Wednesday, September 18, 2013

David Wood vs. Shadid Lewis: Is Islam a Threat to the West?

Allah commands Muslims to violently subjugate non-Muslims (Qur'an 9:29, 9:73, 9:123, etc.). He also commands Muslims to violently subjugate women (Qur'an 2:223, 4:24, 4:34, etc.). Does this mean that Islam is a threat to the West? In this debate, I take the affirmative, and Shadid Lewis takes the negative.


Shadid and I discussed the following Hadith. According to Shadid, Muhammad rebukes Abdur-Rahman for beating his wife. If you can find the rebuke anywhere in this passage, let me know.

Sahih al-Bukhari 5825—Narrated Ikrima: Rifaa divorced his wife whereupon Abdur-Rahman married her. Aisha said that the lady came wearing a green veil and complained to her (Aisha) and showed her a green spot on her skin caused by beating. It was the habit of ladies to support each other, so when Allah’s messenger came, Aisha said, “I have not seen any woman suffering as much as the believing women. Look! Her skin is greener than her clothes!” When Abdur-Rahman heard that his wife had gone to the prophet, he came with his two sons from another wife. She said, “By Allah! I have done no wrong to him, but he is impotent and is as useless to me as this,” holding and showing the fringe of her garment. Abdur-Rahman said, “By Allah, O Allah’s messenger! She has told a lie. I am very strong and can satisfy her, but she is disobedient and wants to go back to Rifaa.” Allah's messenger said to her, “If that is your intention, then know that it is unlawful for you to remarry Rifaa unless Abdur-Rahman has had sexual intercourse with you.” The prophet saw two boys with Abdur-Rahman and asked (him), “Are these your sons?” On that Abdur-Rahman said, “Yes.” The prophet said, “You claim what you claim (that he is impotent)? But by Allah, these boys resemble him as a crow resembles a crow.”

Shadid also said that he doesn't believe Umar would have ordered Abu Musa to expel his Christian scribe, because Umar was a righteous man. According to the following source, then, Umar wasn't as righteous as Shadid thinks, because he ordered Abu Musa to expel his Christian scribe.

Ibn Kathir on Qur'an 5:51—Allah forbids His believing servants from having Jews and Christians as friends, because they are the enemies of Islam and its people, may Allah curse them. Allah then states that they are friends of each other and He gives a warning threat to those who do this, (And if any among you befriends them, then surely he is one of them.) Ibn Abi Hatim recorded that `Umar ordered Abu Musa Al-Ash`ari to send him on one sheet of balance the count of what he took in and what he spent. Abu Musa then had a Christian scribe, and he was able to comply with `Umar's demand. `Umar liked what he saw and exclaimed, "This scribe is proficient. Would you read in the Masjid a letter that came to us from Ash-Sham'' Abu Musa said, `He cannot.'' `Umar said, "Is he not pure'' Abu Musa said, "No, but he is Christian.'' Abu Musa said, "So `Umar admonished me and poked my thigh (with his finger), saying, `Drive him out (from Al-Madinah).' He then recited, (O you who believe! Take not the Jews and the Christians as friends...)"

Clearly, Umar took Qur'an 5:51 to mean that Muslims weren't supposed to have even working relationships with Jews or Christians. If you're wondering why Umar wanted the Christian expelled completely, this goes back to Muhammad:

Sahih Muslim 4366—It has been narrated by ‘Umar b. al-Khattab that he heard the Messenger of Allah say: I will expel the Jews and Christians from the Arabian Peninsula and will not leave any but Muslim.

I guess Muhammad wasn't as righteous as Shadid thinks either!

19 comments:

Nakdimon said...

LOL, What a debacle! Shadid was off topic and irrelevant for pretty much the entire debate.

Well done David. It already was a walkover before it started.

Joe Wyrostek said...

Brother David,

Great job in the debate! Is there any way you can post up your notes and powerpoint here with the references of send them to my email?

Thank you!

Devotee of Christ said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Haecceitas said...

Shadid seemed to interpret "a threat to the West" as meaning "a threat to the very existence of the West as we know it". If one accepts such a definition of the key term in the debate topic, I suppose that gives some credibility to his case. But IMO that's not the most natural interpretation, plus it's pretty unflattering to Islam if Shadid's defense boils down to something like "Muslim countries are so weak that they aren't able to destroy the West, even though they may want to do it."

Radical Moderate said...

I said it before I will say it again.

You have an angry black Muslim shouting at the audience that Islam is not a threat, and the real threat is the white west to dark skinned Islamic countries.

I despise racism.

I loved his preaching at the end and appeal to emotion with his whole "how many babies" sermon.

I think he was a little shocked at the crowds reaction. Not what he was expecting.

Radical Moderate said...

Also good job David Wood, making Shadid back track.

When he demonstrated that even he was afraid of Muslims.

Radical Moderate said...

Just had a interesting inteaction with Shadid Lewis on Paltalk.

He took offence at my stating the obvious on a previous posts that he came off as an angry black Muslim yelling at his audience.

I find this interesting coming from a man who in his first debate with Nabeel said that one of the reasons why he left Christianity is that Christianity failed black people.

And one of the reasons why he became a Muslim is because Islam had the solution for black people.

He has on numerous occasions spewed racists comments on Paltalk. Calling me and others "Crackers.. WhiteDevils.. Honkeys" etc...

In his debate with David Wood he defined the West as WHITE PEOPLE, even quoting material from 70 years ago saying words to the affect that "see THEY could say what they really thought of back then, not like today".

His whole identity and theology is based on his racial idea's.

Yet I am a racist for stating the obvious that he is an angry black Muslim.

Maybe I should of said "he is an angry black man who became a Muslim".

Sis said...

http://www.youtube.com/embed/RWcVguB0GaY

Devotee of Christ said...

In his final statement Shadid says that 174 muslim children (in a particular scenario and context) have been killed and then proceeds to ask, how many of "our" children have been killed. A statement to counter that - more muslim children are killed by Muslims and Islam (because of Islam, not despite it) perhaps in a month than the entire west has killed (against the teachings of the Lord Jesus) in the entire modern era.

taomeano said...

Poor Shadid, he struggled mightily in this debate.

Shadid simply could not focus on the topic being debated. And then because Shadid could not refute the evidence being presented he started discounting Mohammed's companions and even the rightly guided caliph Umar. this was a pathetic debate by Shadid.
I find it hard to believe that such an intelligent person like Shadid will fall for a cult like Islam ?

Ken said...

David,
Excellent argumentation.

I have a question though: What do you say to those Muslims who will agree with you that Surah 9:29 abrogates 2:256, but still say Al Qaeda and all similar Muslims who do terrorist acts are wrong, because they are taking the Sharia law into their own hands, and they cannot do that without the Khaliphate. Since the Khaliphate was abolished in 1924, all aggressive Jihad like 9:5 and 9:29 is illegal. Since the Ummah was divided up into separate countries, the only proper response is self defense for each country ( like Surah 2:190)

They say a general Jihad against the west cannot be called for because there is no Khaliphate.

But, theoretically, if the Khaliphate was re-established, then they could legally call for an all out Jihad against the Jews/Israel and the west, right?

Hassan Al Banna and Sayeed Qutb were responding to the abolishment of the Khaliphate and the breakup of the Sunni Ummah and that Sharia was no longer able to be applied, since many of the resulting countries were run by secular dictators; and they wanted to restore the Khaliphate and Sharia, and unity of the Ummah.

Ben Laden and Al Qaeda took that farther and said basically, "we are not waiting for the restoration of the Khaliphate".

So, it seems one of the resons why so many Muslims don't join with Al Qaeda is because they know it is illegal to call for Jihad, since there is no Khaliphate.

So, it seems that those groups that are calling for the restoration of the Khaliphate, if it was established, would then call for a Jihad against Israel, then the west.

What do you think?

Israel Zindabaad said...

Well done brother David

Israel Zindabaad said...

God bless brother David the debate was awesome really enjoyed it.

Radical Moderate said...

@Ken

You asked David...

"They say a general Jihad against the west cannot be called for because there is no Khaliphate."

I'm not sure of the answer David would give you however I would like to give u my observation.

Muslims who say things like this our of the "Don't worry we will oppress you and kill you later" variety of Muslims.

After the MB won the elections in Egypt Morris gave an interview assuring the Christians and the west that his intent was not to implement Sharia law right away but instead have a 5 year grace and re education time. So you see there is nothing to worry about because they won't be oppressing and killing Christians right away but they have a 5 year plan to do so.

Quran Learning said...

Holy Prophet Hadrat Muhammad (PBUH) always used to perform what he (PBUH) was commanded by Almighty Allah (SWT) so if it was will of Almighty Allah (SWT) who is lord of everything then there is no need of questioning. If you are aware how to learn Quran then you will get why Jews were expelled.

Zack_Tiang said...

Good presentation as always by bro David.
Really emotionally driven presentation by Shadid. =/

I applaud bro David for countering Shadid's 'Muslim countries are weak' argument with his 'you don't have to be strong to commit 9-11 or 7-7 bombing' argument.

There are plenty of evidence to show the Islamic Jihad movement to destroy 'the West' through non-military means; e.g. the Muslim Brotherhood 'Project'...
And how about Iran's drive for nuclear weapons now?

Give Jihadists nuclear weapon, what else do you think they'll do with it?

Ken said...

Radical Moderate wrote:
Muslims who say things like this our of the "Don't worry we will oppress you and kill you later" variety of Muslims.

Even if they don't plan that or have that as their heart motive now, that is the implication of the restoration of the Khaliphate.

If the Khaliphate is restored and they have the police and miliary power, there is nothing that regular Muslims could do to stop their Jihads or Dhimmih-ism, etc.

Doctrinally, and historically (from Muhammad to Khalifs to Ottomans, etc. all the way to 1924) - once Islam is in power in the political and military state, that is what they will be able to do - they have slowly destroyed the Christian communities of every Muslim country.

If a Khaliphate is restored -

Then, Islam will be a threat to the the whole world - the west, and Israel, and Hindus, Buddhists and atheists/communists - China, North Korea, Russia, etc.

Marc Swyane said...

The threat to the West from Islam is how stealthy they are.

Halalifying our food is one thing... but population growth of Muslims is the other.

At first it's all, 'we are the religion of peace', help us escape our terrible country.

So they come, preach peace from the Koran.

All those big names saying that the Imams are wrong and the peaceful verses aren't abrogated are just using taquiya to mislead us.

This is the first stage of stealth jihad. sneak in and tell us Islam is all peaceful.

When Muslims become more in population but not the majority, but enough to make a point on something (aka using our laws of discrimination etc against us), they will.

This is the stage where they cry about everything being an offense to them.

Well everything about our Culture is an offense to them. The reason it is an offense is because it will make us stop to 'consider' the Muslim, which elevates their status above our own.

Elevating their status above our own by complaining and being offended by everything about our culture, so we all stop to not say anything bad or bend over backwards to accommodate their views and stance which elevates them above us. Which is what their book wants them to do because it tells them Muslims are above all others, or more accurately, we are beneath them.

So that is the beginning of the THREAT to the WEST, stealthy injection of themselves in to our society, stealthy changing our food and ways we think and treat them. There is NO need for missiles, they do it stealthily and then get on our welfare and breed like rabbits.

They need to increase their population.

Why work when the infidel can pay you to sit on your ass?

We can pay their Jizya.

Once the population grows to the point that they have the majority, you can bet your ass that they will no longer want to quote or defend any of the peaceful verses of their book. Instead, they will vote in Sharia.

They all want Sharia Law.
Islam is a political ideology, the goal to spread Sharia Law.

The Koran is the blueprint on how to do this, stealthily first and then as you gain more power, your strategy changes. It's all in there, but they will say otherwise until they have the majority of power. Taquiya is commanded of them until that point.

What happens when they get the majority? Look at any nation with a Muslim Majority to find that out... but by that point in time, it's too late, the threat has come and damage has been done, all without any missiles or guns.

But then I get told to go do some research and read the Koran.

To which I wonder, if I wasn't researching Islam or reading from the Koran, then what the hell was I reading and researching?

Estudantes Mocambicanos na Argelia said...

Shadid spent the whole debate trying to prove that the West is a threat to the world because it has a massive arsenal, let's take that as truth! Now we ask ourselves, what if that arsenal was in the hands of the muslims wouldn't really show the real face of islam? Ii mean they don't have enough guns but they still do more mess than the entire west put together! He said the west is killing childrens in muslims countries, who called them there? The muslims of course because one group want to implement sharia and the caliphate and the other not, the only way to solve this problems is by introducing a foreigner trops to hellp! I hope he learned what David meant by threat too the west which is equal to WHOLE world and not WHITES like he thinks!