Friday, May 29, 2009

Debate Announcement

Friends! For those in the Virginia area, I will be debating Muslim apologist and mosque president Shadid Lewis tomorrow (May 30th) at 6:30 P.M. in his mosque. The topic is "Peace and Violence in Christianity and Islam." Nabeel and I will try to post a video of the debate tomorrow night, so stay tuned!


Ehteshaam Gulam said...

David, I just viewed a debate with Nabeel Qureshi vs. Shadid Lewis on this site-- and I have to agree with you-- many converts to Islam convert because of social reasons and not because of the evidence. Interesting.

Unknown said...

How come these recent debates are available so quickly whereas the ones that took place in London last year are still not up yet? At least the audios should be available.

Bfoali said...

Cant Wait For This Debate!
Lets Go Shadid!!

Michelle Qureshi said...

Ibn said:

How come these recent debates are available so quickly whereas the ones that took place in London last year are still not up yet?

Because now we're recording them on our cameras and I'm uploading them onto the YouTube account Yahya gave us. This is as opposed to before, where other people were doing the recording.

Hogan Elijah Hagbard said...


why are you particularly so interested in that particular debate in London?

Anonymous said...


I am looking forward to your upcoming debade with Shadid Lewis. I have heard Shadid before and like all reverts he has no understanding of biblical Christianity and as one has given no compelling reason why he is a Muslim. Quite frankly I think it is an issue of race more than anything else why he is a Muslim.

Anonymous said...

Just a note about more upcoming debates there will be a debate in Toronto on June 11th between Habeeb Ally and Tony Costa
The debate topic is Tawheed vs Trinity. For more details check out our blog Challenging Islam @

Muslim by Choice said...

" Just a note about more upcoming debates there will be a debate in Toronto on June 11th between Habeeb Ally and Tony Costa "

Who's Habeeb Ally? Did you mean Shabir Ally !!?

Sepher Shalom said...

I'll be looking forward to that debate [and directing some prayer requests for your support by Ruach HaKodesh].

Hopefully Shadeed won't try to blame the Bible or The Messiah for American slavery or racism as an issue in this debate. I would be disappointed if he went that direction, but after watching his debate with Nabeel for the first time a few weeks ago I suspect this might be prominently featured.

Nakdimon said...

Bartimaeus, you are so right. And that is the case with almost all black Muslims. Thats why Casius Clay became "Muhammad Ali", because of racial issues, NOT because Islam was the way to go.


Radical Moderate said...

Were is the video :)

Anonymous said...

Muslim by Choice said

Just a note about more upcoming debates there will be a debate in Toronto on June 11th between Habeeb Ally and Tony Costa

No, I do not mean Shabir I mean Habeeb. I have met Shabir on a number if occasions and I know Habeeb and they are two different individuals. But it doesn't matter wheather or not it is Shabir or Habeeb Tony is going to win hands down.

Muslim by Choice said...

" Bartimaeus, you are so right. And that is the case with almost all black Muslims. Thats why Casius Clay became "Muhammad Ali", because of racial issues, NOT because Islam was the way to go."

Well you need to admit that the bible was used to justify genocide and Slavery, Jesus himself never passed judgment on slavery. It is clear from His teaching that he observed slavery

on the other hand Islam not only ordered a Muslim to treat the slaves, islam also encouraged the freeing of slaves.. we dont see that in bible,

I'd love to see David debating Shadid on this topic " Human rights in the bible and the Quran "

Anonymous said...

Some further thoughts on Shadeed Lewis.

As I stated in my earlier comment that I think Shadeed's conversion is much more an issue of race than an issue of theology or an even issue for any compelling evidence that Mohammed was a true prophet.

Years ago I read “Auto Biography of Malcolm X” and noted the pattern is the same with many blacks that embrace Islam. No evidence for Mohammed being a prophet but rather a percieved injustice. However’ I wonder how many of these blacks who have embraced Islam know that Mohammed referred to blacks as “raisin heads” and the involvement of the Arab slave traders. It also may be beneficial if Shadeed would take time to read how the “religion of peace and tolerance” is treating the people of the Southern Sudan.

I have heard Shadeed few times on the internet and he sounds so angry and upset about perceived injustices that blacks have suffered in the past. He presents no compelling reasons why I should become a Muslim. What Shadeed does in all his presentation is to use highly emotional argumentation without any substance. But then again what else does he have.

nma said...

Muslim by Choice said..
It is clear from His teaching that he observed slaveryWhat a blatant lie! It is what your holybook teaches you,i.e., to lie and deceive.

Muslim by Choice said..
on the other hand Islam not only ordered a Muslim to treat the slaves, islam also encouraged the freeing of slaves.. This is stupid al-taqqiya at work. Even nowadays Islam practices slavery.

Radical Moderate said...

Muslim by Choice there is a few problems with the things you said.
First it is true that Jesus never condemed or forbid slavery. The majority of the first christians were slaves. Slavery at the time was economic system. Think of trade union or guild. If Christ would of condemed this econonic system Christ would of first had to order his followers to take up arms and over through every form of government of the time. Thats not why Christ sacrafised his life for our sins. His kindgom is not of this world.

Secondly the bible does have definite rules for slavery. More indepth then anything the quran could come up with. As a matter of fact male slaves were to be freed every seven years. With out exception.

Now your statement on freeing slaves in the quran. One of the reason to free a slave (only if they are a BELEIVING slave) in the quran is to be forgiven of the sin of man slaughter. Accidently Killing a muslim. And the slave to be freed is a only to be a believing muslim slave.(4:92)

Another reason to free a slave is if a muslim breaks a oath. But that is only if he can not feed ten poor people or fast for three days.

Another reason to free a slave is if they earn enough money to buy there freedom. This can be so abused it should not even be considered a legit comandment. All the slave owner has to do is set the price for freedom so high that the slave could never pay it. Or forbid the slave from earning money on the side. (24:33]) Side note this is also the verse that forbids muslims from pimping their slaves. But only if the woman doesnt want to be pimped. So if she does its permisable. So the quran does promote prostitution of slaves if a slave wants to earn their freedom.

Also the quran permits having sex with slave woman even if they are married at the time. Something the bible definitly does not permit.

So you see the difference between the economic reality of slavery is totaly different in the bible compared to the quran.

Thanks for playing. Please come again.

Fernando said...

Muslim by Choice... how far can bee someone from the truth? You cannote make your pointe bie saiyng lies... either you're ignorant, or you're bad intentione... either wai it's nott a good flag for islam.. or maibe it is, since it has been like this from it's starte...

may the truthe God, the Trinity, blees you...

p.s.: human rightes in the qur'an... well ther's an oxymorius...

Anonymous said...

I do need to respond to some comments that were made by Muslim by Choice

Bartimaeus, you are so right. And that is the case with almost all black Muslims. Thats why Casius Clay became "Muhammad Ali", because of racial issues, NOT because Islam was the way to go."

First I appreciate that agree with my point that many blacks in the West who “revert” to Islam do so for of race rather and than as you stated “Islam is the way to go” However it your two statements that must be addressed and challenged as being total false Firstly you stated

Muslim by Choice said

Well you need to admit that the bible was used to justify genocide and Slavery, Jesus himself never passed judgment on slavery. It is clear from His teaching that he observed slavery

Historically there have been those that have twisted the bible do justify genocide in particular some passages in the Old Testament. But it must be understood that when these events occurred that it was because

1. these people were under the judgement of God.

2. these people were sacrificing their children to a pagan deity called Molech.

3. God had given these people 400 years to repent and time had run out. Because Israel failed to carry out the command of God the practice of child sacrifice would spread to the children of Israel.

Muslim by Choice said

on the other hand Islam not only ordered a Muslim to treat the slaves, islam also encouraged the freeing of slaves.. we dont see that in bible

If you Don’t see how slaves are to be treated in the bible they you have never read the bible. In the Torah

If you buy a Hebrew slave, he shall serve for six years; but on the seventh he shall go out as a free man without payment Exodus 21:5

"If a man strikes his male or female slave with a rod and he dies at his hand, he shall be punished. Exodus 21:20

There are but a few examples of how slaves were to be treated, In the bible slavery was never an issue of race as it would become and practiced by the Arab slave traders.

Also you should note that many of the abolitionist were Christian such Willian Wilburforce and John Newton

In the New Testament there are explicit instructions on how masters are to treat their slaves. One is that the slaves in Christian household were to be treared as fellow believers and partakers in the body of Christ.

Yahya Hayder Seymour said...


All of the London Debates with the exception of Shabir Ally's and Mine are already online...

Sami's Debate is online

As are all three of Adnan Rashid's with Wood and White.

Technically they only need to release those with Shabir Ally and myself. I'm assuming David will bring copies with him to London this July.

Drop me an email Ibn.

I'm looking forward to seeing Shadid debate David on these issues.

Yahya Snow said...


Personally I doubt that Shadeed converted due to social reasons, I do believe that Islam is an evidence based faith and has stronger evidence to support it than any of its counterparts. I believe the evidence is the reason of the conversion BUT the social stimuli do lead people away from their previous faith and enable them to study Islam without the burden of Christianity/Hinduism (or whatever their previous faith was). I do strongly believe that people confuse this and you end up with misunderstandings.

Ehteshaam...what do you think? brother. Please make dua for me too.

nkdimon...I would ask you to ponder upon your arbitary comment: 'that is the case with almost all black Muslims. Thats why Casius Clay became "Muhammad Ali", because of racial issues, NOT because Islam was the way to go'...

Anonymous said...


You said:

"Well you need to admit that the bible was used to justify genocide and Slavery..."

So you admit that the New Testament prohibits war and killing ever, but that people misuse the text to try to justify killing?

2 Corinthians 10:3-6 3For though we walk (live) in the flesh, we are not carrying on our warfare according to the flesh and using mere human weapons. 4For the weapons of our warfare are not physical [weapons of flesh and blood], but they are mighty before God for the overthrow and destruction of strongholds,
5[Inasmuch as we] refute arguments and theories and reasonings and every proud and lofty thing that sets itself up against the [true] knowledge of God; and we lead every thought and purpose away captive into the obedience of Christ (the Messiah, the Anointed One),6Being in readiness to punish every [insubordinate for his] disobedience, when your own submission and obedience [as a church] are fully secured and complete.

Matthew 19:19 Jesus replied,"'Do not murder..." Luke 18:20 "... do not murder..."

Jesus never condoned slavery. It was everywhere. It was part of the culture at the time. But what he does continually say is that, "A new command I give you: Love one another. As I have loved you, so you must love one another." John 13:34

Moreover, as Christians we believe Jesus is God. Thus we would expect Jesus to make the best of the slavery situation which was pretty much irreversible in Roman districts, as no mere movement could make policy reform and Jesus' second advent was not scheduled for a long time. Thus what is the solution? It was to make the best of the ongoing practice. Thus the Lord, who knew which writings would be canonized, breathed his spirit into Paul's writings, which on the subject state:

Colossians 3:22 "Slaves, obey your earthly masters in everything; and do it, not only when their eye is on you and to win their favor, but with sincerity of heart and reverence for the Lord."

This is circumstantial. Paul is writing to Christians. The districts of Rome had slavery. Thats just how the culture was. Paul is commanding Christian slaves to behave, to show their masters that Christianity is good and true and transforming. Many of Christ's followers were often lower class and more likely to be slaves. For example 1 Corinthians 26 says "Brothers, think of what you were when you were called. Not many of you were wise by human standards; not many were influential; not many were of noble birth." Moreover it is clear Paul urged Christians to behave as Christians within that social structure. Paul's view was this: It's more important for Christians to carry out our mission as Christians, in whatever social conditions we find ourselves, than it is for us to make changing those conditions our primary concern.

As the scholar James D.G Dunn states:

"... those who live in modern social democracies, in which interest groups can hope to exert political pressure by intensive lobbying, should remember that in the cities of Paul's day the great bulk of Christians would have had no possibility whatsoever of exerting any political pressure for any particular policy or reform."

Anonymous said...


So indeed the Christians were merely playing the card they were dealt so to speak and not advocating slavery. Christian slaves would be a witnessing tool to the unsaved. This explains Jesus' stance on the issue. As he says: Matthew 28:19 "Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit."

Plus Christ inspired the apostle to condemn the SLAVE TRADE. Which Islam does not do. As 1 Timothy 9:10 states:9We also know that law is made not for the righteous but for lawbreakers and rebels, the ungodly and sinful, the unholy and irreligious; for those who kill their fathers or mothers, for murderers, 10for adulterers and perverts, for slave traders and liars and perjurers—and for whatever else is contrary to the sound doctrine."

Now what about Islam? You said:

"Islam not only ordered a Muslim to treat the slaves, Islam also encouraged the freeing of slaves.. we don't see that in bible."

You are forgetting that Muhammad captured slaves himself you deceiver. You are forgetting that it is muslim countries who still have slave trades, not Christian ones. Your false prophet even gave slaves to muslims so they will not leave Islam! Bukhari:V4B53N373"Allah's Apostle got property and war prisoners and gave them to some people to the exclusion of others. The latter seemed to be displeased by that. The Prophet said, 'I give to some people, lest they should deviate from Islam or lose patience.'"

Ishaq:592 "The Apostle held a large number of captives. There were 6,000 women and children prisoners. He had captured so many sheep and camels they could not be counted."

According to Patrick Manning, By how Islam dealt with slavery it seems to have done more to protect and expand slavery than the reverse. Manning (1990) p.28

Ehteshaam Gulam said...

The Fat Man said:

Also the quran permits having sex with slave woman even if they are married at the time. Something the bible definitly does not permit.

Well not really Fatso. The Quran tells people to free and marry their captives, I document this here:

Also the Bible doesn't allow sex with captives? Consider these verses:

And seest among the captives a beautiful woman, and hast a desire unto her, that thou wouldest have her to thy wife;Then thou shalt bring her home to thine house, and she shall shave her head, and pare her nails;And she shall put the raiment of her captivity from off her, and shall remain in thine house, and bewail her father and her mother a full month: and after that thou shalt go in unto her, and be her husband, and she shall be thy wife. (Deuternomy 21:11-14)

Fat Man this is proof you don't know your own Bible and your just talking out of ignorance. As they say--- Talk is cheap.

Sepher Shalom said...


Deuternomy 21:11-14 is about a woman becoming your wife. What The Fat Man referred to in the Quran gives instructions for "what your right hand possesses". Right hand possessions do not have the rights of a wife in Islamic society. Your attempt to draw a parallel does not hold up in this case.

I would also like to point out, the verses you quoted require a grieving period be given to the woman. This is something your prophet did not offer when he beheaded some 600-900 Qurayza Jews in one day, and took the prettiest young woman (Rahyana bint Amr) for himself.

Radical Moderate said...

I had to break this up.
Ehteshaam Gulam
You seem to be confused, no where did I say that the Hebrews were not permitted to marry slave woman who were single. The verse you quoted is evident that this was not something to be taken in lust. As indicated by shaving the head trimming the nails, and the one month morning period. Also she is to be freed, and the husband is forbidden from selling her or treating her as a slave. This is something you will not find in the Quran,

As far as your article on slavery in the Quran you said “As for Prophet Muhammad having sexual intercourse with his slave girls or female captives, that’s simply not true. Nowhere in the hadith literature of any of the reliable biographies of Prophet Muhammad have I ever read such a thing.”

I find that statement very interesting. We hear time and time again that the hadeeths and biographies are corrupt and only the Quran should be consulted. However on the issue of having sex with slave woman even if these slave women are married you do not consult the one source that Muslims claim is un corruptible. That is the Quran. You do seem to mention a few verses that talk about marrying believing woman from the captives. But you failed to mention the verse’s that permits having sex with slave woman. Not marrying them.

Lets take a look at a few.

Radical Moderate said...

Quran 70:29-30 “And those who guard their chastity, except with their wives and the (captives) whom their right hands possess,- for (then) they are not to be blamed,”
The Tastier of Ibn Kathir says on this verse “(And those who guard their private part (chastity).) Meaning, they keep their private parts away from that which is forbidden and they prevent their private parts from being put into other than what Allah has allowed them to be in. This is why Allah says, except from their wives or their right hand possessions) meaning, from their female slaves.
So here the Quran separates between a wife and a slave. If the slave’s were already married to the Muslim then there would be no need to add “and” when refereeing to slaves. Secondly Ibn Kathir clearly states that muslims are not forbidden from putting there private parts into there wives and slave woman. Notice you don’t have to be married to your slave woman to put your private part in her.
Another verse
Quran 23:5-6 “Who abstain from sex, except with those joined to them in the marriage bond, or (the captives) whom their right hands possess,- for (in their case) they are free from blame,”
Notice again that wives are separate from slave woman and both are permissible for sex.
Again Ibn Kathir confirms this “And those who guard their private parts. Except from their wives and their right hand possessions, for then, they are free from blame. But whoever seeks beyond that, then those are the transgressors.) Means, those who protect their private parts from unlawful actions and do not do that which Allah has forbidden; fornication and homosexuality, and do not approach anyone except the wives whom Allah has made permissible for them or their right hand possessions from the captives. One who seeks what Allah has made permissible for him is not to be blamed and there is no sin on him. Allah says:” (they are free from blame. But whoever seeks beyond that) meaning, other than a wife or slave girl,”

In both these verses it is clear that you don’t have to marry your slave woman to have sex with them. The quran says this as well as the tasfirs.
So please do not confuse the biblical allowance to marry Slave woman with the Quran’s permission to just have sex. You seem to be somewhat confused and I think the root of your confusion could be one of the Arabic words for Marriage, “Nakah” which in Arabic slang is the same as the F word in English.
To illustrate this, a verse in the quran says Your wives are as a tilth for you, so approach your tilth when or how you will. (2:223) A tilth is just a piece of dirt. This is not making love to a wife, this is not even having sexual intercourse. This is using a woman your wife for masturbation only. Now compare that to the Song of Songs.

Oh by the way I do find it funny that a little stick of a man, who from the video's of the debate can not even fit into a mans pair of clothes has the audacity to call me Fatso. :)

Anthony Rogers said...

Hey Ehteshaam,

Is your name really Ehteshaam Gulam, or is that just a nickname to draw our attention to your advocacy of the swoon theory?

Also, since you affectionately referred to Fatman as Fatso, I was wondering if we could call you Ehteshaam Ghulam Ahmad? (I do hope bringing out this curious coincidence doesn't further jeopardize your already tenuous relationship with your speechless friend - Nadir.)

Fernando said...

Ehteshaam Gulam.... your quote on DT. as it was a supporting bidence thate the Bible supportes sex with slaves is another stepp into the voide... are you juste trying to follow the steps off the Osama? Please don'te go thate way: stay apart from false facts; false assumptions and lies... bie the way: it seams thate the assertion thate the Christians do not know the Bible turned againste you whem not quotting qur'an 70:29-30 and
23:5-6... please: don't do thate; I begg you: don't do thate... it's more and more difficult to a muslime make false assertions about the qur'an...

May God blees you, young Gulam...

Radical Moderate said...

I have to say I'm a little disapointed in Muslim by Choice and Ehteshaam. Muslim by choice has not responded to my refutation of his claim that Islam free's slaves. And Ehteshaam has not responded to my refutation of his false claim that the Bible allows for sex with female slaves. What happend gentlemen. Does the truth so frighten you?

Abdullah said...

Whatever you guys say about Slavery ? what you got in your bible is away worse
Let me show you some

Exodus 21:2-6 2 “If you buy a Hebrew servant, he is to serve you for six years. But in the seventh year, he shall go free, without paying anything. 3 If he comes alone, he is to go free alone; but if he has a wife when he comes, she is to go with him. 4 If his master gives him a wife and she bears him sons or daughters, the woman and her children shall belong to her master, and only the man shall go free.

5 “But if the servant declares, ‘I love my master and my wife and children and do not want to go free,’ 6 then his master must take him before the judges.[a] He shall take him to the door or the doorpost and pierce his ear with an awl. Then he will be his servant for life
Give you such details

And look even worse
Exodus 21:7 7 “If a man sells his daughter as a servant, she is not to go free as male servants do.
Imagine you are selling your daughter and your daughter is crying and beg her father to not leave her..

Slaves, obey your earthly masters with deep respect and fear. Serve them sincerely as you would serve Christ.Ephesians 6:5
So does that mean the slaves must fear their master as much they fear god? Well in this case they might end up worshiping him

However, you may purchase male or female slaves from among the foreigners who live among you. You may also purchase the children of such resident foreigners, including those who have been born in your land. You may treat them as your property, passing them on to your children as a permanent inheritance. You may treat your slaves like this, but the people of Israel, your relatives, must never be treated this way. Leviticus 25:44-46
This is racist !! How come the hebrew slaves have only 6 years and forigners are buy and sold as property ?

I am studying the Quran and the bible and one day I will debate David Wood . I love to be like Ahmad Deedat winning all the debates .