Видео

I have no need to cope. The fact that you clowns cannot debate and defend your garbage arguments is a reason for you to cope.

@RefutingOrientalists cant debate? Typical Muslim projection. How do you counter Ibn kathir that states: "Allah says, خُلِقَ مِن مَّآءٍ دَافِقٍ (He is created from a water gushing forth.) meaning, the sexual fluid that comes out bursting forth from the man and the woman. Thus, the child is produced from both of them by the permission of Allah. Due to this Allah says, يَخْرُجُ مِن بَيْنِ الصُّلْبِ وَالتَّرَآئِبِ (Proceeding from between the backbone and the ribs.) meaning, the backbone (or loins) of the man and the ribs of the woman, which is referring to her chest. Shabib bin Bishr reported from `Ikrimah who narrated from Ibn `Abbas that he said, يَخْرُجُ مِن بَيْنِ الصُّلْبِ وَالتَّرَآئِبِ (Proceeding from between the backbone and the ribs.) "The backbone of the man and the ribs of the woman. It (the fluid) is yellow and fine in texture. The child will not be born except from both of them (i.e., their sexual fluids)." Concerning Allah's statement," Clear as day, you've been deceived

@RefutingOrientalists Muslims always run from debates, just like how you blocking my comments now. Ibn Kathir states, "allah says, خُلِقَ مِن مَّآءٍ دَافِقٍ (He is created from a water gushing forth.) meaning, the seggsual fluid that comes out bursting forth from the man and the woman. Thus, the child is produced from both of them by the permission of Allah. Due to this Allah says, يَخْرُجُ مِن بَيْنِ الصُّلْبِ وَالتَّرَآئِبِ (Proceeding from between the backbone and the ribs.) meaning, the backbone (or loins) of the man and the ribs of the woman, which is referring to her chest. Shabib bin Bishr reported from `Ikrimah who narrated from Ibn `Abbas that he said, يَخْرُجُ مِن بَيْنِ الصُّلْبِ وَالتَّرَآئِبِ (Proceeding from between the backbone and the ribs.) "The backbone of the man and the ribs of the woman. It (the fluid) is yellow and fine in texture. The child will not be born except from both of them (i.e., their seggsual fluids)." Concerning Allah's statement,

@@RefutingOrientalists then why you deleting my comments 🙄

@@macavalli2619 except I did not delete your comments clown. Change the comments tab to newest first.

If you are willing, I would be more than happy you have a recorded debate with you on this topic. If not, i have no interest in wasting time in a discussion in the comments.

The Quran is not wrong at all. I think you realise this since you did not bother to respond to anything in the video. If you can grow a spine I would more than happy to have a recorded debate with you on this topic. If not feel free to whine in the comments

@RefutingOrientalists please I havent watched the video yet but if the Quran says jews think Ezra is the messiah or christians think marry is a member of the trinity than absolutely no it has no excuse

​@@RefutingOrientalistsThere's another problem the Trinity by concept is not multiple God's your first argument is stupid Because the God of the Bible is Omnipresent meaning he is everything and is in everything yet he is distinct from his creation Would you say his multiple beings The Bible simply asserts God is one and has revealed himself through the son the spirit and the holy spirit which are himself non and f them is not him but because a distinction but we address them through those distinction.

​@@RefutingOrientalistshow are you going to defend the Quran Mary is the sister of Aaron The Quran is an inconsistent mess

He has no evidence for this. The fact that this is one of the most common orientalist arguments against hadiths shows how weak the orientalist position is. ruclips.net/video/yAFb1fyPzNY/видео.htmlsi=DaLJGL3Fm0lvq_SE watch this video it relates to your question

Brother watch my video on the contention on contradictions. I think I compare Islamic and Christian historical sources there. As far as HCM is concerned, it is baseless garbage that we do not need to take seriously. Somethings like the criterion of dissimilarity are good, but that does not depend on HCM. There are independent arguments why the criterion of dissimilarity/embarrassment is good for historical research. The problem with christian sources is not necessarily that Gospel of Mark post dates 70 CE. In principle, a text even a christian text can have accurate prophecies. The problem with christian sources it has numerous false prophecies which makes the temple prophecy look like a post dated one. If there were no false prophecies in Gospel of Mark, there would be a clear possibility that the temple prophecy is accurate. But the fact of many false prophecies in the Gospels and the patterns of contradictions and other anachronisms is what makes the christian position so weak and problematic

Except I showed Qur'an 4 157. How desperate and deluded are you, If you can grow a spine I am more than happy to have an audio recorded debate with you on this topic on either my channel or a christian channel. If not, feel free to whine in the comments

@@RefutingOrientalists nice ad hominem attack yet you still fail to post one verse that says the Bible is corrupt yet again, nowhere in 4:157 says the Bible is corrupt anyone can read it

If you can grow a spine I would be more than happy to have a recorded audio debate with you on either my channel or a christian channel on this topic. If not, then I will not waste my time with you.

@@RefutingOrientalists my friend, what makes YOU think you’re worth my time? I outlined why I believe you are wrong and you have no response. In fact, in similar fashion to your video, your response is empty of value and aims to attack me as spineless instead of addressing the issue at hand. What reason do I have to think you won’t do the same again in a debate? If you can’t address these problems for your viewers in a comment response how would you address them in a live debate? What I will say is this: as a Muslim you accept Jesus Christ as a great man, born of a virgin, ascended to heaven and who will come again as a Judge for mankind. Who but god can judge mankind? Read the gospels and compare the lives of Jesus and Muhammad. See who brings love to the world and who brings despair. See which man’s teaching prolonged slavery and the oppression of women and which man aimed to destroy it. Seek Christ with an open heart and I am sure he will show himself to you my brother. Peace of Christ be with you ❤️

1- your view is factually wrong by consensus of non Muslims western historians who believes the Quran is preserved. The fact that there are « different Qurans » is blandly false. The Quran is a multi layer texts and has always been, all these differences are expected since it’s part of the text. Even Noldeke agrees that the tradition of the 7 ahroufs goes back to Muhammad ﷺ. So it’s normal for us to have different Qiraat. Also the fact that Uthman burned the Quran is actually normal and expected, new converts who did non knew about that learn the Quran from one companion who recited the Quran in a way, others from an another companion who recited it in another way, therefore when they met, they clashed because of ignorance. Uthman therefore decided to unite the Muslim ummah on one skeleton (rasm) that will allows as much different récitations possible to preserve the most of the different recitations but also by narrowing the recitations possible. 2-the Quran purposefully disagrees and correct narratives from the OT and NT, it’s basic stuff in academia now. These are not errors, it’s voluntary. Therefore agreeing with a part of a thing and endorse this part does not entail endorsing the whole. Also it’s basic rethoric, you use the source of your adversaries to prove the point to him. 3- in fact the crucifixion of Jesus is not a hisitorical fact at all, I suggest to you 2 videos on blogging theology on this fact, 1 with Louhay Fatoohi and the other with Ali Ataie who is a biblical scholar btw. 4- the fact that Allah knew that the gospel would be interpolated doesn’t mean it’s to deceive, Allah knows best what is the reason he let the change happen. But let me ask you this, what if it was to show that His last religion, Islam, will have a book that is unchanged and corrects those errors, thus proving to later generations that Islam has a point ? It’s a way of explaining it and it’s not definitive

Also you need to explain to me how you can have testimonies of the apostles of Jesus when it is stated in the gospels that THEY FLED BEFORE. Also you need to learn what biblical scholars says about Christianity, basically, no trinity, no divine Jesus, ebionites being the most close to Jesus teaching since it was led by James, presumably the brother of Jesus. Paul is a fraud who disagrees with people that knew Jesus alive.

Also we have multiple verses and Hadith that proves that the Quran is correcting the Bible errors and that the gospels and Torah are not preserved, denying this is just being deceptive or stupid