I know how I missed this bit now 😂 I was busy doing a Google search on office chairs in London to see how much you would need to raise. I truly hope you raise enough for a new chair soon!
He wasnt appealing to the ebionites to say that their beliefs are correct and a form of proto-islam or something. He was presenting them as early christians who didnt believe in the trinity as western roman christians later did. This shows Jesus didn't teach the trinity because if he did there wouldnt be as much variance in that belief early on. Also, you'll notice that Mohamed Hijab didn't claim they were earlier, he claimed they were EARLY, which is the truth.
Mimi Hijab did not even know that ebionites did not believe in virgin birth of mary and falsy claimed that jesus was the son of joseph and mary which goes against their quran as Isa in their quran is Kalimatallah and Ruhullah. So, even if he goes to ebionites, he is contradicting his quran.
Yo SIIIG, would you actually like to go on the Fresh and Fit podcast? They do have an email that you can send collaboration requests to in their youtube about me. If you do let me know because I could write one on behalf of you or get other members to request that collaboration? Im being for real too, i have a draft email request ready rn
@SIIIG1 gotcha, thanks. I'm Orthodox myself so just trying to understand. Appreciate your work and the other brothers at Speakers Corner; especially the ones debating Mo Hijab and running circles around him 🏃♂️ 👌
The Trinity is not teached by early Christians as they teach it now but the concept of Trinity and the verses that concluted the church to label God as a Trinity is in the lattters Paul and the apostles wrote they just didn't label God a Trinity until later when they were trying to understand what God was or how he is our minds are not the same as God's mind Muslim act like we are suppose to understand everything about God that just no need to do so God is One Jesus is God in human form it's not that complex he is also a spirit
Deuteronomy 6:4 means when it says, “LORD is one.” The Hebrew word translated “one” in Deuteronomy 6:4 is echad. It means “unity,” not “singularity.” It is also used in Genesis 2:24 in referring to a husband and wife being “one” flesh. A husband and wife are not one as in a singular being. Rather, they are in unity with each other. There is a Hebrew word that means “absolute singularity,” yachid, but it is never used in the Hebrew Scriptures in reference to God.
@@valentino3228 You just quoted a controversial verse many believe is a likely man-made fabrication. Why? Because not a single disciple of Jesus ever baptized in the name of “the Father, the Son, and the Holy spirit”. They all did so in the name of “Jesus Christ” alone which does not prove this verse nor does it prove the trinity.
@@shigechi5027Matthew 28:19 is not a fabricated verse. We know the apostles baptised in the trinitarian formula due to the patristic evidence from the early church and its fathers: Didache (teaching of the twelve apostles) - “chapter 7. Concerning baptism. And concerning baptism, baptise this way: Having first said all these things, baptise into the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit, in living water.” Ignatius of Antioch (ca. AD. 107-112) - “wherefore also the Lord, when He sent forth the apostles to make disciples of all nations, commanded them to ‘baptise in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost.’” Irenaeus (ca. 130-200) - “he said to them, ‘go and teach all nations, baptising them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost.’” Tertullian (ca. 160-200) - “…He commanded the eleven others, on his departure to the Father, to ‘go and teach all nations, who were to be baptised in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit.’” There are many, many other examples aswell.
@@shigechi5027not sure if my comment was deleted but I’ll try again. Matthew 28:19 is not a fabricated verse. We know that the apostles baptised in the trinitarian formula because of the patristic evidence we have from the early church and its fathers: Didache (teachings of the twelve apostles) - “chapter 7. Concerning baptism. And concerning baptism, baptise this way: having first said all of these things, baptise into the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit.” Ignatius of Antioch (ca. AD. 107-112) - “wherefore also the Lord, when he sent forth the apostles to make disciples of all nations, commanded them to ‘baptise in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit.’” Irenaeus (ca. 130-200) - “he said to them, ‘go and teach all nations, baptising them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit.’” Tertullian (ca. 160-220) - “…he commanded the eleven others, on his departure to the Father, ‘go and teach all nations, baptising them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit.’” There are many, many other sources aswell.
Read the damn context, God didn’t send himself that’s a strawman. God the Father sent God the Son. Jesus also says: “Glorify your Son, that you Son may glorify you”. “THAT HE MIGHT GIVE ETERNAL LIFE TO ALL THOSE YOU HAVE GIVEN HIM”. “And now, Father, glorify me in your presence with the glory I HAD WITH YOU BEFORE THE WORLD BEGAN”. “All I have is yours, and all you have is mine. And glory has come TO ME through them”. “Just as you are in me and I am in you. May they also be in US so that the world may believe that you have sent me”. “Father, I want those you have given me to be with me where I am, and to see my glory, the glory you have given me BECAUSE YOU HAVE LOVED ME BEFORE THE WORLD BEGAN”. Here we note that Jesus is God’s Son, Jesus gives eternal life to all that God gives him (which is a claim to being divine since God only can give eternal life). Jesus existed in glory with the father even before the world was created, Jesus demands to be glorified by God which is something no mere creature can ever demand and Jesus indwells all the believers (also a claim to divinity since only God can be omnipresent but Jesus also claims to be omnipresent). So, clearly, the context makes it clear that Jesus’ statement about the Father being the only true God in no way was meant to deny that Jesus is God aswell, since he goes on to make claims only God can make. Jesus is simply addressing the Father for being the only true God since this is what he truly is, but we know from the same Bible that the only true God exists as more than one person as the Bible plainly shows that the Son and the Holy Spirit are God aswell. Since God is triune, this means that the three persons can be addressed as the only true God both collectively and individually. Notice what the Father says about Jesus in Hebrews 1:8-9: “But about the Son he says, ‘your throne, O God, will last forever and ever, and righteousness will be the sceptre of your kingdom. You have loved righteousness and hated wickedness; therefore God, your God, has set you above your companions by anointing you with the oil of joy.’” The Father praises his Son by calling Him God, the eternal King and for being the sustainer and creator of all creation. Does this mean Father is none of these things either!? No! Both the Son and the Father praise each other as being God. In John 17:3, Jesus even makes himself a coequal partner with God by claiming that eternal life is dependent on knowing both the Father and the Son. The grouping of the Father and Jesus as the necessary objects of salvation is evident of this, in Islam this would be shirk! Except if you’re Muhammed of course lmao
