Exposing the Quran's LIES About Jesus' Disciples
Vložit
- čas přidán 27. 06. 2024
- The Quran claims Jesus' disciples were the first Muslims. But what if their teachings directly contradicted Islam? This video dives into a surprising inconsistency that challenges the Islamic narrative. We'll explore Quran verses, the role of Paul the Apostle, and how early Christianity clashes with Islamic beliefs.
Are you a Christian struggling with doubts? Get 1-on-1 counseling at talkaboutdoubts.com
Help support me: / isjesusalive or paypal.me/isjesusalive for a one-time gift
Amazon wish list: www.amazon.com/hz/wishlist/ls...
Join this channel to get access to perks:
/ @testifyapologetics
Visit my blog: isjesusalive.com
Recommended books on defending the Gospels: isjesusalive.com/recommended-...
For the naysayers, I go into depth on Paul's conversion here
.czcams.com/users/liveViuEkEOQFAc?si=Q5Q-Sgya1Q1cwkJp
Evil matches Good in likeness, its a counterfeit that deceives appearance. Paul was a loser, nothing he set out to do ever bore fruit. Jesus said those who are not fruitful and multiplying are imposters and you should judge them based on results not effort, not intentions, not the process. The last part of the Bible is error checking, winners do not hide mistakes they gaze upon it. Newcomers are told to skip to the book of John, the least literate of the disciples and immediately hit Corinthian swamp then read exclusively Paul. You are being lead astray to fail.
At 1:00 he makes a mistake it is Surah 61 Verse 14
Greetings brother from Saint Fana Egypt ☦️🇪🇬 we have survived 1400 years of Arabic islamic invation and genocide. All the glory to our only lord JesusChrist ☦️
Ⲡⲓⲭ̀ⲣⲓⲥⲧⲟⲥ ⲁϥⲧⲱⲛϥ ⲉ̀ⲃⲟⲗ ϧⲉⲛ
@@CorneliusCorndogJr yea and?
@@CatholicaVeritas777 I’m just pointing out a mistake in the video
Islam is the biggest "trust me bro" Reglion ever made
Either that or Mormonism. Both look really rough upon closer examination.
@@jty1999 combine those two and you get nation of islam
ever heard of a guy named yakub?
It's literally the most deceptive religion on earth. At least other religions openly admit they worship false gods. Muhammad tried to paint his false god as YHWH when it clearly isn't
Aint no bro in islam. Its trust me slave.
@@jty1999 Mormonism is just Islam but nicer and an American rewrote it
as a former muslim, CHRIST IS LORD
But CHRIST is the LORD! The Authority, the KING!
@@moosa86 that is true however this claim has been debunked by many scholars which Christ Jesus was referred to as lord lord in the Septuagint which is the oldest Greek translation And in that is lord lord not being of respect and honor but being of something more. But I understand what you mean my friend
👍
@@moosa86 well you are right on that but it also means master and Moses never claimed to be god.
@@moosa86 Rev 17:14 These shall make war with the Lamb (Jesus), and the Lamb shall overcome them: for he is Lord of lords, and King of kings: and they that are with him are called, and chosen, and faithful.
This is exactly why I left Islam and embraced Orthodoxy
Im catholic, but welcome in the fold, Brother!
@@Hohenstein1871 Catholicism doesnt save anyone from Hell. Neither does Islam, Hinduism, Orthodoxy, any religion. One must be born again. One must repent turn from there sin and make Jesus Christ Lord and Saviour of there lives. Then one will be born again and unless you born again then you can't enter Heaven. John 3:3 Jesus answered and said unto him: Verily verily I say unto thee unless a man is born again he cannot enter the kingdom of God. A change needs to be happen a spuritual rebirth and once that happens you will hate sin, love righteousness and live for Jesus Christ. 1 Corinthians 5:17 , "Therefore if any man be in Christ, he is a new creature: old things are passed away; behold, all things are become new". Matthew 16:24 Then said Jesus unto his disciples, If any man will come after me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross, and follow me. 1 John 2:15-16 Love not the world, neither the things that are in the world. If any man love the world, the love of the Father is not in him. For all that is in the world, the lust of the flesh, and the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life, is not of the Father, but is of the world.
Yay I’m ex Ismaili who believes in Christ ❤
@@A-man-in-the-box welcome, both of you! May His love fill you and guide you!
@@danielromani2964 ☺️❤️
When the disciples uttered death threats against their dissenters, Jesus rebuked them. That's all I need to know to accept Christ and reject Islam.
@@moosa86 this is Gethsemane i believe we're referencing. Matthew 26:47-56
@@moosa86
I think he is referring to Luke 9:52-56:
52 And he sent messengers on ahead, who went into a Samaritan village to get things ready for him; 53 but the people there did not welcome him, because he was heading for Jerusalem. 54 When the disciples James and John saw this, they asked, “Lord, do you want us to call fire down from heaven to destroy them?” 55 But Jesus turned and rebuked them. 56 Then he and his disciples went to another village.
When the Arabs of the time threatened "M", he hid behind his wife's skirt and when she wasn't there to defend him, he ran away to another country.
That's all you need to know about the character of "The Prophet".
And when Jesus said Slaves obey your masters?
@@Johnathan950 servants*
Without Lies Islam Dies
Mary being addressed as the sister of Aaron and the daughter of Amran is the most hilarious blunder of Islam imo
True
The ignorant author of the Quran might have done it confusingly between Miriam and Mary but Uzair/Ezra being the Son of God worshipped by Jews in Surah 9:30 is the most ridiculous claim!😂
@@sm2z24 also the Seven Sleepers of Ephesus's story. It was a legend that was written by a cleric to show how Christianity had conquered the Roman empire and Muhammad thought it was meant to be real
she wasnt from the house of levi, ooops allah made errors. oops yet he is all knowing? hmmm gonna have to call claptrap on that idol pagan god lol
@@mgvilaca Yeah there are more such historical problems throughout the Quran.Gnostic stories of Jesus and Mary,Alexander finding the place of sunset,Haman vizier of the Pharaoh, Pharaoh's drowning in the Red Sea,A Samaritan building the golden Calf,The association of Saul with the Water test story.
The list goes on....
Answering Islam has brilliant articles regarding all of these along with plethora of quran contradictions.
Without lies, Islam DIES
That's beautiful! Thank you!!
Same goes for all religions.
@@davepugh2519 Yes! Including the religion of evolution.
@@davepugh2519same goes for Big Bang Theory.
@@DefenderOfChrist_ actually, and they dont want you to know this, but it was actually a priest who came up with the big bang theory and in no way does it disprove or contradict god.
According to the quran, Paul is also correct, let's look at what Paul says! "If an angel comes and gives you a false gospel, let them be under God's curse!", now, tell me, how did Mukhammad receive the Quran?
The same way Joseph Smith received his revelations: from a lying angel (maybe even the same one).
In the Quran, it is described that the angel (this angel was said to be Gabriel) who appeared to Muhammad was arrogant and angered- however, in the Bible, Gabriel is said to be peaceful and without arrogance, which tells me that the Quran isn’t adding up.
Jabreel was also a bully towards the illiterate
Also, fun fact I wanted to add: It is said in the Quran that if the prophet preached something false, that his aorta would be cut (Quran 69:43-46), and how did Muhammed die? Sahih al-Bukhari 4428 says: The prophet in his aliment in which he died, used to say, "Oh Aisha! I still feel the pain caused by the food I ate at Khaibar, and at this time, *I feel as if my aorta is being cut by the poison*".God really has a sense of humor, huh?
@fotisk-sg2sh the Quran still rejects the death and resurrection of Christ which is confirmed by the Old Testament, Paul, the Apostles and Jesus himself so what revelation could Muhammad possibly receive when “revelation” means to make the unknown known and rejects the basics about Jesus lol.
Using NPC-Wojaks for muslims and chads for the apostles, is peak christpilling
Early and Orthodox Christians: Pray on their knees in prostration
Muhammad: *ctrl c + ctrl v*
Christians: Hey we did that first!
Muslims: Jesus wAs a mUsLIm!! yOu sEe! tHe pRooF iS tHeRE
Jesus was Muslim
@@Cjnw Muslims get baptized in the name of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit? Had no idea
@@a.ihistory5879 when did the disciples do that? Show me
@@murgiii9556in the bible, Jesus was baptized by John the Baptist
@@murgiii9556for more clear understanding, you can see it for yourself in Matthew 3:13
If the disciples were Muslims, then why in the world would they even start Christianity? Another contradiction and senseless claim from the false prophet
Cuz Muhammad was the only one who got the honors duh. The Twelve were trying to jump the gun
No it isn't, Muslims just claim that the apostles created Islam but it was later corrupted. I am Christian btw, but I just think people need to throw away lazy arguments like yours. Also, if you would use stuff from the Bible to show that it wasn't Islam that the apostles started, then they will just claim that the Bible was corrupted and changed as well
@@doomcat6426 exactly. Not only is there no proof of this or it existing, the Quran also has been proven to be corrupt too. On top of that, the Quran says the word of Allah can’t be corrupted, and that the Gospels are said words. Surah 18:27, Surah 6:114-115. And it still makes no sense above the disciples wanting the honors. The Quran says they “submitted”, so why would they suddenly disobey? Also this video just destroys any arguments made anyways. Jesus bless you friend. ✝️❤️
according to the hadiths, the apostles knew allah falsified the crucifixion and that christians are a sin offering for muslims, my theory is that the reason the apostles being muslims started christianity is to cultivate a population of sacrificial lambs for muslimkind
@@Boundless_Border tell me you haven’t watched the video without telling me you haven’t watched the video
Amazing video🙌 I was raised Mormon and after leaving I almost converted to Islam. Thankfully the lord showed me the truth of biblical Christianity. I think the reason Islam appeals to so many people is it’s appearance of simplicity. They have the Quaran which is “directly from God” they have only Allah (no Trinity) and Muhammad is the last prophet. It is honestly the same kind of sensationalism and supposed “revealing of simple truths” that draws people to Mormonism. I guess that’s why they say Mormonism is Islam for white people 😂
You're not wrong. The text used by Muslims and the text used by Mormons have been influenced to be written by the same organisation: The Society of Jesus, founded by Loyola.
Their *only* mandate is to solidify the power and control of the Papal office.
Glad God wiped the scales from your eyes. His power to fight these delusions are a credit to His glory!
There’s also a growing divide between men and women in Western civilizations that also makes these kind of religions tempting for young men. Since they try to put more constraints on women than what I believe was actually acceptable to God.
Actually to me, the main draw of Mormonism is the incredibly hopeful, merciful, just, and purposeful theological interpretation of the plan of salvation and the afterlife that is offered nowhere else
@@tornadodex1366 Ah yes, you guys also have your own version of taqiyya I see.
@@tornadodex1366 The only salvation is thru Jesus, not some pagan ritualistic behaviour.
Watch Sam Shamoun. He debates muslims on these stuff every day
he doesn't debate, he annihilates them so badly that nobody has the balls to debate him anymore, he is basically begging them at this point to show up.
@@andree1991 Sam Shamoun, GodLogic, Chris at speakers corner, Bob I forget his channel name, Jai and doc, Rob Christian... We got some mighty folks out there on the front lines both in person and online. And by mighty I mean mightily used by the Lord!
Also Christian Prince. He makes mincemeat out of them. 😂 😂 😂
Can't forget good ol david wood and of course hatun tash.
He has not the love of God in him. He is so rude and talks down to people. He also believes you can lose your salvation. But he does refute them well
also, Peter endorsed Paul in his letters
I was hoping he would mention this.
And The disciples of the apostles affirm paul, like clement who was put in place by peter, or John's many apostles
The disciples are not infallible, nor did they know much about what he was doing. He was teaching for 3 years before he briefly met with them, and they seemed to have a big disagreement about whether or not you could eat food that had been sacrificed to idols. Peter insisted that yahweh told us not to. Paul says all food was clean and only people of weak faith needed to abstain for their own conscience.
If his teachings contradict Jesus, that is far more important. And paul contradicts Jesus a LOT. The extent by which the apostles supported him, and why, is heavily based on speculation and presumption towards the early church. But it's pretty explicit that Jesus says one thing and paul contradicts it. A small example that comes to mind, Jesus says "do not call yourself teacher, for you have only one teacher", himself. Paul repeatedly talks himself teacher. Hm.
@@dantosinferne Where does Jesus say not to call someone a teacher? Because Jesus calls many people teacher
@briandiehl9257 Matthew 23:8-13 ; "But do not be called Rabbi; for One is your teacher, and you are all brothers. (...) Do not be called instructors; for One is your Instructor, that is, Christ", quoted from lsb, when warning about exalting yourself. The whole section pretty explicitly is denouncing the exact type of behavior we see from the self-proclaimed "Apostle" and supposedly "appointed" "teacher-of-the-gentiles" Paul (1tim2:7, 2tim1:11)
Allah calls to die for him, Christ calls to live for him !
Allah wants submission from all, Christ offers his love to all !
Allah says he is the best deceiver, Christ proclaims he is the Truth.
@@moosa86 Now who is Jesus praying to? Do Muslims pray to the father
@@moosa86 your point being?
@@moosa86Imagine going to down each and everyone one of these comments just to be wrong
@@moosa86 Jesus Christ was God himself who sacrificed himself on the cross.
@@moosa86 that's all? That Allah sent Jesus to be nailed on the cross? Or do you have a follow up point?
Islam makes a whole lot more sense when you realize it’s just a bunch of Arian and gnostic themes thrown together in an area and time rife with Arianism. Islam is a Christian heresy that went on for long enough
Arianism + Arabic paganism + an opportunist = Islam
@@moosa86 funny how y ou disregard Jesus's title but y ou make da mn sure y ou add the g oat f ucker's title.
Also Jesus himself repeatedly called himself God, even associating himself with David's prophecy of the Messiah directly
He also directly indicated that he was the "I AM"
Revelations 21:[7] Jesus said : Those who conquer will inherit these things, and I will be their God, and they will be my children.
Jesus is God himself
@@Mavyn316 Then why in Matthew 14:23 says that Jesus is praying? Did he pray to himself?
It’s understandable if he’s praying with the apostles, but in the verse he’s praying alone.
Does that still shows that Jesus is God?
@@justagamerwithamoustache5240 He was separated from The Father by being in human form- The Father, The Son, and The Spirit are three and one. It's a complicated relationship but being on Earth as a human Jesus didn't have the same intimate relationship He had with The Father when in heaven, so He was praying to The Father
I know it's confusing but I hope that makes some sense
@@Mavyn316 Is there’s some bible verses to support that?
@@justagamerwithamoustache5240
Matthew 27:46
And about the ninth hour Jesus cried out with a loud voice, saying, “Eli, Eli, lama sabachthani?” that is, “My God, My God, why have You forsaken Me?”
As Jesus was being crucified, calling to The Father
The fact that Islam also did not even exist at the time of Christ or the early church (1st century) alone rejects any claim that the disciples were Muslim. It literally makes no sense even logically.
@mashedpotatoesfromkfcTrinitarianism did exist, it just hadn't been formalized. This is why people had to be baptized in the name of the trinity, why the epistles start by honoring the different members of the trinity, and why Johns vision of God's thrown showed 3 people
Trinitarianism was definitely there buddy, johns gospel is full of information on how the trinity interacts
@@camillewilliams3185 islam wasn't there when all other prophets lived except Prophet mohammed (pbuh) and we muslims still believe that all other prophets were muslims, even Adam. The word muslim means to surrender to God and everybody who did that before the time of İslam and followed the true teachings was a muslim. You could be a muslim way before islam existed. Don’t get fooled by this corrupt ahh chanel and do your research. Every point of him can be easily refuted he just sum random ahh kid thinkin he tough or sum🤣 May Allah guide you guys
The more I learn about the Quran the more I'm shocked it survived this long.
Well, what bible version do you read?
Bro, it’s Arabic people. Are we really surprised?
being savage raiders gets y ou far in life.
It was hidden from followers. Most Muslims aren’t native Arab speakers. Literacy rates are low in the Muslim world, people don’t buy or read as many books. Also the Quran is difficult to read because it’s very ADHD in how it jumps around and changes subjects. A lot of verses and stories are randomly scattered (like a puzzle). There’s often no context to anything without Hadiths.
It’s only recently that Hadiths have been translated to English and available on the internet for all to read. So people were lost about why a verse is talking about Zaynab or Mariah the Copt. The Imams would likely hide facts and details depending on the cultural acceptance of practices. For example, they’d lie that Mariah was a wife and not a slave, or that you must be peaceful. Typically in areas that encounter a lot of Christians because they have to not look as bad.
Apostasy laws = 💀
And violence and threats prevents muslims from leaving Islam
It’s pretty simple. If I follow islam, it tells me to follow the gospel, if I follow the gospel, I realize the lies of Islam. Islam is self-refuting.
Islam doesn't tell you to follow the gospel that you believe in because the gospels that Christians believe in are authorised by multiple people and it's people words inspired by god (according to Christians) and the gospel the quran talks about was sent to jesus and it was authorized by god not inspired. You have to know how the quran defines the the gospel before talking
@@zephyriaonanime5926 where is this gospel? You have no evidence of it existing. It’s astonishing that not a single shred of this “injeel” is anywhere to be found.
@@noahalban6384 you see… Paul’s goat ate it or something… this is PROOF!!!
@@noahalban6384 bro firstly it says in your own bible that jesus preached a gospel, it can't be the bible because they didn't exist yet secondly I have to to make the arguement that the quran is the word of god which I can't bother writing here 😭 you watch some othrler video and after you established that you'll have to believe it existed and, i am not even obligated to show it to you because you have no proof it doesnt exist but I have the quran even if you don't believe i have a statement that says it exists
And to add to that Muslims don't need it right because it was for the people of jesus not us so we wouldn't benefit of having it, but if you still want some kind of proof I can argue that the injeel have been corrupted which can be proven, and therefore whatever was before it got corrupted is the injeel, however I don't usually use that argument becaue it doesn't matter with it is here with us today or not we have the quran
Never mind the fact that Muhammad was born around 570.... He was a few years late to the party...
@@moosa86 wrong, John the Baptist lead the way for the lamb of God Yeshua (Jesus). Muhammed isn't anointed, he is in hell.
@Faithexplorer4376
3 minutes ago
lets debunk you
your gospels Most scholars agree that Mark was the first written no earlier than 70CE. So about 37-40 years. The consensus is that Matthew followed between 80 - 90CE,(50-60 years later) then Luke between 90CE and 100CE (60 to 70 years) and finally John written between 100-110CE or 70 to 80 years later.
Paul:
Hebrews 6:6 :
If they shall fall away, to renew them again unto repentance; seeing they crucify to themselves the Son of God afresh, and put [him] to an open shame.
So there is just one example of how the Quran does not agree with the message of Paul. Note the Quran says it is no befitting to Allah that he should beget a son, this is referring to the Christian saying that God has a son i.e. Jesus is the son of God. So hence the Quran denies that Allah has a son. When we read Hebrews 6:6 we see that Paul teaches that there is indeed a son of God and Paul is referring to Jesus in Hebrews 6:6, the Quran denies that Allah has a son, and the Quran is specifically denying that Jesus is the son of God in surah 19:35. So there is just one case in which the Quran explicitly denies with Paul. Here are some more differences:
quranic commentry claim
Another renowned commentary, Al-Qurtubi, says of Surah 61:14:
It was said that THIS VERSE was revealed about the apostles of Jesus, may peace and blessing be upon him. Ibn Ishaq stated that of the apostles and disciples that Jesus sent (to preach) there were Peter AND PAUL who went to Rome; Andrew and Matthew who went to the land of the cannibals; Thomas who went to Babel in the eastern lands; Philip who went to Africa; John went to Dac-sos(?) which is the tribe to whom the sleepers of the cave belonged; Jacob went to Jerusalem; Bartholomew went to the lands of Arabia, specifically Al-Hijaz; Simon who went to the Barbarians; Judas and Barthas(?) who went to Alexandria and its surrounding regions.
Allah supported them (the apostles) with evidence so that they prevailed (thahirin) meaning they became the party with the upper hand. Just as it is said, "An object appeared on the wall" meaning it is clearly visible (alu-wat) on the wall. Allah, who is glorified and exalted, knows the truth better and to Him is the return and retreat. (Source; translated into English by Dimitrius, bold and capital emphasis ours)
Notice how al-Qurtubi had no qualms in admitting that Paul was a legitimate follower of Christ! If al-Qurtubi is correct, then this means that Paul was one of the followers whom God gave the power to overcome the unbelievers and prevail!
My Response
No where does Qurtubi say Paul is a legimite follower, all Qurtubi says is that Paul went with Peter. Just because someone is a supposed follower of a religion or a person does not make that person correct. There are several people who claim to be followers of some doctrine or belief and don’t even follow it! Just because Paul happened to be a follower of Jesus does not automatically make Paul a true follower of Jesus. It is clear that Paul mis-interpreted Jesus’ message and taught something completely different to what Jesus taught, this could have been an un-intentional mistake on the part of Paul. He is a human so he is fallible so hence he mis-understood Jesus’ message and taught something completely different all the while believing he was teaching what Jesus taught. Paul was simply wrong. So hence what Qurtubi said has no ground breaking statements. Paul may have been a follower of Jesus, but sadly he didn’t know he was doing harm to Jesus’ message and was teaching something contradictory to what Jesus taught and that he was not a true follower of Jesus.
Where did Ibn Ishaq, Ibn Kathir, al Tabari, and al Qurtubi view Paul in such a positive light? In fact Shamoun refuted himself when he quoted Ibn Kathir here is it again:
"This is what happened. When Allah raised ‘Isa to heaven, his followers divided into sects and groups. Some of them believed in what Allah sent ‘Isa as, a servant of Allah, His Messenger, and the son of His female-servant.
However, some of them went to the extreme over ‘Isa, believing that he was the son of Allah. Some of them said that ‘Isa was Allah Himself, while others said that he was one of a Trinity. Allah mentioned these false creeds in the Qur’an and refuted them. The Christians remained like this until the third century CE, when a Greek king called, Constantine, became a Christian for the purpose of destroying Christianity. Constantine was either a philosopher, or he was just plain ignorant. Constantine changed the religion of ‘Isa by adding to it and deleting from it. He established the rituals of Christianity and the so-called Great Trust which is in fact the Great Treachery. He also allowed them to eat the meat of swine, changed the direction of the prayer that ‘Isa established to the east, built churches for ‘Isa, and added ten days to the fast as compensation for a sin that he committed, as claimed. So the religion of ‘Isa became the religion of Constantine, who built more than twelve thousand churches, temples and monasteries for the Christians as well as the city that bears his name, Constantinople (Istanbul). THROUGHOUT THIS TIME, the Christians had the upper hand and dominated the Jews. ALLAH AIDED THEM AGAINST THE JEWS BECAUSE THEY USED TO BE CLOSER TO THE TRUTH THAN THE JEWS, even though both groups were and still are disbelievers, may Allah’s curse descend on them." (Tafsir Ibn Kathir (Abridged), Volume 2, Parts 3, 4, & 5 (Surat Al-Baqarah, Verse 253, to Surat An-Nisa, Verse 147),
This does not seem that Ibn Ishaq viewed Paul in such a positive light, Ibn Ishaq called Christians disbelievers! The reason he did so is because they believe Jesus died, and they believed Jesus is God which are all teachings of Paul so hence Paul is a disbeliever according to Ibn Ishaq!
@@Faithexplorer4376the quran calls the gospel the word of God. If it is fakse so is islam
@@MarkelMathurin no it doesn't Qur'an refers to the Injil, it should not be taken to mean the New Testament, or its four gospels, for the gospels were not revealed to Jesus.
@@moosa86 Wrong.
The 2 olive trees in scripture are representative of Israel and the Gentiles
Jeremiah 11:16 "The LORD once called you ‘a green olive tree, beautiful with good fruit.’"
Now there is 2 is because in Christ we are also grafted into an olive tree as gentiles as God said to Abraham
Genesis 22:18 "and in your offspring shall all the nations of the earth be blessed, because you have obeyed my voice.”
the Lampstands represent the 7 churches who Jesus directly addresses in Revelation 11:4
nowhere in scripture do these 2 represent persons, but rather a group of people, and nowhere does it closely talk about Muhammed. whatsoever 💀
no they say the bible is corrupted so the real one says what ever they need
Problem is, the Quran says this can’t happen. Surah 18:27, Surah 6:114-115. So they can’t claim they’re corrupted without contradicting the Quran
@@danielromani2964 no i have seen them circunvent this too, their mental gymnastics have no limits
@@republicradio431 well, what can you do but make them dance? 😂
@@danielromani2964 tbh im not in the mood for recentfull comments, its sad and its a struggle to talk to them, sorry
@@danielromani2964 The 3 verses you brought up are talking about the Quran, not the Bible or the Torah
Everything Quran said about Isa is different from the Jesus of the bible. Have you think about why Arab Christians don't call Jesus Isa? It shows that they are different.
Is that different Jesus in the room with us right now?
More than Jesus is different between the two. Gabriel literally behaves like Satan, and Allah is more like Loki than God
It has never occurred to me that Arabic speaking Christians would not just naturally use the Arabic words, in the same way that we say Jesus and not Yeshua.
Do you have documentation
@@mgvilaca if you want to be technical about it, yes, because God is all present
@@danielromani2964the Quran clearly talks about God, not about a created deity like Loki, but it's wrong about God in many ways. Arabic speaking christians have always called God "Allah"
It's so wild how the Quran goes from "Yeah Jews and Christians are Cool" to "Our sins are to be held up and forgiven by being pushed over onto them" LOL
Doesn’t the Quran order Muslims to kill non-Muslims in some cases??
Strawman.
With regard to its meaning, al-Nawawi said in his commentary: “The meaning of this hadeeth is the same as the hadeeth narrated by Abu Hurayrah: “For each person there is a place in Paradise and a place in Hell.” When the believer enters Paradise, his place in Hell is taken over by the kaafir because he deserves that because of his kufr. The meaning of the phrase “your ransom from the Fire” is that you could have entered Hell, but this is your ransom because Allaah has decreed a certain number to fill it; when the kuffaar enter Hell because of their kufr and sins, this is like a ransom for the Muslims. With regard to the report, “On the Day of Resurrection, some of the Muslims will come with sins” - Allaah will forgive the Muslims these sins and will absolve them of them, and He will put the like of those sins onto the Jews and Christians because of their kufr and sins. So they will enter Hell because of their own actions, not because of the sins of the Muslims. This report has to be interpreted in this manner, because Allaah says (interpretation of the meaning):
“And no bearer of burdens shall bear another’s burden” [Faatir 35:18]
They're like stone age lef tists. They tell us they respect us while mur dering and ra ping us.
That is one of the greatest proof that Quran is not from God. It's from Muhammad's mood changes.
@@murgiii9556not reading that fake stuff
Is the Gospel the word of God?
Quran 5:47
So let the people of the Gospel judge by what Allah has revealed in it. And those who do not judge by what Allah has revealed are ˹truly˺ the rebellious.
Ok, so it is the word of God. Then what does the Gospel have to say about the Quran?
Galatians 1:8-9 NKJV
[8] But even if we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel to you than what we have preached to you, let him be accursed. [9] As we have said before, so now I say again, if anyone preaches any other gospel to you than what you have received, let him be accursed.
Ok, so the Gospel tells me the Quran is false. But it had to be corrupted, right?
Quran 18:27
Recite what has been revealed to you from the Book of your Lord. None can change His Words, nor can you find any refuge besides Him.
Ok, so nobody can change God's words. So if the Gospel isn't the word of God, the Quran is false because it says that it is, and if it is the word of God, the Quran is false anyway because the Gospel tells us not to believe it.
Islamic dilemma moment. Always hits
Used this countless times. They always avoid this subject. I’ve even had arguments that the “originals” were destroyed or never written down to begin with
@@danielromani2964 The document situation is funny. The only written parts of the Quran drom Muhammad’s time were the Birmingham Manuscript, which is barely 4 Surahs long. Everything else is 200 years older. Meanwhile, the full Bible was, albeit not compiled, already finished by the year 100, and in widespread circulation and used for teaching in churches by 195
remember that Mohammed supposedly got the Quran from an angel. correct me if I'm wrong
@@theyseeyou7283 it was. Not only does this follow warnings in the Bible that predated Islam by centuries, the only account is from one of the Hadiths I believe, written after the Quran. And the angel constantly attacks and chokes Muhammad. Sounds exactly like Satan
How can you be in a religion that has not yet been started for another 300 or so years?
same for mormonism ....
600 years thats how long it took them
They claim that since “Islam” means “Submission to God”, anyone who submits to God is a Muslim by default. They also call many historical Jewish figures “prophets”. Prophet Abraham, prophet Lot, prophet David, prophet Solomon, etc. Since their concept of prophet is “someone exemplary and near perfect”, they ignore and erase all the known mistakes of these figures, such as Moses hitting the rock. Every bit of evil Muhammad committed is considered blessed and permitted by Allah, and as such not sin (how convenient, huh).
@@arcturus4762It's a good thing that the Bible doesn't have God doing, commanding, or allowing anything evil.
@@Henriettethestrang3 Ah, yes. When God allows evil to happen "wHy GoD DoEsn'T dO aNytHinG!??!?" but when God punishes evil "OmmGg GoD iS eVIl"
My favorite thing is how they call Jesus Muslim, but Jesus drank wine... lol
The Bible says that Jesus drank wine, which also claims that Noah was drunk and naked, and all sorts of slander against otherwise noble and upright human beings…
And as for alcohol consumption, do you recognize that your ability to choose is the embodiment of worship? Asserting your will over another is acting like God, forfeiting your preferences for someone else for no valid reason is worshipping others than God. When you drink you become one of 2 kinds of ppl: a person that is so aggressive that you intend to make ppl bow to you and so you proclaim yourself as god, or you become so docile that you lose all sense of defense and anyone that is willing to assert themselves over you, you willingly worship them.
Realize what worship is, it’s your freedom of choice. Live life on your terms and acquiesce to God only.
@@wc7zr Man, their minds are closed.
@@Mroat84669 it’s a cliche, but they’re in the matrix and we still have to poke our fellow humans awake in the hopes that someone will wake up. It’s ok to previously have been duped, but to remain foolish out of obstinance is their own folly, but we must try nonetheless.
Islamists in the comments are gonna be very ignorant. they are actually stupid or evil.
It's stuff like this is why I converted from Islam to Christianity. Most muslims cannot also answer why the Quran has gnostics texts within it? Lots of Gospel of Thomas, but also Gospel of Infancy..which is a 5th-6th century text?
But I thought the bible had been corrupted or uplifted by Allah according to the muslims? Why is it referencing a book that is gnostic (christian fanfiction) from the later centuries? A book that I can buy from the book store?
Your reasoning for rejecting the truth makes no sense,so the Quran is false because it referenced a book which the catholic rejected. But the Catholic Church has no authority in the eyes of Muslim in determining what is from god and what is not. So my question to you is why did you consider them as a authority to dictate the Quran when you were allegedly a Muslim.
But if you were to use that very standard then the bible itself is false for quoting books rejected by the church;
The following are mentioned in the Hebrew Bible:
The Book of Jasher is mentioned in Joshua 10:13[1] and 2 Samuel 1:18[2] and also possibly referenced in the Septuagint rendition of 1 Kings 8:53.[3][4] From the context in the Book of Samuel, it is implied that it was a collection of poetry. Several books have claimed to be this lost text, some of which are discounted as pseudepigrapha. Certain members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints secured the copyright to a particular English translation of one of these and republished it in 1887 in Salt Lake City.[5]
The Book of the Wars of the Lord[6] is mentioned in Numbers 21:14.[7] The Book of the Wars of the Lord is also cited in the Book of Jasher (translated by Moses Samuel c. 1840, edited by J. H. Parry 1887) chapter 90:48 as being a collaborative record written by Moses, Joshua and the children of Israel.
The Chronicles of the Kings of Israel and Chronicles of the Kings of Judah are mentioned in the Books of Kings (1 Kings 14:19, 29).[8] They are said to tell of events during the reigns of Kings Jeroboam of Israel and Rehoboam of Judah, respectively. The Chronicles of the Kings of Israel is again mentioned in 1 Kings 16:20[9] regarding King Zimri, and both books are mentioned no less than 30 other times throughout 1 and 2 Kings.[10]
The Book of Shemaiah the Prophet and Story of the Prophet Iddo (also called Visions of Iddo the Seer or The Annals of the Prophet Iddo) are mentioned in the Second Book of Chronicles.[11] This book has been completely lost to history, save for its title.
The Manner of the Kingdom (also called The Book of Statutes or 3 Samuel); referenced in 1 Samuel 10:25.[12]
The Acts of Solomon;[13] referenced in 1 Kings 11:41.[14]
The Annals of King David (also called The Book of the Annals of King David or The Chronicles of King David, which could be a reference to the rest of 1 Chronicles);[15] referenced in 1 Chronicles 27:24.[16]
The Book of Samuel the Seer (also called Samuel the Seer or The Acts of Samuel the Seer, which could be the same as 1 and 2 Samuel);[17] referenced in 1 Chronicles 29:29.[18]
The Book of Nathan the Prophet (also called Nathan the Prophet, The Acts of Nathan the Prophet or History of Nathan the Prophet);[17] referenced in 1 Chronicles 29:29, and also 2 Chronicles 9:29.[19]
The Book of Gad the Seer (also called Gad the Seer or The Acts of Gad the Seer);[20] referenced in 1 Chronicles 29:29.
The Prophecy of Ahijah (also called The Prophesy of Ahijah the Shilonite,[15] which may be a reference to 1 Kings 14:2-18); referenced in 2 Chronicles 9:29.
The Book of the Kings of Judah and Israel (also called The Book of the Kings of Israel and Judah); referenced in 2 Chronicles 16:11,[21] 2 Chronicles 27:7[22] and 2 Chronicles 32:32.[23] May be the same as 1 and 2 Kings.
The Book of Jehu (also called The Book of Jehu the son of Hanani) could be a reference to 1 Kings 16:1-7. Referenced in 2 Chronicles 20:34.[24]
The Story of the Book of Kings (also called Midrash on the Book of Kings);[15] referenced in 2 Chronicles 24:27.[25]
The Acts of Uzziah (also called The Book by the prophet Isaiah); perhaps the same as the Book of Isaiah.[17] Referenced in 2 Chronicles 26:22.[26]
The Vision of Isaiah (also called The Vision of the Prophet Isaiah); may be identical to the pseudepigraphal Ascension of Isaiah, and may also refer to the existing Book of Isaiah. Referenced in 2 Chronicles 32:32.[23]
The Acts of the Kings of Israel (also called The Acts and Prayers of Manasseh);[27] may be identical to The Book of the Kings of Israel. Referenced in 2 Chronicles 33:18.[28]
The Sayings of the Seers (also called The Acts of the Seers);[15] referenced in 2 Chronicles 33:19.[29]
The Laments for Josiah (also called Lamentations). This event is recorded in the existing Book of Lamentations. Referenced in 2 Chronicles 35:25.[30]
The Chronicles of King Ahasuerus (also called The Book of Records of the Chronicles or The Book of the Chronicles of the Kings of Media and Persia); referenced in Esther 2:23,[31] 6:1,[32] 10:2,[33] and Nehemiah 12:23.[34]
Mennonite scholar David Ewart has mentioned that Nestle's Greek New Testament lists some 132 New Testament passages that appear to be verbal allusions to paracanonical books.[48]
Pagan authors quoted or alluded to are:[49][50]
Menander, Thais 218,[51] quoting Euripides,[52][53] "Evil company corrupts good habits" (1 Corinthians 15:33)[54]
Epimenides, de Oraculis, (Titus 1:12-13[55] where Paul introduces Epimenides as "a prophet of the Cretans"; see Epimenides paradox)
Aratus, Phaenomena 5, (Acts 17:28,[56] where Paul refers to the words of "some of your own poets")
Non-canonical books quoted or alluded to are:[49]
Book of Enoch (Jude 1:4,[57] 1:6,[58] 1:13,[59] 1:14-15,[60] 2 Peter 2:4[61] and 3:13,[62][63][64] and John 7:38).[65][66]
Apocryphon of Jannes and Jambres, according to Origen (2 Timothy 3:8[67] "... as Jannes and Jambres withstood Moses")
Epistle to the Laodiceans (Colossians 4:16,[68] "read the epistle from Laodicea")
Life of Adam and Eve (2 Corinthians 11:14,[69] "Satan as an angel of light", and 12:2,[70] "Third Heaven")[71]
A lost section of the Assumption of Moses (Jude 9[72] "Michael... body of Moses")
Ascension of Isaiah (Hebrews 11:37,[73] "they were sawn in two")
Paul's letter to the Corinthians before 1 Corinthians (1 Corinthians 5:9,[74] "I wrote to you in my letter...")
Paul's letter to the Ephesians before Ephesians (Ephesians 3:3,[75] "As I wrote afore in few words...")
An unknown messianic prophecy possibly from a non-canonical source, quoted in Matthew 2:23 that states "he will be called a Nazorian" (ὅτι Ναζωραῖος κληθήσεται). "Nazorian" is typically rendered as "Nazarene" ("from Nazareth"), as in Acts 24:5,[76] where Christians are referred to as "the sect of the Nazorians/Nazarenes" (τῶν Ναζωραίων αἱρέσεως). This is speculated[by whom?] to be a vague allusion to a quote about Samson in Judges 13:5 that uses a similar-sounding word: "the child shall be a Nazirite" (ναζιρ)
An unknown version of Genesis (possibly a targum, midrash or other commentary), quoted by Paul in 1 Corinthians 15:45,[77] as a reference to Christ's being "the Last Adam who became a life-giving spirit" (οὕτως καὶ γέγραπται· Ἐγένετο ὁ πρῶτος ἄνθρωπος Ἀδὰμ εἰς ψυχὴν ζῶσαν· ὁ ἔσχατος Ἀδὰμ εἰς πνεῦμα ζῳοποιοῦν). It has been speculated[by whom?] that Paul is simply paraphrasing Genesis 2:7,[78] but there is no clear indication that this is not a complete quote.
An unknown text quoted by Paul in 1 Corinthians 2:9,[79] suggested by Origen to be a lost apocryphal book:[80] "But as it is written, 'No eye has seen, no ear has heard, and no mind has imagined the things that God has prepared for those who love him." This may also be an allusion to the similar Isaiah 64:4,[81] "For from days of old they have not heard or perceived by ear, nor has the eye seen a God besides You, Who acts in behalf of the one who waits for Him.'".
An unknown messianic prophecy, possibly from a non-canonical source, quoted in Luke 24:46,[82] speculated to be a vague allusion to Hosea 6:2:[83][84] "Thus it is written, and thus it behoved Christ to suffer, and to rise from the dead the third day."
An unknown messianic prophecy, possibly from a non-canonical source, quoted in Mark 9:12,[85] speculated[by whom?] to be a vague allusion to Isaiah 53: "and how it is written of the Son of man, that he must suffer many things, and be set at nought."
@@Needlestolearn That wasn't the only reason I left, the Quran has questionable preservation. Like its flat out embarrassing, and wasn't even canonized until 1924 in Cairo?
I'm also part of the Eastern Orthodox denomination, which has 81 books.
There is also a blatant contradiction. The Quran claims that God's words can't be corrupted, but Injeel and Zabul are God's words? So how can muslims claim corruption? Some others say that the bible has been uplifted by Allah? Then why can I walk in a book store and find the same stories?
Gnostics texts biggest issue is that some of them come WAY after christ, like CENTURIES, which is why it was rejected. The disciples had actually walked and lived with Christ, and even Ibn Ishaq confirms this in his book (which comes out BEFORE the hadiths) "The Life of Muhammed" pg 653.
Muhammed more than likely learned it from the gnostic jews and christians. But again, ITS FICTION! Yet the Quran claims these late centuries works are authentic?
I'm not here to debate, turning to Christ was the best decision I ever made.
☦
@@Needlestolearnbut none of those are gnostic texts
@@NeedlestolearnIt doesn’t matter what Muslims think, the Catholic Church has sole and divine objective authority on that issue making the Muslims wrong
@@briandiehl9257 they’re apocryphal books. And there still rejected.
didnt islam come 600 years after jesus death?
it did
Yes it's because Islam is only lies.
The more I see about Islam, the more similar it is to Mormonism
That’s bc Joseph Smith literally took Islam and tried to fit it in to Christianity, but the problem is you can’t replicate a building on an already faulty foundation.
Islam was spread by the sword.
X m
Explain?
The Quran also validates the New Testament while not claiming that Jesus is God the Son. It contradicts itself
It is a lie where did Quran validates the NT?
@@moosa86 Mark 1:11, Mark 9:7, Matthew 14:3, Matthew 3:16-17, Luke 1:35, John 3:16?
@@moosa86 It was taught by Christ's disciples, though. Ignatius of Antioch (who was mentored by John the Apostle) speaks about it. In the first century, too. So do the early Church Fathers. And the Didache.
Also, Jesus explicitly mentions the Son (which he is) as being equal in Divinity to the Father and Holy Spirit (Matthew 28:19, John 5:23), and identifies Himself as God. Hence, that makes His full title God the Son of God the Father.
@@moosa86Jesus refers to himself as ‘I am’, just like the father does. In John 8:56-58, Jesus begins saying, “Your father Abraham rejoiced to see my day: and he saw it, and was glad. Then said the Jews unto him, Thou art not yet fifty years old, and hast thou seen Abraham? Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Before Abraham was, I am.” God refers to himself as ‘I am’ in Exodus 3:13-14, which states, “And Moses said unto God, Behold, when I come unto the children of Israel, and shall say unto them, The God of your fathers hath sent me unto you; and they shall say to me, What is his name? what shall I say unto them? And God said unto Moses, I AM THAT I AM: and he said, Thus shalt thou say unto the children of Israel, I AM hath sent me unto you.” You also can’t forget John 10:30, which is where Jesus clearly states, “I and the father are one.”
The Quran defeats itself consistently. It's so bad. 😂 😂 😂
The Bible and Quran issue is the classic "Two Guards" riddle.
What is that riddle? Can you explain?
@@GodGuy8 I think the one where one tells nothing but the truth, the other nothing but lies?
@@GodGuy8 Yeah Daniel got it right. There are two guards in front of two doors. One guard only tells lies, the other guard only tells the truth. One door leads to certain death, the other leads to freedom. You don't know which guard is which or which door is which. You may ask each guard only one question. How do you find the door?
The riddle is solved when you ask each guard "Which door would the other guard tell me is safe?"
If guard A says "Guard B would tell you my door is safe" and guard B says "Guard A would say his door is safe", you can conclude that the door which guard A is guarding is the door of certain death. Guard A is the truthful guard which is why he said "Guard B would tell you my door is safe" because that's a truthful answer. Guard B is the liar guard which is why he said "Guard A would tell you his door is safe" because that's an untruthful answer.
@@Doc-Holliday1851 my head hurts bro im sorry its a little complicated
@@GodGuy8 Likewise, the Bible says it is truthful, and the Quran say's it is truthful. If we accept that only one can be correct that means one of them is lying so we have to employ a similar tactic. It's a little more complicated because there's no such rule that says one of the books can only tell lies. But to balance that we thankfully we aren't constrained to a single question from each.
The Quran says several things.
A: The Bible is the Word of God
B: The Word of God cannot be corrupted
C: The Bible has been corrupted
Already without consulting the Bible we can tell that the Quran is inconsistent and therefore cannot be telling the truth. When we consult the Bible things get even clearer
The Bible contradicts major points of faith within the Quran. So if the Quran is correct when it says "The Bible is the Word of God." then we know the Quran can't be.
It's not exactly 1x1 comparison. But the general idea is there.
I've just sent this video to David Wood on Twitter also tagging the Apostate Prophet (who's an agnostic)
*Who's an agnostic that too criticises Islam and who is also interested in Christianity.
They thought it was real...but Allahs
(Haha, Wordplay)
Edit: How does this have 41 likes!? This is probably the dumbest joke I've left on a video 💀
You dropped this👑
@@aaron2072nah, that’s Jesus’ crown
@CatholicaVeritas777
Revelation 4:10 - ...fall down before him that sat upon the throne, and worship him that liveth for ever and ever, and cast their crowns before the throne,...
I mean, you're not wrong
Great video to release on the eve of the feast of Sts. Peter and Paul. Pray for us, O Holy Chiefs of the Apostles.
يسوع المسيح هو الطريق والحق والحياه ☦️
Speak English
@@wc7zrHe said Jesus Christ is the way the truth and the life.
@@fotisvon9943 I know. The point that this person is writing it in Arabic is really obtuse and comes off as gaslighting bc the commenter’s assumption is that Muslims are Arab. Muslims come from all walks of life, and some humans that call themselves Christian, agnostic or even atheist, or any religion really, are actually Muslim in their hearts, bc they innately recognize humanity’s right to exist on a more abstract scale rather than asserting that the right to exist is based on an excuse that identifies as a human, a man and white (or cherry pick whatever race you want to insert to assert your dominance). This comment in reference is written on a dense pretense.
56k+. Wow. You've come a long way. I Remember when I used to hope with all my heart this channel blows up and not struggle crawling for a long time. Felt like I couldn't do anything. But seems things ae looking up 🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉
Reasoning left islam a long long time ago
Reasoning and Islam don’t go in the same sentence
I left Islam after watching this video
If you have any questions or want to learn more about the reliability of the Gospels, check out my playlists or check out talkaboutdoubts.com if you want to talk to someone about questions or doubts you may have about Christianity.
Welcome to freedom brother.🙏❤️
I'm named after st Paul and always debunk Islam hust Like the saint🗿
You must take Islam's sources carefully, cause it's common for them to twist their sources to silent the critics.
Yes it's called taqiyya
They even add words in translation to make the message more appealing
Muslims casually throw the best scholars and authors under the bus all the time, it’s natural for them.
Yea they promote lying lol and Islamic country will destroy ancient artifacts if they can
To be a little more simple:
They drank alcohol
Alcohol is Haram in Islam.
@@GhayelRubio Yes, hence the contradiction. If Jesus and the apostles were muslim why were they drinking alcohol? (Last supper)
Are you dumb?? Alcohol wasnt made haram until the last years of Islam 😂😂
Never underestimate a Muhammadans ability to throw his scriptures under the bus.
The funniest thing about the Quran being the direct revelation of God is that it’s actually Jibreel that speaks to Muhammad, thus making it the word of Jibreel.
1. **The Annunciation to Mary**: The most prominent example is the Annunciation, where Gabriel appears to Mary to announce that she will conceive and bear a son, Jesus (Luke 1:26-38). This is a key moment in Christian belief, marking the beginning of the incarnation of Jesus.
2. **Gabriel's Message to Zechariah**: Gabriel also appears to Zechariah, the father of John the Baptist, to announce that his wife Elizabeth will bear a son who will prepare the way for Jesus (Luke 1:11-20).
Your lord Jesus couldn't tell Mary about his own birth that he had to send Gabriel, by your own logic, Gabriel is god? 😂😂
@@syedinsaf7481mary gets news, she is not speaker of god(prophet). If you take mary as prophet just because she talked with angel, then you have to obey everyone who claims they saw angel. Jesus says the true guy is known by his fruits, and he is word of god himself
@@syedinsaf7481 Except none of that works since Mary wasn't given an important message to the world about a supposed "Revelation" and thought she was possessed.
Mary received news about the birth of Christ the King that funny enough was already known to most Jews at the time.. shocker right? your whole argument is goofy
We know who the disciples of Jesus were...they are historic actual people, they were Jews with the exception of a few of the 70 after Jesus' ascension. There is reliable documentation, independent non-biblical reporting, and extant letters. They were not Muslims.
Yup the best way to disprove the Quran is by reading it.
How were they Muslims if Islam was founded 600 years later? Same people will tell you Adam and Eve were Muslim...MAKE IT MAKE SENSE
@@markinson8019 None of that makes any sense. I spoke to Muslims who believe Adam and Eve were Muslims, who believe the deciples were Muslims, that entire topic contradicts their own beliefs. Even in the Quran, they use biblical figures and just say "he was Muslim". My question is this, we all know Christian means follower of Christ, what the hell is a Muslim then? Wouldn't one be a follower of Mohammed? Then how on earth are the deciples, king Solomon, Adam, and Eve even Muslims when they existed before the religion did? You can't cherry pick information like that. The entire religion makes no sense whatsoever
@@markinson8019 By your logic that means Jesus is Muslim right? How on earth does any of that make sense?
@@ashuade7382 you got that all wrong, there are no "islam" before muhammad, the past religion are the in the past, the teaching on believe allah exist before islam, but they are not called islam cus why not i dont know im no expert
@@ashuade7382 he did submit to god as the definition of a muslim
God bless you Brother. Keep fighting for the faith🙏
I all way question how could Jesus and the apostles? Be Muslims. When there no such thing as Muslim during his time
@@yugioh5222 "Muslims" mean those who submit
@@pillow7672 submit to who? Zeus? Hades? Shiva? please be more specific.
God bless you doing this series brother. Allowing healthy and digestible discourse of information to those who seek it.
I have a feeling the Muslims are gonna raid the comments saying stuff like “bro learned the Quran from McDonald’s when they probably didn’t even watch the video
Intellectual laziness is their friend
They are brainwashed from the farts of Mohammad 😂😂😂
@@moosa86 THE CORRUPTED quran :
quran 11:81
Hafs quran : Lot was commanded to bring his family, EXCLUDING his wife, and don’t let anyone look back
quran 11:81
Al-Bazzi quran : Lot was commanded to bring his family, INCLUDING his wife, but she will look back
It’s better to read it in arabic.
This video is literally trying to defend a fairytale abt the god of good’s war against the god evil by incarnating himself into human form on earth to perform a suicide mission to free mankind from the curse of original sin casted by the god of evil, Satan. After that, if humans just believe with all their heart, will they be magically cured of original sin. Christianity is Santa Claus for grown ups. Not only that, but original sin is a lie to manipulate you into not appreciating your self worth and becoming selfless, another Christian virtue, so that you turn yourself into a sacrificial lamb. Talk abt manipulating humans into mindless sheep by taking away their ability to love God by learning how to value and love yourself and your life. Islam teaches one to love God bc you love your existence and learn to appreciate the gift that only God gave you.
So your bad joke abt poor rebuttals looks pretty dumb right now when you bring to light what it is that you’re trying to uphold in the first place. Cringeworthy.
Where are the mooselims that say “ before this video i was Muslim and after still Muslim”
lol, here. And feel free to ask away.
I’m happy to answer why.
@@wc7zrwhy is Muhammad called the patern of conduct (what everyone should be like) if he was a pedophile?
Source: Sahih al-Bukahri
Aisha was six years old when her nikah (marriage) was officially contracted, and nine years later when it was consummated
@@Jakov-or7fp bc in the 7th century he defined how mankind can remain civilized and neutral that we are still unable to grasp in 2024. Unlike secularism that claims that man’s belief in God is subjective and cannot be rationally be agreed upon, and therefore has no bearing on mankind to come together to cooperate and govern in a civil society, Islam objectively defines mankind’s need to define God in order for mankind to understand individual rights and come together in a civilized society. Islam indicates that to exist means to be created, and therefore the human condition objectively identifies God as the excuse one uses to justify one’s existence. Under this point, the argument of “your god vs my god vs no god” is eliminated bc if anyone wants to exist and exercise their free will to exist, the excuse mankind needs to use objectively must be all encompassing to include all creation in order to remain objective and fair over the existence for all. Therefore, God is objectively defined in Islam by maintaining that a responsible citizen of the human existence must validate their permission to exist by maintaining that God is a singular entity in order to unify all creation despite its different traits to maintain its right to exist. If humans claim that one god is in charge of one domain and another god is in charge of another domain, then this causes discord and gives humans an excuse to take sides to justify eradicating the existence of one over the other, when in truth neither side has any power to eradicate the existence of good or bad completely. That power only remains in the objective force that is continually putting things into existence within this realm we are able to perceive. A Muslim is a responsible citizen of the human race that recognizes that God is their validation to exist, and therefore objectively defines God with the following criteria: God is a single entity, God must not be conceptualized and must not be rationalized in any concrete notion; that God must remain abstracted in order for God to remain neutral as a mediator in order to legitimize the existence amongst all creation, whether inanimate or possessing a will. That God has an independent will that mankind can identify thru observing patterns of this existence, both within our consciousness and in nature. God’s will is only communicated thru the affects caused by:
1. natural patterns; both external and internal
2. circumstances isolated by the will of any creation
3. events sealed in the past
With this understanding, a Muslim (aka responsible citizen that intends to uphold rationality and truth) must then hone their ability in respect to the observations of this existence to exercise free will. Our worship is expressed through our constant decision making. If we forego our ability to make decisions to others with no valid reason, we are then worshipping others. A Muslim must empower themselves thru good work to build discernment, intelligence and ability to make smart decisions according to their desires alone, to gain the ability to forfeit decision making to God alone, bc unlike creation that has needs, God has no needs, and put you and I into this existence to exercise our will according to our desires with the expectation that we empower ourselves to be responsible with our desires. God granted each of us that gift of life. You will only love God truly if you can learn to love your life enough to defend it and to defend it for others just the same.
You’re argument of how humans survived in the 7th century by marrying extremely young, in a time when mortality rates were low, boys went off to war as teenagers, and no one washed their hands with soap, including Jesus himself, is placing yourself on a pedestal and looking down on the ancestry of mankind for having less than you but enjoying the fruits of their labor. This argument is repeatedly used to distract you from how subjugated you truly are from recognizing your God given right to live life to the fullest.
@@Jakov-or7fp Aisha was not 6 years old when she was married. Meccans begin to measure age after the age of puberty, so Aisha was 6 years old after puberty when she was married (17). The marriage was consummated when she was 9 years old after puberty (20). Throughout the world in history, people used to get married at young ages, where the average age for 16.
@@therandom3523 This is what Jesus says to do to people like you *Matthew 18:6* and I couldn't agree more.
wow this is crazy! didn't expect you to make videos on islam. thanks!!
Keep up the good work!
You touched on this in passing near the end. But if you take out every book of Paul's, there is still not a lot in the gospels, acts, epistles that are left, nor Revelation that Islam agrees with. It's like they shut down Paul for reasons, but are still left with everything else left in the New Testament that also disagrees with them.
Praise Jesus!
If someone told me Islam was created by a 14 year old who figured out time travel on CZcams and went back to start his own religion, i would be like "yeah that checks out"
Please keep making these kind of videos and stay strong.
Thanks for the lesson bro 😎
Calling Jesus and His apostles, Muslims, when Jesus is and all his apostles were Jews, is like calling a bunch of oranges vegetables 😂
He meant Surah 61:14, not 31:14. Great video as always!
Correct my wires got crossed if that's what I said
You know, a certain German dictator hated Paul too. Like the Muslims, he claimed that Paul twisted Jesus's true teachings.
This was an amazing video thank you
I have one for you
The Quran denies Jesus as the son of God, saying He was a "good prophet"
But he cannot BE a good prophet. He was either God, insane, or a conman.
How can he not be a prophet lmao
@@syedinsaf7481 He claimed to be God
@@moosa86The Son proceeds from The Father. What’s your point?
@@moosa86 Okay well, you’re wrong, but you’re entitled to believe in delusion. Reality will move on without you.
@@moosa86 How many times are you gonna get refuted before you stop yapping.
1 John 4:12 doesn't refute him, Jesus claims to have seen the Father, and been sent by him(lets just ignore the fact that Jesus claiming to the Son here would directly contradict your entire narrative)
John 14:9 " He that hath seen Me hath seen the Father; and how sayest thou then, ‘Show us the Father’?" woahh.. crazy right? No one has ever seen God yet supposedly if you have seen Jesus you have seen the Father.
1 Timothy 6:16: speaks about Jesus lil bro but obviously your not gonna show that huh?
"That you keep this commandment without spot, blameless until our Lord Jesus Christ’s appearing," 1 Timothy 6:14.
John 8:38 “I speak what I have seen with My Father, and you do what you have seen with your father.” I thought nobody has ever seen God?(even when im ignoring the entire context of the verse your still cooking yourself)😂
John 5:30: does not refute him lol, Jesus still claims equality with God above every other being
John 6:38: doesn't refute lol since Jesus claims to give life and raises people from the dead by using the verse' context.
My dear brother in Christ, 1:02 is Surah 61:14 and not Surah 31:14. Nevertheless, may the Lord bless you with your efforts. Keep up the good work.
Yeah, that was just me misspeaking. I got some mental wires crossed, and I didn't notice it on the edit either.
@@TestifyApologetics quick question ( again. Sorry. I have noone to ask):
Are there any good videos refuting Richard Carrier and his claims?
I've heard multiple times even from atheists that he's kinda weird about his theories, but are there any responses to him?
Also, from what I've found, there's actually a more complicated reason on why atheists date the gospels so late (supposedly with the phrasing of Mark and some other stuff. I'd link the thread debating on this, but I have lost it probably for eternity)
Sorry for any trouble
@Faithexplorer4376
3 minutes ago
lets debunk you
your gospels Most scholars agree that Mark was the first written no earlier than 70CE. So about 37-40 years. The consensus is that Matthew followed between 80 - 90CE,(50-60 years later) then Luke between 90CE and 100CE (60 to 70 years) and finally John written between 100-110CE or 70 to 80 years later.
Paul:
Hebrews 6:6 :
If they shall fall away, to renew them again unto repentance; seeing they crucify to themselves the Son of God afresh, and put [him] to an open shame.
So there is just one example of how the Quran does not agree with the message of Paul. Note the Quran says it is no befitting to Allah that he should beget a son, this is referring to the Christian saying that God has a son i.e. Jesus is the son of God. So hence the Quran denies that Allah has a son. When we read Hebrews 6:6 we see that Paul teaches that there is indeed a son of God and Paul is referring to Jesus in Hebrews 6:6, the Quran denies that Allah has a son, and the Quran is specifically denying that Jesus is the son of God in surah 19:35. So there is just one case in which the Quran explicitly denies with Paul. Here are some more differences:
quranic commentry claim
Another renowned commentary, Al-Qurtubi, says of Surah 61:14:
It was said that THIS VERSE was revealed about the apostles of Jesus, may peace and blessing be upon him. Ibn Ishaq stated that of the apostles and disciples that Jesus sent (to preach) there were Peter AND PAUL who went to Rome; Andrew and Matthew who went to the land of the cannibals; Thomas who went to Babel in the eastern lands; Philip who went to Africa; John went to Dac-sos(?) which is the tribe to whom the sleepers of the cave belonged; Jacob went to Jerusalem; Bartholomew went to the lands of Arabia, specifically Al-Hijaz; Simon who went to the Barbarians; Judas and Barthas(?) who went to Alexandria and its surrounding regions.
Allah supported them (the apostles) with evidence so that they prevailed (thahirin) meaning they became the party with the upper hand. Just as it is said, "An object appeared on the wall" meaning it is clearly visible (alu-wat) on the wall. Allah, who is glorified and exalted, knows the truth better and to Him is the return and retreat. (Source; translated into English by Dimitrius, bold and capital emphasis ours)
Notice how al-Qurtubi had no qualms in admitting that Paul was a legitimate follower of Christ! If al-Qurtubi is correct, then this means that Paul was one of the followers whom God gave the power to overcome the unbelievers and prevail!
My Response
No where does Qurtubi say Paul is a legimite follower, all Qurtubi says is that Paul went with Peter. Just because someone is a supposed follower of a religion or a person does not make that person correct. There are several people who claim to be followers of some doctrine or belief and don’t even follow it! Just because Paul happened to be a follower of Jesus does not automatically make Paul a true follower of Jesus. It is clear that Paul mis-interpreted Jesus’ message and taught something completely different to what Jesus taught, this could have been an un-intentional mistake on the part of Paul. He is a human so he is fallible so hence he mis-understood Jesus’ message and taught something completely different all the while believing he was teaching what Jesus taught. Paul was simply wrong. So hence what Qurtubi said has no ground breaking statements. Paul may have been a follower of Jesus, but sadly he didn’t know he was doing harm to Jesus’ message and was teaching something contradictory to what Jesus taught and that he was not a true follower of Jesus.
Where did Ibn Ishaq, Ibn Kathir, al Tabari, and al Qurtubi view Paul in such a positive light? In fact Shamoun refuted himself when he quoted Ibn Kathir here is it again:
"This is what happened. When Allah raised ‘Isa to heaven, his followers divided into sects and groups. Some of them believed in what Allah sent ‘Isa as, a servant of Allah, His Messenger, and the son of His female-servant.
However, some of them went to the extreme over ‘Isa, believing that he was the son of Allah. Some of them said that ‘Isa was Allah Himself, while others said that he was one of a Trinity. Allah mentioned these false creeds in the Qur’an and refuted them. The Christians remained like this until the third century CE, when a Greek king called, Constantine, became a Christian for the purpose of destroying Christianity. Constantine was either a philosopher, or he was just plain ignorant. Constantine changed the religion of ‘Isa by adding to it and deleting from it. He established the rituals of Christianity and the so-called Great Trust which is in fact the Great Treachery. He also allowed them to eat the meat of swine, changed the direction of the prayer that ‘Isa established to the east, built churches for ‘Isa, and added ten days to the fast as compensation for a sin that he committed, as claimed. So the religion of ‘Isa became the religion of Constantine, who built more than twelve thousand churches, temples and monasteries for the Christians as well as the city that bears his name, Constantinople (Istanbul). THROUGHOUT THIS TIME, the Christians had the upper hand and dominated the Jews. ALLAH AIDED THEM AGAINST THE JEWS BECAUSE THEY USED TO BE CLOSER TO THE TRUTH THAN THE JEWS, even though both groups were and still are disbelievers, may Allah’s curse descend on them." (Tafsir Ibn Kathir (Abridged), Volume 2, Parts 3, 4, & 5 (Surat Al-Baqarah, Verse 253, to Surat An-Nisa, Verse 147),
This does not seem that Ibn Ishaq viewed Paul in such a positive light, Ibn Ishaq called Christians disbelievers! The reason he did so is because they believe Jesus died, and they believed Jesus is God which are all teachings of Paul so hence Paul is a disbeliever according to Ibn Ishaq!
Great video! I would love to see more videos about Islam by Testify! Defending the faith doesn't mean just defending it from atheists and skeptics, but those of other religions like Muslims as well. I believe Christians should be equipped to answer not just atheists, but Muslims too!
So happy you are dealing with islam!
It's worth noting that the word "Muslim" just means "one who submits to the Supreme God" so if you took a literal translation, you could describe the desciples as being Muslim, however, our modern understanding of the word Muslim associates it with followers of Muhammad who called the being he thought to be Yahweh "Allah" which, in Arabic, just means "God" and is a title used by both Muslims and Christian Arabs.
Give em what for, Testify! Also, the Quran refers to the Gospels in the PRESENT tense when confirming them to be revelations from Allah, as in during Muhammad’s time. Surah 10:94-95. Surah 7:156-157. Surah 5:46-47. I hope you can make another video on this subject!
The Quran says that Mohammed is the greatest prophet and that Yahusha is not the son of The Most High.
He who denies the Son, denies the Father
He who denies The Father and The Son is of the spirit of the antichrist
Muslims also claim the Kaaba was built by Abraham and Ishmael.
Explain?
@@OttomanGazi-p2h They claim that.It's in several CZcams videos.There is no actual historical evidence of its existence until about 200 years before the birth of Muhammad .
@@David-yw2lv so u muslim?
@@OttomanGazi-p2h Is Yoko Ono Irish?
@@David-yw2lv I am not interested
Sorry
Just read all five books of John. This "Pauline" Christianity isn't authentic as a sole teaching terminology.
Yes I think the label "Pauline-Nicene" tradition is a great label for true Christianity.
But Read all 5 books written by John.
The books of John, 1 John, 2 John, 3 John and revelation. Which I nickname 4 John.
(The 5 books of John. The quad-john books alone can justify Christianity.
Paul was instrumental. But Christianity wouldn't go extinct without his writings.
Infact John can justify the trinity itself.
They claim the Bible is corrupted anyways, so the best defense for Christianity is the Quran itself in its own goals. 😂 😂 😂
Muslims are the funniest people on the face of the earth
@@moosa86 “And this is the will of him that sent me, that every one which seeth the Son, and believeth on him, may have everlasting life: and I will raise him up at the last day.”
John 6:40
You don’t know the Bible bro and I will be laughing and laughing why?
“The wicked plots against the righteous And gnashes at him with his teeth. The Lord laughs at him, For He sees his day is coming.”
Psalms 37:12-13
@@moosa86Ask yourself that very question Muslim.
@@moosa86 “Do not answer a fool according to his folly, or you yourself will be like him.”
Proverbs 26:4
I rather not become a fool such as you but you can argue with yourself and I’ll just keep laughing at you
@@moosa86 momo was a pdf file. Police be upon him.
i dont think theyre funny i think they are evil.
A Muslim I attempted a discussion with said the NT is unreliable, then proceeded to quote Matthew to prove Jesus was Muslim because he prostrated.
I pointed out that Jesus started his prayer with "My Father" and I asked him if Jesus was blaspheming, because the Quran says God can't have children. The Muslim then said "My Father" is a mistranslation from the Aramaic, and that no one has the original Aramaic scripture. Why do you quote it then you hypocrite 😂
The think is, Christians do read the Qur'an and the gospel but the Muslims even don't read the Qur'an - so their beast assption relies on what the Imam said.
Everyone that claims they are the only and one true, that's the sign they are false. Everyone who declares Jesus is the Only One , is the on the right Way, follows the Truth and will find The Real Life!
Or simply ignore both of them & carry on living without the stress & the endless bickering.
@@johnmichaelson9173 yeah might as well go party and do nothing good , for there is no pain after all, there is no stress there is nothing to worry about.
Bha, you think god created pain, stress for us to not to worry about and live our lifes like sheeps who happens to be born in a mysterious world and just never ask, WHY?
@@tadzyxd1190 If you can't be good just by yourself, if you need the bible to assist with your morale compass, if you can't enjoy reading a book, visiting a museum or art gallery, going fishing (catch & release) watching the local sports team, etc etc. That's up to you. I don't drink I don't do party's. I can't help it if you have stress problems but I can say Imho Christianity doesn't help. Why is the knee jerk reaction the blanket accusatory thought "you go partying & sin in a myriad of illegal way that's why you don't believe in Jesus" No I don't do any of that I'm normal & I live in the secular society. I believe Jesus was a man & all the rest simply isn't true.
@@johnmichaelson9173 you think that life is full of roses and everybody has the same good mind as you have ?
oh believe me there will be no killing
or corrupt in the land if so.
Without lies, Islam dies
“Here’s a solid reason to question the Quran as the word of God. The Quran claims that Jesus’ disciples were actually Muslims.”
Video over, thanks for watching, like and subscribe!
Keep in mind that Allah is just another name for God or Yahweh. The Quran is just wrong about the God it talks about.
Allah means god, and god (el/mighty one) is a title... YHWH is the name of the most high... There can be only one
Allah is a title like the word "EL" or "Elohim" the name of the biblical God is YHWH, these are 2 different God's, the Quran has a god(satan) who is so different from YHWH its not even funny.
@@Pet_Shop0 this is not true. The Quran talks about exactly the same God you worship, the same God Moses worships and the same God that is a Trinity. It's simply wrong about many of the things it says about that God.
If two words have the same definition (God in christianity, Allah in orthodox muslim thought) then they always, always always refer to the same thing.
@@tafazziReadChannelDescription "Exodus 32:4" just because someone says "this is the God of Isreal" doesn't mean it is true brother... "Psalm 82:6-7" when addressing the men of Israel, the most high calls them gods... There are also countless examples of false gods/idols being worshipped by Isreal... There are many "gods"... There is only ONE GOD of Isreal, only ONE Father... You shall have no other gods before him or beside him... He ALONE receives the worship of creation & this is done by living like Christ, who was the perfect manifestation of the Father's will for man made manifest... Seek out the spirit brother... Seek Christ... Seek the Father... None of us are perfect which is why we NEED/NEEDED Christ's sacrifice on the cross... I know I can also do better to live by his example... ONE LOVE
@@lonelymobbaoe there is no word in hebrew that means God, capital G God, the maximally great being. A better translation for Elohim would be "deity"
Your sermons are uninteresting and irrelevant, stick to facts. When 2 words have the same definition, then they mean the same thing.
We can't approach the Bible until we agree on basic principles of logic, so do you agree with what I wrote?
Thank you for your videos. Can u make a video about Deuteronomy 32:8-9?
Part 1:
This is probably the most famous passage used by scholars to indicate that ancient polytheism is hidden in the bible, and demonstrates a polytheistic past. It’s 1 of 2 main passages used to try and make this case (the other being Psalms 82:1), but let’s just take a moment to understand the gravity of this: In the entirety of the Hebrew Bible, there are only 2 passages primarily used that could indicate ancient polytheism. This should raise atleast the thought that this could be quote mining and circular reasoning, if I’m being honest if this is the best they can do to try and demonstrate ancient polytheism in the bible, I don’t find this evidence very impressive. But let’s actually get to the passage in question:
Deuteronomy 32:8-9:
When the Most High gave the nations their inheritance, when he divided all mankind, he set up boundaries for the peoples according to the number of the sons of El. For the Lord’s portion is his people, Jacob his allotted inheritance.
So some scholars suggest that ‘’the most high’’, the God El, gave nations to various other Gods to be ruled over, and when it came to Israel, El gave YHWH this nation, and this indicates that ancient Israel use to think El and YHWH were 2 different God’s, with YHWH being subordinate to El.
Now the name El does show up in the bible, in some places we read El Elyon (such as psalms 78:35), which means El Most high. But when we read of El, the authors of the Hebrew Bible indicate this is just another name for YHWH:
Exodus 6:3: And I appeared unto Abraham, unto Isaac, and unto Jacob, by the name of El Shaddai, but by my name YHWH was I not known to them.
Exodus 34:6: YHWH, YHWH, El merciful and gracious, slow to anger, and abandoning in steadfast love and faithfulness.
2nd Samuel 22:32: For who is El, but YHWH?
Psalms 89:6-8: For who in the skies above can compare with YHWH? Who is like YHWH among the heavenly beings? Is the council of the holy ones, El is greatly feared;
he is more awesome than all who surround him. Who is like you, YHWH God almighty? You, YHWH, are mighty, and your faithfulness surrounds you.
Karel Van der toorn lists several comparisons from the biblical texts speaking of YHWH, to other ancient works that speak of EL:
Both are called most high:
YHWH (Psalms 42:7)
El (Oldenburg, ‘’above the stars of El’’, PP 187-200)
Both are called Creator:
YHWH (Nehemiah 9:6)
El (Azitawadd’s inscriptions 2.18)
El is called ‘’father of years’’, is comparable to YHWH being called the ancient of days:
YHWH (Daniel 7:9-14; 22)
El (Curpos des inscriptions de Ras Shamra-Ougarit 1.10 lll)
El at times presides over a council as does YHWH:
YHWH (1st Kings 22:15-29)
El (Curpos des inscriptions de Ras Shamra-Ougarit 1.2 I)
El is said to be compassionate, YHWH is merciful and gracious:
YHWH (Exodus 34:6)
El (Ifitpn ‘il dp’id)
Both are described as shining:
YHWH (Numbers 6:24-26)
El (Kuntillet Ajrud inscription)
both are described as the Holy ones:
El (Kuntillet Ajrud inscriptions)
YHWH (2 Kings 19:22)
Both are called Father:
YHWH (Isaiah 63:16)
El (Curpos des inscriptions de Ras Shamra-Ougarit 1.14 VI: 44-46)
A healing God:
YHWH (Numbers 12:13)
El (Curpos des inscriptions de Ras Shamra-Ougarit 1.16 V-Vi)
Appear in dreams:
YHWH (Genesis 20:3-6; 28:10-12)
El (2 Aqhat Epic 1.3-18)
Set Amid cosmic waters:
YHWH (Psalms 29:47)
El (Curpos des inscriptions de Ras Shamra-Ougarit 1.2 III 4; 1.3)
See:
(‘’YHWH’’. dictionary of deities and demons in the bible by Karel Van Der Toorn, 1995, pages 910-919)
(The origins of biblical monotheism: Israel’s polytheistic background and Ugaritic texts, By Mark S. Smith, Oxford university press, 2004)
‘’It is often argued that originally YHWH was much more like El than like Baal. In the patriarchal narratives of Genesis, El names such as El Olam and El Elyon are frequently used as Epithets of YHWH. Various scholars have drawn a conclusion that El and YHWH were identified at a rather early stage. This identification is sometimes explained by assuming YHWH is originally an El figure ‘’ (Thus, E.G H. NIEHR, Der hochste gott (BZAW 190; Berlin/New York 1990) 4-5)
(See part 2)
Part 2:
Meindert Dijkstra wrote extensively on the origins of the name of YHWH, and given the data it most likely was just original another name of EL. (See: Only 1 God? Monotheism in ancient Israel and the veneration of the Goddess Asherah, pages 81-126)
He says:
‘’This revival of El’s names and Epithets in the Exilic and Post-exilic theological vocabulary is only explicable in the light of the Tenuous, never broken tradition that ‘El-YHWH’ in the end is, and was identical to the Patriarchal ‘El ‘Elohe Yisrael, ‘El, the God of Israel’’. (See: Only 1 God? Monotheism in ancient Israel and the veneration of the Goddess Asherah, page 126)
Mark S. Smith in his book ‘’The origins of biblical monotheism’’ holds to the Evolutionary theory, and argues that by the 8th Century in Israel, YHWH was given the female consort Asherah. The biblical authors condemned such practises as forsaking their ancient covenant (See: Judges 6:28, 1st Kings 11:5; 18:19)
But Asherah was originally El’s partner consort at Ugarit. So such an act would only make sense if there was a cultural idea that El and YHWH were the same deity. So as far as the biblical authors were concerned: El Elyon was just another name for YHWH. This would make sense with the name IsraEL, if El Allotted YHWH the people of Jacob, why was the nation not called IsraYah? Being that there national deity was YHWH. But if YHWH was just another name for El, this would make far more sense: Israel worshipped El who was YHWH.
The case can also be made aswell by looking at the text of Deuteronomy 32:8-9
1st: The text doesn’t say El Allotted to YHWH, it just says the most high divided the nations. ‘’Elyon’’ Is just a title applied to many deities, it is the title given to YHWH in the biblical text (Deuteronomy 28:1), but at Ugarit it is the title given to Bale (Keilalphabetische texte aus Ugarit 1.16:III.6,8), and interestingly enough, it is never applied there to El, the father of the God’s. Since Elyon is most likely just a title meaning ‘’most high’’, it could of just been a title referring to YHWH in Deuteronomy 32
Otto Eissfeldt notes that the language does not explicitly claim there is a distinction between YHWH and the most high:
‘’The author of the song, it is true, when speaking of YHWH’s relationship to his people, avoids, probably intentionally, the application of the Hitherto used active verbal form, and so does not say directly that ‘Elyon gave Israel or Jacob to YHWH as his portion; but is content to establish the fact that Israel has become the property of YHWH.’’ (Otto Eissfeldt, ‘’El and Yahweh.’’ Journal of Semitic studies, Vol. 1 , No. 1, 1956, pp 25-37., (Page 29) )
So the passage could just equally mean that YHWH (who is the most high), gave up the nations to lesser deities and then created a people for himself. Even if the text did say El Elyon, that would not explicitly mean YHWH was thought of as a different deity. Since there are many other passages where they are identified as the same (See: Exodus 6:3; Exodus 34:6; 2nd Samuel 22:32; Psalms 89:6-8) To say they are originally seen as 2 separate deities, is to presuppose the conclusion you’re looking for. An explicit distinction may of been the case in different cultures, but that doesn’t mean it was the case for the biblical authors. Infact Mark Smith agrees:
‘’Despite possible appearances to the contrary, the composer did not intend any picture of polytheism with his rendering of verses 8-9. In fact, he Likely thought of El and Elyon as two of YHWH’s titles. (As they are Elsewhere in the bible), and not as a separate God, El. The implied reference to the multiple Devine sons likely did not bother the composer of the poem. In the wake of the identification of Elyon as a title of YHWH, the ‘’Devine sons’’ are only implied in the text at best. It was probably easy for the for the composer to pay little to no attention to this matter, as this was a standard trope of divinity that the composer had inherited… Thus the passage shows something of the older worldview of translatability of the national Gods as it ultimately rejects it.’’ (God in translation, Page 142)
To see why, let’s look at the internal context and surrounding context of other biblical texts:
Jonas Greenfield draws attention to the prior verses (Deuteronomy 32:6-7), where YHWH is identified as Father, creator, wise and has lived for the years of many Generations. At Ugarit, these motifs are said of El, who is said to be the creator of Mankind as well as wise and father of years.
‘’The language comes, on the whole, from the description of El, the people are called ‘’witless,’’ lo’ hakam, that is, lacking the basic characteristics of El. The first and Third verb-qny, ‘create,’ and Knn, ‘establish’- are used of El, ‘eternity’ (‘Im)/ages past (drdr)’ epithets of El, verse 8, which mentions ‘’the most high’’ (Elyon) and ‘’the sons of Adam’’ (man),’ presents on the one hand another epithet of El and on the other hand reminds us that El was called ‘’father of man’’ (ab adm). The author of Deuteronomy 32 has skilfully woven info into his covenant poem these and other elements of antecedent literary tradition’’. (The library guide to the bible, page 554)
(See part 3)
Part 3:
Thus Deuteronomy 32 applies the same language to YHWH, implying the authors assumed they were 1 and the same. Now some object to this by claiming that in Deuteronomy 32:6-7 YHWH is only said to be the father and creator of Israel, but not all of mankind. Other lesser deities were said to be the fathers of their nations aswell. However this objection misses the point, the passage does just say YHWH is the father of Israel here, but it is not just that title that scholars such as Greenfield, Heiser and Van Der Toorn draw on. It is the fact that the same Motifs and language used of El, is applied as a whole to YHWH. If In this passage YHWH was just called the father of Israel, no one would try to make the connections, but because sereral existing motifs of El are applied to YHWH in Deuteronomy 32, it seems that the authors already understand YHWH was El.
As for the passage only referencing YHWH being the father of Israel, that would be expected, because that is what the passage is about, not all of mankind, and despite that the Motif are still there.
One of the biggest reasons to suggest Deuteronomy 32 doesn’t imply that YHWH is a subordinate to El, is we need to take a step back and look at the larger picture in 2 ways:
First let’s remember where this text came from. In the much later Masoretic texts of Deuteronomy 32:8-9, it doesn’t read ‘’sons of El’’, but ‘’sons of Israel’’, some scholars suggest this is a later attempt to hide polytheism by changing El to Israel. However the reason we know it was not originally the sons of Israel is because of the Dead Sea scrolls, which came from an obviously monotheistic sect. If it is monotheists that copy and persevered this passage in question, we should be skepticism this passage meant to imply polytheism.
As for the Maserati change, I’m not convinced this was an attempt to hide a polytheistic past, I think the change could reflect later talmudi commentary that the Jews were meant to inherit the whole earth, and the gentiles would become there slaves:
Peskita Rabbati 36
Shabbat 32b
Sefer Emunot ve-De’ot 8.6
Berachot 16b
Mitzva 347
The chain would be consistent with this idea, because it would God had already divided the world up according to the seventh of Jacob who went down to Egypt (Genesis 46:27). It doesn’t necessarily refer to an attempt by the Masoretic scribes to hide polytheism. Another possibility (although highly speculative) is that scribe who produced the Masoretic text took the letters BNY’L to be an abbreviation of bney Yisra’el.
Also several other passages within the biblical canon correlate to this monotheistic interpretation of Deuteronomy 32:
Psalms 29
Psalms 24
Numbers 23
Deuteronomy 9:26-29
Isaiah 10:13
Let’s take Psalms 29 as an example, which is considered to be early by many scholars. Says that YHWH is enthroned forever over the flood (Psalms 29:10). The text also begins with plural imperatives, indicating a Devine council was in play. (See: Michael S. Heiser, ‘’the Devine council in late canonical and non canonical second temple Jewish literature; Frank Moore cross, ‘’Cannanite Myth and Hebrew Epic,’’, 90-93; David Noel Freeman, ‘’who is like thee among the Gods?,’’ 317.)
In the ancient Near East, the flood was thought to be over the dome that covered the earth, and if YHWH is said to reign there, then he was already seen as ruler over all the nations that were beneath the flood.
The point being by bringing up this Psalm that there might be existing evidence alongside Deuteronomy 32, that YHWH was seen as already ruling the world, not just as an inheritance from El Elyon.
Nathan McDonald In his Theses ‘’One God or one Lord? Deuteronomy and the meaning of Monotheism’’, notes the theme of Deuteronomy is how YHWH chose or elected Israel (See: Deuteronomy 4:19-37; 7:6-7; 10:15; 14:2; 29:25-26). This would fit better with the interpretation that YHWH the most high, gave other nations to lesser deities, but then elected Israel for himself instead of being given Israel.
Also a later text incorporated into Deuteronomy is Deuteronomy 4, and we see in Deuteronomy 4:19-20 it parallels Deuteronomy 32:8-9, in saying that it was YHWH who Allotted the other nations to other Elohim, and kept Israel for himself.
In other later texts like Isaiah 10:13, has YHWH in control of the boundaries of the nations. These are often dismissed as coming from a later monotheistic time period, however the language and grammar used shows that some of these passages are early as well, and provide surrounding context to better understand the theology of Deuteronomy 32:8-9.
Plus internally speaking, Deuteronomy 32 can function just fine as a monotheistic. However the larger context seems to fit with this monotheistic understanding, as does the internal evidence.
If the only reply after all of this is brought up, is that monotheism is a later development, so there has to be evidence of early polytheism, then your just assuming the conclusion you want, and not letting the evidence speak for itself.
Conclusion:
After an examination of the evidence, we can conclude that Deuteronomy 32:8-9 does not demonstrate evidence of early polytheism in the bible, or a polytheistic past.
@@User81981 if I could use gifs, I’d use the slow clapping one that picks up speed. Jesus bless you and your argumentative skills ❤️✝️
@User81981 well done 👏
I think I struggle with faith a lot, especially recently, so I am wondering if you can explain to me and talk about what makes Jesus's claims better than "Sai Baba of Shirdi" (if you even know who he is), I would greatly appreciate that. Thank you.
I've discussed that here: czcams.com/video/rtsZvGUF40k/video.html and more recently here: czcams.com/video/Asns9nf3VX8/video.html
@@TestifyApologetics oh ok thanks
@@Jeff909_if you have further questions check out talkaboutdoubts.com
Based, 100% true video - Let’s not stand for the slander of our Lord Jesus!
In Islam, the term "Muslim" refers to someone who submits to the will of God (Allah). While the Quran acknowledges the followers of Jesus (known as the Hawariyyun) and respects them as believers who supported Jesus, it doesn't explicitly label them as Muslims in the way the term is understood in Islamic theology. Instead, it emphasizes that all prophets, including Jesus, were sent by God and preached the message of monotheism, which aligns with Islamic principles. Therefore, from an Islamic perspective, the followers of Jesus were aligned with the message of submission to God, but the specific terminology and understanding of "Muslim" as it is used today developed later in Islamic history
Interesting video. I am not a muslim, but one of their core beliefs is that the text is corrupted in favor of Pauline teachings. While it seems to me like quite a lot to take on faith that the implicit or explicit agreement of the apostles with Pauline teachings was inserted in the text in a number of different places across different versions of the bible which arose in very different political contexts, a muslim could certainly claim that. Beyond pointing out how extremely extremely unlikely that would be (and this directly contradicts the assertions of dawahbros online), what would be your response, particularly towards lay muslims who don't make unsupported claims on the basis of ill-conceived (by almost all, myself included) metaphysics?
I thank Jesus that I wasn't born a Muslim but a Christian, praise Christ Jesus amen🙏
You’re thankful for being manipulated into believing that you are flawed at birth when babies are wonderful and blameless. Humans are born sinless, yet you are brainwashed to think that you are evil and that an irrational belief in a fairytale attributing God coming down to earth to kill himself to save the universe from the god of evil and vehemently believing that irrational fairytale is the only thing that will save you. Without that chip on your shoulder you think you are inadequate. You believe that God created you worthless. You believe that good deeds are selfless acts to plead to God to be worthy. You believe this life is abt pain and suffering. How can you even love God when you don’t even think your existence is a gift? How can you love God when you don’t believe that good works are there to empower you and to help you live life according to your desire? You don’t love your life enough to defend it if you can’t see that your life is God’s personal gift to you. You can’t, bc you think that God says you are flawed by default and it’s incumbent on you to make up for your flaw by believing something so irrelevant and useless that does nothing but give you a false sense of superiority with no merit whatsoever.
I feel sorry for you.
Spread the Gospel. So those not as lucky as you get a chance to hear the word.
@@lullaby218 yeah spread an irrational fairytale so that irrationality proliferates within society. One’s belief in God shapes how one forms bias. It’s bc of the Christian faith that atheism exists, further pushing irrational faith that obfuscates the effect that faith has on the human condition. It’s bc of Christianity that there are atheists that claim to not believe in God when the truth is that anything that exists identifies with a god to justify its existence, and your theologians have allowed them to go around and say they have no god bc your faith obfuscated what God rationally is between humans.
Quran made big mistake claiming Jesus as Lord in ARABIC Quran which is the original language of Allah. Arabic Quran chapter 9:31 says اربابا من دون الله والمسيح ابن مريم. The English should be like as lords instead of Allah AND the Messiah son of Mariam. The Arabic letter و looks like number 9 in English is a conjunction. But Muslims change the meaning when translated to other languages.
Tell me what the Arabic says pls
@@DeAngeloJohnson-ee9bt Quran 9:31 the Arabic says اربابا من دون الله والمسيح ابن مريم. If we translate the he Arabic then the English should be as lords instead of Allah AND the Messiah son of Mariam. The Arabic letter و which looks like number 9 in English that’s a conjunction so Allah و (and) the Messiah son of Mariam.
Thank you brother, God bless you brother 🎉❤
🙏God bless everyone
can you also do islam's definition of trinity?
Police be upon him
Lol
gotta stop this pdf file cult
this argument hinges on the fact "victory" and "domination" of Jesus' disciples necessitates a worldly one, when in reality the victory was only against their enemies plan to kill Jesus which failed. Quite an easy debunk.
just dropped a sub, just by watching a few of your videos I'm able to destroy their logic in debates very easily. and I can easily say 100% that its bogus. (I easily could tell before but now even more so) thanks man
"My Lord and my God"- Peter, Thomas, James, John, Philip, Paul
@@moosa86 my point still stands
@@moosa86 Thomas still said it, Jesus didnt deny it. MY POINT STILL STANDS
Cherry picking is a standard unitarian practice.
@@TestifyApologetics real
@@moosa86
It's funny how you will ignore the rest of 1 Corinthians 8:6 where it says that there is also one Lord who is Jesus Christ. Using your logic, since Paul says that only Jesus is Lord, that means the Father isn't Lord. Not only that but Paul in that verse tells us that all things were made through Jesus implying that he is the ultimate source of creation along with the Father. That just buries your position because Paul is essentially equating Jesus with God the Father.
Without Lies Islam dies
@Faithexplorer4376
3 minutes ago
lets debunk you
your gospels Most scholars agree that Mark was the first written no earlier than 70CE. So about 37-40 years. The consensus is that Matthew followed between 80 - 90CE,(50-60 years later) then Luke between 90CE and 100CE (60 to 70 years) and finally John written between 100-110CE or 70 to 80 years later.
Paul:
Hebrews 6:6 :
If they shall fall away, to renew them again unto repentance; seeing they crucify to themselves the Son of God afresh, and put [him] to an open shame.
So there is just one example of how the Quran does not agree with the message of Paul. Note the Quran says it is no befitting to Allah that he should beget a son, this is referring to the Christian saying that God has a son i.e. Jesus is the son of God. So hence the Quran denies that Allah has a son. When we read Hebrews 6:6 we see that Paul teaches that there is indeed a son of God and Paul is referring to Jesus in Hebrews 6:6, the Quran denies that Allah has a son, and the Quran is specifically denying that Jesus is the son of God in surah 19:35. So there is just one case in which the Quran explicitly denies with Paul. Here are some more differences:
quranic commentry claim
Another renowned commentary, Al-Qurtubi, says of Surah 61:14:
It was said that THIS VERSE was revealed about the apostles of Jesus, may peace and blessing be upon him. Ibn Ishaq stated that of the apostles and disciples that Jesus sent (to preach) there were Peter AND PAUL who went to Rome; Andrew and Matthew who went to the land of the cannibals; Thomas who went to Babel in the eastern lands; Philip who went to Africa; John went to Dac-sos(?) which is the tribe to whom the sleepers of the cave belonged; Jacob went to Jerusalem; Bartholomew went to the lands of Arabia, specifically Al-Hijaz; Simon who went to the Barbarians; Judas and Barthas(?) who went to Alexandria and its surrounding regions.
Allah supported them (the apostles) with evidence so that they prevailed (thahirin) meaning they became the party with the upper hand. Just as it is said, "An object appeared on the wall" meaning it is clearly visible (alu-wat) on the wall. Allah, who is glorified and exalted, knows the truth better and to Him is the return and retreat. (Source; translated into English by Dimitrius, bold and capital emphasis ours)
Notice how al-Qurtubi had no qualms in admitting that Paul was a legitimate follower of Christ! If al-Qurtubi is correct, then this means that Paul was one of the followers whom God gave the power to overcome the unbelievers and prevail!
My Response
No where does Qurtubi say Paul is a legimite follower, all Qurtubi says is that Paul went with Peter. Just because someone is a supposed follower of a religion or a person does not make that person correct. There are several people who claim to be followers of some doctrine or belief and don’t even follow it! Just because Paul happened to be a follower of Jesus does not automatically make Paul a true follower of Jesus. It is clear that Paul mis-interpreted Jesus’ message and taught something completely different to what Jesus taught, this could have been an un-intentional mistake on the part of Paul. He is a human so he is fallible so hence he mis-understood Jesus’ message and taught something completely different all the while believing he was teaching what Jesus taught. Paul was simply wrong. So hence what Qurtubi said has no ground breaking statements. Paul may have been a follower of Jesus, but sadly he didn’t know he was doing harm to Jesus’ message and was teaching something contradictory to what Jesus taught and that he was not a true follower of Jesus.
Where did Ibn Ishaq, Ibn Kathir, al Tabari, and al Qurtubi view Paul in such a positive light? In fact Shamoun refuted himself when he quoted Ibn Kathir here is it again:
"This is what happened. When Allah raised ‘Isa to heaven, his followers divided into sects and groups. Some of them believed in what Allah sent ‘Isa as, a servant of Allah, His Messenger, and the son of His female-servant.
However, some of them went to the extreme over ‘Isa, believing that he was the son of Allah. Some of them said that ‘Isa was Allah Himself, while others said that he was one of a Trinity. Allah mentioned these false creeds in the Qur’an and refuted them. The Christians remained like this until the third century CE, when a Greek king called, Constantine, became a Christian for the purpose of destroying Christianity. Constantine was either a philosopher, or he was just plain ignorant. Constantine changed the religion of ‘Isa by adding to it and deleting from it. He established the rituals of Christianity and the so-called Great Trust which is in fact the Great Treachery. He also allowed them to eat the meat of swine, changed the direction of the prayer that ‘Isa established to the east, built churches for ‘Isa, and added ten days to the fast as compensation for a sin that he committed, as claimed. So the religion of ‘Isa became the religion of Constantine, who built more than twelve thousand churches, temples and monasteries for the Christians as well as the city that bears his name, Constantinople (Istanbul). THROUGHOUT THIS TIME, the Christians had the upper hand and dominated the Jews. ALLAH AIDED THEM AGAINST THE JEWS BECAUSE THEY USED TO BE CLOSER TO THE TRUTH THAN THE JEWS, even though both groups were and still are disbelievers, may Allah’s curse descend on them." (Tafsir Ibn Kathir (Abridged), Volume 2, Parts 3, 4, & 5 (Surat Al-Baqarah, Verse 253, to Surat An-Nisa, Verse 147),
This does not seem that Ibn Ishaq viewed Paul in such a positive light, Ibn Ishaq called Christians disbelievers! The reason he did so is because they believe Jesus died, and they believed Jesus is God which are all teachings of Paul so hence Paul is a disbeliever according to Ibn Ishaq!
in the islamic works you cited, when it comes to speaking of St. Paul, they say: "who was a follower and not an
apostle". Is this an editors note?
There are so many lies in Islam, one half always contradicts the other half. That is a major fact that is very easy to present as reality.
Christian Prince runs through Muslims like he's Forest Gump crossing America on these topics.
hahahah funny search up farid responds christian prince exposed and muslim warriors they debunk cp like they are forest gump crossing america on these topics
@Faithexplorer4376 Farid can't even deal with David Wood and Apostate Prophet, let alone CP. Both Farid and Muslim warriors are too afraid to speak to CP on stream or Skype. Get out of your conclave and learn for once.
@@pigzcanfly444 search apostate prophet refuted by farid theres a hole channel dedicated to refuted him
@@pigzcanfly444 and clowny wood
Hello there!
Before I start my long wall of text(sorry about that), I want to clarify that it is not my intention to offend my muslim, christian or jew fellows or anyone else. I just want to criticize some of the points made in this video and perhaps offer a different approach.
First of all, not all muslims have a problem with Paul or the Bible, simply because the Quran does not have a problem with the apostles or the Bible. I am someone who believes that the Bible and the Quran are inspired by God and I love and respect Paul and all the apostles and I am not alone in doing so. And if someone were to ask me how come, the Quran verses in the video would be enough to prove my point.
The Quran never refutes the Bible or the apostles, on the contrary it praises them. And contrary to what the majority of those who call themselves muslims believe, the Quran never mentions the Bible being corrupted.
But so how come the Bible and the Quran have different teachings?
Well, my research so far has lead me to believe that they do not contain different teachings. But instead contain translation and interpretation errors caused by man-made teachings from both traditional christians and muslims. Here's what I mean.
Three doctrines of the New Testament that are in "contradiction" with the Quran are listed in the video and I would like to present that they actually do not have any contradiction.
I'll start from the last one:
*"Contradiction #3": Jesus' resurrection*
In order to claim a contradiction between the Quran and the Bible in this specific context we would need to have a verse in the Quran that states "Jesus did not resurrect." There simply isn't a verse like that in the Quran. So, safe to say its not a contradiction I guess? Well, not yet. Because the
Quran does mention Jesus not being crucified or killed, right? Let's examine the verse:
*Contradiction #2: Jesus' crucifixion*
Before I go on with the verse I want to ask something. Imagine I was a jew and I said: "We crucified and killed Jesus." What would your response be as a christian?
I think either you would say: "No, it wasn't the jews but the Romans." or you would say "No one killed Jesus but he gave up his own life" quoting *John 10:17-18*
"The reason my Father loves me is that I lay down my life-only to take it up again. No one takes it from me, but I lay it down of my own accord. I have authority to lay it down and authority to take it up again. This command I received from my Father.”
Now let's take a look at the Quran verse that supposedly contradicts the crucifixion, but let's look at it in context, reading also the previous verses *(Quran, Chapter 4, verses 153 to 158):*
153 - The people of the book ask you to bring down to them a book from the heavens. They had asked Moses for even more than that, for they said, "Let us see God plainly!", so the lightning bolt took them for their wickedness. Then they took the calf after the proof had come to them, and We pardoned them for this; We gave Moses a clear authority.
154 - We raised the mount to be above because of the covenant they took, and We said to them, "Enter the gate by prostrating." We also said to them, "Do not transgress the Sabbath;" and We took from them a solemn covenant.
155 - So, for the breaking of their covenant, and their rejection of God's signs, and their killing of the prophets without justice, and their saying, “Our hearts are covered,” - nay, God sealed them for their denial, so they do not believe except a few.
156 - For their rejection and them saying about Mary a great falsehood,
157 - For their saying, "We have killed the Messiah Jesus the son of Mary, the messenger of God!" They did not kill him, nor did they crucify him, but it appeared to them as if they had. Those who dispute are in doubt of him, they have no knowledge except to follow conjecture; they did not kill him for a certainty.
158 - Instead, God raised him to Himself; and God is Noble, Wise.
Traditional muslims misinterpret these verses and take them out of context and say "Jesus was not crucified." while clearly the verses are talking about Jews' claim that they killed Jesus. And if you keep on reading you will see the next verses are also about the Jews.
So who claims they crucified and killed the Christ in this context? The Jews. Did the Jews crucify and kill the Christ? No. What happened instead? Jesus laid down his life and then took it back(John 10:18). After which he was taken up into the heaven(Luke 24:51).
Is it a contradiction now when the verse is read in context?
*"Contradiction #1: Jesus' divinity*
There are several verses in the New Testament that seem like they pave way to Jesus' divinity. So far, I have seen all of them to be either mistranslated or misinterpreted.
Since the example in the video was *Philippians 2:5-7,* let's go over those verses.
Here's NIV translation:
5 In your relationships with one another, have the same mindset as Christ Jesus:
6 Who, being in very nature God, did not consider equality with God something to be used to his own advantage;
7 rather, he made himself nothing
by taking the very nature of a servant,
being made in human likeness.
When read from this translation, certainly looks like Jesus is God. However, when you continue reading, it sounds odd:
8 And being found in appearance as a man,
he humbled himself
by becoming obedient to death-
even death on a cross!
9 Therefore God exalted him to the highest place
and gave him the name that is above every name,
Okay, so on the 6th verse Jesus is in the same nature as God and is equal to God. So Jesus = God.
And then on the 9th verse, God exalts God to the highest place and God gives God the name above every name???
But when you read the 6th verse from let's say NASB translation:
6 who, as He already existed in the form of God, did not consider equality with God something to be grasped.
Two opposite meanings in two different translations. Why?
Because the word translated as "very nature" in NIV is μορφή. Morph in English. Means shape, form. Not "very nature". Besides, the same word is used in *Matthew 16:12* yet NIV translators decide to
pick the true meaning of the word here. "Form". You can easily fact check this on Biblehub.
Are we not all created in the image of God? This is not exlusive to Jesus Christ.
As for the rest of the 6th verse, it can be translated as they did on NASB. NASB translation, in this instance, fits the context of the Old Testament and the New Testament AND the verses that come
after Philippians 2:6.
So yes. My point is, the Bible and the Quran do not contain different teachings regarding Jesus Christ. Only problem is in the translations and interpretations from both muslims and christians. And this is the result of both muslims and christians not guarding against the "yeast of the Pharisees." They valued their traditions and teachings of their ancestors over the word of God.
Now I know some of you will reply with other verses in the Bible that you think implies Jesus is God, or maybe some supposed contradictions between the Quran and the Bible. Before you do that, please
just study the verses carefully. Read the verses in the context and compare translations and check the meaning of the words. And when you reply, please try to be respectful like a christian or a muslim should be.
Peace and blessings!
I think you are being dishonest with yourself honestly. You don’t even need to study deeply to see it’s not the same message at all.
The Bible is clear regarding the essentials and the church believed and teached the essentials since the beginning. Yes there is disagreement within different groups of Christian’s but the essentials is that Jesus is God, he was crucified and resurrected, believing in Him and his sacrifice only save us from sin and hell. Muslim obviously do not believe it a single second because they take from what the Quran says and indeed, it’s different.
Tell me, do you think Jesus existed before the world, and created all things?
@@briandiehl9257 yes. John chapter 1 clearly says it.
@@RunBoy there are quite a few places that clearly state it
@@RunBoy I agree with you that we do not need to study that deeply. However, even when you just scratch the surface, you can see both the Bible and the Quran's translations have been meddled with in favor of tradition. The Bible is clear, yes. Yet some verses in the Bible (and the Quran) are open for interpreting in different ways. I just don't think it would be possible to interpret them in a way that would lead us to believe in a trinity without us being indoctrinated first about trinity by external sources. I think we should all take this very seriously because our lives and afterlives depend on it. I grew up as an atheist in a non-christian society so I was not that familiar with the doctrine although I knew the mainstream christians believed in a trinity, and I knew mainstream muslims disbelieved in the Bible because there was trinity in it. But when I became theist and decided to read the whole book for myself, I just could not see it except in few verses. So I would either reinterpret what I read up until that point which was like 99% of the Bible in favor of those few verses or try to see if i could reinterpret the few verses in favor of the rest of the Bible. I thought the latter made more sense and when I did my research, I noticed some of them were mistranslated or misinterpreted. Same goes for the Quran. When I read it I was shocked how different of a book it was than I had previously thought. It's a book that commands us to believe in the Bible, contrary to popular belief. And when you scratch the surface of things that seem like a contradiction, you find harmony among the books.
The funny thing about quran 31:14 is according to all the tafsir “their enemy“ was the Roman Empire, and the Christians who converted the Roman Empire were Trinitarian.