Wednesday, June 15, 2011

Omar Bakri & Shah Jalal Hussain vs. Sam Shamoun & David Wood: "Who Was Muhammad?"






Haecceitas said...

Did you find out why Choudary didn't participate in this debate?

DMartyr said...

Thanks for uploading this. I missed the live airing. :)

Radical Moderate said...

Wow you guys were quick putting this up even put the Acts 17 intro.

alekhine said...

good guys did well..The Sheik was kinda funny too :)

Gabriella Oak said...

Omar Bakri comes across as quite charming and twinkly, despite being a thorn in the side of the UK security forces for years.

Did you know that one of his daughters in London works as a pole dancer ??!!

mikeyh428 said...

Overall good debate. One comment though - Sam's claim that Jesus returning and abrogating the Quran seems too weak to me. (Not that Islam needs Jesus to abrogate the Quran, it does a fine job of abrogating itself in many places!) However, the verses in question simply no longer apply. It's a similar concept to Jesus fulfilling the law and (in a sense) "abrogating" animal sacrifices of the Old Testament. Sacrifices were no longer applicable. The point just seemed to be hair-splitting to me. But apart from that, it was a really good debate. It was funny to see the Sheik retreat from his own commentators as well as the usual "those claims are just falsehoods" without disproving anything. Very well done guys! :)

Sam said...

This is to Mikey. My argument is actually strong. The Muslim claim is that Muhammad is the last prophet and messenger and, as such, his laws cannot be abrogated or annulled. However, Jesus comes to abolish texts such as Q. 9:29 and all the passages which speak to the issue of Muslim versus non-Muslim relations. In other words, Jesus cancels out many of the passages of Quran, thereby making a good portion of the Muslim scripture obsolete. Your analogy with OT sacrifices doesn't prove your case, but mine. A good part of the Torah deals with the centrality and necessity of animal sacrifices for atonement. However, Jesus' advent consummates all these sacrifices, thereby making them obsolete. So thank you for providing an example which actually reinforces my point.

mikeyh428 said...

I understand that Sam, but the Quran already abrogates parts of itself and thus parts of it are already obsolete. So how does the Muslim Jesus returning and abrogating even more of it any different than the damage it has already done to itself? That's why it seems like hair-splitting to me, or maybe kicking a dead horse is a better expression. Either way, I'm not trying to disprove your case. We're on the same side, brother.

Royal Son said...

Mikey - the point is that if Mohammad were truly the final messenger, we would not expect any OTHER person than Mohammad bringing anything that abrogates parts of the Qur'an. The fact that Jesus comes back proves that Mohammad is NOT the final messenger by Islam's standards. Your point about the Qur'an abrogating itself in part already is irrelevant to the discussion. If Mohammad were the final messenger, then certainly it would seem reasonable that he can abrogate parts of his message. But what Sam demonstrated is that Jesus Himself is the one abrogating the alleged final messenger's message. Jesus is the final messenger according to Hadith and not Mohammad. Interestingly, Zakir Naik was raked over the coals on this very issue.

mikeyh428 said...

Ah, Okay - I understand now. It's not about the abrogation issue itself (that would indeed be a weak case), but that this psuedo-Jesus exercises actions above and beyond what Muhammad, the so-called seal of the prophets, was even authorized to do. I got side-tracked by the abrogation issue itself (Sorry for the misunderstanding Sam). I'm not sure of what hadith address this tradition. Could a Muslim apologist argue that the hadith(s) in question is weak or non-authentic? (Thanks for the clarification Royal Son).

mikeyh428 said...

Royal Son, on a side note - I don't think it would be reasonable for Muhammad to abrogate parts of the Quran. If the Quran were truly from God (aka Muhammad was a true prophet), then why would parts of it need to be abrogated?

Sophie said...

The bit of Islam which offends me more than any other is the concept of the houris. I was disgusted when one of the Muslims suggested that Christians were envious of Muslims for getting an eternity in the Playboy mansion and was very happy when Sam put him in his place on that score. If he thinks that eternity with some prostitutes (oops, sorry, eternal virgins) is better than the Presence of God then he has never been in the Presence of God and has no desire to seek Him.

I pity the wife of any man who is dreaming of the day when he can abandon his wedding vows (such as they are in Islam) and sleep with multitudes of other women who never age. Such a man cannot be a good husband.

Sam said...

Mikey, Royalson hit the nail on the head and understood my point perfectly, as did the Muslims. To say that Muhammad abrogated certain verses is irrelevant since he is supposed to be the final messenger and has the authority to do so. However, as the final messenger no one has the authority to abrogate what Muhammad brought since it is the final revelation and is supposed to be complete, perfect, for all times. That is why Muslims keep saying that Jesus returns to implement the shariah or law of Muhammad, i.e. the Quran and Sunnah are not abrogated by Christ's return. Yet, as I have explained, such is not the case. Therefore, it is not splitting hairs or beating a dead horse, but quite a powerful argument. You simply need to understand it as others, such as Royalson and the Muslims themselves, do.

Sam said...

Mikey, np brother. I praise God that we were able to make it clear since it is a powerful argument to raise against Muslims.

Sam said...

Mikey, the hadiths which address this issue are from al-Bukhari and Muslim, and therefore are completely reliable:

Narrated Abu Huraira:
Allah's Apostle said, “By Him in Whose Hands my soul is, surely (Jesus,) the son of Mary will soon descend amongst you and will judge mankind justly (as a Just Ruler); he will break the Cross and kill the pigs and there will be no Jizya (i.e. taxation taken from non Muslims). Money will be in abundance so that nobody will accept it, and a single prostration to Allah (in prayer) will be better than the whole world and whatever is in it.” Abu Huraira added, “If you wish, you can recite (this verse of the Holy Book): -- ‘And there is none Of the people of the Scriptures (Jews and Christians) But must believe in him (i.e. Jesus as an Apostle of Allah and a human being) before his death. And on the Day of Judgment He will be a witness against them.’” (4.159) (See Fateh Al Bari, Page 302, Vol. 7). (Sahih al-Bukhari, Volume 4, Book 55, Number 657:

Here is how Ibn Kathir, one of Islam’s greatest expositors, explained Q. 4:159:

In the chapter about the Prophets in his Sahih, under, “The Descent of `Isa, Son of Maryam,” Al-Bukhari recorded that Abu Hurayrah said that the Messenger of Allah said…

<> Abu Hurayrah then said, “Read if you will…

(And there is none of the People of the Scripture, but must believe in him, before his death. And on the Day of Resurrection, he will be a witness against them.)” Muslim recorded this Hadith. So, Allah's statement…

(before his death) refers to the death of `Isa, son of Maryam. (Tafsir Ibn Kathir:; bold emphasis ours)

So, no, Sunni Muslims cannot simply brush these aside.

Sophie said...

I didn't understand the argument at first but now I understand it I see that it's powerful.

Sam, mainstream Sunnis reject Ahmadis as Muslims because Ahmadis believe that Mirza Ghulam Ahmed was a prophet after Muhammad. Is their reasoning for rejecting the Ahmadiyya prohet the same as the argument you gave in this debate about Jesus Christ's return in Islam?

1MoreMuslim said...

Sam loool:

Have ever heard Sam saying that one of his arguments is weak? That is because he so humble. looool.

Jesus will abrogate nothing, nada. Can you give me what are those things to be abrogated by Jesus?

Sam said...

Sophie, yes. The main reason why Sunni and Shiite Muslims reject Ahmadis is because of the Quran's teaching that Muhammad is the seal, or last, prophet and therefore by extension the last messenger as well.

Now to 1MoreMuslim, did you even read my posts and the ahadith which I cited? Jesus abolishes the jizya, thereby abolishing Q. 9:29. That is just one example. Now could you please address that.

1MoreMuslim said...


I am really troubled, you can't make the difference between abrogation of Quran, and a simple of its application because change of situation.
For those who have eyes to see, read the Hadith that Sam Pasted above, the refutation is simply in it.

‘And there is none Of the people of the Scriptures (Jews and Christians) But must believe in him (i.e. Jesus as an Apostle of Allah and a human being) before his death

If Jews and christians and all people will be Muslims, who is going to pay Jizya to who?

Radical Moderate said...



Oh that's right you would rather hide behind your keyboard.

Sam said...

It is amazing that 1MoreMuslim actually thinks he is refuting my argument by appealing to Q. 4:159 when he is actually reinforcing the fact that BOTH the Quran and ahadith contradict the Muslim scripture.

Let me take this step my step.

1. Muhammad is supposed to be the last prophet and messenger. As such, no one can come after him to abrogate any of his commands.

2. Jesus is a prophet and messenger who comes after Muhammad. Therefore, Muhammad cannot be the last prophet and messenger if you have another prophet/messenger coming after him.

3. In order to reconcile these contradictory teachings, Muslims claim that Jesus comes to judge by the laws and commands of Muhammad. In this way, Muhammad can still be considered the last prophet and messenger since his laws and rules will still be in force and will not be annulled by Jesus at his second coming.

4. However, the ahadith clearly say that Jesus will abolish the jizya, thereby abrogating Q. 9:29 since there will no longer be any Jews or Christians to extract jizya from.

5. The ahadith also teach that all other religions will be abolished by Jesus when he returns, which means that everyone will be expected to become Muslims.

6. The Quran itself confirms this since Q. 4:159 says that all of the people of the book will have to believe in Jesus before he dies.

7. However, if everyone will be forced to convert to Islam, and if all other religions will be destroyed, this means that all of those Quranic verses which address the treatment and status of non-Muslims will be annulled since there will no longer be any more non-Muslims left when Jesus returns.

8. Therefore, both the Q. 4:159 and the ahadith contradict the assertion that Muhammad is the last prophet/messenger and that his laws and rules will not be abrogated until the last day.

I hope this is now clear for 1MoreMuslim. I do expect that he will address these issues and not assume that by appealing to a text of the Quran that he is actually resolving the contradictions. I hope he realizes that Q. 4:159 only reinforces the contradiction, and does nothing to resolve it.

1MoreMuslim said...

Sam Wants to argue that whenever the circumstances doesn't allow to apply a commandment, that means that the commandment itself is abrogated. Ok Sam, You won , as usual. Can Sam loose an argument? Of course not. he is perfect, even when he makes mistakes about the Arabic language, we should correct the Arabic language to fit Sam's argument, Sam can't make mistakes.

1MoreMuslim said...

Radical Moderate:

Why would I ask Sam or David, do they have uncensored secret Muslim materials? If I have a question about my religion I will search it in its original language. If I have a question about Christianity, I ask scholars of Christianity, or their books.
And to those questions that Christians have no answer, I out them on my blog, and it's up to you to answer.
I called ABN once last year, I stayed on hold for 1 hour, I was given 1 minute for a question, and they give me a silly unorthodox answer.

Sam said...

Notice 1MoreMuslim's ad hominems. When he can't refute my arguments he simply resorts to mocking and attacking my character.

Be that as it may, I did want to address 1MoreMuslim's interpretation of Q. 4:159. The verse says:

And there is none of the people of the Scripture (Jews and Christians), but must believe in him ['Iesa (Jesus), son of Maryam (Mary), as only a Messenger of Allah and a human being], before his ['Iesa (Jesus) or a Jew's or a Christian's] death (at the time of the appearance of the angel of death)[sic]. And on the Day of Resurrection, he ['Iesa (Jesus)] will be a witness against them. Hilali-Khan

He automatically assumes that this verse means that all the Jews and Christians will necessarily come to accept and believe in the Muslim Jesus before Christ's death. This will presumably take place when Jesus returns.

However, that is not the obvious meaning of the passage. The verse does not say that they all will believe, but that they all should believe in the Muslim Jesus. Yet the verse itself shows that not all will do so since it goes on to say that on the resurrection day Jesus "will be a witness against them."

Now why would Jesus be a witness AGAINST them on the day of judgment if all of them will end up believing in the Muslim Jesus? Doesn't this show that, even though they are all required to believe in the Islamic 'Isa, not all will do so, thereby explaining why Jesus will be a witness against them?

Moreover, this text does not say that all the Jews and Christians will only come to believe in Christ when he returns. The passage suggests (just as the parenthetical comments of Hilali-Khan implies) that all the Jews and Christians of all times must come to accept the Muslim Christ before they die.

However, there already have been millions of Jews and Christians who have died without ever coming to believe in the Islamic 'Isa. Therefore, if we interpret this to mean that all will come to faith then this is clearly wrong, and is another false prophecy of Muhammad.

Hence, in light of these factors I take the verse to mean that Allah requires every Jew and Christian to believe in the Muslim Jesus before Jesus dies, since after that time it will be too late. Jesus' death will usher in the day of judgment where everyone will be called to account for their beliefs and actions.

Yet, either way, no matter how one chooses to interpret this text, it is evident that this verse does not support 1MoreMuslim's case.

Royal Son said...

Is it just me or does 1moremuslim read like a Hilali Khan translation?


1MoreMuslim said...

Sam never resorts to personal attacks, never ever.

@ Royal Son I have a scoop for you, 300 million people on the planet don't use translations to read Quran, and I am one of them. I know that is an unusual phenomena in Christianity, where 99.9% of believers don't understand the language of their Holy Book, and nearly 100% don't have a clue about their savior's mother tongue. Our God didn't make Arabic a dead language, not yet.

Sherrie Sutton said...

Appreciated Sam giving Christ the glory and asking for wisdom before his exchanges with the Muslims. It was clear and evident Sam's prayers were honored.

A few things stuck out with me. Shah claims maybe Shia's practice rape but not Sunni's which was certainly not the case in Darfur, who's Sunni president was brought up on war crimes.

Shah also claimed Islam does not force conversion in all cases, that people can choose to live in peace, like he lived in peace in our land. Yes he lives in peace in our land, but this is not the case in Islamic States where Christianity is forbidden or where there is a Christian minority; they are persecuted horribly! Just ask Open Doors or International Christian Concern or other organizations who deal with the Persecuted Church.

Shah also says they basically gleaned truths from Jews & Christians but they renounced Pagen practice. Not true. There is no evidence Abraham & Ishmael built the Kabba, even if they did, when the Arabs took it and destroyed the idols...all but one that is...the black stone. Stone worship was prevelant throughout Arabia then, and Muslims are hard-pressed to find a really sound reason for the perpetuation of a practice more suited to primitive pagan idolatry than the true spirit of monotheistic worship.

Shah also claims Jews & Christians did the same thing of offering their prepuberty daughters in marriage. When I search the scriptures the custom appears to set the age of appropriateness at around 20 years of age. Young women were also given a choice of whether they wanted to go with the man.

I'm sorry for the Muslim who has no assurance of spending eternity with their Creator. Christ is the assurance and they die for a lack of knowledge. They have been deceived and are believing a lie. Will pray for them.

Anonymous said...


Actually 1 the vast majority of Muslim's who memorize surahs can not understand what they reading. Even most Arabs have difficulties reciting and understanding Quran. Your point is ..well..pointless. And even if your attempt at a point was valid it would only prove how irreverent the Quran is to the majority of the human race that can not read Arabic..I guess Islam is no different then Hinduism... just another ethnocentric regional religion.

alekhine said...

it's funny how shah says to david that he lost all credibility and gives an arabic proverb "if you want to lie, don't say the elephant flew"
....the irony is mohammed said that flew on a winged donkey to the heavens and met Jesus ,Moses etc and that somehow doesn't make mohammed lose credibility :p

Mr McStizzle said...

@ 1moremuslims

Your point about the arabic language really just illustrates how disabled the Islamic religion is.

Here we are supposedly presented with an almighty god who created all things, yet he is bound to give is revelation in a single language.

This revelation is so "clear" that it cannot under any circumstances be accurately translated into another language.

Yet, this revelation is for ALL mankind.

Now, compare this to the biblical scriptures which can and have been translated into thousands of languages, with the message intact and understandable.

Muslims often try to attack the multitude of translations, however the only way Muslims are able to make this argument is because we have such reliable ancient manuscripts upon which the translations are based.

Otherwise, Muslims would have no grounds for even trying to attack the differences in certain translations. They are reliant on the oldest manuscripts of the Bible being ACCURATE.

If they are NOT accurate, and NOT reliable, the Muslim cannot even make the argument that differences in translation prove the corruption of the Bible, because they would be basing their conclusion on an unreliable source.

I suggest Muslims either cease making this argument at all, or accept that the ancient manuscripts are reliable, and hence God's Word has been preserved and successfully distributed to the nations, as Jesus commanded.

muhammadjon42 said...

I want to ask a question.

I have seen a website called Answering Christianity were they claim that Ibn Ishaq's Sirat Rasoul Allah is false and that one cannot use Ibn Ishaq's works in a debate because Muslims don't believe his work to be true.

So they are saying that the Satanic Verses are not true, but were made up by Ibn Ishaq.

Can you please confirm if this is true of false?

muhammadjon42 said...

Why do Muslims bring up the "we are only fighting Christians and Jews because they are OCCUPIERS" argument?

Wasn't the majority of the Middle East Pagan, Christian and Jewish before Islam and wasn't South Asia Pagan, Buddhist and Hindu before Islam?

So doesn't that mean that Islam is a 'foreign" belief that was introduced later?

Also the Quran says that Israel is for Moses and the Israelis and never mentions Palestine? So how are Jews "occupying" Israel if the Quran says it is for Israelis?

muhammadjon42 said...

How come you guys don't bring up Abdullah ibn Sa`d Ibn Abi Sarh Muhammad's Quranic scribe who figured out that Muhammad was making up the Quran and left Islam?

Why didn't the Muslims answer how a mere Jewish man took a demonic spell on Muhammad and controlled him for close to a year to 6 months? That is in the most trusted hadiths Al-Bukhari and Al-Muslim and confirmed by Aisha.

Jesus was tempted by Satan when he took human form, but banished Satan and told him he had no control over him...then how could Satan take control over Muhamamd...TWICE? Black magic comes from Satan.

uniquenz said...

Brother David, you brought up a very disturbing Hadith at the end of the crossfire video from Sahih Muslim book 33. It said something to the effect of fight them until they convert to Islam and pay the zakat, and that their BLOOD WOULD BE PROTECTED **EXCEPT** BY THE WILL OF ALLAH. Now let's think about this - If even a Jew or a Christian were to take the Shahada and pay zakat, they wouldn't necessarily be protected because, well "it wasn't Allah's will anyway" - If even the Jew or Christian convert can lose protection then what does that speak of the Jizya paid by Jews and Christians? All the talk about Jizya guaranteeing the safety and protection of non-Muslims is a farce.

Zack_Tiang said...


The same can be said with regards to the shirk; associating partners with Allah.
This is the one and only sin that Allah will never forgive...

So there is no reason for polytheists (and Christians, as Muslims love to accuse us of commting shirk with the Trinity) to convert to Islam, because we have committed shirk and that sin will never be forgiven by Allah.

axiomizer said...

No one should even care who muhammad was - it is obvious that he and his followers contribute nothing to the human race. We should only concern ourselves with how to eradicate the virus that he created so that mankind can evolve.

muhammadjon42 said...

@axiomizer People should know who Muhammad was and what he did. The back bone of Islam IS Muhammad and his revelations. Proving if he was or was not a prophet then questions the validity of Muhammad as a prophet.

pure said...

Want muslim brothers to understand this.You say that bible is corrupted.That means Satan has entered in between and changed the word and deviated all the christians,and hence only part of it is God.The same way we believe as per the scripture that Satan delivered the Quran to muhammad.In the Quran if we see,it says so many verses about jesus that he is not God,he is only a messenger etc...Similar way,in the Bible,its said 600 yrs before that some one would bring message from an angel and you shud not accept.Also said satan himself appears as the light of angel.Also predicted that some one would deny Sonship of Jesus and that he is not manifested in flesh..
Bible nd Quran were opposite in evry basic concept.
Iam asking what is superior?is the one which predicted that some message of this sort will come,or else the One which appeared later(Quran)and pointing the old scriptures wrong.Tell me which is superior and right?

Azdaha ExMuslim said...

Sam and David exposed muhammad totally...hahahaha......awesome work guys.....

blessed z said...

Oh my oh my oh my....I love this debate. It is obvious that the muslim with thick beard and the muslim with the English accent were not happy and looked embarrassed when brother Sam and David exposed the very content of Quran. The two brothers backed their every statement with Quran verses, while the Muslims keep disagreeing all the self explanatory embarrassing Quran verses, and came out with their own interpretation. And the two Muslims still dare to invite people to embrace Islam. What?? They must be joking! Inviting people to be intolerant? To fight? To have no human right? To think heaven is sex house. This religion is appealing to perverted lunatic men who never satisfied with the amount of sex they have on earth. They want to continue sex in heaven. I don't understand why Muslims just swallow muhammad's teaching, especially the women when they know they have no right and they will just be watching their husband having fun with forever vigin girls in heaven. This is so funny. This is Muhammad's imagination. I really pity my muslim girl friends. They always think they are great beacuse they are muslim. That's because they never study the real teaching in Quran. Their parents just simply tell them: Muslim is good, Christian and Jew are bad because christian and jew eat haram food, and have 3 gods, and blaspheme God to take Jesus as God. I believe after watching this debate many Muslims will get shocked about the facts of Islam and many who are honest and humble and intelligent enough to digest information will change their faith to cristianity. Anyway, I must salute the two Muslims to have participated in the debate. This shows they are matured and can take critic to some extend. We can see they were troubled though with the exposure of quran teaching and muhammad immoral life (look at how they tried avoid and discontinued discussing 54 y/o muhammad married 9 y/o aishah. Maybe half of Muslims in the world don't know this fact!

Brother Sam and David, many thumbs up for you. I salute your deep knowledge. Thank you for standing for our true faith, and teach us to defend it, and hope you will groom many people to be apologists. This is very important for us who live in big Muslim countries as many of us sometimes reluctant to defend our Christian belief due to our lack of knowledge. Please pray that many people in Indonesia (Christians and Muslims) and surrounding countries will come to know your apologetic websites, and abnsat, and will learn from these sources. May God always protect you and your team from harm. Amen.

Chaniago said...

Great explanation for me & hope so for our muslim brothers and friends in Indonesia. May God give the light of Truth & Mercy for our Indonesian muslim. Amen.

Unknown said...

we need to have human and animal right from going beyond the limits? who has sex with donkeys and goats? many stories are out there of little girls under 13 dying from internal injuries on or several days after their wedding night to a 30 or 40+ year old man... its not cuz we are oppressed or need limits from going beyond them. its to protect them from people like you who don't have any limits when it comes to your own needs...

عبدالله العزيز said...

There are two ways to propagate Islam
1 . by directly preaching the teachings of the Holy Quraan & prophet Muhammad( PeaceBUH) & it's Noble preachers since prophet Aadam( pbuh)
2.By disseminating lies,fabrications, misconceptions,&hatred against it&
U have chosen the second

oviliz said...

Is Omar Bakri same as Omar Bakri Muhammad arrested in 2010?

If yes, how did he participated in the debate in 2011?

Unknown said...

What was interesting to me was when the Sheik said, "There is no coercion in Islam." (I believe that is what he said), however, the verses quoted from the Koran by David and Sam clearly shows that to be a false statement. Also the lack of sources on the Islamist's part and them saying not to listen to the Muslim commentators is very telling in that if people do listen to them, they will quickly realize the lie that the Koran and Muhammad really is.