Added: Sep 22, 2023
In this episode of the PBD Podcast, host Patrick Bet-David brings together a diverse group of individuals to discuss the importance of the MBA and the greatest players of all time. The guests include Daniel Hakikachu, Jake Brancatella, Rashid, and Robert Spencer. The conversation covers various topics related to religion, faith, and common enemies.Patrick begins the podcast by expressing his concerns about the current state of the country and his love for America. He mentions that the discussion will focus on the differences between Christianity and Islam, the enemies of each religion, and the common enemies they share. He emphasizes that the goal is to find common ground and promote understanding.
The guests then introduce themselves and share their backgrounds. Daniel Hakikachu talks about his Iranian heritage and his journey from being a Shiite Muslim to becoming a Sunni Muslim. He discusses his studies in philosophy and his critique of modernism and secularism. Jake Brancatella, a convert to Islam, explains his reasons for embracing the religion and his belief in the concept of pure monotheism. Rashid, a Moroccan Christian convert, shares his experience of growing up in a Muslim family and his conversion to Christianity. Robert Spencer, an author and commentator, talks about his fascination with Islam and his extensive research on the religion.
The conversation quickly turns to the biggest challenge and differences with the religion of Islam. Robert Spencer highlights the issue of violence and the sanctification of violence in Islam. He mentions the punishment for apostasy and the fact that many Islamic scholars still endorse it. Daniel Hakikachu counters by pointing out the double standard in focusing on the negative aspects of Islam while ignoring similar issues in Christianity. He mentions the punishments for blasphemy and apostasy in the Bible and questions whether Christians truly follow those teachings.
Rashid shares his personal experience of leaving Islam and the threats he has faced as a result. He criticizes the violent actions of Muhammad and the lack of a new testament in Islam. He argues that Jesus, in contrast, never killed anyone and should be seen as a role model. Robert Spencer agrees with Rashid's criticism of Muhammad and the violent aspects of Islam.
The discussion then shifts to the application of Islamic law and whether it should be followed in every country. Daniel Hakikachu argues that Islamic law should be applied everywhere, while Robert Spencer questions the compatibility of Islamic law with modern values and human rights. Rashid expresses his concern about the treatment of women in Islam and the violence against apostates.
Daniel Hakikachu brings up the issue of liberal secularism and its impact on Muslims. He argues that Muslims are under threat from the dominant ideology of liberal secularism, which is imposed through wars and colonialism. He mentions the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan as examples of this threat. Robert Spencer agrees with Daniel's criticism of liberal secularism but questions how Islam can be seen as an alternative when many Muslim politicians in the US align with liberal values.
The conversation becomes heated as Rashid and Daniel Hakikachu debate the morality of Islamic teachings and the actions of Muhammad. Rashid criticizes Muhammad's multiple marriages, including his marriage to a nine-year-old girl, and his violent actions. Daniel Hakikachu defends Muhammad and argues that Jesus also had violent aspects in the New Testament and the Book of Revelation.
The discussion continues with a focus on the differences between Christianity and Islam. Robert Spencer argues that Islam is less willing to change and adapt to modern times compared to Christianity. He suggests that many Christians, Jews, Hindus, and Buddhists have updated their practices and beliefs to align with contemporary values, while Muslims have been more resistant to change. He questions why certain prohibitions, such as those against cross-dressing, homosexuality, and drag queens, are still upheld in some religious texts.
Daniel Haqiqatjou responds by highlighting the evolving nature of religious understanding within Christianity. He explains that the Bible is not meant to be read as a static text like the Quran, but rather as a record of the evolving understanding of the people of God. He argues that certain practices and beliefs in the Bible, such as slavery, have been abolished over time due to a deeper understanding of human dignity and the teachings of Jesus. He also emphasizes the importance of the principle of human dignity in Christianity, which he believes is violated by practices such as transgenderism.
The conversation then shifts to the issue of tolerance. Robert Spencer suggests that Christianity has become too tolerant, allowing for the picking and choosing of beliefs and practices. He argues that this has led to a weakening of the faith and the erosion of traditional values. Daniel Haqiqatjou agrees that there are liberal Christians who have discarded core Christian principles, but he argues that this is not representative of true Christianity. He believes that the rejection of traditional values is a result of the abandonment of Christianity, rather than an inherent flaw within the religion itself.
The discussion then delves into the topic of violence and punishment in religious texts. Robert Spencer brings up passages from the Bible, such as the command to kill the Amalekites, to argue that Christianity also has a history of violence. Daniel Haqiqatjou responds by explaining that these passages reflect the understanding of the people at that time and that later revelations and teachings, such as those of Jesus, have led to a rejection of violence and a focus on human dignity in Christianity. He contrasts this with the Quran, which he argues contains explicit commands to kill unbelievers and apostates.
The conversation then turns to the question of why more Muslims are moving to Christian nations than vice versa. Daniel Haqiqatjou attributes this to economic factors, suggesting that Muslims are attracted to the economic opportunities and freedoms offered by Western countries. He also argues that traditional societies, including Muslim societies, are more conducive to family and community-based life, which may be appealing to some individuals. Robert Spencer adds that Western countries have declared a war on traditional societies, imposing sanctions and bombing those that do not conform to Western values.
The discussion continues with a focus on the future of religion and the growth of Islam. Patrick Bet-David raises the concern that if current trends continue, Muslims may eventually dominate the world. Daniel Haqiqatjou argues that the growth of Islam is natural and driven by factors such as higher birth rates. He suggests that Christians need to recover a sense of their faith and the importance of preserving traditional values in order to counter this trend. Robert Spencer agrees that Christians need to have larger families and engage in proselytizing initiatives to ensure the survival of their faith.
The discussion continues with a focus on the unity within the Christian and Muslim communities. Patrick argues that Christians are not united, with different denominations and sects often competing against each other. Rasheed disagrees, stating that while there may be divisions within the Muslim community, they still share common values and philosophies. He also mentions that Muslims often claim to be united but have their own divisions and disagreements.
The conversation then shifts to the future growth of Christianity and Islam. Patrick suggests that Christianity may face challenges in maintaining its numbers due to various factors such as economic issues and people leaving the faith. Rasheed counters by stating that Muslims also face challenges, including a declining birth rate in some countries and people leaving Islam. He argues that if Muslims were given freedom and surveys were conducted, the number of Muslims would likely be lower than reported.
The panel also discusses the different sects within Christianity and Islam. Patrick argues that Christianity has a history of divisions and disagreements, citing the Catholic-Protestant conflicts in Europe. Rasheed acknowledges these divisions but argues that they are not as significant as the divisions within Islam. He mentions historical conflicts among the early followers of Muhammad and the ongoing divisions between Sunni and Shia Muslims.
The conversation then turns to the question of who the enemies of Christians and Muslims are. Robert argues that Christians see the enemy as spiritual powers and evil forces that threaten their freedom and values. Rasheed identifies Satan, the worldly life, desires, and the ego as the enemies of Muslims. He also mentions that liberal secularism is a major enemy to traditional people, both Muslim and Christian.
The discussion then moves to the topic of political affiliations and voting patterns among Muslims. Patrick highlights that a significant majority of Muslims in the US tend to vote for Democrats. He presents a list of the top 10 issues for Democrats and Republicans in the 2024 election, noting that the values and principles of Muslims align more closely with the Republican Party. The panel agrees that Muslims often vote Democratic due to historical reasons, such as the negative experiences with Republican policies after 9/11.
Robert argues that the left's obsession with racism and the portrayal of any criticism of Islam as racism has influenced Muslim voting patterns. He suggests that Islamic groups have successfully portrayed criticism of Islam as bigotry, leading to support for the Democratic Party. Rasheed agrees that Muslims should not align themselves with any particular party and should maintain their independence.
The conversation becomes heated when Daniel accuses Robert of racism and promoting a white supremacist ideology. He claims that Robert's website, Jihad Watch, demonizes Muslims and immigrants, and accuses him of spreading fear-mongering against immigrants. Robert defends his website, stating that it tracks Jihad activity and only reports on cases where there is justification for the behavior in Islamic texts and teachings.
The episode continues with a discussion on the common values and principles shared by Christians, Muslims, and Jews in America. The panel agrees that traditional values such as the importance of marriage, preserving chastity, and raising children with moral values are shared among these religious groups. They also emphasize the importance of gender roles, respect for parents, and the preservation of the family unit.
The discussion continues with a question about whether there is a deliberate effort to divide Christians and Muslims. Brother Rasheed, drawing from his study of Islam, explains that the enmity between Christians and Muslims is deeply rooted in Islamic doctrine. He highlights that Muhammad considered Jews and Christians as enemies and that this enmity has been inherited by Muslims throughout history. He argues that the Quran instructs Muslims not to take Jews and Christians as friends and to fight against them until they submit.
Robert Spencer agrees with Brother Rasheed's assessment and adds that the powers that be, referring to those in positions of power, do indeed want to divide Christians and Muslims. He explains that the war on terror and the attack on religious traditions have been used to create divisions. Initially targeting Muslims, these tactics are now being used against Christians as well. Spencer argues that the powers that be aim to conquer traditional religions and values by dividing and conquering.
The conversation then shifts to the possibility of finding common ground and unity among different religious communities. Patrick Bet-David shares his experience of starting an insurance company that attracted people from various backgrounds, including Christians, Muslims, and atheists. He emphasizes the importance of finding common values and principles, even if there are philosophical and theological differences. He suggests that by focusing on shared concerns, such as protecting children from harmful influences, different religious communities can come together.
The guests acknowledge the potential for finding common ground but also recognize the existence of significant differences in beliefs and values. They agree that respectful dialogue and understanding are crucial in bridging these gaps.
The discussion concludes with a reflection on the importance of respectful conversations and the potential for unity among different religious communities. The guests express their appreciation for the opportunity to engage in this dialogue and commend Patrick Bet-David for his fair and open-minded approach.
