TruthDefender1914

Is Hell really a place of eternal torment? What does the Bible actually say? When did the Catholic & Orthodox Churches make it official doctrine? Let’s look at Scripture, early church writings, & history 👇

@PSU_Lion_commit @Kalshi Longing the market 😁

@Kalshi brrrrrrt

JUST IN: Trump says Iran deal is to be signed tomorrow and the Strait of Hormuz will be "open to all"

@birdchadlouis Sounds like AI slop

To explain how Jesus did not know the day or the hour of his return (Matt. 24:36), you will often hear some version of this answer: “In Jewish tradition, after betrothal, the groom would return to his father’s house to prepare a bridal chamber for his bride. He would work on it until it was ready, but only the father could decide when the preparations were complete. Once the father approved, he would tell his son to go and fetch the bride. So that only the father knew the exact day and hour of the wedding.” I have been unable to find a single ancient Jewish source that supports this popular explanation. None. It appears to be a modern Christian construction rather than a documented Jewish tradition. If you have used this explanation, I'm sure it was meant sincerely. But please stop. There is no need to turn to fabricated traditions (which always seem a bit too “neat and tidy,” don’t they?) to explain this verse when we have clear teachings in the Bible that explain it. Though fully divine, Jesus did not always fully exercise the divine powers and knowledge that he possessed as the eternal Son, coequal with the Father and the Holy Spirit. He could have turned stones into bread, but chose hunger. He could have wiped out his enemies, but chose to die for them. Luke tells us that Jesus “increased in wisdom and in stature” (Luke 2:52). Paul put it this way: Jesus “humbled himself” (Phil. 2:8). This refers to the time he spent on earth, during which he lived as we do. He experienced hunger, thirst, pain, and death. He “learned obedience” (Heb. 5:8). He willingly grew, learned, and lived within the limitations of human life. This he did while remaining fully divine. “I and the Father are one,” Jesus says (John 10:30). John writes, “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God” (John 1:1). Thomas says to Jesus, “My Lord and my God!” (John 20:28). In the incarnation, the Son did not cease to be omniscient, but he did choose not always to make full use of the divine knowledge that was his. That’s what he’s expressing in Matthew 24:36. _____ We read Matthew 24 today in Bible in One Year: 1517.org/oneyear

Unitarians worship The God of the Bible, YHWH. The same God Jesus called his God. Therefore we are Christian and you’re wrong. We’re not your version of Christian, you know the one that came 400-500 years after biblical Christianity. Unitarians are closer to primitive 1st century Christianity than post biblical constantinopolitan Christianity from the 4th century.

@JLuttje Where does scripture say that? 🤔

Unitarians are not Christians.

If Jesus is eternal in the sense of having no beginning, then verses like these become very difficult to explain: Revelation 3:14 “The beginning of the creation by God.” Colossians 1:15 “The firstborn of all creation.” Proverbs 8:22-28 “Jehovah produced me as the beginning of his way, the earliest of his achievements of long ago.” Trinitarians often dismiss Proverbs 8 as merely a personification of wisdom, but that creates its own problem. Wisdom is one of God’s eternal attributes. If Proverbs 8 is speaking of God’s literal wisdom, then how can God’s wisdom be “produced,” “brought forth,” or become “the beginning of His way”? That would imply there was a time when God lacked wisdom, which is absurd. The passage makes far more sense if it is referring prophetically to God’s first and only direct creation—His prehuman Son, the one who was later sent to earth as Jesus Christ. This harmonizes with Revelation 3:14, Colossians 1:15, John 6:38, and John 17:5, all of which teach Christ’s preexistence while still distinguishing him from the only true God, his Father. The Bible repeatedly teaches that Jesus existed before the universe. What it never explicitly says is that Jesus had no beginning. That distinction matters.

@Defender1914 @brentmoney John 8:58 Jesus (the son) was always there..no beginning..no end..

🚨 Muslims confronted us yesterday at the Sharia-Free Texas booth 🚨 Here’s about 5 minutes of the 40+ minute conversation.

You realize how ridiculous this argument sounds coming from a Muslim, Nayeem? You dismiss Paul as a fraud because he didn’t personally walk with Jesus during his earthly ministry, yet you expect everyone to believe that 600 years later an illiterate man in a cave received a revelation from the angel Gabriel that contradicted the teachings of Jesus and his apostles. According to the Islamic sources, Muhammad was terrified by the experience, thought something evil had happened to him, and had to be reassured afterward. That’s a far cry from the confidence with which the biblical prophets recognized God’s backing. The Bible repeatedly warns that false revelations can come through spirits masquerading as divine messengers. 2 Corinthians 11:14 “Satan himself keeps disguising himself as an angel of light.” Galatians 1:8 “Even if we or an angel out of heaven were to declare to you as good news something beyond the good news we declared to you, let him be accursed.” Paul’s message was consistent with the death, resurrection, and Messiahship of Jesus Christ. The Qur’an arrives six centuries later denying core elements of that message. At some point you have to decide which is more likely: that the apostles, eyewitnesses, and first-century Christians got it wrong, or that a later revelation contradicting them should be accepted without question. I’m done going in circles. You’re entitled to your beliefs, but let’s not pretend this standard is being applied consistently.

@Defender1914 @KingDawah1 Your own book can’t keep its fabrications consistent. Why should anyone trust a man who based his entire authority on a contradictory hallucination, especially when he never even met the living Jesus?

CHRISTIANS YOU CAN’T DEAL WITH THE MUSTARD SEED DILEMMA!

Paul is not admitting he lied. He’s responding to an accusation. Keep reading: Romans 3:8 “And why not say… just as we are being falsely accused…” Paul explicitly says he is being falsely accused. That’s like saying, “If I’m such a thief, why haven’t I been arrested?” and someone claiming you just confessed to theft. Paul wasn’t a spy. He gave up his status as a Pharisee and spent the rest of his life being beaten, imprisoned, shipwrecked, persecuted, and eventually martyred for preaching Christ. Romans 3:7 isn’t a confession it’s Paul refuting slander. You wouldn’t know that because you don’t know anything about the Bible you’ve never read it you just regurgitate stuff from your favorite dawahgandists. Be more original habibi.

@Defender1914 @KingDawah1 You are blindly worshiping the words of an ex-Pharisee spy who admitted himself, 'For if the truth of God hath more abounded through my lie unto his glory; why yet am I also judged as a sinner?' (Romans 3:7)

Your argument only works against Trinitarians. As one of Jehovah’s Witnesses, I don’t believe Jesus is Almighty God I believe only the Father is God. Which is exactly what Paul taught by the way “There is only one God, the Father” — 1 Corinthians 8:6 But even setting that aside, you’ve misunderstood the point of the illustration. Jesus was using a common agricultural example familiar to his audience. The context is a man sowing seed in his field. Nobody listening to Jesus was planting orchid seeds in their vegetable gardens. Ironically, if you’re going to demand modern scientific precision from every ancient figure of speech, then you’d have to apply that same standard to the Qur’an when it speaks of the sun setting in a muddy spring, mountains preventing earthquakes, stars being missiles against devils, and other passages that Muslims routinely explain according to context and intended meaning. The mustard seed illustration succeeds because it communicates the point Jesus intended which is that something that starts very small can grow into something unexpectedly large.

@Defender1914 @KingDawah1 If Jesus is God, he created the universe. A Creator knows about microscopic orchid seeds. To claim God had to use a scientific falsehood just because first-century peasants were uneducated means your God is bound by human ignorance

Paul didn’t become a Christian for money, power, comfort, or social status the scriptures show the exact opposite of what you’re claiming. He actually gave all of those things up. He was imprisoned, beaten, flogged, stoned, shipwrecked, repeatedly threatened, conspired against, and ultimately martyred for his faith in Christ. He went from being a respected Pharisee with status and influence to becoming one of the most persecuted men of his time. 2 Corinthians 11:24-27 records beatings, imprisonments, shipwrecks, hunger, thirst, and exposure. Acts 23:12-13 records a conspiracy to kill him. Philippians 3:5-8 shows that he gave up his former prestige and privileges for Christ. The idea that Paul invented Christianity for personal gain is laughable. The man spent decades suffering for what he preached. At some point you have to ask yourself: does this sound like a fraud seeking power and wealth, or a man who genuinely believed he had encountered the resurrected Christ? You don’t know much about Paul if you think his life was one of comfort, privilege, or personal benefit after becoming a Christian.

@Defender1914 @KingDawah1 Paul is Allah for Christians who, previously a Roman spy, persecuted real Christians for personal gain as the Saul the pharisee, before his supposedly fraudulent, sudden enlightenment by Jesus. Paul was a sinful guy who never met Jesus in person but made Jews deviate from Judaism

Was man created from clay, dust, water, blood clot, or nothing? Clay Qur’an 15:26 — “And We did certainly create man out of clay from an altered black mud.” Dust Qur’an 3:59 — “Indeed, the example of Jesus to Allah is like that of Adam. He created Him from dust; then He said to him, ‘Be,’ and he was.” Water Qur’an 21:30 — “And We made from water every living thing. Then will they not believe?” Qur’an 25:54 — “And it is He who has created from water a human being.” Clot Qur’an 96:2 — “Created man from a clinging clot.” Nothing Qur’an 19:67 — “Does man not remember that We created him before, while he was nothing?” Your prophet Muhammad couldn’t even figure out if God made man from Clot of Blood, Dust, Water or nothing so which one is it ? Don’t act like a scholar unless you’re ready for your world view to be deconstructed.

You guys throw around “low IQ” arguments and then get upset when someone asks for evidence. If you’re claiming the Bible is corrupted, produce the evidence. So instead of insults, provide the proof. If the evidence is as overwhelming as you claim, it should be easy to demonstrate. Zero evidence provided except an out of context Tik Tok style video it’s pathetic and embarrassing tbh.

Imagine being so empty headed that you think a 20 second video is a scholarly argument against the authenticity of the Bible. I’ve met some stupid people in my life but this is far beyond moronic you guys are just plebs online you’re not scholars or have any authority to speak on the matter so take a seat habibi respectfully you have no clue what you’re talking about. Unless you know Greek, Hebrew or textural criticism respectfully just be quiet.

@Defender1914 @KingDawah1 Retarrd ai response again. Without lies Christianity dies

You’re talking out of your teeth. Other than known textual variants—which are overwhelmingly spelling differences, copyist errors, word order changes, and other minor issues—there is no evidence that the Bible’s core message has been corrupted. The Dead Sea Scrolls confirmed that the text of Isaiah remained remarkably stable for over a thousand years. In many cases, the differences are little more than spelling variations. You don’t have “hundreds of ways” to prove corruption. If you did, biblical scholars would’ve abandoned the Bible long ago. Instead, what we see is the opposite: thousands of manuscripts, thousands of quotations by early Christian writers, and a text that has survived more scrutiny than any other ancient document in history. The reality is that you’re just a guy on X making grand claims without evidence. Scholars have spent lifetimes studying textual criticism, manuscript traditions, Hebrew, Greek, archaeology, and church history. So respectfully, let the scholars do their job, buddy. Take a seat.

@Defender1914 @KingDawah1 I have a hundred ways to prove that the Bible has undergone textual alterations, ranging from theological contradictions to grammatical errors. Beyond these textual discrepancies, historical analysis reveals significant changes made during centuries of copying and translation

The Flood wasn’t God randomly killing people for being imperfect. According to the biblical account, rebellious angels abandoned their heavenly position, came to earth, took human wives, and produced the Nephilim violent hybrid offspring that helped corrupt the earth. Violence, immorality, and wickedness became so widespread that the earth was described as ruined in God’s sight. As for Sodom, people often talk about God’s judgment while ignoring how depraved the city had become. When the angels visited Lot, the men of the city surrounded the house and demanded that Lot hand over the visitors so they could sexually assault them. The account describes the crowd as including both young and old. The city had become notorious for sexual immorality, violence, and complete disregard for what was right. The question isn’t whether God was unjust for judging them. The question is how long should a just God allow violence, depravity, oppression, and corruption to continue before acting? People complain when God judges wickedness, but they would also complain if He stood by and did nothing while evil flourished. A God who never judges evil isn’t loving toward the victims of that evil. Similarly, Jehovah God will soon judge mankind once again. The Flood, Sodom and Gomorrah, and the plagues of Egypt serve as reminders that God does not tolerate wickedness forever. According to the Bible, Jesus Christ has been appointed by Jehovah as King and Judge. He will bring an end to false religion, corrupt human governments, and all those who knowingly oppose God’s sovereignty and refuse to support His Kingdom. Many people mock the idea of divine judgment today, just as people did in Noah’s day. But the fact that judgment has not yet arrived is not evidence that it never will. It is evidence of God’s patience. The coming judgment will be the final cleansing of the earth from wickedness so that God’s will can be done on earth as it is in heaven. The question is not whether Jehovah has the right to judge. The question is whether we will be found supporting His Kingdom when that day arrives.

@MasterMaliq Might want to delete this post, brother. It’s embarrassing. I’m not even a Muslim, and even I know the Qur’an speaks about the Flood, Sodom and Gomorrah, the plagues upon Egypt, Pharaoh being drowned, and the destruction of entire nations as acts of divine judgment. I respect Muslims, and as someone who is not a Trinitarian, we probably have more common ground than many people realize. I believe that Jehovah, the Father, is the only true God, and that Jesus Christ is not Almighty God but rather God’s unique, only-begotten Son and the promised Messiah. But let’s stop pretending the Qur’an doesn’t contain accounts of judgment and destruction. It absolutely does. The Flood? The Qur’an records it. Sodom and Gomorrah? The Qur’an records it. The plagues upon Egypt? The Qur’an records them. Pharaoh drowning in the sea? The Qur’an records it. Entire cities and nations being destroyed for wickedness? The Qur’an records that too. You don’t have to agree with the Bible, but at least represent your own sources accurately. This argument falls apart the moment someone actually opens the Qur’an and reads it.

Christians say Jesus is God. Agreed. So they should also agree the same Jesus they worship is the one associated with flooding the earth, destroying cities, sending plagues, killing firstborns, and wiping out nations. Same Jesus, right? So why does the New Testament Jesus look completely different, calm, forgiving, and peaceful? What changed? Was justice different back then… or is it our interpretation of God that shifts across scripture? Because the contrast is massive. And even the God of the Qur’an is consistently described with justice and mercy, without that kind of extreme shift in tone.

No they did not, dude. You’re making the early writers sound way more Nicene than they actually were. Tertullian literally said there was a time when the Son was not. He wrote that there was a time when neither sin nor the Son existed with God. (New Advent⁠) Justin Martyr spoke of Christ as “another God and Lord” who is subject to the Maker of all things, while saying there is no God above the Maker. That is not co-equal Trinitarianism. (Christianity Stack Exchange⁠) Even Tertullian’s own theology distinguished the Father as greater than the Son, which is not later Nicene co-equality. So stop pretending the early writers all taught the fully developed Trinity doctrine of later creeds. At best, many of them held developing Logos theology, subordinationist views, or language that later Trinitarians tried to reinterpret. That is exactly the point: the Bible and the earliest Christian writers did not teach the post-biblical Trinity the way Nicaea and later councils formulated it.

@michal_lw7 @Oluwadaniel_0 You did not understand what I meant by "progressive". Not progressively established, but progressively REVEALED. For instance, Justin and all of these guys affirmed that God was triune yet they did not get the complete picture. Scriptures reveal that Christ *MORE*

Nicene Creed was written in 325AD by a council called by Emperor Constantine a Roman Emperor, not an apostle, not a prophet.

I do believe the Bible, but you’re not listening to what I’m actually saying, Ahmed. You’re forcing a Trinitarian presupposition onto my position instead of taking the time to understand what I believe. I’ve already explained that when I say the Word was “a god” or “divine” in John 1:1, I’m using the term in a qualitative sense, not an identity sense. The Word is not the same God that he was with. John explicitly distinguishes the two. My position is not that Jesus is a second Almighty God, nor that he is a deity to be worshipped alongside the Father. Rather, the Word possesses a divine or godlike nature while remaining distinct from the one true God. There is only one true God: the Father, Jehovah the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. John 17:3 “This means everlasting life, their coming to know you, the only true God, and the one whom you sent, Jesus Christ.” Jesus is not Jehovah God. He is not the same being, the same person, or the same individual as Jehovah. John 20:17 “I am ascending to my Father and your Father and to my God and your God.” John 14:28 “The Father is greater than I am.” 1 Corinthians 11:3 “The head of the Christ is God.” So before arguing against the Trinity, realize that you’re not speaking to a Trinitarian. I reject the post-biblical doctrine of the Trinity entirely. You’re trying to refute a position I don’t hold.

@Defender1914 @muslimorthodoxy But u believe in the Bible Don't you?

Christians genuinely get flabbergasted when they realize that John’s gospel teaches a middle-platonic view of multiple deities! The One, highest ineffable God, and the divine intermediary “The Logos” or “The Intellect” John 1:1 “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was god”

@Ahmadel60295145 @muslimorthodoxy Can you not read ? I’m not trinitarian.

@Defender1914 @muslimorthodoxy Why are u trying to deny ur belief? Don't u believe that the word was with God and the word was god? Jesus is the word and the word was Jesus and the word is god meaning Jesus was god and the word was with God meaning Jesus was with God therefore god (Jesus) with with God.