Found it so funny he wouldn't shut up about the trinity and keep the conversation about what it was supposed to focus on. Props to Testify with how he handled the interaction.
he fr tried hiding behind his commenter back and refuse to continue the argument and try to change the topic and couldn’t defend a single one of his arguments with him, it’s either your ignorant or biased😂😂
Everyone who genuine supports this guy is just downright delusional. This guy here gets debunked HARD from scholars, you can even look it up on yt. He can‘t even defend his arguments without calling out pure cap and with no-context quranic verses. You don‘t even need to be Muslim to understand that this man here is restarted
“Who is the liar but the one who denies that Jesus is the Christ? This is the antichrist, the one who denies the Father and the Son. Whoever denies the Son does not have the Father; the one who confesses the Son has the Father also.” 1 John 2:22-23
@@EvilXtianityJesus’ EXISTENCE is a widely accepted fact, lol. Josephus acknowledges the movement which arose after Jesus, while any sane historian knows there was a rabbi named Jesus who was an itinerant preacher. The question is if Jesus is God, not if Jesus existed. If you deny the very existence of Jesus, then you’re intellectually dishonest.
@@thymic1761 _"Josephus acknowledges..."_ Flavius Josephus wasn't born until 37 AD. References to Jesus are not found in the oldest manuscripts of his Antiquities of the Jews. There are no known manuscripts of Josephus' works that can be dated before the 11th century and the oldest which do survive were edited by Christian monks. Josephus says that he drew from and "interpreted out of the Hebrew Scriptures". His main source was the Gospel According to Luke who in turn copied from from the Gospel According to Mark. None of the Gospel authors witnessed Jesus. In the third century, Origen wrote extensively about Josephus, even about the very chapter that contains the Testimonium, but never mentioned or referred to the Testimonium in any way. This is inconceivable if the Testimonium had existed at that time. Since the first mention of that passage came from Eusebius, we can conclude that is when it was created.
@@EvilXtianity The Gospel of Matthew was written by Matthew the Apostle, The Gospel of Mark was written by Mark, a companion of Peter the Apostle, The Gospel of Luke was written by Luke, a companion of Paul who also knew the apostles, and the Gospel of John was written by John the Apostle
@@EvilXtianity This gospel of Matthew was written by St. Matthew the Apostle. Church Fathers mention it in their writings like St. Clement of Alexandria (150 - 215) in Stromata “…in the Gospel according to Matthew, the genealogy which begins with Abraham is continued down to Mary the mother of the Lord.” (Strom 1.21.147) St. Irenaeus of Lyon (130 - 202) writes in Against Heresies and Lost Writings “Matthew, again, relates his generation as a man, saying, the book of the generation of Jesus Christ, the son of David, the som of Abraham, and also…” (Against Heri 3.11.8) Tertullian (160 - 240) writes in Against Marcion 4.5 “Matthew indeed among Hebrews, in their own dialect put forth also a writing of the gospel while Peter and Paul were evangelizing in Rome and founded the church.” (Adv. Haer, 3.1.1; cf FLWI, 29) “The same authority of the apostolic churches will afford evidence to the other Gospels also, which we possess equally through their means and according to their usage-I mean the Gospels of John and Matthew…” Origen of Alexandria (185 - 253) is quoted by St. Eusebius in his writing Ecclestiastical History “Among the four Gospels, which are the only indisputable ones in the Church of God under heaven, I have learned by tradition that the first was written by Matthew, who was once a publican, but afterwards an apostle of Jesus, and it was prepared for the converts from Judaism and published in the Hebrew language.”
1:09:01 at this stage of the conversation are we not allowed to bring up the Megiddo Mosaic? That revealed early Christians a century before the Council of Nicaea referred to him as God Jesus Christ
@@EvilXtianity Prove Allah is not just a nickname Muhammad gave to 1.8 inchallah. There are over 80 some odd prophets in the Hebrew Bible. Name one time God played wingman with a verse assist for one of those to get laid.
@@EvilXtianity >Jesus himself left no archaeological evidence of any kind, such as artifacts, tombs, dwellings, works of carpentry, or self-written manuscripts. shroud of turin bro
@@UIclaimUIonline The Tafasirs that come centuries after Muhammad, of couse they'd know the divine revelation and it's contents. So now provide a source before 600AD to show that, and to back up your claim. Shouldn't be hard, just find some people that followed Jesus and claimed to be Muslim. Edit: Unless you're claiming modern day Muslims are the ones, then the dominant thing fails. You still aren't number one, even with all the high birth rates and inbreeding in Islam.
@@UIclaimUIonlinehow can it possibly be Muslims when they were unheard of for 6 centuries after the resurrection of Jesus and Christians became uppermost that whole time?
@@MetroMan13testify argument rely on two verses Verse 3:55 refers to the Muslims (the one's who follow Jesus) and 61:14 it says that Jesus's disciples were dominant but it doesn't specify the dominance. It could be a spiritual dominance etc. so the Quran doesn't expect an Islamic Christian group to be physically dominant or an Islamic Christian group at all. And if testify or you are demanding a proto Muslim group, than that would be an argument from silence (a fallacious one)
So you can be a "Muslim" while disagreeing with fundamental Muslim beliefs, and knowing nothing about Muhammad, the Quran or Mecca, but if you disagree with a single Trinitarian concept, you're not a Trinitarian. Got it.
Not the same. If your alive before the prophet ﷺ, the revelation of the Qur’ān, how do u expect them to believe in it? U can’t compare that to no one in the first 3 centuries who believes in the trinity 💀
@@Gazaruu They believed in the Trinity, they just didn't have every philosophical detail of it sorted out. By contrast, you believe someone can still be a Muslim, i.e., one of you guys, even when what they believe is ENTIRELY different from what you believe, not just in a detail or two of theology.
@@ConsideringPhlebas Thats a false equivalence lol. The trinity is the most fundamental concept in Christianity so its expected that there should be early church fathers that believed in it the way that Christians believe in it now. On the contrary, believing in the crucifixion is only a small detail in Islam, and means nothing in the grand scheme of things, as long as you still worship one God.
I appreciate the good dialog without name calling and insults. It amazes me that after all the dialogs with Muslim they still believe that saying Allah is one refutes the trinity. I think it would be interesting to see if the idea of tahwid stands up to the same standards the Muslim demanded for the trinity understanding and early Christians
3:55 says that the followers of Jesus will be above other people. And only 3 verses before in 3:52 the disciples told Jesus testify that “we are Muslims” if you’re gonna use the argument by butchering the scriptures and skipping verses, it’ll crumble between your hands.
Except Muslims didn’t exist in that time. The word Muslim was never used until the false prophet’s time, nor was there any equivalence to it in that time. So basically, you just pointed out another historical error in the Quran. Thanks for that!
@ This is what happens when you were asleep for many years then decide to enter a race you’ll get trashed and ignored. All I’m gonna say is ask you kindly to look up the meaning of the word “Muslim” in Arabic and understand why the Quran is making its claim. Btw I have no reason to answer you besides pity 🤦♂️
@@ConsideringPhlebas it’s not about the word it’s the concept. Muslim means someone who submits to the will of god. Do you think they didn’t submit to god?
wow constantine destroyed christianity and nestorius reigned? i guess the oriental orthodox who vehemently opposed nestoirus even went so far as to think the council of chalcedon is nestorius 2.0 just didn't exist in ibn kathir's mind even though they were right around the corner and existing for 200 years prior.
Bro idk if you are gonna check this comment but i would seriously love it if you also dismantle some arguments of the eastern philosophies and relegions( Buddhism, Taoism, etc.)
I personally dismantled some myself, I defeated several Buddhists and let me tell you myself. Let me tell myself, this guys can't even agree between eachother. The main problem is that Buddhist don't believe in Buddhism , because of intellectually pure reasons, but rather due to personal reasons based on feelings , they themselves admit it . If somebody tries to apouse there view with factual scriptures , they will just say that he doesn't understand Buddhism and procide to say the same things just in more flowerly flavoured way , and this continues until you get them to admit that you were right and than ask them to prove it . Other Buddhist may join in and start telling the previous once that they don't understand Buddhism. Always ask them to prove there claims regardless of how much they try to dodge your questions.
@@alexyordanov6250 very true brother, one of my classmates even gets drunk on such things and when I am factually dismantling his arguments bro just pops up with that eastern traditions provide way for every thought process basically agreeing that they are spineless and yet having super high confidence
I think Testify has said he has no real reason to because there isn’t a lot of history or study behind the religions’ theology. No historical events to verify or trust. Basically, it all comes down to believing in the mysticism alone.
As always, articulate as ever, providing significant and convincing points, all to the glory of The Triune God. Top notch video Erik we all greatly appreciate your contributions to the Kingdom of God, especially this latest new brick in the foundation! I'm currently struggling convincing a muslim friend but these are all great topics and things to bring up, again, we all appreciate you using your gifts to arm us with this knowledge! 1 John 2:22 - Who is the liar, except he who is denying that Jesus is the Christ? this one is the antichrist who is denying the Father and the Son
@@lahleholivia7398 If anyone is worried that he might not be acting honorably toward the virgin he is engaged to, and if his passions are too strong[a] and he feels he ought to marry, he should do as he wants. He is not sinning. They should get married. I don’t see anything about being “past the flower of youth” And can u define “flower of youth” as what metric in terms of human development
Irenaeus and Tertullian both taught monotheism in the form of trinitarianism because they both taught Jesus and the father were the same God. "He, then, who was adored by the prophets as the living God, He is the God of the living; and His Word is He who also spoke to Moses, who also put the Sadducees to silence, who also bestowed the gift of resurrection, thus revealing [both] truths to those who are blind, that is, the resurrection and God [in His true character]...Christ Himself, therefore, together with the Father, is the God of the living, who spoke to Moses, and who was also manifested to the fathers..” (Against Heresies, 4.5.2) "we give a reason why they are NOT said to be two Gods and two Lords, but that they are two as Father and Son; and this not by severance of their substance, but from the dispensation wherein we declare the Son to be undivided and inseparable from the Father - distinct in degree, not in state. And although, when named apart, He is called God, He does NOT thereby constitute TWO Gods, but ONE; and that from the very circumstance that He is entitled to be called God, from His union with the Father.” (Against Praxeas chapter 19 Tertullian is often misquoted as a subordinationist or a logos Theorist but this is a misapplication of him constantly using allegorical language to expound on the economy of the persons. Muslims want to quote these passages but won't even rectify places where to Tertullian not only says that the father son and spirit are of the same undivided substance what also says the father was not alone. "Moreover, He was alone, because there was nothing external to Him but Himself. Yet even not then was He alone; for He had with Him that which He possessed in Himself, that is to say, His own Reason. For God is rational, and Reason was first in Him; and so all things were from Himself.....that even then before the creation of the universe God was not alone, since He had within Himself both Reason, and, inherent in Reason, His Word, which He made second to Himself by agitating it within Himself."(Against Praxaeus 5) We cant read these texts in isolation.
Hey, I was recently wondering when chapter and verse number references were added to the Bible (not authoritatively, but to help readers find passages more easily), and researched that it was around 1551 AD (maybe a little earlier, but definitely between 1200-1555 AD, according to history). The fact that the Quran has chapter and verse number references, even in the "earliest" copies of it, leads me to believe the Quran wasn't even written as early as Muslims like to claim it was. Since it "borrows", in a very twisted way, so much from the Bible, doesn't it make sense that the author(s) of the Quran copied the idea of chapter and verse number references, too, and that makes a valid argument that it was written much later than it has been claimed to have been? Like, after number references were added to the Bible in 1200-1555 AD? To try and make their fake book look authentic, like the Bible most definitely is. So many holes in the Islam falsehood, I can't wrap my mind around how anyone falls for it. It is just so illogical and absolutely no factual evidence for any of it being true, just one big wacky fable, with characters that don't even have any actual historical evidence of ever having existed outside of the Quran.
Glory to the one true God “the Trinity, 1 God, 3 Eternal Persons” who is the greatest and who actually demonstrated it! ✝️ - Perfect righteous justice - The greatest act of love for us - Trinity unlike any other being
Testify do you want my notes on this topic because I’ve done an extensive research on this. Remember Quran says isa was given the uncorrupted Torah in the 1st century so the disciples would have the Islamic stories of the prophets. Which means in the 1st century this should be seen . This is the gist of it but there’s loads more
Most of the ebionites did not believe in the virgin birth because they think jesus was a normal human at first , but when he got baptized god adopted him and made him the christ , they also believe that he died and rose from the dead , plus imo they were not technically followers of jesus they were following jewish law and not what jesus teached , so that clearly contradict islam teachings about jesus ,and his first followers ,and even if few of them believed that he was born out of a virgin , so that makes them the real followers ? So the real followers of jesus were a small group of a small group , that who’s the quran is talking about ?
@@whodoyouthinkiam210 1)there are no brackets in the quran. 2)Only some translations of quran have them.(translators add them so a reader can further understand whats being talked about) 3)quran doesn't NEED brackets and it doesn't have them anyway.
@@Hashirama-up2zj believing in a book full of Contradictions and getting brainwashed by a channel that u trust without even fact checking or researching what that channel is saying is not running towards the truth
@@Hashirama-up2zj 2nd samuel 6:23 Therefore Michal the daughter of Saul had no child unto the day of her death. Then 2nd samuel 21:8 So the king took Armoni and Mephibosheth, the two sons of Rizpah the daughter of Aiah, whom she bore to Saul, and the five sons of Michal the daughter of Saul, and u have 1 chronicles 21:5 Then Joab gave the sum of the number of the people to David. All Israel had one million one hundred thousand men who drew the sword, and Judah had four hundred and seventy thousand men who drew the sword. then2nd samuel 24:9 Then Joab gave the sum of the number of the people to the king. And there were in Israel eight hundred thousand valiant men who drew the sword, and the men of Judah were five hundred thousand men. lastly 2 kings 8:26 Ahaziah was twenty-two years old when he became king, and he reigned one year in Jerusalem. His mother's name was Athaliah, a granddaughter of Omri, Then 2 chronicles 22:2 forty and two years old was Ahaziah when he began to regain, and he reigned one year in Jerusalem His mother's name was Athaliah, a granddaughter of Omri do you want more? or now will u bring up the marriage of the prophet that was answered 100 times your first statement "there is no Contradictions in the Bible" does already prove that u believe wtv youtube video u see so I can't expect much about what u gonna say next and please don't waste time pick arguments from this channel I watched a ton and it's always either using weak hadith or taking stuff out of context to brainwash people the owner was in a debate with the channel I mentioned in my original comment and he lost when he actually met someone with knowledge
The early church didn't teach the Trinity? He needs to do more homework. 140 AD Aristides: “[Christians] are they who, above every people of the Earth, have found the truth, for they acknowledge God, the creator and maker of all things, in the only-begotten Son and in the Holy Spirit” (Apology). 180 AD Irenaeus: “But the Son, eternally co-existing with the Father, from of old, yea, from the beginning, always reveals the Father to Angels, Archangels, Powers, Virtues…” (Against Heresies, Book II, ch. 30, section 9) 180 AD Irenaeus: “It was not angels, therefore, who made us, nor who formed us, neither had angels power to make an image of God, nor any one else, except the Word of the Lord, nor any Power remotely distant from the Father of all things. For God did not stand in need of these [beings], in order to the accomplishing of what He had Himself determined with Himself beforehand should be done, as if He did not possess His own hands. For with Him were always present the Word and Wisdom, the Son and the Spirit, by whom and in whom, freely and spontaneously, He made all things, to whom also He speaks, saying, “Let Us make man after Our image and likeness;” [Gen. 1:26]”(Against Heresies 4:20:1). 180 AD Irenaeus: “And therefore Isaiah himself, distinguishing the things already mentioned, again exclaims, “For the Spirit shall go forth from Me, and I have made every breath.” Thus does he attribute the Spirit as peculiar to God which in the last times He pours forth upon the human race by the adoption of sons; but [he shows] that breath was common throughout the creation, and points it out as something created. Now what has been made is a different thing from him who makes it. The breath, then, is temporal, but the Spirit eternal.” (Against Heresies Ch. 12) 150 AD Justin Martyr: “Then I replied, “Reverting to the Scriptures, I shall endeavor to persuade you, that He who is said to have appeared to Abraham, and to Jacob, and to Moses, and who is called God, is distinct from Him who made all things, - numerically, I mean, not [distinct] in will. For I affirm that He has never at any time done anything which He who made the world - above whom there is no other God - has not wished Him both to do and to engage Himself with.” (Dialog of Justin with Trypho, a Jew, ch 56) 150 AD Justin Martyr: “Hence are we called atheists. And we confess that we are atheists, so far as gods of this sort are concerned, but not with respect to the most true God, the Father of righteousness and temperance and the other virtues, who is free from all impurity. But both Him, and the Son (who came forth from Him and taught us these things, and the host of the other good angels who follow and are made like to Him), and the prophetic Spirit, we worship and adore, knowing them in reason and truth, and declaring without grudging to every one who wishes to learn, as we have been taught.” (The First Apology, ch 6) c. AD 177, Athenagorus: “We acknowledge a God, and a Son, his Logos, and a Holy Spirit, united in essence-the Father, the Son, the Spirit-because the Son is the Intelligence, Reason, and Wisdom of the Father, and the Spirit an effluence, as light from fire.” (A Plea for the Christians 24) c. AD 177, Athenagorus: The Holy Spirit Himself also, which operates in the prophets, we assert to be an effluence of God, flowing from Him, and returning back again like a beam of the sun. Who, then, would not be astonished to hear men who speak of God the Father, and of God the Son, and of the Holy Spirit, and who declare both their power in union and their distinction in order, called atheists? Nor is our teaching in what relates to the divine nature confined to these points; but we recognise also a multitude of angels and ministers, whom God the Maker and Framer of the world distributed and appointed to their several posts by His Logos, to occupy themselves about the elements, and the heavens, and the world, and the things in it, and the goodly ordering of them all. (A Please for the Christians Chapter 10) c. AD 177, Athenagorus: “… that they know God and His Logos, what is the oneness of the Son with the Father, what the communion of the Father with the Son, what is the Spirit, what is the unity of these three, the Spirit, the Son, the Father, and their distinction in unity…” (A Plea for the Christians Chapter 12) 190 AD Clement of Alexandria: “When [John] says: ‘What was from the beginning [1 John 1:1],’ he touches upon the generation without beginning of the Son, who is co-equal with the Father. ‘Was,’ therefore, is indicative of an eternity without a beginning, just as the Word Himself, that is the Son, being one with the Father in regard to equality of substance, is eternal and uncreated. That the word always existed is signified by the saying: ‘In the beginning was the Word’ [John 1:1].” (fragment in Eusebius History, Bk 6 Ch 14; Jurgens, p. 188) 190 AD Clement of Alexandria: ‘For both are one - that is, God. For He has said, “In the beginning the Word was in God, and the Word was God.” (The Instructor, Book 1, ch 8) 190 AD Clement of Alexandria: “I understand nothing else than the Holy Trinity to be meant; for the third is the Holy Spirit, and the Son is the second, by whom all things were made according to the will of the Father.” (Stromata, Book V, ch. 14) 190 AD Clement of Alexandria: “Luke 3:22. God here assumed the likeness not of a man, but of a dove, because He wished, by a new apparition of the Spirit in the likeness of a dove, to declare His simplicity and majesty.” (Framents, III) 200-265 AD Dionysius: “For it is essential that the Divine Word should be united to the God of all, and that the Holy Spirit should abide and dwell in God; and thus that the Divine Trinity should be reduced and gathered into one, as if into a certain head-that is, into the omnipotent God of all.” (Against the Sabellians 1) 200 AD Tertullian: (160-215) African apologist and theologian. He wrote much in defense of Christianity: “All the Scriptures give clear proof of the Trinity, and it is from these that our principle is deduced…the distinction of the Trinity is quite clearly displayed.” (Against Praxeas, ch 11) 200 AD Tertullian: “[God speaks in the plural ‘Let us make man in our image’] because already there was attached to Him his Son, a second person, his own Word, and a third, the Spirit in the Word….one substance in three coherent persons. He was at once the Father, the Son, and the Spirit.” (Against Praxeas, ch 12) 200 AD Tertullian: “Thus the connection of the Father in the Son, and of the Son in the Paraclete, produces three coherent Persons, who are yet distinct One from Another. These Three are, one essence, not one Person, as it is said, ‘I and my Father are One’ [John 10:30], in respect of unity of Being not singularity of number” (Against Praxeas, 25)
testify argument rely on two verses Verse 3:55 refers to the Muslims (the one's who follow Jesus) and 61:14 it says that Jesus's disciples were dominant but it doesn't specify the dominance. It could be a spiritual dominance etc. so the Quran doesn't expect an Islamic Christian group to be physically dominant or an Islamic Christian group at all. And if testify is demanding a proto Muslim group, than that would be an argument from silence (a fallacious one)
As Testify pointed out, there are 2 arguments from silence. One being that the absence of evidence as evidence itself. In contrast to what Testify is using; which is a conclusion that is based on the absence of statements in historical documents. If I claim that the Magna Carta was written by George Washington. You can easily point to there being no historical evidence to back up this claim is an argument against the claim. It is the correct conclusion to draw from there being 0 historical evidence. What Islam fails to provide is a proto-Muslim group in the historical record. What it logically points to is that Islam is not the faith of Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Moses, and the rest of the prophets. That it came about later in history. Also, any line of argumentation can become a fallacy if used incorrectly, this is debate 101. Logical fallacies are leaps of logic that lead us to an unsupported conclusion. What is not supported in the historical record is the existence of a proto-Islamic group.
@@UIclaimUIonline Well logic dictates that there would have to be a group prior to the revelation of Mohammad. So where are the true followers of Jesus who preached Islam?
@@mastermiller2944 first of all we don't claim actually no Muslim in the entire history of Islam was searching for a Muslim group prior to the revelation of Muhammad nor do we care second of all I'm not aware of a Muslim group that is prior to muslims maby the Jews maybe the ebonites, the unitarians I don't know to be fair
attabari's commentary on the part of the verse that says "they prevailed" (61:14) he quotes ibn abbas saying "فأصبت الطائفة المؤمنون ظاهرين على عدوهم الكافرين منهم" the group of believers prevailed over the group that disbelieved
Im sorry but you got intellectually mauled, most of your fanbase will use disproved and refuted arguments to attempt to make a point and will disregard what a muslim is saying regardless of its true or not. But you guys do you.
Muslims will use disproved and refuted arguments to attempt to make a point and will disregard what a Christian is saying regardless of its true or not. But you guys do you.
In which way did he get intellectually mauled? Muslim guy made 0 coherent argument. Bring up any argument that he said which made sense, and using that same logic, I will apply it to islam and see how you will respond.
@@exxssmate This is dawah 101. >Muslim guy brings up no argument or evidence, but he spoke really smugly and condescendingly. >"YOU SEE!? CHRISTIANITY DESTROOOOYED! ISLAM IS THE TRUUUUUUTH!" >"How? Name one argument-" >"HAHA YOU FOOL! I DON"T NEED TO! YOU GOT DESTROYYYYED! ALLAHU AKBAR!" Momo was a p3do and a liar and is rotting in hell. Police be upon him. :)
Sam's article on Trinitarianism in the ante nicene fathers
answeringislamblog.wordpress.com/2018/11/02/were-the-early-church-fathers-trinitarians/
Was a pleasure to be on and refute the arguments against Ireneaus and the Ebionites! God bless.
I wish he called you up sooner. I don't get why he appeased Diddy's waffling and deflecting.
@@nyctom08 Diddy 🤣 bro wtf
@@nyctom08 I know you got doubts, sped. That's why you couldn't bear to hear the truth.
@@legendaryadam The only doubt I have is you not being a bot.
@@nyctom08 Yet I’m actively responding to you
Blessed be the name of the Lord! You are doing His work, and doing it amazingly. Keep it up!
Thank you so much!
Found it so funny he wouldn't shut up about the trinity and keep the conversation about what it was supposed to focus on. Props to Testify with how he handled the interaction.
he fr tried hiding behind his commenter back and refuse to continue the argument and try to change the topic and couldn’t defend a single one of his arguments with him, it’s either your ignorant or biased😂😂
Everyone who genuine supports this guy is just downright delusional. This guy here gets debunked HARD from scholars, you can even look it up on yt.
He can‘t even defend his arguments without calling out pure cap and with no-context quranic verses.
You don‘t even need to be Muslim to understand that this man here is restarted
Love your channel brother
“Who is the liar but the one who denies that Jesus is the Christ? This is the antichrist, the one who denies the Father and the Son. Whoever denies the Son does not have the Father; the one who confesses the Son has the Father also.”
1 John 2:22-23
@@EvilXtianityJesus’ EXISTENCE is a widely accepted fact, lol. Josephus acknowledges the movement which arose after Jesus, while any sane historian knows there was a rabbi named Jesus who was an itinerant preacher. The question is if Jesus is God, not if Jesus existed. If you deny the very existence of Jesus, then you’re intellectually dishonest.
@@thymic1761
_"Josephus acknowledges..."_
Flavius Josephus wasn't born until 37 AD.
References to Jesus are not found in the oldest manuscripts of his Antiquities of the Jews.
There are no known manuscripts of Josephus' works that can be dated before the 11th century and the oldest which do survive were edited by Christian monks.
Josephus says that he drew from and "interpreted out of the Hebrew Scriptures". His main source was the Gospel According to Luke who in turn copied from from the Gospel According to Mark. None of the Gospel authors witnessed Jesus.
In the third century, Origen wrote extensively about Josephus, even about the very chapter that contains the Testimonium, but never mentioned or referred to the Testimonium in any way. This is inconceivable if the Testimonium had existed at that time. Since the first mention of that passage came from Eusebius, we can conclude that is when it was created.
@@EvilXtianity The gospel writers did witness Jesus
@@EvilXtianity The Gospel of Matthew was written by Matthew the Apostle, The Gospel of Mark was written by Mark, a companion of Peter the Apostle, The Gospel of Luke was written by Luke, a companion of Paul who also knew the apostles, and the Gospel of John was written by John the Apostle
@@EvilXtianity This gospel of Matthew was written by St. Matthew the Apostle. Church Fathers mention it in their writings like St. Clement of Alexandria (150 - 215) in Stromata
“…in the Gospel according to Matthew, the genealogy which begins with Abraham is continued down to Mary the mother of the Lord.” (Strom 1.21.147)
St. Irenaeus of Lyon (130 - 202) writes in Against Heresies and Lost Writings
“Matthew, again, relates his generation as a man, saying, the book of the generation of Jesus Christ, the son of David, the som of Abraham, and also…” (Against Heri 3.11.8)
Tertullian (160 - 240) writes in Against Marcion 4.5
“Matthew indeed among Hebrews, in their own dialect put forth also a writing of the gospel while Peter and Paul were evangelizing in Rome and founded the church.” (Adv. Haer, 3.1.1; cf FLWI, 29)
“The same authority of the apostolic churches will afford evidence to the other Gospels also, which we possess equally through their means and according to their usage-I mean the Gospels of John and Matthew…”
Origen of Alexandria (185 - 253) is quoted by St. Eusebius in his writing Ecclestiastical History
“Among the four Gospels, which are the only indisputable ones in the Church of God under heaven, I have learned by tradition that the first was written by Matthew, who was once a publican, but afterwards an apostle of Jesus, and it was prepared for the converts from Judaism and published in the Hebrew language.”
Brooo I had prepared to join this live mann
sorry you came a bit late.
@@1541965may allah bless you
Testify joining the front lines like Sam Shamoun and Christian Prince? Hell yeah!
yeah I got a long way to go to be as quick on my feet as those guys.
@@TestifyApologetics You are doing way more than the average joe. God bless you!
Gehenna* yeah is what I think you mean. 😉
1:09:01 at this stage of the conversation are we not allowed to bring up the Megiddo Mosaic? That revealed early Christians a century before the Council of Nicaea referred to him as God Jesus Christ
Testify > Islam
@@EvilXtianityhe is not he did exist
@@EvilXtianity Prove Allah is not just a nickname Muhammad gave to 1.8 inchallah. There are over 80 some odd prophets in the Hebrew Bible. Name one time God played wingman with a verse assist for one of those to get laid.
@@EvilXtianityThat doesn't mean he didn't exist 😂
@@EvilXtianity >Jesus himself left no archaeological evidence of any kind, such as artifacts, tombs, dwellings, works of carpentry, or self-written manuscripts.
shroud of turin bro
@@EvilXtianity Prove Allah is not just a nickname Muhammad gave to 1.8 inchallah.
The Islamic god is the type of guy to fail on his promise on keeping the "true" followers of Jesus dominant.
The true followers of Jesus are the Muslims referring to us
(all the tafsirs agree on that)
@@UIclaimUIonline
The Tafasirs that come centuries after Muhammad, of couse they'd know the divine revelation and it's contents. So now provide a source before 600AD to show that, and to back up your claim. Shouldn't be hard, just find some people that followed Jesus and claimed to be Muslim.
Edit: Unless you're claiming modern day Muslims are the ones, then the dominant thing fails. You still aren't number one, even with all the high birth rates and inbreeding in Islam.
@UIclaimUIonline Muslims aren't the true followers of Jesus, you don't follow him if you deny him.
@@UIclaimUIonlinehow can it possibly be Muslims when they were unheard of for 6 centuries after the resurrection of Jesus and Christians became uppermost that whole time?
@@MetroMan13testify argument rely on two verses
Verse 3:55 refers to the Muslims (the one's who follow Jesus) and 61:14 it says that Jesus's disciples were dominant but it doesn't specify the dominance. It could be a spiritual dominance etc. so the Quran doesn't expect an Islamic Christian group to be physically dominant or an Islamic Christian group at all. And if testify or you are demanding a proto Muslim group, than that would be an argument from silence (a fallacious one)
So you can be a "Muslim" while disagreeing with fundamental Muslim beliefs, and knowing nothing about Muhammad, the Quran or Mecca, but if you disagree with a single Trinitarian concept, you're not a Trinitarian. Got it.
Not the same. If your alive before the prophet ﷺ, the revelation of the Qur’ān, how do u expect them to believe in it? U can’t compare that to no one in the first 3 centuries who believes in the trinity 💀
@@Gazaruucan you find anyone in the first 3 centuries who believe that muhamad was coming? Do you even know who the names of Isa’s disciples?
@@Gazaruu Thats wrong the trinity had existed in thought before that
@@Gazaruu
They believed in the Trinity, they just didn't have every philosophical detail of it sorted out. By contrast, you believe someone can still be a Muslim, i.e., one of you guys, even when what they believe is ENTIRELY different from what you believe, not just in a detail or two of theology.
@@ConsideringPhlebas Thats a false equivalence lol. The trinity is the most fundamental concept in Christianity so its expected that there should be early church fathers that believed in it the way that Christians believe in it now. On the contrary, believing in the crucifixion is only a small detail in Islam, and means nothing in the grand scheme of things, as long as you still worship one God.
Some dude in the live chat said “there’s no historical proof but that doesn’t mean the verses aren’t wrong” 🤣🤣🤣
You saw that to Lol 🤣?
🤦
To be fair, he is not wrong 😅 at least he is honest, he is in a good path to find the truth
Couldn't you apply the same thing to the Bible?
So ur discovring that absence of proof is not the proof of absence 😮😮
Nice stream
Diddy was doing his best Stretch Armstrong impersonation with the way he was reaching to avoid the problem.
I appreciate the good dialog without name calling and insults. It amazes me that after all the dialogs with Muslim they still believe that saying Allah is one refutes the trinity. I think it would be interesting to see if the idea of tahwid stands up to the same standards the Muslim demanded for the trinity understanding and early Christians
Kept going into the weeds to avoid the problem that Islam has no real history.
3:55 says that the followers of Jesus will be above other people. And only 3 verses before in 3:52 the disciples told Jesus testify that “we are Muslims” if you’re gonna use the argument by butchering the scriptures and skipping verses, it’ll crumble between your hands.
Except Muslims didn’t exist in that time. The word Muslim was never used until the false prophet’s time, nor was there any equivalence to it in that time. So basically, you just pointed out another historical error in the Quran. Thanks for that!
@ This is what happens when you were asleep for many years then decide to enter a race you’ll get trashed and ignored. All I’m gonna say is ask you kindly to look up the meaning of the word “Muslim” in Arabic and understand why the Quran is making its claim. Btw I have no reason to answer you besides pity 🤦♂️
So, when they were speaking Aramaic among themselves, what word did they use for "Muslims" back then?
@@ConsideringPhlebas it’s not about the word it’s the concept. Muslim means someone who submits to the will of god. Do you think they didn’t submit to god?
@@1sosukeaizen1No, “Muslim,” in the modern language is an adherent of Islam. Are Jews and Christians Muslims?
wow constantine destroyed christianity and nestorius reigned? i guess the oriental orthodox who vehemently opposed nestoirus even went so far as to think the council of chalcedon is nestorius 2.0 just didn't exist in ibn kathir's mind even though they were right around the corner and existing for 200 years prior.
Bro idk if you are gonna check this comment but i would seriously love it if you also dismantle some arguments of the eastern philosophies and relegions( Buddhism, Taoism, etc.)
I personally dismantled some myself, I defeated several Buddhists and let me tell you myself. Let me tell myself, this guys can't even agree between eachother.
The main problem is that Buddhist don't believe in Buddhism , because of intellectually pure reasons, but rather due to personal reasons based on feelings , they themselves admit it .
If somebody tries to apouse there view with factual scriptures , they will just say that he doesn't understand Buddhism and procide to say the same things just in more flowerly flavoured way , and this continues until you get them to admit that you were right and than ask them to prove it .
Other Buddhist may join in and start telling the previous once that they don't understand Buddhism.
Always ask them to prove there claims regardless of how much they try to dodge your questions.
@@alexyordanov6250 very true brother, one of my classmates even gets drunk on such things and when I am factually dismantling his arguments bro just pops up with that eastern traditions provide way for every thought process basically agreeing that they are spineless and yet having super high confidence
I think Testify has said he has no real reason to because there isn’t a lot of history or study behind the religions’ theology. No historical events to verify or trust. Basically, it all comes down to believing in the mysticism alone.
As always, articulate as ever, providing significant and convincing points, all to the glory of The Triune God. Top notch video Erik we all greatly appreciate your contributions to the Kingdom of God, especially this latest new brick in the foundation! I'm currently struggling convincing a muslim friend but these are all great topics and things to bring up, again, we all appreciate you using your gifts to arm us with this knowledge!
1 John 2:22 - Who is the liar, except he who is denying that Jesus is the Christ? this one is the antichrist who is denying the Father and the Son
Why do they believe a single word from a PDF file ❓
Like your prophet moses and isaac
@Transparent-s3m Sahih Muslim 1422 b / Sahih al-Bukhari 5158
Now show me yours
@@lahleholivia7398can I ask you what is the bibles view on age of consumation?
@@mystery6980 1 Corinthians 7 36. - Must be past the flower of youth.
Quran 65:4 - minors ✅
@@lahleholivia7398 If anyone is worried that he might not be acting honorably toward the virgin he is engaged to, and if his passions are too strong[a] and he feels he ought to marry, he should do as he wants. He is not sinning. They should get married.
I don’t see anything about being “past the flower of youth”
And can u define “flower of youth” as what metric in terms of human development
Irenaeus and Tertullian both taught monotheism in the form of trinitarianism because they both taught Jesus and the father were the same God.
"He, then, who was adored by the prophets as the living God, He is the God of the living; and His Word is He who also spoke to Moses, who also put the Sadducees to silence, who also bestowed the gift of resurrection, thus revealing [both] truths to those who are blind, that is, the resurrection and God [in His true character]...Christ Himself, therefore, together with the Father, is the God of the living, who spoke to Moses, and who was also manifested to the fathers..” (Against Heresies, 4.5.2)
"we give a reason why they are NOT said to be two Gods and two Lords, but that they are two as Father and Son; and this not by severance of their substance, but from the dispensation wherein we declare the Son to be undivided and inseparable from the Father - distinct in degree, not in state. And although, when named apart, He is called God, He does NOT thereby constitute TWO Gods, but ONE; and that from the very circumstance that He is entitled to be called God, from His union with the Father.” (Against Praxeas chapter 19
Tertullian is often misquoted as a subordinationist or a logos Theorist but this is a misapplication of him constantly using allegorical language to expound on the economy of the persons. Muslims want to quote these passages but won't even rectify places where to Tertullian not only says that the father son and spirit are of the same undivided substance what also says the father was not alone.
"Moreover, He was alone, because there was nothing external to Him but Himself. Yet even not then was He alone; for He had with Him that which He possessed in Himself, that is to say, His own Reason. For God is rational, and Reason was first in Him; and so all things were from Himself.....that even then before the creation of the universe God was not alone, since He had within Himself both Reason, and, inherent in Reason, His Word, which He made second to Himself by agitating it within Himself."(Against Praxaeus 5)
We cant read these texts in isolation.
When we concede the authority and supremacy of the Bible, we grant the fallible wisdom of men. The Bible, not vain philosophy, is our sword.
More live streams please!!
Testify, Thomas apologia, Sam, dawoooood, sentinel apologetics are like the avengers are assembling
İ thought that testify was like 18-24
He has a young voice I guess
Hey, I was recently wondering when chapter and verse number references were added to the Bible (not authoritatively, but to help readers find passages more easily), and researched that it was around 1551 AD (maybe a little earlier, but definitely between 1200-1555 AD, according to history). The fact that the Quran has chapter and verse number references, even in the "earliest" copies of it, leads me to believe the Quran wasn't even written as early as Muslims like to claim it was. Since it "borrows", in a very twisted way, so much from the Bible, doesn't it make sense that the author(s) of the Quran copied the idea of chapter and verse number references, too, and that makes a valid argument that it was written much later than it has been claimed to have been? Like, after number references were added to the Bible in 1200-1555 AD? To try and make their fake book look authentic, like the Bible most definitely is.
So many holes in the Islam falsehood, I can't wrap my mind around how anyone falls for it. It is just so illogical and absolutely no factual evidence for any of it being true, just one big wacky fable, with characters that don't even have any actual historical evidence of ever having existed outside of the Quran.
Glory to the one true God “the Trinity, 1 God, 3 Eternal Persons” who is the greatest and who actually demonstrated it! ✝️
- Perfect righteous justice
- The greatest act of love for us
- Trinity unlike any other being
Yo Nice video your doing god's work
All for Love and Love for All
Testify do you want my notes on this topic because I’ve done an extensive research on this. Remember Quran says isa was given the uncorrupted Torah in the 1st century so the disciples would have the Islamic stories of the prophets. Which means in the 1st century this should be seen . This is the gist of it but there’s loads more
Send it to me i want to read them myself
@@pokemonbacon1237 I hope he sees this
Where does the Qur’ān say that isa was given the uncorrupted Torah?? He was taught the Torah, that’s it
@@Gazaruu loooooool cmon bro , surah 3:48 Allah taught isa the Tawrah, do you as a Muslim want to believe Allah taught isa the corrupted tawrah
@@planetrandom20 how do you want me to send it. Email?
Most of the ebionites did not believe in the virgin birth because they think jesus was a normal human at first , but when he got baptized god adopted him and made him the christ , they also believe that he died and rose from the dead , plus imo they were not technically followers of jesus they were following jewish law and not what jesus teached , so that clearly contradict islam teachings about jesus ,and his first followers ,and even if few of them believed that he was born out of a virgin , so that makes them the real followers ? So the real followers of jesus were a small group of a small group , that who’s the quran is talking about ?
Ty
No no you cant appeal to your bible becuz our quran doesnt make sense without hadiths 😭😭😭
you've never read the Quran did you?
@UIclaimUIonline I have, why does the Quran need words in brackets?
@@whodoyouthinkiam210 1)there are no brackets in the quran.
2)Only some translations of quran have them.(translators add them so a reader can further understand whats being talked about)
3)quran doesn't NEED brackets and it doesn't have them anyway.
Wait, I thought your name was Chad.. 😅
@Mythical Trashcan
It is tim to talk
@Mythical Trashcan I hoo this works and you notice
brother wasn't you defeated by the "Dawah over dunya" channel and still u post lies😭😭
@Hashirama-up2zj keep running from the truth
@@matmat-c3b never running like you bro. Instead I am running towards the truth, who is embodied in the Lord Jesus Christ
@@Hashirama-up2zj believing in a book full of Contradictions and getting brainwashed by a channel that u trust without even fact checking or researching what that channel is saying is not running towards the truth
@@Hashirama-up2zj 2nd samuel 6:23
Therefore Michal the daughter of Saul had no child unto the day of her death.
Then 2nd samuel 21:8
So the king took Armoni and Mephibosheth, the two sons of Rizpah the daughter of Aiah, whom she bore to Saul, and the five sons of Michal the daughter of Saul,
and u have 1 chronicles 21:5
Then Joab gave the sum of the number of the people to David. All Israel had one million one hundred thousand men who drew the sword, and Judah had four hundred and seventy thousand men who drew the sword.
then2nd samuel 24:9
Then Joab gave the sum of the number of the people to the king. And there were in Israel eight hundred thousand valiant men who drew the sword, and the men of Judah were five hundred thousand men.
lastly 2 kings 8:26
Ahaziah was twenty-two years old when he became king, and he reigned one year in Jerusalem. His mother's name was Athaliah, a granddaughter of Omri,
Then 2 chronicles 22:2
forty and two years old was Ahaziah when he began to regain, and he reigned one year in Jerusalem His mother's name was Athaliah, a granddaughter of Omri
do you want more? or now will u bring up the marriage of the prophet that was answered 100 times your first statement "there is no Contradictions in the Bible" does already prove that u believe wtv youtube video u see so I can't expect much about what u gonna say next
and please don't waste time pick arguments from this channel I watched a ton and it's always either using weak hadith or taking stuff out of context to brainwash people the owner was in a debate with the channel I mentioned in my original comment and he lost when he actually met someone with knowledge
@@Hashirama-up2zj the deep core of Christianity is that it's the word of God and God doesn't make numerical mistakes like this wdym
you look so different than i imagined
The early church didn't teach the Trinity? He needs to do more homework.
140 AD Aristides: “[Christians] are they who, above every people of the Earth, have found the truth, for they acknowledge God, the creator and maker of all things, in the only-begotten Son and in the Holy Spirit” (Apology).
180 AD Irenaeus: “But the Son, eternally co-existing with the Father, from of old, yea, from the beginning, always reveals the Father to Angels, Archangels, Powers, Virtues…” (Against Heresies, Book II, ch. 30, section 9)
180 AD Irenaeus: “It was not angels, therefore, who made us, nor who formed us, neither had angels power to make an image of God, nor any one else, except the Word of the Lord, nor any Power remotely distant from the Father of all things. For God did not stand in need of these [beings], in order to the accomplishing of what He had Himself determined with Himself beforehand should be done, as if He did not possess His own hands. For with Him were always present the Word and Wisdom, the Son and the Spirit, by whom and in whom, freely and spontaneously, He made all things, to whom also He speaks, saying, “Let Us make man after Our image and likeness;” [Gen. 1:26]”(Against Heresies 4:20:1).
180 AD Irenaeus: “And therefore Isaiah himself, distinguishing the things already mentioned, again exclaims, “For the Spirit shall go forth from Me, and I have made every breath.” Thus does he attribute the Spirit as peculiar to God which in the last times He pours forth upon the human race by the adoption of sons; but [he shows] that breath was common throughout the creation, and points it out as something created. Now what has been made is a different thing from him who makes it. The breath, then, is temporal, but the Spirit eternal.” (Against Heresies Ch. 12)
150 AD Justin Martyr: “Then I replied, “Reverting to the Scriptures, I shall endeavor to persuade you, that He who is said to have appeared to Abraham, and to Jacob, and to Moses, and who is called God, is distinct from Him who made all things, - numerically, I mean, not [distinct] in will. For I affirm that He has never at any time done anything which He who made the world - above whom there is no other God - has not wished Him both to do and to engage Himself with.” (Dialog of Justin with Trypho, a Jew, ch 56)
150 AD Justin Martyr: “Hence are we called atheists. And we confess that we are atheists, so far as gods of this sort are concerned, but not with respect to the most true God, the Father of righteousness and temperance and the other virtues, who is free from all impurity. But both Him, and the Son (who came forth from Him and taught us these things, and the host of the other good angels who follow and are made like to Him), and the prophetic Spirit, we worship and adore, knowing them in reason and truth, and declaring without grudging to every one who wishes to learn, as we have been taught.” (The First Apology, ch 6)
c. AD 177, Athenagorus: “We acknowledge a God, and a Son, his Logos, and a Holy Spirit, united in essence-the Father, the Son, the Spirit-because the Son is the Intelligence, Reason, and Wisdom of the Father, and the Spirit an effluence, as light from fire.” (A Plea for the Christians 24)
c. AD 177, Athenagorus: The Holy Spirit Himself also, which operates in the prophets, we assert to be an effluence of God, flowing from Him, and returning back again like a beam of the sun. Who, then, would not be astonished to hear men who speak of God the Father, and of God the Son, and of the Holy Spirit, and who declare both their power in union and their distinction in order, called atheists? Nor is our teaching in what relates to the divine nature confined to these points; but we recognise also a multitude of angels and ministers, whom God the Maker and Framer of the world distributed and appointed to their several posts by His Logos, to occupy themselves about the elements, and the heavens, and the world, and the things in it, and the goodly ordering of them all. (A Please for the Christians Chapter 10)
c. AD 177, Athenagorus: “… that they know God and His Logos, what is the oneness of the Son with the Father, what the communion of the Father with the Son, what is the Spirit, what is the unity of these three, the Spirit, the Son, the Father, and their distinction in unity…” (A Plea for the Christians Chapter 12)
190 AD Clement of Alexandria: “When [John] says: ‘What was from the beginning [1 John 1:1],’ he touches upon the generation without beginning of the Son, who is co-equal with the Father. ‘Was,’ therefore, is indicative of an eternity without a beginning, just as the Word Himself, that is the Son, being one with the Father in regard to equality of substance, is eternal and uncreated. That the word always existed is signified by the saying: ‘In the beginning was the Word’ [John 1:1].” (fragment in Eusebius History, Bk 6 Ch 14; Jurgens, p. 188)
190 AD Clement of Alexandria: ‘For both are one - that is, God. For He has said, “In the beginning the Word was in God, and the Word was God.” (The Instructor, Book 1, ch 8)
190 AD Clement of Alexandria: “I understand nothing else than the Holy Trinity to be meant; for the third is the Holy Spirit, and the Son is the second, by whom all things were made according to the will of the Father.” (Stromata, Book V, ch. 14)
190 AD Clement of Alexandria: “Luke 3:22. God here assumed the likeness not of a man, but of a dove, because He wished, by a new apparition of the Spirit in the likeness of a dove, to declare His simplicity and majesty.” (Framents, III)
200-265 AD Dionysius: “For it is essential that the Divine Word should be united to the God of all, and that the Holy Spirit should abide and dwell in God; and thus that the Divine Trinity should be reduced and gathered into one, as if into a certain head-that is, into the omnipotent God of all.” (Against the Sabellians 1)
200 AD Tertullian: (160-215) African apologist and theologian. He wrote much in defense of Christianity: “All the Scriptures give clear proof of the Trinity, and it is from these that our principle is deduced…the distinction of the Trinity is quite clearly displayed.” (Against Praxeas, ch 11)
200 AD Tertullian: “[God speaks in the plural ‘Let us make man in our image’] because already there was attached to Him his Son, a second person, his own Word, and a third, the Spirit in the Word….one substance in three coherent persons. He was at once the Father, the Son, and the Spirit.” (Against Praxeas, ch 12)
200 AD Tertullian: “Thus the connection of the Father in the Son, and of the Son in the Paraclete, produces three coherent Persons, who are yet distinct One from Another. These Three are, one essence, not one Person, as it is said, ‘I and my Father are One’ [John 10:30], in respect of unity of Being not singularity of number” (Against Praxeas, 25)
He did refute some of the fathers mentioned like iraeneus. Testify seems to struggle with this. Thoughts?
@@probaskinnyman4960no he didn’t
🎤👇🏻⤵️
51:05- luke 24:46 lol
PAKISTAN STRONG ARMY WOW GRAPE
Why does anyone waste their time on Islamic nonsense?
Allahhu Akbar ☪️❤
@KingNoir-707 bruh, its a takbir.
🍫
Tho im Christian God is great!
@@NickSantos-o5b God is th greatest ☪️
Did you buy any pagers recently 😮
Be A Chad!
Satan deceived 1/3 of the angels in heaven 👼 and he did it again on earth 1/3 of humanity ☪️
🏜️🐒💣💥
testify argument rely on two verses
Verse 3:55 refers to the Muslims (the one's who follow Jesus) and 61:14 it says that Jesus's disciples were dominant but it doesn't specify the dominance. It could be a spiritual dominance etc. so the Quran doesn't expect an Islamic Christian group to be physically dominant or an Islamic Christian group at all. And if testify is demanding a proto Muslim group, than that would be an argument from silence (a fallacious one)
As Testify pointed out, there are 2 arguments from silence. One being that the absence of evidence as evidence itself. In contrast to what Testify is using; which is a conclusion that is based on the absence of statements in historical documents. If I claim that the Magna Carta was written by George Washington. You can easily point to there being no historical evidence to back up this claim is an argument against the claim. It is the correct conclusion to draw from there being 0 historical evidence. What Islam fails to provide is a proto-Muslim group in the historical record. What it logically points to is that Islam is not the faith of Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Moses, and the rest of the prophets. That it came about later in history.
Also, any line of argumentation can become a fallacy if used incorrectly, this is debate 101. Logical fallacies are leaps of logic that lead us to an unsupported conclusion. What is not supported in the historical record is the existence of a proto-Islamic group.
@@mastermiller2944Islam doesn't expect a proto Muslim group as I highlighted
@@UIclaimUIonline Well logic dictates that there would have to be a group prior to the revelation of Mohammad. So where are the true followers of Jesus who preached Islam?
@@mastermiller2944 first of all we don't claim actually no Muslim in the entire history of Islam was searching for a Muslim group prior to the revelation of Muhammad nor do we care
second of all I'm not aware of a Muslim group that is prior to muslims maby the Jews maybe the ebonites, the unitarians
I don't know to be fair
attabari's commentary on the part of the verse that says "they prevailed" (61:14)
he quotes ibn abbas saying
"فأصبت الطائفة المؤمنون ظاهرين على عدوهم الكافرين منهم"
the group of believers prevailed over the group that disbelieved
Im sorry but you got intellectually mauled, most of your fanbase will use disproved and refuted arguments to attempt to make a point and will disregard what a muslim is saying regardless of its true or not. But you guys do you.
Muslims will use disproved and refuted arguments to attempt to make a point and will disregard what a Christian is saying regardless of its true or not. But you guys do you.
In which way did he get intellectually mauled? Muslim guy made 0 coherent argument. Bring up any argument that he said which made sense, and using that same logic, I will apply it to islam and see how you will respond.
@@Seraph_888 repeating the point i made doesn't do anything, in fact you disregarded what I said anyways with that response so thanks I guess🙏😭
@@exxssmate This is dawah 101.
>Muslim guy brings up no argument or evidence, but he spoke really smugly and condescendingly.
>"YOU SEE!? CHRISTIANITY DESTROOOOYED! ISLAM IS THE TRUUUUUUTH!"
>"How? Name one argument-"
>"HAHA YOU FOOL! I DON"T NEED TO! YOU GOT DESTROYYYYED! ALLAHU AKBAR!"
Momo was a p3do and a liar and is rotting in hell. Police be upon him. :)
Than provide the evidence where he was destroyed because as a third party the Muslim in fact avoided coherent argument and ran.
Diddy embarrassing himself live for the 25th time? Imagine my shock