Finishing the Hamza Tzortzis/Adnan Rashid Video, About 20 Minutes with Wael Ibrahim.

And greetings and welcome to The Dividing Line. My name is James White. We are having technical issues today. I have a fully pixelated screen. And the main thing, though, is it's been raining for a week here in Phoenix.

And the result of that is we're in a bad part of town, and stuff stops working because it gets wet, which it normally isn't wet. And so as a result, we just can't connect up to YouTube to provide any type of live streaming right now.

And so we are going to record the program as we had to when we were having some problems like this a couple weeks ago. And the live stream, the audio stream, is available. But I'm going to be playing video.

But there's really nothing on the video that you wouldn't catch because it's all people talking. So I don't know that it really makes any difference. So it'll work. So anyway, we're going to press on.

And those of you who are listening only by audio, all you are missing is a glorious Coogee sweater. So that is a major step down. That is a bad thing because life is too short to miss any opportunity to see one of my Coogee sweaters.

They will have to endure it later on because we will be uploading the video. We will upload the video. It's just right now. I'll see if I can find a screen cover or something like that. No, no, no. This is one of my favorites.

I just got it this year. It's really nice and light. So I'm not dying in it. I have another one, a beautiful one, that is, what's that stuff? Cashmere. Cashmere. Oh my goodness. The only place you can wear that is Antarctica, unless you want to just die of the heat.

It's just that bad. But it is beautiful. Anyway, what we want to do, this will be the last dividing line for a couple of weeks. Well, actually, it won't. But I'm just not going to put any pressure on anybody as to tell you what's going to be happening.

So I don't even know how that's going to work. But I'm just going to leave that to the powers that be. I do refuse to allow anyone to use any of my teacups or anything related to the program.

Just remember, when the cat's away, the mice will play.

The mice are going to play while I'm away. And so we'll see what that means. I probably won't even have time to look. I'll be teaching probably during this period of time or whenever it is, at least the first week and, well, actually, most of the second week, too.

So very, very busy trip back east. Looking forward to meeting folks at the G3 conference. A week from Monday, this coming Monday, on homosexuality there at RTS and so on and so forth. So I've already talked about all that.

We want to finish up our response to the global Dawa movement video featuring Hamza Tsourtsis and Adnan Rashid. We thought, I thought I'd get that done yesterday and I didn't. And so I'm going to try to get to that, get back to what I'll.

And before I do that, though, I want to, I hope to remember to put a link on the blog when we post this program. We very rarely come to our audience and say, we need your help with something. We have the ministry resource list, which is still out there and by the way, there's a few things sitting on it that I've forgotten to tell anybody about.

The ministry resource list is a great way for you to help me directly. I put stuff on there, books, normally Kindle books, but sometimes hardback books or paper books, sometimes both because it's extremely useful to be able to listen to it, but then also have the references that you can go to.

You can search on Kindle. It's just really great to have both. Anyways, there's a couple items on the ministry resource list right now, but we rarely come to folks. We let people know we are not, we do not have any rich donors.

We do not have a staff that goes around cultivating donation lists. The people that support this ministry do so, because I like that you all are like that. I like that I can give to your ministry and you're not going to be calling me during dinner six months from now asking me to give that same amount again and you're not going to be using cold callers and I don't get it.

My email box doesn't get filled with stuff and my mailbox doesn't get filled with stuff. We just, I'm not trying to say there's something wrong with the people that do all that. It's just, we don't do it.

And we're just as dependent upon, if not more so, because we don't have endowments and stuff like that. Everything we get comes from just plain old people and that's how we do what we do. So when I say we, normally when I come to the audience, it's because we have something coming up and we need to cover the travel expenses.

And just today, I was communicating with Rudolf Buschhoff in South Africa. And it looks like what we're going to do this year is different time, different location, different time, different station. Looks like what we're going to do is at least right now as to the conversation we've been having today, right now it looks like we're going to do Cape Town only.

That there's plenty to do in Cape Town. There's a group of reformed guys in Cape Town that want to work with us in setting up a full conference, Thursday, Friday, Saturday conference on inerrancy. They really want and need teaching on that, which is great.

I mean, just think what kind of effect in Africa that could have if we could really do a bang up job in dealing with that subject and dealing with some of the toughest criticisms of scripture dealing with issues like the destruction of the Amorites and how to deal with the synoptic issue and all that kind of stuff.

But we had already talked with Ayub Karim this past year about doing, because he has, he's not just there in Durban. He also has a location in Cape Town. Never been to Cape Town before. Everybody tells me it's the most beautiful part of South Africa.

Well, I'm not going to have time to be doing any sightseeing other than I would like to do some runs along the beach. That would be not in the sand, but like in Durban. Got to admit, it's amazing how easy it is to run a 10K on a beach in comparison to next to the canal.

The canal, which every once in a while you go by and there's a shopping cart, that type of thing. The beach, much, much nicer. For some reason, it's a lot easier. Anyways, we also have some other folks down there that are interested in debate.

So it looks like we'd be focusing on Cape Town for our ministry this year. But there was also a request. Would there be the option, the opportunity of doing something at a different time? And right now, the possibility exists and what we're going to be pushing for is to do it in four months, May of this year, four months from now.

That's not a long time. Thank you for telling me these things. Yeah, yeah. This is evidence. I tell people I find out about 30 seconds before they do. Yeah, yeah. Here we are, four months. All right, okay, we're right behind you, Dr. Wright.

Here we go. We're, you know, May, right now, this isn't written in stone yet. This is, you know, Rudolph and I are talking and he's talking to the folks at Cape Town and obviously there's a multiple hour, what is it right now, eight or nine?

I forget which one it is right now because it's changed. Well, it's changed since I was down there. Eight, something like that. Obviously, once it gets later in the day here, it's pretty late there and so it isn't as fast.

The point is, if the opportunities open up this would be just fantastic opportunity to do this in Cape Town, to do this kind of thing. But it's very expensive and we need your help. And so I'm going to link to the travel link.

It's in the store. You can find it if you go to the store, down at the bottom you have a travel thing but I'll put the link right there. And this is one of the times we come to our folks and we say, if you want to send me off to Africa to encourage the brothers there and to engage in debate and to do stuff that we've been doing down there, this is when we need your assistance.

What this also will probably open up the opportunity for is I would imagine it would be a whole lot easier to arrange the Hong Kong trip in the September, October time period which we normally keep open for the South Africa time trip.

So the point is, we've got opportunities for doing things on the opposite parts of the world, about as far from Phoenix as you can get, pretty much the other side of the world, either direction. And those opportunities are things that require us to come to our listening audience and not just individuals but some of you sit on missions committees, on churches and things like that.

Think about maybe taking something like this to the missions committee and saying, here's a one-time thing that we can do. Is there, would there be a way for us to help get James White to Hong Kong or to South Africa or whichever one, just donate to the travel link and trust that we'll put it toward the trip that we need it the most at that particular point in time.

To have these opportunities of engaging even more people in different contexts and trying to push that conversation forward and encouraging the saints and doing all the things we're trying to do. So there you go, I'll put the link up and hopefully that will begin the process of helping us to get to those places.

I'm a little taken aback because I mean, that's not a lot long for me either, as far as preparation and things like that go, though I'll be honest with you, doing some of the topics we're talking about is pretty much what I'm doing all the time as far as my study goes and things like that.

So that's useful. So there you go, your prayers and support, very much appreciated in all of that. So let me see here, okay. Just checking some of the tweets. Actually, people are still listening now.

Yes, I'm plugged in, you don't have the audio? I haven't played anything yet, I know, but I will here in a moment, but I didn't turn this off since last time, that worries me a little bit, that it may not be working right.

We'll find out here in a second. Let's get back to this, I want to finish this, we only have four minutes and 41 seconds and you can figure the last 30 seconds is just credits and stuff anyways. So we have been listening to a discussion between two Muslims who engage in Dawah, one of whom I have debated multiple times, one of whom I was supposed to engage with, I believe on the Unbelievable Radio broadcast, but we didn't get a chance to do that, unfortunately, due to the fact that driving in London is difficult.

Hey, I got there on the tube and I'm a Yank, so anyway, still looking forward to have an opportunity of meeting Hamza sometime in the future, but they have been discussing the Bible, we have been pushing back, we have been asking questions, we have been pointing things out.

I've mentioned that I recognize this is an unusual kind of program. A lot of people on Twitter respond, yeah, it's my favorite kind of program. Love when you go toe-to-toe with folks, you do it with respect, you do it focused on the arguments, not the individuals.

And just like a debate, this is similar to a debate in that you're hearing both sides. Now you're only hearing one side responding, so it's not as good as a debate because you don't have the coming back the other direction, but the point is, it is an unusual element of what we have on the web today.

And I do believe that it is important that we engage in this in a respectful fashion. We're not focused upon the individuals. And I would really exhort both people on my side as well as people on the other side.

I believe that if we love the truth and if we want to demonstrate that that is our true focus and our true priority, that we, as a group, Christians and Muslims together, need to recognize that when we give into the personal stuff, when we give into the temptations for unnecessarily utilizing disruptive language, disrespectful language, when you start off what you're saying with, well, here's another video about that liar, James White.

Okay. I'm probably not gonna find that overly useful. It's probably not gonna help my response to it if I, and 99 of the time, I'm not even gonna respond to it. It's probably not gonna be worth it. And when I have failed at that, I am a human being.

I have bad days. I apologize. And I can think of some individuals that something tells me if we were to, like when I come to London, sit down with certain folks over a nice hot cup of rooibos tea. See, this is the perfect temperature right now.

Right now, what time is it? 15, 15 after, so about 20 minutes. It's sitting on my Mr. Coffee warmer thingy. Oh, wait a minute. Ah, it was sitting on my Mr. Coffee warmer thingy. I somehow turned the thing back off again.

Well, I thought it cooled off pretty quickly. Anyway, we can sit down over a nice cup of tea. Something tells me that a couple of you with whom I have less than cordial relationships, we could change that and maybe change the tenor from both sides along those lines.

I'm certainly open to that. I realize there are people on your side that have the wrong motivations for doing what they do. Okay, that happens on both sides. But the reality is, you know, as Christians, we are absolutely constrained by scripture, constrained by the commands of our Lord to put truth at the very top of our priority list.

And I want to be a servant. I want to be a servant of Jesus Christ and his truth. And that means I have to be willing to put myself at a lower level than that which I'm seeking to serve. And when I don't do that, I apologize.

So anyways, with that said, let's get back to what's being said here. Hopefully, everything will work right here right from the start.

Let's go. Well, different churches believed in different things. Okay. Eastern churches had a different view on Jesus Christ. Western churches had a different view on Jesus Christ. So the Christians in Antioch, and even the documents were not being read at the same time.

A document or even four Gospels were mentioned for the first time collectively by a man in the late second century, about the year 200, his name was Irenaeus. This is the first time when four Gospels were mentioned together.

Okay, now Irenaeus is extremely early. And again, one of the issues here, Adnan, is that the nature of the New Testament being much larger and being a collection of books authored by multiple people actually bears more similarity to the Hadith than it does to the Quran.

The Quran is much shorter. You claim anyways, and we're functioning on as far as providing criticism, a unitary authorship. But the claims made for the Hadith and the accuracy of the transmission of those Hadith over time, that's much more of a parallel to the collation of the materials that becomes the New Testament.

But remember, I think if you all were consistent, you'd be a little slower to pull the cannon card. And the reason for this is twofold. A, you have to deal with the reality of the fact that you identify Jesus as a prophet of God.

Now, unless you just simply get to dismiss everything that's found in the text as to what Jesus said about the Old Testament, then he becomes a thorn in your side. Because clearly he knew the extent of the canon.

He knew what was and what was not scripture. And so that process of the Old Testament had his verification. In fact, you could argue that Surah 5 indicates that. He testified to, he confirmed that which came of the Torah before him.

Now, again, you make distinctions about what Torah is or is not, but the word had a meaning when it was used in the writing of the Quran. And I would challenge whether there is a real knowledge on the part of the writer of the Quran of what, for example, the Tanakh was.

I mean, don't you think that would be something that would appear given how much interaction Muhammad had with the Jews in Medina, especially? Don't you think there'd be some recognition of the Tanakh, the Torah, the Nevi 'im, and the Ketuvim, things like that?

The point is Jesus recognizes the Old Testament canon and the process that brought about the Old Testament canon took place over time. I would highly recommend, again, it's a book, I think I've given to a number of you.

I know I've given it, I'm pretty sure I've given it to Shabir Ali. I think I gave it to Yusuf Ismail. I'm not sure who else I've given it to. Like I said, I need a list from each one of you. A list of what books I've given you.

So I don't double it. But Beckwith's book, Roger Beckwith, not Frank Beckwith, Roger Beckwith's book, The Old Testament Canon of the New Testament Church. We carry it here in our bookstore. I would highly recommend it to your reading.

It's not the most exciting book to read. It's rather technical, but really good material. Really important as to the process in history of the development of a theological reality, which is the canon.

So that's the one problem is you have Jesus affirming that as far as the Old Testament canon is concerned. But then the other problem is on the other side, I don't see that there has been nearly enough, at least amongst those who engage in Dawah, attention paid to the many questions that still exist as to the collation of the surahs of the Quran and the mechanism by which that took place, the authority by which that took place.

Why are they ordered in the way that they are? Why do they have the form that they do? What about those troubling elements of the tradition that talk about how one surah of the Quran used to have, it's only a third of the length that it once was and things like that.

I think these are issues that need to be looked at before a confident pulling of the canon trigger, which is sort of what we've got going on here. Gotta find my cursor here now.

So that makes sense. So there's some shoddy ground here basically. The other point is, what was the criteria for canonicity? That's important. So the church wanted to have a canon. What was their criteria to canonize the Bible, to have the Gospels together?

When it comes to canonicity and what the criteria is to establish canonicity, Bruce Metzger is an authority on this field and he has written a book titled The Canon of the New Testament. In this book, he gives the criteria for canonicity.

Basically, the criteria is that you establish a belief or you start to believe in something and then you start to accept documents against that belief. They agree with your belief. They have to. The documents have to agree with your belief, not the other way.

Like a second argument. Exactly, not the other way around. Look, we the Muslims, we form our beliefs based upon the Quran. Yes. The Quran as a document came to us and we base our... Quran is our criteria, not our belief.

But in the early church, it was the belief that was used as criteria to...

Okay, now, okay, we got some problems here. First of all, I would just point out to you the rules by which Hadith are identified as sound or questionable, you know, sahih and weak, to be rejected or the various levels there.

If you'll look at them carefully, they contain the same kind of circular problem. That is one of the rules is, is it consistent with the Quran? Well, according to who's interpretation. But what I really think you're missing here and which ties in with the last review I did here is, and I'm not faulting you for this.

I'm not, I'm not, I'm not faulting you, Hamza, I'm not faulting you for this. Because most Christians fall into the exact same problem and trap that you have. And so I can't, I certainly, if that happens to Christians all the time, I'm not, I'm not faulting you.

But what I am inviting you to do along with my fellow Christians is to get out of that trap and see the issue of the canon of scripture in a much clearer way. And that is, I mentioned this, had a chapter on this, didn't go into as much depth as Dr. Michael Kruger has.

But remember in the last installment, I talked about Michael Kruger's books on the canon. Again, highly recommend them to you. My book, Scripture Alone, has a section where I deal with this. And what I'm focusing on here is the need to recognize that the canon is theological before it's historical.

The vast majority of books, Metzger, even when Bruce addresses it, the majority of books that deal with the subject of the New Testament canon, approach it first and foremost from a historical perspective.

But what is the canon? Let's leave the Bible out of it. What is the canon in regards to the Quran? Is it first and foremost a historical thing? Or is it a theological thing? Well, obviously it's theological.

It is assuming that something has happened. It is assuming that there has been a revelation. And in fact, from the Islamic perspective, again, depending on exactly how you understand this, but most Muslims with whom I've had conversation believe that the Quran was sent down on Laylat al-Qadr, on the night of power.

It was sent down as a whole to Jibril and then is sort of parceled out over 22 years to Muhammad. But it's all sent down as a body, as a body of divine. And so who determines what ends up appearing in history, but Allah based upon the extent of what he sends down to Jibril.

So the first element of a discussion of the canon of the Quran is a theological issue. From the Christian perspective, the same thing is true, but not for the exact same reason. Because again, we have a fundamental and important and different understanding of inspiration.

God breathes out his word by his sovereign decree. He does so at the exact time that he chooses to do so in the exact way he chooses to do so. Using the instruments that he has chosen to use, which again, demonstrates the overarching necessity of recognizing the sovereign decree of God over all events in time.

Because if he wants his word to be in a certain form and he chooses the apostle Paul to be the one who gives that form to 13 of the books of the New Testament, then Paul needs to come into existence. God can't be running around going, oh man, a camel just ran over Paul.

Oh man, and he ain't gonna make it. What is this? I gotta come up with somebody else. And so that's gonna change what my word would have been and so on and so forth. And obviously it doesn't work. So all of these modernistic ideas of man's sovereignty over time and open theism and all the rest of that kind of stuff really doesn't work for either one of our systems when you think about it.

But what's different between us is that when I talk about God's sovereignty, his kingly freedom, his creating the very fabric of time, it has similarities to what is taught in classical Islam regarding Qadr.

But it also has fundamental contradiction to that. Because while both of us, well, again, I'm not sure where you guys come down on this. I realize you guys have your divisions as well. It just seems to me in the Hadith and the Quran, it's pretty clear that Allah does what Allah wills.

And I don't know, I'd like to find out if you guys would accept, for example, the Hadith that narrates that there are people who do the deeds of the people of the fire throughout their lives until they're a hand's breadth away from entering into the fire.

And then what is written of them overtakes them and they enter into Jannah, paradise. And there are people who do the deeds of the people of paradise their entire life until they're a hand's breadth away from entering in.

And then what was written of them, that writing 40 days after conception overtakes them and they enter into hellfire. Now I'd be interested, as far as I can tell, all Salafi-oriented conservative Sunnis would have a hard time rejecting that Sahih Hadith.

But I've read, just started rereading a book by a Muslim scholar saying we have to change our views on all of this. And he specifically mentioned that Hadith as being one that goes against any moral reading of the text of the Quran.

Now that big area of argument and disagreement on your side, I get that. I'm just simply pointing that out. I'd be interested to know whether you would accept that to be the case or not. Point being the difference between us in regards to Qadr is as a Reformed Christian, I believe absolutely in the sovereign decree of God.

But I believe absolutely that sovereign decree of God involves his personal interaction in the events of time, including the very incarnation itself. And you and I both know you say no way, no way. Which means all the guys on my side that try to criticize either you or me by saying that you and I are saying the same things, don't know what they're talking about.

It's not uncommon, they do it. But anyway, that's how it goes. So how did I get onto this from Canon? Oh yes, inspiration. God obviously from our perspective did determine with specificity exactly what would be in the scriptures.

But not by a simple method of dictation. It's much deeper than that. It's much fuller than that. And it involves his personal interaction with us in time, which is a part of his sovereign decree. Don't know if that helped anybody, but it is a subject I get asked a lot about.

And you know, it's a topic that we need to put onto the list. I think it would be very useful. And like I said, at the beginning of the program, if this in South Africa works out for May, what I said last time was, I'm thinking about trying to make something happen in London, either going or coming.

And so Adnan, Hamza, maybe when we're talking about a list here, we're talking about maybe something we could throw at Justin at the very least, possibly for a discussion on Unbelievable. I'm not trying to take over your show, Justin, but Adnan and I have been on before and we behaved ourselves better than some people you've had in the studio.

Or formal debate. I have not heard a debate on Qatar. Now, it would take someone on your side that is really willing to rein in the desire to throw red meat to the Salafis in the audience. It would take a real focus upon both of us to engage in a respectful debate that seeks to increase understanding from both perspectives.

That's what I'd like to see happen. And maybe we can find someone there that would do that. But I think it'd be a fascinating discussion. What is the difference between the Islamic understanding of Qatar and the Christian understanding of the sovereignty of God?

Well, inside baseball, I mean, those always work great.

Inside baseball, you realize you just lost everybody in Australia and England.

You do realize that? When you can go to London and spend a few days doing ministry there.

Oh, it makes the trip to South Africa so much nicer.

And then go from there to whether we've sent you to various. I mean, didn't we do that when you went to Australia once? No, no.

Every trip to Australia has been straight from LA. Was it Ukraine?

May have been. There was some point in which you spent a few days in London, did ministry there, and then went on to the next. It makes the whole trip a lot easier. There's no question. That is really ideal.

Yeah, it is. It is. I've still got my Oyster card so I can get around the tube and I've got my app right here on my phone.

I stopped returning all the foreign currency back to the banks. Oh, I know. I told you. Just leave the pounds there, man. We'll use them.

We're going back. Lord willing, we're going back. So anyways, let's do it, guys. Let's let's let's be talking about this. I this is exciting. This is I want to it's not that the debates that we do on the deity of Christ, the reliability.

It's not that those things are not worthwhile. There's always a new audience. There's people who haven't heard the other ones. There's always something different about the character of the individual that with whom I'm dialoguing that might make things more clear for some person.

Another. I'm not saying we stop doing those things, but there does need to be an expansion. There does need to be a continuation of interaction on a broader spectrum. And I'm excited about the possibilities of that, of that happening.

Documents. And that's how the cannon was. So in a way, that's why massive documents.

Well, of course, it's like basically saying so early church Christianity. Why are your beliefs true? And they may say, because we have a Bible. Then you ask, why is the Bible true? Because it agrees with our beliefs.

But why are your beliefs true?

Because we have a Bible. Why is your Bible true? Because it gives you a belief. So that's the kind of secular argument. Yeah. And if that was if that was how the canon was determined, then that would probably be a problem.

But you see. Who determines canon? You're actually arguing against your own position here or you're you're arguing. Who determined the canon of the Quran? You say God did. And how do you do that? Well, he only inspired certain things.

There is a there is delineation to the to the body of revelation given by Allah to Jabril and then through Jabril to Muhammad over time. Right. So. That's what we say. We say it's not the theological aspect of what the canon is comes first.

Then what you're talking about is 150 years later. When Marcion comes along and comes up with his own canon and starts rejecting things that Christians had always believed. Or comes up with edited versions of these documents.

Now, the question is, well, how can we determine what is what? And. We're stuck looking back at this, we're stuck that by by just simply the fact that we live at a later time period. And so it's a matter of having a historical perspective.

But to have a meaningful historical perspective is to always recognize we're looking backwards. And not to force the people, the time to have the same perspective that we have, because they weren't looking backwards.

And so I know this is probably all you've heard from people, or to be honest with you, I didn't mean to freeze Hamza looking like he's holding his nose on his face, but most Christians have never thought about this any more than Muslims have thought about why they have 114 surahs rather than 100 or 150.

So, again, I don't fault you for this, but I would recommend that you step back. Read Kruger, Hill, some of the others, and see that there's a. Another perspective that's much more much more consistent.

And in fact, I don't know that you'd have a whole lot of grounds for really objecting to it, given again, where you have to go to establish the canon of the Quran, which, again, most Christians never thought about that either.

So it rarely comes up in the conversation.

Effectively, this is what Metzger is saying. Bruce Metzger said this is how the Bible was put together. This was the standard that was used by early church fathers. And there was no agreement on the contents of the Bible.

Christians to this day do not agree on the contents of the Bible.

Now, what do you mean by that? On any meaningful level. The only serious canonical question. Amongst any major group, you might find some little national church someplace that's sort of idiosyncratic, or I suppose you could point the Mormons or something as if they have something to do with Christianity, which clearly they don't.

But the only meaningful canonical argument that exists in worldwide Christianity really. Is the apocrypha. And that's really not much of an argument, even amongst Roman Catholics. I know I've done two debates on it, so there there are those that get all excited about it, but let's be honest, even Rome.

Other than Second Maccabees and some. Utterly absurd attempt to ground some belief in purgatory in the. Prayers of the people after finding the dead soldiers with the idols on and blah, blah, blah. There really isn't much of an argument on that particular subject, and even a lot of Roman Catholics are willing to identify him as deuterocanonical on a second secondarily canonical basis.

But like what what what issues are there with the New Testament? And. The books from which we would argue, for example, prophetically about Jesus, there's no question about Isaiah or anything like that.

So so why just throw that out? You know, you've got a much we've got. Sixty six entire books. You've got 114 chapters again, the playing field isn't the same. You have a much younger, much smaller mono authored, at least from your perspective, work.

And the necessary complexities. For a book that is written not over 22 years, but over 15 years. 1500 years in two major languages, one minor dialect difference in some texts. But over 1500 years, over 40 authors.

Don't you recognize that it actually takes much more. A much greater divine action. To produce that than a mono authored book written over 22 years that is focused upon one little area that's only 14 percent the size of the Bible.

I mean, from my perspective, seems fairly clear.

But anyway. Today, from a social perspective, because we're Muslims, we live tolerantly with other faiths. Yes. How would you take all of this practically in a few words and just basically articulate a compassionate view on that?

Look, we don't believe in the basis of Christianity, biblical Christianity today because of its corruption. How would you articulate that to our fellow brothers and sisters in Christianity?

The best way to do that is. Now, Hamza, I hope. I hope you hear when I say. I don't think you established that. And I think now, of course, I've had a lot more time. You're doing something brief, something short.

I understand that. But I think most people listening to the program would probably say, no, I think there's been a sufficient response given that you really haven't established. What you're saying is your very foundation.

I think there's a lot more work that needs to be done here.

Our fellow humans, brothers and sisters in humanity, Christians and Jews, talk to them compassionately, nicely, explain to them and put these things in front of them. A lot of them don't know these things.

I have met priests in Africa, priests, pastors, people who have been bishops. In some cases, they don't know these things. They don't have a clue about these things.

Now, Adnan, two things. I've met plenty of Muslims that had never read the Quran. Couldn't narrate two hadith if their life depended on it. So we all have nominal Christians, nominal Muslims. And even people in leadership.

But by the way, Adnan, I don't know if you ever saw it, but I think I played. I certainly saw a video on YouTube of you taking on a minister in Africa, in a village someplace. And it really offended me.

It really offended me. And here's why. If I were taking on an imam in a village in Africa. You know, Adnan, I would use the same arguments that I use in debating you. But the fact of the matter is, Adnan, you used arguments with that minister in Africa that you would never use with me.

Because, you know, I would knock them right out of the park. That's a colloquialism, too. Sorry. You know that I would decimate them. I would destroy them in a second. You'd never even attempt to make the arguments you made to that minister to me.

But you made them anyways. And this was after you and I have debated. So you knew. Adnan, that is something I cannot ever do. I don't know how you explain why you would use an argument with someone you know is unschooled and ignorant.