The Pagan Prophet? The Islamic prophet Dhu al-Qurnayn (He of Two Horns) is traditionally identified with pagan king Alexander the Great. His name comes from coins depicting him as Zeus Ammon, a two-horned pagan god. Hardly a champion of monotheism, here! Dhu al-Qurnayn’s stories from Surat al-Kahf (Q 18:83–102) are also filled with information from Syriac legends like called the Alexander Romance, saying that the sun sets in a pool of murky water in the West. Surat al-Kahf (Q 18:83–102): > And they ask you, [O Muḥammad], about Dhul-Qarnayn. Say, "I will recite to you about him a report." > Indeed, We established him upon the earth, and We gave him from everything a way [i.e., means]. > So he followed a way > Until, when he reached the setting of the sun [i.e., the west], he found it [as if] setting in a body of dark water, and he found near it a people. We [i.e., Allah] said, "O Dhul-Qarnayn, either you punish [them] or else adopt among them [a way of] goodness." > He said, "As for one who wrongs, we will punish him. Then he will be returned to his Lord, and He will punish him with a terrible punishment [i.e., Hellfire]. > But as for one who believes and does righteousness, he will have a reward of the best [i.e., Paradise], and we [i.e., Dhul-Qarnayn] will speak to him from our command with ease." > Then he followed a way > Until, when he came to the rising of the sun [i.e., the east], he found it rising on a people for whom We had not made against it any shield. > Thus. And We had encompassed [all] that he had in knowledge. > Then he followed a way. > Until, when he reached [a pass] between two mountains, he found beside them a people who could hardly understand [his] speech. > They said, "O Dhul-Qarnayn, indeed Gog and Magog are [great] corrupters in the land. So may we assign for you an expenditure that you might make between us and them a barrier?" > He said, "That in which my Lord has established me is better [than what you offer], but assist me with strength [i.e., manpower]; I will make between you and them a dam. > Bring me bars of iron" - until, when he had leveled [them] between the two mountain walls, he said, "Blow [with bellows]," until when he had made it [like] fire, he said, "Bring me, that I may pour over it molten copper." > So they [i.e., Gog and Magog] were unable to pass over it, nor were they able [to effect] in it any penetration. > [Dhul-Qarnayn] said, "This is a mercy from my Lord; but when the promise of my Lord comes [i.e., approaches], He will make it level, and ever is the promise of my Lord true." > And We will leave them that day surging over each other, and [then] the Horn will be blown, and We will assemble them in [one] assembly. > And We will present Hell that Day to the disbelievers, on display - > Those whose eyes had been within a cover [removed] from My remembrance, and they were not able to hear. > Then do those who disbelieve think that they can take My servants instead of Me as allies? Indeed, We have prepared Hell for the disbelievers as a lodging. Now a summary of the The Syriac Legend of Alexander from Kevin van Bladel (present in The Qur'an and Its Historical Context by Gabriel Said Reynolds) is attached.

>>4323 A coin depicting Alexander as the pagan demon Zeus Ammon, the inspiration for the Qur'anic and Syriac terms for Alexander as 'horned'.

Caedmon's Hymn v. Ibn Ishaq's Life of the Prophet Both texts here are from the 8th century, describing 7th century events. What explains the curious similarities between an event that allegedly happened in Britain, and one that happened in the Arabian peninsula? Ibn Ishaq’s narrative runs as follows: Muhammad is forty years of age, and happily married to Khadija, a successful merchant and noblewoman of the Quraysh. Each year, for one month, the Prophet Muhammad is in the habit of retreating to a cave in Mount Hira to engage in mediation. One night, as Muhammad sleeps, he is visited by the archangel Gabriel. Here the text reads: > He said: “read(!),” and I said: “I cannot recite.” So he pressed me so hard I thought I would die. He said: “read(!),” and I said: “I cannot recite.” So he pressed me so hard I thought I would die. He said: “read(!),” and I said: “what is it I should recite?” I would not say this, except to get away from him so he would not do it again. And he said: ‘Recite, in the name of your Lord who created, who created humanity from a clot. Recite, in the name of your Lord, the most noble, who taught humanity by the pen, who taught humanity that which it knew not" Bede records Caedmon’s tale as follows: in the mid-to-late 7th century, in the abbey of Whitby, there lives a certain brother named Caedmon, unlearned but pious in character. When he is advanced in years, one evening a banquet is held with music and poetry, and by reason of his lack of learning, Caedmon leaves the gathering to seek solace in the nearby stable where he cares for the horses. Falling asleep, he has a dream where a figure comes to him, and salutes him by name. Here, Bede’s text, 'Ecclesiastical History of the English Nation', reads: > “Caedmon,” he says, “sing something for me.’ But [Caedmon] replies, “I don’t know how to sing, and indeed that is why I left the banquet, because I couldn’t sing.” The one he was speaking with replied, “Nevertheless, you must sing for me.” [Caedmon says]: “What must I sing?’ The man replies, “Sing of the origin of creatures.” So hearing this, immediately he begins to sing verses (which he had never heard) in the praise of God the creator, the sense of which is: “Now we must declare the authority of the king of heaven, the power of the Creator and his counsel, the acts of the Father of glory. How, since God is eternal, he was the originator of miracles, who, as the guardian of humanity, first created the heavens as the roof of a house for humanity, then the earth.” Both tales are followed by a validation of the tale by another. For Muhammad, his cousin Waraqa serves as the interpreter of the experience. He identifies the source of the experience with the angel Gabriel. In Caedmon's case, it is the Abbess. The Abbess affirms that the experience has been granted by divine grace. In both stories, authorities validate the experience after it occurs. It is quite the strange coincidence, if it is one. A Mystery of Revelation: 'Caedmon's Hymn' and the Qur'an 96:1-5 https://www.academia.edu/43266322/A_Mystery_of_Revelation_Caedmons_Hymn_and_the_Quran_96_1_5

Excellent to see a proper thread for this at last. What's next?

>>4345 I agree. While we all appreciate the Muslim friends we have, we have to stay on mission, and bring the souls of our fellow men towards salvation. We can't allow them to proselytize on our ground, but I'm open to honest, courteous debate that meets halfway.

>information against the heresy of the Muhammadans There is a LOT of that. Let me post

Please delete the duplicate post.

How did the demon know that Islam would catch on? Do they just throw shit at a wall until it sticks?

>>4369 There's some of that going on, yes, but they're also just clever. Satan is the oldest and most powerful created being, he's been around the block a lot of times and has a lot of experience with this kind of thing. The enemy probably realized that some sort of corrupted monotheism would be the most effective way to unite pagan tribals into a single conquering force, and the Arabian Peninsula just happened to be a convenient starting point that had been largely ignored by the great powers of the time, which also had the advantage of being well-placed to invade the Empire.

>>4376 Of course, what he didn't count on was Shia/Persian autism.

>>4376 It was certainly a very clever form of deception, playing on the links between the Arabs, their connection with Ishmael, and thus Abraham. Never underestimate the power of 'WE WUZ', which was essentially what Islam started off as. Gradually due to interactions with Jews living in the area, Arab tribes began to get a consciousness of having descended from Ishmael, and from thereon out, it was fertile ground for demons to sow the seeds of a religion that could seem plausibly true, and yet invert Christianity via a return to the Law, a denial of the Trinity, and no atonement on the cross.

>>4379 >jews Rather ironic what happened at Mecca, isn't it? Would set the pattern for centuries to come.

>>4436 >Rather ironic what happened at Mecca, isn't it? Would set the pattern for centuries to come. Mecca itself seems to have been essentially devoid of monotheists except for a few exceptions such as Muhammad's cousin Waraqah ibn Nawfal, who was some sort of heretical Christian. This said though, the entire peninsula filled with Jewish influences in the centuries prior to formation of Islam. We know that in the centuries prior to Muhammad, that there was a Jewish kingdom in modern Yemen, and that probably allowed for a great deal of ideas to swirl around in the Hejaz for a few centuries, even while they were still pagans. At least in one case 20,000 Christians were burned to death in a ditch under the Jewish king Dhū Nuwās. The Qur'an has been found to have material from the midrash and Mishnah within it as well, which shows that there was indeed some sort of non-Christian Jewish material being incorporated into early Islam. As I said in my previous post, it was for centuries prior to Islam that the Arabs began to wake up to being Ishmaelites. You'd be surprised how many references there are in the literature. For example, Sozomen writes in his Ecclesiastical History, finished around ~450 A.D.: >Some of their tribe afterwards happening to come in contact with the Jews, gathered from them the facts of their true origin [their descent from Abraham], returned to their kinsmen, and inclined to the Hebrew customs and laws. From that time on, until now, many of them regulate their lives according to the Jewish precepts https://www.newadvent.org/fathers/26026.htm From Irfan Shahid's "Byzantium and the Arabs in the Fifth Century", referring to an account of Theodoret of Cyrrhus (died 5th century A.D.): >The second reference comes in the Life of Simeon Priscus, the famous solitary who established himself on Mount Amanus, whence he moved to Mount Sinai. Before living on Mount Amanus he had lived in a cave, and his miracles had attracted many of the neighboring barbarians. These are described by Theodoret as Ishmaelites: "those who proudly derive their descent from their ancestor Ishmael live in that desert" https://libgen.is/book/index.php?md5=D218041A306164DFDB6CA2F82CC15A6C Now, most interestingly, Sebeos says the following in the 7th century, speaking about the Muslims and Ishmaelites in particular. The Arabs are 'enlightened' by Jews fleeing from Edessa, and the Jews enlist the Arabs to assist them: >Twelve peoples [representing] all the tribes of the Jews assembled at the city of Edessa. When they saw that the Iranian troops had departed and left the city in peace, they [122] closed the gates and fortified themselves. They refused entry to troops of the Roman lordship. Thus Heraclius, emperor of the Byzantines, gave the order to besiege it. When [the Jews] realized that they could not militarily resist him, they promised to make peace. Opening the city gates, they went before him, and [Heraclius] ordered that they should go and stay in their own place. So they departed, taking the road through the desert to Tachkastan to the sons of Ishmael. [The Jews] called [the Arabs] to their aid and familiarized them with the relationship they had through the books of the [Old] Testament. Although [the Arabs] were convinced of their close relationship, they were unable to get a consensus from their multitude, for they were divided from each other by religion. In that period a certain one of them, a man of the sons of Ishmael named Muhammad, a merchant, became prominent. A sermon about the Way of Truth, supposedly at God's command, was revealed to them, and [Muhammad] taught them to recognize the God of Abraham, especially since he was informed and knowledgeable about Mosaic history http://www.attalus.org/armenian/seb9.htm#30 The next chapter by Sebeos mentions that the Jews only had the aid of the Ishmaelites (Hagarenes) for a short time, and wished to use them to rebuild their Temple: >Now I shall speak about the plot of the Jewish rebels, who, finding support from the Hagarenes for a short time, planned to [re]build the temple of Solomon. Locating the place called the holy of holies, they constructed [the temple] with a pedestal, to serve as their place of prayer. But the Ishmaelites envied [the Jews], expelled them from the place, and named the same building their own place of prayer http://www.attalus.org/armenian/seb9.htm#31 It's not entirely impossible that the rabbis used the Ishmaelite descent of the Arabs to use them as shock-troops against Christendom, and once Muhammad was demonically inspired by Jibreel, the rest was history. I have recently heard that the first reports of the Jews concerning Muhammad and Islam were positive, but I will have to investigate more.

>>4601 Duplicate. Good though.

>>4729 Muhammad was a pedophile.

>>4842 This is ultimately just cope in order to make Muhammad's image as squeaky clean as possible. It is the same with other controversies like the Satanic verses, which despite being present in many fairly authoritative sources such as Ibn Ishaq's sirah and the tafsir of Al-Tabari, is denied by many Muslims because it doesn't accord with their later doctrine of prophetic infallibility / sinlessness (ismah). Muhammad was certainly a pedo, because this is exactly what it says in the collection of ahadith from al-Bukhari, which gives sahih ahadith saying just this, i.e. that Muhammad was a pedo. It can't magically become da'if when your precious prophet embarrasses you. Come to Jesus Christ, friend, the one truly sinless and perfect man.

I think this is the same guy from that /b/ thread.

Rescuing this thread before it slides off the board with a question: where are the Druuze in relation to Christianity and Islam?

I don't really dislike Islam that much, I just think Muhammad was influenced by a devil after discovering the Christian religion. The Muslims I know personally are better company than most protestants if I'm being honest.

>>4369 >Do they just throw shit at a wall until it sticks? They already failed with manicheism so I guess so.

>>6553 It's its own thing. Some sort of gnostic remnant sect.

>>5043 >which despite being present in many fairly authoritative sources such as Ibn Ishaq's sirah and the tafsir of Al-Tabari, is denied by many Muslims because it doesn't accord with their later doctrine of prophetic infallibility / sinlessness (ismah). denied because it is literally blasphemy. Matn(content) is as important as isnad(line of narration). >Come to Jesus Christ, friend, the one truly sinless and perfect man. Muslims already acknowledge jesus (as) as a prophet, what no muslim or jew will ever accept is christians claiming the messiah as the "Literal" son of god. >>6553 >where are the Druuze in relation to Christianity and Islam? Monotheistic (As they emphasise tawhid) but with alot heretical /non-traditional beliefs, such as reincarnation.

Just made this copypasta and posting it for future reference: The Qur'an is full of errors. If anything is universally certain about Jesus, it is that he was killed by the Jews in the time of Pontius Pilate and crucified. The Qur'an in Q 4:157 explicitly denies this fact, saying that it merely 'appeared' this way to onlookers. Due to this, Muslims will ignore the universal testimony to the execution of Jesus Christ that we see from people such as Mara bar Serapion, whose letter is conventionally dated ~73 AD, speaking of the murder of the Jews' 'wise king'. The Babylonian Talmud, admittedly a later source, in Sanhedrin 43a likewise speaks of the hanging (on a cross) of Jesus on the eve of Passover. Tacitus, writing in the early 2nd century, likewise speaks of the killing of Jesus under Pontius Pilate. The entire testimony of the New Testament speaks of the crucifixion of Jesus as well. We have every reason to believe that Jesus Christ was indeed crucified. The Muslim denial of the event and its mere 'appearance' of being real, resembles 2nd century Gnostic doctrines such as that of Basilides, who taught that Simon of Cyrene was made to look like Jesus and crucified in his place (Ireneaus 'Against Heresies' 1.24.4). What is more likely, that Jesus was crucified as everyone saw and everyone knew, or that God tricked people for 600 years before he set it right again to a desert merchant hundreds of miles away? https://www.halakhah.com/sanhedrin/sanhedrin_43.html https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Ante-Nicene_Fathers/Volume_VIII/Memoirs_of_Edessa_And_Other_Ancient_Syriac_Documents/A_Letter_of_Mara,_Son_of_Serapion https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/The_Annals_(Tacitus)/Book_15 https://www.newadvent.org/fathers/0103124.htm The Qur'an also confuses Mary, mother of Jesus, with Miriam, sister of Moses, even saying that Mary has is the sister of Aaron and has a father named Imran (Amram). Aaron is a Levite. Mary cannot be a Levite, because her Davidic descent is vital for Jesus' messianic role. The Islamic prophet Dhu al-Qarnayn (He of Two Horns) is traditionally identified with pagan king Alexander the Great. His name comes from coins depicting him as Zeus Ammon, a two-horned pagan god. Hardly a champion of monotheism, here! Dhu al-Qarnayn’s stories are also filled with information from Syrian legends like called the Alexander Romance, saying that the sun sets in a pool of murky water in the West. https://libgen.is/book/index.php?md5=EC0797AE281AFBCCFE2ACFDA40C3B354 (See chapter 8) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amun#Greece

Muhammad was also a caravan-robbing polygamist pedophile. Jesus said to judge prophets by their fruits (Matthew 7:15-23). Muhammad fails on all accounts. John, Jude, Paul and many others warn against false prophets that will come to lead men from the Gospel (1 John 2:18-23, Jude 1:3-4, Galatians 1:8-9). Muhammad is one. Paul even warns of Satan disguising himself as an “angel of light” (Galatians 1:8). Muhammad got his revelation from “Jibreel”, an entity claiming to be Gabriel giving him revelation contradicting all previous scripture. He never got the Qur’an from God. It was all from Jibreel. https://sunnah.com/bukhari:3 The earliest generations of Christians—Paul, the Twelve, Ignatius of Antioch, Irenaeus, Polycarp, etc. all declared Jesus Christ to be divine, just like the OT teaches. 1 Samuel 7:14-16 > When your days are fulfilled and you lie down with your fathers, I will raise up your offspring after you, who shall come from your body, and I will establish his kingdom. He shall build a house for my name, and I will establish the throne of his kingdom forever. I will be to him a Father, and he shall be to me a Son. When he commits iniquity, I will discipline him with the rod of men, with the stripes of the sons of men, but my steadfast love will not depart from him, as I took it from Saul, whom I put away from before you. And your house and your kingdom shall be made sure forever before me. Your throne shall be established forever.’” Would a mere man be granted a throne that will be established 'forever'? Daniel 7:13-14 > “I saw in the night visions, and behold, with the clouds of heaven there came one like a son of man, and he came to the Ancient of Days and was presented before him. And to him was given dominion and glory and a kingdom,that all peoples, nations, and languages should serve him; his dominion is an everlasting dominion, which shall not pass away, and his kingdom one that shall not be destroyed. Would a mere man be granted everlasting dominion and have all kingdoms, nations and peoples serve him? Isaiah 9:6-7 >For to us a child is born, to us a son is given; and the government shall be upon his shoulder, and his name shall be called Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace. Of the increase of his government and of peace there will be no end, on the throne of David and over his kingdom, to establish it and to uphold it with justice and with righteousness from this time forth and forevermore. The zeal of the Lord of hosts will do this. A son named 'Mighty God' with government on his shoulders sitting on the throne of David forever? Sounds divine to me.

Wisdom of Solomon 2:12-20 >“Let us lie in wait for the righteous man, because he is inconvenient to us and opposes our actions; he reproaches us for sins against the law, and accuses us of sins against our training. He professes to have knowledge of God, and calls himself a child of the Lord. He became to us a reproof of our thoughts; the very sight of him is a burden to us, because his manner of life is unlike that of others, and his ways are strange. We are considered by him as something base, and he avoids our ways as unclean; he calls the last end of the righteous happy, and boasts that God is his father. >Let us see if his words are true, and let us test what will happen at the end of his life; for if the righteous man is God’s child, he will help him, and will deliver him from the hand of his adversaries. Let us test him with insult and torture, so that we may find out how gentle he is, and make trial of his forbearance. Let us condemn him to a shameful death, for, according to what he says, he will be protected.” Sounds just like Jesus. Pair this with Isaiah 53. Trinity in the OT Genesis 1:2- >Now the earth was formless and empty, darkness was over the surface of the deep, and the Spirit of God was hovering over the waters. Wisdom of Solomon 9:17-18 >Who has known Your counsel, >Unless You have given him wisdom >And sent him Your Holy Spirit from on high? >And thus the paths of those on earth were made straight, >And mankind was taught was pleases You; >So They were saved by wisdom. The entire Trinity is revealed here. “Your counsel” – God the Father, who gives His Son, Wisdom, and sends the Holy Spirit. Proverbs 8:22-31 >The Lord created me at the beginning of his work, the first of his acts of long ago. Ages ago I was set up, at the first, before the beginning of the earth. When there were no depths I was brought forth, when there were no springs abounding with water. Before the mountains had been shaped, before the hills, I was brought forth—when he had not yet made earth and fields, or the world’s first bits of soil. When he established the heavens, I was there, when he drew a circle on the face of the deep, when he made firm the skies above, when he established the fountains of the deep, when he assigned to the sea its limit, so that the waters might not transgress his command, when he marked out the foundations of the earth, then I was beside him, like a master worker; and I was daily his delight, rejoicing before him always, rejoicing in his inhabited world and delighting in the human race. This is directly in line with what we learn in John 1 about Jesus as the Logos / Word of God. In Proverbs 9:5 we see this same Wisdom say "Come, eat of my bread and drink of the wine I have mixed." Is this not a prefiguration of the Eucharist? Zechariah 4:6 >And he answered me and spoke to me, saying, “This is the word of the Lord to Zerubbabel, saying ‘Not by mighty power nor by strength, but by Spirit,’ says the Lord Almighty.

Judges 14:19 >Then the Spirit of the Lord leapt upon him, and he went down to Ashkelon and struck thirty of their men... Theophanies in the Old Testament of the Angel of the Lord, who is directly identified by those who see Him as ‘God’ is one example pointing towards multiplicity within the Godhead, which was identified even by 1st century non-Christian Jews such as Philo as the Logos of God, which of course, according to John 1, is Jesus Christ, the Logos made flesh. This example was also used by 2nd century Christian apologist Justin Martyr in his Dialogue with Trypho. Genesis 16:13-14 is one example of this: >She gave this name to the Lord who spoke to her: “You are the God who sees me,” for she said, “I have now seen the One who sees me.” That is why the well was called Beer Lahai Roi; it is still there, between Kadesh and Bered. See verse 12 to see that Hagar was talking with the Angel of the Lord, identified as God. “Angel” means nothing more than “messenger” either, and need not refer to a created being. One can also see Genesis 19:24- >Then the Lord rained down burning sulfur on Sodom and Gomorrah—from the Lord out of the heavens. This is again indicating multiplicity in the Godhead. Made even clearer by the context of chapter 18 and 19, where God appears before Abraham (i.e. the Son). Jacob also wrestles with an ‘angel’ in Genesis 32:22-32. After he wrestles, he names the place ‘Peniel’ or “Face of God”, because “I have seen God face to face, and yet my life was spared.” This clearly puts into context statements about no-one having seen God the Father, and Jesus saying that one who has seen him has seen the Father. Jacob wrestled with the Son. Exodus 3:2-4 >There the angel of the Lord appeared to him in flames of fire from within a bush. Moses saw that though the bush was on fire it did not burn up. So Moses thought, “I will go over and see this strange sight—why the bush does not burn up.” >When the Lord saw that he had gone over to look, God called to him from within the bush, “Moses! Moses!” First it says the Angel of the Lord was in the bush, and then immediately after it says God talks to Moses from the bush. This is similar to Genesis 16. Islam simply has no ground to stand on. Islam. Orthodox View by Daniel Sysoev (martyred by Muslims) https://azbyka.ru/otechnik/world/islam-orthodox-view/ St. John of Damascus’s Critique of Islam http://orthodoxinfo.com/general/stjohn_islam.aspx

>>7361 >denied because it is literally blasphemy. Your idea of prophetic infallibility is a later Islamic theological doctrine intended to gloss over Muhammad's mistakes and bad behavior. You can say 'Oh I don't like the matn, therefore the isnad is false!' This is called coping. By criterion of embarrassment alone it probably happened. >Muslims already acknowledge jesus (as) as a prophet You have a false Jesus. ʿĪsā is not Jesus. Arab Christians don't even use this name. The Jesus of Islam has nothing to do with the Jesus of Christianity and the Messiah of the Bible. I recommend you read these: >>7434 >>7435 >>7436 >>7437 Also, you can never hide your posts with the sage, I watch this thread :^)

RAMADAN MUBARAK! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PmCnKHFEFYc

>>7464 > it has nothing to do with the original "Jewish" conception of the messiah Take the time when you get a chance to read 2 Samuel 7:14-16, Daniel 7:13-14 and Isaiah 9:6-7. We will see that the Davidic covenant necessitates that God will establish the House of David’s throne *forever*, and that God like be like a Father to the king, who will be his Son. This is repeated, of course, in Daniel, where the one like a son of man comes in the clouds of heaven and is granted eternal dominion. Isaiah 9 says that the Messiah promised to David will reign eternally and be named Mighty God, Prince of Peace, Wonderful Counselor, Everlasting Father, etc. Isaiah 11 says that the Messiah from the root of Jesse will stand as a banner for the nations (the cross), and all of the Gentiles will rally around him. His resting place, it says, will be glorious. Isaiah 12 says that in that day, people will sing that God is their salvation, and that the Holy One will be among them. This is Jesus Christ. Islam is a demonic deception. Imagine posting videos by a Talmudic kike lmao

>>7464 That picture of the Gay priests or whatever are obvious strawmen, i'm sure i can find Gay Muslim and sure enough i was able to.

>>7486 >...for peace, and the destruction of israel >seemingly oxymoronic at first, but oh wait... Heh. Surely one of his brethren can help him out with his issues by beheading him?

>>7486 Allah is gay. Spread the news

>>7492 where does that 4 image take place? those buildings look beautiful

>>7492 >>7534 >>7535

Do I really have to remind people that this is a thread about Islam? A faith which, when much of its adherents have bent the knee to Western madness, will convert to the most based Christianity it can find?

>>7534 >>7535 You completely missed the point, you can find faggots on both sides, what matters is what is taught about homosexuality.

As previously stated this guy was on /b/, he tried to push the same bullshit about Aisha not being 9 when muhammed raped her on a thread there as well and got debunked. This guy probably isn't even a real mudslime, even so I find his posts laughable considering historically islamic cultures have been pretty gay, practicing and even glorifying faggotry such as the Ottomans, not to mention the fact that modern muslims think shoving your dick into the axe-wound of a tranny isn't gay.

>>4601 Looks like it's time for another lesson from Doctor Kafir

>>7588 And that concludes Doctor Kafir's lessons. There are still plenty more moral, theological, and factual flaws in islam, this is just scratching the surface. It's one of the most obviously false and worst religions of all time, and I say "one of" purely as a disclaimer.

>>7567 Muslims are not honest debaters. They are literally slimy, deceptive and dishonest. None of them will rebut any points in this thread because they can't.

>BO deletes the honest question thread "Why did God invent niggers?" >Leaves up an openly-hostile thread against the Islamic cult Lol. What are you triggered over BO? Also, aren't you worried that speshul-snowflake Religion of Peace might a Truck of Peace through your front door for such an oversight?

>>7589 What's next on your show, Doc?

>>8065 >and an anti-natsoc. This is /christian/ not /pol/. fuck off.

>>8065 natsoc is atheist satanism, why should we care about it?

>>8625 >natsoc is atheist satanism How so?

>>8626 it makes the source of absolute truth nature, nation, race, etc... or yourself over God. Two problems with that, those things are not sentient beings that communicate to us what truth is. So we have to rely on our authority to decide what the nation wants, or what our race wants. Which is retarded, because those categories don't want "want" anything. They don't have a will. We are simply imposing a will on them, "nature wants us to protect it". This is idolatery, paganism or moral relativism "i think we should defend nature". It replaces God with yourself. That doesn't mean we should neglect our race, nation, family etc... Those things have a place within christianity but not above it. Nationalism is above christianity not underneath it, and the first chance it gets to get rid of Christianity it does. And it treats Christianity as a cultural phenomena equal to other cultural phenomenas like Islam for example. Nationalist movements in the middle east like the ssnp believe we should preserve all national religions whereas in the west nationalist claim to want to preserve christianity but only when it is subservient to their movement, because no other religion exists, but that is just coincidental.

>>8626 . The Satanic currents in Nazism today and in the past have always been an interesting one. All Christians should also be aware of figures such as Otto Rahn, an officer in the SS during the Third Reich who wrote books like 'Lucifer's Court': > Rahn grasped the positive role Lucifer plays in these forbidden religions as the bearer of true illumination, similar to Apollo and other sun gods in pagan worship. https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/2425699.Lucifer_s_Court Miguel Serrano, a esoteric Hitlerist and Chilean neo-Nazi was a Luciferian too. In an old interview he is quoted as saying: >Hitlerism, as Otto Rahn would say, was Luciferian. Lucifer is the Morning Star. I am a Luciferian in the sense that Lucifer is the Morning Star, “the most beautiful light,” and the Morning Star is a God-Goddess Venus. It is more than a planet, it is a comet that stopped where it is now in order to remind the divine men of their own spiritual origin, and to show them the way to recover it. There on Venus, Adolf Hitler is now, together with the elite who managed to escape Earth at the end of the War. He tries to differentiate it from 'Satanism' but this is just a smokescreen. https://volkish.org/2020/01/12/a-talk-with-miguel-serrano/ And we can hardly forget about O9A >The Order of Nine Angles (ONA or O9A) is a Satanic and Left-Hand Path occultist group based in the United Kingdom, but with associated groups in other parts of the world. Claiming to have been established in the 1960s, it rose to public recognition in the early 1980s, attracting attention for its neo-Nazi ideologies and activism. Describing its approach as "Traditional Satanism", it has also been identified as exhibiting Hermetic and modern Pagan elements in its beliefs by academic researchers. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Order_of_Nine_Angles It's almost like Nazis attract Satanists like flies to shit

>>8657 https://www.bitchute.com/video/GcbjIfNLCBjL/

>>8657 >It's almost like Nazis attract Satanists like flies to shit Ehh, isn't that Satan's game after all friend? Usurp and corrupt everything good? Look at the abuse he's done with Jews in attacking free-speech on the Internet. IBs for instance. Aren't the hordes of kike-funded troons and other glowniggers and the hordes of brainwashed leftists the work of Satan. Seems to me old Uncle Adolf had the right ideas. He certainly didn't disapprove of Christ (organized religion OTOH, ...). Again, seems to me it's a fallacy you're promoting with your post. Satanists attack it simply because it's good. >"While you're in this world you'll have trials, but rejoice I've overcome the world."

>>8691 Grow up

>>8691 many liberals and communists are also satanists does that mean that liberalism and communism are good? Of course not! truth is that as far as politics go there are no good guys, everybody gets it wrong. Some are too conservative while others too liberal some are too free market while others too communal, thats why we have the Bible. Follow the Bible and make that your political ideology and everything will be good.

>>8691 Hitler himself hated Christianity and surrounded himself with occultists. He is an anti-Christ.

>>8691 Both the enemies of the Nazis and the Nazis themselves are connected to Satanism. Nazis were not virtuous just because they have given you an ideology around your political enemies. Satan controlling the world includes your political heroes.

>>8718 >>8719 O noes! W/e shall I do to respond to le Maymay spam!? >*thinks hard* Got it! NO U Read a motherf*cking book, nigger. Beside, I think I hear your Mom calling. Moar tendies are ready for you. >>8721 >everybody gets it wrong. Fair enough. You've hardly refuted my position. Old Uncle Adolf had the right ideas, by and large. >>8722 >[citation required] Validate your claims wigger. No second-hand spin, but from the man's own writings. >protip: you can't His biggest error was allowing men like Himmler into his upper echelons. In fact, I believe that cost him the war, spiritually-speaking. >>8723 >Satan controlling the world includes your political heroes. He's not my 'political hero' fren. He was a very good man at heart, and loved & sacrificed more for his volk than you or I ever will in this life. As with the nigger above, read a book. The man is a moral hero, and the world needs many more like him. >tl;dr Here's your (you)'s

>>8726 >You've hardly refuted my position. Old Uncle Adolf had the right ideas, by and large. he had some good ideas (anticommunism, nationalism, conservatism, etc) but not nearly enough for me to dedicate my allegiance to him. He was just like every other man in a similar position that came before him or has after, he was right about some things but far from perfect. He was a product of his time.

>>8726 >The man is a moral hero, how so?

>>8726 >O noes! W/e shall I do to respond to le Maymay spam!? Go back to 16ch /fascist/

>>8732 >>8719 >>8718 I find it funny that gay pagans and arab trannies manage to BTFO christianity for this long, you would think god's chosen people would have the upper hand.

>>8737 D&C nazi with no argument.

>>8726 >He's not my 'political hero' fren. He was a very good man at heart, and loved & sacrificed more for his volk than you or I ever will in this life. He clearly is your "superhero". How can he be a "good man", if he's not following the ultimate standard of good? I've already read Mein Kampf, i used to be a nazi like you. > The man is a moral hero, and the world needs many more like him. He was just another controlled politician (who surrounded himself with occultists and got the approval of the catholic secret societies) in a world of controlled politicians, the communists would almost say the same about Karl Marx who was a satanic priest. The only thing noteworthy to you is he was against your fleshly enemy, but the same can be said about the communists. Nazis are not virtuous or Godly people, you are full of sin just like the rest of us.

>>8737 t.

>>8726 >>8728 I would argue that Hitler was not a conservative despite what he claims. He wanted to converve the white tradition. But what is that if not Christianity? If you claim it is paganism, then do you affirm that Hitler wanted to go back to blood sacrifices and idolatery pagan rituals? If he was not preserving Christianity (which is where monagamy, liberty, justice, etc... all come from) which is the real source of european culture and tradition. And he isn't preserving ancient paganism. then he is a revolutionary just like communists. He wanted to create a new system. Not preserve any old ones. pic: Nihilism - Father Seraphim Rose

>>8826 Kike

You know, we have an actual thread for the most recent German heresy elsewhere. This one is for their allies, the muslims.

>>8847 >You know, we have an actual thread for the most recent German heresy elsewhere. This one is for their allies, the muslims. Have you been living under a rock, Islam and National socialism are more than compatible.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QCmSBfVXEmA Today I will remind them.

>>8833 >I would argue that Hitler was not a conservative despite what he claims Yup. Nazism is just another satanic modern project. Part of the new Babel that the modern man has sold his soul to in the process of trying to establish a counterfeit Kingdom of God on this earth. The idea of the Nazi 'New Order' was even called an 'One Thousand Year Reich' - a clear mockery of the Millennial Kingdom of Jesus Christ. The fact that the main ideas of Nazism were also things like Darwinism - itself a satanic godless philosophy that justified dehumanizing large groups of people and the control of society by rich elites - is very telling. The idea of a master-race is also prideful nonsense pushed by evolutionists to justify conquering and subjugating others in pursuit of worldly political projects. God laughs at the standards of judgement of worldly societies. Nazism, at root, is a satanic form of idolatry, based on self-idolatry / pride, and a fundamental rejection of God's word. Also before anyone says 'but muh communism!', don't even bother. Baal worship is just as satanic and evil as worshiping Zeus. Neither Nazism or Communism are Christian.

>>8732 All of those rumors claiming Ernst Rohm was "gay" came from the SPD and KPD. >4th image Source? >5h image This is a fake quote. Now how about we take a more reliable source (Mein Kampf) and some of Hitler's public speeches. "the personification of the devil as the symbol of all evil assumes the living shape of the jew." - Adolf Hitler (following the position of Martin Luther), Mein Kampf, Vol. 1 Chapter 11 "And the founder of Christianity made no secret indeed of his estimation of the jewish people. When He found it necessary, He drove those enemies of the human race out of the Temple of God; because then, as always, they used religion as a means of advancing their commercial interests. But at that time Christ was nailed to the Cross for his attitude towards the jews; whereas our modern Christians enter into party politics and when elections are being held they debase themselves to beg for jewish votes. They even enter into political intrigues with the atheistic jewish parties against the interests of their own Christian nation." - Adolf Hitler, Mein Kampf, Vol. 1 Chapter 11 "My feelings as a Christian points me to my Lord and Savior as a fighter. It points me to the man who once in loneliness, surrounded by a few followers, recognized these jews for what they were and summoned men to fight against them and who, God's truth! was greatest not as a sufferer but as a fighter. In boundless love as a Christian and as a man I read through the passage which tells us how the Lord at last rose in His might and seized the scourge to drive out of the Temple the brood of vipers and adders. Today, after two thousand years, with deepest emotion I recognize more profoundly than ever before the fact that it was for this that He had to shed his blood upon the Cross. - Adolf Hitler, speech on April 12, 1922 "The fact that the Curia is now making its peace with fascism shows that the Vatican trusts the new political realities far more than did the former liberal democracy with which it could not come to terms. The fact that the Catholic church has come to an agreement with fascist Italy ...proves beyond doubt that the fascist world of ideas is closer to Christianity than those of jewish liberalism or even atheistic Marxism." - Adolf Hitler, Völkischer Beobachter, February 29, 1929

>>9389 > some of Hitler's public speeches. Imagine quoting a politician's public speeches as proof of what he actually thought and believed, lmao!

>>9436 >invalid response no arguments detected. >>9389 He was a much better writer than painter, he also had help writing that though from a monk no less.

>>9436 >Imagine quoting a politician's public speeches as proof of what he actually thought and believed, lmao! Hitler never lied, and if you try to use Table Talks as a source I'll let you know that it's a forgery by François Genoud. It's not even funny how much the SS was based off of the Jesuits and Teutonic Knights and that the NSDAP was heavily influenced by Catholicism. https://forgottentruthhistory.wordpress.com/2017/12/31/hitlers-table-talk-is-a-fraud/

>>9510 >Hitler never lied

Hitler was an antichrist.

>>9510 >Hitler never lied More proof Hitler was an antichrist. Only Christ never lied. Your idol is not God.

>>9512 the emblem of the Nazi party looks nothing like a hooked cross. And if it was a hooked cross then why did they turn it on an angle? aswell:

>>9534 i should clarify that the word "hooked cross" can refer to both swastikas and other things

>>9512 Swastika / Hakenkreuz is a pagan stellar symbol.

>>9555 That's actually really cool.

>>9555 people in le olden times must have really had nothing better to do if they really just sat there and drew pictures in the stars all night.

>>9567 Typical anti-intellectual christian.

>>9556 It is cool, it's sad that race idolators have co-opted it

>>9555 i thought it was based off of the sun instead of the big dipper constellation?

>>9611 some are. like most symbols it has multiple meanings

>>9510 Yes Catholics influenced a lot of evil movements including protestants due to their schism.

>>9648 The truth is evil to the evil

>>9651 I agree

>>9389 /islam/ic infiltration

>>9389 I'm sure that the words of Hitler circa 1929 were of much comfort to many Catholic Germans and Poles that he had imprisoned and killed a decade latter. He openly tolerated a revitalization of paganism in the highest of his command and was rewarded with a humiliating defeat that his people still have not truly recovered from. Perhaps had he remained in proper communion with Rome and, considering his adventure into lands that were once Orthodox but now faced persecutions, could have earned the favour of them too. Instead he was destroyed and it comes down to his tolerance of paganism within his own power structure.

Stop derailing my thread about Hitler. Check out this channel for a good deconstruction of Islam: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCXPr9Vbibc7wIXJT3_ym-dQ/videos

>>9860 >Christianity birthed islam How will christians cope

>>9920 Your religion is an accursed heresy of Christianity. You have no continuity with the past. You have no prophecies predicting your antichrist prophet. Your book is historically inaccurate and is a syncretic mix of heresies, Judaism and paganism. You are so cowardly that you hide your remarks by saging. The absolute state of Muslims.

>>9922 >You have no continuity with the past. *Laughs in hebrew >is historically inaccurate and is a syncretic mix of heresies, Judaism and paganism. That description literally applies to all abrahamic texts written after 2nd temple judaism.

>>9925 >*Laughs in hebrew Is this supposed to be an argument? >That description literally applies to all abrahamic texts written after 2nd temple judaism. Christianity has direct continuity with the 2nd Temple period and beforehand. We have the fulfillment of the Messianic prophecies that show us the coming of Jesus, and can point to a precedence for our claims. Muhammadans cannot. I challenge you to show me prophecies for Muhammad. I challenge you to show me that Jesus was not crucified. I challenge you to show me that the Bible isn't the same Bible that was had in the time of Jesus and beforehand.

>Christianity has direct continuity with the 2nd Temple period and beforehand. You are slime spreading half-truths, christianity Was a jewish sect but no longer. The continuity is severed. >According to historian Shaye J. D. Cohen, "the separation of Christianity from Judaism was a process, not an event", in which the church became "more and more gentile, and less and less Jewish".[117][note 14] According to Cohen, early Christianity ceased to be a Jewish sect when it ceased to observe Jewish practices, such as circumcision.[25] According to Cohen, this process ended in 70 CE, after the great revolt, when various Jewish sects disappeared and Pharisaic Judaism evolved into Rabbinic Judaism, and Christianity emerged as a distinct religion. Even rabbinical judaism had pagan influence, once again demolishing any sort of assertion that judaism and christianity itself did not evolve over time. >Both Early Christianity and Early Rabbinic Judaism were far less orthodox and less theologically homogeneous than in modern day. Both religions were significantly influenced by Hellenistic religion and borrowed allegories and concepts from Classical Hellenistic philosophy >We have the fulfillment of the Messianic prophecies that show us the coming of Jesus, and can point to a precedence for our claims. Shitty pilpul, if the prophecies were fullfilled then the jews wouldn't have rejected him. Also Ahistorical argument. >Muhammadans cannot. Moving goalposts, islam being false does not prove Christianity true, It just means islam is false. Source:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jewish_Christian#Split_of_early_Christianity_and_Judaism >I challenge you to show me that the Bible isn't the same Bible that was had in the time of Jesus and beforehand. The canon developing over time is enough evidence to your assertion >With the potential exception of the Septuagint, the apostles did not leave a defined set of scriptures; instead the canon of both the Old Testament and the New Testament developed over time. Different denominations recognize different lists of books as canonical, following various church councils and the decisions of leaders of various churches. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biblical_canon Funny how christians love to use reason and empiricism to destroy judaism and islam, yet follow blind faith when analysing their own religion.

The angel of the LORD and the origins of angels >The figure of "the angel of the LORD" (Heb. מלאך יהוה‎; mal’akh YHVH) has been perceived by generations of exegetes and interpreters as obscure and perplexing. Almost every appearance of this figure in the Tanakh complies to the following pattern: >The narration introduces the angel of the LORD; He behaves as if he were a deity, e.g. promising fertility (Genesis 21:18), annihilating an army with a single blow (e.g. 2 Kings 19:32-36), or merely delivering a speech in which the angel presents himself as God (e.g. Exodus 3:2-4); The interlocutors of this figure address and revere him in a way reserved exclusively to a deity. >As such, the incident leaves the reader with the question whether it was an angel or a deity who had just appeared.[4] WTF Angels are a jewish attempt into incorporating pagan pantheons while maintaining monotheism!

>>9931 >if the prophecies were fullfilled then the jews wouldn't have rejected him Why did the Jews reject the prophets and persecute them only to celebrate them later on? And why do they reject Mohammad if he's the last prophet, and Jesus as Messiah which even the Muslims confess?

>>9931 You pointing out that Christianity and Judaism gradually became distinct is not an argument. Christianity is merely Messianic Judaism. The fulfillment of the prophecies. A New Covenant. Things all predicted in the Old Testament and fulfilled in the person of Jesus Christ. A sign of the Messiah coming was the coming of the Gentiles to worship the God of Israel. The Jews who rejected Jesus Christ as the Messiah gradually mutated into their own fossilized sect of Judaism. It is outmoded and has been superseded. Christianity is in perfect continuity with the OT's prophecies. You've really not debunked the point at all. I am willing to provide citations for all of this too. >if the prophecies were fullfilled then the jews wouldn't have rejected him The Old Testament says that the Messiah will be hated by His own people and killed. The New Testament says this as well. Is this the power of Muhammadan arguments? You really can't seem to grasp the concept of people being blinded by their own sins and stubbornness, it seems, either. >The canon developing over time is enough evidence to your assertion I'm talking about the core of the Tanakh, which is all I need to prove my argument that Jesus Christ is God and Messiah. >>Both Early Christianity and Early Rabbinic Judaism were far less orthodox and less theologically homogeneous than in modern day. Both religions were significantly influenced by Hellenistic religion and borrowed allegories and concepts from Classical Hellenistic philosophy "It was real in my mind" You've yet to prove anything.

>>9932 The Angel of the Lord is Jesus Christ, you're literally arguing for me now

>>9935 >I'm talking about the core of the Tanakh, which is all I need to prove my argument that Jesus Christ is God and Messiah. >The differences attested to in the Dead Sea Scrolls indicate that multiple versions of the Hebrew scriptures already existed by the end of the Second Temple period.[1] Which is closest to a theoretical Urtext is disputed, if such a singular text ever existed at all.[2] The Dead Sea Scrolls, dating to as early as the 3rd century BCE, contained versions of the text that are radically different from today's Hebrew Bible. >radically different from today's Hebrew Bible. >if such a singular text ever existed at all. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Masoretic_Text >"It was real in my mind" >After a reign of thirty-seven years,[23][24] Romulus is said to have disappeared in a whirlwind during a sudden and violent storm, as he was reviewing his troops on the Campus Martius. Livy says that Romulus was either murdered by the senators, torn apart out of jealousy, or was raised to heaven by Mars, god of war. Livy believes the last theory regarding the legendary king's death, as it allows the Romans to believe that the gods are on their side, a reason for them to continue expansion under Romulus' name. >or was raised to heaven by Mars, god of war. Many such examples exist anon, religions generally are a product of their times anon. You see it in islam yet cannot accept it in your own faith. >>9936 >The Angel of the Lord is Jesus Christ, you're literally arguing for me now Christian historical revisionism + Later interpretation to shoehorn new theology >Knofel Staton says: "The idea that this angel was Christ is unlikely for many reasons, which include the following: 1) God never said to any angel (including the 'angel of the Lord') 'you are my son' (Heb 1:5) ...";[20] Ben Witherington says: "The angel of the Lord is just that – an angel. [... T]he divine son of God [...] was no mere angel of the Lord, nor did he manifest himself in some observable form prior to the Incarnation."[21] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Angel_of_the_Lord >>9934 >and Jesus as Messiah which even the Muslims confess? /christian/ claims otherwise

>>9939 >/christian/ claims otherwise I can't speak for other anons but I don't have a personal anathema against comparative theology.

>>9942 Mudslime samefag

>>9939 You really have no good arguments at all, just like typical Muslims. Why point out the Masoretic text when it is not the text of the early Church and is not the text that is quoted in the New Testament, which is the Septuagint. And everyone knows that the Septuagint aligns with the Dead Sea Scrolls on many key points. Your nonsense about Romulus is a complete non sequitur too. >1) God never said to any angel (including the 'angel of the Lord') 'you are my son' (Heb 1:5) Yeah, bro, Jesus Christ isn't an angel in the sense that He is a cherub or a seraph. The very term 'angel' means in Hebrew (mal'ákh) and Greek (angelos) simply 'messenger'. All the text says is 'mal'ákh YHWH', Messenger of YHWH. The word-concept fallacy is being used here in the appeal to Hebrews 1:5. There are created messengers like Gabriel and Michael, and then there is the uncreated Messenger of YHWH in the Old Testament, who is the Logos, the Son of God, divine Wisdom. The fact that the Angel of the Lord is referred to as God rests my case, as do things such as the two YHWHs in Genesis 19. >Ben Witherington says: "The angel of the Lord is just that – an angel. Already debunked. >[... T]he divine son of God [...] was no mere angel of the Lord Already debunked. >nor did he manifest himself in some observable form prior to the Incarnation."[21] Debunked by the Bible itself since the Angel of the Lord is literally identified as God as is spoken with in the Bible. Muslims are weak in debate lol.

>>9947 >You really have no good arguments at all You are Autistic. >And everyone knows that the Septuagint aligns with the Dead Sea Scrolls on many key points. >Assertion therefore evidence Such is the life of the apologist >Your nonsense about Romulus is a complete non sequitur too. It was to show how similar alot of christian beliefs are to the greco-roman pagans, are we going to deny the greco-roman influence? >Already debunked. >Already debunked. I'm gonna deboooooonk >Debunked by the Bible itself since the Angel of the Lord is literally identified as God as is spoken with in the Bible. Easily refuted by historical study of judaism, it was never monotheistic to begin with, it evolved from a polytheistic cult. >During the Iron Age I, the Israelite religion became distinct from the Canaanite polytheism out of which it evolved. This process began with the development of Yahwism, the monolatristic worship of Yahweh, one of the Canaanite gods, that gave acknowledgment to the existence, but suppressed the worship, of the other Canaanite gods. Later, this monolatristic belief cemented into a strict monotheistic belief and worship of Yahweh alone, with the rejection of the existence of all other gods, whether Canaanite or foreign. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Origins_of_Judaism

>>9860 >using secular research

>>9948 You're not even worth arguing with. Your 'evidence' consists of Wikipedia quotations, which amount to assertions, uniformly from atheistic / secularist scholars. >Such is the life of the apologist Psalm 22 from the Dead Sea Scrolls, crucially, confirms the reading found in the Septuagint. The evidence is easy to find, right in 5/6 Ḥev–Sev4Ps Fragment 11. >It was to show how similar alot of christian beliefs are to the greco-roman pagans, are we going to deny the greco-roman influence? Not really seeing the similarity. Raised in heaven? Okay? Same thing happens to Jesus in Islam. Same thing happens with Enoch, with Elijah, etc. >Easily refuted by historical study of judaism, it was never monotheistic to begin with, it evolved from a polytheistic cult I don't see any evidence of this in the Bible, nor in history, especially given the evidence for revolutionary monotheism and the difference between the Israelite religion and Middle Eastern paganism in so many respects. There are no known deities that have the name of YHWH, neither do we know where where the name comes from, likewise we are also in the dark about predecessors for the sabbath, the ban on idolatry, and many other key aspects of the Israelite religion. You can appeal to Ugaritic and Mesopotamian texts with vague similarities as much as you want, because it will not phase me. All people have had some knowledge of God and the events of the past, and it is clear that they would have preserved distorted versions of it in their own culture and tradition. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=za260DIsgzQ Also, the idea that monotheism is an evolution out of polytheism is an atheistic assumption that is actually not widely supported by the evidence today.

>>9951 Technically speaking, the proper term is Monolatry. As in, only one God worshipped out of many extant spirits. Monotheism is a term invented by 19th century German scholars, many of them at least partly secular.

>>9951 >>9948 Fuck off Ayrab MudslimeNigger faggot samefag.

>>9956 Either start bringing actual rhetoric to bear, or scram yourself. Glowfag.

>>9953 This is definitely important to point out, true. I have long argued too that the terms 'polytheism' and 'monotheism' are inherently flawed, because they assume that the entities worshiped by so-called polytheists and monotheists are of the same variety. The term God and a 'god' are equivocal terms for highly different ideas about religion. One can believe that the so-called 'gods' of polytheism are in some sense real, even if they are never to be worshiped. Pagans (and Muslims) are certainly worshiping some sort of entity, but it is not the one triune God. Jeremiah 10:11 >“The gods who did not make the heavens and the earth shall perish from the earth and from under the heavens.”

>>9951 >which amount to assertions, uniformly from atheistic / secularist scholars. Because christians "scholars"are notorious for pilpul, bias and dogmatic slander even when reporting about pagans and their own "heretics". Using works of creationist retards to prove christianity is no different than using irenaeus and tertullian to prove the supposed "orthodoxy". >Psalm 22 from the Dead Sea Scrolls, crucially, confirms the reading found in the Septuagint. The evidence is easy to find, right in 5/6 Ḥev–Sev4Ps Fragment 11. Interesting, tbh. What do you make of the other texts not included in the current canon? >I don't see any evidence of this in the Bible The bible cannot be taken as an accurate and unbiased source for recorded history anon... >especially given the evidence for revolutionary monotheism who is Ahura mazda >You can appeal to Ugaritic and Mesopotamian texts with vague similarities as much as you want, because it will not phase me. Of course you won't be phased, you're a white man following a semitic antisemitic faith, worshipping a jewish rabbi. >All people have had some knowledge of God and the events of the past, and it is clear that they would have preserved distorted versions of it in their own culture and tradition. Nigga where was jesus in all this, why don't the africans, incans, aztec and hindpoos mention him if he was soo important? >Also, the idea that monotheism is an evolution out of polytheism is an atheistic assumption that is actually not widely supported by the evidence today. Animism still exists amongst natives and the japanese today, what monotheism you speak of. All in all i concede, you can take this as a victory.

>>10025 *give up not concede shitty anglo language.

Funny how the thread got derailed just before this guy showed up.

>>9934 >and Jesus as Messiah which even the Muslims confess? You outed your self mudslime >>10031 Shitskins are trying to slide all good threads, with their idolatry and muhammadanism.

>>10060 >You outed your self mudslime >pointing out that Muslims think that Jesus is their Messiah under a heretical view of salvation means you're a Muslim

>>10025 >What do you make of the other texts not included in the current canon? Are you talking of texts found among the Dead Sea Scrolls not found in the current canon? This is not concerning to me. I, like the first 1500 years of Christians, don't believe in the principle of Sola Scriptura. Many early Christians read the Book of Enoch and The Shepard of Hermas too, but the Church through the Holy Spirit concluded that these were not inspired Scripture, even if they don't per se contain anything heretical or untrue at all. These texts provide great insight into early Christianity and late 2nd Temple Judaism and indeed can be edifying for Christians today. >The bible cannot be taken as an accurate and unbiased source for recorded history anon. The Bible has been proven historically accurate time and time again, even when secularist historians say that it is not, only to be proven wrong with future discoveries. The Hittites are one good example, as are many of the kings in Kings and Chronicles, as well as the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah, etc. The Bible is largely a collection of historical books and other material. >who is Ahura mazda Zoroastrianism postdates the Biblical Patriarchs for one, and it also is a given that non-Israelite peoples could have some apprehension of the one true God from the workings of nature and various spiritual experiences. Zoroastrianism was still polytheistic at root though -- "For what may be known about God is plain to them, because God has made it plain to them. For since the creation of the world God’s invisible qualities, His eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly seen, being understood from His workmanship, so that men are without excuse. " (Romans 1:19-20) >a semitic antisemitic faith The Bible is not antisemitic. The apostles were ethnically Jewish, as was Jesus Christ Himself. The earliest Christians were all Jews. The religion of Judaism today is accursed though, as are those who follow it. Christianity is merely the fulfillment of Old Testament prophecies which show that the Gentiles would come to worship the God of Israel. The Israelites will one day accept Christ, the Bible is clear about this. >Nigga where was jesus in all this Christ only became incarnate in the 1st century. God the Son is the eternal Wisdom and Logos of the Godhead. He was known by the Greeks, by the Hebrews, and undoubtedly many other peoples under various forms and names. Those prior to the incarnation of the Son have no excuse, and this is because the Wisdom was always accessible to them through natural revelation and nature itself. The law is written on the hearts of mankind. >Animism still exists amongst natives and the japanese today You presuppose that animism is an earlier form of religion and not a degeneration of true religion. This is not necessarily supported by the evidence. The Chinese long knew of Shangdi. Even in Shinto we have beings such as Amenominakanushi no okami, who is the source of other kami / gods. Lots of religions have a primeval god that comes out of chaos or something similar that is a distortion of true Biblical religion.

>>10085 >Allamashalla I've been spotted!

>>10085 >>>/islam/

>>10104 >>10110 Muslims are the true Christians kuffar. Isa is the Messiah and was a devout Muslim, not your paganized "Jesus." Allah does not permit His prophets to be humiliated, Isa never died but rather one was crucified in his place while he was delivered to Jannah. Inshallah, you will all taste the fires of Jahannam for your lies.

>>10090 >ethnically Jewish Modern (ashkenazic) jews are khazars/central asians. Even other forms of jews (Sephardic/Mizrahi) have Arab and European admixture. The prime minister of Israel's brother took a DNA test and revealed that his (and the PMs) Y-DNA haplogroup was r1a, meaning that he has slav DNA.

>>10198 >Jesus wasn't crucified Why should I believe what some desert schizo who was born 600 years after Jesus said rather than Jesus' close friends who where at the event of his crucifixtion.

>>10202 Reality is as Allah decrees in His revealed truth of the Holy Quran by His final prophet, Muhammad PBUH. The authentic message of the Injil (your "gospels") was known by the companions of Isa, who never wanted to be worshipped as god, before it was corrupted by idolators.

>>10204 >no proof of widescale corruption of the OT or Gospels >no prophecies for Muhammad >no continuity with OT or NT >has no complete scripture by their own historical standards >is literally warned against by actual Christian apostles >prophet attempted suicide, was attacked by an angel in a cave and spewed satanic verses Complete joke of a religion

>>10208 You are the joke non-believer. Your mind is so twisted by Iblis you are mentally retarded. On the day of judgement Isa will reprove those who wrongly call him god: >And ˹on Judgment Day˺ Allah will say, “O Jesus, son of Mary! Did you ever ask the people to worship you and your mother as gods besides Allah?” He will answer, “Glory be to You! How could I ever say what I had no right to say? If I had said such a thing, you would have certainly known it. You know what is ˹hidden˺ within me, but I do not know what is within You. Indeed, You ˹alone˺ are the Knower of all unseen. >I never told them anything except what You ordered me to say: “Worship Allah—my Lord and your Lord!” And I was witness over them as long as I remained among them. But when You took me, You were the Witness over them—and You are a Witness over all The Holy Quran Sura 5:116-117

>>10202 >schizo Stop using c*ckchan lingo In addition to that many gnostic gospels mention the illusion of crucifixion. >>10209 Based and Allahpilled.

>>10209 I don’t believe in your filthy book. Please provide arguments attesting to the validity of the Qur’an or you are wasting my time, Abdul

>>10218 > many gnostic gospels mention the illusion of crucifixion. You mean the same ones that claim he is a divine being? Lol

>>10219 >filthy book So aggressive for a "man" who can't divorce or hit his spouse. >>10220 >You mean the same ones that claim he is a divine being? Correct me if i am wrong but the emanations from the one are never equal to him.

>>10228 Christians are under no obligation to respect false gods and scriptures. Your appeal to later gnostic scriptures is not an argument either. This is a type of docetism, the idea that a higher spiritual being like Jesus could not have truly become man and suffered because it was unbefitting to God, an idea that is a product of pagan syncretism that ignores the prophecies of the Old Testament. Imagine trying to claim this dude to support Islamic claims: >Basilides again, that he may appear to have discovered something more sublime and plausible, gives an immense development to his doctrines. He sets forth that Nous was first born of the unborn father, that from him, again, was born Logos, from Logos Phronesis, from Phronesis Sophia and Dynamis, and from Dynamis and Sophia the powers, and principalities, and angels, whom he also calls the first; and that by them the first heaven was made. [...] But the father without birth and without name, perceiving that they would be destroyed, sent his own first-begotten Nous (he it is who is called Christ) to bestow deliverance on those who believe in him, from the power of those who made the world https://www.newadvent.org/fathers/0103124.htm Truly we have found the Injil!!!

>>10230 >more Christian pilpul The Jews and the Christians will never be pleased with you unless you follow their ways. Say, ‘Allah’s guidance is the only true guidance.’ If you were to follow their desires after the knowledge that has come to you, you would find no one to protect you from Allah or help you. Those to whom We have given the Scripture, who follow it as it deserves, are the ones who truly believe in it. Those who deny its truth will be the losers. The Holy Quran Sura 2:120-121

>>10230 >docetism >support Islamic claims Not my point, my point was to show the diversity of early christian thought, you F*cking sperg. >Christians are under no obligation to respect false gods and scriptures. Engage in coitus.

>>10204 Well the Quran says no one can change Allah's words, so if the Bible (and even the Torah) was corrupted then Allah was lying. But what should be expected from someone who boasts about being the best of deceivers. Not to mention the scriptures we have today are the same as those published during Muhammad's day, in which he affirmed their inspiration. Honestly I think this guy is just a shitposter, he's just posting quran verses with no argument now. I doubt he's even a real muslim

>>10239 >my point was to show the diversity of early christian thought Pagan syncretism is not Christian.

>>10319 >he's just posting quran verses with no argument now. The Quran argues for itself as the infallible truth. It needs no justification unlike your corrupted "scriptures": >They say, ‘Become Jews or Christians, and you will be rightly guided.’ Say, ‘No, ours is the religion of Abraham, the upright, who did not worship any god besides Allah.’ So believers, say, ‘We believe in Allah and in what was sent down to us and what was sent down to Abraham, Ishmael, Isaac, Jacob, and the Tribes, and what was given to Moses, Jesus, and all the prophets by their Lord. We make no distinction between any of them, and we devote ourselves to Him.’ The Holy Quran Sura 2:135-136 >He is Allah in the heavens and on earth, He knows your secrets and what you reveal, and He knows what you do; but every time revelation comes to them from their Lord, they turn their backs on it. So they denied the truth when it came to them, but the very thing they laughed at will be brought home to them. >Even if We had sent down to you, Prophet, a book inscribed on parchment, and they had touched it with their own hands, the disbelievers would still say, ‘This is nothing but blatant sorcery.’ They say, ‘Why was no angel sent down to support him?’ But had We sent down an angel, their judgement would have come at once with no respite given. Indeed, if We had sent an angel as messenger, We would still have sent him in the form of a man, so increasing their confusion. Messengers have been mocked before you, and those who mocked them were engulfed by the very punishment they had mocked. The Holy Quran Sura 6:3-5, 7-10

>>10328 Is this the argument from literary excellence? Is that why you think just copying and pasting Quran verses expecting it to do anything?

>>10342 >Among them are some who appear to listen to you, but we have placed covers over their hearts—so they do not understand the Qur’an—and deafness in their ears. Even if they saw every sign they would not believe in them. So, when they come to you, they argue with you: the disbelievers say, ‘These are nothing but ancient fables,’ and tell others not to listen, and they themselves keep away from it. But they ruin no one but themselves, though they fail to realize this. >We send messengers only to give good news and to warn, so for those who believe and do good deeds there will be no fear, nor will they grieve. As for those who rejected Our signs, torment will afflict them as a result of their defiance. Say, ‘I do not have the treasures of Allah, nor do I know the unseen, nor do I tell you that I am an angel. I only follow what is revealed to me.’ Say, ‘Is a blind person like one who can see? Why will you not reflect?’ Use the Qur’an to warn those who fear being gathered before their Lord—they will have no one but Him to protect them and no one to intercede—so that they may beware. >The righteous are not in any way held accountable for the wrongdoers; their only duty is to remind them, so that they may be mindful of Allah. Leave to themselves those who take their religion for a mere game and distraction and are deceived by the life of this world, but continue to remind them with the Qur’an, lest a soul be damned by what it has done—it will have no one to protect it from Allah and no one to intercede; whatever ransom it may offer will not be accepted. Such are those who are damned by their own actions: they will have boiling water to drink and a painful punishment, because they defied Allah. The Holy Quran Sura 6:25-26, 48-51, 69-70

>>10328 >The Quran argues for itself as the infallible truth "It's true because it says so!" Lol

>>10358 Yes, Allah is supreme indeed: >It is He who created the heavens and the earth for a true purpose. On the Day when He says, ‘Be,’ it will be: His word is the truth. All control on the Day the Trumpet is blown belongs to Him. He knows the seen and the unseen: He is the All Wise, the All Aware. The Holy Quran Sura 6:73

>>10319 >Honestly I think this guy is just a shitposter, he's just posting quran verses with no argument now. I doubt he's even a real muslim He's not.

>>10371 Takes one to know one, mudslime?

>>10381 >breaks the Muslim law on depicting Muhammad Get out of here LARPer.

>>10381 >>10382 >>10383 >>10384 >>10385 Is th mudslime arguing against himself?

>>10381 Celsus says in his source that he heard this from the Jews, retard

>>10387 Yeah, hes purposely trying to make his side look bad, you D&C false witness.

>>10389 Ignore mudslime d/c

>>10389 true

>>10389 this

>>10396 We've survived worse than one faggot calling everyone a muslim and a muslim. Even if this board is erased we will just talk about God on /pol/.

>>10399 Of course there is a small minority of pagans, atheists and esoteric fags who hate us. so what. It's nothing compared to the hate that Muslims get on conservative channels.

>>10399 D&C kike

>>10397 >>10400 >>10405 We will win. Every church in the West will be turned into a Satanic temple. Your daughters put into burqas and married off off as the second and third wives of sheikhs. Every Bible will be burned.

>>10408 What about the churches that aren't in the west, are you going to leave those for us as a gift, lol. Good luck trying to burn the most popular most well known book of all time, that would be like trying to stop rain with your hand. There was a Freemason who said to an ex-Freemason who became a Christian, "we won't stop till every church is a brothel". It is a testament that Christianity has survived despite having so many enemies, and it will continue to do so regardless if you.

>>10408 Dont spam/demoralize-shill

>>10408 >original post deleted of course

>>10328 >The Quran argues for itself Lets see what it argues. >He has revealed to you the Book with truth. Verifying that which is before it. And He revealed the Torah and the Gospel aforetime a guidance for the people. And He sent the Quran. (Sura 3:3-4) So not just the Gospel but the Torah were revealed by Allah himself as a guidance for the people, but you claim that Allah couldn't protect the Gospel from corruption, so what He intended to guide instead misguided. This is a strange mindset to have considering the following. >And Recite what has been revealed to you of the book of your Lord. There is none who can change His words, and you shall not find any refuge besides Him. (Sura 18:27) No one can change Allah's words as clearly stated in His Eternal Word, which also states that the Gospel is His word. So if any Quran verse states the Gospel was corrupted that would be a direct theological contradiction in Islam, But the actual position of the Quran is that Christians misinterpret the Gospel because Muhammad was literate and only had a vague idea of the Gospel which he got from folklore , which is where you get stuff like Jesus preaching as a baby which comes from the Arabic infancy gospel(a forgery writing centuries after the time of Christ), and Mary being the sister of Aaron because she has the same Arabic name as the sister of Aaron & Moses Furthermore, sura 7:157 states that Christians had the Gospel at the time of Muhammad. >Those who follow the messenger, the unlettered prophet, whom they find mentioned in their own [scriptures]-in the Torah and the Gospel-...It is they who will prosper. (7:157) Putting aside that the Torah and Gospel never mentioned Muhammad in the first place , this would make no sense if the scriptures Christians had access to had already been corrupted. On that note... >Let the people of the Gospel judge by what Allah hath revealed therein. If any do fail to judge by (the light of) what Allah hath revealed, they are (no better than) those who rebel. (sura 5:47) >Say: "Oh people of the Books! You have no ground to stand upon unless you stand fast by the Torah, the Gospel, and all the revelation that has come to you from your Lord." (Sura 5:68) Allah specifically tells Christians to judge by the Gospel, and once again this would be absurd if they were corrupted. We have copies of the Gospel from before the time of Muhammad let alone his time and they contradict it on fundamental theological issues. So judging by the Gospel as Allah commands us to, we can only conclude Islam is false. Why would Allah tell us we have no ground to stand upon unless we stand on a corrupt book? But wait, there's more. The Gospel is also authoritative for Muhammad himself. >But if you (O Muhammad) are in doubt as to what we have revealed to you, ask those who read the book before you; certainly the truth has come to you from your Lord, therefore you should not be of the disputers. (10:94) So Muhammad himself can only confirm the his revelations by checking if they line-up with the Gospel of course he didn't actually check since he couldn't read. And if you claim the Gospel has been corrupted, then you deny Allah's claim that no one can change His words. So in summary, if the Gospel is the inspired and preserved word of God then Islam is false because it contradicts Islam, but if the Gospel isn't the inspired and preserved word of God then Islam is still false because it affirms the inspiration and preservation of the Gospel. Either way, Islam is false. In fact, if the Torah contradicts the Gospel or Quran then Islam is false. If any three of these books contradicts even a single other of the three than Islam is false. However, even without all that, even if Muhammad could read the Bible and adjusted the above verses so they didn't automatically debunk Islam, I still wouldn't believe his heretical fanfiction written hundreds of years after the Gospel. I still wouldn't believe a religion that encourages it's followers to act like rabid pillaging animals, allows sex with children, rape, and it's followers to lie when it suits them among other things. I still wouldn't believe a book that says one fly wing has a disease and the other the cure I still wouldn't believe a religion which calls God the best of deceivers and says He deliberate disguised someone else to look like Jesus so people thought He died, when that would inevitably lead to the belief He rose from the dead when people spotted him after that, which in turn would inevitably lead to the "corruption" of His supposed original teachings. I still wouldn't believe a prophet who initially thought he was demon possessed, and used to have pagan goddesses in his religion before having a revelation that the previous revelation mentioning them was demonically inspired. I still wouldn't believe a prophet who plagiarized several different pagan and heretical Arabian folktales and practices. I still wouldn't believe a prophet who conveniently has a new revelation whenever he wants to do something like take his adopted son's wives or have more wives than Islam allows for anyone else. I still wouldn't believe a religion who's pattern of moral conduct for mankind was a murderous, depraved narcissistic warlord who had sex with a nine year old girl and got little boys to suck on his tongue. And I still wouldn't believe a prophet who died feeling like his aorta had been severed when his own book said that Allah would sever his aorta if he was a false prophet.

>>10426 >I still wouldn't believe a religion that allows sex with children You do believe a religion that allows that. The religion allows it even if you do not

>>10429 Israeli age of marriage was between 16 and 18 for girls.

>>10430 Unlikely. But also irrelevant because scripture itself (which alone is divine) does not contain an age of marriage

>>10431 Jewish law was and still is that no younger that 16 years of age can be married. if anybody would know itd be them

>>10432 So it's pharisaical nonsense? Couldn't care less

>>10431 >>10433 Bruh

>>10426 >So in summary, if the Gospel is the inspired and preserved word of God then Islam is false because it contradicts Islam, but if the Gospel isn't the inspired and preserved word of God then Islam is still false because it affirms the inspiration and preservation of the Gospel. Either way, Islam is false. In fact, if the Torah contradicts the Gospel or Quran then Islam is false. If any three of these books contradicts even a single other of the three than Islam is false. Allah is all-divine, all-powerful, and not in account to anyone or anything. He cannot be circumscribed in principle even by His revealed word, and especially not by a non-believer's exposition of His word. Therefore the Quran as the last revelation is the definitive religion of Ibrahim, Ismail, Ishaaq, Yaqub, Musa, and Isa alongside Muhammad. It abrogates all, if there be any actual, points of contradiction in what was communicated by prior prophets.

>>10449 >tl;dr Allah was mistaken You don't think very highly of Him.

>>10431 >>10433 Based and cunnypilled

>>10433 >No arguments As expected

>>10636 >implying Allah revealed it in the order that He did that the full truth may be understood, to show causes and effects. He is the Almighty, the All-Wise. Defy His will at your own expense: a truly painful torment awaits at the end of your days.

>>11000 >Implying Just stating the evident truth. Creating a logically incoherent, self-contradictory mess is a strange way of making the "full truth" understandable. Speaking of which, if I can't trust Allah when He says no one can change his eternal words, then how can I trust that the Quran hasn't been corrupted? How can I trust any of the numerous versions of Islamic scriptures? The doctrine of abrogation was quite clearly Muhammad's excuse whenever people called him out for making up new revelations on the fly that contradicted old ones, but even putting that aside, claiming no one can change your words only for your words to be changed, doesn't lead to any understanding besides Allah's word being unreliable. Your claim ultimately makes out Allah either lied or was unable to back up His claim, either way it's far from respectful. I guess you have no choice but to resort to that claim despite it's implications, went one revelation from Allah contradicts the others. You know, instead of the word of God being unreliable, maybe the book which calls God the "greatest of deceivers" is unreliable?

>>11014 Save your energy dude, he's already said he won't provide any arguments, and he's just repeating himself with all the "allah is this and that". This is the kind of guy who thinks "having the last say" means he wins, you're just going to go in circles.

>>11014 >deliberately uses infidel translations that substitute "deceiver" for "planner" You have no comprehension of Allah.

Debunking prophets part 1 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=opx8iDvR_nU Debunking prophets part 2 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fL4l9qOn_xM

>>11021 Yeah, that's a deliberate mistranslated. The word is makr translates to deceit, guile, doing one afoul, abominable and evil actions. The word is always used in the context of deceiving someone and scheming to mislead or harm. I notice you've only been picking one subset of the post and attempting to criticize that, you did it before with the child marriage. And you resort to deception or you've been deceived by your teacher, typical.

>>11051 Allah is Allah and will not be held to your pathetic disbelieving judgements. Your impious slanders are so weak that only by twisting the message of the Holy Quran can you find an ounce of substance for it. The only deceiver is you, who cannot help but spew blasphemies accusing others and almighty Allah Himself of deception. There is no point in debate with a lying, manipulative, hard-hearted sinner. You will be held accountable for your incredulity and your mockery in the judgement. The Quran prophesizes of men like you, as it always speaks the truth: >Say, ‘To whom belongs all that is in the heavens and earth?’ Say, ‘To Allah. He has taken it upon Himself to be merciful. He will certainly gather you on the Day of Resurrection, which is beyond all doubt. Those who deceive themselves will not believe. All that rests by night or by day belongs to Him. He is the All Hearing, the All Knowing.’ Say, ‘Shall I take for myself a protector other than Allah, the Creator of the heavens and the earth, who feeds but is not fed?’ Say, ‘I am commanded to be the first among you to devote myself to Him.’ Do not be one of the idolaters. Say, ‘I fear the punishment of a dreadful Day if I disobey my Lord. Allah will have been truly merciful to whoever is spared on that Day: that is the clearest triumph.’ >Who does greater wrong than someone who fabricates a lie against Allah or denies His revelation? Those who do such wrong will not prosper. When We gather them all together and say to the polytheists, ‘Where are those you claimed were partners with Allah?’ in their utter dismay they will only say, ‘By Allah, our Lord, we have not set up partners beside Him!’ See how they lie against themselves and how those they invented have deserted them. >If you could only see, when they are made to stand before the Fire, how they will say, ‘If only we could be sent back, we would not reject the revelations of our Lord, but be among the believers.’ No! The truth they used to hide will become all too clear to them. Even if they were brought back, they would only return to the very thing that was forbidden to them – they are such liars! They say, ‘There is nothing beyond our life in this world: we shall not be raised from the dead.’ If you could only see, when they are made to stand before their Lord, how He will say, ‘Is this not real?’ They will say, ‘Yes indeed, by our Lord.’ He will say, ‘Then taste the torment for having disbelieved.’ Lost indeed are those who deny the meeting with their Lord until, when the Hour suddenly arrives, they say, ‘Alas for us that we disregarded this!’ They will bear their burdens on their backs. How terrible those burdens will be! The life of this world is nothing but a game and a distraction; the Home in the Hereafter is best for those who are aware of Allah. Why will you not understand? The Holy Quran Sura 6:12-16, 21-24, 27-32

>>11068 So weak that you have no argument.

>>11069 So weak that you disbelieve.

>>11071 Yes, your attempts at apologetic for your religion are so weak that I disbelieve.

>>11077 You disbelieve because Allah has willed you to disbelieve, to play a fool who will be condemned to burn in the fire forever.

>>11079 >God wills me to burn in hell What a satanic religion.

>>11079 Ah, so that's why he tricked everyone into believing Jesus was crucified and resurrected.

>>11224 Well yeah. It calls God the best of deceivers and the context is Him disguising someone else as Jesus so they can get crucified in his place, so even putting aside the meaning of the original word and how it's used throughout the quran the context still clearly points towards deceit.

>>11230 Not even Calvin endorsed double predestination if I am recalling correctly. And that's saying something.

>>11234 You are recalling incorrectly. The bible endorses it in any case

>>11235 God desires for all to be saved. It’s right in the Bible. Stop preaching a false Gospel

>>11236 God made one vessel for mercy and one for destruction. And double predestination is not part of the gospel