'Nope. Jesus is Not Yahweh' ~ Dr Bart Ehrman 

Bible is... it's...

Yeah. It can only be studied but the roots have gone to deep for any changes to be made.

I think i got your point lol

⚠️⚠️Has Allah forgotten his name or is he just an IDOL!⚠️⚠️ Why is it the unforgivable sin in Islam to confess " there is only one God and this is YHWH"" The Name Jesus means------------- "YHWH RESCUE" Elijah means------------- --------------" MY GOD IS YHWH" John means ----------------------------" YHWH has been gracious"" Zakariya means -----------------------""YHWH has remembered"" Jacob means----------------------------"YHWH will PROTECT!" are all prophets according to the Quran

Because it's conflicting with the doctrines

Isaiah 41, 44, 48. Revelation 1:13,18 2:8 Jesus is YHVH. in flesh.

@@garlandjones7709 YHVH : I will curse all that curse you Jesus : Bless those who curse you How can they be the same when they preach different levels of morality? Dont be ridiculous. Jesus said in the gospel of John : Your father (YHVH) is a murder since the beginning

@@ketsune23 not what he said. Hes making them to be a type of Cain. The first murderer. Himself to be abel....the one slain Theres also not an issue with morality. Youre comparing apples to rocks with a concept youve completely missed. Men dont take vengeance. God takes vengeanxe for them. Thats both testaments. Nothing new. It isnt ridiculous. Not paying attention is ridiculous.

@@garlandjones7709 wha the hell are you talking about? Jesus is not YHWH.

@@ketsune23 read Matthew 24. Focus specifically on versee 28-31 then read Zechariah 14, 1-9. Not only does Jesus claim himself yhvh. He specifically quotes that and alludes to that and that is the passage they crucified him for. Why did they kill him? Therein lies the answer to all divinity questions. You also obviously didnt read the five verses i listed prior

❤️

@@jeremiahlim2925 Supposition Conjecture Wishful thinking And Jewish rabbis who know the OT better than you laugh and lament and v your opinions and your move towards idolatry.

@@jeremiahlim2925 What did you write. And I don't think Paul would delete a comment.

@@jeremiahlim2925 You can't make 1 intelligent point and you think you are worth deleting. You certainly have to much pride compared to your abilities. Anyone who has a strong argument would be happy to make it. So you believe trading is more important than spreading the truth. Curious! I think you are just confused.

@@BloggingTheology Have you seen Michael Heiser video on Yahweh. Just type his name on search.

Maybe he is fasting?

You are very welcome

Open RU-vid using browser (such as chrome, Firefox, Opera etc) from desktop PC or laptop or tablet. Click the gear icon select menu subtitle / CC >> Auto Translate >> pick your language. *Translation may incorrect because It's using RU-vid auto caption (English) then Google translate into the language you choose

Quran 4:65 claims you can’t be a real Muslim until you accept everything about Muhammad’s laws with no disagreement. Quran 4:24 (also 23:5-6, 70:28-30) lets Muslim jihadis have $3x sl@ves. Sunan Abi Dawud 2155 & Jami` at-Tirmidhi 3016 (both Sahih) give the background for this verse. It mentions how Muslims didn’t want to have $3x with the women because they were taken. But Muhammad miraculously received a verse saying it’s ok (how convenient). Which is why tafsirs mention them already being married: Tafsir Jalalayn, Quran 4:24, ‘And, forbidden to you are, wedded women…save what your right hands own, of captured [sl@ve] girls, whom you may have s3xual intercourse with, even if they should have *spouses* among the enemy camp…this is what God has prescribed for you…’ Tafsir of Ibn Kathir, Quran 4:24, ‘…(except those whom your right hands possess) except those whom you acquire through war, for you are allowed such women after making sure they are *not* pregnant…you are allowed to use your money to marry up to four wives and for (the purchase of) as many female sl@ves as you like, all through legal means…’ (How in the world were those random soildiers more moral than the supposed greatest man ever (Quran 33:21, 68:4)) So If a Muslim country went to war with a country (Mexico for example), are you telling me it’s ok for Muslim men to take Mexican women as $3x sl@ves?? Which includes your family. Because that’s exactly what Muhammad would’ve done and allowed. Absolutely Disgusting! As a side note since this video includes Bart, who Muslims rely upon heavily for Bible corruption, let’s see what he has admitted about biblical manuscripts: “…of all the hundreds of thousands of textual changes found among our manuscripts, most of them are completely insignificant, immaterial, of no real importance for anything other than showing that scribes cannot spell or keep focused any better than the rest of us” (p 207) “The position I argue for a Misquoting Jesus does not actually stand at odds with Prof. Metzgers’s position that the essential Christian beliefs are not affected by textual variance in the manuscript tradition of the New Testament.” (Misquoting Jesus, 2007 edition, p. 252) He’s also said that Jesus being cruc!fied is one of the most historical things we know and that Jesus making birds from clay in Quran 5:110 is stolen from the lnfancy gospel of Thomas.

Also since you’re Mexican, do you believe your unbelieving parents, siblings and fellow Mexicans are the w0rst of all created beings (Quran 8:55, 98:6)? Yes this verse means what it says. Tafsir Kathir on 8:55 “Allah states here that the worst *moving* creatures on the face of the earth are those who disbelieve, who do not embrace the faith” Even the footnote of a translation (Tafheem-ul-Quran - Abul Ala Maududi) happily explains on 98:6 “The meaning is that…they are worse than *all* creatures of God, *even* than animals” If you say yes, I must admit, that’s a pretty disgusting thing to believe. This really shows the hatred/lack of love of Islam. This is such a damaging mindset to have. Unlike Islam, Christianity believes every single human being is created in the image of the Creator of the universe (Genesis 1:26-28). So humans have an intrinsic value & special view in God’s eyes, ESPECIALLY compared to animals. As Jesus said, “If any of you has a sheep and it falls into a pit on the Sabbath, will you not take hold of it and lift it out? How much more valuable is a person than a sheep!” (Matt 12:11-12) Which is why we’re commanded to love everyone, especially God (Matt 22:34-40 etc). Even love for our enemies (Matt 5:43-48 etc), something absent in Islam. In Christianity, we still see Arabs as made in God’s very own image. And therefore worthy of love and respect. In Islam, Mexicans and Latinos (among many others) are viewed as worse than an ant and a cockroach. Is this the god you believe in? It’s never too late to come back (Luke 15) But because of how true Islam is, don’t forget the penalty for leaving Islam (Sahih al-Bukhari 3017, Sahih al-Bukhari 9:89:271 etc.) Because you know, Islam’s a religion of peace

And if you really believe Islam is true over Christianity you should debate Christian Prince and Sam Shamoun. If you really care about the truth, you should debate them. This way you can bring your strongest proofs for Islam & put it to the test. And you will gain knowledge. Your salvation depends on it! As CP says in his all his descriptions, “We welcome any Muslim (big or small) to our debate ANYTIME we go l!ve”

To learn the true Islam, follow C-I-R-A I-ntern-at-ional, Pfa-nderFil-ms, R-ob C-hristian, I-slam Critiq-ued, Reason-ed An-swers and Ada-m Seeke-r etc. (Sorry for dashes, they’re necessary) And read “The Critical Qur'an”

Assalaam Alaykum brother. Ps note: *ilaaha = 1 word.*

He is a Muslim I heard him saying he is a Muslim for 10 years. I don't know whether he is a practicing Muslim or not. But paul is a good person

@@murthe-wise535 Likely correct

same wallahy

He is muslim since last two years and our brother too...

He's already muslim :)

🤭

@@BloggingTheology nice view.

yes yes yes

Noted

@@BloggingTheology Bart Erhman to promote Islam?

⚠️⚠️Has Allah forgotten his name or is he just an IDOL!⚠️⚠️ Why is it the unforgivable sin in Islam to confess " there is only one God and this is YHWH"" The Name Jesus means------------- "YHWH RESCUE" Elijah means------------- --------------" MY GOD IS YHWH" John means ----------------------------" YHWH has been gracious"" Zakariya means -----------------------""YHWH has remembered"" Jacob means----------------------------"YHWH will PROTECT!" are all prophets according to the Quran

or you could literally just search each of those terms lol

@@hannawurst6064 allah is the same as mary from Catolicism the ancient whorship of Babylon theu switched things around and turned on Rome when they took 25percent of the world but Spain and portal were taking and both of the. Have so much dirt on them

Theos is the word for Elohim. Adonia and Hashem are both replacements for YHVH. Ha'shem means the name, adonai meaning Lord. Hashem is used by ultra orthodox Jews today. Adonai was the original replacement. Adonai/HaShem/yhvh are represented in Greek by kyrios

Quran 28/88 Allah has a Face.

@@tyh3120 وَلَا تَدْعُ مَعَ ٱللَّهِ إِلَـٰهًا ءَاخَرَ ۘ لَآ إِلَـٰهَ إِلَّا هُوَ ۚ كُلُّ شَىْءٍ هَالِكٌ إِلَّا وَجْهَهُۥ ۚ لَهُ ٱلْحُكْمُ وَإِلَيْهِ تُرْجَعُونَ And do not invoke any other god with Allah. There is no god ˹worthy of worship˺ except Him. Everything is bound to perish except He Himself.1 All authority belongs to Him. And to Him you will ˹all˺ be returned. - Dr. Mustafa Khattab, the Clear Quran And do not invoke with Allah another deity. There is no deity except Him. Everything will be destroyed except His Face.1 His is the judgement, and to Him you will be returned. - Saheeh International Footnote1 i.e., except Himself.

Thanks but I am not a scholar

A scholar does not need a degree , a scholar needs guidence , that's what you have

He meant God the Father. Since Jesus is God the Son and not God the Father, Jesus can call God the Father/his Father "God", or since he's in his human nature(At that time), he can call God the Father "God".

@@someperson7884 This means that there is more than 1 God? Clearly this is what you claim, if the son is calling the father God.... Surah Al-Kahf, Verse 110: قُلْ إِنَّمَا أَنَا بَشَرٌ مِّثْلُكُمْ يُوحَىٰ إِلَيَّ أَنَّمَا إِلَٰهُكُمْ إِلَٰهٌ وَاحِدٌ فَمَن كَانَ يَرْجُو لِقَاءَ رَبِّهِ فَلْيَعْمَلْ عَمَلًا صَالِحًا وَلَا يُشْرِكْ بِعِبَادَةِ رَبِّهِ أَحَدًا Say (Muhammed): I am only a mortal like you; it is revealed to me that your God is ONE, therefore whoever hopes to meet his Lord, he should do good deeds, and not join any one in the service of his Lord. via iQuran

@@Shahid-if4ws That's not how the Trinity works. You forgot to add God the Son. Not the Son. The basics of the Trinity are that there are 3 persons, God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Spirit. Yet there's only 1 God. 3 persons, 1 being. Not 3 persons, 3 beings. I know this doesn't make sense, but is God supposed to make sense to our human minds to exist?

@@someperson7884 Hindus: We have 3 Million Gods, but they are ONE Xristian: Worship only one GOD. Not 3 Million gods Hindus: Ok, What is Trinity ? Xristian: Father, Son, Holy Spirit.Not 3 but One Hindus: Hahah ..See we are same ..your 3 in 1 , ours 3 Mil in One

@@seekthetruthandthetruthwil2388 It's obvious who is confused....Read the Verses properly....5;117 are words of Esa, continued from Verse 116; "worship Allah who is my Lord and yours".... Surah Al-Maeda, Verse 116: وَإِذْ قَالَ اللَّهُ يَا عِيسَى ابْنَ مَرْيَمَ أَأَنتَ قُلْتَ لِلنَّاسِ اتَّخِذُونِي وَأُمِّيَ إِلَٰهَيْنِ مِن دُونِ اللَّهِ قَالَ سُبْحَانَكَ مَا يَكُونُ لِي أَنْ أَقُولَ مَا لَيْسَ لِي بِحَقٍّ إِن كُنتُ قُلْتُهُ فَقَدْ عَلِمْتَهُ تَعْلَمُ مَا فِي نَفْسِي وَلَا أَعْلَمُ مَا فِي نَفْسِكَ إِنَّكَ أَنتَ عَلَّامُ الْغُيُوبِ And when Allah will say: O Esa son of Marium! did you say to men, Take me and my mother for two gods besides Allah? Then he (Esa) will say: Glory be to Thee, it did not befit me that I should say what I had no right to (say); if I had said it, Thou wouldst indeed have known it; Thou knowest what is in my mind, and I do not know what is in Thy mind, surely Thou art the great Knower of the unseen things. Surah Al-Maeda, Verse 117: مَا قُلْتُ لَهُمْ إِلَّا مَا أَمَرْتَنِي بِهِ أَنِ اعْبُدُوا اللَّهَ رَبِّي وَرَبَّكُمْ وَكُنتُ عَلَيْهِمْ شَهِيدًا مَّا دُمْتُ فِيهِمْ فَلَمَّا تَوَفَّيْتَنِي كُنتَ أَنتَ الرَّقِيبَ عَلَيْهِمْ وَأَنتَ عَلَىٰ كُلِّ شَيْءٍ شَهِيدٌ I did not say to them aught save what Thou didst enjoin me with: That serve Allah, my Lord and your Lord, and I was a witness of them so long as I was among them, but when Thou didst cause me to die, Thou wert the watcher over them, and Thou art witness of all things. via iQuran

Jesus never made himself equal to God…

@@djsynced7625 Never said he did

Awesome, thank you!

@@BloggingTheology Paul, try watching Dr. Joseph Schulman video on monotheism. He is a messianic Jew.

@@seekthetruthandthetruthwil2388 The text indicates God is not born of woman. Was Jesus born of woman?

@@seekthetruthandthetruthwil2388 If Jesus was God just because he didn't have any father then Adam is more godly than Jesus as he was born without both. So the question still stands. If Jesus was born of a woman how does it make him God when the text says, 'How then can man be justified with God? or *how can he be clean that is born of a woman?*

@Elmore but you ignored the fact that Jesus was born of a woman, which was his mother Mary.

Allah is the God of Israel from Abraham?

@Trolling-The-Truth So Allah dwells in Zion and is pro-Israel and against the pagan Palestinian = Philistin?

@@tyh3120 No. There is only one God, the same God that Abraham worshipped. The same God that the Jews worshipped as "Yahweh", the same God that Christians called "The Father", not the 3 in 1 version, just the one that Jesus prayed to, the same God that Muslim worshipped called "Allah". The message of God of Abraham had been altered for the Jews and the Christians due to politics and self interest of their high priest, thus the original message from God in the previous scriptures had been corrupted and no longer truthful. However, as God sent the Last Prophet, Muhammad peace upon him, the original scripture from God is still preserved to be the guide for mankind till the Last Day, in fact God Himself promised to preserved His message thus the last scripture Al-Quran has never been changed and are memorized by millions of Muslims world wide. Even if the world burns Al-Quran, the Muslims can easily conjure a new copy from their memories, and verified it across the world.

It could also mean when Thomas exclaimed as claimed in the Gospel According to John: "O my Lord ! O my God ... I was indeed mistaken ... I thought you're dead (as the dead cannot return as the good book says). I know you're not a spirit (as spirit would not ask for food and drink)".

@@zainiabdullah621 St Thomas was born in Judea, where the Mosaic Law would have had strict adherence. What you propose would qualify as blasphemy, an offence under the 2nd Commandment. The greek, 'theos', unequivocably translates to God. There are passages in the gospel where Christ is worshipped. Consider if it should be in His disposition to deny Godship if He were a mere prophet. See Matt 2:1-2; Matt 28:8-9. The Torah is clear that none except God is to be worshipped.

@@zainiabdullah621 they didnt use those expressions in that culture. It would have been blasphemy and Jesus would have rebuked Thomas. The Hebrew letters each have a meaning. The Hebrew letters that make up the name of God in Hebrew means Hand Behold Nail Behold. Now when you read the doubting Thomas account it becomes clear. Jesus showed Thomas His HAND and the hole from the NAIL. Hope this helps.

@Faisal Siraj Polycarp and Ignatius of Antioch were disciples of John. They were two successors of the apostles. In light of their association, it would be in accord with tradition to entreat their authority on matters of translation just as Abu Bakr was for Islam. Aboveall, their martyrdom would be the best measure of their fidelty to the christian faith. Here are two quotes, Now may the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, and the eternal high priest himself, the Son of God Jesus Christ, build you up in faith and truth...and to us with you, and to all those under heaven who will yet believe in our Lord and God Jesus Christ and in his Father who raised him from the dead. (Polycarp, Lettet to the Philippians, at 12.2) Ignatius, who is also Theophorus, unto her which hath been blessed in greatness through the plentitude of God the Father; which hath been foreordained before the ages to be for ever unto abiding and unchangeable glory, united and elect in a true passion, by the will of the Father and of Jesus Christ our God; even unto the church which is in Ephesus [of Asia], worthy of all felicitation: abundant greeting in Christ Jesus and in blameless joy. (Ignatius of Antioch, Letter to the Ephesian, opening greetings) It is unusual that you should bring up christian concepts that are based on the idea of a personal God and self-giving sacrifice. Deedat would agree with me at least that the latter is not qualified in islam (in reference to his disdain on the christian reading of offering the other cheek). The christian concept of sacrifice is based on the Commandment of Love, properly ordered to God, then to humanity in general. The idea of worship is beyond a overt act. Unless you understand latria in proper context, you stray into idolatory. Let's take the example of an extremist who sacrifice himself in violent destruction. His act may be construed as love for God or the pursuit of expedited entry into Jannah. If the latter, Zakir Naik would agree with me that it is idolatrous. As with any document, the bible is not self-evident revelation. It does not interpret nor corrupt itself. Our assumptions corrupts the texts. It is for this reason that every student of christianity must entreat the authority of tradition and the earliest writings and interpretations of the church fathers. We still have the Septuagint, Didache, the two earliest biblical codices as the deposit of faith. These are prestine. If you read the bible cover to cover, the christian message is couched in the language of prophecy anf fulfilment. Some view it as apocalyptic. Many of the earliest church fathers also saw salvation history as the restoration of all things unto God Himself, the immanentization of the eschaton. The earliest christians saw it in the light of God and men seeking reconciliation. It is this reason that the incarnation of Christ Jesus is the central theme, so that in Him, we know there is a humanly possible path to God. In the words of Athanasius, God became man, so man might become god, not in a prideful way, but as a offering of love, of sacrifice, unto Him. I am sorry. But just as I do not pretend to understand Islam, you have very little knowledge of christianity. However, you pretend to know more than you do. "Ignorance more frequently begets confidence, than doex knowledge".

@Faisal Siraj the truth often hurts, but I do not partake of anger, for the truth needs no defence. Pleass read the bible cover to cover if you have not.

Amos Wittenberg are you a Muslim?

Allah is the God of Israel from Abraham or the moon god of the pagan Palestine=Philistin, the enemy of the Kingdom of Israel?

@@tyh3120 Dear friend, if you will allow me to address you like that. We do not know each other and you reacted to my comment which addressed the Muslimim on this channel and shared with them wishes for a spiritual awakening during their month long fast of Ramadan. I hope you will be kind enough to read my reply to your short question carefully and in a spirit of truth. I quickly looked at your own channel and found some indications that you are a follower of Christianity in some form. If I am mistaken about that, please do correct that impression. If I would have Arabic as my mother language, I would use the word Allah where in English I use the word God. I recognise this word as a Name to refer to the Holy One, the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, of blessed memory. He is the one I worship and obey, in Whom I trust, Who is my Rock and Saviour. There none besides Him. He shares His glory with no one else. I certainly do not accept in any way the notion that somehow my Muslim brothers secretly worship some idol, heaven forbid such an abomination. It is very well possible that in the age of ignorance in the pre-Islamic Arab world some people may have used the generic Semitic word allah for one of their idols. We find among Canaanite nations in the era before the Children of Israel came to the land that God had promised to them, some peoples used similar Semitic words for their idols. It is an unfortunate matter that some Christian apologists spread the false story that Muslimim are idol worshippers, heaven forbid! Muslimim are *extremely* careful to affirm that they worship the same true Almighty Creator, Lord of all the worlds, Whom Adam, Noach, Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, David, Solomon and all the prophets of blessed memory acknowledged, knew, served, worshipped, praised and *obeyed* with total faith. He has no wife, son, daughter, nephew, cousin or uncle. He is not a man and has no human form. He is the One Who dwells on High, the All Merciful, All Trustworthy, All Compassionate. To Him all knees must bend and every tongue must pray. There is no one but Him.

@@fataltruth6000 I am a Jew and I share with my Muslim brothers the confession that there is no god but God Alone - لا إله إلا الله. I express this twice a day with my confession of faith: Hear Israel, the L-RD is our God, the L-RD is One - שמע ישראל ה' אלהינו, ה' הוא אחד - اسمع يا اسرائيل الله الهنا الله واحد.

@@amoswittenbergsmusings non, answer me- Allah is the God of The King David from Abraham or the moon god of the Giant Goliath, the Philistin= Palestinian?

Evolving Christianity

Thank you very much!

He is Muslim

@ياوت 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣

Thanks 👍

just one eye?

I find it amusing when people in fields of science are keen to criticize each others work and find faults in it, but when it comes to their own research, they get mad when it’s done to them.

@@jackricky5453 Touche! However, there is a difference. Science actually thrives on the peer review process, whereby someone will publish their work and everyone else will try to find fault. If an idea can withstand that, it is likely to be sound, if not, it's back to the drawing board. It's a very good system because science claims must be demonstrable and repeatable. On the other hand, religious people tend to proclaim their beliefs/opinions as facts, even though they can offer no verifiable evidence to demonstrate their truth and, at the same time, they rubbish similar assertions by people of other religions.

​@@Outspoken.Humanist I work in a field of science; I understand very well the peer-review process. I understand that peer review is eye-witness testimony, just as religious claims like Christianity and Islam are based on historical testimony. There is evidence present for their claims, and these can be rigorously analyzed. It's not like people just pull things out of thin air. In science there are some things which might be verifiable, but will most likely never be verified, like the decay of a proton. The historical claims made by religious people thrive on testimony as well. Events which are verifiable to a select group at a select time in history, and through personal experience today. Both are documented, corroborated, and falsifiable. There is no significant difference in their epistemology. Only a preliminary bias. All evidence, no matter how strong or weak is eye-witness testimony outside of yourself, unless you personally verify it, this goes for science as well.

@@jackricky5453 This reply is going to be too long but you are making some profound errors and i wish to help you. None of what follows is about your personal faith or whether you are right or wrong in your beliefs. It is only to address the way you think about things. Firstly, peer review has absolutely nothing to do with eyewitness testimony. I'm sorry but that is foolish. In peer review, scientists test and take apart the claims of others by repeating their work and checking their conclusions. They could be in different parts of the world. They are not eyewitnesses to the initial discovery. Secondly, there is absolutely no way to test the claims of religions or in any way assess their validity, which is precisely why all religions place so much emphasis on belief. There is also no way to test the historicity of the stories behind Christianity or Islam, or any other religion. We have a handful of written accounts, none of whom are from eyewitnesses, all of whom are written many years after the events they describe and, in the case of Christianity, these accounts differ in profound ways which mean they cannot all be true. The gospels were originally anonymous and we have no idea who wrote them but the gospel of Luke actually tells us the author was not an eyewitness and in John it refers to "we know the testimony is true" meaning it is not the work of a single eyewitness author. Lastly, whilst there are things science does not yet know and may be things it will never know, every claim made by science has to be testable and repeatable before it is accepted. This is not the case for religion. Religious claims are never tested, never validated in any way, because they cannot be. How do we test if a man rose from death or if someone flew between cities on a winged creature? How do we validate a claim that the moon was split in two and reformed by Allah or if Jesus died for our sins? How do we even know, as a certain fact, that a god exists? We cannot and so we either believe or we don't. Your final paragraph highlights your misunderstanding. Testimony is not evidence. It is anecdotal and therefore cannot be verified. Personal verification is not important. It is the ability to test, repeat and demonstrate the facts which makes something evidence. Example: If I give you my personal testimony that I have fairies in my garden and I say I have seen them and even spoken with them, do you accept that as a fact simply through my testimony or do you need to verify it? Science tests all claims by repeating the process described by the person making the claim, to ascertain if the same results are achieved. This simply cannot be done in religion. Scientists would visit my garden and search it thoroughly and repeat what I did when i met the fairies. If no fairies were found, my testimony would be rejected. In religion you either believe the fairy story or you do not.

@@jackricky5453 Firstly, peer review has absolutely nothing to do with eyewitness testimony. In peer review, scientists test and take apart the claims of others by repeating their work and checking their conclusions. They could be in different parts of the world. Secondly, there is no way to test the claims of religions or assess their validity, which is why all religions place an emphasis on belief. There is also no way to test the historicity of the stories behind Christianity or Islam, or any other religion. We have a handful of written accounts, none of whom are from eyewitnesses, all of whom are written many years after the events they describe and, in the case of Christianity, these accounts differ in profound ways which mean they cannot all be true. The gospel of Luke actually tells us the author was not an eyewitness and in John it refers to "we know the testimony is true" so it is not the work of a single eyewitness author. Whilst there are things science does not yet know, every claim made by science has to be testable and repeatable before it is accepted. Religious claims are never tested because they cannot be. How do we test if a man rose from death or if someone flew between cities on a winged creature? How do we validate a claim that the moon was split in two and reformed by Allah or if Jesus died for our sins? We cannot and so we either believe or we don't. Testimony is not evidence. It is anecdotal and therefore cannot be verified. Personal verification is not important. It is the ability to test, repeat and demonstrate the facts which makes something evidence. Example: If I give you my testimony that I have fairies in my garden and I say I have seen them and spoken with them, do you accept that as a fact simply on my testimony or do you need to verify it? Science tests all claims by repeating the process described by the person making the claim, to ascertain if the same results are achieved. Scientists would visit my garden and search it and repeat what I did when i met the fairies. If no fairies were found, my testimony would be rejected. In religion you either believe the fairy story or you do not.

Thanks! Will do!

@routeduparadis paradis clearly projecting a case of Demonic Possession

are there too many Lebanese Christians converting to Islam? because from what I heard they are the hardest to convert mainly for tribalism reasons.

@@NadDew i am Lebanese sunni muslim it is very rare for Maronite Christians to convert it is not only a religion for them but it’s like a tribal clan like identity Though here in Australia there has been some rare cases of Lebanese Christians coming to islam but in Lebanon it is even more rare

@Fyoutube yes huh what’s this have do with any of the topic

@Fyoutube yes Sunni Lebanese Muslim girls rarely if ever marry non Muslims, I’d put it at less than 1%, at 0.1%. Miniscule it’s a non issue in ninety nine point nine percent of cases Im not sure where you are from to be making these claims. In regards do Shiites & allawite Lebanese girls they are more promiscuous, and some are borderline atheist, some do marry from other faiths, but even they stick to their own sect mainly. Not sure where your info is coming from seems very flawed

@@finalprophet813 That is funny. Infact tribalism is clearly seen in Islam, where every culture once accepted Islam through force , change their language, culture, dress code according to Arab culture. Also more than 12 Islamic countries have death penalties if they convert to non Muslim..talking about freedom..

Salam Ivan

The actual false prophet/teachers are explain clearly to you,They are the TORAH LAW BREAKERS!!!! church or priest, pastor, minister, reverend, or wizard that teaching or having the doctrine that "Jesus is GOD" and "Jesus is the son of God" is a FALSE teacher or a False church. BEWARE of them and don't let them DECEIVE you. Christianity is PURE IDOLATRY!

@@fefe8230 Good you should never believe otherwise you might not reach hell.

@@fefe8230 You are the Law breakers, because the Torah is summarized in Matthew 22 :36-40; but in following in the footsteps of the false prophet of Islam, you break the great commandments in shutting your heart away from the love of GOD, and in despising and judging others without studying what they truly believe. Examine your own heart to know if you are on the path of life.

@@prince2132 You are already heading for eternal separation with God, which produces hell and sadly you don't even recognize it. Call onto Jesus. "And everyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved." Acts 2 :21

@@stephaneamani6476 I not replied to you instead to that FeFe 82

Cool

This is Thomas Aquinas. As far as I know he's an Italian theologian.

Thomas Aquinas - one of the greatest theologians / philosophers in history.

I know almost nothing about Bart Ehrman or the Quran. I try to follow the teachings of Jesus the Christ. May God guide us.

Yes, but Paul avoids reading whatever Ehrman had written about that for some reason.

@@tombuddy100 Hmmmm really? That's interesting. I have no idea what Paul's goal is? But so far I respect what He says, although I don't accept knowledge without struggle. I try to listen to various scholars.

@@johnbrzykcy3076 We should listen to the greatest human, Jesus Christ. He learned from his Father, the God. John 12:49-50 For I have not spoken of myself; but the Father which sent me, he gave me a commandment, what I should say, and what I should speak. And I know that his commandment is life everlasting: whatsoever I speak therefore, even as the Father said unto me, so I speak.

@@tombuddy100 I agree with you but to me Jesus was more than "the greatest human."

It's a collection of first century texts, with a manuscript history better than most other ancient writings. There isn't a problem with textual criticism for that is what it is: examination of all the texts and fragments extant.

@@jamesupton4996 It is a collection of texts with no originals, unknown authors, sparse early manuscripts, unknown authority, subjective criteria for deciding what is Canon and what isn't, filled with inaccurate conflicting accounts, containing paraphrased sayings of Jesus with the inherent issues of loss of meaning in translation, and the insertion of fake verses despite the fact that all scripture is supposedly God breathed, not to mention that it has never been known what exactly is gospel since there is no consensus as to which of the 5500 manuscripts are correct and which the ones with errors. Hardly the impression you were trying to get away with. Finally comparisons are a way off hiding b the truth. The NT is terribly unreliable and saying that it is less unreliable than extremely unreliable other ancient manuscripts is not something that you should be so proud of In reality this is just rhetoric to divert attention from the very serious problems inherent in the NT as touched upon above.

@@think-islam-channel I'm aware of all that multiplicity, but in terms of manuscript history there are groupings, so it is not like there are thousands of utterly dissimilar readings. In terms of ancient texts - what does 'original' mean?: we don't have Caesar's Gallic Wars in his own hand, for instance. Some NT authors are not known by name, definitively, Paul is. Luke, as author of the third Gospel and Acts, companion of Paul can be argued for. But then the texts arose from tradition passed through early Christian communities, the Gospels being written when that first link - eyewitnesses- according to the third Gospel, were dying off. As for subjective criteria in the formation of the Canon - that was formed early in the church, through consensus. There are editorial glosses in the texts at points; that's the nature of writing. Some texts are composites - 2Corinthians, some have been edited before the final form we have them in - John's Gospel. Mark is the first written Gospel: Matthew and Luke use it as a source but can be creative in using it. The concept of inspiration, except for those fundamentalist Christians who adhere solely to the King James, does not involve having some Ur-text to appeal to. I'm not seeking to get away with anything - just challenging your 'totally unreliable' claim, on the grounds that like all ancient texts the New Testament is what it is - a set of ancient texts. That in itself does not preclude its authoritative role in the life of the christian churches. In this regard there are two areas to think about: the nature of scripture and the nature of revelation. Both of which are amenable to critical analysis.

@@jamesupton4996 Thanks for the reply. Original means the original text written by b the initial author aka the autographs. Agreed that Paul is the only definitely known author. But not all the works supposedly by Paul are by Paul. Also Paul is a contentious character. Not a disciple but his authority comes from himself. A human circular argument. We don't know who the synoptics were written by. We have little evidence for the authorship of the other works except for some of the works of Paul. I fully agree that the writings became important once the eye witnesses died or seemed at risk of dying and the information with them. Or perhaps the expected return of Jesus when it failed to materialise brought into focus the need to record what may have been mainly oral accounts circulating at the time. Canon : consensus of the church fathers is a subjective criterion. Which Church fathers? How rigorous? Who had more say - there are always more persuasive people in any field - and not always the most honest. By totally unreliable I mean that we have no guarantee that God sanctioned what you now have as the NT? Why would the letters of a mere man like Paul be considered scripture. I bet he didn't predict that his writings would be held ss the inspired words of God 2000 years later. The writings were utile to early christened true. But when v had critically there are major problems as I listed before. This makes drawing truth claims from the Bible impossible since it is of uncertain reliability and it definitely has errancy and fake verses which cannot lead to probable truths.

@@think-islam-channel Of Paul, first. It is clear that he drew on some tradition: 1. Cor. 15:3 - for what I have received - . That idea of tradition within the community is important. That is the origin of the texts of the New Testament, and the rule by which the canon came to be. I would see the church fathers not as authoritarian figures, on what must have been highly amorphous groups within early christianity, but rather as emerging from such groups, with sometimes striking insight. The heresies of the second century were not extirpated by fiat and power - christians had no recognition in the Roman system - but by argument, and general consensus. The nub of it is here. The rise of christianity, the formation of the canon, its contents and so on are all wide open to historical critical investigation. The evolution of the New Testament is symbiotic on the growth of the early church. So is the continuing understanding of these texts. Drawing Truth claims is not simple. Genesis says: In the beginning God created -John says: in the beginning was the Word. (ok - there's a huge amount behind this parallelism to dig into) - Verses cannot be quoted simply. The truth claims do not entirely hinge on the text. It is the community which witnesses, and the New Testament is part of that witness. The question then becomes one of : is this the people of God, and am I going to become a member of it - the New Israel, called by God? The idea of a God sanctioned text gives me the frights. How on earth would we know? I'm for the community first, and then the God guided discernment of which written products carry the truth, despite their literary and other imperfections. The texts and community being intertwined.

That sorts of problem in both side. Over and under.

@@seekthetruthandthetruthwil2388 I have not said to them anything but what You have ordered me to say, that is, ‘Worship Allah, my Lord and your Lord’ and I was a witness over them as long as I was with them. But when You recalled me, You were the One watching over them. You are a witness over everything. - Mufti Taqi Usmani In no way did I say to them (anything) except whatever You commanded me (saying), "Worship Allah, my Lord, and your Lord." And I was a witness over them, as long as I was among them; then as soon as You took me up, You, Ever You, have been The Watcher over them, and You are Ever-Witnessing over everything. - Dr. Ghali I told them only what You commanded me to: “Worship God, my Lord and your Lord.” I was a witness over them during my time among them. Ever since You took my soul, You alone have been the watcher over them: You are witness to all things - Abdul Haleem Hi! These are different translations of the meaning of the full ayat. I hope that clears that up! Have a wonderful day! 😊

@@seekthetruthandthetruthwil2388 I think the Ayat right before it gives a more clear viewpoint of the conversation. So 5:116: And when Allah said, “O ‘Īsā, son of Maryam, did you say to the people: ‘Take me and my mother as gods beside Allah?” He said, “Pure are You, it does not behoove me to say what is not right for me. Had I said it, You would have known it. You know what is in my heart, and I do not know what is in Your’s. You alone have full knowledge of all that is unseen. - Mufti Taqi Usmani And as Allah said, "O Isa son of Maryam, (Jesus son of Mary) did you say to mankind, "cTake me and my mother to your selves as two gods, apart from Allah '?" He said, All Extolment be to You! In no way is it for me to say what I have no right to. In case I ever said it. then You already know it. You know whatever is within my self, and I do not know what is within Your Self; surely You, Ever You, are The Superb Knower of the Things Unseen. - Dr. Ghali When God says, ‘Jesus, son of Mary, did you say to people, “Take me and my mother as two gods alongside God”?’ he will say, ‘May You be exalted! I would never say what I had no right to say- if I had said such a thing You would have known it: You know all that is within me, though I do not know what is within You, You alone have full knowledge of things unseen- - Abdul Haleem From what I understand, it is an event that will happen. Allah basically asks did you tell them to worship you. And he says, I only told them what you told me to tell them. To worship Allah. Then he goes on to say that he told them "My lord and your lord". That was the job he had as a messenger of God. So he was given explicit instruction to say "my lord" so jesus is speaking to the others saying my lord. As in Jesus's God. And "your lord" as in the people's God. So speaking to the people "worship God, my lord and your lord". He's recounting what he was told to say to the people he was sent to guide at the time. And then he says "You were a witness to this" Saying Allah knows of what occurred and that Allah knows what's in Jesus's heart and that if he forgives them or not, they are inevitably the Servants and Creation of God. (also have to keep in mind that this is a translation of the meaning, it could be more clear in the arabic text, I wouldn't know)

@@seekthetruthandthetruthwil2388 (2) I think it's clearest in this video, I hope it helps: ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-8bnrhQn7dlk.html. Also if it wasn't clear enough (sorry on my account) the direct quotes I'm pulling with the names under it (like the paragraph right above Abdul Haleem) are verses of the Quran, the first 3 are different translations of the meaning from 5:117. and the second 3 are translations of the meaning from verse 5:116. And this youtube vid is a full translation of the meaning plus the arabic recitation of Surah Al-Maidah (5) from the verses 109-120. So it encompasses verse 117 we were discussing plus the verses right before and after

anti-Quran? He has not yet published book criticizing Islam.

@@letmetalk2240 Hasn't yet written a book against the Quran? No and yet, yes. His entire thesis of why he dismisses the Bible is that it's a forgery. He believes that ALL ancient sources are forgeries. Thus when he's done attacking the Bible, guess who's next.

@@libertyg5136 I recalled him having said that he would not 'attack' Quran for the reason that he is not in that field. That is a fair answer for me.

​@@letmetalk2240 I'm simply telling you the man's beliefs. Some might agree, most don't. He's welcome to have his own theories. If you want to believe different, that's on you.

Me too. Let make doa just before iftar, so that Allah will guide him to straight path.Amiin

They’re corruption all throughout the Quran. Quran is a whit mama book not a middle eastern/ Muslim

@UnityTechFuture Exactly! Jesus said," He that honoreth not the Son honoreth not the Father who sent him". John 5:23

@@seekthetruthandthetruthwil2388 And what else did Jesus say which is Just if not more important? " I am the Way, the Truth and the Life, No one comes to the Father but through me". John 14:6 What's he saying? He is the Only Way to God his heavenly Father!! Jesus said," For God so loved the world that he gave his Only Begotten Son so whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal Life. For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn it but that the world might be saved through him". John 3:16-17. Jesus is identifying himself as the Son and he is the Only way for Salvation of the entire world. Jesus said," So that all may honor the Son as they honor the Father. He that honoreth not the Son honoreth not the Father who sent him". John 5:23. Jesus is the Only Way to God , his heavenly Father and Eternal Life. Praise be Jesus Christ the Only Son of Almighty God. Amen

ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-SVAJj1hVcNQ.html

Another foolish translation. The actual word in Hebrew is *YOUNG WOMAN, not virgin.* Isaiah 7:14 (Inaccurate to prove something that doesn't exist!) New King James Version Therefore the Lord Himself will give you a sign: Behold, the virgin shall conceive and bear a Son, and shall call His name Immanuel. *Good News Translation (Accurate!)* Well then, the Lord himself will give you a sign: *a young woman* who is pregnant will have a son and will name him 'Immanuel.' NET Bible (Accurate!) For this reason the sovereign master himself will give you a confirming sign. Look, this young woman is about to conceive and will give birth to a son. You, young woman, will name him Immanuel. JPS Tanakh 1917 (Accurate!) Therefore the Lord Himself shall give you a sign: behold, the young woman shall conceive, and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel. the virgin הָעַלְמָ֗ה (hā·‘al·māh) Article | Noun - feminine singular Strong's 5959: *A young woman*, a virgin

@@seekthetruthandthetruthwil2388 Read the context instead of cherry picking. The situation was intense at that time. The Jews were surrounded by the enemy. It was 700 years before Jesus [pbuh].

@@seekthetruthandthetruthwil2388 Why do Christians always want to see miracle? Why does it have to be miracle? It was a prophecy. Read the text.

@@FreePalestine_____ Either way, God was faithful to His promise, as He always is; and indeed "IMMANUEL": God came among us, and God is with us, as He promised He would. "She will give birth to a Son, and you are to give Him the name Jesus, because He will save His people from their sins.” 22All this took place to fulfill what the Lord had said through the prophet: 23“Behold, the virgin will be with child and will give birth to a son, and they will call Him Immanuel” (which means, “God with us”) Matthew 1:21-23

That didn’t answer my question ? . Moreover, your use of the QURAN verse is irrelevant to what I asked. Christians have a great difficulty answering the trinity conundrum !.

The man polluted bible has been proven many many many times to be false by christian scholars, Doctors of Divinity, Profs of Christianity. It was written, altered, words and sentences put in, taken out according to various parties self interests. If you want proofs feel free to ask. It is well documented.

Ramdhan Kareem rosdi!

@@BloggingTheology Allhuma Kareem. Hope your are keep doing good work regarding ISLAM and people of the book.

@Free Palestine 🇵🇸 where did allah say that Jesus didn’t say that

Holy spirit actually male or female? Said to be female in bible however what's true

The man polluted bible has been proven many many many times to be false by christian scholars, Doctors of Divinity, Profs of Christianity. It was written, altered, words and sentences put in, taken out according to various parties self interests. If you want proofs feel free to ask. It is well documented.

@@abdulazizabdullah6497 Who wrote Quran? Allah? Is it not polluted?

@@abdulazizabdullah6497 Quran tells you to read the book which you consider as polluted. Surah 10:94 So if you are in doubt of what We have revealed to you, then ask those who (have been) reading the Book before you. Verily, has come to you the truth from your Lord, so (do) not be among the doubters.

@@prince2132 typical missionary standard answer. Do you really think that when Jesus pbuh preached the gospel, he brought the gospels according to mark, john, luke, matthew under his arms? Please fathom that you follow pauls teachings not jesus. It has been proven many many times by your own christian scholars. JESUS VERSUS PAULLINISTS 1. Jesus teaches Monotheism; the Oneness of Allah. (Mark:12:29). But Christians are believing and teaching Trinity in obeying Paul but disobeying Jesus. 2. Jesus believed he was a Messenger of Allah. (John, 17:3, John,7:28, John, 8:42). But today's Paulinists believe Jesus is God. Jesus say something but Paulinists believe otherwise. 3. Jesus surrendered his will to Allah. (Mark, 3:31-35, Matthew:7:21). But today's Paulinists don't believe in Allah but they believe their 'national god '. 4. Jesus was circumcised. (Luke, 2:21). But today's Paulinists don't do circumcision. They oppose Jesus and follow Paul. 5. Jesus never ate pork. He despised pork. (Leviticus,11: 7). But opposing Jesus today's Paulinists eat pork. 6. Jesus denied Trinity same as Muslims do. (John:17:3). But Paulinists believe in Trinity. 7. Jesus had a beard and dressed modestly like Muslims. But Paulinists despise beard and like Nudism. 8. Jesus performed ablution before prayer like all orthodox Jews do. Moses and Aaron and his sons used to wash their hands and feet. (Exodus, 40:31, John, 13:10). But Paulinists don't do any worship like Jesus did. 9. Jesus believed only Allah has the knowledge of unseen. (Mark, 11:12-13, and 13:32). But Paulinists say Jesus has the knowledge of unseen. 10. Jesus worshiped Allah with his face on ground as Muslims do. (Matthew, 26:39). But Paulinists don't believe in Allah and don't pray Salah as Jesus prayed. 11. Jesus used the greetings of peace and taught his disciples to greet each other (as he do). (Luke, 10:5, John, 20:19). But Paulinists oppose Jesus. 12. Jesus followed the LAW and forbade interest. (Exodus, 22:25). But Paul abrogated the Law without Allah's authority. 13. Jesus fasted for more than a month. (Matthew, 4:1-2). But Paulinists don't fast even they mock at fasting. 14. Jesus did not worship or wear the cursed cross. But Paulinists worship and wear the cursed cross. 15. Jesus never got drunk. 16. Jesus preached Jihad. (Luke, 22:35-36, Matthew,10:32-34). But Paulinists call it terrorism. 17. Jesus taught Salvation comes from submitting your will to Allah, Fath and good deeds same as Muslims do. (Matthew:7:21-23). But Paulinists oppose Jesus and say otherwise. 18. Jesus believed Miracles were from Allah. (John, 5:30, Acts, 2:22). But Paulinists believe otherwise. 19. Jesus predicted he will survive the alleged crucifixion as Muslims belief. (Matthew:12:40). But Paulinists believe Jesus was crucified. 20. Jesus did not believe in Redemption by his Blood. (Matthew:5:17-20). But Paulinists believe in Redemption by Jesus's blood. False beliefs, false love and total opposition to Jesus.

@@prince2132 This is an open challenge to you. Please reply and counter these miracles in the Quran with facts / proof. Many false paul religion missionaries try to quote the Holy Quran as if they have read it. If they had REALLY read the Quran then they should have realised the multi faceted miracles that made this book untouchable and proof of its divine origins from God. Let me give some examples which will leave the fake pastors and missionaries dumbfounded and lost for words as they absolutely have no answer and not a single one have tried to counter these miracles as they are clear and in plain sight. BTW these miracles are just the tip of an iceberg. Ok lets examine chapter 2 surah Al- Baqarah which has 286 ayats making it the longest chapter in the Quran. Beginning ayat 255 is Ayatul Kursi ( The Throne verse ) which consists of 9 sentences, and it is memorised by millions of muslims around the world and often recited at the end of each obligatory prayer. If you study the ayat you will find out that verse 1 and verse 9 have similar themes, verse 2 and verse 8, verse 3 and verse 7, verse 4 and verse 8 all describes related topics which describes the Greatness of God. And right in the middle, verse 5 it reads "and Allah knows what is in front of them and what is behind them"! Feel free to check anytime. And this miracle extends to the WHOLE chapter with the first part echoing the last part, the 2nd part with the 8th and so on..and right in the middle chapter in ayat 143 ( of 286 remember?) Allah states " and We made you a middle nation"! So to false paul religion missionaries repent before you die, revert to Islam like so many priests, pastors, missionaries, bishops even an arch bishop in recent times who have finally realised and could no longer stomach the lies and propaganda of the false paul religion. As I mentioned earlier this is just the tip of an iceberg. I will provide more irrefutable proofs upon request. All you have to do is ask.

157And because of their saying (in boast), “We killed Messiah ‘Iesa (Jesus), son of Maryam (Mary), the Messenger of Allah,” - but they killed him not, nor crucified him, but the resemblance of ‘Iesa (Jesus) was put over another man (and they killed that man), and those who differ therein are full of doubts. They have no (certain) knowledge, they follow nothing but conjecture. For surely; they killed him not [i.e. ‘Iesa (Jesus), son of Maryam (Mary)]: 158But Allah raised him [‘Iesa (Jesus)] up (with his body and soul) unto Himself (and he is in the heavens). And Allah is Ever All-Powerful, All-Wise. (An-Nisa 4:157-158,

Abba is the father. 🙏🏻

They were Gnostics. Search RU-vid for Ehrman's early Christianities series.