: 𝕵𝖚𝖘𝖙𝖎𝖈𝖊 𝖎𝖘 𝖘𝖑𝖔𝖜𝖑𝖞 𝖋𝖆𝖉𝖎𝖓𝖌 :

@Malkadace @Joe__Bassey They are used to touching every woman; what would we expect them to say?

@Joe__Bassey I always say that some people are genetically dumb, obviously you are one of them. Here are a group of women relaxing on their chairs.

Where are the women?

@InfinitelyManic @searchtillfound @realityishere19 @MuzlimsPostingW John 17:1 needs his father glorify him, just as we need God to glorify us. It means we are dependent. Doesn't mean divinity. Islam won't help u dfnd ur pagnchstnti invented centuries after the Prophet SA. Where is the single Gospel of Jesus 👇❓️🤣

@InfinitelyManic @searchtillfound @realityishere19 @MuzlimsPostingW Son of God refers to the righteous servants.. Ur man-god "revealed" it in the OT

This interpretation is theologically unsound for multiple reasons: 1/ Grammatically incorrect Genesis 1:1 in Hebrew: "Bereishit bara Elohim et hashamayim v'et ha'aretz." · Elohim = God (subject) · Et (את) = untranslatable particle marking the definite direct object — NOT "Alef-Tav" as a name · No ancient Jewish source ever interpreted et as "Jesus" or "Alpha-Omega." That's a modern invention. 2/ "Elohim = Holy Spirit = Bird" is nonsense Elohim is a title for God (used also for judges and angels). It is not "the Holy Spirit." And neither Elohim nor the Holy Spirit is a "bird." This is pure speculation with zero biblical or Quranic basis. 3/ "Alef-Tav = Jesus" is an anachronism The Hebrew letters Alef-Tav (את) are a grammatical particle. Jesus never claimed this. Revelation 1:8 says Jesus is the "Alpha and Omega" — in Greek, not Hebrew. Forcing that onto Genesis 1:1 is eisegesis (reading into the text), not exegesis. 4/ "Lord God shows Yahweh is boss of Bird" — completely invented No such phrase exists in Genesis 1:1. "LORD God" (Yahweh Elohim) appears first in Genesis 2:4 — different context. There is no "boss" hierarchy among divine persons in orthodox Christianity. And Islam rejects all of this entirely. 5/ Islamic perspective The Quran is clear: "Say: He is Allah, the One. Allah, the Eternal Refuge. He neither begets nor is born, nor is there to Him any equal." (Quran 112) No "Bird." No "Alef-Tav as Jesus." No "boss of Word." No Trinity. No filioque. Just One God. Final verdict: This interpretation is grammatically false, historically baseless, and theologically incoherent — rejected by Jews, Christians, and Muslims alike. 🕋

@rfmbtz @searchtillfound @fogtomind @Akinyemisback @Noremac_Ma_i @Machi1Nne Genesis 1:1 Elohim Alef-Tav created. Elohim = God = Allah = the Holy Spirit = Bird. Alef-Tav = Alpha-Omega = Adonai = Jesus = Word. Word order shows who is boss; LORD God shows that Yahweh is boss of Bird; Elohim Alef-Tav shows that Bird is boss of Word (filioque = heresy).

When Jesus comes back, what language will he speak for everyone to understand?

@JBus91731 @lorelei3112 🤣

@lorelei3112 Mijn probleem is dat er een paar uit de maat dansen.

Ik zie gewoon vrolijke mensen plezier hebben. Wat is jouw probleem?!

@nicole_lazarou @Israel2252 What an idiotic comparison; they hate all except Muslims, but they hate Muslims also. How to filter the low IQ people..

@Israel2252 Muslims hate christians because they hate everyone who isn’t Muslim. They even hate Muslims.

I finally understand why Muslims hate Christians Jesus is Jewish ✡️

@athiestboi Then your knowledge is weak.

Both Religions have no positive impact on humanity.

@Skeletonkey5555 @FinalStoic What, your post? Indeed..

You don’t need religion to have morals. If you can’t determine right from wrong, then you lack empathy, not religion.

@Byebyeefeliciaa Waaronder de mannen die het recht beschermen, in de naam van Allah! BarakAllahu Feek Ukhti.

Er gaat geen dag voorbij waarop ik niet een man zie praten over hijabis

1/ You're pretending not to understand the argument. No one said monogenēs by itself means "divine." The issue is what Christians conclude from it. 2/ You use monogenēs to prove Jesus is uniquely God's Son — then from there claim he shares God's nature (John 5:18, John 10:30, John 1:1). That's the leap we reject. 3/ Monogenēs appears 9 times in the New Testament. It describes: · Isaac (Hebrews 11:17) — not divine · The widow's son at Nain (Luke 7:12) — not divine · Jairus' daughter (Luke 8:42) — not divine Same word. Same meaning (unique/beloved). None of them are God. 4/ So you're right: Monogenēs doesn't mean "divine." That's exactly our point. You can't use it to prove Jesus is God. It only proves he's unique — which we already affirm. 5/ The Quran gives Jesus unique titles too: Messiah, Word from Allah, Spirit from Allah, born of a virgin. But unique ≠ divine. Final: We agree — monogenēs doesn't mean divine. So stop using it to prove Jesus is God. Problem solved. 🕋

@searchtillfound @DawahDen @realityishere19 @MuzlimsPostingW [5/ Your argument collapses: Even if John 3:16 is authentic, monogenēs doesn't mean divine sonship. It means unique. We agree Jesus is unique. We disagree he's God.] -- Who told you that monogenēs means "divine"???

Put your glasses on this time! 1/ You're shifting the goalpost. First, "only-begotten" implied literal sonship. Now you admit it means "unique" — which we agree with. 2/ Do we affirm Jesus is the "unique Son of God"? No. Because "Son of God" in any sense — literal or unique — implies a father-son relationship with God. Islam rejects that entirely. 3/ Allah is not a father. Not biologically. Not metaphorically. Not adoptively. Quran 112:3 — "He neither begets nor is born." 4/ If "unique" means unique in honor — we agree. Jesus is unique: born of a virgin, spoke as an infant, raised the dead by Allah's permission. That makes him a unique prophet and Messiah — not a "son."

[Modern scholars agree: Monogenēs means "unique," "one of a kind," "only" — not "only-begotten" in a biological sense .] -- Then do you affirm by your Allah that Lord Jesus is the: unique Son of God? one of a kind Son of God? only Son of God? Who said Lord Jesus was a biological Son of God???

@OpenMindNL @GerritCD @HelemaalRens 🤣

@GerritCD @HelemaalRens Landverrader... mietje... nicht... Wie is hier de frustro? Jij waarschijnlijk, zolang je je geaardheid blijft verhullen in schelden.

Dit is gewoon eng. Heel erg eng. En dan zeuren mensen over Moslims die een maand niet overdag eten. Kom op joh.

1. 2 Chronicles 15:12-13 – "All who would not seek the Lord, the God of Israel, were to be put to death, whether small or great, man or woman." 2. Deuteronomy 13:7-12 – If someone, even a family member, entices you to serve other gods, "Your hand shall be the first raised to slay him... You shall stone him to death." 3. Exodus 22:20 – "Whoever sacrifices to any god, other than the Lord alone, shall be devoted to destruction." 4. Deuteronomy 13:12-16 – A city that worships other gods is to be utterly destroyed with the sword. 5. 1 Samuel 15:2-3 – God commands Saul to kill the Amalekites: "kill both man and woman, child." Luke 19:27 ("bring here those enemies... and slay them before me.") Idiot, can't even read its own scripture and follows a crowd like blind cattle.

@HelemaalRens Flikker op gore landverrader, met je eng. Dit is een onschuldig christelijk festival, waar ze "heb je naaste lief zoals jezelf" prediken. Heel wat anders dan "dood alle ongelovigen!" uit de koran.....

@athiestboi Fixed it..

Me all day

@MichelleAR4118 @JaySommeso @WorkElizab This!

@JaySommeso @WorkElizab Reproductive biology.

If this person is not a woman then who's?

@TheistLess @thoughts17181 Everything we know, in existence, has been set by the One who has to know all. Else we would know nothing, but nothing does not exist.

Atheists don't say that we come from nothing.... We come from something, but it just isn't perfect, all-knowing, or in need of any recognition. It's a living being doing its own thing while we evolve within it. Never to escape its grasp. Simple and beautiful. What's the difference between believing this or that a god was created out of nowhere, to control everything as a dictator? Give yourself a break, I don't like to look at people like they're delusional, but you make it surprisingly easy.

😶‍🌫️ 1/ You keep asking: "Who else claimed to be Son of God before witnesses?" The answer: No one. And that's exactly the point. Jesus never claimed what you think he claimed. 2/ In Jewish context, "Son of God" meant Messiah — a human king (Psalm 2:7, 2 Samuel 7:14). Even the high priest understood it that way. That's why he tore his clothes — not for blasphemy of equality with God, but for claiming to be the Messiah. 3/ Prove it? When Jesus said "I am" in Mark 14:62, he immediately quotes Daniel 7:13 — "Son of Man coming with the clouds." In Daniel, the Son of Man is a human figure given authority by God — not God Himself. 4/ The voice from heaven in Matthew 3:17 and 17:5 echoes Psalm 2:7 — "You are my Son; today I have begotten you." Early Christians and Jews understood this as adoption language for the king, not literal divine sonship. 5/ The Gospel Jesus received (Injil) said none of this. The Quran confirms Jesus said: "Indeed, Allah is my Lord and your Lord, so worship Him" (19:36). And on Judgment Day, Jesus will deny ever telling people to worship him (5:116-117). Final: "Son of God" in the Bible = Messiah (human king). "Son of God" in later theology = God incarnate (a Greek invention). The Quran restores the original message of Jesus: Worship Allah alone.

[Bible has Sons by the tons] -- Who else claimed to be the Son of God before witnesses??? Name them if you can. Do you also affirm by your Allah that in the #Gospel, which your prophet referenced in the 7th century in Surah 5:47, that Lord Jesus declares to be the Son of God before witnesses & that God the Father declares from heaven that Lord Jesus is His beloved Son before witnesses? Surah 5:47 #Let the people of the #Gospel #Judge by what God hath revealed therein... Mat 3:16-17: Jesus came up immediately from the water; and ... He saw the Spirit of God descending ... And suddenly a voice came from heaven, saying, "This is #My #beloved #Son, in whom I am well pleased." Mat 17:5 a voice came out of the cloud, saying, "This is #My #beloved #Son, in whom I am well pleased. Hear Him!" Jn 10:36 ... ‘You are blaspheming,’ because I said, ‘I am the #Son of #God’? Luk 22:70 Then they all said, "Are You then the #Son of #God?" So He said to them, "You rightly say that I am." Mar 14:61-62 But he was silent and did not answer. Again the high priest questioned him, “Are you the Christ, the #Son of the #Blessed #One?” “#I #am,” said Jesus, “and you will see the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of the Power and coming with the clouds of heaven.”

You are or uneducated or you just troll, has been answered! 1/ Surah 39:4 is TRUE. It's the word of Allah. Let me show you what it actually says — not what you want it to say. 2/ Read carefully: "He could have chosen whom He pleased out of those whom He Doth create" — meaning even if Allah wished a son (which He doesn't), that son would be from creation. A created being. Not divine. 3/ Then Allah says: "But glory be to Him! He is above such things." Why? Because having a son — even a created one — implies need, imperfection, and partnership. Allah is far above that. 4/ So both 43:81 and 39:4 use the same structure: hypothetical → created son → but Allah is above it. That's not an opening for Trinity. It's a closure. 5/ Your error: You think "if" means "maybe." In the Quran, it means "even this impossible scenario wouldn't give you what you want — so stop." Final: Allah has no son. Jesus is a prophet. Worship is for Allah alone. That's Islam. Period.

[1/ You just proved my point....] -- FALSE "... a rhetorical device to show impossibility" -- @searchtillfound 👇 Surah 39:4 Had God wished To take to Himself A son, He could have Chosen whom He pleased Out of those whom He Doth create : but Glory Be to Him ! (He is above Such things.) He is God, The One, the Irresistible. Is Surah 39:4 TRUE or FALSE???

@InfinitelyManic @DawahDen @realityishere19 @MuzlimsPostingW Really, short term memory ok?

@DawahDen @searchtillfound @realityishere19 @MuzlimsPostingW Do you affirm that Lord Jesus is the unique Son of God???

1/ You're asking about manuscript evidence for John 3:16. Let me answer: There is no Greek manuscript — early or late — that omits John 3:16. It appears in all known manuscripts, including: · P75 (3rd century) — contains John 3:16 · Codex Vaticanus (4th century) · Codex Sinaiticus (4th century) So your question is a straw man. No one claims it's missing. 2/ The real issue isn't if John 3:16 exists — it's what monogenēs means. Modern scholars agree: Monogenēs means "unique," "one of a kind," "only" — not "only-begotten" in a biological sense . 3/ Proof? Hebrews 11:17 calls Isaac Abraham's monogenēs — yet Abraham had Ishmael too. Isaac was unique (son of promise), not "only-begotten" literally . 4/ Same word, same meaning. Jesus is God's unique Servant and Messiah — not a literal offspring. The Quran confirms this: "Say: He is Allah, the One" (112:1). 5/ Your argument collapses: Even if John 3:16 is authentic, monogenēs doesn't mean divine sonship. It means unique. We agree Jesus is unique. We disagree he's God. Final: Unique ≠ Divine. Messiah ≠ God. Quran 5:72 — Whoever says Allah is the Messiah has disbelieved. 🕋 🤦🏽‍♂️

@DawahDen @searchtillfound @realityishere19 @MuzlimsPostingW What is the earliest Greek MSS that does NOT have this verse? Jn 3:16 οὕτως γὰρ ἠγάπησεν ὁ θεὸς τὸν κόσμον, ὥστε τὸν υἱὸν τὸν μονογενῆ ἔδωκεν, ἵνα πᾶς ὁ πιστεύων εἰς αὐτὸν μὴ ἀπόληται ἀλλ᾿ ἔχῃ ζωὴν αἰώνιον.