*Timestamps:* 00:00 - Intro 00:57 - EF Dawah Panel join: Format of the Stream 04:37 - *Chris (Christian) joins* 06:30 - Concept of Salvation in Christianity 09:01 - Discourse on Forgiveness in Christianity 18:40 - Forgiveness in Christianity vs Islam 22:31 - Discussion on God's Forgiveness & Justice 29:07 - Examining Salvation in Christianity 38:43 - Advice to Chris: Unreliability of the Bible 41:11 - Issues with Salvation in Christianity 46:10 - Repentance of Sins in Christianity vs Islam 52:06 - *Jaden (Christian) joins* 53:16 - Salvation before & after the Resurrection 59:15 - *Lantern (Ex-Christian) joins* 1:00:18 - Rejecting Christianity due to Slavery 1:02:31 - Claim about Qur'an 9:29 1:04:50 - Refuting the claim: Context of Qur'an 9:29 1:10:25 - Advice to Lantern & Debunking his claims 1:15:34 - *Anony Mous joins:* Fatwa Question 1:18:11 - *Adam (Muslim) joins* 1:18:57 - Context of Qur'an's verses about treaties 1:25:29 - Lantern rejoins: Claim about Qur'an 9:29 1:27:39 - Reason behind revelation of Qur'an 9:28-29 1:39:42 - Debunking the claim about Qur'an 9:29 1:44:11 - Discussion on the concept of Jizya 1:49:57 - Explaining Zakat & Jizya in Islam 1:57:13 - Problems with the claim of Lantern 2:05:47 - Inviting & Choosing Guests 2:09:25 - *Masihi (Christian) joins:* Shares his beliefs 2:12:38 - Qur'an being a direct revelation from God 2:15:31 - Issues with the claim of Masihi 2:17:28 - *Rob (Christian) joins* 2:19:00 - Rob's observations about the Qur'an 2:20:38 - Biblical vs Quranic historical accounts 2:24:48 - Evidence for the Qur'an's historical events 2:29:53 - Discourse on events in Bible vs the Qur'an 2:39:31 - Discussion on Resurrection in Christianity 2:41:56 - Discussing nature of Jesus vs Melchizedek 2:52:03 - Scrutinizing the Christian theology 3:02:09 - Masihi rejoins: Meaning of Qur'an 10:94 3:04:38 - Explanation of "If" vs "When" 3:09:41 - *William (Christian) joins* 3:10:57 - Jesus vs Melchizedek: eternality & divinity 3:25:02 - *NGM (Muslim) joins* 3:26:44 - *Zia (Muslim) joins* 3:28:05 - *Georges (Christian) joins* 3:28:59 - Claim about Melchizedek being Jesus 3:30:01 - Refuting the claim: Melchizedek's nature 3:37:45 - *Luis joins* 3:37:59 - Do Muslims affirm the Shema? 3:39:57 - Mention of Yahweh twice in the Shema 3:42:46 - Analysis of the Shema 3:44:52 - Pronunciation of YHWH in the Shema 3:50:32 - Review of the discussion with Luis 3:52:07 - Usage & pronunciation of the name: YHWH 3:54:50 - Closing Remarks & Wrapping Up MashaAllah ❤️💙💛 Magnificent stream 👍🏻👌🏻 _May Allah ﷻ bless you all and reward you for your efforts._ 🤲🏻
Rob thinks for something to have happened, it needs to be mentioned in the Bible, and everything else must be rejected as "fantastical." He then goes on to rattle off the most convoluted and objectively fantastical Christian theology anyone could imagine. At one point, he says "In _my_ Christian theology." These guys can't help but admit that they're just making up their own personal belief system to try and salvage some sense from the nonsensical.
For us to know something from the past it has to be accounted historically somehow. Typical muslim presuppositions of divine inspiration to determine the truth about past events lead undoubtedly to circular reasoaning. Gospels are a historical account, OT as well. That is not the case for the Quran, an a-historical non-chronological book. More precisely the Quran fails the historicity test when one can prove that the Quran brings nothing new on the table and has a certain level of ignorance when, for example, fails to engage with the true beliefs of the Jews and the Christians. All Quran can offer is this kind of street level knowledge that one could easily pick up from the stories and traditions circulating in the 7th century Arabic peninsula.
@@stefang.9763 you can't take a partial, corrupted record as the criteria to judge validity of anything. The Bible as it exists today has been curated from existing writings with political and theological ulterior motives. Why aren't the apocryphal texts considered historical for you? In fact many of the stories in the Quran do appear in other historical writings and older religious traditions that have been arbitrarily edited out of the canon and suppressed. Your claim that there is no historical basis for the stories in the Quran is based mostly on ignorance of the actual historical record. Similarly, your assertions about the Quran are based on a simple misunderstanding of what the Quran says about Christian theology and the actual practice of Christians in the real world.
@@Naushad1210 These are baseless assumptions and conspiracy theories, my friend. Among others, Christians validate their scriptures based on their closeness to Jesus' lifetime, resulting in the 1st century Gospels. In contrast, the first comprehensive biography of Muhammad, Ibn Ishaq’s 'Sirat Rasul Allah' - edited by Ibn Hisham around 200 years later - is often viewed skeptically by modern Muslims. So, much trust for the first Muslim historian !? Furthermore, most of the Hadith come later than Ibn Ishaq’s work, but you trust that ? Next, while early Muslims gathered all the copies of the initial Quran and burned all the variants, you dare talk about political motives ? This occurred during a time of Islamic apostasy wars(so much they believed Mohammed), where political pressures influenced religious adherence. In contrast, early Christians faced about 300 years of persecution, which shaped their spiritual and communal identity in keeping and spreading their scriptures all over the world without political control like you had in Islam. Lastly, the stories in the Quran make no sense on their own account. The author(s) of the Quran rely on existing scriptures or oral traditions when addressing their audience. You need the Christians and the Jews to make some sense of your so called scriptures. Christians have manuscripts of their full Scriptures even before the advent of Islam and the Quran seems unaware and it is not directly engaging with that. On contrary, some of the stories and legends that made it in the Quran are historically known forgeries, it's nothing you can lie about that, that's simple history and that's the point Rob is making again and again without getting an answer from the Muslim side.
Why so many advertisments? Used to enjoy earlier but now it’s impossible to listen due to advertisments every 5 minutes that are 20+ minutes so I have to click them off all the time
I hear you, they are a lot of other chanels that have advertisments that are 20secs to 1 min long and that to me is bearable and can be ignored, it’s the 20+ minutes adveritesments that are unbearable because i have to pick upp the phone to activly click them off
Same with "Jaden " from South Africa. He was on their panel too. Absolutely void of reasoning. Believe he is too young. He should be listening to lecturers and absorbing information and not trying to debate things he knows nothing about.
2:04:36 brother ijaz 👌👌🔝🔝 nicely said. That was i was saying exactly lol. I don’t know what was the point lantern was trying to make if we are not even bound to a particular opinion 🤷♂️
@@truth9328 Heya lantern. You only proved yourself unable to understand what you're reading. That does not make you right - that just proved you're bad at comprehension 🤣
@@truth9328 If millions of Muslims over the past 1,400 years have no problem understanding this verse, and you came 1,400 years later with no ability to comprehend it even after it's been explained to you several times... You're the issue 😏
@@truth9328 _is NOT the understanding of muslim in the old time_ Really? Can you show me where the Prophet ﷺ tells the Muslims in the old time that this verse is because "money problems"? _do you now understand_ Oh I understand just fine. But explain again to me why during the live QnA you are unable to answer any of the panelists' question to you regarding your topic? For example, if jizya is for "money problems" then: 1) why is it not imposed on every non-Muslim? 2) why was it returned when the Muslims can no longer protect the non-Muslims? Or are you going to stick with your own wonky understanding? 😏
@@truth9328 Sure. But leave it to some people to comprehend it the wrong way, and still hold on to that error even after he's been given clear explanations. Guess some people just have their hearts and minds walled off 🤷♂
Listening to Rob is so maddening. His passive aggressive demeanour and talking in circles a lot of the times over people, is indicative of a superiority complex. That’s why people are leaving the Church in droves.
Chris needs to understand the word mercy even though an offence has been committed.. if you as a human can forgive without recompense then doesn't that make you better than god. Need to remember we humans exsist and commit sins which god allowed us to do in this world
I read the tafsir on surah 9 verse 28. From my understanding it says that non Muslims were forbidden from the haram due to their "najas" for this reason many Muslims got worried that it was these non Muslims who contributed to the economy by bringing in goods for shop keepers from other lands to sell. Here it mentions that banning non Muslims would have an effect on trade and Muslims feared poverty because their businesses would struggle. This is when allah revealed a verse telling Muslims that it is He that provides and Muslims should not fear poverty because bounty is in the hands of Allah. Lantern does not understand the verse and is trying to base an argument just for the sake of it.
"Jesus existed before Abraham therefore he is 2nd person of trinity" Satan also existed before Abraham. By his logic Satan is part of trinity. Now you have 4 "persons" in your totally not polytheistic model.
He is still better then the lantern like guests masihi he still reads stuff it is good to expose them as they pretend to be sincere ef dawah did goo d by taking him but lantern nd masihii muslim is waste of time
nah dont say that bro..at least he change his view about the taurat and injil is the 5 book and new testament..that means he do really did his research..give some more time..let him dig deeper..and the truth shall prevail..he is better than before..thats why dr imran also treat him nicely..his heart is opening bit by bit towards islam..his attitude is far much better than all the time he came before..
Lantern, a Malaysian, waste our time every time. I don’t get why his arguments, or lack of it, is so islamophobic, or rather islam or Muslim hating, for no reason. He has heard answers for his question multiple times at various dawah channels but still don’t want to accept the real teaching for this question. He’s becoming more and more irrelevant each time he interacts with dawah brothers.
The local malaysian dawah channels r available too.. wonder if he goes there too.. also seems like here in Malaysia is some kind of movement,maybe political.. maybe racial
@@estonian44 I have never heard him talking to any local dawah brother, but I might have missed them. I would not be surprised if he hasn’t. The fact that he change his screen name each time he appears on dawah panel, I doubt he would be brave enough to meet anyone in person to talk like how he does on these channels. There will not be a problem for him to ask in Malaysia but he might be afraid of his own shadow.
@@baijuriismail4155 really? Is it available online? He faced the same fate with The Muslim Lantern Muhammad Ali too. One can see how much he is affected by brother Muhammad Ali since he calls himself lantern now. 😉
Time stamp 2:20:15 Rob mentions what he finally understands. My brother Rob, you have been on a journey on reading the Quran. You just finished Chapter 22 of the Quran. The Surah is Al-Hajj which I'm you know. Is it ironic that this chapter gave you a totally different outlook of what you thought of Islam?.....My brother after anyone experiences Hajj, they don't look at life the same. Allah (our creator) is speaking to you brother.
Regardless... they are not. BIBLE was not the gospel of Jesus (pbuh) it was the "gopel" gossip, according to other people. Had the prophet made his disciples memorize the Injeel and made them recite it and confirm their recitations, as was done with the Quran, and hence we'd only have 1 Biblia instead of a Bible (library) , then that scripture would be what we refer to as the injeel... the Injeel was lost to time though... so all we got left is gossip (unsubstantiated Hadiths by "Mark", "Matthew", 'Luke" and so called "John") with NO chain of narration... so the Bible is not reliable.
It is true what Masihi said in (2:14:31) about Quran 10:94, it says, "So if you are in doubt, [O Muhammad], about that which We have revealed to you, then ask those who have been reading the Scripture before you. The truth has certainly come to you from your Lord, so never be among the doubters" [Translation : Shahih International]. But how come these two muslims reject it? This is what Quran means "kafiir" i.e. they know it's true but they reject it. -- The response of Ijaz was, the Masihi was wrong of translating Quran. In Quran it uses "if" but Masihi uses "when". Ijaz argue two words are different (to me Ijaz just try to confuse people by making his own meaning), but when we check the dictionary, "when" and "if" can be used as conjunction, for example: "Call me when you're finished!" vs "Call me if you're finished". Similarly, in that verse: bla bla bla, so "if" you are in doubt, then bla bla bla... compare to "bla bla bla, so "when" you are in doubt, then bla bla bla"... Both of them are correct.
The panelists make certain topics laborious but asking guests to recognize their own miscomprehensions......just point it out to them. Your current approach is tedious to say the least
2:46:23 **Highlighting Special Pleading in Biblical Usage of "I Am"** 1. **The Phrase "I Am" in the Bible** 1.1 **Old Testament Usage**: Figures such as David, Jonathan, and Hushai use the phrase "I am" in a straightforward, non-divine manner. Examples include: - **David**: In 1 Samuel 18:18 and Psalm 110:4, where he speaks in a simple, self-referential way. - **Jonathan**: In 1 Samuel 23:17. - **Hushai**: In 2 Samuel 16:18. 1.2 **Septuagint Usage**: In the Greek translation of the Old Testament, the phrase "I am" (ἐγώ εἰμι, egō eimi) is used similarly to mean "it is I" or "I am the one," without any inherent divine connotation. It is a common way to refer to oneself. 1.3 **Divine Name in Hebrew**: The Hebrew name of God, YHWH (Yahweh), is closely associated with the phrase "I AM WHO I AM" (אֶהְיֶה אֲשֶׁר אֶהְיֶה, Ehyeh Asher Ehyeh) from Exodus 3:14. This phrase signifies God's eternal, self-existent nature and is not directly equivalent to the Greek "I am" used by Jesus. 1.4 **Jesus' Usage in the New Testament**: In the New Testament, particularly in the Gospel of John, Jesus uses the phrase "I am" (ἐγώ εἰμι, egō eimi) in ways that Christian theologians argue carry significant theological weight. For example: - **John 8:58**: "Jesus said to them, 'Truly, truly, I say to you, before Abraham was, I am.'" This statement is often interpreted as a claim to preexistence. 2. **The Concept of Preexistence in the Bible** 2.1 **Jeremiah 1:5**: God says to the prophet Jeremiah, "Before I formed you in the womb I knew you, before you were born I set you apart; I appointed you as a prophet to the nations." This implies that Jeremiah existed in a form before his conception. 2.2 **Hebrews 7:1-3**: Describes Melchizedek as "without father or mother, without genealogy, without beginning of days or end of life, resembling the Son of God, he remains a priest forever," suggesting he might be a preexistent, eternal figure. 2.3 **2 Esdras 4:35-36**: Discusses the souls of the righteous in their chambers asking about their reward, suggesting a form of preexistence of souls. 2.4 **Ephesians 1:4**: Paul writes, "For he chose us in him before the creation of the world to be holy and blameless in his sight," suggesting individuals existed before their earthly lives. 2.5 **John 9:2**: The disciples ask Jesus about a man born blind, "Rabbi, who sinned, this man or his parents, that he was born blind?" This question might imply a belief in some form of preexistence or reincarnation. 2.6 **Wisdom of Solomon 8:19-20**: Suggests some form of preexistence of the soul. 2.7 **Psalm 139:15-16**: Emphasizes God's intimate knowledge and plan for an individual before their birth, but does not explicitly suggest preexistence. 2.8 **Ecclesiastes 12:7**: "And the dust returns to the ground it came from, and the spirit returns to God who gave it," interpreted by some to mean the spirit existed with God before being given to a human body. 2.9 **Job 38:21**: Generally understood as a sarcastic remark highlighting Job's lack of understanding about the creation of the world, rather than a literal statement about preexistence. 2.10 **Hebrews 7:9-10**: Suggests Levi was present in a seminal sense within Abraham, not that he preexisted in a conscious form. 2.11 **Jesus Christ**: As mentioned in John 8:58, Jesus claims preexistence with the statement, "Before Abraham was, I am." 2.12 **The Word**: John 1:1-3 states, "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God." 2.13 **God the Father**: Described as existing from eternity past to eternity future (Psalm 90:2). 2.14 **The Holy Spirit**: Considered eternal and preexistent, as part of the Holy Trinity (Genesis 1:2). 2.15 **Wisdom**: Personified and described as existing before the creation of the world (Proverbs 8:22-31). 2.16 **Angels**: Often considered to have been created before the physical universe (Job 38:4-7). **Summary**: Humans use the phrase "I am" in a simple, self-referential way in the Bible. However, Christian theologians engage in special pleading when interpreting its usage by Jesus in the New Testament, particularly in the Gospel of John, arguing that it carries deeper theological implications and is a declaration of His divine identity.
I hate how you guys treated lantern on this one. You guys were the ones in fact going in circles when he was desperately trying to seek the answer to a question from a specific page in a book. Very unproductive discussion on your behalf.
jizya argument is easy to refute. 1. By text of ibn kathir, Allah order believer to blockade Masjidil Haram from disbeliever, and then Quraisy objected. From there, it is lazy to simply assumed that "Quraisy=believer". We need more information of who the Quraisy that rejected the blockade plan. Also other known information is Meccan pagans (from Quraisy tribe) source of income is by trading with groups that visited Kaabah, and from there we can see some disconnection, "Allah orders believer to blockade Masjidil Haram, and suddenly Quraisy disagree"? 2. In the same text of highlighted in the video, Allah ordered who to fight? Believer or Quraisy? If it ordered to the Quraisy, why would Quraisy go to fight for Allah when they can just ignore the blockade order and continue trading? And if it is for believer, they never worry about decreasing income from trade due to blockade, they just need to follow Allah order to blockade Masjidil Haram. 3. It doesn't make sense economically to put a condition of accepting Islam is because Muslims doesnt pay jizya, only disbeliever do. Unless, it is 100% sure nobody will accept Islam and rather pay jizya. But we know from the aftermath of Yarmouk, that people of Syams ready to accept Islam when Islam comes and Damascus even become the capital city. EZPZ.
Its funny rob wanted to know about NPC stuff on the arena and claimed the quran doesnt add up historically because it didn't have these things in... so i ask him what colour was the old man trousers because if you dont know the bible cant be true because thats historical not right we need to know so we can verify it being right
I am Muslim. I listen to you frequently. But today, Abbas and Ijaz really disappointed me. You sounded desperate. You avoided answering his direct question. And yes Ibne Khateer wrote exactly what Lantern mentioned. You could have said Ibne Khateer does not represent Islam. It is his opinion. Finally Imran came to your rescue and started making some sense.
Yes, i Believe that musa(as), Isa(as) and Muhammad(saw) all came with methods that may differ to one another but they all came with ways to repent and become less sinful. The methods are in the teachings and those teachings are apart of their message from GOD. Without the message, none of us would know or understand anything about ourselves being sinful. If Christians feel any regrets after they sin, why? Why feel anything if it is paid for? This is why it does not make sense. Why repent? Our process after being sinful proves that something other than believing in a sacrifice is needed. Reflection is needed. Methodology and discipline is needed. If Jesus taught right from wrong, he would've needed a law to teach and guide us from. The holy spirit can't guide anything if it never knew what you need to be guided to and away from. Law is what helps the inner self and with God as your head to navigate through the deception of one's self.
The dawah guys on this channel says there's no forgiveness of sins,read Jesus Christ own words in Matthew:26v28 i think verse is crystal clear,language losing it's meaning with muslim opologists!!
It felt like Lantern was presenting a false dilemma. He gave the option as: 1. The verse was revealed because the disbelievers were showing aggression 2. The verse according to the Tafsirs give fear of poverty as the reason The issue is that the reason why they feared poverty was because when they were in Mecca, the Muslims were completely boycotted and sanctioned by the disbelievers, many went hungry and began to starve and their livelihoods were destroyed. The Quran is reassuring them that they should not fear this type of aggression and that Allah will compensate them for this type of action by disbelievers. Im not really seeing the issue that Lantern is presenting.
@@truth9328 RU-vid deletes comments with links but the complete boycott of Muslims by the pagan Meccans is well documented. It lasted 3 years and caused a lot of hardship. As per Ibn Ishaq the terms were as, " "that no one should marry their women nor give women for them to marry; and that no one would trade with them, and when they agreed on that they wrote it in a deed."
Muslims misunderstand and misinterpret the Malchesadek story totally and think they undrrstand it,Jesus Christ was God and man,He had two natures so as human Jesus Christ had to pray as man!!
God cannot take on a human nature, since he doesn't change nature AND his nature was perfect before the incarnaton, so you can't add anything to an already perfect nature. Also, the Infinite God cannot seize to be infinite, that reeks of Paganism, what argument do you have against Hinduism and Roman/Greek Paganism? they also believe that their gods took on human forms... What was even the whole point of Monotheistic Jews fighting against Pagans installing a statue of Zeus in the Holy Temple, then? If god can take human forms since "he can do anything" why not worship Krishna or Ganesh?
Ironic really, as you xtians make ur own interpretations up anyway.... One thing you should get great credit for, is the level of creativity used to justify your own interpretations of your bible.. You guys are definitely excellent in this area...
33:30 playing devil's advocate. Although we can say that it's not TRUE forgiveness, the part about crucifying an innocent Jesus (pbuh) can be countered, because they think he is God incarnate. i.e. since God created Man with the ability to sin ( _writing this I realized this doesn't work since Christians think God didn't intend Adam a.s. to sin and their view on the sinful nature of man is different than Islam's_ ) , AND because God allowed us to be tempted to sin; God is ultimately GUILTY of our sin, ( _despite our free will, another problem ha ha_ ) therefore, since Jesus a.s. (they think) is GOD, then he is ultimately GUILTY for all of the Evil sins of mankind and everything ( _including Satan, so satan is going to heaven too.._ )evil in the world, so he IS deserving of punishment. The fact that God is BOUND by the system he created and cannot dupe it, is concerning, and not exactly All forgiving, but it does show a modicum of mercy and an intention of forgiveness... if you can somehow think that the system of sin/punishment is independent of God, and not done on a case by case basis, like some cosmic Karma machine or something.
Please don't waste time with known time wasters because it's a waste of our time too. Give them 10 mins max and thank them for waffling and move on to some new person who hasn't been on this channel before. Would rather have some intelligent person on than experts in Absurdities.
@@truth9328 I watched the video...lantern..a chinese from malaysia/singapore copied from rotten wood website. Jiyza is supposed to make muslims rich eh? How? When it's only small percentage and only male of certain age pays into it... zakat, muslims have to pay , higher than jiyza.. so again, if u r truthful, honest..explain how muslims can be millionaires by tiny minority paying into this pool? Do you pay tax to govt? Is it higher percentage or lower than jiyza? Is it mandatory or voluntary? Tithing 10percent of your income is biblical..do you pay ?
@truth9328 tithing 10percent enrich christian pastors using prosperity doctrine... see Joel Osteen, creflo.dollar, pat robertson.... there I prove to you...when was the last time you open bible? Try to read prosperity doctrine..
Neither is the "father" , we don't use that term since it is clearly problematic and causes confusion, and is gendered. ALLAH is our creator. Yours and Mine. Can you prove Why GOD has to be a father using pure logic and Zero Scripture? also how can God be a "father" if he has no gender? do you mean he sired someone, biologically? which would mean he's corpoeal and has a body? like Krishna or Brahma?
The fact that William says that many were call god's snd that's why Jesus Christ didn't say He's God is a good point because if Christians tell muslims Jesus Chrisy is God,they in fact take you to Verses such as Psalm:86 as well as Moses being a god to Pharoah so William has a point,muslims don't understand Gospel because they're blinded and by all means trying to blind others!!
FORGIVENESS OF SIN,READ MATTHEW:26V28 JESUS CHRIST HIMSELF SAYS HIS BLOOD IS FOR THE FORGIVENESS OF SINS!! GOD IN THE BEGINNING SAID "THE WAGES OF SIN IS DEATH"
Who wrote matthew these guys are generous they never test the bible for historical evidence.. the authors said your referenced verse not jesus... these so called eye witnesses they can't even name more than 10 and there's meant to be 500.. Further more jesus never teaches the original sin in your bible we just get you guys interrupt how you feel like it.
CHRIS IS CORRECT IN SAYING JESUS CHRIST WAS INNOCENT AND YET NOT INNOCENT,READ 2CORINTHIANS:5v21 verse is crystal clear what Jesus Christ became for us!! THIS IS THE GOSPEL BUT THE BIBLE ALSO STATES AS TO WHY MUSLIMS CANNOT COMPREHEND GOSPEL! READ 2CORINTHIANS:4V4
