Reasoned Islam

Do Matthew & Luke contradict each other? #maklelan3297 youtu.be/MgFCyGaj6RU

@enesovat22 Is this serious? 😂😂

This is Jesus’ genealogy from Adam to Noah translated 🤯 Adam: Man Seth: Appointed Enosh: Mortal Kenan: Sorrow Mahalalel: The Blessed God Jared: Shall come down Enoch: Teaching Methuselah: His death shall bring Lamech The despairing Noah: Comfort, Rest

@AEnjoyer447201 Not really. If you see as much as evangelicals misrepresent his scholarship perfectly makes sense. He, for them, is someone akin to Michael F. Bird. Of course he is not.

You in no way called Hurtado “Christian apologists fav scholar” 💀💀💀 that’s a ridiculous statement

Unlike many Christian apologists, I represent mainstream scholarship accurately. Much more on this topic in my book coming soon, in shaa Allah. Christian apologists' fan favorite scholar, Larry Hurtado, writes, "In light of the sorts of proposals I have been reviewing I must emphasize that in considering whether there are precedents for the worship of Jesus it is not enough to point to literary scenes where this or that figure is given obeisance. The early Christian innovation I have alleged was not to write texts in which Jesus was pictured in some imaginary scene receiving obeisance. The innovation was in modifying more characteristic Jewish cultic practice by accommodating Jesus into their devotional pattern, joining him with God as a recipient of their cultic devotion. What we require is another group of devout adherents to the Jewish biblical tradition in the second temple period who freely and programmatically incorporated a second figure along with God as recipient of their cultic devotion comparable to what early Christian groups did with Jesus. In the ten years since I gave my judgment that we have no evidence of such a group and that the early Christian “binitarian” pattern of devotion seems to be a novel innovation in Roman-era Jewish religious practice, no one has in fact been able to show this judgment to have been incorrect." People like William Lane Craig who are aware of Hurtado's work are just as surprised as I am in the way that Christian apologists appeal to the two powers in heaven literature. Craig writes, "I am astonished that Branson considers Jewish “Binitarianism” or the theology of “two powers in heaven” to be “the ground out of which Trinitarianism sprang” and the Theophanies Problem to be “the most central motivation for both the Jewish and the Christian versions of this theology…Jewish belief in intermediate figures, like exalted patriarchs and principal angels, or in personifications of divine attributes, like Wisdom, were part of what Larry Hurtado calls the “forces and factors” contributing to the background of the worship of Jesus in the early Church, but do not suffice to explain it. As a result of his extensive research, Hurtado concluded, “Although there were conceptual resources in ancient Jewish tradition that were likely drawn upon by earliest believers, there was not really a full analogy or precedent for the intensity and nature of the cultic expressions of devotion to Jesus.” In particular, the Jewish theology of two powers in heaven is a later development of rabbinic Judaism, which may even have reference to the beliefs of Jewish Christians. “None of the various ‘chief agent’ figures in second-temple Jewish texts gives us a full precedent or analogy for the more thoroughgoing way that the exalted Jesus was linked with God in early Christian devotion, and neither individually nor collectively do they represent a major mutation in ancient Jewish monotheism comparable to the cultic veneration of the exalted Jesus.”…He explains, “Moreover, the high status of Jesus in earliest beliefs and devotional practice seems to represent a novel development in the Jewish religious matrix in which it first appeared. Although (as I contend) early notions of Jesus’ status vis-à-vis God drew upon traditions about various ‘chief agent’ figures in ancient Jewish tradition, nevertheless, the Jesus-devotion reflected already in Paul’s letters comprises a significant further development, a novel ‘mutation.’…Indeed, as Jewish monotheism itself bears witness, one need not arm a plurality of divine persons at all in order to resolve the Theophanies Problem. One might appeal to a principal angel or another ersatz figure for God who appears to people in such experiences…" youtube.com/live/PxA-j2NwK…

The Angel of the Lord is NOT Yahweh! The most popular argument that Christians will use to prove the trinity in the Old Testament is by using the mysterious figure deemed the “Angel of the LORD”, whom they claim is the Son of God, Jesus Christ. I will split this section into two subsections, firstly, proof the Angel CANNOT be God, and then secondly refuting all of the claims that he IS God. Proof the angel cannot be God: The verses I would like to highlight is below: “Then He said, “Hear now My words: If there is a prophet among you, I, the Lord, make Myself known to him in a vision; I speak to him in a dream. Not so with My servant Moses; He is faithful in all My house. I speak with him face to face, even plainly, and not in dark sayings; and he sees the form of the Lord. Why then were you not afraid to speak against My servant Moses?”  (Numbers 12:6-8) Here, God makes it clear that when speaking to prophets, He reveals Himself to them in a DREAM or a VISION, but with MOSES ALONE, He speaks to them face to face. Now why is this an issue? Well, let’s see some examples of the LORD appearing to prophets in visions, versus the Angel appearing to prophets:
 The LORD: “"After these things the word of the Lord came to Abram in a vision, saying, 'Do not be afraid, Abram. I am your shield, your exceedingly great reward.'" (Genesis 15:1) “"So Samuel lay down until morning, and opened the doors of the house of the Lord. And Samuel was afraid to tell Eli the vision." (1 Samuel 3:15) “"In the year that King Uzziah died, I saw the Lord sitting on a throne, high and lifted up, and the train of His robe filled the temple." (Isaiah 6:1) The ANGEL: “And it came to pass, when Joshua was by Jericho, that he lifted his eyes and looked, and behold, a Man stood opposite him with His sword drawn in His hand. And Joshua went to Him and said to Him, 'Are You for us or for our adversaries?' So He said, 'No, but as Commander of the army of the Lord I have now come.' And Joshua fell on his face to the earth and worshiped… then the Commander of the Lord’s army said to Joshua, 'Take your sandal off your foot, for the place where you stand is holy.' And Joshua did so." (Joshua 5:13-15) “Now the Angel of the Lord came and sat under the terebinth tree that belonged to Joash the Abiezrite which was in Ophrah, while his son Gideon threshed wheat in the winepress in order to hide it from the Midianites… Then the Angel of the Lord put out the end of the staff that was in His hand, and touched the meat and the unleavened bread; and fire rose out of the rock and consumed the meat and the unleavened bread. And the Angel of the Lord departed out of his sight." (Judges 6:11; 21) “Then as he lay and slept under a broom tree, suddenly an angel touched him, and said to him, 'Arise and eat.' Then he looked, and there by his head was a cake baked on coals, and a jar of water. So he ate and drank, and lay down again. And the Angel of the Lord came back the second time, and touched him, and said, 'Arise and eat, because the journey is too great for you.'” (2 Kings 19:5-7) (Also see Genesis 16:7-13; 21:17-19; 22:11-18; 31:11-13; 32:24-32; 48:15-16, Exodus 14:9; 23:20-23; 33:2, Numbers 22:22-35, Judges 2:1-4; 13:3-21, 2 Samuel 24:16-17, 2 Kings 1:3; 15; 19:35, 1 Chronicles 21:15-17, Isaiah 37:36, Zechariah 3:1-6)

🚨 The final article of our inaugural edition is now live. “The Preservation of the Qur’an” By: @al_firas27 This important topic is part of our ongoing effort at @oasis_wisdom to bridge tradition and contemporary academic discussion. open.substack.com/pub/oasesofwis…

🇬🇧 Tommy Robinson admits Zionist Ezra Levant: “Helped me, coached me, trained me, CREATED me.” This is after he admitted receiving 100k from Zionist Robert Shillman. This just gets better and better.

Hey Christians, if you are going to cite Michael Heiser’s nonsense on Deuteronomy 32, then you might also wanna consider the fact that he believes that sons of God are literal divine beings who had sex with human women.

@md_jatta Brought to you by rapist wood university:

NEW ARTICLE LATER TODAY! On the preservation of the Quran. This will complete our inaugural edition of the @oasis_wisdom Substack! I’m looking forward to our June edition!

The so-called “Secret Gospel of Mark” is almost certainly a modern forgery. Stop using it to support your crackpot theories.

@realLPBeria @escutarian I think the *capable* is doing alot of heavy lifting here. Islamic ruling isn't merely that she can *bear it*. It's that she cannot be harmed by it. We know that in modern society the point were intercourse will not cause any physical/mental harm is at least 17 at minimum.

@escutarian All the sources I’ve read say that’s not true. Consummation is allowed when the girl is capable of enduring intercourse, which can be before puberty.

Traditional Hinduism *commands* child marriage. But, unlike Islam, it forbids consummation before puberty:

@JesusIsMyKingX 😭😭

Yes, Angels are “alien” to us, and I am almost certain this is what Ezekiel saw. What do you think?

@dmontetheno1 @AEnjoyer447201 That's a very interesting question. If there was no Adam, there was no "original sin".

Genuine question, but how would a Christian even reconcile this with their theology? Do aliens have souls? Did Jesus die for them?

@LordDiososceles @Ahraz__ I think this counts as humor as well, but hey.... that's just me.

@Ahraz__ You guys are so desperate for moral superiority that you’re now turning to the most trivial shit imaginable. I’d rather our apologists have a sense of humor than beat women and dox people but hey…that’s just me.

How a Christian apologist shows gratitude vs. how a Muslim shows gratitude

“‘The Islamic Dilemma’ Book Foreword by David Wood.”

Nicolas Sinai explaining the axioms of the historical critical method. This is the key to understanding the assumptions Orientalists use when engaging with the Islamic tradition.

@Jamaal4Jesus This is laughable. It's well known, so well known that this narration is referring to abrogation. Al-Suyuti was the first to quote this narration, and he quoted it under the heading of Naskh wal Mansookh.

Most of the Quran has been lost.Umar said "Let none of you say, 'I have taken (learned) the whole of the Qur'an.' And what makes him know what 'all of it' is? Indeed, much of the Qur'an has gone (passed away). Rather, let him say: 'We have taken what has become manifest of it'.""

The Gospels weren’t written by eyewitnesses? #maklelan3282 youtu.be/jNz5iQWuMTg

There’s just a group of christians and muslims (with inferiority complexes i might add) that disregard tabors scholarship because they see it as apologetic slop for muslims to use when in reality the substance is there. If they were to say that “Tabor has his view but i think X is more convincing” that would be different but in reality they’ve just become apologists on their own side with the sort of rhetoric and framing they use when discounting his scholarship. You see a bit of this here when they engage with Javad defending bart erhman again, Erhman is someone who believes the son of man is a distinct figure from Jesus. they scoff at it because of the potential ammo for us to use on the muslim side that the prophet SAWS is the son of man without being objective. Again they don’t say “this view on the son of man is respectable but i take another one” In reality these guys are as much apologists as i am and that’s the ironic reality lol. I’m just not ashamed in saying it.