@@AliTanoli-cq3js respond to the arugments in this video, islam has no continiutiy with ancient judaism or christiantiy, is evidently false, and had to lie about the bible being corrupted after the fact to justify this,
@@buffcommie942 Islam has continuity with islam, and previous prophets not judaism, and christianity that are misled groups, and If you think bible is not corrupted then tell me who authored it, the proof of that and why there are 6 different bibles
after watching this video, i wanna say a big thank you i cant express how much i thank you for reminding me to pray my dhuhr i almost forget lemme go make dhikr stay safe.
As an ex-Mormon I empathize a lot with ex-Muslims. That pain, that familial pressure and ultimate rejection if you leave. I know I lost everything when I left...EVERYTHING. I pray for this brave one, God bless you brother ✝
Welcome home brother. Islam and Mormonism are actually very similar - there's been a lot of scholarship done about that. Glad to have you in the Church though ☦️
Schlözer in his preparation for the Arabia expedition in 1781 coined the term Semitic language: "From the Mediterranean to the Euphrates, from Mesopotamia to Arabia ruled one language, as is well known. Thus Syrians, Babylonians, Hebrews, and Arabs were one people (ein Volk). Phoenicians (Hamites) also spoke this language, which I would like to call the Semitic (die Semitische)." -Before Boas: The Genesis of Ethnography and Ethnology in the German By Han F. Vermeulen He was only half right though, Arabic is the only corollary to "proto-semitic", infact the whole semitic classification is nonsensical for anyone with a somewhat functioning mass between their ears. hebrew, aramaic, rest of madeup dialect continua only have 22 letters of the 29 protosemitic letters Arabic has all 29. The difference betweeen Arabic and the other creoles and Pidgin is the same as that between Latin and pig latin or italian. |Classical Arabic | 28 consonants, 29 with Hamza and 6 vowels; some consonants are emphatic or pharyngealized; some vowels are marked with diacritics | Complex system of word formation based on roots and patterns; roots are sequences of consonants that carry the basic meaning of a word; patterns are sequences of vowels and affixes that modify the meaning and function of a word | Flexible word order, but VSO is most common; SVO is also possible; subject and object are marked by case endings (-u for nominative, -a for accusative, -i for genitive); verb agrees with subject in person, number, and gender; verb has different forms for different moods and aspects | | Akkadian | 22 consonants and 3 vowels; some consonants are glottalized or palatalized; vowels are not marked | Similar system, but with different roots and patterns; some roots have more than three consonants; some patterns have infixes or reduplication | Fixed word order of SVO; subject and object are not marked by case endings, but by prepositions or word order; verb agrees with subject in person, number, and gender; verb has different forms for different tenses and aspects | | Aramaic | 22 consonants and 3 vowels (later variants have more); no emphatic or pharyngealized consonants (except in some dialects); vowels are not marked (except in later variants such as Syriac) | Simple system of word formation based on prefixes and suffixes; some roots or patterns exist, but are less productive than in Arabic or Akkadian | "Semitic" is just mumbled Arabic, really. Imagine English with a third of its letters removed and simplified grammar. That's Aramaic, Hebrew, etc. For example, combine T and D into just T; there's no need to have 2 letters. The same goes for i, e, y - they should all be just y from now on, etc., etc. Arabic is the only corollary to proto-Semitic. In fact, the whole classification of Semitic languages is nonsensical for anyone with a somewhat functioning brain. Hebrew, Aramaic, and the rest of these made-up dialect continua only have 22 letters out of the 29 proto-Semitic letters. Arabic has all 29. The difference between Arabic and the other creoles and Pidgin is the same as the difference between Latin and pig Latin or Italian. "Phoenician" is an Arabic dialect continuum, and not only that, it is pidgin. It is simplified to the point of stupidity. Anyone with a basic knowledge of Arabic would see this clearly. What happened was that Arabic handicapped "scholars" saw the equivalent of Scottish Twitter spelling, with added mumbling due to phonemic mergers (22 letters, not 29), and mistakenly thought they were seeing a different language." Let's start with a simple sentence: ## The house is big Arabic: البيتُ كبيرٌ al-bayt-u kabīr-un Proto-Semitic: *ʔal-bayt-u kabīr-u Hebrew: הבית גדול ha-bayit gadol Akkadian: bītum rabûm Amharic: ቤቱ ገደሉ betu gedelu As can be seen, Arabic and Proto-Semitic have the same word order (noun-adjective), the same definite article (al-), and the same case endings (-u for nominative). Hebrew and Akkadian have lost the case endings and changed the definite article (ha- and -um respectively). Amharic has changed the word order (adjective-noun) and the definite article (u-). But Arabic is not only similar to Proto-Semitic, it is also pre-Semitic, meaning that it is the original form of Semitic before it split into different branches. This is because Arabic preserves many features that are not found in any other Semitic language, but are found in other Afro-Asiatic languages, such as Egyptian and Berber. These features include: - The definite article al-, which is derived from the demonstrative pronoun *ʔal- 'that'. This article is unique to Arabic among Semitic languages, but it is similar to the article n- in Berber and the article p-, t-, n- in Egyptian. - The dual number for nouns and verbs, which is marked by the suffix -ān or -ayn. This number is rare in other Semitic languages, but it is common in other Afro-Asiatic languages, such as Egyptian and Berber. - The imperfective prefix t- for verbs, which indicates the second person singular feminine or third person plural feminine. This prefix is unique to Arabic among Semitic languages, but it is similar to the prefix t- in Berber and Egyptian. - The passive voice for verbs, which is marked by the infix t between the first and second root consonants. This voice is unique to Arabic among Semitic languages, but it is similar to the passive voice in Egyptian and Berber. Finally, a more complex sentence: The letter was written with a pen. Arabic: كُتِبَتِ الرِّسَالَةُ بِالقَلَمِ kutiba-t al-risāla-t-u bi-l-qalam-i Proto-Semitic: *kutiba-t ʔal-risāla-t-u bi-l-qalam-i Hebrew: המכתב נכתב בעט ha-michtav niktav ba-et Akkadian: šipram šapāru bēlum Egyptian: sḏm.n.f p-ẖry m rnp.t Berber: tturra-t tibratin s uccen Here, Arabic and Proto-Semitic have the same word order (verb-subject-object), the same passive voice marker (-t-), the same definite article (al-), and the same preposition (bi-). Hebrew has changed the word order (subject-verb-object), lost the passive voice marker, changed the definite article (ha-) and the preposition (ba-). Akkadian has changed the word order (object-subject-verb), lost the passive voice marker, changed the definite article (-um) and the preposition (bēlum). Now how is it that the Qur'an came thousands of years in a language that is lexically, syntactically, phonemically, and semantically older than the oldest recorded writing? Now how is it that the Qur'an came thousands of years later in an alphabet that had never been recorded before, and in the highest form the language had ever taken? The creator is neither bound by time nor space, therefore the names are uttered as they truly were, in a language that is lexically, syntactically, phonemically, and semantically older than the oldest recorded writing. In fact, that writing appears to have been a simplified version of it. Not only that, but it would be the equivalent of the greatest works of any particular language all appearing in one book, in a perfect script and in the highest form the language could ever take. It is so high in fact, that it had yet to be surpassed despite the fact that over the last millennium the collection of Arabic manuscripts when compared on word-per-word basis in Western Museums alone, when they are compared with the collected Greek and Latin manuscripts combined, the latter does not constitute 1 percent of the former as per German professor Frank Griffel, in addition all in a script that had never been recorded before. Thus, the enlightenment of mankind from barbarism and savagery began, and the age of reason and rationality was born from its study. God did bring down the Qur’an, Mohamed is his Messenger.
I'm an atheist, but having read through the entire bible the dude who said that the word "chiristian" isnt found in the bible in simply wrong. It appear in two different new testament books; Acts and 1 Peter.
@@user-nk8lp4ng8r You're not even talking about the same thing that I am. I said that the word Christian appears in the Bible, which it does. I never once tried to define the word Christian, so whatever you are angry about is completely unrelated to what I said.
to summarize, Kyle literally was just saying “my religion says Islam is wrong, so it’s wrong. I have no more proof except that I sTuDiEd Islam,” y’all literally make no sense, he didn’t prove anyone wrong. And if some of you are gonna say “what about the bad quran verses he showed?” He literally took 1% of the surahs and didn’t use it in context.
@@proffesional-gamerthat one verse he showed (5:47) about people of the gospel judging by it was meant for the gospel that was brought be prophet isa (jesus) himself not the corrupted one. now idc what you believe this is not a proof that it's right search for another proof
Same here but I have decided to help people who also have converted who are being misleaded and lie tell by muslim about who amazing is Allah I will save them
1:29 This graphic is false. 1. Islam has a liturgy. The 5 prayers are formulaic and follow a very precise pattern, reading certain chapters, doing certain motions, etc. 2. Atoning sacrifice is iffy, an animal is slaughtered as a sacrifice during Eid Al-Fitr annually. Idk what is meant here. 3. Islam has feast days, Eid Al-Fitr and Eid Al-Adha with another Mawlid An-nabi being a third but is not universally agreed upon. 4. Mosques are very symbolic, featuring places for ritual washing (wudhu) and to pray facing the Kaaba. 5. Divine immanence exists in sufi Islam but is not mainstream - sufi is a dimension in Islam, not a separate branch. 6. Restricted access to laity: At my local mosque, there's a sign on the front door that says only believing Muslims should come in. I've heard stories of European muslim converts being denied entry to mosques in the Middle East until they could prove they're Muslim. 7. The last point is ridiculous. Islam has many ritual elements, it's TOO ritualistic. There's even a ritualistic way to drink water and trim your nails! I'm not Muslim but that graphic is very ignorant about Islam.
@@AliTanoli-cq3jseverything about Islam is all over the internet , you can literally go right now and read Quran and Hadith . Why would we need a random Muslim to tell us his version of Islam? If you want to know about Jesus hit ME up 🤙 I will prove to you that our Bible is not corrupted, and that Muslims only say this to explain half the stuff in their religion that makes no sense. I have compassion for many Muslims, many are decent people and they truly do not know the truth and are encouraged not to look, they are controlled by FEAR that if they even QUESTION “Allah” and Quran and Mohammad it is dangerous 😂 how can it be wrong to use the brain Allah gave you?? Islam is false my friend, religion that came over 600 years after Christ and is a hodge podge of mystic, gnostic, kabbalistic, heretical teachings that were thriving in Arabia at the time of false prophet Mohammad. Many signs that he was demon possessed and not a true prophet Of God, coming from Muslim own sources. THINK!! REPENT!! and come to YESHUA the messiah, God with us, the savior of mankind and son of God , the true LIVING WORD OF GOD 💜
Then like share and subscribe so other Muslims open their eyes too, their faith in Islam gets stronger etc. Please do it if you care about other Muslims.
@@sadiez11I love how the blind guy tells another blind guy to open his eyes and see god 😂😂😂😂😂 ur basically saying my book has more words than yours therefore mine is the absolute truth... Why don't you guys try reading the Emerald tablets
@@ttru4426 Lol how presumptuous! Am I the blind guy? And I never mentioned anything about "my book" I do read the emerald tablets actually and sumerian texts and the apocrypha and lots more. It's silly to assume that anyone who criticizes Islam is a Christian. I align with Christ consciousness, NOT with Christianity or the bible
What really matters is that you can examine the criticisms in this video about the creation of Islam and still be confident in your beliefs. Islam copies older non religious texts and has a limited scope for the time period and locality that doesn’t suggest any divine inspiration or additional bestowing of knowledge. It’s not a strong basis for belief, so you will be relying heavily on faith.
Thank you for debunking this false religion. Your video about sneako has helped me turn some of my Muslim friends into Christians! God bless you Kyle , greetings from Greece 🇬🇷☦️
i ve been trying to convert my "muslim" friend who doesnt even know anything about islam and when i proved to him that muhammed had sex with aisha when she was 9 he tried to justify it and i was like bruhhhhhh
Asalamu Alaikum guys. He firstly says that prophets like Moses and Isa, peace be upon them, werent Muslim, and he failed to comprehend what is a Muslim in the first place, he think Muslims are those who worship the Kabbah problaby, well i am sorry, but a Muslim by definition is a man who submits himself to Allah, the most merciful, the most compassionate, and thats it. So they were Muslims, he talked about Isa peace be upon him drinking "wine", but little does he know, that what Isa, peace be upon him drank, is just unfermented grape juice, that has no alcohol indeed, then he shows some verses from the bible about Isa peace be upon him being God, but we know as Muslims that the Bible is corrupted, and we cannot trust a corrupted source like the bible. He proceeds to say that we "stole" prostation by Christians, but wait... didnt like Jews prostate before Christians did? that means Christians and Muslims stole prostation from the Jews? nah. He says "how can we trust a book that came out 600 years after the Bible. That is simple to explain, basically i can just debunk this argument by saying, why did Allah, Subannah Wa Tala, reveal the Torah before the Bible? Simply the Torah and the Bible were meant for the people of that time, Allah Subanna Wa Tala, never promised to protect them as He did in the Quran, why did he wait 600 years? cause things happened during those 600 years, the Bible isnt the ultimate revelation as it doesnt contain those things, while the Quran does. As i have no time to finish this comment i will continue tomorrow (no its not because i have nothing to disprove the argument i just have a life.)
The difference is Muslims don’t accept Jesus Christ as the lord and savior which is the pin point of Christianity, you cannot inherit the kingdom of heaven if not through Jesus christ
@@black.7381 I’m dead serious Muslims acknowledge Jesus as a prophet not the messiah and not the son of god, Roman’s 10:9-11 says That if you confess with your mouth, "Jesus is Lord," and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved. For it is with your heart that you believe and are justified, and it is with your mouth that you confess and are saved
Then we should spread this everywhrere - people will convert into islam like crazy. Muslim, finish your primary school properly and start thinking on your own!
I'm personally agnostic and I see your points with errors, contradiction, and historical inaccuracy. Although aren't mostly all religions built off faith over evidence? Basically, putting trust in ancient testimonials and/or deeds made by followers or the god(s) themselves? I'm sure most of these ancient texts would have a degree of human error, or a sort of supernatural logic in which humans are unable to understand. Informative video, nonetheless. It's cool to see other religious viewpoints and arguments from differing perspectives from time to time.
The Danish scholar Patricia Crone wanted to write a book on Meccan trade leading up to the beginning of Islam, since Islam describes Mecca as a major trade route hub, the oldest place of human habitation on earth. She ran into a problem, namely, there is no evidence that Mecca existed until after Mohammed would have died. No trade documents, it's not on any maps until centuries after Islam is supposed to begun, it's not on any trade route. The place is more of a hole-in-the-wall, a robbers roost, a hiding place in the middle of nowhere.
We have no archaeological proof of Moses existence, and if he did exist we have no proof of when that might have been. The only books that speak of Moses are the books of the Jews (then the books of the Christians and Muslims of course) and were written a long time after his supposed lifetime. Yet other local cultures, who generally liked to write and leave traces, have never spoken of a guy who led 2 million people across the sea and the desert. In fact, to go a step further, archaeology would tend to go against most of the information that's told about Moses, since it's often anacronistic, inaccurate or inconsistent with one another. I guess all Abrahamic religions are false since archaeology can't prove the existence of the original prophet, right?
Nice fantasy , The name of Mecca is often claimed to be first recorded by the Greek geographer Ptolemy, who calls it Macoraba in the 2nd century AD. However, this identification is not certain, and some scholars have argued that there are older accounts of Mecca than Ptolemy. For example, some have suggested that Mecca is mentioned in the Assyrian inscriptions of Tiglath-Pileser III (8th century BC) as Magan or Makan, a region ruled by the Arab queen Samsi. Others have proposed that Mecca is referred to in the Old Testament as Paran or Teman, places associated with Ishmael and his descendants. Still others have pointed out that Mecca is attested in some ancient South Arabian inscriptions as Makkah or Makkahum, meaning "temple" or "sanctuary". One inscription from the 3rd century AD reads: "By ʿAthtar of Makkahum and by Almaqah of ʿAwwām and by Dhat-Ḥimyam and by Dhu-Samawi and by Dhat-Baʿdan. I am ʿAbd-Karib son of ʿAbd-Malik son of ʿAbd-Karib son of ʿAbd-Malik son of ʿAbd-Karib son of ʿAbd-Malik son of ʿAbd-Karib son of ʿAbd-Malik son of ʿAbd-Karib son of ʿAbd-Malik son of ʿAbd-Karib son of ʿAbd-Malik son of Ḥaṭṭab. I have made a vow to Makkahum for my life and for my children and for my clan." This inscription shows that Mecca was a place where people made vows and sought blessings from various gods. Another inscription from the 4th century AD reads: "By Almaqah the lord and by Dhat-Ḥimyam and by Dhu-Samawi and by Dhat-Baʿdan. I am Ḥaṭṭab son of Ḥaṭṭab son of Ḥaṭṭab son of Ḥaṭṭab son of Ḥaṭṭab son of Ḥaṭṭab son of Ḥaṭṭab son of Ḥaṭṭab son of Ḥaṭṭab. I have given to Makkahum a gift: two camels with their saddles." This inscription shows that Mecca was a place where people gave gifts and donations to the temple. These inscriptions confirm that Mecca was a well-known and respected city in ancient South Arabia, and that its location was in the same valley surrounded by mountains as it is today.
Greek has a limited ability of capturing Arabic it is infact Markorava (Μακόραβα) and not Macroba as is often localized Greek is known to morph to suit tongue of speakers, the word for Jesus as his name is often misspelled due to the lack of the ayin sound in Greek, which was rendered to Iesous, coupling the nearest sound to ayin, same letter found in 'Iraq', which sounds entirely different in Arabic form 'Iran' in Arabic, with the -ous Greek suffix that Greeks typically add to their names 'HerodotOS', 'PlotinUS', 'AchelOUS' and later mumbled into a J. The original is "Isa" as it is in the Quran Arabic. The yeshua rendition of Isa (his name in the Qur'an) PBUH which is purported to be the name of Jesus is KNOWN to had been taken from greek. Western Syriac also use "Isho". Western Aramaic (separate from Syriac which is a dialect of Eastern Aramaic) use "Yeshu". Western Syriac has been separate from Western Aramaic for about 1000 years. And sounds don't even match up. Syriac is a Christian liturgical language yet the four letters of the name of Jesus «ܝܫܘܥ» [ = Judeo-Babylonian Aramaic: «ישוע» ] sounds totally different in West vs East Syriac, viz. vocalized akin to Christian Arabic, Hebrew, Aramaic «ܝܶܫܽܘܥ» (Yēšūʿ) in West Syriac, but pronounced more akin to Muslim Arabic Quran character name Isa in East Syriac «ܝܑܼܫܘܿܥ» (ʾĪšōʿ). The reason for this confusion is their dropping of phonemes as aforementioned. Only someone that has no idea what the letters are or how they sound would have a name ending in a pharyngeal fricative like the ayin, if it were to be used in a name it would have had to be in the beginning, thus the Arabic rendition is the correct one. In addition, The word God in hebrew is eloah, is a cognate of the Arabic I-L-H, pronounced ilah not eloah. Hebrew dropped the glottal stop and mumbled it into eloh, aramic mumbled a little less and it became elah. Infact it is written A-L-H in Arabic, it is pronounced i in Arabic cause it is an Alef with hamza below (إ أ ) They are two different forms of Alef. And it mean "a god", it is the non definitive form of A-L-L-H, in which the Alef is without a glottal stop/hamza,(ا) Schlözer in his preparation for the Arabia expedition in 1781 coined the term Semitic language: "From the Mediterranean to the Euphrates, from Mesopotamia to Arabia ruled one language, as is well known. Thus Syrians, Babylonians, Hebrews, and Arabs were one people (ein Volk). Phoenicians (Hamites) also spoke this language, which I would like to call the Semitic (die Semitische)." -Before Boas: The Genesis of Ethnography and Ethnology in the German By Han F. Vermeulen He was only half right though, Arabic is the only corollary to "proto-semitic", infact the whole semitic classification is nonsensical for anyone with a somewhat functioning mass between their ears. hebrew, aramaic, rest of madeup dialect continua only have 22 letters of the 29 protosemitic letters Arabic has all 29. The difference betweeen Arabic and the other creoles and Pidgin is the same as that between Latin and pig latin or italian. "protosemetic" Alphabet (29), Arabic Alphabet (28), Latin transliteration, hebrew (22) 𐩠 𐩡 𐩢 𐩣 𐩤 𐩥 𐩦 𐩧 𐩨 𐩩 𐩪 𐩫 𐩬 𐩭 𐩮 𐩰 𐩱 𐩲 𐩳 𐩴 𐩵 𐩶 𐩷 𐩸 𐩹 𐩺 𐩻 𐩼 ا ب ت ث ج ح خ د ذ ر ز س ش ص ض ط ظ ع غ ف ق ك ل م ن ه و ي A b t ṯ j h kh d ḏ r z s sh ṣ ḍ ṭ ẓ ʿ ġ f q k l m n h w y א ב ג ד ה ו ז ח ט י כ ל מ נ ס ע פ צ ק ר ש ת Merged phonemes in hebrew and aramaic: ح, خ (h, kh) merged into only kh consonant remain س, ش (s, sh) merged into only Shin consonant remaining ط, ظ (ṭ/teth, ẓ) merged into only ṭ/teth consonant remaining ص, ض (ṣ, ḍ/Tsad ) merged into only ḍ/Tsad consonant remaining ع, غ (3'ayn, Ghayn) merged into a reducted ayin consonant remaining ت, ث (t/taw, th) merged into only t/taw consonant remaining This kind of nuance is lost in the dialect continua. As a matter of fact, all of the knowledge needed for deciphering ancient texts and their complexity was derived from the Qur'an. It was by analyzing the syntactic structure of the Qur'an that the Arabic root system was developed. This system was first attested to in Kitab Al-Ayin, the first intralanguage dictionary of its kind, which preceded the Oxford English dictionary by 800 years. It was through this development that the concept of Arabic roots was established and later co-opted into the term 'semitic root,' allowing the decipherment of ancient scripts. In essence, they quite literally copied and pasted the entirety of the Arabic root. Hebrew had been dead, as well as all the other dialects of Arabic, until being 'revived' in a Frankensteinian fashion in the 18th and 19th centuries. The entire region spoke basically the same language, with mumbled dialect continuums spread about, and Arabic is the oldest form from which all these dialects branched off. As time passed, the language gradually became more degenerate, and then the Qur'an appeared with the oldest possible form of the language thousands of years later. This is why the Arabs of that time were challenged to produce 10 similar verses, and they couldn't. People think it's a miracle because they couldn't do it, but I think the miracle is the language itself. They had never spoken Arabic, nor has any other language before or since had this mathematical precision. And when I say mathematical, I quite literally mean mathematical. |Classical Arabic | 28 consonants, 29 with Hamza and 6 vowels; some consonants are emphatic or pharyngealized; some vowels are marked with diacritics | Complex system of word formation based on roots and patterns; roots are sequences of consonants that carry the basic meaning of a word; patterns are sequences of vowels and affixes that modify the meaning and function of a word | Flexible word order, but VSO is most common; SVO is also possible; subject and object are marked by case endings (-u for nominative, -a for accusative, -i for genitive); verb agrees with subject in person, number, and gender; verb has different forms for different moods and aspects | | Akkadian | 22 consonants and 3 vowels; some consonants are glottalized or palatalized; vowels are not marked | Similar system, but with different roots and patterns; some roots have more than three consonants; some patterns have infixes or reduplication | Fixed word order of SVO; subject and object are not marked by case endings, but by prepositions or word order; verb agrees with subject in person, number, and gender; verb has different forms for different tenses and aspects | | Aramaic | 22 consonants and 3 vowels (later variants have more); no emphatic or pharyngealized consonants (except in some dialects); vowels are not marked (except in later variants such as Syriac) | Simple system of word formation based on prefixes and suffixes; some roots or patterns exist, but are less productive than in Arabic or Akkadian | Classical Arabic has more consonants and vowels than other semitic languages, and that it preserves some sounds that were lost or changed in other semitic languages. This means that classical Arabic can encode more information in a given unit of speech than other semitic languages, and that it is closer to the original sound system of protosemitic., we can see that classical Arabic has more grammatical features than the other languages, such as case endings, mood endings, and root and pattern system. These features make classical Arabic more expressive and precise than the other languages, as it can convey more information and nuances in a single word or phrase. Classical Arabic is also more flexible than the other languages, as it can use different word orders and verb forms to emphasize different aspects of the sentence. Classical Arabic is therefore older and more original than the other languages, it is the language of Adam. Now how is it that the Qur'an came thousands of years later in an alphabet that had never been recorded before, and in the highest form the language had ever taken? The creator is neither bound by time nor space, therefore the names are uttered as they truly were, in a language that is lexically, syntactically, phonemically, and semantically older than the oldest recorded writing. In fact, that writing appears to have been a simplified version of it. Not only that, but it would be the equivalent of the greatest works of any particular language all appearing in one book, in a perfect script and in the highest form the language could ever take. It is so high in fact, that it had yet to be surpassed despite the fact that over the last millennium the collection of Arabic manuscripts when compared on word-per-word basis in Western Museums alone, when they are compared with the collected Greek and Latin manuscripts combined, the latter does not constitute 1 percent of the former as per German professor Frank Griffel, in addition all in a script that had never been recorded before. Thus, the enlightenment of mankind from barbarism and savagery began, and the age of reason and rationality was born from its study.
To show the relation between Arabic and other "semitic" language, another Aramaic word for God is Alaha . Sounds familiar? Written without the confusing vowels, it is A-L-H ܐ ܠܗܐ (alap-lamed-he) as found in Targum or in Tanakh (Daniel, Ezra), Syriac Aramaic (Peshitta), reducted from the Arabic original (of which Aramaic is a dialect continuum) 'A-L-L-H' (Aleph-Lam-Lam-Ha). Add another A before the H for vocalization. To illustrate, Let's start with a simple sentence: ## The house is big Arabic: البيتُ كبيرٌ al-bayt-u kabīr-un Proto-Semitic: *ʔal-bayt-u kabīr-u Hebrew: הבית גדול ha-bayit gadol Akkadian: bītum rabûm Amharic: ቤቱ ገደሉ betu gedelu As can be seen, Arabic and Proto-Semitic have the same word order (noun-adjective), the same definite article (al-), and the same case endings (-u for nominative). Hebrew and Akkadian have lost the case endings and changed the definite article (ha- and -um respectively). Amharic has changed the word order (adjective-noun) and the definite article (u-). But Arabic is not only similar to Proto-Semitic, it is also pre-Semitic, meaning that it is the original form of Semitic before it split into different branches. This is because Arabic preserves many features that are not found in any other Semitic language, but are found in other Afro-Asiatic languages, such as Egyptian and Berber. These features include: - The definite article al-, which is derived from the demonstrative pronoun *ʔal- 'that'. This article is unique to Arabic among Semitic languages, but it is similar to the article n- in Berber and the article p-, t-, n- in Egyptian. - The dual number for nouns and verbs, which is marked by the suffix -ān or -ayn. This number is rare in other Semitic languages, but it is common in other Afro-Asiatic languages, such as Egyptian and Berber. - The imperfective prefix t- for verbs, which indicates the second person singular feminine or third person plural feminine. This prefix is unique to Arabic among Semitic languages, but it is similar to the prefix t- in Berber and Egyptian. - The passive voice for verbs, which is marked by the infix t between the first and second root consonants. This voice is unique to Arabic among Semitic languages, but it is similar to the passive voice in Egyptian and Berber. Finally, a more complex sentence: The letter was written with a pen. Arabic: كُتِبَتِ الرِّسَالَةُ بِالقَلَمِ kutiba-t al-risāla-t-u bi-l-qalam-i Proto-Semitic: *kutiba-t ʔal-risāla-t-u bi-l-qalam-i Hebrew: המכתב נכתב בעט ha-michtav niktav ba-et Akkadian: šipram šapāru bēlum Egyptian: sḏm.n.f p-ẖry m rnp.t Berber: tturra-t tibratin s uccen Here, Arabic and Proto-Semitic have the same word order (verb-subject-object), the same passive voice marker (-t-), the same definite article (al-), and the same preposition (bi-). Hebrew has changed the word order (subject-verb-object), lost the passive voice marker, changed the definite article (ha-) and the preposition (ba-). Akkadian has changed the word order (object-subject-verb), lost the passive voice marker, changed the definite article (-um) and the preposition (bēlum). Language; When you look at the actual linguistics, you'll find that many were puzzled by the opposite, that is, how the other "semetic" (why in quotes will be revealed later) languages were more "evolved" than Arabic, while Arabic had archaic features, not only archaic compared to bibilical Hebrew, Ethiopic, "Aramaic" contemporary "semetic" languages, but even archaic compared to languages from ancient antiquity; Ugaritic, Akkadain. What is meant here by Archaic is not what most readers think, it is Archaic not in the sense that it is simple, but rather that it is complex (think Latin to pig Latin or Italian or Old English, which had genders and case endings to modern English), not only grammatically, but also phonetically; All the so called semitic languages are supposed to have evolved from protosemetic, the Alphabet for protosemitic is that of the so called Ancient South Arabian (which interestingly corresponds with the traditional Arabic origins account) and has 28 Phonemes. Arabic has 28 phonemes. Hebrew has 22, same as Aramaic, and other "semitic" languages. Now pause for a second and think about it, how come Arabic, a language that is supposed to have come so late has the same number of letters as a language that supposedly predates it by over a millennium (Musnad script ~1300 BCE). Not only is the glossary of phonemes more diverse than any other semitic language, but the grammar is more complex, containing more cases and retains what's linguists noted for its antiquity, broken plurals. Indeed, a linguist has once noted that if one were to take everything we know about languages and how they develop, Arabic is older than Akkadian (~2500 BCE). Now how is it that the Qur'an came thousands of years in a language that is lexically, syntactically, phonemically, and semantically older than the oldest recorded writing? God did bring down the Qur’an, Mohamed is his Messenger.
@@panapolyEpirus The mindless fool cultist sheeps keep posting links to their favorite Dawa channels which is triggering the YT moderation bot to delete their comments and they blaming Kyle for deleting them. This is Islam for you.
@@OnlyJesus-Saves For argument #1: To understand why Allah calls these prophets Muslims, you have to understand what the meaning of the word is. The word Muslim comes from the root verb Aslam, or to surrender oneself to. The word Muslim, in Arabic, is a Ism Fael, or noun of a doer. This means that a Muslim is that who surrenders himself to Allah. Also, Ibraheem is referred to as Haneef, which in the Quran usually means someone who believes in one true god. This is evident as he disbelieved in the false gods of Nazareth and tried to find a real god. For argument #2: How are you attempting to disprove Islam, using your own book. As for the worship, yes we know they worshipped in a different way. You're also literally proving how much more fair Islam is compared to Christianity. You're saying we don't have a hierarchy. And that is very true, we do have however Ulama or Sheiks that know more than people like me and you that we seek their help if we need it. As for the theology, you can't say something doesn't make sense, because I can come up with a lot of "It doesn't make sense" arguments for you guys. Also there's no way you just said that alcohol is haram before understanding the context. Alcohol was HALAL for a certain time period, until it was later forbidden. I'm going to come up with an argument using the same exact method you used. In the Quran it says that Jesus (PBUH) told his people that I'm giving you glad tidings of a prophet who comes after me who's name is Ahmad, in the ayah after it says, then when he comes with the signs, they disbelieve. (This is out of my memory so if I'm off by a couple words please forgive me, the same meaning is evident). This was a prophecy that was prophesized by Jesus. Once again you can't disprove the Quran with the Bible. For argument #3: How does an illiterate person, living in ARABIA, steal things from other religions. For argument #4: Yes we do praise Christians, (real ones who actually follow the rules, and not commit adultery, eat pig, etc) This is all at minute 3:22 btw, I'm going to stop because I have a lot of better things to do, I would love if you made an actual debate between me and you, rather than constantly attacking Islam and expecting a bunch of people on youtube comments to disprove you. And again, I really think we should have an online debate.
Average arguement for islam 1. Jesus ate food 2. Muslims eat food therefore jesus is a muslim because they both eat food also didn't jesus drink whine, and is considered perfect by the quran but that breaks allah's laws to not consume alcholol or things associated with it
I grew up as a Muslim, learned the Quran with 5 years old. Everyone was praising me and respecting it. I left Islam in 2014 and found Jesus in 2021; or lets say he found me after many years of darkness and emptiness. I had an encounter with the holy spirit and two dreams in which Jesus stood in front of me with his holy light. It was amazing. Let us grow and become stronger. Being strong means to be kind. "All truly strong people are kind.” - Vagabond I have learned so much about the true face of Islam through Christian Prince. This man helped me throughout the years to understand what Muhammad really is: The Messenger of Satan. The Messenger who allows killing, raping, stealing, conquering, slaughtering, cheating, lying. Every Muslim is deceived by Allah. Even Allah himself admit it in the Quran 3:54. 600 years after Jesus the Devil claims that it was not Jesus who was killed. Salvation is not in Islam. You learn to fear God but raping is allowed, having sex slaves is allowed. From their fruits you shall know them. And Islam fruits are evil. Watch the world. Everywhere desctruction and hatred coming out of Islam. We don't accept nor respect this. We want peace and the TRUTH which is in Jesus. Thank you my friend for this video and your effort. May the Lord help the Muslims because I grew up with Muslims and I can say that they are truly kind people but in the wrong path which is from the Devil. They need to be saved and set free from the chains of Islam.
Any dehumanization of a human being runs counter to the precept that God created each and every human being, and what God has created is to be respected. In Christianity it is simply stated that those who do not believe in Jesus Christ as their Lord and Savior, and live in accordance to this belief, are kept apart from God by the sinful nature of humanity. No one is considered evil just because s/he rejects Jesus Christ; one can be morally upright and still be out of communion with God. Rather, the one refusing to be purified by the blood of Jesus refuses to enter into communion with God.
Amen brother, God bless you. Welcome to our family. It seems there are more Muslims having Jesus come to them in their dreams than anybody else. We have just seen this happen in Palestine and Iran. I reckon that is because there are none other more trapped then Muslims are, because many fear to leave the relieigon. Did you know one of Israel's most respected and recent Rabbis declared at the end of his life that Jesus was the messiah !? That just blows my mind. All the signs are happening my friend, Christ is the only way that makes sense
Ive asked allah to show me a sign that islam is true, i wanted him to give me a dream of him. Instead you received 2 from the lord jesus christ. God bless you my friend and i hope you touch many lives and inspire many non believer's to come to christ our saviour.
I used to be a Muslim because my friend influenced me but the first thing i seen on yt when doing research on it was about Muhammads 9 year olds wife i tried to ignore it and play dumb but i just found more and more damming things as i went down in the rabbit hole.
@@user-xp5id1kh4r I spoke to the professor at the mosque he took me to and ask what and why their are literally sex slaves in heaven and he laughed it off, I asked my friend the same thing and he didn't have an answer
Yeah, unfortunately, that seems to be their MO. It really makes ZERO sense to me that Muslims say that Allah is so holy and so separate from man, that he could never come down to mankind/earth directly and interact with his creations (even though he created them though, for some reason). But then, apparently, its no problem to bring humans to his own heavenly abode... just not vice versa. Plus, while on Earth, Muslims can't have extramarital sex, or drink alcohol, or have just sin in general... but then... once in heaven/jannah: not only can you have sex with women, but you can have sex with virgin after virgin after virgin that allah will then re-virginize for them to have sex with again and again and again... and in heaven, not only can you now drink, but allah will provide "rivers of wine" for his followers to drink from... and in heaven, pretty much any sin is now A-OK all of a sudden, even though it was vehemently disallowed on Earth. So, the reason allah didnt come down to mankind/earth is because it was below him and sinful... but then... its totally fine to not only bring man to his heavenly abode, but to let them act out on their most sinful and lustful desires whilst in heaven. It just makes no fkn sense, and none of them will ever answer me. Or they'll just totally ignore it. Or they'll go on the attack and viciously attack you or magically become a "super victim" where all of a sudden you're "rude af" or "disrespectful" or "hateful" or a "colonializer" etc. etc. Its ridiculous. @@BigloadPumer445
@@African.mappingit's no use man everytime I talk with a Christian they don't even come up with REAL arguments and all they say Mohammed pbuh married Aesha when she was 6 years old ;-;
@@Elioha-gt8pu "evil it is" really? picking the corrupt muslims in an arabic government and saying that it's the behavior entire population of muslims? what type of ignorancy is this??
@@Matrixorial I live in Georgia country and many of my ancestors were beheaded by Muslims for never converting from Orthodoxy to Islam!We Orthodox Christians never beheaded Muslims for not converting to Orthodox Christianity.
@@gilgameshchosen A non logic story: Question: Who is your God? Christian: Jesus Question: Who created Jesus? Christian: God Question: Who is your God? Christian: Jesus Question: (so, jesus created God or God created jesus?😂) Question: Did Jesus died on the cross? Christian: Yes Question: Who took Jesus' life? Christian: God Question: Who is your God? Christian: Jesus Question: (so, uhm, jesus took his soul by himself😂🤣) Question: Is Jesus the son of Mary? Christian: Yes Question: Who created Mary? Christian: God Question: Who is your God? Christian: Jesus Question: (it's absolutely no make sense!) Question: Did Jesus worship God? Christian: Yes Question: Who does Jesus worship? Christian: God 🤔 Question: Who is your God? Christian: Jesus Question: (so, jesus prays for himself) Question: Did Jesus pray? Christian:Yes Question: To whom Jesus prayed? Christian: To God Question: Who is your God? Christian: Jesus Question: Did God Have a beginning? Christian: No Question: Who was born on December 25th? Christian: Jesus Question: (so, who was God for human who are lived before jesus was born? Was the human an atheist before jesus born?) Question: Is god dead? Christian: Of course not Question: Who died on the cross? Christian: Jesus Question: Who is your God? Christian: Jesus Question: Does Jesus know the Day of Judgment? Christian: No Question: Who knows the end of the world? Christian: God Question: So is Jesus God? Christian: The priest said "just have faith and trust me" 🤪🤪.
@@begobolehsjwjangan2359 No, it'll be Islam, Christianity, and the followers of the anti-Christ. We actually believe some Christians (not all) will be on the good guy side. But when Jesus returns the Christians will become Muslim.
@@begobolehsjwjangan2359Which means Islam by itself can’t stand so had to use kafir arguments to try and debunk Christianity which in turn just as well debunks their entire religion since in their own book, it relies on the Bible for its authenticity of passing down this “continuity” of prophecy (Sura 5.66, 5.68 as blatant examples). It is easy to see the fraud Muhammad was.
Ex Muslim from Greece over here 👋🏽, was born and raised orthodox Christian but for the most part my family and I where atheist and wheee really just Christian’s in name, around 6 year ago I converted to Islam since moving to Sweden due to influence from friends and I have studied the Quran as well as the Hadith’s in hopes of becoming an Islamic scholar and hopefully guide more people to Islam and also debunk Christianity a-swell as Judaism, start of 2022 I have found my faith back in Christ and honestly I can say that when you learn Arabic and actually read the Quran it’s blatantly obvious the evil intentions of the book and I actually question my sanity from 5-6 years ago. Anyway after way too much hours of studying and research i have came to the conclusion that the Quran is nothing more than a book that plagiarised the Bible aswell as the Torah and “Allah” is nothing more than an alter ego for Mohammed, Let's take a look at it from Mohammad's perspective. Mohammad's father died before he could get to know him. His mother sent him away as well and later died when Mohammad was 6. A child has a very strong desire to be known and loved by his parents. I consider Allah to be Mohammad's alter ego. Mohammad might have suffered a narcissistic injury as a child and this created a supercharged desire to be "worshipped", to be seen. It was disproportionate in its scope to what a child needs. This was his overreaction to an unmet need as a child. Loads of children face the same circumstances as Mohammad so why don't they all turn in to prophets? There are a lot of people with the same traits as Mohammad but in the case of Mohammad his underlying narcissism might have been supercharged by an additional medical condition. Temporal lobe epilepsy could have triggered a 'god complex' in him, making him genuinely feel like he's talking to some god even though it might just have been a part of his psyche. We know that Mohammad claimed to be a man, but he wasn't shy in being worshipped like a manGod: Hadith: Narrated Anas:The Prophet (ﷺ) said "None of you will have faith till he loves me more than his father, his children and all mankind." Reference : Sahih al-Bukhari 15 sunnah.com/bukhari:15 -------------------------------- His unmet needs in as a child resulted in such an extreme reaction that now he wanted to be valued above ALL MANKIND. Mohammad became a bottomless pit in his desire for devotion from others. This was even reflected in how he thought about his alter ego Allah: Hadith: Abu Huraira reported Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) having said: By Him in Whose Hand is my life, if you were not to commit sin, Allah would sweep you out of existence and He would replace (you by) those people who would commit sin and seek forgiveness from Allah, and He would have pardoned them. Reference : Sahih Muslim 2749 sunnah.com/muslim:2749 ---------------- Allah's an attention craving malignant narcissist. He cares about attention even more than people not sinning. What happened to Allah being only focused on people doing good deeds as a test? It looks like he loves sinners who give him the satisfaction of groveling for forgiveness in front of him so that they are at his mercy. This doesn't make sense from the perspective of a god of a universe of 200 billion trillion stars. However, it makes perfect sense when we realize that Allah is just Mohammad's alter ego and it too craves attention and worship just like Mohammad. Mohammad in hadith didn't take any clear action against folks who were worshipping him like a manGOD: Hadith excerpt form: ( sunnah.com/bukhari/54/19 )By Allah, whenever Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) spat, the spittle would fall in the hand of one of them (i.e. the Prophet's companions) who would rub it on his face and skin; if he ordered them they would carry his orders immediately; if he performed ablution, they would struggle to take the remaining water; and when they spoke to him, they would lower their voices and would not look at his face constantly out of respect. -------------- How are they not worshipping this man if they are rubbing his spit on their faces? What exactly did they do after saving his wudu water?? Drink it?? As Mohammad's alter ego, Allah saying this makes perfect sense: Koran 51:56: And I did not create the jinn and mankind except to worship Me. The whole focus of the Koran is believing in Allah and Mohammad and NOT doing good deeds. If it had been doing good deeds then Allah would have allowed non muslims to enter heaven based on their good deeds. It seems like worshipping and joining Mohammad's cult seems to be the number one objective of the Koran. Mohammad cooked up a vicious concept of hell in which Allah takes perverse pleasure in the eternal torture of his own creation. Malignant narcissists have extreme reactions to feeling even slightly slighted by somebody. Mohammad was a supercharged malignant narcissist who over reacted to somebody not joining his cult with ETERNAL torture of this magnitude: Koran 4:56: Surely those who reject Our signs, We will cast them into the Fire. Whenever their skin is burnt completely, We will replace it so they will ˹constantly˺ taste the punishment. Indeed, Allah is Almighty, All-Wise. --------------------------------- Is that proportional punishment for not accepting Islam? When Mohammad refused to provide PROOF when asked for? This makes no sense from the perspective of a benevolent god of the universe. It makes perfect sense from a human perspective in which malignant narcissism was supercharged by a god complex. Mohammad did NOT tolerate critics. He ordered the killing of a female poet over just her words. Mohammad's minion killed her while she was still holding her baby. Mohammad massacred a whole tribe of jews because they were not ready to accept a man that failed to answer their questions about scripture. A normal person fails a test and is willing to accept that he lacks in knowledge. Mohammad's reaction was over the top. Imagine a math student failing a math test and then rage quitting by saying that all previous math books have been tampered with! This is basically what Mohammad's claim was about previous scripture. Instead, of accepting that he wasn't well versed in previous scripture, he chose to denounce it as corrupted. The following verse makes it clear that Mohammad was just a fan-fiction Abrahamic scripture plagiarist: The Jews say, "Ezra is the son of Allāh"; and the Christians say, "The Messiah is the son of Allāh." That is their statement from their mouths; they imitate the saying of those who disbelieved before [them]. May Allāh destroy them; how are they deluded? There is no known Jewish sect in history that has ever claimed that Ezra was the son of god. All the verses of convenience in which Allah is acting as his personal secretary, acting as his harem manager show that Mohammad saw nothing wrong with Allah being so obsessed with him because he considered himself to be the center of the universe. His followers claim that he is just a man but they too treat him like a manGod and the center of the universe. This video makes it clear: ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-dk6jnUSaztY.html In my opinion, looking at the Koran and hadith from the angle of Mohammad being a malignant narcissistic cult leader starts to make a lot of sense instead of looking at it from the perspective of an actual god saying all that has been said in the Koran and hadith.
In these days, there are many Muslim kids grown in England and America which are also born there and we see many that become roadman and gangsters, and some who become leaders are like prophets and generals wanting to kill and kill, ice cube converted to Islam and I think because he feels like worshipping his alter ego, he was deceived as well as other rappers which many young Muslim rappers from America speak violent lyrics and about gang stuff and sexual deeds, rappers that get saved which there aren't many, either leave rapping or use rapping to worship God, DMX's music changed drastically after He gave his life to God, as he didn't use profanity as much and made a song talking about his guilt when falling to sin and worshipping God. God bless those who are deceived and may their hearts be turned to the Holy Spirit and feel it not to “just feels right“ amen
It was just June of this year, I was very confused with what I wanted to do with my life . I was raised Hindu but found the faith way too mystic and fake so I decided to convert but I was confused that should I go to Islam or Christianity.I wanted to take up Islam because of its strong position in India and Muslims saying how scientific it is but then I saw one of your videos debunking Islam. And the one fact that the Bible predicted the Quran made me turn fully to Christianity. Thank You Kyle ☦️☦️
AMEN brother! you have been called to Christ 💜☦️ Matthew 16:24 Then Jesus told his disciples, “If anyone would come after me, let him deny himself and take up his cross and follow me. 25 For whoever would save his life will lose it, but whoever loses his life for my sake will find it. 26 For what will it profit a man if he gains the whole world and forfeits his soul? Or what shall a man give in return for his soul? Jesus is calling out to His flock all over the world right now. Take heart, you are loved immensely by God. But God loves all His creation, and many of them do not know this. Many Muslims walking the earth today having no idea that Jesus died for their sins. May you be a light to others and bring the love, Joy and peace of Christ to the people around you.
Not even 2 minutes into the video and you’ve made horrible arguments 1. The trinity is no where found in the okd testament, its simply yahweh speaking in the father son like contest WHICH ISLAM DOESNT DENY, the father son concept isn’t literally like a father or son its simply terms to imply creation and creator. The fatherhood in islam and Judaism is symbolic to the creator not a literal father, as portrayed even in Deuteronomy 32. In which he talks about Israel where he brings them to existence that's how he is a father and a creator. And the son is used as a metaphorical stand point. Even verses christians use like psalm 22 and 1 samuel where it says he has begotten thee and to me you will be a son and to me I will be a father, which clearly means a created son and the father as a creator, the verses themselves are implying creation. Some baptist accounts of Luke even admit that psalm 22 was sent to jesus at the time or implying to him which means AT THAT DAY AND TIME HE BECAME THE SON. 2. islam doesn’t have sacrifice like the jews and Israelites did. Thing is they overestimate and make it seem like they were coordinated large gathering ritual sacrifices which made the priests seem more big and powerful. When in reality they were small like the muslims, as deuteronomy 12:8 which makes it clear that where all scattered and not coordinated and Jeremiah 7:22. Take out the priestly sources and its the same as islam. Even Hosea 6:6 implies sacrifice isn’t even important Also another proof of theology differences, first the jews say that the sabbath is because God rested on the 7th day, but according to deuteronomy it’s because God brought them out of egypt and that's when it started. So that's another contradiction in theology. 3. You say our Jesus failed his mission as the messiah, when in reality your Jesus failed. He didnt slay the wicked like Isaiah would say, he didn’t rule like a king, he didn’t defeat his enemies, rather he died on a cross naked which is cursed according to Deuteronomy, cried to god even tho according to you he will not cry out, and went to hell for 3 days. Christianity doesn’t have a singe thelogy, your bible is a product of the post babylonian exhile, and jewish nationalism.
Finally, I can actually use some of my knowledge. The Trinity can be found *since the creation and the fall of Adam and Eve.* Genesis 1:1, "In the beginning *God* created the heavens and the earth." This mentions the Father. Verse 2, "Now the earth was formless and empty, darkness was over the surface of the deep, and the *Spirit of God* was hovering over the waters." This mentions the Holy Spirit. And then we skip into Genesis 3:15. "And I will put enmity between you and the woman, and between your offspring and hers; he will crush your head, and you will strike his heel." If you know what He's talking about, you know.
@@hectallium you dont understand the biblical language then, Genesis 1:1 doesn’t mentioj the trinity. The spirit of the lord is often referred to angels, which is why muslims say the holy spirit is angel gabriel. The bible makes it pretty clear they are angels too. Genesis 3:15 proves nothing.
Hey @purdess2.040 are you a Muslim and if so then you should be better than this, the clear lack of respect for another one’s religion even if it is not yours truly appalling. Listen I understand you’re trying to prove something here but while doing at least show respect to the people’s religion you are speaking of. Thank you and have a good day Ramadan Kareem!
Acts 8:37 Main article: Acts 8 § Verse 37 KJV: "And Philip said, If thou believest with all thine heart, thou mayest. And he answered and said, I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God." Modern versions: Either sidelined to a footnote (e.g., ESV, RV, RSV, NRSV, NIV, Hodges & Farstad Majority Text) or omitted altogether (e.g., Moffatt, Goodspeed, Schonfield, Robinson & Pierpont Majority Text). Reason: The earliest Greek manuscript (Ea/E2) of the New Testament to include this verse dates from the late 6th or early 7th century[26][27] and it is only found in Western witnesses to the text with many minor variations.[28] The majority of Greek manuscripts copied after 600 AD and the majority of translations made after 600 AD do not include the verse.[29][30][31][32] The tradition of the confession was current in the time of Irenaeus[33] as it is cited by him (c. 180)[34] and Cyprian (c. 250)[35] This verse appears in E (specifically, a portion from a codex consisting of Acts, dated to the 6th century, once owned by Archbishop William Laud and therefore called the Codex Laudianus, sometimes designated E2 or Ea) and several cursives dating after the 9th century (showing many variants), "manuscripts of good character, but quite inadequate to prove the authenticity of the verse," according to F.H.A. Scrivener.[36] This verse was not found in the Syriac Peshitta, with the result that a printed edition of the Peshitta inserted the verse translated into Syriac by the editors,[36] It is similarly missing from p45, 74, א, A,B,C,P,Ψ, and a multitude of other codices and cursives. Its omission has a UBS confidence rating of A.[37] However, as Kurt Aland noted, "The external evidence [for the inclusion of this verse] is so weak that the Nestle apparatus cited only the support for insertion and not for the original omission... The voice which speaks in Acts 8:37 is from a later age, with an interest in the detailed justification of the [Ethiopian] treasurerer's desire for baptism."[38] It was omitted in the Complutensian edition, and included in Erasmus's editions only because he found it as a late note in the margin of a secondary manuscript and, from Erasmus, it found its way into other Textus Receptus editions and then the KJV.[39] As Scrivener said, "We cannot safely question the spuriousness of this verse, which all the critical editors condemn."[36] "For although in the Acts of the Apostles the eunuch is described as at once baptized by Philip, because "he believed with his whole heart," this is not a fair parallel. For he was a Jew, and as he came from the temple of the Lord he was reading the prophet Isaiah," (Cyprian)[35] and is found in the Old Latin (2nd/3rd century) and the Vulgate (380-400). In his notes Erasmus says that he took this reading from the margin of manuscript 4ap (15th century) and incorporated it into the Textus Receptus.[40] J. A. Alexander (1857) suggested that this verse, though genuine, was omitted by many scribes, "as unfriendly to the practice of delaying baptism, which had become common, if not prevalent, before the end of the 3rd century."[41] Acts 15:34 KJV: "Notwithstanding it pleased Silas to abide there still." Reason: Although this verse, or something similar to it, is quite old, it does not appear in the oldest manuscripts, and the manuscripts that do contain it are inconsistent about its text. It does not appear at all in א, A,B,E,L,P,Ψ, and other mss, some Italic, Syriac, Coptic, Slavonic, the best mss of the Latin Vulgate, and other versions, and quotations of this paragraph in Chrysostom. The verse as it appears in the KJV is found in less ancient Greek manuscripts (cursives, after the 9th century) and some other Italic, Syriac, Coptic, Armenian, Ethiopic, and other versions. However some other, equally old resources, such as the C codex, and several cursives, change one word to make the verse read, "Notwithstanding it pleased Silas that they should abide there still." Several other sources, such as Codex D (Codex Bezae) and some Italic manuscripts, extend the verse with the ending, "and Judas traveled alone"; and a couple of Italic and Latin manuscripts add to that, "to Jerusalem."[42] Erasmus annotated this verse with the comment that the reference to Judas did not appear in any Greek ms known to him.[43] As F.H.A. Scrivener put it, "No doubt this verse is an unauthorised addition, self-condemned indeed by its numerous variations. [...] [It must have begun as] a marginal gloss, designed to explain how [...] Silas was at hand in verse 40, conveniently for Saint Paul to choose him as a companion in travel.[44] This verse was omitted from the Revised Version and most modern versions, but many versions include it in a footnote. Acts 24:6-8 KJV: "6Who also hath gone about to profane the temple: whom we took, and would have judged according to our law. 7But the chief captain Lysias came upon us, and with great violence took him away out of our hands, 8Commanding his accusers to come unto thee: by examining of whom thyself mayest take knowledge of all these things, whereof we accuse him." (Only verse 7 is omitted entirely, as well as the beginning of verse 6 and most of verse 8.) Modern versions (RV): "6Who moreover assayed to profane the temple; on whom we also laid hold; 8from whom thou wilt be able, by examining him thyself, to take knowledge of all these things, whereof we accuse him." Reason: These words are not found in the oldest sources - p74,א, A, B, P, several minuscules, some manuscripts of the Italic, Vulgate, Coptic, and Georgian versions. The words are found in sources not quite as old - E,Ψ, some minuscules (with many variants), some Italic manuscripts, and the Armenian and Ethiopic versions. The absence of these words from the earliest resources, and the several variations in the resources in which they appear, made their exclusion probable but not a certainty (the UBS assigned the omission a confidence rating of only D).[45] While verse 7 is omitted in its entirety, parts of verse 6 and verse 8 are also omitted. Acts 28:29 KJV: "And when he had said these words, the Jews departed, and had great reasoning among themselves." Modern versions (RV): (verse omitted from main text, in footnote with comment, "Some ancient authorities insert verse 29") Reason: This verse is lacking in the oldest sources - p74, א, A,B,E,ψ, several minuscules, some Italic, Vulgate, Syriac, Ethiopic, and Coptic manuscripts, and the Armenian and Georgian versions. They appear only in later sources such as P (9th century) and several minuscules, and a smattering of Italic manuscripts. The UBS gave the omission of this verse a confidence rating of B. Erasmus of Rotterdam, in working up the very first printed Greek New Testament from a multitude of manuscripts, included this note for this verse: "I did not find the words in several old manuscripts."[46] Romans 16:24 KJV: "The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with you all. Amen." Modern versions (RV): (omitted from main text, in footnote) Reason: This verse occurs twice in the KJV in this chapter; once as the conclusion to verse 20 and again as verse 24, which is the occurrence omitted from modern versions. The first occurrence (as part of verse 20) is very well supported by ancient resources, including p46, א, A,B,C,P,Ψ, and several ancient versions (although some omit 'Christ' and some omit 'Amen'); its inclusion in verse 20 got a UBS confidence rating of B. However, its recurrence as verse 24 is not so well supported. It does not occur after verse 23 in p46 & 61, א, A,B,C, several minuscules and some other sources; it does appear in D,G,Ψ, minuscule 629 (although G,Ψ, and 629-and both leading compilations of the so-called Majority Text-end the Epistle with this verse and do not follow it with verses 25-27) and several later minuscules; P and some minuscules do not have it as verse 24 but move it to the very end of the Epistle, after verse 27. Westcott and Hort said of the recurrence as verse 24, "This last combination, which rests on hardly any authority, and is due to late conflation, was adopted by Erasmus from the Latin and is preserved in the 'Received Text'."[47] The verses immediately before verse 24, the verse 24 itself, and the verses following verse 24 show many variations in the surviving manuscripts. An abbreviated history of the passage is that the conclusion of the Epistle to the Romans was known in several different versions: about the year 144, Marcion made radical changes in the ending of the Epistle to the Romans, breaking it off with chapter 14. At about the same time someone else made in other manuscripts the addition of verses 16:24 and 16:25-27. despite the existence of a concluding benediction at 16:20 (whose purpose was obscured by the greetings appended at 16:21-23). This resulted in a proliferation of readings (at least 15 different permutations among the surviving resources).[48] Because of its absence from the oldest sources and the confusion about its appearance in several of the sources containing it, its omission after verse 23 got a UBS confidence rating of B.[49]
@@AliTanoli-cq3js you already said 'sad' and 'steered your heart' in one sentence, any further conversation with you is forfeit. Please do the mind ablutions, or there will be pollutions.
@@Kanye249 I actually studied Islam and quran very well before leaving it ,also After studying the christian faith ,I have found the truth in it and I'm satisfied ❤️❤️
@@user-bm7ng6fk7v hope you repent back to Allah he’s the most merciful he accepts everyone back Allah is the only one true God and Jesus is the messenger of Allah
muslims in the comments be like: "y-y-y-you're yapping, islam fastest growing religion, y-y-y-you're misrepresenting, [insert strawman argument which I can't back up after someone responds and refutes it because I copy pasted it], I-I-I-I d-d-d-don't understand the trinity therefore it is wrong. [proceeds not to respond to the arguments].
it is the fastest growing, and christian are leaving because its true the trinity does not make sense and always sound like partialism or modelism when someone is explaining it, you know what they say, the trinity is a mystery
Brother's and sister's I know you love to hear that the Quran is false but we must pray for the people in Islam. Please pray for them that they open their eyes before it's too late for them.
There is no use in praying for a people who take life itself, the Spirit of God and the great teachings of the Messiah! Jesus for a joke. Whoever rejects Jesus as the crucial mediator and connector to our heavenly father, is and remains disconnected to the holy Spirit of God whether you pray or not. 🍷🌁
If allah does strictly NOT allow sin for his believers while here on Earth and is one of the reasons why he would never sully/defile his divine being by coming to mankind/earth and interact with them directly (even though he made them in the first place)... then why does he not only allow man into heaven/jannah, but allows sin and even promises it as incentives to believers while here on Earth??? Muslims tell me that God would never sully himself by coming down to mankind/earth and interact with them and because they are dirty sinners... but then, he not only allows, but incentivizes their beliefs by promising UNLIMITED SIN and worldy pleasures in Heaven/jannah itself!!! Islam says that you can't have premarital sex, or drink alcohol, or sin in general while here on Earth... but then... once we get to god's heavenly abode, not only is SIN now okay (thus sullying his great name and his divine, pure house), but you get even more!!! Instead of no lusting/premarital sex... in heaven, you can not only have sex, but you are promised dozens upon dozens of virgin women, who are re-virginized by allah after you fck them, for you to defile all over again. Instead of no alcohol and drinking... in heaven, not only can you drink alcohol, but allah will provide you "Rivers of Wine" to drink from. Instead of God removing all wants and worldly desires from his believers once they get to heaven (thus maintaining the purity and sanctity of God/heaven) so they can be united with him for ever and ever amen... in Islam, allah welcomes sins of the flesh and lust and just absolute depravity into Heaven itself and defiling not just his creation, but now his heavenly abode too!!! Its disgusting! If sin is not allowed while here on Earth... then why is it not only allowed in Heaven/jannah, but its MULTIPLIED and promised as an incentive! Its disgusting and makes no sense. And it dilutes the sanctity and holiness of the Great Creator, Himself! @@randomfellow1483
Fr people thinking they're giga-geniuses who dump down endless scriptures of who-knows-what translated hadiths & ayats into the comment section really thinking people are gonna read allat. Religious debates are a joke nowadays.
It doesn't say that. It mentions people taking Jesus and Mary as Gods because that's what the Arabs did. They had many pictures and statues of different dieties in the Kaaba which the Arabs used to pray to and one of them was a frescoe of Jesus and Mary.
@@mikeylejan8849 References to that pop up in 2 cases depending on who that verse is directed to. 1) For the Pagans, Allah was also one of the gods in the Kaaba, alongside Jesus and Mary. This is the more common one. 2) For the Christians who believe that Jesus belongs with Allah and the Holy Spirit in a Trinity.
Maybe early Christians in Arabia believed that. With high variations in faith of early Christians (Arians, Valentinians, Gnostics) everything could be possible.
Islam has been around for ages & still going strong! There are hundreds of religions & each of us has a choice. So you are free to take your pick. Hope you make the right one!
Had the thumbnail as Islam debunked and Islam is false but pretty much whatever he said in the intro is from the biblical perspective (unreliable source). Holy Quran got history wrong? Then tell me why does the bible use the word pharaoh at the times of prophet Joseph and Moses (which is incorrect as both times had different titles and not simply pharaoh) and why does the Holy Quran use king for one and pharaoh for the other (which is correct)?. Again if its simply about copying then why does the Holy Quran mention the pharaoh body being prserved (which the body has been) and the bible didnt mention that? You brought up John 10:30, then check john 17:3 (now is Jesus sending himself??) which also shows that they are separate, also check Timothy 2:5 which shows both of them as separate. Also see john 5:30 in which it is said that he cant do anything on his own. Holy Quran 5:47 isnt a nightmare for muslims. It is referring to what Allah revealed, not what you guys go around with gospels of luke, matthew etc. The original message of Hazrat Isa (Jesus) got distorted so they (christians) now come to Islam. Funny thing is you brought up Galatians 1:8 which uses the singular for gospel. And look at how many you have currently. And can you tell me where does the Holy Quran praises the bible?? Why Allah revealed the Holy Quran 600 years later? Christianity got distorted with the passage of time like paul preaching a distorted message to gentiles (check new jerome biblical commentry on matthew 5:17 and how paulism came forward), how the trinity became official 300 years after Jesus at the council of nicaea and constantinople. The actual reason or why the Holy Quran was revealed at that time, Only Allah Knows Best. Holy Prophet (PBUH) marriage to Hazrat Aisha was completed when she was 9 years old and even his worst enemies didnt say anything about the marriage because it was normal at that time. Why dont you check your own societies 100-200 years back. In 1800s the age of consent for girls in UK was 10-12 years and in US in 1881 the age consent was 10-12 except the Delaware state which had it at 7. "Lusted"? Really pathetic and not surprised coming from guys who tries to distort information. The Holy Prophet (PBUH) first marriage, when he was young and 25 years old, was with a noble woman who was quite older than him. "This is why muslims are leaving Islam"? Keep your made up stuff to yourself. Check pew research on religious switching and Islam had an increase (more people converted) while christianity saw a decrease (more people left) comparatively. This is this guy in just the intro and then there are people who try to learn about Islam or even christianity from him. You have the concept of being born as sinners right? While check ezekiel 18:20 which says the opposite of it. And Allah Knows Best.
Hey, to everyone genuinly interested in this topic, I strongly advise you to take your own research into your hand, since none of what this guy is claiming is right. I'm by no means a scholar, nor am I ready to start researching every verse from ALL Abrahamic religions to disprove the false information stated in this video. I'm like any other person here, seeking for the truth and only the truth. I learned about religion in school (I'm 19), mostly Christianity and Judaism. Islam was something I tried to catch up to in my private time. I immediately noticed the wrong interpretation and approach in this video by acting as if the arguments stated are bulletproof and totally logic, while they ultimately boil down to "Islam just copied everyone, yet they're different and came 600 years after, so they are not trustable!" I think its important to note that A. All of them are Abrahamic religions, meaning they're ment to be connected and B. If that 'they came later' argument was valid, it would ultimately be just as effective on christianity aswell, since Judaism was the first one to exist and furthermore create christianity (jesus was a jew that came to guide jews again, since there was a lot of injustice and bad going on among them and their society system with the groups they'd build) Heres a very detailed source with proof regarding the claim that all prophets weren't muslim: www.answering-christianity.com/luke6_40.htm I would also like to add that When islam came last, it literally mentioned how christianity and judaism are from the same God (Allah) and that those before islam and the last revelations are granted paradise aswell. Meaning, that those prophets and people who rightfully followed them did everything right back then. Why would a false God claim such thing if it wasn't true or approved of from the same creator? Also, islam does align with history, its just that people like this guy try to make up arguments that hold no weight really. Thats why folks, ALWAYS do your own research with an open heart. By objective, rather than subjectiv to avoid the 'I only see what i wanna see" effect. ✌️
I almost converted to Islam once upon a time. I was disenchanted with Protestant Christianity (being raised as a not particularly devout AME (African Methodist Episcopal)) and the hollowness and logical inconsistencies of atheism, especially the edge lord anti-thiestic atheism of the early-mid 2000s during my teenage years. I was fortunate enough to go to a good high-school with a diverse student body, and one of my best friends in high school was a Sunni Muslim with family from Egypt. We used to get in all sorts of discussions about all kinds of topics, and he and his family impressed me with his intelligence, manners and hospitality. There were these two Muslim twins I used to hang out with back then too and they were REALLY smart, easily a few grade levels above the average class at the time. Their families were from Pakistan, I think. Later when I went to university, my politics were moving towards a more anarcho-syndicalism libertarian leftism, and I met up with students who were anti-Zionist, and many of them were Muslim, so I became pals with some of them. I bought a Quran and Hadith and started reading, as I was all over the place at the time. I was doing yoga and kundalini exercises regularly and reading Hindu and Buddhist sutras, existentialist philosophy, Zen Buddhist treatises, etc. I didn't commit to Islam at the time, because I was still deeply skeptical of explicit religious claims. Long story short (were talking 10-15 years now), after going to two Buddhist silent meditation retreats and watching our world crumble before my eyes, slowly but surely I'm coming to realize the sheer importance and magnificence of Christ and the the church that immediately followed his earthly sojourn. I have friends and acquaintances today who are Muslim, Zen Buddhist, Hindu, Jewish, etc., but these systems and philosophies don't seem to compare to Christ and what he left for the world. (Oh and the fact that my father (RIP/Memory Eternal) was a member of the NATION OF ISLAM back in the day, but that's a whole other story.)
Me too, I thought that Islam is nice and almost wanted to convert because of the lies of Muslim people on tiktok saying that Islam destroyed racism without mentioning the slave trade that was continued in Islamic nations even after 1800
Buddha soothes me and Jesus comforts me. I find both infinitely glorious and complementary, Buddha is man who becomes God and Jesus is God who becomes man. They both follow parallel paths, with Buddha one attains love through wisdom, with Jesus one attains wisdom through love. They are the 2 lights of the world, the 2 paths that lead to the foot of the sun.
@@Maitatron I'm sorry but you can't serve two masters, either you will hate one and loved the other. Any religion that you can lie to yourself into thinking that you can be pious enough that God will owe you something can not be the true path to God. Jesus is the King that goes infront of His troops as all others makes you fight on the frontline.
Hi kyle me and my friend have recently been having some theological debates reading the bible and are becoming proper chrsitians i was baptised catholic but never rlly practiced his mother is a chrsitian but his father is a muslim and we are seeing the truth of orthodoxy as protestant and catholicism have so many faults. There are no orthodox churches nearby the closest is an hr and we are both 15 what should we do?
Surah Al-Imran Aya 49, of the Quran states that jesus was sent to the israelites, although written over 1,300 years ago in the 19th century (same century bible was only transtalted into Arabic in as well) they came to the same conclusion, independently through textual criticisim, that Jesus did not intend to establish a new religion, instead of being the founder of Christianity, he was merely the occasion of its foundation. Till the day of his death he was a "Jew" by belief and practice, as well as by birth. (in quotations for in reality he was a 'Muslim', one that declares that God is One) He never became a Christian. He never used or heard the words Christian or Christianity or any equivalent of either. Paul had neither met nor seen Jesus, his relation to the twelve apostles was one of decided independence and even of opposition. He acknowledged no subordination to them. He addressed no doctrinal epistle to them or their churches, and received none from them. He made no reports to them. He did not correspond with them regularly. They never invited him to preach to their congregations and he never invited them to address his converts. He declared that he did not owe his conversion, his baptism, or his doctrine to the twelve, and that he never spent any long time in Jerusalem or in Judea as a Christian missionary. He claimed to be an apostle by a secret divine commission, but the twelve never admitted the validity of his claim. They never gave him the title of apostle; they never said anything indicative of willingness to admit him into their councils. Vacancies occurred in their number, but they never chose him to a vacant place, rather we have statements of Peter with regards to Paul which show nothing but animosity: "And if our Jesus appeared to you also and became known in a vision and met you as angry with an enemy [recall: Paul had his vision while still persecuting the Christians: Acts 9], yet he has spoken only through visions and dreams or through external revelations. But can anyone be made competent to teach through a vision? And if your opinion is that that is possible, why then did our teacher spend a whole year with us who were awake? How can we believe you even if he has appeared to you?… But if you were visited by him for the space of an hour and were instructed by him and thereby have become an apostle, then proclaim his words, expound what he has taught, be a friend to his apostles and do not contend with me, who am his confidant; for you have in hostility withstood me, who am a firm rock, the foundation stone of the Church" -Homily 17 Section XIX On the pauline credo currently called trinitanity Peter said "For some from among the Gentiles have rejected my lawful preaching and have preferred a lawless and absurd doctrine to the man who is my enemy. And indeed some have attempted, while I am still alive, to distort my words by interpretations of many sorts, as if I taught the dissolution of the law… But that may God forbid ! For to do such a thing means to act contrary to the Law of God which was made to Moses and was confirmed by our Lord in its everlasting continuance. For he said, “The heaven and the earth will pass away, but not one jot or one tittle shall pass away from the Law.” -Letter of Peter to James, 2.3-5
@mznxbcv12345 you could use the same argument about oauks revelations as Muhammad's he never performed miracles or anything as proof of divinity. Yes was a Jew but he taught different form them Christianity is not supposed to be a new religion form Judaism but the continuation of it which is why the bible includes nt and ot. He came to fulfill the law of the prophets and provide salvation.
The Aramaic word for God is "Alaha". It's the word Isa PBUH used. Sounds familiar? Written without the confusing vowels it is written A-L-H ܐ ܠܗܐ (alap-lamed-he) as found in Targum or in Tanakh (Daniel, Ezra), Syriac Aramaic (Peshitta), reduced from the Arabic original (of which Aramaic is a dialect continuum as will be explained) it is written in the Arabic script 'A-L-L-H' (Aleph-Lam-Lam-Ha) add an A before the last H for vocalization. The word God in another rendition in Hebrew ʾĕlōah is derived from a base ʾilāh, an Arabic word, written without confusing vowel it is A-L-H in the Arabic script, pronounced ilah not eloah. Hebrew dropped the glottal stop and mumbled it, aramic mumbled a little less and it became elaha. Infact both are written written A-L-H in Arabic, it is pronounced i in Arabic and not A because it is an Alef with hamza below (إ أ ) They are two different forms of Alef. And it mean "a god", it is the non definitive form of A-L-L-H, in which the Alef is without a glottal stop/hamza,(ا), but this kind of nuance is lost in the dialect continua. infact "YHWH" itself is an Arabic word as discussed by Professor. Israel Knohl (Professor of Biblical studies at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem) in the paper" YHWH: The Original Arabic Meaning of the Name." jesus as his name is often misspelled due to the lack of the ayin sound in Greek, which was rendered to Iesous, coupling the nearest sound to ayin, same letter found in 'Iraq', which sounds entirely different in Arabic form 'Iran' in Arabic, with the -ous Greek suffix that Greeks typically add to their names 'HerodotOS', 'PlotinUS', 'AchelOUS' and later mumbled into a J. The yeshua rendition of Isa (his name in the Qur'an) PBUH which is purported to be the name of Jesus is KNOWN to had been taken from greek. Western Syriac also use "Isho". Western Aramaic (separate from Syriac which is a dialect of Eastern Aramaic) use "Yeshu". Western Syriac has been separate from Western Aramaic for about 1000 years. And sounds don't even match up. Syriac is a Christian liturgical language yet the four letters of the name of Jesus «ܝܫܘܥ» [ = Judeo-Babylonian Aramaic: «ישוע» ] sounds totally different in West vs East Syriac, viz. vocalized akin to Christian Arabic, Hebrew, Aramaic «ܝܶܫܽܘܥ» (Yēšūʿ) in West Syriac, but pronounced more akin to Muslim Arabic Quran character name Isa in East Syriac «ܝܑܼܫܘܿܥ» (ʾĪšōʿ). The reason for this confusion is their dropping of phonemes. Only someone that has no idea what the letters are or how they sound would have a name ending in a pharyngeal fricative like the ayin, if it were to be used in a name it would have had to be in the beginning, thus the Arabic rendition is the correct one. An example in English is how the appended -d is a common error amongst the English pronouncing Gaelic names. The name Donald arose from a common English mispronunciation of the Gaelic name Donal. Just how it is with donal becoming donald and the two becoming distinct and the original being regarded as something seperate so too did Isa PBUH turn to Iesous turn to jesus and when they tried going back to the original they confused it for yeshua ( ysu is how it is actually written) for Isa PBUH ( 3'eysah ) Schlözer in his preparation for the Arabia expedition in 1781 coined the term Semitic language: "From the Mediterranean to the Euphrates, from Mesopotamia to Arabia ruled one language, as is well known. Thus Syrians, Babylonians, Hebrews, and Arabs were one people (ein Volk). Phoenicians (Hamites) also spoke this language, which I would like to call the Semitic (die Semitische)." -Before Boas: The Genesis of Ethnography and Ethnology in the German By Han F. Vermeulen. He was only half right though, Arabic is the only corollary to "proto-semitic", infact the whole semitic classification is nonsensical as will be shown. "protosemetic" Alphabet (28), Arabic Alphabet (28), Latin transliteration, hebrew (22) 𐩠 𐩡 𐩢 𐩣 𐩤 𐩥 𐩦 𐩧 𐩨 𐩩 𐩪 𐩫 𐩬 𐩭 𐩮 𐩰 𐩱 𐩲 𐩳 𐩴 𐩵 𐩶 𐩷 𐩸 𐩹 𐩺 𐩻 𐩼 ا ب ت ث ج ح خ د ذ ر ز س ش ص ض ط ظ ع غ ف ق ك ل م ن ه و ي A b t ṯ j h kh d ḏ r z s sh ṣ ḍ ṭ ẓ ʿ ġ f q k l m n h w y א ב ג ד ה ו ז ח ט י כ ל מ נ ס ע פ צ ק ר ש ת Merged phonemes in hebrew and aramaic: ح, خ (h, kh) merged into only kh consonant remain س, ش (s, sh) merged into only Shin consonant remaining ط, ظ (ṭ/teth, ẓ) merged into only ṭ/teth consonant remaining ص, ض (ṣ, ḍ/Tsad ) merged into only ḍ/Tsad consonant remaining ع, غ (3'ayn, Ghayn) merged into a reducted ayin consonant remaining ت, ث (t/taw, th) merged into only t/taw consonant remaining The reason why the protoS alphabet here is 28 and not 29, is because the supposed extra letter is simply a س written in a different position, but it was shoehorned to obfuscated. In Arabic letter shapes are different depending on whether they are in the beginning , middle or end of a word. As a matter of fact, all of the knowledge needed for deciphering ancient texts and their complexity was derived from the Qur'an. It was by analyzing the syntactic structure of the Qur'an that the Arabic root system was developed. This system was first attested to in Kitab Al-Ayin, the first intralanguage dictionary of its kind, which preceded the Oxford English dictionary by 800 years. It was through this development that the concept of Arabic roots was established and later co-opted into the term 'semitic root,' allowing the decipherment of ancient scripts. In essence, they quite literally copied and pasted the entirety of the Arabic root. Hebrew had been dead, as well as all the other dialects of Arabic, until being 'revived' in a Frankensteinian fashion in the 18th and 19th centuries. The entire region spoke basically the same language, with mumbled dialect continuums spread about, and Arabic is the oldest form from which all these dialects branched off. As time passed, the language gradually became more degenerate, Language; When one looks at the actual linguistics, one will find that many were puzzled by the opposite, that is, how the other "semetic" languages were more "evolved" than Arabic, while Arabic had archaic features, not only archaic compared to bibilical Hebrew, Ethiopic, "Aramaic" contemporary "semetic" languages, but even archaic compared to languages from ancient antiquity; Ugaritic, Akkadain. What is meant here by Archaic is not what most readers think, it is Archaic not in the sense that it is simple, but rather that it is complex (think Latin to pig Latin or Italian or Old English, which had genders and case endings to modern English), not only grammatically, but also phonetically; All the so called semitic languages are supposed to have evolved from protosemetic, the Alphabet for protosemitic is that of the so called Ancient South Arabian (which interestingly corresponds with the traditional Arabic origins account) and has 28 Phonemes. Arabic has 28 phonemes. Hebrew has 22, same as Aramaic, and other "semitic" languages. Now pause for a second and think about it, how come Arabic, a language that is supposed to have come so late has the same number of letters as a language that supposedly predates it by over a millennium (Musnad script ~1300 BCE). Not only is the glossary of phonemes more diverse than any other semitic language, but the grammar is more complex, containing more cases and retains what's linguists noted for its antiquity, broken plurals. Indeed, a linguist has once noted that if one were to take everything we know about languages and how they develop, Arabic is older than Akkadian (~2500 BCE). And then the Qur'an appeared with the oldest possible form of the language thousands of years later. This is why the Arabs of that time were challenged to produce 10 similar verses, and they couldn't. People think it's a miracle because they couldn't do it, but I think the miracle is the language itself. They had never spoken Arabic, nor has any other language before or since had this mathematical precision. And when I say mathematical, I quite literally mean mathematical. Now how is it that the Qur'an came thousands of years later in an alphabet that had never been recorded before, and in the highest form the language had ever taken? The creator is neither bound by time nor space, therefore the names are uttered as they truly were, in a language that is lexically, syntactically, phonemically, and semantically older than the oldest recorded writing. In fact, that writing appears to have been a simplified version of it. Not only that, but it would be the equivalent of the greatest works of any particular language all appearing in one book, in a perfect script and in the highest form the language could ever take. It is so high in fact, that it had yet to be surpassed despite the fact that over the last millennium the collection of Arabic manuscripts when compared on word-per-word basis in Western Museums alone, when they are compared with the collected Greek and Latin manuscripts combined, the latter does not constitute 1 percent of the former as per German professor Frank Griffel, in addition all in a script that had never been recorded before. Thus, the enlightenment of mankind from barbarism and savagery began, and the age of reason and rationality was born from its study. God did bring down the Qur’an, Mohamed is his Messenger.
Just go to that church one day and speak with the priest. Maybe try to find his number or other contact information. Late response but did you figure it out?
My relative is born muslim and lives abroad she suddenly got the feeling she needs to go to church on sunday, so she now attends church will she beccome christian lets see
Quick reminder that not all Protestants are iconoclasts. Especially not most evangelicals. The closest that most evangelicals get is the idea that some people treat icons like idols, which is certainly true. Just like the crying Mary statue.
Catholics always assume stuff about protestantism that isn't true. From my experience on the internet ive seen way more catholic iconoclasts than protestant iconoclasts.
@@Forty-Juanlol, fallen angel thats funny, because in islam angels are created to obey god, and it does not make sense for lucifer to have that free will like a human being lol, god gives us the free will to chose if we worship him or not but he did not give the same to the angels.
I am a Muslim, thank God. I don't have anything against different views, opinions, or religious beliefs. After all, when provided with evidence, isn't it only okay to believe whatever you want? Who am I to tell what you should believe in? I think it's okay, when you are truly believing it, that you can call others to "the truth" (whatever that should be for you). But to belittle a religion, "calling it out", making fun of it, then, saying it is only merely critique: Isn't that quite disrespectful? Isn't one of the most important views in Christianity to only treat others the way you want to be treated? I am in love with a Christian women and we want to marry. I swear to God, she has such a pure heart. Tomorrow I will tell from this Video, this "critique" and I already know that she will be disappointed from all of you and that I didn't see other Christians "debunking" this video. I also have a friend who is a strict Christian believer, quotes of the bible writen all over his house and bibles all around, opened up. I think he would also be disappointed in this comment section. However, I am no one to judge anyone. After all, I also commit sins. May God forgive our sins, it doesn't matter if Muslim or Christian. Amin. Let's live in peace together and let's respect each other. We are no enemies and we should treat each other nicely. My friends are Christians, my love interest is also. We all respect each others beliefs. Let's talk openly about faith but please don't tell others what they should believe in and in which they shouldn't or wouldn't that make us any different from extremists living in Iraq or Iran?
The fact people believe in islam never made sense to me. The quran was only shown to one man with no eye witnesses to him getting it. While Jesus met many people and we have recorded stories from them
0:36 actually the word "Christian" is mentioned in the bible Acts 11:26 "And when he had found him, he brought him unto Antioch. And it came to pass, that a whole year they assembled themselves with the church, and taught much people. And the disciples were called Christians first in Antioch." Acts 26:28 "Then Agrippa said unto Paul, Almost thou persuadest me to be a Christian." 1 Peter 4:16 "Yet if any man suffer as a Christian, let him not be ashamed; but let him glorify God on this behalf." that's from the KJV version the Greek for "Christian" is Χριστιανούς (Christianos) "Christ" is Χριστός - meaning the annointed one ιανοί is a suffix that indicates relation/association so Christians are either of Christ or of the "anointed one" (the Messiah)
In a book which was "published/released" after 1600 years of jesus pbuh's death. Come on do better. We are looking for the word of god not the word which is corrupted by man
Thank You for the very informative video, Kyle. It's very interesting. Will you ever cover the books that you have behind you in your videos? Happy New Year!
Islam would much rather talk trash about Christianity. Its like that guy who has nothing to offer so he just talks down about the other guy. Islam says muhamed follows all the other prophets yet they have to go outside the quran to find what the other prophets said
And then they'll cry wolf on you when you literally just ask them basic questions, or even just read their book/Quran directly. And call you "rude af" for bringing up anything that might make Islam look bad. Smh
Other way around people dedicate their entire RU-vid lives to bashing Islam lol Christian channels but teach nothing other than why they believe Islam is false meanwhile Ya'll got zionists spitting at u disrespecting Jesus pbuh & his mother smh & no videos on these channels about any of this .. Extremely bizarre behavior
There's more videos/channels like this heaps and bounds then there is the other way around as a matter of fact videos yea but I've never seen an entire Islamic channel fully dedicated to going at Christianity where every single video is about how false it is & it it dies exist I'd keep the same energy & say my brother is definitely unstable if that's all he has to offer rather than teach .. What's even more crazy is even tho we view Jesus (pbuh) different we respect him & his mother The Jews/Zionists do not & somehow a lot of Christians think they have this connection with them & Israel & all that .. Supporting that movement goes 100% against New Testament theology but anything to combat Islam can't make this stuff up 🤦♂️
You are so brainwashed you cannot follow even the most basic logic. Yes, they say 'Without lies Islam dies' and Islam is not dead, and so that means there is lots of lying going on in Islam, not 'not lies then ... cuz Islam is not dies'. And you even put that smiley there, dear God, how delusional can you people get? Wake up.
To whomever watches this ..do your own research , read the Quran yourself and make up your mind ..the first word revealed in the Quran was "read" ..you have a brain for a reason ..watching the video of some dude on youtube isn't it. You don't see him criticizing jews even though we all know how they regard jesus and speak about him but Islam that considers Jesus to be the true messiah and one of the best prophets and dedicates an an entire chapter to Mary. Nah must be a false religion ..maybe cause it makes more sense a d therefore should be attacked cause the truth can be life changing for some people
This is from your Quran (Q24:61): "There is not upon the blind [any] constraint nor upon the lame constraint nor upon the ill constraint nor upon yourselves when you eat from your [own] houses or the houses of your fathers or the houses of your mothers or the houses of your brothers or the houses of your sisters or the houses of your father's brothers or the houses of your father's sisters or the houses of your mother's brothers or the houses of your mother's sisters or [from houses] whose keys you possess or [from the house] of your friend. There is no blame upon you whether you eat together or separately. But when you enter houses, give greetings of peace upon each other - a greeting from Allāh, blessed and good. Thus does Allāh make clear to you the verses [of ordinance] that you may understand." Like some pretentious lunatic raving. You ALSO have a brain, you know. Use it.
Yes, Islam is a religion of unsurpassed beauty and wisdom. For example, here is a great thing I learned from the Hadith: "Whoever cleans his private parts with stones, let him do so with an odd number of stones." I truly cannot express how much this piece of divine wisdom has changed my life. Islam truly is the one true religion, because how could the Prophet have gained such a valuable piece of information if not from Al-Alim?
In 1948 the Qumran scrolls were discovered. One of the most important of these scrolls, is known as the Isaiah scroll. On this scroll the book of Isaiah is written. This scroll was written in the first century CE. Apart from one paragraph, the book of Isaiah on this scroll, is exactly the same as the book of Isaiah on the masoretic text. In other words this scroll proves that a basic tenet of Islam (deliberate corruption of books of the Tanakh) is not true. The Isaiah scroll proves that Islam is a false religion.
@@ShapurDDThen YOUR God has deliberately deceived people, by stating IN HIS QURAN that Muslims are to rely on the Gospel and the Torah to verify the reliability of the Quran. Dude, your religion is holed below the waterline. This is a FATAL issue that Islam simply cannot resolve.
@@smirtuar I love and respect my Muslim brothers and sisters, but I cannot ignore how violent the religion is. That is the difference between Christianity and Islam.
@@Christian_PDB lol no i know that islam is true 100% with the evidences that was provided with the prophecies that was 💯 accurate with the challenge that Qur'an brought that still there and no one can do and the scientific miracles in the Qur'an and sunnah and the preservation of the Qur'an that no one corrupted it unlike other books and so on If u can't prove ur religion to be true then why u follow it ?? Bcz u born in it ?? What if u born in a hindu family?? Would u now defending worshipping cows and name urself Hindu pdb ??? It's literally the path of either paradise or hell for eternity and u just depending on where u born and what feelings u have ???
Attempted to read the Quran but the entire first chapter was a casus belli explaining why it was okay to violently capture Arabia and how they were all asking for it anyway.
I think you brought the Quran From Starbucks. Coz theres no mention of Arabia in the first Chapter. The first chapter (Sura fathia) Talks about the Characters of God
I read it in two languages (not in Arabic), thought it was boring, repetitive, stupid, trivial really. Some parts are idiotic, like Q24:61 here: "There is not upon the blind [any] constraint nor upon the lame constraint nor upon the ill constraint nor upon yourselves when you eat from your [own] houses or the houses of your fathers or the houses of your mothers or the houses of your brothers or the houses of your sisters or the houses of your father's brothers or the houses of your father's sisters or the houses of your mother's brothers or the houses of your mother's sisters or [from houses] whose keys you possess or [from the house] of your friend. There is no blame upon you whether you eat together or separately. But when you enter houses, give greetings of peace upon each other - a greeting from Allāh, blessed and good. Thus does Allāh make clear to you the verses [of ordinance] that you may understand." Like some lunatic or a drunkard raving about something, trying to look important or pretending that he knows something others don't. Pathetic.
@@donkeyisbae1236 No, that's just an excuse Muslims use to explain away evil and idiotic parts of the Quran. EVERY language can be translated into ANY other quite well, and when there are some difficulties they can be further explained in the added notes (schadenfreude means this or that, it's only in German blah blah). Just google 'Chomsky universal grammar', people and languages are not that different. Btw many serious academics consider Greek to be the language that enabled that miracle in science, art, philosophy etc that happened in the ancient Greece. NOTHING like that happened in the Arab world, just lots of posing and posturing. So, this 'mother's brothers' and 'keys you possess' raving is idiotic in any language - English, Arabic, etc etc.
Bruh... allah hates sin and refuses to even directly interact with his own creation/mankind on earth... but, for some reason... even though he would NEVER allow himself to dirty/lower himself by coming to earth and interacting with man (even though he created them in the first place) directly... he literally brings man into his heavenly home itself and dirties it that way. Not only that, but he orders man on earth not to commits sins, not to have lust/sex with women, not to drink alcohol, etc.... BUT THEN, for some reason (even though he'd never interact with mankind or show himself because its beneath him/ungodly), once you get to HEAVEN, not only can you drink alcohol and have sex and sin... but 'supposed' believers are promised dozens upon dozens of virgins who you can fck to your heart's content, that allah then re-virginizes for you to have sex with again and again... and not only can you now drink alcohol in heaven (AKA, taint god's home/presence/name), but he will provide you with "rivers of wine" for you to drink to your heart's content!!! That's disgusting! It's literally anti-god. Why would God ever allow sin into his holy, heavenly abode??? Especially, why would he allow sin and unholy behavior in heaven... SPECIFICALLY when allah is supposedly so separate, holy, and pure that he won't even physically go to man/earth and interact with the sinful lifeforms that He himself created (thus dirtying himself). Its illogical and makes no sense. Its sinful and disgusting, and if allah truly kept separate from mankind on Earth to keep/maintain his separate, oneness, holiness... then why would he EVER allow that kind of behavior/sin to exist/occur in the purity of HEAVEN itself?!?!?! There's sooo many other reasons why Muhammed/Islam is so messed up/dirty/sinful/non-godlike... but that alone should bring you a great number of questions to ask yourself. Then, when you include the Quran introducing the bird-goddesses in addition to god himself (which not only destroys the supposed sanctity of the oneness of allah, but also destroys the eternal and infallibility of the Word of god itself); when you include the disgusting behaviors of Muhammed (who was supposedly a moral example for mankind for time immemorial) and compare them to the perfect, sinless life of Jesus; and the inconsistencies all throughout the Quran and the Hadiths and the history of Islam itself... it should open the flood-gates for a tsunami of questions to ask yourself concerning the truth/lies within islam, and it will hopefully set you on the right path towards the single, one, perfect, true God. Good luck my friend, and may God give you peace, direction, and forgiveness as you begin your journey to finding the everlasting, unyielding, loving, and spotless truth of God.@@ahmedmahamud3015
@@ahmedmahamud3015 Exactly. I can't reason you out of something you haven't been reasoned into, espescially not through a comment section. Alas, I urge you to wake up.
20:50 I'm not an Arab Christian, but I get what you mean. It's like Arab idolatry. I've literally met Ethiopian Muslims who would deny they are black but claim to be Arab. Very strange, very strange.
In Holy Quran 2:261,And remember when Abraham said, ‘My Lord, show me how Thou givest life to the dead.’ He said, ‘Hast thou not believe?’ He said, ‘Yes, but I ask this so that my heart may be at rest.’ He answered, ‘Take four birds and make them attached to thyself. Then put each of them on a hill; then call them; they will come to thee in haste. And know that Allah is Mighty and Wise.’ Besides the afterlife, there is reference to 4 nations that shall rise and fall in ways know to Allah: 1. Nabi Musa was a Great law- bearing Prophet sent for the tribes of Israel with commandments and verities of wisdom that was suited for the Children of Israel at that stage of spiritual and physical requirements. 2. Prophet Isa (Jesus’ peace be upon Him) was the Messiah sent by God to guide the various Tribes of Israel according to the true teachings of the Torah and with the Gospel. He came about 1300 years after Prophet Musa. 3. The Holy Prophet Muhammed is the Last Great law -bearing prophet sent for the whole of mankind with blessings of spiritual guidance and signaling physical/ economic/ secular/technological blessings. 4. The Promised Messiah Nabi Ahmad was sent by God to guide people to the true teachings of the Holy Quran. In the time of the Promised Messiah there are various spiritual blessings and signaling physical/secular/economic/technological blessings. He arrived about 1300 years after the Holy Prophet.
@@chriss2452 theyre more culturally arab than they are "black" and their genes also have a lot of arab admixture due to 1,000+ years of interbreeding with arabs.
The Aramaic word for God is "Alaha". It's the word Isa PBUH used. Sounds familiar? Written without the confusing vowels it is written A-L-H ܐ ܠܗܐ (alap-lamed-he) as found in Targum or in Tanakh (Daniel, Ezra), Syriac Aramaic (Peshitta), reduced from the Arabic original (of which Aramaic is a dialect continuum as will be explained) it is written in the Arabic script 'A-L-L-H' (Aleph-Lam-Lam-Ha) add an A before the last H for vocalization. The word God in another rendition in Hebrew ʾĕlōah is derived from a base ʾilāh, an Arabic word, written without confusing vowel it is A-L-H in the Arabic script, pronounced ilah not eloah. Hebrew dropped the glottal stop and mumbled it, aramic mumbled a little less and it became elaha. Infact both are written written A-L-H in Arabic, it is pronounced i in Arabic and not A because it is an Alef with hamza below (إ أ ) They are two different forms of Alef. And it mean "a god", it is the non definitive form of A-L-L-H, in which the Alef is without a glottal stop/hamza,(ا), but this kind of nuance is lost in the dialect continua. infact "YHWH" itself is an Arabic word as discussed by Professor. Israel Knohl (Professor of Biblical studies at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem) in the paper" YHWH: The Original Arabic Meaning of the Name." jesus as his name is often misspelled due to the lack of the ayin sound in Greek, which was rendered to Iesous, coupling the nearest sound to ayin, same letter found in 'Iraq', which sounds entirely different in Arabic form 'Iran' in Arabic, with the -ous Greek suffix that Greeks typically add to their names 'HerodotOS', 'PlotinUS', 'AchelOUS' and later mumbled into a J. The yeshua rendition of Isa (his name in the Qur'an) PBUH which is purported to be the name of Jesus is KNOWN to had been taken from greek. Western Syriac also use "Isho". Western Aramaic (separate from Syriac which is a dialect of Eastern Aramaic) use "Yeshu". Western Syriac has been separate from Western Aramaic for about 1000 years. And sounds don't even match up. Syriac is a Christian liturgical language yet the four letters of the name of Jesus «ܝܫܘܥ» [ = Judeo-Babylonian Aramaic: «ישוע» ] sounds totally different in West vs East Syriac, viz. vocalized akin to Christian Arabic, Hebrew, Aramaic «ܝܶܫܽܘܥ» (Yēšūʿ) in West Syriac, but pronounced more akin to Muslim Arabic Quran character name Isa in East Syriac «ܝܑܼܫܘܿܥ» (ʾĪšōʿ). The reason for this confusion is their dropping of phonemes. Only someone that has no idea what the letters are or how they sound would have a name ending in a pharyngeal fricative like the ayin, if it were to be used in a name it would have had to be in the beginning, thus the Arabic rendition is the correct one. An example in English is how the appended -d is a common error amongst the English pronouncing Gaelic names. The name Donald arose from a common English mispronunciation of the Gaelic name Donal. Just how it is with donal becoming donald and the two becoming distinct and the original being regarded as something seperate so too did Isa PBUH turn to Iesous turn to jesus and when they tried going back to the original they confused it for yeshua ( ysu is how it is actually written) for Isa PBUH ( 3'eysah ) Schlözer in his preparation for the Arabia expedition in 1781 coined the term Semitic language: "From the Mediterranean to the Euphrates, from Mesopotamia to Arabia ruled one language, as is well known. Thus Syrians, Babylonians, Hebrews, and Arabs were one people (ein Volk). Phoenicians (Hamites) also spoke this language, which I would like to call the Semitic (die Semitische)." -Before Boas: The Genesis of Ethnography and Ethnology in the German By Han F. Vermeulen. He was only half right though, Arabic is the only corollary to "proto-semitic", infact the whole semitic classification is nonsensical as will be shown. "protosemetic" Alphabet (28), Arabic Alphabet (28), Latin transliteration, hebrew (22) 𐩠 𐩡 𐩢 𐩣 𐩤 𐩥 𐩦 𐩧 𐩨 𐩩 𐩪 𐩫 𐩬 𐩭 𐩮 𐩰 𐩱 𐩲 𐩳 𐩴 𐩵 𐩶 𐩷 𐩸 𐩹 𐩺 𐩻 𐩼 ا ب ت ث ج ح خ د ذ ر ز س ش ص ض ط ظ ع غ ف ق ك ل م ن ه و ي A b t ṯ j h kh d ḏ r z s sh ṣ ḍ ṭ ẓ ʿ ġ f q k l m n h w y א ב ג ד ה ו ז ח ט י כ ל מ נ ס ע פ צ ק ר ש ת Merged phonemes in hebrew and aramaic: ح, خ (h, kh) merged into only kh consonant remain س, ش (s, sh) merged into only Shin consonant remaining ط, ظ (ṭ/teth, ẓ) merged into only ṭ/teth consonant remaining ص, ض (ṣ, ḍ/Tsad ) merged into only ḍ/Tsad consonant remaining ع, غ (3'ayn, Ghayn) merged into a reducted ayin consonant remaining ت, ث (t/taw, th) merged into only t/taw consonant remaining The reason why the protoS alphabet here is 28 and not 29, is because the supposed extra letter is simply a س written in a different position, but it was shoehorned to obfuscated. In Arabic letter shapes are different depending on whether they are in the beginning , middle or end of a word. As a matter of fact, all of the knowledge needed for deciphering ancient texts and their complexity was derived from the Qur'an. It was by analyzing the syntactic structure of the Qur'an that the Arabic root system was developed. This system was first attested to in Kitab Al-Ayin, the first intralanguage dictionary of its kind, which preceded the Oxford English dictionary by 800 years. It was through this development that the concept of Arabic roots was established and later co-opted into the term 'semitic root,' allowing the decipherment of ancient scripts. In essence, they quite literally copied and pasted the entirety of the Arabic root. Hebrew had been dead, as well as all the other dialects of Arabic, until being 'revived' in a Frankensteinian fashion in the 18th and 19th centuries. The entire region spoke basically the same language, with mumbled dialect continuums spread about, and Arabic is the oldest form from which all these dialects branched off. As time passed, the language gradually became more degenerate, Language; When one looks at the actual linguistics, one will find that many were puzzled by the opposite, that is, how the other "semetic" languages were more "evolved" than Arabic, while Arabic had archaic features, not only archaic compared to bibilical Hebrew, Ethiopic, "Aramaic" contemporary "semetic" languages, but even archaic compared to languages from ancient antiquity; Ugaritic, Akkadain. What is meant here by Archaic is not what most readers think, it is Archaic not in the sense that it is simple, but rather that it is complex (think Latin to pig Latin or Italian or Old English, which had genders and case endings to modern English), not only grammatically, but also phonetically; All the so called semitic languages are supposed to have evolved from protosemetic, the Alphabet for protosemitic is that of the so called Ancient South Arabian (which interestingly corresponds with the traditional Arabic origins account) and has 28 Phonemes. Arabic has 28 phonemes. Hebrew has 22, same as Aramaic, and other "semitic" languages. Now pause for a second and think about it, how come Arabic, a language that is supposed to have come so late has the same number of letters as a language that supposedly predates it by over a millennium (Musnad script ~1300 BCE). Not only is the glossary of phonemes more diverse than any other semitic language, but the grammar is more complex, containing more cases and retains what's linguists noted for its antiquity, broken plurals. Indeed, a linguist has once noted that if one were to take everything we know about languages and how they develop, Arabic is older than Akkadian (~2500 BCE). And then the Qur'an appeared with the oldest possible form of the language thousands of years later. This is why the Arabs of that time were challenged to produce 10 similar verses, and they couldn't. People think it's a miracle because they couldn't do it, but I think the miracle is the language itself. They had never spoken Arabic, nor has any other language before or since had this mathematical precision. And when I say mathematical, I quite literally mean mathematical. Now how is it that the Qur'an came thousands of years later in an alphabet that had never been recorded before, and in the highest form the language had ever taken? The creator is neither bound by time nor space, therefore the names are uttered as they truly were, in a language that is lexically, syntactically, phonemically, and semantically older than the oldest recorded writing. In fact, that writing appears to have been a simplified version of it. Not only that, but it would be the equivalent of the greatest works of any particular language all appearing in one book, in a perfect script and in the highest form the language could ever take. It is so high in fact, that it had yet to be surpassed despite the fact that over the last millennium the collection of Arabic manuscripts when compared on word-per-word basis in Western Museums alone, when they are compared with the collected Greek and Latin manuscripts combined, the latter does not constitute 1 percent of the former as per German professor Frank Griffel, in addition all in a script that had never been recorded before. Thus, the enlightenment of mankind from barbarism and savagery began, and the age of reason and rationality was born from its study. God did bring down the Qur’an, Mohamed is his Messenger.
It's evident that the individual blatantly plagiarized, making it challenging to authenticate the source material. By closing the door on scrutiny, they allow for further replication, incorporating noteworthy excerpts into subsequent works under the guise of being the final prophet. This represents one of the most egregious instances of plagiarism in history. The religion thrives on appropriating content from other texts and justifying it with fabricated narratives. The enforcement of punishment for apostasy further echoes characteristics of a cult-like structure.
The Quran talks about certain historical matters, i.e. the life of moses, noah, jesus. These are some of the prophets we believe in. It fixes any historical inaccuracy, i.e Jesus not being God. Lets agree that the quran took informations from the previous scriptures, but there is a problem. It only took the accurate parts and left out the inaccurate parts. For example, in the bible, in the story of Joseph, the ruler was the "pharaoh", but in the quran, the ruler was referred to as "king". Now historians found that JOSEPH was located in the Hiscox dynasty, where the ruler was referred to as the king, not the Pharaoh. . Arguement for quran being the truth. 1. It has several HISTORICAL CLAIMS that were only discovered in the recent centuries. i.e. it independently mentions the pharaoh (of moses) claimed himself to be the god, which is discovered just recently after the discovery of rosetta stones in 1799AD. 2. All the PROPHECIES of the Quran and the prophet Muhammad turned out to be true, and some are still to come. i.e. Roman empire's victory against Persians, i.e Muhammad even predicted some countries islam would spread to, ( Egypt, Sham, Turkey, Indian Subcontinent. All these spreading of the religion was done long after the death of the prophet. 3. Scientific claims The quran has made 15-20 claims about the universe that science only discovered recently. i.e. The expansion of universe, all organisms created by water, plants created in pairs (gender), embryology, isostacy, reflected light of moon, etc. If you are a genuine truth seeker, I would be happy to help you learn about the true islam, clarify any question or misconception you might have. instagram- theridwaan Email- ridwaan7r@gmail.com
3:14 The Quran does not say let Christians judge by the gospels. In Islam, they believe Jesus was given a book called The Gospel (al-injeel) similar to how Muhammad was given the Quran. It's not the gospels according to Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John.
There was no record that tells there is a gospel is a book that was given to Jesus. If Quran made it up then that's a different story. And Who gave you guys Quran? Angel Gabriel, not even allah himself, what if devil disguised into that angel and manipulated you all. And even if there is allah, Why would he make a huge mistake?, which is to send another last prophet or to simply change the whole story. Is your allah dumb, he didn't send any prophet for 600 years and sends mohammad after Jesus. Is your allah not able to plan for future and makes a messenger to a man who have committed a lot of sins. After 600 years, all of a sudden there is a rotten messenger and not even your so called allah gave him book but angel gabriel, look like you guys are hugely gambling on your faith on that fake angel
How come this famous ingill hasn't ever been found nor heard of. And if it was supposedly corrupted, did Allah's plan fail? He could have just made it incorruptible so then none would be confused. Allah is the kind of guy who creates the problem and then sells the solution
1 - "Moses, Solomon, Abraham werent muslim" I don't think you know what a muslim is. A muslim is someone, by definition, who submits to god. It's derived from the arabic word "سلام ", meaning submission and peace. Islam means submission. So by definition, yes, Moses, Solomon, etc. were Muslim. So was Adam, Jesus and all other prophets. 2 - Claims of plagarism: This point is embarassing, muhammad couldn't read or write, so how would he plagarise? 3 - Jesus makes no sense in Islam : "Not divine" How does this make no sense? "Not son of god" The quran clearly says in surah al ikhlas: Say, "He is Allah, [who is] One, Allah, the Eternal Refuge. He neither begets nor is born, Nor is there to Him any equivalent." "Prophet of Allah" Again, How does this make no sense? This is simply **your personal opinion** "He drank wine" Yeah? Wine was only made haram in the time of prophet muhammad. Again, refer to point one. 4 - "Jesus talked about the trinity", maybe in the bible (which is corrupted) and this is a whole other discussion. You can believe in the bible, but we don't and its a fact that the bible its corrupted. This isnt an argument against Islam. "Islam copied from christians" How? 5- Quran 5:47 "Nightmare for muslims" The gospel is the injeel. The injeel isn't the new testament. 6- "Islam was founded in the 600s" Whats your point here? 7- "Jesus wasn't crucified" Again its not an argument against islam if islam says something you dont like. deal with it. 8 - "Allah caused the confusion" What? 9 - "Why trust the quran versus the bible?" The bible is corrupted. The quran is not. "The bible is held in such a high regard in islam" Nope. Thats the injeel, not the bible. The injeel is the ORIGINAL gospel revealed to JESUS. Not the new testament/bible which are corrupted 10 - Goes on to yap about the same thing. "Just trust the bible" lol 11 - "Islam does not have the correct theology" Which theology? the one according to you? Dont embaress yourself. 12 - Aisha : This is a topic of a shit ton of discussion. Ask me in the replies to refute this argument against muhammad I wont do it here cuz i dont have much time 13- "Allah is depicted in the quran" As surah al ikhlas says: "He neither begets nor is born, Nor is there to Him any equivalent." So when it says he has 2 right hands, you can't compare them to human hands. 14 - "Similarities between other religions" These religions are all from allah, so there is some truth in them (Christianity, judaism). Not all of it has been corrupted, so if we do similair things to christians, thats just because both religions are from god, although christianity has been corrupted and changed significantly which is why we use the quran. 15- Goes on to talk for almost 10 minutes about plagarism.. 16 - "Only 2 holy books" This is simply wrong? 17 - More claims about plagarism, refer to point 2 I might finish this later but this is all I have time for today. وَمَا هُوَ بِقَوْلِ شَيْطَـٰنٍۢ رَّجِيمٍۢ ٢٥ فَأَيْنَ تَذْهَبُونَ ٢٦ إِنْ هُوَ إِلَّا ذِكْرٌۭ لِّلْعَـٰلَمِينَ ٢٧ لِمَن شَآءَ مِنكُمْ أَن يَسْتَقِيمَ ٢٨ وَمَا تَشَآءُونَ إِلَّآ أَن يَشَآءَ ٱللَّهُ رَبُّ ٱلْعَـٰلَمِينَ ٢٩ And this ˹Quran˺ is not the word of an outcast devil. So what ˹other˺ path would you take? Surely this ˹Quran˺ is only a reminder to the whole world- to whoever of you wills to take the Straight Way. But you cannot will ˹to do so˺, except by the Will of Allah, the Lord of all worlds. (Surah at-takwir, 25-29) May god guide you
Matthew 17:21 KJV: "Howbeit this kind goeth not out but by prayer and fasting." Reason: The verse closely resembles Mark 9:29, but it is lacking in Matthew in א (original handwriting), B, θ, some Italic, Syriac, Coptic and Ethiopic manuscripts. It is, however, found in this place in some Greek mss not quite so ancient - C, D, K, L - as well as some other mss of the ancient versions. It is believed to have been assimilated from Mark.[12] Matthew 18:11 KJV: "For the Son of man is come to save that which was lost." Reason: This verse is lacking in א, B, L (original handwriting), θ, ƒ1, ƒ13, some old Italic, Syriac, Coptic and Georgian manuscripts, and such ancient sources as the Apostolic Canons, Eusebius, Jerome, and others. It is found in some other sources, not quite so ancient, such as D, K, W, X, and the Latin Vulgate. It is not found in any manuscript before the 5th century.[13] According to Bruce Metzger, "There can be little doubt that the words [...] are spurious here, being omitted by the earliest witnesses representing several textual types... [This verse was] manifestly borrowed by copyists from Luke 19:10."[14] Matthew 23:14 KJV: "Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye devour widows' houses, and for a pretence make long prayer: therefore ye shall receive the greater damnation." Reason: This verse is very similar to Mark 12:40 and Luke 20:47. This verse is lacking altogether in א,B,D,L,Z,θ, ƒ1, Ethiopic, Armenian, several Italic, and Syrian and Coptic manuscripts, and the writings of several early Church Fathers. It appears before verse 13 in K,W, and several New Testament minuscules. It appears after verse 13 in ƒ13, some Italic and Syriac and Coptic manuscripts. The fact that it is absent from the most ancient sources of multiple text types and that the sources that do contain the verse disagree about its placement, as well as the fact that it is a repetition of verses found elsewhere, show "that verse 14 is an interpolation derived from the parallel in Mark 12:40 or Luke 20:47 is clear."[14] Mark 7:16 KJV: "If any man have ears to hear, let him hear." Reason: This verse is nearly identical with verses 4:9 and 4:23. This verse here is lacking in א,B,L,Δ (original handwriting), some Coptic mss. It is included in manuscripts only slightly less ancient, A,D,K,W,ƒ1,ƒ13, Italic manuscripts, the Vulgate, some other ancient versions. As it is missing in the very oldest resources and yet is identical to verses that remain, many editors seem confident in omitting its appearance here.[citation needed] Mark 9:44 and 9:46 KJV: "Where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched." (The verses are identical to each other, and to 9:48, which is still in the main text) Reason: Both verses 44 and 46 are duplicates of verse 48, which remains in the text. Verses 44 and 46 are both lacking in א,B,C,L,W,ƒ1, and some manuscripts of the ancient versions, but appear in somewhat later sources such as A,D,K,θ, some Italic manuscripts and the Vulgate. It is possible that verse 48 was repeated by a copyist as an epistrophe, for an oratorical flourish.[15] The UBS text assigns this omission a confidence rating of A. Mark 11:26 KJV: "But if ye do not forgive, neither will your Father which is in heaven forgive your trespasses." Reason: This verse is very similar to Matthew 6:15. This verse appeared in the Complutensian Polyglot and most Textus Receptus editions but Erasmus omitted it and noted that it was missing from 'most' Greek manuscripts.[16] The verse is not in א,B,L,W,Δ,Ψ, some Italic, Vulgate, Syriac, and Coptic manuscripts, and the Armenian and Georgian versions. The UBS edition gave the omission of this verse a confidence rating of A. Mark 15:28 KJV: "And the scripture was fulfilled, which saith, "And he was numbered with the transgressors."" Reasons: This verse is similar to Luke 22:37. It does not appear here in any New Testament manuscript prior to the end of the 6th century.[17] Luke 17:36 KJV: "Two men shall be in the field; the one shall be taken, and the other left." Reason: It is possible that this verse is a repetition of Matthew 24:40. Even the King James Version had doubts about this verse, as it provided (in the original 1611 edition and still in many high-quality editions) a sidenote that said, "This 36th verse is wanting in most of the Greek copies." This verse is missing from Tyndale's version (1534) and the Geneva Bible (1557). Among major Textus Receptus editions, this verse does not appear in the editions of Erasmus (1516-1535), Aldus (1518), Colinaeus (1534), Stephanus 1st-3rd editions (1546-1550), but it did appear in the Complutensian (1514), the margins of Stephanus' 4th edition (1551), and all of Elzivir's and Beza's editions (1565-1604).[18] In modern conservative Greek editions it is also omitted from the main text of Scrivener's Greek NT according to the Textus Receptus, and the two Majority Text editions. Verse 36 is included by very few Greek manuscripts of the Western text-type and by Old-Latin and Vulgate manuscripts.[19][20] John 5:3-4 Main article: John 5 § Interpolation (verses 3b-4) KJV: "3[...] waiting for the moving of the water. 4For an Angel went down at a certain season into the pool, and troubled the water: whosoever then first after the troubling of the water stepped in was made whole of whatsoever disease he had." (Not only is verse 4 omitted, but also the tail end of verse 3.) Reason: It is considered unlikely that these words were in the original text of the Gospel. They are lacking in the "earliest and best witnesses", and several ancient Greek manuscripts that do contain them enclose them with markings indicating doubts about their authenticity, the passage contains words or expressions that appear nowhere else in John (such as the Greek words for "at a certain season [meaning occasionally]" and "stirring" and "diseases"), and the manuscripts that contain this verse differ among themselves as to the wording.[21] The UBS text gave the omission of this verse a confidence rating of A. This verse was omitted from Edward Harwood's Greek NT (1776), marked as doubtful in Griesbach's editions (1777), and thereafter generally relegated to a footnote, enclosed in brackets, or omitted completely. Henry Alford wrote, "The spuriousness of this controverted passage can hardly be questioned."[22] Without the words at issue the context simply states that a swimming or bathing pool in or near Jerusalem was a gathering place for sick and crippled people, some of whom sought to get into the pool (either for physical comfort or for ritual cleansing) and it was there that Jesus performed miraculous healing. However, the words quoted above complicate this story by asserting that miraculous cures were already taking place at this pool in the absence of Jesus, owing to the unpredictable intervention of an (apparently invisible) angel. This passage in John 5 is the only mention of this pool - no such miraculous pool is mentioned in Josephus or other histories.[23] The words in question do not appear in the oldest manuscripts, and in those manuscripts that contain them they are sometimes marked as doubtful, and differ from manuscript to manuscript "with that extreme variation in the reading which so often indicates grounds for suspicion".[24] The italicized words do not appear at all in p66, 75, א, A (original hand), B, C (original hand), L, and some Italic, Syriac, Coptic, and Latin Vulgate manuscripts, and in quotations of the story by several early Greek Fathers. Verse 4 ("For an angel ...") appears but without the concluding words of verse 3 ("waiting for the stirring of the water ...") in A (where it says the angel "bathed in the water" rather than "descended into the water"), L, 18 (14th century), and an Egyptian manuscript. The concluding words of verse 3 but not any of verse 4 appear in D, 33 (9th century), and some Latin manuscripts. The entire italicized passage appears in C (third hand), K (also with the angel "bathed in the water"), Δ,Θ,Ψ, and numerous other manuscripts, and some Italic, Syriac, Coptic, and Armenian manuscripts, and several Latin Fathers, Some manuscripts - S,Λ,Π, and a few others - contain the words enclosed by marks of doubt. Among the manuscripts that contain this sentence-and-a-half, there are many variations and permutations.[25] The Revised Version (1881) omitted the italicized words from its main text, making the passage read: "... a multitude of them that were sick, blind, halt, withered. 5And a certain man was there ...", and as a side-note, "Many ancient authorities insert, wholly or in part," and here present the italicized words exactly as they appeared in the KJV. Several modern versions similarly relegate those words to a footnote, and some others (such as Moffatt) include the words in the main text but are enclosed in brackets with an explanation in a footnote.
1:01 Subhanallah you started with a stupid mistake already? Educate yourself on the definition of a muslim before talking about Islam. Islam means submittion to the will of God and a muslim is someone who submits their will to God. Jesus submitted his will to God, and so did Moses and all the other prophets of God. This is why we call them muslims. Islam started since Adam (the first human and prophet).
all this typing you done but clearly you have done zero research. You sound like someone who think "muslims" man with beard and wrinkles in afghanistan. Please research more about Islam. @@timonpinto4945
@@timonpinto4945 Ima correct it for you. It's the one who submits to the one true God. Not to a man, not to a trinity, not to a God who forgets. The problem with you all is that you use the bible as an authentic source which it isn't. The bible is heavily corrupted and contains alot of mistakes. Christians don't even know how many books there are. So this "history" that you talk about or who jesus/moses is, isn't accurate to us. We don't believe they submitted their will to a trinity or God who forgets. God doesn't forget, he is always all knowing.
@timonpinto4945 our "religion" can have its own means of pilgrimage. Why is that bothering you? I can look at it from the other way and say prove me where jesus said he's god in any transcript decreed from him or prove me the bible is not corrupt. And yes our religion is not just continuation, but also the non corrupted. We have the oldest manuscripts and pages dating all the way to Muhammed saw's period in museum and they have a 100% accuracy. We muslims aren't running around and not answering your questions, you christians are running around blocking your eyes, ears and hearts, not ready to accept truth yet. If you have any questions then please ask them in a clear line.
@timonpinto4945 As I said its not just continuation, its the final revelation because we muslims believe the bible and alot of it is corrupted and influenced by other beliefs. Islam has existed since Adam. Islam WAS judaism, Islam WAS technically "Christianity" too. Jews never had to do Umrah, they didn't have alot of the prayer practices we have now after Muhammed pbuh. But we muslims are just a continuation from the time of the Torah and the holy Gospel, until people's influence shaped the books and changed certain history in them, made new ways of prayers that was never decreed by God himself. People started corrupting it. From here, we believe God decided to drop final revelation in the vast deserts of Arabia through our prophet Muhammed pbuh. The Quran, which is the final revelation deemed by God. Jesus himself has fasted 40 days according to the bible itself. He prostrated to God by setting his forehead upon the ground just like we muslims do. Jesus himself called the father The one true god according to the Bible. There is no mention of trinity at all. It is a concept created by later Christianity.
@timonpinto4945 Now Ramadan was created during the time of Muhammed pbuh, the two Eids, adha and fitr, are just special days for us Muslims. Eid ul Adha from Abraham pbuh when he had a dream/vision of being commanded to sacrifice his son, but was actually a cow (binding of Isaac). And so it was originated by the time of Abraham pbuh and reported by Muhammed pbuh too, meanwhile Eid ul Fitr was from the time of Muhammed pbuh during his time in Medinah. We also as muslims believe the temple in Jerusalem was also destroyed, but it was used by many past prophets to worship the one god we believe which is Allah.
The Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) is considered to be perfect. We strive towards the Sunnah in order to try and replicate his perfect example. The claim that the "intention" isn't really there is false. Yes, before we perform the prayer, we make the intention to pray for God only. However, this isn't robotic as the expectation is that the correct intention to pray is within the heart. God knows what is within our heart, and only He knows what our true intentions are. The physical act of making intention to worship solely for God doesn't necessarily make your intention valid if that isn't your true intention.
@@gregkareem9824Judaism was the first abrahamic religion, its a historical fact, not opinion, that Judaism became a religion long before christianity, and like the video stated, islam stole from Judaism. but we, jews AND christians, can both be OGs 😛
I have a curiosity question since Muslims believe that the Quran is the word of Allah has that exact Quran today exactly word for word since 600 A.D.? Because if there is a typo that changed like that old gain the telephone line, what do you do with that?
typos are irrelevant to the Quran when you realize the meaning of the "Quran" what's the meaning of the "Quran" It means, to recite/recitation/to repeat something from your memory the Quran is never meant to be a book, that's why in the Quran God says "Say, " or "repeat after me" "Say, God is Absolutely one the sustainer of All No parents, No offspring Incomparable" God told the angel of revelation (djibril) about it, and then the angel of revelation repeated what God said to the prophet Muhammad, and then the prophet repeated the whole thing to us, and then people keep repeating the whole thing to more other people It's a chain of repetitions let's be honest, repetition is fundamental in the universe as we know it All things in the universe is just the byproduct of the repetitions of a certain pattern on the microscopic level Spinning up, Spinning down All things are nothing but the repetitions of these 2 distinguishable states
@@JohnP-go6wf Not yet, Quran was WRITTEN after much years, seeing the decrease in the number of people who had Quran byheart. We believe that it does not change because, ALLAH had promised us that He will take care of it. Plus https: //youtu. be/ Hu7-vb7WNlY?feature=shared Anyone commenting false about Islam, please watch this and then repent. "It's not the eyes that are blind, but the hearts". Instead of sticking to a single person's arguments, try to listen to it from some Muslim scholars too. One last thing I have to say: It's been 1400+ years since the introduction of Quran, and even now, as how Quran states it, HUMAN HAD NEVER MADE A VERSE SIMILIAR TO ONE IN QURAN. That's a truth and NO ONE can prove me wrong in this !! I feel sorry for you guys because you are grown up in a society where people always criticizes Islam, and not try to understand a word from Quran. May Allah guide you guys, Aameen
@@TboneWTF Muslims are still practicing slavery in all Muslim countries, most notably Somalia, Saudi Arabia, and Pakistan. Christians ended slavery in all Christian countries nearly 300 years ago, and yet your people still cling to it. Why is that? Do they care less for their fellow man than the average Christian?
Mormonism: we are the restoration of original Christianity and the one true religion. Islam: we are the last fulfillment and completion of Abrahamic religion Jewish/Christian scripture is corrupt. Christianity: No you guys are both wrong, we are the last and final fulfillment of scripture. Jews: all of you are wrong and we are still waiting for the Jewish Messiah! Seems like everyone wants to fulfill Jewish scripture or replace it…
@MushiSlayer-hz1ft The God of the bible can enter creation- You have a different God & the wrong monotheism- that's why muslims can't justify directing their prayers & worship to a created stone. ru-vid.comnYc3iZE-QbA?si=DLxYywKORgEr2wsS
Went to my first ever Divine Liturgy with my family on Christmas. My parents are devout Catholics and I have told them about my desire to switch to Orthodoxy and thankfully they have been very supportive since they know that Orthodoxy was there since the beginning and has valid apostolic succession like RC does. My family and I really enjoyed the experience at the church, even if the church itself was pretty tiny and not as intricate, organized, or decorated as the larger, more popular churches. The incense was amazing and a brand new scent for us, the singing of the majority of what was said was amazing and the priest gave an amazing sermon that made my dad tear up. I am now set on my decision to switch to Orthodoxy, but unfortunately i don’t believe it will happen anytime soon until sometime in the future since the nearest Orthodox Church is an hour away and I work on Sundays and have school on weekdays in another city. Thank you Kyle for all your information and help and God bless! ☦️
Glad to hear you found the try church. But remember my brother just a small correction on what you said. RC does not have valid succession like us. They are cut off from God and are no longer part of the apostolic succession.
@@matheussalim5652 for me, it’s the issue of a pope being infallible and supreme over all other bishops, especially when it’s a bad one like pope Francis, the resurrection sculpture in the Vatican audience hall, the need for a tradcath movement since some of the past few popes and the Vatican 2 council have actively been trying to destroy and replace the traditional Latin mass with clown masses and whatnot, all the innovations and additions Rome added without conversing with the other 4 churches, and romes arrogance in trying to assert control over the others, and most importantly the sack of Constantinople done by Catholic crusaders against the Orthodox empire, the only empire holding back the muslim forces from expanding into most of the Middle East, that make me want to switch to Orthodoxy
Oh well it’s been a huge controversy for a few millenniums already. That’s why the Middle East has a holy war every decade or so and always has 🤷♂️. OP isn’t causing controversy
You are a liar, you are just throwing words here and there, you are not approaching the Quran with analytical mind, you are not garbing the text itself and scrutinize it, and you are using the bible which itself is not a source of authority because it is corrupted and people change it
The Aramaic word for God is "Alaha". It's the word Isa PBUH used. Sounds familiar? Written without the confusing vowels it is written A-L-H ܐ ܠܗܐ (alap-lamed-he) as found in Targum or in Tanakh (Daniel, Ezra), Syriac Aramaic (Peshitta), reduced from the Arabic original (of which Aramaic is a dialect continuum as will be explained) it is written in the Arabic script 'A-L-L-H' (Aleph-Lam-Lam-Ha) add an A before the last H for vocalization. The word God in another rendition in Hebrew ʾĕlōah is derived from a base ʾilāh, an Arabic word, written without confusing vowel it is A-L-H in the Arabic script, pronounced ilah not eloah. Hebrew dropped the glottal stop and mumbled it, aramic mumbled a little less and it became elaha. Infact both are written written A-L-H in Arabic, it is pronounced i in Arabic and not A because it is an Alef with hamza below (إ أ ) They are two different forms of Alef. And it mean "a god", it is the non definitive form of A-L-L-H, in which the Alef is without a glottal stop/hamza,(ا), but this kind of nuance is lost in the dialect continua. infact "YHWH" itself is an Arabic word as discussed by Professor. Israel Knohl (Professor of Biblical studies at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem) in the paper" YHWH: The Original Arabic Meaning of the Name." jesus as his name is often misspelled due to the lack of the ayin sound in Greek, which was rendered to Iesous, coupling the nearest sound to ayin, same letter found in 'Iraq', which sounds entirely different in Arabic form 'Iran' in Arabic, with the -ous Greek suffix that Greeks typically add to their names 'HerodotOS', 'PlotinUS', 'AchelOUS' and later mumbled into a J. The yeshua rendition of Isa (his name in the Qur'an) PBUH which is purported to be the name of Jesus is KNOWN to had been taken from greek. Western Syriac also use "Isho". Western Aramaic (separate from Syriac which is a dialect of Eastern Aramaic) use "Yeshu". Western Syriac has been separate from Western Aramaic for about 1000 years. And sounds don't even match up. Syriac is a Christian liturgical language yet the four letters of the name of Jesus «ܝܫܘܥ» [ = Judeo-Babylonian Aramaic: «ישוע» ] sounds totally different in West vs East Syriac, viz. vocalized akin to Christian Arabic, Hebrew, Aramaic «ܝܶܫܽܘܥ» (Yēšūʿ) in West Syriac, but pronounced more akin to Muslim Arabic Quran character name Isa in East Syriac «ܝܑܼܫܘܿܥ» (ʾĪšōʿ). The reason for this confusion is their dropping of phonemes. Only someone that has no idea what the letters are or how they sound would have a name ending in a pharyngeal fricative like the ayin, if it were to be used in a name it would have had to be in the beginning, thus the Arabic rendition is the correct one. An example in English is how the appended -d is a common error amongst the English pronouncing Gaelic names. The name Donald arose from a common English mispronunciation of the Gaelic name Donal. Just how it is with donal becoming donald and the two becoming distinct and the original being regarded as something seperate so too did Isa PBUH turn to Iesous turn to jesus and when they tried going back to the original they confused it for yeshua ( ysu is how it is actually written) for Isa PBUH ( 3'eysah ) Schlözer in his preparation for the Arabia expedition in 1781 coined the term Semitic language: "From the Mediterranean to the Euphrates, from Mesopotamia to Arabia ruled one language, as is well known. Thus Syrians, Babylonians, Hebrews, and Arabs were one people (ein Volk). Phoenicians (Hamites) also spoke this language, which I would like to call the Semitic (die Semitische)." -Before Boas: The Genesis of Ethnography and Ethnology in the German By Han F. Vermeulen. He was only half right though, Arabic is the only corollary to "proto-semitic", infact the whole semitic classification is nonsensical as will be shown. "protosemetic" Alphabet (28), Arabic Alphabet (28), Latin transliteration, hebrew (22) 𐩠 𐩡 𐩢 𐩣 𐩤 𐩥 𐩦 𐩧 𐩨 𐩩 𐩪 𐩫 𐩬 𐩭 𐩮 𐩰 𐩱 𐩲 𐩳 𐩴 𐩵 𐩶 𐩷 𐩸 𐩹 𐩺 𐩻 𐩼 ا ب ت ث ج ح خ د ذ ر ز س ش ص ض ط ظ ع غ ف ق ك ل م ن ه و ي A b t ṯ j h kh d ḏ r z s sh ṣ ḍ ṭ ẓ ʿ ġ f q k l m n h w y א ב ג ד ה ו ז ח ט י כ ל מ נ ס ע פ צ ק ר ש ת Merged phonemes in hebrew and aramaic: ح, خ (h, kh) merged into only kh consonant remain س, ش (s, sh) merged into only Shin consonant remaining ط, ظ (ṭ/teth, ẓ) merged into only ṭ/teth consonant remaining ص, ض (ṣ, ḍ/Tsad ) merged into only ḍ/Tsad consonant remaining ع, غ (3'ayn, Ghayn) merged into a reducted ayin consonant remaining ت, ث (t/taw, th) merged into only t/taw consonant remaining The reason why the protoS alphabet here is 28 and not 29, is because the supposed extra letter is simply a س written in a different position, but it was shoehorned to obfuscated. In Arabic letter shapes are different depending on whether they are in the beginning , middle or end of a word. No such thing as the bible, the new testament is a concoction of several books that were deemed canonical, books written in Greek that were given the hellenized names of Apotsles who neither wrote, nor spoke greek to give it an illusion of antiquity, much like the calendar we have today, which was established in the year 535 CE by Dionysus Exegesis so too was the original message altered to that of the pauline credo, a digestible religion to the yet to be converted greeks who had no desire to follow the mosaic laws. None of the disciples spoke of trinity, ate pork or proclaimed it is allowable to do so, yet the miracle begotten paul, whom peter called him enemy, introduced his new creed according to his whims, often boastful of his innovations he said " I was not a whit behind the very chiefest apostles." There is no passage in Paul inconsistent with these quotations; no passage suggesting that the admission of the gentiles into the Christian church was an idea of Jesus, or that it was accepted by the twelve apostles in Jerusalem before the conversion of Paul, or that he received any instruction from them or acknowledged any duty of obedience or submission to them. This gospel which Paul preached and which, according to his boast, was original with him, included many tenets not found in the four gospels or not set forth there in unmistakable terms. By implication, it repudiated the ascetic and communistic maxims of the synoptic gospels, It proclaimed the abrogation of the Mosaic ceremonial law. It proclaimed that the unsearchable riches of Christ were to be distributed as freely among the Gentiles as among the Jews. It announced itself as a new and independent religion; and popular speech recognized the correctness of the claim by calling its adherents Christians, and their doctrine Christianity. Language; When one looks at the actual linguistics, one will find that many were puzzled by the opposite, that is, how the other "semetic" languages were more "evolved" than Arabic, while Arabic had archaic features, not only archaic compared to bibilical Hebrew, Ethiopic, "Aramaic" contemporary "semetic" languages, but even archaic compared to languages from ancient antiquity; Ugaritic, Akkadain. What is meant here by Archaic is not what most readers think, it is Archaic not in the sense that it is simple, but rather that it is complex (think Latin to pig Latin or Italian or Old English, which had genders and case endings to modern English), not only grammatically, but also phonetically; All the so called semitic languages are supposed to have evolved from protosemetic, the Alphabet for protosemitic is that of the so called Ancient South Arabian (which interestingly corresponds with the traditional Arabic origins account) and has 28 Phonemes. Arabic has 28 phonemes. Hebrew has 22, same as Aramaic, and other "semitic" languages. Now pause for a second and think about it, how come Arabic, a language that is supposed to have come so late has the same number of letters as a language that supposedly predates it by over a millennium (Musnad script ~1300 BCE). Not only is the glossary of phonemes more diverse than any other semitic language, but the grammar is more complex, containing more cases and retains what's linguists noted for its antiquity, broken plurals. Indeed, a linguist has once noted that if one were to take everything we know about languages and how they develop, Arabic is older than Akkadian (~2500 BCE). Now how is it that the Qur'an came thousands of years later in an alphabet that had never been recorded before, and in the highest form the language had ever taken? The creator is neither bound by time nor space, therefore the names are uttered as they truly were, in a language that is lexically, syntactically, phonemically, and semantically older than the oldest recorded writing. In fact, that writing appears to have been a simplified version of it. Not only that, but it would be the equivalent of the greatest works of any particular language all appearing in one book, in a perfect script and in the highest form the language could ever take. It is so high in fact, that it had yet to be surpassed despite the fact that over the last millennium the collection of Arabic manuscripts when compared on word-per-word basis in Western Museums alone, when they are compared with the collected Greek and Latin manuscripts combined, the latter does not constitute 1 percent of the former as per German professor Frank Griffel, in addition all in a script that had never been recorded before. Thus, the enlightenment of mankind from barbarism and savagery began, and the age of reason and rationality was born from its study. God did bring down the Qur’an, Mohamed is his Messenger.
@@lorenzo8208 You need to specify the question, otherwise it looks like you're asking if God can actualize impossibilities. Impossibilities aren't things to be actualized to begin with. They aren't real. An example of this would be: Can God create a stone He can't lift? This is a paradoxical and incoherent question. God is All Powerful and cannot be limited, this question is asking for an absurd reality where an All Powerful being is limited in Power. These impossibilities aren't even candidates for existing, they by their nature cannot exist. Sheikh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyah (may Allah's mercy be upon him) said: 'According to Ahl al-Sunnah, Allah is Able to do all things; such things that are possible are included in this concept. As for what is impossible in itself like if something is existing and non-existing at the same place and in the same time, such a thing is in fact false and unimaginable. There is no difference among sensible people concerning the above-mentioned. So, the issue of 'if Allah can create another match to Him and so on' is included in the above ruling'. Finally to clarify it, Omnipotence is the ability to realize every possible affair. Omnipotence also includes the impossibility of failure. In the stone question, the questioner is saying that since God is All-Powerful, He is capable of anything, including failure. This is irrational and absurd, as it is equivalent to saying “an All-Powerful Being cannot be an All-Powerful Being”. Failure to achieve or do something is not a feature of omnipotence. Impossibilities are not real, they cannot be realities so asking for their realization is an absurd and meaningless question.
@@timonpinto4945 This is an incredibly weak point. Alright so a foundation has to be set here, do you know what the Quran's stance is in regards to the previous scriptures and why it was revealed to begin with?
The Bible proves that Muhammad (saws) is a true Prophet! - [The word "Prophet" comes from the word "prophecy"] - Deuteronomy 18:22 "If a prophet speaks in the name of the Lord but the thing does not take place or prove true, it is a word that the Lord has not spoken." - In the previous verse, it is asked how one can distinguish a TRUE prophet from a FALSE prophet. - The answer was that only a TRUE prophet makes prophecies that ACTUALLY happen. - And you know what? Muhammad (saws) made HUNDREDS of prophecies that are very precise and yet ACTUALLY happened!
You can look at this multiple ways. He wrestles with an angel sent by God (not God Himself) and then he gets renamed to Israel which means "One who wrestles with God". This is clearly an allegory for wavering faith. This would come back and become a major theme in Exodus. We can tell that it is an angel of God because Hosea 12:4 states that it is, if you want to believe it as such. If you reject this interpretation and view it as God Himself, let me explain it for you. Jacob came to a position where he held onto the Lord and pleaded to be blessed whilst they wrestled. Not because of what he did, but inspite of it. He is known as Israel not because he fought and was stronger; but because he held on by faith pleading for forgiveness and didn't let go. That's how he prevailed, through having faith and not giving up, which is a lesson to be learned here. Moreover, God is often referred to as a father. Think of it like a father with a little one, he let him "win" in an effort to teach him something; the child did not 'beat' the father, but conceded in order to allow the child to grow. Similarly, Jacob did not overpower God, but instead continued to cling and hold onto Him. Jacob holding onto Him and clinging to Him and being unwilling to let Him go is what God wanted from him, and he was thus blessed. I could go on more and more as to how this could be interpreted, but I feel like it would drag. This passage doesn't show the inferiority of God, but rather if you look deeply into it, you will see the beauty of God. It has beauty and substance that the Quran lacks, in my opinion.
lmao muhammad is a false prophet or he's not even a prophet amd jesus once said there will be no prophets after him and if muhammad is a prophet then which means he is a false prophet or maybe he is not even a prophet
But of that day and hour knoweth no [man], no, not the angels of heaven, but my Father only. (Matthew 24:36) ‘I am going away and coming back to you.’ If you loved Me, you would rejoice because I said, ‘I am going to the Father,’ for My Father is greater than I. (John 14:28) And this is eternal life, that they may know You, the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom You have sent (John 17:3)
@@Ilovebullyingfurrystransplandp Christian artifacts have been discovered recently, if you look into it you may want to revert to Christianity! Though that's entirely your choice to look into it, just saying Christianity is confirmed truth.
Hey! I grew up Roman Catholic but I'm still pretty young, (I'm not even a teenager yet) what could I do to look into Orthodoxy? Also my family does know about Vatican II and whats wrong with it
Definitely check out if there is an Orthodox Church near you and see if you can go visit! Get in touch with a priest. Feel free to reach out to me too if you need a friend to talk to :) I'll pray for you bro. God bless you! May the Holy Spirit guide you to the Orthodox Church!
Its all being controlled by Satanist Freemasons: the catholic church, orthodox church, mosques, synagogues, temples, school, book publishing, the TV, the internet.... Dont waste your time with these trolls, my fellow man. Follow your heart.
For all of you talking about context, translation, interpretation, Arabic, Islamic scholars and so on - just see Nabi Asli and/or The Masked Arab videos and the references they give, and check those references, read them. Then either you'll see or there is no point in talking to you.
