A heated debate between two individuals discussing the authenticity and reliability of religious texts, specifically focusing on the sayings and prophecies attributed to Jesus Christ. The conversation begins with one participant questioning the completeness of Jesus’s teachings as recorded in the Gospels and whether Jesus met Paul in real life. The other participant argues that visions and dreams are not equivalent to physical encounters, leading to a disagreement on whether Paul met Jesus.

The discussion shifts to the authenticity of the documents that report Jesus’s sayings and actions. One participant demands criteria to verify these documents’ reliability, while the other counters by questioning the authenticity of a specific quote attributed to Jesus, showing a lack of consensus on what is considered authentic. This leads to a broader debate on how to determine the authenticity of religious texts.

An important point of contention arises when one participant challenges the other’s belief that Jesus predicted the coming of a prophet named Ahmed, as mentioned in the Quran. The question is posed about where Jesus explicitly made such a statement. The response points out that the absence of such documents is due to centuries of textual corruption by Christians and Jews, which the other participant dismisses as a cop-out, asserting that the Quran itself claims the Gospel was preserved.

The conversation becomes more confrontational, with frequent interruptions and accusations of not engaging sincerely. The debate then touches upon the concept of God, specifically whether God can be wrong about anything. The Muslim participant hesitates to answer directly, leading to further accusations and a breakdown in productive dialogue.

As the debate continues, one participant accuses the other of lying, which leads to a refusal to engage further. The discussion then devolves into mutual accusations of intellectual dishonesty and unfair debate tactics. Attempts to steer the conversation back to the original topic of religious text authenticity are unsuccessful, and the debate becomes increasingly personal.

In the end, the Muslim participant withdraws from the conversation, accusing the other of being insincere and unworthy of engaging with. The Christian participant asks if any other Muslim can address the question regarding Jesus mentioning Ahmed, but the transcript ends without a resolution, showcasing the deep-seated disagreements and emotional intensity of the debate.