoth this monster i wish that christians would wake up and also stand against this but right now islam is the only religion that's standing up for these abrahamic values i feel like i've defended the old testament more in this debate the bible more in this debate than david has i mean what does that tell you this one coming in from do appreciate your question zagros ascan says daniel and david first david would you guys sacrifice your first borns if your god commanded it to you like he did with abraham i can say yes god commands me and i'm a prophet of god like abraham yes of course i obey god saman al waqana we hear and we obey and uh i'm a diagnosed psychopath so i i have i have to i have to say there's um yeah that is something i could i would have a problem in that i would i would not believe that it's from god given the revelations that have been handed to me but if if i knew that it were from god fortunately never in this situation i've been commanded to love everyone to harm no one and so on um but yeah i have to say that uh i had this sort of personality that i would obey god again come on come on david if it were me come on just defend abraham just tell them when they ask when these liberals just say yes god commands it i will do that don't just like give this long explanation let's say yes be a chad david be a chad yo yo yo i know from experience as soon as you say i would yes i i would kill my son if i were ordered to or something like that they'll run with that and say he's he's going to kill his son as soon as he hears a voice or something like that and he's already crazy so he's going to hear a voice and so i'm pointing out i'm pointing out that let these losers say whatever they want uh defend abraham this is northern abraham be proud david it's normally it's normally muslim saying it i just know how could muslim say it because muslims believe in this uh that abraham was commanded and he was going to do it he was going to sacrifice his son that's that's what we believe so how can they accuse you forget about these looter losers david i think you need to give a strong answer be a chad you can do it i believe in you yeah and by the way in the in the just so everyone knows in the bible uh god had made promises to abraham about his son and about the covenant coming through his son so the bible also says that as far as abraham's reasoning it was god made these promises about this son and he's commanding me to kill him therefore even if i kill him god is going to raise him from the dead that those are abraham's thought processes and then when he's ready to do it uh what's really cool is he's he's willing to do it and if you look this is not a message about hey everyone should uh should always be ready to kill their kids in the surrounding culture the highest form of worship according to some of these weird groups was child sacrifice right and so the the takeaway message from that situation is god is saying hey you know abraham you all have this test about the the greatest thing someone can do is to sacrifice their child uh abraham is just as devout and obedient as any of the rest of you the difference between you and abraham is you have a different god your god requires that child sacrifice abraham's god doesn't require that sacrifice abraham's god provides his own sacrifice and notice what uh abraham abraham even said god will provide the sacrifice god will provide the lamb and if you look what abraham said let me finish i'm almost done abraham said uh abraham said when he was asked by isaac hey you know where's the sacrifice abraham said god will provide the lamb for sacrifice if you look then god provided a ram what happened to the lamb well very interesting that whole situation was on mount mariah that's where jerusalem is and that's where the lamb of god became the sacrifice of uh of god so interesting how all this if you're tied together you're just you're just liberal explaining look you're getting the gospel you're getting the bring a sword this is how you answer you just flash this sword and say yes i would bring a sword to all of these debates and conversations david and prove that you're a chad you're not embarrassed about your scripture yes i would yes i'm just trying i'm just trying to give a complete picture there because everyone's gonna i'm again they're gonna they're talking about killing kids what's up with these guys they're talking about let them let them shout make them look like fools make them look like fools we're gonna jump we're gonna jump into the next one do want to say thanks we got to wrap up in just a few minutes folks as our guests have been we've already gone over time for the q&a but want to say thank you so much we have we're gonna maybe go with one or two more questions and thank you huge thank you to our guests who have been so i'm like look at you guys and you look like you could go for another two hours you look high energy and i'm like wow anyway the only thing the only problem is uh i've had uh two and a half leaders of water water here so that is the only thing holding me back right now why has this debate revolved around urine so much more on that later but muzzy muzzy buzz says can david give us an example of a peaceful christian empire in history why is every example for christian dumb been one of extreme violence and subjugation um yeah i'm not i'm not sure what what what you mean here i mean if you if you look there there are plenty of christian nations down through history that yes they they fight um but i mean gosh how many christian nations are there in the world how many of them are going out trying to subjugate the world there there aren't a lot they'll they'll fight if they if they need to but um it's just a it's kind of a modern it's kind of a modern problem and that you and you see it you see it largely from atheists like sam harris talked about something like the vast majority of histories wars were fought in the name of religion and it actually wasn't something like six percent of histories wars were fought in the name of religion but we tend to look back at every christian country and you know muslim countries and so on and think that these these wars they're they're fighting are all over religion they did sometimes have some wars over religion especially you know especially in islam but you know the the wars would generally be over it would be over territory or it would be over who's the appropriate king and so on and so yeah the vast majority of histories wars had nothing to do with uh with religion so don't think oh here's a christian country and it's at a war with another christian country they're fighting over jesus and usually they're not you got it and want to let you know folks we've got to let these guys get to sleep we've got to let david go to the bathroom but i want to let you know they're linked in the description we really do appreciate david and daniel it has been a true pleasure to host you guys this is honestly been i this will be like one of the best we've had i think on moderated debate all the while that it's existed so i want to say thank you so much this has been tremendous yeah i'd like to thank you james for organizing and moderating i appreciate all your help you know it takes a lot of time to do these and i also thank david for taking the time and i appreciated talking to you and hearing your perspective and what i said about you and your family i really didn't mean that so thank you yep and thanks to you both and thanks everyone for watching 100 percent the pleasure is all ours and folks i'll be back in just a moment with updates on future debates coming up here so if you haven't yet hit that subscribe button and i'll be back in just a moment with that post credit scene on upcoming debates so stick around and be right back


Hi and welcome to Nursing School Explained. In this video I'm going to discuss the importance of being prepared for emergencies. Not that long ago I was at a local sporting event and the need to provide CPR for a community member occurred. And what happened was that I did not expect this emergency to happen and so it took me a little bit by surprise. And although I have all the years of training in the emergency department and teaching and have a lot of experience with providing CPR and advanced cardiac life support, it was a stressful situation for me. So I wanted to make this video to encourage you to go over the emergency guidelines because whether you're in the clinical setting at an outpatient facility, at an inpatient facility somewhere out in the community or maybe even a family member, you may be called or you may have the opportunity to help somebody by providing CPR. And it is very important to stay up to date on the guidelines and to take a little refresher every so often because like I said, situations like that can be very stressful and if you are not familiar with the protocol and the different guidelines and kind of have that down like a T, it's going to take a little bit of adjustment to the situation at hand and you're jeopardizing the life of that person in front of you because you really are able or should be able to provide help for them. So whether that is in the clinical setting or somewhere in your personal life, know that it is very important to always be up to date on the latest guidelines and also know your state laws and regulations when it comes to bystander or good Samaritan CPR or the good Samaritan law. So I've come up with a couple of videos where I go over the most important reminders or points for CPR guidelines from the 2020 American Heart Association. And those are both videos for adults as well as infants and children. So these videos will be coming out in the next few weeks here. So make sure to check back and check them out so that you can refresh your memory and then be prepared to help your patients anywhere at any time. Thanks so much for watching. See you soon.


Welcome to Church of the Chair, where we always suggest you run away from an abusive relationship. I'm your host, E, and today we're getting madder. If you're new around here, a word of warning. I will be spoiling all of Stephen King's work in this series. So if you haven't read all of his books, short stories collections, and novella collections, I suggest you leave now. You've been warned. Today we're talking about Stephen King's most polarizing work, Rose Madder. You either love it or hate it. Spoiler alert. I'm team loved it. So how does Rose Madder tie into the Stephen King universe and the Dark Tower? Let's talk about that. The first mention I would like to bring up is Ralph Roberts from Insomnia is mentioned in this one. As is Cynthia or Cindy, depending on which book, from Desperation and its Twitter novel, the, I almost said the Bachman books, The Regulators. We even take a jaunt into Misery territory. There are mentions of Annie Wilkes, Paul Sheldon, and the Misery Chastain books. But that's not all because also mentioned is Kujo and Carrie White. It is insane how much of King's work is mentioned in this one book. Now that we have the Kingverse out of the way, let's talk about how it ties into the Dark Tower. This one has a hard connect because Rose actually ends up going to the city of Ludd, which is in the Dark Tower III, The Wastelands. There were very few comments on my original video about how it ties into the Dark Tower and the Stephen King universe. Mostly people either complained about the book or praised the book, which is why I said that it's his most polarizing because in all of my videos, I think this is the only video. I'm pretty sure I haven't rewatched them all, where people were arguing in the comments about how bad or good it was. I do want to bring up one cool theory. It's actually the only theory someone posted and it's this one. John Greenleaf 1000, thanks for this comment. And as you can see, I even screenshotted my response. I like this idea. I do believe that the painting is like the doors from the drawing of the three. But that's all the time I have for you today. If I missed anything, if you would like to correct something I said in this video or if you have theories of your own, please leave them down there in the comment section. But until next time! Roused by a single drop of blood on the bedsheet, Rosie Daniels wakes from 14 years of a nightmare marriage and suddenly takes flight. That's from the blurb, the book description. The inside jacket, whatever you want to call it. That is one of the most eye-catching descriptions I've ever read. And the book does not disappoint. That of course is just my opinion. You guys can argue about it in the comments if you want to. I'll hail the chair.