I Just COOKED Sheikh Uthman FACE-TO-FACE For 25 Minutes STRAIGHT...

A detailed debate on Islamic theology focusing on shirk, the uniqueness of Allah's names, and Jesus' divinity from a Quranic and biblical perspective.

Key Takeaways

Muslims can commit shirk, but ignorance and intent affect the theological judgment.
Certain names and titles of Allah are unique and cannot be claimed absolutely by any creature.
Jesus' titles in the Bible are interpreted differently in Islamic theology, with debate on his divinity.
Understanding the original language context is crucial for interpreting religious texts accurately.
Respectful dialogue is essential when discussing sensitive theological issues.

What the video covers

Discussion on whether a Muslim can commit shirk (associating partners with Allah) and its theological implications.
Debate on the exclusivity of Allah's names and titles, such as al-'Alim and al-Rahman, and if creatures can share these titles.
Clarification on the difference between sharing attributes of Allah and claiming His unique divine titles.
Examination of the meaning of shirk and its unforgivable nature according to Islamic scripture.
Analysis of Jesus' claim to be 'the first and the last' and whether this implies divinity in Islamic and biblical contexts.
Dispute over the interpretation of divine titles in Arabic versus Greek and Hebrew languages.
Discussion on the use of terms like 'most loving' in qualified versus absolute senses.
Addressing insults and misunderstandings during the debate, emphasizing the importance of respectful discourse.
Comparison of Quranic and biblical language and the challenges in translating theological concepts.
Final remarks on the nuances of Islamic theology and the boundaries of correct belief.

Chapters

Can a Muslim commit shirk according to the video?

Yes, the video explains that a Muslim can commit shirk, but factors like ignorance and intent influence whether they remain Muslim or are considered disbelievers.

Are Allah's names and titles exclusive to Him?

The video clarifies that some names and titles, such as al-'Alim, are unique to Allah and cannot be claimed absolutely by any creature, while others can be used in a qualified sense.

Does Jesus claiming to be 'the first and the last' imply divinity?

The video debates this point, highlighting differences in interpretation between Islamic and biblical contexts, with some arguing it implies divinity and others emphasizing linguistic and theological nuances.

Full Transcript — Download SRT & Markdown

Speaker A

You are ignorant of what we are caught you right now. Can you be a Muslim and commit shirk?

Speaker A

Yes, you can. You can. Let me sit down. Sit down. Sit down. Somebody, somebody who does the—what about that?

Speaker A

This is why I didn't want to do this. Go ahead. What is it? What is it?

Speaker A

It's okay, man. You can—you can be a Muslim and commit shirk. You can associate partners with Allah.

Speaker A

You are done with your measuring tools. Put them away. Jesus is an almighty God himself, according to the Bible.

Speaker A

All right. So, um, I kind of want to take a little bit of a different angle. I want to do this in a way that relates to you and your theology. The Quran has names and titles of Allah that you would

Speaker A

agree only apply to Him. No creature, no angel, no prophet can claim these titles, or else it'll be what is called shirk or associating a partner with Him. Just quickly, you agree with that?

Speaker A

That is incorrect. It's incorrect. It's incorrect. So, so just because we do want to get into Islamic API because that's off the prompt.

Speaker A

No, it's not. It's tying into the point, which is—do you want me to explain that point then because you're incorrect on it?

Speaker A

So, you're saying creatures can actually share in the names and titles of Allah? Can I respond?

Speaker A

Please. It's a yes or no, 'cause I—I'm not going to—yes or no. If you're going to ask a question, I'm going to respond.

Speaker A

It sounds like a line of logic that he's trying to run by. So, if you're asking for a yes or no, you can do a yes and I have a clarifier. And then if you want to get through your thought on the

Speaker A

line of logic and then offer the clarifier. Yeah. Yes. I have a clarifier, which is that there are certain names that are only for Allah subhanahu wa ta'ala, like al-'Alim, that cannot be used for any of the creation, but there are like which can be used for

Speaker A

creation. Allah is wudoo, He's loving. That doesn't mean that the creation are not loving. Of course, the characteristics of Allah are unique to Him, but there are some that humanity does share in as well. Is living—we are all living, but the way

Speaker A

Allah is living is unique to Him. So your base point was incorrect, and I hope that clarification helps. It's not because I didn't ask about whether or not we share in His attributes like, "Oh, I'm merciful, Allah's

Speaker A

merciful, so yeah, we're both merciful." I didn't ask that. So, for example, can someone be called 'Alim' again? For 'Alim'—if you put the part—can I—can I speak? Looks like—okay, I got you, I got you. Seem like you're about to speak, so like

Speaker A

Allah subhanahu wa ta'ala is al-'Alim. That is unique to Him. Nobody can be called that, right? But even the indefinite can be used with certain characteristics, for example, aloud, the most loving. But the way that it applies to Allah is unique to Him. But

Speaker A

as you earlier said that those are only for Him, that is incorrect. Some are shared. Not just that, they are merciful, very merciful, but to the level of Rahman? No. Okay, so I—I'm not asking if we can be

Speaker A

merciful similar to how Allah is, He's just more merciful than us. I'm asking about His specific titles. So He's called al-Rahman, al-Rahim, al-Wadud, meaning the most loving. Can any creature share these titles? I'm not saying, "Oh, Allah's loving, I'm also loving." I'm—can I be

Speaker A

called the most loving? Can I be called the most merciful, the living one, which is one of His names? Can I be called any of these things? Can any prophet claim these things? Any angel? There's your point. Okay. Again, certain ones, no.

Speaker A

And that's why you have to understand the nuance here because you don't understand, right? Certain ones, no.

Speaker A

Certain ones, yes, you can be the loving, the most loving, the most loving, of course, amongst a—amongst a—amongst, go for it. Yeah. Amongst, for example, if I said these are all my kids but this one, he's the most loving of them, right?

Speaker A

That can be in that context. Notice—let me—let me—there you go. Right now the clarification here is yes, even can be used with certain things of the creation, but Allah is unique. That is His level is unique to Him. But

Speaker A

to answer your question, yes, even the infinite of al can be used. Okay, so what you just did is you qualified. You said the most loving of my children. I didn't ask that. I'm not asking can someone use these terms in

Speaker A

qualification of certain things. I mean in general outright absolute. Can someone claim themselves to be in general the most loving, al-Wadud? Yes or no?

Speaker A

Once again, I'm going to—yes or no. I'm sorry. You know, I'm—guess I would say yes and or no and it—please do not interrupt. I won't. Just get—just answer straight away.

Speaker A

Again, that's why he's trying to run the line of logic because that's where we're running into—uh, that's how he's trying to get to his point.

Speaker A

I get that. So, yes, and or no and yes and. So when we're talking about, for example, somebody being very loving, are you calling me mushrik here?

Speaker A

Yeah.

Speaker A

Nobody gave you that authority. Thanks a lot. You're not—you're not—wait, not a Muslim. You're not a—you don't know anything about Islam. You're not a shaykh.

Speaker A

Out of the meta. Let's get back to it. Thank you. So, please refrain from calling me a mushrik 'cause that's an insult.

Speaker A

That's a disbelief. How's that an insult? I don't know what that word just means. He's a disbeliever. That's all. He just called me a disbeliever in Islam.

Speaker A

That is definitely an insult. Thank you so much. We don't need your—keep it to yourself. You don't know the— the wabbit of—I do. You're not a Muslim anymore. Let's get back to the point so that we don't

Speaker A

escalate this any further. He said he knows that the—what are they? You just commit—

Speaker A

What are they? You commit what are the—you can't commit. You do not know.

Speaker A

You are ignorant of—we are caught you right now. Can you be a Muslim and commit—

Speaker A

Yes, you can. You can. Let me sit down. Sit down. Sit down. Somebody, somebody who does—what about that?

Speaker A

This is why I didn't want to do this. Go ahead. What is it? What is it? Okay, man? You can—you can be a Muslim and commit shirk. You can associate partners with Allah.

Speaker A

Whenever the two of you are done with your measuring tools, we put them away.

Speaker A

I guarantee you I'm ready to hear his answer. It's not going to get us anywhere. We have a prompt. We have a debate. I'd love to get back.

Speaker A

He's already gone off the prompt, but no, I didn't. I'm right here. Now, once again, I'm not struggling at all. Your ignorance when you said you're a shaykh and you said I'm doing shirk and I'm a mushrik, not understanding what even is.

Speaker A

You don't even know what the word means. If a Muslim does, but he's ignorant of it, he's forced by it. There are many that he would still remain a Muslim. These are called which you are ignorant. You do by your

Speaker A

own free will. You are ignorant of. That's why I said even if a Muslim does, we don't say he's kafir. We don't choose mushrik until those safeguards are put into place, which you are absolutely jahil of. So you do not know. You're not a

Speaker A

shaykh. You do not know Islam. Now let me respond to that. Can I respond to that?

Speaker A

I would rather get out of the personal insults preferably and get back. Yeah. This is all religious. This is all—this is all religious.

Speaker A

Okay. But you were—it was all based off of some kind of insult that interrupted when he was trying to answer the yes and. Okay. So I would love to get back to the original prompt if you gentlemen

Speaker A

don't mind because this personal insult stuff can go offscreen somewhere else. Can I—so, can I reiterate then the question? Do you need the question?

Speaker A

Really? I already answered it, so I don't know why we're redoing it over and over again.

Speaker A

Well, you were—you were saying yes and and then he said something. Well, I can finish with yes and no.

Speaker A

And then you were on an insult. Let me—let me re—let me reiterate this the point.

Speaker A

Recked the question. It had to do with the, um, with the titles of Allah. And he's saying—and so this is why I said this.

Speaker A

This isn't a personal insult. If you, according to Islam, attribute the names and attributes and titles of Allah to any of His creatures, then you have committed shirk. You have associated a partner with Him and you—

Speaker A

I'm the first and last of my parents. No. In a general absolute sense when they say I am the first and the last.

Speaker A

Would that be sherk? Would that be associating partner? Can anyone claim to be to do this be this and it not be blasphemy? Yes or no? And then explain.

Speaker A

That's a good point. So he made a point earlier and then he went to a yes or no.

Speaker A

No, no, he's asking the question. No, hold on. He qualified to There was a condition built into asking the question. I'll allow it. The question is a yes or no, right? So, you can offer a qualifier for it, but he asked the

Speaker A

question right there at the tail end. That's what I'm looking for. In the Arabic context, being used without any qualification can only be used for Allah.

Speaker A

Now, having said that, I will address first thing. You said the Quran says that and you have not given us a verse.

Speaker A

You're lying on the Quran. Secondly, you're go ahead. It's in chapter four where Allah says that he can't that he will not forgive Sherik and if you don't and if you don't forgive and he doesn't forgive Shik you're not a Muslim he

Speaker A

doesn't forgive you earlier he said this isn't even on the prophet anymore you guys are giving me a run for my money now earlier he said now you're not on the prophet if you use any of the names

Speaker A

of Allah like and so on for anybody else the Quran says you're mushik now he doesn't have a verse for that I just did no no you did not that's just saying that is not saying if you give one of

Speaker A

the names which are not unique to Allah to others in Allah's creation that is not I explained that already the prophetam is called in the Quran is he called he can be called as well in certain context again you're jumping off but you do not

Speaker A

have a verse show me the verse from the Quran that you said that if you take any of those names and give them to the creation it is shipped yes okay I don't show me the verse that that does not say that verse does not

Speaker A

say that brother you ask me a question that verse does not say that okay that's cool and Oh, let me You did ask him a question. Go ahead. I appreciate it.

Speaker A

So, the verse in chapter 4, ladies and gentlemen, says that there's one sin. There's one sin that Allah does not forgive and that is sherk. For those who do not know what sherk is, like I guess man doesn't. Sherk is when you associate

Speaker A

a partner with Allah. What does that mean y'all? That means when you equate someone with Allah. When you give names and titles uh that are attributed to Allah uniquely to Allah to a creature to anyone other than Allah in his lordship

Speaker A

in his attributes in his names you are associating a partner which is i.e. sherk. So when he says hey guys there's one sin that I will not forgive that is sherk. When you associate a partner with me naming someone a creature attributing

Speaker A

them names or qualities or attributes that belong only to Allah to a creature is sherk which takes you out of Islam.

Speaker A

Allah won't forgive you and you did that today. You might as well come to Christ.

Speaker A

Now, let me land this, too. Okay, I'm getting back to the point. Hold on. Let me hold on. Hold on. Hold on. Hold on.

Speaker A

Yeah. Let me finish my thought. So, in in in all of this, like you just said, you just said for example that Allah being identified as the first and the last, this is something unique to him.

Speaker A

No one can be attributed this name and title. So now when we go to the Bible and Jesus identifies himself, he says, "I am the first and the last, the beginning and the end, the alpha and omega, specifically first and the last."

Speaker A

Can you agree that by Islamic standards that when Jesus claims to be the first and the last that he's claiming to be God Almighty?

Speaker A

Are you done? Yes. No. Please expound. No. And now I will expound. First off, what's the verse in chapter 4?

Speaker A

48. Thank you. 48. Oh, you didn't know it, huh? I got you. Indeed, Allah subhanaa tala does not forgive association with him but he forgives that which is less than that. Now earlier what he's caught in the lie of is he says the Quran says

Speaker A

that if you take any of the names of Allah and give it to the creation then that is in the Quran you're a mushik.

Speaker A

The verse does not state that he lied. First off he's interrupting now. You interrupt.

Speaker A

No I did not. I'm going to speak. Okay. somebody like no that is a lie right secondly you call me a mushik without you understanding the you're absolutely ignorant of it and even here you're ignorant of it cuz

Speaker A

there are that are that can be used for the creation and any book of beginning book of if you picked up you would have known that but there are those that are unique to Allah and the way it befits

Speaker A

Allah is unique to Allah so for example Allah has a yad and if we were to say Oh, you have a yud. That doesn't make me a mushri. Allah's yud is unique to him.

Speaker A

So that does not make me a mushri. You have a hand. Allah has a hand. Saying that those two exist does not make me a mushri. You're absolutely ignorant of Now let me no let me let me finish your

Speaker A

time. Now when you go to the alpha and omega that is not and I said first and last, not alpha and omega. That's what I'm focusing on.

Speaker A

Okay. Let's be mindful. Let's be mindful. Let him let him finish through his thought.

Speaker A

Do you want a pen? You can write down some notes. That's okay. So So once again, when you when you take something that is in the Arabic language and you try to associate with something else, for example, alpha and omega in

Speaker A

the Greek alphabet is the first and last of the alphabet. In other instances, you can say somebody's the first and the last. If I was to say that Michael Jordan is the alpha and omega of basketball, he is the first and last of

Speaker A

basketball. That is not the same as saying and in the Arabic language. So for you to say that because of the Arabic and that means nobody but Jesus could be called God by being called that is equating apples and oranges.

Speaker A

Secondly, I have not made the point of the Bible saying that alpha and omega are first and last. My point that he still hasn't addressed the original points was the verses in the Bible that clearly shows that Jesus is not God

Speaker A

because he calls out to a God even postresurrection. Okay. So Shake Uman I need you to for the sake of this argument brother please track what I'm asking you man. I'm not asking you about in general uh I'm sorry

Speaker A

with uh qualifications. I actually made it clear so that you wouldn't waste our time talking about, well, if I said Michael Jordan is the first and the last in basketball, that's a qualification.

Speaker A

Whenever you say in this or of that, you're qualifying it. I'm specifically talking about unqualified, which you said only God can be identified unqualified as the first and the last.

Speaker A

So, yes or no on this so I can build my point. When Jesus says, can I can I say yes or no and then talking?

Speaker A

Yes, I need a yes or no on this cuz I'm building my point on this. Asking the question. Yes. When Jesus says, "I am the first and the last," does he qualify it? Yes or no?

Speaker A

Can you give me the verse? Revelation 22:3. He says, I'll read it for you. He says, "I am the first and the last, the alpha and the omega, the beginning and the end." Does he qualify when he says, "I am the first and the

Speaker A

last." Revelation 22. What? He just he just read it to you. I just I'd like to see it from my own Bible.

Speaker A

Okay. Verse 13. You got the You go open all of them. Revelations 22. Verse 13.

Speaker A

13. Okay. I am the alpha and the omega, the beginning and the end, the first and the last.

Speaker A

Does he qualify first and last? Yes or no? He does not. Thank you. All right. So, he doesn't qualify. I have remember he's running the line of logic.

Speaker A

These are yes or nos, but that means you got to do yes or no.

Speaker A

Absolutely. Absolutely. So, the only I asked for a yes or no to build this point and I'm going to give it over to you. Okay. So, remember you said when I asked you can anyone claim to be the

Speaker A

first and the last unqualified and it's not a claim of being God. Can anyone claim that unqualified? You said no. That belongs to Allah alone, God alone. So Jesus here, as you just admitted, unqualified, claims to be the

Speaker A

first and the last. So by your own admission, can you admit that even by Islamic standards, Jesus claims to be God? Absolutely not.

Speaker A

I mean, you can laugh track all you want, but that's okay. Now, once again, you're taking something that is in one language and equating with a different language, whether you're saying qualified or not. If if I tell my wife,

Speaker A

you are the first and the last, doesn't mean that she's God. That shows my that shows my love for her. Absolutely.

Speaker A

You're the first and the last. So for me, she is no problem with that.

Speaker A

Understanding Greek context, understanding that the clarification here of alpha and omega here in the verse that you quoted, that's why I wanted to bring the verse up myself as well, shows that this is not what we would consider and in the Quranic

Speaker A

context. For example, let me let me finish. If you're trying to take something from an Islamic concept and try to prove the Bible by it, that's just not going to work. In Islam, for example, if you say God has a son, that

Speaker A

by itself would be rejected in the Bible. Obviously, that's used all the time. And if in Islam somebody says, for example, uh God like like you you were talking about God came in the form of a man, that would be by itself. So, you

Speaker A

cannot take and from the Quranic aspect and try to put it with the biblical aspect. The Bible has many things that would not work with that concept to begin with. For example, many gods being referenced. For example, gods being

Speaker A

judges. For example, many people being sons of God. None of that would work. So if you were to show me in Islamic context Ab.

Speaker A

But seeing the first and the last in a biblical context is not the same.

Speaker A

So those two do not match. And my answer is clear to you now. No, it's not. So watch this. When you say you said that the first and the last the first and last in Islam in the Quran

Speaker A

is different from the first and last in the Bible because that's why can you tell me okay listen I'm going to give you a chance brother you got all the time in the world can you tell us very intricately with verses and

Speaker A

references what is the difference when Allah claims to be the first and the last in the Quran and when Jesus claims to be the first and last in the Bible what's the difference absolutely first thing I didn't say just

Speaker A

why so don't put words in my mouth Thank you so much. Stay out of my mouth. Now, secondly, secondly, yeah. Secondly, we're talking about two absolutely different languages with two um Please don't interrupt me.

Speaker A

He's getting there. So, we're talking about two absolutely different languages that use language differently. So, you cannot take something from one language and bring it into another language. For example, the word son, as you have seen in the Bible,

Speaker A

it has been used for other than even Jesus, right? Sons of God. That could never work in the Quran. So if I was to say, hey, because in Islam, Allah has no son. Son is not used. So it means the

Speaker A

same thing. Can I sorry you know it does not mean the same thing because here obviously because it's you are using an Islamic context into the Bible just like the Bible's language would not work in the Quran. You cannot take the

Speaker A

Arabic of the Quran and try to bring it in the Bible. Those are two different things. In Hebrew, in Greek certain terms are used in certain ways for other than God, other than even the pious people and so on that would not be in

Speaker A

Islam. So when in the Quran it says Allah has no sons. If you were to say, "Oh, if you bring that in the Bible, would that mean that these are not sons?" Well, as you know in the Old

Speaker A

Testament and even in the New Testament, son is used as a term of endearment.

Speaker A

That's why they're sons of God, whether they're angels or pious, that would not work in the Arabic language, but it did in Hebrew and in in in Greek and so on.

Speaker A

So I do not say that the and of the Quran can be used in the Bible. They're two different languages that do not correlate.

Speaker A

Okay. So, that is not just why. Okay. But yes, it is. It's because that's why what you look with mine. I'm going to break I'm going to break down what you just did. You just said it's different languages. That's why it's

Speaker A

different. That's not Hold Hold on. Hold on. Hold on. Hold on. I'm going to let you speak.

Speaker A

Yeah. Thank you. I let you get it all out. So, I'm about to break this down to you in very very simple terms. I'm going to give you examples since you love to use examples. Allah says he does not

Speaker A

begget or is he or or is begotten. When he says he does not begget, but when Jesus says that God for forgotten so love the world that he sent his only begotten son or in in Hebrews chapter 1

Speaker A

where it says about Jesus today you are today I've become a father to you. Today I have begotten you. Let me just ask you yes or no cuz I'm building my point.

Speaker A

When it says today I have begotten you. Can that language be used in the Quran?

Speaker A

Yes or no? It is a that's a easy yes or no. No problem. But I'm going to clarify that. Right. No. Is it a yes or no?

Speaker A

Can it or can it not? It cannot. Thank you. And I will No. No. No. I can I cannot be told you can't clarify your point.

Speaker A

Hold on. He's finishing the line of logic. Let's finish it. It's a line of logic.

Speaker A

These are how line of logics work. It's a yes or no. I see. I understand it. I know where I know what he's doing right now in terms of trying to get that.

Speaker A

See, even gets it. All right. So that that language cannot be used in the Quran. But wait, I thought it's different. It's a different language. So what about begotten in Arabic? Wouldn't that work? But no, he rejects it. He rejects all these terms.

Speaker A

He rejects sunship in in any sense. He rejects being begotten in any way, shape, or form. He rejects these terms.

Speaker A

It doesn't matter what language you use. If I say in Spanish that Allah is begotten. Guess what? I'm a mushriick.

Speaker A

I'm a disbeliever. Right? So according to you, when you say, "Oh, the language is different, so therefore it doesn't mean the same." According to what? When I say Allah and I say deals, do that mean the same thing? And let's do it.

Speaker A

And let's do this. I'm going to let you do your response and then we're going to maneuver into some final statements. So then we'll go to you and then you. But yeah, I want you to have one more

Speaker A

response to that and then you build your your final into that. Yeah. Absolutely not. If you were to say Allah and theos, it would not be the same thing. Even though sometimes the word theos is used for translation. Even the

Speaker A

word god does not befit Allah because God has gender. For example, goddesses and Allah is unique to that. And I'm going to speak now. I never interrupted.

Speaker A

I have not. Now once again, so the childish attitude here is is pathetic where you would say that just because one word has the same meaning in another language, does that mean every word in that language has the same meaning?

Speaker A

Absolutely not. So for example, when we talk about sons of God in the Bible, there are references where it's not for the begotten. And that is something that according to Christians and Jews whether you go to Rashi or others is a reference

Speaker A

to just people for piety or angels not literal sons. So here that son would be different in use than begotten son. Here you could say that these were pious people that were close. For example even in the Arabic language wed is used for

Speaker A

endearment. For example, if I was to say w come speak to me in endearment that is used and that would mean that you are wrong. Your equation is wrong. Now can I can I finish? Can I can I finish?

Speaker A

I just ask for clar what does mean son? Oh yeah. And it's a term of endearment not of necessarily of physical relation. So even if I told you oh child come here my son I don't mean that I literally had

Speaker A

intercourse with your mother. What I mean is a term of endearment. In that sense, yes, you could use it.

Speaker A

But in the sense of actual physical children of God, that would not work. So equating one aspect of one language to another is childish. It's a trick. Now if we go to the word dos or God, those words are only represented when somebody

Speaker A

doesn't understand the concept of Allah because the word God does not equate to Allah. God can be used for other than Allah. While the word Allah is unique to Allah. God has gender could be goddess.

Speaker A

So your theos example is also wrong. And in the end, can I should I finish or should I let him?

Speaker A

Uh we'll let him do a final and then Yeah. Uh so build it into your final cuz I know you have a response to that. Take your time with it. I know I I see where you're going. I know what you want to

Speaker A

do. Go ahead. Okay. So shake, you completely undermined your entire rebuttal when you just admitted that son in of endearment or wid in Arabic, the word for son in English can be used I guess in as a term

Speaker A

of endearment. It can still work in the Arabic because it means that in in a in a particular context that's how it defines. So what you just showed me is that words even in different languages can still work in the Quran, in the

Speaker A

Bible, in other different uh whatever walk you're coming from. So when you say when the when the and by the way, this will be also it's also interesting.

Speaker A

Anybody can look this up. Look up Revelation 22:13 in an Arabic Bible. Look up Revelation 1:1 17 in an Arabic Bible. It says the same thing, the same name, the same uh titles that is said in the Quran. And so when you look this up,

Speaker A

his whole excuse of, "Well, the languages are different doesn't even work." We were just having fun with that. So by your own admission, let me just work this off to my closing. By your own admission, the unqualified titles of Allah cannot be applied to

Speaker A

anyone else. When it's unqualified for Allah, like the first and the last, only God can have those titles. These are your words, not mine. I agree with you though. And so when Jesus says, "I am the first and the last unqualified,"

Speaker A

that demonstrates even by your own standards that Jesus is claiming to be God Almighty. And what you did was is when you saw the problem, you still said no.

Speaker A

You said no because you couldn't admit that even in the Bible, Jesus claims to be God. And your prompt is over.

Speaker A

Once again and your final statement the the concept that you brought of sun also clearly indicates that languages do not go over equation. This is why I said son as the sins of begotten would not work with the Arabic language. But son

Speaker A

in the sense of endearment would. So that means first and last has to be understood in the same manner. When you say first and last in a different language it works different than a in the Arabic language. Even in that

Speaker A

context you were wrong. Secondly, when you said the Arabic Bible, the childish thing here is the fact that the Bible wasn't written in Arabic. It was written KA Greek. So all your actual understanding of the words have to come

Speaker A

from Ket Greek, not from Arabic. Those are translations and they wildly vary because the Arabic Quran is the original language of the Quran and not of the Bible. So Quranic Arabic cannot be understood to understand biblical theological concepts that would be in

Speaker A

Greek. And you know that but you brought that up to show your ignorance. Last thing I will say on this, you did not address any of the points from the prompt that all the verses that I had mentioned, he didn't address any of

Speaker A

them. He just ran on this first and the last point which according that's why I brought up the verse itself cuz alpha and omega the the qualifiers that are used in there are used for other than God. First and last are used yes in the

Speaker A

Greek language alpha and omega can be used for other than God. You can Google that. Show the Show the verse. I'm sorry. Show the verse.

Speaker A

Shake hands, gentlemen. This was beautiful.

Topics:Islamic theologyshirkAllah namesJesus divinityQuranic interpretationbiblical titlesIslam and Christianity debateGodLogic Apologeticsreligious debateIslamic attributes of God

Get More with the SozAI App

Transcribe recordings, audio files, and YouTube videos — with AI summaries, speaker detection, and unlimited transcriptions.

App Store Google Play

Or transcribe another YouTube video here →

Free tools: TXT to SRT · SRT Validator · Merge SRT · Subtitle to Text · All tools