Video wird geladen...

Video konnte nicht geladen werden

Zur Startseite

Check out #Louisville 2026 safety commit Emoni Smith rolling hot in some drill work. This kid is criminally underrated by every single ratings website it’s insane. But he doesn’t care about any of that because we all know once you get to college that all goes out the window.

12,176 Aufrufe • vor 1 Jahr •via X (Twitter)

0 Kommentare

Keine Kommentare verfügbar

Kommentare vom Original-Post werden hier angezeigt

Ähnliche Videos

Dawah is deception. Why are you leaving out the context SeerahPro ? You know right after this he says he doesn’t remember well what he wrote in that entry on Muhaymin. Why leave that part out? He even goes on to say that section seems to be non-committal and he needs to go back and re-read it. So since you don’t want to show every one the full context, I’ll do it, and expose how you are lying now and lied in the debate. Sinai doesn’t help your claim that the Quran believes the previous scriptures were textually corrupted. He says he doesn’t think the Quran believes the previous scriptures were corrupted in the deep past and that they are unrecoverable (Clip 1). Now let’s look at the short clip you pulled in context (Clip 2). First, what he says does not affirm why you cited him to begin with, which is that the Quran is supposed to be a supreme authority and determine which parts of our scriptures are corrupt and which are not. In the very clip you pulled he says, “The Quran is claiming to be able to sort of determine the correct reading of these previous scriptures and to remedy misreading and misunderstandings.” So by arbiter he means it is not determining what parts of our scriptures are true or corrupted, it is only an arbiter in determining meaning. You just buried yourself by citing this, because you implied Sinai was saying the Quran is an arbiter for determining textual corruption, which he doesn’t say. It’s like you didn’t even pay attention to what you pulled. That is embarrassing. Second, right after this (in what you left out) the interviewer reminds him he entertained two possibilities in his book and was noncommittal. Sinai says he doesn’t remember what he said and was probably leaving open possibilities, which is what I already had to correct you on. If you go back to the book, once again, he said on page 707 essentially what I said, “Muhaymin, meanwhile, is derived from Syriac mhaymnā (or conceivably from its equivalent in some other form of Aramaic), a passive participle of the verb haymen and meaning ‘trustworthy, faithful, loyal.’” After this all he does in the book is mention other possibilities and the one you want is more contingent on non-canonical readings. But even if that interpretation is correct (which Sinai confirms in this interview is his view) it doesn’t help you, because you misunderstood what Sinai means by ‘arbiter.’ In Clip 3 he first says, “So I need to reread that entry. I guess it seems to be very non-committal.” But remember you said (Clip 4), “In his 'Key Terms of the Quran' he explicitly says that Muhaymin means the Quran is the arbiter of the contents.” That is incorrect. He did not explicitly say that. Why did you lie? In Clip 3 he goes on to say “But I think entrusted with authority can mean, authorized to sort of authoritatively interpret and determine especially theological significance.” So you don’t even understand what Sinai means by “arbiter.” He doesn’t mean what you mean, that the Quran is determining which parts of our scriptures are true and corrupted, but that it is an arbiter of meaning. The fact that you still do not see this means you are beyond delusional. You never should have cited Sinai because he doesn’t help you at all. The funny thing is we were already planning to go live tomorrow to review this interview because he doesn’t help you at all and unintentionally helps with the Islamic Dilemma.

InspiringPhilosophy - Michael Jones

36,857 Aufrufe • vor 9 Tagen

Shut the fuck up, Kate. First it was "Liam wrote me notes" now suddenly it’s a whole fucking book???? Which one is it? You can’t even keep your lies straight. Every time your views drop, the story changes, notes letters, books, journals, whatever it takes to keep milking his name. And don’t even start with the handwriting because it’s not his. We’ve been over this. Anyone who’s seen Liam’s real writing knows it doesn’t even come close. On top of that, Liam never called the people he actually loved by their full names... not once. Every single person he truly cared about, he had nicknames and shortened names for and all of that has been out in the open for years. But suddenly he’s writing out "Kate Cass" in some fake-ass notebook like it’s a fucking diary entry? Get the fuck out of here. And let’s talk about why you even replied to that comment saying "he literally hated her." If he loved you so much, like you won’t shut the fuck up about, why did that hit so hard you had to grab your little prop and make a video? Because deep down, you know it’s the truth. He couldn’t stand you. He was drowning while you partied, and now you’re still here trying to rewrite history with fake receipts. You sit there, bragging like a clown, chewing Chinese food on camera, turning Liam’s death into your flex. That isn’t grief. That isn’t love. That isn’t healing. That’s exploitation. That’s bragging. That’s lying. Liam didn’t write you a journal. He didn’t write you a book. He didn’t write you shit. You wrote yourself into his story because without him, you are fucking nothing. You weren’t his safe place, Kate you were and still ARE his fucking curse. #JusticeForLiam #StopExploitingLiam

Iris

39,494 Aufrufe • vor 11 Monaten