Biggest Hypocrites on Earth,always same (: like in bible false(98% at least),its like rule,claim some then denied and twist and then go listen false pastor who preach all out of any of 2 before,thats real trinity.Ignorance and denies of all other till dines urself in the end.
Why nobody of retards not even read and research,learn then after comment some u find clear?if u left any brain to get some logic and clear inthere,how human mind can be so poor,senseless zombies
@ElfyBoys Look i just dont understand how musslims think muhammad is a prophet, when he married a 6 year old while in his fifties, and he thigh her till she was 9 when he finally penetrated he only got revelations when he was in bed with her and not with his other 10-11 wives, thats because Aysha was so young she believed anything he told her and how is he Greater then Jesus??
@candiceevans1 Your lost mate I think u need 2 watch this video again or watch 82% of Bible written by Paul. Keep ur money in ur pocket amayb it will help u on judgemnt day.
@candiceevans1 Truth is there is no highest of intellects in Christianity as the Bible is corrupt so they have no evidence to go on, but Quran is in pure Arabic form for 14 centuries. Allah has said in the Quran we have sent forth this Quran and surely we will guard it and if u say this is from Muhammd then make 1 verse thereof or be ready 2 taste thpunishmnt of hellfirewho's fuel is fire and men.
Biblical manuscripts themselves are corrupt, as is evidenced by the fact that none of them agree with each other 100%.
Take for example the story of the woman taken into adultery -- such a story was added into Biblical manuscripts 1,100 years after the original writings (as any Biblical scholar will admit, including the Christian ones). The story doesn't appear in our earliest manuscripts -- it spontaneously appears over a millennium later.
Quran altered a little bit, Bible about 30-40%. Who altered Quran? Arabian influential elites of that period for their own agendas, specially sheikhs told to few scribes in the threat of death, unfortunately they conceded without even trying to leave some documents to testify this. When Human beings will be honest and grown up? Many saw this is as marvelous document written by someone who is of great cohesion to put things together, unlike Bible half coherent and half contradicting.
@symmetry08 Perhaps u r mistaken mate cos Quran was memorized by heart by the companions of the prophet and 2 this day even non Arab children no this by heart, 8 members of 1 family of my relatives nw this all by heart. plus God has challenged all of mankind 2 make1 verse of the Holy quran and said they will neva b able 2 make it.
james white you need to debate with real historians like ray hagins so he can crush yo ass with real facts you are no more than dirt under a real historians fingure nails you sound so stupid standing among people telling fiction type shit you are very funny your hole movement is present with lies you ever believe you is just as crazy if it is all about the money your message is going to forever be broke what possible can you tell god to make him forgive your DUM ASS
Calvinism/Doctrines of Grace/Reformed Theology are from the pit of Hell.....they are heresies that make God Almighty a sinner and not just a sinner but the Author of ALL sin.
Every child raped....every women beaten...every person murdered...every deceitful business deal...every cruelty man has done, was authored by God. It is a blasphemous false religion and many otherwise fine Bible teachers are promoting it today. MacArthur, Sproul, Piper, are some of them. Flee and Repent of Calvinism!!
obviously you've never read anything of the ante-nicene church? They quote the same Scriptures we do, only thing I wish most Bibles would have is the Septuagint rather than the Masoretic since the apostles quoted it and so did the ante-nicene church.
The Bible's not been corrupted, we could just about compile the entirety of Scripture from their quotes alone in the early church--it's the same. Either way, my faith isn't ultimately in the Bible, but Christ. You are still in your sins.
when you say god which god are you paying homage too the god of war, god of the moon, god of the sun(and the list goes on), realized where you are being deceived! All those gods have names but deceitful blind scholars keep them hidden due to ignorance. overall the original Words are Yahweh Yahuwshua research them and you will find amazing information. pray to the Living mighty Ones that He reveals His real name to you..
Oh christians , why is it so hard for you to admit the bible we have today is nothing even close to the bible in its original form , every christian leader/scholar admitted the bible is seriously altered and manipulated ..just get it over with and admit like i did..isn't the bottom line salvation ...if it is salvation that you are after then you need to find where the truth is, because if you die before you find it you will end up in hell ..i accepted christianity is a made up faith ..period .
@1malik1966: The funny thing is that the original manuscripts of the Qur'an have been proven by multiple scholars to have been altered and changed in type, such that new words were placed down. Further, we know the Uthman burned all remaining Qur'anic literature that contradicted his own copy. This makes the Qur'an nearly impossible to verify historically. Please pay attention to your own book before you pay attention to the Holy Bible.
8. (cont.) Additionally, the website quoted states that 9/11 was a lie...is this the work of a scholar or a conspiracy theorist?
9. The constant ad-hom attacks on Dr. White only proves one thing...that his arguments are hitting home and the creator of this video and the website quoted is desperate to find something, anything, which would validate their points. Otherwise, why attack Dr. White's character, and why not directly quote the website's points which positively refute him?
6. Muhammad believed that he was mentioned in the Bible. How could he refer to a book that was corrupt, AND speaking of him?
7. If the Bible was corrupted, who corrupted it? When was it corrupted? More importantly, why was it corrupted and why do Muslims use it to validate their prophet?
8. The Quran refers to the Bible as "the Book." To say that this only refers to portions of the OT is blatant cherry-picking.
4. The Muslim in the debate quoted in this video was asserting that the Bible had been changed and altered, and used an Catholic apologetic to support. Dr. White's point is relevant, and manuscripts found in Yemen seem to indicate an evolving Quranic text.
5. Matthew was more concerned about another monumental event...the death and resurrection of Jesus. And the Talmud does record the rending of the veil surrounding the Holy of Holies.
1. Admitting that a quote comes from a book does not imply agreement with what that quote says...the first point is non-sequitur.
2. There are no prophecies in the Quran. None. Stretch the text of the Quran all you like, but there are no clear, unequivocal prophecies there...
3. The Quran wasn't committed to paper until after Mohammed died, according to Muslim sources. Perhaps some of it was written down, but we have no Quranic manuscripts from the time that Mohammed was alive...
see the accounts of one person. mark luke john ect . .
then see the same accounts of someone else of the same account and youll find there would be many insetsy ini.. for example one person would say he said this.. anoyther would say compltry something else..
one person would say he said nothign when he was on the cross and die that way. another wouls say he said my father ect .. also go on my page and youll see many listed in the infos
@HERETIChelper Do Christians know that Joseph was reported to be 99 years old wen Mary was 12 and engaged at age 7.
Do christians know dat before the time of Muhammed (saw) that many girls were married off as soon as they hit menstruation(starting age 8-16) because this is a sign they are a women when they can bear children, n dat girls were engaged and married off before they hit puberty, but kept at home till they started menstruation. Do history research with books, not internet blog sites.
@khalilah40, in which book did you read that Joseph was 99 and Mary was 12 when Jesus was born? Is that book a peer-reviewed historical text? Thx in advance...
@HERETIChelper Who tells you such stupid and baseless things.. your mental calibre is infantile, I must say. The Prophet Muhammad PBUH was a human being, a normal human being. It was the tradition in Arabia to marry girls at a young age. Many girls married at a young age. Like the tradition in America for girls is, well what can I say..... Ignorance prevails in your minds... May Allah show you the right path. Ameen
I'm not always a fan of James White because of his dogmatic adherance to flawed Calvinist theology, however. He is right about these things. Minor variations in manuscripts, even between manuscripts in remote parts of the world; while still preserving key doctrines indicate that Christianity is the superior religion. Christianty thrives because it is stronger than literal, letter-for-letter, texts and manuscriputs.
If this guy is right, then WHAT are the "before scriptures" Muslims are to ask about from those who have read them? What is the "Book" that makes "People of the Book", and, why are they to obey Quran 5:68? Also, if this guy is right, then what is the Quran "confirming"? How can it confirm something that is corrupted, IF this guy is right?
@ItsAmadWorld2 The "before scriptures" are all the scriptures that God revealed before the Quran, which Muslims have to beleive in, including the Torah and the Gospel, BUT...only in their original, pure forms. Because the originals are lost, and the only original scripture we have is the Quran, we follow it. Hope that helps
If what you are saying is true, how come Quran 2:106 never kicked in to abrogate and tell Christians to NOT stand upon the Injeel, and, instead, say that the Injeel and Torah are lost and what's left have corruption in them, thus, CAN'T be confirmed by the Qur'an? I mean, why obey Quran 5:68? By the way, did you know that the meaning of Torahs in the Old Testament match those found in the Dead Sea Scrolls? Thus, the Torahs of Quran 5:68 are the ones to "stand firm upon".
Surah 2:4 states that the previous revelations are successful and are guarded. Moreover, we have manuscripts from the time of Muhammad that reveal the same message about the new testament gospels as they do today.
If the Qur'an states that the gospel and torah are guarded, how can they become corrupted?
@ndntakeover24 It doesnt say that they are guarded, it refers to the tenet of muslim beleif that we must beleive that the older books revealed by God were indeed revealed by God himself, the verse doesnt talk about us having to beleive in the Torah and Gospel. Hope that this helps, keep asking if it doesnt make sense. Also, its an established historical fact that the Bible has been added to and deleted, its impossible to change the Quran, even now, bc soo many people memorized it cover 2 cover
"About 200 years after Muhammad died (840 CE), Muslim scholars wrote down some of the oral traditions. It is believed that there were about 500,000 Hadith by the end of 200 years. At that time, Muslim scholars discarded the vast majority of these Hadith sayings as coming from the imaginations of Muslims. The remaining Hadith (less than 15,000) were recorded."
@tadpoleposition The video made the preposterous claim that "The Hadiths were documented shortly after the prophet's death...".
Even Muhammad knew what a mess he made of the Quran having to invoke a doctrine of abrogation to nullify his earlier more peaceful though incoherent pre-hijra ramblings, with his post-hijra calls for his followers to fight non-muslims, once Islam as a political system displaced any pretense of religiosity, other than repackaged Quraish pagan rituals.
@PeteWaldo ...and that allows us to know who all those anonymous authors were how? Basically what you're saying is you know the monstrosity that is the severely poor Christian textual tradition and are willing to "cling to that old rugged (solstice) cross" and blindly follow unverifiable sources. Whatever supposed criticism you might have of our texts is still 10X better than what you have.
@tadpoleposition My sadly deluded friend, no amount of blasphemy against the Word of God will ever magically create a history of Mecca prior to the 4th century AD, any more than it will move Mecca 1200 kilometers closer to the Holy Land of the prophets and patriarchs.
watch?v=F-PDQFTzNTc
Yet because Satan calls, you must reject the blood that would save you, to follow the EXACT OPPOSITE of the WHOLE SUBJECT of the Gospel, through a murdering, female prisoner abusing, thief.
@PeteWaldo "...no amount of blasphemy against the Word of God..."
Umm, I thought we already went over this. You're accusing me of blaspheming a book that only God knows who wrote the majority of and whose authors are not considered eyewitnesses to anything Jesus said or did nor did they reference an eyewitness. It looks as if the one doing the blaspheming is you.
@tadpoleposition "You're accusing me of blaspheming a book that only God knows who wrote the majority of and whose authors are not considered eyewitnesses to anything...."
So then Muhammad was simply consumed by sheer stupidity when, IN THE 7TH CENTURY, he quipped...
Sura 5:47 Let the people of the Gospel judge by what Allah hath revealed therein. If any do fail to judge by (the light of) what Allah hath revealed, they are (no better than) those who rebel.
@PeteWaldo "Sura 5:47 Let the people of the Gospel judge by what Allah hath revealed therein. If any do fail to judge by (the light of) what Allah hath revealed, they are (no better than) those who rebel."
You've already proven you're ready to contextually adapt everything in the Bible that doesn't suit your creed and twist it and turn it until it delights your fancy. Of course, it's not surprising you'd do the same with the Quran. (Yaaaawn)
@tadpoleposition Even as your blasphemy against Yahweh and His Word are perfect fulfillment of prophecy in regard to THE false prophet Muhammad and his Islamic "beast" kingdom.
Rev 13:6 And he opened his mouth in blasphemy against God, to blaspheme his name, and his tabernacle, and them that dwell in heaven.
1Jo 5:12 He that hath the Son hath life; [and] HE THAT HATH NOT THE SON OF GOD HATH NOT LIFE.
1John 5:10 He that BELIEVETH ON THE SON OF GOD hath the witness in himself: HE THAT BELIEVETH NOT GOD HATH MADE HIM A LIAR; because HE BELIEVED NOT THE RECORD that God gave OF HIS SON.
1John 2:22 Who is a liar but he that denieth that Jesus is the Christ? HE IS ANTICHRIST, THAT DENIETH the Father and THE SON. 23 WHOSOEVER DENIETH THE SON, THE SAME HATH NOT THE FATHER:
@PeteWaldo 1, 2, & 3 John were all written, according to Christian tradition, by the Apostle John, the same Apostle who authored the Gospel of John and Revelation. The same Apostle, who in Acts 4:13, was regarded as illiterate. Uh-huh. Exactly how did you interpret the meaning of illiterate again. Was it done to suit your delight or did you keep in its proper context? That's what I thought.
@PeteWaldo "... to follow the EXACT OPPOSITE of the WHOLE SUBJECT of the Gospel..."
Yeah, I will not accept the solstice cross as a symbol of salvation nor the Ra, Isis, and Horus trinity as my God nor December 25th, the birthday of Sol (the Sun) as the birthday of Jesus nor the feast of Ishtar, a celebrity of fertility, as being the day Jesus was resurrected. I refuse to and you should do the same.
@tadpoleposition Instead you follow the doctrine of Simon Magnus, known as Simon the Magician or sorcerer, wherein he said that it only appeared that Jesus was crucified. His was the first Gnostic doctrine, and was adopted and embellished by later Gnostic sects including the Ebionites. No surprise then that Muhammad's wife Khadijah's cousin, that she sent Muhammad to, to help him out of his suicidal funk, was an Ebionite occult priest.
this video is misquoting, and taken out of the context of what Oakley is saying. You guys are just mad that the guy effectively debunks his opponents academically and even logically. Muslims always never understood the christian theology and for some reason view the trinity as a 3 seperate beings when we've showed over and over that the bible speaks the trinity as one single God. I am a person composed of Mind, Body, and Spirit.. does this mean i'm three different beings?
@cisco19 "I am a person composed of Mind, Body, and Spirit.. "
I am a son, brother, dad, uncle, cousin, husband. Look mom, a 6 in 1! First of all, you're trying to draw comparisons between you and God. Jesus said he doesn't know the hour and the Father is greater than him and he died. God cannot die, knows everything, and is the Greatest. We're dealing with 3 distinct beings here. 1 is the Creator of all and the other 2 are creation. "Your" interpretation of "fell on their face" is unfounded.
@tadpoleposition You ever heard of the word "hypostatic union". That was the case when jesus said he doesn't know the hour. God is a universal immaterial entity, while Jesus is the natural Embodiment of God. If God's personality is a humble God, and he became purely man, wouldn't he take the sacrifice of supresinf his divinity and experiencing the mortal code of us humans? It's not 3 distinct beings, it's 3 different revelations of one God. That's why you muslims have always been inaccurate.
@cisco19 Your "brother, son.." is a bad example. These are your 6 different roles.. God has 3 different titles for his 3 revelations: The father (cosmologic and universal), The Son (the manifestation), the Spirit (God's immense force in the world).
If i went to the ocean and scooped some water from it, and then contained it a bucket. Is the water in the bucket different from the water where i originally scooped it from? Even if i freeze the water in the bucket, it's still the same water.
@cisco19 "Even if i freeze the water in the bucket, it's still the same water."
There's no sense in a trinity. God is God, but became human and died, while still being God, and His spirit descended after he resurrected himself. We Muslims will always be inaccurate because there is absolutely no proof of what it is and how it works in the Bible. If it's a guessing game for Christians, how do you think others will view it? The fabrication of 1 John 5:7 doesn't help your cause.
@tadpoleposition When you die, what happens to your spirit? Isn't your spirit still alive after the moment you die? Same thing with God. Jesus only PHYSICALLY died. That was the entire sacrifice of God. it wasn't just dieing on the cross but actually experiencing our humanity and subjecting himself.
1 John 5:7 says the 3 are 1. read the end.. The bible teaches it all over.. you muslims don't want to realize the proof because it contradicts the Koran which was made 600 years after the cannon.
In the RSV, 1 John 5:7 reads, "and the spirit is the witness because the spirit is truth." The verse is a fabrication. Meant so suit the need for a "trinity" verse.
@tadpoleposition Can you prove it was a fabrication? If you can show the original greek translation and sripture that doesn't contain this verse, then you win. But with out it, then you are just restating false arguments against the bible.
1st John and every book in the bible dates 600 years before the quran, It dates no less than 150years of Jesus' lifetime. To scholars, writings that date no more than 150 years is considered academically credible.
Are you seriously requiring to prove whether a verse in the KJV or RSV is a fabrication? 1 John 5:7 KJV, For there are three that bear record in heaven... 1 John RSV, But the spirit is the witness... Look it up for yourself. One is definitely a fabrication. Why our they both in the same book referred to as God's word?
@tadpoleposition Actually, 1st John 5:7 is a perserved verse because there was a time before that the bible removed it from it's later greek manuscripts.
There is evidence that 1st John 5:7 is original because it has been quoted by
Tertullian in his Apology, Against Praxeas (200AD); Cyprian (250 ad), and more manuscripts of that century to the 500 AD.. The Bible was not published yet during the 200, and the koran came into existence 600 after the bible was published.
@cisco19 "Actually, 1st John 5:7 is a perserved verse because there was a time before that the bible removed it from it's later greek manuscripts."
Which one, the KJV or the RSV? Also, Greek manuscripts? Wasn't Jesus' mother tongue and all of his disciples Aramaic? I mean, you boast about Greek manuscripts, yet the source of the Gospel, Jesus, was a Jew and so were all of his disciples. It's another knock against Christianity.
@tadpoleposition You need allot more homework to do. Originally, the verse was always there. It was never added, but it was taken out in many greek manuscripts. the KJV preserves that verse.
Why was the bible written in Greek? because Greek was the universal language during early Palestine. So in order to reach out to others, the NT was written in greek instead of Aramaic, because everyone knew greek.
@cisco19 "Greek was the universal language during early Palestine."
Listen, you can't even tell me where the author of John got his information from since you'd have to first tell me who authored it. Just because the information aligns with the Christian creed means nothing until the source of that information is revealed. Otherwise it's hearsay at best. Trying to prove if Jesus and his disciples spoke in other than Aramaic would be as fruitless. Your reply is circumstantial at best.
@cisco19 "looks like you've knocked yourself out there with that ignorance of the history of the greek language."
Not exactly. There's a reason Jesus told his followers to go only unto the lost sheep of Israel. The mere fact Acts 4:13 regards John and Peter as illiterate is enough to signal a problem. Peter and John are alleged to have authored more than one book in the Bible while not knowing how to read or write their own mother tongue. That's the elephant in the room.
@cisco19 Your Greek argument is circumstantial at best. You cannot prove Jesus or his disciples spoke Greek, never mind read or wrote Greek. Also, proving the disciples were even able to read or write their own mother tongue is impossible. Illiteracy was common in those times. That said, it's obvious the Gospels were written decades later after the evolution of Christianity as a faith and its severing ties with the Jews thus the Greek (Roman) influence by anonymous authors.
@tadpoleposition Circumstantial? That's actually fact that Greek was the universal language during early AD palestine. It wasn't just the apostles targeted for their ministry. You are just grabbing out random arguments for replying now with out even doing your own research. Making a case against why the apostles wrote in greek is very uneducated in your part. That should not have been even considered a case for you if you wanted to be taken into seriousness.
@tadpoleposition Anyway, christianity didn't evolve until rome adopted it. The gospels (even if you say they where decades later) still fit scholar credentials because they don't suprass 150 years after Jesus' lifetime. Therefore they are much more reliable as sources than the quran since the quran is 600 years after the Nicene creed.
Chrisitians worshiped Jesus even before the NT, just read anti-xtian writings of early AD.
@cisco19 "Chrisitians worshiped Jesus even before the NT, just read anti-xtian writings of early AD."
In other words, you're planning to blind follow unverifiable sources not proven to have referenced any eyewitness, disciple or Jesus. It seems all of your biased Greek sources are attempting to settle theological disputes rather than establish the truth. It's no wonder God sent another revelation. There's no way a just and merciful God is going to leave us with such a mess.
@tadpoleposition unvarifable sources? How is writings of Lucian, and Plinny the younger unvarifiable? These are historical documents that even atheist scholars such as Grant, don't deny to be actual anti-christian reports of early AD.
You really are making up arguments now. It really doesn't matter what your trying to contradict anymore, because it is purely academic history, that Greek was the universal language during early AD, and christians believed Jesus to be a God ever since the AD 30's
@tadpoleposition what sources are you talking about that shows early christianity believing the same thing Islam did? If you are going to make claims, and bash my evidence, can you atleast provide a legit reason?
Writings from lucian, Josephus (which matches the accounts in acts), Plinny, Celsus, and all those non-christians of 1st century are considered factual historical documents about christianity in palestine. There is no historical record of an Islamic like faith during that time.
@cisco19 "There is no historical record of an Islamic like faith during that time."
Islam means submission and obedience to the One True God and worshipping Him alone without dividing your worship between Him and other beings. If anyone claimed to be a Prophet or Messenger of God, then he wouldn't have strayed from this foundation. Over exaggeration accounted for the evolving legend of Jesus which resulted in the worship of Jesus. Something Jesus never told you to do.
@tadpoleposition Why are you strawling away from the main point of the current argument? I don't care what islam means, what i'm saying is that there was no "Jesus is a prophet" belief found in early Christianity during it's start. We've seen that in the writings of Lucian and other Historians of that time.
Of course he told us to believe in him. Why do you think Christianity worshiped him as god 200 years before they had a bible?
@cisco19 "... there was no "Jesus is a prophet" belief found in early Christianity during it's start."
Matthew 21:11, The crowds answered, "This is Jesus, the prophet from Nazareth in Galilee." Mark 6:15, ...And still others claimed, "He is a prophet, like one of the prophets of long ago." Luke 7:16,They were all filled with awe and praised God. "A great prophet has appeared among us,..." John 4:19, "Sir," the woman said, "I can see that you are a prophet. Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John say yes.
@tadpoleposition oh, the strangers in the crowd who barely knew the man saw him as a prophet. We all know about the rumors going on about his identity, But did Jesus' contemporaries say he was?
Jesus: "peter, what do they say about me"
Peter:"Others say you are a Prophet, others say you are Elijah...
Jesus: "Who do YOU (a man who knows Jesus personally) say that I am?
Peter: You are The Son of God
No body who was with Jesus personally saw him as a prophet.
@cisco19 That doesn't happen to be the same Peter who is described to have found out that Jesus was the Messiah not by flesh and blood, but by the Father which is in heaven in Matthew 16:16-17, does it? John 1:40-41 tells us Peter found out that Jesus was the Messiah by his flesh and blood brother Andrew. Also, Matthew 4:18 tells us Peter first met Jesus by the Sea of Galilee, whereas John 1:28-1:41 tells us they first met near the Jordan River. Some anonymous collaboration would've helped.
@tadpoleposition That's the same peter, but the time of realization was different. Peter said in Matt 16:16-17 "you are the Messiah, Son of the Living God". It means the admission of truth was revealed to him through God. John 1:40-41. Peter is introduced to Jesus as the Messiah, by andrew. Peter doesn't fully believe it yet.
Jn1:28-1:41 doesn't say he met peter anywhere. They didn't even meet in person yet in those verses, what are you talking about?.
@cisco19 The time of realization? Uh-huh, and there happens to be a verse or verses that support that allegation? Oh yeah, John 1:28, "These things were done in Bethabara beyond Jordan, where John was baptizing." That's not anywhere, that's Bethabara beyond the Jordan. On the other side or or across the Jordan River depending on which version you're reading. Either way, it's not the Sea of Galilee. There's no change of scenery between verses 28-41. Good try though!
@tadpoleposition well, yes. If you actually read it. Jn 1:28:1:41 does not contain anything about Jesus and Peter formally meeting. And yes there was a change in scenery, because you have in Jn 1:30 saying "the next day".. the next day was obviously not in the same area. You see Jn Talking about the events the day before. Jn:1:35 says "the next day" again, meaning it's he next day after verses 29-34. but nice try though, this time. make sure to read carefully the key details of the verses.
@cisco19 "And yes there was a change in scenery, because you have in Jn 1:30 saying "the next day"."
Look, why not just admit it's an irreconcilable contradiction? Even if I give you the benefit of the doubt, a change of scenery takes us to where? It wouldn't matter if it was Timbuktu, it's still not the Sea of Galilee mentioned in verse 43 and in Matthew's Gospel. The formal meeting is verse 42 still without a change of scenery. I'm amazed at the extent Christians go to attempt harmonizing.
@tadpoleposition It's not a contradiction because there are no scenes mentioned. You cant give an assumption of a contradictions if there is nothing to point out, "oh he didn't say the place like the others did", so what? All you need to do is read and use your common sense. John focused on "when/time" while the others on "where/setting".
I'm amazed at the extend of muslims trying to point out contradictions with out actually reading the context.
@cisco19 "John focused on "when/time" while the others on "where/setting"."
That is apologetic hogwash. John clearly mentions "where" in 1:28 and 1:43. Matthew clearly mentions "where" in 4:18. John's Gospel, according to you, claims Jesus met Peter in an unnamed place and Matthew's claims Jesus first met Peter at Galilee. The irony is John 1:43 places us at Galilee after Peter first meets Jesus. Rather than just admitting your folly, you digging a deeper ditch. What's wrong with you?
@tadpoleposition Nope, it's not even apologetics. It's just reading.In John 1:28, it says "this is what HAPPENED(past tense)" indicating that every thing before was of the past.. a past SETTING. You then read on wards, and before Jesus meets peter, you have "the next day" said twice. John 1:19-28 is what you call a RECAP.. a flow run to the main story of the chapter. it's not the point of the chapter, because the chapter is dedicated on the start of the apostles.
@tadpoleposition it's an apologetic. You don't apologetics to read something simple. You muslims love putting random and unpresent details in the bible just to fit your benefit in the argument. Nice try, but next time please point out an actual detail given in the bible instead of making up your own.
@cisco19 "Nice try, but next time please point out an actual detail given in the bible instead of making up your own."
I mean, who are trying to convince, me or yourself? Matthew's Gospel says clearly Jesus first met Peter by the Sea of Galilee. John's Gospel, according to you, places us in no man's land. John 1:43 places us at the Sea of Galilee and 1:28 places us near the Jordan River. Are we supposed to believe Jesus first met Peter no where and by the Sea of Galilee?
@cisco19 "Jesus only PHYSICALLY died. That was the entire sacrifice of God. it wasn't just dieing on the cross but actually experiencing our humanity and subjecting himself."
God experienced humanity and subjected himself? That's just plain sick.
@tadpoleposition Yes. it isn't sick, it's what you call the display of love the creator had for his creation. He didn't come here to show he was greater.. he came here to heal us, save us, and bring us all closure. So, he abided to our natural and mortal code, it was all part of the sacrifice. Because it was the power of great love that destroyed the power of sin.
@cisco19 "Yes. it isn't sick, it's what you call the display of love the creator had for his creation."
Actually, it's a play on human psychology. God sent his only son to die for us is intended to win human appeal. He did for our sins is a guilt trip. It's a brand marketed by the Church to win over the masses. It has nothing at all to do with truth. Your sins are your sins. Seeking God's forgiveness is what Jesus taught his disciples to do. You should be doing the same.
@tadpoleposition You didn't understand anything again. God sent his son for the purpose of bringing us closure and ending sin. You see, God is the righteous Judge and he can't let sin go out unpunished.. so instead of us taking the punishment, he takes it instead. He died for our sins is the truth..
Jesus taught that he was sent so that the world through him could be saved. Jesus taught forgiveness in general, because he was God's reconciliation with Man.
@cisco19 "God sent his son for the purpose of bringing us closure and ending sin."
You fail to understand that we continue to sin and God continues to send hurricanes, earthquakes, tsunamis, tornadoes, and other forms of punishment. There's no end to sin as long as man is alive and no closure from an original sin because that concept is heresy invented by Paul. Adam's sin doesn't carry over to his offspring. No soul bears the sin of another soul otherwise God is unjust.
@tadpoleposition whats wrong with the analogy. we can use elements in our reality to describe the reality of God. God is trinity. God is a universal being.. who is immaterial. You see the problem with you muslims is that you view the trinity as triad. Like Guy 1, Guy 2, Guy3. that is not a trinity,
@tadpoleposition whats wrong with the analogy. we can use elements in our reality to describe the reality of God. God is trinity. God is a universal being.. who is immaterial. You see the problem with you muslims is that you view the trinity as triad. Like Guy 1, Guy 2, Guy3. that is not a trinity. Why do you view God to a be of a single mass just like that of a human? Didn't God say that he created us in our likeness? We are also a trinity - mind, body, and spirit.
@tadpoleposition "The plurality of one's self expressed in semitic languages"
What are you talking about? You contradicted my example of the Mind,Body, soul = one human being.. saying that we can't use God in that "human" sense". But the bible said that God created us humans in his likeness, therefore we can use natural examples to describe this supernatural being. Mind,Body, and Spirit = 1 human being; respectively, the Father, The Word (Jesus), and the Spirit = 1 God
Your ignorance of Semitic languages shows. Again, go ask any Jew or Muslim regarding passages where God refers to himself in the plural and ask them what that means.
that, is how could Muhammad or early Islam know for a fact that the OT/NT was corrupted when he could not read it & it is only a very small portion that insists that Jesus is not whom He claims to be ? Could you tell me the proof that the Koran came from an angel ? Jesus accepted the OT and NEVER said that it came from an angel (or that His own words came from an angel ) but Islams claims that both the OT/NT were 'corrupted'. WHEN-U are saying then Allah was too weak to protect the truth?
Please read these books: Misquoting Jesus, Jesus Interrupted, Studies in the Textual Criticism of the New Testament Christianity in Late Antiquity, The Lost Christianities: The Battles for Scripture and the Faiths We Never Knew, Lost Scriptures: Books that Did Not MakeIt into the New Testament by Bart D. Ehrman, American New Testament scholar. if you are honest spent some time and research. And Also research Quran with open heart and dont follow what media says about islam.
The Bible backs itself up through many writers of many different eras,yet we are all told that we should take Muhammad's word that everything that Jews and Christians believed about God as being all wrong ,so much for having the truth established in the mouths of 2 or more witnesses.Muhammad was so sure that what he was saying was true,but once it was shown how wrong he was,then he cried foul,everyone else was wrong, typical.
Muhammed had so many women in his bed and yet muslims consider him to be a true prophet of God.Jesus was the only one who was sinless he is the one we ought to follow.
Whenever you come across a verse that states, "that it might be fulfilled" or "as was written in the scripture", in the Bible, cross-reference and look at the context of the verse cited. The authors did their best to prove Messianic prophecy, but, it turns out, they did exactly what the author of Matthew did in 2:15. The author of John even cited a verse that doesn't exist in 7:38, "...as the scripture hath said, out of his belly shall flow rivers of living water." LOL! What a joke!
Something funny about the Book of Matthew; in chapter 2 verse 15, the author, only God knows who he is, cites a verse from Hosea in reference to Jesus. It reads, "... that it might be fulfilled which was spoken of the Lord by the prophet, saying, Out of Egypt have I called my son." The thing is, that verse he cites in Hosea, 11:1, reads as follows, "When Israel was a child, then I loved him, and called my son out of Egypt." The author ripped the verse in half and misapplied to Jesus! LOL!
(5) there are no miricles in the quran hence no testimony. this is only the first 1:44 the absence of a detail in a story doesn't mean that it didn't happen. the gospels were written for different people groups and hence emphasize different things I can't really go on this is such a bad video the double standards for "proof" are simply overwhelming. clearly drfmm you have no idea about christianity even in the vaguest sense of the term. this only proves your complete lack of knowledge. good day.
(4) If you are going to make the claim that your source is correct, then you also HAVE to agree that the points contained in (1)(2)(2 cont.) are also 100% correct, right and true. if you can't do that then you really can't be using this source as definitive. which makes YOUR VIDEO COMPLETELY VOID AND MOOT. not to mention pt (3) which on it face means you can't trust the quran b/c you have no way of authenticating it. except the word of the guy that burned all other copies! uh huh...
(2 continued) on sources of the koran... Zoroastrianism, Hanifism, Native ancient and contemporary Arabian heathen beliefs and practices,pre-Islamic Arabian heathen belief, traditions, customs, and superstitions.
(3) you don't even have a source that is close to an original b/c the original sources were oral, palm leaves, tanned hides, or dry bones. none exist today. the copies made from these were then BURNED by someone who said that he alone had the only real koran. riiiight?!?
(2) on the koran and doctrine it teaches - moral, historical, and legendary lessons taken from the canonical, but mostly apocryphal, Christian and Jewish Scriptures, and from contemporary and ancient Arabian heathenism."
sorces of the koran include... Old Testament (canonical and apocryphal), hybrid Judaism of the late rabbinical schools, New Testament (canonical and apocryphal) and various heretical doctrines,Sabaism, a combination of Judaism, Manicheism,old disfigured Babylonian heathenism...
(1)an utter FAIL on behalf of the muslims AGAIN! the same encyclopedia when speaking on textual criticism says " Indeed it is a material impossibility to transcribe absolutely without error the whole of a long work; and a priori one may be sure, that no two copies of the same original will be alike in every detail." this includes the quran. hello!
@RedLetterChristian "(1)an utter FAIL on behalf of the muslims AGAIN! the same encyclopedia...says "...and a priori one may be sure, that no two copies of the same original will be alike in every detail." this includes the quran. hello!"
Rough translation: Our Bible is so jacked up, we see it an impossibility for the Quran to also stand up to the same historical textual criticism.
Dude, that doesn't prove the Bible isn't corrupt and it doesn't prove the Quran is corrupt.
@tadpole the guy in the video uses a source that proves that the bible has been corrupted. if this source if taken as authoritative and can be relied apon to speak truth, then they have to also contend with the fact that it says that the quran hasn't been perfectly preserved, which all muslims i know will argue emphatically that it was, it’s almost blasphemous to say it wasn’t. he needs to find a better source to back his arguement or accept that the quran is also corurpted as they would see it.
@RedLetterChristian A proven source can be used in an absolute sense if its established application has been shown to work across the board. Christians don't know how to qualify things. If a critique proves the Bible is corrupted, it's automatically presumed the Quran will also fail this same critique. Any alleged criticisms, i.e., Muhammad, peace be upon him, plagiarized the Bible and so on, have all failed miserably. It's a distraction from the absurdities contained in the Bible.
@tadpoleposition you aren't following my arguement at all.what i am saying is that the same source that the guy in the video says discredits the bible (as far a a muslim is conserned) that EXACT SAME SOURCE also discredits the qruan (as far as a muslim would be conserned) if you are going to use a source in an arguement to back your point, then don't use a source or arguement that ALSO demolishes your own holy book. it makes your own arguement completely moot. btw mo used heretical xian material
I mean, I followed you all the way up until this Luciferian plug of yours. Although quite clever, Mr. White clearly lied through his teeth and you seem to condone that. He's self-interpretting the Quran and not surprisingly so because Christians deal with the Bible the same way. The same source can be used if an exception can be proven to stand up to the source's criticism and, of course, the Quran does. Peace!
could you pls offer some support or proof from the Hebrew scriptures that the islamic god is the same as the God of the Hebrews and the Christians? There appear to be many differences- the most obvious is that neither the Hebrews nor the Christians call Him allah. Also, Christians claim the revelation of the Godhead. Where is the proof in the Hebrew scriptures that an angel (the same angel) delivered a message to the Hebrew prophets as it is claimed he did to Muhammad. Did Muhammad read the NT?
@shieldsff I think you mean Aramaic. Even the two names, Aramaic and Arabic, are almost the same. Aramaic is widely considered a dead language. Therefore, it's almost impossible to link the name Allah with what ancient Israelites might have called God. The Jewish civilization was wiped out more than once and with it their language. Gabriel is the Archangel of chief of the angels. He's mentioned in Luke and Daniel as a carrier of revelation. Muhammad, peace be upon him, was illiterate.
thanks- the NT was written in Aramaic & Greek; the OT in Hebrew. Yes w/ the exception of Daniel few exceptions of angels delivering inspired text. Also, the accounts of most other prophets like Isiah, Moses, Jeremiah, Micah,etc;do not relate angelic msgs.The NT authors do not claim to have received their msgs. from angels.That Muhammad did not (could not) read the NT is very disturbing- it means he could not have known the complete truth & revelation of the world salvation works God did in Judea
@shieldsff "That Muhammad did not (could not) read the NT is very disturbing- it means he could not have known...the world salvation works God did in Judea."
That's where the Catholic Church influence comes into play. Jesus' mission was confined to the lost sheep of Israel. The Church required a god-like universal fountainhead for its cult. Jesus's life was cut and pasted to suit their world salvation criteria. Most NT authors remain anonymous. Your statement "it means" is very disturbing.
@tadpoleposition - not exactly..On the contrary, the majority of the NT books are identified- of course, the Apostle Paul wrote the majority, so if we had to ignore several of the NT books we are still left with a clear msg from Peter, Paul, & John. Early period Islam did not seem to question the authenticity of Paul's writings. Also, Jesus did not confine his mission to the pple of Isreal. See Gospel of Matt. chap 28. And of course in John, Jesus said if I am lifted up, I'll draw all men to me
@shieldsff Peter and John were illiterate. They couldn't even read or write their own mother tongue let alone Koine Greek. Paul wasn't an eyewitness of Jesus' life and never once referenced anyone who was. So your clear message isn't so clear after all. I think your claiming Jesus flip-flopped on the issue of who he was sent to. Matthew 15:24, "I was sent only to the lost sheep of the nation of Israel." If Jesus was the savior of mankind, then he would've stated as such throughout his ministry.
sorry, but again you are incorrect; there's no proof that John or Peter were unable to read or write. Saul the Pharisee was extremely literate&mult-lingual. Paul was, just as crucially, an eyewitness of the resurrected Jesus;as a persecutor of christians, obviously had NO reason whatsoever to make lie about it otherwise.As he makes clear in his writings,it did not materially benefit him at all to become a Christian.That you accuse Jesus of flip-flopping shows you did not read or respect Him
Again, you have no support for this, but assuming it were true, it's seem to me it's irrelevant to topic. Again, the assertion is being put forth by islam that the Koran amends and supercedes the NT; Islam argues that the scriptures have been 'corrupted and that Muhammad received the Koran. But, again, all I have done was to request clarification or proof that this could possibly be true. The obstacle I see is that is how could Muhammad know.
@tadpoleposition -Neither Jesus nor the apostles ever claimed to supercede the Hebrew scriptures, nor did christians ever claim that the Hebrew scriptures were 'corrupted' , false or wrong. Do you see the difference ? In fact, Jesus said that he did not come to abolish the law; but to fulfill [the LAW]. So, Islam also says that the scriptures prophesied that Jesus is the Messiah-would you tell me where the scriptures says this and why is Muhammad not the Messiah ?
@shieldsff Acts 4:13, Now seeing the constancy of Peter and of John, understanding that they were ILLITERATE AND IGNORANT men, they wondered; and they knew them that they had been with Jesus. Again, Peter and John could not read or write in their own mother tongue, yet they're alleged to have authored books in Koine Greek, one might argue in a very skilled fashion. Paul wasn't an eyewitness and didn't reference anyone who was. Muhammad was inspired by the same angel mentioned in Luke and Daniel.
sorry, but not convinced.; the word here is also 'unlearned' ( possibly meaning having no FORMAL torah studies). You will note from the CONTEXT that they are addressing the rulers, elders & scribes (v. 4-8). More meaningful is that these sophisticated rulers marveled at what they were hearing. In addition, this is the very early stage of the church- nothing precludes that Peter's wrote his letter at a later time after ARAMAIC. There is also more than one John in the NT.
Paul of course, had the acceptance & approval of those who witnessed the cruciifixion (& resurrection). God was more concerned that Paul received & witnessed the person of the resurrection But again, why would an angel go to Muhammad ? Like Daniel, the Apostles didn't claim to receive his 'scriptures' from an angel (just the answer to his prayer- remember ?) Jesus accepted the OT; but Islams claims the NT is 'corrupted'. Could you tell us the proof the Koran came from an angel.
@tadpoleposition -So, Islam also says that the scriptures prophesied that Jesus is the Messiah-would you tell me where the scriptures says this and why is Muhammad not the Messiah ?
@tad-again:that, is how could Muhammad or early Islam know for a fact that the OT/NT was corrupted when he could not read it & it is only a very small portion that insists that Jesus is not whom He claims to be ? Could U tell me the proof that the Koran came from an angel? Jesus accepted the OT & NEVER said that it came from an angel (or that His own words came from an angel) but Islams claims that both the OT/NT were 'corrupted'. WHEN-U are saying then Allah was too weak to protect the truth?
thanks my friend, but these statements are simply far too ambiguous and uncertain... Have you read the Torah or the Gospels? Both Moses and Jesus said that there would come false prophets. Therefore, credibility must be established and not taken for granted, How does one prove that muham. received both the 'true message' from the angel, and that the angel was not 'fallen'? Where is the attestation that allah sent the original scriptures. What other prophets received scriptures from angels?
@tadpoleposition - pardon my error,I meant to write, how come there are few if any prophets who claimed to receive written scriptures from angel. In the cases you cited, those were very unique circumstances and the angel did not tell them to write down scriptures.The angels which came to Sodom did not tell Lot to write down scriptures.Why don't the major prophets (such as Moses, Isiah, Joshua, Amos, etc.) say that an angel told them to write down scriptures. Isn't Muhamm claim highly irregular?
-"yet they're alleged to have authored books in Koine Greek,"
I want to reiterate that you have no proof that Peter (or John who was killed) were illiterate."Koine" simply means common,but more likely when his letter was wrote it was in Aramaic. Also,it might have been written later (after he did learn to read).Have you read Peter's letters? It is possible they were conveyed, but that is immaterial b/c there was attestation from other writers and Peters letter were widely accepted as true,
@tadpoleposition-"yet they're alleged to have authored books in Koine Greek,"
I want to reiterate that you have no proof that Peter (or John who was killed) were illiterate."Koine" simply means common,.but more likely when his letter was wrote it was in Aramaic. Also,it might have been written letter. Have you read Peter's letters? It is possible they were conveyed, but that is immaterial because there is verification from other writers,
The burden here lies w/you tp prove UR case because Islam claims that scriptures were corrupted when the founder of Islam NEVER read them. Paul was an eyewitness to the resurrection. Here is the gist of the matter in my view however, which is the source of the revelation ? How do you know it was the 'same angel' that came to Muhamm?
@tadpoleposition -Jesus' mission was confined to the lost sheep of Israel.
I really hope if you have the chance you will read the gospels. After Jesus was fully revealed, he clearly stated that the salvation of God was not just to the lost sheep but to all the gentiles (like you and me) as well, thanks
@tadpoleposition "A proven source can be used in an absolute sense if its established application has been shown to work across the board"
IT DOES NOT WORK ACROSS THE BOARD!!! look at it this way say chapter 1 discredits the bible then in chapter 3 that same source discredits the quran hence, you can't use the source unless you are willing to become an atheist. this is extreamly bad form and only proves that muslims are grasping at straws. also please read my other posts.
@RedLetterChristian After all, how do you fall for his crap speech when it's known the Bible has been altered. The three oldest codices have differences in number of books, verses, etc. The Catholic Bible has 73 books and the Protestant has 66 books. The reading of 1 John 5:7 in the KJV and RSV are not the same. The last verses in Mark 16:9-20 have been proven to be fabricated. The NIV omits over 40 verses and literally thousands of words. The issues don't stop there. Peace!
A final point I would raise is that the central truth of the original prophets was NOT submission anywhere or that there is a unitary god (for example, both baal & molech were claimed as [names] for god). The central truth is that there is One God and only One True & Living God. It is this God we are commanded to worship. Also, Muhamm. claims that he received his revelations from an angelic being. Can any examples be offered of earlier prophets who received written revelations from angels
@shieldsff "A final point I would raise is that the central truth of the original prophets was NOT submission anywhere..."
Matthew 26:39 Going a little farther, he fell with his face to the ground and prayed, "My Father, if it is possible, may this cup be taken from me. Yet not as I will, but as you will." Jesus was in full submission to the One True God's will. That defines a perfect Muslim. He is pleased with what God decrees for him.
I must agree this passage provides a strong example of an obedient act to the will of God. However, you have a major problem-in citing this example, you have violated a MAJOR rule of argumentation & bible exegesis: namely consistency & non-contradiction .Specifically,what exactly is Jesus claiming to submit to? -- the CROSS (v.53-54). If U are right, U MUST also accept v.28,32 & 28:18-20. Also, where does he commands OTHERS to 'submit' like this? Sorry, this does not 'prove' your position.
@shieldsff Genesis 17:3: And Abram fell on his face:... Numbers 20:6, Then Moses and Aaron...fell on their faces. Joshua 7:6, Then Joshua...fell to the earth on his face... 2 Chronicles 7:3, When all the people of Israel saw the fire come down...they bowed down with their faces to the ground. Nehemiah 8:6, And Ezra...worshiped the LORD with their faces to the ground. 1 Kings 18:42. And Elijah...put his face between his knees. Yeah, I can. Perfect Muslims in submission to God's perfect Will.
sorry, but your 'proof' is again, not consistent at all. I do not dispute that these instances of the prophets or others praying face down, but in NO WAY does that mean they subscribed to muslim beliefs. First, the entire text indicates these are Hebrews praying to the God of Isreal; also many christians pray face down; secondly U discount other prayer postures, eg., Esr. 9:5; Da 6:10; Ac 9:40. Again, you are inconsistent if U reject the other verse. UR argument still not proven by context
@shieldsff Other prayer postures including raising their hands, which Muslims do, bowing, which Muslims do. For you to claim my evidence is inconsistent shows lack of mental depth. Have a good life and may God guide you to become like the prophets, perfect Muslims in complete submission to God's Perfect Will.
@tadpoleposition - NO, I NEVER claim anywhere that U have a lack of mental depth because of your statements about prayer postures. Rather, I claim that your arguments on behalf of belief in Islam are mistaken and wrong because cannot demonstrate that the original scriptures state that 'submission' is the primary requirement of god and because there is no way to establish that Muhammad received msgs from an angel being, when prior prophets of God DO NOT claim that about written scriptures. Pray
Hey regarding these prayer postures just let me say that I do not disagree that this is how pple prayed or that these were not sincere positions of entreats to God. But you invite a great error and confusion when you insist that because some people prayed in this manner it means that they had islamic beliefs- that is just fatuous. People in the Hebrew scriptures prayed ONLY to the Eternal, Creator, Triune God of Abraham, Issac & Jacob, Also in the NT believers prayed to Jesus in the same way
@shieldsff "Also in the NT believers prayed to Jesus in the same way"
Jesus was a Jew and so were His disciples. If they prayed to Jesus or if Jesus prayed to himself they/he were/was committing idolatry because the Jews believed God can't be a man and a woman can't conceive God and carry God and give birth to God. Jesus taught his disciples to pray directly to God without a mediator. All of that mediator/god-man jazz sprung up by heretics who invented practices/beliefs Jesus didn't teach.
@tadpoleposition- On the contrary, I think that again you are mistaken and clearly have not read the Torah; Yes the disciples were devout Hebrews- So, if fact, if they prayed to Jesus and found pardon for their sins in Jesus it can only be because the very God of the scriptures gave them an astounding revelation that God was with them. Again, have you read the Bible ? I think Islam misleads you about who God is- the scriptures make clear He is transcendent & with us. Read Gen 18 & Deut 4-8
Can't notice any problems in James's arguments, your comments generally seem to involve missing the point completely...
Rhuanjl 1 week ago
Biggest Hypocrites on Earth,always same (: like in bible false(98% at least),its like rule,claim some then denied and twist and then go listen false pastor who preach all out of any of 2 before,thats real trinity.Ignorance and denies of all other till dines urself in the end.
Why nobody of retards not even read and research,learn then after comment some u find clear?if u left any brain to get some logic and clear inthere,how human mind can be so poor,senseless zombies
TheAmch0 1 week ago
why do muslims think that Qur'an is a miracle? it took 26 years to compose, what kind of miracle takes that Long
njfreddy 4 weeks ago
@njfreddy The miracle is here my friend :) watch?v=nUMNgu6Ws8s
ElfyBoys 2 weeks ago
@ElfyBoys Look i just dont understand how musslims think muhammad is a prophet, when he married a 6 year old while in his fifties, and he thigh her till she was 9 when he finally penetrated he only got revelations when he was in bed with her and not with his other 10-11 wives, thats because Aysha was so young she believed anything he told her and how is he Greater then Jesus??
njfreddy 2 weeks ago
In most of his debates Mr White keep asking the arthur of the koran, I bear witness that He knows the arthur of the koran more than his WIFE...
julio14335 1 month ago
@candiceevans1 Your lost mate I think u need 2 watch this video again or watch 82% of Bible written by Paul. Keep ur money in ur pocket amayb it will help u on judgemnt day.
truth4urlife 1 month ago
@candiceevans1 Truth is there is no highest of intellects in Christianity as the Bible is corrupt so they have no evidence to go on, but Quran is in pure Arabic form for 14 centuries. Allah has said in the Quran we have sent forth this Quran and surely we will guard it and if u say this is from Muhammd then make 1 verse thereof or be ready 2 taste thpunishmnt of hellfirewho's fuel is fire and men.
truth4urlife 1 month ago
The Bible is full of crap it even talks about mythical creatures such as Unicorns.
ExtremeEnergyForce 1 month ago
@candiceevans1,
Biblical manuscripts themselves are corrupt, as is evidenced by the fact that none of them agree with each other 100%.
Take for example the story of the woman taken into adultery -- such a story was added into Biblical manuscripts 1,100 years after the original writings (as any Biblical scholar will admit, including the Christian ones). The story doesn't appear in our earliest manuscripts -- it spontaneously appears over a millennium later.
05lowell05 1 month ago
Quran altered a little bit, Bible about 30-40%. Who altered Quran? Arabian influential elites of that period for their own agendas, specially sheikhs told to few scribes in the threat of death, unfortunately they conceded without even trying to leave some documents to testify this. When Human beings will be honest and grown up? Many saw this is as marvelous document written by someone who is of great cohesion to put things together, unlike Bible half coherent and half contradicting.
symmetry08 1 month ago
@symmetry08 Perhaps u r mistaken mate cos Quran was memorized by heart by the companions of the prophet and 2 this day even non Arab children no this by heart, 8 members of 1 family of my relatives nw this all by heart. plus God has challenged all of mankind 2 make1 verse of the Holy quran and said they will neva b able 2 make it.
truth4urlife 1 month ago
james white you need to debate with real historians like ray hagins so he can crush yo ass with real facts you are no more than dirt under a real historians fingure nails you sound so stupid standing among people telling fiction type shit you are very funny your hole movement is present with lies you ever believe you is just as crazy if it is all about the money your message is going to forever be broke what possible can you tell god to make him forgive your DUM ASS
moneygone100 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Calvinism/Doctrines of Grace/Reformed Theology are from the pit of Hell.....they are heresies that make God Almighty a sinner and not just a sinner but the Author of ALL sin.
Every child raped....every women beaten...every person murdered...every deceitful business deal...every cruelty man has done, was authored by God. It is a blasphemous false religion and many otherwise fine Bible teachers are promoting it today. MacArthur, Sproul, Piper, are some of them. Flee and Repent of Calvinism!!
willpower242 1 month ago
lol james white deffend bible buy quran what a shame
iwantyou9944 1 month ago
WHY DON'T YOU GUYS JUST BLOW HIS ASS UP LIKE YOU DO EVERYBODY ELSE ???
siannarino 1 month ago
obviously you've never read anything of the ante-nicene church? They quote the same Scriptures we do, only thing I wish most Bibles would have is the Septuagint rather than the Masoretic since the apostles quoted it and so did the ante-nicene church.
The Bible's not been corrupted, we could just about compile the entirety of Scripture from their quotes alone in the early church--it's the same. Either way, my faith isn't ultimately in the Bible, but Christ. You are still in your sins.
droptozro 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
when you say god which god are you paying homage too the god of war, god of the moon, god of the sun(and the list goes on), realized where you are being deceived! All those gods have names but deceitful blind scholars keep them hidden due to ignorance. overall the original Words are Yahweh Yahuwshua research them and you will find amazing information. pray to the Living mighty Ones that He reveals His real name to you..
YahuwshuaTruth 2 months ago
Salam Drfmm could u tell me what was the title of this debate ?
MuslimByChoice 2 months ago
@MuslimByChoice
wa alikum salam bro..well sorry to tell you that I don't know the title of this debate. I just uploaded this video from answering christianity.
DrFMM 2 months ago
@MuslimByChoice ,is the new testament inspired word of God ?
sususoos 1 month ago
Oh christians , why is it so hard for you to admit the bible we have today is nothing even close to the bible in its original form , every christian leader/scholar admitted the bible is seriously altered and manipulated ..just get it over with and admit like i did..isn't the bottom line salvation ...if it is salvation that you are after then you need to find where the truth is, because if you die before you find it you will end up in hell ..i accepted christianity is a made up faith ..period .
1malik1966 2 months ago
Comment removed
MTLBOBIRAS 2 months ago
@1malik1966: The funny thing is that the original manuscripts of the Qur'an have been proven by multiple scholars to have been altered and changed in type, such that new words were placed down. Further, we know the Uthman burned all remaining Qur'anic literature that contradicted his own copy. This makes the Qur'an nearly impossible to verify historically. Please pay attention to your own book before you pay attention to the Holy Bible.
dimic 2 months ago
8. (cont.) Additionally, the website quoted states that 9/11 was a lie...is this the work of a scholar or a conspiracy theorist?
9. The constant ad-hom attacks on Dr. White only proves one thing...that his arguments are hitting home and the creator of this video and the website quoted is desperate to find something, anything, which would validate their points. Otherwise, why attack Dr. White's character, and why not directly quote the website's points which positively refute him?
stronzo5785 3 months ago
6. Muhammad believed that he was mentioned in the Bible. How could he refer to a book that was corrupt, AND speaking of him?
7. If the Bible was corrupted, who corrupted it? When was it corrupted? More importantly, why was it corrupted and why do Muslims use it to validate their prophet?
8. The Quran refers to the Bible as "the Book." To say that this only refers to portions of the OT is blatant cherry-picking.
stronzo5785 3 months ago
4. The Muslim in the debate quoted in this video was asserting that the Bible had been changed and altered, and used an Catholic apologetic to support. Dr. White's point is relevant, and manuscripts found in Yemen seem to indicate an evolving Quranic text.
5. Matthew was more concerned about another monumental event...the death and resurrection of Jesus. And the Talmud does record the rending of the veil surrounding the Holy of Holies.
stronzo5785 3 months ago
1. Admitting that a quote comes from a book does not imply agreement with what that quote says...the first point is non-sequitur.
2. There are no prophecies in the Quran. None. Stretch the text of the Quran all you like, but there are no clear, unequivocal prophecies there...
3. The Quran wasn't committed to paper until after Mohammed died, according to Muslim sources. Perhaps some of it was written down, but we have no Quranic manuscripts from the time that Mohammed was alive...
stronzo5785 3 months ago
this is how you find the errors in the bible...
see the accounts of one person. mark luke john ect . .
then see the same accounts of someone else of the same account and youll find there would be many insetsy ini.. for example one person would say he said this.. anoyther would say compltry something else..
one person would say he said nothign when he was on the cross and die that way. another wouls say he said my father ect .. also go on my page and youll see many listed in the infos
rudeboywaz 3 months ago
@HERETIChelper Do Christians know that Joseph was reported to be 99 years old wen Mary was 12 and engaged at age 7.
Do christians know dat before the time of Muhammed (saw) that many girls were married off as soon as they hit menstruation(starting age 8-16) because this is a sign they are a women when they can bear children, n dat girls were engaged and married off before they hit puberty, but kept at home till they started menstruation. Do history research with books, not internet blog sites.
khalilah40 3 months ago
@khalilah40, in which book did you read that Joseph was 99 and Mary was 12 when Jesus was born? Is that book a peer-reviewed historical text? Thx in advance...
stronzo5785 3 months ago
@HERETIChelper Who tells you such stupid and baseless things.. your mental calibre is infantile, I must say. The Prophet Muhammad PBUH was a human being, a normal human being. It was the tradition in Arabia to marry girls at a young age. Many girls married at a young age. Like the tradition in America for girls is, well what can I say..... Ignorance prevails in your minds... May Allah show you the right path. Ameen
tahatehseen 3 months ago
I'm not always a fan of James White because of his dogmatic adherance to flawed Calvinist theology, however. He is right about these things. Minor variations in manuscripts, even between manuscripts in remote parts of the world; while still preserving key doctrines indicate that Christianity is the superior religion. Christianty thrives because it is stronger than literal, letter-for-letter, texts and manuscriputs.
gsschoenfeld 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
It started in Genesis 3: with satan Questioning Gods word to eve .
Did God surely say?
It will end with satan and man under the power of satan Questioning Gods word.
Did God surely say?.
KJV=GODS WORD
believeonetime 4 months ago
Hey, maybe Ergun Caner isn't so bad after all, since he attacked the credibility of him.
ItsAmadWorld2 6 months ago
YouTube SEARCH...( poem about cross worship )...
ghs224 7 months ago
If this guy is right, then WHAT are the "before scriptures" Muslims are to ask about from those who have read them? What is the "Book" that makes "People of the Book", and, why are they to obey Quran 5:68? Also, if this guy is right, then what is the Quran "confirming"? How can it confirm something that is corrupted, IF this guy is right?
ItsAmadWorld2 8 months ago
@ItsAmadWorld2 The "before scriptures" are all the scriptures that God revealed before the Quran, which Muslims have to beleive in, including the Torah and the Gospel, BUT...only in their original, pure forms. Because the originals are lost, and the only original scripture we have is the Quran, we follow it. Hope that helps
wrijal 8 months ago
@wrijal
If what you are saying is true, how come Quran 2:106 never kicked in to abrogate and tell Christians to NOT stand upon the Injeel, and, instead, say that the Injeel and Torah are lost and what's left have corruption in them, thus, CAN'T be confirmed by the Qur'an? I mean, why obey Quran 5:68? By the way, did you know that the meaning of Torahs in the Old Testament match those found in the Dead Sea Scrolls? Thus, the Torahs of Quran 5:68 are the ones to "stand firm upon".
ItsAmadWorld2 8 months ago
@wrijal
Surah 2:4 states that the previous revelations are successful and are guarded. Moreover, we have manuscripts from the time of Muhammad that reveal the same message about the new testament gospels as they do today.
If the Qur'an states that the gospel and torah are guarded, how can they become corrupted?
ndntakeover24 7 months ago
@ndntakeover24 It doesnt say that they are guarded, it refers to the tenet of muslim beleif that we must beleive that the older books revealed by God were indeed revealed by God himself, the verse doesnt talk about us having to beleive in the Torah and Gospel. Hope that this helps, keep asking if it doesnt make sense. Also, its an established historical fact that the Bible has been added to and deleted, its impossible to change the Quran, even now, bc soo many people memorized it cover 2 cover
wrijal 7 months ago
"About 200 years after Muhammad died (840 CE), Muslim scholars wrote down some of the oral traditions. It is believed that there were about 500,000 Hadith by the end of 200 years. At that time, Muslim scholars discarded the vast majority of these Hadith sayings as coming from the imaginations of Muslims. The remaining Hadith (less than 15,000) were recorded."
brotherpete. com/index. php?board=41.0
watch?v=kEJ1hk4lH3U
PeteWaldo 8 months ago
@PeteWaldo How does that help you?
tadpoleposition 8 months ago
@tadpoleposition The video made the preposterous claim that "The Hadiths were documented shortly after the prophet's death...".
Even Muhammad knew what a mess he made of the Quran having to invoke a doctrine of abrogation to nullify his earlier more peaceful though incoherent pre-hijra ramblings, with his post-hijra calls for his followers to fight non-muslims, once Islam as a political system displaced any pretense of religiosity, other than repackaged Quraish pagan rituals.
watch?v=xfWy5KaFvbU
PeteWaldo 8 months ago
@PeteWaldo ...and that allows us to know who all those anonymous authors were how? Basically what you're saying is you know the monstrosity that is the severely poor Christian textual tradition and are willing to "cling to that old rugged (solstice) cross" and blindly follow unverifiable sources. Whatever supposed criticism you might have of our texts is still 10X better than what you have.
tadpoleposition 8 months ago
@tadpoleposition My sadly deluded friend, no amount of blasphemy against the Word of God will ever magically create a history of Mecca prior to the 4th century AD, any more than it will move Mecca 1200 kilometers closer to the Holy Land of the prophets and patriarchs.
watch?v=F-PDQFTzNTc
Yet because Satan calls, you must reject the blood that would save you, to follow the EXACT OPPOSITE of the WHOLE SUBJECT of the Gospel, through a murdering, female prisoner abusing, thief.
watch?v=kEJ1hk4lH3U
PeteWaldo 8 months ago
@PeteWaldo "...no amount of blasphemy against the Word of God..."
Umm, I thought we already went over this. You're accusing me of blaspheming a book that only God knows who wrote the majority of and whose authors are not considered eyewitnesses to anything Jesus said or did nor did they reference an eyewitness. It looks as if the one doing the blaspheming is you.
tadpoleposition 8 months ago
@tadpoleposition "You're accusing me of blaspheming a book that only God knows who wrote the majority of and whose authors are not considered eyewitnesses to anything...."
So then Muhammad was simply consumed by sheer stupidity when, IN THE 7TH CENTURY, he quipped...
Sura 5:47 Let the people of the Gospel judge by what Allah hath revealed therein. If any do fail to judge by (the light of) what Allah hath revealed, they are (no better than) those who rebel.
islamandthetruth. com
PeteWaldo 8 months ago
@PeteWaldo "Sura 5:47 Let the people of the Gospel judge by what Allah hath revealed therein. If any do fail to judge by (the light of) what Allah hath revealed, they are (no better than) those who rebel."
You've already proven you're ready to contextually adapt everything in the Bible that doesn't suit your creed and twist it and turn it until it delights your fancy. Of course, it's not surprising you'd do the same with the Quran. (Yaaaawn)
tadpoleposition 8 months ago
@tadpoleposition Even as your blasphemy against Yahweh and His Word are perfect fulfillment of prophecy in regard to THE false prophet Muhammad and his Islamic "beast" kingdom.
Rev 13:6 And he opened his mouth in blasphemy against God, to blaspheme his name, and his tabernacle, and them that dwell in heaven.
watch?v=dJODE7Q2KcM
PeteWaldo 8 months ago
@tadpoleposition Tragically,
1Jo 5:12 He that hath the Son hath life; [and] HE THAT HATH NOT THE SON OF GOD HATH NOT LIFE.
1John 5:10 He that BELIEVETH ON THE SON OF GOD hath the witness in himself: HE THAT BELIEVETH NOT GOD HATH MADE HIM A LIAR; because HE BELIEVED NOT THE RECORD that God gave OF HIS SON.
1John 2:22 Who is a liar but he that denieth that Jesus is the Christ? HE IS ANTICHRIST, THAT DENIETH the Father and THE SON. 23 WHOSOEVER DENIETH THE SON, THE SAME HATH NOT THE FATHER:
PeteWaldo 8 months ago
@PeteWaldo 1, 2, & 3 John were all written, according to Christian tradition, by the Apostle John, the same Apostle who authored the Gospel of John and Revelation. The same Apostle, who in Acts 4:13, was regarded as illiterate. Uh-huh. Exactly how did you interpret the meaning of illiterate again. Was it done to suit your delight or did you keep in its proper context? That's what I thought.
tadpoleposition 8 months ago
@PeteWaldo "... to follow the EXACT OPPOSITE of the WHOLE SUBJECT of the Gospel..."
Yeah, I will not accept the solstice cross as a symbol of salvation nor the Ra, Isis, and Horus trinity as my God nor December 25th, the birthday of Sol (the Sun) as the birthday of Jesus nor the feast of Ishtar, a celebrity of fertility, as being the day Jesus was resurrected. I refuse to and you should do the same.
tadpoleposition 8 months ago
@tadpoleposition Instead you follow the doctrine of Simon Magnus, known as Simon the Magician or sorcerer, wherein he said that it only appeared that Jesus was crucified. His was the first Gnostic doctrine, and was adopted and embellished by later Gnostic sects including the Ebionites. No surprise then that Muhammad's wife Khadijah's cousin, that she sent Muhammad to, to help him out of his suicidal funk, was an Ebionite occult priest.
watch?v=yR3Bla8YwbU
Other inspiration
watch?v=TEYbJxylA2s
PeteWaldo 8 months ago
this video is misquoting, and taken out of the context of what Oakley is saying. You guys are just mad that the guy effectively debunks his opponents academically and even logically. Muslims always never understood the christian theology and for some reason view the trinity as a 3 seperate beings when we've showed over and over that the bible speaks the trinity as one single God. I am a person composed of Mind, Body, and Spirit.. does this mean i'm three different beings?
cisco19 8 months ago
@cisco19 "I am a person composed of Mind, Body, and Spirit.. "
I am a son, brother, dad, uncle, cousin, husband. Look mom, a 6 in 1! First of all, you're trying to draw comparisons between you and God. Jesus said he doesn't know the hour and the Father is greater than him and he died. God cannot die, knows everything, and is the Greatest. We're dealing with 3 distinct beings here. 1 is the Creator of all and the other 2 are creation. "Your" interpretation of "fell on their face" is unfounded.
tadpoleposition 8 months ago
@tadpoleposition You ever heard of the word "hypostatic union". That was the case when jesus said he doesn't know the hour. God is a universal immaterial entity, while Jesus is the natural Embodiment of God. If God's personality is a humble God, and he became purely man, wouldn't he take the sacrifice of supresinf his divinity and experiencing the mortal code of us humans? It's not 3 distinct beings, it's 3 different revelations of one God. That's why you muslims have always been inaccurate.
cisco19 8 months ago
@cisco19 Your "brother, son.." is a bad example. These are your 6 different roles.. God has 3 different titles for his 3 revelations: The father (cosmologic and universal), The Son (the manifestation), the Spirit (God's immense force in the world).
If i went to the ocean and scooped some water from it, and then contained it a bucket. Is the water in the bucket different from the water where i originally scooped it from? Even if i freeze the water in the bucket, it's still the same water.
cisco19 8 months ago
@cisco19 "Even if i freeze the water in the bucket, it's still the same water."
There's no sense in a trinity. God is God, but became human and died, while still being God, and His spirit descended after he resurrected himself. We Muslims will always be inaccurate because there is absolutely no proof of what it is and how it works in the Bible. If it's a guessing game for Christians, how do you think others will view it? The fabrication of 1 John 5:7 doesn't help your cause.
tadpoleposition 8 months ago
@tadpoleposition When you die, what happens to your spirit? Isn't your spirit still alive after the moment you die? Same thing with God. Jesus only PHYSICALLY died. That was the entire sacrifice of God. it wasn't just dieing on the cross but actually experiencing our humanity and subjecting himself.
1 John 5:7 says the 3 are 1. read the end.. The bible teaches it all over.. you muslims don't want to realize the proof because it contradicts the Koran which was made 600 years after the cannon.
cisco19 8 months ago
@cisco19 "1 John 5:7 says the 3 are 1."
In the RSV, 1 John 5:7 reads, "and the spirit is the witness because the spirit is truth." The verse is a fabrication. Meant so suit the need for a "trinity" verse.
tadpoleposition 8 months ago
@tadpoleposition Can you prove it was a fabrication? If you can show the original greek translation and sripture that doesn't contain this verse, then you win. But with out it, then you are just restating false arguments against the bible.
1st John and every book in the bible dates 600 years before the quran, It dates no less than 150years of Jesus' lifetime. To scholars, writings that date no more than 150 years is considered academically credible.
cisco19 8 months ago
@cisco19 "Can you prove it was a fabrication?"
Are you seriously requiring to prove whether a verse in the KJV or RSV is a fabrication? 1 John 5:7 KJV, For there are three that bear record in heaven... 1 John RSV, But the spirit is the witness... Look it up for yourself. One is definitely a fabrication. Why our they both in the same book referred to as God's word?
tadpoleposition 8 months ago
@tadpoleposition Actually, 1st John 5:7 is a perserved verse because there was a time before that the bible removed it from it's later greek manuscripts.
There is evidence that 1st John 5:7 is original because it has been quoted by
Tertullian in his Apology, Against Praxeas (200AD); Cyprian (250 ad), and more manuscripts of that century to the 500 AD.. The Bible was not published yet during the 200, and the koran came into existence 600 after the bible was published.
cisco19 8 months ago
@cisco19 "Actually, 1st John 5:7 is a perserved verse because there was a time before that the bible removed it from it's later greek manuscripts."
Which one, the KJV or the RSV? Also, Greek manuscripts? Wasn't Jesus' mother tongue and all of his disciples Aramaic? I mean, you boast about Greek manuscripts, yet the source of the Gospel, Jesus, was a Jew and so were all of his disciples. It's another knock against Christianity.
tadpoleposition 8 months ago
@tadpoleposition You need allot more homework to do. Originally, the verse was always there. It was never added, but it was taken out in many greek manuscripts. the KJV preserves that verse.
Why was the bible written in Greek? because Greek was the universal language during early Palestine. So in order to reach out to others, the NT was written in greek instead of Aramaic, because everyone knew greek.
cisco19 8 months ago
@cisco19 "Greek was the universal language during early Palestine."
Listen, you can't even tell me where the author of John got his information from since you'd have to first tell me who authored it. Just because the information aligns with the Christian creed means nothing until the source of that information is revealed. Otherwise it's hearsay at best. Trying to prove if Jesus and his disciples spoke in other than Aramaic would be as fruitless. Your reply is circumstantial at best.
tadpoleposition 8 months ago
@tadpoleposition looks like you've knocked yourself out there with that ignorance of the history of the greek language.
cisco19 8 months ago
@cisco19 "looks like you've knocked yourself out there with that ignorance of the history of the greek language."
Not exactly. There's a reason Jesus told his followers to go only unto the lost sheep of Israel. The mere fact Acts 4:13 regards John and Peter as illiterate is enough to signal a problem. Peter and John are alleged to have authored more than one book in the Bible while not knowing how to read or write their own mother tongue. That's the elephant in the room.
tadpoleposition 8 months ago
@tadpoleposition What does this have to do with the greek argument you gave earlier?
cisco19 8 months ago
@cisco19 Your Greek argument is circumstantial at best. You cannot prove Jesus or his disciples spoke Greek, never mind read or wrote Greek. Also, proving the disciples were even able to read or write their own mother tongue is impossible. Illiteracy was common in those times. That said, it's obvious the Gospels were written decades later after the evolution of Christianity as a faith and its severing ties with the Jews thus the Greek (Roman) influence by anonymous authors.
tadpoleposition 8 months ago
@tadpoleposition Circumstantial? That's actually fact that Greek was the universal language during early AD palestine. It wasn't just the apostles targeted for their ministry. You are just grabbing out random arguments for replying now with out even doing your own research. Making a case against why the apostles wrote in greek is very uneducated in your part. That should not have been even considered a case for you if you wanted to be taken into seriousness.
cisco19 8 months ago
@tadpoleposition Anyway, christianity didn't evolve until rome adopted it. The gospels (even if you say they where decades later) still fit scholar credentials because they don't suprass 150 years after Jesus' lifetime. Therefore they are much more reliable as sources than the quran since the quran is 600 years after the Nicene creed.
Chrisitians worshiped Jesus even before the NT, just read anti-xtian writings of early AD.
cisco19 8 months ago
Comment removed
tadpoleposition 8 months ago
@cisco19 "Chrisitians worshiped Jesus even before the NT, just read anti-xtian writings of early AD."
In other words, you're planning to blind follow unverifiable sources not proven to have referenced any eyewitness, disciple or Jesus. It seems all of your biased Greek sources are attempting to settle theological disputes rather than establish the truth. It's no wonder God sent another revelation. There's no way a just and merciful God is going to leave us with such a mess.
tadpoleposition 8 months ago
@tadpoleposition unvarifable sources? How is writings of Lucian, and Plinny the younger unvarifiable? These are historical documents that even atheist scholars such as Grant, don't deny to be actual anti-christian reports of early AD.
You really are making up arguments now. It really doesn't matter what your trying to contradict anymore, because it is purely academic history, that Greek was the universal language during early AD, and christians believed Jesus to be a God ever since the AD 30's
cisco19 8 months ago
@cisco19 "...christians believed Jesus to be a God ever since the AD 30's"
You're basically picking and choosing what you want to follow and turning a blind eye to other far more reliable sources that prove otherwise.
tadpoleposition 8 months ago
@tadpoleposition what sources are you talking about that shows early christianity believing the same thing Islam did? If you are going to make claims, and bash my evidence, can you atleast provide a legit reason?
Writings from lucian, Josephus (which matches the accounts in acts), Plinny, Celsus, and all those non-christians of 1st century are considered factual historical documents about christianity in palestine. There is no historical record of an Islamic like faith during that time.
cisco19 8 months ago
@cisco19 "There is no historical record of an Islamic like faith during that time."
Islam means submission and obedience to the One True God and worshipping Him alone without dividing your worship between Him and other beings. If anyone claimed to be a Prophet or Messenger of God, then he wouldn't have strayed from this foundation. Over exaggeration accounted for the evolving legend of Jesus which resulted in the worship of Jesus. Something Jesus never told you to do.
tadpoleposition 8 months ago
@tadpoleposition Why are you strawling away from the main point of the current argument? I don't care what islam means, what i'm saying is that there was no "Jesus is a prophet" belief found in early Christianity during it's start. We've seen that in the writings of Lucian and other Historians of that time.
Of course he told us to believe in him. Why do you think Christianity worshiped him as god 200 years before they had a bible?
cisco19 8 months ago
Comment removed
tadpoleposition 8 months ago
@cisco19 "... there was no "Jesus is a prophet" belief found in early Christianity during it's start."
Matthew 21:11, The crowds answered, "This is Jesus, the prophet from Nazareth in Galilee." Mark 6:15, ...And still others claimed, "He is a prophet, like one of the prophets of long ago." Luke 7:16,They were all filled with awe and praised God. "A great prophet has appeared among us,..." John 4:19, "Sir," the woman said, "I can see that you are a prophet. Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John say yes.
tadpoleposition 8 months ago
@tadpoleposition oh, the strangers in the crowd who barely knew the man saw him as a prophet. We all know about the rumors going on about his identity, But did Jesus' contemporaries say he was?
Jesus: "peter, what do they say about me"
Peter:"Others say you are a Prophet, others say you are Elijah...
Jesus: "Who do YOU (a man who knows Jesus personally) say that I am?
Peter: You are The Son of God
No body who was with Jesus personally saw him as a prophet.
cisco19 8 months ago
@cisco19 That doesn't happen to be the same Peter who is described to have found out that Jesus was the Messiah not by flesh and blood, but by the Father which is in heaven in Matthew 16:16-17, does it? John 1:40-41 tells us Peter found out that Jesus was the Messiah by his flesh and blood brother Andrew. Also, Matthew 4:18 tells us Peter first met Jesus by the Sea of Galilee, whereas John 1:28-1:41 tells us they first met near the Jordan River. Some anonymous collaboration would've helped.
tadpoleposition 8 months ago
@tadpoleposition That's the same peter, but the time of realization was different. Peter said in Matt 16:16-17 "you are the Messiah, Son of the Living God". It means the admission of truth was revealed to him through God. John 1:40-41. Peter is introduced to Jesus as the Messiah, by andrew. Peter doesn't fully believe it yet.
Jn1:28-1:41 doesn't say he met peter anywhere. They didn't even meet in person yet in those verses, what are you talking about?.
cisco19 8 months ago
@cisco19 The time of realization? Uh-huh, and there happens to be a verse or verses that support that allegation? Oh yeah, John 1:28, "These things were done in Bethabara beyond Jordan, where John was baptizing." That's not anywhere, that's Bethabara beyond the Jordan. On the other side or or across the Jordan River depending on which version you're reading. Either way, it's not the Sea of Galilee. There's no change of scenery between verses 28-41. Good try though!
tadpoleposition 8 months ago
@tadpoleposition well, yes. If you actually read it. Jn 1:28:1:41 does not contain anything about Jesus and Peter formally meeting. And yes there was a change in scenery, because you have in Jn 1:30 saying "the next day".. the next day was obviously not in the same area. You see Jn Talking about the events the day before. Jn:1:35 says "the next day" again, meaning it's he next day after verses 29-34. but nice try though, this time. make sure to read carefully the key details of the verses.
cisco19 8 months ago
@cisco19 "And yes there was a change in scenery, because you have in Jn 1:30 saying "the next day"."
Look, why not just admit it's an irreconcilable contradiction? Even if I give you the benefit of the doubt, a change of scenery takes us to where? It wouldn't matter if it was Timbuktu, it's still not the Sea of Galilee mentioned in verse 43 and in Matthew's Gospel. The formal meeting is verse 42 still without a change of scenery. I'm amazed at the extent Christians go to attempt harmonizing.
tadpoleposition 8 months ago
@tadpoleposition It's not a contradiction because there are no scenes mentioned. You cant give an assumption of a contradictions if there is nothing to point out, "oh he didn't say the place like the others did", so what? All you need to do is read and use your common sense. John focused on "when/time" while the others on "where/setting".
I'm amazed at the extend of muslims trying to point out contradictions with out actually reading the context.
cisco19 8 months ago
@cisco19 "John focused on "when/time" while the others on "where/setting"."
That is apologetic hogwash. John clearly mentions "where" in 1:28 and 1:43. Matthew clearly mentions "where" in 4:18. John's Gospel, according to you, claims Jesus met Peter in an unnamed place and Matthew's claims Jesus first met Peter at Galilee. The irony is John 1:43 places us at Galilee after Peter first meets Jesus. Rather than just admitting your folly, you digging a deeper ditch. What's wrong with you?
tadpoleposition 8 months ago
@tadpoleposition Nope, it's not even apologetics. It's just reading.In John 1:28, it says "this is what HAPPENED(past tense)" indicating that every thing before was of the past.. a past SETTING. You then read on wards, and before Jesus meets peter, you have "the next day" said twice. John 1:19-28 is what you call a RECAP.. a flow run to the main story of the chapter. it's not the point of the chapter, because the chapter is dedicated on the start of the apostles.
please read better.
cisco19 8 months ago
@cisco19 Digging a deeper apologetic ditch.
tadpoleposition 8 months ago
@tadpoleposition it's an apologetic. You don't apologetics to read something simple. You muslims love putting random and unpresent details in the bible just to fit your benefit in the argument. Nice try, but next time please point out an actual detail given in the bible instead of making up your own.
cisco19 8 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@cisco19 "Nice try, but next time please point out an actual detail given in the bible instead of making up your own."
I mean, who are trying to convince, me or yourself? Matthew's Gospel says clearly Jesus first met Peter by the Sea of Galilee. John's Gospel, according to you, places us in no man's land. John 1:43 places us at the Sea of Galilee and 1:28 places us near the Jordan River. Are we supposed to believe Jesus first met Peter no where and by the Sea of Galilee?
tadpoleposition 8 months ago
@cisco19 "Jesus only PHYSICALLY died. That was the entire sacrifice of God. it wasn't just dieing on the cross but actually experiencing our humanity and subjecting himself."
God experienced humanity and subjected himself? That's just plain sick.
tadpoleposition 8 months ago
@tadpoleposition Yes. it isn't sick, it's what you call the display of love the creator had for his creation. He didn't come here to show he was greater.. he came here to heal us, save us, and bring us all closure. So, he abided to our natural and mortal code, it was all part of the sacrifice. Because it was the power of great love that destroyed the power of sin.
cisco19 8 months ago
@cisco19 "Yes. it isn't sick, it's what you call the display of love the creator had for his creation."
Actually, it's a play on human psychology. God sent his only son to die for us is intended to win human appeal. He did for our sins is a guilt trip. It's a brand marketed by the Church to win over the masses. It has nothing at all to do with truth. Your sins are your sins. Seeking God's forgiveness is what Jesus taught his disciples to do. You should be doing the same.
tadpoleposition 8 months ago
@tadpoleposition You didn't understand anything again. God sent his son for the purpose of bringing us closure and ending sin. You see, God is the righteous Judge and he can't let sin go out unpunished.. so instead of us taking the punishment, he takes it instead. He died for our sins is the truth..
Jesus taught that he was sent so that the world through him could be saved. Jesus taught forgiveness in general, because he was God's reconciliation with Man.
cisco19 8 months ago
@cisco19 "God sent his son for the purpose of bringing us closure and ending sin."
You fail to understand that we continue to sin and God continues to send hurricanes, earthquakes, tsunamis, tornadoes, and other forms of punishment. There's no end to sin as long as man is alive and no closure from an original sin because that concept is heresy invented by Paul. Adam's sin doesn't carry over to his offspring. No soul bears the sin of another soul otherwise God is unjust.
tadpoleposition 8 months ago
@cisco19 The comparison of water with God is, again, comparing the creation with the Creator.
tadpoleposition 8 months ago
@tadpoleposition whats wrong with the analogy. we can use elements in our reality to describe the reality of God. God is trinity. God is a universal being.. who is immaterial. You see the problem with you muslims is that you view the trinity as triad. Like Guy 1, Guy 2, Guy3. that is not a trinity,
cisco19 8 months ago
@tadpoleposition whats wrong with the analogy. we can use elements in our reality to describe the reality of God. God is trinity. God is a universal being.. who is immaterial. You see the problem with you muslims is that you view the trinity as triad. Like Guy 1, Guy 2, Guy3. that is not a trinity. Why do you view God to a be of a single mass just like that of a human? Didn't God say that he created us in our likeness? We are also a trinity - mind, body, and spirit.
cisco19 8 months ago
@cisco19 "Didn't God say that he created us in our likeness?"
The plurality of one's self expressed in semitic languages does not mean more than one. Go ask any Jew or Muslim.
tadpoleposition 8 months ago
@tadpoleposition "The plurality of one's self expressed in semitic languages"
What are you talking about? You contradicted my example of the Mind,Body, soul = one human being.. saying that we can't use God in that "human" sense". But the bible said that God created us humans in his likeness, therefore we can use natural examples to describe this supernatural being. Mind,Body, and Spirit = 1 human being; respectively, the Father, The Word (Jesus), and the Spirit = 1 God
cisco19 8 months ago
@cisco19 "What are you talking about?"
Your ignorance of Semitic languages shows. Again, go ask any Jew or Muslim regarding passages where God refers to himself in the plural and ask them what that means.
tadpoleposition 8 months ago
Comment removed
cisco19 8 months ago
that, is how could Muhammad or early Islam know for a fact that the OT/NT was corrupted when he could not read it & it is only a very small portion that insists that Jesus is not whom He claims to be ? Could you tell me the proof that the Koran came from an angel ? Jesus accepted the OT and NEVER said that it came from an angel (or that His own words came from an angel ) but Islams claims that both the OT/NT were 'corrupted'. WHEN-U are saying then Allah was too weak to protect the truth?
shieldsff 9 months ago
Please read these books: Misquoting Jesus, Jesus Interrupted, Studies in the Textual Criticism of the New Testament Christianity in Late Antiquity, The Lost Christianities: The Battles for Scripture and the Faiths We Never Knew, Lost Scriptures: Books that Did Not MakeIt into the New Testament by Bart D. Ehrman, American New Testament scholar. if you are honest spent some time and research. And Also research Quran with open heart and dont follow what media says about islam.
shovon100 9 months ago
The Bible backs itself up through many writers of many different eras,yet we are all told that we should take Muhammad's word that everything that Jews and Christians believed about God as being all wrong ,so much for having the truth established in the mouths of 2 or more witnesses.Muhammad was so sure that what he was saying was true,but once it was shown how wrong he was,then he cried foul,everyone else was wrong, typical.
CBALLEN 10 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Muhammed had so many women in his bed and yet muslims consider him to be a true prophet of God.Jesus was the only one who was sinless he is the one we ought to follow.
muhammedquran 11 months ago
Whenever you come across a verse that states, "that it might be fulfilled" or "as was written in the scripture", in the Bible, cross-reference and look at the context of the verse cited. The authors did their best to prove Messianic prophecy, but, it turns out, they did exactly what the author of Matthew did in 2:15. The author of John even cited a verse that doesn't exist in 7:38, "...as the scripture hath said, out of his belly shall flow rivers of living water." LOL! What a joke!
tadpoleposition 11 months ago
Something funny about the Book of Matthew; in chapter 2 verse 15, the author, only God knows who he is, cites a verse from Hosea in reference to Jesus. It reads, "... that it might be fulfilled which was spoken of the Lord by the prophet, saying, Out of Egypt have I called my son." The thing is, that verse he cites in Hosea, 11:1, reads as follows, "When Israel was a child, then I loved him, and called my son out of Egypt." The author ripped the verse in half and misapplied to Jesus! LOL!
tadpoleposition 11 months ago
(5) there are no miricles in the quran hence no testimony. this is only the first 1:44 the absence of a detail in a story doesn't mean that it didn't happen. the gospels were written for different people groups and hence emphasize different things I can't really go on this is such a bad video the double standards for "proof" are simply overwhelming. clearly drfmm you have no idea about christianity even in the vaguest sense of the term. this only proves your complete lack of knowledge. good day.
RedLetterChristian 11 months ago
(4) If you are going to make the claim that your source is correct, then you also HAVE to agree that the points contained in (1)(2)(2 cont.) are also 100% correct, right and true. if you can't do that then you really can't be using this source as definitive. which makes YOUR VIDEO COMPLETELY VOID AND MOOT. not to mention pt (3) which on it face means you can't trust the quran b/c you have no way of authenticating it. except the word of the guy that burned all other copies! uh huh...
RedLetterChristian 11 months ago
(2 continued) on sources of the koran... Zoroastrianism, Hanifism, Native ancient and contemporary Arabian heathen beliefs and practices,pre-Islamic Arabian heathen belief, traditions, customs, and superstitions.
(3) you don't even have a source that is close to an original b/c the original sources were oral, palm leaves, tanned hides, or dry bones. none exist today. the copies made from these were then BURNED by someone who said that he alone had the only real koran. riiiight?!?
RedLetterChristian 11 months ago
(2) on the koran and doctrine it teaches - moral, historical, and legendary lessons taken from the canonical, but mostly apocryphal, Christian and Jewish Scriptures, and from contemporary and ancient Arabian heathenism."
sorces of the koran include... Old Testament (canonical and apocryphal), hybrid Judaism of the late rabbinical schools, New Testament (canonical and apocryphal) and various heretical doctrines,Sabaism, a combination of Judaism, Manicheism,old disfigured Babylonian heathenism...
RedLetterChristian 11 months ago
(1)an utter FAIL on behalf of the muslims AGAIN! the same encyclopedia when speaking on textual criticism says " Indeed it is a material impossibility to transcribe absolutely without error the whole of a long work; and a priori one may be sure, that no two copies of the same original will be alike in every detail." this includes the quran. hello!
RedLetterChristian 11 months ago
@RedLetterChristian "(1)an utter FAIL on behalf of the muslims AGAIN! the same encyclopedia...says "...and a priori one may be sure, that no two copies of the same original will be alike in every detail." this includes the quran. hello!"
Rough translation: Our Bible is so jacked up, we see it an impossibility for the Quran to also stand up to the same historical textual criticism.
Dude, that doesn't prove the Bible isn't corrupt and it doesn't prove the Quran is corrupt.
tadpoleposition 11 months ago
@tadpole the guy in the video uses a source that proves that the bible has been corrupted. if this source if taken as authoritative and can be relied apon to speak truth, then they have to also contend with the fact that it says that the quran hasn't been perfectly preserved, which all muslims i know will argue emphatically that it was, it’s almost blasphemous to say it wasn’t. he needs to find a better source to back his arguement or accept that the quran is also corurpted as they would see it.
RedLetterChristian 11 months ago
@RedLetterChristian A proven source can be used in an absolute sense if its established application has been shown to work across the board. Christians don't know how to qualify things. If a critique proves the Bible is corrupted, it's automatically presumed the Quran will also fail this same critique. Any alleged criticisms, i.e., Muhammad, peace be upon him, plagiarized the Bible and so on, have all failed miserably. It's a distraction from the absurdities contained in the Bible.
tadpoleposition 11 months ago
@tadpoleposition you aren't following my arguement at all.what i am saying is that the same source that the guy in the video says discredits the bible (as far a a muslim is conserned) that EXACT SAME SOURCE also discredits the qruan (as far as a muslim would be conserned) if you are going to use a source in an arguement to back your point, then don't use a source or arguement that ALSO demolishes your own holy book. it makes your own arguement completely moot. btw mo used heretical xian material
RedLetterChristian 10 months ago 2
@RedLetterChristian " btw mo used heretical xian material"
I mean, I followed you all the way up until this Luciferian plug of yours. Although quite clever, Mr. White clearly lied through his teeth and you seem to condone that. He's self-interpretting the Quran and not surprisingly so because Christians deal with the Bible the same way. The same source can be used if an exception can be proven to stand up to the source's criticism and, of course, the Quran does. Peace!
tadpoleposition 10 months ago
could you pls offer some support or proof from the Hebrew scriptures that the islamic god is the same as the God of the Hebrews and the Christians? There appear to be many differences- the most obvious is that neither the Hebrews nor the Christians call Him allah. Also, Christians claim the revelation of the Godhead. Where is the proof in the Hebrew scriptures that an angel (the same angel) delivered a message to the Hebrew prophets as it is claimed he did to Muhammad. Did Muhammad read the NT?
shieldsff 9 months ago
@shieldsff I think you mean Aramaic. Even the two names, Aramaic and Arabic, are almost the same. Aramaic is widely considered a dead language. Therefore, it's almost impossible to link the name Allah with what ancient Israelites might have called God. The Jewish civilization was wiped out more than once and with it their language. Gabriel is the Archangel of chief of the angels. He's mentioned in Luke and Daniel as a carrier of revelation. Muhammad, peace be upon him, was illiterate.
tadpoleposition 9 months ago
thanks- the NT was written in Aramaic & Greek; the OT in Hebrew. Yes w/ the exception of Daniel few exceptions of angels delivering inspired text. Also, the accounts of most other prophets like Isiah, Moses, Jeremiah, Micah,etc;do not relate angelic msgs.The NT authors do not claim to have received their msgs. from angels.That Muhammad did not (could not) read the NT is very disturbing- it means he could not have known the complete truth & revelation of the world salvation works God did in Judea
shieldsff 9 months ago
@shieldsff "That Muhammad did not (could not) read the NT is very disturbing- it means he could not have known...the world salvation works God did in Judea."
That's where the Catholic Church influence comes into play. Jesus' mission was confined to the lost sheep of Israel. The Church required a god-like universal fountainhead for its cult. Jesus's life was cut and pasted to suit their world salvation criteria. Most NT authors remain anonymous. Your statement "it means" is very disturbing.
tadpoleposition 9 months ago
@tadpoleposition - not exactly..On the contrary, the majority of the NT books are identified- of course, the Apostle Paul wrote the majority, so if we had to ignore several of the NT books we are still left with a clear msg from Peter, Paul, & John. Early period Islam did not seem to question the authenticity of Paul's writings. Also, Jesus did not confine his mission to the pple of Isreal. See Gospel of Matt. chap 28. And of course in John, Jesus said if I am lifted up, I'll draw all men to me
shieldsff 9 months ago
@shieldsff Peter and John were illiterate. They couldn't even read or write their own mother tongue let alone Koine Greek. Paul wasn't an eyewitness of Jesus' life and never once referenced anyone who was. So your clear message isn't so clear after all. I think your claiming Jesus flip-flopped on the issue of who he was sent to. Matthew 15:24, "I was sent only to the lost sheep of the nation of Israel." If Jesus was the savior of mankind, then he would've stated as such throughout his ministry.
tadpoleposition 9 months ago
sorry, but again you are incorrect; there's no proof that John or Peter were unable to read or write. Saul the Pharisee was extremely literate&mult-lingual. Paul was, just as crucially, an eyewitness of the resurrected Jesus;as a persecutor of christians, obviously had NO reason whatsoever to make lie about it otherwise.As he makes clear in his writings,it did not materially benefit him at all to become a Christian.That you accuse Jesus of flip-flopping shows you did not read or respect Him
shieldsff 9 months ago
"Peter and John were illiterate...."
Again, you have no support for this, but assuming it were true, it's seem to me it's irrelevant to topic. Again, the assertion is being put forth by islam that the Koran amends and supercedes the NT; Islam argues that the scriptures have been 'corrupted and that Muhammad received the Koran. But, again, all I have done was to request clarification or proof that this could possibly be true. The obstacle I see is that is how could Muhammad know.
shieldsff 9 months ago
@tadpoleposition -Neither Jesus nor the apostles ever claimed to supercede the Hebrew scriptures, nor did christians ever claim that the Hebrew scriptures were 'corrupted' , false or wrong. Do you see the difference ? In fact, Jesus said that he did not come to abolish the law; but to fulfill [the LAW]. So, Islam also says that the scriptures prophesied that Jesus is the Messiah-would you tell me where the scriptures says this and why is Muhammad not the Messiah ?
shieldsff 9 months ago
@shieldsff Acts 4:13, Now seeing the constancy of Peter and of John, understanding that they were ILLITERATE AND IGNORANT men, they wondered; and they knew them that they had been with Jesus. Again, Peter and John could not read or write in their own mother tongue, yet they're alleged to have authored books in Koine Greek, one might argue in a very skilled fashion. Paul wasn't an eyewitness and didn't reference anyone who was. Muhammad was inspired by the same angel mentioned in Luke and Daniel.
tadpoleposition 9 months ago
sorry, but not convinced.; the word here is also 'unlearned' ( possibly meaning having no FORMAL torah studies). You will note from the CONTEXT that they are addressing the rulers, elders & scribes (v. 4-8). More meaningful is that these sophisticated rulers marveled at what they were hearing. In addition, this is the very early stage of the church- nothing precludes that Peter's wrote his letter at a later time after ARAMAIC. There is also more than one John in the NT.
shieldsff 9 months ago
Paul of course, had the acceptance & approval of those who witnessed the cruciifixion (& resurrection). God was more concerned that Paul received & witnessed the person of the resurrection But again, why would an angel go to Muhammad ? Like Daniel, the Apostles didn't claim to receive his 'scriptures' from an angel (just the answer to his prayer- remember ?) Jesus accepted the OT; but Islams claims the NT is 'corrupted'. Could you tell us the proof the Koran came from an angel.
shieldsff 9 months ago
@tadpoleposition -So, Islam also says that the scriptures prophesied that Jesus is the Messiah-would you tell me where the scriptures says this and why is Muhammad not the Messiah ?
shieldsff 9 months ago
@shieldsff "that, is how could Muhammad or early Islam know for a fact that the OT/NT was corrupted when he could not read it..."
He was inspired with God's knowledge.
tadpoleposition 9 months ago
@tad-again:that, is how could Muhammad or early Islam know for a fact that the OT/NT was corrupted when he could not read it & it is only a very small portion that insists that Jesus is not whom He claims to be ? Could U tell me the proof that the Koran came from an angel? Jesus accepted the OT & NEVER said that it came from an angel (or that His own words came from an angel) but Islams claims that both the OT/NT were 'corrupted'. WHEN-U are saying then Allah was too weak to protect the truth?
shieldsff 9 months ago
thanks my friend, but these statements are simply far too ambiguous and uncertain... Have you read the Torah or the Gospels? Both Moses and Jesus said that there would come false prophets. Therefore, credibility must be established and not taken for granted, How does one prove that muham. received both the 'true message' from the angel, and that the angel was not 'fallen'? Where is the attestation that allah sent the original scriptures. What other prophets received scriptures from angels?
shieldsff 9 months ago
@tadpoleposition - pardon my error,I meant to write, how come there are few if any prophets who claimed to receive written scriptures from angel. In the cases you cited, those were very unique circumstances and the angel did not tell them to write down scriptures.The angels which came to Sodom did not tell Lot to write down scriptures.Why don't the major prophets (such as Moses, Isiah, Joshua, Amos, etc.) say that an angel told them to write down scriptures. Isn't Muhamm claim highly irregular?
shieldsff 9 months ago
-"yet they're alleged to have authored books in Koine Greek,"
I want to reiterate that you have no proof that Peter (or John who was killed) were illiterate."Koine" simply means common,but more likely when his letter was wrote it was in Aramaic. Also,it might have been written later (after he did learn to read).Have you read Peter's letters? It is possible they were conveyed, but that is immaterial b/c there was attestation from other writers and Peters letter were widely accepted as true,
shieldsff 9 months ago
@tadpoleposition-"yet they're alleged to have authored books in Koine Greek,"
I want to reiterate that you have no proof that Peter (or John who was killed) were illiterate."Koine" simply means common,.but more likely when his letter was wrote it was in Aramaic. Also,it might have been written letter. Have you read Peter's letters? It is possible they were conveyed, but that is immaterial because there is verification from other writers,
shieldsff 9 months ago
The burden here lies w/you tp prove UR case because Islam claims that scriptures were corrupted when the founder of Islam NEVER read them. Paul was an eyewitness to the resurrection. Here is the gist of the matter in my view however, which is the source of the revelation ? How do you know it was the 'same angel' that came to Muhamm?
shieldsff 9 months ago
@tadpoleposition -Jesus' mission was confined to the lost sheep of Israel.
I really hope if you have the chance you will read the gospels. After Jesus was fully revealed, he clearly stated that the salvation of God was not just to the lost sheep but to all the gentiles (like you and me) as well, thanks
shieldsff 9 months ago
@tadpoleposition "A proven source can be used in an absolute sense if its established application has been shown to work across the board"
IT DOES NOT WORK ACROSS THE BOARD!!! look at it this way say chapter 1 discredits the bible then in chapter 3 that same source discredits the quran hence, you can't use the source unless you are willing to become an atheist. this is extreamly bad form and only proves that muslims are grasping at straws. also please read my other posts.
RedLetterChristian 10 months ago
@RedLetterChristian After all, how do you fall for his crap speech when it's known the Bible has been altered. The three oldest codices have differences in number of books, verses, etc. The Catholic Bible has 73 books and the Protestant has 66 books. The reading of 1 John 5:7 in the KJV and RSV are not the same. The last verses in Mark 16:9-20 have been proven to be fabricated. The NIV omits over 40 verses and literally thousands of words. The issues don't stop there. Peace!
tadpoleposition 10 months ago
A final point I would raise is that the central truth of the original prophets was NOT submission anywhere or that there is a unitary god (for example, both baal & molech were claimed as [names] for god). The central truth is that there is One God and only One True & Living God. It is this God we are commanded to worship. Also, Muhamm. claims that he received his revelations from an angelic being. Can any examples be offered of earlier prophets who received written revelations from angels
shieldsff 9 months ago
@shieldsff "A final point I would raise is that the central truth of the original prophets was NOT submission anywhere..."
Matthew 26:39 Going a little farther, he fell with his face to the ground and prayed, "My Father, if it is possible, may this cup be taken from me. Yet not as I will, but as you will." Jesus was in full submission to the One True God's will. That defines a perfect Muslim. He is pleased with what God decrees for him.
tadpoleposition 9 months ago
I must agree this passage provides a strong example of an obedient act to the will of God. However, you have a major problem-in citing this example, you have violated a MAJOR rule of argumentation & bible exegesis: namely consistency & non-contradiction .Specifically,what exactly is Jesus claiming to submit to? -- the CROSS (v.53-54). If U are right, U MUST also accept v.28,32 & 28:18-20. Also, where does he commands OTHERS to 'submit' like this? Sorry, this does not 'prove' your position.
shieldsff 9 months ago
@shieldsff Genesis 17:3: And Abram fell on his face:... Numbers 20:6, Then Moses and Aaron...fell on their faces. Joshua 7:6, Then Joshua...fell to the earth on his face... 2 Chronicles 7:3, When all the people of Israel saw the fire come down...they bowed down with their faces to the ground. Nehemiah 8:6, And Ezra...worshiped the LORD with their faces to the ground. 1 Kings 18:42. And Elijah...put his face between his knees. Yeah, I can. Perfect Muslims in submission to God's perfect Will.
tadpoleposition 9 months ago
sorry, but your 'proof' is again, not consistent at all. I do not dispute that these instances of the prophets or others praying face down, but in NO WAY does that mean they subscribed to muslim beliefs. First, the entire text indicates these are Hebrews praying to the God of Isreal; also many christians pray face down; secondly U discount other prayer postures, eg., Esr. 9:5; Da 6:10; Ac 9:40. Again, you are inconsistent if U reject the other verse. UR argument still not proven by context
shieldsff 9 months ago
@shieldsff Other prayer postures including raising their hands, which Muslims do, bowing, which Muslims do. For you to claim my evidence is inconsistent shows lack of mental depth. Have a good life and may God guide you to become like the prophets, perfect Muslims in complete submission to God's Perfect Will.
tadpoleposition 9 months ago
@tadpoleposition - NO, I NEVER claim anywhere that U have a lack of mental depth because of your statements about prayer postures. Rather, I claim that your arguments on behalf of belief in Islam are mistaken and wrong because cannot demonstrate that the original scriptures state that 'submission' is the primary requirement of god and because there is no way to establish that Muhammad received msgs from an angel being, when prior prophets of God DO NOT claim that about written scriptures. Pray
shieldsff 9 months ago
Hey regarding these prayer postures just let me say that I do not disagree that this is how pple prayed or that these were not sincere positions of entreats to God. But you invite a great error and confusion when you insist that because some people prayed in this manner it means that they had islamic beliefs- that is just fatuous. People in the Hebrew scriptures prayed ONLY to the Eternal, Creator, Triune God of Abraham, Issac & Jacob, Also in the NT believers prayed to Jesus in the same way
shieldsff 8 months ago
@shieldsff "Also in the NT believers prayed to Jesus in the same way"
Jesus was a Jew and so were His disciples. If they prayed to Jesus or if Jesus prayed to himself they/he were/was committing idolatry because the Jews believed God can't be a man and a woman can't conceive God and carry God and give birth to God. Jesus taught his disciples to pray directly to God without a mediator. All of that mediator/god-man jazz sprung up by heretics who invented practices/beliefs Jesus didn't teach.
tadpoleposition 8 months ago
@tadpoleposition- On the contrary, I think that again you are mistaken and clearly have not read the Torah; Yes the disciples were devout Hebrews- So, if fact, if they prayed to Jesus and found pardon for their sins in Jesus it can only be because the very God of the scriptures gave them an astounding revelation that God was with them. Again, have you read the Bible ? I think Islam misleads you about who God is- the scriptures make clear He is transcendent & with us. Read Gen 18 & Deut 4-8
shieldsff 7 months ago
@tadpoleposition "fell on their face" is a terminology. it's used to describe a state of emotion..
cisco19 8 months ago