Tahir Nasser and his little brother vs. David Wood and Apostate Prophet-November-2024

Intro
In the below, I review this debate. Check out my video on this too.

—-It is interesting here how Umar didn’t quote the “Marham-i-Eisa” which was invented by MGA.

—-The name Yuz Asaf was never uttered. What about the Gospel of Barnabas?

—-Umar argued that the Torah said (Deuteronomy-21) that anyone hung from a tree is accursed, this means that Ahmadi’s see Eisa (As) as accursed (naozobillah), since Ahmadi’s allege that Eisa (as) was hung on a cross (tree).

—-at 2:08:49, Tahir Nasser says that Adam (as) was also born of a virgin. Hain? The clip is on twitter and tiktok. See 3:59 (3:60 in the Qadiani Quran).

—Did MGA ever mention the Bhavishya Purana ?

Qadiani writers had also tried to explore the Sanskrit sources to support this myth. They quote an extract from the Bhavishya Maha Purana by Sutta. It may be stated here that the Puranas are eighteen in number. They are purely mythical in nature and are characterized as popular
sectarian compilation of mythology, philosophy, history and law. The earliest Purana was probably compiled around 4th Century A.D. Bhavishya Purana was printed for the first time in Bombay in 1910 under the order of Maharaja Partap Singh of Kashmir.

_____________________________________________________________________________________________
—At 12:44, Apostate Prophet starts the debate. Apostate Prophet gives the Christian position on the Crucifixtion, i.e., Jesus was sentenced to death, was flogged and then nailed to a cross and died. He then explains how Muslims don’t agree, via the substitution theory, he mentions the Ismaili Shia position and the Jesus in India theory. Apostate Prophet quotes the Bible and asserts that Jesus (as) told everyone around him that he was going to be nailed to a cross. He quotes non-biblical sources which seem to be confirm the same. He called it a fact, Jesus (as) being killed via crucifixtion.

—At 21:49, David Wood begins asking about the Quranic position. He goes to Substitution theory vs. Swoon theory. Wood calls Allah a deceiver for tricking people. Wood quoted 61:14 (61:15 in the Qadiani Quran) of the Quran and is confused that “uppermost” means herein. He then quotes 7:157 (7:158 in the Qadiani Quran) and 5:47 (5:48 in the Qadiani Quran). Wood claims that the Ahmadi viewpoint makes Allah look incompetent.

—At 34:40, Tahir Nasser begins with his opening remarks. Occam’s razor? Tahir Nasser is an idiot, he is explaining why people make decisions. Nasser then quotes 4:157 (4:158 in the Qadiani Quran) and alleges that the Quran refutes the Substitution theory. Nasser asserts that crucified means killed by crucifixtion, not simply hung on the cross. Nasser argues that the Quran proves that Eisa (as) was put on the cross and survived the crucifixtion attempt. Nasser argues that there are only 2 possible hypotheses herein, either Eisa (as) died on the cross or he survived. Resurrection hypothesis vs. Survival hypothesis.

–at 42:51, Umar Nasser begins. He compares quotes in the Bible/Torah to this graph of Resurrection hypothesis vs. Survival hypothesis. Umar quotes Deuteronomy-21 (Torah), wherein it is stated that anyone hung from a tree is accursed, and concludes that this supports the Ahmadiyya via, Survival hypothesis. Umar quotes the Torah and the sign of Jonah in the chapter entitled, Jonah. Umar concluded that this also supports the Ahmadiyya via, Survival hypothesis. Umar quotes Matthew 10 and 15 and alleges Eisa (as) went to look for the lost sheep. Umar quotes Matthew 26 and alleges that Eisa (as) didn’t want this cup. Umar concluded that this also supports the Ahmadiyya via, Survival hypothesis. Umar then quotes Matthew 27 and alleges that Pilate’s wife had a dream about Eisa (as) being an innocent man. Umar concluded that this also supports the Ahmadiyya via, Survival hypothesis. Umar then quotes Mark-15 and alleges that when Eisa (as) was on the cross he cried out “‘Eli, eli, lema, sebachthani”. Umar concluded that this also supports the Ahmadiyya via, Survival hypothesis. Umar then quotes John 19 and alleges that Eisa (as) legs weren’t broken. Umar concluded that this also supports the Ahmadiyya via, Survival hypothesis. Umar quotes John 19 again and says that Eisa (as) was stabbed and blood and water gushed out. Umar concluded that this also supports the Ahmadiyya via, Survival hypothesis. Umar quotes John 10 again and alleges that Eisa (as) survived and was given aloes and myrrh. It is interesting here how Umar didn’t quote the “Marham-i-Eisa” which was invented by MGA. Umar then quotes Luke 24 and alleges that since the disciples saw Eisa (as) after he died, and having a body, Eisa (as) must have miraculously been cured.

–at 54:47, Tahir Nasser adds some brief notes and alleges that there is a 1st Century Maunscript. The Bhavishya Purana is quoted by Tahir, however, this was refuted by Wood, this is not an accurate reference, it’s been tampered with (see the case of Holger Kersten). Further, the Bhavishya Purana exists in many inconsistent versions, wherein the content as well as their subdivisions vary, and five major versions are known. Some manuscripts have four Parvam (parts), some two, others don’t have any parts. The text as it exists today is a composite of material ranging from medieval era to the modern era.

—At 56:00, Apostate starts. He argues that there is scholarly consensus that Jesus (as) was killed via crucifixtion. Apostate alleges that Islam adopted Gnostic views on Eisa (as) and the crucifixtion.

—At 1:02:00, Wood starts. Wood mentions Tahir’s explanation that a rational explanation is always better than a miraculous one. Wood accuses Tahir and Umar of arguing like atheists. Wood then mentions how even in the Quran people can rise from the dead, like Eisa (as) made some people. Wood was responding to Umar saying that it would be strange to see someone die and then see them again. However, technically, Ahmadi’s don’t believe that Eisa (as) was allowed by Allah to raise men from the dead. Wood argues that the disciples saw him alive and concluded that he died and was resurrected. Umar argued that the Torah said (Deuteronomy-21) that anyone hing from a tree is accursed, this means that Ahmadi’s see Eisa (As) as accursed (naozobillah), since Ahmadi’s allege that Eisa (as) was hung on a cross (tree). Wood mentions the sign of Jonah and how Ahmadi’s and Muslims have mi-interpreted this, and become satanic like Peter, since Peter said that Jesus (as) wouldn’t die.

—At 1:06:29, Tahir starts, he argues that it is the Quranic position that Jesus (as) survived the crucifixtion, not the Ahmadi position. Tahir said that whatever Muslims choose to believe is on them! Tahir alleges that Jesus’ (as) followers in India eventually became Muslim. Tahir argues that the actions of Jesus (as) supersede his words? Hain? He then gives the same arguments as Umar. Tahir discards the testimony by Peter and the other disciples, since these were received via divine revelation. Hain? But that’s what MGA said. Tahir then quotes 5:47 (5:48 in the Qadiani Quran) of the Quran and tries to refute the claim of Wood. In reality, this verse could mean that Christians should be judged by the law of the Gospel, not the Quran, this is if they commit a crime.

–At 1:13:48, Umar starts, he argues that Paul was revealed about the death and resurrection of Eisa (as), it never happened in reality.

–At 1:16:48, Apostate starts, repeats his summaries from before, i.e., it is almost impossible to escape death via crucifxition, and consensus opinion. He refutes Nasser on the Quranic position on 4:157 vs. the Ahmadi position. Wood jumps in and proves that 4:157 does in fact prove the Islamic position that Eisa (as) was never hung. Tahir presented a translation “like one crucified”, this is in italics, which proves that it is not in the wording. Wood specifies that the overwhelming Islamic position on 4:157 means that Eisa (as) was never hung (salaboo-hoo). Wood goes on to explain sarcastically, that Muslims had to wait 1300 years to get the proper explanation of the crucifixtion, i.e., that Eisa (as) was hung and survived and escaped to Kashmir. Apostate tells the Nasser brothers to stop cherry picking, either take all of the biblical excerpts or take none of them. Wood jumps in again and explains how Jesus’ (as) legs weren’t broken because he was already dead. Wood calls out Ahmadi’s for presenting Bhavishya Purana which refers to Jesus as “Isa-Masih”, it is obviously a fraud and they are still adding to it. This is supposedly a 5000 year old source, this is from before Jesus (as). Apostate adds, this document is from the 18th century. Apostate adds how Hindu’s added this into their sacred texts. Apostate adds that Jonah (as) died in the whale and was resurrected from death. Wood adds that Paul/Peter verified the info on Jesus (as) dying and coming back to life through others, not simply through revelation.

—At 1:27:30, Tahir Nasser starts and calls the arguments of Wood and Apostate as bad. Tahir pretends to be an expert in Arabic. Tahir quotes 12:41 (12:42 in the Qadiani Quran) and alleges that “salaboo” doesn’t imply death, however, in this verse it does. Tahir Nasser than admits that “salaboo” doesn’t mean to death, simply to be hung on a cross. Tahir concludes that “salaboo” doesn’t imply death. Tahir then argues that “Shubbiha Lahum” in 4:157 only means, “it was made to appear to them as so”. Tahir then argues that the early Muslims did in fact believe that Jesus (as) died. Tahir mentions 3:144. Tahir mentions the Ibn Abbas argument, mumeetuka. Tahir argues that actions can’t be interpolated, only words can. Tahir then argues that Jonah (as) never died in the whale. Tahir doesn’t understand why Jesus (as) was stabbed in the side, this was done as a precautionary measure.

–At 1:35:00, Umar starts, he argues that even in 2024, medical professional can make mistakes if someone is dead or not. Tahir chimes in and sarcastically says, “A roman soldier, in the dark, with the sign of eclipses, 4 meters away and in the dark”. Tahir jumps in again and says it was God’s plan to save Eisa (as). However, this totally contradicts 5:110 of the Quran.
_____________________________________________________________________________________________
Crossfire round

—At 1:38:53, Apostate starts, he quotes 4:157 and argues that the Islamic position is that Eisa (as) was never on the cross, it was only made to appear so. Apostate shows how 4:157 would be redundant if we take the Ahmadi view. Wood jumps in, and for the 3rd time, explains how Jesus (as) told his disciples that he was about to get killed. Wood argues that Jonah (as) was dead, not merely in the belly of the whale and still alive. In conclusion, Wood and Apostate ask to see the first century manuscript of Bhavishya Purana which refers to Jesus as “Isa-Masih”.

—At 1:43:20, Umar starts and talks about the case of Jonah (as) and how he believes that he was not dead. Umar asks why did this happen? And why did that happen? And then presents the Ahmadiyya position as coherent. At 1:45:25, Tahir argues that the case of Jonah (as) was a near death experience only. Tahir argues that “wa ma kataloo hoo” means that the spear that was thrusted into the side of Eisa (as) didn’t kill him. Tahir again argues that “salaboo-hoo” means death via crucifixtion only.

–At 1:47:20, Apostate gives an example of saying that someone was electrocuted but didn’t die. He then presents Matthew 28, and how it clearly says that Jesus (as) was risen from the dead. Wood then talks about Jonah (as) again and how he was dead, from the pits of hell. Wood explains how shoving a spear into a human was a normal process of confirming death. Wood argues that the spear must have hit Jesus’ (as) heart and made it blood and water gush out. Apostate and Wood ask for the Bhavishya Purana again.

–At 1:51:50, Tahir mentions the Bhavishya Purana. Tahir says that he doesn’t have the original Old Testament, thus, he doesn’t have to show anything. He then mentions Jonah (as) again. Umar argues that it is hard to pray when dead, however, he forgets about the afterlife. Umar mentions the hypostatic union of Christ. This is about why Jesus (as) said, “‘Eli, eli, lema, sebachthani”. They end by arguing that Jesus’s (as) heart was beating when he was stabbed in his side.

—At 1:56:00, Apostate asks again for evidence of the Bhavishya Purana. He then calls MGA as “insane”. Apostate also explains how Ahmadi’s believe what MGA said (without saying MGA). Wood explains how the Bhavishya Purana is only 200+ years old and how Hindu’s have been adding to their text. Apostate also wants to see in “Acts” where it says that there are these followers of Jesus (as)(asian Christians?), this was made up by Tahir. Apostate also says that Ahmadi’s sound like Atheists. Wood mentions how Ahmadi’s think that they can add spices to wounds and they can miraculously disappear.

—At 2:00:26, Tahir starts, he mentions the work of Fida Husnain and Jesus in India” (published in Oct. of 1908). Tahir then mentions that there is a tomb in India that belongs to Jesus (as)(naozobillah). Tahir alleges that this tomb is in Srinagar, Kashmir. Tahir alleges that the tomb is called the site of the skull, just like in the Bible. Tahir alleges that Matthew-28, wherein it is written that Jesus (as) died, is an idiom. Tahir argues that this simply means that Jesus (as) came from the place of the dead, not actually dead. Tahir alleges that James (James the just) accused Paul of teaching against Jesus (as).

—At 2:04:26, Wood says that Jesus (as) was eating to show people that he wasn’t a ghost, he had risen from the dead. Wood explains how in Islamic Heaven, there will also be food to eat. Wood accuses Tahir of attacking Islam, simply to defend MGA. Apostate then accuses Tahir of lying about Acts-21. This verse does not say that Christians went to India. Acts-21 has nothing to do with the Crucifixtion. Wood then explains how Paul never repented. Apostate then tells Tahir to stop cherry picking the Bible, either take it or leave it. He also asks Tahir to explain why Jesus (as) was born without a father.

—-at 2:08:49, Tahir Nasser says that Adam (as) was also born of a virgin. Hain? Tahir says that the nature of food in paradise is unknown. Tahir admits that he gave the wrong reference earlier, it wasn’t Acts-21, it was Corinthians?
_____________________________________________________________________________________________
Closing remarks

–At 2:14:00, Umar Nasser starts and argues that modernism in the West has forced people to abandon Christianity. Umar argues that belief in God being 3 in 1 is irrational. Umar thus argues that Ahmadiyya is rational and NO ONE else is. Umar says that Ahmadi’s believe in Jesus (as) of the Gospels, but they can’t accept everything. Tahir calls Paul a pharisee plant who destroyed Christianity.

–At 2:19:22, Apostate starts, he mentions how Tahir said that Adam (as) was born without a mother too. This is nonsensical. Apostate says that Muslims believe that Eisa (as) breathed life into things. He then calls Islam arrogant and Muhammad (Saw) got it wrong. Wood argues science in the Muslim world vs. science in the Christian world. Paul was a pharisee plant? Wood quotes 61:14 and how Allah said that he aided the disciples, thus, how could Paul be a plant?
_____________________________________________________________________________________________
Q and A

—at 2:25:00, Tahir is asked about Acts-21 and the swoon theory. He calls James as the brother of Eisa (As). Apostate alleges that Tahir has changed the goal post, Tahir had earlier claimed that Paul invented Christianity. They then argue over Paul and how he verified the death and resurrection of Jesus (as).

—At 2:31:00, Umar Nasser answers a question on Muslims before Muhammad (Saw). He says Islam came at the end and is available for everyone, he then calls Muhammad (Saw) as the final law bearing prophet. Wood explains how Qurtubi quoted 61:14 in terms of Paul. He then quotes Ibn Ishaq who mentions how Paul and Peter were sent to Rome to preach, he mentions Tabari too. In the end, Paul was a Muslim.

–At 2:35:00, Tahir argues that there is nothing in the Quran that asserts that Eisa (as) wasn’t crucified. Wood says that Ahmadi’s and Christians agree that the substitution theory is false. Wood argues that many sources are available that Jesus (as) died and was resurrected.

—At 2:40:00, Umar argues that Israeliyat crept into Islam and created the substitution theory. Umar argues that many early Muslims believed that Jesus (as) died. Tahir mentions Ibn Abbas and mumeetuka and 3:141, Imam Malik. Wood immediately refutes them on this, he says ALL the earliest commentaries say that Eisa (as) hasn’t died and present the substitution theory. Wood argues that Mutwafeeka means Allah takes the soul from the body, and even in sleep. Wood shows how Ibn Kathir argued that Mutwafeeka means “sleep” and thus, Muslims believed that Eisa (as) fell asleep before Allah took him.

—At 2:43:35, Apostate again argues that most of the historical consensus is that Jesus (as) died on the cross. He mentions how Bart Erhman said the same. Wood makes the same argument. Umar says the scholarly consensus doesn’t convince him. Umar argues that Eisa (as) was alive, people saw him. Thus, he never died.

–At 2:48:50, the Islamic Dilemma is discussed. Tahir quotes 5:47 (5:48 in the Qadiani Quran).

—At 2:54:21, Umar argues that Eisa (as) was successful and finished his mission in Kashmir (Messianic Judaism). Which spread in India. He then argues that Christianity is the anti-Christ and Ahmadiyya came with the antidote to defeat it. Wood again claims that the Quran vindicates Paul. Wood argues that Jesus said he would die.

—At 2:57:42, Wood mentions how only 1 person in history has survived Crucifixtion. And this person got help, the Romans wanted him to survive. Wood then presents how Ahmadi’s think that Nicodemus presented the cure, via aloes and myrrh (Marham-e-eisa).

—At 3:00:00, Tahir Nasser quotes 5:13 (5:14 in the Qadiani Quran), and says that the Bible and Torah have been interpolated. Tahir argues this is the reason to follow the actions of Eisa (as) and not his words. Tahir argues that 33% of people who were crucified and got medical treatment could survive.

–At 3:01:00, a question is posed that Umar and Tahir are brainwashed. Umar responds.

–At 3:02:54, Apostate mocks MGA and says that Muslims had to wait 1400 years to get the answer on the crucifixtion. Apostate argues that MGA shouldnt be trusted by anyone. Apostate argues that Ahmadi’s take MGA above Allah. Tahir responds and calls that blatantly false. Tahir then says that MGA (the messiah) was prophecied to break the cross, and these arguments fulfill that. And even identified the tomb. This breaks the cross. Tahir then says that the great grandchildren of Apostate will accept Ahmadiyya. Apostate then mocks MGA. Arguments break out, Wood chimes in.

—At 3:07:00, Wood explains how the vast majority of Jews rejected Jesus (as). Paul preached to the Gentiles and Peter preached to Jews.

–At 3:14:00, Umar answers a question, he calls it a clear deflection. They talk about the dual nature of things and how they can’t be contradictory. Wood argues that the Quran has dual nature, it’s a book and the word of Allah. Allah can enter a fire? Apostate mentions the hypostatic union.

In conclusion, Wood mentions Nabeel Qureshi. He also accuses Ahmadi’s of following MGA instead of going to the evidence.

_____________________________________________________________________________________________
Holger Kersten and the false idea of Jesus of India – ahmadiyyafactcheckblog

in the Bhavishya Purana which refers to Jesus as “Isa-Masih” (Jesus the Messiah). The passage describes the Hindu king Shalivahana travelling to mountains where he meets a man who calls himself Isa, son of a Virgin. Isa says he has ministered to the Mlecchas, explaining that he has reformed the lives of the mlecchas by recommending principles of mental purity, japa by chanting holy names, and meditation. Kersten interprets this as a record of Jesus in Kashmir. In reality the passage is an 18th-century dialogue also featuring Muhammed, and not an early source as Ahmad claimed. Most scholars consider this part of the Purana to be a 19th-century interpolation.

Scan