meanwhile in holy book of islam, Anas said : A man asked : where is my father, Messenger of Allah? He replied! Your father is in Hell. When he turned his back, he said : My father and your father are in Hell. حَدَّثَنَا مُوسَى بْنُ إِسْمَاعِيلَ، حَدَّثَنَا حَمَّادٌ، عَنْ ثَابِتٍ، عَنْ أَنَسٍ، أَنَّ رَجُلاً، قَالَ يَا رَسُولَ اللَّهِ أَيْنَ أَبِي قَالَ " أَبُوكَ فِي النَّارِ " . فَلَمَّا قَفَّى قَالَ " إِنَّ أَبِي وَأَبَاكَ فِي النَّارِ " . Grade: Sahih (Al-Albani) what a family of profit moe!!! who is this slave of al lah in hell fire? who is this al lah of his father, Abdullah ibn Abdul-Muttalib? al lah said these is my seal of profit. WOW what a hahalala religiom!!!! who is this pagan god, al lah of his father?
meanwhile in holy book of islam, Anas said : A man asked : where is my father, Messenger of Allah? He replied! Your father is in Hell. When he turned his back, he said : My father and your father are in Hell. حَدَّثَنَا مُوسَى بْنُ إِسْمَاعِيلَ، حَدَّثَنَا حَمَّادٌ، عَنْ ثَابِتٍ، عَنْ أَنَسٍ، أَنَّ رَجُلاً، قَالَ يَا رَسُولَ اللَّهِ أَيْنَ أَبِي قَالَ " أَبُوكَ فِي النَّارِ " . فَلَمَّا قَفَّى قَالَ " إِنَّ أَبِي وَأَبَاكَ فِي النَّارِ " . Grade: Sahih (Al-Albani) what a family of profit moe!!! who is this slave of al lah in hell fire? who is this al lah of his father, Abdullah ibn Abdul-Muttalib? al lah said these is my seal of profit. WOW what a hahalala religiom!!!! who is this pagan god, al lah of his father?
@@iqbalahmed6191 meanwhile in holy book of islam, It was narrated from Ibn `Abbas: that the Prophet said: “When anyone of you has intercourse with his wife, let him say: Allahumma jannibnish-Shaitana wa jannibish-Shaitana ma razaqtani (O Allah, keep Satan away from me and keep Satan away from that with which You bless me).' Then if they have a child, Allah will never allow Satan to gain control over him or he will never harm him.” حَدَّثَنَا عَمْرُو بْنُ رَافِعٍ، حَدَّثَنَا جَرِيرٌ، عَنْ مَنْصُورٍ، عَنْ سَالِمِ بْنِ أَبِي الْجَعْدِ، عَنْ كُرَيْبٍ، عَنِ ابْنِ عَبَّاسٍ، عَنِ النَّبِيِّ ـ صلى الله عليه وسلم ـ قَالَ " لَوْ أَنَّ أَحَدَكُمْ إِذَا أَتَى امْرَأَتَهُ قَالَ اللَّهُمَّ جَنِّبْنِي الشَّيْطَانَ وَجَنِّبِ الشَّيْطَانَ مَا رَزَقْتَنِي ثُمَّ كَانَ بَيْنَهُمَا وَلَدٌ لَمْ يُسَلِّطِ اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ الشَّيْطَانَ - أَوْ لَمْ يَضُرَّهُ - " . Grade: Sahih (Darussalam) al lah said these is my seal of profit. what was the religion of profit mu ham mad's father and mother? WOW what a hahalala religiom!!!!
@@joyphillips1821 The preacher claims he knows John wrote John. and he try to snake his way out from having to prove his claim. So what is the point of further discussion when the preacher can keep on making claims out of his snakey mind without having to prove any..
Uncle Sam always plays games we know his ways and he knows very well not being honest how can people get the knowledge anyway Shukran my Muslim brother
This indian Christian guy said when he did that ,meaning he admitted of changing the subject,after accusing the brother of changing the subject, the brother never admitted of changing the subject.
But he did change the subject... The Muslim man didn't let him ask a question and then changed the subject. That's why if you really want to learn about the Bible or the Quran, you need to ask one question and then let the other person ask a question. When you dominate a conversation, you are changing the subject. Christians notice when Muslims won't let others ask questions about their Quran like surah 5: 20 and 29: 27...
The Indian guy ie comical. He has cap pulled over his eyes and has to tilt his head backward in order to see because his field vision is obstruted by his cap. Where do they find these characters from?
Johns chain; Polycarp Bishop of Smyria, was one of Johns students He was in touch with Bishop Irenaeus. Its new information to many as church history is not taught any more
The Christian says he not going to answer what Brother Anwar asks of, is typical of his behaviour. Nothing more can be expected of him because he is that pigeon that just knocks all the pieces over on the chess board, then shits all over the board and struts around like it won.
Imho, debate, 'conversation' & whatsoever with these people should be avoided... They aren't sincere, lack of knowledge & no matter how you explain to them, they will not understand & reject it due to their poor mindset. Sometime to IGNORE the IGNORANCE is better. Focus on on the sincere people. Anyway Bro Anwar did a fantastic job 👍 ٱلْحَمْدُ لِلَّٰهِ
TO THE INDIAN CHRISTIAN PREACHER... Jesus says to remember this: You will be hated by everyone because of My name, but the one who perseveres to the end will be saved. ( Mathew 10:22)
Why the compelling of the Quran matters to him so much if he don’t care about how the Bible was written.. just leave the Quran alone if you don’t care about your bible.. Christians forget the fact that the Quran was not just written but memorized by many at the time of prophet.. Muslims could have compiled it at any time.. they just don’t wanna be reasonable when it comes to Quran.. not even ready to listen to the ans..
The Quran would not exist WITHOUT THE BIBLE.... When Muslims say there is no other book like the Quran, I suggest you turn to the bible since it is BETTER.... the verses are better... it is clear and God means what he says.... I still can't believe Muslims think their Quran is better when the Quran references the bible and not the other way around.
Childish tactics grow up Hindu man I heard and have seen a video where Hindu get human Excrement cooked it and then Consumed this food rich in protein 😂 Wow next level
*Regarding 'Chain of Narration':* - Islam has this as a concept and Muslims continually promote this concept as a 'proof' of the Quran being the 'unchanged word of their god'. However, both Islamic legends regarding pre-Uthman qurans being destroyed, and evidence that the quran's text was still being edited long after Mohammed allegedly died (see Sana manuscript), lead us to the reality that we must conclude that the 'unchanged quran' is a religious legendary myth, that is not supported by history or manuscript evidence. When we additionally consider the 30 qirats (readings) that are circulating to this day as individual qurans all different from one another, the idea that there is 'one quran' that has been unchanged, is a contradiction of reality. Yasar Quadi, a quranic expert, admitted that if he was asked to produce the exact quran today as spoken by Mohammed, he would be unable to do so and that this has been a serious problem for scholarly Muslims for centuries. Thus the 'chain of narration' concept, sounds good, but in reality it is a religious legend, meant to assure 'the faithful'. - Christian tradition, names John as the author of the gospel of John, due to Polycarp and Papias, knowing the author and this information being passed on to Irenaus and Eusibius, the early church historian, who worked in the great library at Ceasarea Maritime. The author of John's gospel, known as "the beloved disciple" or "the disciple that Jesus loved", is known as 'John the Elder', and he was a close associate of the High Priest's family, if not a family member himself. This is how in the gospel, he had the authority to not only go into the High Priest's house, but also to allow Peter inside the courtyard. In the final chapter of John's gospel, in verse 24 we read: "This is the disciple who is bearing witness about these things, and who has written these things, and we know that his testimony is true." and this verse immediately follows a very personal conversation between Jesus, Peter and the author, in which the author who would be the ONLY one to remember or note this conversation, as it concerns him personally, recalled how Peter had asked if the author would continue to live after him? And what this conversation in fact reveals, is that the author recalled this as the last remaining disciple, long after Peter had died. Thus the author of this writing is in fact, the author ('the beloved disciple') himself and not someone else..... So in verse 24, where it appears that someone is testifying on the author's behalf, there are a couple of options, none of which detracts from the author being the beloved disciple, but which in fact confirm the author as the true author and that his words are true. Whether the beloved disciple wrote this in the company of his own disciples or whether it was added as a final testimonial to his authentic gospel, we may never know. However it suffices to bare witness to the gospel being true and to the author being known as a companion of Jesus. Since Polycarp and Papias named this beloved disciple as John (the Elder), this tradition has been passed down through church history and there is no real argument against it, except by the pedantic who don't want to accept the gospel because they are in opposition to Jesus.
@@kashifkhan-yr8wi The Birmingham manuscript, appears to be evidence of a pre-quranic source, ie material that was used to contribute to the making of the first Quran. The Birmingham Folio is not in itself a Quran as it is only a few stories collected in a manuscript, which pre-existed Islam, such as the story of the Seven Sleepers of Ephesus from the 5th century AD and the story of Moses - from biblical literature. There does not appear to be anything in the Birmingham Folio that is a 'revelation' of new material. This is why it appears to be a source which was used to compile the Quran, particularly as it pre-dates the likely production of the first Quran.
@@theonlyway5298 "pre-dates the production of the first Quran" . When do you think the "first Quran" was produced and how long did it took to produce the "first Quran"?
@@kashifkhan-yr8wi Honestly, I don't know when the first Quran was produced and I don't think anyone actually does, because no such example exists to tells us! However, the first Quran was clearly produced quite some time after the alleged death of Mohammed in AD 632. At this point, the contents of the Quran were allegedly on scraps of bone and pot etc or allegedly in the memories of people. This being the case, that there was no order of the contents, meant that the contents would need to be sifted and put into some kind of order, which will have been debated for a very long time. In fact, the palimpsest found in the Sana manuscripts, which shows under ultra violet lighting that the words and order of the Quran's contents were originally in a very different order from today's Quran, provided a window into the history of the formation of the Quran. It seems to tell us that the palimpsest reveals that the Quran was still being edited up to 70 years after the death of Mohammed. This is due to there being a drawing of a mosque on the material which is dated to 70 years later, hence providing a dating for this editing. This is clearly a big subject, which is out of my area of knowledge, apart from the rather obvious evidence that the Quran is not what it is made out to be by Islamic legend.
@@theonlyway5298 I don't understand You're saying people had memorised the Quran but they didn't knew the order of content Do you mean the order of chapters or the order of verses completely?
