The Bible is corrupted.

I'm so done with these pagget cringe dawah hoz Bruh nobody gives a fuck about a woman's opinion Get back in the kitchen fool 🤦🏻‍♂️🤦🏻‍♂️🤦🏻‍♂️🤮

A Muslim being a pick-me for Christian approval and defending biblical corruption while perpetuating misogyny and spelling like an illiterate hillbilly is actually what’s cringe 😂😂😂 holy. You belong in a pig sty.

You're literally not attractive or feminine at all. You defend PDF also. Here is a Gorgeous Christian sister silencing you

Christian man basing truth over who’s “attractive”. This is why Muslim women cover, not from Muslim men who lower their gaze - but from creepy Christian men like yourself.. 😂

Incoming kaffir cope in the comments: "This doesn't change the overall Biblical message"-🤡 "But your Quran confirms our random letters to churches and bios"-🤡 "Aisha 9"- 🤡

Absolutely. The same old same old. Like robots.

Don't know if this one will interest you, but since they also seem to like throwing shots at your niqab as well (as I said these people are predictsble as the sunrise) you might also wanna show'em Issac's(as) wife wore one

@SpiritualSalafi Genesis 24:65 contradicts the Islamic view of veiling. Rebeckah was with non-Mahram. The person who took her from her parents house was the Abrahams chief/Executive. Rebeckah only covers up when she meets the person she marries MUCH LIKE CHRISTIAN WEDDINGS.

@SpiritualSalafi 1. Different legal systems (the fact that you veil while worshipping shows its a superior dress) 2. Point is its still used all the way to the face

Variation in textual transmission is common. The problem is how Salafis extrapolate that data. To illustrate this, what percent of manuscripts attest to Jesus dying on the cross versus the percent that have a substitute on the cross. Answer that and ask what the implications are

Deflection. Did John write this verse, or did someone push this onto John’s mouth, testimony, and pen 400 years later?

Christians identified this as an insertion centuries ago. The manuscript evidence demonstrates it’s not original to John. Now can you answer my question: based on manuscript evidence is Jesus’ death on the cross original to John?

Here before the men start crying of why ur not married

😭😭🙏🏼

Im sorry Tina but this ain’t it and also you need to do a bit more research and understand what the actual word “Corrupted” truly means.. I’ll teach you… A 'corrupted' text implies the core message was twisted, but here, the core message remains completely intact even someone

Thats not what corruption means. A corrupted text is a change, addition, ommission or alteration than the original author intended. This was not a verse John had in his gospel and therefore another hand or multiple hands have added it to the words and testimony of John. That’s corruption. You also stated that Bart ehrman says the the gospels were so theologically molded that you can’t rely on it for historical accuracy.

Wrong!.. That definition mistakes a textual variant for systemic corruption. If a single later addition completely ruined a text, then every ancient historical document in existence would be considered useless today. True corruption means the original message is lost here,

because we have thousands of older manuscripts, we can easily isolate the addition and read John’s original words completely unaffected by it. The system is self correcting. As for Bart Ehrman you are misrepresenting his position. He is a secular critic, but in misquoting Jesus

he explicitly writes, “Essential Christian beliefs are not affected by textual variants in the manuscript tradition of the New Testament.”Ehrman routinely fights against internet skeptics to prove that historical methods allow us to reconstruct the original core text of the New

Yes he believes those beliefs are not original to begin with 😂😂😂 clearly you’ve never read his works AT ALL.

You are confusing Bart Ehrman’s personal theological opinions with his actual academic science. Ehrman explicitly acknowledges that we can successfully reconstruct what the original New Testament authors wrote which directly disproves your claim that the text is corrupted

beyond historical recognition. You are using the Bible’s unmatched, transparent preservation history to try and argue it was destroyed, and the irony of that speaks for itself. You need to actually read what he writes not me.

WHAT 😂 first of all, the New Testament doesn’t align with the Torah AT ALL. And secondly, how is going against the command to stone the adulterer or adulteress in alignment? 😂😂😭

LMAOOOOO you’re saying Jesus didn’t stone her because the man wasn’t with them?? 😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂 no where in the history of the Jews did they believe not having both parties for any reason dismisses the case for the part they do have 😂 they’re both guilty and each one is charged regardless. Not even Christian history or church fathers agree with you. You’re so slow. Respectfully, that was the SLOWEST argument I’ve heard. And that doesn’t solve why the story appears in the Bible 400 years later… FOUR HUNDRED YEARS LATER. 😂😂

GIRL WHY WHY WAS STORY ADDED TO THE BIBLE FOUR HUNDRED YEARS LATER 😂😂😂😂😂 stop running, you’re getting baked on the topic you tried deflecting with.

Girl you’re baked. 😂😂😂😂 dumbest Christian I’ve spoke to 😂

If the Bible is corrupted then the Quran and Allah confirms corrupted scriptures. Islam is a false man made religion. Accept Jesus as your LORD and Savior before it’s too late.

Sybau hojabi

You worship 3 gods tho

Why did Uthman burn the quran? If there is no inconsistencies? ?? Why does Aisha mention 5 suckings are found in the quran and they’re nowhere to be found? Why did the first Muslims disagree with the manic codex? Why did the first quran have 116 and 112 chapters ?

why are you running to Islam, deal with your bible that was still in the process of corruption in the 5th century 😂

The bible is the same before council of nicea and after. The criteria’s used to compile the bible is actually very good criteria’s. That doesn’t change the fact that the pagan prophet mohammed came and confirmed the bible and used it as a guidebook for you and Christians in 6th

Origen (who is the first Christian to translate the OT) said the Holy spirit helped corrupt the bible, hence the empirical and geographic contradictions, to "give it allegorical meaning and make the reader ponder spiritually". He picked a contradiction between two gospels, and corrected both of them Origen mentions: (Mark 5:1 & Luke 8:26) say that Jesus (pbuh) cast out a legion of demons into a herd of pigs in the town of Gerasa (modern day Jerash, Jordan) Whereas (Matthew 8:28) says he performed this miracle thousands of leagues away in the town of Gadarenes/Gadara (Modern day Um Qais, Jordan) He then invented his own Gospel/Opinion that the true location was "Gergesa"... so both Gospels ("God's word"/bible) were wrong, but Origen is right. He elaborated on this and other similar contradictions and said that the Holy Spirit helped create them and corrupt the scripture on purpose. Source: On First Principles (also known by its Latin title De Principiis or Greek Peri Archon) Exact Reference: Book IV, Chapter 2, Section 9 He managed to live and die before the first full bible (Codex Vaticanus) but somehow still managed to correct the bible

Yes, Epiphanius and Augustine also said the corruptions in the Greek Septuagint Old Testament were new revelations from the Holy Spirit 😂😂 even Jerome said nah 😭. Church fathers are so funny.

Lol, like the new revelation in the video below ⬇️😂 And at least Origen was honest, he made peace with the corruption and tried to refine it himself, but that is proper hilarious 😂 Alhamdulillah our book was preserved in the hearts of thousands before the prophet pbuh passed away victorious and his best friends sat on the thrones of Heraclius and Cyrus less than 10 yrs after him, and made sure by themsleves the message was preserved.

So islam is false for referring to corrupted scriptures And telling Muslims to ask Christian’s and their scriptures if they’re in doubt or lack knowledge. And told the Christians to follow ALL OF IT not parts of it. The bible have the same meaning, doctrines purpose context

Tina my sincere suggestion to you is that go and spread the knowledge amongst your Muslim sisters. These christian-jewish debates are not a necessity and we have plenty of other veteran debaters for that. Not anything. Against you but people do it for cheap clips and fame&money.

You are a Muslim, not an atheist. Stop using the research and arguments of atheists. Your Prophet affirmed the validity of the Bible in 18 Quranic verses. If the Bible is corrupted, then your religion is false because it affirmed the Bible’s validity.

Do you really want to have a convention with a knowledgeable christian? Let me know.

the imams already refuted these arguments centuries ago, and our dawah brothers are carrying on that work. dr zakir naik & ahmed deedat already dismantled christian apologetics. we don’t need pseudo dawah girlies reinventing the wheel, learn something from imam maliks daughter.

The imams refuted biblical corruption? 💀💀💀 it seems you DO in fact need the Dawah girlies, since you’re so intellectually subpar.

Yes..anonymous authors century later..bible not from god,not from jesus,not from disciples,but from anonymous authors century later,,its fact..full contradictions,,even narrative of jesus' resurrection in matthew 28 n john 20 contradictions..

Absolutely

You’ve just shown how textual criticism has preserved the original text by highlighting that the story was added.

proof of corruption doesn’t nullify that it’s corruption 😂😂😂

Is the original text missing or altered? No. We've simply identified that an insertion does not belong. Corruption would be like having a goat eat a whole Surah.

💯

Literal prostituta eyebrows

Those are my natural brows, so you’re saying God gave me “prostitute eyebrows”. But you’re a Christian, so you don’t actually care about God or in your case, gods.

Of curse he would give a harlots eyebroes, withour ir how are you going to please muhammed in hell?

I mean, I'm a Catholic, so I just don't believe that the Bible is the inerrant word of God. There was never a "pure" version of the Bible.

@grok verify the claim in this video. Especially since her prophet around 600-700 AD pointed to the scriptures, indicating they were not corrupted. Right?

Really? Provide proof the event never happened? Because later textual insertion and historical fabrication are not the same things.

You can’t prove a negative, genius 😂 you gotta prove it DID happen, since the testimony regarding it is compromised.

Why are you guys so one dimensional in thinking? Yes you do need to prove you’re negative that’s how it works. You’re making the claim so provide the connection and evidence

No that’s not how it works 😂 and again, because you’re too slow to track: the claim isn’t that the event never happened, that’s just an implication. The claim isn’t that the story is not original to the Bible and the author of John never wrote this in his testimony of the gospel. It appeared 400 years later.

Then thank you for conceding you have NOT thereby demonstrated that the Bible is corrupted, that the event never happened.

Nice jumper.

Lmfao. This you?

Who is this?🤡🤣

Someone who doesn’t believe in a Christian creative writing project that was called “scripture”.

Partly corrupted yes

Partial corruption IS corruption. That's enough to deem the whole thing unreliable. Saying the entire thing, letter for letter, is corrupted is gibberish anyway, as that would just be a whole other work of literature, at that point. So again, partial corruption is corruption.

@WaleedZak1_ Your extrapolation is invalid. We have reason to doubt the pericope of the adulterous being part of the original. Why should we doubt Jesus’ death on cross was part of the original? All manuscripts *unanimously* agree Jesus died on the cross. Zero attest to a substitute

@SpiritualSalafi No she's right. The Bible is corrupted, i was actually backing her. @SpiritualSalafi Several writers falsified the Bible over the years. Especially PAUL the murderous false Apostle.

@SpiritualSalafi She acknowledged the death of Jesus is not part of the corruption, it’s part of the original

@SpiritualSalafi Btw since you're speaking about the original, what makes you think that the original one that was on Greek was actually right and true and authentic? The Quraan her made a stand to back only the authenticity of the Torah of Prophet Moses and The Gospel of Prophet Jesus pbut.

@SpiritualSalafi There’s no motive in inventing the crucifixion. There is ijma among early Christians that Jesus died on the cross because that is what happened. Now since the basis for your belief is in a kitab and not in evidence, why do you assume the Quran to be revelation?

@SpiritualSalafi It's simple because its the word of God (Allah) Everything thats in it entails that these things only known by God Language barrier? This is what you resort to to win debates? & btw Mark is unreliable what proves hes not a liar? Quraan says Crucifixion happened to friend of Jesus

Calling the story of Jesus and the woman caught in adultery a “forgery” overstates what the evidence proves. The passage is absent from the earliest surviving manuscripts of John and is widely considered a later addition to the Gospel. However, that does not prove the story was

Kind of a moot point. First off, let me preface by explaining that the Islamic “Bible is corrupted” argument you’re toting is pretty lame. First off, you appeal to secular contemporary scholarship and try to point at the Bible as if it is totally unreliable; however, that isn’t what the vast majority of secular scholars state. Many of those who reject the Bible as divine still agree that it, in its original form, told the same story as it does today. For example, take these quotes from several different Bible scholars, some Christian, some not: “There is no body of ancient literature in the world which enjoys such a wealth of good textual attestation as the New Testament.” - F. F. Bruce “None of your cherished doctrines appears to be in real danger because of variations in our surviving manuscripts.” - Bart Ehrman “No biblical doctrine would go unsupported if a favorable reading was abandoned in favor of a more valid variant. This does not mean, as is sometimes said, that no doctrine of Scripture is affected by textual variation. Rather, a doctrine that is affected by textual variation will always be adequately supported by other passages.” - David Alan Black Point being? While a few locations are debated in contemporary scholarship, many are not. For example, every historian in academia who believes Christ is alive would agree He died on the cross. So do the Codexes you listed in your video. So, the “corrupted Bible because scholarship…” argument really doesn’t work in your favor. Anyway, Augustine literally offers an alternative explanation. He said it was removed in some copies because some people intentionally suppressed it due to fear it would lead to promiscuity amongst wives. The point I’m trying to make here is this isn’t the “gotcha” you want. If you want to appeal to secular scholarship, let’s see what the vast majority of contemporary scholars say about the Isnad’s in Islamic tradition! “Goldziher’s argument that the hadith literature provides documentation not for the life of the Prophet but for the later development of Islam remains the dominant paradigm in Western hadith scholarship.” - Daniel W. Brown At the end of the day, when you point to scholarship, you’ll find that most scholars give the same or LESS credence to Islamic transmission of theology when compared to Christian theological transmission.

Depends on your standard and definition if we put it under the Islamic standard fairly well then because there is a chain of believer all the way back to Jesus then its perfectly preserved. However reality is The Bible has its own standard called textual criticism and people study it for years before making that call ...being fair which you can't it goes either way Bart Erhman is the perfect example of this believes its 99% preserved but is an agnostic because he cant rationalise the problem of evil....when I put the quran under those same standards it failed so fast there are some Islamic critics that have the quran at only 70percent preservationof meaning...so keep coping Tina...

Holy yap. Did John write this verse or did someone add it to his gospel narrative 400 years later?

who wrote any of the quran?

@SpiritualSalafi Was that the question asked? Or do you think John and Quran read alike?

@SpiritualSalafi not ny pro len she didn't understand my point....Im going to hold the same standard between the 2 because it proves the quran is false

@k7waiti So you just admitted the standard to judge the Bible proves it’s false. Thank you for your concession.

@k7waiti No I didn't....but you condemned your quran...I accept your concession

@k7waiti You admitted you think that standard would prove the Bible is false 😂 lmfaoooo and you can hold the Quran to that standard, but we don’t have verses and stories that are added to the Quran 400 years later 😂

Illiterate follower of an illiterate pdophet.

Down dog, chill. Your disciples who supposedly wrote gospels and letters were illiterate 😂

They were filled by the Holy Spirit, not some spirit that took over the pdophet prompting him to throw himself over the hill.

If that concerns her, wait till she learns about the Sana’a lower text.

Scholars still believe the story is true but it may have been added later! Now can you do the apocryphal fiction stories found in the quran next! Thar Muhammad copied from! Examples- Jesus speaking as a baby, Mary giving birth under a palm tree etc. Q 19 30-33, 19 22-26

When did the corruption happen, before or after muhammad?

Before and after.