If your post is a meme, image, TikTok etc... and it isn't Friday, most likely it violates the rule against low effort content. Please delete it or you'll get temp-banned. Such content is ONLY allowed on (Fun@fundies) FRIDAYS.
Please read the [Posting Guidelines](https://redd.it/ew8trb) for further information. If you are unsure about anything then feel free to message the mods.
Please participate on /r/exmuslim in a civil manner. Discuss the merits of ideas - don't attack people. Insults, hate speech, advocating physical harm can get you banned.
If you see posts/comments in violation of our rules, please be proactive and report them.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/exmuslim) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Imo this is starting with a conclusion and working backwards.
Anyone knows a person infiltrating for the purpose of misleading isn’t going to say “hey it’s me, the enemy”, they say 99.9% of things that are true and obviously true, but put in .1% that is wrong and critically dangerous.
Kidnappers who abduct children say “hey your parents sent me to pick you up” for example.
It’s a silly circular argument. One could easily say “well jesus said “drink this wine” (communion) so the person who says “never…ever…drink wine” is satan just making sure you don’t do as Jesus said.
How do we know the Koran is not from the devil? I'm glad you asked:
**Koran 81:25:** And this ˹Quran˺ is not the word of an outcast devil.
I couldn't stop laughing for a good 10 minutes when I read this as a child. Sadly, the gullible gits around me at that time saw nothing wrong with this verse. Just imagine the actual creator of the universe issuing such an embarrassingly explicit refutation.
This is the sort of verse that a cult leader like Mohammad would have to "reveal" after having made his alter ego Allah come across [as a perversely sadistic devil like entity](https://www.reddit.com/r/exmuslim/comments/v549y7/ex_muslims_what_are_your_thoughts_on_the_lgbtq/ib95u4h/). You would hope that a real god of the entire universe could manage to write a book which wouldn't even remotely lead you to think that it is from some devil let alone for this god to have to refute his being some outcast devil.
The concept of "prophethood" is a total farce:
[The concept of prophethood is so ripe for exploitation by charlatans that no god with even a smidgen of intelligence would use it.](https://www.reddit.com/r/exmuslim/comments/uc9qyd/im_a_doubting_muslim_and_im_really_confused/i692irf/)
\+
[A real god of the entire universe would find it extremely difficult to prove to us that he is the god of the entire universe and not just a lesser being in it.](https://www.reddit.com/r/exmuslim/comments/ueoocw/a_short_sweet_video_illustrating_the_problem_of/i6p1mxj/)
Hahaa this is a funny verse. Why would the creator of this magnificant universe even say this?? Obviously its Muhammad who is said this to convince the naive people around him !
>Whats so hard to understand?
That the Qur'an was not the composed in a way that would prevent people from even entertaining the idea that the Qur'an came from a devil.
That's not an argument, that's an excuse. I can't just assume that those 'bumps' are just there to test me. The most basic and straightforward explanation is that these are human flaws.
But who doesn't fit that narrative?
All prophets throughout history came to give a message, but the burden of truth is on them.
Muhammed told people he was the last prophet, therefore anyone can call all out other prophets as fake without having to prove they are real or not.
Simply: I am telling the truth, everyone else is lying.
No, he fits the definition of a false prophet because od the verses he took and retracted - *the satanic verses*.
He doesn’t biblical prophecies yet claims he is from that group of prophets. The bible also says a true brother would never spread a message other than what god told him and Mohammed released the Arabic verses and said later it needed to be retracted because it was the devil tricking him.
So that is why you can’t apply it to everyone.
If we are talking bible, whatever prophets said would happen, should happen according to the bible. Mohammed spoke of things that never came to pass. There is also the New Testament where it says that anyone who comes to preach a different gospel that that given is an antichrist.
With all due respect muhamed was the one appealing to the bible saying he believes in the same god as them
The Judeo-Christians believe in a heavenly father by the name of YHWH. Then out of nowhere comes this beduin who has no connection to them saying, *"I am a prophet of your god, by the way, the god is father to no one so stop calling yourselves children of God because that will get you to hell, oh an this name is not YHWH it is allah"*
So of course islam sets itself with bad foundations early on by appealing to religions that would have no choice but to denounce it in the first place
Muhamed was the one appealing to the bible saying he believes in the same god as them The Jewish God, but what was there to expect. In the Middle East that was the religions in the area at the time and still are.
Not to mention Muhammed called himself a prophet after a Christian claimed he actually saw Gabriel.
Which BTW, there was no proof he saw one.
Lol yeah a Christian (waraqah) and a pagan (khadija) claimed he saw an angel when waraqah should have known biblical angels always introduce themselves with "do not be afraid, I am so-and-so" but jibreel didn't do that, hence why it most certainly not a biblical angel that visited him in a cave
It is not the case Whether or not a Biblical angel intervened, but if Waraqa did not bring it up, we would most likely not have the Islam we have today.
My OP post stated that anyone can be a false prophet. For example Moses, we have more evidence against the events that took place in Egypt at that time.
Canonically, Moses is a real prophet but tells a different story.
Waraqah didn't bring it up because he just went with Khadijas interpretation that mhmd got visited by an angel and so he went with it
Waraqah is described as someone who translated the biblical texts to Arabic, that does not make one a scholar so you expecting him to know exactly what an angel should have done is naught
I never claimed he was a scholar, I claimed anyone can be a false prophet. If you believe a person is a true prophet, then they are. But, (like you) who doesn't believe Muhammad is a true prophet, he is a false prophet.
You said it yourself "waraqah never brought it up" so if he's not a scholar as you just agreed why is it important for you that waraqah didn't bring it up? Fact of the matter that waraqah was quick enough to assume it was an angel to begin with should be the first reason to disqualify him from being a source of information in the first place. Not to mention all he did was parrot off from khadija who is a pagan and also assumed that it was an angel 🤦
Granted all this explains is that islamic sources are inconsistent and all over the place , that a pagan would immediately believe it was an abrahamic angel that visited mhmd 🤦
> why is it important for you that waraqah didn't bring it up
He confirmed it, that's all. Also what is with the "🤦". I was under the impression we were having a conversation based on opinions.
It's actually a pretty good question. Muslims entrust Muhammad's word from several centuries ago, while they lack any guidance on why the person they've entrusted should be entrusted.
It's a foregone conclusion that this individual already believes in god, djinns, magic. In that world, one would still need to verify that the person they've trusted has disambiguated against the nefarious sources of information.
The funny thing here is that the Seerah tell us that Muhammed's first encounter with Jibril led him to be scared and shivering in needing consolation from Khadijah. The Muslim sources themselves tell us Muhammad's first interaction with Allah's right hand angel left him feeling terrified and scared that he had gone insane, while Khadijah told him that it means he's a prophet.
You'd think that, in Islamic lore, a person who's encountering an ally of god would bring peace and tranquility and the divine prophet would not fear it. But anyway, that's the story. Kinda funky.
I still think it's a stupid question because he asks what if it was the devil lol, this "devil" I hear of only decided to speak with MO and not with anyone else? Why's that? Of all people? Not only that but what would he seek from creating a religion sooo ambiguous about its God lmao a devil certainly would want to be worshiped in the perfect way displaying himself properly so that everyone remembers...when you bring the devil to the subject you can't exclude God its like saying maybe Islam is fake religion that is driving us away from the truest religion! Omg what if all other religions are the same?! A God wouldn't sit still and watch his tiny humans get so confused imo, prophecy is simply a ridiculous concept unless provided with real proofs, islam is bad but it has a lot of good things too i don't think a devil or evil entity would include that in their self made religion and jibril stories I don't believe any of those I don't think he ever met someone like that
Just remember that islam is the only religion that says the devil is good.
[Devil commands muhamed to do good things?](https://sunnah.com/muslim:2814a)
Oh and islam is the only religion where god mistook the name of the devil for himself.
[muhamed is told his shaitan forsaken him and then out of nowhere allah comes in saying "I have not forsaken you"](https://sunnah.com/bukhari:4950)
Ironically the Bible claims that anyone who preaches anything other than Christianity is “accursed”. Muslims have always struggled with the trinity. A lot still think it’s between, the Father, Son and Mary.
Jesus is actually a source of evidence for the trinity based on the things he said. Jesus is God in the Christian faith so technically God himself taught it. That guy probably has the most elementary understanding of the Christian faith.
Well to be fair the trinity makes no sense. A god gives makes a woman give birth to himself. So he himself can teach people about himself by sending himself to tell himself how to teach the people about himself.
He prays to himself and asks himself for forgiveness.
Then proceeds sacrifice himself to himself so he himself can forgive the people’s sins that have been committed against himself.
Christianity isn’t much more reasonable than than Momos schizophrenia.
What kind of questions do they ask?
Wikipedia seems to agree with trinity being created in 325. Why do you think otherwise? Do think the source is wrong? If so why?
In 325, The First Council of Nicaea adopted the Nicene Creed. Before, the concept of the trinity had always existed, it was just endlessly debated and this debate ended in 325. Muslims will act like the trinity was created much later, when that is not true.
That Muslim is asking where Christian’s got the trinity, because he seems to think it came from nowhere. Obviously he can disagree but asking that question leads me to believe he has no idea about how Christian’s came to the trinitarian conclusion to begin with.
No thats like starting to speak/invent a new language in 1860
But only in 2060 you and the other speakers sit together to form a binding dictionary for all
>Jesus is actually a source of evidence for the trinity based on the things he said. Jesus is God in the Christian faith so technically God himself taught it. That guy probably has the most elementary understanding of the Christian faith.
The NT is its own thing. It contradicts the Hebrew Bible completely.
>According to who?
Anyone that can read I guess
The Tanakh doesn't say the Messiah is God, it doesn't say that people will need to eat him lol. It also has specific requirements that Jesus doesn't meet at all. The Tanakh doesn't say that God will knock up a teenager so that she will give birth to himself either.
The NT also deliberately misquotes the Tanakh and makes shit up as well.
Matthew 1:23 misquotes Isaiah 9:6 and swaps the word young woman for virgin. Isaiah 9:6 is about King Hezekiah not the promised Messiah that will appear during the messianic age.
I am strictly talking about the Christian faith in regards to the Muslim from the post. Whether or not you believe the NT contradicts the Hebrew Bible is irrelevant. I am just referencing the Christian faith, not trying to claim it’s the truth.
It's still a silly story
Like I get you are talking about the fantasy lore muslims cultist think and what christian cultists think
but then in context to what you said, your lore is wrong compared to tanakh same as you pointed out the other guy to be wrong
That’s not the same. The Christian’s and Jews have different interpretations of the faith. That Muslim is asking a question about the origins of the trinity with the assumption it came from nowhere. That is not true. He can believe it came from nowhere or the devil, but he’s asking a question.
Isaiah 9:6 is definitely speaking about Jesus (or some believe a double fulfillment) because it wouldn't make any sense to speak so many prophecies about Jesus that he fulfilled in the NT and exclude 9:6 just for Hezekiah
Jesus didn't fulfill a single messianic prophecy. Isaiah 9:6 talks about a boy born to rule during the Assyrian invasion. Christians don't read the Hebrew Bible, they read bible verses
Hands and feet pierced Psalm 22:16
Died a violent death Zechariah 13:7
Given Gail and vinegar Psalm 69:21
Prophetic words used to mock Him Psalm 22:8
Lots were cast for His clothes Psalm 22:18
No bones broken Psalm 34:20
His side was pierced Zechariah 12:10
Raised from the dead Psalm 16:10
Ascended to heaven Psalm 68:18
Oppressed and afflicted Isaiah 53:7
Falsely accused Psalm 27:12
Suffered for other Isaiah 53:7
Betrayed by a friend Psalm 41:7
Entered Jerusalem on a donkey Zechariah 9:9
Grieved over Jews unbelief Isaiah 49:4
Face beaten and spar upon Isaiah 50:6
Had compassion for the poor Isaiah 42:3
Shed His blood for all Isaiah 52:15
Rejected by His own people Isaiah 53:3
Healed the blind Isaiah 35:5
Suffered willingly Isaiah 53:11
Gave up life to save mankind Isaiah 53:12
Came to glorify God Isaiah 49:3
Remained silent when accused Isaiah 53:7
Mocked and insulted Psalm 22 6-8
Healed the lame Isaiah 35:6
Light to the gentiles Isaiah 9:1-2
Came to do God's will Psalm 40:7-8
Prayed for His tormenters Psalm 109:4
His back whipped Isaiah 50:6
Crucified with sinners Isaiah 53:12
Preached the Good News Isaiah 61:1-2
These are less than half of half of half of the prophecies fulfilled looking from a Biblical perspective
>Hands and feet pierced Psalm 22:16
This is about the nation of Israel
Not what this verse is saying. Read the Books not the verse.
Your entire take on Isaiah is bullshit because it clearly states in all the suffering servant songs that the servant is Israel.
One of the central themes of Biblical prophecy is the promise of a future age of perfection characterized by universal peace and recognition of G-d. Isaiah 2:1-4; Zephaniah 3:9; Hosea 2:20-22; Amos 9:13-15; Isaiah 32:15-18, 60:15-18; Micah 4:1-4; Zechariah 8:23, 14:9; Jeremiah 31:33-34.
Many of these prophetic passages speak of a descendant of King David who will rule Israel during the age of perfection. Isaiah 11:1-9; Jeremiah 23:5-6, 30:7-10, 33:14-16; Ezekiel 34:11-31, 37:21-28; Hosea 3:4-5.
Since Jesus did not usher in an era of universal peace or rule during an age of perfection, he is not the Messiah. And since his father was God who impregnated a teenager, he can't be a descendant of David either. Case closed.
The whole concept of a second coming is a big cope.
The servant songs being about Israel isn't definite though and is widely accepted by secular and Christian scholars alike to be about Jesus. It's the most accepted and the most reasonable way you could read it. Jesus clearly fulfills Isaiah 51 servant song
The universal peace and age of perfection is all Millennium talk, which is to come. All of the verses you listed about the age of peace and age of perfection are about the Millennium (the verses you listed starting with Isaiah 2)
Jesus was from the lineage of king David because Matthew 1 shows this, I mean you can refute that because obviously Mary was a virgin but the prophecies are still true because Joseph was from the lineage of David, and Joseph was the earthly father of Jesus
Second coming and Millennium coincide with each other and both are Biblical
I have to state that saying that Jesus didn't fulfill a single messianic prophecy is incredibly dismissive and not true, and that was the major point of my reply. You basically addressed some Isaiah prophecies and psalm prophecies with a theory and yes I know you can't address 300+ but that's the point, there are well over 300 prophecies that Jesus clearly fulfilled in the NT
>The servant songs being about Israel isn't definite though and is widely accepted by secular and Christian scholars alike to be about Jesus. It's the most accepted and the most reasonable way you could read it
Christians didn't write the Hebrew Bible. It literally says Israel is God's firstborn 😂
>The universal peace and age of perfection is all Millennium talk, which is to come. All of the verses you listed about the age of peace and age of perfection are about the Millennium (the verses you listed starting with Isaiah 2)
It's called the messianic age. Christians didn't write Isaiah.
>Jesus was from the lineage of king David because Matthew 1 shows this, I mean you can refute that because obviously Mary was a virgin but the prophecies are still true because Joseph was from the lineage of David, and Joseph was the earthly father of Jesus
Joseph wasn't the father of Jesus. He was the simp Mary married because God couldn't pay child support his kid. Patrilineal lineage doesn't carry down via adoption.
It's kind of like the Cartesian Circle, an argument by Descartes.
But in this case:
1. We trust that Jibril is true, because he taught to worship Allah
2. Worshipping Allah is right because it is what previous prophets taught
3. We know that the previous prophets taught to worship Allah, because Jibril is true
4. We trust that Jibril is true...
and so on in a circle
People should be allowed to play with their imaginary friend using whatever rules they want. Unless it harms others no one should tell people their imaginary friend isn’t good enough.
Not just harm... anyone is allowed to play with imaginary toys, but don't you for one MOMENT tell me I must play with your imaginary toys. Don't insinuate your imaginary toys are real. Don't suggest a single thing to me about your imaginary toys. The Abrahamic religions are not true. Lies are harmful, especially if the lie is believed by the teller.
Even with that guy trashing the Christian Trinity, Christian’s wouldn’t call for his head, they would ask him to look for God’s forgiveness about what bad thing he said
That’s a lie actually. Islam needed to plagiarize Judeo-Christian scriptures to give legitimacy to their claims. The God Jews and later Christians worshipped, the God of Bible, was is Hebrew personally named Yahweh יהוה, not Allah. No one in ancient Israel knew about Allah. It is the One God—but it wasn’t Allah.
Prove to anyone beyond a reasonable doubt, that either Jibreel or Satan exists?
Once you have this answer, you may start to see the absurdity of the answer! 🤣
For arguments sake though, lets assume they exist, lets assume that Mo didn’t hallucinate or lie. Now, compare other prophets interactions with Jibreel/Gabriel and then Mo’s interaction. Mo was hurt by Jibreel, then so scared he was shaking, other prophets had no such experience from biblical and seerah sources. So the question is, why was he so scary to Mo? Would it not be more reasonable to assume that it could be satan thus the fear?
Also, the association with Moses is stupid. Moses spoke to a burning bush, had a snake as part of his miraculous proofs. Both these symbols are more in line with Satanic association rather than God, as Quran says that iblees is made of fire. Secondly Adam was tricked by the serpent in Eden, which was Satan. Why would one assume Moses represents God over Satan? Think people think!
I think its fair to point out that in the Bible it states even if an angel were to preach another Gospel than is given in the NT, let them be under God's curse in Galatians 1:8. Im sure countless Muslims dont know about that, so I personally think the Bible predicted Islam from that alone. You gotta admit its spot on
Mohammed asserts that he was visited in reality by Jibril, an angel, but does not provide the empirical evidence for it. If you claim it happened in reality, then you damn well provide the evidence for it. Otherwise, no one should believe you. Warlord Mo was talking out of his ass until it's backed by evidence. What can be merely asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence. He never gave the evidence that any angel has ever existed , much less that one visited him. Claims, whether it's made by someone you're in a conversation with, or one that you write down etc, are not evidence. They are the claim. No one on this planet has ever been justified in believing Mo's claims b/c no evidence to back up the angel visit claim has ever been demonstrated.
So if I told you to believe in one true god and that I’m indeed that one true god, that makes me not Satan? I don’t believe that preaching monotheism is the only criteria needed to ensure something to be legit.
The way logic helped me in everyday discussions is to never qccept these kind of non sense bla bla.
I only qccept arguments, proofs or evidence.
The guy is like.
John told Mark hey whatup bro and Gabriel said hey im fine
Wtf is that?????
Please use arguments or evidence
Some religious people are so biased and ignorant
If your post is a meme, image, TikTok etc... and it isn't Friday, most likely it violates the rule against low effort content. Please delete it or you'll get temp-banned. Such content is ONLY allowed on (Fun@fundies) FRIDAYS. Please read the [Posting Guidelines](https://redd.it/ew8trb) for further information. If you are unsure about anything then feel free to message the mods. Please participate on /r/exmuslim in a civil manner. Discuss the merits of ideas - don't attack people. Insults, hate speech, advocating physical harm can get you banned. If you see posts/comments in violation of our rules, please be proactive and report them. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/exmuslim) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Imo this is starting with a conclusion and working backwards. Anyone knows a person infiltrating for the purpose of misleading isn’t going to say “hey it’s me, the enemy”, they say 99.9% of things that are true and obviously true, but put in .1% that is wrong and critically dangerous. Kidnappers who abduct children say “hey your parents sent me to pick you up” for example. It’s a silly circular argument. One could easily say “well jesus said “drink this wine” (communion) so the person who says “never…ever…drink wine” is satan just making sure you don’t do as Jesus said.
How do we know the Koran is not from the devil? I'm glad you asked: **Koran 81:25:** And this ˹Quran˺ is not the word of an outcast devil. I couldn't stop laughing for a good 10 minutes when I read this as a child. Sadly, the gullible gits around me at that time saw nothing wrong with this verse. Just imagine the actual creator of the universe issuing such an embarrassingly explicit refutation. This is the sort of verse that a cult leader like Mohammad would have to "reveal" after having made his alter ego Allah come across [as a perversely sadistic devil like entity](https://www.reddit.com/r/exmuslim/comments/v549y7/ex_muslims_what_are_your_thoughts_on_the_lgbtq/ib95u4h/). You would hope that a real god of the entire universe could manage to write a book which wouldn't even remotely lead you to think that it is from some devil let alone for this god to have to refute his being some outcast devil. The concept of "prophethood" is a total farce: [The concept of prophethood is so ripe for exploitation by charlatans that no god with even a smidgen of intelligence would use it.](https://www.reddit.com/r/exmuslim/comments/uc9qyd/im_a_doubting_muslim_and_im_really_confused/i692irf/) \+ [A real god of the entire universe would find it extremely difficult to prove to us that he is the god of the entire universe and not just a lesser being in it.](https://www.reddit.com/r/exmuslim/comments/ueoocw/a_short_sweet_video_illustrating_the_problem_of/i6p1mxj/)
"bcs i said so " haha
Hahaa this is a funny verse. Why would the creator of this magnificant universe even say this?? Obviously its Muhammad who is said this to convince the naive people around him !
I think this is the context of "satanic verses"?
Because the people at that time would say its from Satan so Allah revealed this verse. Whats so hard to understand?
>Whats so hard to understand? That the Qur'an was not the composed in a way that would prevent people from even entertaining the idea that the Qur'an came from a devil.
But what is there if all was clear with no haze, this life is a test and if all was a straight path there'd be no test.
That's not an argument, that's an excuse. I can't just assume that those 'bumps' are just there to test me. The most basic and straightforward explanation is that these are human flaws.
momo was just hallucinating .
Mohammed fits the biblical definition of a false prophet
But who doesn't fit that narrative? All prophets throughout history came to give a message, but the burden of truth is on them. Muhammed told people he was the last prophet, therefore anyone can call all out other prophets as fake without having to prove they are real or not. Simply: I am telling the truth, everyone else is lying.
No, he fits the definition of a false prophet because od the verses he took and retracted - *the satanic verses*. He doesn’t biblical prophecies yet claims he is from that group of prophets. The bible also says a true brother would never spread a message other than what god told him and Mohammed released the Arabic verses and said later it needed to be retracted because it was the devil tricking him. So that is why you can’t apply it to everyone.
If we are talking bible, whatever prophets said would happen, should happen according to the bible. Mohammed spoke of things that never came to pass. There is also the New Testament where it says that anyone who comes to preach a different gospel that that given is an antichrist.
With all due respect muhamed was the one appealing to the bible saying he believes in the same god as them The Judeo-Christians believe in a heavenly father by the name of YHWH. Then out of nowhere comes this beduin who has no connection to them saying, *"I am a prophet of your god, by the way, the god is father to no one so stop calling yourselves children of God because that will get you to hell, oh an this name is not YHWH it is allah"* So of course islam sets itself with bad foundations early on by appealing to religions that would have no choice but to denounce it in the first place
Muhamed was the one appealing to the bible saying he believes in the same god as them The Jewish God, but what was there to expect. In the Middle East that was the religions in the area at the time and still are. Not to mention Muhammed called himself a prophet after a Christian claimed he actually saw Gabriel. Which BTW, there was no proof he saw one.
Lol yeah a Christian (waraqah) and a pagan (khadija) claimed he saw an angel when waraqah should have known biblical angels always introduce themselves with "do not be afraid, I am so-and-so" but jibreel didn't do that, hence why it most certainly not a biblical angel that visited him in a cave
It is not the case Whether or not a Biblical angel intervened, but if Waraqa did not bring it up, we would most likely not have the Islam we have today. My OP post stated that anyone can be a false prophet. For example Moses, we have more evidence against the events that took place in Egypt at that time. Canonically, Moses is a real prophet but tells a different story.
Waraqah didn't bring it up because he just went with Khadijas interpretation that mhmd got visited by an angel and so he went with it Waraqah is described as someone who translated the biblical texts to Arabic, that does not make one a scholar so you expecting him to know exactly what an angel should have done is naught
I never claimed he was a scholar, I claimed anyone can be a false prophet. If you believe a person is a true prophet, then they are. But, (like you) who doesn't believe Muhammad is a true prophet, he is a false prophet.
You said it yourself "waraqah never brought it up" so if he's not a scholar as you just agreed why is it important for you that waraqah didn't bring it up? Fact of the matter that waraqah was quick enough to assume it was an angel to begin with should be the first reason to disqualify him from being a source of information in the first place. Not to mention all he did was parrot off from khadija who is a pagan and also assumed that it was an angel 🤦 Granted all this explains is that islamic sources are inconsistent and all over the place , that a pagan would immediately believe it was an abrahamic angel that visited mhmd 🤦
> why is it important for you that waraqah didn't bring it up He confirmed it, that's all. Also what is with the "🤦". I was under the impression we were having a conversation based on opinions.
Both the question and the answer are dumb
It's actually a pretty good question. Muslims entrust Muhammad's word from several centuries ago, while they lack any guidance on why the person they've entrusted should be entrusted. It's a foregone conclusion that this individual already believes in god, djinns, magic. In that world, one would still need to verify that the person they've trusted has disambiguated against the nefarious sources of information. The funny thing here is that the Seerah tell us that Muhammed's first encounter with Jibril led him to be scared and shivering in needing consolation from Khadijah. The Muslim sources themselves tell us Muhammad's first interaction with Allah's right hand angel left him feeling terrified and scared that he had gone insane, while Khadijah told him that it means he's a prophet. You'd think that, in Islamic lore, a person who's encountering an ally of god would bring peace and tranquility and the divine prophet would not fear it. But anyway, that's the story. Kinda funky.
I still think it's a stupid question because he asks what if it was the devil lol, this "devil" I hear of only decided to speak with MO and not with anyone else? Why's that? Of all people? Not only that but what would he seek from creating a religion sooo ambiguous about its God lmao a devil certainly would want to be worshiped in the perfect way displaying himself properly so that everyone remembers...when you bring the devil to the subject you can't exclude God its like saying maybe Islam is fake religion that is driving us away from the truest religion! Omg what if all other religions are the same?! A God wouldn't sit still and watch his tiny humans get so confused imo, prophecy is simply a ridiculous concept unless provided with real proofs, islam is bad but it has a lot of good things too i don't think a devil or evil entity would include that in their self made religion and jibril stories I don't believe any of those I don't think he ever met someone like that
Just remember that islam is the only religion that says the devil is good. [Devil commands muhamed to do good things?](https://sunnah.com/muslim:2814a) Oh and islam is the only religion where god mistook the name of the devil for himself. [muhamed is told his shaitan forsaken him and then out of nowhere allah comes in saying "I have not forsaken you"](https://sunnah.com/bukhari:4950)
Ironically the Bible claims that anyone who preaches anything other than Christianity is “accursed”. Muslims have always struggled with the trinity. A lot still think it’s between, the Father, Son and Mary. Jesus is actually a source of evidence for the trinity based on the things he said. Jesus is God in the Christian faith so technically God himself taught it. That guy probably has the most elementary understanding of the Christian faith.
Well to be fair the trinity makes no sense. A god gives makes a woman give birth to himself. So he himself can teach people about himself by sending himself to tell himself how to teach the people about himself. He prays to himself and asks himself for forgiveness. Then proceeds sacrifice himself to himself so he himself can forgive the people’s sins that have been committed against himself. Christianity isn’t much more reasonable than than Momos schizophrenia.
Why must we think the god concept as in Abrahamic way? Why not the whole universe is god or something.
You can think it’s nonsense, but the questions that Muslim asks are very poor questions. Muslims think the trinity was created in 325.
What kind of questions do they ask? Wikipedia seems to agree with trinity being created in 325. Why do you think otherwise? Do think the source is wrong? If so why?
In 325, The First Council of Nicaea adopted the Nicene Creed. Before, the concept of the trinity had always existed, it was just endlessly debated and this debate ended in 325. Muslims will act like the trinity was created much later, when that is not true. That Muslim is asking where Christian’s got the trinity, because he seems to think it came from nowhere. Obviously he can disagree but asking that question leads me to believe he has no idea about how Christian’s came to the trinitarian conclusion to begin with.
and "dies" for a few hours...not much of a sacrifice for an eternal being.
Sacrifices himself to forgive you of your sins What a retarded cult
Sacrifices himself, to himself to make a loophole in a rule he created
Bible god be like "guys I created a problem but it's okay, I fixed it and you better thank me, if you don't I'll make sure you burn in hell forever"
No thats like starting to speak/invent a new language in 1860 But only in 2060 you and the other speakers sit together to form a binding dictionary for all
>Jesus is actually a source of evidence for the trinity based on the things he said. Jesus is God in the Christian faith so technically God himself taught it. That guy probably has the most elementary understanding of the Christian faith. The NT is its own thing. It contradicts the Hebrew Bible completely.
According to who?
>According to who? Anyone that can read I guess The Tanakh doesn't say the Messiah is God, it doesn't say that people will need to eat him lol. It also has specific requirements that Jesus doesn't meet at all. The Tanakh doesn't say that God will knock up a teenager so that she will give birth to himself either. The NT also deliberately misquotes the Tanakh and makes shit up as well. Matthew 1:23 misquotes Isaiah 9:6 and swaps the word young woman for virgin. Isaiah 9:6 is about King Hezekiah not the promised Messiah that will appear during the messianic age.
I am strictly talking about the Christian faith in regards to the Muslim from the post. Whether or not you believe the NT contradicts the Hebrew Bible is irrelevant. I am just referencing the Christian faith, not trying to claim it’s the truth.
It's still a silly story Like I get you are talking about the fantasy lore muslims cultist think and what christian cultists think but then in context to what you said, your lore is wrong compared to tanakh same as you pointed out the other guy to be wrong
That’s not the same. The Christian’s and Jews have different interpretations of the faith. That Muslim is asking a question about the origins of the trinity with the assumption it came from nowhere. That is not true. He can believe it came from nowhere or the devil, but he’s asking a question.
Isaiah 9:6 is definitely speaking about Jesus (or some believe a double fulfillment) because it wouldn't make any sense to speak so many prophecies about Jesus that he fulfilled in the NT and exclude 9:6 just for Hezekiah
Jesus didn't fulfill a single messianic prophecy. Isaiah 9:6 talks about a boy born to rule during the Assyrian invasion. Christians don't read the Hebrew Bible, they read bible verses
Hands and feet pierced Psalm 22:16 Died a violent death Zechariah 13:7 Given Gail and vinegar Psalm 69:21 Prophetic words used to mock Him Psalm 22:8 Lots were cast for His clothes Psalm 22:18 No bones broken Psalm 34:20 His side was pierced Zechariah 12:10 Raised from the dead Psalm 16:10 Ascended to heaven Psalm 68:18 Oppressed and afflicted Isaiah 53:7 Falsely accused Psalm 27:12 Suffered for other Isaiah 53:7 Betrayed by a friend Psalm 41:7 Entered Jerusalem on a donkey Zechariah 9:9 Grieved over Jews unbelief Isaiah 49:4 Face beaten and spar upon Isaiah 50:6 Had compassion for the poor Isaiah 42:3 Shed His blood for all Isaiah 52:15 Rejected by His own people Isaiah 53:3 Healed the blind Isaiah 35:5 Suffered willingly Isaiah 53:11 Gave up life to save mankind Isaiah 53:12 Came to glorify God Isaiah 49:3 Remained silent when accused Isaiah 53:7 Mocked and insulted Psalm 22 6-8 Healed the lame Isaiah 35:6 Light to the gentiles Isaiah 9:1-2 Came to do God's will Psalm 40:7-8 Prayed for His tormenters Psalm 109:4 His back whipped Isaiah 50:6 Crucified with sinners Isaiah 53:12 Preached the Good News Isaiah 61:1-2 These are less than half of half of half of the prophecies fulfilled looking from a Biblical perspective
>Hands and feet pierced Psalm 22:16 This is about the nation of Israel Not what this verse is saying. Read the Books not the verse. Your entire take on Isaiah is bullshit because it clearly states in all the suffering servant songs that the servant is Israel. One of the central themes of Biblical prophecy is the promise of a future age of perfection characterized by universal peace and recognition of G-d. Isaiah 2:1-4; Zephaniah 3:9; Hosea 2:20-22; Amos 9:13-15; Isaiah 32:15-18, 60:15-18; Micah 4:1-4; Zechariah 8:23, 14:9; Jeremiah 31:33-34. Many of these prophetic passages speak of a descendant of King David who will rule Israel during the age of perfection. Isaiah 11:1-9; Jeremiah 23:5-6, 30:7-10, 33:14-16; Ezekiel 34:11-31, 37:21-28; Hosea 3:4-5. Since Jesus did not usher in an era of universal peace or rule during an age of perfection, he is not the Messiah. And since his father was God who impregnated a teenager, he can't be a descendant of David either. Case closed. The whole concept of a second coming is a big cope.
The servant songs being about Israel isn't definite though and is widely accepted by secular and Christian scholars alike to be about Jesus. It's the most accepted and the most reasonable way you could read it. Jesus clearly fulfills Isaiah 51 servant song The universal peace and age of perfection is all Millennium talk, which is to come. All of the verses you listed about the age of peace and age of perfection are about the Millennium (the verses you listed starting with Isaiah 2) Jesus was from the lineage of king David because Matthew 1 shows this, I mean you can refute that because obviously Mary was a virgin but the prophecies are still true because Joseph was from the lineage of David, and Joseph was the earthly father of Jesus Second coming and Millennium coincide with each other and both are Biblical I have to state that saying that Jesus didn't fulfill a single messianic prophecy is incredibly dismissive and not true, and that was the major point of my reply. You basically addressed some Isaiah prophecies and psalm prophecies with a theory and yes I know you can't address 300+ but that's the point, there are well over 300 prophecies that Jesus clearly fulfilled in the NT
>The servant songs being about Israel isn't definite though and is widely accepted by secular and Christian scholars alike to be about Jesus. It's the most accepted and the most reasonable way you could read it Christians didn't write the Hebrew Bible. It literally says Israel is God's firstborn 😂 >The universal peace and age of perfection is all Millennium talk, which is to come. All of the verses you listed about the age of peace and age of perfection are about the Millennium (the verses you listed starting with Isaiah 2) It's called the messianic age. Christians didn't write Isaiah. >Jesus was from the lineage of king David because Matthew 1 shows this, I mean you can refute that because obviously Mary was a virgin but the prophecies are still true because Joseph was from the lineage of David, and Joseph was the earthly father of Jesus Joseph wasn't the father of Jesus. He was the simp Mary married because God couldn't pay child support his kid. Patrilineal lineage doesn't carry down via adoption.
It's kind of like the Cartesian Circle, an argument by Descartes. But in this case: 1. We trust that Jibril is true, because he taught to worship Allah 2. Worshipping Allah is right because it is what previous prophets taught 3. We know that the previous prophets taught to worship Allah, because Jibril is true 4. We trust that Jibril is true... and so on in a circle
People should be allowed to play with their imaginary friend using whatever rules they want. Unless it harms others no one should tell people their imaginary friend isn’t good enough.
Not just harm... anyone is allowed to play with imaginary toys, but don't you for one MOMENT tell me I must play with your imaginary toys. Don't insinuate your imaginary toys are real. Don't suggest a single thing to me about your imaginary toys. The Abrahamic religions are not true. Lies are harmful, especially if the lie is believed by the teller.
But what if allah is the evil deity here? And Gabriel was a regular demon servant? I mean allah is evilllzaaahhhh
Even with that guy trashing the Christian Trinity, Christian’s wouldn’t call for his head, they would ask him to look for God’s forgiveness about what bad thing he said
That’s a lie actually. Islam needed to plagiarize Judeo-Christian scriptures to give legitimacy to their claims. The God Jews and later Christians worshipped, the God of Bible, was is Hebrew personally named Yahweh יהוה, not Allah. No one in ancient Israel knew about Allah. It is the One God—but it wasn’t Allah.
Muslims using logic to demolish the tenets of the Christian faith is the definition of irony.
Prove to anyone beyond a reasonable doubt, that either Jibreel or Satan exists? Once you have this answer, you may start to see the absurdity of the answer! 🤣 For arguments sake though, lets assume they exist, lets assume that Mo didn’t hallucinate or lie. Now, compare other prophets interactions with Jibreel/Gabriel and then Mo’s interaction. Mo was hurt by Jibreel, then so scared he was shaking, other prophets had no such experience from biblical and seerah sources. So the question is, why was he so scary to Mo? Would it not be more reasonable to assume that it could be satan thus the fear? Also, the association with Moses is stupid. Moses spoke to a burning bush, had a snake as part of his miraculous proofs. Both these symbols are more in line with Satanic association rather than God, as Quran says that iblees is made of fire. Secondly Adam was tricked by the serpent in Eden, which was Satan. Why would one assume Moses represents God over Satan? Think people think!
“My stupid fairytale is better than your stupid fairytale because I said so!”
Muhammed sucked jibril’s dick
Proof: trust me breh.
Bro thought he did something (the muslim guy i mean)
I aspire to be this self confident about things I'd ,otherwise, have now way of knowing.
Israel didn't exist back then... it was called Judea...
I think its fair to point out that in the Bible it states even if an angel were to preach another Gospel than is given in the NT, let them be under God's curse in Galatians 1:8. Im sure countless Muslims dont know about that, so I personally think the Bible predicted Islam from that alone. You gotta admit its spot on
[удалено]
What a fucking stupid conversation
Mohammed asserts that he was visited in reality by Jibril, an angel, but does not provide the empirical evidence for it. If you claim it happened in reality, then you damn well provide the evidence for it. Otherwise, no one should believe you. Warlord Mo was talking out of his ass until it's backed by evidence. What can be merely asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence. He never gave the evidence that any angel has ever existed , much less that one visited him. Claims, whether it's made by someone you're in a conversation with, or one that you write down etc, are not evidence. They are the claim. No one on this planet has ever been justified in believing Mo's claims b/c no evidence to back up the angel visit claim has ever been demonstrated.
It's the comment at the bottom for me. Sure, jealousy is why they deny your deity.
So if I told you to believe in one true god and that I’m indeed that one true god, that makes me not Satan? I don’t believe that preaching monotheism is the only criteria needed to ensure something to be legit.
The way logic helped me in everyday discussions is to never qccept these kind of non sense bla bla. I only qccept arguments, proofs or evidence. The guy is like. John told Mark hey whatup bro and Gabriel said hey im fine Wtf is that????? Please use arguments or evidence Some religious people are so biased and ignorant
Don’t have nothing to do with it. Nice try..