Hey everybody, today we're debating whether or not Sharia law is good for humanity and we're starting right now. With Muji's opening statement, thanks so much for being with us, Perfect Alwa, the floor is all yours. Hello, thank you very much James for this opportunity and all right I will start my opening statement. We have three types of Sharia laws. One is divine Sharia laws, such as praying, fasting, not drinking alcohol and not gambling, etc. The second Sharia law is a man-made Sharia law based on fabricated hadithes such as stoning adulterers, killing capital states. The third one is wrong interpretation of Quranic verses such as chopping hands of thieves and other barbaric acts, which I will talk about them later. There are some Sharia laws that I don't think any rational person would reject them, and if you don't reject them and follow them, then you don't need to be worried about your salvation according to my belief because you have submitted to Allah's commands and Allah is the most merciful and forgiving and knowing that your intention was good but you just didn't have the right information. Here are some divine Sharia laws. Quran chapter 2 verse 83 to 85. Remember when we took the pledge from the children of Israel, worship none but God. Be kind to parents, relatives, orphans and the needy. Say good words to all people, keep up the prayer and you shall spend in charity. Then all but a few of you turned away as you were not interested. When we took a pledge from you, you shall not shed the blood of one another and you shall not drive one another out of your homes. You acknowledge and you bore witnesses, yet here you are killing one another and driving a group of your own people out of their homes, supporting each other against them in sin and aggression. And if they come to you as prisoners, you would ransom them while their very expulsion was unlawful for you. Do you then believe in some parts of the book and disbelieve in others? So what can be the punishment of those among you who do that except this grace in present life and on the day of judgment they shall be turned to the most severe punishment and Allah is not unaware of what you do. The two verse 177, righteousness is not interning your face towards the east or the west, rather the righteous are those who believe in Allah the last day, the angels, the books and the prophets who give charity out of their cherished wealth to relatives, orphans, the poor, needy, travelers, beggars and for freeing slaves who establish prayer, pay all the tax and keep the pledges they make. And who are patient in times of suffering, adversity and in the heat of battle. It is they who are true in faith and it is they who are mindful of Allah. Chapter four verse 75.  Chapter five verse 89, Allah will not call you to account for your thoughtless oaths but he will hold you accountable for this deliberate oaths. The penalty for a broken oath is to feed 10 poor people from what you normally feed your own family or to clothe them or to free a slave. But if none of this is affordable, then you must fast three days. This is the penalty for breaking your oaths. So be mindful of your oaths. This is how Allah makes things clear to you or so perhaps you will be grateful. Chapter 107 verse 1 through 7. Have you seen the one who denies the religion? That is the one who repulses the orphan and does not encourage the feeding of the poor. So who to those who pray yet are not mindful of their prayers. Those who only show up and refuse to give even this simplest aid. Chapter 16 verse 19, indeed Allah orders justice and good conduct and giving to relatives and forbids the morality and bad conduct and oppression. He administers you that perhaps you will be reminded. Chapter 15 verse 85, indeed the hour is approaching. So pardon those who wrong you with most graceful pardon without revenge. Chapter 5 verse 80, oh believers, stand firm for Allah and bear true testimony.  Be just. That is closer to righteousness. And be mindful of Allah. Surely Allah is all aware of what you do. Chapter 2 verse 263, a kind word and forgiveness is better than charity followed by injury. And Allah is self-sufficient most forgiving. Chapter 7 verse 199, adopt forgiveness, instruct that is right and ignore the ignorance. Chapter 4 verse 135, oh believers, stand firm for justice as a witness for Allah. Even if it is against yourself, your parents or close relatives, be they rich or poor, Allah is best to ensure their interest, refrain from following your own desires so that you do not act unjustly. If you conceal the truth, God is fully aware of what you do. Chapter 3 verse 134, who spend in the cows of Allah during seas and hardship and who restrain anger and who pardon the people. And Allah loves the doors of good. Chapter 42 verse 43, and whoever is patient and forgives indeed that is of the matters requiring determination. Chapter 23 verse 96, oh Muhammad, repel evil in the best manner. We are well aware of all that they say about you. Okay, there are many, many more beautiful teachings of Allah that I could read. As a converted Muslim, I believe in any rational and logic teachings and it doesn't matter if the good teachings are from God or a human. Buddha says, no one in this world is pure and perfect. If you avoid people for their little mistakes, you will always be alone, so judge less and love more.  So even though I'm a Muslim, I don't believe that I shouldn't follow beautiful teachings of Buddha and I don't understand why any rational person should reject those beautiful commands of Allah the most merciful and forgiving God. All right, now I'm finished and thank you very much. You are muted. Thank you very much. Perfect. We're going to kick it over to David Wood for his opening statement as well. That'll be 10 minutes. If it's your first time here at Modern Day Debate, want to let you know, folks, we are a neutral channel hosting debates on science, religion and politics. We hope you feel welcome no matter what walk of life you are from. Hit that subscribe button for many more juicy debates to come. And with that, thanks so much. David Wood, the floor is all yours. Thank you, James. I just glanced at the chat and I saw people are asking why you're so jacked. That's funny. Thank you. I appreciate you saying that. So thank you, James for hosting and for putting together these debates. And thanks to Muji for challenging me to another debate and for giving your perspective. This debate is about whether Sharia is good for humanity. It's not about whether one particular Muslim's miracle of reinterpretation is good for humanity. So I'll begin by explaining why actual genuine 100% grade A Halal certified Sharia is definitely not good for humanity. And it looks like Muji does want to talk about some of these issues. So we'll just lay out some of the issues and then we can discuss them. When we ask why Sharia is good for humanity or whether Sharia is good for humanity, we're really asking something like, is the Taliban good for humanity? Does the world need more Taliban? Or should the governments of the world model themselves after the Taliban? Of course, the answer is no, but why is the Taliban bad for humanity? The Taliban is bad for humanity because the Taliban enforces what has traditionally been understood as Sharia. There are plenty of different problems with Sharia that we could discuss. Let me give a few examples and then Muji can give his understanding of these issues. And then once we have that, then there's another big problem here, even if Muji is actually correct. There's a huge problem here.  This is confirmed in the Quran, the Hadith and the most respected Muslim commentaries of all time. Muhammad himself, the pattern of conduct in Islam, married a six-year-old and consummated the marriage when she. So we have to ask, is marrying prepubescent girls good for humanity? Second, under Sharia, Muslim men can take female captives as their sex slaves and they can buy, sell and trade sex slaves. Muhammad himself, the pattern of conduct in Islam, had sex slaves.  And so we have to ask, is sex slavery good for humanity? Is human trafficking good for humanity? Third, under Sharia, Muslim men can beat their wives into submission simply for fearing some sort of disobedience or rebellion from the wife. We learn from Muhammad in the Hadith that men are allowed to beat their wives until their skin turns green. Muhammad said that no one should ask a man about why he beat his wife because it's no one's business. So is domestic violence good for humanity? Fourth, under Sharia, penalty for stealing is chopping off the hand of the thief. But losing a hand makes it even more difficult for the thief to make an honest living. So is dismemberment good for humanity? Fifth, under Sharia, the penalty for adultery is death by public stoning. Are public executions by stoning good for humanity? Is that something that we should be implementing to improve the world? Sixth, under Sharia, anyone who leaves Islam and refuses to return to it is to be executed. Even popular Muslim YouTubers like Alidawa openly call for the public executions of apostates who spread their apostasy. So is publicly executing people for rejecting the most obvious false prophet in history good for humanity?   So is it good for a religion to act like the mafia? Now we see Sharia being implemented to various degrees in Muslim countries around the world. Many Muslim countries implement a watered-down version of Sharia where the most brutal penalties are no longer enforced. But we start to see Sharia in all its blood-spattered gore, gore-ness, beheadings, amputations, groups like the Taliban or ISIS rise to power. We all seem to understand that it's bad for humanity. Even most Muslims when they see Sharia being implemented want no part of it. So why are we having this debate? Why are we having a debate about whether Sharia is good for humanity if Sharia is obviously bad for humanity? How's this even a topic for debate? Well, we're debating whether Sharia is good for humanity because there are Muslims who believe in Allah and Muhammad and the Quran but who understand that Sharia, as it's been understood for nearly 14 centuries, is terrible for humanity. So they reinterpret the commands of Allah and Muhammad. But reinterpreting the commands of Allah and Muhammad. So the three main options for Muslims here are, one, you can believe in Islam and you can accept what it teaches about Sharia. You can believe in Islam and accept what it teaches about the laws that are to be imposed. Approach that the Taliban takes. Two, you can believe in Islam and then reinterpret what it teaches about Sharia. This is Muji's approach. And three, you can stop believing in Islam. You can say, hey, I don't believe that this is from God. So I'm not going to reinterpret it. I'm just going to abandon this religion. So Muji's approach is actually fairly common nowadays, especially in the West. And the modern Western approach to interpreting Islam's most trusted text is to go through Islam's most trusted sources, find everything that you agree with and claim that when Allah and Muhammad said those things, they really meant what they said. They really meant what they said when they say the things that I agree with. And then once you figured out that, wow, Allah agrees with everything I already believe in because I've gone through and I've picked out all the passages that agree with me. Once you've done that, then you can go through and you can find all the verses that you don't like where Allah says that you don't like and don't agree with things because I've already had all these paths. I've already shown all these passages over here where Allah agrees with what I believe. So since Allah just keeps agreeing with me, he must not mean what he says in these other passages or reason to dismiss or reject them. With the hadith, it's very easy to just say that's a weak hadith. That's a weak hadith, even if it's in Islam's most trusted sources, even if it's in Sahih al-Bukhari, Sahih Muslim and so on, even if it's there multiple times, even if it's all over the collections of hadiths. No problem. It was all just it was all just made up. So you could do that there. And then with the Quran, it usually goes like this. Here's the word and here's how Muslims have understood it for. Fourteen centuries, but but this word actually, if you look at the root, can mean this other thing. So Allah is actually saying something very different from what it has sounded like he's saying to scholars for 14 centuries. He really means something else. And this brings us to two possibilities. And this is why I'll say that even if we grant everything about Sharia, in other words, if I sit here and I say, you know what? Who cares what 14 centuries of Muslims and Muslim scholars and Muslim governments and Muslim leaders and the caliphs and the greatest Muslim scholars of all time? Who cares what they all say? We are sitting in the presence of greatness and Muji is the only one in history who's ever actually understood Sharia. He's got it. Suppose conclude that he is saying it's pretty good. So therefore, Sharia is good for humanity. No, obviously, then you'd be saying that Sharia is so unclear that Allah's commands, what Allah has commanded is so hopelessly unclear that in 14 centuries, it's been understood by one person who wants a legal system that can't be understood by the incredibly vast majority of people who ever tried to understand it. No one wants a legal system that no one can understand. So two options here, ladies and gentlemen, either Allah meant what he said and it's brutal and it's bad for humanity or Allah meant something completely different, but it sounds like he meant something that's horrible for humanity and either way, that's bad for human. You got to thank you very much for that opening statement, David. And we're going to go into a bottle. The first rebuttals, folks, want to let you know, as I mentioned earlier, welcome to everybody, no matter what walk of life you are from. And with that, the seven minute rebuttals begin. Thanks so much, Perfect Awa. The floor is all yours for that first rebuttal. Oh, I think that you might be on mute in Zoom. Let me just double check. Yeah, all right. Thank you very much. I would like to say that, of course, David brought up a lot of different things that for sure we don't wish to talk about all of them one by one. But anyway, if David says that all Muslims believe in that, first of all, it is not like that. I'm not the only one I've said it many times before. There are other people and my organization that I'm following. Also, they interpret Qur'an.  They want power. So they don't care about the correct interpretation of Qur'an.  So I have to read this verse once again. Of course, we talked about such things before as well. And I have to say one more thing is that why now we are, you know, reinterpretating Qur'an is because if I was living two, three hundred years ago, most probably I couldn't read and write. So definitely I would just follow imams and scholars blindly. But today we have education. We have, you know, internet. We can communicate with each other. We have I meet different people from different parts of the world, doctors and people who start themselves. They have time and education to reinterpret Qur'an and, you know, read them. So chapter three verse seven, once again, I have to say this to David, is that it is he who has sent down to you, oh, Muhammad, the book. In it are verses that are precise. They are the foundation of the book and specific. As for those whose heart is corrupted, they will follow that of which is unspecific. So those whose heart is corrupted. OK, unfortunately, David goes with them. Those Taliban and, you know, Iranian fascist regime who they just want to make money through religion. Those whose heart is corrupted, they go after those unspecific verses of Quran like chopping hats. OK. They will follow that which is unspecific, desiring to create confusion and their own interpretation. So they they have a different interpretation. And no one knows it's true interpretation, except Allah and those filming knowledge. And they say, we believe in it, all it is from our Lord. And no one will be reminded except those of understanding.  If David would go with me, let me chopping hands. OK. So David, you have to know that in chapter five verse 30 38, that they say that these hands has to be chopped off. Is it use the words that and yeah. OK. And the same word is using in chapter 12 verse 31. OK. And last time we read it together and you saw that the same verb, the same words has been differently translated in both these two chapters, chapter five verse 38. They translated as chopping hands and in chapter 12 verse 31, they translate it as cutting hands. So every rational person understand that cutting hands is different with both hands of thieves. In chapter 12 verse 31, obviously those women who were appealing, if you want, I can read for you. Chapter 12 verse 31. When she heard about their gossip, she invited them and set a banquet for them. She gave each. Said to Joseph, come out before them. When they saw him, they were so stoned by his beauty that their hands and exclamation, exclimate God, good God. These cannot be human. This must be a noble angel. OK. So first of all, why here is cut hands and there is chop hands because here rationality comes in and says that no, it cannot be possible that when you are peeling a fruit, you chop your both hands.  Which even doesn't make sense that they cut their hands and they were women, they didn't scream. Quran doesn't talk about the single blood of, you know, and then how can be possible? Chapter five verse 38 says that chop their hands and then next verse 39 says that and if they repent, Allah will forgive them. So I gave this example also that last time that how can if you pass the red light, the officer catch you and take your driving license and write you a thousand dollars ticket and you say, oh, officer, forgive me. The officer officer tells you that, OK, I forgive you, but you have to pay the thousand dollars ticket and I take your driving license. That doesn't up for giving. OK, so the forgiving is that giving him back the driving license and taking back the ticket and say, OK, next time, don't do that. OK, so how can you chop someone's hands who how can I repent if so, because you have already and I will play a little bit for the a shape that I had a discussion with. They say that we punish people here so that they are not going to be punished next night. So I think I don't have more time. So I will play that video later. OK, and there are there were many other things that you were talking. So we later, we talk about sex slaves if you want all these these things, OK, please. You got it, we're going to jump in. You are muted. Thanks for that reminder. We're going to jump into the next rebuttal. And folks, I know the interconnection internet connections a bit weak. So once in a while, you have a dropped word or two and pardon me for that as I'm streaming while traveling. But we are going to jump into the seven minute rebuttal from David Wood. Thanks, David. The floor is all yours. David muted. Check, check. All right, ready for you and starting the timer right now. All right. Well, thank you, Muji. And in my opening statement, I showed that Sharia, as it's been understood for nearly 14 centuries, is obviously and indisputably bad for the world. It seems like Muji actually agrees with me. It seems like Muji agrees that Sharia, as it's been understood for nearly 14 centuries by the vast majority of Muslim scholars and Muslim rulers and so on, is obviously and indisputably bad for the world. But Muji thinks that he understands what Sharia really is and that it's this very different from what we think of as Sharia. Fourteen centuries of Muslim scholars got it wrong, but Muji got it right. He quotes Surah three, verse seven of the Quran, which says that some verses of the Quran are unclear. Let me let me read what the Quran says on the issue of clarity of the Quran here. Surah 11, verse one, this is a book whose verses have been made firm and free from imperfection, and then they have been expounded in detail. Twelve one, these are verses of the clear book. Fifteen one, these are the verses of the book and of a Quran that makes things clear. Twenty four, forty six. Certainly we have revealed clear communications. Twenty six, two, these are the verses of the book that makes things clear. Twenty seven, one, these are verses of the Quran, a book that makes things clear. Twenty eight, two, these are verses of the book that makes things clear. Fifty seven, nine, he it is who sends down clear communications upon his servant that he may bring you forth from utter darkness into light. So it sounds over and over again in the Quran, like, I mean, like a beating drum that Allah really, really means exactly what he says. And then we get to Surah three, verse seven, where he says that where Allah says that, you know, hey, some of these verses only Allah really understands. And so what do you do? How do you reconcile those as a Muslim? Well, the the traditional method of reconciling those passages is that some of the theological verses of the Quran can't really be understood by humans. Only Allah is really going to understand. Saying human beings can't get their mind around things of the unseen very well. So but when Allah gives you a command, he makes his command crystal clear. That's the traditional way of reconciling all these Quran verses that say the Quran is crystal clear with this other verse that says that there are unclear verses. The theological claims can't really be understood by human beings or too far beyond us. But when Allah gives you a command, something to obey, he's crystal, crystal clear. Muji, it sounds like completely reverses that, where when Allah is giving you commands on penalties to enforce and so when he's given commands, then these are the unclear verses. And then people just use those unclear verses to to, you know, help out their own agendas here. And so he could once again completely reverses what traditional Islam has taught. And so we we can kind of go down the line. It looks like you only really responded to one of the points I brought up, but we've got a discussion period.  That was taken for granted during the time of Muhammad, beating women into submission. If you simply fear rebellion from your wife, you can beat her into submission, chopping hands off. And here, Muji says that this popping the hands off. He says the Quran talks about repentance there and forgiveness. And so how can he said, how can I repent if my hands been chopped off? But I think it's pretty clear.  You can do that. You can stop committing some shot off. That that's the in fact, that's the idea. The other issue is we see exactly how this works in the Muslim sources. So Sahih Muslim 41 87. It's a long hadith, so I don't want to read all of it. But there were people who were thinking that that Muhammad could simply intercede or some wealthy person or some important person could intercede for someone who's going to have his hand chopped off or her hand chopped off and just say, hey, well, we're not going to enforce that punishment because some some important person is interceding. And Muhammad daughter of Muhammad were to steal. I would have her hand cut off. So Muhammad saying, look, my own daughter got caught stealing. I would chop her hand off. So this is Muhammad, the prophet of Islam, who's considered the greatest interpreter of the Quran. He's interpreting Allah's commands as, yeah, I should.  And we actually see Muhammad carrying carrying out this penalty in the in the very next of these. Sahih Muslim 41 88 after he says it.  And this is a response to Muji here.   So not Fatima woman who the issue raised this issue for the Muslim community.  And Aisha further said hers was a good repentance and she later on married and used to come to me after that. And I conveyed her needs and problems to Allah's messenger. So the woman stole something. Her hand was chopped off. She repented and then it says she had a good life after that. She got married. She didn't need to steal anymore. And she lived happily ever after with one hand.  We have all these issues. And the claim is that we need to reinterpret these things. But there are only two possibilities. Either they mean what they say. Allah's commands mean what they say. And it refers to these horrible penalties. Or they mean what Muji says, in which case they're so horribly unclear that 14 centuries of Muslims all got it wrong. Either way, not good for humanity. Thank you very much, David. And thanks folks in chat for letting us know that a word or two occasionally drops. And I'm working on that connection issue. So thanks so much. We definitely have gotten that feedback and we're going to jump into open dialogue. So this will be about 60 minutes. The floor is all yours. Perfect Dawah and David Wood. Of course, I said from the beginning there are a lot of things that has been mentioned here. And I don't think we wish to talk about all of them. And you keep continuing to say that I'm the only one who reinterpreted Quran. And I said that no, I'm not the only one. There are millions of people who understand it differently. And I said as well in the past, people would just follow a bunch of scholars who their job was to sell God. And it is not only Islam, of course, it's in all other religions as well. And I can I want to share one, you know, let me share screen or how can I share file? If you'd like to share screen on the bottom of the yes, that is I want to share file, right? You do that by sharing screen. So if you go to the bottom, as long as it's open, namely the file you want to show, you can select which window or which file you want to show. Let me see, OK, sure. In the meantime, folks, our guests are linked in the description. Highly encouraged. You'd like to check out both Perfect Davos and David's link, as mentioned, that's in the description box below. Do you see it? Yes, I've got to adjust the size. But let me just adjust the size. Yes. In the meantime, folks, as mentioned, both of our guests are linked in the description and now they can see it full screen. All right, David, you see here that somebody is talking. This is a Sunnah or something. Somebody is talking to, I think, a Jew, OK? Somehow this person want to say that Quran and Torah, I think, yes, are the same from the same origin or something. And he says that, look, the stony verse in Torah and, you know, Quran is the same, yeah? Then I believe in these and who revealed these. He then said, bring to me learning amount transmitted. So let me see. He's talking about the stony verse of Torah. Do you read it? Yes, I know this hadith very well because it's one of the it's one of the hadiths where Muhammad affirms the inspiration, preservation and authority of the Torah. So he has that he has the Jews bring the Torah of their time. We know the Torah of that time said Muhammad said, I believe in you and in the one who revealed you. So he affirms the actual Torah. So we use we use this to refute people who say the the the Bible's been corrupted. OK, all right. That's the thing is that these people have tried so hard. First of all, when I talk to these extremists and say that the hadith, these hadiths, like stoning adulterers is fabricated, they refer, say right away, look, it isn't Torah and Bible. OK, and I tell them that how come you believe that Torah and Bible have been corrupted? OK. And then only when you want to prove me that these verse that is missing in Quran, this barbaric act of stoning a human being is missing in Quran and you cannot find it. And you try to persuade people that it was eaten by a goat. And then everywhere in different hadiths, you try to, you know, and here also, they try to prove it through Bible and Torah. OK, which, of course, I say that these verses, these commands were never a command of the Most Loving God, that I, a sinner, stone another human being to death. OK, so these are practice of the barbaric pagans and Quran, confirm it in many verses of Quran, that if you do this, they stone you. So stoning in Quran is an act of pagans. OK, so that's what Moji, Moji, Moji, I'm not going to I'm not going to correct anything you say. I'm just the issues we're talking about right here. So I'm just going to clarify what you're saying because you brought up like the hadith, the goat eating them and so on. So I'm just going to I'm just going to for people who are new to all of this and don't know what we're don't know what we're talking about here. So here's the issue, ladies and gentlemen, that Moji is pointing out. It is it has been considered by by by Muslims for for centuries that the penalty for adultery is death by stoning. We go to the hadith and according to the hadith, the verse was revealed as part of the Quran, but you can open the Quran today and it's not in the Quran. So the question is what happened in the Quran? If it was revealed and if it's supposed to apply, where is it? And so you go to the hadith and they talk about the verse being revealed. But then Aisha had the only copy of the Quran verse and so a goat came in a goat or a sheep and soon in Ibn Maja came and ate that passage, ate that passage of the Quran. And she had the only copy, so they didn't have a copy with that verse anymore. And so it's no longer in there. But if you if you look at what Muslim scholars say today, because a Muslim obviously obviously doesn't want to believe that the parts of the Quran were lost because a sheep or a goat ate them. So Muslims will say that that it was abrogated, that the verse was abrogated from the Quran. But notice they want to say that the verse has been abrogated from the Quran, but they still want to apply the ruling. They still want to say it's the different categories of abrogation where sometimes Allah, but he leaves it in the Quran, even though it's been abrogated. And other times Allah removes a verse, abrogates a verse and the ruling. So he takes it out of the Quran because it no longer applies. But then in this case, it's one where he it's the verse removes it from the Quran, even though it's still supposed to apply to Muslims and Muslims are still still supposed to apply this verse. So that's how Muslims are reconciling their belief in perfect preservation of the Quran with the fact that this verse is supposed to apply and is no longer in the Quran. And I think Muji and I would agree on this, that there's something there's something suspicious about that entire method of interpretation where you're saying Allah removed a verse that he still wants to apply, but he removed the verse from the Quran. And then if you were to go to the sources and say, why was this verse removed? The only explanation is Isha's sheep ate it or Isha's goat ate the verse. So we're looking at that and going, hey, this is suspicious. And from my perspective, I'm looking at that going, man, I just I just don't trust this whole idea of perfect preservation, all this all these other things. And Muji is interpreting it as the verse was just never there. They just made that up later. They made that they made up the story because they wanted to enforce the penalty of stoning, but it wasn't in the Quran. According to Muji was never in the Quran. And so they made up the Hadith. Yes, so they made up the Hadith in order to pretend like it was there so they could still enforce it. So that just wanted just wanted to clarify that. Yeah, thank you. Now I want to give you a chance to screen share if you want it. I was just stopping the screen share before just because I usually wait until the person can explain it to be able to put it on the screen. I realize after I read these verses. Screen OK, that's. Sheikh that I had a debate with, OK, a little debate. OK, chapter 11 verse 91. It's to so high, so high.  And most surely we see you to be weak among us. And where is not for your family? We would surely stone you. And you are not mighty against us. Chapter 18, verse 20 is about Ashon. For sure, for surely if they prevail against you, they would stone you to death or force you back to their religion and then you will never succeed. So there are many verses in Quran that's talking about stoning by pagan. So it was a ritual by pagans. And unfortunately, they inserted these verses in Bible and Torah and they wanted to do it in Quran. That's why I believe that Quran was protected so they tried to do it, but they couldn't because it was memorized by many people. That's why they came with fabricated hadithes. Now I would like to share this.  If you know him, he's quite also famous. OK, so let me share and see what he talked about this stone. The audio is super low. I don't think anybody's going to be able to hear it. OK, it's low. Let me see. You could always just say what the scholar says. Yeah, you can. Yeah, you can share the clip later on your site and so on. But yeah, you could just tell us what he says that these people, they first of all, they are not accused for adultery. OK, they confess themselves because they want to be. You can then in that case, you can remove it. You don't need to keep it now. Stop the sharing. Let me stop sharing. OK, yes, he says that we stone them so that they are clear. We because these people, they believe very much that they have done something wrong and to be stoned to death. OK, I think we must pardon my interruption. I think sorry, well, the connection is normally not like this. I think we miss like the last sentence that you just said, Muji. Normally, it's only one word that drops. But in that case, I think we miss. All right, OK. So I said that this shake said that they stone people to death because these people, they believe that they have done something, committed something wrong and they want to be pure. So they come and ask this shake and these extremist people to stone them to death so that they go to heaven. And this shake was one saying that. And then after this, there was a mom. Also, I was talking mom from Houston, Musk that he said that I do not believe that this because Allah cannot put me in, you know, question in the day of judgment that you should follow a verse that you cannot see in Korat. OK, so anyway, this is what I was going to say about that these people, they just say they try to impose this barbaric act by fabricated hadith this and they even try to prove it by Torah and Bible, despite they believe that they were corrupted. And so what what what we agree on there is that the explanation given by many Muslim scholars when they're trying to put all of this stuff together with it being revealed in the Quran and then coming up missing from the Quran. And then the only explanation in the Muslim sources is that the sheep or goat ate the verses. And that's why it's not in the Quran. But Muslim scholars who don't want to say that parts of the Quran were lost by by a goat that that Allah was allowing things to be taken actually abrogated, which is weird, because according to the hadiths like Umar wanted to add it back in. Umar wanted to add the the verse back into the Quran. So they're looking at all of this and they say, well, there's this extra category of abrogation where Allah removes the verse, but the verse still applies. So the the verses supposedly in Allah's eternal Quran, Allah reveals it in the Quran that we have in the world. And then it disappears because he abrogated the verse, even though he wants the ruling to still apply. I think we agree that that is a very, very. Um, so we agree, we agree on that sort of thing. But notice with with me, I can grant. And I said this, I said this earlier, I can grant everything you're saying about. You have the correct interpretation. This was just made up by later Muslims that this was made up because they wanted later. And then they start coming up with these silly explanations for why this verse is supposedly in the Quran, but is somehow missing. And we can say they made up stories about Umar wanting to insert the verse back into the Quran. We can say they made all of this up because these sources come from, you know, if you're talking about Bukhari, this comes from two centuries after it was written soon and a little later than that. So there was plenty of time to invent things like that. I think we're on the same page there. But really my my my view in all of this is a opening statement that assuming you're right, assuming you're right and you have the correct interpretation, Sharia would still be bad because look at what you have to do, look at what we have to do in order to get what Sharia actually is. We have to go to sources that are hopelessly unclear. We have to go to sources that are filled with things that people made up later. We have to go to the Quran, which has been interpreted for 14 centuries by people who, according to you, are just interpretation of the Quran. And we have to somehow sift through all of that mess to try and figure out how we're supposed to live right now. And the overwhelming tide of interpreters for 14 centuries have given us something that we agree would actually be very bad for the world today. And the people who are reinterpreting these things are always going to be in the minority. I'm not talking about there are tons and tons and tons and tons and tons of Muslims. I'm talking about once you get to the scholarly level of people who are interpreting the Quran, they usually get eaten alive if they're talking to you on. And so you would have, let's just see how this would play out. Suppose a bunch of people agreed with you and suppose I agreed with you and suppose James agrees with you and suppose all the viewers right now agree with you that you have the correct interpretation of Sharia. So suppose we were to stand up and say, great, Sharia is actually good for the world. We want this version of Sharia. Well, the world is filled with Muslim shakes and imams who are going to look at that and say, you're saying what about Sahih al-Bukhari? You're saying what about Sahih Muslim? You're saying what about our sources on the things that Muhammad said? You're saying that that verse isn't clear and that Allah is not clear in His commands and that we have to reinterpret what Muslims have said. And it just wouldn't work out that way. So the point, once again, is either way, this is a bad legal system. Either Allah means what 14 centuries of Muslims have said had for humanity or Allah means what you say, but it's so unclear that 14 centuries of Muslims have misunderstood it. Either way, we do not want that. It's not good for the bad or it's so hopelessly unclear that it's really, really bad. So either way, it's bad. And if it's bad, it's obviously not good. And I think we have our answer on the topic of the debate here. But I read for you those verses. And as I said, I don't think any rational person would reject those beautiful teachings of Allah. And what I believe is that what I understand of creation is that Allah wanted also to test us. He wanted that we grow, we develop slowly, slowly. And he wasn't in a hurry. He waited billions of years. For example, the verse in Torah about an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth. And several or 1,500 or 2,000 years later, in Quran, Allah put a sentence on that and said that despite you have the right to revenge or to punish someone, if someone take your eye or tooth, it's better for you. Allah will forgive your sins. So for me, Allah didn't want us to do such things. For example, take each other's eye. At the time, it was not good for people to understand the beauty of God's message. If you like, I say God, not Allah, because you don't believe in Allah. But anyway, God's message. So he sent his messages slowly, slowly, after a few hundred years or 1,000 years and new prophet and so on. But he waited. He knew that one day we will understand and one day we start, people educate themselves and we start to open these verses of Quran and understand it in a better way. Because as I said, any rational person would understand that you cannot forgive someone that has been already punished so severe, that both hands has been chopped off when Allah in the next verse says that and if they repent, Allah will forgive them. And then next verse says that you know that the entire universe belongs to Allah. He can forgive or punish whomever he wants. So according my understanding is that we are not the one who can punish people or judge people. Let me read. It is not only me. I will read for you once again. Ali, Ali radiAllah was writing to his governor of Egypt says that Malik, the worst people for you must be those who try to reveal people's mistake and sins because people make mistakes and sins. And the governor is the one who must cover them. Do not try to find people's mistake because your duty is to fix the problems that leads people to bad deeds and it is God's right to judge people, not yours. Cover people's mistake and sins as much as you can so that God covers yours. So it is not only me, it has been 1400 years ago also. Ali radiAllah says, not the one who judge people. You are not God. God is going to judge people. You are not going to punish people, fix the problem. Okay.  I don't know if you want to talk about it. I'm fine. I'm fine going on a new topic, Muji. Just let me give my thoughts very quickly on what you just said and then we can move on to this issue. I just want to respond to the idea. But first of all, we do agree on the idea. God can, I would agree that God can reveal something that people aren't going to be able to fully process or grasp and that it's going to take because a lot of people don't understand how messed up a lot of ancient cultures were and you just come in and if you were to just give something completely just radically different that they would never in a million years understand it's not, it's not going to go very. Totally, I would be totally fine with a law in Islam injecting some ideas into society that people might not grasp at first but then over time they would grasp. The question is whether that's actually the case here but the only thing I really disagree with here is this idea that if someone is punished then you can't forgive them. It's not forgiveness if someone's been punished and that's just not true, right? If you like rob me, let's say, let's suppose I'm walking outside and Muji robs me and so on and then you end up going to court and they sentence you to 10 years for robbery. I can still forgive you or not forgive you. I can still say, you know what?  He robbed me. It's totally horrible. Even though he's being punished for it I still just, I still hate him. Or I could say, you know what? And he's been punished. Why am I still going to hold this against him forever? You know what? I'm going to go ahead and forgive him. And again, in the Hadith I quoted the entire issue was brought up before Muhammad. Can we just let this woman slide with some intercession? Someone, can we please not chop her hand off? And that's when Muhammad chopped off.   And then it says, but then, you know, she had a great repentance, meaning she just turned away from her life of theft and so on, got married and lived happily ever after with a missing hand. So just so you know, I'm totally fine with you saying that that stuff didn't happen. Just agreeing on that little point that you can't forgive someone if they've been punished. Of course you can, I would say you can't definitely forgive people if they've been punished. But if you wanted to go on to the issue of wife beating that's why. No, no. David, I don't think that you made a wrong. You put two different parties here. The government and yourself, okay? The government cannot say, okay, now you repent. I will forgive you. 10 years he has been there. If you release that person after nine years, okay, you forgave him one year, okay? You can say that we forgive you one year. But after 10 years, and then I told you that why in that chapter, the other chapter is the same sentence, the same words are cutting hand and this one is chopping hands. What makes them think that here you have to say chopping hands and there you have to say cutting hands because they're in the chapter 12 verse 93. I think it was, it doesn't make sense that those women were peeling the same verb, the same words. And then this hand has been 120 times used in Quran. Word cut, which is cut, has been also 32 times used in Quran, many different meanings. So those who don't understand, didn't understand, they thought that, okay, yes, a thief's hand should be chopped off, okay? So that's why they interpreted or translated in this way. It is not translation.  Allah says in chapter 16 verse 61, if Allah were to punish people immediately for their wrongdoing, he would not have left a single living being on earth, but he delays them for an appointed term. And when their term arrives, then they cannot relate for a moment, nor can they advance it. So if Allah was going to punish people, then he would do it himself. He wouldn't, you know, wait that I punish people, okay? So he says that I give them time.  He didn't put him in a single day in jail. His wife, Abu Sofyan's wife killed Prophet's uncle Hamza. She didn't go to jail a single day. And then you chop someone's hands for stealing something. That's not true. Prophet Muhammad was the most merciful and forgiving prophet of God. And he said that the pleasure you get in forgiveness, you never get it in revenge, okay? And I read many verses of Quran that Quran says forgive, forgive. Oh, Muhammad forgive, you know? And if you want, I can read other verses of Quran that how Allah command Prophet Muhammad to act against evil things, okay? Yeah, let me just respond very quickly. On the issue of the government forgiving someone, well, they're not forgiving someone if they punish people, even that's wrong. So the way people have conceived this is if you commit some crime, you do something wrong, there's some sort of, it's like there's an imbalance in the world. There's an imbalance of justice has been wrong. And now there's some sort of imbalance. There's something that has to be fixed.  And that that somehow needs to get put right. And the traditional Muslim view is that once you've been punished, all right, it's been fixed, the scales have been fixed. You stole something, now something is out of balance, out of balance, there is injustice in the world. Well, now your hand has been chopped off, okay, that's the method that Allah gave for human beings to then set that right. So now things are in balance again. Now we forgive you, things have been made right through the penalty that Allah has given. As for the rest of these things, Muhammad just forgiving everyone, forgiving the people. I still don't know how you're reading sources because yet you can go to a source and say, well, Muhammad forgave this person. So in other words, they come to Mecca, Muhammad says that, all right, everyone has to convert now or start running.  To me, it looks like that was always Muhammad's goal from the beginning was to get his tribe to submit to him as leader. And once they did that, I think he was good. But the same sources would say that Muhammad gave a list of people who had insulted him at various times and say that those people have to be executed even if they run to the Kaaba, even if they run to the Kaaba to seek refuge, those people still have to be killed. So it looks like we have the same method over and over and over again, which is go through the source, whether it's the Quran or whether it's the Hadith or commentaries or whatever, go to the source, go through the source, find all the passages. If it's the Quran, we already have the method. We already have the method right now. Since the Quran says in Surah 3, verse seven, that there are some verses that are unclear, well, great, now you can use that as a Muslim to go through the Quran and say, well, all the verses that I like, well, those are the clear verses. That's where Allah meant what He said. And all the verses that I don't like, the verses that are bad, those are the unclear verses. Those are the verses where we have to interpret it through the lens of these, and then that's what you have to do with the Quran because you obviously don't want to reject parts of the Quran. But with other sources like the Hadith and so on, they're simpler, just every Hadith that you go through, if you agree with it, you say, you see the supports my view of what the Quran says and what Islam teaches and what Sharia is. And if I don't agree with it, well, it's obviously not an authentic Hadith because an authentic Hadith has to agree with the Quran. And when I say it has to agree with the Quran, I mean, it has to agree with my interpretation of the Quran. But how do I interpret the Quran? Well, everything I agree with, that's good, Allah is clear there. And everything I disagree with, that's unclear. We have to do some serious interpretation. But this would just go back to my point. If this is the method that we have to use to get to a version of Sharia that's actually good for the world, it's still bad for the world because something that depends on that methodology for figuring out what the rules are for how we're to interact with the world would be bad. It would be bad if you give rules a leader understood for 14 centuries that very, very few people have actually grasped that. So that's my position there. I saw people mentioning Nadir, so I scrolled through. And I saw Nadir Ahmed say, what a fraud David would is. He is running away from the Quran and science debate. I thought I had already agreed to that debate and that Nadir had actually backed out for some reason. Maybe I'm mistaken here, but let me say here in public. James, I agree to that debate. I agree to debate Nadir Ahmed on whether science confirms that the Quran is the word of God. So feel free to set that up with Nadir. I'm in. All right, thank you. Thank you, Muji. All right, chapter 76 verse eight. They give food to the needy, the orphans and the war prisoners saying, we feed you only for the sake of Allah. We do not pay reward from you nor any times. You meet those who, the kufa, in battle, strike their necks until when you have inflected, slotted upon them, then secure their bonds. This is about prisoners, those you captive and either confer favor grants on them until the war lays down its borders. So Quran doesn't say anything about that they have to convert and then, or you have to kill them or anything. Chapter eight verse 70. O prophet, say to the captives in your heart, he will give you that which is better than what has been taken away from you and he will forgive you. Allah is ever forgiving most merciful. And so these, those, what is it? Stories that I said about Abu Sufyan and other prisoners of war, then they match with Quran. And I said about hadith that if contradict Quran, when Quran says that about adulterers, you have to slash them 100 lashes and then you have to stay against Quranic teachings. So let's talk about, you talk about killing the apostates as well. Repent as well. Okay, repent as well. It's, you were talking about that there are many verses of Quran that Allah forgives all, you know, sins and the side when their time is off. It's not me that if you kill somebody, I just take you an execution. On it right, I have according aliradiyullah is that I rehabilitate you. I have to keep you somewhere. What was the problem? The governor's job is these not to punish people. Only God's job is to judge people and punish people. Killing apostates, of course, they have a lot of verses of Quran that says no compulsion in religion and about those who believe and disbelieve and then believe and again, and disbelieve Allah never says to kill them because if you, if the punishment was killing someone who believed and left Islam, then they couldn't believe again, okay? After have been already killed. Of course, I have scholars who read such a things and gives verses of Quran, which I don't know what was the problem that I couldn't play. You were not hearing that. Sex slave Quran says that you have to marry them. There is no any sex slave and it's exactly like married. Let you talk, I can find the verse about. Oh, I'll talk. So the issue, ladies and gentlemen in the Quran on the issue of taking sex slaves is that the Quran and of course, much more common in the Hadith would say that Muslim men are supposed to guard their private parts so that they accept for their wives and those whom their right hands possess.  And so right hand, those whom your right hands possess has historically been interpreted as the people you've captured in battle. That's what we see over and over again in the Hadith and in the Sira and in the commentaries.  So that's the way it looks. And that's how it's been for 14 centuries of Islam. That's how it was according to the Hadith.  It was considered very, very bad to do it in the bed of one of your wives. So Muhammad's wives had different houses and so on.   And she was out running some errands.  Muhammad said, whatever you do, don't tell Aisha because he didn't want Aisha to complain. And so Hafsa immediately told Aisha then all Muhammad's wives were upset. And so finally he swore an oath.  Just stop bothering me, stop yelling at me. I'll stop. I won't do it anymore. And he swears by Allah that he won't do it anymore. But then Allah reveals in the opening verses of Surah 66, Surah 66, it's okay for Muhammad to break his oath to his wife.  And we know he did because he eventually got her pregnant and apparently married her once he realized that he got her pregnant. So that's what we read in the Muslim sources, right? And I'm sure Muji is gonna have all sorts of problems with this story. But what we read in the Muslim sources, even in a Sahih narration and even in commentaries, you can read this in Tafsir Jalalayn on the passage, Surah 66 verses one to two, that this is referring to Muhammad getting caught having sex with his slave girl, Mary the copped, in the bed of his wife, Hassa, getting in trouble for it, swearing an oath. I'm never gonna do it again. And then Allah coming in and saying, actually you can break that oath because I didn't order you to make that oath. So you're free to break your oath to your wives.  So notice that those are kind of two issues there. One, there's Muhammad doing it. There's Muhammad doing it. But then there are the passages in the Quran which talk about guarding your chastity except with your wives and those whom your right hands possess. And so just to anticipate, I imagine Muji is going to give us some verse.  And some of it would be, some of it would be, matter of fact, this is just in too many Muslim sources to really just dismiss, but the Muslims would go into a battle, they would take captives and they would start practicing ozal which is quite as interruptus, which is pulling out before you do something that might actually get the slave girl pregnant. And they were doing that because they wanted to sell the girls once they got to the next town.  So they pull out before they ejaculate in the girls. They pull out so that when they go to the next town, they can sell them or trade them for more weapons and so on. But things like this after various battles. In fact, in Sunan Abu-Daud, we even read about the historical background of Surah 4 verse 24 of the Quran, which says that all women are women who are married.  And the historical background is given in Sunan Abu-Daud where Muslims conquered a group of people, but this time as opposed to earlier times when they had killed the men and the women were left over and then they could take the women as their sex slaves. In this case, they captured the men and the women. And so Muhammad's followers actually came to him and they raised the issue. Hey, wait a minute.  So what's going on here?   So that's what we read in the Muslim sources and that's the understanding we've gotten from the Muslim sources and it looks like Muji has a different understanding of all of this. Pardon my interruption. What was the exception that you said? I'm so sorry about the connection today, you guys. What was the exception you said in particular, David, when Allah would permit it according to your side? When he would permit what? When he would permit the relations? Well, so there were two issues there. One, in the Quran, Allah says over and over again that Muslims are supposed to guard their chastity or their Muhammad is supposed to guard his chastity, whatever, but there are two categories to have sex with. One is their wives and two are those from the right-hand possess. And so those from the right-hand possess are your battle captives in traditional Islam as it's been understood.  Well, if these are two different categories and not the same thing, then it sounds like they're not your wives and Muji's saying, no, they're your wives. So that's one issue and the other issue is that normally we would say it's adultery, adultery is condemned in Islam. And so Muhammad and his followers captured both men and women.  This time they catch all the men and women together. And so wait a minute, these women are married. What do we do here? What do we do with these married women? Isn't it adultery? So they actually go to Muhammad, they stop. It says they didn't wanna have sex with the women because they're worried that they'd be committing adultery. So they go to Muhammad for the answer. Surah 4, verse 24 of the Quran is revealed, which say, yes, it is forbidden to have sex with a married woman unless she's your captive, unless she's one of the people that your right-hands possess. And this was taken to grant permission to Muhammad's followers to go ahead and have sex with those married women, with the married women because they're battle captives. And so the only point here is that's how it's been understood by Muslims. Muji, I'm sure has a different interpretation, but the point is over and over again, it's Muji and maybe a few others who are going against the traditional understanding. It looks like we agree that that traditional understanding would be horrible, but I just don't, I don't see how you get around, how you keep getting around the way Islam has been understood for 14 centuries. Thanks for clarifying that. And we'll give you plenty of time to respond, Muji. As I mentioned, sometimes we just have the connection for some reason has dropped. But go ahead, Muji. And I'll let you know the same Muji in case it drops, in case we need any clarification from you. Yeah, actually I was trying to find the worst which says over and over that you have to marry them, okay?  So I cannot find it right now, but slavery actually was a norm in the past. And as I read for you verses that Allah says many verses that I knew that righteousness is to free slaves, yeah? That he wanted that people free slaves and slavery is a crime in Islam because one of the biggest crimes in Quran, crime of fraud was to enslave people. If you want, I can find for you slave. And reminder folks, our guests are linked in the description both here on YouTube as well as at the podcast. So if you're listening via podcast, you can look down in the description box below. You can find both of our guest links there as well. And with that, thanks so much. Perfect. I'll kick it right back to you. Unfortunately, I cannot bear it anyway. It's mentioned that his crime was to taking, you know, banish Israel or Israelis in a slave. So one of his biggest crime was enslaving people. So slavery in Islam is itself a crime, but that it was not possible for the time to abolish it entirely. I can give you this example that in Sweden, 1949, they realized that this alcohol is very bad for the society. So they tried to stop it by referendum and because 51% of people voted against banning it. So the government couldn't stop it because it was in their culture. So what government did was put it in liquor store. And the liquor store was closed open only nine in the morning until six in the afternoon and you couldn't drink in the public and so on. So in such a situation when people do not accept it, then the one who want to impose is not just to, because especially that in Quran it is, you cannot force people to believe in Islam. There is no compulsion in religion. So that's why Allah came with different methods slowly, slowly to free slaves. And it said it in many, many verses as well that slavery was one of the crimes of the fraud.  It's not correct that I say to my Christian neighbors that I love you and then I chew their Bible. And I hope that you try from now on work towards peace. And of course, if you are against such a, you know, hadithes, I'm also against them. It is a wrong interpretation of Quran. I'm also against it. But I urge you that you follow the command of Jesus peace be upon him and love your neighbors as yourself, love one another. Unfortunately, I made a great mistake and weren't to talk to these Christian Prince. And I don't know from which religion these people follow. He's, I think, one of your friends. A half an hour almost I was talking to him 20 times.  Please, I also say to my fellow Muslims, don't so much talk about Jesus was crucified or he wasn't crucified. He was prophet of God or he wasn't. If tomorrow entire Christianity believed that Jesus was a prophet of God, nothing will change. So please first learn your own religion. Okay. That's why they black me. They don't want me to talk to them and tell them that your understanding of Quran is wrong. Okay.  He was criticizing you and saying that, oh, David Wood is a nice person and he cannot talk to debate Muslims.  So I hope that from now on you, because I read, I have a clip from Muammar Tijab as well. Okay. That he was showing, I don't know if you saw it or not.  I don't know, you saw that or not.  They feel embarrassed or oppressed. That's why they go towards these, you know, extremists and try to help them to support them. I don't know why this Muammar Tijab was thanking somebody who is burning Quran. He was saying, thank you very much. You help us, you know. So I hope that you work towards peace more because I don't think that anyone win from these, you know, only the extremists, of course, they win from making people, putting people against each other. So I don't go to my neighbors and say, I love you, my Christian neighbors and this is your book, I'm going to chew it, okay? No, let me go ahead and address that, which I think I've done repeatedly before. This is not a situation of me saying, hey, I love you, so let me eat your book. This was, that was a specific situation where Muammar Tijab announced to his followers that the new plan was to threaten the wives of any critics of Islam with these threats of rape and torture. And he announces to his followers that that's what he's doing. And they were specifically going after the apostate prophet's wife. And then in addition to that, he was announcing to, guy has hundreds of thousands of followers and he's telling his hundreds of thousands of followers, this is what you all need to do as well. We're all going after, I've started it, now you guys go ahead and finish it. So what he's calling for is a campaign of threats and abuse against our wives, against women. Now, I have always known that there is surah six verse 108 of the Quran, which is telling Muslims not to insult people's religions and so on, if it's going to lead to insults towards Islam. You look at the historical background, the historical background was saying, even if it's gonna lead people to insult Muhammad, then don't start tossing around these kinds of insults and attacks and so on. So I looked at that and I said, okay, here's something in the Quran which says, if this is going to cause a backlash against us, then stop it. If it's gonna lead to a backlash against Islam, then stop it. So I've been aware that I have that in my back pocket for years. So when Hijab is deciding that he's going to escalate and take things to another level, by going after people's wives, I said, all right, here's a place where I'm going to implement this. And guess what, Hijab, if you're going to do that and your followers and your hundreds of thousands of followers are now going to go around on social media targeting people's wives, going after people's wives, well, I'm gonna eat your book and took a bite out of surah al-Fatiha. Now, here's the thing, Muji, because I'm responding to what you're saying here. You're saying we're supposed to love people and loving people wouldn't involve that. I think it's just the exact opposite. I think if I know a situation where I can prevent some horrible abuse of women and keep men from doing it, I think I'm actually obligated to do something. It doesn't mean I have to do it exactly and exactly that way. That was just what popped into my head, first thing that popped into my head right when it was happening. But my view is that if you can stop some horrible behavior and stop some horrible abuse of women, targeting of women with online harassment of rape and torture, I think you have to do that. So here's the thing, if you let me replay that situation over and over, if you put me, and by the way, he did stop, they did stop, they stopped it right there.  So it did, in my defense, it did work. But here's the thing, if you give me that same decision to make over and over again and say, okay, these guys, these people with this thug mentality are going to go on a campaign of harassing people's wives unless you do something to stop them, 100 times out of 100 times, if you give me a hundred opportunities, what are you gonna do in this situation? 100 times out of 100 times, I'm going to do something to make them stop. And if that's eating the Quran or making origami out of the Quran, I'm going to do that 100 times out of 100 times. The different perspective is, I don't say, oh, but that's offensive to them. Of course it's offensive to them. You have to deal with people, sometimes the only way to make them stop some horrible behavior is to do something that they're going to find offensive. So I would do that every time. I don't regard that as unloving. I think that's like something very loving to do.  I'm making you guys stop. In other words, in other words, it's ordinarily bad to shoot somebody.  You shot someone. No, that's not, that's definitely different, different situation. With all of that said, we're kind of off topic, complaining about different people and so on. At the end of the day on the issues that we're talking about, Sharia, I'm still stuck on, even if I agreed with her, I don't agree with everything you're saying, but even if I agreed with everything you're saying, I said, you are correct in every interpretation and every hadith you say is fabricated, you're correct. Even if I were to grant every interpretation of every Koran verse you've given and grant every hadith fabrication that you've said is fabricated, even if I grant everything you've said, we're still stuck with the method of interpreting the Muslim sources would be so, such a mess. It would be such a sloppy process that the vast majority of Muslims who study these issues have gotten it wrong for the vast majority of Islamic history. And if that's the case, then even if it were something good, if it's that unclear to where people are reading it and it's not actually saying chop their hands off, it's saying something else, but everyone's interpreting it as chop their hands off and this leads to amputations for 14 centuries because there are still places, there are still places like Africa and so on where they do these amputations because of what they think the Koran means. So if the Koran is that hopelessly unclear, then it just shouldn't be the basis for, shouldn't be the basis for how we live today. All right.  So they bring up, everybody can bring up their own wishes that I wish that it was like this. But chapter 23 verse 96 said, Oh, Muhammad, repeal evil in the best manner. We are well aware of all that they say about you. And I read many other verses of Koran, that in reality, chapter five verse 38 says that stop them, the thieves, okay? And if they repent, Allah will forgive them, okay? And even stealing, even stealing is not only one place. Allah says in another verse that hearing, stealing information is also, you know, stealing. Let me find it for you to read. So stealing is not just to take something physically, okay? Chapter 12 verse 79. So who to those who write, sorry, not that is not, okay, chapter 15 verse 18, except one who steals a hearing and is pursued by a clear bearing, a burning flame, sorry, burning flame. So here, even stealing information is stealing. So why they don't chop their ear here, okay? So if stealing something with your hand leads to stealing, to your hands being chopped off, then there you have to chop someone's ear because he stole some information. And stealing $1 Koran doesn't talk about stealing $1 or $1 billion. So these are going against, because chapter three verse seven said that clear verses of Koran, precise verses of Koran are the foundation of Koran. When Koran, Allah is the most merciful, most forgiving, Allah is just. So we understand that this is not just to chop someone's hands for stealing $1 and then someone who stole a billion dollars also hands be chopped off. So these people, they have never been thinking critically and they just, they didn't care. They just said, okay, chop their hands off, okay?  They just do such a terrible things like scholars, as I said, those scholars in Iran, in Afghanistan, these Taliban themselves, they are a bunch of, by the way, one of the ISIS judges, I remember, he was on the run because he was corrupted himself. He was one of ISIS judges. So these people are themselves a bunch of corrupted people, bad people, and they want to judge other people. And Allah says, only judgment is upon him, not us. Yes. We've got four minutes for our concluding statements. Before we go into the Q&A, wanna remind you folks, if you happen to have a question, feel free to fire it into the old live chat. And if you tag me with that modern day debate, or if you put it in the form of a super chat, we put those at the top of the list, we'll read through them. And I wanna let you know, folks, we really do, we wanna have as much balance as possible. We need questions for David Wood. We have a lot of questions for Perfect Dawah and we really do, we want, and this is a criticism we sometimes get, from some, not all, but a small percentage of Muslims on Twitter will say, hey, modern day debate is biased. And it's like, really, if we don't have any questions for the person that, oh gosh, sorry about that, that's embarrassing. No problem. Is if we don't have any questions for our guest who's going against the Muslim speaker, I really don't know what to do. And so if you're a Muslim, if you can share this debate with Muslim friends, we'll have more Muslims here, asking questions of David Wood or whoever it is that's facing the Muslim guest. And then we have more balances because we aren't, we're not purposely trying to stack the odds against anyone, but we're gonna jump into those four minute concluding statements. And given that we had Muji start, we'll have Muji go first with his four minute concluding statement. Thanks, Muji, the floor is, I mean, Perfect Dawah, the floor is all yours. All right, thank you. And I just would like to say that, I wish that we all, as I said that those verses I read, if you just follow those verses that you understand and they are clear, they teach you to love people, give charity and so on. If you follow those verses of Quran, I don't think any rational person should reject them. And I hope that we all work towards peace, help each other. And yes, if you would like to fight these extremists, then you have to help progressive Muslims because you cannot, David, people like you, cannot fight these extremists except we progressive Muslims. And that's why, unfortunately, they are ban me. And I think James is trying to arrange a debate with Daniel Harirajou and I hope that you manage so that I can directly talk to them, to such a people and show that, unfortunately they have misinterpreted Quran. So please join me after this, I go live and talk to me, ask your questions directly and please subscribe to my channel so that my voice is also heard, not only these extremist Muslims' voice is heard, okay? So please, David, try to work towards peace because I know that some people make good money money from dividing people and for creating hate. I hope that you are not one of them. Some people, they create fight war to sell their weapons and so on. So I hope that you are not such a person and try to work towards peace and love people, okay? You got it. Thank you very much for that conclusion and as mentioned folks, wanna encourage you if you have questions for David Wood, fire them into the old live chat and please do share this with your Muslim friends as we are looking to have a balanced community and thanks, David, the floor is all yours for your four minute concluding statement as well. All right, well, yes, I agree, Muji, that we should be working towards peace and love and so on, but I have the issue of massive numbers of people following the teachings of Muhammad, which as they've been historically understood are very, very bad and detrimental to world peace. And so as far as I can tell, as far as I can tell, I have to oppose those commands and oppose him as a prophet. It looks like we're partly on the same page. We agree that we do need to deal with this, with these calls for violence and this extremism and so on. The only difference is I believe that's what Islam actually teaches. You believe that it's a misunderstanding of Islam. I have to say on this issue of reinterpreting Islam and so on, to Muji's credit, he actually takes on Muslims on these issues. So one of the things that historically is always going through our heads when you have groups like the Council on American Islamic Relations and so on and they're here telling us how peaceful Islam is and Islam is actually peaceful and wonderful. One of the things we always are grappling with is, hey, why aren't you telling the people in Afghanistan? Why aren't you telling the people in Pakistan? Why aren't you first trying to convince your fellow Muslims that it's peaceful and that they shouldn't be calling for jihad against the world? Why aren't you going after them? Why are you telling us?  Get it through to them so that we don't have to deal with this endless violence. So that's normally a criticism that we're thinking, but again, to Muji's credit, he does actually try to convince his fellow Muslims and he does try to convince popular Muslims that he is correct. So, but there is this problem of ongoing problem of reinterpretation, reinterpreting the historical Muslim texts that if you want to reinterpret the texts and the Quran sounds like it's saying something and the Hadith sound like they're confirming this and you want to come up with a different interpretation. I mean, and it's historically in Islam, that's considered the sin of innovation. So most Muslims would look at someone who's calling into question the penalty for amputation or the killing of apostates and so on. Most Muslims who actually know what they're talking about and these issues would say, you're actually sinning by reinterpreting these things, you're committing the sin of innovation.  It actually teaches something very different. You're going to be accused as an innovator in Islam and that's why I say that either way, either way Islam is dangerous. On the issue of, Muji brought up the issue of the Quran verse, no compulsion in religion. Well, you've got various Muslim commentators who say, that's a verse that's been abrogated or that it means something different. It was applying to a specific context. If you go back to the early Muslim commentators, no one agrees that it means what Muslims say it means today. No one thinks, no one thought that it meant that. That there's just, oh, you never impose this on anybody. No one thought that it meant that. It was either abrogated or it meant something else. Why? Because they knew that later commands like fight those who do not believe still applied and therefore they have to, they have to understand that verse in a certain way. And so if you want to reinterpret it and go against the grain of history, you're free to do that, but you're still left with this either or situation. Either the Muslim sources mean what they say, in which case it's definitely bad for humanity. Sharia is bad for humanity. Or Sharia is so hopelessly unclear because the Muslim sources are such a mess that you can never figure out what it says. And the vast majority of people conclude that it means something very different from what Allah really means, in which case it's bad for humanity. So either it's bad for humanity or it's bad for humanity. And I say it costs something very, very fast. I hate to do that, but just because we do have to jump into the Q and A, we have limited time. And just because each of you guys did have your concluding statement, I do want to jump in. I want to say, folks, please do send a question. If you have a, and Muji, if you want to sneak your answer into a question since virtually all the questions are for you, you can do that in terms of your rebuttal. That you had on your mind. But I do want to say, folks, for real, we really do want as many questions as we can for both sides. This one coming in from, do appreciate it. Notion Slave says, reminder, quote, perfect Dawah has no, let's see. They say you have no Islamic education credentials. He's a layman. And I think they're attacking your credibility. Muji or perfect Dawah, what do you have to say? All right. First of all, I have to say, I would like to say about that one as well, that I know much more than that scholar that I was going to play with. First of all, like, there was a Sheikh called Sheikh Massary. I had a debate with him. What is it, David? And he was so ashamed that he even didn't publish the video. Unfortunately, that time he didn't allow me to, because he was saying that the Hadith, you know, that says that Omar, read Allah, he said that, oh, I'm afraid that they will not find the verse of stoning in the Quran later and they abandoning it. So he said that Omar was old and he forgot that this verse was abrogated. Okay. So that's why he said this Hadith. So he meant really that that Sheikh, he meant really that this verse came down but was abrogated. So, which I asked him that if it came down and it was so beautiful, then why it was abrogated? So anyway, this, and then that Sheikh who says that he's doing a lost job and he, he punish people here so that they will not be punished next life because I told this Sheikh. Pointing back to the board. We have so many questions. I will say that.  It takes five minutes for me to die. And then I will have my salvation. So it's a good deal. And then David, following the most merciful. You gotta keep these short and pithy. I hate to do this. Very fast, yeah, very fast. Falling the most merciful and forgiving God is not that I make. It's not a crime that you said that they will punish me and say that you will, you know, in a way things, okay? So I'm following the most merciful and forgiving God and that's, I don't think anybody can blame me. Yes. This one from Joe Schwartz. Thanks so much, says Dr. David Wood. What is your favorite thing about Sharia law? I don't, I think they mean like if you, if it doesn't have any sort of redeeming parts and then they say, perfect Dawah, what is your least favorite thing about Sharia? I can't say I like anything about Sharia very much, but I have to say that it is, at the least it is pointing out that certain things are wrong, right? It's saying, so it's at the end of the day, even if we disagree on the penalty for stealing, it is saying that stealing is wrong. It is saying that adultery is wrong. It is saying that there are, there is a moral standard here and that human beings need to be aware that certain actions are wrong because there are a lot of people in the world who don't believe that any of this is really wrong or that there is such a thing as sin and so on. So I can say that Muhammad is on the wrong track with some of his penalties like amputations and so on, but that's, at least he's admitting that things are wrong. Sometimes I have to think about it a little more, but that would be what I'd say off the top of my head there. Okay, I read all those verses of Quran at the beginning of my opening. So I read it once again, they were all my favorite Sharia laws, chapter 16 verse 90, indeed Allah orders justice and good conduct and giving to relatives and forbids immorality and bad conduct and oppression. He admonishes you that perhaps you will be reminded. I don't see anything wrong with it. I don't know, I don't believe even David would reject such a verses of Quran, chapter 15 verse 85. Indeed the hour is approaching. So pardon those who wronged you with most graceful pardon without range and many other verses that I read beginning of my opening. So these are my beautiful favorite parts of Sharia laws and of course those barbaric acts I said that there have been misinterpretated in Quran, yes. Appreciate that.  You could, you could make, well you could certainly, certainly argue that laws in Muslim majority countries have been shaped by Western influence but usually that's to tame down Sharia. In other words, it's most of these countries have like a watered down version of Sharia. So Indonesia for instance, they'll put you in prison for blasphemy whereas Pakistan will give you a death sentence for blasphemy. So, yeah, you just can't, you can't say that colonial powers are responsible for things that we find in the Quran and the Hadith. The overall impact, the overall impact has been to not enforce certain things or to water down the penalties or to enforce something that you might call like Sharia light or something like that. Dan, thank you very much. This question coming in from doappreciatedghost says, praise the toad and to be honest, modern day debate isn't a channel I wanna watch unless it's with James. Thanks for your kind words, a ghost. It's good to be back at least on Saturdays. Notion slave says reminder, quote, we got that one. Cannabare says the fact hand chopping is being discussed at all should be a red flag. I think that's for you, perfect Dawa. In which way is the red flag? I don't know. Silver LTC says, thanks James. If Allah is against interest, why does one seed make a plant that makes more seeds? Or why does quote some good deeds unquote, get you into paradise? Okay, it's to me, yeah? The question. The interest is actually this is a deep discussion, but interest is when you exploit someone, okay? But those you mentioned there are good things, you know, that a seed becomes more because it is positive. It is good for humanity, but that one interest is not good for humanity. So that's very simple, I think, to understand. Okay, I think you should understand that I myself as a converted Muslim and those I know there are many millions of people, we hate that interpretation of Islam and I have been fighting such a, you know, interpretation of Islam in 43 years and we are fighting them.   But anyway, so I describe you Islam with all those verses. It's up to you, accept it or reject it is not up in me to judge you. So I read for you the verses, I hope that you will not reject them and you will follow them and you get your salvation according my belief. This one coming in from, do you appreciate it? You'd have- James, James, did you fix the issue of being muted? A bunch of people said you were muted when you asked the last question. Oh, was it for the whole question? Yeah, they said they missed the question. Yeah, yeah, we can hear him, but they're saying he was muted for the broadcast. Oh, sorry about that, folks. Thanks for letting me know that. Let me, huh, I'm looking at it here. It looks like, well, folks, let me just read the question because sorry about that. I'm surprised, I'm like, it shows on my end that it's, let me know if you can hear me right now, folks. It shows on my end that I'm, but maybe there's something wrong, but the question though was, they had asked, that was, they said basically if everyone read the Koran and the Hadith that Islam would crumble, that was what Muji, or Perfect Awa just responded to. And then Yudhaf Haqq says to David Wood, since you get your morals from the Bible, do you agree with quote, trial by ordeal, like in the book of Numbers in parentheses, forced abortion, bitter water?  People still to this day do not understand, you have different covenants in the Bible. You can read the Torah. It says over and over and over and over again. These are the rules given to the children of Israel. These are the rules given to the children of Israel. This was what Moses revealed to the children of Israel. People entered into a covenant where if they were going to live on this land and it's going to be in the presence of God. So God would actually be there at first in a pillar of cloud or a pillar of fire with them, but even after that would fill the temple. So they're actually living in the presence of God. And he also gives them all of these amazing things like no miscarriages and things like that, no diseases and so on. So he's miraculously preserving and sustaining people. In exchange, there are harsh penalties if you disobey, right? So that's that situation. That's not the covenant that I'm under. I wasn't brought out as one of the children of Israel and to enter into that covenant. Then later you have what's called the new covenant because you have even in the Old Testament, the old covenant, they're told that a new covenant is coming. That's not just for the children of Israel, right? So a new covenant is coming and then it gets here and then that's the covenant that Christians enter into with Jesus and we're told that the law, the law is love the Lord your God with all your heart, mind, soul, strength, love your neighbor as yourself. That's the heart of the law that we're supposed to follow. And then we have the rules that are directed towards us as part of the covenant that we're under. And they even address in the book of Acts chapter 15, read it, the issue arises, hey, what about these non-Jewish people who are following the Messiah, who are believing in Jesus, what of the law are they supposed to follow? And there's nothing about following the rituals and these penalties and so on. There's nothing about that. We're not under that covenant. And so you look at how then people then interpret it and saying, hey, David, where are you getting your morality? Well, where I'm getting my morality from is God has given a general kind of revelation in the world to people, to human beings. He can write the law on your heart, but also through the revelations given to Jesus Christ that tells me how to live. And what am I actually commanded? I'm commanded to love God. I'm commanded to love my neighbor. I'm commanded to love my enemy. I'm commanded to honor all people.  So this sort of reasoning that is so common. I see it from some atheists. I see it from almost every Muslim, whoever comments on this. How I'm supposed to interpret the scripture is to say, okay, here are the commands that Jesus directed towards me as part of my covenant. But I'm supposed to ignore all that and I'm supposed to go to the old covenant for a particular group of people who are in a situation where they're living in the actual presence of the Almighty and are given these amazing blessings of constant healings and so on and protection from miraculous protection from all their enemies. And in exchange, there are harsh penalty. They are required to obey and there are harsh penalties if they don't. I'm supposed to go and live according to this covenant, which the New Testament specifically and repeatedly says, I'm not under.  Ignore everything Jesus said. Ignore everything that the apostles said. Ignore everything the apostle Paul said. Ignore the entire New Testament.  And what do you think about that since that's where you get your morality? And that's why I said, I don't wanna call names, but you don't sound like you know what you're talking about when you argue like that. This one coming in from, do appreciate your question. Topper says, perfect Dawah, could you please explain why Allah said that women should be in a veil or a tent, but Allah can't be able to, is not able to control men's sexual frustration. Any suggestions to Allah? I don't see anywhere in Quran, Allah says that they have to be in such a things. Allah only in Quran says that cover your chest. And that's only for your own security, okay? Because in the past they were molested and that's only that. But I believe in, what is it? In modesty both for men and women equally. So that's what you see for me is tradition. Both men and women were dressing like that in Arabia because of sandstorm, because of the sun, the heat. And that's nothing in Quran that you have to dress like that, yes. This one coming in from Nadeer Ahmad says, thank you, David Wood. We'll get that set up soon. And to be fair, as I mentioned, that one was agreed upon. And then January, Nadeer, he couldn't make the travel. So we'll set that up and it will be a juicy one. And Senator Kato says, great debate, keep up the good work. Thanks for your kind words. And our guests are linked in the description, folks. What are you waiting for if you haven't already checked those links out? Happy Campers says, hope you're doing okay, James. Thanks for hosting. I appreciate your support, friend. And William Camon says, come for the debates. Stay for James's handsome face. Okay, thanks for that, that's funny. Grimlock says, James' beard is absorbing some of the Wi-Fi. That's funny. Yeah, thanks for your patience with our connection today. Benjamin Iota says, do al-Dawah and convert, do Dawah and convert more Westerners to Islam. I want Islam to keep spreading so more people read the Quran and Hadith. I can't wait until Islam becomes common knowledge. I think that might have been a response to one of the earlier questions or statements. Topper says, perfect Dawah, if alcohol is bad, then why do Germans have high life expectancy, higher than that of Arabs? What do you think? Also, alcohol can treat kidney stones. Are you aware of this? All right. I used to drink alcohol before I became a Muslim myself and I made a documentary movie. I'm a film director as well. And it is on my channel also, it's 15 minutes. I made it between Russia and Sweden and Sweden is not a Muslim country. They wanted to ban it because they saw that the impact of alcohol on people's life and health and society. So that's why they wanted to ban it. But because in that interview, in that documentary movie, I was interviewing a Swedish woman, the head of alcohol committee of Sweden.  She said that unfortunately it is in our culture, that's why we cannot ban it. Otherwise, if it came today to Sweden, we would ban it. So everybody knows and I stopped drinking alcohol because I saw, I read a lot about it and alcohol is poison, alcohol kills any creature. So the amount of that poison you drink depend on that, that kills you right away or slowly. So don't tell me please that alcohol is good. It's poison. Everybody knows that alcohol is poison. Yes. You got it, Anne. Thank you very much for your question. This one coming in from HK Fui says, if CL, I don't know who CL is, they said, if CL Edwards received the Holy Spirit, what happened, David Wood? How would I know? Gotcha. Anne, thank you very much for this question coming in from Ballerion the Black Dread says, question for David, assuming that Islam is true, doesn't it mean that Islam is morally perfect then? I mean, I'm just trying to think what you could say if you disagreed with that. So if someone was going to say that if Islam is true, in other words, could a Muslim say, hey, I believe that Islam is true, but not that it's morally perfect. I think someone could say that. No, I think Islam is claiming to be the correct system directly from God and that the rules are to be imposed over time, but I think a Muslim could say that, hey, some of this was given because of a certain context. And matter of fact, I mean, you even have like abrogation in the Quran where Allah is announcing that he gives some rules that later are, something better comes along. He gives something better than what he revealed earlier. And so not necessarily all the revelations are the perfect moral system or something like that. But I think in general, in general, if you were to say that Islam is true, you'd have to say that Allah knows what he's talking about and therefore that you should be following what he says. You got it, Arne. Can I respond to that as well? Short and pithy. Yes, I just would like to say that as David said, the verse in Torah and then in Quran, Anay for Anay for the two, that's not the perfect moral standard today. It looks like a barbaric act, but for that time was the only option because people didn't have jails. They didn't have this system.   So that Anay for Anay was a much better option than to be killed you and your entire family or tribe. You got it. I just wanted to confirm that, that historically going back to the Mosaic Covenant and so on, if you look, the emphasis in Anay for Eye, tooth for tooth was not, it didn't seem to be, hey, make sure you get revenge. It was sort of, don't go beyond, don't go beyond what is equivalent, right?  It was don't go beyond justice. Exactly. You got it, Anne. Thank you very much for this question. Coming in from Arne Rorvick says, question for both, why didn't God strike down upon the first man who took a slave? Why did he wait until millions had suffered the fate? You both talk like he suddenly realized it. I mean, I'll give my, I'll give my perspective. The biblical perspective is that human beings are really messed up. We're in a world, we're in a world of sin and bad things. And if God were to, were to, matter of fact, this is the position of the Koran too. There's a Koran verse that says, if Allah were to punish us for our sins, he would not leave anything alive, right? So the idea here is, if God is really going to punish us for our sin, it's not just someone who takes a slave or something like that. I mean, we all do very bad, very messed up stuff. The biblical position is that God, I mean, there are two things here from a biblical perspective. One, God puts up with us. God puts up with us. God is patient with us. But two, it's a different perspective from the Bible that we're supposed to be. I mean, we're the image of God here. We're God's representatives on earth. This idea that we just sit back and God is here running, ruling over us and subjugating us and so on or that anytime we do something wrong, he blasts us with a lightning bolt or something like that. That's not the biblical position. It's we're God's representatives here on earth. And I think we're the ones who have the responsibility to figure out how to live appropriately, how to love our neighbors, how to love our enemies while still implementing justice when needed and so on. But it's almost like this weird view of human beings are supposed to be like these puppets or something like that and be these perpetual sort of children who have this parent here who's punishing us when we get things wrong instead of being the image of God and we're the ones who have dominion in this world and we're the ones who are responsible.  Yeah, so. Okay, my response is that as you said mentioned that verse of Quran that Allah says that he cannot, he will not punish us immediately for what we do. And then there is no compulsion in religion. So Allah wants that we learn and slowly, slowly, he guide us and he teach us that certain acts are immoral and forbidden and we shouldn't do such a things. And then I believe Quran says about seven heavens and seven earth, okay? And scientists believe in parallel universes and a copy of planet earth in each of these universes. And Allah says in chapter 17 verse 99, do they not see that Allah who created the heavens and earth is the one able to create the like of them? So I believe that there are other, you know, planets in other universes as well and Allah might have, you know, created differently. And for example, scientists say that today morning, Muji on planet earth wake up and have breakfast and then go to job, but on another planet, my copy do something else, okay? So these things can be, can exist as well. So next time this fellow become God, he can create such a planet that he wish, you know, that everything is perfect in those planets. So maybe there are such planets, maybe the angels are living in such a planet that everything is perfect, okay? So, but he decided to create such a planet as well that we are here and this is the situation. So now deal with it, okay? This one coming in from, thanks very much for your question as well. Duke of Sahib says, David, what are your thoughts on the use of contraceptives? Why is there so much controversy among Protestants and Catholics on this issue? Well, I mean, this isn't an area where I am any sort of expert, something I've never studied. So the idea, as far as I know, that Catholics can correct me, that you have authorities in the church who can actually say that this is the rule.   And so that would generally be the disputes between Catholics and Protestants is if you have an addition, so a Protestant would normally say, hey, the Bible is my authority. In the Catholic church, you have the Bible as an authority, but you also have leaders like the Pope and so on and the clergy and so on who they can also present their views. And in some situations, like the Pope can give rulings that are actually binding. Doesn't mean everything he says is correct, but in certain situations, he is speaking with a kind of authority.  So you're gonna disagree on some things. You got it, Anne, thanks very much. For your question, Benjamin Iota says, please, this is more of a comment, says, please do more Dawa in the West so that everyone talks about Islam and it becomes the talk of the town. We'll see how long it lasts after that. So basically the same idea, but if you want to respond, we'll give you a chance, perfect Dawa. I didn't get... I think they're saying that the more people learn Dawa. Let me just, this was kind of a jab, Muji. He's saying, please do Dawa, please do more Dawa because that will let people know what Islam is and then more people are going to see what Islam really teaches and they're gonna see the problems. That's what it sounded like to me. But there is, I just wanna add one thing. There is this issue of for people like Ali Dawa and a lot of the popular representatives of Islam, they are making it look really bad with going around saying, hey, once we get into power, we're gonna execute apostates and things like that. So they are, they are, I have to say, making it look really bad. So that's kind of what you're up against, Muji. You got a lot of people who are making things look bad for you and they're very popular. Yeah, I understand, yes. I hope that people help me. You can help me by subscribing and then you can help me by calling in and I will tell you what to do because I'm banned by these extremist YouTubers. So if you are a fighter, you want to fight against these extremists, then please contact me, help me, okay? You got it and thank you very much for your question. This one coming in from William Kamuna. Says Islam has not always operated in this way. The rise of modern fundamentalist Islam is not the norm. For the religion. The quote, it's what the book says, unquote, stuff ignores history of regions and how religions actually function. I think that's for you, David. Well, I mean, you're correct in the sense of there have been plenty of Muslim majority societies down through history who aren't implementing these things, especially after World War I, when you had the collapse of the caliphate, there were lots of Muslims back then who said, you know what, doesn't look like this thing is really working out for us. So maybe we need to try to Westernize. And that's when you had places like Afghanistan and Iran and so on after that becoming much more Western and much more laid back. But there are two possible reactions there. There are two possible interpretations of why you lost or why you lost your caliphate and so on. One is, hey, that's actually not how we're supposed to be living. So let's try and live not in that way. That's one interpretation. And the other is, hey, the reason that we lost and the reason we're losing and the reason Western nations are so much more powerful than us is that Allah is punishing us for not being faithful enough in carrying out His commands. And so you have the other direction things can sway in is we really need to crack down. We really need to crack down on any sort of disobedience. And this has led to a lot of fundamentalism, but you still got the early Muslim sources and that is definitely what you would call fundamentalism. This one from Why So Religious says, Perfect Dawah, do you have any proof that your interpretation of Islam of your interpretation of Islam and how to implement it is the particular correct way? I gave, of course, references from Quranic verses, for example, about chopping hands that these scholars or whoever has interpreted, they interpreted differently in two different verses, despite it is the same words, okay? Because in that verse, doesn't make sense that these women chopped their hands while they were peeling a fruit. So that's why they change it and make it that they cut their hands, which is also not, you know, rational because then Allah will talk about. And then there are other things like last time we were talking about the day with that. They say that Prophet Muhammad split the moon despite Quran says in many verses that, oh, Muhammad, you don't need, you know, miracles. You don't, we gave it to previous prophets and they didn't believe in it. So these are, I give facts from Quran. My facts from Quran says that these are the true interpretation. Yes. You got it, Anne. Thanks for your question. Martin, thanks for being a member of the channel. Appreciate your support. It says, question for both. Can you steel man each other's main argument in the debate? And that's probably the question we'll wrap up with. So whichever one of you wants to go first. Do you know what that means, Maji? Mujee? No, what? Steel, steel man. So straw man is when you misrepresent what your opponent is saying to make his argument look bad. When you steel man. So he's asking us to steel man. He's asking me to steel man your argument and for you to steel man my argument. When you steel it, you try to give it accurately and as strongly as possible. So I'll give you an example, right? So now I'm gonna steel man your position. So if I'm steel manning Mujee's position, it would be this, what Allah has revealed, it doesn't matter if there are plenty of people who are misinterpreting it and misrepresenting it for their own personal gain. If you look at what he has revealed, you can see that people are clearly misinterpreting and misrepresenting the commands of Allah and the penalties that we look at in places like Afghanistan that are being enforced. Yes, there have been Muslims using these penalties for a very long time, but that's because people inserted those into the Islamic tradition because they wanted to do that and they were in positions of power and sometimes wealthy and they were able to do that. But if we get back to the true commands of Allah and Muhammad and we sift through and get rid of everything that was added later and twisted and misinterpreted, if we get back to what he actually commanded, we find that it is good for humanity. All right, I think I put it in this way that of course you would say that those everything is how it has been interpreted and that Quran and Islam is what the extremists say. So if I understood it very well, otherwise I don't come with anything else. Did I do it right or not, David? You're okay, you're okay. It's your first time stealing many, we'll give you that. Yes. You got it, this one, one last one, just because we want to have as much balance as possible, this was for you, David. They said, what does the Bible mean when it tells that there's only one God if the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit are all God? It would mean that Father, Son and Holy Spirit are actually one in nature or one in being or one in essence. And this isn't a, people seem to have trouble understanding how something can be one in one way and more than one in another way. A human being is not the same, but people point out that, what am I? Well, am I my body or am I my soul? Well, I'm both, I'm one person and this one person is somehow two very different things who are nevertheless one person. So again, that is, I'm not saying God is like that. God is very, very different from that. I'm saying that that's an example of how something can be one in one way, more than one in another way. So God is more than one in one way in person, Father, Son and Holy Spirit, but one in nature, being or essence. You got it. Can I say something? Despite I disagree with David about that, but it is not my problem and I don't think that the people should put their time. So much on such a thing. That's why I say also to my fellow Muslim, leave all these discussions and try to learn your own religion better. You got it. With that, we're gonna wrap up. I wanna say folks, we really do appreciate you hanging out with us here. Our guests are linked in the description. As mentioned, we wanna have as much balance as we can. And so I've gotta tell you, I know that a lot of Muslims are super supportive and we appreciate that. There are small pockets within the Muslim community that seem to hate modern day debate. And I have no ill will. I don't hold a grudge. But I've gotta say, we are going to host debates on Islam no matter what. And so if, for example, those Muslims want to say, well, we're not going to modern day debate. We're gonna quote unquote boycott them. Is this, all right, that's fine. But in that case, like you're gonna have these consequences of, for example, there may not be as many questions for the opponent of the Muslim during the Q and A. And which is ironically, so they're actually making the thing worse. The very thing that they said was a reason that we were biased. We would say we're gonna keep doing it. And so it's like, okay, if you feel like this community being even less balanced with fewer Muslims due to a boycott is good for Islam being represented in a neutral platform. Well, it's like, okay, if that's what you want, we're just gonna keep going. We're not gonna stop. So I wanna say thank you. I wanna be fair. There are a lot of Muslims that are super supportive, which we really appreciate. And so I don't wanna paint with broad brush strokes. I'd say that I think most Muslims are really supportive of a modern day debate. And we appreciate you guys. We love you guys. Thanks so much. And thank you so much for everybody else as well. Christians and atheists who support us as well. So I wanna say one last thank you though. Perfect Dawah and David, it's been a true pleasure to have you guys. Can I say one thing, please? I would like to ask David there, maybe we could have a debate about Satan in Christianity and Islam later. What do you think about that? Because as it is the biggest enemy of mankind, I don't think it has been much discussion about that. I just think there would be people who would be way better at that. There are certain things, like I never really studied end times prophecy and so on. So certain things that I haven't really studied a lot. So I actually think that someone else might be better to have a discussion with. But if you'd like to have that discussion with a Christian debater, I have friends who study this stuff. All right, great. Yeah, please say to James maybe or give their contact to James. I would like to have that discussion as well. And as I said, those who would like to help me, please join my channel and help me please. Juicing. Yes, so that my voice is heard and we can fight together against these extremists. And it's true that both of our guests are linked to the description folks. What are you waiting for? That includes if you're listening via the podcast as all of our debates are uploaded to the podcast within 24 hours of the debate. Thanks so much everybody. I'll be right back with a post credit scene updating you on big moves that we're making with the channel. Thanks so much for all your support and we'll be back in just a minute.