.

@SplSomeOne @humanitarian380 @apostateluffy no he didnt, js look at the original tweet from korra

@dabke036 @humanitarian380 @apostateluffy Forget Hadith. Your creator of universe, Allah. also said the same stupid thing in Quran. Matches exactly what Mohammad thought about sun setting place. Proves that Allah is the fake id of Mohammad

You Prophet was talking literally and you are playing metaphor game👇

@enesovat22 How many gods died for my sins bro

Muslims why is it so hard to accept that someone died for your sins? Y’all are so afraid of accepting free gifts 🤦‍♂️

@ApoloGeniuss @korrathetaymi She meant omnipresent that was pretty clear from how she brought it, and i think she already clarified it once. other than that there is no problem with what she said other than that elijah was js using buzzwords.

MUSLIMS, always remember y'all's face of Dawah @korrathetaymi said: "Allah is not all powerful" (Omnipotent) "Allah changes" (Mutable) "Allah exists within Time" (Temporal) "Allah is Limited" (Spatial) Basically y'all MUSLIMS believe in a created dude😭💀

@JeromeChukwuwem "Did Moses Speak to God or to the angel Gabriel?" demonstrate how they're mutually exclusive

"Did Moses Speak to God or to the angel Gabriel?" - GodLogic "tHERE wErE aNgElS in the VICINITY" - Itachi's Shawty

@humanitarian380 @apostateluffy js stop speaking honestly, you dk what ur talking about

@dabke036 @apostateluffy Sahih hadith are now weak?

@moloking500 @dawahxdialogues @heisgabe_ this gotta be the dumbest comment i've ever seen, calling someone blessed is shirk. 🤣🤣🤣🤣

@dawahxdialogues @heisgabe_ So Allah and the angels are blessed , that’s shirk

watch as nologic contradicts himself and failing to keep track of his own “arguments”. sad state of christian apologetics.

@ApoloGeniuss r u slow? the quran is not the word of muhammad pbuh. even in a narration format where Allah narrates the words of muhammad pbuh, that barely happens ever in the quran. the gospels are a detailed account of jesus' sayings, deeds, and teachings so you would expect his words there.

Same Challenge: Find one verse where Mohammed explicitly says, "I am the prophet of Allah" Not being referenced. Not the Hadith. Not tradition. Just Mohammed's direct words. Chapter. Verse. I'll wait.

@Bernard50394137 @David_Y3 yeah u just ignored my response lol, i js showed how he's not using it in that sense lmao

@dabke036 @David_Y3 Title first and the last is referring to the phrase that God uses in OT. iSAIAH 41:4, 44:6, 48:12... So by saying "I am the first and the last" in revelation, Jesus is confirming and that He is God.

Jesus never said, "I am GOD."

@SavyoXy @muslimorthodoxy @Strawhatt11 @ModernDayDebate so according to the first guy he's boycotting because he wasnt invited, now according to you he's boycotting because he WAS invited. you genuinely cant win with you guys

@muslimorthodoxy @Strawhatt11 @ModernDayDebate So you're boycotting because you're not capable of debating, got it 🤣🤣🤣🤣

James Kunz, @ModernDayDebate the founder & host of Modern Day Debate has been losing his mind on Twitter because we are boycotting his absurd platform. I hereby declare that NO prominent Muslims will debate on your platform anymore. You are boycotted! You have publicly blasphemed, insulted the prophet, shown bias to Christians, and we simply have better hosts. Bye, bye Kunz! You lost!

@Cccpp916 @DrMaleekk "we need you" 😭😭🥀💔

@DrMaleekk Maybe because he's still Muslim and trying to hold on but yall are making it too hard for him with your vile behaviour and threats etc? please Maleek keep being more vile it's drawing more Muslims away from Islam. so please don't stop bro. we need you

Muslims, do u see the Pauline taqiyya? This is why I go after GodLogic and his crew. “Ibrahim Mohamoud” wants to leave Islam apparently—475 likes. Powerful debate, wow. So you would think… Check who he’s subbed to: Christian anti-Islam channels. Cope. And we will keep exposin

@ZombieScroller @Hanbali2024 @muslimorthodoxy @GodLogic_GL @mohammed_hijab and thats also exactly the reason why GL has been dodging him since forever

@Hanbali2024 @muslimorthodoxy @GodLogic_GL @mohammed_hijab This is why @muslimorthodoxy was adamant on bringing that fraud to expose his ignorance.

So @GodLogic_GL was talking about Leibniz’s law, relative identity, and matters with regards to theories of persistence when he talked to @mohammed_hijab right? Please tell me why nologic doesn’t know what a sortal even is? It’s pretty clear he was getting help from behind the scenes. Any Christian who can defend how logic doesn’t know what a sortal is yet speaks about RI? @Fearless__Truth thinks red is a sortal, doesn’t know what validity and soundness is. Please Christians, convince me these guys aren’t complete larp retards? @muslimorthodoxy

@enesovat22 they used to seek refuge behind him in battle when the battle got fierce. he would do it in a heart beat

Jesus died for the kuffar. Would Muhammad even die for his companions?

@Daniel5yearsago @enesovat22 omg ur so stupid, he's talking about him having intimacy with different wifes but making ghusl only once at the end.

@enesovat22 Muhammed was busy having orgy.

@AhmedSheriffdin @SaintTeemo we dont believe in materialism tho

@dabke036 @SaintTeemo Exactly, that’s what I was telling you, with a materialist ontology, to exist=spatial.

Ibn Taymiyya’s Ontological Pairs: A Hidden Linguistic and Theological Fault Line In IT works and in classical metaphysics and Islamic theology, the boundaries separating the Divine from creation are frequently mapped across four core metaphysical axes. A close reading of Ibn Taymiyya’s ontology reveals however a striking linguistic and logical asymmetry. The text sets up four specific contrasting pairs to differentiate God from the universe (pic1): - Necessity vs. Contingency - Perfection vs. Deficiency - Indestructibility vs. Destructibility - Eternality vs. Temporality Notice the structural nature of the first three axes. They rely entirely on direct opposites. They do not attempt to positively define or quantify the infinite; rather, they conceptualize the Divine purely by negating a creaturely limitation. Necessary is functionally "not-contingent." Perfect is conceptually "not-deficient." Indestructible is literally "not-destructible." By the internal logic of this linguistic framework, the fourth axis should naturally follow the exact same pattern: Atemporal vs. Temporal. This would define God as simply "not-temporal," completely transcendent of the constraints of time. Instead of maintaining this consistency, the framework shifts to "Eternality vs. Temporality." 🧐In the Taymiyyan worldview, this is a deliberate choice. Ibn Taymiyya rejects true atemporality (timelessness) because he views a static, timeless God as an abstract impossibility that cannot actively perform actions. He defines eternity not as the absence of time, but as uncreated, infinite duration (sempiternality). 📿An Ash'ari theologian would immediately spot this asymmetry and reject it. To the Ash'ari, temporality is only of creatures. By defining the Divine axis as "eternal duration" rather than "atemporal transcendence," you inadvertently introduce temporal sequence into the Divine Essence. ♦️By forcing a positive statement about duration onto a list otherwise built entirely on defensive negations, the internal consistency of the ontology breaks down. For a truly transcendent theology, the contrast must remain Atemporal vs. Temporal.

@AhmedSheriffdin @SaintTeemo I dont know of any concrete existence that exists nowhere ngl. not saying its a an analytic truth but its most likely the case that being a concrete existence entails being somewhere.

@dabke036 @SaintTeemo So you believe a being can have existence without being spatial and not mental?

@AhmedSheriffdin @SaintTeemo first of all that has nothing to do with what i just said. secondly i dont believe exist=spatial. things can exist abstractly, like numbers or concepts for example. they're not spatial but they're mind dependent existences.

@dabke036 @SaintTeemo You believe exist=spatial, so it’s tautology for you, even at that existence is a judgement, unlike spatial extension

@AhmedSheriffdin @SaintTeemo yeah im saying how does that blur creator-creature distinction. you could say God exists and creatures exist so now you're likening God to creation.

@dabke036 @SaintTeemo No, they believe God and creatures are both spatiotemporal

@AhmedSheriffdin @SaintTeemo you think spatiotemporality is the creator-creature distinction?? 🤣🤣🤣

Yeah, spatiotemporality is what bridges the distinction between God and creatures, Taymi Salafis have a materialist/physicalist ontology. This is exactly what the post shows, if he were consistent like the other pairings, it would mean denying temporality, which is why he didn’t.

@cnich0306 @muslimorthodoxy because he says "as for ishmael i have heard you" contextually that would mean the meaning of "great nation" that moses talks about in deuteronomy. i mean it can even work without deuteronomy i just highlighted it because it explicates great nation in that way. (2/2)

@dabke036 @muslimorthodoxy So, you're saying: Genesis 17: Ishmael will become a "great nation." Deuteronomy 4: Israel is called a "great nation" because it has God's law. Therefore, "great nation" in Genesis must mean a nation with divine law. Islam has divine law. Therefore Genesis predicts Islam. ?

He died after fulfilling the trust given to him from the heavens above, without leaving any inheritance behind, having gathered the divided tribes of Arabia into a nation that ruled the entire world. They went on to control more land in 70 years than the Roman Empire did in 800 years. They established justice & God’s sovereignty between the people and amongst themselves. They brought the nations to know and worship One God, disassociating from their idols and espousing pure monotheism. He is the best of God’s creation, the finality of the prophets and messenger, he who is more beautiful than the moon on a clear night. We miss you O Messenger of Allah. Oh Allah we ask you the companionship of your beloved in your paradise.