Oh now you wanna hop on the was bandwagon, now that he won the debate? Some of us, we've been here since the beginning, not me though as i only subscribed after the debate, but others have been here all along, while you come along begging for Wes's success. If you think that's contradictory, we'll this is about you and isn't about me... doing the very thing I'm complaining about you doing. I'm fed up with these posers, pretending to be something they are not, like upset. Lol well you asked for comments and I only do jokes so....
@@CHE-Undercover what a silly thing to fight over! You know many people hadn't seen wes' channel until the algorithm picked it up. Just be satisfied that he is getting the attention the content deserves!
Those men claimed Christ resurrected and stood on that till martyred . Never denied it and gained nothing! No power no wealth no status! Men of GOD. Jesus is Lord
Hi Wesley, I'm Peter, we met yesterday if you remember, though I wouldn't blame you if you forgot I've watched this video that you recommended to me yesterday. Thank you for informative presentation regarding the reliability of the Bible and Qur'an. I'll dig in deeper into what you presented regarding the Qur'an and engage with my Muslim friends and hopefully make some progress. Regarding to what you presented for the Bible, it further fortifies my belief and confidence in God's word, so again thank you and God bless
Great video, sir. I really appreciate your hard work. I will be praying for your ministry; you have many great skills and insights to offer the intellectual community and the body of Christ. Thank you for doing what you do.
I'm happy to have found you, brother. I'm excited to learn more. We need more of this... may Jesus reach out to the lost, and may we find strength to spread the word in good faith. God bless you, sir, and thank you for your work.
Another W. Gotta go to sleep but liking this to watch/finish it later. commenting for the algorithm. everyone viewing should do the same! we need Wes pushed in the youtube algorithm! Ave Christus Rex ✝☦
This is so cool. Especially that bit about "MEN" and why the KJV varies just a little bit to a modern translation like the NIV. Things like this add to my confidence in the translations we have today. God is so good with the way he has preserved his word over the last 2000 years
Great video, Wes. The Qur'an is a small book compared to the Bible. It has 77,000 words, while the Bible has 800,000 words. It may not seem small because the Qur'an uses large, well-designed letters and framed pages. As a result, there are many pages, but not too many words. You did a great analysis.
So thankful that you chose to pursue the path of apologetics and also take the initiative to share your knowledge with us for free 🙏🏽 God bless you for your generosity!
Thank you so much for all this valuable information to defend the Bible! I’m an amateur apologist and your my go-to when it comes to the reliability of the Bible and other apologist topics as well. May God continue to bless you with wisdom and keep you teaching us!
When I first decided to study the history of the Bible, the first person I ran into was Bart Erhman. After reading his work, my faith was hanging on by an experience I had at a church in clayton county Georgia. I said all that to say that to me, Wes is the reward for Christians who held on to their faith after running into people like Billy Carson and Barr Erhman. I enjoy watching his videos and yes im here after his debate with Carson. That was quite the belt-to-ass situation and definitely enjoyed watching it.
Don’t forget to keep reading and praying the word of God. The NT authors constantly remind us to remember the object of our faith, Christ Jesus. Doubts come and go, and some should be addressed, but Christ never changes.
Really great video Wes! It is so amazing how God preserved His Word through time! So interesting and educational! Thank you so much for your videos! God Bless!
Thanks for sharing your knowledge with us. May God continue to use you to help those who are lost or confused to find their way back to Him, their Lord and Savior Jesus Christ, Amen 🙏🏽.
Thank you ever so much for doing the work of God in such a clear, and precise way, in the light of day. You are a true servant of God. " For there is nothing covered that will not be revealed, nor hidden that will not be known. Luke 12:2-3 "
Regarding 27:40, can you please provide the original Arabic? All I could find resembling this was حَدَّثَنا عَبْدُ اللَّهِ قَالَ: حَدَّثَنَا عَبْدُ اللَّهِ بْنُ مُحَمَّدِ بْنِ خَلَّادٍ قَالَ: حَدَّثَنَا يَزِيدُ قَالَ: أَخْبَرَنَا مُبَارَكٌ، عَنِ الْحَسَنِ، أَنَّ عُمَرَ بْنَ الْخَطَّابِ سَأَلَ عَنْ آيَةٍ مِنْ كِتَابِ اللَّهِ فَقِيلَ كَانَتْ مَعَ فُلَانٍ فَقُتِلَ يَوْمَ .الْيَمَامَةِ فَقَالَ: إِنَّا لِلَّهِ وَأَمَرَ بِالْقُرْآنِ فَجُمِعَ This translates quite differently from the translation that you provided. See below: ‘Umar bin al Khattab enquired about a verse from the Book of Allah and was told it had been with a certain person who had been killed on the day [battle] of Yamama. Upon which he [Umar] said ‘Verily we belong to Allah’ and ordered the Qur’an [to be gathered] and so it was compiled.’ Nothing here about Umar being in deep "sorrow" and about the verse being "completely lost".
@@csmoviles I would not recommend Sam, ever. He curses and insults people, falsely representing Christ, does not believe in grace alone, through faith alone, in Christ alone, through the cross alone, and this makes him a false believer
Galatians 1:6-8 ESV I am astonished that you are so quickly deserting him who called you in the grace of Christ and are turning to a different gospel- [7] not that there is another one, but there are some who trouble you and want to distort the gospel of Christ. [8] But even if we or an angel from heaven should preach to you a gospel contrary to the one we preached to you, let him be accursed. Romans 3:23-25 ESV for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, [24] and are justified by his grace as a gift, through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus, [25] whom God put forward as a propitiation by his blood, to be received by faith. This was to show God's righteousness, because in his divine forbearance he had passed over former sins.
Well done explanation. I would rather put confidence 40 authors over 1600 years whose message is consistent than one man who speaks of revelations from an "angel" that contradict the previous messages. (Galatians 1:8) I pray daily that Muslims read the Bible not to tear it down but to gain knowledge of the true God.The message of salvation through Jesus Christ the Son. (Ephesians 2:1-10) and what God Himself has done to reconcile humankind to Himself. All glory to God the Father forever and ever and to His Son Jesus Christ. (John 3 :16)
🎉Wow what a really inspiring video❤ The graphics are just incredible! This is 4AM when I was supposed to be asleep. I seem to be stuck to the video. 🎉If one adds Sam Shamoun, David Wood, Jay Smith, Al Fadi, Christian Prince, God logic, Hatun, brother Rashid, Nabeel Qureshi etc the Quran just falls apart Holes in the SIN (Standard Islamic Narrative) when you do a deep dive, Dr. Sheik Yasir Khedi Welcome to the Lord Jesus Christ as your Lord and Savior my Moslem brothers and sisters ❤
This was really good, I appreciated this! I seriously love the infographics you make and use to give a visual description, I’m visual so that helps me haha! And P.S. Wes, a little while ago a friend of mine’s husband told me that he remembers you from high school!! (I’m from British Columbia) thought that was cool.
@@WesHuffBetter than the Islamic Dilemma, check out PSEUDO CLEMENT, it's the origin of Islamic epistemology. Published in Arabic and common to the location of Muhammad. Can't miss the definition of a true prophet and how to handle "corrupt texts". This is way bigger than the Islamic Dilemma.
Absolutely enlightening for those of us who are not scholars. All this hard work you put into this glorifies our God (JHWH) for sure. The Quran seems to be a man’s take in the holy scriptures. 🤨
Exactly coming from Muhammad. When Jesus was clearly superior and was sinless. Muhammad sinned. Muhammad had two human parents where Jesus come from God/is God. The Quran even says he's the messiah which is the "anointed one". The quran also states that Jesus came from the Virgin Mary, also in the Judaism if you look at the torah Isaiah 53 it clearly is talking Jesus. Judaism, Islam and Christianity all pooint you to Christ. Amen. My question is would you rather follow Christ or Muhammad?
Yeah, this just goes to show that Billy had no idea what he was getting into! Very compelling work. This reminds me of how the shroud of Turin apparently passes all tests but the one that can be manipulated, the carbon dating, that is, despite I've heard they say (I'm not there with them) they found spores from extinct species of plants from Jesus' time and place. So, it seems legit.
Great video with a lot of research done! Thanks. My question is if the difference between Hafs and Walsh Qur'an would resemble the difference in Biblical versions e.g. KJV vs NIV
I believe they are regional differences with different dialects (generally), but the “standard narrative” is that the Koran has changed a single letter or accent mark. That is Wesley’s principle point
Hey Wes!! I just discovered you this week, and I'm so thankful I did!! What are your thoughts on preterism? From a historical pov is there anything to back up or deny the second coming of Jesus in 70AD?
How dare you attack Islam Habibi?! Jesus cannot be as great as Muhammad as Jesus slept with 0 girls while Mohammed slept with hundreds young and old, but mostly young. A clear measure of his greatness.... Lol
The thing is, the quran also says that the followers of jesus were made upper most. And, according to islam, the followers of Jesus wouldn't believe Jesus was God. And we can see through history which followers of Jesus were successful, the ones who claimed he was God. So either these are false followers, and the Qur'an fails in it promise to make Jesus' followers uppermost. Or, the real followers of Jesus were indeed made uppermost and the quran is wrong about Jesus. Either way the quran is false.
Hi Wes, Thank you for sharing your video. I found your research insightful, especially in shedding light on the historical transmission of the New Testament. After watching, I had a few questions I’d appreciate your thoughts on: 1) In your presentation, you acknowledge that the earliest New Testament fragments date to the 2nd century, with nearly nothing surviving from the 1st century. This suggests that your research primarily clarifies the form of the New Testament as it existed between 100-200 CE. Could you elaborate on why this significant gap between the original writings and the earliest fragments is not addressed in your conclusion? 2) From a methodological perspective, how do you justify comparing the New Testament and the Qur'an using textual criticism, which is specifically designed for reconstructing texts with significant manuscript variants? Given that the Qur'an's preservation relied on a unique oral tradition, doesn’t applying this methodology to the Qur'an misrepresent its transmission history? 3) Regarding the Sana’a manuscripts, it’s noted that they consist of approximately 12,000 parchment fragments, with most attributed to 926 Qur'anic manuscripts. Why does your analysis focus primarily on the erased and corrected text in one manuscript, especially given that these corrections seem to align with standard orthographic adjustments or minor linguistic differences, such as singular versus plural forms? 4) You highlight the Qur'an’s "controlled transmission" as a weakness compared to the New Testament's "free transmission." However, couldn't one argue that controlled transmission ensures uniformity and reduces the likelihood of corruption? How do you address this counterpoint? 5) You discuss that there are 400,000-600,000 textual variants in the New Testament manuscripts and emphasize that these do not affect any core doctrines. Could you provide specific examples of significant variants and explain why these do not challenge core theological claims? Additionally, given the sheer number of variants, how was confidence tested or established that every variant was reviewed, and how did you ensure that all were accurately accounted for in your conclusions? 6) Lastly, I noticed a potential issue in the timeline graphics presented for Islamic history. For example, the passing of Muhammad in 632 CE and the Battle of Yamama, which also occurred in 632, are shown at noticeably different points on the timescale. Could you clarify the reasoning behind this placement? Thank you for taking the time to consider these questions. I look forward to your response and further discussion.
ginza rabba go read this Arabic book written hundreds of years before the Quran and this will answer your questions and let you know the truth about Mumu and Allah.
To answer your first question: There are no manuscripts from the 1st century that have been discovered. We have some fragments from the early 2nd, but the vast majority come from mid- to late-2nd century onwards. How do we know we have reliable sources from the 2nd century? A few lines of evidence: 1.) the timeline itself-crucifixion 33AD, Paul begins writing letters +20, Gospels written between +30 & +40. These are immediately used religiously (read and studied and memorized) every week for worship alongside the Septuagint (Greek translation of the Old Testament). Variation would be noted, especially as Christians travelled from one town to another. 2.)They were quickly copied and transmitted to the furthest parts of the empire (we have fragments from monasteries all over the Roman world). This is the free transmission element Wesley mentioned. It’s precisely this geographical distribution that argues for a stable text. 3.) Early translations, such as the Syriac, present another line of manuscripts to test the Koine Greek. 4.) Early Church Fathers extensively quoted the New Testament in their writings. Also in early lectionaries (worship manuals). It’s been noted that the NT could be completely reconstructed from these sources alone. So, even without 1st century manuscripts, we have reliable transmission to the 2nd and beyond. Also, it would be worth looking up how other ancient texts that we believe are reliable-how much later and fewer the earliest manuscripts we have
Question 2: Critical Source Analysis I like your question that we might be comparing apples and oranges using Critical Source Analysis on the Koran when it was developed for a book with thousands of manuscripts and over 10,000 variants. But I believe that the point still stands. A controlled transmission functionally eliminates the ability of scholars to do textual analysis because variants were destroyed. We cannot go back beyond the point of destruction. In fact, this happened twice in early Muslim history. So, the Koran Muhammad gave and the Koran we have today we *know* is not the same because the Hadith tell us this. Yes, a controlled transmission does create a more stable text. But it still does not make it “perfectly preserved” as in the “standard narrative”. The Muslim argument is that a free transmission means that Allah’s Word can be corrupted. Wesley points out that we still have the same Bible today as the Syrians and Arabians did in the 6th and 7th centuries. There has been no corruption of the text.
@@jeffreybrannen9465 Thank you for your response. While I appreciate the effort to explain the reliability of the New Testament and the process of textual criticism, several key points in your argument deserve clarification: It’s true that many ancient texts have fewer manuscripts and are reconstructed with greater gaps. However, comparing religious scripture like the Bible or Qur'an to works like Homer’s Iliad or Tacitus’ Annals is problematic. These are not considered divine revelations, so the standard of preservation expected is much lower. For divine scripture, one would anticipate a process that maintains the integrity of the original message over time. Moreover, the purpose and expectations surrounding these texts are fundamentally different. Religious scripture often claims divine authorship and guidance, which logically raises the bar for its transmission integrity. Additionally, ancient non-religious works rarely, if ever, involve competing theological interpretations based on textual variants, making the stakes much lower for their fidelity. The Qur'an was not compiled into a book during the Prophet Muhammad’s lifetime because revelation continued until shortly before his passing. However, it was written down by scribes under his supervision and memorized by a significant number of companions. The process after the Battle of Yamama (shortly after the Prophet’s death) was not out of fear of losing the Qur'an, as it was already widely memorized. Rather, Umar and Abu Bakr recognized the practicality of compiling it into a single text to aid Islam’s expansion and ensure ease of reference as the religion grew. This compilation was done publicly, verified against existing memorized and written portions, and reviewed by companions who had learned directly from the Prophet. About a decade later, Uthman addressed the potential confusion caused by non-Arabs reciting the Qur'an with different dialectical pronunciations or verse arrangements. He standardized the Qur'an to the Quraishi dialect and publicly burned copies that deviated from this. It’s worth noting that this process focused on the consonantal skeleton (rasm), which preserves the core meanings, while the oral tradition continued to ensure fidelity. This was also done openly, and those who had memorized the Qur'an approved and attested to its authenticity. The different qira'at (modes of recitation) that exist today, such as Warsh, were always known in Islamic history and accepted as valid because they do not involve changes to root meanings. For example, the word Malik in Malik Yawm al-Din (King of the Day of Judgment) versus Malik (Master of the Day of Judgment) reflects dialectical variation but conveys the same underlying meaning since the root word encompasses both. Unlike the Bible, which relies heavily on textual criticism due to the sheer volume of manuscript variations, the Qur'an’s oral tradition makes this methodology less applicable. Thousands of companions memorized the Qur'an, ensuring consistency even when written copies were compared. Variations cited by Wesley, such as diacritical or orthographic differences, reflect Arabic's early orthographic conventions, not discrepancies in content. For example, diacritical differences might affect pronunciation but do not change the meaning, as Arabic's root-based linguistic system preserves the integrity of the text. This is fundamentally different from the manuscript traditions of the New Testament, where interpolations, omissions, and modifications can have broader implications for meaning. Wesley’s citation of hadith about variations is taken out of context. These hadith often refer to abrogated verses, earlier drafts, or companions unaware of the final arrangement revealed to the Prophet. Furthermore, if we are relying on historical context, we must consider the strict accountability of the companions. For instance, during Umar’s caliphate, a man publicly threatened him with a sword over what he perceived as an unjust fabric distribution. Such people, who wouldn’t tolerate injustice in mundane matters, would certainly not allow a distorted or altered Qur'an to be distributed. It is crucial to note that every decision regarding the Qur'an’s compilation was made publicly and with the consensus of those who memorized it. The transparency of this process reinforces its authenticity. The core issue here is that we are discussing the “preservation” of the Qur'an and the “reconstruction” of the Bible. This distinction is vital. While the Qur'an remains as it was delivered by the Prophet Muhammad, the New Testament underwent centuries of textual transmission before arriving at the form we have today. The idea that we can confidently reconstruct the original New Testament despite the 100-200 year gap between its writing and surviving fragments is, at best, an educated approximation. The absence of a centralized oral tradition like the Qur'an’s means that textual variations in the New Testament required subsequent scholarly judgment, which introduces layers of human interpretation. While the geographical spread of the Bible’s manuscripts is impressive, it does not guarantee textual fidelity to the original. A similar analogy can be drawn to the concept of legends or folklore, where a common theme (e.g., dragons) emerges across disparate cultures without direct interaction. Just because a story spreads widely doesn’t validate its origin or guarantee its accuracy, as human error and intentional edits can still occur. Additionally, the claim that no single authority could corrupt the text fails to account for unintentional changes during transmission, which are exacerbated by the lack of oversight in a free transmission model. The Qur'an’s controlled transmission is often contrasted with the Bible’s free transmission. While free transmission allows for comparison of textual variants, it also opens the door to a higher likelihood of alterations and interpolations, especially over extended periods without centralized oversight. Controlled transmission, by contrast, eliminates many of these risks. For example, Uthman’s efforts were not a suppression of variants but rather a standardization to ensure uniformity as Islam expanded into non-Arab regions. Furthermore, Uthman’s work was publicly verified by thousands who had memorized the Qur'an, ensuring that the standardized text reflected what was revealed to the Prophet. Finally, it’s important to frame the discussion in a way that acknowledges differences without creating unnecessary tension. A Christian could say: “Yes, the Qur'an is preserved as it was delivered by Muhammad of Arabia. We lost the original texts of the Bible, but I believe the reconstructed version sufficiently conveys its main theological teachings. The Qur'an might have better preservation, but that doesn’t necessarily make it true, as I believe in the holiness of the Bible.” This approach focuses on faith rather than the limitations of historical methods. Preservation of scripture and its theological validity are separate matters. While the Qur'an’s preservation is unparalleled among ancient texts, the discussion about faith ultimately rests on belief in its divine origin. Similarly, Christians may uphold their belief in the Bible’s message despite acknowledging its historical reconstruction. Recognizing these nuances leads to more respectful and productive interfaith dialogues.
Don't know if you will read this, but are you aware of the new scholarship of Dr. Jay Smith? The traditional narratives seem to be in great peril these days...
Already from the get go at 18:00 you made a mistake, the Quran was revealed in 7 ahruf meaning 7 difrent ways of reading the Quran in 7 difrent dialects which have all been preserved, with an (isnad) meaning chain of narration back to the prophet through a disciple, the one copy of the Quran witch was govermentaly prescribed was the hafs Quran through uthman ibn afans rule, as a standard do to it being the qurishe dialect, but all the other 7 ahruf where still being recited by the companions and there students.
Again in 20:20 1000 of pages of the Quran where found and only 1 was found with underlying differences this page does not contain an isnad, and the deleted text is very normal in the islam world that a person would write the Quran and later have it checked and if there was found a mistake it would be deleted and written again, so the argument does not hold weight.
Again 20:54 what you are refering to as two difrent qurans are 2 out of the 7 ahruf whitc the prophet said have been revealed to him to make it easier for different people groups to read. Fx in Harf in surah fatiha it says alaihim, but in khalaf an Hamza it says alaihum, so the meaning is completely the same just difrent dialect, also in Wars it says sirat al mustaqeem with an sad ص in khalaf an Hamza its written with a sad but pronounced with a mixture of sad and zeen ز so it wil sound sziraat and in ibn katheer s version its pronunciation is with a seen س so one is seiratal one is sziratal and one is siratal all Muslims with basic nowlegde knows this
Again in 25:20 you clearly haven't read the hadith thoroughly it clearly is Narrated by Anas ibn Malik (RA): > "When someone among us would receive revelation from the Prophet (peace be upon him), we would hasten to memorize it and write it down on anything available: parchment, stones, palm leaves, or bones." (Mentioned in various early Islamic historical sources like Ibn Hisham's Sirat Rasul Allah and Musnad Ahmad)
Galatians 1:6-8 ESV I am astonished that you are so quickly deserting him who called you in the grace of Christ and are turning to a different gospel- [7] not that there is another one, but there are some who trouble you and want to distort the gospel of Christ. [8] But even if we or an angel from heaven should preach to you a gospel contrary to the one we preached to you, let him be accursed. John 3:16,18 ESV "For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life. [18] Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe is condemned already, because he has not believed in the name of the only Son of God.
@GogglesOstrich do you really expect me to take Paul as if he is speaking on behalf of god, when he was the one who changed the religion, he is basically argumting against himself.
So what other copies do you know of?? Here search this book it's another version of your Quran, ( ginza rabba ) it's on UA-cam. Alot of former Muslims from Arabia found these and left the cult.
All truth was presented, rest assured that 1st century New Testament documents were found. And be sure that the quran was most definitely standardized contrary to belief. Truth is unbiased.
I disagree. If you know wes he seems to, despite his birth into a religion, approached his studies of all religions with the intent of trying to find oppositions that hold actual value through truth of all texts.
This was a terrible attempt. It was so much wrong with your conclusions that it almost shows that you're not approaching it with academic but with a biased. The Quran does not say nothing about the gospel the word is injeel the Revelation that was given to jesus. Not the whiting according to Matthew mark Luke John and Paul. Same thing with apply with the Torah the revelations given to prophet Moses
Ummm I hate to break this to you but the word injeel is derived from the Greek word for Gospel or “good news” in Quran translations it’s called the Gospel and Moses wrote Torah and historically speaking there doesn’t seem to be any book given to Jesus
@@The-Negative-Commentator exactly the translation is for good news. The words that Jesus spoke. Not the good news according to Matthew Mark Luke John and Paul. Just like you admitted that the Quran was not put into book form until after the prophet returned peace and blessings be upon him. The word or the Revelation that Jesus spoke was also not put into a book form. Because when Jesus was here he followed the Torah. And he bought new revelation for his time which is called the good news. The Quran does tell Christians and Jews or to be more correct people of the books to follow that which God has sent down to them. In the Quran clearly states that Jesus never claimed to be the son of God. So if Jesus never claimed to be the son of God in the gospels are saying that Jesus is the son of God clearly the Quran is not talking about those Gospels. There were many Christian groups that believe Jesus to be a prophet a messenger and not the son of God however those groups eliminated. Their beliefs were suppressed and they were persecuted by the state. So the true followers of Jesus peace and blessed be upon him. Follow the Torah the law, received new revelation the Gospels. In worshiped One Almighty Creator.
@ words written by Mathew marks Luke and John are first and second hand accounts of Jesus and the words he spoke the good news Jesus spoke and the only Christian groups that believed Jesus was just a prophet also believed God was evil therefore ur point is null and void 😭
I really like Jay Smiths lecture on this. Do you consider him an authority on the subject? He seems to poke a lot more holes in the chain of custody and history of Islam and the Quran as where you seem to take less liberties and just go after the actual writings in the Quran.
Let’s keep pumping comments so more people see Wes’ videos. Like so many of you, I discovered him from the Billy Carson demolition
Same. 🙏
Amen❤ the knowlegde he has is outstanding
Oh now you wanna hop on the was bandwagon, now that he won the debate? Some of us, we've been here since the beginning, not me though as i only subscribed after the debate, but others have been here all along, while you come along begging for Wes's success. If you think that's contradictory, we'll this is about you and isn't about me... doing the very thing I'm complaining about you doing. I'm fed up with these posers, pretending to be something they are not, like upset. Lol well you asked for comments and I only do jokes so....
Same and right as me and my family are turning to Christ. Perfect timing to find Wes.
@@CHE-Undercover what a silly thing to fight over! You know many people hadn't seen wes' channel until the algorithm picked it up. Just be satisfied that he is getting the attention the content deserves!
Thanks Billy for introducing me to mr.Huff. Love it.
Same here!
Same! 😅
😂😂😂👍
Billy Carson, thanks for introducing me to Wes Huff! This guy is great. 🎉
Peterson is my second favourite Canadian now, bless you brother😊
😂
I found out about you after the Billy Carson beat down. Good work brother, I'll pray for Billy
Billy shoulda called in sick man😭
What a beatdown
Those men claimed Christ resurrected and stood on that till martyred . Never denied it and gained nothing! No power no wealth no status! Men of GOD. Jesus is Lord
Hi Wesley, I'm Peter, we met yesterday if you remember, though I wouldn't blame you if you forgot
I've watched this video that you recommended to me yesterday.
Thank you for informative presentation regarding the reliability of the Bible and Qur'an.
I'll dig in deeper into what you presented regarding the Qur'an and engage with my Muslim friends and hopefully make some progress.
Regarding to what you presented for the Bible, it further fortifies my belief and confidence in God's word, so again thank you and God bless
Beautiful analysis brother. This needs to go viral.
This channel has blew up. Praise God🙏🏾💯
Such fantastic knowledge being laid out for anyone who wants such treasures!! Awesome video
Great video, sir. I really appreciate your hard work. I will be praying for your ministry; you have many great skills and insights to offer the intellectual community and the body of Christ. Thank you for doing what you do.
Wes, thank you for a thorough breakdown of a complex topic. I truly enjoy these videos. God bless and keep rolling like an 18-wheeler.
I'm happy to have found you, brother. I'm excited to learn more. We need more of this... may Jesus reach out to the lost, and may we find strength to spread the word in good faith. God bless you, sir, and thank you for your work.
Another W. Gotta go to sleep but liking this to watch/finish it later. commenting for the algorithm. everyone viewing should do the same! we need Wes pushed in the youtube algorithm! Ave Christus Rex ✝☦
This is so cool. Especially that bit about "MEN" and why the KJV varies just a little bit to a modern translation like the NIV. Things like this add to my confidence in the translations we have today. God is so good with the way he has preserved his word over the last 2000 years
Wes' knowledge is incredible! More of this!
Thanks for your work on this. This brings me to think more deeply about truth
Praise God!
Great video, Wes. The Qur'an is a small book compared to the Bible. It has 77,000 words, while the Bible has 800,000 words. It may not seem small because the Qur'an uses large, well-designed letters and framed pages. As a result, there are many pages, but not too many words. You did a great analysis.
Awesome video and really good explained. Thank you!
So thankful that you chose to pursue the path of apologetics and also take the initiative to share your knowledge with us for free 🙏🏽 God bless you for your generosity!
Thank you so much for all this valuable information to defend the Bible! I’m an amateur apologist and your my go-to when it comes to the reliability of the Bible and other apologist topics as well. May God continue to bless you with wisdom and keep you teaching us!
When I first decided to study the history of the Bible, the first person I ran into was Bart Erhman. After reading his work, my faith was hanging on by an experience I had at a church in clayton county Georgia. I said all that to say that to me, Wes is the reward for Christians who held on to their faith after running into people like Billy Carson and Barr Erhman. I enjoy watching his videos and yes im here after his debate with Carson. That was quite the belt-to-ass situation and definitely enjoyed watching it.
Don’t forget to keep reading and praying the word of God. The NT authors constantly remind us to remember the object of our faith, Christ Jesus. Doubts come and go, and some should be addressed, but Christ never changes.
Really great video Wes! It is so amazing how God preserved His Word through time! So interesting and educational! Thank you so much for your videos! God Bless!
Simply awesome Wes! So refreshing to see a real scholar expose truth!
This is a powerful presentation and wonderful resource. May God bless you and your ministry!
Excellent! Well done. The truth is undeniable. Thank you.
Dawg big Wes is growing like crazy. Congrats Wes!
Thanks for sharing your knowledge with us. May God continue to use you to help those who are lost or confused to find their way back to Him, their Lord and Savior Jesus Christ, Amen 🙏🏽.
Thank you ever so much for doing the work of God in such a clear, and precise way, in the light of day. You are a true servant of God. " For there is nothing covered that will not be revealed, nor hidden that will not be known. Luke 12:2-3 "
You sir, are an absolute Godsend!
Great wisdom
Great presentation. Really insightful
Regarding 27:40, can you please provide the original Arabic? All I could find resembling this was حَدَّثَنا عَبْدُ اللَّهِ قَالَ: حَدَّثَنَا عَبْدُ اللَّهِ بْنُ مُحَمَّدِ بْنِ خَلَّادٍ قَالَ: حَدَّثَنَا يَزِيدُ قَالَ: أَخْبَرَنَا مُبَارَكٌ، عَنِ الْحَسَنِ، أَنَّ عُمَرَ بْنَ الْخَطَّابِ سَأَلَ عَنْ آيَةٍ مِنْ كِتَابِ اللَّهِ فَقِيلَ كَانَتْ مَعَ فُلَانٍ فَقُتِلَ يَوْمَ .الْيَمَامَةِ فَقَالَ: إِنَّا لِلَّهِ وَأَمَرَ بِالْقُرْآنِ فَجُمِعَ
This translates quite differently from the translation that you provided. See below:
‘Umar bin al Khattab enquired about a verse from the Book of Allah and was told it had been with a certain person who had been killed on the day [battle] of Yamama. Upon which he [Umar] said ‘Verily we belong to Allah’ and ordered the Qur’an [to be gathered] and so it was compiled.’
Nothing here about Umar being in deep "sorrow" and about the verse being "completely lost".
Call Sam Shamoun with all of your questions. Wes might not check every comment, since this video is 2 years old
Christian Prince would be another great source to go to. He, too, takes calls and addresses any doubts or questions a person may have
@@csmoviles I would not recommend Sam, ever. He curses and insults people, falsely representing Christ, does not believe in grace alone, through faith alone, in Christ alone, through the cross alone, and this makes him a false believer
Galatians 1:6-8 ESV
I am astonished that you are so quickly deserting him who called you in the grace of Christ and are turning to a different gospel- [7] not that there is another one, but there are some who trouble you and want to distort the gospel of Christ. [8] But even if we or an angel from heaven should preach to you a gospel contrary to the one we preached to you, let him be accursed.
Romans 3:23-25 ESV
for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, [24] and are justified by his grace as a gift, through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus, [25] whom God put forward as a propitiation by his blood, to be received by faith. This was to show God's righteousness, because in his divine forbearance he had passed over former sins.
Thank you so much for this video. May GOD bless you❤❤❤❤
28:50 “the battle of yo mama” 😂😂😂
I never heard that way but after reading your comment I cannot hear it any other way now 😂😂😂
Fun fact, the battle of Yomama was the start of yomama jokes.
I cant get over the lone survivor of the battle "yo mama". 😂
Well done explanation. I would rather put confidence 40 authors over 1600 years whose message is consistent than one man who speaks of revelations from an "angel" that contradict the previous messages. (Galatians 1:8) I pray daily that Muslims read the Bible not to tear it down but to gain knowledge of the true God.The message of salvation through Jesus Christ the Son. (Ephesians 2:1-10) and what God Himself has done to reconcile humankind to Himself. All glory to God the Father forever and ever and to His Son Jesus Christ. (John 3 :16)
God bless!
The New Testament - Legit through and through!
The Quran - A patchwork of this and that, that contradicts itself.
GREAT STUFF
Wes needs to be one of the most visible religion people on youtube
Glad I found your channel
Keep it going brother!!
Thank you for this ❤
More muslims need to see this
Amazing stuff!
Battle of "yo mama" 😂
🎉Wow what a really inspiring video❤ The graphics are just incredible! This is 4AM when I was supposed to be asleep. I seem to be stuck to the video.
🎉If one adds Sam Shamoun, David Wood, Jay Smith, Al Fadi, Christian Prince, God logic, Hatun, brother Rashid, Nabeel Qureshi etc the Quran just falls apart
Holes in the SIN (Standard Islamic Narrative) when you do a deep dive, Dr. Sheik Yasir Khedi
Welcome to the Lord Jesus Christ as your Lord and Savior my Moslem brothers and sisters ❤
This was really good, I appreciated this! I seriously love the infographics you make and use to give a visual description, I’m visual so that helps me haha!
And P.S. Wes, a little while ago a friend of mine’s husband told me that he remembers you from high school!! (I’m from British Columbia) thought that was cool.
Thanks! That's an interesting connection, what's your friend's husband's name?
@@WesHuff His name is Gregg Stevens. I shared something of yours on FB quite awhile ago and then he told me 😁.
@@HopeKuhn wow, yah I knew Greg in grades 7/8, so that’s even predating high school. Small world for sure.
@@WesHuffBetter than the Islamic Dilemma, check out PSEUDO CLEMENT, it's the origin of Islamic epistemology. Published in Arabic and common to the location of Muhammad. Can't miss the definition of a true prophet and how to handle "corrupt texts". This is way bigger than the Islamic Dilemma.
Excellent.
Absolutely enlightening for those of us who are not scholars. All this hard work you put into this glorifies our God (JHWH) for sure. The Quran seems to be a man’s take in the holy scriptures. 🤨
Exactly coming from Muhammad. When Jesus was clearly superior and was sinless. Muhammad sinned. Muhammad had two human parents where Jesus come from God/is God. The Quran even says he's the messiah which is the "anointed one". The quran also states that Jesus came from the Virgin Mary, also in the Judaism if you look at the torah Isaiah 53 it clearly is talking Jesus. Judaism, Islam and Christianity all pooint you to Christ. Amen. My question is would you rather follow Christ or Muhammad?
Yeah, this just goes to show that Billy had no idea what he was getting into! Very compelling work. This reminds me of how the shroud of Turin apparently passes all tests but the one that can be manipulated, the carbon dating, that is, despite I've heard they say (I'm not there with them) they found spores from extinct species of plants from Jesus' time and place. So, it seems legit.
Great video with a lot of research done! Thanks. My question is if the difference between Hafs and Walsh Qur'an would resemble the difference in Biblical versions e.g. KJV vs NIV
I believe they are regional differences with different dialects (generally), but the “standard narrative” is that the Koran has changed a single letter or accent mark. That is Wesley’s principle point
Big fan of Wes. Can you imagine the word count if he had a discussion with Ben Shapiro?
Thank you sir.
Good stuff
Obligatory reference to that one debate.
Fantastic
There is just something in english about talking of the battle of "yo mama" that comes off as very different than what is intended... 😂
Every muslim needs to see this
Excellent informatiom and very high quality work - the anti dawah is coming from all angles!
@27+mins. What you say about my momma?? Haha
This is good
Good information
Was the battle of Yomama a large battle? I mean, was it a big, or heavy battle???
Not sure, but when it sat on a rainbow...
I love this
God bless in the name of the Lord Jesus
Hey Wes!! I just discovered you this week, and I'm so thankful I did!!
What are your thoughts on preterism? From a historical pov is there anything to back up or deny the second coming of Jesus in 70AD?
Much. The eyewitnesses of it. I'd suggest reading 1 Corinthians 15 😁
@GogglesOstrich I agree!
That was so interesting.
I’m sorry, the battle of Yomamma was it?
Battle of yo mama?? LOLOLOLOL
😂😂😂
Billy sent me
How dare you attack Islam Habibi?! Jesus cannot be as great as Muhammad as Jesus slept with 0 girls while Mohammed slept with hundreds young and old, but mostly young. A clear measure of his greatness.... Lol
Wes has been God sent into a world so hostile to God's word.
You used the Sinai Bible! It don't even have the crucifixion!
Love,
BILLY
What are you talking about mate? Like, I'm actually asking
The thing is, the quran also says that the followers of jesus were made upper most.
And, according to islam, the followers of Jesus wouldn't believe Jesus was God.
And we can see through history which followers of Jesus were successful, the ones who claimed he was God.
So either these are false followers, and the Qur'an fails in it promise to make Jesus' followers uppermost. Or, the real followers of Jesus were indeed made uppermost and the quran is wrong about Jesus.
Either way the quran is false.
❤❤❤❤❤❤❤
My daughter smiled and laughed at this video. 😊😂❤
God bless her. It's beautiful how jesus is our prince of peace. I'm glad to hear your daughter is a follower of jesus our Lord and savior
I was wondering why she would be laughing... And then I got to the battle of yo mama lol 😂
Meaning what?
@@Bluenotes11watch the whole video. Like come on.
Battle of your your mama
Hi Wes,
Thank you for sharing your video. I found your research insightful, especially in shedding light on the historical transmission of the New Testament. After watching, I had a few questions I’d appreciate your thoughts on:
1) In your presentation, you acknowledge that the earliest New Testament fragments date to the 2nd century, with nearly nothing surviving from the 1st century. This suggests that your research primarily clarifies the form of the New Testament as it existed between 100-200 CE. Could you elaborate on why this significant gap between the original writings and the earliest fragments is not addressed in your conclusion?
2) From a methodological perspective, how do you justify comparing the New Testament and the Qur'an using textual criticism, which is specifically designed for reconstructing texts with significant manuscript variants? Given that the Qur'an's preservation relied on a unique oral tradition, doesn’t applying this methodology to the Qur'an misrepresent its transmission history?
3) Regarding the Sana’a manuscripts, it’s noted that they consist of approximately 12,000 parchment fragments, with most attributed to 926 Qur'anic manuscripts. Why does your analysis focus primarily on the erased and corrected text in one manuscript, especially given that these corrections seem to align with standard orthographic adjustments or minor linguistic differences, such as singular versus plural forms?
4) You highlight the Qur'an’s "controlled transmission" as a weakness compared to the New Testament's "free transmission." However, couldn't one argue that controlled transmission ensures uniformity and reduces the likelihood of corruption? How do you address this counterpoint?
5) You discuss that there are 400,000-600,000 textual variants in the New Testament manuscripts and emphasize that these do not affect any core doctrines. Could you provide specific examples of significant variants and explain why these do not challenge core theological claims? Additionally, given the sheer number of variants, how was confidence tested or established that every variant was reviewed, and how did you ensure that all were accurately accounted for in your conclusions?
6) Lastly, I noticed a potential issue in the timeline graphics presented for Islamic history. For example, the passing of Muhammad in 632 CE and the Battle of Yamama, which also occurred in 632, are shown at noticeably different points on the timescale. Could you clarify the reasoning behind this placement?
Thank you for taking the time to consider these questions. I look forward to your response and further discussion.
ginza rabba go read this Arabic book written hundreds of years before the Quran and this will answer your questions and let you know the truth about Mumu and Allah.
@michaelmartinez5217 Couldn’t really see which of the 6 questions this “reply” of yours should answer?
To answer your first question:
There are no manuscripts from the 1st century that have been discovered. We have some fragments from the early 2nd, but the vast majority come from mid- to late-2nd century onwards.
How do we know we have reliable sources from the 2nd century? A few lines of evidence:
1.) the timeline itself-crucifixion 33AD, Paul begins writing letters +20, Gospels written between +30 & +40. These are immediately used religiously (read and studied and memorized) every week for worship alongside the Septuagint (Greek translation of the Old Testament). Variation would be noted, especially as Christians travelled from one town to another.
2.)They were quickly copied and transmitted to the furthest parts of the empire (we have fragments from monasteries all over the Roman world). This is the free transmission element Wesley mentioned. It’s precisely this geographical distribution that argues for a stable text.
3.) Early translations, such as the Syriac, present another line of manuscripts to test the Koine Greek.
4.) Early Church Fathers extensively quoted the New Testament in their writings. Also in early lectionaries (worship manuals). It’s been noted that the NT could be completely reconstructed from these sources alone.
So, even without 1st century manuscripts, we have reliable transmission to the 2nd and beyond. Also, it would be worth looking up how other ancient texts that we believe are reliable-how much later and fewer the earliest manuscripts we have
Question 2: Critical Source Analysis
I like your question that we might be comparing apples and oranges using Critical Source Analysis on the Koran when it was developed for a book with thousands of manuscripts and over 10,000 variants. But I believe that the point still stands. A controlled transmission functionally eliminates the ability of scholars to do textual analysis because variants were destroyed. We cannot go back beyond the point of destruction. In fact, this happened twice in early Muslim history. So, the Koran Muhammad gave and the Koran we have today we *know* is not the same because the Hadith tell us this.
Yes, a controlled transmission does create a more stable text. But it still does not make it “perfectly preserved” as in the “standard narrative”.
The Muslim argument is that a free transmission means that Allah’s Word can be corrupted. Wesley points out that we still have the same Bible today as the Syrians and Arabians did in the 6th and 7th centuries. There has been no corruption of the text.
@@jeffreybrannen9465
Thank you for your response. While I appreciate the effort to explain the reliability of the New Testament and the process of textual criticism, several key points in your argument deserve clarification:
It’s true that many ancient texts have fewer manuscripts and are reconstructed with greater gaps. However, comparing religious scripture like the Bible or Qur'an to works like Homer’s Iliad or Tacitus’ Annals is problematic. These are not considered divine revelations, so the standard of preservation expected is much lower. For divine scripture, one would anticipate a process that maintains the integrity of the original message over time. Moreover, the purpose and expectations surrounding these texts are fundamentally different. Religious scripture often claims divine authorship and guidance, which logically raises the bar for its transmission integrity. Additionally, ancient non-religious works rarely, if ever, involve competing theological interpretations based on textual variants, making the stakes much lower for their fidelity.
The Qur'an was not compiled into a book during the Prophet Muhammad’s lifetime because revelation continued until shortly before his passing. However, it was written down by scribes under his supervision and memorized by a significant number of companions. The process after the Battle of Yamama (shortly after the Prophet’s death) was not out of fear of losing the Qur'an, as it was already widely memorized. Rather, Umar and Abu Bakr recognized the practicality of compiling it into a single text to aid Islam’s expansion and ensure ease of reference as the religion grew. This compilation was done publicly, verified against existing memorized and written portions, and reviewed by companions who had learned directly from the Prophet.
About a decade later, Uthman addressed the potential confusion caused by non-Arabs reciting the Qur'an with different dialectical pronunciations or verse arrangements. He standardized the Qur'an to the Quraishi dialect and publicly burned copies that deviated from this. It’s worth noting that this process focused on the consonantal skeleton (rasm), which preserves the core meanings, while the oral tradition continued to ensure fidelity. This was also done openly, and those who had memorized the Qur'an approved and attested to its authenticity. The different qira'at (modes of recitation) that exist today, such as Warsh, were always known in Islamic history and accepted as valid because they do not involve changes to root meanings. For example, the word Malik in Malik Yawm al-Din (King of the Day of Judgment) versus Malik (Master of the Day of Judgment) reflects dialectical variation but conveys the same underlying meaning since the root word encompasses both.
Unlike the Bible, which relies heavily on textual criticism due to the sheer volume of manuscript variations, the Qur'an’s oral tradition makes this methodology less applicable. Thousands of companions memorized the Qur'an, ensuring consistency even when written copies were compared. Variations cited by Wesley, such as diacritical or orthographic differences, reflect Arabic's early orthographic conventions, not discrepancies in content. For example, diacritical differences might affect pronunciation but do not change the meaning, as Arabic's root-based linguistic system preserves the integrity of the text. This is fundamentally different from the manuscript traditions of the New Testament, where interpolations, omissions, and modifications can have broader implications for meaning.
Wesley’s citation of hadith about variations is taken out of context. These hadith often refer to abrogated verses, earlier drafts, or companions unaware of the final arrangement revealed to the Prophet. Furthermore, if we are relying on historical context, we must consider the strict accountability of the companions. For instance, during Umar’s caliphate, a man publicly threatened him with a sword over what he perceived as an unjust fabric distribution. Such people, who wouldn’t tolerate injustice in mundane matters, would certainly not allow a distorted or altered Qur'an to be distributed. It is crucial to note that every decision regarding the Qur'an’s compilation was made publicly and with the consensus of those who memorized it. The transparency of this process reinforces its authenticity.
The core issue here is that we are discussing the “preservation” of the Qur'an and the “reconstruction” of the Bible. This distinction is vital. While the Qur'an remains as it was delivered by the Prophet Muhammad, the New Testament underwent centuries of textual transmission before arriving at the form we have today. The idea that we can confidently reconstruct the original New Testament despite the 100-200 year gap between its writing and surviving fragments is, at best, an educated approximation. The absence of a centralized oral tradition like the Qur'an’s means that textual variations in the New Testament required subsequent scholarly judgment, which introduces layers of human interpretation.
While the geographical spread of the Bible’s manuscripts is impressive, it does not guarantee textual fidelity to the original. A similar analogy can be drawn to the concept of legends or folklore, where a common theme (e.g., dragons) emerges across disparate cultures without direct interaction. Just because a story spreads widely doesn’t validate its origin or guarantee its accuracy, as human error and intentional edits can still occur. Additionally, the claim that no single authority could corrupt the text fails to account for unintentional changes during transmission, which are exacerbated by the lack of oversight in a free transmission model.
The Qur'an’s controlled transmission is often contrasted with the Bible’s free transmission. While free transmission allows for comparison of textual variants, it also opens the door to a higher likelihood of alterations and interpolations, especially over extended periods without centralized oversight. Controlled transmission, by contrast, eliminates many of these risks. For example, Uthman’s efforts were not a suppression of variants but rather a standardization to ensure uniformity as Islam expanded into non-Arab regions. Furthermore, Uthman’s work was publicly verified by thousands who had memorized the Qur'an, ensuring that the standardized text reflected what was revealed to the Prophet.
Finally, it’s important to frame the discussion in a way that acknowledges differences without creating unnecessary tension. A Christian could say: “Yes, the Qur'an is preserved as it was delivered by Muhammad of Arabia. We lost the original texts of the Bible, but I believe the reconstructed version sufficiently conveys its main theological teachings. The Qur'an might have better preservation, but that doesn’t necessarily make it true, as I believe in the holiness of the Bible.” This approach focuses on faith rather than the limitations of historical methods.
Preservation of scripture and its theological validity are separate matters. While the Qur'an’s preservation is unparalleled among ancient texts, the discussion about faith ultimately rests on belief in its divine origin. Similarly, Christians may uphold their belief in the Bible’s message despite acknowledging its historical reconstruction. Recognizing these nuances leads to more respectful and productive interfaith dialogues.
This is some other dangerous stuff to say even if it is true.
The standard narratives has holes in it.
Encouraging
Don't know if you will read this, but are you aware of the new scholarship of Dr. Jay Smith? The traditional narratives seem to be in great peril these days...
Old church slavonic😂😂😂😂😂 is glycolic writing, and some old bulgarian...so called slavonic languages are based on bulgarian😊
❤
Battle of your mama😂😂😂😂
Already from the get go at 18:00 you made a mistake, the Quran was revealed in 7 ahruf meaning 7 difrent ways of reading the Quran in 7 difrent dialects which have all been preserved, with an (isnad) meaning chain of narration back to the prophet through a disciple, the one copy of the Quran witch was govermentaly prescribed was the hafs Quran through uthman ibn afans rule, as a standard do to it being the qurishe dialect, but all the other 7 ahruf where still being recited by the companions and there students.
Again in 20:20 1000 of pages of the Quran where found and only 1 was found with underlying differences this page does not contain an isnad, and the deleted text is very normal in the islam world that a person would write the Quran and later have it checked and if there was found a mistake it would be deleted and written again, so the argument does not hold weight.
Again 20:54 what you are refering to as two difrent qurans are 2 out of the 7 ahruf whitc the prophet said have been revealed to him to make it easier for different people groups to read. Fx in Harf in surah fatiha it says alaihim, but in khalaf an Hamza it says alaihum, so the meaning is completely the same just difrent dialect, also in Wars it says sirat al mustaqeem with an sad ص in khalaf an Hamza its written with a sad but pronounced with a mixture of sad and zeen ز so it wil sound sziraat and in ibn katheer s version its pronunciation is with a seen س so one is seiratal one is sziratal and one is siratal all Muslims with basic nowlegde knows this
Again in 25:20 you clearly haven't read the hadith thoroughly it clearly is Narrated by Anas ibn Malik (RA):
> "When someone among us would receive revelation from the Prophet (peace be upon him), we would hasten to memorize it and write it down on anything available: parchment, stones, palm leaves, or bones."
(Mentioned in various early Islamic historical sources like Ibn Hisham's Sirat Rasul Allah and Musnad Ahmad)
Galatians 1:6-8 ESV
I am astonished that you are so quickly deserting him who called you in the grace of Christ and are turning to a different gospel- [7] not that there is another one, but there are some who trouble you and want to distort the gospel of Christ. [8] But even if we or an angel from heaven should preach to you a gospel contrary to the one we preached to you, let him be accursed.
John 3:16,18 ESV
"For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life. [18] Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe is condemned already, because he has not believed in the name of the only Son of God.
@GogglesOstrich do you really expect me to take Paul as if he is speaking on behalf of god, when he was the one who changed the religion, he is basically argumting against himself.
You implied as if the Rightly guided caliphs captured the ALL copies of the Qurans and burnt them.
He did tho, people like Abdullah ibn masud were not in agreement with his decision.
So what other copies do you know of??
Here search this book it's another version of your Quran, ( ginza rabba ) it's on UA-cam. Alot of former Muslims from Arabia found these and left the cult.
I thought Mohammed could not read or write
False dichotomy, you can't trust either of them is also a possibility! In fact it's also the correct answer!
31:51 Ubayy was not killed. He was among the companions of the prophet/disciples.
Source?
seems like you may have a slight bias
Of course! He’s Christian lol
If the information he's presenting is true; bias really doesn't matter.
All truth was presented, rest assured that 1st century New Testament documents were found. And be sure that the quran was most definitely standardized contrary to belief. Truth is unbiased.
I disagree. If you know wes he seems to, despite his birth into a religion, approached his studies of all religions with the intent of trying to find oppositions that hold actual value through truth of all texts.
False, trust neither.
This was a terrible attempt. It was so much wrong with your conclusions that it almost shows that you're not approaching it with academic but with a biased. The Quran does not say nothing about the gospel the word is injeel the Revelation that was given to jesus. Not the whiting according to Matthew mark Luke John and Paul. Same thing with apply with the Torah the revelations given to prophet Moses
Ummm I hate to break this to you but the word injeel is derived from the Greek word for Gospel or “good news” in Quran translations it’s called the Gospel and Moses wrote Torah and historically speaking there doesn’t seem to be any book given to Jesus
Keep in mind the Quran commands the people of the injeel and Torah to follow the injeel and Torah
You also couldn’t even catch him on the rest of the video which is just from your own sources this seems to be a great attempt
@@The-Negative-Commentator exactly the translation is for good news. The words that Jesus spoke. Not the good news according to Matthew Mark Luke John and Paul. Just like you admitted that the Quran was not put into book form until after the prophet returned peace and blessings be upon him. The word or the Revelation that Jesus spoke was also not put into a book form. Because when Jesus was here he followed the Torah. And he bought new revelation for his time which is called the good news. The Quran does tell Christians and Jews or to be more correct people of the books to follow that which God has sent down to them. In the Quran clearly states that Jesus never claimed to be the son of God. So if Jesus never claimed to be the son of God in the gospels are saying that Jesus is the son of God clearly the Quran is not talking about those Gospels. There were many Christian groups that believe Jesus to be a prophet a messenger and not the son of God however those groups eliminated. Their beliefs were suppressed and they were persecuted by the state. So the true followers of Jesus peace and blessed be upon him. Follow the Torah the law, received new revelation the Gospels. In worshiped One Almighty Creator.
@ words written by Mathew marks Luke and John are first and second hand accounts of Jesus and the words he spoke the good news Jesus spoke and the only Christian groups that believed Jesus was just a prophet also believed God was evil therefore ur point is null and void 😭
Great video ❤❤
I really like Jay Smiths lecture on this. Do you consider him an authority on the subject? He seems to poke a lot more holes in the chain of custody and history of Islam and the Quran as where you seem to take less liberties and just go after the actual writings in the Quran.