JEFF💫

Jesus

@MasterMaliq The whole book

As a non Muslim, which verse in the Quran genuinely makes you uncomfortable or uneasy? Let’s talk about it.

@dawahxdialogues You just know the debate went bad for the Muslims lol

“the disciples of jesus were stupid” Any guesses which anti islam apologist(s) said this during our debate today? 😂😂

The new birth introduces you to an athmosphere of conflict and following Jesus will demand everything from you.

"Should I convert to Islam? Because they say if you die as a non-Muslim, you’ll go to hell. This line hits hard and scares many people. But when I put it under the microscope, something didn’t add up. I picked up the Qur’an like any reasonable person would and found this: “I am not something original among the messengers, nor do I know what will be done with me or with you. I only follow what is revealed to me...” — Quran 46:9 Muhammad himself said he doesn’t know his own final destination. Then I flipped to Jesus: “I know where I came from and where I am going.” — John 8:14 “I came from God and I am going back to God.” — John 13:3 “I am going to the Father.” — John 14:12 One says “I don’t know.” The other says “I know exactly where I’m going.” Follow who no road? Jesus has never failed me. He’s all I’ve got — and He has already assured me of heaven. What about you? Would you leave Jesus for anything? Drop your thoughts Like if you’re standing with Christ Repost to warn someone. #Jesus #Christianity #Faith #EternalLife"

Being an atheist in Nigeria is wild tho, Like bro, you only gat God.

The earliest Christians believed that Jesus could be present at the liturgical gatherings in different cities at the same time. We must ask Muslims: could you say, in hundreds of mosques today, "Our Lord Jesus, come, be with us in our Friday prayers today"? Note: The Aramaic invocation/prayer-formula "Maranatha" translates as "Our Lord, come!".

@Kryptotajeer Surah 79:30 does not describe the Earth as egg-shaped; it refers to the Earth being spread out like the flat expanse where an ostrich lays its eggs. Even if you chose to interpret it as egg-shaped, the Earth is an oblate spheroid and does not match the shape of an ostrich egg.

Let’s address this properly. The verse in Surah Adh-Dhariyat 51:47 clearly states “And the heaven We constructed with strength, and indeed, We are [its] expander” The plain reading of the text uses the word expander (Musi’un) in the present continuous sense indicating an ongoing expansion. This doesn’t require heavy exegesis to understand, the language is direct. When you heavily rely on Ibn Kathir’s classical interpretation where he saw it as God making the heavens vast and spacious like a roof without pillars, you’re missing the point. Ibn Kathir was a great scholar, but this is not a matter of aqeedah (creed) or fiqh (jurisprudence) where we expect classical scholars to have comprehensive timeless understanding. Those fields deal with theology and law grounded in revelation. Scientific descriptions of the cosmos however depend on empirical observation and discovery. In the 14th century no one including Ibn Kathir had access to telescopes, Hubble data, or knowledge of the Big Bang and cosmic expansion. He interpreted according to the limited cosmology of his time. That doesn’t lock in the verse’s meaning for all eras. The Quran is meant to be a timeless sign and its wording can align with later discoveries in ways earlier scholars couldn’t have anticipated. You based your entire refutation on classical tafsirs while sidelining the plain Arabic text itself. That approach feels selective. As for 51:48 “And the earth We spread out” yes, the Quran uses spread out (farashnaha) here, which fits a descriptive phenomenological style like how we still say “the sun rises” today. But the Quran also describes the earth with other terms elsewhere like made round or egg-shaped implications in some other places like 79:30, or its stable habitable form.Calling it a bed or carpet is clearly metaphorical for comfort and stability, not a literal flat object just as no one accuses modern science of literalism when it says sunrise. The author of the Qur’an knew how to use layered language. Additionally the Quran explicitly says the sun and moon each move in their own orbits like in Surah 21:33 and 36:40. This is not a random or primitive statement. A 7th century person operating with a simple flat earth or basic geocentric view wouldn’t naturally describe both the sun and moon as orbiting in precise courses. This reflects accurate astronomical insight beyond the era’s common knowledge. On 51:49 “And of everything We created pairs, that you may remember” you’re misunderstanding the scope. This isn’t narrowly about biological species only. The verse speaks to a general principle in creation: duality and complementarity. It covers broad categories like heavens and earth, night and day, male and female where applicable, land and sea, sweet and salty water, paradise and hell, positive and negative charges in physics, etc. Pointing to a few asexual organisms like some bacteria or lizards doesn’t debunk the wider generalization. It’s a sign for reflection on balance in the universe, not a strict biology textbook claim with zero exceptions. And for the Bible We’re not saying it has no accurate scientific statements, some verses show remarkable insight just as there are bunch of errors in it. The discussion is about the Quran containing specific descriptions that align strikingly with modern science in a context where such knowledge wasn’t mainstream. Finally Hamza Tzortzis has indeed critiqued flawed approaches to scientific miracles warning against overclaiming or forcing interpretations, but he has not rejected the concept outright. He still acknowledges certain verses as compatible with and pointing toward scientific truths.

@Kryptotajeer Surahs 21:33 and 36:40 contain another blunder. Surah 36:40 claims the sun is not permitted to overtake the moon, because Muhammad believed the moon chased the sun. This is further supported by Surah 91:1-2: ​(1) By the sun and its brightness (2) And the moon when it follows it

@Kryptotajeer I have studied every single scientific claim in the Quran, and they are all false. Not only does Surah 51:47 not talk about an expanding universe, but if you choose to interpret it that way, it directly contradicts Surah 41:12, where it says something completely ridiculous.

Believing in the authority of the Scripture 🙌🏽 Because we are committed to the scripture Sound doctrine still exist, Na you dey find snippet! Catch up with the full sermon on YouTube

Your Doctrine of God is very important - Apostle Gideon Odoma

KEY DISTINCTIONS The groanings of Rom 8:26 are WORDLESS, not SOUNDLESS. Those groanings are 'done' by the Holy Spirit through the believer in prayer, yes, through both those of us who speak in tongues & those of us who don't. Groanings are groanings. They're not 'tongues'

@theHonestOne121 @basedandbougie Lol There's a difference Elijah’s ascent is transphysical, it's a divine translation from earthly to heavenly reality Muhammad’s Night Journey is narrated more bodily it is described more like an actual journey undertaken by a human person.

@cryptojay02 @basedandbougie I mean Elijah went up to heaven on a flying donkey too 🤷🏽‍♂️

Jesus Christ is the one true God.

God bless you sir Apostle Gideon Odoma, Thank you so much sir. Many people here think i am a troll and all but i am just holding unto scripture If you are a heretic i will call you out for it and not greet you even in public

My brothers and sisters, some from Chloe’s household have informed me that there are quarrels among you. What I mean is this: One of you says, “I follow Paul”; another, “I follow Apollos”; another, “I follow Cephas”; still another, “I follow Christ.” Is Christ divided? Was Paul crucified for you? Were you baptized in the name of Paul? I thank God that I did not baptize any of you except Crispus and Gaius, so no one can say that you were baptized in my name. (Yes, I also baptized the household of Stephanas; beyond that, I don’t remember if I baptized anyone else.) For Christ did not send me to baptize, but to preach the gospel—not with wisdom and eloquence, lest the cross of Christ be emptied of its power. ~1 Corinthians 1:11-17

@YusufAsunmogejo No heaven for black man Surah Ali 'Imran (3:106) "On the Day faces will turn white and faces will turn black. As for those whose FACES TURN BLACK, 'Did you disbelieve after your belief? Then taste the punishment for what you used to reject.'" x.com/i/status/20579…

I am utterly amazed at how this self-acclaimed pastor speaks ignorance with confidence. Unfortunately, the people he is speaking to are just lapping it up. I will not even bother quoting a single Islamic text or book to dismantle this, because you do not need theology to fight blatant lies; you just need standard, neutral world history. If you look at mainstream, secular Western scholarship, specifically the landmark academic volume titled: “The African Diaspora in the Mediterranean Lands of Islam” by Princeton historian Professor John Hunwick, the pastor’s claim that Islam teaches Black people cannot go to heaven is exposed as a complete fabrication. Secular historians have meticulously documented that from the birth of the Islamic civilization, spiritual equality regardless of race was a foundational, revolutionary pillar of the movement. This proves that his opening premise is built on nothing but thin air. Moving to his next claim, the pastor tries to rewrite the biography of Bilal ibn Rabah. Ignorantly, he claims he was a slave forced into the religion by Muslims. However, standard historical textbooks completely shatter this narrative. According to mainstream historical records regarding the seventh-century Near East documented by Dr. H.A.R. Gibb in the Encyclopedia of Islam, Bilal was an enslaved African owned by a pagan, polytheistic Arab elite named “Umayyah ibn Khalaf.” As documented by independent historians, Bilal chose to accept the faith willingly while still in bondage, enduring brutal public torture from his pagan master who tried to force him to renounce his monotheistic beliefs. It was the early companions of the Prophet (peace be upon him) who stepped in and bought his freedom for an exorbitant price to save his life. Therefore, to claim he was forced into a religion by the very people who purchased his freedom is a spectacular inversion of basic historical facts. Again, his rant about Bilal being made the caller to prayer strictly because he was a slave and not out of favor shows a hilarious ignorance of ancient sociology. In the ancient world, climbing to the top of a city's holiest sanctuary to summon the entire population to worship was an immense, highly coveted public honor. Secular researchers noted that selecting a liberated Black man to perform this duty in a highly prejudiced, aristocratic society was a deliberate, public execution of racial hierarchy. To top it off, his wild story about Bilal begging to be freed only to be kept a slave is an absolute invention with zero citation in any historical record. In fact, Bilal lived out his life as a highly respected leader, serving as a chief administrator and treasurer of the early state as a free, honored hero. Finally, the pastor throws around the usual Sunday school buzzword “Taqiyya”. According to them, it means lying to spread a message. In fact, don’t be surprised in the CS when they say what I am doing is also Taqiyyah. lol 😂 They get their information from sketchy internet forums rather than peer-reviewed literature. If you open any standard textbook on global religion or sociology, such as the Encyclopedia of Religion edited by Mircea Eliade, you will find that the concept is a highly specific legal minority concession allowing a person to conceal their faith strictly under direct threat of death or extreme persecution. It is identical to how a Jewish person would hide their identity during the Holocaust to survive. This man is not teaching history or theology; he is practicing desperate historical revisionism to scare his congregation. Unfortunately for him, mainstream academia completely paralyzes his entire argument. Dear Muslims, be joyous, you are upon the Truth. Allah knows best.

@sa123453d @Omahrah @omar_dddg Thank you very much for proving the quran made a very huge blunder.

@sa123453d @Omahrah @omar_dddg Pharoah is historically a title attributed to the sovereign of Egypt But the author of the quran seems ignorant of this and thought it was the personal name of the sovereign at Moses time. The Qur'an called him YA FAR'AWN numerous times

So the skeptic here claims that the Quran plagiarised stories from the Bible. Yet somehow still got the story wrong, even though most academics are shocked at the levels of knowledge the Prophet had of Christian and Jewish traditions. Now, here’s the fascinating bit, in the story of Joseph it somehow changed the title of the sovereign from Pharaoh, as in the Bible, to King. The Quran also somehow makes a precise and consistent distinction in its use of titles for Egyptian rulers that happens to align with modern Egyptological findings. When narrating the story of Joseph, it refers to the Egyptian sovereign as Malik (King), but when narrating the story of Moses, it uses Fir'awn (Pharaoh). How did it know? Why did the Arab man in the small village make that distinction? Why did he take that risk? The interesting thing, is this, distinction is historically very accurate: the title "Pharaoh" only came into use as a personal designation for the Egyptian ruler during the New Kingdom period (from around the 18th Dynasty, ~1550 BCE onwards), which corresponds to Moses's era but postdates Joseph's . The Bible, by contrast, applies "Pharaoh" anachronistically to both. What makes this remarkable is that Muhammad's (pbuh) contemporaries, Arabian Jews and Christians, derived their knowledge of these narratives from biblical tradition, which makes the same anachronistic error throughout. Had Muhammad, peace be upon him, simply borrowed from those sources, we would expect him to reproduce the same mistake. Instead, the Quran corrects it consistently, using a distinction that was only recoverable through 19th century Egyptological research into hieroglyphics. Explain..

@omar_dddg The Qur'an uses pharoah as the proper name of the Egyptian king, which is a massive historical error.

@cryptojay02 Yet it never calls Pharoah a king lol