Full transcript of “The One Question That Made Zakir Naik Lose His Temper Live on TV”. Click a timestamp to open the video at that moment. Need another video? Use the YouTube transcript generator.
0:00 Which commentary of the Bible, which church fathers who says that there is a prophet Muhammad in the Bible? Show me. Show me the manuscripts. Keep your mouth shut. You are acting like a fool in front of everyone. You have just watched Zakir Naik shut down a young Christian student publicly and forcefully. This wasn't just a heated debate. This was a collision over one thing, evidence. Because before that moment, a student asked a question. A very specific one. And it's that question that begins to unravel everything. We need to go back where it started. And what you're about to see only makes sense if you watch carefully.
0:45 My name is Jonathan and I'm a student. Uh my question to you is you mentioned before about Prophet Muhammad in the Gospel of John, for example. But my question to you is what is your references? Um what I'm I want to talk to you is uh when you say that Prophet Muhammad is in the Gospel of John, which commentary of the Bible, which church fathers who says that there is a prophet Muhammad in the Bible? Uh for example, I cannot say that Jesus is God according to the Quran uh because the Quran never say that Jesus is God. Uh and I I must study the Quran, I must study the Sira, the Tafsir, uh the the Hadiths. So, I cannot say that my religion is
1:32 perfect because the Quran says so. So, my challenge to you is which verse of the Bible that says that Muhammad is in the Bible? And where is the references? I challenge you now. From the church fathers At this moment, everything locks into one question. Which commentary, which church father says Muhammad is found in the Bible? Jonathan set a rule. He cannot claim something about the Quran which is not written in the text. So, he applies the same rule to the Bible. If Muhammad is in the Bible it must be shown clearly from the text itself. If you want breakdowns that go beyond the surface level debate, subscribe and turn on on the
2:18 notifications. So, let's watch it together how this whole thing unraveled. And at the end, I provide a theological rebuttal. Brother asked the question >> Yes. that can be which Bible am I referring to? Yes. >> Then you have which church? Church is not important. He doesn't even wait for him to finish. We have to follow the Bible. Okay. Bible is important, not church. If church makes a mistake, you can't say that the Bible has made a mistake. I know better than the church. So, I'm not going to the church. Naik knowing better than the church. And we are talking about early church fathers who were disciples of the disciples of Jesus Christ. >> If you quote the Quran any verse I will read the translation, I have to
3:03 follow it. If someone give a commentary, IF IT MATCHES, I TAKE IT. SO, PLEASE DON'T BELIEVE in the church. The church has made many mistakes. Yes, you want to know which Bible I'm speaking from? I'm quoting from King James version. Okay. King James version from the Protestant Bible. Okay. Sanctified by King James V. Correct? I gave you the reference. Now, I'm giving you verbatim quotation. You want from the Old Testament or the New Testament? Both. Up to you. Now, which you prefer, old or new? New Testament. Okay, New Testament. It's mentioned in the Gospel of John, chapter number 14, verse number 16. Jesus Christ, peace be upon him himself says, "Now, there is something like a red letter." Red letter Bible means everything what is there in the Bible are not spoken by the almighty God. Naik
3:49 just accepting that Jesus is almighty God because what's written in red letters refers to what Jesus said. Except what is red, a very small percentage. 1 2% is from God. Who says that? The scholars of Christianity. So, there's something like a red letter Bible. What I'm quoting to you are in red. A very small percentage, less than 1% of the Bible are in red. I'm quoting you the main words of almighty God. Did you hear that? He again calls Jesus almighty God. Gospel of John, chapter number 14, verse number 16 says Jesus Christ, peace be upon him himself says, "I shall pray to my father to give you another comforter who shall abide with you forever." Gospel of John, chapter number 15, verse number 26.
4:34 "When the comforter shall come he who is sent by my father, he shall glorify me." Gospel of John, chapter number 16, verse number 17. "It is expedient for you that I go away. For if I go not away, the comforter shall not come. For if I depart, shall I send him." Now, the Bible is not in English language. Brother, do you know the Bible is not in English language? The Bible is not even in Hebrew language. The Bible is >> Which Bible in Hebrew language? The New Testament The New Testament is in the Greek Bible. >> is not in Hebrew. Your knowledge is weak. The New Testament in the Greek, Dr. Naik. That's why the New Testament is in Greek and Aramaic. The present Hebrew Bible is a translation from Greek and Aramaic. Show me. Show me the manuscripts. There is no
5:21 manuscript. The original Bible is not in Hebrew, New Testament. It is in Greek and Aramaic. I'm quoting to you from King James version. Now, let me tell you. Let me complete my answer. The word used for comforter here in Aramaic is it is Paracletos. But in the original manuscript Paracletos they have translated as comforter. What is the name of the manuscripts? I'm telling you King James version. King James version. >> Now, from the Greek or the from the Aramaic? Aramaic. But you don't understand English. Okay. It's in Greek and Aramaic, two languages, the manuscripts. I'm quoting you the reference. If you don't understand, the problem is yours. The original I'm quoting you the Aramaic word, Paracletos.
6:06 Paracletos actually means a good friend. But they translated as comforter. The original script, if you go to the manuscript, it says Pericletos, not Paracletos. Do you know the difference between Pericletos and Paracletos? Do you know Aramaic? No, I don't know. Okay, so I'm telling you, listen to me. Yeah, show me. What is What is the name of the manuscript? What is the Aramaic? What is the Aramaic King James version No, no, no, it's in English. I want from the Aramaic. >> No, King James version is not English. >> I'm sorry. Uh have you read John You You mentioned from John 14. Have you read John 16:7? Jesus said he will send the the the comforter. Is that mean if Prophet Muhammad is the spirit is that mean that is it Yeah, is is the
6:52 comforter? Is that mean that Jesus send Muhammad? Is that make Jesus God? You will not believe that. You are a Christian. >> You will not believe that. >> You would listen to what it said, "I will ask my father to send the comforter." But Jesus But Jesus says Okay, listen to me. Don't argue. Okay. >> First, you're not listening to me and you're asking a question. This is a question time, not a debating time. If you can't understand English, give other people a chance. Okay. Listen to me, hear correctly, then ask. I'm quoting original Aramaic, you're saying which Aramaic. Do you know Aramaic? You don't know Aramaic. So, you don't know Aramaic, it's not my problem. You Google. Use your internet mobile and see what this Paracletos means. Wait, don't argue. Jesus Christ said, "I WILL ASK MY FATHER
7:38 TO SEND COMFORTER." NOW, YOU ARE saying Jesus will send the comforter. You don't understand English. Gospel of John, chapter 14, verse number 16 says, "I will ask my father to send the comforter who will abide with you forever." Who will send? Father, not Jesus, peace be upon him. Gospel of John, chapter 16, verse 7 says, "It is expedient for you that I go away." Jesus Christ is saying, "It is expedient that he goes away. For if I go not away, the comforter shall not come." Prophet Muhammad will not come. "If I go, shall I send him? He shall glorify me." Very clear. If you can't understand English, it's not my problem. I'm going back to the original. Original word is Pericletos. Pericletos, if you translate, means the praiseworthy. If you translate praiseworthy into Arabic,
8:23 it means Muhammad. So, Muhammad by name is mentioned in the New Testament as Pericletos. He's also mentioned in the Old Testament. Song of Solomon, chapter 5, verse number 16. The word is Muhammadim. In Semitic languages, they add im for respect. So, to the word of Muhammad, they added im to become Muhammadim. And they translate that "His mouth is most sweet. He's altogether lovely. He's my beloved, oh daughters of Jerusalem." These are references. Gospel Furthermore, in the Gospel of John, chapter number 16, verse number 12 to 14. Jesus Christ, peace be upon him says that I have many things to say unto you, but he cannot bear them now. For he, when the spirit of truth
9:10 shall come, he shall guide you into all truth. He shall not speak of himself. All that he shall speak, he shall glorify me. This cannot be the Holy Spirit. Holy Spirit cannot be >> According to you. >> Brother, can you please not interject the speaker? I have read to you the rules of the question and answer session. Okay, maybe maybe I think you don't understand English. When you ask a question, you have to listen to the answer. Can you please stay silent until the answer is completed? You will be given the chance to ask your question. If you can't speak If you can't understand English, the problem is yours, not mine. Correct? You can read the translation if you don't understand English. You are interjecting. Why? Why? They are coming >> understand English. You're not supposed to interject. After I finish I'm listening to you. After I finish, you
9:56 all listen You're not listening to me. You are giving wrong statement. You are saying Jesus said send Muhammad S.A.W. Where did he say that? I WILL ASK MY FATHER to send. But but you say it's referred to the prophet Muhammad. Yes. Yes. Jesus kept saying I will ask my father to send prophet Muhammad. Okay. Who says that? Gospel of John chapter number 14 verse number 16. Do you know what does Gospel of John chapter 14 verse 16 say? If you don't know, open your Bible and read. Do you have a mobile? Yeah. Yeah. Of course. OKAY. OPEN. TYPE THERE GOSPEL OF JOHN. TYPE. But to >> If you can't remember what I'm saying I remember what you say but but to What does What does Gospel of John chapter 14 verse 16 say? Repeat. Repeat.
10:42 >> It's very difficult to to debate with Zakir Naik. Doesn't allow people to actually express themselves especially when he knows that he's been caught napping. No, repeat. Repeat. >> no but to understand the Bible Repeat Gospel of John chapter 14 verse 16. Repeat. Repeat. Repeat 14 16. If you can't repeat then keep your mouth shut. Okay. Can you repeat 14 16? I just said Can you repeat? YES OR NO? YES. REPEAT. [cheering] Go ahead. Take your mobile phone out. No. If you don't know by heart I'm giving you a chance to open your Bible. You are not like me who can remember from the brain. So the problem is you don't know your Bible yet you are arguing. Don't waste the time of so many people. You are You are acting like a fool in
11:29 front of everyone. Not Dr. Naik. Your question is over. Okay. Not okay. Finish. You asked the question. I gave the answer. Okay. Not okay. Go behind the queue. Okay. Thank you, Dr. Naik. Now step back because there's one moment in that entire exchange that explains everything. Show me the manuscript. What is the name of the manuscript? King James version. Now we step back and evaluate the argument. It's important to understand that Naik's position lays on a chain of reasoning. Number one, the comforter in the Gospel of John refers to a future figure. Number two, the original word is not parakletos but perikletos. The word perikletos means the praised one.
12:14 The praised one translates to Muhammad. So the conclusion is Muhammad is mentioned in the New Testament. Now this argument depends entirely on one premise that perikletos exists in the original manuscripts. Now if that fails, the entire chain breaks. Zakir Naik had to prove that there's an original manuscript in which the word perikletos appears because everything else, the translation, the meaning the identification depends on that single substitution. In every extant of the Greek manuscript of the Gospel of John, the word is parakletos, not perikletos. Not a
13:02 variation. Not an alternative reading. There's no manuscript evidence of perikletos in this passage. And that text does not leave this figure undefined. In John 14:16-17, the comforter is described as the spirit of truth, one whom the world cannot see. In John 14:26, the identity is made explicit. The comforter is the Holy Spirit. This is not a symbolic language that is waiting to be decoded. It's a direct identification within the text itself. For the original audience, the disciples, the promise is immediate and continuous. The comforter will abide
13:48 with you forever, will teach you all things, will be in you. This describes ongoing spiritual presence, not a future historical individual arriving centuries later, six centuries for that matter. This is where the argument breaks conceptually. It takes a Greek theological term of divine presence and replaces it with a seventh-century Arabic personal name. That's a category shift from spirit to human, from indwelling presence to external messenger. These are not interchangeable ideas. They operate in entirely different frameworks. If the comforter is Muhammad, then the text requires
14:36 someone whom the world cannot see, someone who will be with you forever, someone who will dwell within believers. But within the Islamic theology, Muhammad is a visible human prophet, a historical figure bound by time, not indwelling spiritual presence. This creates a direct contradiction between the description in the text and the identity being assigned to it. You can clearly see that the Islamic theology and the standard Islamic narrative rests on a broken foundation, the psychological collapse. And now we return to the moment, the question. What is the name of the manuscripts? I'm telling you King James version.
15:21 Because this is where the entire structure is tested. If perikletos exists, it must be in a manuscript. But when the answer becomes King James version, the foundation shifts because now a claim about original language evidence is supported by a later English translation. The argument is no longer anchored in the level it claims to operate on. And here is the point where Zakir Naik lost it on live TV. The young man asked for the name of the manuscript where the word perikletos appears. And Zakir Naik's response? King James version. What is the name of the manuscripts? I'm telling you King James version. King James version. Now from the Greek
16:08 or the from the Aramaic? Please Aramaic. Why you don't understand English? Okay. It's in Greek and Aramaic, two languages, the manuscripts. I'm quoting you the reference. If you don't understand, the problem is yours. Is the King James version an original Greek manuscript? Definitely it's not. And when Naik realizes that he's been caught, he got terribly upset and shut the whole conversation down. Can you repeat? YES OR NO? YES. REPEAT. Go ahead. No. If you don't know by heart I'm giving you a chance to open your Bible. You are not like me who can remember from the brain. So the problem is you don't know your Bible yet you are arguing.
16:53 Don't waste the time of so many people. You are You are acting like a fool in front of everyone. Not Dr. Naik. Your question is over. Okay. Not okay. Finish. You asked the question. I gave the answer. Okay. Not okay. Go behind the queue. But for most of the ignorant members of Naik's audience, they clap for him, not realizing that their celebrity Islamic apologist has just been exposed. The conclusion is to insult the young man, to call him foolish, to call him ignorant, and immediately shut the conversation. The argument doesn't fail because the idea is controversial. It fails because the core premise is unsupported. There is no manuscript
17:38 evidence for perikletos. The text itself defines the comforter as the Holy Spirit and requires inserting a later concept into the context where it does not belong. Not a hidden meaning but an imposed one. Thank you very much for watching up to the end. And if you want breakdowns like this, like, subscribe, and smash the notification bell so that when you upload another video, you receive a notification. And don't stop there. There is another debate in Dubai where Zakir Naik is challenged by another young Christian. And what happens there will surprise you even more. Tap the video on the screen to watch it right now.
18:24 >> [music]
