Objective Christian retweeted
Replying to @dawahxdialogues
99% of persecuted Muslims are persecuted by Muslims
That's against what your Quran states. There is not one single ayat that says the Kitab of the Christians & Jews is corrupted. Not even one.
2:79? It's about a new book that was written, and not the text the Jews had in the 7th century (see 2:41 & 2:85). No textual corruption.
Sometimes you guys try 2:75, but it too has no mention of text.
3:78 & 4:46 are a common one you guys misinterpret. Both state the people of the book twist the words ๐ฌ๐๐ฉ๐ ๐ฉ๐๐๐๐ง ๐ฉ๐ค๐ฃ๐๐ช๐๐จ. That's about teaching and interpretation. No textual corruption.
Last one you guys have is 5:13. If you read the context from 5:1-12 you will find that it's talking about contracts. Your early scholars like Ibn Kathir state it refers to the Covenant of Sinai for the Jews, and the covenant Christians in Arabia made with Muhammad. Not a single reference to the kitab of the Christians & Jews. No textual corruption.
And that's it. That's ALL you have.
The Quran instead claims to fully confirm the kitab of the Christians & Jews.
Ayah 2:85 states the Jews must obey the ๐๐ช๐ก๐ก ๐๐ค๐ง๐๐ and not just parts, impossible if there is corruption. This is full confirmation.
In 5:43-48 the Quran establishes that the kitab of the Christians and Jews is every bit as authoritative as Muhammad's divine judgements, even claiming to be the guardian protector of it.
That is 100% ๐๐ช๐ก๐ก ๐๐ค๐ฃ๐๐๐ง๐ข๐๐ฉ๐๐ค๐ฃ of what Christians & Jews held "between their hands" in the 7th century AD. Guess what? That's the same one we have today.
If the Bible is TRUE the Quran is FALSE for contradicting it.
If the Bible is FALSE the Quran is FALSE for claiming to fully confirm it. Either way the Quran is FALSE. โ๏ธ๐
Let's talk Christian monotheism.
The Trinity.
There is no comparison that is truly able to fully articulate the nature of the one God. However, I like to use Jesus as an example.
* Jesus the Messiah is a prophet. This is a true statement that in no way challenges Christianity.
* Jesus is a king. He's the King of kings and Lord of lords.
* Jesus is a high priest in the order of Melchizedek.
Which one is he? King, priest, or prophet?
Jesus is all three, and Jesus is one. He's not partly a king, or partly a prophet. He's not a prophet one day and high priest the next.
Jesus is fully king.
Jesus is fully high priest.
Jesus is fully prophet.
All three are one in Christ Jesus, a tri-union. The Trinity is the same. God is one, and in whom are three persons. This isn't 3 gods. Just like how king, priest, & prophet share the same "Jesus-nature". Father, Son, & Spirit are one.
โ
๏ธ Christianity is monotheistic
I've used this argument too. Slimmies have NO RESPONSE. Their puny god is trapped in the night side of the planet. Their tiny rat god is subject to his own alleged creation.
The Allah of the Quran must submit to creation. He's not the YHWH of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob.
There is no valid reason to trust the Quran
Awesomeness mode: LEGENDARY.
Bravo #Korea ๐
Muslims just don't get it. They're so quick to cry about pork being haram that they blindly miss that camel is also unclean according to the covenant law they claim to follow. It's literally THREE VERSES earlier in the same chapter of Leviticus.
In the Quran it says to eat camel meat. How do Muslims reconcile this? They say Allah "abrogated" it.
It just so happens Allah Yasu al-Masih (Jesus Christ) abrogated the dietary laws in Mark 7:19. Surah 22:36, line all the Quran, is entirely unnecessary.
The truth about Jesus Christ is found in the kitab is the Christians & Jews, the Bible. There is no valid reason to trust the Quran.
"Progressive Christianity" isn't Christianity.
Over on ๐งต this one tried to challenge me. My response to her ๐
It's not the answer I "๐๐ฎ๐ป๐". It's the ฮตแฝฮฑฮณฮณฮญฮปฮนฮฟฮฝ Jesus taught. Tell me, in mathematics which number comes before the other: 3 or 15?
I only ask because you mentioned John 15, and last I checked John 3 comes before that, which marks the ๐๐๐๐๐ฃ๐ฃ๐๐ฃ๐ of Jesus' ministry. What does Jesus say at the ๐๐๐๐๐ฃ๐ฃ๐๐ฃ๐? You must be ๐ฃ๐ฐ๐ณ๐ฏ ๐ข๐จ๐ข๐ช๐ฏ.
Maybe that's just Gospel of John though. ๐ค๐ค
In Matthew 4:17 the earliest ministry statement he made was "๐ฟ๐ฒ๐ฝ๐ฒ๐ป๐ for the kingdom of heaven is at hand".
Mark 1:15 says the same thing, "repent".
Luke 5:32 says that he had come to call sinners to repentance.
So.....yeah I guess.๐คท๐ผโโ๏ธ
The Gospel message is belief in Jesus, repentance, transformation, forgiveness, and eternal life in Jesus. THAT is the answer to the question. It's not my interpretation.
It's what Jesus taught.
It is the ฮตแฝฮฑฮณฮณฮญฮปฮนฮฟฮฝ.
It is the Gospel.
Islam is struggling.
UPDATE: Mohammed Hijab SUED me...and LOST
youtu.be/zU8iCCoJZGQ
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
Oh man #OrthoDucklips (@muslimorthodoxy) Thank you for the sitcom of your debate with #VocabMalone.
You got thoroughly EMBARRASED.
You got thoroughly CURB-STOMPED.
You got thoroughly EVISCERATED.
You barked like a filthy dog while Malone tap danced on your false prophet's grave.
Thank you for showing everyone Islam is a false religion.
There is no valid reason to trust the Quran
๐คฃ๐๐โช๏ธ
With respect to Dr Ehrman this is false.
1 Corinthians 11:23โ25
Paul mentions the event of Jesus' betrayal. While it does not explicitly call Judas out by name it's reasonable to conclude he did in fact know about the circumstances surrounding the event.
I don't need to know the names of the 9/11 hijackers to know it really happened, and even if I did, my not mentioning them does not add to or take away from it's validity
That's just the thing though, Jesus doesn't deny it. You can't cherry-pick a verse out of context like that the thesis statement drives interpretation. This is how exegesis works.
In Mark several times Jesus refers to himself as the Son of Man. That's all fine & good until you get to Mark 14:62.
The chief priest asks is he is the Son of YHWH the blessed one. Jesus replies
โI am, and you will see the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of Power and ๐๐ค๐ข๐๐ฃ๐ ๐ฌ๐๐ฉ๐ ๐ฉ๐๐ ๐๐ก๐ค๐ช๐๐จ ๐ค๐ ๐๐๐๐ซ๐๐ฃ.โ
Who alone comes riding on the clouds of Heaven?
Deuteronomy 33:26
"There is none like the God of Jeshurun, ๐ฌ๐๐ค ๐ง๐๐๐๐จ ๐ฉ๐๐ ๐๐๐๐ซ๐๐ฃ๐จ ๐ฉ๐ค ๐ฎ๐ค๐ช๐ง ๐๐๐, ๐๐ฃ๐ ๐ฉ๐๐ ๐๐ก๐ค๐ช๐๐จ in His majesty."
Who alone comes riding on the clouds of Heaven?
Isaiah 19:1
This is the burden against Egypt:
๐ฝ๐๐๐ค๐ก๐, ๐ฉ๐๐ ๐๐๐๐ฟ ๐ง๐๐๐๐จ ๐ค๐ฃ ๐ ๐จ๐ฌ๐๐๐ฉ ๐๐ก๐ค๐ช๐;
He is coming to Egypt.
The idols of Egypt will tremble before Him, and the hearts of the Egyptians will melt within them.
Who alone comes riding on the clouds of Heaven?
Psalm 104:2-3
He wraps Himself in light as with a garment; He stretches out the heavens like a tent, laying the beams of His chambers in the waters above, ๐ข๐๐ ๐๐ฃ๐ ๐ฉ๐๐ ๐๐ก๐ค๐ช๐๐จ ๐๐๐จ ๐๐๐๐ง๐๐ค๐ฉ, ๐ฌ๐๐ก๐ ๐๐ฃ๐ ๐ค๐ฃ ๐ฉ๐๐ ๐ฌ๐๐ฃ๐๐จ ๐ค๐ ๐ฉ๐๐ ๐ฌ๐๐ฃ๐
Who alone comes riding on the clouds of Heaven?
Daniel 7:13
and I saw One like the Son of Man
๐๐ค๐ข๐๐ฃ๐ ๐ฌ๐๐ฉ๐ ๐ฉ๐๐ ๐๐ก๐ค๐ช๐๐จ ๐ค๐ ๐๐๐๐ซ๐๐ฃ.
Who alone comes riding on the clouds of Heaven?
Revelation 14:14
And I looked and saw a white cloud, and ๐จ๐๐๐ฉ๐๐ ๐ค๐ฃ ๐ฉ๐๐ ๐๐ก๐ค๐ช๐ was One like the Son of Man, with a golden crown on His head and a sharp sickle in His hand
Even Surah 2:210 shares this imagery.
When Jesus made his claim that he'll be the one riding on the clouds, everyone present understood what that meant.
Jesus claimed to be GOD.
You can't cherry-pick a verse out of context like that the thesis statement drives interpretation. This is how exegesis works.
This Post is from an account that no longer exists. Learn more
Objective Christian retweeted
I just dropped a new YouTube video. Itโs an important heavy one. Make sure you share it wide, especially to Muslims. May the Lord use this to draw them away from the false religion of Islam to the loving arms of Jesus.
What Islam Requires of a Wife, and What it Costs Her
youtu.be/9Z35z5cRqO4
Is this you in this picture?
When was the Quran written?
Why is there zero evidence of a pre-7th century Islam?
Why are you saying YES to this double standard?
The estimate for the earliest Gospel account is roughly 40 years. True.
However, your conclusion is false. You falsely resolve that therefore none of this existed prior.
What do the facts tell us? Paul's letters to the Thessalonians and Romans are from decades before Mark's account. In it we see evidence of a strong oral tradition and creed dating back to the very beginning of the apostles' teaching.
The Gospel isn't a mere book. It's not four books. The Gospel is the unified message is God's redemptive salvation through the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ the Immanuel.
Replying to @ObjectChristian @HalalNation_
Scholars note that the canonical Gospels were written roughly 40 to 60 years after the death of Jesus (typically dated from the late 1st century onward), meaning they are not direct, real-time eyewitness accounts.
I laugh every time when one of you tries to cherry-pick Bible verses thinking it'll help you.
So you're a lawyer eh? Tell me law guy, what does a thesis statement do for a written work?
As any educated person knows it sets the author's purpose and direction. It is the lens through which the rest of the writing is focused.
Mark's thesis statement is in 1:1-11.
At Peter's dictation Mark establishes Jesus is God. Using Isaiah & Malachi he establishes John the Baptist is the voice in the desert preparing the way for YHWH, who is Jesus the Messiah.
So by cherry-picking Mark 10:18, the only thing you accomplish is showing why taking verses out of context will always fail.
Reject Muhammad's lies. There is no salvation in Islam. There is no valid reason to trust the Quran
This Post is from an account that no longer exists. Learn more
Here's why you're wrong.
The Bible never gives Mary's age. The source you guys use is a late 2nd century pseudepigraphal forgery. It's not God-inspired scripture. Even so, using the forgery as a source it also says Mary remained a V-I-R-G-I-N.
So already your imbecilic argument fails.
Second it's you guys who say Muhammad is "the greatest moral example for all time". For what time? For ๐ผ๐๐ ๐๐๐๐.
This means his morality is non-temporal, and creates a dilemma for you.
Muhammad had sex with a child.
If he's the greatest example, you๐ซต MUST believe pedophilia is a ๐ข๐ค๐ง๐๐ก ๐๐ค๐ค๐ today.
But if it's morally evil today, then you๐ซต MUST conclude Muhammad is not the greatest moral example for all time.
And that's the Muhammad Moral Dilemma, and your "it was the custom back then" doesn't hold up.
๐ค Made with AI





























