CHAPTERS: 00:00 - Introduction 01:36 - ALLEGATION 1: The Prophet gave “free rein to carnal pleasure.” 05:23 - ALLEGATION 2: The Sahaba (Companions of the Prophet) were “carnal men.” 09:55 - ALLEGATION 3: The doctrines of Islam appeal to the simple-minded. 11:32 - ALLEGATION 4: The Prophet taught “fables”. 12:33 - ALLEGATION 5: The Prophet did not perform any miracles. 14:44 - ALLEGATION 6: The Prophet’s only evidence was military aggression. 17:58 - ALLEGATION 7: No wise Jewish/Christian men accepted Islam in the beginning. 22:30 - ALLEGATION 8: The Prophet forced people to become Muslim. 24:57 - Thomas Aquinas’ endorsement of religious violence, Crusades 26:28 - Thomas Aquinas’ views on heretics, apostates, and torture 27:30 - Aquinas’ endorsement of the oppression of the Jews 29:26 - ALLEGATION 9: Islam distorts the legacy and teachings of the previous Prophets 31:03 - ALLEGATION 10: The Prophet completely forbade Muslims from ever reading the Bible 35:38 - Another example of Aquinas’ negative view on Jews 36:08 - Closing remarks
Answering Allegation 1 from the Holy Quran: Surah 23 THE BELEIVERS 1. Successful are the believers. 2. Those who are humble in their prayers. 3. Those who avoid nonsense. 4. Those who work for charity. 5. Those who safeguard their chastity. 6. Except from their spouses, or their dependents-for they are free from blame. 7. But whoever seeks anything beyond that-these are the transgressors. 8. Those who are faithful to their trusts and pledges. 9. Those who safeguard their prayers. 10. These are the inheritors. 11. Who will inherit Paradise, wherein they will dwell forever. What about touching? harassment or even shaking hands? لَأنْ يُطعَنَ في رأسِ رجلٍ بِمِخْيَطٍ من حديدٍ خيرٌ من أن يمَسَّ امرأةً لا تَحِلُّ له الراوي : معقل بن يسار | المحدث : الألباني | المصدر : السلسلة الصحيحة | الصفحة أو الرقم : 226 | خلاصة حكم المحدث : إسناده جيد | التخريج : أخرجه الروياني في ((المسند)) (1283)، والطبراني (20/212) (487) واللفظ لهما، والبيهقي كما في ((الترغيب والترهيب)) للمنذري (3/26) باختلاف يسير To be stabbed in the head with an Iron needle is better than touching unlawful woman Answering Allegation 2 logically, Islam restricted whatever carnal impulses they had AND they submitted! Alcohol FORBIDDEN Women FORBIDDEN except for their spouses, or their dependents. Racism & feeling superior FORBIDDEN & forcefully HUMPLED Backbiting & gleefully tarnish others FORBIDDEN Wearing silk/gold for men & walking stark naked (The western carnal fetish) FORBIDDEN Answering Allegation 3, A creed should be simple & clear lest people deviate like Christianity, also were the fellowship of Jesus philosophers or fishermen & shepherds? Answering Allegation 4, Its proven revelation from God whom is a witness over everything. Answering Allegation 5, Pepples chanting glorification to Allah (imagine lifeless stones not a once empty husk of man but SOMETHING that is not supposed to be living comes to life & chant Tasbih even when passed around), healing(with spit/Dua) & feeding/watering the masses amongst many mentioned in Sahih Hadith. We have the longest lasting existing miracle of any prophet that is the Quran! 1400+ years & counting 😎 Answering Allegation 6, Guess which Messiah did not fulfil a supposed "military aggression" sign 😗😗Okay we still wait the second coming but to date it IS NOT fulfilled Answering Allegation 7, And this proves what? NO Jewish Rabbis followed Jesus only Fishermen & low standing citizens.. what exactly does that mean 😅Also a religion that made even Brutes submit indicates its true since it TOUCHED THEIR HEARTS. Answering Allegation 8, Compulsion is not accepted Answering Allegation 9, Islam conforms Jesus message but not Paul or whatever Roman Pagans devised. Negus of Ethiopia remarked both messages are from the same lantern... Answering Allegation 10, Scholars agree upon that you need to be knowledgeable in Islam before venturing to read any scripture whether it be Bible or Vida, so its requirement dependent.
I forgot to mention regarding the claim "only simple low status accepted Islam in the beginning"~ that apart from Al-Negashi the Abyssinia King believing in Islam (Wise high status Christian King) there were wealthy high status Sahaba (companions) being 'Abd al-Rahman ibn 'Awf, Uthman bin 'Afan, Hakim ibn Hizam, Thumamah ibn Uthal (Controlled all granaries) & others. Note: I don't know about the Indian King report being true of any way so I dismissed it, but allegedly he sent Ginger. (He was neither Jew nor Christian anyways so should not be included in reply)
Salam alaykoum dear brother, Honestly from the bottom of my heart : Thank you, may Allah bless you and reward. I am a Muslim apologist studying the Magisterium of the Catholic Church, I am talking with Traditional Catholics about Islam and about internal contradictions within the Magisterium on a daily basis so I am so happy when I see a brother responding with knowledge and wisdom to Thomas Aquinas objection's against Islam. I'd like to add that when somebody like Steve Ray quotes Aquinas against Islam it is rather funny as quite a few statements made by Aquinas in the the Summa Theologica clearly undercut many arguments Steve Ray uses against Islam (textbook example of when Novus Ordo 'Conservative' Catholics argue against Islam like Liberals protestants). You did an outstanding job in this video, may Allah bless you and reward you.
Wa alaykum as salaam brother and thanks for the feedback and encouragement. I hope we can look forward to you one day sharing your knowledge and findings in this area; I'm sure we can all learn a lot from it, inshaAllah. Please be in touch. JazaakAllah khairan. thatcanadianbrother@gmail.com
@@ThatCanadianBrother That actually could be the reason why yesterday was the first time in several months your videos have been shown on my TH-cam timeline. InshaAllah - Allah will allow your platform to grow (with or without the shadow ban)
Allegation #3 is literally criticizing Islam for its core doctrines being easily understood by both scholar and a layman unlike Trinity or incarnation where even the greatest theologians have struggled to grasp it.
Exactly. I'm glad you also agreed with my assessment of that "allegation". It's more like a compliment. Yes, Islam is easily understood by all. The Truth must be available and accessible to both the scholar and layman alike.
@@ThatCanadianBrother Nah, this is sheer nonsense. Anyone who actually dives deep into it knows that it is not simple, whether it comes to Qadr; the attributes of God; Quranic interpretation, Hadith science,etc etc. Sure, it manifests itself as a simple religion among the masses but that’s because the masses don’t give a shit about doctrines
@@stquodvultdeus4613 The Prophet (pbuh) actually said to *not* dive deeper into things like Qadr, the essence of God, etc. Qur'anic interpretation and hadith sciences can be done by those who *do* have the intellectual caliber and training for it; it is not a requirement for salvation and the average Muslim is not expected to do it. On the other hand, I would argue, belief in the Trinity *is* a requirement for salvation in Catholic Christianity. That is because if you get the Trinity wrong, you will get Jesus wrong, and you will get the Crucifixion and Resurrection wrong (ie. from the Catholic perspective).
@@ThatCanadianBrother You don’t have a choice but to dive deeper, otherwise you can’t eradicate heresy. That’s exactly why debates about the sifat are still very alive today. I think that’s exactly what Imam Ahmad said, at first he didn’t want to debate and use logic when it comes to the attributes, but he was left no choice and hence you see him using logic against the Jahmiyyah. Also, the way you define the requirements of salvation leads to fideism and the implications of fideism itself are far from simple. Because if quranic interpretation, hadith science, etc etc should be not be investigated by the laymen that how do you which scholars are the truthful ones? Which scholars should the simple laymen use? Because even if yoi believe in the Quran is the word of God that doesn’t mean ur done. Sunni, shia, ibadi? What is ahlus Sunnah wal jamaa and what is ahlul bidah? So you have to investigate yourself how the quran and the sunnah is to be interpreted, unless you wwnt to be a fideist. But fideism is random, and not simple at all, for you can’t justify what you believe then
Whoever is seeing this video should like this video for algorithm, this should be on the top, great Work, Sadat. May Allah bless you for it. (Please indicate viewers to like your videos next time).
@tachikoma7757 no muslim scholar came up with anything original. Prophet mo copied parts of heretical Christian writings into his book as well as Arabian myths and Persian fables. No Muslim scholaf understands Thomas Aquinas so they stay away from him.
The truth should be accessible rationally and logically, as in Islam. Claiming a belief to be true yet it defies logic in its system of beliefs gives no benchmark for deciding the truth on the matter.
First time here I so enjoyed your presentation on Aquinas. I did not know he wrote about Islam my mom being Catholic loved him. Ty for enlightening us all about him. Your very knowledgeable & funny too:)
Also another point Sadat. You suggest that modern day Christians would naturally have more knowledge of Islam than eg Aquinas. True to an extent but most do not possess Aquinas’ intellect and additionally the Quran had already been translated into Latin in Toledo by a team set up by Peter the venerable. Additionally there had been lots of contact between Christians and Muslims during the crusades, which were still ongoing during Aquinas’ writing period in the 1260s CE.
This is the gazaly of Christianity? Subhanallah, many of these points fail on basic logic. It says more about Christian doctrine that this person is their major scholar
That's not all, his work is alarmingly close to Al-ghazali's material, even in general formatting - whom as you know came before Aquinas. Even today, their greatest apologists like William Lane Craig rely on Al-Ghazali's version of argumentation for God in their apologia.
The preacher doesnt realise carnal pleasure in paradise does not equate to giving free reign to carnal pleasure in this world. He needs a lesson in logic
Well done for exposing the ignorance and hypocrisy of these Christian haters. Shouldn't Christians start by rejecting the Prophets and saintly men of the Old Testament who had multiple wives on the premises that they were following carnal pleasures? Shouldn't 😊Paul of Tarsus and his teachings not be rejected when he says celibacy is the ideal while marriage is for those who cannot control their carnal desires? 1Corinthians7:8-9 In short then, most Biblical Prophets who are polygamous (representatives of God), and Christians who marry are led by their carnal desires, and btw are following Christianity.
I am enjoying this - for the argument of Aquinas on believers being seduced by carnal pleasures, I assume he intended some of the pleasures prepared for believers in Paradise and I do not think this was reflected in your reply. And Allah knows best. For the clergy such as Aquinas, relations with women were not allowed as marriage was and still is, as you know, forbidden to them. I suspect this also impacted on the sharpness of words used by him. His use of the word ‘carnal’, albeit in translation has a rather unpleasant connotation even though relations in marriage in Islam are very healthy, clean and a source of reward.
Did you even watch the video? This was a much better response than Syfe's response which was riddled with Tu Quoqe's. Sadat calmy dismantled all the arguments using our own sources, and without flipping the argument back on Christianity
Most of their arguments really come down to "muh mozlems have different morals from ours!!1!", which is a faulty argument, because if Islam is from God, then you have a problem with what God has ordained. Imagine a pagan made an argument against Christianity, and it's just "Christians don't sacrifice humans, that's so immoral and thus their religion is wrong". I'm sure any reasonable Christian would see how these polemics based on morality is faulty. The only valid arguments when it comes to morality is when you call out contradictions and hypocrisy in the morality of others, like we Muslims do against Christians when they claim that worshiping other than God is immoral, but then they go and worship a man (Jesus), his mother, and an angel (Gabriel, the Holy Spirit, thus showing their inconsistency.
@@SOX-9 In our eyes, whenever we see Catholics say "We should pray to the Holy Mary" that is seen as worship by us, whether you agree or not. So in our eyes, you're definitely worshipping Mary, mother of Jesus.
@agellidmalik so I can define Islam based on my own perception of its practices, right? In my eyes, whoever wrote the quran just copied things around them, even the fabricated stories about Jesus, so Islam is a religion made by a human copycat. There is no way Allah could have gotten the Trinity wrong because he would know it even if it is wrong.
@agellidmalik is that how it is? You would not care about what people actually believe, but only what you think . OK, what if I say Muslims are pagan for praying to a rock. That is what I think
Straw arguments. Read the whole Summa contra gentiles, but before you read it make sure you have a deep understanding of both Aristotelian metaphysics AND the scholastic method of defining terms, this is something which prevents wrongful interpretations
Just know that the more apologetic we are the stronger others remain in their own religions. All these arguements wont help bringing anyone to the truth as everyone gets quotes that favour their arguement.
Absolutely disgusting saying things like that about the Aussie accent! Shocking coming from a Canadian. You content is great though just wish it was in Aussie accent
If you call out 'life', it may respond, but there is no life for whom you call. My brother Allahuma baarik and grant you eloquence.. These are individuals filled with animosity towards Islam, and undoubtedly, most of their criticism stems from their political inclinations that are nurtured under the auspices of their masters .. They only thrive on spreading these ideas. They have no valid argument..
John of Damascus called it the heresy of the Ishmaelites. He believed an Arian monk influenced Muhammad. 10:26 "The truth should be *equally* accessible to everyone... and not only to those who have studied Koine Greek for 5 years..." You don't even believe that. When I bring out the Quran the first thing a Muslim says is, "Do you know Arabic? No? Then you don't understand." Stop being a hypocrite.
Please. The church was consistent in its refusal to allow generally accessible translations of the Bible available to them masses. Especially in the earlier centuries, the papacy ensured that even its general priesthood did not have access to Bibles, even if they could read. Standard approved liturgy was what was used for mass. Quran is best in Arabic, which is a current spoken language, unlike koine Greek or Latin. However translations have been available for a long time and are encouraged. The first known Quran translation was into Persian, circa 10-12th century.
If you are a Muslim that is trying to derive legal rulings from the Qur'an, then it will be expected that you know Arabic and have some training in Islamic jurisprudence. If you're a non-Muslim and you're quoting an English translation of the Qur'an to try to prove to Muslims that you understand the Qur'an better than Islamic scholars-- then yes, we will expect you to know Arabic as a starter, in order to even consider what you're saying. The truth of the Qur'an *is* equally accessible to everyone. 'God is One" is easy to understand in Arabic, English, Hebrew, Japanese, Spanish, etc. "God is three in one" or "God is three persons" is difficult and unnatural to understand and grasp in any language, despite however much academic training one might have. So you are comparing apples and oranges. In order to access the basic truth of Islamic monotheism, you do not need Arabic. In order to access the understanding of the Trinity, you actually need much more than just Greek grammar or Latin; you need to be a super-philosopher as well. What I'm saying here is neither hypocritical or controversial. The idea that Islamic doctrine is simpler and easier to understand is generally acknowledged. I mean, that's exactly what Thomas Aquinas was saying too, wasn't he? Many Orientalist scholars of the history of Islam have also expressed that it was the simplicity and accessibility of the Islamic doctrine of God's Oneness that helped facilitate historical conversion to Islam.
@@thetriumphsprintShows your ignorance of history. Parchment was expensive. There was no printing press. It took a long time for monks to hand copy. The literacy rate was low in the world. Go back to dawah school. The hypocrisy. When you watch debates the Muslim will always say the English is not correct you need to read it in Arabic yet this guy says anyone can understand the Quran and you don't need 5 years of Koine Greek. It sounds like I need 5 years of Arabic. Hypocrites.
@@ThatCanadianBrotherSo I don't need the Quran to understand Allah right? So then why do we need the Quran? You got caught in your hypocrisy. You said at 10:26 , "The truth should be equally accessible to everyone... and not only to those who have studied Koine Greek for 5 years..." So in order for me to know the whole truth I have to study Arabic. Not only that, but I need hadiths too. Do I need tafsir books too?
In metaphysics his intellect is apparent - his discussion of matter, form, efficient and final cause etc - all these are much closer to reality than the social constructivism of post-modernism. However his refutation of Islam is frankly based on uninformed generalizations, cherry picking of verses out of context and other fallacious arguments.
Also Aquinus i belive married and had sex with a child. And had loads of other wives some of who were related to him. And had his followers the thomists take sex slaves plus take his share of the plumder of battle. And have his captives decapitated in front of him.. That is some of the reasons we dont consider Aqunis the best of men.
it was too long and they don't want their audience which is their god hearing many thing about infidel so it's better to pick a little of it and talk much more about their side. man even "The actual content of Aquinas’s critique is negligible. " literally are on long elaboration text that is supposedly their respond on the critique
@@fdav3537 He is really a nothing burger "Aquinas’s critique" be like "Izlam falze cuz violenze" while ignoring all the violence and calls of genocide by his own god in the bible, this is just low level apologetics
@@Sheragust good, let me speak your language, 'aquinaz iz nothing cuz hipocrizy', right? i want to praise ,what a flexible thinking, you can just point out about a christian in relationship with minor when someone call it out regarding muhammad, you know, cus of hipocrisy, right?
@@fdav3537 Funny how you picked this topic out of any other one 😂 From Thomas Aquinas : "Since marriage is effected by way of a contract, it comes under the ordinance of positive law like other contracts. Consequently according to law it is determined that marriage may not be contracted before the age of discretion when each party is capable of sufficient deliberation about marriage, and of mutual fulfilment of the marriage debt, and that marriages otherwise contracted are void. Now for the most part this age is the 14th year in males and the *12th* *year* *in* *women:* but since the ordinances of positive law are consequent upon what happens in the majority of cases, *if* *anyone* *reach* *the* *required* *perfection* *before* *the* *aforesaid* *age*, *so* *that* *nature* *and* *reason* *are* *sufficiently* *developed* *to* *supply* *the* *lack* *of* *age,* *the* *marriage* *is* *not* *annulled.* Wherefore if the parties who marry before the age of puًًberty have marital intercourse before the aforesaid age, their marriage is none the less perpetually indissoluble."
@@fdav3537 So incase you don't understand.. he endorsed marriage and intercourse with 12 y o, and if they mature earlier their marriage is allowed (not he isn't referring to just arrangement before consummation because arrangement is at 7)
Actually, they did that and far worst during last 2 hundred centuries of colonization of Muslim countries. BTW, this vid was a factual refutation of sh*t directed against our Prophet and religion. Do you not believe that people have a right to defend themselves against lies?
He's refuting the criticism of a medieval scholar. If someone makes an accusation, are you not allowed to respond to it? It's also over the internet, not face-to-face in their country, you're literally getting upset over nothing lol.
@@CostcoChicken Totally misundertood what he wrote, he wasn't referring to respond to their arguments. in a lot of muslms countries people would loose their lives for that
Please brother let's not use these stupid thumbnails 🤦🏾♂️. Subhanallah Muslims do these ridiculous things but get triggered and mad when non Muslims do horrible thumbnails about our great figures. Be consistent guys let's not be munafiqs
Talking bad about Aquinas while absolutely straw-manning him and not even refuting his claims. To me ( a Kafir and Mushrik ) it seems like the Quran contradicts itself, because you didn’t explain and ad the context to his mentioned verses.
@@Sheragust He didn’t even respond to the verses Aquinas mentioned. All he said was „ Aquinas says we are hateful??? Well here it says …“. He didn’t represent Aquinas‘s arguments honestly.
@@tafelsalz4662 You realize that Aquinas in his original works never cited a verse or a hadith ? Biblical scholar Alfred Guillaume called Aquinas attempt in critiquing Islam to be poor in knowledge of the Islamic scripture " A work written under such conditions is likely to be gravely deficient " Source : Christian and Muslim Theology as Represented by Al-Shahrastānī and St Thomas Aquinas, Page 40 Christians would blast anyone who doesn't have knowledge of their Church tradition or the scripture while critiquing it. Apply that to Aquinas please.
@@Sheragust I know that Aquinas never cited verses in his argumentation. But other people did it for him, due to the fact that he only gave it a short passage in Summa contra gentiles. And The creator of this Video is an absolute joker, he doesn’t know how to properly respond to arguments. And I’m pretty sure that he has not read the actual piece on Islam in summa contra gentiles, or the modified versions of it from Thomistic scholars.
@Boo-sc9gz Oh that's interesting.I didn't know that verse. I'm not religious by the way. I'm a cultural Christian. I like Churches, Christmas and Jesus. I look on Christianity as a fecund Illusion...
I think that is what Aquinas meant yes. There are many other delights prepared for those in paradise as elucidated in the Quran but Aquinas seems to have overlooked them. I believe he had access to a Latin translation of the Quran. If so, not sure what the justification for such selectivity would be. And Allah knows best.
@@eigengrau77 that many people follow the example of Jesus, they prefer preach the Gospel rather to married. It is regarding to the second objection of this video.
How do you know he never married? The earliest accounts you have only contain details on 3 out of 30 years of his life and are all silent on his marital status. Logically speaking, it would've been very odd for a man in that culture to not be married at that age but we find no discussions of it in the Bible which leads one to the logical conclusion that he was living a normal life until the start of his ministry.
@@blackcatmuezza9338 We know that Jesus never married because all the information transmitted to us shows that. Also prophet Jeremiah never married. So, there was not any problem to be single.
Really, Thomas was right in the first point, The Paradise is Islam is very materialistic. The promise of God is to give you what ever you want if you accept and convert to Islam. There is no sin in Muslim Paradise then you can do whatever you want.
So if this life is a test against the flesh and you pass, what is wrong with getting what you did not accept in the flesh? Another thing, do you think Muslims worry about what they going to get in the next life? Yes it sounds great but meeting GOD is the most important. Even if what we're promised doesn't manifest in the next life, is it not a good deterrent in this life? Your lack to understand will never allow you to understand. Hell is not something I would like to go to, so it is a damn good deterrent. We don't only live this life in the best way possible but this life is preparation for the next which keeps our sinful ways low. How hard would you worship GOD if you never thought of hell being the consequence for the lack thereof? Reward is a motivator. Just look out of the box and not remain in the box
@@arefinkamal7654 because the Paradise in Islam is very materialistic. Virgins for men, and whatever you want God, will give you. If a Woman wants 10 men, she will have in Paradise. Men will have wine, and we can continue talking about it. Christian Paradise is more about to enjoy God. From Christian perspective, yes Islam Paradise is very materialistic.
And if Jesus "died" for our sins..WHY WOULD AN INNOCENT MAN DIE FOR OTHER PEOPLES SINS WHILE THEY STILL SINNING UNACCOUNTABLY? That's horrible and doesn't make any sense
Exactly right! So called rebuttals isn’t that those things are lies or ignorance [they are correct and did happen] it’s rebuttals through you can find so much contradiction in the hadith and ”prove” anything.
@MACH15-20 The hadiths are the prophet's sayings and they also include alot of his explanation of the quran and God ordered us to obey and listen to his prophet which makes the hadiths which are the prophet's sayings authorative and most of thomas the clown's allegations are pseudo-historical claims about the prophet and his companions which when we analyse the historical documents about the prophet it becomes visible how laughable those allegations are It sucks that your favorite theologian is a lying ignoramus 😂
@@MuttonBiryani1994 The seera are taken from the hadiths we dont accept books that are based on anonymous chain of narration like ibn ishaq's book or al waqadi And You dont dictate for us what we should accept as our tradition
I'm sorry to ask this question ...but what do we have to lower our gaze from ,when a Muslim female is dressed in a Ninja Costume ?! Is the Ninja Costume just a traditional Arab Dress trend ?! Does it have any backing in the religious text ? I happen to think that the Ninja Dress( aka Burqa) is a purely Arab Desert Custom that defies religious text ,defies Human Fitra & pleases nobody except Extremists who insist to confuse people into thinking that somehow their local Arab Dress Customs that stem from Geographic necessities are 100% aligned with what Islam teaches ...??!!!
The awrah of a woman doesn't cover her face. I assume you're talking about niqab which covers their face, which in my experience most women don't wear since it's an obviously optional. Where do you live that every woman has her face covered?
@@jeewa7114 Precisely, Why are muslims acting as if covering a face of a Woman is religious teaching ,When it’s not. This extremism leads to very negative consequences… In Kingdom of SA … The Wahhabi so called (Vice Police) were chasing women in malls …rebuking them for showing their manicure when handling merchandise … What the Hell is wrong with these loonies!! Now they’re attending Parties of washed up Who*es from Australia who publically insult God & his messengers with blasphemous lyrics … Usury is all over the financial sector & not a single one is speaking out….!!!!Astonishing approach to religion.
If you are a Muslim, beware of mocking religion. This will take you out of Islam, because covering the face and wearing clothing that covers the entire body for a woman is part of the religion according to Muslim consensus.
CHAPTERS:
00:00 - Introduction
01:36 - ALLEGATION 1: The Prophet gave “free rein to carnal pleasure.”
05:23 - ALLEGATION 2: The Sahaba (Companions of the Prophet) were “carnal men.”
09:55 - ALLEGATION 3: The doctrines of Islam appeal to the simple-minded.
11:32 - ALLEGATION 4: The Prophet taught “fables”.
12:33 - ALLEGATION 5: The Prophet did not perform any miracles.
14:44 - ALLEGATION 6: The Prophet’s only evidence was military aggression.
17:58 - ALLEGATION 7: No wise Jewish/Christian men accepted Islam in the beginning.
22:30 - ALLEGATION 8: The Prophet forced people to become Muslim.
24:57 - Thomas Aquinas’ endorsement of religious violence, Crusades
26:28 - Thomas Aquinas’ views on heretics, apostates, and torture
27:30 - Aquinas’ endorsement of the oppression of the Jews
29:26 - ALLEGATION 9: Islam distorts the legacy and teachings of the previous Prophets
31:03 - ALLEGATION 10: The Prophet completely forbade Muslims from ever reading the Bible
35:38 - Another example of Aquinas’ negative view on Jews
36:08 - Closing remarks
Answering Allegation 1 from the Holy Quran: Surah 23 THE BELEIVERS
1. Successful are the believers.
2. Those who are humble in their prayers.
3. Those who avoid nonsense.
4. Those who work for charity.
5. Those who safeguard their chastity.
6. Except from their spouses, or their dependents-for they are free from blame.
7. But whoever seeks anything beyond that-these are the transgressors.
8. Those who are faithful to their trusts and pledges.
9. Those who safeguard their prayers.
10. These are the inheritors.
11. Who will inherit Paradise, wherein they will dwell forever.
What about touching? harassment or even shaking hands?
لَأنْ يُطعَنَ في رأسِ رجلٍ بِمِخْيَطٍ من حديدٍ خيرٌ من أن يمَسَّ امرأةً لا تَحِلُّ له
الراوي : معقل بن يسار | المحدث : الألباني | المصدر : السلسلة الصحيحة | الصفحة أو الرقم : 226 |
خلاصة حكم المحدث : إسناده جيد | التخريج : أخرجه الروياني في ((المسند)) (1283)، والطبراني (20/212) (487) واللفظ لهما، والبيهقي كما في ((الترغيب والترهيب)) للمنذري (3/26) باختلاف يسير
To be stabbed in the head with an Iron needle is better than touching unlawful woman
Answering Allegation 2 logically, Islam restricted whatever carnal impulses they had AND they submitted!
Alcohol FORBIDDEN
Women FORBIDDEN except for their spouses, or their dependents.
Racism & feeling superior FORBIDDEN & forcefully HUMPLED
Backbiting & gleefully tarnish others FORBIDDEN
Wearing silk/gold for men & walking stark naked (The western carnal fetish) FORBIDDEN
Answering Allegation 3, A creed should be simple & clear lest people deviate like Christianity, also were the fellowship of Jesus philosophers or fishermen & shepherds?
Answering Allegation 4, Its proven revelation from God whom is a witness over everything.
Answering Allegation 5, Pepples chanting glorification to Allah (imagine lifeless stones not a once empty husk of man but SOMETHING that is not supposed to be living comes to life & chant Tasbih even when passed around), healing(with spit/Dua) & feeding/watering the masses amongst many mentioned in Sahih Hadith.
We have the longest lasting existing miracle of any prophet that is the Quran! 1400+ years & counting 😎
Answering Allegation 6, Guess which Messiah did not fulfil a supposed "military aggression" sign 😗😗Okay we still wait the second coming but to date it IS NOT fulfilled
Answering Allegation 7, And this proves what? NO Jewish Rabbis followed Jesus only Fishermen & low standing citizens.. what exactly does that mean 😅Also a religion that made even Brutes submit indicates its true since it TOUCHED THEIR HEARTS.
Answering Allegation 8, Compulsion is not accepted
Answering Allegation 9, Islam conforms Jesus message but not Paul or whatever Roman Pagans devised. Negus of Ethiopia remarked both messages are from the same lantern...
Answering Allegation 10, Scholars agree upon that you need to be knowledgeable in Islam before venturing to read any scripture whether it be Bible or Vida, so its requirement dependent.
@@EslamNawitowell done my Muslim brother
JZK
I forgot to mention regarding the claim "only simple low status accepted Islam in the beginning"~ that apart from Al-Negashi the Abyssinia King believing in Islam (Wise high status Christian King) there were wealthy high status Sahaba (companions) being 'Abd al-Rahman ibn 'Awf, Uthman bin 'Afan, Hakim ibn Hizam, Thumamah ibn Uthal (Controlled all granaries) & others.
Note: I don't know about the Indian King report being true of any way so I dismissed it, but allegedly he sent Ginger. (He was neither Jew nor Christian anyways so should not be included in reply)
Jazakullah khair. I personally skipped the cathcuck parts just to see your rebuttals. I'm tired of these people's lies.
Very nice work Sadat!
❤❤❤
Brother Paul Alhamdulillah less goooo
Salam alaykoum dear brother,
Honestly from the bottom of my heart : Thank you, may Allah bless you and reward.
I am a Muslim apologist studying the Magisterium of the Catholic Church, I am talking with Traditional Catholics about Islam and about internal contradictions within the Magisterium on a daily basis so I am so happy when I see a brother responding with knowledge and wisdom to Thomas Aquinas objection's against Islam.
I'd like to add that when somebody like Steve Ray quotes Aquinas against Islam it is rather funny as quite a few statements made by Aquinas in the the Summa Theologica clearly undercut many arguments Steve Ray uses against Islam (textbook example of when Novus Ordo 'Conservative' Catholics argue against Islam like Liberals protestants).
You did an outstanding job in this video, may Allah bless you and reward you.
Wa alaykum as salaam brother and thanks for the feedback and encouragement. I hope we can look forward to you one day sharing your knowledge and findings in this area; I'm sure we can all learn a lot from it, inshaAllah. Please be in touch. JazaakAllah khairan.
thatcanadianbrother@gmail.com
Glad to have you back Sadat bhai. InshaAllah see you this Sunday in Downtown
I never went away, bhai; I have the feeling I might be shadow-banned..?
@@ThatCanadianBrother That actually could be the reason why yesterday was the first time in several months your videos have been shown on my TH-cam timeline.
InshaAllah - Allah will allow your platform to grow (with or without the shadow ban)
Allegation #3 is literally criticizing Islam for its core doctrines being easily understood by both scholar and a layman unlike Trinity or incarnation where even the greatest theologians have struggled to grasp it.
Exactly. I'm glad you also agreed with my assessment of that "allegation". It's more like a compliment. Yes, Islam is easily understood by all. The Truth must be available and accessible to both the scholar and layman alike.
@@ThatCanadianBrotherabsolutely 💯 the author of confusion is Satan not God 😂
@@ThatCanadianBrother Nah, this is sheer nonsense. Anyone who actually dives deep into it knows that it is not simple, whether it comes to Qadr; the attributes of God; Quranic interpretation, Hadith science,etc etc. Sure, it manifests itself as a simple religion among the masses but that’s because the masses don’t give a shit about doctrines
@@stquodvultdeus4613 The Prophet (pbuh) actually said to *not* dive deeper into things like Qadr, the essence of God, etc. Qur'anic interpretation and hadith sciences can be done by those who *do* have the intellectual caliber and training for it; it is not a requirement for salvation and the average Muslim is not expected to do it. On the other hand, I would argue, belief in the Trinity *is* a requirement for salvation in Catholic Christianity. That is because if you get the Trinity wrong, you will get Jesus wrong, and you will get the Crucifixion and Resurrection wrong (ie. from the Catholic perspective).
@@ThatCanadianBrother You don’t have a choice but to dive deeper, otherwise you can’t eradicate heresy. That’s exactly why debates about the sifat are still very alive today. I think that’s exactly what Imam Ahmad said, at first he didn’t want to debate and use logic when it comes to the attributes, but he was left no choice and hence you see him using logic against the Jahmiyyah. Also, the way you define the requirements of salvation leads to fideism and the implications of fideism itself are far from simple. Because if quranic interpretation, hadith science, etc etc should be not be investigated by the laymen that how do you which scholars are the truthful ones? Which scholars should the simple laymen use? Because even if yoi believe in the Quran is the word of God that doesn’t mean ur done. Sunni, shia, ibadi? What is ahlus Sunnah wal jamaa and what is ahlul bidah? So you have to investigate yourself how the quran and the sunnah is to be interpreted, unless you wwnt to be a fideist. But fideism is random, and not simple at all, for you can’t justify what you believe then
Whoever is seeing this video should like this video for algorithm, this should be on the top, great Work, Sadat. May Allah bless you for it.
(Please indicate viewers to like your videos next time).
Absolutely this video is a gem 👏👏
American Catholic quoting Aquinas on Islam is like The Blind Leading The Blind
Fradd is an Aussie
Muslims attempting to throw shade on other religions is a monkey getting mad after a book is place in front of it.
Allahuma Barik brother Sadat. Amazing refutation video once again! Quite the nail in the coffin. Jazakallah Khair for your efforts.
Wa iyyaakum, brother; may Allah bless you.
SADAT IS BACK, you know its gonna be a good one.
No wonder no Muslim scholars ever refute this Thomas Aquinas because his arguement is based on fallacies.
Alla scholars are like people thar cannot even walk alone alrun and are up against Usain Bolt. What do they do? Walk away.
@@artifexdei3671 says the coping xtian.
@tachikoma7757 no muslim scholar came up with anything original. Prophet mo copied parts of heretical Christian writings into his book as well as Arabian myths and Persian fables. No Muslim scholaf understands Thomas Aquinas so they stay away from him.
@@artifexdei3671 not true . just lies lol
@@SawsanYasen-nu5vo where are they to refute Thomas?
The truth should be accessible rationally and logically, as in Islam. Claiming a belief to be true yet it defies logic in its system of beliefs gives no benchmark for deciding the truth on the matter.
The answer to the first allegation was basically „I don’t care that my book says that, because it also says other wise“.
Jazakallah Khair from your fellow Canadian brother :) May Allah (SWT) increase you in knowledge to benefit the Ummah
Wa iyyaakum, "That Fellow Canadian Brother." :) Ameen to your du`a. May Allah bless you and family.
First time here I so enjoyed your presentation on Aquinas.
I did not know he wrote about Islam my mom being Catholic loved him. Ty for enlightening us all about him.
Your very knowledgeable & funny too:)
Thanks for leaving a comment. I hope you'll stick around. :)
@@ThatCanadianBrother
Yes I will stick around:)
Ty
Also another point Sadat. You suggest that modern day Christians would naturally have more knowledge of Islam than eg Aquinas. True to an extent but most do not possess Aquinas’ intellect and additionally the Quran had already been translated into Latin in Toledo by a team set up by Peter the venerable. Additionally there had been lots of contact between Christians and Muslims during the crusades, which were still ongoing during Aquinas’ writing period in the 1260s CE.
Awesome content Sadat. The end of Equinos’s nonsense in one comprehensive video ❤️💕.
This is the gazaly of Christianity? Subhanallah, many of these points fail on basic logic. It says more about Christian doctrine that this person is their major scholar
yeah christian scholarship has produced very few great critical thinkers. probably because they constantly feared excommunication and death.
@@hamzakhairi4765 Prejudice on your part possibly
In sha Allah...the more " slanders " we got from these sort of peoples...the more peoples will convert into Islam.
It doesn't work like that
that was so civil and nice you are awesome
I really enjoyed this video and benefited. Jazak Allah khair ❤
Wa iyyaak.
500 years later and no one has yet to address the points head on
Jazzakallah khair, good to see you back Sadat bhai.
Wa iyyaakum, akhi. I never went away. :) I might just be shadow-banned though, I dunno.
Fantastic... Another classic mA.
Allahuma Baarik.
Ghazali Or Ibn Tayymiyah of Christianity 😂😂 This is disrespectful for both of those people
These were very poor arguments. I expected better from someone like Aquinas.
What's so great about him? He sounds like the David Wood of his time.
@@shahidabdoullakhanzorovr1564
He is one of their greatest theologians lmao 😂
@@shaka769 From a time when laity wasn't even allowed to read the Bible LOL
Amazing refutation. In fact, Aquinas was influenced by Muslims (Averroes and Avicenna)
That's not all, his work is alarmingly close to Al-ghazali's material, even in general formatting - whom as you know came before Aquinas. Even today, their greatest apologists like William Lane Craig rely on Al-Ghazali's version of argumentation for God in their apologia.
The preacher doesnt realise carnal pleasure in paradise does not equate to giving free reign to carnal pleasure in this world. He needs a lesson in logic
What is bad remains bad what is good remains good. Logic remains the same here and after, before and now.
Thank you so much!! That was really helpful.
Well done for exposing the ignorance and hypocrisy of these Christian haters. Shouldn't Christians start by rejecting the Prophets and saintly men of the Old Testament who had multiple wives on the premises that they were following carnal pleasures? Shouldn't 😊Paul of Tarsus and his teachings not be rejected when he says celibacy is the ideal while marriage is for those who cannot control their carnal desires? 1Corinthians7:8-9 In short then, most Biblical Prophets who are polygamous (representatives of God), and Christians who marry are led by their carnal desires, and btw are following Christianity.
Thomas Aquinas is 100% right about Islam ☪️
you guys are dumb pagans that follow your dumb priests
@@KallCall how are you not able to understand the Trinity? 3 person who are one. Those persons share divinity which is God.
@@sirkermitthefirstoffrogeth9622no I don't have a problem with the trinity I don't think it's hard to understand I was just angry with this dude
I am enjoying this - for the argument of Aquinas on believers being seduced by carnal pleasures, I assume he intended some of the pleasures prepared for believers in Paradise and I do not think this was reflected in your reply. And Allah knows best.
For the clergy such as Aquinas, relations with women were not allowed as marriage was and still is, as you know, forbidden to them. I suspect this also impacted on the sharpness of words used by him. His use of the word ‘carnal’, albeit in translation has a rather unpleasant connotation even though relations in marriage in Islam are very healthy, clean and a source of reward.
JazakAllahu khair
Wa iyyaakum, brother.
Jazakallah khayr
Wa iyyakum, brother.
Alhamdulillah for Islam
جزاك اللهُ خير
Wa iyyaakum.
this is supposed to be a refutation?? where’s the refutation💀😭
Did you even watch the video? This was a much better response than Syfe's response which was riddled with Tu Quoqe's.
Sadat calmy dismantled all the arguments using our own sources, and without flipping the argument back on Christianity
@@HxzaifaaaMajor cap 😂😂😂
@@HxzaifaaaMajor cap 😂😂😂
There is no refutation 😂
MashaAllah awesome
We need people like him especially during these times when alot are scared to speak the haqq
Lmao a Muslim talking about people stuck in past centuries is hilarious
An 8-year old posting hate comments on my channel is hilarious too. :)
جزاك الله خير
Wa iyyaakum.
Most of their arguments really come down to "muh mozlems have different morals from ours!!1!", which is a faulty argument, because if Islam is from God, then you have a problem with what God has ordained. Imagine a pagan made an argument against Christianity, and it's just "Christians don't sacrifice humans, that's so immoral and thus their religion is wrong". I'm sure any reasonable Christian would see how these polemics based on morality is faulty.
The only valid arguments when it comes to morality is when you call out contradictions and hypocrisy in the morality of others, like we Muslims do against Christians when they claim that worshiping other than God is immoral, but then they go and worship a man (Jesus), his mother, and an angel (Gabriel, the Holy Spirit, thus showing their inconsistency.
You should at least get the trinity right given how you started your argument. Who ever wrote the Quran got it wrong.
@@SOX-9 In our eyes, whenever we see Catholics say "We should pray to the Holy Mary" that is seen as worship by us, whether you agree or not. So in our eyes, you're definitely worshipping Mary, mother of Jesus.
@agellidmalik so I can define Islam based on my own perception of its practices, right? In my eyes, whoever wrote the quran just copied things around them, even the fabricated stories about Jesus, so Islam is a religion made by a human copycat. There is no way Allah could have gotten the Trinity wrong because he would know it even if it is wrong.
@agellidmalik is that how it is? You would not care about what people actually believe, but only what you think . OK, what if I say Muslims are pagan for praying to a rock. That is what I think
@@agellidmalik bowing to a rock is praying to a statue
Straw arguments. Read the whole Summa contra gentiles, but before you read it make sure you have a deep understanding of both Aristotelian metaphysics AND the scholastic method of defining terms, this is something which prevents wrongful interpretations
Just know that the more apologetic we are the stronger others remain in their own religions. All these arguements wont help bringing anyone to the truth as everyone gets quotes that favour their arguement.
Absolutely disgusting saying things like that about the Aussie accent! Shocking coming from a Canadian.
You content is great though just wish it was in Aussie accent
haha! To each their own! :) Peace.
Man I love this guy!! Can't believe I just found him now,he's one of the few who speaking the truth
May Allah reward you with goodness
And you as well; Ameen.
John of Damascus and Aquinus would be great friends
Great video brother
alhamdulillah for islam
May Allah bless you
And you as well, brother.
We muslim just need Allah,prophet muhammad s.a.w and Al Quran are enough.
So very true my brother
Very nice
Remember me when you’re famous bro ISA ❤️
Who are you? :P
Syfetalk responded to a different video on the same subject
If you call out 'life', it may respond, but there is no life for whom you call. My brother Allahuma baarik and grant you eloquence..
These are individuals filled with animosity towards Islam, and undoubtedly, most of their criticism stems from their political inclinations that are nurtured under the auspices of their masters ..
They only thrive on spreading these ideas. They have no valid argument..
May Allah bless you and your loved ones.
John of Damascus called it the heresy of the Ishmaelites. He believed an Arian monk influenced Muhammad.
10:26 "The truth should be *equally* accessible to everyone... and not only to those who have studied Koine Greek for 5 years..." You don't even believe that. When I bring out the Quran the first thing a Muslim says is, "Do you know Arabic? No? Then you don't understand." Stop being a hypocrite.
Please. The church was consistent in its refusal to allow generally accessible translations of the Bible available to them masses. Especially in the earlier centuries, the papacy ensured that even its general priesthood did not have access to Bibles, even if they could read. Standard approved liturgy was what was used for mass.
Quran is best in Arabic, which is a current spoken language, unlike koine Greek or Latin. However translations have been available for a long time and are encouraged. The first known Quran translation was into Persian, circa 10-12th century.
If you are a Muslim that is trying to derive legal rulings from the Qur'an, then it will be expected that you know Arabic and have some training in Islamic jurisprudence. If you're a non-Muslim and you're quoting an English translation of the Qur'an to try to prove to Muslims that you understand the Qur'an better than Islamic scholars-- then yes, we will expect you to know Arabic as a starter, in order to even consider what you're saying.
The truth of the Qur'an *is* equally accessible to everyone. 'God is One" is easy to understand in Arabic, English, Hebrew, Japanese, Spanish, etc. "God is three in one" or "God is three persons" is difficult and unnatural to understand and grasp in any language, despite however much academic training one might have. So you are comparing apples and oranges. In order to access the basic truth of Islamic monotheism, you do not need Arabic. In order to access the understanding of the Trinity, you actually need much more than just Greek grammar or Latin; you need to be a super-philosopher as well.
What I'm saying here is neither hypocritical or controversial. The idea that Islamic doctrine is simpler and easier to understand is generally acknowledged. I mean, that's exactly what Thomas Aquinas was saying too, wasn't he? Many Orientalist scholars of the history of Islam have also expressed that it was the simplicity and accessibility of the Islamic doctrine of God's Oneness that helped facilitate historical conversion to Islam.
@@ThatCanadianBrother on point ☝️
@@thetriumphsprintShows your ignorance of history. Parchment was expensive. There was no printing press. It took a long time for monks to hand copy. The literacy rate was low in the world. Go back to dawah school.
The hypocrisy. When you watch debates the Muslim will always say the English is not correct you need to read it in Arabic yet this guy says anyone can understand the Quran and you don't need 5 years of Koine Greek. It sounds like I need 5 years of Arabic. Hypocrites.
@@ThatCanadianBrotherSo I don't need the Quran to understand Allah right? So then why do we need the Quran?
You got caught in your hypocrisy. You said at 10:26 , "The truth should be equally accessible to everyone... and not only to those who have studied Koine Greek for 5 years..." So in order for me to know the whole truth I have to study Arabic. Not only that, but I need hadiths too. Do I need tafsir books too?
Aquinas' haircut is the sign of a man without logic
Thomas Aquinas is OG!
You cannot understand Thomas Aquinas because you are not at his level of intelligence.
@@TeweldeberhanTzeggai-Amenay lame argument lmao
In metaphysics his intellect is apparent - his discussion of matter, form, efficient and final cause etc - all these are much closer to reality than the social constructivism of post-modernism. However his refutation of Islam is frankly based on uninformed generalizations, cherry picking of verses out of context and other fallacious arguments.
I rly thought aquinas was better than this 💀💀
Also Aquinus i belive married and had sex with a child. And had loads of other wives some of who were related to him. And had his followers the thomists take sex slaves plus take his share of the plumder of battle. And have his captives decapitated in front of him.. That is some of the reasons we dont consider Aqunis the best of men.
This is fables. Where did you get this from sir? He was a virgin.
@@MuttonBiryani1994if you don't believe me Google it 'famous leader who married a 6 year old'
Why you don’t use the original Quotes of Thomas Aquinas?
it was too long and they don't want their audience which is their god hearing many thing about infidel so it's better to pick a little of it and talk much more about their side. man even "The actual content of Aquinas’s critique is negligible. " literally are on long elaboration text that is supposedly their respond on the critique
@@fdav3537 He is really a nothing burger "Aquinas’s critique" be like "Izlam falze cuz violenze" while ignoring all the violence and calls of genocide by his own god in the bible, this is just low level apologetics
@@Sheragust good, let me speak your language, 'aquinaz iz nothing cuz hipocrizy', right? i want to praise ,what a flexible thinking, you can just point out about a christian in relationship with minor when someone call it out regarding muhammad, you know, cus of hipocrisy, right?
@@fdav3537 Funny how you picked this topic out of any other one 😂
From Thomas Aquinas :
"Since marriage is effected by way of a contract, it comes under the ordinance of positive law like other contracts. Consequently according to law it is determined that marriage may not be contracted before the age of discretion when each party is capable of sufficient deliberation about marriage, and of mutual fulfilment of the marriage debt, and that marriages otherwise contracted are void. Now for the most part this age is the 14th year in males and the *12th* *year* *in* *women:* but since the ordinances of positive law are consequent upon what happens in the majority of cases, *if* *anyone* *reach* *the* *required* *perfection* *before* *the* *aforesaid* *age*, *so* *that* *nature* *and* *reason* *are* *sufficiently* *developed* *to* *supply* *the* *lack* *of* *age,* *the* *marriage* *is* *not* *annulled.* Wherefore if the parties who marry before the age of puًًberty have marital intercourse before the aforesaid age, their marriage is none the less perpetually indissoluble."
@@fdav3537 So incase you don't understand.. he endorsed marriage and intercourse with 12 y o, and if they mature earlier their marriage is allowed (not he isn't referring to just arrangement before consummation because arrangement is at 7)
Thomas the liar
Of course the better truthful videos don't get much views. Acquinas was another one of those foolish philosophers who had no idea
Can you imagine Christians or Atheists moving to Islamic countries and then talking sh*t about Muslim theologians and historical figures?
So to you valid criticism of the writings of theologians and historical figures = “talking sh*t”?
@@danalmariti509I think his point is: Muslim countries don’t tolerate criticism of their religion period.
Actually, they did that and far worst during last 2 hundred centuries of colonization of Muslim countries. BTW, this vid was a factual refutation of sh*t directed against our Prophet and religion. Do you not believe that people have a right to defend themselves against lies?
He's refuting the criticism of a medieval scholar. If someone makes an accusation, are you not allowed to respond to it? It's also over the internet, not face-to-face in their country, you're literally getting upset over nothing lol.
@@CostcoChicken Totally misundertood what he wrote, he wasn't referring to respond to their arguments. in a lot of muslms countries people would loose their lives for that
Please brother let's not use these stupid thumbnails 🤦🏾♂️. Subhanallah Muslims do these ridiculous things but get triggered and mad when non Muslims do horrible thumbnails about our great figures. Be consistent guys let's not be munafiqs
Wise person
How else can one attack the most perfect way of life?, when everything fails, lies non stop lol,
I saw a comment that was praising the idiot Aquinas 😂 they should see this video.
Next debunked the atheist/ex muslim who praised al rawandi and al maari
👍
Talking bad about Aquinas while absolutely straw-manning him and not even refuting his claims. To me ( a Kafir and Mushrik ) it seems like the Quran contradicts itself, because you didn’t explain and ad the context to his mentioned verses.
What exactly did he strawman ?
@@Sheragust He didn’t even respond to the verses Aquinas mentioned. All he said was „
Aquinas says we are hateful??? Well here it says …“. He didn’t represent Aquinas‘s arguments honestly.
@@tafelsalz4662 You realize that Aquinas in his original works never cited a verse or a hadith ?
Biblical scholar Alfred Guillaume called Aquinas attempt in critiquing Islam to be poor in knowledge of the Islamic scripture
" A work written under such conditions is likely to be gravely deficient "
Source : Christian and Muslim Theology as Represented by Al-Shahrastānī and St Thomas Aquinas, Page 40
Christians would blast anyone who doesn't have knowledge of their Church tradition or the scripture while critiquing it. Apply that to Aquinas please.
@@Sheragust I know that Aquinas never cited verses in his argumentation. But other people did it for him, due to the fact that he only gave it a short passage in Summa contra gentiles. And The creator of this Video is an absolute joker, he doesn’t know how to properly respond to arguments. And I’m pretty sure that he has not read the actual piece on Islam in summa contra gentiles, or the modified versions of it from Thomistic scholars.
@@tafelsalz4662 So how is he strawmanning the guy with poor understanding of Islam anyway according to Alfred Guillaume ?
where have you been handsome sadat?
Don't compare sheikhul Islam ibn tayymiah to gazali bro come on
ve aleyküm selam muslim brother
Wa alaykum as salaam, my brother.
@@ThatCanadianBrother radiyallahü anküm🤲
ıam nogai turkic we are muslim ELHAMDÜLİLLAH
Carnal pleasures alluded to are the lustful promises for the After Life.
@Boo-sc9gz Oh that's interesting.I didn't know that verse. I'm not religious by the way. I'm a cultural Christian. I like Churches, Christmas and Jesus. I look on Christianity as a fecund Illusion...
@Boo-sc9gz I checked Matthew 19:29 and I think your interpretation is a distortion.
@Bazinga-2dRead it you will find truth in the lies.
I think that is what Aquinas meant yes. There are many other delights prepared for those in paradise as elucidated in the Quran but Aquinas seems to have overlooked them. I believe he had access to a Latin translation of the Quran. If so, not sure what the justification for such selectivity would be. And Allah knows best.
❤️❤️❤️🌹🌹🌹🤲🤲🤲
Jesus never married,
okay and
@@eigengrau77 that many people follow the example of Jesus, they prefer preach the Gospel rather to married. It is regarding to the second objection of this video.
@@luissalazar6960 you've seen what happens when institutional celibacy is employed. there's a reason it's frowned upon in islam
How do you know he never married? The earliest accounts you have only contain details on 3 out of 30 years of his life and are all silent on his marital status. Logically speaking, it would've been very odd for a man in that culture to not be married at that age but we find no discussions of it in the Bible which leads one to the logical conclusion that he was living a normal life until the start of his ministry.
@@blackcatmuezza9338 We know that Jesus never married because all the information transmitted to us shows that. Also prophet Jeremiah never married. So, there was not any problem to be single.
Really, Thomas was right in the first point, The Paradise is Islam is very materialistic. The promise of God is to give you what ever you want if you accept and convert to Islam. There is no sin in Muslim Paradise then you can do whatever you want.
So if this life is a test against the flesh and you pass, what is wrong with getting what you did not accept in the flesh? Another thing, do you think Muslims worry about what they going to get in the next life? Yes it sounds great but meeting GOD is the most important. Even if what we're promised doesn't manifest in the next life, is it not a good deterrent in this life? Your lack to understand will never allow you to understand. Hell is not something I would like to go to, so it is a damn good deterrent. We don't only live this life in the best way possible but this life is preparation for the next which keeps our sinful ways low. How hard would you worship GOD if you never thought of hell being the consequence for the lack thereof? Reward is a motivator. Just look out of the box and not remain in the box
Paradise is a physical place where physical beings will do physical things. What is so rationally objectionable about it?
@@arefinkamal7654 I do not have any problem with your answer, this is why Thomas Aquinas is correct.
@@luissalazar6960 yeah, but Aquinas was implying that a physical paradise is a bad thing. What's so bad about it?
@@arefinkamal7654 because the Paradise in Islam is very materialistic. Virgins for men, and whatever you want God, will give you. If a Woman wants 10 men, she will have in Paradise. Men will have wine, and we can continue talking about it.
Christian Paradise is more about to enjoy God. From Christian perspective, yes Islam Paradise is very materialistic.
Abraham worshipped the trinity
Bruh
@@dimas4998 I know it sounds far fetched since you have no connection to Abraham
@@kbedini5738Jesus worship allah
@@Gokuwird50 he worshipps Yahve the Father. Allah is just a generic term for God.
@@kbedini5738 if you say what you believe I would say what I believe Isn’t that fair ?
Lord Jesus Christ, Son of God, have mercy on us and our world ☦ 🙏 🌍 🙏✝️ Amen ❤
The cope is insane
Why not pray to the God Jesus prayed to.
Luke 6:12-
One of those days Jesus went out to a mountainside to pray, and spent the night praying to God.
He’s not the son of God. God doesn’t need human children, He can simply create them.
It clearly tell us lam yalid wa lam yulad
And if Jesus "died" for our sins..WHY WOULD AN INNOCENT MAN DIE FOR OTHER PEOPLES SINS WHILE THEY STILL SINNING UNACCOUNTABLY? That's horrible and doesn't make any sense
You can find a Hadith for everything. What does the Quran say?
Exactly right! So called rebuttals isn’t that those things are lies or ignorance [they are correct and did happen] it’s rebuttals through you can find so much contradiction in the hadith and ”prove” anything.
Seerah and Quran alone should be used.
@MACH15-20
The hadiths are the prophet's sayings and they also include alot of his explanation of the quran and God ordered us to obey and listen to his prophet which makes the hadiths which are the prophet's sayings authorative and most of thomas the clown's allegations are pseudo-historical claims about the prophet and his companions which when we analyse the historical documents about the prophet it becomes visible how laughable those allegations are
It sucks that your favorite theologian is a lying ignoramus 😂
@@MuttonBiryani1994
The seera are taken from the hadiths we dont accept books that are based on anonymous chain of narration like ibn ishaq's book or al waqadi
And You dont dictate for us what we should accept as our tradition
@@shaka769 I spoke for myself. And there is a reason many muslims are starting to reject the laughable Hadith litterature.
Avoid jokes and humer
I'm sorry to ask this question ...but what do we have to lower our gaze from ,when a Muslim female is dressed in a Ninja Costume ?! Is the Ninja Costume just a traditional Arab Dress trend ?!
Does it have any backing in the religious text ?
I happen to think that the Ninja Dress( aka Burqa) is a purely Arab Desert Custom that defies religious text ,defies Human Fitra & pleases nobody except Extremists who insist to confuse people into thinking that somehow their local Arab Dress Customs that stem from Geographic necessities are 100% aligned with what Islam teaches ...??!!!
The awrah of a woman doesn't cover her face. I assume you're talking about niqab which covers their face, which in my experience most women don't wear since it's an obviously optional. Where do you live that every woman has her face covered?
@@jeewa7114 Precisely, Why are muslims acting as if covering a face of a Woman is religious teaching ,When it’s not.
This extremism leads to very negative consequences… In Kingdom of SA … The Wahhabi so called (Vice Police) were chasing women in malls …rebuking them for showing their manicure when handling merchandise … What the Hell is wrong with these loonies!!
Now they’re attending Parties of washed up Who*es from Australia who publically insult God & his messengers with blasphemous lyrics … Usury is all over the financial sector & not a single one is speaking out….!!!!Astonishing approach to religion.
This discussion might help: th-cam.com/video/lGqEtv_lBYg/w-d-xo.html&ab_channel=SafinaSociety
If you are a Muslim, beware of mocking religion. This will take you out of Islam, because covering the face and wearing clothing that covers the entire body for a woman is part of the religion according to Muslim consensus.