• This article delves into the outcomes of the recent debate between Mohammed Hijab and William Lane Craig.
• It further explores public reactions and critiques from Christian apologists.
On the memorable evening of Thursday, September 21st, a highly anticipated and intense debate unfolded on YouTube. Our brother— the unapologetically Muslim, bold and formidable Mohammed Hijab, faced off against the distinguished and refined Christian, Dr William Lane Craig.
To be candid, I was utterly disappointed. Given Dr Craig’s reputable name and his two PhDs, I expected much more from him. He undeniably carries himself with a certain gentlemanly grace, particularly when comparing him to the pit-bull approach of career Islamophobes such as David Wood, whose debate review we will examine in the latter portion of this article. I watched this review so that you, my dear readers, would not have to endure the same assault on your senses that I did.
Craig’s opening remarks began with the predictable pattern now adopted by most Christian apologists. Rather than engaging with the challenge of explaining how three distinct persons constitute one God, they avoid the issue altogether, simply stating it as fact and swiftly pivoting to criticise Tawhid, presenting it as an incomprehensible or overly complex doctrine (ironically). Moreover, having the audacity to present the narrative “If we have this problem” so do you (more of this later in shaa Allah).
Brother Hijab deftly sidesteps this simplistic tactic by affirming that all Muslims, regardless of school of thought—whether Athari, Mu’tazila, Ash’ari or others—agree on the fundamental belief in the Oneness of Allah swt. This approach is strategic, shifting the burden back to the Christian interlocutor, who is now forced to defend a concept that is either patently contradictory or, at the very least, exceedingly perplexing.
For Muslims, it is nonsensical to fall into the trap of engaging in discussions on the nuances of various schools of aqida, thus playing directly into the hands of the Christian side and missing the opportunity to deconstruct the inherent contradictions of Trinitarian doctrine.
Brother Hijab is entirely justified in refusing for the topic to be diverted. The agreed topic was the Trinity, not a comparative debate between the Trinity and Tawhid.
Craig uses Cerberus (the 3 Dog heads in Greek Mythology) to prove the validity of Christianity
“This is your model of the trinity. I think this could be debunked by children with all due respect.” says Hijab whilst challenging Craig’s stance on partiality. Hijab’s brilliant use of the figurine in his hand really allowed his audience to picture exactly what we are dealing with here.
Who is responsible for the creation of the universe?
Craig replies with: “Causal overdetermination is not incoherent Mr Hijab.” He proceeds to present an analogy of a, “candle being lit by two simultaneous matches, each of which is sufficient to illuminate a candle,” he says. However, this argument completely contradicts Craig’s own discombobulating stance on Trinitarianism. He addresses the classical doctrine of the Trinity and says, “The operation of the Trinity towards the external world is undivided and therefore taken by all 3 persons at once, I don’t agree with that in any case.” He continues, “I think it’s very plausible that the three persons act in concert with one another in relation to the creation of the Universe.”
If we, for arguments sake, agree with his postulation that the Universe was indeed created by three entities who are in agreement with one another but not unified on Earth (as is Craig heretical position) then why does the unification occur at different times? And, if the candle would be lit with or without the second person in the analogy, why would God have an entity to accompany him in the process of creation? Was it for companionship? What was the purpose? God is not in need of anything from anyone.
Craig believes that humanity needs Jesus’ atoning death for salvation
Why would humans require anything from another, including mercy and salvation, if God is truly all-powerful and the only one we rely on? While Craig concurs with the Qur’anic assertion that God neither begets nor is begotten, he unfortunately persists in his belief in the Trinity.
Furthermore, if this is the crème de la crème of what the Christians can present, the Christians are in serious trouble.
There are several passages in the Bible that indicate Jesus (AS’s) dependence on God, especially in his human nature. This is in stark contradiction to the mainstream narrative of Trinitarianism. Here are a few key verses:
John 5:30:
“By myself I can do nothing; I judge only as I hear, and my judgment is just, for I seek not to please myself but him who sent me."
John 14:28:
“You heard me say, ‘I am going away, and I am coming back to you.’ If you loved me, you would be glad that I am going to the Father, for the Father is greater than I."
Luke 6:12:
“One of those days Jesus went out to a mountainside to pray, and spent the night praying to God."
Matthew 26:39 (In the Garden of Gethsemane):
“Going a little farther, he fell with his face to the ground and prayed, ‘My Father, if it is possible, may this cup be taken from me. Yet not as I will, but as you will.”
These verses reveal Jesus’ submission to God’s will, showing his reliance on God’s plan and power. Furthermore, these passages illustrate that in his human nature, Jesus showed dependence on God for guidance, strength, and fulfillment of his mission.
Reviewing The Career Islamophobes’ Review of the Debate
The timbre of the conversation is now about to take a different turn. We are, after all, about to discuss grown men who feed their families by desecrating the Qur’an, swallowing its pages, and are notorious for their deceit and Islamophobic fear-mongering gibberish.
David Wood
Shortly after the debate, the clowns in question chose to provide their own commentary on the event.
David wood began the live stream, jesting with his panel member, Cameron Bertuzzi, “You seem worse than the pedo dawah guys.”
“Islam can’t be mentioned without bringing up sexual perversion” says David wood.
Let’s dissect this comment in further detail:
Regarding the comment about the “dawah guys”, The majority of pedophiles in the UK are white. The majority of white people in the UK are either Christian or Atheists. Furthermore, we won’t get into the online gutter antics of Christian Prince.
In relation to Tawheed, David Wood argued on the live stream that simplicity does not equate to truth. Let’s examine this further:
Does this imply that one must possess a PhD to truly understand who God is? In William Lane Craig’s case, two PhDs—yet, ironically, he still seems uncertain about God’s nature. Does this also suggest that a child is incapable of knowing who God is?
A considerable portion of the stream focused on Craig’s use of the “dog head” analogy, with all four panelists contributing their thoughts on how it served as a springboard for further discussion. But one must wonder— are Christians truly comfortable with the idea that a three-headed dog is being used as a foundation to explain the nature of God (even as a spring board). Christians allow Jesus to be mocked and now this?
Another point raised in the reaction stream as well as the debate was that Muslims face the same issue with Tawheed as Christians do with the Trinity. Craig made this assertion based on the various attributes of Allah (swt). This argument is fundamentally flawed and nonsensical; having different attributes does not imply the existence of separate entities.
APus
It seems that Christian Islamophobes rely on ex-Muslim atheists to defend their cause!
In addition, Apus is a genocide supporter, having recently visited Israel with David Wood.
A poll was taken on a Christian channel regarding who was the victor of the debate. Here were the results:
Reactions to the debate
As a final thought, before we become entangled in the back-and-forth of Muslim-Christian apologetics, I want to stress that faith is a matter of profound importance. If you are a Christian who has happened to stumble across this article, I urge you to focus on the arguments presented, not on the big YouTube personalities or entertainment value. What truly matters is your understanding of who God is, for what happens to us after death is a matter of the utmost seriousness. May Allah keep us all on the sirat ul Mustaqeem—-Ameen.
