Nadir Ahmed Debate

Webcasting around the world from the desert metropolis of Phoenix, Arizona. This is the dividing line. The Apostle Peter commanded Christians to be ready to give a defense for the hope that is within us.

Yet to give that answer with gentleness and reverence. Our host is dr. James white director of Alpha Omega ministries and an elder at the Phoenix reformed Baptist Church. This is a live program and we invite your participation.

If you'd like to talk with dr. White call now. It's 602 nine seven three four six zero two or toll-free across the United States. It's one eight seven seven seven five. Three three three four one and now with today's topic.

Here is James white. Well, let's get started getting some of the channel rats doing some earn some of their pay. I forgot to find out before we got on the air today. Are we on the air because radio is on the air.

We're on the web. But you know, it might help if you turned it on because I didn't hear a word you just said El muto very good. You're we are the air. You're a professional broadcast engineer. I see. Just because we moved down here got rid of the bailing wire the duct tape doesn't mean things change.

No, no. No, I was just watching rich talking into a dead microphone. Those are funny. I should just left to go. Okay channel rats find out when Steve Gregg's radio program is because starting Thursday Thursday Friday Monday Tuesday and Wednesday.

Is the big Calvinism debate? And why haven't I said anything about it? Cuz I haven't been thinking about it. That's why as I will tell explain to you in a moment I've just gotten like super busy all of a sudden and I I'm gonna be doing this off the top of ye old head.

And as we all know, there's nothing up there anyways, so it's I'm gonna be flying by the proverbial seat of the pants and I have my hair is gonna be on fire. You're gonna be busy. Yeah, but it's only an hour a day.

But somebody tell me okay, it says two to three Pacific. Chris says it's two to three Pacific time bad timing for you. Well, not really. Well, I thought it was in the morning all right, well if Steve Gregg's that is bad timing for me.

Yeah, it's gonna be rough, but We need to simulcast it and he's on a radio station. So there's way not much he doesn't get to move things around like we can move anything we want to move and then laugh at all the people who can't figure out how to find us again, but We are going to be simulcasting.

I haven't heard back from him yet as to whether he has News at the top of the hour whether he has hard breaks. I've asked a couple times and we need to find that out so that we know how to cover those things.

That's what we'll be figuring out between now and Thursday. Evidently, I don't know what the format is gonna be because we really haven't figured that out yet. We keep talking about you know, do we do five minutes each?

Do we have opening statement? We don't know so I have a feeling it's gonna be pretty Free flowing. I would assume we'll find out one way or the other. But we're doing Thursday and Friday and then Monday Tuesday and Wednesday of next week's total of five hours worth of Exchange.

I don't again. Assuming we start the top of the hour and ago the top there. I don't know if that's the case yet. I can't tell you. We will sort of figure this out as we are going along but that starts on Thursday and What's this.

Uh Much yeah, yeah the narrow path April 3rd 4th 7th 8th and 9th. Yeah. Okay. There's there's that I don't know if how we're gonna handle if we're gonna do anything with audience calls. We haven't really discussed that I maybe the last day or something.

I don't know. But you know, I think most folks are probably just rather here. He and I going back and forth on things but that's what's gonna start on Thursday. Mr. Gregg has informed me that some of his views have changed since the Last summer you may recall pretty much last May as I recall I was listening to his mp3s on Calvinism and responded to them and After I did all that he basically informed me that well that was those were really old and I've changed some my views and I'm like Well, okay.

Unfortunately evidently those views have not been put in mp3 format or I would have listened to them. They referred me to I believe around 200 pages of web forum posts. That's I obviously have not had any time to bother to read.

I have asked some folks a channel to look through Some of that material and tell me what they think is most important. And so. But what I'm telling you is I haven't I just have not had the time to be making any preparations with this at all and I apologize for that on the one hand, but on the other hand, it's not because I've just been sitting around twiddling my thumbs Instead what I've been doing as you all know over the past number of weeks.

Well, maybe you don't know. Maybe you don't read the blog. All you do is listen to the vying line. I suppose there are a few people I do that probably not very many though. I was back east I was in Virginia.

I was on Long Island and in New Jersey got back this weekend and Did a debate with another Ahmed and if you could call it a debate I'm not sure that there are many people who would call that a debate.

We might play some sections from it today. I don't know. I'm not sure how much worth there is to it we're just going to take the tapes and Video put put them in YouTube format and put them on YouTube and if somebody wants to watch them great fine wonderful Probably at least make mp3s out of make those available if someone wants to grab them that way.

But we're gonna throw it up on YouTube and I just would not feel proper asking anyone to even Part with a small amount of money for the the DVDs For something like that because it just on any level at any point Mr. Ahmed would have been disqualified in any meaningful Judged debate and The Muslims were embarrassed obviously my hope is that Any last support that the man had will disappear.

But I I can guarantee you If he was the last if there wasn't a single Muslim who support him he'd keep going because he truly truly does not believe That he can ever lose a debate. He wins everything he humiliates everyone he debates he is undefeatable in his own mind and Once someone is that far disconnected from reality, then there's really not much you can do about it.

They're going to Believe that you know, they're gonna believe what they believe and that's that's the situation with neither argument. So But what happened was I thought I'd have a little time when I got back to start doing a little preparation for the Steve Gregg thing.

But while driving up to from Virginia up to Long Island my phone Rings and David would one of the two gentlemen that were involved with the debates over the weekend David would and Nabil Qureshi were the Christian debaters.

Calls me up and says hey a situation has developed in regards to a debate in, California. The debates already scheduled and Wondering if you can participate in a debate with Sheikh Jabal Jabal see I was I'm looking at the last name Jalal's the easy part.

I'll be all Rube Is a very difficult name to say for any English speaker. I'll be you all Rube I dare you to say it three times fast. It's not possible to do for an English speaker. I see rich and they're trying to do it.

And so far he's said something about rubber baby buggy bumpers. But Shake Jalal a we're gonna call him Jalal a I think that's the easiest. Anyways He is a Salafi scholar. He has translated some books from Arabic into English.

He's actually written some books. And I know that the debate was already scheduled with two topics is Muhammad a prophet and Does the Bible teach that Jesus is God and The David Wood is going to be doing the first debate is Muhammad a prophet and this will be on Saturday April 12th.

I'll be doing the second debate does the Bible teach that Jesus is God now. Here's another thing for the channel rats to discover for me. I'm wondering because I'm looking at the location here. This is in Fullerton, California.

We have debated in Fullerton, California. And I was just looking at the address 2505 Yorba Linda Boulevard. That sounds familiar to me. Is this the same place where I've debated Tim Staples twice? I'd like to find out what is 2505 Yorba Linda Boulevard in Fullerton, California.

Is what was the place called where I debated Tim Staples? I debated him in 96 and 2000. So it's been eight years as I've been there, but there was it was some sort of an auditorium and I forgot what it was called.

But it's it's a good place for debates, there's no question about that. That's where you had the Eucharist to take place. So it'd be sort of ironic in the same place where I've debated Roman Catholics on solo scriptura and papal infallibility to debate the subject of Is Jesus God against a Muslim that would be very very interesting.

Okay. I am seeing Lane saying Eastside Christian Church auditorium. Okay, and there is a link thank you very much. Lane wins the fastest channel rat to Google Award today. And so it looks like it's Eastside Christian Church auditorium is where this will be held.

Please note that there is a cost. I imagine the auditorium is being rented. It looks like it's right next to Cal State Fullerton right next to Cal State. Well, that would make sense because on the blog we have $8 for one debate $12 for two and students are free with ID.

So it must be someplace close to where students would have an ID and need to get in free. So we are not the ones doing this debate. This is being sponsored by others. Please note those plumber auditorium was what the other place was.

That's right plumber auditorium. Yeah, I'll go came up with that one. But of course I'll go remembers all things. So that's just sort of how it is. Doors will open at 1 p .m. And 5 p .m. All attendees must present ID.

Security will be present. Please leave all phones large bags and Cameras in your car. Thank you in other words there will be security at the doors and so just keep that in mind and security will be present during the entirety of The debate.

So that's what's going to what's going to be happening. So that is on Saturday April 12th. My debate is at 530. David Woods debate is at 130. Both debating the same gentleman. That's a lot in one day, but that's what he's agreed to do.

So that was not on my on my Radar, okay. This came up very very quickly and that's one of the reasons I just don't have time to be doing any type of special Anything between now and Thursday and Friday and so on so forth.

And in fact as soon as each one of those programs is over I will be going right back to I believe my opening statement and this one's 35 minutes long 30 minutes in the similar debate with Hamsa Abdul Malik.

So I've got five extra minutes, but I've been obtaining My opponent's written materials and video materials. And so obviously what I want to do just as I did with Hamsa Abdul Malik in 1999 is I I made my opening presentation specifically in light of his own presentation.

I Preempted most of his presentation by addressing the issues before he ever got to them. Because I had taken the time to sit down watch previous debate. He had done write down all the objections that he had what text to use then work that into my opening statement I'll do the same thing here.

In fact, they have next to me from Prophet his book prophet of mercy a discussion of reestablishing monotheism where my opponent addresses tries to address John 1 1 and The issue of the Trinity and so on so forth and so we may even find some time to go through that today well, we'll find out but That is what's coming up on 12 now then beyond that remember I thought April was gonna be a month where I get some writing done.

You know get back to regular Arabic study and stuff like that. No. Because as soon as I arrive on Long Island Dr. David Johnson who runs the Arizona campus of the Golden Gate Baptist Theological Seminary where I am teaching a class on Islam right now drops me an email and California State University Had contacted Golden Gate, which is right across the bay up there in the San Francisco area looking for someone to debate a California State University professor on The 22nd of April a brief debate.

Basically. I have a feeling it may be outside. It's at noon. It'll probably be out on the you know where the students gather there at California State University East Bay and The Subject is gay marriage and So dr. Johnson knowing that I've written a book in the subject on the subject of homosexuality.

Anyways, and have debated John Shelby Spong and Barry Lynn on that particular topic. Forwarded to me and I'm like, well It's only ten days after the debate with with the shake. But You know, it's a opportunity to once again speak God's truth.

Couldn't get much of a wider spectrum of stuff in ten days. In California in Southern, California debating a Muslim Sheikh defending the deity of Christ and ten days later, Northern, California, San Francisco area Opposing the concept of gay marriage.

Yeehaw. I'm hoping the clutch will survive the the shift that we that we make in those ten days. But that's what I'll be doing. So I'll be going up to a Golden Gate and Making a little trip out of it there.

So that's also I believe a Tuesday as I recall. So, of course the dividing line that day will be preempted unless somehow I can you know Set up my laptop to be recording the debate and live streaming it or something back to the studio or something.

I don't know that that kind of stuff is not impossible to do any longer and Who knows since it's got a camera in it It would be a possibility if I get somebody to babysit it you could actually do something like that.

But anyway, so there is there is what's upcoming In in April and that's just stuff that I had already had a one dozen trips Between January of 08 and January of 09 this these these two weren't included in that and so we just.

You know when opportunities present themselves you you do what you possibly can the second debate is I'll just let you know right now. There's there's no there's no funding for this. So that second debate on gay marriage.

We're we're footing the bill we're we're having to grab the airline ticket, which of course this time only three weeks out is not the best time to be doing things like that and Hotel rental car. I do like to eat once in a while.

I do debate better having eaten then I don't and So those are our issues that we just let folks know and Invite your participation in taking advantage of these types of opportunities. So that is what is coming up.

Now. Let me I Suppose I should make some commentary. If you've been watching the YouTube videos I've been putting up you saw my immediate responses to some of what I What I watched Sammy's Atari's Presentation against the deity of Christ seems to be borrowing very heavily from the same type of material that I have here in Jalal Abul rubes materials.

They the only way I can describe it the same way described Hams Abdul Malik's materials and that is bad Jehovah's Witness argumentation for example one of the One of the statements, I'm just looking page 18 here.

According to the Bible collection suite the Greek copy of the New Testament uses Theos in both instances. Where God is mentioned in John 1 1 however the first instance of Theos is preceded by ha which makes the reference in it to the God, but the second instance is not preceded by ha which makes the second Theos merely a God.

Now I looked at the Bible collection suite. It's a bunch of public domain Old commentaries that you can get for $9 .99 a CD from Amazon if you want it's. But that's not the point. It is true that the first instance of Theos is preceded actually it's not even that's not even correct the first instance of Theos is taun they on in the accusative and It's just very obvious that none of these folks whether it's the Sheikh or Sammy's Atari or Shadid Lewis.

None of them Know anything about Greek. They know nothing about Greek articles. They know nothing about how to translate them and of course I'm gonna have to criticize the Sheikh because this man translates Arabic into English.

So he he knows he has to have sufficient linguistic capacity to recognize that Arabic has one concept of the article which is closely related to the Hebrew concept of the article, but neither one of those and Certainly not the English article Has almost any relationship to the complexity of the Greek article and that if the article ha Appeared before Theos and John 1 1 C that is this would be teaching a heresy.

It would be making the logos and Theos equal to one another. It would be saying that all the logos is all of God and vice versa. Which would of course make it contradictory to John 1 1 B. So it's it's a slaughtering of the Greek language.

They don't understand that they could not use these types of rules to translate any other phrase in or any other verse in the New Testament because they just don't know what they're talking about but they will make these kinds of assertions and they will make them forthrightly and with a smile on their face and Christians sadly do not tend to know how to respond to those particular things.

Just as an example of this, let me see if I can find the specific one here. Let's see, how large is that one? That's not it and that's not it I'm looking for. Let's get off the thumbnails to the details here.

It's 300 and there it is. Let's let's listen to what Sammy is a tardy said on this very issue. This is from a video. But it's amazing the sound quality that my little camera and then we're talking about a little credit card sized Casio cameras the super thin ones and It's not even the newest one.

It's now about two years old. Sound quality is incredible. It truly is but here's. Here's the section where he presents his stuff on on John 1 1 you'll see that it very very closely parallels what I just just read.

Let's see how this ends up sounding. Now let me stop just for a minute did you catch that Christian Unitarians Muslims seem to believe that they have the right to redefine the Christian faith now. We don't have the right to redefine the Islamic faith.

I would like to ask Sam it's a toddy. Would you accept a person as a? Muslim who rejects the prophet hood of Muhammad and I would Imagine I you know, I don't know but I would imagine the majority of Muslims Would not accept someone as a Muslim who rejects the prophet hood of Muhammad so I do not accept as a Christian someone who rejects the deity of Christ and At least going back to at least the Council of Nicaea that has been Christian Orthodoxy.

And so I wonder why they get the right to reject those things and refer to Christian Unitarians or to Christian Gnostics or blah blah blah blah the term Christian Loses all meaning when it no longer defines anything.

And I do find that to be a rather interesting double standard that point Sammy's Atari is completely dependent upon these quote-unquote Christian cults for his information and he accepts what they have to say without question.

If I were to quote Islamic cults, I'm sure he would be quite offended by that, but that again is the Standard double standard of Islamic apologists. So There you have it the word was a God the the Jehovah's Witnesses live again.

And Here we have a man who admits he cannot read the language standing in front of the audience and saying this is the accurate Translation. Now, obviously, you know if I were to stand in front of an Islamic audiences and this is what I said that evening when I recorded the video that I posted on the blog if If I listened to Christians Massacring the Arabic language the way that the Muslims massacred the Greek language that day.

I would have felt humiliated as a Christian. But again, it's mainly because of who I debate for I debate for people who love truth. I do it for people who want to know the truth. I'm not debating just to try to make one side feel good and the other side feel bad.

That's that's not why I do debates and so it just makes me wonder why why does Sammy's Atari or Shadid Lewis? Why do they debate? What is their purpose in debating if if not to seek to cause me to consider the truth claims of Islam and if the truth claims of Islam are dependent upon this kind of Really bad argumentation.

I mean An audience member asked a question later on in the evening and asked Sammy if if what you said is true that They asked without the article of John 1 1 should be translated a God which is not true over 20 of the appearances of the OS in its various inflected forms in the New Testament are Anarthurist that is they do not have an article.

No one no Bible anywhere translated by anybody renders all of those as a God. I Mean that just that's you have to be completely ignorant of the language to come up with that kind of argumentation it just doesn't work.

You fail first semester Greek if you think this way and So the person asks the question well Just a little bit later in John 1 6 you have the word God. There was a man sent from God whose name was John.

God does not have the article. Now to the Greek reader the reason it doesn't have the articles obvious is preceded by para and those prepositions Generally replace the article as far as their function the Greek New Testament, but Sammy doesn't know that and So if he's just gonna stay out there and say Wilson's don't have the article now There's a reason it doesn't have the articles because the predicate Nominatively put the article in front of it and that makes it the subject and since it's a pre verbal that that would be making this An equative clause, but he doesn't know any of that and so he just throws this out there and so if he's gonna use that rule then John 1 6 would have to be there as a man sent from a God if he's gonna be consistent and He ran From that question as I mean there was absolutely no meaningful response at all nor can there be in in these types of We can Now just again Moffat, you know again the Jehovah's Witnesses try to borrow Moffat because he used a weaker translation divine Without even knowing what he was attempting to deal with and that is that an anarthorist pre verbal predicate nominative Is describing the nature of someone and divine for him is not something that a Muslim could possibly accept.

Etc. Etc. This is again An illustration for me that these folks just don't do their homework. They're not doing their homework. They just have a position that they want to defend they give knee-jerk reactions these things.

They're not actually engaging the subject in the way that Christian scholars and Christian apologists try to engage seriously the subjects endemic within Islam there just isn't a Compatible comparison between the two the two at all.

So he then went on he went after John 8 58 didn't understand to go I me didn't recognize and the Beal did it did a fine job in Encountering these things and in presenting the truth on these things but it was just amazing to hear the kind of Argumentation that was being presented within that particular context so with that said We have Our first phone caller that I would normally wait for a little while.

But yes we could probably skip the break because he's probably gonna take up all the time that the break would you think you think I'm not Worrying edgewise from now on once I hit on air I Once I hit on air I should just go ahead and get a drink.

Is that the idea? Take a break. Okay, all right and that's because We have one of the four horsemen of the Islamic apocalypse. I was told I was told after the debates that one of the Muslims that identified Four people as the four horsemen of the Islamic apocalypse or something along those lines the four debaters and Against Islam today and and that was David Wood and the vehicle a she Sam Shimon who is now on the air with me and me.

So Sam, which one are you? You've got to be which which of the four horses are you? It's got to be the big horse. I can be all four at the same time. I Because I think you and I both got David and the Beal beat as far as that goes.

Yeah, I'm sorry to even interrupt you you you do a better job than I can imagine doing but I just wanted to Give you an analogy that you can use because you're using some great analogies to show how inconsistent their argumentation is.

When you said they quote Christian Unitarians, it's like you quoting a Muslim who says Mohammed isn't a prophet, right? Well, I mean Sammy may chime in and say well that assumes that the Bible teaches as God and that's the whole debate.

What I'd like to use against them is That the Quran says that although Mohammed is the last prophet. It does not say he's the last messenger. In chapter 33 verse 40 says Mohammed is not the father of any of you men, but the messenger of God and the seal of prophets and.

Because of the wording of the text this has let some Muslims such as the followers of Rashad Khalifa to say that although he's the last prophet He's not the last messenger and other messengers will come after him because in chapter 22 verse 52 the Quran The Quran clearly distinguishes between a messenger and a prophet.

So you can use that logic against them saying okay. If you're going to follow that line of argumentation Then I can quote these Quran only Muslims who argue that the Quran nowhere says Mohammed is the last messenger.

He's the last prophet but not the last messenger. Therefore other messengers will come after him.

So yeah, it's interesting what I observed at the debates was that is after the second not that the first morning debate I believe it was. It was the one where Shadid Lewis was was debating David Wood.

I I went up to him after the debate and I challenged him on the Soma issue. You've probably seen the videos I've put up on that subject and He did not even want to talk to me. The first thing he did was look right into the audience and find Hamza Abdul Malik.

Because they were borrowing some of his arguments. I mean if you listen to Malik, you can tell they're borrowing some of his his material. And so he's trying to get him to come up there to to answer my challenges on the Greek.

The thing is They must know by now that Hamza Abdul Malik is a Quran only person. And that he said to me there at the debates he considers the Shahada to be shirk. So from their perspectives doesn't that make him a heretic?

Yep. So why are they dependent on a heretic to try to defend their Greek? Claims. Why would they I mean that'd be like me calling up a Jehovah's Witness to to answer a Muslim. I mean it just it does not make any sense to me whatsoever.

It's shocking to them. Yeah. Yeah, you're doing a great job. I just wanted to do that. Just add that one.

Sam if you can while keeping your blood pressure nice and low and calm give us a little description of What I'm going to be up against on on the 12th in Southern, California.

Okay. Well the chef that you're going to be debating Jalal Abu Alrub. He is a older version of Nadir pretty much. He's going to be well again that depends. I'm assuming that if he's going to try to influence Christians to consider Islam He may conduct himself in a very respectful way.

But you can read from his emails his letters. Even when he responds to Christians who he doesn't view as being hostile to Islam. Quote-unquote, right? All right, you can see that. He's very very Nasty in his approach so Depends on Jalal's intention on that night.

If he's trying to influence Christians He may come on his best behavior. But he's an older version of the deer and can be very nasty and can be very personal so expect that.

So it's hard. It's hard to say what what to expect. Well, obviously. However, there's got to be a difference between the two in the fact that this man can at least Translate Arabic. He has to have some Linguistic capacities that to be able to do that so I would I would assume I would be able to make reference to those and try to hold him to some level of Of a standard there that I couldn't do with none with neither because he just doesn't Doesn't seem to understand any of the issues you try to raise to him.

Yep.

Well with Jalal obviously his knowledge of Islam is vastly vastly superior to Nadir. Jalal is considered a scholar and knows Islam very well. But with that said if you read some of his argumentation even in defense of Islam Even though he has this vast knowledge of Arabic He does a lot of well again I'm I don't want to judge his heart, but let's say distortion whether it's Unintentional because he's reading these Islamic sources with a Salafi lens, right?

Oh, yeah, and so because of that that affects his understanding of the chronic passages, which would for example I just wrote an article. He was trying to mock the doctrine of original sin and He mocked me by writing an article called original chin.

Just you know making fun of what we believe in making fun of me because he really loves me.

Well, in fact, I see on page 24 of his book good news about original sin. Yeah. Calling a Christian innovation. Another Christian innovation added more bleak news to the invented notion of original sin.

So yeah.

What's amazing about that is that the Quran itself and the so-called authentic narrations and I've documented this Muhammad actually believed and this is documented. So I'm not just saying this. I can quote Sahih Bukhari Sahih Muslim these so-called authentic narrations attributed to Muhammad and the Quran itself.

Muhammad believed that Adam's sin affected us. So that because of him we were thrown out of paradise because don't forget. According to Islamic theology paradise was in heaven so that when Adam was created Adam was living in heaven.

And when he sinned he plunged himself and his descendants after him Outside of paradise, so now we live on earth because of it. And if I can just mention one narrative real quickly according to Muhammad, this is both in Bukhari Muslim Muhammad said that Adam got the upper hand in a debate with Moses.

Because Moses went up to him and said aren't you Adam our father and didn't you expel us from paradise? The Muhammad said that Moses supposedly told Adam that because of you we were thrown out of paradise.

And that Adam respondent says are you not Moses the one whom Allah spoke directly. Do you blame me for something that Allah decreed determined for me 40 years before my creation? Hmm. So according to these so-called authentic narrations Muhammad realized that Adam's sin affected us negatively and no matter how many times you quote these sources They still just turn a deaf ear to it.

Don't want to admit. Yeah, this is what Muhammad believed. They just want to attack Christianity. Like you said for the sake of attacking it not because they're seeking truth. Yeah.

Oh, yeah, I do expect that and and I think what happened with the debate with Nader was You know, obviously as soon as I saw the way he was going to be approaching things He takes seven minutes out of his opening 20.

And then later is well, I just did that because I knew it to be so difficult for you I It was pretty hard not to laugh a number of times, but I obviously very early on Made the determination that the best thing I can do here aside from hoping that finally the the Muslims themselves Will say this man, would you please?

You know go do you know go help clean the mosque go do this other thing? But don't don't present don't pretend to present yourself as if you are Representational of us. The other thing to try to do was to just contrast how a person can while being treated like this by by another and you Know what?

I don't even know that he knows. I don't know how much of a connection He has to reality itself because he treats he treats the audience. He treats Eric even treated I even mentioned this to Sammy's a toddy.

I don't know if you if you saw this, but He jumped up to ask audience questions in the other debates and When Sammy's a toddy had just debated David Wood on on Muhammad he gets that he's the first one up you know, it's like the jack of jack-in-the-box pointing, you know up to the up the microphone and He he's like, you know, I want to say you've done a really good job.

You're and you're an up-and-comer, you know all that, you know these flowery words, but then he threw him under the bus. Because basically turns David Wood, why are you debating this kid instead of me the greatest, you know He honestly believes someone during one of the breaks asked him who could you recommend other than these men?

To be debating and the only person nother Achmed could recommend was not Oh Megalomaniac, it's incredible. I mean he I mean, it's just absolutely incredible. So But he was willing to throw these guys under the bus and when when I tried to Initially contact Shadid Lewis after the first night debate with he and on the bill, which I thought was very illuminating I thought was more illuminating the second day because they were talking about the reasons Nabil's reasons for becoming a Christian and Shadid's reasons for becoming a Muslim I tried to talk to Shadid and that neither literally physically got between me and Shadid To just almost like jumping up and down Why would you make me James?

You're a coward James, but I'm and and even Shadid's like chill out man, you know. It was just incredible. It was just unbelievable. So I thank God for you, dr.

Right, and I pray the Lord will use you more and more and exposing Islam because I really don't believe there's anyone more qualified to do.

So so keep up the great work. Well, thank you for your call Sam. All right. God bless. It was. That's truly incredible. I guess since I've mentioned it I might as well. Let's just play a section of it here.